Local Mediots

[Shinywalrus]

That's the problem with local/regional beat guys. Anyone with a modicum of competence and balance (ahem, Albert Breer) gets snapped up by national. The yellow dog illiterates get brought into ESPN's local affiliates and the shills get brought into PR departments.

In other words, don't be surprised if Bob Sturm is writing for SI at some point in the future.

 

[Charlie47]

I know I'm new here, but I like Babe Laufenburg.

 

[jday]

I'm a long time fan and no pro football expert by any stretch, but I'm tired of the so-called experts; I can't even read them anymore. i read more intelligent analysis of the Boys on CowboyZone. The last 2 articles I began to read and stopped were one that began with the assumption that our OL was awful against the Rams (really, all the OL?). Another talked about how JJ was undermining Red because he announced that Felix's roster spot was secure (like the writer knows that the 2 or 3 have never discussed this).

Is there anyone writing for any Metroplex outlets who has anything to listen to?

Not sure what to tell you on that. I too hate it when the local journalist bring up stupid stuff and try to make more of it.

Reminds me of when the papers announced that Jerry called Marion Barber a wuss for not playing, when he had actually said he was told Barber was cleared to play. The local media is notorious for this type of cheap reporting, and the only thing you can do is stop reading it. If enough people stop reading it, you will see change, but until then, I'd just avoid those particular journalist. Here's my ignore list:

JJT
Goose
Randy Galloway
And there used to be a female journalist for the Ft. Worth Star that contributed who also didn't seem to really know anything about football, so she would basically repeat everything Galloway said. I don't think she works there anymore, though.

Of course, I'll read there contributions here and there, if I run out of stuff to read, but they, in particular are notorious for trying to stir up trouble.

 

[Mr_Bill]

Jonathan Bales began as one of us -- a fan. So he's not exactly a mediot.

His "running the numbers" gimmick is really nothing more than what about 10 posters here on the boards do. Whoever hired him was a part of that insularity that exists amongst mediots, so they thought what Bales did was avant garde and hired him. That's how out of touch these people are. They're still mesmerized by Microsoft Outlook. Anyway, we've been doing for years what his editor think Jonathan Bales just now began doing.

But, hey, I'd rather have 10 more Jonathan Bales than 1 more Tim McMahon.

If the DFW media actually hired those 10 posters it would exponentially increase the level of their team coverage. Other than Bales, Broaddus and Sturm, the last any of the current local media reviewed tape was at a porn site.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Archer is good because he's a true reporter in the sense that he's there to fact find, get perspectives from people in and out of the organization and when he editorializes, he has the sense to understand what each side is thinking.

Sturm is downright excellent with his analysis of the actual game, what is really hurting the team, what the strategies each team has employed and the reason behind those strategies. Rafael Vela is similar to Sturm. I don't think Vela's analysis is as strong, but it's not too far away. I think Vela has a better sense of Cowboys history and can write a more appealing article from the sense of not being too long-winded and not having too much filler. However, he does write more from a fanboy perspective. Personally I have no problem with it, but some may not like that.

I think Dan Graziano is decent. He comes off like your typical beat writer for any other team not named the Cowboys. He's definitely pro-Cowboys and does come off like a fanboy. If he weren't in Dallas where the media is filled with hacks that desperately try to make stories and try to include them in stories, he wouldn't be as effective.

Almost all of the rest I find to have no redeemable qualities.








YR

 

[Mr_Bill]

Archer is good because he's a true reporter in the sense that he's there to fact find, get perspectives from people in and out of the organization and when he editorializes, he has the sense to understand what each side is thinking.

Sturm is downright excellent with his analysis of the actual game, what is really hurting the team, what the strategies each team has employed and the reason behind those strategies. Rafael Vela is similar to Sturm. I don't think Vela's analysis is as strong, but it's not too far away. I think Vela has a better sense of Cowboys history and can write a more appealing article from the sense of not being too long-winded and not having too much filler. However, he does write more from a fanboy perspective. Personally I have no problem with it, but some may not like that.

I think Dan Graziano is decent. He comes off like your typical beat writer for any other team not named the Cowboys. He's definitely pro-Cowboys and does come off like a fanboy. If he weren't in Dallas where the media is filled with hacks that desperately try to make stories and try to include them in stories, he wouldn't be as effective.

Almost all of the rest I find to have no redeemable qualities.








YR

I have been following Vela for over a decade. I don't consider him 'local', though, since he is Austin-based. Nor do I consider him a part of the media, even though he usually attends training camp. He is just a guy with an internet site, who happens to have sound opinions, writes well, and has developed a few reliable sources. In other words, several planes above most of the DFW media rabble.