An ‘Enemies’ List at ESPN? Say What? An Interview with Sportsline’s Mike Freeman
Uncategorized March 12th. 2007, 3:16pm
We’ve been a bit negligent in regards to interviewing sports media members of late, but this one’s worth the wait. After much cajoling, we got Sportsline’s Mike Freeman to open up to us about … well, everything. Freeman has enjoyed a distinguished print journalism career, having covered the NFL for the New York Times. And he published perhaps the definitive book on ESPN, and he also wrote a book about Jim Brown. Freeman’s also famous (notorious?) for this epic rant against sportswriters. Then there was his George O’Leary moment. He talks with us candidly about all of this. There’s a hilarious Mike Lupica anecdote and ripping of Brady Quinn. Sorry about the photo - Freeman swore to us he had nothing worthy of submission.
Q: The legendary Sportspages ‘letter on unprofessionalism,’ for our money, is one of the coolest, most ballsy things ever accomplished. You must have pissed some people off with it. Why’d you do it, what was the reaction the day after it was published, and do people still look at you with a crooked eye because of it? What’s the best story to come of that that’s never been told?
Oh boy, the Sportspages.com rant. I wrote that like I was the Unabomber sitting in a log cabin at an undisclosed location wearing a diaper and drinking Jack while listening to Public Enemy with an oversized portrait of Malcolm X on the wall behind me.
You want to know what’s funny? One of the guys I criticized was Mike Lupica. He told someone afterwards that criticizing him was like “throwing spitballs at a battleship.” That line still cracks me up. The thought of a guy that diminutive comparing himself to a battleship is just funny to me. Okay, maybe I am the only one who finds it amusing. I’ll move on now.
The Sportspages rant was the end result of facing severe racial double standards in the business from some writers, including a handful in New York. Then there was one terribly racist act by several of the writers covering the Jets at the time (and one NFL writer) and I had seen enough.
It was your prototypical case of someone reaching a boiling point.
Let me back up. It is always amusing when I hear cracks from right wingers about the liberal media. I have not yet seen this legion of liberal writers in sports. Many sports journalists I have known are extremely conservative and few have people of different ethnicities as close friends. This leads to all kinds of problems. When I was covering the Patriots in Boston, I got into a stupid argument with another beat writer (who is now a columnist in the New England area) who ended it by saying: “You dress like a black pimp.” True story. I actually dressed more like Urkel with a touch of Michael Irvin. But I digress.
Not long after that I go to New York. Some of the football writers there had applied for the same job I would eventually receive. Here I was this young black kid in his 20s and all of these older white guys were furious I got the position over them. Thus it was ugly from the start with some of them (emphasis on some).
Later, some actually started saying the only reason I got scoops was because I was black and the players were black (a PR guy also said this). Then came some of them discussing the race of the women I was dating.
Some writers used to play touch football before the locker room and press conferences started. We were a bunch of out of shape fat boys but it was fun. Once I was changing into a pair of sneakers in the press room when a writer sitting near me (who was not playing) said: “I hate the sight of black people’s feet.”
What…the…hell? He said that. He actually said that. He was not kidding. I assume he likes white feet. Or Pakistani feet. Or maybe he loves the toes of American Indians. I don’t know.
There were a few other things. I once broke a Jets story while covering the Giants and wrote a few interesting things here and there about the Jets while covering the league. This angered some of the Jets writers. Several of them went to members of the coaching staff and began repeating the same, old crap about how I only got stories because I was black. Except some of the dolts told coaches I knew on the staff. The coaches of course told me. I was rightfully furious. This stuff and other incidents I have not mentioned had been going on for years (with other black writers as well). I subsequently went to my bunker, pumped the Public Enemy and cranked out that rant.
You asked about the reaction. A lot of people loved it; a lot of people hated it. I probably heard from a total of several hundred people over a period of several weeks either by e-mail, phone or in person and most people, I came to realize, hate the way some in the New York sports media operate and treats one another and supported what I wrote. Others felt I should have just kept my mouth shut. To this day, I will be in a locker room somewhere and someone will say: “Damn, do you remember that Sportspages rant?”
There is no pride (or shame) in what I did. I just felt like it needed to be done and that was the forum for it. I’m beginning to think something like that needs to be done again based on some of the things I am hearing now. If I was some of the women, in particular, working in New York, I would be seriously concerned about some of the stuff being said about them. I mean terribly nasty rumors about lesbians and affairs and oh, God, just awful stuff.
Basically, I don’t speak to many of the New York football writers when I see them. One or two guys, I wish I could pull them aside, and make amends. Break bread over the bullshit they pulled with me and me retaliate. I really do not lose any sleep over pissing some of the others off. There are some writers in New York where if they hate you, that is actually a badge of honor.
Others are not bad people; they just behave reprehensibly when threatened or challenged or forced to work hard. Many people (another clarifier: not all) in our business are remarkably insecure. In New York, people would be shocked at the pack journalism that occurs there (I’m mainly talking football here). It is fairly disgraceful. That is why I like reading Ralph and Hutch and a few others. They always have things no one else does because they really work at it.
Then there are other New York writers who are great people and I remain friends with them to this day.
Q: You were a columnist at the Indy Star for a few seconds until they realized you pulled a George O’Leary and didn’t actually get the degree you had on your resume. Did the paper find it out, or did someone tip them off? After it happened, did the thought ever cross your mind that you may never write again?
Dumbest thing I ever did or ever will do. There are no excuses and I have never made any. Never will either. I’ll get my degree this summer or fall and start my pursuit of an advanced degree the following spring.
You basically asked if I was ratted out. The answer is yes. Someone called the paper. I don’t know who. The paper would not tell me. But one thing I am going to do for my book is hire an attorney to discover who did it (I had heard from several lawyers at the time who believed — and still do – that I had a strong legal case for tortious interference). Then I want to confront the person and write a chapter about the entire experience.
Q: What’s the deal with your boy Gregg Doyel? Why does everyone always have beef with him? (We actually think his mailbags are someone funny.)
Gregg is a good dude except when he is constantly lobbying our bosses to be on the front page and make his column mug shot bigger. Just kidding. One of many things I like about what we do at SportsLine is that we are not slaves to the athletes and teams. We like who we like but we do not care as much as certain other websites about what the athletes or teams think of us (or media types for that matter). We’re not constant ass kissers. Gregg epitomizes that. His opinions are tough and raw. He has been very fun to work with. He looks funny in glasses though. Like a pubescent Jack Bauer.
Q: You were at the New York Times, a big-dog in Jacksonville, and are now at Sportsline. Plusses and minuses of working in print vs. website?
It is very interesting having spent most of my life in newspapers – internships in college at the Washington Post, Boston Globe and Associated Press, and full-time gigs at the Dallas Morning News, Boston Globe, Washington Post, a dozen years at the New York Times and then working as a columnist for the Florida Times-Union — and now writing for CBS SportsLine.com. You hear a lot of reasons for the demise of newspapers and the growth of the Internet. Many are valid and some are more important than others. Now having worked in both mediums I can definitively say one reason for the troubles of newspapers is something few people talk about and it has to do with work ethic.
Too many newspapers have become lazy; too many newspaper reporters have become lazy. No one in the industry wants to discuss this. This is not everyone in newspapers of course but almost everyone I know writing for the Internet works far longer hours and writes more than most newspaper guys I know. It is not even close. I think readers know this and appreciate the difference.
When I was covering football in New York, there were a handful of guys who worked their asses off (and still do now). Guys like Ralph Vacchiano and the person who works harder than anyone I have ever met in almost two decades in this business, Jay Glazer, among others (who now writes for Fox Sports). But they were few are far between. Most guys relied heavily on the PR people and pack reporting; spent more time playing golf and in some cases chasing strippers and hookers than they did working at their jobs. Then if you didn’t join in, you were ostracized, and attacked.
(One reporter that used to work the football beat in New York constantly broke stories. He was terrific. In order to compensate for getting their asses kicked, a few New York writers, with aid from an NFL team PR guy, concocted and spread a lie that the reporter was paying players for information. It was complete bullshit.)
I’m writing a book about the sports journalism business. Another example I remember is there was a football beat writer who during training camp used to disappear for hours in the middle of the day to go to softball games play golf and then some of the other writers would phone quotes and info to him. Eventually, he got yanked from the beat by his editors. He walked up to me one day and said: “You’re the reason why I’m getting taken off the beat. All that shit you write.” He blamed me for his own laziness. Then a group of other reporters stopped talking to me for a few weeks as some sort of weird punishment. It was like fourth grade.
Some of this laziness is the fault of the newspapers. Some pay like crap and this breeds bitterness. Some ask a writer or editor to do the work of two and three people and then wonder why so many people get burned out or take shortcuts or make mistakes. Some are laying people off when they really do not have to.
I am not saying websites are perfect or are immune from any of this. I have just been amazed at how much work websites do compared to newspapers. At our site the number of bylines, notes and blogs written by guys like Pete Prisco, Clark Judge, Dennis Dodd, and Gary Parish, among others, is incredible. Scott Miller, who covers baseball for us, writes as much as anyone I have ever seen. At ESPN.com Buster Olney is a machine. Jason Cole at Yahoo and Peter King at SI.com are constantly writing and producing. So does Glazer at Foxsports.com.
Again, this is not about all newspaper writers. When I was in Jacksonville, I was stunned by the work ethic of Garry Smits the general assignment and golf writer for the Times-Union. Dave Hutchinson who dominates the Jets beat for the Newark Star-Ledger is one of the harder working guys I have ever met.
The Internet allows you to write constantly and many web writers take advantage of that apparatus.
Newspapers are also resisting the inevitable day when all newspaper content is put online. Currently newspapers are like aircraft carriers out to sea trying to make a large turn. Newspapers have had a centuries-old lead but the slowness in recognizing change as well as cockiness and being lethargic are as big a reason for the loss of that dominance as any other.
It is only a matter of time before many newspapers are forced to provide all of their content exclusively online. Much of the Internet, including some of the better blogs, are forms of journalism simply utilizing a different delivery system.
Q: March Madness is upon us. Your Final Four picks, please.
Here are my Final Four picks: Blake, Chris Richardson, Melinda and Lakisha. You did mean American Idol, right?
Q: You are big on the NFL, so perhaps can help us with this: A) Why is a non-event such as the NFL combine so heavily written about, B) Are we the only ones who’d take Quinn over J Russell, and C) When someone like Nate Clements gets $80 million, do you throw up a little bit in your mouth?
I wrote a book several years ago examining the NFL and why it was so popular and people love football for three main reasons: Americans enjoy violence, it is a great television sport (and we watch lots of TV) and you can gamble on it. There you have it. The love of football in a nutshell. If we could have a sport where participants blasted each other with guns and someone kept score that would be even more popular because Americans love their firearms, too.
I covered the combine when it was not nearly as popular as it is now. You literally only had a handful of reporters there chasing coaches, and the coaches in turn chased women, and between the skirt chasing and recording 40-times, the coaches would stop and spend as much time with them as we wanted. Now, it is like a Spielberg production. It’s all slick and official and even the skirt chasing is no longer so public.
The reason the combine has become wildly popular coincides with the rise of the website and blogs and to some degree the rise of ESPN. Shows and websites have lots of space and airtime to fill and there is a large group of football fans that eat this stuff up. I’m sure Mel Kiper’s lovely hair plays some factor in the rise of the combine as well.
As for Brady Quinn, he is by far the most overrated quarterback prospect in perhaps the last 10 to 15 years. I cannot believe the nonsense some in the media say about the guy. I’ve seen most of his big games and he is just not very impressive against better competition. A lot of NFL writers are in love with his size and his whiteness. I look at him and see Kerry Collins. Not a bad player but both possess what one scout called “shrinking violet syndrome.” In big games, Quinn was non-existent. He never led his team to a huge win against a formidable opponent. If I was an NFL team, that would scare me. But then again what do I know. I love the show “Cold Pizza.”
Q: Pro Football talk floated it, then you made a blind item out of it, and we went and put it all together: Sean Salisbury’s cell phone ordeal. Did you hear from him at all? You surprised all he got was a week’s suspension? Along those same lines … can blogs have an impact on reporting?
You know firsthand blogs can have an impact, Mr. or Mrs. Big Lead. A huge impact. You have had an impact. So have other sites like Profootballtalk.com, one of my favorites. In general, they are good things.
This is what I like most about blogs and alternative websites. I am one of the few people that gets ripped on the site Sportsjournalists.com but still enjoys and respects the site. Here is why. A significant number of people in our business have become remarkably arrogant. One of my pet peeves is that a number of journalists commit plagiarism, crimes, cheat on their wives, lie all the time, steal information from other writers, etc. But only a select few are busted and punished. The system will try to crush one person for committing a sin while ignoring and even protecting many others.
What SJ.com and other blogs do is level the playing field (a bit) and serve as a sort of watchdog. Reporters hate admitting this but that is true. SJ.com has its faults. There is some terribly racist and sexist stuff on the site and there are anonymous writers bitter about being beat out for a job by someone or taken off a beat/threatened to be taken off a beat, who then use SJ.com as a way to retaliate. Doing so anonymously. But for the most part it is a good thing.
(I do wonder, however: how many other professions have something similar to SJ.com? Are there doctors out there ripping each other the way writers rip each other on SJ.com? Are the doctors writing under the name Bitteryoungdoc and saying: “That Dr. Johnson couldn’t use a scalpel if his life depended on it.” Is there a neurosurgeons.com?)
As for the broadcaster who shall never be named, I just thought what he was doing was so repugnant I had to write something. Some of the executives at ESPN think I hate the network based on the book I wrote about them. I’ll say this again. They have some of the best reporters I have ever seen including Ed Werder, Chris Mortensen and host of others. Buster Olney might be the best pure journalist I have ever seen (he also has some classic stories about what it is like dealing with other media on the Yankees beat).
If I really wanted to rip the network and write a tell-all, I would have written about the numerous affairs some of the anchors have had, the other sexual harassment incidents I learned about that failed to make the book, and many, many other sordid things. But I wrote what I believe is a thoughtful book that examined the rise of one of the most powerful media entities in history. All of the ugly stuff just didn’t fit.
The problem with some people at ESPN is the same problem that afflicts many people across many different professions and that is arrogance. Management allows some of that jock culture that exists in Bristol to run rampant. Not all the time. Not constantly. But enough. The broadcaster who shall never be named is a symbol of that arrogance.
You will also find this interesting regarding ESPN: several high ranking people there that I trust, informed me recently the network has composed an ‘enemies’ list. An actual list known only to a few high ranking people. The people on the list are banned from appearing on the television side. If this is true, it is very Nixonian stuff. What’s next, wiretaps?
I have the names of some of the banned people provided to me by my sources and it is pretty amusing. Let’s put it this way: If I were the guy who runs Deadspin.com or Jason Whitlock, I’d hire an official food taster. Or borrow some body armor. Don’t worry, Sir Big Lead, I don’t think you’re on the list.
Q: Sportsline writers aside, who are your top 3 reads in sports journalism today?
My top three writers might be considered a little unusual. To me, the clear No. 1 is Michael Wilbon. I judge columnists by talent and work ethic and few columnists in the past 20 years have traveled as much as Mike, written as much as he has and are as talented. The hardest part of this job is getting on planes and trains and Mike has done that consistently. Plus he cranks out great columns. While he is doing more television now he has always been the hardest working columnist I have seen. He does not write
once or twice a week. He does not leave games at halftime or write off the television. He has written three and four times a week consistently for decades. Work ethic counts when you are describing top writers.
Wilbon has also done something only two or three people maybe in the history of our business have accomplished and that is be extremely talented, high profile, and make gobs of money all while not engendering jealously. Dave Anderson and Bill Plaschke are two others. Not many more after that. Actually, none after that. Think about it. How many people of Wilbon’s abilities are normally hated in our business solely because they are talented and are highly successful? Or because they became arrogant jackasses? None of that has happened to Mike and it says a lot about him.
My second favorite is Bob Ryan for a lot of the same reasons. In the past year I have seen Bob Ryan everywhere: big events, small events, on media buses, everywhere. He travels extensively and writes a clever, hard nosed column. Plus, he has prospered in a tough media town.
My third favorite is someone I believe is the most underrated in the country and that’s Lisa Olson from the New York Daily News. She should be the lead columnist at the Daily News. When you read her consistently you see she has tremendous ability. I think that if Lisa were a man, she would be held in much higher regard.
48 Responses to “An ‘Enemies’ List at ESPN? Say What? An Interview with Sportsline’s Mike Freeman”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

March 12th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
great interview. Freeman writes some good stuff sometimes. but let me be the first to point out that Michael Irvin DOES dress like a black pimp. there is nothing wrong with that comparison - it’s not racist, it’s fashion-related. Lupica comparing himself to a battleship is priceless.
March 12th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
great interview, but with just one small quibble with what Freeman says. To say that there are no liberal sportwriters strikes me as absurd. I don’t question his contentions about racism in newsrooms, but everytime an issue of social-cultural import beyond sports arises, sportwriters opine as one in favor of the liberal position. Not a big deal, just find it hard to believe he doesn’t see that perspective when saying there is a myth about legions of liberal sportswriters.
March 12th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
I thought I saw Lupica on a train once. He really does look bigger on the Lucky Charms box.
March 12th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
This was good stuff. Racism, sexism, jealousy, infighting, infidelity, sabotage, harrassment - DAMN!!!!!!
Wow!!!
only one thing missing - he left out the homos.
March 12th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Bill Plaschke? Really?
March 12th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
Here’s a controversial p.o.v. I don’t think they’re are many good female sportswriters out there. Maybe in the next generation there will be, but that’s how I feel. I think some of them get these jobs because they are women and it turns alot of people off AND the kicker is that then these people don’t give those who can write a chance because of it.
March 12th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
And, clearly by bitching about women sportswriters and then typing “they’re are” I’ve shown that I am an ass.
March 12th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
Why are some female writers not very good? Writing style? Grammar? Content? Incompetence? Why specifically do you feel some get jobs because they’re women?
March 12th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
Which of the following does not belong with the others?
(a) Jared Lorenzen
(b) USS Theodore Roosevelt
(c) Mike Lupica
(d) USS Missouri
answer: (b)
The USS Theodore Roosevelt is an aircraft carrier
March 12th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
This is just from my experience reading sportspages. They aren’t bad because they are women (not like you need testicles to write about sports). I do think, though, that when these women were growing up, it wasn’t A) okay or at least as accepted for women to be obsessed with sports so B) it leaves a smaller pool of sportsfans from which sportswriters are culled. I’d like to think it’s just statistics, and the next generation will be better.
I hope I don’t come off as sexist, but there are not many female sportswriters I’ve read who I think are great writers. Are there some out there I should check out? Freeman mentioned Lisa Olson, anyone else?
March 12th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
Selena Roberts at the NYT is outstanding.
Funny, funny stuff, Awful Chief.
March 12th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Interesting interview — enjoyed it, and he’s spot-on about the arrogance of ESPN. But am I the only one who thought Freeman came off as a bit hypocritical in supposedly “owning up” to falsifying his resume and in the next breath saying he wanted to sue someone for exposing his lie? To me, that makes it sound like he’s a lot less sorry about lying on his resume than he is about getting caught.
March 12th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
Kornheiser told a great story about a year ago on how Lupica went all diva on him when he dropped in on a taping of “The Sports Reporters” just after Tony had gotten the MNF booth job. Apparently, Mike threw an off-air hissy fit, though he would never say what exactly he was hissying about.
(And as for the liberal media thing — Have you ever read the Wednesday political column the Daily News has given Mike? Makes him sound like Keith Olbermann’s angry midget older brother.)
March 12th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
Good interview. Freeman makes some good points with problems facing newspapers. But I still feel it hard to get by the point he falsified his resume. And now he wants to turn around sue the dude who outed him? Huh? Shouldn’t the Indy Star or whomever hired him have the right to sue Freeman instead? I think so.
I find it funny a guy like Freeman who breaks all this inside dirt on people at ESPN, does not quite like it when people go messing around in his personal background. Sort of a joke. And its not even his personal background, its his professional background which has a direct correlation to his work.
I love this site but you should not praise this guy just because he is willing to rip on ESPN & other writers.
March 12th, 2007 at 10:06 pm
Sorry, I have to add more. For Freeman to write an article on “unprofessionalism” when he has no leg to stand on, is absurb. I can’t think of a more “unprofessional” thing than falsifying your resume with a bogus degree. And from what I understand, he lied about having a college degree, which I think is the worst thing you can falsify on a resume. It’s not like he said he had Power Point or Excel skills when he did not, he lied about a thing that is a huge bare minimum for qualifying for many jobs.
Sorry, but I think this is worst than Salisbury taking pictures of his junk. Then to even consider trying to sue a guy who was actually telling the truth about Freeman’s background, is beyond ridiculous. Especially for a writer who loves to uncover inside info & the real truth. Freeman is a hypocrite & the Big Lead needs to get off his jock.
March 12th, 2007 at 10:56 pm
jay- right on, you hit the nail on the head (and sweet name). TBL is completley hypocritical and it shows often, I love it when they call out others for the same shit they do and glorify. The more I come to this site, the more all of that is apparant.
March 12th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
Great interview. Personally I could care less that he lied on his resume. Sure, it’s both ridiculous and hypocritical but it only reflects on him and not what he writes. I’m still inclined to believe nearly everything he says about backstabbing and bigotry in sports journalism and the general sordidness and paranoia lurking behind the flashy, booming facade of the Worldwide Leader. His insights ring true. I don’t have a hard time believing that an industry dominated by middle-aged white guys is shot through with racism or sexism, or that ESPN’s rise to prominence is riddled with all kinds of suspicious misconduct. There’s a good reason so many sports fans despise, for example, Jay Mariotti and detest the Disneyfication Sportstainment! veneer that ESPN shoves down our throats on a daily basis. Freeman just says things that a lot of people think but he does it fearlessly in a public forum.
March 12th, 2007 at 11:27 pm
It’s probably just us, but comparing lying on a resume, which we assume many people have done, to taking pictures of your junk and showing it to female coworkers, are completely different things.
March 12th, 2007 at 11:28 pm
I cant really comment one way or the other but I will say on the “hard news” beat the shit Freeman talked about is real and twice as bad
I just wish once BET would be given credit for the Budweiser Sports Report which Valerio and ESPN ripped off
March 12th, 2007 at 11:46 pm
Good God —– If Freeman was such as balls-out journalist he would name names. Instead, it’s the same old sportswriters’ circle-the-wagons crap. And if a guy is that good, how in hell has he had something like 50 jobs with most of the movement lateral or downward. The New York Times to the Jacksonville Times-Union????????? Yeah, that’s the ticket.
Oh, I almost forgot. He could have been in Indianapolis but the truth got in the way. What a journalist!!!
The only thing dopier that this crap was your piece with Andy (Panda) Marchand. And whatever happened to that cockroach?…..
March 13th, 2007 at 12:21 am
Great interview. I am definitely buying the book. I would have to agree about Wilbon as well. I was introduced to him via PTI but his writing is great too.
March 13th, 2007 at 12:22 am
He lied about having a degree he did not have. That’s big. I don’t know of too many people who do that. O’Leary did it, and he got crucified like he should have. I understand people pump themselves up on their resume, where they may say they were a asst. manager when they were only a sales clerk. But I am sure you’re aware of what just having a 4-year degree qualifies you for. Think of all the jobs & opportunities you’re officially disqualified for just by not having a 4-year degree. I am sure he probably would not have been even considered to be hired at most of the places he worked without having the bare minimum of a 4-year degree. And Freeman knew how important it was to have a degree to get jobs at these places, because why else would he lie about it?
It’s sort of hard to take Freeman’s rants on “unprofessional” journalism & dishing the dirt about ESPN when his whole career hinges in large part on a big lie which opened doors that very well would not have been opened without a degree. Again, I love this site, but I just don’t understand why you feel the need to promote this guy. Still can’t believe Freeman wants to sue a guy for pointing out the truth about his resume.
March 13th, 2007 at 12:27 am
When Freeman mentioned Lupica, I thought about The Sports Reporters and vomited in my mouth a little bit.
By the way, I would pay good money to read the tell-all, and I mean ALL, book about ESPN. Please tell me you have dirt on Erin Andrews…
March 13th, 2007 at 1:28 am
Great read. I think the problem that Freeman has in identifying conservative vs. liberal writers is the misconception that liberal = friendly to minorities, while conservative = trying to hold minorities down. Not to politicize things, but since that is not the case (although it is a popular stereotype), then perhaps his perception of the situation is incorrect.
March 13th, 2007 at 1:34 am
Loved Cleaver’s “circle the wagons” reference. Perfectly put. Freeman’s just another in a long line of print putzes who hide behind the veneer of “in the public interest.” Frauds like this guy are lucky it’s so hard for an aggrieved party to win a libel suit. What a creep……..
March 13th, 2007 at 1:47 am
Mike Freeman is my hero!
March 13th, 2007 at 2:22 am
You guys just outed yourselves. If anyone at ESPN had lied on their resume you would have been on their jock like a two dollar hooker. Except the hooker doesn’t hide who she is and put up this fronts about being pure.
Where where you when Mr. Leitch convicted Puljos about taking steroids. I wish Puljos’ trainer would have taken Albert on his offer to sue those who started this lie. Then Leitch acts like nothing ever happened when the Cardinals won the world series. Where is that reporting aren’t you guys held to the same standards.
I guess you give passes to those who blow and rim you and those who use strap-ons get no benefit of the doubt.
Tell Mr. Freeman to get laid and get out of people’s business. Mr. Liar needs to look in the mirror before he can judge anyone else.
March 13th, 2007 at 2:33 am
One wrong + one wrong = you are the judge, jury, and excutioner on what is an acceptable wrong and what isn’t. Aren’t we acting like ESPN and Deadspin, better be careful Deadspin has more pull than ESPN does in this area. You don’t want to step on Leitch’s feet or an all out war will happen.
March 13th, 2007 at 3:10 am
Rim - There was a direct connection between Pujols and the trainer. And then the trainer and Grimsley. Don’t recall the post you speak of, but connecting them isn’t convicting anyone.
As for Freeman … the guy lied on his resume. He is apologetic and admitted the error in his ways. He says he’s getting his degree. Do you want blood?
Also, I have no clue what your second post says.
March 13th, 2007 at 3:54 am
If he did not convict him why did Leitch apologize. Also why was Olbermann and Letich the only people that were brought up with the thought of the lawsuit. Use google search.
March 13th, 2007 at 3:58 am
Sounds to me that this hypocrite Freeman was trying to get hired by ESPN but couldn’t. Mark Shapiro must have already filled his “gasbag quota” that month. Then he writes a book with more errors than a kindergarten homework assignment and wants to be taken seriously. Where do I puke?
March 13th, 2007 at 5:02 am
I love it when the hatas come out.
Look at their thought pattern.
Freedman is totally impervious.
Can’t say that for folks at ESPn or those other useless rags that deminishing in circulation.
March 13th, 2007 at 5:07 am
Sir-
Mr. Freeman did something in indisputable poor judgment. He admits he was wrong and doesn’t deny or profer some extraordinary tale to explain away his wrong actions.
Apparently, his work is good enough that, despite not having a degree, he has proven his mettle.
Is the contention that he should never work again?
George O’leary is working again.
March 13th, 2007 at 5:45 am
So TBL, how do ya feel posting an interview with a guy whos dick you’re riding hard that the majority of the people dislike and disrespect… you’re doing a better job than I am of making people realize just what this site is all about. You judge others from your high horse hiding behind a site name and prove time and time again that you lack credibility and integrity, qualities that many of the writers/institutions you continually bash possess. I liked this site when I first came to it, then it became filled with your meaningless opinions, which when you really think about it, means no more then any opinion left by anybody that comments here, or anybody else at all for that matter. The worst thing that could have happened to you was PTI putting that sign with your website on it on the air. Know your role, you’re measly bloggers, you’re barley a blip on the sport radar scene. Keep it informative and semi-humorous, throw in some hot bitches like you do… and leave the opinionated material to the experts. Like ESPN.
March 13th, 2007 at 7:18 am
A few thoughts–
1. Yeah, its hard to gain credibility when you lie so blatantly about it, apologize and then contemplate suing the guy who called you out. That being said, building a body of work can help with the reconciliation and give you some of your credibility back.
2. I also think that you guys would have gone ape shit if you found out that Stu Scott didn’t actually finish his degree at Carolina, or if person X on ESPN lied on their resume… you guys seem to have it out for the worldwide leader, sometimes its valid, sometimes its not… we’ll see in future events
3. jay the Most Hated, I’ve read several of your posts and have to ask… why in the hell do you keep coming back here? Its pretty obvious that you pretty much disagree with TBL on practically everything (or at least like to tweak them on numerous occasions) Is it just b/c you like to argue and need someone to sound off to?
4. As a young, white man I fear the day when I’m lumped into the category of “middle aged white men” b/c they seem to be the whipping boy for anybody who wants to make a generalized claim that a group/demographic of people are racists.
5. Ahhh the sports reporters… oh how i miss Dick Schapp.
March 13th, 2007 at 9:36 am
Here’s Freeman’s “rant” from the Wayback Machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/20001109173200/http://www.sportspages.com/pages/freeman.htm
March 13th, 2007 at 10:03 am
I have no problem with him lying about his degree, but I also see the point about his complaining about “profesionalism” seeming ridiculous in light of it.
– How is calling someone dressed like a black pimp a “black pimp” racist?
March 13th, 2007 at 10:05 am
“Why are some female writers not very good? Writing style? Grammar? Content? Incompetence? Why specifically do you feel some get jobs because they’re women?”
Female sportswriters, by and large, are lousy because they know nothing about sports. It’s really that simple. They run in social circles and have friends that are not 100% obsessed with sports like a lot of guys are.
Not that this is a well rounded life, but dating back to the time I was 8 I’ve been playing or talking about sports all day every day with my friends going over every angle. Think of all of the women you have ever met or known… do any of them do this?
Of course not. So now they try to write about a subject they have only a passing knowledge of and, of course, they suck.
There might be one or two exceptions out there, but I can’t say I’ve ever seen a female sportswriter who from a purely knowledge standpoint knows more than most of my guy friends about sports.
March 13th, 2007 at 11:54 am
Justin - Think you’re right about angry Jay. He’s probably just mad because we don’t fawn over Mark McGwire.
March 13th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
This site is pretty decent but why in hell do you blow all credibility with pieces about people like Freeman and Marchand. Freeman is just an always angry phony with a new area code every few months. Marchand is a rodent who’d get flunked out of a high school journalism class and gets his “scoops” in the sewer and has zero credibility. You should be outing these garbagemen instead of giving them another fradulent forum.
March 13th, 2007 at 6:47 pm
Justin - you’re somewhat right, I have strong opinions and I like to share them… but they wouldn’t be so negative if it weren’t for the material put on this site. TBL likes to try and cut so many others down, especially ESPN (who MADE TBL, wether they like it or not) and I think they need a little of that themselves. And its obviously getting to them since they got a hard on once someone questioned me and left some dumb remark about Mark McGwire… like I said I really enjoyed this site at first but time always reveals the truth about anybody, and as time has gone by the truth about this site is that its run by complete hypocrites with no courage or mettle. How weak do you have to be to never put your name on ANYTHING? So if this site wants to continually shit on ESPN and other established companies and individuals, then its gonna have an asshole named jay The Most Hated on here everyday reminding them just how insignificant they really are.
Listen, I’m all about people being creative and trying to be succesful in our world, which is what these bloggers are trying to do, I get that. I was all for it at first, but reading over and over again about everything they hate about ESPN, Bill Simmons, etc… they’re just trying to make a name for themselves at the expense of someone who is better at it then they are… and thats not cool. Add to all of that that its pretty obvious that whoever runs this site are total babies who get scared watching hockey, and all of it is pretty hard to respect. So until the baby girls that run this site man up and earn some credibility and respect, you can get used to my comments because I do not care if they bother you. I love sports more than anything in this world (except pussy) and I think these bloggers are making it worse, not better… and besides deadspin (which I cannot seem to sign up to, or I’d be doing the same there) this seems to be the leader of the blogging pack, so what better place to voice my opinion. Everybody needs to be checked, looks like I’m the one thats going to check this site. And for the record, I am a nice guy. With that being said, if you dont like me… go fuck yourself.
March 13th, 2007 at 7:14 pm
Great, insightful interview. Whether you like or dislike Freeman, he raises interesting discussion points — and that’s a part of what great columnists do, provoke thoughts.
As for the subject of female sportswriters, I disagree that women are overall worse writers.
I think women are held under the microscope and picked and ripped apart for every undotted i or uncrossed t, or eveytime we don’t know a statistic off the top of our head. As a double minority, you have to work twice as hard to get half the respect and that can be emotionally draining when you’re facing those sorts of daily pressures.
That’s not an excuse, just context.
Besides, there are more untalented white male sportswriters young and old who compared to minorites and women — just look at the numbers.
Furthermore, since when did knowing how many RBIs Gary Sheffield had two years ago make someone a more qualified candidate to write sports stories?
March 13th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
If in fact many people lie on their resumes (as you say you assume), that’s not acceptable. Secondly, if there are various falsehoods on resumes, the kind of deliberate falsehood on Freeman’s resume is about as big as they come. Yes his words now say he was wrong, but his planned actions say something different, ie to hire a lawyer and sue someone. His behavior says more than his words do. And why would a character defect such as this not also play out in all other aspects of his life? I’m more concerned about the recipients or innocent bystanders victimized by persons with deep character flaws than the perpetrator.
March 13th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
“Spitwads against a battleship” is not a Lupica original. The great Jim Murray came up with that phrase in describing the impact of boycotting the Olympic Games on geopolitical events.
March 13th, 2007 at 10:10 pm
With all this talk about female sportswriters I thought I’d point out that Jemele is doing a fantastic job on 1st and 10, and on Page 2.
March 13th, 2007 at 11:48 pm
“I think women are held under the microscope and picked and ripped apart for every undotted i or uncrossed t, or eveytime we don’t know a statistic off the top of our head. As a double minority, you have to work twice as hard to get half the respect and that can be emotionally draining when you’re facing those sorts of daily pressures.”
This actually doesn’t even come close to addressing the point. Name me one female sportswriter who has a strong working knowledge of sports.
March 15th, 2007 at 4:20 am
Mike talks about arrogance in the business. He drops a bomb on every big name he can think of and then cast aspersions anonymously on other people. He might be right about a lot of those people, but it just smacks me as arrogant to become the judge of everything moral in the sportswriting business, especially if you had problems with ethics yourself and women. (I seem to remember a story in Washingtonian magazine about the problems between he and and former flame).
March 15th, 2007 at 4:39 am
Mike,
Only two points of concern:
1. Bob Ryan. The guy threatened a woman on a Boston radio station a few years back and got a 30-day sit down from the Globe. Mr. Ryan is known to have views about women, and violence towards women, that make Bristol look like a haven of respect and common decency. A truly vile creature and a thug, that’s Bob Ryan.
2. Using American Idol references for a Final Four answer. The show exemplifies the worst in our culture. What’s next: Grand Theft Auto references to describe a well-fought game?