Once a trOJan, always an...
...Assclown.
When Rich Perelman stepped down as the LA Times blogger for "What's Bruin", many eyebrows were raised when they chose a SUC hack like Adam Rose to take over. He tried to maintain that he could be objective, and while he may be able to do so from here on out, this was certainly not the case two years ago, when he displayed a propensity for lying and spinning worthy of a trOJan, but certainly not worthy of a journalist. In the interest of fairness, from the Anals (yes, one N) of bad writing, we present you with Adam Rose's Verbal Diarrhea.
I will not link the article, as it is better not to reward his mental deficiency with hits at "laist", but I will block the relevant points that show why Rose is just another typical trOJan SCumbag. He calls this dreck "Why (SUC) Haters Are Lame".
FLAME #1: USC breaks all the rules.
USC has faced lots of allegations over the past year, but that's due to the increased scrutiny that comes with the national spotlight. Notice that I didn't say "convictions" or "violations." The team has managed itself far better than Thug U and they didn't demonstrate the same handicap that plagued the Bruins. As for Reggie Bush, nothing seems to stick to him (kinda' like most college defenders over the past three years). If anything shady happened, look to his step dad. This is the same guy who alienated USC fans when declaring that Reggie would go pro several weeks before Reggie made his decision official. There won't exactly be any tears shed in the land of Troy if he goes down for something.
Willful. Ignorance.
Adam is allegedly a journalist, which means that technically he should be just as capable of digging up any of the items on the laundry list of transgressions under Pom Pom, Timmeh, et al. Keeping in mind that this "article" was written in 2006, I wonder how his clairvoyance regarding the Bu$h situation is working out. Last time I checked, Reggie is still on the hook and the justice department is now involved with SUC's cheating because of Mayo's shady entourage setting up a fake charity. Great call, Adam. Maybe you can pick the Patriots over the Giants in this past year's Superbowl too.
FLAME #2: USC fans are bandwagon.
Of course there are bandwagon fans in Los Angeles. Does anybody else remember what Laker car flags looked like? They were yellow. I remember some very empty stands while the Trojans slumped through a 5-7 season in 2000. I even traveled hundreds of miles to watch a squad dubbed "the worst football team in USC history." Why would anybody subject themselves to that sort of loyalty? Because when I wasn't sitting in the stands I was sitting in class with a much maligned Carson Palmer (a so-called underachiever before he took home the Heisman). Students are the best fans (followed closely by alumni) because they are more dedicated, more passionate, and more connected with the student-athletes. As a student-fan, I appreciated the support from non-student diehards when we were loosing, but I couldn't be upset with the large bandwagon that came shortly after USC's last non-bowl loss in 2003 (and yes, I was on the road for that game, too). The students and alumni have always been there. To everybody else, welcome aboard.
Use. Google.
By that I mean a simple google search for football attendance reveals that the season Adam talks about was when the trOJans drew 57 thousand per game in Paul Hackett's final year. Even a bumbler like Karl Dorrell drew 76 thousand in his final year as a lame duck coach (although those numbers were likely inflated due to ND). Bob Toledo as a lame duck? 65 thousand. Yes, lame duck coaches are a good metric, because by that time, the bandwagon fans are gone and the team hasn't had success in a while. So is Adam arrogant enough to say that his sole presence in 2000 offsets this difference of thousands? Well he is a trOJan isn't he? Seems that he doesn't even have a point in this paragraph except to namedrop Carson Palmer like a giddy schoolgirl. Although he's right in his implication that Palmer has gone on to do great things, like this:
I suppose the thousands fewer fans that the trOJans drew than the Bruins did in similar situations is evidence that trOJans aren't bandwagoners...oops? Adam: YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG.
FLAME #3: USC is an ivory tower dynasty. Damn Yankees, errr, Trojans.
USC's fans are actually cheering for something that has taken shape over just the last 5 years. Pete Carroll has built something from nothing, taking over a team that had just recaptured the Victory Bell after 8 long seasons, and did it all while being looked down upon as an NFL retread. Unlike other sports dynasties which do it with money (ahem, Yankees), Carroll energizes the team with his own youthful enthusiasm and energy. Other coaches don't take snaps with the team in practice, and that attitude is part of the reason he was able to recruit the best players despite the modern era of NCAA scholarship parity. While the NFL's version of parity gives the best team the last draft pick (and only one per round), Carroll takes future top NFL draft picks into his program en-mass.
Ivory. Tower?
"Today, ivory tower usually describes a metaphysical space of solitude and sanctity disconnected from daily realities, where certain idealistic writers endeavor and even some scientists are considered to reside."
That phrase. It does not mean what you think it means, Adam. Given what has transpired since then regarding Bu$h and Mayo, his line about sports dynasties not doing it with money is particularly hilarious. Even if we ignore that, the Yankees are a professional franchise and are within their rights to build their team however they want, SUC is supposedly an amateur football program. Criticizing the Yankees for building a team with money and holding up SUC as virtuous because they "don't" is one of the most fallacious arguments I've ever heard. I've never heard anyone flame SUC as an "Ivory Tower Dynasty". You know why? BECAUSE THAT PHRASE DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. The rest can only be described as brainless fluff, much like Petey the "Humanitarian" or Petey the "Physical Genius". "HE TAKES SNAPS WITH THE TEAM, OMG." Hope you didn't cream your shorts, Adam. I'm sure those snaps are the reason that they want to go to SUC. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the free flatscreen TVs in their dorm rooms or free houses. I'm sure no one at SUC knew anything about that.
FLAME #4: USC is the University of Second Choice.
Stay classy, Bruins. I'm sure those erudite scholars of Westwood realize this is an ad hominum, or "straw man," attack (the last cry of a desperate orator). Different institutions are going to be better at different things (USC gets the gridiron, UCLA gets the hardcourt, USC gets film, UCLA gets medicine). When painting the schools with a broad brush, remember that USC was recently named Time-Princeton School of the Year, and that the incoming Freshman class has a 3.7 GPA and middle 50% SAT range of 1290-1430. Once somebody becomes a Trojan, they become part of a network so strong it's known as the USC Mafia. And if sports are your thing, USC and UCLA are neck and neck for the national lead once football championships are factored into the NCAA rankings (which don't officially crown a champion). When it comes down to it, which championship is more impressive, football or men's gymnastics? (Sidebar: After (UCLA and SUC), Stanford is third. With Cal ranking just outside the top 10, California is by far the top college sport state in the nation.)
Spell. Check.
I don't know what an ad hominum attack is, probably because it's spelled ad hominem. The point of this is not to be a Grammar/Spelling Nazi, but to point out that in a paragraph meant to illustrate how the gap isn't as big as people think it is between SUC and UCLA, he only shows that the gap is as wide as ever with his bumbling of the English language. He's the ice skater that goes for the big jump and falls flat on his ass. If you're going to assert your "smarts" by throwing out Latin phrases in a smug tone, I humbly ask that you SPELL IT CORRECTLY. Furthermore, an ad hominem attack and a straw man attack ARE NOT THE SAME. This guy is a journalist? Are you freaking kidding me? How is an an "argument against the man" the same as "intentionally misrepresenting an opponent's position"? He probably thinks this is an ad hominem too without realizing that intelligence and understanding are the central focus of his paragraph.
I looked up this supposed Time-Princeton thing (from the year 2000), and all I saw was references to helping out in its immediate community (and yes, that area needs PLENTY of help). This is certainly admirable, but it doesn't advance his argument. UCLA is a University Of The People. Our public status ensures that our accomplishments advance the interests of our immediate community, the State of California, and beyond. SUC, once again, is left playing catch up.
He talks about the trOJan mafia like it's a good thing, nevermind that it doesn't travel well. UCLA is worldwide. My UCLA degree will be respected the world over. SUC degrees are only worth something in Los Angeles, and most of the time not even then. How's that trOJan mafia working out in paragraph 1, where he throws Bush's family under the bus? That's some good old fashioned trOJan loyalty.
Then there's the pathetic "if we count football championships" argument. I don't see him mentioning that SUC awarded themselves championships from 7 decades ago that they never actually won. No, this, like everything, has caveats. That's the SUC way. "SUC would be as good as UCLA, IF YOU COUNT..." We don't need caveats. We're UCLA. We are better than SUC. That's why we had the most applicants in the country once again for the hundreth straight year (I've lost count). It goes without saying that I got into both SUC and UCLA. That's what we UCLA students have in common: rejecting SUC. It's so common that we don't even have to mention it as Adam does in reverse (a claim, given his writing, that I am quite skeptical of). That's just the way it is.
See, I can write a flame piece too, except my piece is grounded in facts and logic. I sure hope Adam didn't go to journalism school to put out this kind of garbage, because I've already done him one better, and that's with an Engineering degree (let's just say we are not known for our writing). Looks like Shakespeare was wrong: A Rose by any other name actually smells like sh!t.
0 recs |
53
comments
Read Related
Comments
that argument of U$C being an academic institution
is a hot steaming pile of fecal matter. ranking schools in CA (just in CA) by academics, it’d be something like: 1) CalTech; 2) Stanford; 3) UCB and UCLA; 5) UCSD; 6) Pomona….UCD, Cal Poly SLO, CMC, UCSB, Occidental…then maybe UCSC, UCI, UCR, U$C. I think it’s a real leap to place them higher than around #10. Basing your decision purely, mind it PURELY, on academics, could you honestly turn down any schools on that list and choose $C? Besides a few small departments (50 students in film), I think it is widely understood that academics is not the motivation to don the hated colors.
by jjreicher on Aug 2, 2008 12:12 PM PDT 0 recs
is occidental really that good of a school?
My list goes like so:
1) Cal Tech
2) Stanfurd
3) UCLA/UCB
4)UCSD/ Pomona
5) UCD/UCSB/SLO
6) UCI/$cum
7) UCSC/UCR
by Rivertownbruin on
Aug 2, 2008 12:20 PM PDT
up
0 recs
what about cmc
that would have to rank as high as SC, if not higher ….
there is no way SC even comes close to CMC in Econ, Gov, or IR.
by Dante on
Aug 2, 2008 2:31 PM PDT
up
0 recs
i incude cmc with the pomona schools as a whole
by Rivertownbruin on
Aug 2, 2008 4:51 PM PDT
up
0 recs
my experience with people from occidental
is that they are a bright, well-rounded group. they always rave about the occy education, and many of them are physicians. oh also, i would probably add USD to the list.
but subtleties aside, the main point is upheld on your list: you’ve got $C at ~#11. what that means is that when they call $C a premier educational institution, they are simply including essentially every school in CA—that’s fine, but what’s the point of saying “premier” then? it’s like saying “everyone is above average.”
by jjreicher on
Aug 2, 2008 7:08 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Ummm....
Maybe “premier” just means better than Chico State and your average junior college. Just guessing here.
by Moosen on
Aug 2, 2008 7:11 PM PDT
up
0 recs
wow
I am a Bruin fan all the way but man….get over the grudge. While I dont agree with the Times putting Rose in charge of the Bruins Blog, dont blame Adam, blame the incompetent Times editing staff. This article is 2 years old BEFORE he was writing for the Bruins Blog. He was clearly a $cum fan but now that he has to cover bruins he has rightfully toned it down and does a decent job aggregating UCLA content from all over the web. His blog is different from Dohns, he doesnt try to keep constant updates coming but rather serve as a source of cool and interesting UCLA content that one may havent come across. But seriously, man a chill pill may be in order.
by Rivertownbruin on Aug 2, 2008 12:15 PM PDT 0 recs
We don't care whether or not it was Rose's decision
Why is a Trojan like him with this kind of track record blogging on “What’s Bruin”?
What would be the reaction of Southern Cal alums/students if a UCLA fan from BruinsNation or Trojan Haters Club running the site at “All Things Trojan”? Incompetency wouldn’t be a satisfactory explanation.
by Nestor on
Aug 2, 2008 12:26 PM PDT
up
0 recs
"The USC Mafia"
Now, we all have heard of the “trojan family”, and I will admit that for those staying in Southern California, it is a plus factor for SC. The USC Mafia, however, is not typically discussed in such a manner, for good reason.
A reference to the mafia by Penn State
Who do these kids (I refer to them as kids because they have yet to prove maturation beyond the point of junior high school student council) think they are, Richard Nixon and the USC Mafia?For those of you who are not history or journalism majors, the USC Mafia was a group of conservative students at the University of Southern California. This group, many of whom went on to engineer the Watergate scandal, felt it was their duty to undermine public discourse in any way possible.
And more on these “petty criminals”, and a little discussion of Woodward and Bernstein’s treatment of the membership.
Woodward and Bernstein’s exposé All the President’s Men reports that many staffers who had attended the University of Southern California such as Donald Segretti, Tim Elbourne, Ronald Louis Ziegler, H. R. Haldeman and Dwight Chapin had participated in the highly-competitive student elections there. UPI reporter Karlyn Barker sent Woodward and Bernstein a memo “Notes On the USC Crowd” that outlined the connection.
If this is one of the things that makes him proud to be a trojan, then by all means lets let him sing it from the rooftops… Or maybe SC simply left Watergate etc. out of its politics and US History courses.
by bruinhoo on Aug 2, 2008 12:33 PM PDT 0 recs
This definately is NOT
a court of equity…But I love it anyway.
by Bruins102NCAA on
Aug 3, 2008 1:48 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Speaking of PSU
Anyone else find it amusing that ESPN did such a huge OTL story on Joe Pa based on their troubles from last two years bringing up “lack of instrituional control” yet have done nothing on Southern Cal, except for that one story on OJ2?
by Nestor on Aug 2, 2008 12:34 PM PDT 0 recs
That's because OJ2's legal team doesn't have anyone connected with WWL
Mr. BB and I saw that piece last week. I don’t know enough about the PSU situation to comment, but Mr. BB wondered if maybe more schools are experiencing more players getting arrested and if they shouldn’t have focused on that instead. Alabama has had about eight players arrested since Saban took over.
Of course, WWL would have to devote a big block of time if they were to do a story about South Central, and I’m not holding my breath.
by bruinbabe2000 on
Aug 2, 2008 3:01 PM PDT
up
0 recs
A side story about Alabama/South Central
Alabama recently kicked off a player who was arrested for selling crack cocaine. Apparently, most of his career at Alabama had been filled with problems. Anyway, I asked Mr. BB if this had happened at South Central what Pom Pom would have done. Mr. BB concluded that Pom Pom would not suspend the player until an investigation was completed. The investigation would just happen to last longer than the player’s remaining eligibility.
by bruinbabe2000 on
Aug 3, 2008 6:30 AM PDT
up
0 recs
He talks about the trOJan mafia like it’s a good thing, nevermind that it doesn’t travel well. UCLA is worldwide. My UCLA degree will be respected the world over. SUC degrees are only worth something in Los Angeles, and most of the time not even then.
I agree with this entirely. The network is all hype. My status as a bruin alum has connected me with more solid connections than my status as a u$c law grad. Yes yes i was rejected by UCLA law and had to go to u$c, but this gives me a unique perspective. The UCLA network is as strong, and probably stronger than the so called mafia.
I go to a lot of professional events and you know it’s bad when i tell people that I went to USC and they say ask, “Oh, I didn’t know South Carolina had a law school.”
On the flip side, when I went to Asia this past summer and sported my UCLA, I could see the recognition just about everywhere. So yes, UCLA is global and $C goes only as far as south central.
by UCLAbruin920 on Aug 2, 2008 3:42 PM PDT 0 recs
Tydides
maybe you should petition the LA Times to write the What’s Bruin blog
by sharpie20 on Aug 2, 2008 4:22 PM PDT 0 recs
University of Desperate Lack of Choice, more like it.
Normally, I don’t like so much venom. Today, I didn’t seem to mind so much.
Part of it reminded me of when I was looking at colleges back in the day. SUC was my last backup school but was the first school I visited simply because of the way we scheduled our trip. I went to UCLA next (my top choice, obviously) and immediately freaked out that I might not get in and might have to go to SUC. I can’t imagine how someone could stomach having to attend SUC after seeing/experiencing what UCLA has to offer. There is simply no comparison and I can understand why SUC fans are bitter towards UCLA. I would be, too, if things hadn’t worked out the way that they did.
I don’t know if Adam Rose got into UCLA. If he did, I would imagine he made his SUC choice based on having SUC alumni in his family or maybe because his friends went to SUC. I simply can’t imagine someone choosing SUC over UCLA when given the choice. I don’t know anyone who did and every Bruin I know who applied to SUC got in.
by Moosen on Aug 2, 2008 7:08 PM PDT 0 recs
A Bit of Context
It’s unfortunate I need to re-address this. I’ve been open and public about it before. Here’s some context that’s missing:
The post in question was the very first blog entry I ever wrote (long before I had any interest in pursuing blogging with a journalistic twist). More significantly, it was the only blog post I have ever been assigned. LAist had another post up titled “Why USC Football is Lame” and an editor asked me to respond in kind. Instead of writing “Why UCLA Football is Lame,” I opted to take a gentler approach by responding to the haters. Not only was I following up on a specific request, it was intended to bait people. Based on the frenzy it still stirs, looks like it was a success! Anyway, in about two years and 2,000 posts since, I doubt I’ve written anything remotely like it.
Since then, my approach has shifted to a much more professional level. Even when I was first brought on at the Times, I was told I could do anything - even be a total USC homer. (No, not because of any hidden agenda - just because all our bloggers get lots of liberties.) Anybody reading my posts will notice that I’ve worked to keep it fair. I’d like to think that’s part of the reason I’m managing the UCLA blog (Achilles pretty much nailed that whole deal a few weeks ago). Also, notice that I said “managing”—we’ll have a lot of other voices on there in the very near future. And if anybody’s forgotten, the LA Times had a sports editor from Notre Dame for many years. That worked out fine, even for USC fans.
I think I’ve been very transparent about this whole thing. I’ve also linked frequently to Bruins Nation, given hat tips, and saluted jobs well done. If you ever have concerns about our coverage, or tips/suggestions, you’re welcome to email me at adam@laist.com. You’re also welcome to hold my feet to the fire—but please try to keep it in context!
by Adam Rose on Aug 2, 2008 8:49 PM PDT 0 recs
Good deal
I stand behind every rebuttal made to your laist post. Glad to see that you recognize that being a lying troll isn’t professional.
I also left open the possibility that your work could be even handed going forward, with the implication that objective reporting would, at worst, not be torn to shreds in this space. I’m not going to compliment you for trying to keep it objective because, well, that’s your job. I actually provided the context for what I was responding to. I make no attempt to hide the fact that I am responding to a 2 year old article. I’ll let our readers determine whether, in light of this, your reporting is objective or not. That’s not for me to decide.
If you are able to keep the bias out of your posts and articles, I promise there won’t be any more posts (directed at you anyway) like this one. Here’s to objective reporting going forward.
by Tydides on
Aug 2, 2008 9:20 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Sorry Adam, but you just don't get it.
“Based on the frenzy it still stirs, looks like it was a success!” You measure successful “journalism” by the frenzy it still stirs. I am not a journalist, although I make my living by writing about legal things. The measure of success for me is accuracy and effectiveness in my argument. Your first blog was certainly not accurate, as Tydides demonstrated. It was not an effective argument, because it has been shown to be pure drivel.
And that’s the problem I find with many trOJies, yourself included. You have been wallowing in filth for so long you no longer notice it. In my opinion, that is why you show no inclination to discuss, let alone investigate, the following:
1. Reggie Bu$h. And there are many sub issues here. Why didn’t the fishwrap (research that term, and start with Jim Healy) find out any of the facts that were reported by Yahoo? Why has the fishwrap not done an expose on itself, and explained its own inability to see the obvious or to report on the obvious? Why has the fishwrap not called ESPN’s intergrity on Bu$hgate into question, given the conflict generated by an ESPN lawyer also being a Bu$h lawyer. And you personally, with your lifelong connection to the trOJan mafia – why haven’t you dug into any of this? Answer, at least in my opinion: you are a trOJan first and a reporter second. Likewise, the fishwrap has so long been just a part of the Daily trOJan that its editorial staff cannot conceive of the fact that the emperor has no clothes. I do not expect you or the fishwrap to say there is no institutional control at justsc. Indeed, I believe just the opposite to be true. Justsc has perfect institutional control. From the highest level justsc was aware of the truth about Bu$h and did its best as an institution to control access to the truth and to put its spin on things as they were uncovered. But my conclusions have not been affected by what has been written in the fishwrap, and that’s your fault.
2. OJ Mayo. I have seen nothing from you or the ‘wrap on this guy since he departed. No questions about how he got to your school. No discussion of your coach’s complicity in anything. No discussion of his connection with the same guy who caused ncaa discipline a few years ago. No nothing. Why? Where has the fishwrap been? Where have you personally been? Answer: You have the intellectual capacity to know how the trOJan Mafia would react when one of its own broke the code of Omerta. Your preference is to hide the truth rather than expose it.
3. The White Nation. That scandal has simply been swept under the rug. Why is there no sense of outrage anywhere in the trOJan Mafia? Why have you personally and the fishwrap institutionally not been screaming about this at the tops of your collective lungs? I can’t believe that neither you nor the fishwrap are totally insensitive to this. So why don’t you do something about it?
4. Outright thuggery. One of the moderators generates a list (posted annually) of the felonies, misdemeanors and just plain thuggery practiced by members of your esteemed football squad. Any comments about either the list or the factual matters contained in the list either by you or somewhere else in the fishwrap? Nope. You might run a sentence explaining that one of your guys had a run in with the law or had a conviction set aside, but to me that’s simply a recognition of what your of your thugs said a year or so ago: “Man, we own the LAPD.” No sense of outrage shown at that sort of comment either.
To me, your response to Tydides demonstrates once again why you should have nothing to do with UCLA other than to come by here once to allow really easy target practice. You again have the opportunity to demonstrate integrity: If you can’t bring yourself to look at the dirty side of your alma mater, at least have the moral courage to tell your bosses that you can’t continue to pretend to be fair about UCLA. You see, Adam, fairness to UCLA includes fairness to justsc, and the blind eye you and fishwrap turn toward justsc just isn’t fair.
Here’s another way to look at the issue which you might understand. “Based on the frenzy it still stirs, looks like it was a success!” Think of the success you’ll have if you actually dug into the facts of bu$hgate and wrote the truth. Think of the frenzy it would stir in the trOJan Mafia. That would really show you are a success. Until then, why don’t you opt out of the UCLA blog business. Or maybe let me write the justsc blog.
by Fox 71 on
Aug 3, 2008 5:50 AM PDT
up
0 recs
One clarification on the White Nation
Former fishwrap columnist J.A. Adende expressed his outrage in one of his columns. He was the only person connected with the fishwrap who voiced anything.
by bruinbabe2000 on
Aug 3, 2008 6:21 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Phew!
Remind me not to piss you off, Fox. Please accept my early registration into your new TrOJan blog.
by Bruinut on
Aug 3, 2008 4:37 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I think I'd be a great trOJan blogger
I think I would have theme days. Monday would be football rule violation day. (So would Tuesday and Wednesday.) Thursday would be violations of other rules in other sports. Friday, to lead into the weekend, I would have a sports quiz – guest panelists would try to guess the identity of the arrestee based solely on the spin in the fishwrap. Saturday and Sunday would be open topic days, when we would discuss any SCandal.
by Fox 71 on
Aug 3, 2008 7:42 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Dear FOJx,
(For Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday)
I’m a newcomer to your TrOJan blog. I graduated from the SC School of Self-Importance last year. I had always thought that the accusations and innuendo concerning Reggie Bush were just so many examples of outrageous and inflammatory rhetoric, or simple jealousy over our success.
Recently, however, I have come to suspect that I may not have the whole story. Could some of what Reggie’s detractors say be true?
Signed,
Perplexed in my Lexus
by Bruinut on
Aug 3, 2008 8:54 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Well, Bruinut, there you go again.
First of all, let me say once and for all. The stories about Bu$h are totally untrue. In fact, I’m not even sure there ever was anyone named Reggie Bu$h who went to justsc. All that is simply unsubstantiated rumor.
And second, I have been assured by Mike Garrett that if there was anything to all those rumors, which there isn’t, he would certainly get to the bottom of it, which he can’t, because all those rumors are false.
And third. Well, I can’t think of any third. But as a mild mannered reporter for a great metropolitan newspaper …, no wait. That’s the other guy. Anyway, as a hard-hitting, hard-driving investigative reporter, albeit without clairvoyance, x-ray vision or super powers, I can tell you that I’m here to ask those hard-hitting, hard-driving questions that we all want to have answered, and once Inheritance Hall tells me to mind my own business, then that will obviously be that.
Why don’t you guys concentrate on the scandals out of UCLA, where most every player, coach, student, fan and aluminumius, is on the FBI most wanted list. Sheesh!
signed, Adam “Hard-hitting, Hard-driving” Rose
by Fox 71 on
Aug 4, 2008 2:03 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Unfortunately,
you continue to lapse into “baiting.” Equally unfortunate is the fact that, to many, you “represent” UCLA because you have been given the privilege of being an “official” blogger for our school. Therefore, you cannot be allowed the luxury of your “Oops, I did it again!” approach to your position. Your responsibility is not situational—you are responsible for what you write, regardless of when you write it, or what your theoretical “intent” was. What you wrote was ignorant and inaccurate. Time does not change that.
Ty is gracious, and extremely fair-minded in his reply to you. I am going to try to follow his good example, but, frankly, Fox is absolutely correct—your definition of journalistic “success” is warped.
You are correct about being “transparent.” That is a very accurate insight on your part.
Also, in my opinion, anyone with concerns about your coverage should be expressing those concerns in an open comment, not to your e-mail adddress.
Love My Bruins
by Bruingirl83 on
Aug 3, 2008 8:24 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Nice work
I agree that Adam Rose has made an effort to present information on his UCLA blog in a balanced fashion. He has certainly done a better job of it than the morons on the SUC Register “UCLA” blog.
However, it will be interesting to see how that plays out over time. How will he treat all the negative stories on Neuheisel the week of the Washington game? Will he truly post all things that are interesting to UCLA fans? What about Reggie Bush? OJ Mayo? The next SC cover up? On the other hand, would he present a story about a UCLA player breaking the rules in a fair and even handed manner? In either case, all we would expect are the facts without bias or prejudice.
Only time will tell, but I think Tydides did a nice job of putting some factual information out there that we can cite to if Mr. Rose ever does lose his objectivity. Mr. Rose can downplay it and make all of the excuses he wants (but your honor, I was ordered to shoot that guy in the head!), but the fact remains he authored the post. The fact also remains that Tydides called him on it fair and square in a manner that gave the proper context.
At the end of the day, I think we can all agree that posting and reading stuff like this is what makes these blogs so f’ing fun.
by Koach Karl I on Aug 2, 2008 9:45 PM PDT 0 recs
Good perspective
I wouldn’t expect him to bend over backwards to paint a rosy picture where there isn’t one. This blog certainly didn’t get where it is by doing that. I expect fairness and a minimum of opinions. Since Rose runs both blogs, this should be easy enough to keep tabs on. When trOJan scandal hits, I want it covered in depth (on SUC’s blog most likely) and in the same quantity as a similar Bruin scandal would. Similar standards should apply for positive news, equal quantity and depth in both blogs. I think that’s more than fair.
by Tydides on
Aug 2, 2008 10:50 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Speaking of Scandal
I was the first person - anywhere - to publicly review “Tarnished Heisman” and was also the first person to say that if a fraction of the book’s evidence is true, Bush should lose his Heisman.
In the Mayo situation, I’ve been consistent in saying that there are a lot of unanswered question’s on the school’s part—specifically the coaching staff. I’m also one of the few people to emphasize some of the “iron clad” claims of ESPN, like calling Mayo on the same phone number that was paid for by a credit card in Guillory’s name.
When people from BN asked me to link to their list of all USC infractions and legal issues over the past few years, I did.
Hopefully that shows some fairness.
by Adam Rose on
Aug 3, 2008 11:57 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I guess I missed a few articles
Please put up the link to your interviews with Garrett and Cheatie Petie. I missed those. And I missed the one where you took your employer to task about not seeing anything at all wrong in Heritage Hall despite so many people with so much access.
I also must have overlooked the series of articles that questioned how student athletes from impoverished families could have such great clothes and great cars and big flat screen TV’s.
I don’t know if you have been consistent or not in saying that there are a lot of unanswered questions about OJ2. But here’s a thought. You work for an alleged newspaper. You have a press credential. You have access to justsc (sorry, but that’s the way it comes out for me) and its athletes. You have a phone. You have internet access. Why don’t you go out and get the answers to the questions? How many questions did you put to your basketball coach? Or to anyone else with first hand knowledge of the facts?
And why is it that the bu$h case was cracked by Yahoo reporters and TOTALLY OVERLOOKED BY EVERYONE AT THE FISHWRAP?
I applaud your courage for coming here to try to defend yourself. But can’t you see that you’re just making excuses for past failures? You haven’t even said that those past failures to see what the entire world sees will not happen again. You haven’t said how you plan to atone for those failures by aggressive pursuit of the ttruth. No one here in the BN is a journalist to my knowledge. No one here is charged with finding the truth and reporting it. But you are. Thus, to me, your excuses for not doing your job don’t particularly move me.
And to return to one of the basic thesis advanced here by many, I still object to having a Bruin blog written by someone whose entire undergraduate career was consumed with antipathy to all things Bruin. Again, how many trOJies would like to have All Things trOJan written by me? I can assure you that if such were the case, I would camp out in Garrett’s office until he provided all the facts about bu$h, OJ2, and all the rest of the scandals. I wouldn’t avoid my responsibility and then try to justify my inaction by saying that I said there were unanswered questions. So put me in charge of the trOJan blog, just as a trOJan is in charge of the Bruin blog, give me a press pass, and show me how to find Garrett’s office. How do you think that would go over within the trOJan community?
You probably don’t care what I think of you or your job performance. But if you do, and want me to change my opinion, then give me a reason to do so. Don’t comment that there are unanswered questions. Go dig up the answers.
by Fox 71 on
Aug 3, 2008 3:21 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Not quite realistic
There’s a huge difference between making excuses and being realistic. I could ask you why you don’t have seven PhDs, a net worth of $40 billion, and family vacation photos on Mars—then say you’re just making excuses when you tell me why that’s not the case (and if it is the case, I’d love to interview you and/or borrow your yacht).
As has been mentioned in print and in the blogs, USC has a policy against commenting on active investigations. It doesn’t matter how many times anybody asks, they simply won’t comment. You can camp out all you want, you can have as much (or more) access than anybody in the media—it won’t help.
The reason ESPN and Yahoo broke their stories is really, really simple: a source went to them first. If Lake or Guillory came to the anybody else with their documentation, that’s where you would have read about it. As it was, the LA Times did extensive followup on both cases. Which reminds me, the Yahoo reporters happen to be guys who worked at the Times and moved over to Yahoo Sports—I’ve got a hunch they learned a thing or two from their previous employer.
You might be making a false presumption about how flashy Bush and Mayo were. I wasn’t covering Bush while he was in school, but I do know that people in the media checked into his car early on—not out of suspicion, but just to leave no stone unturned. There wasn’t a public paper trail that could prove anything about the vehicle (a used Impala, at that). And do you really think LA reporters were going to notice a house in San Diego?
I was around Mayo. He would typically leave practice or games on a bike or maybe in the passenger seat of a friend’s car. He didn’t own a car himself. He was always wearing t-shirts and I never saw him in expensive jewelry. It would be incredibly illegal for a reporter to barge into his room. Even then, how would anybody know that the TV didn’t belong to a roommate?
If you’ve got some new (and legal) journalistic methods that could have broken these stories, I’m sure somebody will get you a press pass! In the mean time, I this dialogue is healthy. It seems that people might have misconceptions about the work done by the media. Reporters (and bloggers) are human. There is no x-ray vision, no clairvoyance, and no super powers. Just a lot of grunt work. Even that will only go so far.
If you still think these are just excuses, I’m waiting to take a ride on your yacht.
by Adam Rose on
Aug 3, 2008 10:27 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Typo
Yes, of course the “I this dialogue” was a typo. Just forget the “I.” No need to make another classy remark about my edumacationz.
by Adam Rose on
Aug 3, 2008 10:31 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Adam...
Glad you read BN but I believe that, on a whole, coverage by the local media is lacking when it comes to SC scandal.
Who could have known that O.J. Mayo might have been a problem? Apparently CBS SportsLine.com “National Columnist” Gregg Doyel knew something was wrong way back in October of 2006. In his piece “Burned by Bush, Southern Cal should be wary of Mayo,” Doyel outlines Rodney Guillory’s influence with Mayo and his past indiscretions, one of which being Guillory’s improper dealings with USC’s Jeff Trepagnier. USC should have known as well as should the local media. Doyel was able to put it together without barging into O.J.’s room or anything else illegal. I suppose that Guillory was hiding in plain sight.
Honestly, these excuses are not going to wash for USC for very long. Sure, Trojans might content themselves by calling those involved in these scandals “low-lifes” and continue to insist that evidence of rule violations are hard to spot in such an opulent atmosphere, but people around the country are starting to take notice of USC getting away with it time and time again. Sooner or later the NCAA is going to do something about it and rest assured the hammer is poised to drop.
Over at the LA Times they seem to be a step behind when it comes to USC. Whenever something goes wrong with our medical center, they are right on it. Recently they reported on a foreign crime lord getting a liver transplant. Seems to me they didn’t have all the facts but saw fit to report it anyway. This is the sort of disparity in the quality and quantity of coverage that we at UCLA notice about the Times.
One would hope that now that you, an unbiased and objective reporter, will use your considerable credentials at USC to dig deeper and be the first to break some of these stories. When I say that it is better for the university for you to do just that is probably falling on deaf ears. When we can sit here and say that there is a culture of corruption at USC with a straight face and as Bruins, and have most of the nation agree with us, you know something is wrong. It’s up to you to right this wrong. Remember, USC is counting on you Adam!
by Bruins102NCAA on
Aug 4, 2008 4:13 AM PDT
up
0 recs
How, Mr. Rose,
is this in any way responsive to Fox’s challenge to you? Why respond to specific inquiry with nothing but hyperbole?
Is there any evidence of your “grunt work?” Can you provide links to any product of your own “grunt work” on any issue Fox or Ty raise?
By the way, it is rather foolish of you to assume that Fox does not have a yacht.
Love My Bruins
by Bruingirl83 on
Aug 4, 2008 8:27 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Hmmm...
“The reason ESPN and Yahoo broke their stories is really, really simple: a source went to them first”...
Really? Care to discuss why that was the case? Could it be because the source knew that if they went to the Trojan Times, nothing would happen?
All of this discussion is really pointless anyway. There is simple, hard evidence to show the bias at your “newspaper”. Baron Davis (bought SUV slightly below blue book! oh no!), Donnie Edwards (someone gave him free food!), Kevin Love (he talked to Wooden!), and the handicapped parking fiasco. All of these stories were “broken” by the Trojan Times. In a whole decade, when was the last time they did a similar story on U$C? Not for Bu$h, not for OJ2, not for Free Rent Jarrett, not for Alleged Rapist Sanchez, not for Senora Ross’s freebie Spanish “class”, not for anything. The only stories they ran were apologist stories to counter the scandals that others have uncovered.
So Adam, you’ll excuse us if we are a bit touchy. It gets old.
by tasser10 on
Aug 4, 2008 10:16 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You still don't get it
You still have absolutely nothing negative to say about your alma mater or your employer. There is no institutional corruption at justsc. There is no pro-trOJie bias at the fishwrap. The emperor has no clothes.
You still deal in excuses and only excuses. You do not have to have x-ray vision to see what the rest of the world sees with all the SCandals that have been taking place regularly. All you need is relatively decent vision.
You do not have to have clairvoyance to see what is happening, just the ordinary five senses. That includes the sense of smell. Does absolutely nothing that takes place at the justsc campus tickle your sense of smell? Everything over there passes the smell test?
You don’t need super powers to deduce what is going on. In fact, I suggest that just the opposite is true. You would have to have super powers not to see the obvious.
You claim you didn’t see anything wrong with OJ2. Well, OK. Maybe that’s so. But that’s still an excuse. Why didn’t you see all the rest of it—all the stuff that’s been reported and documented. Are the guys who broke those cases equipped with x-ray vision or clairvoyance or super powers? Or are they guys who did not assume that the world was flat simply because that was more convenient for Heritage Hall. Could it be that they are actual journalists who wanted to actually do their actual jobs, rather than simply make excuses.
I have no problem with your continuing to chant the justsc mantra on the justsc blog. But you do not bring the right mindset to a blog about UCLA. And the unfortunate thing is that you just don’t get it.
by Fox 71 on
Aug 4, 2008 11:25 AM PDT
up
0 recs
That picture
of Carson Palmer has got to be the winner in the Pictures-that-Generate-the-Greatest-Number-of-Hilarious-and-Right-on-Captions contest.
by Bruinut on Aug 3, 2008 4:54 PM PDT 0 recs
To Fox and Tydides
I stand in awe of your above work. Makes me proud to be a Bruin.
by artybruin on Aug 3, 2008 10:04 PM PDT 0 recs
I have to acknowledge respect for Rose
For addressing all of the above and doing his best to engage earnest discussion with others who will give him no quarter.
I think it is entertaining to read all of the criticism of this truly comical situation, and I will continue to laugh at it. Even Rose himself realizes the no-win juxtaposition he’s in, being an SC alumnus and a UCLA blogger. I have also given him a hard time when he’s mixed up SC and UCLA links on the page, and otherwise been caught dropping the ball in this ridiculous juggling act.
But objectively I have to credit Rose with the following:
1) He provides an easily accessible and extensive composite of UCLA media stories several times a week.
2) He does not drop any out and out bias on the UCLA page.
3) He leaves up critical comments, often responding to them himself earnestly and with commendable patience.
4) He acknowledges his typographical errors—of which there are many, admittedly.
5) Indeed, he was the first to review “Tarnished Heisman,” and I thought it was a well-balanced account without an agenda. He simply presented the facts, then commented that things did not look good for his beloved program.
Lastly-and this speaks more to the original post-I think it’s fairly silly (albeit funny and entertaining) to take something written for one purpose then lambaste it as ill-suited for an entirely different purpose. Anything any of us has ever written is with an intended audience and particular purpose in mind, and when a different audience and purpose are substituted our original work appears seriously flawed. Even before Rose explained the context of that piece, it was obvious to me that it was not intended as real reporting or anything close to objective-it was a fan piece designed to speak a fan mentality, and that’s what it did. It read just like what a lot of the rest of us on here write-on a fan’s blog.
Again, I’m not saying that Tydides parsing of it wasn’t funny. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and please write more of the same, sir. But I am also saying that Rose has earned my respect by his handling of it.
That being said, I think Rose should devote ALL of his time to SC blog, and one of us should be hired by the Times to write the UCLA blog. Obviously.
by VA Blueblood on Aug 4, 2008 11:28 AM PDT 0 recs








