Scipio, very nice well written thread. For confirmation that this is not a new trend watch the movie 61* By and large sportswriters have always been geeks and will always be geeks. There are easily a dozen posters here with better insights into football than most of the writers. Alas, I still read their dribble. "The future's so bright we gotta wear shades"
Scip, Good points all. The glancing cuff off the foreheads of the marketers should have been a straight right to the jaw, though. Captain Kirk himself never faced a tractor beam as powerful, and Circe is just a B-girl chanteuse in a skid row dive by comparison. Any business dependent upon the average schmuck’s discriminatory intellectual powers is in danger of foundering if the product requires anything other than passive uptake. To be sure, the abstruse and arcane belong in specialized, highly directed product lines, for example, those who would understand the Cubs’ mimesis of Nietsche’s Eternal Return or the Longhorn’s defiance of the tenets of Hegelian synthesis. George Will gets away with it, but only because his sole allusion seems to be to Eliot, who his readers remember from ET. I'll tell you one thing...the present state of affairs would deeply offend my grandfather, a thoughtful man and sports fanatic whose favorite saying was, 'A good horse eats the same as a bad one.' Anyway, it seems that no matter where you go, there is always a marketing person ready to put pressure on content whenever surveys and focus groups indicate that market share in the nose-picking, drooling, and pronounced supraorbital ridge demographics could be better. Alas, sportswriting has followed the general trajectory described by the capitulation of sports to marketing, beginning with America’s Team and Show Time, wherein the aficionado became less important than the idiot in search of something ‘fun’ to do. This is why so many murgatroyds watch the Super Bowl just to see the commercials, why the NBA is dedicated to spectacle rather than basketball, and why baseball stadia feature everything from putt-putt courses to petting zoos. McNews, McSports, it’s all McShit as far as I’m concerned, and Reid Ryan’ll be up Salt Creek without a paddle if Schlitterbahn comes to Round Rock. However, on an optimistic note, there does seem to be an alternative: keep up the good work. Thanks. HOOK THEM, HEAD THEM, DRAG THEM THROUGH THE DIRT
Scip, your comparison of those who chronicle sports (reporters), as oppossed to journalists (commentators) struck a cord. Interesting that many rags reward those who climb the ranks to ultimately secure a commentary column. Personnally, I think that the better reporter should get the raise. (Opinions are like ********, right? So maybe I should get a raise.) Maybe today is not about better reporting. Maybe it's about who can talk the loudest and sling the better line? Who generates the most interaction and helps sells the most products is most important I guess. Sports journalism has defiled itself as much as most other things I suppose. It didn't always use to be this way. That's what make it sad. "We Don't Rent Pigs" Lonesome Dove
Scip, Cramer has done it, and he "retired" having done very well when most did very poorly. As he will tell you. Can't help it -- I like the guy, a lot. That brings me to columnists. You don't like them. Fine. But the job is a little tougher than you may think. Not all columns are written on deadline, but if you had to do a couple, you might change your opinion about producing quality writing... not to mention the fact that they may disagree with you. Harrumph! How dare they? And when they don't know as much as I do about football! (which is possible, BTW, but it's more likely a difference of opinion, which is, after all, their job). As to guessing on polls and the herd mentality, of course it happens, quite a bit. But, if I had had advance knowledge of, say, 63-14 and proclaimed it, in addition to being a lot better off financially, I wouldn't have heard the end of it (before the game) from people like you who know football. Since I used to write sports and edit stories for a living, and still do from time to time, I agree that not all words typed by sportswriters are golden. So when I read insipid stuff (like Whitlock's Texas rants), instead of complaining on face value I tend to read harder to see if I think it's well-written insipid stuff. In Whitlock's case, I barely skimmed it because I know he's done it before and it's calculated to get a reaction. But what made it bad in my opinion was writing something that can be refuted so easily. In other words, he was lazy. But hey, everybody has bad days -- although in Jason's case, I'll say this: He can write a little, but his goal in life should be to be as good as he thinks he is. The other thing I will say is that when people found out that I wrote/edited, invariably they would ask what it was like, figuring that it must be exciting and interesting. It was, of course, but not all the time. And that's how it is with people who write sports for a living. It's a job -- and many days, that's all it is. There are perks, but everyone pays dues -- I covered Little League games in 100-degree heat because it was my job... but I gave it all I had because I didn't want to do that again. I guess now I'd ask, what is it you want from sportswriters? dnd -- are you possibly related to Lou Maysel? Lou was so far inside UT athletics that he never really revealed anything, except what Darrell Royal thought -- I hardly ever read him.
Well, gee, Scip, now I'm sorry I wasted those 4 1/2 years at Texas getting a degree in journalism with sports emphasis. Columnists exist for one reason -- to stir up enough controversy to sell papers. I grew up reading Blackie. I didn't see columns by Stan Isaacs and the other guys in the north until I went to college. But I recognized at an early age that Blackie's writing was something special. For a long time he was the only reason we took the Dallas Times Herald. On the other hand, Skip Bayless also wrote during part of the time I lived at home. I hated his columns, because he always seemed to take a position opposite to my own (and he's a sooner). But you know what? We took his rag because we wanted to see what he had to say so we could feel superior to him! We read him passionately. What irritates me now is the insane, apparently mandatory issuing of a nickname to just about every single jock who plays a professional sport by the television guys. For this, I say that Chris Berman must be stopped. Several years ago, in a span of about 3 seconds, I heard, "Howard '31 Flavors' Johnson" and Darryl 'One Flavor' Strawberry." I mean, aren't some things just obvious? And who can forget the ridiculously inane "Andre 'Bad Moon' Rison"???? These days, I usually avoid columnists with one notable exception: I really enjoy Dave Kindred in The Sporting News. If you've not read him, you should. Excellent writing, and he usually selects topics that are off the beaten path: about minor leaguers you've never heard of but can learn something about life in general from, about coaches who made positive differences in players' lives, about people you'd never read about anywhere else who embody the true definition of sport. Occasionally he'll write about Jordan, or Tiger, or Baffert, but usually it's someone of less stature and I always put down the magazine feeling as if I've learned something important. I wrote sports for about 3 1/2 years in Irving, where I mainly covered high school and community college sports. The main perk was getting to cover the Cowboys' home games. This was when Tex Schramm ran the place and he started the "intervwiew room" concept so that we few reporters on the distaff side had equal access to stories -- I didn't have to wait out in the cold and try to catch a few words from a player as he was trying to hurry home to his family or his hooker. I got to ask questions right alongside the boy reporters! And one more thing about Bayless. I was at the first of two Byron Nelsons I covered and really didn't know that much about golf. I had an interview scheduled with one of the golfers and really didn't know much of what to ask. I was sitting in the press tent and I guess I had a look of consternation on my face. Bayless, whom I'd never met, came over to me, sat down, and said, "What's wrong?" Well, I told him my predicament, and he suggested several questions for me to ask, lead questions and follow-ups. My interview with the golfer went very well and I could tell he thought I something other than an idiot. It was a great example of a veteran writer mentoring a newbie and for all that I disagreed with most Bayless' columns, I never forgot him for that. "... he was more than just a number, he was a person." -- Cory Redding on Cole Pittman
Some responses: Xover: DCTF and Lindy's are prime examples of chronicling. They assemble information and data in one place, get some inside poop from the coaches and print depth charts. Not quite in your face sports journalism. Prodigal: Thanks for your good nature. Tell me about your career if you don't mind....what got you out etc.? marley: Nice to know Wangrin is still here. I doubt the AAS would hire him back: monopolies are generally content with the status quo. texaus: Since most coaches allow athletic directors, university PR guys or their 12 year old daughters to fill out the ballots, I'm not surprised the writers do a better job. After all, it is their job. Polls, by their very nature and size, will reflect general rationality even if the individual opinions that went into them do not. JJLizard: Very funny and very truthful. The dreaded ....(dot dot dot) column has gone from the Entertainment section to the Sports section by some strange act of osmosis while all of our papers were sitting bunched in the driveway. ....Austinites were stunned when they saw Brad Pitt leave only a $2 tip at Guero's Taco Bar, no word on whether Jennifer Aston was with him.....Bob Stoops was also in town, where he was seen dining with Colleen from Survivor at Louie's 106....Christ, shoot me. Stuck: Thanks for your response. Though I must disagree. I know a fair amount of people who assiduously avoid reading Bohls' stuff despite reading the rest of the paper, or if they do read him, it's merely to confirm that the AAS is a second rate rag. He's not Howard Stern. The Statesman exists in a one paper town and as such, could fill their rag with bad Alan Ginsberg poetry and still turn a profit just so long as they slip in Longorn sports box scores and movie times at Gateway 12. dnddavis: Thanks for the compliment. No, I don't think I'd want to write sports, I'm guessing the paycut would be a *****. It might be fun on a lark, particularly if I could compile material for a book or generally make Aggies cry. echeese: I saw 61. Very good flick. You're right, the weasely sports writer is a historical constant, though I'm convinced that archetype is on the rise. orange avenger: Great post. Thanks for the kind words. You made me rethink the role of marketing. That mindset might be at the core of this sort of phenomena. There may be some marketing yabbo in the AAS offices right now, who, when not masturbating vigorously to his Ikea catalogue is using words like "paradigm" far too much and has decided that Bohls is "hot....very hot" because a focus group rated him between Neville Chamberlain and a death adder in scientific likeability ratios. When asked by some layman -- well, hey, but isn't that bad? -- I can only imagine the smug mien as Marketing Boy sighs and says,"No! The Great Appeaser and the death adder are BRANDED! People are interested in what a death adder has to say! People just love to be provoked!" I thoroughly bitchslap the marketing types in my company with stunning regularity, though most of my barbs lose their impact when, upon seeing their blank expressions, I have to carefully explain how it was I was just making fun of them. Inspired by Dilbert, I recently taped a "Two drink minimum" posterboard under the Marketing Department sign in their wing in the Home Office, but this only prompted them to ask their neighbors if there was some sort of party planned that they didn't know about. After all, it was Tuesday. Though hucksterism has a long and proud history, the modern diving rod tapdancer actually believes that he or she is doing SCIENCE. Apparently Charles Darwin and his Galapagian focus groups started this all. Action: You nailed it IMO. Bob in Houston: What do I want from sportswriters? To stop doing the things I mentioned above. And if Jason Whitlock is a good writer in your book, then I can understand your befuddlement at Clive Cussler having not yet won the Pulitzer Prize. Dirk Pitt, when shall you receive thy due?!?! Attributing my skepticism of most sport's writer's knowledge to my own overinflated opinion of my own knowledge may be true, but I would submit the more simple theory is that I've talked with, and read, a decent number of sportswriters and am unsure as to whether many know how many men are allowed on the field at any given moment. Perhaps, as you say, we have a simple difference of opinion. Some say 11; some say 9.5. Who knows where the ultimate truth can be found? It's all just opinions. Now tired. Head hurts. Babble more tomorrow.
Scip, I don't get it. I take multiple shots at Jason Whitlock, call him lazy and a legend in his own mind, and you tell me that I called him a good writer. If you interpret other people's words as you did mine, then I have to wonder about everything else you wrote. Of course, it also could be that I'm a lousy writer.
Anyone up for a good John Lopez article? Often it is just too painful to read the Houston Chronicle. I think these guys are on the rise due to the perceived success of guys like Jim Rhome. Editors want somebody to play the bad guy like Andy Kaufman I guess.
to the top.... ________________________ "It is neither possible for a man to know the truth fully nor to avoid the error of pretending that he does." - Reinhold Niebohr
I have an equal measure of contempt for marketing degrees, public relations degrees, and the entire psychology department at U.T. I could do without most sportswriters and probably most sportscasters. I'll never forget in the aTm game from 1997 at memorial some sports caster actually said to the younger brother of one of the players, "so you were a crack baby?", no one believes me but go check your tape, it really happened. That was great, I love that moment. The above comments should in no way discourage West Houston sorority girls with marekting, P.R., or psychology degrees from continuing to consider me a nice and genuine guy who has their best interests at heart even though they may or may not be a freeloading scab taking a post grduate ride on daddy's money, polishing the glass frame that holds their aforementioned worthless degree.
I hope the venting on this thread will bury the concept that "This writer/broadcaster is biased for/against us/them." First and by far most, it doesn't matter. Second, most of you would be surprised how little writers/broadcasters care who wins. Writers uniformly root for fast games because they give them more time to write; broadcasters root for close games because they keep viewers and listeners interested.
