Chicago Fanatics Message Board
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

11/10: A New Low
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=90287
Page 1 of 5

Author:  Dave In Champaign [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:17 am ]
Post subject:  11/10: A New Low

Not just for the Bears, but for Señor Columnist, too. Observe:

Quote:
It turns out that not playing football is indeed the best thing for the Bears, because any lukewarm attempt to do so is a convincing argument for regime change. Swiftly.


Try to fit that adverb into the preceding sentence. "Swiftly regime change" was the best I could come up with.

Quote:
To say the Bears quit in a 55-14 loss to the Packers on Sunday night that dropped them to 3-6 would be unfair, because it would assume that anything was ever even begun at Lambeau Field.


"It would assume" is kind of a weird construction, but he goes right ahead and tops himself with "was ever even begun."

Quote:
Trestman’s spinelessness and circle-talking prattle, general manager Phil Emery’s manufactured arguments


Aren't all arguments manufactured? Where would one find organic arguments?

Quote:
in support of bad players who he thinks are good, Jay Cutler’s inherent blithe indifference and Brandon Marshall’s over-romanticized pathological narcissism have conspired to bring them here.


Word soup, comin' through!

Quote:
There’s nothing for Trestman to say, now.


(unnecessary comma)

Quote:
Any previous buy-in from any hopeful player in that locker room has been sold short, cashed out at a loss.


"I'm having trouble deciding between two phrasings of the same hackneyed image. Hey, wait a minute, I can just use both!"

Quote:
Not one word from him can stop that at this point, nor can one from any other Bear


what is this i cant even

Quote:
Professional football teams aren’t allowed to perform so unsatisfactorily without some kind of response beyond the plaintive wails and acid invective of insulted fans.


Plaintive wails! Acid invective! Writering!

Quote:
Trestman’s vaunted “toolbox of concepts” is empty. Even in the mythical Pandora’s Box,


oh for fuck's sake

Quote:
after the release of all its similarly hideous contents upon the world


Similarly hideous to what? The concepts from the toolbox? This is so hamfisted.

Quote:
The contemplation of longer-term ramification of such abject failure is so much more than sobering, especially when any look at the Bears’ current reality demands first the consumption of some strong stuff.


"Thinking about the Bears' future is sobering, especially since thinking about their present drives one to drink." -what this sentence actually says, minus the SAT words

Quote:
it starts with a cold look at who is under contract and what voices may need to be heard to get the best out of some sunk commitments.


Sometimes I think Dan isn't writing a column so much as he's playing a private game called "How Many Dependent Clauses Can I Cram Into Each Sentence?"

Quote:
But these coaches, at least and in this moment, have been reduced to useless ciphers.


Department of Redundancy Dept.

Quote:
This group won’t be here when and if the Bears ever pull out of their unconscionable tailspin


How can a tailspin be unconscionable?

Quote:
If this isn’t enough, what does enough look like?

Marc Trestman should be going into the “Bye.”


This is something Mitch Albom would write.

Author:  No Clever Moniker [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

He did what many of us here have done, he drunk wrote. Except here on this board we would be more tolerant of his hamfisted writering in exchange for some open discourse or disagreement about what he's saying today and what he has said in the past. It is writing like this that makes Doug & OB seem reasonable and rational, and I thank you DiC for sparing me reading this before I go to bed.

Author:  Curious Hair [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Post of the year. I'm tearing up laughing. This is a dark day for Señor.

Author:  W_Z [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 7:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Dave In Champaign wrote:

Word soup, comin' through!



too many cooks!

Author:  badrogue17 [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 7:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Curious Hair wrote:
Post of the year. I'm tearing up laughing. This is a dark day for Señor.

I figuratively love Dave in Champaign, I really do.

Author:  SomeGuy [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 8:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

badrogue17 wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
Post of the year. I'm tearing up laughing. This is a dark day for Señor.

I figuratively love Dave in Champaign, I really do.


I literally love him in a figurative way.

Author:  Curious Hair [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

This is seriously like some Matt-Taibbi-on-Tom-Friedman shit. Destroyed like Carthage.

Author:  Regular Reader [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Dave, that is yeoman's work!

Thank you.

Author:  Brick [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Wow. I hope Dave doesn't read my posts now.

Author:  Dr. Kenneth Noisewater [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Dan Bernstein wrote:
Professional football teams aren’t allowed to perform so unsatisfactorily without some kind of response beyond the plaintive wails and acid invective of insulted fans.


Come on. Who is he writing for?

I've never met anyone in my life that would want to read that sentence.

Author:  Curious Hair [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

How does indifference conspire? Conspiracies are a lot of hard work!

Author:  ZephMarshack [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Dave In Champaign wrote:
Quote:
If this isn’t enough, what does enough look like?

Marc Trestman should be going into the “Bye.”


This is something Mitch Albom would write.

I hate Albom but that's really Dim O'Braincell worthy.

Author:  Curious Hair [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

dummy Trestman and his wife and three kids

Author:  City of Fools [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
Dan Bernstein wrote:
Professional football teams aren’t allowed to perform so unsatisfactorily without some kind of response beyond the plaintive wails and acid invective of insulted fans.


Come on. Who is he writing for?

I've never met anyone in my life that would want to read that sentence.


answer: himself.

Author:  Dr. Kenneth Noisewater [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Curious Hair wrote:
dummy Trestman and his wife and three kids


I read some tweet of his over the weekend where I thought DeLuca had actually died but it was another one of his witticisms.

Author:  redskingreg [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Wow.

Is this really "wow" worthy? Reminds me of those Wow chips that explicitly stated consumption could lead to anal leakage, like your posts.

Boilermaker Rick wrote:
I hope

You can hope in one hand and shit in the other. Tell me which fills faster, Rick.

Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Dave doesn't read

Something tells me Dave couldn't have gotten this far in life without the ability to read. How stupid are you?

Boilermaker Rick wrote:
my posts now.

WHERE IS THE COMMA AFTER POSTS?!?!?!?

Author:  Brick [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

:lol:

Author:  City of Fools [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

"Which lasts longer: Marc Trestman's tenure as Bears HC or Sun-Times masquerade as "a newspaper"?"

Author:  rogers park bryan [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Jim O'Donnell
@jodonnell17
Any ass-wipe Chicago columnist who writes with anything but outrageous humor & sarcasm about this game should report to Chris De Luca Mon-am

Author:  Kirkwood [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
Dan Bernstein wrote:
Professional football teams aren’t allowed to perform so unsatisfactorily without some kind of response beyond the plaintive wails and acid invective of insulted fans.
Come on. Who is he writing for?

I've never met anyone in my life that would want to read that sentence.

OK, so English was my worst subject in school by far. I had to google plaintive, acid and invective. Once I put the sentence in English for Dummies I see why DiC wants to scratch his eyeballs out.

wails: a prolonged high-pitched cry of pain, grief, or anger.
plaintive: sounding sad and mournful.
acid: sharp, biting, or sour in manner, disposition, or nature
invective: insulting, abusive, or highly critical language.

Bernstein wrote:
Professional football teams aren’t allowed to perform so unsatisfactorily without some kind of response beyond the sad sad cries and biting insulting language of insulted fans.


I'm insulted.

Author:  Curious Hair [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:11 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
Dan Bernstein wrote:
Professional football teams aren’t allowed to perform so unsatisfactorily without some kind of response beyond the plaintive wails and acid invective of insulted fans.


Come on. Who is he writing for?

I've never met anyone in my life that would want to read that sentence.


"Plaintive wails" was the moment I knew Señor was gonna get it here.

Author:  Dr. Kenneth Noisewater [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Curious Hair wrote:
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
Dan Bernstein wrote:
Professional football teams aren’t allowed to perform so unsatisfactorily without some kind of response beyond the plaintive wails and acid invective of insulted fans.


Come on. Who is he writing for?

I've never met anyone in my life that would want to read that sentence.


"Plaintive wails" was the moment I knew Señor was gonna get it here.



FULL DISCLOSURE - I originally read that as "plaintive walls". I need to get my prescription checked.

My objection still stands.

Author:  Curious Hair [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Image
Plaintive whales.

Author:  Brick [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Reading Dan in that article was like reading Tall Midget with a serious head injury.

Author:  redskingreg [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Wish the Rochester Jeffersons would have faced the Louisville Brecks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1923_Roche ... ons_season

Author:  Curious Hair [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Dave In Champaign wrote:
Aren't all arguments manufactured? Where would one find organic arguments?


Whole BRick's

Author:  Zizou [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Dave's marauding into Bernstein's kingdom, burning his villages, and salting his fields. I like it. The excerpts from Beerstain's column epitomize the term "word vomit."

Author:  FavreFan [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Curious Hair wrote:
Dave In Champaign wrote:
Aren't all arguments manufactured? Where would one find organic arguments?


Whole BRick's

:lol: :lol:

This whole thread is great.

Author:  Don Tiny [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

This thread is a delight. :lol:

Author:  Reared on the Score [ Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 11/10: A New Low

Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Reading Dan in that article was like reading Tall Midget with a serious head injury.


there's your intended audience.

Page 1 of 5 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/