Some thoughts about the Huskies Halloween loss to CMU

Here are a few thoughts I have about Northern Illinois University's 37-31 loss to Central Michigan University on Halloween night. 

1.) I detest the contract with ESPN that has the Mid-American Conference playing football games on Tuesday and Wednesday nights in November. College football should be played on Saturdays, in my opinion. The mid-week games are terrible for tradition, are bad for attendance and erode the fan base.  I hope the MAC will not renew the contract with ESPN, but I fear money will talk and the mid-week games will continue, much to my disappointment. 

2.) With the loss, NIU fell to 4-5 overall, 3-2 in the MAC, and appears to be looking at another mediocre season under head coach Thomas Hammock.  For the record, CMU moved to 5-4 overall, 3-2 in the MAC. 

3.) While CMU dominated the first half, NIU played a good second half.  Here's a look at some key stats:

Total yards of offense - NIU posted 506 yards, while CMU tallied 447

Time of possession - NIU: 29:48, CMU: 30:47

Fourth downs NIU: 2-4, CMU: 0-0

Rushing yards - NIU: 208, CMU: 331

3rd downs - NIU: 0-10, CMU: 4-12

4.) NIU continues to struggle on offense in the first half, which is a consistent weakness for the Huskies, not only this season, but during the 2022 campaign, too. During Tuesday's game, NIU scored a field goal in the first quarter and came up empty in the second quarter, while CMU posted 7 points in the 1st quarter and 17 in the 2nd quarter. 

The Huskies offense mounted a vigorous comeback in the second half, posting 14 points in the 3rd quarter to CMU's 13, and NIU scored another 14 points in the 4th quarter, but a Chippewa interception late in the game ended NIU's comeback bid.

I've followed the Huskies for more than 40 years. I've known several coaches, players and have been personal friends with more than a few of the reporters who covered the team over the years. I know NIU is capable of being a conference champion, and it's difficult to see where things stand today. 

-- Thank you for reading. Your comments and questions are always welcome. 

When we choose not to offend (or inform)

I was talking last week with a friend from my days as a reporter and editor at a daily newspaper. 

We talked about former coworkers and quickly moved on to what we agreed is the sad state of newspaper opinion pages and columns.

My friend left the news business more than 20 years ago and is nearing the end of a successful career in public relations. We both started in newspaper journalism in 1980 and first worked together at The Northern Star, the student newspaper at Northern Illinois University. 

I always preferred news reporting to column writing, but wrote a weekly column for several years at a weekly newspaper, where I first started as a full-time reporter. I enjoyed column writing at times, but found more satisfaction in reporting news and shooting photos. 

My friend wrote columns for newspapers, and at a public relations magazine. He now produces a blog that's popular with those in the public relations field.

Although we have different perspectives about columns, we agreed on a key point about the state of opinion writing today - most of today's columns and editorials are bland and unengaging.

I readily acknowledge we sound like two old dogs complaining that things are just not as good as they once were, and I don't fault anyone for thinking that about me and my friend. But before reaching a conclusion, please read on. 

I miss the days when most newspapers produced distinct and vibrant opinion pages, and frequently had several sharp and talented columnists. There are many good opinion writers working today, and I respect them, but I believe those few are the exceptions that prove the rule. 

My friend and I focused on columnists because we agreed at the outset that the majority of editorials appear crafted so as not to offend anyone with a viewpoint. And that's too bad, because a well-written, well reasoned editorial can be persuasive, thought-provoking, and engaging. But too many editorial boards seem more concerned with keeping the peace with their subscribers than with advancing a proposal that might spark controversy. 

I think similar comments apply to many of today's opinion writers. We see little in the way that strays from safe, mainstream thinking, possibly because many writers today fear the "cancel culture," and they're probably right to be cautious.

I offer as supporting evidence these column headlines, all published the same day and captured from the Chicago Tribune, the Daily Herald and the Northwest Herald. You be the judge. 

"Will remote learning spell the end of snow days? I sure hope not"

"In praise of good neighbors" 

"Let's be kind to one another, for it makes the world better"

"Foreign Language Study is Valuable"

"When you've got a yen for comfort there's nothing like mother's cooking"

I can't argue with any of those. Can you? 

My journalism career started in the years before the Internet and social media. Readers and society in general seemed more tolerant of those with differing opinions. There were readers who frequently wrote to the newspaper, some with pleasant comments, but mostly they were people eager to share a complaint or angry opinion. 

The key difference then was it took a bit of time and effort to write a letter, address an envelope, stick a postage stamp to it, and then put it in a mailbox. 

Not today. A guy made angry about something he read on Facebook can hammer the keyboard and post a snarky comment in a matter of seconds. There's little in the way of a cooling-off period, and the result is usually uncivil and unproductive. How many of us really want to stir up that kind of a response?

So it's understandable why columnists have lost some of their bite, but I still find it disappointing. 

And that's where we find ourselves today - afraid to share unpopular ideas or views that don't mesh with what the majority thinks. I find that sad.

-- Thank you for reading. Your comments are always welcome. Email me a kbotterman@gmail.com