Sad and wrong end to a legend's era

I have a sportstalk vlog on youtube now, so I encourage people to check it out. I hope to post a new one there within a day or two. But for the purposes of this topic, I felt it would be more appropriate to discuss it in a written form. By now, most of you know or have heard at least something regarding coach Joe Paterno being fired from The Penn State University. If not, you must be living under a rock because ESPN and just about every other news show's coverage has been inundated with the topic.

First off, let me congratulate ESPN's Trevor Matich for standing up to the senseless coverage his employer has taken with this story. Mr. Matich played football at the NFL level and played for Brigham Young University as well, as much of a moral school as it gets in today's society. Yet Matich is the only one that thinks it unfair how Paterno was let go before all the facts are revealed. We are so quick to judge anymore, that it feels at times like we are one step away from returning to the era of stoning people. Paterno was wrong in not doing more with this scandal than he did, no doubt. But the vilification of such a good leader of young men is ridiculous.

As Matich said, the testimony in the grand jury report is not enough to justify the termination of the longtime coach based purely on what was said. Also, the testimony that is being taken for fact is the testimony of a man who not only did not go to the authorities himself, but waited a full 24 hours before even approaching Paterno with the information. As Matich also stated, we don't know the full extent of what was actually told to Paterno. Paterno only recalls vague statements of touching or horsing around. The then grad-assistant and now assistant coach, Mike McQueary, told the jury all the details. How are we to know that he told the full story to Paterno. And then we are to assume that no matter what Paterno was told, he should've picked up the phone and called the police right then and there based on something he didn't witness himself and on information that may not have been delivered as cut and dry as people want to make it out to be.

Nothing is being reported on the timeline. ESPN posted a crude timeline that stated Jerry Sandusky was fired in 1999, but allowed to stay as a consultant with access to facilities. The main incident happened in 2002 but then the grand jury did not come with their investigation until 2010. Someone went to them. Someone did turn in Sandusky. We don't know when, so how are we to know that the PSU administration did not present this to authorities and then the legal system drug its feet?

Also, why is it that this story is only revolving around coach Paterno? The only coverage has been about "what did he know?", "when did he know it?", "why didn't he do more?" Jerry Sandusky, the actual one accused of the heinous acts, has all but vanished onto the back pages. An afterthought in the wake of this embarrassment that has gone on at Penn State. All the coverage has centered on Paterno. Not only that, but many now question the very pillars that Paterno built his football program on and helped build within the entire university. For one mistake to wipe out all the good things this man has accomplished is beyond my comprehension. He never came under investigation in an era when almost every major coach and/or major program has been dirty in some form or fashion. He graduated his players at or near 90% in an era when 50% has become acceptable. All this vanishes because people want to vent their anger at the highest profile person? Ridiculous.

Why is Paterno fired and not McQueary? How can people justify the idea of getting rid of Paterno, who did not act on a watered down story, but the man who actually witnessed the act, did not act on it for an entire day or longer and then passed it on to someone else retains his job? He is just as responsible, if not more so. Yet he gets a pass in most public opinion. What is wrong with society that we have to vilify the highest profile person and push the others, who are more prominent in the story to the side?

Did Paterno do all he could in every sense? No. That's not the point I'm making. Paterno will have to go to whatever end a person chooses to believe in knowing the truth about what he could've done and will have to meet his maker with that information. We don't know the full truth, but are more than happy to judge anyway. Let us for one moment take this out of the world of sports. A rookie cop (McQueary) goes to his captain and gives him a vague story about the captain's longtime collegue. The captain deliberate's the information and goes to the Chief of Police. If the Chief of Police, i.e PSU's president, does nothing, would the precinct captain be just as responsible? Morally yes, but I highly doubt there would be as much furor calling for the job of the captain. There wouldn't be as much looking down the nose and saying all the good the captain had done for the community now meant nothing.

The man they call JoePa is not without responsibility in this, but Sandusky was the villain. He is the sick, twisted person that robbed these children of their identities. That is where the blame should rest. Why do we blame Paterno with such passion, but mothers of abused children get a pass when they let their husbands or boyfriends beat them near to death? Why is there not a news truck parked outside of the house of a parent who does not report the beating of their daughter who is with an abusive partner? The crimes are quite similar. Society is quick to toss blame at others with disregard for the victims actual needs and then hide behind saying they are thinking of the victims. Have any of them blamed him for not personally stopping Sandusky? Have any of the actual victims come out and said they feel better now that Paterno has been fired?

Ultimately it boils down to this. Paterno should have done more, if he knew all or most of the details. He did go to his superiors and though morally that may not have been enough, I do not feel he should have been forced out in such a rushed and unprofessional fashion. The man stood for good things and in the end, most people will only remember him for this ugly situation. The mere fact that it took eight years to get the case heard might be more the fault of the judicial system than Paterno himself. It is just a sad end to what was a great career of a fine coach and mentor.

As always, this is just one man's opinion...but I feel I'm right.

Two steps forward, one step back. Opposites attract?

Ok, so the title is a poor attempt at referencing a bad 90's song by Paula Abdul, with a cartoon cat. Yet, the overall idea is what I'm getting at in regards to the U.S. soccer team. After an uninspired group phase of the Gold Cup, the Americans seemed to get things rolling a little bit in the knockout round. Wins over Jamaica and Panama, though poorly played, seemed like the U.S. was getting things on track. Then the final against Mexico. Granted, these two are rivals on the same level as Kansas vs Missouri. They hate each other, the games are often chippy and sometimes downright overly physical, you can usually throw out the record books when they play each other and like Kansas/Missouri, despite the ferocity and passion of the rivalry, nobody outside of the rivalry thinks much of it.

In recent years, it seemed as though the U.S. had supplanted their southern neighbors as the top team in CONCACAF. The Americans were picking up wins against teams like Brazil and Spain in buildups to World Cups. The Americans were improving and making strides towards being an actual legitimate player on the world stage. The Mexicans were struggling to keep up amid aging players and a coaching carousel that reeked of low tier levels. Early on in the qualifying for the '10 World Cup, it was even a possibility that El Tri might miss the tournament. How quickly things can turn.

Despite an early setback of five top players being suspended from the team for testing positive for a banned substance (once again attributed to "tainted meat"), the Mexicans rallied themselves and pole-vaulted the Americans as the top team in the region. Not only the they recover from a 2-0 deficit in the Gold Cup final, they made it look as though the U.S. was the old man of the region. One too weak and feeble to match the speed and skill of a youth as it runs circles around its elder. Don't get me wrong, the U.S. had chances that it could not capitalize on. Clint Dempsey cracked a good shot off the crossbar. Goodson put a deflection just wide of the near post. Michael Bradley smashed a one timer that curled just wide of the upright. Yet despite all the good that came, there was double the bad.

The U.S. defense looked sluggish, slow, out of shape and unaware of their surroundings. Time and time again the Mexican attack found holes in behind the back line of the Americans. Injuries are a part of sports and though the loss of Steve Cherundolo was a serious blow, by this stage in the game, the U.S. has got to have more depth at every position to be able to absorb such a hit. Obviously this is not the case. Jonathan Bornstein is not a bad player, but you have to question his ability to be a national team player when he could not keep up with the speed of his marks. The U.S. defense was constantly sprinting towards their own goal. This cannot be the case as often as it was against Mexico.

Quite frankly, as poorly as the American defense played in the Gold Cup final, one wonders if the youth push came too quickly. Personally, I'd rather have an aged yet still speedy Frankie Hejduk guarding the flanks with his quickness and tenacity than the players I saw on the field today. What happened to the staple of the U.S. team? Defense and goaltending used to be the one thing the Americans didn't have to worry about. Marcelo Balboa and Alexi Lalas and Frankie Hejduk and Jeff Agoos and even defensive midfielders like Thomas Dooley didn't necessarily have the skill of today's players but they knew how to mark and knew how to defend their back third.

What's disappointing is that Mexico, as a team, is really not much better than the U.S. Individually, however, they have the skill that the Americans do and may always lack. While more and more U.S. born players are getting the opportunity to play overseas, they rarely see starting minutes on top clubs. Mexican players do. Chicharito plays significant minutes for Manchester United, one of if not the top club in Europe. Americans can't buy that kind of experience. The closest they get is Clint Dempsey, who is one of the EPL's leading scorers, but still often falters on the national stage. Mostly due to his fiery temper. The Americans lack the skill and creativity that foreign players seem to master.

Even the country's top players like Landon Donovan and Clint Dempsey don't really have the ball skills to take on players one-on-one. On the positive side, Freddy Adu does have those skills and showcased them against Mexico. One can only hope that he continues to grow and mature and stay on the national side, but that's still a 50/50 proposition. The problem may be that America's greatest strength is also its greatest weakness. Despite having the financial ability and numbers of athletes to produce some of the top teams in the world, Americans struggle to get their best athletes to focus on sports like soccer and hockey. For years we've heard that America's time is coming and that the next generation is going to put us over the top and get to that next level. Yet we still languish behind, looking up at the top tier. We outnumber Canadians nearly 10-1, but their top athletes go all out for hockey from early ages. The U.S. only gets certain numbers of top athletes from mostly northern and eastern states. We outnumber many European countries combined. But again, soccer, though growing, is still somewhat of a niche sport.

The United States has made great strides, but national team sports just take a back seat anymore. Even in sports we invented, like baseball and basketball, the U.S. is no longer head and shoulders above the rest and in some cases is not even close to the best anymore. With regards to soccer, the States have made giant leaps. Yet with every few steps forward they seem to always take a step or two backward. Alexi Lalas said it quite nicely following the American's loss on this day. The team has got to come to a point where they stop saying they can take lessons from these sorts of performances and actually learn from the lessons and not do it again. The U.S. has got to shore up its defensive line. They need speed and physicality from their back four. The midfield is still set with Donovan, Dempsey, Bradley, Jones and hopefully a rejuvenated Adu. A forward must emerge that is a legitimate threat to score every time they touch the pitch. Jozy Altidore could be that player, but there have been several forwards to take that "could be" mantle and fallen back into the shadows. Only time will tell. The team must find consistency though. If it wants to be taken seriously on the world level, it can no longer play to its opponent. The U.S. must learn to crush teams like Panama and Jamaica and Honduras and El Salvador and run through CONCACAF as though they were flies buzzing around the face of a giant. Only when we force our opponents to match the way we play can the U.S. truly move forward.

RANDOM THOUGHTS

- Again, Freddy Adu was a nice bright spot during his time played in the semi-final and final of the Gold Cup. Personally, I did not like the way he was brought up into the league and immediately deemed a superstar and thrust into the spotlight of stardom and fame with articles saying how he was America's Pele` and how the Brazilian star knew he would be great. (apologies for the run-on sentence there). Now that he's matured and grown and been humbled however, I root for his success. His footskills and vision are what we hoped for. If he can continue to grow as a player and stay humble AND stay in the good graces of whoever may be the national team coach, he could be a good offensive force for the American attack. The U.S. needs someone who can challenge defenders and break them down off the dribble.

- I dearly love my St. Louis Blues and I want to trust that the management is doing everything they can to improve the team and attempt to get back into the playoffs and push for their first Stanley Cup. They are making it difficult, however, with the constant talking out the side of the mouths. Before the trade deadline, we were told that the team would only be making player-for-player deals. No more player for draft picks. They were beyond that point. A week later there were two trades for draft picks. While the players given up weren't going to be the difference in a Cup run or not, it just seemed as though more could have been returned for their services. In the same manner, it was said by many that the Blues would almost certainly not use all their picks in the draft. They would be used to attain a veteran player. Again, I defer to the management team of John Davidson and Doug Armstrong. If no deals were available that would help our team, then so be it. But why the double speak? If it's a possibility that all your picks would be used on draftees or as was the case, one was traded for a prospect, then just use the old fallback line of "we're pursuing every avenue to improve the team." It's a long offseason and free agency still looms. One can only hope that the fortunes of the team turn around with perhaps a wise offseason acquisition and if we're very lucky, new ownership willing to keep the team on the upward trend.

- Why are NBA fans so defensive. I heard Dari Nowkhah, of ESPN, say on his radio show that this year's draft was boring. It was. By far the most uninteresting draft in recent memory. Yet the NBA fans were blasting him left and right. Why defend something when the person is not blasting the on-court product, but the talent level of this years crop of newcomers? Wackos, I say.

- Someone, and it pains me to say I forget who, made a fantastic point when it comes to the things wrong with pro sports. Major League Baseball and the NHL have far fewer legal battles and issues with draft prospects and the like because they have well established minor league systems. Basketball and football use the collegiate ranks as their minor league and are thus the most corruptible sports. While I'm sure there are not zero instances, I challenge someone to tell me of the last time a college hockey player or baseball player was in trouble for receiving improper benefits because they were so highly touted that every school in the country was drooling after them. It doesn't happen because, despite the fact that those recruits are still fought over amongst the coaches, there isn't the clamor by the "boosters" because there isn't the notoriety of possibly having the next big pro since even high draft picks in hockey or baseball will most likely spend at least a year in a minor league system. Despite this grand epiphany, it is highly unlikely that we will ever see any serious minor league implemented for either sport.

- Why is it so damned hard to get people to contact you back regarding broadcasting jobs? Sigh...I digress though.

- Gongrats to Markief Morris and his brother Marcus on being drafted into the NBA. A golf clap for Josh Selby on his second round selection *coughshould'vestayedinschoolcough* May your pro careers be long and productive. Rock Chalk.

That's about it for now. I think I've prattled on long enough for this post. Until next time, just remember: It's just an opinion...but I'm right.

Why does everything revolving around sports seem so sad?

There are several things lately that I've noticed that just make me sad about the state of sports and sports fandom (if that's even a word). The first would be the Albert Pujols contract situation. Yes, I am more likely to care about this because I am a St. Louisian. Yet I am upset at the foolishness that both sides present. I support neither Pujols nor the Cardinals because both have royally screwed this pooch. On the one side, the Cardinals have dragged their feet so far in the sand you would think they were trying to make a new Grand Canyon in the midwest. The team should have resigned Pujols before the Matt Holliday deal. They did not. They should have signed him during the season when there were plenty of opportunities to go to Albert and say "let's get this done so we can focus on building around you in the offseason." They did not. They had an entire offseason to negotiate and from all accounts, they gave the public impression that nothing was broached in earnest until the few days before Pujols deadline.

That brings me to this "deadline." I find the idea ridiculous. I understand why Pujols THINKS it is a good idea, but the reality is that it will keep absolutely no media member from asking him about his contract throughout the year. In fact, I would venture to say, it will increase the questions. Think of just about any scenario. Pujols is on fire. Reporters will ask if he thinks he's driving up his asking price come free agency. Pujols is ice-cold. Reporters will ask if not being offered his money by the Cardinals is weighing heavily on him. Everything is a contradiction with this deadline. Reporters will keep asking questions in every new city he goes to, yet he says the deadline was to prevent the circus he faced on his first day at camp. He wants to protect his teammates, yet they will be asked in just about any failing circumstance if it's because of Albert's contract. Pujols wants to focus on playing, yet he himself said that he doesn't have much if anything to do with the negotiations anyway. Every athlete talked to on sports radio has pretty much said the agent deals with the team and only reports what is absolutely necessary to the player to spare them any animosity that would affect their performance. So the idea that he can't have his agent talk to the team and still focus on playing is silly.

Then, as always, it comes down to money. While I would like to believe Mr. Pujols claim that he and ownership laughed at ESPN's reports on the length and financial compensation, I have to believe the money that will be involved in any deal for Albert will be astronomical. How any man can believe they are worth $300 million is beyond me. How any man can think they can perform, naturally, at the age of 42 the same as they did at 32 is beyond me. Yet that is the figure we as fans are left to digest. On the flip side, the Cardinals are reported to be low balling the best player in the game. Say what you will about liking Pujols or not, but offensively no player in history has put up his numbers to begin a career with the same consistancy and he's won gold gloves as well. Yet we are led to believe that St. Louis' offer would not even have made him one of the top 5 paid players. You can't tell me, regardless of being a midwestern city of a mid-market size, that this team hasn't saved up enough money to pay top salary to the best player. Does no one understand the definition of negotiation any more? It seems like everyone has the mentality of it's my way or the highway and if you don't like it they'll take their ball and go home. The Cardinals will survive without Pujols if that is their lot, but it would be sad for a man who could go down as a legend of the game to play in more than one uniform.

Speaking of negotiations being sad, the NFL and it's player's union seem to be locked in the same sort of stalemate. Again, there is little to no movement by either side. We're talking about billions of dollars here. Not millions. Not hundreds of millions. BILLIONS. And these fools want to squabble over how to slice it up. Now no good business man gives away profits, but when we're talking sums as large as the NFL sees, why does it make any sense to even hint at the possibility of labor unrest, let alone a lock-out when the NFL has pretty much taken over as America's true sport? It doesn't. That's why it makes the average fan so sad. As a fan, we can't even focus on our teams for next season because there may not be a season. As such, rosters are being trimmed. Free agency will not happen and the draft takes on a much different role as it will be used to fill spots instead of add depth. With both of these situations, there is always that faint glimmer of hope. That final straw that we can try to hold on to that each side will come to their senses. However, as I age and sports moves ever toward the side of business (if it ever wasn't 100% business) I begin to wonder if sports and sense even go together.

On that note a few briefer things that have saddened me recently in regards to sports. One is the St. Louis Blues. Yes, the team has been disappointing and I as well as many others expected a lot more out of this team. But, I am speaking to the fanbase that is so quick to turn their backs on people that if they were gunslingers, they would fit right in at the OK Corral. So many people have turned on Jaroslav Halak that it makes me wonder what those sort of people want in a goaltender. I write this, not as defense to Halak. He has not lived up to expectations in his short time with the Blues. That much is clear. Many fans, however are already wanting to ship him out of town. One customer at my work even made the asinine comment "yeah, maybe the Blues will win a few now that Halak is out." People need to realize that Halak is only 24. That is the same age as Ben Bishop, who has played the vast majority of his career in the minor leagues. People also need to realize what a difficult position it is. I have played inbetween the pipes in both hockey and soccer. It's a lot more difficult than the average person wants to believe to keep the opponents from scoring. Even the best, such as Patrick Roy or Glenn Hall or Marty Brodeur or Jaque Plante had bad streaks. Staying confident is the key. Whether I'm proven right or wrong, I personally believe what we saw of Halak in the playoffs last year is the true player. Until proven otherwise, I cannot believe someone who shut down both Pittsburgh and Washington and almost defeated Philadelphia (the three top offensive Eastern teams) is a fluke. He just needs to regain his confidence and continue to grow with this team. A team that consists of several defenseman that are in the same age bracket. The Blues cannot continue to swap goaltenders every few years.

Along the topic of St. Louis sports fans, another comment made by a different customer at my work just proved how big of a joke the idea that St. Louis sports fans are the greatest is. Now don't get me wrong. I love the city and will always associate myself with St. Louis and its teams. Outside of the Cardinals though, the Gateway city's teams have had on and off support at best. The comment that riled me up was "I hope the Rams do move away so maybe I can see some good games on Sunday." You don't want to support the Rams, that's your choice. But the NFL only has teams in 32 cities. Even the largest market west of the Mississippi doesn't have an NFL team. To me, that's a pretty big honor. To just throw it away because the team here hasn't been managed properly the last 8-10 years is like throwing the baby out with the bath water. For goodness sake people...support a team. Don't latch on to a winner and then cry about it when they're no good. Only one team wins the final game in every sport and the odds are against even the best.

Lastly, and I apologize for any rambling this post has taken on, but most importantly it saddens and sickens me the lack of perspective some people have. Earlier today, the NHL's facebook page posted a video of the Miracle on Ice game and asked for people's thoughts since it was 31 years ago today that the group of US college kids beat a Soviet team that had won four straight gold medals and not been defeated at all since 1968. The overriding thought is had any team defeated the Soviets, except perhaps Finland, it would have been almost as big a deal. It meant more to the United States at the time because we were not a hockey country except for small patches in the north and northeast. We were in an economic and political crisis. People began to question what it was to be American and then this ragtag team in a sport very few cared about, galvanized an entire nation. If we are to believe the stories, there were no USA chants during sporting events until that game against the Soviets. It was bigger than any one person involved and bigger than just a hockey game. Yet people, unfortunatly the majority were Canadian, had the audacity and gaul to put the game and the US down. Statements were made as dumb as "American vs. Canada rivalry. What rivalry we beat them every time he he," and ones talking about the US' economy today and another saying Ovechkin scoring 65 goals proves Russia is better and even one going on about how if Canada made a movie about every great game they played in, there would be a movie out every day. It honestly made my blood boil. I'm a patriot and a homer and a loyalist when it comes to my country and my sports teams, so I understand the idea of putting down a rival. But do it at the appropriate time. People today are so self-involved, so stupid, so jealous that it would not surprise me to find this sort of sickening dribble being posted even during something such as the death of a president. It makes me sad that people can't put down their differences for just a little while instead of wasting their time trying a dumb putdown that can so easily be crushed by someone with a brain on an online post that was meant to be a celebration of a gream moment in sports and in history.

Whew...I feel a tiny bit better.

Random Thoughts

- Congrats to the WWE on keeping the Rock's return a surprise. It was nice to not know what was coming for once. Too bad they pretty much screwed it all up with the 50th Undertaker return the Raw the following week.

- Why is it the Blues refuse to play for a full 60 minutes? Granted, their game has improved mightily since Oshie and McDonald returned and with the addition of Stewart and Shattenkirk, but there are still so many mistakes. 10 minutes. 10 minutes of poor play out of 60 cost the Blues a game against the Blackhawks. You just can't have that.

- Speaking of not playing consistantly, this year's Kansas basketball team has me fooled. They look like world beaters with talent and depth in one game and then in another it looks like nobody can shoot and they can be stopped by controlling one or two players. I believe they'll make a deep run, but given the lack of a dominant team or teams in college basketball this year it's going to be a stomach churning, nail biting tournament.

Well I figure that's enough rambling for this post. As always, remember it's just my opinion...but I'm right.