• News Ticker alerts

Voice of San Diego reports this morning (June 2) that sports columnist Tim Sullivan is out at the Union-Tribune. Sullivan confirmed his ouster to the online publication by twitter, although his past columns are still on the U-T website. This is almost certainly another case of propaganda triumphing over truth. Sullivan was not a boot-licking sports journalist. Throughout the controversy over the subsidizing of Petco Park, Sullivan took a balanced, realistic approach, as opposed to other sportswriters who were toadies for sports owners, and remain so.

Upon buying the U-T, "Papa Doug" Manchester and his sidekick John Lynch announced that the paper would be even more of a propaganda rag. The paper had to be cheerleaders for local businesses. Anyone covering the attempt at a second downtown sports scam — a massively subsidized Chargers stadium — would have to be in favor of it, and denounce any opponent as an obstructionist, declared Lynch. But Sullivan continued to cock an eyebrow at the idea, although he didn't come out against it. (What sportswriter could?) On May 27, Sullivan wrote a column about a local neurosurgeon who won't let his son play football because of possible brain injuries. I wondered at the time if that would be the end for Sullivan. (Incidentally, I don't know Sullivan, and I don't remember even having met him, although we were at the U-T at the same time.)

These insults to San Diego's intelligence have been piling up rapidly since Manchester and Lynch took over. If editor Jeff Light has any integrity whatsoever, he will resign.

  • News Ticker alerts

Comments

Gail Powell June 2, 2012 @ 8:42 a.m.

This is shameful! The U/T needs a measured sports voice more than ever and they go and can Tim Sullivan? The one that needs to be shipped to an Italian old age home is that sycophant with a pen Nick Canepa. Papa Doug is also removing all negative comments about Sullivan's "departure" in the comments section on the U/T website. Can we say brutal censorship?

1

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 9:32 a.m.

Yes, Tim Sullivan was a sportswriter who was not afraid to point out that 2 plus 2 did not equal 22, even though the establishment, team owners, and U-T brass claimed it was so. For this integrity he lost his job. It is indeed shameful. It is time for San Diegans to act. Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel June 2, 2012 @ 1:40 p.m.

yippee!!!

tell us how to do it kemosabee

0

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 2:03 p.m.

Easy, Nan: don't get your news from wholly unreliable sources. Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel June 2, 2012 @ 1:43 p.m.

None

except at the Reader sometimes...it's alive and well at many writers and bloggers pages here!!!

the Readers here are very lucky to get the unadulterated truth for the most part

0

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 3:10 p.m.

That is precisely what I am saying. Read a publication that gives you the true picture -- not one that specializes in propaganda. Best, Don Bauder

0

PeterHarris June 2, 2012 @ 9:07 a.m.

There is an assult on IQ taking place at the U-T. Tim Sullivan is an honest, clever, funny, insightful, and above all, professional sports columnist. The U-T's integrity is in a free-fall.

0

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 9:36 a.m.

I was talking yesterday to a former UT professional who was commenting on the honest book review that got killed. (This sordid tale is also on this website.) He said it was amazing that we look back at the Copley reign -- also satiated with propaganda -- as the "good old days." Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel June 2, 2012 @ 1:54 p.m.

None

just this would be welcome...let the reader choose their own conclusion without having their arm twisted by lies and half truths

0

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 2:06 p.m.

But people are fooled by the way stories are played -- say, on the front page of a newspaper, where Manchester placed a big package touting his downtown plans that included, of course, a massively subsidized Chargers stadium. Best, Don Bauder

0

David Dodd June 2, 2012 @ 12:40 p.m.

I found out yesterday in the press box at Petco before Tim tweeted it. Great writer, and I got to work along side of him a few times, I'm lucky to have watched him at work. He's also a lot nicer guy than I thought he would be after reading him for all of these years. He's talented and connected, no reason he won't bounce right back on his feet.

0

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 2:07 p.m.

I certainly hope Sullivan bounces right back, but it's not easy getting a media job these days. Best, Don Bauder

0

OBSurfer June 2, 2012 @ 2:27 p.m.

So the U-T shows Sullivan the door the same week they have the worthless clown Scott Kaplan anchor their new TV show? Words fail. I don't agree with Don on everything, but he's spot on about Tim. In Cincinnati he refused to worship Pete Rose and took all sorts of hell for it. His did his job, did it very well, and for doing so was let go. It's enough to make one wish for the days of no-show David Copley.

0

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 3:15 p.m.

I've heard that the new TV show is pretty funny, but people are laughing AT it, not with it. What we are seeing is a newspaper that has been dumbed-down and deliberately made a propaganda organ. I wouldn't expect much from the TV show, either. Best, Don Bauder

0

monaghan June 2, 2012 @ 3:23 p.m.

Thank you, OBSurfer, for providing the name of the nincompoop anchor of UT-TV. I looked at this on its first day around 8 a.m. at the behest of a friend and was ready for a drink forthwith.

Kaplan, along with Mr. Billy-Ray Kimberley Hunt and some blonde female, talked to U-T political reporter Craig Gustafson about the hotly-contested and important mayoral race. First question to a stunned Gustafson: "Who are you voting for?"Days before this memorable debut, the U-T's mad hotelier-managers had been using estimable U-T writer Peter Rowe to flog microbrewskis on "weekend" segments.

Sullivan may be out of work but hey, there really are worse things.

0

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 4:07 p.m.

I am hardly surprised that the anchor on that show had no idea that reporters covering a race should not say which candidate they prefer. A columnist or editorial writer is free to express his/her opinion, but not a reporter. Remember, Lynch spent his career in radio, mostly sports talk radio, and he was not all that successful. Before he bought the paper, Manchester had not been in the media, and generally would not talk with the media -- certainly not me anyway. In all the years I tried to get him to respond to questions, I never got a call-back. Best, Don Bauder

0

dmerz70 June 2, 2012 @ 6:38 p.m.

Don, do you know why Sullivan was fired? I liked him, too, but I haven't heard anything anywhere and I don't buy that they fired him for the neurosurgeon story. If you know something, please share.

Maybe his contract was up and he wanted too much money. Maybe he told J Lynch to go F himself. Who knows? If the U-T didn't want a story published, they would have killed it like the alleged book review you mentioned. Running it and then firing him for it makes no sense...

0

dmerz70 June 2, 2012 @ 6:41 p.m.

Or maybe Acee was much cheaper and the paper didn't need three sports columnists...

0

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 8:25 p.m.

Acee almost certainly would have been cheaper. On the short run, that is. The paper's bottom line will probably suffer long term as a result of Sullivan's firing. But I don't think anybody in management is capable of thinking long term, from what I have observed. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 8:22 p.m.

As I have said, I believe he got fired because he was not a toady to the big money, jockstrap-worshipping establishment -- including the new U-T owner -- in San Diego. As long as he had the column, he wrote skeptically about the ballpark and stadium swindles, although he did not oppose them. Then when he wrote a couple of columns suggesting how concussion-related brain injuries could seriously harm football, his time was up, since Manchester/Lynch consider a new football stadium the most important project on the San Diego horizon. Another possible factor: Sullivan was said to have a high salary -- rumored to be $140,000. But I don't think that was it. He was just too independent-minded for the U-T brass, who put a new Chargers stadium ahead of education, infrastructure, maintenance, City financial stability, etc. Best, Don Bauder

0

David Dodd June 2, 2012 @ 11:42 p.m.

They ran Sullivan out of Cincinnati because he wouldn't worship Pete Rose. That should be a tip-off as to the type of journalist that Sullivan is. A friend of mine in the radio business has been contacted by many of the athletes and other types of sports figures that Sullivan has interviewed over the years to related their disgust over what the U-T has done. Sullivan did not always treat them gently, but he certainly treated them fairly.

0

TimSullivan June 4, 2012 @ 11:47 a.m.

For the record, I was not run out of Cincinnati. I left at the end of the only bidding war of my career, 13 years after Pete Rose was banned from baseball. The Enquirer improved its offer twice to keep me, but I chose to try something new.

0

David Dodd June 4, 2012 @ 3:36 p.m.

I stand corrected. Tim, I hope you catch on locally somewhere, I thoroughly enjoyed your presence in the clubhouse, dugout, and press box, I learned a lot just watching you do your thing. Thanks for that.

0

Don Bauder June 4, 2012 @ 4:32 p.m.

I have heard that Tim has already heard from 4 or 5 possible employers, but I don't know that any were local. (I did not hear that from Tim.) Best, Don Bauder

0

David Dodd June 4, 2012 @ 4:41 p.m.

I have heard the same. He's a great writer, I've criticized him for using BIG words, tongue-in-cheek, us sports fans wake up, hungover, we can't handle big words that early in the morning. He'll work wherever he wants to, question is what they'll pay him in this down market for writers.

0

Don Bauder June 4, 2012 @ 4:30 p.m.

Good to hear from you, Tim. I just posted an item about your explanation of the whole matter that you gave to The Sherman Report. I can say that in my almost 50 years of business journalism, there was never a bidding war for my services. In fact, most of the time I was walking on eggs for having said truthful things about business executives. Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel June 3, 2012 @ 12:16 p.m.

Don...did anyone ever hear what was decided by family about Junior Seau brain...was it donated to the concussion study at Boston University???

0

nan shartel June 3, 2012 @ 5:24 p.m.

i guess u don't know....

Don...did anyone ever hear what was decided by family about Junior Seau brain...was it donated to the concussion study at Boston University???

0

Don Bauder June 3, 2012 @ 11:02 p.m.

I have been watching to get information on that and I do not know. USA Today reported in a well-researched article that he was having bad insomnia -- often a sign of CTE. Hopefully, that will motivate his family to donate the brain. Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel June 4, 2012 @ 11:11 a.m.

so as of yet it hasn't been donated i guess...they may have buried it with him and it will never be donated..

i think there's so much about the truth of the brain donation decision that will never be revealed...and the brains of the interested living will soon forget the whole thing

0

Don Bauder June 4, 2012 @ 4:34 p.m.

If his brain is NOT donated, there will be much discussion about the decision, and who influenced it. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 5, 2012 @ 5:47 a.m.

I hope to follow it. Best, Don Bauder

0

tomjohnston June 4, 2012 @ 6:50 p.m.

You are assuming that if it isn't donated that it was because pressure was brought to bear or money exchanged hands. Personally, I would think a member of Seau's family or his close friends would be greatly offended by someone in your position saying it was pressure from someone that influenced them or even worse that they accepted money to not donate this brain and try to find out what really may have been the cause. That seems to be a pretty irresponsible thing t even hint at let alone come right out and say. But that's just my opinion and the way I think. Always tryin' to be the rebel in the room. LOL

0

nan shartel June 5, 2012 @ 1:32 a.m.

pure speculation on ur part tomjohnston...i'm simply interested in how it all turned out...as of now the situation is up in the air as far as the public is concerned

if however the family chooses not to give out any more information that is of course their right

0

Don Bauder June 5, 2012 @ 5:53 a.m.

As I said, Johnston begins with a faulty premise. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder June 5, 2012 @ 5:51 a.m.

The trouble with your assertion is a faulty premise. You say I said that if the brain isn't donated that pressure was brought to bear or money exchanged hands. But I did not say that. I said that if the brain is not donated, there will be much discussion of the decision and who influenced it. And I believe there will be. Best, Don Bauder

0

tomjohnston June 5, 2012 @ 11:26 a.m.

If that's the case, the my apologies. However, I do seem to remember you saying something to the affect that when you heard of Seau's suicide, one of the first things you thought of was the possibility that the NFL would try to make sure his brain was not examined. Combined with you saying that you hope that monetary interests don't conspire to impede or cover up the results of any tests that may occur, your admitted cynicism towards the NFL and your feeling that even though it would be risky for the NFL to try such a thing,they are used to taking risks, perhaps I incorrectly extrapolated that to mean if there is no donation and subsequent examination of the brain, that you would be of the opinion that the NFL was involved. If I over thought the situation and that is not the case, then that's my bad. Perhaps it's just my cynicism towards someone who says one of his first thought upon learning of Seau's suicide, was the possibility that the NFL would try to make sure his brain was not examined. My own thoughts were entirely different. I can clearly remember when my wife first told me Seau had died, she didn't mention suicide. My first thought was that it was either a traffic accident or something that happened while he was surfing. When she said it was suicide, my next thought was to wonder if it was somehow connected to when he drove off the cliff in 2010. Even when we heard that he shot himself in the chest, I didn't think CTE. My comment was at least he didn't do a Kurt Cobain and literally blow most of his head off, sparing a loved one from having to see that. Maybe I just have a different thought process than other people do. Not better, just different. Just my opinion. Opinions vary.

0

nan shartel June 5, 2012 @ 11:44 a.m.

tomjohnston ur thoughts concerning the events are as valid as anyones..they are as valid as Don's...but Don wasn't aggressive with u about ur opinions and u were aggressive with him because u didn't agree that his ideas had validity

Don has many years...(30+) as an investigative reporter...he has much background to allow him to be skeptical about such things

he carefully guarded his words and coached them as possibilities only...he gave a wide variety of possibilities in fact....personally i hope the more sensational possibilities turn out to be a tempest in a teacup...but Don could also be right!!!!

0

tomjohnston June 5, 2012 @ 7:25 p.m.

Nan, i wasn't being "aggressive" with Don Bauder's ideas.and it has nothing to do with validity of anyone's thought, because that's all they are just thoughts, or opinions if you prefer, with no factual basis behind them. I asked him on his thread re Seau's suicide why was it that one of his first thoughts was that the NFL would try to make sure his brain was not examined. He never really provided a direct answer other than admitting his cynicism towards the NFL, which is really not an answer at all. With his comments about the NFL, the monetary interest they and others have in NOT having test results revealed and his reference to the NFL being willing to take such a risk , to me it was, and still is, a logical assumption that when he refers to a discussion of who may have influenced a decision to not have the brain examined, should it end up that way, that he is referring to the NFL. Based on his previous statements, I don't consider that the faulty premise that he claims it is. If he wants to say he is not referring to the NFL, he can do that. I just don't happen to believe him. Everyone has their own opinions based on their own biases and what we do here is share them. Even though Don Bauder has those 30+ yrs as an investigative, he has his biases also. To me the whole question in my comments is not about who is right. Without being insensitive, dead is dead. My question simply remains why would the likelyhood of the NFL's interference in the investigation into the possible contributing factor into Seau's suicide be one of the first thoughts Don,or any other journalist would have. To me that's just putting the bias right out in front from the start and that's not what I used to expect when Reading a story written by someone of Don Bauder's stature. Maybe it's just my point of view, but I find it disappointing. And as an fyi Nan, I am pretty familiar with Don Bauder's background as I have been coming down to SD for a very, very long time. And I'm pretty sure my very first comment ever on the Reader website was on one of his stories, probably about Petco since that was the hot topic of the time, and I know it was on 12-8-2003.

0

Don Bauder June 2, 2012 @ 8:32 p.m.

WAS IT A HOAX? OR NOT? UT staff members today (June 2) got a purported message from John Lynch, chief executive officer. Said the alleged note, "Writers will be required to write an essay about why a new Chargers Stadium would invigorate the community and improve America's Finest City. We will select seven winners from the submissions and print one each day for a week on the front page of the newspaper." And authors would read them on the UT's new TV show.

Then, staffers apparently got a message from Jeff Light, editor. It said, "This message was not sent by John [Lynch]. It is not the kind of thing we would ever do at the U-T. I.T. is trying to track the source now. Please let everyone know that this is just a mean prank intended to embarrass the company."

Of course, whether or not the letter was a hoax, the company is doing quite a job embarrassing itself. Best, Don Bauder

0

dwbat June 3, 2012 @ 11:15 a.m.

I've noticed how the U-T sometimes runs stories that previously appeared in the READER. I know of two of my stories that scooped the U-T, and I'm sure Don and the rest have had many.

0

Don Bauder June 3, 2012 @ 3:08 p.m.

Oh yes, media in town almost never give the Reader credit for breaking stories. An egregious case was the UCAN story, in which the UT told two whoppers. On two occasions, the reporter covering that story stated that the press had not begun covering it until the watchdog organization filed for dissolution early this year. But I had been covering it intensely (two columns, numerous blogs) beginning in July of 2011, and any reporter doing a modicum of research would have picked that up. But we expect this. Best, Don Bauder

0

BobDorn June 3, 2012 @ 11:26 a.m.

Manchester is a foreigner to newspapers; he sees them as part of Big Capital, and the traditional part print news has played in the billionaire’s world is public relations. You don’t do journalism if you’re Big Capital, you buy it. Now that he’s bought the newspaper he doesn’t have to buy it again. I think this is a concept a bit beyond (below?) that of Murdoch, who only owned newspapers and television stations, or, for that matter, the old Copley regime, which was an out an out reign of restorationist terror. Any journalist who worked at the old Copley U-T knew that he/she had a chance of saving a good story from the waste can either because the editors’ heads didn’t move swiftly enough to overcome arguments, or sometimes because even Copley’s editors had been journalists before and recognized a real story when they saw it, though it might scorch the toes of the numerous elites in town. What Jeff Light is making clear is A.J. Liebling's old dicta: "The free press belongs to the man who owns it."

0

Don Bauder June 3, 2012 @ 3:16 p.m.

Good point on Light. What he has to consider is that the national press is now watching Manchester's bumptious actions at the UT. (I've already had a call from a national pub on the Sullivan firing.) If Light continues to be an enabler, he might not be able to get another job. Best, Don Bauder

0

gekko June 3, 2012 @ 6:57 p.m.

Don,

I agree with dmerz70's previous comment. Why would you run the column if you don't agree with it to the point that you would fire the columnist? Tim Sullivan was the best sportswriter at the UT. Sullivan's columns were well researched. Unlike John Sinor's of yesteryear. I've mentioned this before, but this is another example of what can happen with no union (Newspaper Guild). If the Guild was still around, Tom Blair and Tim Sullivan could not be fired on the spot for no legitamate reason. If Clarence Darrow was still alive he would take on the UT.

0

Don Bauder June 3, 2012 @ 11:05 p.m.

But the guild lost the election. Top management (this was under Copley) sold employees a bill of goods. When the massive pogroms came a few years later, many employees wished they had not voted the guild out, although I doubt the guild could have saved many, if any, jobs. Best, Don Bauder

0

ReggieBoy June 3, 2012 @ 8:52 p.m.

Interesting how Mr. Lynch will support a new stadium and at the same time support the mayoral candidate that is against any taxes and basically anti government. Seems to remind me of the Chargers owner Dean Spanos who also wants to have the public support him with public money and at the same time was endorsing Rick Perry. Cut public money for everyone except for the wealthy, have these clowns have no shame.

0

Don Bauder June 3, 2012 @ 11:09 p.m.

Oh yes, that is one of the great contradictions all around the U.S. Purported conservatives buy the Grover Norquist line that government must be shrunk down to nothing -- until they want a massive government handout, or a law that limits labor unions, or a fat tax break. It's true on the national and local levels. Best, Don Bauder

0

gekko June 4, 2012 @ 6:44 a.m.

Don,

Who else at the UT is on thin ice? I'm sure you are glad that you didn't have work under the present management. I know you butted heads with the Copley management.

0

Don Bauder June 4, 2012 @ 8:16 a.m.

I would think anybody who is writing or speaking independently at the UT is on thin ice. A political writer who dares suggest that DeMaio isn't godlike, or a columnist or cartoonist who points out that Mitt Romney has flaws (such as low credibility), could go to the guillotine without warning.

As to my experiences at the U-T: oh yes, Herb Klein was trying to get me fired for years. Helen Copley stood by me, however, and then after she became essentially unconscious in her illness, the management still didn't act, because I had a following among a certain number of people who were disgusted with the Copley propaganda line. Actually, I was on thin ice long before the stadium/ballpark scams came up. The top brass at both the U-T and at corporate headquarters in La Jolla wanted puff coverage of local business. I insisted that we must have balanced business coverage. Many local executives complained to the brass about such coverage. They wanted home-town refereeing, and so did U-T leadership. Copley management slammed me not only for what I was writing, but for my sticking up for reporters who were writing the truth about local business. In the end, I was not fired. I kept my plans to retire secret. Had I even suggested I was thinking of retiring, I would have been out the door immediately. Best, Don Bauder

0

HellcatCopley June 4, 2012 @ 10:11 a.m.

Under the Copley regime there was a general aversion to firing anyone, especially without just cause. The Copleys did not want wrongful termination suits filed. Those suits ask for punitive damages which call for opening the company's books to see the finances. And that was considered the ultimate no-no. Unbridled firings also lay the groundwork for labor union fomenting, another no-no.

That said, the circulation and marketing departments maintained a steady drumbeat to replace columnists that research showed no one was reading -- Neil Morgan, Don Freeman and Diane Bell come immediately to mind. When Morgan was tossed overboard it was not then-editor Karin Winner who made the call. That came from higher-ups in La Jolla. Winner was ordered to wield the hatchet on him, though.

0

Don Bauder June 4, 2012 @ 12:32 p.m.

I did not know that La Jolla brass ordered the firing of Morgan. David Copley would have had to concur. He was CEO, although Chuck Patrick was de facto CEO. Since Neil had been so close to Helen, his firing must have been difficult for David, even though David probably stayed in the background. As you recall, the firing was handled abysmally, Neil hired a lawyer and walked away with a bundle. Best, Don Bauder

0

gekko June 4, 2012 @ 9:23 p.m.

Don,

I thought Neil Morgan's firing was because of something he said that was supposed to be kept secret. That's why David went along with the firing. I'm sure you know what I am talking about, but I don't want to go into detail.

0

Don Bauder June 5, 2012 @ 5:59 a.m.

Please send me an email at don.bauder@mac.com and tell me what Neil allegedly said that was supposed to be kept secret. I faintly remember hearing such a story, but do not remember the details -- either what he purportedly uttered, or whom it offended. Best, Don Bauder

0

Psycholizard June 4, 2012 @ 10:35 a.m.

The truth will set you free, of your employer. Mr. Sullivan has won our respect, and lost his job. There is a book in the concussion story, and one in the UT disaster. He can put "fired from the UT" on the cover, and that will help sales.

0

Don Bauder June 4, 2012 @ 12:35 p.m.

The national media press is already zeroing in on the Sullivan firing. That might help book sales. I agree the concussion-related CTE story must be told in detail. It is one that has enormous societal overtones. Best, Don Bauder

0

Psycholizard June 4, 2012 @ 8:18 p.m.

The pads, helmets and cleats aren't safe, and cause injury, but there seems to be a code of silence that good journalism could break. If Mr. Sullivan has examined this I applaud him. Now that he has left the UT I might read him also.

0

Don Bauder June 5, 2012 @ 6:01 a.m.

Yes, there is a code of omerta about the concussion-related injuries, and also about other injuries suffered by players, and how the league abandons them in their retirement. Best, Don Bauder

0

Psycholizard June 5, 2012 @ 11:07 a.m.

The scandal goes beyond the NFL, ten year olds play football. The sport can be reformed, and made stronger and better. This was done a hundred years ago, and no one misses the flying wedge. For parents of risk takers, a football remains a safer gift than the car keys, but football could use improved rules and equipment, like seat belts and airbags.

Football could use a compelling journalist/advocate like Ralph Nader once was for the Auto industry. Sometimes blowhards save lives.

0

Don Bauder June 5, 2012 @ 2:12 p.m.

Oh yes, Pop Warner kids and other grade schoolers play football. It's huge in high schools and colleges. And all may have problems getting insurance as more comes out about concussion risks. I am not sure that better equipment will solve the CTE problem, although it may quiet public wrath for a couple of decades. Best, Don Bauder

0

Psycholizard June 6, 2012 @ 1:38 a.m.

The helmets and pads should be soft on the outside, to protect the ball carrier. Present day equipment is designed to protect only the wearer, and come as close to injuring the opponents as the rules allow. The game might never be safe, but good engineering could certainly make it safer.

0

Don Bauder June 6, 2012 @ 6:20 a.m.

We should welcome suggestions such as yours to make the game safer. The problem is that most of the fans enjoy the violence of football. Just listen to announcers exulting about "great hits" and "bone-crushing tackles." As one who watches football, I can say that I think we men, in particular, are vicariously reveling in the carnage. There is a reason why men commit more than 90% of violent crimes. Evolution brought us to this sorry state. Best, Don Bauder

0

Psycholizard June 6, 2012 @ 11:11 a.m.

Hitting is central to football, and danger is part of the thrill, but that doesn't mean the game can't be made safer. The game now is like boxing with brass knuckles, only the ball carrier doesn't get to hit back. It seems almost cowardly. Rugby presents a more brutal spectacle, but may in fact be safer.

0

Don Bauder June 6, 2012 @ noon

I faintly recall seeing an interesting article saying just what you say: rugby may be more brutal, but for some reason it may be safer. Best, Don Bauder

0

GB1 June 25, 2012 @ 12:48 p.m.

I was wondering what happened to Tim Sullivan's column. I guess someone in the new UT management hasn't forgotten his article calling Rush Limbaugh unfit to own an NFL team a few years back.

UT, you are really starting to suck. I already know three long time readers who have canceled their subscriptions.

0

Sign in to comment