The Nihilist Rants: How the NCAA can do better by players and schools

While we at SAI have been in a prolonged state of mourning over our beloved team’s spectacular fall in the NCAA tournament last week, we now must press on. And so we shall.

The NCAA Tournament gave us many surprises over the past month, not the least of which was our unranked group of superstars coming together to give us one of the most spectacular runs in ALL of NCAA history (and you can quote me on that). Still, what has been even more surprising for this nihilist is the heightened scrutiny of the NCAA that has arisen around college basketball’s centerpiece event.

Last Sunday, the morning before the national championship, the New York Times wrote a revealing piece showing just the tip of the iceberg of profits the NCAA has been reaping at the expense of unpaid college players. In total, the NCAA had at least 19 major corporate sponsors listed on their official fan guide. But the article dug in deeper to some of the corporate promotion that only the keenest of observer would notice.

For example: the cutting of the nets, which is one of the most prominent and eagerly sought ceremonies of NCAA teams and fans. What you might not notice, as the article reveals, is that this is nothing more than another carefully orchestrated corporate affair.

Each team is immediately donned with Final Four apparel (because who doesn’t love free t-shirts and hats), which are made by none other than Nike, one of the largest manufacturers of sports apparel in the world.

The players will then be handed a pair of bright orange Fiskars scissors and climb a yellow and blue Werner ladder as they take down the net, strand by strand.

While the players and fans could care less who makes the ladder and probably wouldn’t be able to pick out the scissors from their local Staples scissor aisle, the NCAA cares about these details greatly. Can you imagine the price tag of being the sole ladder supplier for the NCAA tournament? Not to mention the much more prominent, and probably more expensive price tags, of being the official drink supplier, which Powerade has so generously paid to be this year’s drink sponsor.

Wisconsin (boooo) forward Zach Bohannon, who has been a part of the players’ union movement, described it this way: “With all of the corporate sponsors, it’s like a professional league, only the student-athletes are amateurs, and we don’t have any say in the process.”

The NCAA defense for these actions is weak. Let me rephrase that for emphasis: The NCAA defense for these actions is ridiculously weak, repugnant, deplorable and completely indefensible. They know better. NCAA executive president Mark Lewis defended it this way, “We don’t force anybody to do anything. There is no requirement that anybody drink anything or hold anything of any kind.”

Tell that to Bohannon. He describes walking onto the court with a water bottle from a company not named Powerade (GASP!) and being told by security he could not go onto the floor until he changed it. He was required to tear the label off the bottle before being able to go warm up.

Or tell that to his other Wisconsin teammates who were lined up for one-on-one interviews before the headlining event. In each interview, a Powerade cup was prominently placed in front of them, regardless of whether they ever touched it.

We know this defense is nothing more than lip-service. Are the players supposed to haul in their own ladder for the net cutting? Can they bust out their grandfathers pocket knife when cutting? Are teams allowed to supply their own coolers of sports drink because, ya know, it’s got better electrolytes?

Corporate America is now the reigning king of college athletics. I’ve heard the complaints from friends every time we talk sports: “ACC, Pac 20, SEC, what does it even mean anymore? These teams aren’t even on the Atlantic Coast! (Or the South, or the PAC either.) And my only response is that this is what you get when corporate organizations rule. You don’t get entities that are tied to state or region, history or tradition, players or fans. You get groups that care about one thing only: the market share.

Here at SAI, we have rightly shined a light on the NCAA corrupt policies of reaping the rewards, thanks to Bob Kahne. The thing is, the NCAA says it is simply following rules. But rule-following is not justifiable if you are making all the rules and no one else has a say. This is, for all intents and purposes, an association that behaves like a corporation – one that is happy to join in one, big multi-partnered square dance around the sweet, sweet sounds of profits.

So with the players’ union movement gaining momentum, I’d like to propose three options to get the NCAA back in line, from most likely (or what I’d most like to see) to least likely:

1. The NCAA moves into a more equitable relationship with both players and colleges.

As Kahne described, college athletics reaps all the benefits and faces none of the risks. Rutgers University, he said, took a significant hit on covering the losses from the athletics department. And who foots the bill for Rutgers? The taxpayers of New Jersey. The University of Louisville, not unlike many programs I know, struck up a deal for tax incentives, breaks and money with the city government to help build its basketball mega complex. Tax payers see no tangible return on the investments. The universities are facing the hurts of economic recession and limited government funds, often times raising tuition for students even while their athletic programs are wildly successful.

Likewise, players invest years of training in leagues and with special coaches, all in the hopes of getting a scholarship and competing for an even slimmer chance of going pro. The NCAA, coaches and athletic departments share in the huge profits and incentives that come with championship sponsorship, yet the players and universities do not receive a dime.

I’d propose more benefits for players and a more equitable among universities and their athletic programs. Early last week, coach John Calipari described an aggressive plan to boost player benefits, offering these guidelines: raising players stipends from $3,000 to $5,000, covering players’ insurance and allowing them to take loans on future earnings, doing away with the one-year transfer rule, and giving players money to fly home once a year and buy suits to wear to games.

These would be only meager gains in the much larger pool of NCAA profits. With such protections and benefits in place, players would receive better treatment and it would change the college-to-pro deal from a crap shoot to more stable odds. Players would be treated like students, like real people, and actually have a better experience while in college.

College athletics as a separate entity for profits but a shared entity for losses also has go to go. If the NCAA really is about colleges and about student athletes, then it should start acting like it. Contracts should be made that outline shared revenue from sports income.

I realize this is a less popular argument in the equation, but one of the greatest crises we face now (and this gets into another article) is the inaccessibility of adequate education and resources for our republic. I see no reason why college programs should be able to offer multi-million dollar contracts to coaches and receive numerous corporate sponsorships, while simultaneously raising tuition (double digit percentages each year) for the wider populace.

If the program benefits, the college affiliated with it should benefit as well. The NCAA should be required to be a part of this profit sharing as well, doling out benefits (more than scholarships) for member schools who play in their leagues. It is the same way for TV contracts and league tournaments; why can’t it be that way for college sports and their supporting college entities more broadly?

2. The profit-making sports could fully detach and become an amateur league unto themselves.

With the one-and-done rule, the NCAA and the NBA essentially manufactured a de facto amateur league for college basketball. Why not go ahead and make it official? As an amateur league, athletes could truly focus on their sport and colleges would not have to funnel resources to support instruction time, housing space and accommodations for a one-year honeymoon with athletes who know they are for sure going pro.

The one-and-done rule is crooked any way you slice it. It was a brokered deal so that the NCAA could get a slice of the pie and not completely missing out on NBA talent. The NBA benefits from an extra year to watch players develop and play on a team in a more rigorous environment.

Who else benefits? No one. An amateur league would break down this shrouded farce. It would be sustained by its own profits and would create rules that benefit the league and the players, without giving a veiled attempt at factoring universities into the formula.

3. The NCAA could start to make sense in what it does.

And I won’t even flesh this one out because it’s so laughable. The NCAA (and NFL) rules that football players must meet an age requirement before going pro, while basketball players must come to college for one year. It assesses fines for players who sell autographed jerseys, while a regular fan or the athletics department can do so for major gains. The NCAA punishes players for actions that would benefit themselves, but then rules that the player can play in championship games that will yield it huge profits and TV ratings.

Honestly I want to slap myself it’s so stupid. So the NCAA could, I guess, get an entry level course in ethics and integrity and begin ruling in ways that are right by the players and the universities, instead of right by it. It could establish clear guidelines for the ways that it will rule in violations and the rights of players, instead of acting arbitrarily. This way everyone, players included, would know for sure what they’re getting themselves into. As it stands right now, everyone is acting based on calculated risk.

If the NCAA were to pursue any of these proposals, I’m sure it would hold up much better to scrutiny than the way it now acts. Until then, it will face continued pressure showing the glaring reality: that a scholarship just doesn’t cut it anymore.

UGA Game Wrap-Up: The difference a week can make

What a difference a week can make! This UK team seems to be hitting a stride at a good time in SEC play. There is a lot to be happy about for yesterday’s win against UGA (but let’s be honest, it is UGA).

As I noted a week ago, there was much to lament about the way this UK team played against Arkansas and at other times during the season as well. All those factors seem to be turning around. The Cats shot in stellar fashion against the Dawgs, going 41 percent from 3-point range and an amazing 50 percent from the field. What’s even better – UK showed drastic improvement in free throws, hitting 16 of 20 for a remarkable 80 percent on the night.

It was raining threes for the Cats, as James Young lit it up with three for the night. Even Julius Randle got in on the action, knocking down a tre midway through the game.

But we’re not just here to give you the facts, SAI nation. What I love even more about this game is the way it showed how well this team can really play and it also proved me right. All of the factors I mentioned as keys to our loss against Arkansas are showing marked improvement. We’re shooting better. We’re sharing a lot better. The Harrions together logged 8 assists and four UK players scored double digits.

What I’m most excited about being right on is the critical play of Poythress and Cauley-Stein. As we’ve seen, Poythress has been playing outside of his mind, navigating his way around the basket like a fat kid in a candy store. He’s playing hungry.

What’s more, this game shows how crucial the improvement of WCS is to the overall play of the team. As KSR reports, Calipari cited his play as a marker for the overall dominance of this Cats squat. If Willie is hot, the rest of the team is hot. If he’s cold, this team can still win, but they’re not playing with the flash and dominance that they showed yesterday. Willie only scored 8 in yesterday’s win, but he tore it up on defense, snatching 6 steals and throwing down 6 blocks.

As you and I both know, one solid win against a bottom-rung SEC team does not a championship team make. So what does this mean going forward?

Bracketologist and fans everywhere are being driven mad by this team. We don’t know if the good, the great or the ugly UK team is going to show up on any given night. Bracket geeks are projecting UK to be anywhere from a 2-seed down to a 6-seed come tourney time.

Here’s what I think we need to do in order to shore up the season and have a firmer foundation come March:

First, we have a good string of winnable games coming up. It’s not going to be easy, four of the next five are on the road. This will be a good test of the resolve of this team. Can we play teams like LSU, Mizzou, both Mississippis and Auburn and come out on a hot streak? Let’s hope so. So long as Kentucky continues to improve on the basics – shooting well, sharing the ball, being tenacious on defense – and so long as Willie can build on the momentum he built yesterday, we should come out with all Ws.

Secondly, we have to win out the SEC. Perhaps this is redundant given the first point. The SEC isn’t exactly stellar this year, but conference play is very important for us this year. Our two best chances to show we’re a good team come at home and away against #6  Florida. As an optimist, I’d like to take away both those games and win out the SEC. As a nihilist, I know that we have to win the rest of our games and take at least one away from the Gators, or else all is lost and hopeless. If we lose both and suffer another unexpected loss somewhere along the way, the SEC tournament will be our only hope and will not give us a great seed for the NCAA.

Finally, be watching Cauley-Stein and Poythress as markers for our success going forward. As I’ve said before, we can only be a great team if we have our experienced players playing great. All those missteps, all those rookie plays against Arkansas – we KNOW we’re going to get those from our freshmen. What will help us overcome is the play of our veteran players who can grind it out and who can play hungry. They’re out to prove themselves this year just as much, if not more so, than our diaper dandies. So let’s get behind those guys as we go deeper into SEC play.

Quick Hits: Hump day edition

We’re bringing back an old series on the blogs – Quick Hits – for all your hump day needs. And no, not that kind of humping. Here’s what’s happening in the world of sports:

UK puts away another SEC team. 

UK put away another SEC team, housing the Aggies of Texas A&M 68-51. While it wasn’t a great night offensively, I was very impressed with UK’s defense. They tallied 7 blocks and 6 steals. And what was really impressive was UK put away a team from the opening tip off, like a championship team should. UK has now won two in a row in the SEC and is 4-1 overall. And while it wasn’t an amazing shooting night, UK still managed to dazzle with some ridiculous dunks and play in the paint. Check out this monster dunk from Poythress:

And yes, for some reason that is the ONLY clip I can find of this slam. Speaking of Poythress, he was on last night. He came off the bench to score a team high 16. Randle also logged another double-double, keeping him ninth in the country for double-doubles.

Kevin Durant knocked down 46 against the Trailblazers. 

Say whaaaaaaaaaat?!?! I know. Check out the highlights here. I don’t even know what to say. His play is just sick.

Indiana took Michigan State down to the wire. 

But ultimately lost. No one rushed the court. One thing is for sure, people are starting to buzz about the Spartans of Michigan State. They’ve been playing soundly and have won 11 in a row. I can tell you this much – Izzo is one of the best coaches when it comes to March Madness. As we get into the thick of conference play, this is one author that will be keeping an eye on the Spartans. You should too. Read more here.

And finally, Richard Sherman has us all buzzing about race, pride and sports. 

In his post-game interview with Erin Andrews, Sherman said, “I’m the best corner in the game. When you try me with a sorry receiver like Crabtree, that’s what you’re gonna get.” His comment inspired a backlash on the Twitternets, with people calling him anything from a ‘thug’ to a ‘disgrage.’

All I can say is – Are you kidding me?!? That’s what the NFL is all about. We want the best athletes playing out on the field. Sherman is playing on one of the NFL’s best defenses and made it all the way to the biggest stage in the NFL. He IS one of the best corners in the league.

All Sherman did was bring the trash talk from the field to the interview. You think this is bad? Can you imagine what they say on the field? But this is why we love the NFL. It’s about showmanship as much as it is about talent. And Sherman has both.

While I don’t think his argument holds up, Isaac Saul shows us why most of the backlash is misguided (Read here). Turns out, Sherman is a stand up guy who graduated from Stanford and started his own charity. Pretty impressive. Kevin Garnett says it best I think:

 

And that’s your Quick Hits for hump day.

3 Things We Learned About UK Last Night: A nihilist response

From time to time, I am prone to bouts of nihilism. Aren’t we all? Particularly when we watch the most talented recruiting class UK has EVER seen drop one to the Hogs of Arkansas. And because of things we’ve all seen before.

Today’s rundown recounts three things we saw in the game last night and wished we hadn’t.

1. This team is still struggling with the basic stuff.

In the post-game interview, Cal pinned the loss on three key factors: free throws, a botched inbound play and a missed box out to end the game. Though admitting he was proud of his team for fighting the whole game, these were the factors he pegged, some of the same factors we’ve seen for quite some time in a Cal-coached squad. Cal remarked that this happens when you’re working with freshmen.

And when you look at the stat line you realize he’s right. UK bested Arkansas in shooting (48% to 37%), three-pointers (45%-28%) and dominated on the glass (50-32).

But then look at the plays that really impacted the outcome of the game. UK still couldn’t hit free throws down the stretch, missing fourteen on the night and finishing with 65% from the stripe to Arkansas’ 70%. Not much difference but when you’re talking about a loss of two points, it makes a big difference.

And then there’s the freshmen mistakes. Watch the clip off Michael Qualls game-winning dunk and what do you see? Two freshmen in Young and Harrison out of position to make a play on the ball. This is BASIC stuff that we keep fumbling over throughout the season and I don’t see it getting any better.

If I were Cal, I’d be having basic basketball bootcamp every single day for practice until we start seeing things like this improve.

2. This team plays to the level of its competition.

Granted, this was a good Arkansas team that obviously has some talent and can beat some teams. They can even keep up with some very good teams, as proven by their overtime loss to #10 Florida and now an overtime win over UK. But let’s be honest, when you have a roster this chock-full of talent, when you dominate all meaningful stat lines and still come away with a loss, that shows that this UK team does not have the drive to put away a team early and keep them there, at least at this point.

UK played from behind most of the game and when it came down to the last crucial seconds, they did not finish the way they should. They made a less talented team look like All-Stars and come away with the ESPN top-10 play of the night.

3. This team is getting there, but still lacking the intangibles that will make them a great team.

I’ve felt worse about some UK teams in the past, but I don’t feel great when I watch these guys play either. While Poythress and Willie both upped their game significantly in the past few weeks, we’re still not seeing the hustle plays or the grit to grind it out to the end from the rest of the team. There were too many loose balls that went the other way and too many turnovers for this team to show they’re a gutsy team that is gelling together.

Now I’ve gotten over the fact that we’re going to have a fresh batch of new freshmen every year and we’re going to have less and less experience on the team. I can’t blame Cal for going out and getting the best talent he can year in and year out. I’d even admit that it makes me really excited every year.

But when you get a bunch of unpolished guys who have all the talent in the world but don’t know how to play together, this is what you’re going to get. A half a season of inexperience and missteps. And it’s going to take some time to get that team to play together. I’m proud of this team for sticking it out and making some amazing plays when they needed to. But if some of these things were different, maybe it would’ve gone the other way last night.

And while I’m nihilistic about last night, we here at SAI believe there’s always hope. As the great Walter Sobchak said about his detestation for nihilism, “Say what you will about the tenets of the National Socialist Party dude, at least it’s an ethos!” So here are a few things I think we have to be hopeful about for the Cats moving forward:

• The play of Willie Cauley-Stein (can you ever say his name without saying all three names?) and Alex Poythress. They are stepping up like experienced players should. They’re making the tough plays and really complimenting the tremendous play of Julius Randle. Heck, Poythress looked like a downright champion with his play around the glass last night. We need these guys to keep it up and for the team to step up and match them.
• More play from Dakari Johson. I don’t know where this guy came from but he’s popped up on the radar as of late. He played 9 minutes last night and snagged 4 boards for us. I’m glad to see another guy that can come off the bench and give us some size and toughness down in the paint, particularly with Randle having cramps and Cauley-Stein in foul trouble (see, I tried it and it still doesn’t sound right).
• Improved shooting. Going 48% from the field is pretty darn good. What’s even more impressive is going 45% from 3-point land. There have been times when I’ve wanted to take my TV and throw it off my porch just to watch it burn because of ill-timed and seemingly illogical 3-point shots. Last night, UK seemed to pull it together, including a couple of stellar threes to tie the game at crunch time. Hitting the longer shots will help out the trio of big men down low and give us a much more well-rounded offense.

One thing is for sure: We can’t hope to be tournament-ready with one win over a ranked team and a less than impressive streak in the SEC. Here’s hoping we see some of these things get better.

(There, I guess that wasn’t completely nihilistic, was it?)

 

Petrino’s Back: Do you want to be the pot or the kettle this time?

Bobby Petrino will be the next head coach at the University of Louisville.

That’s what the Internets have been buzzing about since the departure of Charlie Strong late last week. Now multiple ‘sources’ have confirmed that Petrino has interviewed and will be offered the position by UofL Athletic Director Tom Jurich. Read Yahoo’s Pat Forde and his ‘sources’ here. (But remember, you heard it here first.)

Thus begins the Petrino Era Part Deux. And what can we say about that here at Sports Are Involved?

Say what you will about wins and losses, on the field performance versus off-the-field motorcycle rides, and that Orange Bowl win way back when. At the end of the day, the hiring of a new coach says something about the direction of your program.

As far as UK-UL matters go, we’ve both seen our fair share of coaches at the helm of basketball and football programs. Each of them came in with expectations based on their previous experience and coaching record. And each of them, for the most part, lived up to the hype.

Consider when this whole thing started: Petrino’s first stint at the helm of UofL football in 2003. That year UK and UL hired new coaches, Rick Brooks and Petrino. Petrino, we knew, was young and dynamic, and a highly effective offensive-minded coach. Brooks was more of a tried and true coach, having served in various roles before landing the UK job. We knew it would take some time for a coach like Brooks to build a program and we also knew he was in the waning years of his career.

And what did these programs get out of these promising hires? Well…what they signed up for.

Brooks did take some time, but with a patient fan base he was able to build a stable program. He built a solid base of Kentucky talent paired with out-of-state SEC talent and compiled some of the most exciting years of UK football in recent memory. (Yes, I was there when we beat #1 LSU and I still have the handful of grass I pulled up after rushing the field.) And when he felt that the time had come, he handed over the program with advanced notice so that the whole thing wouldn’t come crumbling in on itself.

Petrino, on the other hand, was the bright and shining star UL hoped for. He amped up the offense to some of its highest levels of productivity. Over his four seasons, he amassed a 41-9 record, including an Orange Bowl victory over Wake Forest in 2006. But like a burning supernova, he shone radiantly only to quickly fizzle out and collapse in on himself. We all know the story from there – the short stint in the pros, the made-for-tv disaster motorcycle mistress ride in Arkansas and now a short lived stint at even littler brother WKU. But what’s more, like any dying supernova, Petrino left in his wake an enormous vacuum from which it would take years to recover.

Or consider some of the other hires by these programs: Steve Kragthorpe – a nice guy from some mid-level Midwest team who ran a nice program with a mid-level mindset. Billy Gillepsie – hired to bring in newer and better talent. He delivered, turns out he couldn’t coach…or compose himself in Lexington restaurants. Charlie Strong – brought into to repair an ailing team and bring a big program mindset from a squad reeling from the mid-level mindset. He set higher expectations and with the help of an exceptionally talented QB, they reached his expectations. Mark Stoops – brought in to bring in recruits and a similar big program mindset to a bottom-dweller SEC program. While it’s too early to make a judgment on the change in mindset, Stoops certainly has brought in the recruits.

Coaches carry with them momentum/expectations/baggage that says something about their tenure as coach and the direction of the program.

So where does Petrino 2.0 fit into all of this?

For years, UL faithful have decried UK basketball coach John Calipari for his trail of sanctions, his propensity towards one-and-done recruiting and his pruported ‘sleaziness.’ That’s one side of it and the sanctions are certainly reprehensible. But as far as I can see, Calipari is recruiting the players that anyone else would recruit if they could. And in each case, he has always said he would help his athletes in whatever way he could – whether it be to stay with the program or move on to the NBA. (With the rules being what they are, I don’t see how you can blame the coach or the players WITHOUT first blaming the rule.) He does what we thought he would do – bring in the best recruits, coach them well, win ball games, and help them get to the next level.

So what does it say about a program who, after a year of great success, looks backwards to a coach they’ve already had, a coach who left them just days after promising to stay and a coach who has more than enough history to show what he does. And this wasn’t an aberration. He’s a coach who’s left every time the next best opportunity came along. He’s a coach who carries one of the more corrupt and detestable scandals in recent memory in his baggage. Sure, he’s still got the numbers. But he’s severely lacking in integrity. What kind of precedent and expectation does that set for the years to come in Louisville football?

Oh and as far as the ‘sleazy’ coach business – UofL fans…do you want to be the pot or the kettle this time?