Jack’s Blog

Whether reading accounts of the World Cup and the British Open, or watching television or listening to talk radio about them, one theme was discussed over and over - the subject of choking.  Did the U.S. women choke?  Did Phil Mickelson choke?

The arguments shared by those who claim “choke” by the females are that they were big favorites, missed on early opportunities, gave up goals that could have been avoided and performed poorly during the penalty kick phase of the contest.  Losing as an overwhelming favorite has nothing to do with choking; maybe overlooking the opponent or taking them too lightly (neither of which explanation I believe was the case with the World Cup final), but not choking.   The early lost chances could have been chalked up to lack of focus, not choking.   The first goal for Japan was due to a mistake in clearing the ball, not because the players involved choked.  Granted, the second goal should never have happened but because of a questionable strategical decision, not anything related to choking.  Regarding the PKs, two of the misses were superbly turned away by Japan’s goalkeeper and while the other miss was badly airmailed, to reason that one play caused the loss would be absurd.

Only because Phil Mickelson played absolutely magnificently for the first half of the final round was he even in contention for the Open Championship.  Lefty’s explanation for some risky shots was that he saw Darren Clarke was playing so well he knew taking risks were the only chance anyone would have to beat him.  I’ll take his analysis over some talking head whose golf game is more like mine than Mickelson’s.  He does miss more short putts than any great player but the rest of his game is as good or better than nearly everyone on tour so if that’s choking, he’s a choker.

The word “choke” is overused, especially in these two situations.  A little empathy would be wise in sports, considering our own performances.  As Stephen Covey has said:

“We judge others by their actions, ourselves by our intentions.“

From Kobe Bryant several years ago, who he said he was disgusted with himself for having an affair, to Tiger Woods, years later, who also held a televised apology, to the unfortunately named Anthony Weiner, who was forced into resigning his position, the public has seen high profile individuals paraded before them, whether on TV or in print.  There are others - Ben Roethlisberger, Plaxico Burress, Terrell Pryor, Chris Brown - who appeared before cameras and expressed remorse for their actions.

In nearly every case, the scenario is identical: a humbled man who wishes he were anywhere else, sincerely apologizing for past transgressions.  Usually the way it plays out is with, initially, an indignant denial, followed by additional, irrefutable evidence that finally results in a statement that sounds like “I’d like to apologize to my family, those who believed in me, my (team, owner, constituents), yada, yada, yada.”

The only thing missing is what all of us know each truly means.  “I’d like to apologize . . .

“ for getting caught.”

Even if you’re not a football fan, chances are you’ve heard of the situation Plaxico Burress got himself into at a New York nightclub.  In the wee hours of the morning, two days before his team (for now), the New York Giants, were scheduled to play a game he wasn’t even going to play in, Burress brought a loaded gun into the club.  Somehow, he managed to accidentally shoot himself in the leg.  Are we sure he didn’t try to end it all, but accidentally missed his head (which at the time was no doubt firmly planted in between his legs, but a little higher up).

The NFL has a rookie orientation program which educates guys entering the league.  Although I’ve known players who’ve attended the sessions, I’ve never asked what areas were covered.  To be honest, if “packing heat,” i.e. bringing a loaded firearm into a club wasn’t one of the topics addressed, I wouldn’t be surprised in the slightest.  After all, does someone really need to be told not to bring a loaded gun into a public place?  What, did he feel threatened?  With the kind of bank he’s pulling down, you’d think he could hire security - you know, people who actually have permits to carry weapons.

What they may cover in the professional orientations is what to do and say once you’ve screwed up.  My reason for saying that is that these guys always seem to come up with some marvelous fiction, stuff they could never have dreamed up on their own.  Burress’ explanation?  He was shot in a restaurant.  I know for a fact those New York chefs are ultra-sensitive when you criticize the daily special.  This was right after he’d checked into a hotel under the name of Harris Smith.  Why do I think there are some lawyers working overtime trying to find a Harris Smith, any Harris Smith?

For reactions to Plaxico’s behavior, let’s start with the ESPN analysts, Steve Young and Emmitt Smith.  They were asked the question all of America wants and desperately needs to know at this time, right after there was a shooting in a club in New York (where the crime rate has been one of city’s claim to fame) - “Do you think he’ll ever play for the Giants again?” 

To their credit, each commentator handled it about as well as could be expected.  Young said what must first be answered is, “Is he a good teammate?”  (Well, he’s certainly one I wouldn’t go with to get some take out).  Young’s conclusion is that, “No, he’s not (although Steve might be biased because, chances are, he never had a teammate at BYU quite like Plax) and the Giants don’t need him.”  Which begs the question, “What if they did?”  Smith made me feel like he and I think alike, a much higher compliment to me than to him.  In my blog a couple days ago (11/30), I said Stephon Marbury was a cancer and cancers need to be cut out.  Emmitt used exactly the same term, “cancer” when referring to Burress - and said he had to be removed.

When you’re an uber-talented wideout for a team that won last year’s Super Bowl in one of the greatest upsets ever, and the team has continued playing lights out again this year, you have to do something really bad to piss off the mayor to get him to say he thinks you should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  Especially when what you’re facing is the charge of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, carrying a mandatory minimum sentence of 3 1/2 years in the slammer and a maximum of 15 years. Yet this is precisely what Michael Bloomberg so vehemently decried at his press conference.

How could someone not see this coming?  Consider that in the past, Burress has been fined and suspended, and wasn’t healthy enough to play.  In this instance, maybe he could have called on the NFL sessions he received as a rookie, which undoubtedly told him that in cases similar to this, stay home!  So why would Plaxico Burress do what he did?  One of the oldest lines of all time tells it best:

“The greatest indicator of future behavior is past performance.”