Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Why Thinking before you post is important; Why The bias is strong at ESPN


Birdlives

Recommended Posts

What the ESPN recap said tonight before I posted in the ESPN conversation (if only I had a witness):

"The Redskins were missing only one key player, safety Oshiomogho Atogwe (hamstring)."

What I posted in the Skins vs. Colts "conversation" several minutes later, after I signed up:

Really? (insert Seth Myers here) Really?

Laron Landry isn't a key player, I guess?

Really?

Josh Wilson signed as the #2 CB?

Chris Cooley certainly isn't a starter, right?

Nevermind that London Fletcher didn't play.

Nope, just one starter out. The Skins went full strength against the mighty Peyton-free Colts.

If I rolled my eyes at this analysis, I'd probably never see them again.

Clearly Cowherd is right, quick inaccurate snapshots are far better than well thought out analysis.

Go ESPN! Yay!

Dear ESPN,

Please stop for a second before you post, thx

WHAT THE RECAP CHANGED TO WITHIN MINUTES AFTER MY CONVERSATION POST:

"Washington played without safeties LaRon Landry (Achilles tendon) and Oshiomogho Atogwe (hamstring), tight end Chris Cooley (knee), middle linebacker London Fletcher (groin) and cornerback Josh Wilson (groin)."

And here my friends, is the crux of the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHAT THE RECAP CHANGED TO WITHIN MINUTES AFTER MY CONVERSATION POST:

"Washington played without safeties LaRon Landry (Achilles tendon) and Oshiomogho Atogwe (hamstring), tight end Chris Cooley (knee), middle linebacker London Fletcher (groin) and cornerback Josh Wilson (groin)."

And here my friends, is the crux of the issue.

Dude, you're my new favorite person, ever. You got ESPN to change an article. Can I have your babies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schlereth was actually going crazy over Beck tonight in a positive way....And I was sure he hated the Skins.... Count me surprised.... Maybe the bias is just on certain broadcasters.

Really? You thought Schlereth hated the Skins? Everything I've seen from him on the Skins is an actual well thought out evaluation of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schlereth was actually going crazy over Beck tonight in a positive way....And I was sure he hated the Skins.... Count me surprised.... Maybe the bias is just on certain broadcasters.

Schlereth has said on more than one occasion that he is always more strict with the teams he played for because he wants to avoid the bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schlereth was actually going crazy over Beck tonight in a positive way....And I was sure he hated the Skins.... Count me surprised.... Maybe the bias is just on certain broadcasters.

Believe it or not Schlereth is usually the quickest of any "analysts" on ESPN to ever give any credit to the Redskins when they do well. He just has a habit of changing his opinion quickly from week to week. I don't think he actually loves or hates any one team, but like I said, he is usually one of the few guys giving props to the Redskins whenever they do really well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? You thought Schlereth hated the Skins? Everything I've seen from him on the Skins is an actual well thought out evaluation of them.

I have thought he has gone overboard before on his judgement but taking into account that he wants to stay away from bias, I guess that makes sense when you think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you really think the guys at ESPN enacted some sort of Skins bias....for a preseason game?

If you want to criticize the national media, criticize them for being sloppy, because that's all this is--sloppiness and most likely a lack of interest in covering bases for a meaningless preseason game.

lol on this comment. This isn't the "national media". This is ESPN throwing out a quick hit recap without research, without any instance of educating themselves on the circumstances. This is a multimillion dollar SPORTS exclusive media outlet showing a lack of understanding on reporting the single most popular sport (NFL) in their primary market (USA), our country. In less than ten seconds, the writer of this recap could have all the info needed to drop a simple recap detailing this game with all facts stated. Instead we get analysis that indicates the slog at ESPN could just as easily write Hallmark cupcake cards for grocery store birthday balloons.

Quite frankly, if you want to be an ass, that's fine with me, but at least get your facts straight. I can spit tobaccy on a street corner in dumb**** Missou and write that kind of drivel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schlereth was actually going crazy over Beck tonight in a positive way....And I was sure he hated the Skins.... Count me surprised.... Maybe the bias is just on certain broadcasters.

Schlereth doesn't hate the Skins. He was drafted by the Redskins and won a Super Bowl with us. He has been critical of us (and rightfully so) in recent years, but I'm sure he's like "show me what you've got" in regards to us. He was loving on Beck tonight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol on this comment. This isn't the "national media". This is ESPN throwing out a quick hit recap without research, without any instance of educating themselves on the circumstances. This is a multimillion dollar SPORTS exclusive media outlet showing a lack of understanding on reporting the single most popular sport (NFL) in their primary market (USA), our country. In less than ten seconds, the writer of this recap could have all the info needed to drop a simple recap detailing this game with all facts stated. Instead we get analysis that indicates the slog at ESPN could just as easily write Hallmark cupcake cards for grocery store birthday balloons.

Quite frankly, if you want to be an ass, that's fine with me, but at least get your facts straight. I can spit tobaccy on a street corner in dumb**** Missou and write that kind of drivel.

Um, okay.

ESPN is the national media. It's located in Bristol, CT. It's a cable channel. There's this show called Sports Center that doesn't just cover one local team, but a range of teams across the country, and a range of sports.

And the rest of your post supports my claim in regards to general sloppiness.

I think my facts are straight, but if you insist, here you go:

Redskins vs. the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Redskins vs. the illuminati!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redskins vs. the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Redskins vs. the illuminati!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Last month you violated rule 11, and today rule 13, and your history, including today, includes enough treading on rules 12 and 5 that it's time to invoke rule 18 (sometimes I just love numbers). I just went through your interesting (and numerous) user notes where it's also stated how amazing it is you're still here---a tribute to our, and mine in particular, leniency.

But given you being you and all, and given how your main purpose in so many threads seems to be acting the pot-stirring dick, too often adding little substance (the case as your posting history shows), I think a good way to move forward into the new season is to do so without you--so we'll permanently ban you for excessive rule violations and being an igwad/troll too often.

Others take heed. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, okay.

ESPN is the national media. It's located in Bristol, CT. It's a cable channel. There's this show called Sports Center that doesn't just cover one local team, but a range of teams across the country, and a range of sports.

And the rest of your post supports my claim in regards to general sloppiness.

I think my facts are straight, but if you insist, here you go:

Redskins vs. the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Redskins vs. the illuminati!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now you're just trying to make yourself feel better.

My reference was to a written recap on ESPN.com.

I pointed out, very simply that their article on the Skins vs. Colts game implied that the Redskins were doing well in their preseason game against the colts because they were missing only one significant player on defense.

I pointed out in their (ESPN's message board) conversation thread that the Skins were missing several key players.

Had nothing happened after that, this thread would not exist, however, when I went back to the game link and clicked on the recap thread, the info had changed to include the exact same players I mentioned in my post on their message board. Simple as that.

Clearly a, (Sorry) NATIONAL sports news organization that has near infinite cash and resources is not spending nearly enough time actually doing their job.

You dont like what I'm saying, post somewhere else.

Simple enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a majority of his posts were fine, just a few mishaps. After looking at his post history, I wouldn't have banned him if I was a moderator. But I have never been one, so I don't know what the job entails.

I do feel like this board is over-moderated sometimes. I think if OuterBanksTarHeel brought a lot more traffic to the site than he does, the mods would be a little more hesitant in banning him. The fact that he only has 1000 posts in 7 years, absolutely diminishes his value as a poster on this message board. If the same poster was to post here 10 times a day, I'm sure the mods would reconsider banning that poster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a majority of his posts were fine, just a few mishaps. After looking at his post history, I wouldn't have banned him if I was a moderator..

Thanks for contributing.

Maybe I wasn't clear with my limited research.

My son turned 7 today and most, if not all of today was for him.

Meanwhile, I could not see much of what happened for the Skins.

When I went to ESPN online (Big National Sports News), I got a recap that indicated that:

1. The Colts were severely lacking in regular season starters including their star player.

2. Meanwhile, the Skins played all of their starters except Atogwe.

Fortunate for me I am a sick individual who could instantly name off the top of my head 4-5 additional starters not playing in tonights game.

Shame for me if I were a normal person trying to find out if my favorite team was doing well, because the out list for the colts was:

"The Colts offense was missing Manning, receivers Austin Collie (knee), Anthony Gonzalez (hamstring) and Reggie Wayne (personal matter), and the defense played without tackle Tommie Harris (hamstring) and linebacker Ernie Sims (appendix). The Colts also lost Pro Bowl safety Antoine Bethea on the game's second play, and rookie cornerback Chris Rucker, a second-round pick, later in the first quarter -- both with hamstring injuries."

Prior to my post the Skins out list was:

"The Redskins were missing only one key player, safety Oshiomogho Atogwe (hamstring)."

Sorry, but I take a bit of an issue with this, especially from an outlet like ESPN.

Persoanlly, I think this warrants a thread. I don't start many, but people should know what they're getting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for contributing.

Maybe I wasn't clear with my limited research.

My son turned 7 today and most, if not all of today was for him.

Meanwhile, I could not see much of what happened for the Skins.

When I went to ESPN online (Big National Sports News), I got a recap that indicated that:

1. The Colts were severely lacking in regular season starters including their star player.

2. Meanwhile, the Skins played all of their starters except Atogwe.

Fortunate for me I am a sick individual who could instantly name off the top of my head 4-5 additional starters not playing in tonights game.

Shame for me if I were a normal person trying to find out if my favorite team was doing well, because the out list for the colts was:

"The Colts offense was missing Manning, receivers Austin Collie (knee), Anthony Gonzalez (hamstring) and Reggie Wayne (personal matter), and the defense played without tackle Tommie Harris (hamstring) and linebacker Ernie Sims (appendix). The Colts also lost Pro Bowl safety Antoine Bethea on the game's second play, and rookie cornerback Chris Rucker, a second-round pick, later in the first quarter -- both with hamstring injuries."

Prior to my post the Skins out list was:

"The Redskins were missing only one key player, safety Oshiomogho Atogwe (hamstring)."

Sorry, but I take a bit of an issue with this, especially from an outlet like ESPN.

Persoanlly, I think this warrants a thread. I don't start many, but people should know what they're getting.

My post wasn't directed towards you, reread it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Birdlives, don't feel bad at all for making this thread. There's a hundred other threads far less worthy that manage to generate 10 pages of responses. This was informative and entertaining, furthermore, it was an obvious lack of journalistic integrity that ESPN has shown time and time again with their articles that caused you to make it. Nothing to be ashamed of, just ignore those who are trying to make you feel so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a majority of his posts were fine, just a few mishaps. After looking at his post history, I wouldn't have banned him if I was a moderator. But I have never been one, so I don't know what the job entails.

I do feel like this board is over-moderated sometimes. I think if OuterBanksTarHeel brought a lot more traffic to the site than he does, the mods would be a little more hesitant in banning him. The fact that he only has 1000 posts in 7 years, absolutely diminishes his value as a poster on this message board. If the same poster was to post here 10 times a day, I'm sure the mods would reconsider banning that poster.

Stop talking out your ass. When I speak of things like member user notes, it's info you don't even have access to, only some of which is culled form every post relevant. Did you read all 1000? Like hell you did. But even if you had, you don't have the rule violations recorded as we do and those alone were sufficient grounds. Not to mention I made it clear he actually HAD been given much slack, but not because of his number of posts which means that angle is just more of your ignorant prattle on this matter. And how the hell do you have any idea of who brings how much traffic? That's right--you don't. But we do. And the rest of your comments are equally ignorant and incorrect. I am left to wonder why I don't just help you move on to a board that's moderated more to your liking. And since in your post you too violate rule 18 to the point where you qualify for a boot, I'm even harder pressed to tolerate your nonsense.

BTW, you also violated rule 11 too in your following post. :doh:

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...