What do they want?
Where's the gushing? Where's the credit given to our local college football team while recognizing the young men's efforts to almost cover the point spread?
I know there's no cheering allowed in the press box, but isn't The Times the hometown newspaper?
OK, so I know reporters don't write the headlines atop their stories, but don't the headline writers understand their roles as feel-good barkers when a team wins?
Take the headline in Sunday's sports section: "The Plod Thickens."
The what? Am I just stupid? Is that how I'm supposed to start my day, reading the newspaper and thinking I'm stupid because I don't get what someone is trying to tell me?
Below that there was this: "Kiffin votes conservative ticket, as a passing game that is effective early against Huskies disappears."
Does that mean USC lost?
Is it really necessary to bring Romney into this?
At this point I'm worried it might keep folks from turning to Page 2 and a helpful review of the movie, "The Master."
A newspaper doesn't always get credit for the public service it provides, but then it's just a thankless job, I guess.
But as a reader, I still don't know whether USC won. So I go online because that's where we're all headed anyway and notice a different headline atop the USC story:
"USC passes up a chance for a big win at Washington."
Does that mean USC lost?
Now I understand what Lane Kiffin was saying last week when he said headline writers and little green men are out to get him.
"You read the headlines and you can't tell if we won," he said.
I say, what's wrong with a simple "Hooray!" in bold type in the hometown paper?
