White Sox not getting the cover of Sports Illustrated

They said it wasn't on purpose. They said it was because of the way the World Series ended (on a Wednesday night) that it was impossible to put them on the cover of the issue. Whatever. Couldn't they have at least put them on the cover the following week?

 

 

But the slight was indicative of the way the media (and the North Side of Chicago) treated the Sox all along their improbable, impossible ride. From my own doubtful, bandwagon-sensitive column written right after the All-Star Game to Joe Buck's unforgettable omission of African-Americans when he mentioned the variety of cultures, races and nationalities that filled the South Side minutes after the Game 4 victory, the treatment of the White Sox shocking the world was similar to Toccara's treatment on "America's Next Top Model." Foul.

 

 

Because after giving the Braves (1995), the Yankees (1996, 1998-2000), the Marlins (1997, 2003), the Angels (2002), the Diamondbacks (2001), and the Red Sox (2004, and they got the cover of Time too) the cover of the bible of sports magazines, they decided a non-playoff Monday night football game featuring Peyton Manning and Tom Brady was a bigger story. A more important story. The sad part is (outside of Chicago), as wrong as SI was, it may have been right.

 

Here's a link to the whole column.

Racist bastage. He has to mention race in every single one of his articles no matter how small the mention.

Scoop needs to shut the hell up and go away. I hate him more than any other sports writer/sports writer on tv/any of that. He's an embarssment to Chicago, his race, his profession, and his name.

 

Have I made it clear how I feel about this f***?

YOU ARE ALL RACIST!

YOU ARE ALL RACIST!

 

 

I hate people like Scoop so much because he's VERY racist against white people, but NOBODY takes him to task because he's black. It should be a 2 way street, white racists suck, but so do black racists, and they should both be treated the same way....like the scum they are.

Edited December 27, 200520 yr by whitesoxfan101

I guess you could call it an acquired taste, but I like Scoop. I especially like the reactions arising from simply mentioning his name.

What a stupid f***.

I guess you could call it an acquired taste, but I like Scoop.  I especially like the reactions arising from simply mentioning his name.

 

The reason his name gets such a strong reaction is he's a stupid, fact ignoring, racist hypocrite. People like him (and Moronotti, although in different ways) are clueless and act like asses simply to get attention because they aren't good enough to earn their attention through good, honest writing.

The sad part is (outside of Chicago), as wrong as SI was, it may have been right.

 

Anyone care to mention this little story to him?

 

White Sox' first title since 1917 is AP Story of the Year

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-s...ov=ap&type=lgns

Why "Scoop" would get all in a tizzie about the communities Joe Buck mentioned is a waste of time. I recall that Joe mentioned that a lot of White Sox fans WORK (Not worked) at the stock yards. Somebody forgot to tell Joe that the stock yards have been gone for almost 40 years. Would it make Scoop happy if Joe mentioned all the White Sox fans in the Robert Taylor homes?...is that what he's looking for?

 

As for Scoop, being a White Sox fan and writing about the White Sox not getting respect from Sports Illustrated is a valid point. Every World Series winner since 1995 has been on the cover....except the White Sox.

people can say what they will about him, I still think this is the best article that I read on the Sox 2005 historic run....

 

 

http://proxy.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?...=jackson/051019

Edited December 27, 200520 yr by watchtower41

Scoop is an ass his articles are junk propaganda. :headshake

do you know why a sterotype about white sox fans is that we have an inferiority complex?

 

yeah, this would be why.

I enjoyed Scoop's columns at SLAM but I think he has not been a good columnist outside of basketball. He's trying to be controversial more than provocative which is a common mistake amongst writers

I vehemently hate Scoop Jackson for two reasons: one being that he brings race into every topic (just read the Steven A. Smith part of his article), and two is that he just doesn't write well. Here's an example of how his pieces read:

 

Man, 'cause I'm black I can write like a damn fool.

 

I just started this here paragraph 'cause I believe that after every sentence I should start a new paragraph.

 

He criticizes FOX, and rightfully so, about how Buck omitted the blacks on the South Side, but there isn't one mention of how Buck also forgot to represent the Irish part of the South Side. That and he referred to the White Sox as "gangsta". Just because Bridgeport isn't the greatest of areas on the South Side doesn't mean the White Sox are "gangsta", you stupid urban f***. If you had any recollection of White Sox history, you'd know that the team symbolized the blue collar, Catholic demographic more than any other.

Isn't he a basketball writer?

Why "Scoop" would get all in a tizzie about the communities Joe Buck mentioned is a waste of time.  I recall that Joe mentioned that a lot of White Sox fans WORK (Not worked) at the stock yards.  Somebody forgot to tell Joe that the stock yards have been gone for almost 40 years.  Would it make Scoop happy if Joe mentioned all the White Sox fans in the Robert Taylor homes?...is that what he's looking for?

 

As for Scoop, being a White Sox fan and writing about the White Sox not getting respect from Sports Illustrated is a valid point.  Every World Series winner since 1995 has been on the cover....except the White Sox.

 

Not to go all derailed and such, but aren't the Robert Taylor homes gone too?

I enjoyed Scoop's columns at SLAM but I think he has not been a good columnist outside of basketball. He's trying to be controversial more than provocative which is a common mistake amongst writers

 

You're exactly right.

Staying away from all the politics that have been brought up, I do agree with him that the White Sox winning the world series should of been on the cover of SI.

 

f***ing bulls*** you put a monday night match up on there and in the upper right hand corner you put a little circle "White Sox win world series".

 

s***, the Red Sox were on the cover three weeks in a row when they won.

 

Thats why I didnt buy any of that bulls*** from Sports Illustrated when the White Sox won the world series. Get off of our band wagon SI, ignore the White Sox again when they go back to back.

Isn't he a basketball writer?

 

Sure is, he made his mark in SLAM magazine. This is just like ESPN though, they try and make every announcer/commentator weigh in throughout the year, regardless of affiliation. I dont know if anyone remembers Dick Vitale July 31st this past year in a trade deadline rundown, He couldnt stop talking about the Yankees and Red Sox. Stephen A Smith is also a classic example of someone completely out of his element when he is doing his show "Quite Frankly". SAS understands basketball very well, but he just doesnt understand every sport equally, and ends up sounding incredibly misinformed when he makes comments on his show.

Sure is, he made his mark in SLAM magazine.  This is just like ESPN though, they try and make every announcer/commentator weigh in throughout the year, regardless of affiliation.  I dont know if anyone remembers Dick Vitale July 31st this past year in a trade deadline rundown,  He couldnt stop talking about the Yankees and Red Sox.  Stephen A Smith is also a classic example of someone completely out of his element when he is doing his show "Quite Frankly".  SAS understands basketball very well, but he just doesnt understand every sport equally, and ends up sounding incredibly misinformed when he makes comments on his show.

Ok I thought so.

scoop's ok with me, but he's a pale imitation of ralph wiley.

scoop's ok with me, but he's a pale imitation of ralph wiley.

 

There will never be another Ralph Wiley

Not to go all derailed and such, but aren't the Robert Taylor homes gone too?

 

Yeah, that was a reference to what Stuart Scott said.

 

"People are going wild in the Robert Taylor homes after the White Sox won!" or something to that effect.

Why the hatred for Scoop and Jay Mariotti? They are just doing their job by getting you emotional about what they write- which I can see you guys have fallen into their trap. Columnist are supposed to have an opinion that is controversal, if they did not- they would be beat writers. Wise up and if you truly don't like Scoop or Jay Mariotti (like Hawk says) DON'T READ THEM

 

and don't tell me that you do not read them because when I ask why you don't like them you always come up with 5 or 6 articles they had done recently. (SORRY HAWK but you do it too.)

Edited December 28, 200520 yr by palehose23