09-18-2009, 03:46 PM
<!--quoteo(post=63636:date=Sep 18 2009, 02:38 PM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Sep 18 2009, 02:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=63635:date=Sep 18 2009, 02:35 PM:name=1060Ivy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (1060Ivy @ Sep 18 2009, 02:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'll take Sullivan over Phil Rogers any day of the week.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Rogers may be the greater fool, but I don't think there is a single sportswriter in world who I'd like to punch in the nads more than Sullivan.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
Remember that Scoop Jackson article written right after the Sox World Series? That was the worst piece of garbage I've ever read. Not only was the premise completely faulty, but the grammar was poor and the prose was clunky. It read like an 8th grader's blog post. Based on that article alone, he will always be the sportswriter I most want to give a nut-punching. Sullivan is a very close second, though.
Rogers may be the greater fool, but I don't think there is a single sportswriter in world who I'd like to punch in the nads more than Sullivan.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
Remember that Scoop Jackson article written right after the Sox World Series? That was the worst piece of garbage I've ever read. Not only was the premise completely faulty, but the grammar was poor and the prose was clunky. It read like an 8th grader's blog post. Based on that article alone, he will always be the sportswriter I most want to give a nut-punching. Sullivan is a very close second, though.