Skip to content

Washington Times sports section prints for last time Friday

A moment that was feared for more than a month by the Washington Times sports staff was realized Wednesday afternoon.  Then confirmed to the world by tweet.

“It’s official. @TWTSports got Mike Leach’d,” the Times sports section wrote.

The newspaper is cutting back 40% of its staff, including the entire sports department.  Dan Steinberg of DC Sports Bog did a better job than we could explaining what a loss it is for Washington sports fans.

We’ll let others discuss the impact of the decline of newspapers, and simply thank David Elfin and Ryan O’Halloran for their coverage of the Redskins, which added to our understanding of the team.  Check out the section’s final issue Friday.

The Redskins organization has had a combative relationship with the press during the Dan Snyder era, but it must know how lucky it is. Few teams can match the loyal fanbase and comprehensive coverage the Redskins receive, no matter how bumbling the owner. 

That coverage took a big hit Wednesday. 

Permalink 29 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
29 Responses to “Washington Times sports section prints for last time Friday”
  1. Hugified Wang says: Dec 31, 2009 11:42 AM

    Poopishmear!

  2. Leviathan says: Dec 31, 2009 11:52 AM

    The Washington Times is barely considered news to begin with, and it’s run by a bunch of nuts anyway.
    No big loss.

  3. Richm2256 says: Dec 31, 2009 11:58 AM

    Wow, an UNBELIEVABLE tribute to the Washington Times sports staff from – of all people – their COMPETITOR!!!!!
    An excellent piece, kudo’s to Steinberg.
    I can’t believe a major metropolitan paper is dropping their entire sports department. How does that happen? Sports sections are one of the most read parts of any newspaper, it’s the part that gives so many people relief from the “real” world.
    I can’t imagine the Boston Globe deciding one day to shut down their sports desk and dump guys like Bob Ryan out on the street, leaving New England sports fans with the likes of those Herald hacks.
    Sad day in D.C. without a doubt.

  4. MLZ says: Dec 31, 2009 12:02 PM

    Leviathan said “The Washington Times is barely considered news to begin with, and it’s run by a bunch of nuts anyway.
    No big loss.”
    RIGHT – The Washingington Times is not part of the compliant, liberal mainstream media, so who cares?

  5. Florio-is-a-tool says: Dec 31, 2009 12:07 PM

    While the rest of the newspaper was bizarre, the Time sports section was its only redeeming quality. Lots of talent in that department and I hope they all find satisfying jobs. This is a big loss and another mistake by the Moonies.

  6. phildo says: Dec 31, 2009 12:10 PM

    hopefully the rest of the paper goes next

  7. Seeryer says: Dec 31, 2009 12:13 PM

    I am sure O’Reilly will be runnign a story on his show about how the WT couldn’t stay in business because of their political bias. Oh wait, he just does that story when so called liberal media institutions are struggling. Nothing on the money pits of conservative ideology at the Washington Times and the NY Post. I will say that it is pretty hard to be politically biased covering sports so the Sports section will be missed.

  8. okforko says: Dec 31, 2009 12:16 PM

    Considering I read it here on the interweb….says something about sports sections of newspapers….

  9. SamWyche says: Dec 31, 2009 12:18 PM

    Seeryer – you are an idiot. All you liberals posting on this are plain ignorant. I’ll agree, the WT is conservative-slanted, but at least it has not given President Obama a free pass on every F’ing mistake he’s made (except the War, which most flaming Liberals believe will magically go away from the terrorists whose sole mission is to kill us). Lets just worry about football talk on here, not your left-wing idiocy.

  10. ☻☼CBS, FOX, ESPN, NFLN nbc says: Dec 31, 2009 12:32 PM

    SamWyche, You call Seeryer an ‘idiot’ then in the next sentence go on and agree with him. Does that make you a partial idiot?

  11. fm says: Dec 31, 2009 12:35 PM

    SamWyche says:
    December 31, 2009 12:18 PM
    Seeryer – you are an idiot. All you liberals posting on this are plain ignorant. I’ll agree, the WT is conservative-slanted, but at least it has not given President Obama a free pass on every F’ing mistake he’s made (except the War, which most flaming Liberals believe will magically go away from the terrorists whose sole mission is to kill us). Lets just worry about football talk on here, not your left-wing idiocy.
    Well put. To bad the left wing MORONS won’t get it.

  12. Sociofan says: Dec 31, 2009 12:44 PM

    The Redskins coverage by the Times was pedestrian. They never seemed to get the big interviews or insights that other local media had. Their most redeeming quality was their hockey coverage back when Dave Fay was alive. That was top shelf. Since then, the sports section read like USA Today. D.C. has a lot of local sports coverage that trumps the Times. I guess I’m not surprised.

  13. famucancer says: Dec 31, 2009 12:51 PM

    The Washington Times?? LMAO

  14. SheHateMe says: Dec 31, 2009 1:03 PM

    SamWyche says:
    December 31, 2009 12:18 PM
    Seeryer – you are an idiot. All you liberals posting on this are plain ignorant. I’ll agree, the WT is conservative-slanted, but at least it has not given President Obama a free pass on every F’ing mistake he’s made (except the War, which most flaming Liberals believe will magically go away from the terrorists whose sole mission is to kill us). Lets just worry about football talk on here, not your left-wing idiocy.
    ===================================
    The times gave up it’s sports section because there aren’t enough right wing Cheney/Palin/Limbaugh/Hannity idiots in the DC area to be fooled into believing that this rag qualifies as a newspaper anymore.
    The plain fact is that as America gets more intelligent (as evidenced by the last election), the birther/truther/nutcase wing of the population continues to get dumb and dumber (as evidenced by the likes of Mr Wyche and Mr FM).
    Now that I’ve got that out of my system, I agree that those of us who love football (of whatever political stripe) should really leave their politics out of this blog and stick to the sport……..

  15. Sportsavant says: Dec 31, 2009 1:08 PM

    Yeah us left wing MORONS should certainly listen to you right wing NUTJOBS as you guide us toward an isolationist vision of the United States with regard to dealing with the rest of the world. We aren’t living in the 1950′s anymore numb nuts. Rest assured righties, this lefty is all for stomping out terrorism and I’m more than willing to personally take up arms to do so, but like today’s football play books, it ain’t all black and white, so finesse and diplomacy does matter in the long run.

  16. CaptainFantastik says: Dec 31, 2009 1:13 PM

    The real morons and nutjobs are the ones who firmly identify themselves as “conservatives” or “liberals”. They represent the extremes of “both” arguments. Hate to break it to you guys, but rational and objective people live in the middle. Life doesn’t fall neatly into 1 of 2 baskets. Voting for Obama doesn’t make one “liberal”, and just because somebody voted for Bush doesn’t make them “conservatives”. 2 party politics is killing this country and has turned it into a laughing stock of ignorant stupidity.
    But it’s funny……the guys that talk the loudest are usually those representing the extreme right (this thread is a good example) and they label anybody who doesn’t agree with them on every issue as “liberal”. And usually these people by and large saw no formal education beyond the 12th grade level…..and it is reflected in their posts in a huge way. These are the same people who listen to hate/fear-mongering people like Rush, Hannity, Coulter, O’Reilly, and Beck. They listen to these people on the radio and read their books for affirmation, not information. They tend to be un-educated beyond the high school level, and they want everything they believe to be affirmed. In fact, they often refer to institutions of higher education as “liberal”…….most likely because they’ve never bothered with higher education and they’re tired of getting absolutely schooled in debate on various issues by educated people who form their opinions based on fact and reality rather than blind rhetoric.
    Since i’ll be labeled a “liberal” anyway (even though i’m a post-9/11 military veteran and believe in other conservative points like the death penalty), i’ll say this: A liberal’s love for their country is a mature adult’s type of love. They take the good WITH the bad and love it in spite if the warts and imperfections. A conservative’s love for thier country is like a child’s love for their Mommy. Mommy is absolutely perfect and anybody who criticized Mommy is BAD.

  17. cmich06 says: Dec 31, 2009 1:17 PM

    The Times sports coverage dwarfed the Post’s and will be missed in DC…sad day when Patrick Stevens is out of a job and Eric Prisbell still has one.
    The Times was willing to take on the dysfunction within the Univ of MD athletic department(most recently how the women’s assistant coaches are paid more than the mens) while the Post serves as a mouth piece for the AD. Sad day indeed!

  18. golongboyee says: Dec 31, 2009 1:18 PM

    “Few teams can match the loyal fanbase”……….please, the ‘Skins fan base is the biggest fair-weather, cry-baby fan base this side of Indy fans!

  19. SmashMouth says: Dec 31, 2009 1:52 PM

    CaptainFantastic
    “The real morons and nutjobs are the ones who firmly identify themselves as “conservatives” or “liberals”. They represent the extremes of “both” arguments.”
    Well put. And these same confused souls keep wondering why terrorists want to target this country. Two faces of the same coin.

  20. SmashMouth says: Dec 31, 2009 1:54 PM

    I cannot speak on the Times coverage of other sports, but their coverage of football in general is reminiscent of the Skins performance on both sides of the ball; anemic, at best.

  21. troll_aikman8 says: Dec 31, 2009 1:55 PM

    Even their sports coverage had a horrible right-wing bias. But go ahead and mark me as conservative on crime, but liberal on prostitution (C.Rock).

  22. SmashMouth says: Dec 31, 2009 1:59 PM

    I do hope that the likes of Ryan O’Halloran and Thom Loverro are not left out in the cold for too long. Their insight and contributions are invaluable and I hope they can find a worthy home where they can continue to hone their craft.

  23. Deb says: Dec 31, 2009 2:50 PM

    Oh my, I seem to have been censored. How to put this so it gets posted?
    Guys …
    The Times is not exactly a run-of-the-mill “conservative” paper. It’s owned by a cult (apparently I’m not allowed to say which one, but you can Google it). The founder has described himself as the Messiah, expressed his wish for world domination, and been convicted of income tax evasion. This organization has been known to issue press releases about its leaders channeling everyone from Confucius to Buddha to Muhammad to Jesus … as well as Lenin, Marx, Trotsky, and Chairman Mao.
    So for those screeching at “liberals” for bashing a good “conservative” news outlet … have you ever considered backtracking to find out the real source of your news?

  24. Seeryer says: Dec 31, 2009 2:52 PM

    Sam Wyche and other Rushbots,
    I didn’t bring my ideology into this, you did. I just noted the irony of O’Reilly going off on liberal papers that are struggling but will not mention the NY Post or WT. He claims it is because of bias when it almost all can be attributed to technology. Obama has more troops in Afghanistan than Bush ever had. We have carried out two drone attacks in Yemen this month. And we have over 100,000 troops in Iraq. Sorry he has not attacked Iran or N Korea, I know you love unnecessary bloodshed. He and liberals know terorists are trying everything in their power to kill Americans and attack American interests. The sad part is you think the president and people on my side want to “coddle” them when the facts overwhelmingly abolish that charge. You call us stupid when you have no ground to stand on in your argument.

  25. Patsfan1776 says: Dec 31, 2009 3:14 PM

    Newspapers need to save space so each week we can see the headline, “fewer people have filed for unemployment this week.” When you read the article it says “only 400,000 filed for unemployment this week.” At some point, when everyone is unemployed, are they going to write “Hurray, noone filed for unemployment this week!”?

  26. HAILSKINS says: Dec 31, 2009 3:57 PM

    please, the ‘Skins fan base is the biggest fair-weather, cry-baby fan base this side of Indy fans!
    Right thats why even though we have had to deal with a decade of losing and morons owning/running the team the games still sell out every year and the team sells more murchandise than almost all teams in the NFL. But we are fair weather fans. Clearly golongboy you have no idea what you are talking about.

  27. chrismoore06 says: Dec 31, 2009 4:04 PM

    CaptainFantastik says:
    December 31, 2009 1:13 PM
    The real morons and nutjobs are the ones who firmly identify themselves as “conservatives” or “liberals”. They represent the extremes of “both” arguments. Hate to break it to you guys, but rational and objective people live in the middle. Life doesn’t fall neatly into 1 of 2 baskets. Voting for Obama doesn’t make one “liberal”, and just because somebody voted for Bush doesn’t make them “conservatives”. 2 party politics is killing this country and has turned it into a laughing stock of ignorant stupidity.
    But it’s funny……the guys that talk the loudest are usually those representing the extreme right (this thread is a good example) and they label anybody who doesn’t agree with them on every issue as “liberal”. And usually these people by and large saw no formal education beyond the 12th grade level…..and it is reflected in their posts in a huge way. These are the same people who listen to hate/fear-mongering people like Rush, Hannity, Coulter, O’Reilly, and Beck. They listen to these people on the radio and read their books for affirmation, not information. They tend to be un-educated beyond the high school level, and they want everything they believe to be affirmed. In fact, they often refer to institutions of higher education as “liberal”…….most likely because they’ve never bothered with higher education and they’re tired of getting absolutely schooled in debate on various issues by educated people who form their opinions based on fact and reality rather than blind rhetoric.
    Since i’ll be labeled a “liberal” anyway (even though i’m a post-9/11 military veteran and believe in other conservative points like the death penalty), i’ll say this: A liberal’s love for their country is a mature adult’s type of love. They take the good WITH the bad and love it in spite if the warts and imperfections. A conservative’s love for thier country is like a child’s love for their Mommy. Mommy is absolutely perfect and anybody who criticized Mommy is BAD.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    That had to be one of the most cogent analyses I’ve seen written. Thank you!
    Regarding the issue at hand, as a Washingtonian, I will miss the Times Sports section if only because they served to keep The Post on their toes. Ryan O’Halloran, Mark Zuckerman, and Thom Loverro in particular will be missed, but should have no trouble finding work, hopefully in town.

  28. chrismoore06 says: Dec 31, 2009 4:13 PM

    @Hailskins: EXACTLY! You cannot call us fairweather fans. Delusional? Maybe. Gluttons for punishment? Almost certainly. But you cannot call a fanbase that has never a threat of a blackout in spite of not having a shot at a title in 10 years fair-weather. HTTR!

  29. TheWizard says: Jan 1, 2010 1:35 AM

    people who listen to hate/fear-mongering people like Rush, Hannity, Coulter, O’Reilly, and Beck.
    You fool.
    You obviously know nothing about these people, nor have listened to their shows.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!