Pearlman on Lupica with a sportsjournalists.com reference

I use my real name, but I don't get the vibe about people using pseudonyms not being allowed to bash anyone. This is a message board, not a Congressional hearing. You don't need to swear in. If you want to call somebody a bum, you have the right. When you put your work out for the public to see, the public gets the right to respond, whether by a real name or Fliesinmyasshole156.

 

I'm not Jeff Pearlman. Can anyone link to the original clip that got this started? Feel like I'd enjoy/tolerate the thread more if I didn't miss the first 10 minutes of the episode.

 

He deleted it. Hence why you get the "file not found" on the first link and the second link explaining that he deleted it.

 

I know ... was just hoping somebody had it elsewhere and could cut-and-paste ...

 

It wasn't worth reading or saving.

 

On arrogance and egos that get into the realm of cocky: I've met very few people in this business who don't go there every now and again. I sure as hell do. Considering how may people want to tear us down just for what we do, if you don't have a pretty high opinion of yourself, you can be in for some very long days.

 

I have to admit I know nothing about Jeff Pearlman, but that's a pretty astounding first sentence.

"When I write books, I don’t have all that much interest in interviewing the person I’m featuring." ?

I can understand the thought you might not get much out of the interview, but this seems a little extreme.

 

I thought it was a pretty curious statement too, fth. Astounding is actually a very good way to describe it.

And I say this as a not-very-anonymous author who made every possible effort to personally interview everybody I could who had anything substantial to do with the subject about which I was writing.

 

That's a pretty accurate summary of what I was saying, yeah. It happens a lot on these boards from what I can tell, too. The blasting of people, that is. Constructive criticism is absolutely okay. It's part of what makes SportsJournalists.com so useful.

But there is a lot of insensitive arguing and attacking that occurs here behind anonymity. I think it is smart to post anonymously if you are writing about situations like you mentioned where it could compromise one's professional career, or create unnecessary awkwardness in the workplace. But yeah, the blasting of people behind these internet masks is pretty much, like you said, crossing a line.

 

Also, while I'm in this thread, I'd like to give some props to Jeff. Many of you on here know that I'm a young kid, 22 years old, fresh out of college. My fiancee's mother bought me his book about Roger Clemens, knowing that I'm working on a sports book, and thought that it'd be a good read for me. While his writing style wasn't my favorite, I decided to email him and see how willing he would be to offer a kid some advice.

I don't think I wrote an email that he didn't reply to. We wrote back and forth for about a month solid, I think, and he was incredibly helpful. I don't mean just general responses--I asked very specific questions about different things, and while I don't think he pondered over them for hours, I could tell that he put some thought into his responses. That earned a lot of respect.

I'm not necessarily defending him, but if some folks on here are going to rip him, I figured I might as well provide a counterpoint to that. He's got his faults, sure, but he's been really willing to help someone who nobody has ever heard of, for no other reason than to be helpful.

Mad respect.

 

A friend of mine could share a similar story. Come to think of it, same age and everything.

Hey, maybe I know you!

 

Always thought of Lupica as the kid who was picked last on the sandlot and that's why he became a sportswriter. Never been that impressed, especially after he ripped Oklahoma for dropping 77 on Texas A&M a few years ago. Sure, Stoops and Co. are known as point droppers, but I watched the second half and A&M just quit, plain and simple. It was obvious Lupica hadn't watched a nanosecond of it.