Evidence That Soon White Sportswriters Will "Ruin" Perfectly Good Articles By Discussing Race
I just wanted to warn you. The White guys are getting more comfortable discussing race. They'll soon be bringing it up all the time, just like we do. Be prepared.
Just in the past few days...
Michael Irvin did go on the Dan Patrick radio show yesterday to apologize for his comments about Tony Romo. He was contrite. Whatever. But what was really hilarious about the interview was Dan Patrick! I have to say I have never experienced this Dan. Dan is a pretty fair, open-minded guy. He has a take, but he is pretty magnanimous about entertaining a lot of viewpoints on his radio show. However, by his tone, it was clear that Dan was INDIGNANT about having to deal with the Michael Irvin thing. And The Playmaker was not his problem. You would have to listen to the audio on ESPN Insider to really get the feel for this, but Dan was not so subtly conveying that that he felt the whole thing was blown out of proportion and that he and Mike should be able to talk about anything they want. Dan clearly took treated the whole exchange as a joke. I don't think Dan appreciated the censorship on what's supposed to be a genuine conversation between buddies for the entertainment of the listeners. DP mumbled some apology about participating in the joke and potentially offending anyone. But I have to tell you that "apology" was 5 notches less sincere than T.O./Rosenhaus apology. I mean, Irvin sounded like he was going to cry. DP couldn't care less. DP gave about 60 seconds to the topic and he wanted to move on. Irvin wanted to keep explaining himself. Dan told Michael, "Let's move on. If you don't feel like talking about football today, I'll talk to you next week." Damn, Dan. But I'm glad you feel empowered in your right to talk about race. Sure things may get a little out of hand occasionally, but that's just how it goes sometimes. Way to stand up for honest racial discourse - kind of.
Pam Oliver did a very good piece on Black coaches in the NFL on the Fox NFL Sunday. I wasn't expecting much, but it was done with a fresh perspective. It discussed the current coaches and profiled some Black guys paying their dues in the league to become coaches. And she flat out asked Chicago Bears GM Jerry Angelo why Lovie Smith was the lowest paid coach in the league. Sorry, Pam, despite all your hard work, I'm going to have to give some love to the White guys. Girl, you know that's just how it goes. I mostly noticed the reaction of her co-hosts to the piece. I thought it was genuine. Jimmy chimed in with some interesting supplemental facts. Howie relayed his positive experience playing under Art Shell. It was nice to see the White guys contributing meaningfully and comfortably to a discussion concerning race. It may not have seemed notable to you, but it struck me just for that reason. Joe Buck praised Pam effusively, gave her a hug, and - the ultimate reward - let her sit at the desk. And, BTW, I don't understand why Pam didn't get the moderator job at the desk after James Brown left. She paid her dues. Maybe she sucked at her try-out, but I have a hard time believing that Joe Buck wanted a 17th job at Fox. I think that man might want to see his kids occasionally. And I have nothing against Curt Menefee, but he doesn't bring anything special to the table. And given that Fox is competing against Sunday Countdown, NFL Today and the NFL Network, you would think that they would work a little harder to keep the show fresh. They've already lost JB and Jillian Barberie. If they lose Caliendo, my loyalties are for sale. And I've sensed a little underlying bitterness from Pam this season. I think Pam will be, um, open to other offers when her contract with Fox expires.
And, back to Michael Irvin, some thoughtful commentary has come out of this. Not from the politically correct mainstream media, just the bloggers. As usual. Here's one at 55 Problems. Here's something from The Big Lead. Another one from Can't Stop the Bleeding. See, if Irvin can make uncomfortable statements without getting fired, some White guys have figured out that they too can criticize Irvin and discuss race without being labeled a racist. Don't ever forget this gift that Michael has given you, Irvin-haters.
And a final word about Irvin. I have a take on this. I initially thought this was a non-issue, but it's been interesting to contemplate the whole thing. It's a complicated issue actually. It's kind of like saying things are "gay." I hear that offends some people too, but it's a common characterization. (Deadspin used it just recently.) I have to put it out there - for people who may not know that - Black people commonly discuss things in terms of like "something is Black" "so and so is ghetto", "that's White", etc., etc. It's not a defense, but what Irvin said was not shocking in terms of whether that would be part of ordinary casual conversation between buddies in our community. But, of course, talking on ESPN is not the same as carrying on a conversation between buddies. That being said, if Peyton Manning stops by with a tasty homemade pound cake and beats me in a game of spades, I'll remain suspicious.
Just in the past few days...
Michael Irvin did go on the Dan Patrick radio show yesterday to apologize for his comments about Tony Romo. He was contrite. Whatever. But what was really hilarious about the interview was Dan Patrick! I have to say I have never experienced this Dan. Dan is a pretty fair, open-minded guy. He has a take, but he is pretty magnanimous about entertaining a lot of viewpoints on his radio show. However, by his tone, it was clear that Dan was INDIGNANT about having to deal with the Michael Irvin thing. And The Playmaker was not his problem. You would have to listen to the audio on ESPN Insider to really get the feel for this, but Dan was not so subtly conveying that that he felt the whole thing was blown out of proportion and that he and Mike should be able to talk about anything they want. Dan clearly took treated the whole exchange as a joke. I don't think Dan appreciated the censorship on what's supposed to be a genuine conversation between buddies for the entertainment of the listeners. DP mumbled some apology about participating in the joke and potentially offending anyone. But I have to tell you that "apology" was 5 notches less sincere than T.O./Rosenhaus apology. I mean, Irvin sounded like he was going to cry. DP couldn't care less. DP gave about 60 seconds to the topic and he wanted to move on. Irvin wanted to keep explaining himself. Dan told Michael, "Let's move on. If you don't feel like talking about football today, I'll talk to you next week." Damn, Dan. But I'm glad you feel empowered in your right to talk about race. Sure things may get a little out of hand occasionally, but that's just how it goes sometimes. Way to stand up for honest racial discourse - kind of.
Pam Oliver did a very good piece on Black coaches in the NFL on the Fox NFL Sunday. I wasn't expecting much, but it was done with a fresh perspective. It discussed the current coaches and profiled some Black guys paying their dues in the league to become coaches. And she flat out asked Chicago Bears GM Jerry Angelo why Lovie Smith was the lowest paid coach in the league. Sorry, Pam, despite all your hard work, I'm going to have to give some love to the White guys. Girl, you know that's just how it goes. I mostly noticed the reaction of her co-hosts to the piece. I thought it was genuine. Jimmy chimed in with some interesting supplemental facts. Howie relayed his positive experience playing under Art Shell. It was nice to see the White guys contributing meaningfully and comfortably to a discussion concerning race. It may not have seemed notable to you, but it struck me just for that reason. Joe Buck praised Pam effusively, gave her a hug, and - the ultimate reward - let her sit at the desk. And, BTW, I don't understand why Pam didn't get the moderator job at the desk after James Brown left. She paid her dues. Maybe she sucked at her try-out, but I have a hard time believing that Joe Buck wanted a 17th job at Fox. I think that man might want to see his kids occasionally. And I have nothing against Curt Menefee, but he doesn't bring anything special to the table. And given that Fox is competing against Sunday Countdown, NFL Today and the NFL Network, you would think that they would work a little harder to keep the show fresh. They've already lost JB and Jillian Barberie. If they lose Caliendo, my loyalties are for sale. And I've sensed a little underlying bitterness from Pam this season. I think Pam will be, um, open to other offers when her contract with Fox expires.
And, back to Michael Irvin, some thoughtful commentary has come out of this. Not from the politically correct mainstream media, just the bloggers. As usual. Here's one at 55 Problems. Here's something from The Big Lead. Another one from Can't Stop the Bleeding. See, if Irvin can make uncomfortable statements without getting fired, some White guys have figured out that they too can criticize Irvin and discuss race without being labeled a racist. Don't ever forget this gift that Michael has given you, Irvin-haters.
And a final word about Irvin. I have a take on this. I initially thought this was a non-issue, but it's been interesting to contemplate the whole thing. It's a complicated issue actually. It's kind of like saying things are "gay." I hear that offends some people too, but it's a common characterization. (Deadspin used it just recently.) I have to put it out there - for people who may not know that - Black people commonly discuss things in terms of like "something is Black" "so and so is ghetto", "that's White", etc., etc. It's not a defense, but what Irvin said was not shocking in terms of whether that would be part of ordinary casual conversation between buddies in our community. But, of course, talking on ESPN is not the same as carrying on a conversation between buddies. That being said, if Peyton Manning stops by with a tasty homemade pound cake and beats me in a game of spades, I'll remain suspicious.
Labels:
dan patrick,
joe buck,
michael irvin,
pam oliver
0 comments:
Post a Comment