Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 51
  1. #16
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Bulger interview

    Quote Originally Posted by RamWraith View Post
    You know z...

    First you come out say how you don't believe what is being written and that basically the media is blowing it out of proportion, and how you can not wait to hear the real interview and hear his quotes. Then you come out and say how great the media is and they basically hit the nail on the head with this one. I get the impression you just like to try to get people wrapped in some sort of drama, or maybe you just like to be heard...I am not sure which. You make things interesting that for sure...I am just not sure which side of the fence you are most of the time.
    Well. Really, you didn't get a single thing I said right.

    What I *first* said was that we were getting contradictory and different reports of what Bulger said in his interview. And that we therefore needed a transcript. That had nothing to do with "the media" because some of the initial reports were from posters who heard the interview---and posters are not "the media." The idea was, that we didn't know yet what was really said because there were different versions. That's not a criticism of anything or anyone. Just an effort to be scrupulous. I never said anything about anyone blowing anything out of proportion...just that we did not really know yet.

    I still can't download your link to the interview so I have not heard the whole thing. There's no transcript anywhere. But Schein did include parts of the interview in his article.

    And as for the "next" I didn't say a thing about how "great the media is." I did question the generalization that they are ALL slimeballs, but I don't see how you get "how great the media is" out of that. Fact is I said nothing about "the media" one way or another, or make any generalizations about "reporters" and what they are all supposed to be like (great OR slimeball). What I said was that I did not see the big distortions...and I asked someone to point them out to me. That means what it says. Once I had the Schein version of some things Bulger said, rendered in direct quotations, I could compare the various versions, and I did not see any big distortions when I did that...but then I left it open: maybe someone does see that and can demonstrate it. Meaning, the response would be to demonstrate it, not to try and make the poster the issue for some mysterious reason.

    As for your speculations about my motives---look, man, you didn't even get what I said right, so what are the chances you're going to accurately describe all my evil terrible motives? How about this instead. Leave the poster out of it, and that includes speculations about motives. That's said in good humor but it is good practice.

    As for what side I am on? I never approach anything as having 2 sides. For me there are many sides to everything. There are gray areas. Few if any big generalizations hold up. So I look for the details.

    It was like the Martz debates. Very early on, early in 2000 as a matter of fact, I was critical of some aspects of Martz's coaching. Including playcalling and being more of a coordinator than a head coach. Among other things. I got a lot of grief for that. Then, after the Warner fiasco, criticizing Martz started becoming common...but some of THAT was (as you probably saw yourself) way over the top. So I would repond to over the top artists and say no it's not THAT bad, the guy does do some things right (for example some of the over the top artists denied he every really developed the qbs---Green, Warner, Bulger.) I had a mixed response to Martz, was glad to see him go in the end, I like Linehan so far (mostly), but don't particularly agree with either the Martz is a Genius model OR the Martz is a Devil model. I thought it was a mixed thing. That only means---I see things as mixed, not stark. That does NOT mean I like to stir things up or whatever it is you said about my motives. It just means...I see things as mixed, not stark.

    Same with this. I think it's a mixed thing. Bulger did not threaten to hold out. Then again no one put it that way (that I remember). It was smart to be cautious with the first reports on his interview (which mostly came from posters, not "the media.") Not that we have some direct quotations, we can compare accounts. I think the hold out thing was less stark than ONE print version set it out to be (just one, not "THE media"), but then, maybe Bulger isn't used to being in the national spotlight, cause, it's possible he should be a bit more careful with how he puts things. I saw him doing this---he can't rule out a hold out (he loses a playing card if he does openly rule it out). But I don't really believe he WANTS to do it. But if it came down to it in certain circumstances, I bet he WOULD do it. I just don't know what those circumstances are.

    I don;t think there's just 2 sides to anything and I like to look at the details, where things are a little grayer and less black and white. I think the issue in this case is a matter of degree. I don't think it's a stark "sides taking" thing. And there are good press accounts...Schein has direct quotations.
    Last edited by z.nrd; -07-12-2007 at 02:06 PM.


  2. #17
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,692
    Rep Power
    168

    Re: Bulger interview

    There are definitely 2 sides:

    Side 1: The Truth
    Bulger casually mentioned that he would not rule out a holdout, but clearly indicated that he hopes and expects to get a deal done.

    Side 2: The BS
    RotoWorld Headline of blurb on this interview: "Bulger threatens to hold out of training camp."

  3. #18
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Bulger interview

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    There are definitely 2 sides:

    Side 1: The Truth
    Bulger casually mentioned that he would not rule out a holdout, but clearly indicated that he hopes and expects to get a deal done.

    Side 2: The BS
    RotoWorld Headline of blurb on this interview: "Bulger threatens to hold out of training camp."
    If Rotoworld actually used the term "threatens" then they were bs-ing. I have pasted the Rotoworld comments, along with other summaries of the interview (mostly by fans) and I never once saw the headline "Bulger threatens to hold out." I DID see that a POSTER used that title for a post in which he copied the rotoworld comment. That was on the Post Dispatch Rams board. But I never personally saw Rotoworld use that headline. Actually if you go to Rotoworld today, they have a report on their Bulger page which says "Marc Bulger says his comments on Sirius radio Tuesday stating he'd consider holding out of training camp were `blown out of proportion.'"

    But let's say Rotoworld (and not just the Rams board poster) used a headline including the word "threatens," and I just didn't see it. RW is one site, and it's not even staffed with reporters---these are just guys reading stuff off the net or getting it from the radio and repeating it, and sometimes, not all that accurately. But it's just one site---it's not "reporters," it's not "the media." The article by Schein and the stuff in the PD on this was good. Moreover, even if RW did use "threatens" in a headline, their report did not say he threatened anything. It says, straightforwardly, "Marc Bulger told Sirius radio Tuesday that he won't rule out a holdout if the Rams don't sign him to a contract extension prior to training camp." The RW report immediately adds: "Bulger says he does expect to complete a new deal before the start of camp."

    Now what's my stake in this?

    Just trying to be accurate. I don't take "sides" on these things...and just trying to be accurate means you sometimes say "slow down there" if a poster says "Bulger threatened to hold out!" and it also means you sometimes say "slow down there" if someone says that The Media (the whole media) got the Bulger story dead wrong. Trying to be accurate means trying to be accurate no matter who or what it serves.

    My own personal opinion is, Bulger could not shut down the possibility of a hold out, cause you don't take negotiating cards off the table. So he could not just flat say no to that question. That doesn't mean he would ever use that card if the situation called for it. But at the same time he's new to being in the national spotlight in this particular way---a Bulger contract is national sports news, and he's not used to that. So I suspect if he had it to do over, he would have worded himself more cautiously. Because he WAS asked, would you rule out a holdout? and he DID answer, I won't rule anything out. That answer, to me, looks like someone who does not yet have complete mastery of "player speak." (The player's equivalent of "coach speak"---like the scene in "Bull Durham" where the experienced catcher helps the green pitcher practice his interview cliches.)

    PS someone on another site said that ESPN blew it out of proportion. I wouldn't know. So that might be a real example. Yet actually...many got it right.
    Last edited by z.nrd; -07-12-2007 at 02:01 PM.

  4. #19
    cfh128's Avatar
    cfh128 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Age
    31
    Posts
    782
    Rep Power
    29

    Re: Bulger interview

    ^^^^ Boy thats a lot to read

    The interview worked fine for me, and all that was said is the same thing we've heard a million times this offseason. Bulger wants to stay in St. Louis, he hopes a deal will be done by training camp, he wont rule out a holdout. Same stuff we've been hearing for a while by now.

  5. #20
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,692
    Rep Power
    168

    Re: Bulger interview

    The reason I used quotation marks is that I was quoting RotoWorld's headline word for word. Its still there, by the way. Not sure how you missed it.

    They have also added a new blurb with the headline "Rams QB Bulger retracts holdout threat." Again, complete BS. Bulger never made a threat, so there was nothing to retract.

    You are correct that RotoWorld is not exactly the primary source for NFL information, but people do read it, and it is irresponsible to put such a BS spin on something that was barely even noteworthy to begin with.

  6. #21
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,618
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Bulger interview

    But at the same time he's new to being in the national spotlight in this particular way
    But Tom Condon's not.
    So I suspect if he had it to do over, he would have worded himself more cautiously.
    I disagree. I think it's a slim chance of happening, but the FO has to know it is on the table. Otherwise, Bulger is giving up too much out of the gate.

    Will it happen? Nah.........but the possibility has to be there.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  7. #22
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is online now Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,692
    Rep Power
    168

    Re: Bulger interview

    There's a new PD article on this by Bill Coats with the headline: "Wait for deal concerns Bulger." The article again emphasizes the "holdout" quote.

    Nothing in the article is a lie. Its a matter of emphasis. Marc is obviously "concerned" about his contract, but the implication of the article is that he's worried because the deal is not yet done.

    That's not what he said. What he said is that he'd like to have the deal done as soon as possible, but he trusts that his agent is handling the negotiations in a manner that serves his interests.

    Man, I haven't seen a non-story get so much mileage since... well, since that Claude Wroten thing last week!

  8. #23
    ramsbruce's Avatar
    ramsbruce is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    FIRING SCHOTTY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    3,663
    Rep Power
    52

    Re: Bulger interview

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    But Tom Condon's not. I disagree. I think it's a slim chance of happening, but the FO has to know it is on the table. Otherwise, Bulger is giving up too much out of the gate.

    Will it happen? Nah.........but the possibility has to be there.
    Right, I agree that Bulger made the right statement for him. Just saying "I won't hold out" he gives up a lot of leverage in the negotiation process. If he says no I won't hold out and then he ends up holding out he looks bad. So he played his hand perfectly. He still wants to be a Ram, but he also wants the best contract he can get, so playing it cool and saying "anything is possible" is the right way to go.
    BRUUUUUUUUUUUCE


  9. #24
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,533
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Bulger interview

    Quote Originally Posted by z.nrd View Post
    If Rotoworld actually used the term "threatens" then they were bs-ing. I have pasted the Rotoworld comments, along with other summaries of the interview (mostly by fans) and I never once saw the headline "Bulger threatens to hold out."
    http://www.rotoworld.com/content/home_NFL.aspx

    Look at the sidebar labeled Headlines. Currently the fourth item on their list is "Bulger threatens to hold out of training camp." When you click on the headline, it takes you to their original blurb about the interview (quotes of which you posted in bold), but again the headline misconstrues the tone and context of the comments.

    Quote Originally Posted by z.nrd View Post
    Moreover, even if RW did use "threatens" in a headline, their report did not say he threatened anything.
    All the more reason to not use a misleading headline if there's nothing in the report to support it.

  10. #25
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Bulger interview

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    But Tom Condon's not. I disagree. I think it's a slim chance of happening, but the FO has to know it is on the table. Otherwise, Bulger is giving up too much out of the gate.

    Will it happen? Nah.........but the possibility has to be there.
    Condon wasn't the one being interviewed.

    He didn't make the statement that was easily taken out of context.

    The issue I raised had nothing to do with the agent's experience...it has to do with the player's interview experience. The agent can't hold his hand and tell him what to say.

    My feeling is that if Bulger had it to do over he would be more circumspect in how he put it.

  11. #26
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Bulger interview

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    http://www.rotoworld.com/content/home_NFL.aspx

    Look at the sidebar labeled Headlines. Currently the fourth item on their list is "Bulger threatens to hold out of training camp." When you click on the headline, it takes you to their original blurb about the interview (quotes of which you posted in bold), but again the headline misconstrues the tone and context of the comments.



    All the more reason to not use a misleading headline if there's nothing in the report to support it.
    So, all you have is the rotoworld headline?

    That doesn't strike me as being a controversy with the media.

    Now, do you want a link to the transcript, or not? I can stick it in this thread, but it seems to me it would get lost here. The point of the transcript is that it's new info that shouldn't get buried and warrants a new thread in its own right. Posting a link and asking someone to make a copy (I can't copy and paste here) is not "discussing something," it's providing absolutely new data...cause so far this board has no transcript of that interview. Again, do you want it or not? Let me know.

  12. #27
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,618
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Bulger interview

    Quote Originally Posted by z.nrd View Post
    Condon wasn't the one being interviewed.

    He didn't make the statement that was easily taken out of context.

    The issue I raised had nothing to do with the agent's experience...it has to do with the player's interview experience. The agent can't hold his hand and tell him what to say.

    My feeling is that if Bulger had it to do over he would be more circumspect in how he put it.
    Tom Condon knows what he's doing. He knows what Bulger needs to say, and needs to not say, in order to maximize his (Bulger's) value. It's probably a little jejune to think Condon has not had discussions with Bulger on how to handle this situation.

    We'll never know, but I'm sure Bulger handled this exactly the way he (and Condon) wanted to.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  13. #28
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Bulger interview

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    There's a new PD article on this by Bill Coats with the headline: "Wait for deal concerns Bulger." The article again emphasizes the "holdout" quote.

    Nothing in the article is a lie. Its a matter of emphasis. Marc is obviously "concerned" about his contract, but the implication of the article is that he's worried because the deal is not yet done.

    That's not what he said. What he said is that he'd like to have the deal done as soon as possible, but he trusts that his agent is handling the negotiations in a manner that serves his interests.

    Man, I haven't seen a non-story get so much mileage since... well, since that Claude Wroten thing last week!
    I disagree. I think it's clear that Bulger is somewhat bothered that the deal is not done, and that it comes through in the interview. I agree with Coats.

    It would help if we had the transcript. So do you want it or not.

    Oh, and, personally, I don't care if you think something that interests others is a "story" or "non-story." I don't know why you think anyone does care.
    Last edited by z.nrd; -07-12-2007 at 03:35 PM.

  14. #29
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,533
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Bulger interview

    Quote Originally Posted by z.nrd View Post
    So, all you have is the rotoworld headline?
    Considering that was my first post in this thread and all I was responding to was your comments about Rotoworld and their coverage, yes.

    You stated that if Rotoworld actually used the term "threatens" then they were bs-ing. I showed they used the word threatens, thus you agree they were bs-ing, right?

    And as you said, their actual report did not say he threatened anything. Thus, there wasn't any reason to use that word in their headline.

  15. #30
    z.nrd Guest

    Re: Bulger interview

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    Tom Condon knows what he's doing. He knows what Bulger needs to say, and needs to not say, in order to maximize his (Bulger's) value. It's probably a little jejune to think Condon has not had discussions with Bulger on how to handle this situation.

    We'll never know, but I'm sure Bulger handled this exactly the way he (and Condon) wanted to.
    Look, anyone who has followed football past 12 years old knows that agents prep clients. You can count on most people knowing the basics.

    And we also know that even the best clients of the best agents say things spontaneously in the heat of the moment that might wander outside the parameters. We've seen it our whole lives.

    Bulger probably had no idea that a direct, honest answer to the question "would you rule out a hold-out" could take on a life of its own. Well he knows that now. And it's also extremely doubtful that even the magic Condon could anticipate every question asked every single client he has, and prep them accordingly.

    Fact is, the statement as put could easily take on a life of its own. In fact the question as put was a kind of trap. Hence Bulger having to come back and calm the waters by saying it was taken out of proportion. Maybe a more experienced cliche-user might have said something like "well no one can really rule anything out in this life but I do not expect to be in a hold out." That, as put, woulda have been a kind of savvy dodge that also didn't rule out a hold out.

    UNLESS you're saying that Condon WANTED Bulger to give the impression he would not rule out a hold out. But I don't think that woulda been a real good idea.
    Last edited by z.nrd; -07-12-2007 at 04:00 PM.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: -11-11-2006, 05:38 AM
  2. Bulger Headed for Big Year
    By Rambos in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -10-26-2006, 10:34 AM
  3. Bulger Focusing on the Future
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -09-21-2006, 07:25 AM
  4. Linehan Believes Bulger is Among the Best
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: -08-05-2006, 05:39 AM
  5. Bulger Healthy, Happy with New Staff
    By .ramfan. in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: -02-16-2006, 11:37 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •