Jenni Carlson NewsOK.com Blogging Community

The Olympic Games can’t have too many CP3s.

Or can they? 

Watch my latest video commentary or read below:

USA Basketball has finally made the roster for the men’s Olympic team official.

Chris Paul’s a part, and rightfully so. The Hornet point guard will go to Beijing with Kobe Bryant and Carmelo Anthony, LeBron James and Deron Williams. CP3 deserved to be part of that team.

But what about the other CP3 that is also beloved in our fair state?

Oklahoma center Courtney Paris is still among the possible candidates for the Olympic women’s basketball team. USA Basketball has already announced nine of the 12 players who will be on the team, and it expects to name the final three by the end of the month.

Will Paris make the cut?

It’s possible, but the odds don’t look great.

USA Basketball has already selected two centers — Lisa Leslie and Sylvia Fowles — and Tina Thompson is listed as a forward but can definitely play the post.

Leslie is an Olympic veteran, having been a member of three gold-medal-winning teams. Even though she’s almost 36 years old, she is still one of the best players in the women’s game.

Fowles is an Olympic newbie, but she is one of the game’s best young centers. She is in her rookie season in the WNBA after a stellar career at LSU.

As for Thompson, she is an Olympic veteran like Leslie. She was a member of the 2004 team that won gold in Athens.

No doubt, Paris is a great player. There has never been a women’s player with the combination of size and skill that Paris has. Never before has someone as big as Paris been as agile and mobile as she is. Frankly, most women who’ve played at her size have been stiffs. At 6-foot-4, 200-plus pounds, Paris scores, rebounds and defends like a player much smaller.

But still, she seems like an Olympic long shot. If you look at the three post players already selected, they’re all lean and lanky. Leslie is 6-5, 170 pounds. Fowles is 6-6, 200 pounds. And Thompson, the pseudo-center, is 6-2, 178 pounds.

With post players built like that, you have to think USA Basketball is building a team with a need for speed. There is definitely a nod toward up-tempo, fast-paced play.

Paris thrives more on half-court teams, squads that set up the offense and pound it inside to her. There’s nothing wrong with that style, but it might just mean that Paris isn’t a fit on this year’s Olympic team.

Renee Brown, the selection committee chair, said that USA Basketball still wants to add at least one more post player to the roster. The final spots are expected to be named by July 1.

One CP3 is already going to Beijing. Will there be another?

Stay tuned.

Everybody in the pool!

Watch my latest video commentary or read below:

The U.S. Olympic swimming trials start next weekend in Omaha.

Yes, Omaha.

And no, Omaha doesn’t have some big-time, state-of-the-art swimming facility. Well, actually, it has one for another two weeks or so. The City of Omaha built two temporary pools at the Qwest Center, the city’s downtown arena. There is one Olympic-sized pool for competition and a second one for warm-ups.

Where there wasn’t a pool before, now there are two holding millions of gallons of water.

All of this begs a question — why can’t Oklahoma City go after the 2012 U.S. Olympic trials?

We don’t have a facility right now that could host the trials, but apparently, we don’t need one. Temporary pools are the way most of the U.S. trials are hosted. Four years ago, the trials were in Long Beach. Sunny California is one place you might suspect they’d have suitable facilities for the trials. Nope. They leased a pair of European-made portable pools and set them up in the parking lot of the convention center.

Why outside? That was because the swimming competition at the 2004 Olympics in Athens was held in an outdoor venue. USA Swimming likes to have the trials at a venue that’s similar to the Olympics.

The 2012 Games are in London, and an indoor pool will be used.

Why couldn’t Oklahoma City host the 2012 trials at the Ford Center? Heck, even the Cox Convention Center could be an option.

Samantha Woodward notwithstanding, Oklahoma City isn’t exactly a swimming mecca. But the city definitely knows how to put on big-time sporting events. Wouldn’t it be cool for Michael Phelps and Co. to come through in four years on their way to London?

And remember, Woodward, the young phenom who recently graduated from Edmond Memorial, will be 21 heading into the next Olympics. Wouldn’t it be cool if she made the team in her hometown?

The 2012 U.S. Olympic swimming trials in Oklahoma City would only be the greatest thing ever. Maybe it seems like a crazy idea, a far-flung dream.

You know, I bet the folks in Omaha thought the same thing four years ago.

One of my counterparts at The Seattle Times does a fun weekly feature on his blog.

This week, he asked me to be a part.

The subject?

No big surprise — it’s the court case between the City of Seattle and the Sonics’ Oklahoma-based owners.

Here’s the link to Jerry Brewer’s blog, or you can read this week’s edition of the Q&A(rgue) below:

My guest this week is Jenni Carlson, a wonderful sports columnist at The Oklahoman. So, you know what this is about: two sports columnists from dueling cities, fighting till death to protect the places they live.

Well, it won’t be that dramatic.

While Jenni and I have different perspectives on the Sonics situation, we won’t be going to court over them anytime soon. And while we reside in opposing cities, we aren’t shills. I consider it a columnist’s job to write what is in the best interest of his or her city. Sometimes, they are popular opinions. Sometimes, they are not. We go on an issue-by-issue basis.

Enjoy this one. Considering our viewpoints, it should be an enlightening discussion. And, as always, you are welcome to continue the debate on your own in the comments section.

1. Who do you think will win the case over the KeyArena lease? And will that be the right decision?

Brewer: Though I think Sonics attorney Brad Keller has impressed so far by presenting his case more clearly than the Seattle attorneys, I still think the city will win the trial. And, naturally, I think that will be the right decision. When following the trial this week, I have realized how much fat there is around the arguments on both sides, but it still boils down to this for Judge Marsha Pechman: Will she make the Sonics owners obey that vague, one-paragraph “specific performance” clause in the lease? It is a tough call. But I think that Paul Lawrence and Co. have done a good job of showing what the city hoped its lawyers would show: the new owners knew what they were getting into when they bought the team. So, why should they be let off the hook? They understood the KeyArena lease did not run out until 2010. They knew Seattle wanted the team around for the entire lease. There should be no such thing as naivete in mega-million dollar business. A deal is a deal.

Carlson: At the heart of all this craziness, this whole matter is a legal one. The question is, Can the Sonics be held to their lease for two more seasons? And I think if you look at what courts generally do in landlord-tenant cases, you’ll see that they usually rule in favor of the tenant. Basically, the courts aren’t usually in favor of keeping someone somewhere they don’t want to be. That smacks of indentured servitude, not something the courts, or anyone in America, think real highly of. Obviously, though, this is a special case. It’s not like some guy living in a rent house who’s trying to break his lease. It’s a sports franchise that has been in a city for four-plus decades.

At the end of the day, though, I believe the judge will come back to the central question of whether Seattle can hold the Sonics to their lease. And it seems to me that she’ll rule that this tenant cannot be forced to stay.

Will it be the right decision?

In the eyes of the courts and the legal system, probably.

In the eyes of NBA fans, maybe not.

2. Do you buy it when Clay Bennett says his “man possessed” e-mail was about trying to keep the team in Seattle and not moving it to Oklahoma City?

Brewer: Absolutely not. It is ridiculous that he continues to insult our intelligence with this lie. Look at the context of that e-mail. To me, there is no way he could have been referring to Seattle with that phrase. So “I am a man possessed” are words that will remain in Seattle spots ignominy. Perpetuating this myth makes Bennett look like an untrustworthy leader.

Carlson: This is a question I’ve thought a lot about. When I first read the e-mail exchange, I thought he was talking about being a man possessed to move the team to Oklahoma City. But I’ve looked at it the other way, and I could see it being that way, too. E-mail is a funny animal. There is no voice inflection. There is no facial expression. The subtleties of language are often lost in an e-mail. I think everyone out there has written something in an e-mail before that has been misunderstood by the receiver. Maybe you intended something to be funny, and it came across instead as mean. It has
happened to all of us.

That’s why I struggle with the context of that e-mail. I don’t really know what Clay Bennett intended to say in that e-mail, but when it was sent, he was knee-deep in efforts to persuade folks in Seattle and in Washington to get an arena deal done. Perhaps he thought that the other owners knew that and responded in turn. Perhaps not. This is one of those questions that we may never know the true answer.

3. Do you envision any scenario in which the Sonics don’t wind up in Oklahoma eventually? Can pro basketball thrive long term in OKC?

Brewer: The only scenario I can envision is that the team is forced to stay here for two more years and suffers way more than the estimated $30 million per season the Sonics say they will lose if they keep playing in KeyArena. Then the Sonics will have to consider all options to stop the bleeding, and selling the team is something they will have to flirt with. But that’s an incredible long shot. I think the team is gone. The question is whether they will leave now or later.

As far the second question here, I have serious doubts about Oklahoma City’s long-term viability as an NBA market. In the beginning, all will be great. Many Oklahomans will support the team out of novelty and civic pride. But the start is always fun. What happens when the Sonics go 20-62 again? The measure of true fandom is whether you will stay with a team during the rough years. Those years are inevitable in pro sports. We still have so much to learn about this market, so I will remain skeptical until I see otherwise.

That said, however, I have to compliment Oklahoma City for doing what needed to be done to have an NBA team. More than 60 percent of voters approved a $120 million tax package to transform the Ford Center into a more NBA-competitive arena. Before that, the fans were incredible in embracing the displaced Hornets. You look at what that community has done, and you have to think that they deserve a chance to house an NBA team.

It’s just disappointing that the target is Seattle’s team.

Carlson: Right now, it does seem more like a question of “when” rather than “if” with the Sonics moving to Oklahoma City. I don’t believe the owners are going to sell the team, and from all accounts, they are set on moving the team to Oklahoma City.

When that happens, I believe the team will do very well for the first few years. Oklahoma was off-the-charts excited to have an NBA team when the Hornets were here, and that was a team that wasn’t intending on staying. When there’s a team here that is intent on putting down roots and having “Oklahoma City” on its jerseys, I think people are going to buy in even more. Ticket sales should be great, and corporate backing should be strong. Long-term success, though, remains a question. Then again, it is every time a team relocates. I think Oklahoma City will be like every other market. It will support the team to some extent long-term regardless of its success on the court, but if the team really wants strong long-term viability, it needs to have a good product on the court.

It needs to win.

There will be a honeymoon period for several years, but eventually, the team must have consistent success or the fan base won’t be as strong. Then again, I think that’s the case in just about every market out
there.

4. Obviously, this whole situation has turned into an acrimonious mess. Who do you think deserves the most blame?

Brewer: I am not sure that we can put all of this on one person. There are so many villain-types: Howard Schultz, David Stern, Clay Bennett, state lawmakers, the city of Seattle. Some would even include the voters who passed Initiative 91 overwhelmingly. There are no heroes in this situation. There are lots of people who could’ve done more if they truly wanted the team to stay around.

But since Schultz started us down the path to relocation by selling to the Oklahoma group, I give him the biggest share of the blame. If he truly cared about keeping the Sonics here, he would have been more patient and sold the team to a local group. He took the sweetest deal he could find, and now pro basketball in Seattle is on its deathbed.

Carlson: Truthfully, there’s blame that can be placed on everyone involved. I’m most disappointed, though, in government officials in Seattle and in David Stern. I traveled to Seattle in the days after the Oklahoma group bought the Sonics, and even then, I sensed a lack of cooperation from elected officials. There was a feeling of hostility toward the Sonics, and already, I felt like they believed there was nothing to be done to keep the Sonics in town.

Maybe we’re spoiled here in Oklahoma City, but the city, county and state government here get along and work together on issues like this. I didn’t get the sense like that was the case with government officials in Seattle. As for Stern, I really believed that the NBA commissioner would be the mediator in all of this. I thought he would ride in, sit down with Bennett and Nickels and whoever else, and help them strike a deal. Perhaps he would offer to give Seattle the next expansion team. Perhaps he would pledge that Seattle would have another NBA team in five years.

I just honestly believed that Stern would be a unifier in this whole thing, considering the size of the market in Seattle and the gateway it provides to the Asian market that the NBA so strongly wants. Instead, he’s become a very divisive figure. I had hoped for more.

5. For Brewer: What misconceptions do you think Oklahomans have of Seattleites? For Carlson: What misconceptions do you think Seattleites have of Oklahomans?

Brewer: Based on some e-mail interactions I have had with Oklahoma residents, as well as other things I have read, I would say that Oklahomans think people here are arrogant, disrespectful and petty when it comes to slinging stereotypical insults about Oklahoma.

But the average Seattle sports fan is far more intelligent than that. Yes, some scream that the Sonics are about to be stolen by a bunch of hicks. But more people understand all the nuances of this situation. More accept the fact that the opposition was willing to do what Seattle clearly does not want to do: Fund another palace for millionaire sports owners. They want the Sonics to stay here, but not at that price. And if Oklahoma City is willing to pay it, so be it. Seattle will get over it. I think that is the prevailing attitude.

There is ill will toward Clay Bennett for being the face of this ownership group. There is a level of ignorance about Oklahoma. But the majority of fans around here have nothing against Oklahoma.

Carlson: I’m sure there are broad misconceptions on both sides. Oklahoma has long had a stigma that dates back to “The Grapes of Wrath” days, but the truth is, Oklahoma is a place that is changing for the better. I moved to Oklahoma nine years ago, and it isn’t the same place today. There is a vibrancy and an energy that wasn’t here then. There are more jobs opportunities, more cultural opportunities, more opportunities all around.

Many of my friends here are people who moved to Oklahoma from other places. When they did, they didn’t foresee themselves staying here for long. But now, they are putting down roots and thinking about starting families here. They see Oklahoma City as a place with many of the big-city benefits without many of the big-city pitfalls. The crime rate is low. The cost of living is low. And you don’t spend four hours sitting in traffic every day.

I’ve talked to many people in Oklahoma City who like the fact that outsiders don’t know just how good a place this is to live. Funny thing is, I’ve heard a lot of people from Seattle say the same thing.

Rick Gandy was hardly a household name throughout Oklahoma.

Head down to the southern part of the state, venture into small towns where the Friday night lights blaze like prairie fires, and Gandy was a legend. He grew up in tiny Ringling, then stayed in tiny Ringling where he built a football giant. The small-class football team won two state titles and 242 games under Gandy’s leadership. In 28 seasons, the Blue Devils missed the playoffs just twice.

Along the way, he molded the lives of generation after generation in Ringling.

His lessons were never more poignant than these past few years. Three years ago this February, Gandy was thrown from a horse while riding on the family farm. The fall left him paralyzed and wheelchair-bound.

It didn’t keep him from coaching football or from molding lives.

Rick Gandy died Monday afternoon. The 59-year-old had a long battle with pneumonia and complications from his paralysis.

I had the good fortune of meeting Gandy a few years ago after his accident. His body was broken, but his spirit was not. He still talked to his players. He still met with his coaches. He even talked of the day when he would walk again, leading his team into the field for a game.

He molded lives even though he couldn’t stand on his own.

Rick Gandy might not be a recognizable name to you, but you’d better believe that he will be missed. He was a great coach but an even better man.

We all lose when someone like Rick Gandy passes away. 

What could be better than Danica Patrick in “The Q&A”?

How about Danica Patrick talking about pedicures in “The Q&A”?

Here’s the uncut version of my conversation with the IndyCar star:

Jenni Carlson: Fess up — how sick were you of the all the no-wins talk before this season?

Danica Patrick: On a scale of one to 10, I was an 11. But what am I going to do about it? It’s not like I could push a button and make it happen, so I definitely had to ride that out. You just have to know what you can do. You have to believe in your own abilities. Then, the rest of it is just talk.

JC: You got kind of emotional after you scored that first win earlier this season in Japan.

DP: It was necessarily just from winning a race; that’s the sort of thing I expect to do. But I don’t want to cry. You don’t see guys going to victory lane and crying, but I don’t think many people have had to deal with the sort of questions, the repetitive questions. The emotion was really tied to how long that haul was to get there and not just for the win but because of what the win meant and what led up to it.

JC: Do you feel like you’ve faced more scrutiny because of your gender?

DP: You know, the microscope is a little bit bigger. You do well, people notice, and when you don’t do well, people notice. I was always so flattered that people kept asking me when I was going to win. I was frustrated, don’t get me wrong, but the bright side I saw to it was that the still believed I could or they wouldn’t be asking.

JC: Who are the people you think about in those moments after getting that checkered flag on your first win?

DP: The most common denominator in everything has always been my family, so you think about them and you think about how long the haul was. Then you think about your team and how much faith they’ve had in you. I remember seeing Mike (Andretti) afterwards, and he looked like he had a little tear in his eye. I know that’s something he really wanted to happen. He believed in his team, and he believed in me, and he thought, “You put those two together, and we will make some history. We will get to victory lane.” To see that follow through, to see that come true, it was a rewarding feeling.

JC: Tell me about your role models, those people who you looked up to along the way.

DP: I didn’t really have idols or anything like that. I had people that I learned from, but I think always subconsciously I knew I was different. I always wanted to be the first Danica, not the next whoever else. I never really wanted to be like anybody else. I wanted to achieve a lot as some people had, but I just never really had a mold for what I wanted.

JC: It’s interesting because a lot of people now point to you as a role model.

DP: It’s very flattering. The first thought that comes to my head is, “Want to be better than me. You need to want to be the best. You need to want to be better than everyone else.” Sometimes, kids have been like, “I want to be like you.” I’m like, “You want to be better than me, don’t you?” As much as I don’t want to be outdone, I want people to believe they can be the best. That’s how you’re going to follow through with it. That’s how you’re going to get there. When I say to these kids, “Dream big,” I really mean that. I even ask my friends … “If you could do anything in your life, what would you do? Then, try to do it.”

JC: Are you any more mindful of little girls when it comes to being a role model?

DP: They’re so impressionable. They’re so raw. They’ll sit next to you, and they’ll be like, “You’re pretty.” They’re like, “You’re short.” They’re just so innocent and real, and so if you are unable to sign something for them or don’t take the time, they’re going to remember that possibly their favorite driver didn’t have time for them. If I’m really busy, I’ll only sign for the kids.

JC: I was looking at your website. The first photo is you, racing helmet, blue dress, black nails. I gotta ask — are you a girlie girl?

DP: (Laughs.) I’m really pretty feminine. I enjoy being a girl. I like to go get my nails done. I like to go shopping and dress up. I do enjoy all that. My favorite part of a photo shoot is hair and makeup. I think that’s a fun part about me and probably an unexpected part. In the race car, I’m very tough and moody, and I don’t wear makeup and I don’t care, and my hair’s all over the place. It’s just not what matters. But when I go away from the car … I’m still that same tough person, but I look out for my friends and I’m always having the newest fashions. That side of me is pretty different.

JC: Gotta tell you, best part of the pedicure is the foot massage.

DP: I like when they scrub my feet. I work them to death. They need a little bit of tough love.

JC: Being a celeb, you get a leg up on the sales at the stores and the deals, right?

DP: You would think that, but not so much.

JC: No?

DP: Pretty much every outfit except for one or two things that I’ve worn on TV have been from my own closet, bought at full-price. I know what looks good on me, and I’m very picky with my clothes.

JC: We need to get someone to work with you, though, on that discount celebrity thing, don’t we?

DP: I’m lucky enough that I do get sent certain things. But normally … I’m on the road. For me to get a box of clothes the week before is impossible. I have to stockpile dresses. My husband is like, “How many dresses do you need?” I need ‘em when I need ‘em. When you want one, you can’t find one.

JC: Last question — you said earlier that you ask your friends, “If you could do anything, what would you do?” So let me ask you, if you could do anything, what would you do?

DP: At the moment, win races, win championships, be dominant. I would love to be in that position. I’d love to be doing what Scott Dixon’s doing right now. But in the long-term, I’d love to have some sort of a clothing line and go to fashion week all over the world and have a hand in designing. And I’d love to own a winery. That would be a lot of fun.

JC: You are a girlie girl.

DP: Yeah, well, like I said, you’ve gotta dream big, right?

It’s summer, my friends.

Time for a little fun.

Watch my latest video commentary or read below:

I’ve never been to Vegas. It’s not that I dislike it. I’ve just never made the trip.

Now, I’m tempted.

Next weekend is the third annual USARPS League Championship Tournament.

You know, the USA Rock Paper Scissors League.

And yes, we are talking about the kids’ game where you pound your fist on your palm three times, then make either rock, paper or scissors.

I kid you not, my cyberspace friends. I don’t know what’s funnier — that there’s a Rock Paper Scissors League or that the league has a championship tournament in Vegas.

Here is a bit from the league about the upcoming tournament: “More than 300 RPS athletes representing all corners of America will descent on Las Vegas … in the hopes of roshamboing their way to the $50,000 grand prize.”

You heard right — $50,000 goes to the winner.

But wait, there’s more.

The winner will also be flown to Beijing later this summer to represent the U.S. Apparently, the U.S. winner will square off against folks from Ireland, Canada, Hong Kong and Guam in the International Rock Paper Scissors Federation Championship.

The best part of this whole story is that competitors are known to wear crazy costumes in hopes of psyching out their competition. Some have dressed as warriors. Others have dressed as cavemen.

Honestly, this might be a strategy that other sports should think about adopting. What if Kobe Bryant showed up with warrior paint all over his face? Or if Tiger Woods wore only a loin cloth the next time he played? If it works for Rock Paper Scissors players, it would surely work for them.

And according to the World Rock Paper Scissors Society, there are actually strategies and techniques. They even have terms for them. One is blocking. That means you hold back a throw of paper until the last possible moment duping your opponent into believing you’re throwing a rock.

Ha! And you thought Rock Paper Scissors was just some kids game!

The USARPS League Championship hits Vegas next weekend.

Eat your heart out, Wayne Newton.

Turns out, the Lakers aren’t dead yet.

Doesn’t mean they’ll win the series, though.

The Celtics are still my favorite to win the NBA Finals. I picked them during the first round, and I’m sticking with them even after the Lakers won Game 3 on Tuesday.

Here’s why: the power of three.

There are lots of ways to build successful basketball teams, but the best formula for winning a championship is having three go-to players. The Celtics have Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen. Sure, the Lakers have Kobe Bryant, one of the best players to ever walk planet earth, and Pau Gasol, one of the nicest gifts to ever be given from one NBA team to another, but they don’t have that third star.

Lamar Odom has moments when he’s great, but he’s still too sporadic to be considered a go-to player. Derek Fisher is a nice player and an even nicer person, but he doesn’t have that go-to quality either.

The Celtics have three legitimate stars, which takes pressure off of them and puts it squarely on opponents.

The power of three is nothing new in our neck of the woods. The last Oklahoma State men’s basketball team to make it to the Final Four had Tony Allen, John Lucas and Joey Graham. The last Oklahoma men’s team to make it had Aaron McGhee, Hollis Price and Ebi Ere.

Even when the gender changes, the power of three still holds. When the Oklahoma women went to the Final Four a few years back, they had Stacey Dales, LaNeishea Caufield, Rosalind Ross and Caton Hill. I’ll leave it up to you to decide who the best three were.

Honestly, the most important thing is having at least three go-to players. More is great, though it can become a little more challenging for a coach who has to manage minutes and balance scoring. But those are challenges that you accept.

Three is the minimum.

Three is the magic number.

That’s why I like the Celtics in the NBA Finals. A few days ago in a video commentary, I predicted that the Celtics would sweep. OK, so that isn’t going to happen, but it’s difficult to think that the Celtics won’t win this series. They don’t have the best player in the series, but they have three very good ones. There is great power in that, and for the Celtics, that means they have a great chance of winning a title.

There’s plenty of unsavory stuff in sports.

But the annual scholar-athlete awards presented by The Oklahoman and the Jim Thorpe Association count as some of the good stuff. There are no messy scandals. There are no seedy situations. There are only kids who have struck an amazing balance between athletics and academics.

Watch my latest video commentary or read below:

Year after year, envelope after envelope, the amazing resumes flood my mailbox every spring.

As the coordinator of the high school scholar-athlete awards presented by The Oklahoman and the Jim Thorpe Association, I have a chance to see every nomination. I marvel at the awesome performances in athletics and the amazing accomplishments in academics.

You’d think I’d get used to it.

Hasn’t happened yet.

On Sunday, we will reveal this year’s crop of scholar-athletes. These are the best and the brightest in the Oklahoma City area. And they will amaze you.

After being involved with the scholar-athlete program for several years, I am mindful not only of what these young men and women have done but also what they will do. These past few years, we have had Ivy Leaguers and Big 12 champions, even a Sooner quarterback who you might’ve heard about. But now, we’ve got college graduates, too. Four years ago was the first time we awarded scholar-athletes the way we do now, with an overall boys and girls winner. Traci Rohde from Community Christian School and Michael Gibson from Tuttle were the winners that year. Now, Traci is a graduate of Stephen F. Austin getting ready to start on her master’s and Michael is an alumni of Princeton.

By the way, you can hear more about all of our past winners on Sunday by going to NEWSOK.com and clicking on our special scholar-athlete page.

For as accomplished as Traci and Michael continue to be, their successes are likely mirrored by many of the young men and women who have been scholar-athletes over these past few years.

Who knows what might become of this year’s group? They could become doctors or teachers or leaders, coaches or stars or even Olympians.

Sometimes we wonder about the value of sports. What do they really matter? What purpose do they really serve? In these scholar-athletes, we should be reminded that sports teach valuable lessons that can apply to all areas of life. Hard work. Focus. Dedication. Those skills are just as important in chemistry lab or English class as they are on the football field or basketball court.

Great athletes can be great students, too.

So, who’s the best of the best this year? You’ll have to check out The Oklahoman or NEWSOK.com on Sunday to find out for sure, but I can promise you this — you won’t be disappointed.

They will amaze you.

No doubt the Celtics-Lakers series has a storied history.

There’s no one better to give us a look back into that history than Jim Murray. The Pulitzer Prize-winning sports columnist died several years ago, but the Jim Murray Memorial Foundation re-issued one of his columns about the Celtics from 1987.

Read and enjoy:

THURSDAY, MAY 28, 1987, SPORTS
Copyright 1987/THE TIMES MIRROR COMPANY

JIM MURRAY

Never mind the numbers, I don’t make the Boston Celtics any better than the fourth-best team in basketball. If that.

*Reprinted with permission by the Los Angeles Times.

College softball has suffered a huge loss.

Plus, a video commentary first — fun sound effects. You won’t want to miss it.

Watch my latest video commentary or read below, though you’ll have to watch the video to get the sound effects:

After a baker’s dozen games at the Women’s College World Series, a disturbing trend has emerged.

Shorts are dead in softball!

Used to be, just about every softball team that came to Oklahoma City to play for a national championship did so wearing shorts. They would wear shorts that fell just above the knee with stirrup socks that stretched all the way to the knee. It was a fun look, a different look, a look that set softball apart from baseball.

Teams that wore pants were oddities.

Now, short-wearing teams are the odd ducks.

You had to be paying close attention this week during the Women’s College World Series to find a team even wearing shorts. Through four days, only Louisiana-Lafayette sported shorts and the Rajun Cajuns only did so once. They went with pants in their other two games.

I don’t know why, but I found myself lamenting the loss of shorts in softball. Just maybe it felt a little bit like softball was trying to look more like baseball.

Boy, would that be a bad idea.

Softball is a fun, vibrant sport that is growing by leaps and bounds. People love the energy and the enthusiasm. They love the way the game is played. Heck, spend a few minutes listening to John Kruk on the ESPN broadcasts, and he’ll sound like Shakespeare waxing poetic about how softball is played the baseball should be.

Softball needs to keep its unique identity, and how the players look is a part of that.

But you can say this much for the gals, at least they wear their pants the right way. See, I’m a big advocate of the old-school, pants-to-the-knees, stirrup-socks-from-there look. It’s crisp. It’s sharp.

And it’s completely dead in baseball.

These days, the last thing a baseball uniform is, is uniform. You’ll see guys with pants to their knees, pant that go all the way to their shoe tops, baggy pants, tight pants. And they’ll all be on the same team.

The guys need to take a fashion tip from the gals. Then again, when is that not true?

Softball knows how pants should be worn, but that doesn’t mean they should always wear them.

Bring back the shorts, softball. It was distinctive. It was fun. It was one more reason to love this sport.