If you work for the Chicago Tribune please contact us at:
NOISportsblog@gmail.com
Thank you.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Peter King: Thanks For That
Since discovering Peter King, we have been awed by his prose and his insight.
Had to share this on Randy Moss:
I'm about to get preachy/sappy. Even when the Patriots took a chance on guys like Corey Dillon, they were using roster spots on guys who were never accused of not hustling. To me, and to Bob Kraft, Bill Belichick and Scott Pioli, cheating the game is the worst crime a player can commit.
Obviously, based on the trade, the Patriots managers don't lump themselves in with Peter's holier than thou grouping.
And clearly, he shouldn't include himself either. He writes about the game on an almost daily basis.
No game deserves that kind of treatment. Peter doesn't just cheat the game. He brutalizes it. He would do less damage if he went to Canton and just set the Hall on fire.
And if doing so meant he would stop submitting columns; we'll provide the kerosene.
Had to share this on Randy Moss:
I'm about to get preachy/sappy. Even when the Patriots took a chance on guys like Corey Dillon, they were using roster spots on guys who were never accused of not hustling. To me, and to Bob Kraft, Bill Belichick and Scott Pioli, cheating the game is the worst crime a player can commit.
Obviously, based on the trade, the Patriots managers don't lump themselves in with Peter's holier than thou grouping.
And clearly, he shouldn't include himself either. He writes about the game on an almost daily basis.
No game deserves that kind of treatment. Peter doesn't just cheat the game. He brutalizes it. He would do less damage if he went to Canton and just set the Hall on fire.
And if doing so meant he would stop submitting columns; we'll provide the kerosene.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Brady Quinn: Like A Rock
After our submission a few days ago predicting the inevitable demise of the white QB, we received many emails. Some understood the reality of the situation and were able to fully embrace our vision. Some were skeptical, but were receptive to the concept that the role of QB was really better suited to the Negro competitor. And some were simply blind, raging discourses belittling the Tribe of Shabazz or demanding that Negroes be shipped back to Africa. Or they pointed out great white QB's from the past and compared them to the Negro QB's of today. Which in our mind, is like comparing the great white players of the '20's and 30's to Negro players in 1958. There isn't a sufficient history to juxtapose to accumulate an accurate study.
Our favorite email excerpt was this:
Dear Brillopad Haired Jabangi's,
Your apelike insolence and ignorance is typical of the racist bullshit that negras (that's how we pronounce the word around these parts) are always spouting off about. An old ass white guy says nappy, and the world stops. Some stupid jigs blog about white quarterbacks and running backs being inferior, and it's just fucking great.
Much like yourself, the average negra is too stupid to play quarterback. Yeah, yeah, I know, McNabb, Young, Vick. All illiterate mental midgets that get by on athleticism. Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, Rivers. All field generals that understand more about the game than the hip hop addled minds of your negra quarterbacks will ever know.
Your racist blog is full of shit. And the negra quarterbacks are just a passing trend.
I hope you choke on your chit'lins, you dark faced monkey.
Hmm. Wonder if Bill Simmons ever gets email like that in his mailbag.
Anyway, we just figured it was appropriate to point out something very telling and important about this draft.
Once again, the Negro QB was at a premium.
And the pale skinned dandy out of the Cathedral of College Football proved to be a nonfactor.
Now, we normally don't gloat. It isn't necessary. Our righteousness is reward enough for our instinctual correctness and our intuitive understanding of the workings of the world, and the relationship therein to sports. So, to say, we told you so...would essentially be redundant. We told you. Therefore, it is so.
While Jamarcus Russell proved to be the most coveted commodity available, teams avoided Brady Quinn as if they knew he was prepared to come out as soon as he was drafted.
How could this be? Brady has been groomed to be the next great QB. He has "movie star" looks and poise and grace in front of the camera. Even we have to give him credit for his ability to remain cheery as his world collapsed around him in the green room. Or, maybe he was just too dumb to understand what was happening?
Regardless, when you get down to it, the reasons for Russell's value and Quinn's irrelevance are quite obvious.
Did you notice that the two receivers that Russell threw to at LSU were both drafted in the first round? Russell's talent runs so deep that he was able to provide financial futures to his teammates. Imagine the riches and victory that await the receiving corps in Oakland? Think Randy Moss won't be kicking himself come fall while he is shagging intermediate passes from Tom Brady; when he could have been on the receiving end of the greatest long ball thrower ever seen? Russell was able to step into the starting role at LSU and lead a program that had been left in a shamble of turmoil by Nick Saban, and somehow general a hodgepodge of unknown talent to the elite of college football. The past two drafts saw several players from LSU's offense go quite high. And there is an indisputable correlation between their performance and draft status and having played with Jamarcus Russell.
On the other hand, we saw Brady Quinn predicted to be the highest picked QB since the moment Charlie Weiss stepped on campus. In contrast to Russell dealing with the mess Saban left behind, Quinn lived in the bedrock of security at the Golden Dome. Surrounded by some of the highest rated talent assembled in the country. And yet, Quinn could never win the big game. Despite the fact his defenses gave him the chance to be on the field as much as possible by waving at opposing offenders as if they were bullfighters holding red capes. The greatest indicator of the lack of impact Quinn really had is the dearth of ND offensive players drafted over the past few years. With four picks left in the entire draft, former super recruits Rhema McKnight and Darius Walker were still on the board. It is telling that the "best" player on ND's offense is now playing pro baseball. Clearly, Quinn had quite an impact on their careers.
While Russell was drafted to be the savior of the proud Oakland franchise, Quinn seemed to be drafted in the low first round for two main reasons:
-as a personal favor from Romeo Crennel to his old friend Charlie Weiss. Basically, an attempt to salvage the "quarterback guru" reputation that Weiss has perpetrated.
-and as a marketing scheme. The Browns will be playing the hell out of the photo of a 5 or 6 year old Quinn in a Browns helmet and jersey.
In retrospect, it seems clear that the talent evaluators, draft experts and NFL executives have arrived at the same conclusion that we have:
The white QB is on the endangered species list.
We fully expect the evilishness behind the NFL to do all they can to save it. But we also fully understand the laws of nature.
And the position of QB in the NFL is completely subject to its very own version of the laws of Social Darwinism.
Brady Quinn's slide from the top of the draft to being a novelty pick is symbolic of the things to come.
Praise be.
Our favorite email excerpt was this:
Dear Brillopad Haired Jabangi's,
Your apelike insolence and ignorance is typical of the racist bullshit that negras (that's how we pronounce the word around these parts) are always spouting off about. An old ass white guy says nappy, and the world stops. Some stupid jigs blog about white quarterbacks and running backs being inferior, and it's just fucking great.
Much like yourself, the average negra is too stupid to play quarterback. Yeah, yeah, I know, McNabb, Young, Vick. All illiterate mental midgets that get by on athleticism. Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, Rivers. All field generals that understand more about the game than the hip hop addled minds of your negra quarterbacks will ever know.
Your racist blog is full of shit. And the negra quarterbacks are just a passing trend.
I hope you choke on your chit'lins, you dark faced monkey.
Hmm. Wonder if Bill Simmons ever gets email like that in his mailbag.
Anyway, we just figured it was appropriate to point out something very telling and important about this draft.
Once again, the Negro QB was at a premium.
And the pale skinned dandy out of the Cathedral of College Football proved to be a nonfactor.
Now, we normally don't gloat. It isn't necessary. Our righteousness is reward enough for our instinctual correctness and our intuitive understanding of the workings of the world, and the relationship therein to sports. So, to say, we told you so...would essentially be redundant. We told you. Therefore, it is so.
While Jamarcus Russell proved to be the most coveted commodity available, teams avoided Brady Quinn as if they knew he was prepared to come out as soon as he was drafted.
How could this be? Brady has been groomed to be the next great QB. He has "movie star" looks and poise and grace in front of the camera. Even we have to give him credit for his ability to remain cheery as his world collapsed around him in the green room. Or, maybe he was just too dumb to understand what was happening?
Regardless, when you get down to it, the reasons for Russell's value and Quinn's irrelevance are quite obvious.
Did you notice that the two receivers that Russell threw to at LSU were both drafted in the first round? Russell's talent runs so deep that he was able to provide financial futures to his teammates. Imagine the riches and victory that await the receiving corps in Oakland? Think Randy Moss won't be kicking himself come fall while he is shagging intermediate passes from Tom Brady; when he could have been on the receiving end of the greatest long ball thrower ever seen? Russell was able to step into the starting role at LSU and lead a program that had been left in a shamble of turmoil by Nick Saban, and somehow general a hodgepodge of unknown talent to the elite of college football. The past two drafts saw several players from LSU's offense go quite high. And there is an indisputable correlation between their performance and draft status and having played with Jamarcus Russell.
On the other hand, we saw Brady Quinn predicted to be the highest picked QB since the moment Charlie Weiss stepped on campus. In contrast to Russell dealing with the mess Saban left behind, Quinn lived in the bedrock of security at the Golden Dome. Surrounded by some of the highest rated talent assembled in the country. And yet, Quinn could never win the big game. Despite the fact his defenses gave him the chance to be on the field as much as possible by waving at opposing offenders as if they were bullfighters holding red capes. The greatest indicator of the lack of impact Quinn really had is the dearth of ND offensive players drafted over the past few years. With four picks left in the entire draft, former super recruits Rhema McKnight and Darius Walker were still on the board. It is telling that the "best" player on ND's offense is now playing pro baseball. Clearly, Quinn had quite an impact on their careers.
While Russell was drafted to be the savior of the proud Oakland franchise, Quinn seemed to be drafted in the low first round for two main reasons:
-as a personal favor from Romeo Crennel to his old friend Charlie Weiss. Basically, an attempt to salvage the "quarterback guru" reputation that Weiss has perpetrated.
-and as a marketing scheme. The Browns will be playing the hell out of the photo of a 5 or 6 year old Quinn in a Browns helmet and jersey.
In retrospect, it seems clear that the talent evaluators, draft experts and NFL executives have arrived at the same conclusion that we have:
The white QB is on the endangered species list.
We fully expect the evilishness behind the NFL to do all they can to save it. But we also fully understand the laws of nature.
And the position of QB in the NFL is completely subject to its very own version of the laws of Social Darwinism.
Brady Quinn's slide from the top of the draft to being a novelty pick is symbolic of the things to come.
Praise be.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Brian Leonard: Who Knew?
Coming off their most successful football season, a few Rutgers football players are on the NFL draft radar. Including FB Brian Leonard.
Leonard was moved to fullback last season, after starting at running back for a few years.
Apparently, Leonard has been working very hard to drop weight and increase his speed. His hope: to be the first white running back drafted in the first round since Penn St.'s John Capelletti in 1974.
Has it been that long?
Think about it:
It has been 20 years since a white running back had 1000 yard season.
It has been 44 years since a white running back led the league in rushing.
Of the backs to have gained over 10,000 yards in their careers, only John Riggins is white.
Most people, us included, didn't realize these staggering numbers. And of course, when white folks look at these numbers, the first thought is: why is there no public outcry?
Fair question.
There has been much talk and complaint in the past over the dearth of Negro QB's. The fight was to overcome the stereotype of the Negro not possessing the intellectual capacity to be the on field general. The fight was for opportunity.
All that seems to have been laid to rest by the success of Negro QB's recently in the NFL and by the ever increasing number of young Negroes taking snaps in the college ranks.
Isn't the scarce number of white RB's a similar issue to the previous lack of Negro QB's? A specific position on the field that is pretty much represented by one race.
Sure, to the untrained and unthoughtful eye.
The rest of us understand, that for a long period of time, there were no Negro QB's. And for a long period of time there weren't many Negro running backs. The position was virtually all white.
Gradually, as time went on, the Negro proved to be a more qualified fit for the demands of the position of running back; vision, quickness, speed, durability, stength, power, explosiveness. All traditional athletic attributes common to the Negro. And lacking in most white athletes.
Similarly, as time has gone on, the Negro is gradually assuming control of the QB position. Quick decision making, running ability, superior arm strength and unmatched determination have become the requisites to excel. Again, the position has gradually shifted to being tailor made for the Negro.
So, clearly, this isn't a case of the white athlete being deprived the chance to excel at running back. Which is in direct contrast to the Negro at QB.
This is clearly a case of the white athlete being protected for a long period of time by not allowing the competition from Negroes. And gradually, the Negro took over the running back position.
And we are seeing the same thing at QB.
Clearly, the extinction of the white running back is a sign of evolution in the NFL. Natural selection.
The absence of Negro QB's in the NFL was completely unnatural, and completely manufactured.
In comparing the two, it becomes clear. If you are someone who appreciates the positive evolution of the game and understands that weakness selects itself out of the league; well, then you should anxiously be awaiting the extinction of the white QB.
It is inevitable.
Leonard was moved to fullback last season, after starting at running back for a few years.
Apparently, Leonard has been working very hard to drop weight and increase his speed. His hope: to be the first white running back drafted in the first round since Penn St.'s John Capelletti in 1974.
Has it been that long?
Think about it:
It has been 20 years since a white running back had 1000 yard season.
It has been 44 years since a white running back led the league in rushing.
Of the backs to have gained over 10,000 yards in their careers, only John Riggins is white.
Most people, us included, didn't realize these staggering numbers. And of course, when white folks look at these numbers, the first thought is: why is there no public outcry?
Fair question.
There has been much talk and complaint in the past over the dearth of Negro QB's. The fight was to overcome the stereotype of the Negro not possessing the intellectual capacity to be the on field general. The fight was for opportunity.
All that seems to have been laid to rest by the success of Negro QB's recently in the NFL and by the ever increasing number of young Negroes taking snaps in the college ranks.
Isn't the scarce number of white RB's a similar issue to the previous lack of Negro QB's? A specific position on the field that is pretty much represented by one race.
Sure, to the untrained and unthoughtful eye.
The rest of us understand, that for a long period of time, there were no Negro QB's. And for a long period of time there weren't many Negro running backs. The position was virtually all white.
Gradually, as time went on, the Negro proved to be a more qualified fit for the demands of the position of running back; vision, quickness, speed, durability, stength, power, explosiveness. All traditional athletic attributes common to the Negro. And lacking in most white athletes.
Similarly, as time has gone on, the Negro is gradually assuming control of the QB position. Quick decision making, running ability, superior arm strength and unmatched determination have become the requisites to excel. Again, the position has gradually shifted to being tailor made for the Negro.
So, clearly, this isn't a case of the white athlete being deprived the chance to excel at running back. Which is in direct contrast to the Negro at QB.
This is clearly a case of the white athlete being protected for a long period of time by not allowing the competition from Negroes. And gradually, the Negro took over the running back position.
And we are seeing the same thing at QB.
Clearly, the extinction of the white running back is a sign of evolution in the NFL. Natural selection.
The absence of Negro QB's in the NFL was completely unnatural, and completely manufactured.
In comparing the two, it becomes clear. If you are someone who appreciates the positive evolution of the game and understands that weakness selects itself out of the league; well, then you should anxiously be awaiting the extinction of the white QB.
It is inevitable.
At A Loss....
We here at NOISb rarely, if ever, are at a loss for words. This totally stumped us.
By Mike Penner, Times Staff WriterApril 26, 2007
During my 23 years with The Times' sports department, I have held a wide variety of roles and titles. Tennis writer. Angels beat reporter. Olympics writer. Essayist. Sports media critic. NFL columnist. Recent keeper of the Morning Briefing flame.Today I leave for a few weeks' vacation, and when I return, I will come back in yet another incarnation. As Christine.
We just don't know what to say to this.
By Mike Penner, Times Staff WriterApril 26, 2007
During my 23 years with The Times' sports department, I have held a wide variety of roles and titles. Tennis writer. Angels beat reporter. Olympics writer. Essayist. Sports media critic. NFL columnist. Recent keeper of the Morning Briefing flame.Today I leave for a few weeks' vacation, and when I return, I will come back in yet another incarnation. As Christine.
We just don't know what to say to this.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Michael Strahan: Life In Hell
Sometimes, as sports fans, we become enamored with the bright lights, big city aspect of being a sports star. We see the money, the adoration, the opportunity, the material advantages and the potential to carry a career on the field into other business opportunities. Oh, and the women. There would seem to be ample opportunity to come into contact with plenty of adoring and friendly women.
As fans, we are led to believe that the life of a star athlete is filled with nothing but frivolity, enjoyment and happiness. The parties, the not worrying about having money to pay all the bills, the long off season with a relatively open schedule. It all seems too good to be true. At least to the fan.
Michael Strahan is here to let us know. The grass isn't greener.
"Let's say one day I came to you and offered you a million dollars to let me take a huge hunting knife and wear down the blade until it was rusty and really dull. Then, when it's really dull and nasty, I would stick it into a pit of burning coals until the blade was white-hot. Finally, I would pull that sucker out of the flames and stab you over and over and over again. Take that blade and stab you in the ankles, your feet and your wrists. Not just stick it in but turn that rusty old knife and twist it when it's sunk deep into your knees or shoulders." And the point of his bloodthirsty scenario? "That is the reality of my NFL," Strahan writes. "Every single year I have somebody sink this awful, dreadful blade into a few parts of my body."
Praise be! It hardly seems worth playing. The pain. The agony. The unfairness of the harsh reality of the big, long term contract NFL player. Life in the NFL, akin to being mercilessly gouged over and over with a rusty, hot and dull dagger. Penetrating your wholesome skin over and over. Until your blood is let and flowing uncontrollably. This sounds like the work of the devil.
If only Michael could enjoy the capricious lifestyle of the lower middle class hourly employee. Maybe if Michael had the joy of punching a time clock. Of having his supervisor monitor his fifteen minute morning coffee break to ensure he didn't take 16 minutes. Maybe if Michael had to make the choice each month of paying his rent on time or paying the power bill on time. Of deciding between purchasing enough to feed his family in generic goods at the store, or splurging and buying the name brand stuff; but not having enough to fill every one's belly. Indeed, that must be the life that would sooth the vicious knife gouging that Michael endures as an NFL multi-millionaire.
Our heart goes out to Michael.
Sometimes, life doesn't seem fair. But remember, Michael, our earthly existence is only a test for our reward. Just think: If you can endure the hell on earth of being an NFL multi-millionaire; what a bountiful paradise awaits you!
Stay righteous, Brother Strahan. We shall pray for you.
As fans, we are led to believe that the life of a star athlete is filled with nothing but frivolity, enjoyment and happiness. The parties, the not worrying about having money to pay all the bills, the long off season with a relatively open schedule. It all seems too good to be true. At least to the fan.
Michael Strahan is here to let us know. The grass isn't greener.
"Let's say one day I came to you and offered you a million dollars to let me take a huge hunting knife and wear down the blade until it was rusty and really dull. Then, when it's really dull and nasty, I would stick it into a pit of burning coals until the blade was white-hot. Finally, I would pull that sucker out of the flames and stab you over and over and over again. Take that blade and stab you in the ankles, your feet and your wrists. Not just stick it in but turn that rusty old knife and twist it when it's sunk deep into your knees or shoulders." And the point of his bloodthirsty scenario? "That is the reality of my NFL," Strahan writes. "Every single year I have somebody sink this awful, dreadful blade into a few parts of my body."
Praise be! It hardly seems worth playing. The pain. The agony. The unfairness of the harsh reality of the big, long term contract NFL player. Life in the NFL, akin to being mercilessly gouged over and over with a rusty, hot and dull dagger. Penetrating your wholesome skin over and over. Until your blood is let and flowing uncontrollably. This sounds like the work of the devil.
If only Michael could enjoy the capricious lifestyle of the lower middle class hourly employee. Maybe if Michael had the joy of punching a time clock. Of having his supervisor monitor his fifteen minute morning coffee break to ensure he didn't take 16 minutes. Maybe if Michael had to make the choice each month of paying his rent on time or paying the power bill on time. Of deciding between purchasing enough to feed his family in generic goods at the store, or splurging and buying the name brand stuff; but not having enough to fill every one's belly. Indeed, that must be the life that would sooth the vicious knife gouging that Michael endures as an NFL multi-millionaire.
Our heart goes out to Michael.
Sometimes, life doesn't seem fair. But remember, Michael, our earthly existence is only a test for our reward. Just think: If you can endure the hell on earth of being an NFL multi-millionaire; what a bountiful paradise awaits you!
Stay righteous, Brother Strahan. We shall pray for you.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Eva Longoria: Hates Sick Africans
Apparently, Dikembe Mutombo had been working with the NBA to sanction an NBA all-star game in Paris, with proceeds benefiting a hospital Mutombo had donated in the Congo.
The plan was to have a French team, lead by Tony Parker play against a team of NBA'ers, lead by Yao Ming.
One problem. Parker will be marrying Eva Longoria, who apparently feels her little honeymoon is more important than curing diseases in Africa. Lord knows she probably NEVER has the chance to go on relaxing trips with Parker.
"Tony is going to be on the honeymoon, and the French Federation says if Tony Parker will not play, the game cannot happen," Mutombo said. "Everybody said yes, but Tony cannot leave the honeymoon to come to play. I don't know his fiancée, so I don't know how to talk to her."
Well, Dikembe, we'd suggest talking to her just like Parker does, "Yes, ma'am, whatever you say, ma'am."
Just in:
Doug Christie says Parker is whipp-ed!
The plan was to have a French team, lead by Tony Parker play against a team of NBA'ers, lead by Yao Ming.
One problem. Parker will be marrying Eva Longoria, who apparently feels her little honeymoon is more important than curing diseases in Africa. Lord knows she probably NEVER has the chance to go on relaxing trips with Parker.
"Tony is going to be on the honeymoon, and the French Federation says if Tony Parker will not play, the game cannot happen," Mutombo said. "Everybody said yes, but Tony cannot leave the honeymoon to come to play. I don't know his fiancée, so I don't know how to talk to her."
Well, Dikembe, we'd suggest talking to her just like Parker does, "Yes, ma'am, whatever you say, ma'am."
Just in:
Doug Christie says Parker is whipp-ed!
And, What Else You Selling?
UCLA point guard Darren Collison said Monday night that he would have an announcement about his future basketball plans Wednesday. Collison's mother, June Griffith-Collison, submitted her resignation Monday as director of San Bernardino County's Regional Medical Center and in a news release said one reason was to help her son with his decision making. However, she said Monday night her resignation should not be taken as a sign that Collison would leave school for the NBA. ... A source close to the UCLA program said he "didn't expect" Collison to leave school. Collison was attending a tutoring session Monday night.
Ok, Mama quitting the j-o-b just to help baby boy make up his mind. Damn the bills!
But this doesn't mean he's turning pro.
I think Collison's mama, in an underhanded way, is calling us all idiots.
Ok, Mama quitting the j-o-b just to help baby boy make up his mind. Damn the bills!
But this doesn't mean he's turning pro.
I think Collison's mama, in an underhanded way, is calling us all idiots.
Mike Conley, Sr: Agent to the Buckeyes
Mike Conley, Sr., former track star and father to Ohio St. point guard Mike Conley, Jr. ; has announced that he will be the agent for the three OSU players declaring early for the draft. That would be Oden, Conley and Daquan Cook.
We find it terribly interesting that the NCAA has rules against player interaction with agents, yet Conley has a long history with these three. Particularly his son.
Conley coached all three in AAU, and one can only assume (since Conley says that he has been planning for the last 5 years or so to become an agent) that some conversations or discussions took place between Conley and the players.
Anyway, in this day and age, with the slotted salaries for the draft pics in the NBA, the issue isn't negotiating a salary. It is marketing and endorsement deals and image protection.
"Conley Sr. said his son didn't realize he was a lottery pick until someone mentioned it to him the day before the national title game against Florida in Atlanta. "
Mmmm. Excellent. Good luck, fellas.
We find it terribly interesting that the NCAA has rules against player interaction with agents, yet Conley has a long history with these three. Particularly his son.
Conley coached all three in AAU, and one can only assume (since Conley says that he has been planning for the last 5 years or so to become an agent) that some conversations or discussions took place between Conley and the players.
Anyway, in this day and age, with the slotted salaries for the draft pics in the NBA, the issue isn't negotiating a salary. It is marketing and endorsement deals and image protection.
"Conley Sr. said his son didn't realize he was a lottery pick until someone mentioned it to him the day before the national title game against Florida in Atlanta. "
Mmmm. Excellent. Good luck, fellas.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Vince Young REALLY is in Trouble
It's hard enough for Vince Young. Being a Negro QB in the NFL paints a target right in the middle of his back. Being the cover boy for Madden now subjects him to the curse.
But things just got worse.
We all know that SI.com's Peter King is well known for NEVER being right. Well, this is what Peter had to say about the Madden "curse":
And this stuff about a jinx for the last six players on the box getting injured the year they were featured on the box? The sport is football, people. Men get hurt, very often, playing football. And by the way, the only man I ever knew who seriously did not want to be on the cover of SI because of its supposed jinx was Bill Parcells, a card-carrying superstitious nut. Jinx, schminx.
Well, there you have it. Clearly, the power brokers in the NFL have decided to ensure that Young's season will be a short one.
Personally, we at NOISb are firmly convinced (based on past history) that Peter King's opinions and picks are substantially more jinxed than the curse.
We wish Vince a speedy recovery and successful rehab, in advance.
Oh and by the way. Just in case you were wondering, Peter also had this to say:
I like the way Jason Whitlock thinks.
We suggest Jason do some soul searching.
But things just got worse.
We all know that SI.com's Peter King is well known for NEVER being right. Well, this is what Peter had to say about the Madden "curse":
And this stuff about a jinx for the last six players on the box getting injured the year they were featured on the box? The sport is football, people. Men get hurt, very often, playing football. And by the way, the only man I ever knew who seriously did not want to be on the cover of SI because of its supposed jinx was Bill Parcells, a card-carrying superstitious nut. Jinx, schminx.
Well, there you have it. Clearly, the power brokers in the NFL have decided to ensure that Young's season will be a short one.
Personally, we at NOISb are firmly convinced (based on past history) that Peter King's opinions and picks are substantially more jinxed than the curse.
We wish Vince a speedy recovery and successful rehab, in advance.
Oh and by the way. Just in case you were wondering, Peter also had this to say:
I like the way Jason Whitlock thinks.
We suggest Jason do some soul searching.
The Leak: Who Benefits?
Interesting. Calvin Johnson, Gaines Adams and Amobi Okoye all admitted to experimenting with marijuana.
More interesting. The information was leaked to the press.
None of the players had ever been disciplined for any sort of infraction. None have had issues with the police. None has tested positive for any substance.
Yet, all of a sudden, this issue is on the front of sports pages.
Even more interesting. Johnson, Adams and Okoye are all being mentioned as possible top 6 picks. Who would benefit from their fall?
Jamarcus Russell is pretty much a lock at the 1 or 2 spot.
That turns our eyes to the big, white tackle from Wisconsin. Joe Thomas.
Throw this mud at the Negro players that might go before him, and watch his stock rise? Could that be the strategy of his management team?
We find it very interesting that no one is asking the white players what they are smoking. If Brady Quinn's answer ever got out, it might be very surprising.
More interesting. The information was leaked to the press.
None of the players had ever been disciplined for any sort of infraction. None have had issues with the police. None has tested positive for any substance.
Yet, all of a sudden, this issue is on the front of sports pages.
Even more interesting. Johnson, Adams and Okoye are all being mentioned as possible top 6 picks. Who would benefit from their fall?
Jamarcus Russell is pretty much a lock at the 1 or 2 spot.
That turns our eyes to the big, white tackle from Wisconsin. Joe Thomas.
Throw this mud at the Negro players that might go before him, and watch his stock rise? Could that be the strategy of his management team?
We find it very interesting that no one is asking the white players what they are smoking. If Brady Quinn's answer ever got out, it might be very surprising.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Whitlock: Up to His Old Tricks
Jason Whitlock unleashed his latest hate letter to Negro America today. Talking 'bout some sort of "revolution" against Negroes, or some such blather.
When revolution comes, you pick a side, ride the wave and hope you’re on the right side of history.America is in upheaval over what it can do to limit the pervasiveness of negative images in pop culture. Black America is on the verge of revolt over what it can do to curtail the negative influences of a particular strand of pop culture – hip hop.
Last time we checked, Negro America was on the verge of revolt; against Imus and racist remarks. Jason Whitlock is the one revolting against hip hop...and Negro culture. Don't lump everyone in with you and your "revolution", Mr. Whitlock. Some Negroes refuse to "jigaboo" for the man.
There are people – Al Sharpton, Russell Simmons, for example -- who want to control this revolution. They want to continue holding “hip hop summits” and negotiate a $ettlement. They want to talk until the revolution goes away or offer up some farfetched, grand plan that will basically say that “KKK rap” – it’s not gangsta – will go away when poverty ends.
Whitlock forgets, rap was born in the streets. The hood. In poverty. The connection is fundamental. To suggest that Sharpton or Simmons would be wrong in connecting the demise of what is the poetry of the hood with the alleviation of poverty itself only shows a massive disconnect. The underlying innuendo is that Sharpton and Simmons are in it for personal gain. That they only provide lip service and blame everything on poverty, knowing that poverty can't be wiped out quickly. To suggest that Simmons, the brains behind Def Jam and Phat Farm, a man that essentially molded the culture of hip hop through music, entertainment, fashion and language, is only in this for personal gain (after making billions) is borderline slanderous. Why would a man that has a vested interest in the proliferation of hip hop culture have any reason whatsoever not to actively try to address the problems it may (or may not) create?
The real problem then and the real problem now is a lack of respect. White folks wouldn’t give us our respect then, and we’ve lost our respect for ourselves now. We need to protest our self-hatred wherever we see it.
That almost sounds as if Mr. Whitlock is putting some of the blame for race relations and for the day to day problems of Negroes....on NEGROES! Has Mr. Whitlock never heard of slavery or racism? Does Mr. Whitlock not understand that white people are responsible for those things? And therefore assume responsibility for all the problems? If Negroes were to now assume some sort of responsibility, it would be akin to saying, "Slavery was the fault of the Negro".
Where better to start than “KKK rap?” Why not challenge the folks who call us bitches, hos and nigga? Why not protest against the very people and institutions that promote and celebrate our self-destruction? Why not go after the people who are defining black men and women as immoral animals?
We remind Mr. Whitlock, that is exactly what the Rev's did just two weeks ago!
I know the perfect target: Black Exploitation Television, sometimes known as BET.It needs to fall, and it needs to fall hard. It’s the leading provider of “Jigaboo TV.” It justifies all the other jigabooing you see on TV. If we bring down Black Exploitation Television, we won’t have to wait 10 years for victory.
So, the agenda becomes clear. Mr. Whitlock contends that Negroes have some sort of responsibility to change. Have some sort of culpability for the situation of Negroes in America. And need to police themselves.
Is that what he is saying?
Well, Mr. Whitlock, we see through you.
Clearly, Whitlock must have pitched an idea to BET and was shot down. And now he is demanding that Negro society look inward for their problems and their solutions, as penance for his failure.
Again, we ask Mr. Whitlock: Have you never heard of slavery or racism?
When revolution comes, you pick a side, ride the wave and hope you’re on the right side of history.America is in upheaval over what it can do to limit the pervasiveness of negative images in pop culture. Black America is on the verge of revolt over what it can do to curtail the negative influences of a particular strand of pop culture – hip hop.
Last time we checked, Negro America was on the verge of revolt; against Imus and racist remarks. Jason Whitlock is the one revolting against hip hop...and Negro culture. Don't lump everyone in with you and your "revolution", Mr. Whitlock. Some Negroes refuse to "jigaboo" for the man.
There are people – Al Sharpton, Russell Simmons, for example -- who want to control this revolution. They want to continue holding “hip hop summits” and negotiate a $ettlement. They want to talk until the revolution goes away or offer up some farfetched, grand plan that will basically say that “KKK rap” – it’s not gangsta – will go away when poverty ends.
Whitlock forgets, rap was born in the streets. The hood. In poverty. The connection is fundamental. To suggest that Sharpton or Simmons would be wrong in connecting the demise of what is the poetry of the hood with the alleviation of poverty itself only shows a massive disconnect. The underlying innuendo is that Sharpton and Simmons are in it for personal gain. That they only provide lip service and blame everything on poverty, knowing that poverty can't be wiped out quickly. To suggest that Simmons, the brains behind Def Jam and Phat Farm, a man that essentially molded the culture of hip hop through music, entertainment, fashion and language, is only in this for personal gain (after making billions) is borderline slanderous. Why would a man that has a vested interest in the proliferation of hip hop culture have any reason whatsoever not to actively try to address the problems it may (or may not) create?
The real problem then and the real problem now is a lack of respect. White folks wouldn’t give us our respect then, and we’ve lost our respect for ourselves now. We need to protest our self-hatred wherever we see it.
That almost sounds as if Mr. Whitlock is putting some of the blame for race relations and for the day to day problems of Negroes....on NEGROES! Has Mr. Whitlock never heard of slavery or racism? Does Mr. Whitlock not understand that white people are responsible for those things? And therefore assume responsibility for all the problems? If Negroes were to now assume some sort of responsibility, it would be akin to saying, "Slavery was the fault of the Negro".
Where better to start than “KKK rap?” Why not challenge the folks who call us bitches, hos and nigga? Why not protest against the very people and institutions that promote and celebrate our self-destruction? Why not go after the people who are defining black men and women as immoral animals?
We remind Mr. Whitlock, that is exactly what the Rev's did just two weeks ago!
I know the perfect target: Black Exploitation Television, sometimes known as BET.It needs to fall, and it needs to fall hard. It’s the leading provider of “Jigaboo TV.” It justifies all the other jigabooing you see on TV. If we bring down Black Exploitation Television, we won’t have to wait 10 years for victory.
So, the agenda becomes clear. Mr. Whitlock contends that Negroes have some sort of responsibility to change. Have some sort of culpability for the situation of Negroes in America. And need to police themselves.
Is that what he is saying?
Well, Mr. Whitlock, we see through you.
Clearly, Whitlock must have pitched an idea to BET and was shot down. And now he is demanding that Negro society look inward for their problems and their solutions, as penance for his failure.
Again, we ask Mr. Whitlock: Have you never heard of slavery or racism?
Steve Spurrier: Making Sense
South Carolina's ole ball coach is taking some heat for a recent remark he made while accepting a citizenship award.
"That damn flag needs to come down."
Was part of a larger statement the coach made, in reference to the confederate flag flying at South Carolina's state capitol building.
"It would make us a more progressive, better state, I think, if the flag was removed. But I’m not going to go on any big campaign to have it removed. That’s not my position,” Spurrier said in an interview with The State. “But if anyone were to ask me, that would certainly be my position. And I think everyone in there, it was their position, too.”
Certainly, we see no need to fly a flag of division. And, any reasonable person would listen to what Spurrier said and realize the man is just stating his opinion and is not calling for the state to do anything or leading a campaign against the flag. It's just how he feels.
Remember, we said reasonable person.
"We're outraged," Randall Burbage said. He's South Carolina's division commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans.
Outraged that the ole ball coach doesn't support a symbol of division? Or outraged that he opened his mouth about it?
"When he called it 'that damn flag,' we got incensed," Burbage said.
Spurrier had said he was embarrassed when a fan (or fans) were waving the flag in South Carolina's stands.
Apparently, Burbage and his group feel that Spurrier should be proud?
"I'm one of the long-suffering Gamecock fans," Burbage said."I thought this guy was great. For this to happen, he's gone down in my eyes."
Apparently, this effects Spurrier's coaching ability as well. We suggest that in order for Spurrier to go up in the eyes of the likes of Burbage, he wear a grey CSA uniform top and a cavalry officer's hat with a feather in the brim when he takes the sidelines. He could also start calling himself Colonel Spurrier and each time his offensive takes the field, lead them in a confederate battle cry. That should win back the long suffering Burbage, no?
Perhaps the most interesting reaction to Spurrier's comments was this:
Don Gordon, a state officer with the Sons of Confederate Veterans, said Spurrier’s call for the removal of the flag was “the moral equivalent of calling our ancestors ‘nappy-headed hos.’”
Now, while the logic in that passes over us like a 747, we would understand Gordon trying to make the illogical connection if Spurrier were a Negro. But Spurrier is a white, Southern male.
At NOISb we are willing to make this concession:
Supporters of Imus introduced rappers use of "ho" into their argument as to why Imus did nothing wrong. They said it was a double standard that Negroes could use the words "ho" and"nappy" and that whites couldn't.
Well, we suggest applying the same double standard in this case, in an effort to allow white folks to enjoy the type of thing Negroes so effectively hide behind.
Perhaps the white southern males so outraged at Spurrier's comments will let him off the hook for this "moral equivalent of calling our ancestors ‘nappy-headed hos". Everyone promises not to complain when old white southerners exercise the moral equivalent of calling Negroes nappy-headed hos on to each other. Deal? Now old white southerners have a double standard of their own. It's about time!
An old southern white guy calling for other old southern white guys to move into the 21st century seems like a double standard we can all support.
"That damn flag needs to come down."
Was part of a larger statement the coach made, in reference to the confederate flag flying at South Carolina's state capitol building.
"It would make us a more progressive, better state, I think, if the flag was removed. But I’m not going to go on any big campaign to have it removed. That’s not my position,” Spurrier said in an interview with The State. “But if anyone were to ask me, that would certainly be my position. And I think everyone in there, it was their position, too.”
Certainly, we see no need to fly a flag of division. And, any reasonable person would listen to what Spurrier said and realize the man is just stating his opinion and is not calling for the state to do anything or leading a campaign against the flag. It's just how he feels.
Remember, we said reasonable person.
"We're outraged," Randall Burbage said. He's South Carolina's division commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans.
Outraged that the ole ball coach doesn't support a symbol of division? Or outraged that he opened his mouth about it?
"When he called it 'that damn flag,' we got incensed," Burbage said.
Spurrier had said he was embarrassed when a fan (or fans) were waving the flag in South Carolina's stands.
Apparently, Burbage and his group feel that Spurrier should be proud?
"I'm one of the long-suffering Gamecock fans," Burbage said."I thought this guy was great. For this to happen, he's gone down in my eyes."
Apparently, this effects Spurrier's coaching ability as well. We suggest that in order for Spurrier to go up in the eyes of the likes of Burbage, he wear a grey CSA uniform top and a cavalry officer's hat with a feather in the brim when he takes the sidelines. He could also start calling himself Colonel Spurrier and each time his offensive takes the field, lead them in a confederate battle cry. That should win back the long suffering Burbage, no?
Perhaps the most interesting reaction to Spurrier's comments was this:
Don Gordon, a state officer with the Sons of Confederate Veterans, said Spurrier’s call for the removal of the flag was “the moral equivalent of calling our ancestors ‘nappy-headed hos.’”
Now, while the logic in that passes over us like a 747, we would understand Gordon trying to make the illogical connection if Spurrier were a Negro. But Spurrier is a white, Southern male.
At NOISb we are willing to make this concession:
Supporters of Imus introduced rappers use of "ho" into their argument as to why Imus did nothing wrong. They said it was a double standard that Negroes could use the words "ho" and"nappy" and that whites couldn't.
Well, we suggest applying the same double standard in this case, in an effort to allow white folks to enjoy the type of thing Negroes so effectively hide behind.
Perhaps the white southern males so outraged at Spurrier's comments will let him off the hook for this "moral equivalent of calling our ancestors ‘nappy-headed hos". Everyone promises not to complain when old white southerners exercise the moral equivalent of calling Negroes nappy-headed hos on to each other. Deal? Now old white southerners have a double standard of their own. It's about time!
An old southern white guy calling for other old southern white guys to move into the 21st century seems like a double standard we can all support.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
C. Vivian Stringer: The Autobiography
Some folks gave Rutgers' basketball coach Vivian Stringer some heat and criticised her for "grandstanding", recruiting and taking a "holier than thou" posture during the news conference addressing Imus' comments.
Well, apparently the country became enthralled and infatuated with the coach. And a book deal is now on the table.
"It's about an incredible woman with an extraordinary life story," said Tina Constable, executive vice president for publicity at Crown, who declined to say how much the company will pay Stringer. "She's a pioneer, a legend, an icon and a role model."
And for some reason, it took a disasterous comment by a shock-jock for us to realize this.
Well, apparently the country became enthralled and infatuated with the coach. And a book deal is now on the table.
"It's about an incredible woman with an extraordinary life story," said Tina Constable, executive vice president for publicity at Crown, who declined to say how much the company will pay Stringer. "She's a pioneer, a legend, an icon and a role model."
And for some reason, it took a disasterous comment by a shock-jock for us to realize this.
Pokey Chatman: Wrongly Resigned
According to former LSU women's hoops coach Pokey Chatman's lawyer, she was mislead and pressured into resigning her position by the LSU administration.
Interestingly enough, LSU wasted little time after their season ended and brought in a Hall of Fame coach. Who just happens to be a white male. Certainly no connection between pressuring Negro female Chatman to leave Baton Rouge and talking an elderly white male coach out of retirement to take her desk. None whatsoever, we trust.
""You can't con somebody into something and then hold them to the agreement," Pierson later told ESPN.com."
Apparently, LSU mislead Chatman into believing she had no options but either resigning or being fired.
"Chatman's attorney, Mary Olive Pierson, said Tuesday her client was given about two hours to resign or be fired on March 7 amid allegations she had inappropriate sexual relationships with former players."
The choices seem pretty clear, so we suspect that the administration mislead Chatman with the allegations.
"They said, 'This is your option -- you're out of here or you're out of here.' That's pretty much what they said."
And, from a legal standpoint, we believe that the law provides that there must be choices which provide options that are satisfactory to all parties. One can't just give someone two options, with similar outcomes, for allegedly engaging in conduct unacceptable for a teacher/coach. Legal precedent suggests that she should have been given some sort of out that would have been to her benefit.
"Reached late Tuesday, LSU general counsel Ray Lamonica said the university gave Chatman two options on March 7 -- resign as head women's basketball coach or be put on administrative leave while the investigation continued. "
So, the university admits, that they essentially only gave Chatman one option. To cease coaching. Accepting the "option" of administrative leave while the investigation continued probably folds into Chatman's lawyer's complaint about being conned. If they were asking her to resign, why would they need to continue the investigation? Wouldn't they have all the information needed? How could you suggest someone resign if you didn't have the full details?
And this is where things get murky.
If Chatman knew the university didn't have full details, she probably never would have resigned. She assumed, when the university suggested resignation, that they knew the whole story. Which would have left her with no option, save to leave town. If she had known they didn't have full disclosure, there would have been time to conduct damage control and possibly paint a different picture to the situation. Essentially, the university robbed Chatman and her counsel of the opportunity to spin. And, in this circumstance, that hardly seems fair.
"Within a couple of hours, Pierson said, her client was forced to resign. She said LSU claimed to not know the names of the athletes who were involved in the alleged relationships, and said the university made no attempt to interview them. "
Chatman must have been confused by the situation. Normally, if a complainant would ask for a resignation, and made it known they didn't have details, the target of the complaint would probably not simply agree to the complaint and resign. It might look like you admit to the complaint. Clearly, in this case, the resignation was not an admission of truth to the complaint, but rather a result of pressure, innuendo and confusion.
"Pierson also said the university cited an "absolute zero tolerance" policy involving coach-player relationships that Chatman's camp later discovered didn't exist. "If I'd have known on March 7th they didn't have a policy," Pierson said, "she would not have resigned."
And that seems fair enough. Firstly, if the university didn't have a policy delineating the limits between teachers/coaches and students, how is the teacher/coach to know that it is wrong to have sex with the students that they act as a father/mother figure for? Additionally, is it fair to expect the legal counsel of Chatman to familiarize herself with the university policies? This is looking more and more like strong-arm tactics designed to quickly get Chatman out of the picture so that the old white guy can take over the program that Chatman had built into one of the best.
Asked about a written zero-tolerance policy, Lamonica (LSU attorney) referred to NCAA bylaws and said Chatman's contract outlaid conduct policies. "Does anybody believe you can do this kind of stuff and not have sanctions?" he said.
Clearly, Lamonica has not discussed this with Chatman's counsel.
"Frankly, it was my clear impression that the university had taken about two weeks to a) get one version of the story from Ms. Berry; b) make no effort to contact Coach Chatman to seek her input into the situation; c) make no effort to validate the unsubstantiated stories being told by Ms. Berry; d) rush to judgment; and e) terminate Coach Chatman and try to make it look like a voluntary resignation," she wrote. "For a timely analogy, I suggest that the decision making process applied in this case was created by someone who must have graduated from the Nifong school of decision making."
The one dissimilarity in the case: The Duke players vocally and vehemently denied the accusations, and the white media reported the denials. For some reason the white media has never reported on any denials to the accusations by Ms. Chatman. Obviously, she would have denied untrue or unsubstantiated stories.
Though the relations were never outright denied in the e-mail, Pierson did call the claims "stories" based on hearsay. She said those "stories," according to the university, took place when Chatman was an assistant coach.
So, it becomes clearer. Chatman's lawyer is not going to issue a denial on her clients behalf, because stories based on hearsay are beneath denial. They require no response. Additionally adding to the mounting argument of Chatman's lawyer is: if this happened when she was an assistant coach, what does that have to do with her head coaching career?
Obviously, Chatman is the victim here. Conned into a resignation after the administration caught wind of some "stories" and mounted a lynching party. The victim of an unsympathetic media, an unclear code of conduct and an inability to effectively communicate a denial.
This isn't about money. This is about fair and equal treatment.
Pierson also said further legal action is likely if Chatman isn't compensated for the final two years of her contract.
Interestingly enough, LSU wasted little time after their season ended and brought in a Hall of Fame coach. Who just happens to be a white male. Certainly no connection between pressuring Negro female Chatman to leave Baton Rouge and talking an elderly white male coach out of retirement to take her desk. None whatsoever, we trust.
""You can't con somebody into something and then hold them to the agreement," Pierson later told ESPN.com."
Apparently, LSU mislead Chatman into believing she had no options but either resigning or being fired.
"Chatman's attorney, Mary Olive Pierson, said Tuesday her client was given about two hours to resign or be fired on March 7 amid allegations she had inappropriate sexual relationships with former players."
The choices seem pretty clear, so we suspect that the administration mislead Chatman with the allegations.
"They said, 'This is your option -- you're out of here or you're out of here.' That's pretty much what they said."
And, from a legal standpoint, we believe that the law provides that there must be choices which provide options that are satisfactory to all parties. One can't just give someone two options, with similar outcomes, for allegedly engaging in conduct unacceptable for a teacher/coach. Legal precedent suggests that she should have been given some sort of out that would have been to her benefit.
"Reached late Tuesday, LSU general counsel Ray Lamonica said the university gave Chatman two options on March 7 -- resign as head women's basketball coach or be put on administrative leave while the investigation continued. "
So, the university admits, that they essentially only gave Chatman one option. To cease coaching. Accepting the "option" of administrative leave while the investigation continued probably folds into Chatman's lawyer's complaint about being conned. If they were asking her to resign, why would they need to continue the investigation? Wouldn't they have all the information needed? How could you suggest someone resign if you didn't have the full details?
And this is where things get murky.
If Chatman knew the university didn't have full details, she probably never would have resigned. She assumed, when the university suggested resignation, that they knew the whole story. Which would have left her with no option, save to leave town. If she had known they didn't have full disclosure, there would have been time to conduct damage control and possibly paint a different picture to the situation. Essentially, the university robbed Chatman and her counsel of the opportunity to spin. And, in this circumstance, that hardly seems fair.
"Within a couple of hours, Pierson said, her client was forced to resign. She said LSU claimed to not know the names of the athletes who were involved in the alleged relationships, and said the university made no attempt to interview them. "
Chatman must have been confused by the situation. Normally, if a complainant would ask for a resignation, and made it known they didn't have details, the target of the complaint would probably not simply agree to the complaint and resign. It might look like you admit to the complaint. Clearly, in this case, the resignation was not an admission of truth to the complaint, but rather a result of pressure, innuendo and confusion.
"Pierson also said the university cited an "absolute zero tolerance" policy involving coach-player relationships that Chatman's camp later discovered didn't exist. "If I'd have known on March 7th they didn't have a policy," Pierson said, "she would not have resigned."
And that seems fair enough. Firstly, if the university didn't have a policy delineating the limits between teachers/coaches and students, how is the teacher/coach to know that it is wrong to have sex with the students that they act as a father/mother figure for? Additionally, is it fair to expect the legal counsel of Chatman to familiarize herself with the university policies? This is looking more and more like strong-arm tactics designed to quickly get Chatman out of the picture so that the old white guy can take over the program that Chatman had built into one of the best.
Asked about a written zero-tolerance policy, Lamonica (LSU attorney) referred to NCAA bylaws and said Chatman's contract outlaid conduct policies. "Does anybody believe you can do this kind of stuff and not have sanctions?" he said.
Clearly, Lamonica has not discussed this with Chatman's counsel.
"Frankly, it was my clear impression that the university had taken about two weeks to a) get one version of the story from Ms. Berry; b) make no effort to contact Coach Chatman to seek her input into the situation; c) make no effort to validate the unsubstantiated stories being told by Ms. Berry; d) rush to judgment; and e) terminate Coach Chatman and try to make it look like a voluntary resignation," she wrote. "For a timely analogy, I suggest that the decision making process applied in this case was created by someone who must have graduated from the Nifong school of decision making."
The one dissimilarity in the case: The Duke players vocally and vehemently denied the accusations, and the white media reported the denials. For some reason the white media has never reported on any denials to the accusations by Ms. Chatman. Obviously, she would have denied untrue or unsubstantiated stories.
Though the relations were never outright denied in the e-mail, Pierson did call the claims "stories" based on hearsay. She said those "stories," according to the university, took place when Chatman was an assistant coach.
So, it becomes clearer. Chatman's lawyer is not going to issue a denial on her clients behalf, because stories based on hearsay are beneath denial. They require no response. Additionally adding to the mounting argument of Chatman's lawyer is: if this happened when she was an assistant coach, what does that have to do with her head coaching career?
Obviously, Chatman is the victim here. Conned into a resignation after the administration caught wind of some "stories" and mounted a lynching party. The victim of an unsympathetic media, an unclear code of conduct and an inability to effectively communicate a denial.
This isn't about money. This is about fair and equal treatment.
Pierson also said further legal action is likely if Chatman isn't compensated for the final two years of her contract.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Vince Young: Targeted
The desire to rid the NFL of Negro QB's is alive and well.
Vince Young has been targeted for termination. EA Sports has announced that Young will be on the cover of this year's edition of Madden.
Young had an outstanding rookie season, taking over the starting QB role and leading the Titans to respectability. Apparently, his progress this off season has caught the attention of those determined to rid the NFL of Negro passers.
A list of previous players represented on the cover of Madden reads like a hit list. Injuries seem to go hand in hand with the cover.
The only thing in Young's favor is that he was able to avoid the SI cover jinx on multiple occasions.
We pray for your protection, Vince. Remember, when in the cross hairs of evilishness, zig and zag. The hand of evil on the trigger is not steady. The path to righteousness is.
Vince Young has been targeted for termination. EA Sports has announced that Young will be on the cover of this year's edition of Madden.
Young had an outstanding rookie season, taking over the starting QB role and leading the Titans to respectability. Apparently, his progress this off season has caught the attention of those determined to rid the NFL of Negro passers.
A list of previous players represented on the cover of Madden reads like a hit list. Injuries seem to go hand in hand with the cover.
The only thing in Young's favor is that he was able to avoid the SI cover jinx on multiple occasions.
We pray for your protection, Vince. Remember, when in the cross hairs of evilishness, zig and zag. The hand of evil on the trigger is not steady. The path to righteousness is.
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Viking Victim of Jim Crow Laws
Minnesota Vikings' cornerback Cedric Griffin was arrested over the weekend.
Griffin was out at club, minding his own business and having a wonderful and joyous time. Apparently, the managers of the club noticed a young Negro in their establishment and decided that they would prefer he not be there. Living in the 21st century, the powers that be decided they couldn't simply approach him and say, "No Negroes, you must leave."
The bouncers enacted a tactic often used in the here and now to preclude young Negro males from partaking in the fun of club life. A dress code. But, not just a typical dress code, like "Jacket and Tie Required". No, a dress code written in a spirit that would make Jim Crow smile and look down his nose. A restriction written specifically towards the Negro male.
Young Mr. Griffin was asked to leave because his pants sagged too low. What a novel approach to enforcing a racist entry policy at the club.
Supposedly, America is a free society that respects the cultures of its citizens and encourages diversity. Diversity can only be experienced and cultivated through appreciating and accepting different cultures. And, in case you just rolled into town and plopped off the back of the turnip truck, saggy pants that hang low are a mainstay in Negro culture. To ban their presence is to ban Negro Males.
And that is just what this Jim Crow dress code has done. Making matters worse, the bouncers antagonized and harassed Mr. Griffin to such a point that he lost his cool and ended up leaving in handcuffs in police custody.
Our plea: Rev's Jackson and Sharpton, you have defeated the racist voice of Imus. Now, do what is the number 2 thing on the list of bettering the Negro's existence in America. Get a repeal of club dress codes. There can be no equality without saggy, low riding pants.
No drawers sticking out of our jeans. No peace!
Make the signs now.
Griffin was out at club, minding his own business and having a wonderful and joyous time. Apparently, the managers of the club noticed a young Negro in their establishment and decided that they would prefer he not be there. Living in the 21st century, the powers that be decided they couldn't simply approach him and say, "No Negroes, you must leave."
The bouncers enacted a tactic often used in the here and now to preclude young Negro males from partaking in the fun of club life. A dress code. But, not just a typical dress code, like "Jacket and Tie Required". No, a dress code written in a spirit that would make Jim Crow smile and look down his nose. A restriction written specifically towards the Negro male.
Young Mr. Griffin was asked to leave because his pants sagged too low. What a novel approach to enforcing a racist entry policy at the club.
Supposedly, America is a free society that respects the cultures of its citizens and encourages diversity. Diversity can only be experienced and cultivated through appreciating and accepting different cultures. And, in case you just rolled into town and plopped off the back of the turnip truck, saggy pants that hang low are a mainstay in Negro culture. To ban their presence is to ban Negro Males.
And that is just what this Jim Crow dress code has done. Making matters worse, the bouncers antagonized and harassed Mr. Griffin to such a point that he lost his cool and ended up leaving in handcuffs in police custody.
Our plea: Rev's Jackson and Sharpton, you have defeated the racist voice of Imus. Now, do what is the number 2 thing on the list of bettering the Negro's existence in America. Get a repeal of club dress codes. There can be no equality without saggy, low riding pants.
No drawers sticking out of our jeans. No peace!
Make the signs now.
Friday, April 13, 2007
Whitlock: Why Doesn't He Like Negroes?
Jason Whitlock is at it again.
Pandering to the white media. Betraying his community. Turning his back on the agenda of Negro America. Siding with racists and users of horrible language directed at destroying the self esteem, self worth and self respect of young Negro women.
For shame Mr. Whitlock, for shame!
The Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton have launched a defense through offense. Exhorting the media to understand and report the damage that Imus' comments caused not just the scholar-athletes of Rutgers, but Negroes in general. The Revs have cemented a united front to challenge the racist language used by Imus and proliferated on the airwaves of CBS and MSNBC. To allow Mr. Imus to continue to use their airwaves would be condoning his language and it would be a complicit act of racism.
Mr. Whitlock suggests that the Revs only involve themselves in such an issue because they see the opportunity to hijack the news and to somehow line their pockets. That they neglect to speak out on other issues that might not present them with the opportunity to monopolize the headlines and add to their bank accounts.
We suggest that the Revs reserve such actions for only the most important and socially repressive actions. That the good Revs have been involved in the struggle and have built the credibility to determine which issues require kid glove treatment and which ones require a maelstrom.
The Negro community has grown to trust their judgment. They have rarely let the Negro community down. Why else would they be able to generate such response and such coverage? Would the media grant them such privilege and respect and input if the Revs did NOT reflect the accumulated voice of Negro America?
"We have more important issues to deal with than Imus. If we are unwilling to clean up the filth and disrespect we heap on each other, nothing will change with our condition. "
But, isn't that hate and disrespect heaped on Negroes by other Negroes a reflection of the fact that people like Imus say what they say? If the Imus's of the world can be censored. If the Revs can complete this dialogue on what is acceptable to say and what is not, won't we then see the Negroes self-image improve? If white America is silenced, Negro America will certainly be able to flourish. And the incestial disrespect will cease. Can't Whitlock see that the disrespect Negroes have for other Negroes is a product of white Americans getting on the radio or tv and saying whatever they want about Negroes? Is this not clear?
We believe Mr. Whitlock is the one completely out of touch with the community that the Revs gracefully and fully represent. Perhaps Mr. Whitlock should take to heart Snoop Dogg's assessment of the situation. The suggestion that rappers say worse things than Imus is out of touch with what Negro America believes.
"It's a completely different scenario," said Snoop, barking over the phone from a hotel room in L.A. "[Rappers] are not talking about no collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports. We're talking about ho's that's in the 'hood that ain't doing sh--, that's trying to get a n---a for his money. These are two separate things. First of all, we ain't no old-ass white men that sit up on MSNBC [the cable network home to Imus] going hard on black girls. We are rappers that have these songs coming from our minds and our souls that are relevant to what we feel. I will not let them mutha-----as say we in the same league as him."
Could this be more clear? Rappers using those terms are ART. It is how they feel. White folks using them is hate. Understand, Mr. Whitlock?
And Snoop went on to further illustrate the REAL hypocrisy of the incident.
"Snoop Dogg insisted "this punk" Imus deserved much more than a two-week suspension. He deserved to be fired. He should at least be punished like the NFL suspended Tennessee Titans football player Adam Jones for an entire season for scrapes with the police:
"Kick him off the air forever," he said. "Ban him like they did [Adam] 'Pacman' Jones. They kicked him out the [National Football] League for the whole season [for numerous violations of the NFL's personal-conduct policy, including multiple arrests], but this punk gets to get on the air and call black women 'nappy-headed ho's.' "
So, before self indulgent panderers attack the only people with the fortitude to stand up to white, corporate America and its flagrant and profitable racism; we'd ask that you fully understand the plight of the Negro. That you fully understand the needs of the community. That you fully consider WHY Negroes use the terms they do. That you concede that the hypocracy ISN'T in who can say what, but is in how the system doles out retribution.
And, sometimes, that system needs the maelstrom of the Revs to right it.
Get in line Mr. Whitlock, as a Negro, your resistance is only hurting yourself.
Pandering to the white media. Betraying his community. Turning his back on the agenda of Negro America. Siding with racists and users of horrible language directed at destroying the self esteem, self worth and self respect of young Negro women.
For shame Mr. Whitlock, for shame!
The Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton have launched a defense through offense. Exhorting the media to understand and report the damage that Imus' comments caused not just the scholar-athletes of Rutgers, but Negroes in general. The Revs have cemented a united front to challenge the racist language used by Imus and proliferated on the airwaves of CBS and MSNBC. To allow Mr. Imus to continue to use their airwaves would be condoning his language and it would be a complicit act of racism.
Mr. Whitlock suggests that the Revs only involve themselves in such an issue because they see the opportunity to hijack the news and to somehow line their pockets. That they neglect to speak out on other issues that might not present them with the opportunity to monopolize the headlines and add to their bank accounts.
We suggest that the Revs reserve such actions for only the most important and socially repressive actions. That the good Revs have been involved in the struggle and have built the credibility to determine which issues require kid glove treatment and which ones require a maelstrom.
The Negro community has grown to trust their judgment. They have rarely let the Negro community down. Why else would they be able to generate such response and such coverage? Would the media grant them such privilege and respect and input if the Revs did NOT reflect the accumulated voice of Negro America?
"We have more important issues to deal with than Imus. If we are unwilling to clean up the filth and disrespect we heap on each other, nothing will change with our condition. "
But, isn't that hate and disrespect heaped on Negroes by other Negroes a reflection of the fact that people like Imus say what they say? If the Imus's of the world can be censored. If the Revs can complete this dialogue on what is acceptable to say and what is not, won't we then see the Negroes self-image improve? If white America is silenced, Negro America will certainly be able to flourish. And the incestial disrespect will cease. Can't Whitlock see that the disrespect Negroes have for other Negroes is a product of white Americans getting on the radio or tv and saying whatever they want about Negroes? Is this not clear?
We believe Mr. Whitlock is the one completely out of touch with the community that the Revs gracefully and fully represent. Perhaps Mr. Whitlock should take to heart Snoop Dogg's assessment of the situation. The suggestion that rappers say worse things than Imus is out of touch with what Negro America believes.
"It's a completely different scenario," said Snoop, barking over the phone from a hotel room in L.A. "[Rappers] are not talking about no collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports. We're talking about ho's that's in the 'hood that ain't doing sh--, that's trying to get a n---a for his money. These are two separate things. First of all, we ain't no old-ass white men that sit up on MSNBC [the cable network home to Imus] going hard on black girls. We are rappers that have these songs coming from our minds and our souls that are relevant to what we feel. I will not let them mutha-----as say we in the same league as him."
Could this be more clear? Rappers using those terms are ART. It is how they feel. White folks using them is hate. Understand, Mr. Whitlock?
And Snoop went on to further illustrate the REAL hypocrisy of the incident.
"Snoop Dogg insisted "this punk" Imus deserved much more than a two-week suspension. He deserved to be fired. He should at least be punished like the NFL suspended Tennessee Titans football player Adam Jones for an entire season for scrapes with the police:
"Kick him off the air forever," he said. "Ban him like they did [Adam] 'Pacman' Jones. They kicked him out the [National Football] League for the whole season [for numerous violations of the NFL's personal-conduct policy, including multiple arrests], but this punk gets to get on the air and call black women 'nappy-headed ho's.' "
So, before self indulgent panderers attack the only people with the fortitude to stand up to white, corporate America and its flagrant and profitable racism; we'd ask that you fully understand the plight of the Negro. That you fully understand the needs of the community. That you fully consider WHY Negroes use the terms they do. That you concede that the hypocracy ISN'T in who can say what, but is in how the system doles out retribution.
And, sometimes, that system needs the maelstrom of the Revs to right it.
Get in line Mr. Whitlock, as a Negro, your resistance is only hurting yourself.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Imus: The Fallout and the Solution
Imus has lost his gig on MSNBC as a result of the outcry led by Revs. Sharpton and Jackson.
No real surprise in this. Imus has allowed himself to be played like a fiddle by the Revs and has helped them every step of the way. He has continued to insert his foot in his mouth and his codgerly manner has created a most unsympathetic image.
Sharpton and Jackson have become masters of playing the race baiting game and Imus has been a complete pawn in there little game. Remember, these are BOTH men who have made intensely offensive comments against whites and Jews, and were able to escape scott free. So, they not only know how to trap Imus, but they also are able to continue to expose his weaknesses on this front.
Imus only has two option here. One, cease and desist with any commentary. At this point, he can't win. His only other option is to engage representatives of the NofI for his mea culpa.
Jackson and Sharpton are in this for personal gain. To further their agenda and gain attention so as to illicit greater corporate "contributions" to their causes. Dancing before them or trying to stand up to them only emboldens them and draws more attention to them.
Imus should quickly open his studio to a NofI representative. Offer the representative a permanent post on his show. And allow the NofI to facilitate his rehabilitation by gradually imposing their voice on his show. Eventually, with Imus stepping down and giving full creative control to the NofI.
The benefits of this are many fold. Imagine the pain the women of Rutger's basketball team felt as they were gathered around their radio, listening to Imus degrade them. With the NofI controlling the topics of discussion and leading the dialogue, we would be most assured that Imus and his colleagues would never engage in any dialogue which the Negro community would find offensive; as they gather in barber shops and at home to listen to his show.
Additionally, the show would set an example for other shows. What is proper and just to discuss and the terms that would be allowable would be gleaned from the new Imus & the NofI Morning Prayer Show. Guidelines could be set, and eventually, there would be no need for the likes of Jackson and Sharpton dirtying the issues for their personal gain. We'd all already be aware of acceptable speech. Deviations would be dealt with accordingly.
We believe that firing Imus is not the answer. Silencing one man does not create change. It only creates indignation in those that share his treacherous beliefs.
Allowing Imus the opportunity to truly and honorably demonstrate that he isn't racist and that he is willing to try to contribute to a nation that does not institutionally degrade and control Negroes, by allowing the true voice of the Negro to dictate his voice, would be the only path to righteousness in this instance.
And, eventually, the rest of the media could follow his example.
The path to righteousness does not diverge.
This is the only way to mend the fences that Sharpton, Jackson and Imus have created. None of them are victims. And none are righteous. Allow the true righteous victims to create this solution.
No real surprise in this. Imus has allowed himself to be played like a fiddle by the Revs and has helped them every step of the way. He has continued to insert his foot in his mouth and his codgerly manner has created a most unsympathetic image.
Sharpton and Jackson have become masters of playing the race baiting game and Imus has been a complete pawn in there little game. Remember, these are BOTH men who have made intensely offensive comments against whites and Jews, and were able to escape scott free. So, they not only know how to trap Imus, but they also are able to continue to expose his weaknesses on this front.
Imus only has two option here. One, cease and desist with any commentary. At this point, he can't win. His only other option is to engage representatives of the NofI for his mea culpa.
Jackson and Sharpton are in this for personal gain. To further their agenda and gain attention so as to illicit greater corporate "contributions" to their causes. Dancing before them or trying to stand up to them only emboldens them and draws more attention to them.
Imus should quickly open his studio to a NofI representative. Offer the representative a permanent post on his show. And allow the NofI to facilitate his rehabilitation by gradually imposing their voice on his show. Eventually, with Imus stepping down and giving full creative control to the NofI.
The benefits of this are many fold. Imagine the pain the women of Rutger's basketball team felt as they were gathered around their radio, listening to Imus degrade them. With the NofI controlling the topics of discussion and leading the dialogue, we would be most assured that Imus and his colleagues would never engage in any dialogue which the Negro community would find offensive; as they gather in barber shops and at home to listen to his show.
Additionally, the show would set an example for other shows. What is proper and just to discuss and the terms that would be allowable would be gleaned from the new Imus & the NofI Morning Prayer Show. Guidelines could be set, and eventually, there would be no need for the likes of Jackson and Sharpton dirtying the issues for their personal gain. We'd all already be aware of acceptable speech. Deviations would be dealt with accordingly.
We believe that firing Imus is not the answer. Silencing one man does not create change. It only creates indignation in those that share his treacherous beliefs.
Allowing Imus the opportunity to truly and honorably demonstrate that he isn't racist and that he is willing to try to contribute to a nation that does not institutionally degrade and control Negroes, by allowing the true voice of the Negro to dictate his voice, would be the only path to righteousness in this instance.
And, eventually, the rest of the media could follow his example.
The path to righteousness does not diverge.
This is the only way to mend the fences that Sharpton, Jackson and Imus have created. None of them are victims. And none are righteous. Allow the true righteous victims to create this solution.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Pacman: Making The Righteous Choice
You've heard about Pacman Jones meeting with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell last week. Supposedly he was called on the carpet to explain himself to Goodell, and for Goodell to meet the man face to face to form an opinion about his future with the league.
The expectation being that Pacman would cow tow to the commissioner and greet the press with contrite words and an attitude that would reflect a spirit supposedly broken by the highhanded, ivory tower dwelling commissioner.
Pacman would, in theory, beg forgiveness and promise to repent for his "sins". Turn his back on his community, friends and family; and reinvent himself in a new image determined by Goodell.
Despite the fact that Pacman had charges unresolved and had not been admonished by the court for anything more than a misdemeanor, Goodell enacted a new "behavior" policy and threatened to arbitrarily and retroactively enforce it. Clearly, violating any and all tenants of juridprudence. Which is something quite ironic. Goodell is angry with Jones because of alleged infractions of the legal system, yet feels comfortable in violating the ideals and principles of the same system in retaliation. Goodell is more than happy to circumvent the concept of double jeopardy and essentially trample the rule of law as it applies to free and democratic society by suggesting ex post facto application.
After learning of Goodell's capricious implementation of the policy and his flagrant disregard for the legal principles which we enjoy as a free society, Pacman decided that he had to take protestorial action.
For over a year, the NFL was getting free marketing and press through their association with Pacman. As the media and paparazzi followed Pacman's carefree exploits, we were always reminded that he was a member of the NFL's Tennessee Titans. Well, Pacman decided that enough is enough.
In response to the meeting with Goodell, and tired of letting the NFL thrive off the press from his exploits, Pacman decided the time to act was now. The NFL and Goodell must be punished. A lesson must be doled out.
The punishment is two fold. Pacman is sitting out the season. And, Pacman is going to discontinue his footloose and fancy free lifestyle. Thereby denying the NFL and the Titans the accompanying press and attention.
We could not be more proud of Pacman for taking this hard stand against the monopolistic NFL and its new tsar.
The awaiting ratings dip and lack of fan interest in the upcoming season will surely lead to the ouster of Goodell and the restoration of the traditional principles of enactment for codified justice that this country was founded upon.
This proactive act of righteousness is an example for us all.
Thank you for your bravery in the face of the great, pale evil, Pacman.
The expectation being that Pacman would cow tow to the commissioner and greet the press with contrite words and an attitude that would reflect a spirit supposedly broken by the highhanded, ivory tower dwelling commissioner.
Pacman would, in theory, beg forgiveness and promise to repent for his "sins". Turn his back on his community, friends and family; and reinvent himself in a new image determined by Goodell.
Despite the fact that Pacman had charges unresolved and had not been admonished by the court for anything more than a misdemeanor, Goodell enacted a new "behavior" policy and threatened to arbitrarily and retroactively enforce it. Clearly, violating any and all tenants of juridprudence. Which is something quite ironic. Goodell is angry with Jones because of alleged infractions of the legal system, yet feels comfortable in violating the ideals and principles of the same system in retaliation. Goodell is more than happy to circumvent the concept of double jeopardy and essentially trample the rule of law as it applies to free and democratic society by suggesting ex post facto application.
After learning of Goodell's capricious implementation of the policy and his flagrant disregard for the legal principles which we enjoy as a free society, Pacman decided that he had to take protestorial action.
For over a year, the NFL was getting free marketing and press through their association with Pacman. As the media and paparazzi followed Pacman's carefree exploits, we were always reminded that he was a member of the NFL's Tennessee Titans. Well, Pacman decided that enough is enough.
In response to the meeting with Goodell, and tired of letting the NFL thrive off the press from his exploits, Pacman decided the time to act was now. The NFL and Goodell must be punished. A lesson must be doled out.
The punishment is two fold. Pacman is sitting out the season. And, Pacman is going to discontinue his footloose and fancy free lifestyle. Thereby denying the NFL and the Titans the accompanying press and attention.
We could not be more proud of Pacman for taking this hard stand against the monopolistic NFL and its new tsar.
The awaiting ratings dip and lack of fan interest in the upcoming season will surely lead to the ouster of Goodell and the restoration of the traditional principles of enactment for codified justice that this country was founded upon.
This proactive act of righteousness is an example for us all.
Thank you for your bravery in the face of the great, pale evil, Pacman.
Michael Irvin: Doesn't Care About Your Disability
If you ever get hired to do some contracting work for Michael Irvin, make sure you do it properly. And you better make sure that Irvin is ok with the price.
"Former Dallas Cowboy Michael Irvin is facing accusations he assaulted a disabled contractor who was hired to install a fountain at his Plano home. Shawn Vandergrift filed a lawsuit Monday against Mr. Irvin in Denton County, claiming that the former player yelled at him and grabbed him during a December dispute over a final payment for the construction work. The suit claims that Mr. Vandergrift is permanently disabled by a hip condition and that he required medical attention as a result of being grabbed on the left arm during the confrontation. Mr. Irvin could not be reached for comment Monday night. "
How ridiculous of this man to try to use his "coach K" hip as a sympathy tactic. The hip bone's connected to the leg bone; not the left arm!
We are sure Irvin will be vindicated. And we applaud Irvin on his good taste in having a fountain installed in his home.
"Former Dallas Cowboy Michael Irvin is facing accusations he assaulted a disabled contractor who was hired to install a fountain at his Plano home. Shawn Vandergrift filed a lawsuit Monday against Mr. Irvin in Denton County, claiming that the former player yelled at him and grabbed him during a December dispute over a final payment for the construction work. The suit claims that Mr. Vandergrift is permanently disabled by a hip condition and that he required medical attention as a result of being grabbed on the left arm during the confrontation. Mr. Irvin could not be reached for comment Monday night. "
How ridiculous of this man to try to use his "coach K" hip as a sympathy tactic. The hip bone's connected to the leg bone; not the left arm!
We are sure Irvin will be vindicated. And we applaud Irvin on his good taste in having a fountain installed in his home.
Hampton U: HBCU Proves They Have Better Athletes
As draft day approaches and teams really begin to narrow their boards, one of the schools making the most noise is Hampton University. A I-AA HBCU in eastern Virginia, Hampton had five players invited to the combine.
Brand name schools that finished at the top of the polls, like USC and Wisconsin, simply can't match the talent output of the Pirates this year. USC had 4 invited to the combine and Wisconsin only 2. That gives credence to the idea that Hampton is ready to move up to compete with the big boys.
Tavaris Bain, a prospect at cornerback, left the University of Miami for the chance to be a Hampton Pirate. Knowing that getting on the field at the perennial MEAC powerhouse would lead to major exposure with the scouts.
“It says something about the talent and coaching we had,” said Bain. “We’re still at a disadvantage in some ways. If a team drafts a top player from Miami, nobody’s going to argue. If a team takes a player from a small school, immediately people ask more questions. But to have as many guys as we did at the combine, we had to be doing something right.”
We couldn't agree more. Although we would speak more plainly than young Mr. Bain and not sugar coat the "small school" reference. Change that to HBCU and you have the truth.
Boise St. is a smaller school that isn't a traditional football powerhouse. And, they aren't attracting the NFL talent that Hampton is, yet they were invited to play in a BCS bowl this year and beat Oklahoma. Imagine what Hampton could do, if given the chance, with 5 top prospects on their roster.
But, Hampton is an HBCU and will be relegated to invites to things like the Bayou Classic and other smaller venues. Locked out of the big money games they need to upgrade their facilities and seduce recruits away from Notre Dame, Florida and Texas.
Certainly, the NFL is fully aware of the talent. The reluctance of the big boys to schedule Hampton and the clearly formulated BCS manifesto to lock them out of the money bowls demonstrates, that without a doubt, the "elite" in college football are aligned in their effort to keep the HBCU from reaching the BCS promised land.
If Boise St., USC and Wisconsin could all have outstanding seasons and win big bowl games; imagine what Hampton could have done with the talent that those teams just can't match!
Brand name schools that finished at the top of the polls, like USC and Wisconsin, simply can't match the talent output of the Pirates this year. USC had 4 invited to the combine and Wisconsin only 2. That gives credence to the idea that Hampton is ready to move up to compete with the big boys.
Tavaris Bain, a prospect at cornerback, left the University of Miami for the chance to be a Hampton Pirate. Knowing that getting on the field at the perennial MEAC powerhouse would lead to major exposure with the scouts.
“It says something about the talent and coaching we had,” said Bain. “We’re still at a disadvantage in some ways. If a team drafts a top player from Miami, nobody’s going to argue. If a team takes a player from a small school, immediately people ask more questions. But to have as many guys as we did at the combine, we had to be doing something right.”
We couldn't agree more. Although we would speak more plainly than young Mr. Bain and not sugar coat the "small school" reference. Change that to HBCU and you have the truth.
Boise St. is a smaller school that isn't a traditional football powerhouse. And, they aren't attracting the NFL talent that Hampton is, yet they were invited to play in a BCS bowl this year and beat Oklahoma. Imagine what Hampton could do, if given the chance, with 5 top prospects on their roster.
But, Hampton is an HBCU and will be relegated to invites to things like the Bayou Classic and other smaller venues. Locked out of the big money games they need to upgrade their facilities and seduce recruits away from Notre Dame, Florida and Texas.
Certainly, the NFL is fully aware of the talent. The reluctance of the big boys to schedule Hampton and the clearly formulated BCS manifesto to lock them out of the money bowls demonstrates, that without a doubt, the "elite" in college football are aligned in their effort to keep the HBCU from reaching the BCS promised land.
If Boise St., USC and Wisconsin could all have outstanding seasons and win big bowl games; imagine what Hampton could have done with the talent that those teams just can't match!
Pacman Jones: What are the Odds?
Now, we aren't the betting type at this blog. However, we felt that we would pass this along.
We hear people joke about pools on such things as when the next Bengal will get arrested or when Pacman Jones will catch another charge.
Well, if you are interested in wagering on Pacman Jones, you can do it at bodog.com.
They are currently booking odds on how many games he will be suspended. They are giving 2-1 odds on a four to 6 game suspension.
For those of you of poor character and low morals, this bet seems like a way to make a little scratch to feed your porn habit.
We hear people joke about pools on such things as when the next Bengal will get arrested or when Pacman Jones will catch another charge.
Well, if you are interested in wagering on Pacman Jones, you can do it at bodog.com.
They are currently booking odds on how many games he will be suspended. They are giving 2-1 odds on a four to 6 game suspension.
For those of you of poor character and low morals, this bet seems like a way to make a little scratch to feed your porn habit.
Monday, April 9, 2007
Don Imus: Poor Word Choice?
As most are aware by now, Don Imus is being taken to task over some derogatory comments he levied against the Rutgers' women's basketball team. And rightfully so!
"That's some nappy-headed hos there, I'm going to tell you that," Imus said.
How dare you, Mr Imus, not only insult these fine young women; but indirectly insult ALL Negro women. And, by connection, all Negroes.
Why not just say that they look like Buckwheat?
Mr. Imus made the remarks in his studio. Wearing his trademark cowboy hat. Covering his stringy, unkempt, curly hair. His translucent skin, wrinkled and leathery, looking as if it would crack as he cackled in laughter and racist delight over his insensitive statement.
It would seem that calling young, female student athlete "ho's" would be the type of thing that would raise the ire of the very Reverend Al Sharpton and the civil rights minded Reverend Jesse Jackson. We applaud these men for their courageous cry for Imus to be silenced. It is comforting to know that neither Sharpton nor Jackson would idly sit by and allow anyone to derogatorily call young Negro women "ho's". Particularly an old white man, in a seat of virtually unparalleled power.
We've heard the argument that goes something like this: "Imus and other white people hear Negro women referred to as ho's in hip hop and rap songs, by Negro comedians and movies directed at Negro audiences. Why only make a fuss when an octogenarian white guy uses it, why not picket Def Comedy Jam, 50 Cent and Soul Plane?"
First of all, adding "nappy" is what really makes it racist. Nappy is a slave word implying that these beautiful and natural women somehow do not meet the norms set by white society when it comes to beauty and coiffure. It is because of comments like Imus' that wonderfully talented Negresses like Candace Parker run out and spend their scholarship food stipends on extensions and weave. Money she could use to feed herself, instead, being stitched in and glued onto her wonderful and natural hair. All in an effort to stay out of the line of Mr. Imus' fire.
Sharpton grilled Imus on his radio show, and Jackson led a demonstration of nearly 50 civic minded individuals in picketing NBC headquarters to demand the termination of Imus. We applaud their activism. Other less scrupulous individuals might simply try to chain their wagons to the Imus mule in the hopes of garnering attention and media acknowledgement. But, we know a man of Sharpton's stature would never resort to such chicanery. Sharpton is the man that broke the Tawana Brawley story and led that fight. Certainly, that sets every one's mind at ease in this (and all) instances involving the Reverend.
"Sharpton called the comments "abominable" and "racist" and repeated his demand that Imus be fired. "
And that seems like the only reasonable outcome. Calling the girls "ho's" would have been mean spirited and insensitive. But a little sensitivity training and an appearance on Oprah could have rehabilitated Mr. Imus and mitigated the damage. Attaching the descriptor "nappy" to the equation turned it into an overt attack on an entire race. And the only way to properly treat such action is through job termination. It's been proven time and time again. Civil Rights are won, and racial differences are solved by leading parades and demonstrations demanding old white men are fired.
You think Abe Lincoln would have signed the Emancipation Proclamation without the threat of being picketed against? Think again.
The Rutgers team in Imus' dreams....
Friday, April 6, 2007
You Go Girl!: Jemele Hill Gives Bob Huggins Hell
Normally, we would suggest that women stay in the background and play an ancillary role in sports, politics and philosophy. But today, we may have to change our stance.
ESPN Page 2's columnist Jemele Hill lambasted Kansas State coach Bob Huggins for his decision to walk out on his Manhattan constituency after just a year on the job.
Hill holds no punches, going so far as to title her piece "Huggins wronged Kansas State". Just the type of controversial statement that has made Page 2 the cutting edge of sports commentary, and giving a sample of the deeply insightful analysis to follow.
"Today, though, it's one more reminder that loyalty in sports is as outdated as doing the right thing."
True enough, because the previous reminders that seem to come virtually by the day haven't solidified the concept in our minds that in the world of sports, the bottom line is the bottom line. Money and the chance to improve your situation to make more of it are the magnets that attract loyalty. We needed Page 2's Hill to be the one to take up the gauntlet on this issue and deliver a no holds barred expose on Huggins completely shocking and unexpected early departure from K State. We are glad that Hill, and no one else for that matter, has the gaul to pretend that they saw this coming; and therefore act like this isn't really much of a story.
"Huggins is leaving a school that took a helluva chance on him and chose to believe in him despite an embarrassing graduation rate at Cincinnati and an even more embarrassing drunk-driving incident."
And Huggins deserves all the scolding. Who can fault a school for rolling the dice in this situation and crapping out? A drunk who can't get his kids to go to class?! Certainly any school that offered such an individual the platform to get back into the public eye would be shocked that the man would be on the first bus out of town as soon as he had an offer. One would expect that a man that didn't have the sense to call a cab or have the desire to push his kids to go to class now and then would certainly exhibit Semper Fidelis quality loyalty to the school that allowed him to rehabilitate his soured image.
"You don't turn your back on people who risk themselves for you. KG understands that. So why doesn't Huggins?"
So true. You don't do that. Especially when the other party's motives were purely altruistic and done solely to help the poor soul they took a risk on make a better life for himself. Certainly, their is no selfish aspect in extending a job to a proven winner of questionable character. There would be no expectation of things NOT going as planned, right? Makes one wonder why the author would use the word "risk", when certainly K State didn't foresee anything going wrong. No risk here, right? Cause, you know, if they did believe they were taking a risk, then this wouldn't be all that surprising or upsetting. Or even much of a story. But it is a story. It's on Page 2!
"It's funny. Too many people lambaste and vilify college basketball players for leaving early for the NBA because we are put off by their "selfish" decision to try to set up their families for life financially. But coaches, who already have financial security, are given a free pass regarding their quest for bigger money and bigger stages."
So true. Kevin Durant and Greg Oden (and the Florida Four) have received nothing but heat and ill feelings for entertaining the idea of leaving early. While coaches like Nick Saban (when he jilted LSU for the Dolphins) are ALWAYS given a pat on the bottom and told by the boosters and the fan base that they are still loved forever at the school. You can bet Billy Gillespie will be on the booster club Christmas card list for years to come. The Texas A&M community seems genuinely thrilled for him. Oh, and yeah, the guy this column is about. No hard feelings on his leaving. Not a critical voice out there.
"But there is always going to be a better job, more money and, yes, even a hometown available. And when you allow the pursuit of those things to supersede everything else, your character will inevitably be compromised."
And this is the part that makes the column so poignant, timely, knowledgeable and even controversial (the new hallmarks of Page 2). 'Cause, after all...we are talking about...........
BOB "HUGGYBEAR" HUGGINS.
Shocking!
The only acceptable response from the K State administration would be to deliver a Denny Green-esque soliloquy, "Bob Huggins is who we thought he was."
That's it. End of story.
Jemele has outdone herself and proven why Page 2 is the razor's edge of sports commentary.
Excuse us while we apply some pressure to stop the bleeding.
(edit note: Looks like K State learned nothing from hiring Huggins. Should they expect loyalty from this new coach? Or is this one a hire with "risk", that might lead to what should be no surprise....)
ESPN Page 2's columnist Jemele Hill lambasted Kansas State coach Bob Huggins for his decision to walk out on his Manhattan constituency after just a year on the job.
Hill holds no punches, going so far as to title her piece "Huggins wronged Kansas State". Just the type of controversial statement that has made Page 2 the cutting edge of sports commentary, and giving a sample of the deeply insightful analysis to follow.
"Today, though, it's one more reminder that loyalty in sports is as outdated as doing the right thing."
True enough, because the previous reminders that seem to come virtually by the day haven't solidified the concept in our minds that in the world of sports, the bottom line is the bottom line. Money and the chance to improve your situation to make more of it are the magnets that attract loyalty. We needed Page 2's Hill to be the one to take up the gauntlet on this issue and deliver a no holds barred expose on Huggins completely shocking and unexpected early departure from K State. We are glad that Hill, and no one else for that matter, has the gaul to pretend that they saw this coming; and therefore act like this isn't really much of a story.
"Huggins is leaving a school that took a helluva chance on him and chose to believe in him despite an embarrassing graduation rate at Cincinnati and an even more embarrassing drunk-driving incident."
And Huggins deserves all the scolding. Who can fault a school for rolling the dice in this situation and crapping out? A drunk who can't get his kids to go to class?! Certainly any school that offered such an individual the platform to get back into the public eye would be shocked that the man would be on the first bus out of town as soon as he had an offer. One would expect that a man that didn't have the sense to call a cab or have the desire to push his kids to go to class now and then would certainly exhibit Semper Fidelis quality loyalty to the school that allowed him to rehabilitate his soured image.
"You don't turn your back on people who risk themselves for you. KG understands that. So why doesn't Huggins?"
So true. You don't do that. Especially when the other party's motives were purely altruistic and done solely to help the poor soul they took a risk on make a better life for himself. Certainly, their is no selfish aspect in extending a job to a proven winner of questionable character. There would be no expectation of things NOT going as planned, right? Makes one wonder why the author would use the word "risk", when certainly K State didn't foresee anything going wrong. No risk here, right? Cause, you know, if they did believe they were taking a risk, then this wouldn't be all that surprising or upsetting. Or even much of a story. But it is a story. It's on Page 2!
"It's funny. Too many people lambaste and vilify college basketball players for leaving early for the NBA because we are put off by their "selfish" decision to try to set up their families for life financially. But coaches, who already have financial security, are given a free pass regarding their quest for bigger money and bigger stages."
So true. Kevin Durant and Greg Oden (and the Florida Four) have received nothing but heat and ill feelings for entertaining the idea of leaving early. While coaches like Nick Saban (when he jilted LSU for the Dolphins) are ALWAYS given a pat on the bottom and told by the boosters and the fan base that they are still loved forever at the school. You can bet Billy Gillespie will be on the booster club Christmas card list for years to come. The Texas A&M community seems genuinely thrilled for him. Oh, and yeah, the guy this column is about. No hard feelings on his leaving. Not a critical voice out there.
"But there is always going to be a better job, more money and, yes, even a hometown available. And when you allow the pursuit of those things to supersede everything else, your character will inevitably be compromised."
And this is the part that makes the column so poignant, timely, knowledgeable and even controversial (the new hallmarks of Page 2). 'Cause, after all...we are talking about...........
BOB "HUGGYBEAR" HUGGINS.
Shocking!
The only acceptable response from the K State administration would be to deliver a Denny Green-esque soliloquy, "Bob Huggins is who we thought he was."
That's it. End of story.
Jemele has outdone herself and proven why Page 2 is the razor's edge of sports commentary.
Excuse us while we apply some pressure to stop the bleeding.
(edit note: Looks like K State learned nothing from hiring Huggins. Should they expect loyalty from this new coach? Or is this one a hire with "risk", that might lead to what should be no surprise....)
Colin Cowherd: An Act of Self Defense
In one of the most courageous acts of defiance and self defense of our time, ESPN radio mainstay and flag bearer Colin Cowherd summoned the power of his listeners to defend himself and his employer from the overbearing intrusion of sports bloggers.
Cowherd, well known for his even handed approach to radio broadcasting and for his logical and rational broadcast "journalistic" conclusions, decided that he was no longer going to allow sports bloggers to impose their far reaching and all powerful will on himself or his ESPN parent.
As fighters for righteousness ourselves, we can only admire the type of fortitude that it took for Cowherd to stand up to the bloggers. Trying to carve out a niche for himself (and ESPN) in a world that is controlled and dictated by the corporate agenda of sports bloggers is a noble endeavor in and of itself, but to say "enough is enough" and take matters into ones own hands is righteousness personified.
Cowherd was tired of the fact that certain blogs perpetuated the concept that he "stole" from blogs on the internet. That the wonderfully humorous and bitingly funny commentary on his show did not always originate in his own brain housing group. We can only sympathize with the emotional hardships and stress such unfounded and hurtful accusations would cause a man of Cowherd's ethics and character.
Clearly, the blogs attempted to undermine his efforts to bring his fledgling network to the top. Not only were the blogs purposefully attempting to squash his personal and professional growth by trying to damage his reputation; but they were also trying to USE his growing fame and recognition to market themselves on his coat tails. It is bad enough that blogs like deadspin and the big lead have a strangle hold on the sports agenda. But now, they try to extinguish the soaring star of Cowherd AND market themselves in one fell swoop.
In an act of great personal risk, Cowherd apparently floated the idea of his loyal listeners mounting a revolution against thebiglead.com. Attacking the Death Star at its very heart. Sending a message that the little man at EPSN would no longer stand idly by and be a besmirched casualty at the hands of thebiglead's corporately inspired agenda. The suits at thebiglead's headquarters be damned!
And the self defense initiative was apparently launched. And with incredible results. At this posting, thebiglead.com was still down, dazed and confused, blinded by the fog of the war they had initiated by unfairly and maliciously supposing that a blog maintained some sort of intellectual ownership over the ideas that they posted on the free and public internet. That if a RADIO host or TV host or real sports columnist should come across these free and public ideas and re-convey them through a real and legitimate medium, there was some sort of ethical, civil or just plain decent responsibility to acknowledge it.
We would agree with Cowherd, the only appropriate response to the corporate sports bloggers stance and resultant acts of pointing out instances of occurrence was to take matters into his own hands. Shut them down.
And the best part in all this: As the sports blogs are finally silenced, we can all sit back and FINALLY hear the voice of ESPN.
It's about time.
As-Salaam-Alaikum, Colin Cowherd and your righteous fight against lilly-white corporate sports bloggers.
Cowherd, well known for his even handed approach to radio broadcasting and for his logical and rational broadcast "journalistic" conclusions, decided that he was no longer going to allow sports bloggers to impose their far reaching and all powerful will on himself or his ESPN parent.
As fighters for righteousness ourselves, we can only admire the type of fortitude that it took for Cowherd to stand up to the bloggers. Trying to carve out a niche for himself (and ESPN) in a world that is controlled and dictated by the corporate agenda of sports bloggers is a noble endeavor in and of itself, but to say "enough is enough" and take matters into ones own hands is righteousness personified.
Cowherd was tired of the fact that certain blogs perpetuated the concept that he "stole" from blogs on the internet. That the wonderfully humorous and bitingly funny commentary on his show did not always originate in his own brain housing group. We can only sympathize with the emotional hardships and stress such unfounded and hurtful accusations would cause a man of Cowherd's ethics and character.
Clearly, the blogs attempted to undermine his efforts to bring his fledgling network to the top. Not only were the blogs purposefully attempting to squash his personal and professional growth by trying to damage his reputation; but they were also trying to USE his growing fame and recognition to market themselves on his coat tails. It is bad enough that blogs like deadspin and the big lead have a strangle hold on the sports agenda. But now, they try to extinguish the soaring star of Cowherd AND market themselves in one fell swoop.
In an act of great personal risk, Cowherd apparently floated the idea of his loyal listeners mounting a revolution against thebiglead.com. Attacking the Death Star at its very heart. Sending a message that the little man at EPSN would no longer stand idly by and be a besmirched casualty at the hands of thebiglead's corporately inspired agenda. The suits at thebiglead's headquarters be damned!
And the self defense initiative was apparently launched. And with incredible results. At this posting, thebiglead.com was still down, dazed and confused, blinded by the fog of the war they had initiated by unfairly and maliciously supposing that a blog maintained some sort of intellectual ownership over the ideas that they posted on the free and public internet. That if a RADIO host or TV host or real sports columnist should come across these free and public ideas and re-convey them through a real and legitimate medium, there was some sort of ethical, civil or just plain decent responsibility to acknowledge it.
We would agree with Cowherd, the only appropriate response to the corporate sports bloggers stance and resultant acts of pointing out instances of occurrence was to take matters into his own hands. Shut them down.
And the best part in all this: As the sports blogs are finally silenced, we can all sit back and FINALLY hear the voice of ESPN.
It's about time.
As-Salaam-Alaikum, Colin Cowherd and your righteous fight against lilly-white corporate sports bloggers.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Billy Packer, Duke, Fags and ESPN
By now, most are aware of the -phobia faux paux committed by Billy Packer on Charlie Rose's interview show. Packer used the term "fag out" (in actuality, we believe anyone named "Packer" can use the word fag in any context they choose, you can't be a -phobic when your driver license says "packer"), in reference to Rose not following through on something he said he might do. Of course, the -phobia crowd is having a field day with it .
While we reserve the right to use any language or reference we choose, we will admit that it is plain foolhardy to get on a "nationally" viewed TV show and speak in such colloquialisms. Especially given the charged environment the anti- and the -phobia crowd are currently operating.
But all this is irrelevant. Truly. Billy Packer said "fag out". It isn't the end of the world for homosexuals. When in the past have they ever cared what Packer said previously? When did we, for that matter?
The insidious and truly flagrantly offensive aspect of this event isn't the term Packer used, and it isn't the overly defensive and borderline histrionic sensitivity of the -phobia folks (aside: if you don't want people to use the term "fag" interchangeably with "wimp" and "pussy", don't stamp your feet and act like a wimp and pussy every time the world doesn't greet you with a hug and a cookie).
The truly egregious aspect of all this is the fact that ESPN hasn't given front page coverage to this. ESPN's columnists (except for a reference by Simmons) haven't been treating this as if it were an earth shattering event. It must be upsetting to Packer that he isn't getting Hardaway level exposure from the WWL. Maybe ESPN isn't releasing a book this week that touches on this subject? Or maybe ESPN only feels inclined to castigate Negro athletes that make -phobia sensitive statements?
We posted the other day about the persecution that Duke suffers. And in that, it was argued by a Duke defender that ESPN is biased and anti-Duke. Now, anyone with a rational and logical intellect can deduce that Duke's basketball coverage team includes Duke's biggest fan and a Duke graduate, and calling the coverage anti-Duke sounds like the ruminations of a wandering, homeless whino. One would have to be either so blinded by their fanship of Duke; or so intellectually barren that the grey matter encased in their soft, malformed cranium is dried and cracked at Sahara desert levels, to take credit for such a diarrheal flow of obstinance, misinformation and unabashedly vacuous suppositions.
The notion that ESPN is anti-Duke is further refuted by the Packer incident and the lack of critical light ESPN is shining on it.
How so, you ask?
ESPN is a protector of the Dark Dungeon of Cameron in the bowels of Dukedom. And the handling of the "fag out" reference displays incontrovertible proof.
In an effort to protect Duke and its associates from negative press, ESPN has chosen to ignore the story. Charlie Rose went to Duke. As a result, Packer's transgression on his show gets a pass from ESPN.
Now, try and make the argument that ESPN is anti-Duke.
Checkmate.
While we reserve the right to use any language or reference we choose, we will admit that it is plain foolhardy to get on a "nationally" viewed TV show and speak in such colloquialisms. Especially given the charged environment the anti- and the -phobia crowd are currently operating.
But all this is irrelevant. Truly. Billy Packer said "fag out". It isn't the end of the world for homosexuals. When in the past have they ever cared what Packer said previously? When did we, for that matter?
The insidious and truly flagrantly offensive aspect of this event isn't the term Packer used, and it isn't the overly defensive and borderline histrionic sensitivity of the -phobia folks (aside: if you don't want people to use the term "fag" interchangeably with "wimp" and "pussy", don't stamp your feet and act like a wimp and pussy every time the world doesn't greet you with a hug and a cookie).
The truly egregious aspect of all this is the fact that ESPN hasn't given front page coverage to this. ESPN's columnists (except for a reference by Simmons) haven't been treating this as if it were an earth shattering event. It must be upsetting to Packer that he isn't getting Hardaway level exposure from the WWL. Maybe ESPN isn't releasing a book this week that touches on this subject? Or maybe ESPN only feels inclined to castigate Negro athletes that make -phobia sensitive statements?
We posted the other day about the persecution that Duke suffers. And in that, it was argued by a Duke defender that ESPN is biased and anti-Duke. Now, anyone with a rational and logical intellect can deduce that Duke's basketball coverage team includes Duke's biggest fan and a Duke graduate, and calling the coverage anti-Duke sounds like the ruminations of a wandering, homeless whino. One would have to be either so blinded by their fanship of Duke; or so intellectually barren that the grey matter encased in their soft, malformed cranium is dried and cracked at Sahara desert levels, to take credit for such a diarrheal flow of obstinance, misinformation and unabashedly vacuous suppositions.
The notion that ESPN is anti-Duke is further refuted by the Packer incident and the lack of critical light ESPN is shining on it.
How so, you ask?
ESPN is a protector of the Dark Dungeon of Cameron in the bowels of Dukedom. And the handling of the "fag out" reference displays incontrovertible proof.
In an effort to protect Duke and its associates from negative press, ESPN has chosen to ignore the story. Charlie Rose went to Duke. As a result, Packer's transgression on his show gets a pass from ESPN.
Now, try and make the argument that ESPN is anti-Duke.
Checkmate.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Arkansas: Retribution for Mistreatment
Not long ago, we addressed the racist dismissal and mistreatment of the past two Arkansas basketball coaches. And today, it seems that Arkansas is paying the price for their lack of decency and lack of humanity.
Crypt keeper athletic director, Frank Broyles, apparently believed that the righteous souls of the world would stand idly by while he enacted his devious intentions on Stan Heath. Firing a man that had achieved measurable year to year improvement and post season appearances. And had brought in some fine recruits. Broyles, a living caricature of the reconstruction era south, wanted to bring in a white coach (as his last act as athletic director) to reap the success that had been planted in the field by Heath's hard work and steady hand.
But somewhere in Broyles' formula of injustice, he forgot to compensate for the fact that the coaches he envisioned as lining up to usurp the success meant for Heath; might actually have a conscience.
In an act of unprecedented solidarity and support for a Negro coach, Texas A&M's Billy Gillespie, Kansas' Bill Self, Southern California's Tim Floyd, Memphis' John Calipari and Marquette's Tom Crean each reportedly turned the job down.
And in the ultimate act of sabotage, Creighton's Dana Altman accepted, and then vacated the position. Altman went through the charade of actually spending a day in the coaches office before, like the fabled Trojan Horse, he sprung his assault.
Altman said. "My ego was involved and I'm not sure of all of the reasons, but again, it was something today that, in my heart, wouldn't allow me to do it."
We would suggest that the something Altman felt was his conscience. Effected by righteousness and acting in the humane and just way normally reserved for the original human.
In addition to suffering the indignity of having to reopen the search, the antediluvian Broyles is being denied one of the great pleasures of his southern heritage.
Meantime, Broyles was expected to return from Augusta, Ga., where he was scheduled to attend the Masters (he is a member of Augusta National Golf Club). The Razorback Foundation's jet was scheduled to pick up Broyles later Tuesday night.
It's probably best that Broyles had to leave. Another Tiger Woods victory would certainly be more than his segregated heart could take.
As-Salaam-Alaikum, Dana Altman. Your act of sabotage in the name of civil justice earns you the respect of Shabazz.
Crypt keeper athletic director, Frank Broyles, apparently believed that the righteous souls of the world would stand idly by while he enacted his devious intentions on Stan Heath. Firing a man that had achieved measurable year to year improvement and post season appearances. And had brought in some fine recruits. Broyles, a living caricature of the reconstruction era south, wanted to bring in a white coach (as his last act as athletic director) to reap the success that had been planted in the field by Heath's hard work and steady hand.
But somewhere in Broyles' formula of injustice, he forgot to compensate for the fact that the coaches he envisioned as lining up to usurp the success meant for Heath; might actually have a conscience.
In an act of unprecedented solidarity and support for a Negro coach, Texas A&M's Billy Gillespie, Kansas' Bill Self, Southern California's Tim Floyd, Memphis' John Calipari and Marquette's Tom Crean each reportedly turned the job down.
And in the ultimate act of sabotage, Creighton's Dana Altman accepted, and then vacated the position. Altman went through the charade of actually spending a day in the coaches office before, like the fabled Trojan Horse, he sprung his assault.
Altman said. "My ego was involved and I'm not sure of all of the reasons, but again, it was something today that, in my heart, wouldn't allow me to do it."
We would suggest that the something Altman felt was his conscience. Effected by righteousness and acting in the humane and just way normally reserved for the original human.
In addition to suffering the indignity of having to reopen the search, the antediluvian Broyles is being denied one of the great pleasures of his southern heritage.
Meantime, Broyles was expected to return from Augusta, Ga., where he was scheduled to attend the Masters (he is a member of Augusta National Golf Club). The Razorback Foundation's jet was scheduled to pick up Broyles later Tuesday night.
It's probably best that Broyles had to leave. Another Tiger Woods victory would certainly be more than his segregated heart could take.
As-Salaam-Alaikum, Dana Altman. Your act of sabotage in the name of civil justice earns you the respect of Shabazz.
Monday, April 2, 2007
Duke Basketball: Victims of Vitriolic Hatred
If only there existed a group of people that could tell us what it is like to be unfairly persecuted against, misrepresented in the media and hated simply because of the color they wear. A group of people that do nothing inherently wrong, and everything inherently right. And are solely hated for who they are. A group that just tries to live good lives and be good people on a day to day basis. That does absolutely nothing to provoke the malfeasance and divine dislike that they receive. Hatred based on inconceivably irrational logic and a lack of understanding and appreciation for the culture they have created.
Where can we find a group to tell us about the details of the viciousness they endure? To enlighten us with the lessons of how they trudge on in day to day life; facing the hatred and ill will of an uninformed and biased opposition. To detail the history of hate levied against their people. A group to teach us that, in the face of torment and caustic words, the appropriate response is to cry out in defiance and complain to all that will listen. Although, usually the only sympathetic ear is attached to the nerdy, rounded head of their fellow group members. But no matter! If the media does not cast an entirely positive light, cry out one must.
Through trembling lips and teary eyes they tell the world: "We shall be your whipping boy no longer! You will LOVE us! YOU will! You WILL!
As one, they come together as a people and allay the jealous and hateful insults with an offensive attack meant to show everyone how wrong they are!
"Freedom", screamed William Wallace on the torture table.
"Stop being mean", would be the rallying cry of this venerable group of ideological stalwarts and warriors of self preservation in the face of innumerable forces designed to thwart their very existence.
But, where is such a group?
Are they a civil rights coalition aimed at fighting racism? An anti-defamation league aimed at combating negative stereotypes and mistreatment? A group fighting for acceptance and the right to live out their lifestyle choices in equality and peace?
No, this group has undertaken a far more socially responsible movement. A movement designed to not only impact how we think, but how we live. This is a group that has been the recipient of hate and persecution that Negroes, Jews, Homosexuals and all other groups combined could only imagine in their worst dreams.
And now, it is time for them to respond. The time has come for this group to rise up against the media, opposing fans, naysayers, carpetbaggers, muckrakers, rabble rousers and all such undignified entities that would find fault with their identity. Fault with the identity they have willfully chosen: Duke Blue Devils (fans and team alike).
Unwilling to allow the proliferation of anymore hate against them, they have responded with a detailed history of the roots of the ill-placed hatred; and a sure fire plan to stamp it out.
"But the performance of the media at times, particularly in light of a recent incident during the tournament, has been disturbing, and several reporters have contacted us to express their concern and their hope that we would take this up. Wish granted."
On high, the wish for a consolidated and powerful response to any media that might perform an act which could be construed as not flattering towards Duke is most appreciated and most righteous. We feel a kinship and a solidified perseverance in our own work when we read such highly motivated and ideologically sound expressions.
"To a large extent, what now gets called Duke hating started at Maryland and was spread by Gary Williams, who in various ways insinuated that Duke gets all the breaks. In the 2001 Final Four, when Duke came back against Maryland, he famously yelled at a court side official, “how badly do you want Duke to win this game?”
And in that one moment, when a frustrated coach mocked the referees, a Pandora's box of execration was unleashed. And an easily swayed and unnaturally accepting media and citizenry wrapped themselves in loathing and brought Gary Williams vision of intolerance to life.
"His jihad against Duke and his perception of a favoritism towards Duke have had results which were likely beyond his wildest dreams. "
And here would be our only point of contention: Beyond his wildest dreams? Indeed. His precursory attack on the referees with the accusation of favoritism was calculated and intentional. Williams knew quite well that such an insult would lead to the rest of the basketball world forgetting that Coach K and Duke were worthy of only love. The results fully realized what Williams intended that day, with those refs.
"But in 1992, with Christian Laettner’s “stomp” of Aminu Timberlake (we’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: if a 6-11 guy plants his foot in your stomach and you get up laughing and clapping, it’s not much of a stomp), which, remember, closely followed UConn’s Rod Sellers pounding Laettner’s head onto the Meadowlands floor, Duke started getting some heavy criticism from the media and, of course, from the Commonwealth of Kentucky. And no discussion of Laetter in this context would be complete without mentioning the rumors that he was gay and that he and teammate Brian Davis had an intimate relationship."
For some reason, the author inadvertently forgets to mention Gary Williams' role in all this. After all, he started the hatred for Duke in 2001, right? Wait. What?
And we agree. For some reason NO ONE can mention Laettner and Brian Davis without bringing up that rumor of an intimate relationship. Thank goodness the author of this article lays that slander to rest with an all none to definitive denial and deters its proliferation by ambiguously referencing it in a context which bears no relation to it. That is the text book method for debunkment.
"In the late ’90s, antipathy towards Duke coalesced around Steve Wojciechowski, who played with a surpassing intensity despite his limited athleticism. One national columnist responded to e-mails by telling people he just couldn’t stand Wojo and thought he shouldn’t be a candidate for any postseason honors (he said it in a harsher way than that)."
Who is this columnist that would suggest that Wojo shouldn't be the player of the year? We remember watching Wojo slap the floor with the agility and poise of a rabid gibbon; and we thought, "Now there, there is the ACC player of the year." And then Duke lost the game and Wojo shed salty, giant tears. And we thought, "What passion!"
"Online, it was far worse. Duke fans had long since gotten used to the taunts about Krzyzewski’s surgery and the suggestion that he bailed on his team."
Excellent point. Anyone who knows basketball knows that his team bailed on him!
"But then there are some truly abhorrent sites. There is the normal pedestrian crap, which we don’t link to, and then there’s stuff like the nakedly racist Nation Of Islam Sportsblog"
We assure all readers, the posters on this blog are clothed at all times.
"However, the willingness of ESPN (among others) to fan the flames is pretty hard to take - and grossly unfair. It’s gotten to the point where every call at the end of a close Duke game is highlighted and questioned."
And this is further evidence of the hate. Questioning close calls, or pointing out obvious errors by referees couldn't be more prejudicial and hateful towards Duke. The madness must end.
"Still, it’s hard to understand how ESPN can allow Stuart Scott to openly display his bias towards Duke. It gets tiresome to say the least to hear him promote UNC and constantly denigrate Duke. ESPN also employs Bomani Jones, who could moonlight at the Nation Of Islam blog with statements like this: “without question, I’d say that Duke is a white supremacist institution.”
Agreement! ESPN should balance the tables. It would be wonderful if they had a Duke grad as a major analyst. Or a Duke fan as their top color man. If only.....sigh.
And we can't agree more here with the brilliant method of combating the "Duke is a white supremacist institution." Going after a Negro anchor and Negro writer is the BEST means of promoting a Duke image of colorblindness. Well done, author! Well done.
"There’s nothing one can do about individual wacked-out fans, but when the media loses their sense of perspective, whether out of a rooting interest or because slagging Duke pumps up ratings, the only way we can deal with it is to express ourselves, frequently and forcefully. "
Agreed. We would suggest the same. Do yourselves......frequently and forcefully.
Where can we find a group to tell us about the details of the viciousness they endure? To enlighten us with the lessons of how they trudge on in day to day life; facing the hatred and ill will of an uninformed and biased opposition. To detail the history of hate levied against their people. A group to teach us that, in the face of torment and caustic words, the appropriate response is to cry out in defiance and complain to all that will listen. Although, usually the only sympathetic ear is attached to the nerdy, rounded head of their fellow group members. But no matter! If the media does not cast an entirely positive light, cry out one must.
Through trembling lips and teary eyes they tell the world: "We shall be your whipping boy no longer! You will LOVE us! YOU will! You WILL!
As one, they come together as a people and allay the jealous and hateful insults with an offensive attack meant to show everyone how wrong they are!
"Freedom", screamed William Wallace on the torture table.
"Stop being mean", would be the rallying cry of this venerable group of ideological stalwarts and warriors of self preservation in the face of innumerable forces designed to thwart their very existence.
But, where is such a group?
Are they a civil rights coalition aimed at fighting racism? An anti-defamation league aimed at combating negative stereotypes and mistreatment? A group fighting for acceptance and the right to live out their lifestyle choices in equality and peace?
No, this group has undertaken a far more socially responsible movement. A movement designed to not only impact how we think, but how we live. This is a group that has been the recipient of hate and persecution that Negroes, Jews, Homosexuals and all other groups combined could only imagine in their worst dreams.
And now, it is time for them to respond. The time has come for this group to rise up against the media, opposing fans, naysayers, carpetbaggers, muckrakers, rabble rousers and all such undignified entities that would find fault with their identity. Fault with the identity they have willfully chosen: Duke Blue Devils (fans and team alike).
Unwilling to allow the proliferation of anymore hate against them, they have responded with a detailed history of the roots of the ill-placed hatred; and a sure fire plan to stamp it out.
"But the performance of the media at times, particularly in light of a recent incident during the tournament, has been disturbing, and several reporters have contacted us to express their concern and their hope that we would take this up. Wish granted."
On high, the wish for a consolidated and powerful response to any media that might perform an act which could be construed as not flattering towards Duke is most appreciated and most righteous. We feel a kinship and a solidified perseverance in our own work when we read such highly motivated and ideologically sound expressions.
"To a large extent, what now gets called Duke hating started at Maryland and was spread by Gary Williams, who in various ways insinuated that Duke gets all the breaks. In the 2001 Final Four, when Duke came back against Maryland, he famously yelled at a court side official, “how badly do you want Duke to win this game?”
And in that one moment, when a frustrated coach mocked the referees, a Pandora's box of execration was unleashed. And an easily swayed and unnaturally accepting media and citizenry wrapped themselves in loathing and brought Gary Williams vision of intolerance to life.
"His jihad against Duke and his perception of a favoritism towards Duke have had results which were likely beyond his wildest dreams. "
And here would be our only point of contention: Beyond his wildest dreams? Indeed. His precursory attack on the referees with the accusation of favoritism was calculated and intentional. Williams knew quite well that such an insult would lead to the rest of the basketball world forgetting that Coach K and Duke were worthy of only love. The results fully realized what Williams intended that day, with those refs.
"But in 1992, with Christian Laettner’s “stomp” of Aminu Timberlake (we’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: if a 6-11 guy plants his foot in your stomach and you get up laughing and clapping, it’s not much of a stomp), which, remember, closely followed UConn’s Rod Sellers pounding Laettner’s head onto the Meadowlands floor, Duke started getting some heavy criticism from the media and, of course, from the Commonwealth of Kentucky. And no discussion of Laetter in this context would be complete without mentioning the rumors that he was gay and that he and teammate Brian Davis had an intimate relationship."
For some reason, the author inadvertently forgets to mention Gary Williams' role in all this. After all, he started the hatred for Duke in 2001, right? Wait. What?
And we agree. For some reason NO ONE can mention Laettner and Brian Davis without bringing up that rumor of an intimate relationship. Thank goodness the author of this article lays that slander to rest with an all none to definitive denial and deters its proliferation by ambiguously referencing it in a context which bears no relation to it. That is the text book method for debunkment.
"In the late ’90s, antipathy towards Duke coalesced around Steve Wojciechowski, who played with a surpassing intensity despite his limited athleticism. One national columnist responded to e-mails by telling people he just couldn’t stand Wojo and thought he shouldn’t be a candidate for any postseason honors (he said it in a harsher way than that)."
Who is this columnist that would suggest that Wojo shouldn't be the player of the year? We remember watching Wojo slap the floor with the agility and poise of a rabid gibbon; and we thought, "Now there, there is the ACC player of the year." And then Duke lost the game and Wojo shed salty, giant tears. And we thought, "What passion!"
"Online, it was far worse. Duke fans had long since gotten used to the taunts about Krzyzewski’s surgery and the suggestion that he bailed on his team."
Excellent point. Anyone who knows basketball knows that his team bailed on him!
"But then there are some truly abhorrent sites. There is the normal pedestrian crap, which we don’t link to, and then there’s stuff like the nakedly racist Nation Of Islam Sportsblog"
We assure all readers, the posters on this blog are clothed at all times.
"However, the willingness of ESPN (among others) to fan the flames is pretty hard to take - and grossly unfair. It’s gotten to the point where every call at the end of a close Duke game is highlighted and questioned."
And this is further evidence of the hate. Questioning close calls, or pointing out obvious errors by referees couldn't be more prejudicial and hateful towards Duke. The madness must end.
"Still, it’s hard to understand how ESPN can allow Stuart Scott to openly display his bias towards Duke. It gets tiresome to say the least to hear him promote UNC and constantly denigrate Duke. ESPN also employs Bomani Jones, who could moonlight at the Nation Of Islam blog with statements like this: “without question, I’d say that Duke is a white supremacist institution.”
Agreement! ESPN should balance the tables. It would be wonderful if they had a Duke grad as a major analyst. Or a Duke fan as their top color man. If only.....sigh.
And we can't agree more here with the brilliant method of combating the "Duke is a white supremacist institution." Going after a Negro anchor and Negro writer is the BEST means of promoting a Duke image of colorblindness. Well done, author! Well done.
"There’s nothing one can do about individual wacked-out fans, but when the media loses their sense of perspective, whether out of a rooting interest or because slagging Duke pumps up ratings, the only way we can deal with it is to express ourselves, frequently and forcefully. "
Agreed. We would suggest the same. Do yourselves......frequently and forcefully.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)