Slow Down on Marketing Mark Sanchez

Courtesy of Jessica Bader at The Perpetual Post, this article from The Atlantic hit the inbox yesterday.

Though it’s a quick article, here’s the synopsis:

Tony Lee likens New York Jets rookie quarterback Mark Sanchez to President Barack Obama. Yes, you read that correctly. Actually, he brings up the revelation in the recently-released “Game Change” how despite publicly showing support for now-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, fellow Democrats in Senators Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer were secretly rooting for Obama during the 2008 Presidential primaries. He ponders if NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell may be secretly cheering for Sanchez and the Jets over the establishment that is the Peyton Manning-led Indianapolis Colts.

When Sanchez was drafted last April, quite a few business experts lined up at the door to espouse on how he can become a major boon to the NFL’s efforts in marketing the game to Latino communities across the country. Lee is just the latest person to add to this overall perspective.

Further, Lee said:

His marketing potential and reach dwarfs Manning's. And while commentators such as Rush Limbaugh have gotten in trouble for saying what I am about to suggest, that the NFL wants--needs--Sanchez to succeed even more because he's a Mexican-American who embraces his heritage. The NFL has had trouble attracting fans from America's fastest growing minority group, so NFL executives were probably joyous beyond belief at the future when the Jets drafted Sanchez. Surely, the Jets have often won in spite of Sanchez's rookie mistakes.

Now, as you expect to see from articles on the Internet, commenters ripped Lee’s assessment apart, so read them at your peril. Yet, in a less haughty rage, here’s are three issues with the article;

Potential versus reach: At this time, I give you that Sanchez's marketing potential dwarfs Peyton's, but disagree with the idea that the reach does. Potential is something unrealized and yet to be proven. If Sanchez has all this potential, then where's the reach when he just arrived on the scene and done little so far to suggest that he has earned the reach of Peyton other than being of part of a desired ethnic market?

Not only is Peyton the most omnipresent American sports figure as pitchman during the season, but his greatest impact has come in the offseason (that Sony has him alongside Justin Timberlake is a little strange. Might as well pair a player with Janet Jackson, right?) There isn’t another NFL player that appears in the number of national advertisements that he does nor has the league or Madison Avenue exactly picked out another one just yet.

Putting the cart before the horse, again: Too many stars have burnt out before they truly shined. Why we collectively continue to repeat this doomed history is simple; we spend more time immediately reacting to snapshots of people’s careers and lives than analyzing the body of work as time progresses.

In the duration of his career, not just a few games, Sanchez has to not only win, but play his butt off while doing so. He can't be marketable (at least outside of the NYC/NJ metro area) if he doesn't throw for 250, 300+ yards a game on a consistent basis.

Sanchez, if you haven’t heard, had a pretty rocky rookie campaign, something that other than those seasons for Pittsburgh’s Ben Roethlisberger, Atlanta’s Matt Ryan and Baltimore’s Joe Flacco, is expected. Now, if he builds upon this by reversing that touchdown-to-interception ratio and making strides year after year, then Sanchez can capture some of this potential both on and off the field.

Yes, the Jets have to win. Nothing sells like a winner, right? Yet, these Jets are looked upon as one of those run-heavy, QB-don’t-screw-up, tough defensive teams that have won Super Bowls in the past. The 1985 Chicago Bears, 2000 Baltimore Ravens, 2003 Tampa Bay Buccaneers and to an extent, the 2006 Pittsburgh Steelers and 2007 New York Giants fit those moulds (the latter teams had better aerial attacks, but they were better rushing offenses).

To appeal to a broader market, there has to be something exceptional for a marginal quarterback to become a sponsor’s dream. For starters, Sanchez can't be Rex Grossman (that's mandatory). Secondly, Pittsburgh’s Roethlisberger and the Giants’ Eli Manning are certainly two of the top ten QBs in the league, yet they have the advantages of being on two of the more popular teams in the league and for Eli, being Peyton’s brother helps.

If all Sanchez has to offer is his heritage, then, as Jessica Bader reminded her fellow Perpetual Post colleagues, why did the world forget that he wasn’t the only quarterback of Mexican decent playing last week? Leading to point #3;

Wait, the NFL doesn’t appeal to everybody?: Actually, the answer is a resounding no, but that’s stating the obvious. Yet, while Sanchez plays in a larger metropolitan area, it’s Tony Romo who plays for the league’s most beloved and reviled team. Yes, there’s a Mexican-American who plays the so-called most prestigious position in the National Football League; quarterback for the Dallas Cowboys.

Apparently, the league has used Romo in promotional efforts towards Hispanic markets. However, though, we walked though this path before, the only other reason why Romo is known nationwide is because of the tabloid coverage of his relationships with Jessica Simpson and Carrie Underwood.

That doesn’t sound like marketability at all.

Considering that only the federal government seems to have more of a presence in American media than the NFL, the fact that they need such a promotional push to the Hispanic community is admittedly surprising.

So I ask anyone who comes across Scribe to provide some insight because making assumptions about this topic would be foolish. In terms of that community, would it be logical to think that the league’s greatest pull is at least in the West Coast? Maybe broadcasting on unique Spanish-language channels would have helped the cause as opposed to hitting the SAP button? What’s your take?

Say What?!?!: NFL fans, enjoy today to the fullest extent. These are the games that are for us before the non-fans show up to ruin the Super Bowl.

Photo credits to the Newark Star-Ledger, Obsessed with Sports and ESPN.

Rage

Since I was a kid – okay, so it wasn’t terribly long ago – there was one person on television that I had strong, but unshared admiration for. It wasn’t so much that I understood the topics or knew where the story began, but I was drawn to the style that he spoke to the audience. Without openly flaunting his knowledge or tossing sound bites to move stories along, his newscasts presented the differing sides of conflicts while introducing unfamiliar issues to a mass audience.

At ten years old, I may have learned as much about the world from Peter Jennings as from any teacher or textbook at I.S. 131 in The Bronx.

Over the past week, I’ve been reading a book about him that was published last fall called Peter Jennings: A Reporter’s Life. More of an anthology of reflections about the late anchorman than a biography crafted during his career, the book chronicles his career from aspiring to follow his father’s footsteps as Canada’s most beloved newsman in the fifties and sixties to an icon in his own right. You could look to his experience in the Middle East or his news specials featuring children to see that Jennings’ mission was to present as many sides to a story as possible, even if it challenges our sensibilitues and experiences. Yet, in an interview sourced in the book shows, he showed great concerns about the direction of the media industry:

“Maybe it started with the Robert Bork nomination to the Supreme Court. Maybe it was the 1988 political campaign using the image of Willie Horton, or the Clarence Thomas hearings, Whitewater, the Clinton sex scandal, the Clinton impeachment, the 2000 election. Whatever it may have been, the public dialogue today is often rude and vulgar to the point where I begin to think it’s shameful. It is true that we have been through ugly cycles before. But today I think that it is made much worse by the constant need for the drama of conflict that many broadcasters seem to demand. Our national conversation is very often a shouting match – and too much of it is infected with venom.

“I am not naive and I do not imagine a world in which we all get along. And I do not think we need to single out the right or the left, the talk radio ranters or the angry columnists. To some extent we are all culpable – including the staid center,
which if only by its silence is not without responsibility… Our modern communications system and other technologies have increased the volume of public argument to an unholy racket. Our national conversation sometimes feels
impoverished as a result… Civility doesn’t just promote decency; it also leads
to a fairer exchange of ideas and a greater chance of finding workable solutions
to the kinds of problems we face.”

While it would be strange to think that the words from one of the most revered journalists of all time would apply to the sports arena, they struck a chord in relation to the national and local conversations that take place daily. After reading it over and over again, so many questions regarding the sports media industry came to mind. I wondered where the rage came from in sports media. I wondered when did someone’s performance on the field lead to diatribes about his personal life. I wondered when did reporting the goings-on with sports become an athletic-themed version of the Geraldo At Large or the Rush Limbaugh Show.

Much of the venom that Jennings described comes from economics. There is no doubt that the growing divide between multimillion dollar professional athletes and fans has played a significant role. The idea that someone can make more money in a day as an elite athlete than a teacher does in a year keeps the distance fairly lengthy. Yet, when the folks that travel the globe to cover what’s essentially someone’s typical day at work, something more is added to the fray.

Whether we care to admit it or not, most – if not, all – of us wanted to be athletes, playing at the highest level possible. We wanted the adulation, the last name and our favorite numbers on the back of some jersey and the contract offers to go along with the joys of winning and the pains of losing. Some of us may have played at some point, but we’re holding cameras and voice recorders to those who are playing now as a way of life. We learn about the lives of these players and some of us develop relationships with them based on personal interaction and an understood professional agreement between media and subject. As we learn about these players, we begin to find those quarks, those words, those looks that remind us that they are emotional beings as well as physical marvels. It disappoints many in the business, especially those of us who have never played beyond junior high school.

It disappoints because the men and women who look to be above the flaws of flesh and blood are still just flesh and blood. The disappointment turns into judgments on his or her character. The judgments can become a nasty discourse where Terrell Owens, despite his gross shortcomings, can be mocked for anything genuine that he does, such as his emotional postgame comments about Tony Romo. The judgments against the surly persona of Barry Bonds become a near-decade of vitriol coming from coast-to-coast. The judgments become manifestos of the usual “he’s not worth that much money” line of at least half of the players in the NBA.

The judgments make stars out of some columnists like Jason Whitlock, Skip Bayless and Mike Lupica.

Unlike many of the political jousts that Jennings and many past and present journalists have narrated, these subjects aren’t directly responsible for money towards stem-cell research or alleviating homelessness in America’s cities. As much as we love and consume sports, at times, we protest too much. Sure, the media is responsible for much of the tenor towards the players and the business of sport. Yet, it is also responsible for not doing enough to remind fans that there has to be a separation between the job and the person. For as much as athletes do contribute to society in terms of entertainment and community outreach, their job functions do not reflect the human condition as much as those you’ll see on the evening news.

Before playing Game 7 of the 2005 NBA Finals, Rasheed Wallace, the forward/center for the Detroit Pistons who is known for an irascible demeanor on the court, was asked about the pressure of this winner-take-all game against the San Antonio Spurs. Maybe the media at the stadium clamored for him to say something that would invite a fine from the league or bulletin board material for the Spurs. Yet, in the spirit of the day, he said;

“Pressure? This isn't pressure and this is not pain. Afghanistan, Iraq and that other place, Croatia and Bosnia - now, that is pressure. This ain't nothing but a little hoops.”

It was hard to debate the next day on the local sports shows.

Sensationalism

For once when Terrell Owens says something, it wasn't illicting hoards of hate in his direction.

In fact, it seemed as if when Owens jokingly referred to Jessica Simpson's appearance in a Texas Stadium luxury suite at Tony Romo's worst game this season as a distraction, people laughed it up.

And went too far.

Days after losing to the Philadelphia Eagles, folks began to have a field day with the fact that Romo hadn't performed well with her or former girlfriend Carrie Underwood were in the suite. While many in the media used the excuse of 'T.O. being T.O.' to run with this story, it already had legs of its own thanks to someone... something else.

FOX.

It's no secret that FOX fashions itself as an entertainment network, from its success with staples such as The Simpsons and American Idol to its monumental emphasis on sports programming with its coverage of NFC games. The slant on sports is similar to anything else under the helm of Rupert Murdoch; make it sexy, salacious or scandalous. FOX is a master of cross promotions in their sports programming... not so much on their technological innovations (that failed tail on the hockey puck during their five minutes of NHL coverage). Yet, FOX wants to show their games to more than sports loyalists, but to the ultimate casual fan who probably doesn't have a clue about what is happening on the field.

Enter Jessica.


Somehow, the pop singer who lagged behind Britney Spears, Christina Aguliera and the boy-bands of the mid-to-late nineties has survived it all to become something more than relevant in a new era of entertainment. She has the music, movies, magazine covers, Pepsi campaigns and likely, the best publicist in the business (the latter is the only logical explanation of how she has made it to 2007 without becoming an answer to a trivia question). And now she has the quarterback of the most popular team in the country's most popular sport. Though this wasn't her first appearance at a Cowboys game at home, this was the first time that FOX noticed this. Just when you thought that you were watching a football game with a few bells and whistles, you found yourself wanting to throw the remote at the TV because of the constant references and attention to Simpson's relationship with Romo.

Outside an October loss to the New England Patriots, there was little for Cowboys fans to get riled up about this season. Of course, considering that any mention of her brings out the gossip pages, trashy tabloids and Perez Hilton-wannabes, this gave Cowboys fans something to be quite miffed about. One fan was so incensed that he felt that this story is the reason why women shouldn't watch football. While this isn't or shouldn't be a reason to call upon women's right advocates, this is a reason to wonder if this would happen with another network. Well...

This wouldn't happen on CBS. CBS' sports coverage is as no-frills as it gets.

Maybe on NBC. The Peacock has its hands in many forms of entertainment thanks to its parent, General Electric, yet they have some limits.

ABC? Well, it happened already. Someone by the name of Eva Longoria.

If you are tired of hearing about Jinxing Jessica, don't blame Owens. Don't even blame the media at-large. Blame FOX.

Because the camera could have shown the Eagles enjoying this upset. Or maybe Romo, himself.

If there's one thing to appreciate about this overblown story, the sales on pink-colored jerseys may decrease. It's about time.

Say What?!?!: Call this an early present from Scribe. I remember watching this game in my dorm room. There was no doubt that this was one of the worst officiated games I have ever seen, but the nation only knows about this because of color commentator Tommy Heinsohn's brilliance. Enjoy!