TMQ: Both backpedaling and making stuff up again - Page 4 - New England Patriots Forums

PlattsFan · 10-30-2007, 01:52 PM

Seriously, Gregg Easterbrook is an elaborately dressed up troll, and he always has been. This is what he does, and the "I was being satirical" defense is stock-in-trade for that crowd. Ignore him, it's the only response.

That said, I continue not to care if the Pats are really running up the score or not. As you can see from Fixit's sig, I ranted for that very thing even before the Chargers game. I was waayyy ahead of the national media on the Eff You angle. Really, F*** you, NFL and Randall Godfrey and everyone else. You want the Pats to score under 40 on you, try holding them under 40 yourselves, you sniveling dogs.

This is the most enjoyable football season ever. How can you not be having fun as a Patriots fan?

Fixit · 10-30-2007, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PlattsFan

That said, I continue not to care if the Pats are really running up the score or not. As you can see from Fixit's sig, I ranted for that very thing even before the Chargers game. I was waayyy ahead of the national media on the Eff You angle. Really, F*** you, NFL and Randall Godfrey and everyone else. You want the Pats to score under 40 on you, try holding them under 40 yourselves, you sniveling dogs.

I was your first disciple.

Saqs · 10-30-2007, 01:56 PM

Wow. Easterbrook is well known for hating on the Skins. I'm rather surprised he didnt come out calling Fletcher and Daniels whiners.

FlyingElvis75 · 10-30-2007, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PlattsFan

Seriously, Gregg Easterbrook is an elaborately dressed up troll, and he always has been. This is what he does, and the "I was being satirical" defense is stock-in-trade for that crowd. Ignore him, it's the only response.

Exactly. It's the classic defense of the blustery coward: say something that's stupid or gets you in trouble, try to weasel out of it by saying "it was a joke" instead of standing up like a man and admitting you were wrong.

This is what satire looks like:
Peyton Manning runs naked into burning houses every month to save kittens. Tony Dungy invented penicillin. Bill Polian builds low-income housing in Indianapolis with his bare hands.

Tom Brady went to an orphanage last month and adopted four children so he could eat them. Bill Belichick was approached with an offer from Satan, and now *he* owns *Satan's* soul. Bob Kraft is single-handedly driving the blue whale to extinction.

I.e, satire isn't satire unless it's obvious to the vast majority of readers. It includes things that could not possibly be true in the eyes of most readers. His TMQ column was nowhere NEAR any definition of satire. It's closer to the definition of "libel."

SVN · 10-30-2007, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingElvis75

And let's look at a game from the Manning-record season. Colts up on Houston, 42-7, in the 4th quarter:

1-10-IND 12 (12:02) P.Manning pass incomplete to M.Harrison.
2-10-IND 12 (11:57) P.Manning pass to M.Harrison to IND 25 for 13 yards (G.Earl).
1-10-IND 25 (11:21) P.Manning pass to R.Wayne to IND 37 for 12 yards (D.Robinson).
1-10-IND 37 (10:44) P.Manning pass intended for M.Pollard INTERCEPTED by A.Peek at HOU 48. A.Peek to IND 32 for 20 yards (D.Clark).

Four consecutive passes. Up 42-7 in the 4th. But that's good sportsmanship, because he graciously allowed an interception, right?

Later in the same quarter:

2-10-IND 30 (1:47) D.Carr pass intended for A.Johnson INTERCEPTED by V.Hutchins at IND 23. V.Hutchins for 77 yards, TOUCHDOWN. PENALTY on IND-V.Hutchins, Taunting, 15 yards, enforced between downs.

Taunting after returning an interception for a touchdown. Oh, but the Colts "always show class," so that's great sportsmanship, right?

i sent this info to jason cole of yahoo sports

in response to his column today - http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_yl...yhoo&type=lgns

his response was thus

Quote:

Well, I've never written that the Colts always show class. Frankly, I didn't know if they did or not. But I will give you credit for doing some good research. But a good point to ask is, what did Dungy do about the behavior afterward?

Take care, Jason Cole

so i guess i need to thank you for your research

FlyingElvis75 · 10-30-2007, 02:52 PM

Heh, no problem, though I wouldn't call it "research" in the sense that anyone could do it in 10 minutes of surfing NFL.com.

I think the more pertinent questions are:
a) Isn't it a journalist's job to look up facts like that (potential opposing evidence) when presenting a "balanced" story?

b) How did you (and the rest of the media) react afterwards?

SVN · 10-30-2007, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingElvis75

Heh, no problem, though I wouldn't call it "research" in the sense that anyone could do it in 10 minutes of surfing NFL.com.

I think the more pertinent questions are:
a) Isn't it a journalist's job to look up facts like that (potential opposing evidence) when presenting a "balanced" story?

b) How did you (and the rest of the media) react afterwards?

this is what i sent him back

Quote:

Well , credit for the research goes to other fans on the pats board so i will forward them that. I dont know what dungy said but i guess i wont be wrong to say that in that season people were saying 'poor lions' and 'awesome manning' more than 'running up the score' . I didn't see a column about running up the score written then but now people are breaking down every play the pats run in the 4th quarter and crucifying them as if they were the first to do it. It would be great if someone mentioned that the colts also did this and its no different.

FlyingElvis75 · 10-30-2007, 02:59 PM

Nice. If only the sports media were more concerned about reporting than stirring up *****...

Some other factoids re: Gibbs' Redskins (I'm sure these have been posted in the larger thread):

1991-2 season:
Week 11: WAS 56, ATL 17
Week 3: WAS 34, PHO 0
Week 1: WAS 45, DET 0

I think it's easy to explain why Gibbs "had no problem" with the Pats game.

SVN · 10-30-2007, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingElvis75

Nice. If only the sports media were more concerned about reporting than stirring up *****...

Some other factoids re: Gibbs' Redskins (I'm sure these have been posted in the larger thread):

1991-2 season:
Week 11: WAS 56, ATL 17
Week 3: WAS 34, PHO 0
Week 1: WAS 45, DET 0

I think it's easy to explain why Gibbs "had no problem" with the Pats game.

i heard schlereth on felger's show and he was still frothing over last week. Felger asked him about a denver game and he said they wouldnt throw 35 yd passes. they would run. He said joe gibbs wouldnt have done that.

SVN · 10-30-2007, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingElvis75

Nice. If only the sports media were more concerned about reporting than stirring up *****...

Some other factoids re: Gibbs' Redskins (I'm sure these have been posted in the larger thread):

1991-2 season:
Week 11: WAS 56, ATL 17
Week 3: WAS 34, PHO 0
Week 1: WAS 45, DET 0

I think it's easy to explain why Gibbs "had no problem" with the Pats game.

here is what he says now

Quote:

But do be a little careful on the comparison. In that Houston game, the Colts were in their own territory when they did it and all the throws were short. Granted, they should have been burning clock with a backup RB and a backup QB, but at least they didn't throw deep, which is what the Pats did and they didn't go on fourth down.

Again, I don't have a big problem with what the Pats did, but they are doing two things (as further evidenced by the late score against Dallas and putting Brady back in the game against Miami).

First, no mercy. Second, they are toying with the egos of their opponents. That can be dangerous if you play someone with a big ego and a low emotional IQ.

Just ask Anthony Gurode about Albert Haynesworth.

Later, Jason