Serena Williams was named the Sports Illustrated Sportsman (or Sportsperson) of the year.
It is still an honor—even if the sports media landscape is much more crowded now than it was when the magazine and the award were created.
Of course, because of a plurality of opinions and opinion makers, there are no shortage of HOT and lukewarm takes available on this topic.
Let us leave aside the concept of a "Horse" winning Sportsman of the year for a second. Yes, the horse accomplished something that literally had not been accomplished in my lifetime before this year. However:
1) Even the horse that many would regard as the greatest of all time, Secretariat, didn't win the award the year he won the Triple Crown, and;
2) It's a horse
With that being said, I wanted to focus on a particular aspect of the coverage surrounding Serena.
It has to do with what some people thought of the cover photo.
It's here, at the top of this piece, in part because there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.
Came across this tweet. It includes a screen shot of something Clay Travis wrote. (Again, I refuse to actually link to any of his work. You can find it by using the search engine of your choice.)
But as I continued on throughout the day, and as some of the eulogies and takedowns have rolled in, I've become somewhat introspective (as I am wont to do).
The main takeaway I've gathered from the demise of Grantland is this:
I don't necessarily think I want to work full-time in sports media anymore.
Every now and then, I've had the itch and I've managed to scratch it in some ways. I do part-time work here on my own site (where I have the pleasure of being able to write whenever I please and whatever I please) and on The Student Section. I've written at Crystal Ball Run, Southern Pigskin, Rock M Nation and at Bleacher Report in the days when that was considered to be a punchline instead of an opportunity. I started on a site way back in the day called E-Sports Media Group.
I dabbled in a couple of podcasts on here, and did semi-regular spots on ESPN Radio in Coastal Georgia. I have been grateful for all of those opportunities.
And yes, during a couple of bouts of (extended) unemployment from my vocation, I probably could have better seized opportunities to turn this sports media avocation into a new career.
The time for that has come and gone, I believe. Some of it because of my age and the fact that I feel it is too late to really break into the game.
Some of it is because of a lack of confidence.
Some of it is plain old frustration with the state of things.
When Butch Davis took the Miami Hurricanes job back in January 1995, he was 43 years old and coming off of back-to-back Super Bowl victories as the defensive coordinator for the Dallas Cowboys.
It was a different time and a different era.
With the termination of Al Golden, the job at "The U" has come open again. There has been...a rumbling? A groundswell? A casual mention? The correct words fail.
Anyway, let's just say that there has been mention of bringing back Butch Davis from his cable television exile, and 15 years away from South Florida, to coach Miami again.
Trying to limit helmet to helmet collision is a good thing in theory....
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
It’s an old proverb or aphorism. One way to interpret it is that even though an idea may look good or may have a noble intention, it can have unforeseen negative consequences.
The current approach to targeting in collegiate football is a prime example of this aphorism in action.
The spirit of the rule is, without question, a positive thing. Yes, football is a collision sport, with bodies flying around at an impressive rate of speed. Given the spate of head injuries, and the idea of CTE being a real thing that can affect lifespan and quality of life after playing days are over, doing something to minimize major concussions is a good thing.
However, when the idea of trying to minimize injury is affecting the on-field product, well, that is troubling.
This is one isolated instance from a game two weeks ago. The Michigan defender was blocked into the Michigan State quarterback who was lying on his back. Their helmets met facemask to facemask. Granted, Michigan State partisans will say that he was intentional in how he landed on Connor Cook; it appears to have been an accident. Upon review, the targeting call stood and the Michigan player was ejected.
Here is a video from 2014 showing a couple of accurate calls in conjunction with an absolutely awful application of the rule to a Clemson player.
Now, this is not to say that player safety is not important. That is not the case I am making at all.
(Although to be fair, there is just as much damage done from sub-concussive blows as from large, "He got blowed up!" kinds of hits. There is still more research to be done, obviously, but the issues related to head trauma from collision and contact sports seems to be taking more of cumulative effect approach.)
The initial rule was a personal foul penalty and an ejection. Upon review the ejection could be rescinded but not the penalty. That was changed a couple of seasons ago to allow for the rescinding of the penalty and the ejection. Which was a move in the right direction for sure.
However there still seems to be too much gray area and subjectivity as to what is targeting or not targeting. (Much like what is a catch or not. But that's another blog post.)
I would prefer it being two personal fouls and you're done for that game.
Or another option would be a point system like with technical fouls in the NBA. Let's say that your first targeting that's upheld is a 15 yard penalty. Second one is a penalty and you miss the balance of that game (no carryover). If you get popped for a third in a season you miss the rest of that game AND all of the next game.
It's not perfect, and it's a plan that needs ironing out. Maybe, though, it could serve as a jumping off point to revise how the rule is applied.
In this epsiode of the Final Timeout, Dave talks about the bad blood between Kliff Kingsbury and Bret Bielema, why the Big Ten doesn't seem to understand a good football program, and expresses his fondness for LSU fans.
A lot has happened over the last couple of days, and so I decided to try and use some of my skills to cover everything.
So let me introduce the inaugural "The Final Timeout" podcast.
I decided to start by discussing Kyle Flood's suspension, SMU's reviewing of prospective student athletes' social media accounts, and the termination of Steve Patterson as AD at Texas.
I don't write fast because, as my banner says, I prefer to avoid "hot sports takes," especially when something controversial has erupted.
So when the video above started to go viral on Twitter on Saturday, my first inclination was to write about how awful this was. Was Florida coach Jim McElwain right to snap on running back Kelvin Taylor?
He is 15 years old, 5-foot-9 and 185 pounds of cartoonish muscles on top of muscles. He had six-pack abs when he was 6. Today, he bench-presses one-and-a-half times his body weight and can leap from a standing position to the top of a car. He averages four touchdowns per game and hasn't lost a wrestling match since 2012, making him the nation's top-ranked football player and wrestler for his grade. And even though he doesn't begin high school for another two weeks, he already is one of the most talked about athletes in New Jersey.
And the story is off and away.
His uncle took Josh and his older brother, Matt, in to help them out because their mother (his sister) had a drug and alcohol problem. I get that. It's a lovely story and demonstrates a kind heart.
That's not the problem I have with the situation.
It's all of the money being spent on the training and coaching and nutritionists and wearing a "Darth Vader" like mask to restrict breathing while training and hanging upside down on a table in search of an elusive three inches so Josh reaches a magical height of six feet.
On Wednesday, we came across a story in the Wall Street Journal by Ben Cohen about how Auburn University's College of Liberal Arts and the football program differed over the survival of a failing major in public administration. The major was ultimately saved by a new dean.
One of the points raised in the article was the concern about the clustering of student athletes in the program:
Public administration majors account for less than 1% of Auburn’s undergraduate student body. But in the fall semester of 2013, documents show, 51% of the 111 students pursuing the degree were athletes. Among them were the football team’s starting quarterback and running back, its leading wide receiver and the three defensive players who led the team in interceptions, tackles and sacks.
While we tend to not think of this being that big of a deal, because it actually could allow for a learning community of sorts to develop if properly curated, on the surface, perception-wise, it can be viewed as an issue by outsider.
And whether it makes sense or not, perceptions is often viewed as reality.
Year three in the Sport Major sees a subtle shift in requirements. Less focus on general education courses, and more courses in the major. If a student-athlete were to go pro after this academic year (for example, in football or baseball), then obviously the journey would end here, but the student would have enough credits accumulated that if they decided to return to school later it would be primarily for major field courses with only minimal general education left over.
Sophomore year. A year that used to be overlooked in higher education circles until really the last decade. Plenty of research was done on the importance of the first year experience, and juniors and seniors received their fair share of analysis. But sophomore year was glossed over, even though at many places that is a milestone year—particularly for those who are planning on studying in majors at schools that limit entry to said majors. The application process for limited entry (or enrollment controlled) majors is usually during the second semester of sophomore year.
Doubt and what ifs creep in, and sophomores often find themselves adrift.
Sophomore slumps are real.
In the major, the sophomore year is focused on easing students into the major. The focus is still primarily on some general education requirements, but major field courses do make an appearance early on.
While Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany would rather have first year students endure "The Year of Readiness" and be automatically redshirted (and while I lean towards approval of that stance), let's operate under the assumption that all first year students could be immediately eligible.
The first year, and the first semester in particular, should be about the transition and orientation process. The most critical time for any student is during that first semester. Good habits and attitudes need to be established at this point, and the introduction to resources that can aid in that success is crucial.
We will examine the semesters separately. First up is the first semester:
The tagline for an NCAA public service announcement in the mid-2000s was "...going pro in something other than sports."
And while it is true that the vast majority of student athletes will find career opportunities in fields such as medicine, education, and business, there are some who will go pro in sports and make a long career in the industry.
Why shouldn't those students, who see themselves as potential workers in the field of athletics (at the intercollegiate level and above) be encouraged to enter into a major—with a certain emphasis in the electives/additional required courses—that would allow these student athletes to gain access to the skills and knowledge base to be successful in the endeavor of sport?
This is a thought experiment; a mental exercise in trying to compose a major in sports that is a broad based approach to addressing the needs of people who are going to be employed as an athlete in a professional sports organization (either team or individual) and/or as an administrator after leaving the playing field.
Caught an interesting quote from Notre Dame head football coach Brian Kelly in this story from ND Insider (h/t: SB Nation). In it, Kelly states that basically, all of his football players are probably at-risk students:
I think we recognized that all of my football players are at-risk — all of them — really. Honestly, I don’t know that any of our players would get into the school by themselves right now with the academic standards the way they are. Maybe one or two of our players that are on scholarship.
So making sure that with the rigors that we put them in — playing on the road, playing night games, getting home at 4 o’clock in the morning, all of the demands that we place on them relative to the academics and going into an incredibly competitive academic classroom every day — we recognize this is a different group.
And we have to provide all the resources necessary for them to succeed and don’t force them into finding shortcuts.
I think we’ve clearly identified that we need to do better, and we’re not afraid to look at any shortcomings that we do have and fix them, and provide the resources necessary for our guys. Our university has looked at that, and we’re prepared to make sure that happens for our guys.
There's quite a bit to unpack there. Some hyperbole, and some truth.
I am not a huge fan of the Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany. I've found him in the past to be excessively rigid, dogmatic and a hectoring sort of individual. This is not to say that he has not done good things, but I am not a fan of the man from what I have seen at a distance.
So I went into the reading of his white paper on freshman ineligibility (titled "Education First, Athletics Second") with a healthy dose of skepticisim. Granted, when he started talking about the idea of a "Year of Readiness" I had no clue exactly how much thought had gone into it.
I have to admit...I was surprised.
Not by the level of thought that was put into the paper, but by my inclination to agree with the points being made and actually being in support of the idea.
When I first started going to college lo so many years
ago, I would have painted myself as firmly in the camp of stating that student
athletes who were receiving scholarships should not be paid. Period.
However, as I spent time on campus and then became a
higher education professional (and now part time sports blogger/analyst), my
position evolved and changed. Of course, the cost of attendance at most schools
around the country has spiraled out of control over the last 15-20 years.
Yes, an athlete is receiving, in some places, an education
valued at nearly $40,000/year or more (and possibly much more when some schools
start paying the full cost of attendance). The howls from those who believe
that student athletes should not receive any additional compensation grow loud.
The hurdle of Title IX is also in place as well, and as
costs increase across the board, important decisions are going to have to be
made in regards to the place of Olympic sports and their sustainability going
forward.
Of course, another option could have/should have been
pursued. It might not be any more than a patch, but it also reflects a reality
that, sadly, the NCAA brass and administrators seem to be missing.
Allow for the student athletes to receive their
scholarships, and also allow them to monetize outside of the scope of the
program.
In other words, let them profit off of their talent and
ability and the fame that comes along with that.
The 2015 NCAA Men's College Basketball Tournament wrapped up last night, with the Duke Blue Devils walking away with shards of a net, a new floor if they want it, and the satisfaction of a successful championship season being completed.
And they'll head either back to class or off to prepare for the next phase of their lives (even if that seems to annoy the senior Senator from Missouri for some reason. But that's another post.).
I consume a lot of sports media. Not as much as I used to, because I just have more important things to do, but more than a sane person probably should. And with my interest/expertise being in the realm of the college experience and intercollegiate athletics, I spend a lot of time reading about and listening to people blabber about college athletes.
I constantly hear sportswriters, analysts and commentators refer to the young men and women as "kids".
His reptilian, repugnant, race baiting and elitist approach
to sports radio has been document multiple places multiple times (just go hit
Google to find the list too long for me to link directly to).
But today’s commentary on what New England Patriots tight end Rob Gronkowski said during an
interview on Jim Rome’s show on Showtime was too much.
Gronk basically said that he would rather suffer a knee
injury or a concussion. Gronk’s response was, well, telling:
“[S]o if we’re sitting here and I had choose would I want a
concussion right now or my knee blown out, I’m going to say a concussion. Why
would I want to sit there for eight months and not do anything, when with a
concussion I’ll just wake up and I’ll be ready to go again.”
Thank you Dr. Gronkowski.
Cowherd—that noted M.D., PhD and scholar—waded into the
discussion as well. Some of his choice quotes were:
Lots of jokes have been made about Larry Brown’s wandering
eye.
Yahoo’s Pat Forde called Bobby Petrino “The Disingenuous
Drifter” at one point for interviewing for job after job after job.
I even wrote a piece commenting on Mike Anderson leaving
Missouri for Arkansas and mentioned the numerous flirtations he had racked up
during his tenure in Columbia.
And each time the coaching carousel spins in college sports,
the conversation about what is a good job/great job/best job in college
football or basketball comes up.
I would not wish the itinerant wandering by most of the coaches
upon anyone. Looking at the work histories of some longtime assistant coaches
is enough to make you feel for them and their families, and the lack of roots
somewhere is horrifying in many respects. It’s a hard life, no matter how much
they may be compensated for the experience.
I don’t know about you, but I know that I was not fully
formed as a professional entering my field when I was 21. Hell, when I was 21 I
was actually still in school getting the preparation I needed to become a
professional in my chosen occupation.
Even at 31, I was not a fully developed professional; I
still made a lot of mistakes.
Today as I am in the midst of the first week at a new
job, at the tender age of 36 on the cusp of turning 37…I am still learning and
growing and changing.
I know, I know. I am in the field of education and not in
the field of professional athletics. Believe me, I am made aware of that fact
each and every day as I look at my bank account and my car.
I still feel, though, that the point in my lede stands: expecting
someone to be a fully developed, fully formed professional when one is barely
old enough to drink in most circumstances is ludicrous.
Yet when it comes to professional sports, and football in
particular, that ludicrous notion seems to be the expected norm.
I’ve been amused by the idea that a certain member of the
sports media felt entitled to an interview by an NFL player and took to Twitter
very pissed off that he was denied the interview by the athlete.
Dennis Dodd of CBS Sports got salty for no reason after
Aaron Rodgers declined his request for an interview. The entitlement that
dripped from Dodd’s series of tweets was somewhere in the neighborhoods of
amusing, sad and pathetic.
What got to me, though, was the fact that Dodd also seemed
to be pissed off that Rodgers was on the floor for the celebration and then had
the audacity to not want to speak to Dodd, someone who thinks of himself as a
kingmaker, apparently, because he writes about people who play games for their
education/vocation.
I was finding it difficult to get comfortable, as all these thoughts kept running through my head.
A quote from William Shakespeare: "It is a tale told by an idiot/full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" is followed by a video clip of Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith shouting vile, nonsenical things at each other.
An adage: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt" is followed by images of the clickbait written by Clay Travis.
A quote from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's famous detective Sherlock Holmes: "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts" is followed by the sound of Colin Cowherd's nasal whine spewing forth all kinds of utter nonsense.
The swirling noise forced me to sit up and assess some things.
Why is it that those who yell the loudest these days get the attention that quieter, more competent people cannot? All the racebaiting and women hating drives eyeballs and ears to the televisions and the web. Traffic is king, I guess.
Trollingis easy and lazy to do. Make an outlandish outrageous statement and voíla-instant fame.
I guess I want more. I guess I expect more.
Can I bring more to the table? I don't know. But in this space I hope to accomplish more by shedding light on inane statements and nonsenical theories that seem to be circulating relatively unopposed.
I won't be able to cover everything; I am only one person who has a family and a full-time job. And there is a lot of noise out there.
