My worst fear is coming true

Looks like John Calipari is going to be the new man in Lexington. In my previous post, I outlined the options for UK before Gillispie was fired. I don't know how seriously, if at all Donovan was approached, but it is certain UK had other alternatives beside Calipari, alternatives who I'm sure would have taken the job, and for a lot less money.

These are my concerns about hiring Calipari:

1. He's never had any success outside of the A-10 and Conference USA. He's built an impressive record on pretty flimsy competition. Yes, he's had two Final Four runs, but I can't help but wonder whether he can stand the grind of a major conference schedule like the SEC. Going to LSU and winning in late January just isn't the same as Duquesne or Houston. If his NBA stint is any indicator, it doesn't bode well. Also, in the final game last year, he admittedly suffered a coaching meltdown. The Tigers blew a seemingly insurmountable lead against Kansas. Calipari could have and should have used a time out to settle his club down and get the ball into the hands of better shooters. Again, even he admits his error here. If this is how he responds to pressure, I'm concerned.

2. The "one and done" players concern me. Calipari has liberally used the talents of these basketball mercenaries along with many JUCO transfers. Not that any program is without some of these, but Memphis was built on the backs of these players. As we've seen there and elsewhere (UC, Ohio State, etc.) these players may contribute toward a single year's success, but it's at the expense of the continuity of the program and the reputation of the university.

3. How Calipari has recruited these players is most disconcerting. At Memphis, he was associated with AAU flesh-peddler, "World Wide Wes." And while nothing (to this point) has come out in terms of recruiting violations, these new age "street agents" are certainly part of the dark underbelly of college athletics. The evidence that Calipari used Wes' "services" to steer such prospects as Dejuan Wagner, Derrick Rose, and Tyreke Evans to Memphis is incontrovertible. And before this, at UMass, Calipari employed an equally shady character named Wayne Simone. Simone hooked him up with players like Marcus Camby, Lou Roe, and Edgar Padilla, all integral parts of UMass's Final Four run. It was not surprising that Camby was later found to have taken money from an agent. Because of this, UMass was forced to vacate their Final Four. And again, while it might not be technically illegal in the eyes of the NCAA, it is a highly questionable ethical practice and does nothing to enhance the reputation of a university already associated with shady recruiting practices (see Sutton, Eddie, and Mumme, Hal). I don't see CM Newton, if he were still AD getting within 100 feet of a coach like Calipari. I wouldn't have thought Barnhart would have either. Which leads me to...

4. Is Mitch still in control of the program? Kentuckians know only too well how "influential" some of the big donor fans can be. These are the same folks that helped fashion the out of control, win at all cost culture that nearly drove this storied program to its death. Given the events of the last three years: the pressure on Tubby Smith, the dismissal of Gillispie, and now the apparent hire of Calipari, there is a clear pattern moving away from the appearance of integrity back toward the win at all cost mentality. I hope I'm wrong on this, but I can't ignore the signs.

Could Calipari be the "savior" UK fans have been waiting for? Certainly. Could Calipari be the death blow to this historic program? That's what I'm afraid of. Time will tell.

Mark Story is right. It's not MERELY "win at all costs"

http://www.kentucky.com/839/story/740443.html

It's also about arrogance and entitlement. We'll find out which is more important very shortly. Here are the ways this could play out and the messages they send:

1. Gillispie stays. This has all been a media-created circus over some legitimate issues that were handled internally.
Message: The administration is in control of the program and has dealt with the problem. No amoount of heat from outside has affected their decision making

2. Gillispie out, Donovan in.
Message: We screwed up the first time. Wrong guy, wrong place, wrong time. We got the guy we initially wanted and we've tried to make it a soft landing for all involved.

3. Gillispie out, Calipari in
Message: It is "win at all costs." We said "to hell with reputation" and drove the Brink's truck to the guy who will win the fastest. The boosters have told Todd and Barnhart what to do.

4. Gillispie out, Ford in.
Message: This is a face saving "compromise" between the boosters and administration. We threw out the guy who pissed you off, but the administration couldn't stomach Calipari. We got the Kentucky guy who "gets the tradition." He'll show up at all the events and give the boosters the respect and access to the program they need. Hopefully he'll win, too, since his resume is thinner than Gillispie's was.

This thing's a mess.

Kentucky's Shame: Redux

As I posted the other day, we would see whether the inmates were indeed running the asylum at the University of Kentucky. This morning, according to numerous news reports, the takeover is all but complete: Billy Gillispie will apparently be let go as coach of the Kentucky Wildcats after only two seasons. As a lifelong Kentucky fan, this saddens me to no end.

First let me state, my sadness has nothing to do with Gillispie, per se. He's just a man, for better or worse. I don't know him personally or have any standard to bear on his behalf. By these eyes, however, he's done a better than tolerable job in less than ideal circumstances. He's managed a modicum of success with less than stellar talent, and has recruited a promising class for next season. His track record speaks well for him as well. As Jimmy Dykes said last night on ESPN, "This guy can flat out coach." The fact that a thin, inexperienced team went to the NIT this year doesn't indicate the Coach Gillispie has lost it as a coach. What's more impressive to me than the wins and losses is the way the players played for him in this tournament. All rhetoric and rumors aside, one can tell how players feel about their coach by the way they play. Quite simply, this group showed tremendous support for their coach by the way they hustled and gave every ounce of energy on the court. The execution certainly wasn't flawless, but the heart was there. That tells me all I need to know about the coach.

Nonetheless, it appears Gillispie won't be given the opportunity to continue his rebuilding of the Kentucky program. His detractors cite "off the court" issues as being the primary cause in his dismissal. Strangely though, in this day of cell phone cameras and internet blogging, where Larry Eustachy shows up clearly drinking with coeds, where every last indiscretion of the private lives of celebrities is made public, there are no specifics out there, in word or image, of Gillispie's alleged unforgivable actions.

That leads me to the conclusion I laid out in my earlier post: UK basketball culture has returned to the "win at all cost" mentality that nearly destroyed it in previous decades. CM Newton's legacy of ridding Kentucky of that unsavory reputation is in great jeopardy.

If Gillispie is indeed fired, these are the names for replacement that are being mentioned most:

Billy Donovan (Florida)- Billy "the Kid" allegedly spurned UK's offers after Tubby Smith left town and flirted with the Orlando Magic before returning to UF. He's a Pitino disciple with two National Championships to his credit. He's also been to the NIT the last two years with far more talent than UK had. To say the Calathes, Werner, Spaights, et al have underachieved is an understatement. He's proven and runs a clean program, though. I only question how he will handle the pressure if UK is back in the NIT under his leadership.

Travis Ford (Oklahoma St.)- This native Kentuckian, alum, and Pitino disciple is an up an comer in the coaching world. So was Billy Gillispie, only he had a more impressive resume. Ford would be a lateral move, at best. At worst, the pundits claim he carries the same personality flaws as Billy Gillispie. Might the UK faithful be more willing to accept these foibles from "one of their own" as opposed to the Texan, Gillispie? Maybe. It would depend if we get the Travis Ford who guided OSU to an NCAA berth this year, or the one who took an experienced UMass squad to the NIT. Kentucky fans have shown their true colors: win or else. I doubt Ford's Kentucky ties would get him any significant grace in their eyes.

John Calipari (Memphis)- Coach Cal's record gets a lot of play in UK circles, but alas, to this point he's without a championship. One could even argue that his poor game management cost him one last year versus Kansas. For all the criticism about Gillispie on this front, I've not seen anything from Calipari that suggests he's a superior "X and O" coach. On the contrary: Calipari has always won by recruiting superior talent. Now that's no small talent, but in Calipari's case, the overwhelming impression is that he's managed this through, shall we say, less than ethical means. Yes, he personally was cleared in the Marcus Camby agent mess at UMass, and no, there are no specific citations of rule breaking at Memphis....yet. But as UK fans have been wont to say about Gillispie's indiscretions, "Where there's smoke, there's far." Calipari has a dubious relationship with AAU pimp "Worldwide Wes." Right or wrong, he's garnered a reputation for recruiting mercenary athletes like Dajuan Wagner and Derrick Rose who only use the university as a step-stool to the NBA. Calipari would be the most concerning hire. He would represent the repudiation of all that CM Newton, David Roselle, Rick Pitino, and Lee Todd have tried to do at UK. Hiring Calipari would signify that the reconquest of UK athletics is complete.

As a lifelong UK fan, I'm conflicted. I'm truly disgusted by the behavior of my fellow fans and how this matter has played out. I'm disgusted by their impatience, their willingness to engage in slander and gossip, and especially their willingness to throw players like Michael Porter and Ramon Harris under the bus. These players, albeit limited in basketball ability, have shown the same type of heart and determination celebrated in years past by UK fans. I'm looking right now at my autographed lithograph of "The Unforgettables," a team lauded in the annals of Kentucky basketball. These players are cut from the same cloth, if not blessed with the same success.
I'm thoroughly discouraged by the willingness of a large segment of the fan base to sacrifice two decades worth of arduous labor to restore UK's good name for what, to me, appears to be "magic beans."

And yet, like my own family, I can no more jettison Kentucky basketball than I can my own kin. For better or for worse, they are mine. I own a lifelong identity with this often depraved culture known as Kentucky basketball. There have been times when I have been ashamed of their behavior: the Sutton era, and now. But, I cannot leave them. Like a wayward loved one, I pray that their poor decisions do not kill them or do irreparable harm. And make no mistake, my shame is not directed at the players or coaches, but my fellow fans. We have a dysfunctional culture which has made Kentucky the laughingstock of college sports. I can only pray that, despite this dysfunction, Kentucky basketball can continue to thrive.

Clean up day!

My office is a disaster area. I'm spending today getting things straightened up. I'll check in tomorrow with some thoughts.

Are the inmates running the asylum at UK?

It's what nearly earned them the "death penalty" in the 1980s. It's what Rick Pitino decried when he took the job in 1989: the culture of elitism and entitlement among boosters. Surely, the University of Kentucky is not the only school in the country that struggles with boosters, but over the years, UK athletics has perfected the booster's sense of entitlement and privilege to a dark, and it not careful, deadly art.

In the 1980s, this culture backed Cliff Hagen, the AD and former hero from the Rupp era. They not only looked the other way as UK institutionally suborned payments to players and academic fraud, but actively encouraged it. First the football program under Fran Curci was hit, then Eddie Sutton's basketball program. The result was nearly a fatal blow to the basketball program. Only C.M. Newton, another Rupp protege, who's integrity was unquestioned, was able to save the day by cleaning house.

When Pitino arrived on campus, he pronounced for anybody who could hear that things would now be different at UK. He sarcastically criticized UK as the "Roman Empire" of college basketball and vowed to change the culture. Indeed he did, and the boosters stayed quiet as Pitino built a program that dominated the college basketball landscape in the mid-90s. Then Sheriff Pitino left for Boston and Sir C.M. Newton retired. The boosters had gone underground, but only for a while.

After Tubby Smith, an affable sort, but not one to ingratiate himself to hangers on, missed the Final Four several consecutive years after winning it all in year one, the boosters started to make noise. "Tubby's lost it," they cried. "He can't recruit." And indeed, Coach Smith had started to chalk up double digit losses, had surrendered dominance in the SEC, and was not landing the 5-star recruits, especially after "Team Turmoil." They mounted a negative PR campaign, and eventually, Coach Smith, well-respected by his peers and a proven success both on an off the court, felt the need to get out of Lexington with his mental health in tact.

Enter Billy Gillispie, the self-described "basketball junkie" from Texas. He had turned around programs at UTEP and Texas A&M, basketball wastelands. Surely, given the abounding resources of UK, he would reestablish the Wildcats into basketball preeminence. He had everything Kentucky could want: his life was dedicated to basketball. Even the most voracious "blueblood" UK fan couldn't match the passion and dedication to the game that Billy Clyde brought to the table. He was Southern. As good as Pitino was, something about that New England accent always made Kentuckians a little uneasy. And while Gillispie's Texas drawl won't get anyone thinking he's from Harlan, it was somewhat comforting to hear on the radio. It seemed to be a match made in heaven.

It would have been, except for two things: Billy Clyde, folksy as he sounded, was his own man. He was as advertised: a basketball junkie. He put no truck in glad handing with boosters or answering daft questions from some hottie ESPN put before the cameras as a "sideline reporter." This offended the sensibilities of some pretty important people in the UK community...some people who regularly wrote large checks to the university, and thus by virtue of that act, felt as if they had a right to expect certain courtesies from the basketball coach.

Add to that that Billy wasn't winning right away. Oh sure, anyone with half a basketball brain could see that he wasn't dealt a very good hand. In his first season, he somehow cobbled together an NCAA team that went 12-4 in the SEC by sheer force of will. Two seniors, Joe Crawford and Ramel Bradley, handled the ball and accounted for over 70% of the team's scoring. Billy landed a 5-star power forward in Patrick Patterson, but he was injured three-fourths of the way through the season. Still, UK made the NCAA tournament, only to bow out in the first round at the hands of Marquette.

Again, anyone with a little basketball sense would know that the next season would be iffy at best. UK had lost Crawford and Bradley. Patterson and Jodie Meeks, who had missed most of the previous season to injury, returned, but the team had little else it could count on. There was some promise in some freshmen and JUCO transfers, but more question marks. The team started off by losing at home to VMI. Still, by early January, they had stormed out to 16-5 and 5-0 playing the easy part of weakened SEC schedule. When they hit the meat of the schedule, their lack of point guard experience and scoring diversity did them in. UK struggled to the 20 win mark and was left out of the NCAAs, relegated to the lowly NIT.

Remember those boosters? They were mad because Billy G. had affronted them. Now he had committed the mortal sin: not winning. He would be run out of town. As the losses mounted, these boosters acquired more of the popular sentiment. The message boards teemed with calls for Gillispie's head. It seemed to be a done deal, until....

Billy Gillispie has now won two games in the NIT, a victory against Notre Dame away from taking his young team to the Big Apple. It is a young team, one which all signs point to being totally intact for next season. Gillispie has also put together a stellar recruiting class, led by 5-star post man, Daniel Orton. Anywhere else in the basketball universe, fans would be excited by the growth of their young team. They would be proud of the effort exerted by these players under Gillispie's guidance. They would be anxiously awaiting the new recruits as missing pieces to the puzzle that would return them to their rightful place among basketball's elite. Not in Lexington, Kentucky.

It's 1985 again and the inmates, if not running the asylum, appear to be mounting a takeover. There's talk of Calipari, Izzo, even Pitino returning. We'll see if Dr. Todd and Mitch Barnhart have what it takes to stare down this insurrection. They certainly don't carry the clout of a C.M. Newton. They did, however, stand up to public pressure and rightfully retain Rich Brooks with the football program. This is a crossroads moment for UK Basketball. They can maintain their integrity and allow Billy Gillispie to continue his rebuilding process, letting the boosters know that they are in charge of the program; or they can give into that pressure and open UK up to a delayed rebuilding process and, if someone like Calipari is brought in, a total rejection of the reforms made under C.M. Newton.

Are the inmates running the asylum at UK? Time will tell.

A Crack in the Foundation

We are a nation of laws, not of men. That guiding principle has served our nation since its inception. Today, however, we can clearly see cracks forming in that foundational ideal. Over time, post modern relativism has gradually seeped into our culture and brought into question some of the immutable principles upon which our society rests. Chief among these is the notion of the family.

Sociologically speaking, the familiy unit and how it is defined, is the bedrock of any culture. For ages, our cultural definition has centered around the consensual monogamous relationship of one man and one woman. Certainly other cultures have had other definitions, to their ruination. There seems to be some timeless wisdom in the Judeo-Christian ideal of a life-long commitment between a man and a woman.

First of all, there is obviously the biological advantage. One man and one woman in a committed relationship provide sexual satisfatction for one another without the risks of disease, the stress and anxiety of infidelity and jealosy, and countless other pitfalls that come with polygamous or uncommitted affairs. Procreation cannot be discounted either. Psychologically, we see the benefits of intimate relationships which are based on something more than mere sexual gratification. The notion that sexual union can concieve a new life is sobering for those who truly consider it. That sobering truth brings added respect to the sex act and to the partner with whom one is sharing. Sexual union becomes something awesome and, dare I say, holy, when it is more than a pursuit of physical gratification.

Second, we see the sociological advantages of committed monogamous relationships: the idea of a "help-meet" as expressed in scripture. It is comforting to know that, come what may, there is one person in the world who will always be at my side, offering encouragement and support.

Third, the monogamous, heterosexual union of man and woman provides the ideal structure in which to raise children. Like a mini corportation, this union provides co-equal "CEO's" who run the family. Children are exposed to both genders, allowing them to establish healthy notions of themselves and others. Roles within the "company" are clearly delineated, again providing a sound structure. Like any organization, these roles and boundaries must be defined and observed. There are obviously many families where this is not the case. It is only within the monogamous, heterosexual union, however, that the ideal can be attained. Other unions naturally begin with dysfunctional patterns. In those cases, one can only "hope for the best" out of an already bad situation.

We have already seen the homosexual lobby succesfully put the first cracks in this foundation. Under the ruse of "equal rights," they have successfully called into question the very defintion of marriage, parenthood, and with it, the very foundation of our culture. Many warned of the "slippery slope" that was eminent once we started this redefinition. They were dismissed as "prudes" and "alarmists." This was all about "equal rights for gays and lesbians."

Now we see the further erosion of the bedrock as polygamous families begin the quest for their "rights."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7953270.stm




Where will this end? Now that we've allowed precedent for individual "rights" to supercede bedrock societal laws and principles, where can we stop? Where is the defense against other "choices" of relationships?

I pray that we can come to our senses, but history teaches us that once we've started down this road, there's no turning back. That's why it's called the "slippery slope." I fear we are gathering momentum and headed toward a precipice.

Barack Obama: Willy Loman in the Oval Office?

"Brought to justice"? Good god, man, what the hell are you talking about? I don't know what he is talking about -- they haven't seen the inside of the United States District Court for the District of Colulmbia? -- but I do understand what Obama means when he says the Bush policies were "a great advertisement for anti-American sentiment." Obama and his fellow Democrats helped make them so by spreading pernicious falsehoods about their illegality and cruelty. Even worse, like the pitiful Willy Loman in Death of a Salesman, Obama aspires for us to be be well liked!


http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/03/023140.php

Presidents: A study in contrast

Hat tip: Sondra K.

http://www.sondrak.com/index.php/weblog/reagan_bush_obama/

Live blogging the NCAA tourney

Since I'm stuck on the couch, I'll add my $.02 about today's NCAA tournament action. First up on the docket: Syracuse v. Arizona St. I picked Syracuse in this one. I think they're a stronger team. My heart is going with ASU, though. Herb Sendek was a Pitino assistant at UK and he did a great job at Miami U. He seems to have gone back to his roots a little with a more perimeter oriented offense after inexplicably getting caught up in the Princeton offense fad when he was at NC State. They've definitely got the shooters to break Boeheim's vaunted zone. Early on, looks like Syracuse can exploit some mismatches on their offensive end.


12:21 ASU is hitting their 3's. They are falling into a trap with the Syracuse zone, though. They need to get some degree of penetration.

I'm somewhat surprised at the Big 12's success thus far. I thought they were pretty overrated during the season. They've definitely performed better than I thought so far.

8:42 Looks like Herb's reading my blog on his I-phone. He's gone inside since my post :-)


Is it me, or is Devendorf a punk. Looks like he should've gone to Florida to carry on the tradition of Jason Williams and Teddy Dupay.


I'm old. I remember watching Rautins' dad play at Syracuse with Rony Seikaly.

1:40 There's the story: points in the paint. Syracuse is pushing it inside and ASU has settled for jumpers. That's exactly what SU wants.

LOVED Mark Few's comment from last night about why he didn't call a time out: "Everybody knows it's about the players. I wasn't going to call a time out and screw it up. Let the players make the plays."

Just when ASU was getting it inside, Pendergraph picks up #4. They're in trouble.

10:19 Pendergraph out with fouls. They got it within 10, but I don't see them being able to overcome this now.

6:32 James Harden singlehandedly keeping ASU alive. Now Abbott chips in with a 3. 61-57. They need to keep up the inside out approach. Syracuse needs to stay patient on their end.

Like I thought, this one's over. I'll pick up the next game (maybe) in a new post.

Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes

Anybody else laughing out loud that President Obama's popularity ratings are lower than W's at this time in his presidency? Remember how the MSM had him portrayed after the Florida recounts? Selected, not elected? Obama's first 100 days have been a doozy so far. I shudder to think what he has planned for an encore.

Check out Schoen and Rasmussen in the WSJ for the gory details:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690358175013837.html

Perfect Timing

I'm an idiot. I fell down the stairs this morning and hurt my knee, so I'm stuck on the couch all day. What a break for all of you! That mean I can sit here on my laptop and blog all day! You all get unrestricted access to my mind for an entire day...at no cost whatsoever!!! Where's Billy Mayes to advertise this great deal on TV?

Anywho, this should be a fun way to kick off my blog.

From the gallery: The buck stops where?

Enough already! Whether or not you were a supporter of the bailouts, recognize that they happened. And now, with AIG, we've got folks forming quasi-lynch mobs protesting the bonuses received by AIG executives. One problem here folks: your elected representatives signed off on those bonuses. Once the bailout happened, your elected representatives became the the de facto "execs."

So if you've got righteous anger, aim it at the folks on Capitol Hill (yeah, the same ones trying to deflect the blame right now by stoking up the class warfare rhetoric against AIG). They could have nixed the bonuses. Lord knows they had the leverage. Instead, they signed off. But instead, we see folks grabbing the torches and pitchforks and heading after AIG execs.

I'd love to see half that righteous anger directed at the Congress who truly deserves it. After all, they gave away 10 times the bonus money in other bailouts that won't be accounted for. At least we know where the AIG guys are and where the money is. Where's the anger about all the rest? Where are the mobs descending on Capitol Hill.

At least that's how it look from here.

From the upper deck

Coaches are overrated. I say that as a former coach. I get sick and tired of fans and the media heaping unwarranted praise and criticism on coaches when it's the players who are mostly responsible for the outcomes of games.

Don't get me wrong. Coaches are leaders and their jobs are important. But most of the important work is done off the court/field, during recruiting and practice. Once the whistle blows, it's all about the players. Coaching decisions within the games themselves have minimal impact. There may be a dozen plays that would work, but the players need to execute. Whichever team executes the best wins the game. It's that simple.

To hear the ESPN types though, you'd think during games, coaches are some sort of genetic mutation of General Patton and Albert Einstein. Sport strategy isn't rocket science. I remember Tim McCarver one time commenting how a manager who had come over to the National League from the American would struggle making pitching changes because of the lack of a designated hitter. Come on, Tim! This guy managed to put his pants on this morning and drove his car to the ballpark. In those actions alone, there were decisions more complex than figuring out how to double-switch.

On the other side, you've got the fans. Let their favorite coach have one bad season (or in some cases one bad game) and you'd think the guy had suffered massive head trauma. Oh sure, just last week he'd been a genius, pushing all the right buttons on the way to victory. But now, in defeat, he apparently lost all that intelligence. What happened? Contrary to popular belief, he didn't lose his coaching ability; his players just didn't execute as well, or (the unthinkable) the other squad had better players who executed better than our team.

This attitude has contributed to the prima donna attitudes many of these coaches carry around. They are immensely overpaid. Their skill set is not all that unique. The media and the culture, however, have set them up on pedestals. This earns them both unwarranted criticism and an awful lot of money.

At least that's how it looks from here.

Welcome to Mixed Company! The purpose of this blog is to discuss issues that most folks won't talk about in "mixed company"....Those discussions that tend to elicit strong reactions from people. For the most part, I'll be sticking to my primary interests: Sports, politics, and religion. I've got enough controversial opinions saved up on those matters to keep posting for a decade :-)

Each day, I'll try to cover each of these areas: From the upperdeck, From the gallery, and From the pew. You can count on my opinion, whatever that's worth. You can also count that I will have carefully considered that opinion before publishing it, and that I'll be ready to defend it if you want to attack it. I won't be throwing stuff up on the wall to see if it sticks on this site.



Please take time to look at my background; get to know me a bit before rushing to judgment on my posts. I'm really quite excited about this venture. I hope this can be an avenue for me to "vent my spleen," but I also relish the opportunity to communicate with my readers and hopefully, actually share something of value to the greater community.



So without further ado, here we go!