[OT] Martinez

[RichS]

Yes he did and a lot of Tech folks think he is too tough on them.  There's some thought that something went on while he was there that caused him to be a bit bitter but I'm not aware of it.

So what shows his anti-cornell bias?  I had not picked up on it but admittedly I do not read his column every week.

[ugarte]

[Q]RichS Wrote:

 Yes he did and a lot of Tech folks think he is too tough on them.  There's some thought that something went on while he was there that caused him to be a bit bitter but I'm not aware of it.

So what shows his anti-cornell bias?  I had not picked up on it but admittedly I do not read his column every week.[/q]He seems to pick against the Red an awful lot, but I can't say that it is bias. More that he is trying to be an iconoclast. It is a side effect of fandom to constantly think that a writer is biased against one's team because the writer doesn't bend over backwards to remind the reader how great the team is.

I apologize for mentioning writing and/or journalism again.

[Beeeej]

My God, Bill, your latest response wasn't even full of sound and fury.

Beeeej

[adamw]

I have never seen someone speak so much yet say so little.

The answer lies within a simple sentence:  Whether it be USCHO, INCH or anywhere else ... when you're covering 58 teams and 6 conferences, not everyone can write Pulitzer material on $50/article.

Any more analysis than that is a waste of time.

By the way, at no newspaper where I've ever worked, have any washed up retreads like Bill ever tried to teach me "the craft" ... Thus, especially at USCHO and the like, when one editor is editing 50 articles/week, they don't really have time to teach them either. But we try.

But to insinuate that the theoretical standards aren't high, or that the editors don't know what they're doing, is false.

Poke around - you'll find a ton of good writing ... On INCH and USCHO.

[ben03]

[Q]adamw Wrote:
Poke around - you'll find a ton of good writing ... On INCH and USCHO.[/q]
the latter yes, the former ... not so much. well i take that back, the writing at INCH might be good but the writer OTOH might be talking out of ones a$$. i kid, i kid


btw adam, nice job last night (and all others) standing toe-toe with the western nimrods (won't mention any names) on the one college sports show.
you do the east proud :-D

[ugarte]

[Q]adamw Wrote:
By the way, at no newspaper where I've ever worked, have any washed up retreads like Bill ever tried to teach me "the craft".[/q]Probably for the best.

[Robb]

[Q]RichS Wrote:
So what shows his anti-cornell bias?  I had not picked up on it but admittedly I do not read his column every week.[/q]

The impression I get is that there are a lot fewer column inches about Cornell than most other teams.  He may not have good sources in Ithaca, or Schafer may always respond with platitudes or no-comments, or whatever - so even if it's true that there's less material about Cornell (and I don't care even CLOSE to enough to go back and count the words!), that doesn't necessarily indicate a personal anti-Cornell bias on his part.