Setting it straight with Scott Drew
Had a pleasant chat with Baylor men’s basketball coach Scott Drew early Thursday afternoon, which is not big news. Drew has always been pleasant with media.
But this was the first time I spoke with Drew since the Big 12 Tournament in Oklahoma City last March, when I wrote Baylor was “widely considered the worst-coached team in the league.”
Drew sent an e-mail with his phone number around noon on Thursday. I immediately called back.
We started out with small talk. Drew asked about the Thunder, the NBA draft, how long I had covered the Big 12, et al. I asked him if he was still in the running for undeclared high school recruit John Wall.
We meandered our way to the reason Drew wanted to talk, which was my March 14 column, the gist of which was to welcome Baylor basketball to the 2008-09 season with “Where the heck you been?”
A preseason pick to finish tied for third in the Big 12, the Bears had finished ninth with a 5-11 record (one game ahead of Iowa State). They came alive in the conference tournament, advanced to the Big 12 title game against Missouri and went on to finish as the NIT runner-up.
Other than three middle paragraphs criticizing Drew, the 23-paragraph column was extremely positive about Baylor and its players. As is always the case, however, folks remember only the negative.
I explained my side. Drew gave his side. No raised voices. No threats. No cheap shots. A completely civil 10-minute exchange.
I reaffirmed my belief that Baylor had underachieved during the regular season and 2008-09 was an opportunity lost. I also admitted to Drew I was heavyhanded with my words and could have articulated my opinion much differently. He said he appreciated those thoughts and asked if I had any particular questions about his team.
In my column, I wrote Baylor started playing better toward the end of the season probably because Drew started doing less coaching. Drew said the opposite was true. The Bears were far more structured and ran multiple offensive sets toward the end of the season. Why not take that approach earlier in the season? “Because we were 15-3 and things seemed to be working pretty good,” Drew explained.
I asked why guard Curtis Jerrells, who I thought was headed for the NBA, might not even be drafted. Drew said the 6-foot-1 Jerrells has long been considered a tweener. Is he a point guard or shooting guard? I vote shooting guard.
I asked what was in store for power forward Kevin Rogers, who had flashes of brilliance. Drew said Rogers needed to improve on his toughness and envisioned him playing overseas.
Drew did not ask for an apology or a retraction, nor did he ask for my boss’ phone number. He simply said he was glad we had the chance to chat.
Drew mentioned that Baylor fans and his family were surprised a writer in a tournament’s host city would write something so negative. I told Drew the same thing I tell everyone when they are angered with my viewpoint — take it out on me, don’t take it out on the state. Don’t let something I wrote make you think less of Oklahoma.
With that, we said our good-byes and Drew wished me a good summer.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Wish you would have mentioned they finished 5-9 with a gift call in the last second against OSU or they would have finished 4-10. I wonder if John Pelphrey over at Arkansas is as sensitive as Drew is after a similar season. The season is what it is and I’m happy Baylor got it together and played well the last 9 games of the year. But the question has to be asked as to what the heck happened the 14 games before that. Glad your conversation was civil.
[...] VizWorld.com placed an interesting blog post on Setting it straight with Scott DrewHere’s a brief overviewDrew since the Big 12 Tournament in Oklahoma City last March, when I … I also admitted to Drew I was heavyhanded with my words and could have [...]
Nice fair article John Rohde, both of them. I agree that Baylor underachieved in the Big 12 regular season but they redeemed themselves in my eyes in the Big 12 tourney and in the NIT. I was very proud of the way they played after the end of the regular season. Scott Drew sounds like quite the stand up good guy and this article makes me think much higher of him, not that I thought poorly of him before; I just didn’t think about him. The article makes me think more highly of John Rohde also for standing up for his comments and not backing down, and then writing a nice follow-up about a class act coach. Thanks also to John for asking folks not to hold any animosity toward the State of Oklahoma. Excellent job Mr. Rohde. I’m proud of you too.
The difference in this article and the original is that the original was piling on to a far more dubious article (i.e. hit piece) ran by Rick Barnes (not a typo) in the New York Times. Shame on John Rohde for the original article, and kudos to Scott Drew for turning the other cheek. He is and has always been a first class coach.
So you wrote a pathetic article with backhanded compliments and showed the type of person you are. He writes a civil email, and speaks to you cordially and kindly after you insulted him and his team. All the while you are trying to catch on to the NY Times article that criticizes Baylor and possibly get yourself some notoriety. I am sure you were hoping for the “I am a man, I am 40″ speech and you were sadly disappointed. The reason people think less of Oklahoma is because of the Oklahoman.
let’s pat john on the back for at least trying to do the right thing, and leave it at that. I don’t know a single Baylor fan that would tell you they didn’t underachieve. No argument there.
But you don’t win ANY tournament if you’re truly “the worst coach in your league”.
If the Daily Oklahoman wants people in the blogosphere to treat it’s writers’ with respect, then it’s standard of journalism needs to be higher than tabloid sensationalism.
Maybe the fact that you thought Jerrells was a draft pick and he apparently isn’t, actually speaks less to Jerrells’ ability and more to your incompetence at scouting players. Probably why you write about basketball rather than work in basketball.
I think it is fair to observe that Baylor underachieved during a mid season slump. And it is certainly fair, even important to ask why.
The answer is clear to experienced fans of schools who are not among the sainted elect. Baylor got raped by officiating that was part of a system clearly designed to maximize TV revenues by keeping schools like OU and UT on top. If you don’t believe it, look at the film. This was far from aberration. OU and UT consistently get the benefit of very biased officiating. And schools like Baylor, who cash the big checks, play along.
Sour grapes? I wish. Drew and his team answered the questions about coaching and talent once they got to the tournaments where officiating for whatever reason is usually reasonably unbiased. It was the difference, not coaching. Schools like UT and OU make their living by having the conference and NCAA promote them,untalented media hacks like Rhode do their dirty work, and by administration that more resembles the WWW than to any legitimate enterprise.
Rhode is an embarassment to legitimate journalism and insofar as he is employed by The Oklahoman, is a blight on the State. When coach Drew comes along and isn’t defeated by the machinations of the system, it upsets those who make their living by them. People like Rick Barnes and John Rhode. If it weren’t true, Rhodes would be selling newspapers on a street corner instead of cluttering their pages.
I head Rhode accuse Scott Drew of cheating a few months ago on Al Eschbach’s show on the Sports Animal. When Al asked how he cheated, the only thing Rhode was able to say was, “I don’t know, I’ve just heard things.” Really? Well if you can’t produce any facts don’t go on a regional radio show and accuse people of cheating. Rhode is not a sports journalist, he’s similar to a tabloid writer. The only positive thing I can say about him is this: at least he’s not Barry Trammel.
Plagerizing names is very illegal, but “Blake Griffen” is awful. Don’t write something you are afraid to attach your name to. If the paper in question is a “rag”, then why is your writing so much better?
OU and Texas are getting edgy at Scott Drew’s & Baylor’s basketball recruiting successes in recent years. In spite of some reverses this year, Baylor is catching up across the board–and not with state/taxpayer money since Baylor is the only private school in the Big12. The Oklahoman and the Austin American Statesman are getting involved in the recruiting battles with their overt critical articles about Baylor and Drew filled with petty and unsubstantiated gossip and implication. When Baylor does well in any sport, the AAS notes it with as tiny an article as possible even though Austin is the state capital and untold numbers of Baylor grads live and work in Austin. TO does the same with OSU. In both cases, both newspapers exhibit little town attitudes & an abject lack of professionalism. It is as if the two papers were little town and little time. Conversely, when any Big 12 team–including Baylor’s most disliked opponents (Texas, A&M & OU)–does well, the Waco Tribune Herald touts it with just plain old professionalism and conference pride. I liken the AAS and TO to Rush Limbaugh or Bill O’Reilly insofar as journalistic honesty and intellectual integrity is concerned. I liken little old Waco Tribune Herald to Walter Cronkite or Tom Brokaw in those categories. What’s the deal Rohde? Get good or step aside and let a real professional have your spot at TO. That goes for the sports editor at the AAS as well!
Coach Drew needs to realize there is no reason to take anything that anyone at this rag says seriously. I have yet to find one person in Oklahoma that does, so why should he. This paper consistently makes errors ragarding the “facts” in their stories, and fails to proof their stories prior to posting them (See the article where in they called Brandon Pettigrew Scott Pettigrew).