Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Analyzing Sports Illustrated - the WORST NFC South Preview Ever

KB_fan

By KB_fan,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

KSpan Grand Master

KSpan

Posted
Posted

Best LBs in the NFL, studs on the DL (when healthy), two of the top performing CBs in the latter half of 2014, a newly-minted $100M QB, a rookie WR that was a part of one of the best-performing rookie WR groups ever, one of the NFL's best TEs, upgraded ST coaching... yup, nothing to see in Carolina.  Can't imagine what could have possibly been written about, as it's not like the other teams are retooling to catch up with the progress that Carolina has made or anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveThePanther2008 Grand Master

DaveThePanther2008

Posted
Posted

Every point you make is 100% valid.  The blatant disrespect will always be there. 

What it looks like to me.  The plagiarist, I mean writer, did nothing more than steal a bunch of other writers garbage and write a long winded huge pile of poo (yeah I even spelled it out just for the auto-change).   He probably was too damn lazy to even pull up the Panther website to see who we actually drafted and who our coaching staff was.

Many of you all bitch and moan about Bleacher Report but IMO this garbage makes Bleacher Report look like a multi-award winning publication. Sports Illustrated has fallen to new lows.   Personally I do CBSsports.com

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PntherPryd Rookie

PntherPryd

Posted
Posted

The actual title of the article is "NFC South challengers eye rebound after season of historic lows".   I don't see where it is a division preview except in link address?

Doesn't invalidate the OP's many points, including the writer ignoring 2013, but adds some context.  The 3 losers are chasing the two-time champs but she did not write the article well because you still have to include the Panthers in any article about the other 3 trying to challenge them.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KB_fan Proficient

KB_fan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The actual title of the article is "NFC South challengers eye rebound after season of historic lows".   I don't see where it is a division preview except in link address?

Doesn't invalidate the OP's many points, including the writer ignoring 2013, but adds some context.  The 3 losers are chasing the two-time champs but she did not write the article well because you still have to include the Panthers in any article about the other 3 trying to challenge them.

@PntherPryd - when I read it yesterday it was entitled

New-look NFC South eyes rebound after season of historic lows

And the editors / headline writers had it posted with a big blazing title "NFC SOUTH PREVIEW"

I wrote the author outlining my complaints (much more politely than I did in my blog entry, hah!) and she responded with one sentence:

I'd just like to clarify: the story was not at all an NFC South preview but rather about the three teams in the division that made major overhauls in terms of coaching staffs and rosters, which Carolina did not. 

Fair enough, and that was obviously the thrust of the article, and it was interesting enough as far as that goes.  She can't necessarily help what the editors and headline writers did when they titled this "an NFC South Preview."  I get that.  

But here's what I wrote back to her, because even if she was not doing a full NFC South preview, there were problems with her leaving Carolina out the way she did:

I called her on including the rhetorical question of "why did Carolina make so few tweaks"  without providing any details about what we did or did not do:

Fair enough question.  But given what you did profiling the other three teams, why leave the question rhetorical?  It seems like you're setting up a strawman.  Even if you couldn't visit the Panthers camp in person (Spartanburg is not too far from Atlanta, you know),  you could have called David Gettleman or Ron Rivera and asked them such questions.  Your article would have been much better for that, rather than just assuming the Panthers did nothing to improve and dismissing them.  If you're not prepared to answer that question, don't ask it.  You implied they stuck their heads in the sand, which I don't think is true.... you've left me and a lot of other Panther fans feeling like SI thinks our team is not even worth discussing.

You may not have been responsible for the headline "NFC South Preview" but you wrote that the whole division was bad and was needing to improve.  Writing about one or two teams in detail and leaving out the others would have been normal, but to write about three and leave out the fourth entirely, that was strange, especially coming as it did with the not-so-veiled criticism of the team's perceived "inaction."  If the Panthers had been as 12-4 or 13-3 powerhouse and the other teams needed to re-tool to beat us that would have been one thing to not discuss our team, but you lumped us in the same boat (fairly enough) with the other teams who had losing records and needed to revamp, and then you failed to discuss our strategy to improve.  The article was simply incomplete. 

I didn't have any further response from her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveThePanther2008 Grand Master

DaveThePanther2008

Posted
Posted
 

@PntherPryd - when I read it yesterday it was entitled

New-look NFC South eyes rebound after season of historic lows

And the editors / headline writers had it posted with a big blazing title "NFC SOUTH PREVIEW"

I wrote the author outlining my complaints (much more politely than I did in my blog entry, hah!) and she responded with one sentence:

Fair enough, and that was obviously the thrust of the article, and it was interesting enough as far as that goes.  She can't necessarily help what the editors and headline writers did when they titled this "an NFC South Preview."  I get that.  

But here's what I wrote back to her, because even if she was not doing a full NFC South preview, there were problems with her leaving Carolina out the way she did:

I called her on including the rhetorical question of "why did Carolina make so few tweaks"  without providing any details about what we did or did not do:

I didn't have any further response from her.

Probably you hurt her feelings.....  You're so mean. 

Isn't that sad.  Atlanta working for S.I. and cannot carry her ass a couple hours up the road to get some first hand info.

My previous post nails it if you ask me.   She compiled a bunch of half-ass written articles, used them as her research and wrote a half ass 2600 work piece of crap.    

I love that you confront her I am sure she is still babbling figures no one would call her out. 

Good Job

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PntherPryd Rookie

PntherPryd

Posted
Posted
 

 

I called her on including the rhetorical question of "why did Carolina make so few tweaks"  without providing any details about what we did or did not do:

I didn't have any further response from her.

You are spot on about that.  It is actually a good premise for an article.  Tampa we knew that they were going to continue making changes, but falcons and saints were in it till the last games last year, why did they each feel the need to blow things up and start over?

I'll take "Carolina Panthers" for $2000 Alex.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...