Who writes for NFL.com? The three stooges?

[y*so*blu]

9 hours ago, bomont said:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001055124/article/what-we-learned-from-sundays-week-2-games

I'm not talking content, but general writing ability, up to and including basic grammar. I realize most people probably don't care, but does it bother anyone else that these so-called professional writers "write" like a (drunk) 3d-grader? Has proofreading become optional? Don't they teach grammar in schools anymore? Most of you could probably do better. 

I think the people in charge of NFL.com assume no one is going to read the summaries anyway. So they hire unexceptional sportswriters to churn out awkward, listless, and poorly written copy.

For the bulk of the night, Calvin Ridley was Ryan's security blanket, the second-year game breaker leading Atlanta on the night with eight catches. His 105 yards and one score would've paced the Falcons, as well, had they lost. But then fourth-and-3 happened. Late in the final frame, Atlanta called on Ryan, who had thrown three picks already, to throw a quick screen to Julio Jones, his longtime battery mate, now paid in full. Put the ball in Jones' hands, not Ryan's. - Jeremy Bergman

Houston almost coughed up another late lead for the second straight week to open the season. Rookie quarterback Gardner Minshew drove the Jacksonville offense down the field with chunk throws and heady big runs [...] Fournette, however, was stuffed inches before the goal line, allowing the Texans (1-1) to escape without another late collapse. Houston breathed a sigh of relief but can't be thrilled by the limp defensive effort -- including more off coverage -- to close out the tilt. - Kevin Patra

Perhaps the tight end is a dynamic that has been overlooked when it comes to the Ravens offense, especially considering they want to deem themselves a threat on the ground and through the air on seemingly every play. - Michael Baca

Ugh.

Speaking of stooges, the so-called comedians they pay to come in and talk football on their videos are even worse than the writers. Who on earth wants to listen to those people?

Edited September 17, 2019 by y*so*blu

[TecmoSuperJoe]

Maybe try Sports Illustrated instead.

Edited September 17, 2019 by PapaShogun

[scottishpatriot]

I like listening to the ATN podcast on my drive into work - although I find half of them individually annoying and their bickering to be childish. I have just started with Move the Sticks and it is better. I have a soft spot for Dave Dameshek too but it's barely a football podcast at this point.  I can't stand Robert Mays - both his voice and his content - so the Ringer is out.

Any other suggestions for podcasts for someone trying to learn more about Xs and Os and deepen their understanding of the game. 

[Hunter2_1]

6 hours ago, Wyld Stallyns said:

Listen to the Around the NFL podcast and then read the article in the voice of the 4 co-hosts and you’ll get it. 

Hanzus the clown

[Hunter2_1]

2 hours ago, scottishpatriot said:

I like listening to the ATN podcast on my drive into work - although I find half of them individually annoying and their bickering to be childish. I have just started with Move the Sticks and it is better. I have a soft spot for Dave Dameshek too but it's barely a football podcast at this point.  I can't stand Robert Mays - both his voice and his content - so the Ringer is out.

Any other suggestions for podcasts for someone trying to learn more about Xs and Os and deepen their understanding of the game. 

I started with ATN, then realised they are a bunch of charlatans.

 

Ringer is good, the PFF weekly review is good (tons of stats), and Pats Pulpit podcast for us

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, bomont said:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001055124/article/what-we-learned-from-sundays-week-2-games

I'm not talking content, but general writing ability, up to and including basic grammar. I realize most people probably don't care, but does it bother anyone else that these so-called professional writers "write" like a (drunk) 3d-grader? Has proofreading become optional? Don't they teach grammar in schools anymore? Most of you could probably do better. 

 

 

It's because all internet media gets revenue based on clicks, and because it's sportswriting, not an Economist piece, writers won't lose readership over spelling or grammar mistakes (although you'll see these same problems a little less frequently in more "serious" internet journalism too).  Editors don't check for that, they just check the content for anything that the site doesn't want up or anything blatantly unprofessional, and each editor usually has a ton of writers under them, so they don't have time for it anyway.

The writers themselves can easily miss spelling or grammar mistakes because spellcheck won't notice that you put "boat" instead of "boot."  Plus, it's actually fairly difficult to proofread your own work for mistakes like that.  They're easy to miss when you're the one writing the sentence.

It's one of the sadder things about web based journalism.

[VigilantZombie]

If it were the 3 stooges itd at least be entertaining and it isnt.

[Art_Vandalay]

On 9/16/2019 at 8:30 PM, Dome said:

Good Morning Football is one of the worst football programs of all time 

Really? A lot of the segments are cheesy but I think that's the intention. Brandt, Schrager, and Burleson are funnier than anyone on any other program.

Edited September 18, 2019 by Art_Vandalay

[Jlowe22]

19 minutes ago, Art_Vandalay said:

Really? A lot of the segments are cheesy but I think that's the intention. Brandt, Schrager, and Burleson are funnier than anyone on any other program.

And Kay is fun to look at.

[Dome]

1 hour ago, Art_Vandalay said:

Really? A lot of the segments are cheesy but I think that's the intention. Brandt, Schrager, and Burleson are funnier than anyone on any other program.

Yeah, just not what I’m looking for in a Football podcast.

not enough real football analysis, too many buzzfeedesque “if these players were boybands, which ones would they be?” type segments. 

[ET80]

2 hours ago, Jlowe22 said:

And Kay is fun to look at.

Yes she is...yes, she is.

I like that GMFB group. It's not supposed to be too serious, they're supposed to be light-hearted and fun, kind of like "The Today Show" for football.

I've seen worse than that.

[Pugger]

On 9/16/2019 at 7:35 PM, bomont said:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001055124/article/what-we-learned-from-sundays-week-2-games

I'm not talking content, but general writing ability, up to and including basic grammar. I realize most people probably don't care, but does it bother anyone else that these so-called professional writers "write" like a (drunk) 3d-grader? Has proofreading become optional? Don't they teach grammar in schools anymore? Most of you could probably do better. 

 

 

It isn't just sports journalism that has gone down the toilet.

[Jlowe22]

1 hour ago, Dome said:

Yeah, just not what I’m looking for in a Football podcast.

not enough real football analysis, too many buzzfeedesque “if these players were boybands, which ones would they be?” type segments. 

I’m with you but I haven’t found that anywhere except YouTube film studies and such.  I turn NFL network on for noise and news more than anything else.  It’s not like anything else on TV is much worth watching.

[Mega Ron]

I like the ATN guys. They seem to me to be football fans and structure their content that way.

I can think of not one US sports media personality that I'd prefer to listen to ahead of them. And that includes Tony Romo, who for some reason (because he's competent perhaps?) everyone seems to think is this incredible orator. I'll tell you what Tony, you've got a nice-sounding voice and everything but I'd rather listen to country music than you tell me how a play is going to develop point 6 of a second before it happens.

Unless that is you can tell me even earlier and I can make money from various betting establishments.

[Elky]

Adam Rank is an embarrassment.