Mr. WEO Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 I'm no journalist, but as a human being and a fan of the team, a person's perspective should be balanced...negative about some things, positive about other things. Even if the team were losing 12 or 13 games a season (which it is not), I would still expect some good and some bad. If it really is negativity day after day as the OP says, it doesn't make much sense to me. There's being realistic, then there's just being pessimistic. I've been reading the D and C (and, formerly, the TU) for many years--and these two guys for quite a while. Some kid picks up the paper now and gives us his 2 cents based on, what, a couple of articles he's read? Couple of years ago, these two could easily have been faulted for never having made any meaningful critical commentary thorughout the RJ debacle and the subsequent JP disaster. What would have been the "positive" they should have focused on at the end of last season, for balance? Read them for yourself--it's free, right there on your interwebs machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 I'm no journalist, but as a human being and a fan of the team, a person's perspective should be balanced...negative about some things, positive about other things. Even if the team were losing 12 or 13 games a season (which it is not), I would still expect some good and some bad. If it really is negativity day after day as the OP says, it doesn't make much sense to me. There's being realistic, then there's just being pessimistic. I covered a high school team that went 3-15 last season. At some point, writing "Hey, they only lost by 10 instead of 20 this time" begins to sap your will to live... Last playoff game: Jan. 8, 2000 Last playoff win: Dec. 30, 1995 Roth and Maiorana both covered four consecutive Super Bowl seasons. Compared to that, being realistic about the postseason-free 2000s probably DOES sound negative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in SC Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 I'd LOVE to know how you acquired this information, especially since the D+C is part of the nationwide Gannett chain, not under private ownership. Also, Matthews doesn't even cover games, other than the columns written from Rochester. Lori, He got you this time! Read the D&C article and then read his comments again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Lori, He got you this time! Read the D&C article and then read his comments again. Link? No, on second thought... Sal's on vacation this week, so it has to be something by Matthews. And if that's the case, don't bother. Positive or negative, doesn't matter to me. Mailing it in does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 I have no problem with their perceived negativity. The team hasn't been good for a long time. When it was good back in the 90s these guys were much more generous in their writings. My only problem is that I fail to consider either of them a true beat reporter. They don't get us any real inside info and are constantly scooped by the real reporters out there -- like Adam Schefter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 I'd LOVE to know how you acquired this information, especially since the D+C is part of the nationwide Gannett chain, not under private ownership. Also, Matthews doesn't even cover games, other than the columns written from Rochester. Now now ...don't throw facts into the equation ..... party pooper! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts