2012 Division III NCAA Tournament

[Gregory Sager]

That's like asking someone if he'd rather be insulted or ignored. I suppose that it depends upon the recipient ... or the skill of the insulter.

[fcnews]

Sager - Brian Burwell is the leading feature writer for the largest and only newspaper in an extremely large mdwest sports market. On a Saturday night, with the Big 12, Big 10 and even the Missouri High School tournaments were going on, he chose to attend the DIII sectional game at Washington University. Even more importantly to write a front page lead story about it, with all the other sports news going on (ie; New Cardinal President, ending of spring training, the last weekend of DI basketball) this is HUGE. Not to merntion that the Post sent Mark Herb out to write an almost half page article covering the game for the "College Basketball" section of the same paper.

I don't think Burwell intentionaly belittled anyone. It was a Feature Story written in that style. It was his perception. Did you write him with your opinions? I doubt it. How many other major sports markets had a front page story on the DIII Elite Eight games in their Sunday Paper.

Compared to the Scottrade Center (were SLU and the Mo. Valley Conference Tourney are played), the Dome (where NCAA regionals are played) and even the New Sports Center in Columbia where (Mizzou and the MSHAA Final Four are played) the Field House at Wash U. is quite small.

I don't think he insulted or ignored anyone. You had the biggest sportswriter and major sports talk radio personality in St. Louis attending a game between two DIII basketball teams. And, this is what he decided to write about in the Sunday Sports page.

If you question is journalism skills then write him personally. Like Dave said "I will take that over completely missing the point and the event all together!".

You've missed the point on this one Mr. Sager.

[Pat Coleman]

It's just not good sportswriting.

That's par for the course. Where I used to work the guys on the desk had a file of his stuff, and it's never good if the copy desk keeps your stuff on file.

[fcnews]

Oh, I'm sure that's what it is.
Most of us here in the STL do appreciate the coverage. It's been a long time coming. And, I'm almost positive that Bryan Burwell does not get his material from any copy desk file.

I look forward to hearing the responses you get from Bryan. I'm sure you will all drop him a line and not just rip him here. Where he can't explain his thoughts.

Geeesh!!!

[hopefan]

Count me in as another St. Louisan who looks at any coverage ot of the St. Louis Post as a cup 5% full, not 95% empty.  I enjoyed Burwell's article not for its inaccuracies, but for the fact it was there...  as well as the game coverage.   
Also impressive is the radio coverage on KFNS, the sports station here in St Louis - the count is up to 5 Wash U related interviews in the last week and a half - 3 with Coach Edwards, one with Troy Ruths, one with Ron Zeccher, supervisor of local officials - all extremely positive, and they generated several phone ins too.... 
In this Cardinal/Rams/ Blues/ Mizzou wasteland, D3 fans are appreciative of this kind of recognition.  One must recognize that the Post NORMALLY posts no game day event schedule for small schools (thank goodness for D3hoops), and less than half the time has box scores or a one line artice about SLIAC or Wash U games - generally their nationwide scores are only D1.

[mark_reichert]

not compare Wash U's gym as something out of hoosiers, old yes, but small...not really,

It's not that old.  The current Field House was built in 1984.  The old one was started in 1925 and Francis Gymnasium dates from the 1904 Olympics, as does Francis Field.

I appreciate the publicity but the lack of fact checking shows a lack of care.  He wouldn't be so sloppy with teams with a larger fan base because he'd get just that much more flack.

[fcnews]

Folks, with out major media coverage this tournament will never be anything more then the "widdle d3 event" mentioned. And, yet when coverage is given, instead of taking it for what it is worth all we do is bash it.

It brings me to the conclusion that a lot of people here on this board are just find with the way it is. Keep it pigeon holed to a point that the only news is what a few posters put on this site.

I don't beleive this is what the majority is striving for. IMHO

[Pat Coleman]

Oh, I'm sure that's what it is.
Most of us here in the STL do appreciate the coverage. It's been a long time coming. And, I'm almost positive that Bryan Burwell does not get his material from any copy desk file.

No. It ends up there because it is so poorly written and spelled that it gets saved for posterity.

I am with the Sager camp -- I am not satisfied by half-ass coverage of D-III. We shouldn't be happy to get a mailed-in story because that's all we can get. If that's our goal, folks, then we should just stay marginalized and never strive for better. If the big-time media doesn't respect D-III enough to write a REAL story about it, then we should not settle for what we get!

[fcnews]

Did you read the story on page 5 of the same paper. Do you have any idea at all how much coverage it got. The article being ripped was one of several stories in the Post last week.

[Pat Coleman]

I bought the paper on my way out of town, yes. I also read Friday's paper.

I just don't think Bryan Burwell's column belongs on the same pedestal as Dave Kindred's far better piece in The Sporting News 2001.

I will always stand up for Division III when it is portrayed by the national media as the News of the Weird. And I always have.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I don't think any one is settling for what we get. I would love to see more coverage and more in-depth coverage. But at the same time, I am not going to "look a gift horse in its mouth" and bash any time of coverage outside of a box score or a small paragraph any where.

It is certainly a Catch 22. I would love to see far more coverage and something in the breath of the Sporting News article in 2001. I would rather see something a bit more long-term and more in-depth... but I also am not going to say "thanks, but no thanks" to the fact a big-time writer, radio host, and sometimes contributor to national television for deciding to even write something on the Elite 8 game.

I didn't remember seeing a camera at the Ursinus/CGA game (though, was told the ABC affiliate made it) and I haven't been able to find any article worth noting in the Philly papers to marked the fact the team was heading to Salem. That is more troubling than at least a reporter coming and writing something. Now, we can work on getting him to write more now that he has shown up.

At the same time, if we want more coverage, we should help out. I speak as a producer in a television station. There are times people just don't know what is going on and when we fill in the holes and help push an event, more "news people" become aware. We can do it on an individual basis. For example, the email to this writer shouldn't bash his efforts, but maybe thank him and then say... here are some things to consider next time you write; or did you know this; or I hope this isn't the last time you take the effort to cover this event and next time you can spend more time chatting with players, coaches, and fans.

I would also like to see Sports Information Directors and Athletic Departments, heck, maybe colleges as well - but they tend to miss out on that "stuff" as welL, to make more concerted efforts to tell local media about events at thier schools. I know this isn't easy and I know it sometimes falls on deaf ears, but that doesn't mean the effort should be dropped as well.

Sure, we want better coverage, but is it a good idea to say no thanks to what ever coverage we do get?

(PS - would you consider the article by Burwell as "news for the weird?")

[Pat Coleman]

Yeah, because it's the boilerplate stuff over and over. The person who writes only one column on it a year doesn't know what to write about so he/she falls back on the same old cliches that have been written everywhere. These guys try just as hard, they play in front of little crowds, blah blah blah.

The problem is, there probably won't be a second column. If there is, I would hope that there's some actual angle. As a news journalist yourself, you know this, right?

It's great for Wash U that it got its name on the front page of a Sunday sports section. But that doesn't mean it's a great piece. I don't think people realize those are two separate things.

It's great there's a piece. But it's not a great piece.

[Pat Coleman]

I'm not saying "no thanks" -- I'm just not drooling over it.

[fcnews]

Pat I cut and pasted to the CCIW because we have two discussions going on.

Dave I appreciate your comments. And respect them, coming from someone of your background. Saturdays game had local TV station Channel 5 there. All four DIII schools in St. Louis have had features on the local TV stations. This has been a long and trying process to get them out. I used to be and SID at one of these schools. Ms. Kathleen Turner made the trip to Minn. in 2001 to cover the Fontbonne and Wash U. games in the sweet sixteen for the Post. It has been a long dry spell since.

This year has been great. And I'm of the school of thought that we have to start somewhere. Kindred's piece was well written. But, that was seven years ago.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion on the quality of Burwell's work. But, the Hack and poor sportswriter comments are way off base. Unless we have someone of Burwell's stature stepping up to do some immediate coverage, don't knock a new fan from the media off the bleachers.

[Pat Coleman]

And knowing national columnists as I know them from my decade-plus in the national media, fcnews, I'll tell you this: Don't assume that someone is a fan just because they write a fawning column.

If he's a fan, he'll be back multiple times, like John Walters of NBC or Austin Murphy of SI or Pat Reusse in Minneapolis or Jim Mandelaro in Rochester.