Articles from around the Web
NOW DISCOUNTED 40%
Discounted for midseason; buy the PDF version here for just $7.50.Buy print version here for $22.95.
Click here to buy PDF version
Official Account: @fboutsiders
Scott Kacsmar: @FO_ScottKacsmar
Rivers McCown: @FO_RiversMcCown
Ben Muth: @FO_WordofMuth
Aaron Schatz: @FO_ASchatz
Danny Tuccitto: @FO_DTuccitto
Vince Verhei: @FO_VVerhei
-- plus --
Andy Benoit: @Andy_Benoit
Bill Connelly: @SBN_BillC
J.J. Cooper: @jjcoop36
Cian Fahey: @Cianaf
Brian Fremeau: @bcfremeau
Tom Gower: @ThomasGower
Matt Hinton: @MattRHinton
Mike Ridley: @TheMikeRidley
Mike Tanier: @MikeTanier
Matt Waldman: @MattWaldman
Rob Weintraub: @robwein
25 Jun 2012
Our (much shorter than usual) MMQB this week from DeMaurice Smith focuses on being a good sport.
Posted by: Rivers McCown on 25 Jun 2012
23 comments, Last at
28 Jun 2012, 3:11pm by
Until they get the link fixed:
Rule 1 may as well go out the window on this thread. I'm pretty left wing and pro union but even I think that Smith cannot expect anyone to believe this beauty, "During the course of that fight, we championed the rights of stadium workers like UNITE union member John Marler, who would have lost his job in a lockout.".
That section was bad, but it wasn't even the worst of it. The paragraph directly prior begins with "No group of players in history did as much as this group to make the NFL a good sport." No need to wonder any further why the older, retired players aren't particularly keen on the players union. I can't believe he actually said that.
Agreed that given the ongoing friction with the older retirees that was an amazing comment to make. Then again, he also made the entire "speech" about good sporstmanship without ever mentioning bounties at all, which is a pretty amazing omission.
I'm with you. I'd probably be considered left of center and thought this was a bigger waste of bandwidth than anything PK has written.
I wish that I would have read these comments before reading that article.
Also, OH SNAP!
I'm with you - pro-union but anti-this column.
For a second there, I thought he was going to launch into the "wear sunscreen" speech.
I didn't really have a clue what he was on about in that speech. Bored me into submission (or rather skipping paragraphs at a time).
I could understand The Things He Thinks He Thinks because he said it concisely.
"2. I think the Nats are for real, and that I need to work Bryce Harper's "That's a clown question, bro" into my next press conference."
From what I can, he's been working clown questions into press conferences for years.
Haven't had a chance to read it yet, but it will get much more attention than Kings usual drivel. I pretty much consider unions obsolete, but I will certainly acknowledge that this is a real coup for King to get someone like Smith to do his column for a week.
Smith gets to take a column read by millions and turn it into a PR monologue for himself. Why exactly wouldn't he want to do that? He'd probably said "yes" before PK had finished asking.
Now that I've read it, yeah, it's every bit as worthless as everyone here already observed. No insight to be had whatsoever.
Wow. He clearly wants to say "all that is right and good in the world is in some way on the side of unions, especially my union." He's just missing either the frankness or the ingenuity to say it.
What a meandering pile of nonsense.
I don't see where he even goes that far. Everything good is the result of HIS union, specifically HIS tenure and HIS current group of players. He singles out his guys as doing the most for sportsmanship as any players in history. And somehow his guys were doing it all because of the poor stadium workers who otherwise would have lost their jobs. He does everything except give himself a medal.
How does it rate compared to Lloyd Blankfein's claim that he (and his bank) are "doing God's work"?
One of the most self-serving columns I've read in quite a while.
Yeah. It's pretty lame of King to give this guy a column to more or less reprint his union propaganda to a bunch of readers who really aren't interested in it. There had to have been a hundred better options than this, right? What about a thoughtful column from a few UFAs who are trying to make a team? What about the recently-retired Tomlinson doing something? No doubt there's an up-and-coming sports journalist from a local paper or other media outlet who'd put in significant work into producing a readable column (complete with "10 things I think I think" and "beer nerdness") that we'd all enjoy. But instead, he gives it to a guy who's just shilling for the players union? Lame.
What's particularly irritating is that Smith presumably has access to plenty of anecdotes and inside information that would have contributed towards a compelling column but instead he serves up this dross.
Totally. If you're going to have a guy like Smith do a column, he should have put in some anecdotes-- perhaps harmless/humorous "behind the scenes" stories of the labor negotiations, or just thoughts on the future of the NFL (what does HE think about the suggestion that we get rid of kick-offs? What has he heard from actual players? Etc., etc.)
Let's hope King makes a better choice next time.
I dunno - I think if you ask someone whose an official, professional representative of any kind, you're only going to get the most uncontroversial (within the body you represent) rah-rah stuff. His job is to act as a stand-in for the players and you're just not going to get anything from him other than the party line even on harmless stuff like kick-off's and "the future of the NFL." He can't be himself because his job is to be the voice of entire group of people.
Dr. Backshoulder's low catch rate: an aberration, or a long-term problem?
See All XP | NFL XP | College XP
© Football Outsiders, Inc. // Site powered by Stein-Wein // Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties