PDA

View Full Version : Bob Verdi Column


Lip Man 1
10-06-2002, 12:26 PM
In today's (Sunday's) Tribune, Bob Verdi has a column reflecting on another season of no playoff baseball in Chicago.

You might want to look at it. Verdi isn't considered a ripper like Jay Mariotti. He basically uses humor and satire to make his points.

Here's an example...

The Sox aren't high on anything, either, except themselves. When they swept Minnesota in September, they announced they were "sending a message" about next year. The Twins didn't seem scared, but we should be because the Sox always leave messages this year about next year. Then when we call them on it come April, nobody's home.

And what about those two goofs who jumped that Kansas City coach? Only in Comiskey Park can there be crowd-control problems with no crowds.

Lip

guillen4life13
10-06-2002, 12:29 PM
can i get a link?

voodoochile
10-06-2002, 12:29 PM
I thought Verdi resigned. Did they bring him back?

TornLabrum
10-06-2002, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
I thought Verdi resigned. Did they bring him back?

Verdi does a Sunday column, iirc. He spends the rest of his time writing for some golf magazine.

voodoochile
10-06-2002, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Verdi does a Sunday column, iirc. He spends the rest of his time writing for some golf magazine.

No, I knew that. I was thinking of Bob Greene (Verdi translates as Green and I have a hangover, so my brain isn't working right).

Oh well... Just another example of why you should never drink and post or post with a hangover either...

:D:

cheeses_h_rice
10-06-2002, 03:04 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-0210060312oct06,0,6444358.column?coll=cs%2Dcolumni sts

PaleHoseGeorge
10-06-2002, 03:17 PM
Isn't it painfully obvious Bob Verdi hasn't a clue what is going on in Chicago sports anymore? His columns have always been droll, even when he was writing them everyday. Now their just plain stupid. Reading his crap is like traveling in Mr. Peabody's Way-back machine to 1985. What a waste of space.

I give you Exhibit A taken from today's Verdi column filled with his usual tired cliches. I quote...

And what about those two goofs who jumped that Kansas City coach? Only in Comiskey Park can there be crowd-control problems with no crowds.

He matter-of-factly slips in that little stab at Comiskey and the South Side. Again, the ignorance of Chicago's media to where most of the trouble starts, both inside and outside the ballpark, is (and has been for several years now) that pisshole the Cubune owns on the North Side. Count on the Chicago media to get it EXACTLY WRONG.

Is it too much to expect these imbeciles to check their facts before spouting their cliches?
:angry:

Bob Verdi is beyond tired. He ought to stick to golf, preferably the seniors tour. He would be perfect for writing the obituaries.

MarqSox
10-06-2002, 04:16 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


Is it too much to expect these imbeciles to check their facts before spouting their cliches?
:angry:


Yeah see, I know you're speaking in general terms, but what part about the goofballs rushing the field in a stadium that had attendance of what, 10,000 or so that night, is exactly wrong here? I thought it was kind of funny, certainly not inaccurate. A jab sure, but columnists are supposed to jab. If they didn't, they'd suck.

All the anti-Chicago media posters on this board jump on every little thing that could be construed as anti-White Sox, but you're conspicuously silent whenever they praise the Sox or knock the Cubs. Yes, it does happen. I agree that the media is easier on the Cubs, no doubt, but it's not nearly as bad as you might think from reading some of the posts on this board.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-06-2002, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by MarqSox
Yeah see, I know you're speaking in general terms, but what part about the goofballs rushing the field in a stadium that had attendance of what, 10,000 or so that night, is exactly wrong here? I thought it was kind of funny, certainly not inaccurate....

It was another of Verdi's droll attempts at humor. He was pasting the Sox and the Cubs, yet which one got singled out for having security trouble, hmm?

I'm not speaking "in general terms" at all. Verdi is a clown to make that assertion in this column.

I don't see anything "funny" about professional incompetence.

Sorry.

voodoochile
10-06-2002, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by MarqSox
Yeah see, I know you're speaking in general terms, but what part about the goofballs rushing the field in a stadium that had attendance of what, 10,000 or so that night, is exactly wrong here? I thought it was kind of funny, certainly not inaccurate. A jab sure, but columnists are supposed to jab. If they didn't, they'd suck.

All the anti-Chicago media posters on this board jump on every little thing that could be construed as anti-White Sox, but you're conspicuously silent whenever they praise the Sox or knock the Cubs. Yes, it does happen. I agree that the media is easier on the Cubs, no doubt, but it's not nearly as bad as you might think from reading some of the posts on this board.

I agree. Like it or not, the Sox are going to take some heat for the attack. That is really as it should be. For once it is a well deserved attack instead of the same old tired crap about poor attendance and the neighborhood. His reference to low attendance isn't a shot at the attendance, but rather the Sox inability to control the crowd even though it was a small one. Verdi does his fair share of flubbie bashing in that article too. In general I thought it was well written and interesting. Chicago baseball is a joke and has been for a long long time. Verdi was merely pointing out that both teams leave much to be desired and if a fan wants to see good baseball, they have to wait until the playoffs begin, because the local teams take up all the coverage here in Chicago, deserved or not...

PaleHoseGeorge
10-06-2002, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
I agree. Like it or not, the Sox are going to take some heat for the attack. That is really as it should be. For once it is a well deserved attack instead of the same old tired crap about poor attendance and the neighborhood. His reference to low attendance isn't a shot at the attendance, but rather the Sox inability to control the crowd even though it was a small one. Verdi does his fair share of flubbie bashing in that article too. In general I thought it was well written and interesting. Chicago baseball is a joke and has been for a long long time. Verdi was merely pointing out that both teams leave much to be desired and if a fan wants to see good baseball, they have to wait until the playoffs begin, because the local teams take up all the coverage here in Chicago, deserved or not...

Now I'm really confused. Are you suggesting the Sox should be "take heat" for low attendance or unruly fans?

If your answer is low attendance, sure, the lack of support has been well-documented. No less an authority than Verdi has been predicting the relocation of the franchise for the last 20 years, most of it as reasoning for why the Sox needed a new ballpark. Verdi, of course, looks like an idiot now that the new ballpark has been built and the team still won't spend to field a winner. Funny how that works, isn't it?

OTOH, if your suggesting the Sox should "take heat" for unruly fans, you need to back it up better than Verdi did. Remember--this is a column pasting BOTH teams in town, right?

It isn't the Sox offering money to neighbors around the ballpark as compensation for public urination by the team's fans.

It isn't the Sox who had to break up a riot in the stands between ballplayers and its fans.

It isn't the Sox who had their relief pitcher accosted on the mound by a drunk.

It isn't the Sox who have the higher crime rate in their neighborhood, not just this year but for the last several since the Cubune started playing night games.

If Verdi wants to make a point about Chicago's unruly fans, why were only the Sox singled out? This column was about the Cubs, too, remember? Could it be he was simply following the same tired cliches you appear to think he avoided in this column? Take a closer look.

Verdi leaves his readers believing the same tired stereotypes he used to write about as a regular columnist back in the 1980's. I'll bet $1000 HE DOESN'T EVEN KNOW Wrigley has the higher crime rate!!!!! How could he? Chicago sports isn't his beat anymore, besides Sunday morning when he dutifully fills column-inches.

In journalism, is it okay to make the exception into the rule? If you think it's okay to pound the Sox for Ligue's attendance at a game, then I guess you see no problem with this. If Verdi was a real journalist (i.e. not a sports journalist), he would probably write columns about welfare mommas driving Cadillacs and living a life of luxury. Is that okay, too?

More precisely, is getting the facts wrong with an inaccurate stereotype okay if its entertaining to the reader? I say no.

Journalists reach millions of people with their thoughts and words. They have professional responsibility far greater than any of us engaging in small talk here, at home, at school, or at the office.

Verdi hasn't a clue what he's talking about, and for that he is guilty of professional incompetence. How anyone can argue otherwise is beyond me.

Whatever... if you think Chicago's sports fans are served better by having this nonsense presented as fact for a couple million readers, I can assure you I don't.

voodoochile
10-06-2002, 06:04 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Now I'm really confused. Are you suggesting the Sox should be "take heat" for low attendance or unruly fans?

If your answer is low attendance, sure, the lack of support has been well-documented. No less an authority than Verdi has been predicting the relocation of the franchise for the last 20 years, most of it as reasoning for why the Sox needed a new ballpark. Verdi, of course, looks like an idiot now that the new ballpark has been built and the team still won't spend to field a winner. Funny how that works, isn't it?

OTOH, if your suggesting the Sox should "take heat" for unruly fans, you need to back it up better than Verdi did. Remember--this is a column pasting BOTH teams in town, right?

It isn't the Sox offering money to neighbors around the ballpark as compensation for public urination by the team's fans.

It isn't the Sox who had to break up a riot in the stands between ballplayers and its fans.

It isn't the Sox who had their relief pitcher accosted on the mound by a drunk.

It isn't the Sox who have the higher crime rate in their neighborhood, not just this year but for the last several since the Cubune started playing night games.

If Verdi wants to make a point about Chicago's unruly fans, why were only the Sox singled out? This column was about the Cubs, too, remember? Could it be he was simply following the same tired cliches you appear to think he avoided in this column? Take a closer look.

Verdi leaves his readers believing the same tired stereotypes he used to write about as a regular columnist back in the 1980's. I'll bet $1000 HE DOESN'T EVEN KNOW Wrigley has the higher crime rate!!!!! How could he? Chicago sports isn't his beat anymore, besides Sunday morning when he dutifully fills column-inches.

In journalism, is it okay to make the exception into the rule? If you think it's okay to pound the Sox for Ligue's attendance at a game, then I guess you see no problem with this. If Verdi was a real journalist (i.e. not a sports journalist), he would probably write columns about welfare mommas driving Cadillacs and living a life of luxury. Is that okay, too?

More precisely, is getting the facts wrong with an inaccurate stereotype okay if its entertaining to the reader? I say no.

Journalists reach millions of people with their thoughts and words. They have professional responsibility far greater than any of us engaging in small talk here, at home, at school, or at the office.

Verdi hasn't a clue what he's talking about, and for that he is guilty of professional incompetence. How anyone can argue otherwise is beyond me.

Whatever... if you think Chicago's sports fans are served better by having this nonsense presented as fact for a couple million readers, I can assure you I don't.

The Sox problem with security was just more recent then those other incidences. As a result, Verdi is going to use it as an example. The flubbies took plenty of heat when the fans grabbed the Dodgers hat and even more when it turned out to be an employee of the Tribune. It's not Sox bashing instead of flubbie bashing, it is just bashing the most recent event and that happened in Comiskey. If the Sox are still taking heat for this problem next year and in the years to come when other problems have occured more recently, then you have a point, but this is a recent event and is going to come up in conversation and in columns for a period of time. Verdi is still within the grace period, imo. Yes, he was using hyperbole to make a point. That is what editorial writers do. The column as a whole did an excellent job of pointing out the futility of Chicago baseball. I don't think this one comment (whether deserved and in good taste or not) makes Verdi's viewpoint biased.

But, we obviously disagree...

PaleHoseGeorge
10-06-2002, 06:39 PM
I never said Verdi's opinion were biased. To the contrary, I've repeatedly made the assertion Verdi's comments show professional incompetence. I haven't read ANYTHING to suggest he isn't guilty of professional incompetence among those who think the column was accurate.

And I still haven't.

You're willing to overlook this sort of stereotyping--no matter how inaccurate; I'm not. That's what we disagree about.

DVG
10-06-2002, 11:42 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I never said Verdi's opinion were biased. To the contrary, I've repeatedly made the assertion Verdi's comments show professional incompetence. I haven't read ANYTHING to suggest he isn't guilty of professional incompetence among those who think the column was accurate.

And I still haven't.

You're willing to overlook this sort of stereotyping--no matter how inaccurate; I'm not. That's what we disagree about.


I knew Verdi was a whining, incompetent clown back in 1991.
Back then, Michael Jordan missed a last second shot when the
Bulls lost game 1 of the finals to L.A. And what did Verdi's
column have the next day? Him pissing, whining, and moaning
about "The Curse of Leon Durham." He even ended it with
"there's a ground ball to first base..." He is an idiot. To this
day, he's still whining. "Oh, our poor sports teams. Everything
happens to us. Oh, oh."

Lip Man 1
10-06-2002, 11:56 PM
Originally posted by DVG: "He's still writing oh our poor sports teams, everything happens to us..."

Hey DVG,

So what exactly is incorrect in that statement? Or have you noticed how many championships the Sox, Bears and Hawks have won recently?

The Sox have one of the longest World Series droughts in baseball, the Hawks HAVE the longest Stanley Cup drought, and the New England Patriots have made more Super Bowl appearances then the Bears, and have the same number of wins.

I'd say verdi's dead on the money!

Lip

PaleHoseGeorge
10-07-2002, 12:05 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1


The Sox have one of the longest World Series droughts in baseball, the Hawks HAVE the longest Stanley Cup drought, and the New England Patriots have made more Super Bowl appearances then the Bears, and have the same number of wins.

I'd say verdi's dead on the money!


Okay, if Verdi writes that about the Sox, Cubs, Bears, or Hawks, I guess I could forgive it. But he wrote that about the BULLS! They went on to win that championship, and five more after it. How can you say he's dead on the money?

I think DVG's point is Verdi writes the same droll schtick over and over and over again. Same ****, different day.

Again, this is a good example of Verdi offering no insight to his readers, preferring to fill column-inches with the same stale and outdated cliches.

Droll, droll, droll.

WinningUgly!
10-07-2002, 12:10 AM
Is there anyway we can get them to take Ed Farmer? :D:


:farmer
"Ooooh, I'd get to watch Mr. Sosa in person 19 times a year!"

DVG
10-07-2002, 01:36 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Originally posted by DVG: "He's still writing oh our poor sports teams, everything happens to us..."

Hey DVG,

So what exactly is incorrect in that statement? Or have you noticed how many championships the Sox, Bears and Hawks have won recently?

The Sox have one of the longest World Series droughts in baseball, the Hawks HAVE the longest Stanley Cup drought, and the New England Patriots have made more Super Bowl appearances then the Bears, and have the same number of wins.

I'd say verdi's dead on the money!

Lip

It isn't WHAT he says, it's HOW he says it; whining and crying
like having losing sports teams is a great, unspeakable trag-
edy. I am well aware of Chicago sports teams records over
the years, it is his mindless self-pity about it that I can't take.

pudge
10-07-2002, 03:06 PM
I've never been a Verdi fan, but I did sort of think the Comiskey comment was funny... Short-sighted? Yes. Cheap shot? Yes, indeed. (After all, I live in Seattle and heard much about how great Safeco security was, and then a few nights after the Gamboa incident, a streaker made it all the way to center field before being tackled.)

But the point that is being missed by PHG and some other posters is the role of the columnist. They are not jounalists in the true sense of the word, they are more "entertainers" (if you consider their stuff entertaining). Columnists, by nature, repeat themselves over and over. (I think it was Royko who said, to remain a columnist, you can't be afraid to repeat yourself.) They sort of have to resort to lame cheap shots, which is why there are very few columnists I enjoy reading on a daily basis. Trying to make insightful comments on Chicago sports every day is an odd assignment. I just think daily columns are sort of weak - just like TV sitcoms, which is why I don't watch much TV. You just have to take the columnists for what they're worth, and that's not much. ;)

I'm an NU journalism grad and I understand PHG's frustration. I hate the lack of professionalism in the industry, which is one reason I'm not in it. But, unfortunately, it comes with the territory, because the "mass" audience craves it.