SWFLSkins Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I just sent her this:I don't get paid to write about football, and never liked/followed the Broncos, but still knew that the Broncos made an AFC championship game appearance in the last 5 years. Lazy journalism... More pwnage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkinsFan1975 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/story/_/page/howard-111006/mike-shanahan-2011-success-washington-redskins-changing-mindsA nice article about how Shanny has changed the aura of the Redskins, until you get to this little nugget: Now, how in the hell does that make it through an editor and get published in a national publication? Does anyone ever fact check articles at ESPN? We played the Steelers and Ravens in preseason. We do not play them this year. Instead, we play the Vikings and Seahawks. Just a slight bit different..... You are exactly right. How on earth does something like that not get caught before it hits publication? After seeing this gross inaccuracy I did not bother to read the article. When it was talking about Rex and the decline of passing yardage, did it mention the fact that our RB core put up just shy of 200 yards on St. Louis? This dramatically affects the game plan, clock management and passing attemps/yardage. If we are able to run like that, I don't care if sexy rexy never puts the ball in the air. If running it 60 times in a game leads to a win, sign me up! HTTR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I just sent her this:I don't get paid to write about football, and never liked/followed the Broncos, but still knew that the Broncos made an AFC championship game appearance in the last 5 years. Lazy journalism... Has she gotten back to you yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_neon Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I think what happened was the she looked at the Redskins schedule on redskins.com and saw the preseason schedule at the bottom of the page --- which I will admit can be kind of misleading if you're looking at it carefully. Probably should have been placed at the top of the page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman21ST Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 I think what happened was the she looked at the Redskins schedule on redskins.com and saw the preseason schedule at the bottom of the page --- which I will admit can be kind of misleading if you're looking at it carefully. Probably should have been placed at the top of the page. Only it says "PRESEASON" right before and it has "WEEK 1, WEEK 2," etc. Oh yeah, and it has the RESULTS of the game. Lazy journalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailToTheRedskins14 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Yall do understand that this article was more optimistic than negative? Bunch of negative nancy nitpickers on here, I mean come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Yall do understand that this article was more optimistic than negative?Bunch of negative nancy nitpickers on here, I mean come on. Doesn't matter. For someone who gets paid to research and write about sports, how hard is it to pull up a team's schedule? It's just lazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailToTheRedskins14 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Doesn't matter. For someone who gets paid to research and write about sports, how hard is it to pull up a team's schedule? It's just lazy. Sure, I agree, but this board cries and cries about how Shanahan handled Haynesworth and McNabb correctly, and then someone comes out and says the same thing for the hated ESPN, and she gets nitpicked on an honest mistake and then called a transgender. Classy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Acre Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 A girl wrote it. Best post on thread. (No offense to football girls, but it's really funny.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoRnAndRaiSedSkinsFan Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 The one thing Shanny never seems to get credit for is helping to build Elway as a QB. Mike was the O Coordinator who developed John Elway before Mike went off to Oakland. In fact, Elway was going to leave Denver if Shanny was not brought back as the HC of the Broncos because of difficulties with the current HC(can't recall name)....Information obtained from one of the actual informative interviews at 106.7 The Fan with a formal Denver sports reporter sometime last season. I wonder why this tidbit never seems to surface. Yes Shanny only won a SB with Elway. But it wasn't some accident that they fell into each others' laps. Shanny had a hand in developing Elway earlier in his career, and Elway wanted Shanny back as a coach because of the trust built on a prior working relationship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampEm Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 A girl wrote it. Do you think Johnette might have been John at one point? Google "her", and look what "she" normally chooses to write about, then look at "her" picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phixius Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Sorry but after looking at her i am not putting anything in her inbox.After reading this, I decided to look at the link and proceed to laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmania123 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 O.K. while she obviously had inaccuracies regarding who we play during this season, which folks pointed out in almost every post, she is absolutely correct in her assessment that if Rex continues his decline we will not be able to pull out games with our D alone. We have all said the same thing. No news there is my take on the whole damn article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 The one thing Shanny never seems to get credit for is helping to build Elway as a QB. Mike was the O Coordinator who developed John Elway before Mike went off to Oakland. In fact, Elway was going to leave Denver if Shanny was not brought back as the HC of the Broncos because of difficulties with the current HC(can't recall name)....Information obtained from one of the actual informative interviews at 106.7 The Fan with a formal Denver sports reporter sometime last season. I wonder why this tidbit never seems to surface. Yes Shanny only won a SB with Elway. But it wasn't some accident that they fell into each others' laps. Shanny had a hand in developing Elway earlier in his career, and Elway wanted Shanny back as a coach because of the trust built on a prior working relationship. Would that be Dan Reeves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirtyfive2seven Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 It's still a fun article despite the stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
authentic Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 ESPN fires Hank, and hires a transgender columnist who doesn't even know who we play. Good Job! Dang man, ya'll hit hard... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DexterSackMachine Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Has she gotten back to you yet?Nope. I haven't rechecked the article to see if she changed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogNose Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Yall do understand that this article was more optimistic than negative?Bunch of negative nancy nitpickers on here, I mean come on. It doesn't matter how optimistic it is. She didn't do her research and failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coolio47 Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Dang man, ya'll hit hard... But hopefully not "that" hard. :paranoid: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/story/_/page/howard-111006/mike-shanahan-2011-success-washington-redskins-changing-mindsA nice article about how Shanny has changed the aura of the Redskins, until you get to this little nugget: Now, how in the hell does that make it through an editor and get published in a national publication? Does anyone ever fact check articles at ESPN? We played the Steelers and Ravens in preseason. We do not play them this year. Instead, we play the Vikings and Seahawks. Just a slight bit different..... Actually, the writer must expect us to get to the SB and meant to put an 'or' between his two picks for the AFC rep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins2victory Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 WOW..... This deserves a COME ON MAN......... Get it right ESPN!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 So wait, has Romo sits to pee fallen so far in the media's eyes that now Grossman's turnovers are used to justify is bad? Cause all I have been hearing from the media is how 50% of Romo sits to pee's turnovers aren't his fault and that he is still an American hero and can get the job done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Yall do understand that this article was more optimistic than negative?Bunch of negative nancy nitpickers on here, I mean come on. So you order a rare steak and then bring you a burnt burger. And you ***** about it are you a nitpicker? Because that is what this writer did here, she brought the wrong items to the table. Facts are her job, this was not even speculation, this was facts relevant to the topic. It is her job to get this right and it is easy enough to find the correct facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DexterSackMachine Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Yall do understand that this article was more optimistic than negative?Bunch of negative nancy nitpickers on here, I mean come on. It just bothers me when people who are getting paid to do this stuff: a) know less than the casual fan, and don't bother to check the facts on even the shortest piece. Another example is yesterday on ESPN 980, one of the "experts" who covers the skins all the time was trying to make the point of how stupid the team was to not play Torrain sooner, and in trying to make his point he said that Torrain had like 5 or 6 100 yard games last year. If you watched the game last Sunday, you knew that it was Torrain's 4th 100 yard game of his career. In some cases, it's probably just lack of knowledge, in others it may be using exaggeration to prove their point. either way, I find it annoying. Especially when the inaccuracies are at the heart of the argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew_Fl Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 When these things happen it doesn't surprise you when your expectations of good Redskins coverage from the national media is already so low that it could only get better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.