My blog has moved!

You should be automatically redirected in 6 seconds. If not, visit
and update your bookmarks.

Monday, March 23, 2009

Coaching Search Update

The rumors surrounding Anthony Grant's impending arrival in the SEC swirled again Monday, but Georgia officials were quick to offer a flat denial of any contact between the school and the Virginia Commonwealth head coach.

A day after several media outlets reported an offer had been extended to Grant by Georgia, sports information director Claude Felton explicitly denied any involvement on the part of school president Dr. Michael Adams or athletics director Damon Evans in an email to several media members.

"I can say with complete authority that neither Damon Evans nor Dr. Adams has ever had a conversation with Anthony Grant as of today, Monday, March 23," Felton wrote in the email.

Felton said that both Adams and Evans attended Georgia's women's basketball game in Duluth on Saturday afternoon and then took a private plane to Nashville, Tenn. for the gymnastics team's meet. They did not return until after 10 p.m., Felton said.

The Telegraph reported Sunday that, while sources said there was interest in Grant on the part of Georgia, Evans was adamant in his denial that the school was close to hiring any candidate, including Grant.

Meanwhile, another SEC school could make any discussions a moot point.

The Richmond Times-Dispatch confirmed that Alabama had asked for permission to discuss its coaching vacancy with Grant. Virginia Commonwealth sports information director Norwood Teague said Alabama athletics director Mal Moore contacted the school about Grant on Saturday night, but Georgia's Web site that no such communication had occurred with Georgia.


-- Scout's comments from VCU athletics director.

-- Gentry Estes' continuing coverage from the Bama side of things.


I mentioned in yesterday's post that there were tons of rumors swirling yesterday. I honestly haven't been on this beat long enough to have people I trust with 100 percent accuracy, and I'm not sure any reporter should ever do that anyway. That said, I have no doubt that reporters beyond myself heard information that certainly sounded accurate, because I heard it, too. After talking with Damon Evans yesterday evening, however, I was convinced that no hire would happen soon, and I was not convinced enough of anything else to run with it. Some of it sounded awfully accurate, some of it not so much. That's to be expected, and that's why our paper has a rather high standard for what we are allowed to print.

The question, I think, becomes this: When are rumors news? I was watching ESPN today and the network ran a commercial touting Buster Olney's coverage of baseball's rumor mill. The rumors section on is one of the most popular destinations on the behemoth's Web site for good reason. Fans love it.

As journalists, it is our job to report the news in as factual a manner as possible. Sometimes, however, the simple fact that there are so many rumors is news in and of itself. False reporting is always inexcusable, but to ignore the elephant in the room becomes increasingly burdensome as the news cycle gets faster and faster. From ESPN using anonymous sourcing regularly to Internet message boards that post any rumor, no matter how baseless, the line between what should and should not be reported becomes more and more blurred. It's my goal -- as it should be everyone who does this for a living -- to stay on the right side of that line.

I say all of this for two reasons: 1.) Because while it is my goal to get you breaking information first as often as possible, I can't make that promise if it means running with information I'm not comfortable with, and 2.) while it's easy to offer a critique of information other outlets have, it is a very, very rare occasion in which that information doesn't come from a good source. It's just a matter of where you draw the line, and that, my friends, is a much bigger debate these days than I care to have here.


Anonymous said...

That's a great post on the issues involved in covering a story that is widely known (thanks to the internet) but thinly sourced. You're absolutely right about fans loving rumors and with the proliferation of media outlets of varying standards of proof for running with a story, it makes it all the more difficult to know what to report and what to hold off on.

That's why I think blogs like this are great. It fills the space between "hard news" and more speculative news. Thanks for the work you do on it.

David Hale said...

Thanks for the kind words, anon. These are the issues we grapple with all the time. Just as there are stories that are thinly sourced that we have to decide whether to write, there are also other stories that are well sourced, but you have to ask if it's worth the fallout of writing it. In a perfect world, there is only fact and non-fact, but journalism is far from a perfect world, and there are tons of gray areas. In sports, it makes for great debate, but in the rest of the "real" journalism world, there is a lot more riding on it. It's both interesting and scary. I greatly appreciate the readers like you who can appreciate the depth of the issues.

baboon said...

Well said, David. I second the post made by anon at 9:29pm.