i swear sports reporters have to have the thinnest skins of anyone. boers, mully, mariotti, telander...who else?

I think you can include many in the media on that list, not only reporters. Try adding Stone, Mac, North, etc....
All of these guys LOVE being critics, but none of them can take any criticism. They are all thin skinned.

i swear sports reporters have to have the thinnest skins of anyone. boers, mully, mariotti, telander...who else?

And many of the posters here too.

HEEEEEERRRRREE WEEEEE GO...

on the other side of the coin, I think silvy has some pretty thick skin, he's taken a lot of shit over the years, and it doesn't really seem to affect him...

. . . . and never leave the house to cover a story."

Mully just made this statement with sarcasm. I wonder if it's a "shot" at someone at the Score?

Did anyone else hear it?

Please, no...

i swear sports reporters have to have the thinnest skins of anyone. boers, mully, mariotti, telander...who else?

I think that's just a rather juvenile reaction to what is essentially a rather mature realization of how utterly ridiculous their line of work is.

I would probably add Bernstein to that group as well...

on the other side of the coin, I think silvy has some pretty thick skin, he's taken a lot of shit over the years, and it doesn't really seem to affect him...

Your statement lacks any substance. There are far more trite (aka 'ridiculous') professions than there are necessary, meaningful ones - and even the latter is entirely subjective based on person, place, time, and context.

I think that's just a rather juvenile reaction to what is essentially a rather mature realization of how utterly ridiculous their line of work is.

What makes you say that?

You're giving Spmack more fodder, Seacrest. Check on that shield.

I don't think there's anything offensive about describing professional sports coverage as "ridiculous," and don't take what I said to mean that I begrudge anyone their ability to make a living at it. Legitimate and ridiculous are mutually exclusive in this case, as with many professions.

You're a notorious argument baits-man, on par with Seacrest, and so I'm not sure how exactly to respond other than to say that of course my statement "lacks substance," it's armchair speculation on a field in which I have no expertise. Lacking substance doesn't necessarily = a lack of "value" on a message board, though, unless you're that guy who loathes one-liners.

All I'm saying is that if I were to put myself in Mully's shoes, my gut reaction would be the same, to fire a weak, self-deprecating shot across the bow. The content and delivery of Mully's statement lead to my conclusion, and you're more than welcome to disagree.

...and I'll take that as "I've got nothing."

You'd be more fun if you weren't so predictable, Mr. Rozner.

If you were capable of typing out more than two lines at a time,

you might have better results when attempting to make a point.