You have to give it to Seth Everett talk about trying to save face and back out from comments directly attributed to him. This is what he had to say today to 1050 ESPN’s Michael Kay when he went on to say he went to see Francoeur to clear the air so to speak about his BBTN incident that infuriated Mets players for trying to suggest the Mets players were somehow unhappy with Manuel.
He says and I am para phrasing but this is the heart of it,
I didn’t report anything I don’t call myself a reporter. I simply interpreted 4 pieces of news from last week and I brought it up on BBTN…..The fact that 4 Mets players had openly questioned Jerry in the media….as a result of the caption on ESPN was “Mets unhappy with Manuel” and Francoeur did not like that but he didn’t hear the context of what I said.
OK so Francoeur didn’t hear the context right OK so let’s see what was the context. Here is the link of that night when Everett made his statements. Link
Now a few quotes from that night. At one point Everett is quoted to say, “The reason that Santana became an issue is because he wasn’t happy about it.”
“wasn’t happy about it“? Sounds like another way of saying unhappy to me Seth. In other words the caption that ESPN used simply repeated what you yourself stated.
Here is one more quote. “I’m not sitting here saying that Jerry Manuel is making mistakes but if his player’s aren’t happy how many times you have to go through it where Reyes is going to again question Jerry Manuel publicly?”
“but if his player’s aren’t happy“? Again Seth is the one suggesting the players aren’t happy.
So tell me then if Everett is trying to suggest that Francouer somehow read the caption and reacted without hearing the context of what he said then what was the context? Seems to me the title fits the story maybe Seth should MAN UP and admit he was in fact trying to insinuate that Mets players were unhappy with Manuel.
What do you think?