Baumannisms

by **Soren** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 16:09:36

of fucking course he's a gooner. That explains a lot.

by **etched Chaos** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 17:18:41

Soren wrote:of fucking course he's a gooner. That explains a lot.

Redknapp is a gooner... No wonder he spent half his time antagonising Spurs fans, he's a stinking gooner cunt.

by **phatj** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 18:12:57

Phylan defended this guy

by **td11** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 18:57:41

everyone at crashburn seems to love him

by **SK790** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 19:03:37

Soren wrote:of fucking course he's a gooner. That explains a lot.

He's got the gooner persecution complex, that's for sure.

by **phdave** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 19:23:48

td11 wrote:everyone at crashburn seems to love him

He has plenty of people saying great things about his writing, not just at crashburn.

For example:

Liz Roscher ‏@lizroscher 11 Jan .@MJ_Baumann is my favorite writer, so please read his latest Crash Bag over at @CrashburnAlley.

by **etched Chaos** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 21:09:10

Liz Roscher is probably a fan of 50 Shades of grey too.

by **Woody** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 21:11:53

Who isn't though

by **Benny Lava** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 21:13:17

Most defenses that I've seen of his writing is that he is a satirist. But it does seem a bit out of place to have a satirist for a sports blog, no?

by **kruker** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 22:02:05

phdave wrote:
One commenter remarked that he preferred Paul’s more level-headed tone to my “sour” and “bitter” outlook, and while I appreciate lemons as much as the next guy, that remark got me thinking: I do find myself in a default state of bitter, florid, impotent rage. It’s not that surprising, considering my hobbies:

Watching/thinking about/reading about/writing about the Phillies.
Watching/thinking about/reading about/writing about the Sixers.
Watching/thinking about/reading about other teams I follow: Arsenal, the Flyers, the Eagles, the South Carolina Gamecocks.
Consuming narrative fiction that’s heavy, dark and extremely cynical, like House of Cards and the novels of Richard Ford.
Consuming music that is heavy and wallows in human weakness and suffering.
Contemplating the pitiable futility and smallness of the existence of mankind in general and myself in particular.

Not a lot to get excited about there, particularly when you’re as pessimistic a person as I am anyway.

I've got nothing left. He can't be real. He can't be real. Off the charts.

by **ReadingPhilly** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 22:04:54

He's a fucking idiot. People that like him have an open invite to the bsg tailgate and swift kick to the nuts.

by **mcare89** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 22:18:35

kruker wrote:
phdave wrote:
One commenter remarked that he preferred Paul’s more level-headed tone to my “sour” and “bitter” outlook, and while I appreciate lemons as much as the next guy, that remark got me thinking: I do find myself in a default state of bitter, florid, impotent rage. It’s not that surprising, considering my hobbies:

Watching/thinking about/reading about/writing about the Phillies.
Watching/thinking about/reading about/writing about the Sixers.
Watching/thinking about/reading about other teams I follow: Arsenal, the Flyers, the Eagles, the South Carolina Gamecocks.
Consuming narrative fiction that’s heavy, dark and extremely cynical, like House of Cards and the novels of Richard Ford.
Consuming music that is heavy and wallows in human weakness and suffering.
Contemplating the pitiable futility and smallness of the existence of mankind in general and myself in particular.

Not a lot to get excited about there, particularly when you’re as pessimistic a person as I am anyway.

I've got nothing left. He can't be real. He can't be real. Off the charts.

He just seems like a miserable dude, and misery loves company.

by **phatj** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 22:36:33

Benny Lava wrote:Most defenses that I've seen of his writing is that he is a satirist. But it does seem a bit out of place to have a satirist for a sports blog, no?

Not really. But he's not a satirist, he's a shitirist.

by **The Dude** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 23:06:44

yeah, there is no satire at all. just shitty analogies and unseen levels of goth

by **phdave** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 23:40:32

He has written satire. Like that Delmon Young is a winner thing. But that isn't what he does most of the time. I don't quote that kind of stuff. Its boring. If it looks like he is trying satire I skip over it and save myself the trouble of having to read it.

by **bleh** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 23:54:43

90% of what he writes is about himself. It's like they took a random person's personal blog and put it on a baseball site. And he's the most boring person on the planet. I don't know why anyone would ever want to read that.

by **smitty** » Sat Mar 23, 2013 05:40:10

He's a lot of fun to make fun of though.

by **SK790** » Sat Mar 23, 2013 07:37:41

mcare89 wrote:
kruker wrote:
phdave wrote:
One commenter remarked that he preferred Paul’s more level-headed tone to my “sour” and “bitter” outlook, and while I appreciate lemons as much as the next guy, that remark got me thinking: I do find myself in a default state of bitter, florid, impotent rage. It’s not that surprising, considering my hobbies:

Watching/thinking about/reading about/writing about the Phillies.
Watching/thinking about/reading about/writing about the Sixers.
Watching/thinking about/reading about other teams I follow: Arsenal, the Flyers, the Eagles, the South Carolina Gamecocks.
Consuming narrative fiction that’s heavy, dark and extremely cynical, like House of Cards and the novels of Richard Ford.
Consuming music that is heavy and wallows in human weakness and suffering.
Contemplating the pitiable futility and smallness of the existence of mankind in general and myself in particular.

Not a lot to get excited about there, particularly when you’re as pessimistic a person as I am anyway.

I've got nothing left. He can't be real. He can't be real. Off the charts.

He just seems like a miserable dude, and misery loves company.

i kinda feel bad for the dude.

by **phdave** » Sat Mar 23, 2013 15:25:43

There's no math involved in understanding WAR. If anything, what you need to understand is philosophy and psychology.

by **Grotewold** » Sat Mar 23, 2013 17:34:13

phdave wrote:
There's no math involved in understanding WAR. If anything, what you need to understand is philosophy and psychology.

Not taxidermy?

Archived

Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms

Re: Baumannisms