Ced Golden gives BON free plug...

by Texas4Life on Oct 20, 2009 4:51 PM CDT Comment 27 comments

AAS Columnist Cedric Golden was talking about Peter Bean and BON today on his local sports radio show, The Sports Buffet.

Seems Bean called Golden the "worst columnist in America" which is pretty harsh! I have Read BON for a while now and listened to Golden on AM1300 for about a year now too, I like that he is the voice of moderation on that show but BON is the best resource on the web for all things TEXAS.

Anyone know what Beans beef is with Golden? I respect his takes and wonder what Golden did to get in Beans doghouse!

BLOG WAR!!!! {chanelling Belushi} What do yall think? Who wins the Blog War?

All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.

0 recs | Comment 27 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

PB...

You ought to get a round of Blog Pong going with Golden. 54b-Tbone style.

Get off your knees Greg, you're blowin' the game.

by kriess on Oct 20, 2009 4:56 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Of all the 1300 commentators in the afternoon:

Cedric Golden is the best. I actually do like him / his columns for the most part.

The swine flu takes a Will Muschamp shot every September.

by pleaseplaykindle on Oct 20, 2009 5:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Babers is good too

I love Rod B. He is really the only reason I listen to the show, opposed to the morning and Ahmad Brooks, bless his soul, is working the wrong gig and Madani is the reason to listen.

"Texas Till I Die"

by Texas4Life on Oct 20, 2009 5:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

When Rod is on

He is downright hilarious.

When hes not, its just disjointed.

But by God I love him either way.

by BoddickerIsClutch on Oct 21, 2009 8:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not a fan of the blog style for my informative analysis

so maybe I’m biased in that respect, but peep this:

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/golden/entries/2009/10/19/longhorns_are_as_good_as_anybo.html

read that and tell me if any of that is noteworthy commentary. How long did it take him to spit that out? it’s 85% large photos and 15% pedestrian write-up maybe totalling 75 words?

I get it…its blog style…we are in a fast-paced society and need our info in small bite size piece while on the go, but how about at least making it interesting (as if everyone and their dog doesnt know the consensus top 5 teams in CFB)

The point has been made before that they (ced and bohls) have to write more to a broader audience and assume the reader isn’t a college football expert…but, COME ON!!! COME OOOOONNNNNN!! OH COME ONNNN!!!!

Disclaimer: I havent listened to his radio show

by trueorangeblood on Oct 20, 2009 5:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Disclaimer indeed:

I never read the statesman… its such hyperbole. I was shocked when I learned Golden was on the AAS staff because he normally has such solid moderate takes on his radio show.

Then again AJ Hoffman (the Heel of the show) is always trying so hard to incite a Riot with his listeners that almost anyone else could sound reasonable on the show.

"Texas Till I Die"

by Texas4Life on Oct 20, 2009 5:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Blog style doesn't have to be short and bite size.

Most of the detailed analysis here is longer.

Ced and Bohls don’t have to writer to a broader audience. BON is about both wide-spread information and incredibly specific analysis. Every damn day. The hard truth is the AA-S doesn’t have the space nor will it pay for the time to do real deep analysis of college football. They skim the surface, saving bits of the cream for columns. They barely keep up with one team from what I see.

by whills on Oct 20, 2009 6:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Blogs and Newspaper websites

are apples and oranges. They are two completely different vehicles. The issue as I understand is style. The AAS columnists write opinion from a different perspective. IMO, more from an entertainment perspective as opposed to analytical. It is a foregone conclusion that Bloggers are inherently biased, whereas newspaper columnists are traditionally “supposed to be” unbiased.

The problem newspapers have is adapting their columnists as bloggers. Can’t happen. The genre is different. The audience is different. Plus, there is a predisposition to style. You don’t see bloggers writing for newspapers. That would never happen.

Bottom line is share of audience. AAS, as with all newspapers, are late to the internet party which is why they are sucking revenue wind these days. Blog sights are the “coffee shop” gathering places of news and discussion for very specific topics.

Until newspapers, and their respective columnists, understand this they will continue to be criticized for “blogger wanna be” style points and their ego’s will continue to shatter.

"We don't freestyle Texas Fight, big boy." - Coach Brown

by TXStampede on Oct 21, 2009 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not style or bias but distance.

We don’t owe the University of Texas one damn penny, not one damn word. We don’t suck their informational teat. We don’t get insider info via that means. We have a distance that allows BON to criticize in depth at any time. Beat writers like the AAS columnists don’t have that distance and do have to make that consideration if they want more insider info. That’s the big difference.

Style is merely adherence to a form. It is not relative to this. The real differences are immediacy and interactivity. That’s immediacy in both transmission of the original information and the reaction to it, the interactivity.

And it is not a different genre. It is a different medium. The net contains everything – content – that the newspaper has plus a hell of a lot more; it is a medium and means of organization unto itself. Newspapers are archaic. So is TV and radio. That doesn’t mean they will die, it does mean they will no longer hold a commanding position in disseminating information and knowledge.

by whills on Oct 21, 2009 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

WORD TO MOTHER.

"Texas Till I Die"

by Texas4Life on Oct 21, 2009 3:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

How much of this really happens?

I don’t buy the distance argument, but I have noting to base that on but my own gut feeling.

Woodward is not shunned by republicans for breaking watergate, and neither are the white house press reports for asking tough questions and writing scathing opinions. Is sports media really that different? Do the ADs really have that much control of the mainstream news?

by Wells on Oct 22, 2009 10:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with PB that Golden is terrible....

He’s halfway decent on the radio, but Rod Babers and Ahmad Brooks are the best to listen to by far now. Ced is better than AJ Hoffman who’s terrible and seems to live for bashing Horns in the NFL.

Golden is the columnist who lives for some minor controversy to break out (some player arrest, anything negative) and then write a column ripping the program or player to shreds by taking the moral high ground. His

by the1austin on Oct 20, 2009 7:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

A major factor in newspapers' demise

is that the medium is totally stuck on the concept of separating “reported” stories from “analysis” stories . . . Either a column/editorial or a straight news story (rarely a mix). There’s valid reasons for this, but ‘s rapidly becoming part of the past. A really good writer can slip analysis into “reported” stories with clever style and the way quotes are used and the phrasing and use of connecting words and thoughts. It isn’t done enough, and it often isn’t done well.

The “pregame advance” and “game story” vehicles — the lifeblood of covering team sports for decades — do not work with an audience that knows more than the writer who’s penning the story. Why would any of us read a day-after “game story” on Texas-OU when (1) we’ve seen the game, in person on on TV; (2) maybe seen parts of it again on DVR, tape or ESPN etc.; (3) blogged over it on this site or other similar ones; (4) seen the same quotes the writer uses in the game story that are posted a few hours after the game on MB-TF.

by edsp on Oct 20, 2009 8:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Golden

Is never gonna let me forget I wrote that. Bear in mind this was two, maybe three years ago…

I’ve spoken with Cedric on several occasions and like him — good guy.

You ain't hurt.

by Peter Bean on Oct 20, 2009 8:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I heard the Maple Street Press interview as well

I have to say that I was surprised at the way he took his shot at you knowing you were cornered. You handled it like a professional.

By all accounts, he is a good guy but he needs to get over it. By his own admission, you’re not the first to have said that.

by gwh65 on Oct 21, 2009 8:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Texas4life and the1austin, y'all have no clue what you're talking about.

AJ Hoffman is an awesome guy and truly loves the horns. But he’s not going to be a homer like every other radio personality in town and I guess that bothers you. He tells it like it is and has good points to back up his arguments. It amazes me how people can truly dislike someone because he has an objective opinion about the hometown team.

by 2Cor12:9 on Oct 20, 2009 9:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't think he's always objective

I admire someone willing to argue a point when it may be the unpopular one, but he seems to go to Daily Texan Firing Line type barbs at times that make me lose interest; they seem to be solely to generate interest. But hey, some of the best radio guys do that too, it’s part of what makes people interested in the show. I still listen, but Babers and Brooks are spectacular while Hoffman doesn’t pique my interest. Point taken, though.

by the1austin on Oct 21, 2009 12:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No clue? Nice scripture there, is that the verse that Jesus acts hypocritical?

I listen to the show everyday… so I have SOME clue. And i never said I “truly dislike” Hoffman, did you read the comment I made? AJ has a great sense of humor and is a great radio personality. Check the comment, what I SAID was: He tries to hard to be the heel of the show. He takes shots at Texas and the Longhorn fans to get people riled up and tune thier dial to 1300. There is nothing wrong with that. especially when you have a former Longhorn on the show that is going to be very Texas-Friendly

One thing about AJ that I respect is that he sticks to his takes and will admitt when he was wrong. And that isnt very often so that says something for him as an analyst.

"Texas Till I Die"

by Texas4Life on Oct 21, 2009 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

So by me saying that you have no clue what you're talking about

when referencing AJ Hoffman, somehow that makes me a hypocrite?

by 2Cor12:9 on Oct 21, 2009 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

should i spell it out for you?

You already misinterpreted an entire post…

CHECK IT: don’t go around falsely accusing people when the writing is on the wall. does the bible teach you to slander people? No? then that’s hypocritical.

Maybe you could change your nick to: Guy that doesn’t know what he is talking about but acts really pious.

I didn’t post this with the intention of arguing with D-Bags. Have a nice day. I’m thru with you.

"Texas Till I Die"

by Texas4Life on Oct 21, 2009 11:25 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I didn't misinterpret a post.

You slander someone by calling them the Heel of the show and saying that he’s trying to start a riot and because I stick up for him and call you out, somehow that makes me a slanderer and hypocrite. There is such a thing as righteous anger. Silence is acceptance.

by 2Cor12:9 on Oct 21, 2009 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs