I'm sure Chris Brown would have run for 175 yards against last year's #2 defense with Kerry Collins under center on Sunday as well.
FYI... Since starting 0-3 last year, the Texans are 7-7 and are the last team to beat the Superbowl champion Colts. And the way the Colts looked the other night, it may stay that way for a while...
yes; they won at least two games in spite of baby vince. and look at the giant comeback: three times in the 4Q, pac man jones cut the field in half for the offense. give baby vince credit for making up the other half; but let's not assume he's the only QB capable of moving a team 40, 40 and 40 yards.
Speaking from the point of view of a relative outsider when it comes to the Texans (only started following them late last year), it doesn't surprise me at all that Texans fans are upset about the way Williams, Bush, and Young are treated in the press. From what I've read and heard in the national media, it seems as if they're more about comparing that Bush and Young won national championships, so they should have automatically been picked higher than Williams (as if that was more of a prerequisite for success in the NFL). They never seem to compare how they played in the actual NFL season. I mean, the amount of times I've had to hear about how the Texans' decision was one of the worst in the history of sports (Bill Simmons has done much to add to that hyperbole) is numerous. I just don't get it- Williams didn't have a great season, but it was decent- how does that translate into "worst"? And I'll admit that Young had some great moments (including one we'd all like to forget), and Bush might have, too, but nothing compared to what the media would have you believe. From a relative outsider, it's very biased.
arguably the preeminent football writer of our era, peter king, said this monday when naming mario williams defensive player of the week: and we should assume the press is treating williams fairly when prominent members of it are admitting to poking fun at him?? i usually resist the urge, but i sent an email to king and asked him to explain himself; to convince us we weren't receiving unbiased, unfiltered reporting when he blatantly admits to being both biased and filtered. i pointed out that he's excusing terrence newman this year for being out with the SAME injury williams battled through last year (while not missing a game) and wondered if he and the nbc crew were poking fun at newman. or if he bothered to report on the planta faciis, or whatever it is, that williams had admist their laughter. i don't expect a response, but he shouldn't expect me to ever read his **** again, either. **** him. and his daughter's field hockey team.
Ric, are you a reporter or writer or something? You seem to always be analyzing them. Why do you think sports reporters should be held to such a high standard? Maybe he doesn't think Mario should have been a number one pick. Just because Mario has a good game a year later doesn't mean he has to change his mind on that.
I know you didn't ask me, but here's why I think they should be hedl to a high standard: Reporters have two things that the overwhelming majority of us sports fans do not:<ol><li>A degree in journalism (which should translate into solid skills with prose and word usage, not mere syndicated sarcasm)</li><li>A much higher level of access to professional sports franchises, professional athletes, employees, scouts, and "the business" in general</li></ol>As such, I expect MORE--*much* more--from a reporter than something I could hear from any undereducated, overopinionated whiner at a freaking water cooler or in the back end of a warehouse somewhere. And by "undereducated" I mean specifically as it relates to writing and the sports business, not to a BS in general.
Bingo. As someone in the business, you just pointed out the biggest problem. There's absolutely too much pandering to the uneducated masses of casual fans, and not enough actual substance in reporting given the access most of these writers have. It's lazy journalism to get a laugh and to get a pat on the back from most of their readers, so to speak. It's not reporting. I'm glad some people see this.
fair enough, I guess I've always just held them in the same regard as entertainment columnists, People magazine level, etc. Purely entertainment. The box scores need to be factual but everything else is opinions
But even entertainment columnists do research. As far as opinions go, I can get that drivel for free right here on the BBS or at the water cooler. When a guy is making six figures, I expect more. And, IMO, you should, too.
because, updawg, as a reporter, he's agreed to be held to a higher standard of integrity and honesty. and in return, is given the conduit to reach a large audience with an explicit understanding that he will not exploit either of those virtures.
An awful lot of the national sports reporters feel that way and I, for one, fully understand why because I have felt the same ever since Mario was picked no. 1. Now this in no way should be interpreted as a slap at Mario because I felt that he was a legitimate 1st round pick just not worthy of being the overall no. 1 pick. By 2006, the Texans had become a joke in the eyes of the national media and when they picked Mario ahead of players like Bush, Leinart, Cutler and even VY, it sort of affirmed their impression of ineptness in this franchise. This is to be expected until the Texans start winning on a consistent basis. Once that happens, we'll start to hear the talking heads gush over what a well run franchise we have down here in Houston. What does all of this mean? Probably nothing in the grand scheme of things. It is what it is. I believe that quite a few folks here are somewhat sensitive to the criticism (and wise cracks) from the so-called "national sports press" whom they feel aren't giving the Texans a fair shake. This is to be expected because woeful losing teams have always been the butt of jokes (remember the Aints with their fans donning paper bags at the games?). In their heyday, the Oilers weren't just bad, they were comically bad (just go take a look at the NFL Football Follies). Over the past 5 years, the Texans have done what they can to add to that sorry legacy. Thankfully, the days of being the butt of football jokes now appears to be finally over in Houston - hopefully for a long long time.
I can see expecting a higher standard when they are breaking something big, such as steroids, cheating, gambling etc. That’s more of real investigative reporting. But the day in, day out stuff is just normal entertainment columns. They have some inside info and the rest is their opinion and playing homer to the team market. Purely entertainment to sell magazines and newspapers
Meh. To each his own. I don't have time for any of that drivel. I read no entertainment "news", and once I've delved into a sports article or column and discover it's nothing more than syndicated sarcasm, I click out and move on. I get all my online sarcasm, overinflated opinions, argumentation, and general whining right here at ClutchFans. Unlike those pompous windbags, all of us windbags are passing our gas online for free!
well, i think you're making a bigger, and not altogether inaccurate, point about the role of sports in society. BUT... as it is, sports (and entertainment, etc.) journalists are, and should be held to the same standard as news journalists. peter king's opinion, because of his status, carries weight; influences opinions; changes minds. you're being awfully naive if you don't believe this, or, if you assume, for example, my column carries any of the same pedigree as his.
ehhh... it's been so long and i'm so far removed... i don't think there's an actual hand on the bible, etc., pledge/ceremony, but journalistic ethics are drilled into the curriculum and expected to be upheld from day one. it's a big deal within the profession. case in point, the boston globe columnist (bourges, i believe?) who was suspended for copy a story and not plagarizing it; or the hot water albom got into at the final four for filing a story early with info that simply never happened, but he assumed it was going to. it's why people are having trouble with espn being a "news" source while broadcasting the nfl, nba and mlb, not to mention ncaa. etc., etc.
IT'S A TRAP!!! I guess I'm the lucky one here. I never fell into the whole "pick one and hate the others" BS game. It is BS. I would have stood up and cheered if the Texans would have picked any of those 3 guys. All 3 were ready to contribute immediately, and make the team better in the future. All 3 have the right stuff to be great players. They picked Mario, get over it. He is good, he can be great. Not a single one of those players are great, they all can be great. All of this hype is 10 years premature. How people think they can rate a player's career before the draft even took place or even now is beyond me. You don't even have to add the fact of comparing 3 different players at 3 different positions. The sooner you can separate one of these guys from the other two, the sooner we all can start having a relevant conversation.
you asked me a specific question; sorry - my response is that he SHOULD report "news"; as in facts. everyone is human, so i by no means expect reporters to keep their own biases and opinions grounded. at the same time, to admit to poking fun at mario williams is, imo, crossing the line - why would you poke fun at mario williams? he didn't draft himself first. when you then spend the year overinflating the two guys picked behind him, ignore doing ANY homework whatsoever on williams, and then come back the next year as go off on how serious plantar fascitis is in the same breath you admit to making fun of mario williams... like i said, i think it crosses the line.
Agreed. I'd just assume never compare any of them to eachother again and just judge them each on their own individual merit. But of course, that's never going to happen. I fall into the trap every now and then, although it's not as much as last year.
