Solid Crouse Angle On Bears/ Saints

Show me where I have ripped Karen personally?

Yes I have ripped some of her stories because I think they are soft. My rips have been validated by many who are in a far better position to judge than I.

Obviously someone at the Times has made a decision to cultivate these type of stories. What is the purpose? Are they trying to reach the little lady at home who has marginal interest in sports? The same technique that NBC uses on the Olympics. Everyone has a sad story and has to overcome great odds to get to where they are.

I happen to think its a fair discussion point to raise that has a place on a sports journalism board - more so than many threads.

 

There is a mocking, sexist tone to your posts. You wouldn't use Lifetime and Ladies Home Journal references if a man wrote the stories. And, indeed, you've completely ignored my point that veteran Chicago Tribune columnist Mike Downey took a similar tack on Tank, indeed an even more sympathetic slant.

So how come you won't put your real name to these attacks? What are you so afraid of? You're not in our business and have no reason to fear retaliation, so your anonymity is puzzling.

 

Frank as much as I want to move this to a discussion of the technique you continue to want to make it personal.

You are obviously in a position to know. What is the purpose of the Times doing this.

Karen is a very diverse talented writer that does not need to stay in the human interst type stories. Why do the editors of the Times keep sending her off in this direction? What is the purpose? What are they after ?

 

You are barking up the wrong tree there. I interviewed there in the 1980s and 1990s but haven't worked there.

Again, why won't you address the Downey column and why won't you tell us why you're afraid to put your real name to these attacks? Could it be because of the way you used to adorn your posts with a Confederate flag and you wouldn't want to unmask your real self as the racist, sexist slob you are?

 

Frank if you had been paying attention you would know that I have been at forefront of seeking NASCAR to ban reb flag.

As far as being sexist believe me that 21 keeps me well informed.

You may recall that the first time I brought up Crouse story I did not even mention her name or the fact that she was female. I did that on purpose so people would judge story in unbiased manner .

Other board members quickly jumped on it though and were quick to point out her gender

 

Then why won't you address the Downey column? Here's a writer a lot closer to the situation than either you or Crouse.

And why are you afraid to identify yourself?

 

Nice little catfight here. Seems that Boom is on point about the story being a bit soft, though with plenty of detail; perhaps there had been even more specifics in the Times in days past, and didn't need to be repeated. Downey's column, incidentally, was similar to others in Chicago papers.
Also seems that Ridgeway is rather unglued, compared to several thousand previous more reasoned posts, in his defense of Ms. Crouse, no matter what the merits of the argument.
Carry on. All of us enjoy watching a car accident in progress.

 

I think Boom cast the first profanity of this thread with this aimed at spnited:

So I decided to use language the semiliterate moron would understand.

Yeah, I got a bit unglued. But the asshole contributes nothing to this board but negativity.

 

Frank Ridgeway is really Frank Burns.

What's wrong with negativity? It's good to look at stories from all angles. Should we put a happy spin on everything -- like Karen does?

Without electrons you would never have electricity. Negative can be good sometimes.