Being Curt
Posted: February 9th, 2008 | Filed under: Baseball | 30 Comments »
I like Curt Schilling. I don’t just like him because the morning after he pitched Game 1 of the 2001 World Series he sent me a nice email. I also like him because he’s loud and opinionated and judgmental and hypocritical and fantastic and whiny and spiritual and political and calculating and generous and selfish and everything else, all in BIG CAPITAL LETTERS. He is like that guy you know, only moreso. We sometimes call people larger than life. Well, that’s Curt Schilling in the most appealing and infuriating ways. He’s an athlete and personality on high-powered batteries.
Because of this, his blog, almost without exception, has been entertaining. You never know what you’re going to get on 38pitches. One day, he’s just skewering the media for getting stuff wrong. The next day, he’s trumpeting John McCain for president. The next days he’s off on some rant that doesn’t quite make sense, but almost does. The next day he’s skewering the media again. And so on. The blog is all Schilling, and that’s what’s beautiful about it.
The blog is so entertaining, in fact, that I wonder sometimes if blogs like 38pitches make up the future of sports media. You may have heard this somewhere, but people seem pretty down on the American media. I could be wrong, but I think I saw a poll the other day that said 77% of Americans believe that journalists hid the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
In the political world, as everyone knows, Fox News took full advantage of this media anger and resentment — no matter how you may feel about Fox, they plainly spoke directly to a substantial portion of the American population who felt underrepresented and distrustful of their media choices.*
*This has nothing whatsoever to do with the previous sentence, but have you ever heard a radio show called “The Ed Schulz Show?” **I was flipping through my XM Radio options a while ago, trying to get away from the non-stop Branson, Mo. commercials that litter those airwaves (more on this coming up on another day … believe it or not I am writing you live from Branson right now) and I ran across Schultz’s show on Air America (“Progressive Talk!”). I didn’t listen very long at all because any kind of extended talk radio makes me break into hives. But I listened long enough to wonder: Am I wrong or does this guy sound EXACTLY like Rush Limbaugh? I mean, pitch, tone, rhythm, everything. I listened for a good 10 or 15 minutes (which is 9 or 14 minutes longer than I ever listen to talk radio) just because I was wondering, “Is he TRYING to sound like Rush Limbaugh? Or is that just his natural voice? Or am I just imagining the similarities?”
**I just looked up Ed Schultz on Wikipedia. It says here he was the Division II passing leader in 1977 for Moorhead State. That would mean he started OVER Phil Simms and was, in fact, better than Simms in college — oh, wait, never mind, as brilliant reader John points out, Schultz went to Moorhead State in Minnesota while Simms went to Moorehead State in Kentucky. So never mind on that one. Wiki then says Schultz went and played a half season in Canada but couldn’t adjust to the Northern game. That 55-yard line will throw you.
Anyway, Fox obviously filled a perceived media void. Many, many, many others have too. That’s how it works.
Well, I don’t need to tell you that there are a few, you know, perceived voids in mainstream sports coverage too. Yeah. A few. It seems like some people may believe that mainstream sports media — and I’m sticking with newspapers for the moment — is, I don’t know, too stodgy, full of itself, passionless, stuck-in-the-past, stuck-in-the-mud, cynical, conflicted, you know, just as a starting point. Countless people have jumped into those voids.
The biggest perception problem in sports media coverage to me, though, is that many seem to believe they are not getting the latest or most authentic information* in their newspapers. They want something closer to the truth. Every so often I will look at reader comments on Curt’s blog, and I will find them peppered with lines like, “Thank you for finally telling us the REAL story,” and “The media sucks, you rule Curt!” That seems pretty fair to me. Fans appreciate Curt speaking directly to them.
Curt isn’t the only guy out there trying to get that direct connection to the fans. More and more teams have hired their own writers to tell “the truth” — quotation marks and everything. More and more players make their big announcements on their Web site. I don’t blame them one bit. And like I say, I sometimes wonder if that’s where we’re headed, if that’s what many people really want — news directly from the source, unmarred by the biases and outsiderness of newspaper reporters.
*Speaking of latest information, I just got two emails. One says that the Kansas City Royals have signed pitcher Mike Maroth to a minor league deal. Big applause here. I’ve always liked Maroth, always, even when he was losing 21 games for the 2003 Tigers, even after he put up one of the worst lines in baseball history for the St. Louis Cardinals last year.
That line: 0-5 record, 10.66 ERA, 38 ip, 71 hits, 56 runs, 45 earned (yeah 11 unearned runs keeping that 10.66 ERA down), 11 homers (yikes in 38 innings), 17 walks, 23 strikeouts. I mean, seriously, that line is epic. It’s even more epic when you consider that in his first outing with the Cardinals after being traded he threw 7 1/3 innings of 2-hit ball.
But, you know, he was coming back from injury last year and maybe he just got into a bad rut in St. Louis. He’s been bouncing back from stuff all his career. He’s just 30. I don’t know, a lefty with control, he watched Kenny Rogers closely, he seems to have regained his health, I really think the guy might help the club. Of course, he might not.
The second email says that the Chiefs are going to put synthetic turf in Arrowhead Stadium next year. Big, big boos here. I hate, hate, hate anyone and everyone who tries to take mud out of football.
OK, I’m going to try and stay focused the rest of the way. Look, I try to be realistic about the sports media, the world where I make my living. There are good people working in it and not so good people. There are hard workers and lazy ones. There are bright, talented, insightful and incisive reporters and also what we in the business like to call foofs, which is sort of an all-encompassing description of someone who for any number of reasons would not fit into the bright, talented, insightful and incisive category. There are plenty of days when I pop on Baseball Primer, read a mainstream baseball story or analysis and think, “Um, we do suck.” There are some proud days too.
But, here’s the thing that it’s worth remembering: The media biases — and sure, there are plenty — are probably a whole lot less involved than, say, the team’s biasses. The athlete’s biasses. The corporation’s biasses. We live in the age of spin. The media may not do a great job all the time of wading through it all. But, for the most part, at least we’re trying.
I’m thinking about this again because, you may have heard, Curt Schilling has a dead arm. I mean a DEAD SHOULDER. I mean his shoulder is so dead that his doctor, Dr. Craig Morgan, told the AP something I have never heard before: Schilling’s arm hurt so much the guy could not even get an MRI on January 24 because — this is unbelievable to me — he could not hold his arm up for the necessary 10 minutes. Are you kidding me? That’s a dead arm.
Now, apparently, there has been a dispute between the Red Sox and Schilling’s doctor over the shoulder issues — a dispute that involves potential treatment options and pitching possibilities for this year and an $8 million contract and other stuff that I simply don’t know enough (or care enough) about to get into.
No, what interest me is something else entirely. Here’s what we know from Dr. Morgan: Curt Schilling really hurt his shoulder. Just opening a door caused him great pain. Curt could not even lift his arm long enough to get an MRI. Dr. Morgan determined that Schilling’s shoulder tendon is torn to pasta and he recommended some sort of surgery that has never been tried on a Major League pitcher. The Red Sox doctor supposedly came back and said that the tendon is not really torn and he suggested rest. A third doctor got into the mix and said that while the shoulder was torn, the surgery would finish Schilling’s season. And so on.
And here’s what Curt Schilling wrote about on his blog during this general time period: McCain winning New Hampshire; a new pirate video game; the death of pitcher Johnny Podres who Curt says hugely impacted his life; a plea for males over 40 to test for prostate cancer; McCain winning in South Carolina; a request for people to run the Boston Marathon for charity; a couple of touching posts about a young woman named Holly Young, who died at age 22; a couple of celebratory stories about the Red Sox signing Sean Casey; a plea for people to vote; a congratulations to John McCain for a big Super Tuesday and then finally, after media reports emerged, a vague statement about his shoulder that more or less said nothing but did have this rather odd media swipe:
“Please understand that a lot of what has been reported is not true. When the club feels it’s appropriate to further discuss the details of this issue publicly I will elaborate but I need to make it clear that Dr Morgan did NOT diagnose me with a tear of the rotator cuff at any time during this process, nor did he recommend rotator cuff surgery.”
I don’t know who reported that it was a torn rotator cuff. But it apparently IS a torn shoulder tendon — or at least that’s what Dr. Morgan believes — and that doesn’t seem much better. And the doctor IS recommending surgery for that. Seems to me that while Schilling is not lying in the above sentence, he’s also not telling the truth.*
*I know I said that Curt’s shoulder post more or less said nothing and I can’t find any actual facts or details in it. But I thought it fair to give an opposing point of view, which was easy to find by clicking on the 38 Pitches comments. This one represents: “Gotta say this: It’s wonderful & exhilarating to know that, whatever the situation, Curt Schilling will tell you what’s going on from his view, straight-up.”
My point is not that Curt Schilling owes his blog readers intimate details about his private pain and turmoil. He does not. He obviously was (and is) going through some very involved and sensitive things, and writing about it could not help him in the slightest. I don’t blame him one bit for not writing about it. Still, for a solid month his arm was in agony, his shoulder was apparently hanging by spaghetti (or linguini) and he was writing about John McCain.
And that seems to me the final point … athletes, teams, companies, politicians, they can promise the story. They can attack the media lies. They can offer a few insider details. But sooner or later there’s a pretty good chance that their own well being is involved. And things change.
Helter-Skelter lawyer and author Vincent Bugliosi was asked once if he thought people were good. He said — and I’m paraphrasing the rest of the way — “Yes, until their self-interest becomes involved.” Then he asked the questioner, “Do you think people are good?” She said, “Yes.” He said, “I can prove to you in 30 seconds that you don’t really believe that.” She accepted, and he said, “OK, imagine that you go outside and find that there’s a huge dent in the side of your car. And you look, and there’s a note on your windshield from the driver who did it with his number and insurance info. Are you surprised?” She nodded. The point was made: People can be friendly, they can be good-hearted, they can be open and honest and kind, but how many would leave that note on the windshield?
I suspect few would. I don’t think that’s bad, exactly. It’s human. I think the athletes’ personal blogs, the team-driven story, the company-sponsored sports Web sites all have their place in the huge megaplex that sports media is becoming, and that’s good. Those can be very entertaining. I just hope that the majority of people will not just settle for that. I just hope that the mainstream media has not turned people off so much that sports fans haven’t given up all hope that we can give them something real.
Loading ...
I think the Chiefs should bring back artificial turf. Also, they should add a dome. Take out 20,000 seats. Ban tailgating before the game. Make it so quiet walking up to the stadium that it feels like you’re inside a museum. Then once in the stadium they should pipe in crowd noise.
Finally, they should change their name to the Indianapolis Colts.
Transformation complete.
Really nice post Joe. I like all your stuff, but this is the sort of thing I really appreciate. Also, remember where people are coming from when they bash the media: they want it done right. In some situations you can accept 80% or even the occasional mail-in. Reporting the news is not one of them. It’s a little like being an ump/ref. When you get it right, you’re just doing your job. When you f*** up, all of North America has the right to be mad.
I say that, and it’s heartfelt, but I also feel I should mention this: When you mentioned Fox News, I got excited because I thought maybe you were going to tear them up, and that would have been fun to read. I’m very rational until you bring up something I care about.
Far be it from me to let facts get in the way of a good story… but… Moorhead State is in Minnesota, and Morehead State (where Phil Simms played) is in Kentucky.
I think Schilling’s blog is one of the best things sports has seen since that yellow line in football where they have to get to for the first down. OK maybe not that big, maybe just as big as when they also added the blue line-of-scrimmage line. But it’s big.
When it first began, the posts were incredibly insightful, he was all over the comments responding to people, etc. He lost a little of that when I think the team asked him not to talk about every approach he took against every batter, which I can only assume they asked him not to do for strategic reasons.
And here, I think there may be a similar issue. His GM was going after the biggest free agent in baseball, and offering a lot of good prospects to do so. He was in a bidding war with the Yankees. Don’t you think that if the Twins GM knew that one of the Red Sox top pitchers couldn’t open a door, that he’d have quite a bit more leverage in the negotiations?!
I like Schilling’s candid approach to the blog, but I don’t mind him withholding details if it poses a strategic threat to the folks who sign his paycheck.
I always liked Curt because he offered to cover teammates’ bills during the strike. I always disliked him for threatening to kick Wild Thing’s ass after the Carter shot.
That’s all secondary.
I, we, Power Chord Jihad, hereby lay down the gauntlet: We have established the “Posnanski Fan Club” Yahoo! Fantasy baseball league. To engage us on one of the few truly honourable fields of battle:
(1) go to http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/
(2) select the blue “Join a league” button,
(3) choose the far left “custom league” option
(4) plug in league ID: 44683
password: soulofbaseball
But venture not near, should ye be of faint heart, for Power Chord Jihad always wins!!!!!
Wiki then says Schultz went and played a half season in Canada but couldn’t adjust to the Northern game. That 55-yard line will throw you.
It’s not the length of the field, it’s the width that’s the killer (isn’t that the way in all things?).
That, and the extra DB, what with 12 players and all…
Re: Mike Maroth
As a Tigers fan, I was a bit surprised that they traded him this year, especially for a PTBNL, and especially since they had all kinds of injuries woes in their rotation at the time. I thought, though, that they must be expecting a pretty decent player back – since after all, Maroth was a bit of a workhorse: lefty starter who could pile up innings. Imagine my surprise when he totally tanked for the Cards. I guess we can expect, I don’t know, Chris Pittaro back as our PTBNL now…
After Santana went to the Mets, the bloggers in this part of the country (”Twins Territory”) went pretty much crazy. Not much analysis or reasoned argument, mostly hyperventilating and wanting to hang the Twins’ rookie GM. Then along comes a mainstream media article (in the Mpls. Star Tribune — not one of the great sports sections in the country) that I thought took a very comprehensive, thoughtful, and objective look at the Twins options.
In this instance, the mainstream guy was way better than most of the bloggers. Not saying that’s the norm, but it does happen.
The Tigers have their PTBNL for Maroth. His name is Chris Lambert, and it’s not the guy from Highlander (who used to be married to Diane Lane!).
Mike – I think that’s exactly Joe’s point. Schilling’s blog is a great place for interesting reading and maybe some insight, but it’s nothing close to an actual source of news. That’s true specifically because he has interests to protect that are more important to him than the info his readers get.
For me, the reason I started blogging was my frustration at questions I asked myself all the time not being answered often enough. So I set out to answer and share them.
I think your better bloggers understand the MSM is doing most of the heavy lifting when it comes to providing news. They’re just trying to be the caulk that fills in what’s missing for the small percentage of fans who want more.
It was all that blogging that shot Schilling’s shoulder.
The impressive thing about Schilling’s injury post is not its lack of information, it is it’s fine and skillful deceptiveness. Pretending to answer a question honestly but dishing out misdirection. It’s not that he should have revealed anything; it’s that in the process of addressing without disclosing, he staged a pretense of disclosure intended to give an entirely false impression.
This from a guy who poses as a wide-eyed true believer in John McCain’s “straight talk express,” lionizing that candidate for flawless honesty, character, and integrity. Everyone knows McCain *at best* must engage in exactly the kind of concealment and deception Schilling employed in his injury post, and there’s a pretty fair record of McCain (and Schilling) more blatantly lying as well.
I don’t see a bigger than life character here. I see a guy of normal intelligence who earned money and fame through sports, has the requisite ego, and needs a certain kind of attention. Like others have, he’s parlaying his niche success into political influence and presence. He leverages his blabbermouth personality against ambient stereotypes pertaining to athletes to simulate honesty. Everyone wants to be thought honest, and everyone values the notion of direct, honest, and unvarnished contact with a public person. So give the public what it wants.
Schilling probably values the truth too, of course. But the self-righteous know the TRUE truth, and live in service to it. The lies the righteous tell are in service to that truth. See? Not at all like the lies the unrighteous tell. When the righteous do it, it isn’t a lie.
Anyone want to start a pool for when Curt replies to this thread? I say Feb 11…
Hey Joe, wow I didn’t realize Curt was such an Obama supporter! At least he’s not for a guy born in 1936 who publicly admits he knows “nothing” about the economy, sees “more wars” and a presence in Iraq for “100 years”, and wants to continue Bush’s domestic and foreign policies. Phew. As for big Ed Schultz, he may sound like Rush but about as opposite in views as someone could get. Peace!
Nice post, Joe. I agree with you that blogs like Curt’s are similar to press releases– they’re clearly designed to serve the subject’s interests. We need that information to be filtered through an independent observer who, we assume, does the investigative work we don’t have time to do. As far as I’m concerned, the issue with the mainstream media isn’t that they occasionally get things wrong, or that I disagree with their conclusions (you can’t be a good reporter without pissing somebody off).
My issue is that the MSM is starting to look a lot more like larger platforms for those blogs and press releases than independent sources. In many ways, members of the media become so integrated with the subjects they cover, it’s impossible for them to be objective. Think of reporters based in Washington DC. They get invited to all the big parties, they spend a lot of time speaking to various people who have a particular view of America and of the world. Over time, they become as much a part of the establishment as any politician. Whether consciously or no, they begin to have an interest in maintaining the status quo. Add to that the increased focus on maximizing profit, as well as consolidation of media with corporate America, and we have a huge problem.
Fox News is neither Fair nor Balanced. They tried (and kept) Ron Paul from participating in the debate before the New Hampshire primaries. They targeted him there because his principles of freedom would’ve done well there. They then included him in the South Carolina debate a week later.
It’s not anybody in the media’s decision to decide who wins this or that primary or election. It’s OUR decision. The fact that they have the balls to deny any candidate equal face time is ridiculous, and I now refuse to watch the channel.
Fair and Balanced? I think not.
Re:Ron Paul, the guy never stood a chance at being president. The guy didnt get much face time because he was fringe candidate, meaning he only had the support of a few. If he was unable to get his message to the masses then that was his fault not Fox’s.
Re:Mike Maroth, I like this move. No harm in seeing what he has left.
As a Cardinals fan, and after having watched Maroth last year, I’d be shocked if he even makes the Royals coming out of S.T.
Re: Jeff P.
He raised more money in the 4th quarter than any other GOP candidate. His message is getting out plenty. My problem is that Fox (and other media channels) decided long before now that they wanted Paul out of the race. Even the Republican Party was pissed at Fox over that, and withdrew their support for that debate.
Also-
I could care less if his chances we less than zero. If anybody that actually stands to win delegates (and he’s won over 40) is shut off because it “doesn’t mess with the rest of the party” and Fox’s ideals, it’s wrong. WE should chose the candidates and narrow down the field, NOT Fox News.
…his first outing with the Cardinals after being traded he threw 7 1/3 innings of 2-hit ball.
I’m going to go out on a limb, and guess that this epic performace was against the Reds. They have a tradition of bringing out the Hobbs in pitching hobos everywhere.
I’m looking forward to the eventual Republican nominee imploding, but maybe there’s still time in the primary season to see Chuck Norris v. Curt Schilling.
Ed Freakin Shultz- Former “Voice of the Bison”, play-by-play guy for North Dakota State (my alma mater) did Bison games for 15 years, was suspended for vulgarities on air after having a whiskey bottle tossed at him. Then went to do play-by-play for the North Dakota Sioux, our hated rival, needless to say, he’s not exactly a Bison or Fargo favorite anymore.
re: problem with sports media
All too often, sports media forgets it’s supposed to be fun. Sports aren’t really important, they’re just a fun distraction. I don’t need to read 50 stories about the moral implications of Michael Vick’s dogfighting. I want to know that it happened, that he was punished for it, and then move on. I really like the following quote:
“The sports page records people’s accomplishments; The front page nothing but their failures.” – Justice Earl Warren
Too often sportswriters want to turn the sports pages into an exact copy of the rest of the paper. But it shouldn’t be the same, and a few sportswriters (yourself included) seem to have grasped this, which is why I keep reading.
Kyle, it’s over.
You lost.
No, Josh in DC, you are obviously the loser here. The lack of thought and insight in your post is truly disheartening to those that would like to make a difference in this country.
But that is not what I meant to write about. I just want my sports back. I don’t care about the current soap opera story lines that are so prominent today. And I can’t believe that there are enough people that do to justify how much “ink” the MSM wastes reporting on them.
Sigh.
Okay, fine.
Sen. Phil Graham of Texas, no hero of mine, was asked before the 1996 Republican convention why he had thrown all his delegates to the presumptive nominee, Bob Dole, instead of continuing to fight as Pat Buchanan was doing. (I could have the names and dates wrong, but it was definitely Graham.) On PBS, the Senator said, “In a democracy, when you lose, you sit down.”
Ron Paul’s supporters have made great use of the tools of the 21st Century. They have raised a pile of money via the Internet. They have inundated blogs and online surveys. I dare say that I have seen more Ron Paul bumper stickers while vacationing in Florida, while visiting relatives outside of Pittsburgh, and in my decided liberal neighborhood than that of all other candidates combined.
What they do not have is votes. The American people do not like Ron Paul any more than they like Dennis Kucinich. Representative Paul participated in dozens of debates, just not the one on the Faux News Network. (For those Ron Paul supporters who just realized that Fox News is the most visible propaganda arm of the corporate wing of the Republican Party — and not a legitimate new source — welcome aboard!) He received ample media coverage, far outweighing any measure of actual success as reflected in polls. If people wanted to vote for him, they would have.
Caucuses are practically designed to give great weight to a well-organized outsider candidate with a passionate base of support, but Rep. Paul only attained 10 percent of Iowa Republican caucus attendees.
New Hampshire is probably the most libertarian state in the union. And even there, in a state where face-to-face contact FAR outweighs the importance of media coverage or fund raising, in a state where Independents can vote in either party’s primary, Rep. Paul attained 18,303 votes, 2 thousand fewer than Rudy Guiliani, 30 thousand fewer than John Edwards, and 93,948 fewer than Hillary Clinton.
In a democracy, when you lose, you sit down.
It’s over. You lost.
The Colts do not pipe in crowd noise.
That is a ridiculous allegation.
It’s easy to win graciously in the NFL, but it’s hard to lose graciously.
That accusation is completely unfounded and I can see no good reason for saying a thing like that.
“Lose graciously” must mean complaining to the Competition Committee that your feminine wide receivers are taking a beating by defensive backs after you lose in the playoffs… or throwing your offensive line under the bus after losing another time in the playoffs…
Curt Schilling – larger than life, indeed. No doubt, that is why the Sawx inserted a weight clause in his current contract.
The biggest dissatisfaction with the mainstream media is the lack of real coverage. Or maybe, more precisely, the problem with a news outlet like the Star is that it is not well adapted to the internet age.
Consider what the Star Sports section gives us. 1) It gives recaps on the games. These recaps are really only helpful to Kansas Citians who managed not to watch the game and haven’t visited the internet since the game finished. Recaps written by star reporters seldom differ materially enough from AP reports carried on SI to be worth making the special trip to the Star’s website.
2) It gives occasional recruiting updates and health updates for KC squads. There is a small value to this, but now most of this information can be found on the websites of those teams.
3) Puff pieces about KC athletes. Again a definite but minor value.
4) Info on smaller sports and high schools. The argument could be made that these items should be expanded as they fill a niche that isn’t easily available elsewhere, but the demand isn’t that great as only a limited number of people care about any given high school (and even fewer may care about the Explorers, of whom, I’m a fan).
5. Commentary.
Now I could be wrong, but it seems like the commentary pieces have been reduced. Obviously Joe writes pretty prolifically here, and Whitlock writes across the web, but the actual Star seems to carry less.
I can understand why they carry less Whitlock. While he may be a principled and entertaining writer (he may not too, but to give the benefit of the doubt), the vast majority of Jason’s columns are designed to generate readership by stirring the pot. It is hard to trust someone who essentially plays a clownish version of devil’s advocate (which is why his serious columns on hip hop culture seem to generate publicity while nevertheless gaining little actual traction). More importantly, his interest in and knowledge of KC sports often seems completely absent.
On the other hand, the Star has Mr. Posnanski who is widely regarded as one of the best sports columnists in the country, and for good reason.
All of this ignores a vast KC sports market: sophisticated commentary on the teams.
Now Joe does some of this, maybe as much as his employer will allow. He has consistent columns on the Royals that contain actual information and his article detailing the Patriots plan versus the Chiefs non-plan was excellent. Still, the demand for information of that ilk is practically insatiable.
Where blogs are the most effective is where they bring rigorous and entertaining analysis to sports. (Perhaps these aren’t accurately called blogs with the word’s ugly-sounding smushing of web log that seems to indicate a certain laziness and lack of consequence.) The best of these websites is FootballOutsiders, an amazing combination of sophisticated analysis and meaningful stats. They bring the Bill James approach to football. (Unfortunately, as their influence has grown, their writing has become consistently snarkier, a phenomenon which hopefully Aaron Schatz and the gang will move back away from.)
The Star may believe that the demographic of fans with an interest in a Moneyball approach to sports isn’t that large (the relative infrequency of the high quality Stat Guy columns would suggest that). Or they may believe that the existence of high quality websites like FootballOutsiders and the plethora of baseball-related sites is enough to cover that market.
I don’t think so. Kansas City is such a fanatical sports town that the Chiefs message board receives hundreds – and sometimes thousands – of posts a day. Now those posts are not all the quality of the posts on this board, and there is a lot of the kind of flaming that exists on any highly trafficked board. On the other hand, there are a lot of surprisingly sophisticated posts. Not from a writing standpoint, but from the standpoint of a rigorous arguing of the Chiefs’ suggested strategy.
Consider how it would drive hits and message board activity if the Star published a DAILY strategy debate between two of their writers. And this doesn’t have to be pandering to the lowest common denominator. These can be high quality debates using advanced stats and fleshing out the truth behind ideas like “The offense can help the defense by scoring less, suffering more three-and-outs and reducing its own TOP.” – Herm Edwards, circa 2006-2007, virtually every week.
As an aside: Right now, Rotoworld, with an assist from an FO writer, has a spectacular column demonstrating why Brian Brohm is going to be a star and Matt Ryan a bust. Brian Brohm will almost certainly be available when the Chiefs pick (if he continues to “fall” based on “draft momentum” he might fall within range of a trade up from their second round spot).
If the Star wants to re-invent itself as a model newspaper for the current times, it needs to focus less space on rather mundane transactional news and on blog-like screeds from Whitlock, because there is no comparative advantage there. You can find both things everywhere on the net. Instead, it should focus on detailed, analytical reporting on its teams. You can find column after column like this in the national media on the Yankees and Red Sox, the Patriots and Cowboys. You cannot, however, find it on the Chiefs or Royals, because KC is a small market.
But KC is not a small market for the STAR, it is THE market. Even if Joe weren’t such an entertaining writer, people would still follow this website for that very reason. (And that’s the reason Rob and Rany on the Royals probably gets more hits per update of content than any website in the world).
I have a feeling what Schilling was trying to get at in the part of his post you quote concerning “what has been reported” and Dr. Morgan was that some stories (including blog reports) were portraying Dr. Morgan as suggesting Curt could have rotator cuff surgery and pitch later that year. In other words, they were making Morgan look ridiculous, and Schilling didn’t like that.
I keep seeing remarks on this story which suggest that there is no difference between “surgery” and “rotator cuff surgery” and that just seems silly to me. There are lots of things that can go wrong in a shoulder and lots of different things that can be done to try to fix them, and only a limited number of those involve the rotator cuff.
I imagine this is particularly sensitive to Schilling since he was once mis-diagnosed with a rotator cuff tear which could have ended his career. Dr. Morgan came up with a different diagnosis, did a different surgery, and saved Curt’s career. Hence Schilling’s special concern for Morgan’s rep.