PDA

View Full Version : Morrissey Article


lukesappling
05-14-2005, 04:34 PM
"Embrace what you have. Be happy you're not Cubs fans. You can get a good parking spot. You can get in and out of the park fast. You can get a nice seat almost any game. You have a winning team. You apparently have a closer in Dustin Hermanson. You don't have to wallow in your tears."

Lets have fun with the season!

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-050514morrissey,1,2797721.column?coll=cs-home-utility

DannyCaterFan
05-14-2005, 05:28 PM
Amen to that !:supernana:

Ventura Fan 23
05-14-2005, 05:42 PM
Hah, yeah, Wrigley field is a disastar.

rwcescato
05-15-2005, 11:42 AM
Hah, yeah, Wrigley field is a disastar.

It was the best of the Sox articles in the trib today. Maybe this will put the Sox on the front page as the main story as the season progresses.
GO SOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:supernana:

Dan H
05-15-2005, 11:49 AM
One of the best things in this column was Morrisey challenging his cohorts in the media stop browbeating Sox fans about attedance. The media has been doing this for decades, and it hasn't worked. And it will never work. Meanwhile, it looks like the Sox will have the season we all have been truly waiting for.

aniceItch
05-15-2005, 11:52 AM
I really enjoyed the John Kass article:

But not only for the secret few of us here in the Tribune Tower, deep in the headquarters of Cubs Nation, discreetly meeting in cells of three so that if one of us is ever caught, the rest can't be captured.

Who would have thought the Trib would have someone telling the media to shut up about attendance when Mariottis headline is: "Latest nonsense from media troll Moronotti (http://www.flyingsock.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=50201)"

winning ugly 72
05-15-2005, 11:54 AM
i couldn't believe how many sox articles were in the tribune today i thought i had the wrong paper

Lip Man 1
05-15-2005, 01:21 PM
Dan:

Apparently a columnist at the Sun-Times Sunday didn't get Morrissey's memo.

Lip

hsnterprize
05-15-2005, 02:38 PM
...and this is what I said. Mr. Vickery...you might want to consider publishing this in a future article for WSI.

Mr. Morrissey,

Last year at around this time, I wrote you a letter explaining my disgust over how your newspaper handled the shooting a man outside the Cubby Bear Lounge across the street from Wrigley Field. I wrote that in spite of the fact this shooting had nothing to do with the Cubs per se, the incident happened outside Wrigley, and it seemed like the company that owns "The Shrine" seemed to want to steer away from such negative press instead of covering the story. I also wrote because you wrote a piece on all of the shenanigans going on around Wrigley, and how it was negatively affecting the "cute, wholesome" image of the ballpark and its surrounding neighborhood (the words in quotes are mine...I'm not quoting your piece directly for the sake of brevity). In all, I said that Chicago White Sox fans were sick and tired of the all of the negative stigmas associated with the team and everything associated with it while seemingly everything associated with the Cubs is "pure" and "wholesome".

So I'm reading the Sox fansite, "White Sox Interactive", and someone posted a link to an article you wrote for today's edition, and I'm suprisingly pleased with what you said. Now please forgive me for not reading your columns more frequently, but I must admit that this was one of the better articles I've seen in a LONG time about the Sox, Sox fans, and everything associated with "all-things-Sox". So it's with a heavy silver-and-black heart that I must express genuine thanks for what you said, for I'd like to believe you now actually "get it" with regards to how we Sox fans are, and how we're constantly perceived by the local and national press.

As a reporter, I understand that a story that's worth the mention is going to get mentioned over and over again. It was understandable with the expectations of many in the press that last year's Cub team was "supposed to win". Let's face it...on paper, last year's Cubs were one of the better teams in baseball. However, overkill is still overkill, and I think you'll understand Sox fans' displeasure with the constant story after story about everything Cub. Now that the tables are turned, it's kind of hard to believe the attention is slowly pointing south, and many people who have held long-standing negative perceptions about "all-things-Sox" are learning it's not so bad south of Madison Street.

One thing that really garnered some respect from me was what you said to other "newspaper brethren". To quote, you said, "Please, no more articles on what's wrong with the Sox's attendance. And no more columns brow-beating fans for not coming to the park. There's nothing wrong with Sox fans. This is what they are and who they are. They're a relatively small pool of people who really care. It's hard to grow grass in the desert." It's interesting you said that with Jay Mariotti in the Sun-Times basically calling Sox fans out for not selling our U.S. Cellular Field every day like Cubs' fans filling up Wrigley. And as far as your challenge to fans to "embrace what you have", let me tell you we already are. It's a remarkable start to the season, and we're prouder than ever of our team. However, considering recent collapses by teams like the 2003 Cubs, and the 2004-05 Bulls and Fighting Illini Mens' Basketball team, we're holding our collective "enthusiasm" until it gets close to pennant chase time. Believe me when I tell you if the Sox are still holding court in the American League by the time games really count, you won't have to worry about low attendance and a "lack of enthusiasm" by the fans...it'll be one of the greatest collection of fandom this city's ever seen. I won't say it'll be as big as the 2003 Cubs playoff run, but Sox fans who have been under scrutiny for so long will be able to voice a collective, "Up yours!!!!!!" to all the critics and Cubbie lovers who swear there's no legitimate interest in the Sox. Forgive the terminology, but there will a strong feeling of vindication that'll embrace White Sox young and old, and there will be NOTHING Cubs fans can do about other than sit down and deal with it.

Rick, I've seen you in the press box a few times, and the next time I cover a game and see you, I'll come by and say hello. I don't know who you cheer for personally, but I'm glad you're seeing what many of us Sox fans have been seeing for years...a team that finally fits the profile of a winner. It's not October yet, but wait...the post-season baseball season will come quicker than you can say, "Na, na, hey, hey, goodbye."


I know it was long, folks, but I think this pretty much explains how I and other Sox fans feel. It's a shock the Trib is giving legitimate credit to the Sox, but I'll take it.

John Barrett
05-15-2005, 03:16 PM
...and this is what I said. Mr. Vickery...you might want to consider publishing this in a future article for WSI.

Mr. Morrissey,

Last year at around this time, I wrote you a letter explaining my disgust over how your newspaper handled the shooting a man outside the Cubby Bear Lounge across the street from Wrigley Field. I wrote that in spite of the fact this shooting had nothing to do with the Cubs per se, the incident happened outside Wrigley, and it seemed like the company that owns "The Shrine" seemed to want to steer away from such negative press instead of covering the story. I also wrote because you wrote a piece on all of the shenanigans going on around Wrigley, and how it was negatively affecting the "cute, wholesome" image of the ballpark and its surrounding neighborhood (the words in quotes are mine...I'm not quoting your piece directly for the sake of brevity). In all, I said that Chicago White Sox fans were sick and tired of the all of the negative stigmas associated with the team and everything associated with it while seemingly everything associated with the Cubs is "pure" and "wholesome".

So I'm reading the Sox fansite, "White Sox Interactive", and someone posted a link to an article you wrote for today's edition, and I'm suprisingly pleased with what you said. Now please forgive me for not reading your columns more frequently, but I must admit that this was one of the better articles I've seen in a LONG time about the Sox, Sox fans, and everything associated with "all-things-Sox". So it's with a heavy silver-and-black heart that I must express genuine thanks for what you said, for I'd like to believe you now actually "get it" with regards to how we Sox fans are, and how we're constantly perceived by the local and national press.

As a reporter, I understand that a story that's worth the mention is going to get mentioned over and over again. It was understandable with the expectations of many in the press that last year's Cub team was "supposed to win". Let's face it...on paper, last year's Cubs were one of the better teams in baseball. However, overkill is still overkill, and I think you'll understand Sox fans' displeasure with the constant story after story about everything Cub. Now that the tables are turned, it's kind of hard to believe the attention is slowly pointing south, and many people who have held long-standing negative perceptions about "all-things-Sox" are learning it's not so bad south of Madison Street.

One thing that really garnered some respect from me was what you said to other "newspaper brethren". To quote, you said, "Please, no more articles on what's wrong with the Sox's attendance. And no more columns brow-beating fans for not coming to the park. There's nothing wrong with Sox fans. This is what they are and who they are. They're a relatively small pool of people who really care. It's hard to grow grass in the desert." It's interesting you said that with Jay Mariotti in the Sun-Times basically calling Sox fans out for not selling our U.S. Cellular Field every day like Cubs' fans filling up Wrigley. And as far as your challenge to fans to "embrace what you have", let me tell you we already are. It's a remarkable start to the season, and we're prouder than ever of our team. However, considering recent collapses by teams like the 2003 Cubs, and the 2004-05 Bulls and Fighting Illini Mens' Basketball team, we're holding our collective "enthusiasm" until it gets close to pennant chase time. Believe me when I tell you if the Sox are still holding court in the American League by the time games really count, you won't have to worry about low attendance and a "lack of enthusiasm" by the fans...it'll be one of the greatest collection of fandom this city's ever seen. I won't say it'll be as big as the 2003 Cubs playoff run, but Sox fans who have been under scrutiny for so long will be able to voice a collective, "Up yours!!!!!!" to all the critics and Cubbie lovers who swear there's no legitimate interest in the Sox. Forgive the terminology, but there will a strong feeling of vindication that'll embrace White Sox young and old, and there will be NOTHING Cubs fans can do about other than sit down and deal with it.

Rick, I've seen you in the press box a few times, and the next time I cover a game and see you, I'll come by and say hello. I don't know who you cheer for personally, but I'm glad you're seeing what many of us Sox fans have been seeing for years...a team that finally fits the profile of a winner. It's not October yet, but wait...the post-season baseball season will come quicker than you can say, "Na, na, hey, hey, goodbye."


I know it was long, folks, but I think this pretty much explains how I and other Sox fans feel. It's a shock the Trib is giving legitimate credit to the Sox, but I'll take it.





outstanding could not havr said it better! Thanks!

Chez
05-16-2005, 09:46 AM
I thought this was one of the best columns ever written about what it means to be a Sox fan -- this year or any year.

Iwritecode
05-16-2005, 10:45 AM
It's interesting you said that with Jay Mariotti in the Sun-Times basically calling Sox fans out for not selling our U.S. Cellular Field every day like Cubs' fans filling up Wrigley.

:hijacked:

I haven't read an article from the Moron for quite awhile but did he actually say that? Or at least imply it?

This is something that I just can't figure out. I don't know why people keep questioning our attendance and can't understand why the stadium isn't sold out every night. Between the newspapers, sports blab radio and John Kruk on Baseball Tonight it's just getting old. So this rant is just for them:

Here's the simple answer: Name one team in the history of baseball that has gone from averaging under 25,000 a game to 38,000+ without the benifit of a) a new stadium or b) a World Series trophy. Guess what? It's not going to happen! We don't even have the benefit of a single playoff appearance in the past 4 years!

We've had 1.5 months of good baseball. It has been a pretty cold and rainy 1.5 months at that. The attendance is on the way up. We are poised to break 2 million for the first time in since 93? 94? But it's a gradual thing. Not an overnight thing. If the Sox go and make the playoffs this year and make another run next year and the fans still don't show up then by all means, go to the rooftops and yell "***?!? Where are you people?" But until then, watch and observe. If the team continues to do their part, the attendance numbers will be there in the end. It won't be the 3 million that everone seems to expect. It will probably be closer to 2.3 - 2.5 million. Which is pretty good for a team that drew under 2 million and finished in second place last year.

Please feel free to print this and read it aloud the next time you hear somebody question the attendance this year. I've been tempted to call into the sports blab radio programs but just can't bear to waste my cell phone minutes.


BTW, nice letter hsnterprize. :cool:

Flight #24
05-16-2005, 10:54 AM
However, considering recent collapses by teams like the 2003 Cubs, and the 2004-05 Bulls and Fighting Illini Mens' Basketball team, we're holding our collective "enthusiasm" until it gets close to pennant chase time

:?:
An NCAA record-tying # of wins, championship game appearance, and close loss in the title game to a team with potentially 4 NBA lottery picks counts as a "collapse"?

tebman
05-16-2005, 11:05 AM
But check out Sunday's Tribune. It should be called the Sox-une. The Sox no longer are just a story in the sports section. They're on the front page of the paper and inside the main section. I haven't looked in Tribune Magazine yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if Dave Barry has come out of retirement just to weigh in on the Frank Thomas situation.

Sox fans probably will have a hard time with this, seeing as how some of them view the Tribune as the Cubs' paper and all. It's an understandable perspective, seeing as how Tribune Co. owns the Cubs. But trust me, if the choice were between a story on a cross-dressing billy goat and a story on a Sox victory, we would go with the Sox victory. I can't say the same for some other media outlets in town.

Well.

It's pretty clear to me that Mr. Morrissey has been reading WSI. Our words are like a note in a bottle: you never know where they're going to end up.

Gotta give it to him, though -- his piece really nailed it.

skobabe8
05-16-2005, 11:31 AM
Yeah Rick's been checking out WSI. Where else would he come up with 'Sox-une'?

hsnterprize
05-17-2005, 12:58 AM
:?:
An NCAA record-tying # of wins, championship game appearance, and close loss in the title game to a team with potentially 4 NBA lottery picks counts as a "collapse"?Okay...I wouldn't call this past Illini basketball season a "collapse" per se, but with all the hype Illinois got, you'd think the natural progression of things would equal a national championship. They lost in St. Louis despite most of the crowd wearing orange, and the Chicago media as a whole acting like Champaign is a super-far southern suburb of Chicago.

I appreciate the Illini being close, but as Jesse Ventura often says, "Close only works with horseshoes and hand grenades."

hsnterprize
05-18-2005, 04:57 PM
First of all, thanks for all the good comments about my letter. Unfortunately, I have some bad news to tell you.

I tried sending this letter to Rick about 3 times within the past few days. Every time I send it to his e-mail (the one that's written on the end of the article and listed on the Chicago Tribune website), I get a message back some time later telling me the letter's been "rejected as spam". And here's something else to consider...I e-mailed Assistant Sports Editor Dan McGrath with a note to please forward the letter to Rick, and I got the same rejection message soon after.

Obviously, this wasn't a spam letter. I don't know what the problem is, but I think it's kinda strange someone would reject a complimentary letter to them. Maybe they've been hit with so many responses they've got a few words stored up that automatically deem the letter no good if they're mentioned. I don't know, but whatever the reason, this isn't good.

So much for writing the Tribune.

miker
05-18-2005, 05:03 PM
So the "World's Greatest Newspaper" gives the Sox significant column space for the first time in over a decade...has the Sox Army earned some respect, or are they just pandering to us?

jackbrohamer
05-18-2005, 05:05 PM
Ya know what, screw him. For MANY of us the Sox have always been the #1 team in Chicago. A team that doesn't need to rehabilitate itself to compete with the Scrub Juggernaut.

tebman
05-18-2005, 07:05 PM
First of all, thanks for all the good comments about my letter. Unfortunately, I have some bad news to tell you.

I tried sending this letter to Rick about 3 times within the past few days. Every time I send it to his e-mail (the one that's written on the end of the article and listed on the Chicago Tribune website), I get a message back some time later telling me the letter's been "rejected as spam". And here's something else to consider...I e-mailed Assistant Sports Editor Dan McGrath with a note to please forward the letter to Rick, and I got the same rejection message soon after.

Obviously, this wasn't a spam letter. I don't know what the problem is, but I think it's kinda strange someone would reject a complimentary letter to them. Maybe they've been hit with so many responses they've got a few words stored up that automatically deem the letter no good if they're mentioned. I don't know, but whatever the reason, this isn't good.

So much for writing the Tribune.

I'd suggest that you print a paper copy of your letter and mail it to him, with a separate note telling him about your e-mail messages being rejected.

The Tribune is a clumsy corporation and probably has some bloated IT system that identifies half of its incoming e-mail as spam.

Don't attribute to malice what can be attributed to ineptitude.