Negative media coverage of the Redskins
 

The front page of the ESPN.com Web site has a picture of Joe Gibbs with the caption, "Speaking Gibberish." (not very complimentary in and of itself)

Basically, the coverage of the Redskins includes the following messages:

1. The offensive line - with focus on their poor performance last year: "Old system created headaches for offense."

2. Gibbs' inadequate starting quarterback: "Now only if his new quarterback would respond to standing upright," and "Brunell having another shaky camp."

3. Dan Snyder's meddlesome ownership approach: "Stick to the plan, Dan."

Not the most complimentary coverage.

I was amazed to see this type of tone, considering Gibbs' re-hiring. Gibbs is one of the most celebrated and well respected figured in the NFL. It blows my mind that the coverage doesn't focus more on him.

I've got to say, there must be something deeper going on here (beyond Pastabelly's lame resentment towards the Redskins). I wonder if there was some sort of bad blood between Snyder Communications and the Walt Disney Company, which owns ABC, which in turn owns ESPN.

we talk about this all the time, Snyder is going to get picked on until we win some. If we start making the playoffs everyyear again, and Snyder keeps to his ways, then they will just talk about him like Jerry Jones, where hes willing to pay to win and does.

What I'm saying is that I think there is something deeper here. I can understand the one article that focuses on Snyder - but what I can't understand is the criticizm of Brunell, the focus on the offensive line problems last year, and the lead caption that takes Gibbs name and puts it into the word "Gibberish."

ESPN has very savvy editors, they wouldn't be using a term like "Gibberish" without knowing full well the negative connotation that it has.

its an interesting theory. i'd love to know any media relationship Snyder and co. have with ABC/Disney/ESPN. conspiracies do exist.

I work in media, and we see things like this all the time. It never ceases to amaze me how much the media is driven by the personalities of a handful of people at the top.

The thing that amazes me is that Snyder Communications was a friggin' communications firm. To think that the Redskins are getting such consistently negative publicity tells me that there must be some underlying situation here.

Even more interesting - did you know that the Hearst Corporation (yes, William Randolph Hearst's company) owns 20% of ESPN?

I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see some bad blood between Hearst and Snyder - possibly over the sale of the Skins?

Remember - Snyder outbid John Kent Cooke to purchase the Skins. I wonder if there are any relations between the Cooke family (JKC was a noted socialite) and the Hearst family, which may be currently leading to the negative press of the Skins?

I believe it has something to do with the front office not leaking info to Lenny P. to his satisfaction, there was some sort of riff between him and Vinny C., I forget the details maybe someone else can clarify.

I read that piece yesterday on another site, and it had Len P.'s name on it. So it does not surprise me. He has never been one to hide his extreme biases. The entire article was pure bull crap. I don't know why he has an ax to grind with the Redskins, but he definitely does.

Snyder sold his company when he bought the Redskins (or so I thought)...what would his former company have to do with his relationship with the current media?

like it was stated before, until the Skins start having winning seasons, the media will be all over him. he's trying to be a Steinbrenner/Jones type owner, yet has been unsuccessful to this point.

i wouldn't put a second thought into "Speaking Gibberish"...someone on the espn.com writing team was trying to be clever...nothing more.

reading the O-Line article, it points out all the faults from last year, which anyone with half a brain could see that they had no guidance or vision. Third from last paragraph states, "Arguably one of the finest line mentors in the recent history of the game, Bugel came to know the Washington personnel during his consulting stint, and he has put some of that knowledge into action. More important, he has restored order, implemented ideas that are steeped in fundamentals and brought sanity and soundness to the dazed unit."

Typical Pastabelly...wait until the end to declare the Skins have done something correct, and surround it with past faults.

The Skins have been someone's NFC East pick ever since Snyder took over, and it has not panned out yet. Credit that to why the media doesn't think much of the Skins.

The other article about Brunell, and Pastabelly's 5 course meal, i mean 5 observations, are just that...observations...you can't trust him as far as you can throw him, and Don Vito, I mean Pastabelly is too big to be lifting.

I'd say there's something going on too. Notice how ESPN visited all the other high profile camp sites this week but skipped right on by Washington. There's more to this than ESPN is leading us to believe.

[QUOTE=BDBohnzie]Snyder sold his company when he bought the Redskins (or so I thought)...what would his former company have to do with his relationship with the current media?[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't entirely agree with the assumption that just because someone no longer has a relationship with an organization, means they are never associated with that organization.

That would be like saying what would Halliburton have to do with Cheney's current political orientation.

Also, as I noted in a subsequent posting, perhaps the ardor was spawned between Snyder and the Hearst Corporation.

[QUOTE=BDBohnzie]i wouldn't put a second thought into "Speaking Gibberish"...someone on the espn.com writing team was trying to be clever...nothing more.[/QUOTE]

ESPN.com consistently ranks amongst the most viewed sites on the Internet.

When you're talking about a daily audience in the millions, and millions of dollars in advertising revenue, a writer "trying to be clever" doesn't qualify as motivation for why a lead caption would imply that Joe Gibbs and the Redskins are not going to be successful.

Snyder Communications (which he sold) was not a "communications" company per se. They were a medical/pharmeceutical marketing firm that put on symposia and offered continuing education for doctors that were sponsored by the drug companies. Ever wonder where all those Viagra/Vioxx/Plavix etc ink pens/hats/notepads come from? Now you know!

When he bought the team, I worked for a direct competitor (now a part of Cardinal Health) of Snyder Communications that offered the same services.

Hope that clears up any confusion!

this is rediculous, maybe he pasquerelli does not have a bias against the redskins, maybe he actually puts up valid points, and we are the ones being biased.
More importantly though, nobody seems to be talking about his point on Sean Taylor. He said Andre Lott would start at safety.. Andre Lott? He also said iffy is buried on the third unit. What is going on? Taylor was in camp on time and in my mind there is no reason he should not start.

[QUOTE=JoeGibbsIsBack]I'd say there's something going on too. Notice how ESPN visited all the other high profile camp sites this week but skipped right on by Washington. There's more to this than ESPN is leading us to believe.[/QUOTE]


Maybe Gibbs didn't want ESPN to visit camp??? Just a thought.

[QUOTE=Bergman14]this is rediculous, maybe he pasquerelli does not have a bias against the redskins, maybe he actually puts up valid points, and we are the ones being biased.
More importantly though, nobody seems to be talking about his point on Sean Taylor. He said Andre Lott would start at safety.. Andre Lott? He also said iffy is buried on the third unit. What is going on? Taylor was in camp on time and in my mind there is no reason he should not start.[/QUOTE]


How can someone predict the starting lineup when we haven't even completed our first week of training camp, and we haven't even played a single preseason game? I like the fact that Taylor has to earn his stripes(he said it himself). Just like Ramsey has to earn his (I thought he did that last year, but in Gibbs we trust) and McCants, Jacobs, and Thrash have to earn theirs. Competition will only make them better. Anyone else agree??

I would guess that Williams favors Lott over Ohalete because of his coverage skills. Iffy is solid against the run but suspect in coverage.

Lott was a bit of a project when we drafted him, it's nice to see he's developed.

Reality check time.

Let's see. If ESPN.com writes a glowing piece on the Redskins saying they are the odds on favorites to win the Super Bowl because Joe Gibbs is back and all the other coaches in the league are so afraid of him they are going to soil themselves, then the author and ESPN.com are geniuses? How juvenile would that be? :stop:

Look folks, the Skins have been downright awful for the last four years. They won the same number of games as the [B]Jacksonville F-ing Jaguars [/B] last year. Take a breath and go back and read that last sentence again. All the huffing and puffing and righteous indignation in the world does not change that! If you are a Redskin fan, you should be angry about what your team has done on the field and not angry at people who report it.

Lots of folks can share the blame for the fact that the Skins have stunk. Players underachieved; coaches were less than brilliant. AND the owner and his front office minions have done a bunch of things that turned out to be moronic even though they were touted as "cutting edge brilliance" by those folks.

You guys are shooting the messenger; he is only recounting history. Example: Last year on this very board lots of folks were afraid that Patrick Ramsey was going to get himself killed because the O-Line (and the offensive backfield too) couldn't block a gentle breeze. This year you have the same guys out there with a different coach to teach technique (Bugel) AND an offensive system that centers on keeping the QB upright by throwing the ball only when you have to or when the defense is looking for the run (Gibbs) If the O-Line is as bad as last year and the backs still don't block, fire the players because there is evidence that the offensive system does work. There are three Lombardi trophies that say that. :D

I'll tell you why many of the media folks do not like Danny Boy. When he came into the league he was an arrogant hothead who demanded that everyone cater to his whims and call him "Mr. Snyder". That was not just his employees; he tried - briefly - to pull that crap on longtime NFL writers and broadcasters. Guess what? They told him to take a hike and when he bristled, they took great pleasure in goading him. For some folks, that edge has not worn off yet.

you guys keep talking about all the negative media coverage we have been getting over the years, but I dont see that at all. During the year last year is when I think it started. Up until that point everyoen kept thinking that we were goign to do well and that we had the talent, plenty of peopel raved about us getting Spurrier, and it was mostly positive news. I think now they have every reason to be hisitant, I dont think its some conspiracy of any sorts towards snyder. I bet if we start winning it will be positive again.

ESPN must be getting paid bye jerry joke to talk up his football team. :iamwithst Did anyone notice every day ESPN talks about the cowgrils? :nono:

[QUOTE=Bergman14]More importantly though, nobody seems to be talking about his point on Sean Taylor. He said Andre Lott would start at safety.. Andre Lott? He also said iffy is buried on the third unit. What is going on? Taylor was in camp on time and in my mind there is no reason he should not start.[/QUOTE]

The reason he said that is that he can't see past his fat belly. That is the current order they are playing in now, and has no real significance for the start of the season. It would be REAL unusual for GIBBS to immediately move in a rookie to the starting spot. He will work him into the starting job over the next week or two.

And, Curmudgeon, as far as not liking the piece because it is anti-Redskins, get real. This piece was a horrible, blubbery, BASELESS slam against the team. How many decent points did he make???? If it was an intelligent, well-written piece, it would make me think, and wonder if I am overestimating the team. This was not anywhere near that category. It was typical of him.

Its not liek Lott has anymore game time saftey experience in teh NFL then taylor does, taylor will be in that first string unit soon enough. As soon as he gets up to pace with the speed of the nfl and gets conditioned to it.

Pasta Belly made so few relevent points he may well have not bothered going to camp at all. I could have made these comments from 7,000 miles away in the Uk Brunell is having a shaky camp he even poored scorn on Brunells numbers from last year saying the high compleation rate was down to him relying on dump off passes and short compleations but isn't that basically how the NFL works now? Quick effeicient passing for short gains relying on the reciever to make the yards after the catch to defeat the pass rush. Its how Brady makes his money and Delehume certianly dosen't live by the bomb.

Thing is Brunell wasn't brought in to shine in camp he has been through alot of them but to win games where his expericene guts and football smarts pay off. Ramsey might have the younger more powerful body but putting him in with only Hamden and Hastlebeck(sp?) behind him would be the eqivelent of starting a rookie. The other thing is Brunell can sit on the pine if need be and pass on the benifits of his expereince if need be he did it last year for Leftwitch in a situation which was very badly handled by the Jags front office. Compare that to the Warner Eli situation bubbling n New York. We all know how well the Warner clan handled his demotion at St Louis.

the big point here is, you can't judge an entire team by one 2 hour practice...

[QUOTE=That Guy]the big point here is, you can't judge an entire team by one 2 hour practice...[/QUOTE]

EXACTLY! Especially in the first week of camp...

Tom Friend of ESPN has give the Skins some love recently, he had a great piece on espn.com when the news broke that Gibbs had returned. Recently lambasted Peter Angelos for blocking a baseball team for DC. Len P. is hard on the Redskins, but he give Gibbs the benefit of the doubt because he knows how good Gibbs is as a coach, but I do wish he would lay off The Danny a little.