Skip to content

ESPN-on-ESPN crime extends to Bears' interest in Vincent Jackson

Rosenthal recently has coined a term for those instances when one ESPN reporter refutes a prior report from another ESPN reporter, dubbing it “ESPN-on-ESPN crime.”

We mention this because there has been another incident.

Earlier this week, Adam Schefter reported that the Bears have interest in unsigned Chargers receiver Vincent Jackson.  On Friday, Len Pasquarelli had this to say on the matter, in the pay-only version of his weekly Tip Sheet:  “There were reports from credible people this week that several clubs
have inquired about the availability of sixth-year San Diego wide
receiver Vincent Jackson, who has yet to sign his restricted free-agent tender and
suggested he will not report to training camp.  But unless folks are lying to us (and it certainly wouldn’t be the first
time), the Chicago Bears are not one of those teams.”

Pasquarelli’s report makes no specific reference to Schefter’s report, but the import is clear to anyone paying attention.  Pasquarelli has contradicted Schefter, and either way ESPN is guaranteed to get this one right.

And wrong.

Permalink 26 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Chicago Bears, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
26 Responses to “ESPN-on-ESPN crime extends to Bears' interest in Vincent Jackson”
  1. Omnipotent_1 says: Jul 3, 2010 12:34 AM

    Adam Schefter has a picture of some ESPN bigwig in a compromised position, because he is the worst football analyst ESPN has ever had. He should of never been hired there.

  2. QB_of_the_Future says: Jul 3, 2010 12:58 AM

    I laughed so hard at “ESPN on ESPN Crime” I snorted…

  3. Wellsee says: Jul 3, 2010 1:11 AM

    It isn’t a “crime”, even in the non-literal meaning you use. They have a gazillion reporters with different sources yanking their chains so they will get different information. Should they sit on it until they determine which is right? Where’s the fun in that? If anything, they get to have their cake and eat it too.

  4. rovibe says: Jul 3, 2010 1:22 AM

    Can’t see why Jackson would want to play for the Bears, anyway. He’d have to share all those catches with opposing DB’s.

  5. Sow Crates says: Jul 3, 2010 1:51 AM

    Schefter reported that Chicago at least took a whif of a good receiver that was available for trade. A player on a holdout with a few DUI’s and a suspension in his pocket might be shipped out for cheap, Chicago might as well smell around.
    Pasquarelli reported that Chicago wouldn’t (and shouldn’t) pour draft picks and extra money on Vincent Jackson and that there was no practical way to make a deal.
    Both covered a different angle, not sure how either of them can be considered wrong.

  6. Tony DeHoff says: Jul 3, 2010 1:58 AM

    ESPN sold out. They are a joke and if not for Streak for the Cash I probably wouldn’t visit their site at all.

  7. ZombieRevolution says: Jul 3, 2010 3:08 AM

    “Rosenthal recently has coined a term for those instances when one ESPN reporter refutes a prior report from another ESPN reporter, dubbing it “ESPN-on-ESPN crime.””
    Unlike PFT ESPN lets their reporters refute each other. In PFT everyone agrees with Florio, whether they publically want to or not. That is why Florio uses the royal “we” so many times. PFT is Florio’s kingdom to rule as he will, to grind into dust certain stories.

  8. monet99 says: Jul 3, 2010 3:30 AM

    Schefter is great at making up stuff.

  9. Cambodian Breast Milk says: Jul 3, 2010 3:30 AM

    This Jackson thing is starting to become about as annoying as all the Haynesworth madness. Trade him or extend him. Why is this difficult?

  10. Steve W. says: Jul 3, 2010 5:37 AM

    Not necessarily. Pasquarelli stated “unless folks are lying to us”. How many times have teams inquired about trading for a player or signing a free agent, and at the same time denied it…especially if they thought there was a good chance nothing would come of it. I don’t blame them. Sneaking around behind your players’ backs looking to replace one or more of them could cause trouble down the line if you end up being stuck with what you have. The Bears certainly wouldn’t admit to it after having publicly talked up their receiving corps. The fans might think they were being had, and that the prospects for their team weren’t that good this year, which in turn could mean a decline in ticket and merchandise sales.

  11. aec4 says: Jul 3, 2010 7:48 AM

    Hey, if the weatherman was right 50% of the time, everyone would be happy. Seems like ESPN is keeping their success rate > weathermen with this move.

  12. ProDarter says: Jul 3, 2010 8:46 AM

    What’s truly a crime is that you took the time to spew out this garbage. Every site, including this one, repeatedly, gets thing wrong. Pointing out others, and not your own, shows you to be the sad little man you are.

  13. chemicalxv says: Jul 3, 2010 8:58 AM

    Schefter is NEVER wrong. I hope Pasquarelli knows who he’s messing with

  14. Football Fan says: Jul 3, 2010 9:13 AM

    I don’t even watch ESPN anymore unless I am specifically looking for a score. Someone needs to start a sports news network with people who know what they are talking about on draft day and where reporters don’t contradict each other weekly. ESPN has really become a joke. They have way too many people on air and allow their own people to say that others within the company are wrong. ESPN has truly become a joke.

  15. Florio-is-a-tool says: Jul 3, 2010 9:20 AM

    Len Pasquarelli is mostly known for having some sort of jones for Jeff George in a Peter King-Brett Favre sort of way. He’s the Al Davis of reporters.

  16. Levija says: Jul 3, 2010 10:07 AM

    I don’t see the bears wasting that type if money and draft picks for someone who will be out the 1st 3 games. however, its not like it hasn’e happened before with them.

  17. Hap says: Jul 3, 2010 10:47 AM

    Hee-heespn is always wrong.

  18. wildcatter says: Jul 3, 2010 11:21 AM

    I just wish Florio would go back to calling Pasquarelli “pastabelly”.

  19. J. Clayton says: Jul 3, 2010 11:51 AM

    ESPN is “sportish” news for high school girls.
    I watch because there is sadly no other option.

  20. GregO says: Jul 3, 2010 12:18 PM

    The Bears could also have changed their minds between the time of Schefter’s report and Pasquarelli’s.
    I am not sure why you feel the need to point out every ESPN contradiction. It doesn’t make you look any better by comparison. When you have dozens of reporters questioning hundreds of sources there are bound to be conflicting reports.

  21. CanadianVikingFan says: Jul 3, 2010 12:26 PM

    Adam Schefter also coined the term Schism, in the Vikings lockeroom.

  22. dlodown1 says: Jul 3, 2010 12:37 PM

    Jackson is a product of a good QB and a great offensive system….He is nothing more than an average receiver, it’s that simple. Any WR in the league can do the things Jackson does, he’s not special. The only thing that makes Jackson standout is his character issues. The Bears never hand any interest in bringing this scum bag to Chicago. To the contrary, the Bears are happy with what they have at the position. This is just another botched rumor job by the attention starved Adam Schefter. Take Schefter with a grain of salt. The guy talks out of his ass more than his mouth.

  23. dabarber says: Jul 3, 2010 12:41 PM

    ESPN is a huge company with lots of reporters. It’s not that hard to have contradicting stories–especially since ESPN has like 5 channels and a website with 100′s of stories posted each day.

  24. TryTheVeal says: Jul 3, 2010 1:18 PM

    You mean to tell me BSPN is actually reporting on other sports instead of ramming this world cup crap down eveyone’s throat 24/7?

  25. J-oh says: Jul 3, 2010 1:30 PM

    Schefter > any other analyst out there.
    Its simple as that. He’s accurate, holds zero bias and has good sources.

  26. Lions 8-8 says: Jul 3, 2010 3:57 PM

    ESPN? Don’t you mean the James watch 2010?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!