Talk:Todd Pinkston

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject National Football League, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

While I am no Pinkston fan, this article seems to have a negative POV regarding Pinkston, his draft status and his career - Gantry 13:36, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Did you read the news story under the External links? Doesn't look too negative to me; and calling the Philadelphia media and fans "notoriously unforgiving" puts things in perspective, doesn't it? Plus I just added some very positive stats, from both his college career and the current season - TOttenville8 07:36, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Pinkston

These statements are negative in nature. Anytime you post an entire article from the paper you are going to post the writer's negative opinions with it. This type of opinionated information should be kept off of a supposedly "informational" site. The only information that should be posted about any person, period, is a general bio. And in the case of a professional athlete, maybe their career stats/history.

[edit] These critisms are crazy

Just because he didn't catch a pass against the Redskins, everyone thinks his too afraid to catch a ball. And when Freddie Mitchell gets open like twice a game without the ball thrown to him the media is all over it (the media makes it seem like he's open like 15 times without the ball thrown to him) - how many times does Terrell Owens, Todd Pinkston, and L.J. Smith get open without a ball thrown to them and get as much attention as Freddie Mitchell does (Even though it happens to Terrell Owens sometimes,, the media is more on Freddie Mitchell when it happens to him and I'm glad the Eagles got rid of him. --Phbasketball6 00:08, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

He is too afraid to catch ball. It's not that he just didn't catch one ball, it's that he went out of his way to not catch it because he was afraid of catching the ball and getting hit. I'm pretty sure this is widely regarded as one of the most deplorable/ridiculed plays in the modern NFL, and let's face it - it's primarily what Pinkston is known for at this point in his career.

And why are you talking about FredEx so much? Who cares about him. This is about Stinkston.

Finally, shame on whoever edited this entry. It was one of the most classic ones on Wikipedia. Rick Rossovich 23:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, Ok, very mature about calling him Stinkston, but name me another game he avoided a hit by not catching the ball. By the way, I'm an Eagles fan and I watched every game of Todd Pinkston's career and the Redskins game was the only time he avoided the hit by not catching the ball and I used Freddie Micthell as an example by saying if a thing barely happends like Mitchell getting open like twice a game the media makes it seem like 15 times a game and when Todd Pinkston avoids a hit by not catching the ball once they make it seem like he did it 6 more times. Shame on me, thats very mature, I can already tell you think your always right by trying put others down.--Phbasketball6 11:06, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

No, not shame on you. Shame on the guy who edited the Wikipedia. Rick Rossovich 15:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh ok, My bad, I apoligize. Sorry --Phbasketball6 21:43, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

That 'Stinkston' edit is horseshit. Sounds like the WIP kids are really bored at the station. Montco 02:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Lighten up. It's not the end of the world if the Wikipedia entry on some two-bit receiver is biased. It was funny and it was a nice contrast to the sense of self-importance that abounds here. I agree that actual encyclopedic entries should be completely free from bias - but come on. It's not like there is someone out there writing a Todd Pinkston thesis and is citing this entry as fact. Face it, this entry wouldn't exist if people didn't remember him for running away from the ball, so trying to make it anything else is pointless. Without heavily referencing that play and Pinkston's softness, it would just be another stub and wouldn't mean anything to people outside of Philly. Rick Rossovich 16:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Look I don't agree with Todd Pinkston's "softness" and I don't feel like argueing, but I will always remember Todd Pinkston as a starting receiver for four straight NFC Championships and I think that means something to people. --Phbasketball6 22:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

The neutral Point of View policy says that all significant viewpoints should be represented and undue weight should not be given to a minority viewpoint. I believe this article adheres to that policy because 99% of the people out there believe Pinkston is a soft receiver and not very good. This is verifiable over and over again in the media. He was just cut from the Eagles. His high yards per catch and good performances are represented, but the popular viewpoint has the most weight in the article- as it should be. Just because much of it is negative, doesn't mean it is biased or untrue. Watch him back off of a catch yourself on Youtube.com User:24.118.89.238 13:00, 4 September, 2006

It just keeps on coming back with that ONE game, show me another game. Besides that, even though I don't agree with his "softness", I don't have a problem with that being in the article, but I have a problem with most of the article being negative, just about the only positive sentence in this article is "Pinkston signs with the Vikings". Oh and another positive sentence is repeated being removed which is very biased God forbid if something positive is said about Pinkston because of that one game. --Phbasketball6 23:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you missed the parts about "His most productive year year in Philadelphia was 2002 when he hauled in 60 receptions for 798 yards and seven touchdowns. His performance that year earned him a five-year contract extension with the Eagles which included a large signing bonus", "However, later that half Pinkston was the recipient of an 80-yard bomb from Donovan McNabb", and "This negative publicity notwithstanding, Pinkston's 18.8 yards-per-catch average for the 2004 regular season was exceeded by only one other NFL receiver with as many or more receptions than the 36 he recorded (Ashley Lelie of the Denver Broncos averaged 20.1), and his six catches gaining 40 or more yards was topped by only three other receivers (teammate Terrell Owens, who had nine, and Javon Walker of the Green Bay Packers and Dennis Northcutt of the Cleveland Browns with seven each)." -- User:24.118.89.238 19:00, 4 September, 2006

Its obvious that you want to hold Pinkston responsible for that loss to Carolina. Of course you ignore the fact that McNabb was hurt and that one of Mannings picks was from a ball that Thrash couldn't hold and another was on a lousy pass from McNabb on a slant. You keep wanting to define his 2004 season by one game against Washington. The way you write up the Super Bowl entry implies that the injury was faked. Do you have an unbiased source that it was? of course not. Montco 00:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I didn't put anything in about the Carolina game, somebody else did. But all it says is his 0 catches contributed to the loss, and it did. Manning Jr himself said: "Pinkston is not that strong and I thought their wide receivers didn't have too many moves off the line," adding he couldn't recall ever making three interceptions in a game before. "All week long I thought I could get these guys." Comcast Philadelphia wrote: When searching for the scapegoats, fans did not need to strain their eyes. A glance at receiving stats of the starting wide receivers told all. James Thrash: 1 rec., 9 yards, 0 TD; Todd Pinkston: 0 rec., 0 yards, 0 TD Thrash’s locker is now in D.C., and until Thursday, Pinkston was nowhere near his, either, footballguys.com wrote: The Eagles WRs were horrendous, combining to drop seven passes. The worst offender was Todd Pinkston, who managed no catches despite the fact that he was targeted seven times., and Sport's Illustrated wrote: The starting receivers, James Thrash and Todd Pinkston, combined for one catch for nine yards Sunday, and Pinkston looked like he gave up on one route by not being physical enough with Panthers corner Ricky Manning Jr. (and if you can't be physical with the 5-foot-8 Manning, who can you be physical with?), -- User:24.118.89.238 20:00, 4 September, 2006

Yo User:24.118.89.238 Maybe you missed the parts about "His most productive year year in Philadelphia was 2002 when he hauled in 60 receptions for 798 yards and seven touchdowns. His performance that year earned him a five-year contract extension with the Eagles which included a large signing bonus", I added that part back I after it was removed (twice), MAYBE you missed that. --Phbasketball6 01:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Thats great with the Ricky Manning Jr. quote I think thats fine since he really said it but Jaranda is not vandalising anything.--Phbasketball6 01:28, 5 September 2006 (UTC)