Here's a superb summary/warning to mainstream media outlets clinging to the last, medieval vestiges of traditional media supremacy and waning credibility by CFR friend and intelligent MSM member Whit Watson.

This could very well be a rider to the whole Nancy Clark firestorm (more, more, more and more) forged in the wild and wooly days of the CFB blogosphere last year.

Here's the problem---some of us do want greater access, to do the press thing, to be accountable.  A small handful of the more prominent CFB blogs out there have done interviews with various figures within the game.  But there are also skeptical sports information departments who are happy to keep everyone at a safe distance.  It's a catch-22, where you can't be granted access until you prove yourself reliable but you can't prove yourself reliable until you're extended the privilege of greater media access.

Thing is, we're not going away, and neither are the teams and athletic departments.  The longer the serious bloggers are kept at a distance, the greater the possibility for feverish behavior within the community.

The other angle here is one of insight and opinion.  This is where the SI article appears to direct its focus.  Bill Simmons is a funny guy, but he also has some decent game insights.  There are casual fans out there who also know a thing or two.  I trust HP's judgment about a player or team a lot more than I do Dennis Dodd's or Ivan Maisel's (no offense, guys).  They got their jobs because they are fine writers, extensively trained in the art and also happen to have a passion for reporting on the game.  Some of us aren't trained writers, but have greater insight than what's out there.  Informed opinions that come from HP, that come from Lannie Julias etc. that are out there will eventually provide checks on some of the ill-informed game-watching that happens by big media.

Heck, at a handful of points last year it looked like some of the topics (sophistication/scheme, SEC's lack of offensive punch, Georgia/Boise State) argued on here and HP were setting the agenda within the halls of the bigger college media.

All of this is healthy and good.  There are obviously flaws to both the big media and the bloggers that need to be worked out, and there's nothing inherently unhealthy or offensive about examining the role of the sports blogs.  However, we're growing in popularity and influence, and there's a reason for it beyond pure entertainment explanations.

We aren't "hooterville," thank you.