Give some context please. Has Quick said something like "The Blazers are going to lose and the Ducks are going to win?"
He went from covering the Blazers to covering the ducks and now the Blazers are doing great while the Ducks have had a disappointing year when compared to expectations so far Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Oh okay, thanks. I stopped paying any attention to Jason Quick about three years ago. Now let's drop this Sarah Palin rehash, and let it fade to obscurity. A Pox on anyone's house who keeps this thread alive.
Thanks gosh we don’t have to deal with his negative attitude. Last thing people want to hear about from a team their interested in is the person relaying the information hates doing his job. The spoiled ungrateful Ducks honks deserve quick <---Beavs fan
Omg why can't u guys except any form of criticism?! It's good to hear what people think who aren't huge fans or homers! The problem here is it's a witch hunt unless u say the blazers are unicorns and rainbows. It's so pathetic
That would be a great point, except that it's completely untrue. Criticism is accepted readily (by many, not by all, of course) when it is presented reasonably and without an agenda. When a writer appears to be focused more on generating a reaction than simply presenting analysis or opinion, it is not well received. For example, Zach Lowe (my current fave) can criticize the team's shortcomings without generating a freak-out or meltdown, because he does so in an objective, intelligent, reasonable manner. There are many posters in this forum that do the same.
Quick is an informer, not a reporter. He asks trick questions, fishing for what he considers to be character faults. He's destructive, not constructive.
