View Full Version : Paul "the waffler" Sullivan

04-30-2002, 01:03 PM
Did anyone read the interview with Paul Sullivan on WS Interactive today?

Here's an exerpt:

ML: Paul some Sox fans feel the Chicago media slights the Sox. That itís biased towards the Cubs. You have probably heard that a lot especially in your "Ask Paul Sullivan" weekly column. When this comes up, what do you say?

PS: "I donít agree that the media is biased against the Sox, though I was watching WGN-TV in Cleveland the other day and the Sox were the 3rd story behind the Hawks and the Cubs. The Hawks? OK, they were in the playoffs. The Cubs? Thatís not right.
First he claims the media is not biased, then in the same breath says the Sox were "the 3rd story....That's not right".

He's such a moron, you can throw evidence in his face and he still doesn't get it. DUH! :angry:

04-30-2002, 01:47 PM
I caught that one too--but what's he gonna say? "Yeah, of course--especially the paper I work for?" He also didn't want to say anything about Reinsdorf--which makes me think he's smart enough to know he's gonna have trouble doing his job if he's not allowed in the ballpark.

The rest of the article is good--especially the stuff about Sox marketing and about Bevington.

04-30-2002, 01:58 PM
That's the only thing i disagreed with and like he stated in that interview. "People only remember the negative. "

Beside that biased comment, I agreed with everything he said and I thought it was a good interview.

I stopped reading Lipman's columns, but decided to check out what PS had to say. This will sound odd coming from me, but I give credit where it's due. Good job Mark. :gulp:

04-30-2002, 02:58 PM
Good interview.

Interesting point: Sully is a Sox fan (I honestly thought he bled Blue).

I disagree with his contention that Comiskey is one of the worst parks in the majors. I think that the Baggiedome, Veterans Stadium, the Tampa Bay palace, and several others would have to rank below Comiskey. Comiskey is probably somewhere closer to middle of the pack.

Also, grammar errors in the article diminish the professionalism of WSI, IMO. Two of them in Liptak's article stick out -- it's "embargos" (or "embargoes"), not "embargo's," and it's "whose," not "who's."