The Chicago Cubs Are Worst in the World, Per Keith Olbermann

keith olbermann worstI’ve long passed the point where I have an opinion on Keith Olbermann. I kinda liked him on SportsCenter, and I occasionally find him sharp and on-point when he diverts from sports discussion. He just kind of exists, and I don’t think about him much.

And then he did this:

Watching Olbermann flail to recap the Cubs/rooftops situation while labeling the Cubs the “worst persons in the sports world” of the day yesterday, I can’t help but wonder: was he always this blowhard-y, and I just didn’t know any better, because I assumed he was better informed on the issue at-hand than I was?

Because now that he’s touched on something I tend to think I understand pretty well, he sounded like an SNL caricature of a talking head, speaking miles out of his depth. (Putting a video board up in Wrigley is equivalent to putting up a video board atop a pyramid in Giza – this is a thing he said.) He completed the caricature by reading recent statements by Cubs VP of Communications Julian Green in a mocking tone. Blowhard Pro-Tip: if you don’t have a good response for something, or don’t have the time to/interest in digging into the nuance, read someone’s statements in a way (complete with “humorous” inflection changes, and facial contortions) that implies that someone is an idiot. It’ll totally make *you* look like the smart guy!

Mostly I just don’t get what Olbermann was going for here. It appears that he was set off by what he perceived to be a renewed “threat to move” by the Cubs, and somehow worked backwards to make that into the Ricketts Family is dumb, the rooftops are great, Wrigley Field is perfect as is, and people come to Wrigley Field only to see Wrigley Field. I’m guessing it was simply designed to be the kind of low-hanging-fruit rant that gets attention (ta-da), but it’s quite a shame. On some of the substance, Olbermann and I actually agree – the implausibility/undesirability of the Cubs leaving Wrigley Field, for one – but that all gets lost in a morass of pomp and glib sound bytes.

Olbermann’s real crime? Choosing the Wrigley Field situation as the predicate to declaring them the worst persons in the sports world. There are so many better avenues, what with the recently awful stretch and the ugly projections for 2014.

… then again, I guess they’re not “the worst” in those respects! Thanks, Houston!

Brett Taylor is the editor and lead writer at Bleacher Nation, and can also be found as Bleacher Nation on Twitter and on Facebook.

309 responses to “The Chicago Cubs Are Worst in the World, Per Keith Olbermann”

  1. TWC

    “…was he always this blowhard-y, and I just didn’t know any better[?]”

    Yes. Whether you agreed with the substance of his rants or not, Olberman was, and is, a dick.

    1. 5412

      Hi,

      From what I understand he is that way both on and off camera.

      I wait until just before kickoff on nbc games and mute the sound when he appears.

      Regards,
      5412

  2. Cizzle

    Olbermann’s an ass. Always has been.

  3. IA_Colin

    Cant wait for one of his twitter response binges where he criticizes a person’s grammar instead of actually answering anything.

  4. willis

    Y’all beat me to it…he’s been a prick forever. He just rants and blows almost to shock value to try and get ratings. Typical ESPN jerk off.

  5. Corey C

    Dude’s a blowhard. All there is too it.

    ESPN should have never rehired him back.

    1. blublud

      ESPN is making plenty of money off the guy. If they weren’t/are, then the show would be/will be cancelled.

  6. Cubbie in NC

    I was one of the 7 people that have tried to watch his other shows and he appeared to have the same grasp of the topics on those shows as he has on the rooftops situation.

    This show I expect will last just about as long as his last few have.

  7. brainiac

    i don’t really care for sports “personalities” unless they’re former players, but i think he makes some solid points here.

    you guys are missing the bigger picture too. the cubs’ new owners are only known to the rest of the country as the guys who hate their own tradition, love advertisements, and don’t care about winning. its the caricature, and it’s completely correct. this period will be looked back on as dark days in chicago baseball history.

    1. D-Rock

      Who let “brainiac” on this site? This has to be Olbermann’s alias…

      1. brainiac

        i’ve been here for a while. in case yo haven’t noticed, my loyalties are to the team, its tradition, and its players, not white collar middle management who tries to squeeze more money out of the fans and the neighborhood. once these guys show they can help the team, they’ll have my support.

        1. When The Musics Over

          Yep, as you mentioned the other day, if this ownership / front office is very, very good at anything, it’s getting fans, or at least the fervent ones, to somehow ardently back and defend ownership / management and their decisions, all while purposeful fielding God awful teams and having spin constantly thrown in their faces as if they’re all dumb. It’s akin to someone protecting a family member or very good friend because it’s programmed into them.

          I get being loyal in sports. However, typically you have to earn that loyalty first, and over many years. Given the mess at hand, excluding the farm system, a city funded spring training stadium and a Dominican training facility, I don’t really understand what the ownership / front office has done to this point to generate this extreme loyalty.

          1. brainiac

            best post in the history of bleacher nation. some of y’all are mystifyingly dense or cynical about your loyalties.

            1. CubFanBob

              It’s called being a fan, Look it up sometime.

              1. Brocktoon

                Being a fan does not = blindly supporting everything done by the 2nd worst ownership in baseball.

                1. TWC

                  No. According to some around here, being a “real fan” means shitting all over anything and everything the team’s ownership does.

                  1. brainiac

                    not true, we love mcleod. that guy’s a genius.

                2. CubFanBob

                  Here is a tip stop following the Cubs then if you feel they are one of the worst ownership’s in baseball. Follow a White Sox blog or just find another sport to be interested in. Only a hypocrite would call themselves a supporter of something they really believe is horrible.

                  Because see as a Cub fan since I was four years old, and a baseball fan, I am going to be watching or listening to the good majority of Cub games as well as going to a few games a home stand regardless if they are in first place or last. I bleed Cubbie Blue. Call me mystifyingly dense or cynical about my loyalties all you want but I wouldnt trade the experiences Ive had since being a wee lad cheering on his Cubbies for any other fandom.

                  1. Jon

                    “Extreme Negativity” can become overbearing, but at the same time, so can the “like it or leave it” mantra too. Just because you can maintain a higher level optimism during this awful stretch of losing doesn’t make you a better fan by any means…

                  2. When The Musics Over

                    This type of response is something I just can’t agree with. It’s like when my mom used to say to me growing up: if you don’t like it here and the rules I have, find another place to live. Yep, that’s what I was going to do. Move out when I was 12. Sure, I tried. I ran away for hours at a time, sometimes past dark. Then they’d freak out and canvas the neighborhood. But I was just following her very limited polarized set of rules.

                    The black and white ultimatum world is something I can’t get behind. Life is such a massive grey area, and it should be treated as such. Telling people they should live on one polar end or the other (like our stupid, inefficient political system), so often means you don’t truly hope to find the most efficient / optimal outcomes in life. It’s either this or that, take it or leave it. Absolute answers like that should really only apply to mathematics and related scientific fields where the rules and answers (often after huge amounts of research) are defined by forces we cannot control.

                  3. Brocktoon

                    “Only a hypocrite would call themselves a supporter of something they really believe is horrible.”

                    I think I’d call that being a fan.

                    You seem to confuse being critical with lack of support. Disagreeing with whoever happens to be president at a given time doesn’t mean you hate the US, it means you disagree with the direction said person is going.

                    Some of us are pretty damn annoyed that Tom Ricketts is robbing the Cubs blind and putting out an inferior product because of it. Does that mean I won’t be out there opening day? Does that mean I won’t spend an obscene amount of time watching the Cubs and talking about them with strangers online? Of course not, but it doesn’t mean I’m going to defend the abomination that has been the Ricketts ownership

                    1. Brocktoon

                      I’ll trust Forbes and Bloomberg, thanks for your concern.

                    2. Brocktoon

                      How about what Cubs sources have said about them being the most profitable team in baseball for the 2012 season. How about Crane Kenney saying they had the 5th highest revenues in baseball for 2013.

                      It doesn’t take time and thoughtfulness to note that the Cubs have cut payroll by 65 f’n million dollars over a 3 year period during a time of immense growth across the board for MLB teams.

                      It’s not Poor Tom Ricketts’s fault that the Cubs can’t afford a top 20 payroll in baseball. We just can’t compete with the booming Kansas City baseball market.

                    3. aaronb

                      Agreed,

                      I find it ridiculous that we could support a 145 million dollar payroll 5 years ago…But now we can’t even though there is an extra 25-50 million dollars flowing to the Cubs from the MLB central fund annually.

                    4. Brocktoon

                      What was that? The Cubs got intentionally bad for 3(maybe more?) seasons? Yes, I agree that brilliant business model has for some reason cost the Cubs revenue.

                      What exactly was it that happened between 2003 and 2014, because that’s the last year the Cubs had a payroll as low as this year’s embarrassment will carry.

                  4. brainiac

                    this is a very, very silly claim. i would actually argue that you’re rooting *against* the cubs when you support ownership and middle management over players and communities.

                    this is the most fascinating turn since the 2000s, the move to black/white for/against thinking regardless of context. take a side, any side, and then use it as a sticking point against your peers to claim superiority of affiliation. except that we’re not talking cubs vs cards. we’re talking white collar vs blue collar, management vs labor. they’re rich labor in this case, but the loyalty correlation is pretty clear.

              2. Jon

                When do we start measuring penis size?

              3. When The Musics Over

                I get being a fan of many people or things in life, however, call me guarded or cynical or whatever, but typically before I’m a loyal fan of anything that is relationship or trust driven, trust must be earned first through repeated actions.

                This applies to so many things in life: TV shows, movies, books, friends, cities, sports teams, restaurants, products etc, if you want long term and repeated loyalty from me, you have to prove to me that you’re worthy of this trust I’m putting in you (eg, spending my time, which is the most finite resource in my personal world, and money on being a loyal fan of your product or your personal product in the case of people).

                The Cubs have new ownership. So while the name on the product remains unchanged, those that control this product are not. I am still loyal to the team, however, until proven otherwise, I will remain skeptical of those that control this product.

                In terms of the Cubs and sports in general, atypical emotion driven loyalty, and the abuse of it is a very weird thing and something that is often preyed up / taken advantage of by ownership. How many products would you use or friends would you keep if they put out a purposefully shitty product or purposefully took advantage of you. Not many. You’d switch to a replacement product or find new friends. Now this is where sports teams have a very distinct advantage over other products / relationships. There are very few replacement products, so teams can abuse their fans. It’s not always explicit abuse, but it happens all the time.

          2. Patrick W.

            Well then, how did they earn your loyalty? What did they do that made you love them that their not doing now?

            1. When The Musics Over

              My dad took me to Cubs games when I was a small child. This created blind loyalty that defies the logical / rational loyalty trust relationship that governs adults. Once that was baked into me, it’s almost the trust / relationship for family that is so hard to undo, even in the face of abuse.

              Also, if you must know, my dad passed away when I was pretty young. He worked a ton, so we didn’t have tons of time together, therefore, the Cubs and our limited relationship with them is one of the few things I am able to still hold onto.

              1. Patrick W.

                I think it’s wonderful that you have that memory, and that legacy from your father.

                A lot of us have stories like that, I dare say most of us do. We were brought in by the intangibles. Your relationship with your father, mine with my grandmother, those are the things that trigger the sense memory that keeps us coming back. Because I know why I love the Cubs, I know why I’m loyal, I find it hard to criticize others for their loyalty to the ballpark, say. I find it difficult to fault somebody if they are overly optimistic, because I don’t know exactly what drives that.

                I have great respect for the commenter who will argue logical arguments with logical arguments, but I lose total respect for people who attack sentimentality as if it’s a bad thing. Your bond and mine were cemented for sentimental reasons. There are a ton of logical arguments about the way things are run, and those are great discussions. Arguing about a subjective optimism is just terrible.

                1. When The Musics Over

                  You are right. I need to do a better job at letting people be people and only worry about myself, my beliefs and how those two things interact with the world in general.

                  1. Patrick W.

                    I saw a license plate a couple of months ago that, no kidding, changed my point of view about things. It was a vanity plate that read: IBMEUBU

  8. Voice of Reason

    It’s easy to make fun of Olbermann or shoot holes at anything he says… BUT….

    his opinion that the Cubs are world’s worst in sports is probably universally thought by most. They haven’t won a World Series in over a hundred years for goodness sake. That right there makes them worthy of such connotation.

    I think the L.A. Clippers are world’s worst in sports. I would never say the Cubs, but that’s because I’m a big fan!

  9. Diehardthefirst

    He’s auditioning for Cubs channel to liven it up

  10. CubsFaninMS

    When reporting on politics, Olbermann was as inflammatory as Ann Coulter or Ed Schultz. He’s a weak attempt at being a “shock jock”. I hold what he says in low regard and I agree with the poster above that ESPN must’ve been desperate to have hired him back.

    1. BenRoethig

      Agreed. If you’re going to do it hard edged, I’d take Jim Rome. He has substance. Olbermann is “I’m mad at everybody since I keep getting fired since I’m a major d-bag”

      1. D-Rock

        +1

      2. Brocktoon

        Rome’s just as big a d-bag, but way less intelligent.

        1. YourResidentJag

          +1

    2. Cubbie in NC

      +2

  11. CubSTH60625

    Ironically said in front of a billion jumbo trons going off behind him as he said it.

    Also…maybe we should move Olberman to Rosemont?

    1. Voice of Reason

      I’ll bet we can get Olbermann on the cheap and flip him right before the trade deadline?

      He fits into the plan!

  12. Edwin

    “Double meat, sir, does not give you license to go on auto-pilot and text your friends about Hoobastank!”

  13. BlameHendry

    While I would love to move the Cubs after all the things this city has put them through, this guy is still right. Truth hurts, but it’s still truth. Wrigley Field IS keeping the Cubs alive. Right now, 90% of the attendance is only there to get drunk and see Wrigley, not to see the disgrace on the field. If they move right now… well then the only reason for most people to go is just to get drunk, and considering it’s like $8-10 for a beer at Wrigley, they could achieve that same goal somewhere else for much less of a cost. Their attendance would plummet without a good on-field product to show. The Cubs organization needs to be called out, I’m glad somebody is doing it. A little kick in the side might make you try harder, so maybe that’s what they need.

    1. mjhurdle

      “A little kick in the side might make you try harder”

      yep, the possibility of much greater revenues or the fame of being the owners/Front Office that bring a championship to the Cubs is just not enough.

      Sometimes you have to be called out by a uninformed shock jock (in the 6 months he has his show before he gets fired….again). THAT is what the team needs.

  14. Evolution

    Beware the guy who constantly needs to tell you that he’s the smartest one in the room.

    Whether Olbermann were Democrat or Republican…he would still be an annoying blowhard, and emblematic of all that is wrong with today’s news media.

    This diatribe about Wrigley is flatly ridiculous.

  15. blublud

    Its funny how someone becomes an ass when they disagree with opinions here. I also disagree with Olberman, but to call him an ass because of it is taking it quite far. His show on MSNBC was one of my favorite for a liberal, considering I’m more the conservative type. His show now is also pretty good. I don’t see him as an ass. I see him the same as I see Rush Limbaugh, Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, Glenn Beck, Rachel Meadows and even guys like a Richard Sherman, Muhammad Ali and several others. Guys who don’t believe everything they say, but they say it anyway because it gets them attention and makes them money. I guess you have to just take them for who they are. It just another form of entertainment.

    1. blublud

      Oh, I forgot Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity. Anderson Cooper is the only one you can trust.

    2. blublud

      You can add Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith also.

    3. mjhurdle

      While i respect these peoples ability to market themselves and make a good living, I have a hard time respecting the people themselves.

      These type of “entertainers” deliberately mislead people in order to heighten the effect of their statements, making them more intense or passionate. It is one thing to take a point of view and defend it. It is another thing to choose points of view based on the number of people it will resonate with, then either changing facts, or leaving important pieces out to make your point of view resonate the strongest it can.

      It is ‘TV Trolling’, and earns the same level of respect and credibility that any other form of trolling garners.

      1. blublud

        MJ, there is no such thing as an adult being mislead. If you are mislead, then its your own fault. Any person with any amount of common sense should these shows are entertainment designed to attract a certain demographic to increase ratings to make money from commercials. If anyone takes anything off of any of these shows as hard facts, then it the person that needs to be evaluated, not the show.

        1. mjhurdle

          I disagree completely.
          There are different levels of competency between adults. There are events that shape every single person’s life differently, making them stronger in some areas and weaker in others.
          To simply assume that the rest of the world operates at your own level is the height of arrogance.

          1. blublud

            Correct. I agree completely. That why I said the person being mislead needs to be evaluated.

            If my son become a drug addict, its either my fault for not teaching him right, or his fault for not listening to what I taught, but in no way is it the drug dealers fault, because he can only sale you what you are willing to buy.

            1. mjhurdle

              i would say responsibility lies with the dealer as well.
              with your logic, a young girl that just lost someone close to her and is in a state of emotional distress is the one to blame for someone coming along and taking advantage of her. After all, he was just offering something, it was her fault for accepting it.

              1. blublud

                Yep, I think it’s her fault 100%. If you are educated about something, a time like that is not going to make you try something you know is wrong unless you just want to. If you are not educated enough on the subject, its still not the other persons fault.

        2. hansman

          “MJ, there is no such thing as an adult being mislead.”

          There are sooooooooooooooooooooooo many cases that would prove this inaccurate and soooooooooooooooooooooooo many cases where it is a famous figure solely looking to personally gain on someone else’s ignorance. No human can begin to possibly have a hope of knowing enough about everything to not be misled in some area of life.

          Even just being skeptical about things doesn’t guarantee you can avoid being misled. Some issues (taxes, healthcare, the economy) are too complex for the average citizen to become enough of an expert to not have to rely on someone else (and even the experts have to rely on others).

          1. blublud

            Right, but whose fault is it that the person is has a certain level of ignorance. To expect all people to be honorable and not take advantage of others is “mislead” hope. Only way to avoid this is to educate yourself as much as possible and be skeptical of everything you see, hear, touch, smell, feel until its proven to be true, instead of believing it until proven false.

    4. Cizzle

      I believe he’s an ass because he doesn’t listen to other people’s point of views. He intentionally gives limited facts so that he can make straw man arguments, then go on rants about how stupid everyone who disagrees with him is.

      He actually might fit in well here.

    5. hansman

      “Its funny how someone becomes an ass when they disagree with opinions here.”

      I thought he was an ass before this.

      1. Boogens

        Agreed. I think you can also use this single example to point out his ass-ness. He didn’t do his homework on the issue and, either intentionally or not, left out significant details in order to slant his story. That’s makes it a simple determination for me.

    6. BT

      This isn’t the place for political arguments, so I’ll keep it to one side of the aisle, but there is a vast difference between what Olbermann does and what Maddow does. You are free to disagree with Maddow, but she is not a bomb thrower. Partisan as hell, but she’s methodical.

      1. blublud

        This is not a political debate. I like Maddow, but her first priority is to get ratings. Just like the rest, she’ll do or say whatever to get them.

        1. BT

          Understood. I’m saying, unlike most of the people quoted, almost none of her schtick is based on ad hominem attacks, and are backed up by research, reason and fact. She plays to a base, but she does it fairly.

  16. MichaelD

    “…he sounded like an SNL caricature of a talking head.”

    Ben Affleck did a funny send up of Olberman on SNL a few years ago. Of course it was basically just doing what Olberman does on his show.

    I would point out that the Cubs part doesn’t start until a third of the way through the video, but the Oklahoma City part is by far the most interesting. I hadn’t heard that story.

  17. clark addison

    Before he went national he was a talking head on the local news in LA. He gave the impression then that it was all about him and his opinion, not the sports news. He didn’t last long.

  18. OlderStyle

    Olbermann does seem to do a good job representing a supporting view for the rooftops. This is the thing that gets my goat. Why should the Cubs be beholden to that crappy but sentimental stadium where they’ve not won a championship? Because (according to Olbermann) it’s the ONLY redeeming aspect of this Sad Sack franchise?
    Take a hike, Olbermann.
    This only reinforces my support for, if it indeed becomes necesassry to leverage it, the Rickett’s threatening, and perhaps actually doing it, to move. I have always loved Wrigley, I saw my first baseball game there and it will be a cherished memory until I die. (Even though Greg Luzinski hit two homers and the Phillies won). I would love to see a championship celebrated there, but I love the Cubs even more. If moving out of Wrigley greatly enhances their ability to get the revenue that makes them contenders then I’m all for it.

  19. CubbieBubba

    ‘ the rooftops are great, Wrigley Field is perfect as is’ – blow-hard much? I must have missed that part, Brett.
    Like it or not, the CUBS have a contract with the Rooftops, and the CUBS applied for and received historical Landmark status. Nobody forced them to do either. Now that neither of those are convenient they’re going to complain and put up Ads everywhere and drag the team down with them == WORST

  20. Ill see you at Sluggers.

    I absolutely hate Keith Olbermann. He was too liberal for msnbc which is impossible, and is currently dating an 18 year old girl. He’s a total scumbag. He got kicked out of the liberal inner circle and ran back to the sports world for a job. And honestly I don’t even hate him for his hatred of Republicans anymore, I simply hate him for being a douchebag in general. For him to hate on the Cubs just further proves my point.

  21. VanceLawblawsLawBlog

    I don’t know. It’s hard for me to get worked up over this. His points are nonsensical and come from a purist standpoint of not wanting to see the changes coming to Wrigley Field, but at the same time, this is probably how people with only a cursory understanding of the situation see it, as well.
    Nobody comes off looking good in any of this. The rooftop owners are sanctimonious property owners clutching to a money grab that wouldn’t even exist if the Cubs weren’t there. The Cubs look like they are bullying a group of property owners. That’s the perception to people who aren’t close to the situation. There are no winners.
    What Olbermann says is meaningless, because if both sides had handles with with even a little bit of intelligence and/or class, then he wouldn’t have had anything to say in the first place.

    1. VanceLawblawsLawBlog

      *handled this with

  22. rabbit

    I understand the fans only come to see Wrigley field argument because in reality that’s probably mostly true, but you can tell he has no idea what has been going on the last few year since Rickets decided to renovate. They spent the last year trying to come to an agreement with the rooftops and now are using the only leverage they really have left to try and get this deal done. He obviously doesn’t understand the revenue streams and the importance of future free agent signings (from both the future available money and lure of the renovated dugouts/facilities). I think it is a pretty reasonable proposal to put a scoreboard in a professional baseball park. And how in the hell is putting a scoreboard for a baseball park the equivalent of putting an ED add on the pyramids. Worst analogy ever? I think so.

  23. kbr7171

    “I can’t help but wonder: was he always this blowhard-y…?”

    Yes

  24. itzscott

    I am no fan of Olbermann and have always found him to be pompous, arrogant and self-righteous. I don’t understand him making it personal by implying Ricketts, etc as being the worst persons. That implies being villainous…. and I’d bet he doesn’t know Ricketts, etc anymore than I do.

    Additionally, I am a Cub fan through and through and have supported ownership and all things Cubs since Wrigley’s ownership and the College of Coaches concept. I support Ricketts as well as Epstein & Hoyer now without much question.

    However, I have to admit that the Cubs historically have been one of the worst franchises in sports history, the most snake-bitten and consequently dysfunctional pretty much throughout my entire life.

    I don’t think anyone with a balanced perspective can refute that.

    So I think what Olbermann is saying is that the Cubs never could get anything right and now they can’t even get it right with the rooftops in spite of offering to pony up $500 mil to bring Wrigley into the modern world without city/state assistance.

    He can legitimately say the franchise is the worst, but choosing to say that the people are the worst pretty much destroys his validity.

  25. Big City Mick

    Olberman is most definitely a blow hard but there are worse out there. If I ever accidentally not turn the channel fast enough while he’s on, I think he actually has some clever opinions on most matters. I view his take on the Cubs situation as nothing more than a humorous narrative on the current renovation/rooftop dispute. It is quite comical that the Cubs would even feign at moving out of Wrigley especially considering their current 2014 W-L projections. He also has a point that if the Cubs were in Rosemount, the attendance would probably decrease considering the state of the MLB team both past and present.

  26. TTH

    Cut Keith some slack. If there is anything he would be an expert on, it’s being a bad person.

    1. mjhurdle

      ha! well played sir

  27. COWA

    Brett,
    Very well written take on Keith Olbermann. He’s always been an unaware, self important muck raker who demonstrates an embarrassing, & adolescent need for attention. It’s pretty uncomfortable to listen to a guy, who is, quite literally, the only person in the room who appreciates his cute & condescending cut & paste of the English language. After hearing his strained verbal contortions one is left with true pity. Some please put him out of his misery.

    1. brainiac

      i don’t have one opinion or another about olbermann, though he has our owners’ number. but note that muck raker is a major complement to a journalist – it means that they’re good at inciting reform by discovering and contextualizing new information. woodword and bernstein were muckrakers, for instance.

  28. Aisle303

    I quit watching ESPN a couple years ago, mainly because of their ridiculously lop sided coverage of football in comparison to baseball. I realize this is not completely the networks fault, people want football. This just shows how the average “sports fan” doesn’t care enough about baseball (or the cubs) to read the blogs or do the research outside of ESPN to understand that there’s more to the story.

  29. COWA

    Olbermann– When Arrogance meets Ignorance

  30. CubsFaninMS

    Let’s assess this whole situation separately.

    The Messenger: A blowhard, obnoxious and polarizing figure. For those of us complaining.. are we shooting the messenger? No, not when you know the messenger and his tendencies beforehand.

    The Message: Polarizing, but has basis in fact. We’ve not won a World Series in over 100 years, longest draught of any professional sports franchise. I agree that many sports fan may agree with the toned down, less polarizing version of Olbermann’s argument. Until we win a World Series, the Cubs franchise will be seen in this light despite our fondness of our team.

    The Intent: If the intent is to “get this front office off of its butt”, then this won’t work. They have a plan and, whether you agree with it or not, they’re sticking with it. They won’t be signing Nelson Cruz and trading three of the Big Four for David Price because of Olbermann’s heckling.

    1. TTH

      That wasn’t his intent. He’s actually a buddy of Theo’s. I just have to wonder if Tom’s father and brother had different political viewpoints. would Olbermann have done this little failed attempt at being clever? Probably not.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.