Let me present to you today's winner on Around the Horn (the other ATH): Tim Cowlishaw. He won, in part, thanks to getting points for this statement:
There was never any indication from his agent that he would have played for a reasonable amount of money. It's not like you could have gone out and signed him for a million dollars. He wanted a ton of money.
And if you keep un on your sports news, you know what's wrong with this. First, there's the fact that a team couldn't know how much Bonds wanted to play for without first making him an offer.
Second, there's the fact that, you know, what Cowlishaw said was flat-out wrong.
Bonds is willing to play for the MLB minimum. . .
Well, that seems to stand in stark contrast to what Cowlishaw just said. And this was no small sports story. And Cowlishaw's job is to follow sports stories. So, somehow, this escaped both he and Tony Reali.
So how do you put up the best argument in a sports debate? Simple! Don't have a clue what you're talking about, allow raging bias to get in the way of reason, and make sure the judge of the debate doesn't know what you're talking about, either.
Posts
1 comment:
It's just like politics!
And Bonds was going to donate his salary to poor little inner city kids. They could at LEAST argue that he was trying his best to bring collusion upon himself, but that would be too much work.
Post a Comment