Bryan Price's Anti-Media Rant Said a Lot More Than Just 77 F-Bombs

There a couple things in baseball that are always going to be funny:

• Players fraternizing on the field during “fights.”
• Bullpen cars.
• A well-groomed 80s-style mustache.
• Bob Uecker’s anecdotes.
• A good old fashioned managerial tirade.

Whenever we have a rant, like we saw on Monday with Reds’ manager Bryan Price dropping 77 f-bombs in just under six minutes, everyone laughs about it. We think of Lee Elia or Tommy Lasorda and snicker at grown men with potty mouths. Frustration and losing your cool comes with the territory of managing in the Majors. It’s not easy when your job is in the spotlight for a six-month regular season, plus spring training, and if you’re lucky, the postseason. Day in, day out, you’re answering questions from the media before and after the game.

Meltdowns are bound to happen. Everyone is human.

Beneath the surface of Price’s profanity is a major disconnect about the relationship between the team and the media. One of the undercurrent themes of 2015 is the outward manifestation of pro athletes’ distaste for being asked questions. We saw it all week during the Super Bowl with Marshawn Lynch and later frequently in the Oklahoma City Thunder locker room.

Thanks to social media, if an athlete wants to express themselves to the world, it’s a tap of the phone away.

But in this instance, Price wasn’t upset about being asked banal questions. His anger was directed at the fundamental aspect of reporters doing their job: reporting news. Enquirer Reds beat writer C. Trent Rosecrans, gasp, did his job reporting catcher Devin Mesoraco wasn’t in the ballpark on Sunday and it infuriated Price since the other team could use that information as an advantage. This one quote, cut through all the profanity, is telling:

"“How the f*** does that benefit the Reds? It doesn’t benefit us one f****** bit.”"

The answer: it doesn’t and it’s not supposed to that.

Beat writers get paid the same salary whether the team they’re covering wins a game or loses a game. Maybe this is one of the biggest misconceptions between people who consume sports media and those who produce it. Yes, occasionally the old “no cheering in the press box” adage is violated, but more often than not reporters do their best to stay objective toward the teams they’re covering. Unlike players or managers, I’d guess 99.9 percent of the men and women covering Major League Baseball don’t lose a wink of sleep after a “bad loss.” Sure reporters might develop an affinity for some of the people they cover and if asked, they’d want them to do well, but it’s not all that high on the agenda.

If anything, the beat writers root for one thing: good stories. (And quick, nine-inning games.)

This line can often be blurred when it comes to television and radio, since they’re employed, in part, by the teams and being a “homer” is part of the job. I’d be lying if I didn’t admit there aren’t agendas or biases aren’t formed over time, but those tend to be exceptions to the rule.

Also blurring the line? Technology. In yesteryear, i.e. about 1999, teams needed and wanted media attention. Without newspaper writers following the team on a daily basis, it was difficult for teams to reach out to fans outside of radio or TV broadcasts. Now with technological advances, teams can basically cover themselves and disseminate information digitally and reach millions of eyeballs without relying on the members of the Fifth Estate all that much.

Take baseball, with the MLB app, a fan can get every relevant highlight, stat or piece of information at the press of a finger each and every day without so much as going to another media site. The downside is that each story penned by an MLB.com beat writer contains the line, “This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs,” meaning although the league or teams isn’t censoring information, you’re unlikely to get very much critical analysis or investigative work, rather by-the-number reporting — which suits a need for most fans over a 162-game season.

More and more, you just wonder whether or not teams will restrict access to reporters and use their own in-house stuff to pass along information — information they deem relevant — to fans, be it through the web, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, SnapChat or whatever. Price, and other like-minded thinkers, would want it that way.

On Tuesday Price doubled down, saying he stood by the content of his message, which further illustrates the disconnect.

Even so the fact remains so long as independent media — practicing the tenets of journalism — is allowed to cover professional sports on a daily basis, guys like Price need to realize guys like Rosecrans have a job, too. Price is supposed to do whatever he can to help the Reds win, which is hardly a writer’s job description. The sooner both sides accept this, the better for everyone involved.

If not we might push closer to a world where only one side exists, if we aren’t there already.