Occam's Razor says the solution which requires the fewest assumptions should be selected.

Back in November we would have had to assume 1) Cannizaro was lying about Cohen talking to him previously, 2) Cohen was lying about not talking to Cannizaro, 3) Cannizaro lied about being surprised when Mainieri told him about Cohen going to call him, and 4) Mainieri likely knew about them lying about all of the above and so he decided to lie about it, too.

2 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Posted by ell_13

Member since Apr 2013

85530 posts

Posted on 5/17/17 at 3:31 pm to LSURussian

quote:
Back in November we would have had to assume 1) Cannizaro was lying about Cohen talking to him previously, 2) Cohen was lying about not talking to Cannizaro, 3) Cannizaro lied about being surprised when Mainieri told him about Cohen going to call him, and 4) Mainieri likely knew about them lying about all of the above and so he decided to lie about it, too

Lying comes 2nd nature to coaches, especially good recruiters.

0 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Posted by therick711

South

Member since Jan 2008

25526 posts

Posted on 5/17/17 at 3:33 pm to LSURussian

Yet you were ok with assuming that 1) Cohen wouldn't talk to a guy he was going to offer a job to prior to offering; 2) Cohen would tell Mainieri that he was going to hire Andy without talking to Andy; 3) Andy would accept a job in 30 minutes he did not previously even know he was a candidate for; 4) State wouldn't have to interview its candidate for a job before hiring him; and 5) Cohen would extend Mainieri any kind of professional courtesy.

It never made sense, Occam's razor as you define it in this situation is asinine, and you have since been proven wrong on the facts. Seems pretty simple to me.

This post was edited on 5/17/17 at 3:35 pm

1 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Tiger Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board