Yeah, wrap your head around THAT title. Anyway, in case you didn't know, James Morisette over at Bleacher Report took exception to Graham's open letter to Ken Holland. You can read his article by clicking here. In it, Morisette really takes Graham down a peg or two. Graham tries to remind Ken Holland that Wings fans are watching him, that he as a responsibility to the fans and to the team to bring us success and warns Holland if he doesn't deliver that he may begin to lose the respect and admiration of scores of Red Wings fans. As a result, criticism may become vicious and relentless as we dissect everything he does.
Morisette's scathing response? "Can someone say, 'Creepy?'".
Holy shit, he got you good, you fucker! Seriously Graham, how can you respond to the rapier wit of something that might have be uttered by Alicia Silverstone in Clueless? To hell with responding, how can you even survive that Dresden burning? Man am I glad I'm not you.
But I like you Graham, you seem like a good guy despite being Canadian. So allow me to respond for you, with this open letter to James Morisette. Because if there's anything James Morisette loves, it's open letters.
Dear James Morsiette,
I read your article on Bleacher Report where you teared into Winging it in Motown's Graham Hathway. I think Graham's Canadian heritage prevents him from responding to you, because it might be construed as rude and vindictive. I, on the other hand, have no qualm seeming to be either of those things.
In your slobbingly fellatic defense of Ken Holland, did you ever stop to consider putting any kind of evidence into your article to refute Graham's claims and more strongly support your own? I would think someone who received the exalted award of "Honorable Mention" 4 times in the month of May would have more substance to his writing. You say that "...a Red Wings build is a temporary rebuild" and that "...I wish people like Hathway would realize the Red Wings are a team not to be taken for granted."
Yet you can't point to evidence of these "temporary" rebuilds. Nor can you quote a section where Graham actually takes the Red Wings for granted. Instead, you're just really really upset at the idea that someone would criticize Ken Holland. You can't seem to get a grip on the notion that someone may have the audacity to question Ken Holland's decisions. You quickly point out that those who write open letters such as Graham did are "chauvinistic", because it comes with the assumption that Graham believes Holland will read the letter and immediately agree with everything.
Did you stop to read your own article? Because reading it, one cannot help but reach the conclusion that you're a huge hypocrite. Reading it immediately conjures up the idea of you sitting behind a computer, frantically typing away at what essentially boils down to a love letter to Ken Holland, thinking to yourself, "Oh man, Kenny is TOTALLY going to read this! And he's going to call me up and be like, 'Hey Morrey', because that'd SO be his nickname for me, 'I read what you said about me on Bleacher Report. It was so sweet of you to stand up for me against that jerk Hathway. Here are some tickets. Do you wanna makeout?'"
I also found it interesting that you basically agree to the whole premise of Graham's concern. "Is it a realistic assumption to say this hockey club may take a step back this season?", you ask. "Absolutely", you answer. Is it truly that Graham is misguided and wrong, or is that he asked questions in a thought provoking way that is forcing you to deal with your own fears and uncertainty of the Red Wings, and that kind of cognitive dissonance is extremely disturbing and uncomfortable for you? I'm guessing the latter.
Finally, to wrap up this letter. It's kind of a smaller sticking point, but it pissed me off anyway. You wrap up your article saying that Graham being so wrong wrongity wrong wrong is further evidenced by the fact that the Detroit Free Press "strapped the following atop Hathway's letter: '[Graham Hathway's] opinions do not necessarily reflect those of the Detroit Free Press nor its writers."
The fact that a so called "Featured Columnist" doesn't understand why a newspaper or other major publication is obligated to put that boiler plate statement atop an article that was written by someone who doesn't work for that publication is as telling as anything you wrote as to how misinformed and misguided your criticism was.
The Cadre of Obsessively Senile Red Wings Fans
Mike: 3rd Round Draft Pick