Big Ten now playing

ButchPlz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
6,547
Likes
10,141
First off, they wish they were the SEC.

Second, for a conference whose members employed both Larry Nassar and Jerry Sandusky, I think this will fall well short of its "darkest day."
Check out her feed, the leathery hag is tracking to walk it back.

This is a sports story, and this dumb broad has to exaggerate something as meaningless (in the grand scheme of things) as the Big 10 playing football. This BS is why people hate the media. It is fully deserved.
 

RDU VOL#14

I’m a Flawed Character
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
13,467
Likes
13,154
First off, they wish they were the SEC.

Second, for a conference whose members employed both Larry Nassar and Jerry Sandusky, I think this will fall well short of its "darkest day."
Exactly. You’re a writer. I don’t know your history, but did you write about sports because you loved it or because you were assigned to it? I’m guessing because you love sports and Alabama. I only ask because people like Brennan, Nancy Armour and Wolken seem to be much more enamored with things other than sports. Whether it is the case or not, their writing over college football in particular seems to have an agenda that is influenced by their political leanings. What’s your take on that?
 

bamawriter

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
21,357
Likes
10,392
Exactly. You’re a writer. I don’t know your history, but did you write about sports because you loved it or because you were assigned to it? I’m guessing because you love sports and Alabama. I only ask because people like Brennan, Nancy Armour and Wolken seem to be much more enamored with things other than sports. Whether it is the case or not, their writing over college football in particular seems to have an agenda that is influenced by their political leanings. What’s your take on that?
Keep in mind that it's not my day job. I write a column that's carried in small newspapers who want some SEC coverage but aren't going to pay for full-time writers for the sports beat. I've also never met Brennan, and have only met Wolken two or three times when we've been in the same press box. I've probably spoken to him for a grand total of 90 seconds. So I don't want to give the impression that I know either of them.

That said, I think that news rooms in this country have become bubbles or echo chambers. It used to be that "news" was meant to be limited to presenting the facts plainly and clearly without spin or bias. But because of the echo chamber environments, a lot of the folks running these publications think that their political stance is synonymous with "fact." And that bias runs downhill, so now even sports and weather can't be reported without some level of editorializing. I'm not even sure that folks like Brennan and Wolken even realize they're doing it. When every person around you spouts the same opinions, and you never interact with anyone who dissents, after a while you lose sight of the difference between opinion and fact.

To be completely honest, I'm not 100% sure that trying to play football this Fall is a good idea. I want to believe that very intelligent people have made very thoughtful decisions, and that we can be reasonably assured that everyone is going to stay safe and healthy. I'm encouraged by the fact that we are 19 days into the Tour de France, and so far none of the 200+ riders have tested positive. That's no small feat. That tells me that athletes can be at close quarters for hours at a time and be kept healthy. But, just because I don't totally agree with the decision to play doesn't mean that I'm angry about it, or disappointed. I'm still going to watch every game, and I'm still going to write about them. But I'm resolved to write about the games themselves, not any of the nonsense surrounding them.
 

05_never_again

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
13,130
Likes
9,396
Exactly. You’re a writer. I don’t know your history, but did you write about sports because you loved it or because you were assigned to it? I’m guessing because you love sports and Alabama. I only ask because people like Brennan, Nancy Armour and Wolken seem to be much more enamored with things other than sports. Whether it is the case or not, their writing over college football in particular seems to have an agenda that is influenced by their political leanings. What’s your take on that?
A lot of national sportswriters (the Wolkens/Brennans of the world) probably wanted earlier in their careers to write about more serious topics like politics, or do something like investigative reporting, but the cookie crumbled in such a way where they ended up writing about sports. Look at Brennan's resume/credentials - it's impressive. Undergrad and grad degrees from N'western, on the BoT at N'western, was the first president of the Association for Women in Sports Media. That isn't a typical "sports fan" resume. I think that many sportswriters who come from those backgrounds are bothered by the fact that ultimately what they are writing about is frivolous; they wish they were getting a big political scoop like Bob Woodward, not writing about stupid, meathead dudes playing ballgames. If you have a sourpuss attitude about your job, it'll bleed into your work product.

I even think some of these writers, perhaps after they'd had a few drinks, would admit that they don't even particularly care for sports, but they cover it because it's their job. Which makes sense - there's all sorts of people in professions they don't like, but they do it anyway because it's their job and the best opportunity they have at the moment. Much of the woke brigade at ESPN seem to cover sports this way; Deadspin also covers sports this way. I don't even think they like the sports they are writing about; it's akin to being the WH correspondent for CNN but hating political discussions because they can get heated and divisive. It makes no sense.
 

RDU VOL#14

I’m a Flawed Character
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
13,467
Likes
13,154
Keep in mind that it's not my day job. I write a column that's carried in small newspapers who want some SEC coverage but aren't going to pay for full-time writers for the sports beat. I've also never met Brennan, and have only met Wolken two or three times when we've been in the same press box. I've probably spoken to him for a grand total of 90 seconds. So I don't want to give the impression that I know either of them.

That said, I think that news rooms in this country have become bubbles or echo chambers. It used to be that "news" was meant to be limited to presenting the facts plainly and clearly without spin or bias. But because of the echo chamber environments, a lot of the folks running these publications think that their political stance is synonymous with "fact." And that bias runs downhill, so now even sports and weather can't be reported without some level of editorializing. I'm not even sure that folks like Brennan and Wolken even realize they're doing it. When every person around you spouts the same opinions, and you never interact with anyone who dissents, after a while you lose sight of the difference between opinion and fact.

To be completely honest, I'm not 100% sure that trying to play football this Fall is a good idea. I want to believe that very intelligent people have made very thoughtful decisions, and that we can be reasonably assured that everyone is going to stay safe and healthy. I'm encouraged by the fact that we are 19 days into the Tour de France, and so far none of the 200+ riders have tested positive. That's no small feat. That tells me that athletes can be at close quarters for hours at a time and be kept healthy. But, just because I don't totally agree with the decision to play doesn't mean that I'm angry about it, or disappointed. I'm still going to watch every game, and I'm still going to write about them. But I'm resolved to write about the games themselves, not any of the nonsense surrounding them.
That’s great insight. Thank you for the response, staying professional and for staying true to your craft .
 

05_never_again

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
13,130
Likes
9,396
Keep in mind that it's not my day job. I write a column that's carried in small newspapers who want some SEC coverage but aren't going to pay for full-time writers for the sports beat. I've also never met Brennan, and have only met Wolken two or three times when we've been in the same press box. I've probably spoken to him for a grand total of 90 seconds. So I don't want to give the impression that I know either of them.

That said, I think that news rooms in this country have become bubbles or echo chambers. It used to be that "news" was meant to be limited to presenting the facts plainly and clearly without spin or bias. But because of the echo chamber environments, a lot of the folks running these publications think that their political stance is synonymous with "fact." And that bias runs downhill, so now even sports and weather can't be reported without some level of editorializing. I'm not even sure that folks like Brennan and Wolken even realize they're doing it. When every person around you spouts the same opinions, and you never interact with anyone who dissents, after a while you lose sight of the difference between opinion and fact.

To be completely honest, I'm not 100% sure that trying to play football this Fall is a good idea. I want to believe that very intelligent people have made very thoughtful decisions, and that we can be reasonably assured that everyone is going to stay safe and healthy. I'm encouraged by the fact that we are 19 days into the Tour de France, and so far none of the 200+ riders have tested positive. That's no small feat. That tells me that athletes can be at close quarters for hours at a time and be kept healthy. But, just because I don't totally agree with the decision to play doesn't mean that I'm angry about it, or disappointed. I'm still going to watch every game, and I'm still going to write about them. But I'm resolved to write about the games themselves, not any of the nonsense surrounding them.
Technology is a double-edged sword that comes with pros and cons.

Now that we're in an age of instant, everywhere access to information, there isn't value anymore in simply being a fact transmission vehicle. That was a big deal when "the news" was this thing that came once a day as a newspaper or a TV broadcast at 7 PM. It was a huge deal to be the first with the information; things were slower and if you had it first you had a huge leg up on the competition. Now it's on all the time and can be accessed anywhere.

The "value add" now is in providing "analysis" (both terms firmly in quotes). Information is cheap - it's everywhere and in large quantities. What people really value now is editorializing. An interpretation or analysis of the facts that jives with what they already believe.
 
Likes: Aesius

VFL-82-JP

Bleedin' Orange...
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
14,346
Likes
28,459
Ohio State has won 67% of games against the SEC
Clemson has won 61% of games against the SEC
is winning games against the SEC a cakewalk?
Where did you get that info?

Because at the first site I checked, looks like Ohio State is 5-11-1 (32%) against the SEC. Specifically, Ohio State's record against:

Alabama: 1-3
Auburn: 0-1
LSU: 1-1-1
Florida: 0-2
Georgia: 0-1
Tennessee: 0-1
South Carolina: 0-2
Arkansas: 1-0
Kentucky: 1-0
Vandy: 1-0

Here's the source I used. First one that came up when I googled "ohio state versus sec": mcubed.net : NCAA Football : Conference Series Records : Ohio State vs. SEC


p.s. Same site says Clemson is 56-99-5 (37%) all time against current SEC teams. They do have a winning record against in-state rival South Carolina, though, you can give them that. mcubed.net : NCAA Football : Conference Series Records : Clemson vs. SEC
 
Likes: escapegoat2

hUTch2002

Wait til next year!
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Messages
5,149
Likes
4,460
Respect the heck out of Justin Fields.... He could have easily opted out but got over 301,000 petitions to play. Said he would give an arm and leg to play on a team like this, even though 1st round picks Wyatt Davis, and Shawn Wade opted out, because of BIG10 draggin their feet.
Hey, I was just wondering, do you respect the heck out of Justin Fields?
 

Aesius

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2009
Messages
24,580
Likes
33,342
A lot of national sportswriters (the Wolkens/Brennans of the world) probably wanted earlier in their careers to write about more serious topics like politics, or do something like investigative reporting, but the cookie crumbled in such a way where they ended up writing about sports. Look at Brennan's resume/credentials - it's impressive. Undergrad and grad degrees from N'western, on the BoT at N'western, was the first president of the Association for Women in Sports Media. That isn't a typical "sports fan" resume. I think that many sportswriters who come from those backgrounds are bothered by the fact that ultimately what they are writing about is frivolous; they wish they were getting a big political scoop like Bob Woodward, not writing about stupid, meathead dudes playing ballgames. If you have a sourpuss attitude about your job, it'll bleed into your work product.

I even think some of these writers, perhaps after they'd had a few drinks, would admit that they don't even particularly care for sports, but they cover it because it's their job. Which makes sense - there's all sorts of people in professions they don't like, but they do it anyway because it's their job and the best opportunity they have at the moment. Much of the woke brigade at ESPN seem to cover sports this way; Deadspin also covers sports this way. I don't even think they like the sports they are writing about; it's akin to being the WH correspondent for CNN but hating political discussions because they can get heated and divisive. It makes no sense.
This is spot-on. I'm a journalism school graduate, but not much of a reporter. I did it for about a year after graduation (covered the TN legislature). But I do know that the industry is saturated and you often have to take whatever comes your way. It's not as easy as just thinking "I want to report on X" and immediately being placed on that beat at a newspaper or magazine.

So these people often take whatever jobs they can find initially, or whatever pays best. In the back of their minds they think these jobs are stepping stones, but next thing they know, 15 years have passed and they're still covering something they have no interest in. And I think a lot of journalists, even those who start out loving the subject of their beats, eventually become jaded and dislike every aspect of it. I hated covering the statehouse within months because everything was so petty and inconsequential, and yet there were plenty of curmudgeons up there who had been reporting on it for decades and just seemed miserable 24/7.
 

Aesius

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2009
Messages
24,580
Likes
33,342
Technology is a double-edged sword that comes with pros and cons.

Now that we're in an age of instant, everywhere access to information, there isn't value anymore in simply being a fact transmission vehicle. That was a big deal when "the news" was this thing that came once a day as a newspaper or a TV broadcast at 7 PM. It was a huge deal to be the first with the information; things were slower and if you had it first you had a huge leg up on the competition. Now it's on all the time and can be accessed anywhere.

The "value add" now is in providing "analysis" (both terms firmly in quotes). Information is cheap - it's everywhere and in large quantities. What people really value now is editorializing. An interpretation or analysis of the facts that jives with what they already believe.
Right. And to make matters worse, the media getting it wrong has become accepted. Accepted to the point that people would rather listen to talking heads tell them what to think because they don't even trust that what's being reported is accurate, or they don't know how to "interpret" the news anymore.
 

hUTch2002

Wait til next year!
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Messages
5,149
Likes
4,460
First off, they wish they were the SEC.

Second, for a conference whose members employed both Larry Nassar and Jerry Sandusky, I think this will fall well short of its "darkest day."
Seriously, this isn’t even close to as bad as those things. I’m sure those were Trump’s fault too in her mind.
 

VN Store




Sponsors
 

Top