A gun discussion by the N(B)A

(Stephen Curry on NBA's PSA)

(Stephen Curry on NBA’s PSA)

Whoa. Stop the presses.

“NBA Lends Its Name and Its Stars to Campaign Against Gun Violence.” Front page of the New York Times just before Christmas. Now, that’s news. Far more staggering than ongoing accounts of Donald Trump’s xenophobia and bellicosity; the bloody conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Turkey; the latest report of America’s top one percent exploiting tax loopholes to further enhance their filthy-richness.

For a sports league to wade into the contentious national debate surrounding firearms is truly astonishing. By definition, sports is escapist entertainment, primarily concerned with expanding its clientele and therefore averse to ruffling feathers. As Nathaniel Friedman pointed out on Salon, “The NBA has put itself in a position that major sports leagues—multibillion-dollar operations dependent on broadcast revenue—should in theory try to avoid. They’re in the business of attracting new fans, not alienating them. Using the league as a platform for unpopular ideas is deeply counterintuitive…”

New Jersey’s Record newspaper noted how “professional sports leagues usually promote causes that won’t cause a backlash, such as fighting breast cancer or supporting Habitat for Humanity.” Traditionally, the standard for big-time athletes to avoid damaging their marketability is Michael Jordan’s reported explanation for declining to support black Democrat Harvey Gantt’s senatorial campaign against race-baiting GOP incumbent Jesse Helms in 1990: “Republicans buy sneakers, too.”

So this is a big deal, what a Washington Post editorial called “a brave decision…charting a new course in civic responsibility.” Partnered with former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety project, the NBA-endorsed TV spots do not mention the phrase “gun control” or call for specific policy or legal action. Instead, they lament the loss of innocent lives, at a time when—according to polls—the need for more reasonable access to weapons is something that the majority of Americans favor.

The NBA appeal, then, hardly casts it as a cultural infidel, and Everytown for Gun Safety’s Jason Rzepka stressed to SBNation that the project is “neither pro-gun nor anti-gun,” but “about gun violence.”

Predictably, though, the NBA/Everytown effort is being interpreted by some trigger-happy Second Amendment vigilantes as an assault on their constitutional rights. Fox News correspondent Ed Henry expressed dismay that the public service announcements spoiled some citizens’ Christmas joy. (“Shouldn’t people have a chance to celebrate with their families and not what is seen clearly as a political message?” he asked.) The online site northwestfirearms.com used its message board to ask, “Are you ready to boycott the NBA?”

And Larry Pratt, founder of Gun Owners of America, somehow perceived racial and religious implications, telling Henry, “Privately-owned guns have become the last line of defense of true white Christian Americans. And now they’re going on about how ‘we can stop gun violence together?’ What does that have to do with white people when black Americans are twice as likely to die from gun violence in this country? And gun violence is committed by predominantly black people, not white people.”

Whoa.

Clearly, the NBA’s resolve to get involved in such a touchy topic is a revelation. Big news because of the passionate—and anticipated—pushback, the inclination to choose up sides and apply a full-court press to the NBA’s business model. Still, in terms of shaping attitudes about illegal firearm trafficking, it has been pointed out that young people watch sports and hear what their favorite players say. And NPR commentator Frank Deford said he was willing to bet “there are more sports fans in Congress than there are gun fans.”

Hey, don’t shoot. I’m just the messenger.

nba

Odell Beckham might be really sorry.

plato
So we went from a sorry situation, Odell Beckham Jr.’s reckless and vicious comportment during the Giants-Carolina Panthers game, to Beckham’s issued apology—which isn’t the same as saying he regretted trying to take off an opponent’s head.

In fact Beckham, glorified for the neither moral nor immoral ability to catch footballs with one hand, didn’t come out with his apology until his one-game suspension (which he had appealed) was upheld. And even then, his expression of remorse was offered to his teammates, the Giants organization and fans. With no mention of either the Panthers or defensive back Josh Norman, whom Beckham very well could have rendered a paraplegic by launching himself—helmet-first and full-speed—at Norman’s head.

hit

Perhaps Beckham’s “apology” fit the rarely employed definition: A justification of his actions rather than an expression of penitence—the old Plato Apology of Socrates defending himself in 399 B.C. against charges of “corrupting the young.” The 23-year-old Beckham did go on about how “a lot of kids look up to me as a role model” and how that “is a responsibility I accept and take seriously.”

Certainly, Giants coach Tom Coughlin and some Beckham teammates did the Platonic thing in countenancing Beckham’s relentlessly nasty play by maintaining that the Panthers had heaped contumely upon him. “He was provoked,” Coughlin said.

The coach cited reports that a member of the Panthers, during pre-game warmups, had threatened Beckham while holding a baseball bat, and painted Beckham as something of a victim because Norman also violated the no-roughing rules. (Norman was fined but not suspended.)

But the NFL dismissed, for lack of evidence, suggestions that Beckham was the target of opponents’ homophobic slurs. (As if that were license to attempt inflicting serious physical harm.) Just as easy to disregard was Beckham’s post-game excuse that his actions merely were a function of manly competitiveness—the last resort of cheap-shot scoundrels.

So, unable to talk his way out of the suspension, Beckham released his written apology in which his (or his consultant’s) eloquent wording acknowledged that he had “dropped the ball on sportsmanship.” More than one commentator called that a “perfect apology.” But people who study these things have noted how they too often are “part of the ritual,” as author Paul Slansky put it, allowing offenders to “just move on.”

Slansky, who co-authored the 2006 book, “My Bad: 26 Years of Public Apologies and the Appalling Behavior That Inspired Them,” once told me he considered the public mea culpa “rarely sincere because it’s obligatory. It’s meaningless. [A person] apologized; how easy is that? You have to prove you mean it. Otherwise, it’s just all p.r.”

It is to Beckham’s benefit that there is a willingness in the sport’s culture to quickly leave unpleasantries behind. “Football fans—and the football media—have zero long-term memory,” DJ Gallo wrote in The Guardian. “Our brains function like we’ve taken years of spearings from Odell Beckham.” Outrage over some player’s misdeeds regularly is replaced by hearty cheers as soon as he resumes excelling for the home team.

At this point, Beckham must be given the benefit of the doubt. University of Massachusetts psychiatry professor Aaron Lazare, who spent 12 years researching his book, “On Apology,” has allowed that “people do apologize for genuinely humanist reasons.” But other times, he said, “they do it to get off the hook.”

Maybe this is a case of a real apology, with the ability to remove a desire for revenge, to encourage forgiveness, to relieve guilt. Coughlin insisted that Beckham “felt bad” about the whole thing. Or maybe it’s just Beckham bunkum. We’ll see.

excuse

Merry Christmas

(In a previous century, Newsday would publish an annual Christmas essay, each penned by a staff member, and somewhere along the way I was invited to participate. Here, slightly updated, is the old yarn….)

snow on dec 14

“Write about snow,” my daughter said.

That would be a Christmas topic. It also would expose me as an Outsider. I grew up in Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, California, New Mexico. My first recollection of snow was in the Dick Tracy strip of the Sunday comics one mid-December, big white flakes wafting down onto Tracy’s stylish yellow fedora. People didn’t wear fedoras in the South and West. Until I went off to college in the Midwest, I don’t recall owning a sweater, either.

Now, frankly, I can get fairly passionate about snow’s rightful place in the whole Christmas mood. Currier & Ives prints. Snowball fights. Ice-skating on the local lake. One year we drove up to Connecticut to chop down our own tree in a postcard snow-covered field, equipping ourselves with boots and hats and scarves and a saw. What we should have brought was one of those surveyor tripods, because if an otherwise perfect tree is growing on a hillside, it will lean alarmingly when snugly nestled into its stand in the den. It will then necessitate small guide wires tied to the sliding-glass door handle and to a nail next to the fireplace, just to hold it upright. But I was unaware of this; not only did we not have snow in west Texas and eastern New Mexico, we also did not have hills.

Anyway, a white Christmas is a symbolically familiar thing only because it has been filtered through a lot of Anglo-Saxon and European wintertime tradition, layering English gift-giving of Boxing Day over the Dutch legend of St. Nicholas and various other Old World customs. There’s no snow in Bethlehem.

“Write about the time you tried to eat Christmas dinner at McDonald’s,” my wife said.

That would get into the traditionally poignant holiday theme of how a singular soul sometimes can become disconnected from the big human family, a most fundamental element of Christmas, the old no-room-at-the-inn experience. I was single, I was roughly 2,000 miles from my nearest sibling, my parents no longer were living, and my roommate had gone home to Pennsylvania for the holidays. I was wandering a bit ghostlike through the noisy Yuletide bustle.

(Bob Newman artwork)

(Bob Newman artwork)

I don’t recall feeling sad about it. I was ticked off and, mostly, hungry because McDonald’s—my very last choice, whatever the occasion—was closed. I don’t remember quite what I did about it, though I doubt seriously that I cooked anything. Maybe a can of soup.

To be in such a situation now, at 69, really would be awful. But when one is 24, gainfully employed, with a football game to watch on TV, what’s the problem with being alone to face a shuttered fast-food emporium? That was roughly the time of life when I was so confident where my next meal was coming from that I didn’t own a credit card and often forgot to carry cash. I wrote checks—some for amounts of 57 cents or $1.23—at the grocery store and must have assumed that emotional nourishment always would be in plentiful supply as well. Probably because it always had been.

When I was growing up, Christmas itself seemed cozy enough and, being snowless, certainly warm enough. Grandparents, uncles, aunts and cousins lived too far away for any of those rollickingly festive, chaotic gatherings so often depicted in movies and books. But there were four of us kids, and the posed snapshots of the family each Christmas included the cat and the dog and at least one battery-powered contraption or an electric train, so there was no lack of excitement.

My father, one of the quietest, most peaceful people I ever met, always answered our query of what he wanted for Christmas with, “Just a little peace and quiet.” So we gave him socks or a tie.

“Write about the first Christmas present you remember,” my daughter said. “I remember my tricycle. And my red Christmas robe.”

Now, that’s interesting. I remember I once admired a tiny notebook that my brother had. It had maps of the United States and the world in it, and I always loved maps, an affection for geography that may have had something to do with subconsciously feeling the movement of my father, an oil company executive who was transferred every three years, like clockwork, causing the family repeatedly to fold up our tent and move along. To me, a primary question in life is: How do you get there from here? What roads do you take?

My brother’s notebook, then, was to be coveted, beyond the automatic extra value carried by all of his belongings (based on the fact that he was older), which he sparingly and warily loaned to the Charlie Brown of the family for the very good reason that I forever was breaking his stuff. His model airplanes, his homemade go-carts powered by old lawn mower engines, whatever; they fell apart in my innocent hands. Even years later, I borrowed his motorcycle and was not yet a mile away when the clutch cable broke. I captained his new ride-on mower and had gone 20 or 30 feet when some essential gizmo gave out.

So it was no small thing, that long-ago Christmas, to unwrap an apparently humble package from my brother to find the notebook-with-maps.

I could write about the red necktie and black blazer I got from my parents way back when. Worn with a white shirt, The Look accurately replicated Dick Tracy’s daily garb (indoors, where he courteously would remove the yellow fedora)—a reminder that Christmas gift-giving is an ideal time to humor otherwise ridiculous requests.

I could write about the Christmas-card routine. “Dear Aunt (Somebody): Hope your year has gone well. We are fine and busy here. Well, guess I better go now so this gets in the mail in time for the Christmas rush. Love to all….” I always mean to do a better job of it, but I am hesitant to bore an aunt in Effie, La., or an old family friend in Hobbs, N.M., with the fairly exciting news that my car passed 100,000 miles in October, and it would sound too much like putting on the dog to gush about my business trip to London in June. Plus, there’s a built-in difficulty in picking up a dialogue with someone you last told, “Hope your year has gone well. We are all fine and busy here….”

I could write about the maturation of my own appreciation of Christmas as an occasion, except that may not be giving credit where credit is due. From the time I met my wife, I have been thoroughly marinated in the sounds, smells, tastes and rituals of Christmas. The tree is settled upon only after standing in the cold until toes and fingers are numb. Homemade wreaths go up everywhere. Advent calendars and Christmas placemats materialize. Outdoor lights are painstakingly strung on bushes. Ornaments—we must have at least 200 now—must be placed for maximum visibility on the tree, with the most breakable ones strategically away from the cat’s reach. No two gifts are wrapped alike; creativity and tactics of disguise (such as several boxes of ascending size, each inside the other) are held in high esteem.

IMG_0834

But I digress.

Our daughter was born at Christmastime. How’s that for a spectacular gift? We stuck her under the tree in her modern-day swaddling clothes and took her picture, and to look at that photo now—all these years later—gives a sort of Normal Rockwell texture to my life, far removed from the time outside that darkened fast-food joint long ago.

Now that’s something to write about.

IMG_0831

 

Bowl games and grid inflation

College football

It’s a zeitgeisty thing to have the holiday season filled—stuffed, crammed, clogged, jampacked—with college football bowl games. But we are up to 40 major-college bowls this season, and even some of the sport’s insiders have begun to wonder about a form of grid inflation.

Because, while there is no danger of running out such events, we are running out of blue-ribbon teams to play them.

Three of this winter’s 80 bowl teams—that’s almost two-thirds of the 128 schools that field maximum-scholarship teams—have losing records (Minnesota, Nebraska and San Jose State). Another 12 also are not above .500 after scratching out 6-6 seasons.

Only 18 teams are either conference or conference-division champions (though two independents, 10-2 Notre Dame and 9-3 BYU, could be added to that level of accomplishment). One bowl, the first-year Arizona Bowl, was so desperate for participants that it had to settle for two middling teams in the same conference, fellow Mountain West members Colorado State and Nevada. (One of 7-5 Colorado State’s losses was to that below-par Minnesota outfit, and Nevada is among the crowd of 6-6 teams.)

“Clearly,” Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson said, “the system is broken.”

Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby is on record acknowledging that “we do have too many bowl games and have more bowl games waiting in the wings.” According to Atlantic Coast Conference commissioner John Swofford, his league’s athletic directors would prefer teams be at least 7-5 to be bowl eligible.

Even NCAA president Mark Emmert, the primary-care official for college football, last week cautioned that his organization members “are going to have to figure out what’s the purpose of bowl games? Is it a reward for a successful season, or is it just another game that we’re going to provide an opportunity for?”

Behind that curtain of concern, though, are some financial and competitive realities that don’t appear likely to change:

  • ESPN, which will televise 34 of the 40 bowls—plus the national championship game—wants the programming and the advertising riches that brings. (ESPN, in fact, owns 13 of the bowls through its ESPN Events subsidiary.)
  • Athletic departments and conferences want the payouts for bowl participation, which last year ranged from $325,000 per team in Boise’s Famous Idaho Potato Bowl to $18 million each for contestants in long-established bowls such as the Rose, Orange, Sugar and Cotton.
  • Coaches want the added game experience for players with remaining eligibility, plus the recruiting-tool visibility. Not to mention the automatic bonuses that schools routinely spread throughout their staffs. (The Seattle Times recently detailed how Washington State has guaranteed head coach Mike Leach an additional $75,000 for getting his team to the Sun Bowl, while Leach’s assistant coaches will receive from $15,000 to $35,000 each, and athletic director Bill Moos $50,000.)

No surprise: Money was the motivation when all this started with the 1902 Rose Bowl, which leaned on college football’s growing popularity as a way to finance the annual Tournament of Roses Parade, then 12 years old. The final score was so lopsided—Michigan 49, Stanford 0—that the Rose Tournament’s game was held in abeyance until 1916. But, by 1935, the Orange and Sugar Bowls had appeared, and the Cotton in ’37.

Only Major League Baseball was more popular and more widespread than college football then, though perennial superpower Notre Dame had stopped accepting bowl invitations after winning the 1925 Rose and didn’t lift its self-imposed ban on the post-season until 1970.

There was some assertion that Notre Dame chose not to extend its seasons with bowl appearances because the additional games didn’t jive with the primary purpose of education. But that quaint notion was quickly discarded as big money increasingly came with bowl appearances and the Associated Press decided, in 1968, to discontinue crowning its national champion prior to the bowl season.

With that, bowl games (of which there were only 10 in 1969) suddenly evolved from holiday exhibitions to match-ups with we’re-No. 1-implications. And continued to multiply, sending all on this Road to Excess. Civic leaders want the prestige and the free publicity of staging bowl games. Conferences want pre-arranged tie-ins with bowls for a slice of the lucre. Corporations want bowls as billboards. The Quick Lane Bowl. The GoDaddy Bowl. The Zaxbys Heart of Dallas Bowl. The AdvoCare V100 Texas Bowl. The Foster Farms Bowl. The TaxSlayer Bowl….

toilet

An irony is that the year-old, four-team national championship tournament has clearly diluted the significance of all but the two bowls serving as championship semifinal sites. (This season, those are the Orange and Cotton). And that is just as predicted in 2007 by UCLA administrator John Sandbrook, who first studied a possible playoff for an NCAA committee in 1994 and provided an update on the subject for the NCAA-watchdog Knight Commission in 2004. A formalized playoff for No. 1, Sandbrook said then, would “overtake” the traditional bowl format.

Then again, it hasn’t slowed a more-of-less-accomplished-teams trend. And what are the odds that some player on one of those under-.500 teams, giddy to win a bowl and finish a humdrum 6-7, will then run around proclaiming, “We’re No. 1”?

lucy

Jets-Giants: Nobody wins (until OT). So familiar.

Did this happen Sunday? Or in 1974?

IMG_0822………..

The Jets were playing the Giants in a rare regular-season NFL clash between New York teams, though the game wasn’t in New York. The Giants led, 20-13, early in the fourth period. The date was Dec. 6, 2015. Also, Nov. 10, 1974.

IMG_0822

The Jets, their bacon saved on an implausible keeper by their quarterback, summoned the tying touchdown in the dying moments and sent the game into overtime at 20-20. Whereupon their sudden-death victory was finalized when the Giants’ placekicker missed a field goal. Wide left.

Same plot. Same details. Same ending.

In ’74, 31-year-old Joe Namath, whose multiple knee surgeries rendered him the least likely person in the entire stadium—spectators included—to run with the ball, shocked the outfoxed Giants by literally limping in real-time slow motion on three-yard bootleg for the tying score. (Namath completed the hobble with a lame straight-arm more evocative of a “please don’t hit me now that I’m across the goal-line” appeal.)

joe

In ’15, an even older—but far healthier, at 33—Ryan Fitzpatrick, scrambled 15 yards on a desperation fourth-and-six to keep the Jets moving toward their late equalizer. Echoes that seem to qualify under the definition of déjà vu, the illusion of having previously experienced something actually being encountered for the first time.

ryan

There’s more. In ’74, when NFL sudden-death rules were new to the regular season and allowed a team to win on any first-possession score, the Giants needed only seven plays in the extra period to move to the Jets’ 25-yard line. There, on fourth-and-one, they opted for a decisive field goal try, but Pete Gogolak knocked the 42-yard attempt just left of the upright. (And the Jets soon answered with a Namath touchdown pass to Emerson Boozer.)

In ’15, it was Giants’ kicker Josh Brown who missed a 48-yarder that could have kept the overtime going and avoided defeat. He, too, missed to the left. A not-so-instant replay of Giants doom.

New York, New York? By 1974, the Giants had become Big Town ex-pats, leaving Yankee Stadium to play most of the ’73 season and all of ’74 in New Haven, Conn., at the Yale Bowl, their temporary home field while a new Giants Stadium was under construction in the New Jersey Meadowlands. So Connecticut was where they dueled the Jets that November.

In 2015, of course, the teams jousted in their five-year-old shared East Rutherford, N.J., home that replaced Giants Stadium. They’ve all been Jersey boys for a long time.

In ’74, Giants fans questioned why coach Bill Arnsparger hadn’t gone for a first down on that overtime fourth-and-one. In ’15, they are grumbling about coach Tom Coughlin’s choice to try converting a fourth-and-two on the Jets’ four yard-line, instead of taking an apparent clinching field goal when already leading by 10 points.

It could be argued that, 41 years later, there was a new back story to the Jets-Giants meeting, because in ’74, neither team was going anywhere, though the Jets—1-7 entering the Giants game—didn’t lose again in the old 14-game schedule and finished 7-7. The Giants, who had been 2-6, didn’t win again on their way to 2-12. In ’15, at least, both sides entered the local fray with some hope for the post-season, however frayed those hopes. Maybe the Jets can put the modest boost to a 7-5 record to good use. And even the 5-7 Giants, in dire straits, aren’t mathematically eliminated from the post-season.

But there is so much about this that hints at some cosmic burlesque. One beauty of sports is the unscripted drama, the surprise ending. And yet, as the Latin motto goes, nihil sub sole novum. Nothing new under the sun. Everything that is happening now has happened before.

I covered that 1974 game. I could have filled in the blanks.

Gray matter: Is watching a brain-addling sport ethical?

 

bad

Just who among us needs our heads examined?

Football players? Last week’s revelations of the late Giants star Frank Gifford’s positive test for the degenerative brain disease chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE, came days after St. Louis Rams quarterback Case Keenum, attempting to rise after a tackle, was all rubbery and disoriented, while  little imaginary birds twirled around his helmet.

Football fans? There certainly are some who have begun to wonder about the ethics of supporting a sport faced with increasing evidence of its participants’ cognitive impairment. Gifford was the 88th of 92 deceased former NFL players examined who was found to have had CTE.

Parents of potential football players? At the Boston University center that studies CTE, the percentage of positive tests on former players from all levels is a whopping 90-plus percent, and pre-collegiate players have been sustaining some 90,000 concussions per year. Among the public figures who have said that, if they had sons, they would not allow them to play football, is Football-Fan-In-Chief Barack Obama.

How about anyone who thinks these headache-inducing reports signal the imminent demise of our most popular sport? It has been almost 14 years since the first case of CTE was diagnosed in a deceased football player, yet Harris Polls continue to find football to be the nation’s overwhelmingly favorite spectator sport—37 percent of the population lists the NFL as No. 1 and another 11 percent prefer college football. (Only 16 percent of the citizenry list Major League Baseball as top choice and no other sport breaks into double figures.)

In 2009, in a New Yorker magazine piece, Malcolm Gladwell considered football’s future extinction, and a stream of thoughtful reports since then have considered how the ramifications of head injuries might play out: Liability suits that could subject coaches, team doctors and referees to financial exposure. Parental concerns. Skyrocketing Insurance costs. The drying up of advertising and television commitments. Congressional action.

Last year, a self-described NFL fan wrote to New York Times ethics columnist Chuck Klosterman pondering the morality of supporting a league apparently aware that its sport is detrimental to the health of its participants. Klosterman concluded that, as long as everyone is enlightened about the peril that could visit football players, he “can live with” the public loving something that is dangerous.

Me, too. And, after all, football isn’t boxing or—worse—mixed martial arts, in which the primary purpose is to separate an opponent from his or her senses. But we should persist in furthering our education about the potential hazards, and hope that football authorities do the same. Early-onset dementia among players is real gray matter, something to consider in all its shades and consequences.

A crack neurologist once explained to me the brain’s vulnerabilities, and it goes something like this:

The brain isn’t much more than a blob of Jello, about three pounds net weight, floating in a fluid, held in place by a scaffolding of fibers. It is as well-housed as any other internal human gadget—the skull, after all, doesn’t crack easily. But with a blow to the head, whether encased in a helmet or not, the brain easily can rattle off the inside walls of the skull or, worse, twist violently, causing a tear.

A simple concussion brings temporary alteration of consciousness, often so brief as to go unnoticed, yet short-circuits the part of the brain controlling awareness, alertness and focus of attention. A stronger bop on the head can create a contusion, a bruise caused by the brain ricocheting off the opposite wall of the skull and then back again. Even more damage results if the torque force wrenches the Jello mass.

Later this month, the movie Concussion will be released, and director Peter Landesman has said the film can’t help being “a shot between the eyes of the NFL,” because it portrays how forensic neuropathologist Bennet Omalu (played by Will Smith) had to battle NFL efforts to suppress his research on players’ brain damage.

Omalu was the man who, in a 2002 autopsy of former Pittsburgh Steelers lineman Mike Webster, first recognized CTE in a football player. Each of the first nine deceased NFL players’ brains Omalu examined, in fact, had CTE, and he told me during a telephone interview in 2010 that the root cause was not “just concussions. It’s repeated blows to the head. Helmets do not prevent concussions or [undiagnosed] sub-concussions, because they don’t stop the brain from bumping around in the skull.

“We have to take the head out of the game.”

emalu

And good luck with that. Though the NFL and other football authorities belatedly are implementing rules and protocols to limit head trauma, there is this Gordian knot: With both Frank Gifford’s conspicuous 1960 concussion, suffered on what often has been described as a “brutal, blindside” tackle by Philadelphia’s Chuck Bednarik, and Case Keenum’s recent injury, the damage in fact was not a result of an opponent’s contact with the head.

gifford

The Gifford injury, which precipitated his one-year sabbatical from football, was sustained when the back of Gifford’s head struck the ground as he went down. He had attempted to sidestep the charging Bednarick and the two essentially were facing each other at the instant of the tackle. On impact, Bednarick caught the off-balance Gifford with an arm and shoulder across Gifford’s chest, rocking Gifford backward.

tackle

Keenum was tackled waist-high but, like Gifford 55 years earlier, bounced his noggin off the turf as he fell backward. Jello surprise. So how to safeguard against that?

I don’t have a son. So that’s settled. And I will continue to be a football spectator. But I will make sure to check out Concussion as well.

 

 

Remember Alice? (A Thanksgiving tradition)

arlo

There was a lot of gray hair at Carnegie Hall Saturday night. A full house of 2,800, all of us ready (when the chorus came around on the guitar) to sing a bar of Arlo Guthrie’s mischievous anti-war ‘60s ballad, “Alice’s Restaurant.” More than a celebration of the 50th anniversary of the song’s inspiration, which was Arlo’s 1965 Thanksgiving Day arrest for littering, it was a movement, an identification with a bygone era that somehow doesn’t feel as troubled as it did then.

Everyone there knew exactly what Arlo was talking about when he noted that it is difficult to reminiscence when you can’t recall much from so long ago. But his bit of wisdom regarding a fading memory was that, in order to make room for something that may happen in the future, a person tends to discard stuff from the past.

Some stuff, though, is too good to throw out. That certainly includes the way “Alice’s Restaurant” typifies Arlo’s audience-friendly concerts. His genuine form of interactive entertainment, the sing-along format carried on from his mentor Pete Seeger, is a civilizing antidote to so much impersonal modern social media. When he plunges into the great anthem written by his father Woody, “This Land is Your Land,” the full-community vocalization is a veritable Kumbaya moment.

(A sidebar here: In the delightful compilation, “The Final Four of Everything,” using so-called bracketology to rate all that we love and hate, New York Times reporter Richard Sandomir imagined a competition of 32 songs vying to be the New National Anthem. Matching contenders from “God Bless America” to “We Shall Overcome;” from “You’re a Grand Ole Flag” to “Born in the USA,” Sandomir settled on “This Land is Your Land” as the ultimate champion in a final-round showdown with “America the Beautiful.” Because, Sandomir wrote, Woody Guthrie’s song “evokes America’s coast-to-coast natural beauties…” Without, one could add, bellicose imagery and excessive flag-waving.)

Anyway, beyond being a card-carrying member of Saturday’s Carnegie codger crowd, I can claim to have first attended an Arlo performance in the earliest days of “Alice’s Restaurant,” originally recorded in 1967. Arlo has said that the first gig he ever did outside New York City was at a joint called Café Harris in Columbia, Mo., in 1965, which was my freshman year there at the University of Missouri.

harris

It was in 1967 that my college roommate, Dave Prigge, suggested we check out this touring young folk singer, son of the famous Woody Guthrie, at Café Harris on the edge of campus. And I was rewarded—in that smoky, intimate coffee house—with hours of humor and melodies from Arlo and Ramblin’ Jack Elliott. It turns out that Arlo wrote a song about that now-defunct establishment, “Café Harris Rag,” which was included on the soundtrack when “Alice’s Restaurant” became a movie in 1969.

What I wish I had now, since it indeed is difficult to remember much about so long ago, is 27 eight-by-10 color photographs, with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one, documenting that Café Harris experience, the inspiration for me learning to play the guitar. (Not well, okay, but it was a nice hobby for years.)

So, more than simply nostalgia, Arlo’s annual Thanksgiving weekend show at Carnegie Hall and the widespread playing of “Alice’s Restaurant” as a Thanksgiving standard feel like a connectivity to people and places and events. A movement. With full orchestration and four-part harmony.

 

The U.S., Cuba and baseball diplomacy

(N.Y. Daily News photo)

(N.Y. Daily News photo)

Anyone lucky enough to visit La Esquina Caliente in Havana’s El Parque Central immediately learns the exalted status of baseball in Cuba. There, at The Hot Corner of the island capital’s Central Park, men have been gathering for decades to passionately argue the value of players and teams.

It is the Cuban version of discourse that we Yanquis typically experience on barstools and sports talk radio, evidence of an unbroken spiritual link between Americans and Cubans in spite of a half-century of political polarization.

Baseball is their national pastime, too.

So, now that the Obama administration at last has moved to normalize relations with Cuba, what could be a more logical cultural exchange than sending the Tampa Bay Rays to the Caribbean island for an exhibition game next spring?

If all the details can be ironed out, that will be the first such tour by a Major League Baseball team since the Baltimore Orioles played a home-and-home exhibition against the Cuban national team in 1999. But it hardly would represent a new relationship, despite the decades of ideological hardball between the two nations.

As early as 1937, the New York Giants made Havana their spring training site, followed by the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1941, ’42 and ’47 and the Pittsburgh Pirates in 1953. When Jackie Robinson broke the majors’ color barrier in 1947, one benefit to training in Cuba was that country’s long history of racial integration.

In his acclaimed 1952 novel, “Old Man and the Sea,” Hemingway—a Cuban resident for most of the 1940s and 1950s—had the fictitious Cuban fisherman Santiago talk baseball with his young companion, rhapsodizing about the Yankees and “the great DiMaggio.”

The 1959 Cuban revolution severed the island’s formal ties with Organized Baseball. But big-league teams, technically prevented from doing business in Cuba, found ways to get Latin American scouts into the country to evaluate the plentiful homegrown talent, and a fairly steady stream of Cuban defectors continued to find their way to the majors—Yoenis Cespedes, Yasiel Puig and Aroldis Chapman being some resent examples.

It might be worth remembering that a young Castro was once considered a pitching prospect by the Giants; that Havana was home to the Cincinnati Reds’ Triple-A affiliate Sugar Kings of the International League from 1954 to ’59; and that just months after Castro’s rebels ousted the U.S.-backed authoritarian government of president Fulgencio Batista, the Junior World Series was contested between the American Association champion Minneapolis Millers and the I.L. pennant-winning Sugar Kings.

havana

That series concluded with a seventh-game, ninth-inning Havana victory, with future Hall of Famer Carl Yastrzemski playing second base for the Millers, who were managed by perennial hard-luck baseball man Gene Mauch. Castro was omnipresent—in the stands, in the Sugar Kings dugout, addressing the home fans: “I came here to see our team beat Minneapolis, not as premier, but as just a baseball fan. I want to see our club win the Little World Series. After the triumph of the revolution, we should also win the Little World Series.”

millers

The next year, Castro nationalized all U.S.-owned enterprises in Cuba and then-baseball commissioner Ford Frick decreed the Sugar Kings be moved to Jersey City, the first of several stops for that franchise before reaching its current iteration as the Norfolk Tides. (An Orioles affiliate; small world.)

U.S. national teams have made a couple of Cuban appearances since then, including the 1991 Pan American Games, which were attended by both Castro and (separately) Yankees owner George Steinbrenner, a U.S. Olympic Committee vice president at the time.

Steinbrenner contended then that Castro had wanted the Yankees to “come down here for an exhibition in 1977, ’78, but [baseball commissioner] Bowie Kuhn, in his infinite wisdom, wanted it to be an All-Star team instead. And it never happened.”

Now, what a visitor to Havana from Estados Unidos might be surprised to find, along with the baseball knowledge of those fanaticos at La Esquina Caliente, is a lovingly maintained 45,000-seat national stadium, Estadio Latinoamericano, smack in the middle of the city’s many paint-starved, deteriorating buildings. And, on the scoreboard, the retention of English-language baseball parlance—“ball,” “strike,” “out.” Topps baseball cards have been known to find their way around Cuba.

The island is a thoroughly natural locale to host a team from what Cubans know as the Gran Ligas. If the Rays indeed venture to Havana a few months hence, it will be—for baseball fans here and there—a touch of paradise lost and found.

 

Mizzou: Bursting the bubble on race-relations naivete

IMG_0813

At Mizzou’s 1968 post-season football banquet, a virtually anonymous black linebacker named Ed Taylor—a member of the scout team who never got into a game—was briefly the center of attention. He sang songs, teased several teammates and delivered a personal judgement on the state of civil rights in the school’s athletic department.

This was amid an especially tense time in the national struggle for federal protection against institutional segregation, on an overwhelmingly white campus in what had been a slave state. That season, some white students still were waving Confederate flags while the marching band played “Dixie” during games, resulting in a protest that formed the Legion of Black Collegians to afford students of color a campus voice.

Taylor, during that 1968 football soiree, said, “There isn’t a problem here.” He called head coach Dan Devine “a genius in things like hiring Prentice Gautt” to be the first black football assistant in the Big Eight Conference.

IMG_0809

I was a senior in Journalism School, football beat reporter for J-School’s Columbia Missourian. Taylor’s brief public remarks, and his thoughtful answers in a later interview, made a nice story. I barely knew the fellow, just as I barely knew Gautt, though he lived in my off-campus apartment complex and we always exchanged pleasantries as we came and went.

Taylor was a biology major who wanted to be a teacher “because I want to do something about the Negro problem,” he said. “I want to get through to as many people as I can before their parents ruin them.”

Gautt, after breaking the color barrier on the University of Oklahoma’s football team and playing seven years in the NFL, in ’68 was studying for his doctorate in psychology, even as he worked on the football staff.

At the time, might Mizzou’s football team, far more diverse than the rest of the university, have existed in a protective bubble against the kind of racial tension that Taylor said he experienced at his Cahokia, ill., high school? Might white students such as myself have been functioning in a bubble of naivete, mostly oblivious to how marginalized the minority students felt?

I recall going with friends to catch a Dick Gregory appearance on campus, expecting a first-rate comedian’s act and instead getting a taste of Gregory’s other vocation—civil-rights activism. Some fairly heavy things to think about.

I was aware of Journalism School colleague Sylvia Carter’s expose, published in our independent student newspaper, The Maneater, of racism in the Columbia community. She had showed up at city real estate agencies about rental inquiries with a black friend, to whom she pretended to be engaged, whereupon she was informed, posthaste, that there no longer were any vacancies. Anywhere.

IMG_0819

But now, it somehow is more depressing to be confronted almost a half-century later with news of ongoing racial incidents at Mizzou; of tone-deaf university leadership; of how it took a boycott threat by the football team—its leverage based on the kind of money the school stood to lose without more games—to generate the kind of attention that forced administrative action.

As a graduate of the Journalism School that proclaims itself the world’s oldest and consistently is rated among the best in the country, I find it almost as dispiriting to learn of a communications professor who called for “some muscle” to eject journalists covering last week’s public protests. Students taking up a chant of “Hey, hey, ho, ho! Journalists have got to go!” just needed an education regarding free speech and the First Amendment. But the last person who should require a journalism lesson was someone supposedly providing such an education: Melissa Click, described as holding a “courtesy appointment” in J-School, which is separate from the communications department.

In marked contrast to Click, there has been some real journalism going on at Mizzou for months, long before the football team’s involvement triggered national coverage. Both the student-staffed Missourian and all-student Maneater have been well ahead of the curve in chronicling complaints about the university’s top management that went beyond racial issues and included significant disgruntlement among the faculty.

Click since has apologized and resigned the J-School appointment. And the Missouri Board of Curators, in the wake of resignations-under-pressure of both the university’s four-campus president and the chancellor of Mizzou’s flagship Columbia campus, has appointed as interim president a black man, Michael Middleton, former law professor, civil rights attorney and deputy chancellor of the school. At least that move sounds like a far better Missouri Compromise than the original.

It turns out that Middleton was an undergraduate at Mizzou when I was. Too bad I didn’t know him. I might have learned some things sooner.

Miami’s discredited touchdown: Remember Cornell?

 

5thdown

To anyone interested in historical context and the nobility of sportsmanship, it is exquisite timing that Cornell was playing Dartmouth just days after Miami’s controversial eight-lateral, no-time-left kickoff return that was allowed to stand in a Halloween night upset of Duke—visual evidence and official admission of error notwithstanding.

Miami’s scoring play, the Atlantic Coast Conference later acknowledged, should have been over before it was over. Which would have left Duke a 27-24 winner instead of a 30-27 loser.

The result will stand, based on the NCAA rule that states, “When the referee declares that the game is ended, the score in final.” But there is the Cornell-Dartmouth exception.

In 1940 Cornell, ranked No. 2 in the nation, gave back a 7-3 victory over Dartmouth after Cornell confirmed that it had scored the winning touchdown when it accidentally and innocently was permitted a fifth down at the end of the game.

five

That game, too, should have been over before it was over. So, while the ACC, NCAA, Miami authorities and Miami advocates insisted that further action was completely out of their hands, Cornell long ago demonstrated the opposite.

A review of the Cornell-Dartmouth film had prompted a heartfelt mea culpa telegram from referee Red Friesell, lamenting his critical error in permitting an extra down, and Cornell’s president subsequently visited his team’s practice field to announce he would forfeit.

“We have done the right thing, and this will live with us,” president Edmund Ezra Day told the Cornell players. “We shall not have to spend the rest of our lives apologizing for a tarnished victory.”

What, then, is different about the Miami-Duke situation, when matters also took a turn for the weird as the clock ran out?

Neither Miami’s players, in 2015, nor Cornell’s, in 1940, had engaged in any nefarious act. Miami reasonably kept playing through its zany kickoff return after Mark Walton barely failed to complete his lateral—the third of an eventual eight legal, backward passes—before his knee was down on his own 26-yard-line.

knee

Likewise, Cornell quarterback Pop Scholl did nothing more criminal than throw a six-yard scoring pass to William Murphy 75 years earlier. It was the ref, Friesell, who had lost count of the downs in the confusion after a delay penalty that was followed by an incomplete Scholl pass on what in fact was fourth down. And it was the crew of on-field officials, as well as the replay official, who botched the handling of Miami’s last-ditch scramble. It’s just that Cornell’s authorities chose to override the rules.

Might Miami have exercised a similar gesture?

In the post-game spin room, a Miami forfeit was interpreted as either the ethical, magnanimous thing to do (Tom Jones of the Tampa Times: “It’s never too late to right a wrong”) or was seen as simply “stupid” (Yahoo Sports’ Dan Wetzel: “There would be litigation. There would be court-ordered stays. There would be endless howling. There would be chaos….”)

Mostly on display in this latest episode of human imperfection on the part of referees, as it relates to the passionate enterprise of big-time college football, is that too much is at stake to put a primary emphasis on grace. That final, wild and clearly exciting Miami kick return—though it should not have counted—impacted Miami’s chances of qualifying for a lucrative bowl game; meant plenty to a legion of investors (OK, “gamblers”) in the sport; affected career paths of coaches and marketing types.

In justifying its decision not to consider forgoing the stained victory, Miami athletic director Blake James sent a letter to season-ticket holders and donors reporting that the ACC had admitted “multiple incorrect calls” against Miami throughout the game, including an erroneous pass-interference flag on Duke’s go-ahead touchdown drive. (That essentially cast Miami as as much a victim of the refs’ incompetence as Duke.)

In the end, while that eight-lateral return may have been a feverish dream to the unfortunate Dukies, to Miami, channeling Cornell’s 1940 benevolence was a downright nightmare.

cornell