Jack’s Blog

*The following is an excerpt from the article I wrote for the latest (July/August 08) issue of HIS magazine.  The article, in its entirety, can be seen by obtaining a copy at a local news stand or in many of the fine establishments that display HIS.

Of all the vacation spots there are in the world, the most enigmatic is Las Vegas.  In some ways, “Lost Wages” represents all that’s wrong in America, the ultimate of a “something-for-nothing” mentality and a propensity for bad decision-making.  It’s all too common to see a man with a cardboard sign on the street - the day after he blew the rent money on “23 red.”  Someone once told me, “You see those magnificent structures?  They didn’t build ‘em on winners.”

Although anyone can get into trouble, when professional athletes embark on the city to do some serious partying, all too often, bad news and, occasionally, tragedy follows.  The combination of excess cash and irresponsible behavior is a surefire recipe for disaster.  The most notorious case is of Adam (Don’t call me “Pacman”) Jones, a member of the Dallas Cowboys.  The summary of the Jones’ story is: he went to a strip club, threw thousands of dollars at the dancers and a shooting ensued which caused devastating injuries.  His explanation was he only went to the establishment to dine (which equates to saying the reason you went to a brothel was for the exercise).  This only illustrates that not only can someone lose their money in Las Vegas, but their mind as well.

Yet, with Las Vegas being the major resort destination that it is, there must be positives - and there are - in abundance.  It is the ultimate entertainment location as far as quality, quantity and diversity of attractions - anywhere in the world.  When the name Las Vegas is mentioned, the first thought that comes to mind is gambling - all of which is legal.

Right after gambling, the shows are probably the greatest attraction.  Folies Bergere, the best plays on Broadway, singers, dancers, comedians, animal acts and magic shows - all are advertised as breathtakingly spectacular and never disappoint. 

If it’s food you live for (and there are many of us in that category), you can find both fine dining (if you can afford it) and inexpensive, all-you-can-eat specials (if you can’t).  Should your love be golf, some of the most luxurious courses in the country can be found here.   Also, as is the case with many families, while one member might favor the links, another is more inclined for some intense shopping.  From the Forum Shops at Caeser’s to the outlet malls and every price range in between, Las Vegas is a shopper’s delight.  If there weren’t all these attractions, why do you think so many conventions, events, rodeos and basketball tournaments (including the NBA All-Star Game) would be held in Las Vegas?

Most amazingly of all is what the Chamber of Commerce has done in promoting the city.  In the early days, the mob allegedly ran it (but you didn’t hear that from me).  Then, commercials about Las Vegas were advertised as a fun family experience, and roller coasters and mega-game rooms were built all over the Strip.  Now, it’s “What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.”  I think they’re trying to attract the same folks: it just depends on whether dad - or mom - go with the kids - or alone.

If you’re thinking about making the trip to “Sin City,” here’s some unsolicited advice.  Don’t bet more than you can afford to lose and go for the right reasons, whatever right means to you.  But remember:

“If you sell your soul to the devil, the devil owns it.”     

If a poll were taken among the people in today’s workforce who are affected by the “casual Friday” rule which most companies operate under, there wouldn’t be too many employees (or bosses for that matter) who would vote to return to the traditional dress code of yesteryear.

We’ve become a more relaxed country in many ways and, as far as stress levels go, that’s not such a bad thing.  The question that begs to be answered now is, “How has this informal attitude changed our way of living, or thinking, in other areas?”

One of those areas, in particular, is today’s blog topic: “Have the parents of today relaxed their children’s respect code?”  I’ve taught in the public school system for the past six years.  The school where I teach happens to be in a rather affluent section.  When I first started teaching there, I noticed that many of the students called their teachers by their last name, i.e. no Mr., Mrs. or Ms.  Granted, I’d come back to the high school scene after three decades in the field of intercollegiate athletics where my “clientele” was older and usually referred to me and my colleagues as “Coach.”  On occasion, some (mostly depending on the head coach’s philosophy), called us by our first names (as a majority of professional athletes address their coaches).

As far as people addressing me, I’ve often said, if it were up to me, I’d be fine if everyone in the world, except for two people, called me “Jack” - and those two would call me “Dad.” But, when I began hearing fourteen- to eighteen-year-olds addressing their teachers by their last name only, I was, more than anything else, shocked. 

When I was growing up, it was a show of respect, when speaking to one’s elders, especially one’s teachers, as Mr., Mrs, or Miss.  Years ago, Bob Knight ultimately lost his job because he grabbed a kid by the arm who called out to him, “Hey, Knight.”  He told the youngster he should have called him “Mr. Knight” or “Coach Knight.”  It turned out that the kid was the son of a radio personality who was on the anti-Knight side of the IU battle that was being raged, so there could have been some hidden agenda in that case.

Early in my first year, I was outside the boys’ locker room when I heard a boy call one of our PE teachers by his last name.  Mind you, he didn’t do it in a disparaging way; it just seemed a natural way of greeting his teacher.  I saw a lady who I assumed was his mother who must have been there to take him to an off-campus appointment.

Intrigued by the child’s behavior, I asked her, “Do you know your son addresses his teachers by their last names?”

She looked at me as if I didn’t understand how easily my problem could have been solved and said, “Well, have you ever told him not to?”

To which I responded, “Have you?”

Today’s parents seem to want to be friends with their children and, just as you wouldn’t want to say anything to your friend to upset them - and possibly put a strain on the friendship - the parents take the same attitude when dealing with their kids.  There is, however, a major difference.  As a parent, you have a responsibility to give guidance to your offspring, whereas with a friend, you merely give advice.  In each case, your words may be taken to heart - or discarded.  In both cases, though, you must make certain the receiver of your “wisdom” understands you have their best interests at heart, not yours.  It is mandatory to remember that your job is not to raise your friends, but it is when dealing with your children.      

In such an instance as the mother-son mentioned above, Matthew Arnold would have been stunned, as evidenced by the feeling he expressed in the following statement.  Oh yeah, he said it in the 1880s:

“If there be a discipline in which the Americans are wanting, it is the discipline of awe and respect.”

In all the excitement of watching Greg Norman, at 53 years of age, contend for the British Open (watched closely by his new bride, who seemingly got more air time than anyone other than Norman and eventual winner, Padraig Harrington), there was a conspicuous void during the tournament.  Seldom did I hear, and even less did I read, about the absence of Tiger Woods.  Maybe that was as it should have been.  He wasn’t in it, he couldn’t win it.  So focus on those who could.

But is there a sliver of doubt in anyone’s mind that the best player in the world today wouldn’t have shot better than three over par for the tourney?  Even with the nasty weather conditions.  It appears in those type of situations that he pulls more rabbits (or birdies) out of his hat.  Had I been glued to the television, as opposed to watching my son play seven basketball games in three days in a tournament in Walnut Creek, I quite possibly would have heard more “Tiger talk.”  However, I did try to keep up as much as I could, since golf is an absolutely fascinating sport (especially if you’ve tried to play it - see my 5/9/07 blog on regretting not having taken up playing it sooner) by watching late night wrap-ups on the tube and reading accounts in each day’s paper.

Maybe I’m caught up in the whole Tigermania concept - that not only is he the best player, but he becomes even better when he doesn’t play.  Then, I simply think back to Torrey Pines and remember what he did there, in the physical condition he was in, and I have a hard time not deifying someone who could accomplish what he did in San Diego (where the weather was considerably nicer).

I remember putting away in my files a snippet of an article written about Tiger and I apologize to whomever wrote and the publication from which it came.  It summarizes much of the reason he is what he is - and a good portion of the dialogue comes from others.  It reads:

With Tiger, it always goes back to knowledge. “Along with a vision of what he wants, he always has a plan, and he has the patience, understanding and drive to take all the little steps,” says Hank Haney.  “At the beginning, there are lots of them and the progress is slow, and everybody is second-guessing him.  But eventually there are a few steps, and things come faster, and then there’s a breakthrough.  Most people, and a lot of players, don’t understand that process.  He does.”                                                              “I’ve always wanted to be an overachiever,” Tiger said. “My whole idea is, I will outwork you.  So that in the end, I will be better than you.”                                            Fred Couples says, “He can do stuff nobody else can do, wins all the time, but he never stops practicing or thinking of ways to get better.  Who’s like that?  Who’s ever been like that?  I guess Michael Jordan, maybe Jerry Rice.”

And that’s why there are so few guys that great - and why it would take a real persuasive argument to make me think, for one moment, that the winner of the recently completed British Open wouldn’t have been Tiger Woods.  He exemplifies the oft-repeated slogan regarding successful people:

“The difference between ordinary and extraordinary is the ‘extra.’”                     

Back from the (final) weekend high school basketball tournament of the summer.  It was in Walnut Creek, CA and there can’t be too many better places to be (on the mainland anyway) for better weather this time of the year.  Near the end of this week, I’ll be off to Michael Jordan Flight School and when I get back from Santa Barbara - another beautiful weather destination (c’mon, you didn’t think MJ would hold a camp where you’d have to suffer through heat and humidity), there will be some pretty funny blogs about the goings on there (especially if it’s like any of the past MJ sessions - see the 8/15 entry and the second one on 8/14 from last summer).  As for today’s entry:

September 7, 1979 marked the birth of ESPN, the brainchild of Bill Rasmussen.  Shortly after being fired by the New England Whalers on Memorial Day Weekend in 1978, Rasmussen set his sights on what to do next.  He felt the nation’s sports fans were being shortchanged by having the capability of only viewing sports on television on the Big Three networks (ABC, NBC, and CBS for you youngers readers who think KG, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce when you hear the term, “Big 3″).

Sports on TV all the time seemed like a sure fire winner, as well as a logical idea for a country of 1) sports-obsessed fans and 2) a group, growing daily in numbers, of couch potatoes.  Needless to say, it worked out quite nicely for Bill - and the rest of us.

One problem: how can a network fill 24 hours each and every day with sports?  The first live televised sporting event on ESPN was a Kentucky Bourbons vs. Milwaukee Schlitz Slo-Pitch Softball World Series game.  I can’t tell you who won (and not because it occurred before Tivo).  His next brilliant move (after thinking up the concept of ESPN, not televising the softball game) was buying up every available second of NCAA March Madness, owned by NBC, a station that, in no way, quenched the college hoops fans’ unquenchable thirst for the greatest televised spectacle in the country.  (I say that with no hint of prejudice, although I did spend the greatest thirty years of my life - thusfar - as an NCAA intercollegiate men’s basketball coach).

No one can begin to argue with the success of Bill Rasmussen or ESPN but some of the ideas that are televised are either a test of the limits of super-fandom or are a joke in the back offices in Bristol, i.e. “Hey, let’s try to think up something completely idiotic and see how many people will respond” (the ability for someone to “voice” their opinion by voting on their computer only adds to the jocularity at ESPN).  

And so was born the “Question of the Day.”  Example: Which do you think is most likely: a) MJ really wears Hanes, b) Tiger really drives a Buick, c) Shaq really uses Icy Hot or d) Peter Griffin really eats at Subway?  Vote online and we’ll have the answer for you by the end of SportsCenter (because there’s no other reason to watch the rest of the show since if something significant happened, you already know the outcome).

Each year, the staff comes up with whackier promotions/contests.  The answer to the trivia question, “What are the only two days of the year that none of the top four professional leagues (NFL, NBA, NHL and MLB) play a game?” is, I believe, the day before and the day after baseball’s All-Star Game.  MLB is off during the days surrounding the All-Star Game, the NFL has yet to start and the NBA and NHL have recently completed their Finals (give them time, though - either of the last two will soon have their Finals stretch to where it’s competing against “Home Run Derby”).  Something needs to be televised and, although there will undoubtedly be some lawsuit, accusation of wrongdoing, etc. during that time, ESPN needs something that’s on the calendar, something concrete (just in case everybody decides to behave).

This year’s burning hot question is “Where is Titletown, USA?”  There were nearly 150 cities nominated, including New Lothrop, MI (somehow, Detroit and Ann Arbor made the group of finalists, depressing many of the New Lothropers), Woodstock, GA (I went to college in the late ’60s and if a Woodstock were going to be considered Titletown, it wouldn’t be the one in Georgia), Bemus Point, NY (once again, the citizens of BP take a back seat to those millions in NYC), Saint Paris, OH (if Cleveland, Cincinnati, Dayton and Toledo couldn’t make the cut, did the people of St. Paris really think they could sneak in?), Montezuma, KS (revenge factor?) and Watertown, SD (sorry, South Dakota, but if you want to be taken seriously as Titletown, the home of the Terry Redlin Art Center shouldn’t get the nod over Mt. Rushmore). 

The finalists range from Williamsport, PA (the home of the Little League World Series), to Massillon, OH (for high school football) to college campus towns like Ann Arbor, MI and Columbus, OH (can’t have one without the other), Gainesville, FL and Knoxville, TN (representing the SEC - and don’t think Lexington, KY; Baton Rouge, LA and Tuscaloosa, AL aren’t a hootin’ and a hollerin’); Chapel Hill, NC (ACC rep), Lawrence, KS (reppin’ the Midwest), Palo Alto, CA (to prove there’s no East Coast bias); New York, Detroit, Boston, LA, SF, Chicago and Pittsburgh (the power cities), and not to be outdone by the “big boys and girls,” Valdosta, GA and Parkersburg, WV).  Throw in Green Bay, WI because they need some love, what with all that Brett Favre thing going on and Louisville, KY for U of L and the ponies (further upsetting Lexington) and you have your twenty finalists.

How can any sane person even begin to argue which city on that list should be called Titletown, USA?  That’s not the point.  It gets people watching, even though that was probably the farthest thing from Bill Rasmussen’s mind when he conceived ESPN.  The lesson he learned was to take heed of Alexander Graham Bell’s advice:

“Sometimes we stare so long at a door that is closing that we see too late the one that is open.”

         ¼/p>

John Daly’s latest outburst has many wondering if he’s finally hit rock bottom.  He claims former swing coach, Butch Harmon, who many consider the best in the business, “destroyed my life for a little bit.” 

Daly says Harmon lied about his antics, one of which was drinking at a Hooters’ tent and subsequently apologized to him about the remarks, telling Daly he would recant those statements.  For his part, Harmon merely said he told Daly he was sorry for Daly and his behavior, not what he (Harmon) had said and had not recanted the statements, nor had he any plans to do so.  In a thinly veiled threat, Daly said it would be best for Harmon to stay as far away from him as possible.

The John Daly story has been documented so many times, even non-golf fans can tell you who John Daly is.  Blessed with ungodly talent, he has put on displays of professional golf that left fans and experts spellbound.  He’s also put on displays of misconduct that left them with the same feeling.

His lifestyle, starting (and maybe eventually ending) with booze, gambling, an admitted sex addiction and simply outrageous behavior, e.g. playing a round topless (displaying a less than sculpted torso), has made many wonder why someone so talented would sabotage a career that had the potential of cracking the lists of all-time greats?  In dealing with the media, Daly makes public personal information most people in their right minds would never want anyone to know, shortcomings the average person would be seeking help to cure.  In some cases, he’s tried to cure them (three stops at the Betty Ford Clininc). 

John Daly is the original “Good Time Charlie.”  He just happens to have a ton more talent than Charlie could ever have wished for.  He’s lived life to the fullest - “acceptable behavior” and “moderation” be damned - and admits as much.  When this is “how you roll,” it shouldn’t come as a surprise that someone who tried to help you became frustrated.  Whether it’s called, he “told it like it was” or “destroyed my life a little,” the hurtful comments you felt ought to set you to reassessing your life - for the who-knows-how-many-eth-time. 

Vince Lombardi put it best:

“The quality of your life is directly proportional to your commitment to excellence.”

Several years ago, the Major League Baseball All-Star Game ended in a tie, so declared by the commissioner everyone loves to pick on, Bud Selig.  This year, the game went 15 innings and nearly five hours.  It was called a classic.

Yet, had Michael Young not come through with a sacrifice fly in the 15th, the game would have continued with position players pitching, making for neat water cooler talk, but certainly not what an all-star game should be.  So, once again, Selig would have been forced to make a decision - play on or call the game a tie.

Since the game ended, I’ve heard the “talking heads” expound both sides.  While one commentator said, although it was an epic game, how much greater it would have been had it gone on (”Imagine what dads would have been able to tell their grandkids!”), another pointed out how upset Phillies’ fans ought to be, seeing their ace reliever, Brad Lidge, get up on many different occasions and throw upwards of 100 pitches, something he’d never do for the team that’s paying him to save games and get them into the post season.  Great for debate, not so for the guy at the top, Commissioner Selig, who just seems to have that look that makes people want to belittle him.  Although I don’t know Bud Selig, nor have I ever met him, I find it hard to believe he became as successful as he is by being the fool many want us to believe he is.  As has been well-documented, he is, and always has been, a die-hard fan of the game, so it must truly hurt to hear others who don’t (or barely) know him make such uninformed remarks. 

Had this year’s game gone on and he decided, once more, to call it a tie (which, by the way, I happened to think was the correct decision the first time he did it), he would have gotten roasted by the fans.  If he let them play it out (especially if an injury was to occur), he would be excoriated by (many of the same) people.

Hence, the job description for MLB Commissioner must be that of the anti-bureaucrat, who Brooks Atkinson once described as:

“The perfect bureaucrat everywhere is the man who manages to make no decisions and escape all responsibility.”

Shortly after the conclusion of last football season, fans around the nation witnessed an emotional press conference in which Brett Favre tearfully retired from the sport he so obviously had poured his heart and soul into since his days in the youth league.  It was a sad day, but one which every athlete eventually faces at one time or another.

The most difficult part of retiring, other than realizing the comraderie, competition, adulation and, for the athletes of the past twenty years or so, incredible pay checks are going to be no more, is the timing of the decision.  As has happened to other greats (and not-so-greats), Brett found he had second thoughts.  Not altogether surprising, having watched the boyish enthusiasm and intense competitive spirit he displays when he plays. 

His story is no worse than any of the others who’ve traveled the same path - with one exception.  He played for a team that is owned by the community and now he’s decided he wants to come back.  And, basically, his “owners” want him back.  But, and here’s the rub, the owners aren’t the decision-makers.  And lucky for the Green Bay Packers they’re not. 

Fans are a fickle breed.  They love Brett Favre because he is the All-American boy, because of the family values he represents, because of the personal problems he endured, but most of all, because he helps the Packers win.  He was the quarterback on a Super Bowl Championship team and somehow, it seems championships mean more to the people of Green Bay than they do other cities.  To put it in perspective, Green Bay, WI is the 233rd largest city in the country and has almost the identical population of Clarksville, TN.  How proud do you think the people of Clarksville would be if they were given an NFL franchise and, at some point, it won the Super Bowl?  Green Bay’s done that - and then some.

Few people believe the Packers wouldn’t be a better team if Favre were the quarterback and Aaron Rodgers his backup than if Rodgers were to start and Brian Brohm were the backup.  But that thinking, as most fan-thinking, is short-term.  Eventually, the Packers had to deal with the fact Brett Favre wasn’t going to be their QB.  Because of Brett’s press conference last fall, they felt this was that year.  They came to grips with it, handed the team over to Rodgers and he has been trying to win the guys over (as any successful quarterback must) during the off-season.  Allowing Favre to return now would create chaos - and by no means, make the Packers the odds-on Super Bowl favorites.

Bringing him back would certainly polarize the team, a situation which has disaster written all over it.  The team’s other options each have serious problems, too.  One is to release him, the other to trade  him.  Before anything can happen, Favre has to write a letter and submit it to the league office, stating he wants to be reinstated.  To date, this hasn’t happened.

Releasing him certainly can’t be an option.  Brett Favre is very good at reading defenses.  I think his read on that choice would the same as any other rational thinking individual.  If he somehow were transformed into the Packers’ general manager, he’d never let a Brett Favre play for Minnesota or anyone else in the division - especially when the club gets nothing in return.  Trading him is very complicated as well.  How do you trade a Hall-of-Fame quarterback?  Even if the team gets a great player, a couple of great players or draft pick(s) that turn into great players, they’ll always be known as the team that traded Green Bay’s favorite son.  Of all the options, however, this is the best one, but the complications might prove impossible. 

I may be selling Brett’s naivete short.  In a television interview in which the question about the Packers moving on without him, Favre was quoted as saying, “By me retiring March 3rd, I knew that could possibly happen.”  Possibly!  I’ve been a sports fan for over half a century, during which time, I’ve seen superstars in all sports retire and never, never, has a franchise folded when the player left.  Possibly?

Yet, although I really don’t believe Favre is naive, I don’t think he’s conniving either.  I simply feel it’s a situation of “buyer’s (or retiree’s) remorse.”  At heart, he’s still a kid and just can’t see a life without football, independent of how he knows his body will feel on Monday mornings.  He knows the Packer fans are on his side and it’s a card he’s chosen to play.  We speak of drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, over-eating and gambling.  To a professional athlete like Brett Favre, add “playing” to the list of addictions.

As far as what Brett, the Packers’ front office and their fans will do, all will eventually have to deal with the line made famous by Ulysses S. Grant:

“Live life the way it is, not the way you want it to be.”

So far, the “feel-good” story of the year has to be Josh Hamilton and all he’s accomplished thus far this season, capped off with the amazing display of home run hitting during the first round of this year’s Home Run Derby.  Not only did he knock out a record 28 homers (before making 10 “outs,” i.e. anything that’s not a homer counts as an out), but he hit the “no doubt” kind (three over 500′) and, during one stretch hit 13 in a row!

Granted, he selected his personal pitcher, 71-year-old Clay Counsil, but each of the other contestants had the same option and chose someone who they thought would consistently put the ball in their wheelhouse.  Possibly the best line of the night was by portly former major leaguer and current ESPN studio analyst, John Kruk.  It was mentioned, about the time Hamilton launched number 25, that in Kruk’s best year, he hit only 21 dingers.  Kruk remarked he would have hit a lot more had Clay Counsil been pitching.

Hamilton absolutely bombed home runs, although none of them found their way out of the House That Ruth Built (no one’s ever hit a home run that left Yankee Stadium), a comment Josh had made earlier in the week that people ought to be on the lookout for.  “Bombed,” though, is a word that used to have a different meaning in Josh Hamilton’s life.

Considered the best prospect in baseball - ever , Hamilton was a high school phenom who allegedly hit a home run 549′, could nail a runner from the warning track and threw 96 mph fast balls as a left-handed pitcher.  He was considered the ultimate prospect, a five-tool guy, and that was only because there weren’t any other possible tools in the box.  In reality, however, Tampa Bay, the club that signed him to a record (near) $4 million signing bonus, considerd a sixth tool: character.  And Hamilton came up straight A’s in this category as well.  Only after a car slammed into the vehicle that Josh and his mom were in, did problems arise.  Mom (and dad) went home to rehab and since his injury wouldn’t allow him to play, he had too much free time - away from his parents - who had been traveling along with the team, following his career.

We’ve heard the story before: falls in with the wrong crowd, gets introduced to alcohol and drugs, makes bad decisions.  One night, he staggered into his grandmother’s house and, as grandma’s tend to do, by the time he’d left, he decided to make his life right.  Three years later, he’s clean and the rage of Major League Baseball. 

One shrewd move made by the Texas Rangers, his current employers, was to hire Johnny Narron, someone who knew Hamilton and had coached him with the Reds (his former team) and as far back as when Josh was an 8-year-old, playing in a basketball league with Narron’s son.  Hamilton goes nowhere without Narron and the two spend as much time discussing religion as they do anything else.  The key is the same as with any true relationship: it’s built on trust.  In fact, Hamilton trusts Narron more than he trusts himself, which is why he won’t eat with his teammates or go out at night alone.  He feels everything’s under control, but there’s no reason to even come close to anything that might become a temptation.  So, where Hamilton goes, Narron goes with him.

On Monday night, at the Home Run Derby, Josh Hamilton had over 50, 000 fans (and make no mistake about it, New York fans are the most knowledgeable - and unforgiving - in the world of sports) chanting his name.  He said it gave him “chills.”  Yet, here was a guy who had earlier derailed his own career.  It makes me wonder - How many other people are out there sabotaging their own chance of realizing their potential?  One would be too many.

At the All-Star break, Hamilton is hitting .310 with 21 home runs and 95 RBI.  He has a shot at winning the Triple Crown.  Joe Morgan, ESPN color commentator (and someone who knows of which he speaks), made the observation that it’s mind boggling that a guy could hit major league pitching so well after spending three years away from the game.  Morgan said a one month layoff would destroy most hitters’ rhythm and confidence.

On October 6, 2005, when he went to his grandmother’s house, at the depths of despair, Josh Hamilton ought to be able to relate to the comment made by Albert Schweitzer:

“In everyone’s life, at some time, our inner fire goes out.  It is then burst into flame by an encounter with another human being.  We should all be thankful for those people who rekindle the inner spirit.”

Just got back from a weekend basketball tournament in Sacramento.  Fun time, but now let’s get back to blogging.

Undoubtedly, the greatest problem in the country today is: People refuse to take responsibility for the actions.  From a parent’s, boss’ (or even society’s) standpoint, it would read: People are not held accountable for their actions.  Here’s a reprint from the early days, i.e. when hits weren’t nearly as high (thank you, readers) as they are now:

Rather than get into a long blog, today’s entry is a quote from Stephen Covey which, if practiced by every man, woman and child would dramatically improve the state of the union.

“You can’t talk yourself out of problems you behave yourself into.”

How powerful is that line! I used to half-kiddingly say that when people make mistakes today,  they take one of three methods to extricate themselves.

1) They blame someone else, 2) If no one else can be blamed, they lie, or 3) they sue.

After watching and listening to the news, reading the papers and teaching today’s youth, I’m not so certain that’s not right on. Covey’s line would improve our physical situation and our mental health exponentially. 

Try it.  I am & my wife and I preach it to our two sons.  Although there will inevitably be slip-ups (in which case, a lesson is learned), more often than not you’re pleased with their (or your) growth.  When people (especially those close to you - including yourself!) practice accountability, another line fits in nicely.  It’s from my late mentor, John Savage:

“The softest pillow you can lay your head on at night is a that of a clear conscience.”¼/p>

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>