There are islands of competence and even charm out there. And obviously, if you're reading this, you're not included in that criticism. (You are clearly brilliant, beyond reproach, and already reading the right things, you sexy devil, you.) The NFL Network does a decent enough job of sounding human-esque, but even that may be the most damning criticism of all: the NFL's official network, owned and operated by the league, feels greater independence and exhibits greater candor than those covering it.
A quick survey of NFL stories viewed by someone who has never seen a single NFL game, and who might be confused about what the game is, would probably divine that it was a contract-based game of real estate acquisition. Half the news concerns contracts, negotiations thereof, and rumors surrounding various parties' happiness or unhappiness in the situation. It's essentially the real estate section of the New York Times, complete with the story of someone far richer than you insisting how they're more than happy with their fifth-floor walkup Victor Cruz.
After passing through the real estate section of NFL coverage, there is the rumors section. This is usually naked advancement of owners' and management's opinions regarding players, and the strangest part of the NFL media's formula: a bootlicking fealty to the sport's landlords that transcends what could even be considered reasonable. Take out the obviously repellent and unsuccessful Daniel Snyder, the deranged fax machines running the Oakland franchise, and Bud Adams, and every other owner successfully feeds precisely what they want to hear into the local media without question.
*Try to find an NFL columnist who takes a quote from an owner directly who then does not turn around and say "I came away impressed" by said owner. Owners are very rich men, and reporters are evidently really impressed by even moderate amounts of wealth.
It's less "writing about football" than "business reporting that smells like filthy jockstrap," and it carries the same vernacular of confidence games, tautological assumptions of confidence, and backroom rumor leakage. And like business reporting, it rarely sees fit to correct itself even in the face of mounting evidence that someone, despite holding a title and a position of importance, might be utterly and evidentially incompetent. There is not an NFL studio crew commentary that doesn't start a discussion of a coach without mentioning what a good man he is; there is not a GM who doesn't "get it."
