Pearlman: 'Press conferences suck'

For a writer, press conferences are brutal. You might as well wait around for a copy of the quote sheet from the media folks. You always feel like you are "performing" and it's just plain weird asking someone a question with two other people right next to him - let alone everyone else in the "audience."
Sure, you can get the "Coach, what was your strategy on third and four at the end?," or "How great was this win?" stuff - but not really a great setting for the "Do you think you are playing for your coach's job? What's up with the feet video?"
If you've spent day after day covering a team, developing a relationship with the coach or players as someone who is accurate and honest, why shouldn't you expect better answers and more detail than those given to people parachuting in for a big game?
I think of that thing Peter King wrote yesterday about watching Charles Woodson dress himself, or Sean Payton sleeping with the trophy - there is a reason that some writers break through and others are just a name at the top of some copy.
I imagine press conference work well enough for TV though.

 

absolutely not. if a reporter has enough of a relationship with the person holding the presser i have zero problem with it. i hate pressers; it rewards the lazy journo and is simply a way for p.r. guys, coaches, whoever, to control the message.

if i had a question essential to my story, damn straight i'd wait 'til after the presser if i knew i could get the subject alone. i hated asking 'good questions' in front of the whole class -- hated the thought of tipping off a competitor what i might be working on and DESPISED the idea of doing a lazy journos work for him/her.

any way to avoid a gang-bang is okay by me.

 

Depends. There was a major metro guy in the conference I covered who ALWAYS did this. But his post-presser questions were absolutely no better than the cliched crap the TV guys read off their palm.

I felt like he was just doing his own performing.

 

I agree with that in principle, as long as your questions are legitimately unique and central to a competitive advantage. Some reporters just like to re-ask the same stuff that was asked in the pack because it makes them feel special.

 

Bang on.

 

What readers think? Clearly some folks here won't agree with the thoughts of this writer but I thought Jeff's thoughts smelled like garbage in a New Jersey landfill in August and as if they were coming from a whiny brat.

A) We don't get "private time" with players/coaches after post-game pressers in my corner of the hoops world but that's OK with me. I cover a lot of night games on deadline so I'm forced to endure the horror of having to ask a question in a presser. Not sure how I've survived 25-plus years in this business.

Soul-sucking experience? Please. Can they be dry? Of course. But it's amazing what sometimes happens when you ask a thoughtful question. You get a thoughtful/humorous/thought-provoking response.

B) This is supposed to be a joke, right?

C) I might be in the minority but the programs I cover have helpful, professional folks in the SID offices. Do we butt heads from time to time? Absolutely. But the times these folks are hovering and waiting to pounce are rare. And if they were more frequent, tough. I'd deal with it.

D) I've never called any coach "coach." Always used his/her first name and never once had a coach instruct me to refer to him/her by the title. And that list includes an often surly guy who used to work the sideline in Bloomington, Ind.

 

A little off topic, but as a younger guy, when I'm standing on the field after the game with one or two other veterans from other papers, I sometimes find they dominate the questions, asking all of what I had jotted down before I can squeeze it in. If there's something they didn't cover, I'll certainly ask it, but at the same time, I don't want to be rude and be cutting in.

 

I'm so in agreement with this.

Is there really a coach in the country who "requires" that he be called coach? I don't know of one off the top of my head, and I wouldn't play along anyway.

Also, I like Pearlman, but sometimes reading his blog is like reading someone's diary. It makes me feel uncomfortable, it feels like whining (even when I don't think that he's trying to whine) and yet I can't look away.

 

It's a useful catch-all when I'm a preps-writing hack and don't know the coach's name off the top of my head, however. (ducks, raises hand)

 

Hint: His last name rhymes with a part of the female anatomy.

 

Guys aren't named Delores!