EVENTS
 Sportsman of the Year
 Heisman Trophy
 Swimsuit 2001

CNNSI.com GROUP
 Sports Illustrated
 Life of Reilly
 Television
 SI Women
 SI for Kids
 Press Room
 TBS/TNT Sports
 CNN Languages

COMMERCE
 SI Customer Service
 SI Media Kits
 Get into College
 Sports Memorabilia
 TeamStore

Chat Reel: SI's Frank Deford

Athletes need to understand their influence on youths

Posted: Friday March 03, 2000 02:13 PM

On the heels of one of the most exciting NFL seasons ever, a star stands charged with murder and the league struggles to cope with its violent image. CNNSI.com examines the problem in this special report. The Stories  The Slayings | The Victims The Entourage Dealing with Violence Starting Young Your Reactions Multimedia  Video Box:  The NFL and Violence Boom Box:   NFL Players on Violence Interactive Chats  Chat Reel: SI's Lester Munson Chat Reel: SI's Frank Deford

CNNSI Host: Welcome to our chat this afternoon with SI's Frank Deford, on the subject of violence in the NFL. Thanks for joining us, Frank!
Frank Deford: Nice to be with you.

From Guest: Do you think that football has a greater problem with violence than other sports, or have the two recent incidents caused football to be our focus?
Frank Deford: No, I think very definitely we can say that the recent two events are obviously horrible, but I don't think that they alone suggest that football is a problem. I think that football does have a greater problem than other sports with violence, and I think that history shows this. The McSorley incident, of course, was on the field... When we talk about problems with violent athletes, we're usually talking about off-the-field behavior. Without looking at statistics, I would think that hockey is the second sport that creates violent characters. You see somewhat of a correlation of violent sports with violent behavior off the field. You don't hear a great deal about golfers or swimmers being violent off-the-field, but you do hear quite a bit about football and hockey players.

From Guest: Has the NFL looked into stiffer punishments for flagrant fouls (ie: facemasking)?
Frank Deford: I think over the last few years the NFL and college and amateur football has made an effort to protect the more vulnerable players and to penalize more harshly. Unfortunately, you're dealing with a very brutal sport and no matter how many or how strong the penalties, you're going to have a degree of violence on the field. You can never legislate that out.

From Guest: Do you think it is just the time we are in, in the past decade was the violence brushed under the rug?
Frank Deford: That's a question that's often asked, and I think the answer is that to some extent, in the past, there was a tendancy to wink at what athletes did. "Boys will be boys." So I suspect that there was more misbehavior off the field than we're aware of, but I don't think that can account for the epidemic of violent behavior that I see today. I think, yes, more players are violent off the field today than there used to be.

From Guest: Frank - do you think we, as a society, coddle these guys from when they are high school stars - which allows them to think they can get away with anything?
Frank Deford: I think that's probably the main reason why we do see, not only so much violent behavior, but also general lawbreaking. Players from an early age find people to bend the rules for them, to take tests for them... it's okay to take money under the table, it's okay this and okay that... If that's the way you're treated, if that's the way you think society is and our culture is, then you are probably more inclined to feel you're above the law.

From Guest: Football is a violent game. How are athletes supposed to just turn that on and off, and why are we so surprised when they don't?
Frank Deford: I think that's the problem. They can't turn it on and off, so that's probably what lies at the heart of this. And we shouldn't, perhaps, be surprised. You create these monsters, so you can't shake your head when they're unable to pull the string and walk away. We may be asking too much of young men. And these are, after all, immature young men in many instances.

From Guest: How do you feel about the argument that players are role models as opposed to having a right to be their own, private selves?
Frank Deford: Players, and particularly star players, have to understand that they're going to be looked up to by children. That goes with the territory, they may not like it. You might remember Charles Barkley, at the height of powers, made a commercial for Nike: "Don't look up to me." But kids will look up to athletes. It's not a question of whether it's right or wrong. It's a reality. And athletes have to come to understand that, it's part of the bargain. It's like when these guys get big and make a lot of money, you're going to lose your privacy. And they shouldn't complain about that, because it's just a fact. So if you're going to be a star, you're going to be looked up to, and that can't be avoided.

From Guest: Will the Carruth and Lewis cases have a chilling effect on football's fan base (like the NBA and MLB strikes), or is this becoming something we have to live with?
Frank Deford: I think those are exceptional cases. I don't think that they're going to cast out many ripples. I think it's the general trend of the day-to-day, the drumroll of violence, that will have more of an effect on the way people think negatively about football, rather than these two specific cases. Let's face it, we could go for years and years -- as we have -- and not have a professional athlete involved in a murder. That's so rare. But we can rarely go for a day without having a professional athlete involved in lesser crimes. It's the cumulative stuff that I think football has to worry about. And when I say "lesser" stuff, I don't mean to take it lightly... I mean "lesser" relative to murder.

From Guest: Do you think these particular incidents are being overblown?
Frank Deford: No. No, I don't. When you have a situation of somebody who is famous, who commits or is alleged to have committed a capital crime, we can't be surprised that they're going to receive a lot of attention.

From Guest: Why does there seem to be a different set of laws for atheletes, NFL players in this case, then the rest of us humans?
Frank Deford: Who says there are a different set of laws? I think that all you have to do is look at the large number of athletes who have been convicted, and no, I don't think that in the courts that criminal behavior is excused for athletes. I think in the casual way of life, though, in school, for example, athletes may get advantages. In courts of law, they've had to suffer fines, jail sentences, no less than anyone else.

From Guest: Is the NFL violent crimes policy working? Is it a factor?
Frank Deford: Well, it doesn't seem to be working, does it? We still have a number of athletes who commit violent crimes. I think the NFL is doing the best it can, but unfortunately, teams are not looking for boy scouts. They're looking for the best players. So they might be thinking of signing players who already have criminal records -- one thinks of Lawrence Phillips immediately. At least to a certain extent, people who have served time and paid for their crimes deserve an opportunity to be employed, so we shouldn't hold it against teams that hire ex-cons, or those convicted in one way or another of violent behavior.

From Guest: Mr. Deford, I wonder what you think about what happened to the Cleveland Browns' Orlando Brown. Do you think the NFL handled this incident appropriately?
Frank Deford: That was such a bizarre incident... He had to be punished, they punished him... you always can argue about whether somebody got too harsh or too light a penalty. John Rocker, for example, just had his sentence reduced... But, yes, I think the league was right about spot-on there, yes.

From Guest: Are there going to be any changes in policy to try and lower the amount of stupid violence in the NFL?
Frank Deford: I don't think that it's a policy decision. I think the league is going to strive to do all it can to see that the players do not commit crimes, but what kind of a policy can you have? You can't say, "our policy is no more crime." They'll do the best they can, but you can't create any statutes to convince people to behave better.

From Guest: Should teams discipline their players more severly for their acts on and off the field?
Frank Deford: I think that may be a possibility in the same way that your employer and my employer would discipline or even fire us if we misbehaved. It may be that teams should be more quick to act when their players misbehave.

From Guest: How do you think a player's entourage affects his behavior?
Frank Deford: I think it relates to what I was talking about earlier... how athletes are pandered and spoiled. It probably gives him heightened awareness of himself and his value, and when you feel that way, you are inclined to feel that you're different and special and ultimately that you're above the law. I suppose that entourages can have a negative effect. I suppose it could also be argued that a good entourage could help keep you on the straight and narrow, so I guess it's the people in the entourage that matters.

From Guest: Do you anticipate an OJ Simpson-style reaction from the public if either Lewis or Carruth is found innocent?
Frank Deford: No. For the very simple reason that Simpson's crime was across racial lines. Lewis and Carruth, that's not an issue in their cases. Simpson's crime disturbed people in many different ways that aren't involved in these cases. It was much more emotionally charged.

From Guest: Do you think that some players are targeted, by media etc., waiting for players to make mistakes?
Frank Deford: I think if people have acted in a certain way in the past, we naturally -- human nature being what it is -- anticipate that they're more likely to act that way in the future. If you'd asked someone three weeks ago, who is more likely to have a drug addiction problem again, Joe Smith or Darryl Strawberry, they would have picked Strawberry. So it's natural for us to expect those who have acted inappropriately in the past to act that way again. It doesn't mean that people are laying in wait for them; it's just a natural response.

From Guest: What can be done to help NFL players (as well as younger athletes) to learn to control their emotions, yet still keep their competitive edge?
Frank Deford: I think I have to give a very sweeping answer, which is that this is very much the problem of everyone who comes into contact with these guys, from their friends, their coaches and teachers at a young age, their families... By the time someone gets to the NFL, the tree is already bent. All of that person's social experience has come to bear to make him who he is. So it's too late, in most cases, for a coach or a well-meaning team chaplain or even teammates to change that person. We have to work all along to help potentially violent young men learn that they have to learn to restrict that behavior to the field. My pleasure. I enjoyed being with you.

CNNSI Host: Thanks for joining us today, Frank.
Frank Deford: My pleasure Thanks for having me.

CNNSI Host: Thanks for all your questions, everyone. Sorry we couldn't get to all of them. Check back later today for a full transcript of today's chat.

CNNSI Host: Be sure to follow CNNSI.com's coverage of violence in the NFL.

Copyright © 2000 CNN/Sports Illustrated An AOL Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our privacy guidelines.