New Kravitz Article -

[MAC]

For the most part I agree with a lot of what I've seen you post on other parts of the forum. I could be wrong about the New York Times Sports Section and it having a high standard of writing. I don't read newspapers for the most part so I used their bankruptcy as a reason for their writing not being of very high quality. It's nothing personal, it just seemed like a logical reason for them not being the top when it comes to newspapers anymore.

I appreciate your clarification.

One of the reasons that I thought that you were trying to irritate me was your reference to bankruptcy. The entire print industry is in danger - regardless of content - but the Times is in no more or less trouble than anyone else. They are not, and never have been bankrupt. They took out a loan from Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim a few years back - which certainly raised some eyebrows and suggested a weakened financial position - but they sold much of their investment in Fenway Sports Group (the company that owns the Red Sox and Liverpool Football Club), and paid off Slim 3 1/2 years early. They still own 7% of Fenway Sports Group, as well as the "About.com" website, the Boston Globe, and many other papers. They still have the third largest daily circulation in the country (only behind nationally oriented newspapers "USA Today", and "The Wall Street Journal"), and NYTimes.com is (per google) the most popular newspaper website in the world, with considerably more viewers than "USA Today", "The Wall Street Journal", and "The Indianapolis Star" combined - despite beginning to charge some online users a few months back. I'm sure margins are tight, but they still gross a couple of billion dollars per year. It's a large and successful company. I have no idea why you think that they are not at "the top when it comes to newspapers anymore."

The tendency in this horrible media and economic climate is to reduce labor costs by cutting staff and relying more on less experienced writers. I'm sure that that has happened at the Times as well. That doesn't change the fact that my initial reference was more about the papers standards and ethics, (http://www.nytco.com/press/ethics.html), not my arbitrary opinion about their talent. The fact is that you just don't see articles like this Kravitz effort in the NY Times - even in their online blogs, which are considerably less formal. The fact is that it's still a journalists dream job to make it to the Times, and I doubt very much that Kravitz would be a candidate.

[Xfiles]

I'm not clear on how "ignore" works. If you have him on ignore, how did you know that he was posting annoying things here - just by seeing the responses to him I assume?

The beauty is, you still know they posted something, and you can click on it to read it, but you can ignore also. I love it.

[Ramblinwreck7]

The beauty is, you still know they posted something, and you can click on it to read it, but you can ignore also. I love it.

...You've got to be kidding me. You sound like a little kid right now. The funny part is that you will still read what I'm writing even though you have me on ignore...

[Ramblinwreck7]

I appreciate your clarification.

One of the reasons that I thought that you were trying to irritate me was your reference to bankruptcy. The entire print industry is in danger - regardless of content - but the Times is in no more or less trouble than anyone else. They are not, and never have been bankrupt. They took out a loan from Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim a few years back - which certainly raised some eyebrows and suggested a weakened financial position - but they sold much of their investment in Fenway Sports Group (the company that owns the Red Sox and Liverpool Football Club), and paid off Slim 3 1/2 years early. They still own 7% of Fenway Sports Group, as well as the "About.com" website, the Boston Globe, and many other papers. They still have the third largest daily circulation in the country (only behind nationally oriented newspapers "USA Today", and "The Wall Street Journal"), and NYTimes.com is (per google) the most popular newspaper website in the world, with considerably more viewers than "USA Today", "The Wall Street Journal", and "The Indianapolis Star" combined - despite beginning to charge some online users a few months back. I'm sure margins are tight, but they still gross a couple of billion dollars per year. It's a large and successful company. I have no idea why you think that they are not at "the top when it comes to newspapers anymore."

The tendency in this horrible media and economic climate is to reduce labor costs by cutting staff and relying more on less experienced writers. I'm sure that that has happened at the Times as well. That doesn't change the fact that my initial reference was more about the papers standards and ethics, (http://www.nytco.com/press/ethics.html), not my arbitrary opinion about their talent. The fact is that you just don't see articles like this Kravitz effort in the NY Times - even in their online blogs, which are considerably less formal. The fact is that it's still a journalists dream job to make it to the Times, and I doubt very much that Kravitz would be a candidate.

I don't know if it's true, but I thought I heard on the radio a little while back that they mortgaged their office building. That's where I got the bankuptcy part from. Your right though that a lot of newspapers are going under though, but not all of them.

[BleedingBlue]

If journalists aren't able to at least point out a team is tanking then what exactly are they allowed to say? Its not hes talking about point shaving.

[pacolts56]

If journalists aren't able to at least point out a team is tanking then what exactly are they allowed to say? Its not hes talking about point shaving.

LOL..... if we're point shaving we're doing it with a machete.

[MAC]

If journalists aren't able to at least point out a team is tanking then what exactly are they allowed to say? Its not hes talking about point shaving.

First of all, do you honestly believe that the Colts are trying to lose? And when you insinuate that, who exactly are you referring to? Was Coyer intentionally having the DBs play way off the receivers because he wanted the defense to get torched? He's now out of work, with an enormous black mark on his resume. Was that a grand sacrifice because all he really cares about is the long-term future of the Colts? How about Caldwell and the rest of the coaches whose jobs are likely at risk, do you think they enjoy getting humiliated every week, and ridiculed by the fans and the media? How about all the players who are going to be free agents, do you think Mathis and Wayne want to negotiate with other teams for the final contract of their careers - their LAST chance EVER to secure their families financial future - coming off the worst seasons of their careers? Do you think Dallas Clark was intentionally knocking balls to the ground, diminishing his value at every turn? Is Carter fumbling on purpose because he wants to play with Luck next year? Do you think that Polian - whose every action is entirely predicated on protecting his ego (according to too many people on this site) WANTS to be going through this nonsense. Do you think that Jim Irsay wants to go from champion to utter failure in the eyes of his 31 contemporaries, to have fans not show up for games, to have jersey sales drop, to have fans Tweeting garbage to him on a constant basis? COME ON. Any suggestion that the individuals who comprise an organization want to lose, particularly when you are talking about people who are by nature amongst the most competitive on the planet, is patently absurd. In total then, why would anyone conclude that "the team" wants to lose. "The team" is just a bunch of people who want to win more than ANYTHING.

Secondly, intentionally losing in order to gain a better draft position is an ethical breach which violates the principals upon which competitive sports are based. Taking the opportunity to evaluate young players is fine, but "trying" to lose is cheating - just as surely as point skimming is cheating. The Colts pride themselves from top to bottom on being one of the most morally sound organizations in sports - yet you think it is such common knowledge that they are cheating, that it's OK for a sportswriter to sarcastically accuse them of it.

The Colts are NOT tanking, and the Colts do NOT cheat, and I can think of dozens of things for Kravitz to write about other than that. HE is the one with the ethics problem, not the Colts.