andyman Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by Art Yes, though, in Nunyo's defense, he believes the mistake was widespread and the team set out to embarrass him after the fact by creating the impression Clark wasn't to be released, when he was. I think that's somewhat correct. Wait a minute. As I read this Nunyo has told you he believes the team decided to embarrass Nunyo by not releasing Ryan Clark when it really wanted to? And gave up a roster spot just to embarrass Nunyo? And still keeps Clark to continue the embarrassment? How can anyone believe that??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blondie Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by andyman How can anyone believe that??? Exactly. We don't. Blondie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 I certainly don't. Looks like Nunyo does though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerpSkin Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 The mistake that upset me the most was when he said that the Redskins would have to trade Coles or be forced to release him without compensation. He totally ignored the fact that we had the option to keep him. In a later article, he admitted that we had this option, but still made it sound like the only realistic possibilities were trade or release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by andyman Wait a minute. As I read this Nunyo has told you he believes the team decided to embarrass Nunyo by not releasing Ryan Clark when it really wanted to? And gave up a roster spot just to embarrass Nunyo? And still keeps Clark to continue the embarrassment? How can anyone believe that??? I'm not speaking as to exactly what Nunyo has said to me. The impression I get is Nunyo believes the team screwed him on the Clark story. If it wasn't that the team was going to release him, then changed its mind and pretended it never was going to, or if it was that after it was reported, statements from the team attempted to embarrass him for a story everyone had from team sources, I'm not entirely clear. I don't really agree with some of the specific comments Nunyo has on this. And I won't mention those. I get the impression from comments that he believes a certain way. I may not be completely accurate in that impression and without posting his words, something that seems too incredible to believe should probably be written off as me reading too much into it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Adama Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Personally my favorite example of how out of tune Nunyo is came during a Chat a week or two ago, when Nunyo commented that Courtney Brown and Lavar Arrington went to school together at Notre Dame! :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by TerpSkin The mistake that upset me the most was when he said that the Redskins would have to trade Coles or be forced to release him without compensation. He totally ignored the fact that we had the option to keep him. In a later article, he admitted that we had this option, but still made it sound like the only realistic possibilities were trade or release. More amusing is before the trade possibility clarified, here's what Nunyo wrote about it If Coles does not agree to forfeit a portion of the $13 million signing bonus he received when he signed a seven-year, $35-million contract in 2003, the Redskins probably could not trade him because the team would absorb a huge salary cap hit. A source said Monday that talks centered on Coles forfeiting a $5 million signing-bonus payment he is due April 1. As you point out, the story began that the team had agreed to release Coles. The team denied that. The team indicated it would keep him or trade him, and Nunyo dismissed that as a possibility. Not sourced dismissal. Just Nunyo thinking that would be improbable. In the same time frame, he wrote it would be very hard to trade Coles, additionally, because there'd be a limited market for him. Then, right after, he wrote, several teams were interested. Nunyo writes a WHOLE lot and the way he does it, no matter how a story turns out, he can go back and say, "See, I got it right on that Wednesday story," even if he got it wrong in five others. This is a problem, though, of style and I'm not really addressing those issues. YET. Waiting on the factual errors -- the simple stuff -- to get cleaned up and we'll go from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNatsFan Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by Art Yes, though, in Nunyo's defense, he believes the mistake was widespread and the team set out to embarrass him after the fact by creating the impression Clark wasn't to be released, when he was. I think that's somewhat correct. So, I've stopped trying to talk to Nunyo about errors of fact as reported by his sources -- that there was an agreement that Coles would be released, that Brown was always scheduled to visit on Thursday, etc. -- and tried to focus JUST on the clear, unquestionable factual errors that stand WITHOUT sourcing and come DIRECTLY from the writer. Like most of the list in this thread. Stuff that should shock the sensibilities of a good reporter. I hope they aren't being dismissed, which I fear they are. Ok, I understand your focus here. With regard to the other problem he clearly has, I still think that Nunyo said it best "You can't go with a story without facts. You have to have reliable sources and give the Redskins a chance to corroborate. You want to be first but you also need to be right." With Clark, Coles and Brown, among others, he has not been right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaudry Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 While it's obvious that Nunyo has written many inaccurate articles, what about our superstar Paul Woody? He routinely gets players names wrong. Why is the backlash directed at Nunyo instead of Woody? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by Beaudry While it's obvious that Nunyo has written many inaccurate articles, what about our superstar Paul Woody? He routinely gets players names wrong. Why is the backlash directed at Nunyo instead of Woody? Nunyo matters. Woody doesn't. Woody is largely burnt out, working in a back woods paper when it comes to Redskins coverage. Nunyo is front and center here. And, trust me, I've talked to Paul about his mistakes . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goaldeje Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by Art Nunyo matters. Woody doesn't. Woody is largely burnt out, working in a back woods paper when it comes to Redskins coverage. Nunyo is front and center here. And, trust me, I've talked to Paul about his mistakes . As much as I would like to defend my home paper, I can't. You are correct. Before I found this wonderful site, I went to WP.com every morning to check on Skins news, and was dependent on Nunyo and his reporting. Well, I did supplement with ESPN and Pastabelly, of course. So I really appreciate the time everyone here spends correcting those mistakes, and ensuring that we fans who want to know more actually get the facts straight. Thanks guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by Sanders 83 Maybe that wasn't your intention, but if I had that many complaints about me at work in one month, I would either be suspended or fired. How many times can he mistakes like this? At some point, someone from the Washington Post needs to take some kind of responsiblity for this happening. As important as the Washington Redskins are in this town, we can not have the most read newspaper, making mistakes like this all the time. Let's just be glad that he doesn't have a real job, like working in a nuclear facility or as an airplane mechanic. Maybe the world is lucky that the most incompetent people end up as reporters, and the worst of them end up as sports reporters. The only lives they endanger are their own. If I made that many factual mistakes in five years my business would go under and I'd be flipping hamburgers somewhere trying to pay for the lawsuits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by Art I have sent this information to Mr. Emilio Garcia-Ruiz, who is the chief editor. With hope, someone starts to actually pay attention to these articles. Frankly, Nunyo would be better served having me read them over for him before he goes to his copy desk. I clearly know more than he does, so I can help him avoid simple mistakes that plague him, leaving the desk to assure his sources are sound, which, also, seems a big job . Art, you might want to add this one to Mr. Garcia-Ruiz' mail box: On Feb. 22nd Nunyo stated the following: (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42348-2005Feb21.html) "But any move is contingent on Coles agreeing to restructure his contract. One possibility, according to a source, involves Coles forfeiting a $5 million deferred signing bonus payment he is scheduled to receive April 1 in exchange for being sent to a team of his choice. Such a move would limit the amount of money that Coles would account for under the Redskins' salary cap. " Art, the interview that you conducted with Vinny Cerrato exposed the falsehood in this statement. You asked Vinny about paying Coles his bonus before trading him. Vinny responded: "The thing about it is if a player gives back money -- signing bonus money -- he's not tradeable." The possibility that Coles would forfeit his bonus prior to being traded was discussed for days on this board, other boards and I believe even the national press, ALL BASED ON NUNYO'S "SOURCE"! And Nunyo has never retracted the statement or apologized for the confusion or given any indication that he is aware that he was wrong. In any organization that I have been involved with, employees who have been this consistently wrong have either been fired or given duties more in line with their capabilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Factual errors aside, I do like the idea -- in theory at least -- that the Post has finally stopped being Redskins.com. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by Art And, trust me, I've talked to Paul about his mistakes . Do you have a relationship with these writers or do you share your opinions by writing e-mails or calling the paper? I'm just curious what kind of clout you have. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by TD_washingtonredskins Do you have a relationship with these writers or do you share your opinions by writing e-mails or calling the paper? I'm just curious what kind of clout you have. Thanks! I have no clout whatsoever. In fact, it's probable I annoy the hell out of these guys and qualify as a message board lunatic. . However, I knew Woody personally for years before moving. I express my opinions the same way I recommend any reader express their thoughts, pro or con. Contact the editors and writers as best you can. As a reader you do have tremendous clout if you bother to contact these people. They will generally reply and attempt to explain their actions as best they can. And, you WILL enact change ONLY by calling into focus limitations you see. Art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Thanks Art, I wasn't sure if you were a bigwig or something...other than on Extremeskins that is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 23, 2005 Author Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by Hooper Factual errors aside, I do like the idea -- in theory at least -- that the Post has finally stopped being Redskins.com. Right, because Maske was known to write PR pieces, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Speaking of Maske, didn't he cover the beat by himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCnDaHouse Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Nunyo may be guilty of just regurgitating what he's seen or heard elsewhere. MC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Originally posted by Beaudry While it's obvious that Nunyo has written many inaccurate articles, what about our superstar Paul Woody? He routinely gets players names wrong. Why is the backlash directed at Nunyo instead of Woody? ???? Woody does not get basic detail info wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 I enjoyed Maske's reporting. Still do. But I also think he went out of his way to avoid any criticism of the Redskins, where as Nunyo isn't against reporting what the majority of the league often thinks -- some of the moves by the Redskins front office are very questionable. And is that wrong? He's just reporting what much of the league is saying -- no matter how right or wrong the rest of the league may be. Maske does the same thing in his column on the NFL -- without the numerous factual errors of course. But he didn't do it when he was covering the skins. Nunyo has his faults. Plenty of them. But what many of you see as him editorializing, I see as... well, reporting what the view of league is rather than what the Redskins want him to print. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Maske was criticized for writing "homer" pieces.. total BS He wrote fair objective articles, never overly praising nor did he over look glaring problems. He reported the pros & the cons. He never passed pre-judgement on moves made or pretended he knew more about running an NFL franchise than Snyder & company. Nunyo is going the Don Banks, Lenny P route of twisting and turning everything in a negative viewpoint. One point about that type of "reporting" it doesn't give you much leeway in making mistakes... hard to be overly critical of others when you constantly keep making mistakes yourself. Plus if you are going to condemn someone else you better have your facts straight, unless you want to look like a fool with an agenda. Reguardless of what "others around the league" think not everything the Redskins do, is foolish or a disaster waiting to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. S Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 wow, never knew you were this passionate about it Art. Sounds like a good idea, just making him realize his mistakes especially. If not, what happened to your idea of storming the washington post forums, ive still got my membership there, though never turned back once I came here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Didn't mean to criticize Maske -- you're right, he didn't write homer pieces. He just reported the facts and there's nothing you can criticize about that. That said, I really don't have a problem with Nunyo reporting what much of the league thinks about a certain signing or coaching move or whatever (something Maske didn't do as much as in his Redskins coverage). That's not editorializing in my opinion. He certainly isn't as bad as Lenny P or Don Banks, who seem to have a genuine hatred for the skins and routinely go out of their way to bash them. Nunyo deserves criticisim -- a lot of it. But sometimes I think we all tend to "shoot the messenger" a little too much on this board. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, my friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.