Shaughnessy, what a tool

[Patriot_in_NY]

God, I dislike this douche.......

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2007/05/07/rocket_lands_with_yankees_again/?page=full

"After the Sox beat the Twins in Minneapolis yesterday, Schilling was asked his reaction to the Rocket's re entry into the Yankees clubhouse. Ever the blowhard, Schilling declared, "We don't need him" -- a comment of stupefying arrogance that is sure to come up a couple of million times between now and the end of the 2007 postseason."

Ummmmmmm, I think Schill SAID THIS d*ckweed

"It would have been nice to have him, but we didn't need him. We DON'T need him," Red Sox ace Curt Schilling said. "It's May, a long way to go, but I like the way this team is comprised right now. This team has incredible makeup, it's got great chemistry and I feel like we were a legitimate World Series contender without him, so it doesn't change my mind."

Does he even care if he's misleading readers or worse, blatantly dishonest?



{sorry if this has been posted before........}

 

[Danny Boy®]

We dont need him...he said it...no misleading there.

 

[Eugene Chung]

Does he even care if he's misleading readers or worse, blatantly dishonest?

He made a career out of misleading readers with his curse propaganda so taking Big Schill out of context probably doesn't mean much to CHB.

 

[Real World]

If you saw the footage from when he said it, he was a tad arrogant in his tone. That's Schill though. Nothing really wrong with what he said.

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

If you saw the footage from when he said it, he was a tad arrogant in his tone. That's Schill though. Nothing really wrong with what he said.

Perhaps you're right. Shaughnessy is still a tool though

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

I can't see how CHB can come out of his Schilling feud looking like anything but a child. I also like how the Globe can care less about their credibility as long as tools like CHB and Borges get people to read them.

maybe I'm weird, but what they allow on their sports pages has affected the way I view their whole paper. If they allow tabloid journalism in one section I really have no reason to believe they don't allow it in the rest of the paper.

Eh, maybe they want their paper to be viewed as a medium for childish reporters to carry out personal vendettas. it doesn't seem like a good reputation though.