PonyFans.com

http://media.www.smudailycampus.com/media/storage/paper949/news/2009/11/18/Opinion/Goin-Bowling-3835315.shtml

Ignoring the quality of the writing, a few mistakes really stand out:

1. Bowl eligible for the 5th time in 25 years?
2. The win over UTEP puts SMU at 6-6?
3. Nevada is 5-0 and will likely go to a BCS bowl?

Wow.

and "lowest bowl eligible SEC team." Liberty bowl gets choice #6 or #7 (actually 7 or 8 with 2 BCS teams), and there are already 9 bowl eligible SEC teams.

Yeah...the uhhh writing from certain sports journalists has been...yeah...uhh about that.

It baffles me how they consistently mix up facts.

Did you know Emmanuel Saunders has 240 career TDs? Quite an impressive feat.

Wuba wrote:http://media.www.smudailycampus.com/media/storage/paper949/news/2009/11/18/Opinion/Goin-Bowling-3835315.shtml

Ignoring the quality of the writing, a few mistakes really stand out:

1. Bowl eligible for the 5th time in 25 years?
2. The win over UTEP puts SMU at 6-6?
3. Nevada is 5-0 and will likely go to a BCS bowl?

Wow.

Actually, I think that #1 is correct. We were bowl eligible in 1985 (6-5), 1986 (6-5), 1997 (6-5), 2006 (6-6), and now 2009 (6-4, so far). In the last 25 years, we've been bowl eligible 5 times including this year, but haven't been invited to one.

Those other mistakes are inexcusable.

perunapower wrote:

Wuba wrote:http://media.www.smudailycampus.com/media/storage/paper949/news/2009/11/18/Opinion/Goin-Bowling-3835315.shtml

Ignoring the quality of the writing, a few mistakes really stand out:

1. Bowl eligible for the 5th time in 25 years?
2. The win over UTEP puts SMU at 6-6?
3. Nevada is 5-0 and will likely go to a BCS bowl?

Wow.

Actually, I think that #1 is correct. We were bowl eligible in 1985 (6-5), 1986 (6-5), 1997 (6-5), 2006 (6-6), and now 2009 (6-4, so far). In the last 25 years, we've been bowl eligible 5 times including this year, but haven't been invited to one.

Those other mistakes are inexcusable.

Embarassing. Nothing like making a mistake in the process of pointing out a mistake to really make yourself look like an [deleted] I just thought since the death penalty even though it said 25 years.

Wuba wrote:

perunapower wrote:

Wuba wrote:http://media.www.smudailycampus.com/media/storage/paper949/news/2009/11/18/Opinion/Goin-Bowling-3835315.shtml

Ignoring the quality of the writing, a few mistakes really stand out:

1. Bowl eligible for the 5th time in 25 years?
2. The win over UTEP puts SMU at 6-6?
3. Nevada is 5-0 and will likely go to a BCS bowl?

Wow.

Actually, I think that #1 is correct. We were bowl eligible in 1985 (6-5), 1986 (6-5), 1997 (6-5), 2006 (6-6), and now 2009 (6-4, so far). In the last 25 years, we've been bowl eligible 5 times including this year, but haven't been invited to one.

Those other mistakes are inexcusable.

Embarassing. Nothing like making a mistake in the process of pointing out a mistake to really make yourself look like an [deleted] I just thought since the death penalty even though it said 25 years.

I depends. Bowl eligibility wasn't a requirement back in the 80s. So technically, one can argue that 5 years of bowl eligibility has not occurred.

On the other hand, if one applies the bowl eligible standard to all years over the last 25 years, then the 5 years assessment is correct.

What frost me is the roll over and wet on ourselves attitude that we can't face certain competition. If I am a player, I don't want to play against the second string; I want to play against the big boys. That is what competition and challenges are all about.

Playing in a lesser bowl then the Liberty Bowl is fine IF we don’t earn the right to play in the Liberty Bowl. But if these guys achieve that honor, then by gosh be proud of the opportunity to play with the big boys and accept the challenge that comes with being a champion.

I've noticed errors from the editor in chief in every single article this year from Daily Campus.

Does that byline really say Editor-IN-CHIEF? Good god.

So let's review:
1)Too many grammatical/punctuation errors to count. To wit:
"... the team becoming bowl eligible ..."
"Bowl-eligible is used as a compound modifier and should be hyphenated.

"... the final home game being played over Thanksgiving Break..."
When did Break become part of the name of the holiday, thereby justifying capitalization?

"... Mustang fan base could see a decline in their numbers."
a fan base is a singular entity, meaning it would be (or the oft-misused "see") a decline in its numbers...

... and on ... and on ... and on ...
(Rhetoric 1301)

2) "... With the average attendance of the season at 22,110, students are actually staying through halftime to cheer their team to victory ..."
Has the author ever been to a game? There aer some hard-core fans in the student section, but clearly she has not seen the rats-leaving-the-ship act so many students perform at (if not before) halftime, apparently for fear that area liquor stores will close by 8:30 p.m.

3) "... The Mustangs, if they host the Conference Championship, would also be the second team in Dallas, next to the Big 12 conference, to host a conference championship in Dallas..."
Um ... what?
Never mind the fact that the Conference USA title game is hosted by the conference itself, not the school whose stadium is the site of the game ... what I want to know is, when did the Big 12 become a team?

4) "... What fans needs to realize, though is that if SMU wins out (meaning they finish the season 2-0) they will host the Conference USA ..."
Where to start here?
* Should the Mustangs win out, they will finish 8-4, not 2-0.
* Either if SMU wins out, it will host ... or if the Mustangs win out, they will host ...
* Or does she mean that the fans will host... ?

5) "... while members of the WAC and SWC, SMU did make it to the SWC championship in 1984 ..."
Did the SWC have a championship (game)? I don't believe so.
Perhaps the intent here was that SMU won the SWC championship in 1984?
And was SMU a member of the WAC and SWC?
I'm pretty sure that makes SMU the first WAC member to win anything related to the Southwest Conference...

6) "... Sure, these teams may not look great on paper, but size-wise, SMU would be screwed..."
Right - ignoring for a moment the eloquence of the description, enrollment doesn't necessarily dictate a game's outcome, right? Or will there be a mandatory tug-of-war between the entire student bodies of each school to determine the outcome?

7) "... SMU won't have to play Boise State (10-0, 5-0) or Nevada, as both teams will likely receive bids to a BCS bowl..."
Really? TWO teams from the WAC getting BCS bowl bids?

8) "Yes, the payout for the Liberty Bowl would be much, much larger, the implications of the Mustangs playing in Hawaii have a higher appeal to the team and Dallas community."
It's possible - sort of - to discern what is being said here, but is that supposed to be a sentence?

PonyFan wrote:Does that byline really say Editor-IN-CHIEF? Good god.

So let's review:
1)Too many grammatical/punctuation errors to count. To wit:
"... the team becoming bowl eligible ..."
"Bowl-eligible is used as a compound modifier and should be hyphenated.

"... the final home game being played over Thanksgiving Break..."
When did Break become part of the name of the holiday, thereby justifying capitalization?

"... Mustang fan base could see a decline in their numbers."
a fan base is a singular entity, meaning it would be (or the oft-misused "see") a decline in its numbers...

... and on ... and on ... and on ...
(Rhetoric 1301)

2) "... With the average attendance of the season at 22,110, students are actually staying through halftime to cheer their team to victory ..."
Has the author ever been to a game? There aer some hard-core fans in the student section, but clearly she has not seen the rats-leaving-the-ship act so many students perform at (if not before) halftime, apparently for fear that area liquor stores will close by 8:30 p.m.

3) "... The Mustangs, if they host the Conference Championship, would also be the second team in Dallas, next to the Big 12 conference, to host a conference championship in Dallas..."
Um ... what?
Never mind the fact that the Conference USA title game is hosted by the conference itself, not the school whose stadium is the site of the game ... what I want to know is, when did the Big 12 become a team?

4) "... What fans needs to realize, though is that if SMU wins out (meaning they finish the season 2-0) they will host the Conference USA ..."
Where to start here?
* Should the Mustangs win out, they will finish 8-4, not 2-0.
* Either if SMU wins out, it will host ... or if the Mustangs win out, they will host ...
* Or does she mean that the fans will host... ?

5) "... while members of the WAC and SWC, SMU did make it to the SWC championship in 1984 ..."
Did the SWC have a championship (game)? I don't believe so.
Perhaps the intent here was that SMU won the SWC championship in 1984?
And was SMU a member of the WAC and SWC?
I'm pretty sure that makes SMU the first WAC member to win anything related to the Southwest Conference...

6) "... Sure, these teams may not look great on paper, but size-wise, SMU would be screwed..."
Right - ignoring for a moment the eloquence of the description, enrollment doesn't necessarily dictate a game's outcome, right? Or will there be a mandatory tug-of-war between the entire student bodies of each school to determine the outcome?

7) "... SMU won't have to play Boise State (10-0, 5-0) or Nevada, as both teams will likely receive bids to a BCS bowl..."
Really? TWO teams from the WAC getting BCS bowl bids?

"Yes, the payout for the Liberty Bowl would be much, much larger, the implications of the Mustangs playing in Hawaii have a higher appeal to the team and Dallas community."
It's possible - sort of - to discern what is being said here, but is that supposed to be a sentence?

Thanks for running through all that, I started to when I first posted but I just did not have the energy so I stuck to factual errors (or at least what I thought were errors...).

One other grammar pile on:
"The Mustangs, if they host the Conference Championship, would also be the second team in Dallas, next to the Big 12 conference, to host a conference championship in Dallas. If we win, it's a safe assumption June Jones would win Coach of the Year."

The Mustangs are both THEY and WE? She needs to pick either 1st person or 3rd person and stick with it throughout.

I also didn't know that the Big 12 Conference was a team.....

huskerpony wrote:I also didn't know that the Big 12 Conference was a team.....

I also didn't know that ARLINGTON was "in Dallas."

Good call - a reporter should never, EVER use "we." I don't care if it's Troy Aikman covering a Cowboys game - even he doesn't use "we," and of course that's the only NFL team for which he ever played. Listen to him call a game (and I like him a hell of a lot more as an analyst than I did as a player, because I can't stand the Cowboys). He and Joe Buck can call a game for 3.5 hours and never once will you hear him refer to the Cowboys as "we" ... which adds considerably to his objectivity and professionalism. Under NO circumstances should a reporter or an analyst ever refer to a team as "we." Even in the preseason, the media hacks WHO ARE EMPLOYED BY THE TEAM (including the biggest homer in the world, Mickey Spagnola) absolutely never refer to the team as "we" and neither should any other reporter.

From the DC:

Nicole Jacobsen - Editor in Chief

Hey everyone! I've been working for The Daily Campus for almost four years now. I started as a contributing writer for the club baseball team, and eventually moved up to become the associate sports editor. The fall of my junior year I was the opinion editor. That spring, I applied as the Editor in Chief.

I am now a senior (majoring in journalism and advertising with a minor in business). After graduation, I want to work with ESPN hosting either my own show or doing sideline reporting for the NFL or college football. I love to write, as well, and hope to one day be a sports columnist for a major publication.

http://www.smudailycampus.com/user/inde ... id=2702551

Theere is a pic at the wbsite as well.

Also from the DC
Letter of Apology
Nicole Jacobsen
Issue date: 10/6/09 Section: Opinion
PrintEmail Article Tools Page 1 of 1 To everyone I offended in my column about the upcoming SMU versus TCU football game this weekend (namely the Texas Tech fans), I want to apologize for my comment about how difficult it would be to find a "disease free Texas Tech student."

What was meant to be interpreted as a joke was taken to a level I had not intended, coming across as offensive rather than humorous. It was not my intention to disrespect the Texas Tech community and the Red Raider Nation. I again apologize for those offended by my comment.

Please recognize that my comment is the opinion of one individual and is not reflective of SMU as a whole. I will learn from my mistakes in future stories I write, and be careful of distasteful comments appearing in my work.

Again, what has been a joke amongst several students (both at Texas Tech and other universities) was not an appropriate comparison in an article about SMU and TCU.

- Nicole Jacobsen
The Daily Campus

Well, she isn't all bad.