- Aug 4, 2005
That would be a suitable essay by Bob Costas — after suckling off the NFL for many years (like Howard Cosell and boxing). Shank is trolling people who remain in the club.
I’m good with being strange. Aren’t we all?Is it CHB's columns or this thread that give poopy mouth?
You continue to highlight how strange you are, Theo. To be sure, you should send me an email about it though.
Yeah, I may have whiffed on your intent. Didn’t completely agree with him, but thought Theo was getting piled on a little bit. I’m going to go have my moderate IPAs. Cheers.Goodness, some brevity is in order.
To moderate though, I will have a few beers. In moderation, of course.
What’s the business interest in having the Patriots seen in a negative light compared to the Red Sox and are you really calling a 40 year old who married when she was 30 a “child bride” while angling that a human trafficking investigation was what, falsely characterized to try to do more harm to a 78 year old billionaire who got caught at a massage parlor in a strip mall?Dan Shaughnessy personally dislikes Bob Kraft. The Boston Globe, through its parent company, has a business interest in having the Patriots seen in a negative light compared to the Red Sox. The Red Sox owner’s child bride, while letting Bob Hohler emphasize Ricki Lander’s age, has authorized about 30k words over the last 3 weeks delving into the evils of human trafficking by trampolining off a human trafficking investigation in which not one indictment for human trafficking has been issued. Seems on the up and up...
Dan acting wounded about the disappearance of one of the more polarizing figures in Sox history is the height of irony. It's not like Shank needs Deep Throat to lob grenades and recycle negative Sox tropes.The Kremlinesque erasure of Larry Lucchino from Red Sox history continues.
A funny. Yippee for you.
Other than decisions around the blow job and the response to same, what is the basis for your last line?Outside of a legendary coach (Belichick, Lombardi, Noll, Walsh) or player (Bird, Jordan), the owners define the culture of the team. When you see an owner doing something buffoonish, it usually mirrors a silly tenure of owning a team. Donald Sterling was a perfect example of this.
Kraft has been an excellent owner, so that makes this really standout. As long as they have Belichick running football operations, the on field product should be fine; but I’m firmly in the belief that the transition of duties from Robert to Jonathon should be in full motion now. I don’t trust Kraft without Belichick, which is a big change for me.
Outside New England, Robert has rarely gotten the proper credit for identifying/hiring Belichick in 2000 and subsequent growing of the New England Patriots. I believe the current version of Kraft is no longer that shrewd decision maker.
Maybe not at that particular moment, but yes, most of us do think of the owners when the hometown teams do well. Like Wyc had to sign off getting Garnett and Allen and going all in on that particular championship. Most people think Jeremy Jacobs is a PoS and we're glad that the B's won, but weren't particularly pleased that this cheapskate owner got a championship. And were you around for 2004? Every other article mentioned LL, Werner and Henry. People were practically throwing them a parade for, again, not cheaping out and bringing the Sox to mountaintop. And even after last year's win, many people on this very board were gobsmacked that this ownership -- which was viewed with suspicion in the early days -- had brought four championships to Fenway Park.When the Cs win, do you think much about Wyc? Was John Henry on your mind when Sale corkscrewed Machado? How about Jacobs when the Bruins broke through in game 7?
I agree that he’s handled this very poorly. I found myself nodding at all of Chris Gasper’s recent column wherein he said RKK may win the litigation war but lose the PR battle.The complete and total lack of judgement he displayed by doing visiting the parlor, at least twice, and how he is handling his defense.
Wha?Would Shank getting shoved back onto the baseball beat (due to the Nick tragedy) been worse had it happened last last year; when the Sox got off to a tremendous start; or this year when they are struggling mightily? Rest assured in 2018 it would have been one tomato can reference after another.
No kidding. This could be extended to pro sports owners in general, but just looking at the NFL, I’ll take the owners collective repression of the concussion and CTE issue over a couple of handjobs as far as morally reprehensible behavior and a reason to feel uncomfortable as an NFL fan.Of course ownership matters, it might be the most important thing in terms of building the right culture around a team, hiring the right management, and investing in the team to win. But does it matter what kind of person an owner is? It would be better if they were good people, but I'm not sure it matters. If you are a fan of an NFL team there's a good chance the owner of the team you root for is an asshole.
Nobody scapegoats like your Boston Red Sox (hello, Juan Nieves and Chili Davis), and so on Tuesday the world learned that Swihart had been outrighted to make room for the return of Leon, who was batting a robust .120 with Pawtucket.
Do not wait under water for the Sox to admit that they were wrong about anything. Ever. They aren’t likely to admit they misused and abused Swihart starting in 2016 (they are now likely to get zip for an athletic, switch-hitting 27-year-old catcher). They’ll continue to insist that their “plan” to hold the starters back in spring training was a swell idea. They aren’t going to come clean and tell you that the Dustin Pedroia comeback should have included a longer stay in the minors. And on Tuesday they wouldn’t admit that keeping Swihart instead of Leon to start the season was a mistake. No. This sudden switch was just something they decided to do because . . . well, it was time. Oh, they want you to know that this was not a result of complaints from starting pitchers.
Perhaps it’s time for Larry Lucchino’s CEO title to be restored to the Boston masthead so the Sox can blame this hideous start on evil Larry.
Its not that he's wrong. Its that he "asking" for something that no team does ("admit they were wrong."). Or, they *did* admit it, in Swihart's case, by doing something different. But Dan wants words, not deeds. Which is the opposite of how it should be. (Unless Dan thinks the Catholic Church approach to sex abuse -- words, not deeds -- is the right way to do it).Is Shaughnessy wrong? This team sucks right now.
Only the CHB would feel the need to include that second sentence, lest anyone think he's taking glee from all aspects of this shitty start.NEW YORK — Are we nearing the end for Dustin Pedroia?
No one takes any pleasure in this prospect. But there was a sense of doom and gloom when Pedroia was taken out of the lineup after flying to right field in the top of the second inning Wednesday night at Yankee Stadium.
I think that sells him short. He changed things. He made them credible. They went to a SB. He brought Bill Belichick in and that paved the way for his return.Parcells was LB coach for 1 year and HC for 3-4 years I think. Is that long enough to make the teams HOF?
Not sure of the rules for being on the ballot, but parcells has been a pats hof finalist at least once, bledsoe beat him out in 2011, it's not like the pats are being petty and ignoring him. Did Dan mention that or conveniently ignore it?Dan takes aim at the Pats for not including Parcells on the ballot for their HOF.
Parcells was of course great in NE. He begot BB, among other big things. But he also plotted his exit in the two weeks before a SB, a truly unforgivable betrayal. Maybe those pats never could’ve beaten those packers but does anyone think that the reports about the jets helped their chances? Could it have been a distraction on any level? Parcells preached “no I in team” and then was all about I when it should have been only team. Oh, and the 3 candidates this year are all totally deserving. They have been every year. It’s always a little sad to me to think about the two greats who didn’t make it. Parcells can wait. Or never get in.
Tying Parcells to the 6 titles with anything other than an indirect cord is fantasy.If Parcells and Bledsoe never showed up, the Pats would be getting ready for their 25th season in St. Louis. Even before Bledsoe, Parcells brought instant credibility to a franchise that needed it badly.
Is Parcells an ego maniac dickhead? Of course he is, he’s a football coach. Do I like him for what he did at the Super Bowl? Of course not. He acted like a hypocritical princess. But Kraft wasn’t great in this whole saga either.
But what he did for the franchise is immeasurable and Kraft (assuming it his him who has the final say) should get over it already. He won. He’s been the steward of a team that has seen its national profile explode, not to mention six (and counting) Super Bowl championships.
You can’t tell the history of the New England Patriots without Bill Parcells. To try to do so is folly. Therefore, he should be in the Pats HoF.
As is often the case, in your rush to snark it up, you miss the point entirely.Mentioning grogran and Fairbanks in the same paragraph as parcells in terms of the future direction of the franchise is . a ridiculous exercise that would injure a circus contortionist. Parcells stabilized the franchise and taught (for lack of a better word) Kraft some valuable football stuff. Grogan was a good QB and Fairbanks was a good coach.
Guilty as charged re Grogan. The point remains re Parcells. Grogan was just an example, albeit a flawed one.I just look. Brogan is indeed in the Patriots HOF ... inducted in 1995.
So, once again, someone argues a point that was flawed from the beginning.