Buc wrote: I am 12 minutes behind your post SouthernDawg . . . . Working on this post prior to reading your efforts.
www.ajc.com/sports/college-football/the-...VlViNZNjnicxcwM8ZvK/
Reading the article above, come to a couple of conclusions that I made some time back. First off, this particular beat reporter was all about Mark Richt after the firing. Actually one of the leaders of the “Bleeding Hearts Club”. Nothing new comes from the article, and quite frankly there are some differing offerings as to the way the final outcome came down. The release of Richt.
On our board recently it was mentioned that Thomas Davis and others had a serious involvement in the way our program was being “mishandled”.
McGarity made the decision to release Richt by himself . . . . BS.
This could go on forever, not surprised to see the “click gang” making a 180 degree move.
As someone who bemoans modern "journalism," I'm always skeptical of a piece using "anonymous sources." I don't like it, nor do I trust it. Anyone can be "anonymous" and that "anonymous" person can say whatever fits the narrative of the piece. Conversations and comments rarely make for authentic journalism but yet, in our modern society, conversations and hushed tone comments now pass off as journalistic integrity. Whether Pouty's sources actually said that or not will never be known. Do I have a hard time believing those type of conversations were had? No, but I also have no way to corroborate it, so as far as I'm concerned, that piece could have been had between two UGA fans at any bar over drinks in Athens and those were the anonymous sources.
Do I think the article was necessary? No. Just let it die already. And I know some of you may say "but SD, you've beat the dead horse on here too." Yeah and if I do, I
always preface my statements to that effect with a disclaimer saying "I realize this is beating a dead horse" and/or "at the risk of beating the dead horse." Go back and check. And if I do, it's because its a necessary point to bring up to contrast this staff with the former.
But what's really disgusting and I'm telling you right now that this
is going to happen...If we win the natty tomorrow night, prepare yourselves for the articles from the same Pouty about Kirby winning it with Richt's players. This was really Richt's team, get it? Kirby really didn't win it with his players, so somehow, this isn't as big of a championship for Kirby as it is for Richt. Trust me. This will happen. I saw the same thing happen with Jon Gruden in 2003 winning the Super Bowl and that narrative played out to a T - this was really Dungy's team, Dungy's players, and Gruden didn't build the team himself. So let's discredit Gruden because all he had to do was show up and win a Super Bowl.
Pouty is an opportunistic journalist to the nth degree. He sets his journalistic sails in whatever direction the popular winds of the sports day blow. I'm not saying everything he writes is bad, nor do I have any personal dislike for the man. I tend to be very sterile and objective about journalism and journalists these days. But I can smell this one coming a mile away.