Are sports writers skeptical enough?

I think in Canada, sports writers are skeptical, right, left and center.

 

Than you are no better than a fan. So basically you aren't reporting what is truly going on you are feeding fans BS

 

You got it. One of our main teams in our coverage area is going to S-U-C-K, but we're definitely playing them up because they are the main teams for our core readers. For high school, at least, there's no need to bury them just because they're not a good team. Major college and pros, I can understand.

 

Alabama women's hoops coach Stephany Smith, during the midst of a winless SEC season, said, "Next year, we won't be much better."

 

But how did she respond during the next preseason? If it was last year, how will she respond? I'm guessing something like, "We learned a lot from that winless conference season. That will only make us stronger and our upperclassmen will work even harder to show they can play with LSU and the Lady Vols."

I don't mind fluff stories during the preseason, it's a matter of what you do once the team starts playing exhibitions, or non conference games. A coach isn't doing his job if he isn't optimistic during the preseason. Who seriously says that their team is going to suck in the upcoming season? If you cover the NFL and a few players are battling for a starting job and they are all terrible, you should be skeptical and say that. If your D-1 football team with a highly touted D has 50 points put on them by a no-name school, then you should write about it. Things change when you play someone besides yourself, and that's when you should start to be skeptical.

 

Please. It's not like we're reporting that Jimmy Quarterback is 6-foot-3 and has a rocket for an arm this year, when he's actually a 5-9 pansy.

We ask questions about what they're doing to improve on the happy feet in the pocket, what was worked on the last six months to keep from fumbling the ball every fucking series, and why he thinks the team has a chance to do better than 1-11. Then we report on the answers.

It's usually positive. It doesn't mean we're dishonest fuckfaces.

 

it's like any businees. rose-colored glasses are worn by all until it's time to see the results. only after the fact does the truth come out, by which time the rose-colored glasses are back on.

is any business different? ??? ??? ???

 

God, is she ever right too.

 

I don't agree that you have to feed the fans all fluff all the time this time of year.

Your preseason stories, when combined, should give the fans a feeling of what to expect once the season starts.

If the team has a badass quarterback coming back, and everyone thinks he's poised for a big year, write that.

If the team just lost three starters in the secondary to the NFL and there is no experience on the roster to replace them, write that too. Of course, the coach is going to be optimistic -- include his view in the story -- but it doesn't mean the whole story has to be fluff.

 

Well, sometimes it does. Did you have the Detroit Tigers making the World Series last year, after their 2005 season? Did you have the Mariners with the third-best record in baseball after their 2006 season?

Last- (or middle) to-first stories used to never happen. Now, while not commonplace, they aren't exactly unusual, especially in college, where kids do mature in six months, or when there is a big difference in team chemistry when the glory-seeking ballhog turns pro.

 

I wrote a realistic preview for one of our area HS teams (2A) just a day ago, curious what the reaction might be. Here are the highlights:

1. Far-off West Podunk High lost exactly half the roster to graduation, so the entire JV is moving up.

2. Far-off West Podunk High will likely win the conference for a third straight year because the JV are still better than the varsity of the other two fuckup teams in the league.

3. This will probably be the last year Far-off West Podunk can contend for the conference title as Far-off East Podunk High, a killer of a 3A team, will drop to 2A in 2008 and own the conference from the start.


I'll let you know how readers take it (assuming they give a shit to read it).

 

You're not automatically guilty of using rose-colored ink in your pen just because you're writing that last year's bust is back again and has a chance to be better, etc. The majority of these stories (I hope) accurately reflect how horrible so-and-so was last year, lays out who the competition for playing time will be this year and explains what changes in circumstances (new offensive scheme, better teammates, 30 days in drug rehab, etc.) might make improvement possible.