You're right. I'm targeted with it everyday along with the obsession it illustrates. I come back to this thread, and just look at it...
Petrino comments
- Thread starter CommodoreCard
- Start date
Hey, wait a minute - didn’t he leave wife #1 (Louisville) for a sexy chick (Atlanta) only to dump her and marry a second wife (Arkansas) get thrown out and pick up a skank (WKU), then come running back to his first wife... this dude’s more drama than Rick.
Not that you asked, but that's a much healthier way to look at the situation IMO.
Where in the world did all of the justification for extreme opinions come from? I can't get to the point of hate for just about anyone. Hell, I may end up saying "Vince" has done a good job when it's all over with. I'll never respect the guy, but that ain't hate and it has nothing to do with performance...
You can't even help yourself, and we're talking about you...
BTW "Vince" won't return my calls--appreciate you ghost writing for him...
I'm open minded. Quote post all the extreme opinions let's examine those alleged extreme opinions.
Hate is what I'm talking about as the example in this thread. Surely you don't question that as an "extreme opinion"? And we have some who openly admit that sentiment...
I certainly don't hate CBP but I also never want him coaching here again...ever!
Calling our AD, whether we like him or not, a sl-----k is enough to ruffle feathers. Therefore I've deleted the words on Vince. So in the future that term is only a Ky reference and not our current AD.
There is context to sports/hate.
Quote the entire posts, bold type the hate...let's take a closer look and see if these posts are truly extreme. This should be easy since you claim there's alot of it here.
Let's admit the truth here. Vince screwed up royally for taking that picture with the enemy of UofL fans. Facts are facts. Vince gave his enemies ammo with that pic. Ok, he's new and folks make mistakes? But that move was a dumba$$ moment.
Look, here’s the reality. I don’t love or hate Vince. I don’t know him personally. I don’t hang with him. I shook his hand and gave him a high five as the players ran out onto the field but what the hell does that mean. He smiles and looks friendly. That’s not enough for me to love him. I’m also not afraid to say I “loved” Bobby at one time. Vince is apparently doing his best for U of L but isn’t that what he’s paid to do as a job? In the end, like Zipp says, is did he do a great job? I’m giving him a chance, but the book isn’t finished. Our history tells us so.
With all due respect to you guys, I could give two squirts of piss about Petrino now. He was supposed to be a leader of young men and look at what he did to guys like Pass and others. He quit on them. I would say he quit coaching when Lamar was here, it just so happened that Lamar had done enough already to win the Heisman. Even with all of that to literally kick this University, the city of Louisville, and Cardinal fans in the nuts while the NCAA and everybody else was piling on is just inexcusable to me.
At the same time zipp isn't giving him a chance. A wait and see attitude is just that. Attempting to frame every since move as negative isn't wait and see. Its taking a stance and jumping to conclusions before the book is finished. The matt jones picture was stupid and I said that then but is it really something that we need to continually bring up months later? zipp only wants us to wait for more evidence when something positive happens but can't wait to jump for joy when some negative happens or cry and moan to temper expectations on every positive thing.
Maybe Vince keeps his friends close, and his enemies closer. Just a thought.
I’ll send him an invoiceYou can't even help yourself, and we're talking about you...
BTW "Vince" won't return my calls--appreciate you ghost writing for him...
Maybe I will delete all threads titled Pitino, Petrino, TJ, VT, monies, or Yum. Did I forget anything?
That's me making a joke, I think?
That's me making a joke, I think?
No doubt - all of that is true. With respect to the picture of zippy, I’d say that was a dumbass moment on his part, and it seems inconsistent at best to to be able to highlight one such moment, and not the other.
Since this thread has significantly gone off track, let's all understand (or try to) these elements of message board policy as it applies to personal attacks...
I wanna talk about #2 at some length... I'm a frequent violator of #2 although seldom/never of #1. I've acknowledged that publicly and privately to moderators and site owners along with an explanation--over and over. When the people who run this place moderate as it should be done IMO, they don't have any issues with me and #2. It's ONLY WHEN THEY DON'T that I will defend myself and be a violator of #2. And the reason I'm a frequent violator is because that's how often moderating isn't done properly. That said, I like the people who run and have run this site, and I commend them for the work they do. As they know, never do I complain about anyone's behavior here even though I'm the target of much of it. I simply take matters into my own hands when they opt to sit and watch.
#3 is misunderstood, but it's consistent with how defamation standards are adjudicated in the real world. When you're a public figure, the "laws" protecting you aren't enforced as strictly as they are for private individuals. You elect to put yourself in the public eye for better or for worse. "Vince" in this case is the AD and wants to be the AD. He has subjected himself to the scrutiny that comes with that. You don't get to protect him like you try to protect yourself with message board protocols. Now if I said he cheated on his wife, that's a different story. If my criticism is confined to the job he's doing, his background--he is factually a -- or any other element of his public life, that's fair game. You don't have to like it, but it doesn't matter.
Current and former moderators, if I'm misunderstanding any of that, please chime in. And please take out the trash as much as you can tolerate...
- It's most simply defined as attacking the person, not the message.
- It doesn't mean you can attack back even if you're personally attacked.
- It doesn't protect public people and entities.
I wanna talk about #2 at some length... I'm a frequent violator of #2 although seldom/never of #1. I've acknowledged that publicly and privately to moderators and site owners along with an explanation--over and over. When the people who run this place moderate as it should be done IMO, they don't have any issues with me and #2. It's ONLY WHEN THEY DON'T that I will defend myself and be a violator of #2. And the reason I'm a frequent violator is because that's how often moderating isn't done properly. That said, I like the people who run and have run this site, and I commend them for the work they do. As they know, never do I complain about anyone's behavior here even though I'm the target of much of it. I simply take matters into my own hands when they opt to sit and watch.
#3 is misunderstood, but it's consistent with how defamation standards are adjudicated in the real world. When you're a public figure, the "laws" protecting you aren't enforced as strictly as they are for private individuals. You elect to put yourself in the public eye for better or for worse. "Vince" in this case is the AD and wants to be the AD. He has subjected himself to the scrutiny that comes with that. You don't get to protect him like you try to protect yourself with message board protocols. Now if I said he cheated on his wife, that's a different story. If my criticism is confined to the job he's doing, his background--he is factually a -- or any other element of his public life, that's fair game. You don't have to like it, but it doesn't matter.
Current and former moderators, if I'm misunderstanding any of that, please chime in. And please take out the trash as much as you can tolerate...
Since this thread has significantly gone off track, let's all understand (or try to) these elements of message board policy as it applies to personal attacks...
I'd add that "items 1-3 don't apply to slapd!cks" but that's obvious.
- It's most simply defined as attacking the person, not the message.
- It doesn't mean you can attack back even if you're personally attacked.
- It doesn't protect public people and entities.
I wanna talk about #2 at some length... I'm a frequent violator of #2 although seldom/never of #1. I've acknowledged that publicly and privately to moderators and site owners along with an explanation--over and over. When the people who run this place moderate as it should be done IMO, they don't have any issues with me and #2. It's ONLY WHEN THEY DON'T that I will defend myself and be a violator of #2. And the reason I'm a frequent violator is because that's how often moderating isn't done properly. That said, I like the people who run and have run this site, and I commend them for the work they do. As they know, never do I complain about anyone's behavior here even though I'm the target of much of it. I simply take matters into my own hands when they opt to sit and watch.
#3 is misunderstood, but it's consistent with how defamation standards are adjudicated in the real world. When you're a public figure, the "laws" protecting you aren't enforced as strictly as they are for private individuals. You elect to put yourself in the public eye for better or for worse. "Vince" in this case is the AD and wants to be the AD. He has subjected himself to the scrutiny that comes with that. You don't get to protect him like you try to protect yourself with message board protocols. Now if I said he cheated on his wife, that's a different story. If my criticism is confined to the job he's doing, his background--he is factually a slapd!ck-- or any other element of his public life, that's fair game. You don't have to like it, but it doesn't matter.
Current and former moderators, if I'm misunderstanding any of that, please chime in. And please take out the trash as much as you can tolerate...
Seriously? You act like a all the time
Let me clarify.....sl*****k is for KY fans that infuriates them. Our AD is not considered a KY fan, regardless if there are pics of him in KY uniform or posing with the enemy.
Now you are ruffling my feathers.
In fact, I'm not smiling now
Last edited:
Depends on if “Regime Apologist” is a perjorative term.
Before you get too settled in at the Victimhood Hotel, remember that whatever the target or intent of your counterattacks, they are aggressive and incessant, and pretty much on one topic. Also, you do walk a tightrope sometimes, in attacking a post so vigorously as to cast aspersions on the poster. In short, you sometimes invite attacks, then strike back. I enjoy a vigorous debate as much as anyone, and frankly don’t mind a few personal shots of the lighthearted variety, but not everyone is that way.
I have no problem with your characterization of my debating style. And it's why I take no particular offense when I get attacked. But if someone else wants it stopped, they have to stop the attacker; and failing that, you can't blame me for attacking back.
I typically use the term "regime apologist" in a general sense, not as particular to a single person although that does sometimes happen. The word "apologist" is also technically speaking not criticism...
"...a person who makes a defense in speech or writing of a belief, idea, etc."
If you take it as a criticism, it's in the context I use it or because it's coupled with a criticism of others, e.g., "clown show apologist" which is interpreted as a criticism of the person making the apology. We're getting into murky water when you try to broaden the rules to INTERPRETED as a personal attack...
Zipp you crossed the line on #1 in your first reply in thread. Accusing posters of "a special kind of hate" without directly quote posting anybody was a personal attack. Instead of debating their opinions directly with reasoning for why you disagree with their opinions you lobbed an insult instead, saying their hate is special.
When people admit they hate someone, how is my pointing that out criticism? And I could question how calling it "special" is anything more than expressing a POV that it's unique.
In a discussion of how we discuss, it's also good to keep in mind timeless zipp-ism #216...
Thin skin has no place on an internet message board.
You are implying their hate is inappropriate. Or maybe you aren't? Do you think their hate is inappropriate? The hate isn't special they are posting standard POVs the rest of the world shares about BP.
As for thin skin you are the one claiming the hate is over the top (it isn't) and complaining about being attacked and needing to fire back at your enemies in your rule #2. I'm just pointing out you broke your rule #1.
It's whatever. Keep banging whatever drum it is over there. I agree, it's everybody else. Not you.
Cheers!
Last edited:
So what I am getting from this post now is that we as Louisville fans are being too over the top about our feeling towards Petrino. He took money from the University and the fan base that he flat out didn't earn. Like I said just take Jawon Pass, he failed that Kid. Petrino nor his Son did anything to help that young Man last year when he was struggling, nothing. But put that aside and look at all the players who transferred out, was it because of Petrino and his staff quitting on them or something else. We will never know.
Well just because he was the HC doesn’t mean we should lay all the blame on his shoulders. There was enough blame to go around. Coaches and players. That’s what happen when the team just didn’t perform to anybody’s expectations.
That’s a pretty soft landing spot for Bobby. Expectations probably involved being 6-6, 7-5 or 5-7 but even if those were inflated, 2-8 and getting beat by 40 points a game were on the sorry ass previous regime. Petrino.
I think just about all hate under any circumstance is inappropriate. I'll argue it's irrational, unproductive, and paradoxically too often feeds into the target of that hate.
It's however not uncommon, and it's becoming too common for it to be justified. Thinking and behaving in extremes is IMO ridiculous most of the time.
I'm not sure where you're getting "everybody else" as far as what I've said. The characterizations I describe are too common for my liking, but they're not everywhere and in everyone. You either misunderstood, or you're exaggerating my position.
More on point, I'm not defending Petrino--mostly because it doesn't matter. I'm pushing back against the grossly oversimplified analysis that one thing explains the outcome in a complex situation. Hating Petrino goes along with that...
"Thin skin has no place on an internet message board"
I think the posts in this thread are standard feelings fans have about BP nation wide. Honestly some of the reactions are tame and alot more forgiving than you would see from fans of other programs if they first hand witnessed last year. So no, I do not think UofL fans are being over the top at all.
Last edited:
I don’t hate anything in this life, but I do despise the fact that there are people out there that are either getting paid or were paid to do a job that they were, or are, not doing. That describes Bobby Petrino to a “T”. I guess it boils down to whether you believe he intentionally torpedoed our season last year for his personal gain or not. I just happen to believe that is exactly what he did and I’m all for suing him for the return of either all or, or a great portion of, the $14 million. Yeah, I know he’s only received around $7 million at this point and I’m in favor of not cutting another check to him period. Let him sue us and prove that he actually did the job he was charged with performing.
GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!
GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!
Don’t forget, there are certain elements that consider any criticism of Petrino / Pitino as criticism of TJ and that, cannot and will not be tolerated. It will push back vigorously.
It’s over.
He’s gone. All of them are gone.
It didn’t work out like we’d hoped, and 98% of us were wrong.
Let it go.
I’ll not click this thread again
Maybe.
He’s gone. All of them are gone.
It didn’t work out like we’d hoped, and 98% of us were wrong.
Let it go.
I’ll not click this thread again
Maybe.
Just for the sake of argument. No responsibility for having 3 different DC’s, no responsibility for the AD who was Bobby’s boss meaning there should have been some management control or oversight. Using your math, several years of prosperity will never equal 1-2 really bad seasons. What have you done for me lately. I completely understand but you got to accept the ups and downs and if you can’t you move on, which we did. I don’t see a need to burn him at the stake.. he didn’t cost us a NC.
That is right Louisvillian. It doesn't matter if it's the NBA, NFL, MLB, or NHL. If a team that should have the talent to at least go to a bowl or make the playoffs , under achieves that Coach is held responsible and is fired. Why should Petrino be any different? And to throw it at the feet of the players is cheap. What were they supposed to do? If your coaches are not given you anything to work with what are you supposed to do. Make it up on your own. Like I said I another post this past game Coach Satterfield had a game plan and they executed it. Petrino's was left Puma start if he gets in trouble pull him, and watch our team get roasted by 40 points a game.
Similar threads
