Joltin' Joe has left and gone away

It's been awhile, but I've covered this ground before:

• I asked Where Have You Gone, Joe DiMaggio?
• After some feedback, I clarified some of those thoughts with More on the Eclipse of the Great American Hero.
• And finally I found some satisfaction in getting to watch The Josh Hamilton Redemption begin to play out one night at old Yankee Stadium.

And if you don't want to go re-read all of that, essentially this was the root of my frustration:

I still find myself dejected over this sad state of affairs. It isn't because I just realized that there is hopelessness where I had always expected there to be hope. I think it is more that I wish to see my faith played out on that stage of public celebrity. I want to see some light shine through. I want to see some evidence in the world -- that I can point to... that I can show to others -- to say, "Here is where the Reign of God is breaking in & making a difference. Here is where the beacon on a hill is shining."

I know that Christ has forgiven us of all our sins (lowercase-"s"). But what about the (uppercase-"S") Sin problem here, while we're still on Earth? The cross has salvific power for eternity, and Scripture is witness to that. But also, the logic of the cross overcomes the problem in the here & now of the power of Satan in our lives. It's not enough to just have our record expunged. I want my heart washed clean, too.

And, so, it would be marvelous to find more examples, that are in public view, of humanity overcoming. I know some of you are still going to argue, "You're looking in the wrong place." I don't think I am. I'm just looking for that city on a hill. And I suppose my point in all this is that it's hard to find in celebrity. I want to be able to point at someone and say, "See, Christ works even THERE!"

That's a nice sentiment. But the more I've thought about it, it's a sentiment that's not completely honest. Because, whether or not I knew it at the time, I wanted to do more than point. I wanted to worship.

---

Worship is what we do with celebrities. Of all kinds -- whether from sports, politics, Hollywood, private enterprise, or the music industry.

Even before tabloids there was a fascination with celebrity. In the Bible, when Israel had no King, they coveted other nation's that had one. And they begged God for one. So he up & gave them what they wanted. So Israel finally had it's King.

This urge to crown Kings is at the root of some of humanity's best stories. Tell me -- how many of our ancient legends or fictional stories are a variation on this basic premise:

"ONCE- there was a great King. Who ruled with wisdom and power and justice and compassion -- all at once! And therefore, when the King was there, the land experienced a Golden Age. And everyone blossomed and we all reached our potential. The land blossomed, the arts blossomed, our relationships blossomed, civilization blossomed.

"BUT- something has taken the King away. So everything has deteriorated. Everything has fallen into disrepair & decay.

"BUT- we look for the day in which the King will come back."

(HT Tim Keller, "Jesus Our King")

How many of our stories trace these themes? Robin Hood. King Arthur. Lord of the Rings. The current Batman franchise of movies. That just off the top of my head. There are so many others. How many more?

And why is this the case? Why this fascination with Kings? Why this need to crown them? When the actual record of human kings is terrible. When you survey the landscape of history, the actual record of kings is nothing but a trail of tyranny, tragedy, and broken-ness. There's a very good reason we don't have kings any longer. We decided it was a good idea to get rid of all the kings! We've replaced nearly all of them with Democracies.

And yet still: a good story about a king has a powerful impact on us. Why?

I'm convinced now that it's because we were wired to worship. We were made to give our devotion to someone. As the ancient writer said: "Our hearts are restless until they find their rest in you."

The problem is this: we have this culture where we are invited to misplace our worship in any number of ways. We're even honest about it. We have a TV show called "American Idol." We even call our sports heroes idols.

Sportscaster Bob Costas put it this way 17 years ago when he eulogized Mickey Mantle:

And more than that, he was a presence in our lives-a fragile hero to whom we had an emotional attachment so strong and lasting that it defied logic. Mickey often said he didn't understand it, this enduring connection and affection-for men now in their 40s and 50s, otherwise perfectly sensible, who went dry in the mouth and stammered like schoolboys in the presence of Mickey Mantle.

Maybe Mick was uncomfortable with it, not just because of his basic shyness, but because he was always too honest to regard himself as some kind of deity.

But that was never really the point. In a very different time than today, the first baseball commissioner, Kenesaw Mountain Landis, said every boy builds a shrine to some baseball hero, and before that shrine, a candle always burns.

For a huge portion of my generation, Mickey Mantle was that baseball hero.'

In a time where baseball monopolized America what Judge Landis said was true. But now, with so many sports & entertainment options, boys (and even grown men) have shrines to all manner of heroes.

For generations of men in Pennsylvania, that shrine was built for JoePa. He was a great ball-coach. He represented winning, yes. But more than that. His credo was "success with honor." He championed the Penn State way. He represented doing things right, not taking short-cuts, and being people of integrity. Once, when asked when he would retire, he quipped that he would not leave the game "to the Jackie Sherrills and Barry Switzers." And those who worshiped at the feet of Paterno pumped their fist. Because Joe was their crusader. Wrestling the trophies away from those who would get down in the slop & dirty up the game we loved.

Penn State isn't unique in this way. I like the way Cecil Hurt put it:

Part of the culture which made denial possible in Happy Valley is a mentality that takes hold most tenaciously with success, one in which the football program isn't simply successful, or an asset to the community or the engine of a powerful economic machine. An attitude develops that the program is "good" (and, by extension, that most of its rivals are "bad").

All the great paeans of the great white knight Joe Paterno... Rick Reilly calls them idotic hagiography.

Hagiography: writing about the lives of saints. Beyond just putting people up on pedestals. But putting them on thrones & placing halos over their heads. When really they're just human.

You know what Saint Joe did 18 months ago when he found out that his old pal & assistant Jerry Sandusky was under investigation? When Joe could feel the noose tightening around his own neck? He did what most folks would do: he gave into instincts of self-preservation. He took Penn State University to the negotiating table and extorted them for a sweet contractual exit package. He transferred ownership of his home to his wife. Because he knew what was coming. It was like a slow motion train wreck for him. And he was shielding Sue & the rest of his family from the liability locomotive that was barreling down the tracks directly at them.

That's a far cry from the philanthropic image of Joe Paterno. The man who gave millions of dollars back to the University he worked for. Nevertheless, in the end, Joe & his sons were using whatever leverage they could to extract whatever benefits they could out of that University.

Hardly a saint. Idiotic hagiography.

Some people still have a hard time accepting the truth about Joe. After the Freeh Report was released last week, someone placed a sign at Joe Paterno's statue that read, "Remember: He was a man, not God!!!" It seems that at least one person couldn't accept that:

This was passed onto me by Mary Curran. Someone ripped the Paterno statue sign, which said, 'he was a man, not a god' twitter.com/sganim/status/…

— Sara Ganim (@sganim) July 15, 2012

It seems to be a ferocious thing to step between someone & the object of their worship.

---

We all would be better off if we kept the sobering lessons of this tragedy in our minds. Lesson #1 being this: protect the defenseless.

But while fans with their Joe Paterno shrines have furiously been defending the man, I appreciated these words from one of Joe's best players & one of Penn State's best ambassadors-- LaVar Arrington:

"If you really think about it, how much do I really know [coach Joe Paterno]?" Arrington told the "Wetzel to Forde" radio show. "How much do we really know him? I know the coaching figure - just like with Jerry Sandusky, I knew the coaching figure. I mean, there's obvious ways of looking at this right now with 20-20 hindsight, but I didn't know the person I thought I did."

The next time you're tempted to go use all your social media powers defend the honor of Barack Obama... or Mitt Romney... or Ron Paul...

or your favorite coach... or your favorite player...

or your favorite billionaire... or your favorite writer...

...as deeply as you may desire to offer your devotion to somebody -- as much as you may want to sit that person on the throne of your heart & place a crown on their head...

that person is just a person. How well do you really know them?

On Paterno

How ironic can names be? Consider with me:

• A man who grows up to become the General Manager of George Steinbrenner's New York Yankees... named CASHMAN

• An already famous man who becomes infamous for tweeting out a picture of his manhood... named WEINER

• A guy who runs a multi-billion-dollar Ponzi Scheme for decades, defrauding thousands of people & living off their wealth… named MADOFF

And, now-- we have a man who was a revered father figure for multiple generations of young men. Who, as it turns out, abandoned children who were in need of just such a father figure & protector. Who, as we learned in yesterday's Freeh Report, shielded a monster by acting like the father figure of a family mafia.

... named PATERNO.

The lionized leader of the Nittany Lions who, it turns out, was the definition of duplicity.

That's a lot of levels of irony. But it's no joke. Not for the victims of the man who Joe Paterno and his superiors lackeys protected.

A lot of good writers have already weighed in on Paterno. About how he was a derelict father figure. Or about how he was a a liar. Even about how Paterno's legacy now stands. An excerpt from that Dan Wetzel column:

There is no denying Paterno was a positive force in many lives, a gifted coach and motivator and, until now, a fine image for Penn State. None of that equals his shame.

The reason Paterno was able to wield such influence is the outsized value placed on college sports and the coaches who deliver those winning programs. A “pyramid of power,” Freeh described it. And anyone pointing to all the players he helped is just repeating the same pathetic concept.

Paterno did help his football players. Those men, however, were heavily recruited, talented and often highly motivated people. If they hadn’t gone to Penn State they would’ve gone to Michigan or Virginia or Notre Dame.

For decades he found a way to take top-line kids and maximize what they could do, usually by motivating them to excel at a sport they already loved. They were subject to mass adulation and had the potential to become millionaires at the professional level.

He wasn’t taking illiterate third-world children and getting them to Harvard. Almost every person Paterno positively impacted through football would have fared similarly had Penn State not even fielded a team. They just would have played elsewhere. Bo Schembechler or Lou Holtz or Bobby Bowden would’ve coached them up in football and life, just like Paterno did.

Conversely, the kids that Jerry Sandusky tricked, molested and in certain ways destroyed wouldn’t have lived the same life had Paterno done the right thing. They were attacked, out of nowhere. Without fault. Without provocation. Without the opportunity to create their own destiny.

The lives of these kids were profoundly and forever destroyed because of the actions of Sandusky, Spanier, Schultz, Curley and, yes, Joe Paterno.

There could never be enough victories, enough perfect graduation rates, enough national championships to justify that.

Joe Paterno was a great influence on men who were already likely to live great lives, men who could help him win football games.

He was a failure to those Second Mile boys who had no such talents, no such opportunity, no parade of recruiters looking to offer them scholarships. He turned his back on the very kids that were desperate for the kind of hero that Joe Paterno’s former legacy claimed he was all about.

And yet there are those who persist in saying that Joe Paterno was a man who "lived a profoundly decent life." Like Joe Posnanski, the man whose biography on Paterno will be published next month. And far be it from me to put words in Posnanski's book that the public has yet to see. But I suspect he will make mention of the lives Paterno touched that are touching others in tremendously positive ways.

Can you ignore that? You may have heard the Scriptures (1 Peter 4:8, James 5:20) that highlight the possibility of covering over a multitude of sins. But is it possible for a sin to cover over the magnitude of having “lived a profoundly decent life?”

I guess it depends on who is keeping the moral ledger. In the eyes of public opinion, I suppose the answer is 'yes.' The weight of Paterno's misdeeds is leading the media to tear his reputation asunder. "Not even a lifetime of heroism can make up for leaving a single child alone, abandoned to evil, weeping in the dark." (NYT) "Like the Roman Catholic Church, Penn State is an arrogant institution hiding behind its mystique." (NYT) Certainly the courts will follow public opinion. There may be nothing left but a heaping crater after the civil liability lawyers get finished with Penn State. Not to mention the separate on-going investigations being conducted by the Attorney General's Office of Pennsylvania, the FBI, and the Federal Department of Education. That last one is especially frightening for a University. Making the on-going NCAA investigation look paltry by comparison.

But public opinion can be such a capricious moral judge. And if our moral compass is only as actuated as the scale of punitive damages that may be exacted, then that compass is broken.

I think Dan Wetzel artfully explains (above) how that the magnitude of these wrong-doings overwhelm the good Joe Paterno has done. But does it wipe out the good in it’s entirety? No. Because Paterno’s influence in the lives of his players persists. Players that in fact did not go to UVA or Notre Dame. Who were shaped and molded by Paterno & who are shaping and molding others with positive values. That’s what makes this so complicated.



I'll say this- the statue & shrine at Penn State University that lionizes Paterno as a “Humanitarian” has to be removed. The Freeh Report showed very clearly how PSU weighed the sentiment of being "humane." It had everything to do with how Paterno & co. weighed treating Jerry Sandusky. It had nothing to do with how Paterno & co. weighed the lives of children who had been raped. Not to mention the ones who would be raped over the next decade. Yes- the statue has to go. Has to. It mocks Penn State University (and everything that Joe said he stood for) as long as it stays up.

And even in some ways still I pity Paterno. The choices he had before him in 1998 and beyond weren’t clean. As a good buddy wrote to me, “Paterno had a right choice, but he didn’t have a nice choice.” I think that's right. Paterno didn't ask for this. He had a serious decision thrust upon him. And he made the wrong choice to cover willfully for a monster.

I just hope that you & I make better decisions if, God forbid, we’re ever faced with a right choice that’s not a nice choice.

The Best of Sports Writing This Week

Good writing offers perspective: a chance to see a subject from another vantage point. That's why, hopefully, I use this blog to not merely echo majority sentiment. The last thing we need in the world is our news broadcast to us at a slightly higher volume. But I hope I'm providing an alternative perspective -- a chance to see subjects from another vantage point.

These three pieces did that for me this week. And if you find some time on Sunday afternoon, they would be worthy choices for reading that I think you might find enlightening and enjoyable...


• Meyer, Stoops Go for the Jugular by ESPN.com's Pat Forde

In a college football world littered with would-be National Champions, why was it that Oklahoma & Florida were the only two left standing? Well, part of the explanation lies with the system of major conference conglomeration (known as the Bowl Championship Series, or BCS) which ensures that the lion's share of bowl revenue will be reserved for the college football elite.

The other part of the explanation, however, involves the sportsmanship (or lack thereof) of coaches Urban Meyer and Bob Stoops. And it left me wondering whether one of the last vestiges of gentlemanly behavior -- whether your particular school calls it sportsmanship, class, or whatever -- is simply a relic of an older time in college sports: an unnecessary & cumbersome luxury in today's climate and under our current circumstances.

I think I've already figured out what it says about the BCS: yet another reason to pile on & beat the dead horse. But it also left me wondering, "What does that say about college football?" And, more broadly, "about our culture?"

Here's an excerpt:

There are so many things to debate here in the run-up to the FedEx BCS National Championship Game.

But one thing about this game is indisputable: Running up the score pays off. Sooners and Gators alike can agree on that after watching their teams pile on the style points late in games to influence poll voters.

In today's college football, sportsmanship is hazardous to your BCS health. Greed is good.

• The Courage of Detroit by Mitch Albom

Mitch Albom is one of the nation's best writers, period. And he just happens to write about sports for a living.

This one was a warm exercise in homerism. It'll leave you feeling like you know Detroit.

Thanks to Bob for passing this great little piece along.

And we are modest. In truth, we battle an inferiority complex. We gave the world the automobile. Now the world wants to scold us for it. We gave the world Motown music. Motown moved its offices to L.A. When I arrived 24 years ago, to be a sports columnist at the Detroit Free Press, I discovered several letters waiting for me at the office. Mind you, I had not written a word. My hiring had been announced, that's all. But there were already letters. Handwritten. And they all said, in effect, "Welcome to Detroit. We know you won't stay long, because nobody good stays for long, but we hope you like it while you're here."

• Coffee quietly went about his business at UA by Cecil Hurt

Cecil Hurt is hands down the best sports writer that you've never heard of. He should be the Sports Editor of a newspaper with a much larger readership, like the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Instead he's at home covering University of Alabama athletics for the Tuscaloosa News.

I enjoyed how he broke down the sensationalism of Tim Tebow & his faith, as compared with the humble nature of how Alabama running back Glen Coffee worked out his faith. As wonderful as Tim Tebow probably is, the vast amount of media affection for him is perhaps ultimately counter-productive for what he wants it to be: the sharing & spreading of his faith.

I respect Tim Tebow as I respect Glen Coffee. Both are warriors on the field and, as far as I can judge, sincere off the field.

I was never convinced Tebow’s decision to sign with Florida instead of Alabama was quite the inner struggle that it was purported to be on the ESPN special chronicling his recruitment. But he says it was tough and I will give him the benefit of the doubt. He’s been on my past two Heisman Trophy ballots and if, unlike Glen Coffee, he decides to return for another season in college, he’ll probably make my list for 2009 as well.

I refrain from calling him “Superman,” as television commentators do repeatedly, not because he isn’t a great player and a fine young man, but because ultimately, the over-the-top hyperbole doesn’t do Tebow any good, either.

The Florida quarterback seems to have turned just about every person with a microphone into a blathering fan. In the end, one fears, it will end up having the same result as Dick Vitale’s endless paeans to the Duke basketball program. You’ll start to resent the subject because the messenger — or, in Tebow’s case, the legions of messengers — finally push you to a point where you say “enough is enough.”

I ended up watching the BCS championship and wondering if Tebow had any teammates. That’s not Tebow’s fault, but it was the impression you were left with by the Fox broadcast. It’s great to say that Tebow was “willing his team to victory,” but there must have been at least 21 other Gators who were doing a little something.

That’s why, sometimes, it is easier to like someone who goes about things in a more quiet world, not free from media attention but not transformed by it. Someone like Glen Coffee. One always knew Glen Coffee was part of a larger team.

PLAYOFFS?! You kiddin' me? PLAYOFFS???

It's bowl season. Which of course means it's time for every sanctimonious blow-hard to complain about the bowls & how college football needs a playoff worse than GM needs a bail-out.

This morning, I read Stewart Mandel's compelling case for keeping the bowl system in tact:

I love the NCAA tournament as much as anyone. It's our nation's most captivating sporting event. But it's also an entirely made-for-TV product. The stands at the opening-round sites are often half-empty. The Final Four is played in a dome where half the seats are so far from the court you wind up watching most of the game on the JumboTron. And it really doesn't matter whether you're in San Diego or San Antonio, Dallas or Detroit, because the NCAA's rigid adherence to uniformity (all drinks at courtside must be poured into matching Dasani Cups) ensures not a single ounce of local color or character dare ooze its way inside the arena.

You'll have to forgive me if I'm in no hurry to see the Fiesta Bowl turn into the "NCAA Southwest Regional."

Black Coaches in College Football

I wrote a little diatribe today over at "Saints, Sinners, & Sports" today about African-American coaches & college athletics. Really, it's more about how the media loves to let the University of Alabama be it's whipping boy. Go have a look.

The Immovable Object vs. The Unstoppable Force

I just hope we get as good of a game as the resume's of the two schools entering it.

It's ALABAMA...

"When they get a hold of you, there's no letting go. They've been tied or led in just under 756 of the last 780 minutes, and they've scored first in 12 of their last 13 games dating back to the end of last season."

... versus FLORIDA

"The No. 4 Gators walloped rival Florida State 45-15 at Doak Campbell Stadium on Saturday, marking the seventh consecutive game in which they scored 40 points or more.

In fact, since losing to Ole Miss 31-30 in The Swamp on Sept. 27, the Gators have outscored their eight opponents 414-97, and won each game by at least four touchdowns."

What "they" are saying so far...

From ESPN.com's Chris Low:

Not long after Alabama had put the finishing touches on a 36-0 battering of Auburn on Saturday night, somebody asked Alabama quarterback John Parker Wilson about being the nation's No. 1 team and still being an underdog this coming Saturday in the SEC Championship Game.

Not that the Vegas line had come out by that time, but it's the assumption college football has made for the last several weeks.

Florida is the team to beat.

"It doesn't matter to us," Wilson said, his smile widening. "It's about the guys in the locker room. It's about our attitude. Underdog or favored, it's not going to affect the outcome of the game at all. The whole season, people have not expected us to do the things that we've done.

"We'll just keep taking it that way, and we've seemed to handle it pretty well."

Nobody on Alabama's team was coming right out and saying it, but you could tell they're reveling in the whole notion that Florida is a cut above.


From ESPN.com's Mark Schlabach:

Florida might be the fastest team in the history of college football.
[...]

And whether you love or hate him, it's hard to find many coaches who are better than Saban at preparing a game plan.
[...]

The Gators haven't seen a team as strong or menacing as the Crimson Tide.


From ESPN.com's Ivan Maisel:

Now that everyone is looking forward, the next big issue for the Gators is whether Harvin will play against Alabama. The fleet wide receiver got sandwiched by linebacker Nigel Bradham and corner Korey Mangum late in the second quarter. He stayed on all fours, stopping only to grab his right ankle. Meyer described it as a sprain and said he would wait to see what the doctors say Sunday. Harvin left the locker room on crutches with his ankle in a boot.

Meyer has never coached against Alabama coach Nick Saban. Asked where their paths have crossed, Meyer said they haven't, beyond the SEC head coaches meetings. Meyer said they have been cordial toward one another.

"Helluva coach," he added.

Helluva game.


From SI.com's Stewart Mandel:

"When you look at Alabama, the sum is greater than the parts," CBS' Gary Danielson said during Saturday's broadcast. "When you look at Florida ... the spread [offense] highlights the parts that beat you."

It's not the smoothest analogy I've ever heard, but it's pretty accurate. It may well be that the Gators' multitude of weapons is too much for even as stout a defense as Alabama's -- but I wouldn't bet my house on it. The Tide's formula is one that's stood the test of time since well before the spread offense ever entered the sport's lexicon.


"It's going to be a good game," said Terrence Cody, the Tide's 365-pound nose guard. "We're both very good teams. Florida is flashier and all that stuff. But we're hard-nosed and we'll go out there and give them everything we've got."

Be a Man, Manny

As a fellow Red Sox fan like Bill Simmons (ESPN's "The Sports Guy"), I too rooted on Manny Ramirez. I loved him when he was funny. But I also hated him when his jokes weren't so funny. I wrote a couple months ago that with the way Manny disrespected his team-mates, the fans, and the game, I hoped he fell flat on his face in L.A. & went the way of Nomar.

In his really, really ridiculously long article that will headline ESPN.com this weekend, Simmons argued that Manny shouldn't take the blame. He had put up great numbers, he was still putting up great numbers, he was going to put up great numbers -- what wasn't there to love? And any culpability for a poor attitude, lack of hustle, faking injuries & ducking games, intentional strikeouts, and being a bad team-mate in general should be laid at the doorstep of Manny's agent, Scott Boras. I personally think Simmons overstates his case. But did he have good reason to do so?

The Sports Guy stops just short of overtly alleging the existence of a cabal between the Red Sox front office, the Boston print media, the Boston sports talk machine, ESPN analyst Peter Gammons, and -- The Great Satan himself -- Scott Boras. He essentially assassinates Gammons in terms of him having any journalistic integrity or objective voice of his own anymore.

Not to mention that he takes swipes at current Red Sox GM Theo Epstein's integrity in holding Manny to a standard he himself allegedly did not keep. He compares Epstein not being re-signed & let go at the end of the '05 season to Manny quitting on his team mid-season for no apparent reason. I'm not sure how solid those comparisons are.

And, on top of all that, The Sports Guy even makes veiled accusations of racism. There is a long-standing history of sports racism in Boston (with both the Celtics and the Red Sox). Simmons patently implies the Red Sox front office of preserving this long-time Boston sports pastime of sorts by referring to the current product on the field as "lily-white" & akin to looking like a prep school athletics squad.

My first reaction was that Simmons must not be a Sox fan anymore. I mean, seriously: the guy never writes about them anymore. He spills endless amounts of ink over football lines and on baskeball; but he barely acknowledges baseball anymore. And when he FINALLY decides to grace us with his thoughts on baseball by talking about the Manny divorce, he basically slanders his favorite team? One of my major gut reactions was that Simmons just needs to go buy a Dodger blue #99 jersey & make it official. If it's Manny you're loyal to, then be up front about it. But don't claim Red Sox fanhood if you're not into it anymore.

I'll give Simmons credit where he deserves it, though. He doesn't throw darts without hitting a few targets.

The strongest part of Simmons' article is probably his critique of the widely-loved Peter Gammons. It is indeed puzzling that Gammons never once blamed Boras, but only spoke noble words of him. Even I recognized it to be pretty clear (in my write-up two months ago) that it felt like Gammons was the mouth-piece for the Red Sox administrative arm. For Gammons to not even say a single ill word about Boras, though -- a man universally recognized in baseball circles as the media's version of the protector of the integrity of the game -- is really bad. Even Curt Schilling fingered the obvious villain when interviewed at the trade deadline:

On Scott Boras’s involvement:

“I think absolutely he’s absolutely had a hand in this … I think he absolutely has a piece of this. Scott Boras stands to make zero dollars if the Red Sox pick up Manny’s options the next two years. Manny’s not 1- years from retirement, he’s maybe four obviously, that’s where he’s at. So does Scott Boras want to get a two year-deal for Manny or a four-year deal for Manny? At the end of the day it falls on the player because Manny’s an adult… I can’t fathom Scott hasn’t had some… you read his comments, he just has no ability to answer a question short, tactfully, and straightforward. It’s a 12 paragraph way to say 19 syllable words that you just can’t figure out what the hell he’s saying.”

There does appear to be an attempt by the Red Sox front office to control spin & to establish relationships that are ultimately beneficial for their own self-preservation & advancement. Think about who benefits. Gammons gets first dibs at any scoop coming out of the Red Sox front office, not to mention other probable fringe benefits at Fenway Park when watching his self-disclosed favorite team. The Red Sox watch Boras drive up prices on all the mid- & low-market franchises -- a development that plays into their hands with their massive fan base and, thus, money pool. On top of that, though, the Red Sox help establish a gentler view of Boras & a kind relationship with an agent who is vilified everywhere else in order to perhaps receive favorable treatment with Boras' long list of clients (cough, cough -- J.D. Drew). And, of course, Boras gets paid.

This article by Simmons even brought back fresh to my memory an interview I remember seeing Theo doing four years ago after the Red Sox re-signed Varitek but had let Pedro go. Varitek is, of course, represented by Boras. When Theo was asked about Boras' cut-throat, blood-sucking reputation, he succinctly & directly responded, "Well, Scott always gets top dollar for his clients." I remember being shocked by that answer. It was sort of a relentlessly positive way of looking at a really, really awful person in terms of what a scourge he is on baseball in general. I like the way Simmons referred to him: "one of the worst human beings in America who hasn't actually committed a crime."

I want to make this clear: I detest Scott Boras. He himself is a huge reason why a baseball game is so expensive to go watch in person right now. He encourages and openly fosters disloyalty to the "home team" (he basically fundamentally opposes one of the first principles from the National Anthem of Baseball, "Take Me Out to the Ballgame"), which completely spits in the face of baseball fans everywhere. And he does all this to increase his own bottom line.

And you know what else, my Republican readers? I want to say to you that this is what unchecked free market enterprise produces. So everytime you praise Republicans for their common sense and demean Democrats for how "wrong" they are, I want you to remember that you are giving a tacit endorsement to the reckless & utterly insensitive greed of The Great Satan himself.

And as I wag my finger on that point, I can't help but be almost completely ashamed of my Red Sox fanhood now. I've been a fan for a long time. I don't know if these revelations will change that overnight. But the Red Sox look more & more like the Yankees at every turn. It's disillusioning, to be sure.

Back to Simmons, though... one thing I think that he completely overlooks is the fact that it wasn't a guarantee that Manny was not going to quit on this team that was defending a title. Manny had already done just that when he sat out for five weeks at the end of the '06 season for some mysterious, probably non-existent injury. Manny could have shut himself down for as long as he wanted. He didn't care. And if the '08 Red Sox were going to make a run at defending their title, it was clear that Manny wasn't going to be a part of that effort. It was clear enough that he had other selfish interests in mind, and Manny's not one to juggle more than one task at a time.

At the end of the day, though, the man who is speaking the most truth here is Curt Schilling. (Why is it always the jerks & the blow-hards? Canseco was the truth-teller on steroids. Now it's Schilling on Manny.) He was absolutely correct when he said, "At the end of the day it falls on the player because Manny’s an adult." Simmons can call Manny an "idiot savant" all he wants, and portray him as the ignorant puppet in Boras' puppet-master scheme. But Manny ultimately chose this path when he chose Boras & acted out like a petulant child. I don't see God absolving everyone, both sheep & goats, on Judgment Day just because that Satan was one persuasive cat. That's just not how it works -- at least not in my worldview.

Manny made his bed. Now he's lying in it. And I'm still hoping that it has some uncomfortable lumps so that Manny will go the way of Nomar. My hope is still that Manny falls on his face to the extent that whenever a future athlete thinks of acting out and being selfish, he will think of the cautionary tale that is Manny Ramirez.

Bama is Back?

Three years ago, right after Alabama had a big blowout victory over highly-ranked (and clearly over-rated at the time) Florida, Sports Illustrated made a bold declaration:



Now, two years and 11 months later, following a big blowout victory over highly ranked (and clearly over-rated) Clemson, Sports Illustrated has evidently decided to do it again:



There's a strong sense in which, to Alabama fans, this pub is unwarranted & unwanted. We don't want it, and it really chaps our behinds.

'Bama hasn't really done anything yet. Sure we beat Clemson, and looked good doing it. And, as the mag cover says, we served notice that we're among the ranks of the "contenders" again. But we still haven't beaten Auburn since 2001. We've won our conference division only once in the last eleven years. And some of us are tired of celebrating smaller victories (e.g. recruiting "National Championship," etc.) in place of ultimately consummating the rebuilding process into something real and substantive.

And Nick Saban feels the same way. Here is his attitude concerning the mindset that Alabama can start to feel confident & good about itself:

(Warning: A little profanity)

That man has got a fire in his belly! I love it!

Here's how one guy put it on an internet forum I read:

I think feet and I are in total agreement here. I want people to continue to downplay our excitement by pointing out what a dismal team Clemson is. I don’t want the media on our side right now. I want to beat Georgia and have them claim they were a paper tiger. I want to beat Tennessee and have everyone point out what could be a dismal record by then (Florida, Auburn, and Georgia all before they play us). I want to go into Baton Rouge and beat LSU. After ending the streak in Tuscaloosa (he's talking about the Auburn game here), tell us how Florida is going to show us how the big boys do it.

It's fun to go through a season as the underdog with a perpetual chip on your shoulder. More fun than having an early coronation only to discover later that it was premature.

There’s another sense in which this SI cover is unwelcome to me. I’ve become almost completely cynical when it comes to my view of the mainstream media. They all hated on us when we hired Saban (aside from a select few -— Herbstreit, and maybe a couple others). And I just knew they would start to pump us up again once we started winning. And here it is already. The media is so transparent. They’ll build us back up so they can tear us back down. I’m still harboring some seriously awful feelings for mainstream media.

'Bama is on a mission. And it's about ACTUALLY being back. Not just a magazine proclaiming that we're there.

One Last Spring for Dodgertown

It's the end of an era.

Mayor Lasorda will have one final spring under the Florida sunshine

The spring training home of the Los Angeles (and formerly Brooklyn) Dodgers is closing. For years, it has gone by the title of "Dodgertown." It is a monument to year's gone by. It's a relic of the good ol' days. But after this spring, Dodgertown is closing its doors & the Los Angeles ball club is relocating to a new & improved spring training home in Arizona.

(This is the part where you go, "Awwwwww." This is the part where movies like "Cars" have conditioned us to revolt against the idea of progress because of the tarnished glory of what is left behind...)

However, LA sports writer Bill Plaschke is glad that Dodgertown is closing its doors, and he says that it's time is coming "Not a minute too soon". Plaschke says that Dodgertown has become a relic of the past. It is no longer relevant. It has become a monument to yesteryear, but the mystique of that bygone era has not endured.

When I read this, I couldn't help but think about so many of the churches in my particular fellowship that hold on to the past. So much of the surroundings change for older folks that one of the few things they can hold onto that stays the same (and, thus, helps them feel more comfortable) is the church. And then those generations of older folks build intellectual arguments around Scripture & Restorationist pleas (e.g. "We want to be just like the 1st century church") to argue against change from tradition. And then churches become monuments instead of movements & the buildings turn into relics of a bygone era.

I had a great professor at Harding who was fond of saying, "I don't know want to be the 1st century church; I want to be the 21st century church." The past was lovely, and we should certainly respect our history. But we shouldn't re-live it, or create bubbles of existence that seek to preserve it.

As an organization, the Dodgers have struggled in part because of their desire to hold on to nostalgia to the neglect of their mission. Let's not do the same in our churches.

Conversation with a Hog Fan: A Study in Fanhood

The following is a set of E-mails with a good friend of mine from college who is a big Hog fan. Here goes…

----------------- Original Message -----------------
From: III (that’s ME)
Date: Dec 12, 2007 1:45 PM

Gotta get your thoughts on Bobby Petrino.

Are you happy with him?
How long do you think you’ll keep him?
What do you think of him as a person?
Do you think he will bring a championship to Arkansas?
If so, how long will it take?

----------------- Original Message -----------------
From: Original Grubb
Date: Jan 7, 2008 1:11 PM

I’m not thrilled with the hire but I think it is a bolder step for the program. One of the board members said something about how the past business model had been 8-4 and that the new business model is a REAL national championship.

I think the hire is immediately good in a couple of areas...namely the PASSING GAME. Which has just continued to get worse and worse and worse.

I think he has to stay at Ark. for at least 4 years to improve his “jumping” image.

I don’t know what to think of him as a person. I think the way he left Atlanta was not ideal. However, that is the business. In the past the Falcons have fired coaches quickly just like most NFL franchises.

I think he should have offered to stay and finish the season, and maybe he did and maybe they said “don’t let the door hit you”. I don’t know. It does seem like what the players wanted though, like it was a SPLIT that was going to happen anyways. In terms of betrayal. I think what Coach FRAN was the WORST. I think Saban was worse, ONLY because he specifically denied not only interest but in ever TAKING the BAMA job. Then he did it. I have no problem with him leaving the FINS for BAMA (though I am a FIN fan) but rather in how he did it.

I do not like how ESPN bashed and bashed him, but that was one thing and then mocking the UA program is not ok. Nutt was chased off for more than just his record and never proving he could take the NEXT STEP. In the past Arkansas’s expectations were just that of being 8-4. Only once in 50 years should the razorbacks be a top 5 team. Yet you look at Kansas, Rutgers, Boise State, Wake Forrest....other programs with similar excuses...small state, no big talent base???? Yet other programs have success. Still it was the DRAMA. The way he mishandled the recruiting and treatment of players, his wife’s involvement in the email and texting and the continual lack of a passing game, and the moral character issue of how he unfairly treated players...someone did DWI and a started was patted on the wrist and the other guy was kicked off the team for GOOD! And again, the inability to develop QB...ala DICK who looks worse as a Junior than he did as a raw 17 year old true freshman when he played at LSU.

I think he could bring a CHAMPIONSHIP to the HOGS but I don’t see it in the next two years. The talent is not all GONE but it is sparse. Pending Felix coming back. The schedule is killer. Play Florida and Texas the next two years plus the regulars of the west and South Carolina at Carolina. The year after that along with the SEC west and Florida, there is Georgia, and Texas and Texas A&M. So 2009 is a bad bad bad year.

The defense is sooo gross though.

And another thing about coach P. that I don’t think I’ve expressed yet is the concern over how he left the sitcha in Louie. Did he leave a bad pile for the new coach to step into in terms of OFF the field problems or...was he the GLUE that was keeping things stable? I don’t know.

----------------- Original Message -----------------
From: III
Date: Jan 11, 2008 12:01 AM

I love studying fanhood. Its one of my hobbies. And it’s fascinating to hear you talk about Petrino & Arkansas. You almost sound like an Alabama fan talking about Saban! Its hilarious! The similarities:

1) Common hatred for ESPN
2) Remarkable ability to forgive prior sins
3) Having to defend shoving the old guy out the door by…
- a) Having to share insider-type info to back it up
- b) Not settling for mediocrity
- c) Pointing to chronic problems that were never fixed
- d) Claiming that that our program & our “folks” are misunderstood by the national media.

I’m not making fun of you. I promise! I’m just pointing out how similar the logic, rationalization, & propaganda is.

---

As far as the “coaching sins” deal, here’s my take. As long as we live in a world where the two winningest coaches in Division 1A history are perennially on the hot seat, I refuse to fault coaches for looking after themselves by pre-empting their own dismissals. There’s a double-standard that exists here. Organizations & G.M.’s can give their “vote of confidence, still fire a guy, & get away clean, but Nick Saban can’t do the same. Organizations & G.M.’s can fire a coach midseason without repercussion, but if a coach leaves the team midseason he’s quitting on the team.

I understand the point of view that a majority of the nation holds about these two coaches. I just think its biased in favor of “fanhood” of the team. Why should a coach care to be loyal when it will never be shown to him? And this reveals a lack in character in coaches? Sports writers need to get off their sanctimonious high horses. Either that, or NEVER take a better job with a higher salary. When did upward mobility become taboo in our country?

That said, I think Petrino is gone from Arkansas in 3 years time. And Saban will be gone from ‘Bama in at least 5. These men are not settlers. Why would either of us expect that they ever will be? If your MFT studies taught you anything, I’m sure you learned that the best predictor of future behavior is past performance. I think Saban will rebuild Alabama just enough, but will not stick around to suckle off his success—he never has. Petrino will be looking for a new job every offseason—he did just that at Louisville according to Pat Forde (who covered him as a beat writer at that paper before moving on to ESPN).

I do agree with you that Fran is the slimiest one of them all.

Saban is putting together a scary ‘08 recruiting class. If he continues to stack this caliber of class year after year for several years, like he did at LSU, I won’t care whether he stays or goes. Looking at everything right now, I think the Tide re-emerges on the national scene in 2010 with enough flashes of brilliance between now & then to keep our loony fanbase satiated enough.

FWIW, I think Saban is an honorable man in a dishonorable profession. Underneath the veneer, he is a shy boy from West Virginia who doesn’t know how to deal with so much attention. From just listening to his press conferences each week, I can tell that he is a wise man who has keen insight in coaching & human nature. I’m telling you: this is no snake-oil salesman. He’s the genuine article… unless he is the most sociopathic, Machiavellian liar that I’ve ever heard of. I just don’t buy that he could be. I don’t think he could have the level of success that he has if he was. He’s a “Do the Right Thing” kind of guy who could only get what he wanted (having his cake & eating it, too—finishing the job in Miami while wanting to be back in the college game) by doing the wrong thing. I’m sure it will haunt him for the rest of his natural born days, but there was no other way around it.

I’m with you in not knowing what to think about Petrino.

Why College Football is King

Written by a sports writer named Travis Reier:

The Best Thing About College Football?

Is that it's not pro football. At least, it wasn't as of midnight, when Missouri and West Virginia returned to their pumpkin statuses. But there is good news on the horizon for the ever-growing faction of college football fans who seemingly want to NFL-ize the Saturday game. With club seats, luxury suites and multi-million-dollar head coaches with Power Ball buyouts becoming a permanent part of the landscape, major college football is taking on an uncanny resemblance to the no-personality horsecrap we see on Sundays.

So I must be opposed to a playoff, right? Not necessarily. An eight-team format would allow the regular season to retain a shred of integrity while also identifying the nation‘s top team. Anything more than that, though, would be another ill-advised step “forward” for the game. A 16 (or more)-team format would admit three-loss teams to the party, watering down the importance of September games in the process.

See, I like that Georgia fans tonight are mourning a home loss to South Carolina from nearly three months ago all over again. Same for USC (Stanford loss). And while they may not realize it right now, the fear of losing even one game and the haunting consequences of a week two defeat is why we travel to Nashville to watch a game involving Vanderbilt instead of the Titans.

TR

Saluting an Accomplishment

On an Alabama Football message board that I frequently read, there was a post following the Pats/Colts NFL game tonight that said, "Congrats Tony and Lovie -- first african american HC's to superbowl. very fitting." It was a salute to Indianapolis Colts head coach Tony Dungy & Chicago Bears skipper Lovie Smith. Both are African-Americans. Both will share the honor of being the first African-American head coaches to lead their teams into the Super Bowl.

The responses to this thread were varied. Some echo'd the adulatory sentiment. Others questioned what the big deal was. And thus, as often happens on messsage boards, a debate ensued. And since I have friends who are weary of "reverse-discrimination" and don't seem to share this congratulatory sensibility, I feel the need to write.

"What's the big deal? Plenty of white coaches have made the Super Bowl. What's so special about two black coaches?"

I understand the sentiment. I really do. And I'm tempted to feel that way, too. I know it seems like any time a black man takes any kind of small step, it's celebrated. For people of my generation it's hard to understand why a colored man gets praise for something lots of white people have already done.

The reason for that is simple: it's ignorance. For a great deal of 18-35 year-old white males, discrimination is not something we experienced growing up. We've heard about it. We've read it about it history books. Now I'm not saying that racism & profiling still don't exist today, but it's not as publicly exposed as it was 30-to-40-to-50 years ago. When Martin Luther King, Jr. was making speeches. When the Ku Klux Klan was an accepted way of southern life. When "coon" was part of the everyday vernacular.

And for those of us who do not share that perspective, we will never know what it was like to grow up in Tony Dungy's or Lovie Smith's shoes. I really don't know what that kind of discrimination is like. Those guys grew up in a generation where opportunities & priveleges were hardly open. They had to work harder & do it twice as good as the next guy because of the color of their skin.

Whether or not it's admitted, there is a stigma against black coaches. It was accepted as common thought as recently as 25 years ago that African-Americans could not make good quarterbacks. They simply didn't have the mental capacity to handle the demands of the position. And it was people like Doug Williams (the first black QB to play in & win the Super Bowl) and Warren Moon (the first black QB to enter the NFL Hall of Fame) who changed that perception. The same perception existed & STILL exists for African-American head coaches. They aren't smart enough to handle the demands of being a head coach. They're not as good at X's & O's. They're not as smart at the psychology of motivating players. They can't handle the public relations demands of dealing with the media day in & day out.

And now Tony Dungy & Lovie Smith have proven those critics wrong. They climbed the coaching ladder -- a steeper & more demanding ladder than their white counterparts were made to climb. I'm not even beginning to mention some of the familial & financial hardships that often come from arising out of the African-American culture. And after jumping through all those hoops, finally they have made it to the pinnacle of sports achievement: The Super Bowl. As a white man, I will never understood what it took to get there.

But, there's another part of this that's difficult for people of my demographic to swallow. As was written last Friday by Bill Simmons, ESPN.com's "The Sports Guy:"

Now here's where a slight dose of hypocrisy comes in. We spend so much time complaining about underachieving superstars, overpaid and overhyped players, incompetent GMs, rookie flops, dreadful officiating, troublemakers, thugs, players and coaches doing/saying dumb things, bad trades and signings, annoying announcers and writers, and overrated teams getting too much credit -- by the way, I do as much complaining and mocking as anyone, I'm not absolving myself here -- that I'm starting to wonder if we'll ever fully embrace a special team anymore. Are we too cynical? Are we too desperate to poke fun at everything? Has being a "fan" morphed into something else? Has the fan-sports dynamic started to become a little unhealthy?

Think about it. As recently as 20 years ago, the concept of a sports radio station didn't even exist. Neither did the internet or DirecTV. Fantasy leagues and SportsCenter were just starting to round into shape, but it was still pretty early for both. You simply watched a game, discussed it with friends, devoured the ensuing newspaper coverage, argued about the game at work or school the following day, then you waited for the next one. Now sports has evolved into a 24/7 event, between the instant highlights and internet coverage, thousands and thousands of Web sites and blogs, an infinite number of fantasy leagues, a never-ending slew of sports radio shows, sportswriters screaming at one another on TV and everything else you can imagine. Every game and event is digested and processed almost instantly, and then it's rehashed and digested again, and then it's beaten into the ground, and within a few hours everyone feels obligated to come up with their own unique angle on things -- even if it's extreme, even if it's insane, even if it's blisteringly nasty or vicious, even if it's completely nonsensical or inane.

And that's what we're REALLY afraid of. We just know that this is the kind of story angle that the ESPN/Talk-Radio/Sports-Print-Media Machine will love. And we just KNOW that they are going to milk this Super Bowl sub-plot for all it's worth. And just when we finally think that cow is all milked out, they will squeeze some more. We will be sick of it after two weeks, and then we'll have to listen to the announcers drone on about it the whole game during the Super Bowl. And the thought of all that is exhaustingly reprehensible.

Well, here's the solution: turn off SportsCenter. Go without a little Sports Talk Radio. And read CNN.com instead of going to ESPN.com.

One other interesting angle about these coach's success. Since the NFL is renowned for being "the copy-cat league" (that is, "If that concept/philosophy/method is working for someone else, maybe we ought to employ that in our franchise as well!"), hiring an African-American coach could become the new trend. Heck, it could carry into the NCAA. And you may think that to be dumb & think NFL exec's are smarter than that. But franchises have copy-catted dumber things before.

This is a significant event from many perspectives. Perhaps not for some of us with a priveleged caucasian perspective. But for many, this is a real inspiration. I'd say it's even on the scale of the Miracle on Ice -- the 1980 USA Gold-Medal-winning Hockey Team at Lake Placid that raised the spirits of an entire nation. This kind of scenario was unimaginable a generation ago. And now? Doors will be opened. Children will be encouraged. Barriers will be removed.

Congratulations Tony & Lovie. I appreciate your dedication to chasing your dreams, and I salute your dual accomplishment of making it to the Super Bowl. Well Done.

The Talking Heads

Alabama's name has been rubbed in the dirt this past week, especially by ESPN. It's because Alabama fired Mike Shula. The same Mike Shula that had ONE winning season in four tries. The same Mike Shula who had a losing record in the SEC, including a 2-14 combined record against Arkansas, Tennessee, LSU, & Auburn. This is ESPN, who flamed Notre Dame for firing Tyrone Willingham "too soon" & has since turned around and embraced what Charlie Weiss has done for the Fighting Irish.

Sometimes, sports-writers & the ESPN talking heads turn out to be right. However, as the following article proves, often times they have no earthly idea what they're talking about. The last paragraph, and especially the last line, are particularly amusing. Enjoy!

Carroll's hiring is another mistake for troubled USC


The Sporting News
Jan 1, 2001
by Tom Dienhart



Dear Mike Garrett:

I think you made a mistake hiring Pete Carroll as USC's next coach. As Trojans athletics director, you needed to hit a home run with this hire. This looks more like a scratch single.

I know. Carroll might end up being grand, but the perception in the here and now is what matters for a program that's on the wane. And that perception isn't good.

Some might compare Carroll to Paul Hackett, the coach he replaces. That might not be fair, but you can't blame them. Carroll is an NFL guy. He's a defensive tactician who hasn't coached in college since 1083, when he was an assistant at Pacific. Hackett was an offensive expert who hadn't coached in college since 1092 when he landed the USC job before the 1998 season. At least Hackett's most recent college stint at the time was as head coach at Pittsburgh.

Unlike Hackett, Carroll proved he can be a successful head coach, leading the New England Patriots to a pair of winning seasons and playoff berths. He's also a super-enthusiastic guy. But Carroll doesn't know college football.
Advertisement

Oh, he's saying the fight things. You know, stuff like, "If you can understand the process in the NFL ... in the draft process, it's all about watching players in college, I don't consider myself unfamiliar with the college game at all."

I'm sure Carroll, like Hackett, knows his X's and O's. The problem is the college game Carroll doesn't know. It was the same one Hackett had trouble grasping. I'm talking about things like academic issues, recruiting / and dealing with alumni.

Is Caroll up for whispering sweet nothings into the ears of know-it-all 18-year-olds? Is Carroll up for spending more time speaking at booster events than breaking down film? Is Carroll up for fans demanding to know why USC can't dominate the Pac-10 anymore?

Carroll needs a positive start and would help himself by retaining defensive line coach Ed Orgeron and running backs coach Kennedy Pola, a pair of Hackett assistants who red-line their intensity meters.

I know, Mike. You say, "Average Joe doesn't know football." Believe what you want, but Average Joe has reason to doubt your hiring skills and thinks you are part of the problem. Hackett was 19-18 at USC, and his last team finished last in the Pac-10, the first t/me that ever has happened. He was your man after you mishandled the termination of John Robinson after the 1997 season.

Your job might be riding on Carroll's performance. Your non-communicative ways cause people to make conclusions that might not be tree about you and your program. And you didn't help yourself a few years ago when you gave a "pep talk" in the locker room.

It was hard for you to believe people didn't fall over themselves to coach your beloved USC. But it's not that good of a job because it's not 1975 anymore. The 85-scholarship limit has made college football an equal-opportunity sport in which schools such as Oregon State and Virginia Tech have BCS dreams.

Also working against USC are substandard facilities-all the way from Heritage Hall to the antiquated weight room. And the L.A. lifestyle isn't tot everyone, especially not for assistant coaches. Housing prices are out of sight, To live in a decent area, coaches must drive an hour to and from work. Their days are long enough as it is.

Oregon State's Dennis Erickson and Oregon's Mike Bellotti are the biggest names who sniffed around the USC job but didn't really pursue it. San Diego Chargers coach Mike Riley would have been a good hire. He served as Oregon State's coach from 1997-98 and was USC's offensive coordinator before that, but he couldn't make up his mind. When he continued to drag his feet, you grabbed Carroll, who was out of work last season.

Contrast that to the job search at Alabama. Marquee names such as Virginia Tech's Frank Beamer and Miami's Butch Davis seriously considered taking the job. In the end, the Tide got TCU coach Dermis Franchione, one of the hottest coaches in the college game.

Dennis Franchione, USC Coach. Would've had a nice ring to it.

On the Exploitation of Sports

I just did some blog surfing, and I stumbled across the blog of distinguished Christian scholar, Ben Witherington III. Added him to my "Other Links" section on the left column of this blog. His recent entry about which he wrote about Rick Warren being a Model of Faith is well worth a read. I too have my critiques of Warren -- most especially the way he uses (or rather, MIS-uses) Scripture. But he's a phenomenal example of Christ in the world today & I'm happy to see an intellectual elite recognize him as such.

It also appears that Big Ben is a big movie afficionado. I'm glad to find a theologian who looks at movies as a way to take the pulse of contemporary culture & as a conveyer of ideas and truth.

-----

Today's sports entertainment business has grown into a monster. It's beyond a machine. If it were only that, it would merely be a mechanized tool that facilitates our enjoyment of sports or helps us more productively or efficiently follow sports. No, the sports entertainment business is beyond a machine. It is a resource-consuming monster, out to devour every shred of it's customer's time & money it can possibly get it's grubby fingers on. It is a competitive world where different networks vie for fans' attention through any & every medium possible.

Used to be that sports was something people engaged in for recreation. Somewhere along the line, as the competition of these recreational games increased, people began to recognize the greatness of some athletes over others. Lines began to be drawn between professionals and amateurs, and all of a sudden people became willing to pay money to watch someone else play these recreational activities. And thus born was the sports fan. And from that point, it did not take long for smart capitalists to turn sports into an industry & learn how to exploit people's money.

It's a fascinating evolution from recreation to monster. And nowadays, there seems to be no limit to the exploitation of athletics. From newspapers to radio to books to magazines to television to internet to cellphones, the sports entertainment industry will use any medium they can possibly manipulate to make a buck.

Part of me loves it. Part of me loved turning on the radio Sunday evening & Monday to listen to the radio hosts talk about the collapses of Colin Mongomerie & Phil Mickelson at Winged Foot. I've listened to some of them so much that I've come to almost regard them as friends. I have an inkling of what they will think & say, and so I'm that much more interested. I enjoy reading what my favorite writers will write. I enjoy watching Kornheiser & Wilbon yelling at each other when they will discuss this topic.

However, I've come to notice how the monster rears it's head in less tasteful & enjoying ways. Some radio hosts took strange angles to keep listeners tuned in & people calling the station. One guy said everyone loves Mickelson only because he's fat. Others were insistent that what happened to Mickelson was not a choke, of course prompting phone call after phone call to try to set the host straight. Still others were comparing Mickelson's choke with the great golf chokes of all time (Palmer at the '66 U.S. Open, Norman at the '96 Masters, Van de Velde at the '99 British) and were taking the "inarguable position" that Phil's choke was the greatest of all of time. This is the tactic that I observe is used most often. It does 2 things: (1) makes people want to call in and argue, & (2) makes people think that this is such a ground-breaking subject that they must listen to the host's every word as he and his callers dissect every angle of this "greatest" or "worst" sports moment "of all time." It seemed like the hosts were less trying to capture the the main issues of the sports world and were more trying to take the most absurd angle so that they might inflate their show's ratings. Bill Simmons touched on this phenomenon in an article he wrote following Boston's victory in Game 6 of the 2004 ALCS (a.k.a. the Schilling Bloody Sock game):

"Over the next few days, everyone will make a big deal about Schilling's Game Six, only some for the right reasons. We live in a sports world where every good moment gets beaten into the ground. It isn't enough for something to happen anymore. You have to vote. You have to watch two guys screaming on a split-screen. You have to read 400 columns about it, then columns by people reviewing those columns. You have to hear sports radio hosts screaming, and once the subject becomes exhausted, one of them takes a crazy angle on the topic just to keep the phone lines ringing for another few hours. It keeps going and going, a vicious little snowball. When it runs out of steam, something else replaces it and the whole cyce starts all over again."

There's no way Mickelson's choke was worse than any of the three mentioned above. Palmer had a 7 stroke lead with 9 holes to play & a 4 stroke lead with 4 to play. When he went to a playoff, he was up 2 after nine and ended up losing by 9. Van de Velde needed just a double bogey to win. You thought Mickelson's 18th was bad? Try multiplying that by 18, and then you get what it was like to watch Greg Norman lose to Nick Faldo at Augusta in 1996. Phil choked, and it was bad, but it's not on the same scale as the above three chokes.

If a buck can be made off of it, it will be exploited. Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and Ann Coulter have made names for themselves by putting down others in the realm of politics. Since police investigations & the justice system are somewhat interesting, our televisions are saturated with shows dedicated to the subjects. The same with reality TV. And as long as our obsessive-compulsive personalities feed these monsters in our culture, they will continue to grow, adapt, and find even more creative ways to rob us of our time & money.

I suppose the solution is like the story I used in Bible class last Wednesday: starve the monster.