Pearlman: 'Press conferences suck'

well, some people disagree. i believe only his players should ever address their coach as 'coach' -- and other team/school officials and suck-up boosters.

but professional journos assigned to report on the team? NEVER!!

others insist on doing so and the debate rages on...

makes for spirited debate, though, doesn't it?

 

I usually keep stats from the sidelines. The press box is for loosers. What say you guys?

 

Yes, because it's impossible to ask someone a tough question after you've called him "coach." :

 

When I worked as a very young journalist in the New York market, I was taught that calling someone coach was, as shockey indicates, the mark of a rube and completely unprofessional.

I've since worked in the Midwest, where I've seen extremely respected journalists, people whose work is admired and quoted on this board, refer to coaches as ... well ... coach. This is not seen by anyone as showing some lack of professionalism.

Before I'd left the business I'd come to my own conclusion that we should probably all be a little less judgmental about something that really doesn't matter all that much.

 

perhaps this is a 'regional thang.' and perhaps in the midwest journos address the coach of the teams they cover as 'coach' and still hit 'em hard. i've only worked in the east, where i've absolutely NEVER heard a print journo call parcells or larry brown or tom coughlin 'coach,' or if a newbie did, it was the last time.

i understand how this could seem like a small, insignificant thing to those who use 'coach' matter-of-factly with no concern about 'appearances.' perhaps the mindset attitude in the midwest is vastly different, though for the life of me i can't understand why it would be.

sorry, obviously no minds are being changed here and people should all conduct their business however they seem fit. whatever gets the job done, yada yada yada.

it could well be my attitude comes from the environment in which i was raised in the biz. and for the life of me, i just cannot wrap my head around cannot wrap my head around the idea that this is an acceptable practice or one any journo would be comfortable with.

but i agree this discussion isn't getting us anywhere and isn't likely to in the future. so, since i was probably the one who let this issue raise its head again in the first place i'd be absolutely grateful if we could let it drop. no need for any of us to pound our heads against the wall or risk hurting anyone's feeling further.

and if i have ruffled some feathers on this thread i sincerely apologize. i can become hardheaded and insist on having the last word when i get caught up in these debates and i'm trying to lighten up more these days since i am no longer an active member of our fraternity.

hopefully my opinions on some other issues of import to us will continue to be considered by y'all. i promise you my heart is in the right place; i'm just trying to help us all bring pride and honor to our profession...

 

As I said before -- and I meant it -- I love your knowledge and insight on many issues and respect the hell out of you and your experience in the biz. You're a real pro. And you are correct, no minds are being changed. So we'll leave it at that, with no hard feelings. Even if you are mocking me (aw, I couldn't resist one last shot).

 

wow. can't believe a 20-second blog post inspired this interesting converstaion.

One truly never knows.

Didn't mean to offend anyone, for the record.

 

Love that someone defense for his skill as a reporter is that he can't remember anyone's name.

 

I don't remember anyone using that as a defense of his or her skill as a reporter.

I think you need to read the thread again.

 

There is nothing wrong with having a debate about the coach/name issue. If it hurts people's feelings, well, toughen up a bit. It's a journalism debate worth having.

I agree with shockey because I think calling someone "Coach" cedes some ground immediately, however insignificant. And some of it may be regional, because the relationship between the press and the people they cover has always been a bit more adversarial on the East Coast. But I think it's just a small sign by people in our profession that we're not going to be deferential. There is no disrespect in calling someone by their first name. He's not your coach, he's the subject. I don't take any great offense to those who do use the "Coach" term, but personally, I try not to do it.

 

But how do we feel about wearing shorts to cover events in hot weather?

 

I feel I could be totally objective and do my job properly if I went to a game wearing apparel of the home team head to toe. They are just clothes.

However I wouldn't do it, and I suspect none of you would either, because of the appearance.

Same thing with using "Coach."

You may know that you're still objective and independent, but you can't blame people for drawing their own conclusions.