All The News That's Fit To Print My Ass

In the span of a typical Monday through Friday workweek, I chalk up a total of about 15 hours of time riding the rails. In other words, I am afforded the daily pleasure of sitting on a train for an hour and a half each way to get to work. Yeah, it sucks; I know. Anyway, the usual routine is to read the newspaper on the way to work at least until I pass out and read a book or some work related goodness on the way home. My daily newspaper rundown – usually 2 NY Times, 2 USA Today, and 1 Wall Street Journal in a given week – keeps me pretty well covered in the world, in sports, in politics, and in finance. Anyway, this brings us to the point of this here ‘tribe. The New York Times Sports page just flat-out blows.For starters, the biggest problem - and real oversight in my opinion - is that they are incredibly focused on the local teams from New York. The Yankees and Giants get the majority of the coverage, but Mets, Jets, and Knicks fans aren’t starving. The Nets are bastards for sure. I ask why is this extreme concentration necessary? New York consists of over 8 million occupants from over 8 million places, not only from all over the country, but also the world. Sure, the NYC teams deserve to have quality coverage, but couldn’t they at least make an effort to cover nationally. After all, this is the most famous newspaper in the world, yet the sports page has but a tiny roundup section of little paragraphs detailing the other games in the nation. To go a step further, shouldn’t they pay at least some attention to the international futbol leagues, most importantly the EPL? Anyone who has ever been to Nevada Smith’s can attest that the footy scene in NYC is huge. There are tons of tourists and ex-pats working and living in NYC, so the major news internationally seems totally underreported.Another gaping hole in the New York Times sports page is their lack of a strong columnist. Again, this is the biggest, most famous newspaper in the world, yet they have no Mitch Albom, Rick Reilly, Bill Simmons, or Michael Wilbon. Shit, they don’t even have a Stephen A. Smith. Shouldn’t the best sports writer in the world want to be writing for the Times?The problem with the NY Times is that there is an image conflict. By setting a certain standard for professionalism for it’s coverage of foreign affairs, politics, and the arts, the sports page follows suit. The astute sports fan appreciates a little more innovative approach – whether it be through complex statistical analysis, humorous slants to the writers, or even insider content, such as the surge of athlete blogging. These are just a few examples, but the evidence is mounting that New York Times is becoming irrelevant as a source for credible sports coverage. It’s just too objective, too mainstream, and too focused on the NY teams.Another shortfall of the NY Times sports page is the emphasis on stats. A serious sports page understands that sports fans love stats. They dedicate a lousy half a page to the boxes and the majority of the data is just the standings. There have box scores for NFL and NCAA games, but nothing for college and very little in terms of league leaders and more detailed data. This is the difference of the sports page entertaining us for 10 minutes or an hour. I guess that real estate is just a little too precious.Shall I keep going? OK, the next complaint is the layout. The Times typically crams 7 to 8 stories on the front page. Rather than featuring the two or three best stories and keeping the majority of it on the front page, the Times has a couple leader paragraphs on the front and then requires flipping through the pages back and forth to read the articles. This is really bush league. Anyone who has held a newspaper on train knows that the less have to turn those damn pages, the better.Finally, the biggest gripe is the content. I’ve already stated my piece on the over concentration of New York team coverage, but there’s more. It’s the feel good stories, of Ron Bunyan, the high school volleyball coach, who helped increase participation in the volleyball program among young children. I just made that up, but this one is actually in a Sunday Times: “The Keeper of the Silks For Jockeys." Now that is a gripping headline. It’s literally a story about some guy who does the laundry for some horse racing jockeys. Can someone please explain what is interesting about that story?As I mentioned, I try to plow through the NY Times about twice a week. As much as I appreciate the real news coverage and solid Op-Ed writing, it’s definitely to the point where I dread these mornings, because I know the sports articles are going to suck so royally. Thank goodness for USA Today (don’t laugh).Subscribe to us