There has been much press about Texas QB Vince Young scoring only six of 50 questions correct on something called The Wonderlic Test, and that the test was incorrectly scored. Aside from the character assasination that has taken place against Young, and by some who don't want to see him succeed and are acting in a boarderline illegal and prosecutable fashion, I doubt the Wonderlic itself is being used properly. It's supposed to test an employees ability to solve problems related to a job.
I'm going to throw this bomb: The Wonderlic Test -- as it's applied -- has nothing to do with football and given the fact that the questions aren't directly related to the game, an athlete could sue an NFL team or the NFL itself for damages related to the improper use of the test.
I'm not kidding.
According to legal scholar Daniel L. Wong, the case of Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 considered and invalidated the use of the "Wonderlic Personnel Test," which purported to measure general intelligence, and the Bennett Mechanical Comprehension Test.
Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 431 (1975) also considered the Wonderlic test as well as the Beta Examination, which purported to test non-verbal intelligence. The key in these and subsequent federal decisions, is the extent to which employers are able to demonstrate that tests are truly related to job performance.
Jason Chung wrote an 18-page paper reporting in part how the Wonderlic is used as a way to block the assention of black college quarterbacks into the NFL. Chung writes:
The "Wonderlic" Argumentation
Another major barrier that African-American quarterbacks face stems from the increased use of the Wonderlic intelligence test through 1968 to 1999. Michael Callans, President of Wonderlic Consulting, advances the popular argument that:
[Quarterbacks] need to lead, think on their feet, evaluate all of their
options and understand the impact their actions will have on the
outcome of the game. Wonderlic helps team owners make the best
selections by identifying which players have the mental strength to
lead their team to victory.
This belief has been prevalent since at least the 1970s when Tom Landry of the Dallas Cowboys became the first NFL head coach to screen for players using a generic aptitude test - the Wonderlic Personnel Test.25 Landry was looking for a tool to quantify intelligence and draw a correlation between that and performance. In the subsequent 30 years upon its introduction the Wonderlic has become a key performance prognosticator for many NFL franchises. Though most prospective NFL players are put through the test, those players in strategic (read white) positions are scrutinized more closely. NFL scouts believe that the test will help them identify quarterbacks that will assimilate NFL playbooks quicker and identify quarterbacks that make better decisions.
Generally speaking, a score in the mid-twenties is considered acceptable for a prospective NFL quarterback. In 1994, the Cleveland Browns were looking for a quarterback that scored at least a 24 on the Wonderlic. These high expectations have acted as an imposing intellect barrier for African-American quarterbacks who, as an ethnic group, have historically had a tough time meeting this benchmark and thus were discounted from consideration by some NFL teams due to a deficiency of intellect. There were but few black quarterbacks, the argument went, that had the mental capacity to succeed on the test and therefore on the field. An examination of relatively reliable Wonderlic scores shows that black quarterbacks, more commonly than white quarterbacks, score lower than 20: Jeff Blake in 1992, Kordell Stewart in 1995 and Steve McNair in 1995 all scored 17 or lower.
The failure of African-American quarterbacks to meet the lofty mid-twenties standard has spawned criticism of the whole procedure. The traditional argument against the Wonderlic has been that it, like all aptitude tests, was culturally biased and therefore systemically set up to ensure that black athletes receive lower scores. This charge, until recently, was the primary accusation levelled against the Wonderlic.
However, more recent studies have exposed a more illuminating fact. A study by David Chan et al. noted that African-Americans adults in general have a lower regard in general for aptitude tests than their Caucasian counterparts which caused them to score lower on the tests. After motivation was given to black test-takers their scores improved until there was no
discernible difference between black test scores and white test scores.
Critics point to additional flaws with the Wonderlic system other than race-related lower test scores. It has been pointed out that there are some "Wonderlic smart" players that are "football dumb". Numerous NFL coaches, including Tony Dungy and Denny Green, note that good Wonderlic scores do not necessarily equate success in decision-making prowess on the
field.
Indeed, the converse is also true, low Wonderlic scores do not necessarily signify weak quarterback play. For instance, Dan Marino, the NFL's all-time leading passer, only scored a 16 but by all accounts he was very intelligent football-wise.
Still, because it remains the only quantifiable method of measuring intelligence the Wonderlic continues to be used by NFL teams. As a consequence, because of the reasons stated above, it seems black quarterbacks will generally continue to score lower on the Wonderlic than their white counterparts. If the period from 1968 to 1999 is any indication, many black quarterbacks will be shunned due to a low score and "low intelligence".
That is what's happening today. But since it's true that the Wonderlic does not actually measure football related aptitude, then the NFL itself is wide open for a class action lawsuit if this problem is not cleared up -- a legal battle the league would surely lose.
It would lose on the very basis that its own coaches can't defend the claim that it tests "football intelligence" yet that's the image being communicated by much of the media and some NFL teams. If a player scores poorly on it, they, like Vince Young, are branded as not football smart, an observation anyone would have to be a total fool to accept in the case of Texas' National Champion QB.
And with that, someone must explain how Miami's NFL Hall of Fame Quarterback Dan Marino -- who scored a 16 on the Wonderlic -- became one of the league's best signal callers in its history? A 16 on the Wonderlic means that Marino had an IQ of less than 100. Do you believe that? I didn't think so.
Someone out there better appologize to Vince Young.
Monday, February 27, 2006
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Tom O'Neil: Is secret homophobia fueling a possible 'Crash' upset?
Tom O'Neil of the LA Times penned this column which I just read. It's not designed to be directly linked to, so here it is:
"I don't think he's right, but there's some of it. I think Brokeback will win because it's got too many mainstream A-List Hollywood people behind it. But we'll see.
Is secret homophobia fueling a possible 'Crash' upset?
Something weird is going on among Oscar voters — and it's also going unspoken. "Crash" and "Good Night, and Good Luck" have their passionate supporters who gush with their honest love of those best picture nominees, but most non-"Brokeback" votes I hear from Oscar voters are really anti-"Brokeback."
Scads of academy members fume to me when they tattle on how they're inking their ballots, "I'm not voting for 'Brokeback'!" Then they calm down a bit and add, "I'm voting for (fill in the blank)" and give a positive reason to justify their decision for picking an alternative. In most cases I hear contrary votes for "Crash," but there's also surprising strength for "Good Night, and Good Luck." So far I've heard equal numbers of votes for "Brokeback" as "Crash," with "Good Night" not far behind. The best picture race is really thisclose.
It's the fury that voters express when mentioning "Brokeback" that's so odd and suspicious. In some cases I believe they're people who think the film is overrated. Or they're just weary of gay cowboy jokes. But in the majority of cases I suspect it's something else and something bad that they feel they can't utter out loud, so they're holding it in. You can see it on their faces.
Could it be secret homophobia? Perhaps. The academy is comprised mostly of straight white guys with white hair who know it's intolerable to bash gays in lavender-friendly, liberal Hollywood. But I really don't think it's that in any large way. Instead, I think it's the same frustration non-Jews feel when there's a glut of Holocaust films leading the Oscar pack in Jewish-friendly Hollywood. They want to exclaim, "Enough already with the Holocaust films!" This time I suspect many straight Hollywooders — who are totally cool with gay people in general — are fighting the urge to shriek, "Enough already with the gay persecution films!"
This Oscar year there really is a glut of them and, if I'm right in my predictions, we'll see the all-gay Oscars on March 5 with victories in the top categories by "Brokeback Mountain," "Capote" and "Transamerica."
How widespread is this anti-"Brokeback" tide? It's hard to say because it's mostly unspoken, but it's very real and it makes predicting the best picture race a crapshoot. It's quite possible that we could see another one of those best picture/director splits that used to be so rare, but are now commonplace with "Chicago," "Shakespeare in Love" and "Gladiator" winning best picture while the director laurels went to, respectively, Roman Polanski ("The Pianist"), Steven Spielberg ("Saving Private Ryan") and Steven Soderbergh ("Traffic"). Whatever happens this year, it's clear that Ang Lee has the best director trophy in the bag.
In the end, I believe "Brokeback" will win because there's a clear voting pattern in the top category recently: academy members want to be on the winning team. Front-runners tend to win even when there's a growing surge against them. Backlash against "The English Patient" was so widespread that "Seinfeld" did a whole episode about it, but it still won. Even though "A Beautiful Mind" was under attack on all fronts a few years ago, it nonetheless prevailed. "Chicago" pulled off its best picture victory even though late-breaking momentum for "The Pianist" was so strong that it won the top prizes for director, actor and screenplay. That bodes well for the gay cowboys remaining tall in the saddle on Oscar night.
"I don't think he's right, but there's some of it. I think Brokeback will win because it's got too many mainstream A-List Hollywood people behind it. But we'll see.
Is secret homophobia fueling a possible 'Crash' upset?
Something weird is going on among Oscar voters — and it's also going unspoken. "Crash" and "Good Night, and Good Luck" have their passionate supporters who gush with their honest love of those best picture nominees, but most non-"Brokeback" votes I hear from Oscar voters are really anti-"Brokeback."
Scads of academy members fume to me when they tattle on how they're inking their ballots, "I'm not voting for 'Brokeback'!" Then they calm down a bit and add, "I'm voting for (fill in the blank)" and give a positive reason to justify their decision for picking an alternative. In most cases I hear contrary votes for "Crash," but there's also surprising strength for "Good Night, and Good Luck." So far I've heard equal numbers of votes for "Brokeback" as "Crash," with "Good Night" not far behind. The best picture race is really thisclose.
It's the fury that voters express when mentioning "Brokeback" that's so odd and suspicious. In some cases I believe they're people who think the film is overrated. Or they're just weary of gay cowboy jokes. But in the majority of cases I suspect it's something else and something bad that they feel they can't utter out loud, so they're holding it in. You can see it on their faces.
Could it be secret homophobia? Perhaps. The academy is comprised mostly of straight white guys with white hair who know it's intolerable to bash gays in lavender-friendly, liberal Hollywood. But I really don't think it's that in any large way. Instead, I think it's the same frustration non-Jews feel when there's a glut of Holocaust films leading the Oscar pack in Jewish-friendly Hollywood. They want to exclaim, "Enough already with the Holocaust films!" This time I suspect many straight Hollywooders — who are totally cool with gay people in general — are fighting the urge to shriek, "Enough already with the gay persecution films!"
This Oscar year there really is a glut of them and, if I'm right in my predictions, we'll see the all-gay Oscars on March 5 with victories in the top categories by "Brokeback Mountain," "Capote" and "Transamerica."
How widespread is this anti-"Brokeback" tide? It's hard to say because it's mostly unspoken, but it's very real and it makes predicting the best picture race a crapshoot. It's quite possible that we could see another one of those best picture/director splits that used to be so rare, but are now commonplace with "Chicago," "Shakespeare in Love" and "Gladiator" winning best picture while the director laurels went to, respectively, Roman Polanski ("The Pianist"), Steven Spielberg ("Saving Private Ryan") and Steven Soderbergh ("Traffic"). Whatever happens this year, it's clear that Ang Lee has the best director trophy in the bag.
In the end, I believe "Brokeback" will win because there's a clear voting pattern in the top category recently: academy members want to be on the winning team. Front-runners tend to win even when there's a growing surge against them. Backlash against "The English Patient" was so widespread that "Seinfeld" did a whole episode about it, but it still won. Even though "A Beautiful Mind" was under attack on all fronts a few years ago, it nonetheless prevailed. "Chicago" pulled off its best picture victory even though late-breaking momentum for "The Pianist" was so strong that it won the top prizes for director, actor and screenplay. That bodes well for the gay cowboys remaining tall in the saddle on Oscar night.
Arkansas Governor Huckabee Refers to Legislators as "Puppets." - Live on C-SPAN Today
I just heard Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee gain a problem of running off at the mouth when at the National Governors Association and after a skit with Sesame Street puppets, he said "I never thought in my time as Governor I'd spend part of it talking to puppets. Kind of reminds you of the legislature." To which the crowd said "Ooo," as if to say "He just blew that one."
Gov. Arnold Schwartzenegger at the National Governors Association Conference live on C-SPAN - Now
Arnold is the talking about health care and physical fitness -- "Communicating Heath Messages" -- to the nations governors right now. I'm listening for any news. Right now he's poking fun at Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee's much-reported fitness habits.
(By the way, Arnold's once swollen lip is just fine.)
The California Governor says that lack of excersize has a terrible impact on kids, including depression. He also stresses that the Department of Heath Human Services was not (and still it not) communicating with the Department of Education. There's no coordination. "On the one side, they're giving them fast foods, and on the other, they're taking physical fitness away," he said.
What's interesting is he's talking to the group of our countries governors, and C-SPAN gets this crowd shot full of -- overweight double-chinned people.
Arnold said he signed into law a bill that prohibits junk food in the schools. "We want to make sure that we're giving kids the chance to excersize 45 minutes." He's not trying to make athletes -- they turn to a shot of Maria wearing a nice leather jacket -- he said. Just healthy people.
Arnold ended his speach with his famous line: "I'll be back," and was followed by Sesame Street's Elmo and Rosita.
Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer
I got this item from my friend Richard Liberman, who got it from....You'll see. If it's true -- and it bears no image of being false -- it was a classic case of irresponsibility that the VP should thank god didn't end in Mr. Whittington's death.
The Rant
Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer
By DOUG THOMPSON
Feb 22, 2006, 07:35
Secret Service agents guarding Vice President Dick Cheney when he shot Texas lawyer Harry Whittington on a hunting outing two weeks ago say Cheney was "clearly inebriated" at the time of the shooting.
Agents observed several members of the hunting party, including the Vice President, consuming alcohol before and during the hunting expedition, the report notes, and Cheney exhibited "visible signs" of impairment, including slurred speech and erratic actions.
According to those who have talked with the agents and others present at the outing, Cheney was drunk when he gunned down his friend and the day-and-a-half delay in allowing Texas law enforcement officials on the ranch where the shooting occurred gave all members of the hunting party time to sober up.
We talked with a number of administration officials who are privy to inside information on the Vice President's shooting "accident" and all admit Secret Service agents and others say they saw Cheney consume far more than the "one beer' he claimed he drank at lunch earlier that day.
"This was a South Texas hunt," says one White House aide. "Of course there was drinking. There's always drinking. Lots of it."
One agent at the scene has been placed on administrative leave and another requested reassignment this week. A memo reportedly written by one agent has been destroyed, sources said Wednesday afternoon.
Cheney has a long history of alcohol abuse, including two convictions of driving under the influence when he was younger. Doctors tell me that someone like Cheney, who is taking blood thinners because of his history of heart attacks, could get legally drunk now after consuming just one drink.
If Cheney was legally drunk at the time of the shooting, he could be guilty of a felony under Texas law and the shooting, ruled an accident by a compliant Kenedy County Sheriff, would be a prosecutable offense.
But we will never know for sure because the owners of the Armstrong Ranch, where the shooting occurred, barred the sheriff's department from the property on the day of the shooting and Kenedy County Sheriff Ramon Salinas III agreed to wait until the next day to send deputies in to talk to those involved.
Sheriff's Captain Charles Kirk says he went to the Armstrong Ranch immediately after the shooting was reported on Saturday, February 11 but both he and a game warden were not allowed on the 50,000-acre property. He called Salinas who told him to forget about it and return to the station.
"I told him don't worry about it. I'll make a call," Salinas said. The sheriff claims he called another deputy who moonlights at the Armstrong ranch, said he was told it was "just an accident" and made the decision to wait until Sunday to investigate.
"We've known these people for years. They are honest and wouldn't call us, telling us a lie," Salinas said.
Like all elected officials in Kenedy County, Salinas owes his job to the backing and financial support of Katherine Armstrong, owner of the ranch and the county's largest employer.
"The Armstrongs rule Kenedy County like a fiefdom," says a former employee.
Secret Service officials also took possession of all tests on Whittington's blood at the hospitals where he was treated for his wounds. When asked if a blood alcohol test had been performed on Whittington, the doctors who treated him at Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial in Corpus Christi or the hospital in Kingsville refused to answer. One admits privately he was ordered by the Secret Service to "never discuss the case with the press."
It's a sure bet that is a private doctor who treated the victim of Cheney's reckless and drunken actions can't talk to the public then any evidence that shows the Vice President drunk as a skunk will never see the light of day.
The Rant
Secret Service agents say Cheney was drunk when he shot lawyer
By DOUG THOMPSON
Feb 22, 2006, 07:35
Secret Service agents guarding Vice President Dick Cheney when he shot Texas lawyer Harry Whittington on a hunting outing two weeks ago say Cheney was "clearly inebriated" at the time of the shooting.
Agents observed several members of the hunting party, including the Vice President, consuming alcohol before and during the hunting expedition, the report notes, and Cheney exhibited "visible signs" of impairment, including slurred speech and erratic actions.
According to those who have talked with the agents and others present at the outing, Cheney was drunk when he gunned down his friend and the day-and-a-half delay in allowing Texas law enforcement officials on the ranch where the shooting occurred gave all members of the hunting party time to sober up.
We talked with a number of administration officials who are privy to inside information on the Vice President's shooting "accident" and all admit Secret Service agents and others say they saw Cheney consume far more than the "one beer' he claimed he drank at lunch earlier that day.
"This was a South Texas hunt," says one White House aide. "Of course there was drinking. There's always drinking. Lots of it."
One agent at the scene has been placed on administrative leave and another requested reassignment this week. A memo reportedly written by one agent has been destroyed, sources said Wednesday afternoon.
Cheney has a long history of alcohol abuse, including two convictions of driving under the influence when he was younger. Doctors tell me that someone like Cheney, who is taking blood thinners because of his history of heart attacks, could get legally drunk now after consuming just one drink.
If Cheney was legally drunk at the time of the shooting, he could be guilty of a felony under Texas law and the shooting, ruled an accident by a compliant Kenedy County Sheriff, would be a prosecutable offense.
But we will never know for sure because the owners of the Armstrong Ranch, where the shooting occurred, barred the sheriff's department from the property on the day of the shooting and Kenedy County Sheriff Ramon Salinas III agreed to wait until the next day to send deputies in to talk to those involved.
Sheriff's Captain Charles Kirk says he went to the Armstrong Ranch immediately after the shooting was reported on Saturday, February 11 but both he and a game warden were not allowed on the 50,000-acre property. He called Salinas who told him to forget about it and return to the station.
"I told him don't worry about it. I'll make a call," Salinas said. The sheriff claims he called another deputy who moonlights at the Armstrong ranch, said he was told it was "just an accident" and made the decision to wait until Sunday to investigate.
"We've known these people for years. They are honest and wouldn't call us, telling us a lie," Salinas said.
Like all elected officials in Kenedy County, Salinas owes his job to the backing and financial support of Katherine Armstrong, owner of the ranch and the county's largest employer.
"The Armstrongs rule Kenedy County like a fiefdom," says a former employee.
Secret Service officials also took possession of all tests on Whittington's blood at the hospitals where he was treated for his wounds. When asked if a blood alcohol test had been performed on Whittington, the doctors who treated him at Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial in Corpus Christi or the hospital in Kingsville refused to answer. One admits privately he was ordered by the Secret Service to "never discuss the case with the press."
It's a sure bet that is a private doctor who treated the victim of Cheney's reckless and drunken actions can't talk to the public then any evidence that shows the Vice President drunk as a skunk will never see the light of day.
A follow up to "Misunderstandings, Race, and Ass Holes in San Francisco"
The next day, Friday, after my Aqua horror, I went to a nice place called Americano to enjoy the Friday sun and a glass of wine in a place crowded with nice-looking women, and where I always see people I know. In this case, the person was Kevin Shannon.
Kevin's a friendly bespectacled real estate lawyer of Irish decent who lives and practices in San Francisco. Over the years, we've always had great -- and some times heated -- conversations about politics, race, and society.
See, I've noticed from talking with people I know that I'm one of the few African Americans who openly talks about a race-based problem with anyone who may be the cause of it, or with someone white. Most blacks I have talked with and observed don't do this. It's a total shame, but a pattern. I contend that you can't know if someone's your true friend if you can't be yourself around them. Plus, they can't say they really know you.
Anyway, I told Kevin about the Aqua horror, as I will call it, and he said that though I may have been correct, sometimes it's not necessary to counsel the person. He used the example of our mutual friend, Bill Patton, who passed away two years ago. Bill was a very energetic African American man who had a smile and a kind word for everyone. He always went to the bars in SF, but only drank water.
With all of the people Bill knew, you'd think that there would be thousands of people at his funeral. There were about 50. I was really hurt by that. It opened my eyes.
Kevin said that Bill had a great way of dealing with ass holes and apparently racist people. He used a humble approach. For example, some woman -- white -- bumped into him and spilled her drink and his too. But instead of appologizing, she blamed him and started yelling. He said "I'm just a poor black man from the South" and that disarmed her.
At one point a long time ago, I was a little like that, but it was before my heart problem in 1991, where I thought I had a heart attack. After medication, and seeing a therapist on the advice of the doctors, the psychologist realized that many of the encounters I had in society bothered me, and yet I could have changed things by mentioning my hurt or desire on the spot.
That observation opeened me up. It caused me to write, and shortly after that became a columnist for The Motclarion, and generally far more expressive. Plus, I felt better.
Now, Bill passed of a heart attack at 70 years old. I think Kevin's right about Bill's approach and my need to "pull back" a little bit. But the other side of the coin is that loosing two parents and buring them, as I did last year, has an impact on how you view life. I don't want to waste my time on earth not expressing what I see, for better or worse.
As much as I love Bill Patton, I have to be myself. I have a fear of being subordinated by the society around me. I'll never let that happen. Perhaps that's the wrong way to look at things. But Kevin's point is that I should take a look at a situation before I point an accusatory finger.
I try to. But in the retrospect of the Aqua Horror, I really did do that.
Bill had a formula that did work for him. But what got me was that only 50 people came to his funeral. That was insulting, and when I think about what Kevin said, I keep coming back to the thought that maybe his heart couldn't take all of the pounding of society with no real outlet, and so after a time it just gave up. That almost happened to me and I'm fearful of another episode.
Kevin's a friendly bespectacled real estate lawyer of Irish decent who lives and practices in San Francisco. Over the years, we've always had great -- and some times heated -- conversations about politics, race, and society.
See, I've noticed from talking with people I know that I'm one of the few African Americans who openly talks about a race-based problem with anyone who may be the cause of it, or with someone white. Most blacks I have talked with and observed don't do this. It's a total shame, but a pattern. I contend that you can't know if someone's your true friend if you can't be yourself around them. Plus, they can't say they really know you.
Anyway, I told Kevin about the Aqua horror, as I will call it, and he said that though I may have been correct, sometimes it's not necessary to counsel the person. He used the example of our mutual friend, Bill Patton, who passed away two years ago. Bill was a very energetic African American man who had a smile and a kind word for everyone. He always went to the bars in SF, but only drank water.
With all of the people Bill knew, you'd think that there would be thousands of people at his funeral. There were about 50. I was really hurt by that. It opened my eyes.
Kevin said that Bill had a great way of dealing with ass holes and apparently racist people. He used a humble approach. For example, some woman -- white -- bumped into him and spilled her drink and his too. But instead of appologizing, she blamed him and started yelling. He said "I'm just a poor black man from the South" and that disarmed her.
At one point a long time ago, I was a little like that, but it was before my heart problem in 1991, where I thought I had a heart attack. After medication, and seeing a therapist on the advice of the doctors, the psychologist realized that many of the encounters I had in society bothered me, and yet I could have changed things by mentioning my hurt or desire on the spot.
That observation opeened me up. It caused me to write, and shortly after that became a columnist for The Motclarion, and generally far more expressive. Plus, I felt better.
Now, Bill passed of a heart attack at 70 years old. I think Kevin's right about Bill's approach and my need to "pull back" a little bit. But the other side of the coin is that loosing two parents and buring them, as I did last year, has an impact on how you view life. I don't want to waste my time on earth not expressing what I see, for better or worse.
As much as I love Bill Patton, I have to be myself. I have a fear of being subordinated by the society around me. I'll never let that happen. Perhaps that's the wrong way to look at things. But Kevin's point is that I should take a look at a situation before I point an accusatory finger.
I try to. But in the retrospect of the Aqua Horror, I really did do that.
Bill had a formula that did work for him. But what got me was that only 50 people came to his funeral. That was insulting, and when I think about what Kevin said, I keep coming back to the thought that maybe his heart couldn't take all of the pounding of society with no real outlet, and so after a time it just gave up. That almost happened to me and I'm fearful of another episode.
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Misunderstandings, Race, and Ass Holes in San Francisco.
See it centers around a little outing that I planned with Chrissy, who I always run into at sports industry related fuctions. The latest was The Leigh Steinberg Party at the Super Bowl. ( A great party, but more about that later.) She is perhaps the only person other than my best friend Beth Schnitzer, who actually recognizes me and says hello.
So, I thought getting together and talking would be fun, as she's been quite nice for a while now. I didn't have any date idea in mind; frankly it was the business of finding out what a person -- her in this case -- was doing that may be such that we could work together in the future.
Anyway, Chrissy has the idea of inviting both Beth and Gary. I thought that as a good idea as Gary's a friend who helped me on the Super Bowl: Oakland campaign and who sat next to me at Super Bowl XL (I got his ticket for him).
Well, I was informed by Beth that Gary and Chrissy had dated. I feared another drama scenario ahead, and started at one point to back out of it. Then I asked my friend Sarah to come as Beth could not make it, but Sarah had a mid-term. So, I was stuck. And still my gut was saying it wasn't going to go well.
I was right.
We planned to meet at Aqua, which is one of my favorite San Francisco places to visit. I go on Thursdays as Kathy's the bar tender there and I've known her for about 16 years.
Anyway, I arrived at Aqua at about 6:49 PM and seated right just as I walked in was JT and Mary. JT is someone I met six years ago, while I was working to bring the Super Bowl to Oakland. At any rate, he was trying to gain the NFL as a client to a company called Dream - something or other. I said I could help him do that. At any rate, the conference call with the CEO of Dream - something or other - was annoying. The guy said to me "Why do I need you to get into the NFL." And I felt he was being nasty for no good reason, so I told him he should try it on his own, and essentially ended the conversation. I had no time for rude ass holes, and that's what he was being.
Well, JT was upset that I didn't try harder. But the stakes were not that high because the person I was talking to didn't sell me on the idea of working with him; it's a two way street, and they needed me much more than I needed them.
Well, I had not talked with JT for some time after that. Meanwhile, Beth had developed a friendship with him, and so he started showing up to her parties -- but he'd never say anything to me. Wouldn't even look at me for a time. But after a while he came to so many events that I got rather annoyed with his unnecessary behavior, and so complained about it to Beth on several occasions. Whatever the connection, he at least speaks now. But we've only had one coversation of meaning since the "warming" period.
Well, JT was sitting with M Condy, who's husband Charles owns Aqua and three other restaurants. M is also a friend of Beth's. M's OK, but at times she's more than a bit weird toward me. That happens only when she's not with Beth and I see her in public. For example, I was recently at The Balboa Cafe and standing at the far corner of the bar. Where I stand is such that if you order a drink at any place at the bar, and look toward the back of the place, you can't miss me. But that's not why I stand there.
I do so because it gets me away from the crowd, and frankly a few of the white males who walk in there can be a little "stupid" in what they say to a person of color after they've had a few drinks -- this even happened once when Beth and I met for a drink about a year ago. Since I'm totally tired of anything that smacks of racism, I stand away from the crowd to avoid the desire to smack someone upside the head who might say something stupid. Now that written, it doesn't happen often at all. I like The Balboa Cafe especially when the regulars walk in, but that's another story for another time.
At any rate on the day I'm thinking of, M was there but when I looked over at her, would not allow her eyes to meet mine. Now, I'm the only black person there, and given where I stood impossible to miss. So, I resolved that I would treat her just like she treated me; I said nothing. I did this until a really nice and lovely Irish woman came over and said "We were debating whether you played Rugby or Cricket." I laughed. That woman turned out to be with a group of friends, which included Mary. So, I was pulled over, and then Mary talked to me. At that point, I was concerned that she had too much to drink, and so got her some water. She was fine later.
So, back to the present. M said hi, but there was no place to sit over there. I wanted to find a stool and order food. So, I went down to the other end of the bar and found the only place to sit. As I did, Aqua's great host Jean Pierre came up to say hello. A nice person. Consistently gracious.
I ordered wine and the Aqua Classic Appetizer, which is a great dish of chopped Steak Tar Tar and other seasonings. Then Chrissy arrived and Gary showed up about 25 minutes later. We were fine, until two things happened: first she and Gary had broke up, and then were acting like, well, kind of cheezy, feeding each other food and acting like they're on a date rather than hanging with a friend -- me. Gary seemed more like he was concerned that he was competing with me for her, which wasn't the case. It was all bothersome to me. But the kicker was this weird ass hole who JT and Mary were talking to and who came over to where we were. He shook Gary's hand and Chrissy's, but basically ignored me even though Gary introduced is -- until I called him on it. He then walked over, but had nothing of value to say -- I can't even remember his name. All I got from his words -- to Gary, not me, even as he was standing next to me -- was that his dad owned some resort and that he knew some woman in Chicago who was a "Wrigley" as in the chewing gum and baseball stadium.
Big deal.
But Gary and Chrissy never made an effort to stop the guy from being an ass hole, and so I was out of the conversation they all were having. I was pissed. For one thing, I never got to talk with either one of them about NFL stuff, or anything else. And Gary and I had unfinihed business that was for him, not me. And it was a friendly gesture on my part, this deal I was trying to craft for him.
As Gary was talking to the ass hole, I told Chrissy about his behavior and how from my perspective the guy may have a race issue spinning in his head. I mean he walked up and saw me, a black guy sitting with a blond woman, so he could be racist, given his response toward me. But she said "I don't understand this because I don't see color." I tried to explain to her a black person's point of view, but she wasn't listening and didn't try to, which irked me.
So, we continued to talk and M walked over. After a point she complained that Beth wasn't there and "always says she's going to be somewhere and doesn't show up," to which I quickly corrected her that her statement wasn't true and she should not even say that to Beth, explaining that I would come after her -- I was playing -- if she accused Beth of that. The reason I came off so hard was that Gary and Chrissy were nodding there head in approval of what Mary was saying, and so I got pissed. I don't like "two-faced" behavior. Beth's a friend, and so they should honor her as a good friend, not talk about her behind her back.
Mary walked back to the other side of the bar and we started talking with a gentleman named Wally, I believe. After we told jokes somehow Chrissy started talking about USC QB Matt Leinart and how she thought he was cute. I listened to her talk and then asked about Vince Young. She said "I'm not attracted to him, and I don't date athletes." So I asked if she really just preferred white athletes since Matt Leinart's also a football player. "No," she and Gary and Wally -- all of whom are white -- said.
Geez.
At that point, I'd had enough. They got their bill; I paid mine. On the way out, Gary and Chrissy -- she was his ride home or whatever -- stopped to talk to Mary and JT and the other people. D Blackford, who also worked with me on the Super Bowl and stopped to talk earlier -- a good bright spot in an other wise dark evening -- asked where I was going.
"I'm leaving," I said. And that was that.
I didn't hear from Gary or Chrissy, and I didn't contact them. And it was Gary who wanted NFL business -- and I was trying to help him -- gratis. Now, I don't care one way or the other.
Earlier in the encounter Chrissy said "I don't see color." I really hate when people say that -- It's not true. No. I've never heard anyone black, Asian, or Latino or Jewish say that -- only whites who are Irish or English, but not Italian.
Those same people who say that are the first to mark "white" when stating a dating preference in a personals ad. I think Chrissy meant well and she's certainly not mean sprited, but just isn't sensitive to how what she says may impact people of color. So, in a way she's right -- she doesn't see color.
And that's the problem.
So, I thought getting together and talking would be fun, as she's been quite nice for a while now. I didn't have any date idea in mind; frankly it was the business of finding out what a person -- her in this case -- was doing that may be such that we could work together in the future.
Anyway, Chrissy has the idea of inviting both Beth and Gary. I thought that as a good idea as Gary's a friend who helped me on the Super Bowl: Oakland campaign and who sat next to me at Super Bowl XL (I got his ticket for him).
Well, I was informed by Beth that Gary and Chrissy had dated. I feared another drama scenario ahead, and started at one point to back out of it. Then I asked my friend Sarah to come as Beth could not make it, but Sarah had a mid-term. So, I was stuck. And still my gut was saying it wasn't going to go well.
I was right.
We planned to meet at Aqua, which is one of my favorite San Francisco places to visit. I go on Thursdays as Kathy's the bar tender there and I've known her for about 16 years.
Anyway, I arrived at Aqua at about 6:49 PM and seated right just as I walked in was JT and Mary. JT is someone I met six years ago, while I was working to bring the Super Bowl to Oakland. At any rate, he was trying to gain the NFL as a client to a company called Dream - something or other. I said I could help him do that. At any rate, the conference call with the CEO of Dream - something or other - was annoying. The guy said to me "Why do I need you to get into the NFL." And I felt he was being nasty for no good reason, so I told him he should try it on his own, and essentially ended the conversation. I had no time for rude ass holes, and that's what he was being.
Well, JT was upset that I didn't try harder. But the stakes were not that high because the person I was talking to didn't sell me on the idea of working with him; it's a two way street, and they needed me much more than I needed them.
Well, I had not talked with JT for some time after that. Meanwhile, Beth had developed a friendship with him, and so he started showing up to her parties -- but he'd never say anything to me. Wouldn't even look at me for a time. But after a while he came to so many events that I got rather annoyed with his unnecessary behavior, and so complained about it to Beth on several occasions. Whatever the connection, he at least speaks now. But we've only had one coversation of meaning since the "warming" period.
Well, JT was sitting with M Condy, who's husband Charles owns Aqua and three other restaurants. M is also a friend of Beth's. M's OK, but at times she's more than a bit weird toward me. That happens only when she's not with Beth and I see her in public. For example, I was recently at The Balboa Cafe and standing at the far corner of the bar. Where I stand is such that if you order a drink at any place at the bar, and look toward the back of the place, you can't miss me. But that's not why I stand there.
I do so because it gets me away from the crowd, and frankly a few of the white males who walk in there can be a little "stupid" in what they say to a person of color after they've had a few drinks -- this even happened once when Beth and I met for a drink about a year ago. Since I'm totally tired of anything that smacks of racism, I stand away from the crowd to avoid the desire to smack someone upside the head who might say something stupid. Now that written, it doesn't happen often at all. I like The Balboa Cafe especially when the regulars walk in, but that's another story for another time.
At any rate on the day I'm thinking of, M was there but when I looked over at her, would not allow her eyes to meet mine. Now, I'm the only black person there, and given where I stood impossible to miss. So, I resolved that I would treat her just like she treated me; I said nothing. I did this until a really nice and lovely Irish woman came over and said "We were debating whether you played Rugby or Cricket." I laughed. That woman turned out to be with a group of friends, which included Mary. So, I was pulled over, and then Mary talked to me. At that point, I was concerned that she had too much to drink, and so got her some water. She was fine later.
So, back to the present. M said hi, but there was no place to sit over there. I wanted to find a stool and order food. So, I went down to the other end of the bar and found the only place to sit. As I did, Aqua's great host Jean Pierre came up to say hello. A nice person. Consistently gracious.
I ordered wine and the Aqua Classic Appetizer, which is a great dish of chopped Steak Tar Tar and other seasonings. Then Chrissy arrived and Gary showed up about 25 minutes later. We were fine, until two things happened: first she and Gary had broke up, and then were acting like, well, kind of cheezy, feeding each other food and acting like they're on a date rather than hanging with a friend -- me. Gary seemed more like he was concerned that he was competing with me for her, which wasn't the case. It was all bothersome to me. But the kicker was this weird ass hole who JT and Mary were talking to and who came over to where we were. He shook Gary's hand and Chrissy's, but basically ignored me even though Gary introduced is -- until I called him on it. He then walked over, but had nothing of value to say -- I can't even remember his name. All I got from his words -- to Gary, not me, even as he was standing next to me -- was that his dad owned some resort and that he knew some woman in Chicago who was a "Wrigley" as in the chewing gum and baseball stadium.
Big deal.
But Gary and Chrissy never made an effort to stop the guy from being an ass hole, and so I was out of the conversation they all were having. I was pissed. For one thing, I never got to talk with either one of them about NFL stuff, or anything else. And Gary and I had unfinihed business that was for him, not me. And it was a friendly gesture on my part, this deal I was trying to craft for him.
As Gary was talking to the ass hole, I told Chrissy about his behavior and how from my perspective the guy may have a race issue spinning in his head. I mean he walked up and saw me, a black guy sitting with a blond woman, so he could be racist, given his response toward me. But she said "I don't understand this because I don't see color." I tried to explain to her a black person's point of view, but she wasn't listening and didn't try to, which irked me.
So, we continued to talk and M walked over. After a point she complained that Beth wasn't there and "always says she's going to be somewhere and doesn't show up," to which I quickly corrected her that her statement wasn't true and she should not even say that to Beth, explaining that I would come after her -- I was playing -- if she accused Beth of that. The reason I came off so hard was that Gary and Chrissy were nodding there head in approval of what Mary was saying, and so I got pissed. I don't like "two-faced" behavior. Beth's a friend, and so they should honor her as a good friend, not talk about her behind her back.
Mary walked back to the other side of the bar and we started talking with a gentleman named Wally, I believe. After we told jokes somehow Chrissy started talking about USC QB Matt Leinart and how she thought he was cute. I listened to her talk and then asked about Vince Young. She said "I'm not attracted to him, and I don't date athletes." So I asked if she really just preferred white athletes since Matt Leinart's also a football player. "No," she and Gary and Wally -- all of whom are white -- said.
Geez.
At that point, I'd had enough. They got their bill; I paid mine. On the way out, Gary and Chrissy -- she was his ride home or whatever -- stopped to talk to Mary and JT and the other people. D Blackford, who also worked with me on the Super Bowl and stopped to talk earlier -- a good bright spot in an other wise dark evening -- asked where I was going.
"I'm leaving," I said. And that was that.
I didn't hear from Gary or Chrissy, and I didn't contact them. And it was Gary who wanted NFL business -- and I was trying to help him -- gratis. Now, I don't care one way or the other.
Earlier in the encounter Chrissy said "I don't see color." I really hate when people say that -- It's not true. No. I've never heard anyone black, Asian, or Latino or Jewish say that -- only whites who are Irish or English, but not Italian.
Those same people who say that are the first to mark "white" when stating a dating preference in a personals ad. I think Chrissy meant well and she's certainly not mean sprited, but just isn't sensitive to how what she says may impact people of color. So, in a way she's right -- she doesn't see color.
And that's the problem.
I need to blog more!
Wow, I didn't realize I had not written a single post since Wednesday. I've got to change that one. We've got over 20 blogs now, and I suppose I should establish the one-post-per-blog-per-day minimum. Sounds like a plan.
Colts GM Bill Pollian on NFL Network Now
NFL Network's Rich Eisen is talking to Indianpolis Colts President GM Bill Polian at the 2006 NFL Scouting Combine, so I thought I'd try to type what he says. The quotes are close to exact, but not right on.
On the Scouting Combine:
"First combine was in 1984 and with about 150. Now it's grown into a major event.
On Reggie Wayne's new contract and not franchising RB Edgerin James:
"Hopefully, we will be able to get him back. That may happen if there's no CBA. Reggie's been an important part of our team...We wanted to get him signed." Poliann said it would have made no sense to "tag" Edgerin as the number was "untenable."
On the 2006 draft:
We have three or four people contribute from the draft each year: Cato June, and others. The way our model is set we have to have contributions from younger players.
On the CBA:
We're wating to see what happens. All of the good things we have had come from labor peace. We've got Peyton (Manning) and Tony (Dungy) and have been to the playoffs six out of the eight years. How did we get there as a team in the smallest stadium in the league? The salary cap.
On the Competition Commiteee and Mike Holgren leaving it:
Rich Eisen asked if the Super Bowl Officiating problem had to do with it: "Absolutely not. He wants to spend more time with his family..,.He may change his mind in Florida.
Polian says that the committee is not going to look at just the officiating problem but the whole game.
That was it. Polian's off to other matters.
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Colts WR Reggie Wayne Signs New Contract - RB Edgerin James' Future with Team in Doubt
Colts re-sign Wayne but probably won't keep James
By Mike Chappell, The Indianapolis Star
INDIANAPOLIS -- Reggie Wayne won't be designated the Indianapolis Colts' "franchise player," but his value to the franchise has been confirmed with a lucrative six-year contract. However, it's doubtful that development increases the possibility of running back Edgerrin James returning for the 2006 season.
In line to be slapped with the franchise tag before Thursday's deadline, Wayne agreed on Wednesday to a six-year deal, according to his agent, David Dunn. Dunn would not disclose financial parameters of the contract, but it's believed to be worth approximately $40 million with bonuses of nearly $13.5 million.
Team president Bill Polian could not be reached for comment.
The contract ties Wayne to the Colts through the 2011 season and keeps intact an elite receiving corps that includes seven-time Pro Bowl selection Marvin Harrison and Brandon Stokley.
It also keeps the franchise designation available to the Colts for one of their other players who will become an unrestricted free agent on March 3. The tag must be used by 4 p.m. ET Thursday.
However, there's a strong possibility the team will not use the tag because of the steep financial commitment required to place it on linebacker David Thornton ($7.169 million) or defensive end Raheem Brock ($8.332 million).
And the Colts almost certainly will not use the tag on James as they did following last season.
Polian reiterated last week that it would be virtually impossible from a financial standpoint to use the tag once again on James. The cost of a one-year contract for James in 2006 would be nearly $11 million, which is a 20% increase over his '05 salary cap number ($9.081 million).
Polian described the $11 million franchise number for James as "untenable."
To retain both James and Wayne, he added, would require significant changes in the current roster. That probably would entail "drawing a line through" the names of several players, cutting them to make room for Wayne and James under the projected salary cap of roughly $95 million.
"And I don't know if you can draw enough lines, even if you wanted to," Polian said. "And you may not want to because it would weaken the team so much in other capacities."
Wayne was one of 13 Colts eligible for unrestricted free agency, but there never was a possibility of him hitting the open market. When asked during the '05 season about Wayne's future with the Colts, Polian replied, "Reggie Wayne isn't going anywhere."
The team's 2001 first-round draft pick has elevated his game every season. Wayne, 27, led the Colts with a career-high 83 receptions in '05, ending Harrison's six-year run as their leading receiver.
"Reggie's thrilled to stay with the Colts," Dunn said. "He could not respect the organization or Bill Polian or (coach) Tony Dungy any more than he does. And he has the maturity to understand the importance of winning."
In five seasons, Wayne has registered 304 receptions for 4,164 yards and 28 touchdowns. He topped the 1,000-yard mark in 2004 and 2005 when he established himself as one of Peyton Manning's top targets. He caught a then-career-high 77 passes for 1,210 yards and 12 TDs in 2004 when he became part of the NFL's first receiving trio to top 1,000 yards and 10 TDs. He followed that with last year's 83-catch, 1,055-yard season as his role continued to expand.
The move makes Wayne one of the NFL's highest-paid receivers. But Wayne wanted more than money out of his contract.
"He thinks in terms of enjoying the situation with the team and the offense he's familiar with," Dunn told The Associated Press. "And having Peyton (Manning) throwing you the ball and Coach Dungy doesn't hurt. He thinks it's a good situation."
While Wayne could have left the Colts for another team, where he could have avoided being overshadowed by Harrison, the Colts' career receiving leader, he opted to stay with a team that has won three straight AFC South titles and been to one conference title game.
"Over the last month, I became acutely aware of how much he wanted to win," Dunn said.
Wayne's signing means the Colts will keep their passing attack intact long-term.
Harrison signed a six-year, $66 million deal in December 2004. Manning, a two-time NFL MVP, signed a seven-year, $98 million deal in March 2004. The Colts' No. 3 receiver, Stokley, agreed to a lucrative five-year deal late in the 2004 season.
The Associated Press contributed to this report
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
President Bush's Is Right; CNN's Lou Dobbs and Others Wrong About Port Deal
I see no concreate reason why the US can't suddenly partner with this organization of long standing. They're not new.
To block the deal for essentially racist reasons is not American.
Moreover, the matter of Terrorism is more complicated than many of us chose to understand. You can complain, bitch, and moan, but like it or not, this deal is actually best for the US and the World. I'd rather have an Arab firm -- with the great attention it gains -- run some cargo transactions, than a British firm I know nothing about. Oh, except that they're white.
To block the deal for essentially racist reasons is not American.
Moreover, the matter of Terrorism is more complicated than many of us chose to understand. You can complain, bitch, and moan, but like it or not, this deal is actually best for the US and the World. I'd rather have an Arab firm -- with the great attention it gains -- run some cargo transactions, than a British firm I know nothing about. Oh, except that they're white.
NFL Revenue Sharing with Players - I Say Scale The Percentage
The impass between NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue and NFL Players Association Executive Director Gene Upshaw seems to be over the size of the percent of revenue the league will share with the players. I say, rather than have a fixed percentage, scale it with repect to overall increase or decrease in annual league revenues. Simply, if there's an increase, the percentage is somewhat greater; if there's a decrease, it reduces.
Now, the measure should be gross revenues, not net revenues. Or perhaps a better measure is revenues minus player playroll for that year. This way, if there's a year where, for a combination of reasons, overall player payroll is higher than the previous year (incentives, etc.), but overall NFL gross revenue is lower, the percentage would be lower than the year before.
Just an idea.
Now, the measure should be gross revenues, not net revenues. Or perhaps a better measure is revenues minus player playroll for that year. This way, if there's a year where, for a combination of reasons, overall player payroll is higher than the previous year (incentives, etc.), but overall NFL gross revenue is lower, the percentage would be lower than the year before.
Just an idea.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)