Cam Newton reaction shows the perils of our culture of immediacy
Yesterday was fairly quiet for most of the afternoon, and then, Cam Newton blew up twitter. A few "rumors" turned into wild allegations against arguably the best player in college football this year.
And, as has happened countless times over the past few years, the internet ran wild. With little concrete information, message boards exploded, everyone (myself included) laid out their ill-informed opinions, reporters jockeyed for that big scoop, and national columnists tried to be the first to act like this incident (if we can even call it that at this point) is something that will carry importance for more than just this season. Pete Thamel of the New York Times wrote that college football fans should be 'disillusioned' by the Newton investigation. Stewart Mandel wrote that these allegations could be a blow to college football.
Wait? What? I'm supposed to change my thinking on college football simply because of allegations against a single player? Give me a break guys, and let's just take a dash of perspective before acting like this event has some grand meaning.
These overreactions shouldn't be a surprise. Every time there is a big story, the train to condemn or sound important gets rolling. When Oregon faced its offseason troubles, writers got in line to condemn Chip Kelly and acted like they had some special insight into the situation at Oregon.
As the internet has taken off, how we consume information has changed. In my case, I rarely watch sporting coverage on TV since finding Addicted To Quack and the entire SBNation network. We can pick and choose the media that we read and watch. We are lucky to be sports fans in this time, with so many resources at our fingertips.
But this has also created a culture of immediacy that has some downfalls. If you get your name out there first, your article gets to the top of Google news, and you bring in those page views that are the lifeblood of internet publishing. But this doesn't always mean that you're producing the best (or most accurate) content.
The internet has given us more of everything: more writing, more videos, more opinions. You cannot lack for content while online. We are inundated with information. This gives us as fans the power to control what we consume, but also gives us a responsibility to discern accurate and fair reporting from rumor-mongering and hearsay.
This is the second of three posts sponsored by Samsung, discussing the intersection of sports and technology.
13 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It’s not guilty as charged anymore, but rather charged as guilty.
In Chip I trust. In Nick, not so much.
Meanwhile
Trackemtigers.com says that Kelly will be in the NFL next year, and Gus Malzahn might replace him here.
I don’t see Kelly in the NFL next year.
I love what Gus Malzahn does, but he doesn’t spread out enough, and he does too much wildcat stuff. I’m not a fan of the wildcat overall.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-A-L-I-T-T-L-E-T-I-G-H-T-A-T-T-H-E-H-E-E-L"
You're telling me you don't want to see a direct snap to Lamichael James, with Kenjon Barner coming across in a fly sweep pattern and Lache Seastrunk in a slot-back position on one of the sides?
/drools on laptop
"Hawaii doesn't win many games in the United States." -Lee Corso
Sounds like our offense last year…no threat of the pass
--Dominic, Addicted to Quack
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
I also don't EVER see Kelly in the NFL
he’s a college guy, through and through
"Hawaii doesn't win many games in the United States." -Lee Corso
I agree
I could see the Oregon offense making it to the NFL at some point in some form. The run/pass option is what makes it effective, and when it’s working, the attack is balanced, unlike many other spread offenses.
It’s certainly less gimmicky than the wildcat or triple option.
Prince: This bores me. Is anyone up for a game of basketball?
CK's offense would be difficult to implement in the NFL
strictly because of the pace. It puts a lot of pressure on your defense to be deep and talented and most NFL teams don’t have the cap room to go 2 or even 3 deep at every position to keep guys healthy and fresh. With a 57 man roster most teams have 0 or sometimes 1 back up at certain positions. It’s a lot easier in college when you can field a team of 86 quality players.
Now, if CK was able to slow the offense down and make it effective at a slower pace, you could easily see it implemented. Besides as much as people say the offense is predicated on the QB running need only look at DT’s rushing stats and realize that’s not so much the case.
Personally, I don’t see an owner or GM being willing to risk a $4MM buyout on CK’s system and also risk pissing off star players making more than the coach in the first place getting upset about the conditioning and practice regimen especially when injuries happen and that hurts their salary potential even more. CK in the NFL would be a high risk system in a league that rarely takes risks in the first place.
Kelly’s new contract pretty much guaranteed that he wasn’t going to the NFL any time soon.
ATQ's #1 Double D fan
Addicted to Quack
I hate that you have to write these,
but I appreciate that you make it topical and reasonably interesting.
I’m pretty sure that this whole thing can be blamed entirely on the Fuskies. Or Boise State. Most likely an evil conspiracy concocted jointly by the pair of them.
Republicans are liars, Democrats are hypocrites, they are both bought and paid for by corporations. Grrr.
























