1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

BBWAA Complaints About St. Louis Press Box

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moondoggy, Oct 26, 2006.

  1. SEC Guy

    SEC Guy Member

    The fact that Selig is even acknowledging this shows just how bad it truly is. If this was just a bunch of hacks whining, it would not be treated so seriously.

    Good for the BBWAA.
  2. Sly

    Sly Active Member

    That's a shame because the box at The Cell is one of the best around.
  3. wickedwritah

    wickedwritah Guest

    If the main box is that shitty, I only can imagine how bad the auxiliary box must be.
  4. spnited

    spnited Active Member

    That will not happen without a major fight from the BBWAA.
    And if Bud supposedly told the Cards they could not put the main box along the right field line, what makes the Sox think they can move it to the third base line?
  5. Pringle

    Pringle Active Member

    Well they sold their game start time to Seven-Eleven, so I think they think they can get away with whatever brings in dough. And when I heard the marketing guy on the radio, they were kissing his ass and saying, "Hey, look at the press box at Fenway and how high up it is. This shouldn't be a big deal. You're doing a great job!" And on and on and on.
  6. spnited

    spnited Active Member

    How does selling the start time relate to moving the press box, other than it's another money grab?
    Selling the start time does not affect our ability to do our jobs properly. Moving the press box could and does.
  7. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    This is a bit of a threadjack, but speaking as someone who covered 7 World Series, and is now a mere reader, if I were an East Coast sports editor, I'd seriously consider not staffing any Series where my home or area team isn't involved. You're spending a goodly sum of money for pregame (news of the day before yesterday) coverage plus post-game coverage that makes precious few papers, driving your readers to the website so you may not get their fifty cents.
    Obviously, if your local team is on the verge of some major offseason moves, you want to be there to keep tabs on it. That's not the case for the Red Sox this year, and I really wonder if the "prestige" of having their staff on site is worth the investment for two seriously hard-pressed Boston papers.
    If I was still ON the Herald staff, I'd howl with rage at anyone who made the suggestion I just did. But I'm developing a new perspective here at home.
  8. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    That's a bad analogy. The Cardinals are not your employer. If your employer provided work space at the stadium that was lacking in the basics to do the job, I understand your argument. But what enforceable obligation do the Cardinals or the owners of the stadium have to provide journalists with appropriate working spaces?

  9. spnited

    spnited Active Member

    Trust me, Gee, it's already happening in a lot of places. Not total lack of staff coverage but maybe one writer or columnist (and using wire for gamers) instead of multi-staffing.
  10. Pringle

    Pringle Active Member

    Because they'll do anything to make a buck. That's what I meant. I didn't realize it would be a controversial statement here. Jeez.
  11. spnited

    spnited Active Member

    Not controversial. The make a buck angle is what it is.
    All I'm saying is nobody would fight the selling of the starting time as the BBWAA is likely to fight moving the box.
  12. Pringle

    Pringle Active Member

    Gotcha, gotcha. I think we just were not connecting there. We're on the same wavelength.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page