Chicago Media Can Get Still Get On Board For Northwestern
The Chicago media has its darlings. The Bears. The Bulls. The Cubs.
When I turn on The Score or ESPN 1000 in Chicago, I only hear the same old "Rain Man" rambling by the personalities. It's always about the Bears. It's always about how the Bears stink. It's always about how the Bears need to make changes. It's never about Northwestern.
I hate to break it to you guys, but your ratings aren't that great, and your listeners are only tuning in because it's either that or "Eric and Kathy." Take your pick, Bears or Sarah Palin, what would you rather hear about?
The Northwestern Wildcats might be the most exciting team in Chicago. They're fresh off an 8-4 regular season, destined for their first New Years Day bowl since the 1996 season and have an energetic and entertaining coach.
The Bears? They have Lovie Smith, a monotonous, robotic, company-line machine that thinks the team is on the right track.
Pat Fitzgerald will tell you how it is, and while he sticks to his coach-speak and flowery cliches, he spews out some of the best quotes you'll ever hear this side of Brian Kelly.
Besides the sub-par attendance, Northwestern football games are fun for fans. They always come down to the last couple possessions, and the offense is like a '66 Mustang with how pretty it looks at times.
The Chicago media is clearly covering what's popular. Why not cover what should be popular? Why not cover the guys that don't get paid? Why not cover the team that has a history of horrible teams turned into a team built on character, responsibility, and academic integrity, all while winning eight games?
Fitzgerald is giving the big-time media outlets a chance now to hop on the bandwagon. Now is the chance. Before you know it, Northwestern will be a Rose Bowl contender, if Fitzgerald has his way. When that happens, the Chicago media will surely be regretting it.
Or will they?
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?