Are sports writers skeptical enough?

[The Commish]

Patrick Reusse weighed in with a big no in Thursday morning's Strib.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Well, he's a bitter old chap, isn't he?

 

[Shaggy]

Hilarious, only because it rings true.

In the preseason, all we get is fluff, we have little to dispute it unless we want to dwell on last year and quite frankly, the fans want the fluff to reassure them that their team will be hanging banners at the end of the year. It is what it is.

 

[Shaggy]

If you cover a **** team, it's your only time of year to write positive stories and keep your sanity.

 

[20questions]

Love Reusse. He can drop the hammer as well as anyone when called upon.

 

[EE94]

Great piece, and as true as Newton's Law.

Ballsy to write it and admit to it.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

But they all try hard.

 

[mike311gd]

But they all try hard.

And deserve just as much coverage as anyone else; if not more.

 

[TheMethod]

A good, true, funny piece.

Another of my favorites is how every year, coaches all the sudden get really frank about last year's team. "Oh, last year we had no chemistry. Last year we had no depth. We weren't mentally tough last year. I was a terrible coach last year." And we're all supposed to believe everything changed in 6 months.

I don't see a solution to this problem, though. Maybe if you had daily access to practices, you could do a better job of countering the BS Machine, which is precisely the reason we don't get access to practices. But there's no way coaches are going to honestly address their teams in the preseason (most won't even do it during the season or after the season).

And, regarding football, unless we've played or coached it at a high level, most of us wouldn't really know what to look for anyway.

My only recourse has been to simply not write glowing coaches reports that I know aren't true, or to throw in contradictory information whenever possible.

 

[Babs]

quite frankly, the fans want the fluff to reassure them that their team will be hanging banners at the end of the year.

Absolutely fans are looking for optimism, and preservation of our audience says that's exactly what we should give them. If fans don't think their team at least has a fighting chance this year, why watch the games, and certainly why read the coverage.

 

[musicman]

as a fan i agree. as a journalist, if you take that approach with said endgame in mind, that's horse****.

 

[Meat Loaf]

Looks like another year of a few sloppy wins wedged in a mostly pointless season according to Podunk Pissants coach A.S. Shole.
"Everybody knows that we went 2-9 last year," he began. "We're still low on talent, we don't have the numbers and I don't feel like trying anything different because I might have to work extra. We're just going to do the same tired things that didn't win us games last year."
The only thing to look forward to is the week three opponent, the University of Idaho B-team.

Is that better?

But seriously, if you can prove that a ****ty team is hurting your circ numbers, find something that will get people reading the paper. That's the only way we'll have a fighting chance of keeping employed, and that's the most important thing.

 

[Cansportschick]

I think in Canada, sports writers are skeptical, right, left and center.

 

[JC]

quite frankly, the fans want the fluff to reassure them that their team will be hanging banners at the end of the year.

Absolutely fans are looking for optimism, and preservation of our audience says that's exactly what we should give them. If fans don't think their team at least has a fighting chance this year, why watch the games, and certainly why read the coverage.

Than you are no better than a fan. So basically you aren't reporting what is truly going on you are feeding fans BS

 

[budcrew08]

Looks like another year of a few sloppy wins wedged in a mostly pointless season according to Podunk Pissants coach A.S. Shole.
"Everybody knows that we went 2-9 last year," he began. "We're still low on talent, we don't have the numbers and I don't feel like trying anything different because I might have to work extra. We're just going to do the same tired things that didn't win us games last year."
The only thing to look forward to is the week three opponent, the University of Idaho B-team.

Is that better?

But seriously, if you can prove that a ****ty team is hurting your circ numbers, find something that will get people reading the paper. That's the only way we'll have a fighting chance of keeping employed, and that's the most important thing.

You got it. One of our main teams in our coverage area is going to S-U-C-K, but we're definitely playing them up because they are the main teams for our core readers. For high school, at least, there's no need to bury them just because they're not a good team. Major college and pros, I can understand.

 

[Yodel]

Alabama women's hoops coach Stephany Smith, during the midst of a winless SEC season, said, "Next year, we won't be much better."

 

[Jeremy Goodwin]

Alabama women's hoops coach Stephany Smith, during the midst of a winless SEC season, said, "Next year, we won't be much better."

But how did she respond during the next preseason? If it was last year, how will she respond? I'm guessing something like, "We learned a lot from that winless conference season. That will only make us stronger and our upperclassmen will work even harder to show they can play with LSU and the Lady Vols."

I don't mind fluff stories during the preseason, it's a matter of what you do once the team starts playing exhibitions, or non conference games. A coach isn't doing his job if he isn't optimistic during the preseason. Who seriously says that their team is going to suck in the upcoming season? If you cover the NFL and a few players are battling for a starting job and they are all terrible, you should be skeptical and say that. If your D-1 football team with a highly touted D has 50 points put on them by a no-name school, then you should write about it. Things change when you play someone besides yourself, and that's when you should start to be skeptical.

 

[Shaggy]

quite frankly, the fans want the fluff to reassure them that their team will be hanging banners at the end of the year.

Absolutely fans are looking for optimism, and preservation of our audience says that's exactly what we should give them. If fans don't think their team at least has a fighting chance this year, why watch the games, and certainly why read the coverage.

Than you are no better than a fan. So basically you aren't reporting what is truly going on you are feeding fans BS

Please. It's not like we're reporting that Jimmy Quarterback is 6-foot-3 and has a rocket for an arm this year, when he's actually a 5-9 pansy.

We ask questions about what they're doing to improve on the happy feet in the pocket, what was worked on the last six months to keep from fumbling the ball every ****ing series, and why he thinks the team has a chance to do better than 1-11. Then we report on the answers.

It's usually positive. It doesn't mean we're dishonest ****faces.

 

[shockey]

it's like any businees. rose-colored glasses are worn by all until it's time to see the results. only after the fact does the truth come out, by which time the rose-colored glasses are back on.

is any business different? ??? ??? ???

 

[dixiehack]

Alabama women's hoops coach Stephany Smith, during the midst of a winless SEC season, said, "Next year, we won't be much better."

God, is she ever right too.