I know fans of any team and any sport tend to be convinced the media hates them, the league hates them, the refs hate them - but at first glance this appears to be very unique. Local sports media being homers or haters is one thing; it's both accepted and expected. And even some national media have had a rooting interest - but it's been both obvious and admitted. Examples would be Bruschi and Rodney for the Pats, Hoge for the Steelers, Greenberg for the Jets, etc.
But I don't know that I have ever heard of a sports analyst who has been portrayed as unbiased by his employers and by himself - regardless of our thoughts - after the fact come out and say, 'hey, not only was I rooting for this team to win and that team to lose - but I did something that I felt would affect the outcome'.
His very last words, in an attempt to clarify: "it was done premeditated."
Think about that; he's saying he attempted to affect the outcome.
In case you're thinking I'm misrepresenting Jackson's intent, here again are his words:
"I played a bit of a psychological game with the Jets," Jackson explained. "I thought it was important that they have in their minds that they got beat 45-3 [their last time in New England] and that a large segment of the population thinks that could happen to you again."
"I wanted to further fuel them in a little of a cement -- cement them in that bunker mentality of 'us against the world,'" Jackson added.
"And so, I accept Bart's comments for what they were, but I hope that he understands that I actually am a fan of the Jets, and Rex Ryan, and that defense," he said. "I think that they were well served by the fact that, yes they were angry and they got a little angrier, and I think it served them well on the field."
Frankly I don't think Jackson's comments affected the outcome - and that is not based on my disdain for his choice of sides. For him to pat himself on the back for the win is a whole separate discussion.
However for him to take sides and attempt to affect the outcome - that is a very slippery slope from which I see no return. What's next, espn analysts looking at the coaches all-22 film and giving pointers to one team? Doing the same thing but misleading their opponent? CBS and FOX doing something similar in hopes of setting up a playoff match between big market teams that they can get bigger ratings from?
The NFL and their business partner, espn, has a choice to make here. Goodell has been on his soapbox about integrity of the league and not tarnishing the brand. I know it's difficult to distinguish when exactly that line is crossed, but a national sportscaster admitting that he was attempting to influence the outcome of a game?
I'd say that's crossing the line.
Jackson should be fired.
