[QUOTE=Over40NINER;142946]Survivor, I am sorry.
You still have my respect. [/QUOTE]
Now I can walk around with my chin held high today.
That signature was getting old anyway
I mean, what is the point of paying for a subscription to something you can get free online? Most of the people that I know that subscribe to the paper now are the older generations that arenāt as familiar with the internet.
Look here whipper snapper! 
For me, I honestly prefer the printed version. Obviously, Iām familiar with the internet and from time to time check out an Observer story on there but usually itās when I want to provide a link to someone. Sitting down each morning with a cup of coffee and my paper is just a daily ritual of mine and Iām sure that speaks for a large number of people, including the internet-savvy. I have no problem paying for the Observer and would continue to do so even if it didnāt include a sports section. I read virtually the entire paper and the Sports section of the Observer is a poor source of sports info anyway.
As for the excessive ACC coverage and lacking A-10 coverage: Letās face it, thereās really no comparison when it comes to status. Of course the Observer is gonna saturate itās Sports section with info on Duke, Carolina, Wake and State. Those teams are far too rooted in this area to not provide substantial coverage. But with that said, yes, I do feel the Observer should cover us consistently, win or lose. Though, when we lose to teams like NW and Wyoming, Iām kind of glad weāre overlooked. 
[QUOTE=jcl49er;142969]Look here whipper snapper! 
For me, I honestly prefer the printed version. Obviously, Iām familiar with the internet and from time to time check out an Observer story on there but usually itās when I want to provide a link to someone. Sitting down each morning with a cup of coffee and my paper is just a daily ritual of mine and Iām sure that speaks for a large number of people, including the internet-savvy. I have no problem paying for the Observer and would continue to do so even if it didnāt include a sports section. I read virtually the entire paper and the Sports section of the Observer is a poor source of sports info anyway.
As for the excessive ACC coverage and lacking A-10 coverage: Letās face it, thereās really no comparison when it comes to status. Of course the Observer is gonna saturate itās Sports section with info on Duke, Carolina, Wake and State. Those teams are far too rooted in this area to not provide substantial coverage. But with that said, yes, I do feel the Observer should cover us consistently, win or lose. Though, when we lose to teams like NW and Wyoming, Iām kind of glad weāre overlooked. [/QUOTE]
2nd that JCL, but you forgot to mention the best place to read the observer is in your personal library at home, where the king sits on the Throne.
The tarholes front page sunday was entirely appropriate for many reasons more than the Falsons/panthers āpreviewā.
First of all, the football game was not news. It was a preview to a game that everyone knew was going to take place sunday(i.e. it wasnāt news). The tarholes won the national championship last year. That automatically puts them at the top of the radar nationally and of course in the state for 3 yrs no matter how they play.
There is a lot of speculation how they will be this year since they lost 7 players. Them beating #10 (and #10 being Kentucky) @UK is an actual news story. Dan Morgan sitting out a game again, Michael Vick being fast, or whatever there was to write before the football game wasnāt news. The tarhole game was a huge story to any neutral observer. (no pun intended)
In my edition of the sports section, There was a good sized article about the UL-Laff. game with a good B/W picture and the A-10 wrap-up. Our coverage was pretty good for beating a sunbelt team by 5 pts. with a 5-3 record to our name.
The observer may promote the tarholes over the niners unfairly sometimes, but the UK game was not a good example of that.
[QUOTE=Max Power;142964]Thatās an interesting point. As time goes by, I think there will be less and less people subscribing to newspapers in general. I mean, what is the point of paying for a subscription to something you can get free online? Most of the people that I know that subscribe to the paper now are the older generations that arenāt as familiar with the internet. If newspaper sales steadily decline over the next 10-15 years I wonder if the newspaper websites will start charging for subscriptions.[/QUOTE]
You meant kind of like āfreeā porn sites? The disturber will charge us for looking at their sorry kind of a write up? Until then, I will still hanging on to my quarter and let the nite riders get their coins elsewhere.
OK, Iāve pissed, moaned and complained about the Oās coverage of us over the past 30 years to make anyone sick. And I hate the tar holes from crapple hell as much as any ABCāer, But COME ON PEOPLE! What the flip have we done this year that warrants more than what weāve gotten so far? NOTHING! Be for frickinā real. I believe if we were 8-0 (as we should be, dammitt!) or had gone to UK with a whole new starting 5 (or even THIS team) and beaten Tubbyās ranked boys in Rupp, weād be getting more pub, front pages, the works in the O and many other national sports outlets. But, you know, weāve done NOTHING but lay some nice sized eggs that will be stank on us for the rest of this year.
NCAAs? Weāll have to win the A 10 tourney with the record and RPI weāll have come conference tourney time. Soā¦enjoy. 
Judging from the responses, only about 15 % of the people on here think the chapel hill promotions are justified (no, I did not count mikep).
One question. If we had beaten the 10th ranked team, would we have received the entire front page and almost all of the back page?
To take it one step fartherā¦ If we had beaten the 10th ranked team (I think they were ranked 10th) and chapel hill had also won a game, would we have received the entire front page and almost all of the back page?
Certainly the internet is changing our industry. I agree that over time, fewer people will read the newspaper because of the internet, but weāre not there yet. A story can be among the top 10 most viewed on charlotte.com with about 5,000 page views. We sell 236,000 newspapers on Sunday, and with passalong reach about 900,000 readers. Since Knight Ridder owns both the newspaper and charlotte.com, at some point a set of eyeballs in either place will be equally valuable.
As for Panthers coverage, it has not and will not decrease. In fact, I added space in December for Panthers coverage in the Monday paper because of the playoff run. We didnāt play the Panthers advance huge on Sunday because it was an advance, and they donāt frequently run as the focus of the front. Weāre more apt to put results there if we have a choice.
And as for how much money The Observer makes, Wall Street demands profit margins like Gannett has from the newspaper industry, and that means about 23 percent. The Observer is not that high, but itās not far off, and is one of the most profitable newspapers in the chain. We do make a TON of money, but the Street demands more (from the corporation, not necessarily The Observer), hence the possibility of a sale. If you could afford to buy The Observer as a business, youād get a nice return on your investment. But youād have to do what weāre doing now, which is figure out that change in delivery platforms from newsprint to online. I think that move is necessary, and that we will have to consider ourselves an information company from this point forward rather than a newspaper company, but I think there will be a market, because of economics and education level, for the printed paper for the forseeable future.
[QUOTE=Over40NINER;142983]If we had beaten the 10th ranked team, would we have received the entire front page and almost all of the back page?
[/QUOTE]
Think back to the victories over Syracuse and Indiana and tell me what kind of coverage you got, and I think you can answer your own question.
And the game against Davidson got big coverage, even though two schools in Mecklenburg County failed to sell our your 9,000-seat arena.
Louisiana-Lafayette isnāt the same kind of win or the same kind of opponent, I think we can all agree.
[QUOTE=49er1]What the flip have we done this year that warrants more than what weāve gotten so far? NOTHING! Be for frickinā real. [/QUOTE]
I disagree with thatā¦ the "hometownā paper should provide thorough coverage for local teams no matter how bad of a season they are having. You shouldnāt have to earn write-ups in the local paper. The Observer coverage of the 49ers was pretty good last year, but it has been lacking so far this year.
[QUOTE=Mike_Persinger]And the game against Davidson got big coverage, even though two schools in Mecklenburg County failed to sell our your 9,000-seat arena. [/QUOTE]
Comments like that are why you donāt have many fans on this board. Sure itās true, but the way you say it seems like you are mocking the basketball program and the fans. You seem to enjoy rubbing stuff like that in. Youāve made similar comments in the past and it really makes you come across as a d*ck.
[QUOTE=Max Power;142994]
Comments like that are why you donāt have many fans on this board. Sure itās true, but the way you say it seems like you are mocking the basketball program and the fans. You seem to enjoy rubbing stuff like that in. Youāve made similar comments in the past and it really makes you come across as a d*ck.[/QUOTE]
The truth makes one a dick?? He is right. I donāt see an mocking, just a fact.
And now, mike is using his alias s9er to post.
I would hope a newspaper monopoly in one of the fastest growing markets in the country turns a nice profit. I think the real problem is letting personal bias creep into the news reporting, a flaw of human nature.
the question is would good coverage over a long period of time for the hometown team CREATE Demand, can a newspaper influence peoples views and perceptions? I say, yes
[QUOTE=Over40NINER;142996]And now, mike is using his alias s9er to post.
[/QUOTE]
And again, Over40 is being an asshole.
Of the current Observer readers, more specifically Observer Sports Page Readersā¦where do you think the most college basketball fan loyalty lies?
We know the answer to that one and a poll would be a waste of print space.
Hereās an idea, how about on Sat. Feb 11thā¦the Niners go up the road and beat the Deacons? Then weāll see what the front page story is on Sunday the 12th.
And say what you want about Sorensen and his opinions, he does at least acknowledge the Niners with a column every now and then. Heās been doing that since at least the time I was student here back in the early '90s.
This age-old arguement about the Observer sportspage is really simple.
Mike P. is paid to provide a profitable daily sportspage for the Charlotte Observerā¦no more, no less. He does his job very well.
IF (by some stretch of the imagination) the Charlotte Observer (the newspaper, not the sports dept.) ever showed an interest in a CHARLOTTE paper, they would trash their current product in a heartbeat.
Hereās a question.
Gardner Webb almost beat chapel hill earlier this year. If Gardner Webb had won that game, would the write-up have taken up 2 pages, including the entire front page? In many ways, a win by Gardner Webb over chapel hill would have been an even bigger story.
[QUOTE=SilvioDante;143005]This age-old arguement about the Observer sportspage is really simple.
Mike P. is paid to provide a profitable daily sportspage for the Charlotte Observerā¦no more, no less. He does his job very wellā¦[/QUOTE]
I wouldnāt be so sure about that after reading this last Fridayā¦
Charlotte Biz Journal: Observer eyes cost-cutting as parent seeks buyer for chain
As I recall, Mike recently posted on this board about not being able to hire a new beat writer to cover the Niners and instead had to find someone on staff for the job. And we see who covered the game in Lafayette, LA for the Big O! :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=run49er;143011]I wouldnāt be so sure about that after reading this last Fridayā¦
Charlotte Biz Journal: Observer eyes cost-cutting as parent seeks buyer for chain
As I recall, Mike recently posted on this board about not being able to hire a new beat writer to cover the Niners and instead had to find someone on staff for the job. And we see who covered the game in Lafayette, LA for the Big O! :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Trueā¦We (their target audience) pay the price and they count nickels & dimes.
I guess we can say (& this is NOT a personal attack on Mike P.) that the current Charlotte Observer is what you get when newspaper people focus on finances, instead of value of their content.
Iām not surprised that the ULL story came from the wire services & in all honesty, I didnāt expect an Observer reporter, journalist and/or photographer to go thereā¦but Iām SHOCKED that the story could make it to print with a reference to the Bobcats. My 5 year old dog could sniff that mistake out.
[QUOTE=run49er;143011]Charlotte Biz Journal: Observer eyes cost-cutting as parent seeks buyer for chain [/QUOTE]
The first five words of that story are false.
[QUOTE=run49er;143011] As I recall, Mike recently posted on this board about not being able to hire a new beat writer to cover the Niners and instead had to find someone on staff for the job. And we see who covered the game in Lafayette, LA for the Big O! :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
David Scott is covering Charlotte basketball, in conjunction with Jim Utter starting in January. So while I donāt have a hire available at the present, you have people looking after you. We have skipped some games, and will skip some upcoming games (including North Carolina at Southern Cal; Duke in the preseason NIT semis and final, the ACC football championship, Wake Forest in Coaches for Cancer in New York, and N.C. State at Iowa in Big 10 ACC challenge, to name a few) to save travel money. We also didnāt go to N.C. State at Florida State in football, which in hindsight I wish we had been at given the upset. We havenāt pulled off Panthers, Bobcats or racing, and I donāt plan to.
Itās a blip. But if your boss comes to you and says, āHit this number,ā you do it unless you donāt like your job, right?