PDA

View Full Version : Olbermann analogy


SoupAppling
05-14-2005, 06:21 AM
I doubt anyone will be surprised by this information. Keith Olbermann on his show yesterday was discussing the Wendy's chili finger story. He started off his comments by stating that a friend asked him why the White Sox weren't as popular as the Cubs. He says he thought about it and told his friend 1919. Saying that Sox fans left because of the scandal and never came back.

So, what does this have to do with Wendy's? Olbermann then asks his advertising expert how Wendy's can avoid being the White Sox because of the finger in the chili. One of the dumbest analogies I ever heard but I wasn't surprised since it was coming from someone who spent much of his career at ESPN.

Apparently Keith didn't read the New York Newsday article mentioned in this thread before talking with his friend or making his comment on the air.
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=50062

Fredsox
05-14-2005, 07:06 AM
First of all, yes, Keith Olberman is a putz. So is the question about why the cubs are more popular than the Sox? That's really an easy question with a one-word answer: Addison.

Baseball is not cheap entertainment. I didn't say it didn't have value (i.e. it's worth it), I'm saying it costs $100-$150 to go to a game with a family of 4. You need to be accessable to the people who can afford to go, and the Sox are not in as good a position as compared to the cubs. Our fans have to work harder to get to a game.

For the fans who live nearby they need to work harder to earn the money to go to a game. For the fans who live in the suburbs but can afford to go to a game, they need to travel a longer distance (comparatively).

Didn't somebody say that the cubs have 400,000 middle-to-upper income people within a few square miles? We have a working class neighborhood.

It is my feeling that if the Sox had consummated the deal that would have built the new park in Addison (remember that?), given their record for the past 10 years, they would be drawing 3 million fans and be the darlings of the city. To me, Reinsdorf's inability to close this deal was his biggest failure, though I believe he tried hard to make it succeed. It's just the way it worked out.

Dan H
05-14-2005, 08:06 AM
Personally, I don't care if the Cubs are considered more popular. I don't want any part of the that Disneyland atmosphere at Wrigley. I don't go to a game because weeds are growing on the wall or there is a bar across the street. (Though I do miss McCuddy's where they just slid a can of beer across the bar.) It took the Cubs three decades just to put winning seasons back to back, and even when they did that, they choked in both seasons. Their best player was a cheater, and their manager thinks magic wins games.

Besides, the White Sox, a team with a richer tradition, have a chance to turn it around for good this year. Dopey Cub fans can talk about the Shrine all they want, but no one can argue with success. I hope the Sox are truly committed to going to the World Series. I don't want to hear any whining about attendance. If there is a chance at mid-season to get a player to get them over the top, they should do it without thought to cost. A World Series on the South Side will finally expose the Cubs for the frauds that they are.

TommyJohn
05-14-2005, 09:31 AM
His answer doesn't surprise me one bit. It is the answer of someone who is
completely ignorant to the history of the White Sox and Chicago baseball in
general. It is also one of those convenient little ten second explanations
that suit the sound bite society we live in, where ten to thirty seconds
supposedly tells you everything you need to know about someone or
something. Cubs can't win? They're cursed by a goat. Sox can't draw fans?
1919. Happened 86 years ago and a lot of history has happened on both
sides of town since then, but never mind all of that. He was asked a simple
question, and he gave a simple-minded answer.

I can go on, but I fear I'm rambling already. You get the idea.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-14-2005, 09:48 AM
... It is also one of those convenient little ten second explanations that suit the sound bite society we live in, where ten to thirty seconds supposedly tells you everything you need to know about someone or
something. ...

This is the same exact defense Neyer used for his ignorant and flippant comments about the Sox, Sox Fans, and Sox Park. When they have nothing to say (i.e. they're ignorant about the subject) they get cute and feign surprise that their ignorant answer isn't taken in the spirit of the "joke" it was intended to be. "You Sox Fans are soooo negative and humorless..."

Here's the truth that puts the torch to their lies: these same people are held up as EXPERTS on the subject. That's why Olbermann has his own show and Neyer gets paid for doing "chats" on ESPN.com.

If they're "experts" why are they so clueless?
:roflmao:

I'll let one of the propellerheads defend these clueless dopes. I never had any respect for the opinions of either Olbermann or Neyer and have even less respect today. They just keep proving me right and the propellerheads wrong.
:cool:

voodoochile
05-14-2005, 10:03 AM
The thing gets weirder when you ralize that the finger in the chili wasn't from any of the employees. The lady who found it is being investigated for fraud and probably other crimes involving whomever she took the finger from in the first place.

I have no idea what Keith was getting at and the fact that any of you actually do kind of freaks me out to be honest with you...:?:

EDUT: Now if he had said the Sox ARE the finger in the chili that I could understand. I can just picture these experts sitting down to a bowl of MLB chili expecting a good meal and then presto... there's that finger... I think I know which finger we Sox fans want it to be...:cool:

soxwon
05-14-2005, 10:16 AM
First of all, yes, Keith Olberman is a putz. So is the question about why the cubs are more popular than the Sox? That's really an easy question with a one-word answer: Addison.

Baseball is not cheap entertainment. I didn't say it didn't have value (i.e. it's worth it), I'm saying it costs $100-$150 to go to a game with a family of 4. You need to be accessable to the people who can afford to go, and the Sox are not in as good a position as compared to the cubs. Our fans have to work harder to get to a game.

For the fans who live nearby they need to work harder to earn the money to go to a game. For the fans who live in the suburbs but can afford to go to a game, they need to travel a longer distance (comparatively).

Didn't somebody say that the cubs have 400,000 middle-to-upper income people within a few square miles? We have a working class neighborhood.

It is my feeling that if the Sox had consummated the deal that would have built the new park in Addison (remember that?), given their record for the past 10 years, they would be drawing 3 million fans and be the darlings of the city. To me, Reinsdorf's inability to close this deal was his biggest failure, though I believe he tried hard to make it succeed. It's just the way it worked out.


the deal was squashed by HENRY HYDE, and DUPAGE republicans,
also the people of addison voted against it, by i believe 13 votes.
im a republican and at the time, i lived in Addison, i was UPSET at HYDE and the others.

MRKARNO
05-14-2005, 10:43 AM
Olbermann should stick to covering the news. He's done a good job of that with his show in spite of the poor ratings. This analogy made no sense at all.