The relevance of the classic game story

I have a lot of things to say about gamers, but no time to write them. I'll try to tweet them.

 

I think a lot of it comes down to this, frankly: You have too many people writing too many bad gamers for too damn long. They get stale, they get rote, they get boring, they turn into a paycheck and the folks with the institutional memory to be useful don't often enough draw upon it to make stories interesting.

Often, it boils down to plum apathy.

Even on this site: Almost never does anyone do what Rusty did, and post a game story for people to critique/enjoy/whatever. It's always some 3,200 word piece from a mag, some columnist's rant, more of this complainy-head blog shit from a guy who's probably never asked a coach a question, new layoff reports, or Simmons' dick in his hand. In other words, the north and south poles of the industry. You're either gazing into the meaning of life 12 times a year as a takeout writer, getting fired, or soiling yourself in self-indulgence. Rarely, if ever, do we see an honest, consistent examination of what it is most people do, and whether they do it well.

Gamers (and previews) by and large comprise the majority of a beat writer's daily workload, and if you guys can't work up a winter passion for the material, who will?

I may just have to start posting those gamer comparison threads again to remind writers how it's done, and done well, instead of some chimp on the Big Lead rubbing his belly in butter and calling it a souffle.

 

Last week I'm at our state tournament and have three games to cover. the first is a 9 a.m. game, the second is a 10:30 a.m. game and the last game is 5:30 p.m.
I go heavy on featurizing the gamers because A. i've already posted to the web when the games were finished; B. They were early so everybody knows who won by the time the podunk times gets to their driveway.
I get back to the office and have an email waiting for me: 2under, why don't you just tell us who won and what the score was. I don't care that billy bob stubbed his toe and then had a flat tire on the way to the game. When i was in college, they taught us to get all of the relevant information at the very top of the story. To see how you should write, turn to your college roundup.

 

Since the subject has come up, I figured I'd share this game story. Some of you may find it amusing. It was written on tight deadline.

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/sports/high_school/article/prep_baseball_gw_erupts_for_19_runs_in_one_inning_tramples_fleming/11129/

 

Write about people, not games.

 

In the first inning, Joe Schmoe led off with a hit. The second inning had three Cubbies come to the plate.

Rinse and repeat.

 

My experience has been when the local NFL team loses a game, people want to know who fucked up. They're more interested in that than a heart-tugging story about the wide receiver's impoverished upbringing.

 

I know I've always been challenged when this thread comes up, to try to get my gamers beyond "Podunk High scored the first 10 points of the game, but Podunk Poly answered with a barrage of 3-pointers to take a 21-12 lead. In the second quarter, Poly ..."

On top of that, we're a PM, so the questions "why" and "how" have always been imporant to me. "How did Johnny Doubledribbles get open on that play? Why did you go away from the zone in the second half?"

 

If newspapers do nothing but write features, then they become magazines. If people want to read a magazine, then they'll buy a magazine.

You can't build the credibility required to be able to effectively write features and analysis if you don't prove, as a publication, that you have a handle on the basics of the subject material. It's why news departments have to cover boring City Council meetings, and it's why sports departments have to cover games.

 

If a newspaper covers a pro or college team heavily there's likely at least one column, game story, sidebar, story on the opposing team in the newspaper. And maybe another off beat story.
To the thinktankers I ask you ... how the fuck are you going to fill a 4 page wrap with no fucking game story?
Good game stories (if the game is on TV) have little play by play anyway. Hardly any.

 

I agree with a lot of the points raised by Alma and Fredrick. I think in a lot of gamers, you can tell the writer isn't really into it for whatever reason. As with any piece of writing that is covered by another medium like television or radio, then I think it is your job as a writer to incorporate something - attitude, atmosphere of the arena, player reactions to plays or crowd taunts - that you can't get elsewhere.

Since some people are sharing, here is a gamer I did for URI vs. Holy Cross. I write for a small daily in Southern RI:

http://www.thewesterlysun.com/sports/article_878358da-d83b-11de-a541-001cc4c002e0.html

 

I don't think that's what the method meant.

I think he means doing exactly what you say your readers want, about why the game was lost, and what the players that caused it to happen had to say about it afterwards.