Carlie Irsay-Gordon’s presence on the Indianapolis Colts’ sidelines during their recent London game has sparked a wave of social media criticism, with some questioning her involvement and others defending her role. After the Colts defeated the Washington Commanders 30-13, images of Irsay-Gordon, the team’s principal owner, writing notes and speaking with coaches went viral, igniting debate over whether her actions were appropriate or “performative.”
Bill Simmons, a prominent sports commentator, described Irsay-Gordon’s note-taking as “f—ing nuts” during his podcast, sparking further backlash. Simmons said, “I can’t believe she does this, and I can’t believe people in her life haven’t talked her out of it.” His remarks drew both criticism and support online, with some accusing Irsay-Gordon of micromanaging and others defending her right as the owner to be deeply involved.
Sam Kass, who teaches Gender and Sports at Indiana University, highlighted the gendered nature of the backlash. Kass noted that Irsay-Gordon’s consistent sideline presence—unlike other owners such as Dallas Cowboys’ Jerry Jones, who appears sporadically—has made her a target since she became the principal owner following the death of her father, Jim Irsay, in May 2025. “Would there be any backlash at all for her sideline presence if Irsay-Gordon were a male owner?” Kass asked. She pointed out that the language and tone of the criticism would likely differ if Irsay-Gordon were a man.
Kass also drew attention to the way Simmons’ critique was framed, referencing a co-host’s comment that suggested Simmons had avoided criticism because he had a crush on Irsay-Gordon. “That was a tough place to begin,” Kass said. “They are either putting her in a category of someone to have a crush on or someone to be criticized. She couldn’t be both.” She added that calling her “Irsay’s daughter” discounted her authority as an owner.
The most contentious aspect of the criticism seems to be Irsay-Gordon’s note-taking during games. Some have labeled it “performative,” implying she is simply putting on a show rather than genuinely engaging. Kass rejected this, saying, “Sports is about performance, so the weaponization of performativity as a critique is also not sitting with me great.” She argued that questioning Irsay-Gordon’s authority to be on the sidelines or her interest in the team’s performance is problematic.
Dr. Colin Johnson, an associate professor of gender studies, suggested that the attention Irsay-Gordon receives is partly due to her visibility as a female owner who often wears dresses and lipstick, making her stand out on the field. “She may be the first NFL owner whose often conspicuously feminine attire makes her easy to pick out of a crowd,” Johnson said. He noted that this distinct presence might be intentional and could be a factor in her becoming a prominent figure in Colts’ stories.
Irsay-Gordon herself has acknowledged that after taking over as principal owner, her sideline presence has attracted more scrutiny. Speaking to Front Office Sports Tonight, she said, “With our dad passing away … the title change, a lot of what I was doing, what I’m still doing, isn’t any different. So I think that’s been something to be more mindful of, that now people like giving more attention to what I’m doing.”
Despite the divide in opinion, many concede that as the owner who pays the bills, Irsay-Gordon has the right to be involved as she chooses. The debate continues over how much participation is appropriate for an NFL owner during games and how much of the criticism reflects broader gender biases in sports. The Colts’ London game and subsequent reactions have brought these questions to the forefront, sparking conversations about ownership, gender, and authority in professional football.
According to Yahoo Sports.
