For instance.. If a chick says she has a boyfriend, that might be the truth or it might be a lie. If it’s a lie, she’s trying to block you from rapping to her. Neither situation is good, however both situations call for different tactics, so your counter is to figure out what her relationship’s like. If she can’t/won’t tell you, it might be because it doesn’t exist.

So, instead of her statement “I have a boyfriend” becoming reality to you, it needs to be filed away as merely a parameter. It’s another item of information that you have to help you in your quest to get on. Throw that in the mix with the rest of her statements and behaviors and you eventually end up profiling her properly, like CSI.

Besides that, a chick having a boyfriend doesn’t mean anything in and of itself. Statistically, 50% of people in relationships cheat, AND relationships break up every day. Today’s brush-off becomes tomorrow’s revenge-****, Capisce? :D

The coach is the leader, except he’s an old-ass man. :D

The coach can THINK and STRATEGIZE all he wants, but he’s not in the physical shape to move the football ONE INCH on the playing field. The quarterback has to do it.

Also, Yes.. The coach gives the QB the play and essentially demands that he runs exactly that play. This makes the coach the leader, UNTIL the QB is on the playing field. If he looks around and doesn’t like what he’s seeing, he can call an audible and change the play at the line of scrimmage by calling out predetermined set of signals.

This is why I used that analogy. Ultimately, even if the coach decides to put the QB on the bench, when the ball is snapped, it goes in to the QB’s hands and he’s the only one that can ACTUALLY make anything happen, so, to me, he’s still the leader, with the coach giving suggestions and even having a better overview of the entire situation, but still not being the primary person in the trenches.

Speaking of trenches, it’s the same thing with war. The General sits in the USA telling YOU what to do in some other country. If you’re told to take that bridge, because on paper, that looks like a good thing to do from the USA (or because that person’s willing to sacrifice YOUR LIFE to try to gain control of something), even though the General is clearly your leader, YOU are the leader in that situation, because if you head away from the bridge instead of towards it, there’s nothing the General can do except throw you in jail, ALIVE, when you return to the base.

So, my opinion is that Pauly was in a position to make SUGGESTIONS, but not to actually lead the situation. What happened was, since Pauly DIDN’T tell Mike he was on the short clock, Mike didn’t speed his game up and eventually, Pauly dipped and Mike isolated his chick too late, leaving the grenade with nothing to do but pull her own pin.

On top of that, as soon as Mike understood that Pauly wasn’t interested in the extra chick, *HE* should have gone into two-minute drill mode and separated ASAP but he didn’t.

I agree entirely with what you’re saying about “Help your boy to get on = separate”, but I didn’t see anything in the way they edited that show that said that Pauly’s game worked that way. They had multiple chicks over several times, and the pecking order was clearly Mike, Pauly, Ronnie (who wasn’t even there, because he was busy screwing Sammi), and then Vinny.

It seems that Pauly’s game is that chicks dig how he looks, so he gets to choose from the ones that like him. They didn’t show him doing any aggressive moves towards J-Woww, but somehow, they ended up laying around while she’s looking down his pants. They didn’t show him doing aggressive moves towards the Israeli chick, but here she comes stalking him again AFTER he told her to kick rocks.

So, From what I saw, I don’t believe that Pauly could / should have been counted on to make the isolation happen. He seemed to be the bait sidekick.. The kind of guy that helps out your rap without saying anything because the extra chicks want to meet him. It’s always easier to pull groups of chicks with groups of guys that are all on-par.

So the way I saw the situation, there’s no way that Pauly should ever have been in control of Mike’s actions, but yes.. He should have tried to isolate the grenade to assist Mike in getting on. However, I don’t think at any point that Mike ever stopped being the actual leader.

He should have either told Pauly to go show his chick his mega-expensive DJ equipment on the spot or he should have worked out isolation techniques with Pauly ahead of time, such as going upstairs without the alcohol and then telling Pauly & the grenade that they were going back downstairs to get the drinks and then disappear into some locked room where they can’t be interrupted.

Having said all that, Pauly should DEFINITELY have become the leader of the grenade, which he didn’t do at all. The hierarchy is Leader > Good-Looking Chick > Wingman > Other Chick. Each guy’s in charge of controlling his own girl.

what we have here is the difference in opinion on what the leader is because i always thought that the coach was the leader? play calling is exactly what pauly should have done as a matter of fact the seperation of the duff from mikes chick should have happened asap.

seperation is the key to all situations chicks become totally diffrent when they are not in front of their friends. Trying to help your boy get on = seperate. You and your boy are bout to get on = seperate.