NFL Media

[NinerSickness]

After watching the Richard Sherman / Skip Bayless interview, something occurred to me. A lot of people in the sports media are former NFL players. How is it that former NFL players so often don't know a freeking thing about the NFL? For the most part, people who cover the NFL do a superficial, uninspired, analytically bankrupt job of covering the sport. There are exceptions to the rule, but it seems like the NFL media is just as much of a spectacle as the actual game itself.

Ever heard Colin Cowherd break down the NFL? He loves the sound of his won voice so much that he can't hear the stupidity that comes out of his mouth (although he has some decent insight into the NBA, which is a much less complicated game).

Freddie Coleman (ESPN radio) seems like a nice enough guy, but I don't think he's ever had an inspired thought about the NFL in his life. He said the NFL combine is useless; he called Sam Bradford a "bear" after his rookie season because he (and 95% of the NFL media) bought a bunch of hype.

AJ Smith and Skip Bayless: are they even watching the same sport as I am?

Then there are the Patriot apologists like Rodney Harrison, Teddy Bruschi, etc.

The answer should be clear to everyone: in general, NFL fans are about as bright as the inside of a coffin, so they pander to them. But how is it that there is nobody holding these people accountable for the ridiculous things they say? Maybe they all get fired for pissing 'em off?

There are exceptions to the rule, but I wish there were more.

 

[antone112]

Looking for logic and enlightenment at Disney is fruitless. 95% of those guys are there to say things that will get ratings. The only one of their NFL guys that I put stock in is Tom Jackson, love me some TJ.

 

[Jikkle]

Most of these former players I think didn't like to be criticized by the media when they played so they make it a point to not criticize players when they are in the media.

Also they are all in it to collect a check anyways so no reason to ruffle anyone's feathers and play it safe with softball questions and answers.

And most of these guys basically know how their position works and outside of that they don't know squat about the other positions nor do they follow the teams they are covering. For example I just shook my head on NFL Total Access when Shaun O Hara when discussing the 49ers need for a backup QB suggested......David Carr. Gee Shaun the same David Carr they cut right away in 2011? What makes you think they are going to be any more interested in him now?

The only ones that like to rock the boat are the ones who basically get paid to do it. First Take and Skip Bayless is a prime example of that.

ESPN knows the show is more appealing when you have outlandish things said and arguing. The masses aren't going to be interested if it's just two guys having deep intelligent sports conversations and agreeing with each other. Someone has to take the role of the "heel" and that's what Bayless' role is.

 

[Jikkle]

Looking for logic and enlightenment at Disney is fruitless. 95% of those guys are there to say things that will get ratings. The only one of their NFL guys that I put stock in is Tom Jackson, love me some TJ.

Always liked TJ since he typically knows his stuff and has good overall football knowledge.

I actually respect Sapp, Deion, and Irvin ONLY when they are talking about their respective positions. Yea they come off as goof balls and idiots but they know there stuff when it comes to the positions they played.

Willie Mcginest I think is alright as well

 

[NinerSickness]

You make a good point about criticizing current players. For being such "tough" guys, NFL players sure seem to have pretty thin skin for the most part. And those are the players who proclaim the loudest and most distainfully that they don't care what anyone thinks about them.

 

[SY8goat]

Trent Dilfer and Steve Young are two my favorite NFL analyst/commentators. Chris Carter and TJ too.

 

[NinerSickness]

Trent Dilfer and Steve Young are two my favorite NFL analyst/commentators. Chris Carter and TJ too.

No foolin: Those are the first 2 names of whom I thought what I wrote that first post. I didn't mention 'em because I didn't want to leave out a more obvious name I might have forgotten. But those 2 are definitely intelligent, objective and analytical.

Chris Carter? I actually haven't heard him enough to say much about him.

Keyshawn Johnson on the other hand? Yikes! He's gotten better over the years, but he has said some of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard.

 

[mem49er]

How awful is McNabb? I'm amazed that guy gets a check.

 

[NinerSickness]

Watching Jerry Rice brek something down on TV is very awkward. Public speaking is not one of his talents.

 

[NinerSickness]

NFL Network is much better than ESPN on TV. Unfortunately, ESPN's website is ran a lot better than NFL.com is. So I often gravitate there for football news. I know twitter is the best for football news, but I don't use social media.

Fox sports doesn't do anything well; they seriously need to get rid of those goofballs on TV and get serious about their website. Yahoo is a joke in everything they do.

I wish someone came along and kicked all their asses on TV and online. People have tried before, but it's always been lame and gimicky. And the best football sites on the internet are usually like an online magazine rather than sports news media (they don't have any Adam Schefters).

The NFL just needs to get rid of whoever runs the website & hire some football nerds with a grasp of the English language.

More football nerds; fewer former players who don't know their asses from a hole in the ground.

 

[MHSL82]

How awful is McNabb? I'm amazed that guy gets a check.

Well, he figured out he was basically alone when calling himself Hall of Fame as an individual, so he figured that if he became part of the media, he'd get someone in the media (himself) to back that claim.

 

[threelittleturds]

I think the problem is imagining that they should know what they are talking about because they played in the NFL. I only pay attention if they are talking about something that relates to their experiences... for example, when linemen start talking about QBs I just tune out, because what the hell do they really know?

 

[NinerSickness]

I think the problem is imagining that they should know what they are talking about because they played in the NFL. I only pay attention if they are talking about something that relates to their experiences... for example, when linemen start talking about QBs I just tune out, because what the hell do they really know?

You're right. The problem is that they think playing football means they understand it better than other people. There's a reason the best coaches in the NFL are 40-60 year-old men, and very few GMs actually played in the NFL (Ozzie Newsome is an exception).

The other problem is that everyone who's actually in the NFL, or recently was, is EXTREMELY biased. Very few of them are objective. For example, ask any player in the NFL what they think of a player on the oppposing team, and he'll say somehting like, "Oh he's a great player. We just have to work hard & prepare to make sure we're ready for him." It's pure nonsense. It's a political response designed for morons. They're not going to say, "Oh him? He's terrible. The guy shouldn't even be starting" because these NFL tough guys will get all butt hurt because they can't stand a little criticism.

One of the rarest commodities on this planet is objectivity. Even rarer is someone who views criticism as a good thing.

 

[threelittleturds]

You're right. The problem is that they think playing football means they understand it better than other people. There's a reason the best coaches in the NFL are 40-60 year-old men, and very few GMs actually played in the NFL (Ozzie Newsome is an exception).

The other problem is that everyone who's actually in the NFL, or recently was, is EXTREMELY biased. Very few of them are objective. For example, ask any player in the NFL what they think of a player on the oppposing team, and he'll say somehting like, "Oh he's a great player. We just have to work hard & prepare to make sure we're ready for him." It's pure nonsense. It's a political response designed for morons. They're not going to say, "Oh him? He's terrible. The guy shouldn't even be starting" because these NFL tough guys will get all butt hurt because they can't stand a little criticism.

One of the rarest commodities on this planet is objectivity. Even rarer is someone who views criticism as a good thing.

Charlie Duke is a perfect example of that.. all those years as a Falcon made him a card carrying member of the Fuck You 49ers club... and he carries that over to his analysis whenever they ask his opinion on the 49ers.

As to the responses, I just recently realized that it isn't political... but it is psychological. I used to think they said all of that praise when asked to avoid bulletin board material... but the truth is they say it in hopes of making people relax and feel recognized by blowing smoke up their ass. Like you said though, they are insecure, since you can't even tweet about them without getting a response... so coaches and players try to use that against them... when you praise insecure people they tend to play a little less inspired. Well, at least that is what they seem to think... probably some Freudian shit they all bought into.

 

[Jikkle]

Speaking of NFL media but ProFootballTalk pushing it's political agenda down everybody's throat is getting old.

I'm really not interested in finding out what a nobody like Ayanbadejo has to say about gay players for the 1,000th time and how the Redskins need to change their name.

Just simply report on the news of what's happening in the league and keep the opinions football related.

I really don't care about the conservative or liberal beliefs and opinions of a player. I guess it's great for them having an opinion since apparently with all the concussions they aren't supposed to be able to remember their names but I would them keep it to themselves.

 

[NinerSickness]

Speaking of NFL media but ProFootballTalk pushing it's political agenda down everybody's throat is getting old.

I'm really not interested in finding out what a nobody like Ayanbadejo has to say about gay players for the 1,000th time---

The Ayanbandejo story was the top story on the ESPN/NFL page for a while too. The top freeking story! I know it's the offseason, but come on.

I don't mind if people are opinionated or even outspoken about politics. I just can't stand it when people mix politics into something else you want like putting a roofy in a drink.

 

[DoobieKeebler]

Speaking of NFL media but ProFootballTalk pushing it's political agenda down everybody's throat is getting old.

I'm really not interested in finding out what a nobody like Ayanbadejo has to say about gay players for the 1,000th time and how the Redskins need to change their name.

Just simply report on the news of what's happening in the league and keep the opinions football related.

I really don't care about the conservative or liberal beliefs and opinions of a player. I guess it's great for them having an opinion since apparently with all the concussions they aren't supposed to be able to remember their names but I would them keep it to themselves.

Even though Charles Barkley said "I am not a role model," athletes are going to be looked up to as icons, so even if you and some others don't like the politics of something like Ayanbadoblahblahs opinions, a lot of people do.... even people who aren't sports fans.

In the end, the story of players coming out is bigger than football because A) players don't come out during their careers B) The NFL has people like Cully talking about "fags aren't welcome on my team," or whatever the hell he said, so PR people are gonna push the equality angle.

Finally, how is being gay considered politics? I know there are anti gay/pro gay legislations being argued all over America, but merely being gay shouldn't be deemed political IMO.


(I do agree about the Redskins thing, though. And most of the Natives I know don't really care about the name)

 

[MHSL82]

Even though Charles Barkley said "I am not a role model," athletes are going to be looked up to as icons, so even if you and some others don't like the politics of something like Ayanbadoblahblahs opinions, a lot of people do.... even people who aren't sports fans.

In the end, the story of players coming out is bigger than football because A) players don't come out during their careers B) The NFL has people like Cully talking about "fags aren't welcome on my team," or whatever the hell he said, so PR people are gonna push the equality angle.

Finally, how is being gay considered politics? I know there are anti gay/pro gay legislations being argued all over America, but merely being gay shouldn't be deemed political IMO.


(I do agree about the Redskins thing, though. And most of the Natives I know don't really care about the name)

I don't think being gay is political nor is anyone really saying being gay is. I think that people are just saying that talking about it all the time is political, and since one side is more vocal against it and one side more vocal for it, it appears political. There are things that can seem universally right or wrong, but if one side typically preaches for it and the other against it, it's political. Political doesn't mean not worthy of discussion or wrong, it just means divisive or made for the benefit of one party or candidate.

Sorry for the following bad analogy, but people can choose to be vegetarian, animal rights followers, philanthropists, etc. without letting others know about it. They can just be. One cannot just be homosexual and treated the same, but one could be homosexual or agree with the movement without being vocal about it. It won't accomplish anything, but they could do it and this is what some who don't care one way or another want it to be. They come on ESPN to see draft talk or March Madness, not social or political issues. I think if people were against it and it was showing up in sports talk, people would be annoyed by it, too.

For the record, I don't care. I'll read what I want to read and titles to articles aren't that disruptive to me. A few seconds on a TV before I choose to change the channel or stay on, is not that important. If I've chosen to watch TV or surf the internet, that time is already blocked off from life production.

 

[NinerSickness]

Finally, how is being gay considered politics?

Ayanbadejo isn't gay (at least not that I know of). He's constantly pushing the political agendas surrounding the issue though. The sports media is more than happy to do all kinds of stories about it because they are just as adimant about pushing that political agenda.

If he went on Larry King's show to talk about this stuff, that would be one thing. But he has to bring it into sports coverage, which most people would agree should be an escape from that kind of stuff.

 

[DoobieKeebler]

Sorry for the following bad analogy, but people can choose to be vegetarian, animal rights followers, philanthropists, etc. without letting others know about it. They can just be. One cannot just be homosexual and treated the same, but one could be homosexual or agree with the movement without being vocal about it. It won't accomplish anything, but they could do it and this is what some who don't care one way or another want it to be. They come on ESPN to see draft talk or March Madness, not social or political issues. I think if people were against it and it was showing up in sports talk, people would be annoyed by it, too.

I apologize because I don't exactly get what you mean, so forgive my ridiculously long response if I missed the point of what you are saying:

You're right people can choose to be veg, animal rights hippies, etc, because they want to live that life; it is up to the individual to talk about their hobbies or beliefs, but gay people don't have that same option. As you said, gay people aren't necessarily treated the same as straight people because being gay is a stigma in many areas... especially sports.

Although, with Cully's comments on gay players, or Tim Hardaway (one of my fav NBA players) making anti-gay remarks, they bring the discussion into the sports world. I understand if you'd rather not hear that referred to as "sports news" either, but it is wrong that there is a stigma against gay players. Being gay doesn't hurt a player's ability to run or jump, so why is being openly gay in the sports world so wrong to some people? When so much of the general population is gay, it isn't fair that sports stars may have to lie about who they are just so they aren't alienated by teammates who focus on that 1 issue.

Heck, I know a Warriors player that is either gay or bi because I met him at my old job in SF in the gay district. He lied about his name & who he was until I called him on his lie, as I'm a huge GSW fan. Eventually he relented, but explained he was afraid of being outed and asked me not to tell anyone, as he thought it would hurt his career. In that sense, it is not a fair way to have to live, so that's why I don't mind Ayanbadoobidydoo vocally supporting gay players since the narrative has been so 1 sided with many teams/players saying they don't want to play with gay people.

You may not care if a player is gay or not, but many people do, and even I don't want to see these articles because sexual orientation shouldn't matter, as the important thing is WINNING. Gay people aren't going to go away, so acting like they don't exist is silly, and asking them to hide who they are, or lie about it, is both disrespectful and insulting. Maybe gay players shouldn't have a press conference about it, but it's almost a necessity because there are no other openly gay players. I hate to use this analogy, but it will be somewhat similar to black integration in baseball; fans and players alike will be split on whether they accept homosexual players or not. This gay stuff will be news until a few players come out so that other players can & the concept becomes normative.