Read the debate intro and the argument from Loyal Homer about whether or not Carolina Panthers head coach John Fox should lose his job.
During the 2003 season the Carolina Panthers won the NFC South Division, the NFC Championship, and traveled to its first Super Bowl in franchise history. That season the Panthers won seven of the 11 victories in nail biting fashion – with those games decided by three points or less – thus earning the team the moniker “The Cardiac Cats.” Now the team that once seemed like it would be a perennial powerhouse of the NFC seems to have veered off course. The Panthers are quickly becoming one of those teams that must settle for boasting about potential instead of accolades. The Cardiac Cats are in need of a heart transplant – an operation that will bring with it new life to a failing organization. The figuratively defective heart in need of replacement belongs to head coach John Fox.
Fox’s conservative approach is no longer winning games. The Panthers often use a run first offense that wears down defenses in order to open up the big play on a play action pass. They also run a lot of “smoke routes” (short screen passes) to Steve Smith hoping to catch the defense napping or set up a fly route to Smith late in the game. The problem with all of this is that if the average fan can explain the Panther’s offense in two sentences, how well will it do against teams that watch hours of game footage in preparation to defend against it?
NFL teams are constantly bringing new strategies to the field. From the scrambling quarterback to the wild cat formation, ingenuity is apparent around the league. But when was the last time Carolina tried something new? When was the last time they scored off of flea flicker, a halfback pass, or a fake punt? In fact, when was the last time Carolina’s special teams scored? If the answer is, “it has been awhile,” then John Fox is to blame.
Another major flaw with Fox is that he is loyal to a fault. He stands behind his players through the good, the bad, the really bad, and even the ridiculous… yes, I am talking about you, Jake Delhomme. When it comes to Jake Delhomme Fox brings new meaning to the song “Stand by Your Man.” In fact, I would venture to say that Fox’s bromance with Delhomme has shown more undeserved faithfulness to him than most marriages. John Fox’s undying loyalty to his starting quarterback has started to undermine his coaching ability and become a hindrance to the team’s future success.
Who could blame him for liking Delhomme? Delhomme’s rise from bench warmer to prolific passing field general was a feel good story for the ages. The fact that Delhomme seemingly stepped up at the right time and led his team to the Super bowl would make a believer out of most people, but all things change with time. It is like that hot cheerleader you drooled over in high school. Sure, she was smoking hot back in the day, but after 10 years, four husbands, three kids, and two stints in rehab she is not so hot anymore. Jake Delhomme has become that girl.
Jake’s interception woes have revealed a glaring weakness in the Fox regime – loyalty has prohibited the team from having any other options. With Carolina’s rushing game Delhomme does not need to air it out. All that is necessary is maintaining possession of the ball until one of his running backs breaks off a big run. Time and time again Delhomme has proven to be ineffective (e.g. Jake’s five interception games). The problem is not that Fox does not bench Jake, but rather that he CANNOT bench him because he has no other legit options. Fox could have encouraged the team to draft a young quarterback (i.e. Pat White or Josh Freeman) to groom for the future… but he did not. Fox could have implored that the team acquire an experienced free agent quarterback (i.e. Jeff Garcia or Michael Vick) to spark some competition… but he did not. Fox could have forced a trade for quarterback (i.e. Matt Leinart, or Brady Quinn) to mix things up, but he did not. John Fox put all of his proverbial eggs into the ragin’ Cajun’s basket, and now that those eggs are broken. Carolina is left with one nasty looking omelet.
The biggest and most important reason John Fox should no longer coach the Carolina Panthers is that he has mortgaged his team’s future for contemporary relevance. It appears that Fox’s team management skills are akin to the financial management skills of Michael Jackson. (What!? Too soon?)
Fox has developed a team with minimal depth at any position other than running back. His roster can boast of virtually no depth at vital positions. Over the past two off-seasons Fox has traded away the following year’s first round draft pick in order to acquire a target player. Sure, Fox lucked up in landing Jeff Otah in the 2008 draft, but in the 2009 draft Carolina surrendered the team’s 2010 first round pick for second round pick defensive end Everett Brown and fourth round pick Mike Goodson. This move was largely motivated by the fear of replacing a disgruntled Julius Peppers, but these moves weaken the Panthers in the long run. The Panther’s would have been better served by trading Peppers for draft considerations and a serviceable quarterback, but once again Fox missed out on an opportunity to build for the future. The teams’ lack of involvement in the free agency is another testament to the poor leadership of Fox. When a coach becomes this destructive to his teams future, a change must be made.
The Panthers have to face the facts – better options for head coach are out there. Former Super Bowl winning coach Bill Cowher seems ready and willing to take John Fox’s job should it become available. Now it seems that it is more a matter of when, rather than if, the Panthers move in a new direction.
Read the debate intro and the argument from Loyal Homer that the NFL is right to clamp down on fun players who allow companies to influence their end zone dances.
Hypocrisy, an American tradition. The NFL merchandises EVERYTHING. There is the usual fare like hats, shirts, jackets, and jerseys. It is possible to purchase key chains, imprint a team’s logo on a credit card, and even buy a topper for the car antenna. But, when players attempt to monetize something the NFL simply has not thought of and harnessed yet – like the end zone dance – the NFL squashes it. How dare a player come up with or participate in a great idea they financially benefit from – and the league does not. A travesty! Quick, shut it down, NFL. The No Fun League strikes again.
By now many of us are familiar with the story of Philadelphia Eagles tight end Brent Celek and his complicit participation in an end zone dance featuring the Captain Morgan signature pose. This is an incredibly smart marketing tactic from Captain Morgan and the brand’s advertising agency… guerilla marketing at its finest. The company correctly identified an entertaining pop culture commercial, targeted the right player to pull off the stunt (one that scores touchdowns and is on board with the idea), and developed a program that was so fun and interesting it was difficult to identify as an actual advertising campaign. Leave it to Buzz Killington, a.k.a. the NFL, to put the kibosh on fun.
The only way to improve this end zone celebration for Captain Morgan is if the team captain was the player striking the pose.
This type of end zone celebration is good for the league, too. Subtlety makes good advertising great. Audiences appreciate ads that demand interpretation. No, not every viewer of an NFL football game will understand the meaning behind the celebration, just like not every consumer grasps the various idiosyncrasies of Apple ads. Viewers appreciate a brand more when they are forced to uncover meaning and feel as though they are in on the inside joke. It is an example of basic targeted marketing, and NFL should embrace it.
As a person with some experience in marketing communications, it pains me to see the NFL treat this idea and execution with such disdain. Talk about a victimless crime! The player and the brand had some fun and gained a few headlines. It is not as if the NFL does not believe in alcoholic beverages being associated with the league (see the 400+ Bud Light and Miller Light ads during each game). Put simply, there is no reason for the NFL to squash this idea – other than the fact that it did not think of it first. Perhaps the NFL will re-launch the idea officially sanctioned by the league, with no money offered for players.
The end zone celebration should be for sale as a fun way for players to earn some notoriety and money in the league. The league can put some rules around what is permissible and what is not. However, the idea behind banning excessive end zone celebrations is because they are disrespectful to the opposing team. The thinking behind the end zone celebrations should change from unsportsmanlike to an occasional advertising model they becomes a must watch part, clever part of the NFL experience.
I encourage players (I am talking to you, Chad Ochocinco) to try and develop campaigns and continue this trend, regardless of what the muckity-mucks in high rises in downtown Manhattan think. Provided campaigns stay guerilla in nature, remain good ideas, and are not over used (e.g. the same overtly paid for dance each time a player scores… during a game where they just so happen to score five touchdowns) players should continue to make a few bucks on the side promoting their favorite products. Or maybe a loosely governed NFL ban may make these end zone dances even better. The breaking of the rules makes the celebrations even more enticing and daring… and legendary.
The Captain Morgan’s end zone dance example is not an example of a slippery slope, either. The celebration had enough of the cool factor to be warmly received by fans. If players start whipping out flags or wearing sandwich boards over their jerseys, then fine away. But, the same league that permits paid advertising patches on training camp jerseys cannot ban branded end zone dances.
If the NFL takes a hard-line stance against this and levies massive fines for each player caught “touchdownvertising,” I have just one thing to say to them: Child, please.
It is hard to imagine a more polarizing political figure than conservative radio talk show host and commentator Rush Limbaugh. It seems most folks are either big fans, or strongly dislike him. Limbaugh’s mercilessly communicated opinions and knack for drumming up controversy fly in the face of any moderate opinion attempting to toe the line. Either a person agrees with Limbaugh, or they do not. There simply is no middle ground.
When recently announcing his role in a prospective ownership group assimilating to put a bid in on the St. Louis Rams NFL football franchise, Limbaugh showed how easily the political divide can translate into the world of sports. Two well known and respected NFL players – New York Giants defensive lineman Mathias Kiwanuka and New York Jets linebacker Bart Scott – each publically announced their refusal to play for a franchise owned, even in part, by Rush Limbaugh. Kiwanuka told the New York Daily News, “I mean, I don’t want anything to do with a team that [Limbaugh] has any part of. He can do whatever he wants, it is a free country. But if he goes through, I can tell you where I am not going to play.” Kiwanuka is a good football player, the kind of football player a team needs to be successful. His former defensive coach Steve Spagnuolo is now the head coach of the Rams, the team Limbaugh was originally in the bid to purchase. Despite the opportunity for a possible reunion, Kiwanuka still emphatically slammed the door on playing for the Rams due to Limbaugh’s presence – an action that is both powerful and a sign of things to come.
This is not the first time Limbaugh has stirred up controversy in connection with the NFL. In 2003 Limbaugh was hired to be a studio commentator for ESPN’s popular Sunday Morning Countdown show. His role was supposed to be a question asker, a glorified fan who desired to explore the depth of social issues inherent in the NFL’s framework. What ESPN got instead was a lightning rod for controversy they were forced to fire. Limbaugh said on the show that the media loved Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb, and consequently made the player overrated, not because he was a talented quarterback but because they wanted to see a black quarterback have success in the NFL. Limbaugh was fired from the show shortly after the live incident, and then arrested on allegations of prescription drug possession, a habit he eventually went through rehab to kick.
Every person has made mistakes. But, not every person deserves to own part of an NFL franchise. Certain actions or statements we all make in life have consequences. Sometimes those consequences involve opening doors to new opportunities, sometimes they close doors. Limbaugh’s history and inflammatory opinions have closed this NFL door of opportunity.
Whether a person agrees with what the players are saying about Limbaugh’s ownership or not, the comments do reflect perception. We all know the saying… “Perception is nine tenths of the law.” Whether Limbaugh’s ambition is to own an NFL team now – though not with the Rams thanks to last night’s report that Limbaugh got the boot from the prospective ownership team – or later, the lesson is clear: If the NFL welcomes Rush Limbaugh into the ownership fold it is asking for public relations drama and a string of players that refuse to play for the team he owns.
What Mark Cuban is to the NBA, Rush Limbaugh would be to the NFL… times a hundred. Limbaugh did not get to this point in his career by always playing diplomat. He ascended by being controversial, and that attitude cannot be turned off indefinitely for the purposes of a business investment. And the current group of NFL owners agrees.
Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay went as far as publically announcing that he would not support Limbaugh’s bid to own a share of an NFL franchise. He told the Associated Press, “When there are comments that have been made that are inappropriate, incendiary, and insensitive… our words do damage, [Limbaugh’s inclusion as an NFL owner] is something that we don’t need.”
Then, despite Irsay’s words and a strongly worded warning from NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, Limbaugh kicked the controversy machine into overdrive and declared he would not be backing out of the bid for ownership. That comment is exactly opposite what owners were hoping for. So, the ownership group did the RIGHT thing by the NFL and removed Limbaugh from the picture to strengthen their bid and endear themselves to the other owners.
Rush Limbaugh likely has a legitimate love affair with the NFL. But he has burned far too many bridges to be an effective owner. Part of the responsibility of an owner is to cultivate an environment that employees are willing to not just work hard for, but walk through walls for. Whether that employee is a coach, a player, a cook, or a kick off tee retriever, every member of the organization must BELIEVE, and those cues ultimately come from the ownership.
Could Limbaugh field a viable NFL organization with the difficulties he has already created for himself? It is highly doubtful. It is hard enough to build a winning professional football franchise when financial resources are unlimited. Imagine trying to build a consistently successful franchise when a faction of players simply refuse to play on the team.
Limbaugh can learn a lesson here, if he is open to learning moments in his life. His radio and commentary career is brilliant, no matter if a person agrees with his politics or not. He is extremely wealthy and has the fame he seems to relish. But taking the principles that helped construct his currently successful career path into the NFL is beyond unwise, it is impossible. And, it is bad business.
We all knew it would come to this, right? Michael Vick, the Philadelphia Eagles quarterback, has and seems able to continue to say and do the “right things” – finally. He is contrite. He is a team player. Heck, he is even articulate in discussing how his poor decision making has impacted his life and the lives of his family members. When listening to him speak to the media, I am not hearing a player with a sordid, despicable past in danger of rearing its ugly head again. I hear an athlete who has completely come to terms with mistakes and past transgressions with a demonstrated willingness to right the wrongs. So, it is easy to see why Nike – or any brand – is considering Mike Vick as a spokesperson.
Vick is now a rare combination. He is a super athlete with substance. He is no longer flash and fluff, he is a real human being. Why is that compelling to marketers? Emotion! Marketers are always striving to create situations where their brand makes emotional connections to consumers. That is the tail the marketing dog perpetually chases. How does that translate to sports? Simply, why do sports fans root for underdogs? Because they have developed an emotional connection.
The thing about people is that we have all made mistakes (like Loyal Homer and Bleacher Fan do when they fail to choose my argument as the winner). When Mike Vick admitted his mistakes and acknowledged his poor decisions, he became the underdog – despite his once enormous talent. Vick transformed himself into someone fans WANT to see do well (take notes, A-Rod…).
The other funny thing about underdogs… people pay to watch them. They pay a lot. Whether fans are choosing to purchase tickets and attend games, gather at bars and parties to watch, or watch a game on television (complete with advertising breaks), fans eat up the underdog comeback story.
Advertisers love underdog stories because they inspire emotionally eliciting ads – whether the ad creative is shooting for joy, frustrating, anticipation, or any human emotion. Ad in an emotional element and they have a much better chance of doing well with an emotionally charged audience… i.e. the kind of audience that loves a good underdog story. And, the emotional investment keeps the fans talking the next day at the water cooler – and the brand in the emotional consumer’s minds the next time they open their collective wallets.
Vick is in many ways the ideal spokesperson. Once an athlete many admired – with moves few can replicate – Vick is now humbled, another human being just like the rest of us. It is just that we all know who he is, now. Fame, rightly or wrongly, has its advantages.
Nike – or any brand – is wise to take a chance on Vick. He is a household name. He is appealing to common fans and people. He still has the aura of a player with incredible athletic gifts (even if we have not yet seen them since his comeback commenced). He is in a major market. And, he is a regular on the speaking tour, preaching the perils of a life that leads to jail. Could Nike benefit if Vick is wearing their apparel during a speech, or a work out with local kids? Yes. Could Nike benefit if Vick dons a Nike Swoosh cap for a post game interview? Yes, since the media is falling all over itself to get more access to Vick.
Nike signing Vick is not poor taste, it is good business. Nike needs to sell stuff, and leveraging willing players with influence to help them sell stuff is good business. Vick is one of those players.
Does Mike Vick attract attention? Yes. Does attention equate to revenue in business? Yes (it is called brand awareness). Since the answer to both of those questions is a resounding yes, the answer to whether a brand should sign Vick as a spokesperson must also be yes.
Read Loyal Homer and Bleacher Fan’s arguments about the timing of firing a head football coach, and if four games into the season is too soon.
Yesterday The Sports Debates discussed which preseason favorite NFL teams have already fumbled their chances of making the NFL postseason. Today, we will discuss the OTHER teams that we did not mention in yesterday’s debates. You know, those teams that are so despicable, so terrible, SO disorganized and unprofessional that their loyal fan bases are already discussing what it will take to give their team’s head coach the quick hook or axe (depending if you like fishing or lumberjack metaphors better).
It does not matter if a coach has been with a team for four weeks, four years, or four decades. If perception has shifted to the point where the majority of the fan base is no longer supporting the current coaching regime, it is likely fans and media will pressure an owner or general manager to make a change.
There are a few teams in the “coach status pending review” category right now. The Cleveland Browns, the St. Louis Rams, the Kansas City Chiefs, the Tennessee Titans, the Carolina Panthers, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers are all examples of winless teams through four weeks of the 2009 NFL season. While Titans head coach Jeff Fisher is the longest tenured coach with any of those teams, he is fair game in the evaluation process for this debate. So are the five (of seven) other head coaches in their first season with new organizations.
There are countless examples on both sides of this debate. Some coaches are forced out before they are really given an opportunity to prove how effective they are as head coaches, and some coaches are given too much slack and perpetually underperform in their leadership role. Both scenarios are nightmarish for general managers. They are constantly toeing the line, trying to give rookie coaches the slack they need to learn, grow, and become great coaches while balancing the immediate needs of the organization, players, and fans. It is certainly not an easy job, and it requires more intuition than math.
Fortunately, The Sports Debates exists to give needy general managers the input they need to be more effective in their jobs. Today’s debate question: Is four weeks in to the young NFL season too soon to fire a head coach?
Bleacher Fan, the known Cleveland Browns lover and Pittsburgh Steelers hater, will argue in favor of early termination for an underperforming head coach. Bleacher Fan will provide the rationale necessary to pragmatically cut a coach loose early in the season. On the other side of the debate is Loyal Homer, who is responsible for arguing that four games is too early in the season to give up on a coach and that patience is a virtue rewarded with championships.
May the best debater win! But, since I am not debating this one, may one of the other debaters win!
Read Loyal Homer and Bleacher Fan’s arguments for which NFL teams they believe have already squandered a chance at postseason glory, just four weeks into the 2009 regular season.
In order for a team to fumble its chances for the postseason – especially this early in the 2009 season – it must have started the season with some shot to actually make the playoffs. In others words, the Cleveland Browns do not really qualify for participation in this debate (lucky for them). This debate is about teams that actually had a shot and have already squandered their chance at the postseason.
Since the lousy usual suspects will not be included, there are just a handful of teams that should have played good football and earned a spot in the playoffs this season. For me, no team has already blown its opportunity at postseason glory quite as spectacularly as the Carolina Panthers.
How appropriate that the Carolina Panthers spent week four of the NFL season at home on a bye week. You know, “bye” as in good “bye” to the team’s postseason chances this season, despite the fact that the calendar still reads early October.
The Panthers are showing all of the signs of a team destined to miss the NFL playoffs after a preseason of hype and high expectations. Exhibit A – the win-loss record. The Panthers completed their preseason slate with a record of 0-4. Fans speculated the team was struggling in the preseason because of the quality teams the Panthers faced, losing at the New York Giants, at Miami, then at home against Baltimore and defending Super Bowl champions Pittsburgh. Tough losses, but it was preseason and not the end of the world.
The thing about losing all of the preseason games is that it creates a culture of losing throughout a team. The Panthers saw that losing culture in full force in week one as the team hosted Philadelphia, and were destroyed 38-10. The Panthers followed up that surprising loss with a trip to Atlanta to face a Falcons team with many weapons. The Panthers lost that game, too, and then traveled to Dallas and lost on Monday night, scoring a mere seven points.
While the offense has struggled, the normally excellent defense that is the hallmark of Panther teams has struggled as well. For some perspective on the poor play of the defense, consider that the Panthers have given up more points than EVERY team in the NFC, except the St. Louis Rams.
That Panthers have only outpaced the offensive prowess of two other teams in the NFL – the Cleveland Browns and the St. Louis Rams. Not the company a team wants to keep in the stat column this season.
So, the offense is bad and the defense is bad. All of the badness will make it difficult to come back and compete in a division that is tough. The Panthers have already lost to one division opponent – the Atlanta Falcons – and will have a challenge to beat them when the two teams play again. The New Orleans Saints lead the division and promise to continue giving Carolina’s defense fits. The Panthers even trail the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in tiebreakers, placing the presumed impressive Panthers squarely in the basement of the NFC South.
The team is also suffering from the slow decline of established veteran leadership and infighting – and the two issues are related. Quarterback Jake Delhomme has slowly changed into a leader with diminishing skills. In the opening game of the season the quarterback threw a whopping four interceptions before getting the hook from the head coach. He has now thrown seven interceptions in three games. His teammates are apparently frustrated. Star wide receiver Steve Smith, showing an uncanny ability for how to use the media, called in to a local sports talk show in Charlotte to announce that he “never liked” Delhomme as a quarterback. When the quarterback and star receiver are not getting along… well, that is not exactly a foundation for a winning team.
On top of all of these obvious issues, the team is now losing faith in its head coach, John Fox. If the coach’s seat was warming up on September 13 – before the season actually started – then it must be on fire now.
The simple fact is that all signs point to a continued collapse from the Panthers. The team does not appear to have the guts and leadership to pull itself up by the bootstraps and compete in the division and fight for a spot in the playoffs. After all of the preseason and training camp belief that the Carolina Panthers were a team destined for an appearance in the postseason, they are now the team most notorious for blowing their shot early in the season.
The headline fits. Andy Reid is putting together one heckuva a coaching job so far in the 2009 season. He signed quarterback he did not need in Michael Vick, he unexpectedly lost a quarterback he DID need with Donavan McNabb’s injury, and he is getting much more of a quarterback he was not sure he even wanted in Kevin Kolb.
After a 1-3 preseason (like THAT matters), the Philadelphia Eagles have looked quite solid with a 2-1 record as the team enters its bye week. The Eagles are currently second in the NFC East behind the New York Giants. The team has overcome the potential distraction of Michael Vick’s presence as McNabb seems to remain the team’s leader despite his injury.
Everything seems to point to a great season for the Eagles, right? Wrong. The Philadelphia Eagles have the league’s most deceiving win-loss record.
After the team returns from the bye week it will host the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, a team that is thanking its lucky stars the Cleveland Browns are so bad. Then the Eagles hit the road to face the 1-2 Oakland Raiders and the 1-2 Washington Redskins – you know, the team that just lost to the DETROIT LIONS. It is hard to imagine an easier schedule in the entire league. It is very possible that the team ends up 5-1 after the first two months of the season are in the books.
But, that is when the wheels will fall off the Eagles’ first class train ride to Miami for Super Bowl XLIV.
When the calendar turns to November, the season becomes more difficult and the team’s true nature will be revealed. The Eagles play five games in November, starting by hosting the New York Giants and Dallas Cowboys before hitting the road to face the San Diego Chargers and the Chicago Bears. The final game of the month is at home against the struggling Redskins. November may change the Eagles 5-1 fortunes as they play much tougher defenses and offenses that will test the team’s limits.
The season does not get any easier in December, either. The Eagles play the Atlanta Falcons in Atlanta – think they will boo Michael Vick? – then the Giants in New York before hosting a resurgent San Francisco 49ers and the league’s best defense to date, the Denver Broncos. Then they play at Dallas to end the season.
A strong start is vital if the team believes it has any chance to make the playoffs. The Eagles must bank early victories against subpar teams to ready itself when the schedule becomes more difficult when the weather turns colder.
The Eagles also struggle with injuries year in, year out. Running back Brian Westbrook has never avoided injured reserve for an entire season. McNabb has been injured more often in recent years, too. The Eagles have already lost four players for the entire season are playing with a depleted linebacking corps and secondary.
The Eagles also play in a very difficult division where the Cowboys and Giants are two of the elite teams in the entire league. The Wild Card spots are more uncertain than ever before, too, considering the emergence of the NFC North as a decent division and the strength of the Falcons and New Orleans Saints in the NFC South. For the Eagles to have a shot at returning to playoff glory, early wins must be combined with the capacity to survive the season physically and emotionally.
With a depleted, injury-riddled team and an increasingly difficult schedule on the horizon, the Philadelphia Eagles have the most deceiving record in the NFL.
See how long you can hold your breath. Now see if you can bend a spoon with your mind. Now haze someone. What do all of these activities have in common? They are all pointless with zero redeeming value.
Hazing is bad for sports for three primary reasons.
Reason #1: Waste of Time
Playing sports, at either the collegiate level or the professional level, requires an enormous amount of time. Using football as an example, there is practice time, stretching time, film room time, rep time, conditioning time, weight lifting time, playbook study time… plus all the stuff people normally do like sleep and eat. If a player is a good player, then they have media time, autograph signing time, so on and so forth. With all of those elements necessary to the life of an athlete, why would an athlete build extra time into their schedule for a pointless waste of time like hazing a teammate? The time it takes to plan a hazing incident, perpetrate it and deal with the aftermath is all time better spent preparing for a game. Plus, it can get a player into unnecessary, easily avoidable legal trouble.
Reason #2: Bad for Team Chemistry
Not everyone in every locker room wants to haze a person. As in any social situation, there are players who will side with the ones who are hazing a player, and players who will defend the player who is being hazed. It is human nature to take sides. As those sides become more prominent they become more divisive and drive a wedge between a team. You know what a team is? It is a group of people working toward a COMMON goal. Any behavior that distracts from the common goal should be immediately eliminated from the team dynamic. And, it should not be up to the coaches to eliminate a negative activity. If everyone on the team truly is working toward the same common goal, then none of them would be willing to engage in activity may harm the team dynamic.
Reason #3: Hazing is Stupid
Hazing is stupid. It is designed, supposedly, as a way to welcome new players into a team. In reality it is the old, established guard of the team making newcomers feel unwelcome. How is that in any way a characteristic of a winning team?
Reason #4: Rite of Passage
Either a player contributes to a winning team or they do not. There is no middle ground. It is not more complicated than that. Therefore, labeling hazing as a rite of passage for a new player on a team is ludicrous. A rite of passage should always be focused on the task at hand. The first hit in the NFL is a rite of passage – something everyone must encounter as they grow. Hazing is not something everyone must encounter.
There is a substantial difference between a hazing incident and a prank (a prank defined as many of the examples Loyal Homer provided in the intro). Frankly, Coye Francies of the Cleveland Browns overreacted. That sounded like a harmless prank. More often than not in sports, hazing turns violent and can scar emotionally.
Here is a list of more than 40 sports hazing incidents that have a negative outcome. Each was avoidable. None took place on a championship team. If the goal is winning championships, it appears that hazing must be eliminated.
Read Bleacher Fan’s argument that the Miami (FL)/Virginia Tech game will be the best of the weekend, and Loyal Homer’s argument that the best is the Atlanta Falcons/New England Patriots game.
It sure took a long time. Relevance eluded the San Francisco 49ers for years since Steve Young and George Seifert left town. Once the picture of NFL dominance, the 49ers have been mired in the NFL cellar for several seasons. Last season management fired former head coach Mike Nolan and promoted assistant and Hall of Fame linebacker Mike Singletary to the position. Congrats, Niners. With a single swift move the organization has again been catapulted to prominence again and have another opportunity to prove it this week when they visit the retooled Minnesota Vikings in the best game of THIS weekend.
Everyone in the world is aware of why the Vikings are a story. Besides that quarterback fellow, the defense is fourth in the league in yards allowed per game and in the top 10 in most categories (though the season is just two weeks old). The defense plays hard and hits tough. They are a good and continuously improving defense thanks to the team’s defensive coordinator – Mike Singletary’s former teammate with the 1985 Chicago Bears, Leslie Frazier.
While Frazier is slowly gaining recognition for the stamp he puts on an NFL defense, Singletary has infused the 49ers with a toughness they have long lacked. His commitment to team unity has renewed the team’s confidence. Some significant changes Singletary has made, though he has not yet completed a full season as head coach, include forcing tight end Vernon Davis into both a good talent and a good teammate, ending the quarterback Alex Smith experiment, renewing a focus on running the ball well and playing good defense.
Singletary has now proved he is a good head coach in the NFL. Now the expectations from fans and media will increase. He is not longer the new kid on the coaching block and no longer a talented player turn coach many just root for.
Coming into this game it is billed as another opportunity for Brett Favre to shed rust, for Adrian Peterson to continue to assert himself as a league MVP candidate, and for the Vikings to potentially take a commanding lead in their division with a win and potential losses by Green Bay and Chicago.
For the life of me, I cannot figure out why the media is not covering the story of the 49ers more thoroughly. If the team wins against Minnesota on the road, however, it will be time to pay close attention to these 49ers. For the 49ers to earn the respect it has craved for so many down seasons a few key events need to take place.
First, Frank Gore has to be solid. Just solid. Twenty-five carries, 90 yards and a touchdown should do it. Also, quarterback Shaun Hill has proven he can take care of the ball, and the defense has proven they can play well when the game is on the line. While the aforementioned Vikings defense has some nice statistics to claim in the first two weeks of the season, the 49ers have the more highly ranked run defense, allowing a stingy 53 yards a game. The team also allows just 13 points per game thus far this season, good enough for fourth across the league. The game against the Vikings is winnable provided the 49ers play up to their potential. It seems likely Singletary is the right coach to ensure that happens.
Both of these teams are 2-0. The 49ers, however, have more to lose – and much more to gain. A motivated San Francisco team may shock the Vikings on Sunday and breathe needed life into a stale, but important, NFL franchise.
In the most recent and bizarre quarterback controversy to date in the NFL, Cleveland Browns head coach Eric Mangini FINALLY named a starting quarterback. On Wednesday of the week dedicated to preparation for the team’s first game against the Minnesota Vikings. But, he did not tell the media. Nor did he notify the team, deciding instead to let the team figure it out when the first team offense took the field at practice.
It is hard to play Monday morning quarterback to NFL coaches. Fans and media cannot possibly understand all of the factors weighing on a coach making a key decision, even if both pretend as though they do. However, it is fair to analyze what impact Mangini’s quarterback battle – and the circumstances surrounding the announcement of the decision – had on the actual game.
As Bleacher Fan stated in the intro, Mangini believed that he was misdirecting his team’s week one opponent by forcing them to prepare for two quarterbacks. Mangini believed that preparation would waste valuable time in the Vikings’ clubhouse and give his team an advantage. Did that decision have any impact on the game itself?
Uh… no. Looking back, it is rather laughable that Mangini believed it would impact the game at all. First, the two quarterbacks he was deciding between have very similar traits. Both Brady Quinn and Derek Anderson are traditional pocket passers. Both have strong arms (those questioning Brady Quinn’s arm strength clearly have not watched him play). Both make head scratching decisions from time to time (though Anderson has an edge on frequency). Both tap the ball as a timing mechanism when they are preparing to throw. What is the real difference? Potential (Quinn) versus known/frustrating commodity (Anderson). It is not as though Mangini was forcing the Vikings to prepare for either Mike Vick or Dan Marino.
The Mangini decision aside, Minnesota showed no signs of being ill prepared for the quarterback they were facing. Their game plan was to stuff the run (which they always do), and force the quarterback to beat them. They knew if they covered the receivers, both quarterbacks would hit the check down receivers in the tight end and the running backs. Of the nine different Browns that caught passes on Sunday, only three were receivers. Safe to say the Minnesota defense shut the receivers down.
More, leading up the game Minnesota Vikings head coach Brad Childress said he was preparing for a scheme, not for a quarterback. The way the defense played indicates his team did a fine job, giving up only one touchdown on defense in the waning moments of the game.
Plus, Mangini’s decision to not publically announce his quarterback going into week one seems to have been a non-issue for the Patriots while possibly hindering his own team. Rather than concentrating on getting his team focused and prepared – and having all of the team’s leaders empowered and in place – Mangini distracted himself and his team by playing needless head games with the opponent. One of the great values of football I learned early on as a writer was that coaches, more than anything else in the game, loved when they were in an obvious running situations and their team STILL dominated the opposing team. The point is that it should not matter who is under center for the Browns. If the team executes properly it should not matter if they share their entire game plan.
All of the smoke and mirrors served only as a distraction for the Browns, not a disruption for the Vikings. All of the head games and gamesmanship exhibited by Mangini and the team – who Mangini convinced of his genius plan – did not in one way impact the game. Perhaps Mangini should spend more time preparing his team, and less time trying to fool the opposition before the teams even take the field.
Posted by Babe Ruthless 
