Derek Jeter is Mr. Yankee.  The organization has even referred to him as the modern day Babe Ruth.  Fans love him, women want to be with him, men want to be like him and, more importantly than all of that, he’s led his team to World Series championships.

What could possibly ruin such a marvelous relationship?  Turns out it’s time for him to sign a new contract because he’s not quite ready to retire.  Who can blame him?  His numbers were the worst of his career but he’s still better than many at his position and he’s a colossal draw.

The Yankees have made him a rich man beyond his wildest dreams and he’s added value to one of the most popular organizations in all of sports.  The Yankees have offered him 3 additional years at $15 million per year.  Jeter’s agent, Casey Close, reportedly wants $23 million a year for 4 or 5 years.  Apparently, the talks have become so contentious that the Yanks told Jeter and Close to test the open market.

Would Derek Jeter really consider finishing his career in a uniform other than the pinstripes?  Most people think not.  They believe that if ever someone was destined to play for one team throughout his career, that person is Derek Jeter.  I can still remember when Jackie Robinson quit rather than put on a uniform other than the Dodgers (especially that of the hated Giants).

It’s hard to believe to think that Jeter feels like he actually needs more than $15 million a year to live on, so could it be pride, the pride of the Yankee?  Conversely, it’s not like the Yankees can’t afford to fork out the kind of money the Jeter camp is demanding.  In my mind, the reason behind Derek Jeter vs. New York Yankees story has to do with the way sports are managed today.

His agent is the one who’s making this situation into the mess it’s become.  Casey Close probably makes 3-4% of Jeter’s contract.  The difference between $15 million and $23 million is, as incredible as it sounds, insignificant to Jeter.  Unless he’s a complete fool - and while there may be professional athletes who are sure fire bets for the Fools Hall of Fame, Derek Jeter is nowhere to be found in that category - he has more than enough money socked away that neither he, nor anyone he deeply cares about, will ever be in any type of financial bind.  And don’t think for a minute that the Yankees are hurting for dough either.

Casey Close has quite a few big money clients but . . . 3% (using the low end) of $45 million is $1.35 million, while 3% of $92 million (only 4 years at $23 mil per) is $2.76 million, or a difference of $1.41 million.  That is a significant number for a guy whose talent is squeezing negotiating teams on behalf of his clients and whose reason for being isn’t that of those he represents, e.g. World Series championships, Gold Gloves or MVP awards but, rather, the accumulation of money.  And power.  But the power comes from the money.  There’s the rumor of Close leaving Creative Artists Agency (CAA) to start up his own conglomerate.  It’s all about ego - which comes from the number of powerful clients - which means the guys who command . . . the most money).

Close is a brilliant guy who knows a strong hand when he’s holding one.  He’s made the statement that Derek Jeter’s value to the New York Yankees cannot be overstated.  Wise move.  To many, Jeter is the all-American boy and the Yankees, even to their fans, are the big bad bully.  Close is also smart enough to make sure Alex Rodriguez’s salary is brought into play.  But if A-Rod retried, or said he’d take less money (both of which are extremely doubtful), does anyone think for a (New York) minute that Close would back off his asking price?

Substituting “agent” for “umpire” in Christy Mathewson’s quote is right on the money as far as sports are viewed today:

“Many baseball fans look upon an agent as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile.”

My close friend, Dave Severns, assistant coach for player development with the Los Angeles Clippers, and I were discussing the plethora of outstanding point guards.  Dave mentioned that the two most difficult positions to play (in team sports) are quarterback and point guard.  I’ve always felt point guard is tougher (not to devalue QB - see the 11/15/10 blog and the John Harbaugh quote regarding comparisons) because the point guard has to play both offense and defense and is handling the ball or guarding it 90% of the time.  One reason for our conversation was that the Clips had just played the Utah Jazz who has, arguably, the best lead guard in the league in Deron Williams.  Dave gets to watch these guys up close and we came to the conclusion that never before have there been as many great - and at all using that word lightly as often is the case in discussions in sports - point guards as there are today.  Williams is certainly one, but by no means is he the consensus pick.In fact, if you were a general manager and had to select a point guard for your team right now, you could be satisfied if you selected no higher than, say, tenth!  Really?  Let’s count them.  Beyond Williams, there’s Derrick Rose, another point whose name is bantered about as the best in the NBA.  As early as a few weeks ago, Rajon Rondo or Chris Paul was the sexy pick.There can’t be too many GM’s who’d be disappointed if they had to go into a game with Steve Nash as their starter at the one and, although he’s been in the league as long as nearly everyone else currently playing, Jason Kidd ruled the lead guard roost for quite a while.  The rap on Kidd was that he was a classic big guard who was an incredible passer, but couldn’t shoot.  His rookie year, he made just 27% of hos three-point attempts.  Now in his 19th season (yeah, nineteenth) his three-point accuracy is around 45% (after shooting over 42% from three-point land last year). Show me a coach who doesn’t moan and groan about how difficult it is for their point guard to keep Tony Parker from penetrating?  As far as young guards, last year’s rookie-of-the-year Tyreke Evans hasn’t played anywhere near the way he did last year, but the other candidates for ROY, Stephen Curry and Brandon Jennings wouldn’t disappoint too many clubs if they wound up on their rosters.  Plus, the youngest, John Wall, although beset by injuries recently, was the talk of the league from the summer league until he went down. The up-and-coming team in the NBA,

Oklahoma City, is led by Russell Westbrook who seems to be the perfect complement to future MVP Kevin Durrant.  And, as far as a good match for the team, I’m not so sure the Lakers would want anyone other than their two-headed point, Derek Fisher and Steve Blake.Nowhere in this conversation have the names Chauncey Billups or Devin Harris come up, neither of whom are slouches.  And there are more!  The position of point guard is as difficult a challenge as there is in team sports, but as George S. Patton said:“Accept the challenges so that you may feel the exhilaration of victory.”

When I speak with people connected to the NBA, to a man they tell me a lockout at the conclusion of this season is inevitable. I’m not so sure that a lockout wouldn’t be beneficial to owners, coaches, players and fans alike.

Subsequent to the infamous “The Decision” by ESPN, Jim Gray and, of course, LeBron James, the NBA has seemingly changed, as has the fans’ attitude toward it.  First of all, the better players (the word “superstar” is bantered about a little too loosely) talk more than ever about enlisting their “boys” and deciding to join forces to create a “power” team - like LeBron and Chris Bosh did with their friend, Dwyane Wade.  That move hasn’t been a riveting success - to date.  Side note: I wonder how Eric Spoelstra’s feelings have changed from the day of The Decision until now.

Secondly, while teams of ultra-talented guys blending on one team seems like an interesting concept - maybe even “must see TV” - the question remains, as I’ve blogged in the past, what about (the majority of) the teams that get shut out?

A couple cases in point: I watched a game between the Los Angeles Clippers and the Sacramento Kings a few days ago and, as far as pure basketball entertainment, it wouldn’t qualify as time well spent - although the game that preceded it (between the Atlanta Hawks and the Washington Wizards) was much worse.  The two were part of a TNT doubleheader.  Studio analyst Kenny Smith referred to the first fray as “el gar-bage.”  He got no argument from either of his partners, Charles Barkley and Ernie Johnson.

The Clippers-Kings battle was a contest between one team that has the current front-runner for rookie-of-the-year, Blake Griffin, a player worth watching in Eric Gordon and a solid rookie, albeit one who ought to be coming off the bench so his skills can be developed, rather than throwing him in before he’s ready, in Eric Bledsoe.  The remaining Clippers, mostly, are not much more than upper level D-League players.  And that team was the attraction!  Side note 2: Griffin is remarkably skilled as in terms of running, jumping and dunking, but what makes him stand out is that he tries harder than the other guys.
Sacramento, however, played as though they didn’t care who won or who lost - or who did much of anything else for that matter.  Because NBA players are obscenely compensated individuals (in comparison to the rest of society), they ought to have the decency, if not the pride, to give the people who in essence pay their absurd salaries, a legitimate effort.  Perhaps a sense of entitlement has invaded the professional ranks?
Another game between the Wiz and the Golden State Warriors was similar to the Clippers-Kings fiasco, a game played between two clubs in which the outcome is of little to no consequence.  Which is exactly what it was.  These players know which teams have a chance to make the playoffs.  I wonder if the uninspired play of NBA players on teams going nowhere isn’t due to this new “let’s take our talents to ______” attitude.  The conclusion I’ve come to is that a lockout might be the just the remedy the NBA needs to shake up its members.
All this may sound like jealousy from someone who wishes he were part of such a lucrative business.  Not true in the slightest.  As someone who’s about to retire in a couple of years and whose entire adult life has been associated with basketball in one way or another, I’d love to be able to spend being entertained by the best athletes in the world.

As for those who say that the NBA is at the height of its popularity, I remind them of the late President John F. Kennedy’s quote (which had nothing to do with hoops):

“The time to repair the roof is when the sun is shining.”

There were three collegiate football games with major implications played yesterday.  Oregon, Auburn and Boise State, ranked #1, 2 & 3 in the AP Top 25 poll were all competing, and each had hopes for a national championship.

Both sides - BCS and non-BCS teams and conferences - have debated the fairness of the current system, with no clear cut “winner” in the discussion.  One factor that has not been mentioned has to do with the leaders of the actual schools involved, i.e. the directors of athletics and the presidents, as well as the conference commissioners.

During the Alabama-Auburn game, U of A president Dr. Robert Witt and AD Mal Moore, most certainly were comfortably seated in their sky boxes, cheering on their beloved Crimson Tide.  No doubt, Mike Slive, the SEC commish was there as well.  All were entertained by a terrific game, the Alabama contingent obviously disappointed with the outcome.  Commissioner Slive’s only rooting interest was, most probably, that no further incriminating news regarding Auburn’s Heisman Trophy leading quarterback, Cam Newton, was revealed during the afternoon.

Similarly, in Eugene, Arizona prez Robert Shelton and its director of athletics, Greg Byrne, were intently watching the contest, hoping that somehow their Wildcats could do what no team on the Ducks’ schedule had done - slow down Oregon’s fast-paced offense and derail the nation’s number one team.  I would imagine that Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott got what he wanted.  Both schools played well and there were no embarrassing incidents.

In the Boise State-Nevada nightcap, however, there had to exist the height of ambivalence on the part of the Wolfpack’s president, Milt Glick and its AD Cary Groth.  If their boys won, it would be an upset for the ages.  The game was billed as “The Biggest Sporting Event in Reno History” since Jack Johnson fought there - 100 years ago!

Yet, because of the current BCS structure, their conference, the WAC, would be denied the mega-check that comes from one of their conference members participating in a BCS bowl - which has now been lost due to the overtime thriller in which Nevada prevailed.  Sure, the ‘Pack won, but what about the million or so dollars they, and the other conference schools, would have received had Boise won?  This isn’t a concern for the schools in the BCS leagues - even those as pitiful as Vanderbilt, Washington State, Wake Forest, Kansas or Minnesota.  Or Indiana - who gave up 83 points in an earlier game to fellow conference member Wisconsin.  Do the Hoosiers really deserve all that revenue?  More than Boise State and Nevada do?

And that’s just for playing in a BCS bowl.  I read somewhere that each BCS school receives in the neighborhood of $7 million - regardless of whether they even won a game during the season.  Nice neighborhood - if they let you in.

So far there’s been no mention of the WAC commissioner, Karl Benson, who must be in mourning.  Not only has Benson lost out on the BCS bowl paycheck, but next year Boise State moves to the Mountain West conference, followed by Nevada the following season.  Fresno State also leaves with Nevada and Hawaii is seriously consider bolting the WAC too.  Anyone who thinks Karl Benson was an impartial observer last night in Reno doesn’t understand the true problem a non-BCS conference commissioner has.

There’s little doubt that Benson and everyone belonging to the NCAA “family,” but outside the all-powerful BCS group, shares Mike Honda’s feeling:

“My own mother always taught me that fairness was a family value - I think equal pay is about fairness for everyone.“ 

Most of the my Thanksgiving day was spent in front of the television (with our two sons while the fourth member of our family slaved in the kitchen).  I then returned to the same spot I held down prior to the feast for the remainder of the evening.

The thought of composing a blog seemed like too exhausting of a task.  I checked out an entry I posted Thanksgiving of ‘08 and, not so incredibly, the message is identical - even after two years.  It’s kind of sad we haven’t seemed to make any progress in certain areas in all that time.  See what you think, and as always, comments - both pro & con - are welcome.

After having Thanksgiving dinner with my wife and our two sons, one of them home from college, it’s very easy to be thankful.  Since a great deal of what we’ve always done in our family has revolved around sports, on a Thanksgiving Day, our television is usually turned on to a football or basketball game.  (If you ask my wife, that’s not much different from any other day).

Seeing the “NBA Cares” segments, watching the NFL United Way spots, and seeing all the charitable work done by intercollegiate athletes, it’s heartwarming to see that many of those who have, reach out and help those who do not have.  What’s difficult to escape is that each year, it seems that the list of those who do not have, grows.  This year the growth seemed to have been exponential.

We’ve just elected a president who is so transparent in his feelings about this (expanding)section of our society that it does look like help will be coming in some way, shape or form. A good many of us are definitely paying for our excesses, i.e. buying things we truly can’t afford/don’t really need, such as (at the top end) new homes (shame on the people who made loans available to those who - if even a novice realtor or loan officer looked at the borrower’s financial condition - would never have, in good conscience, let them sign such documents) to those (at the other end) obscenely priced professional game jerseys.

It’s the season of giving thanks and we all should.  Things could be worse and according to many, are going to head in that direction for a while before we can right the ship once again.  However, we all still must keep in mind the quote from Honore Gabriel:

“Society is composed of two classes: they who have more dinners than appetite and they who have more appetite than dinners.”

This year, as in most of the past ones, there have been several in-season coaching changes due, naturally, to losing.

In the NFL, the Dallas Cowboys fired Wade Phillips, whom many in the business think highly of, while many outside the business, e.g. fans, feel the opposite.  Naturally, the following week under interim coach Jason Garrett, the Cowboys won.  To most people (with anything other than an after dinner mint for a brain), this was a major indictment on the players - highly paid men who are, or at least like to refer to themselves, as professionals.  To go from losers to winners in one week has a whole lot more to do with effort and commitment than it does with changing the leader.  True, the head coach could have communication problems but to say professionals whose production during all those weeks previous to the win was because of one change is to greatly diminish the character of the squad members.

More recently, Brad Childress of the Minnesota Vikings was cut loose.  In this case, Childress acted as though he actually wanted to be relieved of his duties - and relief is probably what he is feeling.  This isn’t to condone the moves the former Vikes’ head man made.  However, it seemed to an outsider that Childress was exactly that from the start - an outsider.  It should be interesting to see how the Vikings fare this weekend.  The players are in a no-win situation.  If they come out on top, it will look like they weren’t giving their all for their employer.  If they lose, well, that’s why the situation is a “no-win.”

The NBA season is barely underway - about one-sixth of the year has passed - and already rumors of coaching changes  are in the air.  Paul Westphal of the Sacramento Kings is on the hot seat, although the Maloof brothers who own the ballclub are preaching patience.  They’re some of the more colorful owners, yet have incredibly loyal to the people of Sac-town thus far.

The other, more high-profile coach who is skating on thin ice is Eric Spoelstra of everyone’s new favorite team to hate - the Miami Heat.  Having Pat Riley as a mentor must be exhilarating but, given past history - and with the same franchise no less - he can’t be getting too comfortable.  Especially after Riley pulled off what no one thought was possible last summer by not only keeping Dwyane Wade from leaving, but coaxing LeBron James and Chris Bosh to take less money than they could have (although neither has to worry whether he’ll be able to pay the mortgage) to join D-Wade in South Beach.

Mid-season coaching changes usually don’t work although they may reveal a combination of how little respect the players had for their now departed head coach, how little they understood their responsibility, how little talent they truly have and how little character they possess.  The late, great Jim Murray once said regarding in-season coaching changes  - and this is loosely translated:

“No situation is so bad that it can’t be made worse by firing the head coach.”

Heading back east to see my mother who turned 90 in September.  The blog will return on Thanksgiving Day.

The Los Angeles Clippers got blown out by the Indiana Pacers last night to drop to 1-10 for the new season.  Could the 76ers infamous record of nine wins be in jeopardy?

A tad too soon for Chicken Little.  A summary of the season thus far for the Clips shows a few glimmers of hope.  One of those is the lone win came against one of the more formidable teams in the league, the Oklahoma City Thunder.  While losing is never anything to dismissed, consider that the injury bug - or in LA’s case, the injury tarantula - has struck rather early.

Injury #1: Baron Davis, whose professionalism has been questioned by former players, Kenny Smith, Charles Barkley and Greg Anthony to name just three, allegedly showed up to camp in less than stellar physical condition.  Then, in the third or fourth game, his knee swelled (as often occurs when a player’s body fat does) and he wasn’t physically unable to play.  This meant that rookie Eric Bledsoe, a youngster whom everyone thought would be better served coming off the bench, i.e. easing into the NBA due mainly to his penchant for turnovers, was thrust into the starting lineup.

It wasn’t exactly as though a star was born but an interesting turn of events took place - not unlike those parents who throw their infant into the pool to teach them to (sink or) swim.  Bledsoe swam.  Not Michael Phelps, but well enough to show the Clips drafted a keeper.  Some have mused that this phenomenon might even cause B Diddy to take the game a little more seriously, or his directing career might be jump started in the same way Bledsoe’s point guard career did, i.e. earlier than expected.

If the injury to Davis might be a blessing in disguise, the same can’t be said for injuries #2 & 3: Eric Gordon and Chris Kaman.  Gordon played very well and gained a ton of confidence playing with the gold medal winning USA squad this past summer and was putting that experience to good use in the early going.  Then he injured his shoulder and although he’s back (and continuing his scoring ways), there’s no way the shoulder will completely heal until he has a decent amount of rest (like if he could be spelled a little by Baron).  Regarding Kaman, how is a franchise as down as the Clippers have been replace their only All-Star?  The bad news is he’s not back yet; the good news is his return is imminent.

The other reason the Clippers shouldn’t have to worry about eclipsing the 76ers lowly mark is, as has been stated often in this space, the NBA has turned into a league of haves and have-nots, with a whole lot more of the latter than the former.  Sure, LA has lost to Detroit, Minnesota and Indiana but the first two were in OT and by two, respectively, and those clubs were much closer to full strength.  If the law of averages holds true to form - and it usually does, hence its name - the Clippers should get healthy about the same time some of their opponents’ key guys go down.

Another factor in the Clippers’ favor is that their head man, Vinny Del Negro has shown remarkable poise in the face of adversity.  When one of your bosses invades your locker room following a disappointing loss, calls you out and then, incredible as it may seem of someone with such an exalted title, swings at you (was Paxson ever drug tested after that embarrassment?) - and your response is to coach your team to a spot in the playoffs, you’re at the head of line for the Mr. Cool Award.

Where most coaches, players and fans (not to mention the brass) fall short in times like these is an inability to discover patience.  Clipper Nation, as miniscule as it might have become, needs to remember:

“Patience is waiting.  Not passively waiting.  That’s laziness.  But to keep going when the going is hard and slow. - that’s patience.”

The drama of the 2007 NBA draft was who the number one pick would be - Greg Oden, a center who was dubbed by no less an authority than Steve Kerr as a “once-in-a-decade” talent or multi-skilled forward Kevin Durrant?  The Portland Trailblazers selected first and went with the 7-foot Oden, a move which was not all that hotly debated.  Taking a center whom a team could build around wasn’t, nor should it have been, seen as foolish. The Seattle Sonics (now the Oklahoma City Thunder) picked second and chose Durrant.

Their careers have been diametrically opposed ever since.  Durrant is being compared to the NBA’s best players - Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Dwyane Wade - while his foil in the ‘07 draft class has experienced nothing but heartbreak.  Two and a half months after being the top pick, Oden underwent microfracture surgery on his right knee and missed all of his rookie season.  13 months later, he sprained an ankle in a game against the Lakers and missed two weeks.  The following season, he fractured his left patella and was lost for the season once again.  The latest setback is another microfracture knee surgery which will sideline him for the remainder of this year.  To say this poor guy can’t catch a break would be too cruel.

An NBA regular season is 82 games - and that’s exactly how many Portland center Greg Oden has played.  In four years!  The ironic part of the story, as if one is needed, is that the Blazers were the organization that chose Sam Bowie with the number two pick in the 1984 draft - over Michael Jordan.  Greg Oden didn’t have anything to do with that blunder but you can bet he’s heard the comparisons.

According to those who know, Greg Oden’s injuries have not been due improper conditioning nor has he been accused of a poor work ethic.  His one foolish move has been a texting issue, but Brett Favre has allegedly done the same and he’s started more games in a row than any other quarterback in history.  Oden, simply, has just had tough luck.  Everywhere he goes he says he hears from Portland fans.  Some say they can’t believe he’s hurt again, others advise him to hang in there, while still others question why he’s not rehabbing at that moment.

He’s finding out the old quote:

“Misfortune tests friends and detects enemies.”

Since nobody’s been able to beat - or come close to beating - the UConn women’s basketball team, kudos need to be showered upon the Baylor Lady Bears who came closer than anyone, losing by a mere point.  As with most one-point losses, this one came with controversy.

With UConn up one and in possession of the ball, there was a six second differential between the shot clock and the game clock.  Baylor, coached by former outstanding player, Kim Mulkey, decided to play it out, i.e. not foul, stop the Lady Huskies and win it at the buzzer.  Baylor had one time out left, so although it was a risky choice, a defensive stop and a time out to set something up could have given them a chance to end “The Streak” at 79.

What ensued was a shot block by Baylor’s dominating 6′8″ center, Brittney Griner (her ninth of the contest), with only two seconds remaining on the shot clock.  Geno Auriemma, UConn’s head coach, called a time out to set up an underneath out-of-bounds play.  Upon seeing the Lady Huskies line up, Coach Mulkey burned her last time out.  The ball was inbounded and UConn’s all-everything guard, Maya Moore, took a jump shot which failed to touch the rim.  The shot clock horn went off just as a Baylor player was grabbing the ball.

Technically, the call should have been a shot clock violation and Baylor would have the ball out of bounds, underneath the basket, 94′ feet from their hoop.  But no call was made.  In the post game press conference, Mulkey questioned the media as to what the shot clock violation rule was, knowing - and stating - that the whistle should have blown, giving her team possession of the ball with six ticks to go.  When Mulkey was asked about calling her final time out, she responded that she saw UConn’s alignment and wanted to make a defensive adjustment.

Let’s review the scenario.  She must have known that, while she’s going over her defense, Auriemma could change his UOB.  It’s not like a guy who’s won seven national championships has only one under out-of-bounds play.  Secondly, whatever adjustment Mulkey made didn’t keep Moore - the best player in the women’s game today - from touching the ball, which seemingly would have been the obvious strategy, i.e. “If somebody’s going to beat us, let’s make sure it’s not Maya.”

Secondly, if UConn had scored (a two because a three would have made the remaining time moot), did Baylor have a full court play set up to get a shot to tie?  With a veteran, well-coached team?  Maybe.  This early in the season?  Not so sure.

Next, assume they got the defensive stop they wanted.  Did they have a play designed for what they were going to do when they rebounded the miss?  After watching the outcome, it was quite apparent nothing of the sort was discussed in the huddle as all they could manage was a desperation throw from 30′ as the buzzer sounded - which also resulted in an airball.

Even allowing for a (brief) motivational speech, its message being, “Let’s get a shot clock violation!” the Lady Bears didn’t have a time out left to set up a play to go the length of the floor for the winning bucket - or a chance to get fouled.

After a tough loss, especially one in which her team displayed so much heart in coming back from being down 15 to the best team in the nation, it’s understandable for Kim Mulkey to be upset with a wrong no-call.  Many coaches, during such an emotional moment, tend to point a finger at those who “stole” the opportunity, but as a coaching friend of mine used to say:

“Anytime to point a finger at somebody, just remember there are three more pointing right back at you.”

Cam Newton embroiled in controversy, claims of AAU coaches with their hands out, agents involved with student-athletes while still in college.  None of this should shock anyone who’s been following college athletics.

I’m privileged to be on the Jim Murray Memorial Foundation’s email list.  Each Monday I receive a column written by the G.O.A.T. sportswriter.  Yesterday’s selection (reprinted with permission from Jim’s former employer, the L.A. Times) was on the subject of the less-than-pure world of big-time college football.  It was written on 11/7/86 and, except for adjustments due to inflation, the story could have been penned today (except that the public hasn’t been blessed with a sportswriter of the late Mr. Murray’s eloquence since he passed away).

The content of the article dealt with the imbalance of the importance of college football and its place in the mission of the university.  When you read one of Jim Murray’s masterpieces (meaning everything he ever published) the descriptions, anecdotes, metaphors and other means of narration leave no doubt as to how he feels about the subject matter.  And, if you have any sense, how you should feel about it, too.

Regarding his analysis of big-time college football, his summary was that it starts with college presidents (over)paying coaches, expecting them to produce winning teams (or else) and then being stunned when the “student-athletes” come from seedy environments, e.g. “pool halls or longshore shape-ups instead of seminaries.”  In today’s vernacular, that would equate to recruiting kids with police records.

He goes on to make the case that while college professors are expected to produce educated graduates and make sure these youngsters are “upright members of society,” coaches are held to a different standard.  Then again, points out Mr. Murray, professors have tenure while coaches can be shown the door at the whim of their bosses.  (Note: Equipped with an agent, today’s fired coach leaves far from empty-handed).  Give the coaches tenure and perhaps they won’t be so desperate to recruit any and every talented player regardless of character.  Sure, there would still be crooks, but not as many of them - and they’d stick out a little more than they do today.

No one made a point better than Jim Murray, or as colorfully.  When it came to fixing the problem of recruiting anyone at any price, he said:

“Until football coaches can be assured they’re not more than one blocked punt from going into selling insurance, they will not shrink at suiting up quasi-sociopaths or the Abominable Snowman if he can blitz.”