Originally Posted by dskillz
I am not saying that journalism should be name calling, what I am saying is that NFL journalism has always been namecalling. It's just part of athletics in general. When the Oilers were doing well and people were calling the Saints the Aints, I didn't care really. I will be honest, I thought nothing of them and thought they plain sucked. The same thing about the Lions now. Unless there is an in-depth article about the Lions, I wouldn't expect anything more than a mention about Lions being the destination for under-achieving WRs and a joke about Millen's job security. In an in-depth article about a losing team is the only place you are going to get real discussion about them. Outside of that, that losing team will be a punchline. That is just the way it is, and has been that way for awhile.
Houston having one paper doesn't help the situation at all. You have some of the biggest bandwagoner writers I have ever read at the Chronicle. People who get so much information and access and totally squander it in favor of personal agendas and notoriety. Chronicle needs some competition badly.
Should we only aspire to what things are? Does it help you for your fantasy league to read another Millen joke? Journalists are the only folks who have access to the team, so why shouldn't we hold their feet to the fire for more better coverage?
Oliver Twist asked for more gruel, and got a beating for it. I recognize that I'm tilting at windmills, but it isn't like sportswriters are going to demand better sportswriting.