Kevin Durant, Greg Howard, Ramona Shelburne and the answer for the media scrum

I have no doubt that there are plenty of bullies but what Lynch did is nowhere near bullying. He doesn't like the media, big deal. He may be an asshole but he's not a bully.

Who is a bigger bully, Lynch or Bart Hubbuch? Hubbuch openly mocks the way he speaks and asks for an English translation.

 

Agreed. There are a lot of writers out there who do something similar. Stunningly, they're usually from Boston-NYC-Philly.

There was a guy from Philly who would do that "English translation" thing a lot. He was more of a dick than any player I ever had to deal with. I don't remember his name.

 

Leigh Steinberg's thoughts

When a player asserts that all he owes the public is great performance, it shows a fundamental lack of understanding of why he plays in front of huge crowds on site or on television or radio, and why he or she receives the massive amount of compensation that is paid. Obviously there are athletes who are shy or still filled with game adrenaline who resent the sometimes obnoxious way a journalist interacts with them. They may harbor resentments at past criticism. But players are ambassadors and salespersons promoting a sport. Most journalists are not loooking to break embarrassing stories on athletes or be unfair–they are doing an often difficult job of informing the public. They value ongoing relationships with players and if an athlete tries his best to be responsive, it will be appreciated.

 

The players who like to talk are usually rewarded with high-paying weekly radio gigs and sometimes get as much as $10-$20K a week to do them during the season. Even an average player can usually get $2K to $5K depending on the demand. If a player has his own TV show, that can very easily be six figures.

 

I think that when Lynch or Durant start in with the, "I'm only talking to you because I have to," there's an aspect of belittling to it that strikes me as an attempt at bullying. They're performing. That's why Deadspin gets a woody about it: Deadspin likes to pick on people, too.

I understand that these guys feel legitimate aggrieved - this is the first real adversity of Durant's career, and he's lashing out.

But dealing with it by launching the alpha male routine just strikes me as a form of bullying.

I'm actually way more interested in Deadspin's reaction to these things than I am the things themselves, though. They are such a one-trick pony at this point.

 

I have a hard time considering this bullying when all the reporter has to do is walk away or completely avoid the player.

From what I saw with the Westbrook clip, I think you could argue he was provoked. He was walking away and the reporter just kept going.

People need to realize that sometimes if a player is pissed at you, you stay out of his way for a day or two and then go back like nothing ever happened and they've moved on.

 

I'm probably extra sensitive to it because I covered a coach who walked in from day 1 acting like he was going to throw his weight around and intimidate everybody. He retreated from that pretty quickly, but it was a ridiculous display.

Maybe what Durant did isn't bullying. On the surface, though, telling people, "I only talk to you because I have to" is kind of a dick thing to say.

 

Yeah, I get it. I got death threats because a coach called me out by name on his TV show. It would have been hard for me to prove he did it on purpose, but to an extent, they know what kind of reaction they're going to get.

Durant was being a dick. I have no problem with players being dicks. He's injured, they're having a shitty season, so he's entitled not to be super-friendly. You would hope he would be professional, but that doesn't always happen.

 

One thing I don't love about these exchanges is that I think fans get the wrong idea about the relationship between beat guys and players. It is, as you know, mostly cordial. I would talk movies with the starting center fielder, but when the tape recorders were on, I'd ask him, along with anyone else, the questions that needed to be asked. When I covered football, the coach would get through a grill session during a particuarly tough week, but then you'd pick up the tape recorders afterward and he'd be like, "Hey, Dick, is the wife starting to show? Terrific!"

People think it's just two sides constantly at each other's throats, and I think Deadspin thinks that, too.

 

Funny story: My last year covering the NFL, the radio station where I also worked 10-12 hours a week, paid a player $3500 a week to come on for an hour every Tuesday. He was a starter and a pretty good talker. It's hard to say he was worth what we were paying him, but based on what other stations had paid certain guys, it was a bargain.

So he comes in one Tuesday. He's in there for the intro and talks until the first commercial break and then says, "I have to take a shit, this might be awhile."

He leaves. The main host says, "What's awhile?"

He's gone 18 minutes. When he comes back, I write on a piece of paper, "That was a $1,000 shit." and slide it over to the host, who starts laughing so hard, I had to take over the show for about five minutes...

 

There are so many problems but the main one I see is that there are too many fan boys trying to act like journalists. Throw in the fact that nearly everyone has a blog these days and can get a press credential and you have the makings of a clusterfu?k.
I understand where the athletes are coming from. I definitely know how the journalists feel. There has to be a common ground to be found. I don't have the answers but the first step I think is limiting access to athletes in a working press setting to those who deserve to be there.

 

It can be a hard line to draw, but they need to figure a way to do it.

For something like the NBA All-Star game, "Has your organization covered NBA games or the NBA in general this season?" If the answer is no, no credential.

It used to be that way for the Super Bowl and the NCAA Tournament.