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!

     

It's Official: Tom Jackson to Retire after 29 years at ESPN.


nctarheel0619

Recommended Posts

RS304169_20141208_JF1_3933-660x400.jpg

NFL analyst Tom Jackson has made the decision to retire from broadcasting, concluding a remarkable 29-year career at ESPN. A Hall of Fame broadcaster, Jackson joined the company in 1987 as one of ESPN’s first NFL analysts following an outstanding 14-year playing career with the Denver Broncos. He will work his final assignment this week (Aug. 6-7) at Pro Football Hall of Fame enshrinement weekend in Canton, Ohio.

“I have been blessed in my adult life to work for two companies, the Denver Broncos and ESPN, to do two things that I love – play football and talk about football,” said Jackson.

He added: “Having joined in the early stages of ESPN and remained with the same company for 29 years is especially gratifying. The friendships made are too numerous to mention but I know that many of them will last a lifetime. I also want to thank all the fans who supported me over the years and made my job so enjoyable. This move just comes at a time when the priority of my life is spending time with my family.”

http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2016/08/espns-tom-jackson-retire-29-years/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ESPN will soon be going to poo. He started when they reported on sports that were presented in an objective manner. The people they are beginning to replace the original guys with have far less humility and show the propensity to be unable to be anything but subjective for the sake of ratings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CPcavedweller said:

ESPN will soon be going to poo. He started when they reported on sports that were presented in an objective manner. The people they are beginning to replace the original guys with have far less humility and show the propensity to be unable to be anything but subjective for the sake of ratings. 

IMO, they have already gone to poo. I can't even watch it anymore unless they're showing a game I want to see or Panthers and Tar Heel highlights.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • If his seat was hot enough for him to be fired 6 games in then you should've just fired him when you made the decision to draft a QB #1 overall. I don't think you go from "this is definitely our guy" to "you're fired in 6 games". Seems like there would be had to have been doubts going in and that's not a recipe for success for a rookie QB.
    • I like to use the analogy that a high draft pick QB is like a new supercar. Great to have one except too often, one forgets that they are high maintenance. A bad team secures their car under a cheap tent, puts regular gas in the tank, services it at Pep Boys, and then blames the car for not working properly and proceeds to get another one.  At the least, Ward getting sacked 25 times already is a massive red flag. If you can't protect your rookie QB, you do not put him out there. Otherwise, it's taking your supercar and immediately spinning it right into a tree. A few survive that rough of a start. Most do not.
    • I don't think there's any one size fits all answer. I think you play the rookie when A) you think he's ready and B) you think there's a reasonable expectation that the overall situation provides him an opportunity to be successful, not necessarily in terms of wins and losses but just in terms of giving him a fighting chance with surrounding talent. If you rush either one it's probably not gonna be pretty.
×
×
  • Create New...