I rest my case
I’m sure a lot of you reading the title of this post are
already filling with sanctimonious outrage over what seems like an
unwarranted personal attack.
But it’s actually the most appropriate thing to say and
point out about a coach who has spent his entire career berating players he
deems overweight.
I don't judge people by their weight, but Mangurian clearly does and usually to no good end.
It destroyed his relationship with the players when he was
with the Atlanta Falcons, it shattered relations with players and fellow
coaches when he was with the N.Y. Giants, and today it’s Columbia’s chances to
field a decent team and keep its quarterbacks alive,
And yet this guru of weight loss, this Richard Simmons of
the gridiron, is himself very clearly overweight! I suppose for a 56 year old
man, Mangurian is generally healthy. But he has an enormous gut that’s only
grown bigger over the last year. Is it possible that he’s eating his linemen’s
food? Is he eating to forget? Is he just a hypocrite?
Well, maybe he’s embarrassed about his weight and THAT’S why
he’s kept a low profile lately.
Because it’s been a month since the 2013 Columbia football season
ended.
A MONTH since the Lions completed the absolute worst season in Ivy
League history.
And there hasn’t been ONE WORD of explanation, analysis or – of
course – apology from Mangurian.
It’s hard to fathom how deep Mangurian’s disdain for the fans must
really be.
Perhaps in a few weeks, probably in response to this post, we will
get some kind of statement from Mangurian. I suspect it will put the blame on
injuries and also include some words about how he never fully realized how
great the task of turning the program around really was.
They will be empty words.
Mangurian got the season he planned for and deserved.
His deliberately too-light and non-cohesive offensive line wasn’t
even able to protect star QB transfer Brett
Nottingham for one full game,
resulting in a disastrous QB situation.
His decision to bench key wide receivers and drive other talented
veterans off the team led to incredible incompetence and more dropped passes
than anyone has ever seen in a 10 game season.
His deliberate plan to reduce the number of carries for his star
RB Marcorus Garrett, took away Columbia’s best chance to
compete and made most of the losses blowouts.
The list goes on. But this was all directly a result of
MANGURIAN'S foolish strategies and stubborness. This isn't any former coach's
fault, Columbia's fault, or the fault of bad luck.
This man is a disaster as a coach.
He hates the players, the fans, the students, and especially the
football alumni.
Oh, and did I mention HE’S FAT?!?!
Isn't it hard for the players he pushes into losing so much weight to see him get bigger and bigger himself?
It must be.
Athletic Director Dianne
Murphy is rail thin, but she also
hasn’t made any statement about what happened this season or how she plans to
implement improvements.
Her disdain for those of us who really want positive change is
also well documented.
But again, one MONTH has passed and not a peep.
How can anyone be stupid enough to donate money, buy tickets, or
hand over anything of value to these people until they at least offer some
explanation for this debacle?
How can anyone want to give more time to a group that says
it demands success, but produces none?
Maybe that’s just what it’s like to be overweight and yet
demand that others slim down, no matter what.
It kind of fits.
And in some terrible, perverted, sick way… doesn’t that all
make sense?
76 comments:
Jake, your credibility quotient had already approached zero.
With this bit of gratuitousness, it now spilled into negative territory.
Particularly from your perspective, it seems like an unusually stupid blog entry. For someone who is presumably trying to retain some credibility as a critic of Columbia's football program, why would you indulge in something that is so transparently self-discrediting???
Do as I say, not as I do!
I registered my disappointment to the Development Office over the (1) poor coaching and (2) lack of accountability from the AD and the administration. I received a sympathetic response from an official but attached was a canned piece of nonsense talking about how competitive the Columbia athletic programs are generally. As a former rower, I object to having that program's progress exploited to justify both the failings of other programs and the supposed success of the AD and her staff. Similarly, if the rowing program were suffering, I would be mighty angry to be told that it is all fine because certain other teams were doing well.
It is time for the administration to admit that in the eyes of all (except those looking to excuse their own shortcomings or lack of initiative) that the football program will be judged solely by its own success or failure - not that of any other team(s).
The administration courts danger when it tries to take its alumni for fools.
The elephant in the room...
And nothing could further confirm the impression that some of the alumni ARE fools than Jake's latest entry on his blog.
Nice temper tantrum. At this point in time, how is this rant in any way useful to the future of the Columbia football program?
Really? Then what is his BMI Jake since you know so much? This is a low point Jake in your quest to destabilize the program. He's almost 60 years old and no longer playing college ball. There is a difference and you know it. What a reach.
Comments like this are the reason that no one in the school administration takes you seriously.
More misinformation on our running back. He didn't play because he had a high-ankle sprain. Jake if you are tied into the program as you claim then you already knew this.
Jake, suggest that you remove this posted blog. It is just plain nasty.
Talking about before the injury. Garrett never got enough carries, never.
How about discussing something more productive, like the effect on athletics of the appointment of former basketball reserve Jonathan Schiller as next chair of the Columbia Board. Does anybody know about his commitment to improving our athletic programs?
http://news.columbia.edu/oncampus/3304
Trustees with sports backgrounds aren't always good friends to athletics. David Stern often poked fun at CU athletic woes when he was on the board, for instance.
David Stern is not a good example. He is not a former athlete and is a graduate of Rutgers. He couldn't care less about Columbia athletics.
Let's hope so. But I do know that Schiller is yet another example of the general rule for Columbia: the ex-athlete alumni tend to be the most successful and the most loyal to the school.
Jake, what were you thinking? You've made yourself part of the problem, and ensured there will be no role for yourself in the solution.
Jake,
I agree with the above posters that the fat attack was really quite immature and out of character for you. I am a parent of a current player and could not feel any more strongly that the coach and his staff have done a surrealistically horrible job at coaching, motivating, preparing and fostering the well-being of the players. I am in constant disbelief at the antics of this coach and his staff that I fall privy too. The physical, mental and spiritual health of the current players is greatly endangered by these desperate clowns. I am looking forward to providing complete disclosure once they are out and or once my kid graduates. I have personally had many conversations with current sophomores, juniors and departing seniors and have heard reliable second hand stories from countless others including freshman. I have not heard from a single player who hasn't had football ruined for him or who has confidence and/or respect for this coach and his staff. The AD and or the president needs to reach out to current players and their families. They would literally cringe. this alone is enough for this blog. Personal attacks on physical attributes is unnecessary, even if ironic.
Distressed Parent
Is this the "very severe 'nuclear option" you were threatening last month?
No
Oh dear. This is a rather regretful post.
Well jake now I have seen it all. So much for this blog being about the betterment of Columbia athletics now you have turned it into persecuting a guy because of his weight. Is this new or are you desperate now? You never did that with NW.
The larger issue is Pete is lookiing unkempt. He clearly needs a shower and a shave. He also needs to reinvent himself. His old school, knock heads approach has failed him. He knows it but is too entrenched in his ways to deal with it. Pete needs to do yoga, hire a nutritionist, a personal trainer and for Pete's sake (ahem), take a shower. You're not in Fatlanta any more. You are supposed to be an Ivy League LEADER. For some reason no one can explain you have been given a free pass by your bosses to get the job done. Instead, you look like shit and do nothing about it. You would be out on your duff anywhere else so get a clue Pete or get out of town.
Actually they do have a nutritionist ,trainer on staff for the team. Clearly the distressed parent is one of you jake commenters. Not one parent that I have talked to except the parents of the kids who got in trouble for one reason or another are not happy. No one is happy that we lost this year but moving forward in a positive direction.
To Distressed Paren, I also am a parent . Your son tells you much more than mine. I only know from what I've read on this blog and have witnessed in person. (Games). My son has never had one negative comment about PM. He keeps everything to himself or as your son does , only discusses with his teammates. I wish I knew who you were, your comment about the physical, mental and spiritual health being endangered really bothers me. Can you explain. Obviously I know the physical part. (Weight loss),
Sensoring comments again are we???
JAKE the FAKE!!!!
you have no creditability ,none. You are a fake. you know nothing that goes on in the building. You didn't even played football.
Jake the Fake!
If the team has a nutritionist then the hopefully the program (as well as all CU athletics) has the ability to abide by the various needful diets in the dining facilities. It takes tons of money to keep fresh foods available, monitor intake. It is easier said than done, can't really fault the program because it takes huge commitment to feed your athletes properly. Low IQ schools like Ole Miss stuff their fattys with pancakes and mac n cheese but go to Vanderbilt and they have fitness and nutrition PhDs along with world class dining facilities. If CU can pull that together and the athletes buy into it, that is a big step forward regardless if the head coach chooses to still eat poorly.
I have enjoyed reading the blog for several years and I've commented from time to time. This is the first post that really worries me. Yes, there are big problems with the coaching and the football program but this post is definitely out of line. As someone once said, "Check yourself before you wreck yourself."
I agree with the frustration that motivated this post, but I don't think the post is a reasonable outlet for that frustration. Mr. Mangurian's personal health is not relevant to his management of the team, and resorting to ad hominem attacks (or arguments that sound like ad hominem attacks) weakens the position of those who criticize the program.
I think the right thing to do would be to retract this post and apologize to Mangurian. We can be civil about this.
Holy shit! Bollinger, Murphy, Mangurian and other football destroyers are posting anonymously on this board every few minutes to discredit Jake. Even some of the so-called faithful are abandoning Columbia's football honor to jump aboard the PC--Politically Corrupt-- bandwagon.
Jake, I think your exposure of Weight-Watcher Mangurian's waistline was brilliant.Don't pay attention to all the AD trolls. I already commented days ago about Mangurian's failure to address a single word to Columbia's faithful. He obviously has been pumped up--around his waistline and between his ears--by the unwavering support of Lee and Di. Billy Wilder couldn't have written a better farce.
Don't back down to the losers and trolls, Jake. Mangurian is overweight, non-communicative and 0-10. Instead of you apologizing, how about him apologizing? You have nothing to apologize for...he has a lot.
Attempts have been made to be civil. The administration chooses not to deal with the issue so this is what they get in return. If I could I would cut one in Pete's office to get my point across. Yes, it is immature but it also sends a powerful message. He's not listening to polite requests for him to vacate his post. Therefore, her gets a blast of the Wingman's finest.
Silly, childish and immature. Like PM or anybody else in the administration gives a rat's ass about what the silly people this blog think. It is both sad and amusing to watch you guys ruin your credibility. Are you sure you went to Columbia? It appears like you never got out of third grade.
I find it interesting that somebody asked Jake to give an apology to PM. I do not recall seeing an apology from him regarding the results from last year. In fact, we have seen nothing from anybody.
To the Parent above, i am not trying to throw you under the bus, but if your kid is unhappy with the way things are, as a parent wouldn't/shouldn't you step into the fray? If in fact any of what you discreetly allude to took place, why wait until everything is over and your child graduates or leaves? That just does not seem to make logical sense to me. If yur child were gettign abused would you wait until all involved outgrew the abuse or would you step in? i am not saying PM is abusing anybody; i am just using this as an analogy.
Time for the facts of life: PM has a four year contract, so he is getting a pass for this year; nothing that is now said on this blog is going to change it. If a change were going to be made, it would have happened by now.
To The Lion
Another example of you leaping to illogical and unsubstantiated conclusions. It is both possible, and entirely likely, that someone could agree that PM should be fired and believe that Jake's "fat" post is iill conceived and out of line. It is hard to believe that some of you people went to Columbia.
The powerful message it would send is that your a nasty fu$&/k with no social grace. Jake with support like this, who needs enemies?
The parent above does not exist. It is a work of fiction to further try to discredit our team and coach.
Rich '66
Enough already. I don't particularly agree with this comment either, but since when do any of you expect constant perfection? Jake posted a controversial statement. Get over it.
The vast # of critical "Anonymous" posters here use the same syntax as they have in all other posts, which is a solid indication that most of the very few Jake opponents are just multi-posting and also taking advantage of this controversial weight commentary by Jake to construct some futile "Armaggedon" scenario of their own. It won't work.
I personally would not have commented on his weight, but there is something to be said about the perceived hypocrisy. (a la: good for the goose?)More importantly, the clear effect of weight loss on performance is an issue that cannot be forgotten, even as this past season drifts away.
I am very interested in the commentary of the parents, which has the ring of truth. The season is now over. Your sons, if seniors, have nothing further to fear, if in fact they ever did. Why can't you now come forward? Again, what is more helpful to a solution than the truth? People don't have to make stuff up when the actual facts are overwhelming.
At issue here isn't the past; we have that info carved in granite. It is next season, and what might happen to underweight players then.
Those parents don't exist. They are fictional. A feeble attempt to hurt the program.
Do we really have to explain the difference between coaches and players? Players spend long hours preparing to play, getting and staying in shape. Coaches spend longer hours sequestered, breaking down film, planning games and practices, and traveling to scout and recruit, eating bad road food. Don't become a football coach if you want a healthful lifestyle. This is like criticizing the coach for sacrificing too much to the program. Seems counterproductive to me. And I have to disagree with Distressed Parent. Sadly, this is not out of character for Jake. Passion for CU football he has without question. Judgment and reason not so much. And no, I neither work for the AD nor am a Mangurian fanboy, and I am as concerned as anybody here. I just think it's more productive to solve real problems instead of making up phony ones.
Rich' 66:
Jake's descent into personal attacks about physical appearance demonstrates that he is just the weakest link in the chain. If your coalition wants to change Columbia football, you would be well advised to cut him loose. Surely, you'd rather talk about the problems of Columbia athletics, rather than defend your alliance with such unhinged behavior?
Technically, PM has a paunch, not obese.
Rich '66
Two points:
1) If you don't like this particular piece by Jake, that's your right. But don't toss the baby with the bath water. Jake's entire body of work is what has brought this sorry situation to a focus. and he gets major creds for that.
2) CAEC and I do not have any "alliance" with Jake. On a personal level, I have an affinity for what he is trying to accomplish. Jake has no input into CAEC, and I (we) have none into his blog, with the exception of my personal comments. Those I will continue to post, and if I occasionally differ with him, I will say so.
In an earlier statement, I described my stepping away from further direct commentary on the coach, since his record already says it all. My comments here go to the nature of this specific commentary and the participants, not the coach.
I think that it would have been better for PM to resign or be let go but, I think things might turn out better than most of people on this blog think. People here seem to take as a given that PM won't change any tactics or policies as the the result of this year's debacle. That seems highly unlikely. He was a very successful head Coach at Cornell. He adapted as circumstances changed.
Look at his record. At Cornell, PM's went 5-2 in the Ivy League in back to back seasons (1999 & 2000). Since the founding of the league in 1954, NO CU coach has ever had back to back 5-2 IVY LEAGUE seasons. (The records are on the CU website, you can look it up.) I am talking ivy wins, not overall records (but they are bad also). By this measure (ivy wins in back to back seasons)PM had done something that no past CU coach had ever achieved.
Look at CU's best single season Ivy win/loss records. There are a only three seasons in the history of the Ivy League where has CU gone 5-2 (or better) in the Ivy League. One 6-1 season and two other seasons of 5-2. That is it.
Just to head off the "he won with other guy's recruits" canard. PM was at Cornell for three years. In 2000, 3 /4 of the players were his recruits. In 1999, 1/2 of the players were his recruits. His worst record was during his first year when 3/4 of the players were his predecessor's recruits. The theory here is PM is terrible coach who can’t win with anybody. History says otherwise.
One driver of PM's success was QB Ricky Rahne. Ricky Rahne was a Mangurian recruit. He was still the QB in 2001 after Mangurian left. Cornell went 2-7 overall and 2-5 in the ivy league. They only played 9 games that season because of 911. Big drop off after PM left. Rahne was still there.
PM combined with a good QB was a winning formula. By the way his OL was not huge, the average weight of his OLs in 1999 was 252 and in 2000 was 267. Next year with Nottingham back good things should happen.
So to summarize, while at Cornell, PM accomplished something that no CU coach had ever achieved - back to back 5-2 ivy league seasons. Only one CU coach has ever had a single season ivy league win loss record better than PM's best single season performance, Aldo Donelli in 1961.
I don't think this guy forgot how to coach, I think he will make smart changes, and I expect CU will do much better next year. He is going to here, like it or not, might as well look at the potential positives.
Okay, guys have at it. How about you use logic, not vitriol, in your responses? Vitriol is for dopes.
Let's see, you've got a FAT coach who is pushing the players to get too slim and then you lose by 30+ a game.
What should we do?
I KNOW! Let's blame the one honest guy in the kingdom who has the guts to point out the fat emperor has no clothes!
YES! And then let's pretend we're holier than thou and can't possibly believe such rude attacks are being made against our 0-10 leader!
Keep defending failure and attacking the truth and see where that gets you.
Rich, 66:
Apparently, you're too close to see what's directly in front of you. It's pretty lame to argue that he's written posts of varying quality, and that his critics are insisting on perfection. This one is so utterly and completely disqualifying that CAEC is going to be tarred with it, irrespective of the distinctions you seek to make.
After this post, you can no longer change Columbia athletics with Jake at the helm.
I'm happy to discuss Pete's record at Cornell.
First of all, he's already proven that past performance means nothing. As you pointed out, his second year at Cornell was a big improvement, (and I agree), but his second year here at Columbia was a total disaster and regression, (I hope you agree).
His best team, the 2000 team, was good but much weaker than the eventual champs. Penn won the title by absolutely whipping Pete in Ithaca in the final week. It was not even close.
Hey, I'd take a distant second like that for Columbia any day these days, but Pete is not on that trajectory right now.
Any other Ivy school would have fired Pete by now. The fact that Columbia has not means we will stay "different," read: "worse" than every other Ivy school for at least another year.
You should all realize that the fact that Mangurian is a bad coach is actually good news.
Otherwise, that means Columbia football is completely hopeless. If a good coach is producing the worst season in history in what's already his second year, that would mean the whole program should be shut down.
Luckily, Mangurian is a very bad coach and all Columbia needs, for once, is a good coach to turn things around.
Flailing about with this loser is going to get football shut down for us in 2-3 years tops.
This is absolute stupidity by Columbia. Dianne Murphy is a dickhead!
"I'm happy to discuss...", nice post. I agree year two was a disaster but year one was a significant improvement, 3-7 and they were short first down conversion away from beating Penn and going 4-6. Suppose for a second that Nottingham and Adebayo didn't get injured in the first game, I think they may have won 3 to 5 games and been competitive in most others. Those guys got hurt, wheels started to come off the wagon and then fell apart as Garrett and others got hurt. Winning is contagious and so is losing. It was a bad year but I am not sure it is indicative of what will happen next year. He is going to put quite a few guys with game experience out there next year and they have an excellent strength coach.
I don't think the guy forgot how to coach and I think things will improve significantly next year. His job is clearly on the line. I think he will rise to the occasion, and with a little better luck on the injury front, surprise people next year. If not, he will be gone. It is more enjoyable to root for a positive outcome than to unreasonably assume another disaster.
Okay, but that's exactly what so many said last year.
We were told the offensive line just "had" to improve, but it did not.
That's just one example.
There's a difference between gloomily pessimistic and being honest and vigilant about our problems.
Mangurian is our #1 problem, and we will go 0-10 with body bags for Nottingham and the other QB's to boot.
Mangurian's biggest area of expertise is the offensive line, so why is it just so damn bad?
With coach Argast's illness, I assume we will have a new OL coach this year. So this is a big test for Mangurian: can he hire a good assistant that will work well with him, or will he assume the duties himself?
But the facts are these: Mangurian has been the coach for two years now and we've seen terrible deterioration on the offensive line.
and this is what he's supposed to be good at????
I believe Argast is expected to return. They lost him early in the season. Head coach filling in is not the same. Splitting time between jobs is a real minus.
If he spent full time, we would have lost by more!
The guy comparing Cornell's record under Pete to CU's expected record next season and beyond is pathetically hopeless. You have the same ignorant logic as the people who thought Pete was the right fit to begin with.
Jake,
I used to eagerly read your blog (daily) for more information on my beloved and beleaguered Lion Football Team. You were the most fanatical fan we had and your research especially about recruits was fun to read all year long. Others found your opinions too critical and controversial for their tastes, but I defended your right to make them. (WTF: it’s a free country.)
Earlier this year as the 2013 season disaster worsened, I commented that I thought your ego was getting in the way of your reporting. Recently you have “recruited” a group of alumni who are fed up with 50 years of terrible results. You have also had a tremendous upsurge in comments which contain vulgar ad hominem attacks by people we only know as “anonymous”. That they are all disgruntled parents is only one of several possibilities. The dialog has become coarse and very disagreeable.
Your posts are now more about you and your perception of how the “powers that be” are ignoring you and therefore how stupid and (unbalanced) they must be. You are now posting information about next fall’s incoming class with a real snarky bent.
I prepared the above prior to the . Perhaps you now see that others agree with me that you have lost your way. Let me just paraphrase: “At long last, have you no decency?”
well said!
Rich '66
"Apparently, you're too close to see what's directly in front of you. It's pretty lame to argue that he's written posts of varying quality, and that his critics are insisting on perfection. This one is so utterly and completely disqualifying that CAEC is going to be tarred with it"
Apparently you are a victim of your own optimistic hysteria, and quite frankly your comments are inaccurate and irrelevant. I suggest you give it a rest, but don't really care either way.
To paraphrase Abe, "the world will little note nor long remember what you said here".
Don't even try to link two totally separate efforts with the same long term goal; improvement of a bad situation. Our progress towards that goal is independent, although it seems you would like to paint it otherwise. It won't work. And CAEC is not concerned about folks like you who try to artificially impute "tarring"
The issues are far greater than these here.
Now stop boring people.
You go 0-10, you get fired. Nothing personal. Why is that even being discussed? Just go.
Rich, 66:
Let me explain it to you, nice and simple so you can understand it.
You're the one who said that Jake mobilized alumni to address athletics at Columbia. You're the one who said we wouldn't be where we are today without Jake. And you're the one who has chimed in frequently in support of his blog.
The CAEC may be separate as a matter of organization. But as a matter of perception, Jake is the most visible point man for the entire coalition. Given his increasingly erratic behavior, you can't defend him and retain much credibility with other alumni or the administration.
You can certainly continue on your merry way, either with Jake in the front of the line, or in tow. Think about for a moment, though: either way, it's a big mistake.
I fail to see how you can jump to the conclusion thaat Jake is the point man or lead for the CAEC. Just because Rich adds insights on the blog does not automatically mean the two are one and the same or even related outside of the karger goal, a positive change to athletics.
Last I checked I did not see a mission statement from the CAEC nor have I seen Jake. Suggest that he is the ring leader of any organization outside of a free exchange of ideas on this blog.
I am a bit puzzled by your logic, but perhaps after several more drinks I will be able to find my way tho your thought process.
As far as this topic goes; maybe it was in poor taste, but certainly does appear to be an example of people in glass houses.... I watched new hampshire play north dakota state tonight, I looked at the lineman and I did not see any O lineman that looked to be manu the slender! In fact the best guy was 320 and it was not all muscle for sure. The Redskins O line was not known as the slim jims. They were known as the Hogs, but maybe that is why Riggins was a terrible running back!
Jock/Doc you make no sense. Not one word on this blog is about Jake or his ego. He is just the opposite. He never writes about himself. I suspect you just think this blog should be rah rah all the time because that's what YOU want. And in that case, you are transferring your flaws on to Jake in a lame attempt at intimidation. I dare you to produce any post, paragraph, or even sentence on this blog that was meant to promote Jake's personal or professional fortunes. In fact, it's pretty clear that he knows he's sacrificing personal gain in hopes of getting some changes made that we all know need to be made. How sick are you that after the very worst season in Ivy history, your anger is directed at the guy who writes a blog about it and wants change? How sick are you that you show no disdain for the coach and administration instead? How sick are you that you think Jake is egotistical for simply having the guts to identify himself while you do not?
Only Jake knows for sure who posts on this spot. And likely even he has no real way of knowing who's a football parent, a bona fide alum etc. That said, I suspect that many of his most vociferous backers (even if "with 'friends' like these...") are simply internet trolls Exceptionally cruel ones, too, whose posts have the obvious whiff of the emotionally (even physically) shut in. Again, only Jake knows at least partially for sure.
I cn say for sure, however, that many posts above (usually, curiously, from bckers of Jake) do a Columbia education no real credit in terms of grammar and spelling.
On another matter, and this should in no way be necessarily construed as a defense of Mangurian's coaching ability, I knew Newark's Anthony Imperiale relatively well as a journalist during his heyday. And while even Tony would have gladly agreed that he was FAT, he was in no way ever obese. I always knew that Tony could physically kick the crap out of his many political and personal opponents despite his bulk. Just saying...
I was not aware that perfect grammar and spelling were a prerequisite for adding my two cents to this blog.
I shan't be accused of making the same mistake twice nor shall I adhere to the blog monitor regarding spelling or grammar principles.
However, I have no idea how or why your last paragraph about Anthony from Newark has anything to do with the stream of threads. What I do know is that the worst record ever was produced by this staff and there is no defense of that.
I will not, no, could not post another comment given the most simple task of understanding the basic principle of winning and not losing is so misunderstood by seemingly several people. If you go 0-10 the jig is up!
I acknowledge the problem but I don't think it as bad as this article makes it out to be. I enjoy bagels, lox and cream cheese every morning. I would like to have latkes if I knew where to get them. I know that sounds silly but it's true. Lunch is usually a pastrami sandwich (brown mustard) on rye or pumpernickel. Dinner, nothing hits the spot like kugel, holishkes or cholent. Yum!
So what am I doing wrong?
and trust me, you don't want to be around a few hours after I've had holishkes. It's cabbage - stewed cabbage. 'nuff said!
C'mon guys lighten up. It's going to be a great season,
Happy Holidays to all my fans!
Illogical comment.
Not illogical at all. Mangurian's candid confession of his taste for Jewish cuisine is the best thing we've heard from him yet!
No wonder he was upset by Twittergate!
Hey guys, I'm a matzoh, matzoh man. I want to be a matzoh man.
Haha, sometimes I just crack myself up. You'd never know I had a sense of humor unless I posted here. Admit it!
I looked at the video of the Great Mangu's press conference when he was hired. He's like 40 pounds heavier now! He's definitely eating the team's food, like probably stealing it and eating it in a janitor's closet.
Probably just working too many hours a day trying to change this losing culture that all of you have created over the last million years. Probably doesn't get enough time to take care of himself. Probably more concerned with the players and the entire staff .
"And in some terrible, perverted, sick way… doesn’t that all make sense?"
This is exactly what I thought when I read this statement by Coach Naso in the 1982 media guide:
“Sometimes before you win you have to lose. Once you learn how to lose, then you find ways to win.”
Post a Comment