Dan Shaughnessy: Taking a dump in your mouth one column at a time

[TheoShmeo]

I have a good friend who used to cover the Yankees beat and is now a baseball columnist for one of the NY papers.  He grew up a Yankees fan.
 
His take is that it's not that he can't root for the Yankees to be effective at his job.  It's that beat writers become fans of meeting deadlines more than anything else.  The pressure to meet deadlines is great and overwhelms the fan interest pretty quickly.  And he said that knowing the players personally -- many of whom are dicks or, at minimum, treat the writers poorly -- deadens the rooting interest, as well.
 
For what it's worth, he's no fan of Shaughnessy, but he does similarly claim that he roots mostly for the good story. 

 

[joe dokes]

I have a good friend who used to cover the Yankees beat and is now a baseball columnist for one of the NY papers.  He grew up a Yankees fan.
 
His take is that it's not that he can't root for the Yankees to be effective at his job.  It's that beat writers become fans of meeting deadlines more than anything else.  The pressure do meet the goals overwhelms the fan interest pretty quickly.  And he said that knowing the players personally -- many of whom are dicks or, at minimum, treat the writers poorly -- deadens the rooting interest, as well.
 
For what it's worth, he's no fan of Shaughnessy, but he does similarly claim that he roots mostly for the good story. 

 
 
I dont think there's anything objectionable about the concept of "rooting for the good story."  Nor do I doubt that Shaughnessy's fandom takes a distant back seat to that.  What his piece ignores is that the bulk of the criticism aimed at him ISNT about his "rooting interests." Its about the quality fo his work, and for me anyway, its about the unshakable feeling I get that he actually invents many of his "opinions" just to piss people off.  The ones where he's dealing on a personal grudge are obvious. But those are the exception. (But at least they're sincere). The trolling is the norm.
 
Its not surprising that he refers to fans he met in Miami as the impetus for this.  At the risk of insulting anyone here......if you are a Patriots fan living in Florida, you are probably old and recall the rooting reporter days..  If you are a Pats fan living here and traveling to Miami for the game, you are exactly the type of person who thinks that beat writers should root for the home team.  Those are the people he talked to.  Those are the people who complain about his insufficient cheering. Meanwhile, the remaining 85% of the relevant voting pool just think he sucks because they think he sucks. He sucks for a different reason that Cafardo sucks; or Peter King. But he sucks. And it has nothing to do with the fact that he doesn't cheer in the press box.

 

[ifmanis5]

Everybody in the media (sports or otherwise) roots for a 'good story' because good stories make your job easier (always a plus) and it brings more eyeballs, more traffic, more attention and more money. Everybody says they root for the 'good story.' It's like saying 'the sky is blue.' Of course it is. No shit.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Calling Buffalo Head, please report to the thread post-haste.

 

[Corsi]

Kissing Suzy Kolber joins the fray.
 
 

Dan started today off with a blue whale’s turd of a column telling his readers why other writers who aren’t as brave as Dan Shaughnessy are bad. It is simply too putrid to ignore. So here’s my response: Fuck you, Dan Shaughnessy.

http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/2013/12/week-f-k-dan-shaughnessy.html

 

[TheoShmeo]

 
 
I dont think there's anything objectionable about the concept of "rooting for the good story."  Nor do I doubt that Shaughnessy's fandom takes a distant back seat to that.  What his piece ignores is that the bulk of the criticism aimed at him ISNT about his "rooting interests." Its about the quality fo his work, and for me anyway, its about the unshakable feeling I get that he actually invents many of his "opinions" just to piss people off.  The ones where he's dealing on a personal grudge are obvious. But those are the exception. (But at least they're sincere). The trolling is the norm.
 

I must say that I agree wholeheartedly.  The CHB is everything you said he is and really worse than that. 
 
I was just saying that other non-troll writers have that basic view about the story.  And frankly, that's probably quite common and the CHB is probably just ripping off that mantra from others who can recite it honestly.

 

[joe dokes]

I must say that I agree wholeheartedly.  The CHB is everything you said he is and really worse than that. 
 
I was just saying that other non-troll writers have that basic view about the story.  And frankly, that's probably quite common and the CHB is probably just ripping off that mantra from others who can recite it honestly.

 
You;re right. The others just dont feel the need to display their "objectivity card," probably because they dont catch quite the level of shit he does, which is probably because they are better at their jobs.  He's only doing it to deflect criticism. But it's a strawman.   He's chewing on a breath mint when most people are telling him his feet smell.

 

[riboflav]

According to a poster at BSMW, Ben Volin praised the piece as well. Barf.

 

[JimD]

 
Kissing Suzy Kolber joins the fray.
 
 
 
http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/2013/12/week-f-k-dan-shaughnessy.html
 

 
Absolutely loved this line:
 

With nary a shred of emotion, Gerard barks, “I don’t care.’’
 
That’s it right there, people. It’s not the marshal’s job to determine Dr. Kimble’s guilt or innocence. The marshal’s job is to bring him in.
 
That’s me. I write the stories. I care about the stories. But when my head hits the pillow at the end of the day it does . . . not . . . matter to me if the Patriots won or lost.
 
You brave, brave man. YOU ARE THE GUARDIAN OF THE GAME. Great job, by the way, keeping steroids out of baseball when players were using in front of you for 15 years.

 

[Jordu]

Few things are more tedious and sanctimonious than journalists writing about themselves.

 

[joyofsox]

October 29, 2004
Dan Shaughnessy: "Personally, I already miss the old Red Sox a little." 
 
URL no longer works, but it was:
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2004/10/29/the_feeling_is_unbelievable
 

 

[riboflav]

The irony is that they may root for Boston teams to lose but most Boston media didn't become "big" themselves until the local teams started this incredible winning streak over the past 12 years. 

 

[Buster Olney the Lonely]

October 29, 2004
Dan Shaughnessy: "Personally, I already miss the old Red Sox a little." 
 
URL no longer works, but it was:
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2004/10/29/the_feeling_is_unbelievable
 

Of course you do, Dan. That curse nonsense was your mealticket for more than a decade.

 

[nattysez]

Every single Globe twitter account has been tweeting out a link to that article today.  Click-bait, pure and simple.

 

[joe dokes]

Every single Globe twitter account has been tweeting out a link to that article today.  Click-bait, pure and simple.

 
NewsFlash:  Dear Globies: If I think your work sucks (notice I didn't say "if I hate you," I dont know you well enough to hate you) it is NOT because you don't root for the home team. It's because it's sloppily written or poorly researched or contains factual inaccuracies or opinions not grounded in actual facts. Or maybe it's an opinion piece that doesn't actually express an opinion.  Or maybe it's a piece that insults my intelligence by assuming that your average talk radio caller represents me (or anything close to a majority of the fan population.)  Or maybe it's *exactly* like something you wrote 2 months ago.  Or *exactly* the opposite of what you wrote 2 paragraphs ago.
 

The irony is that they may root for Boston teams to lose but most Boston media didn't become "big" themselves until the local teams started this incredible winning streak over the past 12 years. 
 

Great point; perhaps proven by the exceptions being Gammons and Ryan who were Hall of Famers regardless of the product they were covering. 

 

[Kliq]

Shaughnessy strikes me as someone who is supposed to play some sort of role in the Boston Globe. The pessimist of sorts. But when people call him out on his potentially fabricated opinions and his constant buzzkill, he will get super-offended and go over the top defending himself. I think he is on the Globe to supply a different opinion then the other writers, and play the devils advocate. That is fine, but you can't act like a dick when people start to call you out on your shit.

 

[ForKeeps]

I think Dan senses the the end is nigh. I'm listening to his interview on D&C and he sounds downright Chass-ian. His response to the critics of this recent piece? "The website guys aren't very happy with me." If you can't address someone's actual points, just be derisive. Now that's journalistic integrity.

 

[CoffeeNerdness]

Ultimately Dan is a sad man who lives what must be a tortured existence.  The guy grew up in MA and has written for the Globe over 30 years and he actually wants anyone to believe he doesn't love, with all the fibers of his being, the hometown squads?  Poor guy missed one of the best decades in sports history to be a fan of any group of professional sports teams being the resident grump.

 

[Reverend]

Ultimately Dan is a sad man who lives what must be a tortured existence.  The guy grew up in MA and has written for the Globe over 30 years and he actually wants anyone to believe he doesn't love, with all the fibers of his being, the hometown squads?  Poor guy missed one of the best decades in sports history to be a fan of any group of professional sports teams being the resident grump.

 
Wow. This actually gave me a moment of pause.
 
That would really be fucking tragic. And as has been mentioned, Ryan and Gammo are HoF writers without who seemed to enjoy a moment or two of the home town boys.
 
I suppose maybe Dan enjoyed the good stories of 2004, 2001, etc, but I've got friends from Michigan and NJ who did too; it's not really the same.

 

[Quiddity]

Dan had built up an empire that was dedicated to the Sox losing. The more the Sox lost and the more soul crushing it was, the more money he'd make. Then the 2004 Sox come around and blow that up forever.
 
The Pats snubbed him for a breakfast 15 years ago. The gall! No wonder he couldn't enjoy any of those championships.

By the time the Celtics and Bruins won championships his soul was gone. No enjoyment could be derived from any Boston sports team success.

 

[Granite Sox]

 
 
Picked-up pieces while hiring a food taster after reading fanboy blogs, tweets, and e-mails . . .  

If I ran the Yankees, I’d have listened to Nick Cafardo and moved Derek Jeter to second and signed Stephen Drew.

 
We're under attack!*
 
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/12/20/dan-shaughnessy-picked-pieces/fcl2y9QxqYQTivkzP9WkcL/story.html (paywalled)
 
*(I know we are not a blog)

 

[ivanvamp]

I don't understand the hubbub with Shank's piece.  It's just another whiny piece of "look at me, look at me!"  Nothing new here.  

 

[bankshot1]

Ebenezer Shaughnessy is at it again. Seriously the guy has become a caricature of himself.
 
While we can debate the merits and demerits of a 1 year extension to Ortiz, a 1-year extension and resigning Tiny Tim Lester are not mutually exclusive
 
Screw Santa, screw Ortiz (again) screw the fans
 
bah,  buy my books

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

 
Wow. This actually gave me a moment of pause.
 
That would really be fucking tragic. And as has been mentioned, Ryan and Gammo are HoF writers without who seemed to enjoy a moment or two of the home town boys.
 
I suppose maybe Dan enjoyed the good stories of 2004, 2001, etc, but I've got friends from Michigan and NJ who did too; it's not really the same.

I strongly suspect Dan only enjoyed the "good" stories from 1986 and 2003. I very highly doubt he enjoyed anything from the good stories of 2001, 2004 and so forth.
 
It's illuminating to go back and read some of his front page stories when the local team won unexpectedly. The one that stands out is the Pats first SB win, which was clearly written before the end of the game with the idea that they lost in mind, and then had some late changed made to it. "This time the ball didn't roll through anyone's legs," etc. He needed to make sure to remind us of all the bad things that had happened in the past.
 
He's a pathetic man. As noted above, he presumably got into this business because he liked sports, yet took such an angle for his career that he's deprived himself of all enjoyment of seeing those teams win. After all the years of him trying to make fans miserable, that fact makes me happy.

 

[FelixMantilla]

He's trolled you guys in again.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

He's trolled you guys in again.

 
This.
 
Who cares what CHB has to say about anything? He's not writing for us, he's writing for the old bastards that still buy the Boston Globe every day and like to judge pitchers' worth based on wins, wonders why the hook shot isn't used in basketball and constantly calls the Baltimore Ravens the Baltimore Colts. Shaugnnesy understand who his audience is and when he needs to stir up some shit from the non-tapioca set, he writes stuff like this.
 
And to be honest, I read him if I'm waiting at the barber shop or on Sunday (when I get the Globe delivered) and his stuff hasn't been that bad. A lot of his stuff that I've read is positive (for him at least), but he trolls. The guy has literally been trolling since the 1980s, when do you stop getting angry and let it go? He's never going to admit that he's wrong, you can give him reams and reams of evidence backing your point and he's just going to call you a "fan boy" or "a basement dwelling nerd".
 
That being said, he's not even the worst Globe writer on staff.
 

 
"This time the ball didn't roll through anyone's legs," etc. He needed to make sure to remind us of all the bad things that had happened in the past.
 

 
SJH, you can't be so freaking sensitive. I can guarantee that 90% of writers wrote something similar to that lede when the 2001 Patriots won the Super Bowl by beating the Rams on a last-second field goal. Let's put that in context for a second: for over 15 years the Boston sports scene hadn't sniffed a championship and here comes the Patriots (THE FUCKING PATRIOTS -- the joke of the league for their entire existence) lead by a sixth-round quarterback and a grumpy, paranoid guy who was fired by the Browns, who get all the breaks and bounces in the playoffs and beat the heavily-favored Greatest Show on Turf on a play with less than five seconds to go.
 
It can be argued that the Boston sports scene karma pivoted on that moment right there (or the Tuck Rule Game, whatever) so yeah, reminding us of the shit we had to slog through to get to that height is more than appropriate.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

As a fan, when I watched the Pats win the Super Bowl, the LAST FUCKING THING ON MY MIND was the Buckner play. I wasn't thinking about it at all and I'll bet you weren't either. And no one else was. Only Dan.
 
You can't tell me that the other writers wrote the same thing. Only Dan would remember a painful sports moment in the immediate wake of a tremendous one.

 

[tims4wins]

As a fan, when I watched the Pats win the Super Bowl, the LAST FUCKING THING ON MY MIND was the Buckner play. I wasn't thinking about it at all and I'll bet you weren't either. And no one else was. Only Dan.
 
You can't tell me that the other writers wrote the same thing. Only Dan would remember a painful sports moment in the immediate wake of a tremendous one.

 
I have to admit, after the Tebucky Jones fumble return for a TD that would have made it 24-3 was overturned, and then the Rams scored twice in a couple minutes to tie it, I actually did think of Buckner (the holding call on McGinest being the comparison). But maybe me and Shank are the only ones.

 

[Dummy Hoy]

I think I've expressed this before, but I'm convinced what happened to Dan was that he grew up a HUGE fanboy of the local teams (Sox especially). When he got hired at the Baltimore Sun in 1977 he was young, idealistic, and naive. I think it was such a shock to his system that his heroes were stupid assholes (as most baseball players are) that he became embittered, suspicious, and antagonistic in response to their lack of courtesy, respect, and deference. Getting personally tied into the Sox fortunes via the 'curse' only warped his priorities even more. I've heard numerous stories over the years about Shank bitching about having to be at the ball park/stadium/arena and rooting for the games to end. I don't think he enjoys himself any more unless he's trolling folks.
 
I realize there's a lot of presumption and slander in that paragraph, but I'm sure Dan-o wouldn't have it any other way.
 
Best thing I ever did was to stop reading him. The only reason I brought this column up was that the fucking Globe's twitter feed kept trying to get me to click the link.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

 
I have to admit, after the Tebucky Jones fumble return for a TD that would have made it 24-3 was overturned, and then the Rams scored twice in a couple minutes to tie it, I actually did think of Buckner (the holding call on McGinest being the comparison). But maybe me and Shank are the only ones.

 
Not once, my friend. Not once. God's honest truth.
 
McGinest holding Faulk didn't bother me because if he didn't then Marshall's open for an easy TD.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

As a fan, when I watched the Pats win the Super Bowl, the LAST FUCKING THING ON MY MIND was the Buckner play. I wasn't thinking about it at all and I'll bet you weren't either. And no one else was. Only Dan.
 
You can't tell me that the other writers wrote the same thing. Only Dan would remember a painful sports moment in the immediate wake of a tremendous one.
 

 
Okay, that's probably true about you. But I remember talking with my friends after the game and saying how awesome it was that we got a little luck on our side and we won a close one, the underlying meaning is that the ball didn't squirt through Buckner's legs this time or a banjo-hitting shortstop didn't put one over the wall or Glenn Wesley didn't miss a completely wide open net or Bill Parcells decided to keep kicking the ball to Desmond Howard or the litany of stuff that befell that Boston sports scene since we were alive. And IIRC as the weeks wore on, that was the prevailing thoughts on the airwaves and in print, we finally got some luck on our side.
 
And the bolded part? Are you serious? This was the easiest, EASIEST angle to take immediately after the SB win. I remember in the late 90s, maybe 2000 the Herald had a 40-pt headline on their sports section: "LOSERVILLE" and Gerry Callahan spent at least 1,000 words talking about how the Boston sports scene was a barren wasteland and how there was literally no hope for any of the four major teams in the near future, so we had better get used to it.
 
Shank wasn't the only person who constantly dredged up the past. He may have been the pied piper of the misery, he may have profited the most from it, but he was definitely not the only one singing that tune. Today it's like an Up With People concert compared to what it was in the 90s.

 

[tims4wins]

 
Not once, my friend. Not once. God's honest truth.
 
McGinest holding Faulk didn't bother me because if he didn't then Marshall's open for an easy TD.

 
In retrospect, sure. In the moment, Summerall never even mentioned the flag on the field until Tebucky was across the goal line. There was no "flag" icon by the time and score graphic either. I literally thought the game was over as he was racing down the sideline. It may have been the happiest moment of my life up until that point. Holy shit was I excited. I think I hit my head on the ceiling jumping on the couch. And them Summerall... "and there's a flag on the play". Jesus christ what a 180.

 

[joe dokes]

I think I've expressed this before, but I'm convinced what happened to Dan was that he grew up a HUGE fanboy of the local teams (Sox especially). When he got hired at the Baltimore Sun in 1977 he was young, idealistic, and naive. I think it was such a shock to his system that his heroes were stupid assholes (as most baseball players are) that he became embittered, suspicious, and antagonistic in response to their lack of courtesy, respect, and deference. Getting personally tied into the Sox fortunes via the 'curse' only warped his priorities even more. I've heard numerous stories over the years about Shank bitching about having to be at the ball park/stadium/arena and rooting for the games to end. I don't think he enjoys himself any more unless he's trolling folks.
 

 
 
The irony there, if I remember my history, is that his first gig with the Glob was Celtics beat guy just as the Bird era was really taking off.  Other than the Milwaukee-Fitch-sweep debacle, it was nothing but winning and greatness.

 

[Granite Sox]

I don't feel trolled at all... I'm amused.  He's so hideously and transparently cynical that he stands alone.  As I posted a few days ago, he's a miserable, self-serving schmuck.  I generally pity people like this, but not him.
 
He's got a standing reservation in my DIAF penalty box.

 

[Eric1984]

 
Okay, that's probably true about you. But I remember talking with my friends after the game and saying how awesome it was that we got a little luck on our side and we won a close one, the underlying meaning is that the ball didn't squirt through Buckner's legs this time or a banjo-hitting shortstop didn't put one over the wall or Glenn Wesley didn't miss a completely wide open net or Bill Parcells decided to keep kicking the ball to Desmond Howard or the litany of stuff that befell that Boston sports scene since we were alive. And IIRC as the weeks wore on, that was the prevailing thoughts on the airwaves and in print, we finally got some luck on our side.
 
And the bolded part? Are you serious? This was the easiest, EASIEST angle to take immediately after the SB win. I remember in the late 90s, maybe 2000 the Herald had a 40-pt headline on their sports section: "LOSERVILLE" and Gerry Callahan spent at least 1,000 words talking about how the Boston sports scene was a barren wasteland and how there was literally no hope for any of the four major teams in the near future, so we had better get used to it.
 
Shank wasn't the only person who constantly dredged up the past. He may have been the pied piper of the misery, he may have profited the most from it, but he was definitely not the only one singing that tune. Today it's like an Up With People concert compared to what it was in the 90s.

 
Yup. SB36 came just a few months after they held a City Hall Plaza rally for Bourque winning a Cup with another team. And the shitshow that was the Lansing/Bichette/Everett 2001 Red Sox which was, until 2012, the most unlikeable Boston team I can recall in any sport, except MAYBE the 1990 Patriots. It was an awful, awful time. That made the Super Bowl feel that much more incredible. 

 

[Humphrey]

 
This.
 
Who cares what CHB has to say about anything? He's not writing for us, he's writing for the old bastards that still buy the Boston Globe every day and like to judge pitchers' worth based on wins, wonders why the hook shot isn't used in basketball and constantly calls the Baltimore Ravens the Baltimore Colts. Shaugnnesy understand who his audience is and when he needs to stir up some shit from the non-tapioca set, he writes stuff like this.
 
And to be honest, I read him if I'm waiting at the barber shop or on Sunday (when I get the Globe delivered) and his stuff hasn't been that bad. A lot of his stuff that I've read is positive (for him at least), but he trolls. The guy has literally been trolling since the 1980s, when do you stop getting angry and let it go? He's never going to admit that he's wrong, you can give him reams and reams of evidence backing your point and he's just going to call you a "fan boy" or "a basement dwelling nerd".
 
That being said, he's not even the worst Globe writer on staff.
 
 
SJH, you can't be so freaking sensitive. I can guarantee that 90% of writers wrote something similar to that lede when the 2001 Patriots won the Super Bowl by beating the Rams on a last-second field goal. Let's put that in context for a second: for over 15 years the Boston sports scene hadn't sniffed a championship and here comes the Patriots (THE FUCKING PATRIOTS -- the joke of the league for their entire existence) lead by a sixth-round quarterback and a grumpy, paranoid guy who was fired by the Browns, who get all the breaks and bounces in the playoffs and beat the heavily-favored Greatest Show on Turf on a play with less than five seconds to go.
 
It can be argued that the Boston sports scene karma pivoted on that moment right there (or the Tuck Rule Game, whatever) so yeah, reminding us of the shit we had to slog through to get to that height is more than appropriate.
 
 

Right or wrong, that particular article was one of those moments with me where I realized that I was better off not reading what he wrote, so I often skim over his crap or just plain don't read it.
 
Funny, but I had a similar moment with Borges.  It was right before he was fired.   He wrote something nationally about Adelius Thomas being the cream of the free agent crop during the week; the Pats subsequently signed him; then on Sunday in the Globe he trashed the signing (turns out he was more right than wrong, but that's not the point).  

 

[Kliq]

If I ever get a column in a newspaper, the first thing I'm going to make sure of is that I go out there are troll all those dumb internet fans.
 
We talked yesterday about how he was the anti-fan, but today he went out there a legit trolled us. He literally wrote an article that basically dismissed the two biggest Boston sports victories of the last six months (Sox in world series, Pats over Denver) as flukes. The fact that he would use his position as a nationaly recognized writer for a big newspaper to intentionally try and piss people off is a mockery of journalism.

 

[Reverend]

 
This.
 
Who cares what CHB has to say about anything? He's not writing for us, he's writing for the old bastards that still buy the Boston Globe every day and like to judge pitchers' worth based on wins, wonders why the hook shot isn't used in basketball and constantly calls the Baltimore Ravens the Baltimore Colts. Shaugnnesy understand who his audience is and when he needs to stir up some shit from the non-tapioca set, he writes stuff like this.
 
And to be honest, I read him if I'm waiting at the barber shop or on Sunday (when I get the Globe delivered) and his stuff hasn't been that bad. A lot of his stuff that I've read is positive (for him at least), but he trolls. The guy has literally been trolling since the 1980s, when do you stop getting angry and let it go? He's never going to admit that he's wrong, you can give him reams and reams of evidence backing your point and he's just going to call you a "fan boy" or "a basement dwelling nerd".

 
That's fair. And I haven't read him in years because I found that when I did, I didn't get anything out of it, probably for the reasons you submit.
 
My interest here is piqued by how he has managed to make himself the story. Given the original thrust that he wrote about how he cares about the story and not any team (and tried to imply some kind of nobility and superiority to this), but then the story becomes him being the story... I mean, that's some seriously impressive pomo Andy Kaufman art shit.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

My interest here is piqued by how he has managed to make himself the story. Given the original thrust that he wrote about how he cares about the story and not any team (and tried to imply some kind of nobility and superiority to this), but then the story becomes him being the story... I mean, that's some seriously impressive pomo Andy Kaufman art shit.
 

 
There are two things that Dan Shaughnessy is legitimately good at:
 
1. Writing
2. Making himself part of the story
 
The guy should teach a master's class on subject number two, because he is really, really good at it. Since he started his column back in the 80s/90s, it has always been about him. Always. He can not write an opinion piece without inserting himself into the topic. And I know that sounds weird and maybe even a bit obvious, but CHB has a unique ability to be dragged into a situation. Bob Ryan has been at the Globe since the late 60s and I can only think of one situation where he was at the center of a media storm (the dust-up over Jason Kidd's wife a few years back). Michael Holley, Gerry Callahan, Steve Buckley (though he tried very hard to be Shank Lite, it just never went anywhere), Leigh Montville, Jackie MacMullen, Chris Gasper haven't been the eye of any hurricanes.
 
John Tomase once was (because he's a moron and ran with really bad info), Will McDonough used to get into these things all the time but people loved it because he was "Southie TOUGH", Borges does it but he's so marginalized now, no one cares. Felger and Massarotti couldn''t do it in print because they weren't as talented writers as Shank.
 
The only person who could even approach Shaughnessy is Peter Gammons, but he's a part of the story for the opposite reason. People genuinely love and respect that guy. If you want to do a Simmonsesque pop culture metaphor: Shaughnessy is Vader and Gammons is Obi-Wan. I think Shaughnessy and Gammons went to the same school or grew up in the same home town or something to that effect, they both started at the Globe, made their bones off the Red Sox, etc.
 
Whatever. I think that the bottom line is this Dan Shaughnessy isn't some sort of Svengali who has all these deep-seeded psychological sports issues that a bunch of us are playing arm chair psychologist about. He's a dude that can write well and knows how to work the system, it's really that simple. It's so obvious, he writes what he wrote on Thursday and on Friday he follows up with (in Kliq's words) "dismissed the two biggest Boston sports victories of the last six months". That's some Hulk Hogan/NWO, Ric Flair/Four Horseman virtuoso wrestling work right there.
 
You almost have to admire it.

 

[JohntheBaptist]

I still don't buy the idea he's much of a writer. Good writing isn't just stringing nice sentences together, which he's decent at I guess. Bob Ryan is a great writer; he was engaged with his topic and had substance to his writing.

Dan writes solid copy that is essentially void of constructive content outside of whatever it is he gets out of it. I personally don't see it, or at least maybe we're saying the same thing and I just dont really find that worth mentioning. I mean, he clearly can hold a job at a major newspaper and we're not talking Cafardo bad.

Not a huge deal, obviously, agreed totally with the rest of your take JMOH.

 

[ifmanis5]

we're not talking Cafardo bad.

:lol:
 
Cafardo is Jabba The Hutt, btw.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

I still don't buy the idea he's much of a writer. Good writing isn't just stringing nice sentences together, which he's decent at I guess. Bob Ryan is a great writer; he was engaged with his topic and had substance to his writing.
 

 
Agreed, Shaugnessy isn't Hemingway or Shakespeare, but he can turn a phrase pretty well. This makes him a better writer than 90% of his peers.

 

[Granite Sox]

Good job, Dan.  Kick'em while they're down: http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/12/26/moving-was-big-time-mistake-for-umass-football/8Zh7LNm9RkrxgumwLLZOkO/story.html
 
Irrespective of the truth behind the situation, this is just a (predictable) asshole move designed to rub salt in the wound.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Good job, Dan.  Kick'em while they're down: http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/12/26/moving-was-big-time-mistake-for-umass-football/8Zh7LNm9RkrxgumwLLZOkO/story.html
 
Irrespective of the truth behind the situation, this is just a (predictable) asshole move designed to rub salt in the wound.

 
Once you go there, it's just hurt feelings, isn't it?

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Good job, Dan.  Kick'em while they're down: http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/12/26/moving-was-big-time-mistake-for-umass-football/8Zh7LNm9RkrxgumwLLZOkO/story.html
 
Irrespective of the truth behind the situation, this is just a (predictable) asshole move designed to rub salt in the wound.

 
Unless you happen to go to UMass or are an alum, I don't see what the big deal is. 
 
Shank's job isn't to blow sunshine up your ass. If you want that, read the UMass-Amherst quarterly. 

 

[brs3]

 
Unless you happen to go to UMass or are an alum, I don't see what the big deal is. 
 
Shank's job isn't to blow sunshine up your ass. If you want that, read the UMass-Amherst quarterly. 

 
Is it hard to include details? He neglected to point out that UMass had their best attendance ever for a season, and avoided a 10 year probation that would have included ineligibility for bowl games. He also neglected to point out that next year will have half the home games on campus. 
 
His article read as 'GET OFF MY LAWN'. 

 

[Buffalo Head]

Ok, fess up DPU and brs, which one of you is Marc Bertrand?

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Avoided probation? Well that's certainly something to hang your hat on. And highest attendance rate? How much did UMass' old house hold?

You're making CHB's point here.

 

[Granite Sox]

Haha... I have no ties/allegiance to UMass at all... just thought it was gratuitous piling on and Monday Morning QB'ing by CHB. Serves no purpose other than to rub people's noses in it.

 

[doldmoose34]

I have no ties or allegiance to Mass Aggie other then to remind friends who went there that it is an Aggie school. Honestly, this isn't the usual
CHB hatchet job all he stated were facts, look people around here have a faint interest in the ACC unless. Clemson or FSU Football or Duke or UNC hoop are in town, Miami of Ohio and Westen Mich aren't drawing flies to the Razor. Please if there is a god Let Spaz get the job