No Witty Title for This Sad Subject

Last October, in my very first post of this fresh incarnation of Useless Sports, I derisively referred to “list-obsessed males” in explaining my choice to do away with power rankings. Well, here we are, eight months later, and I have spent the last two weeks writing rather irrelevant, self-absorbed¹ lists. I’m awfully sorry about that. I will try to do better.

ESPN’s Outside the Lines released a report this week which studied criminal investigations and prosecutions of athletes at several major colleges. The study found that male basketball and football players are much less likely to be prosecuted when named as suspects in police investigations than their nonathletic peers.

For anyone who lives in a college town, as I do, this probably comes as no surprise. My relatively small hometown houses the University of Montana, and even at our mid-major level of athletics we’ve had several high profile cases of accusations and attempted cover-ups in recent years.

The reasons cited in OTL’s report are numerous, but they all point to a broader cultural problem. Athletes are held on a pedestal, and the subsequent tickets, apparel, advertising revenue, and television rights that we all pay for feed a lumbering beast of unearthly profits, and college athletic departments are raking in the dough. Sadly, but predictably, many (or perhaps most) of them are willing to protect that cash cow at any cost.

So when the name of a star player pops up in a police report, it’s in the best interest of an AD to do everything possible to clear that name. After all, it’s his job to maintain that revenue stream, and criminal accusations shed a negative light, not just on the name on the back of the jersey, but on the name on the front as well. The AD sets the athlete up with the best lawyer, finding all sorts of ways to skirt NCAA prohibitions against such assistance, or he puts pressure on skittish small-town law enforcement; one way or another, the charges are either dropped or never filed in the first place.

This scene is replayed far too often on campuses from sea to shining sea. We keep sacrificing our hard-earned livelihood and precious time to this god of athletics, willing to overlook a thousand injustices in the name of fandom. “Amateur” athletics have been perverted into a complex profit scheme, and those gifted few on whose backs these profits are gained are often too valuable to see undone by something as petty as theft or rape.

This is not merely anecdotal scraps of evidence. The OTL report documents several specific and alarming statistics that should make anyone who believes in justice, or even simple decency, sit up and take notice.

Who is to blame then? The athletes? Not really, because let’s face it, young men are going to commit crimes whether they are properly prosecuted or not. Of course the individuals who break the law should be treated accordingly, but my crusade is not against them per se. The athletic programs? They are certainly at fault in hundreds of cases, but when so much money is at stake with so little accountability to go with it, corruption is simply inevitable. It’s the burden of being a part of the human race.² What about law enforcement? Surely the police and prosecutors who aren’t properly pursuing these cases bear some culpability? Yes, and again, it’s important to hold them accountable, but all too often the fear is that prosecution will be accompanied by a public backlash. Public response shouldn’t really be a consideration when justice is at stake, of course, but again, they’re only human.

Which leads me to the real problem. The real problem is me. The real problem is you. We gleefully buy our tickets, watch our television, shop for our branded gear, and we ignore what’s happening before our noses. Oh sure, around the water cooler on Monday morning we take a real hard line against that star quarterback whose name is in the paper for all the wrong reasons. “He needs to be charged. There can’t be any special treatment,” we – I – declare all piously, with a self-assured nod. But come Saturday morning, my butt is filling a seat in the stadium³ all the same, watching that very quarterback light up the scoreboard, and cheering as if he was my own son. What is wrong with the upside-down priorities of this picture?

As is often the case, I don’t have an immediate solution here. I don’t think there is one. But reading that article is a good start. It’s well worth the time investment for a dose of perspective. Then we can each do our part by considering our priorities. Is sport king? Or are a good education, fair and equal treatment, and maybe things like family and community a whole lot more significant?

If a big chunk of us sports junkies decided that our obsession with watching some other random schlubs play a game is not worth our supreme attention, then maybe, just maybe, this financial juggernaut can begin to weaken, allowing justice and common sense to again take the reins.

We hold the power, because ultimately, we hold the pocketbooks. We are the problem; now let’s try to be the solution, one baby step at a time.^{4, 5}

¹ This is, after all, “another self-indulgent blog” filled with “worthless trivia”. At least I’m honest, right there in the heading.

² I didn’t mean this as pretentious as it sounded, as you’re about to find out.

³Not in my case, truthfully, as I have never attended a college football game, but the consideration primarily financial, not moral. I have no qualms showing up at two or three much-less pricey basketball games per year.

⁴ Holy cow, that’s corny. However, did you notice that, outside of the first paragraph, I didn’t have as much humor today? I couldn’t bring myself to laugh about this one. Sorry.

⁵ This is very difficult for me to say, because I truly am indicting myself. I love sports, and I am trying really hard to take it out of a position of priority in my life. But actions still speak louder than words, and I still spend a great deal of my free time watching games, or highlights, or SportsCenter, or talking about sports, or reading about sports, or (*gasp!*) writing about sports, time that could – that should – be spent with family or friends, writing something worthwhile, reading something instructive, or better yet, getting my tail in gear and volunteering. Because, ultimately, sports DO NOT MATTER. So perhaps one day I will finally tire of the utterly unfruitful distraction and wean myself of my addiction. But until then, I will keep trying to invest a bit more of my most valuable resource, time, elsewhere.

Baa-aa-aah

All hail the GOAT.

And no, I’m not talking about the newest incarnation of my Chicago Cubs in a season filled with hope on the North Side that’s been dubbed “The Year of the Goat”.¹

The term GOAT is, of course, an acronym for Greatest of All Time. As much as I hate to admit it, the title could easily be applied to Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski, who this season became the first coach in men’s college basketball history to record 1,000 wins and also won his fifth national championship. But that’s not who I’m talking about.

It’s about time we started giving due respect to Connecticut women’s basketball coach Geno Auriemma. This week he won his tenth title in the last 21 years, and the sports world mostly yawned. Anyone otherwise inclined to be casually interested in women’s basketball is likely turned off by the dominance: why even watch if UConn’s just going to win anyway?

I’m not pretending that I watch a ton of women’s college basketball. Very little, in fact. But that shouldn’t prevent me or anyone else from recognizing how great this run has been. Sure, John Wooden won his 10 titles in just 12 years, which is plain nuts, but back then many of his opponents didn’t even allow African-Americans on the team. This left UCLA with a built-in advantage just because Wooden was more concerned with the quality of a guy’s jump shot than the color of his skin, while Auriemma’s competition is self-evidently stronger. This stretch has overlapped with that of Pat Summitt, who has more wins than anyone else in college basketball history to go with eight championships of her own. During Auriemma’s tenure he’s faced, and repeatedly beaten, the best player in women’s college basketball history (Baylor’s Britney Griner), a year-in and year-out stacked Stanford team coached by another all-time great, and, well, everybody else in the last 25 years, getting to 16 Final Fours in the process.

I believe Geno Auriemma absolutely deserves to be in the conversation for the greatest basketball coach of all time at any level, along with Wooden, Summitt, Coach K, Red Auerbach, and Phil Jackson. Let’s not be blinded by the fact that he coaches the women’s game. The talent level is the same for everyone at that level, Auriemma just utilizes it far better than anyone else. I have no doubt that he could coach the men’s game or even the NBA if he wanted to, but his preference is to stay where he’s at.

Aside from giving him the props he deserves, why am I bringing this up now? Because he made some comments the other day that should make both basketball fans and the NCAA sit up and take notice. He called men’s college basketball today a “joke” and went on to shred the lack of offense and snore-inducing pace. I’ll send you to Satchel Price’s article on SB Nation if you want more details of what exactly Auriemma said and why he said it. Later this same week, another very smart person from the basketball world, Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, said much the same thing.

The NCAA has a hard time doing anything right, it often seems, years or decades behind the times with a college football playoff, student-athlete stipends, etc., etc. This is an organization that makes many, many millions off the names and likenesses of its players while still refusing to let them accept a single penny of it. An organization that profits off athletes putting themselves very much in harm’s way almost every single day in ways that can and do cause long-term physical and mental damage, but won’t offer those athletes any insurance to cover such injuries. It’s blatant exploitation on an unforgivably large scale.

Whew. I’ll climb off my soapbox before I begin to sound even more hypocritical than I already do as an avid consumer of that same college sports system that I so vehemently decry. My point is that, this one time, the NCAA better listen to all the criticism. It’s time to move into the 21^st century. Let’s start with the shot clock, which should absolutely not be longer than 30 seconds, and really should be more like 27 or 28. The restricted arc and three-point line should be moved to international standards, and the lane should be widened. Let’s tweak and better define hand-checking and the block/charge rules. Take away a couple of the timeouts. Replay needs to be comprehensively expanded so that referees in every game, at least in the major conferences and the postseason tournaments, have instant access to every possible camera angle in the highest definition known to man. While we’re at it let’s form a centralized replay center where a group of officials can make replay decisions independent of the game itself, just as other leagues are beginning to do (this also applies to college football).

Because right now, the product just plain sucks. It’s not particularly entertaining. Sure, all the close games in March are fun, but in the tournament we just witnessed, exciting finishes were marred far too often by ugly play, slow dribbles, passes back and forth between equally guarded players on the perimeter, and officiating miscues or questionable calls. The game desperately needs to be opened up, given a chance to allow the spectacular athletes to showcase their talents, and it needs to be taken just a little bit out of the hands of overzealous coaches. The spotlight that shines so brightly on the plethora of good or great coaches needs to be shifted back to the real stars, the athletes themselves.

Geno Auriemma is, indeed, one of the Greatest of All Time. Maybe he knows a thing or two about basketball, and maybe it’s foolish to disregard his very strong opinion. If the NCAA knows what’s good for them, they’ll listen.

But that’s a pretty big “if”.

¹To understand why goats have anything to do with the Cubs, please refer to my previous post, Some 15th Century Witch Is the Cause of All My Problems.

The Parody of Parity

If you read my blog, or if you know me at all, you probably know by now that I always root for underdogs. Teams that I like rarely do well, and teams that do well I rarely like.¹ By that criteria, this has not been a pleasant college basketball year for me, especially the tournament.

The Final Four consists of four national powers.²All of them have won at least one title before, with a total of fifteen between them. Four of the eight or so best coaches are represented.³There are three number one seeds. Earlier in the tournament, the biggest Cinderella beyond the Round of 32 was… UCLA? Only the most dominant program in men’s college basketball history!⁴ And of course, the question ever since the final buzzer sounded after Connecticut’s gloriously stunning run through last year’s tournament has been, can anyone stop Kentucky in 2014-15? So far, answer is no, as the Wildcats are 38-0 heading into tomorrow.

But is this so unusual? There’s been a lot of talk about college basketball’s parity in recent years, with Final Four runs by teams like George Mason, Butler, and VCU. UConn last year became the second-lowest seed ever to win a title, and their championship in 2011 was accompanied by the lowest average Final Four seed in history (6.5, with none of the teams seeded higher than third). This has been attributed to various factors, especially the one-and-done rule and the slow pace of play that tends to favor underdogs. The amount of national television exposure for smaller programs these days probably helps spread out recruiting. And although the tournament has become undeniably less predictable in recent years, the question is whether this translates to true parity.

For all the upsets and surprise tournament runs, national champions tend to be pretty conventional; in fact, since 2008, every winner has had multiple championships under their belt already. But Gonzaga has become a consistent top-10 team, right? Zero Final Fours. Wichita State? One great run, followed by an undefeated season that ended in a Round of 32 loss in which the Shockers played perhaps their best game of the season. And still lost. George Mason? VCU? Blips on the radar. Butler? They had the best opportunity of anyone, but their chance at true immortality bounced off the rim with that half-court shot against Duke and along with everything in that nauseating 18%-shooting first half against UConn.⁵

In truth, the best high school players are still choosing the highest-profile programs, because they want the opportunity to play for a legendary coach for a year or two before bolting to the NBA for a nice raise in their allowance. Smaller programs simply lack the resources, scholarships, and recruiting footprint to compete with the North Carolinas of the world, and no amount of savvy senior experience can make up for John Calipari’s sheer NBA-ready talent.

And is that so terrible? Do we need to have a Florida Gulf Coast just to make college basketball interesting? As much as I hope for underdogs to achieve the near-impossible, how exciting would it be to see a Kentucky-Duke final, just a couple weeks after the airing of that Christian Laettner 30-for-30? And as much as we all like the Main Street relatability of Cinderella,⁶ no fairy tale is complete without a villain. Golf desperately needs Tiger Woods in order to stay relevant, Alex Rodriguez is now the most famous player in baseball, and nobody would watch college basketball if there wasn’t someone to root against. We like names and faces we know, too, and we love being polarized over great teams. It’s a fact that we love to hate Calipari, Duke, and Doug Gottlieb,⁷ and if none of them was filling our screens this weekend, you can bet that CBS’s ratings would take a serious nosedive.

Besides all that, just as I pointed out in the lead-up to the recent⁸ Super Bowl, great teams make for great games. The 2008 Final Four was one of the most exciting of all time, and it was the only one in the 64-team era to feature four one-seeds. This year, the on-court matchups may be just as historic, and how can any true fan complain about great basketball?

Schools that cast a long shadow in college basketball, just like great teams or individuals in any sport, make for better business, better ratings, and better quality of play. And who doesn’t want that?⁹

¹Surprisingly enough, this hasn’t lent itself to being a particularly happy or optimistic sports fan.

²At least, three national powers and Wisconsin, who could be counted in the next tier below the top 5-10 annual contenders.

³The other four would probably be Roy Williams, Jim Boeheim, Rick Pitino, and… Billy Donovan? I don’t tend to think of Donovan as much, but the man has won two championships, for pity’s sake. Bo Ryan would probably be the biggest question mark here, but as of this moment, given what he’s doing with the Badgers over the last few years, I would submit that he easily outpaces Bill Self or Sean Miller, and don’t even talk to me about Larry Brown – it’s been over 25 years since the man did anything in college! Otherwise, I need to see Mark Few (as well as Miller) get to a final four before he deserves inclusion, and I need Gregg Marshall’s success to be a little more sustained. My top ten: Calipari, Krz…(a lot of z’s and k’s – Coach K), Pitino, Izzo, Wiliams, Donovan, Boeheim, Ryan, Self, and either Marshall or Few.

⁴Let’s not forget that this year’s Women’s Final Four is even more top-heavy: all number one seeds, and for the most part they cruised through their respective regions to get there.

⁵Butler actually led that game at halftime. That has got to be the most unwatchable national championship of the shot clock era. Incidentally, that was the year that the average seed was 6.5, which proves one of the points I’m about to make.

⁶I’m just mixing metaphors like they’re cocktails in the giant salad bowl of life.

⁷The guy is a great commentator, but he just needs to stop pretending he knows anything about basketball. It’s painfully obvious that his three set-mates are laughing on the inside at his outlandish, attention-seeking predictions. But he makes pregame shows watchable all on his own, which isn’t easy to do.

⁸Already two months ago!

⁹Me, that’s who. I want some upsets, doggonit! And Michigan State doesn’t count. Neither does UCLA. Or UAB, because they single-handedly busted my entire bracket.

Not Schottenheimer

In this basketball-crazed time of year, it’s common to hear talking heads on TV explain that point guard play is perhaps the biggest key in March Madness.¹A team with an effective backcourt, we are told, can take down a big and strong but one-dimensional opponent. It’s easy to see why: the offense runs through him (or her, as the case may be), and a really good point guard will handle the ball on every possession. He really is comparable to a quarterback on the court, and almost as vital to a team’s success.

So, in the middle of a historically competitive first round² of the NCAA Tournament, I thought I’d take a moment to reflect on what’s happening right now in the NBA. History is being made before our eyes. More than ever before, the Association is driven by this one position. Some of the best point guards ever to shoot hoops are playing right now, and we are the lucky beneficiaries.

Who are these fabulous players? As I have noted before, I am a list-obsessed nerdy male, so I will compile my personal list of the top ten point guards in the game right now. This reflects how I feel about each player at this moment; it’s not a measure of career greatness or a projection of future growth.

Stephen Curry, Golden State Warriors

We all know about his smooth shot, his quick release, his playmaking ability incongruous with his size. But what has propelled him to the top of the list this year, as well as the top of the MVP conversation, is his much-improved defense and his orchestration of a high-flying, pass-happy offense. Curry’s assist numbers don’t dazzle as much as his scoring often does, but it’s his setting up of plays well before the actual shot develops, along with his unique “hockey assist” offense creation, that makes his passing elite. Wardell Stephen Curry II³ will never be mistaken for an elite defender, however, largely because he is relatively undersized, but his effort and hustle on that end have been as good as anyone in the NBA this season.

Russell Westbrook, Oklahoma City Thunder

If he continues to play at the ridiculous pace of the last month or two, Russell will inarguably jump to number one here, as he has been without a doubt the best player in the NBA lately. He’s been flat out amazing, but it hasn’t been consistently translating into wins as the Thunder try to cling to the West’s final playoff spot. The knock on Westbrook has always been that, although he may make insane athletic plays and put up gaudy stats, he doesn’t always make choices that are in his team’s best interests. He hogs the ball, commits a more than his share of turnovers, and takes a lot of ill-advised shots, even with MVP Kevin Durant and surprisingly skilled shooter Serge Ibaka are on the floor with him. This was all true until a couple of months ago. It remains to be seen whether his newfound all-around greatness can be sustained when (if) Durant returns from injury.

Chris Paul, Los Angeles Clippers

A year ago, the idea that anyone could approach Paul as the best PG in the land would have sounded outlandish. This hasn’t been his best year, and it has been the best year by far for both Curry and Westbrook, but I would not argue with anyone still putting Paul (or Westbrook, for that matter) on top. He’s a less skilled shooter than the other two, but he enables his teammates in ways that evoke John Stockton. Chris Paul is a complete player: an elite-level defender, especially off the ball, the league’s best passer, a smooth shooter, and savant-intelligent as a ball handler. The little things that Chris Paul does that no one notices are unsurpassed by anyone else.⁴

Kyrie Irving, Cleveland Cavaliers

He’s here almost solely because of his scoring ability. Watch what this guy did the other night against the Spurs and tell me he’s not a top-four player at his position. Not to mention his performance earlier this year against Curry’s Warriors. Yes, his defense is shaky on a good night, but he is flat-out one of the best shooting point guards in NBA history. No, this is not a hyperbole, and it’s been a fact ever since he was drafted number one overall back in 2011. Now that he has a much better cast around him, including the league’s best player in LeBron James, we have a chance to see Irving’s passing ability too. He is creating plays that enable a guy like Timofey Mozgov in ways no one thought possible, and the Cavs are getting scary good as much because of his play as anything else.

Damian Lillard, Portland Trail Blazers

I happen to have a special affinity for Lillard because of his style of play, his personality, and, mostly, because of the small-time conference where he happened to play college hoops. He’s got some work to do on consistency on both ends of the court, but when he is on, Lillard can do it all.

John Wall, Washington Wizards

The lack of consistent scoring has been mostly ironed out of Wall’s game, and he shows every sign of continuing to improve across the board. Still, he doesn’t have the feel yet of a player who can single-handedly elevate his team on a nightly basis, as the five players above him do.

Kyle Lowry, Toronto Raptors

Lowry is clearly the centerpiece of the Raptors as they try to build a contender, and he has shown that he can perform in the spotlight. The question is whether he, DeMar DeRozan, and Terrence Ross are enough to form an effective Big Three. My answer is probably not, but Lowry has potential to be a solid no. 2 option on a very good team.

Jeff Teague, Atlanta Hawks

Maybe he gets too much credit for being on the East’s best team, but there’s a reason. The Hawks’ offense, like Golden State and San Antonio, relies on a lot of passing, which requires a maestro who can manage all that movement. Teague is terrific at this, while also an excellent defender and above-average scorer.

Tony Parker, San Antonio Spurs

Sure, he isn’t what he used to be. But an old, tattered Rembrandt is still a sight to behold. Parker was among the top two point guards in this league for a long time, and while he has been terrible at times this year, he has also shown real flashes of 2007 Tony. So, maybe I’m just being nostalgic with this pick. Cut me some slack. He’s a Hall of Famer.

Mike Conley, Memphis Grizzlies

There is a school of thought that says Conley should be considered on par with the top shelf at the position. Analytics types say his advanced numbers, both on offense and defense, are nearly as good as Curry’s. I don’t quite buy in. There needs to be some scoring for me to put someone at that level, but there is no denying that what he does do, he does really well.

Look at that top ten. What does this fairly diverse group have in common? If the season ended today, every one of their teams would be in the playoffs. That’s why the point guard is comparable to the quarterback: if you’ve got one, you’re set; if you don’t, you’re screwed.

Perhaps even more notable is who’s missing from this list. Former MVP Derrick Rose? Nowhere to be found.⁵All-Star and blockbuster trade bait Rajon Rondo? Never heard of him. 2014 Rookie of the Year Michael Carter-Williams? A schlub. Former All-Stars Deron Williams and Jrue Holiday? His name is JRUE??? Starter in four straight NBA finals Mario Chalmers?⁶ He must be in the D-League somewhere. What about Ricky Rubio, Ty Lawson, Brandon Knight, George Hill, Kemba Walker, and Eric Bledsoe? Collectively, a bunch of good-for-nothing hacks.

Seriously, though, I just named 22 point guards most of whom have a legitimate case for inclusion in that top ten. A top ten in which a future Naismith Memorial inductee is ranked ninth! The depth at the position is truly unprecedented.

Yes, forwards are still key; LeBron and Durant still bring that ability to put a team on their back in ways that no point guard can. But in the glaring absence of big men in today’s game, the finesse of a great point guard holds more value than ever before, and without one, winning on large scale as a true title contender is borderline impossible.

The Age of the Point Guard has officially arrived, and it is beautiful.

¹If you were looking for an explanation of the title, too bad. By now the post that started this ongoing inside joke about the Schottenheimer Effect is about two months old, so if you’re really that concerned about it, then go find the post “A Lot of Talk about Balls” in the archives. Then you’ll understand. Well, not really, but I will have gotten another click out of you, so there’s that.

²I refuse to call this the second round, because that would require acknowledging that those silly play-in games are really the “first round”, which is confusing as fork. Hampton can now claim they won a 2015 NCAA tournament game, even though they got in with a winning percentage below .500, while Big 12 champion Iowa State gets nothing. It’s utterly ridiculous.

³Dazzle your friends with your blinding knowledge by dropping this particular bit of trivia in casual conversation: Steph Curry’s real first name is Wardell, same as his dad, NBA player Dell Curry.

⁴At least I think they are. How would I know? No one notices them.

⁵Literally. For the last three years. He has gone AWOL.

⁶Okay, so I might be stretching a bit including Chalmers here. Never let the facts get in the way of me making an important point.

You Would Think We Would Be Used to This by Now

Note that this post is not called The Schottenheimer Effect. If you have been reading this blog on a regular basis, then you know what I’m talking about. If not then… shame on you.

I do apologize, however, for my recent lack of posts. I swear I have a valid alibi, but if I told you about it, you wouldn’t believe me. There’s no way one person can be so technologically unlucky. Let’s just say I’m tempted to take a sledgehammer to this accursed laptop.

I know this will come as a shock to you, but I have never had a girlfriend. In fact, I’ve never really been close. No dates, no phone numbers, nothing. At 23 years old, I’m still so clueless when it comes to the beautiful denizens of that exotic land known as Women that when I come into contact with one of reasonably corresponding age I lock up like a manual transmission accidently thrust into reverse instead of fourth gear while driving at 50 miles an hour.¹ I stutter, I laugh nervously, but most of all, I just have no idea what to say. I feel totally lost in situations that seem natural to ordinary humans.

Silas Nacita is a walk-on running back for college football’s Baylor Bears.² At least he was until a couple of weeks ago. On February 25, he announced that the NCAA had declared him ineligible to play and that he was therefore dismissed from the team. Nacita elaborated that the ineligibility allegedly³ was a result of benefits he had received that the NCAA deemed to be in violation of its rules. What were these egregious violations, you ask? What was so heinous that the powers that be of college athletics ended this young man’s dream?

When Nacita walked on at Baylor after working his way through community college with partial academic scholarships, he was without a place to live. Rather than see him spend the next several months homeless, a concerned acquaintance let him crash at their apartment. Which, as has been covered before in the bizarre case of Boise State’s Antoine Turner, is illegal. No matter who is offering the assistance or how pure their motives, student athletes are not permitted to receive any help, financial or otherwise, outside of the NCAA’s very strict guidelines for the use of a special fund doled out to each school. Because Nacita didn’t have an athletic scholarship, the university couldn’t offer him any housing, which meant no one else could, either.

Now, the NCAA has categorically denied Nacita’s claim, and the statements from Baylor staff have been a bit ambiguous as to the true source of the declaration of ineligibility. But even if the school itself determined that Nacita couldn’t play, it did so using the NCAA’s own rules and track record regarding benefits infractions, preempting an expected ruling that would have probably had the same effect. Regardless, Silas Nacita has suffered by a strange, austere interpretation of rules meant to preserve amateurism, not prevent common decency.

The point is that the National Collegiate Athletic Association, like me around girls,⁴ has no clue what to do with itself, saying and doing all the wrong things with more tone-deafness than me in the shower. The inconsistent enforcement of the rulebook has the NCAA awkwardly shuffling its feet like a teenaged boy standing alone at a school dance – taking away Reggie Bush’s Heisman Trophy for having the audacity to talk to an agent one moment, for years turning a blind eye to multiple allegations about a host of violations by North Carolina basketball the next; first turning Penn State upside-down and yanking several years of wins for the actions (or inaction) of some disgraced former school officials and a deceased coach, then abruptly giving back all the wins and scaling back almost all of the sanctions a couple of years later.

To the casual observer, the inconsistency and convoluted rules lack the appearance of common sense and smack of, at best, total incompetence or, at worst, widespread corruption. Whatever the case, the governing body needs to get its act together, or risk sinking from a laughingstock to an afterthought.

And, for the sake of all things good, give Silas Nacita back his spot on the team, and let the poor kid stay wherever the heck he wants.

¹If you’re lucky enough never to have committed this particular driving infraction, I’ll explain that it causes a horrid grinding sound reminiscent of Steve Buscemi’s bones getting crushed by the wood chipper at the end of Fargo and simultaneously making you feel like you just caused several hundred dollars’ worth of damage and compelling you to look around you in red-faced shame to make sure no other drivers noticed.

²This will tie together with the previous paragraph. I promise. Have some faith.

³ Now say that 5 times fast: Ineligibility allegedly, ineligibility allegedly, ineligibility allegedly, ineligibility allegedly, ineligibility allegedly.

⁴That’s right, another terrible attempt at a humorous analogy by me. And you wondered why I don’t have a girlfriend.