Links

Monday, October 08, 2007

More Redundancy

When a piece opens with "Unlike the late Frank Sinatra, your Boston Red Sox get plenty of kicks from champagne", you can be pretty sure Dan's got nothing.

Dan also has a glowing recap of Schilling's performance. It is nice to see Dan can get over his paranoia and write objectively about Schilling.

15 comments:

Chris said...

Only a writer steeped in the 'elite and learned' tradition of The Boston Globe would use the term 'bubbly bacchanal' when 'champagne-soaked celebration' would do nicely. But this is a writer who wants to reinforce that he is indeed 'elite and learned' and is indeed 'more intelligent' than the readers of his column. How on EARTH did we get along without The Boston Globe and all its elitism, anyway?

Dubegedi said...

Chris are seriously criticizing CHB for using unique words? CHB is a shitty columnist but he can very good when it comes to pure writing. And what's with all the Globe bashing? Would you rather have the joke that is the Boston Herald?

Chris said...

Well, in perfect and defensible truth, the entire newspaper business is a joke. But that's an essay for another day. It's why you see so many newspaper sports hacks trying every which way to get off their Titanic so that they can sink someone else's.

Shaugnessy is an utter caricature of why Boston sports media hacks are hated. Mostly, they are 'hit-and-run' artists who sincerely hope that readers--those that they have, anyway--will forget what they wrote mere weeks or months prior. The Randy Moss issue is a perfect example, as Carrot-Top is fawning all over the receiver now. We can easily pull out his columns where he thought the move was akin to introducing cancer into the Patriots' locker room. And thanks to Shaughnessy's masterful 'I-voted-against-him-before-I-voted-for-him,' Moss will not speak to the media...at all. The blame is squarely on Shaughnessy's shoulders...with a small assist from the female version of same. And that would be 'Mizz. MacMullan.'

felipe x said...

You call Shaughnessy's latest on Schilling objective, but I think you are just being nice. To me it seems a shameless attempt to APPEAR objective, when we all know he was chomping at the bit to inject something nasty there, if only he had anything of the sort to go on. At this point it amazes me that Shaughnessy's editors haven't ordered a moritorium on any mentions by him of Schilling, as his pettiness, not to mention relentlessness, has descended to a second-grade level.

And hellfire, five bucks says Shaughnessy wouldn't even type with a bloody sock.

Monkeesfan said...

Chris, speaking of Shank's "I voted against him before I voted for him" act, in 2001 he voted against a former Red Sox player for the HoF (Darn, I forget who it was) but argued that he actually supported him in the HoF but voted the way he did so no one would confuse his intentions - it was as bush league as you can get.

BTW, has Shank come out and admitted being wrong on Randy Moss? I know I was wrong about him.

shamrock1957 said...

The Randy Moss issue is as transparent as you can get. Shaughnessy (and MacMullan) ripped Randy Moss and the Patriots to shreds; called the Patriots out for introducing a square peg into their round hole. Now that Randy leads the league and is, from all accounts, leading an exemplary life as a Patriot, Shaughnessy and MacMullan (both!) come out with fawning pieces about Randy. Of course, Randy has totally kicked the entire media cabal in the seeds (and elsewhere, for Ms. MacMullan) by not granting interviews and not being around when the media hounds are released into the locker room. It's clear that no amount of 'sucking up' by Shaughnessy and Jack-eee will reverse this stalemate, and the blame rests squarely with these two media hacks.

Monkeesfan said...

Does the blond-haired girlfriend Jerkee McMullan even understand football?

Monkeesfan said...

dubegedi, the Herald is a better paper than El Globo and has been for decades. They have some terrible sportswriters indeed - notably Douchebag Felger and Tony Spazzarotti - but at least they talk to instead of at the reader like Shank always does.

Dubegedi said...

How has the Herald been even close to the Globe? The Globe is actual journalism while the Herald is a tabloid. Sure, one has a reputation as liberal and obnoxious but really, does that really have to do with their actual contests. One of the things that I find bizarre is that a paper like the Globe would allow some sort of psycho like CHB to take over its sports department.


Yes, Shank is at times (most of the time really) an arrogant bitch. But what does that have to do with the rests of the contents of the paper?

As for the attacks on MacMullan...what the fuck? Is a sportswriter around here supposed to write everything with Tom Brady's balls in their mouth? The Randy Moss trade was questionable at the time. Thus far it has worked out, proving skeptical columnists wrong to this point. So I guess maybe we should go ahead and lynch em for trying to be objective. OB is an idiot but sometimes I can really see where he's coming from. Just because a media member questions a move doesn't mean that they hate the team or its fans.


"Shaughnessy (and MacMullan) ripped Randy Moss and the Patriots to shreds; called the Patriots out for introducing a square peg into their round hole. Now that Randy leads the league and is, from all accounts, leading an exemplary life as a Patriot, Shaughnessy and MacMullan (both!) come out with fawning pieces about Randy"

How did they "rip Moss and the Patriots to shreds?", and if they did why is that in itself a bad thing? And now because it is apparent that the deal has worked out they are somehow frauds for acknowledging that it has worked out? Do you expect them to come out with an "I completely Apologize for Being Wrong on Subject" X column every time they make a wrong prediction? Their jobs are to make predictions and craft opinions, not to write "THE PATS R SOO AWESOME THERE GOING ALL TEH WAY!!!! ANYONE WHO SAYS RANDY MOSS ISN'T AWESOME IS BAD BECAUSE THE PATRIOTS DID IT AND THEY ARE GOOD!!!!"

Monkeesfan said...

dubegedi, the Globe is a leftist newspaper - that's not journalism, that's lying to its readers. That's what makes the Herald a

As for Jerkee McMullan, writers are supposed to write with some connection to truth, not the disconnection writers like Peter King now have. McMullan has parrotted the Belichick bashery pushed by King and the rest of the Mainstream Sports Media and in doing show showed zero understanding of football. And she's admittedly not the only one - Peter Gelzinis and Margary Eagen wrote attacks on Belichick that were inaccurate, hysterical, and lacked factual basis to a degree that warranted taking both writers off the Herald's pages the way Shank and Jerkee long ago justified being removed from the Globe.

"The Randy Moss trade was questionable at the time." We know that; that's not the point. Has McMullan or Shank come out and said "we were wrong, the Randy Moss trade was exactly what the Patriots should have done"? As far as I can find, they haven't. Admitting to being wrong when you so clearly are is what a good writer does. Until Jerkee McMullan admits to being wrong on Randy Moss, she has no business being allowed to cover the Patriots.

"How was (ripping the Patriots) a bad thing?" Because it was false; because they have not come out and said what they need to say - "We were wrong, we owe Bill Belichick an apology."

Chris said...

Dear Dan: I am happy to school you in the finer points of writing. Noting that you really should have 'come back to earth' by using 'champagne-soaked' instead of 'bubbly bacchanal,' you dutifully complied today:

"The Sox hadn't played since last Sunday's champagne-soaked, 9-1 Division Series clincher in Orange County, Calif., but showed no signs of rust as they ran out to another early lead in the matchup of Cy Young candidates."

Thanks again,

Your teacher

Dubegedi said...

"dubegedi, the Globe is a leftist newspaper - that's not journalism, that's lying to its readers. That's what makes the Herald"

Alright I can see that you do not agree with some of the Globe's political views. Fine, I'm not going to get into a debate about politics on a sports website. However, how does having a degree of bias make journalism lying? If every news story is a lie if there is any hint of bias then no journalism has ever been written in the history of mankind. You're basically saying that The Globe cannot be trusted because liberal people write for it.


Back to MacMullan. First off, nobody has even given an example of her "ripping Moss and the Pats to shreds". It was a questionable move at the time, and some people questioned it. It has worked out and it is so obvious that it was a good trade now that why would they come out with an apology column saying "sorry, I was wrong"?

I don't even recall any of these writers saying that it was a bad idea trading for a 4th round pick for a future HOFer. Most of the (some-what) anti-Pats sentiments seemed to be saying something along the lines of "this isn't what the Patriots usually do." Sure, CHB decided to throw in his usual annoying snark and elitist attitude, but that wasn't a change from what he usually does. Simply questioning what a team does isn't something that should prompt us to go out and buy some lynch rope. They shouldn't have to apologize that they were wrong every time they are wrong, simply because it is their job to have opinions and like most people, they are wrong sometimes.

"Because it was false; because they have not come out and said what they need to say - "We were wrong, we owe Bill Belichick an apology.""

You're right. Dan Shaughnessy, Felger, MacMullan, Borges, and any other writer that has decided to look past Belichick's genius and tried to form their own opinions at any point in their writing careers and turned out to be wrong should come out with apology letters and should take turns massaging his balls for the next 5 years.

Monkeesfan said...

dubegedi, it's not disagreeing with the Globe's political vies, it's disagreeing with their inaccurate coverage based on those political views. The Globe is not a reliable purveyor of information. That makes them liars.

McMullan has yet to come out and admit the Patriots were right all along in the Moss trade. If she'd do that she'll gain some crediblity.

And dubegebi, face reality before you come out with stupidity like "let them massage Belichick's balls for five years." Shank was wrong, Borges was not only wrong but a proven liar, McMullen was wrong, Felger was wrong, Margary Eagen was wrong, Peter Gelzinis was wrong, Peter King is pathetically wrong. They all need to come out and admit they owe Bill Belichick and the Patriots an apology.

Dubegedi said...

"McMullan has yet to come out and admit the Patriots were right all along in the Moss trade. If she'd do that she'll gain some crediblity."

First off, nobody here has even given a specific example of any of these writers "tearing Moss to shreds". Give an example of them doing this (besides CHB who we all -besides OB agree is a hack). Second, there were legitimate concerns about Moss coming in here and using the logic "Belichick is smart, Belichick did it, therefore this move was smart" isn't exactly objective. Randy Moss was a very troubled person in the past and there is no debate on that.


"They all need to come out and admit they owe Bill Belichick and the Patriots an apology."

They owe them an apology for being wrong? Are you shitting me? Should Keith Law write an apology letter to Dustin Pedroia for saying that he wouldn't be a Major League starter? Should every single sports writer apologize to every single sports player they have underestimated?

Monkeesfan said...

dube, re-read Jerkee McMullan's Patriots pieces and you'll find what you're looking for. She and everyone else were wrong about
Moss and Belichick was right - the media nitwits need to come out and say it. It's one thing to be wrong, but to be wrong by being dishonest a la Borges and lately Peter King and also McMullan, Shank, et al requires a mea culpa on the writers' part.