Thoughts on Scout and Rivals...

Isn't the Dispatch a private business? How do you know what their profits are?

This whole thread just continues to leave me wondering why every major paper in a Pac 10/SEC/Big 10/ACC city doesn't hire a full-time recruiting writer. That's the shit people are paying to see online, so why not co-opt it?

Swallow your pride and hire someone from piddly Scout or Rivals if you have to. Then you don't have to quote such-and-such writer from Scout.com. You can have him write the stories.

 

if you read the majority of the articles, they can't write too well.

 

OK, that's somewhat of a valid point, but there are good-enough writers out there on some of these sites.

 

I totally agree with this. And there's a larger point. Some newspapers think they are in direct competition with the web site, when in reality, probably only 1-5% of the people who see their sports section will have already gone online for news on a normal day.

 

Are they still written poorly even If you don't read the majority of them?

 

If you care to inform me - shatter my denial - I'd be happy to look at something besides anecdotal hyperbole that suggests the NCAA should have a different blanket approach for Internet reporters than other media.
Call someone at the NCAA, or any school's compliance department, and ask which medium they monitor and scrutinize the most.

That ought to get you up to speed.

 

SouthernScribe,

You...
1. offered a percentage comparison of newspaper reporters and “web site yahoos” who might do dirty work for their schools.
2. Said ethical and professional web site guys are “a distinct minority.”
3. Said that newspaper reporters who do dirty work for their school are an “extremely small minority.”

I’m assuming you are a print guy, and you apparently have a very hallowed view of the newsprint industry, as do I. You also appear to have some skepticism and disdain for other forums to the point you think they are subject to control and regulation by the NCAA - unworthy of first amendment protection. Hence, one would expect you, with such a high opinion of yourself, to be able to back words up with facts. Can you provide facts to support your specific claims? Anecdotes? Maybe. Facts? None yet forthcoming. So don't be so hyperbolic.

You still haven't demonstrated why the NCAA of all groups, should treat reporters in different media differenty. You should really, really be careful what you're asking for in that regard.

 

SouthernScribe,

You...
1. offered a percentage comparison of newspaper reporters and “web site yahoos” who might do dirty work for their schools.
2. Said ethical and professional web site guys are “a distinct minority.”
3. Said that newspaper reporters who do dirty work for their school are an “extremely small minority.”

I’m assuming you are a print guy, and you apparently have a very hallowed view of the newsprint industry, as do I. You also appear to have some skepticism and disdain for other forums to the point you think they are subject to control and regulation by the NCAA - unworthy of first amendment protection. Hence, one would expect you, with such a high opinion of yourself, to be able to back words up with facts. Can you provide facts to support your specific claims? Anecdotes? Maybe. Facts? None yet forthcoming. So don't be so hyperbolic.

You still haven't demonstrated why the NCAA of all groups, should treat reporters in different media differenty. You should really, really be careful what you're asking for in that regard.
Looks like you totally ignored my last post.

Check with the NCAA or a compliance department, and then get back to me.

Otherwise, I'm not into pissing matches.

 

Scribe, that's like saying most airline crashes occur with airliners. The NCAA/compliance offices are worried about boosters and recruiting. Since most newspapers ignore recruiting and rivals/scout lives for it, of course the watchdogs are hounding these sites.

I have a regional beat as opposed to a school specific one so I get to meet the beat guys (print/web/radio/tv/etc.) at most of the programs in my area. As a rule, the web guys are nowhere near as polished as the newspaper guys nor as professional. However, it doesn't take long to find the exceptions in both camps. For example, I was shocked to see a newspaper guy trashtalking from the field to fans in the stands after a game last season. Of course, we've all seen web guys who had no business being credentialed.

It is just like anything else. These sites have to judged individually on their merit. I've put my rep on the line recommending web guys for freelance work that newspaper guys would have gotten in the past. It should be about merit, not the medium.

 

I didn't glean anything substantive in your last post. You trotted some purported facts out there, and now you can't back them up. It's that simple.