SMG interviews Rick Maese ...

Really?
Red Smith was from Wisconsin.
Jim Murray from Connecticut.

 

But I think that's a different argument, CharmCityFella. Maese was a takeout writer, investigative reporter and metro columnist in Orlando. He was a police/metro reporter in New Mexico. If the argument is you need to cover a sports beat before you get a sports column, then I understand that point better, even if I don't always agree with it.

If the reporter doesn't have a wealth of "experience" or local knowledge to draw upon, it's up to him (or her) to do enough reporting to make up for it. I think that's Rick's point in the interview. I haven't read all of his work, but the stuff I have read, to me, is usually backed up up by a fair amount of interviewing and reporting. He's not someone who just shoots from the lip about Baltimore stuff, for precisely the reasons you mentioned. He's not comfortable without having the history.

At some point though Baltimore's attitude about "You don't understand our history!" (as well as Boston's) goes way overboard for me. Does understanding what it felt like when the Colts left town in Mayflower vans or when the ball rolled through Buckner's legs give you context? Does remembering the O's 0-23 start or Frank Reich's comback win over Miami? Sure. But what, in the end, does it have to do with the Derek Anderson punking the Ravens secondary this Sunday? Or Maryland's win over Rutgers? Not that much.

Credibility, ultimately, is earned by a columnist with their words and their opinions, not what they did BEFORE they got the job.

 

And Jim Murray worked as reporter and editor in LA for 17 years before he wrote his first column.

And Red Smith worked for papers in the Midwest and Philadelphia for 18 years before joining the New York Herald Tribune.

What's your point?

 

This is a solid point. Steele and Schmuck are always good for the occasional column that simply lacks good reporting. (Ex. Steele's asterisk column from a week or so back). Whereas with Rick, I rarely finish one of his columns feeling that he didn't do his homework. Last week's column on the 87-year-old golfer was a riot.

 

My point?
Rick Maese's story development and story telling outweigh that he doesn't know who played catcher on the 1974 Orioles that won the East.
The myopia of your posts signify the failure of discerning the two.
Given the options at the time, Maese's "hiring" was a good get. The hire was coming within Tribune. And a columnist on a white horse wasn't riding in from Los Angeles, Chicago or Newsday.

 

Couldn't get past this sentence to read the rest of the interview.

"The site operators or reporters or whatever they call themselves are allowed to call recruits as much as they want. They're fans, not trained journalists. We cover Maryland here, and the site operators have written books with coaches they cover. People purporting to be journalists have financial arrangements with coaches and universities. They're able to call recruits without any kind of oversight."

No. 1, he's either ignorant or intentionally putting out incorrect information. Plenty of "trained journalists" have gone to work for Rivals.com, etc. Has Maese not received the bulletin that his old colleague, Mike Huguenin, now works for the Yahoo/Rivals family?

No. 2, how many sports writers at traditional papers have written books with people they cover, or have covered? You want the NCAA to stick their noses in that too?

The guy's a talented writer, and I was looking forward to reading that interview. Even registered. But throwing around generalizations like that is just silly.

 

I think it's a horrible idea to give a columnist job to someone so young.

But Maese is the exception. He's that good.

 

Why?

How old should someone be?

Should it depend on the size of the newspaper? What they cover?

I'm not being combative. I'm wondering what the conventional wisdom out there is.

 

Maese couldn't be more right about the NCAA needing to take stronger action in regards to Scout and Rivals. Standard operating proceedure at those sites is the guy who calls recruits then turns around and reports back what they say to the coaching staff of the team the site covers in direct violation of NCAA rules. The coach then gives him more names. That's how the relationship works. And so it goes ...

I know this because some of those guys are my good friends.

Recruiting is a dirty business filled with dirty relationships, and a good share of that dirt is one the Scout and Rivals guys who make those calls. Besides, how do you live with yourself when you make a living calling 17-year-olds at home? I mean, seriously, THAT'S how you make a living? Just awful, and I know even a lot of the guys who do it agree with me.

 

OK, I've got a couple cents to add...

Hiring someone young and out-of-town for such a high profile job stinks in exactly one way: If they're really "good," and I mean that in the way that people round here think journalists are good (overwrought, aw-gosh-sincere dressed-to-the-nines takeout writing) they're not likely to stick around very long, because every big paper (and magazine) clamors for these writers. And honestly, that kinda ruins the point of the columnist.

I don't care where they grew up; no columnist is better in their first year in a town than they are in their fifth unless they eat glue or something. They might be mailing it in by year 20, but those prime years...that's when they can speak for a town, and that's what a paper wants.

The reality is that a guy like Maese probably never gets to the "Miller Time" with the Sun. He'll probably be snatched up before that. He'll be added to a stud pony lineup somewhere, and the Sun will be looking for somebody to fill his spot.

And, at that point, you ask: Was it worth it? To the city? To the paper?

Every paper has to confront this. <i> Do I get this star for a couple years, or do I grab a lesser talent I know will be here forever? Do I hire a moderately talented female who will write her ticket out of here in a couple years, or do I hire her white male counterpart, who probably won't? </i> Tough questions. One of them, of course, is an illegal question.

But that's what people face. I know this: Any mid-sized paper that solely chases talent or uniqueness will eventually create a negative newsroom.

And, sometimes, it's sad for the writer, too. Is Selena Roberts terrific? Yeah. It's also too bad that she's one voice in a city that has a million of them already. Isn't it?