Yeah, I have nothing to complain about. Based on how he was on CSNNE last night with Amonte I thought it was going to be a few hours of Seguin bashing but he's stopping callers that are being unreasonable.
Felger and Mazz - Creating False Naratives one day at a time
- Thread starter HomeBrew1901
- Start date
I originally posted this in the CHB thread, but it fits in here too.
I was thinking about the Aaron Hernandez situationon the way home yesterday and the Patriots while listening to the Sports Hub . Felger and Mazz were talking about Hernandez and while the
hosts weren't too fired up about how the Pats handled the situation, it seems as if they understood the gray area that the team is in, some callers were irate that the Pats released Hernandez.
If they suspend Hernandez, the media would say, "they're coddling the player. They don't care how this looks, the only thing that matters to Belichick and Kraft is the bottom line on the field. It's unbelievable that they'd keep this monster."
But if they release him, like they did yesterday, the Patriots aren't "letting due process take it's course. They're reacting to public opinion and don't believe in American ideals like innocent until proven guilty." Felger even admitted that he would rather them due what they did yesterday, as did Massarotti, but at the same time they were wondering why the team wasn't sticking behind their player.
So it's like, what do you want them to do? What will make you happy? And I think that the Pats (and most other teams) realize that you're never going to make the media happy and they have to do what they think is best for the organization and let the chips fall.
I was thinking about the Aaron Hernandez situationon the way home yesterday and the Patriots while listening to the Sports Hub . Felger and Mazz were talking about Hernandez and while the
hosts weren't too fired up about how the Pats handled the situation, it seems as if they understood the gray area that the team is in, some callers were irate that the Pats released Hernandez.
If they suspend Hernandez, the media would say, "they're coddling the player. They don't care how this looks, the only thing that matters to Belichick and Kraft is the bottom line on the field. It's unbelievable that they'd keep this monster."
But if they release him, like they did yesterday, the Patriots aren't "letting due process take it's course. They're reacting to public opinion and don't believe in American ideals like innocent until proven guilty." Felger even admitted that he would rather them due what they did yesterday, as did Massarotti, but at the same time they were wondering why the team wasn't sticking behind their player.
So it's like, what do you want them to do? What will make you happy? And I think that the Pats (and most other teams) realize that you're never going to make the media happy and they have to do what they think is best for the organization and let the chips fall.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
JMOH, this is a good post. It highlights the difficulty of "sports talk radio" as an agenda-driven enterprise. The hosts - who have handled the Hernandez story better than anyone would have imagined (Phenom included) - have a personal opinion that is fair, reasonable and well-considered. Unfortunately, that fair and reasonable is not what makes the phone ring. Callers are, generally, at the extreme ends of the spectrum. Fair, reasonable people don't call to agree or disagree with the fair, reasonable opinion. Talk radio callers scream, froth at the mouth and have extreme opinions. So the hosts need to cater to that vocal minority in some respects by "wondering" if the team has overreacted/not reacted enough and using that as the driver, not the fair, reasonable opinion.
It might be a minor quibble but I never got the impression that they were criticizing the Patriots or catering to the vocal minority. What I got from it was that they were stating how the team "could have" handled it with "Innocent until proven guilty, etc...".soxfan121 said:
At the same time they did give a voice to that vocal minority, gave them a minute or two to vent and state their point, told the caller they disagreed and moved on.
Overall I thought they did a great job being fair and reasonable when it would have been very very easy for Felger to fall into the " SEE THIS IS WHAT I"M TALKING ABOUT, THERE IS NO PATRIOT WAY AND ALL YOU YAHOOS ARE NOW SEEING THAT FIRST HAND!!!?!?!?!"
The only criticism which I thought was a huge stretch was criticizing the Patriots for adding "This is the right thing to do" at the end of the official statement and wanting to be allowed to judge for themselves that it was the right thing to do. That was unnecessary to me.
Totally get that about the callers and I understand that about the hosts too. I mean, this is entertainment and a host needs to have a POV or the audience gets bored (see Ordway, Glenn).
It's just that a host that has enough listeners or enough sway can turn the tide. It's like that old shampoo commercial, one person tells two friends about the awesome shampoo and then those two friends tell two more friends and then those two friends tell two more, etc. And what once was a nuanced (for sports radio) discussion eventually morphs into the prevailing group think that could sometimes forces a team into an action they may not want to do or at the very least make discussing sports with other people very difficult.
Randy Moss is a good example of this. Josh Beckett is another. "Tough Guy" Kevin Garnett, "Trader" Danny Ainge, two more. And now they're starting to get on Tyler Seguin. And while this has segued a bit from the Hernandez discussion, but certain talk show hosts in this town (Felger for one) have an influence in this town. I'm not sure if he always uses that power well.
HomeBrew1901 said:
It's not a minor quibble - it's disagreeing with the hypothesis. Which is fine.
I'm of the opinion that any "wondering" was there only because attempting to have a fair and reasonable discussion is ratings poison for talk radio. That to run a talk radio program, the hosts must cater to and give time to "the yahoos". Because the vast majority of callers are yahoos. Sure, giving those people a minute or two and then shutting them down is something I think we both agree Felger excels at but if he were having a conversation in a bar or at the dinner table, he would not be "wondering". That is all about ratings and generating callers.
Four hours of "they did the only, right thing" is boring radio. Ask Sean McDonough how that worked out.
I can accept that.
Edit: That wasn't meant as snark. I can see where you are coming from with that post and why you would think that.
Edit: That wasn't meant as snark. I can see where you are coming from with that post and why you would think that.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
First, I think I responded to the bulk of your point above.
Second, this point is totally fair. In general. With this specific situation...I disagree. I do think Felger is aware of his "power" to craft opinion on this issue and is using it very responsibly. When things cross the line from the field (or court) of play, Felger tends to be much more fair and reasonable than (say) Gresh or D&C, etc. because he is aware of that power.
I'm not a big fan of his polemics on Beckett, Moss, Garnett, etc. but I do recognize they are all about staking out an extreme position for callers to argue against or agree with. And I don't think he's making any of those up - he's turning up the volume to 11 (if you'll allow the analogy).
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
This is exactly what I was trying to say earlier but put much better. It has a lot to do with why Felger is so polarizing. He has out there opinions but usually he had good arguments with some merit and you could see where he was coming from. But then callers and fans run with it and take it to ridiculous lengths and it becomes black and white. Beckett=Lazy. Moss=Bad. Seguin=Soft. Danny=Trader.
I'm sure he's aware of it, you can almost hear him snickering because I honestly don't think that he believes half the shit he says (which is fine, BTW). What I said is that I'm not sure if he always uses it well. And there's a distinct difference.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
I acknowledged that point. I agree - he uses his power in "between the lines" stuff in infuriating ways. But when it comes to something important (i.e. something that reaches outside the lines), he has yet to abuse it, IMO.
Contrast that to D&C and I gain respect for Felger "trolling" on (for example) the "Texas Tough Guy". He knows how to make the sports talk phone lines light up. And he knows when to be fair and reasonable - and not to troll (i.e. the Marathon, Hernandez). THAT'S the important "distinct difference".
The fact that you disagree with his take doesn't mean he's wrong. "Trader Danny", "Texas Tough Guy", etc are memes he's created and I don't know that many or all of them can be proven right or wrong. Saying that you felt his takes were honest until you severely disagreed with them seems a bit unfair. I mean, do you agree with his "abuses" of power when they push an agenda that you favor, like maybe the way they really helped ignite the Bruins during the first cup run? Especially in light of how things like Beckett and Moss turned out, it seems pretty tough to say these are universally incorrect. They're irritating as hell and Felger is a super contrarian, but that doesn't mean he can't believe it or that he can't at times be right.
As an example, "Trader Danny" drives me up a fucking wall. In general I'm a fan of Ainge and I think he's deserves a ton of credit for this franchise's success. When they bring this up, they tend to oversimplify a bunch of things, ignore facts, and stack the argument, it actually annoys me far more than it has a right to. But at the same time, there's enough truth in there that I can't say with 100% certainty that it's an opinion that a rational person can't have, it just happens to be one I really disagree with.
As an example, "Trader Danny" drives me up a fucking wall. In general I'm a fan of Ainge and I think he's deserves a ton of credit for this franchise's success. When they bring this up, they tend to oversimplify a bunch of things, ignore facts, and stack the argument, it actually annoys me far more than it has a right to. But at the same time, there's enough truth in there that I can't say with 100% certainty that it's an opinion that a rational person can't have, it just happens to be one I really disagree with.
Putting aside that Kraft is heartsick and perhaps throwing up too, the due process arguments are misplaced. By every indication we have here a sociopath, and it is inconceivable that he'll play football ever again, much less next year. So from the very selfish standpoints of brand protection and fielding a team next year, they had to do what they did and they had to so it yesterday.
Only in the star strewn confines of some poor parents' basements must there be at least two sides to every story all the time
Only in the star strewn confines of some poor parents' basements must there be at least two sides to every story all the time
Sorry, I can't buy Felger bashing the Pats to death for their handling of Hernandez when for years he has been bashing the Pats to death for not drafting talent and not signing their rookies early enough. Like other members of the media elite he's acting as if he knew all these things about Hernandez all along, but never said a word of it.
Total revisionist history on the Pats with Felger. He said it was OK to draft guys with weed violations. You also need to take into account positions when you talk about ripping up rookie deals. Hernandez and Gronkowski are more important to this team at their point in their careers than Wilfork or Mankins. Wilfork you had age concerns and Mankins you had the Dante Effect(making undrafted and low-round picks into great players). He's way off with this.
today is the day of the NBA draft, we may be trading KG and Pierce for draft picks and the Celtics are in full rebuild mode.
A caller called in to talk about the NBA draft and essentially got laughed off the air because Felger didn't want to talk about it. He said MAYBE if the Cs had like the 3rd pick he'd let people talk about the draft.
I'm not a big NBA guy, but this seemed pretty stupid and I switched the station (again).
A caller called in to talk about the NBA draft and essentially got laughed off the air because Felger didn't want to talk about it. He said MAYBE if the Cs had like the 3rd pick he'd let people talk about the draft.
I'm not a big NBA guy, but this seemed pretty stupid and I switched the station (again).
NDame616 said:
I'm not much of an NBA or a Felger guy, but I can't say I blame him for not wanting to talk NBA draft. How many listeners/callers know enough about the players who should be available when the Celtics pick to speak intelligently about it? And do Felger, Mazz, or Beetle know anything about these potential draftees? Sounds like a recipe for some disastrous radio.
They talked about the Celtics plenty today, but let's be honest, there was another story today that people care a lot more about.
Red(s)HawksFan said:
I disagree. This is the same exact shit that Ordway was doing in relation to the Bruins and it came back to haunt them big time. Felger isn't much of a Celtics fan, and as I type this today it seems like the days when the Celtics will be huge in this town might be far away, but it WILL happen. You can't just dismiss a sport and not allow talk about it on your airwaves, it alienates people, as we saw with the Bruins.
I think it is debatable as to whether they are giving the NBA the WEEI-NHL treatment at this point in time, but either way it is wholly understandable why they would not take calls on the NBA draft yesterday in light of the Hernandez story. I mean you are talking about pretty much an unprecedented story centered around a guy who two weeks ago was a key piece of the hometown NFL team and who we are coming to find out was probably involved in multiple murders, versus a very week NBA draft where the home town team has a pick in the teens or whatever.
Ralphwiggum said:
I was actually back and forth yesterday but they made it a point during this timeframe (the segment the caller called in) that they did NOT want to talk about Hernandez because "he isn't going anywhere for a long time"
So, it's draft day and they wanted to take a break from the Hernandez stuff and a guy calls in about the draft and he gets laughed off the air and openly mocked.
teddykgb said:
Whoa. They talked about the Celtics, Doc and the KG/Pierce rumor for at least 1/4th to 1/3rd of the show. They didn't take the guy calling about the draft because no one knows who those guys are except Rich Keefe and the denizens of the Port Cellar. Felger said clearly, "if they had a top 3 or top 5 pick, we could discuss names but since they're picking at 16, it's just a guess".
Which is EXACTLY what they did with the NFL draft. They took a handful of calls over two months where there were specific names talked about (Tavon Austin being one) but limited those calls in the same manner, with the same disclaimer. Instead, they talked about team needs, generally.
Ordway (and Holley's Hockey Minute) openly ignored the Bruins, never discussed them, and when they did come up, laughed at the caller. That's not what F&M did during yesterday's show, at all.
Since this gets a lot of love (or at least posts) I tuned in.
Still want to punch Felger in the face whenever he opens his mouth to be wrong about everything.
Still want to punch Felger in the face whenever he opens his mouth to be wrong about everything.
teddykgb said:
soxfan121 hit the gist of what I was saying. It's not about not wanting to talk Celtics. It's about not wanting to talk draft. Draft talk in any sport is boring as hell, IMO, unless you're talking top 3-5 picks where there is high profile talent available (i.e. names people other than the most diehard fans are going to recognize). And even then, there's only so much you can talk about that doesn't amount to speculation, guesswork, and wishcasting. Mixing in hosts who admittedly don't know a hell of a lot about any of the potential draftees and the majority of listeners being in the same boat, it's bad radio.
Even with hosts who do know a thing or two about the draft, or with draft "experts" as guests, draft talk, be it NBA, NFL, NHL, or MLB, bores the hell out of most listeners.
Felger is ripping the local Patriots writers for not getting any quotes from Belichick/Kraft about the Hernandez saga yet. Calls the Patriots' culture, fans, and writers "a cult following". This might be a new low for Felger. Wasn't it known that both of those guys are out of the country? Even if they haven't commented yet, what does it matter? They released a statement following his release and that should close the book on Hernandez as a Patriot. Must be a slow news day for him.
Felger is ripping the local Patriots writers for not getting any quotes from Belichick/Kraft about the Hernandez saga yet. Calls the Patriots' culture, fans, and writers "a cult following". This might be a new low for Felger. Wasn't it known that both of those guys are out of the country? Even if they haven't commented yet, what does it matter? They released a statement following his release and that should close the book on Hernandez as a Patriot. Must be a slow news day for him.
This must be aimed at the hesitant and milquetoasty Reiss, with whom Felger is probably still feuding, and to a lesser extent at the maternal Manza Young. Regarding anyone else, he is spectacularly wrong. Borges said what you would expect him to say. Curran has been bloviating even more than usual about every aspect of the case, from ripping the shirt buyback to coming close to suggesting that BB ought to be considered culpable for the murder. Chris Price published a tough but fair piece on the "disastrous" relationship between Belichick and Urban Meyer, regarding the draftees from UF. Zuri Berry wrote a fairly ridiculous and jejeune article in which he ripped the team, and BB in particular, for not giving the media any self-flagellating quotes, calling the coach a coward and a bully, before he announced that with that said he would be going on vacation for two weeks. In fact, pretty much all of the beat writers and reporters have gone on vacation now, which anyone who follows them on twitter would know. Ben Volin, the latest Miami Dolphin reporter to move to and cover the Pats beat, is obviously not covering up for the team, nor would anyone who works under Joe Sullivan, the sports editor with long-standing animosity toward both Kraft and Belichick. The cult is in Felger's imagination.
This must be aimed at the hesitant and milquetoasty Reiss, with whom Felger is probably still feuding, and to a lesser extent at the maternal Manza Young. Regarding anyone else, he is spectacularly wrong. Borges said what you would expect him to say. Curran has been bloviating even more than usual about every aspect of the case, from ripping the shirt buyback to coming close to suggesting that BB ought to be considered culpable for the murder. Chris Price published a tough but fair piece on the "disastrous" relationship between Belichick and Urban Meyer, regarding the draftees from UF. Zuri Berry wrote a fairly ridiculous and jejeune article in which he ripped the team, and BB in particular, for not giving the media any self-flagellating quotes, calling the coach a coward and a bully, before he announced that with that said he would be going on vacation for two weeks. In fact, pretty much all of the beat writers and reporters have gone on vacation now, which anyone who follows them on twitter would know. Ben Volin, the latest Miami Dolphin reporter to move to and cover the Pats beat, is obviously not covering up for the team, nor would anyone who works under Joe Sullivan, the sports editor with long-standing animosity toward both Kraft and Belichick. The cult is in Felger's imagination.
I had to turn it off because I'm just sick of hearing about the whole thing. On the other hand I can see where he was coming from because he's right if this were the Red Sox they would be getting absolutely killed if the ownership group and Cherington were out of the country and not answering questions.
Seriously October what does it matter? One of their highest profile players that they just gave a huge contract to has been arrested for one murder and is the prime suspect in two others, two others that he may have committed a mere month before he signed that mega contract and you don't think it matters that Bob Kraft and BB haven't said anything about it outside of the statement they made when he was released???
ForKeeps said:
Did you even listen to the show or is this another one of your pop in one liners? Felger said point blank that the reason no one is up in arms over this is because BB has conditioned everyone to not ask questions because they know they won't get an answer. Look Aquanarc, if you are going to keep posting at least try to have a point or something more than a one liner.
I'm really not all that fired up over this otherwise I wouldn't have turned the show off last night when Felger kept belaboring the point, but this is your defense about Kraft and BB not talking about the case? That the Patriots can remain silent because they were only his employers and no one is going to give the owners of your company shit if you go out and kill someone? You're a better poster than that.riboflav said:
He wants them to have to answer questions, not because he expects to get any answers, but like that's their punishment or something.
judyb said:
Or you know... because that's typically what most sports organizations will do or at least what most reporters will try to get them to do.
Personally, I really don't care whether or not Kraft or BB answer any quesitons or make themselves available, it has zero effect on my life and I've stopped following most of the AH stuff, but I can understand Felger's point. If this happened to the Red Sox Luccino or at the very least Cherington would be in front of this and available and if they weren't they'd be getting killed for it, but for some reason the Patriots get a pass.
HomeBrew1901 said:
What possible things that Kraft and Belichick could say that would be meaningful? You know as well as I do that whatever they say will be skewered by media personnel. Whenever they decide to address it, they will do it. The swift release was as much of a statement as anything. I could give 2 shits what Bob Kraft has to say about it. All they'd say is they made a mistake and they moved on. Like we don't know that already?
RedOctober3829 said:
I was just coming in here to say the same thing? What would any employer say in this case? You keep harping on how this would be different if it was a redsox player, but I don't agree with that. They would likely release the player, issue a statement of condolence to the victim's family, and that would be it. Do you think they would hold a big press conference to say they had no clue this was the type of guy he really was?
The Patriots organization got rid of Hernandez before he was even charged, and have done everything they can to distance themselves from him. I don't understand what you want Kraft or Bill to say on the situation.
RedOctober3829 said:
I, for one, am simply dying to know if Kraft and BB are pro- or anti-murder. Also, the admission that they figured he'd probably murder someone eventually but they were hoping to squeeze another few good years out of him first will be memorable.
Or....there'll be a canned response about how disappointed and heartbroken they are. Like the one already given. But I guess everyone who doesn't go get it said again is in the bag for the Patriots?
So you guys all agree that there isn't a double standard in New England when it comes to how the Patriots are covered and how every other team is covered?
What Kraft and BB say is irrelevant because they aren't going to come out Pro Hernandez or pro murder and would just give the canned answers but at least they would be saying something. At the same time you guys are actually proving Felger's point, that BB has everyone conditioned to not ask the questions because they won't get answers so somehow that makes their refusal to address this directly OK.
Felger even admitted that he has fallen into the same trap which is part of why I turned it off because not only was he beating a dead horse but also he was being a hypocrite about Reiss and others not asking the questions when he's accepted it himself.
Lostjumper, are you saying that an organization where the owner stormed into a radio show to how his team performed in 2011 would have just released a statement and not been in front of the media and on the radio every single minute of every day trying to play damage control? I'm not saying this is what I want from Patriots because I'm just having fun going back and forth and debating this, but if you think the Sox ownership would stay silent on this you are high.
What Kraft and BB say is irrelevant because they aren't going to come out Pro Hernandez or pro murder and would just give the canned answers but at least they would be saying something. At the same time you guys are actually proving Felger's point, that BB has everyone conditioned to not ask the questions because they won't get answers so somehow that makes their refusal to address this directly OK.
Felger even admitted that he has fallen into the same trap which is part of why I turned it off because not only was he beating a dead horse but also he was being a hypocrite about Reiss and others not asking the questions when he's accepted it himself.
Lostjumper, are you saying that an organization where the owner stormed into a radio show to how his team performed in 2011 would have just released a statement and not been in front of the media and on the radio every single minute of every day trying to play damage control? I'm not saying this is what I want from Patriots because I'm just having fun going back and forth and debating this, but if you think the Sox ownership would stay silent on this you are high.
HomeBrew1901 said:
I don't think you can compare the RS owenrship being outspoken re: on-field perfromance / collapses, etc. to a team dealing with a player facing murder charges. This scenario is literally unprecedented, they don't have any case to look back on and say "XXX organization handled it like this, let's do that and not do this".
I also don't think they're getting a free pass. As was noted upthread, there have been a number of articles about the "end of the patiot way" or otherwise calling out the patriots for drafting and subsequently extending Hernandez.
Just because they haven't faced a media firing squad doesn't mean that they haven't been criticized.
edit: Not that you were comparing per se but i don't think you can predict how the sox would have handled this, unprecedented, situation based on how they've handled other baseball related situations.
HomeBrew1901 said:
The Red Sox came under criticism because anonymous sources from the organization totally threw their former manager under the bus and people were up in arms about it. They handled things in that situation(and many other similar situations) about as bad as any organization can. The Patriots simply washed their hands of Aaron Hernandez and released a statement basically saying so. That's what you are supposed to do when one of your employees is involved in something like Hernandez is.
Writers in this town and nationally have taken the Patriots to task in many different ways since this has happened. So, I'm not sure why Felger thinks nobody has said anything about it. We also know there is something personal between him and Reiss so anything he says about him, directly or indirectly, is incredibly biased.
Comparing the other organizations in this town to the Red Sox is a fool's errand.
The Bruins, owned by Mr Burns and run by Cam Neely (who STILL hasn't appeared on TSH to do his "exit interview" after the Cup loss), would have cut the player, issued a statement and avoided press conferences.
The Celtics, owned by superfans Wyc & Steve and run by Mormon Danny, would have cut the player, issued a statement and avoided press conferences.
Why? Because there is absolutely nothing to be gained from answering questions. In the wake of a public relations disaster there are several good options and only one bad one - perpetuating the story with the name of the team in the headlines. "Bruins Management Answers Questions About ______" is a negative for the organization. "Celtics Management Questioned About What They Knew About ______'s Actions" is a negative for the organization.
The Red Sox have, time and time again, shown a willingness (eagerness?) to wallow in tabloid messes like Francona's pain killers. The Red Sox, run by Larry Lucchino, have repeatedly tried to spin stories (Theo leaving, Theo not leaving) in an effort to keep themselves front and center in the media circus. And I don't doubt that they'd have had a self-flagellating press conference where they offered nothing of substance while fanning the media flames were one of their players in the Hernandez role. And it would have been a massive mistake.
The Red Sox are run differently than most other organizations because Larry Lucchino and The Dentist are different than most executives. Larry and Charles clearly believe in the old adage that there is "no such thing as bad publicity". And they are wrong. In this case, bad publicity is BAD. Say nothing, don't issue statements - cut the player and move on. Let the media try to fan it's own inferno of speculation. Don't give them kindling and an opportunity to smear the organization more than they would in the absence of statements, press conferences and interviews. Shut up, clam up, keep quiet and don't give them anything. There's nothing to be gained once you've "done the right thing" and cut the player.
ETA: BOO! The new word filter sucks, especially when you've used it specifically to poke fun at SJH's use of the shortened form of press conferences.
The Bruins, owned by Mr Burns and run by Cam Neely (who STILL hasn't appeared on TSH to do his "exit interview" after the Cup loss), would have cut the player, issued a statement and avoided press conferences.
The Celtics, owned by superfans Wyc & Steve and run by Mormon Danny, would have cut the player, issued a statement and avoided press conferences.
Why? Because there is absolutely nothing to be gained from answering questions. In the wake of a public relations disaster there are several good options and only one bad one - perpetuating the story with the name of the team in the headlines. "Bruins Management Answers Questions About ______" is a negative for the organization. "Celtics Management Questioned About What They Knew About ______'s Actions" is a negative for the organization.
The Red Sox have, time and time again, shown a willingness (eagerness?) to wallow in tabloid messes like Francona's pain killers. The Red Sox, run by Larry Lucchino, have repeatedly tried to spin stories (Theo leaving, Theo not leaving) in an effort to keep themselves front and center in the media circus. And I don't doubt that they'd have had a self-flagellating press conference where they offered nothing of substance while fanning the media flames were one of their players in the Hernandez role. And it would have been a massive mistake.
The Red Sox are run differently than most other organizations because Larry Lucchino and The Dentist are different than most executives. Larry and Charles clearly believe in the old adage that there is "no such thing as bad publicity". And they are wrong. In this case, bad publicity is BAD. Say nothing, don't issue statements - cut the player and move on. Let the media try to fan it's own inferno of speculation. Don't give them kindling and an opportunity to smear the organization more than they would in the absence of statements, press conferences and interviews. Shut up, clam up, keep quiet and don't give them anything. There's nothing to be gained once you've "done the right thing" and cut the player.
ETA: BOO! The new word filter sucks, especially when you've used it specifically to poke fun at SJH's use of the shortened form of press conferences.
There used to be a double standard -- when Ordway (and his two Neanderthal buddies) jumped ugly on every single caller who had anything remotely critical to say about the Pats, then took every occasion to take shots at the Sox. But those days are long.
From a PR standpoint, the Sox are singularly cynical and foolish and richly deserve every bit of criticism heaped on them.
Felger in this instance is just stupid. Not only is he being irresponsible on a pretty serious matter in the name of "entertainment", but also (as kolbitr explained yesterday), Felger is "spectacularly wrong" on the facts.
I'm dying for him today to invoke Bill Polian's sniffy criticism -- "We (Colts) weren't in the AH business". Polian drafted Rae Carruth.
From a PR standpoint, the Sox are singularly cynical and foolish and richly deserve every bit of criticism heaped on them.
Felger in this instance is just stupid. Not only is he being irresponsible on a pretty serious matter in the name of "entertainment", but also (as kolbitr explained yesterday), Felger is "spectacularly wrong" on the facts.
I'm dying for him today to invoke Bill Polian's sniffy criticism -- "We (Colts) weren't in the AH business". Polian drafted Rae Carruth.
This isn't really F&M related, so apologies for adding it on, but we can add one more rather vitriolic piece to those I mentioned upthread: Eric Wilbur wrote a piece today demanding answers from "an exposed institution" showing its "true, cowardly colors". The piece isn't well-written, and doesn't actually make a lot of sense in parts, but does conflate the Hale-Bopp comet, Tebow, releasing a player for having diabetes, and giving Hernandez millions just days after he killed two people.
It's actually kind of a shockingly vicious piece...perhaps Felger will feel better.
It's actually kind of a shockingly vicious piece...perhaps Felger will feel better.