PRO getting their cards and books in order now.

Someone made a Celío purple jersey joke about a month ago and, I swear, the pinnies haven't been purple ever since. #AllForCity

During one of the very first matches, you could hear some little kid in the crowd squeal "SHOOT IT, BÜRKI!" on the broadcast, and I have annoyed every soul around me by impersonating it ever since lol

Love this team, but you have not earned this level of hubris. Even against a D-II team 🤷🏼‍♀️

Apparently CBS can't afford diacritics? Also, let's go Timo Baumgarti! 😂

#AllForCity #OpenCup #USOC

Still weird. Why make the back up keeper travel at all if they're actively on baby watch?

If that were the case, would this not imply that Welsh traveled in preparation for an unavailability and therefore Bürki should have been listed as questionable on the availability report?

Fair.

This is really helpful, thank you!

Really the only thing I miss about being on mainstream SM is being nosy in the likes.

They didn't stop?

And…? As is the person I was responding to.

And now you jump into have an opinion about my opinion about their opinion. Don't act like you're above it.

NPR is constantly covering news. If you can't find it, you're being intentionally avoidant.

Just link to info instead of inputting tiny text into a table and posting it as an image.

Really? I'm not sure if you're fully used to this platform, but I think you've confused and conflated me with 2-3 other people 😂

Also, I "keep calling for additives to be banned"? Lol.

I said "ban them" exactly one time, followed by "and then it's not an issue [in regards to consumer preferences]."

Everything else is you trying to goad me into an argument I was never having, and me explaining what my point actually is.

No, I said that if they were banned, then no one would be using them and consumer bias would not be an issue.

You really want a specific argument, but it's not the one I'm making even though you assume it is. Keep shopping around, you'll find someone who is, I'm sure.

I read the article. Ban them and then it's not an issue.

It wasn't very compelling, at any rate. Still, your last statement is simply a reiteration of something I already disagreed with, providing rationale. What "discussion" do you think we're having at this point?

That's rhetorical, btw. Any response will just languish because I'm bored of this.

It ceases to be a discussion when you bring nothing to it. You expected me to just swallow "I used to be a journalist," and when I didn't, you just reverted back to the last thing you said, with which I still disagree. Again, if you have anything new to add, go ahead. If not, move on.

We have differing opinions here. If you don't have anything new to say, feel free to opt out of my mentions.

I mean, my issues are with degrading journalistic integrity and sloppy standards. "I was a journalist for a long time," is not an inherent defense. Neither is citing the NYT as a paragon of virtue.

Look, you don't have to care or even understand the issue. Word choice is part and parcel of journalistic integrity. Headlines should be easily interpreted by even, to use your term, the stupidest people. That's the point.

The thing is, though – record aside – this is the least community-centered the team has felt. It seems to be completely without identity, let alone representative of St. Louis.