The Future of Youth Sports? - We Should be So Proud

Read this article from sfgate.com. If you think my rants against the direction that youth sports are going are a little over the top, this article may in fact convince you that I have been understating the case all along. This is flat out ridiculous, but it happens to some degree all over the country.

I hear that some youth soccer programs have what they call "silent sidelines", meaning the parents can't cheer for their own kids. I'm not sure why anyone would want to participate in that type of environment, but I guess given some of the horror stories of parental behavior, and I've witnessed some in person, I guess it's not a huge surprise.

The real question becomes, how do we get out of this mess.

Charles Slavik, NSCA-CPT,*D
President, Eagle Baseball Club, LLC
Kane County, Illinois Finest Baseball & Softball Training
Phone: (813) 335-8678
EMail: theslav1959@yahoo.com

<"( );::::::;~ ~;::::::;( )">

Eagle Baseball Club Website
http://www.eaglebaseballclub.com
The Slav's Baseball Blog
http://slavieboy.blogspot.com
The Slav's MySpace Page and Blog
http://myspace.com/the_slav1959
Eagle Baseball Club MySpace Group
http://groups.myspace.com/eaglebaseballclub






http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/22/MNGTILTVRT1.DTL

SF Gate - Parents vs. coach: Battle goes wild - C.W. Nevius
Sunday, October 22, 2006

Parents interfering in their kids' sports is nothing new. But a group of parents at Castro Valley High is taking it to a new extreme.

What started as a group of unhappy parents griping amongst themselves has ballooned into multiple investigations, an observer attending every girls varsity basketball practice and a committee that will pick the team.

It's the kind of over-the-top behavior that's increasingly common -- parents running on the field, screaming from the sidelines and, in the worst cases, punching out officials. It happens when well-intentioned parents let their protective instincts for their children overwhelm their good judgment.

In Castro Valley, the club wielded by parents is legal clout.

As Castro Valley athletic director Marie Gray said when she addressed the school board last week, "Thanks. You put Castro Valley on the map."

At the center of the seven-month maelstrom is Nancy Nibarger, a quiet 20-year teaching veteran who is beginning her third year as head girls basketball coach at Castro Valley. Opposing her are a group of parents, represented by a San Francisco attorney and led by Larry Goodman, an Alameda County Superior Court judge whose daughter plays on the team.

The parents' complaints against Nibarger, who played college basketball at Kansas State and was an assistant coach at high-powered college programs like Cal and Kansas, seem innocuous: They range from missing picture day to kicking the team out of the gym after a lackluster practice. But Nibarger's supporters suspect the allegations mask the parents' real beef -- that their daughters didn't get enough playing time.

Three times Nibarger's coaching style was investigated by school officials and found acceptable. Each time the parents group appealed the results. She managed to retain her job, but with restrictions that many coaches would find impossible to bear. In fact, many think the sanctions were designed to force her to quit, but Nibarger is sticking it out.

"Some of the kids who chose to back me, and even some who decided to stay out of it altogether, are kind of being bullied," Nibarger says. "That's one of the reasons I decided not to quit. It seemed like the right thing to do."

It may be right in principle, but it won't be easy. When tryouts take place in two weeks, Nibarger will not be allowed to choose her team. That will be done by a six-person "panel," which will include parent representatives and members of the community, as well as Nibarger and her assistant coaches.

Not, however, the assistant coaches Nibarger had last year. Those two, a member of the Cal women's basketball Hall of Fame and a San Leandro policeman, were told by the school board they were not welcome back, even though there was not a single complaint filed against them.

And finally, Nibarger is required to have an "ombudsman" attend every practice to keep an eye on things. Nibarger calls the representative a babysitter. Janice Friesen, president of the Castro Valley school board, says the stipulations were actually meant to defuse the situation.

"This is to get away from all the 'He said, she said,' " Friesen says. "This is meant to be support for everyone.'' Attorney Andrew Sweet, who is speaking for the parents, said the program was out of control last year. "These kids were coming home from practices and leaving games crying," Sweet says.

Sweet admitted that Nibarger wasn't screaming at the players, playing favorites or subjecting them to physical abuse. It was more a matter of "communication" and "utter vindictiveness.'' That sounded pretty vague, so Sweet went back to the parents and came up with some specific allegations.

Sweet says Nibarger once threw the girls out of the gym when a practice was not going well. (The parents' group says it was 45 minutes early; Nibarger says it was "10 to 15.'') She didn't attend picture day. (Neither do other Castro Valley coaches.) She cut the playing time of anyone who complained about her coaching decisions. (She's proud of her record of playing 9 to 10 players a game.) Once, Sweet says, Nibarger was in a restaurant, saw the players and left without saying anything. (She says she wanted to respect the privacy of what appeared to be a players-only meeting.) So?

"Look," says Lauren Otten, a co-captain on Nibarger's first team three years ago and a unanimous all-district choice. "I have played basketball all my life. I played year-round basketball for six years. I know coaches. And she was the calmest, nicest coach I ever had in my life.''

Nibarger's reign had a promising beginning in 2004-2005, when the team reached the second round of the North Coast Section playoffs (admittedly with the help of a senior-laden team). But the team fell to 11-15 last year, and the grumbling began.

"They'd get a little cadre of parents together and bitch and moan," says Martha Kohl, a middle school teacher who has been the basketball team scorekeeper for 10 years. Nibarger thinks the heart of the issue is the difference between offseason, paid programs and varsity high school sports, and her former team captain agrees.

Otten says parents typically pay $1,500 a year for private basketball club teams. They don't expect to shell out that kind of money to see their daughter sit on the bench. Nor is it atypical for club coaches to praise a marginal player to the skies. After all, the program needs to keep that money coming. That environment sets unrealistic expectations.

"A lot of people came in thinking great things about themselves," says Otten. "They were expecting a lot of playing time just because they were on the team.'' That sense of entitlement is threatening to overwhelm varsity sports in high school. Parents aren't just questioning the coaches, they are demanding their heads on a platter.

"If we don't stomp this out," says athletic director Gray, "whosever mommy or daddy has the most power is going to be the starter. And if you look around the country, you see we are losing that battle.'' As the controversy has mushroomed, the leaders of the parent revolt have retreated from public comments. A call to Goodman, for example, is quickly returned -- by attorney Sweet.

"First," Sweet said early in our first conversation, "I want to dispel one story line, which is that this is somehow Judge Goodman's case. That's not true.'' Maybe not, but the swashbuckling judge -- who pilots a 32-foot gunboat as a "homeland security maritime specialist" for the Alameda County Sheriff's Department -- is certainly deeply involved. Goodman was an assistant coach for the junior varsity team two years ago whose daughter, a guard, will be a senior this season. Although they are careful not to accuse him directly, almost all of Nibarger's supporters believe Goodman spearheaded the protests.

"I think the community kowtowed to these people," says Barbara Siegel, president of the Castro Valley Teachers Association. "He was certainly a part of that power group. He wasn't the only one, but he was one of them.'' Someone certainly had some juice. Although Gray says she didn't "get a single complaint in the AD's office during the season, even an anonymous phone call," the parents group presented Nibarger with a formal letter just after the final game of the season.

An investigation was convened by the principal's office. Shari Rodriguez, varsity girls volleyball coach and a Nibarger supporter, says the administration interviewed every player on the team and reached a conclusion -- no action was needed. The parents group took it to the district level. Once again, every player was interviewed and the conclusion was the same -- no action. Finally, the group went to the school board. The final hearing, in August, lasted nine hours. Those who were there say that the anti-Nibarger group appeared with matching binders and that Goodman was seen pulling girls aside before their appearances to "help" with their statements. The group even led cheers, Rodriguez says.

"We didn't disagree with the earlier decisions," school board president Friesen says, "but we added some additions for the best of everyone.'' Actually, it could have been worse. At one time there were rumors that the parents group might file a civil suit for "child abuse," but that's apparently been put on the back burner. Not that the parents are backing down.

"She's making it all about herself," says Sweet. "She has never once acknowledged that there might be a problem.'' In fact, Sweet says, half of the 14 girls on last year's team signed the original letter protesting Nibarger's coaching. He says Nibarger's supporters would not be standing with her if they knew the real facts.

But earlier last week, Nibarger posted the signup sheet for tryouts for this year's basketball team. Every member of last year's team signed up except one.

Nibarger says there will be another signup next week and she is hoping that last girl changes her mind and writes her name on the list. She says she is looking forward to a great year.

"What I want to know," says coach Rodriguez, "is what are these kids going to do when they leave home and have a boss or a professor they don't like? They can't destroy everyone they don't like.''

C.W. Nevius' column appears regularly. His blog C.W.Nevius.blog and podcast "News Wrap," can be found at SFGate.com. E-mail him at cwnevius@sfchronicle.com.

Page A - 1
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/22/MNGTILTVRT1.DTL
©2006 San Francisco Chronicle

FORTUNE: Secrets of Greatness

What a suprprise, my two favorite four letter words are at the heart of the answer.
HARD WORK!!!

FORTUNE: Secrets of Greatness

What it takes to be great

Research now shows that the lack of natural talent is irrelevant to great success. The secret? Painful and demanding practice and hard work

FORTUNE Magazine
By Geoffrey Colvin, senior editor-at-large
October 19 2006: 3:14 PM EDT

(Fortune Magazine) -- What makes Tiger Woods great? What made Berkshire Hathaway (Charts) Chairman Warren Buffett the world's premier investor? We think we know: Each was a natural who came into the world with a gift for doing exactly what he ended up doing. As Buffett told Fortune not long ago, he was "wired at birth to allocate capital." It's a one-in-a-million thing. You've got it - or you don't.

Well, folks, it's not so simple. For one thing, you do not possess a natural gift for a certain job, because targeted natural gifts don't exist. (Sorry, Warren.) You are not a born CEO or investor or chess grandmaster. You will achieve greatness only through an enormous amount of hard work over many years. And not just any hard work, but work of a particular type that's demanding and painful.


Woods (pictured in 2001) devoted hours to practice and even remade his Swing twice, because that's what it took to get better.


Quiz launchTake the quiz
What kind of manager are you? A psychologist says whether you take all the credit (or blame) when things go well (or badly) means a lot for you and how best to motivate your team. Answer the following 6 questions, and see how you score.

1. When I succeed at a task, it is usually because I worked hard.
Strongly Disagree
Somewhat Disagree
Neutral
Somewhat Agree
Strongly Agree
Tip Sheet: Perfect Practice
1. Approach each critical task with an explicit goal of getting much better at it.
2. As you do the task, focus on what's happening and why you're doing it the way you are.
3. After the task, get feedback on your performance from multiple sources. Make changes in your behavior as necessary.
4. Continually build mental models of your situation - your industry, your company, your career. Enlarge the models to encompass more factors.
5. Do those steps regularly, not sporadically. Occasional practice does not work.
Video More video
Wynton Marsalis, Google's Marissa Mayer and Craigslist's Jim Buckmaster reveal their personal strategies for success.
Play video

Buffett, for instance, is famed for his discipline and the hours he spends studying financial statements of potential investment targets. The good news is that your lack of a natural gift is irrelevant - talent has little or nothing to do with greatness. You can make yourself into any number of things, and you can even make yourself great.

Scientific experts are producing remarkably consistent findings across a wide array of fields. Understand that talent doesn't mean intelligence, motivation or personality traits. It's an innate ability to do some specific activity especially well. British-based researchers Michael J. Howe, Jane W. Davidson and John A. Sluboda conclude in an extensive study, "The evidence we have surveyed ... does not support the [notion that] excelling is a consequence of possessing innate gifts."

To see how the researchers could reach such a conclusion, consider the problem they were trying to solve. In virtually every field of endeavor, most people learn quickly at first, then more slowly and then stop developing completely. Yet a few do improve for years and even decades, and go on to greatness.

The irresistible question - the "fundamental challenge" for researchers in this field, says the most prominent of them, professor K. Anders Ericsson of Florida State University - is, Why? How are certain people able to go on improving? The answers begin with consistent observations about great performers in many fields.

Scientists worldwide have conducted scores of studies since the 1993 publication of a landmark paper by Ericsson and two colleagues, many focusing on sports, music and chess, in which performance is relatively easy to measure and plot over time. But plenty of additional studies have also examined other fields, including business.
No substitute for hard work

The first major conclusion is that nobody is great without work. It's nice to believe that if you find the field where you're naturally gifted, you'll be great from day one, but it doesn't happen. There's no evidence of high-level performance without experience or practice.

Reinforcing that no-free-lunch finding is vast evidence that even the most accomplished people need around ten years of hard work before becoming world-class, a pattern so well established researchers call it the ten-year rule.

What about Bobby Fischer, who became a chess grandmaster at 16? Turns out the rule holds: He'd had nine years of intensive study. And as John Horn of the University of Southern California and Hiromi Masunaga of California State University observe, "The ten-year rule represents a very rough estimate, and most researchers regard it as a minimum, not an average." In many fields (music, literature) elite performers need 20 or 30 years' experience before hitting their zenith.

So greatness isn't handed to anyone; it requires a lot of hard work. Yet that isn't enough, since many people work hard for decades without approaching greatness or even getting significantly better. What's missing?
Practice makes perfect

The best people in any field are those who devote the most hours to what the researchers call "deliberate practice." It's activity that's explicitly intended to improve performance, that reaches for objectives just beyond one's level of competence, provides feedback on results and involves high levels of repetition.

For example: Simply hitting a bucket of balls is not deliberate practice, which is why most golfers don't get better. Hitting an eight-iron 300 times with a goal of leaving the ball within 20 feet of the pin 80 percent of the time, continually observing results and making appropriate adjustments, and doing that for hours every day - that's deliberate practice.

Consistency is crucial. As Ericsson notes, "Elite performers in many diverse domains have been found to practice, on the average, roughly the same amount every day, including weekends."

Evidence crosses a remarkable range of fields. In a study of 20-year-old violinists by Ericsson and colleagues, the best group (judged by conservatory teachers) averaged 10,000 hours of deliberate practice over their lives; the next-best averaged 7,500 hours; and the next, 5,000. It's the same story in surgery, insurance sales, and virtually every sport. More deliberate practice equals better performance. Tons of it equals great performance.
The skeptics

Not all researchers are totally onboard with the myth-of-talent hypothesis, though their objections go to its edges rather than its center. For one thing, there are the intangibles. Two athletes might work equally hard, but what explains the ability of New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady to perform at a higher level in the last two minutes of a game?

Researchers also note, for example, child prodigies who could speak, read or play music at an unusually early age. But on investigation those cases generally include highly involved parents. And many prodigies do not go on to greatness in their early field, while great performers include many who showed no special early aptitude.

Certainly some important traits are partly inherited, such as physical size and particular measures of intelligence, but those influence what a person doesn't do more than what he does; a five-footer will never be an NFL lineman, and a seven-footer will never be an Olympic gymnast. Even those restrictions are less severe than you'd expect: Ericsson notes, "Some international chess masters have IQs in the 90s." The more research that's done, the more solid the deliberate-practice model becomes.

Real-world examples

All this scholarly research is simply evidence for what great performers have been showing us for years. To take a handful of examples: Winston Churchill, one of the 20th century's greatest orators, practiced his speeches compulsively. Vladimir Horowitz supposedly said, "If I don't practice for a day, I know it. If I don't practice for two days, my wife knows it. If I don't practice for three days, the world knows it." He was certainly a demon practicer, but the same quote has been attributed to world-class musicians like Ignace Paderewski and Luciano Pavarotti.

Many great athletes are legendary for the brutal discipline of their practice routines. In basketball, Michael Jordan practiced intensely beyond the already punishing team practices. (Had Jordan possessed some mammoth natural gift specifically for basketball, it seems unlikely he'd have been cut from his high school team.)

In football, all-time-great receiver Jerry Rice - passed up by 15 teams because they considered him too slow - practiced so hard that other players would get sick trying to keep up.

Tiger Woods is a textbook example of what the research shows. Because his father introduced him to golf at an extremely early age - 18 months - and encouraged him to practice intensively, Woods had racked up at least 15 years of practice by the time he became the youngest-ever winner of the U.S. Amateur Championship, at age 18. Also in line with the findings, he has never stopped trying to improve, devoting many hours a day to conditioning and practice, even remaking his swing twice because that's what it took to get even better.
The business side

The evidence, scientific as well as anecdotal, seems overwhelmingly in favor of deliberate practice as the source of great performance. Just one problem: How do you practice business? Many elements of business, in fact, are directly practicable. Presenting, negotiating, delivering evaluations, deciphering financial statements - you can practice them all.

Still, they aren't the essence of great managerial performance. That requires making judgments and decisions with imperfect information in an uncertain environment, interacting with people, seeking information - can you practice those things too? You can, though not in the way you would practice a Chopin etude.

Instead, it's all about how you do what you're already doing - you create the practice in your work, which requires a few critical changes. The first is going at any task with a new goal: Instead of merely trying to get it done, you aim to get better at it.

Report writing involves finding information, analyzing it and presenting it - each an improvable skill. Chairing a board meeting requires understanding the company's strategy in the deepest way, forming a coherent view of coming market changes and setting a tone for the discussion. Anything that anyone does at work, from the most basic task to the most exalted, is an improvable skill.
Adopting a new mindset

Armed with that mindset, people go at a job in a new way. Research shows they process information more deeply and retain it longer. They want more information on what they're doing and seek other perspectives. They adopt a longer-term point of view. In the activity itself, the mindset persists. You aren't just doing the job, you're explicitly trying to get better at it in the larger sense.

Again, research shows that this difference in mental approach is vital. For example, when amateur singers take a singing lesson, they experience it as fun, a release of tension. But for professional singers, it's the opposite: They increase their concentration and focus on improving their performance during the lesson. Same activity, different mindset.

Feedback is crucial, and getting it should be no problem in business. Yet most people don't seek it; they just wait for it, half hoping it won't come. Without it, as Goldman Sachs leadership-development chief Steve Kerr says, "it's as if you're bowling through a curtain that comes down to knee level. If you don't know how successful you are, two things happen: One, you don't get any better, and two, you stop caring." In some companies, like General Electric, frequent feedback is part of the culture. If you aren't lucky enough to get that, seek it out.
Be the ball

Through the whole process, one of your goals is to build what the researchers call "mental models of your business" - pictures of how the elements fit together and influence one another. The more you work on it, the larger your mental models will become and the better your performance will grow.

Andy Grove could keep a model of a whole world-changing technology industry in his head and adapt Intel (Charts) as needed. Bill Gates, Microsoft's (Charts) founder, had the same knack: He could see at the dawn of the PC that his goal of a computer on every desk was realistic and would create an unimaginably large market. John D. Rockefeller, too, saw ahead when the world-changing new industry was oil. Napoleon was perhaps the greatest ever. He could not only hold all the elements of a vast battle in his mind but, more important, could also respond quickly when they shifted in unexpected ways.

That's a lot to focus on for the benefits of deliberate practice - and worthless without one more requirement: Do it regularly, not sporadically.
Why?

For most people, work is hard enough without pushing even harder. Those extra steps are so difficult and painful they almost never get done. That's the way it must be. If great performance were easy, it wouldn't be rare. Which leads to possibly the deepest question about greatness. While experts understand an enormous amount about the behavior that produces great performance, they understand very little about where that behavior comes from.

The authors of one study conclude, "We still do not know which factors encourage individuals to engage in deliberate practice." Or as University of Michigan business school professor Noel Tichy puts it after 30 years of working with managers, "Some people are much more motivated than others, and that's the existential question I cannot answer - why."

The critical reality is that we are not hostage to some naturally granted level of talent. We can make ourselves what we will. Strangely, that idea is not popular. People hate abandoning the notion that they would coast to fame and riches if they found their talent. But that view is tragically constraining, because when they hit life's inevitable bumps in the road, they conclude that they just aren't gifted and give up.

Maybe we can't expect most people to achieve greatness. It's just too demanding. But the striking, liberating news is that greatness isn't reserved for a preordained few. It is available to you and to everyone.

_____________________

How one CEO learned to fly. Boeing chief James McNerney has now made his mark at three major companies. How? "Help others get better," he says. Top of page
Want to learn more Secrets of Greatness? Get the new book

From the October 30, 2006 issue

Tag, Mike Tyson and The U

SCHOOL DISTRICT BANS TAG?

So now a school district in Massachusetts wants to ban kids from playing tag during recess as well as touch football and other games that would require some form of locomotion and interaction.

ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME??

Kids are getting fatter and fatter by the year what with the sedentary lifestyle they lead already. Now this. The fun police are really working overtime nowadays aren't they?

And it might just be me, but did they miss "Kill the Carrier"? That might have been first on the list for banning or at least a name change in the spirit of Political Correctness.

Can't we all just "Hug the Carrier"? (Sarcasm)

I mean a little co-ed touch football is how most young kids first learn how to get to second base safely, if you know what I mean. What's next? Ban "Spin the Bottle" and "Strip Poker" too?

How in the heck am I supposed to enjoy my second childhood now?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MIKE TYSON WORLD TOUR

So Mike Tyson wants to re-start his boxing career? And further, he's not opposed to fighting women in the ring. Good move Mike. After all, it's not like you haven't bounced a woman or two off the wall in the past, might as well get paid for your efforts, right? I know, you have the IRS to pay, so as long as you're going through with this, here's my list of candidates to be your next opponent:

1) Robin Givens (your vivid explanation of your prior exploits doesn't quite do it justice, your going to have to show me some, bro.)
2) Hilary Rodham Clinton (no explanation required)
3) Rosie O'Donnell (no problem making weight)
4) Roseanne Barr (ditto)
5) Desiree Washington (come on, like you don't have her 1 or 2 on your list??)
5) Laila Ali (I think she can take you bitch, even though you probably would go in thinking it would be great to throw a shot or two at her. Thinking with the wrong head has gotten you in trouble before - see Desiree Washington).

Anyway, after this tour as part of my duties as czar of the sports world, I will henceforth decree that all future boxing matches invloving boxers over the age of forty, be fought to the death.

This includes all bouts including Sylvester Stallone, either in person or as the character Rocky I,II,II,IV or gosh darn, you probably have more freaking Roman numerals after this characters name than the Super Bowl for Pete's sake. What is wrong with you old man? Have you gone senile?

I just am so tired of seeing boxers in the ring who need bro-bras. Am I asking too much? It kind of tarnishes whatever past legacy of greatness these imbeciles may have ever achieved.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI - FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

A proud day for the U. So you're telling me that an 0-7 team came into your house talking smack and you can't just dust them off and say look at the scoreboard? Doesn't your initial excuse smack of "Mommy he started it"? That's not the macho U that I know and dislike. That's the kind of excuse I'd expect from a bunch of pansies. Oh Lord, now I've done it, the U is going to come to my house and smack me upside the head with a football helmet.
AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The FIU kids who so "desperately" wanted to go your school apparently were not even good enough for the other 250 some odd DI schools ranked higher than them. So that would even throw into question whether these kids were even seriously considering going there, but whatever. Childish excuse for childish behavior.

Your clown ass President really comes off as a genius, but given her past in the Clinton administration she was probably looking for a suitable working definition for classless, unsportsmanlike behavior. In wasting all that time, she apparently didn't even have enough time left to review film of the debacle. But yet she feels confident enough to go on air and stridently defend your actions.

Most people know classless behavior when they see it. She even defended your practice of jumping on other folks logos or crashing their warmups or stretching lines. Spoken like someone who has never strapped on a jock before. She'd probably attach it to her face like a gas mask or something. It's not like other teams haven't dusted you up before over the practice, where was your clueless President then?

She must have bought your story that before kickoff one of you rascals kick the ball really high and someone on the team catches it, and the rest of the guys just get so excited that you surround him and junk and you don't reallly know that you're jumping on the other teams logo, honest Indian, and then the other team gets all mad and junk, and starts pushing us real hard and we say, "Hey, stop it you guys". But they don't and they say something bad about your Mommy then "Oh Lord, it's on". Is that how it goes? It all makes sense to me now that President Shalala explained it.

So you got off again with a slap on the wrist, the serious alumni (the non-jock sniffers) must be so proud of your behavior and that of your announcer Lamar Thomas. It shows the culture of boorishness, classlessnes and lack of character that pervades the program.

Somewhere Butch Davis is exonerated and smiling the smile of "I told you so". Actions speak louder than words. Miami's actions and words from players to administration spoke volumes of cluelessness and/or stupidity.

9/11 - Corey Lidle - Thurman Munson and the Media

As usual, I'm sitting at home working, minding my own business, when news reports come in that a small aircraft or helicopter , has hit a building on the East side of Manhattan. This brings up memories of 9/11 since that's pretty much how that morning started.

I heard of the first plane hitting a building in NY and even at that time my co-workers and I are visualising a small single engine aircraft flying off course and clipping a building. We were questioning what in the heck even a small aircraft was doing in the area, but chalked it up to pilot error or falling asleep at the wheel or something. That's when word that a second aircraft hit and we all knew that something serious was happening. And life would never be the same again.

Well, even though this sounded innocent enough, the same ??'s seemed to race in my mind and naturally I thought "Oh No, not again?". Seeing the TV images were somewhat helpful in determining that this would likely not be the same type of event. Thank God.

Then word comes that the plane is likely piloted by Yankee Cory Lidle and my thoughts immediately turned to 1979 and the day I heard Thurman Munson had died piloting his own plane. Another event that gave me a feeling that I had been kicked in the gut or sucker punched when I first heard about it.

So in one afternoon, I emotionally drift though stories with eerie parallels to two of the toughest emotionally draining events in my life. The Munson death was brutal because I was twenty years old and had just seen Thurman win a game for the Yankees seemingly the night before and now apparently he was gone, just like that in a tragic accident.

I'm not sure that Lidle holds the same stature that Munson did, certainly not with the Yankees. I'm not even sure that matters. But there must be a similar effect on baseball fans all over. Especially the younger ones, this may be their Thurman Munson, I don't know. Just a tragedy.

And then while staying glued to the radio for updates, the station shifts from the Dan Patrick show to a trio of local hacks hosting their afternoon show. One a hack journalist, another a hack comedian and the other a hack ex-football player. Now, I understand the story having varying effect on different people. And I understand people deal with grief differently. But these assholes didn't grieve, they didn't show any respect for any aspect of the story. To them this was some ego-driven jock who thought he could fly his own plane, but who cares because it was New York and those people are assholes anyway and it was an affluent neighborhood.

Literally within an hour of the body being identified, with speculation that the next of kin had not even been notified, these assholes proceeded into tasteless, classless, boorish Corey Lidle jokes and further elaborated that any comparison to Thuman Munson was stupid, irrelevant , ridiculous and a waste of time since a) Munson was just another Yankee, so who cares and b) Munson was drunk when he crashed his plane.

Now aside from the obvious lack of class and civility, the part about Munson being drunk was certainly factually incorrect. So I penned the idiots a letter:

Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 17:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Charles Slavik"
Subject: Laughing at the Death of Corey Lidle
To: macjurkoharry@espnradio1000.com

You worthless pieces of shit!!!

Telling Corey Lidle jokes almost before the next of
kin were informed. You jack-offs must be so proud.

And since you act like the bunch of sanctimonious know
it alls you so clearly are not, advise whoever the
asshole was who stated that Thurman Munson was drunk
when he crashed his plane that he doesn't have a clue
what he's talking about. I'm sure that won't stop you
from spewing your special brand of humor in the
future. I believe you have the Munson incident
confused with the Steve Crews/ Indians tragedy of
years ago. Don't let the facts get in the way of a
good joke.

I'm sure you'll take great pains to correct
yourselves.
While you're doing that, do something else to yourself
that is seemingly anatomically impossible.

It's probably the only way scumbags like you ever get
laid anyway.

What a bunch of reckless, heartless bunch of assholes.
All of you. Make the world a better place and get in a
vehicle together and wrap it around a tree. Better
yet, don't harm the tree, drive off a f**king cliff
and burn to death, then you'll experience the feeling
you so easily want to joke about.

Whenever athletes complain about the media, assholes
like you will be the poster boys. Don't ever complain
when scumbags like you don't get any respect. You are
due none. From anyone who considers themselves a
member of the human race.

ROT IN HELL SCUMBAGS.

Charles Slavik

Of course, don't expect these cretins to be able to read much less understand what I was talking about, but these guys bordered on slanderous talk.

AND PEOPLE WONDER WHY I HATE THE MEDIA.

What's rich about the story is the very first call these animals get this afternoon the caller chastises them for their insensitivity regarding their comments the previous day about the Lidle incident. They quickly usher him off and say and I quote, "He told our screener he wanted to talk about something else" meaning if they knew he wanted to broach the Lidle subject he would not have had s snowballs chance in hell of getting on the air. (Remember the lesson about censorship and talk shows and agenda and such).

Beautiful, they later let on that each was called on the carpet for the prior days comments. They should have never made it back on the air. But then that would be censorship wouldn't it?

Anyway RIP Cory Lidle. Drop dead and rot in hell media scumbags. Never Forget.

TEACHING BACKWARDS - AN ALTERNATIVE SKILL INSTRUCTION PROGRESSION

http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/dept/coachsci/csa/vol31/fordgolf.htm

TEACHING BACKWARDS - AN ALTERNATIVE SKILL INSTRUCTION PROGRESSION

[Modified version of Rushall, B. S., & Ford, D. (1982). Teaching backwards - An alternate skill instruction progression. CAHPER Journal, 48(5), 16-20.]

One of the major characteristics common to the majority of sport instructors, irrespective of their individual approach and style of teaching, is the sequence in which beginners are taught skills. In the traditional order of instruction a logical progression is followed from the initiation of the skill unto its completion. For example, in the sport of golf the "swing" is taught in varying degrees of minute emphases starting with the grip, then the stance, backswing, downswing, and finally, the follow-through. However, the assumption that this logical progression is the best for instruction can be debated. It is the purpose of this article to question this traditional assumption and to suggest an alternative progression that is demonstrated with the skill of swinging a golf club.

Weaknesses With the Traditional Sequencing of Instruction

Before discussing an alternative method, it is necessary to examine some of the weaknesses and problems that are inherent with the forward progression of instruction.

In most cases, the early lessons in golf instruction taken by a beginner will emphasize the grip, stance, and then probably a part swing or full swing. The grip and stance usually do not present major problems, although they will feel strange and uncomfortable, and will require many trials before they "feel right." Major problems usually occur when the beginner attempts to hit the ball, that is, any deficiencies in the segments prior to contacting the ball are manifested when contact is attempted. From there on many errors are committed and the rate of performance improvement varies greatly. The characteristic performance variation frustrates the beginner which in turn interferes with learning. Consequently, performance improvement and learning are hindered by the concomitant emotional response of the learner.

Unfortunately, the task of learning is made more difficult as the forward progression of instruction develops. The problem resides in the inability of the learner to focus all his/her attention on the new to-be-learned feature of the swing when it is introduced. The requirement of the beginner to rehearse, concentrate on, or remember previously introduced aspects of the swing before the new additional item can be attempted "interferes" with the learning of that item. As the swing development progresses more interference occurs. As a result, learning the latter features of the action becomes more difficult. This increased difficulty produces associated emotional problems as described above. This situation can account for many of the problems which are exhibited by beginning golfers, particularly those who are adults., The fact that one has to perform what has been learned before a new aspect can be attempted is the crux of the problem. It is contended that the interference that is caused by the activity prior to the attempted control of a new skill element is the weakness with forward progressions of instruction.

A further weakness with the traditional order of teaching golf is that the beginner may find it difficult to remember all the different skill aspects. Usually, a mental "check-list" is formed and followed by the student. This often leads to the golfer standing over the ball trying to think of all the things that should be emitted before the new item of instruction is attempted. This "checking" often becomes a habit. Such thought intrusions during the execution of acts like a golf swing interfere with the learning and progression of the skill development. The reasons for this interference are several, but a commonly observed one is tension which contravenes the development of a rhythmical, fluent swing.

Further, as the progression is attempted the time for attempting the new segment is delayed more and more. This leads to the possibility of forgetting what needs to be done after all the previously "learned" segments have been attended to. Also for two-phase ballistic actions such as a golf swing or a throw, there is not sufficient time to cognitively control all the segments. They are completed before that is possible. The skill of forming appropriate motor plans (Gentile, 1972) prior to the execution of each trial is not developed in a beginner. Consequently, as the instruction progresses forward, improvement is made more difficult.

The following figure illustrates difficulties with traditional forward progressions.

Forward progression diagram

It is proposed that the forward progression of teaching skills is inefficient because:

1. learning becomes more difficult as the progression advances,
2. a great deal of mental work is required of the learner,
3. interference and thinking reduces the learning rate, and
4. emotional contaminants further retard performance improvements.

Although this traditional logical progression of instruction is the most commonly observed sequence it does not necessarily mean that it is the best method of instruction.

An Alternative Method

The alternative method of instruction eliminates the problems found in the forward teaching progression. It involves the process termed "backward shaping." Backward chaining has been known as a viable instruction procedure for some time (Whaley & Malott, 1971). In that procedure elements of a behavior chain are learned by doing the last first, the next-to-last second, etc. For example, to learn a poem the line that is learned first is the last line, then the second last line is learned, and so on. This effective instructional strategy has rarely, if ever, been applied to learning a single-skill activity. This paper uses the golf swing as an example.

For teaching golf the grip is the first element that is taught irrespective of the progression used. The student should be able to form a satisfactory grip and wield the club in a variety of actions. From then on, the alternative and traditional methods differ. After the grip, the backward shaping procedure dictates that the final follow-through position is taught. The learner is made aware that this position must be attained for every swing trial. In learning terminology, the attainment of the final follow-through position should serve as a terminal reinforcer. Every subsequent trial should end at the-terminal follow-through position. The next step is to move the club out slightly and then swing it to the follow-through position. The beginner gradually progresses backward through the swing always completing each trial at the terminal reinforcer position. Each trial should be completed successfully if the progression is adhered to with each step being sufficiently easy to not cause any erroneous action. This contrasts with the forward progression which does produce errors, primarily due to the interference phenomenon.

To illustrate the concept, an example will be given of the instructional steps followed for a 35 years-old adult who had never played the game. The next figure depicts the steps with line drawings that were copied from photographs of the subject. Each step is lettered and is represented by an individual figure.

Backward shaping progression for golf

Step A. Teach the grip and place the club on the ground so that a correct grip and club length can be attained.

Step B. Place the student in the full follow-through position and repeat until the instructor is satisfied that the position can be repeated accurately.

Step C. Place the beginner in the part follow-through position as shown. From there have the student swing the club with accompanying body movements to the full follow-through position. Repeat until the instructor is satisfied that the action can be repeated. The sequence of movement is now AB.

Step D. Place the student in a position that starts the follow-through action. From there have the golfer swing the club with accompanying body movements to the initial follow-through position. Repeat until the instructor is satisfied that the action can be repeated. The sequence of movement is now D-C-B.

Step E. Have the beginner placed in a position that is halfway between follow-through initiation and ball contact. Then swing the club through the previous steps to the final terminal position. Repeat until the action flows and is done to the satisfaction of the instructor. The sequence of movement is now E-D-C-B.

Step F. Place the student in a position that would be that of just after impact with the ball. Then swing through the previous steps concentrating on flow of action. By this time, the learner should be able to indicate whether the follow-through action and final position are .satisfactory. Repeat until the instructor is satisfied. The movement sequence is now F-E-D-C-B.

Step G. Introduce the ball into the appropriate position. Place the club head about 12 inches behind the ball and instruct the student to "push" the ball off the ground and swing through to the follow-through position. This is a critical step for the push introduces linearity into the flat part of the swing. It also produces initial satisfying success in the learner as he/she is able to hit the ball straight from the very first contact. This phase should be repeated until the instructor is satisfied with the action and the learner is comfortable with contacting the ball. The sequence of movement is now G-F-E-D-C-B.

Step H. Place the beginner in a position so that the club head is off the ground and near the end of the downswing. From there, complete all the previous steps concentrating on fluent movements and attaining the follow-through position. The movement sequence is now H-G-F-E-D-C-B.

Step I. Place the beginner in the half downswing position and complete the established sequence of movements to the instructor's satisfaction. The movement sequence is now I-H-G-F-E-D-C-B.

Step J. Place the beginner in a partial backswing position introducing a small, controlled hitch as the initiation to the backswing. Swing the club through the previous steps and repeat until the instructor is satisfied. The sequence of movement is now J-I-H-G-F-E-D-C-B.

Step K. Place the student in the quarter backswing position, wind-up to the half backswing position, and swing through the movement sequence. The learner usually has a tendency to do too much backswing in this step. It may be necessary to physically restrain the amount of backswing to that practised in Step I. Repeat until the instructor is satisfied with the fluency of action and the nature of the contact with the ball. The movement sequence is now K-J-I-H-G-F-E-D-C-B.

Step L. The final step is to develop the ball address stance. Then initiate the previous movement sequence. The final sequence of the movement is L-K-J-I-H-G-F-E-D-C-B. The swing is complete once this final step has been satisfactorily executed.

There are several features of the backward shaping process which need to be followed to ensure good teaching.

1. The progression from one step to the next is only followed when the step is performed adequately. A recommended minimal criterion for adequacy is five consecutive executions of a successful enactment. It would be best for the instructor to err on the side of being too strict rather than being too lenient with regard to this feature.
2. If errors are continually demonstrated, return to the previous satisfactorily executed step for further practice and successful performance. Then proceed once again with the backward sequence.
3. If a step is too difficult for the learner, that is, mastery or understanding is not shown, break the step down into further "mini-steps" but still adhere to the backward progression procedure.
4. If several practice sessions are undertaken (which is likely to be the case), each session should begin with a quick revision and practice of all the previous steps.
5. The instructor should attempt to be very demonstrative, positive, and congratulatory for every trial that is successfully completed.

For the subject depicted in Figure 1, the teaching process was conducted indoors using plastic practice golf balls. The total indoor instruction time was 3 1/2 hours spread over 11 days. The sequence of steps described was satisfactory for this subject. it is likely that the step sequence will have to be modified according to the attributes of the individual learner. It is best to progress with too many steps rather than to attempt too few.

It should be noted that from Steps I and J that only the half backswing and half downswing positions were taught. This was done to prevent "over-swinging". It was assumed that the beginner would naturally take the club back to a fuller swing position as confidence was gained. This assumption proved correct as was evidenced in the "field test". What was interesting was that the individual concerned did not "over-swing." over-swinging is a common problem with the traditional forward progression method where a full backswing is usually taught early in the instructional sequence.

To further evaluate the backward shaping teaching method, the subject was "field-tested." He was required to hit 50 balls with a 7 iron from a particular position toward a target 140 yards away. These were the first solid balls that he had hit and were the first shots made outdoors and at a target. Of the shots, 24 traveled over 100 yards and were within 15 yards either side of the line from position to target. In essence, almost half the balls stroked were successful shots. This is a very notable level of performance and suggests that this method of instruction is very effective. However, further testing of the procedure needs to be conducted before a definitive statement can be made as to the absolute value of the backward shaping progression.

What are the Advantages of Backward Shaping?

The major benefit of the backward shaping technique is that it overcomes all the disadvantages of the forward progression method. Interference does not occur since each new element precedes all previously "learned" elements, that is, the learner thinks of the new technique item content and then does what has been done successfully before. Each progression does not increase in difficulty through interference since undivided attention can be focused on the new step element to be learned. The formation of a mental check-list is not necessary because of the naturally occurring actions and successful completions that occur. Attention is focused only on the new step content and achieving the terminal follow-through position. There is an obvious lack of tension in the learner because of the simplicity of the task and its steps. Emotional problems did not occur in this demonstration subject and are not likely to occur while step sizes are small, guarantee a high rate of success, and are clearly understood by the learner.

The following figure illustrates the structure and characteristics of backward progressions.

Backward progression diagram
A Challenge

Backward shaping is advocated as being a viable alternative to the traditional forward progression of instruction. It may not be appropriate for some activities but does have widespread potential. For example, teaching tackling would be commenced with the opponent and tackler lying on the ground in a firm hold position which would constitute the terminal tackling position. Gradually, the two individuals rise up, practice contact and holding, until the last step when the tackler runs in to make the tackle. A similar backward progression would occur for various wrestling take-downs and counter moves. Perhaps the shot putter would assume the follow-through position and work backward through the action. when teaching children to throw a similar backward progression would be advised. The sequence of steps would have to be devised and experimented with for each sporting action.

This article describes something new. Its value is best determined by those involved with teaching. Theory, laboratory investigations, and limited researches suggest great advantages for backward shaping over traditional forward teaching progressions. It is suggested that it be tried as an alternative instructional procedure. There is evidence that the experience will be rewarding for both the learner and instructor. Experimentation is in order!

References

1. Gentile, A. M. (1972), A working model of skill acquisition with application to teaching. Quest, 17, 3-23.
2. Whaley, D. L., & Malott, R. W. (1971). Elementary principles of behavior. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Return to Table of Contents for this issue.

SHAPING BASEBALL SKILLS IN CHILDREN

http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/dept/coachsci/csa/vol31/simek.htm


SHAPING BASEBALL SKILLS IN CHILDREN

Simek, T. C., & O'Brien, R. M. (1982, May). A chaining-mastery, discrimination training program to teach Little Leaguers to hit a baseball: An unintentional between groups, multiple baseline study. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

In their book Total golf, Simek and O'Brien (9181) reported that a chaining-mastery approach to teaching beginning golfers produced significant improvement in golf scores over traditional methods of instruction. In this study, that approach was extended to teaching Little Leaguers how to hit a baseball.

Following two baseline games and a baseline measure in practice of the number of fair balls hit before six strikes, 10 of 12 boys (ages 8-11) were trained to hit a baseball beginning with a bigger bat and ball pitched slowly from only a few feet. The pitcher then moved back with a smaller ball as a mastery criterion for number of hits was attained at each of 11 steps. Both game performance and a repeat of the baseline practice measure after game six showed large increases in the number of hits.

At this time a program of discrimination training for hitable balls (strikes) was instituted using a mastery approach to teach earlier and earlier discrimination of strikes from balls. Number of bases on balls had remained low through the first six games but gradually increased to high levels for games 7 through 10, during the discrimination training program. A repeat of the baseline practice measure, after game 10, showed continued improvement over the post-game-six measurement.

Game measures also improved from a baseline team batting average of .250, to .342 for games 3 through 6 and .369 for games 7 through 10. Two boys whose parents rejected the chaining-discrimination training approach were given training in "guided visual fantasy" for batting skills throughout the study by the father of one of the boys. They showed no improvement on any dependent measure. The results suggest that a program of chaining-mastery instruction, for hitting and discrimination training, for pitch selection can be effective in teaching Little Leaguers to hit. After winning one of two baseline games, the team won 9 of their next 10 games and finished first in their league.

Implication. Shaping/chaining produces a disciplined, reasoned, progression of experiences that lead to gradual progressive improvements in learners, important features for successful instruction. Why this approach to learning is not universally embraced remains a mystery to this day.

Simek and O'Brien introduce the important parameter of requiring a particular performance criterion to be exhibited at each step before progression is undertaken. One successful trial does not substantiate learning where as a small number of repetitions does establish a reliable effect. This is a feature that is not stressed in the Rushall and Siedentop forward progression models of shaping.

BASEBALL HITTING CHAIN AND MASTERY CRITERIA
Step Task Criteria
1. Oversize wiffle ball and bast is held over home plate. Player adjusts bat up and down to hit pitches from 8 feet away. Contact of 5 consecutive pitches (pitches must be in strike zone).
2. Oversize wiffle ball and bat held halfway from plate (mini-swing) pitches from 10 feet. Contact on 5 of 8 swings.
3. Oversize softball and regulation Little League bat. Mini swing t pitches from 10 feet. Contact on 5 of 8 swings.
4. Same ball and bat at 15 feet. Contact on 5 of 12 swings.
5. Same ball and bat at 22 feet Contact on 5 of 12 swings.
6. Same ball and bat at 30 feet Contact on 5 of 12 swings.
7. Same ball and bat at regulation Little League pitching distance (40 feet 6 inches) Contact of 5 of 12 swings.
8. Regular Little League baseball and bat at 15 feet. Contact on 5 of 12 swings.
9. Same ball and bat as in Step 8 at 22 feet. Contact on 5 of 12 swings.
10. Sam ball and bast as in Step 8 at 30 feet. Contact on 5 of 12 swings.
11. Same ball and bat as in Step 8 at regulation distance. Contact on 5 of 12 swings.

DISCRIMINATION TRAINING PROGRAM AND MASTER CRITERIA
Step Task Criteria
1. Player at plate, without bat, calls pitch (strike or ball) after pitch is in catcher's mitt and before umpire calls pitch. 7 out of 10 pitches called correctly.
2. Player at plate with bat, but no swing. Calls pitch (strike or ball) as or just before the pitch impacts the catcher's mitt. 7 out of 10 pitches called correctly.
3. Player at plate with bat (no swing). Pitch must be called (strike or ball) as the ball passes over the plate. 7 out of 10 pitches called correctly.
4. Player at plate with bat (no swing). Pitch must be called (strike or ball) as the ball passes over white markers set 9 feet in front of the plate. 7 out of 10 pitches called correctly.
In all cases, the umpire had the final decision as to whether a pitch was a strike or a ball.

Reference

Simek, T. C., & O'Brien, r. M. (1981). Total golf: A behavioral approach to lowering your score and getting more out of your game. New York, NY: Doubleday.

Buck O'Neill Died Today at 94. Shame on Baseball.

Buck O'Neill died today at the age of 94. And now he will never have the chance to enjoy the induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame he so richly deseved. 17 former Negro Leaguers were inducted earlier this year after the Hall of Fame formed a committee to elect former Negro Leagues players and executives.

These so-called experts could see the value of inducting at least a dozen folks that even serious fans had never even heard of before or of dubious credentials, yet leave O'Neill short by one vote.

O'Neill died today and the cause of death was exhaustion. That he worked so tirelessly to get the 17 people elected would make his cause of death understandable, that baseball rejected his credentials so callously, one could have easily guessed a broken heart.

See Keith Olbemans blog re: the vote (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11478921/)
in which he says:

{Snubbing Minoso and O'Neil -- apparently for all time -- is extraordinary enough. But only baseball could make it worse. In honoring the Negro Leagues -- it managed to exclude O'Neill and Minoso -- but did elect two white people.

James Leslie Wilkinson was the founder of those Kansas City Monarchs -- Jackie Robinson's team before he broke the color barrier with the Brooklyn Dodgers. Wilkinson was a white businessman. And today's election also made a Hall of Famer out of Effa Manley... She was the owner of the Newark Eagles of the Negro American League. It sounds almost impossible to believe -- but she too was white -- married to a black man -- and she pretended to be -- as the term was, then, "passed" -- as a light-skinned black.

Most of the 17 electees yesterday were entirely deserving. Such legendary figures as Sol White and Biz Mackey and Jose Mendez will achieve in death and in the Hall of Fame something they were denied in life. Just to twist the knife a little further into Buck O'Neil, the special committee elected Alex Pompez, owner of the New York Cubans team... Also an organized crime figure... Part of the mob of the infamous '30s gangster Dutch Schultz... Indicted in this country and Mexico for racketeering.

He's in the Hall of Fame. For all time. Buck O'Neil is not. It is not merely indefensible. For all the many stupid things the Baseball Hall of Fame has ever done... This is the worst.}

COULD NOT AGREE MORE WITH KO.

This leaves another horrible stain on the so-called Hall of Fame and leaves the risk that in very short order this so-called monument to baseball's history, will become irrelevant. I think it's currently firmly entrenched in the "It's a joke" stage. A couple of more committee decisions like this and they might consider a name change to the Hall of Shame.

They curently have about a hundred people who clearly don't belong there based on almost any measure known to man. Which means there are hundreds of people who can make the argument that they belong based on the "well if he's in, then he belongs...." argument.

And yet they keep missing on guys whose credentials are beyond reproach. Who are so one of a kind that even if they were let in with whatever their perceived flaws are nobody woould raise an eyebrow.

I mean, if you miss on a Buck O'Neill, and these were supposed baseball historians and academics, what does that say about you? That you're criminally stupid, even though you may have some letters after your name? These morons should be ashamed of themselves and I truly believe I'm insulting morons today. All these supposed guardians of the integrity of the game do more harm to the game by the day.

RIP Buck O'Neill. Rot in Hell, Baseball Hall of Fame Morons.

BaseballLibrary.com entry for Buck O'Neill:
http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseballlibrary/ballplayers/O/ONeil_Buck.stm

Who's cheating now???? Who's cheating now???

{to the tune of "Who's sorry now" with apologies to Connie Francis, who popularized the song}

Well, well, well Mr. Clemens and Mr. Pettite, what does the media say now?

My guess is to shoot the messenger and deny, deny, deny. Even though the circumstances and the so-called "evidence" is so delightfully similar to that stacked against Mr. Bonds.

I'm sure we'll hear words to the effect of "Now remember, these are just reckless accusations of a ballplayer who may have an agenda", they'll actually make Clemens defense for him rather than attack him. I don't recall Mr. Bonds getting similar consideration. Hmmm interesting.

The scumbag, know-it-all media elements like Frank Deford, Rick Telander, Jay Marriotti, Mike Lupica, Rick Reilly et.al. who wanted to string up Bonds, and I use that term for a reason, must be spinning in their sheets. I truly hope they get whiplash from the 180 spin they'll get from having to retrofit their arguments against Mr. Bonds to fit vis-a-vis their oncoming defense of Mr. Clemens.

And now all these bubble-headed cretins can use the Clemens worship articles they wrote, usuually right after crucifying Bonds, the fruit of their work product, for it's best current purpose. TO WIPE THEIR SMUG LITTLE SANCTIMONIOUS ASSES WITH.

LET SPORTS ILLUSTRATED PUT AN ASTERISK ON A COVER SHOT OF CLEMENS.

I've always said, if a popular guy like Derek Jeter ever tested positive, we'd see these same guys trash the very testing program they worked so hard to shove down everyones throat. Although, from the Marion Jones case, we now see what a quagmire the WADA-USADA utopian world of drug testing and storm trooper tactics bring us. Hell, let's have it in baseball and high school sports for that matter.

Jason Grimsley is to the Clemens-Pettite charges what Victor Contee is to the BALCO-Bonds case. So when mouthpieces say "Well, Grimsley made these charges and then backed off them"
well guess what, so did Conte and the same beneift of the doubt wasn't given in that case. EVER.

Now let's hear from guys like David Wells and Curt Schilling, who couldn't wait to find a microphone when it was on Bonds. Talk now hyprocrites.

Just watch and listen and remember. And ask questions in your own mind and don't accept everything these media morons and quasi-racists want to shove down your throat for no reason. Or whatever their personal reasons are. Most of these guys are nothing more than modern day Klansmen in pin-striped suits.

And it's time some of the focus is put on these trainers, who are making their reputations as gurus on the basis of what appears to be fraudulent means, if not outright criminal means. I mean we barely know Barry Bonds personal trainers name, because that's what he was always referred to as, but in all these other cases, it seems as if the willing co-conspirators never suffer any consequences. They shouldn't be allowed to work in the industry again.