Quite a few years ago there was a dinner theater in Bloomington, MN called The Carlton Dinner Theater. My wife and I saw The Spinners and The Temptations there. We saw Roy Orbison there. The food was great and the seats were awesome. Another act we saw there was Leon Russell. Had to go twice to catch Leon. The first night we went to see him we arrived only to find the doors locked and chained with a notice that Leon had cancelled the scheduled performance but that it would be rescheduled. Turns out Leon couldn't make this performance because he was in a detox center in South Dakota. When we finally got to see him perform it was quickly apparent that detox didn't work. After stumbling through the standard "it is really great to be here" line it was obvious that Leon had no idea of where "here" was. A roadie finally told him he was in Bloomington. Leon thought he was in Indiana. Simple mistake...I guess. Aside from this Leon Russell had quite a few songs I enjoyed and a line from one of them clearly defines how I find myself thinking about what is going on in the sports world lately. "I'm up on a tightrope...one side hate and the other side hope."
I can't stand Jose Canseco. The self proclaimed savior of MLB dropping names and insinuations about certain players and leaving his comments to trail in the wind with no real support. Only to claim that he is always right and that eventually all will work out and we will see that he is an honest and truthful man whose only concern is for righting the wayward actions of the players in his sport. I'm up on a tightrope hating that people actually read and listen to this buffoon as he spews accusations without proof. I'm up on a tightrope hoping that the media quits giving this #### air time and print space to feed his enormous ego and hoping he will simply talk himself into oblivion.
While I find them entertaining I don't really understand the "Coaches on the Hot Seat" menality or what prompts people to write this stuff. I understand that opinions are just that...opinions and that we are all intitled to our opinions. And maybe they would be more acceptable to me if they were written from an X's and O's perspective instead of from the "this coach is on the hotseat because he can't control his players" perspective. I'm up on a tightrope hating that there are people out there who think Cincinnati Bengals Head Coach Marvin Lewis is on the hotseat because he is the head coach of the NFL's version of Alcatraz and he can't control the players. He's a football coach...not a prison warden. On the heels of WR Chris Henry being released last week after being arrested on assault charges comes news that RB Quincy Wilson was waived yesterday. Wilson is another player with an arrest record for failing to disperse when requested by law enforcement officials after a wedding party last June and was charged with disorderly conduct. I'm up on a tightrope hoping that some semblence of common sense enters into this and people quit holding Lewis responsible for being a subpar babysitter and try giving him some credit for doing what he was hired to do...coach football. On the hope side of the tightrope would be hoping that at some time in the immediate future the Bengals quit drafting wanna-be thugs and mental midgets (no offense to short people intended) who don't know what accepted appropriate social behavior is, or simply choose to ignore it.
To that end I am having a harder and harder time accepting the concept that NCAA College Football Coach's ( or any sports coaches) should be saddled with the responsibility of disciplining student athletes who get arrested by law enforcement officials for any kind of reason. In order to maintain control of their programs coach's have to have a certain degree of power of discipline. I don't think you need to remove that from them. But when it comes to handing down discipline in situations of arrest I think the coach needs some help and guidance. I'm up on a tightrope hating that we are asking these coach's to be prosecutor, defense attorney, judge, jury and hangman...along with trying to coach a competitive football team and maintain the integrity and character of the institution, themselves, and the program. I understand that they make a lot of money and should therefore accept the lions share of the responsibility for their program. But this is a different day and age and the student athletes aren't from the "Sir, yes, sir!" school anymore. Nope...a lot of these guys are from the "I'm entitled to be here and do whatever I damn well please" school. I'm up on a tightrope hoping that sometime soon the ineptitude of the NCAA's disciplinary policies will become obsolete and that a system devoted solely to assisting institutions and coaching staffs in dealing with runaway behavioral issues ending in arrest or incarceration for student athletes is created. I'm hoping that this system will allow the coach to maintain control of his program while keeping him/her from the old "hotseat for lack of control" situation. I'm hoping this system will determine levels of inappropriate behavior that allow for the coach to discipline and then include an increasing gradient where different infractions are dealt with appropriately BY THE INSTITUTION. Put it on the system and the institution to deal with student athletes who break the law and are A.) accused of breaking some law, B.) arrested and charged with a criminal offense, and C.) acquitted or convicted. And make it as BLACK and WHITE as it can possibly be made by eliminating the hidden outs of an inappropriate action from consequences. Basically...you do the crime (student athletes) you do the time...and the coach is removed from the equation for disciplining said student athlete. You want your coach to have the final say...or any say in the disciplinary process if you do something wrong. Then you better skip class or a team meeting because if you get drunk after curfew, punch someone in the face and get arrested for assault...the institution you are attending based on recommendations of the system will determine your fate. Sound a little like Big Brother is watching you? Probably! But who brought it to this? Must be the coaches, eh! NOT!!!
Speaking of Black and White...racism is in our face now more than ever. I'm up on a tightrope hating that if it isn't then there is surely someone who will bring it there. Its no freakin' wonder we continually slip backwards in regard to race in this country. Does the media treat white players differently than black players? Do black students have better opportunities for scholarships to college than the middle class white student? Am I a better hockey player than Grant Fuhr was because I'm white and he is black? While racism is not something that can, or should, be ignored...I often find myself wondering why it is raised in such insignificant arena's. Who is the better defensive lineman...the white guy or the black guy? What? In what context? Who is the better hitter, the white guy, the black guy, the hispanic guy or the asian guy leading off? In what context? Skin color, power, speed, contact potential, literacy? I'm up on a tightrope hoping that context is included in the question the next time someone asks who is treated better, white athletes or black athletes. In other words I'm hoping that the question is based on a little more specific criteria than the color of skin or the generalized cultural background of those in question. At least then I won't feel like my intelligence is being called into question if I respond appropriately. Fuhr played in the NHL...I did not...enough said!
The Olympics are coming up and the host country, China, is giving itself a bad reputation. So much so that protestors world wide are out in force condemning their actions regarding how they treat their citizens and those of Tibet. I'm up on a tight rope hating that the Olympics have become much more than the intended sporting events between nations and different cultures and that so much venom is being spewed into this situation that will change...absolutely nothing. Of course, political stands and the Olympics have become bedfellows with each other...since 1936...at least. I'm up on a tight rope hoping that at some time, hopefully in my lifetime, we can actually watch an entire Olympic Games without someone, or some organization, turning them into a venue to spout their rhetoric and political platforms on. Can anyone answer me this. Do World Leader's outside of those from the host country, attend the Opening Ceremonies of the Olympic Games? I guess I have never really payed any attention to this but I don't recall ever seeing Queen Elizabeth or Margaret Thatcher or Idi Amin at the Opening Ceremonies of the Olympic Games. And if they don't generally do this...then why is it such a big deal if our fearless leader doesn't attend them...as protest over China...if he isn't expected to be there anyway. And if they do...well...like I told someone else...some politician I would be, eh?
Local Focal
Did failure to hit key free throws do in Memphis? Probably as much as falling apart in the OT did. Kansas wins the National Championship by elevating their level of play and taking advantage of key mistakes by Memphis. Kansas handled adversity better than Memphis did and therefore won the National Championship in the NCAA men's basketball tournament. The last time Kansas won this Championship was in 1988 when Danny Manning was their star. They beat Oklahoma in that game largely because they handled adversity better than OU...that and OU coach Billy Tubbs took his star, Stacey King, out of the game...not literally...but physically and mentally. King never saw the ball in the second half of that game while Manning was taking control. Tubbs didn't have an answer for whatever Kansas was doing and in that context King was never a factor after halftime. Players never even tried to get him the ball. This year missed free throws, a strong Jayhawk rally, a crucial 3-pointer and a lot of standing around in OT led to Memphis' demise. Congratulations to Kansas... AND to Memphis. There are a lot of teams who would have given anything just to be there.
If the Minnesota Twins are going to compete this year it is generally agreed that their bullpen, which is given credit as being one of the best in baseball, needs to be extremely effective all year. Well, they took last night off. Without Tori Hunter and with Michael Cuddyer out of the lineup this team may score less runs than it did last year and they showed some of that last night by leaving runners in scoring position all night. This prompted Manager Ron Gardenhire to comment that they need to learn to close teams out. Leading 3-2 against the White Sox going into the seventh reliever Matt Guerrier walked Jim Thome and allowed a single to Paul Konerko. Pat Neshek came on and allowed a single to Jermaine Dye that scored Thome and moved Konerko to second. He struck out A.J. Pierzynski but Carlos Quentin singled to center. Bases loaded. Next batter...Joe Crede. Bases empty. Grand Slam...Twins lose! This will happen but with their offense it better not happen often. Also last night...Tori Hunter...2 HR's and the last one was a walk-off Grand Slam. Painfull, eh!
Nick Schultz, Minnesota Wild defenseman, will miss at least the first round of the playoffs due to an emergency appendectomy performed yesterday. Schultz is considered a stalwart (love that word) on the Wild blueline and his absence could prove crucial to their playoff hopes against Colorado who move the puck extremely well in the offensive zone. So, now who cares if Derek Boogaard or Chris Simon have Ian Laperriere in their sights for his chippy, 4 shots to the head act on Marion Gaborik...AFTER the final buzzer on Sunday. The Wild now need to find a way to get past an explosive Colorado Avalanche team without arguably their best defensive defenseman. Still, I'm back up on that tightrope hating that guy's like Laperriere pull this #### and think they can get away with it. The unwritten rule about not attacking the other teams star has all but been erased and it is not at all like it used to be. Big bruiser goes after big bruiser. Wayne Gretzky had one fight in his NHL career and it was against Neal Broten of the Minnesota North Stars who mighht have had the one and a roughing penalty. It was like a cat fight with the claws trimmed to nothing. And I'm back up on the tightrope hoping that Chris Simon or Todd Fedoruk take this smarmy little turd on and smack him around a little. He already said he won't fight Derek Boogaard. "I won't fight Boogaard and he knows that," said Laperriere, 34, a 14 year veteran with 161 fights under his breezers. "The guy is 6'7" and 270 lbs. I don't want anything to do with that." Yet, he'll rain punches on Gaborik's head AFTER the game is over and chop him and whack him repeatedly whistle after whistle during the game. Getting and edge is one thing and being a cheapshot hack is another. He thinks Gaborik had it coming. "Go back to the March 17 game in Minnesota, they played Peter (Forsberg) that way," Laperriere said. "OK, they might not have punched Peter in the face 4 times like I did to Gaborik, but overall, Peter had a much tougher night than Gaborik had." Hey, dipstick, at least Forsberg didn't have to protect himself from an all out assault... AFTER the game was over. This is the bush league #### the NHL has to deal with quickly...not the regular heat of the battle fighting that has been an inherent part of the game forever. Yep, I'm on that tightrope hoping that...say...Chris Simon...pummles this little creep.
And that from a non-violent man such as myself...imagine!
What if... the NCAA laid down a set of rules that would take effect in cases where athletes screw up. In other words, if Joe does X then Y happens, no exceptions. The current system is predicated on who it is, not what they've done and that is a real problem. If there is no exceptions just maybe the players would control themselves since they would hopefully figure out that they are not entitled to special treatment. I wonder what the coaches and institutions would do if their star athletes suddenly weren't on the team? One thing is sure, it would take the #### off the coach's back and no one could say the penalty was racially motivated!
Dwindy1 - that would be fine as well. The way it is currently set up isn't working. I'm just not a big NCAA supporter as the NCAA stands on disciplinary practices. Thanks for commenting...always appreciated.
It would seem to me if you have players who feel they are above the law, you have a problem that goes back to their up bringing. Sadly some one has to deal with it now and the coaches need to set standards that prohibits this kind of attitude and activity.
These punks set a bad example to the kids that look up to them as their heroes..
Well scribbled, until the programs and institutions respect themselves they will always be filled with people who respect neither. The NCAA has to divorce itself from pro-sports, it is not a minor or a feeder league, these colleges and the NCAA need to decide if they are going to be degree granting institutions that offer 4 year scholar athletes a platform to shine or just a stepping stone. The basketball & football programs are jokes...so when the thugs they rent a center for a season come unglued I'm not surprised and the blame belongs squarely on the head coach and AD because they knew what they were getting when they wasted a scholarship on the bum.
photo - stemmed in their upbringing is one thing. Dealing with them in the "now" is another. Coaches have guidelines and rules for this as part of having control. When these kids step outside the law there should be an established course of action that supercedes anything the coach may think is appropriate. And it should be the institution that sets the penalty. This would take away a lot of favoritism and poor judgement by coaches who are trying to keep their program together just to win. And the institution should be forced to follow established guidelines from a neutral source. This takes the responsibility off of the institution for making decisions that will be questioned based on race, skill level, position on the team or academic achievement progress, which could be one reason for future reinstatement...to the school as a student. Depending on the extent the student athlete stepped outside the law and the consequences faced doing that...maybe the old football career is over and maybe it ain't. The coach needs some control. But they need help with those who break the law, especially those who continually break the law. Ideally, if a student athlete breaks the law OR puts themselves in a situation facing legal action...removal from the team/school until all legal actions are settled as standard and unbreaking policy across the board, for every school and program, would be excellent. And in line with your last sentence..they are embarrassing those who they held as role models, too.
ed - great point about NCAA deciding if they are going to be degree granting institutions offering 4 year scholar athletes a venue to perform/shine or just a stepping stone. The key is 4 years. Not one, not 2 or 3, but, 4 years. A lot of these kids don't know responsibility on a personal level and by the time some of them leave college after 2 years they still don't have a firm grip on the concept. Holding the coach or AD responsible for the scholar athlete when the scholar athlete breaks the law "because they knew what they were getting when they wasted a scholarship on him/her" is a bit harsh. Bomar, who I keep going back to simply because I know a little about the situation, aside from being a little spoiled more than likely didn't carry a tag that said current or future law breaker across his forehead. Years ago we used to be able to have our student athletes fill out a questionaire that gave you a little idea into a student athletes make-up...intellectually and emotionally. From that you could get a pretty good idea of who could stand up to pressure and who would fold like a broken chair in a stiff breeze. You could get a little insight into who could handle direction and who didn't deal with direction very well. We can't do that anymore and haven't been able to for some time now. Why? Parents got chapped that we were stereotyping their kids and that we were being unfair and basically, that their mental makeup was none of our business. We weren't looking for who would be the first kid to break the law. They used to do the same thing for college recruits.
This may give them an idea on who will stray and break the law but it isn't concrete. So do you deny a scholarship based on a level of probability? I don't know about denying a kid the opportunity based on that at that young an age. The decision is much simpler if the student athlete they are considering offering to has a juvenile record and has been in constant trouble with law enforcement. Then you get the argument about helping a bad kid go good. Well, that is not for us to decide. Once again, guidelines established by a neutral source may help that. My point is that coaches are hired to coach and in that context have to be a bit of psychologist to help shape and guide the student athlete into, not only a viable football player, but hopefully, and more importantly, a solid citizen. They need to be able to establish a level of control to keep the team concept in place. That is why I have hinted at things the coach should and can do and shouldn't be denied the opportunity to do. But when it comes to student athletes stepping outside the law, either have black and white consequences like booting them off the team until all legal actions are satisfied, or place discipline of those situations outside the realm of the "team." Either way, it has to be across the board and followed by every institution and organization from the University of Where Am I, to the NCAA, to any organization established as a neutral source. And the general concept...is to hold the violators responsible for their actions...not their coach or AD.
I am an educator and a coach. I was a goaltender in hockey until my playing days finished but now coach hockey and soccer. Once a goaltender always a goaltender. I am an Oklahoma Sooners fan, hold most professional athletes in low regard and have no time for prima donna athletes who think they are better than others who were not fortunate enough to get where these guys, or girls, are. I don't think celebrity puts anyone higher than anyone else in any capacity which, I think, is contrary to our society perception.
