In Defense of Barstool Sports and Stoolies Everywhere

It's been too long since Barstool got into a good ol' fashioned Twitter war. This one, though, didn't quite have the same build up as some of the past greats. Stephanie Haberman, an Audience Engagement Editor at Sport's Illustrated, came out of the clouds saying she would not be attending any New York Mets games next season that were partnered with Barstool Sports.

Well what about these games makes her feel uncomfortable as a woman? The people.

So the readers of Barstool taking advantage of a great deal on Mets tickets through a website they enjoy make her uncomfortable to attend a game. Never mind the fact that Barstool gets a section to themselves for these outings, so she wouldn't even have to be near them at any point. She insinuated all the people who attend these Barstool events are bad people. I have no problem confirming my bias and status as a "Stoolie". I love the site, the personalities, the different things they do etc. I'd like to think I'm not a bad person. I know plenty of plenty who like Barstool as well. Some hardcore like me, others not so much. But none of them are scumbags like Ms. Haberman would insinuate. 

In a now deleted Tweet, she pointed out the fact Barstool will post pictures of scantily clad women multiple times a day. Yeah that's true. People have different opinions on it, but it's true that they do that. Of course, the celebrities posted are indeed public figures and therefore it is legal to post any publicly circulated image or video of them. And the non-celebrities? They give the website permission to use their pictures. I'm willing to bet a few have even submitted themselves, as a few modeling careers seemed to take off after being seen on Barstool. 

The real kicker is that she is throwing stones when she lives in THE glass house. Working for a company that publishes a magazine dedicated solely to scantily clad women and then taking shots at others is an interesting strategy.

But don't worry, she went on to defend that.

I don't doubt that the models in the Swimsuit Issue are smart, strong, and body-positive, nor would I deny that they love what they do. It's how they earn a living. They can do as they please. How about the women posted on Barstool's website and social media? You don't think they (who gave permission to use their pictures) don't enjoy some of the attention it brings? Some of the positive comments? Maybe some of them worked just as hard on their bodies as the SI models and were looking for an audience, a forum to put forth their body of work, both figuratively and literally. (Sidenote: I'm willing to bet no one called you names of working on the Swimsuit Issue because they A) Didn't know who you were or what role you even played in its creation every year, and B) You didn't attack an entire fanbase. Just food for thought.) So get off the high horse about why your scantily clad women are so much holier than what Barstool posts every day. 

While we're on that string of Tweets, let's look at the top message. "I've been called a c*nt more times in the past 10mins than I have in my entire life. And that's why I'm uncomfortable w/ Barstool's fan base"

Well that's not a good look for Stoolies. Calling someone a Seaward is crossing the line, no doubt about it. Wait, whats that? Twitter search it?

Ruh-Roh Steph! No, actually, I commend her for never being called a Seaward ever before, except the other times she was prior to this Twitter incident. One Stoolie called her that today. And he doesn't represent the rest of us. 

And one more note on her take son Barstool's fanbase, which is apparently the spawn of Satan. A lot of her colleagues, not just at SI, but around the media world are a part of that fanbase. Must be hard to make friends that way. Kenny Ducey and CJ Fogler at SI are fans. As is Katie Nolan, host of Garbage Time on FS1 and someone who has been lauded for breaking the mold of what women in sport media can be and being a champion for women on sports television. 

When you really boil it down this is all because Ms. Haberman made the assumption  Barstool's fanbase are bad people. She took a promo for what is, by all accounts a great series of events (plenty of comfortable looking women there, but your preferences and opinions are your own Steph) and bashed the people that attended them. Did she expect an entire fanbase would sit quietly and take that? She apparently did not do her homework, because once you pull that alarm, Stoolies will go get their weapons and prepare for war. It's one time where they put aside city and sport differences and act as one (yeah, it is kinda sad now that I read that back, but whatever). It's like in Game of Thrones when Mance Rayder signals the Wildling attack to begin. She lit the biggest fire the North has ever seen. 

I still just do not understand people who bash Barstool's fanbase. It's such a diverse audience form all over the world. Men, women, boys, girls, black, white, Asian (am I the only one? Doesn't matter, still counts). To generalize an entire fanbase on a few Tweets is exactly what we're not supposed to do, right? And then talking about the bloggers jumping in? They do it for comedy and content. There's going to be blog material from this my friend. 

Stoolies are the salt of the Earth. Just normal people who happen to all like this one website. Like any fanbase there will be idiots, a vocal minority who do not speak for the rest. Stoolies have raised a lot of money for some great causes to. Boston Marathon bombings, service dogs, wounded military vets, cancer patients/research, ALS research (Pete Frates, creator if the Ice Bucket Challenge, is a huge Stoolie), murdered NYPD cops, and very recently a family who lost their mother to cancer last year and just lost their house, belongings, and dog to a fire right before the holidays. And it's not nickels and dimes either. Barstool always raises A TON of money for these great causes. Stoolies are generally good people and we certainly aren't what Stephanie Haberman is trying to paint us as. 

That's the core of all of this. Being regular people but painted as pariahs because we read this satirical sports and pop culture site. As if looking at Buzzfeed or Deadspin instead makes you the second coming of the kin of God. 

In the end I guess Stephanie Haberman wins. She obviously won't back down from her stance, and ended up getting traffic and recognition from this ordeal. People didn't know her before, but they do now. 

I just needed to touch on this, because I've stayed relatively silent on these topics until now. There's a negative connotation to being a Stoolie, and its time I said something on the fact. 

David Price Signs With The Boston Red Sox

#RedSox in agreement with David Price. 7 years and $217 million. Story on @BGlobeSports: https://t.co/uambYduqBK

— Pete Abraham (@PeteAbe) December 1, 2015

OHHHH BOY! Things just got very, very interesting. David Price pitching in Fenway wearing the red "B" on his cap. Obviously other fans (namely Yankees fans) are coming out of the woodwork saying "Good! Not worth the money and years!" among the other anti-Price arguments. 

The first thing people brought up was obviously the contract. Is 7 years, $217 million absurd? Yeah, but this is baseball, where you overpay for everything. If anyone can afford to take on that contract it's John Henry. If he bankrupts himself, so be it. It;s not my money, and not yours either. There's no salary cap in baseball, so money doesn't matter as long as the man at the top still has a way to make it. 

As for the years argument, there is a 3-year opt out. So when Price is dominant for the next 3 years, he'll opt out in search of a bigger contract and the Sox will cut ties when he does so. He should be in his prime and coming down from it at the end of those 3 years, so this is fine with me. We've also seen plenty of pitchers perform well into their mid and late 30's. John Lackey was 34 in 2013 when the Sox won the World Series. Curt Schilling was 37 in '04 when he helped break The Curse of the Bambino. THIRTY SEVEN. So I'll be the one to throw that argument out the window as well. Moving on...

The David Ortiz beef. Yes, they have had an interesting past and have butted heads. But, as Price told WEEI.com this past July, its exactly that. The past. Jared Carrabis of Barstool Sports has already broken down the Ortiz argument (and postseason one, which I'll get to), but he basically likened it to the Johnny Gomes-Coco Crisp incident. That day Crisp charged the mound, Gomes beat his brains in during the brawl. Who loved Coco? Ortiz. Who loved Gomes when he came to Boston and helped win a ring? Ortiz. Stuff like that can easily be put in the rearview when you're in it for the common goal of winning. Especially now that Ortiz has announced his intent to retire after next season. He wants one last championship, and knows Price can help. It's water under the bridge.

Ah yes. Finally. The postseason argument. Price is 2-7 with a 5.12 ERA in the postseason, and this is a fair point to make. But, as Jared Carrabis also wrote... You know what, forget it. I can't word it any better than Jared so here's the wrap up thought on the last of the Price arguments. 

"Now, here’s the big one. What about his history of poor performances in the postseason? I get it. It’s a more than fair criticism, but I don’t think it should carry as much weight as the Price haters would like it to. Look at the larger body of work here. In his career, Price is 104-56 with a 3.09 ERA. That’s a .650 winning percentage, and you’re either a liar or an idiot if you say that you don’t want a guy like that on your team. This past October, Price suffered his seventh consecutive postseason loss, tying the record for most consecutive postseason losses by a starting pitcher.

Here’s why I think his postseason struggles have largely been a fluke. Not only is it because we’re looking at seven starts spread out over the course of six years, but it’s also because the pitcher whose record he tied for most consecutive postseason losses was Hall of Famer — and arguably the best left-handed pitcher of all-time — Randy Johnson. Johnson lost seven consecutive postseason starts spread out over seven seasons, and he didn’t break that streak until 2001 when he was a co-World Series MVP with Curt Schilling for the Arizona Diamondbacks. Oh, and he was 37 years old. Price is 30 with still plenty of time to shine in October. But nobody remembers Johnson’s losing streak in the postseason. They only remember him mowing down the Yankees in the World Series, which Price is more than capable of doing, as we’ve seen flashes of his dominance as recent as this past ALCS when he racked up 16 strikeouts over his last 13.1 innings."

Welcome to Boston David Price. Let's get some rings.