Jack’s Blog

As television programs go, there are many that aren’t as captivating as Inside the NBA.  The show is so entertaining that I know people who don’t watch the NBA game that’s televised that night yet will tune into Ernie & the ex-NBA stars.  The word that’s used when people try to explain why it wins awards is chemistry.

Ernie Johnson is the moderator and, maybe because he understands which guys the viewers want to hear, or maybe because he wants to keep getting paid large dollars, or maybe because it’s what his bosses tell him to do, he relinquishes the stage to Charles Barkley, Kenny Smith and Shaquille O’Neal.  Since everyone has an opinion (and they all stink - the punchline of an old adage) and this is my blog, I’ll let you know mine.  I feel the best the show was was either when it started and it was only a three-man operation, or when they added Greg Anthony.  Maybe I like guards better, but I didn’t think Chris Webber added anything to the show and I think Shaq takes away from it.

For my (cable subscription) money, I don’t see where a fourth person is necessary.  In the beginning (not to compare the show to The Bible, it’s not that good), Ernie provided the knowledge that a television pro needs to know - plus he’d throw in a witticism every so often.  Kenny’s opinion was gleaned from a guard’s point of view, as well as that of a player who not only was a member of, but was a major contributor to the championship team.  Charles gave commentary from a big man’s perspective, and also that of a Hall of Famer.  Plus, he’d say blurt out statements like, “There’s a fight I wouldn’t break up,” when player-enforcers David West and Kenyon Martin started to scuffle.  That combination was enough.  And perfect.  Why the producers or directors or Ted Turner or whoever thought the show needed anyone else is as shocking as why they continue to allow Shaq overdo whatever schtick comes to his mind.

What the fans get to see is how varied opinions, based on their experiences, can be - whether you hear analysis from a guard (Kenny or Greg), “The guards need to establish tempo” or from the big guys (Charles, C Webb or Shaq), “They need to get the ball inside.”  The fans also get - or have to put up with - depending on the reason a viewer is tuning in, the tomfoolery among the combatants.  Often it is hilarious, sometimes with the on-air banter, sometimes with the vignettes the producers put together to tease the guys in the studio.  Charles has been an amazingly good sport as the other guys, including those not on camera, continually poke fun at him for various mistakes he’s made, things he’s said or . . . pretty much anything from his life.  However, his attitude might just be a case of a healthy salary because the Chuckster once said on-air “I can be bought.  If they paid me enough, I’d work for the Klan.”  Make no mistake about that, however.  On that, he was joking.

Kenny is the perfect foil to Charles (or maybe it’s the other way around).  Charles knows the bond the two of them have is such that anytime Kenny’s embarrassing him, it’s only for the sake of good TV.  Kenny does a great job when he’s explaining video, illustrating his point so that someone who’s not that into the hoops can understand the point he’s trying to make.

Shaq seems to have been added more to capture the interest of a different demographic of basketball fan with his references to today’s music, dance and lingo.  The issue with him is he overdoes it.  His stuff becomes old and tired - and he refuses to let up.  He either doesn’t know he’s annoying or doesn’t care.  Or enjoys it!  I mean wasn’t there anybody in the studio telling him “Birdman, Birdman” was getting old?  I’m not sure how many times he said it last night but, then again, I can’t count to infinity.

The show has obvious off-camera, inside jokes among the four of them, but those are almost funny in a teasing sort of way.  The show can have it’s serious moments as well (apart from the obvious basketball talk).  Although Charles can learn from Shaq about overdoing something (enough already with the “Only God’s an expert,”), Chuck has made several poignant statements.  It’s apparent when he’s passionate about a topic, e.g. remarking on not taking being an NBA player as seriously as those of the five other professions he mentioned (teacher, policeman, fireman, doctor, military) - although plumbers, electricians, maintenance workers, auto mechanics and others working in fields outside the five he mentioned might be offended.  His sincerity does show through.  As it did when he remarked:

“The great thing about sports is that it takes you away from reality.”

One day coming up soon, because of availability I’m not sure which, I’ll be headed to Stanford for some (more) tests.  Since I may be contacted and not have enough time to let you readers know, if you get to this site and you see the same blog you read the day before . . . that’s the day(s) I’m at Stanford.  Rest assured I’ll be returning shortly.

Ed Rush, former supervisor of officials for the Pac-12, lost his job because he made a statement that many people felt was obviously in jest.  Not according to CBSSports.com’s Jeff Goodman however.  Or rather, Goodman - and his secret informant.  Goodman reported one of the officials, i.e. referee, in the room told him Rush said that if an official would bang (call a technical foul on) Arizona’s coach, Sean Miller, or would run him (throw him out of the game), he (Rush) would give that ref $5000 or a free trip to Cancun.  Initially, Larry Scott, Pac-12 commissioner made the statement, “I do not find anything that rises to a fireable offense or a breach of ethics or a breach of the integrity of officiating or the program.”  But, claims Goodman, that was before Scott was privy to what the official told Goodman.

Was it?  Really?  Or, have we as a society, become so sensitive to anything said by or to anybody that a significant number of us have assumed the position of the PC (politically correct) police?  Under the guise of exposing insensitivity, they alert, a la Chicken Little, the public about some horrific crime - and in the process ruin lives of some while not benefiting society nearly to the degree they’re tearing it down.

What needs to be revealed is who leaked the information - and why?  According to Goodman, it was one of the referees.  The more the reporter spoke, it was apparent the secret informant was someone close to Goodman, possibly a good friend of his.  If this official believed so strongly that Rush is that evil a person, i.e. Rush really meant what he said, why not come out himself with the accusation?  Or was the guy upset because - although of course he didn’t referee for the money (just joking because if that was the case, he’d be the first for a guy at that level) - he didn’t get selected to officiate in the NCAA tournament and got stuck with one of the lesser post season assignments which pay less money, per diem and prestige?  Due to the fact that most, if not all, of Pac-12 referees have climbed the ladder of elementary, junior high, high school, JC, D-II and/or D-III and lesser name conferences (possibly skipping a rung here or there), when they’ve risen to the level of the Pac-12 (by far the highest in level and pay on the west coast), egos are bruised easily.  So if you believe his outrage was directed more for the love of the game being violated than his substantial paycheck (and national TV face time) being significantly reduced, you’re beyond naiive.  If this referee, Jeff Goodman’s anonymous source, didn’t have a hidden agenda of some sort, I’ll pay him five large or give him a free vacation to Cancun.  Actually, forget the $5K but my wife and I traded our time share and are headed to Cabo San Lucas next month.  I think there’s an extra bedroom.  Everybody knows that Cabo beats Cancun.  What do you say, anon?

All of this means that, in today’s world, we need to be on our best behavior all the time lest someone be offended.  If this sounds like the raging of an old man who hasn’t decided to play by the current rules, let me correct that sentiment - slightly.  There is no doubt I am from an other time, one that took place long ago.  It also got us where we are as a society.  Alright, so maybe that’s nothing to brag about but in my world, like it or not, sarcasm was used much of the time.  In 99% of the cases it was intended to be humorous.  About 95% of the time, it actually was.  Studies have shown that laughing is good for a person’s health.  If this PC nonsense continues, nobody will ever laugh again - for fear of hurting the feelings of whomever thinks that you’re laughing at him.  Or her.  Or it.

Here’s a short (believe it or not) story that illustrates my point.  Our high school football team was made up of seven or eight ethnic groups.  One day, in the locker room after practice, our center who was Polish Catholic, pulled me aside and said, “You’re the only Jew I know who I like.”  Today, national headlines.  Instead, I viewed it as I truly believe it was intended:

“I took it as a compliment!”

Robert Parish was selected as one of the 50 greatest players of all-time.  Does that make him qualified to be an NBA coach?  To my knowledge there’s never been a definitive study done comparing skill as a player to that of a coach.  However, history tells us that while being a great player doesn’t preclude someone from having a similar career on the bench, it’s a rare superstar who becomes a successful coach.

Parish is upset at his former teammates, claiming they didn’t reach out to him the past few years.  Independent of former players shunning him or teams turning their backs on him (mainly his club, the Celtics), his story boils down to the fact that a) he’s broke, b) he’s not broke but doesn’t have as much money as he needs or c) he simply just doesn’t have as much money as he wants.

The story of his plight always returns to his money woes.  He’s auctioned off his championship rings, his Hall-of-Fame ring and his 50 greatest player ring, items most people would never part with.  Although he was employed by the team he played for, Parish claimed the $80,000 a year job the Celtics were paying him wasn’t enough.  He said he was in the market for an NBA assistant or head coaching position - one that paid six or seven figures.  Right there, he lost sympathy from most of us common folk.  Personally, prior to my retirement, I had seven figure jobs from as far back as 1977.  Of course, two of those figures were after the decimal point.

The reason Parish says he ought to be hired is because he was such a highly skilled player himself; that he could really help a team.  Parish is experiencing the same cold shoulder as a couple other former superstars - Kareem Adbul Jabbar and Rick Barry.  Each of these guys shared a characteristic other than being one of, if not the best, at their position.  All were standoffish.  And that’s being extremely kind.

What Robert Parish, as well as others like him, needs to learn is summed up in a line I heard many years ago from Hubie Brown:

“You’ve got to learn how to say hello before it’s time to say goodbye.”

If you were trying to accomplish something you love, and had worked extremely hard, over a long period of time - and finally got it - imagine how thrilled you would be.  Then you got hurt and the person who wasn’t quite as good as you took over.  While you’re working to get back in tiptop shape, your “understudy” is performing really well.  So much so that your group wins.  Without you.  In the field in which you work, people outside of it have short memories.  They loved you when you were doing well but criticized you when you weren’t, especially when your company wasn’t winning.

Answer honestly, are you be hoping the “next guy in line” 1) does great, 2) does just well enough so that your team wins, 3) flops, but somehow your team wins or  4) does horribly, independent of whether the team wins or loses?  That is the test of every first teamer who lost his job because of injury.

It happened to the San Francisco 49ers starting quarterback Alex Smith.  Keep in mind that Smith was the overall #1 pick in the 2005 NFL draft.  You can’t get drafted any higher and the expectations mirror your selection, only more so.  Smith had to learn the offensive philosophy from the offensive coordinator because in the pros the head coach really coaches the coaches.  The assistant coaches coach their respective position players, with the coordinator in charge of the offense or defense.  If that sounds a little complicated, consider that Alex Smith had five different offensive coordinators in his first five years.

The NFL is the college game on steroids.  Everyone is bigger, stronger, faster.  The defensive coordinator is trying to make the game so difficult for the opposing QB - especially a young one - and the game has become so sophisticated that not only do teams change defenses, e.g. from a 3-4 to a 4-3, they change defensive looks within the same defense.  Worse yet, players have become so specialized that there are third down and long defensive linemen, nickel backs and guys who function so much better in one blitz package over another, their PT is limited to just such situations.  It’s nearly impossible for an inexperienced QB to succeed early in a career.  Ask Peyton Manning.

Alex Smith did not succeed.  Some fans didn’t think he was the guy to lead the 49ers back to championship contenders - and they were the ones who liked Smith.  The others ridiculed him - and the club - for wasting a #1 pick on someone so incompetent.  In walked Jim Harbaugh who, when asked what college QBs he’d like to get for his new team said he thought Alex Smith would be fine.  The fans thought he as kidding.  Maybe he was but it was the beginning of the Harbaugh-Smith-49er fans love affair.

Then Smith went down with a concussion.  It wasn’t diagnosed immediately.  When Smith was not cleared, Harbaugh had to go to the bench for a substitute.  He chose a second year QB, Colin Kaepernick.  Wouldn’t you know it?  Kaepernick led the Niners to victory.  After the win, Smith was asked about how he felt watching his backup play?

Remember the hypothetical question an four choices at the beginning of this blog?  Here was Alex Smith’s reply:  “If you can’t be happy for your teammate’s success you’re playing the wrong sport. Go play tennis or golf or something … That doesn’t belong in team sports. It’s the quarterback position. It gets a lot of attention. We’re going to get talked about.”

Would that have been how you felt?  The difference between players who are legitimately happy for the team, regardless if the teammate they’re competing with outplays them, as opposed to those who want the team to win - but only if they’re the major part of it - is probably going to determine whether or not your team will win or lose.

During my first year of coaching, in the early 1970s, we were losing and I had a kid who wanted to ask me a question.  After I said of course, he kind of stammered, but went on “Well, I want to know why I’m not playing more.  Mark is ahead of me and he can’t shoot, can’t pass, can’t dribble (”handle” hadn’t made it’s entrance into the hoops vocabulary yet) and can’t rebound.”

I looked at him and said, “I completely agree with you.  Mark isn’t a good shooter, passer, dribbler or rebounder.  But he does all of them better than you!”  This led to a mantra we would use throughout the rest of the season:

“Just because someone else is doing poorly doesn’t mean you’re doing well.”

P.S. Harbaugh named Kaepernick the starter for the Niners’ next game.  Will Smith continue taking the high road?  My money’s on him - after all he’s endured.

If everything remained as it was, we’d still be living in caves.  Progress has always been America’s keyword.  But, as the saying goes, “While there is no progress without change, not all change is progress.“  That means that when some changes are implemented, a number of them might turn out negatively.  It’s just how it works.

There are people in society who have tremendous influence over the rest of the folks out there, especially the youth.  There’s a major difference here.  Unless someone is completely magnanimous and can’t wait to get to the soup kitchen or shelter to assist others who have less, money and fame drive the vast majority of decisions made in this country.  One of the areas that most disturbs me is how much money athletes are paid. Another is how they act - in the name of getting more money.

I’m by no means a prude and realize “the good ol’ days” will never return.  On that we ought to be grateful.  Dig deep enough and you find they weren’t that good in the first place.  However, there are still many who cling to tradition.  Understandably so - it’s difficult to give up what your dad and/or your coaches taught you.  In many instances, they were the greatest role models you had/have and letting go of those life lessons hurts too much not to let people know.  By venting. 

Unfortunately, the main message these days is that sports is entertainment.  True - but when the entertainment part gets in the way of how you understand the game was meant to be played, that’s going over the top.   Yesterday, I saw a receiver catch a touchdown pass, do a little dance, flex and throw out his arms to the crowd as if he was embracing them.  His team was playing a road game and - they were behind!  We’re told it doesn’t matter.  He’s merely expressing himself, trying to find a celebration that people back home are going to like enough, so he can use it as a trademark.  Trademark celebrations lead to endorsements.  What doesn’t lead to player endorsements is winning.  That used to be enough; now it’s just a part of a player’s package.  I saw where Phil Rizzuto, the “Scooter,” once said:  

“I’m glad I don’t play anymore.  I couldn’t learn all the handshakes.”  

People were livid that replacement referees were still working NFL games.  It only took an absurd missed call against the Green Bay Packers to bring the situation to a head.  How absurd?  After instant replay, one referee was signaling touchdown while the other was right next to him, waving his arms above his head, signaling time was out meaning a touchback was the outcome.  This was done after the two guys looked at each other.  It reminded me of “rock, paper, scissors” except they were supposed to agree.

Luckily this blown call didn’t result in a severely injured player, as it could have with the guys on the field not being of sound mind and body - when it came to enforcing the rules .  Now that everyone involved has put aside their greed and come to their senses, maybe the beginning of this season will only be reduced to a punch line instead of a tragedy.  There were good arguments on both sides but they needed to be hashed out during the off season.  As with any disagreement in which the parties involved have more ego than sense, stubbornness usually wins out.

It’s easy for me to say but players should have refused to take the field until the refs’ situation was completed.  No one will ever be able to convince me that players - or for that matter, coaches, agents and executives - didn’t know what the outcome would be, especially since the “next level” of officials, i.e. big-time college officials were not going to be available.

The rule book is too difficult, the game is too fast, the players are too good for replacement referees.  Now, all that said, don’t expect people - fans and those in the NFL, not to complain about calls.  There’s a reason for that:

“That’s why the word ‘complainers’ is in the dictionary.”

Coaches are an interesting breed.  If ever there was a profession that exposes incompetence (and competence for that matter), it’s one that keeps score and has a winner and a loser in every game.   Because no one wants to be thought of as a failure, it’s also a profession which comes up with an inordinate amount of excuses.

Ego plays a major part in athletics, coaching included.  Sometimes a seemingly small quote or action occurs that makes for a good story years down the road.  This past August at Michael Jordan’s Flight School (basketball camp), some of the coaches recounted stories from past camps and, if not the best story, certainly one that’s in the finals was when the camp had Larry Brown as the guest speaker.  It was 2004 and he had just led the Detroit Pistons to the NBA championship.

His son was attending the camp so he agreed to speak to the whole group.  After he spoke, the camp broke up for afternoon games.  Prior to the games, there was a period during which the camp coaches were to have their teams go through a brief practice.  I was one of the eight commissioners and, as fate would have it, Larry’s son was in my league.

As his team went out on one of the outdoor courts at UCSB, I could see that Larry, who is the definition of a “coach’s coach,” couldn’t help himself.  The guy who was the actual coach of the team was more of a philosopher than a coach and was doing what he usually did - talking about how things should be.  Since the kids were standing around while the other eight teams were practicing, Larry jumped in and got the guys in a 4-on-4 shell drill.  From a health standpoint, he wasn’t in tip top shape but this was his element.  He never feels better than when he’s teaching the game.

To me, it was an amazing sight.  Upon seeing what was taking place, the “coach” of his son’s team turned to me and, incredibly said, “Is this my team or Larry Brown’s?”  I was stunned to the point where I was speechless.  If you want to know what the significance of that is, ask someone who knows me.  Here’s a guy who just won an NBA championship and he’s helping coach your team.  And you’re complaining about it?

This story reminded me of a quote George Raveling once said:

“You can get a lot done in coaching if you don’t let your ego get in the way.”

P.S, Check me out on CoachGeorgeRaveling.com.  Click on #JackAndCoach.

Usain Bolt won three gold medals the Jamaican Way.  Anyone who’s ever visited that beautiful country can attest to the reply of one of its natives when presented with a request.

“No problem.”  Whatever the question, that’s the answer.  During each of my visits there, I found that to be the response.  Seldom was that actually the case.  It was almost like they were thinking, “No problem - for me.  If we don’t make it on time, life goes on.”

In a country that exemplifies the turn “laid back,” Bolt is the complete antithesis.  He wastes no time getting to wherever it is he’s going - usually to the finish line.  And he gets there well before the guys he’s competing against even though the distance they’re attempting to cover is not that great.

Maybe it’s because he figures his events are allotted only so much air time and he wants to occupy most of it to let people know who the greatest sprinter, if not greatest athlete, of all-time is.  Bob Costas made mention that we can’t have a higher opinion of Bolt than he has of himself.  While this statement might be true, so is that of Satchel Paige who said:

“It ain’t braggin’ if you can do it.”

Rest assured, America, the gold medal stand for men’s basketball will be occupied by the USA once again.  As it will be by our women’s team.  As it was by the original Dream Team.  The opponents the latter two teams faced simply lack, and lacked, talent.  On the other hand, our men will be facing some incredibly talented, i.e. NBA, players.Make no mistake about it, we still dominate from a skills perspective.  Of this past year’s NBA all-stars, 19 of them are U.S. citizens. However, many of the clubs we face have a plethora of very good NBA players.  Last night’s opponent, Brazil, had four guys regularly seen on the NBA Network - Nene, Leandro Barbarso, Tiago Splitter and Anderson Varajao.  In addition, arguably their most talented player, Mercelo Huertas, is not in the NBA.

Why not?  Because he’s making too much money overseas!  Last night he dished out 13 assists to go with his 11 points but was definitely Brazil’s most difficult player for us to guard.  When it became a half court game, he penetrated easily, on his own or with the use of a screen.  His vision is exceptional and he plays like an overseas baller, i.e. with a sense of flair.  No look passes are his forte but they’re made with a sense of purpose, not ego.

So, with the foreign squads catching up in the talent area, how can another American gold be assured?  While our guys do seem a little too content to jack up three pointers (one reason is the ability of Chris Paul to penetrate and get them wide open threes) - which can get them into a hole, as it did last night - there are two reasons for Coach K and his staff to feel confident they’ll bring home the gold.  Both of them start with the letter D.

One is defense.  When the USA got down early, much of which was because of starting 0-9 from behind the (shorter) arc, commentators mentioned it might be time to establish the inside game.  You know, that new stat: “get some points in the paint.”  Which the USA did.  It’s just that the points in the paint were lobs for dunks and more conventional layups off of steals.  If you’ve heard the term that’s also currently in vogue in hoops - long - and you’re not really sure what it means or the difference between long and the better known - tall - watch our men play D.  From the traps (and the four arms) that seem to impede every passing lane, to the rotations that shut down the lanes that an offensive player does manage to locate, Team USA forces turnovers that lead to easy buckets - and demoralize opponents.

The other D stands for depth.  The aforementioned Huertas was dropping dimes like Rockefeller but, in the much more physical international game, he eventually needed a rest.  In came a 19 year old Brazilian and what happened to him could have been called child abuse.  He had difficulty not only advancing his dribble, but in simply retaining it.  Team USA’s roster affords the coaching staff exactly what every coach dreams of - going to the bench and raising the level of intensity - without decreasing the level of talent.

The only way the USA can be derailed is with ego problems an Coach K won’t let that happen.  He takes a page out of John Wooden’s book and, as hard as it might be to believe watching some of them, he gets the guys to buy in:

“Talent is God-given. Be humble. Fame is man-given. Be grateful. Conceit is self-given. Be careful.”

A 5′5″ jock sniffer, Nevin Shapiro, is wallowing in his “15 minutes of fame” while the University of Miami worries about how long they’re going to spend in NCAA purgatory.

Fpr the next few blogs, I’ll be giving some random observations:

The talking heads and people who call in radio talk shows are incensed that college football players would accept something outside the limits of the NCAA rules.  Full disclosure - when I was a freshman in college, I made a field goal late in our homecoming football game that was the difference in our winning.  The next day, I walked into a sub shop we frequented on Sundays when we didn’t feel like having dorm food.  I ordered my sandwich and when I went to pay, the owner said, “Nice kick.  It’s on the house.”

This was at a Division III school.  Technically, it was a violation of NCAA rules.  Not only did I not refuse the freebie, I never even considered it.  To me, it was an honor.  At that time, I didn’t feel entitled; I didn’t have a lot of extra cash and was thrilled I was a few bucks to the good.

As absurd as this sounds, it’s similar to many of today’s infractions.  Schools all claim their boosters are the best.  Do you think they mean the best as far as staying within the NCAA rules?  I’ve worked at nine Division I schools and can tell you that most fans love knowing the colleges’ athletes - and having the kids know them.  If they’re out at the mall and an athlete recognizes them by name, it’s as proud a moment as they can experience.  Having one or more to their house for dinner - especially so their children can be with them - is nirvana.

That happens to be legal now.  I remember when it wasn’t.  Our (coaches association) Recruiting Committee recommended to the NCAA Recruiting Committee that, as long as boosters weren’t providing weekly catered meals, why not allow athletes the same courtesy as other students if they knew someone in town?  The NCAA agreed and added to the rule book “an occasional meal” was acceptable.  When we pressed them to define “occasional” they wouldn’t commit.

Therein lies the answer to “Why can’t the NCAA cut their rule book?”  “Eliminate the gray areas?”  “Use more common sense?”  It’s because if you give coaches an inch, they’ll take a mile.  Everybody is looking for an edge.  Is an occasional meal once a week?  Once a month?  Besides, the NCAA isn’t concerned about a booster giving a student-athlete a meal; they’re worried about what else the kid gets while he’s there.  How is that monitored?  People with a great deal money feel they can buy things they want.  If that means recognition from a top, or even second string player, hey, it’s only money.

It’s interesting to hear ESPN’s Mark May pontificate about how the NCAA might be right in assessing the death penalty to the “U.”  I was an assistant at Robert Morris College in 1976, the year Pitt won the national championship in football.  Maybe their star running back Tony Dorsett didn’t receive any more than room, board, books tuition and fees.  But I’d love to ask May what his guess is - and while we’re at it, would he put his hand on a Bible and swear he didn’t get anything beyond the rules when he matriculated?  Pittsburgh is one of the biggest football cities in the country and the people who live there are as rabid fans as there are.  If a student-athlete goes out after a big win, don’t for a minute think he’s paying for his food or beers.  And if there’s one player who would stand up and say, “Sorry, this is against NCAA rules, I’ll pay,” let him come forth and be anointed with holy water. Ditto for Kirk Herbstreit, Craig James, Keyshawn Johnson, Robert Smith, etc.

It’s not greed; it’s human nature.  The NCAA’s problem is, “Where do we draw the line?”  Excoriating the NCAA is easy.  They do make themselves into an easy target, but:

“If someone is going to expose a problem - without proposing a viable solution - all they’re doing is complaining.”