The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
Only the New York Times could see the dark side of Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow spending time with a brain-injured young man. In an article headlined "Curtain Closes on Tebow's Season, but His Sideshow Goes On," a reporter disparages Tebow for praying with brain-injured Zachary McLeod, 20, after the brutal loss to the Patriots on Saturday night.
After the game, Tebow had told reporters about McLeod and said that overall it hadn't been a bad day, depending on "what lens you look through." That was the first bad thing he did.
When Tebow and family prayed with the McLeod family, apparently the Times reporter tried to intervene and was asked to back off. He didn't take it well. He goes off on Tebow, mocking him for the game (apparently our offense is mostly to blame for our defense letting the Patriots score 45 points). The reporter gets into the mind of John Elway and at one point writes, "While Tebow has made his priorities clear that his faith comes first, Elway’s job demands that Tebow be the analytical secularist and stick to the science of football."
But the kicker is amazing. It pretends like sports teams just hang out together in mass, hugging and crying, for the 6 hours following a losing game. Has this sports reporter ever covered a sporting event before? Check it out:
As he always does, he thanked his teammates for their support and effort immediately after praising God. But one was left to surmise that he, the Broncos’ purported leader, should have been with them late Saturday night instead of in the corridor tending to his personal business, no matter how giving it was.
There are times when duty to team has to come first. Surely one of them is in the wake of lopsided and season-ending defeat.
You can imagine The Onion satirists were angry that this came out in the newspaper of record before they could write it up.
- Comment (58)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments :
Apr '11
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
So I've never been a Broncos fan, sorry. However, the sheer amount of hatred for Tebow in the news this year (coupled with my dislike of the Patriots) actually pushed me over the edge where this year I was rooting for Denver in the playoffs.
The world is all backwards. Dogs and cats, living together. Up is down; down is up. Right is wrong; wrong is right. Bitter is sweet; sweet is bitter. I fear I'm only being half humorous at best when I type that.
Dec '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
I suspect Araton and the NYT crowd is not only offended by Tebow's faith, but also the fact that Tebow sees the value of Zachary McLeod's life. Assuming Araton plays to type (and this writing sure suggests he does), he would rather write Zach off post-injury and move on to the important people in the locker room. It's the same mentality that leads the left to support the abortion of babies with Downs.
Jul '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
Forget it, Jake. It's the New York Times.
Dec '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
tabula rasa:
Has this reporter ever been in a football locker-room? Part of the deal is that when football players lose a game, they man up on their own and handle it.
Except for the childish fools who don't man up. For example, William Gay of the Steelers who handled his grief after blowing his coverage on the game winning Tebow to DT touchdown by vandalizing his (visitors) locker and refusing to talk to the press. I checked, and Araton was not offended by that situation. If he was, there was no column mocking Gay.
The correction at the bottom of the article makes it all the more Onion-ish:
May '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
God loved the world so... BOOM! He gave us Jesus.
Dec '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
Agreed, Mollie, but let's not forget to spread the love around to our non-existent offensive line (14 plays for a loss! 14!), the receivers (especially DT) who dropped way too many passes (both good and bad from Tebow), and the coaches with their insanely timid play-calling. A friend watching the game tweeted what I think encapsulated the entire Bronco's night: "Did anybody on the Broncos team come to play tonight other than McGahee?"
Dec '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
Duplicate post
Edited on Jan 16 at 10:09amDec '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
triplicate post
Edited on Jan 16 at 10:10amDec '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
Whoa! Quadruplicate post. Sorry friends, apparently my little piece of the interwebs just exploded.
Edited on Jan 16 at 10:11amFeb '11
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
Well, this opinion "journalist" obviously knows little about football, and even less about travel time. I'm sure there was enough time for a 6-hour crying session on the long flight home. After all, the game ended (mercifully) before 10 p.m Denver time, and they were due back in Denver around 4:30 in the morning. Good grief!
As for Tebow, his skills are not finely honed yet, but he is a glorified rookie. His football interviews show that he understands the game even if he can't always execute properly. The Broncos played like a 0.500 club versus a perennial juggernaut in Denver's first playoff appearance since 2005. Tebow, the offensive line, and the defense all played important roles in the team's progress this year. All in all, the season was respectable with many things to build on for next year.
Jun '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
das_motorhead: Whoa! Quadruplicate post. Sorry friends, apparently my little piece of the interwebs just exploded. · Jan 16 at 10:06am
Edited on Jan 16 at 10:11 am
In one of his novels, the great Terry Pratchett wrote: "Windle shook his head sadly. Five exclamation marks, the sure sign of an insane mind."
"Ricochet members shook their heads sadly. Quadruplicate posts. the sure sign of . . . . ."
Dec '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
Can I blame George Bush or Global Warming? Please?
tabula rasa
"Ricochet members shook their heads sadly. Quadruplicate posts. the sure sign of . . . . ." · Jan 16 at 10:27am
Mar '11
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
I wonder if some of the derangement over Tebow's expression of faith is pent up frustration in the nihilist journalism world with faithful athletes in general but because most are Black have had to restrain themselves.
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
das_motorhead
Agreed, Mollie, but let's not forget to spread the love around to our non-existent offensive line (14 plays for a loss! 14!), the receivers (especially DT) who dropped way too many passes (both good and bad from Tebow), and the coaches with their insanely timid play-calling. A friend watching the game tweeted what I think encapsulated the entire Bronco's night: "Did anybody on the Broncos team come to play tonight other than McGahee?" · Jan 16 at 9:59am
I know. I have no idea what happened to our offensive line. It was just weird to watch.
Jun '11
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
EJ, guess I gave Araton too much credit... I had him chasing Tebow around after the loss asking "Where's your messiah now, Tebow?"
Jun '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
das_motorhead: Can I blame George Bush or Global Warming? Please?
tabula rasa
"Ricochet members shook their heads sadly. Quadruplicate posts. the sure sign of . . . . ." · Jan 16 at 10:27am
Jan 16 at 11:15am
Global warming seems to explain everything, including insanity.
Feb '11
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
This is not really fair. Here's the quote from the article:
"Soon they were all praying together, while a protective cocoon of Tebow’s people formed around the pair, becoming huffy when a couple of reporters stopped to observe."
I have no dog in this fight. I don't like the Times, and I don't really care one way or the other about Tebow. But you don't do yourself any favors when you don't portray things accurately. "Stopping to observe" is not "intervening." You're just throwing red meat to the dogs here so everybody can unload on the Times.
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
sdb
This is not really fair. Here's the quote from the article:
OK, I may have overshot that one. That I completely distrusted his account of things is not an excuse, either.
Mar '11
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
I understand that when the NYT was asked if they wanted to field a team in a local softball league they wrote back and asked whether they could play badminton instead.
Dec '10
Re: The New York Times Sees Tebow's Dark Side
tabula rasa: I believe what we have here are two concurrent narratives from the school of amateur football psychology: the "losing QB as secular grief counselor" and the "losing QB as kindergarten teacher" narratives.
"No Tim, don't spend time praying with the brain injury patient; you must comfort your bereaved teammates even though most are older than you and are millionaires--it is your duty kiss their 'owies' and build their self-esteem."
Has this reporter ever been in a football locker-room? Part of the deal is that when football players lose a game, they man up on their own and handle it. And, much as I love the Broncos, this wasn't their first loss of the season--it was their ninth.
Is there anything written in the NY Times anymore that isn't agenda driven? · Jan 16 at 7:48am
Don't forget the "losing QB as shepherd of his flock" paradigm. The Times reporter was confused that Tebow was attending to the spiritual needs of another person when he should have been ministering to his teammates. Because, you see, the reporter assigns to football the position in his life that Tebow assigns to religion.