Versatile made this comment on the Boston media thread, and I thought it deserved its own thread. Feel free to reject the premise as part of the discussion, but I think he's onto something. Is it the ubiquity of ESPN that has brought us to this point? Is it excusable because of that? That being the case, what is the value of daily access? My own observation from my days on the beat - and this was college football - was that the national media was granted, in some ways, more access than us daily grunts. Pete Thamel could probably waltz right into the head coach's office, or get a one-on-one with the starting quarterback, while the day-in, day-out crew was really carefully restricted. I think that the SID and coaching staff innocently thought of it as crowd control - and fairness to everyone. I'm not sure that it dawned on them that they were putting us at a disadvantage. Or: Are national guys (and gals) simply better at their jobs than the local hacks, overall? And that's why they are, frankly, national guys (and gals). Peripheral to the main discussion: When did the national media begin to own sports scoops?