Wright Thompson says "Zip it!"

I don't know how you take a shot at that story.

It told me more about the LSU situation than anything I've read in the Times Pic or Advocate, and I've read every story.

 

According to some threads on this board, less experience is what's needed. Not knowing what you're talking about apparently is of great value, at least according to JaredK.

 

this is insanity. i talked to wright over the weekend and he spent two days banging on that door, leaving notes, calling her, calling friends, talking to neighbors, etc. he broke the only news on this story, that the assistant coach turned pokey in --

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncw/news/story?id=2795145

-- and then wrote this column on deadline. this is not something he spent three months on. he is trying to give readers some insight into a story as it continues to break, and ask yourself this: did you get some out of this? the most controversial story in town, and he's in the assistant coaches office, talking about the guy turning off his cable because he knows the end is coming. i think that's pretty good stuff for a deadline column.

 

And many, and I mean MANY, people in glass offices in our industry.

 

Wingman is right on. Overwritten.

Oh, and another thing. I don't think Wright Thompson is that much better than me. Not sure why everyone has to be so reverential toward "legit" writers at massive publications. Everyone seems to trash Bill Simmons and Peter King around here because they're not well known right now for their straight stories. Guys like Wright Thompson get the opposite treatment around here far too often.

Here's what it takes to be big time: Talent, ambition, luck.

I have the talent part. A lot of people I know on this board have the talent. Some of em are at big publications. Some aren't because thet don't want to be. Some aren't because they're waiting for their break.

So all hail T.J Simers. He's awesome.

 

that's a great story. he got stuff other people didn't have, using his old LSU connections from like five years ago. some people might not like the style, but he has great information.

 

I truly think that the most vital thing in this business for people who want to move up is to have nurturing editors. I know that word has a pansy connotation, but I can't think of a better one. "Nurturing," in my world by the way, isn't a coddler. It's the opposite. It's a guy - or woman - who knows what he/she is doing regarding both writing and reporting, puts trust into the writer to carry things out and sink or swim once in a while, and also has the connections and the clout to send said reporter on his merry way after that.

I bet Wright had some editors like that.

Some of us, on the other hand, had people of influence like my h.s. advisor, who told me that "Northwestern and Missouri are on the way down, No-Name College is on the way up!" Of course, she was best pals with the journalism faculty at No-Name U, but what did I know?

This isn't griping or pettiness or bitterness or excuse-making on my part. I've done OK. But when people talk about "luck," I don't think it's to insinuate that a writer won the lottery. Luck in this business, to me, is finding the right mentors. I saw an interview recently with the dean or someone high up at Columbia U's J-school faculty, and she said as much - that a lot of nontraditional students end up in the program not because of credentialization, which is the wrong reason, but because they want to finally hook up with some people who can mold them, which is the right reason.

 

I'm just curious, what time does ESPN.com go to press? Do they have zoned editions?

 

Nice job on both the feature and finding out who served Chatman up. Even though some of Wright's writing is a little heady, the guy is certainly not full of himself. Even takes the time to help out college students trying to get in this biz, and not just kids from Mizzou. Definitely good people.

 

The story is fine. Wingman is a tool...

 

OK, I'm going to repeat myself one more time on this point.

I'm not saying he didn't do any legwork on the story...Obviously he did.

But you know what? Legwork is part of the job. Educated readers (which is pretty clearly his target audience, given how flowery his prose is) understand that a reporter does a lot of phone-calling, door-knocking and neighbor-quizzing. A really good reporter, like Thompson, does more than most.

I'm not arguing he doesn't.

I'm arguing that including the scene of him sitting in her driveway would be pointless if he WASN'T Wright Thompson. Since he is, I find it beyond funny.

Let's compare and contrast.

and then...

Yes, the second excerpt is less egregious than the first, but honestly, you don't see anything funny about the person who wrote the former sitting down years later and writing the latter?

 

Boy, Mizzou really starts lashing out when his favorites get even the most fawning scrutiny.

I don't know how many times I can say it: I respect Wright Thompson's talent and I know he works hard. But this column is pointless.

And it's not helped by the refer from ESPN.com's front page, which was what put the whole "zip it!" framework in my head:

Yes...our obsession with scandal has gotten sadly out of hand. How dare we be interested in the most interesting story EVER in women's college basketball. I guess we're all Baton Rougeans now.

(And for the love of God, I know he didn't write the refer. But it's an accurate description of the column.)