Has anyone read the article by Tom Boswell and the following comment section. If we can't have a good hockey team perhaps with a couple or at least one knowledgeable writer, Ted L could be pressured to make the necessary changes. Just a thought.
Whyno is decent, but generally I agree with you. Part of it is that this simply isn't a hockey town. I mean I guess you could debate that its started to become one, but most of the local media doesn't really follow the Caps other than major stories/scores.
Whyno seems more interested in doing articles on other teams than the caps. Sometimes I don't blame him but still. I follow a lot of beat reporters on twitter from all sports and at the end of the day if your passionate about the team you're covering your work usually turns out better.
Honestly, this is a problem in the entire news industry. There's not enough man power to have people who are specialized enough to have a true understanding of the subject they're writing on. To the uninformed reader, they seem like they know what they're talking about. But if you really follow a team or work in an industry, you realize that the articles in those areas are biased and that the writers really don't have any more knowledge than you would if you read a wikipedia article. That's why I get most of my information from the internet, where people can just write about what they know instead of being forced to cover subjects they don't know or care about. You get far deeper insights on hockey from some of the poster on these boards or at Japer's Rink than you get from the Post or the Times.
Honestly, this is a problem in the entire news industry. There's not enough man power to have people who are specialized enough to have a true understanding of the subject they're writing on.
Zoid, you are exactly right about this. It's a disgrace that American culture has become infected and swollen with frauds and phonies.
Boswell is one of the writers who I don't immediately dismiss. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he has an excellent grasp of sports history and isn't brutally evasive and dishonest like some of the other well-known sports writers. Boswell always seemed earnest to me, even when he goes wrong like he has here.
He doesn't recognize that McPhee built a team without a clear vision of how it was supposed to work.
Boswell thinks the Caps are not so far from a Cup if they keep the course. That's retarded. This team is rudderless and without a compass. Without a Lou L. type to keep a fire burning under the player's ***** (via trades, toughness and discipline) the Caps are going nowhere.
Zoid, you are exactly right about this. It's a disgrace that American culture has become infected and swollen with frauds and phonies.
Boswell is one of the writers who I don't immediately dismiss. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he has an excellent grasp of sports history and isn't brutally evasive and dishonest like some of the other well-known sports writers. Boswell always seemed earnest to me, even when he goes wrong like he has here.
He doesn't recognize that McPhee built a team without a clear vision of how it was supposed to work.
Boswell thinks the Caps are not so far from a Cup if they keep the course. That's retarded. This team is rudderless and without a compass. Without a Lou L. type to keep a fire burning under the player's ***** (via trades, toughness and discipline) the Caps are going nowhere.
vent: my wife is a special education teacher. i have had a lot of contact with these children and their parents. it just pisses me off everytime the word retarded is used as a cheap insult in these threads.
vent off: boswell is as good a sports writer as there is. he is a baseball writer by trade which is a day to day lifestyle. writing other sports on an occasional basis is more difficult.
boswell is as good a sports writer as there is. he is a baseball writer by trade which is a day to day lifestyle. writing other sports on an occasional basis is more difficult.
He doesn't pretend to be a hockey guy, but when he writes about the Caps his columns usually have more insight than other sports columnists the Post has now or has had in the past. Compared to Wise or Hamilton or Wilbon or that idiot Kornheiser, Boswell is Red Fisher or Elliote Friedman.
vent: my wife is a special education teacher. i have had a lot of contact with these children and their parents. it just pisses me off everytime the word retarded is used as a cheap insult in these threads.
You do realize that the vast majority of people who call their friend, a decision, or a situation 'retarded' are not actually calling them mentally challenged. Also they would likely never refer to an actually mentally challenged person as retarded in some derogatory manner.
And for that manner when my friend is being wishy washy about making decision about something and I say 'don't be a f*g' I am not saying 'don't be a homosexual.' And I would never call a homosexual a f*g in a derogatory manner either.
When these words are used that way they are not taking on their literal meanings and everyone knows that.
vent: my wife is a special education teacher. i have had a lot of contact with these children and their parents. it just pisses me off everytime the word retarded is used as a cheap insult in these threads.
I mean, do you react the same way if "stupid" is used? "Retarded" is just a more severe form of that, in reality. By definition, mentally retarded people are not good at thinking. It is literally what defines the condition. If Tom Boswell writes an article and it looks like he wasn't thinking very while when he wrote it, how is calling that article "retarded" wrong, exactly? It seems to make perfect sense to me. That's totally different from calling those kids retarded, or something. It doesn't mean anyone is trying to be malicious towards them, but obviously they are not considered ideal by many people, just as the moron with an 80 IQ (retarded is ~65-70) working at McDonald's isn't either.
Lets just call it the R word. One day saying "mentally challenged" will be frowned upon. A word is a word. We can use a different word to say the same thing, or use several words to replace what was once said in one word. Why is it, that using more words, is better.
Its not just the R word. Does it make the person saying it, sound smarter, spin it into a more positive way, in a <usually feeble> attempt to... wait for it, put lipstick on a pig? I am sure that offended a smart pig.
When I hear mentally challenged, I instantly get distracted and think the person is sensitive, what they say, drowned out. Does their sensitivity change anything?
I assume sped is not to be said as well. Short for Special Education. I always believed it was used for convenience. Is special education offensive now? Why the abbreviation, if not?
Political correctness implies that people actually give a rats ass about politics, or that politicians are not corrupt. Or that politicians actually get things correct.
i am aware of how the term retarded is used here. its being used in the same sort insulting way that previous technical terms like moron and idiot had been used. " you are so stupid as to be comparible to the mentally retarded." i also know what the actual definition of to retard is. scotchguard is a retardant. i know what it means.
i know retarded people. they run up to my wife in the walmart and hug here. george mcphee has a law degree. he's not retarded.
of course, here a simple vent against popular culture has to be argued with.
btw....i used to know tom boswell when i worked in the washington media between '1977 and 1993. he is arguably along with john feinstien the finest sportswriter in the country and remains so. anytime he is allowed to write hockey, its a good thing for us
Lets just call it the R word. One day saying "mentally challenged" will be frowned upon. A word is a word. We can use a different word to say the same thing, or use several words to replace what was once said in one word. Why is it, that using more words, is better.
Its not just the R word. Does it make the person saying it, sound smarter, spin it into a more positive way, in a <usually feeble> attempt to... wait for it, put lipstick on a pig? I am sure that offended a smart pig.
When I hear mentally challenged, I instantly get distracted and think the person is sensitive, what they say, drowned out. Does their sensitivity change anything?
I assume sped is not to be said as well. Short for Special Education. I always believed it was used for convenience. Is special education offensive now? Why the abbreviation, if not?
Political correctness implies that people actually give a rats ass about politics, or that politicians are not corrupt. Or that politicians actually get things correct.
its ok, randy. do what you want. say what you want. write what you want. call me what you want. its a free country. i happen to not like the twist on that word right now. i express a simple disapproval.
its ok, randy. do what you want. say what you want. write what you want. call me what you want. its a free country. i happen to not like the twist on that word right now. i express a simple disapproval.
My post was not pointed at you at all. Please don't misconstrue that. I am usally PC and repsect those that choose to be. But it just seems a bit silly at times. A word is a word, changing it to 2 words will mandate it become 3 words one day, or 2 new words.
It's my shot at political correctness, which translates right into hockey.
Being "correct" appears to me to be the biggest concern about the founding fathers of the nuNHL. They don't want offended stay at home people with nothing better to do calling the league offices en masse about what they saw on the news. The news, only showing the most shocking things they can. You know, doing their thing. Do you give them a free pass for that?
The shocking horrific things I see on the news are far more disturbing then any words one can say.
My post was not pointed at you at all. Please don't misconstrue that. I am usally PC and repsect those that choose to be. But it just seems a bit silly at times. A word is a word, changing it to 2 words will mandate it become 3 words one day, or 2 new words.
It's my shot at political correctness, which translates right into hockey.
Being "correct" appears to me to be the biggest concern about the founding fathers of the nuNHL. They don't want offended stay at home people with nothing better to do calling the league offices en masse about what they saw on the news. The news, only showing the most shocking things they can. You know, doing their thing. Do you give them a free pass for that?
The shocking horrific things I see on the news are far more disturbing then any words one can say.
Nor was I, grabbing the bull by the horns and actually talking about it.
Peace bud, I know its your thing and I am totally cool with that. You have never seen me type the R word. Everyone has their buttons, and we all know you have mashed mine before.
While I think Tom Boswell is an excellent sportswriter, particularly about a sport like baseball that he follows religiously (as opposed to hockey), it is rather ironic that he is essentially preaching "let's be patient with GMGM" and let him stay the course (whatever that course is) with this team, in view of what Boswell wrote about a year ago.
About a year ago after the Caps got ousted by Tampa Bay in the playoffs, Boswell wrote this article:
In this article last season, Boswell called for change, but stated that as usual the Caps would make excuses - injuries, hot goalie, whatever - and not make any drastic, neeed change. While I agreed with Boswell then, he was saying "changes need to be made" with respect to a Caps team that had once again finished at the top of the Eastern Conference in the regular season with a strong finish to the regular season, and finished off the Rangers in five games.
Now fast-forward nearly one season, and Boswell is saying the exact reverse - "stay the course" with GMGM - but this time he is saying this about a Caps team that is vastly under-achieving and is very likely to miss the playoffs and have a losing record, where most of the players are having sub-par years and their sub-par year is part of a larger downward trend, and the team seems to have very little chemistry on the ice.
Makes me think that writers like Boswell are simply assigned a topic to write about by the Post sports editor and then simply wing it. Last year, the editor told Boswell, "Tom, write an article demanding that the Caps make changes," and this week the sports editor instructed Boswell to "write an article suggesting that the Caps just need to stay the course."
While I think Tom Boswell is an excellent sportswriter, particularly about a sport like baseball that he follows religiously (as opposed to hockey), it is rather ironic that he is essentially preaching "let's be patient with GMGM" and let him stay the course (whatever that course is) with this team, in view of what Boswell wrote about a year ago.
About a year ago after the Caps got ousted by Tampa Bay in the playoffs, Boswell wrote this article:
In this article last season, Boswell called for change, but stated that as usual the Caps would make excuses - injuries, hot goalie, whatever - and not make any drastic, neeed change. While I agreed with Boswell then, he was saying "changes need to be made" with respect to a Caps team that had once again finished at the top of the Eastern Conference in the regular season with a strong finish to the regular season, and finished off the Rangers in five games.
Now fast-forward nearly one season, and Boswell is saying the exact reverse - "stay the course" with GMGM - but this time he is saying this about a Caps team that is vastly under-achieving and is very likely to miss the playoffs and have a losing record, where most of the players are having sub-par years and their sub-par year is part of a larger downward trend, and the team seems to have very little chemistry on the ice.
Makes me think that writers like Boswell are simply assigned a topic to write about by the Post sports editor and then simply wing it. Last year, the editor told Boswell, "Tom, write an article demanding that the Caps make changes," and this week the sports editor instructed Boswell to "write an article suggesting that the Caps just need to stay the course."
I doubt they're even given that much direction. He probably barely even remembers writing the other article.
While I think Tom Boswell is an excellent sportswriter, particularly about a sport like baseball that he follows religiously (as opposed to hockey), it is rather ironic that he is essentially preaching "let's be patient with GMGM" and let him stay the course (whatever that course is) with this team, in view of what Boswell wrote about a year ago.
About a year ago after the Caps got ousted by Tampa Bay in the playoffs, Boswell wrote this article:
In this article last season, Boswell called for change, but stated that as usual the Caps would make excuses - injuries, hot goalie, whatever - and not make any drastic, neeed change. While I agreed with Boswell then, he was saying "changes need to be made" with respect to a Caps team that had once again finished at the top of the Eastern Conference in the regular season with a strong finish to the regular season, and finished off the Rangers in five games.
Now fast-forward nearly one season, and Boswell is saying the exact reverse - "stay the course" with GMGM - but this time he is saying this about a Caps team that is vastly under-achieving and is very likely to miss the playoffs and have a losing record, where most of the players are having sub-par years and their sub-par year is part of a larger downward trend, and the team seems to have very little chemistry on the ice.
Makes me think that writers like Boswell are simply assigned a topic to write about by the Post sports editor and then simply wing it. Last year, the editor told Boswell, "Tom, write an article demanding that the Caps make changes," and this week the sports editor instructed Boswell to "write an article suggesting that the Caps just need to stay the course."
He tends to do that from time to time with baseball as well, especially wrt the Lerners and their willingness to spend. Laments them for being cheap and then laments them for spending too freely etc. I think he's better when sticking to the non-management related aspects of sports, he just seems better at it.
He is entitled to change his mind. Look at how minds change here after one loss
Knee jerk reaction to losing in the playoffs, saying that the fans want to hear, its almost predictable.
But even if not, he could realize wow, look at our young D, young G's, and think better of canning GM before his vision of building the team from the blueline out (inadvertent, or not), has had enough time to play itself out.
I wonder if the undertaker visited his offices recently...
with nothing better to do calling the league offices en masse about what they saw on the news. The news, only showing the most shocking things they can. You know, doing their thing. Do you give them a free pass for that?
