A LITTLE TEDDY ARTICLE ON YAHOO SPORTS...

[gbgary]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AtaQSvokNHYwU.ZXKgSFa6VDubYF?slug=ms-8questions011211

[vince]

Thanks for posting that GB. Liked the article. Hated the headline. Thompson explicitly avoided saying anything that could be construed to be an "I told you so." Totally inaccurate and unfair to project that onto him.

[Joemailman]

I wasn't impressed with the fact that he chose to answer for Thompson a question Thompson felt would be inappropriate to answer. A professional journalist would have pointed out Thompson chose not to answer the question, and let the reader draw their own conclusion. My guess is this guy has conducted his last interview with Ted Thompson.

[Scott Campbell]

Thanks for posting that GB. Liked the article. Hated the headline. Thompson explicitly avoided saying anything that could be construed to be an "I told you so." Totally inaccurate and unfair to project that onto him.


I think the article makes it clear Ted didn't say it. The important thing is, he could have said it.

[HowardRoark]

I don’t think the concept of checking sources, etc. is part of Journalism Schools anymore. It is more or less “this is what I think and I will shoehorn the world around me into that reality…….and then report it as quasi truth.”

[Scott Campbell]

I don’t think the concept of checking sources, etc. is part of Journalism Schools anymore. It is more or less “this is what I think and I will shoehorn the world around me into that reality…….and then report it as quasi truth.”

I don't see how anyone would confuse this column with a news article. It's an opinion piece.

[bobblehead]

So vince what do you think about Obama.

Vince: "No comment"

So what you really mean is he is a terrible scumbag kenyan native...at least that is what I wish you had said, so let me write an article saying so.

[Joemailman]

It seemed to me to be an interview that turned into an opinion piece because Thompson wouldn't answer a certain question.

[vince]

I think the article makes it clear Ted didn't say it. The important thing is, he could have said it.

Liked the article. Hated the headline.
Most people don't read the article. He explicitly avoided saying it so as not to create the wrong impression. Whoever wrote the headline didn't care about making shit up and making the Packers look petty.

[Scott Campbell]

I buy that - the headline sucks.

[gbgary]

I don't see how anyone would confuse this column with a news article. It's an opinion piece.
THIS! cool article. didn't think he was being disrespectful to tt. i haven't always been the biggest tt fan but over time he's really grown on me. now if someone would just bump mm when he freezes up. ;-)

[MJZiggy]

I have my opinions about journalism and journalists and I think I've made them pretty clear in the past, but the question on my mind is, Ben Roethlisberger has a fiancee? Someone agreed to marry that piece of shit?

[gbgary]

I have my opinions about journalism and journalists and I think I've made them pretty clear in the past, but the question on my mind is, Ben Roethlisberger has a fiancee? Someone agreed to marry that piece of shit?

some people can overlook a lot of stuff. just look at deanna f.

[mraynrand]

I don't see how anyone would confuse this column with a news article. It's an opinion piece.

It's an interview. The interview is itself the news. Typically, the interviewer inserts him/herself into the story by virtue of the questions and follow-up questions they ask. They should not go further than that. If they do, it's then a commentary. In other words, it's poor journalism, but very typical of our age to insert personal commentary into an interview or news story.

[mraynrand]

I have my opinions about journalism and journalists and I think I've made them pretty clear in the past, but the question on my mind is, Ben Roethlisberger has a fiancee? Someone agreed to marry that piece of shit?

stop inserting commentary into your news reports

[Scott Campbell]

It's an interview.


It's a column.

He asked Ted one question. As in singular. And the included it within his opinion piece.

[mraynrand]

It's a column.

He asked Ted one question. As in singular. And the included it within his opinion piece.


That's what I get for making a general statement without reading the piece in question. I just failed journalism 101.

[HowardRoark]

He said "looked flaccid."

[HowardRoark]

I guess this is just a sore subject for me these days with the reporting about what is going on down in Arizona. A severely mentally disturbed person committed a horrific crime. End of very sad story…….and look what we got out it from our crackerjack journalists.

It was a good read (The TT article) by the way.

[mraynrand]

"Midway through the ’10 campaign little Favre looked flaccid before a late rally pushed him into ...(censored)."

[Little Whiskey]

He asked Ted one question. As in singular. And the included it within his opinion piece.


When I threw out a question about his team’s achievement.....


Then I asked Thompson a question I’d been curious about for awhile

looks like two questions to me. two as in plural.

[HowardRoark]

I just failed journalism 101.

You can't tie your shoes by yourself?

[bobblehead]

He said "looked flaccid."

Was he asked about the pics to Jen Sterger??

[MJZiggy]

You can't tie your shoes by yourself?I thought they used velcro sneakers...

[mraynrand]

You can't tie your shoes by yourself?


I thought they used velcro sneakers...


I'm working on it, just give me a little more time

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ZI9ZC-oL5KQ/SNjKxQTcjnI/AAAAAAAADoM/HTX4KyOGOVc/s400/Jim-Carrey---Dumb-Dumber--C10102378.jpeg

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think the article was obvious that it was the writer's opinion. Silver has been on the Thompson bandwagon this whole time. I'd cut him some slack. I'm guessing Thompson gave him an interview for that reason.

[Fritz]

I have my opinions about journalism and journalists and I think I've made them pretty clear in the past, but the question on my mind is, Ben Roethlisberger has a fiancee? Someone agreed to marry that piece of shit?

Yes. Mr. Hanky's daughter.

[RashanGary]

I think the article was obvious that it was the writer's opinion. Silver has been on the Thompson bandwagon this whole time. I'd cut him some slack. I'm guessing Thompson gave him an interview for that reason.

I didn't like how he said something like Ted T woudln't come out and gloat in front of everyone but he did take me aside. As he went on, Ted never did gloat, not even a little, but right from teh start, the impression was that Ted did a little gloating. I didn't like that.

But it's no different than McGinn. That's what good writers do now-a-days. They create interest be it reality or not.

[vince]

If the Yahoo Sports process is typical, the editor most likely wrote the headline - not the columnist.

[mraynrand]

I didn't like how he said something like Ted T woudln't come out and gloat in front of everyone but he did take me aside. As he went on, Ted never did gloat, not even a little, but right from teh start, the impression was that Ted did a little gloating. I didn't like that.

But it's no different than McGinn. That's what good writers do now-a-days. They create interest be it reality or not.


I can't believe you wrote that. McGinn does full interviews. He routinely interviews Thompson after games and directly quotes him. McGinn writes separate opinion pieces from his reporting and the difference between the two types of articles is obvious.

[MichiganPackerFan]

I don't see how anyone would confuse this column with a news article. It's an opinion piece.

Agreed. And a fun one to read at that. SOmeone beat me to the comment that the headline probably wasn't writted by the author. I've always felt we had a really good duo in TT & MM and I think this season just validates that.

[pbmax]

I can't believe you wrote that. McGinn does full interviews. He routinely interviews Thompson after games and directly quotes him. McGinn writes separate opinion pieces from his reporting and the difference between the two types of articles is obvious.

The same is true of Silver. At least it was back in SI, I do not know if he writes game recaps for Yahoo. If it had a traditional by-line, say the Super Bowl recap, it was a straight magazine story. But if it had his little picture and his name at the top, it was opinion. That Yahoo story had him pictured at the top of the page. There is very little room for confusion. The fact that none of the other quotes are in here seem to point to an opinion/speculation piece based on an answer Thompson wouldn't give and the interview portion may have been used elsewhere.

And he does quote Thompson's exact answer to the question he wished to avoid. You really have to want it for this to look like the secrets of Thompson.

I do grant that the byline along, with or without picture is an odd and subdued way to make an important distinction, but its pretty traditional.

[RashanGary]

We can jump through hoops of technicality, but for me it's a simple smell test. Does this story mislead? If the answer is yes, I don't respect it. If the answer is no, I do respect it.

For all of McGinn's strengths, there are articles where he used Thompson's words and filled in the blanks in ways that were either idiotic or dishonest. I give McGinn too much credit with his intelligence, hence I think he's a snake.

[pbmax]

We can jump through hoops of technicality, but for me it's a simple smell test. Does this story mislead? If the answer is yes, I don't respect it. If the answer is no, I do respect it.

For all of McGinn's strengths, there are articles where he used Thompson's words and filled in the blanks in ways that were either idiotic or dishonest. I give McGinn too much credit with his intelligence, hence I think he's a snake.

The problem with that test Justin is that everyone is at the mercy of the weakest reader or the reader with an agenda of their own. Weak readers can be easily misled or confused. Those with an agenda can object to almost anything.l

I actually prefer either straight advocacy or bland recitations of facts. Almost everything in between makes a hash out of the subject and its relevant points.

[RashanGary]

And that's exactly the problem. After a good (IMO horrible) article by McGinn, half of Green Bay and 70% of Milwaukee are running around bitching about McGinn's insinuations. 2, 3, 4, 5 years later Ted is ripping it up and the things that were written are merely forgotten.

I give the guy credit for his sources and for his detail in much of what he does. But when it comes to opinions, and using Ted's words to write stories, I'm just baffled by how irresponsible he is. The bad ones come in the offseason and they read more like a guy who's throwing a fit and filling in the blanks because Ted wouldn't do it for him.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Pretty good article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune also.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/113462979.html?elr=KArksi8cyaiU9PmP:QiUiD3aPc:_Yyc :aUM2H_MDCiU


Packers can thank Favre for producing Matthews
Posted by Mark Craig, Minneapolis Star Tribune

While wondering if Jay Cutler is aware that Brad Biggs of the Chicago Tribune did some research and discovered a that quarterbacks making their playoff debuts are 5-19 since 2003 ...

FIRST DOWN:

The first sentence of my column the day the Packers traded Brett Favre to the Jets in 2008 went like this: GREEN BAY, WIS. -- The Green Bay Packers handled a difficult situation beautifully.

I'm still recovering from the e-beatin' I took. Vikings fans ripped me. Favre fans torched me. Ted Thompson haters were even more PO'd.

Former Packer and then-Vikings safety Darren Sharper, a big TT Hate-ah, supposedly was asking for me as he walked onto the practice field in Mankato. I wasn't there, but he politely told me later on that I was completely nuts.

Favre made it personal between himself and Thompson. Thompson had a viable replacement he felt would become an elite QB in Aaron Rodgers. So Thompson dumped Favre outside the conference in New York for a conditional fourth-round draft pick.

I thought a fourth-rounder was a steal for a soon-to-be 40-year-old who had already played 17 seasons. A year later, that steal became a ridiculous steal, a third-rounder because Favre played more than 50 percent of the Jets' snaps.

I mention this now because in a few weeks, Clay Matthews is expected to be named NFL Defensive Player of the Year.

And what does that have to do with the Favre trade, you ask?

Well, in 2009, Thompson packaged that third-round pick with others in a trade with New England that gave Ted the 26th overall draft pick. And with that pick, Thompson selected Matthews, who wasn't exactly a star at USC. Now, Matthews is about to be named the league's best defensive player.

SECOND DOWN:

I also was in favor of the Vikings trading a third-round pick for Randy Moss this season. I was wrong and this is why you wouldn't want me matching wits with Ted Thompson.

I assumed Moss was the missing piece and wouldn't act like a jackass since he was in the last year of his contract and would like to make a few more millions down the road.

As we all know, Moss lasted 26 days before Chilly snapped and threw Moss out the door. Then Zygi threw Chilly out the door awhile later.

So, to recap: The Packers got 16 years out of a future Hall of Fame quarterback and then traded him for a third-round draft pick that netted them Clay Matthews, who will be around for another decade or so. That's pushing 30 years for two players. Meanwhile, the Vikings took a third-round draft pick and turned it into a 26-day rental of a player who couldn't co-exist with his head coach.

It's at this point where I'd like to remind any Wilves reading this the virtues of having a good general manager to run your team.

THIRD DOWN:

Michael Silver of yahoo.com has an interesting column on Thompson. Ted is a brilliant GM, and this year's Packers team is proving that. The team has 15 players in IR, including six starters. Week after week, unsung no-names that Thompson found late in the draft or off the street are stepping up with monster games. Whether it's recent street free agent Erik Walden racking up 16 tackles and three sacks in a must-win game over the Bears, or running back James Starks, a sixth-round rookie who didn't even play as a senior at the University of Buffalo, Thompson's fingerprints are all over this team. And that's in addition to Ted's first move as Packers' GM -- selecting Rodgers 24th overall a few years back -- and then working with coach Mike McCarthy, whom he also hired, to stick with Rodgers when Favre decided to unretire.

Silver cornered the media-shy Thompson after last week's playoff win at Philly -- the first for the franchise in the post-Favre era. He asked Thompson if he really knew Rodgers would be this good when he made the move with Favre in 2008.

“I’m not going to touch that,” Thompson said. “I don’t think it’s appropriate.”

But you know that he and McCarthy knew exactly how good Rodgers would be. Otherwise, they wouldn't have been able to stand up to Favre, risk their careers and do what was best for the franchise for the long haul.

The Vikings made the right move bringing in Favre in 2009. It didn't cost them anything other than Zygi's money, and he was light years better than anything they had on the roster. The Vikings also can't be blamed for bringing him back this season after leading them to the NFC title game the year before.

They did what they had to do. But now it's time to learn from the Packers and get this QB mess cleaned up and pointed in the right direction long-term. Everything else is No. 2 on the To-Do list.

FOURTH DOWN:

So how would you rate the quarterbacks left in this year's playoffs? Here's my list:

1, Tom Brady, Patriots. Duh.

2, Ben Roethlisberger, Steelers. Some would say Rodgers, but give me the guy with two rings first.

3, Rodgers, Packers. He can carry an offense, but might not have to since Starks has emerged.

4, Matt Ryan, Falcons. He's got the No. 1 seed and he's 20-2 at home.

5, Joe Flacco, Ravens. He's played six playoff games in three season. All of them on the road. And he's 4-2.

6, Matt Hasselbeck, Seahawks. Don't count the old, bange-up vet out just yet. He's 1-0 in Chicago this year.

7, Mark Sanchez, Jets. He's a clutch player, but way too inconsistent and inaccurate at this point.

8, Jay Cutler, Bears. He's the only one of the eight who has no playoff experience. He's also the most likely to freak out and throw four picks.

[mraynrand]

"Wilves?"

[Cheesehead Craig]

The problem with that test Justin is that everyone is at the mercy of the weakest reader or the reader with an agenda of their own. Weak readers can be easily misled or confused. Those with an agenda can object to almost anything.l

I actually prefer either straight advocacy or bland recitations of facts. Almost everything in between makes a hash out of the subject and its relevant points.

Wait, I'm confused by your stance.

[Little Whiskey]

8, Jay Cutler, Bears. He's also the most likely to freak out and throw four picks.[/CODE]

a man can only hope!

[mraynrand]

"5, Joe Flacco, Ravens. He's played six playoff games in three season. All of them on the road. And he's 4-2.
6, Matt Hasselbeck, Seahawks. Don't count the old, bange-up vet out just yet. He's 1-0 in Chicago this year.
7, Mark Sanchez, Jets. He's a clutch player, but way too inconsistent and inaccurate at this point.
8, Jay Cutler, Bears. He's the only one of the eight who has no playoff experience. He's also the most likely to freak out and throw four picks."


That stat about Flacco is impressive. The Ravens can't get a home game! (good)


I don't know about 7 and 8. Sure Cutler could freak out, but Sanchez is just horrible. If Ryan hadn't taken the ball out of his hands and if Braying Jackass Edwards hadn't caught Sanchez' pop up, the Jets would be golfing now, because Sanchez can't throw an accurate ball to save his life.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Nice!


So, to recap: The Packers got 16 years out of a future Hall of Fame quarterback and then traded him for a third-round draft pick that netted them Clay Matthews, who will be around for another decade or so. That's pushing 30 years for two players. Meanwhile, the Vikings took a third-round draft pick and turned it into a 26-day rental of a player who couldn't co-exist with his head coach.

[HarveyWallbangers]

What's funny about Flacco is that he has been awful in 5 of those 6 games. The Ravens have won despite him. This last game was the first one he played well in. I actually like Flacco, but check out these numbers.

W MIA 27-9 - 9 of 23 for 135 yards with 0 TDs and 0 ints
W TEN 13-10 - 11 of 22 for 161 yards with 1 TD and 0 ints
L PIT 14-23 - 13 of 30 for 141 yards with 0 TDs and 3 ints
W NE 14-33 - 4 of 10 for 34 yards with 0 TDs and 1 int
L IND 3-20 - 20 of 35 for 185 yards with 0 TDs and 2 ints

So, at that point Flacco was 3-2 in the playoffs but had 1 TD, 6 interceptions, 47.5 completion %, and averaged 131.2 passing yards/game.

In the meantime, ARod is only 1-1 in the playoffs but has 7 TDs, 1 interception, 66.7 completion %, and averaged 301.5 passing yards/game.

Flacco is a winner though and Rodgers is a choker. :roll:

[gbgary]

So, to recap: The Packers got 16 years out of a future Hall of Fame quarterback and then traded him for a third-round draft pick that netted them Clay Matthews, who will be around for another decade or so. That's pushing 30 years for two players. Meanwhile, the Vikings took a third-round draft pick and turned it into a 26-day rental of a player who couldn't co-exist with his head coach.

Nice!

LOL

[mraynrand]

What's funny about Flacco is that he has been awful in 5 of those 6 games. The Ravens have won despite him. This last game was the first one he played well in. I actually like Flacco, but check out these numbers.

W MIA 27-9 - 9 of 23 for 135 yards with 0 TDs and 0 ints
W TEN 13-10 - 11 of 22 for 161 yards with 1 TD and 0 ints
L PIT 14-23 - 13 of 30 for 141 yards with 0 TDs and 3 ints
W NE 14-33 - 4 of 10 for 34 yards with 0 TDs and 1 int
L IND 3-20 - 20 of 35 for 185 yards with 0 TDs and 2 ints

So, at that point Flacco was 3-2 in the playoffs but had 1 TD, 6 interceptions, 47.5 completion %, and averaged 131.2 passing yards/game.

In the meantime, ARod is only 1-1 in the playoffs but has 7 TDs, 1 interception, 66.7 completion %, and averaged 301.5 passing yards/game.

Flacco is a winner though and Rodgers is a choker. :roll:


9,10,14 points given up in those three wins. You'd have to suck as bad as Sanchez to lose with defense like that.

[mraynrand]

Flacco is a winner though and Rodgers is a choker. :roll:

Now don't get testy! From the same article:

3, Rodgers, Packers. He can carry an offense, but might not have to since Starks has emerged.

This guy certainly thinks more highly of Rodgers. (The Starks comment is highly premature)

[Patler]

What's funny about Flacco is that he has been awful in 5 of those 6 games. The Ravens have won despite him. This last game was the first one he played well in. I actually like Flacco, but check out these numbers.

W MIA 27-9 - 9 of 23 for 135 yards with 0 TDs and 0 ints
W TEN 13-10 - 11 of 22 for 161 yards with 1 TD and 0 ints
L PIT 14-23 - 13 of 30 for 141 yards with 0 TDs and 3 ints
W NE 14-33 - 4 of 10 for 34 yards with 0 TDs and 1 int
L IND 3-20 - 20 of 35 for 185 yards with 0 TDs and 2 ints

So, at that point Flacco was 3-2 in the playoffs but had 1 TD, 6 interceptions, 47.5 completion %, and averaged 131.2 passing yards/game.

In the meantime, ARod is only 1-1 in the playoffs but has 7 TDs, 1 interception, 66.7 completion %, and averaged 301.5 passing yards/game.

Flacco is a winner though and Rodgers is a choker. :roll:

What, you aren't impressed by Flacco's "sub 50" QB rating in leading his team to 3-2 in the playoffs? :lol:

Funny, isn't it? Some made a big deal about Rodgers "never winning a playoff game" and now "getting the playoff monkey off his back." He had played in exactly one playoff game, and had one of the best playoff performances in Packer history by a QB. He lead them to a ton of points and a great late game comeback. Yet somehow all of that was viewed negatively.

Flacco played like crap for 5 games, but is a "winner" and an asset in the playoffs. :roll:

[vince]

[QUOTE=HarveyWallbangers;565795]Pretty good article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune also.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/113462979.html?elr=KArksi8cyaiU9PmP:QiUiD3aPc:_Yyc :aUM2H_MDCiU

What a great article. Why does it take writers from the markets of all the other teams in the league to recognize the job Ted Thompson has done in Green Bay?

[vince]

What, you aren't impressed by Flacco's "sub 50" QB rating in leading his team to 3-2 in the playoffs? :lol:

Funny, isn't it? Some made a big deal about Rodgers "never winning a playoff game" and now "getting the playoff monkey off his back." He had played in exactly one playoff game, and had one of the best playoff performances in Packer history by a QB. He lead them to a ton of points and a great late game comeback. Yet somehow all of that was viewed negatively.

Flacco played like crap for 5 games, but is a "winner" and an asset in the playoffs. :roll:
Yep, it's dumb and the sad part is it isn't ever going to change.

[get louder at lambeau]

Why does it take writers from the markets of all the other teams in the league to recognize the job Ted Thompson has done in Green Bay?

Because Thompson didn't get Marshawn Lynch, traded away Faver, didn't get Randy Moss, and didn't follow any of the other short-sighted suggestions the GB reporters advocated either.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't blame the reporters. Quite honestly, I think most in the Wisconsin market have been relatively fair to Thompson. At least, the ones I've read. Of course, I don't listen to radio stations out there. It's the fans that have been short-sighted. Many of them anyways.

[Cheesehead Craig]

What, you aren't impressed by Flacco's "sub 50" QB rating in leading his team to 3-2 in the playoffs? :lol:

Funny, isn't it? Some made a big deal about Rodgers "never winning a playoff game" and now "getting the playoff monkey off his back." He had played in exactly one playoff game, and had one of the best playoff performances in Packer history by a QB. He lead them to a ton of points and a great late game comeback. Yet somehow all of that was viewed negatively.

Flacco played like crap for 5 games, but is a "winner" and an asset in the playoffs. :roll:

Flacco is so overrated it's sickening.

[MJZiggy]

I don't blame the reporters. Quite honestly, I think most in the Wisconsin market have been relatively fair to Thompson. At least, the ones I've read. Of course, I don't listen to radio stations out there. It's the fans that have been short-sighted. Many of them anyways.

Are you saying that the reporters have been pandering to the whims of the readership? That could hardly be called journalism.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Nope. I'm saying they've been relatively fair.

[pbmax]

Wait, I'm confused by your stance.

Yes, this was a good example of writing hash. I should have said that if I am relatively well informed about a subject, I can read anything with a critical eye and perhaps even learn something from it, even if it is mostly terrible. I, somewhat less than humbly, think pro football falls into this category for me.

However, for subjects that I follow less, I find that newspaper and magazine articles that try to give a quick overall picture or cover two or more opposing viewpoints tend to make for less understanding than for more. In my experience, anyway. Then I prefer a basic recitation of facts and factors, and then straight advocacy for one position or another. Because then I have some idea of the overall terrain and where the various interests lay.

[Pugger]

I have my opinions about journalism and journalists and I think I've made them pretty clear in the past, but the question on my mind is, Ben Roethlisberger has a fiancee? Someone agreed to marry that piece of shit?

No kidding.

[pbmax]

Sports Writing Narrative Mad Libs.

Player A is (highly drafted/never saw him profiled on ESPN) and therefore has (tremendous physical talent/humble-gritty-lunch pail-hardworker-smart) characteristics. So far in a young career, Player A has had (tremendous results/mixed results/terrible results) mostly due to (overwhelming physical ability/learning curve/factors beyond Player A control). Of course, one player (not even A) can carry a team by themselves so (playoff failure/poor play) might be influenced by (lack of clutch/in love with themselves-don't trust teammates/first round picks who aren't carrying their weight).

Coach B has a knack for (offense/defense/media schmoozing) so of course (success/high expectations/failure to develop) was expected. But recent events (playoff loss/losing streak/loss to rival) indicates that Player A still needs to (mature/find a clutch/get grittier teammates) to find ultimate success (cover of Madden/interview with Bradshaw-Costas-Cowher).