Skip to main content

ESPN takes Mike Pettine out of context

Maybe it's due to the holiday season quickly approaching us (and being lazy in the process), but I've witnessed an increasing number of misleading and/or out-of-context headlines over the past couple weeks. The latest of which comes to us courtesy of ESPN, which published the following headline this morning: "Mike Pettine: I respect Russell Wilson, but QB not in top tier."

Here's how ESPN staff writer Pat McManamon starts his piece:

"Cleveland Browns coach Mike Pettine doesn't consider Russell Wilson of the Seattle Seahawks among the top three or four quarterbacks in the NFL.

He does, however, put him in the next group."

Jebus, really?!?

McManamon then writes this:

"'Would you put him there with the guys that can transcend their supporting cast? The [Tom] Brady's, whether it's Aaron Rodgers, [Drew] Brees, [Ben] Roethlisberger, the ones that you would consider the two, three, four elite guys? No. But he's certainly played himself into that next tier,' Pettine said Wednesday."

Okay, so while the Cleveland Browns coach is essentially saying Russell Wilson isn't one of the top 3 or 4 quarterbacks in the league, he's still contending that Wilson is one of the best in the league, so why's this a big deal, and why did ESPN feel the need to blow things out of proportion with a misleading, attention-grabbing headline?

ESPN didn't stop there, unfortunately, as they went on to ask the Seattle Seahawks quarterback about Pettine's comments. Yes, they actually went there. Wilson responded, "I don't worry about that. I think it comes down to winning games. ...That's the only thing I care about."

To Pettine's credit, he called out ESPN after seeing how they were slanting his comments, saying:

"I have a ton of respect for Russell and what he's done and I've been in this league a long time and I've gone against those guys that you mentioned. He is playing at a high level and if that continues for several more years then you would be able to talk about him in terms of those guys who have done it for 10-plus years as you just mentioned.

To sit and take one fragment of what I said just because I'd gone against Tom Brady, it's not my job to rank quarterbacks and I know the bottom line for those guys, and he's said it himself, is to win football games. And he's one of the best at that. I don't get too wrapped up in that. This isn't the first time that I've said a lot of one topic and one small fragment of it was made into a headline."

While I don't think Mike Pettine stands much chance of maintaining his job past this season, I have to give him kudos here. When the media takes someone's words out of context, like they did in this case, they deserve to be called out for it. Kudos on your follow-up comments, Mr. Pettine!

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14381646/cleveland-browns-mike-pettine-consider-russell-wilson-seattle-seahawks-top-tier-quarterback

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"