Did I mess up in any way?

What column is more meaningful though? Is it one coming from a jack-of-all-trades type who sees the team once in a while, or is it one coming from someone who basically lives with the team day-in, day-out? I'd say there's a lot more ummph to the latter, and I'd imagine, whether right or wrong in their eyes, it'd be more respected by athletes than someone else stopping quickly to rip or prase then move on.

 

An interesting thought, one I surely can't dismiss.

I might suggest that not all JCs or CCs -- or Division II and Division III -- programs are created equal.

You have those which have the support of not only friends and relatives, but the community as well. And you have those where the crowd averages 67.

Perhaps your question is best answered by whether this is a program with some following.

 

For the purposes of coverage style, then of course you're right. If a tiddlywinks tournament draws 10,000 fans to your burg, you cover the daylights out of it. If it gets 100, maybe do a small feature but you don't go overboard.

I guess I consider a columnist (or at least a regular column) at a small shop to be a nice thing if you can do it, but if you can't, you can't. I don't know if kingcreole is a one-man army, but if writing a column might compromise his ability to cover the team fairly (or at least the impression he can do it fairly from the public) then maybe it's not a good idea. I'm sure he thinks he can do both, and he might. I think I could do it. But I'm not going to because I don't want to give people ammo for claiming that I'm biased for or against whatever they're against or for. I don't believe ALL perception is reality, but in this case I tend to think it's more legitimate.

 

The juco I cover has for a long time been THE game in town. It's not a tiny town I live in, but it's not a major metroplex. The men play in front of a few thousand people each home game, sometimes equal numbers on the road. They have a loyal following for road games, sometimes hundreds.

I didn't expect the women's players to be patting me on the back, certainly, and like I said, I don't regret anything I wrote. But as far as I'm concerned, they are college athletes. Juco or four-year, they are college athletes. They aren't the positive-thoughts-only-please people any more. They are adults, old enough to vote and die for this country. And like a couple people told me, if they don't like maybe they should play better.

No, it's not essential to write columns about juco sports. But I do like to occasionally write a column. What am I going to do? Write about the Super Bowl? The worthlessness of the Pro Bowl? Duke basketball being overrated? UFC? Or how about a local sport that people can't read anywhere else?

 

ex

exactly. this is the only way newspapers will remain relevant. when every columnist in podunk is writing the same column you can get on espn and in 100 other papers, no one has a need to buy the local rag. i can't think of a bigger waste of space than when the SE of a small-town 5,000 circulation rag feels the need to weigh in on every major sporting event while ignoring local stories.

 

No, not exactly. The only options aren't "write columns about local stuff" and "write columns about national stuff". I think writing a column about subject matter that you cover as a beat writer puts your credibility in question -- even if you can prove six ways from Sunday that your opinions don't drive your coverage.

Newspapers stay relevant by how well the cover the news in their town, and if people are wondering if the guy who called out the community college basketball team can fairly write stories about them later that week, then it's counterproductive.

No offense intended, king; you're probably a good enough reporter to do both effectively. But it looks sketchy and, as you found out, can get in the way of you doing your job.

 

All I ever guarantee the media is equal access.

If you do something to piss off a coach or any of the players, then you have to live with it.

I've had writers sent to cover my school who have point blank said to me that they have to write a rip-job. I couldn't imagine why coach and players were mad about it afterwards.

I've also had a voter in the AP poll tell a player that either he talks to him or he will refuse to vote for his school in the poll. That threat didn't make for a very happy ending. . . especially for the writer. He didn't get to vote much longer.

 

I would never go that far. Hey, if they don't want to talk to me, then zipadee-do-da. My job goes on and so does their season. But when a player holds one of the conference's top scorers to zero points in 39 minutes and she refuses to talk to me, she's not looking at the overall. My story gets written with or without her comments. I would have preferred to have gotten her comments yes, but if she's too immature to handle it, then fine. I understand. I'll write about her when she plays well, like I did, and when she goes 0-10, that still gets a mention. I won't change the way I cover the teams I do.

 

Meat, I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think my credibility is a question. I wrote an honest game story for today's edition. I mentioned that they held two of the league's top scorers in check, quoted the coach on how hard they played (he's brutally honest too) and I have no doubt that the gamer I wrote for today would have been nearly verbatum (sp??) even without the column I wrote. But again, your points are valid to someone who may not know the writer/situation well.

 

at smaller papers, you obviously don't have the luxury of double staffing most any game(s).

does this mean folks who read those sections should be cut off from analysis? hell no. at the same time, folks at those papers who provide both game and analysis coverage have to be fully ready to admit they were wrong.

some of the most knowledgeable columns i've ever read came from "beat" guys.

 

You know, although I completely see what Meat's saying, the argument could be made that a lot of great columns go unwritten because some newspaper frowns upon their beat writers doing them.

 

King:

Devil's advocate here: From your initial post, it sounds as if your column echoed the criticism offered by the coach. But what if the coach is full of crap? Or, at least, what if the players think he is? If there's an issue of effort once, OK. If there's an issue of effort four times, in the same circumstances, maybe the coach isn't effective, either at preparing the team to play hard or recruiting the right players. There might be an issue worth exploring.

And none of this is to say you're not dead-on. You're the one who watches this team play. But sometimes we give coaches too much credit. Sometimes they're right on. But sometimes they take the credit and blame the players.