Is Peter King a dolt

Vatahala said:

I don't know if it's a generational thing with Peter King as we are the same age but I really have enjoyed his writings for many years. We also share a love of the Red Sox so he' s got that going for him. It's so easy to be negative but I have to ask what writers do you like and respect? I still enjoy reading MMQB with Breer but still harbor ill feelings towards him as he was such a Belichick hater when he wrote for the Globe.

Click to expand...

Mike Reiss, IMO the gold standard, even if he was forced to work for the dark side. We all got bills to pay.

Mike Florio. He isn’t really a sportswriter, but his opinions are always spin-free and well thought out. Really smart guy.

I don’t know about “regulars” for writers, but I frequently read articles where the depth of the writing is just clearly levels above Peter King. Of course I’ll read PK’s stuff because he has access to a lot of important people around the league, but it often disappoints.

His stuff is better outside the sidelines, like someone has cited a more personal story about cancer and loss. The closer to the actual game, where you want to know about strategy and intellectual stuff, that’s where I am let down with his material.

I enjoy Peter King and not just as an ironic way to own the libs. I just kind of enjoy his columns, he's like some football grandpa who might be wrong but he normally interests me.

I don't get the rage some people have for this guy but then again apparently most of you are forced to read his stuff as some sort of torture.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

Mike Reiss, IMO the gold standard, even if he was forced to work for the dark side. We all got bills to pay.

Click to expand...

OMFG is the rage about King that you guys just can't grok the difference between a beat reporter and a columnist?

Look. I don't like Dan Shaugnessy. So here's what I do, it's this neat trick:

I haven't read a Shaugnessy column since the 90s. I know. "But Mr. Circle", you're saying (and thank you for being respectful), "if we don't read someone's stuff how else will we make pointless threads to ***** about them?"

That I can't answer for you, kid.

fnordcircle said:

OMFG is the rage about King that you guys just can't grok the difference between a beat reporter and a columnist?

Click to expand...

Yeah I get your point...I just don’t like his style in general, but as I’ve said, I still read his stuff because he has access to the goods.

fnordcircle said:

I enjoy Peter King and not just as an ironic way to own the libs. I just kind of enjoy his columns, he's like some football grandpa who might be wrong but he normally interests me.

I don't get the rage some people have for this guy but then again apparently most of you are forced to read his stuff as some sort of torture.

Click to expand...

It’s like A Clockwork Orange...they force me to read it.

fnordcircle said:

Look. I don't like Dan Shaugnessy. So here's what I do, it's this neat trick:

I haven't read a Shaugnessy column since the 90s. I know. "But Mr. Circle", you're saying (and thank you for being respectful), "if we don't read someone's stuff how else will we make pointless threads to ***** about them?"

That I can't answer for you, kid.

Click to expand...

I can never understand how Shaugnessy still has a job. I thought when newspapers could read how few people read a particular column on line based on measured clicks then there jobs would be gone like a TV series with bad ratings.

He's a Crockwork Fatso....sellout backstabbing scumbag.

Clonamery said:

It's like the sound of one hand clapping.

Click to expand...

I am hard of hearing. What sound is that?

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

Obviously the way two draft picks pan out is a tiny sample size and beyond the point. You think a Nobel Prize winner economics looks at value, with thousands upon thousands of data points, by reviewing the randomness of one player and two draft picks?

Click to expand...

Seems like looking at things through the lens of probability is a general issue for many people. Actions on the field are mostly praised or dismissed based on the outcome not their priors.

Or in other words people will want to get rid of the OC when he calls something that has a success probability of 75% and fails but calling him genius when a low percentage options miraculously works out.

dtbrks said:

He’s always been a dolt but the doltage has become so much worse in his dotage.

Click to expand...

Such a waste of potential that I had to make the adjustment for you

PK is who we think he is, another degenerate reporter who exists because of popularity on social media sites...

Like him or do not like him, it does not matter, if you feel strong about his writings don't read his stuff..

fnordcircle said:

Look. I don't like Dan Shaugnessy. So here's what I do, it's this neat trick:

I haven't read a Shaugnessy column since the 90s. I know. "But Mr. Circle", you're saying (and thank you for being respectful), "if we don't read someone's stuff how else will we make pointless threads to ***** about them?"

That I can't answer for you, kid.

Click to expand...

Great answer. A good model to follow. (Gasp! I just called Fnord “a good model to follow”!)

Well played sir!

Vatahala said:

I don't know if it's a generational thing with Peter King as we are the same age but I really have enjoyed his writings for many years. We also share a love of the Red Sox so he' s got that going for him. It's so easy to be negative but I have to ask what writers do you like and respect? I still enjoy reading MMQB with Breer but still harbor ill feelings towards him as he was such a Belichick hater when he wrote for the Globe.

Click to expand...

I enjoyed Peter King until recently, say January 2015 and he's still pretty much the only one I read unless I'm visiting Houston where I'll try to read John McClain and Rick Gosselin. I also miss Dr Z. He was excellent read.

As far as King, I'm starting to find his "deep" takes to be only surface deep. That and he likes to toot the Peter King horn.

To the trade, when his retort to the draft value thesis is basically, "sure the most successful team in NFL history ascribes to that theory but I'm still not convinced but maybe I can be convinced." That comes across as Felgerish. You can pay everyone! The cap is crap, etc. Then he glances over data analytics, and which team is in the forefront? https://kagr.com/ So yes, the nerds are ruining football Mike, I mean peter. At least make a counter example, such as this economics nerd is wrong, all you have to look at is the Browns who are so great for so long and always draft in the top of each round.

fnordcircle said:

I enjoy Peter King and not just as an ironic way to own the libs. I just kind of enjoy his columns, he's like some football grandpa who might be wrong but he normally interests me.

I don't get the rage some people have for this guy but then again apparently most of you are forced to read his stuff as some sort of torture.

Click to expand...

Sure, that’s why most of us read your posts, because we enjoy being tortured by a guy who uses the “libs” adjective (so yesterday) and who enjoys being tickled by the football grandpa.

h0c2000 said:

or am I the fool for continuing to read his drivel?

From
FMIA: Reality Not So Nice For Patriots As Rob Gronkowski, Best Tight End of His Era, Walks Away From Football

Click to expand...

While I'm not a Peter King fan, all I read in that article was that Gronk was an awesome force and that the Pats are weaker without him. I don't see any issue with that.

Biffins said:

While I'm not a Peter King fan, all I read in that article was that Gronk was an awesome force and that the Pats are weaker without him. I don't see any issue with that.

Click to expand...

The encouraging thing is that the Pats are not losing prime Gronk and they have won without him despite sitting on his caphit. Now they can fill that void.

If he is a dolt, he is a successful dolt. His SI contract alone is worth more than $1,000,000 annually, plus he does national TV spots. Lots of mediots wish they were he!

His cameo in "Deliverance" was revealing

Any sports or entertainment figure who really believes that others are interested in his/her opinions on matters far outside their area of expertise has usually jumped the shark. In this particular case, he actually believes that people are interested in his thoughts on politics.