ConcreteBoard

Eagles => Eagles Talk => Topic started by: Zanshin on August 16, 2005, 09:15:32 AM

Title: Media Coverage
Post by: Zanshin on August 16, 2005, 09:15:32 AM
So, I'm on the Red Zone this morning, sifting through the reports/columns on last night's game.  And it really sticks out that the overall tone of the coverage is even more doom-and-gloom than usual. 

I mean, did the reporters watch anything other than the first couple of plays?  Are they just trying to stoke the T.O. fires some more?

Last time I checked, the preseason was an opportunity to get in sync and to see younger players in specific game situations.  So, the value of the game is more in individual plays than it is a collaborative game-strategy exercise.

Special teams looked like junk, absolutely.  But there were quite a number of positives, too.  And the whole "camp was chaos, so the team is in disarray and it shows" stuff is crap.  I mean, when's the last time the Eagles looked really sharp in preseason action?  They always look pretty much like they did last night.

The media is getting more retarded all the time.  Really bothers me, because I think the agenda they have is to create and/or prolong negative coverage...and that flies in the face of actual journalism.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: PhillyGirl on August 16, 2005, 09:20:51 AM
Yup, read the articles all over the place and all were saying the Eagles are in big, big trouble. Even on Comcast SportNet...on the SportsRise show...they were making it out to seem like they sucked up the joint.

I especially liked it when the idiot anchor called Chris Samp, Chris STAMP.

Its your hometown team and you can't get the name right? farging toolbag.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: MadMarchHare on August 16, 2005, 09:21:47 AM
In the media's defense, this is from Sheridan:

QuoteLook, it's ridiculous to overreact to this game either way. If you kicked in the TV after that horrendous beginning - the Steelers scored two touchdowns before their offense took the field - you're not going to make it through the season. If you think Reggie Brown can step in and be T.O. right away, you're just not being realistic.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: PhillyGirl on August 16, 2005, 09:23:23 AM
Quote from: MadMarchHare on August 16, 2005, 09:21:47 AM
In the media's defense, this is from Sheridan:

QuoteLook, it's ridiculous to overreact to this game either way. If you kicked in the TV after that horrendous beginning - the Steelers scored two touchdowns before their offense took the field - you're not going to make it through the season. If you think Reggie Brown can step in and be T.O. right away, you're just not being realistic.

Sheridan, when he's not kissing the Eagles' FO's collective asses, is a pretty good writer.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: Seabiscuit36 on August 16, 2005, 09:31:46 AM
On 1290am the Ticket here in DE the morning show is The First Team on Fox with Steve Czaban and Scott Linn were boggled by how so many other media outlets think the eagles are in trouble without TO and how so many media morons were saying that the eagles will lose 8 game this year.  They felt the eagles despite they're WR's being young the eagles have always had ok receivers who fit well into the scheme.  They compared the Star WR to a car.  The star receiver would be the Blaupunkt stereo with woofers and tweeters while the factory stereo still would get the job done. 
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: MURP on August 16, 2005, 09:34:24 AM
what Z, finally realizing the Philly Sports media is awful?  ;)
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: MURP on August 16, 2005, 09:38:53 AM
just to get the daily Eckel rip in:

QuoteWith Todd Pinkston out for the year with a ruptured Achilles' tendon and Terrell Owens out until tomorrow when he brings his circus back to town, the trio of Greg Lewis, rookie Reggie Brown and Billy McMullen were impressive.

Other than that, it was a disaster.

he then goes on to all the bad plays.     :-D

Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: PhillyGirl on August 16, 2005, 09:40:05 AM
What was a disaster other than the ST?

Anyone?

Bueller?
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: ice grillin you on August 16, 2005, 09:43:10 AM
On 1290am the Ticket here in DE the morning show is The First Team on Fox with Steve Czaban and Scott Linn

linn is from philly and huge eagles fan...im surprised at czaban though....hes a huge taterskins fan...tho hardly biased...hes the guy that bashed joe gibbs so much last year on washington sports radio that gibbs boycotted the station
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: BigEd76 on August 16, 2005, 10:13:01 AM
Quote from: PhillyGirl on August 16, 2005, 09:40:05 AM
What was a disaster other than the ST?

Detmer
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: PhillyGirl on August 16, 2005, 10:15:14 AM
Quote from: BigEd76 on August 16, 2005, 10:13:01 AM
Quote from: PhillyGirl on August 16, 2005, 09:40:05 AM
What was a disaster other than the ST?

Detmer

And we all know that if McNabb ever got seriously hurt, Koy would finish the game and McMahon would be the starter for the next, so I don't see how that's really a disaster.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: ice grillin you on August 16, 2005, 10:56:41 AM
i thought the pass protection was weak...but by no means a disaster

the game was a success...theres no way you can argue against that
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: MadMarchHare on August 16, 2005, 11:41:57 AM
That was my only real concern, that even the starting Oline still struggles with the 3-4 alignment.  Especially Honeybuns.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: TempleOwl on August 16, 2005, 11:52:20 AM
Quote from: Seabiscuit36 on August 16, 2005, 09:31:46 AM
On 1290am the Ticket here in DE the morning show is The First Team on Fox with Steve Czaban and Scott Linn were boggled by how so many other media outlets think the eagles are in trouble without TO and how so many media morons were saying that the eagles will lose 8 game this year.  They felt the eagles despite they're WR's being young the eagles have always had ok receivers who fit well into the scheme.  They compared the Star WR to a car.  The star receiver would be the Blaupunkt stereo with woofers and tweeters while the factory stereo still would get the job done. 

The Wilmington News Journal also gave a pretty even and realistic accounting of the game.  One thing I noticed was the starting WR tandem being really, really open against the Steeler's first team, very good defense.  I thought that was a key.  Our ST always suck in preseason, they are trying guys out there who may not make the team otherwise.  Also, our real punter wasn't playing.  Donovan's INT looked like a WR screw up to me.  All-in-all our offense scored 31 points theirs scored 17.  I thought that even the ESPN team tried not to say the Eagles were in trouble without TO.  I thought the game was an overall success.  D hardly played, the offense did some god things, no one got hurt.  The rest is all bullshtein...
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: Beermonkey on August 16, 2005, 12:02:54 PM
Quote from: PhillyGirl on August 16, 2005, 10:15:14 AM
Quote from: BigEd76 on August 16, 2005, 10:13:01 AM
Quote from: PhillyGirl on August 16, 2005, 09:40:05 AM
What was a disaster other than the ST?

Detmer

And we all know that if McNabb ever got seriously hurt, Koy would finish the game and McMahon would be the starter for the next, so I don't see how that's really a disaster.

and unitl that happens, he was disaster last night.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: PhillyGirl on August 16, 2005, 12:05:55 PM
OK, a disaster that MATTERS. LOL
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: Rome on August 16, 2005, 12:26:30 PM
How anyone sees this team losing 8 games with the defense they have and the division they play in is beyond me.

I see four losses, tops, with or without Owens.

farging defeatist doomsayers make me wanna vomit.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: sallad selgae on August 16, 2005, 12:27:49 PM
Quote from: MadMarchHare on August 16, 2005, 11:41:57 AM
That was my only real concern, that even the starting Oline still struggles with the 3-4 alignment. Especially Honeybuns.
No cause for alarm.  Hammering Hank will be eating up the 3-4 by the time the season starts as easily as he can eat up 3-4 Tastykakes.  This is a sponsor's guarantee.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: MURP on August 16, 2005, 12:43:05 PM
the 3-4 has always given Honey Buns some troubles.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: JTrotter Fan on August 16, 2005, 01:10:44 PM
This is why i don't get the media.  What exactly did the Steelers first string offense do?  Nothing..nothing at all.  Look at Greasy Cheeseburgers stats.  They were crap. 
At least the Eagles and McNabb put a drive together.  So the ST had a mishap...well a couple anyway...big friggin deal.  It's one lousy pre-season game.  When have the Eagles gone better than 2-2 in pre-season since 1999?  Maybe once if at all. 
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: PoopyfaceMcGee on August 16, 2005, 01:17:04 PM
Winning pre-season games was very important to Ray Rhodes.


Ray Rhodes is no longer a head coach in the NFL.
Title: Re: Media Coverage
Post by: PhillyPhreak54 on August 16, 2005, 01:25:06 PM
It was important to Steve Spurrier too. Remember the love-fest after he opened up his entire playbook and played his starters too long against SF in the Tokyo Bowl?