Jack’s Blog

Post Super Bowl talk radio went in two directions: praise of the Saints and their “feel good” story or find anything and everything the hosts could to bitch about.

On the same station, I heard one show, talking about Drew Brees’ magnificent rise to the pinnacle of his profession, the guts of Sean Payton to make some calls that could have buried him had they gone wrong, i.e. by the percentages, the clutch kicking of Garrett Hartley and so many more, while on another show, later in the day, the hosts expounded on Peyton Manning (is he really that good?), Reggie Wayne (”as a Pro Bowler, you have to make that fourth down, late game TD catch rather than have ‘alligator arms’ “), why the rest of the country cared more about the Saints winning than the people of New Orleans (”after all, what was Katrina, five years ago?”) and the clincher - complaining about the people who complained about the Who. 

It was so transparent that these (non-)professionals think the way to get an audience is to zig when everyone’s zagging and vice versa.  To show how absurd they are, especially one guy who’s simply a wannabe (as opposed to the “never was” that he  currently is), the classic line regarding the Who (and how much of a fan of the group he claims to be) was that “their music is timeless.”  Wonder how he’d explain “Pin Ball Wizard?”

Prior to the Super Bowl, I heard one commentator make a valid point.  How many of the younger generation know what a pin ball machine is and what, exactly, it takes to become a wizard at it.  Maybe this guy has a soft spot for the blind.  After all, listening to this fool, one can understand his being empathetic to the handicapped.  When it comes to talent, he certainly is.

I won’t use his name.  He will remain anonymous, which is best for all concerned.  I’m still waiting for the audio books I ordered from Barnes & Noble so I can stop subjecting myself to this drivel.  They can’t get here soon enough.  Listening to this guy (which I do because the station he’s on is the same one that airs Tark’s show) reminds me of the line George Raveling told me his grandmother often said:

“There are more horses’ asses in the world than there are horses.”

Super Bowl Sunday might be the greatest party-causing event ever.  I can’t think of anyone I know who wasn’t at someone’s Super Bowl party yesterday.  And I’m fairly certain (nearly) everyone of them had an opinion about how the game was being played.

Hearing the “sofa coaches” opine after the Saints opened the second half with a surprise onside kick was a hoot - mainly because most people waited (and it was a fairly long wait) until it was officially determined which team had recovered the ball before rendering their verdict on whether Sean Payton was a gutsy genius or a bumbling fool (after all, wasn’t he the same guy who was villified for spurning a sure three points in the first half and unsuccessfully going for a touchdown)?  Once the referee’s signal, telling the teams - and the viewing world - the Saints had, indeed, recovered it, did we hear what a brilliant move it was.

I’m usually quick on the trigger when it comes to comments - mostly because I like to offer mine before the play rather than after it’s taken place.  Having been a coach for many, many years, I used to snicker at people who waited until after the play ended and it was obvious whether the call was a good one or not to pontificate. 

After yesterday’s blog, it’s apparent that logic doesn’t play a crucial role in predicting sporting events.  My feeling that Peyton Manning orchestrated each game, so in order for New Orleans to win, they had to get him out of the game, was proved untrue - beyond a shadow of a doubt - as he threw an unheard of “pick 6″ to more or less seal the contest.

This game also showed that, when a player who some people consider “the greatest of all time” is involved, his (or her) counterpart occasionally steps up, in an effort to say, “Don’t count me out of the conversation” or at least, “Hey, what about me?  While I may not be in the discussion, I’m involved in this particular game too.”

As far as the winning coach, Sean Payton, is concerned, Super Bowl XLIV reaffirmed my quote from blogs from 5/22/07 and 6/19/09:

“A good coaching move is one that works.”

According to Trent Dilfer, Peyton Manning won the MVP while he was on the sideline during the game Jim Caldwell decided to forego the undefeated season and rest his starters shortly after halftime.  Dilfer’s reasoning was that Manning’s absence from the game showed how much he means to the Colts.  What the nation saw was - when Peyton Manning is at quarterback for the Indianapolis Colts, they win. 

My prediction might be influenced by the fact that my wife and Peyton Manning both went to Tennessee (although separated by a few decades years) and I worked at Fresno State, alma mater of Trent Dilfer, the guy who explained to the sporting world - before the MVP voting - why Manning would win it.  Logic would dictate that as long as Peyton Manning stays in the game, the Colts win.

So my pick to win the Super Bowl is the Colts . . . as long as Peyton Manning stays in the game.  If the Saints can get away with enough of those “remember me” hits - which will be the X factor but also will be difficult after the league (and everyone else) heard Saints’ defensive coordinator, Greg Williams, make those statements about a week ago (don’t think they haven’t been a topic of discussion among the refereeing crew) - and they have a cumulative effect on Manning, rendering him unable to play, I change my pick to New Orleans.

My motto is:

“It’s better to be boldly decisive and risk being wrong than to agonize at length and be right too late.” �

After Kobe Bryant passed Jerry West as the Laker’s all-time scoring leader, there was an inordinate amount of conversation as to which Laker player was the greatest in the history of the franchise.  Answers ranged from West to Baylor to Kareem to Magic to Bryant.  George Mikan may even have been given the nod by some (very) old-timers.

Arguments came from all sides.  Elgin Baylor is regarded by many to be the best, certainly at his position, but had the misfortune of playing before there was video of every move - from six or seven different camera angles.  West garners strong support because, not only did he become the NBA’s logo, but he played prior to the three-point shot.  How many he nailed from beyond the line no one’s ever checked - which is rather remarkable with as many stat geeks as there are.  One shot that definitely would have been in that category was the 60-footer he hit at the buzzer to tie Game 3 of the 1970 NBA playoffs.

No, say the yuppie crowd (are they still referred to as “yuppies”?), the best had to be Magic.  He won championships, played every position and elevated the game of all of his teammates - especially Abdul-Jabbar, whose name enters the discussion due to the fact he perfected the “sky hook,” as unguardable a shot as any in the game.

Seemingly, everyone under the age of thirty casts their votes for Kobe.  He’s won four rings and isn’t close to finished.  His career has become one highlight after another and, despite nagging injuries that would shelve mortal players, he continues to wow even the casual fan.

The final word on this debate may just go to a superstar in another field.  In the 2/8/10 issue of Newsweek, there’s a Q&A article with several actors.  When discussing winning awards for their work, Morgan Freeman says the following, which probably sums up the “greatest Laker” discussion too:

“There is no best in this business.  We’re not better than each other.  We just got each other’s back.”    �

Games in the NBA come at us so fast that by the time you start discussing something that happened in one game, that team’s already played two more.  So you’ll have to forgive me for not being able to pinpoint the exact game that LeBron James’ ultimate hustle play occurred.

The avid fan, however, will recall that, two or three games ago (I was going to say the game LeBron was close to a triple double, but realized that doesn’t cut down the choices too much), an opponent of the Cavs had what looked to be a sure breakaway deuce.  Until James ran him down (the guy had about a 15′-20′ lead on him) and swatted the shot, nullifying the easy basket.  What was incredible to me (other than the fact that he can cover so much distance in such a short period of time and that he can jump as high as he needs to) was that, at the time, the game wasn’t particularly close.  Also, this wasn’t the first time LeBron has accomplished such a feat. 

During the postgame interview, LeBron was asked about that play.  The reporter was in awe of the sheer athleticism of it - as were everyone in attendance as well as those who viewed it on the evening’s highlights.  The question had to do with what James was thinking as he made the play.  LeBron uncharacteristically said something - especially for today’s athlete who sees such a question as an opening for a sound bite that could lead to an endorsement deal or an opportunity to say something clever - that every athlete, whether they have an ounce of athletic ability or not, ought to heed:

“I just didn’t want to give up on the play.”

 �

My role as host of The Jerry Tarkanian Show is to ask Jerry questions that will elicit responses that listeners will bring to work the following day so they can “one-up” their colleagues.  I call the category “I know something you don’t know.”

It seems that every time I brought up a question about why he was so successful - or even why coaches like him, e.g guys who took over “down” programs and instantly turned them around, found success, his answer was consistent.  “Great players.”  Sure, great players make coaches, but there has to be more to it than just great players. 

Finally, last night, I got him to vary his answer - although this one was rather mundane as well.  What made him get off his standard response was my bringing up the quote from Lou Holtz: “You can’t win with bad players, but you can lose with good ones.”  My octogenarian friend lit up a little and said, “That’s a great line.  I agree completely.”

So my (lengthy) follow-up question was, “How can two guys (Dick Harter and Ralph Miller), at the same time (mid-70s), coaching at the two major in-state universities (Oregon and Oregon State) have such conflicting philosophies?  I worked for Dick (an ex-Marine) and, if any of our guys ever switched on a screen, practice would stop and everybody would run.  Yet, Ralph’s feeling was, ‘To play good pressure defense, you have to use the switch.’

“Dean Smith felt changing defenses was a must, while Bob Knight refused to ever play anything but man-to-man.  And, probably the best example of an ‘anti-coach’ was John Chaney, who practiced at 5:30 am in Philadelphia (where it gets ‘uncomfortably chilly’ in the winter), played only zone (recruiters always would use that against him, saying the NBA had a no zone rule) and, had such a hatred for turnovers, encouraged his players to take bad shots, the cardinal rule be damned.  How could all these guys be so successful?”

Jerry finally gave an answer that was devoid of the words great players.  “That’s what makes basketball such a great game,” Tark said.  “There’s no one way to win.  Everyone of those guys you mentioned had players who believed in their coach’s philosophy and every one of those coaches got their teams to play hard.”

If ever there were two words that were more quoted than “great players” when discussing winning coaches, they’re “play hard.”  Yet, in this blog, the reader has the essentials to be a successful coach: great players, belief in the coach’s philosophy and play hard.

Can it really be that simple?  Yeah - except getting those three tenets accomplished isn’t.  The following quote sums up this blog, yet may not shed any light on how to get it done:

“Everything is simpler than you think and yet more complex than you imagine.”

With all the bad decisions that people in the news are making today, parents of young children have to be frightened by what their kids see their potential “role models” getting involved in.  Quite some time ago, I thought of a policy I’d try on our kids.  I blogged about it on 7/15/07 and, as far as I can tell, my theory still holds true today.

We have only boys, so I’m not so sure this policy would work with girls, but I’m inclined to think it would - and should.  When our two sons each reached 4 or 5 years of age, I had a conversation with them regarding decision-making.  It went like this:

Me: “There’s a right way of doing something and a wrong way.  Which do you think you should choose?”

Sons (identical answer from each, one five years after the other): “The right way.”

Me: “Great.  We’re on the same page.  However, I want you to know that there will come a time when you will do something the wrong way.  It might happen because you thought what you were doing was right, but it was actually wrong, or the wrong way was easier or more fun, or peer pressure got to you - meaning your friends were doing it so you did too, whatever.  Just remember, when you do things the wrong way, there are consequences.  At that time, the best, although certainly not the easiest, way to handle it is to face those consequences and pay the price for your bad decision.”

My wife and I couldn’t be much more proud of our two sons, but there have been times “wrong” has been their method of choice.  (Probably, other times we’re not aware of too, but those times you can only hope, as parents, lessons were learned and actions not repeated).  To be consistent with my message, each time the inappropriate behavior occurred, I’ve held them accountable and said to the person in charge who reported the misdeeds to me, “Do what you’ve got to do.”

The moral to all this was best said by General Norman Schwarzkopf, who made his feelings perfectly clear:

“It’s easy to know what the right thing to do is.  The hard part is doing it.”

In the latest edition of Sports Illustrated (2/1/10), on the SI.com page, there is a brief article about Urban Meyer, entitled One Tough Job.  It talks about the stress of the season.  Following that statement, there’s a line “Nearly every Division I head coach puts in more than 100 hours a week during the season and heavy recruiting periods.”

It hit close to home and, I have to admit, got under my skin a little, because I was an assistant on the D-I level (in basketball) for 30 years.  Although head coaches are front and center, the average person doesn’t realize that assistant coaches put in just as many hours as their bosses do.  The stress level can be just as high (sometimes higher because there have been numerous instances where head coaches fired assistants to buy themselves a year or two more).  This year, that’s been exactly the case at several institutions. 

It’s just that the head coach is the public face of the team and has duties (and stressful ones at that) that assistants don’t have.  However, many of the “problems” a team encounters never get to the head coach because they’re cut off at the pass by loyal assistants.  So, each member of the staff has to deal with a variety of issues, many of them unpleasant, or even worse, out of their control.  That causes stress, too.

This blog is a shout-out to all the hard-working assistants who, while they may not, in the eyes of the general public, have the stress on them that head coaches do, still maintain a rigorous schedule in order to make their teams successful (and make their head coaches  look good).

The late Ken Donahue, Bear Bryant’s longtime defensive coordinator, was given one of the greatest compliments a head coach could ever bestow on an assistant.  To understand the impact (through dedication) that an assistant can have, consider the comment The Bear made to a reporter doing a story on him.  As Coach Bryant was leaving the football complex after a long day at work, the reporter mentioned to him that he left a light on.

Bryant turned around, saw which light was on and said:

“Oh no, that’s the light in Ken Donahue’s office.  He’s busy up there making me a genius.”  �

After all the complaining about the Pro Bowl - mainly by the group (talk radio show hosts) that has more complaints per sentence than any other (with the possible exception of the ACLU), the game was played and, as improbable as it sounds, the world (at least the NFL part of it) didn’t crumble.  Somehow, a catastrophe of epic proportions was avoided.  Listening to their faithful “I don’t have much of a life, so I think I’ll phone in, bitch about the topic of the day (or in this case, week), then brag to my fellow (non-)workers about being a radio personality” callers, only an idiot would have changed the Pro Bowl and moved it to the site of the Super Bowl.

When I was working at Fresno State as Director of Basketball Operations, there were two years in a row that our schedule had us in Hawaii during the week of the Pro Bowl.  It wasn’t like the island was abuzz over the impending game.  Seems like the people on Oahu, residents and tourists alike, have other events planned to occupy their time.

One of those weeks, I bumped into Tony Gonzalez on Kalakaua Ave.  I had recruited (unsuccessfully) Tony to USC while I was an assistant there and I reintroduced myself to him.  We reminisced about his college days at Cal (especially the one great game he had against us at Cal’s old Harmon Gym) and his dream to play basketball in the NBA - which, at that time, he had yet to give up on.  When I brought up the Pro Bowl, he had a few comments regarding the game and the site.

One was that the two main things were it was an honor to be chosen - since it meant you had a fantastic year - and the game was for the fans - to get the best of the league together and put on a performance (and, yes, even back then, there were some no-shows, due to injury - real or imagined - and various other conflicts).  Sure, everybody’s goal was not to get hurt, but once the ball was kicked off, guys still compete.  They are professionals.  Nobody wants to be a quarterback who throws a pick, a receiver who drops passes, a running back who fumbles or a lineman who gets beat and gets his QB killed - even if he’s not on his regular season team.  On the other side, you think a DB wants to get burned?

When I said, “It’s sure nice to play it here,” Tony responded with something to the effect, “No doubt this is beautiful, but we all make enough money that if we wanted to come to Hawaii, we could.”  Different - and honest - perspective.  Especially to me, who was in Hawaii (albeit for two days before we had to go back to the mainland and play at San Jose State) without my family and didn’t make enough money that, had I wanted, I could have taken them to the island.  For the record, he never mentioned the bonus most (if not all)guys have in their contract if they get selected.

So the NFL tried something new?  It’s not like it was going to affect the outcome of the Super Bowl.  It wasn’t as good a game as a regular season contest, but the no Pro Bowl would be - no matter where it was played.  Places that were mentioned on talk radio were Europe, Mexico or other locations in the U.S. where they didn’t get a chance to see pro football (wonder if they meant LA)?  Why was it such an outrage to move the game to Miami?

Maybe Peyton Manning has it wrong.  Maybe there’s too much time between the division championships and the Super Bowl.  Certainly seems that way for talk radio.  To all the worriers, I give them a quote from Socrates - as avid a football fan as many of those callers:

“Enjoy yourself; it’s later than you think.”   �

This blogosphere (or whatever the technical name for it is) has documented time and again my chronic back pain.  Just like buying a new car, and then seemingly seeing that same car over and over when you hadn’t seen one before, it has come to my attention that, while I have back pain, I’m certainly not alone.

Yesterday, a friend contacted me, telling me that his mother-in-law made a seven-hour trip into town to see her grandkids.  She has periodic back problems and forgot her pain pills.  Since I get my medication intrathecally (I don’t even pretend that’s the correct spelling and spell check is stymied as well), I gave him the pain pills I had.  I don’t use pain pills anymore because 1) taking strong meds aren’t good for, among other things, the liver and 2) they don’t work on me (which is probably the #1 reason I don’t take them).

A coaching friend of mine, and his wife, approached me and asked several questions regarding what I was doing and how I was coping.  It turns out she has chronic back pain.  I’d known her from my days at a physical therapy facility where I was rehabbing from my last (I certainly hope it’s my last) back surgery and she was getting therapy for a (couple of) shoulder surgeries.  While her shoulders got better, it was a few years later that she encountered excruciating back pain.

One of my math teaching colleagues came into my room last week and showed me the tens unit she was wearing.  The reason?  Back pain.  She told me anytime she starts hurting, she thinks of me and tells herself she could be worse.  Not the way I’d hoped to inspire people.

I started thinking and realized that during the course of a typical week, I probably hear from and about others who live in a less than pain-free existence.  I just read an article by Jonah Lehrer, entitled The Psychology of Back Pain.  The gist of the article is much of back pain lies further north of the spine.  “It’s all in your head,” a line we’ve all heard on many occasions is now the basis for a great deal of back pain.

Whether or not that’s true, I can say that while you’re reading this blog, I’ll either be in, or just have left, a seminar called Meditation Strategies for Chronic Pain.  Have I become desperate?  I guess I’m hoping Benjamin Disraeli’s quote is right:

“Desperation is sometimes as powerful an inspirer as genius.” �