They just don't get it.

There are many reasons to watch sports.  One is, it's not politics.

Rush Limbaugh on Monday Night Football?  Bad idea that didn't last long.  Keith Olbermann on the Sunday Night Special?  Worse idea not going away any time soon.

Olberrmann and Limbaugh have in common the ability to turn serious issues into a carnival sideshow.  They also share legions of detractors.  Which meant when Limbaugh was on Monday nights it took away from the enjoyment of half the audience.

Olbermann offends the other half.

Did anyone watch Monday Night Football because of Limbaugh?  Is anyone tuning into Sunday Night Football who wouldn't, just to hear Olbermann?

Not very likely.

So what's the point?

Cross promotion.  The idea that maybe someone will watch Olbermann, enjoy his schtick, and end up watching MSNBC.  Anything to get some kind of a buzz going for a network with lots of ink and not so many viewers.

Watching Olbermann reminds you of the great movie "A Face In The Crowd".  Andy Griffith, in a deadly serious role early in his career, played a huckster who parlayed an image as a good old boy into a national radio program and enough power to influence public opinion.  Enough, as it turned out, to turn him into a loathesome creature consumed with the sound of his own voice.

Griffith's character, "Lonesome Rhodes" eventually was so consumed by his own narcissism he became a parody of himself.  Olbermann is well on his way to being a Saturday Night Live sketch.

On the Andy Warhol Fifteen Minutes of Fame Scale, Olbermann is at 14 minutes and thirty seconds.

But will NBC pull the plug?

Not yet, not until he crosses the line and starts pontificating about politics during his pregame show, or makes some statement so far beyond the pale as to end up in the national headlines.

Let it be quick.

My politics are hard to define.  I happen to think the country functions best when the two parties are pushing against each other in a battle of ideas from which some general consensus often emerges.

In all honesty, my biggest wish for politicians is that they would follow the physicians oath and simply "Do No Harm".  That, alas, is not going to happen.  Most of the problems we face in this country are a result of politicians either ignoring what they should fix, or trying to fix what they should ignore.

Come the weekend the chattering classes usually take a rest from their mischief and leave the rest of us to enjoy sports.  We don't need them, or members of their clown show entourage, turning up on our TV screens.

Olbermann must go.

Jesse Jackson is alot of things. Constitutional scholar?

Maybe not.

In a New York Times article Jackson seems to have found a new constitutional right.  The right of Michael Vick to play in the National Football League.

I missed that one, so I went back and looked in the Bill of Wrongs.  Sure enough, there it was, right next to the right to keep and arm bears:

No football player shall be held to answer for dog fighting, or an otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment by the court of public opinion and ESPN, except in cases arising in the carrying of mammals across state lines for immoral porpoises, or in the now defunct AFL, when in actual service in indoor areneas; nor shall any left handed quarterback be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of suspension or deprivment of shoe contracts; nor shall be compelled in any hearing before Roger Goodale to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or multi-million, multi-year, not cut contract, without consent of Jesse Jackson; nor shall fighting dogs be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Who knew?

Jackson's argument, summarized:

There are worse quarterbacks in football than Vick.

Democracy guarantees opportunity.

Not allowing prisoners to resume their former professions breaks an implied societal covenant with them. 

Like most arguments these days, the deeper you dive the murkier the waters.  For the Reverand Jackson then, first a few practical questions unrealated to social justice.

How much room under the salary cap must an NFL team clear in order to obtain the services of a quaterback who has not seen an NFL defense in over two years?

Given that this year probably won't see Vick starting more than a handful of games, is he willing to sign for more than one year?  Where is the value to signing Vick and getting him back to game shape, only to see some other team reap the benefits in 2010?

Vick's calling card in the NFL has been his open field ability once plays break down, not his passing.  Does he still have that foot speed?  It is hard to imagine penal institutions permitting inmates to be involved in conditioning excercises involving running, an activity normally frowned upon behind bars.

How much film of NFL defenses has Jackson watched lately?  "The Longest Yard", a perenial favorite at Leavenworth, notwithstanding.

Which NFL team will most benefit from a situation where the regular quarterback will perform at a higher level, seeing Michael Vick standing on the sidelines holding a clip board?

Provide the names of past quarterbacks who have spent two years away from the speed of NFL action and came back?

Then we reach Jackson's sociological arguments.

Democracy guarantees opportunity.  Does it really?

Does every accountant who fudged the books get to return their profession?  Do school teachers caught with underage students return to teaching?  Do husbands who cheated on their wives get a guarantee of a new relationship?

Actions have consequences.  Opportunity is a fleeting thing for most people under the best of circumstances.  It presents itself quickly, often with a list of demands on the receiver, and moves on to others if not handled with respect.

Having served his time, Vick does deserve compassion and our best wishes for reentry to society.  Does that automatically mean reentry to the NFL?

Consider it from the perspective of an NFL owner.  The nightmare scenario for the league is now, and has been even back to the 1960s, that gamblers will gain access to players and influence outcomes relative to the point spread.

Are teams going to be elbowing each other out of the way to get in line to sign a bankrupt convicted felon with past association in a sport heavily involved in gambling and narcotics?

Michael Vick will get a second chance for the same reason I play 12-1 shots at the track.  The odds of Vick returning to stardom are long enough to inspire dreams of a big payoff, but not so long as to be unreasonable.

Vick doesn't need Jesse Jackson's help returning to football.  If anything NFL owners, generally multi-millionaires with egos to match, don't like being dictated to.  PETA protestors won't keep Vick off the field, but lectures by Jesse Jackson might delay his return.

I've read about Jackie Robinson.  Michael Vick is no Jackie Robinson.

Reverend Jackson believes it will take the same kind of courage Branch Rickey showed in bringing Jackie Robinson to the majors to bring Vick back to the NFL.  The difference, the one that is keeping Vick unsigned, is that anyone with eyes to see knew Robinson could play the game.

At least for now we don't know that about Michael Vick.

It's tempting to fall into the trap of conventional wisdom, the "we all know" school of thinking.  It's a mental short hand that eliminates the need for analysis.  A good example is the way the media, and alot of fans, evaluate Michael Vick.  As in, "runs too much, great arm but not a great passer, his strengths limit the Falcons offensively, not a field general."

Casey Stengel, to settle arguements with writers, used to say "You can look it up."  So I did.  And I used another quarterback for comparison.  A classic quarterback as opposite Michael Vick as you can get.  The anti-Vick if you will-Drew Bledsoe.  Quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys who, like the Falcons, have had an up and down season.

Let's start with the idea that a quarterback leads the offense and is responsible for generating points and first downs.  Vick's Falcons had 274 first downs, 35 touchdowns, and 23 field goals.  Bledsoe's Cowboys had 261 first downs, 35 touchdowns, and 19 field goals.  Granting that Bledsoe had 166 passing 1st downs to Vick's 138, a quarterback works within an offense and this year the Falcons had a better running game than the Cowboys most weeks.

Now, about Vick running too much.  It is worth noting that the Falcons were 5-1 when Vick ran for 50 yards or more.  His mobility helped limit Falcon opponents to 2 sacks or fewer 6 times, in which games Atlanta was 5-1.  Atlanta was 3-3 when he ran fewer than 7 times.  Conversely, the less mobile Bledsoe was 3-4 in games where he was sacked at least 4 times.

Most people concede Vick has a great arm, but question his skills as a passer.  Some wonder how Vick would do away from the Falcons run-oriented attack.  Well, Atlanta was 3-2 with Vick throwing 30 times or more.  In six games that he had a quarterback rating above 90 the team was 2-4 which implies that even when Vick throws the ball well and more often the result on the scoreboard is no better.  One statistic critics might legitimately bring up is that 2 of his 30+ passing days (against the Panthers and Bears) resulted in a 39.1 and 25.8 passing rating respectively and two losses.  However, few quarterbacks travel to Charlotte or Chicago and come away with glittering stat lines.

Drew Bledsoe, is a very good passer, given time to throw.  In games he has a 90+ rating Dallas is 8-1.  But here is food for thought.  Dallas is 5-1 when Bledsoe doesn't throw the ball more than 25 times.   In other words, the running game is the surest path to victory when it works well and quarterbacks win more games handing the ball off than throwing it.  That's the context Vick is working within in Atlanta and it's hard to fault it (or Vick) when it seems to be effective.

Atlanta still has some problems to work out.  The emotional state of their coach being an obvious starting point.  But, whatever the problems in Atlanta, they don't start (and certainly don't finish) with Michael Vick. The jury may be out on Vick as a great quarterback, but there is no doubt he is already a very good one.