THE SPORTS EDITOR : Once Regarded as a Stogie-Smoking Bunch of Rapscallions, the Boys in the Toy Department Have Joined the Real World

The subject was “Stress: What It Can Do to You, Your Spouse, Your Family.”

“Pressure is a deterrent,” the psychologist told his 200 or so attentive listeners. “It will kill you.”

The audience was made up mostly of young men with pens, notebooks or tape recorders. Only a few had gray hair. Many were accompanied by their wives.

“People who deal with people have stress,” the psychologist, Dr. Stephen Douglas of Columbus, Ohio, told them. The men nodded knowingly.

Psychologists who deal with stress usually are invited to speak to such groups as teachers, policemen and doctors, people who live with pressure every day. But, gathered at a resort hotel near Cincinnati on this June morning to hear Dr. Douglas was a room full of sports editors. That group as everyone knows, deals only in fun and games, not the real world. The psychologist himself told them, “Sports are nice but not very important.”

Yet, here were the elite of sports journalism getting a lesson on how to live with stress and debating other serious subjects. The occasion was the 12th annual convention of the Associated Press Sports Editors, a four-day convocation attended by the fellows who run the sports departments of newspapers of all sizes throughout America.

To improve their skills and professionalism, the editors who determine what sports news you get to read attended workshops on how to better manage their time and improve their staff’s writing, editing, graphics and picture selection, and grappled with such non-editing problems as ethics, the printing of gambling information, locker-room access and credentials. They recruited, exchanged ideas, played a little, critiqued themselves and listened to what some outsiders had to say about their work.

Sports editors have been around ever since William Randolph Hearst started the first sports section in 1895 to increase the circulation of his New York Journal. Once upon a time they wore their hats in the office, likely smoked cigars, drank heavily and played poker a lot, wrote a column and were the most recognizable member of their staff. They ran the “toy department” or “the sandbox” of their newspaper and hardly anyone looked upon them as serious journalists.

Today, most journalists understand that sports is no longer the toy department at good newspapers, and the man who runs it, whether he is called the sports editor, assistant managing editor/sports, executive sports editor, associate sports editor, assistant sports editor or deputy sports editor, is, indeed, an honest-to-goodness newspaperman who takes his job as seriously as any editor in the newsroom.

To find out what problems sports editors face today, a reporter joined them at their convention.

Most of the editors interviewed for this story said their job is harder and less fun now because their business is more complicated and competitive, and because they spend too much time being administrators instead of journalists. Some, in fact, view themselves as travel agents and accountants.

Still, they believe sports sections are better, ethics and standards higher and budgets bigger. And they like their work.

The major changes Dick Sandler has observed in his 12 years as sports editor of Newsday have been “the growth of space, a greater emphasis on features and columns and more coverage in general.” Sandler, a former general news editor, supervises a staff of 54 at the Long Island tabloid.

“Papers are beginning to realize how important sports are,” he said. “There is more travel, more resources, more doubling-up on events.”

George Solomon, the Washington Post’s assistant managing editor for sports, said: “The improvement in sports sections during the past 10 years has been stunning. They are generally more competitive and there is a great drive for excellence. Salaries are better, standards higher, behavior better. Very few sports editors today are in it for the ride. It’s working; the product is better.”

Solomon, 45, has a staff of 38. A graduate of the University of Florida, he has been in the newspaper business 21 years and has run the Post’s sports department for 10.

Sports did not always have such credibility at the Post.

“It changed after the 1972 Olympics,” Solomon said. “People realized then we weren’t just dealing with fun and games.” The main story in the ’72 Olympics was the terrorist crisis and the resulting deaths of Israeli athletes.

At the Chicago Tribune, Gene Quinn, 31, views himself as more than just a sports editor supervising a staff of 58.

“I like to think I’m part of the newspaper,” he said. “The sports section is a critical element of a newspaper.” The Tribune editors invite him to sit in on all editorial planning meetings.

The Boston Globe’s Vince Doria, 37, is another who attends a daily meeting of editors to plan the day’s paper.

Sports is important at the Globe. Doria, who has been the sports editor there since 1978, gets as much as 120 to 130 columns of space on some Sundays. His average Sunday space is 75 to 80 columns and he gets an extra 15 columns, for high school sports on Tuesdays. Most major metro sports sections average 30 columns of space daily, 50-60 Sunday.

Bill Millsaps, 43, a newspaperman for 22 years and sports editor of the Richmond, Va., Times-Dispatch for the last 12, believes much of the improvement in sports sections today is due to management “getting a lot more interested in how sports departments operate.

“When I first got into the business, editors didn’t pay enough attention to us,” he said. “Sports was a separate little fiefdom. Today management’s commitment in resources has gone up significantly. We get a huge chunk of the space and the editorial budget. That’s a big change that is important to sports departments and to newspapers.”

Herb Stutz, 55, former sports editor of the Philadelphia Bulletin and Columbus Dispatch and now the head of The Times’ Orange County sports department, said, “Sports sections today look better and are written and edited better by people who are better trained.”

While he believes some sports sections are a great deal better than they used to be, Bill Dwyre, sports editor of The Times, said, “Most still have a long way to go.” The weakness of most sections, in his view, is content. “Most sections do not run good stories, just predictable ones,” he said.

Dwyre, 41, a graduate of Notre Dame and former sports editor of the Milwaukee Journal, was named Editor of the Year for 1984 by the National Press Foundation for his section’s Olympics Games coverage. Until recently, it would have been unheard of in the newspaper business to give this kind of award to a sports editor, rather than a “real” editor.

Management apparently has learned that sports sells papers, and the upgrading of the sports department is usually one of the first priorities of publishers facing circulation fights.

“Many metropolitan papers with flat or sagging circulation try all sorts of remedies,” said Tom Winship, the retired editor of the Boston Globe. “None will guarantee more than a handful of readers. I tell publishers, ‘Give your sports editors their head. Give them more pages--at least two more--to make readers sit up and take notice.’ ”

The sports editor, Winship said, “is the second most important executive in the newsroom, next to the editor.”

Burl Osborne, president and editor of the Dallas Morning News, said: “It is a fact. Sports will build circulation and advertising. Therefore we should have the best sports section we can have to make a profit.”

The sports editor, in Osborne’s view, “Is the most crucial position in the newsroom.”

Small papers profit, too, from a good sports section. Ted Diadiun, managing editor of the Lake County News-Herald of Willoughby, Ohio, said his paper’s circulation rose to 50,000 from 22,000 in 10 years after he improved the sports section.

It is not easy to cover sports today. Editors need more space, later deadlines, bigger budgets. Everyone seems to acknowledge this, except the executives who control such things. There is more competition among papers to excel, and there are more teams and events to cover.

When Gregory Favre, editor of the Sacramento Bee, addressed the sports editors, he said, “It’s nice to visit with people who spend most of our money.”

Winship said he believes sports sections need more space, “because you guys offer the liveliest style in the newspaper business today.”

The Washington Post’s Solomon said: “You always feel you could do more if you had more space, more personnel. It’s almost a whine. But you wish you could be more aggressive in the pursuit of stories. I always feel we can do better. I leave the office every day with a little guilt.”

The manpower problem is especially acute in Los Angeles, according to Dwyre.

“Everything happens here,” he said. “The weather makes this the sports center of the world. There is never any down time.”

Dwyre has had to cover new teams coming to town--the Express, Raiders and Clippers--without additional manpower.

“Resources are always a problem,” said Charles Cooper, sports editor of the San Francisco Examiner. “There are more sports to cover and there is never enough space. Every sports editor thinks the same way.”

But the Boston Globe’s Doria, who gets more space than his contemporaries, said: “If you use space well, it’s a good thing. But you will not be able to keep up quality with 60 or 70 columns every day.”

Sports editors must contend with deadlines more than editors of other departments. An extra-inning game, a pitching change, a brief rain delay, or even timeouts for television commercials, can deprive readers of final scores. In The Times’ circulation area, a couple of hundred or so prep games end at about the same time, and to get only a small percentage of them into the paper on time is a major undertaking.

“We must conquer the late-score problem,” Winship told the editors. “But that’s not your problem; it’s the publishers’.”

Sports editors also must deal with larger egos than the editors of other departments, the result, probably, of an influx of new, eager talent.

“You don’t get into this business to baby-sit 40 people,” said the Globe’s Doria. But baby-sit he does. “When writers get in the mid-30 range, they become restless. Everybody wants to become a columnist.”

The trick, Doria said, is to keep people motivated, productive and happy. To do that, he tries to give them entertaining story ideas.

“If I come up with three ideas a week, I’ve earned my keep,” he said.

Solomon said: “We have to stroke a little. When I hire someone, the first thing I want to know is, will you do windows.”

Cooper said his writers have different personalities.

“One needs a kick in the rump--and doesn’t mind it,” he said. “Some are fragile and need compliments, and some don’t need much attention. I spent too long trying to keep everyone happy, then a light went on and I thought, ‘Hey, they’re supposed to keep me happy.’ ”

On the other hand, one of the joys of the job for Dwyre is “seeing the writers get better and better.”

Virtually all the editors agreed that what they liked least about their job was administration, the chore that is most likely to cause stress. Oddly, while it is half or maybe 60% of their job today, it is work they say they were not trained for and get little help in from management.

What the editors would rather be are journalists.

“The structure of the job has changed,” The Times’ Stutz said. “I became a travel agent, auditor and bookkeeper. Budgets were introduced. These things added to our burden and we’re getting farther and farther away from our job. You get bogged down in things that are not your primary responsibility. It robs you of time to develop story ideas.”

Said Newsday’s Sandler, 46: “The business has become more complicated. Sports editors need managerial skills more and more. We deal with five-year plans and annual budgets. You can’t just be an editor. At times the job is less fun; journalism is the easy and fun part. Administrative problems require more time and sensitivity. We were not trained for such problems.”

The Chicago Tribune’s Quinn, who has a degree in English literature from the University of Delaware, enjoys juggling the responsibility of newspapering with the fun of sports but said: “Too often you’re removed from what is fun. The fun is editing. I didn’t become a newspaperman to be a printer, accountant or travel agent.

“I’m a journalist, but the job doesn’t allow me to be one. I run a multimillion dollar operation and I’ve had to learn to be an accountant. It is a never-ending struggle to streamline the administration so I can concentrate on journalism.”

Doria said: “You end up doing things that have nothing to do with your job. I spend more and more of my time being a manager. Sometimes after making travel arrangements for my staff, I ask myself, ‘What have I done that a good clerk couldn’t do?’ The answer is, not much.”

Solomon said the exciting part of his job is “the big news story, the big project, the big breaking story.” But today, he said, he is a journalist only 50% of the time. “There is a tendency to plain wear out,” he said. “There are not enough hours in the day. If you let it, you can neglect your family.”

Dwyre is among the minority who likes the administrative side of his job. “But that’s probably because I have some of the best inside operational personnel anywhere,” he said. “I want something done, they do it.

“There is a daily fight to balance priorities so nothing gets in the way of today’s big story. Interruptions and low priority items can make you blow stories.”

Asked what training he had as an administrator, Dwyre replied: “None whatsoever.”

Ethics have become a big issue in sports departments. So have the publishing of gambling information and the commercialization of sports.

Ten years ago, the APSE established a set of ethical guidelines, and while all papers are not following them 100%, the editors agreed in a recent survey that their standards are much better today. Debates on ethics usually focus on the acceptance of free tickets, gifts and free travel from teams and promoters. Most papers today do not allow any of the above.

But purity, like pornography, is not easily defined, and some editors are uneasy in their “Big Brother” role. It is easy to say, as Quinn said, that it is a common-sense issue, but where, others ask, do you draw the line?

Some don’t think a reporter should accept a free hot dog in the pressbox, much less a free meal or even a free seat there. Should reporters and editors accept free tickets to banquets, free drinks and snacks in hospitality suites set up by teams, leagues and promoters, or courtesy cars supplied by the National Football League? Should they write stories for magazines published by the NFL and others they cover? Should they, in fact, be allowed to purchase good seats to events without standing in line with the public?

Newsday does not pay for pressbox meals, but Sandler said his staff members pay for all their tickets. “Ethical purists will say that is wrong, too, that we should line up with the public,” he said. “I don’t see anything wrong with it.”

Millsaps said: “Essentially, our rule on gifts is to accept nothing of value. You keep a T-shirt because it would be ridiculous to return it.” Millsaps also once said: “If you can’t eat it, drink it or smoke it in one day, you give it back.”

Quinn said: “Ethics is as much good business as a moral responsibility. We shouldn’t accept favors from people we cover. The issue is credibility with your readers.” The free seat the Tribune accepts in the pressbox is not a gift, he said--”I consider it access.”

Doria said: “The problem with a discussion of ethics, is that you are questioning someone’s morality. Ethics is a very personal thing; I’m not going to say you’re morally bankrupt if you do this or that. I can’t police 25 reporters in the field.”

Most editors allow their writers to accept team discounts on hotel rooms, eat free meals in pressboxes and ride team buses. And sports editors routinely purchase for their newspaper tickets to events not available to the public.

It is against Times policy for staff members to accept gifts, and the paper does not accept free rides and tickets, but Dwyre said that free pressbox meals, hotel discounts and rides on team buses “is an area I think still has to be dealt with.”

Dwyre, and most of the other editors, do not think their writers are bought by teams and promoters; it’s the public’s perception of them that they worry about.

“Sports is a prime area for abuse,” Dwyre said.

The use of commercial names is another area sports editors wrestle with. It has proliferated so much today that Sandler calls it “pollution in the sports section.” However, Sandler’s paper has joined the crowd and now uses them. “It’s a shame,” he said, “that so many traditional events now have commercial names. One of these days we will call it the Cadillac Masters. What if the news side had to call it the IBM Golden Gate Bridge?”

Sports editors also juggle the betting-odds issue. Virtually all newspapers today carry some sort of odds--and many defend its use as news.

“Sometimes the odds can be news,” Millsaps said.

Dwyre, who runs only football odds and does that once a week with a modest display on a back page, disagrees.

“Odds are not news; they are a numerical measurement of games,” he said. “When we run odds we are encouraging gambling.”

Quinn said: “The Tribune’s policy is to run only basic information such as point spreads. We don’t run advice, such as where to find a bookie or where to bet. It is our belief that odds reflect much more than gambling information. They are news. They tell you who the favorite is. I have no trouble with the morality of that.”

Sandler, who once resisted using such information, now must carry it on orders of Newsday’s management.

“We carry everything,” he said. “It’s terrible. They (his superiors) would not allow it any other department of the paper. They have abdicated their responsibility; they don’t see the problem. We did it to be competitive, but it is out of character for what journalism is. We’re doing public relations for bookmakers and gambling interests.”

Sports editors are also giving a big push to increased graphics use.

If done right, Sandler said, graphics can be effective. Indeed, they are useful devices to dress up a page and get in information that would clutter up a story. But Sandler and other editors think some sports sections have gone overboard with tables and charts.

“The scales have been tipped a bit,” Stutz said. “The basis for a good newspaper is the content. Graphics people are artists rather than editors. They have no feeling for words.”

Quinn said: “If not overdone, graphics are a useful device for a reader. But they are no substitute for good writing.”

Graphics, if packaged right, are a good thing, Dwyre said. But he also believes the content of sports sections has suffered greatly because of the focus on graphics.

“We often lose track of the idea that we should give our readers something to read,” he said. “With some of this graphics stuff, we just give them something to look at.”

The competition among sports sections sometimes leads to excessive coverage. Some sports events, in fact, get more stories than a hostage crisis. While some editors are concerned about this--they even scheduled a session at their convention entitled “How Much Is Too Much”--they admit they are guilty of overplaying many events. Their excuse: “You can’t give readers too much on some events.”

But the Sacramento Bee’s Favre said: “It’s the easy way out. It is simply too easy to send seven or eight writers to the Super Bowl or World Series. What about enterprise and investigative reporting?”

Solomon said: “There is a tendency for some papers to be part of the event they are covering. They think they are providing a service. I don’t think that is journalism; that’s hype.”

Some of the excessive coverage is pure vanity, Doria said, “and a lot of it is competition. If I know the Post or the New York Times are going to send six writers to an event, I say, ‘Wait a minute; if they’re going to have six, we ought to have eight.’ ”

The danger in this, Doria added, is “you will not be able to keep up the quality with eight people at one event.”

Dwyre said: “Sure, some ego is involved. And there is a lot of flag-waving. But the issue is not just quantity; it’s quality-quantity. At some events, the coverage is justified. The TV ratings tell you that.”

Readers, of course, will be the ultimate judges of whether the business of putting out sports sections is going in the right direction. Meanwhile, few editors today enjoy the fun that once went with the job. No longer, for example, can Sandler enjoy the days when his main job was to “take a good story and leave it alone and take a bad story and fix it.”

Still, the 40% of the time Charles Cooper can play at journalism makes his job at the San Francisco Examiner worthwhile. “At least we have the 40%,” he said. “That’s when we have fun. If I didn’t have that, you could take the 60% and shove it.”

In any case, sports, on the field or in the newsroom, appears to be a whole new ballgame these days.