one beat (or a few) thoroughly, or more beats more shallowly?

Currently working for a small weekly, I don't only do sports, but I do all the sports for the paper. Of course this means I end up covering not just the sports I really like and understand quite well (hockey, football, basketball), but also sports I somewhat enjoy but don't know a ton about (rugby, "Olympic" sports, soccer) and some stuff I just plain don't care about (swimming, equestrian), although I still cover it professionally.

One of the advantages of this is that I'm never at a loss for stories, but for the sports that I really enjoy, I don't get to go as in depth with them as I might like. There's just not the time in the week. As I move up in the ranks, I imagine that I'll end up with a narrower focus on one or a few sports, but I also wonder if that's not a more difficult thing to do.

I realize that there's a lot of personal preference to the answer to this question, but am I going to look back on a situation like this and think of it as "the good old days", or is everyone who goes through this glad to be rid of it to concentrate on a beat that they truly can sink their teeth into?

 

I would guess that the grass is always going to be greener on the other side of the septic tank with this question. Right now, I'm in a similar situation as yours, only in my case, I'm the editor of a weekly. Thus, I can't put nearly as much focus on sports as I'd like to. In fact, I'm missing a game tomorrow night because I'm going to a legislative dinner.

I often wish I could cover one beat and do a thorough job of it. Right now, I mostly do analysis-type gamers and leave it at that and wish I could have more time to do notebooks, features, etc. However, I'm sure that if I were covering one beat extensively, I'd find it constraining when I can't delve into a different sport or cover something other than sports every once in a while.