Who deserves a/another ring on this roster?

[PatsFanSince74]

I very much agree with you that everyone who goes out and makes it in the big game definitely deserves it for all their hard work. And now I'll say that you could argue that each and every single player in the NFL deserves a ring for the effort that they put out on the field every single game (With some exceptions, no doubt) If you are a professional athlete, and I'll make the assumption that neither of us are, then you have to give it your best. And that's all you can expect from someone. But to say that they don't "deserve" a ring because they didn't win it... They still try their hardest to get to that point. In my books, that means they deserve it.

Perhaps we have different definitions of the word "deserve". But seeing as how you and I have different opinions, I won't press the matter any further.

on YOUR final snitty comment, you first posted and I quote "the recognition comment was in the context of what I regard as an absurd premise of this thread". Not really "politely expressed" if you ask me. Since when has anything as harmless as deserving a/ another superbowl ring been justified to be claimed absurd? You can't say that you "politely expressed" your opinion when you openly put down the thread starter.

The whole Sanders situation sheds some light on the other discussion going on within this thread. The fact that a team loses and wins as a team. I personally emphatically believe this statement, and in doing so I reinforce my point that every single team goes out and does their best to win the Superbowl. The fact of the matter is that we both enjoy different illusions of the word "deserve" when in reality I suspect that we both are in the wrong. Maybe some people don't deserve rings, and maybe some do. But I personally think that if you play in the NFL and each and every day you're practicing so that one day you can get that opportunity, then you DO deserve that ring. Because you're simply doing your job.

But even if I do get some demeaning self-contradictory reply, this has gone on long enough. Seriously. :spygate:

We're not going to resolve our essential disagreement. You defended what I view as a bad, nay "absurd," premise very well, but I still see it differently.

And, BTW, you make a very good point about the effort put out by every guy who makes an NFL Roster. They are warriors and, for the most part, men of character and integrity. They nearly universally deserve our praise, but, in my opinion, the rings are still "deserved" only by those who earn them.

I believe in the value and importance of words. To me, it is important to distinguish between "accomplishment" and "effort."

Those who accomplish the ultimate goal in any field "deserve" the encomia and honors reserved for those who so achieve. Those who strive hard, no matter how worthily, but don't achieve the ultimate goal are still praiseworthy and, indeed, as in the case of Barry Sanders et al., are often superior practitioners to those who end up with, in this case, the ring, but they are eligible for other honors, which they richly and justly "deserve."

Calling the view expressed by another "absurd" is hardly impolite. Had I attacked the poster personally or used offensive language, I would have been "impolite." In your case, for example, just because I think you are arguing an absurd premise doesn't mean I think you are unintelligent, illogical or "absurd" yourself; it just means I think you are wrong in this case.

The definition of "absurd" includes "illogical," "untrue" and "false." If I think a premise is illogical, untrue or false to a high degree, I reserve the right to call it "absurd." I will continue to post in that manner, but, will, as I have done for over 8,000 posts and nearly seven years here, also listen and respond respectfully to those who disagree with me, as I think I did with you.

I've enjoyed debating with you and look forward to future discussions. I see that you are relatively new to the Board, so, here goes:

:welcome:

 

[Creative Username]

We're not going to resolve our essential disagreement. You defended what I view as a bad, nay "absurd," premise very well, but I still see it differently.

And, BTW, you make a very good point about the effort put out by every guy who makes an NFL Roster. They are warriors and, for the most part, men of character and integrity. They nearly universally deserve our praise, but, in my opinion, the rings are still "deserved" only by those who earn them.

I believe in the value and importance of words. To me, it is important to distinguish between "accomplishment" and "effort."

Those who accomplish the ultimate goal in any field "deserve" the encomia and honors reserved for those who so achieve. Those who strive hard, no matter how worthily, but don't achieve the ultimate goal are still praiseworthy and, indeed, as in the case of Barry Sanders et al., are often superior practitioners to those who end up with, in this case, the ring, but they are eligible for other honors, which they richly and justly "deserve."

Calling the view expressed by another "absurd" is hardly impolite. Had I attacked the poster personally or used offensive language, I would have been "impolite." In your case, for example, just because I think you are arguing an absurd premise doesn't mean I think you are unintelligent, illogical or "absurd" yourself; it just means I think you are wrong in this case.

The definition of "absurd" includes "illogical," "untrue" and "false." If I think a premise is illogical, untrue or false to a high degree, I reserve the right to call it "absurd." I will continue to post in that manner, but, will, as I have done for over 8,000 posts and nearly seven years here, also listen and respond respectfully to those who disagree with me, as I think I did with you.

I've enjoyed debating with you and look forward to future discussions. I see that you are relatively new to the Board, so, here goes:

:welcome:

um...
I thank you. :rocker: I thoroughly enjoyed our discussion as well, and I must say that while I view your opinions as somewhat harsh, they do hold some truth. What I can extract is that you believe that everyone has to go out there and earn it by winning the Superbowl. I profusely agree. As for the other points... Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I must say that I always found "absurd" carries with it a level of malicious intent, but perhaps I was mistaken in believing that it did.

And there is a point I've been meaning to bring up for a while. While most athletes in the NFL are hardworking, honest and generally good people all around, there are a different group who take advantage of their situations.
I believe we can both agree that no matter how good a player is, if their physical stature and skills are ill-gained (through the use of steroids or other performance enhancing drugs) that those few do NOT "deserve" their rings (whatever that word may mean to you).

 

[PatsFanSince74]

um...
I thank you. :rocker: I thoroughly enjoyed our discussion as well, and I must say that while I view your opinions as somewhat harsh, they do hold some truth. What I can extract is that you believe that everyone has to go out there and earn it by winning the Superbowl. I profusely agree. As for the other points... Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I must say that I always found "absurd" carries with it a level of malicious intent, but perhaps I was mistaken in believing that it did.

And there is a point I've been meaning to bring up for a while. While most athletes in the NFL are hardworking, honest and generally good people all around, there are a different group who take advantage of their situations.
I believe we can both agree that no matter how good a player is, if their physical stature and skills are ill-gained (through the use of steroids or other performance enhancing drugs) that those few do NOT "deserve" their rings (whatever that word may mean to you).

Yes. That's why I wrote "nearly universally deserve our praise."

Good discussion. See ya around the Board.