In what ways should college sports be covered differently than the pros?

12,000 posts good doctor. give your hand a break, get some fresh air and go meet some live people. It's nice out there!

 

12,647, happily married and gainfully employed at an actual newspaper, thanks. Please tell me I work at a 5K rag, though. I could use a good laugh.

And that post reads exactly like another troll on here. I'm through with you, foof.

 

If my mother shows up on this thread we'll have to get more bandwidth.

 

Please ask Boom to bring the kosker Coke. I'll pay whatever he asks.

 

"foof" -- yeah, probably 3k circulation.

 

Ugh. Let's argue the point you made, about the quarterback. We have all made our opinions known on the Gundy situation.

Maybe you could say something to Doc like, "I don't think we should even cover high school sports. They're aren't mature enough to be semi-public figures yet. College students are the same way, do you remember yourself in college? I think all newspaper coverage needs to be reworked. I'm a douche."

 

Of course, we should cover h.s. sports. Do you cover them differently than you do college? And college differently than pros? Of course, you do ... for pro coverage, you sometimes see a huge takeout -- the athlete has a track record and can be painted in a way that you're confident is accurate. Lots to draw from ... the younger and less experienced the person, the more caution you'll exercise and the less you'll have to draw on ... and when you do draw on something, you'll hve to be careful in what meaning you are assinging to it ...

you probably already have different standards for covering different levels ...

 

Sold it on eBay. Bought a boat.

My mother loves Waynewton, she'll be stunned to learn he posts here.

 

Question: in covering college sports will anyone here do anything differently in the future after following the gundy saga? will you think twice about types of anecdotes you use? whether you go with "rumblings" about a kid's character? ...

anything different?

 

Wow, Wayne's rant reads like HeinekenMan's -- poor boy got his feelings hurt, so we shouldn't write any more stories about him.

And A (bashing Gundy's asshatishness) doesn't mean B (backing Carlson's opinion). Some of you don't get that.

 

Most people here wouldn't go with "rumblings" in the first place. Or with half-baked anecdotes. Now, if she had 'rumblings' from within the program and had said that, then I think she gets more slack.

Holding all of us responsible for a column many of us didn't like is reaching more than just a bit.