I'm likely going to deal with a thunderous avalanche of passive aggressive dislikes for this but I think we need to establish some context to this article/interview instead of getting all butt-hurt.
Let's be clear that the average GQ reader likely doesn't post on NFL fan forums. In fact the average person for both are likely polar opposites. Any vegan lumberjacks currently wearing skinny jeans reading this? Good. I strongly doubt a bicycle riding ironically moustached 120 pound (including the cable knit sweater) slacktivist from Brooklyn cares about the intricacies of the two tight end offense. Their average reader cares no more about the challenges presented by The Seahawks defense than we do farm to table accountability and Instagram filters. Speaking generally, of course. Their average reader has never even looked at a barbell, never mind done deadlifts until their shins bleed while listening to Lamb of God and screaming like a demonic crimson faced howler monkey. Completely different audiences.
Accordingly, the author had to find a general interest angle to pursue that parallels the generally accepted narrative. The background, the triumph, and the squeaky-clean image of Brady contrasted with a potential cheating scandal is incredibly compelling to a non-endemic audience. While I disagree with some of his tactics, he didn't have many alternatives available to him in constructing a compelling narrative and profile.
Yeah. I think you're pretty much on track, though I do think a lot of GQ readers do hit the gym and follow one sport or another, even if it's the Tour de France or Soccer.
Anybody who's taken Journalism 101 can tell you that the "Three C's" of successful reporting and mass media product are "Conflict, Controversy and Crisis."
Other than people on this Board and the extended precincts of Patriots Nation, no one was going to read a "General Interest" article in GQ that fawned all over Tom Brady.
So, the Editors went for Controversy and, to some degree, Conflict (Brady threw them a little red meat on the latter with his "I don't care what people think about the Patriots..." remark).
Brady didn't bite...no, really, he couldn't bite since his case was still in Court. The GQ Editors knew this, but they asked the questions anyway, resulting in instant "Controversy" when he wouldn't answer them.
Shocking!
A guy with a case before a Federal Appeals Court who has already answered five or six hours of questions that the NFL wanted to hide but that were put into the public record thanks to Judge Berman, wouldn't answer questions about the case that he'd already answered
ad nauseam!
GQ knew that going in!
I don't live in New England any longer, but I actually thought the article was reasonably favorable. Come on people, they had to play into the Deflategate narrative or there was no article!
Brady was chosen as GQ's "Man of the Year" because:
(a) he wins (a lot)
(b) he takes a great picture
(c) he looks great in expensive clothes
(d) he was at the center of a six month media firestorm and
(e) he really doesn't give a **** what people say about him and isn't afraid to say so to your face.
In the end, though, the article suggests that 20 years from now all people will say about Tom Brady is that he was the greatest QB of all time and he was accused of a bunch of stuff by jealous and resentful opponents. That's the point of the Raiders comparison (odious to Pats fans, of course) and the MJ comparison, not so odious hopefully.
Klosterman was just a tool for GQ in this piece. He got paid to produce an article of so many words. GQ gave him the questions to ask.
Brady's people were too smart to sit TB down across from Klosterman, but didn't mind the photo-shoot, and, together with Brady and, no doubt, Gisele (who knows more about this kind of stuff than anybody in the world) decided that it was a "Net Plus" for him. I agree.
And, in the end, they ****ed GQ over by turning the interview into a 45 minute phone call while Brady was in a car.
