Re: [Josh's article]

[bird <birdwl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: GuyClinch@xxxxxxx
> [snip]
> Gee..more rose colored glasses..
> None of those guys out there are any good with the exception of Best. 
> Thats
> why we aren't likely getting him. Its bad form to "hype" up potential
> Celtics...and the Celtics while downgrading non Celtics and ex Celtics. 
> Thats
> basically what your entire column did.  I haven't read a more biased 
> column
> in a long time.
Geez, what the hell is wrong with that?  I've never heard Josh describe 
himself as anything other than a fan, certainly not as some objective 
observer or something.  Why does he have to be unbiased?  No one else is.  
While Josh's latest article may have pushed the bounds of optimism, he 
made good points, and while one might take issues with points here and 
there and ask for more evidence, you're acting like he''s betrayed a 
journalistic trust or something.  If you haven't read a more biased column 
in a while, I suggest you're either not reading sports articles, or don't 
read them very closely.

Or, maybe you just mean "optimistic" and not "biased".  Because I've never 
read anything that wasn't biased.

Bird