Personal to Dan McGrath

Finally, the Chicago Tribune has run a story on the Chicago Hounds opener debacle. The Tribune only keeps stories up for a few days so you may find the link, here, it won't work in a week.

It ran on December 14 and I have a few bones to pick. First, being there, I can tell you that more than 30 people complained. That is the writer shilling for the Sears Centre. More questions need to be asked about that. Also, there were far fewer than 8,000 in the stands. Probably 4,500 is better. The 8,000 number probably comes from the number of tickets sold. In hockey, there is a fictional attendance and a real attendance.

Finally, is the best the Chicago Tribune can do is run a story five weeks late? WHAT THE FUCK! The sports desk was called that night, by me. And they didn't care. Why have a "special" printed weeks later? The news occurred that night. It could have hit the Chicago Tribune's Saturday morning Bulldog (early Sunday) edition or the Sunday edition.

Dan McGrath should call his staff together and discuss why newspapers are losing subscriptions and ad revenue: It is shit like this. They ignored the story when it was fresh and ran it five weeks late when the controversy was dead. HINT: The next question on the Hounds is very simple: Will they survive till the end of the season?