Showing posts with label blog on blog action action action. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blog on blog action action action. Show all posts

Sunday, November 4, 2012

I try to avoid posting about bloggers

But this dude blogs for Yahoo so he probably makes decent money for his work (well, some money anyways).  That makes him fair game as far as I'm concerned, and besides, oh my goodness gracious what a fucking idiot.

Where does Andrew Luck ank among NFL quarterbacks at this moment? 

Well, in terms of yards passing, he's now second overall in the league.  That's pretty good, although it's also a function of the fact that his team's running backs are Donald Brown and Vick Ballard.  If you want to use ANY other metric of QB performance, you'll see that Luck ranks pretty low.  24th in QB rating.  29th in completion percentage.  Tied for 17th in touchdown passes.  I can't find a stats site that will rank the league's QBs by TD/INT ratio, but his is 1.25, and that's pretty shitty.  Luck has definitely played decently, especially for a rookie, but he's probably not among the top 20 QBs in the league.

Are there 10 quarterbacks in the league better than him? 

Yes.  There are many more than that, in fact.


Manning, Brady, Ryan, Rodgers, Roethlisberger.  And a bunch of other guys.  Fellow rookie RGIII is outplaying Luck by a pretty significant margin by passing stats alone; add in Griffin's running ability and he's way, way, way better than Luck right now.  Not that RGIII hasn't also received his share of undue hyperbolic praise.  But if someone is going to write an article about how Luck is inserting himself into the MVP discussion (oh yes, he's about to do that, just wait), it seems like "he's not even the best rookie QB in the league" is a good place to start with a counterargument.

What Luck is doing in Indianapolis so far this year is among the most impressive feats a rookie has ever pulled off. 

He's throwing for a lot of yards, in part because he's 3rd in the league in attempts per game with 42.  He's been pretty average.  I know the history of the NFL is littered with crappy rookie QB performances, but it's not like he's setting the world on fire.

Behind his NFL rookie record 433 passing yards, Indianapolis beat Miami 23-20 to improve to 5-3. In a watered-down AFC, the Colts have a great shot at a playoff berth, which is amazing.

The Colts have beaten the Packers, I'll give them that.  On the other hand they've also lost to Jacksonville and been completely humiliated by the fucking Jets.  Their remaining schedule has 5 road games and 3 home games; they play Houston twice and New England.  They'll probably finish 8-8 and if they make the playoffs it'll be predominantly a function of the AFC's shittiness.

This is the same franchise that was in serious danger of going 0-16 last year. 

It's also the same franchise that went 10-6 in 2010 and didn't really lose anyone other than Manning for 2011.  It's not like the roster was a total wasteland when Luck showed up.  They had a horrible 2011, but I doubt they were a true talent 2 win team.  Just like they're not a true talent 10 win team now.

The Colts didn't add much in the free-agent market this offseason, realizing they faced a long-term rebuilding project.

Their offense had/still has plenty of quality pieces.  Their defense put up poor numbers last year, but those were skewed by the fact that the defense spent so much time on the field because the offense was abominable.  It was probably a middle of the pack defense, give or take, as it is this year and was in 2010.  They traded for Vontae Davis during the preseason.  Not really a "we don't expect to be good this year" kind of move.  I hate to be the bearer of bad news but you're going to have give other Colts besides Luck credit for their "5-3 although we're really not that good" start.

But they added Luck. And now they are halfway to a 10-win season and a wild-card berth.  Sometimes success in the NFL is as easy as having a great quarterback.

Just ask any of the vapid talking heads on FOX or CBS's pre/postgame studio shows!  That must mean it's true!

Luck was dominant against the Dolphins. 

He was pretty good.  He completed 63% of his passes and led his team to a 3 point win, at home, against another mediocre team.  

He completed 30-of-48 passes for 433 yards, with two touchdowns and no interceptions. He broke the Colts' rookie record for passing in a game - set by Jack Trudeau with 359 yards in 1986, of course. Were you expecting someone else?

The Colts had a more memorable rookie quarterback who set records that Luck is gaining on. ESPN Stats and Info said Luck is the second rookie in NFL history with four 300-yard passing games. The other was Peyton Manning in 1998. Luck has half a season left to add to that total.

And if he keeps throwing 42 times per game, he's got a good shot at getting there.

Two Colts receivers had 100-yard games on Sunday: Donnie Avery and T.Y. Hilton. That's not exactly Swann and Stallworth. 

And those guys often get single coverage because the Colts still have Reggie Wayne, who's still really good.  

The Colts could go from a team that started 0-13, brought back a roster that isn't dramatically better than last season and had the horrible situation of coach Chuck Pagano being diagnosed with leukemia during the season, to one that goes to the playoffs. Luck's impact on the first half of this NFL season can't be overstated. 

It certainly can.  Congratulations for accomplishing the impossible, sir.

He should be considered a legitimate MVP candidate through eight games.

Not even close.

If Luck isn't already considered in the elite tier of NFL quarterbacks, 

He's not.

his inclusion on that list will be an easy decision very soon, 

He looks pretty decent so far.  Maybe in a few seasons, depending on like twenty different factors.  So basically he has as good a shot as any talented-but-mediocre-so-far rookie would have of eventually joining those ranks, which is probably worse than 50/50.

especially as the Colts start to add pieces around him. 

Yeah, maybe an elite #1 wide receiver type guy.  They certainly don't have one of those right now.  (He would benefit from the presence of a running back who's not Donald Brown or Vick Ballard, I'll concede that.)

Indianapolis picked the perfect year to be awful and earn the first overall pick.

There's a chance Luck will end up being better than other QBs picked #1 overall recently, like Newton or Stafford or Bradford.  There's even a chance he's as good as Manning or Elway one day.  And then there's also a chance he's never any better than middle of the pack, because playing QB in the NFL is fucking difficult.  Up until this point I had no strong feelings either way on Luck.  Thanks to this article, which other than the fact that it uses correct spelling/grammar/capitalization sounds like it was written by a poster at, I now hope he fails spectacularly.

Monday, November 8, 2010


So apparently there's this blog out there called Fire Joe Morgan that stole our idea for how to criticize the sports media. Kudos to them, though, because this just happened. I guess it would be even better if their blog was called Don't Retain Joe Morgan. But still. That's pretty awesome.

Now watch ESPN replace Morgan with some diptard like McCarver.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

The Mariotti Fallout

In the last few days I've read a few of the pieces about the JayBird's fall from grace. If you've been asleep at your keyboard, the sportsblogosphere has been awash with joy at Mariotti's tumble. Here are a few of the sites weighing in:

Sports By Brooks has chronicled an exhaustive list of all the times Jay's castigated a professional athlete for domestic violence issues over the last twenty years or so. It's a pretty extensive list, and the SBB post excerpts all the relevant pieces which do a clear job of exposing Jay's willingness to criticize.

Deadspin has gotten ahold of an alleged eyewitness and even a photo of both the woman and the apartment lobby in question.

Richard Deitsch at has collected a few interesting viewpoints from around the media, though he mostly discusses the vitriolic response of FJayM whipping boy Gregg Doyel. Apparently Doyel had a Mariotti-related rant on his Twitter account (quick recap of the tweets here) a few nights ago. After reading Doyel's Twitter account it is clear to me that these sportswriters have an enormous amount of time on their hands to tweet about bullshit. After reading a few of Gregg's thoughts, it's clear that in spending a great amount of his energy castigating someone before knowing the facts, he seems to lack a sense of self-awareness.

Doyel had this to say:

"My initial thought was of the irony," Doyel said. "Here's a guy who writes without pause or nuance about athlete misbehavior. There is no gray with him, only black and white. In his columns he's fired more people than Donald Trump -- and for doing the exact thing Mariotti was accused of doing the other night. I was shocked by the news, and I was disgusted."

Gregg's timing reveals that he's preposterously eager to see his own version of Jay confirmed in public. It's evident in the way he says it - carefully including the "accused of" phrase to technically cover his ass when he obviously has convicted Jay in his mind. Convicted him not because he has any factual knowledge of the events but because it's a perfect opportunity to kick an enemy when he's down.

[Aside: one of my favorite Onion sidebars ever, moderately relevant at this point: "Bully Not So Tough After Being Molested". Cringe humor. Awesome.]

Even Ochocinco seems to have grasped the fundamentals of the situation. Lord knows he's not one to withhold his thoughts.

In my opinion, the Miami Herald's Dan le Batard offers the most dispassionate and long-distance view of the situation. He points out that Mariotti is a symbol of a greater malaise within the sports world, and the overwhelming vitriol spewing out of the mainstream media and the blogosphere is disconcerting. He correctly recognizes Mariotti as a caricature who's unrepresentative of the sports media as a whole, but also suggests that the sheer glee with which his colleagues have reacted to Jay's situation is a symptom of a culture too obsessed with grabbing attention - even at the expense of core values like "fairness and fair play and compassion". It sounds a little hokey when put that way, but it rings true.

I fall in with Le Batard's take. Domestic violence isn't joyful, and an overhwelming reaction against Mariotti misses the point: he's a symbol of what people want. In a way, Jay isn't really Jay - he's just a stand-in for our own appreciation of an entertainer who stirs the pot on television and in print with a skill that infuriates but grabs attention. He's the face of our desire for entertainment. We hate that, and we hate that Jay has made a ton of money off that... but Jay wouldn't have made that dough and gotten his name in the bylines and his mug on the screen if there weren't enough of us clamoring for it. The sports media is big business, and these companies wouldn't have hired Jay if people didn't want Jay.

Don't confuse your hatred of Jay the personality's existence with a hatred of Jay as a person. I make no attempt to defend Jay's actions or personality: a quick glance at our posts reveals that we think he's an asshole, at least in print. The facts may bear out in any number of directions, and Jay has surely earned little sympathy or forgiveness. But public humiliation went out of style a few hundred years ago.

I suppose we've carved out our own little niche of the blogosphere tearing Jay up, and it's paying off enough that our traffic on the 21st went up more than twelvefold compared to the previous two Saturdays. It pains me to think that we might be making our last few posts labeled "Jay Mariotti" and may even have a moderate identity crisis soon, but at this point there's not much left to say. Let the court case come out where it will; let the eventual firing happen in its course (doubt any media employer would take him now even if the accusation proved false); let Jay go back to being whoever he was before the media conglomerates gave him the pulpit to fulminate from.

To the rest of the sports media: if we really want to attack the problem here, we should take our last opportunity to keep Jay off the air and tone down our attacks on him. Why not just let Jay slink away into whatever career might be left for him? Is that such a bad solution?

Friday, December 4, 2009

Bill Simmons - Fibber

Bill Simmons is currently in a bit of a tiff with Sports by Brooks over whether he stole an SBNation Blogger's idea about how Chris Johnson needed a better name in order to become an iconic player. The answer: it doesn't matter; KSK beat them both to the punch by a couple days.

What I (and perhaps the rest of the sports blogging world should) take umbrage with is this tweet from Simmons on the matter:

I don't read sports blogs. Sorry. Swear on my daughter's life - not true. RT @utep4321 SBB reporting your a thief!

This is a rather bold claim, coming from Simmons, who a few months ago had this to tweet:

"AJ, the emails are coming from inside the house. GET OUT, NOW!" is my single favorite sports message board comment ever.

However, that's not actually a "sports message board" comment, that's a comment on this Deadspin post.
So, in fact, Bill Simmons does read sports blogs because Deadspin is most certainly sports blog. I don't think Bill Simmons is ripping off bloggers ideas (or at least any of the good ones, ZING), and maybe his ESPN overlords don't want him acknowledging Deadspin, but still...c'mon, Bill.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

The Jay-Bird Hypocritically Deals With Erin Andrews & Celeb Culture

As you might remember,the JayBird writes for AOL Fanhouse now. Basically, he's a professional blogger. Here's his take on the Erin Andrews blowup. Basically, he excoriates the blogosphere for feeding the Andrews frenzy. While he has some points, he kind of misses the point. There's a lot of shit in this article, but I don't feel like Tolstoying it for this post. Here's the best selection:

A second-guess, this is not. I've been saying it for years. And sadly enough, I've feared it would involve Andrews, whose only sin is being good-looking and blond on a powerful television network watched predominantly by sports-and-female-loving males.

Well, shit. She's managed to get to the top of the pile in the sportscasting world almost surely because of her incredibly high rating on the conventional attractiveness scale. Though Erin herself didn't commit this sin, isn't it partially ESPN's fault for parading this sex object on the sidelines of famous football games? It's like Jay wants to excuse ESPN for marketing and profiting off Erin-Andrews-as-sex-symbol but then complains when someone actually treats Erin like a sex symbol.

Am I blaming sports bloggers and their commenters that a very disturbed person secretly videotaped Andrews as she was standing nude in her hotel room, then posted the five-minute video on the Internet?

It's not my fault.

No, I am not, even though the video was posted under the title "Hot naked blonde who looks a lot like a sports blogger favorite in her hotel room.'' But am I blaming bloggers for helping create the daily sex-and-objectification culture that turned Andrews into an ongoing peep show on their Web sites?

Look, Jay. Why don't you just blame masculine culture as a whole - the culture that can't look at a good-looking woman on television without objectifying her? That's not something exclusive to the sports-blogging world, that's something shared in any public sphere.

Occasionally glancing at such junk through the years, I was whisked into a cross between a frat boy's porn fantasies and a sports remake of Revenge of the Nerds. Who were these geeks? Why was the Internet, once again, giving semi-lives to people with no lives?

Hey Jay, didn't you recently and publicly abandon your print-media old-school ethics-bound news organization for an internet-only basically-a-blog gig?

Ironically, the internet (and the ESPNiverse) has given a semi-life to people like Mariotti - who should have no life.

My punishment for writing this, naturally, will be a full-scale assault on my character by these very sites,

A deserved assault, considering all the stupid things you've said and done in your entire career.

none of which are worthy of being mentioned on a respectable, globally regarded site such as this.

You're such a fucking big deal, Jay, that you have to remind us about how big a deal you are on AOL fucking Fanhouse.

See, these dweebs can dish out the criticism but can't take it.

Name-calling: way to go, Jay.

Rather than take on an almighty sports executive -- the real test of a sportswriter in an age when leagues and media are frequent bedfellows -- they go after media people.

What? Bloggers are afraid to take on sports execs? I don't even understand this point - in the whole article he complains about amoral bloggers who take advantage of people like Erin Andrews, but now he seems to complain about the media members who are cozied up to the leagues. That's NOT bloggers, who have very little connection to the inside sports world.

When a blog gets something right about me, for instance, I'll be the first to say so.

Jesus H. Christ, Jay. Save yourself a few bucks and mail the fifty-pound package of letters you owe us third-class. We've waited two years; we can wait a few more days.

To date, they're batting way under the Mendoza line, about .150.

He must not have read us.

A blog said I was with a "semi-hot blonde'' at an NBA party; she was a public-relations person for a player marketing a charity game.

So was the blog wrong?

A blog was woefully wrong about my salary, just guessing and never bothering to look into it.

How would they look into it? Is your salary public knowledge? Shit, Jay, there's a lot of things you rarely bother to look into.

A blog recklessly ran items that weren't remotely true when I left the
Chicago Sun-Times.

I hope he's referring to this epic post of ours. I think we can admit to being reckless, though.

A blog said I brag endlessly about our TV show in bars; when people ask about
Around The Horn, I'm friendly and answer all questions or else I'm called a jerk.

We've looked at a lot of your articles and you actually are kind of a jerk. You've made a career off being a jerk, at least in print. Who knows, Jay, maybe you are a nice guy in person.

A blog said I don't like to have pictures taken in bars; that's true, because I don't want some blogger running a picture and calling me drunk when I've had one beer.

That's your prerogative. That's pretty sensible actually - and it doesn't have a lot to do with blogs. Lots of people in this country don't want to be photographed drinking, only because there's a bit of a social stigma about being publicly drunk that extends to more people than you, Jay.

If this is the American Way, what happened to the truth and justice part?

The sort of truth created when you sign a three-year contract extension with your employer in mid-June, only to quit in early August?

A few years ago, after the blogs had their way with me during another Ozzie Guillen meltdown,

You mean last year? Or maybe the summer of 2007? Or all those other times you said stupid shit?

I had death threats in Chicago.

For the official record, that wasn't us. We just wanted to see him fired.

The newspaper ordered me to have a driver take me to U.S. Cellular Field so I would avoid possible violence in the stadium parking lots.

I'm sure you protested all night about being given such special treatment.

So, sure, the Erin Andrews case gives me the shivers, too. While I'm more Jim Belushi than George Clooney, I think I'll take a good, long look at the peephole the next time I'm in a hotel room.

Jay, you're not that important. Or even vaguely attractive. Notice that no male sportscasters ever get this shit happening to them.

And wonder what the hell happened to my profession.

Hey, that's why we're here, Jay. We wonder why people like you have important roles in it.

Monday, January 19, 2009

Can We Nitpick Blogs?

Is that allowed here at FireJay? I know we can nitpick the shit out of people who claim to be real journalists, but what about normal bloggers like us? If they say something stupid, should we be allowed to point it out? In most cases, I'd lean towards no, but in the case of Deadspin, I think they're fair game. Those guys must be millionaires with all their page hits and ad revenue! Well, I was joyfully reading about the football matches this weekend when I came across this.

Before I say anything else, just watch that video a couple times. So good. Anyways, we can have a debate all day on whether or not this was a "clean" hit, but Dashiell throws this out:

And Clark nearly did as much damage to himself as he did to McGahee. So, yes, it was a "clean" hit, but it was horrible form and not very smart. Stop throwing yourself around like guided missiles out there, because it's scary and rarely does any good.

If by "rarely does any good", you wanted to say "forced a 4th quarter turnover in the AFC Championship game and ended whatever slim hopes Baltimore had of a comeback", you'd be much more accurate. These type of hits do all sorts of good-- for the league, the players, the fans, basically everyone except Willis McGahee. Part of why the NFL is so popular is that the game is so fast, collisions like this are bound to occur. If you took these collisions away, I would argue that part of the game's integrity would also be comprimised. Ryan Clark just got tons of free press, and a step towards a nice big contract. Just ask John Lynch what a couple big hits can do $$$$$$$$$$$ for your career. Also, if you want to say that the game was out of reach, I'd point you to this game and the Broncos not making the playoffs.

A sidenote: This wasn't even the dirtiest hit in the game, if you ask me. The crackback block that Limas Sweed threw down at the end of the 1st half was insanely violent. Flacco and McGahee have to know that a safety is gonna be there to deliver a hit on a play over the middle, but the guy that Sweed blew up was in a very vulnerable position and not expecting it at all.