An excerpt of my latest column for Poynter.org.

******

At one time, Robert Lusetich didn’t cover golf for FoxSports.com. He covered Tiger Woods.

Lusetich was assigned to all of his tournaments in 2009. Part of it was due to a book he was writing on Woods, but it also was the result of the insatiable appetite for all things Tiger. After winning his 14th major at the U.S. Open in 2008, the countdown was on for Woods’ inevitable march to Jack Nicklaus’ record 18 major victories.

So if Woods was teeing it up in competition in 2009, Lusetich was there to write about it.

“Tiger moves the needle, not just in golf, but in the world of sports,” said Lusetich of the unique assignment.

The all-Tiger-all-the-time coverage hardly has dulled through the years. The nature of the beat, though, has changed for Lusetich and his fellow golf reporters.

Once again, Woods is the main focus at this week’s Masters. However, the story now has morphed from him making a run at history to chronicling what could be the end of his run.

Woods’ one-time brilliance almost seems like a distant memory in light of his stunning downturn. Forget about winning the Masters. With his short game mysteriously gone, it will be an upset if he makes the cut.

“Has there ever been a story like this in all of sports?” Lusetich said.

Indeed, the Woods spotlight could be so intense, if a player shots a 59 in the first or second round, he might not get mentioned until the fourth graph.

ESPN.com’s Gene Wojciechowski knows Rory McIlroy is going for his third straight major this week, and fifth before the age of 26. He is well aware that there are numerous stories to tell about other players.

Wojciechowski, though, still intends to empty his notebook on the player now ranked, incredibly, 111 in the world. He isn’t going to apologize to any critics who contend there’s too much Woods coverage.

“If you believe every athlete’s career is a three-act play, then this is Woods’ third act,” Wojciechowski said. “Just because he isn’t winning majors doesn’t make Woods any less compelling a story. I’d argue it makes it more compelling. You can legitimately ask the question: Is Tigers Woods done? Reasonable minds can disagree on the answer, but the question itself is telling and fascinating.”

An excerpt from my Tribune column on how things are not equal in Chicago:

*****

The Cubs and White Sox each lost 89 games last year. Both teams were lauded for making bold moves during the offseason. Expectations are high on the North and South sides of town.

Yet only one of the Chicago teams is scheduled to be featured prominently on national TV during the first portion of the season. Care to take a guess?

In the some-things-never-change department, naturally it is the Cubs. The networks are ready to ride the Theo Epstein train this year while taking a wait-and-see approach on Rick Hahn’s work with the Sox.

The Cubs were tabbed for the much-hyped major-league season opener Sunday night with their game against the Cardinals being shown on ESPN2. The “Baseball Tonight” crew will converge on Wrigley Field for special coverage and the network’s top team of Dan Shulman, Curt Schilling and John Kruk were on the call.

Meanwhile, the Cubs also are scheduled for five national games on Fox, including three Saturday prime-time telecasts.

As for the Sox, not so much. They don’t have a game listed on ESPN‘s Sunday night schedule and their only Fox telecast thus far is a Saturday night game against the Tigers on June 6 at U.S. Cellular Field.

Now these TV schedules aren’t set in stone. ESPN’s Sunday night slate is listed only through May with the exception of two additional games in July. Fox has a “schedule subject to change” disclaimer, so the Sox should get national coverage if they perform.

Of course, therein lies the difference between the two teams: The mere promise of a dramatic turnaround has the networks salivating to get in on the Cubs’ action.

*******

“Like the Red Sox, the Cubs have fans scattered throughout the country,” Shulman said. “For TV, the teams that move the needle are the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Dodgers, Cardinals, Giants and Detroit. Those are the top-echelon teams. Everyone else has to fight for more national TV.”

The White Sox are in the “everyone else” category. Schilling, though, is high on the Sox’s moves. He hopes to see them pop up on ESPN’s Sunday night schedule.

“They’ve got some fun players to watch,” Schilling said. “If they win, they’ll find a way to get on TV.”

My latest column for the National Sports Journalism Center. Any thoughts?

*******

Opening Day always has been a very special day for me. Baseball brings the promise of spring, even though winter seems to linger into mid May in stupid-weather Chicago.

My first vivid memory of Opening Day was in 1968 when the White Sox opened at home against Cleveland. I was an 8-year-old just beginning my obsession with baseball. Somehow, I always seemed to manage to will myself to get sick so I could stay home from school to watch the season opener. And it wasn’t some wimpy cold. I had a conveniently-timed string of mono, measles and strep throats in successive early Aprils. I couldn’t have been happier with my 102-fever as I settled into the couch for a day of baseball.

The record shows Cleveland, behind Sonny Siebert, slaughtered my Sox 9-0 in the ’68 opener. Yet that hardly dimmed my enthusiasm, as 47 years later, I am eagerly awaiting another White Sox Opening Day.

However, there’s a problem. The Sox open Monday afternoon in Kansas City. I’m not a kid anymore. I don’t miss work even when I do get sick. As a result, I won’t be able to watch most of the game.

I am sure plenty of other people are in the same boat. MLB has scheduled 14 openers on Monday, and all but three are at night. Many of those fans will be working or commuting home during those games. It never made sense to me that this glorious day always is on a weekday.

Here’s a way to remedy the situation: MLB should schedule a grand Opening Day festival on the Sunday between the NCAA Final Four semifinals on Saturday and the title game on the following Monday. Start with noon games in the East and go through ESPN’s Sunday night telecast.

Technically, there will be an opener on Sunday night, as St. Louis-Cubs kick off the 2015 season on ESPN. That’s great, but what about the rest of the day?

From a TV perspective, the Sunday afternoon on Final Four weekend might be the deadest of the year. It definitely is my least favorite. After several Sundays of March Madness, there’s the letdown of not having any big college basketball games to watch. It is the Sunday before the Masters, so no compelling golf. The NBA and NHL are grinding down their endless regular-seasons, desperately waiting for the infusion of the energy that comes with the playoffs.

Meanwhile, if the weather holds true to form, the false spring will prevent a significant portion of the country, including those stuck in Chicago, from enjoying outdoor activities. Like me, they are homebound just dying to watch some interesting sports programming on this empty Sunday.

Given all those variables, it makes so much sense for MLB to go with wall-to-wall openers on that Sunday. Baseball fans would devour a slate of Sunday Opening Day games, and a high volume of non-traditional viewers likely would tune in because the sports TV programming is so weak on that day. Who knows, perhaps some of them would get hooked and become more avid baseball fans?

With the right marketing, MLB could make Opening Day Sunday into a quasi-national holiday. No need to miss work or stay home from school. Everyone would be able to enjoy the great pitching match-ups of No. 1 starters and the unique color and pageantry that come with Game 1 of the 162-game season.

I broached the Sunday Opening Day concept to MLB. Spokesman Matt Bourne said new commissioner Rob Manfred and his staff are exploring ideas with the schedule.

“All areas of the schedule are under review for the 2016 season,” Borne said in an email.

The commissioner already has done some forward thinking on the back end of the schedule with a recently announced plan to have the final games of the season on Oct. 4 all start at the same time.

“If a game impacts another game, they’re all occurring at the same time, so no team would be put into a lame-duck situation because their fate already had been decided by an earlier result,” said Tony Petitti, MLB chief operating officer, in a Los Angeles Times story.

“If we do have games coming down to the wire, we want to make sure we maximize that day.”

Sounds like a great idea. Clearly, Manfred is a progressive leader who is open to new ideas.

MLB, though, would have to do some juggling to implement the Opening Day Sunday concept. ESPN has an exclusive deal to air baseball’s season opener, serving as a stand-alone game on that particular day. Note: It hasn’t always been on a Sunday. In recent years, openers have aired on Wednesday and Thursdays.

Perhaps a solution would be for ESPN to telecast the season opener on Saturday afternoon prior to the Final Four game, or on the previous Friday night? In both cases, it would be wide open in terms of sports TV competition.

Listen, I know I don’t know all the variables involved here. There are people who get paid a lot of money to figure out this stuff. Maybe this concept can’t be worked out.

However, it still is something that should be considered. At a time when all sports think out of the box, a special Opening Day Sunday package would create a much-needed buzz for baseball. Besides, that Sunday is just screaming for baseball to seize it.

Nothing would please this old fan more than on Sunday, April 3, 2016, when it is 38 degrees and drizzling in Chicago, to be able watch a full day of games starting the new season. Unlike when I was a kid, the only fever I’d have would be baseball fever.

An excerpt from my latest column for Poynter:

******

When Tyler Hansbrough led North Carolina to the national title in 2009, Dana O’Neil left her seat on the floor and climbed a few rows into the stands to talk to his family. The access allowed the ESPN.com reporter to get a quote from Hansbrough’s father, Gene, on how it was the culmination of a dream for his son.

O’Neil cited that anecdote when she told NCAA officials why it is important for reporters to have courtside seating during the men’s basketball tournament.

“It allowed me to tell a much more compelling story,” O’Neil said. “If you put me in [a far-away press box], I’m not going to have that kind of access. I won’t be able to write that story.”

O’Neil, now the president of the U.S. Basketball Writers Association, is on the frontlines of a difficult struggle. She and USBWA are trying to protect the premium reporting positions for the NCAA tournament.

It already is a losing battle in the context of what had existed previously. The NCAA delivered a huge blow prior to the 2013 tournament, telling the USBWA that it intendedto use much of the media floor seating for players’ family and other key supporters [think corporate sponsors]. There was an estimated reduction from 180 courtside seats to 70 for that Final Four. O’Neil called it “a year of Armageddon” with veteran NCAA reporters wailing about being relegated to the rafters or other poor viewing locations in arenas and stadiums.

Since then, the USBWA, along with assistance from the Associated Press Sports Editors, have worked with the NCAA on improving conditions. O’Neil said progress has been made with some courtside seats restored. However, she emphasized, “It’s not near what it was.”

“We recognize we’ll never get it back to what we had,” O’Neil said. “What we’re trying to do is get as many people as humanly possible closer to the floor.”

An excerpt from my Tribune column on one of my favorite guys.

You also can access the entire column at my Twitter feed: @Sherman_Report.

*******

If the NCAA tournament follows its usual script, it will deliver several feel-good stories on the court in the upcoming three weeks. However, a heart-warmer also will occur at the broadcast table.

After more than three decades as one of college basketball’s most popular analysts, Bill Raftery finally will get his chance on the game’s biggest stage. He will join Jim Nantz and Grant Hill on CBS and TBS’ No. 1 team for the tournament and will be spotlighted in their coverage of the Final Four in Indianapolis.

Admittedly, the circumstances of how Raftery landed the role aren’t the best. CBS and Turner needed to find a replacement for its lead analyst Greg Anthony, who was suspended after being arrested for solicitation of a prostitute in January.

Nevertheless, CBS and Turner turned a negative into a positive with its decision to tab Raftery for the premium assignment in creating a new three-man team with Hill, a two-time national champion at Duke. Regarding “Raft”, the response seemed to be a collective “it’s about time” from the college basketball community.

“He’s so beloved,” Nantz said. “Everyone in the game truly embraces him. This is a very popular choice.”

Raftery said he has been overwhelmed by the avalanche of well-wishes from friends, colleagues and fans. It all began when he received a surprising phone call from CBS Sports chairman Sean McManus.

“I joked to Sean that I must have been the last man standing, or that he must have felt sorry for me,” Raftery said.

Seriously, Raftery said he never hungered for the assignment.

“I’m honored by the opportunity,” Raftery said. “However, I never felt that I was unfulfilled. I always enjoyed what I’m doing at the time and never have been concerned with what’s next.”

An excerpt from my latest for Poynter.

******

J. R. Moehringer spent more than 100 hours with Alex Rodriguez. He saw him in a Batman costume during a New Year’s Eve celebration with his children. He was with him on a day in New York when he met with the new Commissioner of Baseball Rob Manfred. And then he accompanied him on a visit to the surgeon who worked on his hip.

They had numerous intimate conversations that carried on into the night. At times, it got to be too much—for Moehringer.

“I told him, ‘Alex, I’m tired. I’ve got to go home,’” Moehringer said.

Yet despite almost unlimited access, Moehringer decided not to use one quote from Rodriguez in his riveting 12,000+-word piece on the disgraced star in the March 2 edition of ESPN The Magazine.

Ironically, it all began when he sought a quote from Rodriguez for an ESPN The Magazinestory he was doing on Derek Jeter, said Moehringer, a Pulitzer Prize winner. He used a Rodriguez quote on his teammate for that story and struck a relationship in the process. Eventually after several off-the-record lunches, Moehringer inquired if Rodriguez would be willing to be the subject of an extensive profile on the eve of his return to baseball this spring.

“It was up and down,” Moehringer said. “They pulled out for at least a month. His people didn’t want him to do it. But he overruled them. He liked where we were going [from their conversations].”

Moehringer embarked on the project full-time in December. He says he was “stunned” by the volume of access.

“I don’t know if I had that kind of access to [Andre Agassi],” said Moehringer, who assisted the tennis star in writing his bestselling autobiography, “Open.” “It was a gradual process. It probably never would have happened if I just said, ‘Let’s go,’ and hit [the record button].”

My latest column for the Chicago Tribune is on Jeff Van Gundy and Bulls coach Tom Thibodeau.

You also can access the column on Twitter at @Sherman_Report.

From the column:

*******

Jeff Van Gundy usually operates without a filter. Whatever thought pops into his brain often does a beeline straight to his mouth.

But the outspoken NBA analyst says he might have to switch on his rarely used internal censor when it comes to discussing Tom Thibodeau‘s shaky relationship with the Bulls.

“I’ve been asked by (Leon Rose of CAA, the firm that represents Thibodeau) to tone it down a bit,” Van Gundy said this week.

In the wake of Derrick Rose’s latest injury, the coach’s future likely will be brought up during ABC‘s telecast of the Clippers-Bulls game Sunday. Mike Breen, Van Gundy, Mark Johnson and Doris Burke will be on the call. Everything seems to be on the table for a franchise that Van Gundy says “feels snake-bit.”

Previously, speculation about Thibodeau’s status provoked Van Gundy to rail about Bulls management during an ESPN telecast of a January game in Dallas. He alleged the Bulls were leaking stories “to undermine” Thibodeau.

The Bulls quickly fired back. Van Gundy said Bulls general manager Gar Forman, who was at the game, berated him at halftime. “He called me a bunch of names,” Van Gundy said.

Two days later, John Paxson, the Bulls’ executive vice president of basketball operations, told the Tribune the remarks were “pathetic” and alleged that Van Gundy “was trying to protect his friend.”

Van Gundy said the incident resulted in him receiving a call from Thibodeau’s agent.

“He asked that I not say anything bad about (Thibodeau’s relationship with the Bulls). It was getting people upset,” Van Gundy said. “I told him I have a job to do, but at the same time, I don’t want to do anything to hurt Tom.”

My latest column for the National Sports Journalism Center at Indiana is on MLB’s initial efforts to deal with the pace of play issue. It’s a start.

From the column:

******

Of all the suggestions being made to speed up baseball, this one might be the best.

Inspired by watching the Oscars, Eric Edholm of Yahoo Sports fired off this tweet last night:

“Instead of a pitch clock for baseball they should just bring an orchestra that plays with more fortissimo when the pitcher is lagging.”

Now that would be awesome. When the pitcher circles the mound for the fourth time because he’s deathly afraid of throwing that next pitch, fire up the orchestra to let him know he’s about to be pulled. Neil Patrick Harris, or specifically his writers, could have used a relief pitcher at the Oscars.

The Oscars, though, always will draw big ratings no matter how long it drags on. The same can’t be said for baseball.

That’s why Major League Baseball took some steps last week to speed up the game. The changes include strict policies to get the games started immediately out of commercial breaks and requiring batters to keep at least one foot in the batter’s box in between pitches.

Pete Abraham of the Boston Globe wondered how that regulation will play with a certain Red Sox slugger.

“Red Sox fans are familiar with the routine. David Ortiz takes a pitch, then takes two steps out of the batter’s box. He taps each cleat with his bat, claps his hands, and adjusts his helmet before stepping back in and taking a few practice swings.

“Sometimes Big Papi will go for a little stroll and adjust his batting gloves, especially if he disagrees with the umpire’s call. The process can take up to 30 seconds.”

Those 30 seconds times 500-550 plate appearances equals viewers tuning out on baseball. For all the talk about the rules changes being aimed at the young demos, it also focuses on old geezers like myself. I have plenty of avid sports fan friends who tell me they no longer can sit through an entire baseball telecast.

MLB’s ratings for the All-Star game and postseason are at historic lows. While some teams do strong ratings at the local level, who is to say they wouldn’t be even bigger with a more palatable product?

MLB knows it can’t continue to sustain an average game time of 3 hours, 2 minutes and climbing. And that’s brisk compared to Tampa Bay (3:19 per game) and Boston (3:17). The numbers are even worse during the postseason with some dreadfully dull 4-1 games pushing four hours.

My latest column for Poynter.org focuses on some important comments from Pam Oliver to aspiring young women journalists.

From the column:

*******

Pam Oliver knew she had a captive audience to deliver her message.

“The journalism has to matter,” Oliver said repeatedly at Northwestern Tuesday as part of the Medill School of Journalism’s “Beyond The Box Score” series.

She joined USA Today columnist Christine Brennan, Rachel Nichols of CNN and Turner Sports, and ESPN’s Cassidy Hubbarth on a panel titled, “The Female Voice in Sports Media.”

Oliver, who was Fox Sports’ top sideline reporter for the NFL for years, made headlines last year for her honest reaction to Fox moving her off that assignment and replacing her with the younger Erin Andrews.

When Brennan, who moderated the session, asked the panelists to open by giving their assessments of the media landscape as it relates to the female voice, Oliver saw a room full of young aspiring women journalists. She is concerned that building a solid journalism foundation has become secondary for many students who want a career in sports. Many seem to be more attracted to the celebrity of being a sideline reporter.

Oliver clearly wanted to set them on the right path.

“It’s a small club of women (in sports media) who put journalism first,” Oliver said. “They’re not in it to be celebrities or big on Twitter. You can tell when someone is serious with what they are doing. You can tell when someone is putting in the hours to get to know the players and coaches beyond just using your looks, or you know, your assets.

“I wish some of the hiring practices would improve. There’s a definite pattern with a certain look and certain quality that the outlets are going after.”

At this point, Oliver paused and took a sip of water. She admitted the issue gets her “emotional.”

“I just want to see passion out there and young people who are in it for the right reason,” Oliver continued. “It’s not about wanting to be seen on TV. It’s about wanting to be a journalist. I hope and pray as I look around the room that you’re willing to do the work.”

Oliver eventually finished her monologue by saying, “It’s the journalism, it’s the journalism.”

*****

Photo by Sean Su/Daily Northwestern.

My latest column for the National Sports Journalism Center at Indiana has me revisiting an old rant.

The video mocking the swimsuit edition on “Last Week with John Oliver” and excerpts of my column:

I had thought about taking a pass on dumping on Sports Illustrated’s swimsuit edition this year. Let someone else do it. There are plenty of people out there who object to the magazine’s annual lowering of its standards.

Then I saw a video from “Last Week with John Oliver.” The HBO show does a regular feature titled, “How is this still a thing?”

Last night, the target was SI’s swimsuit edition. As you would expect, the three-minute critique was funny and mocking of SI.

At one point, the narrator notes in the ‘80s and ‘90s, the prospect of seeing scantily-clad women in a sports magazine was “tantalizing.” Times, though, have changed.

“Do people not understand they can now just type ‘naked ladies’ into the Internet and see what Google throws at them?”

That line inspired a big laugh. Eventually, the narrator delivered this hammer: “Even SI knows (the swimsuit edition) is losing its relevance.”

Indeed, this year’s swimsuit edition made me feel sadder than usual.

*******

Yet you could feel a sense of desperation with the cover of this year’s edition. It features Hannah Davis, also known as Derek Jeter’s girlfriend, pulling down the bottom of her bikini. Perhaps it was hot and she suffered from some chafing issues on the day of the shoot?

Let’s just say, another centimeter more and there would have been nothing left to the imagination. As it was, the cover was ripped for going too far.

Wrote Jennifer Weiner in The New York Times: “It’s shocking, and it’s meant to be. With hard-core pornography available to anyone with a laptop and a credit card, Sports Illustrated has to raise the stakes if it wants to stay relevant.”

SI obviously feels as if it has to push the envelope to keep the public interested in the swimsuit edition. As racy as the cover is, it doesn’t come close to matching some of the photos inside.

It seems like many of the women don’t like the idea of wearing the entire bikini. I counted so you didn’t have to: There are 32 photos of the women either without tops or see-through tops. I’m not even getting into thongs or the one of shot of a completely naked Kate Bock with the bikini sitting at her side.