It's just amazing to me how Rob Parker and Drew Sharp have not been run out of town with their negative journalism over the years.
If you have a minute, check out http://dtrainsports.freemyforum.com ........it's currently a work in progress.
Amazing he even had the time to write something so stupid considering all the time he devotes to fellating Joe Dumars.
this is stretching, even for Rob. This is Aaron's record because he did before anyone ever associated the terms "Balco", "HGH", "the Clear", "the Cream" with MLB. Aaron can do whatever he wants, he's earned it. If he doesn't want to be at the game because he might think Bonds earned it the dishonest way, then that's his choice. The guy is in his 70's, and if he doesn't want to do something, then he's not going to do it. I can't blame Aaron at all for not wanting to be a part of this fiasco. I think him being there would lend credibility to Bonds being there, and by him not attending speaks loud and clear.
I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day.
That sort of knee-jerk, in-your-face antagonism may be all the rage in sports reporting at the moment, but that doesn't make it right. One can create interest and spark discussion, and even make the same point that Parker tries to about how Aaron should be more forthcoming with his condemnation of Bonds, without resorting to the too-easy device of character assassination.
Really, though, the thing that rubs me the wrong way about this piece (a word that takes on two meanings in this case) is Parker's statement that, "There's no other way to look at it," as if merely his saying so makes it true. All that shows is that he admits up front that he can't make a compelling argument, because if he could, he wouldn't have to say it.
R.I.P. Same Old Spartans.
"People who drink light "beer" don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
Drew Sharp may be negative 90% of the time, but most of the time his articles and points make perfect sense and he doesnt resort to what Scott aptly called "character assassination" to draw people in to read his articles
The "talk" that Rob Parker is going to get from this article wont be about the article at all. They wont be debating his points or his views, they'll be debating the rightness or wrongness of him calling Hank Aaron a "Coward"
To attract that kind of attention isnt in his job description, thats exactly what your supposed to avoid. He is now bigger than his own story
I was always of the opinion that the story should be bigger than who's writing it. I guess I was wrong
Learning Taco Bell meat is not meat is like learning that cigarettes are addictive
Does anyone else find it hypocritcal that, Mr. Rob - let me get on my hands and knees for the home team so that I don't upset them and risk alienating them - Parker, is calling someone else a coward for not saying what they really feel???