No Excuses, Huh?

(From BSMW member Claude45)

How about all the reasons you and your d-bag co-hosts keep hammering us with:

– Belichick the GM sucks
– Horrible Drafts
– Letting Welker go
– Kraft is cheap
– Brady is DUN
– Window is closed
– Denver’s ALL IN !!!!!
– The game has passed Belichick by on defense
– They can’t win a rock fight
– They play too many close games
– Lousy free agent signings
– They can’t draft and develop wide receivers
– They missed on Amendola
– They traded the heart and soul in Mankins (which would inevitably lead to Brady getting KILLED!!!)
– Trading draft picks for guys would be cut anyway
– Waiting for guys to get cut and pick them off the scrap heap instead of being AGGRESSIVE. STOP MESSING AROUND AND GET SOME GUYS IN HERE TO WIN SOME GAMES!!!!
– Brady does not care about football anymore. Just banging Giselle and fashion week.
– They will never recover from losing Scar
– Belichick surrounds himself with only yes men, needs a strong voice in the room
– Too many Rutgers guys
– They hate Gooch
– They have a tuba player on the OL
– They don’t have a signature road win in 4 years
– ARROGANCE!!!!
– The Jets passed them by (while somehow remaining a tomato can)
– Wasting a second round pick on a QB who won’t play for years INSTEAD OF GOING FOR IT!!!
– Tough stretch schedule with no tomato cans
– Inexperienced DB coach
– Coaches from Division III schools!
– NO PLAYMAKERS!!!!

Based on your football acumen, the Pats are huge underdogs to hang on for the number 1 seed, Tony. It will be a miracle or I may start to think you don’t know what you are talking about.

Dan Shaughnessy Forgets That Red Sox Won World Series Last Year

Writing about sports is HARD.

That’s the lesson we can take from Sunday’s Boston Globe.

How else to explain some of the content from the region’s largest newspaper?

First we have Shaughnessy, who rails about how Red Sox fans have all gone soft on the team and we’re not miserable bastards like we were in 1978.

At this hour, your Boston Red Sox enjoy a friendlier environment than almost any of the 30 teams in baseball. The Sox have a chance to finish in last place for the second time in three years, win a playoff game in only one of six seasons, and still be perceived by their fans as “perennial contenders.’’

Well, let’s see, since 2003, we’ve had three World Series victories, two other appearances in the ALCS, and made two other playoff appearances. Since 2003 they’ve averaged 91 wins per season, and that includes the 69-win season of 2012.

But we’re insane for thinking that the Red Sox are generally pretty good.

It amazes me how soft this baseball market has become. In 1978 fans and media crushed the Sox for a 99-win season that concluded with eight consecutive pressure-packed victories. The Boston manager was unmercifully booed on Opening Day the following year. Now everything is awesome because the Boston ballpark is a tourist destination and fans fall in love with the hype of every young player coming through the system. Swell. When did we become St. Louis?

I think Dan is still upset he lost his “Curse” business.

What’s truly amazing is that throughout his rant, he never mentions ONCE that the Red Sox actually, you know, WON THE WORLD SERIES last year.

Chad Finn very nicely took Dan to task yesterday – I Can Think of 3 Good Reasons Why The Red Sox are Getting the Benefit of the Doubt.

Then we had Bob Ryan’s column, the premise of which was promising enough – how much sports coverage has changed since the days that he was on the beat. The main thrust of which is that there really is no offseason for sports coverage any longer.

Ryan then includes quotes from all of the regular Globe sports writers, including Nick Cafardo, Peter Abraham, Amalie Benjamin, Shalise Manza Young, Ben Volin, Gary Washburn, Baxter Holmes and Fluto Shinzawa.

Amalie Benjamin once covered the Red Sox. Now she covers the Bruins. “Hockey is not as crazy as baseball,” she says. “I hated baseball offseason.”

Why? Too busy in the offseason? Most of the rest of us work year-round, too. Some travel just as much as these writers, and put in 60+ hours a week for the entire year. No offseason.

Then there’s Volin:

“It’s an 11-month news cycle,” says Ben Volin, the Globe’s NFL analyst. “For one thing, people just love talking about next year. That’s a big part of it. And the whole football thinking is different. They have OTAs because they don’t want people to get out of shape and because they don’t want them getting into trouble.”

So, it’s not about putting in your offense or defense and building a team, it’s all about keeping the players busy so they don’t all become fat criminals in the offseason? OK, Got it.

Let’s go back to the social media thing for a minute. “It’s really changed dramatically the last three or four years,” says Abraham. “The littlest things can become big things. You’re asking yourself, ‘Is this a story?’ ’’

“There is no way to distinguish what is news and what isn’t,” says Manza Young.

Wait, what? These are reporters for the largest newspaper in New England and they don’t know what is news and what isn’t?

Finally in the Sunday Football Notes from Volin, there was his line in the section outlining how advanced the NFL is:

Equality barriers have been broken. The NFL is now the first among the four major North American pro sports leagues to have an openly gay player (Michael Sam).

Do these columns get edited? Jason Collins was a fairly big story last year, and he played in the NBA after his announcement. How does this get missed?

Shaughnessy – The Last 100 Columns

I’m not sure why I subjected myself to this, but I took some time to peruse the last 100 columns that Dan Shaughnessy has written.

This 100 columns dates back to October 14, 2013. So in almost exactly 6 months, he’s written 100 columns.

58 are on the Red Sox. Given that they won the World Series at the start of this timeframe and have held spring training and the start of the season since, it’s natural they would get the most mentions, especially when you consider special editions for the World Series Champions and Season Previews. Still, that’s a lot. Of the 58, 37 were positive or mostly positive. 11 were neutral. 10 were negative or negative/neutral.

20 are on the Patriots. Of those, I deemed 12 to be completely negative. 4 were neutral, 2 were positive. 1 was stupid. (The 12/10/13 parody of how the Patriots could be Super Bowl champs.) and 1 was negative/positive – the Darrelle Revis signing column where he lauded the move, but still took all his usual shots.

5 were “thoughts” columns. I was actually surprised there weren’t more of these.

4 were on Harvard during the NCAA tournament, and his transparent attempt to make Tommy Amaker the next Boston College coach.

2 were on the Celtics

2 on the Super Bowl

2 on general NFL topics

1 on the Texans (victory lap)

1 on the Orioles

1 on UMass

1 on MLB HoF voting

1 on himself (Write not Root)

1 on the Seahawks (Marshawn Lynch and not talking to the media, really)

1 on High School athletics

0 were on the Bruins. (Bruins fans probably prefer it that way.)

The full list:

Appreciating The Unmatched Genius Of Dan Shaughnessy

I don’t know this for sure, but I suspect that in private life, Dan Shaughnessy is a man of iron routine, someone who finds something that works for him, and then does not deviate from it. He’s likely someone who doesn’t handle change very well, and tries his hardest to manage his life in such a way that not much surprises him. We heard stories about how he had the same crappy car for years and years – it was an ongoing joke during the early WEEI days, before the Globe ban. He’s written a column about his obsession with running exactly one mile on a treadmill every single day no matter what. (A MILESTONE, IN SLOW MOTION)

This resistance to change is apparent in his work, where he provides a mad-libs series of column templates, which are used over and over again. Within these recycled columns, he even recycles elements and references, (tomato cans, Animal House, Warren Zevon, Amos Alonzo Kraft, etc etc etc) most of which are terribly dated, but as mentioned, Shaughnessy’s not big on change.

Where’s the genius part, you ask?

Somehow, Shaughnessy has managed to continually pull off the exact same Jedi mind-trick over and over and over. He gets not only Boston, but opposing cities, and national networks to fall for his schtick and give him the attention (and yes, money!) that he is looking for.

Let’s run through the last 48 hours, so that you can see what I’m talking about here.

On Tuesday, Dan’s horrendous column on Patriots/Colts is published. It’s written in such a way that it will make both sides angry. In a nutshell, the theme is The Patriots suck, but the Colts still can’t beat them.

Patriots fans who read the column – and that number dwindles by the day – were furious. Just another hackjob on the Patriots, and this time he included among the usual drivel, the jab that Gerry Callahan suggested he should use – the one about the life guard chairs.

Even though the column is decidedly anti-Patriots, the title is Colts won’t be a challenge for the Patriots.

Naturally, that headline made its way to Indianapolis, where people who aren’t familiar with Shaughnessy on a daily basis took it at face value and were outraged. One semi-prominent Indianapolis blogger said the following of the column:

…since when is a columnist nothing more than a cheerleader for a team they cover?  This column would have made for a good call to a sportstalk station from a deranged and myopic fan.

Just stop and think for a minute here. Dan Shaughnessy wrote a column that bashed the Patriots, and yet there are people out there who think that the column was him cheerleading for the Patriots.

Talk about Jedi mind tricks…

There is just enough in the column for both sides to pick and use as evidence for their side. Genius!

What does this get Dan? He gets to make the media rounds. When doing shows, invariably when he is in the opposing city, instead of being the bombastic columnist, he becomes the humble scribe who is really just a nice guy doing his job, who doesn’t really know much about football, and Gee whiz fellas, I sure hope the Colts can come in here and beat the Patriots!

He writes the column prior to his weekly appearance on 98.5 the Sports Hub – think about it, he could’ve easily written that column to appear today, but instead, he got to bask in the attention yesterday on the radio, and then in the evening do the TV side, which gives us this.

shaughnessy-colts

NFL Network mentioned the column last night, had Bob Kravitz of the Indy Star on to give “the other side” thus portraying Shaughnessy as some sort of homer columnist blindly rooting (ironic, huh?) for the Patriots.

So with one trolling column, Shaughnessy managed to do the following:

  • Get both fan bases steamed at him- and talking about him.
  • Cause an uproar on Twitter and the blogosphere. ( I SWORE I was not going to write about this. And I still did.)
  • Get national attention for himself.
  • Make multiple (paid) radio and television appearances.

The thing is, HE DID THIS LAST YEAR TOO. Exactly a year ago. He’s done it dozens of times.

The exact same playbook.

And yet, everyone falls for it again. They give him exactly what he is seeking, and do so without hesitation. I’m doing it right now.

The man is a genius. He just is.

He revels in your hatred, and has for a long time.

most_hated_man

The only way to make him go away is to ignore him, and many out there have been able to do that, and their sports lives are happier for it.

Unfortunately, there are plenty who can’t, and the biggest offenders are his fellow media who, mindless drones that they are, when he writes something like this can’t wait to get him on as a guest and take advantage of the publicity (and most times, anger) of the local fans.

Forget the Jedi mind tricks, Shaughnessy is The Emperor.

You want this, don’t you? The hate is swelling in you now. Take your Jedi weapon. Use it. I am unarmed. Strike me down with it. Give in to your anger. With each passing moment you make yourself more my servant.

The more we get angry at him and give him attention, the more power he has over us. He knows that, and keeps it coming. We need to break the cycle.

I’m as guilty as anyone else. I try not to mention the guy, and yet, I still get sucked in and find myself writing 1000-word posts like this one.

For that, I apologize. I’m apparently no match for the genius of Dan Shaughnessy.

Media Circling Wagons Around Shaughnessy Are As Clueless As He Is

I’m convinced that the majority of these media people 1) only read the headline or summary of the column, namely that sportwriters shouldn’t root for teams,  and 2) have no idea about some of the stuff Shaughnessy has pulled over the years.

I’m not going to launch into another 2000 word screed here. Just want to reemphasize a couple of things.

I keep hearing from media, while Shaughnessy goes on his media victory tour “Dan’s absolutely right, media shouldn’t be rooting for teams.” – as if that is the entire issue here. The enabling hosts cry “But it would be so boring if there weren’t brave people like Dan and Ron Borges around!  They’re making this into “Shaughnessy makes fans mad because he picks against the locals!!!”  As if that matters at all. I don’t care who he picks to win.

Let me be clear: I don’t think sportswriters should be rooting for the home team.

It is possible though, to write entertaining columns while remaining detached from the outcome and without completely trashing the locals.

I understand that Dan Shaughnessy is simply not a talented enough writer to do this. He’s no Ray Fitzgerald or Leigh Montville. He’s not Bruce Arthur. He only knows one way, and that is the misery way. Shaughnessy is utterly predictable.

Either that, or he’s just too lazy.  Yeah, he’s not there to root. He’s there to troll the fans. That’s brave? That’s creative? When was the last time you ever learned something from a Shaughnessy column? The next time will be the first time for me.

This morning Shaughnessy said his not caring about the outcome allowed him to sit and write after the Patriots blew a 19-0 season instead of “wetting his pants” like the fanboys and presumably others in the pressbox were doing. Even on the air, he needs to bring that game up whenever possible.

How noble. How brave. Yes, Joe Sullivan, I know Shaughnessy is the bravest columnist you’ve ever seen.

I can see how others in the media just want to hold him up as a shining example of their profession.

 

.@Dan_Shaughnessy Is Here To Troll, Not To Write

It seems like Dan Shaughnessy isn’t feeling the love as of late. Why else devote a whole column to trying to justify his pitiful existence?

As usual, Dan also completely misses the point, and shows repeatedly just how clueless and out of touch he really is.

I’ve sort of shied away from the Dan Shaughnessy topic for a few years, mostly because most people who come here have already tuned him out. Beating a dead horse isn’t enjoyable for anyone.

That said, his submission this morning needs to be exposed for the pathetic cry for attention that it really is.

Do you want coverage or celebration? Do you want subjective commentary and analysis, or do you just want writer/fans rooting for the local teams to win?

It is interesting to me that Dan used the word “subjective” here. It is of course, the opposite of “objective.” A subjective commentary integrates the writer’s personal perspective, feelings, beliefs, and yes, biases.

We’ll go more into this later, but I find it really curious that he talks about being the opposite of objective, but then attempts to hide behind the “rules of journalism” and so forth.

But to answer Dan’s question, and I’ve said this dozens of times before, fans don’t want the media to root for their teams. But they don’t want them to be rooting against them, either. It’s called being objective, which I’m convinced, many people in media have no idea how to be. To them, being snide, and negative is being objective.

So anyway, Dan claims that many Patriots fans came up to him down in Florida and asked Don’t you want the Patriots to win?

I call BS. If anyone knew who Shaughnessy was enough to approach and talk to him, they already know what he’s about. I just find it extremely unbelievable that legit Patriots fans would go up to Shaughnessy and ask him that.

Now that he’s got that impossible scenario set up, he unloads:

I don’t care if they win. I don’t care if they lose. I love sports. I love football. I love the story. The story can be great, win or lose. But I am not emotional about the outcome. Overall, of course, it’s better to work in a region with good teams, and Boston has more than any other city. Most of the time it’s a great story if they win. It’s even good for the city. Money flows. Strangers talk with each other. Sometimes it’s a good story even if they lose.

I’ll state this right now. Dan does not love sports. He especially does not love football. How else can you explain that 90% of his columns (that’s an unscientific measurement, by the way) are miserable trolling attempts to anger people? Even when he writes “positive” he does it in a way that is so far over-the-top that you know that he is still trolling. He’s mocking you.

I’ll give Dan a little credit, he at least makes it into the 1990’s with his pop culture reference in this column.

You’ve no doubt seen “The Fugitive” with Tommy Lee Jones and Harrison Ford. It’s a classic. There’s a scene early in the film where Jones, as Deputy US Marshal Samuel Gerard, pursues fugitive Dr. Richard Kimble (Ford) through a viaduct in a dam. In the ensuing confrontation, Kimble points a gun at Gerard and says, “I didn’t kill my wife.’’

With nary a shred of emotion, Gerard barks, “I don’t care.’’

That’s it right there, people. It’s not the marshal’s job to determine Dr. Kimble’s guilt or innocence. The marshal’s job is to bring him in.

That’s me. I write the stories. I care about the stories. But when my head hits the pillow at the end of the day it does . . . not . . . matter to me if the Patriots won or lost.

Of course Shaughnessy fancies himself the journalistic equivalent of Tommy Lee Jones’ character. Of course he does. (As noted by Craig Calcaterra, if Shaughnessy’s job is not to determine guilt or innocence, why did he write the May column accusing David Ortiz of using steroids?)

He cares about the stories. The problem is, he focuses exclusively on stories that are usually contrived controversies, innuendo, settling scores, making a splash so he can make extra money with a Jim Rome appearance, or just lazy, recycled bits that he’s written a dozen times before. Is it a “good story” if no one enjoys it?

He doesn’t care if the locals win or lose? This is the guy who put his kids through college by writing about the misery of Red Sox fans having to deal with a made-up “curse” and as long as the team kept losing, he could keep adding chapters to his book. He had a financial stake in the team losing year after year – the more painful the ending, the better.

For years, Shaughnessy’s email was [email protected] But no, he doesn’t care if the team won or lost.

Now we get into the most ridiculous part of the column:

This is how we were trained a few decades ago. We were instructed not to root for the home team. Just deliver the story and the analysis.

That’s the way it is in other departments of a legitimate news operation. Journalists who cover politics, science, medicine, labor, and international relations are asked to put their agendas on the shelf. Tell the story. The reporter covering the Romney-Obama election is not supposed to be a fan of either candidate.

Why is it presumed to be different for us? Why do readers expect — and in some cases, demand — that sports reporters be fans of the team they cover? This amazes me. Are we supposed to suspend all rules of journalism because we cover sports?

Have you stopped laughing yet? Asked to put their agendas on the shelf. Does anyone have more agendas than Shaughnessy does? What a fraud. This is the guy who, because he was supposedly snubbed by the Kraft family at some breakfast the team put on over 15 years ago, continues to slam them every opportunity he gets.

Readers don’t expect, much less demand that sports reporters be fans. That’s utter nonsense. The real reason Shaughnessy is hated goes right over his head. Rational people are not upset that he doesn’t’ root for the home team. They object to the manner in which he continually attacks certain home teams and players.

Remember earlier Dan asked if we wanted “subjective” analysis? Wouldn’t that go against these “rules of journalism?”

OK, some might say “He’s a columnist, he’s supposed to give his opinion, and be controversial.” I’m not the one citing “rules of journalism” here and attempting to hide behind them as some an excuse for his work. Is a columnist exempt from these “rules of journalism?” If so, why is he then citing them? Is it against the rules of journalism to use the people you supposedly cover to also get your children jobs and internships?

Trust me when I tell you this whole thing has changed. When I came into this business in the 1970s, it was OK for sports reporters to be skeptical and critical. It was not a crime against humanity if you suggested the Patriots or Red Sox might not win the championship, or perhaps might not be serving the best interests of their fans. It was OK to occasionally poke fun at Haywood Sullivan or Billy Sullivan.

I’ll take Dan’s word for it. I know there were plenty of critical sports writers in those days. I also know there were columnists like Ray Fitzgerald, who wrote columns that are still enjoyable to read today. 30 years from now, what will people think if they look back and read Shaughnessy? Why was he so miserable? Leigh Montville shows that a columnist doesn’t have to be constantly bashing the locals in order to be successful.

But if you also read Howard Bryant’s Shut Out, you know that there were plenty of sportswriters in the 70’s who covered the Red Sox and ignored the team’s racist practices. So I’m not sure his claim that they were so critical holds up very well there.

I love the phrase ‘crime against humanity’ slipped in there – isn’t that what Dan and his buds usually accuse Bill Belichick of on a regular basis?  Also they could “occasionally poke fun at” ownership. Does anyone with half a brain think that Shaughnessy is “poking fun” at Robert Kraft when he takes his shots?

 Naturally, the Internet is a good source of explanation for this new dynamic. The web gives fans an infinite forum. Fans have a place to read like-minded people. It’s like one giant sports-talk show with no hosts interrupting. It turns out that fans love reading other fans. And, naturally, they all love their teams. What a surprise. Now they expect everyone else to love a team. It’s the wild west of fanboys.

Stupid “fanboys” reference. Check.

But not everything is always great and it’s OK to point this out now and then. Opinions about sports don’t impact important issues that touch our lives. This isn’t about taxes, abortion, gun control, or health care. It’s about first-round byes and Cover 2 defenses. If we have differing opinions about Wes Welker, it doesn’t mean we can’t get along with one another.

And then:

In this spirit, I submit that the 2013 Patriots are headed to an unfortunate ending this season. Please don’t take this as negativity. It’s just an opinion. I may be wrong. But it really won’t matter if I’m right or wrong. It’s sports. It’s entertainment. It’s fun. And it’s not going to change your life or mine, one way or another.

Wait, so the entire point of this column was to tell us that the Patriots are headed to an unfortunate ending this season. Was it only eight days ago you wrote a ridiculous, over-the-top piece about how the Patriots were going to win the Super Bowl? (By the way, I don’t think the Patriots win the Super Bowl this season, but that’s not going to stop me from enjoying the remaining games.)

Setting that aside for the moment,  Dan is telling us that sports doesn’t matter. It’s unimportant. It’s not life or death. It’s not death, taxes or politics.

OK, granted. Then why all the references to the vaunted rules of journalism above? Isn’t this a contradiction? He has to follow these rules (which he doesn’t) but the subject of sports doesn’t compare to politics or actual news reporting. If we’re talking apples and oranges here, why does it matter? He says it doesn’t. So what is the point here?

I have no problem with pointing out problems on the local teams. I have a problem with him being a totally biased, agenda-riddled prick while doing it, and then hiding behind some “rules of journalism” which he flaunts by being “subjective” when he pretends to be “objective.”

Dan – It’s OK to have your opinion. But you need to own it, not hide behind some “rules of journalism.”

Going back to Dan’s Fugitive reference, does he know how the movie closed out?

Dr. Richard Kimble: I thought you didn’t care?
Deputy Marshal Samuel Gerard: I don’t.
[laughs]
Deputy Marshal Samuel Gerard: Don’t tell anybody, OK?

Shaughnessy cares. Much more than he’ll ever admit. He just wants you to think he doesn’t.

Do you know why he cares? Because he’s a dinosaur. Even Carl Everett would admit this. He’s rapidly approaching extinction. In 1993 his employer was purchased by the New York Times for $1.1 billion. It was sold this fall for $70 million, or less than half what the Yankees will be paying Jacoby Ellsbury over the next seven years.

The Globe has to ‘double count’ subscribers in order to even seem respectable. Shaughnessy is behind a paywall, meaning fewer and fewer people are reading him, which means he has to try harder to get attention.

No Dan, we don’t want you to root for the local teams. We just want you to go away.

Dan Shaughnessy Wants You To Know You Were Wrong, Too.

Poor Dan Shaughnessy.

He’s feeling persecuted right now. All you get-a-lifers are coming after him, and making him feel bad.

Being wrong is OK by me, but I was bombarded Thursday by fans consumed with a message of, “You need to eat crow! How could you have been so wrong?’’ I’m hoping all those folks went to Vegas in March and are now collecting thousands.

So the voice of New England sports, who likes to brag about when he writes a scathing column and then shows up in the locker room the next day, can’t take accountability to his customers for when he is epically wrong? He has to hide under the “no one else saw this coming either” excuse? (If you did go to Vegas and bet, are you allowed to taunt Dan?)

In February, he already had his mind made up about the team:

Sorry. The juice glass is half-empty today. These guys could be really bad. And really boring. “Scrappy” doesn’t sell in Boston in 2013. Not after everything that’s happened. For $170 million, a little more prime-time talent would have been nice.

Failed predictions are not a big deal. Everyone makes them. It’s true that very few people had any expectations for this team. There are a few differences though.

Shaughnessy and his colleagues in the media – notably a certain afternoon radio duo that rhymes with Elger and Assaorotti – once they had established their narrative, they had to keep it going, and try to keep proving that they were smarter than the unwashed fans. They seek to ruin the fan experience, and bring the attention on themselves. It’s also not just that the predictions are made, it’s that they’re made in the most dickish way possible.

Shaughnessy is the professional here. He’s the alleged sports authority in Boston. He’s the one getting paid – very handsomely – to give his opinion. So when it is proven to be wrong, not just a little bit wrong, but historically wrong, he’s got to strike back at his customers and tell them they were all wrong too?

A wise Boston-based NFL reporter recently tweeted that “People in our business are supposed to tell the public what news is, not the other way around.” Based on that, does Dan think it is impossible to believe that some people actually based their opinions on the potential of the Red Sox on what HE told them? (If they did, they’re morons, but that’s another story.)

After all, as he said in February he had spent “Two weeks and too many hours in the Sox clubhouse” actually observing the team and what was going on. I know we’re talking about Shaughnessy here, but is it impossible that people read what he wrote, and concluded that since he had been there for two weeks, he might know better than they did how good/bad this team was going to be?

In any event, he’s supposed to be the expert. He failed. Now he wants us to forget it all, and join him as he writes glowing tributes about how great this team was, and if you bring up his original predictions about them, well, too bad, because YOU didn’t know either.

The thing is, despite his protests, he loves this. He lives for this. He’s on Gresh and Zo right now “defending himself” against all this backlash. He’s soaking it up, basking in the glow that even though the Red Sox just won the World Series, people are thinking about HIM.

I need to go shower now.

By the way, Bill Ballou at the Globe’s sister paper in Worcester back in March predicted that the Red Sox would win the AL East in 2013.

So, 2013 has to be better than 2012. It’ll be better than 2011, for that matter. The 2013 Red Sox will be AL East champions, and I’m willing to put money on it.

Can anybody loan me a nickel?

(Thanks to Lance for pointing this out.)
****************

Somewhat related – does it bother anyone else that media and media bloggers who spent the entire season dumping on the Red Sox and their players (and the other teams in town) now have no issues composing odes to how great it is to be a sports fan in Boston, and how these Red Sox define Boston?  They spend every waking hour figuring out what to complain about, and what #hotsportztake is going to be most infuriating, but then turn into puddles of mush when the season is successful.

****************

They don’t make ‘em like this anymore:

Top of the World – Leigh Montville’s column on the Red Sox win.

Papi and After – How about 93-year-old Roger Angell still cranking out baseball writing?

*****************

How did things shake down on Wednesday night, numbers-wise?

Nationally, the Red Sox game did a 11.3/18.

More information from FOX on game six:

  • Boston led all markets with a massive 55.2/75, the best MLB rating in the market since Game 4 of the 2007 World Series.
  • Boston peaked with a 59.5/84 from 11:00 -11:30 PM ET during the Fenway Park on-field celebration. Red Sox hub Providence followed with a 44.1/61.
  • St. Louis delivered a 37.9/55 followed by Hartford (27.8/41), Fort Myers (16.6/27), Kansas City (14.4/23), Tampa (13.4/21), Memphis (13.3/19), Las Vegas (13.0/22), and Richmond (12.9/22) to round out the top 10.
  • For the six-game series, St. Louis was the top metered market averaging 40.6/60 while Boston came in at 39.6/60.
  • According to figures released by Nielsen SocialGuide, World Series Game 6 was the most social program of the day with 1.6 million tweets from 623,000 unique authors. The 2013 World Series drew 4.3 million tweets, up 86% from the 2012 World Series and more than three times the number of tweets compared to the 2011 World Series.
  • According to Facebook, the 2013 World Series generated 32 million interactions from 11 million users. The Red Sox won the team buzz battle 62% to 38% over the Cardinals during the six-game series. World Series MVP David Ortiz was the most buzzed about player with nearly four times the comments, likes, and posts compared to any other player.

***********

Finally, Chad Finn’s media column from today- Fox should go bold in replacing Tim McCarver – has plenty of media notes and observations from the series.

About That Globe Feature On The Private Detectives…

greenhouse_privateeyes-1[1]

 

Really?

I’d love to have been a fly on the wall when the concept for this story was being  tossed around.

I get that the Aaron Hernandez case is one of the most sensational murder cases that we’ve had around these parts in some time. I get that stories about it are going to be written and are going to attract attention and be well-read.

But this story, and the accompanying piece using handwriting analysis on Hernandez’s jailhouse letters are just ludicrous. This is not really to insult to Shira Springer, who I sort of get the feeling is laughing at the subjects she’s writing about in these stories, but the Globe could not have teed up a better tailor-made story to slap at the Patriots than this one.

The only surprise about it is that it didn’t appear two Sundays from now, on the morning of the Patriots opener at Buffalo. We can only wonder what Joe Sullivan has planned for that day.

So read these, and tell me there isn’t an intentional theme that is being pushed here:

“To say Kraft only knows what’s going on in the building, it’s like having blinders and earmuffs on,” said private investigator Bob Long. “Is that all he wants to know?”

“A lot of teams are willing to take some risk. They keep their fingers crossed that nothing happens and have blinders on and earmuffs on and hope nothing blows up. Well, in this case, it did.”

“It sounds unfathomable that something wasn’t done before they re-signed him.”

“Over the years, I have discussed doing background due diligence for certain sports teams,” said private investigator and attorney John Nardizzi, whose company, Nardizzi & Associates Inc., has conducted roughly a dozen athlete-background checks for professional teams. “The response from some who say they recognize the value of such research, but decline to do it, is that they believe their contacts on the ground — former coaches, ex-players who are with the college or team and ‘knew the guy real well’ — are in a superior position when assessing character.”

“I don’t think it’s a question of [giving them] advice. Some of them I just don’t think believe it’s really important, so they’re not going to do it. They’re willing to take a risk with cowboys, villains, and gamblers and say, ‘This is the team that we’re going to field.’ They’re not too worried about everything else.”

So the Patriots were a) lazy, b) cheap, c) negligent d) arrogant and e) enabling.

But they’re not being blamed for this, no, not at all.

The sources in this article are businessmen trying to sell their services. This tragedy could’ve been prevented if they had just hired us! Free advertising!

Meanwhile, I get that Jerry Remy is an extremely nice guy, a private person, and a media member – all of which make him pretty much untouchable, even though he is a public figure.

Are we going to see anything about how all three of his children have had violence issues with the law, including the latest of his son being charged with the murder of the mother of his child?

I’m not saying there should be. I have no desire to see an article of that type. I don’t think Remy should be subject to that kind of scrutiny. But at the same time, the Globe and others are going all-in with this theory that murder could’ve been prevented had the Patriots been more diligent in monitoring their employee during his off hours, but there will be nothing said about a father’s role in the behavior of his own children, and if such a suggestion is even made, it is dismissed as a private matter?

I saw this over the weekend – Time For A Change In NESN Booth – from WBZ-TV sports producer Scott Sullivan, but Sullivan’s premise is as much about Remy’s performance in the booth as it is about his family issues. I don’t agree really, I don’t think Remy should have to give up his job, and I don’t want to see him put through the type of scrutiny the Patriots are being put under, it just seems unbalanced to me to be pursuing one with zeal and not even mentioning the other.

Guest Column – Henry-Owned Globe Taints Sox Beat

This story first appeared on BostonSportsToday.net

By Gethin Coolbaugh

John W. Henry is a pretty smart businessman — and if you don’t believe me, go check his bank account — but his latest acquisition is a head scratching one on some levels, to say the least.

Henry, the head of Fenway Sports Group which owns the Boston Red Sox and Liverpool F.C., has plucked The Boston Globe, the largest newspaper in the region, from The New York Times Co., according to multiple reports.

When considering the impact of the sale, two questions come to mind. For one, what is a successful businessman like Henry doing buying a newspaper (you know, those things with the ink and the paper you see on the subways)? As sad as it is, and this is coming from someone who loves newspapers, the print business is dying, and I’m pretty sure Henry alone isn’t enough to save it.

But hey, I’m not as smart as Henry is, nor do I have as much money as he does, so what do I know?

More importantly, though, Henry’s acquisition of The Boston Globe would immediately taint the newspaper’s coverage of the Boston Red Sox, one of the teams that Henry happens to own.

You know what’s really sad? The Globe’s baseball writers have nothing to do with it, either.

Regardless of your personal feelings about them, The Globe offers some of the greatest baseball minds in the news business today. Should they be blamed for anything in this changeover? Absolutely not. I bet if you asked them, some would say they would have preferred if Henry did not buy their newspaper, because the second he did, it instantly put a cloud over the Sox beat.

It may not be right, but when Henry steps into the picture, it creates a major conflict of interest.

What is the role of a newspaper? Or, here’s a better question, what is the proper role of a newspaper? It should strive to bring the most important news to its readers, brushing agendas and biases aside. Hopefully, that’s what Henry intends to do as assumes control of the company.

At the same time, Henry is a businessman, and a good businessman has no interest in muddying up any of his prized assets, and the Red Sox certainly qualify as one of Henry’s biggest assets.

What happens when the Red Sox need to be criticized, whether’s it’s on the field or in the front office? Will the writers be allowed to dig deep, uncover the story and say what needs to be said?

It’s a conflict of interest, and there’s no way around it. Does that mean Henry shouldn’t be allowed to buy and run The Boston Globe? Of course not. He had the money, and The New York Times Company had every right to sell the paper to him. There’s nothing wrong with that at all.

Henry is smart, and hopefully he’s smart enough to tackle this issue right off the bat with a clear explanation of the way his newspaper will cover his baseball team in a fair and ethical manner.

Still, there may always be a level of mistrust when anyone reads a Red Sox story in Henry’s paper.

Not even someone as savvy as Henry will be able to fix that.

Gethin Coolbaugh is the Editor-In-Chief of Boston Sports Today. Twitter: @GethinCoolbaugh.

Report: John Henry Selected As New Owner of Globe

Peter Gammons on his new site Gammons Daily has the following report:

Sources say the New York Times Corporation has chosen John Henry as the new owner of the Boston Globe.

–Peter Gammons

If the source is correct, it makes sports coverage in this town a whole lot more complicated, and pretty much all coverage of the Red Sox will be viewed as coming from a certain vantage point. Also, coverage of the other local teams will also be in question as to whether it is hurting or helping the aims of the owner and his other investment.

Will we also see coverage of Liverpool FC and Roush Fenway Racing? Will LeBron James suddenly get more positive coverage?

This whole situation should be interesting to watch going forward.