When Mariotti attacks Simmons, everybody loses, part 1

I mean, not us, the sports-following public.  We all win in the sense that we get to laugh and one stupid asshole with "credentials" picking on another, more popular, stupid asshole without credentials.  But Bill and Jay most definitely both lose.

The Internet has perpetrated too much disarray in the world, 

Could have ended the article right here and actually made a decent point.  Also, get off his lawn and pull your pants up.

giving semi-lives to people with no lives 

Hopefully this is (besides being an obvious critique of YouTube celebrities, etc.) a veiled shot at the people who have exposed Jay as a violent, woman-hitting asshole.

and adding too many reckless, unqualified voices to the daily churn. 

First use of "qualified" or a synonym or related term: 23 words in.  Pay out the winner of your office pool accordingly.

The sports media business is no different. 

Different from what?  The internet?  The sports media business takes place almost entirely on the internet.  Jay of all people should know this, given that his own personal website was the only "outlet" that would hire him for about a six year period there.

A new century gave rise to sports websites that had to compete against legitimate journalists 

Buckle up!  Here we go!  This sentence is like getting pummeled in the face by a boxer whose gloves say OLD and MEDIA on them.

who actually broke news responsibly, 

I'm so tired of these unprofessional bloggers always breaking news irresponsibly!  Why, established media members like Chris Mortensen and Chad Ford and Ken Rosenthal and on and on and on never participate in the race to the bottom that is the effort to get a scoop.  Just because the "instant update" nature of the internet has dragged established media like those guys into its game doesn't mean you can go blaming blogs for it.  And better yet, this whole article is actually a complaint about Simmons, who hasn't broken a fart's worth of news in his whole career.

covered games and press conferences on site, 

Hahahahahahahahahhahaahahaaahhahahaha

interviewed subjects, 

Nothing like a HARD-HITTING Mike Wilbon interview/ball washing session to really get yourself inside the mind of a professional athlete.

understood libel/slander law

Subtext: Jay feels as though he has been the victim of libel and slander.  Reality: Jay has deserved each and every bad thing anyone has ever written or said about him, even the ones that weren't true.

and carried the profession with savvy.

Yes.  Savvy.  So much savvy.

So, to have any chance, many of these new sites went low-brow and hired fans with no training in anything but how to wear a personally customized jersey to an arena, drink three beers and cheer maniacally for one’s team.

Well now you sound like you're just complaining about Simmons and Bleacher Report (They were made for each other, weren't they?), when I really feel like we were building some momentum towards an anti-blogger rant.  Disappointing.

Bill Simmons, for instance.

At least Bill has never (to our knowledge) stalked or assaulted a woman.  Good for him.  Wait, is that libel?  Probably not, since Jay pleaded no contest to charges of both of those in 2011.

ESPN.com, then a digital embryo in a growing corporate empire, lured the eyeballs of sports fans by hiring one. Simmons had some talent, 

Mariotti admitting that Simmons has talent is kind of like a 6 year old admitting that his 8 year old brother is smarter than him.

spoke the fan language and understood the fan perspective, so the hire was a good one … as a blogging niche. But then ESPN did the inconceivable, unleashing him as a sportswriting monster who decided 6,000-word pieces without a quote — 6,000 words of literary masturbation — were good reads. 

Whoa, I have to admit it--all of a sudden Jay is bringing some FIRE.  GO JAY GO.

They were not good reads, 

HOW WILL WE LOOK BACK ON THE MOMENT WHERE WE REALIZED THEY WERE NOT GOOD READS 15 YEARS FROM NOW?  Also, Jay, you're a horrific writer yourself.  Your masturbatory articles just happen to be shorter than Bill's.

but at that point, anything with the ESPN stamp of approval seemed to succeed as the network claimed domination of the industry, 

I will mock Simmons for a lot of things, but one claim I will never make is that he "only obtained his success because he was piggybacking on ESPN's success" or something like that.  He earned all those fans on his own.  Most of them are dipshit morons who know nothing about sports and should never be conversed with, but still: he earned them.

whether it was a revolving all-night cycle of SportsCenter or the quieting of four sportswriters with a mute button on a debate show (I was on that show).

WERE YOU?  REMIND US.  What a monument to the professionalism and savviness of REAL SPORTSWRITERS that show is.

Sports fanboys began to read the fanboy sportswriter. Traffic grew. Advertisers bought in. Simmons wrote two masturbatory books, both best-sellers. Suddenly, it didn’t matter if he never broke news and never quoted anyone but himself and his cousin. 

All true.  Maybe your ire should be directed towards the people who made Bill popular, then, no?  The idiocracy of sports fans creates phenomena like Bill.  Additionally, it's more than worth pointing out that the only person to blame for Jay's lack of success is Jay.

ESPN created the original fanboy sportswriter, spawning a generation of fanboy sportswriters who also don’t know how to break news responsibly, interview subjects and cover sports properly.

I know I've used "hahahahahahaha" already a couple of times in this post, but seriously, how else do you respond to this?  Jay Mariotti just wrote that sentence.  THE Jay Mariotti.  July 2, 2006 Jay Mariotti.  He thinks today's new media sportswriters are irresponsible, shouldn't matter because they don't have ACCESS, and cover sports improperly.  What else do you say to that?

Friday, ESPN uncreated Simmons, choosing not to renew his contract.

VINDICATION!  Maybe they'll hire Jay to fill his shoes!

At long last, an embarrassing business might have a chance again.

Oh my God.  I can't keep going on this tonight.  Someone who simultaneously thinks that Bill only got popular because ESPN got popular first, yet is also to blame for all the shittiness that makes ESPN what it is today, should be placed in a spaceship and immediately shot into the sun.  Seriously, fuck both of these people.

TNTMQR: Oh God Now I'm More Than a Week Behind

So yeah, this is the TMQ from Tuesday 10/26. I'm stubborn as hell and refuse to skip one so I'm still playing catchup.

College hoops tip soon, too. Hope you didn't miss this important article on college basketball, showing cheating coaches prosper while the only coaching flaw that's punished is losing. This syncs with TMQ's contention that the structural problem of major college athletics is that coaches are lavishly rewarded with money if their teams win but not penalized if their players don't graduate.

What a novel, crazy, unique contention this man makes. Can anyone else confirm this nasty rumor? Why would coaches be rewarded for winning but not penalized for failing to get diplomas for their players? Is there a bunch of money in college sports or something?

Suppose this simple rule were added to college football and men's basketball: Unless at least 80 percent of a team's players graduate, the coach is suspended for one year. That would add what's missing -- an incentive for coaches to care about education.

Yeah, I can really see the money-grubbing NCAA and money-grubbing universities going along with that one. Surely they'll vote for something that couldn't be more against their own financial interests. Alternately, let's say the NCAA mysteriously stopped being the big gaggle of assholes they are and actually did create/pass/enforce this rule. Boy, you think schools might just go out of their way to make sure athletes got all the "help" they needed in order to graduate? What a great idea. The problem with college sports is systemic- it's the money- and it's never going away. Deal with it. It's an unsolvable problem.

Stat of the Week No. 1: Stretching back to last season, 2009 non-playoff teams Atlanta, Pittsburgh and Tennessee are on a combined 24-6 streak.

What do you mean stretching back to last season? Since July 2nd, 2006...

Cheerleader of the Week: Bryan Law of Independence, Ohio, nominates Christina of the Broncos, who, according to her team bio, works for the Department of Justice as a paralegal in the Environment and Natural Resources Division. This means you could file a Freedom of Information Act request for her swimsuit photo.

Jesus Christ. You are the nerdiest nerd who ever nerded up the internet with your nerd comments about attractive women.

Leading 17-14, Minnesota had first-and-20 on its 24 with 35 seconds remaining in the first half, holding two timeouts, and simply let the clock expire. Huh?

A team wanted to take a lead into halftime rather than taking a relative long shot on getting into field goal range (needed 45 yards or so) by letting the guy who's thrown more interceptions than anyone else in NFL history chuck the ball downfield. Into 4 deep coverage. Does that unstump you?

Turner sent out the field goal team for a 45-yard attempt; San Diego jumped offside, making it a 50-yard attempt; Brown missed. A 50-yard field goal attempt is a 50/50 proposition, and going to overtime is itself a 50/50 proposition -- so as the kick boomed, Turner was essentially putting his chips on a 1-in-4 chance of victory, as opposed to going for it on fourth-and-2 with the league's top-ranked offense.

Love this argument. LOVE IT. First, you have the super basic problem with his math. The odds at the time of the 50 yard attempt were probably around 25%, but what are the odds of converting a 4th and 7? That was the alternative at that point, not a 4th and 2. The odds at the time of the 4th and 2 were higher than 25% because the odds of converting a 45 yard field goal are higher than those of a 50 yard field goal. But I'm just getting started.

Even if you accept his logic that they shouldn't have bothered to line up to kick because the odds of winning at that moment were pretty low, then you get the amazing false alternative that surely, going for it on 4th was a much better idea. What are the odds of converting that 4th down? The league average on 4th downs is about 49% (source: NFL.com- Google it if you don't believe me), and you figure most of those were of the 4th and short variety. Some were on 4th and 5 or 6 or more, but many were on 4th and inches or 4th and 1. Let's be generous and say they had a 60% chance of getting the 4th and 2. So then that leaves them... on them... somewhere around the 20 or 25, with a running clock, still down 3. What are their odds of getting a touchdown before the clock expires? How much higher are their FG odds from 40/35/30 yards? Enough to compensate for the fact that (randomly estimated) 40% of the time, you go for the 4th and 2 and miss and the game ends right there? NOT SO FAST MY FRIEND.

But just ask TMQ- going for it on 4th down is always the right decision, always and forever, and if you don't think so you're a simpleton idiot who doesn't understand football and probably likes to go Christmas shopping in November. Creep alert!

For New England, Turner's ultra-conservative decision was sweet. For San Diego, it was sour, sour, sour.

I LOVE 4TH DOWN ATTEMPTS SO MUCH I JUST WANT TO BE WITH THEM FOREVER.

Unified Field Theory of Creep: Justin Martineau of New Orleans reports, "Starting in January, license plates for the bicentennial of the statehood of Louisiana will become the state's standard. The date of ascension is April 30, 1812. These plates are 16 months early."

Lame.

Robert Drago of Washington, D.C., writes, "Tonight I downloaded the latest Norton security update, and it was advertised as Norton 2011. Is Norton taking a holiday for the rest of 2010?"

Lame.

Joost Smets of Uffelte, Netherlands, writes, "Recently, I noticed an advertisement in my newspaper for the joint Dutch/Belgian bid for the 2018 and 2022 soccer World Cup. Not only does 2018 sounds like distant future to me, the Netherlands have never organized a World Cup, and already we're looking forward to host the tournament for the second time."

Very lame.

Dwight Peck of Phoenix reports, "On October 15, I received the spring 2011 catalog from Eddie Bauer."

OK, see, now THAT'S actual creep. The rest of you emailers can go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.

The Steelers kicked for a 23-22 lead and a moment later stopped South Florida's fourth-and-6 pass attempt when tackle Vernon Carey, a first-round draft pick, failed to stay with his man despite the Dolphins having five blockers for three Pittsburgh rushers.

We all know Gregg hates first round picks (except Peyton Manning, because what media member doesn't want to blow Peyton Manning?), but this is an unusually flippant shot at one of them. It was one damn play. If a guy with a big ego and a big contract who was drafted in the first round has a bad game, a bad season, a career that never gets off the ground- sure, have at him. But sheesh. This guy had a bad play. You think Jonathan Ogden or Frank Matthews ever had a bad play? This is like some random flippant racist comment, like "Oh I got cut off on the highway the other day by this guy who was talking on his cell phone, and wouldn't you know it, of course he was a _______ to boot." It's so irrelevant what round a guy who has one bad play was drafted in that I can barely express it.

If Richmond, UC Santa Barbara and Wofford also had reached the Sweet 16, that would have brought in the Gauchos, Spiders and Terriers. TMQ thinks fans of the Wofford Terriers should chant, "Here boy! Here boy!"

Crickets. Who is he writing for? Who is his perceived audience? Four year olds? Family Circus fans?

Until such time as there might be an age-21 minimum for the NBA, Adande contends, teams should ignore the draft, concentrating on preserving cap space to sign players drafted and developed by someone else. Teams seem to be taking Adande's advice, if perhaps unintentionally -- there's a clear trend of NBA clubs simply discarding high choices.

Sure, that's somewhat true. And then we see this hilariously bad string of examples used to try to prove that fairly legitimate point.

Miami used the second choice of the 2008 draft on Michael Beasley and in July traded him to Minnesota for essentially nothing, just to get rid of him.

Because he was an asshole. They tried like hell to get him to play well for two seasons before then.

Washington traded the fifth choice of the 2009 draft for Mike Miller and Randy Foye, then a year later waved goodbye to both, netting nothing.

That one's pretty fair.

Minnesota used the sixth choice of the 2009 draft on Ricky Rubio, who won't play in the NBA until 2011, if he ever does.

They desperately wanted Rubio to come and play for them. Rubio is an asshole who doesn't want to play in Minnesota, so he held out. This might be their fault for not doing their homework on him but it's not them "discarding" a draft choice either.

Memphis used the second choice of the 2009 draft on Hasheem Thabeet, who ended up with the Dakota Wizards of the D-League.

Same story as Beasley.

Why not simply open the window and throw first-round draft choices out?

Because teams often use them to take awesome players, such as dozens and dozens of awesome current NBA players who were taken in first round (Or gasp- sometimes in the lottery!).

Banning teens -- isn't there a "right" to play in the NBA at age 19? There's no right to be a 19-year-old airline pilot. Courts have ruled that professions may impose "bona fide" occupational requirements. Requiring NBA players to be at least 21 years of age would pass the test of bona fide, since that would improve the league's quality of play.

Most oversimplified legal argument ever, and one that would take months or years of litigation to settle if the NBA actually made the restriction. It's amazing that this guy's brother is a famous federal judge.

LeBron James was an exception; as a group, basketball players in their early 20s are much better performers than basketball players in their teens. The WNBA requires players to be either college graduates or 22 years of age, and there have been no legal problems with this.

Probably because there is no money involved with the WNBA whatsoever.

A similar example is Shaun Livingston, who jumped from high school to the NBA as the fourth choice of the 2004 draft. He's bounced around to six teams, including the Tulsa 66ers, and never been close to what he might have become with a few years in college.

Shaun Livingston was quickly developing into a pretty badass player with the Clippers when, in 2007, he suffered more or less the most grotesque sports-related injury you will ever see. Youtube it if you want- it's not for the faint of heart. That season, at the ripe old age of 21, he was averaging 9 points, 5 assists, and 3.5 rebounds in about 30 minutes per game. He was well on his way to being a solid starter, if not a star. The injury (to his knee) was so devastating he essentially missed two full seasons recovering. He's still not back and may never be, but before the injury, he was great ammunition for the advocates of letting high schoolers into the NBA.

Worst. Example. Ever.

Last spring Livingston declined a contract offer from the Wizards, saying he didn't want to share the spotlight with Gilbert Arenas and John Wall -- so in six years of bouncing around, he hasn't learned anything.

Translation: he wanted to get more than 7 minutes of playing time a night, so he told the Wizards he'd look elsewhere to revive his spiraling career. WHAT A SELFISH SALLY!

See you again next week, where I'll comment on today's TMQ. Man, I am pathetic.

WMTMQR Part 1: Wouldn't it be Cool if Gregg Easterbrook Went Away and Never Came Back

Here's your political joke: I'd like to "vote" (see what I did there?) that Gregg be deported to Siberia.

In this spread-offense empty-backfield era -- I don't wish to alarm you, but pass-wacky Arizona leads the NFL in scoring --

Why is that supposed to alarm me? Because Arizona is never good? Because passing teams don't usually lead the league in scoring? Because Gregg is just being polite?

Tuesday Morning Quarterback longs for some old-fashioned ground-based football. On Saturday night, Texas and Texas Tech combined for 768 yards through the air and 185 yards on the ground. Will all of football turn into the Arena League? What a relief Sunday was, with old-fashioned rushing and good offensive line play dominating many games.

This never happens in the NCAA. Certainly not, for example, last weekend when Florida clowned Georgia while rushing and passing for essentially equal yardage. Or when Utah won a potential trap game at New Mexico while doing the same. Or when Georgia Tech upset Florida State by rushing for 288 yards while passing for a whole whopping 55. (These are just three random examples from top 25 games last week. Feel free to look up a few more of your own.)

Here's my prediction: The next big innovation in football will be the rediscovery of the power run. Consider:

Here's a prediction: the next big new thing will be something that already exists. Think about it. So crazy it just might work.

Tennessee remained the NFL's sole undefeated team by rushing for 178 yards against Green Bay.

Difference between the Titans and, for example, the "pass wacky" Cardinals: the former has Kerry Collins and a bunch of WRs no one has ever heard of. The latter has Kurt Warner, Anquan Boldin, and Larry Fitzgerald. Hmmm, perhaps the Titans are adjusting their game plan to fit their personnel, no?

The defending champion Giants humbled the ship-taking-on-water Cowboys on the strength of 200 rushing yards, culminating with Derrick Ward's run for 17 yards untouched on a draw for the score that iced the contest.

True, but be careful. The Giants are averaging almost 50 yards per game more through the air than on the ground. That's approaching wackiness.

Atlanta rushed for 252 yards behind some tremendous offensive line performances; see more below.

They were playing the Raiders. You can't prove anything by citing the stats of a team that played the Raiders. Plus, they were up 14-0 after a quarter and 24-0 at the half. I'm not going to look up how many passes they threw in the second half, but I bet it wasn't very many.

Detroit was leading -- that's not a misprint -- Chicago 23-20 in the fourth quarter when Bears tailback Matt Forte had old-fashioned off-tackle runs for 13 and 19 yards on a drive that set up Chicago's game-winning touchdown.

The Bears had 2 good run plays in the 4th quarter- therefore, power running is back! Fun hidden fact: the Lions were a few plays away from winning the game, in spite of passing for 280 yards and rushing for 53.

With Miami leading Denver 19-17 and facing first-and-goal on the Broncos' 2-yard line in the fourth quarter, Ronnie Brown went into the end zone standing up for the icing points.

Someone ran for a 2 yard touchdown- therefore, power running is back!

Stat of the Week No. 1: The Oakland Raiders, at 2-6, are two games out of first place in the AFC West.

A 4-4 division leader. Lunacy. What is the world coming to? Oh yeah- three other divisions have a 5-3 leader.

Stat of the Week No. 5: From the fourth quarter of their previous game through this week's game against the Jets, Buffalo had these possession results: interception, fumble, safety, fumble, muffed punt, touchdown, fumble, interception, turnover on downs, punt, field goal, missed field goal, interception.

Since July 2, 2006...

Stat of the Week No. 6: Jacksonville has lost in consecutive weeks to teams that are a combined 4-13; next week, Jacksonville plays 0-8 Detroit.

Not a stat.

Stat of the Week No. 7: Of the NFL's top four sack-producing defenses, two are from Pennsylvania (the Steelers and Eagles) and the other two are from New Jersey (the Giants and Jets).

Based on stats, but also not a stat.

Stat of the Week No. 9: Pittsburgh is the sole team whose defense has not surrendered a play of 40 or more yards.

Also not a stat.

From Cheerleader of the Week:

NFL franchises are rolling in money -- around $200 million in revenue per club per year -- and glamorous cheer-babes are part of the entertainment appeal. Why isn't there a movement to organize pro sports cheerleaders and pay them fairly?

Parading your body around in front of the ugly, unwashed masses and hoping it's a good enough resume booster to get yourself a job in a Vegas show is its own reward.

Sweet Team of the Week: In Michael Vick's happier days, the Falcons led the NFL in rushing; this stat was dismissed by the sports-yak world as a mere byproduct of Vick's runs, as if quarterback rushes somehow did not count. Be that as it may, the No. 1 rushing team in the NFL right now is the Atlanta Falcons, averaging a sparkling 163 yards per game and 4.7 yards per rush. Obviously Atlanta's running backs are playing well, but rushing success begins with the offensive line -- can you name a single Falcons blocker?

Yeah, you selfish reader- can't you name anyone who starts on the Atlanta Falcons' offensive line? (I'm a huge NFL fan, and I don't think I could name more than 20 linemen league-wide who don't play for my favorite team or in their division.)

Sour Teams of the Week: Two weeks ago, Jacksonville was entering perhaps the softest schedule stretch any NFL team has ever enjoyed: 2-4 Cleveland, followed by 0-8 Cincinnati (citing their records at that point), followed by 0-8 Detroit. The Jags have managed to lose the first two of these three gimme games. Yes, this shows nothing is easy in the NFL. And yes, Jax has injuries. But in football, everybody always has injuries. The Jaguars seemed overconfident and "played down" to their opponents;

Based on what? Based... on... what? If there's one thing I hate about Easterbrook (which, surprisingly, there are several), it's his "Team A lost because of this anecdotal reason and I don't need to prove it because you can't disprove it" bullshit. I should make this his fourth Pillar of Idiocy. That's a reference to something dumb I wrote a few weeks ago- if you don't get it, don't worry about it.

Sunday they didn't wake up until the fourth quarter, when they outscored Cincinnati 16-0, but missed the decisive two-point conversion try at the end. And why wasn't the deuce try a power rush, by this team that specializes in power rushing? Instead it was a rinky-dinky pass attempt that fell incomplete.

Remember this. It will be important later.

And what of coach Dick "Cheerio, Chaps" Jauron? Two weeks ago, when Buffalo was 5-1, the Bills' management gave Jauron a lavish contract extension -- despite Jauron having a career record of 55-68 on the day the extension was agreed to. Now he's 55-70. Has Jauron been paying more attention to his purse than his team? Since the contract extension, the Bills have played two stinker games, and in both seemed poorly prepared.

So they have had turnover problems, and allowed some sacks. That's a better explanation than nothing... but not by much.

Sour Play of the Week: Kansas City led City of Tampa 24-3 in the first half. But at the end of regulation, the Bucs scored to cut the lead to 27-25 and lined up for a deuce try. In very sour fashion, Kansas City rushed only three, dropping enormous defensive tackle Glenn Dorsey into coverage, where he did nothing but stand around. Pass complete, and Kansas City lost in overtime.

Remember that bit about Jacksonville I told you to remember? Well, the Jags are actually only the 17th best team in the league this year in rushing yards per game. How dare they not attempt a run on a 2 point conversion! Oh, but the Bucs, who are 9th best in rushing yards per game? No complaints when they throw when they go for two. Gregg Easterbrook: letting the ends justify the means and relentlessly contradicting his own logic since 2003. Also, if the pass had been knocked down and KC had won, please believe this call by the Chiefs would have been mentioned positively in a "Stop Me Before I Blitz Again!" segment.

Time for me to pass out. More to come tomorrow, including (here's your teaser) Gregg still not understanding how time works! The more things change, the more they stay the same.

I'm Just Now Starting To Understand the Depth of Jay Mariotti's Ability to "Windsock"

By windsocking, I mean the phenomenon Chris W described in the comments section of the last Mariotti post I did. When popular opinion seems to be going one way, Jay must take the opposite stance. Bears fans think their team has a shot this year? Fuck you, Bears fans. The Bears will be lucky to win five games. Cubs fans feeling down in the dumps about a losing streak? Fuck you, Cubs fans. The Cubs are the greatest and classiest organization in baseball. White Sox fans think Ozzie Guillen is for the most part taking their team in the right direction? Fuck you, White Sox fans. Your team hasn't even won a game since July 2, 2006. And so on and so on.

But here's the caveat- with the exception of the Ozzie thing, on which is mind is pretty much made up, all of these stances are 100% susceptible to being reversed in the event that popular opinion begins to reflect what Jay has been thinking. The example from that post was their acquisition of Rich Harden. As Chris said- basically, before the Cubs got Harden, that was what they needed to do in order to make a run and you were a crazy person if you thought they had a shot in the postseason without him. Once the Cubs went out and got Harden, however, Jay was the first to point out that he had some possible lingering injury problems and there was no point in counting on him to contribute in October. And so on and so forth.

So why did I write this lengthy introduction? Because I'm an egotistical blowhard, for one thing. But I'm also getting to the point of this post. If you click the "Jay Mariotti" on our sidebar, here are some of the things you'll find on the first page that Jay has said about the White Sox. (And this is just in the last six months or so.)

-...the Sox, firmly the distant No. 2 baseball team again in the nation's third-largest market...
-Hate to be cynical about Ken Williams' belated offseason attempt to redeem himself, but acquiring Nick Swisher only assures the Sox of one thing: They're a little better than the Kansas City Royals.
-Consider it one more reason, along with the extension given to Ozzie Guillen, that the Sox are locked in as Chicago's second-class ballclub for years to come. ("It" being the fact that they gave a new contract to broadcaster Hawk Harrelson. Apparently, to Jay, nothing screams "organizational measuring stick" like the guy behind the TV microphone. That explains why the Yankees have been so good for so long.)
-The Sox are easy to loathe.
-The Sox can crow all they want about their World Series title, how they beat the Cubs to the holy grail. At least the Cubs still own their dignity as a Chicago institution...
-The team with no class almost spun a no-hitter. (Gavin Floyd, back in early May)
-This weekend at the Palmer House Hilton, snarling fans will continue a Soxfest tradition. They'll demand straight answers from general manager Ken Williams, who would have more fun sleeping naked at Wrigley Field in a snowstorm. They will ask why he left the rotation filled with craters, why he whiffed badly on Torii Hunter and Miguel Cabrera and why he keeps talking about a championship when finishing .500 seems like a -- cue the silly Hawkeroo -- ``stretch, stretch, stretch.''

This sample represents less than 1% of all the bad things Jay has ever said about the White Sox. So then, knowing how he loves this "windsocking" thing, I guess his article from Friday's Sun-Times (as a policy, we don't link him anymore, you'll have to find it yourself if you need the original for some reason) shouldn't come as much of a surprise.

Unfairly Snubbed, Sox Deserve Much Better

Especially from that nasty ol' Chicago media. Why can't they just support the hometown team?

Dadgum, Hawkeroo. Would you believe the records are nearly identical now? In fact, when weighing the difficulty quotient of playing in the superior league, the White Sox actually are having a better season than the charmed, beloved, gush-and-goo Cubbies.

Whom Jay has been gushing and goo-ing over for a good two months now.

Where this uprising came from, I don't know,

I have a theory about one such possible source.

and where it's going, I can't say.

I have a theory about which way you want it to go.

But "Sox In The City" is a boffo hit.

Please don't use pop culture references like that. Or obscure adjectives like that. Or awkwardly shoehorn the name of a team into a dissimilar entity such as a TV show like that.

Not that anyone is noticing.

That has to be an attempt at baiting. It has to be.

Grasping for respect as always, clutching the inferiority complex that never ends in a town that never changes, the Sox are dealing with a relentless trail of dissing that, admittedly, doesn't seem fair.

Damn you, Sox haters. If only Jay Mariotti could figure out who you were, he'd give you a piece of his mind.

They have one of baseball's elite pitching staffs,

I seem to remember hearing something about a rotation filled with craters.

yet none of their pitchers was named to the American League All-Star team.

This is the fault of popular opinion about the team, and has nothing to do with Terry Francona or the player vote.

They launched a crazy/mad campaign pushing the very deserving Jermaine Dye for the final All-Star roster slot, yet he finished second Thursday to Tampa Bay darling Evan Longoria, whose statistics fall shy of Dye's.

1. That's barely true.
2. Dye finished second in a five man race, and he beat out a Yankee. If you have a brain, you should be able to tell that that is reflective of an enormous amount of support.

The Sox will send merely two players to Yankee Stadium, upstart Carlos Quentin and warrior Joe Crede,

The Rays and Angels are only sending three each. The Phillies and Mets are only sending two.

while the Cubs had a whopping seven players named to the National League club, including two (Kosuke Fukudome and injur ed Alfonso Soriano) who belong only as hot dog vendors.

The Cubs have a larger national fan base. Again, not too hard to figure out if you have a brain.

And worst of all? Attendance on the South Side, a traditional Sox bugaboo that should be a non-issue after a World Series championship, is becoming a story again. Despite their success, the Sox rank 18th among the 30 big-league teams with a 28,915 average, down 4,225 bodies a game from last year and a revealing 7,596 fans from 2006.

Attendance numbers in today's game are largely driven by pre-season ticket sales. Therefore there's a strong one year lag effect on those numbers. (That's why the defending NL champion Rockies can be one of the worst teams in the league and still be on pace to draw more fans than they have in six years.) The 2005 Sox won 99 games and the Series but only drew 2.3 million fans, largely because the 2004 Sox stunk. The 2006 Sox were good, but didn't make the playoffs and weren't in first anytime after May. Yet they nearly drew 3 million, mostly because of the 2005 title and subsequent preseason purchases. The 2007 Sox still drew 2.7 million, because the 2006 Sox won 90 games. The 2008 Sox, even if they win the division, probably won't even crack 2.5 million, because the 2007 Sox stunk. But if they do indeed make the postseason, I would wager that the 2009 Sox (regardless of how their season goes) end up back in the 2.8/2.9 area.

This is a long way of saying that I wish Jay Mariotti had never gotten into journalism, and instead grown up to be a garbageman.

The company line blames gas prices,

Probably not true, but whatever.

but last I looked, the Sox primarily draw within 25 miles of U.S. Cellular Field and don't remotely compare to the Cubs as a regional attraction. When it's easier to find a parking space in the Loop than a Cubs ticket -- attendance already is nearing 2 million on the North Side, compared to 1.3 million at The Cell --

2007 White Sox, 4th place. 2007 Cubs, division champs.

I safely can conclude the obvious once again.

The smugness is just oozing off the computer screen, isn't it? That's what makes this so much fun. Sentences (or clauses, or whatever the hell you want to call it) like that are the reason I still enjoy writing for this blog 15 months after it started. No matter how obvious it is that they are wrong about something, leave it to jackassed sports journalists to "safely" conclude the opposite. It's beautiful.

Even in a year when both teams could win division titles, the Cubs own this town like, well, Batman owns Chicago in "The Dark Knight."

Gotham City is a fictional location that's mostly parallel to New York. And what is that "well" doing in there?

The Sox? No matter how much Ozzie Guillen yaps, Ken Williams preens and players make headlines by clashing in the dugout,

What kind of lowlife journalists are writing those headlines? Say something positive about those guys for once! Jay Mariotti is begging you.

they're still the other club in town, the afterthought, the alternative. Sometimes, it's very hard to like the people who run the Sox, but this summer, I don't mind acknowledging that I feel sorry for the entire operation. They deserve better, such as bigger home audiences.

At least he's consistent in identifying them as the Cubs' collective bitch. Still, here's an idea, Jay- how about they deserve better from you?

So why are fewer people showing up? The economy has some impact, sure, but perhaps there's also a burnout effect involving Guillen, Williams and their circus-like way of doing business.

We'll see just how burnt out people are in 2009 if the Sox finish 2008 like they've started it.

A day rarely passes without a Sox controversy, whether it's the federal investigation of a Dominican Republic scouting scandal or the argument Wednesday night between the level-headed Dye and volatile Orlando Cabrera. Personally, as long as the Sox are winning amid the disarray, I believe the fans should be pleased and flocking to ticket windows.

Jeez, this is creepy. Did someone from the Sox organization kidnap Jay's family and tell him they wouldn't be released until he said something nice about the team?

But they could be worn out by it all, waiting to spend ballpark money in August and September when the real drama plays out -- and not the ongoing Ozfest.

Possibly a worse/more shoehorned pop culture reference than "Sox and the City."

Later (this was my favorite part of the article)...

In campaigning for Dye, the Sox were creative to the point of lunacy.

Oh yeah? "Lunacy," you say? Well please, go ahead and tell me about all the madcap antics they pulled to try and get their guy into the All-Star game. Skywriting? Offering to pay off the other candidates to drop out of the race? Bizarre and confusing viral marketing? I can't wait to hear about the outrageous lengths they went to.

They had Guillen, players and coaches wear "Vote for J.D." t-shirts and stickers.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Stop right there. Let me catch my breath.





OK, I'm good. What else?

They posted messages on video boards across town.

That is completely bonkers. My computer's about to overheat just from copying and pasting the text into Blogger.

They flooded in-boxes of fans, making them eligible to win an autographed Dye jersey.

Never heard of anything like this before. Groundbreaking.

They even asked folks to support ex-Sox outfielder Aaron Rowand, who plays for San Francisco and was among five finalists for the last NL berth.

OK, and .... ?

This, too, defeats the purpose of trying to win an All-Star Game -- what if Rowand beat the AL with a home run?

So confusing. What is the point here? We followed this path to get here: Claim that the Sox did some crazy things to try to get Dye elected --> A list of those things, none of which was unorthodox at all --> Pointing out that the team also campaigned for one of their ex-players in the other league, which actually is kind of crazy but has nothing to do with Dye --> Complaining that that player might hit a game winning HR.

I think I'm just going to have to file this paragraph under "dumb" and leave it be. I can't parse it any more thoroughly than that.

The scheme officially went bonkers when the Sox hired a plane to display a banner: "Vote for JD: WhiteSox.com."

A-ha! My fault. They did do something a little wild. Not anywhere as cool as actual skywriting, but still a little out there.

This was done not in Chicago, but at Kaufmann Stadium in Kansas City. Huh?

Huh? I will give you one guess as to where the Sox were playing last Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. Don't overthink it. Hey, if you wanted to get a message like that to its target audience, which plan do you think would work better?

A) Fly the banner over the out-of-town stadium in which the team is playing, enabling fans (who, since they're watching the game and therefore probably interested in getting Dye voted in) to see it on TV and subsequently go online and fill out some ballots.

or

B) Regardless of the fact that no games are taking place there until after the voting closes, damn the torpedoes and fly the banner over USCellular Field anyways. Hope that the grounds crew subsequently goes home and fills out thousands of ballots each.

It's a tough call.

In the end, like everything else, the Sox came up short on the marketing end.

If only they could get a little support from the media every once in a while.

"It's an honor to see as many votes as we all got, that's unbelievable," said Dye, who finished not far behind Longoria, the recipient of nine million votes. "Just great support from everyone, the fans and my teammates. I'm happy to get so much talk about it the last four days. I'm just happy to be mentioned."

Such is the Sox existence, of course. Snubbed and dissed, they're just thrilled when anyone notices.

Way to be a gracious loser, Jermaine. You pussy. Here are some facts I'd like to conclude the post with.

1) Things Jermaine Dye could have said about finishing second to Longoria, other than what's printed above: zero
2) "Zany"/"looney" things the Sox did to campaign for Dye: 0.5
3) Odds that Sox attendance will rise dramatically in 2009: extremely high
4) Size of White Sox fanbase, relative to the average MLB team: high
5) Things mentioned in this article that the Sox should legitimately be worried about: zero
6) Last time the Sox were any good: 7/2/06
7) Media member most responsible for disrespecting the Sox: guy who wrote this article, which is entirely about how the Sox don't get enough respect

This Needs to Be Addressed.....

Teddy Goldstein took a little stab at Jay Mariotti in the Chicago Tribune. It's certainly worth discussing here, is it not?

The ultimate team player—that's how you think of Jay Mariotti, right?

I own 1/6th (currently) of a blog entitled "Fire Jay Mariotti", so the answer to this question is a resounding and emphatic "YES".

I find it funny that Teddy Greenstein thinks that he is addressing an audience that views Mariotti as a "team player."

The same Jay Mariotti who described his Sun-Times colleagues as "soft" for declining to rip White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen.

Damn bunch of softies! He's Venezuelan and swears a lot for crissake! Haven't you seen his team's record since July 2, 2006? The Blizzard is downright rip-able, and deserves to be ripped until the ripping brings "R.I.P." to mind. About his job of course! You tell 'em, Teddy Goldberg!

(yessssss.....nailed that one!)

Mariotti tells WTTW-Ch. 11's John Callaway in an interview that airs at 7:30 p.m. Friday: "When I'm being critical of our writers, it's to try to unify."

In Mrs. Finklebury's kindergarten class, almost everyone wanted delicious yellow cake with chocolate frosting for the class party, but Stubby Stubbornton, always contrarian, refused to have a party with anything but fruitcake. Stubby's ultimate goal, however, was to have a unified class, so that everyone had the same cake preference. After hours of thinking, Stubby decided that the best way to do this was to make fun of everyone until they opted for fruitcake instead. But a strange thing happened! No matter how much Stubby made fun of the other children, they didn't prefer fruitcake! Now if this kind of crap didn't work on kindergartners, Jay, then....

Meh, you know, it's probably just easier to call you a fucking retard.

Mariotti: "Are the local media now brainwashed that every time Ozzie goes off it's 'Ozzie being Ozzie,' or are we dealing with one of the great crackpots in the history of professional sports? I happen to choose the latter."

Maybe, just mayyyyyybe the local media thinks that there's more interesting things to write about than repetitive dissections of literally tens of Ozzie rants? Are you listening, sensible people? Jay is COMPLAINING that the rest of the Chicago media isn't beating a dead horse like he is.

Callaway: "That's what people would say about you."

Attaboy, Callaway.

Mariotti: "Not me."

WRONG as usual, Jay, WRONG as usual.

Mariotti went on to say that Sun-Times beat writer Joe Cowley "has issues" and wrote a "pathetic" column after the Sox's blowup-doll controversy.

Another fine point, Teddy Greenberg! Yeah Jay, what about that? Why are you critiquing the writing of columnists for other newspapers?

He had harsher words for fellow columnist Rick Telander after Callaway played a clip of Telander asking why Mariotti is always so angry and determined to find "the dark side."

Teddy Rosenberg is realllllly hitting the nail on the head here.

Mariotti: "If you're not interested in, as he says, 'the dark side' of sports, then get out of the business."

And there's nothing more to it than that. Period.


Callaway: "Wait a second. Nobody has said more about the dark side of college football than Rick Telander."

A FINE point. I have no idea who Rick Telander is. But a FINE point, nonetheless.

Mariotti: "We're all supposed to cover the entire spectrum.

THE MARIOTTI SPECTRUM

John Paxson is a moron
Jerry Reinsdorf is a cheap-o wuss
Cedric Benson is a stupid person, a stupider runningback, and is responsible for all evil in the world.
Tiger Woods is pretty much the best thing ever.
Alfonso Soriano is a selfish asshole
Lou Piniella is crazy
Ozzie Guillen is the worst human being alive
Kenny Williams is a terrible GM
The Bulls don't have any star players
July 2, 2006 is the most important date in sports history. Period.

Outside of the Mariotti Spectrum: Actual games played by Chicago teams.

Don't sit here and stereotype me.

Oh, sorry, Jay. I'm planning on it. It's fun and easy, and the best part is, it accurately sums up your writing career.

That's just a smear campaign from a guy who … if he calls me angry, I call him bitter and old.

Sounds like he's talking about Hawk Harrelson. It really does.

This is a fellow who needs to examine the newspaper business, where it is right now, where the Sun-Times is in this market and maybe get his act into gear and help us win this battle …"

What battle?

(I think Teddy is Jewish.)

Boooooooooooooring

Nothing to see here, folks. Jay just wrote another awful article about Ozzie Guillen being a crybaby. It's nothing he's never said before....it's just terrible and he repeats himself a lot. I'm just here to remind everyone what little bit sneaks its way into every Sox column Jay writes.

In my mind, the Sox have underachieved for Guillen since July of 2006, a period in which they're 30 games under .500.

Estimated date that Jay stops caring about that date: August 14, 2031.

I've Been Waiting For This

Jay Mariotti is finally back from vacation. He had to have been on vacation, because there's no reason that he wouldn't have written a column bashing Ozzie Guillen over the last 4 days or so. The old favorites are coming back, in a classic Jay article that reminds me of just how much I hate every piece of dribble he puts in a newspaper. Hold on tight everyone, and enjoy the ride.

Ozzie, Sox: Chicago's rude, crude embarrassment

That's a good start. Has anyone written an article like this recently? This Jay article is unique because unlike the other monotonous things he writes, every other journalist in Chicago is saying the same thing.

The team with no class almost spun a no-hitter. Filthy as the White Sox and their manager have been, Gavin Floyd somehow was filthier and nastier Tuesday night on the South Side. After Hawk Harrelson jinxed the young man by babbling, ``Call your family, call your friends, Gavin Floyd is three outs from a no-hitter,'' well, you'll never guess what happened.

Fitting for Mariotti to blame the no-hitter breakup on the broadcaster. Just simply fitting.

Fact of the matter is, Floyd has like an even K/BB ratio and, prior to last night, had one a pretty bad GB/FB ratio (0.66). Him getting a no-hitter would have been just as unlikely as Mark Buehrle doing it last year was.

It's just as well. Ozzie Guillen didn't deserve to be bailed out by a classy, polite kid with hair combed across his forehead, low on his brow.

Sounds like someone has a man-crush! Was Ozzie right about you being a fag?

It isn't news, of course, that

Now wait. If this isn't news, why is the following large chunk of information being printed in a paper in which to read news?

Guillen is the clown doofus of sports, a disgrace to a city, a franchise, intelligent humanity and those of us who must chronicle his arrested-adolescent b.s. to the point of ad nauseum. I'm just wondering how he's still employed. If this was bad standup comedy, I'd understand why a trashy nightclub might hire him to humor drunks for $5.50 an hour.

Well done, Jay. That might have been your best tirade in years.

My one problem is that bad stand-up comics have trouble getting the respect of a baseball team and that most of them aren't insanely good at managing pitcher workloads.

But I've gotta say. I might memorize that block of insults for the next time I get really mad at somebody.

But he's a baseball manager. And since July of 2006,

ZOMG ZOMG! IT'S COMING! I CAN FEEL IT!!!

a sample size that has become more truth than trend, his team has largely failed.

We're getting close....

It's one thing to act like an idiot and win a championship, which causes folks to think you're a crazy genius.

Uh huh....

It's quite another to act like an idiot and go 124-151

!!!!!!!!!!

Okay, so I didn't copy and paste a video of a parade marching from YouTube. But here we are, on May 7th, 2008. We're STILL talking about the record of a baseball team since July 2, 2006. That date was the only relevant date in baseball history.

proving only that your act isn't working and that you're killing an organization with your relentless immaturity and gutter-sludge mouth.

Oh gee, that's a new one Jay. Ozzie's "act" isn't working, because the team hasn't been good. Does Ozzie play baseball? Does the team get on base more when he isn't a lightning rod of attention? The White Sox as an organization are being "killed" because Ozzie swears too much? Really???? Maybe a LITTLE bit of mismatched cause-and-effect somewhere in there?

The Sox can crow all they want about their World Series title, how they beat the Cubs to the holy grail. At least the Cubs still own their dignity as a Chicago institution, as opposed to Guillen, who belongs in one.

ZING! Did....did you guys see what he did there? It was pretty pretty clever!

The Cubs are easy to like.

The Sox are easy to loathe.

That's like, too opinionated to even be printed in an opinion column.

Okay, I didn't even print everything in the article to this point. After 5 full paragraphs and 3 one-liners, we're finally ready for Jay to start reporting the news, that is, stuff that he hasn't said a billion times already.

The latest episode inside Guillen's clubhouse, involving inflatable female dolls and strategically placed bats in a frat-house attempt to end the club's offensive woes, is an insult to women.

Everyone reading this blog pretty much knows what Jay's personality is like. Do you really believe that he gives a shit about the blow-up dolls? He's literally modifying his feelings to lash out at Guillen some more.

This comes after incidents in which he slurred gays, insulted nations, blew off the White House and angered folks in his native Venezuela with his tirade against Magglio Ordonez. So comprehensive is his list of victims, he's almost running out of targets.

Did I say Jay was done repeating himself.......?

::checks a little bit above::

Yeah. I did. My fault.

I cannot think of another company -- another sports team -- that would tolerate this unceasing run of verbal thuggery, especially when he isn't succeeding on the field.

FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME. OZZIE GUILLEN CANNOT SUCCEED ON THE FIELD. HE IS A MANAGER. HE IS A MANAGER WHO DOES NOT PLAY BASEBALL. YOU ACTUALLY TRY TO ANALYZE THE CHICAGO CUBS AS A BASEBALL TEAM SOMETIMES. TRY IT FOR BOTH TEAMS YOU REPORT ON.

YOU ARE THE CLOWN DOOFUS OF SPORTS, A DISGRACE TO A CITY, A FRANCHISE, INTELLIGENT HUMANITY, AND THOSE OF US WHO MUST CHRONICLE YOUR ARRESTED-ADOLESCENT B.S. TO THE POINT OF AD NAUSEUM. I'M JUST WONDERING HOW YOU'RE STILL EMPLOYED. IF THIS WAS BAD STANDUP COMEDY, I'D UNDERSTAND WHY A TRASHY NIGHTCLUB MIGHT HIRE YOU TO HUMOR DRUNKS FOR $5.50 AN HOUR.

If Guillen didn't directly participate in purchasing and displaying the dolls, well, put it this way: He sets the trashy tone. The man isn't exactly stable, which wouldn't bother me if he didn't represent this proud city and a sport that has endured a long steroids scandal and doesn't need dirt of any sort.

Like I've said before, this isn't even close to the worst thing that happens in a clubhouse.

Yet there was Williams, Reinsdorf's yes-man and the one who signed off on Guillen's hiring, making fun of the episode Tuesday and refusing to issue a formal apology. One of Guillen's favorite words -- hypocrite -- is exactly what he and the Sox have become.

ZOMG! Jay's about to call someone(thing) else a hypocrite again! Don't you love irony? Let's see how he fucks this up.

You cannot market ``Family Field Day'' on May 17 and a ticket package called the ``Ozzie Plan,'' then let the face of your franchise cultivate an R-rated atmosphere with more F-bombs than a Chris Rock routine.

Why? Why can you not market these things? It's not like it's called "Family Tour of the R-Rated Clubhouse Day." And that thing about the "Ozzie Plan" is totally irrelevant. Does anyone see why he even mentioned the "Ozzie Plan?" You can't name a ticket plan after a guy who has a potty mouth? This makes no fucking sense.

``I will assure Major League Baseball that the doll was not violated in any way, shape or form," [Kenny Williams] cracked. ``In all seriousness, it is a little bit of a disappointment because we have proactively tried to -- and just did so this spring training -- organizationally, we brought in some people to discuss a better work environment, whether it's gender issues or racial issues. I don't know what a formal apology on behalf of the club is going to do, other than me assuring everyone we are on top of it and we addressed the issue.''

Thank you.

Sure, you did. Just as the Sox and Major League Baseball ``addressed'' matters two summers ago by having Guillen attend sensitivity training, which obviously helped.

Guillen wasn't the one responsible for the blow-up shrine.

Reinsdorf and Williams think they're above these issues, when, in fact, the issues define who they are as executives and human beings.

No. Shut the fuck up. Whether or not there are blow-up dolls in the locker room absofuckinglutely does NOT define who Reinsdorf and Williams are as human beings, and CERTAINLY not as executives. What could either of them had to do with any of this? Are these issues supreme to the success of the team baseball-wise? One thing is completely clear: you, Jay Mariotti, have your head far enough up your ass to the point where you think so.

Unfortunately, some media fear Reinsdorf and curry his favor, which might explain why WMVP-AM's Marc Silverman -- who seems thrilled to have Reinsdorf on the station's ``Lunch With a Legend'' series -- was more eager to criticize his on-air guest, the Sun-Times' Carol Slezak, than simply interview her about her post-dolls, anti-Sox column.

I'm totally siding with Marc Silverman on this one. Criticizing Carol Slezak is a lot of fun.

Keeping with his track record, Guillen was too small to issue an apology to the offended. ``If people think we did something wrong, wow. I'm not going to apologize, I'm not going to say I'm sorry,'' he said. ``I don't know what to say. I can't come up with the words because as soon as I say that, that means I'm guilty of something. I'm not guilty."

He is guilty as sin, actually, for making a mockery of his craft. Can you imagine such a trail of trash ever being littered in Boston, New York? Could you imagine a manager keeping a job through it all, no matter how many championships he won?

Now you're basically copying Carol Slezak's column from a few days ago. This is not smart, Jay. In fact, it's bordering on plagiarism. Can you come up with your own ideas, please? Here's a copy of a sentence from Carol's piece.

Can you imagine the Yankees or Red Sox building a similar shrine in their locker room, in full view of clubhouse visitors?

Complete coincidence that you decided to evaluate the incident against the standards of the same teams, hmmm? Totally by chance, right?

Could you imagine a manager keeping a job through it all, no matter how many championships he won?

For the love of God, YES! If Trashy Awesometon is managing my baseball team and winning the World Series every year and banging strippers in the clubhouse every day while using countless ethnic slurs, he's my manager because he has the supernatural ability to win the World Series every single year, which is the supreme goal of baseball, which you should try to write about sometimes instead of trash like this.

As long as reporters have work to do, and as long as clubhouses are open to media, a sports franchise has a responsibility to maintain a civil, orderly, professional workplace.

Why? You don't hold yourself to the same standard. You are quite possibly the least professional human being alive who sucks up newspaper space every time you decide you want to rant about Ozzie Guillen or Ken Harrelson.

I don't subscribe to any boys-will-be-boys junk when it comes to working environments.

Interesting. Here's another quip from Carol Slezak.

And just so we're clear, the tired ''boys will be boys'' excuse no longer works.

WRITE YOUR OWN DAMN COLUMN.

If players want to go through ``Slumpbuster'' rituals with inflatable dolls, do it in the trainer's room, where the media can't see it. When you make it public, the organization is judged accordingly.

So you do condone sticking wooden bats up the arse of a doll. Doesn't exactly help your argument any.

The Blizzard finally might have made sense when he suggested media be banned from the clubhouse. I don't blame athletes for feeling invaded when they're attempting to shower and dress in the presence of reporters, especially in a time of camera phones and other creepiness. I understand the importance of media access, but it's more sensible to bring players into a large interview area before and after games. That's how it is done on Super Bowl media day. That's how it is done at the Olympics. Is it a pain for the media? Sure. But how would you like to be showering at work and have 50 reporters bust in?

This is a good point.

Besides, it sure beats hanging out in Guillen's den of doom, watching his career disintegrate with every stunt, F-bomb and non-apology.

Yeah, and besides, you don't go anywhere near that place, because you know that there are literally tens of people just waiting to beat the living shit out of you, including Ozzie himself. Can we set that fight up, please?

Jay Outdoes Himself, Literally

Okay, so I was working on a brief from Mariotti's online column, which was something about the Bulls being quitting losers (even though they've had horrendous starts the past 3 years and still made the playoffs). I couldn't even finish doing the writeup before Jay wrote something even worse. I should have known. He's the first person to bitch about Chicago not trading for or signing a star player, regardless of whether or not the player is actually worth it. And here we are, one day after the White Sox "failed" to sign Torii Hunter at a gross price, and I forgot to expect a miserable piece of shit from Jay? Shame on me! No, fuck that. Shame on you, Jay.

Sox too cheap for bidding wars

Here's the thing about bidding wars, Jay. When teams compete to sign the same free agent, offers keep rising until one team bites the bullet and pays too much. The Angels are the suckers here, especially because they have Vlad, G-Matt, 10-RBI team-personifying superhero, and Willits (who has a tremendous ability to walk for a guy with zero power, by the way). Unless they use this surplus to trade for Miguel Cabrera, this is nothing short of a disastrous waste of resources.

Side note: I've heard that the Angels are actually going to keep Anderson in the outfield and squeeze Willits and Matthews (probable DH) with this signing. What dolts. They paid $90M to replace Willits' 4.0 WARP1 with Hunter's 5.5 WARP1. Good move, Angels.

Shocked? What is Ken Williams so "shocked" about? In the Reinsdorfian tradition, the White Sox underbid for a major free agent, making their fans believe they were going guts-out after Torii Hunter when, in the context of a rich 2007 marketplace, they merely were half-buttocksing it.

Hunter should not be making $16M a season. There. I said it. The proposed 5 year, $80M deal by the White Sox is a little high for someone who gets on base below league average and is (CONTROVERSIAL POINT ALERT!!!) a middle-of-the-road defensive CF despite flashy catches (since 2002, nothing special doing on the FRAA front).

Then they told the world about their offer, a dumb poker move that let the Angels swoop in on Thanksgiving Eve and sign Hunter to a five-year, $90 million deal.

Which makes the Angels total suckers. Tony Reagins is trying way too hard to be the best GM in history, IMO.

Shocking? Try embarrassing.

Try "not overspending for 5 wins per season".

Because once again, the Sox have shown they're full of stuffing when it comes to bidding wars. Deep down, chairman Jerry Reinsdorf doesn't want to win such battles, or he and Williams would have been more competitive for Hunter in a period when baseball is flush with wealth

Do you even care how much Hunter is actually worth? Suppose they don't win the "battle" for Carlos Silva by not offering him 5 years, $75M. Will that make the Sox pathetic too? (Silva was worth exactly the same as Hunter in 2007 by WARP1)

Don't you just love Reinsdorf? For two decades, he has been centrally involved in trying to build a better industry financially, but once that has been accomplished, he still refuses to play high-stakes, big-boy ball in a major city. You're better off not bidding for Hunter at all than losing him to a more pro-active franchise that makes you look, well, second-rate.

How does that make sense? Your bid jacks up the competition's offer and drains their resources! This isn't about avoiding embarrassment, Jay. This is a business, and success is measured by wins, not how much or little idiot columnists like yourself blast the moves of management. If you ran the team, you would splurge on every free agent out there and the team would be broke in seconds. Worse yet, you would trade away the entire farm system for overrated "stars", robbing the team of its future as well as its resources. You appeal constantly to the mindless fan who doesn't care how much a big name costs, as long as he lands in Chicago. This entire fucking article is just you pressing the "Look at me! Look at me!" button.

"They shocked me," Hunter said of his new club. "I wanted to be with these guys. I thought maybe they didn't need a center fielder like me but they shocked the world. I love these guys. I want to say thank you, guys, for choosing me. I'm honored.

Even Torii understood that the Angels had no need for a CF.

"I've watched the Angels play for a long time. They play the game the right way, they play hard-nosed baseball every day."

And now he's shifted into mindless broadcaster cliche mode!

As opposed to the Sox who suffered the worst offense in the major leagues last season, a plague that won't be helped by the consolation signing of set-up reliever Scott Linebrink.

Damn you Scott Linebrink for not improving the offense! (Linebrink's 4 years, $19M will almost certainly yield more wins per dollar than Hunter's contract)

Hunter's .334 OBP wouldn't do much to solve the out-making tendencies of the White Sox either.

Consider this the latest significant setback in a bloody, 17-month Sox slide, which includes a 109-135 record since early July of 2006.

Poor Jay, he's been monotonously writing this crap for so long that he's forgotten the exact date!

It's JULY 2ND, 2006, Jay. Exactly 13 days after Ozzie Guillen called you a fag.

This is more confirmation that a star like Hunter, who fled Minnesota with the aim of winning a championship, thinks he has a better chance of achieving those goals in Anaheim than on the South Side.

1) This is the loosest definition of "star" I have ever seen. Torii Hunter was worth half as many wins as A-Rod last year. In that context, A-Rod's contract is a bargain compared to Hunter's, because his salary is less than twice Hunter's.

2) Really? We needed this to confirm for us that Hunter has a better chance of winning a championship with Anaheim, a team that made the playoffs last year, than the White Sox, a team that was one of the very worst in baseball? Thank you soooooo much for clarifying that, Jay!

The Angels have sustained a consistently high level since their World Series triumph five years ago, primarily because they have an elite manager in Mike Scioscia and a title-driven owner in Arte Moreno.

Mike Scioscia is 0% of the reason that the Angels have been consistently good. He bunts, hit-and-runs, and foolishly tries to steal bases to the extent that I think Scioscia actually likes when his players make unnecessary outs. Moreno, sure.

The Sox have a ditzy manager in Ozzie Guillen and an owner who likes to win but only at his price, though Reinsdorf has no problem charging top dollar at The Cell.

This is a blatant appeal to fans' desire to not pay high ticket prices. I've had this theory for a long time that Jay wants to be considered the voice of Chicago fans, even though all of them hate him.

And brace yourselves, Soxdom, because more surprises could be coming from the Angels at your expense. Earlier this week, Williams made a questionable move in dealing pitcher Jon Garland -- a skilled, durable starter entering his prime at 28 -- for Orlando Cabrera, a fine shortstop who, unfortunately, is 33 and becomes a free agent next offseason.

Apparently the fact that Jon Garland is also a free agent after next season is irrelevant!

In the Garland deal, all the Sox did was weaken their rotation, deplete their potential trade pool for Miguel Cabrera and pick up a veteran who might play here one season.

Jon Garland is a veteran that may have only played in Chicago for one more season.

I didn't get it when he re-signed Uribe, I didn't get it when he dealt Garland and I obviously don't get it now. Unless Williams pulls off the pipedream of Miguel Cabrera, giving him a half-Cabrera infield, his "Full go" offseason is stuck in the muck. No wonder he suddenly was shy when reached Thursday by the Sun-Times.

"What's to say?" he said of Hunter.

How about this?

He gone.

The last line of most of Jay's columns is some sort of attempt at biting cleverness. This is just a weak allusion to one of Hawk Harrelson's catch phrases. I'm disappointed, Jay. Even you can do better.

Perpetua-blog

Jay Mariotti has started writing "exclusive online columns every day". Basically he pumps out like 4 new briefs a day onto the Sun-Times web site.

Hooray!

This is more of just an ironic/funny thing than a bad article. I thought it was worth pointing out because it makes me very, very angry.

Sox-paganda exposed!

Gee, I think this is the proudest day of my career. A piece in Columbia Journalism Review says professional sports franchises, such as the White Sox, orchestrate specific campaigns against sportswriters they don't like based on smear strategies derived from -- drum roll, please -- the Bush administration and political public-relations firms.

Let's take a minute for Jay to change his pants.

OK. Good. On we go. (I couldn't find the article he's talking about online, but if anyone does, please post!)

Let me get this straight: You mean to say a baseball team is so obsessed with what I'm writing that it would resort to using Bush-like tactics against me?

This really puts writing on a blog called "Fire Jay Mariotti" into context, eh?

Is that why Hawk Harrelson is always drooling over his flower shirt to say something about me 10 times every telecast -- because he's being told to follow the Dubya handbook? The CJR piece lists me and Jason Whitlock of the Kansas City Star among organized targets.

Yeeesh.

I'm asking for a raise. I had no idea I was this important.

This is the reason that this situation pisses me off.

I also had no idea the Sox were so petty and devious. Actually, I did have an idea, but between covering major stories involving the Cubs and Bears, starting this perpetual Web column, writing my regular column for the paper, doing five ESPN shows a week and making plans to cover the Beijing Olympics, I kind of forgot the Sox were still around.

Forgot? I wasn't aware you knew anything about them at all besides:

1) Ozzie Guillen is an embarrassment and the reason the White Sox suck
2) Their record, up to the minute, since July 2, 2006
3) They are, on average, less popular than the Cubs

Of course, fans are smart enough to see through any silly Sox-paganda attempts. The franchise should stop worrying about the media and try to dig out of its monstrous hole since July 2, 2006, a period in which the Sox have gone 105-133 and fallen back into their irrelevant two-hole on the local baseball food chain.

There it is.

I'm Sleepy, But Mariotti's Dumbness Keeps Me Going

It's nearing 3 a.m. CST here. I could either a) sleep, or b) make fun of Jay Mariotti. I've determined option b) is more important for my mental health right now.

The town belongs to the Cubs again, as if it ever didn't. You realized as much Tuesday when the evening sun gleamed upon a playoff race, the summer ivy, some ugly '70s Night wigs in the bleachers and a scoreboard where MILWAUKEE was the community focus. This while the White Sox swung and missed at the trade deadline, keeping in step with their swinging and missing all season.

You've been saying "the town belongs to the Cubs again" for weeks. No one "realized this" Tuesday, people have understood for awhile. You only said that as an excuse to transition into a bunch of anecdotal crap.

The White Sox, at least according to rumors made public, didn't get favorable offers. What did you expect them to do?

It was fun while it lasted, the afterglow of a South Side championship. But it turned out to be a momentary blip in time, more a cute accident than a long-term, earth-moving tremor in the social order of Chicago baseball.

Jay is acting as if the afterglow of one World Series championship is SUPPOSED to last for years and years. This is Dr. Jay Mariotti, speaking 2 seasons after the Sox won the World Series.

"::adjusts glasses:: ahem....It seems that after much research and study, the 2005 World Series was a thing that happened once, instead of some sort of earthquake that changes peoples' baseball allegiances. All of this research is the reason why I have little time, and am forced to write the same 5 articles over and over again"

Sure, the Cubs were negligent themselves in not helping facilitate their own World Series surge with a significant deal. I'd have preferred to hear that Lou Piniella paced the clubhouse floor instead of getting his weekly rubdown.

Jay is now implying that Lou Piniella needlessly worrying about the trade deadline instead of relaxing would have had some sort of effect on something.

And, yes, I'll also say there are reasons Cubs general manager Jim Hendry has won one division title in six seasons as general manager while his Hall of Fame counterpart, Atlanta's John Schuerholz, won 14 straight division titles, five National League pennants and a World Series. It's a resume that might need updating after Schuerholz acquired slugger Mark Teixeira and relievers Octavio Dotel and Ron Mahay at the deadline, making the Braves a pennant favorite again and a better ballclub than Hendry's.

pnoles: Jay, can you tell us why you think Jim Hendry has only won one division title in six seasons, while John Schuerholz won 14 straight division titles, five National League pennants and a World Series?
Jay Mariotti:, Well pnoles, I'll say that there are reasons.
pnoles: Reasons, you say?
Jay: Reasons.
pnoles: Ah, reasons, care to explain further?
Jay: Nope. There's just "reasons". It's just a sentence, man. Like there are reasons that the White Sox aren't good this year, and there are reasons I was hired to write for a newspaper, and there are reasons that plants don't have to eat other things to stay alive.
pnoles Ah. Thanks for being informative.

But at least the Cubs are relevant and vibrant, something the Sox can't say anymore. The Piniella karma is infectious, and all you need to know about the latest victory is that Jacque Jones lost a ball in the lights, leading to a run, then made up for his gaffe with an RBI double in the sixth inning of a 7-3 victory over the Phillies. That's ''Cubbie swagger,'' as Lou planned all along.

I'll remember this. Lou Piniella planned for Jacque Jones to lose a ball in the lights so that he would hit an RBI double in the next inning. Jay Mariotti, you are an idiot. A complete idiot.

Just once, you'd like to see both teams reach the postseason in the same year, but the Sox seem far from the fray after a bizarre day of inactivity that left a familiar face batting sixth and playing right field at Yankee Stadium.

A familiar face who is better than injury-prone Wily Mo Pena and so-so prospect Craig Hansen. A familiar face who has been tearing the cover off the ball since the All-Star break, and is making a strong case for the first half of this year being flukily bad.

Just so you know, they didn't award World Series MVP trophies in the early 20th century. And no, Mr. Smart Aleck, they didn't give one to Eddie Cicotte or Claude ''Lefty'' Williams for the Black Sox fix. Which means Jermaine Trevell Dye, by default, ranks as the only such honoree in this city's baseball history. Not that I understand one bit why he's still with the Sox today.

Not that I'm suprised, because you lack an understanding of most things. Like that World Series MVP trophies are dumb and can wind up in the hands of mediocrities like David Eckstein.

Whether the GM has been kidnapped, abducted by aliens or reduced to a Ken Doll, I'd really like to know what happened to Ken Williams. He made his name and won a championship with a feisty, kamikaze arrogance that made proactivity and aggressiveness a franchise trademark. But Tuesday, when the retooling of the White Sox was expected to begin with the trading of Dye, he once again failed to pull off a major deadline deal.

Let me summarize this. "Whatever happened to Ken Williams? He's failing to do the same things he was failing to do before!"

For the record, I'm standing pretty neutral on not trading Dye for Hansen and Pena.

A fair return for Dye, who is starting to play older than his 33 years, would have constituted landing power hitter Wily Mo Pena and young reliever Craig Hansen from the Red Sox. Seems Williams preferred another bullpen arm, Manny Delcarmen, yet when the Dye market shrank to nearly nothing as the afternoon closed, he should have cut his losses, made the trade and signaled that his club was starting anew.

Maybe they aren't starting anew. Maybe they'll re-sign Dye and land a free-agent outfielder and trade minor-leaguers for the Pirates' Brian Bixler and be a competitive team. Ever think of that?

Instead, in an awkward turnabout, Dye remains with the club. The missed opportunity to acquire new talent may or may not have contributed to the latest flipout by Ozzie Guillen, who needed one iffy ball/strike call in the first inning to raise a disproportionate amount of hell and earn an ejection after an in-your-face encounter with an ump. The Sox responded to Dye's unexpected return by dying another death themselves, losing 16-3 to the Yankees to drop their record to 85-103 since July 2 of last year.

EVERY SINGLE FUCKING WHITE SOX ARTICLE YOU WRITE CONTAINS THEIR RECORD RETROACTIVE TO JULY 2 OF LAST YEAR, THE MOST ARBITRARY CHERRY-PICKISH DATE IN THE WORLD.

Since August 3 of this year, the White Sox are 2-0. Fuck you, Jay.

Fabulous as Dye was in the Series and last season, when he contended for American League MVP honors, he shouldn't be a keeper for the future. As Guillen says, the Sox need to be younger and faster. Even if Aaron Rowand returns as their center field, they also need to think about a right fielder, a shortstop, a second baseman and a left fielder, among other needs. A good start for the rehab plan would have been dealing Dye, particularly when the Sox won't receive offseason draft picks for him if they don't offer arbitration.

Re-signing Dye plugs the same exact hole that trading for Pena would have fixed. I don't see how this is a hard concept to grasp.

Side note: Ozzie Guillen is an IDIOT if he really thinks his ballclub lacks youth and speed. Remember that no-talent clown you have batting leadoff every day who projects to be a 5th outfielder at best?

Williams held firm anyway, rejecting the Red Sox. He knew what he was doing in 2005, but we never were quite sure what he was doing before that. Now, after doing nothing at last summer's deadline and making little impact this past offseason, we're back to doubting Kenny GM.

''It was not the day we had hoped for,'' Williams said. ''I'm not frustrated. The way we operate, this isn't a one-day affair for us. This is a process we've been working on for weeks. We weren't going to just make up a deal for change sake. There wasn't one that made sense for us.''

There, as much as I hate agreeding/siding with Kenny Williams, you posted in your own column his rational explanation for not doing anything. He's not going to just fucking make a trade for the hell of it. It has to be a GOOD trade. These are things a 1st grader could understand. Don't trade your M&M's for Good n' Plenty if you don't value the Good n' Plenty more than the M&M's. Why can't you understand this?

So are the Sox going to keep Dye? With Jim Thome and Paul Konerko creeping up there in age, I wouldn't recommend it. In my dream of dreams, they would pursue Alex Rodriguez, but I don't suspect chairman Jerry Reinsdorf will fork out $200 million when he's nearing his 72nd birthday. Rather, I suspect the Sox organization is thankful for its one World Series winner and is ceding Chicago to the Cubs after borrowing it for one autumn.

"ceding Chicago to the Cubs". There we go again. The goal of the White Sox is to win baseball games, not suck in whatever bandwagon moron fans follow the trendy team. To repeat. When the White Sox win baseball games, they get a lot of ticket revenue. When they suck, they don't. Their objective, therefore, and bear with me here Jay, it's complicated, is to WIN BASEBALL GAMES. NOT TO "CONTROL CHICAGO FANSHIP".

Of course, there always will be things that drive me nuts about Cubdom, such as Greg Brady -- Barry Williams in real life -- being allowed to sing the national anthem and during the seventh-inning stretch. And why didn't you make a move for an outfielder or reliever, Jim Hendry? Instead of the Red Sox helping their AL chances with Eric Gagne, wouldn't he have looked good in the Wrigley bullpen?

''I have a lot of faith in the guys we have,'' Hendry said.

Faith. That's all the North Side needs to sustain. And it's something the South Side no longer has.

Things I learned about the fictitious world that Jay lives in.

1) Greg Brady singing the national anthem is a federal crime.
2) Hendry should trade for Eric Gagne, because when you trade for a player it doesn't matter what you give up or if the other side is offering you an appealing deal. There's no further analysis needed, because not making trades for good players is always dumb. 29 teams in baseball failed to acquire Adam Dunn at the trade deadline. Therefore, they all are failures.
3) The North Side just needs to sustain "faith" and they will be fine.

This was totally necessary. I can finally say that I'm now losing sleep over how useless this man is.

This Guy Fills Out the Lineup Card With the Worst of Them

Just as the Cubs's swift turnaround is Lou's doing, Jay feels everything wrong with the White Sox falls on Ozzie.

Hold Ozzie accountable

Finger of blame needs to be pointed at their popular manager when burned-out Sox lack energy, focus, commitment, passion

No. Finger of blame falls on underperforming players, aging players, injuries, and the front office not doing anything about it.

Not that managers tend to have more than like a 2-game influence on a team's final record, but if I had to rank MLB managers, I'd toss Ozzie just slightly below the middle of the road. He's not as stupid as the things he says. It's just that his glaring weaknesses get ridiculed while his main strength gets ignored.

Start with the weaknesses. He runs his players into outs. He doesn't care about on-base percentage as long as you can run. He bunts and sacrifice hits excessively because he doesn't understand that, especially with a team that projects to hit a lot of HR, it's dumb to trade an out for a base. In essence, he's a poor offensive manager.

There's one very important thing he should get credit for. Ozzie, historically, has had a very low tendency to abuse his starting pitchers, removing them almost always before the dangerous 120-pitch mark regardless of performance. The way Ozzie keeps his starting pitchers healthy and durable came in handy in 2005, when the playoffs proved that there were no signs of fatigue after a long season.

More than once, I've been asked this spicy little question on national TV and radio: Should the White Sox fire Ozzie Guillen? And each time, I wasn't the only one who considered it a very fair subject, with two out-of-town commentators and a distant talk-show host suggesting the Blizzard of Oz blow away amid a revealing 76-92 demise since last July.

So like, 3 dudes agree with you, and you can't even provide their names. And for those who like to keep track, this paragraph contains the obligatory "Blizzard of Oz" reference. Seriously, explain to me how a hothead like Ozzie is a "blizzard". Just because it rhymes with "wizard" doesn't make it clever.

Only in Chicago is it considered a moot and even blasphemous point, mostly because hypnotized media sheep let Sox management dictate their thoughts instead of thinking independently.

Let me ask you something, Jay. When a person always takes the viewpoint controversial to the mainstream as you do, is that thinking independent? No, no it is not. Your opinions are one hundred per-fucking-cent dependent on what most people DON'T think.

As the slip-slide continues, chairman Jerry Reinsdorf has made it clear his beloved manager isn't part of the blame, which prompts general manager Ken Williams to echo the executive-suite sentiment, which prompts local mouthpieces to disseminate Soxpaganda.

Soxpaganda....weak sauce, dude, weak.

Truth is, while Williams let fungus grow on the ballclub and has been slow to the acquisition switch since last summer's trade deadline,

Stop, stop right here. This is the one time you are right in this entire article. Williams made no effort to win now with a win-now team. He decided to watch them age instead, and not address gaping holes at SS, LF, and CF (no, Erstad is NOT a solution....contenders don't compete by replacing bad players with slightly less bad players). Too bad that's a comma there after "deadline" and not a period.

the Sox still have underperformed by eight to 10 games in each of their last two halves of baseball.

Actually Jay, when you're given the aging of the team's players, the fact that Dye, Crede, and Thome had coincidental career years last year and were bound for regression, and the fact that the bullpen way overperformed in both 2005 and 2006, it's pretty reasonable to expect the team to lose 90 games like PECOTA projected. Do you really think that Ozzie is to blame for Dye's .227 EqA or injuries to Dye, Thome, Crede, Erstad, and Podsednik? (Granted the last two suck, but the guys replacing them are even worse) Do you?

And for that flaw, yes, you should fault Guillen.

Yes, despite the fact that there are 6 above-average players on the team this year, it's Guillen's fault that they aren't winning. A couple others (Terrero, Danks, Podsednik when healthy) have been mediocre, and everyone else has been bad-to-terrible. Granted, Ozzie doesn't put high OBP guys at the top of the lineup, in front of HR-hitting guys, like he should, but remember this fact, Jay....HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY. HE HAS TWO ABOVE AVERAGE HITTERS ON THE ENTIRE TEAM.

You should because the Sox too often lack energy, focus, commitment and passion -- variables that are his daily responsibility. They look burned out, and don't discount the possibility that he personally has applied the burnout with his nonstop onslaught of episodes, incidents, stunts, slurs and F-bombs.

You know, I bet the Sox players didn't injure themselves. Guillen's stunts and slurs caused Joe Crede to undergo season-ending surgery. His F-bombs accelerated the aging process. Because of Guillen's lack of responsibility, Juan Uribe is sporting a passionless, burned-out .219 EqA and is still the club's best option to play everyday at shortstop. (somehow, that number is lower than last years' when he had a .257 OBP)

When a team wins a World Series, follows with a 53-27 record in last year's first half and then takes one of the most sudden and bizarre nosedives I've seen in sports, the manager should be front and center on any accountability list.

Here's the problem with Jay's columns. He only really says one thing throughout the entire article. Each new sentence, paragraph, etc. is just a new way of repeating his wrong opinions. For example, this one right here, I could just reply like this again, because he hasn't said anything new.....

"Yes, despite the fact that there are 6 above-average players on the team this year, it's Guillen's fault that they aren't winning. A couple others (Terrero, Danks, Podsednik when healthy) have been mediocre, and everyone else has been bad-to-terrible. Granted, Ozzie doesn't put high OBP guys at the top of the lineup, in front of HR-hitting guys, like he should, but remember this fact, Jay....HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY. HE HAS TWO ABOVE AVERAGE HITTERS ON THE ENTIRE TEAM.

You know, I bet the Sox players didn't injure themselves. Guillen's stunts and slurs caused Joe Crede to undergo season-ending surgery. His F-bombs accelerated the aging process. Because of Guillen's lack of responsibility, Juan Uribe is sporting a passionless, burned-out .219 EqA and is still the club's best option to play everyday at shortstop. (somehow, that number is lower than last years' when he had a .257 OBP)"

The Sox program is stale, flat and not worth the price of admission, much less a $108 million payroll outlay that ranks fifth in the major leagues. So how do you not point at least a finger or two at Guillen?

Because Ozzie Guillen doesn't have anything to do with on whom that $108M is spent? You know what, forget it, I'm not here. Ignore that stupid, unreasonable blind guess of mine. Ozzie's fault. You win.

Even if he shoots a middle finger back.

::chirp::

The Sox have not capitalized on their championship, fading quickly as a local story and losing much ground in their stated quest to dent into the Cubs' massive popularity.

When was that quest announced? I'm curious, when the hell did they decide that was more important than winning?

TV ratings have dropped dramatically -- not helped by a depressing Hawk Harrelson, who goes silent for long stretches during losing skids -- and the organization seems to be in a panic state.

If it weren't so funny, I'd wish Mariotti and Harrelson would quit vying for the immortal title of "I'm not as much of a dumbass as he is."

The Guillen era has been fun and triumphant, but it also was a one-and-done proposition filled with headaches.

Name one team that has won the World Series twice in the past 7 years.

I don't even want to continue with this. Running short on time, and all this nonsense makes my head hurt.