To all the McGinn Detractors

[KYPack]

I would like you to start quoting all of the scouts by name that are your sources, then. Oh wait, you don't have any connections and if you did you surely wouldn't throw them under the bus and risk their jobs. Face palm.

Have you ever considered that writers are trying to appeal to a wide audience, beyond football fanantics like yourself? The kind of stuff you steal from wikipedia or simply make up is well over the heads of 99% of the casual football fans who do not post in a forum. I bet a good chunk of these people still read a newspaper.

Your arrogance is what gets me. You have an I'm smarter than everyone else attitude, yet you're consistently wrong. McGinn, on the other hand, has a proven track record, has been extremely well respected in his industry w/ shoutouts from national journalists like Peter King, etc. What have you done? Where is your credibility to knock someone like McGinn? Writing some blog does not make you a published journalist.

BTW, still waiting on that check. PM me for my address. Be a man and admit that you were wrong.

Partial, slow way the hell down. Waldo may make the odd error in his posts, but "consistently wrong"? No way I'd characterize his posts in that manner. He does a lot of actual statistical research and posts what he thinks. Basically, he does a pretty good job of that.

McGinn?

The guy has a definite handle on the team he covers. One area of his writing that has always bothered me is a disdain for the nuts and bolts of football. He spent a whole year calling the Packers D a 4-3 over. The Packers rarely were in an over D and basically played a vanilla 4-3 under 99% of the time in the "Sanders era". That shit really bothered me.

JSO has employed writers who could care less about football basics (McGinn Silverstein, etc) or who don't have a clue about them (Lori Nickel). Most staffs have a guy with a great deal of understanding of Pro intricacies. It doesn't have a broad appeal, but it is a necessity. JSO doesn't believe in necessities anymore, I guess.

[mraynrand]

Most staffs have a guy with a great deal of understanding of Pro intricacies. It doesn't have a broad appeal, but it is a necessity.

I'd quibble with you a little on this one - I would change 'most' to 'some.' It's easier to see why in radio and TV - a lot of radio stations bring in a guy who knows the game to the last detail, and every time he starts talking, ratings plummet. It's worse on TV (think weather report on the FOX pregame show - that gives a whole new meaning to 'Boob tube'). It's a sad state of affairs for the football purists who want Xs and Os, but that stuff doesn't have as much appeal in the popular media.

[Waldo]

The critiques of McGinn on here are fair; people seem to have identified all his weaknesses. But I've read McGinn and a whole host of other beat reporters, living in NFL cities Chicago, Minneapolis, Seattle, San Fran, and Cleveland. Terry Pluto and Clare Farnsworth are thought to be among the best beat writers out there. In some ways, they are superior to McGinn - better writers, a little better internal knowledge of the game. But none of them match up with some of the in depth content of McGinn. McGinn presents more interesting and informative aspects of the game than most beat writers. He has some really annoying tendencies and some obvious flaws (mentioned above in this thread), but he compares favorably to other beat writers - even some of the best.

Rick Gosselin is a man among boys when it comes to beat writers.

One thing I really respect about him, he is his own source. He is one of the best, most accurate draft gurus out there, and one of the most knowledgeable members of the press on the history of the game. He doesn't just cover the Cowboys, he covers all teams, and his analysis of the NFL at large is some of the best.

A couple of years back the JSO used to have great draft coverage when they had Gil Brandt do some stuff for them in the spring time.

[KYPack]

Most staffs have a guy with a great deal of understanding of Pro intricacies. It doesn't have a broad appeal, but it is a necessity.

I'd quibble with you a little on this one - I would change 'most' to 'some.' It's easier to see why in radio and TV - a lot of radio stations bring in a guy who knows the game to the last detail, and every time he starts talking, ratings plummet. It's worse on TV (think weather report on the FOX pregame show - that gives a whole new meaning to 'Boob tube'). It's a sad state of affairs for the football purists who want Xs and Os, but that stuff doesn't have as much appeal in the popular media.

No, I agree with you.

The broadcast media doesn't have the time or the bandwidth to get into detail of the game.

Pro football fans don't want to hear about the labor pains, they just want to play with the baby.

The print media is another story. Every staff on a major newspaper covering a pro football team needs to have a source (preferably a person in-house) who can explain the detail of the game to the McGinns who are writing their stories.

If JSO had such a resource, a 2006 story by Lori Nickel never would have seen the light of day, much less have been printed. She interviewed Jags about the ZBS. Then she wrote a particularly execrable story about the scheme. if JSO had a football analyst on staff, he could have helped. He would have told her, "Lori, you can't file this piece of shit, he did nothing but blow smoke up your ass for 90 minutes".

But it was mind over matter. She didn't mind and it didn't matter.

Fox put your weather girl on hold for a year so she can have her baby. Maybe she will bring it to the studio so the fans can play with it, eh?

[bobblehead]

Just because he's predicted the Packers' record correctly the last two years doesn't make him a good sportswriter. People weren't unhappy with McGinn because he couldn't predict a team's success, they were unhappy because he A) lacked deep knowledge of the game he's supposed to cover, and/or B) seemed to often work without doing the legwork necessary to report rather than just speculate, and/or C) seemed to have a bias he needed to share.

This.

I don't care how well he can predict the season. Go to Vegas and get rich.

He uses his "unnamed scouts" for virtually everything he writes. Some of the stuff he says on behalf of them is laughable at best. The fact that he can't filter out the laughable at best statements just makes it worse ("Pickett can't handle the nose because he can't handle a double team." LOL).

During the Favre wars he was the most noticeably biased pro-Favre beat reporter, laying into the FO over and over.

Many of the falsehoods out there that get fans riled up, originated with him. He's been one of the leaders of the anti-ZBS crusade from day 1, doing a ridiculously poor job explaining it, and gets a jab in about it regularly. Some things he has gotten fans to believe is totally false (the whole "struggling in the red zone and on 3rd and short" is riled up by him and his constant low level gripes in the stuff he writes).

He is a fucking journalist, he isn't supposed to filter out what you consider the best and worst waldo. If he did that he would be doing exactly what you accuse him of...writing an article first and then building the facts around it.

He doesn't name the scouts becasue they would stop talking to him if he did...DUH!!!

As far as the "falsehoods" I'd have to see the article and the facts to dispute him as I don't recall him saying anything about 3rd and short. I have seen about 80% of this forum saying that though.

As far as the BF deal...I disagreed with him and I think history has shown that TT and MM did the right thing. But again, he is still merely a human being and will make mistakes. Show me a perfect journalist who's opinions never get proven wrong?

[bobblehead]

Just because he's predicted the Packers' record correctly the last two years doesn't make him a good sportswriter. People weren't unhappy with McGinn because he couldn't predict a team's success, they were unhappy because he A) lacked deep knowledge of the game he's supposed to cover, and/or B) seemed to often work without doing the legwork necessary to report rather than just speculate, and/or C) seemed to have a bias he needed to share.

I would say the fact he got the records right while most around here got them way wrong makes your point A) laughable at best.

[Fritz]

Predicting a team's record correctly two years ago doesn't translate into deep knowledge of the game.

[pbmax]

During the Favre wars he was the most noticeably biased pro-Favre beat reporter, laying into the FO over and over.

FO? Football Organization? Just curious.

I thought McGinn and Wilde were actually two of the few who gave a straight view of the Packers side of the issue. This is mainly a function of their sources. The Packers talked to the local guys (I am sure both were surprised that Thompson, Dorsey or McKenzie had their number) as well as Glazer and Schefter. Brett talked to Al Jones, Mooch, ESPN and Greta.

McGinn's opening pre-season article in 2008 (the first one he writes after the draft, at the start of camp) basically said "So the Packers decided to move on from Favre ..." gave his explanation that this decision had its genesis in meetings after the Giants game and went from there to explain why this was reasonable of Favre's abilities at this point of his career. He didn't go at them for this much after that.

Some thought he and Wilde were harsh after Favre left. Some saw this a evidence they had an agenda, I saw it as evidence the Packers stopped talking to them. Combine closed lines of communication and a 6-10 record and you will get a litany of complaints.

[pbmax]

He is a fucking journalist, he isn't supposed to filter out what you consider the best and worst waldo. If he did that he would be doing exactly what you accuse him of...writing an article first and then building the facts around it....

...As far as the "falsehoods" I'd have to see the article and the facts to dispute him as I don't recall him saying anything about 3rd and short. I have seen about 80% of this forum saying that though.

As a journalist, if you don't filter what sources are telling you then you will be writing and echoing a poor understanding or pure spin. If Waldo is right about the Pickett quote, then it gives the reader a false impression. Pickett is not Grady Jackson immovable, but he can handle a double-team. If McGinn needs to use this source to get at a different nugget of truth, then he needs to clarify with context or a differing viewpoint.

And McGinn directly blamed the ZBS emphasis on small lineman for the short yardage problems in 2006 and 2007. He rarely noted that the same ZBS lineman were much better at short yardage in 2008. The worst offense is not acknowledging Colledge (the first ZBS body type added by T2) having developed into a force as a run blocker. I still almost fall out of my chair remembering him planting Fat Pat Williams a yard deep in the endzone with a one on one block for a TD at Lambeau last year.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Partial calling someone out for not admitting they are wrong.

Ty agreeing with Rand and Bobble on assesment of McGinn.

Might be time to head back to the js online..things are getting a bit to weird here.

[retailguy]

Partial calling someone out for not admitting they are wrong.

Ty agreeing with Rand and Bobble on assesment of McGinn.

Might be time to head back to the js online..things are getting a bit to weird here.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass....

I'm just sayin.....

[Partial]

Partial calling someone out for not admitting they are wrong.

Ty agreeing with Rand and Bobble on assesment of McGinn.

Might be time to head back to the js online..things are getting a bit to weird here.

Dude, you know I'm man enough to take my medicine. Always have been, always will be.

[retailguy]

Predicting a team's record correctly two years ago doesn't translate into deep knowledge of the game.

However, predicting a teams record incorrectly around here will quickly get you ridiculed, labeled and thought of as if you don't know anything.

I love ya Fritz, but you can't have it both ways...

Overall I think McGinn does a pretty good job. Not perfect, but better than most. I'm glad to read him, find I can sort through most of the bullshit, and typically glean quality information from his stuff.

I like him a lot better than Greg Bedard, but I miss cliff a lot. Cleft is a humorous substitute, kind of like your old uncle who thought he was funnier than he was, but, in 2009 it is what it is....

[boiga]

Speaking of reporters, did you guys know that Jason Wilde is back, working for the local espn affiliate:

http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/wilde/

Is ESPN trying to get the monopoly on all sports writers around the country?

[Waldo]

Predicting a team's record correctly two years ago doesn't translate into deep knowledge of the game.

However, predicting a teams record incorrectly around here will quickly get you ridiculed, labeled and thought of as if you don't know anything.

I love ya Fritz, but you can't have it both ways...

Overall I think McGinn does a pretty good job. Not perfect, but better than most. I'm glad to read him, find I can sort through most of the bullshit, and typically glean quality information from his stuff.

I like him a lot better than Greg Bedard, but I miss cliff a lot. Cleft is a humorous substitute, kind of like your old uncle who thought he was funnier than he was, but, in 2009 it is what it is....

I didn't think that I'd miss Cliff, but I do. The guy was a prick in every sense of the word, but when it came to football, he had a level of competance none of them have nowadays.

Notice 2-3 years after Cliff ends his "keep Art Monk out of the Hall" crusade, he gets in. For years he had been #1 on the "guys that deserve to be in Canton but aren't" lists, his biggest roadblock of course was Cliff Cristl, who was the most anti-Monk voter/selector.