If it’s their destiny, do they really control it? Some say yes. Many say no. Most say, “We know what they mean, so what’s the problem?”

I doubt Putin, Zelenskyy, Xi, Kim, the UN, NATO, starving people everywhere and people fleeing brutal regimes are all that impressed.

Who would have thought the American League baseball playoffs would cause so much consternation for writers and editors?

Published October 8, 2025 

Here’s one I think about when people in sports writing and editing talk about cutting unnecessary words: They’ve had five different starting quarterbacks since 2023.

Is “different” necessary in that sentence? Not really, but as an industry, we don’t seem to sweat it. You could easily go with: They’ve had five starting quarterbacks since 2023. How would a reader be confused by that? If you think the extra word helps make it clear, it’s not really hurting anything by being there. I have bigger worries, truly.

The Rams made him the second overall pick of the draft in 2014.
The Rams made him the second pick of the draft in 2014.

Sometimes it’s not clear if you mean a team’s third pick of that year’s draft or the third pick of the entire draft, all teams included? There are several ways to make it clear in context. I’ve seen people introduce an error into a story by removing the “overall,” though, which to me is an example of heavy-handed editing.

Unnecessary for thee, not for me

The five-different-starting-quarterbacks example above supports my contention that people allow all kinds of “unnecessary” words to remain in a story, even if they are vigilant about removing many others. There are many reasons for this. For starters, we are not all the same. We are different. And that’s okay.

He completed passes to nine different receivers Sunday.

Do you need “different” there? Without it, you might say, people could erroneously think you simply mean he completed nine passes.

He completed passes to nine receivers Sunday.

But saying he was 20-for-39 for 310 yards in the story shows he completed 20 passes, which almost anyone who regularly reads about sports would understand.

The nine-different-receivers example supports my contention above. People allow all kinds of “unnecessary” words to remain in a story, even if they are vigilant about removing many others. Part of it, I am certain, is that our language rhythms need some of that for all sorts of reasons that soothe and also smooth out our experience as readers and listeners.

If someone’s being paid by the word, then maybe the worry factor goes up a tick. I have bigger worries.

The Silly Song of the Day

During the ’80s, a radio station in my hometown played a listener-provided song each weekday morning, calling it “The Silly Song of the Day.” I brought a few to the station and went to the trouble of recording the broadcast to prove they’d used my song.

I told a young person, “This morning I had the silly song.”

“Of the day?” he asked, excitedly.

It rounded out the context, yes, but it reminded me that sometimes we like our words in clusters and would rather you not disconnect them. That’s fine. It’s not the end of the world.

I have much bigger worries than an “unnecessary” word or two in a 1,450-word sports story.

Sending love. Protect your peace.

♥

Thank you

If you appreciate what you find here and feel generous, you can check out the Tip Jar. Thank you for reading. Here’s a butterfly for you.

/”””””\  \  /  /”””””\
\   0   \(  )/   0   /
>       l l       <
/    o   l l   o    \
\,,,,,,,,,/v\,,,,,,,,,/

Yes/No image © Ivandzyuba | Megapixl.com 

Whether you write “gauntlet” or “gantlet,” more than a few readers will think you made a mistake. It’s usually best to write around it.