Emotions and the Preseason (A Letter of Thanks to Om, bobzmuda, and those like them)

[Beauty is Only]

Gentlemen,

I am by no means one of the most studied and well-informed Redskins fans on this board. But, I've followed the 'Skins since the early '80s. My 20-plus-year-journey as a follower of this team began largely out of emotion. I grew up in Richmond, the 'Skins were successful in the '80s, and it's easy to get excited about football when your team is always in the hunt. My fanship began and was strengthened by success (i.e., it "felt good" to be a Redskins fan).

I have come to realize that the poorest decisions of my life have normally occurred when I make decisions based on what appears to be the truth. In other words, when I "follow my heart," thats when the trouble starts (there are theological implications here, but that's a discussion for the Tailgate). Emotions have their purpose, but they are by no means to be completely relied on in the decision making process. Truth is paramount. Emotion should be the motivator that drives us to find the truth. Because we feel something is true, that does not, in and of itself, make something true.

I realize that this is a message board, and some people use it to vent their feelings of frustration over what appears to be one miserable failure of a preseason. These expressions of emotion are often knee-jerk reactions to, say, a 41-0 blowout where it seems that the Redskins were humbled by an infinitely better Patriots team. Sadly, the search for the truth, for many, ends with the last play of that game in Foxboro. After all, who can argue with such a decisive victory? The Pats have won 2 of the last 3 Super Bowls, why did we think the 'Skins could hang with them? Belichick, not Gibbs, is obviously the true genius to dismantle a Gibbs-coached team like he did, right?

But then, there's bobzmuda. His post (http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166190)

based on observation (facts), not speculation (feelings) of the Pats game just goes to show how deluded we can become when we stop short in the decision making process. When we only use our "heart" and not our "head" to evaluate a football game (or an automobile purchase, or a romantic pursuit, or anything else) we are bound to end up in the wrong place. Your heart will lie, but the facts don't.

Om, too, was gracious enough to remind the handkerchief wringers and anyone who was tempted to become one of Gibbs' preseason history (i.e., facts) in his post of 08/28/06

(http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166185).

Nothing is more settling to the nerves than a good dose of truth (well, depending on what the truth is about a given subject).

My thanks goes out to these men (and others of their ilk) who have been gracious enough not to merely share their opinions with us, but to share the truth with us. You are a credit to the nation of Redskins fans, and I, for one, appreciate your willingness to gently guide and reassure us as we stand on the brink of what seems to be a very special season for our beloved 'Skins.

[fansince62]

"But then, there's bobzmuda. His post (http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/...ad.php?t=166190)

based on observation (facts), not speculation (feelings) of the Pats game just goes to show how deluded we can become when we stop short in the decision making process. When we only use our "heart" and not our "head" to evaluate a football game (or an automobile purchase, or a romantic pursuit, or anything else) we are bound to end up in the wrong place. Your heart will lie, but the facts don't."

nice post in some ways.

- bobzmuda's post was more reasonable than most. it did have a lot of ideas lined up in a row that made sense. it also had hyptheses for which there was no confirming evidence at all - the speculations on pychological intent/games of the coaching staff specifically. so be clear yourself when it comes to separating the wheat from the chaff.

- facts...you should know by now.....mean nothing by themselves. it is how they are framed in a reasoned argument that results in conclusions/predictions that matters.

- observations can have greater sand lesser accuracy. what is the standard in play?

- decision making process. now there is an interesting idea. one for which, most emphatically, there is no standard on this board. we know there is one. we know they can vary. we seem to see that acclamation is the determining criteria for whether one decision process is more viable than another. but I have yet to see a single post on either side of any issue that starts from "here is the theory", here are the assumptions, this is what is known a priori, this is what we have observed...ipso facto....here are the conclusions. football just aint like that and neither is the posturing on this board. what we see are bits and pieces....it is a message board afterall.

- it doesn't have to be a "heart" or "head" only process. look at the optimists - don't tell me there isn't a whole lotta heart in what lies behind their positions. it's very often what is most admirable about their posts (even if misdirected at times to belittle others).

I suggest you give some more thought to what "truth" is...but while doing that keep your heart in it. THAT COUNTS MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.

[Poteet]

Many have expressed thanks for the insights and observations you are referring to. I didn't want to write a four word post that read "Thanks a lot guys" like so many other have. Your expression of gratitute, on the other hand, is EXACTLY what I've been thinking. EXCELLENT job... my sentiments exactly.

Granted, many of us here are biased and want to believe that the Redskins will be just fine. Others are pessimists by nature and will thrash the team and coaching staff whenever it's convenient. This makes it easier for those so-called fans to cope with a potential letdown season. I, for one, am an optimist. And many have accused me of being biased towards the Skins in the past. In fact I am. But I also believe that posts like bobzmuda's are dead-on. And this letter of thanks was too. Nice work... I always enjoy reading posts that aren't knee jerks reactions of pessimists or know it alls (who typically don't know squat). I believe in Gibbs and trust his judgment. And I'll believe Saunders' word over those that believe the sky is falling... which is more than irrational, considering it's the preseason. This preaseason the Steelers haven't won a game and neither have the Skins. The Raiders are undefeated. No, you can't draw any definitive conclusions from that, but I think you know what I'm trying to say.

Sorry for getting off track... again, nice work.

[Om]

I appreciate the thought, sir.

It's a shame Redskins fans allow themselves to get so incredibly polarized over their favorite team. I guess its to be expected--we're people first--but it's still a drain to see this happen so predictably. Preseason, year after year, seems to bring out both the best and worst in all of us.

End of the day, I think we're all just deeply and passionately involved, from the heart on up to the head and back, with the fortunes of this franchise. I consider it a privilege to exchange my views with so many people who care as deeply as I do.

What the hell is WRONG with us?

[Beauty is Only]

What the hell is WRONG with us?

Again, this question involves theology, which is, again, more for the Tailgate forum.

But, I know what you mean about this being a Redskins fan. It's like a disease.

[fansince62]

"What the hell is WRONG with us?"

absolutley nothing. I know for a fact that come game day...I could be sitting next to OM or PCS and we would be one force united in a common goal....equally and passionately engaged in supporting the Skins......high fiving....discussing the action....passing the binocs......chippin in for the brewskies......and having a ton of fun in the process. let's not get too carried away here folks!

to paraphrase Alan Iverson - "It's a *amn message board. Who cares?"

[authentic]

I think this bobzmuda fella has become and instant legend on this board. Since Coach Saunder's comments last night i've seen people reference him like a prophet. Almost like a modern day John the Baptist. Not hating, actually i'm glad there is a level of calm and intelligence with some folk.

[iheartskins]

Al, I think that's the most positive thing I've seen you write since I came here two years ago. Cheers.

[Om]

"What the hell is WRONG with us?"

absolutley nothing. I know for a fact that come game day...I could be sitting next to OM or PCS and we would be one force united in a common goal....equally and passionately engaged in supporting the Skins......high fiving....discussing the action....passing the binocs......chippin in for the brewskies......and having a ton of fun in the process. let's not get too carried away here folks!

to paraphrase Alan Iverson - "It's a *amn message board. Who cares?"

Time to change the 9-volt on your Humor Detector, brother.

[fansince62]

iheart.....well....you know that's how it would be! same with you.

I've been following this team for over 40 years - why wouldn't I be like that? I assume the same for every person who posts on this board........there is a message board and there is what we do in our active lives. ES is great - but it's important to distinguish the two.

I'm gonna be there Monday night and I expect the Skins to administer an *ss kickin. always have. always will. otherwise....I've wasted a ton of cash that could be better spent elsewhere (like golf lessons!!!!). cmon man....in that sense, when it's on the line, we're all in it together and on the same team - at least that's my mindset.

[authentic]

From bobzmuda:

Since Saunders places such a great emphasis on getting rid of the ball quickly, perhaps it was to give Brunell a better feel for getting rid of the ball during normal situations. For example, a baseball batter will often swing a heavier bat in the on-deck circle when he's warming up in order for his regular bat to feel much lighter when in the batter's box.

I have a feeling that's what was going on here. Saunders wanted Brunell to really get a sense of pressure so when it comes 9/11 and the Skins keep a back into block or make a protection audible, Brunell will feel like he has all day to throw. This makes sense to me since Brunell got a little jumpy last year with pressure.

that made a heck of amount of sense.

[Peregrine]

Good post, but I do think you are a bit too liberal with the word "facts" when describing bobzmudas post. It includes facts yes, but also assumptions and opinions. Lets be honest on both sides of the debate here.

[Beauty is Only]

Good post, but I do think you are a bit too liberal with the word "facts" when describing bobzmudas post. It includes facts yes, but also assumptions and opinions. Lets be honest on both sides of the debate here.

Thanks, Peregrine. I appreciate the comments.

I did, however, say that bobzmuda's post was "based on observations (facts)." I didn't say that everything in his post was, indeed, fact. My thrust was that his post was a result of careful observation on what was actually taking place on the field and not a reaction to looking at the preseason box score which read "41-0". Yes, perhaps some of his assumptions are incorrect (only the coaching staff can confirm or deny his assertions) but his hypotheses were based on his observations, not his gut-feelings. In other words, bobzmuda made an educated guess, not an emotional conclusion. Although, some of the things Al Saunders said in an interview posted yesterday seem to lend more credence to bobzmuda's assertions.

Om's post, on the other hand, was a reference to history and undisputed facts about Gibbs' preseason and regular season history.

Fair enough?

[WallyG3]

I'm just glad to see intelligent debate back on Extremeskins. I think the "no new posts" rule is doing it's job, letting the cream rise back to the top.

I think I may be coming around on the rope-a-dope theory. Between Bob, OM, and today's WP article quoting Saunders, it's seeming to become a more viable theory.

There are still some parts of that though that set off alarms on my Baloney Detection Kit.

13 days until we find out!

[Beauty is Only]

"nice post in some ways.

- bobzmuda's post was more reasonable than most. it did have a lot of ideas lined up in a row that made sense. it also had hypotheses for which there was no confirming evidence at all - the speculations on psychological intent/games of the coaching staff specifically. so be clear yourself when it comes to separating the wheat from the chaff.

I did say that bobzmuda’s post was “based on observations (facts)”. My thrust was that bobzmuda’s post was based on what he saw, not on what he felt. He wasn’t looking at the final score of the game and saying ‘Women and children into the life boats, this ship’s going DOWN!” He made reasonable assumptions from his observations.

"- facts...you should know by now.....mean nothing by themselves. it is how they are framed in a reasoned argument that results in conclusions/predictions that matters.

Facts mean nothing by themselves? Some facts stand alone. I agree, facts must be arranged properly and logically to effectively debate, but facts are facts. They are either true or they’re not. One can make conclusions based on facts or one can trust their gut or a mixture of both. But I can’t agree with you that facts are worthless on their own.

"- observations can have greater and lesser accuracy. what is the standard in play?

Well, the standard in play in the preseason varies from team to team, obviously. As has been noted a good number of times on ES, Steve Spurrier’s goal was to win preseason games. Some have said that Marvin Harrison was trying to win the Bengals/’Skins matchup this preaseason to take some media heat off of his beleaguered team. We can only assume some things from what we know since the current coaching staff in Ashburn is not very forthcoming with their goals for preseason. But, we can look back at Gibbs’ history (and Williams’ history, too—remember him telling the press he set Taylor up for failure in a Rams preseason game a few years ago?) and make assumptions about the current preseason. bobzmuda’s observations seem to mesh well with what we already know about Gibbs’ and Williams’ preseason philosophies.

"- decision making process. now there is an interesting idea. one for which, most emphatically, there is no standard on this board. we know there is one. we know they can vary. we seem to see that acclamation is the determining criteria for whether one decision process is more viable than another. but I have yet to see a single post on either side of any issue that starts from "here is the theory", here are the assumptions, this is what is known a priori, this is what we have observed...ipso facto....here are the conclusions. football just aint like that and neither is the posturing on this board. what we see are bits and pieces....it is a message board afterall.

I would say that bobzmuda's post comes as close to proposing a theory and then backing it up with evidence that reasonably supports that hypothesis. Maybe not an open and closed case, but fairly convincing nonetheless.

"-it doesn't have to be a "heart" or "head" only process. look at the optimists - don't tell me there isn't a whole lotta heart in what lies behind their positions. it's very often what is most admirable about their posts (even if misdirected at times to belittle others).

Note that I said emotions and facts work together to bring us to the truth (“Emotions have their purpose, but they are by no means to be completely relied on in the decision making process. Truth is paramount. Emotion should be the motivator that drives us to find the truth. Because we feel something is true, that does not, in and of itself, make something true.”). If the heart’s position should prove to be wrong in light of the facts, one should abandon the heart’s position and embrace the truth.

"-I suggest you give some more thought to what "truth" is...but while doing that keep your heart in it. THAT COUNTS MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.

I must wholeheartedly disagree that when seeking truth, one’s ‘heart’ counts more than anything else. Like I said before, one’s emotions should stir one to action, not be that which determines how one should act. One should gather as many of the facts as are available at the moment of decision and then make the decision. Emotion unbridled has been the cause of much heartache and pain in the world.

[fansince62]

1) "I did say that bobzmuda’s post was “based on observations (facts)”. My thrust was that bobzmuda’s post was based on what he saw, not on what he felt. He wasn’t looking at the final score of the game and saying ‘Women and children into the life boats, this ship’s going DOWN!” He made reasonable assumptions from his observations. "

Fair enough - point taken.

2) Facts mean nothing by themselves? Some facts stand alone. I agree, facts must be arranged properly and logically to effectively debate, but facts are facts. They are either true or they’re not. One can make conclusions based on facts or one can trust their gut or a mixture of both. But I can’t agree with you that facts are worthless on their own.

a. what constitutes a "fact"? the world is not binary, btw. there are multi-modal systems; fuzzy logic; etc. and, oh by the way, truth/knowledge has been the open-ended source of philosophical discussion for...oh.....3 millenia now. it's not as clear cut as you make it to be. but that is not even what I was after. I suppose a "stand alone" fact such as "it's 90 degrees outside" has some value. on a football board there are "stand alone" facts - he intercepted the ball; it was a two yard gain; etc. this has limited value. and it's not what all the heat around here has been about. these discussions have all been about what the coaches are really doing (with a subtext of arresting the more emotionally inclined). and that is hypothesis that is confirmed by facts. and that places the primary burden on the reasoning.

it's also not even clear what you mean by fact. OM can state it is a fact that twice during JG regimes losing preseason records preceded SB victories. That is a fact. That is a statisical relationship (however small a sample set). That is not an explanation - apologies Sir OM (not attacking you here).

3) Well, the standard in play in the preseason varies from team to team, obviously. As has been noted a good number of times on ES, Steve Spurrier’s goal was to win preseason games. Some have said that Marvin Harrison was trying to win the Bengals/’Skins matchup this preaseason to take some media heat off of his beleaguered team. We can only assume some things from what we know since the current coaching staff in Ashburn is not very forthcoming with their goals for preseason. But, we can look back at Gibbs’ history (and Williams’ history, too—remember him telling the press he set Taylor up for failure in a Rams preseason game a few years ago?) and make assumptions about the current preseason. bobzmuda’s observations seem to mesh well with what we already know about Gibbs’ and Williams’ preseason philosophies.

I can buy into that. I was after how you distinguish fact from observation. That can be a slippery one when building these arguments and you sometimes seem to be using the concepts interchangably

4) I would say that bobzmuda's post comes as close to proposing a theory and then backing it up with evidence that reasonably supports that hypothesis. Maybe not an open and closed case, but fairly convincing nonetheless.

not what I was asking. what is the accepted standard on this board so that when someone like you states "that's a good case" we know what you mean and know that it's not standard 55 of 100 that just happens to fit a preconcpetion. it's a football board so we won't about rigor. just some common approach we all find reasonable.

5) Note that I said emotions and facts work together to bring us to the truth (“Emotions have their purpose, but they are by no means to be completely relied on in the decision making process. Truth is paramount. Emotion should be the motivator that drives us to find the truth. Because we feel something is true, that does not, in and of itself, make something true.”). If the heart’s position should prove to be wrong in light of the facts, one should abandon the heart’s position and embrace the truth.

sounds good to me. though, again, you will find that truth is a very slippery notion indeed -just ask OBL or the maniac President in Iran.

6) I must wholeheartedly disagree that when seeking truth, one’s ‘heart’ counts more than anything else. Like I said before, one’s emotions should stir one to action, not be that which determines how one should act. One should gather as many of the facts as are available at the moment of decision and then make the decision. Emotion unbridled has been the cause of much heartache and pain in the world.

My idea was half tongue in cheek and intended to be positive- "truth" in the context of professional football is secondary. it's great to be a modern day Diogenes - but keep the emotions/heart squarely in front of you. if anything, in my book, that is the one bond that truly binds all Skins' fans together.

[Beauty is Only]

a. what constitutes a "fact"? the world is not binary, btw. there are multi-modal systems; fuzzy logic; etc. and, oh by the way, truth/knowledge has been the open-ended source of philosophical discussion for...oh.....3 millenia now. it's not as clear cut as you make it to be. but that is not even what I was after. I suppose a "stand alone" fact such as "it's 90 degrees outside" has some value. on a football board there are "stand alone" facts - he intercepted the ball; it was a two yard gain; etc. this has limited value. and it's not what all the heat around here has been about. these discussions have all been about what the coaches are really doing (with a subtext of arresting the more emotionally inclined). and that is hypothesis that is confirmed by facts. and that places the primary burden on the reasoning.

it's also not even clear what you mean by fact. OM can state it is a fact that twice during JG regimes losing preseason records preceded SB victories. That is a fact. That is a statisical relationship (however small a sample set). That is not an explanation - apologies Sir OM (not attacking you here). .

Granted, there is much debate on the subject of truth and fact and what they are or aren't. The goal of a court of law (in a perfect world) is to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that something is true or isn't true. To do this, the prosecutor and defense attorney present evidence which will hopefully sway the jurors. In a greater sense, one cannot prove that anything is true or not true. But, one can give evidence that shows what the most reasonable assumption, given a set of circumstances, would be.

I was swayed by bobzmudas eyewitness testimony given what I know of Joe Gibbs' and Gregg Williams' approach to preseason. He gave account of what he specifically saw in the game and what he saw seems to dovetail nicely with what we know of the nature of our coaches and their approach to the preseason. bobzmuda hasn't proven anything, but he does make a good case, which is more than I can say for many posters who point to the lopsided victories of other teams over the 'Skins this preseason and start to panic.

That being said, on an emotional level, I wan't bobzmuda's case to be true. I want to be optimistic about the upcoming season. So, yes, there's some subjective reasoning involved in my embracing of his conclusions. But, you gotta admit, it's hard to argue with his observations, especially when you factor in what the players and coaches are saying about the results of these games.

[fansince62]

I liked his post also and thought it struck a layer or two deeper than most.

hey......good series of exchanges. I look forward to future posts of yours.

AND KEEP YOUR HEART/EMOTIONS IN IT!!!!!!

[Beauty is Only]

I liked his post also and thought it struck a layer or two deeper than most.

hey......good series of exchanges. I look forward to future posts of yours.

AND KEEP YOUR HEART/EMOTIONS IN IT!!!!!!

Thanks for the dialogue. This has been the most challenging exchange I've been a part of since becoming an ES member. I have you to thank for it.

Fear not, fansince62--my heart is squarely behind this team. The 'Skins were, are, and will always be my team, win or lose.

Nice to know we're on the same side.

[Commander Adama]

Bah! I hate Om....always making me think; always making eloquent posts. It's our right to make rash, not well thought out, barely intelligible posts! (VERY tongue-in-cheek)

Thanks for the post Beauty is Only!

Cheers Om!

[autographcollector]

I am tired of posting my own "facts" about this subject.

Take a critical analysis of reading and writing course and you would understand Bobzmua post was more opinion or oped If there were facts in there now I wouldn't be able to disagree now would I :laugh:

Om said it best, we are all passionate about our team....I for one am just not drinking the Kool Aid yet...that high fructose corn syrup will kill ya.

Anyway cheers to our Monday night opener and I hope my "facts" in this case are wrong.

And to the starter of this tread...you haven't been watching the Redskins as long as me so I am right and you are wrong :nana:

Go Skins

[909997]

nice read bro : ).......

[Beauty is Only]

I am tired of posting my own "facts" about this subject.

Take a critical analysis of reading and writing course and you would understand Bobzmua post was more opinion or oped If there were facts in there now I wouldn't be able to disagree now would I :laugh:

Om said it best, we are all passionate about our team....I for one am just not drinking the Kool Aid yet...that high fructose corn syrup will kill ya.

Anyway cheers to our Monday night opener and I hope my "facts" in this case are wrong.

And to the starter of this tread...you haven't been watching the Redskins as long as me so I am right and you are wrong :nana:

Go Skins

No doubt, bobzmuda's post is oped. But what are his opinions based on? His feelings? No, but rather what he saw on the field. Given enough information, or a lack of it, even opinions can be shown to be more right or more wrong. Only the regular season will let us know for sure.

I'm not necessarily in line for the sweet stuff yet, either. But I'm inching towards the queue.

You're right though, by at least six years.

[Meatsnack]

...

it's also not even clear what you mean by fact. OM can state it is a fact that twice during JG regimes losing preseason records preceded SB victories. That is a fact. That is a statisical relationship (however small a sample set). That is not an explanation - apologies Sir OM (not attacking you here).

Not an explanation in the literary sense but the trend is clear. When Gibbs has a losing preseason record he has winning regular seasons and the inverse is true as well. If a thing has been true for 13 years, a significant percentage of NFL existence, then it surely has some predictive value. The explanation as to why Gibbs loses games that don't count in order to win games that do would surely have to come from Gibbs himself since psychologists and priests operate under rules of confidentiality.

3) Well, the standard in play in the preseason varies from team to team, obviously. As has been noted a good number of times on ES, Steve Spurrier’s goal was to win preseason games. Some have said that Marvin Harrison was trying to win the Bengals/’Skins matchup this preaseason to take some media heat off of his beleaguered team. We can only assume some things from what we know since the current coaching staff in Ashburn is not very forthcoming with their goals for preseason. But, we can look back at Gibbs’ history (and Williams’ history, too—remember him telling the press he set Taylor up for failure in a Rams preseason game a few years ago?) and make assumptions about the current preseason. bobzmuda’s observations seem to mesh well with what we already know about Gibbs’ and Williams’ preseason philosophies.

I can buy into that. I was after how you distinguish fact from observation. That can be a slippery one when building these arguments and you sometimes seem to be using the concepts interchangably

An observation is a fact as long as it is a repeatable observation, the observer is qualified, and, in the case of numerative data, it can be shown to be statistically valid. Philosophers and scientists have been using the process of documented observation as fact since time immemorial. Read Darwin or the notes of any field biologist or any psychology journal. Heck, litmus paper in chemistry is a good example. No one preserves litmus paper as factual evidence, they write down what color it turned and the associated pH range. The observations of a trained individual are used as fact in any way that counts. You can argue with some success that observations are the only kinds of facts we can possibly have since we are not metaphysical beings.

5) Note that I said emotions and facts work together to bring us to the truth (“Emotions have their purpose, but they are by no means to be completely relied on in the decision making process. Truth is paramount. Emotion should be the motivator that drives us to find the truth. Because we feel something is true, that does not, in and of itself, make something true.”). If the heart’s position should prove to be wrong in light of the facts, one should abandon the heart’s position and embrace the truth.

sounds good to me. though, again, you will find that truth is a very slippery notion indeed -just ask OBL or the maniac President in Iran.

The slipperiest, that's why we still debate what it is after ten thousand years.

6) I must wholeheartedly disagree that when seeking truth, one’s ‘heart’ counts more than anything else. Like I said before, one’s emotions should stir one to action, not be that which determines how one should act. One should gather as many of the facts as are available at the moment of decision and then make the decision. Emotion unbridled has been the cause of much heartache and pain in the world.

My idea was half tongue in cheek and intended to be positive- "truth" in the context of professional football is secondary. it's great to be a modern day Diogenes - but keep the emotions/heart squarely in front of you. if anything, in my book, that is the one bond that truly binds all Skins' fans together.

Right on, brother 'Skins fan.

My own take on this arguement between heart and head looks very much like motorcycles (a moment while I try to make this make sense to people outside my head).

Assumption: No one in America needs a motorcycle. There are always more practical forms of transportation available for comparable money or less.

Assertion: I love motorcycles and must have one at my disposal at all times to prevent migraines and general crankiness.

Observation: Ducati and MV Agusta make the hottest looking production motorcycles around.

Fact: Ducatis require more frequent and more expensive routine maintenance than other motorcycles.

Fact: Replacing the fairing of an MV Agusta costs more money than I make in a month.

Observation: This makes Ducatis and MVs less practical than a Yamaha or a Honda.

Fact: I don't want a Honda or a Yamaha because they don't look as cool.

Observation: Saying that one hypersport motorcycle is less practical than another is lke saying a one-hump camel is less practical than a two hump camel for daily transportation.

Conclusion: Purchases of discretionary, impractical items should be based solely upon the "heart" since they don't make a lick of sense anyway and happiness is under the butt of the beholder. Or, something like that.

[glikster04]

Amen. good post man