USC fan uses Wikipedia to whine about Larry Scott
by Showcase Showdown on Nov 26, 2011 12:18 AM PST
Email
PrintI found myself on Larry Scott's Wikipedia page tonight (don't me ask me how I got there, because I don't even know). In the section dedicated to his work in the Pac-10/12, there are a couple paragraphs that kind of stand out:
Scott has shown a clear bias against the University of Southern California by not standing up for the conference's premiere program when it was hit with NCAA sanctions. Instead, Scott chose to decree that the USC Trojans would be ineligible to compete in the inaugural Pac-12 Championship game. As of November 26, 2011, the participants in the first ever Pac-12 title game are 6-6 UCLA representing the South and Oregon representing the North. USC has beaten both teams.
Scott went one step further in denouncing support for USC when he released a statement on behalf of the Pac-12 announcing that even though the University of Southern California finished at the top of the Pac-12 South, they can only claim the title 1st place, not champion. The title champion goes to a team they beat with a .500 record. This move by Scott, whose background lies in Professional Tennis, not football, has not garnered him any fans amongst the considerably influential alumni base of USC, nor has it done anything to raise the profile or exposure of the conference. USC fans are still very bitter at Larry even though he has done the best job in the NCAA.
Here's the link, although I don't think it will be kept up for very long.
I guess some USC fans still don't understand the concepts of consequences and punishments. It also shouldn't come as a surprise that most some USC fans still don't understand the basic rules of grammar and punctuation.
Although the paragraphs are full of little gems, I think my favorite line comes at the end. After whining about Scott for almost 200 words, the talented writer remembers that he and "Larry" are great friends and decides to throw in a compliment.
This post should serve as a reminder to all of us to read everything on Wikipedia with a grain of salt. You never know what classless moron could be "contributing" to an article.
Beat $C.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
10 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I did a drive-by and did a few tweaks:
Scott has shown a clear bias against the University of Southern California by not standing up for the conference’s premiere cheating program when it was hit with NCAA sanctions. Instead, Scott, not the NCAA, chose to decree that the USC Trojans would be ineligible to compete in the inaugural Pac-12 Championship game. As of November 26, 2011, the participants in the first ever Pac-12 title game are 6-6 UCLA representing the South and Oregon representing the North. USC has beaten both teams, although the annual USC-UCLA game has not occurred yet.
Wikipedia is truly a scary site…
breaking rules isn't cheating!
GOSH!!
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
hahahah they're saying
that they already beat us?!
U$C
Look at the entry for “University of Southern California” in wikipedia:
The page is a shining example of selective sourcing. It cites the most positive statistics whenever possible. For example, the site mentions a “College of the Year” award that is eleven years old; lists only departments that are well-regarded by a carefully chosen set of surveys; sprinkles in convenient references to Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford to suggest similarity by association; and shows the current national USNWR ranking, which is complimentary, but not the international one, which is not. If another wikipedia user tries to edit the information, the edits are quickly removed, and the text reverts back to whatever the anonymous official writer had entered.
You can go to the bottom of the wikipedia page to rate the quality of the description of U$C, including the level of objectivity and trustworthiness of the entry. That seems to be the only way to alert wikipedia’s staff to the lack of objectivity in the description.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
Related FanShots on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
