Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lutz vs. Suellentrop

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Lutz vs. Suellentrop

    I've been thinking about the two Eagle articles for awhile now. Molly Jabalis entry about Jane's post-Illinois State comment..."moral victory" just brought these thoughts to the surface again. Because i like Molly, and find her entries to be entertaining and fun, i did not want to comment on that same thread. Molly, in a good-natured way, poked fun at Jane saying that the 20 point loss to Ill St was a moral victory. What Jane actually said was,"Ted, I don't think you can really call it a moral victory, but..." and she went on with the positives of the game. This gives a different flavor to her comments, i think. Molly is a person having fun on a message board, and is not paid to be a journalist, though. So Molly's statement is really ok.

    Suellentrop, however, is paid to write articles which give readers an accurate view of whatever the topic of his journalistic effort happens to be. His article made Albright appear to be arrogant (Who else will they get who is as good as me.) The idea of an arrogant Albright just does not fit with anything she has portrayed in almost 5 years. I find it hard to believe that she made that statement at all. If she did, however, it would be interesting to see how he laid out the "trap" to get words like that out of her and then see how he twisted it in the article. He then also tries to make us believe that she believes that her team was "horribly" coached last year. I have heard her discuss the things she identified to work on from a coaching perspective from reviewing last year...and how she went about improving them. She has talked about it on her radio show and in various chalk talks, etc. She never spoke of her team being "horribly" coached. She was just someone accepting responsibility and going about correcting things.

    For Suellentrop to expect us to believe that she believes both of those statements together...is just crazy. A person either believes they're the greatest...OR that they did a horrible job...NOT BOTH. Which one does he think she really believes? I think that He didn't care which she believed...he just wanted to do a HATCHET job.

    Lutz, on the other hand, I can respect. He simply recorded FACTS about wins, losses, team performance characteristics...and then stated his opinion as to what Schaus should do about the WBB program. He was even willing to say that Coach Albright is a good person or something like that. I doubt that he would think she was a good or neat person or whatever he said, if she said and/or believed both of those statements that Suellentrop attributes to her. I even wonder to myself....if Bob Lutz could be open about this, what did HE think of Suellentrop's hatchet job?

    Oh well, enough for now....

  • #2
    well, tru, thanks for the positive spins.rest assured, i mean jane no ultimate ill, beyond looking to coach another team next year! and i'm not really a woman...just a name honoring both an old friend(molly) and my favorite shocker(jabali)! but thanks the same!

    i DO think this is the first time on this board that anyone has chosen lutz over sullentrop, so that is a most interesting take. i respect your opinion on it.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Lutz vs. Suellentrop

      Originally posted by trufan
      If she did, however, it would be interesting to see how he laid out the "trap" to get words like that out of her and then see how he twisted it in the article.

      I think that He didn't care which she believed...he just wanted to do a HATCHET job.
      Well, I'm glad you are completely unbiased and fair. :roll:
      Some posts are not visible to me.
      Don't worry too much about it. Just do all you can do and let the rough end drag.

      Comment


      • #4
        I have a hard time believing Paul went out of his way to get or twist those words from Jane.
        Infinity Art Glass - Fantastic local artist and Shocker fan
        RIP Guy Always A Shocker
        Downsizing Government - Part of the Cato Institute
        Carpenter Place - A blessing to many young girls/women
        Cato Institute - A libertarian take on the issues
        ICT S.O.S - Great local cause fighting against human trafficking
        Wartick Insurance Agency - Saved me money with more coverage.
        MVCFans Alternative, Where ALL Voices Can Be Heard - Come join the party

        Comment


        • #5
          Subgod--I know. I initially had some trouble believing that also.

          After thinking about it for awhile, I realized several things.
          1) No coach believes BOTH the ideas that their team was horribly coached AND that they as the coach are the best that Wichita State can get.
          2) Neither of those ideas are congruent with anything else that this particular coach has expressed before.
          3) I am then left with several possible explanations for this article:
          a) Albright expressed both these thoughts such that Suellentrop HONESTLY believed them as he wrote them up. In this case, we have to believe that he is too INEPT as a journalist to point out that these were contrary to what she has consistently conveyed in the past. We ALSO must believe that he is too weak as a journalist to see that the statements don't fit in the same belief structure, and that he saw no reason to clarify this.
          b) We can believe both thoughts were somehow stated and that Suellentrop was intelligent enough to SEE that they did not fit together and that they are incongruent with what she has said in the past. But that he chose not to clarify things because he wanted to do a hatchet job.
          c) We can believe that Albright honestly expressed one of the conflicting thoughts and Suellentrop intentionally twisted things for the other thought. For this to be true, we have to assume that Albright has changed her tune on at least one of these areas, so slightly more of a stretch to believe this than d) below.
          d) We can believe that since neither sentiment fits with her presentations in the past, and that since they don't make sense together, that Suellentrop twisted or manipulated them both.

          So, in essence, we are left with the option of thinking that he is an INEPT journalist or that he is a DISHONEST or manipulative journalist. I cannot respect either of these. Since it required more of a leap of faith for me to believe a), b), or c) above than d), I came to the conclusion that d) was probably the truth. Certainly, others will come to the other conclusions, but NONE of the alternatives are favorable to this supposed professional journalist.

          Comment


          • #6
            maybe she meant horrible for the 1 game. Personally, I think Trufan you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Paul, from everything I have seen on his articles, blogs, etc., have always been fair minded. If you want to hold a negative opinion of him, that's okay, but don't try to get people to side with you simply because you made some assumptions.

            Past articles about Jane reflected arrogance on her part about the coaching position in relation to any buyout, and where would they find a better coach.
            Considering her past and current record, that took loads of gall. A coach lives and dies by their record, any coach knows that.

            I just hope Schaus takes care of 'business' after March 8th or 16th.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by trufan
              So, in essence, we are left with the option of thinking that he is an INEPT journalist or that he is a DISHONEST or manipulative journalist.
              Or... we could think that you are a Jane apalogist and/ or a conspiracy theorist.

              Paul S is a pretty good beat writer and in my opinion a straight shooter. Jane is the one who knows her job is on the line and thus is trying to say all the right things to keep her job. She knows she has to accept responsiblity for her team (horrible coaching comment) and also portray confidence in her abilities (the nobody better comment). Bottom line she sounds like a desperate woman. She should be worried considering she has not done enough to keep her job.

              The Smith firing and Albright hiring is the only dark spot on JS's record here, IMO. Smith had taken the team to levels of success it hadn't been to much, if any, before he came here. I know he lost his team his last year, but considering the history of the program, I think he deserved another year or two to see if he could match his earlier success. The hiring of JA appeared to be a coup at the time, but the Smith years are looking pretty good right now.

              Comment


              • #8
                Oh My! Trufan you must have snapped.

                On the radio show directly following the article in the paper, she did say the team was horribly coach last year, and that she now had learned to win in the valley.

                I guess this now involves a conspiracy including Shane Dennis as well, and the radio guys as well. Good Post MCShocker, at least the games were fun to watch, and he made every attempt to include all the fans, in the program. He just never got the opportunity to recruit or play in the anemities that he help secure funds, for by his outgoing style.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by trufan
                  Subgod--I know. I initially had some trouble believing that also.

                  After thinking about it for awhile, I realized several things.
                  1) No coach believes BOTH the ideas that their team was horribly coached AND that they as the coach are the best that Wichita State can get.
                  2) Neither of those ideas are congruent with anything else that this particular coach has expressed before.
                  3) I am then left with several possible explanations for this article:
                  a) Albright expressed both these thoughts such that Suellentrop HONESTLY believed them as he wrote them up. In this case, we have to believe that he is too INEPT as a journalist to point out that these were contrary to what she has consistently conveyed in the past. We ALSO must believe that he is too weak as a journalist to see that the statements don't fit in the same belief structure, and that he saw no reason to clarify this.
                  b) We can believe both thoughts were somehow stated and that Suellentrop was intelligent enough to SEE that they did not fit together and that they are incongruent with what she has said in the past. But that he chose not to clarify things because he wanted to do a hatchet job.
                  c) We can believe that Albright honestly expressed one of the conflicting thoughts and Suellentrop intentionally twisted things for the other thought. For this to be true, we have to assume that Albright has changed her tune on at least one of these areas, so slightly more of a stretch to believe this than d) below.
                  d) We can believe that since neither sentiment fits with her presentations in the past, and that since they don't make sense together, that Suellentrop twisted or manipulated them both.

                  So, in essence, we are left with the option of thinking that he is an INEPT journalist or that he is a DISHONEST or manipulative journalist. I cannot respect either of these. Since it required more of a leap of faith for me to believe a), b), or c) above than d), I came to the conclusion that d) was probably the truth. Certainly, others will come to the other conclusions, but NONE of the alternatives are favorable to this supposed professional journalist.
                  You might consider becoming an "Army of One" in your attempt to make Jane look good (enough to keep). I continue to fear that Jane will be back and it will not be for the right reasons.
                  Some posts are not visible to me.
                  Don't worry too much about it. Just do all you can do and let the rough end drag.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Sometimes as I am drifting off to sleep, I wonder if Jim Schaus reads (and even posts on) ShockerNet. I don't think SN represents to views of all WSU fans but it probably represents a reasonable cross-section of Shocker fans. I'm sure many WSU fans who are not registered on SN read ShockerNet because it has been mentioned by the Wichita Eagle on several occasions. I do hope Jim reads this site, at least occasionally, because I think it would give him a better feel for the mood of the Shocker Nation. I'm sure that the lack of success of men's and women's basketball this year has made the Athletic Department much more stressful than usual and might have made Jim a tougher (or toucher) boss than he usual is. I wish everyone in the Athletics Department the best of luck.
                    Some posts are not visible to me.
                    Don't worry too much about it. Just do all you can do and let the rough end drag.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X