Congratulations ESPN!

[kcchief19]

On the heels of all the other accolodes for ESPN in their mystifying efforts of sports journalism, I set a personal record for shortest time ever watching ESPN:

7:10:12 -- Turned on ESPN
7:10:12.5 -- Saw Rush Limbaugh
7:10:12.6 -- Turned channel to anything else

If they could get Limbaugh doing commentary about the season predictions of ESPN NFL for the X-Box, that would be a perfect lead-in to a commercial for The Playmakers.

This almost makes me long for the days when ESPN would broadcast business news in the morning. They are quickly on their way to becoming the MTV of sports in that I can see the day when ESPN broadcasts an entire lineup devoid of sports programming.

[Draft Dodger]

yep

[Schmidty]

Liberals are whiney.

[ISiddiqui]

Rush was very good. I enjoyed his commentary and he made some decent points (especially about Plummer, for once in the NFL, being in a pressure situation).

[Buccaneer]

Matt, intolerant and close-minded, aren't we?

[EagleFan]

Wow, talk about open minded.

[Sharpieman]

I don't know how they put Rush Limbaugh on the same show as Steve Young, its like having satan and a prophet on the same show. (prophet being Young of course.)
It actually makes me sick to my stomach.

[MIJB#19]

Originally posted by Buccaneer
Matt, intolerant and close-minded, aren't we?

Guilty as charged.
Oops, you were typing to another Matt, don't mind my post, continue as if this post did not exist.

[CamEdwards]

Intolerant and close minded? Yep.

Then again, if Michael Moore and Al Franken were doing commentary on the NFL... I might be the same way.

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by Sharpieman
I don't know how they put Rush Limbaugh on the same show as Steve Young, its like having satan and a prophet on the same show. (prophet being Young of course.)
It actually makes me sick to my stomach.

Substitute Michael Irvin for Rush Limbaugh in that statement and I'd be more inclined to agree.

[Subby]

The best part of that pre-game show was when the 'Skins fans were booing Irvin so loudly you could barely hear him during one segment

[Butter]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
Intolerant and close minded? Yep.

Then again, if Michael Moore and Al Franken were doing commentary on the NFL... I might be the same way.

Thank you for being the voice of logic and reason, Cam.

Not that Rush might not have some things to contribute, but I'd just as soon not help line his pockets, really. Plus, all the NFL pre-game shows seem to be trying to just scream louder than the others at this point, at least to me.

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by Butter_of_69
Thank you for being the voice of logic and reason, Cam.

Not that Rush might not have some things to contribute, but I'd just as soon not help line his pockets, really. Plus, all the NFL pre-game shows seem to be trying to just scream louder than the others at this point, at least to me.

I have a feeling Rush would do this show for free. He already has Oprah money. I doubt he is doing the gig for the cash.

[Joe Stallings]

Can't stand Rush Limbaugh, and so was shocked that ESPN would potentially alienate a large percentage of its audience by bringing him on.

That being said, I actually thought he did a very nice job last night (gasp!). His frankness on Vinny Testaverde in the pre-game was pretty ballsy. I'm actually looking forward to following Rush during the season.

Which just confirms what I've known all these years: Rush Limbaugh is not an idealogue, he's an entertainer.

JMS

[Butter]

Originally posted by GrantDawg
I have a feeling Rush would do this show for free. He already has Oprah money. I doubt he is doing the gig for the cash.

Yet I imagine they're still paying him. Quite a bit.

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by Butter_of_69
Yet I imagine they're still paying him. Quite a bit.

I'm sure it is decent money, but I bet it is not 1% of what he'll make this year.

[Buccaneer]

Being hyperbolic was exactly my intent (couldn't find the post where someone complained about that). I can admit to being close-minded and intolertant (like in saying I won't listen to Limbaugh), and esp. hyperbolic but can others? It seems that when liberals are being just as close-minded, intolerant and esp. hyperbolic, they say they are the voice of reason. They're not, they are being no different at all.

[Butter]

Originally posted by Buccaneer
It seems that when liberals are being just as close-minded, intolerant and esp. hyperbolic, they say they are the voice of reason. They're not, they are being no different at all.

Need I go back and find the countless posts where some conservative on here pats another on the back for spouting some conservative clap-trap, congratulating them for "using logic and reason"? I mean, seriously, that's ridiculous.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally posted by Butter_of_69
Need I go back and find the countless posts where some conservative on here pats another on the back for spouting some conservative clap-trap, congratulating them for "using logic and reason"? I mean, seriously, that's ridiculous.

Using logic and reason is ridiculous... riiiight.

[Subby]

Originally posted by Franklinnoble
Using logic and reason is ridiculous... riiiight.

Often times debaters on this forum stand on the mantle of logic and reason instead of digging more deeply on an issue.

Logic and reason are fine as long as you understand that they are often faulty...

[Butter]

Originally posted by Franklinnoble
Using logic and reason is ridiculous... riiiight.

I was referring to his statement being ridiculous, not using logic and reason, of which political debates are often devoid despite declarations to the contrary.

[Franklinnoble]

I was just sarcastically taking what you said out of context.

[Butter]

Ne'er do well.

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by Subby
Often times debaters on this forum stand on the mantle of logic and reason instead of digging more deeply on an issue.

Logic and reason are fine as long as you understand that they are often faulty...

I had a teacher and a very accomplished debater told me in class that "people only abandon logic when logic abandons people."

Take that for what it’s worth.

[Butter]

Originally posted by GrantDawg
I had a teacher and a very accomplished debater told me in class that "people only abandon logic when logic abandons people."

Take that for what it’s worth.

Yes, but if you begin from a logically faulty starting point, you can arrive almost anywhere with your argument. Often, people start with "truths" that just aren't truths, rather opinions.

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by Butter_of_69
Yes, but if you begin from a logically faulty starting point, you can arrive almost anywhere with your argument. Often, people start with "truths" that just aren't truths, rather opinions.

No doubt. I don't think that was what my instructor was discussing.

[GrantDawg]

In other words, it is not logic which is faulty, but the one using it.

[Butter]

Yeah, I guess my post was fairly superfluous. Much like my presence here most of the time.

[Craptacular]

I think I will not watch the ESPN pregame show ...

[Craptacular]

... and yes, I'm a Republican. I can't stand any of these yappers.

[CamEdwards]

define "these yappers".

[kcchief19]

Originally posted by Buccaneer
Being hyperbolic was exactly my intent (couldn't find the post where someone complained about that). I can admit to being close-minded and intolertant (like in saying I won't listen to Limbaugh), and esp. hyperbolic but can others? It seems that when liberals are being just as close-minded, intolerant and esp. hyperbolic, they say they are the voice of reason. They're not, they are being no different at all.

Bucc, my dear friend, I don't know where to begin.

When liberals are closed minded, intolerant and hyperbolic, they say they are the voice of reason. You seriously believe that is true of liberals and not of conservatives?

Idealogues of all kinds many times believe they are the voice of reason when they clearly are not. I share your some disdain for this. But I recognize these are traits that cross all party lines. This is try for many people. I appreciate your initial attempt at hyperbole, but the tone of the above message seems to imply that you believe you are being the voice of reason, which seems unlikely since you have made an assumption which on the surface appears to have little supporting evidence.

I dislike Rush Limbaugh for a number of reasons. The main reason that I will not watch the program with him on it is due to my personal feelings about him. So how is that being closed-minded? If I don't like Keanu Reeves and don't want to see The Matrix, is that being closed minded? If I watched NFL Countdown, would that mean I am not closed-minded?

My "objective" review ESPN hiring Limbaugh is that it is a mistake, just as Cam noted that it would be a mistake if they booked Al Franken for the gig. They are hiring someone who is very polarizing and that runs the risk of alienating people with strong feelings about that person. It's not that different from someone hiring OJ to do a commercial for them. Sure, there are people who still love The Juice, but why do you want the baggage?

Moreover, the audience for NFL Countdown is primarily male. Limbaugh's radio audience is primarily male. His hiring doesn't draw a new demographic to the show. It may shore up support in some ways, but it is also likely to cause an erosion in other areas, as it has in my case.

My guess is that ESPN hired Limbaugh because they are losing market share in the NFL pregame show to Fox. I think ESPN miscalculated there because hiring Limbaugh will not draw people away from Fox. What am I going to do? Watch Limbaugh on ESPN or jiggling women on Fox? Gee, tough call.

Last but not least, the guy has NO qualifications for the job whatsoever. You may not like Michael Irvin, but he did play the game. Maybe you don't like Chris Berman, but he has been working sports broadcasting for almost 30 years. Limbaugh's closest experience to sports is being fired from handling the first-pitch ceremony in the marketing department for the Royals and working in a bowling alley in Olathe, Kan.

Will he make some good observations? Sure, it's possible. But Troy and ChiefRum will make better observations, so let's put them on the show rather than windbag idealogue.

[Craptacular]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
define "these yappers".

Look at the last two words in kcchief's last post.

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by kcchief19
... If I don't like Keanu Reeves and don't want to see The Matrix, is that being closed minded?

I didn't need to go any further than that. Yes. You are being very closed minded and missing out on a very good picture. He is good for the part because the part calls for someone wooden (which leads to the question, does Keanu get periodic termite inspections?)

I can be just as guilty as you in this, but I'm learning to listen to others on these things. If a movie is good enough, I have learned to enjoy it even if Hitler or Barbra Streisand is the star (I would probably prefer Hitler over Babs, but I digress).

Open your mind just a little bit and you may be surprised at what you learn.

[Solecismic]

I'm willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt, because, with the exception of the Ron Jaworski clip show, I only watch games. Couldn't care less about pre-game hype.

But the first time he blames a loss on Hillary, I think ESPN should can the ham.

[QuikSand]

Rush really isn't my cup of tea, either, but I'm in the minority camp to a point... I think he'll work out pretty well. I think it's possible that people will prejudge him almost entirely (like what happened to Dennis Miller on MNF, in my opinion) and his actual performance won't much matter... but my best guess is that he will make generally worthwhile and interesting insights.

[EagleFan]

Rush is an entertainer, pure and simple. I don't even know if he believes most of what he says on his shows because he is just putting out a product. Saying that you don;t like him because of that and won't watch him when he is in a different environment is close minded. That would be like saying that you don't like The Rock on WWE so you won't watch any of his movies strictly because of that.

[lynchjm24]

Originally posted by QuikSand
Rush really isn't my cup of tea, either, but I'm in the minority camp to a point... I think he'll work out pretty well. I think it's possible that people will prejudge him almost entirely (like what happened to Dennis Miller on MNF, in my opinion) and his actual performance won't much matter... but my best guess is that he will make generally worthwhile and interesting insights.

Finally a voice of logic and reason.

[JPhillips]

Grant: Did you hear about the new movie starring Babs and Hitler? I think its the sequel to Prince of Tides.

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by JPhillips
Grant: Did you hear about the new movie starring Babs and Hitler? I think its the sequel to Prince of Tides.

The Feurer of Undertow?

[ice4277]

People on this board need to lighten up a little bit.

[Buccaneer]

When liberals are closed minded, intolerant and hyperbolic, they say they are the voice of reason. You seriously believe that is true of liberals and not of conservatives?

kc, I think you missed my point because I didn't write it too well. All I was saying, in a typical hyperbolic way, was that in most (if not all) debates of this type, no one is being the voice of reason. Perhaps 'conservatives' tend to use more logic and common sense and 'liberals' more compassion and understanding, but to me, it's all the same noise. Personally, I won't listen to Limbaugh any more than I would listen to Couric or anyone else, and that makes me just as close-minded as someone saying they won't listen to either extremes.

[kcchief19]

Well, in an effort to expand my "intolerant" horizons, I actually did not flip the channel this morning when I turned on ESPN and Mr. Limbaugh was sharing his special brand of NFL inside knowledge.

It took me a while to figure out he was trying to talk about Kansas City, since he kept calling them the Rams. At one point, he even said, "It wouldn't suprise me if the Rams lost at Houston today." Hey, even the best of us make mistakes like this from time to time. A professional broadcaster should not make the same mistake three times in 15 seconds. Strike one swinging for calling them the wrong name AND thinking the Texans had a chance today.

The intent of the conversation seemed to be comparing the Chiefs to the Rams during their high-flying days. As noted above, El Rushbo thought the Chiefs might lose today. "The Rams didn't lose games like that," El Rushbo noted. Well, among the Rams' losses in their 13-3 championship season was a loss to the 8-8 Lions and the 5-11 Eagles. Chances are the Texans will be along that lines. And of courses, the Chiefs didn't lose. Strike two.

Apparently the football sage Michael Irvin agree with El Rusbo, as he said, "Michael and I are bros on this." Bros? I haven't heard a white guy call a black man a "bro" since 1992. Is he going to call him a "homie" next week? Strike three for using slang from the '80s and for agreeing with Michael Irvin on anything except the best Dallas-area escort service.

ESPN has some excellent analysts. Tom Jackson and Steve Young both made excellent points during the debate that truly showed how little Limbaugh knew and understood about football.

That being said, I don't think Limbaugh knows less about football than the next guy, but yet that's the point. He doesn't know anything more about football than most of the guys on FOFC. The only thing he brings to ESPN is his dittoheads and the ability to drive away non-fans who don't care for his ideology or his poor football analysis.

If I wanted half-baked football analysis, I can get the same thing on Fox with plenty of women easy on the eyes strutting on screen periodically. Tough call.

[kcchief19]

Originally posted by Buccaneer
kc, I think you missed my point because I didn't write it too well. All I was saying, in a typical hyperbolic way, was that in most (if not all) debates of this type, no one is being the voice of reason. Perhaps 'conservatives' tend to use more logic and common sense and 'liberals' more compassion and understanding, but to me, it's all the same noise. Personally, I won't listen to Limbaugh any more than I would listen to Couric or anyone else, and that makes me just as close-minded as someone saying they won't listen to either extremes.

Dola -- obviously I just revisited this old thread and missed this. I completely agree that no one is being the voice of reason in when the labels come out. I completely disagree that "Perhaps 'conservatives' tend to use more logic and common sense and 'liberals' more compassion and understanding." I know plenty of conservatives who use no logic and no common sense and I know conservatives who are compassionate and understanding. I also know libearala who use plenty of logic and common sense and I know liberals who are cold, heartless bastards. Anyone who begins a sentence "Conservatives are ..." or "Liberals are ..." is not the voice of reason and, to me, lacks any semblance of objectivity.

I also don't think that not liking something and avoiding that makes one closed-minded. Watching or listening to someone or something you don't like doesn't make you open-minded, it makes you a masochist. Being closed minded, to me, is saying that you don't like something even though you have never tried it, or in some cases you don't think others should do something simply because you don't like it.

I've tried Rush. I don't like him. Therefore, I avoid him. I don't think ESPN should not have hired him because I don't like him. I think they should not have hired him because they are in the businesses of making money and I believe that he will hurt more than help their ability of make money.

[Chief Rum]

Glad you're still here making comments on Limbaugh. Why don't you head over to the other thread and respond to what we said about your comments on today's Chiefs' game?

Or better yet, expand on your original point, which seemed to ignore the fact I picked the Chiefs? In view of this revelation here, it seems you dropped the ball rather egregiously over there.

At least you put the Pac-10 up with the top conferences in another thread. It's about time you learned that one.

CR

[EagleFan]

Uh oh, he made a msitake today. So Madden and all the other nimrods on TV should be fired as well. I can't remember the last time I watched a game and the announcer got confused and either called a player the wrong name, or the wrong team name, or completely miss what was happening on the field (like the end of the Jets game when the announcer thought it was 3rd down instead of 4th, get rid of the idiot).

How about you mention some of his other work this season such as nailing the Eagles' troubles this season while other announcers on the show were treating it as just one loss following the opener and he had them losing in a bad wayh to New England.

Of course it's obvious that the only reason that you are saying this is because it had to do with your team and your feelings on Rush in the first place. You are just a poster child for being 'open minded' and objective, aren't you?

[CamEdwards]

On a side note... what's this I hear about Howard Stern doing color commentary on WNBA games next year?

[sterlingice]

Originally posted by EagleFan
Uh oh, he made a msitake today. So Madden and all the other nimrods on TV should be fired as well. ...

Oh please! Fire Madden! You would make me the happiest football fan alive!

Originally posted by CamEdwards
On a side note... what's this I hear about Howard Stern doing color commentary on WNBA games next year?

The WNBA is playing nude this year? That's the only way Stern would have anything to do with it.

SI