[Hank 91]

My impression from reading the recruiting blogs is that their standard for reporting and writing are not that great, which makes me appreciate someone like Drukarev all the more.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I wonder about the process for editing, fact checking, etc.  If a reporter takes it upon him or herself to act like a professional and check their information and actually do some work, that's great.  But often it seems that the reporters are just emailing in their report.

Maybe part of the general decline of American journalism in the digital age.

There are two problems, as I see it. First, the standards for these sites are pretty low. Soon after I started my site, I was approached by the person running the Rivals site about writing for them. (This was three or four years ago, long before Drukarev.) I have no inside information about the program nor any journalistic training. As you mention, Drukarev is excellent, far better than what you see on most of the other Rivals sites.

Second, it simply isn't realistic to expect anyone out there to know as much about Stanford and the Stanford football program as so many of us here do. How often have we heard incorrect information during a national telecast of a Stanford game? I'm sure that writer knows an unhealthy amount about Georgia football. There probably isn't room in his head for Stanford data, and he probably doesn't have time to research it. Maybe he should, but I don't think we should be surprised by others' ignorance; we should expect it.

[Hank 91]

My impression from reading the recruiting blogs is that their standard for reporting and writing are not that great, which makes me appreciate someone like Drukarev all the more.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I wonder about the process for editing, fact checking, etc.  If a reporter takes it upon him or herself to act like a professional and check their information and actually do some work, that's great.  But often it seems that the reporters are just emailing in their report.

Maybe part of the general decline of American journalism in the digital age.

There are two problems, as I see it. First, the standards for these sites are pretty low. Soon after I started my site, I was approached by the person running the Rivals site about writing for them. (This was three or four years ago, long before Drukarev.) I have no inside information about the program nor any journalistic training. As you mention, Drukarev is excellent, far better than what you see on most of the other Rivals sites.

Second, it simply isn't realistic to expect anyone out there to know as much about Stanford and the Stanford football program as so many of us here do. How often have we heard incorrect information during a national telecast of a Stanford game? I'm sure that writer knows an unhealthy amount about Georgia football. There probably isn't room in his head for Stanford data, and he probably doesn't have time to research it. Maybe he should, but I don't think we should be surprised by others' ignorance; we should expect it.