Beyond Dumb: AP Writer Booted From Poll

by PB @ BON on Nov 16, 2006 12:48 PM CST in Football

Is it any wonder that sports fans don't bother with the local newspaper for sports news and analysis anymore? ESPN is reporting that an Associated Press college football voter - Jim Kleinpeter of The Times-Picayune (New Orleans) - has been booted from the AP Poll for voting Oklahoma down nine spots in his most recent ballot. Why, you ask, did Jimmy vote the Sooners down?

Because he thought they lost.

And why did he think they lost? Let's let Jimmy explain:

Jim Kleinpeter of The Times-Picayune of New Orleans said he tried to find the score of the Oklahoma game, but was unable to do so.

He said he was in the press box at the Alabama-LSU game "and I was asking about different teams, thinking about the poll the next day. ... I thought somebody told me that Oklahoma was losing to Texas Tech at some point. And I asked after the LSU game was over, 'Did Oklahoma win?' Somebody said Oklahoma lost," Kleinpeter said...

"It was my fault. I probably had other avenues I could have gone to get the score, but I usually rely on the morning paper here in Baton Rouge. And for some reason, they didn't have the score. I looked all through it," he said.

Seriously?

He looked all through the morning newspaper, couldn't find a score, and just thought, "Yeah, pretty sure they lost. No need to check further."

Couldn't go to ESPN.com? SoonerSports.com? Phone a friend? Ask the audience?

This would be dumbfounding, if it weren't so unremarkable. Most of us don't bother reading the local newspapers anymore for lots of reasons - chief among them being that the beat writers and local columnists seem so far removed from the sports fan experience of most of us these days. This incident only makes Bill Simmons' most recent column all the more relevant. Writes Simmons:

Now it's 2006 and I'm wondering if a press pass does any good. Unlike the old days, basketball reporters rarely get extra access anymore -- it's just the same herd of writers hovering around the same people, day after day, writing down the same boring quotes from the same group of bored people who just want them to go away. Unlike the old days, we can watch every minute of every game on TV. We can watch the postgame press conferences. We can watch highlights and sound bites on ESPN. We can argue about the team with other fans on message boards and blogs. By the time most newspaper stories are published, the news always feels a little dated. I'm telling you from experience -- it's possible to follow a professional basketball team without reading the local beat writers now. I do it every day.

It's just a different world. For instance, reading the Boston papers as they sorted through the wreckage of a shocking Patriots loss, the Herald reporters (John Tomase and Michael Felger, both of whom do a good job) played up the relative discontent in the locker room, with a couple of veterans openly declaring that they had been outplayed and outcoached. And that's exactly how the Herald guys should have played it; it was the best newspaper angle to take. On the other hand, they had been outplayed and outcoached -- anyone who watched the game already knew that. So why was this a big deal? Isn't that like interviewing Britney and having her say, "In retrospect, maybe I shouldn't have married K-Fed"? Thinking over the past 10 months of Boston sports, I can't remember a single time when somebody with "inside access" helped elucidate something about the Red Sox, Patriots or Celtics that I couldn't have figured out myself.

And Simmons isn't clowning around; he's being quite serious, and he's absolutely right. I'm not lying when I say that I haven't read more than 10% of Suzanne Haliburton (the Austin American-Statesman's Longhorn beat writer) stories this year. Not 10%. And why is that? It's not because I have something against Suzanne; it's that Suzanne is reporting news and notes that have been on this site for hours already, if not days. Not a week has gone by this season without a BON commenter saying, "Hey, is such and such newspaper writer reading BON?! Look at the similarity of these notes!"

They're probably not reading BON, it's just that I'm blogging about the Longhorns live, as it happens. When the Bomar story broke, we had a story and a thread of 100+ comments here on the site within 20 minutes. By the time the morning newspapers hit the doorsteps, the news was practically stale.

This isn't to say that bloggers are better than sports journalists, or that sports journalism is dead. It just means that sports fans have new, better ways to follow their teams these days, and many newspapers and their journalists are way too far behind. If I were a sports editor, I'd be damn sure that each and every one of my beat writers and columnists had a blog on the site that they updated at least once a day. It's the only way to stay relevant, what with psychos like myself glued to the computer every day, all day.

If nothing else, it would probably help poor souls like Jim Kleinpeter figure out who won the games each week.

Oy.

--PB--

0 recs | Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

what a bozo...

that's sad he doesn't use the internet to make his weekly ballot.

nice piece PB

Simmons is the man by the way.

by Blitzburgh on Nov 16, 2006 12:55 PM CST 0 recs

The term

irresponsible comes to mind. I think it's so funny how many people pumped up the "prestige" of the AP national title when USC won and now they're booting guys for not even knowing who won a damn game. Too funny!

You make some very good points about the speed of information and how we receive and can react to it.

If it weren't for physics and law enforcement, I'd be unstoppable.

by GoHorns on Nov 16, 2006 12:57 PM CST 0 recs

Furthermore...

The New Orleans guy proves that voters dont find out how the game went, not just the final score. Theres so much more to games, especially in this BCS climate, than just the final score.

The reporter basically says a loss equates to a 9 point drop in the polls irregardless of how you play. That befuddles me, cheeseburgers.

by the other Andrew on Nov 16, 2006 1:21 PM CST 0 recs

internet

Why buy a newspaper when you already have the story?
You have pegged exactly why print media days are numbered and why they are scrambling to learn everything they can about the internet. Not only is circualtion down in the print media, because of the net, but the TV network/cable news numbers have been falling for years. People know where they can go to get the targeted info they are seeking, i.e. BON., and that is through free services on the internet.

by UTeed on Nov 16, 2006 1:33 PM CST 0 recs

The only thing newspapers still have on blogs...

is access, and, as Simmons says, they aren't really taking advantage of it, or aren't getting as much anymore.

For example, the new injury privacy policy keeps even reporters with access from finding out about player injuries quickly, and so the papers are on about the same page as the blogs.

To compete the papers have to offer us something more valuable, like cogent opinions and thoughts that pull weight. The only reason a blog reader will read your paper is if they respect your opinion and want to hear it. They can get the news much quicker.

by aorist9 on Nov 16, 2006 1:40 PM CST up 0 recs

newpapers' attitude toward the internet

i was a bullshit humor columnist for the daily texan when i was in school.

at least half a dozen times i would walk down to the sports guys with a rumor off hornfans (no bon at that time) and ask them if they were writing about it. they always said no and that they weren't interested.

the only example i can remember clearly was when that wr recruit marquis johnson from illinois got in the car wreck. they ended up covering it 2 days later.

i know they can't quote a message board, but they could've read it, hit the phones, and found some sources.

for some reason there was a completely antagonistic relationship between hornfans and the daily texan writers, and it wasn't just because people on there said they sucked.

by Vice President Coco on Nov 16, 2006 6:11 PM CST 0 recs

Do all voters in the AP...

vote the same way Mr. Kleinpeter did? How can you accurately rank these teams just based on whether or not they posted a win? I know you can't watch every single game, but I think that it's just inexcusable, especially given the sheer amount of info available on the web. I also think I read somewhere that Kleinpeter made the mistake of thinking that Auburn beat Georgia.

Hook'em, bitches.

by Ramzlita on Nov 16, 2006 6:53 PM CST 0 recs

You know

for years I've complained about how computers, who don't watch games, help decide the national champion.

But now, we don't even have people who are qualified to rank teams? Maybe we should get people who know what they're doing before we complain about the computers. At least the computers know when a team loses.

I hate to say it, but I almost feel like I trust the computers more if all the voters vote this way. I hope that the others make more informed decisions before turning in their rankings.

by boomhauer25 on Nov 16, 2006 7:18 PM CST 0 recs

ridiculous

I should get a vote. I've got the normal Digital Cable package which includes ESPN "The Ocho", got the Fox College Sports Package, and got ESPN Gameplan. I live in Colorado and watch football on Saturday's from 10 am to midnite. I think I watch more games in a day than some of these jokers do in a year. Seriously, I'm useless to my wife on the weekends.

I do trust the computers, though. Because well, even though a computer doesn't watch games, the numbers dont lie. The only bad part about the computers, is the human created formula.

Who votes in the Harris Poll, btw? Seems like a bunch of homers. And why doesn't every D1A coach get a vote in the Coaches poll? That doesn't make much sense, does it?

One last question (off subject). If the AD has already scheduled the Sep 1 game (ref a comment about it 2 weeks ago) why hasn't it been announced yet? I think I may actually poop a brick if we get a 2 year home and home vs the New Mexico State Aggies again.

by bleed burnt orange on Nov 16, 2006 8:48 PM CST 0 recs