Rivera post Greenbay monday presser

[kungfoodude 3,124]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

La Canfora has always been hit or miss. He's better than Mike Lombardi, at least.

I've mentioned I tend to prefer the local guys because they're only focused on one team, but that doesn't mean the national guys are useless (especially Rapoport).

Aaron Wilson used to be a go to guy for all things NFL when he covered the Ravens, but since switching to the Texans he seems to concentrate primarily on team news instead.

Best thing I could tell you these days? Subscribe to The Athletic. It's worth it.

I am eventually going to sign up for The Athletic. 

I also cannot stand Rapoport. He is the laziest sports reporter about verifying his information. That's why he is wrong so fuging much. And I get that he is obviously well informed and has good sources but my God the amount of incorrect information he spreads would get a normal journalist fired.

[Mr. Scot 58,117]

Just now, kungfoodude said:

I am eventually going to sign up for The Athletic. 

I also cannot stand Rapoport. He is the laziest sports reporter about verifying his information. That's why he is wrong so fuging much. And I get that he is obviously well informed and has good sources but my God the amount of incorrect information he spreads would get a normal journalist fired.

Well to be fair, the nature of what he does is very speculative. There's a lot of "I'm told this might happen" and "this team could be thinking of" and other stuff like that.

Reporters report what already happened. The insider's job is to talk about what might happen. That's always going to be kind of iffy.

[kungfoodude 3,124]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Well to be fair, the nature of what he does is very speculative. There's a lot of "I'm told this might happen" and "this team could be thinking of" and other stuff like that.

Reporters report what already happened. The insider's job is to talk about what might happen. That's always going to be kind of iffy.

It's basically the NY gossip column poo. I don't have respect for that either. It's not real journalism.

[Mr. Scot 58,117]

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

It's basically the NY gossip column poo. I don't have respect for that either. It's not real journalism.

No, but we all hang off of it anyway.

You have to attribute a lot of it to the rise of social media. It wasn't like this before Twitter.

You used to only get insider reports on Sunday morning from guys like Will McDonough.

Edited November 12 by Mr. Scot

[kungfoodude 3,124]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

No, but we all hang off of it anyway.

You have to attribute a lot of it to the rise of social media. It wasn't like this before Twitter.

I honestly don't really put to much stock in his or guys like Schefter's stream of consciousness stuff. I would attribute it to the rise of ESPN and the 24 hour sports news cycle. It very much mirrors the trend that happened with the advent of CNN and the 24 hours news cycle. The need to fill air time shifted rapidly towards rampant speculation just to keep the viewers attention. Did the social media world amplify it? Absolutely. But, make no mistake, that trend existed long before that.

Social media and the 24 hour news cycle has almost completely destroyed real journalism. It's why places like the Athletic stand out so much. They aren't doing anything particularly innovative, they just have a platform where they get the chance to really go more in depth and the time to do so. Not all this hot take BS that floods the airwaves and internet. That stuff should be relegated to us, the fans. We don't need on air personalities to fuel the rampant speculation and rumor spreading. We do it enough!

[Mr. Scot 58,117]

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

I honestly don't really put to much stock in his or guys like Schefter's stream of consciousness stuff. I would attribute it to the rise of ESPN and the 24 hour sports news cycle. It very much mirrors the trend that happened with the advent of CNN and the 24 hours news cycle. The need to fill air time shifted rapidly towards rampant speculation just to keep the viewers attention. Did the social media world amplify it? Absolutely. But, make no mistake, that trend existed long before that.

Social media and the 24 hour news cycle has almost completely destroyed real journalism. It's why places like the Athletic stand out so much. They aren't doing anything particularly innovative, they just have a platform where they get the chance to really go more in depth and the time to do so. Not all this hot take BS that floods the airwaves and internet. That stuff should be relegated to us, the fans. We don't need on air personalities to fuel the rampant speculation and rumor spreading. We do it enough!

I'd agree with all of that.

I remember when Schefter first started he was with the NFL itself. Back then you could count on just about anything he said being true. His reliability went down when he joined ESPN.

As an aside, it makes me feel old that I can remember when there was no ESPN. Lots of younger folks never lived in that world.

I specifically remember a friend of mine coming up to me and saying "Hey, did you hear there's this new all sports channel? It's crazy!" 

(same friend was also kind enough to let me know about this new thing called HBO where you could see boobs)

[kungfoodude 3,124]

11 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd agree with all of that.

I remember when Schefter first started he was with the NFL itself. Back then you could count on just about anything he said being true. His reliability went down when he joined ESPN.

As an aside, it makes me feel old that I can remember when there was no ESPN. Lots of younger folks never lived in that world.

I specifically remember a friend of mine coming up to me and saying "Hey, did you hear there's this new all sports channel? It's crazy!" 

(same friend was also kind enough to let me know about this new thing called HBO where you could see boobs)

I was too young to remember that specifically but I can certainly remember the times before ESPN became the defacto sports news outlet. But, in reality, that has faded with the advent of the internet and social media. 

It's interesting to think about that evolution.

[Mr. Scot 58,117]

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I was too young to remember that specifically but I can certainly remember the times before ESPN became the defacto sports news outlet. But, in reality, that has faded with the advent of the internet and social media. 

It's interesting to think about that evolution.

Anybody else remember CNN-SI?

[kungfoodude 3,124]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

Anybody else remember CNN-SI?

LOL. I do.

[Mr. Scot 58,117]

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

LOL. I do.

I mean, it was actually good. Just couldn't compete with ESPN.

Edited November 12 by Mr. Scot