http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2018/12/attacking-poll-attacker.html
When Gary Parrish of CBS Sports put Marquette at 26 in his most recent Top 25 And 1 column, my first thought was "yeah, that's wrong." After listening to his comments on the CBS Sports Eye on College Basketball podcast, I decided I needed to explain why. First of all, I do generally really enjoy Parrish's work. I listen to the pod all year long, I read both the Top 25 And 1 & Poll Attacks, & follow him on Twitter. I think Parrish does a good job & is entertaining to follow on various platforms.
But in the most recent CBS Sports Eye on College Basketball podcast, Parrish defended his placement of Marquette using what could only be described as pretzel logic. So in the spirit of Poll Attacks, I decided to break down his defense. Here's the bulk of what Parrish had to say:
"
This is the most common thing I hear from Marquette fans: How can you have us so low when we've got three top-15 wins? No you don't. You have one, over Wisconsin, at home, in overtime. You beat Kansas State when they were in the top-15 of the AP poll but they're unranked now, 28th at Kenpom. You beat Buffalo when they were in the top-15 of the AP poll but they're 21st now & 31st at Kenpom. My point being, you've got to stop it. You can't keep claiming you've got three top-15 wins...if you want to say I've got Marquette too low & give some reasons why you think I do, that's fine...They're 30th at Kenpom. It's not like they're 11th at Kenpom & I've got them 25th or 26th or whatever...In other words, think of it this way, on Selection Sunday, the Committee is going to base everything off of where teams are on Selection Sunday. You beat somebody in November or December when that school was ranked in the top-15, now they're no longer in the top-40, it won't register like a top-15 win."
Parrish is right about top-15 wins, but he's wrong about resume quality, which is what I talked about when I made my own comments on Twitter. In the Indiana capsule at #25, Parrish talks about how the Hoosiers have 5 top-50 wins at Kenpom. Let's use that as a guide. Let's look at top-50 wins both in terms of quantity & quality, & all losses. This image will be our guide. The darker green the win, the better it is. The darker red the loss, the worse it is. If a loss is listed in black, it means it's a sub-50 loss, so really bad.
Also, the defense of "look at their Pomeroy ranking", which Parrish used above when he referenced Marquette being ranked 30th at Kenpom, is not a valid defense when you have Kenpom #14 Nebraska at 24 & #44 Kenpom Arizona State 8 spots higher at 16. Also, head-to-head will not be a tiebreaker. It is effectively using the transitive property of basketball. Because not everyone plays each other, we simply have to compare resumes using ranks. So when comparing Wisconsin & Marquette, it's a loss at #30 and a win against #12.
Here's the spreadsheet showing top-50 wins and all losses:
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Vmd4Fh2mhPo/XCQPzi17J2I/AAAAAAAAAJE/nA-pUbaX6C0aKSMIi8Eyu1NYES7oJp5MACLcBGAs/s1600/CS%2BPoll.png)
So here we go. Marquette will only be used as a reference point. Let's compare resumes by breaking resumes into three categories.
Clearly Inferior to Marquette (14)24. Nebraska: They have great computer numbers, but Marquette has 3 wins better than the Huskers' best win & they have a glaring loss to Minnesota.
23. Cincinnati: Zero top-50 wins. Their loss column looks good, but how about actually beating somebody, anybody, before you get ahead of a Marquette team with 4 wins in the top-40?
21. Houston: Undefeated is great, but they haven't beat a single team as good as Marquette's fourth-best win. I'll take 4-2 against the top-40 over 0-0 every single day.
19. North Carolina: The win over Gonzaga is great, but they've done nothing else of consequence. They've only played 4 top-50 games & lost 3 of them. One game does not a resume make.
18. Kentucky: If North Carolina doesn't quality, the Wildcats' case is even weaker. Win over UNC, sure, but only 2 top-50 games & a loss outside the top-50 should disqualify them from the rankings altogether. They're only ranked because Parrish had them #1 preseason. That's it.
17. Mississippi State: 3 top-50 wins to Marquette's 4, each win they have is of lesser quality, & a worse loss than any that Marquette has taken.
16. Arizona State: Their two best wins are better than Marquette's two best, but MU wins in terms of quantity & that loss at Vanderbilt is really glaring. It's amazing that everyone was ready to drop ASU like a bad habit after Vandy, then suddenly everyone forgets that when they beat Kansas. That was a really bad loss to take. It is the single worst loss of any team in the Top 25 And 1.
15. Auburn: No team in the nation right now says "confirmation bias" like Auburn. Zero top-50 wins. Zero. Sure, their losses are good losses, but like Cincinnati, beat somebody, anybody, please.
14. NC State: What has NC State done to deserve this spot? Beat Auburn, who doesn't belong here in the first place. Ignoring that fact, NC State has padded their resume with cupcakes & has half Marquette's top-50 wins & of lesser quality.
12. Ohio State: Only 2 top-50 wins, wins are of inferior quality, & a loss worse than any loss Marquette has suffered.
11. Virginia Tech: They are being propped up by a win over Purdue that loses luster by the minute, have a worse loss than any Marquette has, & nothing else of substance. Another case of confirmation bias with zero substance to back it up.
9. Texas Tech: We already deconstructed Nebraska, which is the only top-50 win on TTU's resume. Are they really in the top-10 because of 1 decent win & 9 against sub-90 Kenpom opponents? Or is it because they played Duke tough for 35 minutes? Sorry, but if results matter, this ranking is a joke.I think Chris Beard is a great coach, but their eFG% is propped up against the #337 ranked schedule in the country. If TTU belongs here, why isn't St. John's right next to them?
8. Michigan State: I know, it seems like sacrilege to mention Sparty. The computers love them. But they don't own a single top-25 win. Their worst loss is worse than Marquette's worst loss. Maybe if they played the same schedule MU wouldn't be as good, but based on the schedule each team has played, Marquette owns the better resume.
3. Nevada: Houston, we have a problem. It's that Houston has two wins better than Nevada's only top-50 win & is ranked 18 spots behind them. And if Marquette should clearly be ahead of Houston, they should also clearly be ahead of Nevada. Nevada might be great, might be deep, might have won all their games, but Marquette is 4-2 against the top-40 & Nevada is 0-0. Get back to me when you actually play someone. So March 21, 2019.
Comparable to Marquette (6)25. Indiana: The Hoosiers don't quite have the quality of Marquette's wins, but they edge them in quantity & have a road win. The loss to Arkansas is bad, but since the 5 top-50 Kenpom wins is the root of the discussion, I'll consider them on par with us.
22. Oklahoma: Matt Norlander likes to talk about their Quadrant 1&2 wins, but Parrish used Kenpom top-50, so that's the measuring stick. Marquette wins in terms of quantity & quality of wins, the Sooners win in quantity & quality of losses, we'll call it a wash.
20. Iowa: Marquette wins in terms of quantity & quality of wins, Iowa wins quality of losses. Iowa having half the total top-50 wins is a problem, but no losses outside the top-12 is really impressive.
13. Wisconsin: Best win goes to Marquette, second best win goes to Wisconsin, best loss goes to Wisconsin, second best loss goes to Marquette. Flip the coin between these two.
10. Florida State: Marquette has the better win, FSU the better loss (and one less loss). These teams should be close together.
7. Gonzaga: Yes, I'm going there. The Duke win is awesome. Really impressive. But what else have they done? The Creighton win is nice, but Marquette has four wins between Duke & Creighton. The Zags have two losses as well. Better losses than Marquette, but 4 wins better than Gonzaga's second best win is a lot to overcome. I'm not saying Marquette should be ahead of Gonzaga. I wouldn't rank them there. But in terms of resume, Marquette's is right there next to Gonzaga.
Clearly Better Than Marquette (5)6. Kansas, 5. Michigan, 4. Virginia, 2. Duke, 1. Tennessee: These are the ones I'm not going to go into. Though that Arizona State loss is ugly for Kansas, Marquette simply doesn't match the quality of victories these teams have & every other loss is better than our best loss.
So what does this all mean? If you're going to cite resumes as the reason for your ranking using Kenpom top-50 as the basis, Marquette should be no worse than 12th. And if you are going to make part of your profession attacking other people's work, be willing to accept the criticism when someone justifiably attacks your own, especially when you invite them to do so on your podcast.
It also means that Marquette isn't the only team that has reason to gripe. Gonzaga, Florida State, Wisconsin, Iowa, Oklahoma, & Indiana should all be moving way up.
Um, isn't the only reason Buffalo is no longer in the top 15 is because we beat them?
What would they have been ranked if they won?
Game, set, match Brew!
Chick also had the same thought I did. MU clearly played a part in knocking Buffalo and KSU out of the Top 15.
Good stuff Alan.
Nicely done
Brew - Based on your analysis I think we should be #7...
Anybody tweet this to him?
Quote from: Galway Eagle on December 26, 2018, 07:49:40 PM
Anybody tweet this to him?
I may have ;D
But the more the merrier ;)
So he defends his Marquette ranking because of KenPom. Let's look at some other KenPom rankings.
30. Marquette
33. Iowa
35. Houston
44. Arizona State
Hmm...
Parrish is an a hole and scumbag. Don't get me started on him and his "reporting" on the recruiting of Malik Newman.
Nice work. I have no problem where MU is ranked, but it is annoying when analysts, such as Parrish, have such strong opinions about certain things without really doing much research on their own.
Quote from: Lazar's Headband on December 26, 2018, 08:18:01 PM
So he defends his Marquette ranking because of KenPom. Let's look at some other KenPom rankings.
44. Arizona State
That's the worst one by far. Completely ignored the Vandy loss just a couple days before. Has them 28 spots ahead of their kenpom ranking while using kenpom to justify his Marquette ranking.
Quote from: AirPunch on December 26, 2018, 08:50:24 PMNice work. I have no problem where MU is ranked, but it is annoying when analysts, such as Parrish, have such strong opinions about certain things without really doing much research on their own.
I thought about this all weekend but decided yesterday not to write it. Then I heard Parrish's defense on the podcast today coupled with the "give some reasons" response and I couldn't resist.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 26, 2018, 08:58:03 PM
That's the worst one by far. Completely ignored the Vandy loss just a couple days before. Has them 28 spots ahead of their kenpom ranking while using kenpom to justify his Marquette ranking.
I thought about this all weekend but decided yesterday not to write it. Then I heard Parrish's defense on the podcast today coupled with the "give some reasons" response and I couldn't resist.
I mean what makes him choose to use Kenpom anyway?? Why not use NET rankings then if you are going to use some sort of ranking. Exactly right Brew...you can't use Kenpom to justify(in his mind), one ranking while completely ignoring it in other cases.
please tell me we aren't going to be THAT fanbase. there are many different ways for someone to rank the top 25 college basketball teams. many would include MU which is why we're ranked 18. some go based largely on kenpom which ranks us 30 (aka not a top 26 team).
nobody likes "those" fans. its the little brothers of the world. the nc states of the world who never get any attention because duke and unc take all of it away from them. lets not be that. a single tweet to the guy saying "yo whats MU gotta do to get ranked in the top 20?" would be plenty. an entire article breaking down every top 25 team is spending way too much time on the opinion of a single human who doesnt even have a vote in the actual polls. there are much more important things than gary parrish's Top 25 and 1.
people don't have the time to put that much thought or effort into these things. the preseason polls are based largely on last season and who returns. after that it takes a slow climb as teams start to lose and you keep winning. if you beat a top 5 team you'll get a big jump, but otherwise you aren't jumping from unranked to top 10 in 3 weeks based on 3 top 50 home wins. just not how it works.
Quote from: muguru on December 26, 2018, 09:47:19 PM
I mean what makes him choose to use Kenpom anyway?? Why not use NET rankings then if you are going to use some sort of ranking. Exactly right Brew...you can't use Kenpom to justify(in his mind), one ranking while completely ignoring it in other cases.
I originally started by putting the NET side by side. If you use the NET, Marquette's wins go to 4/17/23/32 & losses go to 12/16. In addition, Marquette is ranked 13th in that system. Every metric improves for MU in the NET.
Is Gary Parrish even an AP voter? I don't think he is.
The guy to get crazy about is Damien-Sordelett
St. John's 16th? Kansas State, Wisconsin, Buffalo ranked.....MU not ranked at all. That guy should be stripped of his voting rights or a poll tax applied for his stupidity.
https://collegebasketball.ap.org/poll-voter/damien-sordelett
Quote from: Cheeks on December 26, 2018, 11:05:35 PM
Is Gary Parrish even an AP voter? I don't think he is.
The guy to get crazy about is Damien-Sordelett
St. John's 16th? Kansas State, Wisconsin, Buffalo ranked.....MU not ranked at all. That guy should be stripped of his voting rights or a poll tax applied for his stupidity.
https://collegebasketball.ap.org/poll-voter/damien-sordelett
Parrish is not, which means while his vote isn't counted, the people that do read his column or listen to his podcast will likely place more faith in his single, undiluted voice as his Top 25 & 1 is usually updated on a daily basis.
Quote from: Cheeks on December 26, 2018, 11:05:35 PM
Is Gary Parrish even an AP voter? I don't think he is.
The guy to get crazy about is Damien-Sordelett
St. John's 16th? Kansas State, Wisconsin, Buffalo ranked.....MU not ranked at all. That guy should be stripped of his voting rights or a poll tax applied for his stupidity.
https://collegebasketball.ap.org/poll-voter/damien-sordelett
Complete non-sequitur - there are 50,000 students at Liberty - that's crazy!
Quote from: 1SE on December 27, 2018, 06:29:54 AM
Complete non-sequitur - there are 50,000 students at Liberty - that's crazy!
The overwhelming majority of them are online only.
Quote from: warriorchick on December 27, 2018, 07:40:41 AM
The overwhelming majority of them are online only.
Hhmm - probably explains some things about their beat writer.
Interesting in all of this kerfluffle is that Parrish chose MU to win the Big East.
Quote from: WithoutBias on December 26, 2018, 10:32:08 PM
please tell me we aren't going to be THAT fanbase. there are many different ways for someone to rank the top 25 college basketball teams. many would include MU which is why we're ranked 18. some go based largely on kenpom which ranks us 30 (aka not a top 26 team).
nobody likes "those" fans. its the little brothers of the world. the nc states of the world who never get any attention because duke and unc take all of it away from them. lets not be that. a single tweet to the guy saying "yo whats MU gotta do to get ranked in the top 20?" would be plenty. an entire article breaking down every top 25 team is spending way too much time on the opinion of a single human who doesnt even have a vote in the actual polls. there are much more important things than gary parrish's Top 25 and 1.
people don't have the time to put that much thought or effort into these things. the preseason polls are based largely on last season and who returns. after that it takes a slow climb as teams start to lose and you keep winning. if you beat a top 5 team you'll get a big jump, but otherwise you aren't jumping from unranked to top 10 in 3 weeks based on 3 top 50 home wins. just not how it works.
I am fine with being that fan base. A fan base who calls out hypocrisy and inconsistency in individual who claim to be very analytical in their positions.
A better analogy would be the brother who is sits quietly at X-Mas with the family listening to all the drunken relatives and then mocks them with quick retorts for their ignorant statements.
Quote from: tower912 on December 27, 2018, 09:39:22 AM
Interesting in all of this kerfluffle is that Parrish chose MU to win the Big East.
And was the only CBS writer to do so, though Marquette is also the only Big East team in the top-25 & 1, so it makes sense. The point of more his defense of resumes and kenpom rankings for some schools, but completely dismisses them for others.
A KEY point (and not really mentioned in this thread so far I think)....is that we won those two games in OVERTIME.
And (unfair I know), people think we should have lost those two.
Excuse for Louisville - they had those shots at the end of regulation. Louisville has a darling factor. MU got lucky.
Excuse for Wisconsin - Again darling factor. "Everyone else thinks Wisconsin is better". Marquette at home. MU got lucky.
In peoples lazy minds (not on Paper like Brew's masterful work) - Marquette lost those two and Kansas State/Buffalo "are probably not good anyway". Its all assumptions, feeling, prejudices......and for Parrish, not analysis but a deadline to put out a story he won't be held accountable for.
Further, I believe the critical eye on MU will continue thru to the tourney. The SC might get our seed right because hopefully they will use some objective metrics.....but I'll bet MU will be the chic upset choice.
[chip firmly planted on shoulder]
Quote from: warriorchick on December 27, 2018, 07:40:41 AM
The overwhelming majority of them are online only.
Yup, 15K on campus, 94K online for a total of about 110K overall.
Quote from: MUBigDance on December 27, 2018, 11:06:51 AM
Further, I believe the critical eye on MU will continue thru to the tourney. The SC might get our seed right because hopefully they will use some objective metrics.....but I'll bet MU will be the chic upset choice.
[chip firmly planted on shoulder]
The answer to that is to not get upset.
Quote from: MUBigDance on December 27, 2018, 10:57:21 AM
And (unfair I know), people think we should have lost those two.
I don't think that's it at all. I really think Marquette just needs to prove itself on the road. MU had one road game, and got clobbered. Not a trend, but without a convincing win, or a couple wins on the road, folks will look skeptically at Marquette's record.
I'm partially in that camp - Hope we don't get clobbered @ SJU. I'm nervous about that game...
Quote from: rocky_warrior on December 27, 2018, 11:37:00 AM
I don't think that's it at all. I really think Marquette just needs to prove itself on the road. MU had one road game, and got clobbered. Not a trend, but without a convincing win, or a couple wins on the road, folks will look skeptically at Marquette's record.
I'm partially in that camp - Hope we don't get clobbered @ SJU. I'm nervous about that game...
And you know exactly what will happen when MU wins that game?? The pundits will come out of the wood work to cast shade on that MU win by saying "SJU isn't that good, they hadn't played anyone etc etc etc".
And if they do, so what? MU is 10-2 against a tough OOC schedule. The league is there for the taking. If MU performs to expectations, everything will take care of itself. If MU excels (14-4, Big East Champs) they will be rewarded appropriately in March. If MU stumbles (11-7, 3rd-4th in the Big East) MU will be punished.
Quote from: tower912 on December 27, 2018, 11:55:41 AM
And if they do, so what? MU is 10-2 against a tough OOC schedule. The league is there for the taking. If MU performs to expectations, everything will take care of itself. If MU excels (14-4, Big East Champs) they will be rewarded appropriately in March. If MU stumbles (11-7, 3rd-4th in the Big East) MU will be punished.
And, under this scenario, Wojo should be punished as well..7 losses in THIS BE?? Talk about underachieving.
Quote from: tower912 on December 27, 2018, 11:55:41 AM
And if they do, so what? MU is 10-2 against a tough OOC schedule. The league is there for the taking. If MU performs to expectations, everything will take care of itself. If MU excels (14-4, Big East Champs) they will be rewarded appropriately in March. If MU stumbles (11-7, 3rd-4th in the Big East) MU will be punished.
Meh. I think this team is probably like a 7 seed at 11-7. We've given ourselves a good amount of cushion at this point.
Quote from: muguru on December 27, 2018, 11:59:26 AM
And, under this scenario, Wojo should be punished as well..7 losses in THIS BE?? Talk about underachieving.
22-9 would be above what most of our fans predicted preseason. And our fans tend to be more optimistic about our team than the national media would be. I don't know how 11-7 and 22-9 could possibly be seen as underachieving.
My revised prediction for the season is 23-8, 12-6. 4-5 on the road in conference (Nova, SJU, Butler, SHU the losses) and 1 slip up at home. Barring injury, we won't be underdogs in too many games the remainder of the season.
Quote from: muguru on December 27, 2018, 11:59:26 AM
And, under this scenario, Wojo should be punished as well.
Would being fired be enough? Or should he actually face a firing squad? Maybe that would be too good for him. Some kind of slow torture would be more appropriate, no?
Haven't played a BEast game yet, and it immediately goes to calling for Wojo's job in advance.
Joylessness must really suck.
Quote from: warriorchick on December 27, 2018, 07:40:41 AM
The overwhelming majority of them are online only.
They have a residential population of about 16,000. Nice campus, many years ago we did an LBO of a business in town and ended up selling the corporate headquarters facility to Jerry Falwell who was in the early stages of building the school. He had a big vision and realized on it.
Parrish and Norlander spent a lot of time talking about Marquette today. Not just this year's team and that we're the Big East favorites, but also dedicated a few minutes at the end talking about MU players of the past, including some Wade and Diener stories. Suffice to say Parrish has noticed the MU Twitter community.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 28, 2018, 02:03:23 PM
Parrish and Norlander spent a lot of time talking about Marquette today. Not just this year's team and that we're the Big East favorites, but also dedicated a few minutes at the end talking about MU players of the past, including some Wade and Diener stories. Suffice to say Parrish has noticed the MU Twitter community.
Ha just listened - all of his passwords used to be Marquette players... I think we should cut him some slack!
Quote from: Ellenson Family Reunion on December 28, 2018, 02:38:39 PM
Ha just listened - all of his passwords used to be Marquette players... I think we should cut him some slack!
Is that still the case? Asking for a friend....
Really enjoyed that podcast. That was my first time listening. I will have to make that part of my rotation, especially if it is Big East related.
Quote from: MUeagle1090 on December 28, 2018, 04:57:33 PM
Really enjoyed that podcast. That was my first time listening. I will have to make that part of my rotation, especially if it is Big East related.
The Eye on College Basketball pod isn't always Big East related. They generally focus on the biggest stories and programs. So there's definitely a healthy amount of Duke, Kansas, & Kentucky talk. But they have also spent a lot of time on Villanova, Gonzaga, and anyone else who emerges. When they talk about games, it's often any good games, not just the biggest names (Buffalo/Marquette got some discussion & the MU/Louisville game has been referenced often).
Oh...and LOTS of unnecessary Memphis talk, because that's where Parrish lives.
Gary Parrish is the only sportswriter I know of who can pull off an infinity scarf.
That's reason enough for everyone to love and/or hate him.
Quote from: Benny B on December 29, 2018, 10:53:05 AM
Gary Parrish is the only sportswriter I know of who can pull off an infinity scarf.
That's reason enough for everyone to love and/or hate him.
So you don't think any female sportswriters can pull off an infinity scarf?
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 28, 2018, 05:18:26 PM
The Eye on College Basketball pod isn't always Big East related. They generally focus on the biggest stories and programs. So there's definitely a healthy amount of Duke, Kansas, & Kentucky talk. But they have also spent a lot of time on Villanova, Gonzaga, and anyone else who emerges. When they talk about games, it's often any good games, not just the biggest names (Buffalo/Marquette got some discussion & the MU/Louisville game has been referenced often).
Oh...and LOTS of unnecessary Memphis talk, because that's where Parrish lives.
Right. I meant that I would tune in if the discussion was Big East related.
I took it as MU fans are embarrassing themselves and we're going to go so over the top with our MU talk that we're going to make it obvious we're mocking them by just throwing out random names of players past.
Quote from: wadesworld on December 29, 2018, 02:25:23 PM
I took it as MU fans are embarrassing themselves and we're going to go so over the top with our MU talk that we're going to make it obvious we're mocking them by just throwing out random names of players past.
This.
Quote from: warriorchick on December 29, 2018, 10:57:29 AM
So you don't think any female sportswriters can pull off an infinity scarf?
Honestly, I can't think of any female sportswriters off hand. Many female broadcasters, anchors, analysts, commentators, etc., but they're all in an on-screen or in-game role.
It's actually kind of sad if you think about it.
Quote from: Benny B on December 30, 2018, 12:41:06 AM
Honestly, I can't think of any female sportswriters off hand. Many female broadcasters, anchors, analysts, commentators, etc., but they're all in an on-screen or in-game role.
It's actually kind of sad if you think about it.
Dana O'Neill is really good. I always thought Lori Nickel did a nice job for the Journal-Sentinel as well. Not sure if she's still there. But you're right, not a ton of names come to mind.
Quote from: warriorchick on December 29, 2018, 10:57:29 AM
So you don't think any female sportswriters can pull off an infinity scarf?
Wearing only the scarf? 😮
Quote from: Benny B on December 30, 2018, 12:41:06 AM
Honestly, I can't think of any female sportswriters off hand. Many female broadcasters, anchors, analysts, commentators, etc., but they're all in an on-screen or in-game role.
It's actually kind of sad if you think about it.
The sportswriter that ranks us the highest is Shannon Ryan
Mary Schmitt Boyer. Great Woman Sports Writer for Cleveland Plain Dealer. MU Grad, 1977. Favorite of Coach McGuire.
https://www.marquette.edu/alumni/awards-2011/recipient_schmittboyer.php
Quote from: JakeBarnes on December 30, 2018, 02:25:22 PM
The sportswriter that ranks us the highest is Shannon Ryan
That will cause a few heads to explode...
Quote from: Benny B on December 30, 2018, 12:41:06 AM
Honestly, I can't think of any female sportswriters off hand. Many female broadcasters, anchors, analysts, commentators, etc., but they're all in an on-screen or in-game role.
It's actually kind of sad if you think about it.
Who could forget Lisa Olson. She was a legit redhead who covered the Patriots. Zeke Mowatt got fine for proudly displaying his man hood. For a while Mowatt became a verb.
https://www.nytimes.com/1990/11/28/sports/patriots-and-3-players-fined-in-olson-incident.html
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 30, 2018, 06:00:17 AM
Dana O'Neill is really good. I always thought Lori Nickel did a nice job for the Journal-Sentinel as well. Not sure if she's still there. But you're right, not a ton of names come to mind.
Lori is still there. She and I exchanged a Happy New Year note a few days ago.
Washington Post has four female sportswriters assigned to each major team. Liz Clarke covers the Redskins, Candice Buckner the Wizards, Chelsea Janes the Nationals, and Isabelle Khurshudyan for the Caps.
Helene Elliott has been out here with LA Times for a long while...excellent Hockey writer
Jackie McMullan
Quote from: Cheeks on December 31, 2018, 12:49:21 PM
Lori is still there. She and I exchanged a Happy New Year note a few days ago.
Washington Post has four female sportswriters assigned to each major team. Liz Clarke covers the Redskins, Candice Buckner the Wizards, Chelsea Janes the Nationals, and Isabelle Khurshudyan for the Caps.
Helene Elliott has been out here with LA Times for a long while...excellent Hockey writer
Jackie McMullan
Here we go again
Beer summits
Who else do you know?
Name dropping... indicator # 347 of a huge insecurity issues. Chico do u also happen to be extremely short?
Quote from: Benny B on December 30, 2018, 12:41:06 AM
Honestly, I can't think of any female sportswriters off hand. Many female broadcasters, anchors, analysts, commentators, etc., but they're all in an on-screen or in-game role.
It's actually kind of sad if you think about it.
Among those not named here so far is one of the most prominent -- USA Today columnist Nancy Armour, an MU alum.
(Another MU alum that was already mentioned: Mary Schmitt Boyer of the Cleveland Plain Dealer.)
Karen Crouse has been at the NY Times for about 15 years, and she was writing in SoCal before that.
Jourdan Rodrigue has become the main Panthers beat writer for the Charlotte Observer and is doing a great job; she's the writer who got into a minor kerfuffle with Cam Newton last year.
Lori Nickel has been at the Journal Sentinel for awhile now and covers the Packers some.
AP has several female sportswriters: Beth Harris, Janie McCauley, Jenna Fryer, Kristie Rieken, Teresa Walker.
Terry Taylor was AP sports editor for 20+ years and annually turned up on "most influential women in sports" lists.
Rachel Blount is still at the Minneapolis paper, where she covered the North Stars and Timberwolves for several years.
Rachel Nichols was an outstanding sportswriter before she went to TV, where she is very good IMHO.
Plenty of others. But sure, it's still predominantly white males. I'm not sure if that's "sad" or not. I have seen no sign that talented females who want to be sportswriters and move up through the ranks are being denied opportunities. Indeed, newspapers want to diversify more than ever now, and that's good.
Erin Andrews didn't make your list? ;)
Quote from: Cheeks on December 31, 2018, 06:10:43 PM
Erin Andrews didn't make your list? ;)
Is she a sportswriter?
I mean, did Roseanne Barr make your list?
Quote from: MU82 on December 31, 2018, 06:18:44 PM
Is she a sportswriter?
I mean, did Roseanne Barr make your list?
Roseanne Barr? Strange question, but the answer is No. Ever since she dissed the National Anthem with the spitting...simply cannot condone that.
Andrews a sportswriter? She's a sports journalist, not sure about writer. Different mediums and such. I like the barriers she has helped to break down, especially the old caveman thinking how sports journalists are required to act in clubhouses, dugouts and such. Good for her.
Quote from: Cheeks on December 31, 2018, 06:31:31 PM
Roseanne Barr? Strange question, but the answer is No. Ever since she dissed the National Anthem with the spitting...simply cannot condone that.
Andrews a sportswriter? She's a sports journalist, not sure about writer. Different mediums and such. I like the barriers she has helped to break down, especially the old caveman thinking how sports journalists are required to act in clubhouses, dugouts and such. Good for her.
Don't forget how female sports reporters are supposed to dress too.
Ben Steele just got poll attacked by Parish...
Quote from: ZiggysFryBoy on December 31, 2018, 07:14:38 PM
Don't forget how female sports reporters are supposed to dress too.
#IsupportErinAgainstCavemenThoughts
Quote from: mubb3434 on December 31, 2018, 07:25:02 PM
Ben Steele just got poll attacked by Parish...
There's no need to fear, brewcity is here.
Great Interview with Lisa Olson from back in the day. She was one hot and sassy gal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnWaui3YlPI
Quote from: Cheeks on December 31, 2018, 06:31:31 PM
Andrews a sportswriter? She's a sports journalist, not sure about writer.
My post was in response to Benny's post:
Honestly, I can't think of any female sportswriters off hand. Many female broadcasters, anchors, analysts, commentators, etc., but they're all in an on-screen or in-game role.What Benny said was specifically about female sportswriters and was specifically NOT about female broadcasters. Erin Andrews is a broadcaster and not a sportswriter, which is why she wasn't on my list.
I know ... sticking to the actual subject ... that's so out of the usual Scoop realm.
Quote from: MU82 on January 01, 2019, 03:41:13 PM
My post was in response to Benny's post:
Honestly, I can't think of any female sportswriters off hand. Many female broadcasters, anchors, analysts, commentators, etc., but they're all in an on-screen or in-game role.
What Benny said was specifically about female sportswriters and was specifically NOT about female broadcasters. Erin Andrews is a broadcaster and not a sportswriter, which is why she wasn't on my list.
I know ... sticking to the actual subject ... that's so out of the usual Scoop realm.
Has she ever been on your list for other things?
Quote from: Cheeks on January 01, 2019, 03:52:07 PM
Has she ever been on your list for other things?
Yes, she is No. 1 on my list of irrelevant names being brought up by dopes in interwebs chat rooms.