Read the arguments from Loyal Homer and Bleacher Fan about which league they believe had the best 2009.
Another year, another dominant performance by the NFL. One of the world’s best businesses (even the bad teams make money), it is easy to see why the NFL always captures so many eyeballs nationally (and internationally, if we are counting those games played in Wembley Stadium, London).
The NFL is one of those rare parts of society and life that equally appeals to the brainy and brawny folks. Complex week 15 playoff scenarios, the off-the-field news stories, the draft scenarios per team, and the in-game strategy are all examples of aspects of the NFL that appeal to brainy people (like, say, for example… sports geeks…). “People hit hard, fall down” is an example of why the NFL appeals to brawny folks (uh, not sports geeks).
The NFL has an amazing ability to be in the news – and create positives out of potentially negative news situations. Consider the case of former Cleveland Browns wide receiver Donte Stallworth. He struck and killed a pedestrian while driving intoxicated – a terrible tragedy with the ability to cast a large shadow of negativity over the league. Instead, the NFL’s punishment of Stallworth turns out to be more effective and harsh than the penal system. And, out of the this incident is berthed the official “NFL Conduct Policy” – a legacy of active commission Roger Goodell. The NFL is the first league to put a stake in the ground and muddy the lines between personal and professional lives. If the penal system fails to punish, the NFL will not. Tough.
The NFL is also about brand… about creating and protecting an image. While the Stallworth situation conveyed toughness, the idea of toughness was born and now thrives in the locker rooms of every NFL team. For example, remember all of the hubbub about concussions in the NFL, and how some serious changes were on the way to being made to make the game safer, and force players to sit out extra time to avoid long-term damage? Yea, that noble imperative lasted a week, and now it’s “toughness as usual” in the NFL. No league demonstrates – or values – its tough brand more than the NFL (paying attention, NHL???).
One more example of PR prowess… there is a terrible fight going on between the owners and the players association right now… even to the point that there is legitimate talk of a work stoppage before the 2011 season. But, how much of that story do we find in the mainstream media? A couple of random mentions, at best. The one story I found to support my argument is dated in March.
The NFL had the best 2009 of any league because it has the ability to dominate any sports news cycle any time it wants. From future hall of famers making playing or not playing choices to Tom Brady’s return after a devastating injury to the Saints fast start to the season, to the Colts near perfection, etc., “The League” dominates the news. The NFL is a television ratings draw, an ad space seller for sports websites, and the recipient of more ink in newspapers and online than any other league – no matter what time of year. The NFL has the uncanny knack of making relative non-stories into major stories. For example, it seems only in the NFL are teams achieving (see the Indianapolis Colts, Minnesota Vikings, and New Orleans Saints) as much of a story as teams not achieving (see the Pittsburgh Steelers, the New York Giants, and Carolina Panthers). Heck, Monday Night Football analyst Jon Gruden was RUMORED to return to coaching and it was a major story that helped him capture a long-term deal with ESPN. Being in an NFL story is neither bad news nor good news – but it is always news.
Whether evaluating business, brand, public relations, or fan enthusiasm, no league demonstrates more of each than the NFL, making it the best league of 2009.
Posted by Sports Geek 
The What Makes a Better In-Game Analyst Debate – Analyze This!
August 5, 2009Read the debate intro and read Sport’s Geek’s argument that someone with no playing experience makes a better in-game analyst.
This is sure to be an interesting and unique debate, and it is appropriate that Sports Geek and I debate it. We both have backgrounds in various types of media, both on-air broadcast and print. Plus, we are both fascinated with sports media. Heck, we read the same TV media columns, including our favorite written by USA Today columnist Michael Hiestand.
Bleacher Fan asks us what qualification makes for a better in-game sports analyst. And to me, a better analyst is someone who has played the game. A better analyst is someone who can break down the X’s and O’s and the nuances of the game he is analyzing. In his intro, Bleacher Fan asks Sports Geek to argue that the better analyst possesses “an ability to communicate in a manner that makes the sport compelling to watch.” The onus should fall on the play-by-play commentator to do that.
Let’s use a couple of examples. I will hopefully prove that this is an excellent way to get the point across and it is something that only someone who has played the game can talk about.
Don Sutton, a Hall of Fame pitcher who won 324 games, is currently a commentator for the Atlanta Braves radio network and very underrated as an analyst. He was and still is a student of the game. What he does better than most is go inside the head of a pitcher. When a situation comes up in a game he will often talk about what is in the head of a pitcher from a psychological perspective. He’ll break down scouting reports of not only pitchers, but also hitters. He often breaks down what a pitcher does – or should do – on his non-throwing days. It really does vary from pitcher to pitcher. He can talk about this and have instant credibility because of his background as a Hall of Fame pitcher. He is someone listeners trust. His words mean more than someone like Steve Phillips when he says something to about a pitcher. I respect Phillips and his front office background. He did, after all, build a team that made it to the World Series (2000 New York Mets). But, what does he know about pitching? If Sutton was not in the broadcast booth, he could be in the dugout as a pitching coach. Having met the guy in person, he is a heckuva nice guy… and even comes across that way on air.
Another analyst and former player I like is Troy Aikman. When Aikman was first hired by FOX in 2001, I thought it was a match made in hell. Aikman never came across to me as someone who could break down a game the way an analyst should. Folks, I was wrong. He has quickly shot up the FOX chain of command and is now the analyst on the lead crew with Joe Buck on FOX. Aikman’s dry wit and smooth persona go along with his deep knowledge of the game. He is able to see things in the coverage of defenses that Tony Kornheiser can’t see (to be fair, that was not Tony’s role on Monday Night Football). Perhaps Aikman keeps his eye on linebacker or a safety from the booth – much the same way he did on the field – and is able to express how Peyton Manning was able to hit Dallas Clark over the middle. These are little things that make a broadcast more effective… these are little things that Kornheiser might study film and be able to say that, but he is not a Hall of Fame quarterback. He is not Troy Aikman. Whose opinion do you value more when discussing football? It is nothing against Kornhesier. I absolutely love him on Pardon the Interruption. But again, he is not Troy Aikman and would probably tell you so.
Imagine you are at a doctor’s office awaiting a consultation with your cardiologist. You are talking to the nurse and she says, “What they usually do is go in and…” Now, ten minutes later, you talk to your doctor and he tells you, “Loyal Homer, I have done hundreds of surgeries like this. What I will do is connect this valve to this valve and…” Now, who makes you feel better there?
Analysts analyze. Just ask yourself… can you really effectively analyze if you have not been in that position yourself? No you cannot!