Mike DiMauro, Jeff Jacobs, & Joe Zone want to meet u guys | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Mike DiMauro, Jeff Jacobs, & Joe Zone want to meet u guys

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fishy said:
Just let me know whether I should antagonize him or not - I have a lot going on these days.
Expand ...
Well if it is a poll, put me down for a yes. It is always entertaining.
 
bcingya M. Tranghese came right out and said that the BC AD had lied to him after proclaiming that they were all in on the BE and he (Tranghese) would never forgive BC for that. If I didn't spell Tranghese's name correctly, sorry too lazy to look it up.
 
I vote for Spackler to teach them some run-zone blocking and represent the football board! Have Medic posts links to them as they come in.
 
I was the one who made the "FWIW my buddy interned for Joe Zone..." comment.

I am sorry Jeff Jacobs took offense to it and perhaps I should have used more discretion and not posted it since no one probably even cares what my buddy's opinion is. Maybe I should have followed the rule "if you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all."

That being said, I did not personally call Joe Zone a . I related that that is the opinion of him provided to me by my friend who worked for him. I also did not think my friend's opinion was of all that much importance, hence I wrote "FWIW"- to imply that it isn't worth much.

Jeff Jacobs disagrees with my friend's opinion of Zone. Fine. We all are entitled to our opinions. I'm just not sure why Jacobs decided he needed to read my post considering I myself didn't even provide my opinion of Zone- which, for the record, I don't have one since I don't watch whatever local channel he is on and I certainly don't watch CPTV for his irrelevant opinion on local sports.

To conclude, I could not personally care less about Joe Zone, Mike DeMauro or Jeff Jacobs. I don't know them. I don't read them. I don't watch them, and I have no desire to speak to them about this matter as I have no personal opinion of any of them. I simply happened to state my friend's personal opinion of Joe Zone that he garnered after having worked for him. My friend isn't even a boneyard member so it isn't even the opinion of anyone necessarily on the boneyard. No one on the boneyard called him a .

I regret posting the message to begin with, but I also refuse to take responsibility for the opinion in the message- it was not my own.
 
Last edited:
.-.
Waquoit said:
Very lame. You posted it, not your friend. You own it.
Expand ...

Reread my post. I owned up to posting it and said I probably shouldn't have.

And I maintain it isn't my opinion regardless of your desire to make me own it.

Let me ask you, if TMZ, say, were to post a quote from someone calling someone else a , is it now TMZ that should apologize for reporting that opinion? No. Their apology should be for printing the quote, not the quote itself. I apologized if my post offended someone. I will not apologize that someone else thinks Joe Zone is a .
 
Last edited:
.-.
MattMang23 said:
Reread my post. I owned up to posting it and said I probably shouldn't have.

And I maintain it isn't my opinion regardless of your desire to make me own it.

Let me ask you, if TMZ, say, were to post a quote from someone calling someone else a , is it now TMZ that should apologize for reporting that opinion? No. Their apology should be for printing the quote, not the quote itself. I apologized if my post offended someone. I will not apologize that someone else thinks Joe Zone is a .
Expand ...


Namecalling is always a dicey proposition when it gets into the public discourse, even if you're quoting someone else's opinion. Maybe the lesson is that if it distracts from an objective asessment of the guy's work, or his provable statements then just let it lie. The easiest way to let a guy off the hook for being biased, uninformed, thin-skinned etc. , is going beyond that to use a perjorative which paints him as the victim of anonymous smears. Now if the guy makes a statement that proves it, an honest characterization opens the door pretty wide.

It's an interesting subject sure to come up more and more with no clear ground rules about criticizing one guy, or smearing an entire board based on one or two comments.
 
Jimdish255 said:
Namecalling is always a dicey proposition when it gets into the public discourse, even if you're quoting someone else's opinion. Maybe the lesson is that if it distracts from an objective asessment of the guy's work, or his provable statements then just let it lie.
Expand ...

This is fair. Lesson learned.

I still don't get why these men are getting so bent out of shape over it though. I've been called plenty of names on the boneyard and don't feel the need to find out why or what the offender's real name is.

Apologies to all whom I offended and for whatever reason they were offended. I have too much going on in my real life to give this any more thought.
 
Jimdish255 said:
Namecalling is always a dicey proposition when it gets into the public discourse, even if you're quoting someone else's opinion. Maybe the lesson is that if it distracts from an objective asessment of the guy's work, or his provable statements then just let it lie. The easiest way to let a guy off the hook for being biased, uninformed, thin-skinned etc. , is going beyond that to use a perjorative which paints him as the victim of anonymous smears. Now if the guy makes a statement that proves it, an honest characterization opens the door pretty wide.

It's an interesting subject sure to come up more and more with no clear ground rules about criticizing one guy, or smearing an entire board based on one or two comments.
Expand ...

I think this is exactly right. My namecalling took away from the fact that Joe Zone is a know-nothing blow hard and made him the victim in all of this. Not to mention my comments were out of line to begin with.
 
Hmmn, this could get interesting. What exactly can you say about a reporter? Are ill-informed, self-obsessed, lazy okay? How about flame-throwing attention seeker? What about whiner? I think that the do and don't list could get pretty interesting.

By the way, anyone else wonder if Jeff did a search of Doggy and Digger posts, and after coming up empty, went looking for something meatier?

Ironically, each of Jacobs and DiMauro admitted to 'hitting the wrong volume' in a column as professional writers and then came back complained that non-professionals did exactly the same thing in a much less formal forum. I thought it was interesting.

For what it is worth, since the Boneyard came to them, shouldn't they return the favor by coming by here? I don't know the names that they lurk under, but we could set up accounts for that thread or chat. It helps them by generating more interest in their columns and it helps the board by generating traffic to the site. Win/win.
 
.-.
CL82 said:
Hmmn, this could get interesting. What exactly can you say about a reporter? Are ill-informed, self-obsessed, lazy okay? How about flame-throwing attention seeker? What about whiner? I think that the do and don't list could get pretty interesting.

By the way, anyone else wonder if Jeff did a search of Doggy and Digger posts, and after coming up empty, went looking for something meatier?

Ironically, each of Jacobs and DiMauro admitted to 'hitting the wrong volume' in a column as professional writers and then came back complained that non-professionals did exactly the same thing in a much less formal forum. I thought it was interesting.

For what it is worth, since the Boneyard came to them, shouldn't they return the favor by coming by here? I don't know the names that they lurk under, but we could set up accounts for that thread or chat. It helps them by generating more interest in their columns and it helps the board by generating traffic to the site. Win/win.
Expand ...

I believe the industry term is, "hack."
 
Unlike the reporters, the Boneyard holds its own accountable for their opinions.

When one Boneyarder says the Huskies have no talent, another Boneyard will come back with the names of the players in the NFL and stats on all conference players.

When a reporter defends Pasqualoni by writing the cupboard was bare, he answers to no one, he states his unsupported opinion and moves on blissfully unaware of the stupidity of his scribbling.
 
MattMang23 said:
This is fair. Lesson learned.

I still don't get why these men are getting so bent out of shape over it though. I've been called plenty of names on the boneyard and don't feel the need to find out why or what the offender's real name is.

Apologies to all whom I offended and for whatever reason they were offended. I have too much going on in my real life to give this any more thought.
Expand ...

I'm not offended, just thinking aloud about the dynamics in play. I'm a Fireman and we spend all day calling each other much worse. Keeps us accountable but usually stays in the house.
 
It was a nice piece. The yarders from grandma's women's yard did okay.
Good for them. They really did not defend Jimmy Serrano to any extent.
Should they? Just to say the football board is more testerone like? ( my words) so that is why the comments are more harsh? I don't know, to me thos was a set up. Big time programs need boosters and bloggers to see thos as it was. A set up.
 
MattMang23 said:
This is fair. Lesson learned.

I still don't get why these men are getting so bent out of shape over it though. I've been called plenty of names on the boneyard and don't feel the need to find out why or what the offender's real name is.

Apologies to all whom I offended and for whatever reason they were offended. I have too much going on in my real life to give this any more thought.
Expand ...

It's almost as if it is Dimauro and Jacobs first time on the internet.

This place is positively tame, comparatively speaking.
 
Alum86 said:
It was a nice piece. The yarders from grandma's women's yard did okay.
Good for them. They really did not defend Jimmy Serrano to any extent.
Should they? Just to say the football board is more testerone like? ( my words) so that is why the comments are more harsh? I don't know, to me thos was a set up. Big time programs need boosters and bloggers to see thos as it was. A set up.
Expand ...
Well Jacobs was smart about what he did. They went looking for posts that were difficult to defend. I think DD was smart to deflect and move on. You don't need to engage when the ground isn't favorable.
 
.-.
Alum86 said:
It was a nice piece. The yarders from grandma's women's yard did okay.
Good for them. They really did not defend Jimmy Serrano to any extent.
Should they? Just to say the football board is more testerone like? ( my words) so that is why the comments are more harsh? I don't know, to me thos was a set up. Big time programs need boosters and bloggers to see thos as it was. A set up.
Expand ...
I couldn't defend what he said. Jimmy has since apologized publicly to Zone.
 
doggydaddy said:
I couldn't defend what he said. Jimmy has since apologized publicly to Zone.
Expand ...

I thought you handled that well FWIW. It's not fair to expect you to defend my comment. I do agree with Alum in that it was a set up, and you guys handled it as well as you possibly could.
 
Someone hook me up with a journalism gig at a major media outlet to represent UConn. Give me a shot.
 
I haven't watched the video, but maybe I will at some point. Probably not, actually. I just find this whole situation so amusing. Leaving aside the appearance of clear bias toward certain collegiate programs.....all it does for me, is prove yet again, without a doubt that we have a major thing lacking for UCONN football, and that will only improve with time and people, and that is adequate media support. Those guys give the appearance, through media and writing, to know almost nothing about football. I'm pretty sure Jacobs has actually admitted it in columns, which hey - at least he can admit it.

It seems to me, that the road to adequate media coverage for UCONN football goes through New Haven and Fairfield county down toward New York. That makes sense, since football in New Haven, and over to the Naugatuck valley actually does matter to people, and has for a long, long time.

I hope, and it's probably a guarantee that they are reading this, that they actually take some time to learn about the game of football. Randy Edsall - God bless him, actually brought media members into the film rooms to try to teach them.......where else does that happen?

Only with guys like these covering UCONN football.
 
The high school scene along the coast gets more respect than UConn in papers along the coast.
 
Butch said:
The high school scene along the coast gets more respect than UConn in papers along the coast.
Expand ...

I don't know about that. Coverage? Maybe. What the people that actually know football recognize, is good football and bad football. UCONN has been bad the past 3 seasons. We win, and we play good football, and the coverage improves - from the people that understand the game.

That's the thing that these basketball writers and basketball fans don't get. For 130+ years and counting, football is the sport that involves the MOST youth, the MOST parents, the MOST friends, family as spectators of any sport - all that = readership - dedicated readership. At the youth levels and up to the top levels. College football, in particular, has had a unique relationship with media for the entire duration. Media and football go hand in hand, and always have and always will. The manner (and volume - readership) in which a college football program is covered by local media is always hand in hand with the football program itself. Adversarial relationships for media and football programs are never a good thing, for either party.

These guys just have no appreciation for the history of the game of football, as it applies to their own profession of sport writing.

The kid that was covering the games and doing his best to actually look at the film has a better understanding of what questions to ask, what can help the program (and his readership) and what won't - than these guys do. Eventually, new will replace the old. In the meantime, all there is to do, is hope that the guys that cover sports, actually start to take some time to learn about the game.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,388
Messages
4,570,093
Members
10,475
Latest member
Tunwin22


Top Bottom