Presenting: Scoop Jackson Embarrasses Himself, Again

I was going to cover this article in its entirety, but this one particular snippet is so flagrantly awful, it's worth a whole post all by itself. I'll do the rest of it tomorrow. For now, just try to soak this up. Tell me why Randy Moss won't be taking home the NFL's MVP this year.

Moss won't win the MVP award because of his past. It hasn't caught up with him in this respect, but it's too deep for too many people to forgive so soon. If anything has been learned from Barry Bonds, it's you can't be an ass and expect the media to think you are a king, even when you play like one.

Scoop Jackson. Thinks Barry Bonds. Is an example. Demonstrating why someone can't win MVPs. I'm telling you, you can't make this kind of stuff up.

Barry Bonds has seven MVPs. Seven. All of which were given to him by the media. That's more than twice as many as any other player in baseball's hundred whatever year history. Six more than Hank Aaron. Five more than Ted Williams. Four more than Mickey Mantle. Four more than Stan Musial. Seven more than David Eckstein and Darin Erstad combined. Not only has Bonds won the most MVPs ever, no one else is even close. Unless Alex Rodriguez starts popping steroids (or more steroids, depending on your opinion) and reels off four in the next six or seven years, there's no chance Bonds' mark gets touched for the foreseeable future. It might not ever be touched. Bonds is the absolute worst possible example Scoop could have chosen to try and justify his point. Bar none.

This is like saying "Rudy Guliani will definitely not win the Republican presidential primary. If anything has been learned from Ronald Reagan, it's that you can't be a white male and be appreciated by conservative voters."

Or less politically, "There's just no way U2 will be remembered as a popular band. If anything has been learned from the Beatles, it's that you can't be a bunch of goofy European guys wearing ugly sunglasses and expect fans to love your rock music."

How about, "I predict cell phones are a passing fad. If anything has been learned from standard home telephones, it's that people don't like to talk to each other unless it's in person."

Let's get pop-culturally creative! "There's no way Lindsay Lohan will continue to be a gossip magazine regular in the near future. If anything has been learned from the long succession of vapid, drug abusing, airheaded whores that have preceded her in that sector of the public eye, it's that people just don't like to read about vapid, drug abusing, airheaded whores."

Something else from the world of sports! "I can't imagine LeBron James selling a lot of shoes via endorsement during his career. If anything has been learned from Michael Jordan, it's that people don't really care about what shoe a great basketball player's name is on."

How about movies? "The Godfather will never be looked upon as a great film. If anything has learned from Dude, Where's My Car?, it's that film scholars strongly favor serious and sophisticated works of art which can only be enjoyed when you're wasted."

I could go on and on. But I won't. Because I've gone about six jokes too far already. Come on, Scoop. Why don't you just play the race card like usual and be done with it.

Why Do You Think Bill Simmons Is the Only Page 2 Writer Whose Columns Don't Have ESPN's "Conversation" Commenting Feature?

Could it be because he's an absolutely insufferable douche, who despite being wildly popular also infuriates a large percentage of those who read him? That's my guess. I mean, every single ESPN Page 2 writer has the Conversation feature attached to their articles... except Bill. Even Jemele Hill's work is free to be shat upon (or loved, if that's your thing) by the disapproving masses! Why shouldn't The Sports Guy's? I mean, other than the possibility that just as many people hate him as like him which could lead to a lot of angry/inappropriate comments that would need to be moderated. Sure, he's the most popular "fun" sportswriter on the whole wide interwebs. But I'm willing to bet a good portion of his readership doesn't actually enjoy his writing. They just tune in because he's visible, they hate him, and they want to complain about him. (Hey.... that's me!) Welcome to today's sports media: if you want to be popular, take a hint from Bill and be as bombastic as possible. It's not about being journalistically responsible or reporting on interesting topics; it's all about generating "buzz."

With that as a backdrop, it's time for me to become part of the problem rather than the solution. I'm going to spend the next hour or so bitching about Bill's latest mailbag column, thus generating "buzz" for him. Yes, I do see the irony there. But honestly, what do you want me to do? NOT bitch about him? He's atrocious.

With the second round of the playoffs starting Thursday, I thought we'd rip through some baseball-related e-mails for a pseudo-mailbag. As always, these are actual e-mails from actual readers.

I can only dream of the day when you're unpopular enough that you have to make up emails for your mailbag.

Q: I was pretty excited to watch "SportsCenter" on Oct. 9, the day after the Tribe vanquished the Yanks to advance to the ALCS. So I flip on "SportsCenter" and watch a full 40 minutes of coverage about the freaking Yankees. And Joe Torre. And Joe Torre. And Joe Torre. If somebody turned on that show, but missed the first five minutes, they might not have known who beat the Yanks, just that the Yanks lost and Joe Torre's job was on the line. Speaking of which, did you know that Joe Torre's job is on the line? I know it's asking too much for ESPN to stop covering the Yankees endlessly. But you should step up to the plate and mention, just so at least your audience knows, that the Indians are, in fact, in the playoffs. --Tim, Philly

SG: The Indians are in the playoffs? Just kidding. In ESPN's defense ... wait, I won't defend ESPN on this one. Cleveland's toppling the Yankees was just as good a story as the Yankees' getting toppled; besides, how much more could be said about the Yanks at this point? Rivera and Torre might leave, Posada might leave, Clemens might retire, A-Rod might sign somewhere else for a lot of money. ... Um, didn't we know these things in April?

Glad you asked. On that same note, how much more can be said about the Red Sox at this point? They have a decent rotation headed up by the favorite for the AL Cy Young, "Manny" and "Papi" are getting older but can definitely still hit the ball a mile, and their fans are stereotypically assholish. Oh! And don't forget, J.D. Drew has been a mild disappointment! (More on that later.) Minus the Drew thing, didn't we know all these things in April? Yet we still hear about them. Constantly. I love it when Red Sox fans complain about how much coverage the Yankees get.

Anyways, then Simmons goes on to list in bullet point format reasons why the Yankees stink and the Indians are good/scary/might get a game or two off the mighty Sawks in the ALCS. OK, then, fair enough. But Bill, just for the sake of making sure you're not a huge fucking piece of self-contradiction, let's review the comments you made on your podcast before this series started. (Courtesy of Vegas Watch, a pretty decent blog.)

Guest: This could come back to bite me but, uh, last year, because it could be like last year when I had no concerns about Detroit, it turns out I should have been quite concerned, but, uh, I have no fear of Cleveland- I'll believe CC Sabathia, and more importantly, Fausto Carmona can do it in the playoffs when I see it, and as you said Joe Borowski- and their lineup, I mean, I dont know, their lineup doesn't really frighten me much either.

Simmons: Yeah, Grady Sizemore is one of those guys that puts up awesome stats and, you know, is like a five tool guy and everybody loves him and everybody raves about him and is great defensively, but every time, every time the Red Sox play him he's like not frightening at all when he's up, and Hafner has just been a disaster this season.

Later...

Guest: The Yanks are 6-0 against Cleveland this year, including beating Carmona I think, and probably Sabathia if they're 6-0- all you have to do is stick around, you gotta keep the game close, get him out of the game.

Simmons: You're not gonna lose to Cleveland.

Now, it's entirely possible Bill was just agreeing with his guest just for the sake of being friendly. And maybe he didn't intentionally and specifically mean to crap on Cleveland, he was just excited about the prospect of another New York/Boston ALCS. (As we will see later, he strongly believes these are pretty much the only two teams that belong in baseball's postseason.) But regardless of either of those possibilities, basically what we see here is that Simmons verbally left Cleveland for dead before their series against the Yankees even started. Now that he's writing this mailbag after the fact, it's totally obvious to him that the Indians are the better team and have been all along. I guess Bill went to the Jay Mariotti Flip-Flop What Have You Done For Me Lately? School of Journalism.

Q: Let's arrange a summit that would bring together fans of the 2007 Mets and 1978 Red Sox. There could be speeches, seminars and breakout groups. Maybe it could take place at the Elks Lodge in Danbury, Conn. There would be a formal dinner with a cash bar, shrimp appetizer and baked-stuffed chicken with salad and and scalloped potatoes. This would happen if, and only if, the Sox don't win the '07 Series.--Derek, Norwalk, Conn.

A reader with a Mets comment. Thanks for printing that, Bill. How very relevant to the postseason.

Q: Can't believe you defended LeBron in your magazine column. Bulls, Cowboys and Yankees? He is the absolute worst kind of fan. You know you have hated kids/guys like him your whole life. How can you give him credit for being such a bandwagon sports philanderer?--Cy, Boston

Let's go back to the first sentence of this column:

"With the second round of the playoffs starting Thursday, I thought we'd rip through some baseball-related e-mails for a pseudo-mailbag."

Oops. I guess Bill couldn't hold off on an opportunity to plug one of his other columns. Not that this is a totally egregious offense... but given the relatively low number of questions in the mailbag as a whole, I really don't see why this couldn't wait.

Q: If anyone asks, I was with you tonight. I was definitely not in Boston, killing J.D. Drew.--The Duke, Boston

SG: That was the belated winner of the "Funniest J.D. Drew related e-mail during the four-month stretch of the 2007 season when every Red Sox fan hated him" award. Now we're good with J.D. He's had some solid moments the past few weeks. Everything's fine now. I keep telling myself this.

Bill, we've been over this. Over and over and over. I would rather read another one of your let's-watch-paint-dry-instead Celtics columns that hear more annoying crap about J.D. motherfreaking Drew. Guess what? He's not the first big ticket free agent in MLB history to not win the triple crown in his first season with his new club.

Q: As a fan of all Dallas-based sports teams, it wouldn't bother me in the least to see, say, Dirk Nowitzki show up to a Cowboys game in a Redskins hat or Terrell Owens show up to a Mavs game in a Spurs jersey. Not in the least. But I won't buy for one second that you, Bill Simmons, the guy who wrote "Now I Can Die In Peace," wouldn't get absolutely p.o.'d if Paul Pierce showed up to a Yankees/Red Sox game, in Boston, wearing a Yankees hat.--Joel H., Allen, Texas

Probably a good point. Simmons denies he'd mind that behavior out of Pierce; I'm not buying it. In any case, though, what were we talking about? Baseball? Oh, no, that's right, we were talking about one (or in this case, two) of Bill's other columns. My mistake.

Q: Here's my plan for my first kid. I have the entire 2004 Red Sox playoffs on DVD, as well as all the Patriots' Super Bowl DVD's. What if, instead of Dora and Barney, I prop my kid up in front of Tom and Papi? Hell, my kid may come into this world just before the NBA playoffs. What a way to start. This cannot fail; this will be revolutionary. All I need from you is a way to convince my wife this is a good idea.--Bob, Pittsfield, Mass.

That's... almost a question about the 2007 MLB postseason... almost. I guess what's really important about it, from Bill's perspective, is that it was about Boston. Speaking of which- have you heard? Apparently the New England Patriots (the greater Boston area's NFL team) are having a good season! Yeah, no kidding. I'm disappointed too. Sometimes these feelgood stories just slip through the cracks, I guess.

Q: Where's your NLCS prediction? I need to know which team to bet against.--George, New Rochelle, N.Y.

This is where it gets good. The answer to this question is the real reason I decided to make this posting in the first place.

SG: Thank you for asking! I like the Rockets over the T-Backs. Just kidding.

Using this kind of little throwaway joke at the beginning of an answer multiple times (see the very first question) in the same mailbag column is super hilarious! Just kidding.

But I'm glad you brought this up. No matter how much you love baseball, it's nearly impossible to care about the Colorado-Arizona series. You might watch it, you might enjoy it, you might even gamble on it ... but unless you're an absolute baseball nut or a Rockies/D-backs fan, how could you honestly care who wins when neither franchise is older than Jamie-Lynn Spears? It's like going to a wedding in which you don't know anything about the bride or the groom.

Anyway, a friend of mine who works in the sports world got me thinking about this on Monday when he e-mailed just to say, "Colorado versus Arizona might be the least watched LCS in baseball history. Who the hell cares about either team? I'm convinced that sports is all about history. If there's history, it's interesting. If not, who cares?

It's true. Why should average everyday fans care about new franchises? That Patriots/Panthers Super Bowl shouldn't have even been televised outside of New England and Charlotte. Booooooorrrrring. Boise State vs. Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl last year? Lame, unless you had a rooting interest in either team. And didn't the Diamondbacks beat the Yankees in a thrilling 7th game of the World Series a few years back? I sure hope no one besides Yankee and Diamondback fans tuned in for that one. I mean, why would you want to witness a new rivalry being formed (in the case of this year's NLCS) or a team trying to win something they've never won before (all three of those other examples)?

I think baseball needs to realign; let's contract every team except the Yankees and Red Sox in the AL, and the Cubs and Phillies in the NL. (Despite how long they've been around, the Reds, Cardinals, Dodgers, Giants and White Sox will be contracted because they're boring and don't have enough fans.) Think of the possibilities- a Yankees/Red Sox ALCS every year! What baseball fan wouldn't love that!?!?!? Actually, hold on, slight correction- let's allow the other 26 teams continue playing, but in a different league with no playoffs for fantasy purposes. Wait, no- just the 12 AL teams. Who needs NL players? Yeah. That's the solution. So we have the four actual MLB teams, 12 others in a separate isolated league, and we're ditching 14 more. I just threw up in my mouth a little.

People need the emotional attachment that comes from a lifetime of cheering for the same team -- and especially when their parents rooted for the same franchise."

That one goes out to you, Colorado fans over the age of 25 and Arizona fans over the age of 20. So you've been cheering for them for the past ten to fifteen years? Whoop-de-shit. If you were older than 10 when they came into existence, your fandom doesn't count. You're not passionate. No one cares (nor should you) whether or not your team wins the NLCS. Wait, you're telling me that at one point in time EVERY team was only 15 years old? That EVERY team that's won multiple pennants had to win their first pennant at some point? Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter. Nothing new should ever happen. Only repeats of previous things that already happened are exciting.

My response: "You just described why the NHL died in this country over the past 12 years."

You're right, Bill- it had nothing to do with poor marketing, revenue issues, or an ill-timed lockout. It's entirely because Colorado, Tampa Bay, and Carolina won a few Stanley Cups.

(Here's my super brainy deep thinking theory for why Simmons and his friend feel this way: they're still not over the 1986 World Series, when the relatively new (25 year old) Mets knocked off the very old Red Sox. That's right I said it. "Behind the bag.... it gets through Buckner! Here comes Knight and the Mets win it!" Just saying.)

Q: I can't believe John Mellencamp wasn't listed as one of your "25 people to watch in AL playoffs." He needs to go into the witness protection program because I am ready to snap and go OJ on him and everyone at Chevy for ruining another postseason. TiVo and all the DVR makers need to get involved and find a way to block this commercial from broadcasting on TVs.--Silvio, NYC

SG: Lord knows the "This is ourrrrrrrrrr country" joke has been beaten to death ... but (rest of response omitted).

But nothing. No. End of story. We're going on 14 months of that joke; that's about ten too many. And just for the record, that Jack In the Box chicken guy ad has been running far more often and is almost as annoying at this point.

Q: Manny's postgame interview after his Game 2 walkoff homer should shoot right to the top of your Unintentional Comedy Scale. Once he hit that ball, the first words out of all of my buddies was along the lines of, "I REALLY hope they do a postgame with Manny." We were more on edge during that interview than the last half of the ninth. Varitek says, "Joo don't leave Boston without a home run." I says, "Joo know it."--Bobby, Belmont, Mass.

SG: You left out the key part of the interview ... Jose Mota! Teaming up Manny and Mota was like teaming up Cosell and Ali in the early-'70s, only the exact opposite. Couldn't ESPN Radio have given them Dan Patrick's old show?

It's funny because Ramirez has an accent. And hey, thanks a lot for finally taking a Red Sox question, Bill! Geez, why isn't anyone talking about the REAL story in the 2007 postseason? GO SAWKS!

Q: My favorite part about reading your '01 World Series diary was this tag at the end: Bill Simmons writes three columns a week for Page 2. Wow. It really has been a long time since Paul O'Neill played.--Mark, Madison

SG: (Searching for a comeback ... )

Self degradation usually makes me think people are cool and laid back. I really enjoy it and often practice it, so if they do too, we're bound to get along because we have similar views about ourselves. Except in this case. Because Bill is a pudwhacker.

Q: Could you comment on the "twist" on the "Friday Night Lights" season opener? I think it's network executives making sweeping changes in order to try to get ratings, killing my favorite show in a way worse than simply canceling it.--Chris W., New Haven, Conn.

SG: Quick break from baseball to answer this one...

OK, so now we're taking a break from baseball. Great. Glad we cleared that up, in this case. The rest of the breaks we've taken from baseball in this mailbag just slipped right by most readers, but since this one is so flagrant, let's be up front about it.

Q: How 'bout those Yankees? The visiting locker room at Yankee Stadium has seen more bubbly over the past couple of years than the champagne room at Scores!!--Frank, Swampscott, Mass.

I can't believe it took this long for Simmons to print one of his Masshole reader's clever, biting, brilliantly funny Yankee jokes.

Q: I'm sure you were thrilled that Torre decided to go with Wang on three days rest in Game 4. Why, why, why do managers ever choose to use pitchers on three days rest??? The stats are horrible. According to a post on the Web, in the past 10 years, nine of the 14 playoff teams that have employed a version of a three-man rotation in the FIRST ROUND series have lost the series. These teams lost 17 of the 21 games pitched on short rest. What gives?--Graham M., Los Angeles

SG: Graham, that's a fantastic question. I don't have an answer for you. The three-day rest thing only seems to work when you don't have another choice (like the Red Sox in 2004, for example).

Just a quick reminder that Bill likes the Red Sox, and that they won the World Series in 2004.

Q: What is the appropriate reaction to somebody bringing up the Mets' collapse to me 24 hours after it happened? I say I am legally allowed to punch any male who says anything. With females I say it is OK to pick out their greatest insecurity and viciously attack it for a solid 45 minutes.--Joe B., Staten Island, N.Y.

Again, as before, very relevant to the 2007 postseason.

Q: You know when you're fully realizing that something special is happening? A couple weeks ago, I was at one of my usual strip clubs and heard the 50 Cent and Justin Timberlake song, "Ayo Technology," for the first time and KNEW that this was a song I was going to hear in the clubs all the time for the next decade. I haven't seen a song that was able to instantly change the atmosphere in a strip club that much since Christina Aguilera's "Dirty" came out. It's kind of similar to what Joba was able to do to the Yankees in the second half of the season. What gives out earlier, Joba's arm from Torre pitching him ragged or "Ayo Technology" from Larry the bald 45-year-old strip club DJ playing it every half hour?--Brian C, Hopkinton, Mass.

SG: Yup ... these are my readers.

These are his readers, or at least the ones that get their questions published in mailbag columns; Red Sox, Yankees, or possibly Mets fans who love strip clubs. Woo! Strippers! And reality TV shows! And the AL! But specifically not the NL! Hooooooooraaaaaaaay!

(Here's the question topic distribution; I didn't cover some of them):

Total: 24
Indians/Yankees: 4
Red Sox/Angels: 3
Assorted Yankees: 2
Assorted Red Sox: 5
Not baseball/TV/Other Simmons Columns: 7
Mets: 2
Anyone else from the NL: 1 (disparagingly)

Bill Simmons: he's fannnnnnnnnnnnnntastic!

Heyman knows best...

I don't read John Heyman's "Daily Scoop" on si.com that often, and I wish I had decided to skip it today. He squeezed out this turd of an article that basically says, "I don't like Curt Schilling because he talks too much"

After years and years of trying to figure out what makes that fascinating, hard-throwing blowhard Curt Schilling tick, I think I am finally on to something.

He's nuts.

OK, maybe he's not insane in any clinical way. But insane nonetheless. Insane in his own way. There can be no other good explanation as to why he would say aloud that he might like to join the Devil Rays next year as a free agent. The D-Rays. Think about that. No two-time World Series champ and borderline Hall of Famer with a massive ego and thirst for the spotlight willingly signs up to pitch his last season in Tropicana obscurity.

From the Sportswriter's bible, Book of "I Know What's best for you," chapter 12, verse 26-28: "If thouest are an aging great player, thou shall only play for the team with the best chance to winnith." Heyman may have had a point about Schilling being insane here if Schilling says he expects the D-Rays to win it all (or even get to the playoffs) in the next season or two. Luckily Heyman has a quote from Schilling to clear this up.

"It's one of those situations you'd certainly have to look at,'' Schilling said on his weekly radio spot on Boston radio station WEEI. "Knowing that I'm probably going to spend one more year playing, if circumstances happen and things happen and they made some moves that were positive, I'd love nothing more than to finish my career working on a pitching staff where I know that there are young guys that are going to be positively impacted by me being around [after] I was gone. I enjoy that. I love working and talking and being around young pitchers."

Oh, so Schilling would want to play for the D-Rays because he wants to be around young players in a developing franchise? Fuck him, he should be playing for the Yankees, because I'm John Heyman, God of Sportswriting.

Schilling, who is 7-5 with a 4.25 ERA, went on to speak fondly of having a home in the area at one time, as reported in the Boston Globe.

"I love Tampa, I love the area, I love everything about it," he said. "I loved living down there."

So Schilling wants to play in Tampa because

1) He likes Tampa
2) He wants to be around young players

Nowhere in your justification do you provide any evidence that Schilling wants a sweet new deal out of the Red Sox.

Putting aside the fact that Tampa Bay is trying to build for the future and has virtually no chance to win next year (it's never won more than 70 games), and would have no good reason to pursue an attention-starved 40-year-old pitcher, it makes no sense for Schilling to say such a thing from a business standpoint. As a negotiating ploy, it is nothing short of idiotic.

I'll bet Schilling could play for Tampa if he was willing to take a pay cut. Once again, nowhere here does he say anything about getting $13 million dollars out of the Rays, so right now you are just making shit up.

Of course there is one other possibility, and that is Schilling is simply the world's worst agent. Schilling, along with Gary Sheffield and Jamie Moyer, are a few of the very rare major leaguers who represent themselves. That's never a good idea, though Moyer manages to do it without making a spectacle of himself.

Let's look at this closer. If Schilling was such a terrible agent, as you say he is, how did he acquire a contract worth $13 million per year from the Red Sox? Let's look at someone who is very similar to Schilling: John Smoltz. They have an identical career ERA+ (126) as well as nearly identical numbers of Games Started, innings pitched and strikeouts. And to boot, Schilling is two years older. From 2004-2006, the three years guaranteed from the Sox, Schilling averaged $13 million per year, and Smoltz averaged $10.5 million. The going rate for an agent's take in the MLB is at least %5 (plus a waaaaay bigger percentage of endorsement deals), so that brings Smoltz down to under $10 million per year. Even if the Red Sox didn't have to option the fourth year of Schilling's deal, between 2004-07 Schilling would have made a cool $39 million only pitching three years. Smoltz, on the other hand, would have made under $40 million for pitching all 4 seasons. Such. A. terrible. agent. Worst Ever, in fact. What a crazy idiot.

Presumably, the reason players represent themselves is either because they are cheap, or because they think they know better. In Schilling's case, of course, it has to be because he thinks he knows better. Because he thinks he knows everything.

Presumably, idiot writers like John Heyman write stupid shit like this because they are clinically brain dead, or because they like to play armchair psychologist. In Heyman's case, he thinks he knows what's best for a player, knowing next to nothing about what the player actually wants.

After being ably represented for years by competent and accomplished agents Dennis Gilbert and Jeff Borris, Schilling decided to do it himself in recent years, and, ever since, all heck has broken loose. For his first deal with Boston, to get four years, Schilling put himself in position of having to win the World Series -- not a great bet since Boston hadn't won for 85 straight years. Yet, his pitching is a lot better than his agenting, and he helped them do just that, which guaranteed the 2007 season at $13 million, plus incentives. That brings us to today.

Yeah, all heck has broken loose. Let's say Schilling only signed a three year deal, no incentive extra year, worth a guaranteed $13 million per year. As a then 37 year old pitcher, that's a pretty darn good contract by itself. I'm not sure how the "World Series incentive" clause was written, but it sure seems like it worked out pretty well for all parties. Schilling got an extra year, 365 extra days, for $13 million; he likely couldn't have been able to pull that kind of dough for 4 years from any other team, even with an agent.

Just because you can throw a fastball and splitter at world-class proficiency -- not to mention become a World Series hero in two cities -- that doesn't make you an agent.

John, Just because you can bang your keyboard to spit out letters and hyphens and periods and shit -- that doesn't make you a good writer. It's also too bad Microsoft Word doesn't have a "This Sentence Reads like Shit" tool

Or even particularly sane.

So he's insane because he can negotiate a pretty true to market value contract without an agent? Or because he doesn't want to pitch for the team you want him to?

Regarding Schilling's negotiating skills, one general manager said yesterday, "He apparently didn't go to Agent's University.''

According to Internet blogger eriz, "John Heyman apparently didn't go to Write a Cohesive Argument University."

I could do this all day.

Not only has Schilling put the D-Rays into play, but worse, he's taken the Yankees out of the mix, saying they are the one team he would never, ever play for. And, of course, as everyone knows, the Yankees are the one team that could make the Red Sox sweat.

MAYBE HE SAID THAT BECAUSE HE DOESN'T WANT TO PLAY FOR THE YANKEES. DID YOU FOR A SPLIT SECOND CONSIDER THAT? GODDAMMIT, YOU FUCKING RETARD SPORTSWRITERS CONSTANTLY HEAP TONS OF SHIT ON GUYS LIKE JOHNNY DAMON FOR "BETRAYING" THEIR TEAMS AND FANS. AND THEN SCHILLING SAYS HE DOESN'T WANT TO PLAY FOR THE YANKEES ON HIS BOSTON BASED RADIO PROGRAM, AND YOU THINK HE'S RUINING HIS CHANCES TO GET A GIANT CONTRACT OUT OF THE RED SOX, EVEN THOUGH YOU'VE PROVIDED NOT ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT THIS IS WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO.

Instead of making Red Sox people sweat, Schilling made them laugh. These are the dog days of the pennant race, and even the executives of baseball's best team need a tension breaker at this time of the year. And this was theirs.

When Red Sox higher-ups finally stopped cackling at Schilling's latest D-Ray claim, I did get one of them to come to the phone. Red Sox GM Theo Epstein would only say that "out of respect to the player concerned,'' he wasn't going to talk about this. Epstein also said, "Our consideration now is to win the World Series.''

Yeah that quote is totally not the generic response journalists get from team management when they get asked about signing and trade rumors. Theo Epstein was totally like *wink wink* "Curt's a dumbass. Hahahahahahah." You could totally tell from that comment.

That makes sense. While Schilling dreams of the D-Rays, Red Sox people are thinking of October glory.

While Schilling makes a mess of this, Boston people play it perfectly. In reality, Schilling should be the one with bargaining strength here. If he were half as smart as he thinks he is, he should know he already has the advantage. Through the sheer luck of good timing, he is one of the better free-agent pitchers -- if not the best pitcher -- out there in the world's worst free-agent pitching class.

But instead of understanding that silence is golden, Schilling has done what he does incessantly, which is to talk. Schilling already has come down from a two-year request to one (at least he has on the airwaves).

Now we get around to the actual reason you wrote this article. You don't like listening to Schilling talk. Well, I don't like reading your work. So next time you sign on to a new sports publication, I'll write a post about your contract negotiations with CBS Sportsline using only hearsay and shit I make up. And then I'll finish the piece up by saying "plus he's a fucking atrocious writer."