Reply to a comment

Agree. The complaint against JA should not be that he "seems" against the Vols. While it would seem self serving if he was, neither is he apparently paid to be "for" the Vols. We should understand the "rabble he raises" as that is what journalism has come to, these days. We could accept that.

The surprise of this great award (sort of like getting a star for being the top of the bottom five in your class) is that John is just not a good writer. Those enjoying him should branch out, read some quality writing and enjoy the difference. JA never offers original thought. He never breaks news. He never does in depth analysis; he just types out the obvious.

Other quality writers offer valid critisms of results...or even efforts, without demeaning or ridiculing the individual. Other writers offer valid options for cosideration. Other writers establish respect and support from sources...and provide timely and previously unknown facts and insight. JA does none of this. He mixes attempts at satire, humor and news leaving one not knowing which he intends. I doubt he does.

We just deserve better.