Are Coaches Acting More Assholish On Purpose?

I was stunned when I heard that Tommy Tuberville was leaving Texas Tech for the Cincinnati job, especially given the destabilization and demolition of the Big East conference. Comparatively speaking, the Big 12 was a stable place.

Of course, Tuberville at Texas Tech never really made sense, and seeing as how the season ended there for him, I guess I can understand the need to get out of dodge.

But then my mouth gaped open when I heard about Tuberville's alleged dine and dash with recruits that Texas Tech was hosting when he took the Cincinnati job. Of course, Tuberville and Cincinnati denied the allegation. I mean, it's not the kind of thing that a coach with any semblance of a brain is going to admit to.

However...it appears that the Texas Tech prospects are not the only ones to get shafted by good old Tommy boy, as two athletes who had verbally committed to Cincinnati are apparently not going to go there and have been told by the new coaching staff that it's time to look elsewhere.

To Herbstreit, ESPN and the other Anti-NIU whiners...

In the preseason polls, Northern Illinois received one vote in the AP Top 25, and two votes in the USA Today Coaches poll, ranked behind such illustrious teams as South Florida (3-9), Virginia (4-8), Missouri (5-7), Southern Mississippi (0-12!), Utah (5-7), Arkansas (4-8) and Auburn (3-9).

After losing to Iowa in Week One, Northern Illinois did not receive a single vote of any kind in those polls. In fact, the Huskies did not receive any votes in either major poll until week eight of the USA Today poll, when they finally started getting votes again.

The margin of error when you are from a non-AQ conference is beyond slim; the line is so razor thin it is nearly imperceptible. That's not really an opinion; I can take it one step further and say that even within the AQ leagues there is a perception of difficulty, and if you are from the SEC or even the Pac-12 this year you will get more leeway for certain kinds of losses than a school from the ACC and the Big East would.

Northern Illinois doesn't have that luxury, and everyone wants to point to the fact that they lost to Iowa in week one as an excuse to validate the argument against leaving the Huskies out of the Orange Bowl. Fine. It was a one point loss in the last two minutes. Show me all of the other undefeated teams that there are in the country. Oh, wait, there's only one—and they'll be playing in Sun Life Stadium on Monday night, anyway.

Northern Illinois, who apparently even the Orange Bowl doesn't want, are there because of a rule that was instituted years ago. It's not like Northern Illinois rigged the system. They are the beneficiaries of a rule that was put in place that, quite frankly, the powers that be probably did not expect to ever be trigged at its lowest threshold like it was this season.

If a team from a non-AQ conference finished in the Top 16 of the final BCS standings, and finished ahead of a team from a BCS conference, then said non-AQ school would take up an at-large slot.

Blame the Big East for being the home of putrid football. Blame Rutgers for not taking care of its own business, although I wonder if it would've made a difference, given that Rutgers and Louisville were both not ranked in the next to last BCS standings. Blame the FBS for being such a hot mess, with a bloated disgusting postseason that is rife with payola, favoritism and corruption with an emphasis on the almighty dollar.

Just don't blame Northern Illinois for a rule that they simply managed to trigger by doing what we all ask of our teams—winning.

Robert Griffin III, Rob Parker, and ESPN Television's Slow Downward Spiral

This is not the way I planned on reawakening this blog, but I can think of no other good venue for organizing my thoughts about the absolute load of shit I saw and heard on Twitter today.

Good grief, I can already hear you saying. Not another one of those "You can't believe what you heard some assholish media member say today" stories that media types banter about, and by doing so, give more exposure to the assholish media member who made the bullshit statement in the first place.

Yeah, it's one of those stories. Sorry.

First, a little background. In a couple of interviews in the last few weeks, as he has continued to blow up beyond his accomplishments at Baylor, Washington Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III has been asked questions about being a black quarterback in D.C.

Now, D.C. has the nickname of "Chocolate City," and the Redskins are the only franchise in NFL history to have a black quarterback win a Super Bowl (Doug Williams, who was also MVP of Super Bowl XXII). So I can understand why the questions come up.

Here is how Griffin has answered the question in the two interviews. In response to a question during a special on Comcast Sports Net, Griffin said this:

Whenever you can relate to the population of the team that you play for, I think it makes it that much more special. I don’t play too much into the color game, because I don’t want to be the best African American quarterback, I want to be the best quarterback.

But to the fans, and to the fans who think that way and look at me as an African American, it’s important that I succeed, not only for this team, but for them. Because it gives them that motivation, that hey, you know, an African American went out and played quarterback for my Washington Redskins. So I appreciate that; I don’t ever downplay anything like that. Whoever I can go out every week and motivate to do better and to try to go after their dreams, I’m up for that.

In an interview with ESPN on Wednesday, when the whole black quarterback in D.C. thing came up again, Griffin said this:

I am [aware] of how race is relevant to [some fans]. I don’t ignore it. I try not to be defined by it, but I understand different perspectives and how people view different things. So I understand they’re excited their quarterback is an African American. I play with a lot of pride, a lot of character, a lot of heart. So I understand that, and I appreciate them for being fans.

Keep that background in mind as we head into the actual minefield here.

Rob Parker is a writer with ESPN New York. He used to work at the Detroit News until he, well, let's just say that he made a few mistakes. Like, for example, alleging that then Michigan State quarterback Kirk Cousins (who now, funnily enough, is Robert Griffin III's backup in Washington, D.C.) was involved in fight that sent a hockey player to the hospital. Turns out that wasn't, well, true.

Or trying (and failing) to make a joke about then Detroit Lions head coach Rod Marinelli's daughter, who was married to his defensive coordinator during the disastrous 0-16 season. Parker claimed in his column after the incident that he was trying to make a joke. Marinelli didn't think it was funny at all. Neither did the paper.

But hey, why not say shit that isn't true or funny and see what it can get you, right?

Apparently, in 2012, it gets you a seat on ESPN's First Take with the complete hack Skip Bayless and the blustery Stephen A. Smith. It gives you a chance to say, well, this:



Wow.

Really?

In 2012, you're going to go there, of all places?

In case you can't watch the video, I'm pulling out what Parker said, eliminating the cross talk and the questions from the other panelists. I want to give you the full essence of what Parker said.

I’ve talked to some people down in Washington D.C., friends of mine, who are around and at some of the press conferences, people I’ve known for a long time. But my question, which is just a straight honest question. Is he a brother, or is he a cornball brother?

Well, [that] he’s black, he kind of does his thing, but he’s not really down with the cause, he’s not one of us. He’s kind of black, but he’s not really the guy you’d really want to hang out with, because he’s off to do something else.

Well, because I want to find out about him. I don’t know, because I keep hearing these things. We all know he has a white fiancée. There was all this talk about he’s a Republican, which, there’s no information [about that] at all. I’m just trying to dig deeper as to why he has an issue. Because we did find out with Tiger Woods, Tiger Woods was like I’ve got black skin but don’t call me black. So people got to wondering about Tiger Woods early on.

Now that’s different. To me, that’s very urban and makes you feel like…wearing braids, you’re a brother. You’re a brother if you’ve got braids on.

Maybe it's because I'm from a different generation. Maybe it's my own life experiences filtering in, and my own personal relationships that color how I see this rant. As someone who married a white woman and even had people wonder if I was gay growing up in East Harlem because I spoke, "too white," comments like this elicit this reaction from me:

Pure, seething anger.

According to Dan Steinberg of DC Sports Bog, Parker was later asked to clarify his comments, and he said this, "I didn’t mean it like that,” he said. “We could sit here and be honest, or we can be dishonest. And you can’t tell me that people in the barbershops or people that talk, they look at who your spouse is. They do. And they look at how you present yourself. People will say all the time, you’re not gonna get a job in corporate America wearing those braids. (Emphasis Dan's.) It happens all the time. Let’s not act like it doesn’t, because it does.”

Except somebody apparently forgot to tell Rob Parker that HE WASN'T IN THE FUCKING BARBERSHOP!

He was on national television, seen in many places across this great varied nation, and was spewing this vile, insensitive, ass-backward, ignorant, ill-informed rhetoric across the airwaves.

I don't care if it is said in the barbershop. Let it be said in the barbershop. ESPN might be played in barbershops, but you are not having that conversation there.

Silly me, I guess, having the expectation that intelligent, thoughtful discourse would be used on a national network instead of silly remarks about someone not being black enough because they have white fiancee or might be a Republican. And I'll throw the Republican remark out there but then also add a tag like, hey, I don't know this for sure, but if he's taken up with a white chick, then we all know what that means, am I right? Wink wink nudge nudge.

And I know, I know. I'm probably part of the problem, because I've sat down to report on this situation and add my own thoughts to it, thus continuing to feed the flames and give more heat and light to this controversy than it really deserves. I get that, I do.

However, I think it speaks to a larger issue that surrounds ESPN programming and this whole, "Embrace Debate" mantra that has swallowed up most of the oxygen.

It speak to the further devaluation of the televison brand, in my mind, that this show consumes 5 hours of programming on ESPN2 every day. One of those hours is a "best of" hour 30 minutes after the initial 4 hour block has aired.

Whether it's the lies and race baiting that Skip Bayless has done in the past, or Stephen A. Smith saying the "N" word and then claiming he didn't say it and that we all misheard him because sometimes he talks to fast to the buffonery that Rob Parker just pulled Thursday, it is no question to me that ESPN is rewarding trollish behavior.

Again, I probably need to state that those of us who take to social media and rant and rave and argue about who should get fired for forgetting that they are at work instead of hanging out with their friends are just as much to blame as those who say the stupid things. There has to be a reason for ESPN devoting most of their day on ESPN2 to First Take. It has to be bringing in some revenue even if it is a major trollfest from most reports I see or hear. I admit, I have watched the show one time in my life while getting my car fixed. That was the longest two hours of my life, and I am never getting that time back.

According to ESPN's PR department (spinmasters, engage!):

For those asking for ESPN Statement on Rob Parker: "The comments were inappropriate and we are evaluating our next steps."
— David Scott (@ESPNprDScott) December 14, 2012

Uh-huh.

You're right.

Those comments were inappropriate.

But you also went ahead and aired those comments during the "Best of" show. So obviously, they weren't that inappropriate, or you would've scrubbed those comments away as quickly as possible.

However, if you did that, you wouldn't have been able to get another wave of publicity off of said comments, either.

And so the beat goes on.

I guess being the loudest, most ill-informed voice in the room does get paid.

But this also serves to push me further away from ESPN.

*UPDATE* Sometimes, I'm okay being wrong. Although I don't understand what "full review" means. Full review of Parker's comments? Or a full review of the show, its mission statement and its conduct over the last couple of years

Following yesterday’s comments, Rob Parker has been suspended until further notice.We are conducting a full review.
— Mike Soltys (@espnmikes) December 14, 2012

Open A New Window, Open A New Door

Dormancy has been the norm around here of late, through much fault of my own.

I am sad to say that I do not have the time to dedicate to this space like I wanted to. The vision in my head just does not match up to the reality of my current situation, and there were a couple of ways this could have gone.

I could have let this space fall into further disrepair, becoming just another ghost of the internet.

Or...I could go with what I consider plan "B," which is to leave this site up as something of a repository for my writing around the web.

Plan "B" is what it will be.

I will slowly be collating my writing about college football around the web and placing them here, and will continue to do so in the future.

I hope to also use this space as a place for longer, in depth research-oriented pieces about college football.

In the meantime, you can find me writing about Mizzou Football at Rock M Nation.

I'll also write about the national college football scene at Southern Pigskin and at The Crystal Ball Run.

Until we meet again....

Joe Paterno: 1926-2012

The end will come for all of us one day. The nature of the circle of life is that we all will, sadly, pass away. Sometimes sooner than we ever expect.

It seems weird to say that an 85 year old has passed away too soon, and yet for some reason I can't seem to help but shake that feeling now that Joe Paterno has died at the age of 85 from lung cancer.

Obviously, the events of the last two months, and the scandal that continues to engulf the biggest thing in Centre County, Pennsylvania, is the first thing that comes to mind. The events that lead to the retirement/termination of Joe Paterno seemed to be the capper on a truly scandal-ridden college football year of 2011.

To be blunt, it was an abrupt and ignominious end to a great career. 

But today just doesn't seem like a day for that. Joe Paterno was the last of his kind, I think: a true lifer. He arrived in Happy Valley out of Brown in 1950 and didn't leave his job until November of this year. 

61 years as a coach at one school? That is just never going to happen again. Not in this era of college football.

I had the pleasure of living in State College/University Park for three years. Two of those years were among the worst seasons that Penn State endured under Paterno. They were bad. Comically bad. And then 2005 happened, and the great run to the Orange Bowl. You couldn't help but get swept up in the magic of Penn State football and the love that that community had for the program and the coach in particular.

I saw the man quite often walking near campus. I never met him (although I did almost hit him with my car once). He had his good side and his bad side, and obviously he had his flaws. His flaws might have ultimately led to his undoing.

The word "legacy" is going to be utilized quite often over the next few days in discussions about Joe Paterno; it is unavoidable when you are one of the best of all time in your field. And while the end was ugly and ultimately tarnished his legacy, it did not erase all of the good that he did both on the field and in the community.

Rest in peace, Joe Paterno.

Sandusky Situation Could Lead to Paterno's Downfall

I lived in State College, Pennsylvania for three years in the early to mid 2000s. It's hard to live near and work for Penn State without developing some level of affection for the communty, and for the Nittany Lions football team.

I lived about three miles or so from the stadium and drove past it on the way to work. For about a year, my route home took me near Joe Paterno's house, and I even saw him walking across campus on a couple of my drives home.

Centre County, which is where Penn State is located, is most definitely a small, close knit community. It is a special place.

Which is why the news that has come out of there over the last few days is beyond sickening.

There has been a complete and total failure of leadership at Penn State, if you read the grand jury indictment. Complete and total. If you read the full indictment, I advise you to do so on an empty stomach, because it is truly sickening.

Athletic Director Tim Curley has stepped down and is on administrative leave. He's gone, basically.

Vice President of Finance and Operations Gary Schultz has "retired." He's gone.

Curley and Schultz have also been indicted for perjury in lying about what they knew in regards to Sandusky's predilictions via information received in 2002 from (then) graduate assistant Mike McQueary, who allegedly caught Sandusky in the shower one night at Penn State's Lasch Football Building having sex with a ten year old boy.

McQueary (now an assistant coach) told Joe Paterno what he witnessed. Paterno then told Curley. Sandusky's reprimand? His keys to the facility were taken away and he was told not to bring boys into the lockerroom or on campus anymore.

Nobody called the police. And that ban on bringing boys on campus was, as Curley admits, unenforceable.

That pisses me off, especially because, after the 2002 shower incident, there was another document victim, from 2005-2008 when he finally cut off contact with Sandusky.

Someone else allegedly had part of their innocence stolen because of massive inaction by supposed leaders of men.

Curley and Schultz apparently covered for Sandusky and tried to protect the repuation of Penn State. President Graham Spanier was apparently okay with the lack of action taken by Schultz and Curley. And as far as I can tell, Paterno did the bare minimum that was legally obligated of him, as did McQueary.

That's not good enough as far as I am concerned. It simply isn't good enough. And it might, correctly, cost some other people their jobs. Including Joe Paterno, as the New York Times is reporting.

It would be an ignomious end to a great coaching career, and it is an ending that no one could have ever seen coming.

2011 Kickoff: Preseason Predictions

Oh, it truly is the most wonderful time of the year.

Each Labor Day weekend, we receive college football back.

Even with all of the off the field scandals (covered in summation here), and with the drama coming from the pending implosion (again!) of the Big 12, I can't wait to spend more attention to games on the field—like the 50-48 barnburner supplied by Baylor and TCU on Friday night.

But I wanted to go on the record with my divisional, conference and national title picks before the games begin in earnest on Saturday at 9am PDT.

ACC Atlantic: Maryland
ACC Coastal: Virginia Tech
ACC Overall: Virginia Tech
Big 12: Oklahoma
Big East: West Virginia
Big Ten Leaders: Wisconsin
Big Ten Legends: Nebraska
Big Ten Overall: Wisconsin
Conference USA East: Southern Mississippi
Conference USA West: Houston
Conference USA Overall: Southern Mississippi
Mid-American East: Ohio
Mid-American West: Toledo
Mid-American Overall: Toledo
Mountain West: Boise State
Pacific 12 North: Oregon
Pacific 12 South: Utah
Pacific 12 Overall: Oregon
SEC East: South Carolina
SEC West: LSU
SEC Overall: LSU
Sun Belt: Troy
WAC: Fresno State
Independent: Notre Dame

National Title: Alabama over Wisconsin    

The 2011 College Football Season is Here. Thank Goodness

I don't know about you, but I have been waiting for this day for a long, long time.

The start of the 2011 college football season has taken forver to get here, and now that it is here, hopefully attention can be paid to the game on the field.

And this year more than ever, that has to be the case, because this was an offseason that we all should want to forget.

At first, it just seemed to be carryover from the end of last season, with the Ohio State "Tat Five" being allowed to play in the Sugar Bowl, and a little bit of hangover from Cam Newton as Auburn won the BCS Title.

But the drama never seemed to stop, as more and more information came out about Ohio State, ultimately costing Jim Tressel his job and forcing Terrelle Pryor to enter the NFL supplemental draft.

Meanwhile, Bill Stewart, who had a coach-in-waiting situation forced upon him by West Virginia athletic director Oliver Luck, tried to take down said coach, Dana Holgorsen, and failed. He was given the boot after trying to leak information about Holgorsen's wild partying ways to the media.

Over in Eugene, Oregon head coach Chip Kelly tried to parse the name "Will" versus "Willie," in discussing the fact that the Ducks must have been fleeced out of $25,000 by Willie Lyles, a Texas man who serves as some sort of recruiting svengali for LSU, Oregon and some other programs as well as top rated recruits. The recruit in question was running back Lache Seastrunk, who, thanks to a vision from God, has transferred from Oregon to Baylor.

Butch Davis was ousted from North Carolina literally a couple of days after returning from ACC media days because the leadership of North Carolina thought that the best time to get rid of a coach was two weeks before the start of fall training camp. Last summer, a lot of folks thought that North Carolina was poised for greatness. Now, they appear to have lost another season thanks to their NCAA issues.

Yet all of that drama was surpassed by the atomic bomb that Yahoo! Sports investigative reporter Charles Robinson dropped on the University of Miami two weeks ago. If you haven't read it by now, you have to spend a couple of hours going through all of the player pages. It is fascinating reading.

Oh, and the expansion carousel may be spinning again thanks to the Big 12, the University of Texas, Texas A&M and ESPN. Good times, good times.

So now do you see why I am excited about kickoff?

Let the games begin.

A Letter to ESPN

Dear ESPN,

I'm probably long overdue in writing this missive, and for that I should apologize. Although I am sure that by now, you must have realized that this letter was coming. I know from my perspective, the writing has been on the wall for some time now, but events over the past few months have forced my hands to the keyboards.

I probably shouldn't beat around the bush anymore, so here it goes:

I think we should start seeing other people.

It's not you. It's me.

No, no. That isn't quite right; I would say that both of us are probably to blame for the change in this relationship. And sometimes that happens; people change. They drift apart. Interests that used to be shared just aren't there anymore. Quite frankly, I don't think that carrying on this long-term relationship is mutually beneficial anymore.

I know I've changed. I've discovered new outlets for accessing information, as SI.com and Yahoo! Sports have become much, much stronger voices in the sports media, with killer investigative reporting and feature writing. From a different perspective those lines, blog networks like Bloguin and SB Nation allow more fan voices to speak through, and the analysis that takes places on some of the fan sites on these networks outstrips a lot of the work that is done by ESPN.

(Disclosure: I am an author for a site on SB Nation's network of college blogs, Rock M Nation.)

My local sports radio station here in Las Vegas is one of the best sports radio stations in the country, and the mid-day shows Gridlock and DC and the Sunshine Man cover national sports with more edge than I could ever expect from Mike and Mike and with an intellectual honesty that is sorely lacking from the likes of Colin Cowherd.

My tastes have changed. The way I want to receive information has changed. The type of people I want to receive that information from has changed. But you have changed as well.

One of the things that made me realize exactly how far apart we had grown was when the book about ESPN by James Miller and Tom Shales came out in May and I had less than zero interst in the book. I mean, less than zero. Years ago I would have rushed right out to a bookstore and snatched up the first copy I could get my grubby little hands on. Now? I don't even want to look for it a the local libraries.

The second thing that made me realize how small a role ESPN plays in my life now is the fact that there are only three shows I watch on ESPN regularly that are not live sports: Pardon the Interruption, College Gameday (for football) and College Football Final. That's it, that's the list. I don't remember the last time I watched a whole SportsCenter from start to finish; it seriously might have been 2003. That was not the case years ago.

The third thing was when I logged onto ESPN.com and didn't realize that you had shifted some of the bloggers around to different beats and had actually added some new staffers. That blew me away.

The last thing that made me realize that we might have reached the end of the road was the situation with Bruce Feldman. I've never met Bruce Feldman, but I have been reading his writing since the nascent days of ESPN.com (back when it was still ESPN Sportszone). I've always found his reporting and writing to be solid; the essence of professional, quality sports journalism. Feldman is one of the few people that work for ESPN that, off the top of my head, I would love to meet and talk with.*

With that being said, the way that your organization treated him last week was unconscionable, and the bullshit spin that you put out after Twitter exploded with the #freebruce hashtag was abominable.

If Feldman was "never suspended" as your p.r. flacks and the terse, three sentence release stated, then a) why didn't you say so when contacted by other journalists Thursday night and, b) why did your statement mention Feldman was "resuming duties?" There is nothing to resume if there is nothing that was interrupted, which is what a suspension would have done.

Additionally, why was Bruce not allowed on his Twitter account and why was his chat skipped without explanation on Wednesday? Why did it take you a day to say he wasn't suspended if, he, in fact, wasn't suspended?

To an outsider, it looked petty. It looked small-minded. It looked wrong. It looked like it was badly mishandled by management.

Sadly, you've become a network that has little relevance in my life at this point, with few broadcast personalities that I care about or even pay attention to, and a management that (allegedly) treated one of their veteran writers harshly only to be rebuked publicly through blogs and social networks into (allegedly) reinstating him from a suspension that never happened. It's a tough pill to swallow, and quite frankly, I don't need that much drama in my life.

I'm moving on, although I hope that we can still be friends in the fall (for college football) and in the late spring/early summer (for the NBA Finals). Maybe you can put your money into reaching someone younger who is willing to overlook the flaws you have, and I'll find comfort in the arms of a wider variety of information sources.

Good luck, ESPN. I wish you the best.

Sincerely,
The Pigskin Pundit

(* The other ESPN folks I want to meet [in no particular order]: Kornheiser, Wilbon, Forde, John Anderson, Scott Van Pelt, Bob Valvano.)

Michigan needs victories, not mascots

Even though my background is in higher education administration, I have had the pleasure of spending time around business majors and business professors. In addition, I have plenty of friends who work in business, marketing, advertising.

As a communications major, and as a cynical person, I believe that nothing good can ever come from the words, "youth demographic." Especially as it relates to sports.

So imagine my surprise when I read a story in Michigan Today, which contained those ill fated words in connection to...a costumed mascot at the University of Michigan. From athletic director Dave Brandon:

"I'm struck by the fact that when opposing teams come to our stadium, and they bring a mascot, all of our young fans are lined up to see if they can get a picture taken with it, whether it's the Penn State Nittany Lion or Sparty," Brandon told Michigan Today. "That's a little annoying to me.




"You can't get your picture taken with a Block M. Mascots are really embraced by the youth demographic and we want to take advantage of that, for all the reasons that are obvious...Our history and our tradition is great for those of who were there to experience it, or remember it...but there's a generation coming up and you've got to connect with them and keep them excited."

I'm not like ESPN's Michael Wilbon, who detests most mascots and would rather see them banished from the sports landscape. My alma mater has a costumed mascot, Truman the Tiger. Named after President Harry Truman, who was from the state of Missouri. I've been down with Truman for about a decade and a half at this point.

Mascots can be fun, mascots can be entertaining for the kids. I know that when I take my son to events out here at UNLV, he likes seeing Hey Reb around and giving him a high five.

So I totally get what Brandon is talking about.

But I agree with Michigan alum and NFL Network broadcaster Rich Eisen. Michigan should be a mascot free zone.

Part of what makes Michigan, well, Michigan are the maize and blue colors, "The Victors" fight song, the winged helmet (which was not originated at Michigan but is a part of the iconography of the school) and the distinct lack of a mascot.

Nine of the twelve Big Ten schools have on field mascots. Hell, newcomer Nebraska has two with Lil Red and Herbie Husker. Illinois used to have one until the NCAA forced Chief Illiniwek into retirement (and that's a whole other story). So the clear lack of a mascot is a relatively unique position in the conference and on a national level as well.

You know what I think will make Michigan football exciting for the "youth demographic" that Dave Brandon is desperate to reach? It's not a mascot, or "retro-inspired uniforms" or finally playing a night game (although that may help a little bit more than anything else).

It's winning. (Duh!)

Win.

Win often and win big. Beat Ohio State. Beat Nebraska. Beat Michigan State and Penn State. Win your division, win the conference and compete not for Rose Bowl appearances, but for actual BCS Title game appearances.

Because not having a fuzzy mascot like Willy the Wolverine (an attempt that some enterprising Michigan students tried in the 1980s) isn't what will lose you traction with the almighty "youth demographic."

Not having won a national title since 1997 is a much, much bigger ailment.

Housekeeping: Guest spot this week

I'll be doing a guest spot tomorrow over at Blatant Homerism, an Oklahoma blog with the Bloguin network. It's "Best of Week" and I highly recommend you check out the other stuff over there. The guys do good work on Oklahoma football and college football in general and is in my must read rotation of blogs.

Why Playing Spot The Violation is a Problem

Let's Take A Quiz - Phineas and Ferb Lyrics + HQ (MP3 Download) (via PhineasandFerbSongs)


Yes, let's take a quiz. Presented by Bill Lubinger of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, and with a tip of the hat to Mizzou alumnus Graham Watson of Yahoo! Sports for linking to it originally. Let's look at four scenarios in this case study. For each one, I want you to determine if it is an NCAA violation or if it is something that is permissible.
Again, you only have the information laid out in each case; no additional information for the presented scenario is forthcoming:

1. A "super fan" of the local college or university team is having a dinner for one at the local sports bar. He notices that a couple of the guys from the basketball team are sitting a few tables over watching a game. The guy calls the waitress over and orders a pitcher of soda and a bucket of wings to be sent to the guys. This guy is just a "super fan"; he is not an official booster. Violation or permissible?

2. The star middle linebacker has been invited to speak at a local Pop Warner football league's year end banquet. He is not being paid for this speaking engagement. He attends and gives a rousing speech. The grateful parents who are organizing the dinner invite the linebacker to stick around for dinner. They are serving chicken, scalloped potatoes, salad and chocolate cake. Violation or permissible?

3. Before the linebacker headed off to the banquet, he stopped by the football offices to chat with his head coach. The coach suggests that the player wear a tie for this speaking engagement, reaches into his desk and pulls out a tie for the player to wear that evening. Violation or permissible?

4. The compliance office receives an anonymous call from a potential tipster. This person is calling the compliance office because they have learned that the university is paying for contact lenses and braces for student athletes. Violation or permissible?

I'll give you the answers, provided by the compliance officers at the University of Akron and at Kent State University at the end of this piece.

But let's look at the above scenarios for a second and think about this. In each of these four scenarios, something that most folks would perceive as relatively innocuous is occurring, right? Buying a round of drinks and some food for basketball players. Contact lenses and braces (while not cheap are not as expensive as a customized low rider). A catered meal as a way of saying thanks for speaking tonight. Loaning a tie to someone who forgot to put one on.
I'm not going to say that those who were in the Tat Five are blameless, or that they shouldn't have been suspended. Nor am I going to say that Jim Tressel shouldn't have "resigned." The circumstances surrounding what's going on there, or what went on at North Carolina with Marvin Austin and company last season are different, and each case should be examined in detail for what is available.
On the whole, though, I wonder if it isn't necessary to do a full examination of the rule book. It might be time for an overhaul, because, quite frankly, there's no way that the average student-athlete (or even coaches, for that matter) is going to be able to know everything that is in there.
This link will take you to the latest edition of the Division I manual. Go check it out. It's free to download (and I do every year). It's a 444 page PDF, and quite hefty if you have a paper copy (I have an old paper one from about 2005).
It is dense, it is verbose, it is not easy to read and interpret unless you spend a lot of quality time with it. I am increasingly finding it harder and harder to say that as a student-athlete you need to be familiar with the sections that apply to you and you need to know them forwards, backwards and sideways.
Yes, I know that compliance and life skills are there to help with the interpretation of rules and policy for them, and that they do educate student-athletes on the issues that are relevant to them at the beginning of the year.
But there also has to be a reason that lots of schools pile up secondary violations out the wazoo; it isn't easy to keep this crap straight.
I think that the retreat that Mark Emmert has called for August 9-10 is good on its surface, and I'll have more on it later this summer. Part of reforming intercollegiate athletics, to me, involves looking at the rule book and deciding how much of this is actually viable and realistic in the 21st century and what rules make sense.
Let's not focus solely on enforcement; let's look at holistic reform from the ground up. It's time for a new model.
Answer key:

1. Violation. The student-athletes should say "No, thank you" to the soda and wings. It would constitute an extra benefit because they would be receiving it because of their athletics status and because free wings and soda are not generally available to the public. Also, you could argue the person may not have been a booster before, but is one now. Per an NCAA bylaw, he "provided benefits to enrolled student-athletes." By triggering that status, he now retains it eternally.

2. Permissible. The student-athlete can accept actual and necessary expenses for participating. He is also allowed to receive a meal for his participation, so the cost of the meal is not an issue. Interacting with the banquet attendees would not be an issue, either, since they are not of prospect age and the player is not a coach. If the parents insist the player join them for dinner some other time outside of the banquet, he can accept an occasional meal in the parents' home. Institutional discretion sets the definition of "occasional." At Akron, for instance, the definition is once a month, on average.

3. Possible violation. A tie, or other dress clothes for that matter, could be bought by the student-athlete using the Student Athlete Fund -- a fund provided by the NCAA to help them cover the difference between their scholarship and the cost to attend school. However, institutions are not allowed to loan dress clothes. If a school requires a suit/jacket and tie, the items would have to be bought through the fund. Even if the linebacker returned the tie after the event, it could still be viewed as a violation.

4. Permissible. Those items could be considered necessary for participation. Since they are medically related, they would be permissible if the school's budget and policies allowed for them.