Totally not what I expected from that audience. I'm pleasantly surprised.thurin68 said:The comments after the story alone make this a must read
Totally not what I expected from that audience. I'm pleasantly surprised.thurin68 said:The comments after the story alone make this a must read
:bravo:Red(s)HawksFan said:How do we know he's not reacting to the "re-sign Drew" talk?
It's kind of weak that the defense of the cohabitation just boils down to "who cares?" and "it doesn't matter."
Why can't we expect more? A broadcast that doesn't condescend to us and engage in constant farce? We're all psyched to be watching a couple chat it up about the game on the Fenway infield after a big win?
Kirk Minihane is just trying to justify the seriousness of his own job.ForKeeps said:http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/kirk-minihane/2014/01/14/time-jenny-dell-nesn-relationship-end
I wonder if Kirk thinks it's a coincidence or just lack of competency that Dell, who is as close to the team if not closer than any reporter in the country, has never once broken a story. Ditto for Heidi, Tina, Hazel Mae, etc. Put two and two together, Kirk.
Taaaaake it easy Will. Do not feed the trolls.
IpswichSox said:
Ordinarily I would agree. But each time WMB tweets, it increases the chance that he mistakenly posts some of the awesome pictures/videos that you just know are on his phone.
To me, this issue is pretty simple. Jenny is Vanna White, not Bob Woodward. That's not a knock of Jenny -- it's the role she was hired to play. If she wants date WMB -- or Pat Sajak -- who cares? It doesn't affect my ability to watch the game or glean insight from her post-game, on-field interviews. If anything, it probably makes WMB happy, and if that makes him a better baseball player, I'm all for it.
Interestingly enough, this is one reason why these sort of relationships are problematic. There's no real reason why a player should be in a position of choosing whether to jump to the defense of someone covering the team. [hypothetical alert]Is he going to start treating Pete Abraham like shit because fellow-Glober Chad Finn points out that Jenny can't string together 2 coherent sentences in a row?
Will should let her fight her own battles. This goes back to Finn's original point (and one that Abby Chin made): relationships like these make it difficult for those women in sports who see "sideline reporter" as a stepping stone to something better/different in sports; or something to be avoided altogether to avoid the pigeon-hole. "Now her boyfriend is defending her" doesn't help.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:The unbiased in-game reporter or announcer is a myth.
soxfan121 said:
I don't believe anyone is making this argument. Sideline reporters are hood ornaments; it's a BS job.
The issue is one of professionalism. NESN is a house organ coated in a veneer of professionalism. They sell "Hall of Fame" analysts, clear views of home plate, announcers who pay attention (mostly), and most of all, the baseball team. It is an operation in making the Red Sox look good: look like a product the viewer wants to spend money on, look like a product advertisers will get their money's worth from.
The hood ornament fucking the third baseman is not professional. It sells no tickets. It sells no advertising. It makes some very small percentage of the fan base say "good for him, she's hot" and some larger, but still statistically insignificant percentage of the fan base say "ewww, that's not something I want my kids to know". It has the potential to adversely affect "The Product" and can do nothing to sell "The Product".
Dell's behavior also makes it harder for Abby Chin to be taken seriously because too many people don't differentiate between the useless hood ornament and an actual, working, professional journalist. That's a different aspect and I think Dell's an asshole but she's entitled to be an asshole on that issue if she chooses.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
Two things:
1. If Will Middlebrooks isn't holding a grudge against Peter Abraham for some of the things Dan Shaughnessy has written about him (Middlebrooks) or even what Abraham wrote, I doubt he's going to hold something against Abraham for something that Chad Finn wrote about his girlfriend.
2. There might be some examples that I'm not thinking of (Robin Roberts maybe?) but when has a sideline reporter worked he way up to something better/different in sports? And when you say better/different, I'm assuming that you mean something more substantial (reporter, writer, studio analyst) than a sideline reporter. I think that the high-water mark for these women are studio host, a la Heidi Wattney at MLB Network. If you're a serious about journalism (man or woman) you don't take the sideline reporter gig, everyone knows it's a complete BS job.
The issue is one of professionalism. NESN is a house organ coated in a veneer of professionalism. They sell "Hall of Fame" analysts, clear views of home plate, announcers who pay attention (mostly), and most of all, the baseball team. It is an operation in making the Red Sox look good: look like a product the viewer wants to spend money on, look like a product advertisers will get their money's worth from.
It sells no tickets. It sells no advertising. It makes some very small percentage of the fan base say "good for him, she's hot" and some larger, but still statistically insignificant percentage of the fan base say "ewww, that's not something I want my kids to know". It has the potential to adversely affect "The Product" and can do nothing to sell "The Product".
Merkle's Boner said:The fact that it's such a meaningless position seems to be the exact reason why NESN should move her to some other gig. No one cares if it's her or some other eye candy doing the gig so why wouldn't they avoid any perceived issue. No ones gonna give a shit if they move her to the Patriots or Bruins.
Corsi said:
Unless, of course, her contract stipulates that she work specifically for the Red Sox.
Patriots or Bruins fans would.Merkle's Boner said:The fact that it's such a meaningless position seems to be the exact reason why NESN should move her to some other gig. No one cares if it's her or some other eye candy doing the gig so why wouldn't they avoid any perceived issue. No ones gonna give a shit if they move her to the Patriots or Bruins.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
1. We all know that's crap though. Think of all the analysts that NESN trots out and aside from Eckersley, who has said anything even remotely controversial or even interesting about the Red Sox? Even in 2012 when the Sox were complete dog shit, no one said shit. It was all, "Gosh, well the Sox are really giving a solid effort despite the fact that they're 132 games out of first. You have to appreciate that, TC!"
2. Right, but it's not doing the opposite. You think 1-800-54-GIANT or WB Mason is going to stop advertising with NESN because of Jenny Dell? 3. And seriously, "The think of the children!" defense. Take it easy, Helen Lovejoy. Come on.
soxfan121 said:
1. I hate to do this but your first paragraph is invalid. The word "veneer" has a pretty specific meaning, encompassing all of the things you've gone on to use in your post. I completely agree with that first paragraph - it's why I chose the phrasing I did in my post.
2. No, I do not. But there's nothing but downside risk to the situation. There is a 0.0 chance that the WMB-Dell romance raises ad rates 1 cent. There is a non-zero chance that if something unlikely happens (public breakup caught on a cell phone camera?) that ad revenues or public perception of the team/network could be affected. There is literally no upside at all (except for WMB/Dell personally) and nothing but potential risk for their employers. No one is buying a ticket because WMB is shtupping the sideline bimbo. There's a small (again, said this above) small chance that someone doesn't buy a ticket because of it.
3. Scoff if you'd like but those people buy tickets. But if you'd prefer, we can shelve the potential for Helen Lovejoy to be offended and simply reference the "pink hat" segment of fans. The rumor about the previous eye candy breaking up Varitek's marriage (true or not) was an issue for many of them. They buy merchandise, they buy tickets, they watch games and they aren't children. Heck, some of them were just jealous they didn't get the chance to break up Varitek's marriage. But ANYTHING that doesn't sell the product and could keep buyers from buying again should be minimized or eliminated.
1. I hate to do this but your first paragraph is invalid. The word "veneer" has a pretty specific meaning, encompassing all of the things you've gone on to use in your post. I completely agree with that first paragraph - it's why I chose the phrasing I did in my post.
2. No, I do not. But there's nothing but downside risk to the situation. There is a 0.0 chance that the WMB-Dell romance raises ad rates 1 cent. There is a non-zero chance that if something unlikely happens (public breakup caught on a cell phone camera?) that ad revenues or public perception of the team/network could be affected. There is literally no upside at all (except for WMB/Dell personally) and nothing but potential risk for their employers. No one is buying a ticket because WMB is shtupping the sideline bimbo. There's a small (again, said this above) small chance that someone doesn't buy a ticket because of it.
3. Scoff if you'd like but those people buy tickets. But if you'd prefer, we can shelve the potential for Helen Lovejoy to be offended and simply reference the "pink hat" segment of fans. The rumor about the previous eye candy breaking up Varitek's marriage (true or not) was an issue for many of them. They buy merchandise, they buy tickets, they watch games and they aren't children. Heck, some of them were just jealous they didn't get the chance to break up Varitek's marriage. But ANYTHING that doesn't sell the product and could keep buyers from buying again should be minimized or eliminated.
Jnai said:
What if Middlebrooks is happy because he's dating her, and because he's happy, he hits more dingers? People love dingers.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:I know that you're trying to take the opposite side of an argument and are playing devil's advocate, but you should stop. It's tiresome.
soxfan121 said:
No, I'm not playing - I think this is bad for business because it is unprofessional. But since I've been told to stop, I'll let you get back to the non-discussion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-XhyLqC344
joe dokes said:
Will should let her fight her own battles. This goes back to Finn's original point (and one that Abby Chin made): relationships like these make it difficult for those women in sports who see "sideline reporter" as a stepping stone to something better/different in sports; or something to be avoided altogether to avoid the pigeon-hole. "Now her boyfriend is defending her" doesn't help.
Or maybe she doesn't give a shit about what anybody thinks. Not "journalism ethics" people; not other women in the business. I suppose that would be too bad on some level, but that's her call.
crystalline said:
I think the Abby Chin stuff is overblown. I feel a little bad for Chin because she seems very earnest. But if she wanted to be in a profession in which she was taken seriously for her unbiased coverage of the issues, she has to realize that she shouldn't have chosen sports journalism.
Yes because what is funnier than dudes murdering their girlfriends?that last line had me howling
Yes because what is funnier than dudes murdering their girlfriends?
She was hosting sportsdesk or whatever they call it now on Saturday nightsoxhop411 said:Has NESN decided if they are bringing back Dell?
https://twitter.com/GlobeChadFinn/status/429008418586652672(1/2) Statement from NESN spokesman Gary Roy: NESN has an active search for a Red Sox sideline reporter ...
(2/2) Jenny Dell, a multi-talented on-air personality, is anchoring NESN Sports Today and handling other assignments for NESN.