ESPN Needs New Writers

Let's take a close look at some of the good, bad, and ugly ESPN has hired recently to cover the NFL. First the good. Terry Blount, Mike Sando, and Greg Garber.
Then the bad and ugly. Jeffri Chadiha, John Clayton, and Ashley Fox.


While some may not agree on Terry or John, I've read enough of both of their articles to form my own opinion. I have very high standards for just about everything in life. I'm my biggest critic and I'm also everyone else's biggest critic. To me something that is "good" is most likely "phenomenal" to someone else. However, when it comes to the largest and most popular sports network in the world, my expectations on who they hire are quite high. Just like I'd expect an airplane manufacturer to hire the best possible people to design and build safe aircraft that don't fall from the sky. Unfortunately, like all big corporations, ESPN has hired a mixture of good and bad employees. It is truly up to them to listen to their fans and make a judgment call themselves on who gets the raises/promotions and who gets fired/demoted. I truly hope ESPN is paying attention to who is good and bad.


First up on my list is Terry Blount. He was hired to cover my home team in the NFL so of course this may seem biased. However, his articles are always nicely written. He uses a good mixture of vocab, and yet he is simple enough for most Americans to read and understand. What I love most about him is his opinions and presentation of facts are rarely biased. He seems to cover all Seahawks related news from the point of view of all fans. This helps give him a less biased and more respectable view of the Seahawks. You don't see him claiming they will dominate every team in the league. His predictions for their games are based on facts and he is typically dead on. He won't say they will get blown out or will blow someone out. He always expects close defensive struggles. Other ESPN reporters will blurt out non-fact based opinions that are usually way off and have no place in an official ESPN article. Those types of writers remind me of the ESPN/Facebook commenters on each article. Terry Blount was a great hire by ESPN and I'm glad he covers the Seahawks. He gets close to the organization, players, and coaches. He is constantly writing articles about on the field and off the field news. He will analyze practices, games, give injury updates, and even write about what a player does in their free time and how they think and feel as a person, not just a player. This personal touch really makes his articles about my favorite team all that more interesting as he gets to see a side of the team that no fan does. He also pumps out articles at an alarming rate so you know he's dedicated to his work and loves doing it.


Second on my list is Mike Sando. This may also seem a bit biased as he is all about statistical analysis and spreadsheets (which I also love) and we share a common home state as well. Mike writes a lot of insider articles which upsets me because I am not willing to pay extra to look at stats and opinions I can find elsewhere on the internet. However, he always lets the data do the talking via Excel spreadsheets and pivot tables. For this I respect him, his opinions, and his articles. Opinions based on numbers, facts, and mathematical calculations are the best and I'm glad ESPN found him and hired him. His statistical analysis intrigues me and I hope he can apply it to other sports like basketball and horse racing. It'd be interesting to see if his analysis could result in picking the NCAA basketball tournament correctly or the winners of the Triple Crown Races. As someone who has attempted to analyze both of those things, I can certainly say it is quite difficult. I've had success and failure in my methods, as has Mike. Hopefully his articles can become less insider and more available to the public because his data is always interesting to see.


Third on my good list is Greg Garber. Much like Terry, Greg is not very biased in a lot of his posts. He does have opinions like all other human beings, but he doesn't write emotional non-fact based mush in his official ESPN articles. Instead he covers things from well known stories and highlights, to things people may not be talking about, such as off the field good deeds or issues. He also likes to speak in "what if's" just so he can describe as many points of view of a sport as possible. Greg seems to be immersed in the NFL and tennis with his writing. Some good articles would involve what a team would be like if their star players were switched or how an unknown tennis player is the future of the sport. He tends to focus on things people don't really notice or pay attention to. He even has an interesting article on ex-offensive linemen losing weight so they can live longer/healthier lives.


Now onto the bad. I think we can all agree that Jeffri Chadiha is a joke. In fact a lot of comments I see about him call him an "affirmative action hire." Racism aside, he really has proven that his emotional fed opinions and uninteresting articles have no place in the top sports network of ESPN. He will write a strong opinion about something being a bad decision, or how one team is better than others, only to change his mind or not admit to his mistakes later on. Notably most of his opinions or predictions are not fact based at all. My best example of this would be Pete Carroll coming to the Seahawks. In 2010 he wrote this article: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeffri&id=4816051 where he basically rips Carroll, USC, and Seattle a new one. Not only was he incredibly wrong, hindsight is 20/20, but he is still set in his ways. His latest article about Super Bowl 48, http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2013/story/_/id/10322280/broncos-savoring-being-team-destiny-2013-nfl-playoffs, basically makes Seattle look like a little league team about to play a real team and how Manning and the Broncos will dominate the Seahawks because it's "destiny." Like everyone else who realizes the #1 defense vs the #1 offense will be an interesting, and most likely close matchup, he is just too proud to realize his opinions are incorrect. Instead of actually analyzing the game like a true columnist should, he just blindly picks a team because he believes it's their destiny to win. Even if Manning does win, it most likely will not be a blowout and it won't be because of destiny.
Not only has he been wrong about the Seahawks recently, but during this post season he even picked Green Bay to go far in the playoffs with the return of Aaron Rodgers, http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10197528/rodgers-makes-packers-dangerous-opponents, and claimed that the Niners could win it all after they beat Rodgers and the Packers. He also believed the Bengals would have been playing the Broncos in the AFC title game. None of these teams made the super bowl and now he's shifted his allegiance to Peyton and the Broncos.
The guy is inconsistent and his articles are pretty much awful to read for any sports fan. You can tell by all the negative feedback on his articles' comments that a majority of readers believe his writing has no place on ESPN.com.


Next on my bad list is Jon Clayton. I really do appreciate some of his articles and his insight on tv, but a lot of his writing is just not that interesting or clever. He seems to do a lot of opinion based articles or copy and paste type articles that you could find anywhere. However, as a guy who has been in the NFL and MLB media industry for a long time, he has certain connections and inside access that gives him a huge advantage over other reporters. However, as he ages and nears retirement I think he will lose this edge and be overtaken by some of the less experienced, but more talented writers at ESPN.
He does do some interesting Q&A articles where he'll respond to fan mail of his choosing and those are the best articles of his that I enjoy. Mostly because it's unique.


Now the bad and the WORST! Ashley Fox is by far the worst sports writer I have ever encountered. She has a horrible reputation and it's a shame. I know plenty of people who could write better sports articles than her, and a lot of them don't even watch sports that much. This is how bad Ashley is at her job. How she's still employed is beyond me. Much like Jeffri, her comments are all negative. Her articles are seldom accurate and full of typos. It's almost like nobody even proofreads her articles. In fact, even her ridiculous tweets should get her kicked off of ESPN. http://www.spinitreacts.com/2013/01/the-worst-of-espns-ashley-fox-this-nfl.html.
I have literally seen an article where she copied and pasted most of her information, only to forget to change some names and information around. She wrote an article on Marshawn that was edited several times by ESPN in order to be more accurate and to fix lots of typos. At the original posting she put the names of the 49ers offensive linemen as Lynch's blockers (yes this is in fact true and you can read about it in the comments at the bottom of the article to see just how horrible this article was when it was originally published and then fixed by her editor). http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10304802/marshawn-lynch-seattle-seahawks-top-challenge-san-francisco-49ers-nfc-championship-game.
Additionally, she is highly biased to her hometown team, the Eagles. However, like a lot of Eagle fans, she was not a fan of hiring Chip Kelly. She highly criticized him and thought he would fail. She even stayed the course halfway through the season with this incredibly inaccurate opinion of her team's head coach. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9914482/chip-kelly-success-philadelphia-stagnated-coaching-miscues-qb-instability. Much like Jeffri thought Pete Carroll would fail, Ashley thought Chip would be mediocre at best. At the end of the season Ashley then wrote an article about how Chip Kelly is excellent and a perfect fit for Philadelphia. She just can't seem to keep her opinions straight. Additionally, she picked her hometown team to go far in the playoffs, http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10214379/healthy-explosive-eagles-tough-playoff-draw-first-year-kelly, but when they lost to the Saints she suddenly believed that the Saints were the new super bowl threat because they finally won a road game. http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2013/story/_/id/10245932/sean-payton-drew-brees-make-new-orleans-saints-threat. She did not take into account that the Seahawks are dominant at home and had already beaten the Saints a month earlier. She is wrong 90+% of the time and does not seem to want to admit it.
Why would ESPN allow such an inconsistent and unintelligent writer stay employed? It's making their company look terrible to the public and it's an outrage to others who would be much better writers, but were overlooked by this terrible writer.

Top Video Game Releases of 2014

Time to do a post of a different flavor, a nerdy one. Let's list out some of the most hyped games coming out this year so people know what to expect and pre-order. I've personally played a couple of these too.

1. Titanfall (Xbox/PC 3/11/2014)
I've already pre-ordered this game on PC. I decided to play it on PC as I do not wish to purchase an xbox one or PS4 and the graphics will be better. Also the gameplay should be much smoother with a mouse and keyboard. I got a chance to play the Xbox version of this game at Pax Prime and it didn't disappoint. It's a cross between Call of Duty and Mech Warrior with some crazy jumping and building climbing thrown in as well. I like the FPS aspect of the game. The double jump and building climbing make it a more 3 dimensional fight, something Call of Duty lacks. However, the mechs are fairly OP. It'll be nice if they enable an "infantry only" mode in the game so that people can enjoy the FPS more so than the vehicles.

2. Elder Scrolls Online (PS4/Xbox/PC/MAC 4/4/2014)
I also got this game on pre-order as I'm a fan of a lot of RPG's. I've sunk a ton of hours into Guild Wars 2 and dabbled with The Old Republic. I saw this game at Pax Prime as well and I can only describe it as an Elder Scrolls game that you can play with your friends, which is what everyone's always wanted. I personally hate gaming solo but gaming with friends is fun. You can party up and explore the world and quest together. There are also dungeons and a massive PVP area.

3. The Division (PS4/Xbox/PC End of 2014)
I have yet to see or play this game but the reviews and gameplay trailers look very nice. If I can talk some friends into buying it with me later this year then I'd love to give it a try. It seems like a 3rd person survival game in post apocalyptic America.





4. Destiny (PS4/Xbox 9/9/2014)
As a Halo fanboy I was really excited for Bungie's next project after 343 took over and practically ruined Halo by making it too much like CoD. Once I heard Bungie was making an RPG FPS type game I got really excited because I love both genres and have always wanted a great game that would mix the two styles. Unfortunately Bungie has disappointed me as I do not wish to buy an Xbox One or PS4 and they do not plan to release the game on PC. I believe their "always on" game is meant for PC, but alas they just won't listen. I don't see this game doing well long term as it probably can't compete with the console gamers who prefer CoD and Halo, among other things.


5. WildStar (PC Mid 2014)
I saw this game played at Pax Prime as well and I wasn't a fan. It's very cartoony and less serious than most video games. It reminded me of an MMO with sonic the hedgehog because the graphics are that cartoony. However, people are raving about this game so I expect it to sell quite a bit. I'd personally rather play ESO and possibly more GW2 if they ever decide to put out an expansion.

6. Thief (PS4/Xbox/PC 2/25/2014)
I have yet to see anything on this game other than advertisements but I will say that I was addicted to the older school Thief game on PC as a kid. I memorized the maps and the patrols of the guards. I knew where to hide in the shadows, when to run, and when to fight. The game will be a lot like sneaking around in any Elder Scrolls game though so I could see this getting boring fast.

WSU Football Bowl Game Letdown

It's no surprise to anyone out there, especially Coug fans, that the result of the Gildan New Mexico Bowl against Colorado State has only added fuel to the "Coug'd it" term. However, when it comes to end of game clock management an "air raid" offense just isn't the thing any team wants to utilize. This is the one area where Mike Leach seems to fail dramatically since he believes that throwing for first downs is a better idea than running out the clock. Any football fan, player, or coach would tell you he's dead wrong though. We all know at the end of the game that the team with the lead is going to run the ball 2-3 times during their last series on offense. Some teams even take a knee to avoid fumbling.
Let's recap this game. It was a lot of offense and not much defense on either side of the ball. WSU has an interception prone QB. The Cougs built a 22 point lead at one point in the 2nd half but the defense seemed to allow the Colorado State football team back in the game. Unfortunately for the Cougs the desire to keep the air raid style offense going in the 4th quarter was a huge mistake. Leach should've used one of his lead backs to run the clock, burn the Rams' timeouts, and fly home a winner.
After blowing the 22 point lead and then the 15 point lead trying to pass for first downs but only stopping the clock and not scoring; WSU still had a chance to win with 2 minutes to go. They had the ball and an 8 point lead, with the Rams having zero timeouts. At this point everyone is thinking the game is over. Even taking 3 knees would have been a decent option. However, the turnover prone QB Halliday opted to audible into a QB sneak, something he rarely ever does because he is not a good ball carrier at all. This was the first fatal mistake. He then fumbled and nearly turned it over. Luckily for him the replay showed he was down and the call was reversed. Now everyone is thinking crisis averted, there's no way WSU will turn it over again. WRONG! After bad clock management Leach realized he needed to run the clock so he brought in the short yardage back who is third on the depth chart and had zero carries all game. Why bring in the 3rd string back when you have 2 capable backs who rarely fumble ahead of him? Nobody quite knows. However, any running back should be able to take the handoff, put 2 hands on the ball, and go down as soon as they are hit to protect themselves from getting stripped. Also, any smart coach would certainly remind the RB they just put in to do so, along with his teammates. With this the 3rd stringer RB in, WSU has 25 seconds on the play clock that they could let tick down to about the 1 1/2 minute mark. Instead Halliday immediately calls for the snap and hands it off. The RB is immediately stripped and loses the fumble, this time upheld by replay. WSU just gave the Rams the ball with less than 2 minutes to go, no timeouts, and an 8 point deficit to overcome. Surely the defense can make one final stand to protect this victory. At the very least cover all out routes and deep threats. However, the wrong defense was called or the defense was too tired to cover anyone. They immediately gave up a touchdown in no time at all. Ok now the Rams have to score on a 2 point conversion, something that statistically is still in WSU's favor. Unfortunately, the Cougs let them have the 2 point conversion as well. Ok now the game is tied, less than 30 seconds to go, and the Rams are kicking off deep (no onside kicks). This tells everyone they want to go to OT and WSU should have agreed that going to OT was the best option after the collapse meltdown. However, WSU did the exact wrong thing, they tried for a kick return in lieu of taking a knee when fielding the kick. The kick return then resulted in yet another fumble (that's right, 3 offensive plays in a row where the ball hit the ground). The Rams recovered and kicked a game winning field goal as time expired. WSU just finished the most epic Coug'd it moment of all time. It's almost as if Leach had a hefty bet against himself in Vegas and threw the game on purpose. There's no other reason to explain how WSU lost a 22 point lead so quickly in a game they had won.

A message for everyone out there. When it comes to clock management with a lead, always ere on the side of caution. Taking a knee with 2 minutes to go, the other team having no timeouts, and not snapping the ball with time on the play clock is the best option to preserve an end of game lead. In WSU's case they would have had a 4th down with a few seconds on the clock. A simple punt or a QB running back a few yards until time expired would have both been decent options in that case. The game would have ended in WSU's favor.