Jack’s Blog

When polls are taken as to which teams fans like the most, the names that are mentioned most often are the Yankees, Lakers, Patriots, USC (football), UConn (women’s basketball and Duke & North Carolina (men’s basketball).  When the question that’s asked is which teams do fans hate the most, the same names appear.

People want to be winners and, aligning themselves with a winner, makes them one - or so the thinking goes for many I’ve known over the years.  For those who want to see competitive balance, the teams that win all the time are looked at as evil empires (as Geno Auriemma used to call the Lady Vols, and, ironically, what a good deal of the country now refer to his program).  After last night’s NIT semi-final game between the Tarheels and the Rhode Island Rams, that segment of society is in an uproar.

Near the end of a very competitive game (which URI had led, and had more than share of opportunities to seal it), there were four calls, all of which went Carolina’s way.  The first was a drive by a Rhody guard in which a Tarheel defender grabbed his arm, only to have the offensive player fight through it and score anyway.  Definitely a missed call, however.

The next were a series of calls on the final play of overtime.  First, a UNC guard apparently traveled (no replay, but a move that had color commentary Bill Raftery say, “Oh, could have been a travel” and it did look as though there was a shuffling of the feet), then an out-of-bounds call that could have gone either way (although a replay looked as though the refs got it right), followed by a scramble after a Tarheel missed shot, with the Heels up one, the Rams Lamonte Ulmer got the rebound and attempted to push it upcourt when Tarheel Will graves tripped him - with his hand.  It wasn’t a cheap shot, more like a reaction, but nonetheless, a foul should have been called.

ESPN’s “third man in the booth,” Fran Fraschilla, made the comment that not only was there a foul on the play, but that call is a point of emphasis for referees this season.  I know both coaches, Roy Williams and Jimmy Baron, quite well and honestly, I had no rooting interest in the game.  Maybe that’s why my first thought was, “the Tarheel haters will be out in force tonight” (and tomorrow).  The reason jealousy is unhealthy is summed up by Baltasar Gracian:

“The envious die not once, but as often as the envied win applause.”

Fans know weird things can happen to their teams.  When they actually do, though, there’s still major shock value.  For youth, e.g. players, the first time something like occurs, especially when it directly affects them, their world can be turned upside-down.

Take, for example, a group of America’s finest football players who recently, after having their senior years adjusted so they could graduate early, enrolled in the University of Tennessee.  In many cases, these youngsters gave up winter and spring sports in which they may have excelled (not even taking events that become lifelong memories like the prom, the senior class trip and graduation parties into account).  No matter how cool a front a kid puts up, i.e. like he’s not really fazed by all the attention and gear (and that’s some pretty sweet swag), you know there’s an little man inside him jumping up and down, excited as all get-out.

One of those youngsters is the San Joaquin Valley’s Tyler Bray, player-of-the-year, billed as UT’s next quarterback savior - and if you think there’s no one the people of Knoxville have to compare him to, let me remind you of a guy who just won his (unprecedented) fourth NFL MVP.  It’s fair to say the bar is rather high for a QB in Big Orange Country.  Ty was an outstanding (6-7) shooting guard/”small” forward for KHS’s basketball team and an accomplished pitcher for the baseball squad. 

Yesterday, the man who recruited him, Lane Kiffin, as well as the guts of his staff, called an emergency meeting.  We can only wonder what went through his mind when the reason for the hastily called meeting was to inform one and all that the head coach was leaving to replace Pete Carroll at USC.  Obviously, this was a quick courtship of Kiffin, since SC seemed to be directing its efforts elsewhere.  Nonetheless, this has to be quite a shock for young Mr. Bray too.  I mean what if the Big Orange brass decide to hire a guy who prefers the “Wildcat?” 

At least he’s not alone.  His family recently moved to Tennessee.  However, all of this hubbub may not be any cause for concern.  In fact, if rumors are true that Duke’s head coach, David Cutcliffe, is being offered the job, Bray will be trading a young, talented and brash mentor for a wise football mind who tutored the Manning brothers, Peyton as QB coach at UT and Eli as the head man at Ole Miss.  

That depends on whether Tennessee can lure Cutcliffe to Knoxville.  While some may question whether SC’s a better job than UT, the opinion’s as close to unanimous as one can be that the Vols program trumps Duke’s - although Duke is certainly the superior academic school.  Then again, if the institution’s graduation rates really mattered in college football, Stanford and Vanderbilt (or maybe even Duke) would play each other for the National Championship every year.

What Bray and the other “new Vols” are experiencing is similar to what SC’s recruits are going through.  Some, allegedly, “uncommitted” to the Trojans when Carroll left.  With Kiffin and what may be the strongest coaching staff ever assembled coming to SC, they might wish they never reversed field, especially if some of them popped off about loyalty, etc., as young kids are prone to do.  They will surely welcomed back - after all, talent wins out in the end - but their first meal on campus may be crow.

As far as loyalty and breaking hearts, consider that Tyler Bray had verbally committed to San Diego State prior to changing his mind.  I remember one coach saying that a kid backing out of a commitment was akin to saying, “I’ll commit to you . . . unless I get a better offer.”  The coach then made the statement, “How would kids like it if schools offered a scholarship and then, withdrew it saying they found a better player?”  How prophetic.

Egos may be bruised, dreams (temporarily) crushed, but ultimately everybody will survive.  The lesson that will be learned is one articulated by the late John Lennon:

“Life is what happens to you while you’re busy making other plans.”

The overwhelming majority of people in and out of football - from those who know just a little something about the game to the “experts” claim that quarterback is the most important position on the team.

If that’s so (and who out there says it’s not?), then using a draft pick - especially a high one, e.g. the first three rounds - must take considerable thought and planning.  Yet, a number one overall pick like Peyton Manning threatens to break every record for that position in the history of football, while a number two overall pick (the same year) like Ryan Leaf threatens seemingly everything (and everyone) else.  Tom Brady gets drafted late and several other QB’s go before him.  I’d imagine there was considerable reevaluating the draft decisions that year. 

Bill Parcells, legendary coach and now president of the Miami Dolphins, seems to have found the “Rules to Draft by” when it comes to picking future signal callers.  These were announced during last night’s Dolphins-Jets Monday Night Football game and, while they may seem rather restrictive, Parcells (and his track record in the game) are not to be scoffed at, lest the “scoffer” be ready for battle, as Parcells has be known to threaten a time or two.

Whatever the case, here are the Tuna’s rules for drafting a quarterback:

1) He must be a senior.  (Bill’s not known for his patience and, usually, the younger the QB, the more time he takes to properly master the job).

2) He must be a graduate.  (Hey, if you’re paying your guy a lot of money and he’s going to handle the ball on every offensive play, he’d better not be a quitter.  Rather, you want someone who takes his responsibilities seriously, e.g. no blowing off the spring semester to get ready for the combines).

3) He must be a three-year starter.  (Once again, a lot of dough, as well as a good portion of the game plan, goes to this guy and it would be awful to get stuck with a “flash-in-the-pan,” someone who waited, got his opportunity but what was overlooked, was that he took over a veteran team that only needed someone to keep a ship from sinking, not one to direct it to the shore).

4) He must have at least 23 wins.  (It’s too easy to put up big numbers with a losing team who chucks it 50 times a game). 

Very stringent demands and not every year will they be met.  That must be exactly what’s behind the big guy’s thinking.  And if no one meets the standards, there’s always a trade, or easier yet, free agency.

After watching the show Chad Henne put on last night - in a game that Steve Young called the best duel he’d ever seen between two young QB’s (and Steve’s someone with the creds to judge quarterbacks), the Dolphins seem to have found their quarterback of the future - and maybe, the present.  Then, again, one-year-starter Mark Sanchez (whom even his own college coach, Pete Carroll - also no stranger to success - said he needed another year of college) looked mighty promising.

Yet, one of the qualities a leader must have is decisiveness and Parcells certainly qualifies in that category.

I have no idea who Eric Langmuir is, but, when his quote is put in the context of drafting a quarterback, it becomes one of the greatest understatements of all time:

“A decision without the pressure of consequence is hardly a decision at all.”

After watching football on TV for the better part (all?) of yesterday, I’ve come to the conclusion that watching at least one game ought to be required viewing for all parents - as well as each of their children.

Yesterday’s slate (and probably every week’s) taught a myriad of life lessons, among them: accountability, teamwork, humility, the value of a strong work ethic, loyalty and resiliency.  There was drama in most every game - and even in those that were blowouts from the opening whistle, there are valuable teaching points, e.g. for the members of the winning squads, they should realize that either hard work pays off or it’s easy to overpower an opponent not nearly so big, strong or talented as you are.  And when the score is overwhelmingly in your favor, act appropriately.  There’s no need to gloat, strut or trash talk - since you accomplished nothing that wasn’t expected from you - and, should you happen to be on the other end someday, remember the emtions of those on that side and, while displaying dignity in losing, find determination that you will not experience this feeling ever again (or at least for the next week).  Make sure no one ever says you couldn’t handle adversity, that when confronted with a seemingly impossible task to overcome - and you fail (sometimes even miserably) to overcome it, that you simply do not pack it in, i.e. you don’t quit.

If your team is fortunate enough to come out on top of a close, hard fought battle, make certain that you share credit with others who made the success possible (no one player can win a team game by him or herself).  Praise the effort of your opponents and keep in perspective that there might come a time (maybe a lot sooner than you think) when the outcome could place you on the less desirable side.  And, when faced with that reality, you’ll be able to handle it with the grace of a winner, albeit one who just happened to come out on the short end of the scoreboard.  No excuses, no finger pointing, no blaming teammates, officials, coaches, fans, the elements or pure luck and, although the loss stings, that you can’t wait until you get a chance to prepare for the next contest, so that the result will be reversed. 

There were times this weekend when things were going along swimmingly, until the very end, when a chink in the armor was revealed and the team that was winning the whole game found itself wondering how things changed so fast (think about Ohio State-USC) or when a team looked like they had the game sewed up, only to allow its opponent to get up off the carpet, punch them squarely in the mouth, . . . somehow they hang on (think UCLA-Tennessee, with Kevin Prince’s mouth being the recipient - and to add insult to pain, the mistake gave the Vols two points and the ball in excellent field position).

Following any games, but especially the close ones, you normally have to face second guessing - usually that of someone in your camp (although most people are empathetic enough and, thank goodness, lack the blatant rudeness that they wouldn’t confront you during a time where you’re attempting to put a loss behind you and look to the future.  In instances where the outcomes had far greater meanings than just which team was the winner and which was the loser (think ND-Michigan, Fresno State-Wisconsin, Oklahoma State-Houston), life is extra difficult.    

When faced with a second guesser, should you agree with the person posing the “what-if” decisions (often, the coach’s) that were made which may have precipitated or even led directly to the final result going against your squad?  This is an area where many in this country can’t wait to agree with the second guesser, especially if doing so might further their own cause.  No team can function successfully in that environment yet, unfortunately, that seems to be the overwhelmingly shared personality trait of our political world today. 

My (our) agenda is put over the team’s plan because, plain and simple, while I want my way, I, equally as much want need for you to fail.  In this case, the “team” is our country, our party, our organziation - and this attitude is gnawing away at the very fabric of the once powerful team we used to have.  ESPN’s Kirk Hirbstreit referred to living through this environment as dealing with negative energy.  It is following these outcomes, positive energy is not only what’s needed, but what’s mandatory. 

Sure, they’re “only games,” but it’s awful hard to tell that to the players and coaches on those units.  If athletics teams became as fractured as our society has become, football teams would suspend games and simply spread false and misleading information about the people they see as their opponent, misuse statistics and quotes to undermine the credibility of the opposition and lie in wait for a misstep by the other side, and then - treat it like a fumble, i.e. pounce all over it, as opposed to going all out to actually win on their own merits.

I recall years ago (probably more like decades now), the following comparison, which I think rings more true now than it did then.

“Someone once commented that the problem with sports is that they’re not enough like life; in reality, the problem with life is that it’s not enough like sports.”

After spending 30 years working on college campuses, I’ve seen my share of football games.  And working at schools like Washington State, Oregon, Tennessee, Toledo, USC and Fresno State, I’m used to being at schools where football mattered.  I’ve played it and coached it and, after stints at each of the preceding institutions, I consider myself a pretty big college gridiron fan.

That said, I thought the first weekend was a bunch of major league snoozers.  Although Richmond and William & Mary had David vs. Goliath type upsets and the fans of BYU are already talking BCS Championship, the other games - you know, the “body bag” ones - were just that, i.e. games where there was more competition at the tailgates than on the field.  

As I mentioned in yesterday’s blog, I went to the Stanford Pain Management Clinic because of chronic pain in my back.  The treatment I got at Stanford, which was supposed to help relieve some of the pain, was all but nullified by watching game after game of the little guy getting brutally pummelled by the giant, all for a big payday.

I know the season is eventually going to get better (I hope by next week) , but for now it looks like the old fairy tale had it right:

“You’ve got to kiss an awful lot of toads before you meet the handsome prince.”

College football camps have opened around the nation and there are stories for each one.  Can Florida repeat?  Will this be the year somebody, other than SC, wins the Pac-10?  Was there a method to the “Lane Kiffin Madness” of comments, putdowns and accusations leveled by the Vols’ new coach or was he just opening his mouth to change feet?  Does Michigan really think it will return to the glory days because of its . . . walk-ons?  Can another (or maybe a couple other) non-BCS schools crash the big party?  And will Congress get involved - since it seems it’s the only issue everyone in the political world agrees on? 

A much more endearing story, and one closer to home for those of us who live in and around the San Joaquin Valley is one that was featured in yesterday’s Fresno Bee.  It was about true freshman linebacking sensation, Travis Brown, and the beginning of what anyone who ever watched him play at Clovis West High School knew would be a stellar career (right from Game 1 of this season) and about his doing so under a defensive coordinator other than his hero (as well as the hero of so many others, football players and non-players alike), his dad, Dan (who lost his own courageous, two-year battle with brain cancer last March).

When the insidious disease took the life of beloved son, sibling, husband, father, coach, colleague and friend (that pretty much covers everybody who knew Brownie), I posted a piece in which I tried to explain the Dan people didn’t know, i.e. the people who’d never met him - because if you ever met Dan Brown, you knew him - and loved him.  

Some of the blogs I write take a great deal of time and are difficult to put into words. Brownie’s wrote itself.  If you didn’t read it before, please do so know.  If you did, one more time is guaranteed to bring a warm feeling to your heart.  

If Only Everybody Would Have the Impact on Others that Dan Brown Did

Sunday, March 15th, 2009

Our country is in such a state of disarray right now that I can’t ever remember the overall morale of the United States being so low - and I’ve been around six decades.  Bernie Madoff is certainly one of the major causes, but as much as he is the poster boy for destroying people’s belief in one another, there are many other problems that are causing people to be on the verge of surrendering. 

The reason people like him evoke such strong emotions in the general public is that they tear away at the fabric of what makes any group, organization, team, company or society function normally.  They violate the people’s trust.  How anyone could do - to many of his long-time friends, no less - what Madoff did, is pure evil.  Does anybody really need 40 or 50 or 80 billion dollars or whatever the number is now?  What, exactly, gets someone to do what this awful man did (and don’t think for one second he’s the only one who did it, or is still doing it)?

On the complete opposite end of the spectrum are people like Dan Brown, the recently retired Fresno State defensive coordinator who lost his two-year battle with brain cancer late Friday night.  If ever there was a person you could unequivocably trust, that person was Dan Brown.  As few, we hope, people like Madoff there are, unfortunately, the number of citizens like “Brownie” is equally as scarce.

Dan never looked at his glass as half-empty or half-full.  The way he acted, his glass was overflowing -  and he was always trying to share some with you.  He never met anyone who immediately didn’t become a friend.  One of the wittiest people you’d ever come across, he loved exchanging quips and, if you ever got the best of him (which didn’t happen too often), he’d be the guy who’d laugh the loudest.  A brilliant football mind, but infinitely better at dealing with others and getting what he knew across to them, he shunned the spotlight, was always self-deprecating and never accepted credit, instead making others feel as if they had as much (or more) to do with his success than he did.

Outside of football, he was the true role model for people, young and old, especially in an area this country is so sorely lacking - that of being the ideal family man.  His childhood must have prepared him extremely well on the subject of how to get along with others, since Dan was one of 15 children.  Maybe a tough way to grow up, but certainly a wonderful testing grounds for understanding the value of teamwork and also a sure-fire way to learn survival skills.

Dan and his wife, Mindy, had six children of their own and, although each one is unique, every one of the Brown clan oozes personality - obviously, an inherited trait.  If you don’t get a hug from one of the Brown kids, it’s because they didn’t see you. 

Brownie was also a fantastic golfer.  We were paired up at a golf tournament once, which immediately rendered his winning it impossible because as soon as I took up golf, whoever was the worst golfer in the world, moved up one notch.  It was an alternate shot format, so he’d crush a drive and I’d slice “our” second shot into the woods.  He would make a miraculous recovery and, somehow, advance the ball to the middle of the fairway.  I’d top it 5 yards or fly the green, or if I got it near the green, it would be buried in a sand trap.  His shot would inevitably land about 4-5 feet from the hole.  Naturally, I’d miss the short putt - and just to make things worse, I’d miss by an inch or two.  He’d be forced to tap it in, meaning, not only did we waste his shot on a one inch putt - but I would have to tee it up to start the next hole.  This went on, hole after hole. 

While he was driving the cart (he thought, wisely, he’d better drive it) to find my ball - so he could get us out of trouble again, I blurted out, probably due to sheer embarrasment, “I swear, Brownie, I’ve never played this badly before.”

Without taking his eyes off the fairway, he simply said, “Oh, so you have played before.”  Although he was a fierce competitor, his temperment was such that, once he saw who his partner was, he decided we’d have a good time and a lot of laughs.  If only they’d have given an award for that, we’d have blown away the competition. 

There are certain people who, when you see them, automatically put a smile on your face.  That describes Dan Brown perfectly.  Brownie had a lasting, positive effect on everyone he met and the memory of knowing him gives me, and I have no doubt, everyone else as well, a warm feeling.

In one of the many books I’ve read or listened to, I found one line that sums up people like Dan Brown and Bernie Madoff:

“When you are gone, people will either be warmed by your memory, or relieved with your absence.”

Rest in peace, buddy.  Not only are you now in a far better place, but that place just became far better as soon as you got there. �

My book on tape ended and I didn’t have another so I tuned into sports talk radio which, from time to time, can be quite interesting.  (I, for one, ought to be promoting sports talk as I used to have several shows myself and am currently the co-host of “The Jerry Tarkanian Show” on Fox Sports Radio 1340 and 1400 out of Fresno).  The topic being discussed was which player would you want on your team, Matt Cassel (who was portrayed as the ultimate “team player,” a guy who would just as soon defer to Tom Brady instead of trying to go elsewhere so he could have the chance to start) or Anquan Boldin (who was upset - and let anyone who’d listen know it - because he didn’t play a bigger role even though his team won the game that put them in the Super Bowl)?  Naturally, as typical of today’s society, the host of the show and the majority of the callers sided with Boldin.

Those in favor of Cassel (sounded like they) were of the older, there’s no “I” in team group.  They want a teammate who understands and accepts his role because, heading into the dream game in any football player’s career, it’s mandatory that every team member focus on the task at hand and subjugate their individual ego for that of the team.  This group went on to characterize Boldin as “today’s brand of player” (also leading me to believe they were from an earlier era), who only thinks about himself and places his personal goals above that of the team.

The pro-Boldin callers brought up that here was a guy who broke his jaw and had screws put in to his face so he could compete, showing his loyalty to the team was beyond reproach.  All he wanted was for his team to win and he knew the best way for the Cardinals to do that was to make him an integral part of the game plan.  Plus, why would anyone want to count on a guy like Cassel as a teammate?  Someone who could go and show what he was made of, but, instead, was willing to accept a huge pay raise, and be satisfied sitting and holding a clipboard behind Tom Brady.

As with most arguments about whose opinion is right, i.e. an argument with no definitive answer, people get themselves all lathered up when they probably don’t know all the facts (which, to these people, is of little consequence).  Maybe Cassell found out, after being pressed into action and performing admirably, that he loved the New England system, felt it was most conducive to his skills and that the organization (or possibly even Brady himself) confided to him that the Super Bowl winning QB wasn’t going to be ready to go at the beginning of the year and the job was his.  Or, how about the wild idea that, after this season, Cassel might just be playing coy (he remembers that he didn’t start at SC in college but still made the NFL) and is saying the right things (because that’s how he was raised or that’s the strategy he’s using) but, deep in his heart, he feels he can beat Brady out.  Just give me a chance to compete against him, now that we’ve both shown we’re NFL capable quarterbacks.  I plan on coming into camp in the best shape of my life, have hired a personal workout guy and, now that I got a lot of game experience, I’m working on the things the coaches told me throughout the year I needed to improve.  I’ll be ready to earn the big money (franchise tag?) the Pats are offering and then you’ll see the method behind my madness.

Boldin’s side of the story might be that he realizes that Larry Fitzgerald is the new prototype of an NFL receiver, but with all the attention he’s going to receive, he finally will have the chance to go up against a defense that’s not geared toward stopping him and if those guys would throw it his way, they’d all attain the same goal - to become World Champions!  It’s not a selfish attitude as much as it is a practical one.

What separates talk radio (sports, news or politics) from normal conversation are the whack jobs who call in - the people who, rather than forming a logical pattern of thought from their head before they speak, blurt out something idiotic from their heart (or out of their … another body part, located about the same distance from the heart the head is, just in the other direction).  These people are not only incapable of seeing a situation from both points of view, they feel that only one side can be right, so the other one must be wrong.  Then they go about trashing the “opponent” by showing how foolish or cowardly or misinformed they are, thus proving their side to be the “the winner.”  They usually succeed in doing just that, but it’s themselves who wind up looking foolish and misinformed.  If you favor one side over another, does it mean the one you didn’t select has to have no positive qualities?

Usually, the host of the show is one of these types of guys.  Ever since Jim Rome showed how many “wannabees” and “never was’s” there are out there in “Listenerville,” and how bitter they are that other people make a ton money to play a game while they themselves have to work long and hard to barely scrape by, and, how, if the host will give them a platform to criticize these “prima donnas” by doing exactly that as the host, how loyal they’ll be to him and how outrageous his show will become … and what a hit it will be because, in today’s misguided world, this is what sells - and, in radio, selling’s the name of the game.

All of this is based on the principle my late mentor, John Savage, used to say so often it’s burned into my skull: “You don’t strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.”  And, how much, in the times we’re going through now, do I miss him because, in addition to being a close friend, I learned something everytime we’d speak - about selling or investing (he was an insurance salesman/speaker and is the only person, I believe he still holds this record, to speak at the insurance industry’s Million Dollar Round Table twelve years in a row) or simply about life.  John’s brilliance was a very basic type, the kind that’s not in vogue today, mainly because it’s based on accepting responsibility for your own actions.

His advice was similar to that given by John Hancock:

“The greatest ability in (life) is to get along with others and influence their actions.  A chip on the shoulder is too heavy a piece of baggage to carry through life.”

     �

Here we are at the end of another college football season and at the highest of level of the intercollegiate sport, we hear complaining from people (not just the coaches and players) that their school, i.e. not the University of Florida Gators, is the best team in the nation - and each is prepared to do (oral) battle - in the form of a debate, be it on radio talk shows, TV or anywhere any two people disagree.  Bring your stats, tradition, schedule, crap on the other teams who’ll be showing up at the championship debate and be ready to get it on.  It will be held at a bar in South Bend so the participants will be assured of a neutral field.  As bad as the locals there were this past year, I don’t think they’ll be joining the verbal sparring.  They definitely would not be on the invited guests list. 

My blog on 11/23/08 explains that a playoff in big-time college football would not give us the best team in the country.  Let’s say a four-loss Virginia Tech squad snuck in the playoff and upset Oklahoma, then went all the way through unblemished, with the benefit of a miraculous field goal as the horn sounded in their next game against Utah and then, with 0.02 left in the semi-final game, they blocked the potential game winning extra point by three touchdown favorite USC and ran the recovered ball back for two points, snatching a victory out of what was surely what the networks wanted, i.e. a USC-Florida final.  Then they beat the Gators, who on the title game’s opening possession had Percy Harvin and Tim Tebow collide, both being carted off the field and unable to continue.  You’d have your National Champions - the 12-4 VPI Gobblers, the best team in the country.

That’s ridiculous.  Not the scenario, the thought that a team who played in the ACC, a BCS conference but a poor one at that, would be crowned as the best team in the nation.  Being named National Champions and being considered the best team in the nation are two seperate entities.  I mean, how excited would it be to see a scenario like that happen?

You know, like in 1983, when NC State beat vastly superior Houston or two years later when Villanova had to be nearly perfect, but pulled it off against Georgetown, or, more recently and closer to my home, when Fresno State won the College World Series.  I’ve heard so many people call the Bulldogs the National Champs, but don’t think I’ve ever heard anybody lay claim to their being the best intercollegiate baseball team in the nation.

So that’s what we want?  Some underdog, in the powerful sport of football, beating the team ranked number one all year because of a bad call (that couldn’t be reviewed)?  Do you really want a year like ‘83 with Jimmy V running around looking for somebody to hug or ‘85 with Patrick Ewing going down to defeat (when everyone knew his Hoyas team would have beaten ‘Nova 99 times out of 100) or the Underdogs to Wonderdogs Fresno State baseballers dogpiling at the pitcher’s mound in Omaha?

Yeah, me too.  We can still hope.  Who cares who’s considered the best team, we just want the excitement of one-and-done pressure-packed playoff!

“Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.”  �

In a previous blog (11/23/08), I wrote that the current method of choosing a National Football Champion at the highest level of intercollegiate play was flawed and ought to dumped and revamped.  What, as Peter Griffin says, “grinds my gears,” is really the reasoning given by the college presidents and AD’s, men whose integrity is supposed to be beyond reproach.  “Missing too much class” being one of their main arguments is an insult to our intelligence (especially those of us who actually went to college - and may have missed a class or two ourselves, or were in classes with scholarship athletes and wondered why, in the off season, they were often absent).  What I wanted, more than anything, was for these righteous leaders of academic institutions and athletics departments to honestly tell the nation the real reasons for their opposing a playoff system - something like, maybe, those good ol’ boys who are currently representing the bowls being vehemently against the playoff idea. 

However, because I believe in fairness and in the interest of extending equal time, the floor is now open for rebuttal.  In a strange twist, the person speaking in favor of the current bowl system will be none other than … me!  And, once again, it’s not so much because I think what we now have works so well, but because the argument for a playoff system might be just as faulty.

From your geometry days, you may recall indirect proofs, or proving something by assuming the opposite, showing it can’t be true, hence, returning to the fact that since the opposite is untrue, the original statement correct.  Here we go:

Our assumption is “a playoff in college football (at the highest level, since all other divisions already have one in place) would clear up all controversy regarding who is the true number one football team in the country.”

Scenario #1 (the “& 1″ idea): Many level-headed fans, let’s call them “the compromisers,” say, “Can’t we all just get along?”  Give the traditionalists their bowl set up BUT, after it concludes, play just one more, not for the Gipper, but for the top two teams in the country to play for the right to be called National Champion.  And this year, those two teams would be the winner of (what we call today, the “National Championship” game) and another team, the winner of another bowl.  In other words, have what amounts to a Final Four of Football (possibly called the “3F Bowl” - lucky it wasn’t flag football because 4F has already been copyrighted by draft boards around the country and the “4F Bowl” doesn’t lend itself to anything anyone would be proud to win).  This year, obviously, those four teams would be Oklahoma and Florida, along with Texas, Alabama and USC.  Wait, that’s five!  Throw out SC, they lost to lowly Oregon State (on Sept. 25, two and a half months ago!) and have beaten the nine opponents since by an average of over thirty points a game!  Plus, anyone who’s really interested in finding out who the best team in the nation is, would never leave out the most dominant defense in the nation.  Does anybody (who doesn’t live in the 405 area code) think for a minute Oklahoma would put up 60+ points on the Trojan “D?”  If you do, this conversation is over and you can put your white overcoat back on - you know the one you wear with your arms crossed and the sleeves that lock in the back.      

Scenario #2 (a four team playoff): see scenario #1.

Scenario #3 (an eight team playoff): With this one, arguments from #1 and #2 are negated.  You’d have Oklahoma, Florida, Texas, Alabama, USC, Penn State, Utah, Ohio State and Boise State.  Damn, that’s nine, isn’t it?  Well, just throw out Boise State.  Sure, they’re undefeated, but they could never compete with the Big Boys.  Oh yeah, I forgot (what may have been the best football game of all time).  If Boise’s in, then how can you keep out Utah?  They’re also undefeated, ranked higher, played in a tougher conference, and had a tougher non-conference schedule.  Looks like OSU is out of the playoff.  Yeah, right.  If that happened, we’d find out for sure whether or not there’s reincarnation, because if it existed, Woody Hayes would be in front of whatever committee made that decision and each member would take turns being Charlie Bauman.

Scenario #4 (a sixteen team playoff): This is more like it!  Teams just roll off the tongue - until you get to 14-16 where (assuming Ball State who had two-11th place votes, three 12th’s, a 13th and a 14th before losing the MAC championship game to Buffalo would drop out of contention, no longer being undefeated and playing in the MAC) teams like Oklahoma State, Georgia Tech, Oregon, Georgia, Boston College and Missouri all were ranked in at those places and would have arguments as to why they were deserving (as well as the poiticians’ reasoning, i.e. why other people should not be invited/elected, thus making it perfectly clear, with all the other competitors undeserving why none other but themselves should be selected to go to the dance). 

But I thought this was exactly what we were trying to avoid - leaving out deserving teams.  Look at it this way - once you get beyond Scenario #3, none of the teams invited would stand a chance of winning it all anyway.  Just getting a victory or two would mean a successful season for them.  Hey, that’s what the current non-BCS bowls are for.

Scenario #5 (a 64 team playoff): We’ll include this one because it actually has been brought up (usually by a coach).  In basketball, you’re allowed to play two games/week, in baseball and other sports even more.  With this scenario, the presidents and AD’s really would have a case of “missed class time.”

Why many coaches are in favor of keeping the lower division bowls (you know, the ones that cost pretty much everyone involved large sums of money) is (they say with a straight face) because they get valuable extra practice time.  (Most have a bonus clause in their contract that has them - and their assistants - earning a bonus if they get into a bowl, but I’ve never heard one of them mention that as a reason.  Probably because they have what their “extra practice schedule” is going to be consuming every millimeter of their mind).  If that’s truly why they want the bowl, why not pass a rule that says everyone gets more practice time once the regular season ends.  Coaches would be happy (really, now, are they ever?) and it would be a tremendous cost saving technique. 

As I blogged on 11/23, a championship game doesn’t tell you who the number one team in the country is anyway.  It only tells you who it is on that day.  The way the United States is today, with all the special interest groups, whatever is in place will be criticized. What Nehru said regarding governments applies to whatever post season system would be in place:

“Democracy is good.  I say this because all other systems are worse.”

The book on OJ Simpson, at least the one deciding his future, is now complete.  It ended tragically, with a jury and a judge deciding the former Heisman Trophy winner should spend up until his 70th birthday (at a minimum) in an orange jump suit with others just like him - and nothing at all like him.  Here is a guy whose life was full of winning moments and meeting dignitaries, now reduced to one final defeat and a life of meeting people at the opposite end of the human spectrum - or worse, not meeting anybody, but rather spending up to 23 hours a day by himself.  He was a star on TV, now he won’t even own one; has gone from being idolized to being vilified; people used to argue vehemently he was one of, if not the best, running backs in the history of intercollegiate and professional football, now the argument has turned, with equal vehemence, to whether he is one of, if not the slimiest, creatures in history (if, in fact, he did murder two people, one of them his ex-wife and mother of two of his children - and displayed more remorse for himself and what happened to him in Las Vegas than he did over the death of his ex-wife and kids’ mom), basically experiencing a life style change that could be described as moving from alpha to omega.

Is it my imagination or has his public perception swung to the point where a far greater percentage of people today think he is guilty of double homicide than did shortly after those grisly murders took place?  Or is it that his supporters still believe, but have simply stopped talking publicly about it?

I worked as associate head basketball coach at USC from 1991-95 so I was working for the Trojans when the dastardly event took place.  Boy, did I ever experience a different perspective!  If I heard one person who worked or went to school when the Juice was playing for SC, tell how he or she couldn’t believe he could have done something that horrific because of how hard he cultivated his image shortly after his NFL career (TV broadcasting, commercials, acting), I heard twenty.  People just refused to believe it.

They’d cling to every scrap of evidence that may have shown his innocence - the main one being, if the victims had their carotid arteries slashed, there would be blood everywhere, that OJ would have to be drenched in blood, not a droplet here or there.  This man was an honest-to-goodness icon.  

And now he’s just a con.

He’s a case of his own success overtaking the reality that, no matter how big you get, there are still societal rules we all have to live by.  He certainly could have used Norman Vincent Peale’s belief that:

“The man who lives for himself is a failure.  The man who lives for others has achieved true success.”