4/17/07: Attracting Angels

[BuffloSoldier]

Angel free to agree US transfer--BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/a/aston_villa/6563363.stm)

Crew mum on report of Schelotto signing--Columbus Dispatch (http://www.dispatch.com/dispatch/content/sports/stories/2007/04/17/crew17.ART_ART_04-17-07_E7_T96DIQ5.html)

Defense Not Up to Form For United--Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/16/AR2007041601770.html)

De Rosario frustrated his wallet's not feeling love--Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/soc/4721323.html)

Toronto stadium's new turf defended--Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070417.BMOFIELD17/TPStory/Sports)

Ex-Cap coach aims to win Beckham friendly--Vancouver Sun (http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/sports/story.html?id=edae677e-b95c-43a2-8d17-d22cd15697e8)

S.J. support for plan to pay for stadium--San Jose Mercury News (http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_5684951)

Rule designed for attraction--Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/sports/articles/2007/04/17/rule_designed_for_attraction)

Rapids owner deals should benefit MLS--Daily Breeze (http://www.dailybreeze.com/sports/articles/7059227.html)

City Releases Report on Stadium--Daily Spartan (http://media.www.thespartandaily.com/media/storage/paper852/news/2007/04/17/News/City-Releases.Report.On.Stadium-2845446.shtml)

[seahawkdad]

Looks like the San Jose Mercury News has adopted the same unbalanced editorial stance that RSL suffered from: not putting all the facts out.

Truth is that the 'soccer' stadium is also to be a football stadium for SJSU.

That would get in the way of ushing the idea that this is yet another sweet deal for a developer. No mention of what the university gets out of it, wouldn't it?

Must be driving Quakes' supporters nuts.

Interestingly, somehow the University newspaper understands this:

A new combined soccer and football stadium at San Jose State University's south campus would not use any city or student money to be built, according to a report released yesterday by the city.

Maybe one loses one's understanding of what journalism is about once the degree is earned and a 'real' newspaper job is landed.

[RSwenson]

Maybe one loses one's understanding of what journalism is about once the degree is earned and a 'real' newspaper job is landed.
The "job" of journalism these days is "selling papers" and "selling advertising"... the spectacular and the scandal sell papers and, in many cases, one only has to look at the major advertisers in the paper to know who is going to get favorable treatment... the claim that someone is doing something "shady" can be sold to anyone who feels that they "aren't getting what they deserve" (which is a large percentage of the population)... it is tragic what has happened to the print news media...


rand

[texgator]

Genius title today, Buffalo.

[helmet]

Looks like the San Jose Mercury News has adopted the same unbalanced editorial stance that RSL suffered from: not putting all the facts out.

....

Must be driving Quakes' supporters nuts.

Interestingly, somehow the University newspaper understands this:



...

Bingo. Wolff was quoted last year as saying that if there was cure for cancer developed somebody in California would oppose it. The Mercury News is proving this to be true.

There is a subtext to the Mercury news position which is the new Mayor's platform on "open government". The last administration - with whom AEG had a tough time dealing with - was not very forthcoming on anything. Hence Mayor Reed's open government position. But there is no need for disclosure, because as you can see from the article - there is no deal done yet. So it is discussion about nothing, and disclosure of nothing. The Mercury has been pasted recently on local radio for trying to create controversy for the sake of it. All they are doing is further proving there irrelevance. Something they should try to avoid given the number of options out there, including the well written and balanced piece by the Spartan Daily Journal.

[zeusbrowne]

...Although the stadium would require no direct public subsidy - and therefore would avoid the city ordinance that requires voter approval for spending on professional sports facilities - some observers believe a deal would end up costing the city. The city would have to provide public services, such as police and fire protection, to new homes on land that the city had previously reserved for industry and retail uses, which generate more tax revenue than homes.

"It's asking taxpayers to contribute," said Chris Roberts, who lives near the Edenvale property that Wolff has targeted. "That's 74 acres they can't count on to produce revenue down the line."

So basically you're saying that no matter how sweet the deal, you intend to find a way to cmplain about it.

I'd really like to know just how leadingly the question "Chris Roberts" answered was phrased.

Was it, "how do you feel about the stadium proposal?" or "how do you feel about the shrinkage of the SJ tax base as 74 acres are re-zoned from commercial to residential?"

My follow up questions for the reporter would be: "So, do you feel the tax revenue from a free new stadium is better than the current nothing on the land?" Now, my 2 1/2 year-old daughter has figured out this questioning tactic and has taken to insisting that she would in fact prefer a time out to this bite of food so I'd follow up the inevitable insistently contrarian answer with, "You're saying you'd prefer a strip mall?" (She'd say yes, but as I said, she's 2 1/2 and doesn't know what a strip mall is).

Truly unbelievably slanted reporting. Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face. It's like the guy who won the lottery but was pissed off that he had to give half to his recent ex-wife. I mean, put it in perspective, would you rather have nothing, just so you don't have to give your ex anything, or would you try to find peace with the situation that puts you up $7-8mil?

[dredgfan]

So basically you're saying that no matter how sweet the deal, you intend to find a way to cmplain about it.

I'd really like to know just how leadingly the question "Chris Roberts" answered was phrased.

Was it, "how do you feel about the stadium proposal?" or "how do you feel about the shrinkage of the SJ tax base as 74 acres are re-zoned from commercial to residential?"

My follow up questions for the reporter would be: "So, do you feel the tax revenue from a free new stadium is better than the current nothing on the land?" Now, my 2 1/2 year-old daughter has figured out this questioning tactic and has taken to insisting that she would in fact prefer a time out to this bite of food so I'd follow up the inevitable insistently contrarian answer with, "You're saying you'd prefer a strip mall?" (She'd say yes, but as I said, she's 2 1/2 and doesn't know what a strip mall is).

Truly unbelievably slanted reporting. Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face. It's like the guy who won the lottery but was pissed off that he had to give half to his recent ex-wife. I mean, put it in perspective, would you rather have nothing, just so you don't have to give your ex anything, or would you try to find peace with the situation that puts you up $7-8mil?

F*CK that woman!

but great title. I can only hope the Crew get that Argie and De-Ro at least stays in MLS.