Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Press Coverage of Our Beloved Redskins


Grumpy627

Recommended Posts

Have any of you all faithful ever noticed the press coverage our Redskins have received throughtout the year... I am avid sport nut and track what has been written and said about the Redskins and notice that not much of it is favorable... Whether it be ESPN (primarily on NFL Live) Fox (NFL on Fox) or CBS, sorry, I don't watch CBS unless there is Redskin coverage.. Even locally (Washington Post and Michael Wilbon and Tony Kornheiser) it seems to me is not positive..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I have noticed it not being favorable. You'd have to be under a rock not to notice this. However during the five game winning streak during before the end of the season the press coverage got much more favorable than it was prior to that.

However it turned bad in the playoffs again when we couldn't muster much offense. However the coverage has turned favorable again with the hiring of Al Saunders.

The Media Idiots or "Mediots" aren't too intelligent. Just research some of the predictions prior to the season and you'll see that they really don't get enough information before making these predictions.

Dr. Z thought we would win 4 games and if you look at his predictions throughout the NFL they were almost entirely wrong.

I guess what I am saying is not to worry about what the mediots are saying about the skins because in almost all cases they are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I have noticed it not being favorable. You'd have to be under a rock not to notice this. However during the five game winning streak during before the end of the season the press coverage got much more favorable than it was prior to that.

However it turned bad in the playoffs again when we couldn't muster much offense. However the coverage has turned favorable again with the hiring of Al Saunders.

So let me get this straight...

When the skins do good, the media says good things about them. And when they do bad, the media says bad things about them?

Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if you guys realize, but over the years I have been following the Skins (over 30 years) there has been very little respect for the Skins in the media. I will tell you this though, I was surprised by Chris Collinsworth (perpetual Skins basher) and Sean Salisbury, they actually gave the Skins some accolades toward the end of this past season.

Art Monk should be in the Hall of Fame: prime example of the media bias against the Skins.

:dallasuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does anybody give a hoot and a hollar what anybody says about the Skins? Do you think the media cares what you say about them? No.. I actually like when they say negative things about them, because then, when the Redskins do positive things, the only one with egg on their faces, is the media. While we as Redskin fans sit there with a look of "We knew it all the time".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have any of you all faithful ever noticed the press coverage our Redskins have received throughtout the year... I am avid sport nut and track what has been written and said about the Redskins and notice that not much of it is favorable... Whether it be ESPN (primarily on NFL Live) Fox (NFL on Fox) or CBS, sorry, I don't watch CBS unless there is Redskin coverage.. Even locally (Washington Post and Michael Wilbon and Tony Kornheiser) it seems to me is not positive..
That's like saying "have you noticed that Michael Jackson looks really white lately?"

I don't hold it against mediots for being wrong about predictions (the NFL can be extremely hard to predict), but they definitely slant things and fail to analyze things intelligently. I kept hearing about the Redskins' "inept offense" over and over and over again. After the Dallas and Giants wins, the media just sort of put the fact that our offense was doing really well on the back burner. When the offense went sour in the playoffs, blowhards like Salisbury and Golic boisterously shouted "well we KNEW that the Redskins' INEPT OFFENSE would hinder them!" The ignored the fact that the 'Skins had the 11th ranked offense in the regular season and one of the best red zone offenses.:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I have noticed it not being favorable. You'd have to be under a rock not to notice this. However during the five game winning streak during before the end of the season the press coverage got much more favorable than it was prior to that.

However it turned bad in the playoffs again when we couldn't muster much offense. However the coverage has turned favorable again with the hiring of Al Saunders.

The Media Idiots or "Mediots" aren't too intelligent. Just research some of the predictions prior to the season and you'll see that they really don't get enough information before making these predictions.

Dr. Z thought we would win 4 games and if you look at his predictions throughout the NFL they were almost entirely wrong.

I guess what I am saying is not to worry about what the mediots are saying about the skins because in almost all cases they are wrong.

The unfortunate truth about these media IDIOTS is its because of them that Art Monk will once again get shaffted from the HOF.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have any of you all faithful ever noticed the press coverage our Redskins have received throughtout the year... I am avid sport nut and track what has been written and said about the Redskins and notice that not much of it is favorable... Whether it be ESPN (primarily on NFL Live) Fox (NFL on Fox) or CBS, sorry, I don't watch CBS unless there is Redskin coverage.. Even locally (Washington Post and Michael Wilbon and Tony Kornheiser) it seems to me is not positive..

This is a side item, but it does relate to media coverage.

As you all know, to watch the game against the Cowboys in a non-market area next year will seemingly require purchasing NFL Network.

Those of you that have it, how much does it cost, and do you consider it a worthwhile investment even independent of the Cowboys/Skins game for next year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight...

When the skins do good, the media says good things about them. And when they do bad, the media says bad things about them?

Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

When the Dallas Cowboys lose a couple in a row, the media is much more favorable towards them than if the sae losing streak were to fall upon the Redskins. Same with New England and a half dozen other teams. Half of the people who get paid to cover football for a living hate Dan Snyder, and they enjoy kicking him and his franchise every chance they get.

So you tell me - is that how it's supposed to work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...