Skip to main content

The Cam Newton-sports media feud is ridiculous

The only demographic I know of which cares about a Super Bowl losing team's players answering questions at a post-game press conference is the sports media, and when a star player or coach doesn't satisfy their odd needs, it's quite common for them to let the world know about it. The latest such case is with regard to Carolina Panthers starting quarterback and league MVP Cam Newton, who, after his team's disappointing 24-10 loss to the Denver Broncos in Super Bowl 50 on Sunday night, didn't have a whole lot to say at the post-game press conference. While I've heard a few in the sports media say things such as, "Cam's play on the field was a much bigger deal than what he had to say after the game" and "It's not the first time this kind of thing has happened. He'll learn," I've heard many blast the quarterback like they would a player who had just been arrested for domestic violence. Could Cam have handled the situation better? No question about it. But is the sports media kind of blowing things out-of-proportion? Yes again.

While there are times a quick-witted athlete or coach will provide some fun quotes for the media, these occasions are few and far between, and the least interesting thing for most fans are the ridiculous questions asked by sports reporters and the coach-speak-like responses provided by both athletes and coaches.

Reporter: "Sooooooo, why do you think you won today?"

Player: "You know, we stuck together, gave it 110% all the way, and the hard work paid off!"

If I had a penny for every time I heard that question and answer, I could own a pair of mansions and be able to retire at 35 (which is in a couple weeks).

So, no, Cam Newton's behavior postgame didn't place him in the classiest and maturest of lights, but how many people really cared about this Q-and-A session, well, besides sports reporters? Were they going to stumble on some profound bits of wisdom due to a well thought out question which would catch the Panthers quarterback by surprise, leading to a headline for all the ages? Highly unlikely.

Reporter: "So, Cam, why do you think you guys didn't win today?"

Newton: "'Cause we didn't play good."

Reporter: "How was Denver's defense able to contain your offense?"

Newton: "They played better than us."

Reporter: "Is there anything you'd like to say to disappointed Panthers fans right now?"

Newton: "We'll be back. We'll be back."

Groundbreaking stuff, I know... While Cam Newton should have behaved more maturely following the game on Sunday, the sports media shouldn't have made the story a bigger deal than it was. It's really not the end of the world when a star quarterback doesn't provide predictable answers to predictable questions following a disappointing Super Bowl loss. After all, we're essentially talking about members of the media complaining about grown men acting immaturely after getting paid millions of dollars for playing a kids' game...

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"