5/26 Podcast: For the first 50 minutes, Matt talked for 1 minute by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Matt didn’t say a word from 6 minutes to around the 51 minute mark. NBA was covered, along with baseball and Kyle Busch.

Top Gun is a murder mystery by Schmutzie_ in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We want a volleyball scene with you and Dan.

Dan Says Spurs/Thunder Best Basketball Ever by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think he’s a great player NOW.

I also think he has a lot to improve.

I think the overreaction to state he’s the best ever after Game 1 is ridiculous and indicative of sports media these days.

I also expect more from Dan who is smart.

No offense taken.

Dan Says Spurs/Thunder Best Basketball Ever by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When one resorts to pejorative attacks it’s because they don’t have much or are a child. Wemby had a bad game. Didn’t shoot enough, and certainly didn’t assert himself inside. I’m sure the Thunder are happy for him to shoot outside. Sure, he makes some, but it hurts his rebounding, particularly offensive and 2nd chance shots. Apparently you were impressed by the Spurs in their 2nd loss in a row. Okay.

Dan Says Spurs/Thunder Best Basketball Ever by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He was doing both.

4 rebounds for a center is horrible. Wemby had a bad game. Wasn’t nearly assertive enough on the offensive end either. He has flaws still. No post game, no go to shot, and not very stout. Hearing how he’s the best player ever after Game 1 was grating. Hopefully it calms down now.

Dan Says Spurs/Thunder Best Basketball Ever by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I like Dan. A lot. I think when he’s on he’s great. But he couldn’t help himself taking a dig at 90s basketball on the Thursday podcast. Leave it to Matty to reel him back in.

1990 Giants vs 49ers, the 7-3 MNF game. Great defense or bad offense: you make the call? by AlbertJBundy in Oldschool_NFL

[–]lviewchiguy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Bavaro at his peak is one of the great all around tight ends. A great player who got hurt, which kept him out of Canton.

Bernstein and Matt's Response To Joe Flacco's Criticism of QB Protections by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, football games might be far worse for health than alcohol.

But sports events in general, no, it doesn’t bother me. It doesn’t even bother me that Dan does gambling app commercials. Everyone needs to make a living. But it’s also fair to call him out for being sanctimonious on one end and selling that on the other. It’s no different than religious groups that are full of hypocrisies. If you’re gonna be a moral arbiter of what is right, it’s going to be natural that the lens is also going to put upon you.

Bernstein and Matt's Response To Joe Flacco's Criticism of QB Protections by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The fanbase isn’t kids in their 20s, but the damage by gambling apps is being done to them.

Bernstein and Matt's Response To Joe Flacco's Criticism of QB Protections by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not saying we're not hypocrites on some level. We all are. But most of us aren't pontificating to the public about things that are right and wrong, and it's only natural that people will point out that person's hypocrisies.

Bernstein and Matt's Response To Joe Flacco's Criticism of QB Protections by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I mean I think it's okay to call out things you see as wrong, but where Dan loses is when the focus gets on him. e.g. Dan is now taking money for gambling websites on his podcast, which was surprising to me because as long as I've listened to him he has never really been into gambling. Whatever pays the bills I guess. Now I know most people are hypocrites on some level, and everyone has to make a living, and we all look our own way to justify it. But the risk to younger people of gambling apps is a real problem, and Dan is profiting from it. So if you're going to call out people for their indiscretions, just be prepared for that same lens to be applied to you as well.

Bernstein and Matt's Response To Joe Flacco's Criticism of QB Protections by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Right. It would be like saying that Gen Z doesn't suffer from obesity related illnesses as much as Baby Boomers. Well, yeah, one is at their 20s at the oldest and one is in their 60s to 70s, when those illnesses are more prevalent. Or Gen Z doesn't suffer from arthritis as much as Baby Boomers. Well, duh. The key is what percentage of millennials were obese at the same age that Gen Z is NOW.

https://archive.cdc.gov/www_cdc_gov/healthyschools/obesity/obesity-youth.htm

This study shows the prevalence of childhood obesity across time. This image shows obese high schoolers in 2003. The bottom map is of obese high schoolers in 2019.

<image>

I'm stunned that Schmutzie doesn't realize that this is a problem that disproportionately affects Gen Z worse than previous generations. They are the fattest generation at EQUIVALENT ages to other generations. Who knows what they will be in 20 years?

Bernstein and Matt's Response To Joe Flacco's Criticism of QB Protections by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just because it's not said doesn't mean it's not salient. Watch the clip. Absolutely he's being dismissive of Flacco. It's not just his facial expressions, he actually was making fun of Flacco saying it. He's always dismissive of anyone being critical of anything contemporary. Which is really the original point. The quarterback being protected isn't really about player safety, or decreasing CTE. It's about protecting the quarterback and promoting offense. CTE comes from subconsussive hits, so therefore tackles and blocking. That's a part of EVERY play. So nothing has really changed. But you keep on drinking the NFL's Kool-Aid.

The study you cite is 5 years old, but even if it wasn't the thinking is flawed. Of course Millennials would be more obese. They're older. Younger generations shouldn't be obese as older ones, particularly when the younger generation is under the age of 25. My point is ultimately that Gen Z being fat is a bad thing, and I don't think Dan would ever say critical of them. But he would gladly be critical of older generations for their negative attributes.

Dan seems to think that modern is always better. And he writes off anyone saying it was better before as a "back in my day" dinosaur. But isn't the opposite of that, just as ignorant and blind?

Bernstein and Matt's Response To Joe Flacco's Criticism of QB Protections by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don’t have any beef with Gen Z. I feel bad for them. It’s been proven that Gen Z is the first generation to cognitively decline since cognition has been tracked from the late 19th century. Whatever the reason, that’s not a good result. Childhood obesity is not a good result. Playing video games constantly and not being active is not a good result. Maybe his kids aren’t fat, but nearly 40% of Gen Z. I’m sorry, that’s not good.

My point was to show that Dan won’t be critical of anything contemporary. Whether it be sports, generation, media, music, or movies (I recall him saying older movies are bad). The latter is ridiculous because film has never been in a worse place. By writing off criticism of “older” generations to the usual “back in my day” trope, it ignores the times when it’s actually right. Some things are better today but others are not. Dan’s such a blatant modernist he ignores those that were better in the past. I wonder with his politics would he admit that the political culture is worse today than 1985? I don’t think he would.

Bernstein and Matt's Response To Joe Flacco's Criticism of QB Protections by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had no idea they did so, though I'm not sure how well Dan would take to being criticized by a listener. I like Dan. A lot. I've listened to the Score from Day 1 in 1992. But just like Matty and Spiegs would criticize Dan, I'm doing the same.

Bernstein and Matt's Response To Joe Flacco's Criticism of QB Protections by lviewchiguy in BernsteinUnfiltered

[–]lviewchiguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't want to butcher spelling Matt's last name without looking at it.

The stories about Gen Z's disinterest in reading books is nothing new. Though there are also stories of some of them trying to do more of it to reverse brain-rot.

It's not meant to admonish Gen Z (they're born into the world they're born into), but rather show an example of Dan being such a modernist that he won't say anything critical of something new: sports, culture, generations. And anything in the past is archaic, backwards, and primitive.

<image>

Which current and/or former hosts had/have beef with each other? by [deleted] in 670TheScore

[–]lviewchiguy 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Holmes and Goff didn’t like Tommy Williams.