Is Football King, Or Has The Media Made It So?

Let me begin by saying I love football.  It is the greatest sport under the heavens, the ultimate team sport combining brute strength and intelligence in a battle of wills among combatants.  I began playing in fourth grade at the YMCA in North Little Rock, Ark. and didn’t stop until I graduated from Central Missouri State University.  I love broadcasting games, love writing about the sport, love teaching my sons about the game.  I wish the Arena Football League were on television more so I could watch in the spring.  But even I think ESPN and Sports Illustrated might be going a bit overboard in their coverage. 

It seems every time I turn on ESPN I’m getting reports about the Combine, which free agent is going where, whose coach has just signed an extension.  Yes, that is all newsworthy, but college basketball is heating up as we ready for March Madness! Baseball spring training has begun! Hockey is finally back on ice! The off-season football seems to be getting as much coverage as the IN-season football! 

Sports Illustrated is just as football crazy.  In the March 4 issue, of the 51 pages dedicated to content (meaning those without ads), 21 were dedicated to football.  That’s 41 percent of the magazine!  Baseball got less than half that much coverage in SI’s so called “Spring Training ‘13” issue!  The cover of the March 4 magazine shows South Carolina’s Jadeveon Clowney busting through a montage of basketball players and the header reads “Spring Football ’13 (Sorry, hoops, two more weeks to wait).

True, in America, football is king.  Of Forbes 50 Most Valuable Sports Franchises, 31 are professional football teams.  Acording to http://mostpopularsports.net/in-america, football in America is No. 1, followed by baseball, basketball, hockey and soccer.  The Richest, a website dedicated to pop culture and finance, had the same findings.  So did the online resource page “Buzzle”.  And wikianswers.com noted that, while NASCAR actually has the highest national ratings, football is king among team sports.

This, then, begs the question:  Do media outlets such as ESPN and Sports Illustrated bring us football because it is our favorite sport, or is football our favorite sport because that is what are presented with most often? As a professor of journalism, I am compelled to ask the question.  It’s the classic chicken or the egg argument, but with a pigskin.

In 1972, journalism professors Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw proposed Agenda-Setting Theory.  Their hypothesis, according to “A First Look at Communication Theory”:  The mass media have the ability to transfer the salience of issues on their news agenda to the public agenda.  In other words, to quote University of Wisconsin political scientist Bernard Cohen, “The press may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about.”

It would seem, at least when it comes to football, McCombs and Shaw may be right!

Check your facts, Ray

I have never been a Ray Lewis "fan." Really, I've always been indifferent. I love the passion with which he played the game (I say "played" because I am assuming he is going to stick with retirement). I've never been really thrilled with his antics, though; I prefer great players let their play do the talking and show some restraint. But as the playoffs came around, I couldn't help cheering for him. He IS one of the all-time greats, and it is always nice to see them go out on top.


It was with great interest, then, that I read the following article in which Lewis claimed God doesn't use people who do bad things.    

http://www.usatoday.com/story/gameon/2013/02/03/ray-lewis-cbs-pregame-super-bowl-xlvii-baltimore-ravens/1888367/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+newsmain2+(News+-+Flipboard)

In the article, Lewis said it was clear he was innocent of the murder he was charged with 13 years ago. He said it is clear he was not guilty because God had allowed him to succeed.  Now, I'm not saying Lewis IS guilty; I have no idea about the facts of the case.  BUT, there is a severe error in his logic.  Repeatedly in the Bible God used people who had done bad things and they found success, the most obvious example being King David.  David had Uriah moved to the front lines where he would almost certainly be killed, thus leaving Uriah's wife, Bathsheba, available for David.  When David's sin was pointed out to him and he overcame his lustful desires, he repented, God forgave him, and a great nation was formed.  
Similarly, Saul openly persecuted followers of Jesus, often standing in judgment and holding the cloaks of those assigned to stone or crucify Christians.  Yet God spoke to him in a vision, Saul (later to be renamed Paul) repented and became one of the chief leaders of the early church.  Throughout history, He has used murderers, adulterers, prostitutes, thieves and cheats for His glory.  They first repented, paid for their sins and acknowledged His majesty, but He used them nonetheless.
I openly profess my faith in Jesus Christ.  I believe in a loving, forgiving God who is slow to anger and slow to judge, but whose judgment is firm and often harsh when repentance is not present.  So it disturbs me when someone with a bully platform like Ray Lewis stands up and tries to use his God as evidence of his innocence in a heinous crime.  As I said, I don't know if Lewis was guilty or not; I want to believe he is innocent.  But, Ray, please to twist the nature of God and provide false teachings for your own benefit; He will NOT be mocked!