Today’s guest colum is from former CSNNE anchor and reporter Jackie Pepper.

L.A. To Boston And Everything In Between: A Sports Reporter’s Tale

By Jackie Pepper

Nearly every television broadcaster travels the same course:
You start in a small market, living and working in a tiny town nobody has ever heard of. While you dreamed of a luxurious life on camera, you soon realize that being on air is often the last thing you think of in your first job as a “one-man-band.” Shooting, editing, producing, and writing all of your own stories comes first while powdering your face and stepping in front of the camera as “the talent” is a mere afterthought.

Jackie Pepper

After a few years of life as a big fish in a small pond, you get a new job in a mid-size market and repeat the aforementioned steps. You travel the country going from job to job as you work your way up the career ladder until you reach the top; “The top” being the perfect combination of status, location, money and overall happiness; an occupational unicorn of sorts.

Born and raised in Santa Monica, California, I moved back home after graduating from the University of Arizona and continued to work as a freelance production runner for ABC Sports and ESPN, a gig that I landed by chance in the fall of my senior year of college. I traveled the country working on location at various sporting events from college football to NBA games to the X Games and sports awards shows. I went on Starbucks runs, picked up lunch for the crew, made copies, drove on air talent and executives to and from the airport, wrote thousands of shipping labels, mopped floors, stapled papers, packed equipment, took out the trash, cleaned TV trucks, and performed every other random task you can imagine. Being immersed in a business I craved made it all worth it.

At the same time, I was taking classes at a local junior college to give me any possible edge once I decided to pursue my dream of being an on air sports reporter. I took Sports Broadcasting, Football Coaching and Sports Marketing, just to name a few. After two years of classes and working freelance for the holy grail of sports television, I landed a staff position at NFL Network as a production assistant at the Culver City studio. For nearly two years, I learned the ins and outs of television production, working with editors inside dark edit bays, cutting game highlights and writing scripts (aka shot sheets), sitting alongside producers in the newsroom, building graphics in the control room, typing the ticker content that scrolls on the bottom of your screen and watching professional on air talent doing my dream job every single day.

Although I loved my coworkers and the perks that came along with working for the NFL (like watching a good looking man’s eyes light up after telling him the name of my employer, which never got old), I finally got my act together and made a demo tape of myself doing fake sports reports, an anchor segment, highlights, etc. After a few months of sending my DVD to small towns across the country, one news director took the bait and hired me.

My first on air job was as the weekday sports reporter and weekend anchor at KIDK, the CBS affiliate in Pocatello, Idaho. And to think while in college, I considered Tucson a small town! Tucson was like Vegas compared to Southeastern Idaho. I could write a book about the 14 months I spent in Pocatello (I actually plan on doing so eventually), but to get to the point, it was an utter culture shock. I had never spent time in a true small town where everybody really does know everybody. Each person I met seemed to be connected to my job. The mailman served as an assistant coach of a high school team, or a local business owner was a former Idaho State player, etc.

To give you an idea of where I lived, one of the schools I covered was Preston High School, where the movie Napoleon Dynamite was filmed. One school I covered in a farming community moved its daily afternoon football practices to 10p.m. for an entire month each winter so its players could assist their families in harvesting potatoes in the daylight hours after school. Southeastern Idaho borders Utah and is primarily Mormon, which is vastly different from multi-cultural life in Los Angeles.

Going from good weather year-round and the glitz and glam of L.A. to driving long distances in blizzards, scraping ice off my car and seeing snow in June, all for the first time, felt like an impossible adjustment at times. Tears were shed and home was sorely missed, but it was all part of the journey. A journey which, thankfully, I wasn’t alone in taking.

Almost all of the other reporters and anchors in my area were also in their early to mid 20′s, many of whom were California natives. It was like a do-over of college, moving to a strange place, knowing not a soul. The social destitution of the situation bonded all of us transplants, forming a TV news fraternity of sorts. Members were not only co-workers at my station, but those at the two other local affiliates as well. We were one big team and while we competed against each other in the ratings books, we were friends who often times helped each other professionally.

If one person’s camera malfunctioned (which happened all the time since most of us used ancient equipment) you could always count on a reporter from another station to secretly share their footage with you. In fact, even managers and executives of competing stations would call each other for favors once in a while. There was an unspoken, yet palpable camaraderie between us all.

That was small town life. Hard working, friendly and simple.

The only professional sports team I covered in person was the Utah Jazz. Once a month or so, I would make the three hour drive (each way) to Salt Lake City in the news car, work the game, get back in the car and arrive home in Pocatello around 2 a.m. Sometimes I would carpool with the sports reporters from the other stations which always made the trip more fun, and walking into an NBA locker room less intimidating.

Once I got to know the players and staff, working the Jazz locker room before and after games felt natural, and me and my fellow small market pals were often the only television cameras around. Yes, I was that girl holding my camera with one hand, the microphone in the other, and praying that the mic was close enough to get the sound while the camera was far enough away to get all of the player’s head in the shot, all while looking him in the eye as he answered my questions instead of looking through the lens. Many times, I would return to media work room, roll the tape back, and see I had cut off the top of Carlos Boozer’s head. Apparently, that’s an occupational hazard that comes along with being a “one-man-band.”

The lack of sports media in Salt Lake City gave me a chance to get to know guys with the cameras turned off. There was never a fight for 1-on-1 interviews, or the pushing and shoving you experience in bigger markets, so after I asked my questions on camera, I could take the time to know the man behind the basketball player.

I learned that the best way to get your job done was to be trusted, and a stranger only trusts you when you are no longer a stranger in his eyes. Harvesting a relationship based on genuine interest in the person and knowledge of their craft yields the best interviews, quotes, sources, etc. It would have been hard to learn that lesson in a place like L.A. or Boston.

Just when I felt like I had finally figured out my job, I got a new one! I went from Pocatello, market 168 to Boston, market 7.

Aside from then-head coach Jerry Sloan, the most high profile sports figure I interviewed regularly was a high school football player named Taysom Hill, a man-child of an athlete who played quarterback (as well as defensive end, kicker, power forward, long jump and relay) and won the state championship for Highland High School. Hill had accepted a deferred athletic scholarship to Stanford, but while on a religious mission, he bolted for BYU once Jim Harbaugh left Stanford for the 49ers. Keep an eye out for Hill as he will be a super star, believe me. Okay, I digress…

I went from high school sports, rodeo and the monster truck show to Bill Belichick, 17 NBA championships, the Red Sox-Yankees rivalry and No. 4 Bobby Orr.

I was in the midst of yet another culture shock. One day I was a small-town television reporter, the next, I was beamed into four million households. I went from rookie ball to the big leagues in one fell swoop. Within weeks of arriving in Boston, I met Dan Shaughnessy, Jackie MacMullan, Steve Buckley and Bob Ryan, all living legends in the field of sports journalism whom I had long since admired. The journey took me from Hollywood, to potatoes to the Ivy League. Three different parts of the country, three different lifestyles and three different work environments.

I was prepared for the worst as the Boston media is notoriously tough, its intimidating reputation perhaps second only to New York City.

Yes, the Boston media is hypercritical when it comes to sports, and I sure as hell didn’t envy any of the players I interviewed after a loss. But I was surprised to find that much like in L.A. and Idaho, there is a fierce connection between competitors, even in a town as feisty and scrappy as Boston.

The press corps in L.A. is very laid back, warm and welcoming. In Boston, smiles, conversation and recognition must be earned, but once you’re in, you’re in for good. Perhaps the contrast in dispositions is correlated to the weather, who knows. Fans might not want to hear it, but members of each city’s sports media even like each other. Blasphemous, I know.

Even though we started in different places, we all took the same road that got us to where we are today. Despite diverse accents and attitudes, the goal is uniform; do the work, make the deadline and tell your story the best damn way you know how.

Check out Jackie’s Blog, Pepper On Sports, where she regularly weighs in on the current events in the world of sports. Her demo reel can be viewed here.

This is a guest column from Frank H Shorr - a senior lecturer and the Director of the Sports Institute at Boston University. He worked at both Channels 5 and 7 in Boston, most recently being the Executive Sports Producer at WHDH-TV for twenty one years.

It’s called “Local Sports” but you know what? It’s not, really.

If the network affiliates in Boston want to get an audience back, I think they’d better change the approach – and that goes all the way up to the television station GM’s and the owners.

This isn’t meant to be the rant of a “dinosaur” but let’s be honest, the sports fans of today aren’t tuning into the six and eleven o’clock news to find out what’s going on – no revelation there, right? So how can they change that? Well, how about following a few simple rules, three to be exact

1) Advance The Story.

2) Tell Them Something They Don’t Already Know.

3) Tell The Story of the Game Through the Pictures You Use.

That last one is done pretty effectively in this market, BUT when news directors and producers, (who mis-time) keep the reins on the local sports departments, fans get short-changed.

How can you possibly tell the story of a game that lasts two to three hours in 30 seconds? Yeah, you can try, and believe me I did it for years, but while I’m not advocating the return of the eight-minute sportscast, circa 1985, let’s be honest here, if you’re presenting an hour and a half or two hours of news in the early evening, you oughta be able to give the sports guys a block of time to both attract an audience and exhibit their own capabilities (good writing, better storytelling).

Just an aside here, notice I said “guys” – with the exception of Kristine Leahy at FOX25, there’s nary a woman on a local network affiliates! Which begs the question, what does NESN and CSSNE know that channels 4,5 and 7 don’t?

So yes, time is an issue but so is formatting.

That brings us to cardinal rule number one, advancing the story. It’s the most important factor in any news story, be it sports, politics, weather, business.

Let’s examine – If you start a story “The (Patriots, Bruins, Red Sox, Celtics) beat the (name your opponent) last night”, as virtually every sportscast in this market does, you’ve lost before even getting started. Why? Because viewers already know the result. By six o’clock the next day and many times by eleven that same night, they’ve watched recap upon recap on their portable devices, on ESPN, on NFL Network, NBATV, MLB Network, and NHL Network and all the websites. When viewers hear that opening line the first thing they say is “nothing new has happened, I don’t have to watch this guy(this station) – click! – as in, click, I’m changing the channel.

Conversely, this is exactly why beginning sports journalists flourish in the smaller markets. Unlike Boston, and other professional markets, ESPN isn’t covering Tyler, Texas and Panama City, Florida and Walla Walla, Washington so the local stations there have a captive audience. If you live there, it’s your only outlet. Sports will always be king. But for the Boston network affiliates to concentrate on only “The Big Four” is simply a waste of time. Having a reporter put together a Patriots package for Monday at 6:00, shortchanges the viewer. You’re NOT advancing the story.

And that brings us to rule number two, “tell ‘em something they don’t already know.” Repeating yesterday’s(last night’s) score in the lead in just doesn’t qualify. Viewers are thirsty for something new, something they can share, and are you ready – something they can tweet! Sure, news doesn’t break every day but it’s your job to keep the audience coming back for more and it can be done with a little elbow grease. The Boston sports landscape has completely changed when it comes to disseminating information. Tom Curran, Rob Bradford, Mike Reiss, Ian Rapoport, Paul Flannery, Shalise Manza Young to name a few, have burst onto the scene with instant up-to-the minute coverage. Recap sportscasts don’t bring ‘em into the tent.

The late night Sunday shows do very well in Boston. Why? For a couple of reasons, certainly a half an hour helps but the approach is vastly different – Live guests, commentary, longer form story telling – it’s more interesting. So here’s the question – why can’t they do that EVERY DAY? The sixty-four thousand dollar question.

Which brings us back full circle to the station GM’s and owners. Anytime fans debate the fortunes (and demises) of a team, they always eventually say “it starts at the top,” so which owner, which GM, which News Director is willing to surrender thirty minutes (say 5:30-6) for a daily sports show? Who’s the pioneer? Certainly there’s an audience there and what better way for a department to showcase the truly “local” stories, the high schools (thank you, Mike Lynch) the NCAA women’s teams in this market that get virtually no coverage, i.e. BU, BC, Harvard soccer teams to name a few, the casual sports even. It would show a real commitment both in resources and time. The Newsies would still have the 5 and 6 o’clock half hours for their “off the satellite” reports from parts unknown. And what do you think the response from the news producers and writers would be if they knew they had a thirty minute break between shows? Guess what, their product would be fresher, better written, better presented. A win-win all around.

It’s time for something different in local network affiliate sports coverage. The cable outlets are running twenty-four hours a day and producing their own local shows, many wrapped around the games that draw big numbers. It’s time to compete again – take a chance!

Frank H. Shorr is a senior lecturer and the Director of the Sports Institute at Boston University. He worked at both Channels 5 and 7 in Boston, most recently being the Executive Sports Producer at WHDH-TV for twenty one years.

I received this email from Dave Formato this morning, and felt it too good not to share. Thanks Dave!

I found a tweet by Jane McManus yesterday be very revealing as it pertains to our very own sports talk radio personas (mostly one Michael Felger). Now to be honest, I generally like him as a whole (more so back in the day) as he was one of the few reporters who gave the Patriots props when Bill Belichick was making moves that the establishment (Ron Borges, Kevin Mannix and Nick Cafardo) couldn’t stand. However, I believe that to become more contrarian, and get more “street” cred on the radio and TV, he has taken on more of their type of persona in the past five or so years, to the point where he is indistinguishable from all of them (it really is a shame, he was very good when he was a beat writer). Even Tom E. Curran (another favorite of mine) has started with some of that contrarian nonsense this year with the Patriots defensive struggles. Anyway, I digress. Here is Jane’s Tweet:

Tannenbaum: "I think in some cases we didn't do a good enough job getting depth at key positions..." Cap is an issue. #Jets #NFl

January 2, 2012 3:56 pm via webReplyRetweetFavorite

@janesports

Jane McManus

Anyway, to my point: The Boston sports media for the past few years have been all over the Patriots’ (Belichick in particular) front office for the lack of ability to build a team that can win the Superbowl during Brady’s last few “prime” years. Mainly because “they are cheap and only want to draft low round guys and “coach them up” so they don’t have to pay big bucks”. Furthermore, with the recent “success” of the New York Jets and Super Bowl appearances for the Colts, many have come to beat the following horses to death:

• “The Patriots trade down way too much to find “Value” and don’t know how to draft and pick free agents since Scott Pioli left..Belichick needs a contrarian voice in the room since he is a dictator, etc, etc…”
• “The league has passed Belichick the GM by, he doesn’t get the new way to manage a roster, and go and get stud players at every skill position, look at WR, OLB and DB, etc. etc…
• AND my favorite from Felger..” The Patriots always claim “cap jail” issues and “value” when drafting and signing free agents and the JETS go out and get whomever they want whenever they want and don’t worry about any of that stuff, because the cap isn’t real (“Cap is Crap“) and it is a fabrication of the Patriots to their fans to justify being cheap… (or some variation thereof…).

As a fan, this nonsense makes me sick, but objectively, I’ve always had issues with this stuff on two fronts. And with the quote above and the recent events with both teams, I feel we’ve come full circle and these facts should be pointed out and the media (Felger) called out on it. So, I figured you are the perfect guy to do it with your forum and the fact that you’ve always been a voice of reason and perspective with this stuff.

First, There are three reasons, in my opinion for the “bad drafting” the Pats have done.

Number one, I think that the drafts from 05-08 (Pioli left in Jan 09, so that draft was all Belichick) were actually their worst during BB’s tenure (While Pioli was still here). I took the liberty of pasting the 05-11 drafts for the PATS (and JETS/Colts for comparison) at the end of this email so you can see the results. If you look at the Jets/Colts, they have had their share of misses too, and I’d dare say those misses have had a bigger impact on those teams because they’ve made less picks during that time and the misses were high in the draft in some cases)

Two, They were always drafting at or near the bottom of every round from 2001 on (unless they made trades to get other teams higher picks). Tell me; if BB had a top 10 pick every year in that time, the roster wouldn’t be stocked with studs like the Jets always seem to go and “get”.

And three, they were somewhat of a victim of their success. The three Super Bowl titles created legends on the roster that got old or too expensive or both in 2006-2009 (i.e.: Bruschi, Vrabel, Brown, Law, Seymour, etc…) The problem with that is they were never going to flat-out cut some of these “ICONS” and because of that, they probably had them on the roster a year or two longer than they would have if they were just running a team in a vacuüm. You are seeing that to some extent this year with Kevin Faulk. If he were any other guy, he would have been cut after the PUP deadline and maybe Dowling would be back on the field, but if they cut him, that would have been a PR nightmare. Now, I’m not saying that any of this is wrong, however, the issue is roster spots and how limited they really are, I.E, were any of the ’05 or ’06 draft picks really going to earn roster spots on the team anyway because they really didn’t have that many up for grabs due to the log jam up top. So you draft these guys and end up having to either cut them OR cut Bruschi, it was a no win situation. Which is a big part of the reason they traded away a bunch of picks for the likes of Welker and Moss, they didn’t have the roster spots to keep those multiple picks if they made them, so what was the point in keeping them in the first place?

Second issue: If you look at the ’09-’11 drafts, the amount of pics is very high for a reason, which is obvious to me, but never gets any mention on the radio because that would refute their argument (of BB is cheap and doesn’t like to pay high prices for big time players): The Patriots were in process of turning over their “old” roster, so they needed to make a bunch of pics to fill a bunch of roster spots, duh…. Plus, I believe that Belichick has realized that, other than a handful of “sure-fire” picks each year, you just don’t know how these KIDS are going to work out, even the high picks (Vernon Gholston/Jerry Hughes anyone?! (both of whom the MEDIA wanted the PATs to take BTW).

So in one sense, you are much better off with throwing a bunch of stuff against the wall and seeing what sticks. Now that has its downside too, i.e. in 2006 and 2009 when not a lot of it “stuck” so you have a hole in the roster and a bad draft that year, which has hurt the Patriots, no doubt. However, when you hit on it, like in 2010, most of it “sticks” and the Patriots have a 13-3 record in 2011 to show for it from that draft class.

Now, all the trading down on draft day makes me crazy too sometimes, but if they can swing getting extra guys/picks in future years out of it, isn’t that the best formula for long-term success? I think that Belichick is using the “three Superbowls won” capital he has built up with the fans to shift from the “win now to keep my job” mentality most NFL coaches and GMs have to a “build a long-term program so as to protect my legacy” mode. Who can blame him, PLUS, in doing that, he is actually looking out for his bosses best interests (Robert Kraft) and making his NFL franchise a perennial contender, which puts areses in the seats and pays the bills. So he is actually doing exactly what he is being paid to do, in my opinion.

However, to get to my original point: Felger (among others) has been on this three-year rant about how the JETS (and Colts to a lesser extent) have found a new and “better” way to build a perennial Superbowl contender while drafting high and paying for high-priced free agents, which gets you a top-heavy roster of “stud” players and who cares about the backups, etc. All of this with no cap ramifications and no downside to getting the best players and paying them big money.

According to the above quote, however, it seems that isn’t working out so hot for the JETS right about now and how did it work out for the Polians and Colts this year?! Belichick had learned a LONG time ago, being healthy is one of the biggest key’s to winning a Superbowl, BUT, it rarely ever happens. So, the way you combat that is to have depth at key positions so when the inevitable injuries start to come, you have players that can produce at a “serviceable” level to maintain your competitive nature and hopefully get some breaks along the way to win the whole thing.

This is the reason the Patriots go 11-5 without Brady AND why they are a contender year in and year out, even while “rebuilding” like they were doing the past three years and the Colts completely implode when Manning goes down. Think about this for a minute, over the past 11 years, Belichick has essentially turned over this roster and still managed to win the Superbowl three times while winning 13 games in five of those years, ALL while the league is competitively set up to tear you down when you get good, (between the draft and schedule being weighted against you).

That is incredible and, as a fan, I love that fact about this team. This year has been a joy to watch (despite the defense), these guys are fun and entertaining and they play hard and as a team. Furthermore, with some of their young talent, it appears they are stocked to make runs at the Superbowl for the next five years or so, provided that Brady stays healthy.

Bottom line: I think Belichick’s drafting has actually gotten better since Pioli left, his way of doing things builds roster depth and team chemistry, which are vital to winning and sustaining success and I think that we finally have proof that if you do it the other way, things may go good when everything breaks your way (JETS) and when you star players are all healthy (Colts in ’06) but when it goes the other way, which it usually does, you are in big trouble for it.

Going into 2012, both the Jets and Colts have chemistry issues, cap issues and depth of player issues that aren’t going to just disappear in the new year. I think things are going to actually continue to trend down for both teams next year.

So I think the verdict is in BB wins again as both coach and GM and I think Felger, et al, should have to send him a nice apology fruit basket or something.

One last thing and then I promise I’ll stop typing. This year Bill Belichick the “GM” is taking a ton of heat for that defense and how they are historically bad and he has a bunch of “who dats” back there. Now, they drive me crazy too, don’t get me wrong, (not with the yards given up, but mostly with bad technique in the secondary). How none of those guys know to turn their head half way into the route to find the ball, is beyond me. McCourty would have like five INTs if he just turned his damn head around…. Anyway I digress, BUT, my point is that Belichick made roster moves in the beginning of the season that seem crazy now, BUT they’ve been slammed with injuries back there, which you wouldn’t figure on happening to this extent. Your starting DBs were supposed to be:

• Ras-I Dowling – IR (They figured he’d come around, but due to other injuries couldn’t wait any longer and had to take his spot for someone else. I think this one and Bodden hurt them the most this year.)
• Devin McCourty – Injured, missed three games just as he was starting to play with more confidence and hasn’t been the same this year as he was last year.
• Pat Chung – Injured, missed seven games.
• Leigh Bodden – Injured, cut, (should have gone on IR)
•  Brandon Meriweather- Cut (head case)
• Josh Barrett – IR
• Kyle Arrington- Only guy who wasn’t really hurt this year.

So out of all those guys, one was cut for not playing within the system and only one other has been on the field for the whole year. I bet Belichick wishes he still had James Sanders, but in looking at that line-up, you would figure he’d be expendable at his cap number. So, the issue with this team on the back-end has been continuity… There hasn’t been any ALL season long.

I think this explains in part why they get better in the red zone. Things become more simple down there and it is easier to just play one-on-one football if you don’t have the whole field behind you, so they become more effective. I only hope they can develop some in the next month with Chung back and some of the other guys stepping in and up who now have some experience, because, God willing, they make the Superbowl, Green Bay or New Orleans is going to carve them up on that fast track in Indy if they don’t.

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to read all of this, I hope the thoughts came through in some cohesive manner.

Cue the “Et tu, Brute?”, Anakin Skywalker, and Hulk Hogan to N.W.O. jokes. Or, even call me Judas..

Today I’m signing off because (and I’ve thought about a gregarious way to say this), I’m taking my talents to South Beach! I’m going to be writing for WEEI.com.

Needless to say, I’m sure some of you are reading this thinking, “fraud.” And that’s fine, obviously I’ve been critical of WEEI in this space before. But I’ve also been critical of ESPN, 98.5 The Sports Hub, and CSNNE.

I wanted to work in sports media in some capacity, and I really like the news gathering approach of WEEI.com. I think it will teach me discipline both in writing and in my reporting. I also like the writers I’ve had the pleasure of meeting both before and after my stint began there.

The crux of the matter is, as I’m approaching the end of my graduate program, the TLC song, “No Scrubs” was slowly becoming germane to my personal situation.

I can’t thank my editors – KC Downey and Bruce Allen – enough for my time in the blogosphere as media critic for Sports of Boston and Boston Sports Media Watch.

Both gave me a platform and let me run with it. I’m sure at times each felt like Grady Little leaving Pedro on the mound during the ’03 ALCS. But, regardless, they let me ruminate and opine at my own discretion.

Additionally I have to give special thanks to David Scott, who provided me with advice when needed along the way.

I also can’t help but thank those in the media that took the time to talk shop with me whether it be on my podcast or in passing — Rich Shertenlieb, Chad Finn, Kirk Minihane, Michael Holley, Tom E. Curran, Jon Anik, Anna Clark, Gerry Callahan, Chris Price, and many more.

Sometimes I think back to last year when I was working at an investment bank and loathing life. I never thought I would have done half the crap I did in my short stint writing this column. From talking to a class at BU about sports media to writing on BSMW (a site I’ve frequented since I was about 18-years-old), it has been a great ride.

You hear the term “outliers” a lot these days, because of Malcolm Gladwell’s book. I can’t help but feel lukewarm about the term as it pertains to my run here. Let’s face it, a lot happened while I wrote Sports Media Musings.

From the politically correct debate of David Portnoy’s “baby-gate” incident to Michael Felger vs. Heidi Watney — the column basically wrote itself.

(As one reader pointed out, I’m happy to learn my “Sports Lodge Is On Fire” column is referenced on Felger’s wikipedia page)

I never wanted to be the Jim Rome or Skip Bayless of media critics, though. I didn’t want to make myself known by putting people on blast (although I’ll admit, when Andy Gresh called me a ‘chump media blogger’ on the radio, I smiled).

A friend asked me how much more mileage I could milk out of the column a few weeks ago. I never really looked at it that way. Bruce has been doing it for so long, David Scott did it before me, and someone will do it after me. That’s why the ”outliers” concept seems disingenuous to associate with Media Musings.

Predictably, I was assured this much while sitting at Health Point, waiting for Celtics practice to open up to the media Wednesday. I chuckled to myself when I overheard a few writers laughing about Bruce’s enemies list.

As far as my future goes, I’m excited to have this opportunity to be a part of WEEI’s site. Down the road, I’ll be doing a media podcast. Working under the prism of mainstream media will give me easier access to guests and resources. I’ll also be writing some other content for Rob Bradford & Co.

As for right now, I’m contributing to their Celtics coverage.  (Here is my debut piece on rookie, JaJuan Johnson. Later on today, I have something going up about Brandon Bass.)

I realize this is going about 500 words to long, so I’ll leave you with my new Twitter handle. Thanks for reading, I hope you enjoyed the column as much as I loved writing it.

Final papers in grad school are the bane of my existence. In the journalism world, they have these weird concepts called “sources” and “quotes.” And you have to “attribute” everything.

Right now I’m in the middle of a paper on concussions in high school athletics. You wouldn’t believe it, but Athletic Directors aren’t exactly excited to talk to me about it. I’ve talked to nearly 20 sources: players, trainers, organizations, ADs, doctors, MIAA, and the Department of Public Health.

…Now I have to write it.

But you don’t care about any of this. I’m just giving you heads up to why this will be the shortest Media Musings column ever.

Am I Being To Tough On ‘Em?

@GreshandZo: And you waste no time being wrong dickhead RT @KenAolfoque: @GreshandZo jeezz fatboy you waste no time with the speculation…

Some personalities in the local media I crush more than others. As much as I enjoy finding holes in work or flawed logic, part of me feels bad.

Andy Gresh doesn’t get any of this sympathy.

Gresh came into my life as the “matter-of-fact” guy on Patriot broadcasts. Once a week was the perfect dosage of Gresh. In fact, to this day, I like him on that show.

I never listened to the Providence incarceration of “Gresh & Zo”; therefore, when Gresh took over for Gary Tanguay at “The Sports Hub” I was intrigued.

I was also ignorant.

There is no way “Gresh & Zo” survive if “Dale & Holley” never disbanded, am I right? Is that a tipping point?

“Gresh & Zo” are dominant in the midday. There is no disputing this fact. But they are becoming insufferable. Look, I think every personality over at “The Sports Hub” feels great right now. They’ve taken down the institution that was sports talk radio here in Boston….for the time being.

Although, “Gresh & Zo” seem to represent much of what consumers criticized about WEEI. (Condescending attitudes, Dumb bits [their 'Instant Request' segment is a woeful attempt at capturing "Toucher & Rich" magic], Talking-head attitude — “We’ll tell you why..next!”)

This is not as much an assault on Scott Zolak, as it is Gresh. Zolak enables Gresh to act the way he does by NEVER disagreeing with any bite or vehemence.

*Side note: Furthermore, the exchange on Twitter isn’t something I’m going to harp on in terms of “Gresh’s professionalism” (which I’ve attacked before). Gresh calling someone a “dickhead” on Twitter, illustrates his lack of awareness. I can’t call professionalism into question — Fred Toettcher has the same exchanges from time to time. That said, it looks bad. A random dude calling you “fat” should elicit a reaction, but not necessarily a response. Know your platform. I digress.

Anyway, something tells me, you’ll see less discrepancy across the board in the Fall ratings book.

“Mut & Merloni” are improving. Guests are getting better, chemistry is developing, and I don’t think I’ve ever rooted harder for two guys to do well. Earlier this week they landed Adrian Wojnarowski – who is absolutely CRUSHING IT on the NBA beat for Yahoo! Sports – and John Farrell within the same hour of programming.

Quick Musings

1.) Michael Holley & Michael Felger on Sports Tonight together? Break up the band! By far the best combo CSNNE has to offer to host the show. Great stuff last night.

2.) Tony Massarotti has been a respected sports writer in this town for 20 years. Yet, everyday, his “take” is that “____ SUCKKSSS, Mike! And it’s NOT EVER CLOSE!” Did he catch wind, his incessant “YARM-ing” (You’re Absolutely Right, Mike) was over-the-top and called an audible?

3.) Ian Rapoport delivers a great column on Antwaun Molden. Great profile piece.

4.) Kirk Minihane does well to show both sides of the Tyler Seguin benching, but ultimately says, “You’re either a professional athlete or you aren’t.”

5.) COLUMN OF THE WEEK: Chuck Klosterman’s extensive look at the Tim Tebow craze. Voluminous…For sure. Awesome piece, though.

This should be in the next Grantland Quarterly. Remember last week, when I criticized the book’s existence? Well one of the reasons, according to Bill Simmons, was to capture what the period in sports meant. Tebow, like it or not, is one of the biggest stories in sports right now.

Bill Simmons doesn’t like making you pay for his content. I believe that. I really do.

On his podcast with Chuck Klosterman, before his best-selling tome The Book of Basketball was released,  Simmons rationalized the 700 page length saying, “I didn’t want to split it up into two volumes. I hate making people pay for my stuff.”

This made the Sports Guy’s column last Thursday that much more compelling. The first half of the piece detailed reasons why the Grantland Quarterly, um, exists and also, um, why you should buy it!

Perplexing.

The book, essentially, is a cumulative collection of Grantland pieces. Almost like a “Best Of” from the first three months of the site’s existence. Of course this can all be had by clicking on the Grantland archives, but that is neither here nor there.

Here are the five reasons given why this even exists –

1.) Simmons wanted to have something physical to exist in case the internet blew up (he joked). He admits having something tangible is a completely selfish reason. Okay, then.

2.) The book’s goal is capturing ‘the period’ in sports history. What he actually means is reading the pieces and remembering what that period meant. Though, when talking about this in detail, Simmons recalls the struggles of writing around two lockouts, being understaffed, and trying to launch the site. Where does the consumer come in? Are we supposed to have our own thoughts on Grantland’s oral history on the National? Because I don’t have an emotional connection to that piece besides, maybe, ‘This is interesting.’

3.) Probably the only consumer-based reason: Re-inventing the product to book form (to take on the beach or vacation with you) and also adding small retrospective changes to the columns.

4.) From most logical to most self-serving, Simmons talks about creating the collection for his father. I don’t really have anything to say besides, “Put it in a card, dude.”

5.) Finally, Simmons gives a pitch on why the quarterly is a great buy and an even better gift!

If you give the Quarterly out as a holiday present to someone who doesn’t know Grantland, they’ll open it, feel the cover, see the drawings and special wrinkles and think, My God, you shouldn’t have!!!!!

Then, Simmons went there. The “Exclusive Club” sales pitch route…

We printed a relatively small number of them; once they’re gone, they’re gone.

Simmons, who is the earliest benefactor of the Internet age in sports journalism, portrays himself as a man of the people. He writes from a fan’s perspective. Even through his prolific success, the Sports Guy has maintained that voice. He is conventional wisdom.

(The bitter blogosphere will tell you otherwise)

Consequently, the strangest aspect of this whole pitch was Simmons struggling through his own agendas while telling us why we should buy the Quarterly like he is Chris Farley in Tommy Boy. His own trepidation of sounding like an infomercial on NESN is palpable. (Had to get that dig in there)

Your default mechanism might be “That’s a lot of money” or “Why would I pay for stuff I already read?” Believe me, I get it — I hate making people pay for content. Actually, I hate making people pay for anything. Once upon a time, I was creditors-chasing-me-down-for-outstanding-bills-from-two-years-ago broke. I remember being 30 years old and still looking forward to Papa Gino’s “All You Can Eat Pizza” night for $5.99 (I think it was Tuesdays) and thinking, I graduated from college eight years ago, there’s something totally wrong with this picture.

This is the first time I’ve seen Simmons struggle with himself. He tries to see the illogical point of view in this purchase through the eyes of the former version of himself (the bartender – living paycheck to paycheck ). But once you reach a point of success, part of you changes by nature. Simmons isn’t in Cambridge watching 90210 re-runs anymore. He is the guy who accidentally broke the Randy Moss trade via Twitter last year and has made a kajillion dollars off Ralph Macchio references.

Quick Musings

1.) 12:30 pm last Friday, an hour before the early season showdown between the Bruins and Red Wings, NESN showed a re-run of NESN Daily. CSNNE countered with a pre-game show featuring the usual suspects. The game was nationally televised on NBC (who obviously work in conjunction with CSNNE), and CSNNE had immediate post-game analysis.

NESN had a breakdown of the action at 10 pm that night, nearly 6 hours after the game was over. I’m telling you, it’s one thing to avoid teams you don’t broadcast (although, I still think that’s reprehensible) but NESN is teetering a line with their Bruins coverage that I wouldn’t venture.

2.) I do, on the other hand, enjoy Dale Arnold leading the pre/post game shows on NESN. He’s landed nicely.

3.) I refuse to talk about Heidi Watney’s appearance on “Dennis & Callahan” yesterday. As one prominent media member told me, “Her exit has gotten more play than Jonathan Papelbon.”

4.) Saw David Portnoy, El Presidente of Barstool Sports, talk at Northeastern the other night. I asked him if he regretted “Baby-Gate” and – as always – Portnoy delivered his, “No, I look back and I still think that was a funny post.” Also after he conceded he’s older and sees his role posting lewd material diminishing, Portnoy quipped, “I’ll always be El Presidente!”

Say what you want, and I’ve said plenty, Portnoy is extremely successful. He admitted much of the business side of Barstool is “ass-backwards,” and is not sure how to deal with logistics of sophisticated financial dealings (like giving others equity). HOWEVER, the guy is worth $2 million and understands the street side of business (brand promotion, staying true to your audience, etc).

5.) Speaking of Portnoy, El Presidente took a nice jab at NESN’s Michael Hurley for ‘stealing’ a Barstool post. He even went to said-post and commented, “Where have I seen this?”

My first thought was, “Well it’s the Internet, and this sort of content cycles and isn’t really owned by Barstool. Even if Hurley DID get it from BSS, it’s not really stealing.”

@nesnmhurley when you just post our exact post 5 seconds after we do we get inundated with people slamming you. Keep it clean brah

My next thought was, “People actually read NESN.com?”

By Roy Reiss

Did you happen to notice how the University of Arizona recently announced the hiring of their new football coach?

And the new Arizona football coach and his family is....... http://t.co/kiCBPDdO

November 21, 2011 7:36 pm via Camera+ReplyRetweetFavorite

@Greg_Byrne

Greg Byrne

“And the new Arizona football coach and his family is…..” tweeted Athletic Director Greg Byrnes. It included a link to an iPhone photo of Byrnes, the new coach and his family. No formal press statement, no news conference, rather a unique and novel announcement using the social media, thus bypassing the traditional method.

We already see the Patriots utilizing twitter to announce some signings, roster movement and other transactions. Picture the Red Sox announcing their new manager in this fashion. Or for that matter, any team choosing this route to communicate with their followers. Teams can control the message being delivered in the manner they desire which is a fascinating concept after so many years of depending on the traditional media.

Is it a sign of the times? Is this the way clubs will reach out to their fans in the future? If so how will this impact the people covering teams and those ready to enter the news gathering world?

It’s an interesting subject that’s being debated daily in many newsrooms of the traditional media and the new media around the country. And hopefully in the classrooms for those aspiring young journalists at institutions of higher learning from coast to coast.

The role of the traditional beat person, electronic and print, in this new environment is becoming more clearly defined. Being first with a story isn’t quite as important as it used to be. Within minutes everyone knows and moves on to the next phase, thus diminishing the impact of who had the story first.

What is ultimately more important is the why. Insight and communicating with the sports consumer is the “new” method of reaching and cultivating a following.

Those on the outside can watch a Bobby Valentine managerial news conference as it happens. They can digest his every sentence and form their own opinions. So the role of the reporter is to offer something different rather than to spit back what the new Sox manager has just said. It’s called “value-added insight”. What does it all mean? And how will it impact the team and ultimately its fans?

Today’s fans are highly educated and expect more from the media than ever before. There’s videos, audio podcasts, and most importantly many avenues for the fan’s voice to be heard on just about every media platform. The new age reporter has to be multi faceted.

No longer is it acceptable to simply stick a microphone in front of an athlete and then report back what they said. The need is to take that statement or quote and bring it to the next level for a fan base that’s hungry for information and insight.

This week the media reported once again on the Jeff Saturday/Robert Kraft relationship that evolved from the NFL contract talks this past summer. It was old news delivered the same old way which offered little in the way of advancing a possible interesting story. Did anyone mention that Saturday will be a free agent at the end of the year, and maybe his relationship with the Patriots owner could influence his decision as to where to play in 2012?  That’s what the story should have been.

Now and moving forward in this exciting media landscape, “value-added insight” will determine who in the media comes out on top.

Roy Reiss, who started his career working for Curt Gowdy Broadcasting, was a former sportscaster on Channel 7. His son Mike now covers the Patriots for ESPNBoston.

This was posted by one of our newer members on the BSMW Messageboard  (“Claude45″). I thought it insightful:

I was just listening to Belichick on WEEI and a couple of questions and answers highlighted just how misrepresented or misunderstood he is by the media. At least in my opinion.

1.(Steve) DeOssie told a story of how Bill asked his opinion on something on the sideline. DeOssie thought he was joking because no coach had ever asked him what he thought would work before. Paraphrasing, Belichick’s answer was that no matter how pretty a game plan looks on paper, if the players don’t think it will work or think something else will work, then you need to listen and make changes to your plan. So the arrogant megalomaniac who does not want good players to mess with his perfect game plans allows the players to have feedback. This can’t be true, DeOssie and Belichick must be lying.

2. They were discussing the Welker TD play where he was wide open after discussing with Brady what to do on the fly. They asked Bill how often this happens and I thought his answer was an interesting look at how he hires coaches. He almost always promotes from within. Certainly part of it is the familiarity with the system but I think he gave a glimpse at another reason. He talked about how, for example, Brady or O’Brien will come to him and say this team is using the same type of game plan that the Redskins did in 2005 and here is how we beat it then. Bill said that this shared recall with Brady and now O’Brien puts them at an advantage when making adjustments. It may be just one play or an entire game plan. Belichick really seemed to value that continuity. So again, it may not be an arrogant megalomaniac who does not allow a dissenting voice in the room but a professional manager who finds value in that shared experience.

Granted, I am by the media’s low standards a Belichick fanboy. I am a 20 year season ticket holder and he has given me a lot of fun and enjoyment. I value that. I am a little young to clearly remember many details from the Fairbank’s era but this has to be the greatest stretch of Patriots success by any measure. I will miss it when it ends so I choose to enjoy every second of it now. I have no need to wring my hands over second round draft mistakes or fun press conferences. I am having too much fun watching the games.

Michael Felger of “98.5 the Sports Hub”, has spent the last three years purposely tweaking Patriot fans over the New York Jets.

Those who listen to Felger daily know that while he might admit he’s wrong from time to time, he loves to play the “lone wolf” card. He viciously attacked Claude Julien all season last year, portraying him as a coach whose style was unwinnable. Even though he admitted he was wrong about the Stanley Cup Bruins he couched his argument many times mentioning that the Pittsburgh Penguins didn’t have Malkin or Sidney Crosby. Of course, you’ll never hear this argument when he discusses the Steelers and Colts winning Super Bowls when the Patriots were without Tom Brady or Rodney Harrison. It doesn’t fit his argument.

Felger, loves to state he is not trying to be contrarian but that’s not true. He’s all about being contrarian, and I don’t begrudge him that. It’s what gives him the lead in the ratings and makes him very successful. Just don’t think I am one of these lemmings who call him up and pat him on the back on how he saved us all from WEEI.

This brings me back to the New York Jets. There is joy in New England today over what looks like another unfulfilled season for the New York Jets. I say “looks” because with their schedule and their resiliency I would not count them out yet. I expect many callers to be taking Felger to task for his constant propping up of the Jets on the radio and in TV. I don’t expect him to back down. He has the high ground. If the Jets fail, he brings up the Patriots loss last year and the fact they went “farther” than YOU the last 2 seasons. By the way, that whole farther-than-you argument is so ridiculous. Mazz has been spouting that crap since he joined the airways. “The Steelers and Colts have been in Super Bowls and won more recently than you.” Well, Tony from 2001 to 2009 the Jets were hardly even in the AFC discussion. It’s a fallacious argument. The Patriots were undefeated during the 2007 regular season and choked in the big game. In 2008, Brady was out for the season and the next year, although Brady played well, he still went into a playoff game with “unconfirmed” badly bruised ribs and without his prime target.  You got me on 2010, bad loss.

Don’t fall into the trap with Felger. He always presents the circular argument. If we’re talking about the Jets then we are talking about the Jets. And today the discussion is that Rex Ryan, who I think is a very good coach, guaranteed a Super Bowl three years in a row and still hasn’t delivered.

“There are no points for second place.” – Viper in Top Gun or the media folks who dismiss the fact that the Patriots were there in 2007.

The Ron Borges of the world love to talk about Belichick’s success being tied to Brady. Like somehow that’s a novel concept. How about Sexy Rexy with Ray Lewis (HOF), Ed Reed (HOF), Terrell Suggs (perennial pro-bowler) in Baltimore and Darrelle Revis, the “hands-down best defender in all of the NFL” with him in New York.

I like Rex Ryan, I think he’s a character. What I don’t love is the way the media gushes over him like a bunch of schoolgirls. “He’s a breath of fresh air.” “He’s great for the game.” I see and hear this all the time and it makes me think wow, if Bill Belichick started doing this he would be considered not just the greatest coach of all time but the greatest MAN THAT EVER LIVED. That’s how easy it is to curry favor with the media.

Ask Philadelphia Eagle fans what they think about Andy Reid’s four losses in the NFC Championship Game and Super Bowl defeat at the hands of the Patriots in 2004. Let’s just say they are not content with the last 11 years.

If you are going to make it about a title, which is what Rex has done, then it’s about titles. You can’t cherry pick your argument.

I have heard Felger and others rag on Donovan McNabb, Andy Reid and the Eagles for never winning anything. The Jets have 2 Division titles and no Super Bowl Appearances in 42 years!!!

The Red Sox didn’t start getting respect they do today until they WON the World Series. Beating the Yankees would not have been enough.

Bruce Allen was right in his column earlier this week when he talked about perspective. As much as I have been on Belichick lately, Patriot fans have been spoiled in the Kraft Era.

• 10 AFC East Titles.
• 5 Super Bowl Appearances.
• Six AFC Championship games.
• Two Hall of Fame coaches

Oh, and one more thing, we keep hearing, in the biggest matchup in Patriot/Jets history New England lost to their archrival at home. Well, in 2006, the Patriots were just 2 years removed from their 3rd title in 4 years. They had lost a game earlier in the season at home to “Mangenius” and the Jets. The Patriots beat them pretty soundly at home and went on to lose to the Colts. That game had a lot more intrigue to it, Belichick/Mangini, the handshake, another end to the Patriot dynasty. But nope, it didn’t count because Rex wasn’t there. I guess based on personality the media decides what is historic and what isn’t.