What’s the point?
Posted by disappointmentzone on 27 March 2007
The Plain Dealer ran an interview with Browns GM Phil Savage today, under the headline “Draft outlook remains blurry.” It’s a suitable headline. There are a lot of quotes in the article, as you would expect from an interview piece. But for as much space as Savage is given, he reveals practically nothing. Which is not a surprise. There is absolutely no way that Savage would divulge any important draft information in a newspaper interview. Doing so would be grounds for dismissal.
I’m not going to ask the purpose of running such an article, but it would be nice if Savage were able to speak openly at least for a moment, if only so that he could say, “Look, I know you want me to talk about what the Browns are going to do in the draft. But there is no way I’m giving you a straightforward answer and I may very well try to purposefully mislead you. Ask all the questions you want but know those are the terms of the interview. It’s nothing personal. I’m just doing my job. If you care about the Browns, you’ll understand why I can’t speak honestly. It’s just the way it is”
Of course Savage cannot say those things — it would smack of arrogance, for one — but it would be nice to see the PD run a disclaimer at the beginning of the article to let the layperson know what they are reading. Any football fan knows that the GM isn’t giving up information a month before the draft. People who know and care about football know that Savage cannot — should not — answer the questions asked, at least not fully and/or truthfully. They’d only be reading the article to see if Savage screwed up in his duties to be obtuse. The layperson, however, might not know how these things work and might instead take Savage as speaking candidly. And if this were Savage speaking candidly then the whole enterprise of interviewing him would pretty much be shot and he’d looking incompetent. So why not take this opportunity to teach those laypeople something about football (and all sports, really). Namely, why general managers cannot speak candidly prior to the draft on matters concerning the team’s possible draft options. Instead of running an article that’s pretty much worthless to football fans and confusing/frustrating to non football fans — straddling the fence and satisfying no one — the PD ought to hope down on one side and do its readership (or part of its readership) a service.
That said, why am I fretting about Grossi’s reading of Savage when Grossi writes that Savage gave the impression that he is higher on Peterson than he is on Thomas? Thomas before Peterson. Thomas before Peterson. Thomas before Peterson.