The new normal in sports media coverage

pennstatenews via flickr

I usually enjoyed chatting with John Fox when he was coach of the Carolina Panthers. He was always congenial in our conversations and occasionally thoughtful and articulate.

Fox was easy to like. But only when he was talking off the record.

On the record? Fox was one of the more difficult coaches to cover. He wasn't as belligerent as some. He wasn't a jerk like others. But Fox was deliberately and maddeningly vague, bland and unresponsive to even the most obvious questions one might ask a head coach of a major professional sports team. He said nothing. For years. He offered no insight to even the most banal questions. I think if I had asked Fox on the record what time it was, he would have said, "it is what it is."

So I can't say I'm particularly surprised by the restrictive new rules for media covering the Chicago Bears during training camp with Fox now in his first year there after stints with Carolina and Denver. According to reports out of the Bears camp, all interviews with players must be requested 24 hours in advance. And reporters aren't allowed to write about what they see in training camp -- even though fans are allowed to tweet whatever they want.

The excuse offered by the Bears is that this will somehow prevent scouts from learning about opponents. Hogwash. If coaches are motivated enough to learn another team's secrets, they don't need the media to help them. See Bill Belichick.

So this isn't about helping the team win. It's about controlling and limiting the media. And whether this was Fox's idea or not, I suspect he doesn't give a hoot if the media's job is suddenly a lot harder.

In Europe, it happens all the time, as The New York Times reported today. One professional soccer team even banned the local media because the owner didn't like the coverage received.

The phase out of independent media coverage of sports teams isn't quite that extensive in the U.S. But it is happening here. Chicago shouldn't be viewed as an aberration, but more likely a trendsetter.

It didn't use to be this way. For years, sports teams and leagues had a symbiotic relationship with the media. Teams needed media coverage for marketing to build interest and sell tickets. Newspapers needed the coverage to help drive readership. It was a win-win no matter what the tone of the coverage. Back in the day, the New York Giants used to provide travel arrangements for some reporters. When I covered the Hartford Whalers years ago, I occasionally took the team's charter flight and the Whalers routinely booked a hotel room for me on the road (the flight and hotel were paid for by the newspaper).

Of course, the internet changed all of that. Teams now create their own content for marketing and can bypass the media to reach directly to the fans. And they are increasingly limiting independent media in favor of their marketing partners like ESPN, Fox Sports, etc., where coverage is more friendly and controlled.

The media still needs sports content to drive readership. But teams and leagues now seemingly view independent media as parasites. So there is a pressure on reporters to build strong relationships with teams through positive coverage. Those who don't adhere to the company line will be increasingly cut out of access to athletes and coaches.

It's even happening in sports like Nascar, which used to be media friendly but has drastically reduced access to drivers in the last year or two. These days, stories need layers of public relations approval before interviews are even scheduled. And it's not unusual for PR reps to ignore emails from media deemed unfavorable.

This is the new normal.

Nascar joins the national conversation

 flickr/duane.schoon

Nothing I have written on jersey/slant has generated more page views, discussion, misunderstanding and utter vitriol than a post entitled, "Nascar's silence on Jason Collins says it all."

It was written last April, the day after N.B.A. veteran Jason Collins became the first professional athlete in one of the four major team sports to come out as gay. I wrote about the reaction to the news, including a phone call from President Barack Obama and tweet from First Lady Michelle Obama. But more specifically, I noted the sports world reaction, which included support from athletes in the N.B.A., N.F.L., Major League Baseball as well as other sports.

As I pointed out in the column, there was no public statement from Nascar or any of its drivers (although a Nascar official did respond to a request for comment). I wrote that it was a missed opportunity for the sport to join the national conversation and sent the wrong message to those within Nascar who are gay. For that, I was vilified.

Of course, gay rights remain a contentious, ever-evolving issue in this country. There continue to be opportunities to take a stand. And so it was on Wednesday when Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced she vetoed Senate Bill 1062, which would have allowed businesses to legally discriminate against gays in the state.

Brewer came under significant pressure from politicians on both sides of the aisle and business groups who were against the bill. There were also indications the N.F.L. would have considered moving the Super Bowl, slated to be played in Arizona in 2015, to another state if it became law.

When Brewer announced she had vetoed the bill, there were many who went public with their approval of the decision. Among them: Nascar. With the Sprint Cup series about to shift to Phoenix International Raceway on Sunday, spokesman David Higdon released this statement on Wednesday night:

"We are pleased with Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s veto of SB1062. Nascar actively strives to promote diversity and inclusion throughout the motorsports industry. Nascar has a zero tolerance policy against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, race, gender, national origin, age, color, disability, religion, or other factors which deny the essential humanity of all people."

Welcome to the conversation.

Daring the NFL to discriminate

University of Missouri

The NFL has too many immature, homophobic or religiously conservative players who can't handle a gay teammate in their locker room. The NFL has too many owners, general managers or coaches who don't want to deal with the media onslaught that will come from drafting someone who is gay.

The NFL just isn't ready for an out gay player.

That's not my assessment, mind you. That's the opinion of NFL general managers and others interviewed by Sports Illustrated following the decision by Missouri defensive end Michael Sam, projected to be taken as high as the third round by some, to come out as gay before the NFL draft. According to the article, many believe Sam made a mistake by coming out. They think he will plummet in the draft and will lose six or seven figures in salary as a result.

For those wondering why he would do this, why he would make this an issue -- why any person, for that matter, wants to come out and potentially make so many around them uncomfortable:

An NFL coach wants me dead

Anyone who has paid attention to the NFL this season should not be surprised by the Chris Kluwe column posted on Deadspin.com on Thursday. Kluwe described in detail a homophobic coach he claims ended his career as a punter with the Minnesota Vikings.

Clearly, the NFL has taken a step back while the rest of the country moves forward on gay issues. Or maybe the NFL is exactly where it always has been -- to the right of the mainstream with a streak of anti-gay through the core. How else to explain the sudden disappearance from the NFL of gay supporters and at least one athlete in his prime who was rumored to be gay? Just coincidences? Maybe. Maybe not.

Kluwe, a straight ally who was an outspoken supporter of gay marriage in Minnesota, is out of the NFL. So is Brendon Ayanbadejo, another supporter. Both saw their careers abruptly end. Too old? Not good enough? Or too gay-friendly?

What about those football players who were supposedly going to come out before this past season ... until they suddenly crept back into the closet? Or Kerry Rhodes, one of the better defensive backs in the game, who is suddenly out of the NFL after he was rumored to be gay?

And what to make of that bizarre Aaron Rodgers interview recently where he felt obligated to declare "I really, really like women" amid gay rumors?

Stakeholder journalism bias, Pete Prisco edition

Is it just me, or did Pete Prisco's CBSSports.com column on the $765 million concussion settlement with players read like an old NFL talking-points memo?

Prisco wrote that NFL players who sustained brain damage from the game shouldn't be compensated for their suffering because they knew what they were getting into when they agreed to play football. Of course, that doesn't mesh with the accusation that the league misled players about the danger of concussions. But that side of the lawsuit somehow wasn't mentioned in Prisco's column.

Look, if Prisco wants to announce to every player in the NFL that they get what they deserve for playing the game and shouldn't receive a dime in disability compensation, that's his prerogative. It's hard to believe players are going to have an ounce of respect for him after that column. But that's his choice.

Nor am I going to suggest Prisco might have brain damage, as Keith Olbermann did in his otherwise expert takedown of Prisco's relative indifference to the hardship and tragedy of former players like Junior Seau, who committed suicide like others who were found to really have brain damage.

I prefer to focus on the most obvious reason why Prisco would write such a conveniently dismissive, pro-NFL column about potentially thousands of irreparably damaged human beings:

Could gay accusation cost Kerry Rhodes NFL job?

The last time NFL free agent safety Kerry Rhodes was asked about his future, he told AL.com earlier in July that he was in the middle of negotiations and a decision on where he would play was coming soon.

"It's in the works," he said. "I can't talk about it in depth but there's a good four teams that I'm looking at. There are ongoing discussions. I'm trying to see which one will be the best fit for me. You will see me, though."

So far, we haven't.

Training camps opened throughout the NFL this week, with all signed veterans arriving by Saturday. Rhodes was not among them.

Maybe it's a negotiating ploy. Maybe Rhodes thinks he can wait until teams evaluate their rosters and possibly get a better deal later. Maybe at 30 he is hoping to skip the rigors of training camp and sign later in preseason.

Or is it possible an accusation that Rhodes is gay is costing him a chance to sign a lucrative contract, perhaps even preventing him from getting a job in the NFL?

Nascar's silence on Jason Collins says it all

Monday was a groundbreaking day for all sports, not just basketball, when N.B.A. player Jason Collins became the first professional athlete in a major team sport to come out as gay. It was a moment that many had been preparing for and anticipating for a while, a door that finally opened and began a process that will make it easier for others to come out in all sports someday.

And it wasn't hard to see the immediate impact of that opening sentence in the Sports Illustrated column authored by Collins: "I'm a 34-year-old N.B.A. center. I'm black. And I'm gay."

President Barack Obama personally called Collins and First Lady Michelle Obama tweeted about it; President Bill Clinton put out a statement. Athletes and others in the N.B.A. and N.F.L., Major League Baseball and tennis, among others, were quick to show their support as well with tweets and official statements from Kobe Bryant to the Boston Red Sox, who invited Collins to throw out the first pitch at a game at Fenway Park.

What was missing from this national conversation? Nascar.

Don Cherry should be banned from the locker room

I've had my share of battles with coaches and athletes over the years, from Scotty Bowman and Keith Primeau in Detroit to Carolina Panthers wide receiver Steve Smith. If you're a sports reporter long enough, and you ask tough questions or write stories that challenge the status quo, that's going to happen.

But as far as I know, the disagreements have never been about my mere presence in a locker room. Except once.

So when I heard the outrageous-just-to-be-outrageous hockey broadcaster Don Cherry had said on Saturday night that women don't belong in a locker room, I couldn't help but think of the only athlete in all the decades I've been in this business who made the locker room an ugly issue.

Tony Stewart, Tim Tebow and using the media

For all the battles he fights on the track, Tony Stewart is known almost as much for his clashes with the media off of it. I'm guessing more than a few reporters who have spent time in the Nascar garage over the years have stories about confrontations with Stewart.

Including me.

It was last year at Darlington Raceway when Stewart told me after a media session that he didn't need my newspaper coverage -- among many choice words he directed my way that day. And yet Stewart continues to make himself accessible to me or any other reporter who covers the sport. I imagine it's in part because he understands the importance of media coverage to Nascar -- and to the companies that give his race team millions of dollars -- whether he personally likes us or not.

When I heard about Tim Tebow's fan appearance at Whataburger Field in Corpus Christi, Texas, last Wednesday, I couldn't help but think of Stewart.