USF Coverage and the local papers

[stonedonkey]

So this weekend after checking out the sports page in the Tampa Bay Times, I was annoyed with UF getting being slapped over the top 3/4 of the sports page with USF's first article in the paper being that about attendance, this was the placement on Sunday:

http://imgur.com/a/hfwXh

I sent this in bout of being highly annoyed with both our fanbase and this papers lack of support for the team:

Quote

 

Tom,

You know if your paper actually ran full page articles like you do with UF, USF might actually develop a following.  Your paper has never supported the Bulls or help build them as local team .

 

This has went on for years and your paper acts like USF is magically supposed to develop support.

 

Attached is the page where your article appeared today, which team is local again? 

 

How about helping the team instead of crapping on it, there's a ton of good news out of this team, bowl eligible, TD records broken last night, 3-0 in conference etc, you chose attendance.. thanks.. truly the news of the Bulls this year.

 

Why would your article do anything to bolster support.

 

- Me

 

 

 

This was Tom's response:

 

Quote

Mark,

Thanks for the note.
I understand that you are a USF supporter, but you need to realize what it is I do as a columnist and what we do as a newspaper. We're not here to be a cheerleader for any team. We objectively cover the teams.

Now, before you attack us and our USF coverage, you should know that USF is the ONLY team that we assign a full-time writer. Joey Knight covers EVERY USF football game -- home and away. We don't do that for Florida or FSU. And we don't do it even though UF and FSU play in power five conference and USF does not.

Nevertheless, you must also realize that the following for the Gators and Seminoles is much greater than it is for USF. That's just a fact. It's not our fault as a newspaper and maybe it's not the fault of USF because it simply hasn't been around a long time, not like UF or FSU. Still, our obligation as a newspaper is to provide readers with coverage that is equal to the interest.

For example, we don't write as much about the Tampa Bay Storm as we do the Bucs. And we don't write as much about the Rowdies as we do the Lightning. Why? We write about the things that the majority of our readers are interested in.

The argument we get is that more people would be interested in USF football if we wrote more about them. I, personally, disagree. If it's a product that people want to experience then they will regardless of what the Tampa Bay Times says.

Ultimately, it is not up to the Times to see to it that USF gets good crowds. And if you look at it, we DO cover USF well. Quite honestly, I'm not sure USF deserves the coverage it gets based on its attendance. But we do still cover them with a full-time writer -- the only college in which we do that.

Thanks again for the note. Enjoy your week.

Tom Jones

Tampa Bay Times

I disagree with almost everything he responded with (The front page of sports this weekend was the lighting game, which I believe they were down 0-2 to come back from and win late) and early season game at that.  Full time writer or not the consistently throw USF toward the back of the page.  My biggest beef though is the article they chose to run first was piece about attendance instead of actually covering the news of the team... is the real news of USF football attendance, or the conference record, the being bowl eligible in mid oct, the TD record being broken, nope... the news is attendance.    I disagree 100% with his saying that people would express more interest in USF if they covered them like UF... start putting up 3/4 page color write ups about games people might go, wow that looks fun to go watch.. Instead people see, oh so they have ****** attendance, guess it's not that great.

Figured I'd pass it on, and maybe I'm completely off base but it just annoys me to no end.

/rant mode off

Edited October 17, 2016 by stonedonkey

[Roaming Bull]

Wow that guys just summed up the entire tbt sports department in his response to you. We don't care about USF and should use those resources elsewhere  hometown partnership my ass. 

[George_Bullnard_Shaw]

7 minutes ago, stonedonkey said:

So this weekend after checking out the sports page in the Tampa Bay Times, I was annoyed with UF getting being slapped over the top 3/4 of the sports page with USF's first article in the paper being that about attendance, this was the placement on Sunday:

http://imgur.com/a/hfwXh

I sent this in bout of being highly annoyed with both our fanbase and this papers lack of support for the team:

 

 

This was Tom's response:

 

I disagree with almost everything he responded with (The front page of sports this weekend was the lighting game, which I believe they were down 0-2 to come back from and win late) and early season game at that.  Full time writer or not the consistently throw USF toward the back of the page.  My biggest beef though is the article they chose to run first was piece about attendance instead of actually covering the news of the team... is the real news of USF football attendance, or the conference record, the being bowl eligible in mid oct, the TD record being broken, nope... the news is attendance.    I disagree 100% with his saying that people would express more interest in USF if they covered them like UF... start putting up 3/4 page color write ups about games people might go, wow that looks fun to go watch.. Instead people see, oh so they have ****** attendance, guess it's not that great.

Figured I'd pass it on, and maybe I'm completely off base but it just annoys me to no end.

/rant mode off

He is dead wrong about increased coverage not leading to increased interest. Big coverage from the local press is the best marketing that USF football could get.

[stonedonkey]

21 minutes ago, HR Bull said:

Wow that guys just summed up the entire tbt sports department in his response to you. We don't care about USF and should use those resources elsewhere  hometown partnership my ass. 

Yeah I was kinda shocked at him not sugar coating, in a way I can at least respect him being honest.

[Azmodi]

29 minutes ago, George_Bullnard_Shaw said:

He is dead wrong about increased coverage not leading to increased interest. Big coverage from the local press is the best marketing that USF football could get.

Of course he's wrong. That paper is dying. If any of them knew how to run a business, they'd be a lot better off but, they aren't. The proof is in the pudding as they say.

[Dan C.]

The most dysfunctional home-town promotional partnership i've ever seen.

How are they going to be a premier sponsor of the USF football program and not feature them regularly in the sports columns?

 

 

[Bulls On Parade]

USF's biggest mistake was not starting football in the 60s. We got a very late start and will take years of success to get a big following.

 

[MaltLiquorBull]

41 minutes ago, stonedonkey said:

So this weekend after checking out the sports page in the Tampa Bay Times, I was annoyed with UF getting being slapped over the top 3/4 of the sports page with USF's first article in the paper being that about attendance, this was the placement on Sunday:

http://imgur.com/a/hfwXh

I sent this in bout of being highly annoyed with both our fanbase and this papers lack of support for the team:

 

 

This was Tom's response:

 

I disagree with almost everything he responded with (The front page of sports this weekend was the lighting game, which I believe they were down 0-2 to come back from and win late) and early season game at that.  Full time writer or not the consistently throw USF toward the back of the page.  My biggest beef though is the article they chose to run first was piece about attendance instead of actually covering the news of the team... is the real news of USF football attendance, or the conference record, the being bowl eligible in mid oct, the TD record being broken, nope... the news is attendance.    I disagree 100% with his saying that people would express more interest in USF if they covered them like UF... start putting up 3/4 page color write ups about games people might go, wow that looks fun to go watch.. Instead people see, oh so they have ****** attendance, guess it's not that great.

Figured I'd pass it on, and maybe I'm completely off base but it just annoys me to no end.

/rant mode off

I agree with you (in that I disagree with almost all of his response).  

On the day of the USF noon game with ECU, there was a tiny little few words saying that we had a game that day.  There was a HUGE article about how the UF game was cancelled.  You also can't use comparisons like the Storm vs. the Lightning, etc.  That's just silly.  USF is the home town University.  And yes, there was so much good that came out of that game that could have been reported.

[Dan C.]

Forgive my ignorance, as I am not privy on the printed-media business--but the most sense I can make of a local newspaper is to cover the local stories and sports organizations first (60-75%?) and then regional and national news stories after that? 

I don't think anyone is asking the Times to print daily stories about the Bulls, the issue I have is the same as the OP's--I don't want to see the Gators, FSU, Hurricanes, the Tide...etc with big bold print on the top of the sports section Sunday morning. Just like readers won't want to see stories about the Dolphins in the Monday morning edition.

It SHOULD be the Lightning, Buccanneers, Bulls..etc--everyone else should be secondary whether the readers are concerned or not.

If people want to read about the Gators, then they need to subscribe to the Gainesville Sun.

Edited October 17, 2016 by Dan C.

[ForestBull]

I am going to email him

Edited October 17, 2016 by ForestBull
Azmodi told me to