Larry Fitzgerald's dad

[EagleMorph]

Portions of the proceeds.

Operating costs, manufacturing costs, shipping and handling...

 

[Small Town Guy]

The site you saw is Sr.'s site, not Jr.'s. That's why it's about Sr., not Jr.

Right, right, because he is such a well known media giant that he needs his own web-site...... :

Again, it is a classic case of an overblown ego by someone connected to a legitimate star.

And I also found it funny that when you google Larry Fitzgerald, this is the web-site that comes up as the official web-site for the Cardinals receiver. I have a hard time believing that isn't by design.

Again, it is a classic case of an overblown ego by someone connected to a legitimate star.

And I also found it funny that when you google Larry Fitzgerald, this is the web-site that comes up as the official web-site for the Cardinals receiver. I have a hard time believing that isn't by design.

1. That's more than likely google, or any other search engine, coming up with it. Or it's the webmaster of Fitzgerald, Sr. taking some creative license. I highly doubt that Larry Fitzgerald, Sr. is toying with a highly developed flash and HTML of his personal website along with running the sports section of a newspaper.

2. Take some Prilosec for your acidity towards society. I have friends, family, and others with their own personal websites. It makes quite a bit of sense for someone with a semi-public profile to have one. I've thought about doing the same and using my site as a catch-all for links where my articles appear, a new home for my blog, and more.

Yeesh. If anyone needed proof of the stereotype that sportswriters are bitter curmudgeons, they'd only have to read a good chunk of the posts on this website.

Very true on the website. Tons of freelancers have their own sites for clips and for people to find them to write to them. And many of them probably have a lot lower profile than Fitzgerald Senior.

 

[EagleMorph]

If it said profits would go to the foundation, that's one thing, but portion of the proceeds means nothing. If it cost more than $1000 to design that site, someone was ripped off. And it can't cost more than $20-30 a month to host it.

Larry Sr. is all about Larry Sr. Just look at the Web site. What type of journalist shows pictures of oneself with athletes and other celebrities on their own Web site?

If some other journalist did this, they would face the wrath of a lot of posters, but I guess Larry Sr. has his apologists.

What about journalists that write memoirs? Are they not glorifying themselves, saying, "Look at how important I am! Look where I was in history! I met these people, I can tell these stories, nah nah nah!"

You're acting like we don't have egos. We all do, especially writers. We want to be read. Sure, maybe we get some distinct self-gratification out of the process, or completing the finished product. But we want to be read. Better yet, we want someone to acknowledge that they read our material and that they enjoyed it.

Is that any different?

 

[VJ]

This thread is disappointing and yet completely predictable.

 

[DirtyDeeds]

If it said profits would go to the foundation, that's one thing, but portion of the proceeds means nothing. If it cost more than $1000 to design that site, someone was ripped off. And it can't cost more than $20-30 a month to host it.

Larry Sr. is all about Larry Sr. Just look at the Web site. What type of journalist shows pictures of oneself with athletes and other celebrities on their own Web site?

If some other journalist did this, they would face the wrath of a lot of posters, but I guess Larry Sr. has his apologists.

Looks like he's already facing the wrath of a lot of posters, no? I can see the issues with him covering a game in a jersey or whatever, if that's true. Did I miss a link? But if he's been covering Super Bowls for 28 years, he has not been doing that by riding his son't coattails until the last few years, right? I also think the implication that his son being a ball boy for the Vikes is a conflict of interest or came because he pulled some strings is a bit of a stretch. My dad was a journalist (a damn good one, I'd say), and I went to games and met some people that a lot of other kids didn't get a chance to because of that. I'm sure a lot of writers (possibly ones on here) have done similar things for their kids. And most of the photos on that site are of him and his son ... why shouldn't he be proud? I took the others to be simply evidence that he is "plugged in." I say the cut the guy some slack. I don't see the big deal on most of this stuff.

 

[Oz]

Did anyone catch Senior wearing a Cardinals jersey to cover a game last night?

Guy loses a lot of credibility and objectivity in my book for doing this. When you are on the job (as in covering a game) it is a total hatchet, hack, unprofessional move to wear a jersey - particularly of a team you are going to cover next week.

He's not the first, and he won't be the last. I once saw Whitlock with a Ball State jersey and baseball cap sitting on press row at Allen Fieldhouse at a game I covered.

 

[Moderator1]

Wilbon weighs in:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/23/AR2009012302663.html

 

[Michael_ Gee]

With all the REAL ethical problems facing journalism, ripping a sportswriter who wore his NFL star son's jersey to a ball game, and worrying about his reporting on said son at the Super Bowl seems like self-righteous, navel-gazing jackoffery to me.

 

[Boom_70]

With all the REAL ethical problems facing journalism, ripping a sportswriter who wore his NFL star son's jersey to a ball game, and worrying about his reporting on said son at the Super Bowl seems like self-righteous, navel-gazing jackoffery to me.

Well said Michael. The guy has every right to proud. By all signs he has raised a great kid.

Another nice column on the Fitzgeralds by Lisa Olson

http://lisa-olson.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/theres-more-to-fitzgeralds-phenomenon/

 

[Oz]

With all the REAL ethical problems facing journalism, ripping a sportswriter who wore his NFL star son's jersey to a ball game, and worrying about his reporting on said son at the Super Bowl seems like self-righteous, navel-gazing jackoffery to me.

Well said Michael. The guy has every right to proud. By all signs he has raised a great kid.

Alleged domestic abuse aside.

http://www.tmz.com/2008/12/31/nfl-superstar-accused-of-baby-mama-beatdown/

 

[shockey]

With all the REAL ethical problems facing journalism, ripping a sportswriter who wore his NFL star son's jersey to a ball game, and worrying about his reporting on said son at the Super Bowl seems like self-righteous, navel-gazing jackoffery to me.

Well said Michael. The guy has every right to proud. By all signs he has raised a great kid.

Alleged domestic abuse aside.

http://www.tmz.com/2008/12/31/nfl-superstar-accused-of-baby-mama-beatdown/

great. big larry get to sit in while little larry fields questions on this all week. a touching tale.

 

[Drip]

With all the REAL ethical problems facing journalism, ripping a sportswriter who wore his NFL star son's jersey to a ball game, and worrying about his reporting on said son at the Super Bowl seems like self-righteous, navel-gazing jackoffery to me.

Well said Michael. The guy has every right to proud. By all signs he has raised a great kid.

Another nice column on the Fitzgeralds by Lisa Olson

http://lisa-olson.fanhouse.com/2009/01/23/theres-more-to-fitzgeralds-phenomenon/

I am convinced now more than ever that people use these threads to get their jollies off. Why would anyone begrudge this guy for being proud of his son's accomplishments? If he ripped his son publicly, would that make many people happy?
Amazing.