Man, is Sally Jenkins dating Antonio Pierce?

Ok, let's take this piece by piece

I'll respond once I figure out what "instintually" means

You're right it is, and it shouldn't be. Usually when someone makes that comment it's quickly shut down as an errant comment

Nothing inconsistent, but fine.

Touche

I think you completely misread my point. You have stated here that you are/were the Chipotle dude at Wizards games and that's how you got this unique access to Wizards games. And I was simply saying that it would be ridiculous for anyone of us to say "well then keep your participation on this board to that. I'll take a page out your book here...I apologize if I offended any of the forum members, but I stand by my comments.

Ok, clarify.

To be honest, some discourse isn't worth facilitating

Yeah I'm not sure I'm the one you want to argue with over what ESPN does or why it does what it does

I don't think Sally Jenkins was talking about the intricacies of actual game play. And I can't believe I'm here defending her

By Instinctually, I am referring to the "truth bias" that pertains to the individual and the "media bias" that is peddled on behalf of the masses. We automatically or innately assume that the people that we speak to, or the persons that report the news are correct or credible sources because of their positions. So if one were to have a defensive mindset to that aspect(e.g. my comments to the perspective of Sally Jenkins), then the burden of proof would be on the communicator to prove to one's self that their observations are so valid and poignant, that the nature of their inexperience is of no consequence to the listener or reader. All, I was saying is that I believe a more critical apprach is needed when evaluating aspects of the media.

As for clarification, in retrospect, I maybe should have said that I "question" instead of "I don't listen to," and how much "one" can really know about something that they haven't played or in which they were a participant, rather than use "woman" or "SJ." Those comments may not have taken as much heat, but at the same time, I did the exact thing, but I was just more specific with that example.

I agree some discourse isn't worth facilitating, but just as ignorant as that discourse may be, it is just as ignorant to preclude someone's perspective before you understand where that someone is coming from and/or meant.

I really laughed out loud, at your disbelief in defending SJ....that was comedy

Your comment was that women shouldn't do men's sports. Why would you single out women? Did Curt Menafee, Bob Costas, John Clayton, Lenny Pastabelly, Mike Wise, Tony Kornhieser, Michael Wilbon, or Jason La Canfora play pro football? Of course not. So, yes, it's sexist, but moreover, it's just a stupid comment to make.

Ok, this is getting out of hand, so Im going to say this, while you all make valid points, you consistently seem to be missing MY point. Yes, all of these names that you have mentioned are great journalists, but journalism has never qualified anyone to do anything but "comment" on a matter, rather than "criticize" the issue. Criticism is reserved for participants (e.g. coaches, players, and front office) who have a deeper understating of the intricacies of the game. Furthermore, no full-time journalist, no matter how great he/she is, has ever been considered for head coaching role (on any level in any sport) or that of the analyst in the booth. In all cases it is generally an announcer/commentator and an analyst, who has had some affiliation with the sport in question.

I am not picking on women either, because the comments I made do go to both men and women. I just thought that most would pick up on the implicit part of my statement, but yes, its does go for men too. If Pat Summit were to give me some pointers on how to coach, I'd be eager to hear them, and the same thing goes if i could get some pointers on jump shots from Diana Turassi As a result, I hold in "higher regard" the opinions of John Madden(who's game I have played since it debuted), Troy Aikman, Jimmy Johnson, Sonny Jurgs, Joey T, Howie Long, and Steve Mariucci because they have played pr coached. They all have more credibility to criticize, and they always will. To explain further, that is the larger view of the comments relating to SJ.

So because of these things, just to clarify again, I am weary of any man or, in this case, woman who comments on anything that they haven't played. I shouldn't have said I don't listen to them because I do. I retrospect, I hold their comments in lower regard when compared to those who have never played, and they (op/eds) have to prove more in their arguments to me because of the aforementioned points.

So do you hold all our opinions (our non-playing opinions) on this board in low regard as well?

And if so, what were you hoping to accomplish by joining the site in the first place?

I do have esteem for the opinions and comments of everyone in this forum and on The Warpath. I have esteem for the opinions of those who have not played football, coached, or have been part of a sports organization. I respect those with journalism backgrounds.

However, to those on here who have played, coached, or been part of sports organizations, I consider their comments and opinions to hold more weight.

As to why I joined up to the Warpath, I am a die hard fan, and I want to be able to talk about football with like minded people year round. I don't mind conversation. I don't even mind disagreements. I do, from time to time, have to clarify my statements to other members. Thats is what happened today.

So because of these things, just to clarify again, I am weary of any man or, in this case, woman who comments on anything that they haven't played. I shouldn't have said I don't listen to them because I do. I retrospect, I hold their comments in lower regard when compared to those who have never played, and they (op/eds) have to prove more in their arguments to me because of the aforementioned points.

I assume there are exceptions?
http://www.redskinswarpath.com/locker-room/22437-sean-salisbury-vs-john-clayton.html