I realized, as the week went by, and the Worldwide Leader (among others) bombarded us with yet more coverage on the story, that we forgot to address one of the New Year’s most intriguing events in the catch-up post – our boy Michael Phelps’ little mary jane mishap.
(If you missed out on this contentious little bit of news, just Google “Phelps and Bong”. Kinda fun.)
There seem to be two prevailing sets of opinions on the story and subsequent media hissy-fit, and since we’re all about fairness and balance here at 65TPT, let’s give them both some thought.
Opinion set #1: Phelps deserves every bit of criticism and censure he gets from both his sponsorship and the ruling body of his sport – not to mention the disappointment of fans everywhere. The fact that the photo was news in the first place is the natural and necessary side-effect of worldwide fame and millions in sponsorship dollars.
Once a person of Phelps’ stature decides to trade on his personal image by accepting unGodly amounts of compensation in advertising contracts, it is the public’s right (some would call it duty) to scrutinize said image using the facts at hand. The photo was published responsibly and legally because Phelps is a public figure and has no reasonable expectation of privacy at a college party in South Carolina*.
*I don’t think either side of the argument would dispute this point. Any editor in his or her right mind would publish the photo without much hesitation. Personally, we don’t blame agents of the media for acting on this definition of “news” – we blame YOU, the consumer, for caring. (We would also appreciate it if YOU, the consumer, ignored the fact that WE, the publisher, are only fueling this fire by contradicting ourselves and continuing the discussion. But hey, YOU started it.)
The idea that Phelps - an iconic role model for young people throughout the world - would use an illegal substance is shocking, and his personal decisions regarding recreational drug use represent an important issue for public discourse.
Opinion set #2: Regardless of his status as a record-setting athlete and marketing mammoth, Phelps deserves the same amount of privacy and respect as the rest of us Triple-A’s (Anonymous Average Americans). Why should he be penalized for his monumental success in both competition and business? Ignore the fact that he’s the face of the American Olympic team, and the photo would just be one more of the millions depicting toasted-ass, bong-ripping college students on Facebook and MySpace. Therefore, it deserves just as much press as those photos.
[This set of opinions is almost always attached to a rant about someone’s personal stance on American drug policy (marijuana especially) – a subject we’re neither qualified nor interested enough to broach here. The way we look at it, the law’s the law, and there’s little to accomplish debating it in this forum. Got a problem? Write your senator.]
Our biggest issue with the voluminous coverage and subsequent public-opinion overload related to these types of stories is not the reactions themselves, but that the size and scope of the reactions seem to be directly proportional to the achievements and stature of the offender in question. To us, it suggests that the transgression is far less relevant than the individual who committed it – contradicting the reasoning behind its importance in the first place.
It’s like this: If any other swimmer (besides maybe Dana Torres or Mark Spitz) got caught in a similar fashion, we wouldn’t give a damn. We wouldn’t even know the person by sight, name, or biography, and if someone showed us the photo or took the time to Email it to us, we would very likely disregard it immediately. We’re not interested in healthy discourse about the effects of marijuana on society, or even sports – we simply use those premises as thin veils to disguise our hero-worship and obsession with celebrity.
There’s nothing we love more in this country than a good ol’ fashioned fall from grace. We actually enjoy watching the slow, torturous deaths of the Golden Boys (and Girls), because deep down, we know they never existed in the first place. We’re transfixed by the gory beauty of the melting façade.
Jordan, Jones, A-Rod, Rose, Lawrence Taylor and even Derrick Thomas – the list of battered reputations and shattered public personas grows on us each and every day. And why do we love these stories of loss, transgression, and mistake? Because they make our heroes say, “Sorry.” Make them apologize to us.
It’s better than a rookie-card autograph with a personal note. We love these little circuses, ‘cause they flip the script on the traditional player-fan relationship -- empowering us, the ever-forgiving fans, to do our inevitable duty in the infinite cycle of news-media scandal.
And don’t we do it well? Draw up that mental list of disgraced superstars and ask yourself: How many of them have we forgiven? The answer, of course, is every single one who asked for it. Gamblers and cheaters, ‘Roiders and dope-smokers -- drive-home drinkers, wife-beaters, liars, and just plain weasely characters – we’ve forgiven them all at some point or another. But why?
Simple: Innocence is power. We, the innocent consumers, fans, admirers and bystanders basically just love judging people – especially those who have it so much better than we do. We feel empowered by the fact that they ask our forgiveness. And all one must do is ask. Perhaps it’s our overwhelmingly Christian heritage, but Americans tend to grant that forgiveness unquestioningly and, usually, without much hesitation.
All we really want to hear is our hero say the words. We’re a lot like the four-year-old’s mother, prodding: “What do you say, Mikey?”
Of course, Little Mikey (as most of us would still like to think of him) has alweady said his sowwees, and USA Swimming sentenced him to a three-month time out. Only one of his sponsors, Kellogg’s, has vowed not to renew his contract -- no doubt hoping to protect a generation of Froot Loop-slurping brats from that dreaded gateway into the world of illicit drugs, anonymous sex, senseless crime and militant Islam. (And whatever else we’re scared of at the moment.)
You may get an idea about which set of opinions your humble publishers hold, but that certainly doesn’t discount the other side. Personally, we just don’t like the current trends concerning individual privacy and the media in general – including the media outlets we ourselves choose, like Facebook, MySpace, and myriad others. What does our increasing willingness to publish personal information (and other media i.e. photos, audio and video) mean for the civil rights of the future? Will the law ever step in to stem these ever-deepening tides?
Or, will our generation have to take its lumps – Mikey sure took his last month – and learn our lessons the hard way?
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Monday, February 2, 2009
We're Ba-aak
So yeah, it’s been awhile.
Plenty has gone down since we last palavered, but we’ve got neither the time nor the inclination to rehash every important event and news story of the past six months. There were a few highlights that merit mentioning, however, so let’s get our chores out of the way before returning to business.
Right. So how ‘bout them Chiefs? Yowzah. Turns out you can’t play the Cover 2 without a D- line (Or linebackers. Or safeties.) after all. Aren’t you glad your team got to sponsor that little Pro Football research project? Personally, I thought Herm deserved one more year, but I can’t fault Mr. Hunt for dumping Snarling Carl. The moment that decision was made, Herm’s fate was sealed.
Needless to say, it was time for Peterson to find a new hobby. The former GM (I get goose bumps just typing it) negotiated with players as if free agency never even happened – no doubt a symptom of his swollen superego – and operated under the ridiculous assumption that his feelings were more important to the franchise than those of its players. A certain Pro Bowl defensive end comes to mind, among others.
Peterson was in complete denial about the state of the modern NFL employment market, a long-term trend we may consider in future posts.
Front-office makeover aside, it’s tough to see the ‘08 season as anything other than a monumental waste and utter failure.
Draft day, here we come. (Again)
One development of a much more pleasing nature (at least to your procrastinating publisher) has been the outstanding play of the Missouri men’s basketball team. Mike Anderson is makin’ me look damn good. Truth is, he’s finally got his recruits in place, and the team is as deep as it is defensively aggressive.
The real difference, though, has come on offense. Not since the oft-lauded days of Norm Stewart has a Missouri team worked as hard as this one does in its half-court sets. For years (the Snyder years in particular, as well as Anderson’s first two) the Tigers’ set offense consisted of little more than dribble-drives and three point bombs. No picks, no cuts, and few passes.
Granted, Missouri still shoots more three-pointers than it should. Difference is, this team actually has some natural shooters. Freshmen Kim English and Marcus Denmon (a Hogan Prep grad) can both make a man pay for doubling off of them, and their overall shot selection is good for young players. Throw in Matt Lawrence coming off of ten well-set, hard screens a night and you’re halfway to achieving one of the most crucial elements of good offense: balance -- a concept with which previous Missouri teams have been woefully unfamiliar.
And then there’s the defense. Forcing a good Kansas team into 27 turnovers is one thing (Missouri has forced 15+ TOs in 8 of 11 conference games and hasn’t yet forced fewer than ten), but statistics don't convey all the effects of Anderson’s style of play. For every steal and forced turnover, this team makes two or three traps, deflections, and assaults on the ball-handler. (There were unconfirmed reports last week that Chickenhawk PG Sherron Collins is looking into pressing charges. Luckily, Quin Snyder has agreed to represent JT Tiller in the matter -- that Duke Law degree has got to be worth something...)
But there’s one slight misconception about 40 minutes of hell that most sports journalists (yours truly included) have proliferated over the past three seasons. Every time someone describes this style of play, they inevitably talk about increasing the number of possessions in the game, and it’s true, the Tigers do, but it’s slightly more complicated than that.
See, the Tigers don’t just increase the number of overall possessions in the game, they up the count of their own possessions when compared to their opponents. By pressing the entire game, Missouri increases the amount of time its opponent takes to advance the ball past half-court -- slowing down the offense, wasting shot-clock, and limiting the number of that unfortunate team’s potential possessions.
But here’s the key -- by running on EVERY defensive rebound and nearly every turnover, Missouri also shortens its own average possession and multiplies the likelihood that it will take more shots than its opponents.
In conference play, the Tigers have out-shot their opponents in ten of eleven games, and their offensive efficiency (almost three assists per turnover) helps make every extra shot count. It’s kinda like the inverse alley-cat, for all you South grads out there – ball control with the shot-clock in mind. The difference is, Missouri controls the ball on defense – an influence few teams can muster. (See the 2008 Boston Celtics or any Gregg Poppovich team.)
Don’t think for a second that I’m dumb enough to make a prediction about this team, either, ‘cause the minute I do, you know they’ll tank faster than your stock portfolio. That said, an NCAA Tourney berth is extremely exciting and a treat Tiger fans have missed for nearly half a decade.
I think the Scott Pioli/Todd Haley hires deserve their own post, and it’s too early to make any meaningful analysis or predictions about what they might do next year, but let’s note: On the surface, I like both hires. Each is young (relatively), confident, and philosophically aggressive, both in scheme and personality. Both boast impressive pedigrees (though the media over-hypes the fact), and will likely work well together toward the common goal of winning. These are blanket generalizations and blatant assumptions, of course, but hey, it’s the off-season. Look for more on the subject soon.
The NBA regular season is plugging along, and there have been few surprises so far. Boston and LA are great again, as expected, and the Cavaliers are finally realizing some of LBJ’s infinite potential. As the draft deadline approaches, however, Cleveland likely needs help the worst. The ascent of the Magic and Dwight Howard, though expected, has helped the Eastern Conference balance itself with the West, which has been dominant for damn near a decade.
And then, there’s A-Rod. What can one possibly write about this topic that you haven’t already read?
Let’s leave it at this: A-Rod got the long, hard shaft on this one. The Union should have never agreed to “anonymous” testing in an era when unnamed sources outnumber identified ones and your commissioner makes no bones about hanging his players out to dry. The trend in sports journalism (hell, all journalism these days) is to publish first, verify later, and fuck everybody in-between.
So, sorry, Alex -- consider yourself reamed. The fact that Selig insists he deserves none of the blame for the steroid era nor the leak itself gives you a good idea of what kind of fella he is. Pretty scary when you think about it.
Alright, I think we’re about as caught up as we're gonna get for now. We hope to see you again next week – same bat-time, same bat-channel.
Plenty has gone down since we last palavered, but we’ve got neither the time nor the inclination to rehash every important event and news story of the past six months. There were a few highlights that merit mentioning, however, so let’s get our chores out of the way before returning to business.
Right. So how ‘bout them Chiefs? Yowzah. Turns out you can’t play the Cover 2 without a D- line (Or linebackers. Or safeties.) after all. Aren’t you glad your team got to sponsor that little Pro Football research project? Personally, I thought Herm deserved one more year, but I can’t fault Mr. Hunt for dumping Snarling Carl. The moment that decision was made, Herm’s fate was sealed.
Needless to say, it was time for Peterson to find a new hobby. The former GM (I get goose bumps just typing it) negotiated with players as if free agency never even happened – no doubt a symptom of his swollen superego – and operated under the ridiculous assumption that his feelings were more important to the franchise than those of its players. A certain Pro Bowl defensive end comes to mind, among others.
Peterson was in complete denial about the state of the modern NFL employment market, a long-term trend we may consider in future posts.
Front-office makeover aside, it’s tough to see the ‘08 season as anything other than a monumental waste and utter failure.
Draft day, here we come. (Again)
One development of a much more pleasing nature (at least to your procrastinating publisher) has been the outstanding play of the Missouri men’s basketball team. Mike Anderson is makin’ me look damn good. Truth is, he’s finally got his recruits in place, and the team is as deep as it is defensively aggressive.
The real difference, though, has come on offense. Not since the oft-lauded days of Norm Stewart has a Missouri team worked as hard as this one does in its half-court sets. For years (the Snyder years in particular, as well as Anderson’s first two) the Tigers’ set offense consisted of little more than dribble-drives and three point bombs. No picks, no cuts, and few passes.
Granted, Missouri still shoots more three-pointers than it should. Difference is, this team actually has some natural shooters. Freshmen Kim English and Marcus Denmon (a Hogan Prep grad) can both make a man pay for doubling off of them, and their overall shot selection is good for young players. Throw in Matt Lawrence coming off of ten well-set, hard screens a night and you’re halfway to achieving one of the most crucial elements of good offense: balance -- a concept with which previous Missouri teams have been woefully unfamiliar.
And then there’s the defense. Forcing a good Kansas team into 27 turnovers is one thing (Missouri has forced 15+ TOs in 8 of 11 conference games and hasn’t yet forced fewer than ten), but statistics don't convey all the effects of Anderson’s style of play. For every steal and forced turnover, this team makes two or three traps, deflections, and assaults on the ball-handler. (There were unconfirmed reports last week that Chickenhawk PG Sherron Collins is looking into pressing charges. Luckily, Quin Snyder has agreed to represent JT Tiller in the matter -- that Duke Law degree has got to be worth something...)
But there’s one slight misconception about 40 minutes of hell that most sports journalists (yours truly included) have proliferated over the past three seasons. Every time someone describes this style of play, they inevitably talk about increasing the number of possessions in the game, and it’s true, the Tigers do, but it’s slightly more complicated than that.
See, the Tigers don’t just increase the number of overall possessions in the game, they up the count of their own possessions when compared to their opponents. By pressing the entire game, Missouri increases the amount of time its opponent takes to advance the ball past half-court -- slowing down the offense, wasting shot-clock, and limiting the number of that unfortunate team’s potential possessions.
But here’s the key -- by running on EVERY defensive rebound and nearly every turnover, Missouri also shortens its own average possession and multiplies the likelihood that it will take more shots than its opponents.
In conference play, the Tigers have out-shot their opponents in ten of eleven games, and their offensive efficiency (almost three assists per turnover) helps make every extra shot count. It’s kinda like the inverse alley-cat, for all you South grads out there – ball control with the shot-clock in mind. The difference is, Missouri controls the ball on defense – an influence few teams can muster. (See the 2008 Boston Celtics or any Gregg Poppovich team.)
Don’t think for a second that I’m dumb enough to make a prediction about this team, either, ‘cause the minute I do, you know they’ll tank faster than your stock portfolio. That said, an NCAA Tourney berth is extremely exciting and a treat Tiger fans have missed for nearly half a decade.
I think the Scott Pioli/Todd Haley hires deserve their own post, and it’s too early to make any meaningful analysis or predictions about what they might do next year, but let’s note: On the surface, I like both hires. Each is young (relatively), confident, and philosophically aggressive, both in scheme and personality. Both boast impressive pedigrees (though the media over-hypes the fact), and will likely work well together toward the common goal of winning. These are blanket generalizations and blatant assumptions, of course, but hey, it’s the off-season. Look for more on the subject soon.
The NBA regular season is plugging along, and there have been few surprises so far. Boston and LA are great again, as expected, and the Cavaliers are finally realizing some of LBJ’s infinite potential. As the draft deadline approaches, however, Cleveland likely needs help the worst. The ascent of the Magic and Dwight Howard, though expected, has helped the Eastern Conference balance itself with the West, which has been dominant for damn near a decade.
And then, there’s A-Rod. What can one possibly write about this topic that you haven’t already read?
Let’s leave it at this: A-Rod got the long, hard shaft on this one. The Union should have never agreed to “anonymous” testing in an era when unnamed sources outnumber identified ones and your commissioner makes no bones about hanging his players out to dry. The trend in sports journalism (hell, all journalism these days) is to publish first, verify later, and fuck everybody in-between.
So, sorry, Alex -- consider yourself reamed. The fact that Selig insists he deserves none of the blame for the steroid era nor the leak itself gives you a good idea of what kind of fella he is. Pretty scary when you think about it.
Alright, I think we’re about as caught up as we're gonna get for now. We hope to see you again next week – same bat-time, same bat-channel.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)