Jack’s Blog

It’s Norv Turner-bashing time.  Once again, a team Turner has led lost early in the playoffs.  Talk radio show hosts will have an absolute field day!

If it seems I’ve been on an anti-talk radio show host kick, it’s probably because I’m waiting for some audiobooks I’ve ordered and have had the radio on while I’ve been driving.  Anyone who knows me will tell you sarcasm is something I’m fairly well-versed in.  Then why is it I get so riled up when I hear talking heads doing it?

While I (immensely) enjoy back-and-forth repartee (if you couldn’t hold your own in my neighborhood, you’d go home crying everyday), I don’t think people should be allowed to make a living doing it.  Comedians are great and I love stand up, but I have a hard time with people who make money by humiliating and making fun of others - especially when the person doing the ball-busting couldn’t do in a million years the job of the person they’re ridiculing.

So . . . that means I have no issues whatsoever with someone like Tony Dungy, Bill Cowher or Jimmy Johnson taking shots at someone like Turner.  And therein lies my point.  Those former coaches (as well as current coaches) never do - because they know how hard the job is and all the factors that go into winning in the playoffs.

Players (current and former) who criticize coaches are a little different story.  Granted, they have been in the arena and that alone gives them a great deal of credibility.  Before basing a whole lot of credence on what they say, though, what needs to be taken into account is what are/were they like as players?  I mean, should Baron Davis (switching sports here to make the point crystal clear) ever get a commentators job, I would expect nothing less than critical comments directed at coaches.  What else would we expect from someone whose nickname in NBA coaching circles is “CK” (”Coach Killer”)?  Keeping it in the NFL, would you think TO would be impartial when it came to whose fault it was - the quarterback or the receiver?   

Yesterday, the Chargers had a field goal kicker who had made 69 in a row inside 40 yards miss three kicks (two that he normally makes).  Their QB had three uncharacteristic turnovers.  Can you blame those on Coach Norv?  Talk radio hosts somehow, in some smart ass way, will.

Now, I don’t know Norv Turner.  But, undoubtedly, I feel the way I do because, while not in the NFL,  I coached for a long time - and I’ve heard some asinine comments made by people who’ve never coached.  Former coaches have opinions I respect because they’ve been there.  That doesn’t mean they’re the only ones who should be allowed to voice an opinion.  Everyone’s entitled to one.  At the very least, however, the criticism should be based on facts.  Bring up how many times he’s been there - with his team as a favorite - and his teams have gone down, fine.  But don’t make it sound like he’s a total incompetent and . . . that you could have done better.

Count the number of times that he’s gotten teams to the playoffs and research how many other coaches in history there are that have accomplished that feat?  Compare that to how many guys have ever coached.  Because he’s been in that position that many times means he’s in the top whatever percentage of coaches.  Maybe these talk show guys ought to equate that to whether they (or others) consider themselves in that same elite group of talk show hosts.

Many certainly will.  Then they need to ask themselves, “If I’m that good, why am I stuck in the market I’m in?  Shouldn’t I (since there are only 32 NFL teams) be in the top 32 markets?”  If they’re taking shots at college basketball coaches, they only need to be in the top 347.  There’s more wiggle room in that group.  Yet, when rating their own expertise, they need to remember the line attributed to Emmy Cosell when her husband, Howard, asked her how many truly great sportscasters she thought there were:

“One less than you think.”

Most of today’s NBA fans can remember Dennis Rodman when he was helping the Detroit Pistons win NBA championships.  An even greater percentage of people who enjoy the NBA can recall his contributions to the Chicago Bulls’ championship runs in the years following his tenure with the Bad Boys of the Motor City.  Yet, I would wager that far fewer can recite his career with San Antonio, the Lakers or the Mavs. 

Most of his career was based on a few “re” factors: re-bounding and re-belling.  The reason people don’t have memories of his time with the Spurs - even though it was in between his stints with the Pistons and the Bulls - is due to a third “re:” re-spect.  Rodman had some unique skills (for the purposes of this blog, I’ll limit them to the “on the court” kind).  Snatching missed shots was one, but not respecting authority, be it his coaches or referees, was just as pronounced a skill in his life - and it led toward his team’s lack of success just as the rebounding aided in their winning. 

With people who “had the hammer,” e.g. Coach Chuck Daly and teammates Joe Dumars, Isiah Thomas and Bill Laimbeer with the Pistons and Coach Phil Jackson and teammates Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen and Ron Harper, Rodman acted up, but showed respect, or at least enough respect to be given some rope so he could “act the fool” - up to a point.  At San Antonio, Los Angeles and Dallas, his lack of respect caused more discipline problems (often translating in losses) than his talent could to help them win.   

We’ve seen other versions of this “respect or the lack of it” theme since Rodman and I’m not in any way suggesting he was the first NBA player to disrespect his coaches, teammates or the game, but he’s the first that came to my mind.  Since then, others who have picked up on this behavior are Latrell Sprewell, Allen Iverson, Baron Davis and Stephon Marbury.

In Sprewell’s case, nearly everyone remembers him choking his coach, P.J. Carlesimo, being dragged away, only to return and take a swing at him (which grazed the coach).  He was suspended for 10 games, the Warriors voided the remainder of his contract (nearly $24 million over three years) and, subsequently the NBA susoended him for 82 games.  Over a year later, he was traded to the Knicks - and claimed he was a changed man.  He focused his intensity to matters on the court and led the 8th-seeded Knicks to a first-ever (for a team seeded that low) spot in the NBA Finals where, despite his good overall play, they lost in five games. 

Since he “retired” over what he and his agent called insulting contract offers, it’s been reported he is in deep debt.  While he was suspended, I was with an NBA head coach and asked him if he thought Sprewell was a player he would want on his team.  His response was, “Sure, I think he’s very under-valued.”  The answer shocked me, but in the NBA, that’s what it’s come to - value for your money, i.e. it’s easier to deal with someone who might not respect you, than not have enough talent because if your people skills are good, he can help you win.  Not enough talent gets you fired.  But not having respect for people or money gets you broke.

Allen Iverson’s case is also complex.  A little guy in a big man’s game, AI backs down from no one.  Judging from his past (all the way back to high school), it seems like basketball isn’t the only venue Iverson refuses to back down - but that’s another story.  While he was making mega-bucks with the 76ers (Philly was the perfect type of city for AI and they loved him), he once went off when his coach criticized him for not attending practice. His “Practice?“ tirade is one that ranks alongside Jim Mora’s “Playoffs?” and Herm Edwards “You play to win the game!” as the three most often repeated lines when the topic of a question the interviewee doesn’t feel relevant comes up.

Now, however, after leaving Denver (his stop after the Sixers traded him) and hearing his coach there, George Karl, come out and criticize him for selfish style of play, he is determined to lead his new squad, the Pistons, back to a championship.  One problem: he skipped practice - yeah, practice - to stay and have Thanksgiving with his family.  He didn’t tell anyone, didn’t receive permission from bosses and was the only team member not to show up.  He has since apologized, claiming, “It’ll never happen again.”  Believe it?

Baron Davis isn’t as known for his lack of respect mainly because he’s always played on such bad teams.  Therefore, fans seldom get to see him.  He has unreal talent - even compared to guys in a league loaded with talent, but has acquired the nickname of “Coach Killer” or “CK” for short.  He met his match with Don Nelson and I’ve wondered on occasion if this isn’t the true reason, or at least one that played a bigger part than his wanting to go and make the Clippers a winner (ha!) with his buddy Elton Brand, who then signed a contract to play in Philadelphia.  While CK could have opted to stay with Golden State (he had yet to sign his new contract), he said he would move anyway because he was a man of his word - me being the word.  He’s an aspiring Hollywood director and Los Angeles is a better location, plus it’s home (he played high school ball at Crossroads, then went to UCLA for two years).  Not surprisingly, there have been reports that Davis and Coach Mike Dunleavy have been at odds, to which Davis admitted, “There has been a disconnect.”  Disconnect - must be a “director’s” word.

Finally, we come to the poster boy for unrealized potential - Stephon Marbury.  “Starbury” comes from a basketball playing family - brothers Eric (Georgia), Donnie (Texas A&M) and Norman (called Ju-Ju, who signed with Tennessee but failed to qualify academically).  Selfishness ran in the family if you ever watched the Marburys play and, being the youngest and most talented, Steph was going to be it all and have it all.  He went to Georgia Tech and played well, leading the Jackets to the Regional Semifinal game. Everyone in the world of college basketball knew he was going to declare himself for the NBA draft following his freshman season, but he wouldn’t make the announcement public.  

This became the beginning of the end for Bobby Cremins and Georgia Tech.  Any talented point guard Tech tried to recruit would ask Cremins if Marbury was coming back.  He’d tell them what was common knowledge, but rival schools kept telling these prospects that if he was going to enter the draft, why hadn’t he said so.  Put 2 and 2 together, they’d tell prospects: he was coming back (none of them had that big an ego they thought they could beat out Stephon Marbury - recruiting at the highest level is one of the nastiest businesses you’ll ever find).  For whatever reason, Marbury kept putting off his announcement.  When he finally made it public, all the great point guards were gone.

Fast forward to today.  Marbury still has that sense of entitlement.  He’s making an absurd amount of money, not earning even a small percentage of it and when his new coach, Mike D’Antoni (he’s feuded with all the others he’s had) told him to go into the game (due to injuries on the team), he refused.  Next year, he’s due $20.8 million and initially said he wouldn’t take a penny less.  He hasn’t done anything to deserve it and has no consideration for how the economy is affecting everyone else (although, technically, it’s not his problem, if all of us took on his attitude, the US wouldn’t be one of the most desirable places to live - as it is now).  He’s become a cancer and as with all cancers, the best thing to do is cut it out.

The Knicks have suspended him so the NBA Players Association has filed a grievance on Marbury’s behalf.  I wonder who in the Players Association would want to publicly go to bat for him.  Sounds like a case for Mark Geragos, Gerry Spence or some other lawyer who has the ability to check their conscience at the door. 

At one of my nine college jobs, we had a player who was talented, but had the knack for getting into more than just mischief.  One day, his high school coach (who liked him, but also understood him) described this kid to my boss with a line I’ve never forgotten, even though it’s decades old: 

“I think he’s finally become more problem than he is player.”

The term “platform” is used by people in high profile positions, often those in the world of sports.  One case in particular is that of IUPUI basketball coach Ron Hunter who said, “I truly believe that we can use (our platform) to create change and make things happen.”  He’s used his “platform” for a cause named “Samaritan’s Feet,” a project to put shoes on the feet of youngsters around the feet who don’t have any.  His efforts have thusfar seen over 100,000 pairs donated, a drop in the bucket for the 300 million kids who have no shoes, but certainly a promising start.  For more information on this cause, go to www.samaritansfeet.org.

No one can find fault with such a selfless, noble attempt for humanity.  During the past political campaign however, many athletes came out publicly in support of one candidate or the other, knowing that a segment of the population would be influenced by what “superstars” think - whether they have any more depth of knowledge of either candidate than the people they’re influencing do.

A couple amusing anecdotes I came across were from a Sports Illustrated article on jocks and politics.  One comment was by Baron Davis, aspiring Hollywood director and point guard for the Los Angeles Clippers.  “When you see all that’s going on, how can you not take a stand?” said the player whose NBA moniker is “C.K.” (for Coach Killer).  “I want my man to win (and) I want to be involved,” claimed someone who’s not usually quoted on his interest in winning.

When the Cavs’ Ira Newble wrote to the Chinese government to condemn them for their role in the Darfur crisis, he tried to get all of his teammates’ support.  Most did, but LeBron James hesitated, saying he was insuffiently informed on the issue.  If LeBron didn’t take a stand stand on issues he wasn’t suffiently informed on, all we’d ever hear from him would be about a round, leather object … or rap music.

On some occasions, jocks aren’t taken seriously more because of their speaking out of emotion or furthering a personal agenda than out of a thorough knowledge of the issues.  Many African-American athletes were accused of voting for Barack Obama because he was black.  This reminded me of a story my late, brilliant mentor, John Savage, told me when JFK was running for president.  John claimed people would come up to him and say, “You’re just voting for Kennedy because he’s Catholic,” to which John replied, “Not true, I’m voting for him because I’m Catholic.”  Sums it up pretty well. 

While some athletes are criticized for taking a stand, others are treated the same way because they won’t.  One of the most famous of such cases is when Michael Jordan uttered  the now famous line, “Republicans buy shoes, too,” in response to a question why MJ wasn’t lending his support to black candidate Harvey Gantt in a North Carolina political campaign.  The incumbent, Jesse Helms, was viewed as a racist and the support of Jordan was just as much to get Helms out as to inaugurate Gantt, a person who Jordan didn’t know more than he did Nike who, granted, paid him a ton of money, but was a company made up of employees who’d earned his trust over a period of time.  Anyone who knows MJ in the slightest will tell you he’s a very introspective, deep thinker who is hesitant to back anyone he doesn’t know well while possibly being too loyal to the people he does.

Is there a difference between his decision not to back Gantt and LeBron’s not to sign the letter to the Chinese government?  Who’s to say?  Maybe the wisest move is to follow the course another wise athlete did and wait until the election’s over to make your feelings known.  This way you’re not trying to influence anyone else, but you still make your feelings public.  That athlete is Tiger Woods, who was pretty much silent during the campaign, but when asked about what he thought of the election of Obama, said, “It’s incredible.  He represents America” and went on to say that he was thrilled to see a multiracial man of color occupying the White House.  Everyone is well aware of his stance, yet he didn’t have to wave a banner before the election to make it known.  He did that on his timetable.

Athletes are an incredibly gifted bunch to watch - and marvel over - but we need to form our own opinions on such important topics as whom to vote for.  Or as a pretty good (two-sport) athlete, Kirk Gibson, was quoted as saying:

“Just because you’re a great athlete doesn’t mean you know what you’re talking about.”      Â

Last week, there were (allegedly) text messages flying between Tinseltown and the Bay Area that, if only Baron Davis would leave the Warriors and sign with the Clippers, there would be a new team joining the already crowded race for playoff spots in the stacked Western Conference.  Promises were made.

Sure enough, the Baron committed to the Clips, joining Elton Brand to give LA’s “other” team a 1-2 power-punch, capable of competing against the Lakers (and the Mavs and the Spurs and the Suns and the Hornets and the Rockets and the Jazz and the Nuggets - hey, even the bad teams in the West - the Sonics, Blazers, Warriors, Kings, Grizzlies, and Timberwolves are capable of winning, especially at home - as soon as the Sonics determine where home is).  So, does Brand-Baron take over?  Hold on, just a second.

This is LA and the NBA, both known as “home of agents” - and David Falk (Brand’s agent) is one of the most powerful, successful and brightest (with an ego to match).  Well, … he said, he said, someone else said and, poof! Brand is a 76er.  “He went for the money.” “He could have had more money if he had stayed.”  “He could have had even more with Golden State.”  As writer J.A. Adande said, “Whenever things go wrong these days our first instinct is to find someone to blame.”  Sounds likes the makings of a good political campaign.

So, the (fans’/voters’) thinking goes, now Baron will renege on his commitment to the Clippers since his friend turned on him.  How could a friend mislead (lie) to a friend?  Brand, though, can always (secretly) blame Falk - whom he pays to get him as much dough as possible, a small percentage of which makes its way into the Falk Family Trust.  If you can get enough small percentages of big money deals, then you’ve got big money yourself.  And really, does anybody really think calling Karl Rove David Falk bad names actually bothers him?  If he did, would he ask for an outrageous sum of money for his client who, while a “franchise” player and solid citizen, missed a ton of games last year and is coming off of major surgery?  How could someone with any morals do that?  Yeah, right, morals.  Can’t exactly put a price on those, especially when so much money is to be made.

No, the (players’/politicians’) thinking goes, Baron will sign with Los Angeles anyway because it’s his home town, he’s really a movie director at heart anyway and, as he said at the press conference (with a straight face), “I’m a man of my word.”  Look, he’s an actor as well as a director (and politician)!

Mike Dunleavy, a good guy who’s stuck coaching an organization whose leadership pales in comparison to nearly all the others (you don’t exactly have to go 3,000 miles to find another club that’s just as poorly run, but if you did, bingo!), lashed out at Falk, saying the Clips did everything requested, acted in good faith and had the rug pulled out from under them.  Falk takes the easy and popular route, blaming the Clippers (akin to blaming the Saudi’s for the oil problem).  Meanwhile, Davis goes to the Clippers, Brand to the 76ers and, just for good measure, the Clips’ Corey Maggette replaces Davis in Golden State.

Everyone blames someone else, they all make beaucoup money (Falk and Dunleavy, included) and none of them win.  It’s just a typical day in the (lower echelon of the) NBA (and in American politics).

As the famed Zig Ziglar said:

“When you’re slinging mud, you’re not doing anything but losing ground.”

And games.¼/p>