The Blog

What a blowhard. His first paragraph slams Telander, a great writer and a great guy, and his last paragraph brags about how he doesn't backstab or smear. Jay Mariotti makes me want to vomit.

Jay's two contentions about the Sun-Times, based on this: 1. The Sun-Times' management are too dumb to run a newspaper. 2. The Sun-Times' management offered him multiple contract extensions. One of these statements has to be untrue for Mariotti's inflated sense of self to have validity. If it's #1, it makes his resignation "in writing" baseless. If it's #2, then the only people willing to hire Jay Mariotti are incompetents.

" He's not a stable man. His buddy, Steinberg, rips issues. Yikes. my character when he has has domestic-abuse and alcohol" What's going on in this paragraph? Did Mariotti start to say something about Cooke or Steinberg and then try to delete it?

Jay might be full of himself but the paper should not have ripped him as soon as he left. If you had the guy on your staff for 17 years then as soon as he leaves he is this horrible guy, then that means someone there dropped the ball. That is a very unprofessional way to handle a situation in any business, let alone a major newspaper

While he's cooling his heels for his inevitable debut in the Incredible Shrinking Tribune, Jay ought to consider co-writing a column for the Poynter Institute with the Tribune's Poet Laureate, Lee Abrams. Both have a similar grasp on reality and how their continued presence in Chicago might benefit readers and the industry, in general. One wonders how many readers Jay took with him when he left the Sun-Times ... or, for that matter, how many viewers he brings to ESPN, where he plays the role of class clown. I'm guessing, not many.

The line Ed, above, refers to was garbled by me, not Mariotti. I've fixed it.

I'm not a huge fan of Jay's approach and never have been -- but having said that: There's validity in Jo's comment. He was the face of the Sun-Times' sports section for 17 years, the personification of "attitude," the voice they promoted, the guy whose tantrums and deadline-stretching were tolerated. In return, he cranked it out, week after week, year after year. Publishers changed, editors changed, sports editors changed, but Jay endured. And the current regime -- presumably bidding against nobody and operating on a lean budget that's forced cuts elsewhere -- rewarded him with an astonishing contract extension. No problem with Steinberg's column and Ebert's eloquent "don't let the door hit you" essay. Telander got his shots in, and Roman Modrowski and Chris De Luca. No prob. For the most part, Jay didn't nurture friendships among his colleagues, and, well, that's what happens. But months after honoring Jay Mariotti with words and big bucks, suddenly the corporate Sun-Times celebrates his departure as if it's a triumph for Rational Journalism As We Know It? Weak.

Friends: Let me tell you something: The city of Chicago has more sportswriters and more sports "personalities" embedded with (i.e., in-bed-with) the local and national sports sector as a whole than it ever had reporters and commentators embedded with the U.S. executive branch and military across multiple theaters of conflict, such as Afghanistan and Iraq. Or to put it another way: One is free to hate Jay Mariotti all one likes, and I won't contest someone else's feelings. (This comment isn't directed at anyone in particular, by the way.) But for all the years her gig lasted at the New York Times, Judith Miller's byline had nothing on ninety percent or more of the local sports embeds.

Jay proves the old saying never argue with an idiot u may not be able to tell who is who

Jay's thinking clearly. He just has a hard time not sounding like a dick. Considering how many of his colleagues are close to losing their jobs -- I'd say he's in the catbird seat. He just needs to make sure he acts soon before his brand diminishes too much.

Oh my lord...he's been allowed to procreate! And thus the human gene pool has degraded some more...

Im starting to dig Mariotti. Hes got some balls

wah,wah,wah Like a little kid whos going to take his baseball and go home, but the Suntimes got to keep the ball. Jay bad mouths his employer and he thinks they are going to keep him on they x-mass list? Let's see how long you are going to keep this going because you need a couple more nails.

Speaking for myself and not for not-my-father's Tribune, I'll say that I agree with Mariotti's implication that it's beyond strange that the overlords at the Sun-Times who were so eager to trash him when he left were also eager to be sure he didn't bring his act upriver to the Tower. It's like one of those tales in which a guy talks utter trash about an ex-girlfriend, then goes wild with jealousy when some other man begins to date her. As a reader, my problem with Jay's work was not that it lacked skill -- he's a very good writer, and my admiration for his talent with words is magnified by the fact that much of what he wrote was written on a tight deadline -- but that it lacked perspective and integrity. The windsock quality of his views on players and managers and owners were -- are -- as shallow as the views of a fan who is screaming from the bleachers that a guy's a bum, then, when he hits a homer, starts yelling how much he loves him. My blog post documenting this phenomenon in 2005 -- http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2005/10/jay_mariottis_y.html -- was wildly popular among his detractors. Further, his animosity for Tribune Co. in its stewardship of the Cubs always seemed inspired -- even inflamed -- by his own competitive spirit. I don't read sports columns to revel in the knee-jerk reactions of the common fan. I have enough of those myself. I read them for perspective and real insight. And I don't read them to hear the scribe give vent to his personal grudges or promote his employer.

Great points by Paul and Eric Zorn, about the ridiculous hypocrisy and the "windsock"iness of Mariotti's work. Here's two other thoughts: 1) Yes, I particularly like the writing of Telander and Steinberg very much, but, beyond even such personal preference, day after day, year after year, both of them have demonstrated and expressed a far wider breadth of knowledge and opinion on whatever they wrote about than Mariotti could ever bring to the narrow confines of his subjects. Also, they were often able to show varying, changing, re-evaluating opinions on subjects as time went by -- while Mariotti would just see which way the wind was blowing on Ozzie, Dusty, Lovie, etc., and flip-flop his faux-clever nicknames (used nowhere else by nobody) from supportive to ripping. Oh, and would you have ANY interest at all to read what Mariotti could write about (say...) the decline of the US men's hat industry OR about the in-depth struggles of a sporting youth when confronted with family pressures, school expectations, and neighborhood barriers? Nah, me either -- I can't even imagine him doing the research or showing up in Englewood to do the interviews, much less ever writing anything remotely interesting on the subjects. But Neil and Rick? Yep and yep... 2) Of course, I don't have the exact numbers, but I feel fairly certain that his "I usually had the most web hits on the Sun-Times site" boast was ALWAYS exceeded by a multiple of 5, 10, or perhaps even 20 by the man who TRULY drives the web business for the S-T, Mr. Roger Ebert.

Jay is a liar and most of the people who worked with him before know that. Actually, I feel "dirty" after reading this article.

Mariotti's entry above simply validates what everyone has said and written about him. No need to repeat it here. But I did think about Mariotti last night during the news, when they announced a memorial celebration for the late Tribune columnist Terry Armour is scheduled for the Cell on Monday, his birthday. Friends, family, colleagues and the public are invited. I couldn't help contrast the warmth of that gesture to our collective reaction to Mariotti's departure from the Sun-Times (and hopefully, his non-arrival at the Trib). I wonder what Mariotti thinks about it: Does it cause him to reflect at all on the image he's created for himself, the many enemies he's made and the legacy he will leave? Probably not, and that’s sad in itself. What a lonely, bitter human being he must be.

While most employees try to work 'under the radar' and get along with coworkers, Jay must have been a real piece of work to cause the sentiments revealed by those at the SunTimes after his departure. And for those who don't remember a past time with Jay and an earlier SunTimes regime, Jay was in columnist's limbo for a time at the SunTimes. When Jay first arrived on the scene at the SunTimes, I thought he brought a certain wait-til-next-year-ain't-good-enough attitude to the city and the paper, which was sorely needed. But as time progressed, his column seemed to be one that only stirred the pot without anything resembling constructive criticism, evolving into nothing more than personal attacks questioning the judgment of owners and executives (who can run their railroad as they see fit). After a while, I wondered whether Jay had any credentials of running a successful sports franchise. But to be fair, I occasionally read his column just to make sure I wasn't dead wrong. Jay never disproved my thoughts. Most recently, after the Celtics won the NBA title, I was hoping Jay would write a column about the magic of the Celtic mystic, and how Coach Jackson was rebuffed by the very team whose patriarch's coaching record was threatened if Jackson's team had won. Instead, Jay figured it was time to bash Reinsdorf and Paxson for their lack of success. Hey Jay, whether there are three or thirty teams, only two can play for the title; the others have all failed. And in this city, we have lots of examples of sports failure. What we never got out of Jay was a column that was positive. If one can think of more than 17 positive columns out of Jay Mariotti, I'd love to see the list. Why 17? One for every year. And while many have said and will say that Jay is a good (newspaper) writer, I wouldn't put him the 'team' photo with Mike Royko, John Schulian, or David Israel.

D'oh! That should have been 'IN the 'team' photo'. sorry

Jay never gets over his personal bias and never gets over his losses. His persona became so predictable - every day, readers knew he was looking for his pound of flesh and frankly, most who I talked to, decided in the first 5 seconds if they wanted to take a trip down that dark, negative road on any particular day. Nobody really wants that with their morning coffee or sweet roll. I had the opportunity to write for 2 midwest-based sports weekly's beginning back in Jay's early years at the Sun Times and had the pleasure of observing him both in the press area and after games in the occasional out of town watering hole. Jay had almost no friends, rarely spoke with his colleagues, was a loner in every sense of the word and saddest of all, often sat all by himself on a barstool because no one wanted to socialize with him - let alone carry on a friendship. Perhaps he felt he was better than the local scribes because he came from "The National". In Jay's world, somehow being "national" ranks so much higher than Chicago. When his star began to rise a bit and he thirsted for more national exposure, he felt that somehow being on TV or Radio again ranked him higher than the local scribes. His therapist may have more insight into Jays psyche but anyone who observed him in person saw through his fake tan and best- side dramatic profile pic. We saw a man that liked few people, was liked by even fewer and took it all out on those that challenged him as a person and a writer. He just couldn't take the heat so he picked a dramatic time and place to jump off and, shockingly, is surprised that so many people saw right through it. Is there anyone out there that watches ESPN to get his take on anything? He is ESPN wallpaper - but his ego would never allow him to believe that he puts no fannies in the seats and tears away no one from their daily grind. All he really has going for him is his tenure and experience but with so little class to go along with it, that won't be enough to get a welcome mat in this town ever again.

You are extremely UNPROFESSIONAL Mariotti! The Sun-Times and other media companis are better off without you.

Quite a bit of animus directed toward a guy allegedely with no friends, social skills, or readership. Jay's schtick has always been driven by the whipsaw nature of fans who love players/coaches/management one day, and curse them the next. And that's probably why many readers enjoy Jay's take. Does he take the negative road more often than not? Sure seems that way. But the media has moved in that direction. Jay was just a bit ahead of his time. Perhaps his ego got the best of him on occassion. But the sniping and cheap shots sure seem very "high school". Jay left the Sun Times on his own terms. Not many employees ever get that luxury. Usually your escorted out of the building by two burly security guards. Let Jay be Jay. And if you don't like him? Read Ann Landers instead.

What a scary thought that some woman actually had midget sex with the human mini hair helmet and THEN stuck around to raise kids with him, I mean "it".

I always thought that the only thing that separated Jay Mariotti from the average blog ranter was the fact that he was employed by a newspaper. Employment no longer distinguishes him from other keyboard blowhards. Mariotti - ST = Another Jerkass Blogger

On the Milt rosenberg radio show a few years ago, NYTimes Ira Berkow, an excellent sports columnist, implied that Mariotti lifted some material from one of Berkow's columns. Marriott faxed a letter threatening to sue Berkow. It was entertaining radio, but raised some serious questions about Mariotti's news gathering techniques.