Reply With Quote
Probably an article that would be better timed after a Spurs win.
Why The Spurs Don't Get More Attention
By: Bill Ingram
Covering the San Antonio Spurs is one of the most challenging jobs in the NBA. Talk to anyone who's tried to do any kind of in-depth story about the team and they'll tell you the same thing. The Spurs are elusive, evasive, and work hard to make it as difficult as possible to really get to know what's going on with the team. Their players are great using a lot of words to say nothing of interest, and head coach Gregg Popovich, witty as he is, is constantly trying to find some way to outsmart the media. It's not easy to get an interview with their front office guys and even when you do, it's rare to come away with anything of substance. People often ask me why the Spurs, one of the premier organizations of the last decade, don't get much national attention. The answer is simple: they avoid it in every way possible.
This isn't how it is with most teams. There are, generally speaking, two faces on an NBA team. You have the public face - the things their front office staff, coaches and players say to the public at large through the media - and then there is the private side. Very often the inner circle of media is privvy to much of the private side of the organization, but they choose not to talk about it because it might be damaging to the team . . .or it might just not be anyone's business. Besides, if you start airing the private stuff, pretty soon you'll find you're not privvy to it any more. It's background information, but it also helps you to have a deeper understanding of the team. It helps you to truly be an expert on the franchise you're covering.
K.C. Johnson in Chicago recently took some heat because he didn't immediately disclose the now well-publicized hostile encounter between Chicago Bulls president John Paxson and head coach Vinny Del Negro. Maybe that was out of loyalty to Del Negro or Paxson, or maybe he just thought the team's impressive late-season surge was a better story to tell. I happen to think the late-season run was the better story, and applaud Johnson for not airing the dirty laundry. How would Johnson's relationship with Paxson and Del Negro change if he immediately wrote about every little thing he sees between the two of them? Inevitably he would have to take sides, and whichever side he took would alienate him from the other side. In the long term, it might mean K.C. couldn't actually do his job any more.
So let's take that example. Let's say that information didn't become public. How does it benefit Johnson to have that information, but not disclose it publicly? Here's how: He has a perspective about things that is shaped by that knowledge. When he gets asked in his professional world, through blogging, radio, TV, or any of the plethora of ways we interact with the public in this profession, what he thinks about Del Negro's future with the team, he can give a more informed answer. Something like this (my words, not his):
"Vinny did a solid job after rumors of his imminent firing came up in December. He led the team to the playoffs when it seemed they had been written off, and helped them adjust on the fly to significant mid-season roster moves. He may not be the long-term answer for the Bulls, but he's learning as he goes."
See what I did in that answer? I gave Vinny his props - and K.C. would know that Vinny most likely would read or hear his comments - but he didn't commit to a long-term future for Vinny in Chicago. Because of episodes like the one between Del Negro and Paxson, he knows there is tension and he knows there's a pretty good chance that tension will translate into Vinny getting fired, particularly is the organization feels like they need to save face after an embarrassing loss to the Cavaliers in the first round. The knowlege of that poor relationship between coach and front office gives Johnson a more complete understanding of the team and makes him better at his job, even if he never breathes a word of that particular encounter.
I could give a million examples, but that one illustrates the point. There are things we, as journalists, know, but choose not to write about for one reason or another. As part of my daily routine I am told things in confidence by front office executives who only tell me something to help me understand context, and only under the condition that I don't disclose the specifics of a given situation. Those conversations help me to speak more authoritatively about a given team, and ultimately make me better at my job. If I started writing everything I was told, those conversations would stop taking place.
Those conversations just don't happen with the Spurs. I overheard a conversation with some guys who are associated with the team in a way I won't disclose here, and they were talking about how hard it is to even get a player on the record about anything of substance. It's like the Spurs pass out talking points to their players and they recite them on command. They also work to make Tony Parker and Tim Duncan as inaccessible as possible, and when you do get a few minutes with one of them they are anything but insightful.
Compare that to Dirk Nowitzki, for example, who is just as big a star as Duncan and yet always takes time to give well thought-out answers to questions. He's also happy to have a conversation after the microphones are turned off and you just need some private perspective on something. The same can be said of the majority of stars around the NBA. Kobe Bryant, Yao Ming, Chris Paul, Brandon Roy, Carlos Boozer, Steve Nash and many other top tier NBA players understand their relationship with the media to be one of partners, not adversaries - especially with the members of the media they know and trust.
No one really seems to be sure why the Spurs are the way they are, either. I honestly don't believe it to be ego-driven. There is no feeling of self-perceived superiority around the team. Duncan is not an ego maniac, so far as I can tell, nor is Parker, and certainly not Ginobili. Is this some mandate from Popovich, a hangover from his days in the military? Is it a policy set by the front office for some reason, wanting to control (and strangle) the public perception of their team? It's a question that frequently comes up around All-Star, the Finals, or whenever a bunch of media people are all in one place waiting for the next event to unfold. What's wrong with the Spurs?
We may not know the answer to that, but we do know the effect. The effect is the vast majority of the media chooses to talk to and about other teams. It's unfortunate, as the Spurs have been the very definition of elite since Tim Duncan joined David Robinson for the team's first championship in 1999. Assistant coaches like Mike Brown have gone on to be head coaches elsewhere, executives like Sam Presti have left to build their own organizations. The Spurs' organization has spawned some of the best and brightest minds in the NBA today, and yet you hardly hear anything about them outside of San Antonio.
That's the way they like it.
I am frequently asked by die-hard Spurs fans why the national media doesn't talk about them very much. It's viewed as some sort of slight, like the media doesn't respect the Spurs or something like that. The bottom line, however, is that as much as we'd like to talk about them, they really don't want the coverage. In fact, they work to make sure the coverage simply isn't possible - or that the information, the "perspective," as we've discussed, that would make the coverage interesting isn't available.
And so . . .we spend most of our time talking about other, more interesting teams.
Probably an article that would be better timed after a Spurs win.
CIA Pop at work!!!
Just show penis.
This is why I've always viewed the Spurs as a sort of basketball fan litmus test. Outside of San Antonio and Spurs' fans, you really have to do the legwork yourself to find out anything remotely of substance about this team. I like it that way.
Not saying there aren't a legion of ignorant Spurs fans either (indeed, this is ST, of all places), but unlike the Lakers or Cavs, the simply casual fan isn't going to know anything substantial about SA or the way they play (hence the persistent "they're old"/"they're boring" stigmas that have persisted in an era of ball that has been anything but).
that is why i am still a fan of Surs. I became when Rasho played in spurs (i am slovenian), but then remained a spurs fan... a classic organisaion.. no show-offs
GO SPURS GO
There's a negative and a positive to this type of control.
This approach seems somewhat cynical to me. I wonder if Pop realizes that he comes off like a jerk on TV more often than not. Oh well, he has his reasons. If this helps keep the team focused then so be it.
Kind of a pointless article
Been said a thousand times over
Meh, the very reasons the article was written are why it bears repeating, IMO.
I always thought the spurs organization acted they way the did cause Timmy wants it that way. And what Tim wants, Tim gets.
so this is why we don't get attention....
No doubt. I am a big Phil. Eagles fan (yeah boo hiss), and they run their business in similar way in some senses. Read a little of this to get the gist of it:
http://www.igglesblog.com/iggles_blo...education.html
I think it definitely is a control issue and it works with most fans who buy the image. We all know how mad Pop got when TP went to the press about how upset he was about them courting Jason Kidd. You have to keep things within "the family."
Excellent article.
Now, this is PRECISELY why I like the Spurs.
" When you shoot, shoot, you don't talk about your life."
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.
Go talk about the DelonteWests, JRSmiths, DelNegros, NateRobinsons, GilbertArenas, JamrisCrittertons and KobeBryants of this world some other place.
Ok I'm not complaining anymore if ESPN doesn't talk about the Spurs everytime.
I call BS. I may be "misremembering" but havent we had 2 of the winners of that media award over the last decade???
Pop is witty when he wins and a smart ass when he loses.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
