Originally Posted by dalemurphy
This is very cynical and intellectually dishonest... You make assumptions about how things transpired, beyond the known facts... and, anywhere credit is due Smith you argue it is "obvious" or the only decision... Based on what? on your presumption that he's not a good GM. So, you view each event as it unfolds as if Smith doesn't know what he's doing, interpret the events assuming his weakness, and then criticize him if things go poorly while discrediting his contributions if they go well. Okay... I can't argue with you.
Completely agree with the bold. repped
All the non-facts he turns into negative assumption towards the texans FO to try to prove a point...