Quote
Rams43
A pundit seeking attention is just fine, and really quite normal. No objection there from me.
And criticizing a player, including Goff, is standard fare and well within bounds. Again, no objection from me.
But to say that Goff won’t be extended? C’mon...
That’s clickbait territory. And deliberately so. I don’t believe that even the anti-Goff biased Florio believes that for a second. Sigh...
Don't agree. Not every bad argument, and sports media abounds with them, reduces to those kinds of attackable motives.
Besides, again, IF you want to bait clicks, #1 you write it (that was him being interviewed on the radio by Dan Patrick AND he was directly asked), and #2, you pick a topic that will actually generate enough interest to attract clicks. Goff is not high on the list of those topics right now. He is for US. But not for sports fans in general.
Clickbait means the writer (or in this case, radio interviewee) is deliberately being provocative (and not sincere) simply to attract numbers to his site. Not only is Goff not a topic likely to do that, and not only is answering a question on someone else's radio show not likely to accomplish that even if Goff were a big topic, BUT making that claim assumes on our part that we know what the guy's real motives are.
I think it's enough to say it's a bad argument and he's wrong.
To me going after the guy's motives sounds defensive. We Rams fans don't like our players dismissed that way. So we impugn the motives.
Nah he just made a bad argument. And the only thing he could attract clicks for in this case, assuming the majority of NFL fans are going to be hot to hear about Jared Goff in the off-season, is Dan Patrick's radio show.
We agree it's a bad argument.
And. People make bad arguments in national sports media all the time. Those guys cover 32 teams and simply do not know as much about all 32 of those teams as we do about the Rams. I remember in 99 after Faulk trade when Pasquerelli argued that Faulk was a limited runner who could not get yards up the middle of a defense. Well he was wrong. I remember at the time stating with passionate energy that he was just dead wrong about that. But it had nothing to do with his motives. It was just another case of another sports writer being wrong about something. So it goes.
...
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2019 08:48AM by zn.