Jack’s Blog

First of all, thanks for the overwhelming number of responses I got to that frightening last blog.  While I’m not completely out of the woods, I’m 95% better than I was when that bit of horror was posted.

Maybe, although I certainly hope not, it takes a harrowing experience like what I went - and am continuing to go - through to really make us understand how great we have it.  I did get home in time to see our older son, Andy, who could only afford a quick trip, arriving late, late Wednesday night and leaving Friday at about noon, due to an on-campus (he’s a junior at the University of California-Irvine) job he has. 

The academics at college at terrific (especially at a UC school), but what I think the best thing about going to college is the overall education a young man or lady gets.  This includes the academic, athletic, social and financial parts (sounds like the beginning of my recruiting pitch when I was coaching). 

When I am asked the difference between working with high school kids and college kids, my initial answer is always the same.  In high school you have to deal with immaturity, while in college, the main problem is irresponsibility.  The academics in college are demanding and until a kid realizes it’s a whole different ballgame from high school, he or she will suffer - sometimes to the point of dismissal.  While Andy never was near anything like that, his grades, initially, weren’t what they should have been (or what his mom and I expected).  Sound familiar, parents of college kids?  Anyone who knows me, has heard me say at least a zillion times how tragic it is for someone not to live up to their potential.  After a year or so, Andy figured it out and his grades reflect that. 

The social part was never a problem for ol’ Andy-Boy.  He immediately pledged and was in the first SAE class of his freshman year.  He absolutely LOVES frat life (this year, he’s living in the house) and I suspect his minor slippage in grades might have something to do with excessive frat time.

Athletically, his “formal” career ended when he played in Clovis West HS’s last tournament basketball game, but intramurals, naturally representing SAE, has fulfilled his competitive jones - be it in softball, coaching the basketball team or any other of the innane intramural events at the university.  

The number one most difficult factor for us, as parents, was to get him to understand the financial strain going to an expensive college like UCI can be on a family.  California has a unique system (and a wonderful one for its residents) in that the junior colleges share such a close relationship to the four year schools, e.g. classes for the first two years are similar at each level and, more importantly, they transfer without penalty.  Since JC’s might cost (assuming the student lives at home) as little as $1,000-1,500 a year, while four year schools, such as UC’s can carry a price tag of $25,000 & up per annum, spending a couple years at home is a prudent fiscal move.

My wife and I, however, had a completely different collegiate experience.  While I went to a small school in NJ (Upsala College) on a (partial) football scholarship, my wife went where she’d always dreamed of attending, the University of Tennessee, her state institution.  While there was no comparison between the two (Upsala doesn’t even exist anymore), we both left with the identical belief about our time in college.  It was the best four years of our life!

For that reason, we were committed to have our boys attend the four-year school of their choice.  Andy’s high school basketball team played in a summer tournament at UCI every year and, while it’s a highly rated academic institution, being as close as it is to Newport Beach and the Pacific Ocean are pretty enticing selling points too.

Back to the finances.  Andy got a job at a popular on-campus pizza joint.  He’s learned responsibility accompanies the pay, which comes in quite handy.  It keeps gas in his car, which by the way, he’s also helping pay off, gives him much needed spending money (think about how we never had money in college).  But, realizing that sacrifices have to be made - like not spending the entire weekend with your close high school buddies during Thanksgiving break - because the store’s open and the owner needs someone to be able to count on, whether to wait or bus tables, or make deliveries.  That, in itself, might be as necessary a lesson in team play and responsibility as anything he learns in a classroom.

He’s also taken my advice - that of having the discipline to “pay yourself first.”  Whatever you get - salary or tips, immediately put 10% in your savings account (which prior to the job was always hovering around zero).  Even if you only get $10 in tips for the whole night, put a buck in your savings.  Since he has to pay for his parking (the university ought to be arrested for what they charge - per month!) and his fraternity dues and . . . , it’s been an invaluable suggestion.  And he told me as much during his brief stay.

The birth of a child is a miracle.  And watching one grow into a successful, responsible adult is reason enough to be thankful.  He has told me on several occasions that he remembers the statement I use as my signature line when I speak:

“The greatest tragedy in life in unrealized potential, due to injury, death, not getting an opportunity, or, worst of all, LACK OF EFFORT- because that’s the only one YOU CAN CONTROL.”               

As I posted before I left, I spent the past two days at Stanford Hospital.  The reason: for several years I have been dealing with severe back pain.  In 2005, I had a morphine pump implanted in the right side of my abdomen.  Yeah, that severe.

The pump worked wonderfully for about 3 1/2 years, but recently I’ve developed - not only a tolerance for morphine, rendering it ineffective - but “morphine toxicity.”  These symptoms (affecting my brain and breathing) caused my doctor at the Stanford Pain Management Clinic to make the decision to get me off morphine.  That was the reason for my recent trip north.

When I got there, it seemed that Murphy’s Law took over and a series of mishaps took place.  Actually, that’s what this blog was going to be about (”Even the Best Have Their Bad Days”).  Until what followed.

I had a few procedures done at Stanford, one of which was similar to one I had in 2005, around 3 months after the pump was implanted.  While trying to aspirate cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) from the catheter (the first time) and the remaining morphine (this time), apparently, there was an interruption in the flow of the drug.  The first time this happened, I went into withdrawl - all the normal symptoms (sweating, itching, flulike symptons, irritablility), plus one other.  I had this godawful smell (when I would breathe through my nose) and taste (when I would breathe through my mouth).  A trip to the local ER got me back to “normal” the first time.  Not so lucky this time around.

I told the doctors at Stanford I was experiencing this identical smell/taste on Tuesday morning (prior to my third and last procedure).  I was told that it probably had to do with lingering morphine that wasn’t yet out of my system and it would pass, allowing the new drug to take over. 

Two or so months ago, I had made an appointment with my surgeon (the one who fixed me after the first withdrawl session by accurately predicting the catheter had been dislodged) for this past Tuesday (I hadn’t seen him in over a year).  That date was the first he had open.

However, since our school district gives us the entire Thanksgiving week off, Monday was the day we chose (about three weeks ago) to do the change of drugs in the pump.  Although my surgeon’s office is in the same building, the fact I had been admitted to the hospital precluded my leaving my room to see him.  I asked if it was possible for him to come to my room, but told he couldn’t do that because his entire afternoon was booked and I understood. 

For whatever reason, my pain doctor did not show up either, mainly, I believe, because she doesn’t actually do these procedures.  Still, I was disappointed I didn’t get to see her.  I was discharged yesterday morning.  I had told each of the three doctors and the nurse of this “smell/taste” problem, but was told they couldn’t do anything about it, and that it should pass.  It hasn’t.

I’ve called the Betty Ford Clinic and spoke to a counselor as well as a counselor at a detox facility in southern California.  Neither had ever heard of anything resembling this obnoxious smell/taste problem when it came to withdrawl.  The following is a copy of the text I sent my pain doctor - and herein lies my plea to you, the reader.  Please read on.

“Is there any way you could do some research on withdrawl symptoms?  I am exoeriencing an incredibly offensive smell and taste, exactly like I had the last time I went through withdrawl. 

“Imagine yourself stuck in a crowded elevator and someone passes gas.  You’re revolted and try to hold your breath.  Then the elevator breaks down.  Every breath you take sickens you.  Panic sets in.  If someone told you help was on the way in a minute or ten minutes or an hour, you could handle it.  But if not and you thought there was no end in sight, . . .

“That’s how I feel.  Can you help?  Doctor —– said he didn’t know and it would probably wear off.  It hasn’t.  And I’m in my second day.” 

I haven’t received a reply from the doctor yet. 

If there is someone out there who can give me some direction, I would be oh so thankful. And what better time of year?  �

For the second time in as many years, I’ll be checking into Stanford Hospital on the Monday of Thanksgiving week (luckily, our school district gives us the whole week of Thanksgiving off).  As anyone who’s read this blog more than a few times is aware, I’ve undergone numerous back surgeries and still have to deal with back pain on a daily basis.

With as many advances as are being made in the medical world - and with the people at Stanford being some of the leaders in research - I know that one of these days, I’ll be leaving there as close to pain-free as someone my age (who’s in generally good health) can be.

I’ll be in the hospital until probably Wednesday, at which time I hope to get released early enough so I can make it back to co-host The Jerry Tarkanian Show which is on ESPN 1430 AM at 6:00 from the Red Zone Sports Grill in Fresno.  Last year I rushed home, was lucky to hit no traffic and made it just before “tipoff.”  Hoping not to have to cut it so close this year. 

So, . . . if all goes well, this blog will return Wednesday night - at the latest Thanksgiving night.  In the meantime, I plan on listening to (the unabridged version of) Larry Bird & Magic Johnson’s book on CD (so far, it’s nearly as good as they were) in the car on the way up and back I’m sure there will be some future blogs come otu of that book), correcting over 100 math tests I gave last Thursday & Friday and taking baby gift orders (the newly designed website should be up and running by December and it will be Awesome! - the capital A for Dick Vitale).  By the way, it will still have the same address: www.CuteBabyNameGifts.com.  Our artists have just completed one (SHANE) for a newborn in LaJolla, a baby (SARAI) born to an NBA starter and his wife, two of them for seven-year old BFF’s (MINDY & LOLA) and are preparing for the Xmas onslaught.

Other than that, it’s catch-up time for typing the book notes that I mail to friends and (mostly former) colleagues, reading (although with the meds I’m on, it makes it difficult to focus as long as I used to - like reading for the entire six-hour flight to Hawaii during my tenure at Fresno State) and my new form of exercise, yoga, which I wish I’d picked up a lot earlier in life.

A friend in town, who reads these posts daily, asked me what I was blogging for today. When I told him, he said it was more of a tweet than a blog.  If someone had made that statement when I was growing up, a fight would have surely followed.  

It seems like a great many of the really good quotes are by “Author Unknown” and this one, regarding the message at this time of year, is certainly on that list:   

“If you haven’t all the things you want, be grateful for the things you don’t have that you wouldn’t want.”

For the record, let me state that I am in full agreement that people who make slurs about someone’s race, heritage, sexual orientation or ethnicity should be made aware that this behavior is unacceptable.  Such comments, especially when made with an explicit intention to be mean and hateful, have no business in a civilized society and the offender needs to be, in most cases, educated that the world is “shrinking” and no longer do people only live and associate with “their own kind.” 

But, recently, people have seemed to take sensitivity to levels never before been discovered.  Granted, many of the remarks said in the ’60s and ’70s - and even the late 20th century - are now, (and ought to be, as the world shrinks to a civilized melting pot), taboo.  However, some of the statements that people claim offend them are a product of overly sensitive folks, many of whom I’m thoroughly convinced are looking for either their “15 minutes of fame” or “a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.”  And, please, don’t tell me someone is flipping through the Rolodex for their lawyer’s number for my last remark.  If you don’t know what I’m referring to, I sincerely say, “Thank you!”

The latest “speech criminals” to be disciplined (and worse, embarrassed) are the Los Angeles Clippers’ broadcast team, Ralph Lawler and Michael Smith.  The reason for the sullying of their names and each of them having to bear the moniker of “politically incorrect zealot” is due to a brief conversation they had during a recent Clippers’ telecast. An introduction of these borderline felons would be helpful in explaining their heinous crime.

Lawler is 71 years old and is currently in his 31st year with the Clips, having broadcast around 2400 regular and post season games (and anyone who has even the slightest knowledge of the Clippers knows that means nearly all of those contests were of the regular season variety).  Smith is in his 12th year.  Neither of these men are considered novices in the business.  What follows is a transcript (taken from the Los Angeles Times‘ website) of the viciously cruel comments that resulted in their having to serve a one-game suspension (and subsequently caused the management of the LA Clippers’ organization to issue a public apology for their two long-time employees). Smith: “Look who’s in.” Lawler: “Hamed Haddadi. Where’s he from?” Smith: “He’s the first Iranian to play in the NBA.” (Smith pronounced Iranian as “Eye-ranian,” a pronunciation that offended the viewer who complained.) Lawler: “There aren’t any Iranian players in the NBA,” repeating Smith’s mispronunciation. Smith: “He’s the only one.” Lawler: “He’s from Iran?” Smith: “I guess so.” Lawler: “That Iran?” Smith: “Yes.” Lawler: “The real Iran?” Smith: “Yes.” Lawler: “Wow. Haddadi that’s H-A-D-D-A-D-I.” Smith: “You’re sure it’s not Borat’s older brother?” Smith: “If they ever make a movie about Haddadi, I’m going to get Sacha Baron Cohen to play the part.” Lawler: “Here’s Haddadi. Nice little back-door pass. I guess those Iranians can pass the ball.” Smith: “Especially the post players. Lawler: “I don’t know about their guards.”  

Let me pose a question.  Are you as irate as I am?  Before you answer, first allow me to say, it was a rhetorical question, meant to come across as tongue-in-cheek. 

Are you freakin’ kiddin’ me?!?  The Times story also said “The on-air banter offended a viewer who e-mailed Fox to complain.”  A VIEWER (as in one).  Not one thousand guys, not one group of guys, not one of their sponsors.  Just a viewer.  And, although I’m not a gambling man, I’d be willing to place more than a few shekels that this complaint, whether - via email, phone call, flyer, letter, sit-in, demonstation - is not the first of this joker’s career - as verbally battered victim.

Have we, as a nation of educated humans, lost our abilty to distinguish light banter, intended merely as a form of levity and used to break up the monotony and boredom of the day’s events (like watching a Clippers’ broadcast) from those comments made to intentionally disparage a group of people?  Remarks like those said - from the heart - in hatred.  Like those of Michael Richards, Ann Coulter and Jesse Jackson? The Lawler-Smith conversation was merely a rather inept attempt at humor.  The others, and you wouldn’t be too far off the mark to include Don Imus’ now famous commentary with them, were in an entirly different and infinitely more egregious category.

Is what happened to the Clippers’ guys here to stay?  Is there anyone out there (and, unfortunately, there probably is) who would be offended if a broadcast team said, “Well, the Bulls are in town which means their ‘Eye-talian’ coach, Vinny Del Negro, will be in the building.”

“Are you sure he’s not Rocky Balboa’s older brother?”

“If they make a movie about D’Antoni, I’m going to get Sylvester Stallone play the part.”

Should someone truly be offended by those comments, I can only say that if experiencing such a horrific attack is the worst thing that ever happens to them, they’ve lived an extraordinarily charmed life.

The absurdity of the suspension of Lawler and Smith can only be summed up with a quote that matches it in logic.  It was uttered by that famous philospher, Mike Tyson:

“My biggest weakness is my sensitivity.  I am too sensitive a person.”

As a coach, you know your fans want you to win.  Even if they hate you, they still want their team to experience the taste of victory.  Then, your detractors can always dream, maybe you’ll get another job - or even better, maybe you’ll do something foolish (verbally abuse your assistants, players, secretary, somebody else’s wife, or even your own body) and get caught on a morals charge so, not only can the team win, but you’ll be dismissed.  To a disgruntled fan, that is the true daily double.

All coaches know this and live with it.  Maybe they upset a fan because the coach was about to miss his plane, so he blew off a request for an autograph or picture.  Or, maybe the coach is truly an egomaniacal butthead.  Whichever, the coach realizes pissed off fans come with the job.

But how about when your own people start rooting against you.  Example: Last night, Utah State played a football game against Boise State.  Each of the first two times the Aggies scored, it was to tie the game.  There was utter and complete jubilation for those pulling for USU.  Wait!  What exactly do you think Karl Benson, the WAC commissoner, who’s been politicking (as he should be) for Boise State to get into a BCS bowl, was thinking?  “C’mon, Aggies, play hard, play well, but don’t you know what the impact of you guys winning would do to our league?“  His fears were unfounded as Boise ripped off the next zillion points in a row on their way to another blowout (albeit of a WAC school, providing the double-edged sword that, sure the Broncos are good, but look at how weak the rest of their league is).

You think Benson (closet) cheering for the Broncos is bad?  What do you think was running through the minds of Utah State’s administration as dear ol’ USU was showing they weren’t about to back down to one of the nation’s top teams?  By administration, I mean from the prez on down.  Unless the financial condition of institutions of higher learning in Utah are drastically different than that of other states (like every other one in the union), the financial hit Utah State would take if a WAC opponent (since that’s all they’ve got left) beats Boise State and thwarts their chance of going to a BCS bowl, is astronomical.  Not only for Boise (who would take the major brunt of the financial loss), but for the rest of the WAC schools too.  The mere pittance each of the other WAC schools would be awarded (compared to what the BCS schools divvy up - even those whose football team has won once - and probably against a D-II squad - in OT) is a big-time line item for schools in the WAC, Mountain West, Conference USA, MAC and whoever else I’m leaving out due to the fact, well, they’re just not as well-known as the BCS fellas.  It stands to reason that every other AD is pulling for Boise State to win each week, if for no other reason than financial, why is it so far fetched an idea that the director of athletics of the “opponent of the day” would be able to switch loyalties so easily.  After all, isn’t it, ultimately, the AD’s main job to balance the budget.  So, it stands to reason that if he wants to keep his job, the logical choice, in terms of his preference for the outcome of such a game . . .

Throw in the loss of publicity (if the Broncos do make it, everybody - with the exception of Goliath’s faithful - will be pulling for David and if they don’t get in, they’ll be the national martyr of the year - again - for getting snubbed) and it’s a wonder there’s not an unwritten rule among the WAC teams.  Coaches, though, being the rather competitve sort, know that beating Boise State will do wonders for their recruiting (or so they’ve led themselves to believe). 

Having been on the coaching side, while sitting on the Executive Committe of the Fresno State athletics department (by invitation of the director), I had my eyes opened to the reality of conferences trying to play with the big boys without the big boy weapons.

Maybe satirist Kin Hubbard said it best:

“It’s no disgrace to be poor, but it might as well be.”    �

Lesser known schools are notorious for complaining that the big name teams will only play them if the game is played on the home court of the “big-time” college.  “How can we get our strength of schedule up - without ruining our won-loss record - when none of the power schools will play us?”  They do have a point.  I’ve worked both sides of this aisle.

Why won’t the high-major school give his little brother a break?  There are the obvious reasons: 1) It’s a no-win situation.  If the favorite wins, they were supposed to, but if somehow, David beats Goliath, it’s a tragedy (sometimes to the tune of a pink slip).  2) The big guys need home games - to help the budget & the season ticket package, not to mention the record.  3) Home games help a team stay in rhythm, shoot in a venue where they’re comfortable, keep players from missing class and allows the guys to sleep in their own beds (you hope), i.e. keep to their normal routine.

There’s an additional reason the big(ger) guys won’t play the lesser known folks and it was on display last night at Key Arena in Seattle where Fresno State played Seattle University.  The Bulldogs are by no means a big-time team from a national standpoint, but they are much higher up the food chain than the Red Hawks.  Make no mistake, it was a big favor that Fresno did by playing Seattle, long a Division II team, best known for having produced Elgin Baylor (or even, Clint Richardson) in the Emerald City, even if it may have been a home-and-home contract. 

What happened is a major factor why this scenario is seldom seen, and I’m sure is causing the Bulldogs to second guess the wisdom of making that decision.  The game was close (a bad omen), the crowd (at the first home game in Key Arena, where the team which defected to Oklahoma City of all places, the Seattle Sonics, used to play) was getting lathered as the contest became “winnable” and, the officials, being human, seemed to get caught up in the excitement.  Keep in mind that after Fresno State leaves town, these referees will probably never see the Bulldogs again.  But they will continue to officiate SU games, the institution that is signing their game checks.

I watched the game in its entirety and Fresno State got as badly homered as I’d seen in many a year.  First of all, let me point out that I am on record as staunchly opposed to blaming referees for losing games.  This only serves as an “out” for the players (and coaches).  This one, being a one-point contest (85-84), meant there was plenty of blame to spread around to players and coaches for miscues they made without ever bringing the officials into the conversation.

That said, there were some absolutely egregious calls - Bulldog players getting mugged and either seeing no call or having the ‘Dogs being called for traveling.  However, the worst call of the night, at a crucial time - and being so strategic in nature (it was one the Red Hawks faithful would have prayed for - or paid for) that it cast doubt on the referee’s integrity.  It was the one that fouled out Paul George, far and away, FSU’s best player. Granted, block-charge calls are the most difficult to make for an official.  Not this one.  The replay showed exactly what the naked eye saw.  A block, maybe a no call.  It was the kind of call that used to take place before games were shown on television.  You’d hate to think the ref out-and-out cheated, so to give him the benefit of the doubt, let’s just say he got caught up in the moment and, possibly subconsciously, realized how much of an ovation he would get if he made the call he did.  Who doesn’t like to be cheered?  The problem was the call wasn’t right - or fair!

I was in charge of scheduling at each of the last four schools at which I worked.  Whenever we played a home & home series, we always made certain we used “reverse crews,” i.e. the referees were assigned by the commisioner of the visiting team’s coneference.  They knew they were going to see you down the road and it nearly always made for a more fair game, i.e “referee advantage” to neither club.  The down side to this seemingly perfect philosphy, though, is the cost.

Obviously, in last night’s case, the officials’ expense would have been thousands more had the guys in stripes been assigned by the WAC (just as it would to assign officials from the Pacific Northwest to travel to Fresno).  And in today’s tough economic times, that “insurance policy” simply becomes cost prohibitive.

It may have been only Fresno State, but it could happen anywhere.  A win over a “higher up” opponent generates local excitement, helps recruiting and does wonders for coaches’ contracts.  Note: the flip side of that last part also rings true. 

In summary, this falls under the following creed:

“Don’t worry about things you can’t control (officials), but control the ones you can (scheduling the game in the first place).”

No one ever promoted a book as much as Bill O’Reilly did his, i.e. every night for countless nights on his national television show (talk about a great publicity campaign).  Last night, while hearing him shamelessly (as he admitted) promoting his interview with Sarah Palin (for ratings reasons, said he), I thought, “I haven’t had an excerpt, e.g a story, from my book in quite a while.” 

The following happened so long ago that the little boy I refer to in the story is in his 40’s now.  It is a cute story, nonetheless.  And, hey, if it’s good enough for O’Reilly, who am I to buck a trend?

My first job out of college was teaching math at my alma mater, Highland Park (NJ) High School.  I also coached football and basketball.  One of the other assistants on the football staff was a guy named Joe Policastro.  Joe and his wife, Mary, (who are devout Catholics) had three sons. 

One day, he came into the coaches’ locker room and told us how, the night before, he was passing by his youngest son’s room as he was saying his prayers before bed.  The little guy called Joe in and asked him, “Dad, I know who the Father is and I know who the Son is.  I think I know who the Holy Ghost is.

“So who’s ‘Amen’?”

As Muhammad Ali said:

“Children make you want to start life over.”

Recently, I’ve known several people who’ve undergone very complicated surgeries (at least they, as patients, and me, as someone very close to each of them, thought they were very complicated).  Yet each person experienced as much success as they would have hoped for, had they been asked, prior to the procedures, what result they desired.  From the doctors’ point of view - because they are so highly trained - there were no surprises, i.e. each surgery simply turned out exactly as planned.  No doubt, if the docs were questioned prior to the operation, each would have been stunned if anything other than what occurred actually took place.

Next Monday, I’m checking into Stanford Hospital (as I did the Monday of Thanksgiving week last year - thanks to our district giving us the entire Thanksgiving week off from school) for a procedure that is anything but common.  Am I worried? 

There’s no way a person can have something a sensitive as what I’m about to experience and not feel at least a bit uneasy.  But, because I’ve been in this situation before, both at Stanford and elsewhere, I’m actually looking forward to my visit - hoping it will give me the relief the doctors are relatively confident it will.  But worry?  I went back to an archived blog (from 7/7/07 - hey, lucky 7’s) and think there’s a message in it.  Unless you’ve been a loyal reader from the outset, chances are you haven’t read it - and I believe it may help your outlook too - especially if you tend to be a world class worrier.

Someone I know told me of a story about a boss who was worried because his car was in the shop, his wife was using his car and for the past couple hours he was unable to get in touch with her.  He wondered if his co-worker would give him a ride home.  When they got there, lo and behold, all was well.

The night of the 4th of July, I witnessed a mom worried because her daughter had left to walk to their house (about 1 mile away), with her friend, to get a swim suit.  Although they had only been gone 30 minutes max (since the friend had gotten there not even a half hour prior), the mother wondered why it was taking so long since “they left an hour ago.”  I guess time flies when you’re stressed.  The dad went to check and, needless to say, the girls were fine, simply strolling along at the pace teenagers without a care in the world would be traveling and, at least for that night, everyone lived happily ever after.

My wife, somewhat admittedly, is in this “Worriers Anonymous” Club.  For instance, she’ll call the airline to see if, in fact, the flight our son and I were on arrived.  I’ve never understood that.  I’ve had my share of bad luck with the airlines (as several past blogs will attest), but, what would she do if the arrival time passed and the plane hadn’t landed - call 911, the National Guard, form a search party?

Don’t misunderstand, I appreciate her concern, just as I can empathize (somewhat) with the others mentioned in this blog - as well as many other chronic worriers, but when it comes down to it, we all can learn a lesson from one of the great men of wisdom I’ve come across in my readings, Mark Twain, who said:

“I’ve had many problems in my life, most of which never happened.”

As the readers of this blog are fully aware, the large majority of my professional career was spent in the world of coaching (basketball).  Throughout the years, I made hundreds of acquaintances in the basketball community.  One of the gentlemen (and I use that word because it is a perfect description of this coach) I met a long time ago is Kevin Eastman, currently an assistant coach with the Boston Celtics.

He, rather recently, began a website, kevineastmanbasketball.com which is sensational - especially for coaches (men & women, particularly young coaches, but even the old dogs can learn a few new tricks by logging on).  The following (reprinted without his permission - I’m emailing him as soon as I hit the publish button) is his latest post.  It contains valuable information for assistant coaches. 

Since my entire college career was as an assistant of some type, I remember thinking that everything I’d ever seen in print had to do with being a head coach.  I wondered when someone would come out with some information to help assistants be better assistants.  Kevin’s blog today touched on exactly that - and it was followed by a dynamite side out-of-bounds play.  Here’s the entry:

There’s no question that a head coach has to be “on” at all times.  He has to be on when he’s in front of the fan base. He has to be on in his speeches.  He has to be on in his interviews.  He has to be on in his game time decisions.  But most importantly, he has to be on in practice.  He has to have tremendous concentration in seeing the practice and making the corrections.

As assistants we owe it to our head coaches to help our team improve every day.  Whether you have a lead voice or not, you can still help the cause.  Find ways to stay focused for your team and your own growth and future in this profession.

One thing I’d add to this wisdom is that the assistant needs to make suggestions to the head coach - even if you think it might upset your boss.  Don’t just disagree to be contentious or to have your voice heard.  And certainly, when you suggest something, make sure it is just that - a suggestion.  After all, when you get your chance, you won’t want your assistants trying to overhaul your program.  Be tactful, approach at the right time (during practice is usually not the right time) and make sure it’s within the philosophy of the head coach.  Just remember the old saying:

“If you and I agree on everything, one of us isn’t necessary.”

And, much more often than not, it’s you, the assistant who’s expendable.

Situation: The New England Patriots were up six points, 34-28, against the Indianapolis Colts, in Indy, with 2:08 to go and had possession of the ball on their own 28.             

Decision:  Punt, of course!

But head coach Bill Belichick, possibly not yet recovered from the shell shock of the Colts’ previous possession - one in which Peyton Manning took his team 79 yards in 1:52 and scored a touchdown - using no times out!), decided to go for it.  His reasoning?  His vaunted offense certainly ought to have been able to get two yards, for goodness sake.  So he went for it. 

And, got it!  Or would have, had Kevin Faulk, the receiver on the play, not bobbled the pass.  His initial reception was just beyond the 30 yard line (which would have resulted in a first down) but, once he bobbled the ball, was not given forward progress and the Pats came up about a half a yard short.

What the talking heads had only briefly mentioned, was that, on this series, due to a “miscommunication on personnel” (according to QB Tom Brady), NE was forced to take a time out.  Actually, on the possession, the Pats took two times out (their final two).  This meant that, although the completed pass was bobbled, it was by no means a foregone conclusion that Faulk came up short - and since the clock had not yet gone under two minutes, the call could be challenged.  But . . . a team needs a time out in order to challenge.  So, the Patriots had to take the official’s word for it that he spotted the ball properly.

Reactions: Sunday Night Football color man, Cris Collinsworth, vehemnetly disagreed with the decision.  ESPN analyst Trent Dilfer called it a “horrific” call and gave no wiggle room, i.e. the decision was 100% wrong - period.  Tony Dungy, a former colleague of Belichick’s (and coaches are notorious for sticking by each other because every one of them has been second guessed by people with 1/1,000,000th the amount of knowledge, so empathy runs deep) said, “You have to punt the ball.  No matter how much you respect Peyton Manning (and no one respects him more than Dungy does), you have to punt the ball.”  Even Rodney Harrison, a former player for Belichick and someone who understands the genius that is Bill Belichick, said, “This is the worst decision I’ve seen Bill Belichick make.”

Now, let’s step back, take a deep breath and give some rational, rather than emotional, thought to the decision.  Any choice anyone makes in life has a risk vs. reward factor to it.  Without prolonging this blog, the risk far outweighed the reward.

Sure, if they made it, the game would have ended.  However, the season is just a shade over midway complete.  While he is saying, “I trust you, offense, so much that I’ll risk going for it on our own 28, knowing full well, if we don’t make it, Peyton Manning will have to go (at most) a whisker under 30 yards in 2 minutes,” there’s a message he’s also sending is to his defense.  “You guys did intercept Manning twice on the day and, in general, or at least up until that last oh-so-brief-drive, did as good a job on him as we could have hoped.  But, if we punt, we’ll be giving him 70 yards and two minutes to beat us.”  With that (not so) subliminal message, is there any wonder they couldn’t stop him from engineering the winnning drive of 29 yards?

This game was the first in 88 contests that a Bill Belichick-coached team lost after being ahead by 13 or more in the fourth quarter.  Actually, the Pats were up 17 and were up 13 with less than four minutes to go! 

Although his initial reaction seemed not to be second guessing his decision, but rather, questioning whether they really didn’t make it, i.e. feeling they got a bad spot, look for Belichick, one of the greatest NFL coaches ever, to act like the leader Antoine de Saint-Exupery described:

“A chief is a man who accepts responsibility.  He says, ‘I was beaten.’  He does not say, ‘My men were beaten.’  Thus speaks a real man.”