lupedafiasco wrote: ↑15 Jun 2022 15:39
You see it all the time. Damarious Randall is talented. King is good when healthy. Turner is a good player. Lazard has #1 potential. We here all this garbage until the player (or GM for that matter) leaves and finally it’s a breath of fresh air for fans to finally say something like “yeah he was bad.”
I'm going to use this for illustrative purposes.
Some people hold some opinions like these, but almost no one holds all of them.
I'd imagine I'm considered among the most optimistic, team-friendly posters here because I consider myself to be one. I also think the results have validated my optimism. We're the second-best-run organization over the past 30 years; the Patriots have us beat, but the Steelers, Ravens, Colts, and Packers (maybe I'm forgetting someone) make up the next tier of awesomeness. I think it's a joy to be a Packers fan in this era.
But I'm getting sidetracked. My point is the list of positions above. I, as an optimist, hold that Turner is a good player. I hold that view because of numerous advanced analytics about his blocking grades and win rates. He's consistently been an above-average RT for the Packers, much to my surprise, after struggling more at OG than I anticipated. In fact, cutting him while Jenkins and Bakh are still recovering from injury is my least favorite move of this offseason.
So here I am, making Lupe's point, tight? I'm such a boot-licking moron that I'm still holding onto Billy Turner of all people! But I always thought Kevin King stunk, healthy or not. And I'm not sure what the stance is with Randall. I mean, he
was fairly talented, and had a decent few years as a free safety after leaving us, but I also hated the pick initially (I preferred Rollins, so no horn tootin' here) and didn't understand the FS to CB transition. I gave the team the benefit of the doubt for a couple years, as I tend to do, and then was happy to be rid of the guy.
And then we're at Lazard, who I think is a pretty mediocre player. But I'm also not sure what "a #1 WR is" right now. He might be our TOP statistical WR. But I think we're knowingly going into this season planning on not having a "go-to #1" guy. We're planning on having multiple guys with different skillsets fill different roles.
But again, this post isn't about my opinions. It's about the illusion that there's a group of people who hold ALL the rosy, optimistic opinions at once, all the time. But the truth is that there's probably at least one frequent poster (an elite if you will) that holds every position. As a group, they hold all the optimistic ones, but each individual holds some optimistic ones and some negative ones.
By making up a concept of the elite poster who reigns down terror on any who think poorly of any management decision, you are simply misconstruing the trees for a forest, to paraphrase. You don't notice that the individual trees all have different characteristics. You simply know you argue with the forest all the time, so the forest must be one unified group of people who hold every opinion you disagree with.
It's a simple failure of nuance and communication... on the part of those complaining. It's a one-way misunderstanding. If you believe there is an overly optimistic elite., it's because you don't bother to differentiate between people on here, not because there's a unified overly optimistic elite. It doesn't exist. When DJ listed off the things he doesn't like about the team, all the posters were like "oh hey, what a reasonable list of concerns." And y'all still can't grasp what's happening here.
2 guns