PDA

View Full Version : More steller Cubune writing.


chisoxmike
04-25-2004, 10:54 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-040425morrissey,1,2470041.column?coll=cs-whitesox-utility



:morrisey
"I hate the White Sox."

Whitesox029
04-25-2004, 10:58 PM
Morrissey makes me sick. The media thing in this town is getting out of hand.

SSN721
04-26-2004, 08:11 AM
What a pompous ass. That is so ridiculous I cant even put it into words. If you put in Priors name in that article and changed all the descriptions of hitting and cages to pithcing and warmups and "simulated games" you would essentially have the same article they have been writing on Prior for the last 2-3 months. I cant beleive there isnt a columnist with the balls to call out any of this ****ty and slanted reporting thats going on.

BeerHandle
04-26-2004, 08:18 AM
I just read the article. Rick M must hang out with JJ Marriotti.

What a pathetic article! I just wasted three minutes of my life. THANKS RICK.

MRKARNO
04-26-2004, 08:58 AM
If a writer at the tribune disrespected Sosa the way they do Frank Thomas he would be fired.

jackbrohamer
04-26-2004, 09:20 AM
Tough to tell who's lazier these days, Downey with his stream-of-consciousness "top 10" junk or Morrissey's cat fights with Sox personnel. Probably takes both guys 20 minuts total every week to write their columns.

Maybe that's reason the Holley guy quit writing the same column so soon, he wanted to have a full-time job?

KingXerxes
04-26-2004, 10:02 AM
First off - this disclaimer - I know Rick Morrissey tangentially, and I don't think he hates the White Sox or White Sox management.

His column today was not a shot at the White Sox - the way most of you are taking it - but it was more of a defense of the Chicago media (at least that's how I took it).

Look - Ozzie Guillen for whatever reason starts talking about "the Prior Watch" which I think most people think is a ridiculous thing to have in the Tribune. Why on earth Guillen would choose to even address this issue is beyond me, but he did so there you have it. But then to start harping that Frank Thomas doesn't get the media attention he deserves is to set yourself up to look like an idiot. All Morrissey did was illustrate that maybe - just maybe - the reason the media doesn't "fawn" all over Thomas is due to the fact that Thomas can be unbelievably surly when it comes to dealing wiith the media. He noted that Thomas smiled and signed autographs for fans - but for whatever reason he chooses not to deal with the media (including Ed Farmer on WMVP). Life is all about choices and consequences and you can't can't choose to isolate yourself from the media, and then expected to be covered like an absolute favorite.

That all being said - The Prior Watch is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen in a newspaper, and I'll bet you could get Morrissey, Prior, Baker and the entire Cubs organization to agree on that.

woodenleg
04-26-2004, 10:08 AM
If that's the case, then the media are not acting in the public interest, but in their own interest. The most professional thing to do would be to just simply report that Thomas is currently boycotting the media - taking all of these gratuitous shots at him is unprofessional. They're abusing their authority. It's nothing new, of course, but it is pompous and narcissistic to think that Thomas is hurting his fans, as they claimed in the papers this weekend. Maybe Thomas is justifiably 'surly' with the media - I sure would be, but that's not the sort of thing that can be reported. Of course they won't criticize themselves.

They're abusing their position, as far as I'm concerned.

People in the media have this idea that they are proxies for the public. Thomas' not talking to the media doesn't affect me one way or the other - I want to read about the games more than anything. Why can't they just let it go?

KingXerxes
04-26-2004, 10:10 AM
Originally posted by woodenleg
If that's the case, then the media are not acting in the public interest, but in their own interest. The most professional thing to do would be to just simply report that Thomas is currently boycotting the media - taking all of these gratuitous shots at him is unprofessional. They're abusing their authority. It's nothing new, of course, but it is pompous and narcissistic to think that Thomas is hurting his fans, as they claimed in the papers this weekend.

People in the media have this idea that they are proxies for the public. Thomas' not talking to the media doesn't affect me one way or the other - I want to read about the games more than anything. Why can't they just let it go?

Again - I think Morrissey's piece was IN RESPONSE to shots that Ozzie Guillen initially took at the media. They were not gratuitous, they were in defense of charges that, for whatever reason Guillen, made.

jackbrohamer
04-26-2004, 10:20 AM
It struck me as very childish. The "Prior Watch" is silly & it's hard to understand any serious sports fan thinking otherwise. Morrissey is ripping Guillen for criticizing the "Prior Watch" is doubly childish, and should be a waste of his time if he wants people to take him seriously.

Cubbiesuck13
04-26-2004, 10:23 AM
:pee :morrisey

KingXerxes
04-26-2004, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by jackbrohamer
It struck me as very childish. The "Prior Watch" is silly & it's hard to understand any serious sports fan thinking otherwise. Morrissey is ripping Guillen for criticizing the "Prior Watch" is doubly childish, and should be a waste of his time if he wants people to take him seriously.

I'm not sure that Morrissey was trying to make a serious article with this. Maybe I'm reading in to this too much, but it looks like Morrissey was illustrating why Frank Thomas doen't get the media attention that Guillen said he deserves. I don't think Morrissey "ripped" Guillen, and as I said before - I'll bet Morrissey himself thinks the "Prior Watch" is stupid as well.

Will anybody here at least admit that maybe - just maybe - Guillen was a little off base in asking why Frank Thomas doesn't receive glowing media coverage?

hold2dibber
04-26-2004, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
Will anybody here at least admit that maybe - just maybe - Guillen was a little off base in asking why Frank Thomas doesn't receive glowing media coverage?

I agree - Frank has repeatedly shot himself in the foot with the media (and the public) and continues to pay the price for it.

But here's the fault I find with the column - Morrissey took Ozzie's comments as an opportunity to mock Ozzie and, to a certain extent, Frank. That's the point of the article. However, the much more salient point that Ozzie made is that absurdity of the Prior watch. Morrissey doesn't even attempt to address that issue. His response to Ozzie is "a Frank Thomas watch would be ridiculous." By leaving it at that (and not also noting that the "Prior Watch" is ridiculous) he tacitly defends the Prior Watch. If he thinks the Prior Watch is a joke, why not either (a) say so; or (b) if he can't really do that because he's employed by the same paper publishing the "Prior Watch" then just let Ozzie's comments go without an article in response.

Lip Man 1
04-26-2004, 10:52 AM
Wooden says: "If that's the case, then the media are not acting in the public interest, but in their own interest."

In a utopian world the media (all media) would be completely unbiased. This is not a perfect world, these are human beings who are just as biased towards things as any other human being and lastly they work for companies who are in business to make money...period.

Like it or not the Sox are on the short end of the stick in this town. We can argue if it's right, or fair...but that's reality. If tomorrow the city swung towards the Sox the media would be right their beating down their doors because they don't care who wins or loses as long as they make money .

I'm amazed about how all this stuff bothers some people. The answer is, was and always has been if the Sox want to change the attitude of the city and media they have to win something improtant.

Again that's not fair considering the Cubs haven't won anything either but the Cubs did get to game 7 of the NLCS last year. The Sox haven't been that close to the series since they were actually in one in 1959. To a certain extent you have to accept reality because at this point the Cubs are a lot closer to a series then we are.

Sad byt true.

Lip

KingXerxes
04-26-2004, 10:57 AM
"The only purpose of a newspaper is to sell newspapers."