26.Jul.2016 Poor Writing at the Oregonian
I’m back home and trying to catch up on things. So I go to the Oregonian figuring I’d get my cup of generic tea, but instead I’m served a steaming pile of horseshit writing. Check this out:
The case for Irvine: He boasts the most ideal frame and best 1-on-1 coverage ability in this young group. But with that skill set, maybe he will legitimately challenge for a starting cornerback job. That’s where he’s listed on the new depth chart, after all, after holding the No. 1 nickelback spot after spring practice.
What the hell? Is that English?
Why is there a “But” and “maybe” in sentence 2? Why not just say “With that skill set, he will challenge for the starting cornerback job.”??
“That’s where he’s listed on the new depth chart, after all, after holding the No. 1 nickelback spot after spring practice.”
Ah, the old tried and true “after all after”. By why/how does “after all” make sense in that context?
I first noticed awful writing on Yahoo, which had to be 10 to 15 years ago. Now it’s everywhere, and it’s become the norm. I’m thinking it’s due to people being short/incoherent via text messages, but even so, if you’re a professional writer you’d hope you could form complete, coherent sentences, and if not, you’d hope your editor would put the kibosh on ^^ this ^^ before going to print.
To the point of the article, I think Irvine will definitely start. Maybe not game 1 depending how slow GA is to get the best players on the field, but soon into the season. Wallace and Wilson are good looking players. Williams doesn’t look the part, but he gets the job done. I’d think those 4 are the top talent (pretty thin) at CB. I’m bullish on Landry Payne.