Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 1 votes

blaming the generals


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#46 SOJA

SOJA

    Official Panthers Fan

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,002 posts

Posted 22 September 2013 - 07:41 AM

can we bump that old thread where fiz talks about how bad the Jay Cutler trade was 



#47 raleigh-panther

raleigh-panther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,326 posts

Posted 22 September 2013 - 07:43 AM

back in the day when there were wars against western nations, the defeated nation would typically head home with their tail between their legs and everyone would blame the leadership for the poor performance. It was easier to imagine that their soldiers (typically theirs sons etc) were just as good as those fuging prussian pigs, or those papist french, or the godless british sailors, or whatever; they just had a few jews or whatever that had snuck into the upper echelons and fuged it up.

better leaders and we're just as good as the rest of them! next war!

well, sometimes the soldiers just aren't that good. italian soldiers weren't defeated by ethiopia because of bad leadership. the americans didn't get routed by canada because they didn't have good generals. sometimes your soldiers just fuging blow....

....even your favorite one.

It's easy as fans to pin everything on the coaching staff, because it's easier to fire 10 dudes than replace 30.

It's easy to blame the lack of development and, dare I say regression, of a certain favorite player, on the bad coaching, other elements, weather, commercial shooting schedule, etc.

sometimes the british send a bunch of inbred australians over the barricades into machine gun fire. sometimes the soldiers just can't cut it against starving koreans/vietnamese.



Here is the problem with your argument. The generals picked these soldiers or opted to keep these soldiers

#48 cgarsmoker

cgarsmoker

    Kenny Fugging Powers

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 589 posts
  • LocationViera, Florida

Posted 22 September 2013 - 10:20 AM

Look at it this way..... Would San Fran, Seattle, Atlanta, or even New Orleans be any good and considered contenders with Rivera as their HC and Shula as the OC?

Would the Panthers instantly become a better team by replacing Rivera/Shula with any of those coaching staffs?

#49 Kettle

Kettle

    I'm Stainless.

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,386 posts
  • LocationThe Brew Wing

Posted 22 September 2013 - 11:22 AM

our general has less stars and bars than the other generals.

#50 Lords0fPain

Lords0fPain

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 622 posts

Posted 22 September 2013 - 11:33 AM

back in the day when there were wars against western nations, the defeated nation would typically head home with their tail between their legs and everyone would blame the leadership for the poor performance. It was easier to imagine that their soldiers (typically theirs sons etc) were just as good as those fuging prussian pigs, or those papist french, or the godless british sailors, or whatever; they just had a few jews or whatever that had snuck into the upper echelons and fuged it up.

 

better leaders and we're just as good as the rest of them! next war!

 

well, sometimes the soldiers just aren't that good. italian soldiers weren't defeated by ethiopia because of bad leadership. the americans didn't get routed by canada because they didn't have good generals. sometimes your soldiers just fuging blow....

 

....even your favorite one. 

 

It's easy as fans to pin everything on the coaching staff, because it's easier to fire 10 dudes than replace 30. 

 

It's easy to blame the lack of development and, dare I say regression, of a certain favorite player, on the bad coaching, other elements, weather, commercial shooting schedule, etc.

 

sometimes the british send a bunch of inbred australians over the barricades into machine gun fire. sometimes the soldiers just can't cut it against starving koreans/vietnamese. 

 


 

 

 

Its always leadership (at some level), if the soldiers "blow", then the leadership did not  put the RIGHT people (mid level leadership) in the right positions to correct that or maybe the soldiers don't respect their leaders. The 1st Iraq war the regular soldiers where surrendering to camera men, the only ones fighting was the specially picked Republican Guard. Which one you think liked and/or respected their leadership?

 

 

 




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com