I may have been a trifle hasty in joining the deafening chorus condemning Auburn’s decision to hire Caucasian Gene Chizik over African-American Turner Gill as mainly a racist one. (For the record, I “misremembered” when I wrote that Gill wasn’t even interviewed for the job. He was, in fact, given a token interview before being told that the university was pursuing other options.)
Anyhoo, Jason Whitlock, who’s fast becoming the sports version of Thomas Sowell, had a well-reasoned piece in foxsports.com last week that’s cause me to rethink my hasty reaction a tad. His point isn’t that racism might not have played a part in the decision — there’s more than a whiff of that, no matter how they spin it.
Whitlock’s big point is that Turner Gill is extremely lucky that he didn’t get the job, because it was a setup for failure. Not just because it’s probably a crappy situation. What African-American college coach gets his first big-time head-coaching gig at a program that’s not troubled? And yes, that includes Karl Dorrell at UCLA. The reason it was a setup for failure is that there’s simply no question that had he landed the gig, Gill would never have had the full backing of the administration and the booster network necessary to lay a foundation, to allow for the inevitable learning curve, and to forgive neophyte mistakes.
I’m not sure I’m 100 percent sold by Whitlock’s argument, but I do agree that what’s needed IS NOT for a lot more African-American coaches to get head coaching jobs at which they’ll fail — not necessarily because of any personal shortcomings, but because of the situation. What’s needed instead is for one African-American coach to get the right job, and make such a success of it that hidebound administrators and ADs won’t be so afraid to give the second, third and fourth qualified African-American coaches shots at jobs with a future.
Amazingly enough, the African-American D-1 head coach with the best career winning percentage is . . . wait for it . . . the much (and justly) maligned, aforementioned Karl Dorell, who went 35-27. The higher-profile, far more respected Ty Willingham and Dennis Green were 76-88 and 26-63, respectively. If Dorell, of all people, is the current “gold standard,” it’s no wonder that ADs, who are conservative sheep, are hesitant to hire more African-American head coaches. Their day will come, and it’s up to the media and the talking heads to keep the ADs’ feet to the fire, but the day will come sooner once the right African-American head coach is put in the right situation.
Heck, it wasn’t that long ago that people dismissed the idea that African-Americans could succeed as NBA head coaches. Now that Lenny Wilkens, Al Attles, K.C. Jones, Doc Rivers — and, I guess, player-coach Bill Russell — have won NBA championships, African-Americans are hired and fired on their perceived merits, not to make statements. The same is true, to a lesser extent, for the NFL, although the recent travails of Romeo Crennel, Lovey Smith and a few others haven’t helped matters. It’s still the case, unfortunately, that Caucasian hacks — and Hacketts — get cut a lot more slack.
Wasn’t it predictable? When Plaxico Burress got into trouble for his unlicensed firearm incident, I vented about how ridiculous it is that pro athletes, who’re making lots of money and have troops of hangers-on, can’t get it together sufficiently to have one of their minions assure that licenses and registrations are valid and up-to-date. Naturally, we’re now hearing that Burress’s stupidity and carelessness extended to his wheels. He recently rear-ended some poor woman while driving his $140,000 Mercedes — so what else is new? — and, wouldn’t you know it?, turned out to have let his liability insurance lapse 3 days earlier. Plus ça change, plus c’est la meme chose.
That brings to mind yet another of my pet peeves: athletes who apparently can afford such simple luxuries as multiple million-dollar homes, cars that cost six figures, suits that cost 4 and 5 figures, bling that costs who knows what?, but can’t be bothered to pick up a tab or leave a tip. I’m not suggesting that they have to go out of their way to be generous tippers, but how about paying their own freight, or leaving tips in the same proportion that normal people do? Is that really asking too much?
Apparently so. For every story about how Kobe during last year’s playoffs picked up the tab for an expensive team dinner during every round of the playoffs, or about quarterbacks buying each of their linemen a Rolex as a gesture of appreciation, there’s something like this, as reported by Peter (I Make Up Rumors) Vecsey:
“Almost a year later, hotel people out here are still badmouthing Mike Bibby for insisting on ordering everything not on the menu for his party of hangers-on (‘I want fried chicken just the way my mother makes it . . .’) and then trying to sign Ron Artest’s name and room to a $330 bill. Precluded from doing so by the waiter, Bibby sniffed the waiter with a sneer, leaving no gratuity. This obnoxious behavior occurred a couple days before the Kings traded him to the Hawks.”
Or this gem, about the new face of the NBA, King James: He allegedly hosted a few friends late last season at a Cleveland restaurant called “XO Prime Steaks,” keeping the waiter there until about 4 a.m., running up an $800+ tab for food and drinks — and then left a $10 tip. My guess is that he was so P.O.’d that they expected a big star to pay anything — after all, the restaurant enjoyed the pleasure of his ineffable company, which is priceless — that he deliberately stiffed the waiter.
Of course, I don’t know what he is or isn’t really like, and the restaurant’s story — put out after a couple of condemnatory reports — was that it was all an innocent mistake, and that he returned the next day to leave a generous tip. I’m not so sure. If the story is true, believe me, LBJ is far from the only big-name, richer-than-Croesus star athlete (or entertainer) who rarely leaves anything but his fingerprints behind at restaurants.
Barack Obama, by the way — who’s worth a lot less than LBJ — tipped $18 on a $2 beer tab at a joint in Raleigh, NC, around the same time last year, during the Democratic Primary campaign. Of course, Obama was running for public office, and LBJ isn’t, but still . . . .
While I’m on the subject of pet peeves, is it really, really too difficult for American sports media types to learn some of the basics about foreign names — in particular, Chinese names? It’s not as if there are so many Chinese players in the NBA that anyone should be overwhelmed. First, everyone insisted on referring to Yao Ming as if his given name is “Yao” and surname “Ming,” when of course it’s the other way around. There’s really no need for us to look like total hayseeds by never learning that in Chinese culture (and other East Asian cultures, too) the surname comes FIRST, and then the “given” name. That’s why Chairman Mao was always known as, well, “Chairman Mao,” not “Chairman Tsetung.”
It’s not as if there are lots of Yis and Yaos in the league, so they have to use the given names to avoid confusion. And, just by the by, even if that were the case, the people who typeset box scores seem have no problems distinguishing players with the same surname, even if they’re playing against each other. Like, say, I don’t know, the brothers Gasol who played against each other Monday night, an d were identified in the box scores as “Gasol, P,” and “Gasol, M.” Not exactly rocket science.
So I just have to grit my teeth when I read — as I did just yesterday — box scores showing how many points and boards some Nets’ player named “Jianlian” got. Is it really, really too much to ask that he be referred to as “Yi,” just as Kevin Garnett shows up as “Garnett”?
Speaking of those Nets, how’s that J-Kidd for Devin Harris trade working out for you so far, Mark Cuban? Thought so.
I like the fact that the Yankees are willing to spend serious money to give their fans the most competitive team they can. True, they may not always spend their millions wisely — boy, is that an understatement — but the passion to win is evident and welcome. But really, if I’m the ownership of Tampa, Minnesota or Milwaukee, all three of which made the playoffs with total payrolls that might not even cover A-Rod’s tab for Kabalah Water, I’m laughing. Especially when, because of the luxury tax, the Yanks will have to fork over $26 Million-plus, some of which will go to help Tampa and Minnesota keep the Yanks out of the playoffs again.
If there’s any question that Boston is better-managed than the Yankees, by the way, the luxury tax seals the deal. Boston has a payroll second only to New York’s, yet, because of canny planning, owes not a shekel in luxury tax. And the Sox have beat the Yanks like a drum lately, to boot.
My criticism of the Yankees’ financial profligacy DOES NOT extend to their reported deal with Mark Teixeira. I’m sure they’re overpaying for him — that’s a given with a high-profile Scott Boras client. In fact, if the reports are true, he’ll be the second-highest paid player ever, behind only another former Boras client and new teammate, A-Rod.
I’ve dumped on A-Rod for being less than he can be, at times when his team needs him most, but he’s still consistently one of the top producers in baseball, year-in, year-out. If Teixeira is “merely” as consistently good as A-Rod, he may well be “worth” the money, whatever ‘worth” means in that context. And Teixeira, in case we’ve forgotten, was the only consistent Angels’ hitter in their most recent postseason drubbing at the hands of the Sawx. All singles, true enough, but at least he was laying wood on the ball.
Otherwise, Teixeira looks like a reasonable investment. He’s not a drama queen and has no obvious steroid, drug or lifestyle issues. If he doesn’t quite have the pop that the Giambino had, he still swings a pretty big stick, is as constant as the evening star, to paraphrase The Bard, and is for sure going to be the Yanks’ best First Baseman defensively since Tino Martinez. I don’t know that he’ll put asses in seats, but it’s New York, for Pete’s sake. The asses are attracted to the seats regardless. Whether he can handle the inevitable boos is the only imponderable I can see.
Speaking of asses in seats, if there were any doubt that PGA players should stop badmouthing Tiger Woods, and instead be sending a percentage of their winnings to the charities of his choice, the fate of the PGA in Tiger’s post-U.S. Open absence should put the lie to that. There have still been a lot of highly talented golfers competing, and there have been a lot of good story lines, but nobody’s been interested enough to watch the tournaments. Viewership is down, sponsors are bailing left and right, and sales of equipment and gear are in the toilet. Sure, a lot of that has to do with the economy, but it says here that a lot of it also has to do with the fact that most people don’t even know the Tour is going on unless Tiger’s striding down the 18th fairway in contention on Sundays.
What’s that they say in poker, the winners tell jokes, the losers yell “Shut up and deal.” Rod Marinelli, for sure, isn’t telling, or taking, any jokes. Not after his Lions have gone 0-15, with a really good chance to become the first team ever to go 0-16. How anyone in a normal, rational frame of mind could possibly misconstrue a columnist’s question whether Marinelli’s daughter wished she’d married a better defensive coordinator as an attack on Marinelli’s daughter?
Obviously, it was a lame-assed attempt at a humorous attack on the guy she married — who, by the way, is about as inept as it gets, judging by the results we’ve seen. Nice spin job by Marinelli, by the way, attempting to divert attention from the fact that, well, the guy his daughter married really does kind of suck. Who knows, maybe bad judgment does run in the Marinelli family?
Happy Christmakwanzannukah, everybody.
Please send comments and criticism — especially criticism — to thonglaw@sprynet.com, where it will be dealt with appropriately.
