Judging from all the support he has received, Zak Gilbert won’t be out of work for long.
NFL writers were outraged when Mark Davis, in a move befitting his father, Al Davis, fired Gilbert over the weekend. Reportedly, it stemmed from a negative article on the Raiders in Sports Illustrated.
In his Monday Morning Quarterback column on SI.com, Peter King weighed in on Gilbert’s dismissal. Regarding the absurd notion that Gilbert could have changed the nature of Jim Trotter’s piece, King wrote:
Judge for yourself if the PR guy, who has nothing to do with Trotter’s story other than to facilitate interviews, should be canned. I can tell you, from knowing Trotter, that any advice on the story from a PR person would have been met, correctly, with some version of: Thanks for your thoughts. I can take it from here.
King then wrote what should be a letter of recommendation for Gilbert.
One last point about the job Gilbert did. A buddy of mine who writes about the league mentioned to me last season how strange it was to go cover the Raiders now “and actually not dread it.” Much of that was due to Gilbert reopening many avenues of access to a team that had been shuttered to the outside in the Al Davis days. Example: A couple of weeks ago, on Twitter, I said I couldn’t figure out why Charles Woodson signed with Oakland instead of Denver. Gilbert saw the tweet and forwarded me Woodson’s transcript after signing, and asked if I’d like to talk to Woodson. Sure, I said. Gilbert tried, and it seemed Woodson said he was done with media until Raiders minicamp. Gilbert said he thought Woodson should do this one interview if possible, and Woodson said OK.
I’m sure the result wasn’t exactly what Gilbert had in mind — the Raiders were pushing the Woodson-coming-home story angle, and Woodson told me it was primarily the signing bonus that made Oakland more attractive than Denver — but the point is Gilbert understood the business. He put the guy in front of me. What the guy said after that, Gilbert couldn’t control. His job was to get his guy’s story out.
Playing devil’s advocate, especially about the last paragraph in what was transcribed from Peter King’s comments above…isn’t it the PR department’s job to at least script their players? Gilbert knew EXACTLY what King was going to ask, just based on that tweet. Wouldn’t Gilbert ask Woodson that question, just to gauge the response? Then if Woodson was honest, Gilbert could suggest that Woodson go in another direction other than “show me the money”?
Maybe this happened, and maybe Woodson didn’t bring money up. Maybe King pressed and got that response. But ultimately, right or wrong, the PR director needs to be on top of story angles and prep their subjects. Simply giving a reporter access to an individual isn’t enough (though admittedly, it’s the toughest part of the job). I will say, however, that I hate to see anybody out of a job and this is all very unfortunate for Gilbert. Hoping he lands on his feet soon.