re: LSU-Baylor postgame column now on home page

I have a brother that plays baseball at the collegiate level, currently about to graduate from junior college and it looks like a strong possibility that he'll face LSU next year. Anyhow, I'll post on here exactly what I tell him when he lets someone's words get to him - be a man.

You cannot control other people's opinions, no matter how profoundly stupid they may be. Fact is, not everyone is created equal; some folks can run fast, some can jump high, and some are smarter than others. But in this country, everyone, smart or not, has a right to speak their mind. When a particularly 'special' person decides to speak their mind, why let it get to you? Simple answer - you can't. And this isn't just for baseball or sports, but in life. Would you let a huge fat guy calling you slow bother you? Then why let someone who's watching you play criticize the way you play & get to you?

It may be sad some of the things some of our posters say, but a person at the age of the players needs to mature and ignore it.

Settle your feathers my friend. Of course my comments aren't directed at you; of course I know you delete comments - as I said, I've followed the board for years; of course, criticsm and critiques are welcomed and expected on the board. And yes, I hear it all at the games, much of it fueled by alcohol and ignorance or both. It's just getting harder and harder to wade through the junk to find intelligent comments and critiques on here and I don't think that was always the case. I don't know what you can or even should do about it. Maybe split the Rant into 2 sections - one of which requires an IQ above that of peat moss. I WANT to read tigerdroppings - and the addition of Carl's blog is a big draw - but the marketplace is at least as tough a place to compete as the Box and if your faithful followers (not to mention faithful followers of the Tigers) are becoming discouraged, I thought you might want to know. That's all. Go back to sitting on your nest.

As I drink my morning coffee too soon after being up late to write the piece, I am again reminded of a few truths I've learned in almost 26 years in the business.

-- People usually see what they want to see in a story or column.

-- Some of people's harshest criticisms of a piece are often about something that wasn't actually written at all.

-- Everyone could use a good editor. I know I could.

I probably could have better served my main point by saying the questions "must from time to time" pop into the players' minds, because I can't be certain they all think that way. Based on my conversations with a number of college athletes, and being a student of human nature, I'm still OK with the way I wrote it.

As for the comparisons between eras, I'll defer to Augie Garrido, who's forgotten more baseball than I'll ever know. His answer (to the question I asked him at the 2005 College World Series) surprised me, because it was not what I expected. We talked more about comparing the 1982 and 1983 Texas teams to his 2005 Texas team, but he said even the programs of the late '90s had to adjust to the rapid changes in college baseball in 1998, 1999 and beyond. Those are well documented and not worth me rehashing here.

I probably did not state Augie's case as well as he did, and to him, I apologize.

A good editor would have helped me strip my language down to a better core, but I would like to assure everyone I wasn't preaching, I wasn't trying to baby the players or protect LSU or its players and coaches, and I wasn't attacking anyone who posts on this site -- or the site and its owners. Chicken is paying me to write here, so I'd be crazy to rip the site. At no time did I do that in the piece.

I merely pointed out there are things today's players have to contend with that players of a generation ago didn't. Whether the opinions are valid or not, whether the poster has a brain or not, whether the smart thing is to not read message boards if you're an athlete, the fact remains players do read (or hear about) the anonymous criticisms of their game. It's inarguable that this is something the players of 15 years ago didn't have to face.

That's why I have a ton of respect for Austin Nola's late-season upswing offensively. I'm not making a judgment on anyone; rather, noting the conditions have changed from one generation to the next. David Justice had the best approach: He stopped reading newspapers (and the Internet) late in his career. It helped him focus. He realized it was a waste of energy to worry about what others thought of him.

But he was approaching 40 years old, and it took him many years (and criticisms, and untruths, and ignorance) to come to this conclusion. It's probably not as easy for college kids.

I'm not telling anyone how to act. I'm just holding open a window to a world that didn't exist when LSU was becoming a national power. Just an observation. I appreciate everyone's insights.

Enjoy your Sunday, everyone.

I am not sure if Nola's offense has improved so much as he has produced timely hits that (a) were needed in clutch situations and (b) demonstrate that with maturity and patience, he should be able to produce at the plate. If there was some official definition of "clutch" I bet his batting average in that situation would be stronger than what he currently sports.

What I have seen, at the Box, last weekend in Hoover, and this weekend in the Regionals, is that not only is his defense strong, he is clutch there as well: he saves LSU from having runs scored against us. Not only is he defense, he's like the anti-offense, and that is thrilling to see. What that does is create space: teams don't get ahead or too far ahead, the Tigers poke out a run here or there, and the game stays even until the middle innings when we start to wear opponents down and as Rinaudo says, we just get stronger and blow it open.

quote:

---

i know of another forum where , if anything negative is mentioned, about players, recruits, coaches, no matter how much truth is in the post, that person is banned forever, its a ''Praise Party'' very boring, no objectivity,

---

The sad part is that the exact same level of unobjectivity exists among many of the negative posters here, but they are insulated by their "just keeping it real" and "not being homers" bullshite. There are posters on this board who are not half as objective as Dandy Don, but because their particular brand of bias and "homerism" is directed at bashing their team, its coaches and its players, they are raised by many on some sort of pedestal of "objectivity" that does nothing more than reveal how completely blind all involved really are.

Criticism of the team that is one inch beyond what is completely and totally accurate IS NO DIFFERENT WHATSOEVER than the guy who always insists that LSU can do no wrong. The only difference is in the person making the biased observations: one is biased by his passion and love for LSU which manifests itself in an artificially inflated view of the grandeur of the Tigers, the other is biased by an emotion that manifests itself as negative bashing (which ANY incorrect criticism ALWAYS is) of the team they claim to support and love. There is no doubt that the postive homer is far, FAR superior in every way as a fan and as a human being than the negative homer.