http://www.vandelaysports.com/football/a...73010.html
It should be noted that beginning last year and continuing forward, those who were long-time members of the MAC News Media were denied an opportunity to vote under a new format proposed by the Cleveland Plain Dealer’s Elton Alexander, their MAC beat writer who openly does not think much of MAC football. Sadly, some of the twenty people who did vote have very limited knowledge of MAC football and three of the twenty did not even bother to vote for an overall MAC champ. Surprise – surprise.
not alienating the media, just selecting who they consider to be the media
Elton's probably threatened by bloggers who can do his job better than he can...
(08-01-2010 08:37 AM)The Flash Wrote: [ -> ]Elton's probably threatened by bloggers who can do his job better than he can...
...and want to keep MAC Football at Division I level.
(08-01-2010 09:32 AM)Boca Rocket Wrote: [ -> ] (08-01-2010 08:37 AM)The Flash Wrote: [ -> ]Elton's probably threatened by bloggers who can do his job better than he can...
...and want to keep MAC Football at Division I level.
I don't see the conference moving to Division II and adding Grand Valley Sate anytime soon.
(08-01-2010 08:37 AM)The Flash Wrote: [ -> ]Elton's probably threatened by bloggers who can do his job better than he can...
You say that because you've never worked near him or interacted with him.
Because if you did, you'd realize high schoolers could do a better job.
(08-01-2010 02:28 PM)OZoner Wrote: [ -> ] (08-01-2010 08:37 AM)The Flash Wrote: [ -> ]Elton's probably threatened by bloggers who can do his job better than he can...
You say that because you've never worked near him or interacted with him.
Because if you did, you'd realize high schoolers could do a better job.
+1
I have so little respect for Elton that, when I read this, it makes the MAC bloggers have more esteem (that said, I already respect the work they do; just now that they get under Elton's skin, I have even more).
While you're ticking off the 'writers' at the PD, could you get at Connie Schultz and Kevin O'Brien too? I've read better political commentary on bathroom walls.
I'm certainly no professional, but I cannot for the life of me figure out why the MAC or any of its member institutions would be so protective of "media" designations. ANY, heck, ALL exposure is good. I'll give an example:
In today's Toledo Blade there is a column by sports columnist Dave Hackenberg. The column concerns Chuck Ealey, UT quarterback from 1969-1971 who, along with his teammates, compiled a 35-0 record over 3 years. Chuck also went undefeated in high school, for a combined amateur record of 58-0. Nobody else has ever done either. But Chuck not only is not IN the college football hall of fame, he's not even ELIGIBLE because the 2 publications that named him first team all-american weren't recognized by the NCAA at that time. So, leaving out the rest of the details (you can read it all in the link if you'd like), here's a comment Dave included in his column:
Quote:My friend Jack Berry, retired after a distinguished reporting and writing career in Michigan, covered college football for the Detroit Free Press during Ealey's years at UT but admitted he never saw Chuck play despite the proximity.
"Since it was long before ESPN and long before the Internet came along, the major schools dominated college football in every way," Berry said. "The MAC was a 'so-what' league back then in the minds of many sports writers, so I would think it is correct to say that many people did not vote for Chuck Ealey because they had no idea who he was despite the fact he went 35-0 at Toledo. That is sad, but probably very true."
In spite of that, Chuck finished 8th in the Heisman voting in 1971 btw.
It's a good quick read...go ahead, click it
(08-01-2010 06:57 PM)bopol Wrote: [ -> ] (08-01-2010 02:28 PM)OZoner Wrote: [ -> ] (08-01-2010 08:37 AM)The Flash Wrote: [ -> ]Elton's probably threatened by bloggers who can do his job better than he can...
You say that because you've never worked near him or interacted with him.
Because if you did, you'd realize high schoolers could do a better job.
+1
I have so little respect for Elton that, when I read this, it makes the MAC bloggers have more esteem (that said, I already respect the work they do; just now that they get under Elton's skin, I have even more).
While you're ticking off the 'writers' at the PD, could you get at Connie Schultz and Kevin O'Brien too? I've read better political commentary on bathroom walls.
If they ever show up on media row, I'll see what I can do.
It's a consensus of most of us "media" members that we are not good enough; hanging around Elton and a few others at the MAC Tourney each year is like hanging around the snotty, rich girls in high school - minus the fact that at least the snotty, rich girls were fun to look at.
This shows a disconnect by the conference as to who knows MAC football and who actually cares about MAC football. They are looking at the readership of the Plain Dealer and other sources that have a large reach but do not nail their target market (they his sports fans, but not always MAC sports fans). However when you look at our MAC sites like MAC Report and VanDelay, we're here ONLY for the MAC and 99.9% of our visitors are MAC fans, alumni or curious opponents wanting to know more. Thus we NAIL their target market. The ignorance of the MAC front office is quite sad IMO and it seems to have gone way downhill since Rick Chryst left.
Just my 2 cents.
I think that we are going to come to realize, that Chryst was a real asset for the MAC and we have stepped backwards. Rick had a higher vision for the MAC than the MAC presidents and that is really why he is no longer with us. That being the case, I would assume that the presidents made sure that his replacement was not so uppity. Now we have the "yes" man. Just some reading between the lines on my part. Hope I am wrong.
I didn't like Chryst's vision for the MAC, but at least he had one.
Anyway, if you look at other conferences' media days they have a massive throng of reporters and pseudo-reporters following every coach and player around. They make it a spectacle and don't turn away any opportunity to get publicity. It's counter-productive to turn away bloggers when the big media doesn't care enough to show up.
(08-02-2010 09:42 AM)IBleedMACGreen Wrote: [ -> ]The ignorance of the MAC front office is quite sad IMO and it seems to have gone way downhill since Rick Chryst left.
Just my 2 cents.
The MAC also misses Gary Richter, who was the first to get the axe when the new guy came on board.
(08-02-2010 11:45 AM)HuronDave Wrote: [ -> ]The MAC also misses Gary Richter, who was the first to get the axe when the new guy came on board.
...Says a man who knows what's up.
(08-02-2010 10:45 AM)GFlash68 Wrote: [ -> ]I think that we are going to come to realize, that Chryst was a real asset for the MAC and we have stepped backwards. Rick had a higher vision for the MAC than the MAC presidents and that is really why he is no longer with us. That being the case, I would assume that the presidents made sure that his replacement was not so uppity. Now we have the "yes" man. Just some reading between the lines on my part. Hope I am wrong.
I don't know how you can say we've gone backwards under Steinbrecher when he...
1) Signed the MAC to 5 bowl agreements, effectively pushing the SBC out of Papa John's.
2) Kept the MAC in the GMAC over Conference USA.
2) Signed a very effective basketball contract with Sports Time Ohio.
This conference thus far hasn't by any means collapsed under his leadership.
A couple of things about media day. Under Rick Chryst there was a lot of interactive between the media and the conference which enhanced the relationship.
Under the new guy, there were no commissioner forums, no social interaction with the media (which is crucial) and the materials being developed by the schools and the conference really are not meeting the needs of the press.
In order to lure the media you have to make it worthwhile. One prominent media member called MAC media day "media moment."
So, don't lay everything at the feet of the MAC News Media Association, a lot of the issues are coming from MAC HQ in Cleveland.
Out of curiosity, for those who were there, how many bloggers or websites were represented as a percentage of the total attendees?
Facebook and Twitter feeds are nice, but the MAC has to do so much more if it is going to be viewed in a positive light ... as I always say "think small-time and you will remain small-time."
Well, a quick check of the internets reveals at least 5 stories about MAC football from Elton since July 26th. I would like to know where this perception that he does not care about MAC football comes from...and even if he doesn't, all the articles I just read reveal no negative bias that I can see.
Sounds to me like more sour grapes from Vandelay who has on more than one occasion appeared to me as lacking basic journalistic integrity.
(08-03-2010 03:21 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ]Well, a quick check of the internets reveals at least 5 stories about MAC football from Elton since July 26th. I would like to know where this perception that he does not care about MAC football comes from...and even if he doesn't, all the articles I just read reveal no negative bias that I can see.
Sounds to me like more sour grapes from Vandelay who has on more than one occasion appeared to me as lacking basic journalistic integrity.
I'm a Kent State fan and I find he continuously disrespect Kent's men's basketball program. You'll be hard-pressed to find a Kent fan that likes him and he's earned a not so nice nickname on the Kent board.
So if Vanderley and OZoner annoy him, I'm just fine with that.
I can't speak for football because I don't cover it, but I can tell you Elton, when he does actually show up to games, doesn't bother to really watch them. It's his beat and he doesn't treat it with any diligence and professionalism. He's just flat wrong about a number of things and it quickly become evident when you have a conversation with him.
And he asks the dumbest questions in pressers.
(08-01-2010 12:19 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote: [ -> ]not alienating the media, just selecting who they consider to be the media
That makes no sense. If you are part of the MNMA and they approve media credentials to conference championship events to you and your publication, then they do consider you to be part of the media. Elton is fearful, because the newspaper business is nearly extinct. They did it to themselves though years ago when the Internet hit mainstream journalism and they just put everything out for free. They are finding that the online advertising revenue they get is not enough to off-set the loss of revenue from nobody buying the actual printed paper anymore.