post here when announcers (or the media) say or do something stupid

[cookieb]

[ QUOTE ]
watching pti today and the clowns were setting percentages on upcoming events.

chargers beat the pats: korn said 25, wilbon said 10
tiger wins upcoming event: both said 100

i dont remember the others but it was obv these clowns would be broke if they ever bet on sports.

[/ QUOTE ]

And Kornheiser said 60% chance Tiger wins

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
us Latinos sure do know how to crash a party ."

Bolded part was verbatim. What an absurd thing to say, in more ways than one.

[/ QUOTE ]


that's pretty awful.

I can understand the latinos having a certain bond in baseball and pride in their history and success in the major-leagues and even half-joking about it somewhat.
But I suspect that if some white guy or black guy said that about their race it would be immediately noticed.

[prohornblower]

FWIW, I think Anaheim wins it all this year.

[RacersEdge]

I heard Doug Gottleib(?) on ESPN radio call the other owners in his fantasy league idiots because they wanted to hold their draft last Saturday and there would have been one game played already (Colts/Saints) and therefore everyone would already "know who to pick".

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
did ESPN really say that 'most important game between non-ranked teams' crap?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they said "most important game between unranked teams in college football history."

[Gregatron]

[ QUOTE ]
On ESPN tonight, Lou Holtz said that if Notre Dame loses to Michigan on Saturday, they'd have a tough time making a BCS Bowl. I'm not making that up. Look in the Week 3 college football thread for confirmation.

[/ QUOTE ]
That quote is from memory, and might not be exactly his words, but this is pretty damn close:

"If Notre Dame loses this game against Michigan, it's going to be very hard for them to make a third straight BCS bowl game."
- Lou Holtz on 9/13

EDIT: he said this is such a way (voice inflection and all) that suggested IMO that if ND loses they still have a shot at a BCS Bowl game. They will just have a much tougher time, that's all.

[JaredL]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bob, run differential over a season is obviously different than run differential over a 5 game series where they score 30 in one game. Come on now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to mention that he said OPS means nothing as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the only problem is context. He was asked for a prediction. Stuff like OPS and run differential are very important in predicting things so saying they don't matter in the grand scheme of things is really dumb.

If it wasn't about predicting, I think the statement wouldn't be bad at all depending on what he means by "the grand scheme of things." Most baseball fans probably haven't heard of OPS much less know how it's calculated. Hell, most fans don't even know what slugging percentage is other than some indicator of power, which they basically only get from the name. So if the grand scheme of things has something to do with general popularity then it would be a fine statement.

Also, winning titles is for most players the ultimate thing. I'm sure Barry Bonds would give up .200 points in career OPS for the Giants to have just held on to a [censored] 5 [censored] run [censored] lead for [censored] 3 [censored] innings.

I'm sure I'll get flamed for this. My point is that stats are great for answering questions (such as the one he was asked) but otherwise don't really matter.

[Berns31]

Here is one of my favorites

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjyKHGew0FI

[offTopic]

oT, thus the name: My favorite to date was an ESPN Radio interview that was being done with some Eagles DB after they got TO. They asked him what he felt about the acquisition, and he said, "TO's a great player. He's got all the intangibles, you know, he's got the size, he's got the speed..."

[prohornblower]

lol he doesn't know size and speed are things that can be tanged?