"The Switch"

PAV: I know Adrian Peterson was punishing his son the only way he knew how. He was more than likely hit with a switch or something else himself growing up. Does this mean he isn't wrong? No. Should the NFL have suspended Adrian Peterson? I think so, especially considering there was a criminal element to the story in that Peterson turned himself in to authorities and is being charged with negligent abuse.

My parents spanked us. I even got the belt once or twice. It was never excessive and I harbor no resentment for being punished as a child. I have spanked my 5 year old exactly once. I immediately regretted it. He is sweet and caring and he doesn't deserve to be hit because I sometimes grow impatient and angry. My two year old is too little to understand the significance of punishments, in my opinion, but I've swatted him a few times when he's pushed the boundaries. As a new(ish) parent, I struggle with what is and isn't effective punishment. We want to be consistent with our kids, but we want to be firm so they learn right from wrong. I also don't think spankings and scolding are harmful unless they are excessive and done with unnecessary aggression.

I think Adrian Peterson was acting as a parent, but I'm not sure if he knew what that meant. We all think the things we do are justifiable. That's the brain coping with behavior we are morally torn about. To gain perspective on the issue, I invite you to watch HOF wide receiver Cris Carter's reaction to abuse. I think more than anything this story should force those of us who are parents to step back and gain perspective on how and why we punish our kids. I don't want my kids to be afraid of me. Ever. For anything. But I want them to learn to be respectful and listen to direction. Deciding how to instill those lessons is the toughest thing I've ever had to do.

Shaw shanks Redemption

ZBU: Yesterday, USC senior cornerback Josh Shaw admitted to lying about how he suffered two high ankle sprains over the weekend. What's the big deal? Well on Sunday, Shaw came out saying he injured himself Saturday night after jumping from the second story of an apartment complex to save his 7-year-old nephew, who was struggling in the pool. Shaw said his nephew did not know how to swim. By Monday morning, thanks to social media and the "mother ship" as Dan Patrick calls it, Shaw was a superhero athlete with a heart-warming story. Today of course after admitting the entire story was a complete fabrication, Shaw is being demonized by the same media outlets. Now, there are many angles we can explore with his topic and I do think creating such a story was completely idiotic and pretty disgusting, but the two questions I have are what drove a man to make up such a fantastical tale and have all source-checking journalists with integrity died and gone to heaven?

To address my first question, I think more details are going to surface and it is going to come out that Shaw was doing something he wasn't supposed to be doing and he will most likely get a slap on the wrist. But talk about making a bad situation worse! How could you possibly think that making up a heroic tale of rescuing a child's life was going to pass unquestioned? Maybe Shaw just panicked and one lie led to another until he was Super Shaw. Or maybe he was advised to go with the story and hope no witnesses were around to question the facts. But I guess what has really got to me about this whole situation (because there will always be liars building themselves up) is how does such an incredible story get reported without ANYONE checking the facts! I am now a banker and my journalist dream died long ago so maybe I don't know the stresses this day and age of being the first one to report a story, but I do know a little bit about being thorough and taking pride in work that I will be attaching my name to.  We live in an incredible age of technology where news is easily reported and dispatched to the world but that does not mean all integrity should be thrown away.

Is Shaw a complete knucklehead who should be ridiculed and suspended for creating a despicable lie? Absolutely. But let's not lose sight of the other problem in this story. If all source-checking, journalists with integrity aren't dead yet, there is certainly an epidemic slowly killing them off.

PAV:  I think respectable journalism is dying. Shaw was either drunk and miscalculated the two-story jump or he was fleeing an apartment (as I've heard in certain rumors). He's young and was probably embarrassed because he knew he'd injured himself. He's no monster. He lied, but who hasn't? ESPN will run this story into the ground for the next few weeks and then get more play out of it once Shaw returns for USC.

News corporations are just looking for the next "breaking" story. They don't consider sources important until they have to back track. It's too easy for a media outlet to apologize and move on than to miss a story all together. ESPN did this recently when their worst "journalist" by far, Josina Anderson, reported on Michael Sam's showering habits. She was trying to create a story out of nothing. Her own magazine covered and cleared that issue a few months ago during OTA's. Someone made a choice to fuck credibility out the window in the last few decades regarding news reporting and everyone else has followed along. I read a UFO story on the Huffington Post site the other day. I used to consider that publication to be somewhat credible, but they posted a story on a poorly shot amateur video and headlined with: "UFO Caught by Canadian News..."

Honestly, I blame the utter ignorance of the public for all of this. If we didn't give the Kardashians and the Real House Wives such high ratings, then news groups wouldn't feel the need to dump idiotic and meaningless stories onto our laps. It's all about money and those corporations are raking it in because the average news-watching citizen is happy to lap up the garbage that calls itself "late breaking news".
Sidetrack: Why don't we hear about breakthroughs in science and technology? Our intellectual elite have come up with some incredible technology in the last few years that will benefit mankind, but no one gives a shit. I recommend everyone follow IFL (I Fucking Love) Science on twitter or read Scientific American. It's refreshing to read about nanotechnology and what people are doing with stem cells and gene research. Of course, there are negative stories aimed at shocking people, but there's research behind all of it. I love research. I love logic. I love direct and clean information. ESPN and most major news outlets have none of those things.

Club Money vs. National Pride

PAV: After the Brazilians got drubbed by Germany, I wondered two things: Did the Brazilians get paid a lot of money to lose at home? Or were they just worn out and concerned about injury after the back injury teammate Neymar suffered? I find it hard to believe the Brazilians could have been paid the kind of money it would take to convince an athlete already making millions of dollars a year to lose for their mother country. That idea quickly disappeared.

The one that stuck, though, was the Brazilians' possible concern for ending up like Neymar. The Brazil and Barcelona star will likely have a full recovery from his back injury and will sign a huge contract with his current club or another willing to give him max money. But what if he doesn't recover? If he hypothetically got permanently injured in a World Cup game, he may never play at a high level or sign a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract again. Were his teammates thinking about this possibility during the Germany game. The defense was certainly distracted. If not complacent. I'm trying to come up with a reason a team with so much international talent would play so poorly. Were the absences of Neymar and Thiago too much for the Brazilians to make up for? Or were they concerned about a financial future? My wife argues its hard to turn off that competitive nature, especially in a high stakes environment like a World Cup Semi-Final. What if millions of dollars are on the line?

ZBU: Looking back on this idea a couple of weeks removed now, I think Germany was ultimately just the best team in the tournament and Brazil was aided by easier match-ups early on. The Brazilians hadn't lost a game on home soil since 1975 and it was incredible that this streak came to such a shocking end, but let's face it... this was not the Brazil of many years past. This is why you would have thought Neymar died the way his team and country were lamenting his injury and subsequent absence from the rest of the tournament. They knew his magic was all they really had and their dreams of winning a World Cup were crushed with Neymar's back.

To address your other question, I would agree with your wife. I think you really can't turn off that competitive nature even if millions of dollars are on the line and especially when the passion of playing for your country is involved. Patriotism is a strong motivator and causes grown men to cry over losing a game. I guess everybody has their price but I like to think those who represent their country are immune to thinking of their own interests if only for a month.

World Cup Nostalgia

ZBU: In approximately one week from today, the world's greatest tournament will begin anew for the 20th time and fans of all ages will become extremely patriotic. No matter how much you love the sport, we will all be soccer fans for the next month as the World Cup kicks off in Brazil. I don't know if it's just because it only occurs every four years or if it's simply the thrill of rooting for your country but it is always an exciting four weeks that promises plenty of parity and undoubtedly a controversy or two.

Interestingly enough, next weekend when the tournament begins, one of our good college buddies will be getting married in Jacksonville, Florida. This got me thinking about what we were doing during the last World Cup four years ago and just how much life changes in between each magical tournament. Let's take a trip down memory lane so I can demonstrate my point...

In 2010, as the World Cup was rolling in South Africa, I stood on a barstool in disbelief at O'Malley's pub in Charleston as Landon Donovan scored one of the most dramatic goals in World Cup history. His 90 plus minute goal sent the United States through the group stage and allowed thousands of strangers to hug one another and party like best friends. I had also recently graduated college, was working at a hotel in Charleston and was saving up money for a ring for my now wife.

In 2006, with the World Cup being held in Germany, I drank with old high school buddies after our sophomore year of college and watched the United States get crushed by just about everyone they played. We still partied hard for each game because well, that's about all we were doing at that time in our life besides of course being roller-blade carhops and pizza delivery guys when classes weren't in session.

In 2002, as the World Cup aired late in the evening in South Korea, I watched the games with my family and my blog-mate in Disney World. In between chasing after the 16 year old cheerleaders also staying at our resort, we witnessed the United States make it's deepest run ever in the World Cup only to lose to Germany thanks to some questionable calls by the referees.

In 1998, with the World Cup in France, I really only remember being stunned while watching the Final in my aunt's basement as the French shocked the world and shutout the heavily favored Brazilians in a 3-0 route.

And in 1994 with the World Cup in the U.S, I remember playing the World Cup video game for Super Nintendo and having the attention span of a gold fish but you get the picture.

All I know is I will absolutely remember watching some games next week in Florida while celebrating my buddy's big day. And I wonder what I'll tell my son or daughter about Russia when the next World Cup kicks off there four years from now. But most importantly, when you're watching the games in a week, take a look around and soak it all in because the beauty of the World Cup ultimately lies in its nostalgia.

PAV: Brilliant. A word that describes your recollection and a word that "futbol" fans everywhere will hear during any "Queen's English" broadcast of any match during this summer's event. This, too is my absolute favorite sporting event. The reason its my favorite is that I've always been able to share my enthusiasm.

My earliest recollection would have to be the 1998 tournament. Again, my memories of the matches (they aren't games, so stop calling them that) are vague at best, but I remember watching alongside an Irishman and feeling the emotion emit. It's when I first became aware of Zinedine Zidane, who is still one of my favorite players of all time (I loved the headbutt and am not an Italy fan...). Zidane was given the Légion d'honneur, which is the French equivalent to a Medal of Honor or Nobel Prize because he helped his side win the Cup.

My ABSOLUTE FAVORITE World Cup memory is the 2002 event. It has everything to do with ZBU's family. We were at Disney World, as you said. I couldn't sleep because you, your mom, your dad, and your little brother were all snoring in unison. I've still to this day never seen or heard anything like that. It was so bad I put on headphones and listened to the Atticus Clothing Company's compilation CD called "Dragging the Lake" I bought at Downtown Disney that day. It didn't help, but one way or another, I fell asleep...

Only to wake up at 3 am when your dad was screaming at our 25 inch Daewoo not-so-flat screen television. I don't think anyone at the Disney All-Star Resort was awake after that. And Poland was playing. Probably not even against our guys.

It was a vacation I'll never, ever forget and I'll love the World Cup forever because of it.

Even if it's played in a country that steals the bid from other countries. I'm talking to you, Qatar.

Also, I'm still convinced those 16 year-old cheerleaders (we were also 16 at the time, scumbags) will always remember the two Zachs.

To Tweet or Not to Tweet

ZBU: To tweet or not to tweet is a thought that has become as prevalent as the famous Shakespeare quote once was. Thanks to social media, spur of the moment thoughts and instant reactions can be broadcast to the world. For an average guy like you or me, usually about 40 people in the world actually read what we have to say. For pro athletes, however, no matter how popular they are, thousands of people read every little thing they tweet and the more controversial the statement, the more publicity it gets. This of course is not rocket science and comes with the territory of being famous.

 It was no surprise then when Miami Dolphins safety Don Jones got destroyed by fans and media this week after tweeting "horrible" and "OMG" upon seeing Michael Sam, the NFL's first openly gay player, kiss his boyfriend after being drafted.

Now, to tweet or not to tweet is definitely a thought Jones should have had but clearly didn't. Nothing positive could have come from making such a discriminatory statement this day and age. I do, however, wonder if I agree with the Miami Dolphins then fining Jones, making him apologize and take educational classes. I understand that he represents the Dolphins brand and if we broadcast the companies we work for on social media and made comments like his, our companies would probably take action as well. But I guess what I'm getting at is if we are going to allow social media to exist and provide us with others' instant emotions and reactions, how can we regulate and verbally crucify people for what they have to say? Jones reacted to something not natural in his mind and (granted in a very juvenile way) he reacted. Should he have thought twice and kept those thoughts to himself? Probably. But should he have to? I don't know. There was a time when Michael Sam would have been forced to keep such a picture private. Who gets to play dictator and decide what thoughts and pictures should and shouldn't be revealed to the world? Just because someone has an unfavorable and even ignorant opinion that most won't agree with, does that mean he should not be entitled to one at all? An even better question is if social media didn't provide an outlet for virtual mobs to attack someone's opinion would the Dolphins even have taken such swift face-saving actions?  There are only opinions to serve as answers to these questions but when Hamlet asked whether or not he should be, I don't think he was worried about what everyone else thought he should do. So I guess in my opinion, to tweet or not to tweet is to be or not to be and that my friend is the question.

PAV: Love the Shakespearean analogy. What this issue comes down to is the Dolphins saving face, as you said. They can't continue successfully as a brand while allowing one of their employees to be outwardly homophobic. If they allow the tweet to go unpunished, then they are enablers of ignorance and society doesn't like institutions like that. What they did was best for their brand, even though they are essentially impeaching on said player's constitutional and sovereign rights. I don't think anyone's opinion should be regulated and at the same time I don't think opinions like Don Jones or Don Sterling's should be taken seriously. There are obviously people in the world who feel a certain way about things they are either ignorant to or afraid of, i.e. black people and gays.

The official statement from the Miami Dolphins and LA Clippers should be "Who cares what these two-bit scum bags think of black men and gay men. They don't speak for our organization as a whole and never will." I realize Donald Sterling, as an owner, essentially speaks directly for his organization, but his opinion is his opinion and he has no power to turn anyone away from the gates at the Staples Center.

To answer your question: Tweet. Tweet away until you are only followed by the ignorant few who share your idiotic ideals. The rest of us will continue to adapt to a changing and improving world. You can stay dumb.

Perspective for Once

PAV: So this really small thing got me kind of revved up about a topic I don't think gets mentioned enough. I was checking the postgame stats for the Miami Heat's thrashing of Charlotte on Sat., April 29. The recaps on the Yahoo! Sports app have user created video loops. Not only are these mini-highlights created by users, they are also commented on. One intelligent young lass, referring to herself as "Elsie" took this opportunity to make a very bold character distinction between Michael Jordan and King James, saying, "LeBron is an all around better player and better human being than MJ will ever be."

"People" like "Elsie" demonstrate the ignorance created by extreme fandom and the anonymous nature of social media. The extreme fandom creates a false intimacy between fans and athletes. This woman has never met Michael Jordan or LeBron James, yet she feels the need to make sure everyone reading her comment knows that MJ is not a good person. She feels protected by the internet and can pass any sort of character evaluation she chooses because of that protection. This hits me on a deeper level...

Disclaimer: this next paragraph is going to seem unrelated until very late in the process. Stick with me.

I watch a series called "Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee" on crackle.com. Its basically Jerry Seinfeld picking up his comedian friends in a beautiful vintage car and taking them to breakfast. The interactions are nothing but organic and the laughs are certainly genuine, which is why I'm drawn to the show. I recommend it even if you aren't a Seinfeld fan. In an episode last season, Jerry picks up Michael Richards (Kramer from Seinfeld for those of you born after 2001). During their conversation Richards reveals that he has struggled mightily after a racist tirade directed toward an audience member during a stand-up show in 2006 (if you watch this video just know its obscene and offensive, but you should gain some perspective from it). Seinfeld and Richards talk about the importance of coming from a place of selflessness. Seinfeld says "you have to free yourself...we are just raindrops on a windshield." His message is that we need to stop focusing on the judgement and gain awareness. If "Elsie" would just appreciate the entertainment and athleticism provided by both MJ and LeBron, she wouldn't be angry at the former for letting her down at some point to the degree that she feels the need to call him a "bad person." Take things at face value. Appreciate whatever happens to be in front of you right now. If you ever stop doing that, step back and check your perspective.

ZBU: A lack of perspective and a false sense of intimacy are definitely two of the biggest negative by-products brought to us by technology and social media.  There are "Elsies" with opinions all over the internet who sadly truly believe some of the crap they are saying. I would love to see how they would react if their every move was dissected and mocked. "Nice presentation Elsie...too bad you're overpaid and will never have as much talent as Bill up in accounting. His presentations are Hall of Fame caliber."   Maybe that is the only way they would actually gain some perspective... and I may have just come up with the next big reality show. Gain some Perspective.

Anyways, a point I want to make that I believe is often overlooked is that athletes and celebrities endure a lot of anger and stress due to social media. Sure we hear about the catastrophic blow ups like Michael Richards and I know they get paid millions of dollars but I think there needs to be more praise for those who do have perspective and don't let "Elsies" get them down. Last week, Dan Patrick interviewed the Cardinals outfielder Matt Holliday and they discussed some of the negative tweets he's been getting by people who own him on their fantasy baseball teams. Holliday laughed and said he understands it because he's a big fantasy football player who of course hates when his team loses. He went on to say that he's trying really hard and can hopefully get some points for owners soon. His playful mocking tone was a great example of a nonchalant way to deal with the fanatics who feel they are entitled to say what they want. Holliday is a guy who has perspective and refuses to let random people online ruin his day. There will probably always be "Elsies" trolling online, but maybe approaches like Holliday's will eventually allow them to see just how ridiculous they are being.

Cheaters and Racists and Liars OH MY!

ZBU: Sorry for the lapse in recent activity with the blog. There is no excuse for not practicing your craft and for that we apologize.

 A lot has happened since we posted a month ago but there is no better way to come back then to discuss a couple of  good old fashioned cheaters and racists. It all started about a week ago when Yankee's pitcher Michael Pineda was ejected from their game against the Red Sox for having pine tar on his neck. It is one of those "everybody does it" type of scenarios, but when you do it so blatantly and against the team that has already called you out on it this year, you my friend are an idiot. There was literally a blob of tar on this guy's neck. I mean at least get creative and hide it under your hat or something.

And speaking of keeping it under the hat, this leads me to our racist of the week... Clippers owner Donald Sterling. By now, most mainstream media outlets have already beat this story to death and they will undoubtedly continue to do so for weeks ahead. In case you somehow haven't heard however, Mr. Sterling was caught on tape making racist remarks to his girlfriend who ironically is of mixed descent herself, and basically told her to stop taking pictures with "black people."  Mr. Sterling is obviously a bigot and his track record of past law suits backs this fact up. The things he said in the tape are absolutely ridiculous and he should probably step down as owner of the Clippers. But what I don't think is being talked about enough is how this guy has been known to be this way for years and it is just now being addressed. It has been one of those "everybody knows it" scenarios and it took a Pineda type of blatant ignorance to finally expose the man for who he is. In short, Sterling at last blobbed his racism all over his neck and forced the league to react. The hard truth is that there are cheaters and racists all over this planet but we can't turn a naked eye to this fact most of the time and then act surprised when these boneheads finally push the limit. They need to be dealt with swiftly and then swept under rug. Let's not give their stupidity the coverage it doesn't deserve.

PAV: I have to point out the amazing alliteration you produced in the third sentence in the second paragraph.
OK, so I don't think the Michael Pineda saga (I just like the word "saga") is even news. Pine tar is a funny substance to begin with. I understand its purpose, but you would figure there would have been some technological advances in bat grips by now. The word idiot is totally appropriate. Funny is another good word.
As far as Sterling is concerned, he just got fined $2.5 million and is banned for life from the NBA. The NBA board of governors will force the sale of the team for political reasons (backlash of a "no" vote) and we will never hear from him in sports again. The problem with Sterling and men like him is that their bigotry is overlooked when their wallets are out. The great news is people like him are slowly dying out. I realize men like this create offspring, but people are becoming more open to race, ethnicity, and sexual identity than ever despite what you may think. By the time my kids are my age racism will be much less blatant and Donald Sterling's brethren will be dead and gone, gladly.

When the Game's Over

ZBu: It was late at night on a Saturday my senior year of high school. Huddled up in a circle on the outfield grass, down on one knee were nine eighteen year olds looking around an empty field under the bright lights. Some stared aimlessly. Some had anger in their eyes. Others tried to no avail to fight back tears. These were nine eighteen year olds realizing the past four years were over, life was about to change forever and they had fallen short of a goal they had been working so hard towards... a state championship. Some knew they would move on and play again in college but others realized their time on the field was done. Such is the life of an athlete. Such is life in general. Everything you have come to know can be taken from you and over in an instant. But to this day, now ten years later, I remember looking around at my teammates and feeling so proud to have been a part of such a great team filled with many different personalities who cared for each other nonetheless.

I was reminded of this moment in my life while watching North Dakota State's post game press conference last night after being ousted from the NCAA tournament by San Diego State. I really hadn't thought about it in a long time though its one of those life moments that never leaves you and that's probably because I was one of the guys fighting back tears knowing I'd never play again. Something I really love, however, is that even though it has now been a decade since I played on the Wando baseball team, if I ever see any of my teammates out and about, now matter how long its been, we can pick right up and have a conversation as if we were hitting balls off a tee hours before. These are guys I'm forever connected to because we once shared the same hopes and dreams while growing into men together. The North Dakota State's men's basketball team will undoubtedly feel the same way towards each other and if nothing else can always have a drink and discuss the time they knocked off a higher-seeded Oklahoma in their final season.

Our last blog was about kids getting out and being more active. I stand by everything we said in that piece and kids should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want to play sports. But its nostalgic moments like the one described above that really makes me hope my son or daughter invests in athletics. Not simply for a healthy body but for a healthy soul that has felt heartache and bliss all at once. The rest of life is too serious not to lose yourself in a game that can hurt badly at times but only makes you stronger in the long run. Win or lose, the memories and experiences are yours forever.

PAV: I got chills when I thought about that moment after our 4th loss of the season to Stratford. We were nationally ranked and we had really no business being so. We had no top prospects to name (no offense to Mike). We lost to a team that had two current MLB stars. We could've won! That's what I keep telling myself. I'm sure the North Dakota State team is saying the same thing: "If we could've stopped Xavier Thames, we had that game." The comaraderie those guys will feel after a great season by all measures will be everlasting.
The overwhelming feeling I'll always have about our amazing 2004 season will be that we were nationally ranked and outs away from a State Championship DESPITE our coach. Ask any of the 15 guys on our roster that year and all but one of them will tell you that. It was a moment in my life when I learned I could lead and when I learned that just because someone may be older and more experienced than you doesn't mean they are greater than you by any means. We won that year because we had faith in one another at all times. Can't learn that from Call of Duty.

Go Outside!

Pav: Recently, my wife and I were talking about how important we thought sports were in helping us become who we are today. Playing sports, especially team sports, helps you overcome lots of things. Social anxiety, self-esteem, leadership, coordination and just knowing that you can challenge yourself are only a handful of things sports can hep you either hone or overcome. I wish I were more active now and I think all the time how sports would always be a way for me to escape frustrating or otherwise negative situations. Just being outside and getting a little bit dirty can get you over the hump.
What I've noticed recently, though, is a lot of kids aren't active. I know its no secret that tons of kids play video games for hours on end, but having first person experience with two, albeit young, kids of my own and a nephew whom I'm with every day I've noticed a lot of kids could really care less whether they get outside or not. I'm going to digress...
I just watched a video of my dad and his brothers and their friends in 1962! It shows a bunch of kids, ages ranging from probably two to teenagers. They are running outside, trying to mount horses bareback, riding tractors and letting it rip in that primal way you know only exists in those moments when you have the freedom of childhood ahead of you. If you were to interview one of those kids today, not one of them would tell you they'd rather be inside playing board games (my weak attempt at a contemporary alternative to video games). My point is, you discover what you're made of when you're out in nature; getting bloody and bruised and sweating is well worth the effort.
I'm not against video games at all. I think they tap into different parts of us and can help with problem solving, spatial skills and imagination (article).  The real difference, to me, is that you're exposed when you're being physical with other people. Your body is vulnerable to injury. Your ego is vulnerable to embarrassment. If you get hurt in a video game, you start over. If you get beat by another player, you don't have to listen to their taunts. You are insulated in a very comfortable world while at your game console. Sports make you uncomfortable and I think everyone should have to go through that to learn what they are capable of. This article backs me up --> get active!

ZBu: We obviously have a lot of things in common (see Class inseparables yearbook picture) and in this case I definitely agree. My absolute favorite thing to do growing up in Baltimore was to go down to the corner store, buy a rubber ball, and throw it off my row home's wall imitating Cal Ripen with my baseball glove. The next big step was waiting for the older guys on the block to invite you to play street hockey or basketball against the other kids in the neighborhood. I know its cliché but I really stayed outside until the street lights started to come on and my mom called me in.
With that being said, I'm going to play devil's advocate here. Is it really that kids aren't active or are they a by-product of unbelievable technological advances and a complete shift in parenting styles? Imagine if your dad and his brothers had the new Xbox complete with 5 to 10 games and multiple controllers. Is it possible they would be more tempted to stay inside playing these games with incredible graphics while still messing with each other and learning some humility? Is it also possible that your dad and his brothers could play Xbox all day long because their parents allowed this to happen, don't have horses, and feel their kids are safer inside then out? I think so.
As you pointed out, video games definitely serve a purpose with kids and can help them grow in many different ways. There is also absolutely something to be said about getting outside, playing sports and discovering yourself like kids have been doing for centuries. Ultimately, I think it comes down to the impossible task of parenting in an age more advanced than any other. Even if you limit your own child's video game playing, he or she can still go over to friend's house and spend more time inside. I think we just have to continue to show them the benefits of both and understand kids are inherently active. If we show them the benefits of sports and are enthusiastic about them, they'll come around.

PAV: I think you really hit home with the "impossible task of parenting..." in the times we are in. My wife and I second guess all the time if we are making the right decisions about what our 5 year-old does and is exposed to. I know I can be overbearing with my expectations and I actively curb that when I can. I think the goal should be to figure out what your kid responds to naturally. My son plays tee ball 2-3 times a week, has Tae Kwon Do lessons twice a week, and LEGO class once a week. He is allowed to play video games (tablet only) on weekends. That's a lot of stimulation for a little kid, but I know he responds positively to all of it. He gets tired during the week, but I enjoy the fact that his busy little brain and uncoordinated little body get a good workout.  You'll soon learn about this, future dad...

Keeping it Real

ZBU: I had originally intended to throw this topic up at the end of our Court Storming post but later decided the subject deserved its own spot. So who is keeping it real? Well in my opinion, its Ian Kinsler, the infielder who is now a member of the Detroit Tigers. Ian made some news worthy statements recently when being interviewed by ESPN the magazine. He is quoted calling the Texas Rangers General Manager Jon Daniels "a sleazeball" and saying he hopes his former team goes "0-162" this season.  Kinsler felt slighted by his former team's G.M. because he found out about being traded for Prince Fielder well before actually being told in person and he apparently had various other issues with the team's front office. Kinsler is of course being ripped by various media outlets for his comments now but let me be one of the few to say I LOVE IT! I'm so sick of the politically correct, garbage statements that most athletes make. I am especially sick of the "buddy-buddy" attitude many athletes have toward each other. This is why I loved when Kevin Garnett shunned Ray Allen in their first game against each other after being teammates for 5 years in Boston. Ray went to go shake his hand and make small talk before the tip and KG just looked the other way. You are now the enemy. This is competition and your career not some Sunday over 40 church league. Bird and Magic would never have played grab ass before a game started. Pete Rose ran over the catcher in an All-Star game that meant nothing!  I say good for Ian Kinsler. You're not a Ranger anymore. They traded you because they believed they could upgrade. Instead of saying thank you for the time spent in Texas, why not say screw it I hope they lose every game this year because they are now the enemy. If your boss swapped you with another employee at another company would you put on a smile and thank him for having you at the company or would you say the hell with them and use it as motivation? I know what I would do...I'd keep it real.

Pav: This sort of reaches a larger subject for me. People are more and more guarded about what they say in general. I think people should say exactly what they think or keep their mouths shut. I'm obviously not condoning anyone walking out into the world and shaming everyone they know because they are in a bad mood. What I mean is, when someone asks you a question or your opinion about something, just say what you really feel. I would much rather interact with someone who is up front and completely hates me than someone I can't figure out. It's not fun to guess at peoples emotions and motivations. It's a waste of time and energy I'm not willing to engage in.

I think Ian Kinsler is going to catch some more shit because of this silly incident, but he is totally entitled to say what he said. He felt slighted and acted accordingly. He should be respected for that. He was treated like a commodity like athletes often are and he should be mad. I hope it motivates him. 

Court Storming

ZBU: We got a double topic post today as a new issue arose within the last day that I wanted to touch on at the end. First things first. By now everyone has heard about the fight that broke out between fans and players after Utah Valley's 66-61 overtime victory over New Mexico State. If you haven't, have a look https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2al0WUXpCXg. It was a pretty wild scene and to be fair it could have been avoided if New Mexico State guard K.C. Ross-Miller wouldn't have lost his cool and launched the ball at Utah Valley's Holton Hunsaker just before the buzzer. This act was definitely the spark that ignited the chaos. But let's be honest...it's really a surprise this doesn't happen more often in what has become a cliché ritual after wins.

Now I have to point out I have never had the pleasure of storming a court but I know people who have and they all say its a memorable experience. I absolutely think everyone should get to experience it once but when you have fans doing it on a weekly basis, it has to lose its meaning. Not to get all psychological here but I think this can be related back to how kids are raised these days. In the era of "every player gets a trophy," this generation's college students can't be left out of anything, so they have to storm courts like they used to see on tv after big games. Their fatal flaw, however, is they put no meaning behind their celebratory acts. They just do it so they can say they did. But as I said, when every kid gets a trophy and everyone has stormed a court, the passion and meaning are long gone. Do I think a court should be stormed every once and a while? Absolutely. Should you see it happen every week on ESPN and has it become redundant? Without a doubt.

Pav: I think the Indiana Pacer's incident with Stephen Jackson and Ron Artest is a huge reason fans' interaction should be severely limited. The problem is that everyone wants to be as close as possible to the action. People want to be seen next to these athletes so they can be a more intimate part of the experience. The problem is, spectators CAN'T be a part of the action. The sanctity of sports is gone, then.  It only ever hides in the nooks and crannies between social media and fan interaction. Those spaces are disintegrating. I think the Pacer's incident proves that people can't handle being so close to the action a lot of the time. I realize there are two sides to the aggression in the example I'm using, but its hard to protect an already vulnerable athlete from any one of thousands of possibly drunk, likely angry fans. Athletes should be left to celebrate or fight or cry without your drunk asshole friend shoving his face in the camera doing the "suck it" gesture. I do, though, think there is certainly a place for mass celebration...

If you're South Carolina (not picking on the Gamecocks) and you beat No. 25 Kentucky for your fourth conference win of the year, you aren't special and you've won nothing. You are celebrating something less than mediocrity. You are celebrating the fact that you are inferior. This happens almost once a week in whichever conference happens to be televised. Where do you go from there?

Mike Krzyzewski says that Duke fans only storm the court for Championships. Expect greatness from your school or team. Don't celebrate getting lucky or the fact that you beat a perennially great team on a bad night. I went to The U as a freshman in 2004 thinking I would for sure see a championship football game of some kind. It never happened. In fact we were pretty average for the four years I was in Coral Gables. We never celebrated victories as though it would be the only one we'd ever have. I can guarantee we would've found a way around the security wall if we'd won a National Championship, though. We need to give our athletes (professional and, um, otherwise) the respect that we expect them to be better than the game before. Respect them enough to hold them to higher standards than the mediocre.

Arizona Anti-Gay Legislation and the Super Bowl

ZBU: So to kick off our first topic, allow me to briefly summarize the situation. Earlier in the week, the Arizona legislature passed a bill named the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Its proposed purpose was to restore freedom by allowing businesses to refuse to serve anyone on religious grounds. Now, one thing this blog will never be is political propaganda aimed at one side or another. Its not because either of us don't have strong beliefs, but rather because I've found pieces that reveal their allegiance for one side or another  to stir innate stereotypes about the writers and the subject. Its sad but true.

Anyway, the bill obviously caused a scene as many viewed the law as a way for legislators to discriminate against gay people. Basically, your old anti-gay sentiment bill disguised as a pro-freedom law. Now, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act was ultimately vetoed later this week by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer. Many have questioned, however, whether she did so because she thought it was morally wrong or because she was under a lot of pressure from powerful groups...mainly the NFL.

The League put out a statement basically saying how their policies emphasize tolerance and inclusiveness and they would closely follow the decision in Arizona to formally make the bill a law. It is believed they were going to move next year's Super Bowl from Tempe if the bill wasn't vetoed. This would obviously have resulted in a couple million dollars in lost revenue for the state.

With everything that has gone on this year from the Richie Incognito vs. Jonathan Martin saga to the upcoming historic season with Michael Sam as the NFL's first openly gay player, the move by the League is not surprising. And there are other obvious opinions to draw from this story; Arizona has some crazy representatives and the statement by the NFL was pretty noble. But really what business is this of a sports league? When did the NFL become mob-like with its political intimidations?

Has the NFL grown too powerful?

Pav: I think the NFL has a mandate to be as powerful as they have been. Their regular season games get more viewers than World Series and NBA Finals games do on a regular basis. The NFL is America's most lucrative sport and easily the most popular.

The irony of the question of whether the NFL is too power hungry is that they nearly chose to pull the Super Bowl out of Arizona based on their cultural beliefs while Arizona nearly chose to leave those who live "alternative" lifestyles in the dust based on an opposite set of cultural beliefs.

So, no, they aren't too powerful. Google can pick and choose where their headquarters are, where they hold seminars and at which tech expos they present their new products. You better believe it would benefit any city in America or anywhere else to have an employer like Google bring their clout and the revenue that comes with it. Same goes for the NFL.

The NFL may have coerced the queen governess of Arizona to veto the conservative bill. But, if I had enough sway over a business partner and I saw a decision they were about to make would hurt my reputation as a leader of acceptance or at least an entity trying to promote social acceptance, I would certainly intervene in my own interest. Is that wrong?

Actually, the NFL has held this power for a long time. Long before the Goodell era. In fact, the last time the NFL vacated the Super Bowl from a specific venue was in 1993 in...ARIZONA. Arizona passed a bill to NOT recognize Martin Luther King, Jr. Day as an official holiday. They were on the slate to host a Super Bowl and lost that opportunity because of the same kind of radical policy they tried very recently to pass. They of course repealed the law a year later and were given the 1996 Super Bowl. That state is lucky to be in such a warm climate or no one would ever consider bringing business there.

I was so ready to get political on this. Glad you said what you said, though, ZBu. I don't think my political opinions, however acute, should cause anyone to form a complete picture of what online persona (thank you Steven King) I try to bring out in the blog.

The NFL is king. For now. Let the king play throne games until his reign is through.