The "negative" local media

[Feel Real Good]

Garcia was at his best Sunday when it mattered the most. In particular, it was his play in a six-play, 80-yard drive that stepped on the necks of the Rams. He was aggressive. He was efficient. And with every play, with every first down of the drive, Garcia and the Bucs seemed to erase a few more doubts.

After that, at 17-3, it was never a ball game. The Bucs went on to win 24-3, and all things seem possible.

For all of the giddiness of the past two weeks, we still do not know how good this Bucs team can be. But we know that it has qualities that last year's team lacked. The defense is better. The offensive line is better.

Most of all, the quarterback is better.

From here, it looks interesting.

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/09/24/Bucs/On_one_critical_drive.shtml

1. Tickling the memory: The formula for victory looks awfully familiar. Take a smothering defense, add a cerebral quarterback, and you have a chance to win every week. This team may not be filled to the brim with talent, but it is playing a winning style of football. Give Jon Gruden credit for rediscovering the formula.

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/09/24/Bucs/Gimme_5.shtml

Why, exactly, were they picked for last?

These past two weeks might have experts scratching their heads. These past two weeks have the Bucs thinking they've just scratched the surface.

Caution is your safest bet with upcoming games at Carolina and DungyLand, but the Bucs have done some great work these past two weeks and 2-1 is about as good a place as they can be. And this just in: They can beat the Panthers.

Absolutely.

http://sports.tbo.com/sports/MGB467BEY6F.html

So, it would appear if you win the press can't say bad things about you?

[superbuc]

Yeah, I noticed at least the columnists are changing their tune.  My beef has been with the "supposed' reporters/writers that have lacked objectivity/balance (i.e. Cummings and Stroud).  However, Cummings did pick the Bucs (and I cited that on Friday - he floored JP with it on JP's radio show) and I think Stroud had a relatively positive article in today's times (not looking now!).

[BornaBuc47]

When your team stinks the media is supposed to say they stink. When they look good they are supposed to say they look good. What is so difficult to understand about that. They are not supposed to be fans! They are reporters. They report the news.

[superbuc]

ON another note....

JP is saying the Bucs haven't beat anyone with a winning record to cover his butt for being so far off with his prediction again.  No more of him...I'll listen to espn radio online.

[nitey]

I 'expect' fair coverage whether the team wins or loses. The fish wraps have been negative for most of Gruden's/Allen's tenure here. No one (except for you) wants to read negative articles before the season even starts. There is no harm in optimism or positive press before the seasons starts. Sheldon, Cummings, Stroud, Kaufmann and Peterson have been negative since even before Training camp.

That's not reporting news, that's carrying an agenda.

[kimlogan]

It's not an agenda if they really believe what they are saying. Being optomistic without any true belief in that stance would not be professional journalism. That being said, I do believe that there is a lot of negativity directed at Gruden due to his difficulty in relating to players. Some justified, some overblown. It is hard, I believe, to be optomistic coming off 4-12.

[nitey]

kim,

Good point, but when these 'professional journalists' are purpetually negative then that speaks of an agenda not of objectivity. These same writers were hardly ever negative when McKay was the General Manager. The reason being that it's been often reported that McKay offered them 'inside' information for positive press. Is that 'true' journalism? And is the reason that Allen doesn't offer the same level of information justification for negative pieces about his abilities as General Manager?

Is it any coincidence that some of the 'positive' pieces that Stroud has offered been lifted from the pages of Pewter Report?

Professional journalists, the next time I see one working for the newspapers will be the first.

[whobdis]

ON another note....

JP is saying the Bucs haven't beat anyone with a winning record to cover his butt for being so far off with his prediction again.  No more of him...I'll listen to espn radio online.

I haven't listened to JP for weeks..I got tired of the bashing. I decided to listen today..see if it's changed.
I heard about what's wrong with Caddy..what's wrong with Clayton..why hasn't Graham been playing.
Don't give me the "they are reporting news" horsesh*t.  No matter what subject matter any given media
source can show obvious bias..and sports is no different.  There are numerous issues to talk about
after yesterdays game...when you decide to pick the few negative items and harp on those it shows
what side of the fence your on. If your on that side of the fence by all means enjoy them, but don't tell
me it's 'fair and balance'.

[keeponbucn]

They report the news.

Of course they do bornaraider, they always just state the facts.

[kimlogan]

I'll give you the McKay insider link, may well be true. But remember they were consistently successful for the majority of the McKay-Dungy era. Lots of water under Gruden's bridge with players.

[nitey]

>> the local media is out to get the bucs <<

I believe that the local media doesn't like the access provided to them by Allen/Gruden and that is the result of their negativity. Ever listen to some of the Monday morning press conferences with Gruden? Listen to the questions - it's easy to tell which ones come from the local papers because it always seems that they are either outright slanted in a negative way or asked in a way that would encourage a negative reply. For example: Coach, what didn't you like about the offense today? (negative slant) Instead of 'Coach, your offense looked pretty good out there today - what was working the best?' Which do you think the fans want to read about? That was two examples of past conference questions - go back and replay them, you can find lots of others.

[dbucfan]

Was just going to offer something very similar whobdis.  He is outdoing himself to find negatives.

[nitey]

>> But remember they were consistently successful for the majority of the McKay-Dungy era. <<

In what way? That they made the playoffs and exitted early when expectations were high? How about when the offense misfired as it usually did? Okay, I'll give you that in the 6 years that Dungy lead the team it was better - but he never got to or won the Superbowl either. Dungy won 1 division championship in 6 years - Gruden won 2, a NFC Championship and a Superbowl - had to deal with less draft picks and no salary cap room to infuse the team with new talent.

There are reasons for this team having the problems over the last five years since the Superbowl - reasons that are not all of the current regimes making. For the most part, the current regime has admitted to their past mistakes - but I've yet to hear from the press acknowledgement that difficult circumstances existed making it hard to field a competitive team.

Gurden pursued Garcia in 2004 - but lacked the cap space to sign him. Does anyone even consider how much better off this team would have been the last 3 years had Garcia been the QB? Is it Gruden's/Allen's fault that they didn't sign him?

Much of this is individual perception. If you believe that the media is fair and impartial, there is nothing I can really say that will change your mind. But ask yourself this - this team right now is 2-1 and has been in every game that it has played this season. How can that be IF the 'real' media has fairly reported that this team is little improved over last season? If the Bucs had basically lucked into the wins, you would have more of a arguement, but they have soundly defeated two teams that were preseason favorites to get to the preseason.

Humm, makes you wonder if the real media was looking at the same Bucs.

[kimlogan]

I think from a coaching standpoint you are probably inclined to look for the areas you can improve; ie.. the negatives in the performance. I don't know that looking for areas of improvement is necessarily negative. Most people can easily pick out most of the positives.

[BucHawk]

Want to know the difference between biased and honest reporting?

After the Saints game, honest reporting would draw some attention to the lack of a pass rush as a concern.  Biased reporting with an axe to grind tries to cook up a controversy over Garcia calling audibles on touchdown passes as a rift between Gruden and Garcia.