PDA

View Full Version : John Henry is the new owner of the Boston Globe -



grandsalami
08-02-2013, 04:27 PM
Bruce Allen ‏@bruceallen 4m
Report: Red Sox owner John Henry is the new owner of the Boston Globe - http://www.gammonsdaily.com/source-red-sox-owner-acquires-the-boston-globe/

-Lavigne43-
08-02-2013, 04:30 PM
Well I guess he can't deny ownership having any involvement if they murder a player leaving the organization. He's a smart guy, fire Cafardo. Don't know how that guy has a job. If I owned the globe I would go hard after Speier to build my baseball section around.

grandsalami
08-02-2013, 04:34 PM
Well I guess he can't deny ownership having any involvement if they murder a player leaving the organization. He's a smart guy, fire Cafardo. Don't know how that guy has a job. If I owned the globe I would go hard after Speier to build my baseball section around.

im fine with Cafardo, its Dan Shaughnessy who should get the **** out

Pittz
08-02-2013, 04:43 PM
Well now it won't just be rumors that the Red Sox control the media.

-Lavigne43-
08-02-2013, 04:48 PM
Cafardo is awful. He's lazy and stupid, full of his own stupid narratives and cliches. The Globe has the worst Red Sox coverage out of all the options.

B'sCeltsPatsSox
08-02-2013, 05:28 PM
At least we're one step closer to getting Shank out. If I'm Henry, I wouldn't fire him because the Herald would hire him. I would assign him to like Revolution **** lol.

EEasyA
08-02-2013, 06:21 PM
Shaughnessy just speaks the truth sometimes. I have no problem with him.

AI
08-02-2013, 07:07 PM
Shank is quite annoying. I agree with Lav about Speier.

Nomar
08-02-2013, 09:18 PM
Speier is the truth

elements1985
08-03-2013, 06:36 PM
At least we're one step closer to getting Shank out. If I'm Henry, I wouldn't fire him because the Herald would hire him. I would assign him to like Revolution **** lol.

I'm not a Shank fan, per se, but that's your vision: a staff purged of anyone willing to challenge the Red Sox organization?

B'sCeltsPatsSox
08-03-2013, 07:06 PM
I'm not a Shank fan, per se, but that's your vision: a staff purged of anyone willing to challenge the Red Sox organization?

Oh no he is just **** in general. I'm perfectly fine with people challenging the organization, but his work is a joke.

Nomar
08-03-2013, 07:37 PM
Oh no he is just **** in general. I'm perfectly fine with people challenging the organization, but his work is a joke.

Have to agree here, he's the worst in Boston.

ruckus16969
08-04-2013, 04:07 PM
Shank must be scared as hell. I wonder if the Herald will take him?

mooz
08-05-2013, 10:29 AM
I think the biggest reason both Shank and Cafardo get on my nerves is when they talk about things like our prospects and other organizations where they clearly haven't done more than the minimal amount of research. They make run with ideas that can easily be disproved with a pretty small amount of knowledge of either topic. They also lack long term baseball thinking.

Shank is perfectly fine for in-house major league coverage. While I don't agree with him quite a bit, he's at least objective. Cafardo on the other hand is useless. He's a suck up and I really can't think of a time where I've felt he came up with anything useful from independent thinking. For the most part he just regurgitates things that are already being reported from other outlets and misinterprets the information. And then to irritate you more he runs off on a tangent based on his misinterpretation.

bagwell368
08-05-2013, 01:25 PM
Shaughnessy just speaks the truth sometimes. I have no problem with him.

He's an agitator who has something interesting about 15% of the time. He's the "father" of Felger, another odious presence.

bagwell368
08-05-2013, 01:26 PM
Have to agree here, he's the worst in Boston.

Ever read Borges?

RedSoxtober
08-05-2013, 03:17 PM
I'm not a Shank fan, per se, but that's your vision: a staff purged of anyone willing to challenge the Red Sox organization?

I think there's a difference between being willing to challenge the organization and having an axe to grind. He does some of the former and a great deal of the latter.

bruins>habs
08-05-2013, 05:29 PM
He's an agitator who has something interesting about 15% of the time. He's the "father" of Felger, another odious presence.

He's an agitator b/c his opinions aren't on par with other people? Only in Boston can you be criticized if you have a different opinon from the norm and are labeled as a douchebag, not knowing anything, always from or as you say an "odious presence".

bagwell368
08-05-2013, 06:30 PM
He's an agitator b/c his opinions aren't on par with other people?

Are you actually trolling me, or don't you know? He calibrates his opinions to be controversial. There are few cases where he has a consistent opinion across time. He agitates for readership, not intellectual honesty.


Only in Boston can you be criticized if you have a different opinon from the norm and are labeled as a douchebag, not knowing anything, always from or as you say an "odious presence".

Only someone that hasn't read the Boston papers for some time could have posted this.

bruins>habs
08-05-2013, 06:43 PM
Are you actually trolling me, or don't you know? He calibrates his opinions to be controversial. There are few cases where he has a consistent opinion across time. He agitates for readership, not intellectual honesty.

I don't know haha, not meant to troll. I see him on tv and the radio where he sounds fine to me so i wouldn't know how he is on a daily basis (reading the papers and **** like that).



Only someone that hasn't read the Boston papers for some time could have posted this.

Well I from RI so no, i don't read the Boston papers.

RedSoxtober
08-06-2013, 08:30 AM
Well I from RI so no, i don't read the Boston papers.

I'm now from Greenville, SC after growing up in Reading, MA. I still read the Boston Globe sports section all the time at boston.com.