Courtesy New York Post

(January 15, 2010) So now that Phil Simms has blended preparation and wisdom with modesty, folksy charm and good humor to be regarded as the best football analyst in the TV business — for what it’s worth, that’s where I rank him — what now? Where does he go from here?

Does he play it safe, as John Madden did, adding to his pile of endorsements and outside gigs while saying little more significant than “Boom!” and taking occasional shots at anonymous back judges?

Or does Simms, confident and conscientious, seize his forum to leave a different mark, his mark?

Sunday, Tom Brady threw wide receiver Sam Aiken a “medicine ball.” Strung out and hung out in one of those blast-me positions, he was separated from the ball and his senses by a legal hit from Ravens’ cornerback Frank Walker. Aiken spun in the air, out of control. A slo-mo CBS replay showed him actually bouncing off the frozen ground.

You didn’t have to play football to know that Aiken likely was hurt and that he’d likely stay down. He was, he did.

No matter, Walker — a Giant from 2003 to 2006 — went into a hollering, chest-pounding, foot-stomping parade in tribute to himself. It was the kind of remorseless, immodest and primitive behavior now seen 12, 15, 20 times per game.

To know Simms, and for that matter, his partner, Jim Nantz, is to know that both despise “professional” conduct such as Walker’s. Beyond the unsporting, nauseating demonstration, Walker, if Aiken had been permanently injured — crippled, perhaps — would forever be attached to a clip of his celebration of the deed.

But neither Simms nor Nantz said a word. And it’s inconceivable that the analyst — a man hired to provide his opinion — can see something he despises 12, 15, 20 times per game and not say so, not even once. And once is all it takes to leave an important message.

It comes down to whether Simms wants to be just the latest No. 1 or as a No. 1 who also tried to restore some sport to his sport — while protecting what was left. He can continue to be among the best while playing it safe. Or he can occasionally be heard on behalf of right-headed fans.

What’s the worst that could happen? Simms could be called a “square.” He is a square, square enough to prefer right over wrong. So why not say it? Nothing harsh, but pointed, something like, “Gee, Jim, I’d like to see him make a big deal over himself like that after he misses a tackle [or fumbles, or drops a pass].”

It’s worth a try, no? Why would Simms protect the worst acts by subjugating his sense of right from wrong? Silence from a man with Simms’ forum is pandering.

Simms can stay his course and remain a valued analyst, the best of the lot, even. Or he can use it to take it one notch higher, the way fellows in his TV position have never done because they become cautious, even frightened.

Sunday, he should have taken a poke at Walker for pounding his chest and demonstrating his great self-regard after his free shot at a defenseless receiver left him laid out. Simms is too good to have said nothing about it.

Besides, who, except a fool, would have disagreed?

blog comments powered by Disqus

Accelerate Your Sports Broadcasting Career

Meet Employers

Secrets Revealed

Radio Demos, Resumes

TV Demos, Resumes

Sports Broadcasting Books

Sportscastings Jobs

Show Prep Links