Innocent But Proven Guilty

The revelations of the NCAA's sanctions against Penn State for its covering up of Jerry Sandusky's child molestation during his tenure there sparked widespread debate in the sports world. Typically, we see college teams penalized for allowing boosters (Miami), turning a blind eye while players sell their merchandise for other goods (Ohio State) and improper use of scholarship funds (USC). Never in the existence of the NCAA and its bylaws have we seen a team penalized for such an action that deviates so markedly from the field of play. That is not to say that these penalties were necessarily unwarranted or unjust. In fact, most onlookers would tend to agree that Penn State got what it deserved for harboring such a vicious monster in Jerry Sandusky and looking the other way while he ruined the lives of countless children.
But the penalties do raise a remarkably important debate. Where do we draw the line in terms of penalties from the NCAA and society in general? Given that this was the first crime of its kind that we've seen in college sports, it necessitates extenuating circumstances. Thus was the reason for NCAA President Mark Emmert acting so swiftly in deciding penalties for the Penn State football program after the conviction of Sandusky. Penn State willfully accepted each and every one of the sanctions against them and did not argue any of their points. While the same cannot be said for the beleaguered Paterno family, Penn State understood the wrongs that it had committed and allowed the NCAA to lay down the law.
Just to recap, the penalties, severe as they are, include a 4 year ban on bowl and championship games, a loss of 20 scholarships per year (85 to 65), a $60 million fine (about half of the program's overall revenue per year) and the vacation of ALL wins by the program dating back to 1998. In addition, all players are free to transfer to alternate football programs throughout the country without any penalty. These penalties do seem to be more severe (on the surface at least) compared to the so called "death penalty" that the NCAA is also equipped with. The "death penalty", thought to be the most severe and crushing penalty that a college team may receive includes a 2 year suspension of the school's specific sports program. In other words, had Penn State received this "death penalty", they would be forced to suspend all college football activity for a minimum of 2 years. Now contrast the death penalty with the sanctions that Penn State received. Which seems worse? Clearly, the penalties Mike Emmert decided on are remarkably harsher and more substantial and have a deeper and longer impact on the program and the school at large.
Fair as the penalties may appear, there is just cause to argue that they may be unwarranted. Consider head coach Bill O'Brien, his staff, and the players on his roster. Not one of them have any connection to the days of Paterno and Sandusky. Not one of them witnessed any of the crimes committed by Sandusky and more importantly, not one of them committed a crime. All remnants of the ugliness surrounding Sandusky are far removed from Penn State and its football program. In essence, the school has tried to dissociate any connections or links it may have had by getting rid of all people involved in the scandal. By moving in this direction, the school has attempted to repaint its previously tattered image by introducing a new and polished version of its athletics department and its university at large.
But here raises the important question that Emmert and the NCAA will struggle to answer. How do we properly punish the Penn State program for its coverup while also allowing for some room to breath? Granted, we know that a penalty must be handed down. And given the severity of the crime committed, the penalty must be severe. But consider the football futures of the players who bear no responsibility for these crimes. While it's nice and great that they're allowed to transfer, there's no guarantee that they can transfer. Just because they're coming from Penn State does not instantly mean that D-1 schools will be chomping at the bit for their football services. Consider the players on scholarship. Transferring schools or programs could mean loss of scholarship and could also lead to an inability to afford the pleasures of being able to play for a noted college football program. We know that the previous staff deserve blame. But do the current players deserve blame too? I understand hitting them where it hurts most. Their pockets. But denying innocent and talented athletes a chance to live out the full college football experience? That part does not seem right.
Don't get me wrong. Penn State football will recover. But when? Clearly the next 4 years will be marked with hardship. Will O'Brien be able to convince recruits to come in despite no clear objective for their future? And current players? Sure they'll still be able to showcase their talents to NFL teams and play in front of thousands of fans every week but any player currently on the team will never get to experience the benefits of a bowl game, the honor of playing in a league championship and the ability to declare themselves national champions. Ever. If you were a recruit from 1, 2, 3 or 4 years ago being looked at by Penn State and its scouts, would you ever consider their program given their penalties? I guarantee that recruits would choose to look elsewhere. Let's just make one thing clear. I applaud Mike Emmert and his ability to act swiftly in punishing the actions of Penn State. I agree (mostly) with the sanctions he extended to Penn State. The financial penalties do fit the crime as the lost revenue will be spread to organizations that benefit children and protect them against sexual predators like Jerry Sandusky. But the penalties that directly affect the players? Let's take a step back on that one if we can. If a man killed another man and was prosecuted for it, would you then also prosecute the aggressor's kin years later? So to is the issue facing Emmert and the NCAA. Do we punish the direct kin of Penn State who came after the fact in regards to Jerry Sandusky's crimes? Using the previous example, most if not all people would probably give a resounding "no" as their response. So why are we punishing the future kin of Penn State by not allowing its football program to essentially function as a normal team for  at least the next 4 years? Clearly there is no easy way to imagine a proper penalty for the program that keeps the current players safe while also penalizing the past. Does the penalty fit the crime? Sure. But does the penalty fit all those who are affected by the sanctions? That answer is not so clear.
Nevertheless, the penalties are already set in stone and accepted so there is no reversing the NCAA's decision against Penn State. My message to Emmert and the NCAA is simply this: Keep in mind the innocent lives you are impacting with this decision. Penalize but penalize correctly. And don't let the innocent be proven guilty. Not without a fair trial.

Money is an Object

If you know James Dolan, you know that he oozes with money. He's the kind of rich that can lose $100 million in one day and still be considered a billionaire. He's the kind of rich that has money in so many different places that he's even unsure of where it all is. James Dolan, as most if not every NBA fan knows, is the controversial owner of the New York Knicks (as well as the New York Rangers, WNBA Liberty and AHL Connecticut Whale). As the CEO of Cablevision, one of the largest cable, internet and phone providers in the USA and Executive Chairman of Madison Square Garden, the home of the New York Knicks, Dolan clearly has an incredible amount of sway in a various number of markets. Yet, his tenure as owner of the Knicks has been remarkably controversial. Since losing to the Spurs in the NBA Finals in 1999, the Knicks have had just one winning season and only one playoff win. They also overloaded themselves with a number of unpopular contracts including a $100 million max deal for an aging Allan Houston back in 2001 (he would fail to complete the contract due to injury), a 5 year $50 million deal for then coach Larry Brown who would last just one season after a 23-59 record and earn himself an $18 million buyout and most notoriously, giving enemy #1 Isiah Thomas a much undesired multiyear deal as dual general manager and head coach. I won't go into the grisly details but suffice to say it took years for fans to get over the shortcomings of Thomas and his questionable coaching and managerial decisions. Never mind that Thomas was likely only on staff because of his close ties with Dolan. Thomas' tenure as GM left the Knicks with such a bloated team salary that it took subsequent GM Donnie Walsh nearly three years just for the Knicks to be able to afford max level contracts and turn the team around. Nevertheless, during those tumultuous years when Thomas was the helm, Dolan appeared to approve of all his free agent signings and trades despite the impact of the fan base. If not for the remarkably outspoken New York fan base, we'd likely still see Thomas working in some official capacity with the team (he probably still secretly is). But why would any owner in their right mind allow their GM to make such boneheaded moves and inflate the team's salary by such an incredible amount? Beside the fact that Dolan loves Thomas for some unspecified reason, he also does not mind spending the money. When a NBA team goes over the specified salary cap, as the Knicks were doing for many years under Thomas, the owner is required to pay a luxury tax for every dollar over the hard tax line. So for example, if the Knicks salary was at $95 Million as it was in Thomas' last year, Dolan would be required to pay on the dollar for every amount over the specified tax line which changes according to the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Let's just say that for Dolan and the Knicks, that added up to a lot of money that he was "forced" to pay for the penalty of going over the tax amount. But now Thomas is gone (as is Walsh) and we were to believe that Dolan had come to his senses. Boy, were we wrong.
This past season was one of the most exciting in recent Knicks memory. Aside from it being Carmelo Anthony's first full season (despite injury) and the team winning it's first playoff game in over a decade, it also gave rise to the greatest phenomenon the NBA has seen in this century. That phenomenon was Jeremy Lin. Lin, a tossed around player who could never find solid ground as a roster mainstay on any previous NBA team he was a part of, was finally given a chance under then coach Mike D'Antoni with the frequent struggles of Toney Douglas. Playing under an non-guaranteed contract and simply trying to earn his way onto the team, Lin put the Knicks on a wild ride of remarkable success and the now branded "Linsanity." In the 35 games that Lin played and 25 that he started, he averaged 14.6 points, 6.2 assists, 3 rebounds and 1.6 steals per game. He also set the record for most points scored over his first five career starts with 131, breaking the previous mark set by future Hall of Famer Shaquille O'Neal. He also became one of 15 players since 1985 to average 20 points and 7 assists per game in six straight games, including his namesake among such greats as Michael Jordan, Allen Iverson and LeBron James. But most importantly, he turned the Knicks season around at a time when the fanbase began to doubt the abilities of the team to survive without a solid point guard. Lin would be unable to complete the season due to a leg injury but the impact he made on the team, the city and the league was unprecedented. Lin was the first Asian or Taiwanese-American to ever make such an impact on the game. Merchandise sales spiked to record levels. His jersey became a top seller almost instantly and most importantly, James Dolan's MSG stock grew to record levels in a very short time. In a word, the impact of Lin was unmistakable. He had changed the scope of how teams scout their developmental players and challenged the notion that Asian-Americans couldn't cut it in the league. The New York Times even doted him the most important player of the decade despite his short stint as a player. He made the cover of Sports Illustrated not once, but two consecutive times. All this with an non-guaranteed contract and the weight of world on his shoulders.
Of course, life isn't always so peachy. Especially for Knick fans. The Knicks would hit a roadblock when tension between Anthony and D'Antoni led to his resignation from the team and the promotion of Woodson as head coach. While D'Antoni was remarkably high on Lin's ability as a starter on his team, Woodson seemed less confident. Despite the fact that the Knicks would finish out the season 18-6 under Woodson, Lin missed a number of those games, including the playoffs, recovering from his leg injury. Given that the Knicks still shined under Woodson (mostly due to Carmelo's resurgence as a star player), it began to seem unlikely that Woodson really valued Lin as the future of his team. While Lin fit well into D'Antoni's speedball offense, Woodson's game plan of more stagnant ball movement seemed less suited for Lin's style of play. With the season over and the Knicks looking to make as much of a splash in free agency as they could despite their salary cap restrictions, Woodson and even GM Glen Grunwald frequently referred to Lin as the PG for the upcoming season. Lin, as an restricted free agent, was free to take offer sheets from any interested teams. The Knicks, due to their salary restrictions were only able to offer Lin up to around 24 million over 4 years. However, they were able to match any offer sheet to Lin due to his victory in the Early Bird Rights case. What this essentially meant was that the Knicks could let the market dictate Lin's next contract and they would be able to match any amount without it affecting the salary cap. The "rub" however was that it would put the Knicks well over the tax limit and cost Dolan a substantial amount of money in 2014-2015 when the poison pill of Lin's 3 year $25 million contract offered by GM Daryl Morey and the Rockets kicked in. With a $15 million salary in the third year, the Knicks would be forced to pay over $35 million in tax dollars. Clearly, that amount would give any person a clear pause. But as we'd seen with the tax dollars handed out in the past by Dolan, the rational Knick fan would assume that this contract would be no problem and the tax penalty would be an afterthought. Also, given sources that claimed the Knicks would match "up to a billion dollars" on Lin and head coach Mike Woodson going so far as to say that Lin would "absolutely be the Knicks starting point guard", the matching of Lin's deal from the Rockets seemed to be a sure bet. However, the original offer sheet was a 4 year $28 million offer sheet that did not put the Knicks at such financial instability later on in the contract. Just last week, Lin went back to the Rockets and they chose (within their rights of course) to alter the deal to a 3 year $25 million offer sheet to try and persuade the Knicks not to match. Well, the alteration of the offer sheet bothered Dolan so much to the point that despite his excess of money, he found it offensive that Lin could go back and demand such an amount of money. In essence, one of the richest men in New York City was explicitly saying that he could not afford such a contract. The same guy who could afford to drop $100 million in a New York minute was on the record for claiming inability to afford a $25 million contract. Of course that did not include the estimated $35 million tax hit in 3 years time. Nevertheless, for such a free spending billionaire, the decision was markedly perplexing.
For Knick fans especially, considering that this was the same guy who had allowed the team salary to balloon to $117 million just in 2006, the decision did not make much sense. Lin is perhaps the most marketable player the Knicks have ever gotten their hands on. The merchandise sales alone would likely have been able to cover the tax penalty Dolan would have faced. That's not even including the spike in media dollars, marketing dollars and ticket sales. Lin would have grown the MSG stock to unspeakable numbers. Just look at the stock now with him off the team (and it's been less than 24 hours). Dolan had led fans to believe that the Knicks were headed in the right path towards finally reaching the stardom and success we had been promised of when Amar'e Stoudemire joined the team as its first big name free agent in the post Isiah Thomas era. Instead, we the fans are left shaking our heads and wondering just how this turn of events came to be. Despite all the assurances from the Knicks staff that we had finally found the last crucial piece towards contending for an NBA title and challenging the Heat and Bulls, we are instead left wondering what could have been and what will be with an overaged Jason Kidd and out of shape Raymond Felton at the helm. There are always positives and negatives to every decision a team makes regarding a player. In a basketball sense, Lin had shown, despite his short stint, that he would be able to handle the full time duties as the starting PG. Even though his workmanship with Anthony had been suspect, it was nothing that couldn't have been mended and fixed over time. In a financial sense, it was an incredible amount to spend for a player who had only given the league just a short sample of his basketball abilities. With no guarantee that he would be able to emulate those types of statistics again, it was obviously a risk to commit so much money to something that wasn't a sure thing. Consider Jerome James and Jalen Rose for size. Maybe Dolan did not want to suffer from those same dreadful mistakes he had made just a little time ago. But for us the fans that could never be a justifiable reason. As witness to Lin's breakout game against the Nets back in February, I had never seen the Garden so alive and so encapsulated by such an unknown figure. The instant fame and notoriety that Lin achieved was unprecedented and truly historic. And for the first time in quite awhile, the Knicks were in the driver's seat in determining a potential star's future. For a man who frequently gave off the notion that money was no object, Dolan quickly reversed that idea by declining to match the Rockets' offer. And by declining to match an offer that the fans truly believed was no object to his massive fortune, he may have just cost himself the greatest casino chip in sports history. While I will still support the team because of my undying support for the Knicks, the same cannot be said for the millions of fans who hung on to every single Lin movement. If this were a poker table, it's the equivalent of James Dolan folding a royal flush with all his money on the table. All I have left to say is well played Mr. Dolan, well played.

Don't Call It A Comeback

The final threesome at Congressional Country Club in Bethesda, Maryland on Sunday featured a grand total of 74 PGA Tour wins. Only thing was, 73 out of those 74 wins belonged to one of the competitors. Tiger Woods. It almost seemed like a foregone conclusion that Tiger would be able to surpass his fellow competitors, Bo Van Pelt, a 1 time winner and Brandon De Jonge, who's still searching for that elusive win. While De Jonge wilted away early on, Van Pelt held strong until a crucial mistake on the 17th hole cost him any feasible chance of staying with Tiger and challenging him to a possible playoff. Tiger was able to two putt for par on the 18th green and capture the victory at AT&T National as tournament host by 2 strokes.
Some numbers: With the win Sunday at Congressional, Tiger is now in solo 2nd with 74 PGA Tour wins and trails only Sam Snead who sits with 82 career wins. It marked the 9th time (out of 12) in his career that he has come back when trailing by one stroke heading into the final round. With the win, he has now won 27% of his tournaments, an amazing statistic when you consider how difficult it is to win just one tournament. Tiger wins more than 1 out of every 4 times that he steps on the course. For the season, Tiger now has 3 wins, best on the Tour, leads the FedEx Cup standings and is the new overall money leader for the season. For perspective, Nicklaus won 14% (21% at age 36) of his tournaments. The last time Tiger won at least 3 tournaments? 2009. And what did he do that season? How's 6 wins for size and FedEx Cup winner? I can keep throwing more impressive stats at you but I believe that a different discussion is warranted.
Ever since the aftermath of Tiger's "scandal", almost everyone in the sports world has speculated over whether Tiger is "back." Even after his win yesterday, media was still getting testy over the fact that Tiger is still winless at the Majors this year. Let me put something else in perspective for you. Since Tiger's 2008 U.S. Open win, there have 15 different major championship winners to date. To say that Tiger is no longer the lost dominant player on tour is somewhat acceptable but to believe that he has been surpassed by someone like Rory McIlroy or Bubba Watson is absolutely ludicrous. McIlroy has been almost non-existent this season and Watson's carefree attitude did him terribly wrong at Olympic as he missed the cut. Listen, I understand that he isn't the same player that he was in 2000 but the Tiger Woods of 2000 was likely the greatest display of individual sporting achievement that we have ever seen. Jack Nicklaus included. No one will ever replicate that and it's unjust to ever think that we'll see Tiger return to that kind of form. When the media talks of a comeback, they frequently refer to the Tiger of old. The Tiger who won nearly every time he went out. The Tiger who competed at every major championship. The Tiger who was a runaway player of the year nearly every season. The Tiger who was so far ahead in the World Golf Rankings that he would be able to sit out 2 seasons and still hold a sizable lead. Keep in mind that the Tiger of old hadn't undergone multiple knee surgeries, experienced a massive public scandal and faced the intense pressure and scrutiny that he now deals with every single tournament. The Tiger of old is clearly a different Tiger and I acknowledge that. But to compare him to something he longer is seems unfair. It'd be like comparing Alex Rodriguez to his heyday in Seattle and Texas. Yankee fans clearly expect that he'll put up the same numbers but with age comes wearing and eroding. So to say that Tiger is longer the Tiger of old is like expecting A-Rod to put up 50 homeruns a season again. It simply won't happen and it's unfair to think and expect that it will.
This whole idea of a comeback and Tiger being back or not should not be a conversation. There is no back and there is no comeback. Tiger is the golfer he is and he won't change. It's hard to complain about the results. 3 wins through June and still 2 majors left on the docket. It's the kind of season that nearly every player only dreams of. Yet, when Tiger does it, it only skims the surface. Let's get rid of the scrutiny and labeling and give Tiger a chance to win without all the hubbub. You want the Tiger of old? 2000 may be a far cry but we all saw what Tiger can do with and without the scrutiny. Let's give the most scrutinized public sports figure in history a chance to breath. You'd want the same, wouldn't you?