Dan Marino was one of the quarterbacks I tried to emulate
during elementary school. Granted, I was no quarterback and most often ended up
getting more exercise than action with the ball, but I looked at Marino, Montana,
and Elway as superstars and when given the chance tried to play like they did. These
guys seemed like football deities and even after their careers ended they way they carried themselves honored the legacies they left.
That’s why it was a little disconcerting to hear earlier this week that Dan Marino was named as a part of the lawsuit brought against the NFL over concussion cover-ups. Here was one of the greats who seemed to be looking for a handout or a cash-grab. With no indication that he was injured or suffering from the effects of concussions some media outlets expressed consternation over his inclusion in the lawsuit and speculated it had something to do with him leaving CBS as an analyst. The very next day he released a statement saying that he was pulling his name out of the hat and claimed that he only joined the lawsuit as a way to provide for his family financially in the future just in case he ended up suffering any of the problems that other athletes have experienced. What was especially interesting to me was to see the way that the sports media world saw this initial action and then reaction.Once the sports media world heard his side of the story they then backed off it's initial speculations and then started to mildly vilify Dan for pulling out. He was danged if he did or danged if he didn't.
The lesson I have learned from all of this is that if you aren't careful about how your story gets told there are plenty of men and women with a computer and a deadline who will tell it for you and likely not the way you want it told. Even if you are careful in telling your side of the story there will be those who are skeptical of your intentions and will still try to cast you in a light of their choosing. Dan was included in the lawsuit but according to him it wasn't in an effort to collect money until he needed it medically. As soon as the story broke he was in damage control mode and responded quickly to avert the crisis and to avoid looking like a money hungry tag-along. But even in doing so some sportswriters interpreted his disavowal as a betrayal by a "big name" player who could have added greater legitimacy to the lawsuit. I also wonder if the reporters I read were trying to make news instead of report it. Editorializing is fine but to reverse the tone of the story in a complete 180 degrees in 24 hours seems a bit disingenuous.
FYI: Here are a couple of the stories I read.
http://mmqb.si.com/2014/06/03/dan-marino-nfl-concussion-lawsuit-statement/
http://msn.foxsports.com/florida/story/is-there-something-more-to-marino-s-withdrawal-from-concussion-suit-060314
That’s why it was a little disconcerting to hear earlier this week that Dan Marino was named as a part of the lawsuit brought against the NFL over concussion cover-ups. Here was one of the greats who seemed to be looking for a handout or a cash-grab. With no indication that he was injured or suffering from the effects of concussions some media outlets expressed consternation over his inclusion in the lawsuit and speculated it had something to do with him leaving CBS as an analyst. The very next day he released a statement saying that he was pulling his name out of the hat and claimed that he only joined the lawsuit as a way to provide for his family financially in the future just in case he ended up suffering any of the problems that other athletes have experienced. What was especially interesting to me was to see the way that the sports media world saw this initial action and then reaction.Once the sports media world heard his side of the story they then backed off it's initial speculations and then started to mildly vilify Dan for pulling out. He was danged if he did or danged if he didn't.
The lesson I have learned from all of this is that if you aren't careful about how your story gets told there are plenty of men and women with a computer and a deadline who will tell it for you and likely not the way you want it told. Even if you are careful in telling your side of the story there will be those who are skeptical of your intentions and will still try to cast you in a light of their choosing. Dan was included in the lawsuit but according to him it wasn't in an effort to collect money until he needed it medically. As soon as the story broke he was in damage control mode and responded quickly to avert the crisis and to avoid looking like a money hungry tag-along. But even in doing so some sportswriters interpreted his disavowal as a betrayal by a "big name" player who could have added greater legitimacy to the lawsuit. I also wonder if the reporters I read were trying to make news instead of report it. Editorializing is fine but to reverse the tone of the story in a complete 180 degrees in 24 hours seems a bit disingenuous.
FYI: Here are a couple of the stories I read.
http://mmqb.si.com/2014/06/03/dan-marino-nfl-concussion-lawsuit-statement/
http://msn.foxsports.com/florida/story/is-there-something-more-to-marino-s-withdrawal-from-concussion-suit-060314
No comments:
Post a Comment