You would think the Washington Redskins would be a little more careful about public relations and media matters considering the never-ending debate about the team's nickname. After a stunning 20-17 overtime upset win over the rival Dallas Cowboys two weeks ago, everybody at Redskin Park should be happy. A two-game winning streak jumped Washington to a 3-5 record with two games against losing teams coming up, Minnesota and Tampa Bay. Well, this wouldn't be the Redskins if there wasn't some sort of circus. Where are The Flying Wallendas? Where is the fire-eating person? Where are the jugglers? I'm rambling.
Anyway, the Redskins announced injured QB Robert Griffin III would start this past Sunday's game against Minnesota or did they? Many local and national reporters claimed through anonymous sources that this was the case. This was Wednesday, two days after Dallas and four days before Minnesota. Later, Redskins head coach Jay Gruden informed the media that no decision had been made. Basically, Griffin would practice with the first team along with then-starter Colt McCoy. If the Redskins' coaches felt Griffin was healthy to play, they would start Griffin. If not, McCoy would start. This is typical behavior for a team with an injured starting QB and a backup QB filling in as the temporary starter. The problem, lack of understanding and communication to the media.
So, Gruden said a decision would be made on Friday. No problem. Friday comes, Gruden says Griffin is the starting QB versus Minnesota. No problem. Sunday comes, problem. Britt McHenry and Adam Schefter of ESPN both reported issues with the Redskins and Griffin. First, Schefter claimed the Redskins decision to start Griffin was not made by head coach Jay Gruden. Schefter said , on ESPN's pregame show and in a story written by ESPN.com staffers, that owner Daniel Snyder and general manager Bruce Allen made the decision. It was interesting because neither Snyder or Allen said anything publicly.
The ESPN.com story's first sentence read, "multiple members of the Washington Redskins organization told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter this week that they believe the decision to go back to quarterback Robert Griffin III and away from Colt McCoy, who had led the team to two straight wins, is an owner- and general manager-driven decision".
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11808434/call-start-robert-griffin-iii-washington-redskins-came-top
Now the word "believe" was used by the people who talked to Schefter. "Believe" is different than "told" or "said". Schefter was "told" by sources who "believe" the decision was from upper-level management. Do the sources know for a fact? Do they not know? Was the story made up by Schefter? Could it be a misunderstanding?
Well, McHenry's negative Redskins story was about how one person said "Griffin has alienated himself" from the rest of the team. This statement was in response to a bizarre incident when Griffin was speaking to reporters on Friday. A group of players yelled and screamed and cheered so loud for so long that the interview needed to be moved out of the locker room. Griffin and the reporters relocated to a nearby hallway where the screaming continued. None of the two sports radio stations, four D.C. TV stations, or around a dozen writers from various newspapers reported anything.
After the Redskins lost to the Vikings, 29-26, Gruden and Griffin both denied friction between the team and the QB and claimed Gruden made the decision to start Griffin. Okay, so, WHAT IS GOING ON? Is this the football version of the old TV game show, "To Tell the Truth"? Maybe it's the old "Truth or Consequences" hosted by famed "The Price is Right" host Bob Barker? Well, I don't know whose telling the truth but there are consequences (thank you, I'll be at the DC Improv on Friday night, sarcasm).
Anyhow, this bizarre mystery gets even more mysterious when 106.7 The Fan's Redskins beat reporter Brian McNally says it wasn't directed at Griffin. Better yet, the group of shouting players were mad at the media. An athlete mad at a reporter, never hear or see that a lot in sports. Insert your joke, wait, I just did. McNally explained there was ongoing tension between the players and the Redskins PR department/news media.
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/11/03/another-pr-debacle-involving-rgiii-and-the-washington-redskins/
Among the highlights or lowlights were... "We’re trying to conduct an interview with Robert Griffin III in the middle of the locker room, and to have 12 to 15 guys just making a ruckus, yelling nonsense, interrupting what we were trying to do; it wasn’t funny — I don’t care what Ryan Clark said, I’ll go at him next time I see him, it’s ridiculous — it wasn’t lighthearted.”
In addition, McNally was asked by the radio hosts if the Redskins demanded he and other reporters to keep quiet. He told the station they reporters were "asked" but not "told" to not say anything if the Redskins punished their players behind closed doors. It was to be an agreement between and the media. In an interesting note, Britt McHenry, the ESPN reporter who reported the ruckus is based in the local Washington, D.C. area but acted as a national media person. McNally didn't single out McHenry and admitted a personal bias on her behalf while discussing the incident.
McNally sounded angry more toward the players involved at the end of one answer stating, “trust me, that bargain would not have been struck if any reporter thought that that was not going to be nipped in the bud, and I think Robert even referenced that — I think he said that in his press conference yesterday, that will not happen again, and it better not happen again". The question has to be asked, why did the local media not refuse the Redskins request to keep it private? Were the reporters afraid of more player backlash? For one thing, it didn't look good.
So, the Washington Redskins have insulted Native Americans by defending their racist team nickname, insulted their fans with two decades of mostly losing football, and insulted the local media with the actions of a few players. If it wasn't for the Baltimore Ravens, San Francisco 49ers, Carolina Panthers, and Minnesota Vikings, the Redskins would win "Most Embarrassing Off-Field Behavior and PR for 2014".
In my opinion, Washington is a screwed-up organization with tons of locker room and media issues to fix. However, the Ravens, 49ers, and Panthers all planned on playing key star players (Ray Rice-Ravens, Ray McDonald-49ers, Greg Hardy-Panthers) following domestic violence arrests until media backlash forced them to change their mind. The Vikings in the month of September, Washington's opponent last week, were going to start Adrian Peterson the week after not allowing him to play due to a child abuse arrest then suspended him after fans protested.
At least, Washington hasn't had any arrests or suspensions for off-field conduct. One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind! Yes, that was completely sarcastic.
The Washington Redskins ownership, front office, public relations staff, coaches, and players need to show better cooperation and understanding with the media. The media are two-fold. Local reporters need to stand up for themselves and not let the team dictate things. National reporters need to use better perspective of a local story in relation to a national audience. They also have to provide names when mentioning sources. This is sports, this is professional football, nobody is exchanging political or military plans which could affect the world. It's one football team in one professional football league. People's lives and/or professional careers should not be at risk.
It's bad enough for a football team when they're 3-6 with only 7 games left, it's worse when that isn't even the main story.
No comments:
Post a Comment