Responses to Macauley's soundoff letter

[thetorch]

SLU basketball

I agree with Ed Macauley's letter last Sunday. A perfect example was the same Sunday sports paper that had on its front page a huge illustration regarding baseball salaries and an article about an out-of-state football scandal and the Billikens are on page five. What bothers me is that this type of placement happens so often.

Marilyn Hummel, St. Louis

Ed Macauley complained about what he perceives to be a lack of St. Louis University basketball front page coverage in the newspaper at the expense of more favorable coverage of the Missouri basketball program. His point that SLU basketball is the city's only major basketball program and thus should be supported is correct. However, he fails to acknowledge that SLU is a private university whose basketball program has limited appeal beyond the immediate area.

Missouri, on the other hand, is associated with the largest public university in the state with considerable appeal throughout all regions of the state. As such, all of us, including Mr. Macauley, have a stake in the ownership of its athletic programs. I have no qualms with the writer's obvious bias toward his alma mater and its basketball program, but suggest that he not belittle a superior program to make his point.

Ken Gumper Sr., St. Charles

I respect Ed Macauley and what has he done for St. Louis University and the St. Louis area. He is truly is an outstanding individual. However, I must disagree with the opinion expressed in his letter regarding the lack of coverage afforded the SLU basketball program.

If success is judged by wins and advancement in the NCAA championship tournaments, not only Mizzou, but SIUC, Southwest Missouri, Illinois, and even the Washington University men's and women's programs have had one or more years which have exceeded any result achieved by the SLU men's program over the past 35 years.

A large number of graduates and supporters of these schools live and work in the St. Louis area and desire coverage of their programs. The Post-Dispatch provides that coverage by a broad range of game summaries and stories.

SLU supporters would be far better served to refrain from criticizing Mizzou or other conference athletic programs and look inward for ways to improve their own program's results.

I would encourage supporters of SLU athletics to follow Mr. Macauley's example and become involved in their program. Coach Soderberg has been an excellent choice as head coach, and his teams deserve far better home game attendance. The university administration has a vision and a plan to improve facilities. By attending games, providing financial and moral support, boosters can assist SLU in its efforts to attract quality student-athletes and improve on court results.

Gary Martin, Manchester

Ed Macauley was not only an All America basketball player, but a long-time TV sports anchor in this town. So he knows a thing or two about the news business. If he wants his school to get the kind of favorable publicity for his school than the University of Missouri (my school) gets, here's a simple formula:

1) Recruit a group of players good enough to be tagged with the label potential Final Four team and have them underachieve and play horribly, losing to teams like Belmont then make an end-of-the-season, desperate bid to make the NCAA.

2) Have your point guard be ineligible for a while and then when he starts playing have a falling out with the coach and get kicked off the team.

3) Recruit a junior college player who needs to get 24 summer semester hours to come to the university. Have that same player jailed for attacking his girl friend and then have the wife of the president of the university recorded on phone calls to that jailed player criticizing the basketball coaches, the school, the town and making racially-charged remarks.

Wait. The president of St. Louis University doesn't have a wife, but if he did, that would sure be front page news!

Richard Buckley, Manchester

[AlumniFan]

This guy wrote: "However, he (Easy Ed) fails to acknowledge that SLU is a private university whose basketball program has limited appeal beyond the immediate area." This comment was made in the context of another comment about all Missourians having a stake in Mizzou because it is public. Hence, one might infer that Mr. Gumper is suggesting that there should be more interest in public university teams than in private university teams.

Has Mr. Gumper ever heard of Duke?

[billiken_roy]

at least half of the top seeds this year will be private schools (duke and st joe's). and who knows where they might stick stanford and gonzaga. so probably 4 out of the 8 top schools are private.

[Taj79]

... is anyone who compares Duke University or Gonzaga University to Saint Louis University. I think Mr. Gumper is right on ... Saint Louis University is extremely well-recognized locally and maybe even regionally, but no one outside the area knows or cares about who we are. The only reason folks here know about SLU is because they know that's where I went and I talk about the Bills. Otherwise, they would know as much about SLU as they do about Loyola (pick a state or city), Fordham, Dayton, Butler, Detroit, and many others. To take the "private school" arguement is true, but you've got to show a little longevity and history as Duke and Gonzaga have over the last few years (Duke more than Zaga) to come up with that same recognition. As I said in my math in a previous thread, we have like a 10% record of success over the last 30 or so years. That does not cut it.

I agree with Ed's assertion that we should garner "better" Post coverage, but it is follhardy to suggest that we would take over the sports pages domination from the large public school. Penn State gets the coverage in the Philly Inquirer, Scranton Call, Harrisburg Patriot, Allentown Morning Call and Pittsburgh Gazette where as Temple, St. Joes, Villanova and others might find what's left on pages 3 through 16 in the Inquirer or Philly Daily News. That happens all over. I'll bet you the KC papers cover Mizzou just as much as the Post. Rockhurst plays what ... soccer? But they're NAIA so that's not really fair.

St. Joe's is an oddity. This has been a magnificent year for the Hawks but they will be hard pressed to continue that streak past this year. Jameer Nelson is gone and talk is that Dalonte West will go early as well. Speakign of Philly, I've seen La Salle, Temple and Villanova go to Final Fours and all and even win a title (Villanova). I would argue that those progarms are on the lower side of the ledger as far as collegiate programs are concerned and recognized today. I can't hlep but wonder where Temple is going to go once Chaney retires.

Having 4 out of 8 top schools being private focuses on a fact different than the one Gumper seems to be making ... i.e. until SLU does the same things as a Duke or Gonzaga, that's the way its going to be in the local paper of note.

[AlumniFan]

I cannot miss my own point which was, as I explicitly stated, based on an inference, but I know what you are trying to say.

If you read Gumpers' (what a name!) letter, you might conclude that he should have simply left the "private" versus "public" argument out of his response since, as Roy mentioned above, there are plenty of private schools that have huge followings and great traditions. Hence, a public university does not automatically qualify for the highest level of interest by virtue of the fact that it is public.

However, here is another point. As you stated at the beginning of your post, "Saint Louis University is extremely well-recognized locally and maybe even regionally..." I think this is the point that Easy Ed was making and that many of us agree with.

The odd thing is, I have lived in the St. Louis area for almost 40 years, both on the east side and on the Missouri side, and I seem to find as many people who hate Mizzou as those that love Mizzou. When it comes to SLU, people either love SLU or seem to be indifferent. Maybe that's the problem. For example, I really dislike Mizzou basketball (not football) for their arrogance, antics, and empirical ethical lapses, but I love to read about their problems in the paper (although I never, ever read about their games, unless, of course, they lose). SLU doesn't seem to generate this negative interest so SLU doesn't get the same level of headlines. It's all about selling newspapers.

[Box and Won]

Wasn't Easy Ed's point that SLU should receive more/improved coverage in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch? If so, then Gumper's statement that SLU has limited appeal outside of the St. Louis area is moot since the Post-Dispatch is responsible for serving the immediate area, not other regions of the state.

Having done a fair amount of copy editing and proofreading in my career, I was tempted to break out my trusty red pen to make corrections to his awkwardly written letter. Come on, Gumper. You're better than that.

Mr. Martin, on the other hand, made some very valid points.

[TheBand]

Box

You make the key point..This is the ST LOUIS Post-Dispatch...not the Missouri Post. Its a paper that should serve the readers of the local area primarily, then pick up news from the outlying areas. Columbia is one of those outlying areas and shouldnt get the press that an event locally should garner.

Heard on the radio a couple weeks back that the Post has done a study and that its readers are more interested in Mizzou...direct from the sports editor.

[Trich]

I can accept the argument why the P-D gives Mizzou major coverage. What I don't understand the amount of coverage they devote to the Illini.

[Basketbill]

I for one want to hear about the most interesting story or game that occurred the night/day before. Rigid hierarchy is a closed minded, stuck in the box way to edit. The sports editor is an idiot if he wants to give big headline to Mizzou and Baylor, as opposed to a thrilling come from behind improbable win. Mr editor why is it that the first two rounds of the NCAA are so exciting, answer improbable wins, upsets. People like these. 36 font headline for Mizzou playing just well enough to win at Baylor is silly and unprofessional.

[STLfan]

"You make the key point..This is the ST LOUIS Post-Dispatch...not the Missouri Post. Its a paper that should serve the readers of the local area primarily, then pick up news from the outlying areas. Columbia is one of those outlying areas and shouldnt get the press that an event locally should garner."

You do realize that the post is delivered as far west as Columbia. In fact my sister recieves it everyday. And that the paper can be purchased at news stands every day. The posts area and readers extend well beyond just St. Louis.

Personally I read the paper online so I don't see what article goes where but I believe that the coverage of both schools has been great. Yes Mizzou has had more articles but that is because there is more to write about right now. Top ten preseason team, Investigation, the under achieveing, the comeback, the last two loses, final season at the Hearns Center, Quin sitting at 99 wins, and a real chance to sneak back into the tournament with a rpi of about 38 and SOS of 8.

[Alonzo P Hawk]

not only did the billikens friday night game fail to make the saturday morning paper (because it was an over-time, late game, i imagine), but the post put no article into the sunday edition either. pitiful.

[TheBand]

>

>You do realize that the post is delivered as far west as

>Columbia. In fact my sister recieves it everyday. And that

>the paper can be purchased at news stands every day.

Yep, you can get the Post in Columbia. So what? I can also get the Chicago Tribune and the New York times delivered daily, should they have coverage of the tigers too?

>Personally I read the paper online so I don't see what

>article goes where but I believe that the coverage of both

>schools has been great.

Well, then you don't exactly understand any of the arguments presented here since you dont get the physical copy of the paper. The point is not the number of stories, its the continued poor and unexplainable (to some) placement of stories. To see the BIG MIZZOU WIN over BAYLOR on the front page of the post compared to the lowly coverage of the SLU game that same night, you might have a problem as well.

[Box and Won]

The fact that the Post-Dispatch is available in Columbia, Jefferson City, Sikeston, Lake of the Ozarks, etc. is irrelevant. The paper covers the news of the St. Louis metropolitan area, and if that news is relevant or interesting to people in communities outside of the metropolitan area, then so be it. SLU is a part of the St. Louis community, and is therefore relevant to the constituency that the Post-Dispatch serves.

[cheesycow]

It's a travesty that anything that happens outside of st. louis should be mentioned in the st. louis papers. I mean, what do I care about Haiti?

[Box and Won]

I was in no way inferring that national and international news not be included in the Post-Dispatch. Go troll somewhere else.

[cheesycow]

about coverage is a very silly thing to do. KU is the big name in Kansas City over Mizzou or UMKC. I wouldn't complain there, and I don't see the big deal about mizzou being the big name in st. louis.

[Box and Won]

I don't have any problem with Mizzou's coverage. It would be great to see SLU get a little more coverage, but Mizzou is the big game in town, and I'm fine with that. I was just trying to dissect Gumper's argument in his letter to the editor. He stated that since SLU has limited appeal outside of the St. Louis area, that it doesn't deserve coverage. I don't buy that argument, for the reasons I listed above. If someone wants to make the argument that Mizzou should receive more coverage because it has been a more successful program and has more alumni in the St. Louis area, that's good enough for me, but not for the reasons that Gumper listed.

[cheesycow]

I thought Gumpers sounded like an idiot too.

[Oakville Tim]

Missouri basketball, especially, has earned for itself extreme scrutiny by the Post-Dispatch, for as long as Snyder is the head coach. I scarcely think a walk-on could quit the team and not have it appear on Page 1 of Sports. This goes back, by the way, to the Stewart days. Some of you might remember the three-part series by Tom Wheatley in the mid-1980s on all the transfers out, and the 'Boone County Bunker Mentality' that surrounds the program to this day.

There aren't many Missouri fans who were warm and fuzzy about the P-D's coverage of the (heinous) Ricky Clemons episode, laughable and ludicrous as it made their program and university look. I don't know that 'those' Mizzou fans will EVER welcome the Post-Dispatch writing even something positive about the program -- the 'Memories of Hearnes' story in Sunday's edition included.

I don't mean to digress from the topic of this thread. Namely, why doesn't SLU get Page 1 coverage in its hometown Sports section? It's a puzzle to which I have no answer. I suspect it'd take a higher-up at the Post to provide one, and who knows how 'good' that answer would be anyway?

[billiken_roy]

the the missouri alum sports department told you that. however i do doubt it was a fair survey. if it was, surely someone here that reads this board got called/mailed about it. did anyone get that call? i know i didnt.

now if their survey base was an alumni list of missouri grads in the st louis metro area that read the post dispatch. yeah, that probably is an accurate reading of those results.

[billiken_roy]

why? champaign is just as close as columbia and if they are truly trying to be a regional publication why not solicit the area illinois readers? i know if i had to choose between reading about missouri or illinois i would rather read about the illini.

personally i think they should both get equal treatment and get as much as iowa, indiana, tennessee, auburn, cal, texas, etc.

[Billiphan]

Roy,

I can understand not trusting the survey but I will echo a previous posters sentiments when I say it all comes down to economics. I would assume more people in St. Louis watched Mizzou vs. KU then SLU vs. whoever(pick a rival), whether the game is on free TV or not. I am a fan of both programs but attended neither school. I would guess though that the Post thinks Mizzou is a bigger draw both in the city and region as a whole. I don't think the Post covers Mizzou more to spite the SLU fans. I, for one, don't put a whole lot of importance on where stories end up or who has the bigger headline.

[billiken_roy]

i understand your thinking completely. but imo the 6k fans that were coming to the games in the hughes year that arent there now are casual fans that were coming to see the phenom. they had read about him in the paper and wanted to see it for themselves.

if we are going to get those casual fans at games, that is the kind of coverage we have to get. now if it takes winning like st joes, or the next larry hughes coming to slu, that is sad. i personally blame our own internal athletic dept. imo, someone should be wining and dining those media guys to make them want to cover the billikens. for whatever reason, we dont try to sell much of anything billiken wise. be it t-shirts or the billiken experience. i am not sure what everyone's job is but marketing doesnt appear to be covered by much of anyone. if it is, i sure dont see any results.

we get secondary coverage from both the print and electronic media, we have no goods in any stores. we have very few efforts to promote a game(s). (what giveaways did the team throw this year?) please someone try to sell something.