pros and college sports vs. preps sports

Guys get stuff wrong on the pro and college beat every day. Mistakes in this business aren't tolerated on any level. There are guys who get canned on the prep beat for making errors. It happens.
The standards you refer to aren't standards, its just the audience that reads the material. There are more people interested in State U or Pro team x and prep school K.
I'm interested about the standards you were referring to. In my eyes, a mistake is a mistake be it writing preps, colleges or pros. The difference is how many people are reading that mistake and calling you out on it.

 

Everything is on a more human (for better and worse) level covering preps than colleges or pros. Those are big, ruthless, amoral businesses, the people in them act accordingly, and you have to cover them accordingly.

 

You're right about a mistake being a mistake. Still, the standards are higher though on a pro or (major) college beat in my opinion. That's why there's so much scrutiny when a younger reporter lands a major beat and the people defending them say stuff like, "Well, take a look at their work." As someone considered "younger" I've done preps and pros on a full-time, every day basis. So my opinion is based on my own experiences having done both, and my kick-everyone-else's-ass mentality.

I can't put the "standards" thing into words. But if you want to be top dog on a beat (which I think everyone wants), you want to be a better reporter and writer than your competition (for the people that know me, I'm not saying that's what I am, but that's what we ALL strive for). Maybe that's what I mean.

 

I think understand what you're saying but I've yet to hear what the standards are? And I'm not trying to be a wise-ass or anything, but that word "standard" is thrown around so easily.

 

There are a couple aspects of covering a pro or major college beat that you're overlooking. Sure, you're fed the stats and play-by-play, but you're doing at least a sidebar and notes besides the gamer. So the notion that it's easier to concentrate on the game isn't necessarily true. Pro teams and major colleges tend to operate like the iron curtain and will go out of their way to make our jobs as difficult as possible. Players, coaches and GMs/administrators often want no part of us. High school coaches and players tend to be more hospitable to us, although there certainly are exceptions. A pro or college writer has to worry about every other paper and broadcast outlet in the area getting a scoop, not to mention the national media. A high school writer generally does not.

That doesn't mean the job is easy.

High school writers have to done tons of legwork for stats, not to mention cultivating sources while dealing with pushy parents and hoping they don't get rained or snowed on in the fall and spring.

 

Neither is easy if you're doing it the right way.

 

Yours and Waylon's are the best responses on the thread.

 

As stated on the Richmond thread:

[quote author=Drip]
I'm curious, tell me more about what the beat entails.
[/quote]

Start with being on call 24/7. Add competition from everywhere -- other area papers, local TV and radio and all the national media (ESPN, Yahoo, the networks, etc.). There are few worse feelings as a beat guy than a national reporter swooping in to break a story regarding the team you're covering. Players get cut, traded, arrested and shot. The demotion of a starting guard to second string is news, and you've got to find out about it. Contract negotiations, holdouts, salary caps figures, which means dealing with team management, the union and agents -- the hard part there is figuring out whom to trust. By the way, you're doing this with access shrinking every day, so you'd better be working your butt off to cultivate sources, because you're going to need them.

And that's not even mentioning the whole free agency period -- who's your team after, who's being brought in to visit or work out, who on your team is headed elsewhere, and where are they going? -- and the month leading up to the draft. Oh, and is the coach and/or GM on the hot seat? That's a story every day for ... well, as long as it takes.

And the games aren't as easy as you seem to think. Instead of a 12-inch gamer in which some play-by-play is expected (most readers haven't seen the HS game), you've got pages worth of material to produce, from analysis to notes to various sidebars to columns and the gamer. And if you're relying on those typed quote sheets, you're going to miss an awful lot.

That's the quick synopsis off the top of my head. I'm sure there's quite a bit more that I'll think of later.


Yup, I did think of something else -- blogging, videos, ``insider'' newsletters and all the other stuff added because of the Internet that add to your workload but not your paycheck.

And I'm sure there's still plenty missing from this list.

 

Easier to get stats in pros and college. There is a paid liaison who is SUPPOSED to make access to people easier, but of course, they often act more as an obstructor.

Preps involves more people to keep track of because of the higher number of teams (assuming you are in a pretty sizable area), and with few exceptions, most of the organization of phone numbers, rosters, statistics, is up to you.

I would also throw in the fact that pros and college - again, assuming you're in a somewhat large area - are more invigorating to cover because there's more competition and you have a pretty large audience, compared to preps. You're also somewhat pampered with the whole stats, and sometimes food, thing. For many, preps are simply a step to get to the "next level." But of course, the competition on pros and colleges mean that you're looking at a year-round commitment, with a vacation serving as an oppportunity for young cheap preps jockey to try to establish him or herself in your spot should breaking news arise.

So yeah, mental focus-wise and labor-wise, preps are tougher. Emotionally, pros and college are tougher.

They're all great if you are the type who can make them that way.

 

Neither is easier than the other if done right. They're just different.

Each has things about it that make it better or worse, more or less maddening, and more or less work.

I do think it is easier to find and get into a good rhythm, for lack of a better term, with college/pro work, as opposed to preps, though, when it comes to being really strong and productive in terms of consistent quality on a regular basis.

That could be just because you're dealing with pros, and ostensibly, adults/better sources/interviews, instead of amateurs/kids, and/or because there's usually more of a set schedule, and at least some help in terms of stats, notes, information and announcements, etc., though.

The best thing about preps, as opposed to colleges/pros, is that there's more chance of some original ideas, content and interviews, just because there is, usually, less media coverage and competition, and less of the collective group interviewing and constant chasing of each other.

It's very rare to read any really different coverage of the same pro/college team in two directly competing newspapers.

That's often not the case when it comes to preps.

 

Ding! We have a winner!