Monthly Archives: August 2012

Women at Augusta: Did Masters press conference finally get Payne to change mind?

Posted on by

Charlie Hanger, executive editor of Golf.com, had this observation on Golf.com’s PGA Tour Confidential:

My first thought was, finally. Payne seemed genuinely flustered with the  harsh questioning this year, and I wonder if behind closed doors that led him to  push for the change. The issue was clearly not going away, so they really didn’t  have much of a choice.

I went to ASAPsports.com and reviewed the press conference Augusta National Chairman Billy Payne conducted on the Wednesday of tournament week. Indeed, he was pressed as hard on the women’s issue as he had been in years.

Here are some of the exchanges. The first mention came on the third question.

Q.  You began talking about a number of the changes that happened here at the course.  Since you’ve been Chairman, all of those changes have been well‑documented.  One of the changes that has not happened to the Club is the all‑male Membership.  Wonder if you ever foresee that changing, and why or why not.

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  Well, as has been the case, whenever that question is asked, all issues of Membership are now and have been historically subject to the private deliberations of the Members, and that statement remains accurate and remains my statement.

That always has been the Augusta chairman’s standard statement. But it didn’t stop there.

Is it possible to elaborate further on why Membership for (IBM CEO Virginia) Rometty wouldn’t be considered, just to give us a little more spiel on that.

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  I guess two reasons:  One, we don’t talk about our private deliberations.  No. 2, we especially don’t talk about it when a named candidate is a part of the question.

Here’s where it starts to get interesting. Payne starts to feel the heat a few moments later:

Q.  Mr.Chairman, I note your concerns about the growth of golf around the world, and I also note that Augusta National is a very famous golf club.  Don’t you think it would send a wonderful message to young girls around the world if they knew that one day they could join this very famous golf club?

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  Once again, that deals with a Membership issue, and I’m not going to answer it.

Q.  No, it doesn’t.

Q.  Seems like a mixed message, Billy, is what he’s saying.  You’re throwing a lot of money into growing the game, and yet there’s still a perception that certain people are excluded.

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  That is a Membership issue that I’m not going to‑‑ thank you for your‑‑

Q.  It sends‑‑

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  Thank you.

Q.  It sends a wonderful message to girls around the world that they could join this emblematic golf club; it’s not a Membership question.

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  Thank you for your question, sir.

Q.  Mr.Chairman, as a grandfather, what would you say to granddaughters?  How would you explain leading a club that does not include female membership?

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  Once again, though expressed quite artfully, I think that’s a question that deals with Membership, and‑‑

Q.  It’s a kitchen‑table, personal question.

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  Well, my conversations with my granddaughters are also personal.  (Laughter.)

Q.  Billy, kind of on that note, you talked about what a great Masters it was last year and how much anticipation there is coming into this year’s Masters.  I’m curious how you felt when this issue comes up again on the eve of the Masters, and do you feel it reflects negatively on either the Club or the Tournament?

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  I think there’s certainly a difference of opinion on that, and I don’t think I have formed an opinion on that, Doug.  But certainly there’s ‑‑ people have different opinions on that subject.

Ah, the old grandfather end-run ploy. Even Payne appreciated that tactic.

Finally, Payne and the moderator Craig Heatley had enough.

Q.  You said your conversations with your granddaughters are private.  What would you suggest I tell my daughters?

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  I don’t know your daughters.

Q.  What without them, that the most prestigious golf club in the country, they are not‑‑

CHAIRMAN PAYNE:  I have no advice for you there, sir.

CRAIG HEATLEY:  Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much.

Now it would be foolish to think Payne made this decision simply because of tough questioning. However, I do believe the press conference had an impact.

I think Payne has wanted to make this move for quite some time only to be rebuffed by the hardliners at the club. Perhaps, he got tired of having to be on the firing line for an issue he didn’t support. Who knows? Maybe the grandfather questions did finally get to him. Indeed, what kind of message was he sending to his granddaughters?

Whatever the reason, Payne likely will be thrilled not to face another Masters press conference where he has to be battered about the women issue.

 

 

Real Sports interview: Driven Gruden leaves door open to return to coaching

Posted on by

Tuesday night’s edition of Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel (HBO, 9 p.m.) looks at the insanely driven Jon Gruden.

At age 49, Gruden has been out of coaching since 2008. He is about to begin his fourth season on ESPN’s Monday Night Football.

It still seems that it is just a matter of time before he returns to the sidelines. But then again, that’s what we were saying in 2009.

Here’s this exchange on the show.

BRYANT GUMBEL:  You’ve had a bunch of job offers.

JON GRUDEN: Yeah, I’ve had opportunities to come back.

BRYANT GUMBEL: Pro?

JON GRUDEN: Pro.

BRYANT GUMBEL: College?

JON GRUDEN: College.

BRYANT GUMBEL: What’s stopping you?

JON GRUDEN: I don’t know. I’m tryin’ to figure out– I’m tryin’ to figure out where I’m goin’. If the right opportunity presents itself, I will come back.

Here’s another segment in which Gruden talks about his lifestyle, if you could call it that.

JON GRUDEN: Who needs sleep? You know, who needs it?

BRYANT GUMBEL: You- drive yourself hard.

JON GRUDEN:  Yeah.  If you’d call it that.  You know–

BRYANT GUMBEL: What should I call it?  I mean, a guy who gets up at 3:15, that’s– that’s– that’s drivin’ pretty hard, Jon.

JON GRUDEN: Yeah, it’s–probably not wise at times, probably not normal .  It’s my rhythm. It’s the beat that I go to.

 

Posted in HBO

Augusta and women members: My heated confrontation with Hootie; ‘Don’t lecture to me

Posted on by

Better late than ever I suppose.

Augusta National’s announcement that it is admitting two women members certainly will get plenty of national coverage today, and it will go beyond sports. It also means next year’s news conference with Augusta National Chairman Billy Payne just got much duller.

The women question always was the proverbial elephant in the room during these annual taffy-pulls with the club chairman. You always could on the chairman to say, “We consider the club’s membership to be a private matter.”

Of course, in 2002, the issue escalated to another level thanks to Martha Burk’s campaign to shame the club into admitting women. It set up a memorable confrontation I had with then chairman Hootie Johnson.

I had been told Johnson would address the issue during his news conference, which occurs on Wednesday of tournament week. But he began with a general statement about the club’s membership policy and then said he wouldn’t take any further questions about it.

Clearly, Johnson was trying to intimidate the press. When the first question was about whether lift-clean-and-place rules would be used for the tournament, he reacted as if he won.

“Well, now we know why we are here,” Johnson said.

I was fuming. I covered the issue aggressively for the Chicago Tribune. I had been told he was going to talk. A promise is a promise.

*******

Thanks to ASAP, here’s my confrontation:

Q.  Mr. Johnson, many of us have not had a chance to question you about this issue.  If you’re comfortable and you feel, in your standing in the right position on this issue, why won’t you take any questions from us?

HOOTIE JOHNSON:  Because I — we have talked about this for 10 months, as I said.

Q.  You’ve only given —

HOOTIE JOHNSON: What question do you have?

Q.  We have lots of question.

HOOTIE JOHNSON: Is the question that I won’t answer a question?  I mean, go ahead.  What is your question?

Q.  I mean we have lots  —

HOOTIE JOHNSON:  Well, what is your question?

Q.  Just people in this room have lots of questions and you’re coming in here saying that you’re not going to take any questions on this issue.  We have talked about this for 10 months.  You have not talked about this for 10 months.

HOOTIE JOHNSON:  I’ve made my statement.  We are here to have The Masters tournament.  I just told you if you have a question, I’ll answer it, but don’t lecture to me.

******

Payne, who was serving as moderator at the time, cut off the exchange. However, my good friend Christine Brennan of USA Today credits me for changing the tone of the press conference. The next person asked Johnson about the women’s issue. He wound up fielding numerous questions.

He concluded in dramatic fashion:

I do want to make one point, though.  If I drop dead, right now, our position will not change on this issue.  It’s not my issue alone.  And I promise you what I’m saying is, if I drop dead this second, our position will not change.

It took 10 years for the club to change its position. It was inevitable.

*******

There’s a postscript to the confrontation. During a rain delay in the 2006 Masters, I was told that Johnson wanted to see me. As I was escorted to his office, I couldn’t figure what I had done of late that would require a meeting with the chairman.

Johnson said he wanted to apologize for how he spoke to me during that 2002 news conference. To say I was stunned would be an understatement.

I told him I appreciated his apology, and we chatted for a few minutes. As I left his office, I still wondered about his motivation.

The answer came a few weeks later when Johnson announced he was stepping aside as chairman. I’m guessing he simply wanted to clear the decks, and I was on his list.

 

 

Paterno book: Early reviews mixed; Full excerpt on GQ show coach being out of touch

Posted on by

The Paterno book hits the bookstores tomorrow. But thanks to an excerpt on GQ and some early reviews, feedback is starting to come in on Joe Posnanski’s effort.

Rich Hoffman of the Philadelphia Daily News wrote a column after reading the book. The headline for the piece reads: “Paterno bio is insightful and incomplete.”

He writes:

The book – I bought “Paterno” in a bookstore on Saturday, ahead of its  Tuesday publication date – is not a prosecutor’s brief against Paterno, and no  one should have expected one. Neither, though, is it a full-throated defense.  Given extraordinary access to the man, literally until his dying days, Posnanski  does what Posnanski always has done best as a writer: context and texture. As  everything around Paterno shook and then fell, you see a man and his family and  his confidants at the epicenter.

Whether you like the portrait or not, and whether you can even definite it  concisely – the best word here might be complicated – is beside the  point. The truth is that it is a portrait very much in three dimensions. In that  sense, Posnanski succeeds.

However, Hoffman believes Posnanski came up short in describing how Paterno handled the Mike McQuery situation and whether he knew about Jerry Sandusky’s crimes in 1998.

Hoffman writes:

To me, the key is 1998. If Paterno did know about those allegations, as the  Curley emails suggest, and he still did not act to alert authorities in 2001 (or  even recommended against contacting authorities), it changes everything – and  everybody knows it.

Posnanski makes a couple of passing references along the way but essentially  deals with those 1998 emails in one paragraph in the middle of the book. It does not seem enough.

Deadspin’s Dom Cosentino writes about the final chapter.

The book’s final chapter is a collection of unrelated anecdotes about Paterno as told by his children and several of his former players. Much of the chapter is light.

Cosentino then writes that during a session at Paterno’s house, the coach asks Posnanski his view on what he should have done.

From the book:

I had not intended to include this in the book. It was a personal moment between writer and subject. But as the story has played out, I decided it was important. I told him that I thought he should have done more when he was told Jerry Sandusky was showering with a boy. I had heard what he had said about not understanding the severity, not knowing much about child molestation, not having Sandusky as an employee. But, I said, “You are Joe Paterno. Right or wrong, people expect more from you.”

He nodded. He did not try to defend or deflect. He said simply, “I wish I had done more,” again, and then descended into another coughing fit.

Curiously, that passage wasn’t in the GQ excerpts. If you recall, Sports Illustrated passed on running the excerpts. The magazine felt the material in the book didn’t measure up.

I disagree with SI’s decision, because the excerpts have been quoted everywhere. However, the GQ excerpts don’t foreshadow that there will be any new startling revelations in the book. If anything, they portray the coach as a rather out-of-touch old man who stayed around way too long.

When his son Scott first confronted his father about the charges against Sandusky on that November Saturday, Paterno’s reply was to say, “I’ve got Nebraska (the next game) to worry about. I can’t worry about this.”

There was this telling passage in which Paterno had to be persuaded to read the presentment.

On Monday, the family tried to persuade Paterno to read the presentment. He objected that he already knew what was in there, but they told him there was no room left for illusion. D’Elia would remember telling him, “You realize that the people out there think you knew about this? They think you had to know because you know about everything.”

“That’s their opinion!” Paterno shouted. “I’m not omniscient!”

“They think you are!” D’Elia roared back.

Later, D’Elia described watching Paterno read the presentment: “What did he know about perverted things like that? When he asked Scott, ‘What is sodomy, anyway?’ I thought my heart was going to break.”

I love access and I believe the best and most relevant part of the book will be about the access Posnanski had to Paterno and his family during those final days.

However, the book is about Paterno’s entire life and career. The brutal end is just a part of it. It will be interesting to see how people view all the “positives” that took place during his long tenure.

Much more to come on this story.

 

 

 

 

 

Q/A with Darren Rovell: On leaving CNBC for ESPN; ‘It felt bigger’

Posted on by

As any good business reporter knows, the element of risk is a theme in many stories.

So now the tables turn on Darren Rovell. Risk now is a part of his story in his recent jump from CNBC to ESPN.

Rovell had the sports business gig all to himself at CNBC. He also had his own sports business show on the NBC Sports Network.

Rovell, 34, landed many high-profile interviews and developed a huge following on Twitter (now in the 240,000 range). He carved out a nice niche at CNBC.

Rovell, though, decided to return to ESPN (he worked there from 2000-06). Obviously, he won’t be the only sports person at the network. While he will have more platforms for his stories, he also will face exponentially more internal competition. It will be more difficult for him to stick out at ESPN.

Money definitely was a factor in Rovell’s decision (ESPN book author James Miller reports he doubled his salary). Interestingly, for someone who talks at length about the cash athletes earn, Rovell declined to go into detail about his financial decision. I guess it is more interesting to talk about other people’s money.

Rovell stressed this decision is about more than just money. A big part, he said, is the ABC component, in which he will do business stories for various shows (Good Morning America, Nightline, ABC Evening News) on the network.

Ultimately, Rovell said of the move, “I just felt this was bigger.”

Here’s my Q/A with Rovell.

Why make the move from CNBC to ESPN?

I was happy with my gig at CNBC. I loved doing my NBC Sports Network show. It was a dream come true. I love working with my team there.

At the end of the day, I felt like being at ESPN was the right move. The ABC part was the deal-sealer.

How much did money have to do with the move?

CNBC did want me back. I was hoping for more interest from NBC Sports to get paid like a host. It didn’t happen.

I won’t do something solely for money. I’m so passionate about my career. Money alone could never get me to go to a place that I didn’t think was the best for me.

I talked to CNN. I talked to other people. I asked, ‘Do I break out? Do I move away from this niche?’ I decided the answer is no. ESPN and ABC can give me the best of both worlds.

Talk about your niche. Why is sports business so interesting to the masses?

I think a flashpoint came when sports became more corporate. Business became more out there, and people wanted to talk about it. Sports fans want to be armed at the water cooler. When you drop a piece of information, it allows you to beat your friend.

There are so many fascinating things about sports business. It touches people more than most people think.

Your career took off when you left ESPN and started at CNBC in ’06. Why?

CNBC gave me a great TV platform, for sure. The difference for me at the time was CNBC was a smaller place to be, but I could be the bigger fish. At ESPN, I was the geek who covered sports business. At CNBC, I was the cool guy who covered sports business.

CNBC wanted me to help turn up the volume. Traders watch with the volume off. CNBC said, ‘Hey, let’s show sports, but you rationalize it as business because it really is business.’

At CNBC and NBC Sports Network, you got so many big interviews with athletes like Tiger Woods and sports executives. PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem appeared so many times, he was practically your sidekick. Will you get that same kind of treatment/access at ESPN?

We didn’t have a hard time getting people to come on CNBC. Our pitch to athletes and agents was, ‘Come on CNBC if you want to reach the wealthiest people in the world.’

Now at ESPN, Tom Rinaldi will have that interview with Tiger. How do I get Tiger Woods for business purposes? Does (agent) Mark Steinberg say, ‘He already did Tom Rinaldi?’

Admittedly, it’s going to be a challenge to get the big stars. But that’s the challenge of working in a bigger system compared to being a one-man machine. It’s a challenge I’m willing to accept. I still think I can get the big interview.

You’ve become Mr. Twitter. What has that meant to your “brand”?

It’s become a tremendous distribution platform. If all I did was just about sports business, I’d have about 10,000 followers. People like to have something different in their feed. When something happens in sports or otherwise, I’m thinking, ‘How can I inject the business aspect into it?’

When I was at ESPN (the first time), they had so many writers, I used to think, ‘If I write a great story, will it get on the front page (of ESPN.com)?’ Now because of Twitter, placement is not as much of a concern. It’s harder for something to get lost. Going to the Web site isn’t the only place to find the story. If I write a good story, somebody will link to it again and again and again.

It hasn’t all been smooth sailing. You’ve gotten into some notorious feuds on Twitter. Other people also have taken shots at you as your profile has increased. How do you feel about that?

Twitter allows people to reach out to you. Negative stuff is going to happen. Anything is fine. Anyone who is in the public eye has to deal with some negativity. It comes with the territory.

So where will people see you at ESPN/ABC?

I’m going to be the sports business reporter covering the beat. I’ll be working out of the ABC office in New York, but I’ll be in Bristol quite frequently. ESPN is going to be my main responsibility. I’ll write for ESPN.com, be on radio, SportsCenter. I do intend to be on ABC quite often.

I love to put the pedal to the metal. I go 24 hours a day. The only way to not get burned out is to change things up. The ABC outlet allows me to stay fresh, to stay hungry.

 

 

 

Sunday books: Floyd Patterson, a conflicted champion

Posted on by

W.K. Stanton is receiving his praise for his new book on boxer Floyd Patterson.

From the Wall Street Journal:

It is a puzzle how this boxer ever managed to climb to the top of a brutal game. W.K. Stratton’s first-rate Patterson biography attempts to solve the riddle of the most ambivalent of modern gladiators—one who would rush to lift his knockout victims off the canvas and who once even stopped in mid-round to help an opponent find his mouthpiece.

Deadspin ran an excerpt from the book. Here’s an excerpt of the excerpt:

This was Moore’s cue. He rose to his feet and began a blistering verbal attack on Patterson as the cameras rolled and the sportswriters scribbled notes. Patterson was completely taken aback. He believed in treating the opposition with dignity. There was nothing dignified about the words spewing from Moore’s mouth. Finally, Patterson could stand it no longer. He fled the room and hurried through the lobby and out onto the street, where he sucked in some deep breaths of fresh air.

He found a pay phone, called Sandra, and poured his heart out. She was always effective in those days at calming him down. But now he had even more reason to check in with her. Sandra was pregnant and their baby was due to arrive about the same time as the heavyweight title fight. Sandra directed the conversation to the soon-to-arrive baby and how she herself was feeling. She soothed his anger over Moore’s tirade.

Patterson returned to the hotel and completed the interview, although he was irked by later questions about how he planned to stand up against a fighter with Moore’s decades of experience. Floyd believed that he’d learned as much in a short time as Moore had learned over many years, but no boxing prognosticators seemed to consider that possibility.

 

 

Must read: ESPN Boston Edes gets positive (not really) in writing about Red Sox woes

Posted on by

ESPN has put Tim Tebow aside for a minute to get into its other obsession: The Boston Red Sox.

Really, enough with the Red Sox. The only Sox I care about wear White. And by the way, thanks Boston for Kevin Youkilis. He’s been great.

However, I do want to point out a piece by ESPN Boston’s Gordon Edes. In response to all the whining that the media has contributed to Boston’s woes, he plants his tongue firmly in cheek and writes a positive tale about the Red Sox going into their series with the Yankees.

Here’s Edes:

NEW YORK — A weary but gallant group of Red Sox players, led by their plucky skipper Bobby Valentine, gathered in Baltimore’s Penn Station late Thursday night to board the iron horse that will carry them to the Big Apple and a rematch with the Mighty Bombers of Gotham.

The Sox played their hearts out the past three nights against the Orioles, but Fate and Lady Luck dealt them a tough hand. Despite their best efforts — which included a five-inning no-hitter (!!!) by Aaron Cook — the Sox were able to claim just one hard-earned victory, steady Clay Buchholz spinning a beauty Thursday night in Camden Yards. Once again, the game’s greatest fans were represented in large numbers, having made the arduous journey down the Jersey Turnpike to show their support for A-Gon, Pedey, Our Josh and all the Boys.

And more:

It was only three weeks ago, you may recall, that the Sox last visited Gotham and had their spirits lifted by the team-only pep rally organized   by their wise and benevolent owner, John W. Henry. Gosh, was Mr. Henry embarrassed when someone spilled the beans on Henry’s private cheerleading.

“No good deed goes unpunished, does it, Larry?” an abashed Henry declared to his most trusted adviser, Larry Lucchino, who along with Smiling Tom Werner had secretly assembled at the Palace Hotel in New York to surprise the lads with a morale-boosting rendezvous. They beamed as one player after another paid tribute to their skipper, Bobby V, who was detained in another room for fear he would literally burst with pride at all the compliments sent his way.

And finally:

It grieves this correspondent to note that the division title might now be out of reach for your heroes, but while they arrive here wounded, they remain unbowed. There is no quit in these Red Sox, no loss of determination by Bobby V, for whom the word “surrender” does not exist in his vocabulary. Do not abandon your heroes in their hour of need. Invite Don and Jerry into your living rooms this weekend, Joe Castig and O’B on your car radios, and root, root, root for the home team. Remember the words of Al Michaels: “Do you believe in miracles? Yes!”

Great stuff, Gordon.

 

 

Saturday flashback: Vintage Superstars try to lift all of 140 pounds

Posted on by

Here’s something for those of you suffering from Olympics withdrawal: The weightlifting portion of The Superstars from 1973.

If you recall, Superstars was a competition pitting athletes from different sports in various events. This clip features Joe Frazier, Bob Seagren, Jean-Claude Killy, and bowler Jim Stefanich.

Jim McKay, bless him, calls the event with a certain degree of gravity. But looking back at it now, it all seems rather comical. Poor Stefanich. He had no chance at 140 pounds.

And here’s part 2 with the dramatic conclusion:

Update: Simon & Schuster says Paterno book will be featured on site next week; only 1 appearance scheduled for Posnanski

Posted on by

I finally heard back from Simon & Schuster about my post wondering why the Paterno book is receiving limited play on its site.

In an email, Kelly Welsh, S&S senior publicity manager said:

“Joe Posnanski’s book will be featured on S&S.com home page when it officially goes on-sale next Tuesday, and it will be featured in a newsletter which will go out at the end of the month.”

I followed up by asking if a book tour is planned and if Posnanski would be making any appearances. Welsh replied: “He’s appearing in Kansas City on 9/12.”

Posnanski was a long-time columnist in Kansas City.

Given the magnitude of the book, one appearance is nothing. It speaks to the uncertainty of how the public will receive a book on the tarnished coach. With the backlash so extreme, S&S apparently doesn’t want to risk putting Posnanski out there.

Again, I’m sure this isn’t what Posnanski imagined when he signed up to do this project.