Gregg Rosenthal calls out Omar over Wallace criticism | Page 2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Gregg Rosenthal calls out Omar over Wallace criticism

Good... Omey The Would-be killah has about as much qualifications to be a beat writer as I do to be the heir apparent to the British Throne.
 
3sypxk-1.jpg

Omar thinks you work for him, your biased lol
 
pretty dumb thing for omar to jump on this early and pretty dumb thing for rosenthal to care about...
 
Worst thing is the other guys that are left don't really update much, so I have to put up with all his crap on Twitter to get a bit of info... I miss Ben Volin.

I just started following Volin's replacement Andrew Abramson the other day and he's done a pretty nice job over the first couple of days.
 
Don't know what's more absurd...the implication from Omar that at this point we can already tell that either Brent Grimes is back to his pro bowl form or the Dolphins overpaid for Mike Wallace (either could be true, both could be true, or both could be untrue, at this point)...or the reaction to this article, including by Gregg Rosenthal who is part of a Rotoworld crowd that I know for a fact have it out for Omar big time.

Omar has probably earned his enemies over the years but the article he wrote if you actually read it is merely an observation (Wallace not dominating yet), accompanied by an allegory of past experience (Marshall dominating immediately), and then a whole s-ton of reasons why this is a different situation and it's too early for any of this to matter in all likelihood.

To be honest, what's wrong with that? He spent like 75% of the article talking about how certain guys don't toss in that extra gear until they're in game situations and how logistically the role Wallace plays on the offense might mean that he can't stand out in these settings, etc.

Gregg Rosenthal's reaction was nothing more than a hit job and he knows it. Like I said, Omar has earned a lot of negative sentiment over the years but that doesn't change the fact that Rosenthal's article reaction was a hit job.
 
The only person worse than Omar is Chris Perkins. The fact they BOTH write for the same paper just gives reason to ignore that entire newspaper all together.

Both Perkins and Omar have no clue. They both want to make headlines themselves, and just stir the pot

There is a reason that EVERY major reporter in Miami in recent years from Cole, Marvez, Schad, Volin...etc moved onto bigger and better things. Yet they haven't!!
 
it is very odd to have a shot at a local papers beat writers as one of the first articles on nfl.com

I agree with the point of the article, Rosenhal is correct, it is absurdly early to be focusing on the impact of Wallace, but calling out one writer is slightly unusual
 
That's his shtik. He says things to rile the fans up so the read his garbage and follow him. He gets more threads on finheaven than any other reporter, so clearly people are reading his articles so he gets to keep his job. I would liken him more to that guy at the carnival that sits over a vat of water heckling the crowd while people hurl baseballs at him. There is always a big crowd surrounding that act and unfortunately that's what journalism is today.[/

This. Just stop reading his stuff and it will take care of itself. He's not fuming bc this guy just directly quoted him in a national webpage and put his name out there to a whole mess of new people. He is loving life right now I mean this is like 6 pages in two days about this man!!! Come on guys
 
Bah everyone's reports are inconsistent with each other. By all accounts the team has more overall young potential than previous years.

Can't wait for the real action.
 
Omar's piece was textbook content generation at a time when there's not much to talk about.

He laid up a negative observation, threw in a story of past experience to give it perspective, and then spent the bulk of the piece explaining every reason under the sun why this may not, and indeed probably does not, matter.

The diametric opposite of that would be tossing in a positive observation, throwing in a story of past experience to give it perspective, and then spending the rest of the article outlining caveats about why we should not necessarily get too excited about this yet.

Both are instances of content generation at a time when there's not a ton of content to be had and quite frankly I don't really see much that was wrong with Omar's piece other than I can tell he wrote it knowing he'd get negative attention but it didn't matter to him because attention is attention.

Rosenthal's piece on the other hand, there's not a lot for me to respect about it. I like him, but he wrote a piece that was a pure hit job. No attempt to be balanced whatsoever. And it's because the guys that are part of his group have beef with Omar (which may or may not be well deserved).
 
It always amazes me that Omar is widely recognized as a horrible beat writer yet people still read his stuff and get upset with it. I follow Omar on Twitter but learned a long time ago not to put much stock into his evaluations. He is not a sole source of info by any means just one of all the Dolphin beat writers I read. My advice would be that if you can't read Omar without the ability to filter out the garbage, don't.
 
Omar's piece was textbook content generation at a time when there's not much to talk about.

He laid up a negative observation, threw in a story of past experience to give it perspective, and then spent the bulk of the piece explaining every reason under the sun why this may not, and indeed probably does not, matter.

The diametric opposite of that would be tossing in a positive observation, throwing in a story of past experience to give it perspective, and then spending the rest of the article outlining caveats about why we should not necessarily get too excited about this yet.

Both are instances of content generation at a time when there's not a ton of content to be had and quite frankly I don't really see much that was wrong with Omar's piece other than I can tell he wrote it knowing he'd get negative attention but it didn't matter to him because attention is attention.

Rosenthal's piece on the other hand, there's not a lot for me to respect about it. I like him, but he wrote a piece that was a pure hit job. No attempt to be balanced whatsoever. And it's because the guys that are part of his group have beef with Omar (which may or may not be well deserved).

I don't know the source of their particular beef but if it derives from the first phrase I bolded then it would be pretty justified, no? Omar's throwing a little bit of Bayless out there because he knows what that does to his clicks. Not the full Bayless, but a bit.

Reason enough to say negative things, if you ask me.
 
I don't know the source of their particular beef but if it derives from the first phrase I bolded then it would be pretty justified, no? Omar's throwing a little bit of Bayless out there because he knows what that does to his clicks. Not the full Bayless, but a bit.

Reason enough to say negative things, if you ask me.

Maybe. But couldn't you say the same thing about someone for throwing out a piece with positive observations that the author knows don't mean much but will get him attention from the fan base because it tells them what they want to hear?

It's basically the same thing. Like I said it's content generation at a time when there's not much significant content to write about.
 
IMO Omar Kelly privately thinks Tannehill is a 2nd string QB and doesn't really care for him.

So,when Omar points out that Tannehill threw a blown coverage deep pass to Mike Wallace,I ignore the opinion (Blow coverage) part and try and judge it from other reports or sources.

Omar Kelly is the Bleacher report II,has some good,but has some bad and questionable opinions.
 
Back
Top Bottom