The recent hyper-coverage of Virginia Tech by The Roanoke Times has proven that when too many people of one persuasion get together for too long, perspective is often lost.

But before we accuse anyone else of losing their perspective, let us garner our own. The mostly UVa fans who have submitted their anti-"Hokie Herald / Tech Times" letters to the newspaper's editor need to realize that due to its geographic proximity the greater majority of Roanoke Valley residents are supporters of Virginia Tech. Accordingly it makes good business sense, and arguably even good "community sense," for the Roanoke Times to "lean" in that direction. I think most folks wouldn't expect otherwise.

But that's not to say that UVa supporters shouldn't receive good and unbiased reporting regarding UVa news and sports. Unfortunately, based on recent coverage, this is not always the case.

Witness last Saturday and Sunday's sports sections in The Roanoke Times. The pregame coverage for UVa's opening game against Brigham Young University, a nationally known program whose coach, Lavell Edwards, is the third most winning active coach in the NCAA, amounted to 198 square inches of newsprint coverage. One hundred twenty-five of those square inches on paper were an article on Carl Smith, the man who donated the majority of money for UVa's stadium renovations. This left 73 inches for the UVa-BYU game itself.

In contrast, the Hokies were playing the Akron Zips, until recently a Division II school and one of no football prominence in anyone's book. Tech was afforded a massive 788 square inches of coverage, including an article and picture that took up more than half the front page as well as a double-page spread inside entitled "Game Day" that gave more detail than most bowl games demand. ("Two Deep Rosters," "5 Things to Watch," "Fast Facts," "Schedules," "Game Breakdown" "Who's Talking" etc.)

Meanwhile up the road in Charlottesville, the largest crowd to ever attend a football game in the state of Virginia was assembling.

Virginia scored more points on BYU than No. 2 ranked Florida State was able to muster the week before, and by virtue of collecting three turnovers in the first half was able to keep a potent BYU passing attack out of the end zone. The Cougars, however, corrected their turnover problems in the second half, and Virginia's notoriously soft secondary was unable to stem the tide. They ultimately fell in overtime 38-35 in an exciting and tension-charged game.

And this is where The Roanoke Times really showed their mettle. In lieu of the 73 square inches of pregame coverage they now allotted 496 square inches in order to run a huge headline entitled "Collapse" and an 8 x 10 picture of the BYU team in celebration. You can guess the nature of that article.

The negative tone of the Times headlines concerning University of Virginia sports is nothing new, but in the past two years they have become so aversive and "digging" that you hardly feel you're reading a real newspaper so much as an independent newsletter published by someone with a pretty large chip on his shoulder.

I have had Tech fans themselves tell me the Times coverage and anti-UVa position is almost embarrassing. Kind of fun, but somehow not quite right.

But the best example of lost perspective wasn't reflected in the Sports page on Sunday. In fact it had nothing to do with sports. But it did demonstrate the "spilling over" and prevalence of an attitude within The Roanoke Times that many people feel has reached the point of being unprofessional.

The University of Virginia was recently ranked the No. 1 public university in the United States (tied with California) by U.S. News and World Report.

Sound newsworthy?

Imagine for a moment that Virginia Tech had received such an honor. Can you see the headline?

The article in Saturday's Roanoke Times, (the same day Tech was afforded virtually its own sports section), could be found on page B4. It was one of 12 articles and seven obituaries on that page.

And the headline? This is almost unbelievable:

"Tech 26th, UVa tie for 1st in U.S. News college rankings."

Times reporter Michael Sluss then dedicated his article almost exclusively to Tech's 26th ranking, going on to how Tech's colleges of Engineering and Business had fared in those categories. He dedicated one sentence in the third paragraph to UVa's top ranking, repeating the apparently "secondary information" of the headline that UVa topped the list of public universities.

I haven't read The Roanoke Time's mission statement, but I'd wager a bet that kind of coverage isn't what it aspires to.

Let me make this resoundingly clear. Tech fans deserve and should expect continuing great coverage of their school's athletic programs and accomplishments. They've more than earned it. But with the resources available to an organization such as the Times it should be given in a way that neither derides nor neglects the interests of those that support the state's other major university.

Leaning too far in any one direction in life can lead to a pretty bad fall.

Leaning too far as a journalist or news organization can cost you your credibility -- even among those you seek to please by doing so.

Stand up a little straighter, guys. We all deserve better.