if it was a anonymous source they would say that, in fact, they did in the article multiple times. A team spokesman is a different citation.
Again, I saw a report by Rich Cimini last month that has exact same statement as the Athletic report attributed to "one source who attended the meeting". https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...owner-proposed-benching-aaron-rodgers-sept-30 "One source, who attended the meeting, indicated that it was "said in jest in a provocative nature."" From recent athletic report: "a Jets spokesperson said the owner was “being provocative. He made the statement in jest to see how it would be handled.”" It's the same guy, look at the articles, same statement. Rich says One source, who attended the meeting. The Athletic refers to the same guy as "a Jets spokesperson" Which one is it? Who is full of shit, Rich or the Athletic? Because one is, and I don't think it is Rich.
I don't either. I do hope, however, that the onslaught of bad press that just seems to be coming weekly at this point will embarrass Woody enough to be less involved in the day to day football operations of the team. It won't happen, of course, and the dumpster fire will continue to burn further and further out of control. There's a part of me that wonders how the Jets as an organization will "celebrate" 12 years from now when they break the all-time NFL playoff drought record currently held jointly by the Cardinals and Washington franchises, which both began their droughts in the 1940s and reached an impressive quarter-century mark. You have to give the Jets "credit", it's a much harder feat to accomplish that in the age of free agency than it was back then.
Are you serious? You don't believe there is a person in the NY Jets who serves as a spokesperson? You don't think there is anyone who can respond to a press inquiry? https://www.newyorkjets.com/team/front-office-roster/eric-gelfand "Gelfand serves as the club's primary contact and spokesperson for the team's communications efforts for both football and business operations." I'm not saying Gelfand is the "spokesperson" referred to in The Athletic article. I'm sure there are multiple people in the Jets organization who could be described that way.
If this shit was fiction... there'd be lawsuits being filed. Just when you think the clown show couldn't get any clownier...
Is there a difference between "a spokesperson" and "the spokesperson"? Is there a difference between "that guy" and "him"? Can a "spokesperson" not be a "source"? Does it matter if "jest" precedes "provocative" or if those words are reversed? If the things you continue to harp on convince you everything a writer has ever written is false, run with it but stop trying so hard to convince everyone else those things matter. Then examine if it's the messenger(s) who you don't want to believe or simply the message.
Exactly. The details don’t even matter much, because if this is a solid organization, there’s no reason for the “reports”.
This would all go away if Woody behaved like a normal billionaire. Get a VP of football ops and a 20 year old college cheerleader bimbo to occupy his time
I don't think so, not in this case. Anonymous source who is at the meeting is different from team's spokesperson, who is portrayed as someone whom Woody authorized to speak on his behalf, otherwise Rich would also call him a spokesperson. It's a pretty massive difference. But hey, if I have to explain that, game over. The report is damaging to the Jets who are searching for a GM now and therefore us fans, not just Woody, and I believe is mostly a fabrication, so I put out what I feel are obvious big contradictions and why it is mostly BS, and you guys believe what you want. Moving on. Maybe @abysmal is onto something there though with Hyime. I think you are a little off though, it's Brick Johnson who is the source. Trying to take down his dad so that he can inherit the empire when he turns 18.
He's already somehow managed to get an even douchier profile photo than daddy with the Woody chain. https://www.instagram.com/brickjohnsonn/
Wall Street Journal article today. “Woody Johnson” is now a euphemism for an organization being interfered with by an elite who is not part of that organization. I don’t agree with the example given however Woody owns that shit.
As a fan I don't feel "damaged" in the slightest. Specifically, how is it that you do? It is quite common in business and politics for official spokespersons to follow the journalistic standard of "background" or "deep background" where the information may be used in reporting but without ascribing it to any specific person. So, where is the massive difference? Brick Johnson is already 18. Next.
No. I absolutely will not be damaged. Neither will any stable mature adult. To even entertain the thought that a legitimate GM candidate will consider the writing in such an article over what they know of the team and learn during the interview process is absurd.
