Thought this might shed some light on how the false info got put on their bios. I'm sure some of you have read this, but some might not have. I just kills me when I read newsgroups or watch sports channels or listen to the radio and I keep hearing about how the coaches lied on their resumes. Coaches DO NOT have RESUMES. They don't need them. Their records are what get them hired at other places.
From the Hive:
Posted by Lawyer Buzz on January 30, 2002 at 09:29:02: from 64.12.107.42
At least how it worked when I was a student assistant at Tech's SID in the 80's (unlike Goldtimer, that would be the 1980's). It probably has not changed much and was pretty representative of how other SID offices operated. I am not trying to blame or excuse anyone in this ongoing mess, just trying to provide a little info that might help us all understand.
Basically, someone in SID writes bio's from info provided by the players and coaches. The info, however, is usually submitted on forms or comes in bits and pieces from various sources. SID then tries to turn all these little fragments into coherent and interesting sentences.
As an 18 year old freshmen at Tech, I personally wrote the bio's for the media guide on all the new baseball players one year and can easily understand how innocent mistakes can occur. For example, if I got a form with the following responses:
throws - right
position - second base
hometown - Orlando, Florida
graduated - Central High
etc.
I would probably write something like: "This right hander from Orlando played second base at Central High."
Although that may sound like a reasonable assumption from this info, the problem is, he may never have played at the school he actually graduated from (maybe transferred after the season, etc). Even if he did, maybe he played a different position at that school so he was an outfielder for one year at Central, but a second baseman at Washington for two years. In either case, the statement is not accurate, even though all the info on the form may technically be correct.
The opportunities for misunderstanding or misinterpreting are endless. For instance, I can easily see someone in SID assuming that a player who attended a college on a sports scholarship actually played the sport there, especially depending on how the question is asked. What happens when an error is discovered is another issue.
Finally, one of the main functions of the SID is public relations. While it is their job to be factual, they put everything in the best possible light for the school's athletic departments and their players. They are not intended to be objective, but advocates for the athletic programs, so they tend to error on the side of the what sounds best.
Just some thoughts from someone who has been there.
Sounds like the coach or player has little or zero input. Now, if the info is falsely printed, the coach would have to read it to make sure it was corrected. How many times does this happen? Coaches have better things to do. In GOL's words, "I haven't looked at that bio in a dozen years." Also, even if they do discover wrong info, if the SID has already printed 100,000 or so programs for the year, how likely are they to reprint all of them just because they assumed wrong? Not very. No one ever would have thought media bios would be this big a deal before now, so these inaccuracies were probably never a big deal before this year.
From the Hive:
Posted by Lawyer Buzz on January 30, 2002 at 09:29:02: from 64.12.107.42
At least how it worked when I was a student assistant at Tech's SID in the 80's (unlike Goldtimer, that would be the 1980's). It probably has not changed much and was pretty representative of how other SID offices operated. I am not trying to blame or excuse anyone in this ongoing mess, just trying to provide a little info that might help us all understand.
Basically, someone in SID writes bio's from info provided by the players and coaches. The info, however, is usually submitted on forms or comes in bits and pieces from various sources. SID then tries to turn all these little fragments into coherent and interesting sentences.
As an 18 year old freshmen at Tech, I personally wrote the bio's for the media guide on all the new baseball players one year and can easily understand how innocent mistakes can occur. For example, if I got a form with the following responses:
throws - right
position - second base
hometown - Orlando, Florida
graduated - Central High
etc.
I would probably write something like: "This right hander from Orlando played second base at Central High."
Although that may sound like a reasonable assumption from this info, the problem is, he may never have played at the school he actually graduated from (maybe transferred after the season, etc). Even if he did, maybe he played a different position at that school so he was an outfielder for one year at Central, but a second baseman at Washington for two years. In either case, the statement is not accurate, even though all the info on the form may technically be correct.
The opportunities for misunderstanding or misinterpreting are endless. For instance, I can easily see someone in SID assuming that a player who attended a college on a sports scholarship actually played the sport there, especially depending on how the question is asked. What happens when an error is discovered is another issue.
Finally, one of the main functions of the SID is public relations. While it is their job to be factual, they put everything in the best possible light for the school's athletic departments and their players. They are not intended to be objective, but advocates for the athletic programs, so they tend to error on the side of the what sounds best.
Just some thoughts from someone who has been there.
Sounds like the coach or player has little or zero input. Now, if the info is falsely printed, the coach would have to read it to make sure it was corrected. How many times does this happen? Coaches have better things to do. In GOL's words, "I haven't looked at that bio in a dozen years." Also, even if they do discover wrong info, if the SID has already printed 100,000 or so programs for the year, how likely are they to reprint all of them just because they assumed wrong? Not very. No one ever would have thought media bios would be this big a deal before now, so these inaccuracies were probably never a big deal before this year.
