Jellyfish
Jun 2, 2008 Dancing With the 'Tards, Houston Chronicle, Little Dickie Justice, Pancakes McTard, Richard Justice is a talentless hack., Righteous Indignation, Token
If you’ve been following the comments on Jerome Solomon’s “Will the Texans win eight games” blog post, you are (a) as bored as I am and (b) no doubt aware of the back-and-forth that has transpired between Solomon and Mark (1Tex) as well as between Solomon and Solis.
Long story short, Mark took Solomon and the Chron to task for being so needlessly negative and pointed to a pro-Texans article from the Dallas Morning News as proof of getting better Texans coverage elsewhere. Solis then added that the Chron’s negative approach and subpar coverage of the team was why so many people were anti-Chron at this point. Solomon fired back that the same article had been posted on the Chron, that the Texans coverage on the paper was not negative, and that Mark and Solis sounded like they were whining.
Mark and Solis each responded, basically pointing out that Solomon was missing the bigger point here, to which Solomon replied that there was no “point” and likened the idea that people agreed that the Chron sucked to the KKK. (No, seriously.)
In all, it was your typical “Chron writer gets defensive about how poorly the paper covers the team” discussion. It would event be post-worthy were it not for this line from Jerome:
Courage to run what you say? You are nuts if you think I don’t run comments from people who disagree with me.
That’s good to hear. I mean, one wouldn’t want to think that Jerome was selectively approving comments in order to avoid having his argument shot down. Nope, he is better than that; he runs comments from people who disagree with him.
Unless those comments come from me or BFD.
Right after Solis’ first comment, BFD wrote the following:
Cmon, there’s really no reason to try and use logic on this here site. Wasn’t it JS who called Texans fans morons, or something similar, last year? Pancakes was “liveblogging” the Saints game last year, but obviously wasn’t watching the game. And RJ still can’t let go of his unrequited man-crush of VY.
The coverage here is pathetic and condescending with a bunch of reporters who are more excited about the Cow-pokes than they are the team they are supposed to cover.
That was written at 11AM on Sunday. As of 1:40PM on Monday, it still hasn’t been posted. Shortly after BFD, I added a comment of my own:
I also agree with 1Tex. It’s no secret among Texans fans that the Chron’s coverage of the team is horrible. Heck, look at any Texans blog, Texans message board, or just talk to any fan who cares enough to follow the team on a daily basis.
Obviously, Jerome misses the larger underlying point that 1Tex is making–the Chron’s coverage of the Texans should BLOW AWAY Texans coverage on other news outlets, yet it never does. At best, we get the same “oh, the team isn’t that good” tripe that we get everywhere else in the ether of the internet.
On top of that, we get a DALLAS COWBOYS BLOG on the Texans main page. Between that, a guy who lives to make insipid videos, a writer that will never forgive the team for not drafting Radio Young, a piece of eye-candy that has never once written anything remotely insightful, and a guy who literally called the Texans fanbase “losers” last year, it is little wonder that Texans fans feel like the Chron’s coverage is subpar.
I think every Texans writer at this paper should thank the deity of his/her choice that there is not a another major daily paper in Houston.
That comment also to that internet comment graveyard in the sky. I would have chalked it up to our being a collective persona non grata at the Chron and left it at that, but Jerome had to go and make it sound like he wasn’t filtering. So I emailed him, asking where my comment was if he was so willing to run opposing viewpoints. He replied that the problem was my inclusion of the atexansblog.com URL in my header.
Fine, I sent a new comment, basically mirroring my last one with some added responses to what he’d written in the interim and I was sure to leave my URL out. I was even somewhat friendly in this version.
I also agree with 1Tex. It’s no secret among Texans fans that the Chron’s coverage of the team is horrible. Heck, look at any Texans blog, Texans message board, or just talk to any fan who cares enough to follow the team on a daily basis.
Jerome misses the larger underlying point that 1Tex is making–the Chron’s coverage of the Texans should BLOW AWAY Texans coverage on other news outlets, yet it never does. At best, we get the same “oh, the team isn’t that good” tripe that we get everywhere else in the ether of the internet without much in the way of additional, insider-type articles that a local paper should provide.
On top of that, we get a DALLAS COWBOYS BLOG on the Texans main page. Between that, a guy who lives to make insipid videos, a writer that will never forgive the team for not drafting Radio Young, a piece of eye-candy that has never once written anything remotely insightful, and a guy who literally called the Texans fanbase “losers” last year, it is little wonder that Texans fans feel like the Chron’s coverage is subpar.
*****
“And to say that the Chron’s stories on the Texans are shrouded in negativity is a bit disingenuous, considering the team has never had a winning season.”One has nothing to do with the other, Jerome. You don’t have to have a winning season for articles following your best season to date to remain positive about the upcoming year. The team was .500 last year and, for the first time ever, seems to have most of the pieces in place to challenge any other team on any given week. Given that, which makes more sense–to talk about how the team has a better chance than ever to win at least 9 games OR to keep pointing out how they haven’t won 9 games in any previous years?
“Journalists are not supposed to write like fans of the team and say all is well when things are falling apart.”
Nor are they supposed to keep talking about how Mario Williams is a bust and wrong pick when he is dominating opposing teams and making the people who drafted him look like geniuses. They are supposed to write objectively about what is actually happening. So, when things AREN’T falling apart, by your rationale, the writers should not suggest that they are. (Unless you really think things are falling apart right now, which is a ridiculous assertion.)
Look, I don’t disagree that the paper should not aspire to be Pollyanna Sunshine 100% of the time. And I don’t think that negativity is necessarily the biggest problem facing the Chron (though it is certainly an important issue). The problem, as I see it, is that (a) the coverage provided that is good is–more often than not–written by the AP or someone unaffiliated with the paper and (b) the stuff written by Chron staff reeks of negativity so often that the occasional piece that isn’t gets lost in the mix.
That was two-and-a-half hours ago. Still, nada. About thirty minutes ago, following the brilliant KKK mention, I added:
The KKK comment is ridiculous and does nothing to further the debate. If you can’t see why it doesn’t work in the context of this debate–I can already hear you typing “no it’s not, both are examples of people with similar opinions”–then this conversation is pointless.
As for arguing that Solis’ (and others’) OPINION is wrong, how can you take that stance and still argue that people shouldn’t call you an idiot because you don’t like MMA? Your OPINION is that MMA is not entertaining, right? You back it up with other opinions–that it is about violence, that it is boring–but in the end it is still nothing more than opinion. And opinions are a matter of taste, not a matter of fact that can be argued.
Oh, wait, I forgot that it was perfectly acceptable for Chron writers to be hypocritical. See, e.g., Justice’s positions on Mario.
Of course, since you still haven’t posted my last comment, despite my removal of the URL, I doubt this one goes up either. And, yes, that is a thinly-veiled challenge.
I won’t hold my breath that either of these gets posted.
In the end, I can’t even pretend like this is surprising. After all, both BFD and I have taken many, many shots at the Chron and its staff over the past 13 months, so I guess they are justified in shutting us out of their comments if they want to. Whatever. Just don’t sit there and pretend like you are running all of the comments, even the negative ones, when you most certainly aren’t. THAT “is a bit disingenuous,” Jerome. If the people in charge won’t let you run DGDB&D comments, then say so. Hell, I’d have more respect for you if that was the case. Otherwise, I am going to assume that you and your cohorts are spineless and incapable of anything resembling the rational debate you claim to be willing to engage in.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Hoo boy. Let me just say with complete authority that the writer or editor is approving or unapproving those commments. And even though those blogs get pretty backed up from time to time, rest assured the comments are being read eventually.
Keep on fighting the good fight, Matt. Maybe next time you comment, you should include a copy of your site hits for comparison purposes.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Can’t tell if you are being sarcastic at the end there. What I do know is that Solis last comment was submitted well after my revised one and it was posted already. Makes one think that it is not the url that is keeping him from posting mine.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 3:14 pm
What a douche. Before I left Houston I was bouncing around the radio listening to the vast assortment of crappy sports talk shows. One host in particular kept making stupid circular arguments, talking over the top of the callers and his co-host, or just laughing arrogantly and repeating childish phrases like “did not”. I could only take a couple of minutes of it. And, yes, it was Solomon. I hadn’t read anything he had written to that point and decided not to…well, until now. He sounds the same in print.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Oh, most certainly think your comments ARE being filtered.
And I think Solomon, et al. would be stunned to see the hits that y’all get here. I don’t know the exact numbers, but I think the popularity of DGDB&D as well as BRB, Diehards, etc. says that there’s an unmet need that the 7th largest paper in the country is missing. No sarcasm, yo.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 4:03 pm
The Chron truly does suck. Everyone knows the chron filters comments. I come here for Texans discussions…and the occasional fake conversations with real people. I would like to see it stay that way, and not turn into a pissing match with old media.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 4:20 pm
@ papabear: point taken. That’s the main reason that I try to ignore them and avoid the “omg, they suck, look at this” style post. Had he not claimed he was running opposing viewpoints, I wouldn’t have bothered mentioning this fray over here either.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Jerome Solomon has been a fucking moron for the last few years. Nothing changing as I take it. And his radio show is probably the worst thing on radio these days.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Sorry, papabear, as I saw this comment after my last post.
But, most importantly, your point is taken.
-
I admit that it’s sometimes hard for me. I think it’s because I’m tired of all the negativity from the chron. I mean, being called a loser for being a fan of the Texans is just incredible. I will be on better behavior. Mostly
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 8:11 pm
BTW, both Matt and BFD’s comments have been posted but not responded to.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Heh…can I call this a win?
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 10:01 pm
Only if you’re french.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 10:04 pm
Wait wait wait…he is the one who threw up the French white flag of surrender.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 10:22 pm
A few weeks back, Solomon basically wrote that as a reporter, he wanted the Texans either to have a phenomenal season, or to completely suck. Nothing in between because he is interested solely in having something to write about. He’s not a fan. To him, the Texans being a middle of the road team equates to fewer eyeballs viewing his work.
I’ve gotten to the point where I refuse to read anything Solomon or Justice say or write. Besides pissing you off, ever click puts money in their pockets.
(click arrow to reply)
June 2nd, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Yeah - I hadn’t read anything JS had written in a long time.
-
Scenario played out like this:
My girl goes w/ her girlfriend to watch Sex in the City on Sunday ’round noon. I throw the comp on and read an email from 1Tex. Summed up, it was a call to arms. He said that JS was being an idiot and asked if we could engage him. I went, I read, and I responded.
-
The rest pretty much follows what Matt explained above.
-
JS talked himself into a corner… I wasn’t about to bring up his shitty article about us being losers. I’m sure he has his defense already worked out. It’s almost as if he was baiting me to go there. I didn’t give him the satisfaction.
-
His analogic metaphor of “they = KKK” was a fucking weak attempt at establishing a frame of reference for his other readers. It was deplorable.
-
If Jerome hates my guts - so be it. I hate his guts too.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 7:30 am
I give McCain credit for talking to the players and coaches, and occasionally even defending the Texans. However, he is a huge fat douche and I’m sure he’s doing something naughty with 3-Hole behind the scenes. I’ve sworn off reading his blog comments, because I can’t stand the regular commenters on it, especially Cowboy, 5_Rings (what the fuck is up with the excessive use of commas) and that jw1 guy who writes like one of Bill Clinton’s Very Special Forces.
-
Solomon is a moron who believes only what he reads in the New York Post. Also, he’s a terrible journalist. I remember once leaving a comment to an article he wrote last year about how Radio was ahead in the only statistic that matters: wins. I commented that wins are a pretty BS statistic for a QB. He replied along the lines of: “we use it for pitchers too, and that’s not a big deal” or something like that. At that point I gave up because I realized I was never, ever going to get through to him. Some other commenters took up the banner, pointing out that W-L for a pitcher is perhaps the most BS statistic out there, but I didn’t want to stick around and lose even more IQ.
-
I wish they gave the Texans account to Zeierlein. He’s the only one in my opinion that has anything approaching a realistic assessment of what’s going on.
-
Also, while I’m on a roll, Peter King is a total moron and Dr. Z appears to be winning his race to insanity with Larry King.
-
Oh, and every time I see Justice’s head shot on the Chron I want to take a lead pipe to that smug little fuckwad.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 8:39 am
Solomon really pissed me off last year with that loser article, but he’s been slowly winning me back. The bit he wrote about how the current Texans backups were better than the 05 starters was probably pretty true and he’s been pretty complimentary this off-season. I’m sure yall will disagree, but he is actually one of the two chron writers I read for football (Zierlein being the other). His comment section battle with yall was really stupid but he’s still nowhere near as douchey as McClain or Justice.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 8:43 am
I saw on Lance Z’s blog that DieHardChris was begging to be put on the staff to blog about the texans because the current staff wasn’t doing their jobs. It’s been said here plenty before, but just can’t be drilled enough… not only is it these fucks’ jobs to report on our team, but they’ve got access to players and facilities that we could only dream of.
As to Justice’s attempts, I read their top story the other day, and didn’t look at who wrote it, assuming it was Pancakes, and when I was done reading I had this horrible feeling, like I’d been tricked into seeing Sex and the City, while being anally raped by Kimbo Slice. Scrolled to the top to find out it was all Little Dickie’s doing. Piss up a rope.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 8:48 am
@Matt &BFD: No big deal guys. I’ve just come to accept certain things from old media….admittedly the Chron doesn’t even handle that format well. They are always going to do things geared towards a mass audience, not the hardcore live it breathe it fans like many people that come here. The only way they are going to change is when they lose enough business to sites like this. Even then they might not change….print media has already lost a lot of it’s “power” by sticking to the old ways. I still check the chron occasionally because they have access to the players and coaches that I never will. Of course the team is so measured in what it tells the media that doesn’t mean much but it’s better than nothing. How many times are the discussion on fan sites started by an article in the chron though? 95% of the people might disagree with them, but it still started the dialog. They are also going to write whatever draws the most dramatic response. Whether that is good or bad because the average audience doesn’t care if the call was for cover three and Faggins played the flat and didn’t get back to his deep third area of responsibility…but if they talk about Vince or what an idiot the GM is that garners attention to the site.
The blogs are a joke because the writers don’t want to use their best material in a blog when they can use it in an article so they try to come up with whatever will get the most people arguing in the comments. In other words; drive up traffic. Except for Mcclain….apparently he thinks people actually care about his movie or that him and three hole shot another 4 minute video clip with 3 minutes of them telling you what they plan on talking about in that video clip. Last time I emailed McClain he did respond….that that was a great question, and if I leave it in his comments he will answer it. I did. He didn’t. You think he cares about his hit counter?
I’ve been around and around with those guys before, and just gave up. Just keep putting up good content here. That does more damage to them than anything. Don’t be like that girl who says I’m an asshole and never wants to see me again….only to call me at all hours or show up banging at my door at 3:00 in the morning if for no other reason than to tell me she hates me.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 9:03 am
@Papabear- You have girls showing up at your door at 3am to tell you how much they hate you? Did you take repeated, tender advantage of them? That’s the kind of thing that happens in my dreams.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 9:33 am
@willfist: sometimes it was to tell me she loved me. Sometimes it was scream “I know you love me just admit it”. Most of the time it was to tell me she hated me. It could have had something to do with the third hole….and the fact she was just plain crazy. Stalkers are only fun for a little while.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:00 am
@Papabear: those stalkers can get old. It’s a shame, because that whole “I’ll do anything you want in bed” thing is nice at first, before the psycho-ness of it all drives you away.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:02 am
I just need to do a better job to not let them get to me. They are what they are, and I need to keep my expectations excessively low.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:03 am
To be fair, even “I’ll do whatever you want in bed” has its limits. They are never cool with some things. Of course, it’s entirely possible that I am a sexual deviant.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:14 am
That’s why you swing for the fences first thing on the honeymoon. A. It sets the precedence if you WERE lucky enough to marry up to a cool chick, and B. You’ll probably never get it again, anyway.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:23 am
Also, the “IN BED” portion of that rule is really restrictive on the relationship. If the possibility of a Burger King bathroom is removed, she’s really hurting herself in the bargaining department. 110%. Go hard or go home. Get on or get spit on.
Deviant indeed.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:25 am
In your last two comments, beef, you’ve basically laid out why I married the woman I did.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 11:10 am
A few semi-contrarian thoughts to break the group think:
-
Generally, Solomon will publish anything that goes on his blog with the exception of truly vulgar stuff or things that he responds back privately. The way that the comment approval process is at the Chronic blogs is a PITA.
-
Usually, the author has to approve things, which means actually being around a computer. Once in a while, a staffer will handle the approvals.
-
Personally, I thought this comment was the interesting one that he gave in his blog post:
-
“Now, I’m not blindly touting the Chron’s coverage of the Texans - I don’t mind a fair debate on the subject, and there are plenty of things I would do differently if I were in charge of deciding how to cover the team - I’m just saying that if that type of story is what you want, I can show it and others like it to you here at the Chron.”
-
In other words, he doesn’t control how the Texans are covered so there is no reason to crush him over it.
-
Personally, I didn’t find what he said on the over/under or odds of the Texans making the SB as being particularly negative. It was more of a it is what it is post. As y’all know, it isn’t always easy coming up with ideas about what to write about.
-
People at the Chronicle are just people. They like praise and they don’t like being crushed. If you given them polite criticism and ideas, they sometimes act on it. I’ve seen examples.
-
If you see something they write that is completely unfair, I think it is worth pointing out. But I also think that you need to pick your battles–saying to a guy who predicted 9 wins last year that you are POd that he mentioned the Vegas odds in his blog post seems like not the battle to pick.
-
As for his comments about the IR, look what happened to teams that lost their starting QB, #1 receiver and running back for good portions of a season. I’m guessing most of them don’t end up 8-8. The last time the Texans lost Andre Johnson for even part of a season, they ended up 2-14.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 11:19 am
This confirms my worst fears about Burger Kings in Arkansas…
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:24 pm
@27 Steph. It all starts with the weight of the negativity he displays over a year, and how he states a fact, such as instead of: “You look so pretty dressed for the prom.”, he would say “You’re not as ugly as you could be tonight”. Look at his whole body of work, it makes you want to shoot yourself in the head. And his responses to those who disagree are laughing (as if he’s above it, when we know better by all the rest of his responses) or attacks their education etc. Take a look at it again, he’s easy to dislike. Then when you kick back and knock down a couple of the nectars of the gods (Scotch) and then read his title something like “Will the Texans win 8 games” and it’s coming from him, you know he doesn’t think so, so you get in a match that could have been better timed but at this point you don’t care. There is a way to write, such as you and Solis etc do, that tell the facts in a positive way without being a total homer, but highlighting the sunny side rather than always draining the energy of all that read you. That was my main point. God bless the Texans.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 2:19 pm
@ Ted: Well, technically, it was the bathroom of a much nicer eatery.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 3:09 pm
@matt: what? You mean like a Golden Corral? You are a high roller.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Awesome.
(click arrow to reply)
June 3rd, 2008 at 11:24 pm
No comment filtering my ass.
“That’s right Jerome. You finally got it. You sir, are a failure. You failed to see the point that 1tex and everybody else was trying to make so you keep ranting and ranting, throwing nonsensical babble about the KKK.
Here’s the point Jerome. As simple as anyone can put it.
The fans are craving for a much more positive outlook on their team and you sir, are not meeting the expectations of your readership.
Last time I checked, you work for the HOUSTON Chronicle. And the texans happen to reside in Houston. We, the readers/fans are tired of hearing all the negativity that the chron writers
spit out every damn day. Just go ahead. Give it a shot. It might only be June but just go ahead. Try writing a positive article about the Texans.
Oh wait, nevermind. Im pretty sure you’ll fail at it too.”
Its been about 24 hrs since i’ve posted my comment.
Not posted. No response. No nothing. I’ve said before and I’ll keep saying it. Fuck the chron.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 8:38 am
They got you posted now Jordan with a response…of sorts.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 9:32 am
@1TEX
Man, you’re response to Steph was something else. You know, you’re not as stupid as you could be. What? You’re insulted by that - ? Heh heh… I kid, I kid.
-
Thanks for fighting the good fight.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 11:06 am
Can a brotha play a couple rounds of golf on a day off and not be criticized for failing to put up posts on my blog? (Sienna Plantation, 84-85.) And seriously, if you read the blog, you know damn well I don’t have a problem with posting shots at me or the Chron - that’s part of what makes it fun for me - so I find it amazing that you would go there with so little accurate information to support your claim. (Note: you have little accurate information to support your claim.) I didn’t comment on it because after 10 hours on the golf course and 19th hole, I was in no shape to present a sober response. Plus, I’m planning to take this to the blog topic one day soon, where we can hash it out.
Then Jordan posts a reply at 12:23 a.m. last night, and is surprised that it takes me until this morning to put it up? Can I get some sleep? I wish I had come here before I posted it, or I might have had more fun with my reply. I love the back-and-forths, the whiny complaint and the accurate criticisms - they make me better at my job. That’s why I’ve never been shy about replying to e-mail or going on forums such as these. This is fun.
Listen people, I’m not expecting everybody to like me. It would be a better world if everybody was like me, but the world would stink if everybody liked me. I write the truth as I see it, so I expect some to be rubbed the wrong way. All I promise to do is good research so I am as informed as can be on a subject, and to give each side (if there happens to be two sides) a fair shake. (And yes, as a columnist, I have a little more leeway on what’s a fair shake.) If John Doe is your favorite player, and I come down hard on Doe, I don’t expect you to like what I say, but you should count on me to be fair to Doe, and to present credible and accurate information to support my case. If not, call me on it. Now, I will slam Doe mercilessly when deserved, because that’s the way it is. It might bother you if you like the guy, but you will probably applaud if you don’t. As a journalist - and not all do this, but that’s on them - I don’t allow my personal feelings about a guy to sway the analysis of his play. Dunta Robinson is cool with me, but he knows darn well that if he gets smoked by a receiver, I might describe in those exact words and he expects nothing less. I don’t work for the applause, and certainly not to upset people, but I’m here to write what I see about the people, the games and the sports that I’m covering.
Criticize, and feel free to be man or woman enough to come to me directly with the criticism and expect me to respond. I’m not that sensitive. I will tell you what went into a piece and what something meant, but I will also admit if I crossed a line or might have written something that I would rather have back. I don’t think I know everything, I just tell you what I know. What I know comes from some in-depth research, so if I go out on a limb or have a strong feeling, it is most often right. Writers that flip-flop around are trying to make people like them or they don’t know what the hell they’re talking about, so they are willing to take either side.
Now onto some of these comments: 13. Get the proper context. I said if I had a choice, the Texans would go unbeaten, winning every game in overtime, and win the Super Bowl. Wouldn’t that be your choice too? Now, finishing 8-8 and out of the playoffs would be below losing every game in overtime, because that would be a more interesting season to cover. That doesn’t mean I’m not interested in a middle-of-the-road season, just that I’d like a spectacular season. So would you.
14. Solis, who hates you? Geez, you’re a little sensitive. And goodness, why the hell would the KKK line be taken so seriously. Damn, change it to whatever group you don’t agree with - I assumed I would be safer with KKK because of the small number of people who agree with their general stances, but damn, pick somebody else if that makes you feel more comfortable. The point is, because others agree you’re not automatically right.
15. I don’t read the NY Post.
27. Weight of negativity? I challenge you to actually read what I have written and claim there is a weight of negativity. Did you actually write that it is obvious I don’t think the Texans will win eight games?? You don’t “know” what you claim to “know.” I believe I am on record predicting they would be a playoff team. Hell, I predicted they would win more than eight games last year, so why would I not think they are going to do that this season? That is part of my issue - some of you make up your mind before you read anything.
29. I challenge you to look at my whole body of work. Hell in Fact, when I get time I’ll do that for you. I’ll show you every story I have written about the Texans and let you tell me if what I wrote makes you want to shoot yourself in the head. In fact, let’s start with this, since I’m so negative about your team, name the current players, coaches and front office personnel I have written critical articles about. If you get to five I’ll be amazed. If you get to three starters or current staffers, I will be even more amazed, and will treat you and your wife or even some babe you pick up at a bar to a meal at any restaurant in town. (And no, finding the line “the offensive line didn’t play well today,” doesn’t get you to a count of five, and DeMarcus Faggins isn’t a starter.) Wouldn’t that be easy to accomplish I if were Mr. Negative? As for my responses to comments, hey I am sarcastic and I do enjoy a nice dig. Yeah, it might be better to let people take shots and me and never respond, but what fun is there in that?
Finally, I might be able to help in the quest to get better coverage of the Texans. We can do better. I have said many times, we’re not above criticism. Some of what you want you are already getting, but don’t recognize. Some of what you want can’t or won’t be given because there are more who want or like something else. But some of what you want is what the Chronicle should be giving you. You would be surprised about what I agree with in your complaints, but when you complain about something I don’t agree with, we’ll debate. That’s why I just wasted the last 45 minutes of an off day reading and responding to this crap, when there are people on my blog wondering why their comments haven’t yet been posted.
the Chronicle’s Texans coverage.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Jerome,
Thanks for responding. I can’t speak for others, but the negativity of the Chron (perceived or real) has never been my chief issue with the paper (other than when Justice seems to get his rocks off by bashing Mario). In fact, I’ll go so far as to agree with your sentiment that being positive all the time is just as bad as being negative–neither is real and neither furthers the discussion.
-
That said, my chief complaint with the Chron is and has always been twofold: First, I feel the quality of the writing is well below the standards that a major paper should strive for. As others have said, you are not one of the major offenders in this part–but being the best writer at the Chron is kind of like being the prettiest girl in Oklahoma, ya know? McClain and Justice, for all their career accomplishments, write–to put it bluntly–like shit. Neither can construct an argument, neither has much use for commonly accepted notions of syntax and grammar, and both are guilty of more punctuation errors than a 9th grade English paper.
-
Secondly, I find it irritating (at best) that, despite the access the Chron has to the team, we get little to no reporting that is anything beyond “X said this” and other parrot pieces. I’ll grant that part of this is because the Texans as an organization are pretty guarded when it comes to giving real info, but when Megan Manfull spends weeks just echoing what Kubiak said at practice (and what you can get from the daily re-caps at houstontexans.com), I don’t think the paper is using its position to the fullest. If you look at the papers who do a good job–the KC Star, the Newark Daily Ledger, the Pittsburgh Gazette, for instance–a common thread is high-quality writing combined with top-notch REPORTING. Parroting is not reporting.
-
In the end, I think this whole thing got off track. If we can re-focus the debate so that we are discussing the overall quality of the product, I think everyone will be better off for it.
-
Again, thanks for commenting.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
@Solis
I am elevated above pitiful unthankfulness that you, who I laugh at, were slightly amused at that statement. You know, idiots just don’t understand my perfect logic. We have not had a winning season. Why should there be reason to think there is to be improvement above the doom of the Texans mediocrity. I must now drink to inebriation because I fail to see the Texans reasoning for passing up on Vince Young.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Jerome = guts.
-
Part of the problem, Jerome, is the cumulative effect constant negativity on the part of the columnists. RJ is really the prime example of this with his constant man-crushing on VY. Seriously, it’s to the point of being ridiculous, a caricature of journalism.
-
I believe, and I may be wrong, that you are the Editor of the sports section. I know that you must have a difficult job with the group you have, but you should also be able to provide some direction. We don’t want shock-jock reporting. We don’t want Pollyanna-isms. But, jeez, sometimes it just seems as if people there aren’t paying attention.
–
And I will assume that the you shot an 84 on the front and an 85 on the back at Sienna with your reference. Heh.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
That is factually incorrect, Matt, and you know it. Could you at least admit that? You posted a comment to the blog, challenging my point that I don’t mind posting criticism. I even posted 1Tex’s message making the same complaint on your behalf because his was clean. I then sent you a personal e-mail, explaining why I couldn’t post your original comment - the vulgarity on your site. You replied for more clarification, and I replied back. That would be comments to the blog from you, personal e-mail from me to you. Get it? I don’t send e-mail to everyone who comments on the blog. … I never said I didn’t care what was said here. Where did that come from? I have only been here twice: to check the link you tried to post, and today. … For reasons I would think even you are smart enough to understand - but since you made the comment in the first place, I’m not so sure - I won’t respond to your working title here. Clearly, however, you ARE unable to keep it civil, so I don’t see a reason to ever return. I posted here only to join the debate, but if this is the level of discourse, I’ll stay away. And I sent you a personal e-mail before seeing this post that I trust you will be decent enough to handle appropriately. Should you choose to delete these comments, I would accept that as an apology, but as much as I love fun debate about sports and sports topics … obviously I’m not welcome here. (And no, I don’t have a problem with cursing, and to some extent, name-calling. I just won’t play that game here.)
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
bigfatdrunk: since I decided to give up my very entertaining and highly informative radio show - after they told me not to bring my ass back - I have found the golf game I had before working two jobs and before I moved to Boston, which has a one-month golf season (I once cancelled a tee time because it was 50 degrees and raining, in the first week of June). The scores were legit, well other than the four mulligans on the back. … I am not the sports editor, but Carlton Thompson recently took that position. CT covered the Texans before McClain returned to the beat. I don’t know how you all felt about his coverage, but he understands how to cover a professional football team and will listen to your concerns, so feel free to contact him (carlton.thompson@chron.com) when you want to voice a complaint. … And as Matt said, I’ll reply to all e-mail.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Actually, Jerome is right and I stand corrected. I thought I had emailed him directly, asking where my comment was, but I see that I did submit it as a new comment. Also, in order to keep things civil, which I fully admit is not always easy for me, I’ll delete your post re: Jellyfish and my response. Until I got your email, I didn’t know exactly where you were coming from.
-
For the record, you actually are welcome here; everyone but Douchebag Tom (long story) is welcome here. In fact, I hope you continue to post. When we aren’t attacking your paper, there is generally some very good football talk going on.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
@Jerome: Well, golf is a little too hoity toity for a guy like me. The club pros just don’t seem to like my yelling at the ball and home run trots.
-
Echoing Matt, you are certainly welcome here. Our readers are intelligent, passionate, and they aren’t afraid to call bullshit on us, which is incredibly liberating.
-
I dunno, Matt. I kinda like Douchebag Tom. He makes me appreciate being literate.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Now that we’re being all friendly and mushy, if you go back and delete every negative word ever said about me here, I’ll promise to write a letter to the editor of the Chron asking them to do something about that jerk Jerome Solomon calling the Texans fans losers in a column.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Not to burst your bubble or anything, Jerome, but until this thread was posted, I’d never even heard of you. Sounds like a request easily met.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
beef, not to burst your bubble, but I don’t even have to have much of an ego to wonder how big your bubble is if you have never heard of me. … OK, kidding. I’m just an average man, with an average life. I work from 9-5, hey hell I pay the price. All I want is to be left alone in my average home … but these guys came to me to pick a fight. You’re more than welcome to stay out of the ring.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Did you really just quote Rockwell?!?!
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Oh, if you know that’s from Rockwell, you’re not allowed to criticize. Consider yourself guilty by recognition.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
All I want is to be left alone in my average home … but these guys came to me to pick a fight.
Wow Jerome, I was just wanting you to start saying something interesting and upbeat about the Texans. Your article was basically about how the rest of the world perceives the Texans as losers, and how we might make some money off it. One guy responded that you weren’t as negative as last year (wonder where he got that you were negative?) and you told him to reread your articles, that he was way off. You seem to think that we all are reading you wrong, and if that’s the case, then it sounds like the woman who was so proud cause her son was the only one in step when his army platoon marched by. I’m not looking to beat you up, I’m trying to tell you something and you don’t get it. You say you’re normally positive, but I and some others don’t see that. As Matt said, it would be nice to have some inside info, good investigative reporting. What have we heard about the UDFA’s for instance that may be of interest to Texan fans? I’m glad you are willing to talk about it.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
@Jerry#46: My point #1 was, I try to read as much as humanly possible about the Texans, and frankly, I don’t come across your name that much as an author. Point #2 was that until this thread (to my recollection), posters here, if they felt necessary, bashed on Chron writers NOT named Jerome Solomon, so I’d doubt Matt or BFD would find much to retract.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
@Jerome- Much respect for turning up here (and for breaking 200). This place is great for creative snark, insightful analysis of everyone’s favorite team, and barbcue tips. Also, we learn things about people like Travis Johnson, Will Demps, Kevin Bentley and Rhonda Kubiak that you guys in the mainstream media seem to miss.
-
For the record, I would like to point out that the line “… is a moron who believes only what he reads in the New York Post” is a reference to the movie ‘Top Secret’ starring Val Kilmer. Take it for what it’s worth. No one else got it either, so I guess that makes me the moron.
-
All that aside, I think the greater complaint is relevant: much of Chronicle’s analysis is shallow, in spite of the fact that it’s coverage is relatively in-depth. This was the source of my beef with your column that claimed that the only important stat for VY is wins. That might be true on a teamwide basis, but it isn’t for individual players. It wasn’t VY, for example, that stopped Atlanta four times on the goal to preserve the win, nor was it VY who kicked the game-winning field goal against the Texans. There are much better ways of measuring a quarterback’s ability than win-loss record.
-
In any event, I think it’s great that the Chronicle has access to the Texans front office and players. But outside of Lance Z (and the occasional piece by Steve Campbell) the coverage smacks of intellectual laziness. It’s not just the Chronicle, though. The same problems are evident in the national media as well (Peter King, Dr. Z). They may be able to write (well, except for Dr. Z) but that’s only part of the game. I think Gregg Easterbrook is an example of someone who gets it.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
1Texans, the David Carr Years notwithstanding, if I were more upbeat about the Texans I would have to buy a share of ownership in the team. And yes, it sometimes bugs me when I give you inside information and don’t get credit for it. This not my beat. More importantly if you don’t regularly read my stuff, and go with your Internet cronies’ word for it, I think it is pretty easy to come away with an inaccurate perception of what I do.
-
This is what I am going to do. I will pull everything I have written about the Texans - columns, articles and blogs from the end of Carr’s last season through my piece on Jethro Franklin two weeks ago (that way I can’t stack the deck with some stat builders in the mean time) and we will see just how positive or negative I have been. I think you’re wrong, you think I’m wrong, we’ll present the case to the jury.
-
Just for fun, here are some examples of what I quickly found from my blog, and it’ll give you an idea of what to expect. (This will be time-consuming, so it won’t happen today, but I’ll get it done.) …
-
Feb 5, 2007: In a piece from the Indy-Chicago Super Bowl I wrote about the Texans going 8-8 in 2007, 9-7 and just missing the playoffs in ‘08, 10-6 wild card in ‘09 and 13-3 to the Super Bowl in Arlington the next year, and asked you who would you rather have at QB. In that piece I casually asked if you would like a guy named Matt Schaub to be the QB of the Super Bowl team. (hint hint)
-
Feb. 7, 2007: I wrote about how the Texans are a few players and couple of smart drafts from being like the Bears. “The Texans have to have another great defensive draft to keep building. Make the right moves and in a couple of years the Texans’ defense could be as good as this year’s Bears’ defense. Mario Williams should be better than any Bears lineman. Dunta Robinson is as good as any Bears corner. Demeco Ryans probably won’t be as good as Urlacher, but he should be a Pro Bowler down the road.”
-
March 2, 2007: I wrote about Keenan McCardell being a good fit in the Texans’ locker room. Texans fans ripped me mercilessly - coming and going - because Rick Smith had said McCardell wasn’t in the team’s plans. Texans fans said nothing when McCardell signed with the team later. Didn’t work out, but the information was quite accurate, and you didn’t get it anywhere but from me.
-
March 5, 2007: The title of the blog; was, “Calm down Texans fans.” A key sentence: “That panic that I see in your e-mails because GM Rick Smith wasn’t able to work out a deal with the Denver Broncos for Jake Plummer, or convince Jeff Garcia that the Texans were closer to the Super Bowl than the Buccaneers, is beneath even those “looking for a tall building to jump off of at halftime of the season opener,” Texans followers.” … Another interesting line there was the one that ended with, “Matt Schaub is a restricted free agent, who likely will be on the trading block soon. And he’s much better than any of the QBs listed above.” We can argue over whether Schaub is better than Garcia, but I think for the Texans he certainly is and will be.
-
March 9, 2007: I believe the headline of the blog says it all, “Texans continue to get it done.” The first sentence: “This might sound redundant, but the Texans continue to make great moves this offseason.”
-
March 10, 2007: I told you to ignore rumors out of Washington that the Texans were interested in trading up to draft Brady Quinn.
-
March 21, 2007: Blog headline, “David Carr out, Matt Schaub … time to celebrate?” Key sentence in the piece, “I have to applaud the Texans’ brass for another sweet move.”
-
… I could go on, but this is merely the opening statement of this trial.
-
… 50. Just having fun, beef. Believe me, as you can see above, I am amazed when people tell me I am too negative about the Texans. Not only for the reason you mention - I don’t write about the team nearly as often as others at the paper - but for what I listed above.
51. A Val Kilmer movie? My obscure Rockwell reference is getting stronger. The VY argument had nothing to do with the Texans. It wasn’t about the draft or the Texans’ QB situation, it was about what was happening with the Titans at the time. You can call it shallow if you like, but at that point it was relevant and gave information to support the position. And having talked to Tom Brady and Peyton Manning (not to mention the best coaches in the business) about this subject on numerous occasions, I have a pretty good take on what is important in measuring a QB’s play. Still, disagreeing with one column - and there is a legitimate argument against the point I made then - is far from enough to go around spouting that I give shallow analysis when I analyze, or I am too negative about the Texans, which is what we’re discussing here. (Not that you’re one of those on that side of the fence.)
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
@Matt
I am as critical of Justice and McClain as almost anyone expect possibly you and I agree that reading anything that those 2 have wrote is like reading a novel by someone who’s dyslexic, neither makes much sense and overall you just get a headache, and I won’t buy the paper anymore and rarely read much of anything that’s on their site. That said I read Soloman’s MMA column and found it be rather lazily reported and even worse was his rationalizations after watching what has been called by most hardcore fans a FUCKING TRAVESTY as CBS and Elite XC had a show full of one sided analysis and bad refereeing and worse medical examiners, had he watched UFC 83 last month and made then wrote the article I may have seen his side, I don’t but that’s not important. What is important is that the Chronicle Sports reporters as a whole seem to do very little actual reporting and mainly just tell us that the Texans like their draft picks and have high hopes for everyone. Other than the occasional insight into a players background there is not much info on the team at all.
@Jerome
I have no real issues with your blogs as I feel you are relatively unbiased and generally informative, that said calling Texans fans losers for supporting their team even though the team has never had a winning season is simply asinine and mean-spirited and I am sure that you felt that it was your opinion and no one had to listen but as we all know you work for The HOUSTON Chronicle people are going to see your stuff and read it and have reactions to it. If you write something like that then you are simply trying to get a rise out of people just for shits and giggles.
I also take issue with your recent MMA blog as I stated earlier, Showtime’s Elite XC took a deal that the UFC turned down, which is like saying the NFL said no but the Arena League said yes. If the premier company that promotes Mixed Martial Arts and has been doing so almost exclusively through Pay per View didn’t think it was a good deal then odds are it wasn’t. Watch UFC 85 next month and I doubt your reaction will be the same. People don’t watch boxing because of the presentation or the “sweet science” Jerome they watch to see someone get knocked out same reasons people watch UFC but there has been exactly one death related to an MMA fight in the last 10 years and MMA fighters have to know how to defend themselves against wrestlers,jiu jitsu experts and black belts in tons of other fighting styles. So you may be a big boxing guy and that’s fine but until you have sat down and watched a UFC fight all the way through or attended such an event in person then you don’t have all the facts and by reporting without them you sound like an asshole with an axe top grind like “Buzz” Bissinger versus Deadspin.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Jerome, please post links so we can read your whole articles. If I said, hey I’ve got friends that are black, it may not sound like I’ve said something bad, but I’m sure you might feel differently. When Steph Stradley says something negative about the Texans, no one would think twice because everyone knows she’s a loyal dedicated Texans fan. Shoot, I’ve said Schaub looks like the poster child for Dow Syndrome and it didn’t ruffle too many feathers, much less what I’ve said about Petey. I guess what I’m saying, is that fans will take what you say differently depending on what side of the isle they see you standing on. Maybe we’re waiting for Chron writers to show whose side they’re on before airing our dirty underware or badmouthing.
And secondly, we need to get the Cowboy fans on their own sites and off ours, like the DMN does. Oooh, did I insinuate that you are supposed to be on the Texans side…and maybe keep your fans from having to put up constantly with Cowboy stupidity.
(click arrow to reply)
June 4th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Wow. So, I have a super busy day at work, I spend some time with the fam, and I miss so much shit. Dammit! I need to quit my real job.
-
One reason we don’t have much - the “loser” thing the only real exception - to retract is that…how do I put this nicely?…you aren’t Pancakes or Little Dickie Justice, age 12. A blog could be devoted to those guys, and it’d get traffic. So, you know, consider it a compliment.
-
As I mentioned, it’s more that I see a waterfall of negativity. You’ve thrown out some excellent counterpoints, which are great. But, as you’ve seen, Matt and I aren’t the only ones who are frustrated by the Chron’s coverage. Oh, and the cow-pokes blog killed me.
(click arrow to reply)
June 5th, 2008 at 9:27 am
If you slog through all of this, there are a lot of good points amongst random jibberjabber. The key one is to try to constructively criticize.
-
I don’t care if the Chronicle is negative or positive. I don’t want just gratuitous potshots or unthinking cheerleading. I just want lots of coverage and coverage that tells you stuff that you wouldn’t know if you if you just checked out the Texans website. Personally, I would like the coverage to be more left brained and less right brained this is how I feel stuff with nothing to back it up. But talking about this in a blog post isn’t likely going to change anything other than put more words on computer screens.
-
If you want to constructively criticize, I suggest taking up Jerome on sending Carlton Thompson a note on how you as a fan would like the Chronicle to cover the Texans in the future at carlton.thompson (at)chron.com. Your criticisms and suggestions are more likely to be taken seriously if they are factual, polite, realistic and give examples of team coverage from other papers that you think is superior to what you see with the Texans.
(click arrow to reply)
June 5th, 2008 at 11:38 am
@Steph
Yeah but it’s more virile this way. It’s a guy thing.
-
@Jerome
‘I hate your guts’ was something that was said on the playground. It was the coup de grace of any grade school argument. I’m in the military where sensitivity gets you eaten alive. Thick skin and quick wit often times gets you off the menu. In my work environment, it pays to be the diner and not the dinner. Sensitivity is not the issue.
-
As to the KKK comment - don’t play dumb. You work for a newspaper, so I’m sure you understand the essence of political framing. Intentional or not, the correlation was there to be made. I didn’t appreciate it.
-
You’re not the first from the Chron who has felt compelled to come here and explain himself. Thomas Hilton came here after one of Matt delivered a chiding that went down as one of the worst verbal beatdowns the Texans blogging scene had ever witnessed. Then Thomas Hilton did something odd - he thanked Matt for pointing out his imperfections. It was very rainbow of him.
-
Frankly, I first article of yours I recall reading was last years Texans=Losers piece. I remember sitting at my work desk, and being so incensed at your cavalier approach to covering the Texans, who by the way a majority of your readership supports - that I fired off a letter from my government computer. Name, rank, the whole bit. You made a bad first impression. It’s been hard to give you the benefit of the doubt since. Couple that with Justice’s Mario bashing, and it was plain to see that the Chronicle’s approach to covering the team had less to do with informing the fanbase, and more to do with kicking the team while it was down. Don’t hand me a bottle lukewarm and yellow and tell me its lemonade.
-
Just my nickle.
(click arrow to reply)
June 7th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Maynn, Did I push Jerome’s buttons or what. Too bad I got too busy with work that I wasn’t able to respond. Oh well, another day will come when the comicle columnists displayed their ignorance and negativity about the team that they’re suppose to be covering.
(click arrow to reply)
June 7th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
So I scrolled down all the way to when I last commented and saw that it was posted, got a little too excited and skipped the rest of the comments. Mann I missed out on a lot. But yeah Jerome, it was nice of you to stop by and not come in hostile. That took guts man. Too bad I missed the rest of the conversation. I agree with BFD, I need to quit my day job and spend less time with the gf so I wouldnt be missing out on so much.