The Red Card = Back
#16
Posted 03 December 2009 - 10:57 PM
#17
Posted 04 December 2009 - 12:25 AM
his absence meant that we went from 60% soccer/ 40% Maxim-wrestling news to 0% soccer news. (I'm not counting Sam Stejeskal because I don't think many people actually read him... and he's not even on the Trib site)..
If you ignore Sam then you're ignoring the fact that we started getting more news when Luis left. Luis is the more entertaining and refined read, but he had a LOT less content and info. You can read all of the Redcard Fire entries for 2008 in a sitting, I'm not kidding. Now it was different in 2007 when Blanco was getting signed, but things went downhill after that season, fast. It was thin and lacking. Between Sam and Charlie (who joined the game late granted) we had a veritable cornucopia of Fire content this year compared to what Luis gave us in '08.
#18
Posted 04 December 2009 - 12:29 AM
#19
Posted 04 December 2009 - 07:16 AM
ZING!!!If the Hammer is what kept Luis away, that is at least one reason that I will miss him.
#20
Posted 04 December 2009 - 11:19 AM
Pathetic.
Here's an idea: just cover the news: cover the game, get the names right, get the stats right.
But if you're going to start covering all the behind-the-scenes "news" there is no end: you've got to tell everyone that Blanco was hungover at practice, the coach refers to you as "shithead", etc.
Here's some news Luis can cover: many people, many Fire fans think he's a lousy writer and the Tribune owes us someone who can cover the sport. There's two or three columns right there.
#21
Posted 04 December 2009 - 11:26 AM
Luis isn't the best writer in history, fine. He's probably writing about the Fire on his own time (i.e. not getting paid). He has a different perspective than most of us on the events of the last 5 years. The last article, while very harsh, was enlightening.
What are we complaining about again?
#22
Posted 04 December 2009 - 11:36 AM
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!
#23
Posted 06 December 2009 - 02:29 PM
All you have to do is make the effort.
Fire news sucks? go out to practice and find something better.
I await the brilliance
#24
Posted 17 December 2009 - 01:17 AM
http://blogs.chicago...q-a-part-2.html
Who would be your ideal DP for the Fire? – Joe
I don’t think the Fire will get a designated player this offseason. Call it a gut feeling.
Andrew Hauptman doesn't seem like the type of owner who will throw around money just for the hell of it. He likely would only sign a big name player if it makes sense financially. Plus the Fire might want to keep their options open in case Blanco decides to come back.
Please tell me the Fire isn’t really considering Tom Soehn? – Luis Arroyave
OK, I’m going to be honest -- I’m the Luis Arroyave who wrote that question. I just can’t believe that Soehn is one of the leading candidates for the job...
FRIEND: So what does the Fire need in a coach?
YOU: They need someone who can give the organization more than just a trip to the conference final. Someone who can take the team to an MLS Cup final for the first time since 2003. Someone who can re-energize the team.
FRIEND: Makes sense. Who is the Fire considering?
YOU:Tom Soehn.
FRIEND: Let me get this straight. One of the leading candidates for the Fire job is a coach who took D.C. to the playoffs once in three seasons even though more than half the teams in MLS make the post-season?
YOU: Well, he did lead D.C. to the best regular season record in 2007. Then again, they didn’t make the MLS Cup finals that year.
FRIEND: A coach who couldn’t take a decent roster to the MLS Cup final? Where have I heard that one before?
YOU: OK, fine. He doesn’t have the greatest résumé and would probably just give the Fire more of the same, but he did play with the Fire for three seasons and was also an assistant here.
(Friend rolls eyes, makes inappropriate hand gesture)
Have you read Ives post about Andrew Hauptman? Paints a picture that he's a cancer and will bring this team down. But your post on Denis Hamlett makes it seem as though he was the cancer. What is your take on the differences between your and Ives' articles? – otergod
...I strongly disagree with Ives’ defense of Hamlett... don’t feel he deserves the credit Ives gave him and I don’t think he deserved another season with the Fire. On the other hand, I think Ives painted a pretty accurate picture of Hauptman. Some fans probably like that Hauptman is so hands on because they feel it shows how much he cares. Others feel Hauptman should get out of the way and leave soccer decisions to soccer people. I lean toward the latter.
Is publishing this now to get it off your chest or to air dirty laundry? – SparkeyG
When Chris Armas retired, I wrote a behind-the-scenes piece detailing my experience with him. I did a similar piece on Chad Barrett before he faced the Fire for the first time and I did one on Dave Sarachan after he was fired. Obviously, my Hamlett piece had a different tone, but my motivation was the same: I wanted to give readers a closer look at what he was like off the field.
...I didn't need to get it off my chest. When my old sports editor asked me "Feel better?" after reading the piece, I said no. I felt bad being so critical of another human being. But like I told that editor, Hamlett dug his own grave.
After reading this, would it be untrue to say that Denis was one of the reasons you originally stopped this blog? -WWC
Did you leave The Red Card partly because of your relationship with Hammy? Timing of your return implies some connection. - dabes2
I changed jobs for a few reasons, but Denis Hamlett really wasn’t one of them. My move had more to do with the people above him.
When an organization repeatedly complains about you not covering them enough and then says “No comment” or doesn’t return your call when you try to cover them, you start wondering if this is what you want to do with your life. When an organization refuses to give you their side of the story and then gets mad you didn’t include their side of the story in an article, you first look around to make sure you’re not on a hidden camera show, and then you let the paper know you’d like to cover something else.
#25
Posted 17 December 2009 - 02:08 AM
#26
Posted 17 December 2009 - 03:09 AM
#27
Posted 17 December 2009 - 01:04 PM
Old Luis was entertaining and occasionally informative, but New Luis is the shit.
Agreed. Maybe it's just all of the pent up nuggets of wisdom that Luis has been holding back for the last few months. Or maybe he's willing to take a few more risks with his writing now that he knows his livelihood doesn't depend on this blog alone.
#28
Posted 17 December 2009 - 08:35 PM
#29
Posted 18 December 2009 - 02:19 AM
#30
Posted 18 December 2009 - 04:45 AM
Here's some news Luis can cover: many people, many Fire fans think he's a lousy writer and the Tribune owes us someone who can cover the sport. There's two or three columns right there.
His quite popular here.
He's not a bad writer. The blog isn't always great but the stuff that made it into the pages of the Tribune wasn't bad by an stretch of the imagination unless you love to hate on the guy. His big World Cup 06 write up with the bracket prediction was great.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users