Why Do I Continue to Read Peter King?

PBDWake

Member
SoSH Member
May 1, 2008
3,686
Peabody, MA
Or maybe, just maybe, Peter, it'a an ipod touch that the 6 year-old refers to as his "phone". You know, essentially just a hand-held video game device that the parents whip out to keep the kid engaged on car trips?
Even if it's not, so what? There are a lot of extremely limited (call wise) phones that are designed for little kids in emergencies. 3 years ago, my 5 year old nephew was given a phone by his parents. The only numbers he could dial out on were the preprogrammed numbers in it (Home, and the parents cell) and 911. What was more important was that it had GPS tracking, so the parents could know where he was at all times, and could receive incoming calls. The whole setup was like $15 a month. But the parents both worked long hours, and if they needed to let him know someone else was going to be picking him up, or were ever concerned about where he was, they could check. In a world in which you can't always have a parent dropping off and picking their kid up at the bus stop every morning, is it so wrong for a parent to want a direct line of communication to their kid?

Also, he's an old crank, so any touch screen will likely be an iPhone to him.
 

dirtynine

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 17, 2002
8,454
Philly
Beernerdness: Have to hand it to the Yankees, having Goose Island IPA at the downstairs bar behind home plate. Very, very nice
I'm so sick of this particular commentary from PK. In 2012, how much credit do you have to give anybody for having niche beers on tap? It's not like a beer champion in the Yankee front office had to hammer out some deal with a reclusive brewer and have the barrels shipped by clydesdale to Yankee Stadium. Some middle manager read a few marketing surveys and checked a few boxes on a beer distributor's form.

"You have to hand it to the Yankees, I know it's not easy to get Coors (the "banquet" beer, as they call it) on the east coast, but a first class organization makes things like that happen."
 

weeba

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
3,540
Lynn, MA
KSK has also pointed out that Goose Island was purchased by AB Inbev last year, so it's not like it's a small, indy brewery now.
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
14,385
Two crazy bits from the Q&A this week, one on PK, the other just weird:
IN DEFENSE OF PRESEASON FOOTBALL. "You write a lot about the cost of preseason games. I was wondering if you receive a lot of complaints from fans about this? I am a Patriots fan, do not have season tickets, but the friends I have who have tickets do not complain. They enjoy having season tickets and know there are many people who would love to have season tickets but can't -- it is two more chances to tailgate, they know they have eight regular season games to see the top players, and if they get to see the backups playing, they don't mind -- it's a chance to see the entire team, see players you might not see again, see players who might suddenly matter after injuries set in. I see the point you make, but I just have never heard anyone actually complain.''
-- From Andrew Gordon, of Boston
You should read the tweets and emails I get about the subject. I respect that what you're hearing is accurate, but I think the majority of fans who buy tickets feel put upon at paying the same price to see lesser players play as they do for big games during the season.
Okay, who the fuck is Andrew Gordon, and what is he smoking? I've got season tix and there's no way those early games are worth the face value. Most of the time you can't give them away. It's a total burden. I don't know anybody who actually "likes" that aspect of having season tickets. At least PK doesn't try to justify this argument at all. I just can't imagine anyone thinking they haven't heard people complain about the preseason games. I mean, they could at least cut the price of parking!


IF I COULD, I WOULD. "Regular reader and fan of MMQB. I paid particular note to your piece on the officials: 'I cannot say which game this story happened in, but I can tell you it did happen. Final preseason game for two teams. Official calls defensive pass-interference in front of the penalized team's bench. Head coach lambastes the official. Official picks up the flag, tells the coach he's not going to make the call. Coach is stunned.'
I would have expected you to detail specifics of the incident for the benefit of all concerned. You always strike me as well informed. By shielding the particulars of this incident, it takes away from the strength of the story and the concern. At worst, it looks like rumor-mongering.''
-- From Richard Konarski, of Mission, British Columbia
I had a choice when the story was told to me: Tell the story without providing which game it happened in, or which coach did the browbeating of the official, or don't tell it at all. I told it because I think it provided valuable information about a fairly important aspect of the new officials, or at least one of the new officials -- namely, that he could be intimidated into changing his call.
This, however, makes absolutely no sense to me. It's not like there is some infinite amount of preseason games. Last game means you can narrow it down to only 16 games. Plus, if it happened, IT HAPPENED IN FRONT OF 50,000 PEOPLE. Maybe the crowd and the players wondered why the flag was picked up, but it's not like it's hard to miss a flag being thrown, especially since the defensive interference call is almost always called by an official who's in the vicinity of the ball and non-catch and that's where everyone is looking. So, this isn't some kind of secret thing that happened.

The emailer is right that that's an absurd thing to keep "secret." Anybody got the time to figure out which call it was? Anybody notice a flag being picked up? Generally, the broadcast will note immediately when a flag is thrown and then if there's no call, the umpire has to make note of the flag being picked up.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this seems a strange use of purposeful obfuscation.
 

PBDWake

Member
SoSH Member
May 1, 2008
3,686
Peabody, MA
I actually enjoy preseason (weekend) games immensely. It's often the best tailgating weather, I never have any urgency to rush into the gate, or feel any obligation to stay til the end, and in the meantime, I get to do live football. It's a great experience, considering I can usually only make it to 1 or 2 regular season games a year, and I've never been to a playoff game at Gillette. All that being said, even I would never, ever pay anywhere close to face value. So I have zero clue what that guy is talking about. But if tickets were $20 a pop and parking prices were cut, I'd likely go to both every year.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,866
This, however, makes absolutely no sense to me. It's not like there is some infinite amount of preseason games. Last game means you can narrow it down to only 16 games. Plus, if it happened, IT HAPPENED IN FRONT OF 50,000 PEOPLE. Maybe the crowd and the players wondered why the flag was picked up, but it's not like it's hard to miss a flag being thrown, especially since the defensive interference call is almost always called by an official who's in the vicinity of the ball and non-catch and that's where everyone is looking. So, this isn't some kind of secret thing that happened.

The emailer is right that that's an absurd thing to keep "secret." Anybody got the time to figure out which call it was? Anybody notice a flag being picked up? Generally, the broadcast will note immediately when a flag is thrown and then if there's no call, the umpire has to make note of the flag being picked up.

Maybe I'm missing something, but this seems a strange use of purposeful obfuscation.
This would seem to epitomize and bring together several threads of why he is not a journalist. Somebody told him he could print an anecdote if he promises not to source it or explain. He doesn't even say whether or not he verified its veracity or not. And there's no notion that he could have told the guy to fuck off, he can just go do some actual journalism himself and find it, so the only way it would really make sense is if the guy said, "I have a great story for you but I will only tell it if you agree to these conditions beforehand."

Substantively, a pregame flag with replacement officials? No big deal. In formal terms of principle, this is the kind of shit a real journalist would commit seppuku before doing.
 

SydneySox

A dash of cool to add the heat
SoSH Member
Sep 19, 2005
15,605
The Eastern Suburbs
Do you think King thinks he's a journalist these days?

Honestly, without the 'King is an idiot' schtick, giving the guy a little credit, is it possible he has either or both a) accepted he's not a journalist and b) is happy in the position he's 'evolved' to where he just talks about football and tells anecdotes?

I think maybe that's the case.
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
14,385
I'd be completely fine with PK just writing about football and telling anecdotes, but it is hardly rare for him to get up on his journalistic high horse (see the whole kerfluffle about the videographer releasing evidence he collected, blah, blah).

Just look at this particular incident: He's acting like his journalistic ethics prevent him from revealing more! Way to completely misunderstand the role of a journalist. You protect your source when there's no other way to know that something happened. In this case, what he got was on background and he's perfectly ethically correct to go investigate what actually happened himself.

Again, this incident is 100 percent definitely on video somewhere. How many times could a flag have been thrown on a potential pass interference call in those 16 games and then picked up with no actual penalty assessed?

I'd actually sort of be shocked if it happened more than once!

Who is he protecting? He doesn't want to hurt the replacement ref's feelings? He doesn't want to make the coach look like a tattle tale? It makes no sense.

The irony of this press release about the EvoShield deal is priceless:

From the Southeast to the Northeast and then into the Midwest, the award-winning sports journalist and his staffers are traveling in the state-of-the-art EvoShield RV.​
 

SydneySox

A dash of cool to add the heat
SoSH Member
Sep 19, 2005
15,605
The Eastern Suburbs
I know though you're kind of making my point. I think he feels he's evolved into a kind of 'elder' whose role is to do 'more' than report stories. I think he feels these sorts of anecdotes are 'beyond' journalism of the sort people who write the bylines and investigative pieces can produce... but that he can. And when he speaks to an issue - like videographers - it's like he's the big wise prophet descending from the mountain to dispense wisdom.

I would suggest this has a lot do with his public persona. Just yesterday, Simmons (himself a guy whose lack of self-awareness is notable) referenced him in his (shithouse) NFL column in reverential terms. How many team owners and coaches and players do you think namecheck him every week? How many conversations do you think start with "Look, Peter, this is all off the record. I wouldn't tell this to just anyone but you're obviously a great great man of power, virtue and intelligence, so... here's a story for you: -insert PR drop King is too stupid to see through -."

But let's say he's aware of some of this and he thinks he's now at a point where it's his duty? I mean... maybe we can't say that. I reckon there's more of that in his writing than not.
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
14,385
I know though you're kind of making my point. I think he feels he's evolved into a kind of 'elder' whose role is to do 'more' than report stories. I think he feels these sorts of anecdotes are 'beyond' journalism of the sort people who write the bylines and investigative pieces can produce... but that he can. And when he speaks to an issue - like videographers - it's like he's the big wise prophet descending from the mountain to dispense wisdom.

I would suggest this has a lot do with his public persona. Just yesterday, Simmons (himself a guy whose lack of self-awareness is notable) referenced him in his (shithouse) NFL column in reverential terms. How many team owners and coaches and players do you think namecheck him every week? How many conversations do you think start with "Look, Peter, this is all off the record. I wouldn't tell this to just anyone but you're obviously a great great man of power, virtue and intelligence, so... here's a story for you: -insert PR drop King is too stupid to see through -."

But let's say he's aware of some of this and he thinks he's now at a point where it's his duty? I mean... maybe we can't say that. I reckon there's more of that in his writing than not.
You might not be far off, and I definitely see where you're going with this. Partly that he doesn't want to dirty his hands anymore, partly that he doesn't feel he should have to: "I'll make the rules about what's ethical in this particular situation, thank you."

If he wasn't so didactic and sanctimonious all the time, I might even go along with him. He's definitely at the top of his profession and has the resume. Unfortunately, I think he believes his own press and lost any concept of his own fallibility. This makes him really unlikable for me.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
I think both he a Simmons suffer from the same Resting-on-past-reputation issue.

It's not that King is BAD at what he does, it's that he only DOES about 35% of what his ability and access could allow him to do. He's like a once-great band that just puts out a half-assed live album or yet another greatest hits compilation every 2 years instead of going into the studio and working on new stuff.

Sure, he was great once. That only makes his current suck even more egregious.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,866
Do you think King thinks he's a journalist these days?

Honestly, without the 'King is an idiot' schtick, giving the guy a little credit, is it possible he has either or both a) accepted he's not a journalist and b) is happy in the position he's 'evolved' to where he just talks about football and tells anecdotes?

I think maybe that's the case.
He went off on his journalistic ethics recently. So yeah, as hard to believe as it may seem, yeah...

I would normally be in your camp, but it's his own testimony that suggests: it's worse than you think.

Edit: He was pedantic about it too. Weird, right?
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
So, if you recall, King has been trumpeting the fact that he thinks the Broncos will win the Superbowl. This seems odd, given, well... a lot of things. But anyway.

I'll take you through the stories of an eventful Week 1 of the NFL season, but shouldn't that be singular? As in, "story?" Peyton Manning turned the clock back Sunday night, and he got the Super Bowl express rolling in Denver. He had help -- his weaponry on offense, and Tracy Porter's first interception return for touchdown since the Super Bowl-clincher off one Peyton Manning -- but it was a night to revel in the return of one of the greatest quarterbacks ever.
Somewhere, Brett Favre weeps, and looks back on a time when a particularly portly football writer wrote such things about him. Love is cruel.

The headlines of a compelling weekend:
Now that we have the obligatory Manning suck-off done, yes, lets.



Manning Returneth. At 36 and still working to regain his in-the-prime fastball, Manning survived a strange bout of in-game inaction -- he ran two non-kneel-down plays in about an hour of real time, and in 21 minutes of game-clock sandwiching halftime. He used the no-huddle in vintage Manning brilliance, had three consecutive 80-yard touchdown drives, the second ending in his 400th career touchdown pass, and made every fan in Indianapolis who'd been fine with the Manning-for-Andrew Luck tradeoff think, "My Lord, can we have this guy back?''
I love how King just assumes that this is what every Colts fan thinks. That is to say, that they all think like Peter King. Which is to say, that they only think in one dimension, and don't account for payroll or the next 3-10 years.

The win makes Manning 7-1 lifetime against defenses run by Hall of Fame corner/coordinator Dick LeBeau.
King: "Wow. It's amazing how Manning dominates Dick."

The regular officials might want to go to Wikipedia and read about Ronald Reagan firing the Air Traffic Controllers 31 years ago. Not saying the NFL's on the verge of whacking Ed Hochuli and 119 of his officiating peers. Just saying that after 14 of the 16 games of Week 1, the replacement officials have done an adequate job. "We've seen nothing that stood out as a glaring mistake,'' NFL VP Ray Anderson told me at halftime of the late afternoon games.
Of course, then there was one -- the crew in Arizona giving the Seahawks a fourth second-half timeout, instead of three, and the NFL observer on site not straightening out the mess when he had the chance. Bad error. Luckily for the league, the Cardinals hung on to win. Even with that error and game times that dragged, the league's not likely to give much ground if and when talks with the regular officials resume.
I'm not qualified to speak in detail about how good or bad the Refs did. I think they probably did OK, as in a C-level performance, all said and done.

But here's the thing: King has been shitting on them all preseason, and I don't think that their performance this week was any better than how they did a week or two ago when he railed on them in the MMQB and then again in the Mailbag, including calling them out as scabs and such. This seems suspicious to me. My guess? King didn't expect the league to go into the season with replacements, so felt comfortable railing on them because there'd be no real repercussions. Now, however, he has to back off because he just might need to talk to one of these refs for a quote, and needs to go easy on them.

Unveiling a new section of the column: The Deep End
What a...terrible title.




I asked Neil Horsnby of ProFootballFocus.com, the site that examines plays by breaking down all 22 players' roles and performances on every snap, to look at a matchup of the week for me. He'll provide the breakdown of a specific matchup, or how one player performs in a big game.
For Week 1, fortuitously, I asked Hornsby to provide data for Robert Griffin III's first regular season NFL start at New Orleans. Here's what the ProFootballFocus.com study of Griffin's play showed:
So, you ask before the games are played? What kind of idea is that? What if a guy gets injured? What if...

Good lord, this idea sucks already.

• In summation: The best thing Griffin did was not make mistakes, and he had only three or four poor throws. He showed confidence, played well within the system, and evaded the really big hit that eventually dooms mobile quarterbacks. It was an opening game in which Griffin played well beyond his 22 years.
Cliche, cliche, meh, and Griffin did great in not literally getting killed on the field. So there you go!

Newcomer of the Weekend: Randy Moss caught the Niners' first touchdown of the season. He played about a third of the snaps, getting good separation from corners when he was in. And he blocked. That's right. Randy Moss blocked.
Of course, King forgets about Moss' 2007-2009 with New England, and prefers to harp on Moss being lazy, even when he isn't. Which, ironically, is a pretty lazy way to think and/or write about football.










.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
I like when coaches capture a moment and impart the kind of wisdom fourth-grade teachers can impart, but it sounds so logical and simple that ... well, let me throw this story from the Meadowlands at you.
Well, it totally sounds logical when the subject of the story is Mark Sanchez. Guy seems dumber than rocks.

Did you see the silly interception Mark Sanchez threw on the first possession of the Jets' season? Rolling out on second down at his 47, Sanchez neared the sideline when, for reasons known only to him, hs tried way too hard to make something happen, flipping the ball in Favrian style to tight end Jeff Cumberland.
Favre rolls over and cries into his pillow. Pops a percocet to dull the pain.

Meanwhile, Sanchez, reading this column, does a fist pump, jumps up, calls Santonio:

"Yo, bro...Peter King says I'm the next Brett Favre!"

"Listen son,'' Sparano said, "you didn't have to do that. You'd made six or seven positive plays in a row to get us there, and if you throw it away, it's third down and you keep the drive going. It doesn't have to be you winning the game by yourself. Cut your losses. Let your teammates help.''
Sparano told me last night: "It was an easy conversation to have. Mark's a very good kid. He knew. Every play doesn't have to be a home run.''
So, let me get this straight: Sparano saved the Jets season because he told Mark Sanchez, fourth year QB, that completing a short pass is better than throwing an interception?

Jesus, he's dumber than I thought.

9. New York Jets (1-0). How cool is this: Tim Tebow was in the game on the first play of the season, a second tight end. But we never saw the full monty with Tebow, because as offensive coordinator Tony Sparano said afterward, why empty the ideological saddlebag when you don't have to? (Actually, "ideological saddlebag'' is mine. Don't you just love it?)
Indeed. By the way, what ideology do you suppose the Jets saddlebag subscribes to? Marxism? Environmentalism? Existentialism? Has Tebow constructed a Theist saddlebag?
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Note of the Week

I beg you, Delta Air Lines and LaGuardia Airport. Please fix the insane asylum that is Terminal C and D, and the Marine Air Terminal, at the airport. For the unfamiliar, here's how it works if you've got a Delta flight at LaGuardia. Delta is at Terminal A (the Marine Air Terminal), Terminal C and Terminal D. When you approach the airport, the Delta Shuttle (flights to Washington and Boston) operate out of Terminal A. The other flights operate out of Terminal C or D.
If you print out your boarding pass a couple hours before your flight and head for the airport, you'll usually have the gate number on the boarding pass. If not, God help you.
Let's say you're not from New York, and you're just in town, and you have to catch a plane out of LaGuardia on Delta. Cab driver says to you, "Where to?'' You say, "LaGuardia. Delta terminal." Cabbie wonders if that's the Marine Air Terminal, Terminal C or Terminal D. You don't have your boarding pass. So you don't know. You approach the airport, and there should be some signage on site, telling you where your flight is flying out of. Nope. No idea.
And if you guess Terminal D, let's say, and it's Terminal C, you get through the rat's maze of security -- it's always long, because Delta is always busy -- and then have to get sardined into a bus downstairs for the ride to Terminal C. Or if it's the Marine Air Terminal, you've got a long ride on a different airport bus.
I mean, anybody at Delta ever hear of signage?

So, to summarize: King, who travels out of LGA on a regular basis, imagines that people from out of town might get a little confused about which terminal to go to. You know, if they:
A) don't look at their flight information before they print their boarding pass, AND
B) if that boarding pass doesn't have the gate number.

Oh, and
C) if they don't get to the airport an hour before their flight, like they're supposed to.

If they fail to do any one of those things, they may have a stressful 20 minutes where they have to ask someone where to go, and get on a bus for a 5 minute drive to another terminal.

But again: this never happens to King. King is just looking out for everyone else. What a guy.

So, Delta: how about spending 20-30 Million to redo some terminals? Make 'em close together? Lord knows LGA is a broad expanse of airport with plenty of room to work with. And, construction wouldn't cause a big disruption, it's not like NYC is a huge airline hub or anything. We all know airlines are doing really well these days and have plenty of excess cash to throw at problems. What's the big deal? Get 'er done, ok?


Tweet of the Week II

"Troy polamalu is the most instinctive safety in the history of the #nfl #pittsburghsteelers''
-- @merrilhoge, the ESPN football analyst and former NFL fullback, after Polamalu blitzed in the first quarter at Denver and tackled running back Knowshon Moreno for no gain.

Oh fuck off, Polamalu over-plays every fucking down. It's not instinct, it's all-out pursuit. Sometimes he gets the guy, but other times he gets burned. He's like the Rob Deer NFL safeties.

"Don't go. I don't know if I can do this without you.''
-- Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti, to a fading Modell at his hospital bedside Wednesday in Baltimore, from a terrific piece by Ravens PR czar Kevin Byrne on baltimoreravens.com about the last day of Art Modell's life. The piece was spine-tingling. It included a passage about GM Ozzie Newsome rubbing Modell's hands the final time he would ever see his old boss and saying into his ear: "I want you to feel what good hands feel like.''
I guess that old saw about how, being on your death bed, you never wish you had spent more time at work isn't really true. Or Steve Bisciotti forgot about it. I mean, isn't it a little cold and selfish to say to a guy as he's dying: "Hey, man, can you stick around a bit longer so I don't have to work as hard"? Cripes.

And the thing about the "good hands"? WTF is that? What does that mean? I'm seriously not sure. Does that mean that Modell was going to hell, and he'd only feel evil hands from now on?

From his former boss atop the NFL:
"Absolutely. Absolutely killed him ... As time passed by, it was more difficult for him to satisfy himself that he wasn't responsible in some way for at least some of the harm there, some of the harm to the fans' passion.''
-- Former NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, to host Chris Russo on SiriusXM "Mad Dog Radio,'' about the responsibility Modell felt later in life for ripping the Browns out of Cleveland.
Yup. Right there on the chart, the doctor wrote: "Died of an acute moving-franchise-from-Cleveland syndrome."

Perhaps "killed him" isn't the best turn-of-phrase to use there, hm?

c. My forecast of the Jets: awful. I mean, I thought they'd get wiped by the Bills, and it was the Jets who did the wiping.
Ewww.

b. Anything I can get you, Brandon? A hot towel, perhaps? Some warm milk?
Ewwww. Jesus, what a creep.

e. This is what the Red Sox have gotten for the final four years of the six-year Daisuke Matsuzaka contract: 17 wins, a 5.52 ERA, a 1.52 WHIP. For $37 million. Matsuzaka, Lackey, Beckett. Boy, the Red Sox really know pitching.
Whatever. You're the John Lackey of Red Sox fans, asshole.

f. I've got a great idea. Let's pay Zack Greinke $17 million a year
I know he's trying to be funny, but...dude, you're not a baseball writer. You're not a spokesperson for Red Sox fans. Fuck the fuck Off.

g. The freebie Red Sox calendar I got last spring extends to January 2013, with a different man each month. Just checked it out the other day. October: Josh Beckett. November: Carl Crawford. December: Clay Buchholz. January: Bobby Valentine. Three out of four ain't bad. Weirdest thing about Valentine's radio diatribe is he sounded like a man who is either already unglued or within five minutes of being there. Scary.
h. Be careful, Clay Buchholz. That's some bad omen.
King is like Shank except somehow worse.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
j. Never in the history of rotisserie baseball has a team tanked the way the 2012 Montclair Pedroias have tanked. In two weeks, I've gone from second place to sixth -- and you know if you play the game how impossible it is to do that this late in the season. I stink so bad I can smell my team through the laptop.
And that, right there, is yet more evidence that you should not be talking about baseball. You obviously don't know shit.

m. Springsteen at Wrigley update, from my former producer at CNNSI.com, Dave Wilke, who was on hand Saturday night: "Halfway through the show it started to pour. Bruce could have finished the show playing on stage under the canopy but instead he spent the next hour and a half running into the audience and dancing in the rain. He busted out 'Who'll Stop the Rain'acoustically."
Unremarkable Springsteen anecdote from a third party. Thanks, man. We fucking NEEDED that. Shit's embarrassing.

I mean, seriously: What is his motivation? To look cool? By making random and vaguely homoerotic references to a 60 year old rock star that hasn't had a hit single in probably 20 years? Or does King think that Springsteen needs his help in gaining respect or something?

"People! Take my word for it! This Springsteen guy is gonna be HUGE!"

Next year, King's going to openly wonder if Madonna is being intentionally scandalous or not.

n. Coffeenerdness: It's a rough night when there's one pot of Italian Roast going at 11:45, then another at 4:15. I may have to take Florio's advice soon, and give the 5 Hour Energy a try, at least on Sunday nights.
I hope he's talking about 4:15 PM, because if it takes him 12 hours to write this piece of shit, he's an even bigger asshole than I thought.

o. Beernerdness: I hate to be teetotaling this early in the season, but other than the Allagash White I had before dinner the other night, I don't have a good beernerdness story for you. Promise to do more research this week and come back with a good new beer next week.
Oh thank god.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
He's mentioned it maybe six or seven times.


I've never tried it, but it looks like an American weissbier. I'm not into weissbiers, but if I was, I'd drink one from Germany. Of course, King probably went to Germany and didn't even think to try one...
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,464
Southwestern CT
The regular officials might want to go to Wikipedia and read about Ronald Reagan firing the Air Traffic Controllers 31 years ago. Not saying the NFL's on the verge of whacking Ed Hochuli and 119 of his officiating peers. Just saying that after 14 of the 16 games of Week 1, the replacement officials have done an adequate job. "We've seen nothing that stood out as a glaring mistake,'' NFL VP Ray Anderson told me at halftime of the late afternoon games.

Of course, then there was one -- the crew in Arizona giving the Seahawks a fourth second-half timeout, instead of three, and the NFL observer on site not straightening out the mess when he had the chance. Bad error. Luckily for the league, the Cardinals hung on to win. Even with that error and game times that dragged, the league's not likely to give much ground if and when talks with the regular officials resume.
I'm not qualified to speak in detail about how good or bad the Refs did. I think they probably did OK, as in a C-level performance, all said and done.

But here's the thing: King has been shitting on them all preseason, and I don't think that their performance this week was any better than how they did a week or two ago when he railed on them in the MMQB and then again in the Mailbag, including calling them out as scabs and such. This seems suspicious to me. My guess? King didn't expect the league to go into the season with replacements, so felt comfortable railing on them because there'd be no real repercussions. Now, however, he has to back off because he just might need to talk to one of these refs for a quote, and needs to go easy on them.
Going to focus on just this because it's one of the only things I saw this weekend for a number of reasons and I can't let it go.

The fiasco at the end of the game in Arizona was gruesome, because the replacement refs were so obviously out of their depth and were just as obviously given an incorrect interpretation after the fact by the on-site NFL observer. The scandalous part of this is that the only conclusion one can draw from watching the event unfold in real time - the only conclusion - is that the NFL realized that the refs had made an incredible blunder, but also realized that there was nothing they could do about it, since there's no penalty for calling a time out you don't have if the refs are stupid enough to give it to you. So they provided a false explanation for the refs to feed to the crowd on hand and the TV audience in an attempt to obscure the mistake.

This is a very big deal, as it could undermine the NFL's credibility on many fronts. And with this as context, King's reaction is simply incredible.

In week 1, the precise scenario that King had been warning about comes true, and the NFL tried to cover up the blunder both in real time and in their comments after the games. Instead of following through on this, King abandons his previous position and instead fires a warning shot at the real refs telling them that they need to fall in line or risk termination. And while he acknowledged the fiasco in Arizona, he wrote it off as being an event that had no influence over the outcome.

There is no possible explanation* for the sort of dramatic turnabout other than King being reached by someone in the commissioner's office and being told to back off.

Edit: * Unless King is far stupider than I thought.
 

bsartist618

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
850
He's mentioned it maybe six or seven times.


I've never tried it, but it looks like an American weissbier. I'm not into weissbiers, but if I was, I'd drink one from Germany. Of course, King probably went to Germany and didn't even think to try one...
Allagash is a world-class micro-brewery with a particular focus on Belgian-style ales. They tend to be a bit pricey for a domestic brewery, but otherwise you can't go wrong if you enjoy Belgian beer.

I enjoy lurking your weekly MMQB take downs. Thank you.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,283
The regular officials might want to go to Wikipedia and read about Ronald Reagan firing the Air Traffic Controllers 31 years ago. Not saying the NFL's on the verge of whacking Ed Hochuli and 119 of his officiating peers. Just saying that after 14 of the 16 games of Week 1, the replacement officials have done an adequate job. "We've seen nothing that stood out as a glaring mistake,'' NFL VP Ray Anderson told me at halftime of the late afternoon games.
Of course, then there was one -- the crew in Arizona giving the Seahawks a fourth second-half timeout, instead of three, and the NFL observer on site not straightening out the mess when he had the chance. Bad error. Luckily for the league, the Cardinals hung on to win. Even with that error and game times that dragged, the league's not likely to give much ground if and when talks with the regular officials resume.
I'm not qualified to speak in detail about how good or bad the Refs did. I think they probably did OK, as in a C-level performance, all said and done.

But here's the thing: King has been shitting on them all preseason, and I don't think that their performance this week was any better than how they did a week or two ago when he railed on them in the MMQB and then again in the Mailbag, including calling them out as scabs and such. This seems suspicious to me. My guess? King didn't expect the league to go into the season with replacements, so felt comfortable railing on them because there'd be no real repercussions. Now, however, he has to back off because he just might need to talk to one of these refs for a quote, and needs to go easy on them.
The best part of this is that he says they should go to wikipedia to read about it.

And, whether or not they are good refs is beside the point I'm about to make--most are probably pretty successful at whatever they do in life. They probably know all about the ATC strike and their firing by Reagan.




o. Beernerdness: I hate to be teetotaling this early in the season, but other than the Allagash White I had before dinner the other night, I don't have a good beernerdness story for you. Promise to do more research this week and come back with a good new beer next week.
Wait, so he thinks he's giving the people beer they don't know about? From on high?
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
14,385
I guess that old saw about how, being on your death bed, you never wish you had spent more time at work isn't really true. Or Steve Bisciotti forgot about it. I mean, isn't it a little cold and selfish to say to a guy as he's dying: "Hey, man, can you stick around a bit longer so I don't have to work as hard"? Cripes.

And the thing about the "good hands"? WTF is that? What does that mean? I'm seriously not sure. Does that mean that Modell was going to hell, and he'd only feel evil hands from now on?
I believe Newsome was trying to tell Model the team would "be in good hands," ie. his, so Modell wouldn't have to worry, as he took his dying breath, whether the team he loved so much would go to shit upon his demise.

Consider my spine untingled. I mean, is King really raving that hard about a piece put up on the team web site by the fucking PR guy?
 

24JoshuaPoint

Grand Theft Duvet
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2004
4,944
Cell Block C
Allagash White is a white beer from Maine, I'd say more Belgian-style. It's pretty good (a lot better than the dreadfully overrated Shock Top).
Damn him for liking one of my go to beers. Allagash Black is pretty good too.
 

Dehere

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2010
3,143
Do you think King thinks he's a journalist these days?

Honestly, without the 'King is an idiot' schtick, giving the guy a little credit, is it possible he has either or both a) accepted he's not a journalist and b) is happy in the position he's 'evolved' to where he just talks about football and tells anecdotes?

I think maybe that's the case.
Hell. Yes. I think it's likely that this is the case. Peter King is making a hell of a living being the Jay Leno of pro football, and no matter how unbearable SOSH may find it his schtick works for a sizable audience.

He's not an NFL jounalist. He's an NFL personality. There's a big audience out there for personality-driven football news, superficial analysis, and personal anecdotes culled from a selection of the most inoffensive White Dad topics imaginable. He obviously understands this.

I don't even fault him for choosing this route. If you can get rich being the bard to millions of 50+ dudes who are sort of into football but mostly just want something to read while they take a crap at work, more power to you. It's not really for me but that's why I read this thread instead of actually reading MMQB.
 

Dollar

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2006
11,210
g. The freebie Red Sox calendar I got last spring extends to January 2013, with a different man each month. Just checked it out the other day. October: Josh Beckett. November: Carl Crawford. December: Clay Buchholz. January: Bobby Valentine. Three out of four ain't bad.
Am I missing something here, or is anyone else confused by the "three out of four ain't bad?" Does he realize that two out of the four are no longer on the Sox? I can't figure out what the "three" refers to.

He either thinks the Sox have already fired Bobby V, or one of Beckett/Crawford is still with the Sox. I'm not sure which.

Or maybe I'm totally missing something.
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,391
He thinks Bobby V will be fired, so that 3 out of the 4 guys will be gone by January. He was being sarcastic.
 

BoSoxFink

Stripes
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
7,662
South Park
Am I missing something here, or is anyone else confused by the "three out of four ain't bad?" Does he realize that two out of the four are no longer on the Sox? I can't figure out what the "three" refers to.

He either thinks the Sox have already fired Bobby V, or one of Beckett/Crawford is still with the Sox. I'm not sure which.

Or maybe I'm totally missing something.
He wrote it in the completely wrong context I believe. I am pretty sure he is being sarcastic and saying that they had 3 out of the last 4 guys in the calendar off the team and just missed on Buchholz by the end of the year. Obviously that means he is assuming Valentine will be fired as soon as the season is over, but still he wrote it like a moron that most people could not understand.
 

Dollar

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2006
11,210
He wrote it in the completely wrong context I believe. I am pretty sure he is being sarcastic and saying that they had 3 out of the last 4 guys in the calendar off the team and just missed on Buchholz by the end of the year. Obviously that means he is assuming Valentine will be fired as soon as the season is over, but still he wrote it like a moron that most people could not understand.
Yeah, I kinda figured that's where he was going with it. "One out of four ain't bad" would have made a lot more sense, IMO.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
8,568
Unremarkable Springsteen anecdote from a third party. Thanks, man. We fucking NEEDED that. Shit's embarrassing.

I mean, seriously: What is his motivation? To look cool? By making random and vaguely homoerotic references to a 60 year old rock star that hasn't had a hit single in probably 20 years? Or does King think that Springsteen needs his help in gaining respect or something?
I know that you were on a roll here, but:
(1) I am not a Springsteen partisan, but judging the quality of a musician by whether he's had a hit single in 20 years is ridiculous. Here's another metric for you -- his new album debuted at #1 on the Billboard Top 200.
(2) Springsteen's gotten a lot of publicity lately -- new album, many fawning magazine stories, prominent on Obama's campaign playlist -- so it's not like he's fawning over someone no one's heard of
(3) Do a Twitter search for Springsteen and marvel at the unabashed love for him by sportswriters. If King, as referenced above, is writing for 50 year-old guys reading printouts during lunch, Springsteen updates will always be crowd-pleasers.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
I know that you were on a roll here, but:
(1) I am not a Springsteen partisan, but judging the quality of a musician by whether he's had a hit single in 20 years is ridiculous. Here's another metric for you -- his new album debuted at #1 on the Billboard Top 200.
(2) Springsteen's gotten a lot of publicity lately -- new album, many fawning magazine stories, prominent on Obama's campaign playlist -- so it's not like he's fawning over someone no one's heard of
(3) Do a Twitter search for Springsteen and marvel at the unabashed love for him by sportswriters. If King, as referenced above, is writing for 50 year-old guys reading printouts during lunch, Springsteen updates will always be crowd-pleasers.
Yea, I'm going to my 18th and 19th Springsteen shows this coming November, so spare me the lecture on what makes a great artist and all that.

You're missing the point, which is: A) why does he think people who want to know about football care about Springsteen concerts, and B) why does he decide 2012 is the right time to talk about them?

As for A, you repeat the point made earlier in the thread, that sportswriters seem to like Bruce a lot, and a lot of 50 year old dudes probably do too. But here's the thing: one, Bruce isnt nearly as popular outside of the northeast as he is in Boston, NY and Philly. He's wrong if he thinks that everyone in that demographic "nods their heads" , as Bill Simmons is fond of saying, whenever they read about Springsteen in King's column. To a lot of people in the south and Midwest, Springsteen is barely distinguishable from Joh Mellancamp, Billy Joel, and Bob Seger. He's just "The one from Jersey".

Moreover though, anyone who is already a fan of Speingsteen already knows he's a great performer that plays long shows and all that. Which brings us to B, why does King talk about him now? Did he just discover that lots of people still respect Bruce Springsteen?

Maybe you're right, and he's just going for an easy layup with middle aged dudes, but that's still a stupid and misguided way to please/ build his fanbase.

EDIT: I mean, when I say in my original comment that it's "embarrassing", I mean AS A SPRINGSTEEN FAN, I am embarrassed by King's over praise, because it lacks any substance or context. I'd be shocked if King could name 10 Springsteen song that aren't on the Greatest Hits.

And it's so Peter King, too, to praise the appearance of greatness over what goes into making something great in the first place. Favre's grit, Jeter's cool, Springsteen's exuberant performances... These are all signs of something deeper in the person, but King doesn't really want to go there. He'd rather just judge a book by its cover and go with it.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,866
I'm not qualified to speak in detail about how good or bad the Refs did. I think they probably did OK, as in a C-level performance, all said and done.

But here's the thing: King has been shitting on them all preseason, and I don't think that their performance this week was any better than how they did a week or two ago when he railed on them in the MMQB and then again in the Mailbag, including calling them out as scabs and such. This seems suspicious to me. My guess? King didn't expect the league to go into the season with replacements, so felt comfortable railing on them because there'd be no real repercussions. Now, however, he has to back off because he just might need to talk to one of these refs for a quote, and needs to go easy on them.
As always, he's such a fucking Tory.


Of course, King forgets about Moss' 2007-2009 with New England, and prefers to harp on Moss being lazy, even when he isn't. Which, ironically, is a pretty lazy way to think and/or write about football.
<3 you.

(brass ones)
 
Moreover though, anyone who is already a fan of Speingsteen already knows he's a great performer that plays long shows and all that. Which brings us to B, why does King talk about him now? Did he just discover that lots of people still respect Bruce Springsteen?
I agree with most of your posts but I can't single him out and criticize him for this. I don't know what it is about Springsteen but every fucking fan of his I know talks about him non stop. His music isn't my cup of tea but he seems like a nice enough guy...however I've grown to hate him because so many obnoxious, douchey, 50 year old white guys talk about Bruce every waking minute like he invented music. Most of those guys are well off, stick up their ass types, yet they decide to embrace the "working man" mantra on concert night. Each brags about the number of times they've been to his shows and they have some weird fascination about the playlists. When I think of Springsteen, I think of Butch Stearns, Peter King, Pete Abe and a million guys I know just like that. So in summation, I can't stand King, but him commenting on his adulation of The Boss is par for the course for every Bruce fan I know (present poster excluded).
Edit - my shitty grammar.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,848
Oregon
Which brings us to B, why does King talk about him now? Did he just discover that lots of people still respect Bruce Springsteen?
My theory is that in the time that PK lived in Boston and subsequently, he developed a friendship with Abraham ... as evidenced by the string of PeteAbe tweets King mentioned. During this time, King also noticed Abraham's obsession with "this Springsteen fellow" and wondered what all the fuss was about.

At least that's the theory I going on.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
8,568
Yea, I'm going to my 18th and 19th Springsteen shows this coming November, so spare me the lecture on what makes a great artist and all that.
This makes no sense. You think Springsteen is great, but King is not allowed to write about him? He adds random observations to his column every week. You should be happy that he's referencing someone worthy of being referenced. If your beef is with his I-know-more-that-football approach to his column, then that's a more macro issue then his Springsteen reference.

As someone who reached this point with Simmons long ago, I'll say, with absolutely no disrespect intended, that I think you may no longer be able to rationally discuss King, which means that you're sometimes left tilting at windmills. I think this is such an instance.
 

Merkle's Boner

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2011
3,862
This makes no sense. You think Springsteen is great, but King is not allowed to write about him? He adds random observations to his column every week. You should be happy that he's referencing someone worthy of being referenced. If your beef is with his I-know-more-that-football approach to his column, then that's a more macro issue then his Springsteen reference.

As someone who reached this point with Simmons long ago, I'll say, with absolutely no disrespect intended, that I think you may no longer be able to rationally discuss King, which means that you're sometimes left tilting at windmills. I think this is such an instance.
This. The vitriol the writer you reference spews at King is absolutely appalling to me. The guy may not be your favorite writer, he may be a horrible writer, but good God get a grip. I think we can be constructive with our criticism without completely denigrating a man trying to make a living. At least that's what I hope to teach my kids.
 

PBDWake

Member
SoSH Member
May 1, 2008
3,686
Peabody, MA
This makes no sense. You think Springsteen is great, but King is not allowed to write about him? He adds random observations to his column every week. You should be happy that he's referencing someone worthy of being referenced. If your beef is with his I-know-more-that-football approach to his column, then that's a more macro issue then his Springsteen reference.

As someone who reached this point with Simmons long ago, I'll say, with absolutely no disrespect intended, that I think you may no longer be able to rationally discuss King, which means that you're sometimes left tilting at windmills. I think this is such an instance.
I don't really see where the issue here is. King writes a football column. Or, rather, King writes a column about things related to football. That he's had to outsource the actual analysis of football to some guy from PFT in his column is beside the point. However, Springsteen isn't football. Hell, King wasn't even there for the concert, so it's not even like "I went to a great concert!" and it's a personal anecdote. He's shoehorning something in that has no relevance whatsoever. Whether or not Springsteen is a great musician is irrelevant. Being good at your (non-football) craft shouldn't be the deciding factor as to whether or not you make it into a column called "Monday Morning Quarterback".

Coming at it from another direction, I think your reaction might be different if it was someone other than Springsteen. What if It was yet another reference to, say, Red Hot Chili Peppers, and he was just casually dropping that someone he knew went to a RHCP concert and they kicked ass for the 3rd time in a month?
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,464
Southwestern CT
Let me try to help you understand what we're doing here.

This is not a thread where we dish out high-minded criticism in the hopes that Peter King may drop by, take our thoughts to heart and change his writing style. Nor is this a thread where we're trying to instruct our children.

This is a thread where we are mocking Peter King for becoming a parody of his former self. And we're having a lot of fun doing it, because King is a guy who possesses both talent and access but lacks any sense of self-awareness and has become so lazy and entitled that he has trouble stringing together coherent thoughts these days. And yet he puts himself out there, week after week as if he is the official spokesperson for all that is holy about the NFL while not realizing that he's morphed into the official spokesperson for sanctimonious douchebags worldwide.

Is Dr. Leather's obsession with King's obsession with Springsteen a bit over the top? Perhaps. Do I want it to continue? Abso-fucking-lutely.