80-90 cuts expected at the OC Register (story published April 28)

Contrary to what you're getting from some know-nothing, never-was, numbnuts with a grudge, I've known Greg Gibson for nearly 20 years -- all the way back to his days as the SE in Tacoma -- and worked for him at the OCR in the late 1990s. The guy might've been the best SE I've ever had the privilege to work for. And I've worked for some good ones, big markets and small. I covered a major pro beat there before leaving for a columnist gig, and he was sharp, tough (when necessary), fair (always), and human. He knew what the readers wanted, and he put out a terrific sports section that was very competitive with the LA Times. He also treated his people well, so much so that when I left the OCR, I felt as if I were walking out on a friend. And we weren't really friends. Not socially. Just colleagues who liked and respected each other. We haven't been in contact much since I left, and that's as much my fault as my loss. To this day, though, I appreciate the opportunity he gave me. He made me a better sports writer. Greg was/is a great guy, a talented SE and a knowledgeable newspaperman. This is coming from someone who has been in this business for nearly 30 years. Until now -- until reading the drivel from some asswipe on this board -- I had never heard anyone say anything bad about Greg. So, please, consider the source before giving it any credibility.

 

Listen to the General ... and Fishwrap.
There is so much misinformation on this thread (Mid Card) and utter bullshit (RMP) that those guys must be bloggers.

 

Well, if nobody else will, I can vouch for RPM. He's not some hack, I can assure you. ... And his suggestion was a decent one about covering things differently. Jumping on him because he would like to see motorsports covered more is like jumping on me because I want to see more baseball coverage.

That said, I have tremendous respect for Gibson, too. Met him at a recent APSE meeting and, in a seminar about how to deal with the financial realities of this business, he was visibly torn up by what was coming around the corner at his paper.

Sad to see this happen to the Register, because it's long been the only competition the LAT has had in this market.

 

Regarding rpmmutant, you beat me to it, buckweaver.

What's more, I agree with rpm's thought.

It might do newspapers some good to cover some sports besides -- and in addition to -- the major ones. And that goes for both the college and pro levels.

I've long thought that additional readers could be attracted and pulled in with some consistent, good-quality coverage of minor or non-profit sports.

There is interest to be tapped, and developed. And right now, at least, those sports offer a possibility of providing some different coverages and great story opportunities that almost no one else would be likely to have.

If only some paper would do it.

 

Minor sports are minor for a reason. Most people do not give a shit about them and there is zero chance of creating any sustained general interest by telling "people stories" about folks who flip tiddlywinks. And it is usually not cost-effective for a newspaper to appeal to a niche.

 

I wouldn't call auto racing a niche sport. NASCAR's ratings are better than the NBA or NHL.

 

In some markets, it is very much a niche sport. In others it is a major sport. I would not use national TV ratings as a basis for determining coverage in a local market.

 

Motors only recently has grown above the niche sport level, but, oddly enough, those writers covering it still treat it as such. They still have an us-against-the-world mentality and they feel they have to hype their sport. They don't need to, but they still do.
I like volleyball, all levels, but it would be absurd to have a "Volleyball Extra" section every week. The coverage it gets is what it deserves.
OCR has had a "Motor Sports Extra" page for as long as I can remember. Lately, it has been trimmed down, just like most other things.
For Middie and RPM to think they'd can the SE because of a lack of motor sports and MMA is just plain stupid.

 

I wasn't questioning rpmmutant's character. I just got a kick out of his post, because, yes, buck, it would be like me saying "We need more soccer coverage."

Hey, forgive me for registering amusement that a guy named RPM mutant thinks there should be more motorsports coverage.

Like baseball, motorsports receive plenty of coverage, when merited.

As for SoCalDude's point: The same "we've got to sell the sport!!!" mentality also permeates soccer coverage. It's what leads my brethren to assert that there should be more coverage, when overall interest level dictates otherwise.

 

Still, there don't seem to be many things at the moment that are cost-effective, or at least, cost-effective enough, for newspapers. And I don't think ignoring any potential audience right now -- even if you yourself are not a part of it -- is a very good idea.

In the interests of full disclosure, let me say that I've covered plenty of minor/niche sports. What's more, I like, and can appreciate, most of them.

But then, I also love football and basketball, and have done my share on those sports, as well. And I'd still respectfully disagree with the idea that there is nothing to be gained, or at least, potentially gained, by trying a little more of the other stuff.

I understand news judgment, priorities and knowing these sports' place in the world. And I have no particular horse in the race as far as which minor sports I'd like to see more of, whether because I them, or some other reason.

I just think good stories are good stories and great games are great games, no matter the sport. And if we look for them, and can find them, under rocks and in other places other papers aren't necessarily looking, then it seems that should be encouraged and done.

It will only help in finding more such stories, same as would happen the more you cover a football, basketball or baseball team.

It doesn't mean a minor sport needs to, or should, get just as much coverage. Just good coverage, which I think readers can and will notice if and when it happens on a consistent basis.

 

I doubt there is a paper in America that ever, in the history of journalism, did a more encyclopedic job of regularly covering every minor sport contested in its circulation area than the OCR did in the 1980s and 1990s. We are talking weekly notes columns on water polo. And I suppose that's fine when the local economy is booming and the sports news hole exceeds 70 columns daily and 120 columns Sunday. I have to think, though, that the people at the OCR know more than anyone else what that coverage delivered and what it did not, and in lean times whether that kind of expense is worth it. My observation is that it is not worth it and that in lean times you need to aim for the widest audience, not a dozen narrow ones.

 

If you mean employed, then yeah, you nailed me.

This thread is hilarious. It really is. The Register's sports page in no way is even comparable to the Los Angeles Times. Who are you kidding? The Register does a great business because of its high school sports coverage. The Times tried to compete with its Orange County edition, trying to be all things to all people, and failed miserably. But I can't take any opinion seriously when they say that the OCR was on par with the LA Times.

I don't intend to get into a tinkling contest with his friends here on the board. Obviously nothing I say will change their minds. Likewise, you will not change my views on him either. I just wanted to stop the spread of some of the misinformation being bandied around here.

I've turned the page on this matter.