NFL expected to keep locker rooms closed as sports reporters push for a return to access

[Mr. X]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/06/04/nfl-locker-rooms-media-access-pandemic/

 

[SoloFlyer]

Yeah, this was never coming back. Not once the players and leagues realized they could control things more.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

It’s better for their mental health.

 

[BYH 2: Electric Boogaloo]

The NFL and NBA were never ever ever ever coming back. The NHL should be back now, given that it needs all the press it can get, but that's a strangely self-isolated league. The MLB update was encouraging, I guess, but I'll believe the locker rooms are open when we're in there staring at the carpet for 45 minutes every afternoon. I absolutely believe Trent's heard from multiple players who would be happy to see us back. But if there's 52 players on the active rosters in NY on a given day, I can guarantee 48 of them would rather burn the place down than ever allow us back in.

 

[Alma]

We'll see what happens. I think access could take a hard dive for awhile but, over time, bounce back as players realize having their "own channels to share their message" is a a pain in the ass all its own.

Doing media is easier than becoming your own media, as enticing (and potentially lucrative) as the latter sounds. We're in a moment - and may be for awhile - where athletes are being encouraged to turn themselves in a virtual strip mall of product endorsements and political opinions but, sooner or later, it'll wear athletes out, because it'd wear anybody out - but especially someone whose career revolves around physically taking their body to the limit.

 

[Patchen]

Cue the two bonkers takes on this issue:
1) Journalists, probably those who don't cover a beat and don't deal with deadlines, arguing less access is OK.
2) Fans cheering for journalists to get shut out of access, thus reducing the ability to get information about their favorite team/athlete for the fans.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

We'll see what happens. I think access could take a hard dive for awhile but, over time, bounce back as players realize having their "own channels to share their message" is a a pain in the ass all its own.

Doing media is easier than becoming your own media, as enticing (and potentially lucrative) as the latter sounds. We're in a moment - and may be for awhile - where athletes are being encouraged to turn themselves in a virtual strip mall of product endorsements and political opinions but, sooner or later, it'll wear athletes out, because it'd wear anybody out - but especially someone whose career revolves around physically taking their body to the limit.

I am in near complete agreement. My personal guess is that most athletes will opt for the "limited but not shut off" access big stars like Brady or LeBron create. It is, as you say, much easier than creating one's own content. A few Twitter or Instagram mishaps and jocks will go running back to the safety of boring interviews and press availabilities.

 

[BYH 2: Electric Boogaloo]

We'll see what happens. I think access could take a hard dive for awhile but, over time, bounce back as players realize having their "own channels to share their message" is a a pain in the ass all its own.

Doing media is easier than becoming your own media, as enticing (and potentially lucrative) as the latter sounds. We're in a moment - and may be for awhile - where athletes are being encouraged to turn themselves in a virtual strip mall of product endorsements and political opinions but, sooner or later, it'll wear athletes out, because it'd wear anybody out - but especially someone whose career revolves around physically taking their body to the limit.

I don't know. This isn't 1999-2000 with Athletes Direct. They're not "writing" anything or putting much effort into the communication. With 280 characters, these guys can type something pithy, post a pic of them wearing their branded garb, hit send and reach tens or hundreds of thousands of adoring consumers. Our ability to do that, at least in the traditional story-telling sense, is long gone.

And the ones that aren't adoring are almost as valuable. Most of us of a certain age have learned it's easier to just not engage with assholes on social media. But for athletes in their 20s or early 30s, responding to the haters is all they know. It's part of building the us-against-the-world brand. And they've never known a time when they weren't able to Tweet up a storm in the locker room and then go out and practice or play. Most of us would be distracted by the **** we'd just seen on Twitter, but these guys' brains have been wired differently.

The best chance for something resembling normal to return is the realization most of the players don't care enough to control their own narratives. Generally speaking, you've got to be pretty good to really get people to give a **** what you say or do. Unless you're a raging asshole like Aubrey Huff, a routine everyday player posting his defense of Trump or support of George Floyd-related protests isn't really going to move the needle. Maybe there's enough players out there who just think of us as background noise, a necessary nuisance to keep people informed and publicize the game. I'm not even sure that's going to be enough if enough well-known players speak up and encourage them to go along with shutting the doors for good.

 

[Alma]

Cue the two bonkers takes on this issue:
1) Journalists, probably those who don't cover a beat and don't deal with deadlines, arguing less access is OK.

This take, in particular, is embarrassing, but predictable. And it'll come from some journalists who stand to lose needed access, as well. The industry is increasingly populated by writers over reporters, tweeters over transcribers. People don't know how - and sometimes frankly don't want - to ask questions.

 

[Fdufta]

I don't know. This isn't 1999-2000 with Athletes Direct. They're not "writing" anything or putting much effort into the communication. With 280 characters, these guys can type something pithy, post a pic of them wearing their branded garb, hit send and reach tens or hundreds of thousands of adoring consumers. Our ability to do that, at least in the traditional story-telling sense, is long gone.

And the ones that aren't adoring are almost as valuable. Most of us of a certain age have learned it's easier to just not engage with assholes on social media. But for athletes in their 20s or early 30s, responding to the haters is all they know. It's part of building the us-against-the-world brand. And they've never known a time when they weren't able to Tweet up a storm in the locker room and then go out and practice or play. Most of us would be distracted by the **** we'd just seen on Twitter, but these guys' brains have been wired differently.

The best chance for something resembling normal to return is the realization most of the players don't care enough to control their own narratives. Generally speaking, you've got to be pretty good to really get people to give a **** what you say or do. Unless you're a raging asshole like Aubrey Huff, a routine everyday player posting his defense of Trump or support of George Floyd-related protests isn't really going to move the needle. Maybe there's enough players out there who just think of us as background noise, a necessary nuisance to keep people informed and publicize the game. I'm not even sure that's going to be enough if enough well-known players speak up and encourage them to go along with shutting the doors for good.

They can find people to guide them on the limited access they need to provide on these channels. Also, the kind of person/player that is authentic, off-the-cuff (I know there is a fine line, there), but those are the people/players who come off as "real" to the audiences these days, which, from this viewpoint, is the main goal. Those who are good at social media are really good. On clubhouse access: For those who have been in them, especially NHL where I come from, think about the minutes/hours/days/weeks of your lives spent standing around watching a group of reporters stand amongst themselves for 25 minutes.... bumble-beeing around a player two times a day. The great ones know what to do with it. The rest, maybe 95%, don't.

 

[Alma]

I don't know. This isn't 1999-2000 with Athletes Direct. They're not "writing" anything or putting much effort into the communication. With 280 characters, these guys can type something pithy, post a pic of them wearing their branded garb, hit send and reach tens or hundreds of thousands of adoring consumers. Our ability to do that, at least in the traditional story-telling sense, is long gone.

And the ones that aren't adoring are almost as valuable. Most of us of a certain age have learned it's easier to just not engage with assholes on social media. But for athletes in their 20s or early 30s, responding to the haters is all they know. It's part of building the us-against-the-world brand. And they've never known a time when they weren't able to Tweet up a storm in the locker room and then go out and practice or play. Most of us would be distracted by the **** we'd just seen on Twitter, but these guys' brains have been wired differently.

The best chance for something resembling normal to return is the realization most of the players don't care enough to control their own narratives. Generally speaking, you've got to be pretty good to really get people to give a **** what you say or do. Unless you're a raging asshole like Aubrey Huff, a routine everyday player posting his defense of Trump or support of George Floyd-related protests isn't really going to move the needle. Maybe there's enough players out there who just think of us as background noise, a necessary nuisance to keep people informed and publicize the game. I'm not even sure that's going to be enough if enough well-known players speak up and encourage them to go along with shutting the doors for good.

I actually agree with a lot of this, and still think, at some point, we'll turn a corner. At least some of it will be due to what I expect to be, in a decade's time or so, a major shift on youth exposure to tech and social media. And I think we'll see a much smaller shift in how we engage celebrity, especially on Twitter. I could be wrong. I just think Twitter is in a little overvalued right now in a lot of ways.

 

[BYH 2: Electric Boogaloo]

They can find people to guide them on the limited access they need to provide on these channels. Also, the kind of person/player that is authentic, off-the-cuff (I know there is a fine line, there), but those are the people/players who come off as "real" to the audiences these days, which, from this viewpoint, is the main goal. Those who are good at social media are really good. On clubhouse access: For those who have been in them, especially NHL where I come from, think about the minutes/hours/days/weeks of your lives spent standing around watching a group of reporters stand amongst themselves for 25 minutes.... bumble-beeing around a player two times a day. The great ones know what to do with it. The rest, maybe 95%, don't.

Are agents going to hire people to handle social media for their middle relievers and bench-warmers? It makes sense for the agents of Mike Trout or Connor McDavid to hire someone to make their superstars more interesting and engaging on social media. But who cares about the last guy in the bullpen or a fourth-line winger? The irony is those are the guys who are the most interesting and easiest to get to know in those standing around staring at your shoelaces moments of locker room access, and the guys who can best flesh out a story about a far better known and accomplished teammate.

 

[BYH 2: Electric Boogaloo]

I actually agree with a lot of this, and still think, at some point, we'll turn a corner. At least some of it will be due to what I expect to be, in a decade's time or so, a major shift on youth exposure to tech and social media. And I think we'll see a much smaller shift in how we engage celebrity, especially on Twitter. I could be wrong. I just think Twitter is in a little overvalued right now in a lot of ways.

Do you expect kids to become less reliant and less wired on tech and social media? As the father of an eight-year-old, I sure hope you're right.

 

[Alma]

Do you expect kids to become less reliant and less wired on tech and social media? As the father of an eight-year-old, I sure hope you're right.

Personally - and much of this is true conjecture, only my opinion - yes. I think public schools are going to ban phones within ten years. Maybe within five. As in, not even in the schools. And I think the child psychologists or whatever will rebrand phones and tablets an absolute scourge. Now, some of this (not all) dovetails with my own personal beliefs, but I arrived at some those beliefs based on research of what it's doing to kids.

I think it'd be a win for schools, and only a small group of parents would protest.

 

[BYH 2: Electric Boogaloo]

Personally - and much of this is true conjecture, only my opinion - yes. I think public schools are going to ban phones within ten years. Maybe within five. As in, not even in the schools. And I think the child psychologists or whatever will rebrand phones and tablets an absolute scourge. Now, some of this (not all) dovetails with my own personal beliefs, but I arrived at some those beliefs based on research of what it's doing to kids.

I think it'd be a win for schools, and only a small group of parents would protest.

That'd be great. And I'm sure my wife the English teacher would love this. But you're absolutely going to get blowback from dip**** parents who will screech HOW CAN I GET IN TOUCH WITH JUNIOR IF AN ASTEROID HITS THE HOUSE or WHAT HAPPENS IF HE DOESN'T FEEL WELL? You'll call the ****ing school, or the ****ing nurse will call you, as it happened 30-50-100 years ago. Parents fill out emergency forms for a reason and every parent has his or her phone next to him or her at all times.

 

[tapintoamerica]

We'll see what happens. I think access could take a hard dive for awhile but, over time, bounce back as players realize having their "own channels to share their message" is a a pain in the ass all its own.

Doing media is easier than becoming your own media, as enticing (and potentially lucrative) as the latter sounds. We're in a moment - and may be for awhile - where athletes are being encouraged to turn themselves in a virtual strip mall of product endorsements and political opinions but, sooner or later, it'll wear athletes out, because it'd wear anybody out - but especially someone whose career revolves around physically taking their body to the limit.

While creating and distributing your own content can be a big nuisance, keeping The Media out is sure handy when the news is bad and unpleasant to discuss.

 

[sgreenwell]

Personally - and much of this is true conjecture, only my opinion - yes. I think public schools are going to ban phones within ten years. Maybe within five. As in, not even in the schools. And I think the child psychologists or whatever will rebrand phones and tablets an absolute scourge. Now, some of this (not all) dovetails with my own personal beliefs, but I arrived at some those beliefs based on research of what it's doing to kids.

I think it'd be a win for schools, and only a small group of parents would protest.

If schools could ban phones, they would have done so years ago. As BYH points out, it isn't the school that wants phones in the classroom.

 

[Alma]

If schools could ban phones, they would have done so years ago. As BYH points out, it isn't the school that wants phones in the classroom.

They can. It'll take some political will to do it though. And it'll take the adults getting off their phones in the schools. Some legislature will take it up, I imagine.

But there's going to be ample research, I believe, to lean on in suggesting it.

Learning would improve drastically if not a single cell phone was allowed in school. Not one. Not from a teacher, or a student, or an administrator.

 

[BYH 2: Electric Boogaloo]

I'm reading this at the end of a week in which our local school board meeting was overrun by idiot Trumpies screeching it was unconstitutional for them to have to wear masks in order to attend said meeting. There's no way you're overcoming that block of idiots declaring their precious offspring need to have their cell phones at school because the parents' "research" proves the phones help them concentrate.

 

[BYH 2: Electric Boogaloo]

BTW the BBWAA just announced on-field access begins Monday. Hopefully the first and not the last step.