Comments on: Schilling takes it on the chin

By: Big Kev

Big Kev — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 05:14:18 +0000

murphydog, it is very clear from Shaugnessy’s comments that he is not just specifically ripping the people who populate Schill’s blog. He’s ripping bloggers in general. If you even just browse quickly through the comments on Schill’s blog, you will see mostly intelligent, well-written responses just as you see on this blog, or many other blogs for that matter. And so there is no reason to think that those specific bloggers are more of the loser, Star-Trek addicted, mom’s basement type of people that Shaugnessy describes.

You seem to agree whole-heartedly with Dan that Schilling’s blog is made up of these kinds of people. And so I must conclude that you are just ignorant. Have you even looked at Schill’s blog for more than a few minutes?? I hate Schilling just like any other Yankee fan does, but you are simply wrong on this one.

And it’s ok to find Shaugnessy’s article funny from a “I hate Schilling” standpoint. But you are really missing half of his point if you don’t understand that he is also making fun of bloggers in general.

By: Chappy

Chappy — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 02:26:24 +0000

Err, FJM, not FHM. Though FHM is hot too.

By: Chappy

Chappy — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 02:25:22 +0000

Is that really what passes for humor for the Curly Haired Boyfriend? It only becomes funny in light of an FHM skewering of its godawfulness. Christ, Dan, way to take on the challenging strawmen of internet nerds and Curt Schilling. Will you handle hanging chads next? Perhaps Michael Jackson?

Pete, be sure to take Dan Shaughnessy as a bloated example of everything that is wrong with sports journalism. Shitty writing, poor humor, jock envy, everything that has been elucidated above. He is terrible. The only one worse is that moralizing shit Bill Plaschke, who singlehandedly drove De Podesta out of Los Angeles. Oh, and Marrioti, who barely qualifies as a human.

By: Bob Rittner

Bob Rittner — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 01:27:46 +0000

Just to be clear, I am most emphatically not a Red Sox fan, and while I generally do not think I know enough about ballplayers to either like or dislike them-except for what they do on the field-I make an exception in Schilling’s case. I really cannot stand him. None of that is the point. Shaughnessy’s comments are puerile and stupid. I have not read Schilling’s blog (I do not have the stomach for it), but I doubt that his posters are generally sychophants. I have not seen blogs where that is the case. What is clear is that Shaughnessy is purveying moronic nonsense about bloggers and fans who try to understand baseball beyond the traditional reporters’ stress on character and Batting Average. Finding his comments funny is akin to thinking that “Your mama wears combat boots” is a witty rejoinder.

By: grob

grob — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 00:55:15 +0000

anyone ever noticed most people in Boston look like Shaughnessy? What up with that yo?

By: murphydog

murphydog — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 00:19:34 +0000

Let’s recap: Shaughnessy does not like Schill. He thinks Schill is a self-absorbed blowhard. He also does not like the suck ups who write in to Schill’s blog. Does he hate all people who post on blogs? I didn’t read it that way but maybe he does. Do I give a rat’s A? Not at all.

You guys contend that if you found Shaughnessy’s column funny, you are a hypocrite who hates all people who post on blogs. Who cares about Shaughnessy? He took a shot at Schilling, and Pete and others found it funny – - primarily because Dan is relentless about hating Schilling, Schilling is a big blowhard and because Shaughnessy captured the style and thoughts of the sycophants who populate Schill’s blog.

Hey, it’s just my opinion but you Pro-Schiling, Anti-Shaughnessy people are just proving Shaughnessy right about the kinds of thinking you see expressed on blogs by the people who post.

Get over it and stop clogging up this space with your Red Sox garbage.

By: susan mullen

susan mullen — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 23:16:23 +0000

Schilling’s first attempt to go straight to the fans was his oft-mentioned calling of sports talk radio stations. Although he probably wasn’t kept on hold too long, having his own blog saves time from having to call all the stations. Now that I think about it, he deserves credit for that too.

By: Schteeve

Schteeve — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 22:41:17 +0000

Shaughnessy is a moron. And while Schilling might be a blowhard he’s done something potentially game changing. He’s interacting with his fans without some gate-keeping middleman like Shaughnessy in the way.

I give Schilling a lot of credit for having the balls to do what he’s doing. It’s pioneering, and anyone who can’t take one second to give him his due for that, is beyond reasoning with.

By: rbj

rbj — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 21:31:05 +0000

I prefer firejoemorgan.com’s take on CHB.

By: Matt Waters

Matt Waters — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 21:25:39 +0000

The problem with most sportswriters is that they are absolutely embittered by this simple reality: athletes will always achieve far more adoration for physical talent than sports scribes will ever earn for even excellent writing. Itâ€™s basic jock envy. Even in that article, one arrives at the feeling, that, deep down, CHB wants Schillingâ€™s fan boys to be his. The bitter jealously is starkly evident, with his narrow-minded characterization of fans as â€œlosers.â€? I wonder: Are these fans losers, in one writerâ€™s eyes, because they love Schilling, or because most of them probably hate Shaughnessy?

Being a writer now, removed from a failed playing “career” flat lined by High School caliber curveballs, I realize that a perfectly executed, deliciously subtle pun, despite inherent merit, isn’t jamming 50,000 people into Yankee stadium. It’s better to accept this, instead of being an angry troll about it.

Pete, I’m a little disappointed by your endorsement of an article that is so plainly vicious toward fans. Yeah, anyone who posts on Schilling’s blog is a loser who lives in a basement. Right.

All the cool people must be reading Shaughnessy.