Fred Wilpon Apologizes for New Yorker Remarks, Jose Reyes Sleeps Through It
Only a day after the firestorm of controversy caused by Mets owner Fred Wilpon's remarks published in The New Yorker, an addendum to the story is needed to fully encapsulate the Mets seemingly unending off-field woes.
According to The New York Times, the Mets embattled owner, who is facing a billion dollar lawsuit in the wake of the Bernie Madoff ponzi scheme, was embarrassed by his own disparaging comments which became public this week.
Wilpon reportedly apologized to Jose Reyes and Carlos Beltran via conference call yesterday. Beltran's vanilla response did not openly embrace the Mets owner, and he commented weakly that he has had to handle criticisms from ownership in the past. New York sports fans will continue to debate the accuracy of Wilpon's comments this week, although few can argue that they were unquestionably inappropriate coming from the Mets owner.
Unfortunately for the Mets, their performance on the field did little to alleviate the off-field criticisms. Shortly after the conference call, the Mets took the field for what would become one of their most embarrassing losses this season as Wilpon's "sh*tty team" endured an 11-1 rout at Wrigley Field.
Perhaps most disturbingly though, Wilpon's son Jeff, the Mets Chief Operating Officer, said that he reached out to some of the affected players on Monday to try to further explain the situation. When Reyes was asked by reporters if he received a phone call, his response was discouraging.
"No, I mean, probably. But I don’t answer. I was in bed all day yesterday, so I don’t know. A lot of people called me. I don’t know, maybe.”
Way to spend an off day in the midst of a team crisis, Jose. Is this the $140 million man that Mets fans want? Terrible leadership. Lack of motivation. The list goes on and on. Like the rest of the Mets team, Reyes appears to be, literally, asleep at the switch.
As a shortstop in New York, Reyes would be well served to take pause and ask WWJD? What would Jeter do?
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?