Can't people speak on the condition of anonymity? Doesn't that sort of thing happen all the time in the press?
Apparently only if you are slinging mud at CU FB players is that sort of thing allowed...
Can't people speak on the condition of anonymity? Doesn't that sort of thing happen all the time in the press?
Give me 53 years.
Can't people speak on the condition of anonymity? Doesn't that sort of thing happen all the time in the press?
yes that does happen all the time. I think Pissbombers comment about this supposed story is just a piss-bomb - nothing of substance. If you're gonig to say something, then say it. Multiple private businesses and families being tarnished because of an article by Ringo in the Daily Camera about a poor CU football team???...sure...whatever. It's either not really a big deal, and you and those involved are lionizing the entire ordeal - OR, I'm full of **** and there's some crazy conspiracy going on that none of us could ever had guessed. I may still be a piece of ****, but I would venture that it's also nothing of great worth.
Ringo is a horrible writer/journalist that lets his arrogance get in the way of being a professional. I can't stand most of his articles, and the manner he acts in this interview are childish. He is the CU football beat reporter for Boulder's newspaper, and he acts in his responses like a normal fan, venting out of frustration. It's been long known that Hawk has not been nice to Ringo, and the staff (generally speaking) does not care for him.
Sure the honesty might have felt "refreshing" to some of you, but to me, it just goes to speak volumes about Ringo's abilities as a journalist. As a professional working in his position, he had the obligation to be critical without being snide. He covers the team poorly as well. I get most of my Buffs information from Allbuffs, and I bet Ringo does too. Since you're probably reading this Kyle, grow up some or go back to school - you need both.
Look at the negativity 87toinfinity got himself into with the whole powder blue thing.
Yeah, that really sucked. I wonder how that dude is getting along these days????
yes that does happen all the time. I think Pissbombers comment about this supposed story is just a piss-bomb - nothing of substance. If you're gonig to say something, then say it. Multiple private businesses and families being tarnished because of an article by Ringo in the Daily Camera about a poor CU football team???...sure...whatever. It's either not really a big deal, and you and those involved are lionizing the entire ordeal - OR, I'm full of **** and there's some crazy conspiracy going on that none of us could ever had guessed. I may still be a piece of ****, but I would venture that it's also nothing of great worth.
I know I have said some negative things about what PB has posted in the past when he couldn't give details but I think you're out of line on this one. Until you put up the kind of money that PB and other major donors do, you don't get to judge them. I am sure that most of them have ties to the university that go beyond just sitting at games. Even if it's just the possibility that the administration would revoke your season tickets means it's not worth sticking your neck out just so Ringo can have a story.
Ringo wants to get the truth out, period! It does him no good to quote anonymous sources when he is trying to catch Benson/Bohn in a lie. (Which is exactly what has been happening) You can say whatever you want about me dyemeduke...I dont really care. But others may...so STFU! :smile2:
This is all about the "court of public perception."
All Ringo, or any Denver journalist for that matter, would have to say is, "I have personally spoken to donors who, on the condition of anonymity, have told me ______________."
I guess I understand the idea that "going public" could be bad for business, but I have a hard time believing it. I mean, seriously, just how much of a negative impact is a company/donor going to experience for saying "I was willing to donate $750,000 to help buy out Hawkins." Really? If someone can help me understand that a bit more, please do. I just don't see where there is some kind of tremendous public upswell and backlash for going public with the idea that you were willing to buy out a football coach.
All of this just reinforces for me that CU is really a pretty low budget operation, and the successes that McCartney had were nothing short of a miracle.
This is all about the "court of public perception."
All Ringo, or any Denver journalist for that matter, would have to say is, "I have personally spoken to donors who, on the condition of anonymity, have told me ______________."
I guess I understand the idea that "going public" could be bad for business, but I have a hard time believing it. I mean, seriously, just how much of a negative impact is a company/donor going to experience for saying "I was willing to donate $750,000 to help buy out Hawkins." Really? If someone can help me understand that a bit more, please do. I just don't see where there is some kind of tremendous public upswell and backlash for going public with the idea that you were willing to buy out a football coach.
All of this just reinforces for me that CU is really a pretty low budget operation, and the successes that McCartney had were nothing short of a miracle.
Ringo wants to get the truth out, period! It does him no good to quote anonymous sources when he is trying to catch Benson/Bohn in a lie. (Which is exactly what has been happening) You can say whatever you want about me dyemeduke...I dont really care. But others may...so STFU! :smile2:
If you own a business and are a big time donor, you might want to keep your name out of the press in anything that could cause your business to lose money.
Look at the negativity 87toinfinity got himself into with the whole powder blue thing.
There are more people out there than DBT that wants everyone to get behind hawk. They just are not the people that are on message boards.