I'm pretty sure "Pancakes" stems from a few years ago during preseason where they were having a practice and Jason Braddock was live tweeting. John McClain was at the practice but was at the food line or something, flirting with cheerleaders, etc. and never watched the practice. He had done the same thing the day before, but then wrote an article or said on air that Matt Leinart (I think it was him) looked amazing in camp and hadn't thrown a single incomplete pass which was simply false and Braddock went off on him saying something like "he's too busy eating the pancakes to pay attention to the practice." McClain has no inside information and he admits it. All through the draft process he kept saying "nobody has any clue what they think" about anything. That simply wasn't true. There were people out there who knew that they liked Tom Savage for example, but McClain is never in the loop. The only information he ever gets is the information the Texans give him to put out there. What makes me not like him though isn't any of that. It's that when he has an opinion, like that the Texans would take a QB at 1 overall, he acts like anyone with a different opinion is stupid. I don't know whether the people he works with on the radio "like" him (he seems like an interesting guy honestly) but they definitely get a kick out of him being wrong. Even Vandameer cracked on McClain yesterday when the guys at 610 said that Andre wasn't going anywhere according to McClain.
Every reporter out there flip flops from time to time. That is journalism 101 sir . Look how Skip and Steven A flip flops on 1st Take. **** even fans flip flop , look how a lot of jokers on here killing Smith oh but if we have a great season, jokers will be saying what a wonderful job with the draft.
This is what I want you and the rest of McCain haters to do. When the season starts, go to the Chronicle on Tuesday and watch a lot of fans ask him a lot of questions about the Texans. A lot of fans give the man props for his columns and his knowledge about the Texans.
Nope.. They'll just give O'Brien the credit. And if these draft picks aren't as advertised _ then it will be Rick's fault.
There are way more casual fans that think he's the ultimate source of Texans knowledge in this city than there are hardcore fans (message board posters/season ticket holders) like us that know his real shtick.
Example of why McClain isn't a good reporter. Does everyone remember the offseason we signed Joseph and Manning? McClain was on the radio beating the dead horse that the Texans had no cap room and couldn't sign anyone. I was on here saying they could, they just needed to restructure some deals. McClain basically said people who think you can make things happen to sign players are stupid. Then what happened? They signed two free agents, restructured deals, etc. What did McClain do? Acted like this restructuring magic was some mystical power that had never before been used.
McClain was a great writer back in the days when the Sunday paper mattered. Now, he's just an old fossil living on his past reputation. He can't keep up with the young go-getters and probably has no desire to.
I just never would have thought that any of this would have to be said. I really didn't think anyone local put any stock in anything Pancakes says. Sure he's on the radio a lot, but that doesn't lend credibility.
I think it was easier to be a "great" writer in the old days. Back then, most fans couldn't see players on other teams (in all sports), had no access to statistics, had very few venues to get informed, etc. Basically the media was your source of information. What they told you was gospel. This is why media people hate the new statistical wave in sports. It makes it harder for them to write their articles because they can get called out when they are wrong. (Same for radio people) There response is to bash statistics and get fans to think statistics are lies. Baseball is the perfect example of this. The bashing of Billy Beane and his moneyball approach by media people, the most common argument being "what did moneyball ever win." Well, the statistical traits that Beane targeted were used by the Yankees and Red Sox to win 7 World Series between them.
I mean he was angry on the air at people who were suggesting they could sign a big free agent. He was saying the national media was stupid for saying we would pursue Nnamdi, that they don't know anything about the Texans, blah blah blah.
The Yankees and Red Sox are horrible comparisons to what Billy Bean accomplished. The Yankees and Red-sox pay roll was ridiculous buying anything and everything they wanted with ridiculous contracts. John is still a good reporter.
You don't understand my point at all. Billy Beane's approach was to find undervalued skills using statistics and to build a team that way. Reporters have bashed him for his statistical approach, but the point I made was the Yankees and Red Sox targeted those same statistics but were able to spend big while doing so, thus winning WS. Therefore, it's flawed to say Beane's statistical approach was a failure when the two winningest teams in MLB used the same statistical approach.
