But a lot of newspapers have tried and failed.

because only players are inducted. I think what Brendan is saying is that he is prominently featured in the same fashion that he is in Cooperstown, if not more so.

The Reds Hall of Fame is only chartered to induct players, managers, and front office executives. No broadcasters or journalists. So while Hal McCoy was (and still is) a wonderful writer, the Reds have had a number of greats through the years and his “retirement” shouldn’t be the tipping point to change the induction rules. He’s recognized there, and I think he’d agree that’s good enough for him.

If they do eventually change their mission to include the journalists and broadcasters, then absolutely he deserves induction.

You suck.

/jump the gun’d

I don’t know how much else would have to change on the surface.

As we discussed in emails last night, RR doesn’t have to be a news aggregator for the Reds. That’s not the point nor is that expected of the teams. No question, they won’t allow seasonal access to blogs anytime soon. The issues are thick.

But the site is called “Reds Reporter” and there is finite value to occasional access (what’s being discussed in three of the four major sports is a “Blogger Day” about every 3-4 weeks) for interviews, original content and making key contacts that help accentuate/embellish the analysis, opinion and essays you guys do.

Access for sports blogs is a hot, hot topic this very day.

Teams do not and cannot dictate access based on their reporting. Have no idea why so many fans believe this bunk.

First, there are two large and very powerful organizations—the Baseball Writers and Pro Football Writers associations that are in the commissioners’ offices when things like fairness and access are an issue. That’s rare because it’s stupid for the teams and sports. The teams will lose, 100 percent of the time on those issues.

Here’s a great example: A couple of years ago the Redskins decided they didn’t like some of the columns the Washington (D.C.) Times was writing about them. So, they took away one of their seats in the pressbox and sent them to an auxiliary “viewing area” in the bowels of the stadium. John Clayton, then prez of the Football Writers, went nuts and the entire Redskins media corp backed the Times. Clayton’s solution: Give the Times their rightful seats or there would be a media blackout on use of the name “FedEx Field.”

Tagliabue called the Redskins within 4 hours and said give the seat back to the Times and don’t do this sheet again.

Also, there’s a fairly standard qualification throughout sports about who gets access: “Major news-gathering organizations.” Unless the reporter has some behavioral or ethical issue that conflicts with the team, the team never, ever dictates who reps that media company.

I think the “bread and butter” baseball coverage might all come from MLB.com in the future, as more and more papers can’t afford to send beat writers hither and yon covering games.

Especially East and West coast, and DC.
I’ll pay for the wife’s ticket.

i feel like there are enough talented and tactful people here, that we could have decent coverage. I couldn’t being to expect Slyde to cover 81 games, but if he covered 8, and BK covered 8, and JCH covered 8, etc, it could be done.

Would you be willing to cover a few baseball games for free, and get press access to the club? I mean RR couldn’t just send any member done there, Slyde would have to make sure they wouldn’t embarrass RR, but I think there are plenty of people we could send.

1. No reporting is unbiased, no matter what you want to think. Reporting is only considered “unbiased” when it agrees with your preconcieved notions – despite the fact that Sean Hannity has been shown to edit and splice tapes to make his point (and leave out critical, contrary information), millions of people think he’s “unbiased”.

2. Reporting on your home team is going to be biased. Whoever would cover the Reds, for instance, would be watching with the preconcieved notions that (1) the wrong players are on the field, (2) the pitchers will be mishandled, (3) Baker will make a number of in-game managing mistakes, and so on; anything that happens on the field, and thus is written about, will be reported with these things in mind. Further, do you really think a Cubs fan would want to read what I have to say about their team?

3. As Mr. Redlegs keeps trying to point out, and everyone still seems to be ignoring, is that access to the players and front office is highly controlled. SBN, or any news organization, isn’t going to get to waltz right into the clubhouse and ask Volquez about his rehab, or Taveras about his pictures of Castellini with the goat. They will have to prove they belong, either by SBN getting a press pass (by proving to be a legitimate news agency) or the writer becoming a member of the BBWAA (by being a baseball writer for a number of years).

4. THIS IS A JOB. You don’t show up, have a couple of hot dogs, enjoy the game, ask a couple of questions afterwards, and go home. You have to spend hours at the ballpark, both before and after the game; you have to write a quality article after every game. Rinse and repeat 162 times a year, plus spring training.

5. Then, SBN is going to make money on the article – do you think they’re in it just for shits and grins? As such, after all of the hours every day that the writers commit to producing the content, the writers should expect to be paid.

Nevermid

was probably written for the print version before Hal’s post went up.

And they probably figure a lot their readership don’t read blogs anyway.