Fra- too-public....mlb stuff........

As accomplished as the Red Sox were last October, there were fundamental disagreements among members of upper management with respect to organizational philosophy, approaches and priorities. This lack of a shared vision, plus the stress of a far-too-public negotiation, strained some relationships, including mine with Larry Lucchino. Regretfully, we all made mistakes, and, despite our best efforts, we were not able to get on the same page.


Meaning exactly?

I think he is saying that each detail of the negotiations were carefully watched - and reported on - by the media, which led to increased pressure to "make a deal."

It's a sad truth that in modern society (especially the U.S.) stars and professional sports players are not allowed the same respect for privacy that others of us are. This includes their negitiations regarding contracts. Too many media outlets want to "scoop" their competitors, so they dig and dig, until they can come up with as many details as possible, even to the detriment to the process itself.

The negatiation - apprently well-known (and you will have to forgive me, since I have been in Bulgaria since the baseball season was young) - was too public to be appropriate. The writer/speaker obviously feels whatever negotiating went on should have been considerably more private.

"The anger induced by a far-too-personal exchange at the meeting has carried over for weeks on end." This would mean, words were said about someone's wife, mother, late dog, or odor (et cetera) at a company meeting, and no one's gotten over it.

"Rumors abound after the far-too-cosy interactions of Sue and the boss at the company party." In this instance, the boss touched Sue's leg, Sue giggled, touched his shoulder... looked deeply into his eyes for about ten seconds thereafter. Then he spilled his drink on her. And helped her clean it up. She kept giggling.

Hope these examples help to show how we can use, "far-too-".

A far-too-public negotiation is one which is carried out in the media rather than in it's proper venue.

Such as the OJ Trial or the Michael Jackson Trial(s), except in this case, the public really has no right to know, and so the publicity is more representative of declasse on the part of the parties involved, rather than a nosiness on the part of the public.

The implication is that decent, honorable people should have the class, grace and dignity to handle their private affairs privately.

nycphotography said:

The implication is that decent, honorable people should have the class, grace and dignity to handle their private affairs privately.

This was about the Boston Red Sox negotiating a contract with their GM. It seems that it was the Red Sox organization that
fed the press. Whether any of this could be considered 'private affairs', or part of an entertainment industry media circus....
really depends on whether you are a misbegotten Sox fan or
a lover of real baseball as practiced in the Bronx👁 Big Grin :D

Pretty clear now thanks........