Skip to content

Whitlock takes on media coverage of the lockout

There was so much good stuff from Jason Whitlock’s appearance on PFT Live Tuesday, we’re not going to break it into smaller segments.

Whitlock takes on the football media, who he believes needs to tone down the level of hysteria during the lockout.  Whitlock also thinks the NFL uses patriotism as a cheap marketing ploy, believes dumber players are better players, and wonders if football is really a great representation of America.  (Even though he loves football.)

Other than that, it was a pretty vanilla segment.

This video is no longer available. Click here to watch more NBC Sports videos!
Permalink 35 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: PFT Live, Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Videos
35 Responses to “Whitlock takes on media coverage of the lockout”
  1. clintonportisheadd says: May 17, 2011 11:40 AM

    Whitlock hasn’t been relevant or required reading for many years now. In fact, his only claim to fame these days is his obesity (which he seems to revel in) and his lame defense of multiple arrestee Jay Mariotti.

  2. philriverslovespenis says: May 17, 2011 11:46 AM

    IMO, Whitlock has zero credibilty as a journalist simply because his racial agenda rears its ugly head in virtually every statement he makes.

  3. jw731 says: May 17, 2011 11:49 AM

    If he didn’t talk to hear himself speak, which is basically all he does, a fatter version of Stephen A. Smith, fans realize their agenda, trying to make news instead of reporting it…..

  4. stadanko says: May 17, 2011 11:53 AM

    I think what Jason Whitlock doesn’t understand is the longer this lockout lasts, the more we have to listen to idiotic opinions from guys like Whitlock. Of course, he doesn’t care because I’m sure he loves to hear himself speak. “Oh, listen to me. I’m saying something different from everybody else. I’m so controversial. Read my column!”

    And Mike, no one wants to read about baseball or basketball on this site. That is a horrible idea and please don’t listen to it.

  5. nagaswan says: May 17, 2011 12:05 PM

    maybe best pft segment ever. Except the page keeps reloading before it is over!

  6. whoisjongalt says: May 17, 2011 12:17 PM

    Agree with Whitlock about a couple things.

    The NFL marketting with military is about $, and grandstanding. REALLY dislike mixing my sports with highly divisive pro-war sentiment.

  7. whoisjongalt says: May 17, 2011 12:18 PM

    I appreciate that Whitlock isn’t “scared”, and will speak his mind, regardless of how much I agree.

  8. myspaceyourface says: May 17, 2011 12:21 PM

    Whitlock, Jemele Hill, and Stephen A. Smith grind my nerves. These people push a racial agenda before all else.

  9. rooneyruleblues says: May 17, 2011 12:24 PM

    PFT would consider Whitlock a good source for information. The guy is a hack. Leaning on his crutch of pulling the race card every 5 minutes because he has nothing to offer anyone.

  10. chapnastier says: May 17, 2011 12:37 PM

    Whitlock is as racist as Hopkins. Everything to him has to do with race.

  11. Deb says: May 17, 2011 12:40 PM

    Sad how Whitlock’s size and blackness seem the only concerns for most of these commenters. And stadanko, Whitlock wasn’t telling Mike to cover baseball or basketball; he was telling him to broaden his base of sports knowledge to better inform his work. It was a discussion about the craft of writing–and excellent advice.

    Mike’s earlier post on his financial stake in the lockout was commendably forthcoming. But posting the link again couldn’t hurt. Both he and Whitlock made good points that influential sports reporters should find a happy medium between “Chicken Little Reacts to the Lockout” and “Rip Van Winkle Wakes in September.” Yes, life will go on without football, but that’s not the point if your job is covering sports.

    Most interesting was the discussion relating the violence of football to boxing. Whitlock was right about the true nature of football … but I believe that’s why the game is more representative of America than our other sports.

  12. harleyrider1973 says: May 17, 2011 12:42 PM

    Jason makes a good point about we shouldn’t be distracted with sports and we need to focus our attention as a country on the veterans and those that have come back injured, if we could do both that would be great but it doesn’t appear that we can.

  13. profootballwalk says: May 17, 2011 12:51 PM

    philriverslovespenis says: May 17, 2011 11:46 AM

    IMO, Whitlock has zero credibilty as a journalist simply because his racial agenda rears its ugly head in virtually every statement he makes.
    ****************

    Angry white dude speaks out. What’s the matter – did a black guy steal your girl?

  14. mattsffrd says: May 17, 2011 1:02 PM

    Whitlock is a racist moron

  15. tirap says: May 17, 2011 1:06 PM

    How can both of them argue that americans stopped watching boxing because it was too brutal and staying away from violent sports, when those fans went to follow MMA, a more brutal, agressive and primitive sport?

  16. sl1111 says: May 17, 2011 1:09 PM

    Not sure if you’ve had a chance to read it, but you can find the 8th circuit’s opinion to make the injunction permanent here:

    http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/nfl/ca8_live.11.cv.1898.3788031.0.pdf

    If you take a careful look at it – it makes sense why the majority imposed a permanent stay.

    Remember – this decision was looking at the injunction in a vacuum and used the factors to justify extending the injunction.

    It did not rule on the underlying anti-trust aspect of the case – but merely said that the initial injunction was improper. OK – so forget about injunctions and irreperable harm – the real question is who would win the anti-trust case?

    If you read the dissent starting at page 14 – there are some very good arguments as to why the decertification was legitimate and why even the supreme court anti-trust cases that have ruled against the NFL in the past will come back to haunt the NFL again.

    Check out these quotes from these cases(remember – prior court decisions are the basis of any future ruling):

    “Unless the values of collective bargaining are implicated, federal labor laws yield to the
    regular antitrust framework. See Powell v. NFL, 930 F.2d 1293, 1303 (8th Cir. 1989).”

    And:

    “Brown, 50 F.3d at 105 (“If employees wish to seek the protections of the Sherman
    Act, they may forego unionization or even decertify their unions.”);”

    And for all of you worried about a “sham” decertification – the cases are pretty clear that a union has a right to decertify – and that it would be illogical for an owner to be able to “force” a union to stay together just to enjoy the benefits of an anti-trust exemption.

    Look at these cases quoted by the dissent:

    NBA v.Williams, 857 F. Supp. 1069, 1078 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) (predicting the players can avoid the labor injunction if they disclaim the union as their collective bargaining agent);
    Powell v. NFL, 764 F. Supp. 1351, 1356-57 (D. Minn. 1991) (holding that the ongoing collective bargaining relationship ends, and the nonstatutory labor exemption no longer applies, when the players vote to repudiate the union).

    Finally, the dissent quotes the 8th circuit Brown case:

    “By disassociating themselves from the union, the players make a choice in favor of the antitrust framework at the expense of foregoing the protections of labor laws. Brown, 50 F.3d at 1057.”

    Pretty sure the players’ reps will show the players the dissent and convince the players that they actually have a great shot of winning the anti-trust part of the litigation dispite the recent “lockout” rulings.

    The supreme court cases are stacked against the NFL in such a way that it may not matter what the 8th circuit does – because this might go up to the Big Court to clarify the reach of the labor act.

    Kinda scary – but current events could just be the beginning.

    But in practical terms – not sure the players could outlast the owners in a long court battle – so it may not end up mattering what the supreme court would say.

  17. hobartbaker says: May 17, 2011 1:11 PM

    City officials have presented Whitlock a 250′ stack to vent into. That way the harmful gas is released high into the upper air currents and disperses better.

  18. straitalk says: May 17, 2011 1:17 PM

    Outstanding perspective by Whitlock. Nobody has even questioned why the coverage is slanted towards the owners. Nobody is asking ‘who is that man behind the curtain?’ They are all buying into the idea thats its the great and powerful OZ, when in reality its it the news media aka the members of the lollipop guild.

  19. commoncents says: May 17, 2011 1:18 PM

    Let me ask, if you love football so much, like you say, then why have you not had any issues with De Smith, and his posturing on eliminating the draft. I read most articles here and you have thrown a lot of stones at the owners, but not many at the leadership of the PA. Why??

  20. jtfris says: May 17, 2011 1:18 PM

    Fatlock hates everything that made this country great. Other than that he is a nice guy.

  21. cdaws84 says: May 17, 2011 1:22 PM

    “They prefer their violence in the stands not on the field” nice!

  22. hedleykow says: May 17, 2011 1:34 PM

    My favorite Whitlock appearance was last Jan on Inside the NFL when Sapp took offense to one of Whitlock’s comments, and Sapp’s eyes bugged out way passed the limits of what you normally see on a bulging eyed cartoon character. That can’t be safe.

  23. hebro42 says: May 17, 2011 2:32 PM

    While even as an African-American I find that Whitlock and some other journalists of color play the race card a bit more frequently than necessary, does anyone else find the irony in someone named “philriverslovespenis” questioning another person’s credibility as a writer?

  24. straitalk says: May 17, 2011 2:36 PM

    You should reread my opinions. I have said nothing, and have nothing against, the owners. I do have something against people misrepresenting the fans, or media serving as lapdogs for one side or the other. I also have a problem with hired hit men paid to influence real fan opinion. Btw, its good to hear from an honest owner supporting fan, I’ve heard from too many phonies lately. You ought to be angry as well that bots are mimicking and multiplying your response, rendering it irrelevent. I will say again, I don’t care if the players loss or the owners win. What I can’t stand is disengenious, canned responses that drown out real fan opinion. I understand that I can never out-shout the paid mercenaries, but I fight a good fight to hold honest fan opinion relevent and important, irregardless of the auto responses generated out there. I’ve hired PR companies myself and recognize their M O.

  25. whatswiththehate says: May 17, 2011 3:10 PM

    First off Whitlock was right. The media is making way more out of this lock-out and IMO, turning every little thing that has come out to “the sky is falling” story. As I’m sure I’m not alone when I say. as a fan the sports media is ruining football.

    Whitlock is 100% right and judging by the many comments on here, it’s clear many of you see color before you see a person but claim you’re not racist.

  26. riverhorsey says: May 17, 2011 3:11 PM

    I wouldn’t take the time to watch the Whitlock clip if you paid me.

  27. ezwriter69 says: May 17, 2011 3:27 PM

    riverhorse is Greek for hippopoatamus… saw a show on animal planet, several times a day they spin their tails and spray weak watery sheet covering everything within fifty yards…

  28. bluestree says: May 17, 2011 3:47 PM

    “Sad how Whitlock’s size and blackness seem the only concerns for most of these commenters.”

    He’s like the black Meghan McCain to the right wingers who seem to suddenly be overwhelming this site.
    My guess is the dog whistlers’ are one or two guys with multiple screen names.

  29. delebar says: May 17, 2011 4:51 PM

    Wow. I loved this segment and I appreciate you highlighting it – the reason I listened. The only thing I really knew about J Whitlock was that he was well regarded and that – through intermediary reports – I’d heard his comments about Manning’s super bowl int (which, and I didn’t read his coulmn, turned me off). But this is a really, really smart guy. He would make a great guest on RealTime.

  30. Deb says: May 17, 2011 5:26 PM

    @bluestree …

    Let’s hope that’s true come next November ;)

  31. philriverslovespenis says: May 17, 2011 9:18 PM

    profootballwalk says:May 17, 2011 12:51 PM

    philriverslovespenis says: May 17, 2011 11:46 AM

    IMO, Whitlock has zero credibilty as a journalist simply because his racial agenda rears its ugly head in virtually every statement he makes.
    ****************

    Angry white dude speaks out. What’s the matter – did a black guy steal your girl?
    ———————————————————-
    No, my girl isn’t fat, so I’m sure no black man would be interested. Also, if I had a dollar for every time I heard a black person speak up about race, I’d own an NFL team or six. I simply stated my opinion which is based on many articles that I’ve read over the years. And as of this moment, 65% of those that voted, agreed with me.

  32. hebro42 says: May 17, 2011 11:12 PM

    “No, my girl isn’t fat, so I’m sure no black man would be interested. Also, if I had a dollar for every time I heard a black person speak up about race, I’d own an NFL team or six.”

    philrivers,

    Quotes like these are why black people need to speak up about race.

  33. Deb says: May 18, 2011 12:25 AM

    @philriverslovespenis …

    Approaching your 12th birthday or edging closer to 13? A guess based on the user name.

    At one time, 100 percent of the world’s population thought the earth was flat. Having a majority of anonymous bloggers–many of whom have barely passed puberty–agree with your sadly comical stereotypes doesn’t make them accurate.

  34. philriverslovespenis says: May 19, 2011 10:34 AM

    Deb, it’s called a joke. I know that Phillip Rivers is a happily married man with multiple children. It’s simply a way for me to express my disdain for him through a screen name. I have great respect for the guy, I just simply don’t like him because he’s good, and beats my favorite team on a consistent basis. I would figure that you’d “get it,” what with you being such a mature, old woman. Also, how is stating that a writer has an agenda-be it political, racial, etc-a “comical stereotype?” If you don’t think Jason Whitlock has a racial agenda in most (not all) articles, you are obviously just another blind sheep incapable of forming your own opinion. Yet you can form an opinion rather quickly of one’s screen name defining one’s character/age/maturity.

    hebro42, the last thing black people need to speak up about is race. Maybe they should speak up about why 75% of the population in prison is black, or why the majority of them fail to properly pronounce the word “ASK” (it’s not pronounced AXE). Or maybe they should speak up on how to manipulate welfare systems, or how to go to college cheaper than everyone else, or how to go jobless for years on end.

  35. Deb says: May 19, 2011 5:01 PM

    @philriverslovespenis ….

    Thanks for the clarification, but I understood jokes like that before I reached the “old” womanhood of 12. And I wasn’t referring to your critique of Whitlock but to your stereotype about black men and fat women. You can add that to your new stereotypical rants about “axe,” welfare manipulation, etc. When you post the kind of username junior-high kids call each other on the playground and rant one offensive racial stereotype after another, you should be prepared for people to peg you as immature and worse.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!