Unfortunately, X saved their (next-to) worst game for last*

[Mr. Neutral]

What word would apply to our performance in that game, xeus? As I've said multiple times, the team had a great season, they're fine young men (or appear to be), and the coaching staff is to be congratulated on its job as well.

That having been said, nobody in their right mind can say we played well against UCLA. We played well in a many, many other games, but not that one. If you want to use a different word, go ahead.

Great actors can give awful performances.
Great bands can record awful songs.
Great politicians can make awful decisions.
But apparently great teams can't play awful games. Go figure.

[xeus]

Great actors can give awful performances.
Great bands can record awful songs.
Great politicians can make awful decisions.
But apparently great teams can't play awful games. Go figure.

No Gary - you individually named each of the players who, in your opinion, played an awful game. Nice try though ...

[Mr. Neutral]

You're right. I didn't name Bronson, for example-because he didn't play.

Face it, xeus, would you ever say an X player had an awful game? Let's say he was 0-17 with 10 turnovers. Would that qualify?

Which guy (whose stats I mentioned as well) do you think DIDN'T have an awful game, and what specifically is your reasoning? And please leave out things like "tried hard", "good season", etc. Give specific, statistical reasons why the players mentioned didn't have an awful game.

[xeus]

Give specific, statistical reasons why the players mentioned didn't have an awful game.

Sure thing, as soon as you give me specific, medical reasons for why you feel compelled to kick 3 seniors (all 1,000 pt scorers no less) while they are down.

[birdman71]

gary,
just as you missed the point at the beginning of this thread, you're missing the same point so well articulated by my man, xeus. you can choose to argue that we didn't play a good game and others can argue that a great team made our not as good team unsuccessful. the point that several of us have tried, and apparently failed to get through to you is that calling out 4 of our players by name, 3 of whom just finished fabulous careers right before you wrote it, was at best inappropriate, poorly-timed and/or ''harsh''.

xeus,
see you at the banquet.
birdman71

[Mr. Neutral]

Fine, I edited the initial post, so all panties can be unbunched.

Mark Buerhle gave up 7 runs in 1.2 innings today.
He was awful.

Octavio Dotel, another acquisition by our idiot GM, gave up 3 runs in 1 inning. He was awful.

Of course, some might find these performances scintillating and encouraging.

[xeus]

Fine, I edited the initial post, so all panties can be unbunched.

Mark Buerhle gave up 7 runs in 1.2 innings today.
He was awful.

Octavio Dotel, another acquisition by our idiot GM, gave up 3 runs in 1 inning. He was awful.

Of course, some might find these performances scintillating and encouraging.

Don't edit to unbunch my panties Gary - edit it because you realize it was a stupid thing to say in the first place, if you call yourself a Xavier fan. Or maybe you feel your fandom entitles you to say whatever the hell you want?

Do you ever wonder why this board is a ghost town?

[Mr. Neutral]

It wasn't stupid, it was correct. But being right on this board has never been a priority. There's more emphasis on sugarcoating the obvious.

[xeus]

It wasn't stupid, it was correct. But being right on this board has never been a priority. There's more emphasis on sugarcoating the obvious.

Have you ever considered that calling their performances awful - while in your mind that's "correct" - simply isn't a very nice thing to say?

Or does your fandom grant you more license than the basic rules of civility would allow?

[Mr. Neutral]

So, Mr. Rogers, exactly what word describes the quality of our individual performances? Not their effort, not their desire, not their heart, but the actual execution?