As a longtime columnist and former talk-show host who has in the past had his (my) differences with various coaches, administrators, managers and athletes, who as recently as last year was told by a former NBA All-Star that if he (I) didn’t remove himself (myself) from a group interview, said All-Star would refuse to take questions from all other reporters, and who has had his (my) credential taken away and then re-issued by a local team, I approach this topic doing my darnedest not to be defensive, not to be too one-sided, not to blow a gasket in disgust.
But it’s hard. So very hard.
I confess exactly where I’m coming from on this one.
If you read about or heard what Deion Sanders recently did at Colorado, or what Colorado football did, banning a writer at the Denver Post, a columnist, from asking questions of coaches and players and anyone involved with the program, maybe you’ve given some thought to such an action.
I think it’s ridiculous, outrageous, stupid and downright pathetic. Oops, ease up there, pal, remember the pledge in your opening paragraph here.
Let’s see, I think it’s wrong and shortsighted. OK, better.
The writer banned from asking questions is columnist Sean Keeler, who apparently has been aggressive at times, at least in somebody’s view, in his criticism of Sanders and CU football.
In a statement, the school’s athletic department informed the world that on account of “a series of sustained personal attacks on the football program and specifically on Coach Prime,” that questions from Keeler would not be taken, nor answered.
What a bunch of lame-brained, overly sensitive, idiotic babies. Um … I mean, perhaps Sanders and the athletic department should reconsider their position on this matter. Might be a decent idea.
Keeler retains his credential, however, so he can attend football events, and other reporters from the Denver Post are permitted to ask questions, just not that one guy.
I love how Sanders is all good with Keeler being around and asking away as long as he lobs up softballs to the coach, as long as he doesn’t criticize him or his program in a manner with which he disagrees. Which is to say, praise Coach Prime all the day long, play nice, but if you get too tough, nuh-uh, not gonna play ball.
The Post said a Colorado media relations staffer told the news organization that someone at the school — who could it possibly have been? — had a problem with Keeler referring to Sanders as “Deposition Deion” and the “Bruce Lee of B.S.” and a “false prophet,” as well as, according to ESPN, using terms such as “Planet Prime,” and “the Deion Kool-Aid” and “circus.”
Boohoo, poor Deion, did you get your feels all punched out because you’re so picked on, so persecuted, so punked? What a chump. Err, I mean, maybe Deion felt he was being misunderstood and misrepresented, so he was compelled to properly protect himself.
The coach and the columnist had crossed words at a news conference a couple of weeks back at which Sanders accused him of “always being on the attack,” asking him further, “What happened to get you like this?” and adding, “No, I’m serious. I want to help because it’s not normal.”
Thereafter, Keeler wrote in his column that Sanders is, “A confident man who suddenly looked and acted and sounded … afraid.”
According to the ESPN report, a sports information staffer at Colorado told the Post that Keeler had not violated any specific media rules or policies.
Rules, schmules.
Regardless, his questions would no longer be acknowledged or answered. And the ban on him in that regard is indefinite.
OK, look, I guess a person like Deion Sanders can decide not to answer questions from a particular media member if he so chooses. It is said that that much is written into his contract. But to stop a columnist from asking anyone in the program about anything really does seem extreme.
I don’t know Keeler, nor what he’s getting at with Sanders and Colorado. And I do figure that there is a line somewhere out there that can be crossed either in bad taste or bad form. I’ve probably done that myself on one or two occasions over the past 45 years.
But to overreact to a columnist whose job it is, unlike other reporters, to express opinion, to have a point of view, and ban him or her from asking questions because his or her commentary hurts your feelings demonstrates a lack of certainty about the course a coach or a program is taking.
Some readers who believe certain political figures who claim the media is the enemy of one and all, especially readers who are huge fans of a school or a team and who want only positive press, might cheer Deion on in this matter. But from this corner, and from a whole lot of other corners, there can be usefulness in dissenting views.
I’ve attempted through the years to draw the line at cheap shots. Drawing and defining that line can be complicated. But do even big-time fans want only sunshine about their team blown at them? Or can they appreciate a different view?
College sports programs — and some pro teams, too — have gotten increasingly selective and secretive about the access they grant reporters, making rules such as disallowing those reporters from contacting athletes or their family members without first getting approval from staffers inside the program or team.
This is a far cry from the old days, when more than a few coaches were much more open. It varies, of course, and it’s always varied. I remember asking one high-profile coach if he would mind me interviewing one of his players who had a great personal story to tell. The coach refused to permit it. I asked another high-profile coach, as it turned out, a much more self-confident coach, a similar question and he said, “Sure, interview whichever player you want.”
Some coaches, administrators, managers, owners are control freaks who embrace paranoia, others are more open. Might not surprise you which kind I favor and have had more positive experiences with.
One example comes from just a week or two ago, when I visited with BYU football coach Kalani Sitake. I’ve always liked Sitake personally and have praised him, at times. But I’ve also criticized him and his program, some of his decisions, some of his results. Same with people like Larry Miller, LaVell Edwards, Ron McBride, Dennis Lindsay, Kyle Whittingham, Bronco Mendenhall, Kevin O’Connor, Quin Snyder, and many more.
I once wrote something critical of Jerry Sloan that he didn’t appreciate. After a group interview at a Jazz practice, he looked at me with those steeled-dark eyes and said, “I want to talk to you.” We walked to a corner of the gym and he let me know in no uncertain terms that he disagreed with something I’d written. He said his piece, I said mine, we shook hands at the end of it, and not only was it never spoken of again, there was no lingering attitude moving forward.
Like Sitake and Sloan, those are confident individuals who wouldn’t shy away from or ban certain subsequent questions or questioners. They would disagree with them and defend themselves, one way or the other, and move on.
You can decide for yourself which side of that equation Deion Sanders leans toward. But even if he or anyone else, including fans, disagree with questions a member of the media asks or what conclusions they might find or express, throwing a ban at them is not the answer. It only happens now and again, but it’s …
A boneheaded, weak-minded, oafish, moronic way to go.
Oops. It’s almost never a good idea.