Which March Madness game story is the best-written? Judge for yourself.

The first score mentioned was not the final score.

 

OK. Better to say "down by a point." Still, didn't bother me as much as the construct that makes the final score an adjective; when I'm king of the world, the score can be an adjective in an analysis but not in the game story.

 

Why don't editor yank the fake score out of the lead??? This drives me crazy. Journalism 101.

 

Rachel Cohen's story is the best. Good lede. Can't agree that the third graph should have been the lead. It would have been out of place and would not have drawn me in. The third graph is the nut graph and is in the right place.
I thought the quotes were placed in the right spots and she jumped into the game action at a critical point that made me want to keep reading.
This was filed on deadline. She's a very good writer and should be commended. Hope her SE told her it was a great job.

 

Thanks for checking in, Rachel.

 

Another kudo to Cohen, she at least hit on the fact that Gillisipie and Calipari are both possible candidates for the Kentucky job and that neither of them wanted to talk about it.

 

Rachel's got a whole entourage ...

 

I once had the score in the 11th graf. I'm a zealot convert now, believing and preaching that game stories must be inverted pyramids. It's a news story, not an exercise in narrative and writerly vanity. Challenge yourself to get the score in the lede -- or, at least, get the winner in there -- and make it dramatic, passionate, fun.

As for the Kentucky job, that's a sidebar and has no place in the game story. Hell, every coach alive, except for Tubby, is a Kentucky candidate.

 

I'm voting for the Dallas story.

It had concise, well-written prose--which is hard to do on deadline. I know I have a tendency to write rambling sentences when under the gun, feeling pressure to get in all the info and often having to break it up on my second readthrough (assuming I have time for a second readthrough)...

I liked the lede. I thought all the others were excessively wordy by comparison.

 

If you think a story about Calipari and Gillispie shouldn't mention the Kentucky job, you're crazy. First of all, a game story can be a conglomeration of the whole package. So maybe it's a sidebar, but it deserves a mention. Second of all, if you're a Texas A&M fan, your team already lost. You only care about two things: Are your players coming back, and is your coach.
These subjects should be prominent in a gamer.

 

Except in the Dallas story it's an afterthought in the last graf. It would get better play as a sidebar.

 

Yeah, boy, what newspapers need, conglomeration.....