Sports Geek III

As with the last entry, read below to get the most out of this article. This is section 3.

The Sports media as a whole claims to be more involved with the game, and as such, more qualified to make certain judgments about the game that the Sports Geek supposedly can not. Most awards are in the hands of the sports media because they can supposedly be counted on to make a more objective analysis when it comes to these things. Whether this actually happens or not is another story, but most assuredly they can be counted on better than the fan to make these decisions. The average fan just doesn't have the time amidst their 8 hour a day job, family, and other commitments to objectively analyze every player in the league, and there's nothing wrong with that. The sports media has this job to some degree, since they live off their ability to rate and wax poetically about such men.
The danger here is when this responsibility forms a fraternity. A lot of the voters over the years base their judgments on past experience (i.e. Gold Glovers who actually decline over the years but seem better than others) or something even more ludicrous. Woody Paige has lately become the figurehead for insane balloting, and it raises a question. If fans can't be counted on to make objective accusations, why are we relying on such men for their objectivity, when they clearly are influenced by the same hometown influence as other men?
Where am I going with this, you ask? Do I think that Sports Geeks should handle the voting process solely because they are super students? Hell no. While Sports Geeks do tend to have more objectivity due to their reliance on statistical analysis, I don't think that they should replace the sports media in this voting process. I do think that the sports media needs to take into account this new class though when evaluating their position. Sports fans have access to much more information than earlier--if a writer says that Hal from Baltimore is the best hitter in the American League, the average schmuck in Montana can go on the internet and look at the stats and put the writer to his word. Remember Horace and Edwin, the two goofballs I mentioned in section I? Sports Geeks look at Horace and see a star in the final year of his contract who can be dumped for a collection of talent before he inevitably leaves to another team which can afford him, and Edwin as a 45 year old man with bum knees who will never steal 100 bases like he used to (I'm looking at you Rickey Henderson.)
This leaves us at an interesting turning point. Sports media, as the deeply involved faithful, have to be ready to account for themselves because of the existence of the Sports Geek. I believe that we'll be soon shifting into an era where the media present sports more tangibly. Even though we can't pick up the ball and throw a spiral 60 yards for a touchdown, we can make our own informed decisions as to who is or isn't the best. With the oncoming of the Sports Geek, the media must reevaluate their own position; be ready to account for your writing to both fans and players, or be swept away by a sea of criticism.

I believe I'll put this to rest for now. On Monday I'll go back to covering sports, and maybe come back to this at some point later in the year. In the meantime, comment on what you think of this whole thought process!