Paper writes story of star high school player's failure to graduate

Every year, there is a can't miss stud that is written about only to never be heard from again. It's an endless cycle.
The story does not belong on 1A for many of the reasons listed above. Also, why single out the kid because he can play football. What about the kids who aren't athletically gifted. It was a bad decision.

 

To echo a few of you, I agree that this is not an A1 story - or even a newsy story in itself (maybe a feature on the kid's future later would be goor) - unless the kid had committed to a DI and this was the first proof he was ineligible. At my last job, we had a big name stud who had signed with Big In-State DI U rumored to not be graduating and we waited until the night he walked before we knew he had graduated. Had he not, I guarantee I would have been writing a story for A1 the next day. And I guarantee the readership there would have seen it as A1 news, for the most part.

 

Henry: In my experience, the sports editor gets input to at least suggest it and is usually in the Page 1 meeting.

But you are right that in the end the decision is made at a higher pay grade.

 

If he has been receiving a vast amount of publicity and praise for playing football. then absolutely it is news worthy. (Same for playing it bigger when an athlete gets arrested.)

This is an important story on a lot of levels, and I think Green's point about the importance of football and the success of the program are valid points.

A1, unsure, but he's certainly as well-known as anyone else in town. I like would have gone Sports 1.

As far as a Rhodes Scholar goes, I think you'd have to get up to a fairly big paper to not put a local kid getting a Rhodes Scholarship on the front page.

This is an interesting debate.

 

Depends on how big a star this kid was. If he was a major star with Division I offers, and he signed, the fact he didn't graduate should be a story. How he was eligible to play FB, but can't graduate?

Fair game, and important. If he was just a marginal prospect, then no.

 

I think if his not graduating had a direct impact on his athletic future, then arguably it's a story -- particularly if, as some have pointed out, he lost a scholarship offer to a major school because of it. Otherwise, it seems gratuitous. Plenty of papers have academic achievement special sections around this time of year, spotlighting the smartest kids in the schools of their circulation areas, possibly awarding scholarships too. There's no academic failure section with job ads from bail bondsmen and 7-11. Inconsistent? On paper, sure. But that's been the way high school students have been treated in all sections for some time, and that's not likely to change any time soon.

 

This has been stated before and it needs to be stated again that despite what some writers think, they don't have to cover the beat like it's a professional or major college team. Were the kid's academic struggles and the resultant lack of D-I offers on A1 this past year? This is a bush league move by a bush-league paper trying to act like it's covering this in the name of journalistic stamdards.

 

I don't think it's A-1 stuff, but I think something in the sports section is appropriate, especially if you're talking about how the academics resulted in a lack of offers, but that's he's trying to get his grades straight and go the juco route.

 

So it's OK to lionize these guys for what happens on the football field but imagine they are private citizens again when they deviate from the recruitment narrative?

I agree there are issues of sensitivity when it comes to high school students, but at graduation they are for the most part legal adults, able to vote and legally drink when they travel outside of the U.S.

Being a sportswriter should go beyond touchdowns and cheering fans. Sometimes that means covering stuff like this.

 

If it had been part of a larger story talking about how many kids didn't pass the tests each year and looking at how those kids performed in the classroom (basically something examining whether the tests were a good thing or not and whether they limited kids who performed well in classes but didn't test well on standardized tests), then I think it's worth working it in as part of that story if the kid fits the profile of someone who does well in class but can't pass the tests. He'd be a great face to put on a story like that, which would be a news side story.

Also, remember, this isn't about the kid's grades in class; he may have had all As (I doubt it). It's about these end-of-instruction exams that some states require. Some kids struggle with them. We've done some great stories on it here lately since this is the first year Oklahoma kids won't get diplomas because of them.

As the story is written, I don't like it, even in Sports.

 

MisterCreosote is totally right. However it should also be noted that Rice was never the type of player that Chamberlain was in high school.