by Michael Miner on September 17th 2008 - 11:52 a.m.
Digg this
| 
Post to del.icio.us
| 
E-mail to a friend
Digg this
| Post to del.icio.us
| E-mail to a friend
Jay Mariotti writes in response to my post that suggested he was close to being hired by the Tribune. As I said late Tuesday night, the deal fell through.
"I feel sorry for these people you quote. They need to get a grip, do their work, break some stories and concentrate on writing good sports columns. Who cares about me? I could spot Rick Telander 890 words of Rick Reilly, and he still wouldn't write a relevant 900-word column. He's a bitter old man stuck in 1973.
"I did not quit the paper in a huff. I resigned in writing based on a clause in my contract -- I had the right to terminate the deal at any time -- and whether they accepted or not was inconsequential. It was my call, based on a Sun-Times Internet site that runs like a Ford Edsel and my conclusion that the paper isn't far from folding. The night the U.S. basketball team won the gold medal, I had to wake the web editor out of bed at a wedding in California because hours had passed without our stories being posted on the web site. That was pretty much the final straw. I left about $1 million in guaranteed money on the table -- remember, I signed a contract extension in the summer -- because I don't want to deal with the death of another paper; I worked for the National Sports Daily when it died. I told that to the publisher, Cyrus Friedheim, when we had lunch last year. I told him I didn't want to see another paper fold. It's a horrible feeling. That's what drove my resignation.
"The Tribune contacted me the night I resigned. We had several productive discussions, in person and on the phone, over 2 1/2 weeks. I was very impressed with their editorial direction -- this isn't Col. McCormick's Trib -- and we chatted about an Internet page, a television show and, eventually, a column. In the middle of it all, I received a threatening e-mail in what looked like 64-point type from the Sun-Times lawyer, Jim McDonough, who warned of legal action against me if I signed with the Tribune. The Tribune also received a threatening letter from the Sun-Times. Yes, I had a non-compete clause in the Sun-Times deal that prohibits me from writing for the Tribune for a year. Thus, we had to twist and turn to figure out a way to do things, and for now, I'm just thrilled to continue our daily, stress-free, highly successful ESPN show -- six years, almost 1,300 airings -- and consider several options in radio and TV and on the Internet. Maybe someday, the Tribune thing will happen, but if it causes mass resignations on the staff, gee, I don't want to disrupt home lives or anything. All I know is, these aren't the Tribsters I lampooned for years. This is the multimedia group that will survive in Chicago and thrive in the future. They have a plan.
It's amusing that Michael Cooke said wonderful things about me when they announced my extension at a shareholders' meeting in June, ripped me apart as an editorial detriment when I exercised my contractual right to leave, then balked when the other paper showed interest. He's not a stable man. His buddy, Steinberg, rips my character when he has domestic-abuse and alcohol issues. Yikes!
"It's still very possible I'll keep working in this city. I have local and national opportunities. Contrary to pictures painted by the media, we have loads of friends in this city, and my kids have had a great educational experience. Their schoolmates don't even know what the Sun-Times is; they just know I'm the guy on the ESPN show. When I've been in restaurants and bars the last few weeks, or walking down the street, people have been great and wondered why the Sun-Times went smear-job on me after I left. I usually had the most web hits on the Sun-Times site, and if I wasn't a well-read and successful columnist, I don't think the Sun-Times would have signed me to numerous extensions and the Tribune would have shown such interest. The frenzy about me is off-center, disproportionate to reality. And it's all media-driven by people such as the ones you've quoted. Shoot me if I'm in my 60s and ripping a guy in his 40s.
"I wrote more than 300 columns a year for 17 years. I ignored the bullshit, did my job and made enormous impact without dipping into backstabbing and smear-campaigning. I wish others would try the same formula. It works."
1. The Sun-Times' management are too dumb to run a newspaper.
2. The Sun-Times' management offered him multiple contract extensions.
One of these statements has to be untrue for Mariotti's inflated sense of self to have validity. If it's #1, it makes his resignation "in writing" baseless. If it's #2, then the only people willing to hire Jay Mariotti are incompetents.
What's going on in this paragraph? Did Mariotti start to say something about Cooke or Steinberg and then try to delete it?
One wonders how many readers Jay took with him when he left the Sun-Times ... or, for that matter, how many viewers he brings to ESPN, where he plays the role of class clown. I'm guessing, not many.
There's validity in Jo's comment. He was the face of the Sun-Times' sports section for 17 years, the personification of "attitude," the voice they promoted, the guy whose tantrums and deadline-stretching were tolerated. In return, he cranked it out, week after week, year after year. Publishers changed, editors changed, sports editors changed, but Jay endured.
And the current regime -- presumably bidding against nobody and operating on a lean budget that's forced cuts elsewhere -- rewarded him with an astonishing contract extension.
No problem with Steinberg's column and Ebert's eloquent "don't let the door hit you" essay. Telander got his shots in, and Roman Modrowski and Chris De Luca. No prob. For the most part, Jay didn't nurture friendships among his colleagues, and, well, that's what happens.
But months after honoring Jay Mariotti with words and big bucks, suddenly the corporate Sun-Times celebrates his departure as if it's a triumph for Rational Journalism As We Know It?
Weak.
Friends:
Let me tell you something: The city of Chicago has more sportswriters and more sports "personalities" embedded with (i.e., in-bed-with) the local and national sports sector as a whole than it ever had reporters and commentators embedded with the U.S. executive branch and military across multiple theaters of conflict, such as Afghanistan and Iraq.
Or to put it another way: One is free to hate Jay Mariotti all one likes, and I won't contest someone else's feelings. (This comment isn't directed at anyone in particular, by the way.)
But for all the years her gig lasted at the New York Times, Judith Miller's byline had nothing on ninety percent or more of the local sports embeds.
list? Let's see how long you are going to keep this going because you need a couple more nails.
As a reader, my problem with Jay's work was not that it lacked skill -- he's a very good writer, and my admiration for his talent with words is magnified by the fact that much of what he wrote was written on a tight deadline -- but that it lacked perspective and integrity. The windsock quality of his views on players and managers and owners were -- are -- as shallow as the views of a fan who is screaming from the bleachers that a guy's a bum, then, when he hits a homer, starts yelling how much he loves him.
My blog post documenting this phenomenon in 2005 --
http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ez... -- was wildly popular among his detractors.
Further, his animosity for Tribune Co. in its stewardship of the Cubs always seemed inspired -- even inflamed -- by his own competitive spirit.
I don't read sports columns to revel in the knee-jerk reactions of the common fan. I have enough of those myself. I read them for perspective and real insight.
And I don't read them to hear the scribe give vent to his personal grudges or promote his employer.
1) Yes, I particularly like the writing of Telander and Steinberg very much, but, beyond even such personal preference, day after day, year after year, both of them have demonstrated and expressed a far wider breadth of knowledge and opinion on whatever they wrote about than Mariotti could ever bring to the narrow confines of his subjects. Also, they were often able to show varying, changing, re-evaluating opinions on subjects as time went by -- while Mariotti would just see which way the wind was blowing on Ozzie, Dusty, Lovie, etc., and flip-flop his faux-clever nicknames (used nowhere else by nobody) from supportive to ripping. Oh, and would you have ANY interest at all to read what Mariotti could write about (say...) the decline of the US men's hat industry OR about the in-depth struggles of a sporting youth when confronted with family pressures, school expectations, and neighborhood barriers? Nah, me either -- I can't even imagine him doing the research or showing up in Englewood to do the interviews, much less ever writing anything remotely interesting on the subjects. But Neil and Rick? Yep and yep...
2) Of course, I don't have the exact numbers, but I feel fairly certain that his "I usually had the most web hits on the Sun-Times site" boast was ALWAYS exceeded by a multiple of 5, 10, or perhaps even 20 by the man who TRULY drives the web business for the S-T, Mr. Roger Ebert.
Actually, I feel "dirty" after reading this article.
When Jay first arrived on the scene at the SunTimes, I thought he brought a certain wait-til-next-year-ain't-good-enough attitude to the city and the paper, which was sorely needed. But as time progressed, his column seemed to be one that only stirred the pot without anything resembling constructive criticism, evolving into nothing more than personal attacks questioning the judgment of owners and executives (who can run their railroad as they see fit).
After a while, I wondered whether Jay had any credentials of running a successful sports franchise. But to be fair, I occasionally read his column just to make sure I wasn't dead wrong. Jay never disproved my thoughts.
Most recently, after the Celtics won the NBA title, I was hoping Jay would write a column about the magic of the Celtic mystic, and how Coach Jackson was rebuffed by the very team whose patriarch's coaching record was threatened if Jackson's team had won. Instead, Jay figured it was time to bash Reinsdorf and Paxson for their lack of success. Hey Jay, whether there are three or thirty teams, only two can play for the title; the others have all failed.
And in this city, we have lots of examples of sports failure. What we never got out of Jay was a column that was positive. If one can think of more than 17 positive columns out of Jay Mariotti, I'd love to see the list. Why 17? One for every year.
And while many have said and will say that Jay is a good (newspaper) writer, I wouldn't put him the 'team' photo with Mike Royko, John Schulian, or David Israel.
on any particular day. Nobody really wants that with their morning coffee or sweet roll.
I had the opportunity to write for 2 midwest-based sports weekly's beginning back in Jay's early years at the Sun Times and had the pleasure of observing him both in the press area and after games in the occasional out of town watering hole. Jay had almost no friends, rarely spoke with his colleagues, was a loner in every sense of the word and saddest of all, often sat all by himself on a barstool because no one wanted to socialize with him - let alone carry on a friendship. Perhaps he felt he was better than the local scribes because he came from "The National". In Jay's world, somehow being "national" ranks so much higher than Chicago. When his star began to rise a bit and he thirsted for more national exposure, he felt that somehow being on TV or Radio again ranked him higher than the local scribes. His therapist may have more insight into Jays psyche but anyone who observed him in person saw through his fake tan and best- side dramatic profile pic. We saw a man that liked few people, was liked by even fewer and took it all out on those that challenged him as a person and a writer. He just couldn't take the heat so he picked a dramatic time and place to jump off and, shockingly, is surprised that so many people saw right through it. Is there anyone out there that watches ESPN to get his take on anything? He is ESPN wallpaper - but his ego would never allow him to believe that he puts no fannies in the seats and tears away no one from their daily grind. All he really has going for him is his tenure and experience but with so little class to go along with it, that won't be enough to get a welcome mat in this town ever again.
Employment no longer distinguishes him from other keyboard blowhards.
Mariotti - ST = Another Jerkass Blogger