Why are the Cowboys Journalist/bloggers so terrible?

[sacase]

The Dallas media believes that they are they story rather than reporting on the team. Look at everything they write, it is devoid of any good analysis. When we had Breer, he was a good football reporter....he lasted a year.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

It's mostly an editor thing. They run the show, they reward those writers who do what they want. They think that 'negative Cowboys stuff = newspaper buys & Web site clicks' and that's what they look for.

Part of the other problem is that these writers are largely talentless and lazy. Instead of writing something that applies to the team and their possible success or lack thereof and making it interesting and informative, they'll write about anything else. It takes less work and it's easy to write something controversial with little thought or logic than to research and analyze why Mike Zimmer's blitzes didn't work or what the issues in our punt coverage were last season.

Another part of the problem is just the blatant immaturity of these writers. I think the issue here is that there's little reprimand coming from their bosses when they do something so unprofessional. It's gotten to the point where as long as you don't use any of the 7 deadly words, a writer can call a player or a coach every name under the sun (often unjustified) and it's supposedly okay.

It's funny and sad when I see these 'professional writers' complain about amateur bloggers when amateur bloggers often provide far more informative, accurate, entertaining and professional work than they do. Instead of looking at why people go to read amateur bloggers, they'd rather just sit and complain and write the same old, tired crap.



YAKUZA

 

[Yakuza Rich]

And the story over the past decade has been negative for the most part. Do you not agree?

Mostly negative? I'm not so sure.

'98-'99 there's no reason to be 'mostly negative.'

'00 - '02 - agreed, negative indeed.

'03 - nope, 10-6 season.

'04 - negative

'05-'08 = exactly what we want? No. But mostly negative? I don't think so either. Especially '07, where in the MIDST OF A 10 GAME WINNING STREAK THEY WERE MOSTLY NEGATIVE.

I'd say that's a 7-4 difference between a 'not deservedly negative season' and a 'deservedly negative season.'

And it still doesn't stop the fact that they act downright unprofessional with childish insults. Guys like Damon Runyan, Shirley Povich and Grantland Rice would be rolling over in their graves.

And then when it's put into question, they'll say 'it's not our job to root for the Cowboys!' It's also not their job to make irrational statements, resort to childish insults and to try and start up controversy just for the sake of it.




YAKUZA

 

[dadymat]

i notice all the time on NFL radio when they are interviewing newspaper writers from other cities about their teams..they all seem professional and informed and give good detailed info on their teams progress...every time one of these fools around here open their traps its only to stir up drama...they all want to be the guy who uncovered the newest fiasco ..they should all go to TMZ...theyd fit right in...that video of TMZ following Romo around in Cali probably made him feel right at home....that article Sturm wrote was the most informative thing ive read around here in a long time....not being homer and not bashing just giving good old fashioned facts and stats to back it....and hes not a writer

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Mostly negative? I'm not so sure.

'98-'99 there's no reason to be 'mostly negative.'

'00 - '02 - agreed, negative indeed.

'03 - nope, 10-6 season.

As I recall, following the 10-6 season, JFE predicted that the Cowboys would make it to the Super Bowl. Other pundits expressed trepidation about the lack of talent at certain key positions (such as quarterback) and the late season defensive swoon. Unfortunately, their concerns and criticisms would be validated by a 6-10 finish the very next season.

'04 - negative

'05-'08 = exactly what we want? No. But mostly negative? I don't think so either. Especially '07, where in the MIDST OF A 10 GAME WINNING STREAK THEY WERE MOSTLY NEGATIVE.

I'd say that's a 7-4 difference between a 'not deservedly negative season' and a 'deservedly negative season.'

And it still doesn't stop the fact that they act downright unprofessional with childish insults. Guys like Damon Runyan, Shirley Povich and Grantland Rice would be rolling over in their graves.

And then when it's put into question, they'll say 'it's not our job to root for the Cowboys!' It's also not their job to make irrational statements, resort to childish insults and to try and start up controversy just for the sake of it.

I completely agree with you concerning the juvenile and sophomoric name calling and insults, such as Mr. Fix It and Coach Cupcake.

However, after 12 consecutive seasons without playoff win, don't you expect to find an abundance of negativity?

 

[landryscorner]

Journalists have a responsibility to be critical of the team they cover.

The Cowboys haven't won a playoff game in 12 years. Where is the reason for positivity?

Given that the past decade has featured far more downs than ups in Dallas, how can a critical journalist be anything but negative?

agree here

 

[odog422]

As I recall, following the 10-6 season, JFE predicted that the Cowboys would make it to the Super Bowl. Other pundits expressed trepidation about the lack of talent at certain key positions (such as quarterback) and the late season defensive swoon. Unfortunately, their concerns and criticisms would be validated by a 6-10 finish the very next season.

I completely agree with you concerning the juvenile and sophomoric name calling and insults, such as Mr. Fix It and Coach Cupcake.

However, after 12 consecutive seasons without playoff win, don't you expect to find an abundance of negativity?

As Yakuza mentioned above as a topic, the issues in punt coverage. Something like this...or why with our OL being the size it is, we have problems running the ball consistently. That's what I want to see. I understand your point about the success of the team. But why? Why are they unsuccessful?

Unfortunately for most of us, that type of writing requires real work, i.e., interviews with coaches, interviews with perhaps other teams players or coaches, maybe some good old fashioned tape review. Almost all of these guys simply aren't willing to put that kind of effort in. Or are willing to try to come up with original ideas.

That, in a nutshell, is the problem.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Every year someone somewhere asks this question.

Did once you guys who ask this ever go back and see that the negativity was accurate?

Therein lies your answer. They don't see what's to be excited about. And when they say what they think, fans blast them for their opinion.

Now let's count down to the post where someone says, "but what happens when they're wrong? They don't admit it."

But in the last dozen years, they have pretty much said this team ain't all that except last year when the SB was predicted.

Maybe it's not the mediots, but the fans who are wrong?

I bet this goes over like a rash in a nudist colony.

 

[Jay]

Every year someone somewhere asks this question.

Did once you guys who ask this ever go back and see that the negativity was accurate?

Therein lies your answer. They don't see what's to be excited about. And when they say what they think, fans blast them for their opinion.

Now let's count down to the post where someone says, "but what happens when they're wrong? They don't admit it."

But in the last dozen years, they have pretty much said this team ain't all that except last year when the SB was predicted.

Maybe it's not the mediots, but the fans who are wrong?

I bet this goes over like a rash in a nudist colony.

It's not all about their predictions, its about their general blog entries, topics, and actual content. If it were simply predictions, that would be one thing.. but its not, not at all.

 

[TwoDeep3]

It's not all about their predictions, its about their general blog entries, topics, and actual content. If it were simply predictions, that would be one thing.. but its not, not at all.

Harsh truth is not always palatable. But when a mediot says things about this team that are obvious, fans reject this.

The people on NFLN say this WR corp couldn't scare girl scouts from a Jonas Brothers concert. They're labeled idiots by the fans.

Doesn't matter that they played the game and know what they are talking about.

You are right. This isn't about predictions. I never said it was. It's about the state of the union in Cowboy-ville.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

As Yakuza mentioned above as a topic, the issues in punt coverage. Something like this...or why with our OL being the size it is, we have problems running the ball consistently. That's what I want to see. I understand your point about the success of the team. But why? Why are they unsuccessful?

Unfortunately for most of us, that type of writing requires real work, i.e., interviews with coaches, interviews with perhaps other teams players or coaches, maybe some good old fashioned tape review. Almost all of these guys simply aren't willing to put that kind of effort in. Or are willing to try to come up with original ideas.

That, in a nutshell, is the problem.

I've already agreed that the quality of reporting and analysis is often specious. The topic I'm addressing here is negativity, which is perfectly justified in light of the Cowboys' performance over the past decade.

 

[Idgit]

Every year someone somewhere asks this question.

Did once you guys who ask this ever go back and see that the negativity was accurate?

Therein lies your answer. They don't see what's to be excited about. And when they say what they think, fans blast them for their opinion.

Now let's count down to the post where someone says, "but what happens when they're wrong? They don't admit it."

But in the last dozen years, they have pretty much said this team ain't all that except last year when the SB was predicted.

Maybe it's not the mediots, but the fans who are wrong?

I bet this goes over like a rash in a nudist colony.

Rashes in a nudist colony spread for a good reason. Unlike this opinion.

The problem with the Dallas media isn't that it's negative. It's that it's bad. The write repetitive stories based on undocumented support and draw negative conclusions based off of their collective misunderstanding of the game. They pick sides with their favorite players and break 'stories' that will get coverage but which they know they cannot substantiate. They pick fights with the head coach in press conferences. They give insulting nicknames. They repeatedly make factual errors in their reports. They're comfortable and they're arrogant. I'm not a Dallas area local, but I can't stand to read most of them, and I don't know that I've ever lived in a place with such poor coverage, honestly.

There have been reporters who've covered the Cowboys who were very good but were never particularly complimentary. Albert Breer is the most obvious example. Mosely, before he became a full time blogger was good, though he was pretty complimentary (he should have been, since we had such a good team). But those guys are the exceptions to the rules. Colinshaw, JJT, Watkins, and Macmahon are a step above professional clowns. Watkins not even a step up since he's wearing the big shoes and it's apparently hard for him to walk in them.

 

[67CowboysFan]

Every year someone somewhere asks this question.

Did once you guys who ask this ever go back and see that the negativity was accurate?

Therein lies your answer. They don't see what's to be excited about. And when they say what they think, fans blast them for their opinion.

Now let's count down to the post where someone says, "but what happens when they're wrong? They don't admit it."

But in the last dozen years, they have pretty much said this team ain't all that except last year when the SB was predicted.

Maybe it's not the mediots, but the fans who are wrong?

I bet this goes over like a rash in a nudist colony.

The problem here is they follow the lead of that 4 letter network and believe that negativity sells. Get more impressions to your site, get more advertising $$. Don't deliver and you are gone. The days of real journalism as we know it are pretty much gone. It doesn't take a Nostradomus to predict that mid November we will hear about how this team will implode in December no matter what has changed. They are just going with the odds based on the recent past and not actually looking at what might be different. They are not reporting what is real but reporting what will keep the money flowing and their jobs safe.

 

[67CowboysFan]

Rashes in a nudist colony spread for a good reason. Unlike this opinion.

The problem with the Dallas media isn't that it's negative. It's that it's bad. The write repetitive stories based on undocumented support and draw negative conclusions based off of their collective misunderstanding of the game. They pick sides with their favorite players and break 'stories' that will get coverage but which they know they cannot substantiate. They pick fights with the head coach in press conferences. They give insulting nicknames. They repeatedly make factual errors in their reports. They're comfortable and they're arrogant. I'm not a Dallas area local, but I can't stand to read most of them, and I don't know that I've ever lived in a place with such poor coverage, honestly.

There have been reporters who've covered the Cowboys who were very good but were never particularly complimentary. Albert Breer is the most obvious example. Mosely, before he became a full time blogger was good, though he was pretty complimentary (he should have been, since we had such a good team). But those guys are the exceptions to the rules. Colinshaw, JJT, Watkins, and Macmahon are a step above professional clowns. Watkins not even a step up since he's wearing the big shoes and it's apparently hard for him to walk in them.

You forgot Barry Horn, he loves to get in a cheap shot whenever he can and seems to take great pride in it.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Rashes in a nudist colony spread for a good reason. Unlike this opinion.

The problem with the Dallas media isn't that it's negative. It's that it's bad. The write repetitive stories based on undocumented support and draw negative conclusions based off of their collective misunderstanding of the game. They pick sides with their favorite players and break 'stories' that will get coverage but which they know they cannot substantiate. They pick fights with the head coach in press conferences. They give insulting nicknames. They repeatedly make factual errors in their reports. They're comfortable and they're arrogant. I'm not a Dallas area local, but I can't stand to read most of them, and I don't know that I've ever lived in a place with such poor coverage, honestly.

There have been reporters who've covered the Cowboys who were very good but were never particularly complimentary. Albert Breer is the most obvious example. Mosely, before he became a full time blogger was good, though he was pretty complimentary (he should have been, since we had such a good team). But those guys are the exceptions to the rules. Colinshaw, JJT, Watkins, and Macmahon are a step above professional clowns. Watkins not even a step up since he's wearing the big shoes and it's apparently hard for him to walk in them.

I always find the positon that they know nothing, are hacks, and have an agenda to be a blanket indictment with little substance.

I don't know a great deal about football. I have watched this team for every season they have been in existence. Being a Dallas native I have also read the writers throughout the years.

Back in the day the poison pen writers who always looked down at the team and nothing ever was ever right were around. There were a few that lambasted the team and found a perverse pleasure in ridiculing the team.

But I also remember Galloway when he was a baseball writer hungry to break off the beat and become a featured writer. He stood behind Blackie Sherrod for so many years.

I think it is a difficult job to write about a team. Then marry in the editor who assigns the angle and changes your words. The tedium of writing several articles a week and being out at Valley Ranch or wherever all the time.

But I also see fans who disregard some very sage words about the team stating they are crap.

Very seldom do I see fans come back and say, "Remember that article back in November when writer XYZ brought up that player ABC was having trouble with a certain type of blitz pick-up. I said the writer was a moron, but it sure looks like he nailed it now."

Breer brought Xs and Os. The rest find a niche and try to use it as a point to start a view of something interesting.

Time of season or off-season has a great deal to do with this.

I don't like JJT. But he was the first person to say Jerry would sign Galloway. So he must know something.

I like Fisher. I think he has about the most even keeled approach to this tea.

Bob Sturm is one of the best. But if you are looking for sugar-coating, then pass him by.

That is the way I see the fan. They want sugar-coating and not much reality. Nothing that suiggests their dreams will be dashed on the rocks.

When they get this, they name call.

I do find that amusing.

 

[Idgit]

I always find the positon that they know nothing, are hacks, and have an agenda to be a blanket indictment with little substance.

I don't know a great deal about football. I have watched this team for every season they have been in existence. Being a Dallas native I have also read the writers throughout the years.

Back in the day the poison pen writers who always looked down at the team and nothing ever was ever right were around. There were a few that lambasted the team and found a perverse pleasure in ridiculing the team.

But I also remember Galloway when he was a baseball writer hungry to break off the beat and become a featured writer. He stood behind Blackie Sherrod for so many years.

I think it is a difficult job to write about a team. Then marry in the editor who assigns the angle and changes your words. The tedium of writing several articles a week and being out at Valley Ranch or wherever all the time.

But I also see fans who disregard some very sage words about the team stating they are crap.

Very seldom do I see fans come back and say, "Remember that article back in November when writer XYZ brought up that player ABC was having trouble with a certain type of blitz pick-up. I said the writer was a moron, but it sure looks like he nailed it now."

Breer brought Xs and Os. The rest find a niche and try to use it as a point to start a view of something interesting.

Time of season or off-season has a great deal to do with this.

I don't like JJT. But he was the first person to say Jerry would sign Galloway. So he must know something.

I like Fisher. I think he has about the most even keeled approach to this tea.

Bob Sturm is one of the best. But if you are looking for sugar-coating, then pass him by.

That is the way I see the fan. They want sugar-coating and not much reality. Nothing that suiggests their dreams will be dashed on the rocks.

When they get this, they name call.

I do find that amusing.

There's a tendency for hard core fans to support their teams, that's normal. But that's not the problem with the Dallas media. My problem with them isn't necessarily that they aren't all x's and o's guys. Though a bit of football knowledge would be nice. I don't get giving them credit for knowing about things like the Galloway signing before fans do, because they have access fans don't, and that access is the same for every major sports market. I don't see any evidence that JJT has better inside info than his counterparts here in the Bay Area do, for instance.

There are dozen topics they could cover in between the is-Tony-Romo-a-leader nonsense that directly bear on the team's performance. Why do Wade and Garrett get a pass for an offense that led the league in penalties last year? Why didn't the defense get as many takeaways as expected when we led the league in sacks? What does the team really feel its got for the future at left tackle? Instead they use blog entries to test the waters for sensational stories. Roy Williams doesn't lift weights. Really? Oh, wait: it was Coachable Roy Williams doesn't lift weights. What did TO twitter about Tony Romo again? Give me a break.

It's not that this stuff is negative. It's insipid. And I understand posting this crap 70% of the time--after all, the point is to have people read it and most casual sports fans are stupid--but does it really hurt readership to sneak in the occasional interesting story? Even a tidbit like what a Philly player thought about blocking Spencer instead of Ellis is relevant and interesting now and then. It can be directly attributed and it bore directly on a sensational story that was also circulating during the same news cycle. Breer, getting a comment from Mike Martz on the record about Roy Williams' prospects for the upcoming season is another example. There's meat out there to be had. I don't know why we settle for a steady diet of Fruit Loops.

 

[SaltwaterServr]

There's a tendency for hard core fans to support their teams, that's normal. But that's not the problem with the Dallas media. My problem with them isn't necessarily that they aren't all x's and o's guys. Though a bit of football knowledge would be nice. I don't get giving them credit for knowing about things like the Galloway signing before fans do, because they have access fans don't, and that access is the same for every major sports market. I don't see any evidence that JJT has better inside info than his counterparts here in the Bay Area do, for instance.

There are dozen topics they could cover in between the is-Tony-Romo-a-leader nonsense that directly bear on the team's performance. Why do Wade and Garrett get a pass for an offense that led the league in penalties last year? Why didn't the defense get as many takeaways as expected when we led the league in sacks? What does the team really feel its got for the future at left tackle? Instead they use blog entries to test the waters for sensational stories. Roy Williams doesn't lift weights. Really? Oh, wait: it was Coachable Roy Williams doesn't lift weights. What did TO twitter about Tony Romo again? Give me a break.

It's not that this stuff is negative. It's insipid. And I understand posting this crap 70% of the time--after all, the point is to have people read it and most casual sports fans are stupid--but does it really hurt readership to sneak in the occasional interesting story? Even a tidbit like what a Philly player thought about blocking Spencer instead of Ellis is relevant and interesting now and then. It can be directly attributed and it bore directly on a sensational story that was also circulating during the same news cycle. Breer, getting a comment from Mike Martz on the record about Roy Williams' prospects for the upcoming season is another example. There's meat out there to be had. I don't know why we settle for a steady diet of Fruit Loops.

Quiet, sustained applause.

 

[burmafrd]

The Dallas hacks are certainly at least a step below the rest of the leagues hacks.

 

[dogunwo]

Well for one, I'd hope they'd be more thoughtful than that. The Raiders have won a playoff game since we have... Are they better off than we are?

For me, forget the positive/negative slant. No one is asking them to be cheerleaders. I'd just like some reasonably intelligent writing. The Washington Post has some very good writing, whether they're enthusiastic about the team or not. Meanwhile we get garbage like JJT and JFE put out that isn't fit for the bird cage.

The washington post has some of the best journalism in the nation

 

[Hostile]

They aren't bad all the time. Every writer gets assigned something they don't find interesting and don't pour their heart and soul into. Journalism is not what it used to be. Jim Murray is considered by many to be the best sportswriter ever. I would agree. Jim Murray would find it hard to be as popular today as he was in his heyday because what he wrote about is not what sports fans demand now.

JJT was mentioned. I really like JJT. I think he's a very good writer in fact. As evidence I ask you to read his book about the Cowboys. It is top notch.

Todd Archer has some really good stuff too.

What I object to is when a writer does a Chris Berman and a schtick passes for talent. When Chris Berman first got into prominence with his nicknames and stuff it was really kind of refreshing and new. The problem is he can't report without that schtick to fall back on and it has become nauseating.

It's like when someone tells you the same joke every time they bump into you. Or when you have a flat tire and someone tells you it is only flat on one side. It just isn't funny or appealing to say the same stuff over and over.

The biggest examples for me are JFE and her seemingly incessant need to call Owens "T-Faux," or Tim McMahon's "Coachable Roy Williams." You kind of picture them sitting at their keyboards chuckling to themselves about how clever they are and with each time they print that same tired line they get that little self satisfied chuckle all over again. They feel it becomes a signature. I think it's an anchor.

Does this mean JFE and Tim McMahon are always bad writers? Hell no. The very idea is ludicrous. Anyone who tells me they weren't tuned in to McMahon's DMN Blog reports last year at Camp are completely out of their ever loving minds. It was play by play instant access.

I really don't care if the articles are negative unless it becomes every single article saying the same thing every time. If there's no variety to the writing it just becomes a drone. I was actually shocked when the articles about the practice bubble collapsing did not mention the fact Dallas hasn't won a playoff game since the 1996 season. It's almost as if that fact was forgotten for a moment. Here we were reading stuff about a tragedy and it was almost refreshing in a way. It's like that one fact (and I acknowledge it is a fact) was pushed aside for more important information for a change. Some people (not naming any names) can work that phrase into any situation.

"The Dallas Cowboys, who haven't won a playoff game since 1996, today signed Arizona State QB Rudy Carpenter to compete at Camp and possibly earn a position on the Practice Squad."

It starts to remind me of a hangnail that you simply cannot stop agitating. It hurts, but it kind of feels good too. That's what this tactic reminds me of. It hurts to say it, but it feels so good to say the smug lines and chuckle to yourself at how clever you are.

All I can say is God bless Frank Luksa who is without a doubt the most gifted writer who has ever covered the Dallas Cowboys. It's a shame he doesn't have a daily assignment like many of the other journalists we have in the DFW media. The way he can tie stories together and blend analogies and dialogues with current reports is what is lacking in sports journalism today.

Forget relevance, where's the shock value?