Tag Archives: Chicago Bears

Payton biographer goes after Ditka: Calls former coach ‘unambiguously stupid’

Posted on by

Jeff Pearlman is not about to go gently into the night. Oh no.

The author of Sweetness: The Enigmatic Life of Walter Payton continues to fire back at people who accuse him of doing an injustice with his portrayal of the late, great Bears running back.

This time his target is Mike Ditka. Writing on his site, Pearlman takes great offense to Ditka’s introduction in a new book Walter and Me, written by Payton’s brother, Eddie.

A portion of the foreword reads:

“And when it comes to someone writing about my friend, I have to ask, how well did the writer really know him? Did he grow up with him? Was he on the field with him? Did he live with him? Was he a parent? Was he a coach? Was he a player? In the case of Jeff Pearlman, the answer to those questions is, “no.” Pearlman wrote a book about Walter, but it was written from a distance. It was all secondhand. He put together a few things he’d heard—some of them from people who have very little credibility—to paint a picture that just doesn’t look much like the Walter I knew …

“He’ll always hold a high place in my book, and you couldn’t pay me enough to ever crack open the cover of Pearlman’s book. I know he tried to say you can’t just look in the excerpts, but I saw all I needed to see in those excerpts. It’s pathetic to write something like that about an individual who isn’t here to defend himself. If the person has passed and can’t respond, then just let the speculation rest with him. Period.”

Pearlman doesn’t mince words about his feelings toward the former Bears coach. He titled the post, “Dicka.” He writes:

The book’s introduction is written by Mike Ditka, a person I consider to be, unambiguously, stupid. I would call Ditka’s brain rock-like, only I feel it could be interpreted as an insult to some of the world’s fine rocks. Ditka is, in no particular order, a dolt, a bully, a thug, a moron, an ass and a fool.

Pearlman continues to take the sledgehammer to “Iron Mike.”

I love how Mike Ditka has taken ownership of Walter Payton, and feels comfortable in discussing his legacy. If Ditka knew Walter so well, how was he thoroughly, 100-percent unaware of his late-life despondency and depression? If Ditka was so tight with his former halfback, why didn’t he help him out with the emotional problems that so plagued him? Where was Mike Ditka when Walter Payton needed him?

Furthermore, in all those years of slamming Walter Payton into defensive lines, did he ever think, “Hmm, perhaps I should give him a rest?” Did he ever think, “Maybe this pounding is too much?” It’s easy now, years later, for Ditka to talk about all the wounded warriors and how much help they need with the physical and mental beatings NFL life offered. But where was such judgement when he was coaching? Where was Mike Ditka then?

Pearlman notes that he interviewed 700 people for the book, including Ditka and Eddie Payton (twice). He contends to do a complete and accurate portrayal of Payton, he had to delve into his troubled personal life. Pearlman understands how that bothered Payton’s fans, who don’t want his memory to be tarnished in any way.

Pearlman concludes:

I could understand Mike Ditka disliking the book. I could understand Mike Ditka ripping it in an introduction that, we all know, he didn’t write and probably didn’t even review.

What I can’t understand is his pride in blind idiocy.

That’s just pathetic.

Pearlman’s Payton book now is out in paperback. In August, he did an interview with me in which he said he hoped people in Chicago would give the biography a second chance.

Clearly, there are better marketing strategies than taking shots at Ditka, an icon among icons in Chicago. It’ll give his critics another excuse not to read the book.

Pearlman, though, doesn’t care. If somebody takes a swing at him, he is going to swing back. Sales, be damned.

 

 

 

 

 

My lunch with Steve Sabol: In search of art museums at a Super Bowl

Posted on by

Like everyone else, I was a big fan of NFL Films.

So when I was approached during Super Bowl XXXV in 2000 about having lunch with Steve Sabol, I jumped at the opportunity. I looked forward to discussing football, the upcoming game between the Giants and Baltimore in Tampa, and film making, most definitely film making, with the famed president of NFL Films.

Now my memory is a bit foggy, but I’m fairly sure we initially started by talking about art museums. Yes, art museums.

Sabol loved going to art museums in towns he visited, and he was interested in what Tampa had to offer.

I’m not from Tampa and hardly an art expert. But thanks to my parents living in Sarasota, I was able to tell him about the Ringling Art Museum. I had been there once. All I knew is that Ringling (from the circus) was a notable collector and had some famous paintings from the 15th and 16th Centuries.

“Really?” he said, scribbling the name on a piece of paper. “That sounds terrific.”

I learned quickly that Sabol was a different breed. In fact, he had no interest in sports other than football.

“I have no idea who played in the World Series,” Sabol said. “Don’t care.”

Who knows? Sabol might not have had an interest in football if not for the chance to put the game on film.

Looking back, it really wasn’t a surprise that he was in search of a art museum during a Super Bowl. He truly was an artist with his vision for NFL Films.

My favorite was a series called Lost Treasures of NFL Films. It featured vintage old footage that had never been used before.

In a 1999 story for the Chicago Tribune, I wrote:

The programs are like opening a time capsule, tracing the roots of both the NFL and NFL Films, which first started shooting games in 1962. The shows go back to a period when everything was innocent, gritty and more passionate. Everything looked more genuine.

Included are vintage shots of Bears games at Wrigley Field, botched attempts to get audio from Vince Lombardi and the incomprehensible notion of players simply handing the ball to officials after scoring a touchdown.

“You think to yourself, `Boy, how have things changed?’ ” Sabol said. “There were no earrings or headsets. The feeling you get is like sitting around with a bunch of friends, saying, `I can remember what it was like.’ “

The original plan was to have actor Richard Kiley narrate the films. Unfortunately, the actor died two weeks before production.

Fortunately, it led to Sabol filling in. From the story:

Sabol doesn’t read from a script. Instead he talks over on the film, remembering things as he sees them again.

“It’s like sitting around with a proud father who has a bunch of old movies and is dying to talk about it,” Sabol said.

Sabol, the proud father, told those stories as only he could. In the clip above, he discusses working with John Facenda.

“The first words he said for us, ‘It starts with a whistle and ends with a gun,” Sabol said in this Lost Treasure. “We knew we were on to something. He read our scripts as if he was an after-dinner speaker for the Last Supper.”

Hence, Facenda’s nickname, “The Voice of God.”

Sabol, though, was the star of this series. He showed the evolution of the league and NFL Films. It was like an artist detailing every brush stroke.

And then there were stories. It seemed like every frame of film had a tale behind it, one better than the other.

“My dad has a great expression,” Sabol said when his father and NFL Films founder Ed was inducted into the Hall of Fame. ” ‘Tell me a fact, and I’ll learn. Tell me a truth, and I’ll believe. But tell me a story, and it will live in my heart forever.'”

Thanks to his work at NFL Films, Sabol’s stories will live forever.

Thinking back at our lunch at Super Bowl XXXV, I wonder what art museum Sabol chose to visit. I’d like to think he took the hour drive down to Sarasota to see the Ringling Museum.

It would make me feel good to give something back to Sabol considering all that he gave to us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What’s new for NFL 2012: NFL Network gets more quantity, quality; Finally continuity with Nessler-Mayock

Posted on by

Last in a series:

The NFL didn’t just give the NFL Network more games. The league also gave the network an improved schedule.

NFL Network kicks off its expanded 13-game schedule Thursday with Chicago-Green Bay at Lambeau Field. I’m sure ESPN would have preferred that hated rivalry game over Baltimore whipping Cincinnati for its Monday night debut.

Then again, it shouldn’t be a surprise that the NFL took care of its own with a marquee opener. The league wants to build this enterprise, which is a big reason why the Thursday night package landed on NFL Network as opposed to another network.

More Thursday night games will help drive more eyeballs to the network. And it will put more pressure on Time Warner Cable, the lone holdout with Cablevision now in the fold, to finally come to a resolution with the NFL Network.

During a conference call, I addressed those issues with Mark Quenzel, senior vice president of production and programming for NFL Network.

What is the impact on the network of having games in September as opposed to starting in November? 

Quenzel: I think we have a lot of great quality programming, some great people and great shows on our network, and great analysis that we do.  But the bottom line is there’s nothing that even comes close to games.  And to be able to have five additional games to start the season, to be able to deliver that kind of value, and to have the kind of promotional platform that games bring, allows you to talk about everything else you’re doing. Our network is a lot more than just games obviously, and it allows us to tell our fans, to tell NFL fans, what else is out there that they can watch and be a part of.  So that’s a huge thing.

What does it mean for the distribution of the NFL Network?

Quenzel: Obviously we are thrilled Cablevision came on two weeks ago, and that’s a big, big score for us, particularly in the New York market. It’s a big deal.  Obviously a lot has been written about Time Warner, and they’re the only major carrier that doesn’t have NFL Network.  I’m hoping, I think we’re all hoping, that we can figure it out because there are a lot of NFL fans in those Time Warner markets, and they deserve to see the 13 games, and they deserve to see all the other programming and have that choice.

I’m hopeful that we can work something out with them, and I think that would be obviously to everybody’s advantage, but clearly to the NFL fan, that’s the best thing that could possibly happen.

Regarding the schedule, it seems like this is the best NFL Network ever has had. The league obviously owns the channel; they make the schedule. Is there any connection there? What goes into determining who gets what games?

Quenzel: As in most things with the National Football League, and I’m telling you from my heart, it’s an incredibly level playing field.  I go in there, there’s a gentleman named Howard Katz, who is the master of all things with the schedule, and I go in probably right behind the ESPN guys and right behind the NBC guys and I beg Howard for the best games I can possibly get, and he looks at me and smiles and says, I’ll see what I can do.

But the point is I think that ‑‑ look, I know it’s the NFL Network, but speaking frankly, we have some great, great partners that pay us a fair amount ‑‑ pay the NFL a fair amount of money, and they deserve great games.  So while I’m thrilled about our schedule, I think if you look at it, I think if you asked Fox how they felt about Green Bay‑San Francisco yesterday or NBC with Peyton Manning against the Steelers last night, I think they feel pretty good about their games, too.

I’m thrilled with the schedule.  I think that we got some great games to start off, and I think we’ve got some real potential, particularly in the back end of the schedule, New Orleans‑Atlanta, obviously Denver‑Oakland, those games, divisional games, so I am thrilled with it.  But I do think if you look across the entire spectrum of our broadcast partners that everyone has got some things to be excited about, particularly after yesterday and some of the initial ratings I’ve seen from (week 1) look like they’re pretty darned good.

*******

Continuity in the booth

For once, one thing that won’t change for the NFL Network is the announce team. Brad Nessler and Mike Mayock return for their second year in the booth with Alex Flanagan on the sidelines.

That’s no small item for a network that has struggled with its announcing team. Remember Bryant Gumbel on play-by-play?

Continuity is a good thing. Nessler, Mayock and Flanagan appear to be in for the long haul.

Quenzel: It’s not a secret that we’ve had a little bit of a revolving door in terms of our on‑air talent for Thursday Night Football. The three of them I thought were spectacular last year, jumping in, by the way, for the first time really together and trying to do it midway through the season.  To have them back for a second year, to start at the beginning of the season, I can’t tell you how excited I am about being able to do 13 games with them and really being able to get a rhythm because I think they’re fantastic.

Nessler:  Mark talked about Mike and Alex and I, and our production team.  We kind of feel like we were just getting revved up when the season ended for us last year because of the half‑season schedule, and so this year we’re ready to go full bore.

 

 

 

Payton book in paperback: Author hopes for a second chance in Chicago

Posted on by

Jeff Pearlman hopes release of his Walter Payton biography in paperback this week will help right a wrong, especially in Chicago.

When excerpts of Sweetness: The Enigmatic Life of Walter Payton ran in Sports Illustrated last fall, Pearlman was vilified. It couldn’t have been worse if he dressed in green and gold and staged a Green Bay Packers rally on Michigan Ave.

The excerpt detailed Payton’s troubled life after football; addiction to painkillers, issues with depression, affairs and a non-existent marriage. It hardly was the picture Bears fans saw of the valiant warrior during a spectacular 13-year career.

Reaction was harsh in Chicago. Mike Ditka said he would “spit” on the book. Everyone follows “Da Coach” here and you could have filled Lake Michigan with all the saliva. Not a pretty image.

“To me, it was crushing,” Pearlman said.

Pearlman tried to do damage control. He did numerous interviews in Chicago, pleading with people to read the entire book. He said there was much more than the SI excerpts.

Indeed, the book is meticulously reported, detailing with the incredible highs and lows of Payton’s entire life. Once people read the book, it received rave reviews and landed on the New York Times’ bestseller list.

Now with the paperback edition coming out, Pearlman hopes the critics in Chicago will give the book a second chance. Here’s my Q/A.

How did you feel about the initial reaction to the book in Chicago?

To be honest, I thought I was treated unfairly in Chicago. One anchor on the news did a report and then literally shook her head and said, ‘Shameful, shameful.’

(Chicago Tribune columnist) John Kass became my least favorite media figure in Chicago. I felt like he was another guy who didn’t read the book. I called and emailed him to see if he ever read the book. I offered to send him a copy of the book. He never responded.

I think Michael Wilbon is great, excellent. But he questioned my motives. He said it was all about money.

Nobody read the book (beyond the SI excerpts). In today’s media world, we need to turn it around really quick. ‘What’s your take on this?’ People just read the excerpt and said, ‘How dare he?’ To me, it was crushing.

What kind of reaction did you get once people read the book?

I received a number of apologies over Twitter and Email. I had never experienced anything like it before.

When the book first came out, I got a lot of ‘To hell with you,’ and much more vulgar stuff that I won’t get into.

About a month later, I got a number of notes that said, ‘You know what, I owe you an apology. I was wrong. That was a great book.’

Many people think SI’s choice of excerpts hurt you and the book. What do you think?

I used to think something different, but I don’t feel that way anymore. I thought the excerpts showed a fascinating part of his life. I thought the depression he suffered was pretty telling, especially with what we know now (about concussions). If I was editor of Sports Illustrated, I would have gone with the same excerpts too.

You have said that you came to love Walter Payton more after writing the book. Yet for many of us in Chicago, your details of how he treated some people and other issues made us love him less. Please explain your view.

Walter was aware of his shortcomings. He wanted to be righteous, but he didn’t know how to go about it.

He knew what he meant to people in Chicago. It was very important for them to view him in a positive light. He never wanted people to know about his depression.

You always think, ‘If I could have this guy’s life, that would be awesome. What does he have to complain about?’

Walter had a lot to complain about. I had sympathy for him. I realize it wasn’t easy being him.

Now that it is out in paperback, what do you say to Payton’s fans who initially passed on buying the hardcover edition?

I understand that people want their heroes to be heroes, or that they care only about what happens on the field.

But this guy had an amazingly fascinating life beyond football. There was a lot to him. Just because somebody had hard times doesn’t mean you still can’t appreciate him. It doesn’t mean you should change your perception of him.

For more with Pearlman, here is an interview he did with Steven Bennett on last week’s edition of the Sports-Casters. The interview begins at the 1:40 mark.