Sons of Anarchy creator Kurt Sutter whines about critics -- AGAIN.

I'm a fan of the show Sons of Anarchy which airs on FX.  I think it's one of the better shows that's on TV at the moment, and it's on one of my favorite networks, which has featured other shows that are favorites of mine including Damages and the recently cancelled Terriers.

Yet I can't help but be annoyed anytime I read about the show runner Kurt Sutter bitching and crying about how his show doesn't get the respect it deserves, and it's bypassed by award groups, and critics and bloggers are clueless jackanapes who wouldn't know a good show if it bit them in the ass.

And it's weird because I agree with him for the most part.  I think the show is drastically overlooked come Emmy time.  I think Katey Sagal (Married With Children, Futurama, Lost) who is married to Sutter, should have won an Emmy for her brilliant acting in Season 2.   I thought the show should have been more recognized by the awards as well.   I definitely think that the show is better than The Good Wife or any number of other shows that are critical darlings.

However Sutter's constant crying on his blog about it serves no purpose other than to put his show in a bad light to the very people he so desperately wants to appeal to.   The very people he is criticizing, are not going to suddenly read his rants and change their minds.  If they don't like the direction the previous season went in, they're not going to suddenly have a change of heart.

The Emmy people aren't going to suddenly say "wow, we really screwed the pooch there, let's reward them next year".  It's just going to turn those people further against your show, because when they see your show from now on, your insults, and complaints are what they think of.

Making your voice heard is one thing.  That's definitely warranted.  However it's come to the point where anytime I see Sutter's name in an article about "Sons" I almost immediately figure he's complaining about lack of respect.

I compare this to Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban.  The Mavs are my favorite team, and Cuban has done tremendous good for them.  He brought that team from a laughingstock to perennial contenders.  Sure they've underachieved, but they're in contention every year, which is a far cry from what they used to be.

The problem is though that Cuban has a tendency to be a high profile antagonist of anyone that goes against the Mavs.   Reporters who have written about negative things have dealt with his wrath in the form of harsh criticism and in some cases banned bloggers from his locker room.

The Refs have been assailed by him (many times for good reason) and he's been fined well over a million dollars total.  And in response, there's a widely held view that the refs have screwed over the Mavs on calls or non-calls due to Cuban being such a public and vocal critic of them.

That's the same way it is with Sutter.  I love his show, but wish he'd dial back the complaining.  All it does is make him seem extremely thin-skinned, and puts his show even further away from the very acceptance that he aspires to.

In a perfect world, it wouldn't be that way.  A show like "Sons" would be a critical and Emmy darling, due to it's superior writing and acting.   But in a perfect world, shows like Terriers, and NBC's Life wouldn't have been cancelled, and Damages being shipped over to DirectTV, while schlock on other channels thrives and gets renewed.

This isn't a perfect world, and Sutter needs to understand that.   As I said I agree with much of what he says, I simply think he's overdoing it and going about it the wrong way.