Sports PR 101 - A Public Relations Sports Blog

FOX broadcaster Tim McCarver broke SportsPR101’s golden rule when he referred to World War II-Europe on the air.

A major function of any solid public relations game plan is media training – the act of preparing a client for interviews and keeping him or her skilled in the specific messaging points that should be delivered to the media.

A good PR practitioner should be able to anticipate the general themes and types of questions a client might face and properly prepare him or her accordingly.

The teaching and reviewing of important messaging points with a client should also always include what subjects or issues to stay away from – i.e., it’s just as important to know what to say to the media as what not to say to the media and to the general public.

Taking that point one step further, it’s extremely important to advise clients on certain trigger words or phrasing to absolutely avoid. People who frequently speak to the media and to the general public – like athletes, coaches, team executives and broadcasters – can have a tendency to get “comfortable” around the microphone and, on occasion, say something inappropriate or offensive without intending to.

That is why it’sso important for sports PR executives to periodically drill clients on areas and topics to stay away from. As a PR practitioner my first rule in media training, for example, is to NEVER refer to Hitler or Nazism – or anything that could be connected to World War II-Europe. That’s an area where no matter what, your point will be overshadowed by your perceived insensitivity. You just can’t win there.

It may seem silly to have to instill that rule into media professionals, but from time to time those types of  references are made and a strong backlash of negative publicity results.

The most recent example of this media backlash occurred this past week when, last Saturday, FOX analyst Tim Carver was discussing during a broadcast the manor in which the New York Yankees have treated Joe Torre, their former manager, since he left the organization under strained circumstances following the 2007 season.

“You remember some of those despotic leaders in World War II, primarily in Russia and Germany, where they used to take those pictures that they had … taken of former generals who were no longer alive, they had shot ‘em,” McCarver said Saturday. “They would airbrush the pictures, and airbrushed the generals out of the pictures. In a sense, that’s what the Yankees have done with Joe Torre. They have airbrushed his legacy. I mean, there’s no sign of Joe Torre at the Stadium. And that’s ridiculous. I don’t understand it.”

Almost immediately following that comment came a wave of criticism from numerous media outlets, condemning McCarver for linking Torre and the Yankees to that that difficult time in history. Although McCarver never said the words “Hitler” or “Nazi” his statement automatically conjured up those thoughts.

Maybe McCarver’s analogy was accurate but he lost his audience because he used a World War II-Europe reference to make his point. Fair or not, McCarver was severely criticized and had to issue an apology.

Dwyane Wade added a new term into SportsPR101’s rules of “what never to say”when he referenced the September 11 attacks.

We also saw another sports media personality take some heat (no pun intended) this week when Miami HEAT guard Dwyane Wade was discussing with the media the pressure on his team to win following the acquisitions of superstars LeBron James and Chris Bosh.

“…You all are going to make it seem like the World Trade has just went down again. But it’s not going to be nothing but a couple basketball games lost and we’ll have to get back on track.”

Certainly not the wisest choice of words but in no way was Wade trying to compare a HEAT losing streak to the worst tragedy in American history. But because he referenced the World Trade Center disaster Wade opened the door to the misunderstanding and received heavy criticism as result. Subsequently, Wade had to issue an apology.

Wade had also left himself open to being misquoted and making the impact of his quote even worse – which is what happened when AOL Fanhouse reported Wade’s statement as, “If we lose a couple in a row this season, it will be like the World Trade (Center) is coming down again.”  A totally different meaning from what Wade actually said.

AOL Fanhouse eventually published the correct version of the quote (apologizing for the error) but for the few hours it had it wrong additional PR damage to Wade was done.

So now, after learning from the Wade slip, I’ve amended my media training rules to include no references to World War II-Europe and absolutely no mention of the September 11 attacks.

Those two areas are powerful subjects for obvious reasons and will always incite anger and hurt feelings when referenced in a sports context.

One of the great things about sports is its ability to tap into one’s emotional side. Nothing else in life except sports can make a person experience joy, anger, fear and frustration in a span of thirty seconds.

Whether it’s a big playoff game, a coaching change or a simple player acquisition; sports thrives on the emotional rollercoaster it can send people on.

Fans, of course, are encouraged to be opinionated, loyal and obnoxious when it comes to sports (hence the term “fan” from the word fanatic). Even players and, on occasion, head coaches and managers are permitted to act out publicly and display their emotions from time to time.

But the one area of sports where losing your composure is unacceptable is the front office. Front office personnel, although vital to the business success of a sports team, should always remain invisible to the general public. A member of the front office should never put themselves in a position to receive media attention – and that includes an owner.

Dan Gilbert, the majority owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers, broke that rule (actually, shattered it) last week following the news that his organization’s most prized possession defected to the Miami Heat.

In a scathing letter released to the public, Gilbert absolutely blasted LeBron James for not re-signing with his Cavs and for also holding a media event to announce his joining of a different team.

Referring to James’ departure as a “shameful display of selfishness and betrayal”, Gilbert promised that a curse would befall on James and that the Cavs would win an NBA title before James does with the Heat (click here to view the entire letter).

Ouch.

Now, no one could blame Gilbert for being angry and disappointed in which the manner of the LeBron sweepstakes played out. But any negative response by Gilbert, or a team executive, on a public level is a reflection of the total organization – not just ownership.

It was the Cavs' PR execs ultimately responsible to prevent Dan Gilbert from issuing his negative statement.

Gilbert pushed the best interest of his organization aside and lashed out publicly with a personal denouncement of James. Not a good move…

Gilbert’s letter hurt the Cavs’ image by making the organization look like a sore loser that’s crying to the world. He certainly damaged the team brand and hurt the Cavs negotiating power the next time they try to sign a free agent.

One has to wonder where the Cavs’ PR people where when Gilbert drafted the letter and released it publicly.

The possibility of James leaving Cleveland and signing with another team had been evident for quite some time. The Cavs PR department should have had at least two or three different press releases ready to go, anticipating every possible outcome, with the appropriate draft immediately released following James’ announcement.

Of course it’s certainly possible that the appropriate release was ready to go and Gilbert, acting in anger, insisted that his statement be released instead. But despite Gilbert being the boss and owner, the highest ranking PR official for the Cavs should have intervened with Gilbert and absolutely insisted that the negative statement not go out (with cooler heads prevailing).

That’s not an easy thing to do. To challenge the owner of the team (your boss) in such a manner could cost you your job. But sometimes it’s necessary to standup and fight for what you believe in. As a PR executive, your top priority is the image of the client or organization you represent. I’m sure in a more calm state Gilbert understands that and would never have released such a statement.

Ultimately it was the Cavs’ PR department that was responsible for the inappropriate and damaging letter Gilbert released.

My credo as a sports public relations and marketing professional has always been “Anything Goes Outside the Lines”. By which I mean that as along as you don’t interfere or disrupt the action on the field or court, nothing is off limits when it comes to promoting your team and trying to draw more fans to a game (within the spirit of good taste, of course).

Even organizations for the major league-level teams can not just rely on the team and game itself to attract fans, especially in today’s sports age. Now battling numerous other avenues of entertainment that did not exist 20 years ago (Internet, expansive cable television sports packages, a sinking economy, etc.), sports organizations are constantly researching, developing and executing unique promotions and marketing strategies to “put fannies in the seats”.

Although at times there can be a fine line between aggressive promotions and encroachment on an athlete’s performance. A great example of that fine line occurred Saturday night during the Florida Marlins-Tampa Bay Rays game at Sun Life Stadium in Miami.

Attempting to capitalize on the popularity of the World Cup (a brilliant idea, especially for a South Florida sports team); the Marlins gave away 15,000 vuvuzelas to fans before the start of the game. As a result, the game’s atmosphere was dominated by that low, but loud, buzzing sound you hear during World Cup matches.

The promotion was certainly a success, at least from a front office point of view. Attendance for the game included about 7,000 more people than on average. And the promotion also drew a heavy amount of media attention – which is always fantastic!

However, a fair amount of that media attention resulted from some players complaining about the odd noise by the vuvuzelas. Players on both teams along with Rays manager Joe Maddon made disconcerting remarks about the promotion to the media after the game, claiming the additional noise was very disrupting.

There was even a critical miscommunication which, according to home plate umpire Lance Barksdale, may have been the fault of the vuvuzelas. Prior to the start of bottom of ninth inning, Marlins manager Fredi Gonzalez visited with Barksdale to make a change in the lineup. Barksdale, however, apparently misheard Gonzalez and didn’t officially record the change, causing a Marlins hitter to bat out-of-order and cost the team an out in their eventual 9-8 loss.

Marlins 2B Dan Uggla only hurts his team and brand with critical comments like, “That was the worst handout or giveaway I’ve ever been a part of in baseball.”

So does this example of the Marlins vuvuzelas give away challenge my credo? Should it cause me to rethink that statement of “Anything Goes Outside the Lines”?

Although I’d have to stay no, because the vuvuzelas promotion could be chalked up as an exception and not the rule, it’s always advantageous to observe the work of colleagues and other sports executives in order to learn from their successes and failures (as you should learn from your own).

Perhaps the Marlins could of anticipated some type of backlash from the players and, prior to the game, discussed with both teams the impending added noise (which they may have done), better preparing them for any distractions.

Or the Marlins could have simply reduced the number of vuvuzelas handed out (thus limiting the noise level) but that could have hurt the impact of the promotion.

Although the Marlins and Rays are Major League teams and should expect and deserve the highest quality of game operations, the players should still understand that their organizations work very hard to put fans into the seats to watch them play. Those front office and game-day staffs work long hours to assist the players. So players should take that into consideration before making critical statements to the media about their front office staffs – which only hurt their team and brand.

An important side note to the whole affair was the terrific public relations job Marlins president David Samson did to defuse much of the negative feedback of the promotion.

“It was absolutely outstanding,” Samson told Tom D’Angelo of the PALM BEACH POST. “As far as we’re concerned it absolutely worked. People were here, they enjoyed themselves, it was a great atmosphere.” (click here)

It was a smart move for Samson to shift the story’s focus to the success of the promotion, not just simply refute the complaints.

At just 16, Abby Sunderland was allowed to risk her life and attempt to sail a boat solo around the world.

It’s always interesting the type of sports stories the media decides all at the same time to pounce upon.

Aside from the obvious sporting events that are routinely covered (the World Cup, Major League Baseball, the NBA Finals), there always seems to be an unusual story in the world of sports that most media outlets give special attention to.

That story this past week was Abby Sunderland, the 16-year old American who was attempting to become the youngest person to sail solo around the world. Her most recent attempt drew heavy media coverage when on Thursday it was thought she was in serious danger as her satellite phone contact was lost and two of her manually operated emergency radio beacons were activated.

It was apparent that Sunderland was in distress and missing somewhere on the high seas, hundreds of miles away from the nearest ship or vessel.

The story had a happy ending as a rescue team was assembled and Sunderland was found alive and safe by a French commercial fishing vessel.

Throughout the almost 48-hour ordeal virtually every national media outlet issued frequent updates on Sunderland, painting a bleak picture for the young sailor. So when she was found alive and rescued it made for a great “feel good” story.

All’s well that ends well, right? I don’t think so.

It was certainly great news that Sunderland survived and was returned to her family safe and sound. But why was such a young person allowed to take such a great risk?

It’s dangerous for any person to attempt to sail around the world solo. So it is very disturbing that a child is not only allowed to risk her life for a sports record but encouraged to do so with heavy media attention.

Perhaps it’s not my place to question the judgment of Sunderland’s parents or even the United States Sailing Association (US Sailing) for not strongly denouncing the child’s attempt. But the media has a responsibility to at least pose the question as to why the life of a child was put in harms way.

Despite having to be rescued in the middle of the Indian Ocean, Sunderland has boasted the she’s going to try to sail around the world again.

Today’s sports media is well passed the role of just reporting the scores and news. Media outlets now-a-days routinely issue editorials and opinion pieces but did not do so about Sunderland’s foolish risk. It only focused on her incredible skills and abilities for a sailor at such a young age.

If the sailor attempting the extraordinary feat was a legal-aged adult then there would be no place for the media to object. But something is wrong when the life of a child is put at serious risk and no one bats an eye.

If Sunderland were to have successfully completed her journey she would have been hailed as a hero by the media. That’s a very dangerous precedent to set as it would encourage other youths to put their lives at risk for a sports record.

But even being hit with the harsh reality that Sunderland almost didn’t make it back home alive and two days went by with the possibility she could be dead, nobody in the media seems to be bothered that she was allowed to put her life in danger.

I’m not suggesting that one of the functions of sports media is to serve as an oversight committee or some type of watchdog service. But from time to time, when a situation calls for it, the media does need to step up and point out wrong doings or injustices. It has a responsibility to shed light on issues that need to be brought to people’s attention.

Allowing a child, regardless of how skilled, to take a sailboat all alone with no supervision into the middle of the ocean for a number of weeks is extremely reckless and, in my opinion, criminal.

But with all the positive attention the media has created for Sunderland and sailing, more children are likely to attempt similar risks in sports – like sailing, mountain climbing, racecar driving, etc.

Aspiring to achieve goals and break records in sports is a wonderful ambition, at any age. But when a child puts their life at risk for something as trivial as a sports record, someone has to point out the absurdity.

And that “someone” in this case is the media.

It is generally considered throughout the sports industry a good idea to stay as far away from political issues as possible. Sports teams understand that they are in the business of providing entertainment via athletics to as many people as their advertising, marketing and public relations efforts can reach.

The absolute last thing any sports executive would want to do is alienate a demographic with a political opinion or message.

However, once in a great while there comes a time in our country when a political issue collides with sports and some type of public response or action is necessary.

On April 23 of this year the state of Arizona signed into law the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act (aka Arizona Senate Bill 1070 or Arizona SB 1070). Scheduled to go into effect beginning July 28, the law will make it a misdemeanor crime for an alien to be in Arizona without carrying legal documents.

Although, like all laws, the official legal wording is very detailed and specific; the scope of this new law gives all law enforcement officials the right to approach any person in Arizona, under any circumstance, and demand proof of citizenship or legal status.

Obviously this is an extremely controversial law that’s causing outrage and protest throughout our nation. The eye of this storm, of course, is set directly on Arizona but because this has become a national debate and can, ultimately, affect every state all sports teams are being forced to address this issue.

With Hispanic and Latino Americans as the largest ethnic minority group in the U.S. (according to the U.S. Census Bureau), every sports team and league executive must be seriously exploring its strategy on handling this issue.

We’ve already seen two sports organizations step up and offer its position on the matter.

Already an aggressive marketer to its large Latino and Hispanic community, the Phoenix Suns wore jerseys that read “Los Suns” on the front for Game 2 of the Western Conference semifinals on Wednesday night (which also happened to be Cinco de Mayo).

The Suns also issued a press release where owner Robert Sarver stated:

“The frustration with the federal government’s failure to deal with the issue of illegal immigration resulted in passage of a flawed state law. However our players and organization felt that wearing our ‘Los Suns’ jerseys on Cinco de Mayo was a way for our team and our organization to honor our Latino community and the diversity of our league, the state of Arizona, and our nation…However intended, the result of passing the law is that our basic principles of equal rights and protection under the law are being called into question.”

Steve Nash, the Suns all-star guard and future NBA Hall of Famer, also voiced his opinion when he appeared earlier this week on ESPN’s Pardon the Interruption.

“(The Arizona law) really damages our civil liberties. I think it opens up the potential for racial profiling and racism. … It represents our state poorly in the eyes of the nation and the world.”

MLB and every sports league and team in America has a social responsibility to address the controversy surrounding the new law.

Major League Baseball, a sport in which 28% of players on Opening Day rosters this year were foreign-born, has yet to offer any public stance on the issue and will have no choice but to do so in the near future.

According to SI.com’s Melissa Segura, an MLB league spokesman recently declined comment on the issue (click here).

Half of MLB’s teams play their Spring Training games in Arizona and the league’s 2011 all-star game is scheduled to be hosted by the Arizona Diamondbacks.

Also, many players have already spoken out against the law including Chicago White Sox manager (and Venezuelan) Ozzie Guillen who said, “I don’t think (the law) is fair to anybody from any country.”

To put even more pressure on commissioner Bud Selig and MLB, the Major League Baseball Players Association has jumped into the mix by issuing a statement of its own denouncing the law.

“…The Major League Baseball Players Association opposes this law as written. We hope that the law is repealed or modified promptly. If the current law goes into effect, the MLBPA will consider additional steps necessary to protect the rights and interests of our members.” (click here for entire statement)

As a rule, professional sports and politics don’t mix simply because it isn’t good for business. But sometimes things occur in life that are more important than sports and generating revenue…and this is one of those times.

Regardless of ones personal thoughts and opinions on the new Arizona law and how it will affect the rest of the country, every pro team and league has a responsibility to be socially conscious of the important issues surrounding its players and fans.

One of the most popular sporting events in the United States is March Madness, the annual NCAA Division I men’s basketball tournament.

Since the mid 1980’s, when the tournament expanded to include 64 teams, March Madness has jumped into the same class as the Super Bowl, World Series, Daytona 500 and the Masters as, arguably, one of the top five American sporting event.

So when rumors began to surface recently that the NCAA is considering expanding the tournament to 96 teams, thus tinkering with the enormously successful formula that’s made March Madness so beloved, a reaction of anger and extreme disapproval from most fans and media has surfaced – making it clear that the masses do want their tournament messed with.

But despite fan and media opinion, the NCAA will, most likely, take a proven and successful product and alter it in order to generate more revenue. That’s just a fact of life in big business.

So along with an extra couple of hundred million dollars, the NCAA’s decision will result in anger and dismay from fans and heavy criticism by the media.

Aware of the rapidly growing negative reaction, the NCAA has already begun a spin campaign to neutralize some of the backlash.

Jim Isch, the NCAA’s interim president, made himself available for a cushy interview with CBS analyst Seth Davis to discuss the impending tournament expansion.

The interview, aired a few hours before the first game of the Final Fouron Saturday, was a softball-style Q&A session where Isch was able to fire off a host of public relations messaging points without any challenge or follow up from Davis – which makes sense since both the NCAA and CBS will profit from the tournament expansion.

The interview was a good start for the NCAA. But the organization must continue to build its PR campaign in order to ease the transition of the new tournament format.

It’s very wise for the NCAA to lay some PR groundwork before the official announcement, softening up the fans and educating the media on the “positives and benefits” of the expansion.

The NCAA should also encourage its bigger name coaches to speak out in favor of the expansion to develop some stronger credibility for the change (which we’ve already seen from Florida’s Billy Donovan and Syracuse’s Jim Boeheim).

The NCAA will want to keep an open dialogue with media and fans about the expansion. The plan should not just be: Make the announcement; endure the criticism; move on.

However, an important part of its PR strategy should also include avoiding awkward exchanges with the media, like the one that occurred earlier this week.

During a press conference at the site of the Final Four in Indianapolis, Washington Post columnist John Feinstein peppered Greg Shaheen, NCAA senior vice president of basketball and business strategies, with questions about the expansion and how the longer schedule will affect the student-athletes’ class schedule.

It was clear during the exchange that Shaheen was not prepared to address that specific issue and, as a result, may have hurt some the NCAA’s credibility and image with regards to the expansion.

It’s absolutely essential that the NCAA media trains its executives and spokespeople to properly communicate important messaging points and avoid embarrassing mistakes with media.  

There’s no way the NCAA can avoid enduring some degree of negative publicity and bruising to its image by expanding the tournament. But by integrating a solid PR campaign through careful planning and strategy, the NCAA can take control and significanly reduce the damage.

In the most recent chapter of Tiger Woods’ public relations saga, the embattled golfer granted interviews Sunday to ESPN and the Golf Channel that were aired simultaneously.

The interviews were arranged by Woods’ new PR representation, Ari Fleischer Sports Communications, and included two unique and (most likely) unprecedented parameters that each network had to agree on in order to receive the tasty media treat.

Woods’ reps insisted that the interview last no longer than five minutes and could not be promoted or announced publicly until one hour prior to airing. The networks, it was reported, were allowed to choose who conducted the interviews and could ask any question they wanted. But the restrictions of interview length and interview promotion had to be adhered to.

So despite the provisions, ESPN and the Golf Channel’s communications’ bosses agreed to the interview.

CBS, however, who broadcasts many PGA TOUR events including the Masters (were Woods will make his dramatic return to golf in April), was also offered the Woods’ interview with same restrictions but declined  – reportedly deterred by the five minute rule.

So why would CBS balk at the time restriction and turn down the sure ratings hit while ESPN and the Golf Channel agreed to the rule and conducted the interview?

It’s understandable why Woods would insist on the five minute rule. He remains in the extremely awkward situation of attempting to re-enter public life. Woods is fighting to regain (as much as possible) his popularity among fans and sponsors while, at the same time, trying to put his embarrassing scandals and domestic issues behind him.

As a result, Woods has no choice but to deal with the media and make himself available, to some degree, for interviews and other media requests.

But knowing how thirsty the media is for any Tiger Woods news or stories, Woods’ PR reps cleverly leveraged that hysteria into some extremely beneficial treatment for their client. By requiring the interview to last no more than five minutes (a very short time frame for any interview), Woods’ PR reps were able to, in essence, control the topics and limit the airtime of Woods discussing his unfortunate events during the last four months.

The time restriction allowed Woods to glaze over the extremely sensitive questions from ESPN’s Tom Rinaldi and the Golf Channel’s Kelly Tilghman and drag out answers to questions he was more comfortable with – hence, running out the clock. The limited time also prevented the interviewers from pressing Woods to answer questions more thoroughly. They had to hurry to get their next question in.

So, again, why did CBS say no to Woods while ESPN and the Golf Channel said yes?

It comes down to standards. ESPN has built its empire by blending sports reporting with entertainment. The network has increasingly blurred the line between journalism and celebrity and does not hold itself to the same journalist rules and integrity of most reputable media outlets.

ESPN is not a true news media outlet. It’s entertainment that’s wrapped around the façade of sports reporting.

CBS, on the other hand, has different standards and interests. Both the network’s sports and news divisions incorporate very high journalist standards into its content. The network could not, in good faith, air an interview with Woods in the guise of true journalism when the resulting product would have been compromised.

Even though CBS would have scored very high ratings with a five minute Woods interview, the network maintained its credibility as a trusted news source and passed on the opportunity.

(The Golf Channel is a minor player in the sports media world and simply could not afford to pass up the Woods’ interview, regardless of the network’s journalistic standards.)

CBS should be applauded for its decision not to cater to Woods’ PR reps. A real and legitimate media outlet should never allow its subject to manipulate an interview.

A media interview is either true or not. There’s no in between.

In an expected move announced late last week, Michael Jordan and his ownership group, MJ Basketball Holdings LLC, have purchased a controlling interest in the Charlotte Bobcats.

Already a minority owner and the team’s head of basketball operations, Jordan bought out current owner Robert L. Johnson to take total control of the financially struggling franchise (pending league approval).

Since the team’s inception in 2004, the Bobcats have struggled mightily to put fans in the seats and turn a profit. The organization has ranked near the bottom of the league in attendance each of its five seasons and has never come close to posting a .500 record (although they have a shot this year).

Desperate for a strong boost in their marketing and promotional efforts, the Bobcats will receive a gift from the basketball gods when MJ takes full control of the reigns.

Jordan, of course, is not only one of the greatest NBA players of all time but is the single greatest marketing machine in the history of sports. Period.

No athlete has ever been marketed and promoted more successfully or has reached a higher level in sports advertising and sponsorship than “Air Jordan”.

Simply put, Michael Jordan revolutionized the world of sports marketing. The whole thing changed when he came onto the scene.

So what an incredible opportunity for Jordan, whose name still carries the awe-inspiring power and prestige it had during his playing days, to use his influence and invoke some much needed buzz into the floundering franchise.

It seems like a logical and necessary PR move by the team, right? Don’t be so sure it’s going to happen.

Since his “final” retirement from the NBA as a player in 2003, Jordan has maintained a relatively low public profile.

After his dismissal as Director of Basketball Operations for the Washington Wizards, Jordan has devoted the majority of his time to charitable engagements, celebrity golf events, his clothing line and, oddly, a motorcycle road racing team.

Even when he joined the Bobcats’ front office staff in 2006, Jordan stayed out of the limelight and remained behind the scenes with virtually no public presence – you can’t even find his name or face on the team’s web site.

Of course Jordan has the right to remain as anonymous and inconspicuous as he wants. And maybe as a minority partner of the Bobcats he preferred to focus on just the basketball operations and stay away from the team’s marketing and PR.

But now as the sole owner of the franchise it would be an absolute travesty for Jordan not to step out from the shadows and use his name and face to promote the team and dramatically turn the organization around.

Of course Jordan will focus on the basketball side of things. There’s no more effective way to put fans in the seats and drum up interest and publicity than winning.

But there’s more to running a sports franchise than just the performance of your team, especially in today’s pro sports world. Marketing, advertising and PR are vital to promoting your product and generating revenue.

By stepping into the role of team owner Jordan has to be prepared to meet with fans, do commercials and be extremely accessible to the media.

Bascially, get involved on a public level.

Think about how awesome it would be if you’re a sports fan, living somewhere in the Charlotte metropolitan area, and your phone rings one night with Michael Jordan on the line asking you to become a season ticket holder with the Bobcats.

Who’s going to say no to His Airness?

Michael Jordan has been an enigma since his playing days ended close to 10 years ago. Jordan has certainly earned the right to do what he pleases and doesn’t owe the sports world a thing.

But the news of his purchase has launched Jordan back onto the national sports scene…and he knew that would happen.

So let’s hope he does the right thing and allows himself to become a major part of the Bobcats marketing and PR efforts and, as a result, return to the sports world where he is sorely missed.