Writting1 Final draft

Jiangwei Ying
Professor Michal
English 102a
10/15/2009
Staff writer, Elliott Teaford wrote an article, which is named “72 wins not a goal”to express his opinion. He feel that setting the bar this high that might only invite failure. Another staff writer, Pete Marshell gave his opinion in his article, “Small man make the game big”, “Even Fabian Calazada looks even smaller comparing with his teammates, but he can play very well.”In the game against Spartans, he intercepted two passes. The last article was posted by The Associate Press, it is called :“Angels remerber good, bad times in ’09 season.” The bad news for angels is that Adehart was killed along two friends in early April when their car was broadsided by an alleged drunken driver. These were some of the sports news that I read online.
I think Elliott Teaford is right that setting the bar this high that might only invite failure, the 2006-2007’s Dallas Colts is the example. In that season Colts won 69 games, which means the top team in the normal games. Do you know what happened to them? Dalas losed in the First playoff series. Even this summer, Ron Artest’s coming makes Lakers perfect this summer, but setting a realy high goal will not help Lakers at all. As we all know, Ron is one of the best 1 vs 1 defending players and he can also score more than 15 per game. Even though Lakers won the NBA Finals last season, wining the O’Brein Cup is still difficult for them. Making goles too high will only bring pressure and problems to people, which will increase the difficulty. So I
agree with the writer’s opinion that lakers should do their best to play games in the coming season, not only for a goal, like 72 wins. Winning the Champion is what the Lekers need to achieve.
“Fabian Calzada is listed on the Arroyo Valley football roster as 5 feet 8 and 160pounds, but next to his teammates he looks even smaller. However, he plays bigger on Friday,” said by Pete Marshall. I agree his point, somethings height may not stop a real person to reach his goal. If you try really hard, harder than others, you can make up for a deficiency of your gift. Armstrong is one of the best cycling athlete, who has link law big game achievement “seven repeated champions”. He has cancer, which may take his life, but he overcome it, and reach his goal . I think Fabian Calzada is the same, only difference between them is that Calzada is small but Armstrong has cancer. Sometimes, you may not have the same gift as the other people, but do more and try more will help you to reach your goal, just like what Nike advertisement says: “ Everything is possible!”
The Associated Press said :”Angels remember good, bad times in ’09 season.”That’s really a bad time to angel, Adenhart was killed along with two friends inearly April when their car was Broadsided by an alleged drunken driver. Like what his friends said, they feel that the death is so near to them. I think so, too. I t’s so sad to see the friend passed away. It will be always some regrets to people. Jackson gets AIDS make him leve basketball early. That’s so woeful. Just like Adenhart, who is a gifted, skillful, and young players, but he leaves so hurry that he didn’t get the success that he wants. But there is still some good things that it will stimulate his teamates to
play games physically and mentally.
In conclusion, there are lots of miracles and regrets in the field of sports. No matter how gift you are, you may not reach your goal if it is too high. But if you do more and try more, you can use your hardworking to make up for an innate denficiency. Life will always leave regret after people’s death, what we need to do is to make full use of our life time. Many people don’t treasure the thing that they saw, only after they lose them, they will know how important it was. The sports field is full of change, some people reach their goals with their hardworking, while some others leave with their regerts.
Phil Jackson doesn't do predictions. It's not his style. The Lakers' coach usually refers questions about how many games they might win to "the pundits," the reporters, columnists and TV commentators who are unafraid to go bold when it comes time to make predictions about the fate of the team. Just like what Phil Jackson said, setting the bar that high might only invite failure. It’s simple that he would rather not set a publit goal. No matter how many games that Lakers will win in the coming NBA season, the most important for the Lakers I think is how to the O’Brien Cup. Anyone who remmerber Dallas winning seventy games during the regular season and losing in the first round of playoffs knows how stupified it is to talk about making new records at the number of games you win this coming season. Phil is so right about keeping the focus of defending the championship and focusing on one game at a time. Although sometimes the teams that win a lot in the season will be easy to win the O’Brien Cup, I still wish that Lakers should not care too much about the numbers of games they will
win.
Accoding to the three discourse, they are all concrened about the sports. They looks similar, because they are all related to the popular sports, basketball, football, and baseball, which were the top sports in USA. In their discourse, they all give some examples that can support their opinion. Like the first one, the writer list the failure of Dallas Mavericks in the season of 2006-2007 to prove setting a high goal will only cause failure. The second one, Pete Marshell list the game between his team and Spartans, he performs good to prove that he can be a good football player even he is much smaller than his teammates. They all use the same way to prove their opinion. In these three discourse, they all bring some other famous people words. They all use short paragraph, which will help readers easy to understand. When I repackaged the academic response as a letter-to-the-editor response, you had choise the first issue that setting a bar for Lakers will only cause failure. I determine that the examples and words that can support my opinion, and delete what is not concerted about my things, like I had keep the example of Dalas Colt. Based on my experience, setting some examples that concerted about the opinion will support the main opinion. There’s some difference in writing acdemic response and a letter to the writer. The first will be more formal. But there is something that is the same, I need to show the fact or examples to support my opinion. The academic response makes me feel more a part of, because there is two another different body paragraph. But the letter to the writer is more independent, it only talking about one article. To find out the similarity of these topic that I concerned about would better prepare me to become a more
meaningful contributor.。