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!

NYT Hall of Fame sports front

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by wicked, Jan 10, 2013.

  1. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I thought when Grizzard did it it was brilliant...

    I don't like it.
     
  2. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    Aside from everything else already discussed . . . .

    The Hall of Fame election ---- ANY Hall of Fame election, whether it's 10 people or zero people getting in ---- doesn't deserve 80 percent of a lead sports front.

    Somebody stated that it illustrated the "absurdity" of the vote.

    Really? If Craig Biggio gets just 39 more votes out of 569 cast, then there is no blank Times front and thus no absurdity.

    Is the line between absurd and not absurd really so fine?
     
  3. YGBFKM

    YGBFKM Guest

    This would have been a great idea for the 2000 presidential election.
     
  4. jr/shotglass

    jr/shotglass Well-Known Member

    Hey, 2,465 em-spaces don't make themselves.
     
  5. Versatile

    Versatile Active Member

    That's not always true, and it wasn't in this case.
     
  6. Versatile

    Versatile Active Member

    The Times always blows out section-front centerpieces.
     
  7. dooley_womack1

    dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

    Well, I would think you would consider the block of white space to be the ginormous image.
     
  8. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    They do. But if a borderline candidate had gotten 39 more votes . . . the HOF magically wouldn't have been the centerpiece anymore. Imagine that. Borderline first-time candidates often fall a little short. It had been expected this time.

    Never mind that excluding Bonds, Clemens, etc., would have still been every bit as absurd. It was those 39 votes that a borderline first-time candidate didn't get that ultimately allowed the NYT to do what it did.

    And that's absurd.
     
  9. Versatile

    Versatile Active Member

    No, I meant it wasn't inside the business section. I agree that the Times blows out centerpieces, and it does it for all sections. Arts almost never has more than two stories on the cover.
     
  10. Versatile

    Versatile Active Member

    I disagree. The approach would have been to use the same space, devoted to Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens not making it. Consider the space dedicated by other newspapers (via Charles Apple):

    Lafayette Journal & Courier

    [​IMG]

    Florida Today (brilliant headline)

    [​IMG]

    New York Daily News (front, not back)

    [​IMG]

    Newsday

    [​IMG]

    Asbury Park Press

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  11. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    But would the NYT have done that? Perhaps.

    In any event, Bonds and Clemens et al were the story. Not "nobody" getting in, but the suspected juicers not getting in.

    NYT presentation doesn't offer that distinction or that perspective. And, in addition to lacking any visual perspective, it lacks any written perspective. And that's why it fails.

    Don't care much for Asbury Park because who got in in 2000, 2001, etc., is of no relevance. It failed, too, to offer the PED perspective visually (but at least did so in a column).
     
  12. jr/shotglass

    jr/shotglass Well-Known Member

    That Florida Today concept was inspired. Major kudos.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page