MEDIA vs ATHLETES

A heated debate has been in the process on the popular show First Take @ESPN_FirstTake and in the twittersphere between Skip Bayless  @realskipbayless and Jalen Rose @jalenrose. This was initiated by Rose calling out Bayless on what he is saying was a lie. Bayless claimed to have started for a high school state championship team and that he was a shoot first point guard who had to learn to pass first. Rose did some research and found that Bayless didn't start Varsity until his senior year and averaged only 1.4 ppg. He also only started a minimal amount of games.

All of this is irrelevant and none of it makes Bayless a liar. He could have been a shoot first PG on junior varsity just the same. And his ppg lead to his point of needing to be a pass first PG. This debate has spread into a hotter debate of whether the media has the right to criticize professional athletes if they themselves have never played. What do I think of this...

ABSOLUTELY the media has that right. The media makes people stars. Time and again when things start to go bad these athletes hate the media, but when that same media is praising them and spreading their name across the land they love them. How ridiculous is this? Less than a third of current NBA general managers have played professional basketball. GM's may arguably be the most important critics and many of them haven't been players, so why can't media rightly critique these players?

I see this as another case of spoiled and pampered athletes who aren't used to being told something bad about themselves trying to whine their way out of being critiqued. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and if we see an ugly game we will be quick to put the truth out there. To the athletes I say: Suck it up, practice harder, and don't be afraid of a little constructive criticism!