ConcordNCSkinsFan Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 Never noticed this posted anywhere before. It is a Wikipedia article in reference to that slug Pasquarelli. Don't ever let anyone say Redskins fans are paranoid that he has a grudge against the team. Len Pasquarelli is a controversial American sportswriter and analyst with ESPN.com and a 25-year veteran of covering the NFL. He joined ESPN.com in 2001 and has since become a frequent contributor to the other ESPN outlets, including SportsCenter, ESPNEWS, ESPN Radio and ESPN The Magazine. His articles reflect his opinions on various football topics. Prior to ESPN, Pasquarelli served as a senior writer for CBS SportsLine.com, which he joined in 1999. He has also covered the NFL for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution from 1989 to 1999, the Fort Wayne News-Sentinel from 1985 to 1989, Pro Football Weekly from 1982 to 1985, and Pittsburgh Steelers Weekly from 1978 to 1982. Pasquarelli is a past president of the Pro Football Writers of America and has twice won national awards as the NFL Beat Reporter of the Year. He also has won several writing awards, including a first place Associated Press Deadline Sports Reporting Award in 1988. Pasquarelli is a Pittsburgh native and was graduated from the University of Pittsburgh in 1972. Pasquarelli is sometimes controversial in his views. Typically firm and untractable, he also has garnered anger from his reader base. Most prominently, he carries a grudge against the Washington Redskins. This article reflects the total lack of logic, and use of pure opinion that Len utlizes to denigrate the team: According to the excellent NFL salary database compiled by USA Today, the Washington Redskins had the league's sixth-highest payroll in 2003, at $84.826 million. And they finished 5-11. In 2004, Washington led the league, with a then-record payroll of $117.96 million, about $13 million more than the No. 2 team, the Philadelphia Eagles. And the Redskins finished 6-10. Last season, the Redskins had a payroll of just $66.1 million, the third-lowest in the league. And they crafted a 10-6 record, grabbed a wild-card berth, and advanced to the divisional round of the playoffs before being eliminated by NFC champion Seattle. So one would think that owner Dan Snyder might surmise, given the results of last season, that you don't have to sport the biggest payroll to field a pretty viable team, right? Uh, no. This spring, Snyder opened the coffers again, overpaying for overrated free agents such as safety Adam Archuleta and wide receiver Antwaan Randle El. He traded for wideout Brandon Lloyd and then rewarded a guy who's never had 50 catches in a season with a fat new contract. Odds are that the Redskins will be at or near the top of the payroll list again in 2006. And if history is any indicator, out of the playoffs. This isn't from a fan website or anything like that, this is Wikipedia one of the best info sources on the web. If his anti-Redskin bias is even acknowledged on there I don't see how he can continue to have credibility at ESPN. Here's the link to article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Pasquarelli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsOrlando Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 I though pastabelly ate wikipedia, I must've been wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 This isn't from a fan website or anything like that, this is Wikipedia one of the best info sources on the web. If his anti-Redskin bias is even acknowledged on there I don't see how he can continue to have credibility at ESPN.Here's the link to article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Len_Pasquarelli Not to bust your bubble but wikipedia, while a useful source of interesting information, should be taken with a grain of salt on every single entry. Any schlub can edit an entry which appears to be what happened here. Just hit "edit" and see what you can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaos Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 This isn't from a fan website or anything like that, this is Wikipedia one of the best info sources on the web. If his anti-Redskin bias is even acknowledged on there I don't see how he can continue to have credibility at ESPN. :laugh: You do know what wikipedia is right? ......btw my thanks to the writer:applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 May not be a fan site, but I pretty much gaurantee that was written by a Skins fan. Hopefully now the rest of the league will start to catch on though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllAboutSkins08 Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 wikipedia is definitely one of the best info sources on the web, but it is a long way from being infallible. still GREAT read though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinzFan007 Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 I though pastabelly ate wikipedia, I must've been wrong. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoGood28 Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 The author of that entry used the absolute most perfect biased Pasquarelli quote for that passage. I believe len wrote that slop recently. It beautifully illustrates what a moronic douche he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Full Monty Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 A smart skins fan wrote that. You can put almost anything on wikipedia and it takes forever for people to question neutrality, one of the wiki's options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKINZ33 Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 Not to bust your bubble but wikipedia, while a useful source of interesting information, should be taken with a grain of salt on every single entry. Any schlub can edit an entry which appears to be what happened here.Just hit "edit" and see what you can do. Exactly what I was thinking after reading this thread. However I do agree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 Len is considered controversial but mostly by Redskin fans. They should get over it. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softballs Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 To prove everyone's point about Wiki, go to the link again. No more clipped article and just this line: "Maybe Redskin fans should get over their grudges and move on." I liked to older version better, but hey - just think how many fewer posts we would have if it wasn't for the likes of Peter Queen, Pastabelly, Banks or Prisco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 Wikipedia is the profootballtalk of internet Encyclopedic knowledge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishomelette Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 He's from Pittsburgh...That explains it. Old school Steeler fans hate the Redskins. That's just wikiality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trez Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 Thats pretty funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 Wikipedia is the profootballtalk of internet Encyclopedic knowledge Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 it would be funny if people found Lenny quotes and predictions that turned out to be wrong, and linked them to that site. See how many can get put together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 check out the Peter King page on here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_King_%28sportswriter%29 Seriously, wikipedia is one of the more deceptive sources of information on the web because it maintains the appearance of reliability, but in truth is nothing more than a glorified message board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.