Are You Watching Indian Wells?

BY DR. NANCY SPENCER

This is the time of year when tennis is heating up. As a former player, coach/teaching pro, and fan of the game, this is a time when I would normally be watching what is considered by some to be the “fifth Grand Slam” – i.e., the BNP Paribas Tournament at Indian Wells. But to be honest, I have had difficulty watching that tournament ever since March 17, 2001, when the Williams family faced “one of the ugliest scenes in the sport’s history” (Jenkins, 2013, para. 3). From my perspective, I cannot think of an uglier moment.

In 2001, I was among those eagerly awaiting the live televised match that would feature the Williams sisters playing one another professionally for only the sixth time. I remember seeing them play in their first match at the Ericsson (in 1999) when Venus won in three sets. I also watched as Venus defeated Serena in their 2000 semifinal match at Wimbledon. I could not have been more excited to see their sixth match-up, especially since it was scheduled to be shown live on ESPN. Naturally, I was disappointed to learn that Venus had defaulted – supposedly just moments before the match was scheduled to begin. I don’t remember if they showed another match to fill in the time slot. But I do remember seeing the finals between Serena Williams and Kim Clijsters when it was played two days later.

Watching that final match left an indelible mark on me, so I can begin to understand how it must have felt for the Williams sisters. Pam Shriver and Mary Joe Fernandez were commentators for the final match. I remember Fernandez said tournament officials knew “something might happen,” and they had warned ushers to be prepared. In light of their forewarning, I could not understand why no one intervened when the ugliness began. The vitriolic booing by fans started as soon as Serena was introduced; it escalated when Venus and Richard Williams entered the Stadium to take their seats for the final. As the match got underway, fans did the unthinkable – for a tennis crowd – they booed loudly each time Serena made an error or lost a point.

In a powerful article on SI.com, Elizabeth Newman (2013) argues that “Calls for Williams sisters to return to Indian Wells are wrong.” Newman explains how unusual it is to display such behavior in tennis, writing, “we’re talking about tennis, a sport steeped in etiquette, decorum and protocol; a sport where errant catcalls and whistling are considered low brow” (para. 10). 

In 2001, several things struck me as I watched the Women’s Singles Final at Indian Wells. One was that “no one did anything.” When Serena’s autobiography, On the line (Williams & Paisner, 2009), came out, I was particularly moved by her chapter on “The fiery darts of Indian Wells.” In it Serena wrote that, “Some tournament official could have gotten on the loudspeaker and explained to the fans that Venus had been legitimately hurt, that I had nothing to do with her withdrawal, that every effort had been made to cancel that semifinal match in a more timely manner. Some effort could have been made to quiet the crowd. But no one did anything” (Williams & Paisner, 2009, p. 81). Like Serena, I too was astonished to watch the match and observe that no one did anything.

Another thing that I learned as I read the chapter was that Venus had told the trainer earlier in the day that she was injured and would not be able to play. So why was an announcement not made until four minutes before the match was to begin? At the time, it appeared that Venus was solely responsible for the late withdrawal. To this day, I wonder why the tournament director and/or trainer never acknowledged their complicity in what happened.

In the aftermath of the 2001 Indian Wells final, Richard Williams reported that he heard “racial epithets” and that someone even yelled that he was lucky it was not 1975 or “he would skin him alive” (Smith, 2001, para. 29). Venus heard it. Other fans reported hearing the boos and racist epithets. And yet, Tournament Director Charlie Pasarell’s response was simply to say, “If Richard says he heard racist epithets, maybe he did… but I know that’s not Indian Wells people.” Really? What does that mean? Why was it so important to establish that if there was a racist response from the crowd, it wasn’t “Indian Wells’ people.” It was still racism. Was Pasarell only responsible if Indian Wells’ people were yelling epithets? 

Since 2001, the Williams sisters have (understandably) not returned to Indian Wells, a decision I fully support. Yahoo! Sports’ Merlisa Lawrence Corbett (2013) writes that the 12-year boycott taints Indian Wells tournament – which is not to suggest that the Williams sisters are to blame, but that Charlie Pasarell never stood against “overt racism.”

Johnny Manziel Faces Media Scrutiny

BY LORI RAUDIO

After becoming the first freshman to win the Heisman Trophy and leading Texas A&M to a Cotton Bowl victory, Johnny Manziel has gained celebrity-like status. His celebratory off-season has garnered much media attention via his Twitter page, and not all of it is good.

It all started when Manziel had courtside seats to both a Houston Rockets game and a Dallas Mavericks game on consecutive nights. TNT analyst Steve Kerr saw Manziel and publically questioned how an amateur college football player could afford such good seats. Manziel took to Twitter to say he bought them as a birthday present to himself.

Manziel has also been questioned for pictures he posted on Twitter. These pictures include him holding a stack of cash at a casino, celebrating Mardi Gras in New Orleans, and partying in Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. It has also been revealed he takes online classes at A&M and drives a Mercedes. None of these things are against NCAA regulations, but have led to increased media scrutiny of his seemingly extravagant lifestyle

Recently, Manziel sparked controversy when he posted a picture on Twitter of what appeared to be a Texas Longhorns tattoo. He later said it was fake, but also took the opportunity to respond to some negative tweets he received. He replied with “you suck” to one follower as well as other mean-spirited responses, including mocking fellow Heisman candidate Manti Te’o.

I’m sure he gets thousands of negative tweets a day, but this is not the way to respond. There is nothing wrong with Manziel having fun, but now that he is a public figure, he needs to be more careful. It’s unfair, but it comes with the territory of being an elite athlete. He represents Texas A&M and the NCAA, and what he does reflects those institutions.

Texas A&M should have a publicist working with Manziel, who can show him how to better represent himself in the media and reign in his social media posts.

World Baseball Classic deserves more coverage

BY STEVE KUBITZA

The World Baseball Classic is the only tournament of its kind. It is baseball’s “World Cup,” and is in its third installment this year. While soccer is far more popular than baseball worldwide, the WBC deserves more coverage than it’s getting.

In the U.S., the games are broadcasted, but not on basic cable channels.MLB Network is broadcasting the games, but many Americans do not have the channel at their home. This is especially true for the older demographic, many of whom are baseball fans.

ESPN Deportes is also broadcasting the games, but the games are Spanish. Deportes is also not available on basic cable packages.

ESPN is the major sports channel in our country, but it has elected not to cover WBC games. The network is currently broadcasting college basketball conference tournament games, so that is one factor influencing the lack of coverage.

It is frustrating more fans aren’t able to see an event of such relevance. This may be a sign of baseball’s declining importance in our country, or simply a result of a scheduling conflict with basketball. The true reason will be evident as time goes on.

Embrace debate helping or hurting ESPN

 BY ANTHONY ALFORD

Is it more important for a show to be defined by creditability and integrity, or by ratings and attention? That is the issue for ESPN2’s two-hour morning show, First Take, starring Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith. Initially, this program was designed to be a lighter, general interest counterpart to ESPN’s Sportscenter. But the ratings never supported the format and First Take was in danger of being canceled. But then came Tim Tebow and the show went from respectable, but irreverent to a joke with high ratings.

The show’s tagline “embrace debate” has caused conflict among the ESPN networks. This show should be a flop considering the personalities of it stars. Stephen A. Smith is a loudmouth who wins arguments by talking louder than everyone else in the room. Skip Bayless is considered by many to be a joke. He takes the unpopular opinion just to get attention, not because his opinion is actually logical and correct. He uses his daily two-hour platform to openly cheer for Tebow, call LeBron James overrated and challenge athletes to “debate” him.

Last week, Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman took the bait and debated Bayless. Sherman’s main adjective was ripping Bayless during their entire debate. And while Bayless-haters believe this was a win for Sherman, this was really a win for Bayless and First Take. In fact, as ESPN Radio’s Colin Cowherd explains, this was a “walk-off grand slam” for Bayless because Sherman gave Bayless an endless amount of free promotion and attention.

According to ESPN, First Take has increased its total viewership by 21 percent between 2011 and 2012. The big number is their target audience of males, ages 18-34, which is very attractive to advertisers. Between 2011 and 2012, First Take gained 32 percent in viewership in the male 18-34 demographic.

Given the show’s success, it has impacted viewership for SportsCenter. According to Nielsen data, Sportscenter (10-11 a.m.) led First Take in ratings by 636,000 viewers in September 2011. However, the difference between the two shows decreased dramatically as First Take offered more time to Tim Tebow when he was quarterback for the Denver Broncos. By March 2012, when Tim Tebow was traded to the New York Jets, Sportscenter only led by 182,000 viewers according to Nielson data. First Take is no longer a secondary option; it became Sportscenter’s competition.

Since that time, the morning Sportscenter has taken on a debate flair of its own. Most recently, ESPN analysts debated which win streaks between the NBA’s Miami Heat and the NHL’s Chicago Blackhawks is better.

First Take has certainly put a dark cloud over ESPN and its flagship program. This is ill-timed considering it will have competition later this year from Fox Sports 1, Fox’s new 24-hour sports network. The ratings are certainly increasing, however the ESPN and Sportscenter brands are losing creditability by the day. The answer is not eliminating First Take as many media writers have suggested. Instead, the morning Sportscenter must improve the quality of its show so it’s not competing with its ESPN2 counterpart. Limit the worthless debate segments and present an intelligent program that Sportscenter is capable of producing.

NFL Teams Question players’ sexual orientation

BY LORI RAUDIO

The NFL Combine typically brings the excitement of scouting new players entering the draft. This year, however, multiple players who participated in the combine came forward with allegations that teams asked them questions about their sexual orientation. The stories quickly captured media attention and have led to an NFL investigation.

After the Manti Te’o scandal involving his fake girlfriend, he received a majority of the media’s attention at the NFL combine. It was widely reported teams wanted to know if he was gay, and it’s believed his scandal will affect his draft position. It is unknown if Te’o’s case is the cause, but reportedly teams have been asking players questions such as “do you like girls?” and “do you have a girlfriend?”

Colorado tight-end Nick Kasa, Michigan quarterback Denard Robinson, and Michigan State running back Le’veon Bell all came forward with similar stories about being asked questions about their relationship status and sexual orientation.

Multiple sport analysts have weighed in saying, if true, these NFL teams went too far. They also may have violated federal employment laws.

On  Sportscenter, analyst and former NFL coach Herm Edwards said teams “absolutely crossed a line.” He felt teams who asked these questions should be fined or lose their draft picks. ESPN Senior Writer John Clayton agreed lines were crossed. He said if Kasa and the others reveal what teams asked these questions, there could be penalties. Regardless, he expects NFL Commissioner Roger Goddell to issue a mandate saying teams need to comply with federal laws.

The NFL will be investigating the issue, and it will be interesting to see if punishments are handed out or what new procedures will be put into place.

As Edwards put it, it brings up the question: is the NFL ready for an openly gay player? Edwards thinks it is, but given their questions, it seems NFL teams are not. It’s bound to happen, and most likely sooner rather than later. Given this situation, the NFL still has a way to go before it embraces an openly gay player.

Danica Patrick: Not just a pretty face

BY KYLE MCQUILLEN

The Daytona 500 kicks off the NASCAR Sprint Cup season every year and, unlike most sports, it has the biggest event of the year as its first.

Every year there are good storylines coming into the race, such as drivers changing teams and new rule changes. However, this year was like no other as, for the first time, a woman sat on the pole for the historic race.

Danica Patrick has often been criticized for receiving a ride based on things other than her driving ability and her results to date have been shaky at best. That criticism, however, has slowed down some after Patrick not only won the pole, but also had a strong showing in the “Great American Race”.

Patrick finished eighth, but ran in the top five for much of the race. She became the highest finishing female in the Daytona 500 history with her eight place run.

Prior to the race I, for one, thought too much attention was being paid to Patrick. I understand the historical implications of the situation, but she had not proven herself to deserve as much attention as she was getting.

Watching the race, some may have thought, “OK, she has run well, but when is she going to crash? She always crashes.” That has been her downfall.

But on Sunday, she proved her critics wrong by not crashing and finishing well.

She also proved she’s not just a pretty face and she can run with the men.

Media overanalyzes 40-Yard Dash times at NFL Combine

BY STEVE KUBITZA

The NFL Combine is an annual event that brings with it a great amount of media attention.

One of the most talked about events of the Combine is the 40-yard dash. Each player has two attempts to get timed running 40 yards, and the times usually fall into the 4.3-5+ second range. The times are scrutinized heavily, as the difference between a time of 4.6 and 4.7 can be the difference between being a second-or third-round draft pick.

The infamous Manti Te’o was heavily criticized for his time. His “Catfish” story is beginning to die down, but as the draft approaches, it seems like there are still those who do not want to see him succeed.

Te’o ran his 40-yard dash in 4.82 seconds. This seems like a great time on paper, but he is surprisingly drawing criticism for this performance from the media. Chicago Tribune writer Dan Pompei wrote an article titled, “Te’o disappoints with 40-yard dash times.”

Speed is important, but it cannot determine the heart of a player, or the will to win. It does not account for the intelligence of a player, or how he will handle certain game situations.

It is time to stop overanalyzing small, trivial aspects of these men and focus on what matters, which is their performance on the field. Unfortunately, some members of the media forget about this, and nothing will change until these players are on the field for their NFL teams.

ESPN celebrates ‘Danica 500’ and ignores Rousey

BY ANTHONY ALFORD

This past weekend was a historic weekend for women’s sports as NASCAR driver Danica Patrick and UFC fighter Ronda Rousey both took center stage. It was a weekend in which sports media latched on to the historic female storyline.

ESPN began its NASCAR coverage in a “Sunday Conversation” interview with Patrick within 24 hours of her Daytona 500 pole win. Patrick continued to dominate ESPN coverage throughout the week. It felt like ESPN was covering the “Danica 500” rather than the Daytona 500.

Meanwhile, ESPN seemed to ignore fighter Ronda Rousey. Rousey and Liz Carmouche became the first female fighters to compete in UFC history. For years, women’s MMA has been reduced to sideshows on local and regional promotions. But Rousey had the “it” factor to allow women’s MMA to be taken seriously. However, because ESPN does not have TV rights for the UFC (Fox has a 7-year deal with UFC), ESPN felt little need to cover Rousey’s fight.

Rousey and Patrick are both mainstream stars, but if ESPN had it their way, Rousey would have never even existed. ESPN offered only 30 seconds of Rousey’s fight coverage. That’s right, 30 seconds.

ESPN’s coverage selection draws on an even bigger issue in sport. Does ESPN really care about the rise of women’s sports, or is it just a marketing ploy to benefit their outlets? ESPN covered Patrick’s race, but not Rousey’s fight because it was on another network. Sports fans should hope for competition from other networks to end ESPN’s monopoly on sports.

There are rumors of a Fox Sports 1, but those rumors say the network won’t be launched until August. Until then, Americans are stuck with ESPN and its interpretation of which athletes should make history.

On a weekend where women’s sports should be celebrated, instead we must focus on the agenda of mainstream media. Both of these ladies have earned the spotlight this weekend, however only one of the athletes got the fair treatment she deserved.

Media handles Buss death with respect

BY LOREN BRANCH

In the midst of the Lakers’ disappointing season, the team took a loss off the court with the passing of long-time owner, Dr. Jerry Buss. Dr. Buss was an innovator and game-changer for not only the Lakers but the NBA and the city of Los Angeles as well. If it was not for his vision and great business mind, the Lakers franchise would not have the prestige it does today.

With Dr. Buss’ passing, there are a lot of general questions about the team. Obviously, it is the media’s job to seek the answers to these questions and report them to the public. With that in mind, the media has been very polite and understanding while trying to get a feel for what’s next for the Lakers and the Buss family.

On the emotional day of Dr. Buss’ death, a press conference was held with the Buss family speaker where he was asked questions about the future of the team and their ownership. In situations like these, there is always a possibility a reporter will ask an unnecessary or disrespectful question, but no one did. None of the reporters heckled the speaker in any way; when he ended a sentence with: “That is all I am going to say at this time,” reporters moved on to the next question. In addition, there were a couple of questions asked about Dr. Buss’ personality and great memories, which created a positive feel to the press conference.

Since the day of his death, there has been nothing but positive media coverage on Dr. Buss’ accomplishments. The best moment came during the pregame show for the Lakers v. Celtics game, two days after the passing. There was a short speech given by Kobe Bryant at Staples Center, followed by a moment of silence with a spotlight on the seat where he used to sit and watch every game. After the moment of silence, ESPN went back to the studio and there was an emotional and brief statement made by Magic Johnson where he expressed his love and appreciation for Dr. Buss.

The level of respect this situation has been shown is tremendous and the media’s coverage has been nothing but positive. ESPN and all the other media outlets that have covered this tragedy have done a great job giving Buss and his family the respect they deserve.

North Dakota Announcer Suspended

BY LORI RAUDIO

The University of North Dakota’s overtime loss to Northern Arizona was no doubt upsetting to players and fans alike. Play-by-play radio announcer Paul Ralston, however, was apparently very upset by the game.

In an interview with North Dakota’s coach, Brian Jones, after the game, Ralston referred to the loss as a “choke job.” This phrase clearly upset North Dakota’s Athletic Department, which suspended Ralston for two games. The incident was featured on almost every major news outlet including ESPN, CBS, and Yahoo Sports.

To many people, it may not seem like a big deal. After all, we have heard much worse. I think one of the main factors in the decision to suspend Ralston was because his comment was made directly to the coach. Jones, however, did not seem fazed by it. He talked about how his team let the game slip away.

Many bloggers and Twitter users have commented that the suspension seems a bit excessive. While I tend to agree, I also respect North Dakota’s decision. Ralston blatantly disrespected Jones, a fellow employee of the school, to his face. While it is Ralston’s job to report honestly about the game, he definitely crossed a line.

In the wake of the Brent Musburger incident, it is evident announcers are being watched closer than ever. It raises the question of how much freedom of speech announcers have. There seems to be a struggle for some announcers to report the game fairly and keep the audience entertained without offending someone. All the media incidents as of late will only increase scrutiny on announcers’ commentaries.