Skittish?

As said, be prepared for a lot of football talk. To preface this post, your regularly scheduled randomness will return shortly, however, this has been quite the week to get a jump on the pigskin banter.

This Thursday’s New York Beacon will feature my thoughts on the Antonio Pierce situation as he was cleared of any wrongdoing in last fall’s incident involving former teammate, Plaxico Burress . There are probably one hundred members of the Giants’ media that were running on a similar angle on Monday, but for a small weekly such as the Beacon, there’s an understanding that being first to the story doesn’t mean you’ll have the best perspective.

Over a year ago, there was chatter about New York Giants quarterback Eli Manning becoming the NFL’s next $100 million man. Talks between his agent, Tom Condon and general manager Jerry Reese were scuttled (at least to the media’s knowledge) for after the conclusion of the 2008 season. It was inevitable, much to the chagrin of his staunchest critics; which makes the agreement all the more of a hot topic.

There are many a fan, blogger and media personality who will criticize the deal because the one word that sticks in their minds; “skittish”. Reese’s description of his play at the time back in late November ’07 – weeks before his strong postseason en route to a Super Bowl title – politely sums up much of what many feel about the sixth-year signal caller. Some of those critiques are fair as he has a penchant for the ill-advised turnover (that “skittish” remark came in the aftermath of the worst game of his career; a painful-to-witness-in-person four-INT performance at home against the Minnesota Vikings). He’s not the fleetest of foot, though in the Giants’ offense, he’s not asked to run like Philadelphia’s Donovan McNabb or Dallas’ Tony Romo. Yet, the attack on Manning that slowly began to dissipate last season is his perceived lack of hellfire and brimstone in his belly. That even-keeled demeanor may still unnerve some of those with an interest in Big Blue; however, it has also helped him navigate choppy waters in a metropolitan area that prides itself in letting its athletes know how they feel.

All of this is said because while some feel that the near-$100 million pact is a few million too much for the younger Manning, the reality is that the going rate for franchise quarterbacks have gone up immensely over the past decade.

In league history, there are only seven players who have ever met or crossed the $100 million threshold that Eli’s contract slightly missed:

• Six of them are quarterbacks, with Washington defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth becoming the first non-QB and first defensive player to see that amount.
• Brett Favre was the first when he signed a 10-year, $100 million deal in 2001 with Green Bay. Favre, as the world knows, had as many retirement sagas as touchdowns and interceptions thrown and despite his first-ballot Hall of Fame credentials, had not been in the Super Bowl since the 1997 season (XXXII in Jan. 1998) and shot both the Packers and Jets in the proverbial foot more often than some want to acknowledge.
• McNabb followed suit in Philly the following year, beginning a 12-year, $115 million contract. One SB appearance and four other conference championship game appearances should tell Eagles fans that he’s lived up to his end of the bargain, but more often than not in his tenure, he has been a man on an island, whether by his own doing or by uber-irrational levels of criticism thrown his way.
• Michael Vick…
• Big brother Peyton signed his seven-season, $132.5 million deal the same season as Vick (2005) and could very well break every QB-related record before it’s over. He’s not loved in most places, but he has reached the Undeniable realm of elite professional athletes: “I can’t stand him and as much as I want to call him a bum, he just beat my team so bad that the franchise is considering folding tomorrow out of embarrassment.”
• Carson Palmer’s nine-year-$119.7 million contract seemed dubious as he came off a devastating knee injury in the 2005 (06) postseason. His health has been a major issue over the last two seasons, but the Cincinnati Bengals have had far more issues to deal with simultaneously.
• Finally, Pittsburgh’s Ben Roethlisberger signed a eight-year, $102 million deal and won his second Super Bowl within the first season. We can say what we will about recent sexual assault allegations lobbied his way, but we can also say that the true worthiness of this deal has yet to be determined with seven years to go.

Excluding Vick from this list, only Favre and P. Manning have been universally considered elite quarterbacks in the NFL. Though most would kill for a chance to grab the future Hall of Famer, some still take joy in denying McNabb a place in the upper echelon of QBs. Palmer’s health has kept him on the “potential” end of the spectrum for some time and Roethlisberger still found himself a target during last season for a proclivity of being sacked while on the move.

Unquestionably, the numbers of Eli’s deal places him just below these men, but his statistics lie in the middle of the pack among starting quarterbacks last year. The manner of how he became a Giant wasn’t the most favorable in the history of the game, but the Super Bowl title gave him marketability and bought him some reserved judgment with a fan base that called for his head on a skewer not too long ago. He would have not gone on the open market after his rookie contract expires this year as both parties are committed to him retiring as a Giant. However, though he is part of the bonus baby generation (the high priced first-round picks we have grown accustomed to), Eli is a far more proven commodity than anyone else that would have been available in 2010 via free agency or the college ranks.

What should make this deal easier to swallow for his critics – if they so choose- is that the Giants organization is in a far better position to give Eli this deal than most others. Matthew Stafford and Mark Sanchez – both whom should thank Sam Bradford and Colt McCoy for staying in college this year – picked up $70 million in bonuses before taking a snap for teams (Detroit Lions, New York Jets) that have plenty more issues than who plays under center. Eli wouldn’t have gotten the exact dollars that he gets with the Giants if he went elsewhere, but teams that typically shell out major dollars for a quarterback via free agency or the Draft have a lot more holes to fill. Take a look at the teams with quarterback competition in training camp and you might see that there are other equally, it not more important position battles.

The contract is about much more than the stats, though Eli’s tell a far different story than brother Peyton or McNabb. They tell a different story than his truer peers in Roethlisberger, Romo or San Diego’s Phillip Rivers. Of course, the success of all quarterbacks in this league are pale compared to three-time champ Tom Brady; he signed a shorter six-year, $60 million deal in 2005 (modified later to give New England room to suit Randy Moss). Yet, at least with Eli, New York knows that for the duration of the deal, they have someone who has already shown the ability to ride through turbulence. A few more dollars only changes the number of critics, not the player himself.

Dubious

These have been dubious days in Bristol, for sure.

Whether it’s the leaked (and since removed) video of a nude Erin Andrews, the “Do Not Report” controversy of the Ben Roethlisberger sexual assault allegations, slight backlash over launching hyperlocal websites in several markets or the usually-criticized coverage of a handful of sports entities, ESPN has been taking a few punches to the jaw in the last two-plus weeks.

Now, it’s fairly common for non-ESPN media personalities and bloggers to throw a few jabs of their own in order to further the point that the Disney-owned sports behemoth has a few issues of journalistic integrity. In fact, there are some folks who make a pretty decent living off of assailing The Worldwide Leader among others in the sports media business. Yet, instead of piling on and adding fuel to the fire, I want to shed light on a point that so many of us seem to overlook; too many of us allow a single outlet dominate our media consumption.

Yes, ESPN is an omnipotent presence in the sports world; one that is imprinting its cachet across the globe after cornering national coverage here in the United States (along with a 20% ownership stake in Canada’s TSN). This doesn’t come from thin air, but from having the highest subscription fees in the cable industry at around $3.65. That dollar amount seems nominal, almost trivial, until you realize that this is per month per household ($3.65 X twelve months X over 98 million subscribing households = over $4.3 billion). Add the dollars from advertising partners – most notably beer makers such as MillerCoors and Budweiser – and there’s a financial strength that allows the network to do as it pleases.

Yes, the ‘E’ in the acronym stands for ‘Entertainment’ and many will have you believe that this is the very purpose of the network. Its critics lampoon the idea that the network provides sports programming with a twist; whether it’s by on-air debates; highly-hyped interviews or youth-oriented fare such as Madden Nation or its groundbreaking X Games. Its anchors and writers sprinkle in humor – snarky, silly or straight from the Pop Culture Reference Handbook – with their copies and articles as a point of differentiation from other established media outlets.

And yes, ESPN has used television’s most successful formulas. A) People of varying levels of attractiveness - lest we forget that Andrews is attractive to some, but not all – have helped carry television shows for years. B) People screaming to be heard are what make CNN, FOX News and CNBC tick. C) Details, schmetails; just use the major headline and talk about that forever and ever.

The true reason, though, why ESPN has such a presence, such a hold on us is that they are the leading national broadcaster of the actual games themselves. Their mammoth deals with organizations like the NFL, NBA, NASCAR and Major League Baseball are not for the permission to talk about what happened the night before or to strictly show thirty-second highlight clips. Linking up with UEFA (soccer/football), tennis and golf organizations of both genders and even the Professional Bowlers Association isn’t about having something to casually mention on ESPNews. Do you truly think that being in nearly every household in the United States is strictly because of SportsCenter? Hardly.

Sure, it’s hard to think of ESPN as just a broadcaster of the action as it’s equally difficult to think of the network as the lone provider of rumors, news and speculation. Yet, with fewer providers of games than providers of chatter, it might save us from more headaches if we understand that the games are why we avoid the stale, scripted fare every night.

Yet, if you enjoy hearing about the controversies coming out of Bristol, don’t let me stop you.

Forward (I)

Before going any further, I wish the best to all of you as 2008 gets underway. 2007 represented a year of progression for me professionally as well as personally. It seemed as if ’07 was a year of redemption and resurgence from the black hole that was 2006. Despite some bumps in the road regardless of the date on the calendar, I am fortunate to have family and friends who continue to support my endeavors and passions. I believe deeply that 2008 will work from those building blocks for me and, more importantly, those around me.

I extend a hearty thanks to those of you who follow my work on Scribe as well as in the traditional world through WHCR and the New York Beacon. 2008 will be an expansion of those efforts to provide you with so much more than before.

That said, the new year bring about new questions in sports. Instead of a rather lengthy entry, this will be a series called Forward that will stretch into January 8th. Today, the series starts with the National Football League.

Our bodies and mental states will still tell us that 2007 was moments ago, though the calendar has changed throughout all time zones. It’s hard to say “last year” when you say anything without realizing that 2006 is no longer that point of reference. Yet no matter how much joy or pain that came between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2007, we all hope to move forward and prepare for the next 366 days.

Moving forward from what had been a very exciting, but simultaneously troubling 2007 will involve answering the most daunting questions sports have faced in recent memory. It will also involve trying to bring the focus to the fields of play themselves with captivating play, flirtations with history and the emergence of new stars.

The questions in this series do not range in a specific order of importance or timeliness. Rather, they come from somewhere beneath the glitz, glamour and gluttony of snarky BS around us.

NFL: How can we protect our investments? Today marks the dawn of a new year, but it also serves as a reminder of the first major story of yesteryear. The murder of Denver Broncos cornerback Darrent Williams just hours after his team was eliminated from playoff contention still rattles the minds of so many players and likely Denver residents. The Broncos franchise also dealt with the passing of reserve running back Damien Nash weeks later. The New England Patriots also dealt with loss; Marquise Hill, a reserve defensive end who had devoted much of his time helping residents rebuild in a post-Katrina New Orleans, died in a jetski accident shortly after saving the life of his friend.

The NFL had never dealt with the passing of active players in this magnitude. While it was evident that the league had been making a push to distance itself from the Michael Vick saga, its officials have always been trying to find a way to protect players without completely restricting their personal freedoms. Outside of Nash’s death (collapsing while playing basketball at a charity event in his brother’s honor), the deaths of the other players spoke to the biggest fears of athletes and extracurricular activities. Professional athletes tend to be the biggest targets of the shadiest bunch, whether it’s from jealousy or a desire to attain some power. You hear about incidents at a nightclub with famous individuals rather than the ordinary individual and this alarms general managers, owners and commissioners alike.

In the case of Hill, it could be somewhat reminiscent of several athletes who own seemingly dangerous vehicles like ATVs, motorcycles (former Chicago Bull Jason Williams, Steelers QB Ben Roethlisberger) or jetskis. It shakes executives so much that they insists on clauses in player contracts that prohibit the use of those vehicles (for example, Jeff Kent of the Los Angeles Dodgers).

All of this came to mind prior to the most jarring moment in recent league history; the murder of Sean Taylor. As discussed in Profound, all of the players died at the age of 24.

Between guns and riptides, it had been a tumultuous 2007 for the NFL. Now as the playoffs loom and the league prepares for its grand celebration in February, there will be reflections on a season passed. There will be discussions of how the leagues machinations such as the competition committee may take a look at possible rule changes and how the former players will push the union and league for increased benefits. Yet, something that should be under further review will be how to strike a balance between a player’s freedom and a team’s investment. Athletes are human and are entitled to a night out on the town; however, a team shouldn’t have to worry about their players in the realm of the unknown. The question of how – or even if – still needs to be addressed.