This is my first post. I lack the football smarts to post here, but I love to read you guys :) However, before we take a look forward to Atlanta, I want to say my piece on the glove issue.
I must say, I've been somewhat dismayed while reading some of the reactions by the local media and even members of the broncos organization over this issue of Brandon Marshall's plan to display a black and white glove as a tribute of racial unity. Jimmy Page recently dismissed Marshall's glove salute just another selfish, immature step down the path to becoming the next T.O.
Page: "Three years into the league, you wonder if Marshall is ever going to get it. That it's about the team, not him. The truth is, he's showing all the signs of being a prima donna wide receiver in the mold of Terrell Owens and Chad Johnson." (See the Article: http://www.denverpost.com/jimmy/ci_10928114 )
I have to take issue with a such one-sided public negative assessments of Marshall's (almost) action.
I'm not saying people shouldn't call out the potential impact to the team, however I think anyone who is going to criticize Marshall's means should at least level that criticism with some kind of endorsement of his ends (racial and national unity). I feel any comment that fails to at least acknowledge this goal, or, at worse, lumps it it in with typical "wide receiver prima donna" behavior runs the risk of belittling those very admirable goals.
No one here would question Jake Plummer's tribute to Pat Tillman. That act was above football, and justifiably seen as quite noble. Could Jake have found another way to honor his friend? Sure, but he wanted to send a message that at the end of the day football is just a game he was playing, while his friend sacrificed his life for his country.
Now, Marshall's act would have impacted the game, where as Plummer only faced a league penalty. Yet I feel that his tribute, too, classifies as "above football."
Could have Marshall have found another, less costly (though substantially less influential) way to show his national pride? Sure. That would have have certainly been more sensible. Marshall needs to use better judgement–something that was quite clear from listening to Marshall muddle through his incomprehensible post-game news conference.
Yet I stand by my view that anyone with a microphone or widely circulated column) does the public (and dare say the nation*) a disservice when discussing the glove without giving at least a *nod* to its meaning, not to mention the noble (not selfish!) intentions of Marshall.
* Of course this wasn't meant as an explicitly political statement, nor do I believe was Marshall's.