Jon Cornish wins Lou Marsh

[paulwoods13]

And just who said "ALL" journalists are hacks, etc. - on this forum - please provide a quote or name the villain here if you can?

Point is - IMO - a LOT of them are clueless hacks, dweebs, wannabes or otherwise useless tools and they demonstrate it often when they get to run their big ignorant yaps in newspapers or other media - and that is often clear in their limited views or ignorance of the CFL. If you want to defend these morons and yutzes - the Simmons' or Naylor's, etc. out there - in some sort of show of brotherly love, then knock yourself out.

OV, you know as well as I do that many posters on this and other forums -- yourself included -- have regularly tarred all journalists with the same brush. If you want to use the clever "who said ALL?" argument, be my guest but it's sophistry. As for individuals running "their big ignorant yaps," seems to me that these forums are the very definition of that at times. I'm happy to defend -- and to criticize -- journalists when it is warranted. I judge them every day based on what they write/report, rather than arrive at a conclusion and stick to it forever, even in the face of any evidence that may emerge to the contrary (such as the fact that those "yutzes" actually did what you believed they would never do, i.e. vote the Lou Marsh to Jon Cornish).

[Shatto]

One must agree that some of the information and opinions given in Simmon's article do have a modicum of validity. However it is the condescending attitude of the article that I find somewhat offensive. Instead of referring to Cornish as a part time teller, he could have easily referenced, how many of the CFL players flow seamlessly into future careers, which will follow pro football and compared their success to the rather dismal post career lives of a great number of NFL players. Oh well, perhaps we should be grateful that Simmons, did at least acknowlege that Cornish won the award.

[AngeloV]

Also why can't people enjoy watching both leagues? It doesn't have to be one over the other.

I always wonder about this myself. I definitely enjoy both leagues even though I have a greater love of our league.

[paulwoods13]

The fact that the top player in the CFL has an off-season job is newsworthy because it is out of the ordinary. He is almost certainly the only MOP/MVP in any North American pro sport who works for a living outside his sport. (Filming TV commercials in the off-season, a la Peyton Manning, Sidney Crosby et al, does not count as "working for a living," IMO.)

If this was 50 years ago, the fact that Cornish has a job might not have been mentioned in media coverage because back then virtually every pro athlete had to work a regular job. Now the CFL is the only league where this is commonplace. That makes it a legitimate news angle. It is also one of the things that make the CFL special for many of us -- its players are not highly paid and are more like average people than athletes from any other sport. This should be celebrated, and IMO it being mentioned in news stories is a good thing for just that reason.

[OV Argo]

Some of the comments at the end of the articles about Cornish's Lou Marsh win are quite interesting in how negative they are towards the CFL. Why do so many Canadians have so much hate for the Canadian Football League? It is like these Canadians are threatened by the league for some reason. As Canadians, we are brought up with this notion that we are "inferior" and then we have a pro sports league that operates only within Canada and produces an entertaining and skillful product and this somehow offends people to the point that they must spew venom about our great league. Cornish winning the Lou Marsh seems to be opening up some wounds for a number of Canadians.

That has been discussed much on CFL fan forums, hasn't it Ravi? I don't know if there is a simple explanation for the CFL haters. To me though - a lot of it has to do with a simpleton, lowest common denominator type dumbing down of joe average out there. A lot of the lemmings believe what they are told by "expert" media sources, and a lot of Canadians have no respect for or much knowledge of fine things in their own country. So, we get a lot of all-american wannabes and hype suckers who have heard that the CFL (or other things Canadian) is inferior or not "world class" or "major league". The lemmings certainly are entitled to their views though; and they are easily threatened, or led.

[ArgoGabe22]

Only in Canada would people criticize the winner. In any other country, like Sweden, awarded their athlete of the year from the Swedish Hockey league it would be accepted. No one would bring up the NHL is better debate. Same thing if Russia's top athlete was a KHL player. In Canada it seems the only way "you made it" is if you go to the US whether its in sports, music, acting etc.

[AngeloV]

Only in Canada would people criticize the winner. In any other country, like Sweden, awarded their athlete of the year from the Swedish Hockey league it would be accepted. No one would bring up the NHL is better debate. Same thing if Russia's top athlete was a KHL player. In Canada it seems the only way "you made it" is if you go to the US whether its in sports, music, acting etc.

Very well said Gabe!!

[jerrym]

That's perfectly valid criticism of Simmons et al. What isn't valid is the "all journalists are hacks/idiots/NFL lovers" drivel that has become endemic on these forums.

I think you are overstating your case considerably Paul. While a few have made negative sweeping statements about all or most journalists, many more have responding to specific attacks on the Argos, usually by Rogers or Star reporters (surprise, surprise), or decrying the fact that the Argos are ignored most of the time by much of the city's media, which is true and quite different from saying "all journalists are hacks/idiots/NFL lovers", followed by the derogatory word "drivel".

[paulwoods13]

I think you are overstating your case considerably Paul. While a few have made negative sweeping statements about all or most journalists, many more have responding to specific attacks on the Argos, usually by Rogers or Star reporters (surprise, surprise), or decrying the fact that the Argos are ignored most of the time by much of the city's media, which is true and quite different from saying "all journalists are hacks/idiots/NFL lovers", followed by the derogatory word "drivel".

I stand by what I wrote. I read three CFL forums regularly, and on all three of them I regularly see mindless bashing of journalists without reasoned responses to what they actually write/report. Some posters do address the actual content of news reports, but a lot just bash and condemn the entire profession as useless/clueless/CFL haters/etc.

[OV Argo]

OV, you know as well as I do that many posters on this and other forums -- yourself included -- have regularly tarred all journalists with the same brush. If you want to use the clever "who said ALL?" argument, be my guest but it's sophistry. As for individuals running "their big ignorant yaps," seems to me that these forums are the very definition of that at times. I'm happy to defend -- and to criticize -- journalists when it is warranted. I judge them every day based on what they write/report, rather than arrive at a conclusion and stick to it forever, even in the face of any evidence that may emerge to the contrary (such as the fact that those "yutzes" actually did what you believed they would never do, i.e. vote the Lou Marsh to Jon Cornish).

Actually, no, I do not know anything about "ALL" journalists getting condemned; but I have read plenty of sweeping criticism of sports/football reporters on various fan forums and IMO a lot of it is quite warranted. AND, just IMO, the profession features many many hacks, clowns, charlatans, spewers of clueless drivel & cliches, etc. Sorry bout having that opinion though, and I certainly do not intend to "tar" you with that brush, but you are free of course to take my opinion of modern "journalism" as some sort of personal insult. ;o)

As for running our yaps on forums like this one - the internet being a special place for such stuff - that hardly compares to writers who are supposed to be well spoken and knowledgeable on the subject they are getting PAID to cover and who have a potential very large audience (many of whom are gullible enough to take the reports or opinions as expert or authoritative). IMO there are just so very few quality reporters or commentators on the specific topic of the CFL out there in the mainstream media; and the often negativity or clueless commentary there is particularly annoying, frustrating or sickening. And if I want to find sharp or interesting opinions or commentary on that subject that I care about and follow closely, I much prefer to turn to some of the fine writers (non professional journalists for the most part i believe) who do regularly post on the CFL fan type forums - these guys know and care way more about the CFL than almost any "journalist" who does get to report on the subject (I'd name Duane Forde as one of a few exceptions), and often they are much better writers too.

[ArgoGabe22]

I am not an expert in this field so correct if I'm wrong but wouldn't the editors play apart in what gets reported and what doesn't. If the editors want anti-CFL posts posted then the journalists have no real choice. I remember when the reporter shared negative opinions of the students at the pre-season game and then I think he defended himself saying he was only following orders (or something like that).