thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,866
|
Post by thebin on Oct 31, 2011 13:34:06 GMT -5
I honestly think gtown has to build a high school-sized (5-7k) but college-quality stadium before it has any right to complain about Post coverage. Stadiums tell the story of a program to the outside world. Our story is "we're not sure we need a college football program afterall."
I didnt see the stadium mentioned in the new campain. Did i miss it? Any reason they could not carve out $10mm for a football program that could be playing on national tv if the beat lehigh?
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on Oct 31, 2011 13:53:55 GMT -5
I honestly think gtown has to build a high school-sized (5-7k) but college-quality stadium before it has any right to complain about Post coverage. Stadiums tell the story of a program to the outside world. Our story is "we're not sure we need a college football program afterall." I didnt see the stadium mentioned in the new campain. Did i miss it? Any reason they could not carve out $10mm for a football program that could be playing on national tv if the beat lehigh? From the FAQs: 11. You raised money in the last campaign to build an athletics field and didn't; why not, and what happened to that money? The Multi-Sport Field was one of the later priorities of the last campaign. Although substantial funds were raised, they were insufficient to complete the project in its ultimate, very expansive scope. The funds raised to date, together with university investment, were used to build the core of the facility, including a new playing field, lighting, scoreboards and stands. We are working to complete the second and final phase of the work outside the context of this campaign. It's obviously not an entirely satisfying answer, but at least they had the integrity to identify it as a prominent FAQ. |
|
Ro
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 228
|
Post by Ro on Oct 31, 2011 18:31:26 GMT -5
Feels more like a prominent GFY.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,817
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Oct 31, 2011 23:27:16 GMT -5
If the Post is going to claim to be a local/regional paper covering local/regional teams, then it should act like it and not merely pay lip service to it once a year. Many area high schools get more in-depth coverage - even outside of football - than does Georgetown (and to a somewhat lesser extent Howard). If the purpose was merely to run articles about the teams with the largest followings, then the Post sports page would look identical to that of USA Today. I "get" why, I understand their reasoning - I just don't agree with it. I agree the Post should be covering GU football, but I doubt that the Post would buy your argument that it needs to be true to it's local identity. I think the folks at the Post are more concerned with selling newspaper subscriptions, and local HS football sells because there is not a national HS football market (no matter how many HS games ESPN airs). On the other hand, there is a vibrant national market for CFB. Should the Post drop its coverage of Afghanistan to cover local PTA board meetings so that it can retain some local flavor? The only reason the Post doesn't look like USA Today is that it has to differentiate its product and offer something to people interested in their local communities. HS football matters to local communities. College football is something most people watch on television for entertainment. The following day's coverage is also entertainment, and the value of such coverage is maximized when all the "big games" from across the country are included. Georgetown probably needs to offer a better game day environment and/or have greater success on the field before the Post starts covering every home game. Let's beat Lehigh and force the WaPo to cover our playoff run. I agree with most of that, so I'll just comment on some general things. You say "HS football matters to local communities." I would say that Georgetown football also matters - or could matter - to a not insignificant number of people in local communities. Those people also, fortuitously, tend to be in the sort of demographic that actually would consider having and/or retaining a Washington Post subscription. Moreover, aside from the thrill of "getting your name in the paper," WaPo coverage of high school sports rarely adds anything of value. Pretty much anyone who cares about the game was at it (not that many other things are scheduled for Friday evenings), and those that weren't can get better information through other sources, especially the internet, than from the no-frills, written-by-interns pieces in the Post. Aside from human interest stories, there's rarely any real journalism, just stenography. Big-time college football, in addition to being generally easy to dial up on TV, has a million different sources of information - and unless it's UMCP, many of them will be more thorough than the Post. By contrast, there is effectively zero professional coverage of Georgetown football. The niche is there, if they'd like to fill it. Let me approach this another way, by means of comparison: Georgetown football, playing in the Patriot League, gets less coverage in the Post than American basketball, also playing in the Patriot League. Announced attendance at snow-covered Fitton Field on Saturday was 3,873. Last season's AU/HC matchups drew 2,552 to Bender and 2,649 to the Hart Rec Center. 2,083 came out to American to watch AU host Colgate; 3,215 watched the Hoyas play 'gate two Saturdays ago. |
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Nov 1, 2011 6:30:05 GMT -5
Let me approach this another way, by means of comparison: Georgetown football, playing in the Patriot League, gets less coverage in the Post than American basketball, also playing in the Patriot League. Announced attendance at snow-covered Fitton Field on Saturday was 3,873. Last season's AU/HC matchups drew 2,552 to Bender and 2,649 to the Hart Rec Center. 2,083 came out to American to watch AU host Colgate; 3,215 watched the Hoyas play 'gate two Saturdays ago. On a related note, in his Blog yesterday, the Post's DC United/soccer beat writer Steven Goff--who in DCU's offseason is the beat writer for GMU basketball--posted some local college attendance averages. It was in a story about UMD men's soccer, which averaged 4,223 in attendance this season. wapo.st/vliFjw |
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,861
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Nov 1, 2011 7:48:00 GMT -5
Some of this is an attendance issue, some of it a circulation issue. The Post realigned its sports coverage in the 1990's to focus on teams with circulation growth in the suburbs (e.g., Virginia Tech in Fairfax and Loudoun counties) at the expense of a District that was going to buy the Post whether or not Georgetown, Howard, GW, etc. were covered or not.
One excuse the Post often makes is worthy of dispute, however: that its diminished sports staff can't cover these games. There are enough college writers out there, even on the Georgetown campus, to whom a byline as a stringer would be a tremendous acomplishment and one where they would literally stand in line for the opportunity. Securing a HOYA or Voice sports writer to file a story with the cutline "Special to the Washington Post" adds content with little or no cost, and was a means in the pre-Internet era for many sports writers to get their start towards becoming professional journalists.
While the Post uses free lancers (Kathy Orton was one, at least at one point) it no longer seeks college talent, and the lack of coverage figuratively or literally has no excuse. But as long as the paper justifies coverage by attendance figures, it's an easy sell to the editor why these games aren't covered.
As for the Times or the Examiner, I think sports exists there in name only. Where have you gone, Barker Davis...
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506 
|
Post by theexorcist on Nov 1, 2011 9:01:46 GMT -5
I agree the Post should be covering GU football, but I doubt that the Post would buy your argument that it needs to be true to it's local identity. I think the folks at the Post are more concerned with selling newspaper subscriptions, and local HS football sells because there is not a national HS football market (no matter how many HS games ESPN airs). On the other hand, there is a vibrant national market for CFB. Should the Post drop its coverage of Afghanistan to cover local PTA board meetings so that it can retain some local flavor? The only reason the Post doesn't look like USA Today is that it has to differentiate its product and offer something to people interested in their local communities. HS football matters to local communities. College football is something most people watch on television for entertainment. The following day's coverage is also entertainment, and the value of such coverage is maximized when all the "big games" from across the country are included. Georgetown probably needs to offer a better game day environment and/or have greater success on the field before the Post starts covering every home game. Let's beat Lehigh and force the WaPo to cover our playoff run. I agree with most of that, so I'll just comment on some general things. You say "HS football matters to local communities." I would say that Georgetown football also matters - or could matter - to a not insignificant number of people in local communities. Those people also, fortuitously, tend to be in the sort of demographic that actually would consider having and/or retaining a Washington Post subscription. Moreover, aside from the thrill of "getting your name in the paper," WaPo coverage of high school sports rarely adds anything of value. Pretty much anyone who cares about the game was at it (not that many other things are scheduled for Friday evenings), and those that weren't can get better information through other sources, especially the internet, than from the no-frills, written-by-interns pieces in the Post. Aside from human interest stories, there's rarely any real journalism, just stenography. Big-time college football, in addition to being generally easy to dial up on TV, has a million different sources of information - and unless it's UMCP, many of them will be more thorough than the Post. By contrast, there is effectively zero professional coverage of Georgetown football. The niche is there, if they'd like to fill it. Let me approach this another way, by means of comparison: Georgetown football, playing in the Patriot League, gets less coverage in the Post than American basketball, also playing in the Patriot League. Announced attendance at snow-covered Fitton Field on Saturday was 3,873. Last season's AU/HC matchups drew 2,552 to Bender and 2,649 to the Hart Rec Center. 2,083 came out to American to watch AU host Colgate; 3,215 watched the Hoyas play 'gate two Saturdays ago. Yes, but football has five or six home dates a year - every single game is/should be an event. Saying that Georgetown/Colgate (with an 80s band on Homecoming!) draws more than AU/Colgate is just sad. I'm kind of disappointed that the thread has gone this way. It's still amazing since I follow Delaware football (I went to the I-AA championship game last year) and the team with the better chance to go to the playoffs is Georgetown. Hoya. Saxa. |
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,866
|
Post by thebin on Nov 1, 2011 9:05:04 GMT -5
Beyond disappointing that they have left the stadium out of a $1.5 billion campaign. What is the rational?
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on Nov 1, 2011 9:46:45 GMT -5
As for the Times or the Examiner, I think sports exists there in name only. Where have you gone, Barker Davis... Just FYI, there are six pages of Sports in today's Examiner, with slightly more staff content than AP content. Their eight named Sports contributors provided: A staff article on the Nats picking up Davey Johnson's option for 2012. A full page dedicated to the Redskins at mid-season. A column calling for Shanahans and Edsall to be fired. Another column on the Redskins sucking. The now obligatory Page 2-style page, with an evaluation of the NFC East at midseason, potential replacements for TLR, and a blurb about Canadian franchises succeeding early in the NHL. An article on the Caps' current road trip. Half a page on Maryland football and whether the season can be salvaged with a win over Virginia. versus An AP blurb on CC re-signing with the Yankees. The AP story on the WVU lawsuit. The AP story on TLR's retirement. Half a page of wire stories from around the NFL. For what it's worth, the GU-FU game is listed on their what-to-watch calendar, alongside UVA-UMD, Howard-Hampton, and Troy-USNA games on Saturday. |
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,861
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Nov 1, 2011 9:50:13 GMT -5
Beyond disappointing that they have left the stadium out of a $1.5 billion campaign. What is the rational? It's in the campaign, the third of three priorities for Athletics, the others being the IAC and scholarships. Reality would suggest that if a donor had $10 million, they'd be steered toward the IAC, but there is still an institutional interest in getting the MSF done if someone will fund it. A better question would be the degree to which the football and lacrosse constituencies are willing to push to get it done. |
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,866
|
Post by thebin on Nov 1, 2011 10:04:45 GMT -5
Strange then that the FAQ lists it as "outside the context of this campaign.". You make it sound a bit like they are waiting for it to fall into their lap- is that the impression you have dfw?
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,861
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Nov 1, 2011 10:47:08 GMT -5
The FAQ may be dated, but it was discussed that the cost of the MSF is included within the goal for Athletics.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,817
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Nov 1, 2011 13:42:10 GMT -5
Yes, but football has five or six home dates a year - every single game is/should be an event. Saying that Georgetown/Colgate (with an 80s band on Homecoming!) draws more than AU/Colgate is just sad. It really is. The FAQ may be dated, but it was discussed that the cost of the MSF is included within the goal for Athletics. When I was sent a copy of that particular talking point a little while back, I sent off the following reply, which I think is relevant here: The whole thing really is maddening though. What a sad thing that "we are working" is, in the Georgetown context, a euphemism for "we are going through the motions and doing the absolute bare minimum - at best."
As best as I've been able to gather, everyone in the higher ranks is so put off by what college football has become that they don't want to put any sort of institutional prioritization or backing behind it unless the costs are being paid by someone else. You can see it in the nomenclature: the Multi-Sport Field, the Intercollegiate Athletics Center - the emphasis is on multiplicity. With the IAC, they can argue that all the sports and varsity athletes (~10% of the total student population) will benefit from it. Plus, most people understand that the Georgetown basketball brand is an enormously valuable thing and so spending big capital money on it can be justified on those grounds (with the publicly unspoken understanding that Big John will solicit his former players for a contribution to it and it alone). Football, though... it's as if any sort of commitment will be taken as Slouching Toward Coral Gables. Even bundling it with lacrosse doesn't help.
My hunch is that that, as much as anything, explains why the fundraising strategy has been "naming donor first." Whether or not they ever actually had one and they backed out, necessitating cessation of construction, I don't know, though it wouldn't surprise me. But basically, it seems like they want to lock up the naming donor first and then solicit targeted contributions for it specifically, so that if faculty or any other stakeholder comes at them and says "why the hell are you spending money on football, especially at a time like this," they can say: "all the money was earmarked for this, none of it was going to be available to you anyway."
If that is indeed the case, then I understand the rationale, but I think it's both shortsighted and, frankly, lazy. Professionals are supposed to be able to make the case and sell priorities, not shy away from them. Besides, the MSF gets a ton of use outside of football and lacrosse.
Given that this state of affairs has remained constant over several ADs and from Langley to Bart, I get the feeling that it is coming from the top. I think most everyone involved at the higher levels continues to fail to appreciate how alienating the lack of transparency and information is to those who aren't already in the 6-digit donor club. And then they wonder why the alumni giving rate is so low. |
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Nov 1, 2011 13:55:38 GMT -5
Yes, but football has five or six home dates a year - every single game is/should be an event. Saying that Georgetown/Colgate (with an 80s band on Homecoming!) draws more than AU/Colgate is just sad. It really is. The FAQ may be dated, but it was discussed that the cost of the MSF is included within the goal for Athletics. When I was sent a copy of that particular talking point a little while back, I sent off the following reply, which I think is relevant here: The whole thing really is maddening though. What a sad thing that "we are working" is, in the Georgetown context, a euphemism for "we are going through the motions and doing the absolute bare minimum - at best."
As best as I've been able to gather, everyone in the higher ranks is so put off by what college football has become that they don't want to put any sort of institutional prioritization or backing behind it unless the costs are being paid by someone else. You can see it in the nomenclature: the Multi-Sport Field, the Intercollegiate Athletics Center - the emphasis is on multiplicity. With the IAC, they can argue that all the sports and varsity athletes (~10% of the total student population) will benefit from it. Plus, most people understand that the Georgetown basketball brand is an enormously valuable thing and so spending big capital money on it can be justified on those grounds (with the publicly unspoken understanding that Big John will solicit his former players for a contribution to it and it alone). Football, though... it's as if any sort of commitment will be taken as Slouching Toward Coral Gables. Even bundling it with lacrosse doesn't help.
My hunch is that that, as much as anything, explains why the fundraising strategy has been "naming donor first." Whether or not they ever actually had one and they backed out, necessitating cessation of construction, I don't know, though it wouldn't surprise me. But basically, it seems like they want to lock up the naming donor first and then solicit targeted contributions for it specifically, so that if faculty or any other stakeholder comes at them and says "why the hell are you spending money on football, especially at a time like this," they can say: "all the money was earmarked for this, none of it was going to be available to you anyway."
If that is indeed the case, then I understand the rationale, but I think it's both shortsighted and, frankly, lazy. Professionals are supposed to be able to make the case and sell priorities, not shy away from them. Besides, the MSF gets a ton of use outside of football and lacrosse.
Given that this state of affairs has remained constant over several ADs and from Langley to Bart, I get the feeling that it is coming from the top. I think most everyone involved at the higher levels continues to fail to appreciate how alienating the lack of transparency and information is to those who aren't already in the 6-digit donor club. And then they wonder why the alumni giving rate is so low.Who'd you send this to? Well written and several great points. |
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,817
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Nov 1, 2011 21:23:09 GMT -5
Who'd you send this to? Well written and several great points. Gotta keep that on the down low, sorry. |
|
