fantasy football rhetorical analysis

7/28/2019 Fantasy Football Rhetorical Analysis

1/5

Gerzina/ Fracasso 1

Lindsey Gerzina & Jacki Fracasso

Dr. Blake Scott

ENC 3375

17 September 2012

A Rhetorical Analysis: Roddy White Versus Julio Jones

Audience

James Quintong recently wrote an article titled, Which Falcons WR Will Have

the Better Fantasy Season: Roddy White or Julio Jones? It was published online in the

ESPN Fantasy Football Decisions Archive on August 17, 2012. The context of the article

and location where it was published makes the audience clear. It was written with fantasy

football players in mind. NFL fans and Atlanta Falcons fans could be part of a secondary

audience, but his lists of facts and statistics are clearly meant to peak the interest of

fantasy football players. The article was written prior to the start of the football season, so

his argument is attempting to discover which of the two wide receivers would be the

better choice in a fantasy draft. The choice, according to Quintong, ultimately comes

down to two options: whether you prefer Roddy White, the safe and reliable pick, or Julio

Jones, the risky but rewarding pick.

Claims and Reasons

After stating these two options, he launches into an array of statistics about each

player. He begins with Roddy White. He states that White has five consecutive seasons

with at least 1,100 yards, led the NFL with 180 targets in 2011, hasnt missed a game in 7

NFL seasons, and is a steady, super productive veteran. He also says that White seemed

to pick up the stats as the season went on So it doesnt appear that hes really slowing


2/5

Gerzina/ Fracasso 2

down at age 30. (Quintong) Then, he switches over to Julio Jones. He talks about Jones

sensational rookie season, with 54 catches, 959 receiving yards, and 17.8 yards per catch.

He also tells us how Jones had as many TD catches and 100-yard games as White,

despite missing three games because of an injury. The argument continues to highlight

the upside of Jones, saying that theres still plenty of room for Jones to grow.

(Quintong)

After this, he focuses on the downsides of both players. Quintong says that Jones

had game-to-game consistency issues and White led the league in dropped passes. He

presents a series of rhetorical questions and hypothetical situations for the season in the

conclusion of the article. At this point, we, being entry-level fantasy football players,

would have chosen Roddy White as the better pick. Quintong, on the other hand, ends the

article by stating, Im taking the risk on Jones upside and growth in his second year

slightly over Whites consistency that seems destined for a slight decline. (Quintong)

After reading, we feel that the argument was weak and this conclusion was inadequately

supported.

Appeals

Quintong uses a variety of appeals throughout his argument. The primary appeal

used is logos, with the vast amount of statistical evidence provided for the reader. One

example of the use of logos would be when he stated, The veteran White also seemed to

pick up the stats as the season went on, as he had four 100-yard games, three 10-recpetion

outings and five TDs in the final seven games of the season, compared to just one 100-

yard game an three TDsbefore that. (Quintong) The use of logos is helpful for the

reader, as it gives them the option to compare and contrast both players logistically. But


3/5

Gerzina/ Fracasso 3

this is also where pathos comes in. After reading all of the statistics, we are left with our

reaction to his argument. Because Quintong used an equal number of good and bad

statistics for each player, his argument is weakened in our eyes. The statistics become

counterproductive because we, as readers, dont know which player to lean towards. It

would be easier to agree with him on Julio Jones being the better pick if he had presented

more positive statistics on Julio Jones and less on Roddy White.

Another pathos element of the argument is that Quintong doesnt elaborate on the

statistics he gives us. This gives us an adverse reaction as readers. He uses ethos in the

sense that he did his homework and hes credible enough to provide a vast amount of

statistics, but he does not explain them or give his own opinion about the facts. This

weakens both his argument and his ethos. An example of this is when he states,

He finished his rookie season with 54 catches for 959 receiving yards (a

whopping 17.8 yards per catch. He had as many TD catches (eight) and 100-yard

games (five) as White, despite a hamstring injury that forced him to miss three

games and limited him in a few other games as well. (Quintong)

That is the end of one paragraph on the upside of Julio Jones, with no conclusion on what

these numbers mean to him. This is a competing aspect of ethoshe shows credibility

but he does not show goodwill toward his audience by explaining what these statistics

should mean for us.

Conclusion

His conclusion to the argument is only one sentence at the end of the article. We

read this article in order to decide who would be the better pick, and were left with one

simple and unconfident statement about who to choose. He even uses the word slightly


4/5

Gerzina/ Fracasso 4

in stating how strongly he feels about choosing Julio Jones over Roddy White. The use of

this word in itself shows us that hes not truly convinced of his own argument. We are

both brand new to fantasy football, so reading statistics that pull us in multiple directions

is not the way to help us decide who would be the better pick. In the end, we would have

chosen safe and reliable Roddy White. Sorry Quintong, you werent able to convince us.


5/5

fantasy football rhetorical analysis

Documents