Rocketboom's found a replacement for the hard-to-replace Amanda Congdon. And by the looks of this video, the real Amanda Congdon has nothing to worry about.
Friday, July 07, 2006
Pirates Of The Carribean - Walt Disney Uses You Tube - Film At A Theater Near You
Walt Disney's become the first company to employ You Tube -- the video distribution website -- to promote it's new movie Pirates of The Carribean. This article in Online Media Daily explains that YouTube's new ad division's fielding calls from a number of companies that wish to use its system for promotions.
I think this development will cause the infamous YouTube copywrite problem to diminish as the very companies that complain of "illegal use of content" finally figure out that they're getting great exposure.
I think this development will cause the infamous YouTube copywrite problem to diminish as the very companies that complain of "illegal use of content" finally figure out that they're getting great exposure.
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
Rocketboom - Amanda Congdon Sounds Off On What Happened To End Rocketboom As We Know It
Amanda Congdon wrote her explaination of what happened to end Rocketboom as we know it, in her blog. Here it is below.
I am disheartened by Andrew Baron's decision to spread misinformation. He knows I cannot move to LA without a job...but insists on spinning things this way to shore up his assertion that I am "walking away" from Rocketboom. I did not walk away. I did not accept Andrew's idea of "partnership". I'll explain more a little further down.
It's not true. I'm presently living with my parents in Connecticut until I can get back on my feet.
Below you will find a letter written by Andrew on Sunday, June 25, two days after he pulled the plug on Rocketboom. My responses, which were sent to Andrew on the same day, are in red (italics here).
Andrew responded the next day by saying he would not respond to this letter. This then was followed by days of back and forth negotiations, ending yesterday, on Independence Day, with Andrew telling Chuck Olsen, our mediator, that he was taking control of the show and my option was to be the "face" of rocketboom with no involvement beyond that (I might in the future be allow to "produce shows", but not for the time being). Very old media. Considering I have personally written, produced, and hosted Rocketboom and was already a producer on Jet Set, this was totally unacceptable. I don't know any "partnership" that functions like that.
I had hoped to keep things civil, and thought my video message to the Rocketboom viewers was very neutral. I felt the need to communicate with the RB audience, without getting into the nitty-gritty of "he said, she said". Dirty laundry is not attractive. That said, ALL the facts, at this point, based on Andrew's actions, need to be presented.
...
Dear Amanda, this is my last attempt to reach out and let you know I really wish you would stay.
Andrew, you fired me.
After everything that has built up over the last several months (and longer apparently) and with everything I have learned about your disinterest in my various levels of critical input, I can understand why you would need to leave and I as I have always said, I will never hold you back.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I've repeatedly expressed my respect for your many gifts. Especially:
1. You are an exceptional executive producer. Your instincts for what will work or not, and your general vision for the creation of content and distribution for videoblogs is, I believe, unparalleled.
2. You are an exceptional speaker. Whether at conferences, in business meetings or during consulting, you excel at describing the power of Rocketboom and the medium.
3. You are an ingenious curator. Your extraction of outstanding content from all resources is, again, unparalleled.
4. You are a superb navigator of the blogosphere. Additionally, I have always entrusted you with the final decisions of the physical design of Rocketboom.
In fact, it saddens me that you have not had the time and/or willingness to significantly participate creatively in Rocketboom for some months now. We've sent you things during the production process, and what we've received back is criticism after the show has already been produced or after it is too late to make changes. Statements like "I'll continue to check my blackberry but please dont wait on me if it starts to slow you down" and "I will have my phone so I can still chime in but dont feel ever wait on me for any answers if I cant respond in time" really don't cut it.
As you know, when I gave you the 49% of Rocketboom I told you that I hoped it would work out and that the reason why I gave you that percentage was so that you would become involved enough to stay with the company.
I have always been and still am intensely involved in Rocketboom.
Since I told you so many times that I would never want to hold you back from moving on to L.A. to pursue your own thing - since you always said this was really your passion well before I met you -we agreed that you would not take the 49% if you were to move away to L.A. on your own.
That is completely incorrect. There was no agreement about forfeiture of the 49%. We together have had a detailed plan for some time in preparation for the move to LA. And please note I was moving to LA on Rocketboom business, not only to "do my own thing". You did say you would never hold me back, and you also made it clear that doing Rocketboom would not be mutually exclusive of pursuing other passions. Our plan was as follows:
5/05 Amanda told Andrew she was serious about moving to LA by 10/05. Andrew agreed and said that was completely reasonable, since current technology allows Rocketboom to be produced from anywhere.
10/05 Amanda and Mario stored their possessions, gave up their apartment and took a sublet in preparation for the move. Andrew was fully aware.
10/05-4/06 Amanda and Mario continued to sublet. The move was repeatedly delayed, long beyond the original "completely reasonable" time frame. Finally, with Andrew's consent, Rocketboom moved forward to actual transition.
4/06 A plan was implemented for Andrew and Mario to co-direct shoots, gradually transitioning Mario to be interim director. A new professional director was to be hired in LA. What actually happened was that Andrew attended shoots infrequently and by 5/06 had stopped attending altogether.
5/21/06 At this time, the term of Amanda and Mario's sublet was up. Andrew had not attended shoots for nearly a month, and there would be no Rocketboom paycheck for June. Nevertheless, production continued by Amanda and Mario at Amanda's parents' home in Connecticut.
6/16/06 Andrew, Mario and Amanda agreed upon a departure date for LA within the next couple of weeks. Within the next few days, June 30th was chosen. Andrew's assistant had a list of possible editors in LA (which was never delivered to Amanda despite numerous requests). Zadi and Steve were excited to have Amanda nearby to better co-produce Rocketboom's project, The Jet Set Show.
6/23/06 Mario received a call from Andrew in essence saying that Mario and Amanda must either move back to New York or Rocketboom was over.
Since you have claimed that you are moving next week, and because you have never suggested a plan for how this move can integrate into Rocketboom, and because you have already said your goodbye, I get the message and will now move on myself the best I can.
Andrew, see our long term and extensive plan described above.
And, as it turns out, I cannot move to LA because our plan was for me to be engaged in, and compensated for, work on Rocketboom there. Since you will no longer allow that, I have no source of income and therefore cannot move.
With regards to tomorrow's show and the future of Rocketboom, I am not sure what I will do, but you will be honored and respected and encouraged. My plan is to simply say that you are moving on to L.A. to take on the world, that this was always your dream and that you are a obviously a brilliant personality who will no doubt take it by storm.
Please do not speak for me. We've had a long standing agreement in good faith about me continuing Rocketboom from LA, which you have now reneged upon.
Should anyone react and consider the move to be a shame, I will always defend you for following your own dreams and aspirations and staying true to your own interests with acting and now producing.
Again, please do not speak for me. My dreams and aspirations included Rocketboom.
You have wanted to move to L.A. since before I met you, so I am sorry that we could not manage getting there sooner together with Rocketboom still working.
As we've both acknowledged, Rocketboom could not only work but grow stronger by having a presence on both coasts.
With all my love and support for you as a friend, I will never stop caring about you and will always look forward to seeing you bloom.
Andrew, I've said repeatedly that I think you are a genius. Still, there have been problems. Recently, you have treated me as an employee rather than a partner. That may explain your feelings about the 49%.
Business and production can and should be done from both coasts, as we have both acknowledged. To dictate where I live is unnecessary and outrageous and has resulted in the present situation.
And Andrew, our agreement stands. I do own 49% of Rocketboom.
With respect to our show, I suggest we delve into the archives and do a "best of" week. This will allow us some time to work things through.
We had an agreement, Andrew. You should honor it.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Andrew
Sincerely,
Amanda
posted by Amanda at 5:42 PM on Jul 05 2006
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
This is my -- Zennie's -- response to Amanda's blog post.
Sad. Tearfully sad to read, because the problem is obvious to me as I read this.
To look back, Andrew recruited you via his Craiglist post, but obviously -- even by his most current words expressed here -- failed to consider how your role would evolve.
When I started "SBS Personalities" I had (and have) this simple rule: "My job is to make you a star." Think about that for 30 seconds. It means that if I place you in a role to present an image, it's not only my job to promote you in that role, but to make sure your needs and desires are catered to.
I took on that idea because I knew four-square that such a relationship materializes anyway once the person in the "image" role becomes a hit.
Andrew forgot -- indeed, didn't know -- that he was placing you in this position. Moreover, and I think this is where he felt he was losing control as your popularity grew, "Rocketboom" became not so much your story, but you, your brother, and your boyfriend as a vehicle and Andrew probably believed your relationship with him was deteriorating to the point where the show was no longer fun for him.
In other words, Andrew may have felt -- I don't know him -- that he was becoming an "appendage" with every moment and with every "ally" you brought into the picture: brother, boyfriend, etc. I can see his point of view, but my approach would have been to really make sure we've got a detailed corporate structure in place, where you're a corporation with stock.
Why?
Because under that umbrella you can distribute stock to brother, boyfriend, etc, and Andrew can still have his 51 percent. But it would cause you to figure out how much stock you -- and Andrew -- were willing to give up to the others. Or just pay them, where they become employees.
See?
Having written this, your relationship can be repaired, if you like. If you like. If you like (again). But what you have to return to is what you like about doing Rocketboom, and each other. Then really hash out the matter of who does what and the real big issue -- starting a company.
Funny. At Vloggercon I told Andrew this is what he needed to do.
I think the two of your are stronger as a team rather than separate. Amanda, you've clearly established a name for yourself and will go far. Andrew's new version of Rocketboom will not be the success it was because it lacks you.
Plus, there's the other problem: how do you, Andrew, regain the confidence and support of sponsors like Earthlink? This spat is public. Everyone of note is seeing it. It will impact the value of your sponsorships, and not in a good way.
In closing, I wish you God's speed. I believe Amanda that you have a singular talent and wit, and business savvy. I certainly see that, and I think all you wanted was to be seen as the great business woman that you are.
That's nothing to be ashamed of.
Amanda Congdon Fired From Rocketboom - Heads To LA??
Amanda Congdon -- in my view the business side of Rocketboom -- has been fired. As her vlog reports -- complete with an upside down map -- she's no longer with the organization she owned 49 percent of. I met Amanda at Vloggercon and -- as I told her -- came away convinced that she was developing a good business head.
I also explained to Andrew Baron that they seemed to work as brother and sister. Rocketboom -- at the time I talked to Andrew at Vloggercon -- lacked a real corporate structure, other than being an LLC without stock. If Amanda owns 49 percent of Rocketboom and there's no Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws to govern "who's bringing what" to the total value of the Rocketboom LLC, then Amanda could claim that her 49 percent is the "image" of Rocketboom, and thus be paid a royalty for each time Andrew uses a rerun in the future.
For his part, Andrew uses the RB blog to explain what happened:
"RB Announcement:
Amanda Congdon has decided to move to L.A. to pursue opportunities that have arisen for her in Hollywood.
We wanted to meet her request to move production out to L.A., however, we are a small company and have not been able to figure out a way to make it work, financially and in many other ways at this time. So sadly we bid Amanda adieu and wish her all the best.
Rocketboom goes on.
Andrew Baron, the founder and creator of Rocketboom, will stay with the company in New York and will continue to produce and direct the show. We are in the daunting process of recruiting a replacement for Amanda.
While Amanda will be sorely missed, we have big plans for Rocketboom and are determined to make the show better than ever.
After Field Week and a week on hiatus, we know that you are hungry for the news! Rocketboom will be back with a news episode and an interim host this MONDAY, JULY 10. "
....and certainly less than the 250,000 daily viewers the show drew with Amanda Congdon. What Andrew and others are about to get is a hard and tough business lesson: image rules on the Internet. Andrew took an unknown and made her known without a solid plan to build a business around her as her popularity grew.
It was obvious that he was in uncharterted water with this business venture. Now, he's got to dig himself out of a hole he's created. His ability to do that will be the test of his business savvy and determination.
But first, I'd give one more crack at working things out with Amanda. She's going to be huge -- can I say "huger" -- with or without Andrew. If I were him, I'd take the "with."
The idea of having a Hollywood location is totally workable, and at Vloggercon Andrew Baron talked about -- heck, bragged about -- the number of "Rocketboom correspondents" that were nationwide. So they could have worked out something.
The real truth's out there....
I also explained to Andrew Baron that they seemed to work as brother and sister. Rocketboom -- at the time I talked to Andrew at Vloggercon -- lacked a real corporate structure, other than being an LLC without stock. If Amanda owns 49 percent of Rocketboom and there's no Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws to govern "who's bringing what" to the total value of the Rocketboom LLC, then Amanda could claim that her 49 percent is the "image" of Rocketboom, and thus be paid a royalty for each time Andrew uses a rerun in the future.
For his part, Andrew uses the RB blog to explain what happened:
"RB Announcement:
Amanda Congdon has decided to move to L.A. to pursue opportunities that have arisen for her in Hollywood.
We wanted to meet her request to move production out to L.A., however, we are a small company and have not been able to figure out a way to make it work, financially and in many other ways at this time. So sadly we bid Amanda adieu and wish her all the best.
Rocketboom goes on.
Andrew Baron, the founder and creator of Rocketboom, will stay with the company in New York and will continue to produce and direct the show. We are in the daunting process of recruiting a replacement for Amanda.
While Amanda will be sorely missed, we have big plans for Rocketboom and are determined to make the show better than ever.
After Field Week and a week on hiatus, we know that you are hungry for the news! Rocketboom will be back with a news episode and an interim host this MONDAY, JULY 10. "
....and certainly less than the 250,000 daily viewers the show drew with Amanda Congdon. What Andrew and others are about to get is a hard and tough business lesson: image rules on the Internet. Andrew took an unknown and made her known without a solid plan to build a business around her as her popularity grew.
It was obvious that he was in uncharterted water with this business venture. Now, he's got to dig himself out of a hole he's created. His ability to do that will be the test of his business savvy and determination.
But first, I'd give one more crack at working things out with Amanda. She's going to be huge -- can I say "huger" -- with or without Andrew. If I were him, I'd take the "with."
The idea of having a Hollywood location is totally workable, and at Vloggercon Andrew Baron talked about -- heck, bragged about -- the number of "Rocketboom correspondents" that were nationwide. So they could have worked out something.
The real truth's out there....
This video was originally shared on blip.tv by unboomed with a No license (All rights reserved) license.
Hello folks!
Now a part of the SBS blog, I'm looking forward to contributing more material to coincide with the NFL's upcoming season. GO SEAHAWKS!
Monday, July 03, 2006
SI's Michael Silver Tells Denise Debartolo York To Give The 49ers Back to Eddie Debatolo
And I agree. Mike's rather funny "letter" to her, recently posted on the SI website, is chocked full of good observations on how the NFL would welcome "Mr. D" back to football.
It's worth reading. But in case SI takes it down, here it is:
Dear Mrs. York,
I know we haven't spoken much over the years, and your husband and I certainly won't be yukking it up on the golf course anytime soon, so I thought I'd try writing.
Simply put, I have some free advice for you, a small suggestion that can get you the key to the city of San Francisco and a free pass to heaven (upon reaching the afterlife) in one bold stroke.
Give your brother back his football team.
There, I said it. And if you've got a few minutes, I'll explain everything.
Why listen to me, you ask? Having grown up in L.A. rooting for the 49ers before your family purchased the franchise, I know what it's like to be the maligned standard-bearer of an impotent organization, and I can relate to the ridicule and scorn to which you and some of your family members are subjected by the 49ers faithful. Having covered Joe Montana on a daily basis -- and, not coincidentally, having parlayed my years as a Niners beat writer for the Santa Rosa Press Democrat into a gig covering the NFL for Sports Illustrated -- I am qualified to comment on miracle comebacks.
In your case, it will take a doozy ... the ownership equivalent of The Catch. After staying in the shadows while your brother, Eddie DeBartolo, became the best owner in sports, presiding over a franchise that won five Super Bowls in 14 years and went nearly two decades without a losing streak, you took over the team, ceded managing power to your husband, John, and watched the organization plummet to laughingstock status. I could (and will) give a long, sordid detailing of the 49ers' demise, but the Cliffs Notes version is that the product on the field stinks, and many of your employees hate coming to work each day.
Back to Eddie for a moment: You may have seen my story in last week's SI -- or perhaps you've read some of the reaction pieces, many of them irresponsibly reported, in which a quote from your brother expressing his desire to get back into the NFL, and even pondering the idea of buying the Raiders and moving them to L.A., is somehow proven to be "wrong." It has also been erroneously reported that he and I had this conversation at the Super Bowl Reunion gala he threw in Vegas a couple of months ago, which is a tale as tall as the replica Eiffel Tower behind the Paris Hotel and Casino where the event was staged.
But I digress. The story's most important revelation was that, according to Jerry Jones and another prominent NFL owner, they'd lobby their peers to approve your brother's re-entry should he attempt to purchase a team. Both insist Eddie would be approved, and with commissioner Paul Tagliabue set to retire and a new wave of progressive owners in place, I believe them.
That is a somewhat stunning development, given the way in which Eddie made his inglorious exit eight years ago. Certainly you remember it well, since you and your husband had front-row seats. Embroiled in a Louisiana gaming scandal that would soon land him under federal indictment -- Eddie had been shaken down by former governor Edwin Edwards while attempting to secure a riverboat casino license -- your brother followed the advice of his closest confidante, then-49ers president Carmen Policy, and ceded control of the team to you, who owned the other 50 percent. Tagliabue, fearful of the investigation's gambling overtones and potential legal consequences, approved of the switch as well.
From that point on, Eddie was considered toxic waste, a disgraced felon-to-be who'd never again be allowed to come within 500 feet of an NFL owners' meeting. He ended up pleading to a reasonably minor felony -- failing to report an extortion attempt -- and was given two years' probation. He also paid a $1 million fine to the NFL.
But the real killer for Eddie was that despite more than a year's worth of behind-the-scenes maneuverings in an effort to regain control of the team, he lost his pride and joy. Other than his wife and daughters, the 49ers were what Eddie loved most, and -- let's not mince words -- you played a significant role in taking them away. Sure, as Eddie would admit, his own recklessness and awful judgment made the takeover possible in the first place. But rather than serving as a supportive sibling, you reacted more like a scorned spouse or punitive parent, blocking his attempts to regain control. Finally, you gave up your share of the family real-estate empire in exchange for a franchise that, it seems to me, you had very little desire to operate.
Now, even though I probably could, I'm not going to rehash every petty detail in the blood feud between you and your brother. If he has taken the high road and forgiven you, at least to the point where the two of you speak semiregularly (even if he and your husband most assuredly don't), it's not my place to instigate.
That said, let me at least remind you of the rage you reportedly felt when Eddie's legal problems and free spending coalesced: You made a point of taking away his private jet, as if to reprimand him for his impunity. I imagine that you, as the hardworking, clean-living, behind-the-scenes achiever, resented the way your brother, with his charm and largesse, sucked up the bulk of the attention while sometimes screwing up along the way.
I'm sure you had your reasons for being angry, and none of us -- and certainly not your brother -- is perfect. From what I can tell, you are a woman who has done many, many generous and noble things for various charities and organizations. Your aversion to publicity seems utterly sincere (we all remember the time you made a mad dash out of a luxury box to avoid those Monday Night Football cameras), and under your husband's management the franchise slowly seems to be making some hopeful strides.
On the other hand, things aren't exactly Super in San Francisco. The team has gone 13-35 over the past three seasons. The once-lengthy waiting list for season tickets has all but dried up, and the stadium situation is deplorable. That bond measure to allocate public funding to help build a mall and stadium complex in Hunter's Point, the one that narrowly passed after your brother and Policy's indefatigable campaigning? It's all but dead, and there doesn't seem to be a viable alternative on the horizon.
I could go on and on about the mess of a front office, how a bunch of whiz kids who think they're the NFL's answer to Moneyball buzz around the halls of the team facility acting like every other league talent evaluator is misguided. Instead I'll keep it positive: Mike Nolan seems to be a capable head coach, and I applaud you for being willing to spend more money on player salaries since he arrived.
Still, it's hard for me to believe that you're passionate about owning this football team. Your husband seems to enjoy being the man in charge, and word is that he now hopes to groom your son Jed as his successor.
That's one vision. Now here's a better one: Rid yourself of this headache. Move on. Do the practical thing. Do the right thing.
Look, it's not that complicated. Your brother has tons of money now and wants back into the NFL. The other owners would welcome him back. Forget all this talk about the Raiders, Saints and Bucs. Sell the team to Eddie and they'll hold a parade down Market Street in your honor.
Oh, and while you're at it, could you switch the uniforms back to the old red-and-gold?
Sincerely,
Michael Silver
Sunday, July 02, 2006
Wonder Woman Movie Director Josh Whedon's Reported Script Trouble Scaring The Heck Out Of Wonder Woman Fans
Recently Wonder Woman Movie Director Josh Whedon did an interview where he said he found the script he's writing -- repeat, he's writing -- troubling. This bit of news sent Wonder Woman fans at Ultimate Wonder into a frenzy, with many fearing that the movie would be just terrible -- if it ever was made.
In this video below, Whedon' talks about his approach to the Wonder Woman Movie script.
In this video below, Whedon' talks about his approach to the Wonder Woman Movie script.
Saturday, July 01, 2006
ProFootballTalk.com's Cries Of "Reverse Discrmination" Are Down Right Silly
ProFootballTalk.com has interesting posts more often than not, but this one is down right silly. I'll post it first, then respond to it:
WHISPERS OF REVERSE DISCRIMINATION CONTINUE
In the wake of the recent hiring of Tony Softli by the Rams and Don Gregory by the Panthers, there continue to be whispers in league circles that teams are more willing to grant permission to African-American front-office candidates than they are for white candidates.
Under NFL rules, the only promotion in a new city that a team cannot block is a promotion that gives the employee "final say" authority over the roster, the draft, and/or the coach. For any promotion short of one in which "final say" is involved, teams can block front-office employees who are currently under contract.
Some league insiders are troubled by the fact that white front-office employees have been barred from non-"final say" promotions. Most recently, Patriors exec Tom Dimitroff (who is white) was refused permission to interview for the Rams' V.P./Player Personnel gig, which ultimately went to Softli.
Meanwhile, guys like Softli, Gregory, and former Broncos assistant G.M. Rick Smith (all of whom are African-American) received permission to leave their former teams for jobs that did not entail "final say" authority in a new city.
But other league insiders dispute the notion that teams are applying a double standard when deciding who gets permission and who doesn't. In Softli's case, for example, the strong thinking is that he got permission to leave not so that the Panthers could curry favor with the Fritz Pollard Alliance, but because the team was ready to see him go after he had spent two years or more scampering for a bigger gig elsewhere.
Also, it's our understanding that the search resulting in the hiring of Gregory to replace Softli included at least one white scout from another team who received permission to interview for the job, even though he was still under contract.
But regardless of whether African-American candidates are or are not receiving preferential treatment when it comes to getting permission under circumstances where permission can be denied, the human-nature reality of the situation is that the NFL's efforts to place more minorities into high-profile positions will prompt the guys who feel they're getting the short end of the stick to say so privately.
---------------------------------
Here's why that's totally silly. First, white front office candidates have been getting favorable treatment for over 100 years of pro football in America. During this time there were few complaints of discrimination. But in the 21st Century when a group of young, talented, professionally trained African Americans armed with experience and degrees -- in some cases Masters Degrees like me -- emerges and are considered for and get high-paying, high-profile front office jobs, some white candidates cry "reverse discrimination" and then go to ProFootballTalk.com, which publishes it.
I've seen ProFootballTalk.com show pictures of African Americans in ways that could be considered completely racist -- like the one where a photo of "Chef" from South Park was used to represent Raiders Head Coach Art Shell
(What's up with that?) -- but I've never seen that online publication point out racism or discrimination where it's active at any point in its coverage of the NFL.
Look, it's a new World, get with it. There are smart, young, professionally-trained black men who will more often than not be on someone's short list for an NFL job in the future, and in some cases get those jobs. ProFootballTalk.com should be applauding this development and not trying to make the world safe for anyone white and male who thinks an executive position in the league should be theirs because they're white and male.
In my case, at the 2003 Leigh Steinberg Super Bowl Party in Houston, Bucs Head Coach John Gruden and GM Bruce Allen paid me a great complement when they remarked that I would be a great front office person in the NFL -- and I'm not even looking for a job there! It was a totally unsolicited complement but one I take to heart as coming from two well-respected NFL men who do seek out talented African American, Latino, and generally people of color. That's a good thing.
We're out there: young, gifted, and black. Embrace us; don't fear us. Rejoyce in the continued elimination of racial barriers, don't whine because they no longer exist.
It's called competition. Call for more of it, not less.
WHISPERS OF REVERSE DISCRIMINATION CONTINUE
In the wake of the recent hiring of Tony Softli by the Rams and Don Gregory by the Panthers, there continue to be whispers in league circles that teams are more willing to grant permission to African-American front-office candidates than they are for white candidates.
Under NFL rules, the only promotion in a new city that a team cannot block is a promotion that gives the employee "final say" authority over the roster, the draft, and/or the coach. For any promotion short of one in which "final say" is involved, teams can block front-office employees who are currently under contract.
Some league insiders are troubled by the fact that white front-office employees have been barred from non-"final say" promotions. Most recently, Patriors exec Tom Dimitroff (who is white) was refused permission to interview for the Rams' V.P./Player Personnel gig, which ultimately went to Softli.
Meanwhile, guys like Softli, Gregory, and former Broncos assistant G.M. Rick Smith (all of whom are African-American) received permission to leave their former teams for jobs that did not entail "final say" authority in a new city.
But other league insiders dispute the notion that teams are applying a double standard when deciding who gets permission and who doesn't. In Softli's case, for example, the strong thinking is that he got permission to leave not so that the Panthers could curry favor with the Fritz Pollard Alliance, but because the team was ready to see him go after he had spent two years or more scampering for a bigger gig elsewhere.
Also, it's our understanding that the search resulting in the hiring of Gregory to replace Softli included at least one white scout from another team who received permission to interview for the job, even though he was still under contract.
But regardless of whether African-American candidates are or are not receiving preferential treatment when it comes to getting permission under circumstances where permission can be denied, the human-nature reality of the situation is that the NFL's efforts to place more minorities into high-profile positions will prompt the guys who feel they're getting the short end of the stick to say so privately.
---------------------------------
Here's why that's totally silly. First, white front office candidates have been getting favorable treatment for over 100 years of pro football in America. During this time there were few complaints of discrimination. But in the 21st Century when a group of young, talented, professionally trained African Americans armed with experience and degrees -- in some cases Masters Degrees like me -- emerges and are considered for and get high-paying, high-profile front office jobs, some white candidates cry "reverse discrimination" and then go to ProFootballTalk.com, which publishes it.
I've seen ProFootballTalk.com show pictures of African Americans in ways that could be considered completely racist -- like the one where a photo of "Chef" from South Park was used to represent Raiders Head Coach Art Shell
(What's up with that?) -- but I've never seen that online publication point out racism or discrimination where it's active at any point in its coverage of the NFL.
Look, it's a new World, get with it. There are smart, young, professionally-trained black men who will more often than not be on someone's short list for an NFL job in the future, and in some cases get those jobs. ProFootballTalk.com should be applauding this development and not trying to make the world safe for anyone white and male who thinks an executive position in the league should be theirs because they're white and male.
In my case, at the 2003 Leigh Steinberg Super Bowl Party in Houston, Bucs Head Coach John Gruden and GM Bruce Allen paid me a great complement when they remarked that I would be a great front office person in the NFL -- and I'm not even looking for a job there! It was a totally unsolicited complement but one I take to heart as coming from two well-respected NFL men who do seek out talented African American, Latino, and generally people of color. That's a good thing.
We're out there: young, gifted, and black. Embrace us; don't fear us. Rejoyce in the continued elimination of racial barriers, don't whine because they no longer exist.
It's called competition. Call for more of it, not less.
NY Giants TE Jeremy Shockey On NFL Network Today - What's Up? Maybe He's Just High On Life?!?
I'm watching Jeremy Shockey on the NFL Network and just cracking up. I love the passion Jeremy Shockey brings to the game; the way he catches passes and bulls his way for yardage as he did in his first game as a rookie, a preseason tilt against the Houston Texans. But today -- as a veteran -- he was on the NFL Network as a guest and to be totally frank, he acted like he was a bit -- "loose."
Wow.
In all of the episodes of the NFL Network I've watched, I've never seen any guest talk while host Darren Horton was reading the teleprompter in the process of doing the show. Jeremy Shockey did this several times and even to the point where Horton finally gave in and said "This is the Jeremy Shockey Show."
It was hard to watch.
I'd like to be a fly on the walls of the NFL Network studio to learn what the producers thought of that performance.
They can't be slapping high-fives. But, then on the other hand, as it makes for good Internet chatter...
Hey, give Shockey his props, as he provided insightful and heartfelt comments on the late NY Giants Owner Wellington Mara, and his information on newly-hired LB Lavar Aarington, whom Shockey reports is ready to take on all challengers this season after a serious off-season workout program.
But what got me was the number of times Jeremy Shockey rubbed his nose with his left thumb. Check it out -- again and again and again. What's he flicking away? Does he normally do this? Again, he's a massive talent -- there he goes again with the thumb but with the right hand this time -- but what's the deal?
Maybe -- with the white suit (cool, it is) and the thumb act and the interruptions -- he's bucking for a role in Miami Vice II.
Regardless, Shockey has his fans, including me. One produced this cool video:
Friday, June 30, 2006
"Cat Massage" - Cat Massaging Dog Video Found On You Tube
I found this much-viewed video of a cat massaging a dog -- or apparently doing so -- against a wall. One viewer remarked that the dog looked as if it were not alive, but that person seemed to forget the camera-person's not likely to take a video of a dead dog. It's just sleeping. Undoubtedly deeply given the cat's fingers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)