Well, sure. I didn't need this incident to convince me he was deranged -- that ship had already sailed. But the plane crash tweets should have convinced even the most devoted follower that he was despicable.
Yes, I should have made it clear--I wasn't disagreeing with you. Just emphasizing how many lines this guy has crossed in his crusade.
I have to say, given a combination of apparent match day experience, quality of football, TV "appeal" and finances, there are 8-10 teams who are a league apart from the rest. I'll include Seattle, Atlanta, Portland and Toronto, you can work out the rest for yourselves. Suffice to say I'm not looking forward to DC vs. Columbus.
If I'm allowed to go off topic but somewhat on topic I'd like to tell a story. My son is turning 14 and loves soccer. He loves jerseys. He gets them from family members but they are run of the mill jerseys you get at a mall. Last summer he bought a book about the original NASL. We got him a current Cosmos jersey. This year, I looked for on sale jerseys from other NASL teams. I ended up getting him an Indy Eleven jersey on sale. I'd originally looked for the old NASL resurrected clubs like Tampa Bay and Ft. Lauderdale. Then I looked at the Tulsa Roughnecks website and found their 3rd jersey on sale for 25 bucks. So he will be getting a jersey from an original NASL team. I thought of this great thread when I purchased it.
As a distraction, here my to two hypothetical divisions, off the top of my head, with no analysis whatsoever. They're based on a combination of: 2017 playoff potential; organization; stadium; attendances; game day experience (at least on TV); local media coverage and financial resources. For instance, NYC FC rank highly in terms of playoff potential, attendances and finances but low on stadium, match day experience and local media coverage. 4 place margin of error. It's based on the situation today, not a year ago, not in 6 months time and not when the new stadiums open. Please don't kill me! 1. Toronto FC 2. Seattle Sounders 3. Atlanta United 4. LA Galaxy 5. Portland Timbers 6. New York Red Bulls 7. New York City FC 8. FC Dallas 9. Montreal Impact 10. Colorado Rapids 11. Houston Dynamo 12. San Jose Earthquakes 13. Sporting KC 14. Real Salt Lake 15. New England Revolution 16. Philadelphia Union 17. Orlando City 18. Vancouver Whitecaps ======================== 19. DC United 20. Minnesota United 21. Columbus Crew 22. Chicago Fire 23. Cincinnati 24. Sacramento Republic 25. Louisville City 26. Tampa Bay Rowdies 27. Indy Eleven 28. Miami FC 29. New York Cosmos 30. OKC Energy 31. Tulsa Roughnecks FC 32. Richmond Kickers 33. Carolina Railhawks 34. Ottawa Fury 35. Charleston Battery 36. Rochester Rhinos I'm not suggesting we implement pro/rel at this stage, it's purely a distraction.
I didn't realize he was actually banned. He was never banned from this forum, which I thought at the time was his "last stand" but if so he must have continued acting up elsewhere on the site. His tantrums were epic.
He isn't? I assumed he was. But he did run around the MLS forums wuite a bit, maybe he got smacked down there?
My understanding was always that he stormed off. A lot of people say he was banned, but I've never seen a thread about it in the Mods-only forum. Given that this forum was one of his regular stomping grounds, I would think I would have at least been notified about any banning. It's entirely possible one of the Supermods brought down the hammer unilaterally, but IMHO a lot of people ASSUME he was banned but I'm not 100% sure that's true. EDIT: Actually, you may be right--out of curiosity I searched the Mods-Only forum, and couldn't find any thread on him being banned. But a search of members comes up empty--his user profile seems to be gone. It's possible he requested that, but it's also possible the Supers shut him down.
Yep, and now that I look, his user profile is still active. So I'm back to thinking he was only "banned" in his own mind. On my profile page, you can still see the exchange I had with him after I committed the horrible outrage of asking him to explain why he was using this site to solicit money. Still makes me smile.
So, no less than THREE moderators air their dirty laundry on a guy who hasn't posted on bigsoccer in at least seven years. Stay classy guys.
That "dirty laundry" consists of them trying to figure out whether or not he was ever banned, and most of the information they're citing is available to the public. Furthermore, the information would seem to suggest that he was never banned. How is this "dirty laundry"?
So you don't read the personal character attacks they just made years after the guy stops posting?.... typical. "Are pro/rel's most ardebt activists hurting their own cause in fits of sexism, racism, name calling, and by doing little more than shouting into the ether?" "I didn't need this incident to convince me he was deranged." "Just emphasizing how many lines this guy has crossed in his crusade." "Long, long, long. It was back when he first started his reign of terror. He didn't last long." "My understanding was always that he stormed off." "So I'm back to thinking he was only "banned" in his own mind." Belittle, ridicule, marginalize. Typical tactics of the anti-Pro/Rel crowd. And for the past few years when it came to "Tinfoil Ted" and his limited time on bigsoccer, those tactics have included outright vilification and demonization. Oh, and I erred when I said seven years... actually, it's only been about six and a half. MLS Single Entity Sends Handicapped Clubs to CCL. Do We Not Know, or Not Care? Discussion in 'CONCACAF Champions League' started by soccerreform.us, Mar 7, 2010. https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/ml...bs-to-ccl-do-we-not-know-or-not-care.1354368/ Seven years later... .some things never change.
Moderators are allowed to express their personal opinions on this site. It certainly isn't airing dirty laundry when we're discussing things that are public knowledge and, more importantly, related to the discussion that is happening on the thread at the time. I'd also note that the very first one was a paraphrase of the article that I linked and is something that is easily backed up from actual quotes from the most ardent pro/rel activists on twitter that were the topic of the linked article.
"Dirty laundry" generally refers to private information. Almost nothing that's been said about Ted is not backed up by publicly available statements. Literally the only thing mentioned that isn't public is a mod talking about searching the moderators' forum for references to Ted being banned, and finding no such references.
Personal character attacks? GTFO ^ if you're going to say TED doesn't check some of those boxes then just quit life. Or what about Chip telling a female over Twitter to make him a sandwich? and YOU name call with the best of them. Nothing about that statement is an attack ... it's a factual statement in the form of a question. Ted was deranged if he thought he could solicit money without having to answer questions. How in the blue perfect hell can you even characterize this as a personal character attack? Though, how is Ted NOT on a crusade? SIMILE: look it up Again, how is this a personal attack? For the record, you've done this as well. Conclusion based on evidence readily available to everyone. How is that an attack? He HAS stated several times he was banned, when he clearly wasn't. Again, factual statement. Make shit up, get butthurt, selectively apply rational Typical tactics of the pro/rel crowd. And for the past few years when it comes to "the anti pro/rel brigade" and our discussion on bigsoccer, those tactics have included outright vilification and actual personal character attacks. Just the names .... soccerreform -> RuffyBoi
Ted is arguably the most visible American pro/rel advocate beyond actual soccer professionals and officials. As an appropriate subject of Rudin's article, his past activities and the way he conducts his particular brand of "activism" are entirely relevant, as are firsthand accounts by posters. Beyond this article and the occasional reference to related twitter incidents, he gets discussed here relatively rarely. The thing is, you haven't outlined your objections to Rudin's piece. Many pro/rel advocates openly criticize Ted and have themselves claimed that he hurts their cause. It wasn't that long ago that a number of them released an open letter distancing themselves from the type of conduct he routinely engages in. May I ask what your personal take on Ted is?
David Rudin would fall into this group, btw. That's what makes this comment amusing: Rudin and his ilk are exactly the type of people that you want advocating for pro/rel in the US, but they are the ones that, most often, bear the brunt of the attacks from the pro/rel fanatics.
Nipun Chopra, the guy that Ted threw the "caste system" comment at, also falls under that description. Ted now rails against not only US soccer officials, anti-pro/rellers, pro/rel skeptics, and those that simply feel we aren't ready for pro/rel, but also advocates that he believes aren't railing hard enough or those associated with professional non-MLS clubs (like Nipun with Indy XI). On the latter, he seems to have adopted a stance that by operating under the status quo and not pushing for pro/rel, they are complicit.