Heather Fleck Responds to Reusse's Negativity

[Bob_Loblaw]

Being in the spotlight doesn't automatically justify someone's behavior when it comes to things directed at PJ... just like your point about bullying.

I never said it did. But it does justify someone critiquing your ability to coach football. It does justify someone making fun of your "salesmanship" and your attempts to "change the culture". Those things are absolutely up for critique.

If Pat was ripping on his family, appearance, medical situation, etc., I would agree. If Pat is making fun of how the Gophers performed? Completely fair. If Pat is making fun of PJ's "sales tactics"? Completely fair.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

This is exactly correct. PJ called out the media at his first press conference. Reusse needs thicker skin and a new outlook on life. He isn't adding anything of worth to the human race.

I think PJ's observation was still legit.

The media around other schools isn't nearly as negative / dismissive as it is here (other than say Boston pro sports who on several levels above everyone). Other school's media can get negative at times too for sure, but they also can be positive and optimistic at times ... that rarely happens here. I think it legitimately makes it harder for a school to say sell tickets, hope, recruit locally when you've got folks always complaining about them and rarely celebrating.

We've had some nice wins here and there and I've looked for the local media to cover it, and seen radio silence or it's barely mentioned ... but if something goes bad we hear no end of it.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

I never said it did. But it does justify someone critiquing your ability to coach football. It does justify someone making fun of your "salesmanship" and your attempts to "change the culture". Those things are absolutely up for critique.

If Pat was ripping on his family, appearance, medical situation, etc., I would agree. If Pat is making fun of how the Gophers performed? Completely fair. If Pat is making fun of PJ's "sales tactics"? Completely fair.

PJ's thing isn't a critique... it's just full time mocking. There is no other alternative for guys like him, that's not a "critique".

The whole "oh you're a public figure" thing is too easily pulled out to justify just about anything.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

This is exactly correct. PJ called out the media at his first press conference. Reusse needs thicker skin and a new outlook on life. He isn't adding anything of worth to the human race.

The media doesn't have to follow!

I don't like Pat and somehow this forum has me defending him. Just because PJ comes into town and asks the media to change doesn't mean that they will. It also certainly doesn't mean that they should.

 

[saintpaulguy]

Without question he has become far more cantankerous since he quit drinking. Alcohol use to give him his kicks, now his negativity towards the Gophers has taken its place. He obviously isn’t drawing a great/medium salary as he really offers nothing to the Star Tribune. Soon he will be riding off into the sunset and never be missed. His tombstone should read “I tried, I failed”.

He quit drinking on April 27, 1981. Is there some repository of Pioneer Press, Duluth News-Tribune and St. Cloud Times articles you are perusing for comparison? You'd have to be 42 years old to remember reading one in a current paper.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

The media doesn't have to follow!

I don't like Pat and somehow this forum has me defending him. Just because PJ comes into town and asks the media to change doesn't mean that they will. It also certainly doesn't mean that they should.

They should for the reasons people have noted.

You're boiling everything down to "they shouldn't just because they say so"....that's just ignoring the actual argument.

 

[Breakin' The Plane]

The media doesn't have to follow!

I don't like Pat and somehow this forum has me defending him. Just because PJ comes into town and asks the media to change doesn't mean that they will. It also certainly doesn't mean that they should.

Some people think that's it's the media's job to act as a public relations firm for the U. Doesn't work that way. Nor should it.

 

[dpodoll68]

I don't like Pat and somehow this forum has me defending him.

Exactly. I feel gross doing so. People don't seem to get that he lives on the attention and by talking about it at all (especially Heather responding to him in the first place), that we're giving him exactly what he wants and needs. His schtick would die a slow, painful death if Gophers fans just ignored his nonsense.

 

[Unregistered User]

So, Fleck is fair game because he is a highly paid, public figure. His wife becomes a fair target through marriage, after all, she knew what she was getting into.

But Fatprick shouldn't face any criticism? Is he not public enough or well paid enough?

The fact of the matter is that Re-use keeps up this shtick because it is easy. It requires little thought or creativity to be negative. It proves he is lazy. Add to the fact that he relishes the shameful joy of being negative (whether he believes in what he writes or not) proves to me that he does not get the privilege of the benefit of the doubt.

Fatprick is lazy, uninteresting, and now I'm ashamed at myself for even allowing myself to think about that bag of **** for the minute it took me to write this post.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

I think PJ's observation was still legit.

The media around other schools isn't nearly as negative / dismissive as it is here (other than say Boston pro sports who on several levels above everyone). Other school's media can get negative at times too for sure, but they also can be positive and optimistic at times ... that rarely happens here. I think it legitimately makes it harder for a school to say sell tickets, hope, recruit locally when you've got folks always complaining about them and rarely celebrating.

We've had some nice wins here and there and I've looked for the local media to cover it, and seen radio silence or it's barely mentioned ... but if something goes bad we hear no end of it.

I've heard some whoppers but...in my experience this is false. You'd also be hard-pressed to prove this claim. Coaches are routinely roasted for underperforming all across the country.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

So, Fleck is fair game because he is a highly paid, public figure. His wife becomes a fair target through marriage, after all, she knew what she was getting into.

But Fatprick shouldn't face any criticism? Is he not public enough or well paid enough?

The fact of the matter is that Re-use keeps up this shtick because it is easy. It requires little thought or creativity to be negative. It proves he is lazy. Add to the fact that he relishes the shameful joy of being negative (whether he believes in what he writes or not) proves to me that he does not get the privilege of the benefit of the doubt.

Fatprick is lazy, uninteresting, and now I'm ashamed at myself for even allowing myself to think about that bag of **** for the minute it took me to write this post.

The irony in your post (and some others attacking Pat on a personal level) is almost too much to bear.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

They should for the reasons people have noted.

You're boiling everything down to "they shouldn't just because they say so"....that's just ignoring the actual argument.

I'm not saying the "public figure card" justifies anything and everything.

I am saying that if you're a coach of a college football team, your team's success (or lack thereof) are ALWAYS grounds for critique. Your interactions with the media are ALWAYS grounds for critique.

If Pat made fun of his family, I would agree with you that he is out of line. If Pat made fun of something personal in PJ's life (medical issue, church, lack of a church, etc.), I would agree that he is out of line.

As far as our media being negative. . .have you lived in other major sports markets? The Twin Cities media is charming and borderline propagandists compared to those markets. A benefit of going to the school at the U is living in a major media market, but there is certainly a flip side to that coin. We are going to be harsher than the Kalamazoo media. We are harsher than the media in Madison. That isn't bullying or out of line, it's simply the way the media works. So people get upset when the U isn't covered like the other major sports in the area. So we want them covered to the same degree but in a different manner?

 

[Unregistered User]

The irony in your post (and some others attacking Pat on a personal level) is almost too much to bear.

The irony was intended.

Didn't think that would have to be explained.

And I attacked him for being lazy, unimaginative, and filled with schadenfreude. According to those defending him that makes me a paragon of virtue and a straight shooter.

 

[CurveballJesus]

So, Fleck is fair game because he is a highly paid, public figure. His wife becomes a fair target through marriage, after all, she knew what she was getting into.

But Fatprick shouldn't face any criticism? Is he not public enough or well paid enough?

The fact of the matter is that Re-use keeps up this shtick because it is easy. It requires little thought or creativity to be negative. It proves he is lazy. Add to the fact that he relishes the shameful joy of being negative (whether he believes in what he writes or not) proves to me that he does not get the privilege of the benefit of the doubt.

Fatprick is lazy, uninteresting, and now I'm ashamed at myself for even allowing myself to think about that bag of **** for the minute it took me to write this post.

In what way was she targeted in his tweet? Are you saying that because she is married to him, she ceases to be her own individual and is absorbed into him and anything that makes fun of his lack of success with the Gophers is a now a direct personal attack on her?

Pretty progressive view you have there.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

So, Fleck is fair game because he is a highly paid, public figure. His wife becomes a fair target through marriage, after all, she knew what she was getting into.

But Fatprick shouldn't face any criticism? Is he not public enough or well paid enough?

The fact of the matter is that Re-use keeps up this shtick because it is easy. It requires little thought or creativity to be negative. It proves he is lazy. Add to the fact that he relishes the shameful joy of being negative (whether he believes in what he writes or not) proves to me that he does not get the privilege of the benefit of the doubt.

Fatprick is lazy, uninteresting, and now I'm ashamed at myself for even allowing myself to think about that bag of **** for the minute it took me to write this post.

Line 1: Yes - Fleck is fair game and his wife is fair game now (in the limited way of in regards to her injection into the convo).

Line 2 - FatPat is also fair game. I rip on him all of the time (no one was worried about him being bullied or talked about negativism towards FatPat being out of line). He is an outspoken public figure, rip away.

Line 3 - I concur. Not a fan of Reusse.

Line 4 - I concur.

 

[Rescooter]

The irony in your post (and some others attacking Pat on a personal level) is almost too much to bear.

I'm sorry PE, you can't have it both ways. Justifying what Reusse did and then coming down on others for a personal attack is disingenuous. No one deserves to be stalked and trolled in their personal life; and Reusse did just that. It will be interesting to see what his response is.

I'm going to look at the money/rating issue and have to say that in a rating war world; he's seeking attention.

Another area he crosses the line in is journalistic integrity. You should report the news, maybe interject a little professional opinion, but not seek to become part of the story. The story now is Reusse's insults against the Fleck Family. How lame of a publicity stunt is that? Poor journalism.

One more thing: I think Reusse should take a long look at himself and decide if he's making the world a better place. The Flecks certainly are; Reusse is not. It's pathetic.

 

[Mulligan]

9 pages over this? Got to be an over 4 hour erection for Pat. Hope he consults a doctor.

 

[Breakin' The Plane]

I'm sorry PE, you can't have it both ways. Justifying what Reusse did and then coming down on others for a personal attack is disingenuous. No one deserves to be stalked and trolled in their personal life; and Reusse did just that. It will be interesting to see what his response is.

I'm going to look at the money/rating issue and have to say that in a rating war world; he's seeking attention.

Another area he crosses the line in is journalistic integrity. You should report the news, maybe interject a little professional opinion, but not seek to become part of the story. The story now is Reusse's insults against the Fleck Family. How lame of a publicity stunt is that? Poor journalism.

One more thing: I think Reusse should take a long look at himself and decide if he's making the world a better place. The Flecks certainly are; Reusse is not. It's pathetic.

Why? Because he made fun of an inept offense? Geezo Peezo. Nadine has said on here several times how generous Reusse has been when it comes to donating to charities she's involved with, but I guess that's invalid because he poked fun at a team that was flat-out putrid for the final 8 quarters of the season.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

I'm sorry PE, you can't have it both ways. Justifying what Reusse did and then coming down on others for a personal attack is disingenuous. No one deserves to be stalked and trolled in their personal life; and Reusse did just that. It will be interesting to see what his response is.

I'm going to look at the money/rating issue and have to say that in a rating war world; he's seeking attention.

Another area he crosses the line in is journalistic integrity. You should report the news, maybe interject a little professional opinion, but not seek to become part of the story. The story now is Reusse's insults against the Fleck Family. How lame of a publicity stunt is that? Poor journalism.

One more thing: I think Reusse should take a long look at himself and decide if he's making the world a better place. The Flecks certainly are; Reusse is not. It's pathetic.

I still don't understand how it was a personal attack as I would define it. Please provide evidence if this bullying. Can we find some links?

Furthermore, it wasnt that long ago we had many posters here, media figures that should know better, and shameless administration throwing players under the bus for public relations reasons. Stating unproven allegations as fact is far worse than anything I've ever seen out of Pat.

 

[Rescooter]

Why? Because he made fun of an inept offense? Geezo Peezo. Nadine has said on here several times how generous Reusse has been when it comes to donating to charities she's involved with, but I guess that's invalid because he poked fun at a team that was flat-out putrid for the final 8 quarters of the season.

I don't wish to argue with you, but watching someone at a game attended on their own time and trying to draw some connection to an impotent offense in the last two games is a huge stretch.

Also, there is much more to making the world a better place than donating money. When your life is full of insults and negativity all in the name of propping ratings; it's hypocritical and a farce. Try donating time, paying people forward, or just acting in a decent matter. That's making the world a better place.

And yes, I realize being negative and insulting is his schtick, but it wears thin after a while; and in this case crossed the professional line.

 

[Rescooter]

I still don't understand how it was a personal attack as I would define it. Please provide evidence if this bullying. Can we find some links?

Furthermore, it wasnt that long ago we had many posters here, media figures that should know better, and shameless administration throwing players under the bus for public relations reasons. Stating unproven allegations as fact is far worse than anything I've ever seen out of Pat.

I never said anything about bullying - that must have been pages ago when that came up. I clearly stated it was attention seeking (which is true), poor journalism (also true) and pathetic (Ok you got me there, perhaps that was an opinion).

This has nothing to do with the so called "shameless administration" throwing players under the bus. When I see someone bring up issues that are unrelated, I know their original argument was weak and they're bringing up side issue to deflect.

 

[Dano564]

I don't think this is a thing where a single thing crosses the line.

It's the whole Reusse effort of the last 16 months.

Calling PJ "Phil" a few times isn't enough to warrant it as harassment or bullying behavior, but when you are doing it 90% of the time, you are doing it with intent.

So what is Reusse's intent to call PJ a name he doesn't go by?
Flattery?

 

[Pompous Elitist]

I never said anything about bullying - that must have been pages ago when that came up. I clearly stated it was attention seeking (which is true), poor journalism (also true) and pathetic (Ok you got me there, perhaps that was an opinion).

This has nothing to do with the so called "shameless administration" throwing players under the bus. When I see someone bring up issues that are unrelated, I know their original argument was weak and they're bringing up side issue to deflect.

My honest assessment is you're overly sensitive.

As for your second paragraph, calling out hypocritical posters isnt a side issue. I find it an interesting fact.

 

[GFBfan]

I'm sorry PE, you can't have it both ways. Justifying what Reusse did and then coming down on others for a personal attack is disingenuous. No one deserves to be stalked and trolled in their personal life; and Reusse did just that. It will be interesting to see what his response is.

I'm going to look at the money/rating issue and have to say that in a rating war world; he's seeking attention.

Another area he crosses the line in is journalistic integrity. You should report the news, maybe interject a little professional opinion, but not seek to become part of the story. The story now is Reusse's insults against the Fleck Family. How lame of a publicity stunt is that? Poor journalism.

One more thing: I think Reusse should take a long look at himself and decide if he's making the world a better place. The Flecks certainly are; Reusse is not. It's pathetic.

The moment the video went on the board, the personal attack angle went out the window. PJ is a public figure. He made a public video with the Wild to increase fan enthusiasm. The video did nothing to help the Wild win the game, therefore drawing a parallel to the end of the Gopher season is not out of line.

 

[GoldenGopherTilTheEnd]

Reusse is a flaming hunk of ****. It's that simple. What a worthless ass.

 

[Unregistered User]

The video did nothing to help the Wild win the game...

Sadly, the video did not help the Wild win the game. Fleck was so close to being immortalized in one of those videos that we've all seen so many times when the series MVP is being interviewed and states: "I want to thank John Doe for putting out that video that was played in game 4 that really lit a fire under the team and inspired us to victory. You da real MVP!"

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

I'm sorry PE, you can't have it both ways. Justifying what Reusse did and then coming down on others for a personal attack is disingenuous. No one deserves to be stalked and trolled in their personal life; and Reusse did just that. It will be interesting to see what his response is.

I'm going to look at the money/rating issue and have to say that in a rating war world; he's seeking attention.

Another area he crosses the line in is journalistic integrity. You should report the news, maybe interject a little professional opinion, but not seek to become part of the story. The story now is Reusse's insults against the Fleck Family. How lame of a publicity stunt is that? Poor journalism.

One more thing: I think Reusse should take a long look at himself and decide if he's making the world a better place. The Flecks certainly are; Reusse is not. It's pathetic.

At first "bullying" and now "stalking" from this crowd. WOW. We really are a fragile bunch.

 

[Dano564]

At first "bullying" and now "stalking" from this crowd. WOW. We really are a fragile bunch.

At what point is it bullying or stalking?

What do you mean by "fragile". We are raising a point, and in turn you are choosing to label people with an emotional / mental health related response of "fragile".
"Fragile" is usually associated with mental health.
If you intended the use of the word "fragile" differently, please explain how so.

 

[fraternity2017]

At first "bullying" and now "stalking" from this crowd. WOW. We really are a fragile bunch.

It might be a very mild version of bullying and stalking, but Pat's behavior is starting to get a little weird/obsessive.

If Pat were some average Joe with a Twitter account it would be different. But when both people are public figures it gets a little weird.

 

[CentralGopher]

9 pages over this? Got to be an over 4 hour erection for Pat. Hope he consults a doctor.

Exactly. Make it harder for him to make fun and what do you know?. Problem solved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk