PDA

View Full Version : Phil Mitchell Columns


Hangar18
09-27-2003, 11:17 AM
Ive been reading and keeping track of his useless Q&A
"columns" which really double for Cub Adulation. Ive stopped
keeping track of the number of cub vs sox related q&a's (it was obscene, something like 42-7) I wanted to mention the other day, he did his useless column, and he used so many former cubs/cub people, he RAN OUT OF PEOPLE TO ASK A QUESTION TO. Undaunted, He simply ASKED HIMSELF QUESTIONS. Ridiculously and Predictably, he "asked" himself what the effect would be like of the blue team winning their first division in 14 yrs. He "answered" himself by saying it would be pandemonium and other assorted bs. Couldnt he have just TRIED to do his column by getting someone? Just random ranting here.
Back to the other threads now.

anewman35
09-27-2003, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Ive been reading and keeping track of his useless Q&A
"columns" which really double for Cub Adulation. Ive stopped
keeping track of the number of cub vs sox related q&a's (it was obscene, something like 42-7) I wanted to mention the other day, he did his useless column, and he used so many former cubs/cub people, he RAN OUT OF PEOPLE TO ASK A QUESTION TO. Undaunted, He simply ASKED HIMSELF QUESTIONS. Ridiculously and Predictably, he "asked" himself what the effect would be like of the blue team winning their first division in 14 yrs. He "answered" himself by saying it would be pandemonium and other assorted bs. Couldnt he have just TRIED to do his column by getting someone? Just random ranting here.
Back to the other threads now.

At this point, the Cubs are still in a great race, the Sox are dead. I don't like them, but is there a single reason he shouldn't be talking about the Cubs?

Hangar18
09-27-2003, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by anewman35
At this point, the Cubs are still in a great race, the Sox are dead. I don't like them, but is there a single reason he shouldn't be talking about the Cubs?


good point, and Im glad you brought that up. By all means, he should be writing about them, they Won their weak Division. But that explain how he managed to write 42 Q&A's about them
and only 7 for the sox. Hell, if im a sportswriter (and sox fan) Id do the right thing and write about them myself. I might have to get a job with a Media Outlet, and Just be a SHAMELESS SOX PROPOGANDA PLANT in the vein of Mike Kiley or that Couch clown. I see Gammons pulled a Kiley with his column yesterday/

Dick Allen
09-27-2003, 08:52 PM
Actually, it's Fred Mitchell, but that doesn't mean he still isn't a worthless piece of nauseating crap. :angry:

ssang
09-27-2003, 09:05 PM
Fred Micthell is the most pathetic excuse of a sports journalist writer EVER! His job is so easy it's comical. He comes up with one simple question and then types in whatever answer he receives. The questions he ask are so basic it's sad. And he only asks like 4 questions a week. He gets paid to do something a 5th grader can do. Fred Micthell bites the big one!