The Washington Post has, in recent years, provided terrific NCAA tournament coverage. There are five "local" teams in the tournament (Georgetown, Maryland, Virginia, GWU, and Virginia Tech) so the coverage ought to be extensive while these teams continue to play. The link below provides stories on the teams, articles by Wilbon and Wise, and a completed bracket by Kornheiser.
The local sportswriters are all lathered up about the Hoyas and seemingly down on the Devils although Tony K has them going to the sweet Sixteen before losing to UCLA in his completed bracket.
This should be fun, there are seven ACC teams plus GWU and the Hoyas to follow.
Last edited by gw67; 03-12-2007 at 10:43 AM. Reason: typo
The Post's sports section (during college basketball season) was the (second-) most painful part of living in D.C (1997-2006). The incessantly fawning coverage of Maryland and Georgetown while treating GW like a red-headed stepchild and Duke like the great blue Satan was appalling.
If this is true it must be a change for him. Years ago (1994 I believe, I read the column as part of an anthology of the best american sportswriting) he wrote a column about how he was in a minority, he was a black person who rooted for Duke. His arguments were interesting and very persuasive. Granted that was a long time ago, so things may have changed or something may have changed his mind. I have for years seen him say things in the Chathouse for example, where he told Duke haters to get over themselves etc.
Last edited by Spret42; 03-12-2007 at 01:37 PM.
I love how every school thinks they are unfairly picked on. wilbon and kornheiser have coach K on PTI every year. They all seem to get along. Wilbon and Kornheiser both said they think Duke is a year away.
Take a look at Eric Prisbell's online chat session today on the Washington Post's website. Whoa! Bad news if he's right.
Wilbon is absolutely not a Duke-hater, and neither is Tony. Both show much respect. The Post does suck up to MD (though my double Duke-Hoya bias may be showing in that complaint), in the sense that their coverage always goes above the fold, gets the bold-print headlines, the columns, etc. That's just demographics, given all the MD grads in the area.
But they are only now getting on the Georgetown bandwagon. It's been really nice to see prominent Hoya coverage the last couple of days, in part because it's been missing. (Of course, until last year the team hadn't really earned it lately.)
Whew, that would be shocking! If VCU does manage to beat us, I shudder to think of them up against the 2nd best big man in the land in Gray.
-Jason "in fairness, no one ever remembers the columnist who picks favorites-- go out on a limb and if you get it right, you get to crow about it forever!" Evans
Last edited by JasonEvans; 03-12-2007 at 05:58 PM. Reason: typo fix
the first-best being zoubek, or mcroberts?
Overall, I like PTI. However, sports talk shows are a business so it is all about ratings. I enjoy PTI and other sports talk shows more when they aren't discussing Duke. Generally, they do a good job but they always allow the "controversy" angle get in the way when covering Duke. Duke gets all the calls, Coach K is arrogant, Duke students are spoiled rich kids, etc...fans desire to hear Wilbon predict that Duke will lose in the first round so Wilbon saying it is good for ratings!
I'll use an analogy of Arnold Toynbee's multi-volume coverage of World History. Historians rave about it generally, but they all have issues with the sections, which address their specific area of expertise.
I'm sure there are fans from other schools unhappy with Wilbon's bracket.
There's many more examples, including his repetitious criticism of the accolades heaped on Battier, JJ, Wojo, etc.
Wilbon may be willing to say that he thinks Duke will win (when he is of that opinion), however, he seems to think that 18-22 year old college students and their families should be expected to handle irate, irrational fans.