Theory: Why the New York Media Comes Down Hard on A-Rod

Alex Rodriguez has been taking a lot of shit from the sports media, especially in New York. A lot of it during the season was deserved; his defense was horrendous and he went through hitting slumps that made even his deepest sympathizers mad.

In the end, his numbers were very good: .290 batting average, 35 home runs, 121 RBI. Those 121 RBI are the best on the Yankees, better than anyone on the Mets, and ranks 8th in the Majors. Far from a disappointing season, despite hitting just .217 in June. Now the postseason comes and this is all forgotten. The center of attention becomes his 2-for-15 performance in last year's Division Series vs. the Angels. No mention of the fact that he batted .358 in September and this might just carry over into the postseason. Granted, it hasn't. He's just 1-for-8 in the first two games of this Division Series and hasn't come through in a couple of critical spots. But in their Game 2 loss vs. the Tigers, A-Rod somehow manages to be the focus of scrutiny when the whole team came up short.

I wonder why. That was not a sarcastic statement. I truly wonder why Derek Jeter is the face of the Yankees, the pride, the class, the success, everything that is pure and good about a storied franchise, and Alex Rodriguez is the goat, the weakness, the face behind the Yankees' failure to win a World Series since 2000 (nevermind the fact he didn't join the Yankees until 2004).

I came up with a theory. It came to me while mentally reviewing all the shit that's been said over the years about A-Rod. One particular quote came up was from Rick Reilley of Sports Illustrated on Sept. 20. He was a guest on The Big Show with Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann on ESPN Radio reacting to an article by his colleague Tom Verducci in which some of his teammates (most of them anonymously) expressed their opinions on A-Rod. Asked what surprised him most about the article, Reilley responds:

I guess that somebody finally told a reporter what we've heard so often, what we've whispered so often, that A-Rod's not well-liked, that he's sort of alone in the locker room; that the players sort of think he's a phony. He--, I mean, I've been with him, I've been to his house, he's certainly a nice guy, but at all times you always get the feeling that you're always with his-- he's his own PR guy. He's constantly like, 'Look at this painting,' and 'Isn't this-- look at what I've done for kids here,' and 'Here's my best friend from childhood,' and it's kinda like Phil Mickelson in that he's a good guy, he's very good with the fans, he's a great athlete, but you're kinda like 'OK, where's the real you?'

We've become a tabloid society. And it's kinda pathetic. We're so bored with our own lives that we constantly want to know what everyone else is doing. Anyone who opposes is looked at as an oddball or as someone who doesn't know how to deal with their own fame. Everyone looks at A-Rod and it appears that everything he does, from his haircut to the brand of toothpaste he uses to his reaction to a called third strike, is rehearsed or planned out. Like Jose Canseco said in his book, everything out of his mouth "sounds like it was tested by some kind of focus group beforehand."

That's fine. I happen to agree with that. Alex might be a closed person, or maybe he just boring! It might be hard for some people to believe, that a guy that can cause so much excitement on the ballfield can be boring off it.

I believe sports reporters overanalyze A-Rod's on-field accomplishments because of this. Since they won't get any quotes out of him that'll get people talking, they beat the same story to the ground. Osama Bin Laden is no longer front page news, not because he's no longer a top priority for our military (or so they say), but because the same story became boring and wouldn't sell newspapers. My question is, is this A-Rod bullshit really selling papers?