(The Ugly) As I am sure you all know by now, a New York Times profile two weeks ago of the Giants’ star running back Tiki Barber noted that he likely plans on retiring at the end of this season. In subsequent interviews, Barber has confirmed this and last week, three members of the sports commentariat questioned Barber’s decision, or at least the timing of it. Gary Myers, of the New York Daily News, and ESPN’s Tom Jackson suggested that the retirement talk might be a distraction to the team and Michael Irvin went a step further, saying that the announcement, in the middle of the season was tantamount to Barber “quitting” on his teammates. Irvin later elaborated that what he meant to raise was the adverse effect of Tiki’s announcement on his ability to be a team leader the rest of the season, asserting that if Barber tries to pump up his players at a key moment in the game, the younger players are now going to ignore him because of what he’s done.
Tiki, seemingly out of character, criticized all three men, calling them “idiots” on his Sirius radio program this past Tuesday and reserving particular contempt for Irvin, whom he referred to as a “character guy” before adding, “facetiously speaking, of course.”
Tiki especially criticized all three men for failing to talk to his teammates about whether they thought his impending retirement was a distraction before asserting that it was. But, each of the three essentially rejected the idea that they needed to do so.
Here’s what Myers wrote in the Daily News this past week in response to Tiki’s comments:
“I began covering the NFL when Barber was 3 years old and can sense when I believe something will be a distraction. Inthis case, polling his Giants teammates on the Barber Issue, as he suggested should have been done, was not required, although I felt confident that trustworthy people shared my opinion.”
As best as I can tell, this is not so much a defense of how Myers’ practices journalism as it is a refusal to acknowledge that he is one. Because Myers has been doing this for a long time, he doesn’t need to talk to anybody – we should just take his expertise as sufficient for him to assert whatever he thinks is right or true.
Tom Jackson told Mike and the Mad Dog this week that he heard Tiki’s remarks because he was listening to Barber’s show, which TJ said he likes a great deal. TJ also disputed the idea that it was necessary to talk to any of Barber’s teammates before offering his opinion because, after all, TJ is paid to offer his opinion. Jackson also expressed disappointment at Barber’s name calling and suggested that Tiki issues opinions about all sorts of things on his show, such as the war in Iraq without necessarily talking to people in the administration, for example. So, Jackson wanted to know, how is this really any different?
But, according to SI’s Peter King, Barber has interviewed, among other people, John McCain, John Kerry and Condoleeza Rice. In other words, despite the fact that Tiki is a still active NFL player who does a radio show on the side, he would appear to have gone to some length to educate himself about, for example, the Iraq war in order to formulate opinions he expresses on the show. Jackson, by contrast, is a full-time ESPN employee and, presumably, has more ready access to the Giants’ locker room than Barber does to our nation’s leading policy-makers,
Irvin has also bristled at Tiki’s personal shots and defended his opinions primarily by reference to his credentials – as a key leader on a team that won three Super Bowls in four years. Therefore, Irvin has argued this week, he’s been hired by ESPN because of his expertise about what it takes to be an NFL leader.
The problem with arguing that your opinion is unassailable on the basis of your credentials alone is that if you find someone whose credentials are arguably better than yours, doesn’t that make their opinion better than yours? Even leaving aside Barber’s teammates, like Michael Strahan, who have rejected Irvin’s assertions, lots of people this week have dismissed Irvin’s comments – the Giants sure aren’t playing like a distracted team right now, and Tiki is universally respected, especially in his own locker room where, by all accounts, his teammates have known this was coming for at least a year. Mike Ditka is among those who have categorically rejected Irvin’s assertions. Ditka, of course, was a key leader on NFL championship teams as a player and head coach. If credentials make the opinion, doesn’t Ditka’s trump Irvin’s?
Irvin’s comments are also bizarrely out of step with what we know to be Tiki’s on-field personality. If the label “leads-by-example” applies to anyone, it applies to Barber. I’ve watched many Giants games over the years, and I have never seen Barber running up and down the sidelines verbally exhorting his teammates. That’s not his style. If Irvin is reduced to saying that when his teammates watch him perform and no longer feel motivated by that, then he’s really reaching.
Defenders of TJ and Irvin have argued that they were hired to give their opinions and that they are, therefore, en led to do so. But, the obvious response is that Tiki’s en led to his opinion, too. Furthermore, being en led to an opinion is not the same as being en led to having others respect your opinion. If you make a claim that you cannot back up in any way other than “trust me, I know what I’m talking about, even if the people directly involved categorically disagree” then you’re opening yourself up to having your credibility questioned.
Sports commentary is an opinion-driven, seat-of-the pants phenomenon. I understand that and, as a co-host of a community radio sports talk show, I engage in some of that, too. But, being a high profile commentator doesn’t absolve any of these guys of criticism when they fail to substantiate their claims. That the standards of their profession are as low as they are may lead them to believe that they can say whatever they want without justification. But, it doesn’t follow that their own low standards for their work ought to be the only basis for how other people might judge them.
Reply With Quote
Posting Permissions
