Sally's alright....

[Larry Brown #43]

That's great. I think - check that - I know Sally Jenkins is an excellent sportswriter, but I don't bother trying to defend on this board anymore because I know the response will be nothing but hate and word vomit.

Every time someone posts one of her articles on this board, one of the local geniuses will likely respond with:

And then another poster will respond with a ":laugh:" or some such inspired agreement.

You may not like what she says, but she's damn good at what she does. If you don't agree with her opinions, it doesn't make her a "b!tch [who needs] to go get laid or something" as one so eloquent poster once put it. If I searched I'm sure I could find many more similar responses.

Did you happen to catch the column where she claimed that we've played the 5th easiest schedule in the league? That's not an opinion...that's called being uninformed.

[E-Dog Night]

Did you happen to catch the column where she claimed that we've played the 5th easiest schedule in the league? That's not an opinion...that's called being uninformed.

Man, people are piling on that "fifth-easiest" quote like there's no tomorrow. Fact is, every reporter - sports or otherwise - makes minor factual errors from time to time. Rarely do they inspire the kind of visceral reaction as many have demonstrated on this board - with the obvious exception of Art's relentless campaign against Nunyo.

AND - Her statement was based on the preseason rankings, in which case, she was correct, as you will see here. So in fact, her statement was based on correct information, thus, she was NOT uninformed.

[[[ghost]]]

isnt' she too old to say dude?

[G-Prime]

Not bad for a talking vagina

[iheartskins]

I don't discount that she might be a decent or better writer or that she might be an okay person. What I take issue with in the manner in which she is ruthless in her assessments of the Redskins. Being critical, I can take, and I even encourage it as it often leads to better, and more insightful articles. However, her credibility is undermined by the manner in which she continually describes the 'Skins. We have been losing and for awhile, but she's always the first to say something negative, and never one to recognize when things are going well.

I look forward to watching that change as we improve.

As an aside, the geography issue isn't a major deal, but I thought it pretty funny that she did a puff piece on the Giants while living in New York, but has never done the same for the 'Skins (all the while never writing from Ashburn or FedEx.)

Let's hope, if she does attend this week's game, that we win either despite or, in spite of, her presence.

[ouvan59]

SJ:...Contrary to your impression, I'm not self employed. My editors call up and say, "Can you write a Giants column this week?" And since they pay my salary, I say, "Sure."

I suppose I could have written about the Skins some time in the last three weeks if I chose to, but frankly, the BCS, and the Colts trying to go undefeated were just as important and interesting. Like I say, we have three other columnists who are all over the Skins. I think the franchise will survive my opinions, or non-opinions.

Okay, herein lies the problem. Sally lives in New York and writes for a Washington paper. She is so far removed from the pulse of this city that she doesn't realise that during the Redskins' first playoff run since 1999 that people want some interesting writing about the Redskins. This city couldn't give a rat's ass about the friggin BCS or the Colts run. That might be something one would read after you have dissected the playoff scenarios for the 5th time that morning.

Ms. Jenkins, you are writing articles for a readership who for the most part live in Washington. During the weeks of big games against their biggest rivals they do not want to read fluff pieces about their opponents when the last 10 articles you have written about the Redskins are focused on how much they stink.

[Johnny Bones]

Does anyone have any news on what is going on with Brunell - Starting or Not. Up her in NY all I hear about is the Giants. I have a good feeling that the Giants are going to lose this weekend considering they have no linebackers and Kerry Collis having something to prove.

The last 4 weeks I felt really good and confident that the skins would win this week I am feeling a little uncertanty - Maybe because we haven't been in this position in six years. Someone easy my pain.

HAIL TO THE REDSKINS!

[ouvan59]

Up her in NY all I hear about is the Giants.

I just read Sally Jenkins' most recent article in the Washington Post and it didn't have anything about Mark Brunell but I did find out that Antonio Pierce, Carlos Emmons, Jeremy Shockey and Reggie Torbor will miss the game against the Raiders. She also mentioned that Corey Webster will start ahead of Curtis DeLoatch at CB.

There was also a nice blurb about how Amani Toomer is really thriving in his role as the Giants #2 receiver.

[Henry]

Look, she may be a great writer. But it's clear she is very biased against the Redskins. From her piece praising Deion Sanders for sticking it to The Man to her inability to write one positive thing about the Redskins during a 9 (maybe 10) win season, at some point it's not just the fault of the management. Sure, you can explain that '5th easiest schedule' comment away as a technically true statement, but we're not stupid. She's just writing to us as if we are, and she's doing so in a manner that allows her to unfairly bash the Redskins. I don't read her other stuff, but when it comes to the Redskins I have little respect for her opinions.

That said, the insults being thrown her way by this board are way over the line. Calling her all manner of things, from ugly, to a lesbian, to some things I won't repeat is not necessary and not what I'd like to think this place is about. I've closed several threads about this and I'll do it again, but I'd rather we learned to hate the work, not the person.

[ZoEd]

If the poor results on the field "speak for themselves" as to the ability of Snyder to own/manage the team, then success would do the same wouldn't it? Unless you are a bitter *****. Then when you win, it can only be "in spite" of the owner.

Sally Jenkins is most definitely not "alright."

Dirk do you ever, ever have anything nice to say? :laugh: Snyder is a punk and will be until he proves otherwise. The first right decision he made was hiring JG.

[DC_Native,NC_Fan]

Man, people are piling on that "fifth-easiest" quote like there's no tomorrow. Fact is, every reporter - sports or otherwise - makes minor factual errors from time to time. Rarely do they inspire the kind of visceral reaction as many have demonstrated on this board - with the obvious exception of Art's relentless campaign against Nunyo.

AND - Her statement was based on the preseason rankings, in which case, she was correct, as you will see here. So in fact, her statement was based on correct information, thus, she was NOT uninformed.

Sally and E-Dog sitting in a tree...

[wilbur58z]

While she HAS written total garbage concerning the Redskins the past 6 months or so, I do agree that some of the names she's been called on here as a result is pretty low class and doesn't prove any point.

I also have new found respect for her after reading her response...at least she seems a little in tune with reality.

[bubba9497]

she is just the house organ for the post

[E-Dog Night]

Henry,

Good post, but I really don't think she's writing to us as if we're stupid. I think she's expressing how she feels. The fifth-easiest schedule comment is up for debate. Clearly, the Skins' schedule is a lot tougher than 5th easiest, due to the resurgence of the Cowboys and Giants, and the Chiefs are better this year than last. But when I did a search, I found a lot of people seemed certain that she was factually wrong about her statement, when she was in fact accurate.

I think her bias is not so much anti-Redskins as a whole rather than directed at Snyder and his various unsavory actions since taking over as owner (his charitable offerings notwithstanding). We could dissect every article she's written about the redskins since 1999 and find some things that could be construed as unrelated to Snyder, but I am speaking more of general terms here, taken as a whole.

Also, I can say without an ounce of doubt that if Snyder were the owner for any other team, many of his defenders on this board would freely hurl worse insults at him than anything we've ever seen in a Sally Jenkins article.

[Henry]

Henry,

Good post, but I really don't think she's writing to us as if we're stupid. I think she's expressing how she feels. The fifth-easiest schedule comment is up for debate. Clearly, the Skins' schedule is a lot tougher than 5th easiest, due to the resurgence of the Cowboys and Giants, and the Chiefs are better this year than last. But when I did a search, I found a lot of people claiming that she was factually wrong about her statement, when she was in fact accurate.

I think her bias is not so much anti-Redskins as a whole rather than directed at Snyder and his various unsavory actions since taking over as owner (his charitable offerings notwithstanding). We could dissect every article she's written about the redskins since 1999 and find some things that could be construed as unrelated to Snyder, but I am speaking more of general terms here, taking as a whole.

Also, I can say without an ounce of doubt that if Snyder were the owner for any other team, many of his defenders on this board would freely hurl worse insults at him than anything we've ever seen in a Sally Jenkins article.

I agree with that EDN, I'm sure we'd all HATE Snyder if he were a Cowboy or and Eagle.

But he's not. He's a Redskin.

Life isn't that complicated. We're fans. We like the local teams and the people on them.

Synder isn't running for Senate. He owns the local football team.

I think it would behoove Ms. Jenkins to get over her personal issues with the man and write to her audience for a change. As long as she lets her dislike for Snyder overshadow anything positive she may feel towards the team in her writing, she comes across as a writer from New York.

And that's a problem for a columnist of a DC paper.

[E-Dog Night]

Fair enough.

[Jumbo]

Wow, amazing what happens when you actually see someone as a person:rolleyes: Now you've ruined hating her for half the board.

:laugh: My thoughts exaxctly. eEvene when I think I can get away with a little one-dimensional character bashing in my 'skins fervor, I can pulled up short by reality. I still ain't jumping on no "I love Sally" train, but yeh, she comes off as pretty reasonable in that little slice.

[Peregrine]

Sounds like she pulled some BS in that conversation...

Yes, she seems nice, but her excuse for not writing about the redskins was that there were more interesting things, like the colts and the BCS? And she tries and maintains shes an avid Redskins fan? Please.

[ChocolateCitySkin]

Mweeh guess its just the post trying to sell newspapers-- Nunyo sucks.

[grhqofb5]

Sally Jenkins pisses us all off for the reason that out of town fans piss us off. They just don't belong in our backyard. The Washington Post and the Redskins have been intertwined for as long as I can remember (1991 Super Bowl). So it hurts when we have to read see this crap coming from a source which we all have traditionally looked to for Redskins news. A brief review of Jenkins' articles from this year indicate that she has written virtually nothing positive about our team. She clearly just doesn't care about the Redskins. She seemed a little too interested in the Giants this past week, but what can you expect. Is it too much to ask our local newspaper to, at the very least, employ columnists who are not fans of our rivals?? I enjoy some objectivity in my columnists, but when I read a Washington newspaper, I shouldn't have to be bombarded by some out of town, New York homer. Am I crazy?? And no, I cannot simply choose not to read her articles.

[Art]

The unfortunate thing for the Post is they don't realize the BCS and the Colts effort at going undefeated are NOT more important to THEIR readers than the Redskins making a playoff run. This is how out of touch they are. Their readers don't care as much about anything else as they do the Redskins.

As for being the "house" organ, I nominate us as the bal.....er arms .

[The Sisko]

That said, the insults being thrown her way by this board are way over the line. Calling her all manner of things, from ugly, to a lesbian, to some things I won't repeat is not necessary and not what I'd like to think this place is about. I've closed several threads about this and I'll do it again, but I'd rather we learned to hate the work, not the person.

:applause: :applause:

[BraveWarrior]

Did she call you Dude? :laugh:

Funny, thats all I thought about when I read it. :laugh:

Personally, I don't care what she writes about. She has a job to do. If I don't like the article I stop reading it. And since I can only read the Post online, it makes it so much easier - I just click to something else.

[SkinsFTW]

Sally Jenkins pisses us all off for the reason that out of town fans piss us off. They just don't belong in our backyard. The Washington Post and the Redskins have been intertwined for as long as I can remember (1991 Super Bowl). So it hurts when we have to read see this crap coming from a source which we all have traditionally looked to for Redskins news. A brief review of Jenkins' articles from this year indicate that she has written virtually nothing positive about our team. She clearly just doesn't care about the Redskins. She seemed a little too interested in the Giants this past week, but what can you expect. Is it too much to ask our local newspaper to, at the very least, employ columnists who are not fans of our rivals?? I enjoy some objectivity in my columnists, but when I read a Washington newspaper, I shouldn't have to be bombarded by some out of town, New York homer. Am I crazy?? And no, I cannot simply choose not to read her articles.

Exactly. I don't even live in DC but when I lived in Virginia as a kid I remember reading good stuff about Joe Gibbs and the Redskins way back in the early 80's and when they were losing in 81 I don't remember reading all this negative crap that we get now even though they are winning games.

And what Redskins fan really cares about how wonderful Tom Coughlin and the Giants are? Who wants to read anything in detail in the local paper about the enemy and how great their team is righ now, or ever?

[PCRoughrider]

I think her bias is not so much anti-Redskins as a whole rather than directed at Snyder and his various unsavory actions since taking over as owner (his charitable offerings notwithstanding).

I think you should re-read the "Burgundy colored glasses" column.