There’s a razor’s edge between what’s “objective’’ and what’s “negative.’’ Some of us spend a career straddling that edge. Skepticism and its bully twin, cynicism, are part of the game, if only because media heathens don’t want to be co-opted by teams they write about or, worse, be seen as foolish when their best judgments are affected by even a hint of FanBoy favoritism.
I was guilty of the latter when it came to the pleasant success of Jake Browning. He wasn’t as good as I decided he was.
This comes up now in debates about the Bengals and Reds. Being objective about each means I remove any rose tint from my glasses and do my clear-eyed job. You could call it “negative.’’ I can’t worry about that.
As for the Bengals:
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The Morning Line to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.