I've seen her grouped with Goodman and Forde as writers who have a vendetta against Calipari. I get the Goodman and Forde hate. I don't remember seeing anything from O'Neil though. Is it just because she seems to be buddy-buddy with Forde?
Can someone explain the disdain for Dana O'Neil?
- Thread starter FiveStarCat
- Start date
I though it was because she works for ESPN and according to most on this site everyone at that place hates us so we are required to hate them.
Speaking of harpies and shrewish ******, there was one at espn who said that BBN would gladly take Hitler as a head coach if he could win games (thus insulting the whole fanbase while loosely comparing Calipari to Hitler).
My only specific recollection about her is that she was overweight. Anyone remember who she is?
My only specific recollection about her is that she was overweight. Anyone remember who she is?
Thank You! I'd have wasted too much time trying to remember that, today.
OP, as far as dana oneil, she has toned down her caustic rhetoric lately (but I doubt anyone thinks her views have changed). A while back, it was impossible for her to write anything about UK without mentioning sanctions, race, and any other topic that tended to cast UK in a negative light. She had an agenda.
She just wrote a piece about how Boheim's legacy will be forever altered due to the sanctions. She does like to pick on the big boys and build up the little teams. These writers are always diggin for something to write that is new and earth shattering of course. If they can't think of anything, the fail safe thing to do is poke at the BBN. That always works.
I never heard of her before there was an incident in the BCG years where she said something he didn't like I guess and banned her. After that I think it's been kind of contentious between us. That's my hazy memory of it anyway.
Thinking about it a little more and I believe she wanted to do some kind of insider look at UK for some special ESPN program or some such and he said no. Somebody surely has to konw for sure though.
I don't think O'Neil is that bad - especially today, but in 2010 when all of the stuff with Enes Kanter and Eric Bledsoe was going on, she gleefully RT'd every incriminating thing Pete Thamel was putting out on Twitter. A group of about 5 sportswriters were RT'ing pretty much everything in that vein.
Dana just follows the lead of some others and tries to stir the pot at times to see what comes up. She hasn't saddled and ridden the same horse like Tipton, Forde and some others and rode it to death, just yet. Until she does that she is still credible to me at least. As the poster above me said, she has parroted the same thing that others have beaten to death. There are a few of her types that I'm done with, but she is still above water for now. To try and answer the original question I think lots of people have already put her in the camp of the enemy, meaning Tipton and that ilk.
Exactly right.
What I don't get is this: a wannabe writer who is stuck for content decides to use ancient history as filler, like "in the middle of the last century and then again towards the end of the last century, the NCAA spanked UK and, oh yeah, UK fans are like Manson followers.." To keep this brief, I'm going to call that "hate mongering." I don't see how someone can conclude that hate mongering is a good career move, but maybe it is. To me, however, that writer just killed their credibility, because their "reporting" stinks of an agenda and bias. I'd bet that more than 50,000 UK fans have that same opinion of Oneil and Hill..
Not many writers can make a long-term living being a hate clown like shaughnessy (who just compared Calipari to an alleged rapist). Oneil is changing (or being forced to change) her tune some, but most of us won't change our opinion of her for years. I avoid what she writes unless it is specifically linked on here. Hill, all she did was compare BBN (thanks for the correction, guys) to Manson followers, and all I will remember about her journalistic skills is that.
Hate mongering didn't seem to work out very well for pat forde, either. His career has certainly not been on an upward trajectory.
Many people on here have a very dim view of ESPN. Why is that??? Well, every name I mentioned above (and a lots of names I didn't--except shaughnessy) worked at ESPN while they were calling BBN a bunch of Manson followers who worshipped a cheating school. ESPN obviously decided that it would increase earnings by going after UK. ESPN has changed its tune recently, but my long term memory goes back a lot further than 12 months.
This post was edited on 3/10 12:12 PM by MO_Blue
So, what I am hearing is that she wrote some things about 5 years ago that ticked people off and it framed their opinion of her?
That's fine, and it makes sense because I really didn't notice her until about 3 years ago, and I've never really noted anything about her takes on UK that bothered me.
That's fine, and it makes sense because I really didn't notice her until about 3 years ago, and I've never really noted anything about her takes on UK that bothered me.
Yes, you're both right. Below is the beginning of a piece she wrote later when BCG was fired by Texas Tech (this isn't the piece she wrote after the "all-access" was granted at UK). She's not nearly as disagreeable to me as Forde and Goodman - but I defer to Cal's judgment on this, he knows the media, knows their motivations, etc. If he lumps her in with the others as part of the dreaded "triumvirate", then who am I to argue. I will say the bold part was more favorable to us - and the truth - than what many in the media said when Clyde was shown the door:
The televisions inside the bus that day focused on the breaking news: The Dallas Cowboys had parted ways with their malcontent wide receiver, Terrell Owens.
Seated with the Kentucky administrators and coaches in the front seats, I debated with them the merits and faults of the wayward Owens. It was idle talk, typical sports prattle to fill the short ride from the airport to the hotel.
Sitting in front of me -- in the first seat on the right -- was the head coach, Billy Gillispie, a self-described Cowboys fanatic, a guy who days later would tell me, "When the Cowboys are losing or something, I think I have all the answers."
But on this day, he didn't say a word. Not about Owens, not about anything.
Not even hello.
He simply looked out the window, and when the bus pulled up to the hotel entrance, he grabbed his bag, and walked off and through the sliding doors.
That was three years ago, when I was tasked by ESPN.com to do an all-access assignment with Kentucky at the end of the season (which can be found here).
After just two seasons, it would be the end of the line for Gillispie, as a four-game losing skid and an embarrassing home loss to Georgia would push the Wildcats into the NIT and ultimately Gillispie out of Lexington.
Fast forward to today with the news out of Lubbock, of a players insurrection at Texas Tech first reported by Andy Katz and Jason King last week, bolstered with more alleged details uncovered this week by CBSSports.com, and I can only say I'm not surprised.
The Gillispie I met was standoffish to the point of being rude, a taciturn drill sergeant with his players who lacked the ability or interest to engage personally with them for even a minute.
I left fully expecting Kentucky to fire him after the NIT -- which happened -- but convinced it wouldn't be because of his below-UK-standards win-loss record; it would be because of his insular and abrasive personality.
He was coaching in the biggest bubble in college basketball, yet bristled at everyday interaction. He treated people associated with the program with either disinterest or disdain, disenfranchised the fan base that once greeted him with open arms, disenchanted the athletic director who hired him and, most important of all, lost his team.
Kentucky was in the midst of its 2009 spiral when Gillispie agreed to the all-access. I was slightly stunned he said yes and even more so after the Wildcats lost to LSU a week before I arrived.
I headed to Lexington with an understanding that I would be permitted in the locker room before games, at the half and after games; that I could sit and talk with Gillispie, the staff and the players; that basically, as the term implied, I'd have access to the program.
I had done several all-access features before and have done several since. It's not always a comfortable dance. As much as a coach might agree to swing wide the doors to his program, he's never quite sure what that means until the reporter arrives.
But usually there's a grudging acceptance that he has agreed to the access and then he lets you in.
Literally and figuratively.
At Kentucky, I was literally locked out of the locker room, and at one point, after I was told I could come in, I was asked to leave by Gillispie.
I had exactly one sit-down interview with the coach -- and that was on the last day of the trip; could talk to the players only at practice or after a game with the other reporters; and was even called into his office and yelled at for having the audacity to speak to a player's mother without his permission.
Forget all-access. I couldn't get conversation. Gillispie stood across from me at the breakfast buffet and never so much as looked up to say, "Good morning."
This post was edited on 3/10 5:58 PM by Mojocat
not sure, but he may have been in over his head
Her judgement can't be that great, she did marry Pat Forde. She must have a tattoo of Pitinos face on her back. Ba dum tssss
LOL! I see the pope has his cake and wants to eat it to. I absolutely love the "disgusting racist" comments coming from your holiness. Jk, was it Dana Jacobson the chick from Michigan that got drunk at an ESPN event and spouted out against notre dame? Btw what time does cold pizza come on again? I hear papa john is thinking of sponsoring it.
She slants with the way the wind blows for the week, doesn't do proper research and tends to be far more opinionated than informed.
It's a problem with ESPN writers these days.
It's a problem with ESPN writers these days.
Is that true? She married Pat Forde? Ugh, forget her stance on UK. That shows piss poor taste in general.
UK1919, the people you refer to think free board means free to expose the fact you are an idiot.