Sports writer - Grant writer

Author: Kat (Page 37 of 88)

Ring in 2011 By Retiring the Lip Dub

As we prepare to ring in 2011, can we all agree to retire the lip dub genre? Please?

As one who spends her full-time career working in higher education, lip dubs (“A type of video that combines lip synching and audio dubbing to make a music video”) overtook my year. Late in 2009, the genre started picking up speed, and the school I work for made their first in response to the first one to reach mainstream popularity, am I Gotta Feeling cover by the University of Quebec at Montreal.

And then, as the Christmas church reading goes: BU begat Lehigh, Lehigh begat Suffolk, Suffolk begat another BU one, BU begat Northeastern, Northeastern begat Emerson. That may not be the exact descendant line, and there were many more schools nation-wide involved, and Northeastern’s wasn’t really a lip dub but a music video for Northeastern State of Mind, but you get the gist. The lip dub took the place of a bowl game for both colleges and high schools to compete for bragging rights and muster up school spirit. Continue reading

A Holiday Wish

Saturday Night Live may be one of the only non-sports related television shows I watch, dating back to my being a little girl. I remember seeing the following clip when I was 10 or so, and not fully getting it (there may be a term in the sketch I would hope I wouldn’t know at age 10), but still finding it hysterical. Now that I’m much older, it’s still my all-time favorite SNL sketch.

So Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, Belated Happy Hannukah, Happy Snow, Happy Time-Off-From-Work, and enjoy Steve Martin’s “A Holiday Wish.”

How To Get My Little Brother To Watch Hockey: The Guardian Project

I struggled mightly with purchasing a Christmas gift for my 16-year-old baby brother. I don’t blame the canyon-like age difference that separates us, rather the fact that I’m sports obsessed, and that the only sport my brother has showed any interest in is curling. And despite Sam’s initial promise with brooms and stones, he only lasted two years at the curling club before retreating to his preferred comics, anime, and video games.

So what do we have in common, besides the Hasenauer nose bump and a bad Canadian-like accent? Thanks to a collaboration between Stan Lee and the National Hockey League, Sam and I may finally have common ground.

The Guardian Project logo

The Guardian Project begins its roll-out with the new year. (Image: The Guardian Project and Rocket XL)

Comic book legend Stan Lee – creator of the iconic Spider Man and my brother’s favorite, Iron Man – has helped design 30 new superheroes that correlate with the 30 NHL teams. Entitled The Guardian Project, the multimedia enterprise will begin its roll out with the January 1st Winter Classic in Pittsburgh, PA, culminating in a project-wide unveiling at the NHL All-Star Game on January 30th. While the superheroes’ adventures will take place independent of an ice rink, each superhero will take on elements of their related franchise.

Continue reading

If Saponari’s Rejection is News, Who Should Have Been the Source?

Vinny Saponari in a March 2010 game against Merrimack College. Photo: Flickr user seriouslysilly

Vinny Saponari in a March 2010 game against Merrimack College. Photo: Flickr user seriouslysilly (Some Rights Reserved)

The story of the day amongst BU hockey fans was the reported Boston College transfer application rejection by dismissed Terrier forward Vinny Saponari. The rumor had been lurking amongst those close to Boston area college hockey for a few weeks, and the story broke for good when US Hockey Report (aka, USHR, a subscription site that reports on junior, youth and college hockey) posted a piece this morning quoting Saponari’s USHL head coach.

Saponari’s current coach with the USHL Dubuque Fighting Saints, Jim Montgomery, is the only interview in USHR’s brief report, which then spurred on reports by the Eagle Tribune’s Mike McMahon, BostonSportsU18 and the Daily Free Press’s Boston Hockey Blog. The Boston Hockey Blog tried to get a quote with Saponari, but “a call and text were not returned.” Word had spread outside of the USHR report – two individuals mentioned to me that area coaches had just started being open about the news last evening, and the news spread like wild fire through the expanding, but still very small, world of hockey.

As the news was circulating on Twitter, a few folks asked within social media, “Well, who are we all to be talking about a pretty embarrassing and private matter for this hockey player? Why is Saponari’s rejection news?”

There is no question to me that this is news – Saponari’s initial dismissal from BU was very public, as the Terrier program had to give reason for his absence in the then upcoming season, and he decided to engage on interviews on the subject. His decision to subsequently transfer to BC, BU’s biggest hockey rival, was made public on his own Facebook page and a few media sources.

So Saponari’s rejection by BC was going to become public whether he liked it or not. For better or worse, his own statements on the matter earlier this fall made us all expect to see him on the Conte Forum ice come next September. Because of the level of expectation already prepared, the college hockey watching public would find out about the rejection eventually. In hindsight, Saponari, his family and his “family advisors” should have kept word of his desire to transfer down Comm Ave quiet until all the i’s were dotted, t’s were crossed, and transcripts approved.

But where the critics of the publicity of Saponari’s denial may have a legitimate point is that the only on-the-record source through this entire story has been the player’s own USHL coach. Was it really appropriate for Montgomery to be so forthcoming with this news with USHR in the first place? Was it his place to do so? Was he representing the family, and if so, should he or the USHR author been more explicit in saying so?

On a much larger level, if a coach is part educator, part advisor, part mentor, and part counselor, shouldn’t he uphold a certain level of confidentiality?

I’m not defending Saponari in any way (if I don’t have anything nice to say, I’m not going to say anything at all), but didn’t he deserve a tad more from Montgomery? Should USHR have looked for a quote from Saponari or his family? If Montgomery was acting on their behalf, shouldn’t that have been more explicit?

What do you think?

The USCHO Pay Wall: Why Putting Today’s Dave Starman Piece Behind It Is a Giant Mistake

Update: Within minutes of my posting this, Todd from USCHO Tweeted at me, said he saw the point and made today’s Starman column free. He also responded in the comments. Class act! Thank you!

———–

I have had thoughts swimming around in my head over the past week regarding the Wall Street Journal article surrounding the growth of college hockey, as well as national hockey commentator and CBS College Sports on-air personality Dave Starman’s USCHO “rebuttal” (to an article that was overwhelmingly positive, I might add.) As my Twitter followers know, my month long battle with bronchitis came to a head as both articles were posted – I ended up in the hospital with a far worse infection – and thus, I wasn’t able to write a response in a timely manner. I was going to leave the issue be.

Then on Wednesday morning, USCHO posted a further Starman commentary where he responds to the many comments he received on his rebuttal. But I, and many other college hockey fans couldn’t read it. It is posted behind USCHO‘s pay wall, called “USCHO Extra”, which costs $14.99 a year.

Isn’t the fact that USCHO hid this rebuttal-of-a-rebuttal behind a pay wall essentially one of the things inhibiting the growth of college hockey? College hockey is a growing sport with a feverous fan base, with message board posters and lurkers galore, with hundreds of Twitter users wanting to be the next Starman or Jim Connolly or Adam Wodon or Bernie Corbett. How can you inhibit this fan base from reading your pieces? Isn’t hiding your content, especially content about an important conversation about the future of the game, behind a pay wall almost an oxymoron?

That a prominent online media source is making their readers pay to access an author’s response to comments, is both traditional and online journalisticly misguided. A good journalist should respond to his or her critics, as long as they are not personally attacking them, in the same forum in which he or she posted the original piece and/or an easily accessible, preferably free, forum. Starman’s original piece last week was free for all to read on USCHO.com. His response to the comments and emails is behind a pay wall, thereby reducing his readership on a popular topic, and shutting out most likely over half of his original readers. I am not saying he had to respond to every commenter or emailer, or even do so on USCHO itself. His feedback just needs to be accessible to the majority of his readers. Take Sports Illustrated’s Peter King or the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle’s Sal Marjorana – they are two polarizing football journalists who respond to their critics via Twitter, a free-of-charge social media tool. It may not be in the original comment section of their pieces, but you can easily find the two and challenge their controversial sentiments (even if their response may be snarky or not you wanted to hear.)

I am not blind to the costs of hosting and maintaining a large-scale website – frankly, it is becoming more than half of my full-time job in higher education and is what I do for various other sites on my home computer after dinner every evening. I understand that ad revenue alone rarely covers the payment of journalists, the hosting, the design, the forum moderation – all the tools that make USCHO one of the big three sites in college hockey. But is college hockey in a place within the American sports landscape that any site can justify having a pay wall?

Isn’t that, after all, the larger question that Starman – and the Wall Street Journal before him – asking with last week’s pieces? Is college hockey a sport that can sustain past the gimmicky nature of the annual outdoor game? And if both the WSJ and Starman are correct and the sport is still growing in popularity with a much higher future ahead of it, why cut off access to any information, discussion or features that may grow the fan base?

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2024 Kat Cornetta

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑