Fatheaded Ed Brayton the phony sports pundit
BVD-clad blogger Fatheaded Ed Brayton posted a long review of current college basketball. It is obvious that Ed did not write all that stuff -- one would have to be a full-time sports analyst to write such a detailed review. Fatheaded Ed just copied all that stuff or most of it from somewhere else and pasted it. What a plagiarist. And a lot of his writings are just plain stupid, e.g.,
.
Imagine -- they are 17-1, ranked #3 and moving up to #2, and "they're deep and fun to watch," but they lack an "inside player" and Ed just doesn't "see them hanging with the big boys." They are the big boys, you stupid fathead. What an idiot. If Ed did not write that stuff himself, it was written by a super-dumb sportswriter. Sheeeesh.
Blogging about sports is one of the ways Ed attracts readers to his blog.
.
.
Most overrated team so far: my Duke Blue Devils. They're 17-1 and ranked #3 (and about to move up to #2 because of a Kansas loss). There's no way they're that good. This is a good team that plays very hard, which can make them look like a great team at times, but in the end their lack of an inside player will be their undoing in the tournament.
They're deep and they're fun to watch, but I just don't see them hanging with the big boys.
Imagine -- they are 17-1, ranked #3 and moving up to #2, and "they're deep and fun to watch," but they lack an "inside player" and Ed just doesn't "see them hanging with the big boys." They are the big boys, you stupid fathead. What an idiot. If Ed did not write that stuff himself, it was written by a super-dumb sportswriter. Sheeeesh.
Blogging about sports is one of the ways Ed attracts readers to his blog.
.
Labels: Ed Brayton (new #1)
posted by Larry Fafarman | 2/06/2008 10:26:00 PM
5 Comments:
>>>>> If you knew anything about sports, you would know that most fans have a knowledge of their teams that would allow them to write such details. <<<<<
Fatheaded Ed is not just commenting about his favorite team or a few favorite teams -- he is commenting about lots of teams across the country, dunghill. So he is either making stuff up (lying) or not properly crediting his source(s).
The latest news is that even though Duke "beat the crap" (a commenter's words) out of the Univ. of North Carolina, Fatheaded Ed says that he still thinks UNC is a contender and Duke is not, just because UNC was missing a top player. If UNC is that dependent on a single player that they get the crap beaten out of them by a second-rate team when he is absent, then UNC does not have much depth. Duke is ranked #2 or #3 in the nation but Fatheaded Ed thinks he knows better.
So, are you a sports fan or just an Ed "un-fan"?
> If UNC is that dependent on a single player that they get the crap beaten out of them by a second-rate team when he is absent, then UNC does not have much depth. <
This recent football season three highly ranked teams, Oregon, Oklahoma, and Arizona came apart when their first string quarterback was injured. Teams are often affected by the loss of a single player, cretin.
>>>>>> This recent football season three highly ranked teams, Oregon, Oklahoma, and Arizona came apart when their first string quarterback was injured. Teams are often affected by the loss of a single player, cretin. <<<<<
Football is different from basketball, dunghill. In football, the quarterback always gets the ball and so his performance is going to have a great effect on the overall performance of the team. In basketball, say, a missing 30 points-per-game star player might be replaced by a 20 points-per-game player. And the replacement player and the other players might perform better than they normally do because they are going to get the ball more often because the star player is absent. It's just not going to have as great an effect on the overall performance of the team.
>>>>>In basketball, say, a missing 30 points-per-game star player might be replaced by a 20 points-per-game player.
Shows you know nothing about sports; there aren't that many 20 points-per-game players to begin with; to have the depth to have 6 on a team is unheard of!
You clearly know nothing about sports writing either. Most writers are morons (like you) who can barely put a sentence together (again, like you). It doesn't take a high IQ (in other words, this is something even you could do, I guess) to be able to write about sports. If you read a few articles on espn.com or cnnsi.com you'll see what I mean.
Post a Comment
<< Home