Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 2023-04-30 at 12:53 PM, MOBomberFan said:

Ick

League should not allow this clown back. 
barker to tv is such an awful tone deaf move too. Soo many ex players from the past 10 years would be a drastic improvement. 

Posted

the team that likely appreciates Canadian Content more than any other has been in the last 3 GC games, won 2 out of 3, and was a fluke away from winning 3 in a row. That should be the template for every team in the league. CanCon matters....

Posted
40 minutes ago, Noeller said:

the team that likely appreciates Canadian Content more than any other has been in the last 3 GC games, won 2 out of 3, and was a fluke away from winning 3 in a row. That should be the template for every team in the league. CanCon matters....

A Canadian player (Robbie Smith) also got the Argos their GC win.  That coach needs to go have a cup of STFU.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Jpan85 said:

Also them embracing the Globals has led to advantage of being to use all roster spots to during the game.

Right off the top of my head I can think of one of the most hellacious hits ever, was by Global Hansen, and our global Maruo #00 making a notable sack.

Posted
3 hours ago, Rod Black said:

Right off the top of my head I can think of one of the most hellacious hits ever, was by Global Hansen, and our global Maruo #00 making a notable sack.

Wish the league would encourage global players getting an increased role. 

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, rebusrankin said:

Noel Thorpe is a jerk? Next you'll tell me water is wet.

He’s the anti lapolice. Utterly un likeable, piss poor player coach, talented play caller. Even if the als can him I bet he’s back in the league in no time. 

Edited by wbbfan
Posted (edited)
On 2023-04-28 at 1:06 PM, TBURGESS said:

Nope that ain't it. I am a contrarion on this point and several others. That's not the same a a bad faith arguement.  

Bad faith arguments are based in deception & hypocrisy. My argument is based on facts that I believe. It doesn't hide a hidden agenda or mean something that I didn't say. That's where some of you consistantly get it wrong. I say A you complain about B that you think I'm really talking about. That's a bad faith arguement. 

As someone who likes to poke the bear over at the political forum for kicks, I can get part of what you are saying. However, just like the political forum arguments, assuming what you believe to be fact is bad faith arguing in itself. Opinions, and belief in them, does not make them factual. Fact of the matter, is that most of us don't know all the facts on most matters....but what fun would a forum be if most people were self aware enough to realize that.

Edited by GCn20
Posted
15 minutes ago, GCn20 said:

As someone who likes to poke the bear over at the political forum for kicks, I can get part of what you are saying. However, just like the political forum arguments, assuming what you believe to be fact is bad faith arguing in itself. Opinions, and belief in them, does not make them factual. Fact of the matter, is that most of us don't know all the facts on most matters....but what fun would a forum be if most people were self aware enough to realize that.

Someone hacked your account.

Posted
1 hour ago, GCn20 said:

As someone who likes to poke the bear over at the political forum for kicks, I can get part of what you are saying. However, just like the political forum arguments, assuming what you believe to be fact is bad faith arguing in itself. Opinions, and belief in them, does not make them factual. Fact of the matter, is that most of us don't know all the facts on most matters....but what fun would a forum be if most people were self aware enough to realize that.

I make an statement. Dipshit complains about something I didn't say. I point that out. Dipshit calls that an accuasation. I restate my opinion. Dipshit calls it arguing in bad faith. I correct him. Dipshit says I'm lying (That's what I'm sorry I don't believe you means). I say that makes you wrong and point out that he in fact is the one who is arguing in bad faith. I let Dipshit have the last word. Dipshit 2 tries to bring me back in with 'Why are you appologizing to that guy'. I ignore it. You come in the next day or is it the day after to try and start it back up again. :wacko: 

Assuming that what you believe are facts is different than basing what you believe on facts.

There are less than a 100 active posters on this forum especially in the off season. We are the uber fans. We are the one's who would watch a pre-season game that our team isn't in. Assuming that all teams have similar groups of uber fans & that all of them would watch, that's less than 1000 fans across the country. Add in those who would watch their own team's away pre-season game and we're at a few thousand. 

TSN isn't making money on pre-season games & likely losing money. While not a fact, it's based on the above.

TSN can just put on something they already own and make more money in the timeslot. Fact.

When I had seasons tickets in Wpg, BC and Cgy, I couldn't give away the pre-season tickets because no one wanted them. 

Playing pre-season games on TV won't do anything to increase the CFL fan base. Based on the the above fact. 

Defn: "A bad faith argument is an inauthentic argument. By this, we don’t necessarily mean a factually incorrect argument. Rather, an argument that the arguer doesn’t believe in themselves. Common Bad Faith Arguements: "Ad hominem attacks
Straw man claims, Red herring arguments, Appeals to ignorance, Appeals to authority, Slippery slope arguments".

Posted
25 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

TSN isn't making money on pre-season games & likely losing money. While not a fact, it's based on the above.

TSN can just put on something they already own and make more money in the timeslot. Fact.

I'm not sure that's how it works...

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...