The new ombudsman for ESPN: a Jets fan with an anti-Patriots tweet

[Fixit]

I tried and tried to manufacture some outrage over this, but mostly I just think y'all are overreacting at this moment.

I'll show myself out.

 

[EatSleepWinRepeat]

...... and while it's been fun to harpoon this guy on what amounts to his first day on the job for being stupid enough to be a Jets fan, let us take a breath and see what he actually does. The litmus test is gong to be IF or how he reacts to ESPN's actions over the 8 months AFTER the data in the Mort Report was found to be completely inaccurate.

BTW- If I were running Brady's defamation suit, I'd have this guy on the stand, to explain his actions or inactions after he investigated this travesty of the truth.

He's not going to do sh!t and anyone with a brain doesn't need to take a "wait and see" approach to see through a boob as transparent as this.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I am not going to declare outrage .... don't really care too much.

But ... if the NFL truly represents all 32 teams then why are many important employees Jet's fans?

Just asking ....

 

[neuronet]

F him, F the Jets, F ESPN.

 

[Wordsmyth]

How cluelesss and pathetic is this?

ESPN is simply trash. I hope they lose another $300 million.

Why stop there?

 

[Deus Irae]

I tried and tried to manufacture some outrage over this, but mostly I just think y'all are overreacting at this moment.

I'll show myself out.

What outrage? Most of us are talking about the stupidity of someone in that particular position doing what was done.

 

[Fixit]

What outrage? Most of us are talking about the stupidity of someone in that particular position doing what was done.

He wasn't in that particular position when he tweeted that.

Everyone here has commented negatively about the Jets, so I guess they're saying that they couldn't ever take a job that required them to be objective.

 

[Deus Irae]

He wasn't in that particular position when he tweeted that.

Everyone here has commented negatively about the Jets, so I guess they're saying that they couldn't ever take a job that required them to be objective.

We're not talking reporter. We're not talking columnist. We're talking ombudsman.

When you're such a big homerish clown that such a tweet is something you thought worth posting, you shouldn't be taking an ombudsman job for a sports site when that job includes dealing with both the team and, probably more importantly, the team's fan base.

 

[Fixit]

We're not talking reporter. We're not talking columnist. We're talking ombudsman.

When you're such a big homerish clown that such a tweet is something you thought worth posting, you shouldn't be taking an ombudsman job for a sports site when that job includes dealing with both the team and, probably more importantly, the team's fan base. That should be obvious to even the most clueless of people.

So you're saying that you'd be incapable of being objective if ESPN or another site offered you the position of ombudsman. That's interesting.

Edited: I hate the Jets. I've said many bad things about them. But I could still take a job that required me to be objective.

 

[shmessy]

He wasn't in that particular position when he tweeted that.

Everyone here has commented negatively about the Jets, so I guess they're saying that they couldn't ever take a job that required them to be objective.

Yes, Fixit.

There would be something very wrong if ESPN asked me to be their "unbiased' ombudsperson.

What is confusing for you about that?

 

[shmessy]

So you're saying that you'd be incapable of being objective if ESPN or another site offered you the position of ombudsman. That's interesting.

Edited: I hate the Jets. I've said many bad things about them. But I could still take a job that required me to be objective.

"So you're saying that you'd be incapable of being objective if ESPN or another site offered you the position of ombudsman. That's interesting."


Yes.

What don't you get?

 

[memento]

I expect him to say something like past articles are not reviewable, if he says anything at all.

The Mortenson report is only a step, and a small one at that. A proper correction would simply put the ball measurements in a front page article that points out the Patriots' footballs were not 2psi under regulation and that several of the Colts' balls were also below regulation. A true journalistic article would also point out the Pats balls were not out of line with natural occurrence, but given ESPN's close business with the NFL and dealings with Goodell it would be expected to emphasize Goodell's ruling on the matter instead of the hard science.

Goodell's ruling is the real culprit here. The punishments and rulings are what give the accusations weight, even when they are wrong. Any way we can shed light on the greatest screw job in NFL history might be cause for reexamination before the draft.

 

[Nikolai]

Interesting side note; I pointed this little story and that tweet out to a lot of people here, most of whom have openly said they hate the Pats. Looking at that caused pretty much everyone to step back, like their mind was blown. One guy even went so far as to say "I know I give the Pats a lot of ****, but I don't hate them. They just win so much, but I really like them actually".

It's interesting to see the reactions from casual fans when they see the ******** for what it is.

 

[BTTA]

This guy should either be ignored (as part of generally ignoring ESPN) or buried by fact-wielding Pats fans. Not sure which I'm in favor of yet.

 

[Koma]

He's not going to do sh!t and anyone with a brain doesn't need to take a "wait and see" approach to see through a boob as transparent as this.

I guess another way to look at it is to ask "What did the former ombudsman do?" Was there any situation where you could say "Things almost got out of control there, but the ombudsman stepped in and calmed things down" (That might not be what ombudsman's do, so maybe I should just be quiet.)

I know about the example of the column the prior ombudsman wrote questioning the decision to have Wingo, Schlereth, and some other windbag try and one-up their outrage when the Walsh walkthrough story fell apart behind them. Did that accomplish anything, though? Did it give ESPN pause and motivation to avoid situations like that in the future? I don't think it had much of an impact.

 

[woolster22]

I guess another way to look at it is to ask "What did the former ombudsman do?" Was there any situation where you could say "Things almost got out of control there, but the ombudsman stepped in and calmed things down" (That might not be what ombudsman's do, so maybe I should just be quiet.)

I know about the example of the column the prior ombudsman wrote questioning the decision to have Wingo, Schlereth, and some other windbag try and one-up their outrage when the Walsh walkthrough story fell apart behind them. Did that accomplish anything, though? Did it give ESPN pause and motivation to avoid situations like that in the future? I don't think it had much of an impact.

...because the BSPN uppity-ups pit the squash on him, hence his step down from the position.

Edit: There is a clear pattern for those that dare question the propaganda machine that is the NYFL* Office at BSPN, silence and then parting ways.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

And we give these guys clicks because...........................................????

 

[Brady_12]

And we give these guys clicks because...........................................????

I don't click there and I try not to watch there. Except when they are showing an exclusive Star Wars trailer.

 

[Jackson 2]

By definition his Jets' fan admission brings his legitimacy as an ombudsman into question. Now, my next question: Who gives a f### and/or thinks this will make a difference? Next...

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

Well, why pay a real journalist to research facts when you can hire a moron for $50 to talk sh*t and basically get the same amount of web traffic?