It's been a while since I've griped about the Washington Post's 'coverage' of the Nationals, so it's time...
Since the November 11 Willingham-Olsen trade, the Post has written 10,776 words about the Nationals. Exactly 8,419 of them were about Mark Teixeira. That's 1,757 about everything else Nationals. And since Tex signed with New York they've written exactly nothing about the hometown nine.
(It wasn't all that easy to figure this out, since when you click on "more news" from the main Nationals page on WaPo.com you get this archive of stories starting most recently and bizarrely with the August 3 gamer. Don't get me started on their RSS feed.)
Boz in particular has distinguished himself with his singular focus on all things Teixeira. Since September 26, he's written exactly one Nationals column that wasn't about Teixeira (and four about the former Angels first-baseman).
So there hasn't a ton of Nationals news this off season. And from glancing through the sports page every morning for non-Teixeira Nationals news I've noticed that there's a team that plays a game on ice with sticks with a lot of fighting that people seem interested in. But really? Is this much Teixeira coverage necessary? And can it really be that they can't think of anything worth covering now that Teixeira is a Yankee?
Hell, I find something to say almost every day. Bill Ladson reports something inaccurate every day or two. OMG, Federal Baseball, and Nats 320 weigh in regularly. And Nationals Farm Authority just interviewed Stan Kasten, and MASN checked in with Shawn Hill... How about something from the Arizona Fall League, or a little about the Ryan Zimmerman re-signing negotiation that was supposed to get going after the winter meetings. Or Jack McGeary's GPA at Stanford this fall. Something? Anything?
Here's my prediction: the next story on the Nationals will be a feature on how Clinton Portis and Jim Zorn feel about Mark Teixeira not signing with the Nationals.