Dan Shaughnessy: Taking a dump in your mouth one column at a time
- Thread starter weeba
- Start date
"The Jones experience conjures up old-time memories of the first years of Jim Plunkett and Bledsoe — both first overall picks who became starters the day they unpacked their bags in Foxborough."
Wrong... Scott Seycules started the first few games.
Wrong... Scott Seycules started the first few games.
I forgot about Scott too. But I was at Jim Plunkett's first game, 20-6 over Oakland. I will never forget that.
Yes Secules started four games that year, but Bledsoe was under center for the first game of the season. He got hurt halfway through the fifth game of the season (he was 0-4) and Secules led the team to a come-from-behind win and held the starting spot for a few weeks after.
A book about the Pats called "The Dynasty" came out last year. It appears to have been very heavily influenced by the Krafts, to put it mildly. One highlight of the book is that it frequently quotes Shank being completely wrong about the Pats. It's really delightful, and a great reminder what a dunce he is.
Last edited:
I was on the 50 for Bledsoe’s first game (@ BUF). He took that NFL Films sack from behind from Bruce Smith. Loudest hit I’ve heard in person.
I was driving through Newton a few weeks ago, and whilst sitting at a red light I saw Shank shuffle across the street. Pretty sure he came out of a liquor store. He was wearing an oversized t-shirt that was still a bit snug around the middle, and shorts above the knee that were snug around the thigh.
It was terrible.
I wanted to blast my horn at him and tell him he sucks, but I let it go. He seems like the kind of guy who would stand in the middle of the street until police arrive, and then write an embellished, self-aggrandizing column about it the next day. After drinking his Schnapps, or course.
It was terrible.
I wanted to blast my horn at him and tell him he sucks, but I let it go. He seems like the kind of guy who would stand in the middle of the street until police arrive, and then write an embellished, self-aggrandizing column about it the next day. After drinking his Schnapps, or course.
If you have about 40 minutes, Shaughnessy was recently on the Jeff Pearlman podcast "Two Writers Slinging Yang" and it was very good. He's self-effacing, humble and seems like a nice enough guy--so if you want to keep your Shank hate pilot light burning, don't listen. He touches on a lot of topics: Game 6 of the 86 World Series, Larry Bird, Bill Simmons, Curt Schilling and David Ortiz.
He comes at writing from a different angle that most writers do now and he gets into why.
He comes at writing from a different angle that most writers do now and he gets into why.
A pretty good column on why people maybe are pumping the brakes a bit on this Red Sox team – and how Despite it all a battle between the Red Sox, Yankees and Blue Jays should make for some pretty good drama down the stretch:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/09/15/sports/why-has-region-not-truly-embraced-these-red-sox/
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/09/15/sports/why-has-region-not-truly-embraced-these-red-sox/
I didn't read Shank's article, but Mazz had an interesting discussion yesterday where he was theorizing that Dan got wind of the story that Alex Spier wrote and was published yesterday which covered the massive Covid outbreak they had in August/ Sept. He thought that Dan didn't like the tone of the article, presumably because it was excusing the Red Sox for dropping so many games at a crucial time of year and was an attempt to let management off the hook. So Dan tried to get ahead of the story with his usual negative crap.
Interesting to think about, and wickedly petty if true.
Also of note, at some point an editor revised Dan's headline (look at the link above 'why has the region not embraced' and compare to the current headline 'for me to embrace') - quite curious.
Mazz also spent some time building on Shank’s theme of fan interest by bringing up the poor attendance. 30K today, 29K last night. That is up from the 25-26K they were getting against Tampa on the last homestand. So fans still seem pretty interested in this team and race.
Normally, attendance numbers would be a fair thing to use to gauge fan interest in a team. In the age of COVID though, there's no way to distinguish a 25K night due to indifference to the team from a 25K night due to 5K+ people not wanting to be anywhere with 25K other people.
I guess everyone here is so familiar with Shaughnessy’s hackishness that no one bothered to call out his egregious front page lunacy during the ALCS. But it’s an embarassment for the Globe to feature a guy who’s got nothing to say about a riveting team and series other than the watch thing.
He's seeking attention. Got his name out there again. He's a stupid ass but I won't play his game by publicly talking about his idiotic bullshit.
The tell is his omission of Jones and Rolen, who were both markedly superior players over long careers. It’s more attention grabbing if he only put one player on his ballot. I’m sure he will end up kicking himself that he didn’t think of submitting a blank ballot annually.
Yeah, Shaughnessy wants nothing more than to see people getting really upset at his ballot.
Has anyone read Shaughnessy's book that came out in November? I read the preview (first 30 pages or so).....and 85% was retread (Bird's upbringing and history etc.) but was one or two new stories I had not heard of. I figure the rest is the same but am curious.
Wish It Lasted Forever: Life with the Larry Bird Celtics
Wish It Lasted Forever: Life with the Larry Bird Celtics
I'm nearly finished reading it. A friend let me borrow it.Has anyone read Shaughnessy's book that came out in November? I read the preview (first 30 pages or so).....and 85% was retread (Bird's upbringing and history etc.) but was one or two new stories I had not heard of. I figure the rest is the same but am curious.
Wish It Lasted Forever: Life with the Larry Bird Celtics
I like it, except, I'd edit out all the parts Dan Shaughnessy talks about Dan Shughnessy. He's by far the least interesting person in the book.
But, if he left himself out, it'd only be about 100 pages long.
Ortiz calls Shaughnessy an A-hole on the radio ( Merloni & Fauria) toda
View: https://twitter.com/MerloniFauria/status/1483902716170620936
https://boston.cbslocal.com/2022/01/19/david-ortiz-calls-dan-shaughnessy-a-hole-live-radio-hall-of-fame-voting/
View: https://twitter.com/MerloniFauria/status/1483902716170620936
I sort of wonder what Shaughnessy's audience is at this point. Who is actually reading Globe columns anyway? They're pay-walled online and I'm guessing the subscription base only gets older. He doesn't strike me as remotely relevant to Red Sox baseball discussion the way he was 20 years ago.
I still get the Boston Sunday Globe delivered to my house, it's one of my wife and my Sunday morning rituals. I read his Sunday column every week--it's a notebook column--and normally it isn't bad. It's not great, but it's usually pedestrian observations about the week's worth of sports. He's kind of self-deprecating sometimes and I agree with some of his takes other times, but like I said, it's mostly "Old Man Yells at Clouds" stuff. He plays the hits, "Ortiz is a PED user" but it's such an obvious attempt at getting attention that I just roll my eyes. What keeps me reading is that he's genuinely a good writer and when he has a story to tell, he can still bring it. Like a few weeks ago he talked about how John Henry used to invite him over to his mansion to watch ball games. For some reason, that kind of tickled me. That's what I read him for.
I think that Shaughnessy lost a lot of his "power" over the last 20 years during this Boston Golden Age of Sports. And it's one of the better fringe benefits of consistent winning, like no one really interviews him any more about the state of Boston sports. No one gives a shit what he says or writes. I think that he realizes that, and he sort of writes what he feels like. But every once in awhile he gets a bee in his bonnet and feels like he has "to take a stand" on something and like I said, it's just so predictable and boring.
Some irony here. As anyone who has gotten a response from him knows, his standard valediction is "cheers." So, for him, it's "where everyone knows you're an asshole." Doesn't quite fit the melody, but what can you do?
EDIT: In the same Sunday paper boat as JMOH. Same opinion, as well That Henry column was pretty good. He chided Henry for freezing him out personally; but lauded him for not "Rosenthaling" him in response to criticism, la la Manfred.
Funny how this era has been so good for some - Felger, Curran, Reiss, Bert Breer, Giardi, many other Pats guys who have gone national, as well as former players like Wiggins, Ted Johnson, Fauria, Matt Chatham, Mayo (before coaching). But it’s been a disaster for Shank.
Other than the Bird-era Celtics, the guy made his bones covering either bad teams or close but not quite teams ('85 Pats, '86-'90 Sox, '88 and '90 Bruins). Then he went and made himself the "expert" on such things with the Curse of the Bambino book. So it's unsurprising that the guy who excelled when teams were disappointing would flounder when they all found success. Can't really continue to be the go-to Boston guy to talk about a team coming up short when they don't actually come up short.
Let us all die in a swirl of COVID. Let humanity perish as the planet dries to desert. Christ, let the Yankees win another title. But please, in the name of all that has ever truly mattered, do not change the name of this fucking thread!
That's because it's easy to write about bad teams in a good sports market. I don't know the Anaheim sports market, but I would guess that there's not a lot of demand for Ducks analysis; so things get boring when you cover a bad team. Yes, there are die-hard Duck fans who remember the year that they won the Cup or remember Paul Kariya and Teemu Saleane (spell? Who cares.) fondly, but it's not like here where every fan thinks that they can step into the shoes of the athlete, the manager (or coach), General Manager or owner and not miss a beat. So writing about bad teams and the bad things they do and the bone head moves management makes and the utter despair of the fandom is easy. Not only easy, but it also looks like you're "taking these teams to task" and "telling it like it is", when in reality you're just flinging shit.
But when a team is good and your MO is to rip, rip, rip; what do you do then? There have been some bum moves the Sox, the Pats, the Celts and the B's have made over the years, but can you really say that the Henry stewardship is a failure? (I'm a little more pessimistic about the the guy than most people on this board and even I can't do so). Same thing with Kraft. Or Wyc. Or the Bruins of the past decade and a half. You lose all credibility if you slam on Robert Kraft like he was James Orthwein or Victor Kiam (I legit had to look up Kiam's last name, because I only remembered him as the "razor guy"). And I mean the Bruins used to be cheap, but they're not. The Celtics have hit a few bumps in the road, but whether it's Kyrie or how Tatum and Brown haven't played well, how could you say that they made the wrong choices? Sometimes shit happens.
With a good team, I think it probably gets boring patting the team and its front office on the back all the time. And so axe grinders like Shaughnessy have to hunt high and low for the dark cloud. I think most people know that, which is why he's practically irrelevant now. Do you remember in the 90s and 00s when every time a national organization did a piece on anything Boston, Shank's mug was front and center? Unless it's about the 80s, when was the last time you saw that? He's the sports equivalent of the groundhog, he mostly stays in his hole but every once in awhile he'll lift his head up to let you know he's still there.
He’s also been hurt by Bob Ryan and Jackie Mac being the go-to Boston sports experts for national TV and radio outlets for like 15-20 years. Then you add a growing constellation of reporters who specialize in certain sports and thus know way more about the NFL et al than Shank, or are just frankly more engaging, and there’s no space for him in the mainstream podcast/TV/radio landscape.
I'd say Simmons would be the go-to for most people when they think of Boston sports in the media.
Part of Shaughnessy losing his stature is that the newspaper columnist just isn't as relevant anymore as other forms of media of horned in on the market. It's not like Tara Sullivan or Chris Gaspar are household names now. The fact that he doesn't really do national TV, nor does he seem to be appear on a lot of national podcasts, probably hurts him in relation to people like Ryan and Jackie Mac.
Oh, I generally agree re: Simmons but he has had his own platform for some time and isn’t really in the same category as traditional journalists. I should have been more clear that I was referring to Shaughnessy’s peers.
He's not even on The Sports Hub anymore. He used to be on the Zolak and Bertrand show for 2 hours 1 day a week and that ended.
Shaughnessy does little other media. To his credit, he mocks "nitwit radio" (although he far too often lumps *all* fans into the nitwit radio pile). At the same time, though, his style at least tacitly acknowledges that that's his main competition these days.
What's funny is that I never listen to sports talk here in Maine except on rare occasions. A couple of times I've tuned in mid-interview and thought, "Who is this mild-mannered, measured voice of reason?" Both times it was CHB. At least here, he tunes it way down (or maybe I should say "at least twice).
Shaughnessy actually called me once. In hindsight, I feel skeevy for defending Curt Fucking Schilling of all people, but he was relentless in his personal attacks before Curt had fully revealed himself. I subscribed to the print edition at the time. This had to be mid 2007 as I had just taken a sales job where I'd be on the road and was going to cancel anyway. So I emailed the circulation desk, cc'ing Dan, saying I wouldn't renew until Dan was gone.
He replied back directly, omitting the desk, and called me a coward for not including my phone number. I responded with my number and called him a dope since I signed it with my full name (not a common one) and my city/state and he had enough information to get my number since I was, you know, a CUSTOMER. A few days later, I had a missed call from an unknown/blocked number complete with a condescending voice mail.
Shaughnessy actually called me once. In hindsight, I feel skeevy for defending Curt Fucking Schilling of all people, but he was relentless in his personal attacks before Curt had fully revealed himself. I subscribed to the print edition at the time. This had to be mid 2007 as I had just taken a sales job where I'd be on the road and was going to cancel anyway. So I emailed the circulation desk, cc'ing Dan, saying I wouldn't renew until Dan was gone.
He replied back directly, omitting the desk, and called me a coward for not including my phone number. I responded with my number and called him a dope since I signed it with my full name (not a common one) and my city/state and he had enough information to get my number since I was, you know, a CUSTOMER. A few days later, I had a missed call from an unknown/blocked number complete with a condescending voice mail.
I can’t tell whether that last story is commendable or psychotic. On one hand, it takes some balls to call someone who wants you fired and might be spoiling for a fight. Maybe he’d have called to get your side of the story, maybe he wanted to talk, maybe he’d yell. But you’re also a stranger, who knows what kind of dude you are.
But on the other hand, who calls someone to get into an argument? Isn’t that a phone call you wouldn’t make? Like for any money? That’s psycho behavior.
As far as him being on the radio, he never was a loud jackass. He was always kind of smug and detached. On the Big Show they said he’d spend half the show balancing his checkbook.
Someone told a story 15-20 years ago either on this board or the other one I belong to that said Shank was getting some basically harmless crap from some guy during work hours and took it upon himself to call the guy's place of business to complain.
He once called me at home (94 or so). I had submitted a LTE after he'd taken a cheap innuendo-filled shot at someone. (Maybe about faking an injury?) I also called him lazy because he would only write a before the game column when the Sox were on the road, yet others wrote one before the game and one after. I concluded by noting how unusual it was for a guy who works in an ivory tower to urinate out said tower's window onto the heads of the people below.
We were away and he left a message; said he liked my way with words and wanted to chat. I checked with a few friends to make sure they weren't pulling a prank. He called back a few days later. He said he used innuendo because he didn't wanted to get sued for libel. I told him the globe lawyers would tell him it doesnt work that way. he was most pissed about being called lazy.
We were away and he left a message; said he liked my way with words and wanted to chat. I checked with a few friends to make sure they weren't pulling a prank. He called back a few days later. He said he used innuendo because he didn't wanted to get sued for libel. I told him the globe lawyers would tell him it doesnt work that way. he was most pissed about being called lazy.
It's been a long time since I listened to Boston sports radio, and longer still since I've heard Shaughnessy on the air, but back in the day he was always a pretty decent radio guest. He knows his stuff and he could be funny at times. I always had the feeling that he could be a so much better writer if he wanted to be, but at some point it felt like he just found sports increasingly ridiculous and became one if those writers who despised most of his audience. He never passed the 'guy you could sit down for a beer with and have fun arguing sports' test that his colleague Bob Ryan just aces.
That's funny, because so many of his columns are the print equivalent of drive-time, hot take, sports radio.
This is precisely why I found Simmons to be such a revelation circa 2000. He constantly savaged the cynical sports writer. Shaughnessy strikes me as a guy who loved sports as a kid, then got into the profession, quickly soured on it, and spent the remainder of his career hate-watching it. It's such a waste, but I'm sure he's made a nice living off the style.