Okay. Well. How is it that in social media -- and as a novice here I assume football boards are considered such? -- we roundly and always anonymously attack and condemn in the strongest terms things that, addressed to us, would outrage us? We would be jumping up and down and setting our hair on fire and generally making fools of ourselves at even the suggestion we should do such things, and from some guys hiding behind an internet alias? We seem to always impute to others what I suppose I think we would do. We attack them professionally and personally without any regard for civil discourse, and fail to make any connection to the ugliness of the recent election. It seems to be what the internet has made us. A guy can be criticized, and roundly, for what he writes or says, without attaching vile or evil overtones or questioning his integrity. Geez. It is a column. It is an opinion. We remember those, right? I think it is that First Amendment thingy. He's doing his job. For what it's worth, I think he's good at it. If Bradley is wrong, he hangs it out there for all to see. If he makes a fool of himself, so be it. It does not make him John Wayne Gacy or Lord Haw Haw. If Georgia gets the ink it is because Georgia wins. Two great and dramatic victories in three years is astounding and I have watched the 4th quarter of '16 half a dozen times. Will again. But the record, as they say, speaks for itself. Sorry for the rant.
