The Times-Union

[UAalum72]

While publishing several letters in reponse to last week's

Readers come to defense of Great Danes coach Brown

 

the T-U follows the news of our virtually clinching the conference and therefore an NIT berth Danes on verge of making history with an Ettkin column that says everybody remembers $iena's NCAA win over Stanford but nobody cares about the NIT NIT's luster is long gone

 

At least they got in stories on the WBB in at Vermont and the AEast track championships

Danes women end two losing streaks

 

UAlbany men track champs

[Dane Pound]

LadyDP had the sports section open to the letters page before she brought the paper in from the porch this morning.

 

Excellent job by those who had their letters published and everyone who wrote in. Great to read the articulate responses rebutting the original letter. A much truer representation of most Albany fans than the letter that appeared last week and without any of the vitrol that would have faced Mr. Koehn had he accidentally walked into the Across the Street Pub Friday night.

[olddog71]

. . .Excellent job by those who had their letters published and everyone who wrote in. Great to read the articulate responses rebutting the original letter. A much truer representation of most Albany fans than the letter that appeared last week and without any of the vitrol that would have faced Mr. Koehn had he accidentally walked into the Across the Street Pub Friday night. . . .

11958[/snapback]

 

What was missing from the letters which the Times-Union published was the element of the motive for publishing the original letter.

 

I think the reason for the publication of the letter was worse than the actual letter. In order for the newspaper to publish the original letter there had to be a major motive for spotlighting one particular fan's point-of-view. What was that motive? I can think of several possible answers, but I cannot come to a conclusion.

 

The editor(s) of the paper chose to ignore their reason for publishing the original letter when (t)he(y) selected the rebuttals for this morning's edition. In my opinion (again) the paper did not take any responsibility for their role in the discussion that the paper created.

 

Thank you, readers, for submitting cogent arguments in the defense of Will Brown. You are the ones who chose to be honest and objective in your analysis of the job the coach has done for the program.

[bob87]

That is just the Times Union being the Times Union. Obviously Albany has made more strides in the D1 basketball world than the TU ever has in the newspaper business. I don't know why the TU printed the first letter. I think it was either

1) The sports editor knows so little about sports and the Great Danes that he didn't know that Koehn's letter was way off base.

2) He is trying to generate more letters so he can fill his sports page without having to spend money on more reporters to actually cover sports.

 

Thanks all who wrote letters pointing out what an idiot Mr. Koehn is more eloquently than I could have.