PDA

View Full Version : Phil Rogers takes shot at Puckett


Rooney4Prez56
03-07-2006, 12:23 PM
I never saw Kirby Puckett play. However, I send condolences to his family. I understand what a loss this was to baseball.

I heard about Phil Rogers's column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-060306rogersonkirby,1,6069988.column?coll=chi-sportscolumnistfront-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true) this morning on the Score. Rogers takes a shot at Kirby because he didn't give back to his community in Chicago even though he lived in Minnesota.

I ask you two questions.
Do athletes have to give back to the communities where they grew up, and does Rogers have the right to take a shot at Kirby Puckett the day after he died?

Hangar18
03-07-2006, 12:28 PM
I dont think he took a shot at Kirby at all. He pointed something out that alot of LAZY writers were afraid to point out. He pretty much left the city of chicago high and dry. Of course, he adopted Minneapolis as his hometown and its understandable, his career was there. Would have been nice to see him try and make a mark in chicagos south side community

BlackAndWhite
03-07-2006, 12:30 PM
Do athletes have to give back to the communities where they grew up,

No, although some (including me) would say that he gave a lot to his community just by coming from there and succeeding.

and does Rogers have the right to take a shot at Kirby Puckett the day after he died?

Of course he has the 'right' to. I have the same 'right' to say that he's a piece of human excrement for doing so.

Uncle_Patrick
03-07-2006, 12:42 PM
I ask you two questions.
Do athletes have to give back to the communities where they grew up,
No. It would be nice, but they are not obligated to do so.

and does Rogers have the right to take a shot at Kirby Puckett the day after he died?
Yes, he has the right, but he does not have the obligation to do so, either. Had Puckett quietly faded away after his retirement, we probably would not even see this type of article. However, since his retirement years were filled with scandal, its not really surprising to see the media continue to pile it on after he died.

LongLiveFisk
03-07-2006, 12:42 PM
Supposedly his wife (ex-wife eventually) wanted him to cut ties to his past. Sounds like he may have taken her advice, but who really knows?

chaerulez
03-07-2006, 12:45 PM
I dont think he took a shot at Kirby at all. He pointed something out that alot of LAZY writers were afraid to point out. He pretty much left the city of chicago high and dry. Of course, he adopted Minneapolis as his hometown and its understandable, his career was there. Would have been nice to see him try and make a mark in chicagos south side community

I agree with this statement 100 percent. Rogers kept the piece tasteful and asked a question most writers wouldn't. I know a lot of people think Rogers is a Cub loving loser (which I think is unfair, he had a big piece on espn.com that took shots at the Cubs handling of Wood and Prior last year), but when he wants to, he can write as good as anyone in the country.

NoNeckEra
03-07-2006, 12:51 PM
Ask people from Minnesota if Kirby has given back to the community and I think you'll hear a 100% "Yes".

Puckett started his college career at Bradley U in Peoria (my college btw), before going to Triton. He helped build Triton a new baseball stadium, but hasn't been seen or heard of at Bradley. Are my feelings hurt? No way. Just because you're successful in sports or business is doesn't mean you have to go back to all your roots and "pay back".

As for Rogers' column, the headline made it seem like it was going to be a rip job, but as it turned out, it was more of a review of his post baseball years, which wasn't all that pleasant. I guess Rogers feels this was his last chance to make his point about how he feels about Puckett.

D. TODD
03-07-2006, 01:06 PM
Puckett has given plenty to many people. I think it is very petty for people to even mention who he gave back to. He should be commended for the people he helped, not criticized for not helping everyone.

patbooyah
03-07-2006, 01:07 PM
Ask people from Minnesota if Kirby has given back to the community and I think you'll hear a 100% "Yes".

Puckett started his college career at Bradley U in Peoria (my college btw), before going to Triton. He helped build Triton a new baseball stadium, but hasn't been seen or heard of at Bradley. Are my feelings hurt? No way. Just because you're successful in sports or business is doesn't mean you have to go back to all your roots and "pay back".

As for Rogers' column, the headline made it seem like it was going to be a rip job, but as it turned out, it was more of a review of his post baseball years, which wasn't all that pleasant. I guess Rogers feels this was his last chance to make his point about how he feels about Puckett.

i believe that most of kirby's charitable work in minnesota was actually the result of his ex-wife. you may have noticed that after the divorce there was no longer the "kirby pucket eight ball invitional."

and i'm sorry, but helping to build "symonds/puckett stadium" hardly compares to directly affecting the hundreds of desperately poor kids who shared the same poverty as kirby's.

maurice
03-07-2006, 01:12 PM
1. Christ, Phil, couldn't you wait until the body was cold?

2. All accounts (including the accompanying Trib article) indicate that Puckett did tons for charity. How do you know he never gave anything to a poor S. Sider or S. Side charities? How did you manage to prove what is essentially an unprovable negative proposition? Besides, even if it's true, it's absolutely ridiculous for somebody to complain that his substantial charity was directed at the wrong causes. First, he wasn't obligated to donate anything. Second, the target of his giving is none of our ****ing business. It's not like he was donating to Illinois Nazis. Third, if it's somehow relevant, then all of his critics should list their charitable giving (both time and money), so we can compare and criticize. In particular, let us know all of the fantastic work you do for desperately poor folks on the S. Side.

3. This allegation was a relatively small part of a generally positive column. McGrath & Co. blew it out of proportion by making it a page 1 headline.

soxfanatlanta
03-07-2006, 01:35 PM
I hate to speculate what was going on in Phil Rogers' mind, but I really want to give him credit for trying something. I don't think that anybody is going to argue what Puckett did for baseball as a whole, and for his community through charitable work. The media in general will lionize him, and only mention the good things he did. However (like other have posted), he had his share of problems; the man was not perfect.

I think Rogers tried to illustrate this with the article, and take the hometown angle of how he "let down the kids" of his old stomping grounds. Unfortunately, what I read was a parting shot to a man who could no longer defend himself, and that is out of line, IMO. Phil is capable of writing very well, but that editorial stunk.

soxfan13
03-07-2006, 02:14 PM
Why do athletes have to give back to the community? The Robert Talyor homes didnt give anything to Kirby. He made it through his own determination and hard work.

Hangar18
03-07-2006, 02:18 PM
Why do athletes have to give back to the community? The Robert Talyor homes didnt give anything to Kirby. He made it through his own determination and hard work.


Thats a good point, but I think Rogers was on the money to just raise the question. I dont want to hear about "ex-chicagoan" "ex southsider"

TheVulture
03-07-2006, 03:19 PM
This confirms what I've long thought of Mr. Rogers - complete and utter piece of ****.

Flight #24
03-07-2006, 03:37 PM
Had Puckett given back to Chicago, the article could have read "Puckett, although beloved in Minnesota, never really settled in and contributed to that community, preferring to do so in his hometown".

Instead, since he gave back in MIN, we get this.

Seems like Phil's looking for a reason to poke at Kirby. If the story was that he didn't contrbute at all, maybe (although even then, I'd question the timing of it). But since he seems to have been a contributor to his "adopted home", I don't see Phil's point.

bahn1225
03-07-2006, 08:01 PM
1. Christ, Phil, couldn't you wait until the body was cold?

I concur.
When people ask "What's happening to our society?"
the answer is this is.
There is absolutly no excuse for a column such as this the day after the man passed.
This is just as bad as morons protesting at a funeral.

I put blame on our old pal Dan McGrath for this as well.
As editor he had to sign off on this story.
Maybe he figures it makes them look like independent thinkers
but in reality it shows that all turds end up floating together.

rookie
03-07-2006, 08:51 PM
1. Christ, Phil, couldn't you wait until the body was cold?

2. All accounts (including the accompanying Trib article) indicate that Puckett did tons for charity. How do you know he never gave anything to a poor S. Sider or S. Side charities? How did you manage to prove what is essentially an unprovable negative proposition? Besides, even if it's true, it's absolutely ridiculous for somebody to complain that his substantial charity was directed at the wrong causes. First, he wasn't obligated to donate anything. Second, the target of his giving is none of our ****ing business. It's not like he was donating to Illinois Nazis. Third, if it's somehow relevant, then all of his critics should list their charitable giving (both time and money), so we can compare and criticize. In particular, let us know all of the fantastic work you do for desperately poor folks on the S. Side.

3. This allegation was a relatively small part of a generally positive column. McGrath & Co. blew it out of proportion by making it a page 1 headline.

Amen

TomBradley72
03-07-2006, 09:53 PM
The headline in the Trubune: "It's a Shame He Forgot His Roots" Puckett lets down kids who followed the projects" writes Phil Rogers is disgusting. Is it really necessary to emphasize this angle so strongly on the front page of the sports within 24 hours of the death of a good but troubled man?

With all of the accomplishments in Kirby's life....to emphasize a personal decision to focus his charitable giving and time in the Minneapolis area where he raised his family vs. the neighborhood where he grew up his unfair and just out of balance with a great career and incredible rise out of the projects.

Kirby was far from perfect but he deserved better from the Trib and from Phil Rogers.

ma-gaga
03-07-2006, 10:06 PM
I think the article is terrible. It's not quite a "hack job", but it's pretty close. Phil Rogers lurks on this board and occasionally posts, but I don't understand what the hell the point of the article was. To get a reaction? Is that the goal of all writing now-days? To get the most outrageous reaction??

Sad.

Kirby had his demons, and they were pretty well publicized. To attempt to create new ones by "creating" some sort of is discussion topic about what he DIDN'T DO, is petty.

I felt crappy after I read this article.
If that's the reaction you wanted Phil, congrats.

IowaSox1971
03-08-2006, 02:10 AM
The headline in the Trubune: "It's a Shame He Forgot His Roots" Puckett lets down kids who followed the projects" writes Phil Rogers is disgusting. Is it really necessary to emphasize this angle so strongly on the front page of the sports within 24 hours of the death of a good but troubled man?

With all of the accomplishments in Kirby's life....to emphasize a personal decision to focus his charitable giving and time in the Minneapolis area where he raised his family vs. the neighborhood where he grew up his unfair and just out of balance with a great career and incredible rise out of the projects.

Kirby was far from perfect but he deserved better from the Trib and from Phil Rogers.


I totally agree that this was a ridiculous column by Rogers. It's not the first time he's written one, and it certainly won't be the last.

If, God forbid, Ernie Banks, Ron Santo or Ryne Sandberg were to die, would Rogers' column the next day be ripping them for not giving enough to charity in a particular town or city?

TDog
03-08-2006, 02:33 AM
Supposedly his wife (ex-wife eventually) wanted him to cut ties to his past. Sounds like he may have taken her advice, but who really knows?

Eventually he cut his ties to her.

ComiskeyBrewer
03-08-2006, 07:56 AM
Can someone post the article. It won't let me log in.:angry:

SOXSINCE'70
03-08-2006, 08:32 AM
I concur.
When people ask "What's happening to our society?"
the answer is this is.
There is absolutly no excuse for a column such as this the day after the man passed.
This is just as bad as morons protesting at a funeral.

I put blame on our old pal Dan McGrath for this as well.
As editor he had to sign off on this story.
Maybe he figures it makes them look like independent thinkers
but in reality it shows that all turds end up floating together.

:hawk
"YYYYYESSSS!!":nod: :thumbsup:

dickallen15
03-08-2006, 08:41 AM
Why is it when someone dies and people review their life, its only proper to remember the good and completely ignore what could be characterized as not so good? Let the people report the whole story. Kirby Puckett the man died. A big part of him was a fun loving baseball player everyone got a kick out of watching. Another part of him was apparently very dark. There are too many incidents and accusations to ignore.

ComiskeyBrewer
03-08-2006, 09:22 AM
Why is it when someone dies and people review their life, its only proper to remember the good and completely ignore what could be characterized as not so good? Let the people report the whole story. Kirby Puckett the man died. A big part of him was a fun loving baseball player everyone got a kick out of watching. Another part of him was apparently very dark. There are too many incidents and accusations to ignore.

I think it has to do with the fact that it came out 2 days after the guy died(for me anyways). My personal belief is, atleast wait until the guy has been buried before you talk ill of him. Atleast wait until they are done mourning the guy.

Flight #24
03-08-2006, 09:28 AM
Why is it when someone dies and people review their life, its only proper to remember the good and completely ignore what could be characterized as not so good? Let the people report the whole story. Kirby Puckett the man died. A big part of him was a fun loving baseball player everyone got a kick out of watching. Another part of him was apparently very dark. There are too many incidents and accusations to ignore.

It's no big deal to paint the whole picture. But with anyone, you can find flaws if you're looking for them. The crux of the article was that he didn't "give back to his hometown", which is a pretty big stretch since by al accounts, he was fairly active in the community, just in MIN (his adopted hometown, and where he lived & played for much of his life) rather than CHI. That's not "reporting the bad with the good", that's "finding something to take a negative angle on".

The timing of that makes it even worse. For shame Phil, for shame.

samram
03-08-2006, 09:51 AM
It's no big deal to paint the whole picture. But with anyone, you can find flaws if you're looking for them. The crux of the article was that he didn't "give back to his hometown", which is a pretty big stretch since by al accounts, he was fairly active in the community, just in MIN (his adopted hometown, and where he lived & played for much of his life) rather than CHI. That's not "reporting the bad with the good", that's "finding something to take a negative angle on".

The timing of that makes it even worse. For shame Phil, for shame.

I agree that what Rogers discussed in the article seemed like fishing for something negative. However, there are a lot of people who seem to be willing to forget that Kirby was not always the smiling, friendly baseball player that so many, including me, loved to watch play. We all have flaws, but the flaws in this case are not just having an extra drink or liking to gamble excessively. I can't defend Rogers though, since he decided to focus on something that seemed to be a matter of personal preference, which was inappropriate given the timing.

Hangar18
03-08-2006, 10:06 AM
I agree that what Rogers discussed in the article seemed like fishing for something negative. However, there are a lot of people who seem to be willing to forget that Kirby was not always the smiling, friendly baseball player that so many, including me, loved to watch play. We all have flaws, but the flaws in this case are not just having an extra drink or liking to gamble excessively. I can't defend Rogers though, since he decided to focus on something that seemed to be a matter of personal preference, which was inappropriate given the timing.


hey, this is what I wanted to read. I knew there seemed to be another "side" and Puckett was (like that other team) media loved and noone is going to report whats happening with him. Thats fine, i for the most part liked Kirby ....................this wasnt a bad article

Iwritecode
03-08-2006, 11:11 AM
Can someone post the article. It won't let me log in.:angry:

There are copyright issues with that. You can probably find a login id on Bugmenot.

TomBradley72
03-08-2006, 11:29 AM
hey, this is what I wanted to read. I knew there seemed to be another "side" and Puckett was (like that other team) media loved and noone is going to report whats happening with him. Thats fine, i for the most part liked Kirby ....................this wasnt a bad article

The headline is what I had a problem with....kind of a "Rolling Towards Danger" or "Somber Streak"...but in this case around a man who had died within the last 48 hours. The actual body of the article didn't really support the headline. Seemed unnecessary...especially when you consider all of the family and friends he has in Chicago. When Fergie Jenkins passes will the Trib run headlines around how he smoked marijuana? When Sammy passes will their be headlines around steroids and the rum bottle? Rumors abour Jack Brickhouse (we've all heard them) and Harry Caray(we've heard them too)? Seemed like a total lack of compassion from my perspective.

Railsplitter
03-08-2006, 11:37 AM
I'd like to know when and how sports writers were annointed to tell athletes how to live thier lives. You don't see entertainment reporters telling actors, singers, and musicians how to live thier lives.

dickallen15
03-08-2006, 12:02 PM
I'd like to know when and how sports writers were annointed to tell athletes how to live thier lives. You don't see entertainment reporters telling actors, singers, and musicians how to live thier lives.

Rogers simply stated that it was a shame Kirby didn't put any resources into helping the kids that came from the same place he did. If anyone would know how tough it is for those kids, it would have been Kirby. He also said it wasn't a crime. The column was mostly complimentary. From reading some of the posts on this thread if Sammy Sosa were to drop dead tomorrow anyone who even thinks about steriods or cheating belongs in sensitivity school.

PaleHoseGeorge
03-08-2006, 12:10 PM
Rogers simply stated that it was a shame Kirby didn't put any resources into helping the kids that came from the same place he did. If anyone would know how tough it is for those kids, it would have been Kirby. He also said it wasn't a crime. The column was mostly complimentary. From reading some of the posts on this thread if Sammy Sosa were to drop dead tomorrow anyone who even thinks about steriods or cheating belongs in sensitivity school.

Should it count that Kirby is revered in Minnesota precisely because he did so much for the community there? Rogers was silent on this matter. I think it's relevant.

I agree Rogers' piece was mostly complimentary. The headline is misleading and for that the blame falls squarely on Rogers' editor, Dan McGrath.

:cubune

ComiskeyBrewer
03-08-2006, 01:18 PM
There are copyright issues with that. You can probably find a login id on Bugmenot.

yea, i realized that after i posted. I have to remember not to post before coffee in the mornin.

ma-gaga
03-08-2006, 02:57 PM
From reading some of the posts on this thread if Sammy Sosa were to drop dead tomorrow anyone who even thinks about steriods or cheating belongs in sensitivity school.

Well, if Phil Rogers dropped dead tomorrow I would try to refrain from taking any 'shots' at him. There were a 1000 different opinions/angles/articles on Puckett's death. This is one of the worst, and he get's paid to write this. It's a bit sickening.

I feel the same way about Carl Pohlad. It will be a sad day when he dies, as despicable and greedy of a creature that he is. But for at least a week, he ought to be remembered with reverence and grace, and for the good things that he accomplished in his life.

:gulp:

IowaSox1971
03-08-2006, 06:31 PM
Rogers simply stated that it was a shame Kirby didn't put any resources into helping the kids that came from the same place he did. If anyone would know how tough it is for those kids, it would have been Kirby. He also said it wasn't a crime. The column was mostly complimentary. From reading some of the posts on this thread if Sammy Sosa were to drop dead tomorrow anyone who even thinks about steriods or cheating belongs in sensitivity school.



It's silly to make Puckett's alleged lack of charity donations toward the Chicago area such a big part of the column. By all accounts, Kirby was generous with his time and money in the Minneapolis area. He also helped provide a baseball field at Triton College. And during his playing career, at least, he might have been one of baseball's best ambassadors ever.

For all we know, Kirby might have given $1 million to Minneapolis organizations. And that's fine. I would rather have him do that than give $100,000 to Minneapolis and $100,000 to Chicago. The total sum he gave up for charity should be the important thing, not where he decided to put his money. It makes sense that he would give the most to the community where people bought the most tickets to watch him play.

Also, perhaps he didn't give much to Chicago-area charities because of the city's reputation for corruption. Maybe he wondered if his money would go to where it was intended to go if he gave to Chicago. I choose to avoid giving to the United Way in favor of other charities because some top United Way officials were caught in an embezzlement scheme about 15 years ago. I just feel more comfortable donating to other organizations, and perhaps Kirby felt more comfortable giving to Minneapolis groups. This does not make him a bad guy, and it should not have been such a prominent part of the column.

I don't have a problem with Rogers bringing up the negative things about the legal charges Puckett faced after his career ended. Just about every writer has done that. But ripping the guy because he gave money to some groups over others is really a reach.

TDog
03-08-2006, 06:42 PM
Why is it when someone dies and people review their life, its only proper to remember the good and completely ignore what could be characterized as not so good? Let the people report the whole story. Kirby Puckett the man died. A big part of him was a fun loving baseball player everyone got a kick out of watching. Another part of him was apparently very dark. There are too many incidents and accusations to ignore.

Actually, people have been writing unflattering stories about Kirby Puckett for years because it was contrary to his image. There are more of them and they are getting wider circulation with his death. Puckett's mistakes in his life led to his downfall and serve as an object lesson for us all.

When Barry Bonds dies, people will probably be upset because more writers didn't focus on what a jerk he was.