(co-written with Steve Bayko)
The sports spotlight shines brightly at times. Brady Hoke’s purported gaffe—of not removing a presumably injured Wolverine player from the Minnesota game—was met with nearly universal disdain.
Courtesy: onenewspage.com
But Hoke’s situation stands in contrast to an incident that occurred the very next day. It involved a NFL head coach. The context was an unexpectedly eventful interview. The spotlight flickered this time.
Steelers head coach, Mike Tomlin, was interviewed by FOX’s Laura Okmin in a pre-recorded interview, broadcast prior to the Steelers-Bucs game of September 28. Okmin talked with Tomlin about being “a player’s coach.” That’s a racist categorization, the coach responded. It wouldn’t be said of “an old white guy,” Tomlin said, using Dick LeBeau (his 77-year old Defensive Coordinator) as case in point. (See the interview here.)
ESPN covered the story in print, concise as it was, in about 350 words. The story included coverage from Tomlin’s Tuesday press conference. “I refuse to be put in a box,” Tomlin said two days later. “It’s my job to be what my team needs me to be. Sometimes it’s close and cuddly, and sometimes it’s not. I don’t have any problem being any of the above.”
Courtesy: gopixpic.com
There was a bit more press coverage about the incident, but not terribly much. Google “Mike Tomlin’s pre-game interview Fox Sports” and you’ll get about 10 URLs. A good share of the coverage focuses on Tomlin’s intent. Consider Ed Bouchette’s take as told to ProFootballTalk Live: “He wasn’t real happy with people calling him a players’ coach because he thought it was a little racist and because he was a young coach. There were times Bill Cowher was considered a players’ coach here, and I never thought of it as being a bad thing.”
Other articles pushed in different directions. There was a thought-provoking treatment at Steelers Depot. Dean Kovacevic wrote a heads-on treatment of Tomlin himself: “Why exactly is Tomlin untouchable?” “No problems with labels, big problem with stereotypes” is the way Phil Watson of SI’s Fansided interpreted it.
Overall, though, there wasn’t much coverage. Surprising, we think, when you consider the people-related issues pro sports has faced over the last few months, including racial insensitivity.
What’s going on? We think it is press reluctance to take on a black coach and his interpretation of race and racism. It’s a delicate topic.
There’s no other meaningful explanation. There’s no evidence Okmin had ill intent. And delving into the sociological interpretation of “players’ coach,” especially from the angle of racism and/or age-ism, doesn’t yield much.
Can we learn anything from immediate on-air reaction?
When the Michigan player—injured and potentially concussed—stumbled and then leaned on a teammate’s shoulder ESPN’s Ed Cunningham spoke immediately and emphatically to the TV audience. You knew where he stood and why. He was unquestionably concerned about the player’s safety.
The same thing—an immediate response—happened with the Tomlin incident. It came from Steeler great, Terry Bradshaw, now a Fox studio host. Bradshaw said that he’d never viewed “players’ coach” negatively. He’d love to have played for somebody like Bum Phillips, Bradshaw continued, who was known widely as a players’ coach.
Courtesy: usatoday.com
Philips certainly isn’t the only coach people view that way. The list includes legendary George Allen, unflappable Dick Vermeil, and Pete Carroll more recently. Add the Steeler’s Bill Cowher, Tomlin’s predecessor, to that group.
There’s no question that people use seemingly affirmative words “as code” for unflattering, even pejorative, purposes. It happens all the time. But including “players’ coach” in that category seems a stretch. And it’s dicey to attribute nefarious intent—whether it’s to Okmin or to unspecified others who may use an innocuous word negatively.
Accusations, either way, need to have legs. What’s the evidence?
Tomlin may have his reasons. But the press didn’t pursue it much beyond what a surprised Okmin asked during the interview. Without knowing more about Tomlin’s rationale his interview seems more like the ill-advised response of a frustrated head coach. We’ve certainly witnessed that before. There was Jim Mora’s unforgettable, “Playoffs? Playoffs!” And there was Dennis Green’s profanity-laced, “The Bears were what we thought they were.”
Tomlin espouses a “standard is the standard” mantra. That certainly applies to what it takes to win. And it should apply to what he says to the press.
This time it didn’t.
ENDNOTE: Steve Bayko, a Pittsburgh area native, is a lifelong Steelers’ fan.
