Got would?

[bpoindexter]

During this holiday season, we should all be thankful we never had to write the hed "Samardzija, Schnellenberger, Antetokounmpo lead Podunk to homecoming win."

 

[bpoindexter]

Lately my nemesis has been LSU running back Clyde Edwards-Helaire.

Just call him "CEH." Maybe it will catch on.

 

[HanSenSE]

Lest we forget the agate nightmare that is Mark Calcavecchia winning in a playoff.

 

[HanSenSE]

Another word on my list is "different." When one writes "Brady was 22-of-32 passing for 305 yards and two touchdowns, completing passes to five different receivers." Do you need the "different" in there?

 

[silvercharm]

"on the season." As in "Podunk moved to 2-0 on the season."

Nails on a chalkboard.

 

[BTExpress]

99 times out of 100, a team's record can be done with parentheses, followed by other information. "Podunk (13-2) won its eighth consecutive game . . ."

 

[Matt Stephens]

I despise "has got ... "

 

[ChrisLong]

I gave up trying to get rid of "would." It's not "would happen." It "did happen." Even the veteran writers used it. We miss deadline if I changed them all.

 

[Bronco77]

Another word on my list is "different." When one writes "Brady was 22-of-32 passing for 305 yards and two touchdowns, completing passes to five different receivers." Do you need the "different" in there?

My shop is full of reporters who use "different" in that context and assigning editors who contend it's necessary. I've argued that it's wordy, substandard writing, but I'm always either ignored or told to mind my own business.

 

[BTExpress]

Mind your own business?

You're an editor. It IS your business.

 

[Matt Stephens]

Another word on my list is "different." When one writes "Brady was 22-of-32 passing for 305 yards and two touchdowns, completing passes to five different receivers." Do you need the "different" in there?

Only if there are five receivers with the same name.

 

[HanSenSE]

Only if there are five receivers with the same name.

Then you could write "five similar receivers. "

 

[Dog8Cats]

Active voice.

Yes, active voice is great. But the "would" issue isn't a matter of active or passive. It's a matter of an unnecessary conditional.

 

[Sam Mills 51]

Yes, active voice is great. But the "would" issue isn't a matter of active or passive. It's a matter of an unnecessary conditional.

WOULD you stop ...

 

[inthesuburbs]

If we're naming redundancies (words you can nearly always omit):

-- New. Smith named as new coach = Smith named as coach. Of course she's a new coach. Everyone understands that teams don't hire the old coach.

-- Local. A local hospital = a hospital. If they were flown to Paris for surgery, we'd say that.

-- -based. A Nashville-based freelancer = a Nashville freelancer. Everyone understands that people travel for work. They're not the Chicago-based Cubs.

 

[ChrisLong]

If we're naming redundancies (words you can nearly always omit):

-- New. Smith named as new coach = Smith named as coach. Of course she's a new coach. Everyone understands that teams don't hire the old coach.

-- Local. A local hospital = a hospital. If they were flown to Paris for surgery, we'd say that.

-- -based. A Nashville-based freelancer = a Nashville freelancer. Everyone understands that people travel for work. They're not the Chicago-based Cubs.

We always joked about it -- he was slowly taken to a faraway hospital.

One of my peeves was "in the game." Smith got three hits in the game. No ****. If he did it during batting practice, we wouldn't care.

 

[Matt Stephens]

If we're naming redundancies (words you can nearly always omit):

-- New. Smith named as new coach = Smith named as coach. Of course she's a new coach. Everyone understands that teams don't hire the old coach.

-- Local. A local hospital = a hospital. If they were flown to Paris for surgery, we'd say that.

-- -based. A Nashville-based freelancer = a Nashville freelancer. Everyone understands that people travel for work. They're not the Chicago-based Cubs.

“Currently”

 

[Shropshire Slasher]

Woke Up With Would

 

[Bronco77]

Mind your own business?

You're an editor. It IS your business.

Our old-fogey readership includes many people with lots of time on their hands who like to call or email whenever they spot an error or redundancy, and only then does management take such criticism seriously. I'm hoping someone calls us out on "different" and a few other pet peeves so I can say, "I told you so."

 

[baseballeditor123]

These are all great. I hate "would go on to" and "were able to" with a ****ing passion.

My least favorite, though? "Ultimately." And I see it more and more in young journalists.

The word ultimately doesn't do **** for a sentence. See? Take it out of that one. Never need it. Never adds anything.

The Patriots ultimately won the game. NO. The Patriots won the game.