Commentary: Gibbs firing inevitable

WWLTV

10 months ago Saintsational 15 comments 0 recs |

Comments

Blame the morons

“I think more often the pressure comes from the fans, the bloggers and the season tickets holders. Gibbs was a scapegoat…”

In other words: Gibbs is innocent, and we lynched him. We would have done better to listen to the media—people like Jim Henderson—rather than trust our baser instincts.

Get Sean McDermott!

by MtnExile on Jan 8, 2009 6:08 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I think you’re misinterpreting the intent, MtnExile. Jim Henderson took time out of his schedule to do a silly Q&A on my blog last summer, and he stated that he does check out the message boards (over at nola.com, God only knows why he’d choose that particular venue.)

I know that here at CSC, ripping on any and all things “mainstream media” is pretty much the national pastime

but Jim Henderson is not some kind of elitist media snob, and I certainly don’t think that comment was intended to insult any of the groups mentioned.

Furthermore, ultimately, the comment is accurate. That is where the bulk of the “pressure” has come from. Hell, that Henderson would use the word “pressure” (implying that bloggers and fans have any power at all to actually affect change) as opposed to some other less meaningful description like “outcry” is actually complimentary and implies some degree of respect.

I also think it’s accurate to say that Gibbs is a scapegoat. Which doesn’t necessarily mean he’s without (tons of) blame. The two aren’t mutually exclusive, in my opinion.

Sometimes I get the feeling around here that a mainstream media type could say that the sky is blue, and there would be a handful of comments giving the guy crap about it.

by Grandmaster Wang on Jan 8, 2009 7:33 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, I tried to be cute and added < tags > around the second and last paragraphs indicating “no offense” but it looks like the software tried to parse the tags as if they were real, rather than just displaying them. Lesson learned.

Anyway, no offense re: my observations about CSC’s (sometimes a little overdone, in my opinion) anti-media culture.

by Grandmaster Wang on Jan 8, 2009 7:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No offense taken

But I have to admit: I have little respect for the media. I used to be a reporter, until I realized I was temperamentally totally unsuited to it; but my time in the trenches gave me some insight into the mindset of those who used to serve as the sole gatekeepers of the news.

In Henderson’s case, I have to say first that I like Jim Henderson and always have. But when the entire world is saying one thing, there is no upside in a professional commentator saying the same. The only way to stand out is to take a contrary position; and it’s always a dead giveaway when a reporter does so for purely careerist reasons: his commentary makes no sense.

I’m not referring to the uncharacteristically shoddy nature of this particular column (although, Jim, it doesn’t do your cause any good when you come off sounding like an illiterate drunk just before he falls off the stool…just saying); it’s his reasoning that makes no sense. First, a scapegoat is, in fact, literally blameless—that’s what the word means. And Gibbs is far from blameless in this matter.

But more than that: when you characterize a man as a scapegoat—i.e., essentially innocent of blame—and then ascribe the pressure entirely to “fans, bloggers, and season ticket holders,” that says something very definite, both in terms of whom you include and whom you exclude. Henderson very deliberately ascribed part of the responsibility to bloggers; he very deliberately (I believe) left out MSM reporters and commentators such as himself. The message boils down to this: Gibbs was scapegoated; bloggers are partly to blame; reporters had no part in this. Scapegoating is irresponsible; therefore bloggers are irresponsible, while reporters are not. The intent of that message is, to me, very clear: he blames the ignorant, blogging fans, while very neatly aligning himself with the Saints’ coaches and management—on whose good will his career is very heavily dependent.

Lost in all of this tangential nonsense is the fact that Gibbs is not merely culpable, but almost entirely culpable. He and he alone has been in charge of this defense while it has fallen apart over the past couple seasons. Despite supposed upgrades at linebacker, on the line, in the secondary, and even among the position coaches, the defense saw no improvement in overall efficiency, or even in correcting very particular failings. Who else ought you to blame?

You can legitimately ascribe some of my opinions to an animus against the media as a whole—it’s true, I neither trust nor respect the so-called fifth estate (fifth column would be often more appropriate). But that doesn’t change the fact that the “fans, bloggers, and season ticket holders” are correct in this case, and Henderson is simply pulling the typical media stunt of seating himself high above the hoi polloi, from which vantage point he deigns to drop his pearls of wisdom on the unwashed masses far below. Been there; seen that. Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining, Jim.

Get Sean McDermott!

by MtnExile on Jan 8, 2009 9:01 AM CST up reply actions 2 recs

F da MSM, with a few exceptions, damned few. REC'D it

he blames the ignorant, blogging fans, while very neatly aligning himself with the Saints’ coaches and management—on whose good will his career is very heavily dependent.

Nice job, M-E. I would’ve edited you down to a paragraph and you would’ve screamed bloody murder for interfering with your destiny, but I’ll take it as is anyway.

by stujo4 on Jan 8, 2009 9:29 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Great explanation; Rec it

I think you squarely hit the nail on the head:

The intent of that message is, to me, very clear: he blames the ignorant, blogging fans, while very neatly aligning himself with the Saints’ coaches and management—on whose good will his career is very heavily dependent.

Of course the players are partly responsible for the defensive failures, but Gibbs a scapegoat? Come on, Man. He’s the captain of the defensive ship and that ship has been taking on water for the past 2 seasons. I’m not piling on Henderson here, but I like this quote from the article:

In Gibbs defense, after the Chicago game when Devon Hester drew a crucial pass interference call in overtime, Gibbs came up to me before the Detroit game – and I think at that time he was already gone, or certainly on the ropes, and in a way pleading his case – he told me when you warn these guys prior to that play: "Don’t get beat over the top by Devon Hester," and on a double move Roman Harper bites on it, coming up from his safety position and gets beat over the top and has to interfere. Is that Gary Gibbs’ fault or is that a lack of production by the players that are in that position?

So the players didn’t heed his warning on that play, which is truly unacceptable on their part. But doesn’t it also sound like they had already started tuning Gibbs out. That usually indicates a lack of respect for their coach which is very hard to get back. If he wasn’t getting through to them with his instruction, something had to be done. He seems like a nice, likable guy who might have had better production from his players if only he had jumped into their faces a little more.

Go Saints!!!!

by satchmo26 on Jan 8, 2009 9:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

"And now, from Louisiana's News Leader, a few words from our own.... JIM HENDERSON!!!"

I wonder if he had low, dramatic music playing during this. What a hack.

by stujo4 on Jan 8, 2009 9:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Or perhaps Henderson just disagrees with the majority

I hear what you’re saying, MtnExile, and at the risk of going too far down the hair-splitting rabbit hole, just a couple of points of order here….

Scapegoat, as I understand its meaning, is simply someone who bears some amount of misplaced blame on behalf of others (i.e. Gibbs’ players) and/or is the object of irrational or exaggerated hostility. Now maybe that’s not what you’d find in a dictionary, I don’t know. But as a practical matter, I simply don’t believe most people who use the word “scapegoat” intend to imply that the scapegoat is necessarily blameless.

Secondly, the idea of Henderson “seating himself high above the hoi polloi, from which vantage point he deigns to drop his pearls of wisdom on the unwashed masses far below” is completely contradictory to my own personal experience having interacted with the guy, that’s all. I’ve just never seen anything from Henderson that indicates that your characterization is even remotely accurate in Henderson’s case. Then again, perhaps I’m biased. I’m certainly not above entertaining that notion. It wouldn’t be the first time.

I’ve also never seen any indication of Henderson being deliberately, disingenuously contrarian just for the sake of attention. (And personally, I believe that Henderson has no reason to do that. He’s not a Pat Yasinkas or a Jemele Hill who is desperately trying to build an audience by any means necessary. This is the voice of the Saints.)

Is it too far outside the realm of possibility that when a media type disagrees with “the masses”, it’s simply an honest disagreement? Why must it be deliberate contrarianism? You, and most fans, might be 100% convinced that Gary Gibbs is the end all be all of the Saints’ defensive problems. But in categorically dismissing any disagreement as disingenuous and a result of ulterior motives, it seems to me that you’re engaging in precisely the type of elitism you accuse Henderson (and the media at large) of.

But hey, whatever. Given stujo’s replies as I’ve been typing this, it appears I just have a far greater respect for Henderson than some others do, and I’ll just have to agree to disagree. No ill will on my part. Just honest disagreement.

by Grandmaster Wang on Jan 8, 2009 9:40 AM CST reply actions 1 recs

As I said, I like Henderson

…but nobody’s perfect, and I don’t always agree with him. I’ve never met him, but he comes across in his broadcasts as being thoughtful, serious, and fair (all those being relative terms). That’s good. But he’s also a professional journalist; and as a professional, he’s just as much prone to the habits and prejudices of his trade as is any professional in any other line of work.

For a journalist, those habits and prejudices include a marked tendency to self-aggrandizement. He is, after all, on TV. Other people might have the same opinions, or better ones; but they’re not on TV. It’s a very short step from having the power to mold opinion, to believing that your opinions must be, ex officio, correct; and an even shorter step to believing that anyone who disagrees must be—again, ex officio (or ex lack of officio, I guess)—incorrect. I’m not saying that Henderson is particularly prone to this; but I see it all the time in journalists. What looks like lofty disdain usually is.

Couple that with a perhaps equally arrogant belief on my part in the rightness of my own opinion in this case, and what I see here is a jealous journalist protecting his turf from encroachment. Even nice guys do that from time to time. I don’t condemn it, as such; but I also try not to mistake it for actual reporting.

Also, I should point out that I don’t dismiss any disagreement as disingenuous and the result of ulterior motives—just a lot of them. And this one.

Get Sean McDermott!

by MtnExile on Jan 8, 2009 10:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, look at his pic. That guy is a rebel outside the box thinker if I ever saw one. Way to take a stand, Jim.

Maybe he is excellent in most of his on air pieces. I don’t know, I’ve never seen him. But I just read this one.

And just as the defendant in a murder case with overwhelming direct evidence has his day in court, Jim has had his. Nice effort as public defender, Grandmaster Wang. But the verdict is: guilty.

by stujo4 on Jan 8, 2009 10:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Now I feel dirty

I used to report on trials, too. Being even indirectly compared to a prosecutor is not pleasant.

Get Sean McDermott!

by MtnExile on Jan 8, 2009 11:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

after writing this, you deserve it, pal

to believing that your opinions must be, ex officio, correct; and an even shorter step to believing that anyone who disagrees must be—again, ex officio (or ex lack of officio, I guess)

We’re not all catholic school boys who had to take Latin, you know.

by stujo4 on Jan 8, 2009 11:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I will have to appeal then.

I dont work in the media, tho I do work in advertising.
I dont write for a living, and never have, nor ever will. You all know how I write. Badly but with passion.

I will agree that the so called MSM has alot of less then stellar members.
I will agree that I have disagreed with most of them at one point or another.

What part of it did you disagree with.
The part where you said I will cancel my season ticket order if they dont fire him? (season ticket holders)
The part where you said support FireGibbs.com (bloggers)
The part we voted for his firing as our first offseason move (the fans)

WE yelled. we screamed. we rose up and said FIRE GIBBS..
They did.

If they had planned to fire him at the end of the season they would have announced it .. at the end of the season.

They waited… why?

Could it be they thought they could try one more year? Maybe get our boys healthy and see what could be done with what we have? One more kick at the can Mr. Gibbs, we are giving you a hotshot Dline coach to get the powerpuffs motivated. We are going to the show IF your side of the ball can keep us in games or we are going to have to let you go.

But then… we raised our collective voices and said FIRE HIM. we dont care about anything else.. FIRE HIM or else!

So they fired him.

Dave pointed out that we know had to worry. What if … there is no change and it was not Gibbs.

MT
Sean McDermott come on down! your the next contestant on the "Can you fix my Defense". You will be joined by a DL coach of your choice and may we say we are happy to have you here in Who Dat Nation.

by MT_always on Jan 8, 2009 1:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs