With none of the locals in action last night (besides the Beanpot) it’s a mixed bag of top links this morning:

Why you sign Josh Beckett, today. Curt Schilling weighs in on Josh Beckett entering the last year of his contract, and takes a shot at Peter Abraham of The Boston Globe in the process.

These e-mailers are writing about a wrong – Dan Shaughnessy shares some of the emails he received after saying that Peyton Manning was better than Tom Brady, and then having Manning lose the Super Bowl on Sunday.

Harsh dose of reality – Ron Borges tells us that the window of opportunity is closing for Peyton Manning.

Trading Ray Allen only hope for C’s – Gerry Callahan tells us why the Celtics need to make a move if they hope to be a contender come playoff time.

Who would fit with C’s if they deal Ray Allen? Paul Flannery examines whether either Kevin Martin or Andre Iguodala would be an acceptable return for Allen.

Doc Rivers’ done being nice – Steve Bulpett has the Celtics coach saying that his club needs to do more than just talk about getting better.

Cameron front and center for Red Sox – Mike Fine looks over the reconfigured Red Sox outfield, which now has 37-year-old Mike Cameron as its centerpiece.

The deal is, Thomas will stay put – Joe Haggerty tells us that Tim Thomas isn’t going anywhere.

Super Bowl reminds us of the power of sports – Bill Reynolds says that Sunday was one of those games that “reminded us that sports can be transcendent, have the power to be more than just a game with a winner and a loser. One of those games that remind us what we love about sports.”

Classics like this make familiar title game anything but stale – No, not the Super Bowl, Chris Gasper is talking about the Beanpot…


10 thoughts on “A Mixed Bag on Tuesday

  1. Anyone else find it curious that both Shaugnessy this morning, and now Albert Breer, have posted apologias for their picking the Colts?

    I KNOW it’s out of character for Shaugnessy, but to have both of them now do it seems almost like an editorial decision to me.

    Just thinking out loud.


  2. The “apology” makes me believe even more my original theory that Shank wrote the “Manning is better than Brady” article strictly to tick-off Patriots fans–something that he LOVES to do–and that he really didn’t believe in what he was writing. He really doesn’t even like football. Read any of his baseball books and you’ll eventually come to the parts where he criticizes the game basically as a “non-thinking man’s” sport.

    In my view, anything Shank writes about the Patriots or football is all about generating a response from the fans. If it’s about baseball or basketball, two sports he actually likes and knows something about, then there’s a chance that he’s being honest in his opinions.


    1. Tony I think Dan himself would thank you for validating his job description as a columninst. The fact that you can’t stand the way he treats football/Pats but continue to read and even disect his work shows that he is on his A game.


      1. Actually, I rely on Bruce’s recaps of Shank’s work here, for the most part–I don’t read anything he’s writes (unless it’s on a topic about which I think he may actually have a sincere opinion or some actual knowledge). In the case of “Manning is better than Brady,” I didn’t even rely on Bruce’s recap: all I needed to read was the headline to know what the entire column would be like.

        Shank’s been around for a long time, and he’s been mailing it in for at least half the time he’s been around at this point–it’s all very, very predictable and it usually follows a formulaic template.


  3. I think Karen Guregian should apologize for the recycled, pre-planned garbage she’s churned out for the past month. She might be the most underrated worst sports writer in New England.


Comments are closed.