My involvement in this thread was not about you BigPin22 and your stats. When I said there was no excuse for your comment, I did not mean the clerical aspect of it, I meant the derogatory nature of it. Do you not get that?
Here is what it was about, giving Roger Windham his dues. My opinion is that he should be #1. He has done everything that he could have and should have to, in my opinion, to deserve that bestowment (I do realize that the same could be said for Bo, Bo is clearly special). But I can have an opinion just like Chief. Others have had opinions on this thread contradictory to Chief, so can I. The responses on the threads add some "life" to it. It is fun, interesting and entertaining. I do not expect everyone to agree with me and I certainly didn't make the comment because I expected Chief to agree. I just felt that alot of people do not realize how good Windham really was this year, especially down the stretch. So I was compelled to tell them. Windham just got better and better. At the end of the year, there was no "criteria" that I could see that would show that Windham should not be #1 (again I realize the same could be said for Bo). I guess I should not have brought up the Senior Nationals. But it was another way for me to say, "Hey, look how good Windham is!". I know he is a Senior and 103 is loaded more with stud freshmen. Like I said, my son has been wrestling them for years. That did not need to come up.
Your comments were unneccesary. You really did not even need to comment. There was no need to defend Bo or any other of the fabulous freshman. Believe me, I know how good Pursel, Seybold, Watters, etc. are. It was supposed to be about recognizing Windham. Your comments were derogatory and they took away from his accomplishment. You were more concerned about slamming me than how your comments offended others. It is ok though, you are not alone, others did that as well with previous comments. I myself even made a couple of comments that perhaps would have been offensive if I had been on the other side of them. But again, they were truly designed to promote Windham and not offend others. I thought that I had clarified that previously but just in case I did not make that point, I am again now. I should have let it go, but people were responding with derogatory comments which I felt needed to be addressed. I hope that everyone feels better and will stop the negativity.
I just should have created my own top ten and posted it and everyone could slam me which I would not have enjoyed. There would probably still be people that would be derogatory and offensive to others in their attempt to get me or prove their point and that would be sad. But one thing is for sure, in the end, at the top of the list, would still be, Roger Windham #1.
