Quick has written plenty of profile pieces on Blazers players. That you haven't taken the time to read them, and instead make a dumb post like this one to introduce a very informative article on the newest Blazer, speaks to your own ignorance. Seriously, are you on blood pressure meds? You're going to blow a gasket one of these days.
Quick writes for an audience of a few million in the NW; jlprk writes for an audience of hundreds on an anonymous message board. I can understand jlprk's frustrations and feelings of inadequacy, for he feels he has superior literary abilities compared to Jason Quick, but the obvious jealousy he has for more informed and more talented journalists (like Quick) makes me laugh. Which is one of the reasons I like the board so much. It's a never-ending source of laughter, both with posters, and at times, at posters.
I hate you for that link. I tried to read the first one, about Jay John. It reminded me of the crappy 1950s sports novels I used to read in the 7th grade. Only not as good or as interesting. Damn you. Did that crap really win an award? Really? I knew sports writers had a low bar, but I didn't realize it was buried in a trench.
You read me like a book. Every day I crazily stalk my hero jealously and fill notebooks copying him word for word. I think you can divide both your numbers by 10. If I depended upon writing for my livelihood, and every day I felt the pressure to put out, I'd routinely produce much more inspired stuff than that prize-winning garbage. (In journalism, you pretend to cover both sides.) Although I think I'd burn out after a year. To endure years, maybe you have to write at a college freshman level. And I admit that in journalism you don't get to edit and edit and rewrite like you do in other writing. (After a token effort to placate the other side, you return to your own opinion.) Still.....that stuff won awards? LORD HELP ME!!! HE'S BACK!!! (Stay this time.)
As long as they keep making episode of "hoarders" and "animal hoarding" theres not enough time in my day.
Props to Quick for pulling his head out of his ass and writing a good article. Wallace sounds like a good guy. I always worry about guys who's family doesnt come with them. Makes me wonder how focused and happy they'll be. But I totally understand why they do it when kids/school is involved. I'm sure Wallace's family will come visit regularly.
My wife and I actually watched something called Hog Wild last night. Apparently, there are packs of feral pigs wrecking havoc across the fruited plains, and there are people who make a living capturing these menaces to our domesticated way of life. They use traps, dogs, night vision, etc. to wrangle the hogs. It was quite the show, until my wife ruined it all by asking a simple question. "Why don't they just shoot the pigs?", she asked. Why don't they, dear, indeed.
To his credit, though, every team's beat writer got scooped on the trade deadline. The only guys that consistently broke trade news that we heard from on trade deadline day were Woj, Berger and Stein. Quick's downfalls are he believes too much in agents as his sources, and he maybe a little too emotionally invested sometimes. The guy is a good writer though when he wants to be. Those Behind the Locker Room pieces he did a few years ago were pretty memorable reads IMO.
No. In Hawaii, the kill them for pig roasts, and in Texas, the dog killed the gigantic boar. I guess shooting them makes for bad TV?
For all my complaints, I much prefer Quick's writing style and content to Canzano's self-aggrandizing smarmy bullshit. There, I said something positive.
Ha! I saw part of that a few weeks ago. And I asked the same question. They'd rather set a pack of vicious dogs on them, then boast about how dangerous and manly the whole operation is, than just take the varmints out.
