Jerry Micco

Over the past couple of months we've all had to think about what APSE is all about. I know I certainly have.

It started with a rumble in spring 2004 when the Bowl Championship Series said the Associated Press poll would count one-third toward a college football team's ranking in its new formula. Apparently more than ever before, but there was a day under the old system where the AP actually named a national champion.

It ended with a roar as writers were buried under an avalanche of e-mails from overzealous fans. Some sports editors were crying from the mountaintop that we simply can't be the story. The coaches were hiding behind their poll's anonymity. The AP would finally have to issue a cease-and-desist order to the BCS.

And the best team in the country still won. Go figure.

Far be it from me to get our friends at Auburn to fire up their e-mails, but this isn't about which team won the national title or how much money one conference lost or one conference made because some writers changed votes (coaches did too, nine of them). This is about us — APSE — and our role in these situations.

APSE should not be in the business of telling members what they can or cannot do when it comes to being involved in polls, award voting (Heisman Trophy, MVP, etc.) Advise and issue a statement. Certainly. But each individual newspaper has to make those decisions with their newsroom management. This is an individual newspaper decision, not one for our organization to make for its members.

That may put me on the wrong side of the ethics issue and the trend toward completely getting out of the awards/polls selection process. That's fine. We need to look at the bigger picture here.

APSE has always been a body that advises newspapers on ethics issues. There are ethics statements in our by-laws. They are there to advise newspapers how they should handle things like this. We advise, we don't dictate.

With all the best intentions, some members e-mailed me saying this is something APSE should be against from the start. They felt that way for all the right reasons. Anyone who spoke with them or exchanged e-mail with them knows how passionate they were and how much they care about this organization.

But our track record as newspapers wasn't exactly following their logic. Our writers have been participating in the BCS poll since the inception of the Bowl Coalition. Before that, we all voted in the AP and UPI polls. Most papers' writers still vote for MVPs and Cy Youngs and other awards. Until this year, the New York Times allowed its poll to be used as part of the BCS formula. Last time I checked, it was the Coaches/USA Today poll.

This isn't to point out that APSE or the above-mentioned newspapers are ethically bankrupt or that we as editors don't care. But I can't recall papers pulling out of all the polls and award voting on a massive scale at any time over the past half century or so.

And I don't disagree with the sentiments of those editors, but as an organization, we need to turn on the bright lights before we head down a very dark road.

When we get in the business of telling members what they should or shouldn't do, what they should or shouldn't participate in, then we have to be able to enforce what we say. So, if we say APSE-member papers shouldn't vote in the AP poll and thus influence the BCS championship, then there has to be a consequence if a member paper tells us to blow it out our noses.

Do we throw them out? Sanction them with a fine? Not hardly. That's not what we're all about.

But these issues aren't going away. We need to deal with them somehow and our organization needs to be more involved in how college and professional awards are given and more closely examine the role of our writers. The AP took care of all of us when it told the BCS to stop using its poll. That was a good thing.

It doesn't get to the root of this issue, though. This is where we come in.

We aggressively should work with the various leagues and other sports entities that use writers to vote on their awards to let them know how we feel about it. If we feel this isn't in the best interest of our newspapers, it's up to us as sports department managers to talk with our bosses about these issues. We certainly should discuss among all the membership and decide on a course of action for APSE.

We have a convention coming in Orlando. Perhaps we should have a summit on this issue because it goes beyond the BCS. Maybe we need to amend our by-laws to make them stronger. Or make more of a statement on where we stand on this issue as an organization. The discussion itself would be important and eye-opening.

Most importantly, however, we need to have a frank discussion with our writers who vote for these awards and in the polls.

This is a vital part of this issue. Most writers will tell you, and I believe them, that they take this voting very seriously. It's a matter of pride for them to be involved. They don't like making the news, but they also feel they are knowledgeable enough to give an informed opinion.

The first rumblings of change may have come from the movement of sports journalists and the AP on the BCS poll. But the final outcome — and APSE's role in it — should be a louder, more crystal clear message to our bosses, our staff and more importantly, our membership.

• • •

You can reach Jerry Micco of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette via e-mail at jmicco@post-gazette.com.

 Back to index