Don't think Peter King "Gets It".

[Coogs]

I could be wrong here, but this take on Sunday's game seems like a shot at us fans.

Denver Broncos (7-3) at Kansas City Chiefs (1-9)
The Chiefs are in the middle game of three-game homestand. Gee, I bet it's so fun for them to play at Arrowhead, and get the full support of the loyal locals

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz2CxlROTSp

Personally, I think we are all very loyal. That's why we all want ***** and all of his "Patriot Ways" out of here.

[bobbything]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

You are putting emphasis on the "0", King is intending to emphasize the "12".

Key word here, "intending". I know what he's trying to say, but he's not saying it very well. By saying "12-0", it implies an undefeated record. Which, as pointed out, is redundant.

Edit: Hell, it doesn't imply, it states. He should have just omitted the record altogether and talked about the 12 road games and not the teams' records in those 12 road games. Because everyone knows what their record was.

[DoucheMcCloud]

Originally Posted by bobbything

You really don't see how it's both unnecessary and redundant to say that Super Bowl winners are undefeated? If King were to just omit that stat, this would be a non-issue. Here...

"Since 2005, Super Bowl winners have played 12 road games vs. 7 home games; which means the champ..."

No, not at all.

Super Bowl winners have been 12-0 ON THE ROAD since 2005.

Do you have a different way to describe a Super Bowl winner?

[DoucheMcCloud]

Originally Posted by bobbything

Key word here, "intending". I know what he's trying to say, but he's not saying it very well. By saying "12-0", it implies an undefeated record. Which, as pointed out, is redundant.

Edit: Hell, it doesn't imply, it states. He should have just omitted the record altogether and talked about the 12 road games and not the teams' records in those 12 road games. Because everyone knows what their record was.

JFC, so "Everyone knows" that the past seven Super Bowl winning teams were a combined 12-0 on the road during the playoffs?

What?

[bobbything]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

No, not at all.

Super Bowl winners have been 12-0 ON THE ROAD since 2005.

Do you have a different way to describe a Super Bowl winner?

I've said it three times already, but I'll repeat it again...

"Since 2005, Super Bowl winners have played 12 road games vs. 7 home games."

By default, Super Bowl winners are undefeated in the playoffs. However, since 2005, of the 19 games these winners have played, 12 of them have been on the road. That's the point of emphasis, not the record.

Let me ask you this, if you won the Super Bowl last year and played three road games, what was your record? Point being that the record on the road in the playoffs is redundant. It's not necessary to say that Super Bowl winners are 12-0 on the road. Just say, Super Bowl winners have played 12 road games.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Do you have a different way to describe a Super Bowl winner?

One who does not lose in the post-season?

[Molitoth]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Its not dumb if you read it in the full context of the story.

The original quoted link wasn't the full context of the story though...

[DoucheMcCloud]

Originally Posted by bobbything

I've said it three times already, but I'll repeat it again...

"Since 2005, Super Bowl winners have played 12 road games vs. 7 home games."

By default, Super Bowl winners are undefeated in the playoffs. However, since 2005, of the 19 games these winners have played, 12 of them have been on the road. That's the point of emphasis, not the record.

Let me ask you this, if you won the Super Bowl last year and played three road games, what was your record? Point being that the record on the road in the playoffs is redundant. It's not necessary to say that Super Bowl winners are 12-0 on the road. Just say, Super Bowl winners have played 12 road games.

Wow, talk about making a mountain out of a molehill

[DoucheMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Dave

One who does not lose in the post-season?

What is the total number of road victories for the last seven Super Bowl winners?

And do you understand what this number implies?

[bobbything]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Wow, talk about making a mountain out of a molehill

I love it. You repeatedly say that you can't see the redundancy in King's statement(s); which I, and many, many, many others, seem to see. I did my best to explain it as simply as possible.

Bottom line, he could have worded it all much better; and considering he's a Senior Writer for SI, he should be expected to.

[DoucheMcCloud]

Originally Posted by bobbything

I love it. You repeatedly say that you can't see the redundancy in King's statement(s); which I, and many, many, many others, seem to see. I did my best to explain it as simply as possible.

Bottom line, he could have worded it all much better; and considering he's a Senior Writer for SI, he should be expected to.

I completely and utterly disagree and have absolutely no issue with his wording, especially in the context of the paragraph.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I completely and utterly disagree and have absolutely no issue with his wording, especially in the context of the paragraph.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I completely and utterly disagree and have absolutely no issue with his wording, especially in the context of the paragraph.

I'm glad you're not a writer then. I think it's really confusing and sounds idiotic. Can you figure out what point he's trying to make? Sure. But Super Bowl teams are by definition undefeated in the playoffs, so there's no reason to say "12-0," which implies that a loss would be possible in the given scenario.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by bobbything

Key word here, "intending". I know what he's trying to say, but he's not saying it very well. By saying "12-0", it implies an undefeated record. Which, as pointed out, is redundant.

Edit: Hell, it doesn't imply, it states. He should have just omitted the record altogether and talked about the 12 road games and not the teams' records in those 12 road games. Because everyone knows what their record was.

The problem is that people who are nitpicking King are ignoring the fact that he didn't write a stand alone single sentence.

[keg in kc]

Wow, talk about arguing over nothing.

[DoucheMcCloud]

Originally Posted by DaFace

I'm glad you're not a writer then. I think it's really confusing and sounds idiotic. Can you figure out what point he's trying to make? Sure. But Super Bowl teams are by definition undefeated in the playoffs, so there's no reason to say "12-0," which implies that a loss would be possible in the given scenario.

Do I think he chose the best wording possible? No. Can I understand what he's saying? Yes.

In the age of email, Twitter, Facebook and other forms of instant new items and thought, grammar and punctuation have suffered irreparable damage to the point where even the best journalists stumble over themselves to make a point.