re: Why is wanting better for LSU football a negative?

quote:

---

dont act like there isnt posters on here that blame Miles for everything negative and yet don't give him credit for anything.

---

I can't name a poster that literally blames Miles for everything negative, and doesn't give him credit for anything. However, I have seen Pumpers/Miles Defenders (I don't mean to be insulting with the Pumper label, but it works to identify who I'm referring to and it is generally befitting) grossly exaggerate and misrepresent the position of posters who give a critical opinion, which mostly stifles the chance at a good argument/discussion. At that point, the argument shifts from the substance of the topic to arguing against the Pumper's misrepresentation, and oftentimes, the argument just devolves into goofy, crass personal attacks.

Another issue with this is that oftentimes people argue against a general sort of perceived common criticism (as opposed to something specific), and in doing so, create a vague, amalgamated caricature that they are arguing against as opposed to going point-by-point with the actual person who they're arguing with. This has become a popular way to argue on a wide range of subjects. Some people (Weasels) purposefully do this as a dishonest tactic, and create caricatural straw men to attack. If this type of general argument is in response to something real, and doesn't demonize or misrepresent people, then it can be useful.

Back to the topic, I have seen posters critique various aspects of the program, and suggest that LSU could do better with a different head coach, which is different than what you're talking about.