• Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Toughest college programs to cover

Depending on how you look at it, beats where they severely limit and control access to coaches and players might be easier to cover because 95 percent of the time you know when you will be working and know you won't bet beat.

Doesn't mean your stories will sing, though.

A real burnout job would be one that is very open with lots of access, coach jabbering all the time and serious competition on the beat. You'd be looking over your back all the time.
 
Ace said:
Depending on how you look at it, beats where they severely limit and control access to coaches and players might be easier to cover because 95 percent of the time you know when you will be working and know you won't bet beat.

i would think the opposite is true.

in the tight-assed closed programs it's the beat writer's job to break down that wall and find a source who is in the know. this is tough because the source can't do it in the open. that's the guy who beats everyone else. if all you do is show up at the regularly scheduled events at the times they tell you, you're not trying hard enough.
 
leo1 said:
Ace said:
Depending on how you look at it, beats where they severely limit and control access to coaches and players might be easier to cover because 95 percent of the time you know when you will be working and know you won't bet beat.

i would think the opposite is true.

in the tight-assed closed programs it's the beat writer's job to break down that wall and find a source who is in the know. this is tough because the source can't do it in the open. that's the guy who beats everyone else. if all you do is show up at the regularly scheduled events at the times they tell you, you're not trying hard enough.

It says toughest programs to cover -- not toughest programs to cover well.
 
Ace said:
leo1 said:
Ace said:
Depending on how you look at it, beats where they severely limit and control access to coaches and players might be easier to cover because 95 percent of the time you know when you will be working and know you won't bet beat.

i would think the opposite is true.

in the tight-assed closed programs it's the beat writer's job to break down that wall and find a source who is in the know. this is tough because the source can't do it in the open. that's the guy who beats everyone else. if all you do is show up at the regularly scheduled events at the times they tell you, you're not trying hard enough.

It says toughest programs to cover -- not toughest programs to cover well.

SNAP!
 
Ace said:
leo1 said:
Ace said:
Depending on how you look at it, beats where they severely limit and control access to coaches and players might be easier to cover because 95 percent of the time you know when you will be working and know you won't bet beat.

i would think the opposite is true.

in the tight-assed closed programs it's the beat writer's job to break down that wall and find a source who is in the know. this is tough because the source can't do it in the open. that's the guy who beats everyone else. if all you do is show up at the regularly scheduled events at the times they tell you, you're not trying hard enough.

It says toughest programs to cover -- not toughest programs to cover well.

i think most of us knew what he meant
 
Texas Tech has to go on that list.

Oklahoma isn't easy, and I've heard Arizona is just as bad now with Stoops II running the show.
 
leo1 said:
Ace said:
leo1 said:
Ace said:
Depending on how you look at it, beats where they severely limit and control access to coaches and players might be easier to cover because 95 percent of the time you know when you will be working and know you won't bet beat.

i would think the opposite is true.

in the tight-assed closed programs it's the beat writer's job to break down that wall and find a source who is in the know. this is tough because the source can't do it in the open. that's the guy who beats everyone else. if all you do is show up at the regularly scheduled events at the times they tell you, you're not trying hard enough.

It says toughest programs to cover -- not toughest programs to cover well.

i think most of us knew what he meant

Seriously, I know that these anal programs are a bench. But I wondered if there were any out there that were so open and competitive that they drive you crazy.
 
Having talked to a bunch of the folks on the Bama beat, I don't think that's one I'd want. Anal doesn't cover it. As for me, I'm on one of those wide open, competitive-as-heck beats. You're definitely always working it, looking for the edge.
 
To tight-assed coaches who restrict access to their players and themselves I would ask this questions: Name me the two most successful college programs over the past 25 years?

I'll make it easy for you: Miami and Florida State. Seven national championships between them. And two programs that historically allow generous access to their players, and two programs where the coaches make themselves available almost every day of the week.

Therefore, the correlation between restricting access to your players and winning football games doesn't exist.

Therefore, being a tight-ass won't win you any more games than the other way around.
 
Moderator1 said:
Isn't USC open not only to the press but the public for every practice?

Snoop is certainly welcome whenever he feels like showing up. Not sure about Warren G's status.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top