More Hyperventillating from Scott D. Pierce About Things BYU – Steve Young’s Comments in Bloomburg Business Week Profile “Stunning,” “Reckless”? Hardly; They’re Simply Another “Dog Bites Man” Story
By Ken K. Gourdin
Salt Lake Tribune television critic Scott Pierce, who also writes often about sports media coverage, is hyperventilating again about more things BYU (Brigham Young University, the school owned and operated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints [aka Mormons]). Steve Young, of course, played quarterback at “Quarterback U” in the 1980s, and was the most notable, most successful pro quarterback the school has produced in a long line of successful college quarterbacks.
For my commentary regarding the last episode of Pierce’s hyperventilating regarding things BYU that I witnessed, see here, last accessed (this link, along with all other links herein, last accessed February 14, 2017):
Young now is a football analyst for ESPN. Pierce called Young’s confession, in a profile for Bloomburg Business Week, that football is no longer at the very top of Young’s priority list “stunning” and “reckless.” For this episode of hyperventilating by Pierce, see here: http://www.sltrib.com/sports/4938257-155/pierce-steve-young-tries-to-walk. I responded to Pierce’s latest episode of hyperventillating as follows:
I doubt Steve Young is poorly compensated by ESPN. That said, what he earns in private equity probably dwarfs his compensation from ESPN. It’s simply human nature to allocate one’s time, effort, and resources based on the return one gets from the activity. If ESPN’s powers-that-be have a problem with how devoted Young is in his role with them, or how much effort he puts into it (if what they’re paying him doesn’t match what they feel they should be getting from him in return) I’m sure Young will be the first to know.
When Young played football, the lion’s share of his time, effort, and resources were expended in maximizing his performance in that endeavor, because at that time, whatever other activities he engaged in, he got the biggest return from football. Now, while football may be somewhere on his list of priorities, he gets the biggest return from something else, so that’s where he expends the lion’s share of his time, effort, and resources, while, accordingly, devoting proportionally less time, less effort, and fewer resources to football.
That seems like a perfectly sane, uncontroversial, common-sense proposition. All of us must establish priorities, and must live accordingly. With all due respect to the first person who put the slogan “Football [or fill in sport here] is life” on a T-shirt, that’s why so many athletes seem to have such skewed priorities. Yes, it’s a great game, but, still, it’s simply a game. And I might also point out that arguably, Steve Young simply did what savvy interviewees/profile subjects do: He considered his audience. If he were talking to someone from, say, Sports Illustrated, whatever his other priorities are and wherever they happen to rank on his list, he might talk about why football is, or why it has been, important to him. But he wasn’t; he was speaking with someone from Bloomburg Business Week, so they talked about … business, about finance, and he talked about why that is important to him.
This isn’t “stunning,” and it isn’t “reckless.” Putting aside his daring nature as an athlete, if Steve Young is “reckless,” then I’m positively insane. This isn’t a “man bites dog” story; it’s simply another “dog bites man” story.