Thoughts on Scout and Rivals...

This was impressive.

 

I agree completely. The Rivals guy can make phone calls when the coaching staff cant. And since most of the local Rivals guys are total fabois anyway, they're glad to do it. In return, they get some inside info from the coaches, which they usually post on their message boards along the lines of "someone within the program told me ..."

Rivals is really useful for knowing when and to whom kids commit, and which schools they rejected. But beyond that, what they do is a little unethical, possibly illegal with the NCAA, and often misleading.

 

On the prep side, when does ESPN Rise start to factor into the Rivals-Scout combo? It has the name recognition of the WWL, which should help it, and its own set of rankings, recruiting stories and other features -- IIRC, kids and teams can create pages, too.

Hello, MySportSpace...

 

You're painting with a pretty broad brush, Method. Some of the guys are Rivals or Scout sites are total fanboys, but so are some of the guys from papers I see in the press box. The Rivals site that covers Virginia has been breaking all the news on the quarterback getting kicked off the team and it's hardly a propaganda machine.

 

It's pretty easy to break news when it's being given to you by the athletic dept. to spite the local newspaper. So it's a bit misleading to call it "breaking" news. It's like I "broke" the news to my friends and family that my wife was pregnant because she told me first.

 

Jeez...bitter much?

I'm sure you have proof it was given to them by the athletics dept "to spite the local newspaper" though.

i have no dog in this fight. just find it funny what broad-brush conspiracy theories people have.

 

I can only speak of what I've seen.

 

On a lighter note, one of the Rivals guys in my area routinely buries his leads because he's trying to create suspense in his "Joe Dipshit committed to State U" story. It's consistently hilarious.

 

The Rivals guys on my beat are pro's pros. They've certainly broken news, and not just the kind that the coach wants out, that's for sure. But every school is treated differently. I cover a school with an enormous following, and I'm sure the Rivals site brings in enough money to justify the resources they spend covering the team as a true daily beat (two guys travel, etc.).

 

Better them than me when it comes to spending 20 hours a week chasing down 18-year olds, many of whom know exactly where they are going but take 3-4 trips just for the fun of it and to have their ass kissed.

We attribute them when the release a commitment, but generally unless it's an in-state kid, or major, major get, we wait until LOI day and when it's official to go "crazy."

Luckily on my past beats, sources have trusted me enough to where I at least got the commitment info at the same time as the Rivals or Scout people, and often before.

Depends on the coach.

 

I'm amazed that as the newspaper business continues to swirl down the bowl, so many professional journalists have managed to keep their head above the water long enough to shout out their contempt for recruiting coverage one more time.
Newspapers blew this one.
They blew it on the NFL draft, too.
With all their resources, they could have dominated both areas and kept Rivals and the draft sites from ever getting off the ground. But you don't win APSEs with that stuff, do you?

 

On my team's Rivals site, the two full-timers mostly cover the team itself, and a stringer makes the majority of the recruiting calls.

At the Scout site, a full-timer does do the bulk of the recruiting work. He opted out of the daily beat in order to do recruiting instead. I can respect his reasons - more flexible hours, for one. Mostly work from home. And the fact that you can actually get to know the people you're covering a little bit. You don't have to wait for gang bangs at "availability."