David Elfin Interview

[14thDragon]

I was driving to work this morning with NFL radio on, and they were having an interview with David Elfin, head of the ProFootball Writers Association.

What surprised me was the fact that he took about a half dozen shots at Bill B and the Patriots organization. He blames thier success and the rise of Saban, Mangni and Crennel on the fact that more organizations are becoming more closed to the media. He was livid over the fact that these guys do not give full accounts of injury information and limit access directly to the players. He compared it to the access that baseball and basketball writers get to the locker rooms.

What was funny is how he presented the issue. He started talking about how the best society is one with free and open information. His attitude on the importance of an independent press being vital to liberty, while on the one hand commedable, seemed a bit over the top for football. (Somehow I have trouble seeing the rise of a police state resulting from the restrictions to football injury information, but I am not a member of the press.)

In addition he was highly critcle of the NFL network, team websites, team news branches and team radio broadcasts. Apprently free media is dire straights from the fact that these entities can get better access, release information faster, but would be beholden to the NFL or an NFL team, thus not be as objective and critcle as is warrented.

I could not help but think at the end of the interview, what is this guys real issue? Is that he actually thinks that covering sports is such a corner stone of free society? Or is it that he wants the teams to make it easy as possible to do his job and offer no competition to him?

Also can this help explain why some in the Boston print media are so hyper criticle of the Patriots? Given the fact that BB is not going to do thier job for them and the fact that the Patriots have PFW, PVN, Patriots Today, Patriots Web Radio and all the information on their website they see the entire organization limiting thier access and simulatenously competing with them for the audience?

 

[sarge]

I could not help but think at the end of the interview, what is this guys real issue? Is that he actually thinks that covering sports is such a corner stone of free society? Or is it that he wants the teams to make it easy as possible to do his job and offer no competition to him?

That is exactly it right there.

And no, the best society isn't the one where everybody knows everybody elses business!

He just wants it to be easy for him.

Well screw him. It may be his job to get information about football, but it is nobody elses job to provide it to him!

 

[patchick]

In addition he was highly critcle of the NFL network, team websites, team news branches and team radio broadcasts. Apprently free media is dire straights from the fact that these entities can get better access, release information faster, but would be beholden to the NFL or an NFL team, thus not be as objective and critcle as is warrented.

The idea that not letting your assistants speak publicly is a threat to a free press is silly. But the second point, quoted above, is absolutely legit. The NFL is trying to squeeze out the press in favor of its own mouthpieces, and it's getting to be a problem. The attempt to keep local tv cameramen out of the stadiums (i.e. own every image) is egregious.

 

[Drewwho]

Hey, they guy had some decent points. The media is there to report news and BB and Sabin treat their respective organizations like communist countries. I can see why the media would not respond well to the 'close door' policy.

For David Elfin and others in the media it's called lack of job security!

 

[Pats726]

What surprised me was the fact that he took about a half dozen shots at Bill B and the Patriots organization. He blames thier success and the rise of Saban, Mangni and Crennel on the fact that more organizations are becoming more closed to the media. He was livid over the fact that these guys do not give full accounts of injury information and limit access directly to the players. He compared it to the access that baseball and basketball writers get to the locker rooms.

What was funny is how he presented the issue. He started talking about how the best society is one with free and open information. His attitude on the importance of an independent press being vital to liberty, while on the one hand commedable, seemed a bit over the top for football. (Somehow I have trouble seeing the rise of a police state resulting from the restrictions to football injury information, but I am not a member of the press.)

In addition he was highly critcle of the NFL network, team websites, team news branches and team radio broadcasts. Apprently free media is dire straights from the fact that these entities can get better access, release information faster, but would be beholden to the NFL or an NFL team, thus not be as objective and critcle as is warrented.

I could not help but think at the end of the interview, what is this guys real issue? Is that he actually thinks that covering sports is such a corner stone of free society? Or is it that he wants the teams to make it easy as possible to do his job and offer no competition to him?

Also can this help explain why some in the Boston print media are so hyper criticle of the Patriots? Given the fact that BB is not going to do thier job for them and the fact that the Patriots have PFW, PVN, Patriots Today, Patriots Web Radio and all the information on their website they see the entire organization limiting thier access and simulatenously competing with them for the audience?

Good find..Borges is a big member of that organization SOOO why not have the same anti-BB crap???? His issue is that they are all part of dinosaurs from years gone past...when things were done in certain ways..It's an interesting argument..but how farther than football does this schmo really extend his words?? Is he critical of the whole politics of secrecy in the government?? In Corporations?? Other private groups??
I think it MORE important in those areas..more than in sports...it's a bit laughable..if it wasn't so serious. How much does this have to do with the changing OF the media in general..I think a lot..dinosaurs..that is what they are!!! I think it explains some..but why is it writers like Mike Reiss and Tom Curran can deal with it..no BIG complaints and some of the others are full of it????

 

[sarge]

Hey, they guy had some decent points. The media is there to report news and BB and Sabin treat their respective organizations like communist countries.

But in most cases they do not report the news.

They give there biased opinion of what is going on, and only report the facts that further there agenda.

Corey Dillon for instance. Many times in the past the man has given an interview and been deystroyed the following day in print.

So he decides not to give anymore interviews, and the press cries about it!

They feel they are entitled to the news. They are not!

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

The only thing that has gone too far is what Patchick mentioned about not even allowing the regular media on the sidelines in games. This is way overboard, and was done by the NFL.

As far as individual coaches like Belichick, he can control info any way he pleases, just like in any other business. If AT+T develops some gizmo, they expect their employees to keep quiet until the gizmo is on the market.

And it is an outright injustice that injuried players have to tell the world anything about an injury. This puts the player's health at grave risk. This is an awful abuse which is done simply to help gamblers. Maybe this keeps gamblers from trying to get info from an organization thru inside sources, but it is the single worst thing that the NFL does to a player. To document, in detail, an injury that a player is suffering thru, and send it to the opposing team is an amazing injustice.

When Belichick tries to conceal a player's injury, he is PROTECTING that player from further injury, as much as he can. Anyone who disagrees with this is treating these players like a piece of meat.

 

[Pats726]

The only thing that has gone too far is what Patchick mentioned about not even allowing the regular media on the sidelines in games. This is way overboard, and was done by the NFL.

As far as individual coaches like Belichick, he can control info any way he pleases, just like in any other business. If AT+T develops some gizmo, they expect their employees to keep quiet until the gizmo is on the market.

And it is an outright injustice that injuried players have to tell the world anything about an injury. This puts the player's health at grave risk. This is an awful abuse which is done simply to help gamblers. Maybe this keeps gamblers from trying to get info from an organization thru inside sources, but it is the single worst thing that the NFL does to a player. To document, in detail, an injury that a player is suffering thru, and send it to the opposing team is an amazing injustice.

When Belichick tries to conceal a player's injury, he is PROTECTING that player from further injury, as much as he can. Anyone who disagrees with this is treating these players like a piece of meat.

I totally agree about disclosing a players injury..in fact that may be in conflict with HIPAA privacy rules...I agree what BB does is a TEAM thing..
As far as the NFL goes, keeping local media away is just plain scary and NOT in the best interests of anyone. NFL controls like that are not good at all..when in fact they were begging for media to cover the NFL years before..This may have a LOT to do with money and demanding more from local stations..How much of the "sport" does the NFL own?? WHat other extremes could they go to???
It is NOT the same as 20 years ago with the net and such and some writers want that cushy situation and NOT have to do anything for stories...having all kinds of exclusives handed to them..How much do message boards like this have to do with it?? How it changes things??
WHy is it only SOME writers that complain...the ones who have been entreched and vcan not adjust to the new world of media???? NOTE: Borges is the only writer allowed to vote for hall of Fame players..he represents New England in that..it's all very scary!! I do wish to know more about the Writer's Association and their agenda..

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

Don't even mention how the Hall of Fame voting is run......What a nightmare.

 

[bunzoburns]

F*** Him

God forbide he has to work for a living and he is not handed everything on a silver platter. He's just pissed that he actually has to work.

Belichick's job is to win football games...

 

[edzo44]

He was livid over the fact that these guys do not give full accounts of injury information and limit access directly to the players. He compared it to the access that baseball and basketball writers get to the locker rooms.

What was funny is how he presented the issue. He started talking about how the best society is one with free and open information. His attitude on the importance of an independent press being vital to liberty, while on the one hand commedable, seemed a bit over the top for football. (Somehow I have trouble seeing the rise of a police state resulting from the restrictions to football injury information, but I am not a member of the press.)

If he really believes in "full and open information" then obviously he and Borges should have no problem naming their sources for their sometimes biased and inflammatory inuendoes and accusations about players and coaches that until now have been totally unsubstantiated because of source supposed "protection" issues. Can't have it both ways. You want access to players and coaches, fine, BUT you won't get the access until you give the coaches and players the names of your supposed sources for all the unsubstantiated rumors and accusations the media are always touting about the players and coaches. One is supposed to be able to face their accusers, not be hung out to dry on hearsay. Let's make it a two way street. Yeah, right, they'll have no problem with that concept!?!?

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

Touche' !!

 

[Coast2CoastPatsFan]

Perhaps the guy is a fantasy football fanatic.

 

[njpatsfan]

Hey, it's not like the guy advocated releasing classified information that would allow terrorist to avoid detection ....

R

 

[mgcolby]

When Belichick tries to conceal a player's injury, he is PROTECTING that player from further injury, as much as he can. Anyone who disagrees with this is treating these players like a piece of meat.

I am sure that is part of it, but I think affecting the opposing teams preparation is the main reason. If the player is that hurt he will most likely sit, but by not disclosing the exact details or the severity of the injury it forces the opposing team to prepare for that player and his backup.

Remember how pissed BB was after the Atlanta game last year?

 

[RayClay]

I was driving to work this morning with NFL radio on, and they were having an interview with David Elfin, head of the ProFootball Writers Association.

What surprised me was the fact that he took about a half dozen shots at Bill B and the Patriots organization. He blames thier success and the rise of Saban, Mangni and Crennel on the fact that more organizations are becoming more closed to the media. He was livid over the fact that these guys do not give full accounts of injury information and limit access directly to the players. He compared it to the access that baseball and basketball writers get to the locker rooms.

What was funny is how he presented the issue. He started talking about how the best society is one with free and open information. His attitude on the importance of an independent press being vital to liberty, while on the one hand commedable, seemed a bit over the top for football. (Somehow I have trouble seeing the rise of a police state resulting from the restrictions to football injury information, but I am not a member of the press.)

In addition he was highly critcle of the NFL network, team websites, team news branches and team radio broadcasts. Apprently free media is dire straights from the fact that these entities can get better access, release information faster, but would be beholden to the NFL or an NFL team, thus not be as objective and critcle as is warrented.

I could not help but think at the end of the interview, what is this guys real issue? Is that he actually thinks that covering sports is such a corner stone of free society? Or is it that he wants the teams to make it easy as possible to do his job and offer no competition to him?

Also can this help explain why some in the Boston print media are so hyper criticle of the Patriots? Given the fact that BB is not going to do thier job for them and the fact that the Patriots have PFW, PVN, Patriots Today, Patriots Web Radio and all the information on their website they see the entire organization limiting thier access and simulatenously competing with them for the audience?

Says it all.