WSJ: PSU ‘Most Embarrassing’

Just when you think things were looking up with respect to escaping the remaining vestiges of hatred concerning the Sandusky Scandal, the Wall Street Journal raises its irrelevant, conservative hand it weighs in with a hypernegative posture, reviving old, persistent Tickle Monster bad dreams that had heretofore begun gathering dust in the hallowed halls of our collective subconscious. I call bullshit.

The Journal has sunk to new lows. It should stick to stock market charts and lay off college football given the inaccuracy of their chart, which I shall proceed to describe. On a scattergram adorned with major college football team logos, the X-axis represents the scale from “weakling” to “powerhouse”, while the Y-axis tracks the intangible ranging from embarrassing to admirable. Penn State’s logo shows up on the bottom of the “embarrassing” scale and slightly to the right of the Y-axis, representing a modest powerhouse.

Not that I really care about this slur, but it hurts to be regarded as deserving of being well south of that big red and green U. The other teams that ranked close to the “embarrassing” nadir were Oklahoma, Alabama, FSU, and UNC.

Perennial media darling Notre Dame wound up at zero on the Y-axis, which in this turkey’s humble opinion misrepresents the sanctity of the vaunted representatives of Pope Francis, especially in the wake of the recently revealed academic integrity scandal. Perhaps that news broke after this chart was already formulated.

And you won’t believe where Urbz and his storied, Tattoogate emburdened program wound up. Yeah, in positive territory, albeit a couple of squares beneath that big maize-colored “M”.

Just so you can get pissed off, too, you can see the matrix here.

Screw you, Rupert Murdoch!

Shame on Penn State? Hell, no. Shame on YOU.

Comments

  1. Joe says

    And I really give a shit what WSJ thinks. Unless you can provide measurable, objective criteria as the basis for your conclusions/rating then it isn’t worth a tinker’s damn.

    I don’t think their “ick factor” meets my criteria.