Cover what you like, or what the readers do

Baseball, in my opinion, is the second worst sport to cover. (Golf being No. 1).

If you give me a choice between covering a 5K in 95 degree weather for three hours or a baseball game in perfect weather for an hour and a half, I'm taking the race every time.

And that includes high school season, little league, connie mack, legion, amateur, e.t.c.

Though, I do think there's a special section in hell just for legion. God does legion blow ass.

 

Agreed. If you let your readers dictate what you cover all the time, you're going to miss something good. You just have to be sure that when you go against what your readers might want that you're doing it for the right reasons, meaning because it's a better story, not because you happen to like it more.

 

I was at my first Legion game of the year last night. Two-plus hours for a team that has one kid from my town, and the team is 0-9, I believe. That one kid grounded out pinch hitting to end the game. sigh.

 

The last time we did a reader survey, my first thought was all the youth soccer and kidball parents stuffing the ballot box. I expressed that concern to our marketing director (a former DI softball player who knew where I was coming from) and she told me not to worry. Ended up with an hour extra on Friday nights so we could get out to more football games.

Don't mind covering baseball and softball, but get extremely ticked when, after we go out and cover games in town, they leagues forget our number/e-mail when they go out of town for regionals. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that they go two-and-barbecue, but at the same time, readers know what's going on with these teams, then don't see a story, and of course it's all our fault.

 

I will probably be at the first day of our state Legion tournament ... and I don't cover it. I'll probably make 2-3 days of our local regional.

It's good baseball around here, even with the travel teams taking away from it in many areas.

As for Little League baseball, I like a good tournament game as much as I like watching an MLB game. I watch a lot of ESPN's wall-to-wall coverage of regional finals and the LLWS. I watch it not because the kids are "so darn cute," but for the competition level. A 12-year-old who can throw 78 mph ... that catches my attention.

But I know I'm in the minority.

For a newspaper our size, though, I don't see that either should get much play.

That's where you get into the original question, and my answer for Rhody -- my answer, not necessarily the right one -- is that readership ideally drives coverage. What you prefer to cover should not drive coverage. If it works out that what you like covering is what should be covered, that's great, but it's not a goal.

 

Boy, do I feel for you guys who are stuck covering Little League. I suppose if the parents and coaches don't get in your face about it and they are down to earth and keep it in perspective, it might not be so bad. But getting quotes from 11- and 12-year olds ... ugh!

Where I am now, baseball and softball are a virtual afterthought. We have two Little League programs in our coverage area, neither of which has ever sent a team on any kind of postseason run. We've only got two Legion teams, again, neither of them very good. It does make summer a challenge. We've got a lot of summer basketball, a well-organized swim league and some accomplished track clubs. That and some well-planned features help us get through the summer.

I think you have to cover the teams/athletes that are successful, regardless of your preference for the sport. I once worked in a place where the high school soccer was good, but had largely been ignored previously. I like soccer, but even if I had a visceral hatred of it, there was no way to deny the results the area teams were producing -- long playoff runs, state semifinal appearances, a state title.

Admittedly, it's a tougher call when it's something like Little League or a 5K or a tennis player on the USTA Junior circuit. With the high school sports, it feels more like a no-brainer. But if you have successful teams/athletes, that always is the justification for coverage. If they're no good, that's the justification for more limited coverage. And then you'll have some "dimwit on the phone" giving you the reverse-logic argument, "well if you covered them, more kids would want to play and they'd get better." You can't please everyone. But I don't think you can go wrong by basing your coverage decisions on how well the teams/athletes perform.

And Rhody, it's the middle of the summer and you were shorthanded ... don't sweat it. You missed a couple of June Legion games. No tragedy. Summer is the time to diversify the section. Enjoy it while it lasts. We'll all be back to the football/basketball/baseball grind sooner than we'd like.

 

Never, never, never let the public convince you that the newspaper is a factor in the event itself. If they try to tell you newspaper coverage makes a difference in performance, tell them if that's the case, the players are in it for the wrong reason.

 

I've gotten blamed for a small turnout at a football game for using the term "preseason game" (which it was) in the preview.

"We call it non-league, non-league!" Coach said. "When people read the word 'preseseason.' they don't show up."

I interviewed two players after the game. Both used the word "preseason" multiple times.

 

See, we don't cover teams based on success. I don't think success equals most important, at least in high school sports. We try to balance our coverage among the teams throughout the season, but generally we're covering things that fit the schedule and will help fill pages. People ask why we don't always cover the winning teams and we simply tell them we'll get to them when we can and they'll get their coverage in the postseason.

You should give Little League a shot - we're talking all-stars, BTW, not regular season crap. All stars is pretty fun when the parents don't go nuts.

 

So if you have one kid on the team, can't you find something else to put in the paper...that's a complete waste of time.

 

I'd rather not cover high school football. Who cares what the readers want?

Seriously, though, you cover what the publisher and editor wants you to cover.

 

That's the Patch way.