Mister Faded Glory

The day after (media day) prompts some of the sportswriting elite to turn their cameras on a reclusive favorite of Mr. Faded Glory’s — as SI and ESPN both trot out profiles of reclusive (and thus enigmatic) Marvin Harrison, diminishing his career returns because of playoff stat lines that pale in comparison. Check them out:

ESPN’s Michael Smith: Harrison’s actions speak louder than his words

Sports Illustrated’s Jeffri Chadiha: Disappearing Act

I have no problem with discussing Harrison’s statistical downturn in production in the playoffs. (Smith’s piece, in particular, is quite good.) It’s emblematic of both a typical drop in gaudy statistics, for nearly every athlete in a postseason, but also increased focus in opposing coverage — facing off against better, smarter corners and defense with each advancement. Fewer stats is a function of these very circumstances, symbolic of luck as much as any sort of chokery.

I do have a problem with the refusal to paint Harrison in the same light as some receiving greats of all time — and this happened with Rice in his career, as well — because he plays a “dependent” position such as receiver, and depends on a quarterback — Peyton Manning, who, duh, is very good — to get him the ball. Well, sure. In Rice’s day, they lauded Montana, skeptical of Jerry.

However, categorizing receivers as a dependent position precludes any of the theories highlighted in the ESPN and SI cover stories. In fact, it’s complete sportswriter failure.

Assuming receivers are totally dependent signifies the very impossibility of a wideout’s ability to become a choke artist or, conversely, to become cool under pressure. If the WR position is fully dependent, then receivers should be entitled to as little blame as they are entitled credit, or as much disdain as they receive accolades. Or, to wit, nothing at all.

For Harrison, then, if his regular-season excellence can be dismissed because of his career link with Manning, it also can’t be reconciled with any sort of playoff ‘disappearing act.’ And if he does suffer some sort of repeated horrid luck or fortune or loss of skill in the playoffs, then doesn’t that, by its very nature, connote that Harrison is easily the greatest regular-season receiver of all time? The easy-to-write and simple-to-scribe postulates fully exclude one another.

I’m not necessarily trying to defend Marvin Harrison, or going out on any sort of limb to do so (Though, granted, he has been my absolute favorite football player at any level for 16 years). I am attempting to shake my head at problematic groupthink masquerading as media coverage — or the cardboard caricatures painted of a slam-dunk Hall of Famer. To the end, however, Harrison can himself dismiss all these ridiculous stories with a big day on Sunday - and yes, I think this Hall of Famer has the full capability to do so.