Texsox Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 QUOTE(iamshack @ Mar 10, 2008 -> 01:48 PM) The problem is that Jay has lost all sense of objectivity towards the Sox, Shall we start to list the posters here we could make that very same statement about, who also are negative constantly about the team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 11, 2008 -> 10:47 AM) Shall we start to list the posters here we could make that very same statement about, who also are negative constantly about the team? I guess I dont agree with the people on that list either. You have a right to be negative, sure, but on this site there is accountability that comes with negativity. Jay has no accountability now, and he never has. I have every right to be offended when he broadbrushes the entire organization and fanbase. At least when posters are negative about the Sox, they dont broadbrush every other poster together as mindless brawlers who cannot control themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 11, 2008 -> 09:47 AM) Shall we start to list the posters here we could make that very same statement about, who also are negative constantly about the team? Sounds like a good catagory for a Soxtalk award. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Gleason Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 11, 2008 -> 09:47 AM) Shall we start to list the posters here we could make that very same statement about, who also are negative constantly about the team? Ummm, but we are all posters on a message board, and that is it. Mariotti is a professional journalist for one of the two biggest papers in Chicago. Objectivity should be a part of his job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnCangelosi Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Mar 11, 2008 -> 11:33 AM) Ummm, but we are all posters on a message board, and that is it. Mariotti is a professional journalist for one of the two biggest papers in Chicago. Objectivity should be a part of his job. As much as I hate to disagree, the guy is paid to give his opinion and objectivity isn't part of it- he's paid to spew a bunch of BS on a daily basis. And yes, the guy is a total joke. One of the best columns I've ever seen was the one from another Chicago writer who put together Mariotti's articles throughout the 2005 season- from good to bad, to how they wouldn't make the playoff's when Cleveland was on that run, etc. In the end he contradicted himself like 22 million times when you read one article to the next over the course of 2005. The guy is like Hillary Clinton. He stands for nothing. Whatever is popular and whichever way the wind blows that day is what he'll say. In the end that cupcake Mariotti had to eat some crow 2005. Hopefully he will be doing the same this year as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxWS05 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Shall we start to list the posters here we could make that very same statement about, who also are negative constantly about the team? That would be a very long list. Journalism 101, report objectively. Jay failed that class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 I know Couch and he is a great guy. I'm surprised you don't like his style of writing. I think he writes good stuff. We might agree to disagree here but if you read Couch, I think you will get reasonable points of view. You might disagree with what he's saying but I personally think he backs up his points quite well. As far as Stone joining the Sox, I bet you he will remain very critical. He's not going to change. Why would he? All they can do is fire him and he has a contract so he gets the money. He's been around too long doing it his way to change. If Oz and AJP go after him, they are idiots because Stone was a damn good pitcher and is a smart baseball mind. They might listen to him and learn something if things are going south. I love Oz's style but he's not perfect, nor is AJP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Mar 11, 2008 -> 12:33 PM) Ummm, but we are all posters on a message board, and that is it. Mariotti is a professional journalist for one of the two biggest papers in Chicago. Objectivity should be a part of his job. Nope, he writes an opinion piece, not a news article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LVSoxFan Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Oof. Another Mariotti thread. No thanks. But he's right in asking how long Stoney will last if he's not a suck-up like the Hawkeroo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(greg775 @ Mar 11, 2008 -> 05:58 PM) I know Couch and he is a great guy. I'm surprised you don't like his style of writing. I think he writes good stuff. We might agree to disagree here but if you read Couch, I think you will get reasonable points of view. You might disagree with what he's saying but I personally think he backs up his points quite well. As far as Stone joining the Sox, I bet you he will remain very critical. He's not going to change. Why would he? All they can do is fire him and he has a contract so he gets the money. He's been around too long doing it his way to change. If Oz and AJP go after him, they are idiots because Stone was a damn good pitcher and is a smart baseball mind. They might listen to him and learn something if things are going south. I love Oz's style but he's not perfect, nor is AJP. If I want to know what Couch is going to write about I just have to look at Marriotti's articles. Couch over the last year feels that he needs to follow up with another article basically saying the same thing Jay said earlier in the week. Greg was fine when he wrote his own pieces, the minute he decided to take the Marriotti slant on things and pretty much become a lackey for Marriotti is when he became unoriginal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 If I want to know what Couch is going to write about I just have to look at Marriotti's articles. Couch over the last year feels that he needs to follow up with another article basically saying the same thing Jay said earlier in the week. Greg was fine when he wrote his own pieces, the minute he decided to take the Marriotti slant on things and pretty much become a lackey for Marriotti is when he became unoriginal. Does Couch really do that? I don't check the site every day but it seems bad business to have 2 guys writing the same columns. Not saying you are wrong, just wondered if you had any examples to give me on Couch doing this. I really have enjoyed some of Greg's takes on the Bulls and Hawks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 QUOTE(greg775 @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 10:48 PM) Does Couch really do that? I don't check the site every day but it seems bad business to have 2 guys writing the same columns. Not saying you are wrong, just wondered if you had any examples to give me on Couch doing this. I really have enjoyed some of Greg's takes on the Bulls and Hawks. Unfortunately Couch has been called out a few times for re-hashing Mariotti's columns within the same week. The worst part about it is that Greg has written some very good articles on his own, he doesnt need to be Mariotti-Lite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RibbieRubarb Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Marriotti is hysterical today!!! Doing a complete 180 on his stance on players and steroids. He says the Cubs need to get Brian Roberts to achieve a World Series dream. http://www.suntimes.com/sports/mariotti/84...i031308.article Yet, all he has ever said in previous columns is that teams need to avoid guilty players at all costs to preserve the game! I love him. He's a moron. BTW...Because I didn't want to start another thread about this moron...I posted it here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Mar 13, 2008 -> 09:02 AM) Marriotti is hysterical today!!! Doing a complete 180 on his stance on players and steroids. He says the Cubs need to get Brian Roberts to achieve a World Series dream. http://www.suntimes.com/sports/mariotti/84...i031308.article Yet, all he has ever said in previous columns is that teams need to avoid guilty players at all costs to preserve the game! I love him. He's a moron. BTW...Because I didn't want to start another thread about this moron...I posted it here If the cubs wanted to make an impact and win the world series, They would of emptied the bank and their minor leagues to pick up Johan. Even if they get Roberts, facing Johan 2 times in a short series, or god forbid Haren and Web in a 5 game series will be very hard to beat. Even if they got out of the NL, the monsters of the AL would sweep them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Mar 13, 2008 -> 08:35 AM) If the cubs wanted to make an impact and win the world series, They would of emptied the bank and their minor leagues to pick up Johan. Even if they get Roberts, facing Johan 2 times in a short series, or god forbid Haren and Web in a 5 game series will be very hard to beat. Even if they got out of the NL, the monsters of the AL would sweep them. The Cubs were swept by the team that was swept by the team that was swept by the RedSox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox72 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Mar 10, 2008 -> 09:45 AM) Now in about a day or so, Couch (Marriotti Jr.) will write a follow up article basically rehashing the same things his big brother piped up about. The only thing different about Couch, however, is that when you e-mail him ripping his article, he will respond. We went back and forth last summer after an article he wrote about Ozzie like 2 weeks after Jay said the same s***. He was willing to concede that he may have been a little harsh/overboard... But you are right, all he generally does is rehash old crap... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobDylan Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 QUOTE(juddling @ Mar 10, 2008 -> 11:15 AM) i haven't seen the article yet (usually get to the paper over lunch) but upon reading the title of this thread , my first thought was that Jay took his column and made a long plea to the heavens above that before the year was over Stoney would replace Hawk in the booth. I would have bet money that that was the subject. Upon hearing of the jist of the article....don't you think that if Stone felt he was going to be pressured into being a 'yes' man for Jerry then he wouldn't have bothered taking the job????? Likewise...Stone is liked because he presents the numbers (good and bad) and tells it like it is..so if JR was looking for a 'yes' man...why would he think Stone would be that guy????? Isn't that what an interview is for. Personally....I think it would be great to hear Stone's critique of the Sox through the good and bad times this year. He could easily fill those dead spots that Hawk leaves when the Sox hit that mid-summer 10 game losing streak and Hawk is pissed.........umm....not that the Sox will have a losing streak even half that long..lol I love those dead spots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.