After arriving in New York on Aug. 9 to start a job as a Player Participation Auditor for the National Football League, I feel more and more comfortable with the Big Apple.
Here are some random observations that I have made in the last 33 days:
1. "The city that never sleeps" is a pretty accurate description of New York. There are so many places that stay open 24 hours. You can hear car horns blowing at 3 a.m. just as likely as you would at 5 p.m. I personally have been staying up later and later while still waking up at 7 a.m., but somehow I do not feel any more tired than usual.
2. I was told that I would get trampled if I did not pick up my walking pace in New York. This is also fairly accurate. When I was back in Cincinnati, I walked like I had all the time in the world. Now that I have been in the NYC for a while, I notice my strides are longer and quicker and that I get impatient with people who are walking slow right in front of me.
3. If New York could legally charge money for oxygen, it no doubt would. Everything is expensive here. It is a challenge to go a day without spending more than $20. About the only sure-fire way you can is to stay at home and not leave the house for any reason.
4. Apparently the normal pattern for sports-team allegiance is Yankees-Giants and Mets-Jets. I first thought Mets-Jets was because the names rhymed so the chants are easy to remember - "M-E-T-S Mets! Mets! Mets!" - sounds pretty good to me. But the reasoning explained to me was because the Mets and Jets both were started around the same time in the '60s, while the Yankees and Giants were the senior New York pro teams. Funny thing about this combo is that one of my co-workers is a Yankees-Jets fan and most of the people at work view him as a freak because of it.
5. College sports are not as big of a deal here as they are in other parts of the country. I wonder why this is? Could it be that the only BCS school approximate to New York is Rutgers (whom my Cincinnati Bearcats embarrassed 47-15 on national TV this past Labor Day) and the major college basketball team, St. John's, has been in year No. 1 of a five-year rebuilding plan for the past decade? It could simply be the professional teams, most notably the Yankees and Giants, have garnered so much attention lately with their success that college athletics in New York seems like what college sports is technically supposed to be - amateur hour.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
Time for Interleague Play to Go
Now that Interleague Play ’09 concluded Sunday, can we please put it behind us and get rid of it altogether?
IP has without a doubt lost its luster.
Interleague Play was a cute little gimmick designed to spark fan interest after the ’94 baseball strike. And it was highly effective. IP, in addition to the softball scores provided by the steroid era, put butts back into ballpark seats. People wanted to see new and exciting matchups: Mets-Yankees; Cubs-White Sox; Braves-Red Sox; Reds-Indians; Astros-Rangers. The idea was to create new rivalries. Logic said these rivalries would prevail; however, logic was wrong.
These synthetic “rivalries” have not really taken off. The main problem is because the games have very little significance. They obviously affect teams’ overall schedule, but they are played in the first few months of the season. If MLB wanted to add some spice to IP, they should schedule some of the rivalry series in Sept., that way each game carries a lot more weight.
MLB has instead marketed interleague series by giving them a catchy name and a shiny trophy. For instance, the Reds and Indians now play for the Ohio Lottery Ohio Cup. The Rangers and Astros battle for the prestigious Silver Boot Trophy.
In terms of popularity and attendance, baseball is back. IP may have been a factor in this, but now that MLB is stable, it should abandon it. Here are the reasons why:
First off, IP creates an unbalanced schedule, with rotations set by division and “natural rivalries.” This is extremely advantageous for teams scheduled to play weaker interleague opponents and whose natural rival stinks. Take the St. Louis Cardinals for example. Their “natural rival” is the Kansas City Royals. This means they get to play one of the traditionally worst teams in MLB home-and-home every season while the Chicago Cubs have to play the White Sox twice per year. This makes a huge difference in the standings at season’s end and erases any type of parity.
Second, some of the interleague matchups are just plain horrendous. Who in the world is interested in the Rockies playing the Tigers? Or the Reds playing the Royals? How about the Rays vs. Padres? It may have been really cool to watch a team who previously never visited your hometown team, but that coolness has definitely worn off. There is almost no excitement for fans when they are indifferent towards an opponent.
Third, playing these teams really takes away the nostalgia of the World Series. Before interleague play, there was a deep sense of pride between the National and American leagues. It was pennant winner vs. pennant winner. The two teams fortunate enough to make it to the World Series were fully representing their leagues and wanted to prove which league was better. Now that interleague Play is in effect, the idea of the two leagues competing against each other has vanished. The feeling now is simply Team A vs. Team B.
Fourth, IP has taken away the emotion from the intraleague rivalries. There was once a time when fans knew every player on every opposing team and were familiar with who they were rooting against because the opposing team visited more frequently. The more familiar you are with an opponent, the easier it is to dislike and cheer against them. This is how solid rivalries are created. (Think Dodgers vs. Reds back in the 1970s.)
Now that MLB is back on the map and has a steady streamline of attendance and revenue, it is time to disband Interleague Play. League and divisional rivalries will grow, as will parity.
IP has without a doubt lost its luster.
Interleague Play was a cute little gimmick designed to spark fan interest after the ’94 baseball strike. And it was highly effective. IP, in addition to the softball scores provided by the steroid era, put butts back into ballpark seats. People wanted to see new and exciting matchups: Mets-Yankees; Cubs-White Sox; Braves-Red Sox; Reds-Indians; Astros-Rangers. The idea was to create new rivalries. Logic said these rivalries would prevail; however, logic was wrong.
These synthetic “rivalries” have not really taken off. The main problem is because the games have very little significance. They obviously affect teams’ overall schedule, but they are played in the first few months of the season. If MLB wanted to add some spice to IP, they should schedule some of the rivalry series in Sept., that way each game carries a lot more weight.
MLB has instead marketed interleague series by giving them a catchy name and a shiny trophy. For instance, the Reds and Indians now play for the Ohio Lottery Ohio Cup. The Rangers and Astros battle for the prestigious Silver Boot Trophy.
In terms of popularity and attendance, baseball is back. IP may have been a factor in this, but now that MLB is stable, it should abandon it. Here are the reasons why:
First off, IP creates an unbalanced schedule, with rotations set by division and “natural rivalries.” This is extremely advantageous for teams scheduled to play weaker interleague opponents and whose natural rival stinks. Take the St. Louis Cardinals for example. Their “natural rival” is the Kansas City Royals. This means they get to play one of the traditionally worst teams in MLB home-and-home every season while the Chicago Cubs have to play the White Sox twice per year. This makes a huge difference in the standings at season’s end and erases any type of parity.
Second, some of the interleague matchups are just plain horrendous. Who in the world is interested in the Rockies playing the Tigers? Or the Reds playing the Royals? How about the Rays vs. Padres? It may have been really cool to watch a team who previously never visited your hometown team, but that coolness has definitely worn off. There is almost no excitement for fans when they are indifferent towards an opponent.
Third, playing these teams really takes away the nostalgia of the World Series. Before interleague play, there was a deep sense of pride between the National and American leagues. It was pennant winner vs. pennant winner. The two teams fortunate enough to make it to the World Series were fully representing their leagues and wanted to prove which league was better. Now that interleague Play is in effect, the idea of the two leagues competing against each other has vanished. The feeling now is simply Team A vs. Team B.
Fourth, IP has taken away the emotion from the intraleague rivalries. There was once a time when fans knew every player on every opposing team and were familiar with who they were rooting against because the opposing team visited more frequently. The more familiar you are with an opponent, the easier it is to dislike and cheer against them. This is how solid rivalries are created. (Think Dodgers vs. Reds back in the 1970s.)
Now that MLB is back on the map and has a steady streamline of attendance and revenue, it is time to disband Interleague Play. League and divisional rivalries will grow, as will parity.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Crowd Sourcing: How has the economy impacted your family?
I recently asked UC journalism students their thoughts and opinions about dealing with the economy and how it has affected their families.
These are the questions I asked them:
1. Have you or anyone in your family been laid off recently?
2. If so, how was your family coped with this?
3. As a college student, what are your plans for starting a career upon graduation during a time when many companies are down-sizing?
From what I gathered, everyone seems to be influenced by this one way or another.
“No one in my family has been laid off, but my dad's job has him in constant fear of being laid off. They make him work crazy hours, from 5:30pm-4:30am, and have him work every other week. His job is really stressing him out and he can't do anything about it because he wouldn't have a job otherwise. I feel like employers are using the recession as a way to use their employees incorrectly.”
Rose Diroll
4th year
“The recession has luckily not affected my family, because my parent's both work in the hospital, which seem to be fairing well.
I unfortunately have had a harder time getting financial aid because of the poor economy, which has forced me to drop down to part-time status, which has pushed my graduation date back from this June to next December. I've also had to work two jobs to make rent and pay for the classes I am taking now.
As far as jobs, I'm planning on going to graduate school for Spanish so that I can become a translator, since the job market for journalists seems poor right now.”
Rachel Rayburn
Senior journalism student.
“My father retired early in order to save another man's job. However, they were still laid off and the company is closing in Milford and moving to St Louis.”
Karen Shinkle
“My father was laid off from his job in October of 2008 and has yet to find a job. He is an architect who has lived in Cincinnati his entire life, and made a name for himself in this city's architectural community. He is more than qualified for positions he has applied for, with a bachelor's in environmental design from Miami University (OH) and a master's in architecture from the University of Illinois - Urbana Champagne. He has watched people get hired instead of him simply because they are younger, not because they have more experience or more talent. My father has designed multi-million dollar bio pharmaceutical labs and government testing facilities, and he can't find a job designing some of the simpler (yet still important) projects.
My mother, a private school teacher, has had to take a summer job teaching online courses for Butler Tech because if she doesn't, there will not be any income coming into our home over the summer. That's just not doable in my family.
Personally, this has GREATLY affected me. I have scholarship money, but there is still a considerably large amount of money that my parents give to UC every quarter for my education. Because I want to lessen their burden as much as possible, I have picked up extra hours at work (I'm a student worker in the Athletic Department) and begun paying for things that I did not have to worry about prior to my dad's predicament, such as car insurance and rent. These expenses that previously seemed small to me have become more real, and I've had to consider the value of a dollar much more seriously than I did previously. Starbucks doesn't happen for me; I can now make a $4.00 Maxwell House tub go a long way. I haven't been to the mall in months because it's a danger zone for those of us struggling in this economy. I recently joined Netflix because I'm a movie buff and I realized that it's cheaper than paying $4.00 each time I rent a movie at Blockbuster. I don't buy lunch on campus; I pack it. These little things add up and make a huge difference at the end of the week or month.”
Ginny Walters
Secondary English Education & Journalism
2011
“I feel really unsure about what the future holds for journalists. I hope to find a job but the place where I currently intern is on a hiring freeze. Many places are firing people, few are hiring so it is very scary. I have a part time job now, and have wanted to quit so I can focus on my career, but cannot due to the economy. My family is definitely feeling the hit of the economy. My stepdad has been working less and less and the expenses are the same. Also our house is way too big for the number of people living there. My parents really want to sell it and downsize but the market is so poor right now that it would be hard to sell and actually get any money. So it leaves them in a bind because they have to stay in our house right now that just does not make sense economically. My family used to go out to eat a lot together and we rarely do that anymore.”
Rachel Plowden
These are the questions I asked them:
1. Have you or anyone in your family been laid off recently?
2. If so, how was your family coped with this?
3. As a college student, what are your plans for starting a career upon graduation during a time when many companies are down-sizing?
From what I gathered, everyone seems to be influenced by this one way or another.
“No one in my family has been laid off, but my dad's job has him in constant fear of being laid off. They make him work crazy hours, from 5:30pm-4:30am, and have him work every other week. His job is really stressing him out and he can't do anything about it because he wouldn't have a job otherwise. I feel like employers are using the recession as a way to use their employees incorrectly.”
Rose Diroll
4th year
“The recession has luckily not affected my family, because my parent's both work in the hospital, which seem to be fairing well.
I unfortunately have had a harder time getting financial aid because of the poor economy, which has forced me to drop down to part-time status, which has pushed my graduation date back from this June to next December. I've also had to work two jobs to make rent and pay for the classes I am taking now.
As far as jobs, I'm planning on going to graduate school for Spanish so that I can become a translator, since the job market for journalists seems poor right now.”
Rachel Rayburn
Senior journalism student.
“My father retired early in order to save another man's job. However, they were still laid off and the company is closing in Milford and moving to St Louis.”
Karen Shinkle
“My father was laid off from his job in October of 2008 and has yet to find a job. He is an architect who has lived in Cincinnati his entire life, and made a name for himself in this city's architectural community. He is more than qualified for positions he has applied for, with a bachelor's in environmental design from Miami University (OH) and a master's in architecture from the University of Illinois - Urbana Champagne. He has watched people get hired instead of him simply because they are younger, not because they have more experience or more talent. My father has designed multi-million dollar bio pharmaceutical labs and government testing facilities, and he can't find a job designing some of the simpler (yet still important) projects.
My mother, a private school teacher, has had to take a summer job teaching online courses for Butler Tech because if she doesn't, there will not be any income coming into our home over the summer. That's just not doable in my family.
Personally, this has GREATLY affected me. I have scholarship money, but there is still a considerably large amount of money that my parents give to UC every quarter for my education. Because I want to lessen their burden as much as possible, I have picked up extra hours at work (I'm a student worker in the Athletic Department) and begun paying for things that I did not have to worry about prior to my dad's predicament, such as car insurance and rent. These expenses that previously seemed small to me have become more real, and I've had to consider the value of a dollar much more seriously than I did previously. Starbucks doesn't happen for me; I can now make a $4.00 Maxwell House tub go a long way. I haven't been to the mall in months because it's a danger zone for those of us struggling in this economy. I recently joined Netflix because I'm a movie buff and I realized that it's cheaper than paying $4.00 each time I rent a movie at Blockbuster. I don't buy lunch on campus; I pack it. These little things add up and make a huge difference at the end of the week or month.”
Ginny Walters
Secondary English Education & Journalism
2011
“I feel really unsure about what the future holds for journalists. I hope to find a job but the place where I currently intern is on a hiring freeze. Many places are firing people, few are hiring so it is very scary. I have a part time job now, and have wanted to quit so I can focus on my career, but cannot due to the economy. My family is definitely feeling the hit of the economy. My stepdad has been working less and less and the expenses are the same. Also our house is way too big for the number of people living there. My parents really want to sell it and downsize but the market is so poor right now that it would be hard to sell and actually get any money. So it leaves them in a bind because they have to stay in our house right now that just does not make sense economically. My family used to go out to eat a lot together and we rarely do that anymore.”
Rachel Plowden
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Cincinnati Reds Opening Day video blog for Reds.com
Here are the links to two Cincinnati Reds Opening Day videos I produced for Reds.com.
The first video covered the Opening Day Parade.
http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200904064020507
The second video was a glance at the pregame festivities that took place on the field.
http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200904064023163
Comments are welcome!
The first video covered the Opening Day Parade.
http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200904064020507
The second video was a glance at the pregame festivities that took place on the field.
http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200904064023163
Comments are welcome!
Friday, April 3, 2009
You don't need to live in the same state as your favorite teams!
While watching the Siena vs. Ohio State NCAA tournament game March 20 at happy hour in Mt. Adams Pavilion, I came across a sports topic that absolutely needs to be addressed.
As the Buckeyes mounted a small lead over the Saints in the second half, there was a woman standing near me talking smack about OSU winning. I, as usual, had to talk back, defending Sienna as if they were my favorite team.
(I will be the first to admit I’m an anti-Ohio State fan. I root for any team the Buckeyes play, regardless of the sport.)
When I opposed said-women, she started yelling at me is if I was crazy for not loving Ohio State.
“What state are you in?” she repeatedly screamed toward me.
I, having been through this argument several hundred times previously, immediately lied to her and said “I’m from Kentucky,” just to see how’d she react. (I reside in Ohio.)
“Go back to where you came from,” she angrily responded.
Essentially, the gist of her argument was all Ohioans should root and cheer for Ohio State.
This is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard.
If I wanted to take this ridiculous argument to another level, I could’ve asked her “What city are you in?” to imply she’s stupid for cheering for a college basketball team other than Xavier or UC
.
The geographical argument needs to stop!
People, we are not bound by maps when deciding which sports teams we pledge our allegiance to.
There is nothing wrong rooting for hometown teams. It’s the norm and it makes sense because the hometown squad is the most accessible and easiest to follow, but that doesn’t mean it should be a requirement.
If I’m supposed to like Ohio State because I live in Ohio, doesn’t this also mean I’m also supposed to like the Cleveland Browns and Indians? Do I have to cheer for the Toledo Rockets and Akron Zips? Absolutely not.
Yes, I root for hometown teams – such as UC (I’m a Bearcat alum), the Reds and Bengals.
But, I also like University of Miami (Fla.) football, the Phoenix Suns of the NBA and the Detroit Red Wings of the NHL – none of these teams have anything to do with proximity.
Geography should not be the end-all factor when selecting your favorite sports teams.
If you only root for hometown teams, that’s your choice. Just don’t judge those who think outside the box.
As the Buckeyes mounted a small lead over the Saints in the second half, there was a woman standing near me talking smack about OSU winning. I, as usual, had to talk back, defending Sienna as if they were my favorite team.
(I will be the first to admit I’m an anti-Ohio State fan. I root for any team the Buckeyes play, regardless of the sport.)
When I opposed said-women, she started yelling at me is if I was crazy for not loving Ohio State.
“What state are you in?” she repeatedly screamed toward me.
I, having been through this argument several hundred times previously, immediately lied to her and said “I’m from Kentucky,” just to see how’d she react. (I reside in Ohio.)
“Go back to where you came from,” she angrily responded.
Essentially, the gist of her argument was all Ohioans should root and cheer for Ohio State.
This is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard.
If I wanted to take this ridiculous argument to another level, I could’ve asked her “What city are you in?” to imply she’s stupid for cheering for a college basketball team other than Xavier or UC
.
The geographical argument needs to stop!
People, we are not bound by maps when deciding which sports teams we pledge our allegiance to.
There is nothing wrong rooting for hometown teams. It’s the norm and it makes sense because the hometown squad is the most accessible and easiest to follow, but that doesn’t mean it should be a requirement.
If I’m supposed to like Ohio State because I live in Ohio, doesn’t this also mean I’m also supposed to like the Cleveland Browns and Indians? Do I have to cheer for the Toledo Rockets and Akron Zips? Absolutely not.
Yes, I root for hometown teams – such as UC (I’m a Bearcat alum), the Reds and Bengals.
But, I also like University of Miami (Fla.) football, the Phoenix Suns of the NBA and the Detroit Red Wings of the NHL – none of these teams have anything to do with proximity.
Geography should not be the end-all factor when selecting your favorite sports teams.
If you only root for hometown teams, that’s your choice. Just don’t judge those who think outside the box.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
New Pete Rose argument?
So I was at a local sports bar with a couple of friends last night and Barry Bonds appeared on one of the big screens. We couldn't hear the audio from the television, so we had no idea what was being said.
But what ensued, was a conversation about how terrible it is for baseball to recognize Bonds as the all-time home run king. This led to an argument about which is worse: taking steroids (or performance enhancing drugs if you want to be up-tight about it) or gambling on the game, Ala Pete Rose?
Clearly, Major League Baseball feels gambling on baseball games is much worse than taking steroids. Rose's ban is still in effect, almost 20 years later. "Shoeless" Joe Jackson of the Chicago "Black Sox" scandal in 1919 is still banned from the Hall of Fame, as well. All this, while any MLB team is welcome to sign Bonds at their convenience (although this is highly unlikely given his age and the media circus that would follow).
While we were all debating this, I made an argument that none of my friends had heard before; which surprised me because I thought I was just repeating some old jargon.
I noted that the only evidence found of Rose's baseball gambling occurred while he was a manager. There was no evidence that showed he gambled while playing.
So the question I had for my friends was: Why can't he get elected into the Hall of Fame as a player?
Think about this. He wasn't going into the Hall as a manager. He was only caught gambling as a manager and never as a player.
I think the best solution to this whole debate would be to let him in the Hall of Fame as a player, but keep his lifetime ban intact. It's the only way MLB can rid themselves of their hypocrisy.
If MLB can invite Rose to the 1999 All-Star game in Boston for the All-Century Team and make money off him, then they can also give Rose his due as a player and let him in the Hall of Fame. You can't have one or the other. It's either none or both.
And speaking of none or both, this should also apply to gambling and steroids. MLB shouldn't allow admitted steroid users to continue to play if their going to give lifetime bans to men who gambled.
Steroid usage is not less of a crime than gambling, it's equal and should be treated as such.
But what ensued, was a conversation about how terrible it is for baseball to recognize Bonds as the all-time home run king. This led to an argument about which is worse: taking steroids (or performance enhancing drugs if you want to be up-tight about it) or gambling on the game, Ala Pete Rose?
Clearly, Major League Baseball feels gambling on baseball games is much worse than taking steroids. Rose's ban is still in effect, almost 20 years later. "Shoeless" Joe Jackson of the Chicago "Black Sox" scandal in 1919 is still banned from the Hall of Fame, as well. All this, while any MLB team is welcome to sign Bonds at their convenience (although this is highly unlikely given his age and the media circus that would follow).
While we were all debating this, I made an argument that none of my friends had heard before; which surprised me because I thought I was just repeating some old jargon.
I noted that the only evidence found of Rose's baseball gambling occurred while he was a manager. There was no evidence that showed he gambled while playing.
So the question I had for my friends was: Why can't he get elected into the Hall of Fame as a player?
Think about this. He wasn't going into the Hall as a manager. He was only caught gambling as a manager and never as a player.
I think the best solution to this whole debate would be to let him in the Hall of Fame as a player, but keep his lifetime ban intact. It's the only way MLB can rid themselves of their hypocrisy.
If MLB can invite Rose to the 1999 All-Star game in Boston for the All-Century Team and make money off him, then they can also give Rose his due as a player and let him in the Hall of Fame. You can't have one or the other. It's either none or both.
And speaking of none or both, this should also apply to gambling and steroids. MLB shouldn't allow admitted steroid users to continue to play if their going to give lifetime bans to men who gambled.
Steroid usage is not less of a crime than gambling, it's equal and should be treated as such.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Crowd Sourcing: Students reaction to class size
I had an assignment in one of my other journalism classes pertaining to class size at UC.
So I went out and asked journalism students at UC their thoughts on whether they like the student-to-faculty ratio or if they wished it was different.
Here are the three specific questions I asked:
1. Do you feel the class sizes are too big? Too small? Why? Why not?
2. Do you feel the class sizes impact your ability to learn? If so, how?
3. Does class size impact your ability to interact with instructors? Is feedback from instructors sufficient to your liking?
I got a wide range of opinions, but it seemed the general consensus was that students were satisfied with their class sizes.
Here are some of the responses that I received:
"I feel that class sizes in McMicken are just right because you still can interact with the Professor easily. I do not feel the class sizes impact my ability to learn, because I am a proactive student and, no matter how big my class is, I will make sure I communicate with my professor."
Danielle Boyle
Third Year, Journalism
"I don't think that the classes in McMicken are too big, actually I think they are a perfect size. I personally do not like big aud. size classes because I don't think the Professor is able to interact and communicate with the students as well. I've been in those big classes before and it seems that the teacher doesn't have the students participate as much and doesn't even ask questions. It's normally just a boring lecture where all I want to do is fall asleep."
Hope that helps,
Kelli Ives
Senior, Journalism
"I think depending on the classes they could stand to be anywhere between five to ten seats bigger. A medium-sized class - let's say about 20 people - has a lot more people giving input, and that's something anyone could learn from, especially if someone says something particularly ignorant or uninformed and the teacher corrects them. A larger class size doesn't usually affect my ability to talk to instructors. Sometimes I get a lousy teacher who picks out three or four people to pay attention to the whole quarter, and I'm almost never one of them."
Andrew Ritter
Third Year, Journalism
"I feel that my classes in McMicken have been the perfect size. Fairly small, ranging from 15 to 25 students, allows for great class discussion and one-on-one time with professors. I think the small class size is perfect for because I'm receiving individual attention from professors on my core subjects. It's great to get direct attention from a professor about something that will be utilized in my future career."
Alison Jaeger
Freshman UC '12
"I think as far as the journalism department goes, the faculty-to-student ratio is great. As a fifth-year senior, I know that a lot of the faculty know me by name and know what I'm doing as far as internships and classes. They all seem very involved in their student's progress and are very helpful when needed."
Ashley Monk
Senior, Journalism
For the most part, UC Journalism students don't have an issue with their class sizes and seem to be coping well with them.
So I went out and asked journalism students at UC their thoughts on whether they like the student-to-faculty ratio or if they wished it was different.
Here are the three specific questions I asked:
1. Do you feel the class sizes are too big? Too small? Why? Why not?
2. Do you feel the class sizes impact your ability to learn? If so, how?
3. Does class size impact your ability to interact with instructors? Is feedback from instructors sufficient to your liking?
I got a wide range of opinions, but it seemed the general consensus was that students were satisfied with their class sizes.
Here are some of the responses that I received:
"I feel that class sizes in McMicken are just right because you still can interact with the Professor easily. I do not feel the class sizes impact my ability to learn, because I am a proactive student and, no matter how big my class is, I will make sure I communicate with my professor."
Danielle Boyle
Third Year, Journalism
"I don't think that the classes in McMicken are too big, actually I think they are a perfect size. I personally do not like big aud. size classes because I don't think the Professor is able to interact and communicate with the students as well. I've been in those big classes before and it seems that the teacher doesn't have the students participate as much and doesn't even ask questions. It's normally just a boring lecture where all I want to do is fall asleep."
Hope that helps,
Kelli Ives
Senior, Journalism
"I think depending on the classes they could stand to be anywhere between five to ten seats bigger. A medium-sized class - let's say about 20 people - has a lot more people giving input, and that's something anyone could learn from, especially if someone says something particularly ignorant or uninformed and the teacher corrects them. A larger class size doesn't usually affect my ability to talk to instructors. Sometimes I get a lousy teacher who picks out three or four people to pay attention to the whole quarter, and I'm almost never one of them."
Andrew Ritter
Third Year, Journalism
"I feel that my classes in McMicken have been the perfect size. Fairly small, ranging from 15 to 25 students, allows for great class discussion and one-on-one time with professors. I think the small class size is perfect for because I'm receiving individual attention from professors on my core subjects. It's great to get direct attention from a professor about something that will be utilized in my future career."
Alison Jaeger
Freshman UC '12
"I think as far as the journalism department goes, the faculty-to-student ratio is great. As a fifth-year senior, I know that a lot of the faculty know me by name and know what I'm doing as far as internships and classes. They all seem very involved in their student's progress and are very helpful when needed."
Ashley Monk
Senior, Journalism
For the most part, UC Journalism students don't have an issue with their class sizes and seem to be coping well with them.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Crowd Sourcing: Thanks Huggs Tribute
On Thursday, Feb. 26, former UC basketball coach Bob Huggins returned to Fifth Third Arena for the first time as an opponent (he now is the head coach at his alma mater West Virginia).
Huggins, the all-time winningest coach in UC history, was honored before the game with a 45-second tribute video. Signs were also handed out to fans that read 'Thanks Huggs' on one side and 'Go Bearcats' on the other.
The video showed highlights of Huggins from the sidelines yelling at his players and referees. It also showed the large number of players he coached through the years.
There were many senior night moments where Huggins was hugging farewell to his players.
This got to Huggins as he was seen on the West Virgina bench shedding tears.
Upon the completion of the video, Huggins was given a standing ovation and he waved to the crowed in gratitude.
What I want to know is if this moment gave fans closure to the Huggins saga that took place upon his dismissal in 2005.
I went to Bearcatnews.com forum to find out. Bearcatnews.com is a website dedicated to UC basketball and football. The forum members range from prospective UC students to UC alumni. There are also non-UC alumni/students. Men and women of all ages are welcome to join the forum.
Some fans were unsatisfied with the ceremony and felt UC should have done more.
"A class act by UC to do it. Having said that, I think it should have been done bigger...way bigger.
"A 16 year career, the most ever wins by a UC coach, countless titles and championships, and 14 NCAA tourney appearances could have been one heck of a 5 minute video - a video for the ages for UC fans. I think they should have had the former players join Bob at mid-court for a presentation of a plaque with his season records, accomplishments, etc. and a big THANK YOU engraved at the bottom. That would have been even more special. Allowing Bob to take the mic and say thank you would have been really unbelievable." -Bearcat-in-Italy
Other fans thought this ceremony symbolized the end of an era and finally have closure to all of the controvery surrounding Huggins' departure.
"UC's tribute to Coach Huggins tonight was well done and well received. Coupled with the eminent departure of Nancy Zimpher, UC now has closure on the Huggins' era at UC." -jkwuc89
"Thanks Coach Huggins. What an awesome ceremony last night. For anyone who thought Bob didnt care last night hopefully changed your minds. That place went nuts and deservingly so. Great to see that legends from the past like Reuben, Logan, Levett, all were there. Amazing game to be at." -TheLivingLegend
Fans who weren't at the game, but watched it on TV, wished the ceremony coverage was better.
"I like a lot of what ESPN did, but wow they blew it when they took the camera off of Bob way TOO early. Does anybody else agree? He was getting a big ovation, crying, displaying great human emotion that you can't control and, all of a sudden, (Bret) Musburger and (Bob) Knight are on the screen and you can still hear screams and cheers outside of the picture. I guess I was pretty upset even though I think, for the most part, they did a good job." -Forsure21
After reviewing the forum, there was a wide range of reactions. Some people finally felt closure, others were left wanting more, while others simply didn't care and were tired of hearing about Huggins.
Huggins, the all-time winningest coach in UC history, was honored before the game with a 45-second tribute video. Signs were also handed out to fans that read 'Thanks Huggs' on one side and 'Go Bearcats' on the other.
The video showed highlights of Huggins from the sidelines yelling at his players and referees. It also showed the large number of players he coached through the years.
There were many senior night moments where Huggins was hugging farewell to his players.
This got to Huggins as he was seen on the West Virgina bench shedding tears.
Upon the completion of the video, Huggins was given a standing ovation and he waved to the crowed in gratitude.
What I want to know is if this moment gave fans closure to the Huggins saga that took place upon his dismissal in 2005.
I went to Bearcatnews.com forum to find out. Bearcatnews.com is a website dedicated to UC basketball and football. The forum members range from prospective UC students to UC alumni. There are also non-UC alumni/students. Men and women of all ages are welcome to join the forum.
Some fans were unsatisfied with the ceremony and felt UC should have done more.
"A class act by UC to do it. Having said that, I think it should have been done bigger...way bigger.
"A 16 year career, the most ever wins by a UC coach, countless titles and championships, and 14 NCAA tourney appearances could have been one heck of a 5 minute video - a video for the ages for UC fans. I think they should have had the former players join Bob at mid-court for a presentation of a plaque with his season records, accomplishments, etc. and a big THANK YOU engraved at the bottom. That would have been even more special. Allowing Bob to take the mic and say thank you would have been really unbelievable." -Bearcat-in-Italy
Other fans thought this ceremony symbolized the end of an era and finally have closure to all of the controvery surrounding Huggins' departure.
"UC's tribute to Coach Huggins tonight was well done and well received. Coupled with the eminent departure of Nancy Zimpher, UC now has closure on the Huggins' era at UC." -jkwuc89
"Thanks Coach Huggins. What an awesome ceremony last night. For anyone who thought Bob didnt care last night hopefully changed your minds. That place went nuts and deservingly so. Great to see that legends from the past like Reuben, Logan, Levett, all were there. Amazing game to be at." -TheLivingLegend
Fans who weren't at the game, but watched it on TV, wished the ceremony coverage was better.
"I like a lot of what ESPN did, but wow they blew it when they took the camera off of Bob way TOO early. Does anybody else agree? He was getting a big ovation, crying, displaying great human emotion that you can't control and, all of a sudden, (Bret) Musburger and (Bob) Knight are on the screen and you can still hear screams and cheers outside of the picture. I guess I was pretty upset even though I think, for the most part, they did a good job." -Forsure21
After reviewing the forum, there was a wide range of reactions. Some people finally felt closure, others were left wanting more, while others simply didn't care and were tired of hearing about Huggins.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Crowd Sourcing: Students indifferent towards Zimpher's departure
UC President Nancy Zimpher last week announced that she's leaving the university in order to take the chancellor position at the State University of New York system. The official UC announcement can be found here.
I wanted to find out what were UC students' reactions to this news. I asked UC journalism students the following questions:
1. What are your thoughts on the announcement that UC president Nancy Zimpher is leaving UC to go to the State University of New York?
2. How do you feel about her tenure here at UC?
3. What, if anything, do you think she accomplished at UC?
4. Are you a UC athletics fan? Does this factor into your thoughts about Zimpher?
For the most part, UC students didn't seem to mind Zimpher was leaving.
Here are some comments I got:
" Zimpher means nothing to me. I don't know her and she doesn't know me. She ruined the basketball program, yes, but I'm too busy to attend any games anyway so I won't pretend like I am upset about that. However, academically, some people may say she did wonders for the university, but I see it turning our world up-side-down and leaving. Switching to semesters, huh? And not staying to see it through? Good job. How about we make a Journalism department? Nancy is probably a nice lady to have tea with and apparently she is talented enough that SUNY likes her, a lot. So congratulations to her - but it means nothing to me. I'll be gone in a jiffy. But her leaving seems premature; she should stay longer to finish what she started." -Amanda W.
"I don't really think it's going to make that much of a difference that she's leaving. I'm not sure if she accomplished too much at UC. I'm somewhat ignorant on the subject, but apparently it's harder to get into UC now, so I guess that's a good thing (?). Also tuition went up 10% when she was here, although I don't know if that was necessarily completely her fault.
"Yes, I am a sports fan. I said "Nuck Fancy" just about as much as anyone after Huggins was fired, which I disagreed with. She did fire Huggins and pretty much ruined the previous two basketball seasons, but at the same time, she did hire our current athletic director, who hired Brian Kelly. So, while she temporarily paralyzed the basketball program, she did also help to bring the football team to national prominence." -Matthew K.
There were also students who think she did a lot for UC and hope the university can find a competent replacement.
"I know most don't really like her, but I've interviewed her in person several times and she's really super nice. She's done a great job in making the campus more friendly, and she's also done wonders with her various improvements to several programs and departments here at UC... In general she's been great in helping boost up UC's reputation too - we really needed her help in that regard. Hopefully our next president will continue making UC a better school. I think she deserves a lot of thanks for her work here." -Caroline T.
I wanted to find out what were UC students' reactions to this news. I asked UC journalism students the following questions:
1. What are your thoughts on the announcement that UC president Nancy Zimpher is leaving UC to go to the State University of New York?
2. How do you feel about her tenure here at UC?
3. What, if anything, do you think she accomplished at UC?
4. Are you a UC athletics fan? Does this factor into your thoughts about Zimpher?
For the most part, UC students didn't seem to mind Zimpher was leaving.
Here are some comments I got:
" Zimpher means nothing to me. I don't know her and she doesn't know me. She ruined the basketball program, yes, but I'm too busy to attend any games anyway so I won't pretend like I am upset about that. However, academically, some people may say she did wonders for the university, but I see it turning our world up-side-down and leaving. Switching to semesters, huh? And not staying to see it through? Good job. How about we make a Journalism department? Nancy is probably a nice lady to have tea with and apparently she is talented enough that SUNY likes her, a lot. So congratulations to her - but it means nothing to me. I'll be gone in a jiffy. But her leaving seems premature; she should stay longer to finish what she started." -Amanda W.
"I don't really think it's going to make that much of a difference that she's leaving. I'm not sure if she accomplished too much at UC. I'm somewhat ignorant on the subject, but apparently it's harder to get into UC now, so I guess that's a good thing (?). Also tuition went up 10% when she was here, although I don't know if that was necessarily completely her fault.
"Yes, I am a sports fan. I said "Nuck Fancy" just about as much as anyone after Huggins was fired, which I disagreed with. She did fire Huggins and pretty much ruined the previous two basketball seasons, but at the same time, she did hire our current athletic director, who hired Brian Kelly. So, while she temporarily paralyzed the basketball program, she did also help to bring the football team to national prominence." -Matthew K.
There were also students who think she did a lot for UC and hope the university can find a competent replacement.
"I know most don't really like her, but I've interviewed her in person several times and she's really super nice. She's done a great job in making the campus more friendly, and she's also done wonders with her various improvements to several programs and departments here at UC... In general she's been great in helping boost up UC's reputation too - we really needed her help in that regard. Hopefully our next president will continue making UC a better school. I think she deserves a lot of thanks for her work here." -Caroline T.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Red hot Pitt Downs UC
http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/sports/red_hot_pitt_downs_uc-1.1437252
Red hot Pitt downs UC
Jeff Geiser The News Record
The University of Cincinnati men’s basketball team went into Saturday’s game against No. 4-ranked Pittsburgh winning five of the last six games and searching for a signature win to bolster its NCAA tournament resumé.
That search continues after the Panthers defeated the Bearcats 85-69 before a crowd of 12,508 at the Peterson Events Center.
Pittsburgh tied a school record, shooting 67.4 percent from the field and missed only eight field goal attempts from the two-point range for the entire game.
“That’s the difference in their team this year: They’re putting up 77 points a game,” said UC head coach Mick Cronin. “They’re the best team we’ve played. They have the most complete team.”
The Pittsburgh attack was led by Sam Young’s 18 points and DeJuan Blair’s 17.
“They played well. Let’s give Pitt credit,” Cronin said. “Dejuan Blair made circus shots in the paint. His fall-away shots were ridiculous. He played like Karl Malone.”
Pitt’s offensive efficiency could largely be attributed to senior point guard Levance Fields.
“They have Levance Fields, who dominates with 13 assists and no turnovers. He’s probably the best pure run-your-team point guard,” Cronin said. “He’s not the talent that maybe Johnny Flynn (of Syracuse) is, but they have the best, pure senior point guard in the country.”
Despite the defensive struggles, there were some bright spots in the Bearcats’ performance: UC shot over 50 percent from the field against a vaunted Pitt defense and rebounded the ball well.
“Here’s our positives: We were able to come in here and shoot 52 percent and 46 percent [from 3-point range] at Pittsburgh, a team that’s known for their defense and toughness; and we were able to get 12 offensive rebounds, which was 48 percent of our misses,” said Cronin.
UC had three double-digit scorers, led by senior forward Mike Williams’ 17 points. Sophomore guard Larry Davis and freshman guard Dion Dixon added 13 points and 10 points, respectively.
The Pittsburgh defense limited UC’s leading scorer, Deonta Vaughn, to nine points – seven below his average.
“We’re not down. Obviously we don’t believe in moral victories. We’re not happy with our effort on the defensive end, but we did a lot of things well today,” Cronin said. “We just got beat by a better team, let’s just call it what it is. There’s a reason why I think they can win the national championship.”
The Bearcats return to action Saturday, Feb. 21, against Big East rival Louisville at Fifth Third Arena.
Red hot Pitt downs UC
Jeff Geiser The News Record
The University of Cincinnati men’s basketball team went into Saturday’s game against No. 4-ranked Pittsburgh winning five of the last six games and searching for a signature win to bolster its NCAA tournament resumé.
That search continues after the Panthers defeated the Bearcats 85-69 before a crowd of 12,508 at the Peterson Events Center.
Pittsburgh tied a school record, shooting 67.4 percent from the field and missed only eight field goal attempts from the two-point range for the entire game.
“That’s the difference in their team this year: They’re putting up 77 points a game,” said UC head coach Mick Cronin. “They’re the best team we’ve played. They have the most complete team.”
The Pittsburgh attack was led by Sam Young’s 18 points and DeJuan Blair’s 17.
“They played well. Let’s give Pitt credit,” Cronin said. “Dejuan Blair made circus shots in the paint. His fall-away shots were ridiculous. He played like Karl Malone.”
Pitt’s offensive efficiency could largely be attributed to senior point guard Levance Fields.
“They have Levance Fields, who dominates with 13 assists and no turnovers. He’s probably the best pure run-your-team point guard,” Cronin said. “He’s not the talent that maybe Johnny Flynn (of Syracuse) is, but they have the best, pure senior point guard in the country.”
Despite the defensive struggles, there were some bright spots in the Bearcats’ performance: UC shot over 50 percent from the field against a vaunted Pitt defense and rebounded the ball well.
“Here’s our positives: We were able to come in here and shoot 52 percent and 46 percent [from 3-point range] at Pittsburgh, a team that’s known for their defense and toughness; and we were able to get 12 offensive rebounds, which was 48 percent of our misses,” said Cronin.
UC had three double-digit scorers, led by senior forward Mike Williams’ 17 points. Sophomore guard Larry Davis and freshman guard Dion Dixon added 13 points and 10 points, respectively.
The Pittsburgh defense limited UC’s leading scorer, Deonta Vaughn, to nine points – seven below his average.
“We’re not down. Obviously we don’t believe in moral victories. We’re not happy with our effort on the defensive end, but we did a lot of things well today,” Cronin said. “We just got beat by a better team, let’s just call it what it is. There’s a reason why I think they can win the national championship.”
The Bearcats return to action Saturday, Feb. 21, against Big East rival Louisville at Fifth Third Arena.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Cincinnati seeks season sweep over Red Storm
http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/sports/1.1370321-1.1370321
Cincinnati seeks season sweep over Red Storm
Published: Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Updated: Tuesday, February 10, 2009
 "Photo: Kareem Elgazzar | The News Record")
On Saturday, Jan. 10, the University of Cincinnati men’s basketball team lost to the University of Connecticut 81-72, in its fourth straight loss. After losing to the Huskies that day, the Bearcats were winless in conference play and their chances of making it to the NCAA tournament looked bleak.
Now fast-forward exactly one month later and after winning six of its last eight contests, Cincinnati (16-8, 6-5) is very much in the hunt for not only postseason play but a possible NCAA tournament bid.
“Nobody thought we’d be where we are a year ago. I think it’s cool,” said sophomore guard Alvin Mitchell. “We control our own destiny. It depends if we get some key wins at the end of the season whether we can make the tournament or not.”
UC has seven Big East games remaining on their schedule, the next being Wednesday, Feb. 11, against St. John’s at Fifth Third Arena.
The Bearcats previously defeated St. John’s 71-60 on Jan. 22, in New York, after overcoming an 11-point halftime deficit.
Despite the victory, UC Head Coach Mick Cronin is concerned about St. John’s physicality and ability to rebound the basketball.
“We’ve got to compete with them physically. They out rebounded us by 11 in the first half last game. That’s a pretty significant advantage in a half of a game,” Cronin said.
“What we’ve got to be ready for is what they bring from an intensity standpoint on the backboard. That’ll be a major area of concern. We can’t get down that big in the rebounding category. That really was something that had me ready to lose my mind at halftime the last time we played them.”
Another area of concern for the Bearcats is the return of Malik Boothe, St. John’s starting point guard, who missed the previous game against UC due to a
thumb injury.
“Malik Boothe was out for a while, I think it was due to his hand. He’s going to change the tempo of the game a lot. He likes to get it up and down,” Mitchell said. “That’s going to be something we have to adjust to, that we didn’t last game because [Paris] Horne was at the point guard position.”
Win or lose Wednesday, the Bearcats know each remaining game is an opportunity to further rebuild the UC basketball program.
“We’ve got two seniors and we want to get them to the NCAA tournament this year. We’ve got Branden Miller and Mike Williams, who we don’t know for sure if he’s going to be able to come back next year,” said junior guard Deonta Vaughn. “We’re just trying to get them to the NCAA tournament and go all the way for them, so they can feel like they had a lot to do with rebuilding this program.“
Monday, February 9, 2009
Forensics Team Competes in Indianapolis
Critical thinking group participates in public speaking competitions across Midwest area
INDIANAPOLIS — Many people associate the word forensics with police work due to popular television shows like CSI; however, forensics is also a term used to define speech and debate.
It is generally acknowledged that the number one fear among adults is public speaking. So why are there a growing number of students who choose to face this fear by competing on the University of Cincinnati forensics team?
UC forensics head coach Wendy Larcher, an adjunct communications professor, can offer many answers to this question.
“Why are there so many people who like to play basketball? Because you can, because you like it. There aren’t as many speakers as there are basketball players, but that doesn’t make it any less worthy,” Larcher said. “And frankly, there’s just a little bit of thrill because you are able to move an entire room of people with what you can say. It’s thrilling for a basketball player to hit a three-pointer. For speakers, it’s a thrill to move someone with their words.”
The UC forensics team, in its fourth year, competes against other universities in the field of public speaking. There are 11 different speech categories in which students compete, including persuasive, impromptu, poetry and informative speaking.
Competitions are held on weekends throughout the fall and winter quarters at various colleges in the Midwest. Forensic members’ food allowances, transportation, hotel and registration fees are all covered by the university.
The team has approximately 15 members, most of whom are communications students; there are also business, journalism, organizational leadership and aerospace engineering students on the team.
Most members of the forensics team view competition as an opportunity to develop their talents.
“I’ve learned a great deal about my strengths and gathered detailed comments on places I can grow as an orator. The events are full of fun adventures and the company is always great,” said Tifanei Moyer, UC forensics team vice president. “I really have enjoyed my experiences and recommend it to anyone who is looking to build their individual skills, [and] resume and have an amazing time while doing so.”
Other forensics team members simply see competition as an opportunity to travel and make new friendships.
“I thought it would be a great opportunity to cross the Midwest and see different schools. The camaraderie of my teammates is the best part of being on the team,” said Joe Oder, recording secretary for the team.
The team’s most recent competition was Feb. 7 at the Dominata Classic on the campus of IUPUI in Indianapolis. Other schools that competed in the Dominata included Ball State, Butler University, Indiana University, Miami University and Western Kentucky.
The team has three remaining competitions, the next scheduled for Feb. 21-22 at the University of Akron.
“There aren’t many other activities that are going to teach you to get up and talk in front of an audience and to be a critical thinker. What better way to learn how to do that than with your peers?” Larcher said. “You get to travel with friends, get put up in a hotel, and meet students from other schools. And if you’re halfway good at it, you’ll get a trophy. Plus somebody else is paying for it.”
The forensics team is always looking to add new members. For more information about the UC forensics team, call 513-556-4412.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
UC Forensics - Dominata Classic @ IUPUI
INDIANAPOLIS -- I just got back from the UC forensic speech team's competition Saturday at the Dominata Classic on IUPUI's campus in Indianapolis, Ind.
Of the 15 total members on the team, only five competed this weekend.
The highlight for team was Tifanei Moyer and LaToya Suggs finishing second in their Duo Interpretation grouping.
No other members finished higher than third.
Other participants this go around were Joe Oder, Winnie Nguyen, and myself.
This was my first forensics competition and although I didn't finish very high, (I finished last place in both duo attempts) I still had a blast.
Nguyen and I did an interpretation of "The Princess Bride". I haven't seen the movie or read the book. I didn't even get my script until earlier in the week. So finishing with a top score was going to be nearly impossible considering we were competing against students who received scholarships for their forensic speaking abilities.
The competition was solid. There were teams from Miami (Ohio), Butler, Indiana University, Ball State and Western Kentucky.
UC forensics head coach Wendy Larcher was a number of the events.
The coolest part of the competition was when Suggs and Moyer snuck into see Nguyen and I's first performance. Despite getting a low score, mostly because we didn't have the entire script memorized, we for sure had the best crowd reactions. There were several students laughing and carrying on througout our performance.
No other performances during the first round got as many laughs. (Whether or not they were laughing at us or with us remains to be seen, haha)
Look for an article on the UC forensics team from me in the News Record either Monday or Wednesday this week. The article basically introduces the team, as they've never had an article written about them, and mentions their participation in Indianapolis yesterday.
I'll post the link to the article once it becomes available.
Of the 15 total members on the team, only five competed this weekend.
The highlight for team was Tifanei Moyer and LaToya Suggs finishing second in their Duo Interpretation grouping.
No other members finished higher than third.
Other participants this go around were Joe Oder, Winnie Nguyen, and myself.
This was my first forensics competition and although I didn't finish very high, (I finished last place in both duo attempts) I still had a blast.
Nguyen and I did an interpretation of "The Princess Bride". I haven't seen the movie or read the book. I didn't even get my script until earlier in the week. So finishing with a top score was going to be nearly impossible considering we were competing against students who received scholarships for their forensic speaking abilities.
The competition was solid. There were teams from Miami (Ohio), Butler, Indiana University, Ball State and Western Kentucky.
UC forensics head coach Wendy Larcher was a number of the events.
The coolest part of the competition was when Suggs and Moyer snuck into see Nguyen and I's first performance. Despite getting a low score, mostly because we didn't have the entire script memorized, we for sure had the best crowd reactions. There were several students laughing and carrying on througout our performance.
No other performances during the first round got as many laughs. (Whether or not they were laughing at us or with us remains to be seen, haha)
Look for an article on the UC forensics team from me in the News Record either Monday or Wednesday this week. The article basically introduces the team, as they've never had an article written about them, and mentions their participation in Indianapolis yesterday.
I'll post the link to the article once it becomes available.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Archiving past articles
So far, I've had three articles published in the News Record, UC's student newpaper. For the sake of documentation, I will periodically add the links to past articles on this blog.
Jan. 11: http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/sports/bearcats_lose_both_meets_to_louisville_cardinals
Jan. 20:
http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/sports/uc_track_wins_bgsu_challenge
Feb. 1:
http://newsrecord.org/sections/sports/notre_dame_cruises_to_win-1.1320479
As you can see, I've written about the UC swim & dive team, women's track and women's basketball. While these may not be the most glamorous sports to cover, I've enjoyed writing about them because I learned quite a bit doing so. I previoulsy had very little knowledge about swimming and diving competitions, as well as track. Now I'd say I know more than the average person. I also have enjoyed interviewing the head coaches. All three coaches (Monty Hopkins, Susan Seaton and J. Kelley Hall) were tremendous and very accomodating. They were able to fit me in their busy schedules just in time for me to make my deadlines and for that I'm very appreciative.
Jan. 11: http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/sports/bearcats_lose_both_meets_to_louisville_cardinals
Jan. 20:
http://www.newsrecord.org/sections/sports/uc_track_wins_bgsu_challenge
Feb. 1:
http://newsrecord.org/sections/sports/notre_dame_cruises_to_win-1.1320479
As you can see, I've written about the UC swim & dive team, women's track and women's basketball. While these may not be the most glamorous sports to cover, I've enjoyed writing about them because I learned quite a bit doing so. I previoulsy had very little knowledge about swimming and diving competitions, as well as track. Now I'd say I know more than the average person. I also have enjoyed interviewing the head coaches. All three coaches (Monty Hopkins, Susan Seaton and J. Kelley Hall) were tremendous and very accomodating. They were able to fit me in their busy schedules just in time for me to make my deadlines and for that I'm very appreciative.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Introduction
Hello all:
This is Jeff Geiser. I'm a senior Journalism student at the University of Cincinnati. This is my second degree as I've already graduated with a B.A. in Communication in Dec. '07. My career aspiration is to work in professional sports, preferably in Media Relations. I love football, baseball and basketball. One of my dreams in life is to get either a Super Bowl ring, a World Series ring, or an NBA world championship ring. (All three would be excellent.)
Right now, I currently work for the Cincinnati Reds in their Productions department. I've been there since May '08 and loved all my experiences there. I've learned how a major league baseball is presented on television, radio, as well as in the stands. The video board is a key component for clubs to make money off of advertisement. My greatest accomplishment with the Reds was when I was given the opportunity to write and compose the entire script for the main stage entertainment at Redsfest XI in Dec. '08. I am in the process of tranferring to the Creative Services department where I will have the opportunity to write for feature articles for the game program.
My previous work experience includes working for the Cincinnati Bengals in their public relations deparment and WCPO-TV (ABC) in their sports department. I still currently work all Bengals home games as a PR crew member.
I hope obtaining a journalism degree will help me further my career in sports.
This blog is going to center around what's going on campus at UC, with a focus on Bearcat athletics. I am a sports writer for the News Record and would like to add insight on this blog pertaining to the articles I've written in the paper.
I would also like to get student's opinions on campus life, as well as UC athletics.
Any questions? Email me: geiserwj@email.uc.edu
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
