Jump to content

Least Favorite Sports Show Personality


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 322
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

it's absolute insanity to questions collinsworth's greatness. he and al michaels are the GOAT announcing team.

Whitlock did a hit piece on Bomani today. Prior to this, I thought he and Bomani were boys. Bomani goes out of his way to defend Whitlock, and he's basically the only one on #BlackTwitter who capes fo

Joe Buck acts like he is God's gift to announcing. Also because he always hates on Minnesota sports....actually...that is mostly the reason.Moss mooning incident against GB is the most clear memory I

lol I guess earlier in the week, he crushed reilly

Despite this extraordinary promotional push http://bit.ly/cUdIPT RiMarcus Reilly's book bombed. Probably sold fewer than 2k copies. Wow
Sosa pee n cup was my tipping pt. 5-yr-17-mil ESPN deal. Tiger sanctimony final straw RT @Ace2349ersMMA: y do u hate Rielly so much?
We (fans) get mad at overpaid, underperforming, spoiled, delusional, hey-look-at-me jocks. Y not the hypocrites who lampoon those athletes? 1:20 PM May 15th via web
To crack NYT bestseller list (nonfict hard) this time of yr u need to sell about 3k RT @dwade39: just curious where you got that number. 1:43 PM May 15th via TweetDeck
Read that Simmons sold 30-40K 1st week. RiMarcus 2k. But who counting? RT @CoachALR: Any idea Reilly compares to Sports Guy's last release? 2:55 PM May 15th via web
Bottom line: jeri curls and mc hammer are the only things more out of style than a RiMarcus Reilly column.
Wow! RT @endlessmike03: @whitlockjason @jaymohr37 's book on amazon: 127. RiMarcus Reilly: 1,205 3:30 PM May 15th via TweetDeck
If I belittled sports team for wasting money on a kid (JaMarcus, Leaf), it's all good. Ride on 50-yr-old hack (RiMarcus) I'm jealous a-hole. 10:25 AM May 16th via TweetDeck
I call it consistency. We sit n press boxes or n our little media cliques and say all kinds of shat. It's my personality to say it out loud. 10:28 AM May 16th via TweetDeck
jay-z-beyonce-g.jpg
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Basically any fantasy football commentary tilts me. Even guys I like often fall back into rhetorical nonsense when arguing for or against a player. I'll give you an example. I heard two fantasy "professionals" make the opposite argument about the production of Antonio Gates, based on the exact same event: Vincent Jackson's suspension/holdout. I don't remember who the commentators were ( Mathew Berry was one of them, I believe). But the arguement goes like this. Vincent Jackson's missed games really reduces the amount of options that Rivers has, with a new RB he doesn't trust yet. This should mean gates gets even more targets this year, and more production.Vincent jackson's missed games really reduces the amount of passing options rivers has. Because of this, the defenses are really going to focus on gates, double teaming and jamming him, and he'll get even less opportunities until VJax comes back.This shit drives me up a wall. A commentator makes a decision about a player, then makes an argument based on bullshit to try and defend it. I think the factors in determining the success or failure of a fantasy player are the health of the player, the talent of the player and the health and talent of their QB if it's a WR, and the health and talent of their offensive line if their a running back. All of this other nonsense is just crap these commentator's throw out there to eat up time and justify their salaries. Matthew Berry is literally the worst about doing this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I usually don't listen to fantasy talk, but I don't play it either, so I guess that makes sense. Matthew Berry is my least favorite BS Report guest.But...I think there is something to be said about trying to distinguish between talent and circumstances. Like Beasley might be a better fantasy option than Bosh this year, but I don't think you'll find too many people arguing Beasley is better. I don't think it's unreasonable for two people to look at the same circumstances and interpret them differently even if they both agree on the talent of the player.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha, I am so glad to see Reilly get destroyed by Whitlock (who is leaving the KC newspaper biz finally).Oddly, the sosa pee in a cup was what turned me against him too.....just a huge grandstanding jackass who made a name writing mediocre books and schmaltzy columns.On the other hand, that's what they pay Matt Berry to do. What's he going to talk about otherwise? You can argue ESPN should just cool it with fantasy experts (they should) but that's not on Berry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I usually don't listen to fantasy talk, but I don't play it either, so I guess that makes sense. Matthew Berry is my least favorite BS Report guest.But...I think there is something to be said about trying to distinguish between talent and circumstances. Like Beasley might be a better fantasy option than Bosh this year, but I don't think you'll find too many people arguing Beasley is better. I don't think it's unreasonable for two people to look at the same circumstances and interpret them differently even if they both agree on the talent of the player.
That's not what I'm saying. I'm not talking about comparing two players or something, I'm talking about a type of circumstance effecting a player. The most common example I can think of is the effect having a second great wide receiver will have on the production the first great wide receiver. Take a player like Fitzgerald and Boldin. When boldin got injured last year, some people suggested that Fitzgerald's production would go up because he would get targeted more. Some said it would go down because he is being focused by the defense. Or the effect of having a rookie QB being a starter. Some people say it will mean the offense will ahve to pound the ball more, and some people say that it will mean defenses will be putting 8 in the box and stopping the run, and the stats will go down. None of them, and I mean none of them, have ever produced a shred of statistical analysis, by looking a the effect of these situations historically, to detirmine if having two top WR's has a positive or negative effect on one of their production, on the effect of an inexperienced quarterback on the run game. They just pull that out as a bullshit time filler, to support their point. They decide who they like, and then they fill time with garbage rhetorical speculation like that and offer no evidence to support it.And it wouldn't be bad enough, if they would just pick a side of an issue, and always arguing that side. But a guy like berry will argue either side of that argument, based on if he likes a player this year or not. He if he likes gates, he'll say vjax's absence means more targets for him and his production will go up. If he dislikes fizgerald, he'll argue that boldin's absence means defenses will key on him more and his production will go down. In addition to having no actual evidence to back any of this nonsense up, he also has no consistency in applying arguments, and that just drives me ape shit. I hate mathew berry, he wrote crocodile dundee two, he is BRUTALLY unfunny, and he is the biggest hack on ESPN, which is saying quite alot, he's just more skilled at hiding his hackery than someone like Dilfer.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ha, I am so glad to see Reilly get destroyed by Whitlock (who is leaving the KC newspaper biz finally).Oddly, the sosa pee in a cup was what turned me against him too.....just a huge grandstanding jackass who made a name writing mediocre books and schmaltzy columns.On the other hand, that's what they pay Matt Berry to do. What's he going to talk about otherwise? You can argue ESPN should just cool it with fantasy experts (they should) but that's not on Berry.
I missed this post yesterday... Yeah, Reilly is the worst kind of awful. I didn't like him 15 years ago on SI.. he's been so bad for so long.I know that's what they pay berry to do. My point is, they shouldn't pay berry. I'd rather hear ( or specifically, read, as I don't really watch is ESPN TV pieces) someone break down fantasy in some sort of scientific and useful way. Figure out more useful ways to predict a future player's performance than gut feeling, cliches and rhetorical devices. Berry got brought on board on ESPN.com, when ESPN.com was making a push into the fantasy empire. He used to have a website that was called "The talented Mr Roto" or something embarrassing, and they thought he was going to be the bill simmons of fantasy, so they brought him and his audience over to ESPN as a package. Since that time, i've read a lot of his columns, and listened to a great deal of his analysis, and I don't think he knows shit. Often on his podcast ( that i used to listen to), he will talk about players and backups that are no longer on teams, and then be confused when he gets called on it. I don't trust his analysis for shit. I think he finds players he likes, and then comes up with reasons to like them, instead of coming up with a way of evaluating players, and see which players fit that criteria. In short, I think he's useless.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I missed this post yesterday... Yeah, Reilly is the worst kind of awful. I didn't like him 15 years ago on SI.. he's been so bad for so long.I know that's what they pay berry to do. My point is, they shouldn't pay berry. I'd rather hear ( or specifically, read, as I don't really watch is ESPN TV pieces) someone break down fantasy in some sort of scientific and useful way. Figure out more useful ways to predict a future player's performance than gut feeling, cliches and rhetorical devices. Berry got brought on board on ESPN.com, when ESPN.com was making a push into the fantasy empire. He used to have a website that was called "The talented Mr Roto" or something embarrassing, and they thought he was going to be the bill simmons of fantasy, so they brought him and his audience over to ESPN as a package. Since that time, i've read a lot of his columns, and listened to a great deal of his analysis, and I don't think he knows shit. Often on his podcast ( that i used to listen to), he will talk about players and backups that are no longer on teams, and then be confused when he gets called on it. I don't trust his analysis for shit. I think he finds players he likes, and then comes up with reasons to like them, instead of coming up with a way of evaluating players, and see which players fit that criteria. In short, I think he's useless.
You had me at Crocodile Dundee 2. I read a column of Berry's yesterday (I normally do not read fantasy advice columns in general) and it was pretty horrible. The analysis was obvious and the jokes were turrrrrible. I see what you mean.
Link to post
Share on other sites
On Jay Mariottii.."He's garbage, still garbage, going to die as garbage"-Ozzie GuillenWell said.
Concise and accurate. Mariotti is the absolute worst and that includes Woody Paige.
Link to post
Share on other sites

BREAKING JAY MARRIOTI NEWS!http://deadspin.com/5618514/

Here's what the LA Times says about the overnight arrest ... [Mariotti] was booked on suspicion of a felony, but officials would not provide further details. A source with knowledge of the case described it as a domestic disturbance charge involving his girlfriend. He was being held on $50,000 bail. [updated at 9:30 a.m.: LAPD sources said Mariotti allegedly got into an argument with his girlfriend at a club in Santa Monica. The argument continued at the couple's apartment in Venice, where some type of physical altercation allegedly occurred. Police were called to the apartment, and Mariotti was arrested. He is currently being held at the 77th Street station.]
PRISON TIME ONE TIME JUDGE!God, i don't like to advocate hitting a woman, but if roughing up this girl is what it takes to get Mariotti off my TV, then a martyr she must become.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

They had a short segment talking about him on Around the Horn today. All 4 panelists seemed to have nothing nice to say about him, which was kind of shocking to me since they were all colleagues for years. I guess he really is a huge ass.

Link to post
Share on other sites
They had a short segment talking about him on Around the Horn today. All 4 panelists seemed to have nothing nice to say about him, which was kind of shocking to me since they were all colleagues for years. I guess he really is a huge ass.
He is roundly disliked by peers and his subject (athletes/coaches/franchises).
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, it was only 3 panelists, Tim Cow-whaterver was already eliminated. One thing I noticed was that Reali didn't award points during that segment.
Yeah I saw that, Reali usually only does that when someone dies.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
i guess he copped to this in twitter.
Apparently he copped to it just two minutes ago. And even referenced "mutually assured destruction." Maybe he's reading this thread.I find the fact that he was a political science major to be...amusing.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently he copped to it just two minutes ago. And even referenced "mutually assured destruction." Maybe he's reading this thread.I find the fact that he was a political science major to be...amusing.
lol i find the fact that he took the time to reference that right before he completely misused the term to be hilarious.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...