Has This Been Discussed?? Peter Kings's QB Rankings

[RavensFanIAm]

Peter King is a good read, but once again, his rankings are way off. So you put Kitna, Cutler, Romo and V. Young over McNabb, Favre and McNair????? Please help me understand this one??

And I'm sick of the swinging on the Pats nuts with "The Spurs are the Pats of the NBA".... even if it makes sense to say that, can you please stop it with the lovefest???? Okay, sorry for the vent :laugh:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/06/17/qbs/index.html

[Fcowher]

Peter is always biased and he has become a very tired read. I just became very sick of his fat butt whining about which starbucks to visit in each city.

[ExiledRaven]

Same, I'm getting very tired about the vast majority of weeks involving in depth coverage of one team.

A friend of mine from Chicago was going on and on about this and pulled this one out "I bet he started hyping Adalius Thomas just because he was going to be a free agent and King wanted to see what AT could do in NE." I laughed at the time, but with King you never really know if that's the truth or not.

The Pats sign a bunch of WRs 1 of which had 1 good year in Philly and was always hurt in NO. The other simply decided to stop playing when his team got bad (anyone see Larry Fitzgerald, Andre Johnson quitting on those terrible teams? Nope.). Washington always thought he was twice as good as he really was with the Bengals and barely played and got bumped out of the #3 slot several times. He might not even get on the field with the Pats.

Welker seems like a decent pickup, but I'd honestly never heard a word about him before the Pats gave him that offer sheet. Then Boom, PK is going on and on about how good this guy is. Hey Peter, why didn't you ever write about him in your weekly (twice weekly during the season) license to rant about whatever you wish?

Then suddenly, this rif-rafish crew of recievers is going to be unstoppable? Come on. If you're going to talk about an offense with unstoppable recievers, talk about the Rams in their prime, or the Colts when Stokley has his one season where he wasn't a walking injury. I'd still take the Bengals, Colts, and Rams (at least) recievers over the incoming Pats free agent "plunder."

Anyhow, I'm getting off the soapbox, but really...there HAVE to be lots of interesting stories around the NFL every week that might not involve the Patriots. Being a fan is one thing, but the way King writes it's like he's taking the easy way out by writing on things he doesn't actually have to research.

There, I said it, I called him lazy.:bag:

[purplepoe]

All of these "lists" are done for one reason.

They are easy to write, read, and they create debates.

You're right Exiled. It's a lazy way to fill space when you don't wanna write about a real story.

PP

[ExiledRaven]

I'm talking generally too. I would be pretty ticked if every time I turned on the tube some member of the national media talked about the Ravens nearly every week. I don't get the chance or have to time to know tons about teams outside the AFCN or the Bears. If you're a member of the national media, sure there are hot stories and you need to sell papers, but there a lots of things you can do.

Then again, creativity takes effort. :thumbup:

[purplepoe]

I'm talking generally too. I would be pretty ticked if every time I turned on the tube some member of the national media talked about the Ravens nearly every week. I don't get the chance or have to time to know tons about teams outside the AFCN or the Bears. If you're a member of the national media, sure there are hot stories and you need to sell papers, but there a lots of things you can do.

Then again, creativity takes effort. :thumbup:

When I first graduated college I worked for ComcastSportsNet in Philly and then in Balt/DC.

I met many different reporters and writers and you would be STUNNED at how little many of them know about the local teams they cover, let alone other teams around the country.

The worst part is, guys like me, who made 1/10 of what some of these people make, would go over their copy and correct some errors that were so ridiculous that you almost had to laugh.

PP

[ExiledRaven]

Exactly.

for example:

Put Adrian Wilson on a team like the Bears, Packers, Patriots, Steelers, Eagles, or Colts and he'll be one of the most talked about players on defense period. The man is a monster, not only is he a great safety, he's an athletic freak (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vL19q8yL54).

Lots and lots of places put Bart Scott down as a second year player this past year. (hell, some even had him as a rookie)

Almost as many omitted that AD went to the pro-bowl for special teams until the Peter King slobberfest that continued into the offseason and is amplified now that AD is on the Pats. Heck, many places seemed to think AD was a 3rd or 4th year player.

Since when is it that hard to do your job?

[purplepoe]

Exactly.

for example:

Put Adrian Wilson on a team like the Bears, Packers, Patriots, Steelers, Eagles, or Colts and he'll be one of the most talked about players on defense period. The man is a monster, not only is he a great safety, he's an athletic freak (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vL19q8yL54).

Lots and lots of places put Bart Scott down as a second year player this past year. (hell, some even had him as a rookie)

Almost as many omitted that AD went to the pro-bowl for special teams until the Peter King slobberfest that continued into the offseason and is amplified now that AD is on the Pats. Heck, many places seemed to think AD was a 3rd or 4th year player.

Since when is it that hard to do your job?


This one always got me.

Not only was it said over and over, but I actually saw a list of Super Bowl teams that didn't make the playoffs the year after they were in the game.

The Ravens were on the list.

Not only did the Ravens make the playoffs, they won a road playoff game in Miami.

It's really a joke sometimes. The problem is, if a person only gets their sports info from stuff like that, they think it's factual.

Talking sports with someone like that is extremely frustrating.

Here's one I found the other day in the Sun. (shocker). It's about the Orioles but here it is nonetheless.

"White, who moved downtown in 1988 to be near Camden Yards, once made it to 36 games a year or more no matter the team's won-lost record. But her Orioles' decline has been so "depressing," she says, she has had to talk herself into renewing annually."

Now, Im no math genius, but Camden Yards opened in 1992. Im not sure when ground was officially broken on construction, but I know for a fact that nobody in 1988 knew there would be a baseball stadium there. It was a bunch of abandoned warehouses at that point. So either that lady lied to the reporter or got her years mixed up. Either way, anyone who knows Baltimore sports and writes for the BALTIMORE SUN should know something like that. I even emailed the guy. Didn't get a response but then I didn't expect one. And the story still says 1988.

Sure, this isn't a major error but it still annoys me when I see stuff like that.

PP

[flraven]

Poe,
I believe the Orioles announced they were going to build their new place at Camden Yards during the 1988 season, I believe it was at the first home game after they broke that 0-21 streak. That showed what kind of fans the O's had - the team is 1-21 and they pretty much filled Memorial Stadium). So maybe she decided to up and move right then and there.

[Greg]

"White, who moved downtown in 1988 to be near Camden Yards, once made it to 36 games a year or more no matter the team's won-lost record. But her Orioles' decline has been so "depressing," she says, she has had to talk herself into renewing annually."
LOL, it is WON-LOSS record, this is what passes as proper writing at a so-called major newspaper. Incredible. I know it is a picky little thing, but still. These people make their living writing in the English language, you think small things would be easy for them to handle.

[ExiledRaven]

Sun papers are a rag. Period. It's a disservice to Baltimore. You'd think that The Sun might be able to churn out a decent product.

Then again, given the close proximity of the Washington Post and areas of overlapping coverage, it's not entirely surprising the 1-AA team just doesn't quite have it. :rolling:

[purplepoe]

Poe,
I believe the Orioles announced they were going to build their new place at Camden Yards during the 1988 season, I believe it was at the first home game after they broke that 0-21 streak. That showed what kind of fans the O's had - the team is 1-21 and they pretty much filled Memorial Stadium). So maybe she decided to up and move right then and there.

Doh.

Now I look like a dope. O well, the Sun still sucks and most writers don't know shit!!!!

And I still seriously doubt that someone would up and move to the Camden Yards area 4 years before the stadium opened.

PP