I don’t have much of a rooting interest this year and, yet, I am still planning on watching the Super Bowl. It seems to be an event that catches the attention of a lot of people – even those without a big interest in football. Some are watching for the game; some are watching for the commercials; many are barely watching at all, but still find their way to a party. I think there is some value to just having a few days when you get together with friends and having a good time in a way that is common to a lot of your countrymen. Whether the Super Bowl is the ideal vehicle for that, I’m not prepared to argue.
Colts Go to the Playoffs Again
So, the hospital ward masquerading as the 2010 Indianapolis Colts has torn off four straight wins, won the AFC South, and captured the #3 seed for the playoffs. And, in the last four wins, they’ve obliterated opposing running backs and discovered a running game of their own.
I wouldn’t go so far as to call them dominant, but who the hell knows what they can do. I had pretty well given up on the season after Cowboys game where I learned about the “leverage” penalty which enabled Dallas to finally punch it in on about their 9th play from the 1 yard line.
The Jets and their loud mouth coach will come to Indy to play on Saturday night at 8. This is Indy’s 9th straight season going to the playoffs, tying a record set by Dallas during the Landry years. For a city that didn’t host its first playoff game until 1999, this is fairly significant. If nothing else, it’s another week of football; and that’s a good thing.
Semi-Regular Plug for Stampede Blue
The site does not need it anymore, having become a sports juggernaut, but I’ve been plugging Stampede Blue off and on since 2006, and it just seems like something I ought to do at the beginning of the NFL season. They are just an excellent source of Colts news and analysis.
Recognizing the Obvious Enhances Credibility
I’m not known for my sensitivity (college friends in particular will be laughing at the understatement just about now), but I found myself cringing at the “she was asking for it” theme of commentary in the Ines Sainz/Jets matter. (See, e.g. — CBS puts a question mark at the end of the headline forwarding the theme, so I guess that makes it o.k.) The short version is that a very attractive sports reporter was the subject of some inappropriate conduct by the New York Jets when covering them during practice. I haven’t researched it too extensively, but the reports I came across were actually fairly light on the exact nature of the alleged harassment. What I’ve gleaned is that one of the practice units was running plays in her direction to get close to her – overthrowing passes, etc., some of the Jets were throwing out catcalls in the locker room, and possibly her pigtails were dipped in an inkwell. (Frankly, I think a lot of the media attention is simply a pretext for showing her picture a lot; kind of like mainstream media about porn criticism so often seems to be an excuse to indirectly profit off of pornography. I don’t think this story would be getting much attention if she was unpleasant to look at.)
A lot of the reaction I’ve come across (sports radio, Facebook threads) are either leering – a Yahoo sports reporter being interviewed joked that he’d have to do a thorough investigation, making sure to do an extensive interview with her. (I.e. “she’s hot, I want to be close to her, I don’t give a shit about whether or not anything inappropriate happened.”) A Facebook thread had a guy saying, in effect, “she dresses like a whore, what does she expect?”
So, that type of reaction really knocked me back. But, I think maybe the communication breaks down to some degree, not because folks think women should be harassed, but because there is a tendency to ignore an elephant in the room – in this case, the woman’s sexuality is being marketed. It’s not an accident that her employer, Azteca, didn’t give the job to an ugly woman. It’s not an accident that she dresses in a manner calculated to display her attractiveness. I’m guessing that her employer gets more viewers as a result, and I’m guessing that her prospects as a sports reporter have improved as a result. Now, these factors don’t justify or excuse harassment any more than a tight dress justifies rape. But, sexual attraction is being manipulated for a commercial purpose. When that attraction manifests itself in an inappropriate manner, I think you at least have to recognize that attention from that attraction (if not the specific reaction) was a desired response.
When you’re arguing a legal case, or any other case, I would guess; it’s always a good idea to acknowledge inconvenient facts and explain them as best you can. You shouldn’t ignore them because the opposition will be sure to highlight those facts and cast them in as negative a light as possible. I think there is a similar dynamic in these sorts of discussions. Here, there might be a reluctance to come out and say that Azteca is, to one degree or another, selling sex because there is a fear that this suggests that harassment is justified. But I think that’s a mistake. I think you have to acknowledge the inconvenient fact and explain that it doesn’t matter: “The way someone is dressed is not an excuse for being impolite,” or whatever your explanation might be.
From my experience, discussions about race and drugs come to mind as other areas where inconvenient facts are glossed over or ignored. In the case of race, I recall well-meaning people telling me as a kid that it was wrong to treat people differently just because their skin color is different. Of course it is. But, even though I agreed with the premise of treating people equally and with respect, I tended to dig in my mental heels because, even (or maybe especially) as a kid, I noticed that it was not simply a matter of skin color. There were other differences — not differences that justified disparate treatment — but there were differences other than skin color. “Wait a second, if it’s just skin color that is different, why do I feel like I can make a pretty good guess that someone is black when I hear them on the radio or telephone?” And the omission can be pernicious. I recall in the early 90s there was a big brouhaha over “ebonics.” It became a punch line for disgruntled white people. And it had some resonance for me; a resonance I think could have been avoided had those well-meaning racial equality talks in my youth contained some mention along the lines of “whites and blacks frequently have different speech patterns. Here’s why. And here’s why it doesn’t matter.” Again, I think you have to acknowledge the differences but explain why they don’t affect the underlying point.
(And the underlying point in racial and gender relations is captured well, as so many things are, by some advice from the movie Road House: “Be nice . . . until it’s time not to be nice.”)
With respect to drugs, the elephant in the room that rarely gets discussed is that they make you feel good. There’s a reason people take them. I think that has to be acknowledged when you explain to kids why they should be avoided or their use should be moderated. Otherwise, they’ll figure you’re even more full of shit than they would have otherwise. I remember a health teacher who got this right, in my opinion. He told us, “I don’t take drugs, not because they’re horrible, but because I’m afraid I might like them too well.” And then he went on to tell us about the negative consequences of drug abuse.
In the Sainz matter, if people making the point that the Jets acted inappropriately would first acknowledge that Sainz and Azteca are using her appearance to make money by exploiting physical attraction, then maybe we could move past that to the more important point that Rex Ryan is a colossal asshole and his attitude infects his team, making basic politeness something of a challenge.
R.I.P. John Wooden
Johnny Wooden, the Indiana Rubber Man of Martinsville, has passed away at age 99. Drawing inspiration from Fuzzy Vandiver of the Franklin Wonder Five, Wooden helped lead Martinsville to the state title in 1927 against Muncie Central (who else). His nickname came from his fearless dives on the court. Apparently the Martinsville Artesians had lost in the finals to Marion in 1926.
Displaying the type of heart and hustle Wooden earned a reputation for possessing, he and his teammates from Martinsville outlasted Muncie Central 26-23 in the last state title game held at the Indianapolis Exposition Building.
Martinsville [with Wooden] had finished as the state runner-up the season before after falling to Marion 30-23.
Wooden scored 10 points to lead the Artesians (26-3) in the title game, helping coach Glenn Curtis win his third state championship. Curtis won one with Lebanon in 1918 before winning a pair with Martinsville in 1924 and 1927.
Wooden also helped Martinsville earn a trip to the championship game by scoring a game-high 13 points in the Artesians’ 32-21 victory against Connersville. Martinsville guard Les Reynolds scored six points in his team’s semifinal and championship game triumphs.
Nothing can quite match winning the single class Indiana basketball title, but Wooden went on to do some other more or less good things in the field of basketball. His Artesians lost to the Bearcats in a rematch in the 1928 finals.
In a time when people had more and better nicknames than they do today, Wooden played for Purdue under Ward “Piggy” Lambert from 1928 – 1932. He received all manner of acclamations as a player, and led the Boilermakers to an NCAA title (by panel vote since the tournament hadn’t started yet) in 1932 — the Boilermakers’ first and (to date) last national championship.
He coached high school basketball for 11 years (during part of which, he was playing basketball professionally), then entered the Navy in 1942 during World War II. After the war, he coached at Indiana State University for two years.
He wanted to coach for Purdue, but the timing of availability for that position never quite worked out. In 1948, he left Indiana for California and faded into obscurity. became the most successful college coach of all time, coaching UCLA to 12 titles and 620 victories in 27 seasons, including 4 perfect 30-0 seasons. (One thing I hadn’t expected was that he was 53 years old and had coached 15 years (26 if you count high school) before winning his first championship.)
Wooden has become an icon with the emphasis on his virtues and minimization of shortcomings that entails. His solid, Midwestern work ethic is usually cited while the less than ethical recruiting by UCLA boosters that Wooden somehow failed to notice is usually overlooked. That notwithstanding, he seems to have been a very good man, and his achievement at all levels of basketball is remarkable. In terms of role models, we could certainly do worse.
Rest in peace, Coach Wooden.
Butler falls to Duke
I suspected Butler was screwed when I learned that Ted Valentine was one of the referees. He was one of the officials who participated in the jobbing of IU in the ’92 semi-final game against Duke. Aside from Matt Howard’s foul trouble, however, I didn’t feel violated by the officiating like I did after the IU game. Seems like by the end of the game, things were being called (or, more accurately, not called) pretty evenly.
The final score was Duke 61, Butler 59. The end was shaping up a lot like Hoosiers. Small (but very talented) Butler was playing Goliath. With 13 seconds to go, they were down by 2. They gave the ball to Bobby Plump Jimmy Chitwood Gordon Hayward who drove to the base line and put up a shot . . . that didn’t go. The game wasn’t done, however. With 3 seconds to go. Duke made the first free throw and intentionally missed the second. Hayward got the rebound, drove to half court, and heaved a shot from half court has time expired. Had it gone, that shot would have been replayed for decades and decades to come. It was so, very, very close. But, it missed. And, as a friend of mine put it, the clanging of the ball off the rim was like the sound of a sucker punch to the soul.
What a game, and what a season for Butler. I can’t pretend I was anything but a bandwagon Bulldog supporter. But I was awfully proud of how they played last night. Good season Bulldogs.
Coach Klinge Named Big Ten Coach of the Year
I’ll be honest. I never followed college swimming, even a little, before last year. But, when a high school friend starts coaching, it perks up your interest. The Purdue Women’s Swim Team placed 4th at the Big Ten Championships, tying their highest mark last set in ’91 and ’92, and Coach John Klinge was named Big Ten Coach of the Year.
Klinge was voted the conference’s coach of the year by his peers after Purdue posted the highest score in program history at a Big Ten Championships. The 460 points eclipsed the previous standard of 431.5 set in 1991. The fourth-place finish ties the 1991 and 1992 squads for the highest placing at a conference championship meet. Purdue broke 17 program records and five freshman records during the Big Ten Championships. The team also recorded 94 season-best marks during the conference championship meet.
“This award is really a reflection of all the hard work the girls on the team did,” Klinge said. “They did it every day, and this is really a result of their continued hard work.”
John’s in his second year as Purdue head coach and, from what I can tell, has been working his ass off since he hit West Lafayette. Glad to see that hard work paying off. Congratulations to Coach Klinge and the Purdue women!
Never let the facts get in the way of a good narrative: Super Bowl Edition
In honor of the Super Bowl, I thought I’d flag a story I thought was true but turned out to be just another myth regurgitated by media and others. In this case, it’s that supposed statistic about domestic violence spiking on Super Bowl Sunday. Turns out – not true.
The claim that Super Bowl Sunday is “the biggest day of the year for violence against women” demonstrates how easily an idea congruous with what people want to believe can be implanted in the public consciousness and anointed as “fact” even when it has been fabricated out of whole cloth.
Domestic violence has been a problem all too often ignored, covered up, and swept under the rug. Many well-intentioned and successful efforts have been made in the last few decades to bring the issue to public attention – to get the word out to women that they need not suffer silent, helpless, and alone; to advertise that there are organizations victims can turn to for help and support; and to educate others in spotting the signs of abuse. Unfortunately, nearly every cause will encompass a sub-group of advocates who, either through deliberate disingenuousness or earnest gullibility, end up spreading “noble lies” in the furtherance of that cause. The myth of Super Bowl Sunday violence is one such noble lie.
Trudy Schuett has the time line of how the myth got into the public consciousness and some of the ways it has been recycled even after it was debunked. (Though, I have to say the end of the linked editorial has me a little skeptical of the writer’s intent.)
Todd Leary Arrested
The Associated Press is reporting that former IU player and basketball announcer, Todd Leary, has been arrested in connection with a real estate title scheme. Rebecca Green of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette has a more comprehensive story.
Leary, 39, of Carmel, is accused of conspiring with [insurance broker Joseph] Garretson between July 2008 and February 2009 to commit a variety of felonies, including conspiracy to commit conversion or misappropriation of title insurance escrow funds, conspiracy to commit theft and conspiracy to corrupt business influence. The majority of the charges are Class C felonies, with penalties of up to four years in prison each.
Garretson is accused of [and is awaiting sentencing for] arranging mortgage refinancing loans for area clients and failing to use the money to pay off the initial loans, causing mortgage holders to default.
. . .
According to court documents, Leary’s former teammate, Brian Evans, cooperated with state investigators to uncover the scheme.
Garretson claims that Leary pressured him on a number of occasions for more money, threatening to reveal Garretson’s misdeeds.
Leary played for IU from 1990 – 1994. Evans played for IU from 1991 – 1996.
Crimson Quarry offers these thoughts:
It’s hard to know what to say about this. Obviously, the allegations are very serious, and Leary’s career as an IU broadcaster probably is over. Still, it will be interesting to see the authorities’ rationale for making this arrest when and where they did. It seems like an effort to humiliate Leary and an effort to gain publicity for the allegations. Again, I don’t mean to downplay the serious allegations, but he is entitled to a legal presumption of innocence. That presumption of innocence doesn’t bind those of us who want to talk about it (i.e., we’re under no obligation to pretend that OJ didn’t kill his ex-wife), but it does bind the authorities.
Colts versus Jets – AFC Championship Game
The Colts are playing the Jets today. To read the various sports pundits, the Colts should lose. People with money at stake, however, seem to be favoring the Colts. Probably, this has something to do with the fact that sports commentary is easier to write and more entertaining when you are taking a contrarian view – nevermind that the contrarian view seems to be the norm.
Maybe the Colts will will, maybe they’ll lose. But I’m awfully tired of this crap about how there is no other way to win in the NFL other than pound the running game up the middle and have a stifling defense. Obviously these aren’t bad things to have, but I think there is some nostalgia at work in the preference for three yards and a cloud of dust. Some kind of dim memory of guys with flat tops when Men were Men (insert “nervous sheep” joke here). Or something. There is probably some big media market and underdoggism at work with the Jets love as well.
Anyway, from listening to the sports punditry, I have learned that the Colts will crumble under the Jets defense and the team’s “soft” defense will be no match for the Jets’ punishing running game. (In these discussions, last week’s Ravens’ game was almost never mentioned for whatever reason.) Additionally, I have learned, Peyton Manning’s legacy will be forever ruined if he doesn’t win this game. (The goalposts on Manning’s legacy are forever being moved back.)
Well, whatever. The great advantage (or disadvantage) football punditry has over political punditry is that it is soon tested with a clear winner and a clear loser and you can mostly tell exactly why the game was won or lost.
GO COLTS!
- « Previous Page
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- …
- 17
- Next Page »