Today (Thursday) and tomorrow D. Todd Moore has been and will be conducting interviews with Star sports guys. Moore, a photographer when he joined The Star in about 1977, has not been named sports editor, so why is he having interviews with the sports guys, asking questions concerning their duties, etc.? Perhaps the department is going back to the Collins-McBride-Bansch days of a sports editor, assistant sports editor and associate (or some such title)sports editor.

Len Puddock of Cubs win Series book fame: Your information is incorrect. Todd is not meeting with Sports reporters. Not sure who your source is, but you might check it.

This thread is about as timely as writing about the Opening Ceremonies two weeks after everybody goes home but ...
The big question is whether the new EE brings in one of his boys from Detroit, KC taps into her Phoenix pipeline or a mystery candidate emerges.
Guy at NCAA interviewed to be ME several years ago then went to the NCAA when he didn't get the job. He once was a sports editor. Would he be interested? No idea.
Can't see too many established SEs from bigger papers being interested unless they have ties to Indy or IU.
Smaller paper SEs will apply, but they probably will avoid going that route again. I'm guessing the EE already knows who he wants, and knew who he wanted when he stared the re-apply charade 2-3 months ago. Were any other managers shuffled to other departments?

Jill Phillips, read my comment again very carefully. I very carefully did not state sports reporters So I repeat, Moore the ex-photographer for the Pulliam Star who now apparently is in a high command position at the Gannett Star, is meeting today with sports guys for comment on their jobs.

I think the new EE wants to blow the damn thing up and start over, but that's not based on any inside info. Just the fact that everybody has been on the same beat forever. There are positives and drawbacks to covering the same beat as long as those guys have. If you're gonna change, now seems like the right time to do it.

Always get a kick out of the IU beat writer/columnist/cheerleader and his fabricated tales of IU glory no matter what the rest of us objective folks saw. I get that it is an IU town and we have to cater to them, but no objectivity means no credibility...hilarious when he uses the words "appears" and "may have" in a game story. If the ref called it, reviewed it, called it again...IT HAPPENED!!! It didn't "appear" to happen.

Jersey. Yeah, there's cheerleading going on all through that entire sports section, but the worst is probably on the IU beat. Of course, the entire newspaper is devoted to cheerleading as well. "Gee whiz, Indianapolis, aren't we great!!??? Oh, did we forget to mention that we put on an absolutely perfect Super Bowl!!!!!! Super Bowl. Super Bowl. Super Bowl. Super Bowl. Super Bowl..........................."

As an IU alum I have to admit that the Star's IU coverage far exceeds the volume of coverage given to Purdue, but the quality is very low. The Star's leadership may believe it is catering to IU fans, but I don't know any IU fans who think, "wow, what another great article by Hutch!" And his blog...my goodness. Considering the quality of his unfiltered work, whatever copy editors have to work through the first drafts of his stories must be the hardest-working people in the building. In other words, the Star has found a way to alienate Purdue fans without making IU fans terribly happy.