Although Super Bowl XLIX was won by the New England Patriots, most fans will remember the antics of Marshawn Lynch. Lynch's desire to not talk to the media during required media sessions sparked uproar, made people laugh, and at the end of the day forced him to pay a few hefty fines.
The point here is that as a high-profile player in the NFL, there is an overwhelming amount of mandated media appearances, not only on game day, but after trainings, practices, etc. The difference with the EPL is there are almost no requirements to meet with the media ever, and the way a player is portrayed to the public is not tied down to how they are quoted in the newspaper or look on TV.
Do you think the NFL or EPL model is better? Would the NFL lose appeal if media appearances less of an obligation?
http://awfulannouncing.com/2015/epl-media-restrictions-raise-questions-nfl-media-narrative-regarding-marshawn-lynch.html
I am torn between the two. I believe that interviews and media coverage of the players help spike the interest and support from the fans. However, when only a couple players have the obligation to do this, it leads to certain players having higher egos and soon feeling more powerful than the team itself.
ReplyDeleteThere is a similarity in the managers in the Premier League have to talk to the media multiple times each week. One manager, Chelsea's Jose Mourinho, often follows a similar plan as Lynch, saying very few words to avoid controversial statements and fines. I think it's unnecessary to have players and coaches meet with media multiple times per week. Only so much can change in such a short time period.
ReplyDeleteSeeing as though many US sports are based on the individual rather than the team, I think that there would be a huge loss of interest in the NFL if media appearances by NFL players were less of an obligation. Americans, for the most part, will always enjoy watching football because it is a favorite past time, but what makes the NFL such a hype is the individual players. When players refuse to be seen infront of the camera off of the field, it takes away a lot of the personal attention and support for the player. People in America like to feel like they know the players that they rally behind.
ReplyDeleteI'm against the required media sessions that the NFL has especially after losses. You already know players, coaches, and staff are in a bad mood and sometimes say stuff they'll regret and not want to be repeated publicly. Unfortunately for them, the NY Times will be already be printing the quote on the front page. It should be optional, not a requirement.
ReplyDeleteI'm heavily against required media sessions. I completely understand if a player does not want to talk about his game, his mindset, or why he lost. Players are people too, and sometimes they don't feel like broadcasting their thoughts or attitudes to the entire world.
ReplyDeleteThis topic is difficult, because as a competitor you do not want to adress the media after a loss. But the athlete must recognize that it is their profession, it is not a simple game it is a business and for that matter I think that media should require players to talk. Maybe their should be some restrictions as to how much media coverage their should be during the week. But fans want to know the opinion of the professional athlete and the media gains from that access.
ReplyDeleteI think the EPL model is better. All the questions asked by reporters and the media in the NFL, and really any sport, is the same question, just rehashed. All we hear half the time are the same responses from these athletes answering the same questions. It really adds nothing to the game in my opinion. I'm with Lynch on that his actions on the field should speak for him, rather than what he has to say during a press conference.
ReplyDeleteI think the ELP really gets the inside scoop and "digs deeper." As fans, people want the real story instead of what they read in magazines. In press conferences the NFL always ask similar questions but ELP may ask tougher ones and it really gets to the bottom of things. Athletes just have to accept that they will always be under the spotlight, it's part of the job.
ReplyDeleteI think it's really just all part of the American sports culture. Ultimately the NFL is a business that is trying to maximize revenue, and having a model where players are not required to engage with media will eliminate many of those opportunities. I am totally empathetic to a guy having a bad game, but I think by the time you are in the NFL it's really just part of the job and more like icing on the cake than any major inconvenience (though that could also just be an ignorant assumption).
ReplyDeleteOnce again, it is truly about the difference in sports cultures as Jessica notes above. You look at the difference between the NFL and EPL, and yes, the NFL is a business that is attempting to maximize its revenue no matter what and will do whatever it takes to make that sustainable, even in the midst of fining its most renown players. Of course players have bad games and players have great games, but if we were in there shoes, what would we want to do during a post game. To the fans, this brings great entertainment, but on a personal level in regards to the players themselves, you can definitely feel for them. Overall, I am indifferent on the model in both the NFL and EPL.
ReplyDelete