Breakoff Thread - Are Athletes Role Models?

[Bravo]

OK - a very good thread on Mickelson. Good debate in both style and substance by Rock and Grazo....

This presents the question above ....are Athletes Role Models?

I know those of us in North America have seen Charles Barkley on TV a million times saying, "Don't look to me to be a role model for your children. I am not"....

And we all know that President Bill Clinton was certainly not a role model - despite the fact that undoubtedly he was one of the most popular presidents in history. If we did not have a two term limit - the man would be in the Oval Office right now - getting another BJ....

So - Shot Talkers - what role if any do public figures play in this? Do we hold them accountable as Rock has suggested - or we could care less about their personal lives - as Golfbum asserts??

 

[DaveE]

Good thread Bravo.

Since your question is 'are they' instead of 'should they be', role models I'll say yes they are for some.

Whether the athletes like Barkley like it or not, kids look up to them. I'd also say that it's not really fair that they're expected to be role models for our kids. I'm pretty sure that's our job. Also, since you brought up Bill, I think presidents should be held to a high moral standard.

Personally, I don't care what Phil did or didn't do. Not quite true, I would feel bad for his family. I'll emphasize again, IF TRUE, this would be very humiliating for them. Aside from that I just think if he did it that he's and idiot and I think if Callaway was aware of everything that they're not too bright either.

 

[Bravo]

Yes I should have done a better job of phrasing the title.

Should they be role models?

Barkley said repeatedly that the parents should be the role models, not the athletes - but the fact of the matter is - kids Do look up to these guys. And in my view - Clinton Should be held to a high standard of behavior....but obviously millions of American voters could care less.

 

[grazo]

It's an interesting topic Bravo, and one that I think has valid points on both sides. For arguments sake, limiting the discussion to athletes makes sense.

I'm with the camp that says athletes should be admired for their exploits on the field, and nothing else. I realise that they are paid huge amounts of money and in most cases this money is generated by the interest of the man on the street, but to hold your average golfer/footballer/athlete to certain moral standards is not fair. They are not famous because they have strong moral convictions, they are famous because they have an extraordinary ability to do things in their sport.

The only time I think it is fair to lambast an athlete for immoral or unethical behaviour is if they go out of their way to project a clean and wholesome image, so much so that it adds significant value to their marketing appeal. If they are then found out to be frauds, then we may be entitled to bring them down off their high horse.

Having said all this of course, I will be first to admit that sporting ability is not what I most admire in athletes. I like the hard luck stories where the bad guy comes good, or the underpriviliged guy beats the odds. That's why I admire a guy like Rich Beem - I know he's struggling at the moment, but he's story of phone salesman to major winner is inspiring stuff.

Ditto Peter Lonard. Here's a guy who in the mid 90s was struck with Ross River Fever, lost all this weight, had to give up the game, couldn't get up from the couch for extended periods of time. Then he gets better, gets his game back, gets on the US Tour and has 3 decent years, comes back every year to play in Australia, and remains the same knockabout bloke that he has always been.

 

[Slingblade61]

The thing is that their exploits in their personal lives always migrate into their professional lives.

I admire no one who uses drugs, beats on, cheats on or murders their wife, girlfriend, dog or chauffer......dinner time, more later.

 

[chemboy2]

they're special, just like everybody else

i'd have to say that i'm with grazo on this one.

plenty of respect for pro athletes, their abilities, and, for the most part, their work ethic. for the most part i don't hold them to any higher ideals.

grazo's statement "fair to lambast an athlete for immoral or unethical behaviour is if they go out of their way to project a clean and wholesome image, so much so that it adds significant value to their marketing appeal."

i couldn't agree more.

the one twist in my thinking is this, i think these athletes are great examples of life lessons, both good and bad. i like it when we are reminded that they are human and that they too make mistakes. to me, that's a great message to give to my son. now, when their talent and money allows them to get out of trouble - i don't like that very much. but then again, it is also a lesson into how the world really works.

 

[Rockford35]

Good points.

It's unfortunate, however, that sponsors, teams and teammates don't take an active role in creating environments for players that doesn't promote poor off court/course/field behavior. Which leaves me to beleive that if you make bad decisions off the court, you should really be lamented for your actions on the court.

As a player of any professional sport, you are an ambassador whatever your skill level is. There is always someone that is new to it, and looks to professional players for inspiration and example.

Now, if you have a persona that instills poor values, i really beleive that the sponsor and team should be just as liable and have to answer than that one the player by his/her lonesome. I really think that it is the responsibility of the team and league to seek help for a player with a drug/alcohol/anger/gambing additiction and help that player through their tough times. If this happened more often, you wouldn't see the scandals, the players getting suspended for entire seasons because of stupidity. If they had to answer to a higer power for their play on the court, why shouldn't they have to act responsible off the court?

When you are a pro athlete, you are in the media's light 24/7/365. Like it or not, it's true. And being a role model, you are supposed to be a professional. Until your contract is done and you are no longer tied to a team, a league or a sponsor, i feel that your actions should be subject to critisism every minute of every day. As controlling as that sounds, it's a way to manage the outlook and picture given by the league.

Take the NBA. As soon as you hear NBA and suspension, you think of the huge fight in the stands. Wonderful. What about Micheal Jordan or Larry Bird? And MLB? Steroids. NHL, lockout and Bertuzzi. NFL? Moss mooning the fans in green bay.

For years we've been subject to scenes of players taking the game into their own hands and not caring about the repercusions off the field actions take on their outlook. Can anyone look at Bertuzzi or Artest again and ever think that they are a) good players when they want to be and b) team players 99% of the time. I'm sure, with enough squinting.

I have always been very passionate about sponsors dictating your lifestyle (to a point). You chose to sign on the line, you live by the rules that we negotiated. And, if you step outside those rules, see you later. I mean, they're paying you, not the other way around. Sure, athletes promote products, but they also promote the game. If people are sick of the NBA, who's buying the jerseys?

I dunno, it's just how I feel. It'll never be that way, and that's why professional sports always take a back seat to non professional sports in my opinion. No money, no bling. Just the love of the game.

R35

 

[Bravo]

OK Rock:

Let's continue with your philosophy of the team/Sponsor/League having authority to hold the player accountable for their actions...

This is the premise of the next part of the discussion.

So - let's hypothesize that buddha's rumour is true....Mickelson cheated on his wife and has millions in gambling debts.

You are the Commissioner of the USPGA Tour.

What sanctions do you hand down to Phil?

 

[Rockford35]

So - let's hypothesize that buddha's rumour is true....Mickelson cheated on his wife and has millions in gambling debts.

You are the Commissioner of the USPGA Tour.

What sanctions do you hand down to Phil?

Sanctions? I don't know about that. Required to seek help for his gambling addiction? Yes sir.

The USPGA would paint such a great image of the game if they came out publicly and did this if it was found to to be 100% true. They would give the impression of "we respect our sport, our fans and our players. We will bend over backwards to help a fellow competitor, friend and family man."

Now, if he cheats on his wife, this is hard to sanction and deal with. This really is an idiotic move by anyone. Perhaps they could require him to seek counselling, but that might create problems. Addictions are sicknesses. And treatable with the right direction and care. If he cheated on his wife 50,000 times, perhaps it would be a sickness as well. But if it happened once, maybe he hates his wife and wants to get out of his marriage. His choice. Too hard to take control of. The USPGA would have to steer clear of this and come straight out saying that this is for Phil to deal with in his own manner and that the face of the USPGA should not be covered in egg because of someone's stupid, stupid indiscretions. Basically come out and say "You made your bed Phil/Bob/Annika/Whoever, now lie in it. Don't tread on our good name".

As much as these guys want to make the millions and be untouchable, I can't see it. People will say that if you saw Phil on the street, he's just Phil. Sure, he could wax your ass on the course, but off it he's just a man. But if you want to be someone you aren't like so many athletes are, then prepare to pay the price.


Just my $0.02. Not worth much cuz it's Canadian. :canadafla

R35

 

[Silver]

Re the cheating thing...whether Clinton, Mickelson, or anyone else. I personally felt that Clinton gave a very heartfelt apology and was very honest about it, or so it appeared. Granted, he was a politician and is good at that kinda thing, but still

Now, with Phil, let's assume that it's true, for the moment. I'm pretty sure if Sports Illustrated knows about it, his wife probably does. If this is the case, they *seem* to be over it as she seems to be very supportive of him these days.

If they're over it, I don't see why we shouldn't be. Closed doors are closed for a reason.

 

[grazo]

I have to strongly disagree with you on this one Rock.

I don't believe the administrators of the game (any sport) have any right to dictate to their athletes what they do in their own time. My reckoning is that we live in a democratic system where people are free to make their own decisions, even if they are bad choices. But with this freedom comes the knowledge that every action has its own consequence, and everyone must take responsibility for the choices they make.

So while you think gambling, infidelity, drug addiction etc might reflect badly on the game, I don't subscribe to this point of view. I think this reflects poorly on the individual, and the game is bigger than any one person. Any counselling sought for the culprit by the administrators of the game is not done through obligation, but rather through benevolence.

The Tour has no right to tell its members what to do with their private time, and is under no obligation to protect them should they make the wrong decisions.

That's just my $0.02, which is worth about 1.5 cents US

 

[Loop]

I really think that it is the responsibility of the team and league to seek help for a player with a drug/alcohol/anger/gambing additiction and help that player through their tough times. If this happened more often, you wouldn't see the scandals, the players getting suspended for entire seasons because of stupidity. If they had to answer to a higer power for their play on the court, why shouldn't they have to act responsible off the court?

A player should be reprimanded for bad behaviour on the court, not off court.
After all, it is the player's personal life.
I have a european mindset, where everyone is free to do what they want in their private life. Politicians in Europe (I lived in France for a number of years ) have had countless affairs. The public knew about it. And you know what? The public doesn't care, all they cared about was how they performed in their work, because that's what was important.
If I were to vote a politician on the basis of how he lead his personal life, how objective would that be?

The other point is how far can an organization intrude into a player's life? Why should they dictate how a player should lead their own private life?
Role models or not, I firmly believe each person can lead their life as they seem fit (as long as they don't hurt others...).
If the PGA is to offer some help, then it stays as it is: an offer. The moment it becomes obligatory is just plain wrong.
The only scenario that would make sense to offer help is if a player is an alcohol addict and it has repercussion on his behaviour while playing the game. Other than that...

When you are a pro athlete, you are in the media's light 24/7/365. Like it or not, it's true. And being a role model, you are supposed to be a professional. Until your contract is done and you are no longer tied to a team, a league or a sponsor, i feel that your actions should be subject to critisism every minute of every day. As controlling as that sounds, it's a way to manage the outlook and picture given by the league.

Sorry, but a player didn't chose to be famous. Of course, they can walk away from being a player.
But would you walk away from a life where you play a sport you love, and on top of that, earn some big cash with it?
Also, I oppose the sentiment that a player should be criticised every minute on how a player should lead their own life. Criticized on how they played the game, or how they fare professionally. Yes.
Criticized for a private matter? No. These are gossips left for the crowd.

I have always been very passionate about sponsors dictating your lifestyle (to a point). You chose to sign on the line, you live by the rules that we negotiated. And, if you step outside those rules, see you later. I mean, they're paying you, not the other way around. Sure, athletes promote products, but they also promote the game.

"All right "InsertPlayersNameWhoHasBadBehaviourOffTheCourt".
Now you're going to stop seeing that other woman. You'll have to take some marriage counseling.
We've also appointed you a shrink that you'll see every week for your gambling addiction.
On top of that, you cannot eat any more shrimps at Red Lobster.
You are going to be a good little boy. Or we terminate your contract. Got it?"

 

[Silver]

I agree with Loop and Grazo. If an athlete is a chump, it's up the parents to explain this facet of the personality to the children. That a player is a role model is one thing, for him/her to be the only role model is another. A public figure making bad decisions can end up being a very positive role model by portraying exactly what you ought not be.

Furthermore, it's up to the fans to decide if they like a player's behaviour and choose to continue supporting that player. I, personally, would find it an affront to my autonomous decision making for someone to suggest whether I should like Phil as a player based on his actions away from the course...or whether I felt Bill was a competent president despite being sucked off in the Oval Office (which, for the record, I'm sure he wasn't the first to have that pleasure).

While Callaway may have the displeasure of dealing with a player who may have had some spotty history, I think that their image as a golf force is based more spectacularly on his playing, rather than that he bumped nasties with someone else and was down in the chips a bit, so to speak. I'll take a badboy stellar player to sell my wares over a mediocre pretty boy any day. Biz is biz.

 

[DaveE]

Regarding sanctions. I don't really think they would be appropriate for this type of off course behavior. Now if they found out he was gambling on golf, that would be different I guess.

The real punishment that pro athletes receive is when they lose their endorsement contracts. If this story ends up being true Phil will be punished where it hurts the most. Ford probably has their lawyers working on it as we type.

 

[Rockford35]

All good points.

I still think that an athlete choses to be famous the day he signs the contract. A contract that says in writing that while under contact, he/she must give 100% effort to the team, remain in good physical shape to compete and conduct themselves in a manner that reflects well on the team.

Sorry, but if your personal life interefers with your play, you are at the mercy of your contract, and therefore those who pay it.

If you are a gangsta, and you bring that persona to the court, does that make you a better player? No. But if it gets you into trouble, you deserve to be brought down a notch. By the league, by the team.

If you get fat and can't play golf anymore because you're too heavy, or a drunk, or stung out on coke, you're going to lose your sponsors. And the league is going to distance themselves from you.

What i'm saying is that the leagues and teams should take and active role in helping these guys instead of washing their hands from them. It makes me sick to see guys like Theoren Fleury and Darryl Strawberry (both extremely talented in their own rights) be helped with their problems off the field and those that seem to have issues similar to them are swept under the carpet.

John Daly is a good example. The guy has heart, character and strength. he's made many off course decisions that were terrible. Many people rushed to his side and look what happened to him in the meantime. Lost his sponsors, lost friends and had to win back fans. I give a guy like that credit for not tip-toeing around things and dealing with them. He took time off from the game and got his life straightened out. Thanks to the PGA and his fellow competitors, John is again a force out there.

So where do you draw the line?

If it comes onto the court/field/course, it's fair game. Two years ago when Phil's wife and child almost died, he played through it. Not many of us could have done that.

He has the strength, just as anyone does. But, you need help from off the field too. And this starts with a little bit of control by the league and teams.

R35