- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 29,794
- Reaction score
- 20,459
Just an idea, but hear me out:
What do you guys think about making a wiki that includes the opposing perspectives on all of the points that get rehashed every week on this board?
For example:
What would this accomplish? Well, since 90% of debates here are rehashes of arguments that have been had many times over, this could make it so that we spend less time doing nonproductive stuff (beating dead horses, arguing against strawman positions that nobody actually holds), and more time debating the merits of the actual points that two sides of a debate are making. What do you guys think?
For example, next time someone makes a thread about how Maroney sucks and is made of glass and Morris is better, I'd love to be able to respond with a link to the wiki entry that points out that:
Morris has missed exactly as many games as Maroney has
Maroney is statistically a much better RB (advanced, situational statistics that adjust for down and distance, not just YPC and stuff)
Neither are great pass-blockers
This would be a HUGE benefit to the level of discourse on this board, IMO, because any response that didn't attempt to address those points would just end the thread. Wouldn't change anyone's position, and there would be no point in having the discussion in the first place.
What do you guys think about making a wiki that includes the opposing perspectives on all of the points that get rehashed every week on this board?
For example:
- An entry about why Maroney is just fine as a RB (and another about how he sucks and is made of glass and should be cut to make room for BJGE)
- An entry about why we may go with the 4-3 vs. the 3-4 and vice versa
- An entry about trading Tom Brady and why it might or might not have been a good idea
- An entry about whether Ellis Hobbs is a starter-caliber CB
- An entry about Richard Seymour's status as an elite DE
- An entry for opposing viewpoints on Belichick's draft acumen since 2005
What would this accomplish? Well, since 90% of debates here are rehashes of arguments that have been had many times over, this could make it so that we spend less time doing nonproductive stuff (beating dead horses, arguing against strawman positions that nobody actually holds), and more time debating the merits of the actual points that two sides of a debate are making. What do you guys think?
For example, next time someone makes a thread about how Maroney sucks and is made of glass and Morris is better, I'd love to be able to respond with a link to the wiki entry that points out that:
Morris has missed exactly as many games as Maroney has
Maroney is statistically a much better RB (advanced, situational statistics that adjust for down and distance, not just YPC and stuff)
Neither are great pass-blockers
This would be a HUGE benefit to the level of discourse on this board, IMO, because any response that didn't attempt to address those points would just end the thread. Wouldn't change anyone's position, and there would be no point in having the discussion in the first place.
Last edited:
