no box scores

Seems like the fantasy players really want boxes. Yes, I know you can get them online, but they're a pain in the ass to print them off the 'net -- they usually don't all fit on one sheet of paper, whereas they do in agate type.

 

Unfortunately, I think baseball box scores in the newspaper are going the way of the Pullman car, smoking indoors, radio shows and buggy whips.

At best, we're in a tough transition period in our industry. At worst, the printed product is headed toward extinction. I think extinction is a bit overboard, but I think, like radio, we'll have to change.
It comes down to information and how people absorb and process it. I do feel like people younger than I process information much differently than even I do.

There was a time when the newspaper was the only place to find a box score was in a newspaper agate section. That time is in the rearview. I can find that information on at least four sites as soon as the game ends or later that night. Why look it up in the newspaper the next day? It's old news by then. Then again, I'm not a subscriber to any newspaper. If I was, I might feel differently. Then again, my newspapers might pile up during the cold months while I use my computer in the warmth of my home to find that information instead of pulling on clothes, putting on my coat and trudging downstairs to grab the newspaper in 30-below-zero weather.

I would venture to guess that most non-newspaper-affiliated people 30 and younger also don't wait for a newspaper for the boxscore. I know I don't, and I'm slightly older than 30. I would seriously doubt that most younger people playing fantasy baseball would check a newspaper for a box score. Heck, they have programs now that can calculate your up-to-the-second point totals each night.

For the next decade or possibly two, I think we in newspapers will be caught between holding on to the past, which newspaper people definitely love to do, and looking to the future. I think the future is remaking the daily newspaper. I think suggestion of putting the box score(s) on the newspaper website is not a bad one if your space is dwindled that much. I wouldn't give readers an excuse to go elsewhere, which is what we do when take away box scores and don't put them in another place. It might be a hard-to-reach place for some readers, but at least, it would be another place.

I think in this Good-Lord-Knows-where-we're-going push to the internet that some companies are embarking on, we'll definitely and unfortunately piss off some of our older readers on the way. I wish it was a more measured approach.

Part of me thinks that it's 2008, and it's time to get with the program. And the only place to find those Luddite readers in increasing numbers is on the obit pages. Personally, I've been using the world wide web since 1995. That's 13 stinkin' years now.
The other part of me sympathizes with the generation gap. There are a large group of people who will never click on Safari, Explorer or FireFox. My grandparents are part of that group. The newspaper, the printed word and perhaps some TV is how they process their information, and we're taking it away from them. Therefore, we're making it worse on ourselves.

Personally, I like agate in that you can get a ton of information in a small space, but some nights when I'm working on it, I feel like its days are numbered.

 

This is a simple business proposition. The less information in a paper, the fewer people are going to buy it. And the fewer people who think your flagship product is worth buying, the fewer people are going to hit your Web site "where they can get the box scores, like everyone in my generation does."
This trashing the brand identity to save very little money. It's sheer foolishness, whether the paper actually has a plan to transform itself to the Web, or, more likely, is planning on a quiet death and a poorly-attended funeral.

 

I don't think it's a matter of being able to get the box score online, therefore don't print it. That doesn't make sense to me.
And you can't compare it to stocks: Those are outdated by the time the paper prints; a baseball box score doesn't change.

There just is no more efficient format to give the reader so much information about a game.

 

For a paper in a major-league market, that's inexcusable. Elsewhere, maybe not.

 

We don't run wire box scores period. SE says they're a "waste of space".

To be fair, we normally get 3-4 pages and have a standing "all local first" policy (that is, D-3 girls HS golf is must-run and uncuttable in all but the most desperate circumstances, but a regular season gamer for probably any team but the Packers and Lions is not even a 100% guarantee to go if we're tight.

Also, we don't have a devoted agate page (same reason as above). Normally, we just run pro standings, prep calendar and briefs/announcements.

 

Box scores are one of the few things a newspaper does better than the internet.

To stop doing what you do better than your direct competition is asinine.

No one can read the boxes online faster than I can on one page right in front of me, and certainly not while drinking coffee at the kitchen table.

 

The other reason it would be ridiculous is the East Valley paper competes with the Arizona Republic, and you would presume they didn't stop running box scores.

 

Stock tables are different because the price is always change, and they're underrated as well.
Box scores? Go ahead, cut them out.
You'll be out of business within a decade.
Box scores are exactly the kind of info a daily paper can provide that is of lasting value to the customer. Yeah, the price of Google will be changed again before the reader sees the paper, but Tim Duncan is going to be 8-of-12 from the field from the time the game ends until eternity. Anyone in the newspaper business who thinks cutting out box scores on major sports is a good idea should be out of the newspaper business.

 

On some days, I actually think EV does a better job than the Republic when it comes to covering Phoenix sports (although I am a fan of the Repub's sports section), so I couldn't understand this decision at all.

Like sbordow said, power to the people!!

 

I disagree. Boxscores take up a ton of space, with most of them having little to no value to a particular reader. Yes, there are the rotisserie/fantasy players to consider, but keeping track of your players' performances are a whole lot easier online than going through 15 boxes. When that segment of the readership is weaned off the agate page, how many people actually are interested in every box score for every major sport, or do they mostly just read the 2-3 involving teams that interest them? That's why I say box scores in this day and age of shrinking space are becoming a waste of space. You are dedicating a full/half page to agate (and during baseball season, another page to MLB boxes) to something where only a minor percentage of the entire page is of interest to a specific reader. Think about how many more stories -- especially local stuff -- you could run in that space that would more effective target a bigger portion of your readership. That's stuff that they can't get elsewhere. The problem is when agate is cut and the space is just gone, not re-used for something else.

 

Thirded (or maybe fourthed).

We still run every box score, but only three full gamers a day. We run the local team's gamer (we don't cover them ourselves, but use the full wire optional), then pick a "game of the day" from each league to run on the inside baseball page.

The "games of the day" are the first things that get sacrificed if space is tight, but we ALWAYS run every box score, the standings and a rail featuring news items from around the majors (trades, injuries, suspensions, call-ups, etc.)