Exposing Peter King's blatant bias

[Westbrook36]

I'm sick of Peter King. I hate the guy, actually. To get someone to agree with me tonight, I decided to show a Skins example of his blatant bias. :D

King writes this about Art Monk:


3. Monk was the not considered one of the very best receivers of his era either by his peers or the media. He played 16 years. Twice he made the AP's All-Pro Team, which honors the top two receivers in football. He never made the second-team. So twice in 16 years the media considered Monk to have had one of the top four seasons by a receiver in football. Three times he was named to the Pro Bowl. That means three times in 16 years his peers thought he'd had one of the top four seasons by a receiver in the NFC. Those facts are significant to me. We're saying no to guys who made 10 Pro Bowls. Mick Tinglehoff was an All-Pro center seven times, more than any center in history, and five times more than enshrinee Jim Langer ... and that guy can't come close. Think of it this way: Eight wide receivers go to the Pro Bowl every year. In three of 16 NFL seasons Monk was judged to be one of the top eight. Is a Hall of Fame player one considered one of the top eight at his job three times in 16 seasons?


Then, just this past Tuesday, he talked about current Patriots that he thinks have a chance. The one that stuck out to me is Teddy Bruschi:


Sure things, assuming they stay productive three-to-five more years

1. Belichick
2. Brady

Good prospects as I see it because of their long-term value to the team

3. Bruschi

Now, will all of those guys get in? Of course not -- not even if they win two more Super Bowls. But if I'm still in the room discussing Hall of Famers in 15 years, I will fight like heck for Bruschi. That's for sure.

Pro Bowls for Bruschi: 1 (added after Ray Lewis injury)
All Pro Teams: 0

I'd love to hear the arguments he could make for Bruschi that he couldn't make for Monk. Great team player? Check. Made the players around him better? Check. Played with great intensity? Check. Won Superbowls? Check.

If I ever have the displeasure of running into Mr King, I'm going to ask him this very question and see how he answers it.

He also said about Monk:


2. Monk was about the fourth-most dangerous skill player on those teams. I covered the New York Giants for Newsday from 1985-'88, and I remember covering a lot of those great Giants-Redskins games. And the guys in that locker room really respected Monk as a consistent player who gave a great effort on every play. But they feared Gary Clark. To a lesser degree, they feared Ricky Sanders. And they feared the run game, whoever was toting it on that particular day. If you stopped the run, and you stopped the fast, quick guys on the outside, the Giants felt, you'd beat the Redskins every time. I started covering the NFL in 1984, and I saw much of Monk's career. Some of what he did was unseen and important to the success of that offense. He was an excellent blocker downfield. That helps his candidacy. It doesn't get it over the top, at least not to me.

I'm going to keep on bringing his ridiculous statements towards Monk (because I dislike him not because of love for the Skins) back to Bruschi who King just told us he is going to lobby hard for if he's still picking HOF players when he's eligible.

Would ANYONE argue that Bruschi is DEFINITELY behind Seymour, Harrison, and Law as the fourth-most dangerous defender on the Pats teams of the last few years? (I know Law has been out this year, point still remains the same).

Times yours. ;)

[carter23]

send that to him! a non redskin fan calling him out would be awesome... it'd probably be printed too

[Aikmans Killer No.56]

Whoa, westbrook, coming to the defense of a Redskin. I am impressed!

and your logic is very very good. Seriously, you should email this to him. I know he's too much of a chicken:pooh: to reply...but really, he is so biased, its sickening.

I hate Peter king.

[Aikmans Killer No.56]

Furthermore, I don't get why he's so biased. Big whoop, he covered the Giants for a few years ago. Back in the 80's. Give it up.

Maybe Monk stiffed him for an interview or something? Who knows.

All I know is that I think players in the Hall of Fame should get some say so, too, because they'd know a little bit more about football than this fat sock sniffer ever would.

Maybe not all of the people in the Hall should vote, just people that played in his time period, because those are the guys who'd know Monk best.

But something has to be done against this travesty, it's sickening


Westbrook, is he biased against the Eagles too? Maybe he's got issues with the entire NFC east. I only read his schlock when someone on here posts his extreme bias. I started skipping his artciles in SI long ago.

[Sebowski]

If I ever see King I'll ask him to consider this:
If the NFL shut down the year Monk retired, Monk would go down in history as the all-time leading WR. Jerry who?

It is absuloty insane that he wasn't a 1st ballot HOFer.


Then I am going to kick his ass!

[Aikmans Killer No.56]

Originally posted by Sebowski


Then I am going to kick his ass!

I'll hold him down. You get your shots in.

[Westbrook36]

Originally posted by Aikmans Killer No.56
Westbrook, is he biased against the Eagles too? Maybe he's got issues with the entire NFC east. I only read his schlock when someone on here posts his extreme bias. I started skipping his artciles in SI long ago.

I believe he is. Maybe it's just my perception because most NFL fans think writers are biased against their teams. I have come to the conclusion that Peter King can ONLY write about the following subjects in his columns:

1. Bill Parcells
2. Patriots team
3. Bill Belichick
4. Tom Brady
5. Chris Simms

Look over his columns over the last year. I'd be willing to bet anyone on this board that 50 percent of his columns deal with one of the previous subjects. Why though? Let's break it down:

1. He is neighbors with Parcells in Northern NJ. He covered his old Giants teams so he gets a pass and the benefit of the doubt.
2. He grew up in the greater Boston area and is a huge Redsox fan. I'm sure he has an affinity for the people of the area. It's obvious he likes the team.
3. See number 2.
4. See number 2.
5. He is also neighbors with Phil Simms. Surprise suprise. I never seen so much prime column space devoted to a sixth round draft pick in my life. To hear Petey talk, Simms not being a first day pick was the travesty of the draft. He almost believes noone will be smart enough to put two and two together and realize he is friends with the guy's dad and that's why he is getting preferential treatment. Amazing.

Everything Peter King does annoys me because of his blatant hypocrisy. I'm reading his column today (because I love to piss myself off) and King says this:


2. I think, with these reams of anti-Jacksonville columns coming out of this city from the scribes, I'd be asking myself this if I were at a water cooler in Mankato today: What on God's green earth do I care about some columnist's opinion about the Super Bowl host city? We don't get sports sections to read about how fun the night life is or isn't in Jacksonville. Sheesh.

This is from the guy who for YEARS tortured the football public with tales of his daughter's softball and hockey games.

Peter, what on God's green earth do I care about some columnist's opinion on his daughters field hockey games and which Starbucks locations don't make a Hazelnut Latte up to his specifications?

You can't make this stuff up. :doh:

[Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin]

Don't forget, he's going to cast his vote for Michael Irvin.

Irvin before Monk, what a damn joke.

[Aikmans Killer No.56]

Originally posted by Westbrook36


This is from the guy who for YEARS tortured the football public with tales of his daughter's softball and hockey games.

Peter, what on God's green earth do I care about some columnist's opinion on his daughters field hockey games and which Starbucks locations don't make a Hazelnut Latte up to his specifications?

You can't make this stuff up. :doh:

I think he does that stuff to be cute or quirky, but thats just annoying.

If everyone on extremeskins flooded his mailbox with pro Monk emails, the outcome could be downright hysterical, all of them pointing out his hypocrisy with your logic.

[Sanders 83]

How does he still have a job? Snyder should buy SI and then fire Peter King.

:laugh: :laugh:

[JoeSkinsfaninNJ]

Originally posted by Westbrook36
[B]

I believe he is. Maybe it's just my perception because most NFL fans think writers are biased against their teams. I have come to the conclusion that Peter King can ONLY write about the following subjects in his columns:

1. Bill Parcells
2. Patriots team
3. Bill Belichick
4. Tom Brady
5. Chris Simms


You forgot about two of his other favorite subjects Brett Favre and Jake Plummer.

[TheDane]

Quick, page Blade! Wake up TK! Someone hacked into Westbrook36's account!

;)

Well said, though. Once upon a time I used to write a "Weekly Sh*t on Peter King Article" for my close friends and colleagues. I may have to bring that back next season... or earlier.

[Rooner]

EXCELLENT thread, EXCELLENT points, EXCELLENT job by all.

[fuji869]

Can we just grab Peter King, Tar and Feather him and throw him in the Patomac River! :loser:

[Ernie5]

As much as it pains me to agree w/an Eagles fan, Westbrook36 is not only correct, his reasoning and support for that reasoning are top drawer. To me, it was sealed when King said that Monk shouldn't make the Hall and Michael Irvin should. Say what? I don't know if he has a bias against the Redskins (as Lenny the Idiot does) as much as he just doesn't see them as really existing. As though their 3 Super Bowl trophies don't measure up the Giants 2.

[TheDane]

:mad:

[Riggo-toni]

If you want proof of the jerkoff's bias, how about the fact that he put the 90 Bills as one of the greatest teams of the last 25 years :laugh: ....and not the 91 Redskins.

The Bills, who lost the SB to a team playing a backup QB, were somehow far greater than the team that completely whooped their ass the following year. :doh: When questioned about it, he said he saw a Skins game that year, and wasn't that impressed. :dunce:

[wskin44]

Something else I haven't seen brought up: A guy like Irvin played most of his carreer with Aikman (probably a HOF inductee). Monk adjusted to 4 or 5 QB's, non of them HOF candidates, and his performance never dropped off.

[Skins11]

Originally posted by Westbrook36
I'd love to hear the arguments he could make for Bruschi that he couldn't make for Monk. Great team player? Check. Made the players around him better? Check. Played with great intensity? Check. Won Superbowls? Check.



You forgot one thing. Teddy Bruschi trash talks openly and brags to the media. Monk never did anything of the sort. :rolleyes:

[jrfriedm]

Good post Westy!!!:cool:

[ECU-ALUM]

This idiot (King...Westbrook36 is not an idiot...I may not always agree with his posts but he's passionate about how he feels.) needs to be beaten over the head with his columns that said Jake Plummer was going to be the league MVP.

At times I don't know who's worse Lenny P, Don Banks, or Peter King (I am tempted to say all of the above are equally annoying).

[Skins11]

Originally posted by Riggo-toni
If you want proof of the jerkoff's bias, how about the fact that he put the 90 Bills as one of the greatest teams of the last 25 years :laugh: ....and not the 91 Redskins.

The Bills, who lost the SB to a team playing a backup QB, were somehow far greater than the team that completely whooped their ass the following year. :doh: When questioned about it, he said he saw a Skins game that year, and wasn't that impressed. :dunce:


1991 Washington Redskins
Record: 14 - 2 - 0
Head Coach: Joe Gibbs

Points scored: 485 (#1 of 28 in the NFL)
Points allowed: 224 (#2 of 28 in the NFL)



Not impressive at all. :doh:

[Cool Hand Loki]

You're absolutely right Westbrook, I brought up this exact point in an earlier thread, after I saw King's article.

If the Patriot defenders deserve to get in because they were on three championship teams, and were team players, despite not having any numbers...

what about the Redskins players who won three Super Bowls, were team players, and DID have the numbers?

He just doesn't make a lick of sense.

[Skinz2Win]

Originally posted by ECU-ALUM
This idiot (King...Westbrook36 is not an idiot...I may not always agree with his posts but he's passionate about how he feels.) needs to be beaten over the head with his columns that said Jake Plummer was going to be the league MVP.

At times I don't know who's worse Lenny P, Don Banks, or Peter King (I am tempted to say all of the above are equally annoying).

Yeah, Plummer for MVP, he also said Holmgren would be coach of the year and the Seahawks were going to the Superbowl.

The man is absoulutely clueless, but it's hard to know what's going on if your head is impaled in a bucket of fried chicken.

[Skins11]

OH yeah I forgot about the Jake Plummer MVP thing. I guess he's a first ballot hall of famer as well.

[ECU-ALUM]

Originally posted by Skinz2Win


Yeah, Plummer for MVP, he also said Holmgren would be coach of the year and the Seahawks were going to the Superbowl.

The man is absoulutely clueless, but it's hard to know what's going on if your head is impaled in a bucket of fried chicken.

Don't forget he picked the Jags to represent the AFC. Although I do have to give him creidt for 1 thing...he suggested taking Peyton Manning first in a Fantasy Football draft..which I did and he was great pick...but does that make up for the obvious bias against the Skins...no way!

[Skinz2Win]

Originally posted by ECU-ALUM


Don't forget he picked the Jags to represent the AFC. Although I do have to give him creidt for 1 thing...he suggested taking Peyton Manning first in a Fantasy Football draft..which I did and he was great pick...but does that make up for the obvious bias against the Skins...no way!

Somebody who is so far out of touch with reality probably would have their finger on the pulse of fantasy. ;)

[ECU-ALUM]

Originally posted by Skinz2Win


Somebody who is so far out of touch with reality probably would have their finger on the pulse of fantasy. ;)


:laugh: Nicely done!

[SNEET]

Originally posted by JoeSkinsfaninNJ


You forgot about two of his other favorite subjects Brett Favre and Jake Plummer.

That's what I was going to say. He's first string on the Favre-jock-licking team, lining up next to John Madden and Chris Berman.

[skns4life]

alright guy posting as westbrook36...cut it out...everyone knows it really isnt him writing all this...we're starting to like him because of you!

[Hooper]

I know this is damn near sacrilegious, but all this talk of the Patriots and how they're a "real team", blah, blah, blah has made me want to root for the frickin' Eagles for the first time in my life. Love em or hate em, the Eagles are getting no respect at all.

NFC East Baby!

[Skins11]

Originally posted by Hooper
I know this is damn near sacrilegious, but all this talk of the Patriots and how they're a "real team", blah, blah, blah has made me want to root for the frickin' Eagles for the first time in my life. Love em or hate em, the Eagles are getting no respect at all.

NFC East Baby!

Just stop! Just because westbrook makes a good post doesn't mean you root for his team!

[skns4life]

Originally posted by Hooper
I know this is damn near sacrilegious, but all this talk of the Patriots and how they're a "real team", blah, blah, blah has made me want to root for the frickin' Eagles for the first time in my life. Love em or hate em, the Eagles are getting no respect at all.

NFC East Baby!
:wtf::puke: and why would you want the eagles to get respect again?? BAN HIM!

[Hooper]

Don't worry -- when they're celebrating their upset win by rioting in the city of brotherly love, I will climb up to a nice, high vantage point, calmly load a high-powered rifle and... well, at least wound a couple fans in the ass.

[skns4life]

Originally posted by Hooper
Don't worry -- when they're celebrating their upset win by rioting in the city of brotherly love, I will climb up to a nice, high vantage point, calmly load a high-powered rifle and... well, at least wound a couple fans in the ass.

again...:wtf:

[dinamo]

I like Art Monk and I want him to be in the Hall. But I think Peter King has the right to experess his opinion. I did not see him say anything bad about Monk. Those were mostly the facts as he saw them. As a Hall of Fame voter he can vote for whoever he wants. It is too bad he won't vote for Monk.
In King's defense - I think he exresses his honest opinion most of the time. Remember wneh he said something about Owens and Owens refused to talk to him after that?
:helmet:

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Then I am going to kick his ass!

Careful Sebowski, it's even odds that you'd never see that foot again!

[ECU-ALUM]

Originally posted by TD_washingtonredskins
Then I am going to kick his ass!

Careful Sebowski, it's even odds that you'd never see that foot again!

:laugh: ...nice point!

Here's something else that I forgot to mention about Peter...Deion Sanders won't even talk to him...oh well there goes his chances at the H-O-F.

[Westbrook36]

Originally posted by dinamo
I like Art Monk and I want him to be in the Hall. But I think Peter King has the right to experess his opinion. I did not see him say anything bad about Monk. Those were mostly the facts as he saw them. As a Hall of Fame voter he can vote for whoever he wants. It is too bad he won't vote for Monk.
In King's defense - I think he exresses his honest opinion most of the time. Remember wneh he said something about Owens and Owens refused to talk to him after that?
:helmet:

The problem is he previously listed his "thinking" and "criteria" when he explained why he wouldn't vote for Monk. As stupid as his thinking is, I do suppose he has the right to have that opinion.

The thing that bothers me is his blatant hypocrisy. Since he likes the Patriots, he wants a few of them in the HOF. So he talks about a guy who if going by his "thinking" and "criteria" wouldn't even make the final 15 ballot.

I think he is:

1. Lazy (doesn't do enough critical thinking to match his position as a HOF voter)
2. An Ego-maniac (what other columnist makes it all about them? You can be sure Peter King will write a self-centered piece once a year talking about his huge responsibility and how serious he takes it, blah blah blah)
3. Biased Like I talked about before, people who are chummy with him get better treatment then others. This feeds into his enormous ego of thinking players and coaches should kiss his ring or feel the wrath of his pen.

[SRBFan]

King embodies the very reason fat, coffee-swilling, never-played-the-game sportswriters have NO BUSINESS selecting the players for the Hall of Fame. Instead, there should be a committee of current and former players (including Hall members), that makes the selections (say 5-7 every year). King's obvious bias against everything Redskin has again brought critical attention to a process that desperately needs to be fixed.