Can they ever really win?

[justAthought]

I just finished reading the article about the Soddy Daisy Tournament entitled: "Baylor Holds of Trojans for Title"

 

Given the fact it was a great tournament with close matches this title seems appropriate. The picture, however, containing the caption “Soddy-Daisy’s Jason McCoskey, looks at the score as he finishes off Mike Bell” does not. Baylor won, but they show a picture of a Soddy person “finishing off” Bell. McCrosky wasn’t finishing him off; he was barely beating a wrestler that has twice beat him in the past, and one who also began the week with salmonella poisoning. Ok, so being a Baylor athlete in another sport who constantly has felt a bit under appreciated by the paper, I guess you could say I’m being a bit sensitive. Here is what I saw:

To begin the article and set the tone the author states that “Baylor came out on top – just barely.” The writer then goes on to say “Baylor survived the Soddy Daisy Invitational – and primarily Soddy-Daisy— by a slim 8.5 point.” Personally I don’t think “survival” was a true concern. It was close, but they still won. Half way down the page the article gives Baylor credit by saying they “did well.” The author preempts this, however, with “despite the losses to Soddy Daisy.”

 

The writer goes on to quote Morgan, referring to a “wake up call” and “a competition to be learned from.” One would almost forget that Baylor, even on a bad day, came out on top. Our winners were then quickly listed, with the author giving credit to Waddell as OW. Highlighted were Downey and Wes Stroud, who did well. The quotes used, however, remind the reader that Downey hasn’t placed into a tourney yet and Wes shocked people. The writer makes these wins sound like chance occurrences. To further this tone, the author uses quotes from Soddy’s coach which discuss the fact that Soddy had a tri-meet Friday night. As stated, “The kids came off a tough physical and emotional night to get here this morning at 6:30 and still performed very well.” For the record: every wrestler that planned on competing that day had to arrive at 6:30 and Baylor had a tri-meet Friday as well as a meet on Thursday.

 

In discussing the finals the writer claims that McCrosky lost in a 7-4 “scramble” against Usary. McCrosky’s scramble was with Bell… Usary won. When discussing Manson, the article downplays his unbeaten record and state title by claiming he “just barely got past” Buchanan. I was there… Manson was not about to lose. The other finals matches that the writer highlights rather than listing surprisingly included Soddy rather than Baylor wins. The writer discusses Winesburgh’s pin and says it occurs in 19 seconds… try with 19 seconds left after Hussein held the kid for a minute. To follow with a boast, the author discusses Doster’s loss, reminding the reader that “Toney also beat a Red Raider”

 

I realize that the Soddy wrestlers had nothing to do with this, and neither did their coach. I personally feel that the Times has on more than one occasion and more than one sport either exploited or downplayed Baylor’s losses and wins. What these writers need to remember is that the athletes participating care about the city paper. They work hard for their success and look forward to support from the community. Though Baylor won this tournament, the wrestlers were overlooked, under appreciated, or even worse exploited for losses that don’t come often. Baylor should be proud of their win. The article was surely a disappointment. These are just my opinions, but I was there during that tournament. Those guys worked for more than that paper gave them credit for.

JustAThought

Edited January 23, 2006 by justAthought

[CoachDelgado]

It is just journalism in its normal form. It is done all of the time in West TN. The paper will have a picture of a wrestler or team in the bottom position (perceived losing position or dominated position to those that don't understand wrestling) then the caption will read that the bottom wrestler won the match. Or one team lost the weight class of the picture shown but won the dual meet or tournament. The caption will read something like "Joe Blow from Goobersville dominates John Doe of Hooterville last night on his way to victory in the 152 pound contest. Hooterville stormed back and won the dual meet 78-3."

Don't sweat it. The papers write what they want to write. the validation is in the practice room, the state tournament, among the team members and coaches, with the families and school and potential college recruiting of a kid.

[LiLTillerSDHS]

If you really want something done about it... Why don't you email the Chattanooga paper instead of coming on coacht and complaining about it. It is not just Baylor wrestling that does not get the attention they deserve. When Soddy beat Bradley this year there were two pictures in the paper from the match. What two pictures did they put in there?? 2 guys from Bradley beating 2 Soddy guys... but you didn't see anyone from Soddy coming on here to complain about that.

 

And the whole Mike Bell previously beating McCroskey- Yeah that's true. But are we talking about the Soddy Inv. or was the article written about previous matches? I believe it was about the Soddy Inv.... therefore that's what the article is going to talk about. And your comments about Ulric Winesburgh were far from reality. If you were really there and were paying attention to the match- You would know that.

 

Soddy wrestled McCallie and Notre Dame the night before- getting out of the final match around 11:00. That is what coach Henry is referring to. Yes Baylor wrestled also that night- A few of their wrestlers made it to Soddy before the Soddy and McCallie match began. I'm not taking anything away from either team Baylor wrestled... but they were no where near as tough as McCallie. Oh and Soddy also had a meet on Thursday just like Baylor did.

 

Both Soddy and Baylor wrestled hard. But your post to me seems as if you believe Baylor killed Soddy in the tournament and anyone who was there knows that is far from true.

 

Great job to all teams that were in the tournament!!

[justAthought]

LiltillerSDHS

Lol, don't worry. I plan on writing the paper about it. I'm just getting outside opinions first. I never said Baylor killed Soddy. I thought Soddy had won. I'm just tired of reading a biased paper. This isn't the only time it's happened, and i wish it would stop.

How did i down play winesburgh? He didn't pin in 19 seconds.

 

See, now I know about the quote's reference. Thanks.

Edited January 23, 2006 by justAthought

[MatWizard87]

it's ok at least the times puts articles in the paper about wrestling (i live in chattanooga currently). where i'm from the paper thinks that basketball is the only winter sport in existence and there are at least 2 teams where i'm from that are actually pretty decent, one of those teams has placed in the duals top 4 since 1999 and actually won it one year. But they don't seem to remember this. So i can relate to your frustrations with the paper. newspapers try to make things seem different than they really are. I don't think that basketball shouldn't be covered, i just think that there should be a balance in coverage. but either way soddy and baylor are both excellent schools, in terms of wrestling especially. There may be someone working for them that has a tie to one school and wants to make one team sound bad and the other not and vice versa. in the long run don't worry about it, both teams will probably do excellent in state.

[cobrakid8]

under appreciated give me a break thats a joke right? Baylor has never been under appreciated in the paper, heck most of the times the private schools seem to be the Only schools that wrestle. Your match although very intriguing with McCallie will have like a page and a half with pics and two articles. Like tiller said we beat Bradley and barely had anything in the paper about the match. Baylor has articles in the paper with every sport. If you had underwater basketweaving competively they would cover that. First, yes the Manson-Buchanan was a very close match, Manson was even on his back counting lights for a little so yes he was having some difficulty. Towney winning was somewhat chance heck Ive been watching wrestling for years and havent even heard his name till he was in the finals. Also the article did not mention that we were without a heavyweight altogether and even though heavy was very tough he could have won at least a match or two. Also finish a tri-meet after 11:00 and try to be at a gym to wrestle at 7 in the morning, would be hard in any sport much less wrestling. The tournament was very good and Baylor wrestled very tough and won, Soddy did the same, but to say Baylor is under appreciated is a crock. Lets just have a section dedicated to you guys Im sure you can afford it and maybe you will be happy. I was also at the tournament and watched the matches. Also who did your guys wrestle in your tri-meet? Webb, Knox Catholic, and Dade county

Edited January 23, 2006 by cobrakid8

[mtnrasslin]

As a Baylor supporter, I thought the article yesterday fairly accurately captured what was ultimately a long day for us. Like was mentioned, I too thought we had lost and was pleasantly surprised when it was announced that we came out on top. Soddy Daisy gave us all we wanted, which we certainly anticipated, and it made for a great day of wrestling. I am thankful that they included us this year. They run a great tournament.

 

With regards to some of the specifics, my guess is that the paper wanted a Baylor-Soddy picture and had to choose the best picture out of a bunch of action shots. As anyone knows that has tried to take action shots, a small percentage turn out to be decent pictures. The Hussein match was certainly a result worthy of mention (though I agree that some of the details were not quite right) as it was not expected. I guess the same is true of the 135 semifinal match, though I don't think we should be surprised when the meeting of two good wrestlers results in a good match. Manson has had several of those this year.

 

Again, I think the article painted a good picture of what was in some ways a day of struggle for us. There were some bright spots and some not so bright spots. We will learn from it and get better, which is the whole idea. I think that was what was depicted.

Edited January 23, 2006 by mtnrasslin

[centerofthemat]

You all need to be happy that they even put something in the paper. Instead of complaining about the bias, how about complaining about the lack of coverage. You are mad about the wrong issue. They barely cover high school and college wrestling. UTC beats major universities who happen to be nationaly ranked, and they give a bigger story about some basketball game that happened across the country.

 

Who gives a rip about the pictures, the results speak for themselves in black and white.

 

No one cares if you ate bad chicken, or your girlfriend dumped you. You either win or you lose, that is it! No excuses. No one is ever 100%. That is what is great about this sport. Who can push through the pain, and come out on top? Complaining about calls, sickness, hangnails do not belong in this sport. In the words of Terry Brands, "EAT THE PAIN!"

[Sommers]

You all need to be happy that they even put something in the paper. Instead of complaining about the bias, how about complaining about the lack of coverage. You are mad about the wrong issue. They barely cover high school and college wrestling. UTC beats major universities who happen to be nationaly ranked, and they give a bigger story about some basketball game that happened across the country.

 

Who gives a rip about the pictures, the results speak for themselves in black and white.

 

No one cares if you ate bad chicken, or your girlfriend dumped you. You either win or you lose, that is it! No excuses. No one is ever 100%. That is what is great about this sport. Who can push through the pain, and come out on top? Complaining about calls, sickness, hangnails do not belong in this sport. In the words of Terry Brands, "EAT THE PAIN!"

I like this!!

 

Also, Congrats to Joe - the proud papa and his boy, Dan, getting OW!! I know there's a lot of hard work behind that.

[harry thornton]

it's ok at least the times puts articles in the paper about wrestling (i live in chattanooga currently). where i'm from the paper thinks that basketball is the only winter sport in existence and there are at least 2 teams where i'm from that are actually pretty decent, one of those teams has placed in the duals top 4 since 1999 and actually won it one year. But they don't seem to remember this. So i can relate to your frustrations with the paper. newspapers try to make things seem different than they really are. I don't think that basketball shouldn't be covered, i just think that there should be a balance in coverage. but either way soddy and baylor are both excellent schools, in terms of wrestling especially. There may be someone working for them that has a tie to one school and wants to make one team sound bad and the other not and vice versa. in the long run don't worry about it, both teams will probably do excellent in state.

You must be from Dalton.

[Rabble Rouser]

I just finished reading the article about the Soddy Daisy Tournament entitled: "Baylor Holds of Trojans for Title"

 

Given the fact it was a great tournament with close matches this title seems appropriate. The picture, however, containing the caption “Soddy-Daisy’s Jason McCoskey, looks at the score as he finishes off Mike Bell” does not. Baylor won, but they show a picture of a Soddy person “finishing off” Bell. McCrosky wasn’t finishing him off; he was barely beating a wrestler that has twice beat him in the past, and one who also began the week with salmonella poisoning. Ok, so being a Baylor athlete in another sport who constantly has felt a bit under appreciated by the paper, I guess you could say I’m being a bit sensitive. Here is what I saw:

To begin the article and set the tone the author states that “Baylor came out on top – just barely.” The writer then goes on to say “Baylor survived the Soddy Daisy Invitational – and primarily Soddy-Daisy— by a slim 8.5 point.” Personally I don’t think “survival” was a true concern. It was close, but they still won. Half way down the page the article gives Baylor credit by saying they “did well.” The author preempts this, however, with “despite the losses to Soddy Daisy.”

 

The writer goes on to quote Morgan, referring to a “wake up call” and “a competition to be learned from.” One would almost forget that Baylor, even on a bad day, came out on top. Our winners were then quickly listed, with the author giving credit to Waddell as OW. Highlighted were Downey and Wes Stroud, who did well. The quotes used, however, remind the reader that Downey hasn’t placed into a tourney yet and Wes shocked people. The writer makes these wins sound like chance occurrences. To further this tone, the author uses quotes from Soddy’s coach which discuss the fact that Soddy had a tri-meet Friday night. As stated, “The kids came off a tough physical and emotional night to get here this morning at 6:30 and still performed very well.” For the record: every wrestler that planned on competing that day had to arrive at 6:30 and Baylor had a tri-meet Friday as well as a meet on Thursday.

 

In discussing the finals the writer claims that McCrosky lost in a 7-4 “scramble” against Usary. McCrosky’s scramble was with Bell… Usary won. When discussing Manson, the article downplays his unbeaten record and state title by claiming he “just barely got past” Buchanan. I was there… Manson was not about to lose. The other finals matches that the writer highlights rather than listing surprisingly included Soddy rather than Baylor wins. The writer discusses Winesburgh’s pin and says it occurs in 19 seconds… try with 19 seconds left after Hussein held the kid for a minute. To follow with a boast, the author discusses Doster’s loss, reminding the reader that “Toney also beat a Red Raider”

 

I realize that the Soddy wrestlers had nothing to do with this, and neither did their coach. I personally feel that the Times has on more than one occasion and more than one sport either exploited or downplayed Baylor’s losses and wins. What these writers need to remember is that the athletes participating care about the city paper. They work hard for their success and look forward to support from the community. Though Baylor won this tournament, the wrestlers were overlooked, under appreciated, or even worse exploited for losses that don’t come often. Baylor should be proud of their win. The article was surely a disappointment. These are just my opinions, but I was there during that tournament. Those guys worked for more than that paper gave them credit for.

JustAThought

 

Please do send your complaints. It will be placed right on top of the notes and letters from parents from the other 52 schools in the coverage area that are convinced the paper has a bias against them. Wonder if anyone ever writes to give props for covering their kid's event.

 

The list of people who have done as much as Ward Gossett for local sports, especially high school sports, is very short.

 

Congrats to Baylor and Dan Waddell, btw. Wish I'd seen the Hussein pin. Didn't think that was possible, but that's the beauty of wrestling, isn't it?

Edited January 23, 2006 by Rabble Rouser

[MasterBlaster 1]

You all need to be happy that they even put something in the paper. Instead of complaining about the bias, how about complaining about the lack of coverage. You are mad about the wrong issue. They barely cover high school and college wrestling. UTC beats major universities who happen to be nationaly ranked, and they give a bigger story about some basketball game that happened across the country.

 

Yep. there has only been two articles in the Knoxville press and neither one was on the undefeated 215lb state champ. He has receuved press in the Nashville and Chattanooga press over the last two years but zero in the locale press.

 

Be glad you have great coverage in the Chattanooga press.