As The Athletic investigates the Dianna Russini/Mike Vrabel situation (with Russini being essentially suspended without it being called a suspension), some facts are emerging regarding the internal reaction to the situation.
Natalie Korach of Status reports, via Sam Neumann of Awful Announcing, that staff members within The Athletic and its parent company, the New York Times, have concerns about the publication’s P.R. strategy.
One unnamed source called the companies’ handling of the matter, per Korach, “unnecessarily messy.” Another unnamed source, per Korach, objected to the initial statement from The Athletic executive editor Steven Ginsberg, which was loud and clear and devoid of any mention that an investigation had already begun. The source called the approach “reckless,” “premature,” and “intentionally sneaky.”
Said Ginsberg, in his initial comment to the New York Post upon publication of the photos: “These photos are misleading and lack essential context. These were public interactions in front of many people. Dianna is a premier journalist covering the NFL and we’re proud to have her at The Athletic.”
Even if the initial statement resulted from an aggressive and unequivocal denial by the reporter, it made no sense to push a narrative that, based on the photos, may not have been fully accurate. That said, The Athletic was in a tough spot. Saying nothing would have said plenty. Telling the full and complete truth would have given credence to the notion that the reporter’s aggressive and unequivocal denial may not have been fully accurate.
The best response may have been some version of the truth. Something like this: “We have seen the photos. We have received the reporter’s explanation. Given the high editorial standards that apply to this publication, we are reviewing the situation.”
It’s a wrinkle that makes it even less likely, in our view, that Russini will return to The Athletic before the expiration of her contract. It reportedly expires in August 2026. It may lapse even before that.
Either way, the contract was already in the home stretch. The easy out is to let it expire and move on.
Internally, other reporters with The Athletic and the Times may expect something more clear and definitive. Some may believe, rightly or wrongly, that the situation impacts their own credibility. Others may simply want an unmistakable message sent within the organizations as to what will or won’t be tolerated, given the very high bar set by the New York Times.
However it plays out, it’s been a little clunky so far for The Athletic. That makes it even more important for The Athletic to stick the landing in a way that will create the right impression externally and, more importantly, internally.
Patriots quarterback Drake Maye’s second season ended with a rough game against the Seahawks in the Super Bowl, but getting that far that early in his career would seem to be a good sign for future trips to big games.
Many would have said the same about Dan Marino after the Dolphins got to Super Bowl XIX in his second season. Marino never got back to the game, though, and only three teams in history have gone from losing the Super Bowl one year to winning it the next.
Those facts likely colored Maye’s answer to a question about making another run at the title during an interview from The Masters.
“I think that’s the biggest thing about it. It’s humbling,” Maye said. “You’ve got to get back to work. When you’re so close and within reach, you want that feeling. Everybody says, ‘You’ll be back.’ It’s not that easy. So, we’ve got to get back to work, and I’m looking forward to trying to prove to myself that I can get back and just have another year to get a chance at it. Everybody’s got the same goal this time of year — to get back to that game. I think knowing that we were there and had a chance at it’s just that much more fulfilling for me being able to reach that.”
Maye’s right shoulder injury had a negative impact on the Patriots’ chances against Seattle. He said recently that things are doing well on that front and continued health will be a necessary piece of the puzzle for New England getting back to the league’s biggest game, but it won’t be the only one that needs to fall into place.
Last year, Patriots coach Mike Vrabel conducted a pre-draft conference. This year, he won’t be.
Mike Reiss of ESPN reports that V.P. of player personnel Eliot Wolf will conduct the team’s pre-draft press conference on Monday at 2:00 p.m. ET.
From Reiss’s article: “Vrabel -- who has been in the news this week, as The Athletic is reinvestigating the coverage of NFL reporter Dianna Russini and the nature of her relationship with him, sources familiar with the matter told ESPN -- isn’t expected to address reporters until the draft.”
Teams often make coaches available on multiple occasions during draft weekend, often on each day of the draft.
It remains to be seen whether anyone even asks Vrabel about the situation the next time he speaks. There will be many other questions to ask regarding the team’s new players, and no one will want to be the one who asks the question Vrabel won’t want to answer.
Given the widespread interest in the story, outlets that ordinarily don’t cover the team may seek access to the next Vrabel press conference, whenever it is. Those folks, if any get in, will be far more willing to go there than the people who have to deal with Vrabel on a regular basis.
Then there’s the question of what he will say, if/when he’s asked about it. He may simply repeat his original statement to the New York Post: “These photos show a completely innocent interaction and any suggestion otherwise is laughable. This doesn’t deserve any further response.”
As Michael Holley said on Friday’s PFT Live after I read that quote, “Nobody’s laughing.”
At some point within the next two weeks, we’ll see whether Vrabel will be doing any more talking on the situation. Or whether he’ll simply issue a revised statement in the coming days that ends with a claim that he will have nothing further to say about the matter. He could then refer to that statement if/when he’s ever asked about it during a press conference.
College football players change positions often, but few start off as wide receivers and end up as edge rushers, and even fewer show the promise that Florida edge rusher George Gumbs has shown.
Gumbs went from a walk-on wide receiver at Northern Illinois, to a scholarship tight end, to a defensive end, then transferred to Florida and held his own against elite competition in the SEC.
Injuries cut Gumbs’ final season at Florida short, but he’s still generating some draft buzz after his 41-inch vertical was the second-best of all-time for a defensive lineman at the Combine. New England is among the teams showing interest; Mike Reiss of ESPN reports that Gumbs will be one of the Patriots’ 30 pre-draft visitors.
Gumbs doesn’t project as a high pick, but he has the kind of talent, and room to continue growing, that will make some team take a flier on him, in the hopes that an athlete of his caliber can contribute on special teams right now, and eventually develop into a top-notch pass rusher.
Everybody wants to cover sports media. Except, of course, when the coverage involves a sports media colleague working for the same publication.
The Athletic ended its conspicuous silence regarding the NFL’s story of the week on Saturday. The item from Katie Robertson confirms that Russini is under investigation after the emergence on Tuesday of photos of Russini and Patriots coach Mike Vrabel “holding hands and hugging at a resort in Arizona, as well as sitting together in the hotel’s hot tub.”
The item posted by The Athletic reports this, about The Athletic: “According to the person familiar with The Athletic’s investigation, the nature of Ms. Russini’s relationship with Mr. Vrabel and her coverage are being reviewed and she will not be reporting while the investigation is underway.”
Robertson adds that the publication’s editorial guidelines “require that their journalists avoid any activities that pose a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict, so as not to call into question their credibility.”
Here’s the relevant language from the editorial guidelines, to which Robertson’s article links: “When reporting and writing stories we do not have an agenda and it is important that our readers understand that. If our readers question our adherence to that basic tenet of journalism, our credibility will be at stake. To maintain the highest form of authority we should avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest and reveal those sources or affiliations that may put into question our ability to be credible. For instance, writers who have collaborated with a source — athlete, GM, team official or broadcaster — on a book should not report on that subject going forward. In addition, written permission from editorial leadership is needed to pursue a project of that nature.”
That’s a high bar. The photos published by the New York Post, regardless of what they ultimately do or do not show, arguably reflect a failure to “avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.” Which makes the initial statement from Steven Ginsberg, executive editor of The Athletic, seem to be even more curious. To say the least.
The Athletic has not yet used the word “suspended” in reference to Russini. But that’s the practical impact of the phrase “will not be reporting,” since she was hired by The Athletic to be a reporter.
Looming over the entire situation is the fact that Russini’s contract expires in August 2026. Absent complete and total exoneration as a result of the internal investigation, it’s hard to envision Russini ever reporting for The Athletic again.
