Is this weird or is it just me?

[dcfanatic]

I just went over to DC.com and noticed what I thought was a 'new article' from Nick Eatman.

Then as soon as I read the first line I knew I had read it already, but the title did not register with me. Then I checked the date.

Looks like Eatman or the editor changed the title at some point...

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120737

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news.cfm?id=A80487EF-D6B0-9F8D-7831828B810C1A2A

Now the first title is a little more of a 'worry about changing your ways and then worry about the name' theme.

The second title is more of a 'changing the name comes first and then it's going to help him continue on the right path' theme.

My brother has already said I am reading too much into this, but it seems like maybe Eatman was told to change the title so it's more on the positive tip.

Since it's DC.com I am wondering if this was a direct command from the top brass to change the title.

Pretty slow news day. What do you guys think about this?

 

[dargonking999]

It is what it is

 

[CrazyCowboy]

I just went over to DC.com and noticed what I thought was a 'new article' from Nick Eatman.

Then as soon as I read the first line I knew I had read it already, but the title did not register with me. Then I checked the date.

Looks like Eatman or the editor changed the title at some point...

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120737

http://www.dallascowboys.com/news.cfm?id=A80487EF-D6B0-9F8D-7831828B810C1A2A

Now the first title is a little more of a 'worry about changing your ways and then worry about the name' theme.

The second title is more of a 'changing the name comes first and then it's going to help him continue on the right path' theme.

My brother has already said I am reading too much into this, but it seems like maybe Eatman was told to change the title so it's more on the positive tip.

Since it's DC.com I am wondering if this was a direct command from the top brass to change the title.

Pretty slow news day. What do you guys think about this?

I noticed the same thing and thought I was crazy and mis-read it.....so blew it off.....your right.

 

[Hostile]

Maybe he thought none of the top brass read the first article and won't read this version. He kills 2 birds with one stone.

:

 

[dcfanatic]

It is what it is

Maybe, but Eatman is a journalist, a very good one, so he should be given his journalistic freedom on this issue.

I wonder how much different it is working for DC.com as opposed to working for the DMN or the Star-Telegram?

 

[Hostile]

Maybe, but Eatman is a journalist, a very good one, so he should be given his journalistic freedom on this issue.

I wonder how much different it is working for DC.com as opposed to working for the DMN or the Star-Telegram?

Then again, maybe he just didn't like the first title and when he thought of one he liked better, just used it.

 

[dcfanatic]

Then again, maybe he just didn't like the first title and when he thought of one he liked better, just used it.

That's what my brother said. He also said I am a the king of the conspiracy theories, lol.

It's not like I have not gone a lil overboard on some things before.

It doesn't make me a bad person. lol.

 

[dargonking999]

Maybe, but Eatman is a journalist, a very good one, so he should be given his journalistic freedom on this issue.

I wonder how much different it is working for DC.com as opposed to working for the DMN or the Star-Telegram?

If he wants that freedom then he can work at DMN or the star-telegram.

If you're going to work for a team-website your generally not going to write negative articles about the players or the team. That wouldn't make the fans happy would it? (in a owners mind)

 

[dcfanatic]

If he wants that freedom then he can work at DMN or the star-telegram.

If you're going to work for a team-website your generally not going to write negative articles about the players or the team. That wouldn't make the fans happy would it? (in a owners mind)

I can agree with not writing negative articles because the site is run by the team, but that's really the case here. The article wasn't changed at all.

Plus I don't think the first title was all that negative.

I think I was also including the sentiments from Eatman's article a few weeks ago that Pacman shouldn't just be given the starting job opposite Newman. I guess I was wondering if some people are letting Eatman know that 'the team' only wants to 'talk' positive about Pacman in anything that is put up on the site.

Here's a piece of the article..

------------------------
Newman mans the left side, Anthony Henry has the right. And for now, that's the way it is and the way it should be.


A lot of people seem ready to just throw Pacman in the starting lineup. Not sure why. The guy hasn't played football in a year. He's down to his very last strike in terms of even having a job in this league. Why can't he just come in, learn the scheme, learn the defensive calls and try to contribute?

No, he's Pacman Jones. So let's kick out Anthony Henry and his team-leading six interceptions last year and ship him over to safety. Let's make Jones a starter at cornerback, let him return all the punts and play him on offense, too.

Hey, I've been all for acquiring this guy. I've said "why not" on more than one occasion about bringing him here.

But let the guy get acclimated to football once again. Once he does that, and if he needs to be on the field for every play, then you adjust accordingly.
Somehow, I see him as the third cornerback this year, barring any injuries.
--------------------------

I don't really see that as negative, but it is taking the approach that maybe everyone should slow down on the 'Pacman's the savior here so he get's the starting job' idea. Seems Eatman is pro Henry and that's fine because it's just his opinion on who should start and who should be the 3rd CB.

Man it's a slow news day, lol.