Why Do I Continue to Read Peter King?
- Thread starter John Marzano Olympic Hero
- Start date
Well, yea, I knew that! But that's the only connection between Don Banks and Don[nie] Brasco: that they have a similar first name.
Why not "Don Draper", or "Don Mattingly," or "Don Corleone"?
It's just another sign that King is a mental midget, that "ooo, your name is like the name of that guy in a movie I once saw! Heheh...I'm a-gonna call you that! Funny. Funny."
My first name is Chris. If someone walked into my office, and said "Hey, Christopher Moltisanti!" my reaction would be "What? I'm sorry...excuse me? Did I dress like a mobster today or something?" and I'd just think the person was odd. If someone referred to me that way in a national or industry-related publication, I'd be outright pissed about it, because it just raises the question "what the fuck does THAT mean?" Honestly, it would be disrespectflul and thoughtless.
I get that King is buddies with Don, but it doesn't change the fact that it facially makes no sense, and if it's referring to an inside joke (maybe Don refers to his pecker as "Johnny Depp"), then keep it out of the fucking column because it's just sophomoric and dumb.
You know that every time Pete stops by the office - in between being annoyed by his travel travails, stopping at the Starbucks whether he needs to or not, peeing into the display case at the local super marchette for this week's beernerdness, or reminding John Fox (gently) that his defense sucks - Pete stops into Donnie Brasco's cubicle and yells, "HEY DONNIE BRASCO!" and then does a little shuffle-step, finger-point, over-smile, wink while Don Banks rolls his eyes and sighs softly.
King also refers to every co-worker named "William" as BILL BRASKY!
Sometimes, like today, when I read his column I imagine that his editors actually hate him so much that they've decided to run everything he says, consequences be damned. The pedantic hectoring they used to get has convinced them that every field hockey and shivering woman story runs, in it's entirety, because someone, somewhere will recognize King for the ridiculous parody he has become.
I would just like to say that I am several weeks into my subscription to your Peter King newsletter and I am pleased to report that I am a satisfied customer.
It's the Manning thing that really gets me this week. I mean, the guy JUST met with all of those people and spent hours and hours with them. They were the very thing on which he was making his decision about where to spend the next three years of his life. Why would he not remember their names?
"Hey, honey, what's it going to be, Denver or San Fran?"
"Gosh, I dunno. I really liked what what's-his-face had to say about progressive route running over the middle, but that guy in Miami made some good points about who my left tackle would be. I just can't decide!"
"Hey, honey, what's it going to be, Denver or San Fran?"
"Gosh, I dunno. I really liked what what's-his-face had to say about progressive route running over the middle, but that guy in Miami made some good points about who my left tackle would be. I just can't decide!"
Plus I'm not sure why he thought that was a factoid that would only interest him. Boobs interest me greatly.
Wait. So Adele "seemed" to be there? Did she play or not? WTF?
If so, you got to be at a (presumably) small event with someone who is one of the probably 3 or 4 hottest artists out there right now. You're not going to comment on this? For Chrissakes, you comment about the consistency of the chocolate chips in mass-produced biscotti! Surely you'll comment about Adele? I mean, that's pretty cool, getting to see Adele for free, with free booze, in a small theater environment...
"The NFL threw a party with a world famous singer! PEOPLE FROM THE NFL MINGLED AT IT! They asked me questions about football!"
Jesus. He's a mockery of a storyteller. He introduces extraneous shit that he has no interest in discussing further, but the red-herrings are more interesting than his totally predictable storylines.
"Yesterday, I came home and there was a beauItiful, naked, woman lying on my couch. I asked her if we were out of dog food. She didn't know, so I checked to be sure."
"A well-known man got fired from my office today for doing something unthinkably rancid. His tie had paisleys on it. I don't like paisleys."
Of course. The stock "I don't know, but I'll make it sound like I kind of do" response.
Wow. Awesome.
Wow. Awesome. So, you like, asked him, right? If he was coming back?
[Gives 5 reasons that are either obvious ("Parcells likes money." Fucking seriously? or, better yet, "It's fun." Christ almighty. Peter King's #5 of 5 reason, the topper, the one that traditionally makes you go "Oh yea....good point." is "it's fun." That's something that 4th graders say when they get asked why they like football.) or are not at all particular to Bill Parcels ("The Saints have Drew Brees!")]
You didn't ask him, did you, Peter King?
Peter King: you did not do your job. Fuck you.
Oh, gee, thanks: "Here's the rub: if the Saints don't need a new coach...they won't hire one! Stay tuned!"
Sam, from fucking Pittsburgh, took the bait that King laid down yesterday in glorious fashion. Congrats, King and Sam. Now go die.
Sam's argument in a nutshell: "I THINK that the salary cap stuff is bogus. I ALSO THINK that it was more about camarderie and motivation. I ALSO THINK that nobody ended up getting hurt as a result. Oh, and The Patriots had two picks, which kind of is irrelevant but I wanted to throw that out there because, in my mind, it means the punishment wasn't that severe and it should have been worse, because I THINK that Goodell was hiding something, and I THINK the tapes implicated a lot of people, and I THINK that they must have given an advantage to the Patriots. I THINK Spygate is worse, and I THINK my opinions are better than everyone else's. HOW CAN PEOPLE NOT AGREE WITH ME!?"
Peter King: kudos. You set out to get a letter like this one just so you could shit on Spygate again, and you succeeded in finding the World's Biggest Pittsburg Asshole to write such a letter. That's impressive. It also speaks volumes about the mental capacity of your true fans.
King: "Um...you might be right, but I disagree!" (I'd like to point out that by highlighting the manpower it would possibly take to "interpret" the signals, it just goes to show that the signal taping, which is allowed but only in certain areas, has very little practical, in-game, benefit. It's not like (and this is how I imagine most non Pats fans view it) they got a signal, called down to the sideline 3 seconds later, and the playcaller could adjust immediately. That's not what happened. But...whatever.
As a long-time Peter King scholar, I believe he means that a generic band played a collection of Adele songs, not that Adele herself played. And, no, that reading is in no way self evident because the fuck can't write clearly.
My oh my, what a marriage that would be.
King: "Boy am I bushed! What a day, you wouldn't believe how long it was to get a coffee and this homeless woman was complaining about how cold it was outside. Sister, if you don't like it move to Florida! Why is our pajama-clad son in snow drift? And what's for dinner? I hope it's not carrots!"
Johnston: "It's always about you, isn't it Peter? Well fuck you and your beernerdness. Here's something that may interest only you: I'm going through menopause and fuck off."
King: "Hoo boy. I gotta tell Don "Donnie Brasco" Banks about this one! Did we DVR Leno last night?"
is there anything less surprising that King still thinks Leno is the best? (see below)
Just when I think King can't get to me anymore--this bothered me way beyond what you, JMOH and PDW laid out...
It's like a Louis CK bit, but it's not satire. What, doesn't this woman know that blankets are only for people in first class? Who does she think she is? if she doesn't want to be cold, she should pony up the cash.
It reminds me of Louis CK's WalGreen's pharmacy insurance bit. No, this medicine won't cure you. The other shit would, and it's too bad but we got tons of it!
He. Is. Such. A. Tory.
I'll give credit where credit is due. Pretty good article about the Manning signing. When he shuts his mouth and uses his wide variety of NFL sources to write a factual story, he does great work. Amazing what happens when he stops writing about coffee and air travel.....
http://cnnsi.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?expire=&title=The+behind-the-scenes+story+of+how+the+most+prized+free+-+04.02.12+-+SI+Vault&urlID=474121005&action=cpt&partnerID=289881&fb=Y&url=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1196623/index.htm
http://cnnsi.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?expire=&title=The+behind-the-scenes+story+of+how+the+most+prized+free+-+04.02.12+-+SI+Vault&urlID=474121005&action=cpt&partnerID=289881&fb=Y&url=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1196623/index.htm
King had said in a tweet that Manning picked Denver because he was familiar with coaches/players. I think that other guy challenged that so King responded the way he did. The other guy then said something like "did I hurt your ego? Don't get hurt patting yourself on the back."
Here's what I think happened after looking at their timelines:
Peter RT'd someone else's link to his story here (not sure why he didn't just tweet the link himself, since he wrote it, but whatever):
Peter King ‏
RT
Raiders blogger responded:
Silver & Black Daily ‏
King then "responded" by broadcasting his response to all his followers. But he messed up the syntax because he doesn't know how to communicate on Twitter (which is fine, but he has 16k tweets and 800k followers...you'd think he'd learn:
Peter King ‏
RT
So the "it's slightly possible I know more than you do" part of that tweet was King's response, but he wanted to make sure all his followers saw what an ass he was being. But he should have either put the tweet he was responding to in quotes, or put his response before the @name, because then you could more easily tell that King was saying that part and it wasn't part of the quoted and re-tweeted tweet.
The Raiders guy then tweeted:
And then:
But there's no visible tweets from King that he's responding to here, so King either DM'd him and he doesn't know how to DM back (or can't, since King would have to be following him to be able to accept a DM) or he's being sarcastic.
I spent far too long on that.
It's the main weaknesses of Twitter, IMO. You have to do a lot of digging to know what people were responding to. Twitter naturally discourages feedback/response.
I thought it was funny even without the context, honestly. He just sounds pompous.
Thank you to Toe Nash for taking the time to elaborate on that.
Thank you to Toe Nash for taking the time to elaborate on that.
Plenty of stupids in today's column - things could get much worse in New Orleans: Goodell could get booed! A lot! No, I'm serious! - but for some reason this was my favorite paragraph:
Dear Pete's Editor, this is how that paragraph should/could read: "Their interaction made me wonder if Belichick might be inclined to recommend Schiano as a successor when he decides it's time to hang 'em up."
Or, say you wanted to give Pete a little rope and let him use his own phrasing, can we at least put the sentence in the right order so we avoid odd dependent clauses and unnecessary pronouns: "I wondered the other day whether Schiano is the kind of guy Belichick would recommend to be his successor as Patriots coach. You never know what the future could bring."
See how the word "successor" makes that whole "when he retires" clause completely redundant, Pete's Editor? Could you at least maybe show you give half a rat's ass about whether your readers can actually, you know, read the prose being published on your web site? Is that too much to fucking ask?
He wondered the other day. He's not currently wondering this now? And he didn't wonder if Schiano would BE the guy he'd recommend, just wondered whether he was the KIND OF GUY he'd recommend. Then, to hedge his wondering further, he would like to remind us that you never know what the future could bring. Which is very helpful. Saves us all tons of money on tarot readings, I'm sure.
Dear Pete's Editor, this is how that paragraph should/could read: "Their interaction made me wonder if Belichick might be inclined to recommend Schiano as a successor when he decides it's time to hang 'em up."
Or, say you wanted to give Pete a little rope and let him use his own phrasing, can we at least put the sentence in the right order so we avoid odd dependent clauses and unnecessary pronouns: "I wondered the other day whether Schiano is the kind of guy Belichick would recommend to be his successor as Patriots coach. You never know what the future could bring."
See how the word "successor" makes that whole "when he retires" clause completely redundant, Pete's Editor? Could you at least maybe show you give half a rat's ass about whether your readers can actually, you know, read the prose being published on your web site? Is that too much to fucking ask?
It was a boring column today.
But...
What do you think the odds are that Peter King is aware that NYC has shooting ranges, too?
But...
"Guys, GUYS! OMG. I was in FLORIDA, you know, the state that Trayvon Martin got shot in? Right, well, I was at some sporting event that had nothing to do with that case, no logical connection at all except that I was 120 miles away from where it happened. And guess what? There was an ad for a shooting range, where people shoot guns in a safely controlled environment. So, I like, put on a really obnoxious and judgmental expression right there in public. It was so obvious that some guy had to point out to me that, unlike in New York (where I'm from), some states have shooting ranges."
What do you think the odds are that Peter King is aware that NYC has shooting ranges, too?
Is it just me or does King's little blurb have nothing to do with, and shed no light at all, on the subject of Leaf's tweet?
"Let me place this contrived stupidity in here, in a forced effort to ostensibly talk about coffee, to tell you again how luxurious my life is."
Don't forget he drank Jimmy Buffett's swill and complained about the taste. Which is like going to McDonald's and saying that their hamburgers aren't the best thing you ever tasted.
Anyone else think it's a little strange that he makes a big deal about only going to Starbucks, but in the very next paragraph (in every MMQB), he extolls the virtues of always sampling different beers?
Is Starbucks a big SI advertiser, or something?
Is Starbucks a big SI advertiser, or something?
Really? He can't grasp that a huge marketing change in the NFL would have enough interest to be a "news story"? How many millions do they sell every year in merchandise? How many fans wear the jerseys to games? He does cover the most popular sport in this country right?
Don't you realize that Peter King is above the Madison Avenue commercialized bullshit society that America has become? Man, you people are dull robots. Now if you excuse him, King has to grab a Starbucks latte, fire up his iPad2 and read the latest John Grisham novel while he waits for the next JetBlue flight to take him to Orlando where he's going to enjoy a Budweiser at Margaritaville.
All the while quoting 30 year old movies, and discovering bands such as U2
What a fucking asshole.
"I can't believe people care this much about football! I mean, really, there are people out there who are willing to read about and follow things that are only semi-related to the game itself? Oh, crap, right, I gotta get working on my blurb about Dick Vermeil's wine company for MMQB."
"I can't believe people care this much about football! I mean, really, there are people out there who are willing to read about and follow things that are only semi-related to the game itself? Oh, crap, right, I gotta get working on my blurb about Dick Vermeil's wine company for MMQB."
That was less of a "heated exchange" than I expected, and more like King being the kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar getting scolded by mom. Which is equally fantastic. I think he didn't expect to get called out on it by Vilma, obviously. And then he turns to "NFL's investigation, not mine!" as some kind of stupid defense, like "I didn't mean it like that", when if he actually didn't, he could have just said something to the effect of "The Saints signing all these linebackers seems to indicate they expect to lose Vilma for a significant amount of time". This is like junior high level stuff, getting overheard talking trash by the guy you're saying it about, then backtracking as fast as possible.
King is really petty in his tone with Twitter. He really does come across as a loud mouth jerk who can't "take what he dishes out."
I agree completely with PDBWake: if he wants to be viewed and respected as a serious NFL writer, he should act the part. If he wants to be an opinion-maker/Op Ed style writer, he should be prepared to get some pushback. Right now he's neither; just the worst of both worlds.
EDIT: in a strange way, he's kind of the mirror image of Bill Simmons. Simmons is a pure Op Ed guy who, at times, seems to want to be respected more as a "Real Writer." King, on the other hand, has serious bona fides as an actual reporter, but has decided he'd rather just give his personal thoughts on everything. Where they differ is that (IMO), Simmons shorcomings are merely frustrating and can be excused as a sort of over-ambition. King is just getting lazy.
I agree completely with PDBWake: if he wants to be viewed and respected as a serious NFL writer, he should act the part. If he wants to be an opinion-maker/Op Ed style writer, he should be prepared to get some pushback. Right now he's neither; just the worst of both worlds.
EDIT: in a strange way, he's kind of the mirror image of Bill Simmons. Simmons is a pure Op Ed guy who, at times, seems to want to be respected more as a "Real Writer." King, on the other hand, has serious bona fides as an actual reporter, but has decided he'd rather just give his personal thoughts on everything. Where they differ is that (IMO), Simmons shorcomings are merely frustrating and can be excused as a sort of over-ambition. King is just getting lazy.
But that difference is the really damning thing for King, though; as much as some people get annoyed with Simmons, Simmons has decided to branch out and use his status as leverage to do some legitimately cool shit.
Just off the top of my head, I can easily think of a couple dozen people just on this site who I believe would do fantastic stuff given the kind of capital King has built up. And all he does with it is prevent himself from being fired as he gets worse at his job.
What a fucking waste.
Fire the lazy scumbag. Seriously. There's an incredibly typical Peter King-ism on page 1 of the new MMQB today where Reggie McKenzie is forced to respond to an asinine question that isn't explicitly stated (making McKenzie sound foolish in the process). Ha ha. More Peter King being lazy and shitty at his job.
But I am FURIOUS at the item that concludes page 1, where King "cannot bring himself" to Pamphilion a "rat" (which he does) for leaking the Gregg Williams audio. The same hypocritical douche who has railed against "stop snitching" in the past. The same hypocritical lazy retard who moralizes openly, all the time.
What a colossal turd.
But I am FURIOUS at the item that concludes page 1, where King "cannot bring himself" to Pamphilion a "rat" (which he does) for leaking the Gregg Williams audio. The same hypocritical douche who has railed against "stop snitching" in the past. The same hypocritical lazy retard who moralizes openly, all the time.
What a colossal turd.
I thought that same thing.
"Nice job New York Giants quarterback the Super Bowl on Sunday. Heck of a job by your quarterback."
Happy marriage, Jeff Darlington. Jeff's the terrific recent NFL.com and NFL Network hire, and he got married Saturday. Hear it was a lively affair. Good luck, Jeff. You're 31.7 years of wedded bliss behind me.
Seriously? In one sentence King congratulates someone on getting married, and then in the next he makes it a contest that Darlington can't win because King has a 30-year head start. Might as well write "Hey everyone, I've been married for 31 years and we're still together. I'm such a great husband even though I work long hours and travel a lot."
He's an asshole.
I guess my point is, Peter, I'm eager to hear your thoughts on this, because I am curious. This is a pretty huge draft for the Patriots.
But seriously, isn't it plainly obvious between this and the wierd "let-the-American-soldier-be-tried-for-murder-in-Afganistan!" comment a couple weeks back that King doesn't simply not understand the law (whatever), but actively avoids trying to engage in any analysis of it whatsoever? And, that would be fine (preferable, in fact), except he loves to bring up legal issues in his football blog! And, for the record "This is one of those cases where what's morally right [should trump legality]" is some pretty wishy-washy standard writing, there Peter. Who gets to be the moral arbiter? You?
Fuck you, Peter, you fat hypocrite.
You know what name is funny? Peter. It's slang for penis. And Peter King is especially funny, because it's like he's the Monarch of Cocks.
Only it's not funny, because it's true.
Here's a riddle:
Q: When is Peter King not the Emporer of Dicks?
A: Never.
Um. I don't know, Peter. There are a lot of possible ways that could go. I'm no pro football writer or anything, but hasn't Belichick taken some flak for trading his high picks the last few years? It's arguable (at least in some parts of the internet) that they were one player away from winning it all in 2006, 2007, 2010, and 2011. One player. Yet BB often trades high picks. What if he didn't for one of those years? What if they had drafted a hot young receiver in 2006? What if they had drafted another offensive lineman in 2007? Who knows? And, frankly, isn't New England a "live-for-today" team? I mean, Brady isn't getting any younger. Maybe BB should think about moving up in the draft, no?
I guess my point is, Peter, I'm eager to hear your thoughts on this, because I am curious. This is a pretty huge draft for the Patriots.
Wait, you're not going to tell me? WTF? Seriously, Fuck You! God, you're an asshole. I think I have a moral imperative to fucking hit you in the face for being a dick. Unfortunately, the law prohibits me from doing so.
SWEET!
But seriously, isn't it plainly obvious between this and the wierd "let-the-American-soldier-be-tried-for-murder-in-Afganistan!" comment a couple weeks back that King doesn't simply not understand the law (whatever), but actively avoids trying to engage in any analysis of it whatsoever? And, that would be fine (preferable, in fact), except he loves to bring up legal issues in his football blog! And, for the record "This is one of those cases where what's morally right [should trump legality]" is some pretty wishy-washy standard writing, there Peter. Who gets to be the moral arbiter? You?
Thanks, Peter. It is getting a little.... [Peter King then spends 2 of the next 3 pages talking about bounty related stuff].
Fuck you, Peter, you fat hypocrite.
Um. Ok. Is there a point to this? Guy spells his name funny? Does Peter King think that the guy's name is inherently funny (which is kind of vaguely racist, but whatever)?
You know what name is funny? Peter. It's slang for penis. And Peter King is especially funny, because it's like he's the Monarch of Cocks.
Only it's not funny, because it's true.
Here's a riddle:
Q: When is Peter King not the Emporer of Dicks?
A: Never.
But, you know kids, don't go ratting out other bullies just because you legally can. Plotting to hurt people is not the moral equivalent of kind of embarrassing your friend.
You forgot the best part ...
Hear it was a lively affair.
... PK making it known he was invited
Sorry, Doc, can't blame him on that one. It's very possible that the circumstances were as good as they could be a couple of weeks ago AND still have it not come to fruition.
It is Parcells after all; Tampa Bay still has the press release printed up for it news conference
It is Parcells after all; Tampa Bay still has the press release printed up for it news conference
He was neither explicitly wrong nor right, but simply set himself up 2 weeks ago so if Parcells did take the job (and I think it's pretty clear that he thought Parcells would), he could say "As I predicted 2 weeks ago, the situation was too good to pass up!"
Go back and read it, he says:
1) I know Parcells.
2) I hung out with Parcells this week.
3) We spoke.
4) Circumstances are perfect for him returning.
5) He'd love to work with a great QB for the first time, and could always use the money!
6) "But the one immediate hangup would be this: If Payton decides to appeal the suspension to Goodell, he'd wait to hear the results before the Saints acted on Parcells. Because if the suspension is reduced so Payton would coach part of this season, he likely would turn to an interim coach on the staff instead of Parcells."
ergo, he thought that if Payton lost his appeal, the Saints would ask Parcells, and Parcells would be their coach. He just didn't have the balls to come out and say it directly.
At the very least, he gets docked a huge amount of points for having spent time with Parcells and not coming to the conclusion that he wasn't really into coaching. The fact is, he clearly thought opposite.
:bahgawd:
Go back and read it, he says:
1) I know Parcells.
2) I hung out with Parcells this week.
3) We spoke.
4) Circumstances are perfect for him returning.
5) He'd love to work with a great QB for the first time, and could always use the money!
6) "But the one immediate hangup would be this: If Payton decides to appeal the suspension to Goodell, he'd wait to hear the results before the Saints acted on Parcells. Because if the suspension is reduced so Payton would coach part of this season, he likely would turn to an interim coach on the staff instead of Parcells."
ergo, he thought that if Payton lost his appeal, the Saints would ask Parcells, and Parcells would be their coach. He just didn't have the balls to come out and say it directly.
At the very least, he gets docked a huge amount of points for having spent time with Parcells and not coming to the conclusion that he wasn't really into coaching. The fact is, he clearly thought opposite.
:bahgawd: