Sorry, but Erika is much hotter than Jan Jeffcoat. An 11/10???
> There is a lot of posts here about Erika on the
> board. I think I know why.
> This town has a lot of very good looking, very
> good anchoring TV on air staff. Almost all of them
> are 10/10 for looks, and read the news very well
> and project the right affect. Jan Jeffcoat is
> 11/10 for looks, and all the men could be modeling
> for GQ. As such they are perfect people. You may
> see them in Washington Magazine posing in evening
> dress at a $10,000 art dinner, but never see them
> in sweats at the ball game in the upper seats.
> Erika, and to a lesser extent Amelia Segal, don't
> fit that mold. I am sure Erika was good at
> anchoring in Austin (I googled that), but her
> skills are not quite up to DC anchoring. She is
> pretty, but only about an 8/10, and her hips and
> butt are bigger than what the other TV women here
> The fake accent is an attempt to cover for these
> issues, and in part it works--such as the gang
> story she was sent out to do, which propelled her
> into being the go-to sick time fill in anchor
> before her skills meritied that promotion.
> I think she is us, the viewers. Soneone not
> perfect, not a 10/10, but trying like hell to make
> it to a better life. The things that get posted
> here about her personal life, the chuch and such,
> add to that. Some of us here overdo that
> attention, but it is the internet so that kind of
> thing happens.
> Does she, and Segal, rate the attention they get
> here based soley on their looks and skills,
> stacked up against the other on-air talent? No.
> But as people we can assign our hopes to, our
> struggle to, they are noteworthy. We feel a
> connection, becuase we see a flawed person
> reaching for the top in an environment filled with
> people who have the perfect looks and the perfect
> I also suspect, without any proof at all, that she
> or someone close to her does a little churning on
> the web. Any publicity is good when trying the
> long climb to the top she is doing.