Marshall now a Safety

[MakoShark]

And then... there is "antique", which is either something very old or someone who really doesn't like to be cued at all! :deadhorse:

There's too many English majors in this forum.

Can I get an Amen!, Stinky?

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

Maybe he is trying to speak spanish...

[Panama]

Christ Panama! You catch that...that....and you can't see how you made a contradiction in the other post?

Well, show me, then. Show me what I'm missing, 'cause I just do not see a contradiction. There is nothing contradictory about saying a guy has potential worth developing and a guy is regressing in the development of his potential.

[Panama]

Fleet had to remove some of them, because they skewed the page when you'd go to browse for different emoticons. I have been adding them back at a dimension of 125 pixels or below, so as not to
make the emoticons page all jacked up. I have re-added it!

Awesome, thanks! That's one of my favorite smileys!

:que:

[Antonio's Gates]

Addae is definitely on a different level than Gilchrist. He just flies around the field. I could easily see him surpass Gilchrist in snaps by years end and I like Gilchrist.

[Antonio's Gates]

as for marshall, who cares. I don't see him as active unless there's an injury anyways. for insurance, he's not bad.

[MakoShark]

Well, show me, then. Show me what I'm missing, 'cause I just do not see a contradiction. There is nothing contradictory about saying a guy has potential worth developing when the guy is regressing.

:Beerbong:

With that said. Sorenson could flip the polarity of his potential with a good showing tonight.

[Panama]

:Beerbong:

With that said. Sorenson could flip the polarity of his potential with a good showing tonight.

Polarity??? What the hell does polarity have to do with the price of tea in China???

I can't tell if you're making a joke or being serious.

Look, I'm not just trying to be contentious here. I suspect the root of our disagreement is a misunderstanding over terms. I suspect we mean different things by potential and/or regression. Because otherwise I can't see where the contradiction might be, and you're not spelling it out for me.

Maybe a third party can point out clearly where either Mako or I have gone wrong?

[MakoShark]

I work in the electronics field so polarity is a term I use frequently. Positive vs negative, up vs down, playing your way on to a roster vs playing your way off. To be regressing is to not be progressing or realizing a perceived potential to develop into something positive.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

You guys should debate whether big guys or little guys are more prone to ankle injuries.

[MakoShark]

There's no debate to have. Its big guys with little ankles :smile:

Anyway, I'm about out for the weekend. Got an "organization day" in a few, tomorrows my AWS day (off day) and Monday's a holiday. Long weekend for me! Got big plans for the hotrod this weekend so I don't think I'll be around. Ya'll have a safe weekend.

[Panama]

I work in the electronics field so polarity is a term I use frequently. Positive vs negative, up vs down, playing your way on to a roster vs playing your way off. To be regressing is to not be progressing or realizing a perceived potential to develop into something positive.

Ok, well, polarity doesn't fit into this argument, does it? It's not as if potential is either a positive or a negative you can flip like a switch. Perhaps that is why you thought I was contradicting myself.

It's more like a paper cup. The potential is defined by the shape of the cup. As you pour water into it, you get closer to developing the potential, and as you pour water out, you regress. You can pour in half a cup's worth of water, then regress by pouring some out, and there will still be water left in the cup. Meanwhile, the potential is not changed by pouring water out, because the cup's capacity to hold water is not changed by pouring out. In fact, the only things that diminish potential are injury and age: in the former, if the cup is ripped, then it's potential (capacity to hold water) is diminished or, if the injury is severe enough, completely obliterated; in the latter, as the cup ages, fibers weaken, and the paper's tensile strength diminishes, the potential (capacity to hold water) is likewise gradually diminished, more rapidly the older it is, until again the potential is gone.

So, when I say a player has potential, I certainly don't mean potential as defined in electronics or physics. (And I would venture to guess most of us don't, as that is not the layman's definition of potential.) Rather, I mean a player has latent abilities which, when maximized, resemble a certain form (a Platonic ideal, if you wish to get philosophical). As he develops, he comes closer to resembling that form; if he develops fully, he fully fills or resembles that form; if he regresses, he less closely resembles that form; but the form that represents his maximized abilities (i.e., potential) is only reduced by age and injury.

Brad Sorensen has demonstrated that he has a certain amount of potential. He has begun his journey towards fulfilling that potential, but in the last couple of games he seems to have taken steps backwards. He is farther than he was from achieving the ideal that is possible when his latent abilities are maximized. But that idealized form, that potential, has not changed simply because he is further from his goal. Hence, there is no contradiction in saying Sorensen has potential and has regressed, because this isn't physics/electronics and a negative charge does not flip potential.