Daylon Mack is visiting Texas today

[joeywa]

This is why I am not a fan of covering recruiting. That doesn't mean I don't do it from time to time but here is the problem. 

Sources are 95% family members or coaches. They are being courted as well. They may be enamored with 1 school but the recruit is not. Every signing day, we see a story about some parent refusing to sign the letter of intent for the recruit. So you hear from the parent "They don't like X school" and then the recruit says "I really like X school". Then the readers are like WTF??? 

So these readers take out their frustration of losing recruits on these staffs because a 17 or 18 year old kid changed their mind. It's a minority, but it's a very vocal one. This is not like a professional contract where they have agreed to terms and now all they are doing is adding standard clauses, adding in the provisions agreed upon in negotiations, and then signing it.  So they are mad at the Texas A&M coaching staff but they don't blame them, they blame the independent reporters that cover the team. 

That being said, Taylor Hamm does need to grow tougher skin if he wants to cover Texas A&M or any Texas school for that matter. 

While I agree wholeheartedly with what you're saying Chris, Hamm and Lucci are big time homers, and pander to their fan base's insecurities instead of being factual all the time.  When they try to be factual like this, after being homers for so long, the masses turn on them. 

Right or wrong, it could have been avoided by being journalists first and separating that from their fandom. 

Sorry if this offends, but that's my take. 

 

[bill_ut75]

That said - I don't think any of this happens.  It just won't.  It can't.

You just trying to be the prefect reverse barometer?

 

[Sirhornsalot]

While I agree wholeheartedly with what you're saying Chris, Hamm and Lucci are big time homers, and pander to their fan base's insecurities instead of being factual all the time.  When they try to be factual like this, after being homers for so long, the masses turn on them. 

Right or wrong, it could have been avoided by being journalists first and separating that from their fandom. 

Sorry if this offends, but that's my take. 

Agree, all three are more closely related to cheerleading than they are journalism. They are not objective and seem, at times, to think they can "will" a recruit to aggy.

They violate journalism ethics almost as often as they do sheep.

 

[java]

And I'm not the spelling police, in fact, I can't stand it, but both their grammar and spelling is terrible.

 

[Chris Flanagan]

Agree, all three are more closely related to cheerleading than they are journalism. They are not objective and seem, at times, to think they can "will" a recruit to aggy.

They violate journalism ethics almost as often as they do sheep.

Journalism ethics are being violated all across the board. Not just sports, but politics, entertainment and even weather. The issue is two-fold. 1. The internet. 2. The industry ethics and lack of enforcement. 

1. The internet makes it easier to get a specified source of news. Live in St. Louis but don't want to read about the Cardinals all the time (Which the Post-Dispatch covers like crazy)? Then there are plenty of team specific sites for the Blues and the Rams. Do you think you're political affiliation is always on the right side of the issue and you don't want to read anything that may have you question your position? They're sites for that on both sides of the aisle. The internet makes it's so easy to reaffirm your beliefs and that narrative persists in the daily stories.

For instance. Texas A&M. Texas A&M fans were sold on the SEC on the narrative that this move was the ONLY way that they could ever compete with and even surpass Texas. Then Johnny Football happened and the narrative got stronger. Then the Aggies have had 3 straight seasons of more wins than the Longhorns in the "toughest conference in football" and with better recruiting classes. So Aggie fans believe that not only have they competed with Texas but now they have surpassed them.

The assumption they made as a fanbase was that this would always stay the same. They're in the SEC and there is no way anyone would pass up an opportunity like that right? Wrong. College football is cyclical and what goes up must come down. So they are frustrated that Texas is starting to pick up recruiting momentum. And if Charlie Strong starts to do what he did at Louisville, it's going to be harder for Texas A&M to get the recruits they need to win more than 7 games in the SEC. Texas A&M will get recruits and they are going to be battles for recruits for the foreseeable future but the #WRTS is not applicable.

2. The industry "ethics" to quote the Joker is "like a bad joke". If they graduated from a journalism program, they know what they are but there is no reward for sitting on a story anymore till you get all the facts. There are plenty of journalist who do this. Now, they do try to get double confirmation of a story but that's not a guarantee anymore. Unlike in the medical or legal profession, there is no board that you can report an ethics violation and be punished for a violation. It's just something nice to follow but not required to do your job.

That's my take on that.  

 

[Matt Cotcher]

Nice post, Chris. I agree on both points.

 

[shansentx]

Jefferson and Mack are 1 and 1A in my opinion, but Mack seems to enjoy this too much. A prospect capable of critical thinking? Blasphemous. Mack's story actually is quite entertaining. But so is his tape... six of one and half a dozen of the other.