That Aud Smell

Soon enough, the brands that you wear, the national chain restaurants you patronize, the car that you drive, etc. will pronounce to the world who and what you are. I realize this is already true to some extent. But I think the lines are going to become much clearer -- and the corporations themselves are going to facilitate the process of branding themselves in alignment with certain segments of society.

Did you read what I wrote? That's not what I was doing (to the extent I was doing anything). In a way, you were. In another, you were not.

You really need that much more with regard to Peterman? Sheesh. Okay, though. Another name comes to mind: DiMarco. I watched Embedded. He is a darling of McDermott's. I read that he was the team's top-paid FA acquisition on the offence's side of the ball (can that be right? was he on the team last year?). Anyway. I saw a Tweet that he played ONE snap on offence yesterday. ONE. What is it about DiMarco that McDermott clearly finds so valuable? Literally went and Googled for this: ""Len's been awesome. He's a mentor. He's a spiritual leader, not just for games, but in the locker room," fullback Patrick DiMarco said. "He's in here a good bit talking with guys. He's also been ears to listen sometimes when we need to get something off our chest. ... This is the most proactive chaplain I've had from a team standpoint. For Bible study we have at least 15 or 20 guys, and chapel it's more than 30."

And of course all of that is correct, too. And yet, this regime has shown a willingness, a readiness to look beyond similar (or worse) failings or limitations with other players.

That's another part of what I was getting at with Taylor, and I appreciate your identifying it (where I failed). Taylor seemed to check every box with this FO, and yet ... something didn't fit or click. Was it his penchant for high-fashion outfits that did it?

I infer that Nevada's tax code played a role.

as far as you know or are concerned.

10

Lol at the Penguin prospect coming into the frame/play on his knees. https://twitter.com/BuffaloSabres/status/1039205815171702784

Appreciate that. My thoughts are really half-baked at this point. Lotulelei and Tolbert are other examples. Obviously, they fit into an obvious "those are their guys" assessment. But I think there's maybe something else, or maybe something specific, with what Beane/McDermott value and prize in those guys. I have no idea what those things might be. This may be a roundabout way of simply saying they have poor, flawed criteria for personnel selection. It's the specific manner in which the criteria are poor or flawed that interests me, though. Because I think they could be going about their fukkery in a uniquely bad way. Could be. I'm not sure.

The national political parties have long been trending towards extremes to mobilize their base(s) and energize the electorate. I think it's a fair point that the Democrats were on the leading edge of this tactic (identity politics, I guess?), and that Trump's GOP reflects the right making its own move within the culture wars. Talking head pundits from differing political alignments appear on TV and mostly yell at each other, or make faces of disbelief and disgust. So, our political leaders have been fanning the flames of division for a while now, with the hope that the result will be their party taking a seat, a majority, what have you. When the Nike ad campaign came on line, it really stopped me in my tracks. I'd long assumed that for-profit ventures, like Nike, would prefer to stay out of the culture war fray. Because they want everyone's money. This was played out in a microcosm when Deep South Taco in Buffalo got into a political p1ssing match on social media about a year ago or so (for supporting Sheriff Tim Howard). My wife was encouraged when Nike's online sales jumped 30% or whatever. Because, ostensibly, this means that there's some majority of the country (or maybe just active consumers?) who support the political position Nike staked out. But I found myself despairing. I have all sorts of family members who've been posting all sorts of take-downs of Nike, Kaep, etc. on their social media feeds. I've muted most of them. But I love them all. I love them all (or at least try mightily to love them) because they're my family. I have an in-law whose politics are really backward and fairly repugnant. But there are many ties that bind the two of us. I prefer to focus on the ties that bind, rather than the forces that serve to separate and divide. But now that Capital has arrived, now that the Markets are in the mix, I don't think the situation stands much hope. The country will be divided, irrevocably. I think that Artificial Intelligence will soon play a role in this, too. Augmented reality devices will allow us to avoid, and never meet or interact with, people with whom we disagree.

That's not the point that I, or anyone as far as I know, is making. I appreciate that. My antenna are back up for Beane/McDermott trying to find, draft, recruit players based on certain ... call it non-football criteria. And I'm not saying that a player's race or ethnicity plays a role in those criteria. It could, subconsciously I guess, but I don't think that would have to be the case for the hypothesis to have some validity. The Trent Murphy situation was the one that really got me thinking about it.

Nice work by Asplund on that first goal.

Good stuff. I do not mean to suggest that McDermott consciously thinks this way or is that stupid.

If I understand your question, I think Eleven was inferring that I'd implied there could be a racial preference at play in choosing between two try-hard, faith-based QBs. That wasn't the point I was trying to make, although I wouldn't rule it out as having been in play on some level when it came to going with Peterman over Taylor. (I also think lots of other things were in play, too, including Taylor's value to Cleveland (and the value of that pick to the Bills), the idea that McCarron might be the bridge QB, maybe the savings in moving on from Taylor as a veteran bridge QB (?).) More broadly, I am concerned about the presence of a feedback loop (not sure that's the term I want) with regard to Beane's and McDermott's preferences with personnel. Did Harrison Phillips do anything noticeable yesterday? Let us not forget: He's got that prominent football/cross tattoo on his arm. I'm not reaching any conclusions. But my radar's been turned back on in this regard.

I didn't mean to be too on the nose with that. I don't think it's quite that straightforward. I do think there are some unacknowledged (and maybe acknowledged) biases that are unduly influencing this regime's decision making processes with regard to personnel. Not for nothing: It struck me yesterday how much Trent Murphy looks like McDermott - generally speaking.

And so too is Peterman. I wonder if there are/were any other criteria.

I'm fairly convinced that they believe their own narrative. The question I'd left open was whether they could make it work. It has seemed at times like they'll be able to do it. Yesterday, not so much.

Fair. Last year's team started smartly -- they generally looked good. Then they were effing terrible. Then they squeaked into the playoffs.

(no idea whether what pi says will come to pass -- but let it be so!)

Interesting. I think that impression took hold for me in the first half of last season -- before the Saints and Chargers games.

I've also got my antenna up anew for whether Beane's and McDermott's type of player ("try-hard" and/or faith-based guys) is causing them to target and sign the wrong players. My current point of concern and curiosity is Trent Murphy. The guy's either not that good of a player, or he's plagued by undisclosed injuries (my bet would be a nagging sports hernia) and therefore not showing well. In either case, a FA signing that is doing nothing to move the needle.