Visit my new Technology News website, TECHPopuli.

December 22, 2003

Sean has an explanation

SMcCarthy.com: Joe Namath's drunk interview on ESPN

Posted by jghiii at December 22, 2003 02:12 PM
Comments
Posted by: sherman on December 22, 2003 05:45 PM

Lousy site to link to, Jack. The guy expects you to download.

Posted by: Sean on December 22, 2003 06:04 PM

Thanks buddy for saying my site stinks, it's common courtesy so you donít hog all of the monthly bandwidth.

Posted by: jgh on December 22, 2003 06:06 PM

Actually I linked it that way exactly so that the reader would have a choice of downloading or not.

You get the point by reading his text. If you want to see the thing then you can download.

Posted by: Steve Garfield on December 22, 2003 07:10 PM

#1: Jack, Why do you say SMcCarthy has an explanation? I see no explanation there.

I don't think Joe Namath behaved that way to take the fan's minds off the Jets. So it's not an explanation.

I'd say it's pretty obvious why Joe acted that way. And I haven't even downloaded the clip.

#2: Sean, Sherman doesn't even have his own web site. So his comments about your site being 'lousy' are worthless. Worthless I say. Until the time that Sherman gets his own website his comments on sites being lousy or not are irrelevant to me!

#3: Sherman, start a web site.

Posted by: jgh on December 22, 2003 08:08 PM

The 'explanation' I was referring to, was a possible reason ("drunk") as to why Namath appeared impaired -- he did to me anyway -- when interviewed on the sidelines last night. That's all.

Second, I wouldn't characterize Sherm's response as "worthless". I would agree that it might not carry the same weight as from someone who had experience running a site, but an experienced observer has a valuable perspective too. But I agree that he should start his own weblog.

Finally, I didn't take his original comment as a slam at Sean. Sherm and I go way back, and I think he was dissing ME. It's what we do.

I'm sorry if Sean took offence. I only found Sean's site today. I liked what I saw, and I've added to my personal list to keep an eye on.

That's enough for now, I think.

Posted by: Sean on December 22, 2003 09:50 PM

OK, hopefully it wasn't a shot at my site. The way it was worded 'sounded' that way; sarcasm isn't portrayed easily in writing.

I see you are Sox fan Jack, what are your thoughts on the A-Rod situation? It seems like both owners want it (Hicks more so), and with the collateral damage that may occur with current players, Henry & Co. may have to force it through.

Posted by: Steve Garfield on December 22, 2003 10:16 PM

Namath Drunk!
Sherman Worthwhile!
Sherm Loves Sean!

Whew!

I'm glad that's all cleared up.

I guess my flames have now been doused. Ha Ha. I don't think I ever wrote a flame before. Maybe I just did. I'll try to write some less firey comments again on another post and see if they are recieved better.

Posted by: shermy on December 22, 2003 10:29 PM

Sorry. Didn't mean to insult. Was a quik comment made in haste. Sorry.

I'm spoiled -- on all the other blogs/message boards i go to, i never ran into this.

Sorry. Sorry. Sorry.

Damn, this is gonna get me on Santa's bad list, isn't it?

Posted by: Sherman on December 22, 2003 10:31 PM

By the way, I might point out this is rare -- no one ever responds to my responses. So if we want to talk postivie reinforcement, today's lesson is be an "MOM ALERT!!!!" asshole, and people pay attention to you.

Posted by: Steve Garfield on December 23, 2003 08:10 AM

Sherm,
I think you've taken away the wrong lesson.
--Steve

Posted by: beth on December 23, 2003 09:24 AM

Hey you guys leave Shermy alone.

Posted by: jgh on December 23, 2003 12:17 PM

By the way, I answered Sean's Q about the Red Sox in private email.

Posted by: sherman on December 23, 2003 01:07 PM

Beth has always been my favorite Hodgson.


Post a comment