THE SPORT COUNT

A great player, a great writer.

I’ve often wondered whether athletes stand to gain much from blogging. Evidently Rod Benson — a man lauded more often for his way with words than his impressive play on the court — has had similar thoughts:

Is there a certain line [with blogging] that should not be crossed, and even if I think so, does the NBA, or any pro-league that has blogging players, feel like that line should be more conservative?

Honesty and openness are rarely rewarded in the sport world; cliché soundbites are expected and encouraged by sportswriters keen on easy angles, and safe pull quotes (‘breaking news: athlete works hard, thinks of the team first’).

As is often the case, it comes down to money: a lack of personality is fantastic for the bottom line. Advertisers want athletes who project strength, achievement, and a blandly likable demeanour. Major corporations won’t sign cheques for outsized personalities.

Nike don’t want you to know what LeBron James had for breakfast — they’d prefer you didn’t think of LeBron eating at all. Or going to the bathroom, or lying on his couch, watching The Hills. They want you to imagine LeBron in the gym, training hard, earning his money, striving for excellence above all else.

The thinking is obvious. If you’re in the business of selling shoes, athletes shouldn’t speak; they should act as screens upon which the everyday aspirations of ‘the everyman’ can be projected. They shouldn’t be interesting, or intimidating, or strange, or fun.

Michael Jordan — the model of corporate success for athletes worldwide — desperately strived to be consistently inoffensive. When in doubt, he closed his mouth, lest his words hurt the Swoosh:

In 1990, America watched a neck-and-neck North Carolina Senate race that was as close to a morality play as an election gets. Republican incumbent Jesse Helms, a spiteful right-winger and a barely reconstructed segregationist, was running a racially tinged campaign against the up-and-coming black mayor of Charlotte, Democrat Harvey Gantt.

It was clear for weeks leading up to the election that the race would turn on a narrow margin, and it occurred to Gantt’s backers that a certain beloved native of the state could make a huge impact on the race with a single quote or a brief photo op. So they approached Michael Jordan. Declining to get involved, Jordan offered this explanation: “Republicans buy sneakers too.”

Republicans read blogs too. And, sometimes, it’s a Republican who signs the cheques at the team you’re trying out for.

Think of Bryan Colangelo, whose dad funds a pack of anti-abortion freaks. Would Bryan pass on a top-notch prospect who has expressed liberal sentiment in his blog? Of course not. But if he was in any doubt about offering a contract, surely a ‘pro-choice’ button on a player’s site couldn’t help.

On BDL. Should be in NBA.

So, what’s the incentive to blog? It entertains the punters, it offers a way to blow off steam, and — most importantly — it connects you to the fans that enjoy your work. It should come as no surprise that Gilbert Arenas and Rod Benson are so beloved by serious basketball fans (The Sport Count included). Benson is the charismatic underdog, Arenas the endearingly idiosyncratic league favourite.

When you watch Arenas play, it’s all the more satisfying for knowing that he’ll be playing Halo later that night, and lounging in his extraordinary pool. There’s a relationship there, however superficial.

But does our knowledge of Gilbert’s semi-odd life hurt his ability to score major marketing money? Is it worth the hassle of naysayers and lazy sportswriters constantly questioning his priorities? And is it true, as Benson writes, that general managers view a player’s blog as a ‘red flag’?

For the sake of literate basketball fans everywhere, let’s hope not.

Posted By: Anton

Cheers to Australian league marksman (and great blogger) John Rillie for the Benson tip.