Audio: Werder on GAC - Romo to blame?

[dcfanatic]

The majority likes McDonnald's hamburgers and supersized fries with a half-gallon of coke at mealtime. The majority watches 4 hours of tv a night and goes to movies called 'Twilight' because they can't wrap their brains around the book. The majority is fat, stupid, and unhealthy.

You seem to think majority-rule is a sensible system for meting information, I don't. But don't make the mistake of thinking just because something is popular that it's done right or that it's helpful, or even worthwhile.

Conveying poorly researched opinions is not power. If fans want to forfeit their judgment in favor of those opinions, that's on the fans, not on the media. But you'll never get me to agree that something has to be unsupportable or insipid in order to be interesting. And I don't think that's a 1950s sensibility. I'd like to think we care about accuracy in 2009, but that's just me.

Are we discussing articles in medical journals that can change a Doctors opinion on treating patients?

No.

So stop acting like we are. It's sports.

This next line says a lot about your views on things in general.

The majority is fat, stupid, and unhealthy.

That majority uses the same monetary system as you do.

Their money is just as green as yours.

ESPN is a business. They aren't elected officials. They aren't here to please everyone. They aren't the only resource for you to get information on the Cowboys.

You have to realize that you are such a minority here. Just because you can find some people on here to agree with you doesn't mean ESPN gives a crap.

And you also have to realize that Cowboys fans are the only ones who would even give two minutes of their time hating Ed Werder. A huge portion of this fan base has become so caught up in hating the media that they love to talk/discuss these issues more than they even talk about the team anymore.

Someone started an 'ESPN Bias' thread the other day because they didn't show any highlights of the Cowboys game of the halftime show on Monday Night. Seriously. The Cowboys didn't have any highlights, lol.

But because this new built in excuse is there for fans they fall back on it instead of just saying to themselves - There were no highlights because the Cowboys offense played like crap!

I stopped wondering a long time ago why fans of other teams hate the Cowboys fan so much. That sense of entitlement has now turned into whining and moaning in defense of the star as they look for other reasons why the team doesn't win Super Bowls.

And this line from you...

Conveying poorly researched opinions is not power. If fans want to forfeit their judgment in favor of those opinions, that's on the fans, not on the media.

If this is the case why would you gripe about the media?

It's on the fans. You said it yourself.

You are not let down by McDonalds and their crappy food.

You are mad at the fatso's who keep buying it and giving it to their kids.

You are mad that not everyone is as insightful as you and can realize that not everything reported should be taken as gospel.

[youtube]X3MsfSf4v3w[/youtube]

 

[adbutcher]

You are mad that not everyone is as insightful as you and can realize that not everything reported should be taken as gospel.

[youtube]X3MsfSf4v3w[/youtube]

We have fallen pretty far as a society. It use to be a time that when it was reported it was gospel.

Whatever happen to keeping the powers honest? I guess happened along with the other crappy loose with the truth organizations.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

He's reporting what was told to him.

What is he a lie detector?

Now nothing can be reported unless there is video/audio evidence of it?

I would be fine with it.

Would the print media? No.

Get it?

What you fail to understand is that Mr. Blue Suit has a worse than Mendoza line accuracy with his reports that he gets from 'sources.'

I think most people here understand the media needing sources and needing to keep them anonymous.

But, they also have to be proven time and again that they are accurate.

Mr. Blue Suit's sources are not even close to being accurate.

Plus, jouralism basics state that if you are reporting a rumor, you need at least 3 sources before you report that.

Something Mr. Blue Suit almost never does.

He just takes any source and runs with it. And it's apparent that he never verifies the credibiity of the source and/or their information because you simply cannot be that innaccurate if a journalist did that. Or if they did and these sources were still inaccurate, then it's time to get new sources.

But, we don't get that from Mr. Blue Suit. It's the same of one 'source' reporting some stupid rumor that winds up being either completely false or has a high percentage of mistruths to it and he and others still want us to believe he's credible and still think we should believe what he says.

No, anybody who can see it for what it is sees him as a hack.

Plain and simple.





YAKUZA

 

[jimmy40]

I know some of Mr. Blue Suit's sports journalism peers who have told me point blank that they really question his credibility the past couple of years and think he did a real hatchet job on Owens.

name sources or it's all lies- Ed Werder

 

[dcfanatic]

What you fail to understand is that Mr. Blue Suit has a worse than Mendoza line accuracy with his reports that he gets from 'sources.'

I think most people here understand the media needing sources and needing to keep them anonymous.

But, they also have to be proven time and again that they are accurate.

Mr. Blue Suit's sources are not even close to being accurate.

Plus, jouralism basics state that if you are reporting a rumor, you need at least 3 sources before you report that.

Something Mr. Blue Suit almost never does.

He just takes any source and runs with it. And it's apparent that he never verifies the credibiity of the source and/or their information because you simply cannot be that innaccurate if a journalist did that. Or if they did and these sources were still inaccurate, then it's time to get new sources.

But, we don't get that from Mr. Blue Suit. It's the same of one 'source' reporting some stupid rumor that winds up being either completely false or has a high percentage of mistruths to it and he and others still want us to believe he's credible and still think we should believe what he says.

No, anybody who can see it for what it is sees him as a hack.

Plain and simple.

YAKUZA

If you can provide any evidence of anything you just wrote you would have a golden ticket in getting him fired.

Terrell Owens even admitted, and sort of retracted his comments, about Ed Werder being a liar when he sat down with Deion.

I don't see one person on record coming out and saying that what Ed Werder reporting me saying is a flat out lie.

Find me this report.

 

[dcfanatic]

I know some of Mr. Blue Suit's sports journalism peers who have told me point blank that they really question his credibility the past couple of years and think he did a real hatchet job on Owens. And some of these people have told me that detest Owens, but Mr. Blue Suit did a really shoddy job on that report and there was a clear conflict of interest.

That being said, I do know many of his peers that do respect the guy. But I also know many peers that respect fraudulent, scumbag attorneys who have zero ethics. And many peers who respect embezzling politicians.

Peers tend to stick up for peers regardless of profession. I learned that a long time ago when my ole man would always stick up for HS teachers (he used to be a HS teacher himself) regardless of some of the things, some of which were downright heinous, they did.

Plus, Mr. Blue Suit is in a position of authority. The newspapers are dying and it's always been quite common for sports writers to find new avenues to work in if anything to help supplement their income. ESPN is a powerful sports media outlet becaue it's practicaly everywhere and that includes local radio and possible big-time TV. So I keep these critics of Mr. Blue Suit anonymous becaue ESPN simply won't let them on their airwaves if they tell the world how they really feel about Mr. Blue Suit's journalistic integrity.

YAKUZA

So you are bashing Werder for being a hack because he has sources.

Then you come off and don't name names.

:laugh2:

Name the people.

And don't give us names of people that only work for his competition.

Werder does have an axe to grind. So what? If there is nothing there all is doing is sitting around with a dull axe as the wheel sits at a dead still.

He had a vendetta against Terrell Owens after the man starting next questioning him. Was he supposed to sit there and be belittled in front of his peers every time out and never develop a dislike for #81?

All Terrell Owens had to was not go sit down with Deion and throw Garrett under the bus. But he opened up the ****storm.

He thought he was unflappable in Dallas right up until the moment Jerry Jones pulled out that pen.

Right now it's clear Werder doesn't think too highly of Roy Williams either.

Guess what? If Roy doesn't give him anything nothing will happen.

But if he keeps sitting around in the locker room every Wednesday for 8 minute interviews after putting up zilch on Sunday I am sure he's going to slip up and say something to create a headline.

And Roy is an even harder target because he has less baggage than Terrell Owens had for Werder to pick through.

If anything Terrell Owens and Ed Werder deserve each other.

It's a game. The players are paid millions to be a part of it. The NFL life isn't just about the game of football. It's not 1950 people!

There is a boat load of money hovering over every aspect of this thing.

Reporters like money just as much as players like money.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

If you can provide any evidence of anything you just wrote you would have a golden ticket in getting him fired.

Terrell Owens even admitted, and sort of retracted his comments, about Ed Werder being a liar when he sat down with Deion.

I don't see on person on record coming out and saying that what Ed Werder reporting me saying is a flat out lie.

Find me this report.

I keep rattling them off, you just keep ignoring them.

Mr. Blue Suit has reported:

- Keith Davis was shot dead.

- Parcells was going to retire after '03.

- Parcells was going to retire after '04.

- Parcells was going to retire after '05.

- Owens was crying after the Cincy game last season when he didn't get the ball enough (he was actually in tears because he had a family member die earlier that week)

- Miles Austin wasn't going to have any big pass plays set up for him because he's not in the #1 WR position (Miles wound up having 150 yards receiving in the next game and then had the big TD catch against Philly)

And your point about Owens 'retracting' the statements against Mr. Blue Suit is completely moot because again, THE REPORT WAS INACCURATE. Did Owens ever once say that he was 'jealous' of Romo and Witten's relationship?

THAT is the point.

THAT is the point that you and other obsequious lapdogs of Mr. Blue Suit continue to ignore.

His stuff is inaccurate. Hiding behind your sources is irrelevant if they are wrong on a continual basis.

BSPN wouldn't fire Mitch Albom from their Sports Reporters WEEKLY show when he was caught red handed making up a story by his own paper. What makes you think they'll actually take Mr. Blue Suit to task for being a hack, much less fire him?




YAKUZA

 

[Yakuza Rich]

So you are bashing Werder for being a hack because he has sources.

Then you come off and don't name names.

:laugh2:

Name the people.

I've stated in this thread that people understand that reporters have sources and keep them anonymous for good reason.

But when your sources are continually inaccurate and nothing changes from that standpoint then you are either not doing your job as a reporter or you're making stuff up.

The fact that this goes above your head speaks that you either don't have much logic or you are some type of blind fanboy of him.

And don't give us names of people that only work for his competition.

Did you even read what I wrote?

I stated point blank I couldn't give names because these are people THAT WORK FOR ESPN AFFILIATES.

Werder does have an axe to grind. So what? If there is nothing there all is doing is sitting around with a dull axe as the wheel sits at a dead still.

Basics of journalism.

Reporters are not supposed to have an axe to grind. That doesn't mean they can't criticize. Doesn't mean that they may not like the person they are reporting on. But they still have to have intregrity with their job and most importantly, the stuff they report is to be ACCURATE and you can't just say 'well, my sources told me this even though it was false.'

He had a vendetta against Terrell Owens after the man starting next questioning him. Was he supposed to sit there and be belittled in front of his peers every time out and never develop a dislike for #81?

And that's what makes you ridiculous.

He should have understood that (at least his supervisor should) that there's a possible conflict of interest of him reporting that story against Owens. And if he was going to report such a story against Owens, it had to be on the up and up.

When reporting a rumor, you should have AT LEAST 3 sources so you can establish some credibility to that rumor.

What did Mr. Blue Suit do?

He quoted ONE source.

Is that credible to you? Well, by your logic it probably is.

That is why some of the peers that I know of, who work for ESPN affiliates, told me point blank why they thought negatively of his reporting and as one of them told me 'he's been doing this for awhile.'







YAKUZA

 

[tyke1doe]

You are completely off on how Werder's colleagues feel about him.

He is well respected by his peers. Even if he does have a rep for going after stories about particular players.

Werder still has plenty of sources at Valley Ranch. You should know this by the fact that your boy is now catching 98 yard TD's in Canada.

Sssshhh. Don't disturb the rant.

 

[dcfanatic]

I've stated in this thread that people understand that reporters have sources and keep them anonymous for good reason.

But when your sources are continually inaccurate and nothing changes from that standpoint then you are either not doing your job as a reporter or you're making stuff up.

The fact that this goes above your head speaks that you either don't have much logic or you are some type of blind fanboy of him.



Did you even read what I wrote?

I stated point blank I couldn't give names because these are people THAT WORK FOR ESPN AFFILIATES.



Basics of journalism.

Reporters are not supposed to have an axe to grind. That doesn't mean they can't criticize. Doesn't mean that they may not like the person they are reporting on. But they still have to have intregrity with their job and most importantly, the stuff they report is to be ACCURATE and you can't just say 'well, my sources told me this even though it was false.'



And that's what makes you ridiculous.

He should have understood that (at least his supervisor should) that there's a possible conflict of interest of him reporting that story against Owens. And if he was going to report such a story against Owens, it had to be on the up and up.

When reporting a rumor, you should have AT LEAST 3 sources so you can establish some credibility to that rumor.

What did Mr. Blue Suit do?

He quoted ONE source.

Is that credible to you? Well, by your logic it probably is.

That is why some of the peers that I know of, who work for ESPN affiliates, told me point blank why they thought negatively of his reporting and as one of them told me 'he's been doing this for awhile.'

YAKUZA

.

So it's ok for you to say people said something and we believe it, but when Ed Werder does it then it's hack journalism.

You make no sense.

And if you don't give us the names of these people then it didn't happen because I can't verify it.

And don't tell me it was an A to B conversation because well then we know by simple math that we can't get three sources.

And none of those things you stated in the other posts are anything but Werder hearing things and reporting them.

- Keith Davis was shot dead.

Was Keith Davis shot? Yeah. Did Werder just make up out of nowhere that Keith Davis was shot dead? No. Did he maybe get information that the shooting resulted in him dying? Maybe.

Stop acting like you could get anyone fired for this one.

- Parcells was going to retire after '03.

- Parcells was going to retire after '04.

- Parcells was going to retire after '05.

He didn't make anything up on Parcells. If he did then every other reporter in America did at the same time because after every season they all had him retiring.

- Owens was crying after the Cincy game last season when he didn't get the ball enough (he was actually in tears because he had a family member die earlier that week.)

Come on. You have as much proof of why he was crying as I do. He could have been crying because the Bengals uniforms scared him for all we know.

Give me some something real here already. Give me something where Ed Werder reported that someone did or said and it's come out that Werder made it up so he can produce a headline story on ESPN.

- Miles Austin wasn't going to have any big pass plays set up for him because he's not in the #1 WR position. (Miles wound up having 150 yards receiving in the next game and then had the big TD catch against Philly.)

He was forced into the starting role in KC. And all of his big plays were on broken tackles. There was no #1 WR option going into that game.

Give me a story where he made up facts, figures and events.

You can't because they don't exist.

You sound like Ed Werder. And Ed Werder is your Terrell Owens.

Talk about punking yourself in public.

If all of this 'proof' about how Ed Werder is being such a dishonest jouranist existed some other media person looking to make a name for himself would have gone public already with it.

Even the media eat their own if it's good for them.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

.

So it's ok for you to say people said something and we believe it, but when Ed Werder does it then it's hack journalism

You make no sense.

I make plenty of sense, you just fail to use any logic in your fandom of Mr. Blue Suit.

I've said over and over, it's okay for a reporter to use anonymous sources. We all understand that. But what we don't understand is how incorrect his info has been and after awhile you can't hide under those sources.

Do you honesty think that none of Mr. Blue Suit's peers may not hold his journalism efforts in high regard?

And if you don't give us the names of these people then it didn't happen because I can't verify it.

How do you verify Mr. Blue Suit's sources?

You can't have it both ways.

And don't tell me it was an A to B conversation because well then we know by simple math that we can't get three sources.

I have at least 5 professionals writing for newspapers, one who works for the AP, that have said this. If it was just one fellow sports writer, then I wouldn't feel the need to type this. But when you get upwards to 5, then you start to get the point that there is some type of contingent that really doesn't respect the guy.

If I used Mr. Blue Suit's journalistic methods, I would just get one sports writer from Podunk, ND telling me that they think his reporting stinks and run with it. But,

- Keith Davis was shot dead.

Was Keith Davis shot? Yeah. Did Werder just make up out of nowhere that Keith Davis was shot dead? No. Did he maybe get information that the shooting resulted in him dying? Maybe.

Stop acting like you could get anyone fired for this one.

Who said I could get anyone fired?

Was Keith Davis shot dead?

NO.

Is that accurate?

NO.

It's not the end of the world, but when you have HISTORY of reporting incorrect items, and I think stating somebody is DEAD over being alive is a pretty big error, then it's a problem. And it hurts your credibility.

- Parcells was going to retire after '03.

- Parcells was going to retire after '04.

- Parcells was going to retire after '05.

He didn't make anything up on Parcells. If he did then every other reporter in America did at the same time because after every season they all had him retiring.

Was he correct?

NO.

NO.

And NO.

Where is the accuracy?

- Owens was crying after the Cincy game last season when he didn't get the ball enough (he was actually in tears because he had a family member die earlier that week.)

Come on. You have as much proof of why he was crying as I do. He could have been crying because the Bengals uniforms scared him for all we know.

It was practicaly reported by every local Dallas reporter on the scene.

Give me a break.

Again, was he accurate?

NO.

Give me some something real here already. Give me something where Ed Werder reported that someone did or said and it's come out that Werder made it up so he can produce a headline story on ESPN.

That's not exactly the point.

The point is his stories are wildly inaccurate. And when he gets asked about them, he replies 'my anonymous sources told me this and that.'

How can his sources be this inaccurate?

Why this simple question goes above your head is almost asinine.

Either he's not doing his job to make sure that his sources are providing accurate information or he's making it up.

Even if he's not making up some of his stories (and it would've been considered blasphemous at the time to accuse Albom of making up his story and it wound up being true he did make up the story, and ESPN still paid him to do shows anyway), the fact is then he's doing a lousy job as a reporter because his stories are usually inaccurate.

- Miles Austin wasn't going to have any big pass plays set up for him because he's not in the #1 WR position. (Miles wound up having 150 yards receiving in the next game and then had the big TD catch against Philly.)

He was forced into the starting role in KC. And all of his big plays were on broken tackles. There was no #1 WR option going into that game.

Give me a story where he made up facts, figures and events.

You can't because they don't exist.

Parcells supposed to be retiring in '03, '04, and 05?

Keith Davis DEAD?

Are those accurate?

You're Werder's lapdog, fanboy and stooge.

It's pointless discussing any of this with you any further because you cannot answer the question 'is Werder accurate?' And apparently it doesn't make a difference to you because it's clear that you think it's okay to be inaccurate the majority of the time as long as you have sources.






3JACK

 

[Arch Stanton]

Eldo's not at VR. I love me some Werder.