AHL no hockey upgrade for OKC in term of cities
The Oklahoma City Blazers have suspended operations and say they won’t field a franchise in the Central Hockey League next season, with an eye towards getting an American Hockey League franchise for 2010-11. Sounds fishy to me, how the AHL will be financially feasible if you can’t make a go of it in the CHL. But maybe it will work.
Anyway, one thing that has sort of disturbed me in recent years is that while OKC’s status among sports cities has risen, with first the Hornets and then the Thunder to where Oklahoma City is a thriving major-league city, its minor-league hockey team was in a league playing franchises based in Amarillo, Texas; Rapid City, S.D.; Shreveport, La.; Corpus Christi, Texas; Odessa, Texas; and Hidalgo, Texas (Rio Grande Valley).
The CHL did have some traditionally strong minor-league markets like Tulsa; Albuquerque, N.M.; Wichita, Kan.; and Austin, Texas, and was even in some suburbs of major-league markets: Allen, Texas (Dallas); Prescott Valley, Ariz. (Phoenix); Southaven, Miss. (Memphis); Independence, Mo. (Kansas City); Broomfield, Colo. (Denver); and Richland Hills, Texas (Dallas-Fort Worth).
But here’s the stunner. The American Hockey League is split much the same way. A bunch of major-league markets, some traditional AAA minor-league markets and a bunch of smaller towns.
The major-league markets in the AHL: San Antonio, Cleveland, Toronto, Milwaukee, Houston, Boston (Lowell, Mass.).
The AAA markets: Austin; Providence, R.I.; Norfolk, Va.; Des Moines, Iowa; Winnipeg, Manitoba; Hamilton, Ontario; Rochester, N.Y.; Hartford, Conn.
If that was the league, that’s good company to be in. But the AHL also has a bunch of franchises in cities that are the eastern version of Amarillo and Corpus Christi. Binghamton, N.Y.; Hershey, Pa.; Peoria, Ill.; Wilkes-Barre, Pa.; Syracuse, N.Y.; Rockford, Ill.; Glens Falls, N.Y.
If you’re going to play hockey against Wilkes-Barre or Glens Falls, you might as well be playing against Odessa or Shreveport. At least Oklahoma City fans will know where those cities are.
The AHL is better hockey, no doubt about it. But in terms of city status, it’s no step up.
The better sire: Richard Williams or Earl Woods?
Richard Williams and Earl Woods are two of the most interesting people on the American sports scene in the last half century, though neither played sports at a high professional level.
Both black men raised children in country-club sports but outside the country-club environment, and both raised those children to be the best in the world. And said so. And succeeded.
Tiger Woods is the greatest golfer of all time, while Serena and Venus Williams have been the dominant female tennis players of this decade.
No one would dare say the Williams sisters surpass Tiger in accomplishments, but here’s an interesting way to gauge them. Which of the sires, Earl Woods or Richard Williams, will have the most major championships from their offspring? Right now, Richard Williams leads Earl Woods 17-14. Serena has 10 major titles and Venus seven, and it certainly looks like the sisters will add to that total this weekend at Wimbledon.
Golf is bigger than tennis in the U.S., so no matter what, the Williams sisters wouldn’t be bigger than Tiger. But if not for Venus, Serena would be close to Tiger in major championships, 14-13. Serena thrice has lost to Venus in major finals.
Golfers have a longer shelf life than tennis players. Tiger could be winning majors well into his 40s. Tennis players do little after their 20s.
But for now, Richard Williams leads Earl Woods. The race is on.
Gortat & Powe intriguing free agents for Thunder
The NBA’s free agency signing period has begun, and I don’t expect Oklahoma City to be in the market for big-name players.
Some of the names mentioned don’t fit. Chicago sharpshooter Ben Gordon doesn’t fit at all, culturally or financially. He would cost too much and require too much of a presence in the offense of a young, developing team. New York Knickerbocker power forward David Lee would cost too much money and has little defensive presence, though he does score and rebound. The Thunder needs interior defense. Utah power forward Paul Millsap is the kind of player the Thunder needs, but he likely will require too much money, and the Boomers are not going to upset their financial solidarity, in which they appear in good shape to adequately pay their young core players when contract negotiations come around.
But a couple of players seem right in the Thunder wheelhouse. Marcin Gortat and Leon Powe.
Gortat is a 7-foot, 25-year-old center from Poland who backed up Dwight Howard this past season, after playing just six games as a rookie. Gortat is a rugged defender with limited offensive skills, but rugged defense is exactly what Oklahoma City needs. The Thunder has an offensive center in Nenad Krstic, a sold-shooting 7-footer who has his moments rebounding, too. But Gortat would form a very solid center combo with Krstic. Defense and offense. Gortat doesn’t figure to command a huge salary, maybe something in the $5 million range, which would not wreck the Thunder’s payroll structure. Gortat averaged just 12 minutes a game last season but played well in the playoffs.
Powe is a 6-foot-8, 25-year-old power forward from the University of California. He has spent all three of his NBA seasons with the Boston Celtics and really impressed a year ago in the playoffs. Injuries limited him to two games for the Celtics this post-season. Powe has averaged 6.6 points , 4.2 rebounds and 14.6 minutes per game for Boston over his career. Not a great player, but potentially a solid inside presence, which the Thunder needs.
OKC is not in the playoff hunt next season. Sam Presti and Scott Brooks can’t say that, of course, but it’s true. Next season is one more year in the development of a promising team. No reason to spend a lot of money on a player who might get you from 34 to 38 wins. But a young player who in two years might help you get from 44 to 48 wins? That’s a more intriguing signing.
Maravich’s record the greatest
A couple of weeks ago, I filled in for a two-hour radio shift on the Sports Animal radio. I decided to put democracy in action.
We voted on the greatest record in sports. Not necessarily the most unbreakable record, which definitely is a part of it, but the greatest. I used a New York Times article to jump-start nominations, but we let listeners nominate, too.
Me and my producer, Bobby Thompson, voted between two nominations, and if there was a disagreement, we let a caller break the tie. We had a bunch of 1-1 standoffs, so the callers were very involved.
We had all kinds of great records. OU’s 47-game winning streak led much of the day. The Boston Celtics’ eight straight NBA titles were hard to beat. UCLA’s seven straight NCAA titles was stout. Wilt Chamberlain’s 50-point average in 1961-62 (we picked that one over Wilt’s 100-point game) was strong. Richard Petty’s 200 NASCAR wins was tough. Someone nominated Walter Johnson’s 110 career shutouts, and that merited big discussions.
Personally, I made a strong plea for the Yankees’ five straight World Series titles, 1949-53, a vastly underrated feat in which the Yanks beat the epic 1951 Giants and thrice beat the Boys of Summer Dodgers, 1949 and 1952-53.
But in the end, an individual record emerged as the champ, and you know what, democracy worked.
We settled on Pete Maravich’s career scoring average of 44.2 points a game in college basketball. Before the shot clock, before the 3-point line, Maravich scored like no one before or since.
I don’t know if that’s the greatest record in sport, but you certainly can make that argument.
We had lots of Maravich talk in recent weeks as the NBA Draft approached. Spaniard Ricky Rubio was compared to Maravich, with good reason. He looks like the Pistol and he passes like the Pistol. But make no mistake; Rubio does not shoot or score like Maravich.
It’s hard for the new generation to know what a truly mythical figure was Maravich, what a legend he was at LSU from 1967-70.
For Maravich’s record to be broken, I think the game will have to change. Which is true of a lot of baseball records. But unlike the pitching records which seem insurmountable (Cy Young’s 511 career victories, Jack Chesbro’s 41 wins in a season), Maravich’s feats did not occur in a full century past. They do not live in dusty history books. Many fans who are not all that old saw Maravich do what now is considered unbelievable. Many fans remember Maravich from those days; I remember Maravich from those days.
I don’t know if 44.2 is the greatest record in sports. But I know it’s in the discussion.
Tebow the favorite? Naturally
Florida quarterback Tim Tebow seems to be the Heisman Trophy favorite in what shapes up to be the most-competitive race ever, with two Heisman winners among the contenders.
And it’s only natural that Tebow is the favorite over OU’s Sam Bradford. Tebow’s team won the ballgame. When Florida beat Oklahoma 24-14 in the national title game, both quarterbacks played well, but Tebow played better, and voters won’t forget that.
If the Heisman voting had occurred in mid-January instead of early December, Tebow almost surely would have won, so voters in summertime remember.
Bradford still could win. So could Texas’ Colt McCoy, and frankly, a lot of voters will want to vote for McCoy, figuring if someone has a Heisman, who needs two? That seems sound reasoning to me.
Darkhorses abound, of course. Keep an eye on Notre Dame quarterback Jimmy Claussen, if the Irish’s easy schedule propels Notre Dame to a good year. Someone from Southern Cal always makes noise. Ole Miss’ Jevan Sneed, who lost the quarterback derby at Texas with McCoy three years ago, will have a chance. Illinois quarterback Juice Williams, hero of that upset of Ohio State in 2007, could be the Big Ten nominee, which carries a lot of voting power. Oregon State’s Jacquizz Rodgers and Oklahoma State’s Kendall Hunter have the potential for huge rushing numbers, which will be required for a tailback to make a run. Ohio State sophomore Terrelle Pryor has the hype to at least get a campaign off the ground.
Heck, the Oklahoma defense could propel a candidate to victory. If Brigham Young’s Max Hall (early) or OSU’s Zac Robinson (late) could engineer an upset of the Sooners, they would be in the thick of the discussion.
But for now, Tebow is the clear front-runner, and that’s only natural.
Emails in on NBA Draft & wishbone
The new emails are in, and lots of talk about the NBA Draft, plus some discussion about the late, great wishbone.
Lew: “In my opinion, the Thunder did well in the draft. They need a center most, and a shooting guard second. Trading for, or acquiring, Blake Griffin would not fill either requirement, nor would Rubio (an unknown talent). They got a guard who can hit the three and later got a center who, hopefully, can develop into a force on defense. I give them credit for the best possible result, given their position in the draft.”
Well, I wouldn’t put a B.J. Mullens poster on the wall just yet. He’s a total stretch. But since he was a surplus pick, that’s OK. I like Harden. Rubio would have been fine, too. Griffin would have transformed the franchise.
Bob: “So if the best players period win championships - example: U.S. Dream Team - then I am not a huge fan of Presti. But if team unity is the biggest issue - example: Phil Jackson’s 10 championship rings - then Presti is a genius and I most definitely am not (that later part has been proven over and over by the way). The Thunder seems to have above good and borderline great talent. If they can pull together the loyalty and chemistry, we could have a neat long-term borderline dynasty ahead of us. I sure hope so, but regardless, you gotta love having something other than OU football to talk about all year.”
This is why I love the NBA. Yes, it’s great to have something to talk about in June. Even if some of the talk is goofy. The best talent doesn’t always win; of course chemistry matters, though I don’t think Phil Jackson is the great example of that. The Thunder has very good young talent, and young is a great qualifier. Before we start talking borderline dynasty, let’s get the Thunder to 35 wins.
Alan, before the draft, wrote: “Rubio looks good, but I don’t know about that with Westbrook already in the picture for the Thunder. Why not trade down and get some good stuff, and put yourself in a position to draft (Stephen) Curry at the 2?”
The Thunder brass agrees with you on Rubio. Not a good fit. But I like Harden much more than I like Curry. I think Harden can penetrate and score and pass. I’m not sure Curry is anything more than a Kyle Korver, a one-dimensional shooter.
Richard: “I am a fan of Hollis Price, the former Sooner. The man plays hard and has a lot of heart. I don’t see how he is playing overseas and the Thunder has a player like way-overpaid Earl Watson, who is horrible. Earl should be ashamed of his boneheaded play. I guess that is why Earl played very little at the end of last season. Hollis is not too old. Hollis has a lot of skills. He may love to play in Europe or Russia, I don’t know. Could the Thunder work him into their system? Would Presti even know who he is? I think some public awareness is in order for Hollis and the role he could play for the Thunder.”
You know, we’re going to have to emerge from this mentality at some point. Blake Griffin, for example. Griffin is a wonderful prospect and would be a huge get for anyone, including the Clippers, who got him. But the hand-wringing over the Thunder somehow getting Griffin was a little over the top. If he had played at Connecticut or Wisconsin or Stanford, no one would be suggesting trading Jeff Green and the draft pick for Griffin. And the idea that Hollis Price belongs in the NBA is just silly. Price was a wonderful college player. But he’s now 28 and been playing overseas for six seasons. He’s not been overlooked by the NBA. He’s just not big enough or strong enough or good enough. Earl Watson is a functional NBA point guard. Not great, but OK. It’s tough for this college market to swallow, but Earl Watson is miles ahead of Hollis Price.
O.L.: “Gosh, do you and the Opubco staff have anything to write about besides featuring Blake Griffin with photos in every issue? I guess he is newsworthy, but he is getting worn out with me and maybe a few others readers too. Perhaps this is a slow time for sports, but it might not have been if OU and OSU would not have crapped out in baseball. Maybe the sports staff could say more about why this happened. Anything to get Griffin of the front page for a change.”
The days of Griffin frequenting the front page are over. He’s old news now. You won’t be reading a bunch of college baseball stuff, but you won’t be reading a lot about Griffin.
Royce: “I especially enjoyed your column about the Thunder Three and I completely agree. As much as I love Blake Griffin, it’s not worth splitting those guys up.”
Like I said…
On to the wishbone. Some agreed that it wouldn’t work today; others, not so much. Kent: “Great article on the wishbone. It died in 1988. Switz still believes it would work. It would not. Too much speed on defense and too one-dimensional. Check the last three games in 1988: 16, 3 and 7 points.”
Pat Jones believes it still would work and does, in a broken-bone format, at places like Georgia Tech. I’m not so sure. Let’s see if the Yellowjackets continue to run on ACC opponents.
Don: “You make some thought-provoking points, but I would agree only to a point. I coached three option offenses in four years (wishbone, I bone, and veer). I had limited success, because we couldn’t recruit the type of fullback or quarterback we needed. It appeared to me that Gary Gibbs was influenced by recruiting to switch offenses. He had reasonable success running the option in 1989 with Steve Collins but switched with mixed success to a pro I with Cale Gundy in 1990. Had fullback Jermaine Fazande not broken his jaw in pre-season, and Eric Moore not been driven into the retaining wall at OSU, John Blake in 1998 would have been able to win at least three additional games.”
Seems to me if an offense relies on a certain type of fullback, it’s in trouble. Quarterback, yes. But fullback? As for 1998, OU already was losing when Moore got injured at Stillwater, and Fazande, while a good player, was no difference-maker. OU went 5-6 in 1998 and was closer to 3-8 than 7-4.
Joshua: “Random question. Who are your favorite OU football players of the ’90s? Yes, I said ’90s.”
Great question. Made me think a little. I thought of Reggie Barnes and Chris Wilson, linebackers I really liked. Dewell Brewer always was fun. P.J. Mills, too. But my vote has to go to Steve Collins. Always was a solid guy when he played, and I’ve gotten to know him some through radio and really like him a lot.
Bedlam basketball debate
I got an interesting email this week from OU fan named Geoff. I thought it was very interesting, so I’m posting it separate from my usual email bag, which will come later.
“I am going to submit to you what I think is one of the biggest misconceptions in the Oklahoma sports world. It is the fact that many media members and fans of both schools feel as though OSU has a better basketball program and a better history than OU basketball. Keep in mind that I do believe that OSU has a really quality program and a lot of great tradition (Iba was an amazing coach and won them two championships), but please take a moment and read these stats, and tell me what you think. I think some of them may surprise you.
The Big Eight, as we knew it, came into being for the 1958-59 season. From the 1958-59 season to 2008-09:
OSU
Total win/loss record: 802-640, .554
NCAA tournament appearances: 16
Final 4 appearances: 2
Title game appearances: 0
NIT appearances: 5
Conference titles: 2 Big 8 (1 shared), 1 Big 12
Conference tournament titles: 2 Big 8, 2 Big 12
OU
Total win/loss record: 933-543, .630
NCAA tournament appearances: 24
Final 4 appearances: 2
Title game appearances: 1
NIT appearances: 7
Conference titles: 5 Big 8, 1 Big 12 (shared)
Conference tournament titles: 4 Big 8, 3 Big 12
Overall head to head since 58-59: OU 66, OSU 47
“In the 51 seasons since OSU joined the Big Eight, OU has a better conference record 36 times, OSU 11.
Since the inception of the Big 12 conference, OSU has only finished ahead of OU in the conferences standings one time.
So, you want to go back all-time?
Overall record: OU 1,468-936 (.611) OSU 1452-1018 (.588).
Bedlam Wins: OU 126, OSU 89
Winning coaches: OU 10, OSU 6
All-Americans: OU 22, OSU 17
Conference titles: OU 22, OSU 17
1,000-point scorers: OU 35, OSU 30
Draft selections: OU 42, OSU 32
NCAA appearances: OU 26, OSU 23
Home-court win streak: OU 51, OSU 46
“OU has spent more weeks in the AP poll than OSU. OU has had more winning seasons than OSU. OU has a better all time home winning percentage than OSU. OU has made it to 4 Final Fours (two championship games).
OSU has won two national championships (’45 and ‘46) in basketball. This is a stat that simply cannot be ignored, and really the main reason why the Cowboys are even in the ballpark with Oklahoma in terms of basketball program comparisons. I will not take anything away from their accomplishments but consider this:
1. These championships happened 62 and 63 years ago. Most of us on this board were not even born when the Cowboys won the championship. Before you bombard me with the 50’s football championships, at least we have won one in the new millennium (2000), and, this is about basketball, not football.
2. The road to winning the championship was a lot less meddlesome back in the old A&M days. The Aggies only had to win three (3) games to be crowned the champion unlike the grueling six games of the modern era. That is certainly not the Cowboy’s fault, but should at least be mentioned. Four of OSU’s six Final Fours were obtained via this three-game system. Two of Oklahoma’s 4 were also obtained this way. Eight of Oklahoma State’s 11 Elite 8 appearances were accomplished by only having to win two games in the tournament. Three of OU’s eight Elite 8 appearances were won in this fashion.
3. The good old NIT was still a major player during this time. It was an era in which the NCAA was battling for dominance. While it is debatable which tournament ran supreme during these championships, one thing is for sure, not all the good teams were playing in the NCAA tournament. Could that of impacted OSU’s two victories? Who knows? But again, worth mentioning.
4. All-American Bob Kurland was a game-changing center for the Pokes. There was no goal tending back then, so the big 7-footer could just sit back and guard the goal until the cows came home. It was certainly within the rules of the day, but it obviously gave the Cowboys a big advantage that they wouldn’t have had a few years later (because of Kurland).
If OSU fans really want to use all of that success from the Iba days as the main basis of claiming superiority over Oklahoma (despite all the facts that I have presented in this comparison), then I think they might be living in the past just a tad!”
Well, Geoff, I certainly thank you. That’s a lot of research, and while much of it has been done before, it remains very interesting.
The Bedlam basketball debate is long-standing and quite fascinating.
First off, I would disagree with the whole premise, that the Oklahoma media gives OSU basketball the edge. I think this whole argument stems from the Eddie Sutton era, in which fan support at OSU superseded fan support at OU.
Most people who give OSU an edge do so because of Gallagher-Iba Arena. Its attendance and its atmosphere. In the post-Eddie era, when the fan support withered, no one really argues that OSU has the better program.
As for which program is most successful, it’s entirely how you want to define success.
Head-to-head? OU, but if you count this, you have to swallow the OU-Texas head-to-head football rivalry, in which the Longhorns have had a 20-game lead over the Sooners for most of the last 70 years.
Conference supremacy? OU
NCAA championships? OSU, and any talk of how OSU’s 1945 and 1946 titles were won in inferior eras has to take us to OU football’s three national titles in the 1950s, which were won before any black player was on a roster south of the Mason-Dixon Line, including OU. To question Iba’s national titles because of the goal-tending rule is like saying Bud Wilkinson’s early great teams were a product of World War II veterans. It’s clear to me that OSU basketball with a goal-tending rule would have been much closer to its eventual success than OU football without all those 22-year-old veterans who showed up in 1946.
And since we’re talking history, I never pass up the chance to remind people of 1945. After OSU’s NCAA title, the Cowboys played a Red Cross benefit game against NIT champ DePaul, beating the Blue Demons at Madison Square Garden in what was one of the biggest games in college basketball history. A game that ranks with OU-Notre Dame 1957 football in terms of national impact.
Anyway, for me, college basketball is the easiest sport in which to debate programs, because of the NCAA Tournament. Just add up the wins. And in that regard, OSU is head of OU. The Cowboys are 38-22 in the NCAAs; OU is 35-26. That’s very close, by the way. OSU is 18th nationally, I think, while OU is 21st.
Geoff is right. More of those OSU victories came in a previous era, which adds weight to OU, in the same way football wins 50-60 years ago don’t count the same way as football wins in the last 20 years, else we’ll be forced to say Army and Navy still have great football programs.
A few years ago, I ranked the college basketball programs. I had OSU No. 19 and OU No. 20. I did it again several months ago and had OU slightly ahead of OSU.
I think they’re very close. In head-to-head matchups of all kinds of comparisons, yes, OU is ahead. In the categories that matter most, NCAA titles and NCAA victories, OSU is ahead.
25 years later: David Overstreet remembered
Twenty-five years ago today, June 25, 1984, David Overstreet died. Drank, then drove and crashed his Mercedes into a gas pumps in a small East Texas town, creating an explosion that took the life of the Miami Dolphin halfback.
Ethan Skolnick of the Fort Lauderdale (Fla.) Sun-Sentinel wrote an excellent piece on Overstreet’s death. Here’s the link: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/football/pro/dolphins/sfl-david-overstreet-062009,0,6384766.story
Overstreet was a Texas high school legend, a teammate of now-Chicago Bears coach Lovie Smith at Big Sandy High School. He came to OU and muscled his way into a crowded Sooner backfield.
Overstreet’s son, David II, played at Missouri earlier this decade, and now Overstreet’s grandson, Quincis Overstreet, is a 16-year-old prospect at Dallas Skyline being recruited by OU. Quincis is the son of Dayetta, Overstreet’s daughter.
It doesn’t seem like 25 years since Overstreet died. Of course, it doesn’t seem like 29 years since Overstreet rushed for 258 yards on 18 carries in that wild 82-42 victory at Colorado. Doesn’t seem like 32 years since Overstreet shared playing time as a freshman with Billy Sims and Elvis Peacock.
But it has been that long. And Skolnick does a nice job of remembering a Sooner great.
Ideal Thunder draft: Thabeet & DeRozan
The headline to this blog is misleading. The ideal draft is a trade with the Clippers for Blake Griffin, but let’s assume that longshot won’t happen. Then what?
How about another longshot? This one more likely, courtesy of the Minnesota Timberwolves. The T-Wolves traded with Washington on Tuesday and now possess the fifth and sixth picks in the NBA Draft. Minnesota’s goal is either to pad its roster with young talent — the T-Wolves have two later first-round picks — or to trade up in search of who knows who.
What if the T-Wolves covet Ricky Rubio and doesn’t come to a deal with Memphis, which drafts just ahead of the Thunder? The Grizzlies take Hasheem Thabeet or James Harden or Tyreke Evans, and that makes it OKC’s turn. And what if the Thunder plays good enough poker to get Minnesota to offer those two picks at five and six?
Not likely. The T-Wolves likely don’t covet Rubio that much, that it in effect would lose Randy Foye (traded to Washington) and the No. 6 pick for Rubio. But you never know. Stranger draft things have happened. The T-Wolves are one of those franchises that need an excitement jolt, which Rubio would provide.
And for the Thunder, there’s no better scenario this side of Blake Griffin than getting the fifth and sixth picks. All teams could use young (inexpensive) talent, and the chance to add two players this high in a draft is a shortcut to success.
Who could the Thunder get at five and six?
Here’s the ideal situation. Memphis unexpectedly takes Arizona State sharpshooter James Harden at No. 2. Minnesota gets Rubio at No. 3. Sacramento grabs University of Memphis star Tyreke Evans.
Then the Thunder gets back to back picks, and the 7-foot-2 Thabeet remains available. And general manager Sam Presti’s commitment to defense kicks in. He grabs Thabeet, then at No. 6 takes Southern Cal swingman DeMar DeRozan, the best athlete in the draft (yes, including Griffin). DeRozan is incredibly athletic with a limited (for now) offensive game. Sort of a 20-year-old Desmond Mason.
And the Thunder’s defensive future sparkles. Thabeet can block shots; if he can defend the post, he’s a franchise defender. There is every reason to believe DeRozan can be a shutdown perimeter defender; put him on the same team with Thabo Sefalosha and a maturing Russell Westbrook, and the Thunder eventually would be defensive demons.
There is much speculation that the Thunder covets Harden or Stephen Curry. But the Thunder has plenty of perimeter offense, with Kevin Durant, Jeff Green and Westbrook. Aside from Griffin, there is no interior offense to speak of in this draft. Rubio might be a special talent as a point guard, so the Thunder might decide to step off the defensive track for a chance at the Spanish teenager. But otherwise, the best value to the Thunder in this draft is defense, and that’s Thabeet and DeRozan.
Most coaches will avoid reality TV
Remember EDtv? It was a 1999 movie directed by Ron Howard and starring Matthew McConaughey in which a guy agrees to let his life be filmed 24/7 for a reality television show. Seemed like a good idea, but of course it becomes a mess, because loss of privacy will derail a life.
Anyway, I thought of EDtv the other night watching Jon & Kate Plus 8, the reality show about the couple that had twins, then had sextuplets. They signed a deal with The Learning Channel to have their lives filmed for a weekly series. The show once was about raising the kids, but now it’s about Jon and Kate, and Monday night they announced they are splitting up. But the show will go on.
They should have canceled the show and kept the marriage. Instead, they kept the show and canceled the marriage.
And it made me think of football coaches. Not just our locals like Bob Stoops and Mike Gundy, but NFL coaching icons like Bill Belichick and Bill Cowher, and their aversion to the media-explosion age. How they build walls around their organizations and how you can’t really blame them.
Stoops and Gundy have limited access compared to their predecessors, and when you see the train wrecks caused by all the cameras and tape recorders and message boards and web sites in this new century, you understand it.
It makes some media jobs much more difficult. I think back to the early 1980s, and how easy it was to cover college football, how opens it was, and I wonder how in the world we produce as much as we today, which is much more than we did a quarter century ago.
But I also know that coaches have to maintain a tight rein. The new media demands it. Without restrictions, a football team could turn into EDtv.
