Women vs Marist

[jalidanefan]

Marist #3 Midmajor - big test for the women Thursday.

[MRSGDG]

Marist #3 Midmajor - big test for the women Thursday.

 

Yep.. http://bigpurplefans.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7550

[olddog71]

I could not find any article in the Times Union the last couple days on the women's game versus Marist tonight. I have access only to the online version. Did I miss something?

[UAalum72]

I could not find any article in the Times Union the last couple days on the women's game versus Marist tonight. I have access only to the online version. Did I miss something?

The game's not until tomorrow night.

[olddog71]

I could not find any article in the Times Union the last couple days on the women's game versus Marist tonight. I have access only to the online version. Did I miss something?

The game's not until tomorrow night.

UAalum, Thanks a lot again.

[jalidanefan]

Sorry for new thread - should merge this into OCC or just delete

Edited November 13, 2013 by jalidanefan

[olddog71]

There's no online article in today's Times Union about the Marist game tonight. What a letdown! How often does such a highly-ranked college team visit the Capital District, or is it because the game isn't being played at the TU Center?

Edited November 14, 2013 by olddog71

[alum73]

Hoping to get out of work early tonight, so I can attend.

[UAalum72]

There's no online article in today's Times Union about the Marist game tonight. What a letdown! How often does such a highly-ranked college team visit the Capital District, or is it because the game isn't being played at the TU Center?

The top of the sports page is Jennifer Gish's column "Green pasture's right here". Not really a pregame story, but the start time is a sidebar, and comparisons to Marist are in the story.

 

The Marist game is a two-year deal. Their women's team, rather than the boring Lady Red Foxes, should be known as the Vixens.

[UAalum72]

While Marist drew 3,000 for Kentucky, they normally get 1,500 - 2,000 for most home games, so it's hard to tell how many will drive 1 1/2 hours north for this game. Checking their schedule last year, I can see how they get their ranking - they played Wake Forest, UConn, Purdue, Kentucky and Oklahoma - but only beat Wake, and also lost to Hartford and Boston U. Then they went 18-0 in the MAAC and lost to Mich. St. in the NCAAs. So while I'm sure they're a good team I don't see that they're really top-25 material.

[Dane96]

There's no online article in today's Times Union about the Marist game tonight. What a letdown! How often does such a highly-ranked college team visit the Capital District, or is it because the game isn't being played at the TU Center?

The top of the sports page is Jennifer Gish's column "Green pasture's right here".Not really a pregame story, but the start time is a sidebar, and comparisons to Marist are in the story.

 

The Marist game is a two-year deal. Their women's team, rather than the boring Lady Red Foxes, should be known as the Vixens.

 

Those are the types of articles that should be written about ALL our teams. Jeesh. I vote Jennifer Gish as our new beat reporter!!!

[Dane4ever]

I'm getting into the habit of reading Bob Weiner and Andrew Santillo, and just sort of glancing at Wilkin because it's obvious he hates being on the UA beat -- he probably sees it as a demotion. There's no enthusiasm, no creativity, no enterprise reporting; there is lifelessness and lame wit. Compare Weiner's NJIT story with the TU story. But it's also a bigger issue problem with the sports department and news judgment -- no better evidence today than the fact that a women's game of this caliber and meaning with 2 of the best women's teams in the state (how is Syracuse this year?) playing, and no game advance from the beat reporter? Nothing about "here's a special game for the Capital Region..." .

[UA_MA_2000]

Just to play devil's advocate, the issue could also be above the writers at the TU and could be the editors dictating what gets covered, how it gets covered, and when it gets covered.

 

But I am only speculating of course. I have no knowledge of the inner workings of the TU.

 

I do find the topic of Times Union bias a fascinating topic that is itself worthy of coverage by a young journalist looking to ruffle some feathers.

 

I differ from nearly all posters on here because I am not ready to make a claim that the TU is biased towards UA or holds an animus towards us. I do not deny that it might exist; I simply want an objective standard by which to measure such bias.

 

Again, I do not deny that there is a TU bias. I am just interested in applying the definitions of animus and bias and then seeing how the data or way we measure these concepts affirms our claim that the TU is biased.

 

 

 

[Clickclack]

Just to play devil's advocate, the issue could also be above the writers at the TU and could be the editors dictating what gets covered, how it gets covered, and when it gets covered.

 

But I am only speculating of course. I have no knowledge of the inner workings of the TU.

 

I do find the topic of Times Union bias a fascinating topic that is itself worthy of coverage by a young journalist looking to ruffle some feathers.

 

I differ from nearly all posters on here because I am not ready to make a claim that the TU is biased towards UA or holds an animus towards us. I do not deny that it might exist; I simply want an objective standard by which to measure such bias.

 

Again, I do not deny that there is a TU bias. I am just interested in applying the definitions of animus and bias and then seeing how the data or way we measure these concepts affirms our claim that the TU is biased.

 

Why do we need all that if we can just hate...hate is fun! Seems like a lot of work...

Edited November 14, 2013 by Clickclack

[bob87]

Just to play devil's advocate, the issue could also be above the writers at the TU and could be the editors dictating what gets covered, how it gets covered, and when it gets covered.

 

But I am only speculating of course. I have no knowledge of the inner workings of the TU.

 

I do find the topic of Times Union bias a fascinating topic that is itself worthy of coverage by a young journalist looking to ruffle some feathers.

 

I differ from nearly all posters on here because I am not ready to make a claim that the TU is biased towards UA or holds an animus towards us. I do not deny that it might exist; I simply want an objective standard by which to measure such bias.

 

Again, I do not deny that there is a TU bias. I am just interested in applying the definitions of animus and bias and then seeing how the data or way we measure these concepts affirms our claim that the TU is biased.

 

It is a bad product(newspaper) with bad editors, bad reporters, etc. Doesn't matter who is at fault any more than it matters who is at fault if I get a bad meal at the same restaurant more than once. I am not going back to spend money there.