- Joined
- Feb 27, 2010
- Messages
- 12,084
- Reaction score
- 17,864
The league already has their pound of flesh from the Patriots.
You could have (and someone definitely did) said that as Deflategate was building up.
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.The league already has their pound of flesh from the Patriots.
Why the F would the omsbudsman be writing about deflategate? An internal memo, or an article for general consumption? If the latter, that seems like a weird use of his time as an ombudsman.
Yea that will happen. You are 100% correct though.I have to assume he's writing about ESPN's coverage of Deflategate. That would be a standard thing for an ombudsman to do.
3 articles in 3 months.
That's Woody Johnson-type production.
Look, I'm hoping he completely rips the Patriots and that his piece gets alot of national attention.........
..........
That job looks like one that George Costanza would land.
I agree that based on ESPN's pattern of responding to criticism so far this is what is most likely to happen, but if that is the tack he takes, I'm not sure why he would feel the need to defend ESPN in the first place. The thing to understand is, there is very little serious criticism of ESPN's reporting of hyped up or fictional Patriots cheating scandals outside of New England fans and media. Doubling down on deflategate reporting by publicly claiming that ESPN had little to no fault and was practicing ethical and accurate journalisn will not improve the national image of ESPN because nobody cares outside of New England, and for us Patriots fans it will just aggravate a more negative response than before. It would make more sense to either say nothing or make some genuine concessions about how reporting practices need to be improved.I have to assume he's writing about ESPN's coverage of Deflategate. That would be a standard thing for an ombudsman to do. A real ombudsman would write objectively about it, levying criticism of ESPN as warranted.
Since this guy is a boob I expect he'll give ESPN a couple of lightweight, token criticisms but otherwise say ESPN did a fine, fine job.
And the next injection of common sense from BSPN might be the first. Especially regarding defamegate.I agree that based on ESPN's pattern of responding to criticism so far this is what is most likely to happen, but if that is the tack he takes, I'm not sure why he would feel the need to defend ESPN in the first place. The thing to understand is, there is very little serious criticism of ESPN's reporting of hyped up or fictional Patriots cheating scandals outside of New England fans and media. Doubling down on deflategate reporting by publicly claiming that ESPN had little to no fault and was practicing ethical and accurate journalisn will not improve the national image of ESPN because nobody cares outside of New England, and for us Patriots fans it will just aggravate a more negative response than before. It would make more sense to either say nothing or make some genuine concessions about how reporting practices need to be improved.
Since this guy is a boob I expect he'll give ESPN a couple of lightweight, token criticisms but otherwise say ESPN did a fine, fine job.
Well he must have done something. If he would just own up to it it would be a small fine and we could move on.I heard this Jim Brady guy is a child molester and distributor of child porn. I just e-mailed a number of ESPN sponsors of what I've heard. Then I e-mailed news outlets and religious organizations in Kansas, Iowa, Oklahoma, North and South Dakota and Utah asking why they were supporting child molestation and child pornography. Do their congregations know this Jim Brady , northeast New Yorker is a child molester and trying to distribute child pornography in Salt Lake City, Dubuque and Muskogee?
I mean, I heard that so it must have some truth to it.