PDA

View Full Version : Flubsessing: Well, this Trib article started off well...


caulfield12
02-09-2007, 08:39 AM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-070208sox,1,6475702.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

I wonder, if you looked back on them all, how many of the similar Cubs' attendance/"marketing" articles would contain the 2 obligatory mentions that Carlos Zambrano will most likely be gone after next season?

Are the Trib writers getting paid to insert that Buerhle and Dye aren't going to be around? At least they didn't throw in Joe Crede's status twice for good measure this time.

rdwj
02-09-2007, 09:11 AM
That's a hatchet job for sure. Anyone that doubs Trib bias - look at this mess

WizardsofOzzie
02-09-2007, 09:36 AM
Brilliant insight as always :rolleyes:

RedHeadPaleHoser
02-09-2007, 09:42 AM
In comparison, this gem is posted for the recent Cub ticket price increases:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-070206cubs,1,1957042.story?coll=cs-cubs-headlines

With this insight:

Despite finishing with the worst record in the National League, they could break their own ticket record this month. Signing free agent Alfonso Soriano to a $136 million deal, committing $300 million on other free agents and bringing in high-profile manager Lou Piniella have helped erase the bitter aftertaste of the '06 debacle.

So just spending $300M, not necessarily producing wins on the field helps erase the bad season?
Oh, that's what the Sox have been doing wrong all along, then. :rolleyes:

PatK
02-09-2007, 09:42 AM
What's funny is seeing this article after seeing an article earlier this week about the Cubs raising ticket prices the same amount.

Guess which one had the positive spin?

rdivaldi
02-09-2007, 09:52 AM
So let's digest the ticket increase headlines this last week.

"$2 more to root for Cubs"
"White Sox Strike While Iron is Hot"

The Cub headline is very benign, stating that you can root for your Cubs for $2 more. The Sox headline though implies that the Sox are striking (or attacking) their fans while they are hot (also implying that a cool-down period is on the horizon).

So basically one team is charging fans $2 more to continue "rooting" for them and the other team is "striking" their fans before they cool off.

But hey, there's no bias at the Trib, right?

AuroraSoxFan
02-09-2007, 10:01 AM
Can't say I'm surprised in the least bit on this one. They have quite a streak going. Earlier in the week you got to read how you could pay just a wee $ 2 more to "root" for their team showing so much promise (coming off 66 win season). Yesterday you got to read about the newly created curse. Today you get to read on how you can pay a damaging, nasty $2 more to see a team fizzling out (coming off 90 win season). Wonder what they'll come up with over the next few weeks.

WizardsofOzzie
02-09-2007, 10:03 AM
Can't say I'm surprised in the least bit on this one. They have quite a streak going. Earlier in the week you got to read how you could pay just a wee $ 2 more to "root" for their team showing so much promise (coming off 66 win season). Yesterday you got to read about the newly created curse. Today you get to read on how you can pay a damaging, nasty $2 more to see a team fizzling out (coming off 90 win season). Wonder what they'll come up with over the next few weeks.

It's been a couple weeks so they'll probably go back to the "Juan Uribe is a typical White Sox thug" stories

98navigator
02-09-2007, 10:05 AM
I don't see any bias in the Sox article. I also read the Cub article and it didn't seem to be overly positive. I thought Sullivan was being sarcastic when he talked about the Cubs losing 96 games only to spend money and raise ticket prices! He is, afterall, a Sox fan... The Suntimes doesn't have much positive to say either.

AuroraSoxFan
02-09-2007, 10:10 AM
I don't see any bias in the Sox article. I also read the Cub article and it didn't seem to be overly positive. I thought Sullivan was being sarcastic when he talked about the Cubs losing 96 games only to spend money and raise ticket prices! He is, afterall, a Sox fan... The Suntimes doesn't have much positive to say either.

I agree to the point about the Sun Times. Their articles are usually about even with the Trib in terms of positive/negative spins. I still think Trib is on quite a Cubbie kick. Seems to me they are doing whatever they can to create a positive "buzz" on their team while trying to be a "buzz kill" on the Sox. I am sure it will pick up quite a bit once ST kicks off.

rdivaldi
02-09-2007, 10:17 AM
He is, afterall, a Sox fan...

:thud:

You gotta be kidding me. Sully is probably one of the biggest homer Cub fan reporters in the entire city.

TommyJohn
02-09-2007, 10:21 AM
:thud:

You gotta be kidding me. Sully is probably one of the biggest homer Cub fan reporters in the entire city.

Paul Sullivan is a Cub fan through and through, no matter how many lies
he may have told Lip.

SoxFan78
02-09-2007, 10:24 AM
What a load of crap. If anybody doesnt believe the Cubune has a Cubs bias, believe it now.

rdivaldi
02-09-2007, 10:27 AM
Paul Sullivan is a Cub fan through and through, no matter how many lies
he may have told Lip.

He was completely unbearable when he was "demoted" to the Sox beat writer in 2001 or whenever it happened. It was like reading writing from a brooding teenager.

chisoxmike
02-09-2007, 10:37 AM
WHAT ****ING BULL****! WOW! UNREAL!

To answer the question asked the other day "Do you believe there is a Tribune bias?"... my answer is YES!

RedHeadPaleHoser
02-09-2007, 10:49 AM
To answer the question asked the other day "Do you believe there is a Tribune bias?"... my answer is YES!

I give props daily to www.cubune.com (http://www.cubune.com). I send anyone who tells me that there is no bias to that site; not because of what's written there, because it details the story count going back to April 2005.....and it documents the details in stories written in the Trib.

I also refer them here, but all I hear about is, "It's a White Sox site. Well, yeah, duh."

maurice
02-09-2007, 11:03 AM
I don't see any bias in the Sox article.

Caufield hit the nail on the head. The glaring problem with the article is this:
[I]t will cost a few dollars more in 2007 to see what could be the Mark Buehrle/Jermaine Dye farewell season . . . . Now, they believe 2007 will attract significant demand despite the trade of 17-game winner Freddy Garcia and the strong possibility Buehrle, who has won 97 games over the last seven seasons, and Dye, who finished fifth in the 2006 AL Most Valuable Player balloting, could leave as free agents after this season. . . .

The Dye and Buerhle references have absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the article. They are completely gratuitous references to the Trib's anti-Sox gameplan, which has been developing during the offseason. Contrary to the Trib party line, Sox fans don't think that Buehrle's contract situation in 2008 is a reason to stay away from the park in 2007.

Adding Dye to the formula is just frosting a very biased cake. Previous articles speculated (but stated the speculation as fact) that the Sox wouldn't re-sign any veteran pitchers. Attn: Mark Gonzales - Dye isn't a pitcher.

Hitmen77
02-09-2007, 11:04 AM
So let's digest the ticket increase headlines this last week.

"$2 more to root for Cubs"
"White Sox Strike While Iron is Hot"

The Cub headline is very benign, stating that you can root for your Cubs for $2 more. The Sox headline though implies that the Sox are striking (or attacking) their fans while they are hot (also implying that a cool-down period is on the horizon).

So basically one team is charging fans $2 more to continue "rooting" for them and the other team is "striking" their fans before they cool off.

But hey, there's no bias at the Trib, right?

That was my reaction too. Honestly, why is a $2 annual increase in ticket prices for an MLB game so surprising? I would expect that's the norm. To me "striking while the iron is hot" would be jacking up prices by about $10.


Paul Sullivan is a Cub fan through and through, no matter how many lies
he may have told Lip.

Absolutely. I haven't seen all his quotes, but the most I've heard from Sully was that he grew up a Sox fan. I doubt that's true now.

maurice
02-09-2007, 11:19 AM
This has been a busy offseason for Gonzales and friends. In addition to this type of nonsense, they mistranslated the Juan Uribe articles making them sound worse, told us that Garland was gone, and told us that Crede would be traded. In 2005, Gonzales told us (among other things) that the Sox would choke like the '93 Giants. I'm not quite sold on his ability to predict the future.

The saddest part is that he started off as a decent writer but cracked under the pressure of the Sox success and shrinking Trib stock prices.

Hitmen77
02-09-2007, 11:24 AM
Caufield hit the nail on the head. The glaring problem with the article is this:

Now, they believe 2007 will attract significant demand despite the trade of 17-game winner Freddy Garcia and the strong possibility Buehrle, who has won 97 games over the last seven seasons,


Amazing statement. It sounds like they are suggesting that fans might (should?) feel otherwise about the demand of Sox tickets for '07 because of the Garcia trade and Buehrle's contract status.

Funny how Freddy was never given the moniker "17-game winner" until he was traded. Until then it was all about how poorly Freddy pitched last year.

With Buehrle, why would fans be lukewarm about tickets if he's still here for another year. By the same logic, shouldn't Cub fans have a problem with Zambrano's likely final Cub season?

Also, in all this villifying the Sox for failing to extend Mark, the media completely ignores Mark's 6+ ERA in the 2nd half. It's not as simple as the Sox being "cheap". This is really a tough call for KW - does he give MB a big fat extension only to see that he's continuing the downward trend from last half of '06?

maurice
02-09-2007, 11:35 AM
Amazing statement. It sounds like they are suggesting that fans might (should?) feel otherwise about the demand of Sox tickets for '07 because of the Garcia trade and Buehrle's contract status.

That's exactly what they're saying. The "farewell season" BS is in the 2nd sentence of an article about ticket sales. Newspaper Article Writing 101 taught Gonzales that you don't put stuff that high up unless it's part of the main point you're trying to convey, namely: "Stop buying tix for the cheapo (but good) Sox and instead buy tix from the free-sepnding and lovable (but bad) team we own."

Funny how Freddy was never given the moniker "17-game winner" until he was traded. Until then it was all about how poorly Freddy pitched last year.

And how he lost several MPH off his FB and was in decline and never would be as good as he used to be.

Before Fingernails was traded, he was an unproven prospect unable to fill the huge void in the rotation left by Garcia. The day after Fingernails was traded, the Trib called him "a polished workhorse."

The Cubs crappy FA signings and alleged prospects give them "22 solid options" for their "good" pitching staff, but the Sox highly regarded prospects will leave holes in their rotation for years to come.
:rolleyes:

caulfield12
02-09-2007, 11:42 AM
White Sox nearly destroyed franchise by letting go 14 game winner and "future ace" Danny Wright go.

Sox fan on a car phone (paid for with welfare checks) from MLK Blvd. laments, "If only Porzio, Arnie Munoz, Felix Diaz, Josh Stewart and Rick White were still around, I'd feel much better about the future of this organization. I can't believe they're gone. I just wonder what their GM is doing when he's not belittling Frank Thomas or pontificating on the sorry state of the game economically."

caulfield12
02-09-2007, 11:43 AM
That's exactly what they're saying. The "farewell season" BS is in the 2nd sentence of an article about ticket sales. Newspaper Article Writing 101 taught Gonzales that you don't put stuff that high up unless it's part of the main point you're trying to convey, namely: "Stop buying tix for the cheapo (but good) Sox and instead buy tix from the free-sepnding and lovable (but bad) team we own."



And how he lost several MPH off his FB and was in decline and never would be as good as he used to be.

Before Fingernails was traded, he was an unproven prospect unable to fill the huge void in the rotation left by Garcia. The day after Fingernails was traded, the Trib called him "a polished workhorse."

The Cubs crappy FA signings and alleged prospects give them "22 solid options" for their "good" pitching staff, but the Sox highly regarded prospects will leave holes in their rotation for years to come.
:rolleyes:

Was the exact quote by Rogers "polished" or "proven" workhorse?

tebman
02-09-2007, 12:07 PM
The Dye and Buerhle references have absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the article. They are completely gratuitous references to the Trib's anti-Sox gameplan, which has been developing during the offseason. Contrary to the Trib party line, Sox fans don't think that Buehrle's contract situation in 2008 is a reason to stay away from the park in 2007.

Adding Dye to the formula is just frosting a very biased cake. Previous articles speculated (but stated the speculation as fact) that the Sox wouldn't re-sign any veteran pitchers. Attn: Mark Gonzales - Dye isn't a pitcher.

Aw, c'mon fellas -- the Tribune's just reporting here. Since it's been demonstrated beyond contradiction that White Sox fans are not in the same income level or social circle as Cub fans, raising ticket prices by $2.00 really is striking while the iron's hot. After all, a $2.00 increase is big money to a Sox fan.

Contrast this with the ability of Cub fans to make good use of their disposable income. Tribune readers are an attractive and comfortable lot, as simply everyone knows. A ticket-price increase for the privilege of celebrating a multi-hundred-million dollar investment is part of the tithe that Cub fans are more than happy to offer.



Ahem... I didn't think teal was necessary in those paragraphs. Back to reality: the Tribune and its press acolytes will continue to follow this narrative until there's a seismic shift (like new owners). They find the White Sox team, the fans, and the front office to have more rough edges and texture than they like.

It's easier to sell a Disneyfied form of baseball and local culture than it is to credit hard work and honest effort. What we're stuck with is a string of stories that paint the Sox as cheap, coarse, ungrateful to their customers, and opportunistic; Sox fans are depicted as suckers and thugs. It's so much simpler making pitches to advertising agencies when you can show an "us" and a "them."

Bah.

ewokpelts
02-09-2007, 04:27 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-070208sox,1,6475702.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

I wonder, if you looked back on them all, how many of the similar Cubs' attendance/"marketing" articles would contain the 2 obligatory mentions that Carlos Zambrano will most likely be gone after next season?

Are the Trib writers getting paid to insert that Buerhle and Dye aren't going to be around? At least they didn't throw in Joe Crede's status twice for good measure this time.2nd half of the article was like an ad for the sox

santo=dorf
02-09-2007, 05:15 PM
And how he lost several MPH off his FB and was in decline and never would be as good as he used to be.

One major decline for Freddy last year was his superb ERA in September after using a new pitch.

I can't wait for the "that's because he's in the NL" excuse when Freddy is pitching well in 2007.
Brilliant insight as always :rolleyes:
There were some interesting points in the article about the Sox attendance last season:
The increase comes one year after the Sox won 90 games but finished third in the competitive American League Central. Despite falling short of the postseason, the Sox drew a franchise-record 2,957,411 fans.

They ranked third in the league in home attendance—their highest finish since 1993 when they won the AL West.

The Sox also set a franchise record with 52 sellouts, including 22 consecutive full houses from July 5-Aug. 17. The Sox drew 75 home crowds of 30,000 or larger.

Their 26.2 percent increase in home attendance was second in the majors to the AL champion Tigers (28.2).

The Sox played to 89.9 percent capacity at U.S. Cellular Field.

bigfoot
02-09-2007, 06:11 PM
2nd half of the article was like an ad for the sox

However, many people do not follow any article to its conclusion. Especially if it would entail chasing down the remainder onto another inside page. Many times the "go to" page is incorrect, misidentified heading or just frustrated with the first few paragraphs.
Gonzo(and others at CubuneCo) have mastered the clever art of writing trash in the lead and following up with more positive things on the inside. Thereby insulating themselves from the accusations of bias. Any ad writer will tell you to capture your audience in the first line or two or you will not get your point across. Nobody's listening, watching or reading after the first paragraph and most will remember ONLY the headline, if anything at all.

caulfield12
02-09-2007, 06:13 PM
I love the mods and their vigilant monitoring of my flubsession. It makes me feel like someone really cares about me. I sincerely appreciate their concern. I'm Good Enough, Smart Enough, and Doggone It, People Like Me.

HotelWhiteSox
02-09-2007, 07:06 PM
What a joke, not just the Cubune (and their stupid TV show), a lot of the Chicago media. Wow, $2-3 more, I guess we'll all have to rob some Northsiders now right? Last time I checked all teams raise prices (prices for the Cubs and Bulls are a joke), and I can still watch the Sox, who gave me a WS Championship two years ago for about the same price as the Chicago Fire. Off with Jerry's head

Domeshot17
02-09-2007, 11:45 PM
Personally, I don't think the article was that bad. Yah a little shot about Dye and Buehlre, but its a true statement. There is a very good possibility in 2008 you will not be able to see Buehlre take the hill or Dye play RF. I know I will be trying to time things right to get to Buehlre's last home start.

I think they threw in some good stuff about Fan increase and showed how the Sox are pushing the Payroll to the level it should always be at.

rainbow6
02-10-2007, 12:02 AM
Would any of the folks offended by this article be willing to bet that:

A. The Cubs won't resign Zambrano

or

B: Buerhle and Dye will be on the roster next year.


Yeah, me neither.

If anything the 'farewell tour' remark validates their place in Chicago sports history...

Thus far, I'm standing behind Kenny Williams, but Sox fans better stop flinching when remarks like this are made....








Personally, I don't think the article was that bad. Yah a little shot about Dye and Buehlre, but its a true statement. There is a very good possibility in 2008 you will not be able to see Buehlre take the hill or Dye play RF. I know I will be trying to time things right to get to Buehlre's last home start.

I think they threw in some good stuff about Fan increase and showed how the Sox are pushing the Payroll to the level it should always be at.

rdivaldi
02-10-2007, 01:40 AM
Would any of the folks offended by this article be willing to bet that:

A. The Cubs won't resign Zambrano

or

B: Buerhle and Dye will be on the roster next year.


Yeah, me neither.

If anything the 'farewell tour' remark validates their place in Chicago sports history...

Thus far, I'm standing behind Kenny Williams, but Sox fans better stop flinching when remarks like this are made....

I'd be willing to bet that

A. Zambrano won't be a Cub, and
B. Dye will be on the White Sox

TheOldRoman
02-10-2007, 01:58 AM
I'd be willing to bet that

A. Zambrano won't be a Cub, and
B. Dye will be on the White Sox
Yeah, people don't realize that the Cubs had money for Zambrano, but they gave it to Marquis, Lilly, and the other horrible pitchers they signed. They signed those pitchers to stay "competetive", not to win. They won't be willing to throw the extra $20 or so million a year at Zambrano even though he is the only non-crappy starter they have (other than a healthy Prior, which is as common as Haley's comet).

Dye will be on the Sox in 08. As for Buehrle, everything we've heard through the press is meaningless at this point, and we are in pretty much the same spot with him as we were with Garland and Contreras last year. It is possible Buehrle might not come back, but at this point, the only ones who are sure it's true are the pants pisser who know more than a world championship GM.

WhiteSoxFan84
02-10-2007, 07:34 AM
I might be a little blind at 6:30AM, but I think you guys are overreacting and just choosing to read the Sox negatives and Cubs positives.

I don't think any of you mention how in the Cubs article, they talk about the Cubs slogan 25 years ago being "Building a New Tradition" and that this year's slogan is "Buying a New Tradition". That's just like saying they're trying to "Buy a World Series". Pretty negative, no?

Ease up my friends, this war is not worth fighting anymore. And outsiders may look at this, read both articles, and just completely disagree about how much bias there is.

caulfield12
02-10-2007, 10:52 AM
Didn't the same articles last year say that Konerko was "gone for sure," and that either Garland or Contreras wouldn't be signing long-term deals?

How right were those predictions?

Just read every article on the Cubs and see if they insert (at least twice per article) that Zambrano is likely leaving at the end of the year...they don't even have to add the addendum that it would be due entirely to their foolish spending this offseason, fans can read between the lines.

Find an article like that in the Trib, and we won't have this conversation anymore. You don't even need to do anything besides read the headlines.

It's almost like we've returned to 1919 all over again...that evil/miserly/sadistic Charles Comiskey is back again, out to gouge the fans and make a quick profit on them before tearing the team apart and rebuilding.

veeter
02-10-2007, 11:50 AM
Man, you guys are right on this stuff. I read the article yesterday and couldn't get to my computer. But I knew WSI would be all over it. You did not dissappoint me. I have to think though, that WSI and Jeff McMahon of cubune.com, are getting to these guys. I mean, when I read that article yesterday, I was thinking, this spin is so blatantly obvious, that I laughed at it, rather than getting angry. The Trib. might as well have said, "To all Sox fans on our biased asses, this is for you". I have no doubt they hear our voices and have become very irritated. Keep up the great work everybody.

maurice
02-13-2007, 01:46 PM
Yeah, people don't realize that the Cubs had money for Zambrano, but they gave it to Marquis, Lilly, and the other horrible pitchers they signed.

Yep, and now Zambrano has given them a 6-week window to come up with Zito money (at least).

The point of the free-spending offseason was to drive up the value of a 96-loss team to make it more marketable in the short term in the face of shrinking market share. The Trib has been trying to sell off its assets. They're not concerned about long-term success.