The second marking period exam week starts on Monday, November 3rd. Your homework for the days leading up to your test date is to prepare one page of notes that you may bring into the exam.
Remember, you are using facts and information from classwork and articles to answer the question: Should girls play high school football?
If you have any questions about the exam, please email me at mr.donohue@gmail.com
Exam dates are:
Wednesday: Period 8
Thursday: Periods 3 & 7
Friday: Periods 4 & 9
Good luck!
-Mr. Donohue
Friday, October 31, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
HW #11, Due Friday, October 31st!
For Friday, read "15-Year-Old Girl Throws Three Touchdowns". When done, complete your pro/con list from class with regards to the question: Should girls play high school football?
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
15 year old girl throws three touchdowns
________________________________________
Associated Press
TORRANCE, Calif. -- When the Bishop Montgomery High School quarterback went down with a fractured leg, his replacement stepped in and completed four of five passes for three touchdowns.
There's nothing too unusual about that, except that the replacement quarterback was a girl.
Miranda McOsker, 15, is one of 253 girls out of 100,000 high school students in California who are playing football this year, according to the California Interscholastic Foundation. She joined the private Catholic school's football program last spring.
"I didn't try out for quarterback, I was just looking to play anything," said the 5-foot-9, 140-pound sophomore. "One day I was throwing with the quarterback after practice and the coaches watched me. They told me to play quarterback the next day and ever since I've been playing quarterback."
McOkser is the starting quarterback for the junior varsity team and the third-stringer on the varsity squad. She got into the varsity game Friday after her team led early and Coach Arnold Ale put in the second-string quarterback, who was injured.
Ale said he doesn't know if Miranda will become the starting varsity quarterback for the school in suburban Los Angeles but expects her to compete for the position during the next two seasons.
Her parents support her choice of sport and her teammates accept her as just another player.
"We've been good friends for a while," sophomore center Rob Huizar said. "When she started playing football, I told her that I'm the center, so I'll get the offensive line to protect her as long as she gets the throw to the receivers."
Miranda's uncle, John McOsker, also played quarterback for Bishop Montgomery. The family is trying to figure out if he ever threw three touchdowns in a game.
"I think the answer is no, because he hasn't gotten back to me yet," said Miranda's father, Tim McOsker, an attorney who served as chief of staff to former Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
15 year old girl throws three touchdowns
________________________________________
Associated Press
TORRANCE, Calif. -- When the Bishop Montgomery High School quarterback went down with a fractured leg, his replacement stepped in and completed four of five passes for three touchdowns.
There's nothing too unusual about that, except that the replacement quarterback was a girl.
Miranda McOsker, 15, is one of 253 girls out of 100,000 high school students in California who are playing football this year, according to the California Interscholastic Foundation. She joined the private Catholic school's football program last spring.
"I didn't try out for quarterback, I was just looking to play anything," said the 5-foot-9, 140-pound sophomore. "One day I was throwing with the quarterback after practice and the coaches watched me. They told me to play quarterback the next day and ever since I've been playing quarterback."
McOkser is the starting quarterback for the junior varsity team and the third-stringer on the varsity squad. She got into the varsity game Friday after her team led early and Coach Arnold Ale put in the second-string quarterback, who was injured.
Ale said he doesn't know if Miranda will become the starting varsity quarterback for the school in suburban Los Angeles but expects her to compete for the position during the next two seasons.
Her parents support her choice of sport and her teammates accept her as just another player.
"We've been good friends for a while," sophomore center Rob Huizar said. "When she started playing football, I told her that I'm the center, so I'll get the offensive line to protect her as long as she gets the throw to the receivers."
Miranda's uncle, John McOsker, also played quarterback for Bishop Montgomery. The family is trying to figure out if he ever threw three touchdowns in a game.
"I think the answer is no, because he hasn't gotten back to me yet," said Miranda's father, Tim McOsker, an attorney who served as chief of staff to former Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
HW #10, Due Thursday, October 30th!
For Thursday, read: “HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS; In Field Hockey, a Twist on Title IX ”. Is this situation fair to the girls? Should boys be allowed to play field hockey?
Respond in 5-7 sentences.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS; In Field Hockey, a Twist on Title IX
By MIKE WISE
Before a smattering of about 50 people in the stands at Arthur H. Roberts Field, the leading scorer for the junior varsity field hockey team at Amherst-Pelham Regional High School swerved through the opposition, keeping the ball on the nub of the stick, churning forward. Several parents rose from their seats, their voices laced more with venom than with enthusiasm.
''Get him! Get him!''
Bradley Bell was finally detained along the right sideline, but Bell, a freshman in a burgundy skirt, had already made his presence felt, wristing two goals and assisting on another in a 4-0 victory over Holyoke High School.
''He'll be playing varsity soon,'' Amy Bottke, the former varsity coach at Amherst, lamented. ''That means a girl will have to sit down.''
As another splendid season of October foliage unfolds here in western Massachusetts, an intermittent debate has begun anew. The sunlight dies before 6 p.m., the hues from burnt-orange-, mustard- and sienna-colored leaves poke through on the horizon and, in another rite of fall, boys compete on girls' field hockey teams.
Bell is among almost a dozen boys playing on six teams in the regional high school leagues, where the Division I varsity champions of the last two seasons, Southwick and West Springfield, had boys on their rosters.
A passion for field hockey runs deep in Massachusetts, with more than 8,000 students playing each year.
Julia Hunter, a senior co-captain on the Amherst varsity, is tolerant enough to accept Bell. But she added, ''In some ways, it feels like Title IX has been used against us.''
This fall, the issue has produced a seething opinion piece published in five area newspapers, subsequent hate mail and a threat by a junior varsity coach not to put her girls on the field against Amherst if Bell competes the next time they play.
After the playoffs in November, two coaches plan to submit a realignment proposal at their annual meeting: one league for all-girls' teams, another for teams that include boys.
Another less controversial, if delicate, issue of sex has also emerged: the clear admission by fervent women's sports supporters that boys are indeed stronger and faster.
''Sheryl Swoopes is great, but she's not going to challenge Michael Jordan,'' Bottke said as she leaned over a chain-link fence separating the all-weather track from the stands at Holyoke High School. ''Carl Lewis against Marion Jones? It's a joke. It's silly. We're different biologically. We have baby makers in our gender. They don't. Enough already. Put them on different teams.''
What's a Boy to Do?
The problem is, there are no boys' teams. Among the 18 states with field hockey programs, Massachusetts is one of only three in which boys compete at the high school level. (California and Maine are the others.) Men's field hockey thrives in other countries, but the sport has traditionally been played by girls in the United States. Either because of custom or state law, most American boys do not compete.
On one side of the debate here, boys are viewed as physically dominant, enough so that they dramatically alter competition for girls. Even for boys not as talented or as physical as their female teammates, some coaches and parents argue that they should not play because they would be displacing girls from teams, thereby reducing the opportunities afforded girls and women under Title IX, the 1972 legislation that prohibits discrimination in educational programs that receive federal funds.
Just because girls are allowed to go out for the boys' football team, the critics say, does not mean that boys should be allowed to compete on the girls' field hockey team.
''Typically, adding a girl to a boys' team doesn't have the level of impact when a boy plays on a girls' team,'' said Janet Ryan, the mother of Megan Horrigan, an Amherst player. ''It's not a level playing field. We almost hate to say to our daughter, 'Boys are stronger and faster than you are,' but they are.''
But other coaches, parents and players maintain that without a comparable boys' team, boys have a right to play field hockey and do not significantly change the way the game is played.
''I understand the whole reason behind Title IX in its original form was to provide girls equal opportunities to play sports,'' said Katie Zacarian, a former Amherst player who is now the starting goalkeeper at Harvard University. ''But I think when you create a policy like that, you have to apply it equally. The inclusion on a team should be based on merit, not on sex.''
Dave Bell, Bradley's father, said fairness required that his son be allowed to play. ''We don't want to make waves, we just want Brad to continue playing hockey,'' he said. ''When you create a policy like that, you have to apply it to everybody.''
The rules of the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association are clear: ''No student shall be denied in any implied or explicit manner the opportunity to participate in any interscholastic activity because of his or her gender.''
Rule 43 of the association's handbook permits schools to establish separate teams. But if only one team exists, additional language in the handbook allows for mixed-sex competition. If an all-girls' team refuses to play a team fielding boys, it is subject to a forfeit unless the school can demonstrate a specific safety reason to justify not playing. To simply say a boy is bigger and poses a physical danger does not qualify as a reason.
''The language says there can't be a gender-based distinction,'' Sherry Bryant, the assistant director of the state athletic association, said. ''We have to let them play.''
Bryant estimated that about 20 boys play field hockey each year in the state, most of them in western Massachusetts.
Bell, 14, is already 5 feet 10 inches and 220 pounds. Like many of the boys who take the field each week this fall, he consciously walks the line between showing his dominance and trying to fit in. On Oct. 11 against Holyoke, his performance helped bring the Amherst junior varsity's season record to 12-0.
Bell grew up playing field hockey in South Africa, where the sport is popular among boys. He played on a youth national team until his family left so his mother and his father could pursue doctorates in education at the University of Massachusetts. He is often razzed by classmates because he has to wear a skirt, and he has heard his share of off-color remarks from parents in the stands.
Asked why he does not compete on the varsity with his skill level, he said: ''I guess I could be playing for them, but I like the J.V. team. If I stay here, there won't be any negative vibes from the varsity team.''
His father said: ''I probably would have felt the same way as many parents if my daughter was on the team. But Brad is as gentle as a lamb out there. He could probably run and score 20 goals. But he wants to take the least-disruptive route.''
Bottke, the former varsity coach at Amherst, said, ''I think it's great that Brad passes and fits in, but he shouldn't have to be aware of his delicacy.''
Boys playing girls' field hockey is not a new phenomenon in western Massachusetts. Brenda Kurle, the Amherst junior varsity coach, said she believes she competed against the first boy 24 years ago. About 15 years ago, Northampton fielded four boys on the girls' team.
''This has been going on awhile,'' said Ann Simons, the coach at Longmeadow High School. ''It's just picked up steam again.''
Dissent and a Proposal
Bottke has taken up the latest crusade. Bell declared last May that he was going to play this fall. Bottke resigned as Amherst varsity coach in August, though she insisted that there was no connection; her full-time job as a real-estate agent did not allow her to continue coaching, she said.
In her editorial published in the summer Bottke contended that boys playing on girls' teams represented a ''major injustice to high school athletes.'' She noted that three of four teams in last year's western Massachusetts semifinals fielded boys, including the eventual champion, West Springfield.
Bottke and other critics say some of the boys employ intimidation tactics around the goal. Players in field hockey use Kevlar-wrapped wooden sticks and a baseball-size, industrial-strength plastic ball -- a ball nearly as hard as a cue ball in billiards.
In an all-girls' game between East Longmeadow and Longmeadow High Schools this season, an East Longmeadow player broke her jaw, lacerated her lip and lost three teeth when a Longmeadow player inadvertently struck her in the mouth following through on a swing.
''The dynamics of the game change when a boy is on the field,'' Colleen Rafferty, a junior player at Longmeadow, said afterward. ''If a girl has a free hit, I will be much less resistant to go up and block the ball. I'll give her maybe 5 yards. If it's a boy, I'll give him at least 15 yards. I just know it has a higher chance of being a harder shot, going up and injuring me.''
But some coaches insist that the inclusion of boys changes the game less than many people think. ''There are bad aspects, and I can see where Amy is coming from, but you would not believe how much more open-minded and tolerant these kids become once they play together,'' Maryann Pelligrinelli, the varsity coach at Holyoke, said. ''I tell my players: 'The only difference is, you shave your legs. Go out there and play. Don't make excuses.' I will say that Amy and the others might not have a problem if the boys weren't any good.''
Pelligrinelli and other coaches say boys from West Springfield and Southwick were verbally abused the last two seasons after victories. At one match, where ''Go home, Sissy!'' and ''The football field is over there'' were some of the tamer retorts, several parents were ejected from school grounds.
Diane Lussier, the coach at East Longmeadow, and Simons, the Longmeadow coach, are adamant about boys not playing with girls. They plan to propose a realignment with two leagues, one with all-girls' teams and one with mixed-sex teams. The coaches are not confident that the athletic directors of the 22 field-hockey programs in western Massachusetts will approve the proposal.
''I've had plenty of boys ask me to play,'' Lussier said. ''I've always said, 'You can have a tryout.' I will not tell them that they may never get off the bench. I feel very strongly that they are denying a girl an opportunity to develop their skills.''
Hunter, the Amherst varsity co-captain, said she used to have major problems with the idea of boys playing field hockey. ''Then Brad came out for the team,'' she said. ''At first, I was like, 'Oh, no, Amherst is going to be one of those teams that wins with guys.' But since Brad has been on the team, we've all gotten used to it and we like him as a player. He plays for the love of the game, not because he wants to run over the girls.
''But I'm still not for it.''
At the year-end Amherst team banquet last season, a special plaque was made for Hunter, an aggressive midfielder who takes great pride in physically shadowing male opponents. ''Boy Basher,'' the plaque read.
''I love that title,'' Hunter said. ''That's my way of saying: 'I belong here. You don't.' ''
Respond in 5-7 sentences.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS; In Field Hockey, a Twist on Title IX
By MIKE WISE
Before a smattering of about 50 people in the stands at Arthur H. Roberts Field, the leading scorer for the junior varsity field hockey team at Amherst-Pelham Regional High School swerved through the opposition, keeping the ball on the nub of the stick, churning forward. Several parents rose from their seats, their voices laced more with venom than with enthusiasm.
''Get him! Get him!''
Bradley Bell was finally detained along the right sideline, but Bell, a freshman in a burgundy skirt, had already made his presence felt, wristing two goals and assisting on another in a 4-0 victory over Holyoke High School.
''He'll be playing varsity soon,'' Amy Bottke, the former varsity coach at Amherst, lamented. ''That means a girl will have to sit down.''
As another splendid season of October foliage unfolds here in western Massachusetts, an intermittent debate has begun anew. The sunlight dies before 6 p.m., the hues from burnt-orange-, mustard- and sienna-colored leaves poke through on the horizon and, in another rite of fall, boys compete on girls' field hockey teams.
Bell is among almost a dozen boys playing on six teams in the regional high school leagues, where the Division I varsity champions of the last two seasons, Southwick and West Springfield, had boys on their rosters.
A passion for field hockey runs deep in Massachusetts, with more than 8,000 students playing each year.
Julia Hunter, a senior co-captain on the Amherst varsity, is tolerant enough to accept Bell. But she added, ''In some ways, it feels like Title IX has been used against us.''
This fall, the issue has produced a seething opinion piece published in five area newspapers, subsequent hate mail and a threat by a junior varsity coach not to put her girls on the field against Amherst if Bell competes the next time they play.
After the playoffs in November, two coaches plan to submit a realignment proposal at their annual meeting: one league for all-girls' teams, another for teams that include boys.
Another less controversial, if delicate, issue of sex has also emerged: the clear admission by fervent women's sports supporters that boys are indeed stronger and faster.
''Sheryl Swoopes is great, but she's not going to challenge Michael Jordan,'' Bottke said as she leaned over a chain-link fence separating the all-weather track from the stands at Holyoke High School. ''Carl Lewis against Marion Jones? It's a joke. It's silly. We're different biologically. We have baby makers in our gender. They don't. Enough already. Put them on different teams.''
What's a Boy to Do?
The problem is, there are no boys' teams. Among the 18 states with field hockey programs, Massachusetts is one of only three in which boys compete at the high school level. (California and Maine are the others.) Men's field hockey thrives in other countries, but the sport has traditionally been played by girls in the United States. Either because of custom or state law, most American boys do not compete.
On one side of the debate here, boys are viewed as physically dominant, enough so that they dramatically alter competition for girls. Even for boys not as talented or as physical as their female teammates, some coaches and parents argue that they should not play because they would be displacing girls from teams, thereby reducing the opportunities afforded girls and women under Title IX, the 1972 legislation that prohibits discrimination in educational programs that receive federal funds.
Just because girls are allowed to go out for the boys' football team, the critics say, does not mean that boys should be allowed to compete on the girls' field hockey team.
''Typically, adding a girl to a boys' team doesn't have the level of impact when a boy plays on a girls' team,'' said Janet Ryan, the mother of Megan Horrigan, an Amherst player. ''It's not a level playing field. We almost hate to say to our daughter, 'Boys are stronger and faster than you are,' but they are.''
But other coaches, parents and players maintain that without a comparable boys' team, boys have a right to play field hockey and do not significantly change the way the game is played.
''I understand the whole reason behind Title IX in its original form was to provide girls equal opportunities to play sports,'' said Katie Zacarian, a former Amherst player who is now the starting goalkeeper at Harvard University. ''But I think when you create a policy like that, you have to apply it equally. The inclusion on a team should be based on merit, not on sex.''
Dave Bell, Bradley's father, said fairness required that his son be allowed to play. ''We don't want to make waves, we just want Brad to continue playing hockey,'' he said. ''When you create a policy like that, you have to apply it to everybody.''
The rules of the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association are clear: ''No student shall be denied in any implied or explicit manner the opportunity to participate in any interscholastic activity because of his or her gender.''
Rule 43 of the association's handbook permits schools to establish separate teams. But if only one team exists, additional language in the handbook allows for mixed-sex competition. If an all-girls' team refuses to play a team fielding boys, it is subject to a forfeit unless the school can demonstrate a specific safety reason to justify not playing. To simply say a boy is bigger and poses a physical danger does not qualify as a reason.
''The language says there can't be a gender-based distinction,'' Sherry Bryant, the assistant director of the state athletic association, said. ''We have to let them play.''
Bryant estimated that about 20 boys play field hockey each year in the state, most of them in western Massachusetts.
Bell, 14, is already 5 feet 10 inches and 220 pounds. Like many of the boys who take the field each week this fall, he consciously walks the line between showing his dominance and trying to fit in. On Oct. 11 against Holyoke, his performance helped bring the Amherst junior varsity's season record to 12-0.
Bell grew up playing field hockey in South Africa, where the sport is popular among boys. He played on a youth national team until his family left so his mother and his father could pursue doctorates in education at the University of Massachusetts. He is often razzed by classmates because he has to wear a skirt, and he has heard his share of off-color remarks from parents in the stands.
Asked why he does not compete on the varsity with his skill level, he said: ''I guess I could be playing for them, but I like the J.V. team. If I stay here, there won't be any negative vibes from the varsity team.''
His father said: ''I probably would have felt the same way as many parents if my daughter was on the team. But Brad is as gentle as a lamb out there. He could probably run and score 20 goals. But he wants to take the least-disruptive route.''
Bottke, the former varsity coach at Amherst, said, ''I think it's great that Brad passes and fits in, but he shouldn't have to be aware of his delicacy.''
Boys playing girls' field hockey is not a new phenomenon in western Massachusetts. Brenda Kurle, the Amherst junior varsity coach, said she believes she competed against the first boy 24 years ago. About 15 years ago, Northampton fielded four boys on the girls' team.
''This has been going on awhile,'' said Ann Simons, the coach at Longmeadow High School. ''It's just picked up steam again.''
Dissent and a Proposal
Bottke has taken up the latest crusade. Bell declared last May that he was going to play this fall. Bottke resigned as Amherst varsity coach in August, though she insisted that there was no connection; her full-time job as a real-estate agent did not allow her to continue coaching, she said.
In her editorial published in the summer Bottke contended that boys playing on girls' teams represented a ''major injustice to high school athletes.'' She noted that three of four teams in last year's western Massachusetts semifinals fielded boys, including the eventual champion, West Springfield.
Bottke and other critics say some of the boys employ intimidation tactics around the goal. Players in field hockey use Kevlar-wrapped wooden sticks and a baseball-size, industrial-strength plastic ball -- a ball nearly as hard as a cue ball in billiards.
In an all-girls' game between East Longmeadow and Longmeadow High Schools this season, an East Longmeadow player broke her jaw, lacerated her lip and lost three teeth when a Longmeadow player inadvertently struck her in the mouth following through on a swing.
''The dynamics of the game change when a boy is on the field,'' Colleen Rafferty, a junior player at Longmeadow, said afterward. ''If a girl has a free hit, I will be much less resistant to go up and block the ball. I'll give her maybe 5 yards. If it's a boy, I'll give him at least 15 yards. I just know it has a higher chance of being a harder shot, going up and injuring me.''
But some coaches insist that the inclusion of boys changes the game less than many people think. ''There are bad aspects, and I can see where Amy is coming from, but you would not believe how much more open-minded and tolerant these kids become once they play together,'' Maryann Pelligrinelli, the varsity coach at Holyoke, said. ''I tell my players: 'The only difference is, you shave your legs. Go out there and play. Don't make excuses.' I will say that Amy and the others might not have a problem if the boys weren't any good.''
Pelligrinelli and other coaches say boys from West Springfield and Southwick were verbally abused the last two seasons after victories. At one match, where ''Go home, Sissy!'' and ''The football field is over there'' were some of the tamer retorts, several parents were ejected from school grounds.
Diane Lussier, the coach at East Longmeadow, and Simons, the Longmeadow coach, are adamant about boys not playing with girls. They plan to propose a realignment with two leagues, one with all-girls' teams and one with mixed-sex teams. The coaches are not confident that the athletic directors of the 22 field-hockey programs in western Massachusetts will approve the proposal.
''I've had plenty of boys ask me to play,'' Lussier said. ''I've always said, 'You can have a tryout.' I will not tell them that they may never get off the bench. I feel very strongly that they are denying a girl an opportunity to develop their skills.''
Hunter, the Amherst varsity co-captain, said she used to have major problems with the idea of boys playing field hockey. ''Then Brad came out for the team,'' she said. ''At first, I was like, 'Oh, no, Amherst is going to be one of those teams that wins with guys.' But since Brad has been on the team, we've all gotten used to it and we like him as a player. He plays for the love of the game, not because he wants to run over the girls.
''But I'm still not for it.''
At the year-end Amherst team banquet last season, a special plaque was made for Hunter, an aggressive midfielder who takes great pride in physically shadowing male opponents. ''Boy Basher,'' the plaque read.
''I love that title,'' Hunter said. ''That's my way of saying: 'I belong here. You don't.' ''
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
HW #9, Due Wednesday, October 29th!
For Wednesday, read: “Another Victim at Colorado”. What does Hdina say happened to her? Do you believe her? Could this happen anywhere? Explain in 5-7 sentences.
Another Victim at Colorado
After being verbally abused and molested by teammates, former kicker Katie Hnida says, she was raped by one of them
If you thought Colorado football recruiting parties were jailbreaks, brace yourself for the allegations made by the only woman ever to play on the team.
As a CU placekicker in 1999, Katie Hnida says she endured a kind of sexual hell you can't imagine. After being verbally abused and molested by teammates, Hnida says, she was raped by one of them.
An honor-roll student, a homecoming queen and an honorable mention all-county kicker at Littleton (Colo.) Chatfield High, Hnida (NYE-da) had dreamed of booting for Colorado. "Football is what makes me breathe," she says. Then-coach Rick Neuheisel invited her to walk on, she accepted and then he took off, leaving her in new coach Gary Barnett's hands. "None of the players wanted her on the team," Barnett remembers. "Basically we were doing her a favor."
On her first day of practice Hnida found out how welcome she was. She says five teammates surrounded her and verbally abused her, making sexually graphic comments. During the season players exposed themselves to her "at least five times," she says. "They'd go, 'Hey, Katie, check this out!'" One player came up from behind, she says, and rubbed his erect penis against her.
Sometimes when the entire team was huddled up, Hnida says, players stuck their hands on her crotch or groped her breasts under her shoulder pads. "She endured more abuse than one person should have to bear," former teammate Justin Bates says. Even as she practiced, players called her vulgar names and one fired footballs at her head.
Why didn't she tell Barnett? "Because I was terrified," she says. "He didn't want me around in the first place. I thought for sure he'd kick me off [the team]."
The worst was yet to come. One summer night Hnida was watching TV at the house of a teammate. "He just starts to kiss me," she recalls. "I told him, 'That's not O.K.' Next thing I know he's on top of me. I told him, 'No!' But he just kept going, 'Shhhhh.' I tried to push him off me, but he outweighed me by 100 pounds."
Hnida says he lifted her skirt, pushed aside her panties and penetrated her. She was a virgin. The phone rang, he reached for it, she slipped out from under him and ran.
Why didn't she go to the police? "I was so scared of what he might do to me," she says. "And I didn't want a huge media mess. I was already carrying around so much inside me, I was numb."
Just before the start of the 2000 season, it was clear that Hnida, sick with tonsillitis, was not going to make the roster. She says she fell into "the darkest of dark places."
Worried for his daughter after she had finally told him about some of her hell (but not the rape), Maj. Dave Hnida, an Army surgeon currently stationed in Iraq, went to athletic director Dick Tharp and Barnett about "the cornering, the groping, the name-calling and the football-at-the-head thing," Katie's father says. He got nowhere. "Talking to Barnett was like talking to a wall."
Neither Tharp nor Barnett recalls Dave Hnida saying anything about sexual harassment. "If I'd have heard that, I'd have jumped down somebody's throat," Barnett says. "Not one time did I ever see or hear about anybody treating her wrong. I don't believe she was sexually harassed. I don't believe our players would do that. They'd be in too much trouble with me." Barnett says he gave one player a "tongue-lashing" for making a vulgar comment to Katie.
She dropped out of CU after her sophomore year. She says she was depressed for two years, suffered from insomnia and gave up kicking. Her dad ached for her. "Barnett went on TV and said how these [recent recruiting party] accusations have hurt his family," Dave Hnida says. "I'll show you a hurt family."
Katie went into therapy, enrolled at a junior college and then had the guts to walk on at New Mexico in 2002. Last August she became the first woman to score in Division I football history when she kicked two PATs in the Lobos' 72-8 rout of Texas State-San Marcos.
Meanwhile, three other women alleged they were raped by players or recruits at or following a Colorado football recruiting party in 2001 (click here for full story). There have been reports of players hiring strippers for recruits as recently as last month.
So why is Hnida, 22, telling her story now? "Because all the news sent me back into that nightmare," she says. "It made me literally sick. I realized that until I tell my story, I can never heal."
Hnida isn't suing Colorado or pressing charges against former teammates. "I just want to see changes made there," she says.
She also wants a sixth-year exemption from the NCAA, so she can return to the Lobos. "We have 125 great guys on this team, and I haven't had one single incident," Hnida says. "That's because of the standard Coach [Rocky] Long sets here for behavior. There's no b.s."
At Colorado they're majoring in b.s. The denials have piled up like cordwood. You show me a coach who maintains he's unaware of recruiting parties featuring paid strippers, of four alleged rapes, of sexual harassment claims by one of his players against other players, and I'll show you a coach who is hell-bent on not knowing.
Makes this alum want to hide his class ring.
Another Victim at Colorado
After being verbally abused and molested by teammates, former kicker Katie Hnida says, she was raped by one of them
If you thought Colorado football recruiting parties were jailbreaks, brace yourself for the allegations made by the only woman ever to play on the team.
As a CU placekicker in 1999, Katie Hnida says she endured a kind of sexual hell you can't imagine. After being verbally abused and molested by teammates, Hnida says, she was raped by one of them.
An honor-roll student, a homecoming queen and an honorable mention all-county kicker at Littleton (Colo.) Chatfield High, Hnida (NYE-da) had dreamed of booting for Colorado. "Football is what makes me breathe," she says. Then-coach Rick Neuheisel invited her to walk on, she accepted and then he took off, leaving her in new coach Gary Barnett's hands. "None of the players wanted her on the team," Barnett remembers. "Basically we were doing her a favor."
On her first day of practice Hnida found out how welcome she was. She says five teammates surrounded her and verbally abused her, making sexually graphic comments. During the season players exposed themselves to her "at least five times," she says. "They'd go, 'Hey, Katie, check this out!'" One player came up from behind, she says, and rubbed his erect penis against her.
Sometimes when the entire team was huddled up, Hnida says, players stuck their hands on her crotch or groped her breasts under her shoulder pads. "She endured more abuse than one person should have to bear," former teammate Justin Bates says. Even as she practiced, players called her vulgar names and one fired footballs at her head.
Why didn't she tell Barnett? "Because I was terrified," she says. "He didn't want me around in the first place. I thought for sure he'd kick me off [the team]."
The worst was yet to come. One summer night Hnida was watching TV at the house of a teammate. "He just starts to kiss me," she recalls. "I told him, 'That's not O.K.' Next thing I know he's on top of me. I told him, 'No!' But he just kept going, 'Shhhhh.' I tried to push him off me, but he outweighed me by 100 pounds."
Hnida says he lifted her skirt, pushed aside her panties and penetrated her. She was a virgin. The phone rang, he reached for it, she slipped out from under him and ran.
Why didn't she go to the police? "I was so scared of what he might do to me," she says. "And I didn't want a huge media mess. I was already carrying around so much inside me, I was numb."
Just before the start of the 2000 season, it was clear that Hnida, sick with tonsillitis, was not going to make the roster. She says she fell into "the darkest of dark places."
Worried for his daughter after she had finally told him about some of her hell (but not the rape), Maj. Dave Hnida, an Army surgeon currently stationed in Iraq, went to athletic director Dick Tharp and Barnett about "the cornering, the groping, the name-calling and the football-at-the-head thing," Katie's father says. He got nowhere. "Talking to Barnett was like talking to a wall."
Neither Tharp nor Barnett recalls Dave Hnida saying anything about sexual harassment. "If I'd have heard that, I'd have jumped down somebody's throat," Barnett says. "Not one time did I ever see or hear about anybody treating her wrong. I don't believe she was sexually harassed. I don't believe our players would do that. They'd be in too much trouble with me." Barnett says he gave one player a "tongue-lashing" for making a vulgar comment to Katie.
She dropped out of CU after her sophomore year. She says she was depressed for two years, suffered from insomnia and gave up kicking. Her dad ached for her. "Barnett went on TV and said how these [recent recruiting party] accusations have hurt his family," Dave Hnida says. "I'll show you a hurt family."
Katie went into therapy, enrolled at a junior college and then had the guts to walk on at New Mexico in 2002. Last August she became the first woman to score in Division I football history when she kicked two PATs in the Lobos' 72-8 rout of Texas State-San Marcos.
Meanwhile, three other women alleged they were raped by players or recruits at or following a Colorado football recruiting party in 2001 (click here for full story). There have been reports of players hiring strippers for recruits as recently as last month.
So why is Hnida, 22, telling her story now? "Because all the news sent me back into that nightmare," she says. "It made me literally sick. I realized that until I tell my story, I can never heal."
Hnida isn't suing Colorado or pressing charges against former teammates. "I just want to see changes made there," she says.
She also wants a sixth-year exemption from the NCAA, so she can return to the Lobos. "We have 125 great guys on this team, and I haven't had one single incident," Hnida says. "That's because of the standard Coach [Rocky] Long sets here for behavior. There's no b.s."
At Colorado they're majoring in b.s. The denials have piled up like cordwood. You show me a coach who maintains he's unaware of recruiting parties featuring paid strippers, of four alleged rapes, of sexual harassment claims by one of his players against other players, and I'll show you a coach who is hell-bent on not knowing.
Makes this alum want to hide his class ring.
Friday, October 24, 2008
HW For Monday, October 27th & Tuesday, October 28th!
This weekend, work on the final draft of your Michael Vick column (450 words) due on TUESDAY. Information that may help you has been posted on older assignments below.
Remember the assignment will be graded out of 25 points with each of the following areas being worth 5 points.
-Lead & Headline
-"Hammer" or "Velvet Glove"
-Clear and sustained opinion
-4-6 pieces of support or evidence to back up your opinion
-Writing: Spelling, grammar, punctuation and paragraph separation.
Also, please feel free to email me with any questions: mr.donohue@gmail.com.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Remember the assignment will be graded out of 25 points with each of the following areas being worth 5 points.
-Lead & Headline
-"Hammer" or "Velvet Glove"
-Clear and sustained opinion
-4-6 pieces of support or evidence to back up your opinion
-Writing: Spelling, grammar, punctuation and paragraph separation.
Also, please feel free to email me with any questions: mr.donohue@gmail.com.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Rough Draft Due Friday, October 24th!
For Friday, be sure to bring in your completed rough draft column on Michael Vick. Columns need to be 450 words long.
If you need information to help you out, please look at columns posted in previous homework assignments. Also, you may email me at mr.donohue@gmail.com for additional help.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
HW #9, Due Thursday, October 23rd!
For Thursday, add another 150 words to your column about Michael Vick (250 so far...remember, the column will be 450 total when done).
The videos about Michael Vick's dogs seen today in class can be found by clicking here.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
The videos about Michael Vick's dogs seen today in class can be found by clicking here.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
HW #8, Due Tuesday, October 21st!
For Tuesday, review your own work from last night. What “main question(s)” are you trying to answer? What style will you use – Velvet Glove or Hammer? What 3-5 pieces of “evidence” you will use?
For ideas, read the articles pasted about Vick in older homework assignments.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
For ideas, read the articles pasted about Vick in older homework assignments.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Monday, October 20, 2008
HW #7, Due Tuesday, October 21st!
Bring in first 100 words of Michael Vick column with a lead.
Be sure to answer a "Central Question" by the time this column is done. The final assignment will be 450 words.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Be sure to answer a "Central Question" by the time this column is done. The final assignment will be 450 words.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Friday, October 17, 2008
HW #6, Due Monday, October 20th!
For Monday, read "It is Time For Vick's Deeds to Speak For Him" and come up with 2 to 3 ideas from the article that you can incorporate into your own column about Vick.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
It Is Time for Vick’s Deeds to Speak for Him By WILLIAM C. RHODEN
Flowery Branch, Ga.
Alge Crumpler sat in a small office inside the Atlanta Falcons’ training facility earlier this week, talking about his friend and teammate, the fallen Falcon, quarterback Michael Vick.
Crumpler, Atlanta’s tight end, said he spoke with Vick several times a week — not so much about football, but about life. Crumpler passes along scripture passages from his mother, and well wishes from teammates. The last time they spoke, Crumpler said, they joked about playing the Madden NFL 08 video game online. But even that was bittersweet: Yesterday, EA Sports pulled Vick from the rosters of Madden NFL 08.
Vick’s fall from grace is stunning, so traumatic that its effect on the team is difficult to measure. Crumpler and his teammates have spent the past several weeks putting this situation into perspective, trying to keep a team that once had lofty aspirations inspired.
Vick and Crumpler were members of the 2001 draft: Vick was the first player taken.
Crumpler, taken in the second round, was the 35th player selected. They were going to contend for the Super Bowl together; Crumpler said he could feel it. In fact, Crumpler said he saw it.
“I had a vision that we were going to win the Super Bowl together,” Crumpler said. “I had a vision of winning the Super Bowl, and it was always going to be with Mike. I’ve had that vision since the day we were drafted. I want to still have it, but I just don’t.”
Would Crumpler ever catch another pass from Vick?
“Not here,” Crumpler said, referring to the Falcons.
“I think Mike is going to be back in the league,” he added, and then said: “I think it’s going to take a lot of ‘show me’ for Mike to get back into the league. It’s going to have to be more than words.”
Everyone has carved out their turf on this issue. Like Crumpler, I feel that Vick should and will return to the N.F.L., as a quarterback. Suggestions to the contrary betray an underlying prejudice that goes far beyond the legal issue at hand. Vick should receive a yearlong sentence for pleading guilty to a felony charge of conspiracy stemming from his connection to dogfighting but should serve no more than six months in jail.
The more intriguing question is how Vick’s fall from grace will affect a city that had become deeply invested in him.
Friends of mine who live in Atlanta say, half-jokingly, that the Falcons are black America’s team. The city has a large African-American population, and a substantial portion of the team’s season-ticket holders are African-Americans.
On the other hand, Atlanta has had an up-and-down relationship with its pro football team, and the fans are largely regarded as fair-weather ones. Right now, the weather is stormy.
The Falcons may have to deal with empty seats this season. Last year, they drew an average of 55,000 fans in two preseason games; this year they drew an average of 40,000.
In many ways, Atlanta’s fans have never stood on solid ground. The Vick episode is simply the latest blow.
Atlanta played its first season in 1966 and didn’t have a winning season until 1971.
The Falcons have never had back-to-back winning campaigns, with or without Vick.
The Falcons did reach the Super Bowl in the 1998 season but that moment was tarnished when Eugene Robinson, a star safety, was arrested on charges of soliciting a female undercover police officer posing as a prostitute the night before the game.
The Falcons lost, 34-19, to the Denver Broncos. The next season they finished a dismal 5-11.
In 2004, Vick led Atlanta to an 11-5 record and the National Football Conference championship game. In 2005, the Falcons finished 8-8. Last season, they finished 7-9
.
Before Vick officially pleaded guilty 11 days ago, there was a sense in Atlanta that the African-American community was split down the middle regarding its star quarterback.
Now there’s a resignation in that community that he did something seriously wrong, that he will have to atone for what he did and that in all likelihood he will never play for the Falcons again.
“But if we can win, if we can show some form of competitiveness on a consistent basis, I think we’ll be all right,” Crumpler said.
Vick apologized the day he pleaded guilty. He apologized to the Falcons’ owner, Arthur Blank, to Falcons fans, to the city of Atlanta. But when Vick said that he had also found Jesus, I felt that the time for talking had come to an end. Faced with being hemmed in, as Vick was, one can easily find the Lord.
At this point, Vick has to demonstrate his remorse, not only enunciate it.
As for Crumpler; the new starting quarterback, Joey Harrington; the new coach, Bobby Petrino; and Blank, the challenge is to move on and build a consistent winner, something Atlanta has never had even with Vick running the show.
In Atlanta, this is a time for deeds, not words.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
It Is Time for Vick’s Deeds to Speak for Him By WILLIAM C. RHODEN
Flowery Branch, Ga.
Alge Crumpler sat in a small office inside the Atlanta Falcons’ training facility earlier this week, talking about his friend and teammate, the fallen Falcon, quarterback Michael Vick.
Crumpler, Atlanta’s tight end, said he spoke with Vick several times a week — not so much about football, but about life. Crumpler passes along scripture passages from his mother, and well wishes from teammates. The last time they spoke, Crumpler said, they joked about playing the Madden NFL 08 video game online. But even that was bittersweet: Yesterday, EA Sports pulled Vick from the rosters of Madden NFL 08.
Vick’s fall from grace is stunning, so traumatic that its effect on the team is difficult to measure. Crumpler and his teammates have spent the past several weeks putting this situation into perspective, trying to keep a team that once had lofty aspirations inspired.
Vick and Crumpler were members of the 2001 draft: Vick was the first player taken.
Crumpler, taken in the second round, was the 35th player selected. They were going to contend for the Super Bowl together; Crumpler said he could feel it. In fact, Crumpler said he saw it.
“I had a vision that we were going to win the Super Bowl together,” Crumpler said. “I had a vision of winning the Super Bowl, and it was always going to be with Mike. I’ve had that vision since the day we were drafted. I want to still have it, but I just don’t.”
Would Crumpler ever catch another pass from Vick?
“Not here,” Crumpler said, referring to the Falcons.
“I think Mike is going to be back in the league,” he added, and then said: “I think it’s going to take a lot of ‘show me’ for Mike to get back into the league. It’s going to have to be more than words.”
Everyone has carved out their turf on this issue. Like Crumpler, I feel that Vick should and will return to the N.F.L., as a quarterback. Suggestions to the contrary betray an underlying prejudice that goes far beyond the legal issue at hand. Vick should receive a yearlong sentence for pleading guilty to a felony charge of conspiracy stemming from his connection to dogfighting but should serve no more than six months in jail.
The more intriguing question is how Vick’s fall from grace will affect a city that had become deeply invested in him.
Friends of mine who live in Atlanta say, half-jokingly, that the Falcons are black America’s team. The city has a large African-American population, and a substantial portion of the team’s season-ticket holders are African-Americans.
On the other hand, Atlanta has had an up-and-down relationship with its pro football team, and the fans are largely regarded as fair-weather ones. Right now, the weather is stormy.
The Falcons may have to deal with empty seats this season. Last year, they drew an average of 55,000 fans in two preseason games; this year they drew an average of 40,000.
In many ways, Atlanta’s fans have never stood on solid ground. The Vick episode is simply the latest blow.
Atlanta played its first season in 1966 and didn’t have a winning season until 1971.
The Falcons have never had back-to-back winning campaigns, with or without Vick.
The Falcons did reach the Super Bowl in the 1998 season but that moment was tarnished when Eugene Robinson, a star safety, was arrested on charges of soliciting a female undercover police officer posing as a prostitute the night before the game.
The Falcons lost, 34-19, to the Denver Broncos. The next season they finished a dismal 5-11.
In 2004, Vick led Atlanta to an 11-5 record and the National Football Conference championship game. In 2005, the Falcons finished 8-8. Last season, they finished 7-9
.
Before Vick officially pleaded guilty 11 days ago, there was a sense in Atlanta that the African-American community was split down the middle regarding its star quarterback.
Now there’s a resignation in that community that he did something seriously wrong, that he will have to atone for what he did and that in all likelihood he will never play for the Falcons again.
“But if we can win, if we can show some form of competitiveness on a consistent basis, I think we’ll be all right,” Crumpler said.
Vick apologized the day he pleaded guilty. He apologized to the Falcons’ owner, Arthur Blank, to Falcons fans, to the city of Atlanta. But when Vick said that he had also found Jesus, I felt that the time for talking had come to an end. Faced with being hemmed in, as Vick was, one can easily find the Lord.
At this point, Vick has to demonstrate his remorse, not only enunciate it.
As for Crumpler; the new starting quarterback, Joey Harrington; the new coach, Bobby Petrino; and Blank, the challenge is to move on and build a consistent winner, something Atlanta has never had even with Vick running the show.
In Atlanta, this is a time for deeds, not words.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
HW For Thursday & Friday, October 16th & 17th!
By Friday, be sure to finish your 300-word "mini-column" about Barry Bonds. The assignment is fully explained in the rough draft assignment post. Click here to view.
Good luck!
-Mr. Donohue
Good luck!
-Mr. Donohue
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
HW #5, Due Wednesday, October 15th!
For Wednesday, read “Elusive Vick Takes His Hardest Hit” and reflect on the following questions in 5-7 sentences:
Should the NFL or Falcons have had someone watching over Michael Vick?
Is there a problem with giving a young man millions of dollars with no restriction?
Also, the Final Draft of your “mini-column” (300 words) is due on Thursday.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
The Elusive Vick Takes His Hardest Hit
By WILLIAM C. RHODEN
I’ve argued for a number of years that Michael Vick of the Atlanta Falcons is one of the most important players in the N.F.L. His approach to quarterback — with speed, quickness and a rifle arm — makes him, on some days, the most dangerous player on the field. Many of the arguments against the way he plays the game reflect a deeply rooted cultural bias against athleticism at one of the most hallowed positions in sports.
The debate has now moved beyond the playing field, and Vick is facing an unprecedented rush. The federal government is accusing him of not merely crossing the line between good and bad judgment, but of going completely out of bounds.
Earlier this week, Vick was indicted on federal felony charges alleging that he had sponsored dogfighting since 2001, that he frequently gambled on dogfighting and that he authorized acts of cruelty against animals on property that he owned.
An 18-page indictment suggested that Vick was not just a distant spectator sitting on the 50-yard line; he was the quarterback for Bad Newz Kennels.
Now the federal government must prove its case, and Vick has to think long and hard about whether he wants to challenge the government’s evidence or strike a deal.
•
The pressure also shifts to the N.F.L. and its new law-and-order commissioner, Roger Goodell. Goodell is like a scrambling quarterback approaching the line of scrimmage who must decide: does he run or does he pass? The animal-rights activists — and a number of fans in general — are clamoring for the league to suspend Vick; the players union is ready to fight such a suspension. The owners and N.F.L. sponsors, ever taking the public pulse, are looking for Goodell to suggest a great move that assures the public that the inmates are under control.
So far we’ve been blitzed by cautious statements by the N.F.L., the Atlanta Falcons and the players union about how disappointed they are in Vick, but also how they are committed to letting the legal process run its course.
Nike made a statement yesterday by suspending the introduction of Vick’s latest shoe — the Air Zoom Vick V.
Since he joined the N.F.L. in 2001, Vick’s No. 7 jersey had been among the top-five sellers, according to the N.F.L.
My original position on the Vick investigation is that, for all its validity, it had the earmarks of overzealous federal prosecutors taking on a high-profile athlete. I still feel that way, but my hope is that the investigation and indictment becomes a catalyst — not for a referendum on conduct and African-American athletes — but for a far-flung war on animal fighting. Animal-rights activists say that dogfighting is more popular today than ever.
Yesterday, Senator Robert C. Byrd, Democrat of West. Virginia, spoke out against the practice of dogfighting in the United States.
What’s troubling for me, and it should be troubling for all of Vick’s so-called handlers and advisers, is how Vick came to be so close to this fire in the first place. How did one of the N.F.L.’s brightest stars, one of a multibillion-dollar league’s most recognizable faces — indeed, the face of his franchise — become inexorably linked to dogfighting, one of the lowest forms of savagery in modern society?
Guilty or innocent? You wonder. From the Falcons’ executive staff to Vick’s business associates, was there — is there — anyone telling Vick, “You, know Michael, this may not be such a good idea?”
Association can be as devastating as doing the deed itself. That’s certainly the case here.
•
The Vick indictment is not a pleasant document to read. It describes, point after point, heartless, often barbaric acts of cruelty. During an April raid, law enforcement officials found a stand used to hold dogs in place for mating. They found an electronic treadmill modified for dogs, and bloody carpeting.
Last June, a search uncovered the graves of seven pit bulls that were allegedly killed by members of the Bad Newz Kennels after sessions to test their fighting ability. Documents allege that sometimes dogs were starved, and described how a fight ended when one dog died, or when a dog gave up. According to documents, losing dogs were sometimes put to death by drowning, strangulation, hanging, gunshot, electrocution or body-slamming them to the ground.
“This has become bigger, much larger than Michael Vick,” said Christopher A. Bracey, a professor of law and an associate professor of African-American Studies at Washington University in St. Louis. “He has become a poster child for animal rights and animal fighting, for conspicuous consumption, for bad judgment and for what happens when you give someone too much too soon.”
How do young, newly created millionaires react when wealth allows them to indulge their dark side? We have to embrace the presumption of innocence, but the sad truth is that no matter what happens now, this indictment has thrown Vick for the greatest loss of his career.
Should the NFL or Falcons have had someone watching over Michael Vick?
Is there a problem with giving a young man millions of dollars with no restriction?
Also, the Final Draft of your “mini-column” (300 words) is due on Thursday.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
The Elusive Vick Takes His Hardest Hit
By WILLIAM C. RHODEN
I’ve argued for a number of years that Michael Vick of the Atlanta Falcons is one of the most important players in the N.F.L. His approach to quarterback — with speed, quickness and a rifle arm — makes him, on some days, the most dangerous player on the field. Many of the arguments against the way he plays the game reflect a deeply rooted cultural bias against athleticism at one of the most hallowed positions in sports.
The debate has now moved beyond the playing field, and Vick is facing an unprecedented rush. The federal government is accusing him of not merely crossing the line between good and bad judgment, but of going completely out of bounds.
Earlier this week, Vick was indicted on federal felony charges alleging that he had sponsored dogfighting since 2001, that he frequently gambled on dogfighting and that he authorized acts of cruelty against animals on property that he owned.
An 18-page indictment suggested that Vick was not just a distant spectator sitting on the 50-yard line; he was the quarterback for Bad Newz Kennels.
Now the federal government must prove its case, and Vick has to think long and hard about whether he wants to challenge the government’s evidence or strike a deal.
•
The pressure also shifts to the N.F.L. and its new law-and-order commissioner, Roger Goodell. Goodell is like a scrambling quarterback approaching the line of scrimmage who must decide: does he run or does he pass? The animal-rights activists — and a number of fans in general — are clamoring for the league to suspend Vick; the players union is ready to fight such a suspension. The owners and N.F.L. sponsors, ever taking the public pulse, are looking for Goodell to suggest a great move that assures the public that the inmates are under control.
So far we’ve been blitzed by cautious statements by the N.F.L., the Atlanta Falcons and the players union about how disappointed they are in Vick, but also how they are committed to letting the legal process run its course.
Nike made a statement yesterday by suspending the introduction of Vick’s latest shoe — the Air Zoom Vick V.
Since he joined the N.F.L. in 2001, Vick’s No. 7 jersey had been among the top-five sellers, according to the N.F.L.
My original position on the Vick investigation is that, for all its validity, it had the earmarks of overzealous federal prosecutors taking on a high-profile athlete. I still feel that way, but my hope is that the investigation and indictment becomes a catalyst — not for a referendum on conduct and African-American athletes — but for a far-flung war on animal fighting. Animal-rights activists say that dogfighting is more popular today than ever.
Yesterday, Senator Robert C. Byrd, Democrat of West. Virginia, spoke out against the practice of dogfighting in the United States.
What’s troubling for me, and it should be troubling for all of Vick’s so-called handlers and advisers, is how Vick came to be so close to this fire in the first place. How did one of the N.F.L.’s brightest stars, one of a multibillion-dollar league’s most recognizable faces — indeed, the face of his franchise — become inexorably linked to dogfighting, one of the lowest forms of savagery in modern society?
Guilty or innocent? You wonder. From the Falcons’ executive staff to Vick’s business associates, was there — is there — anyone telling Vick, “You, know Michael, this may not be such a good idea?”
Association can be as devastating as doing the deed itself. That’s certainly the case here.
•
The Vick indictment is not a pleasant document to read. It describes, point after point, heartless, often barbaric acts of cruelty. During an April raid, law enforcement officials found a stand used to hold dogs in place for mating. They found an electronic treadmill modified for dogs, and bloody carpeting.
Last June, a search uncovered the graves of seven pit bulls that were allegedly killed by members of the Bad Newz Kennels after sessions to test their fighting ability. Documents allege that sometimes dogs were starved, and described how a fight ended when one dog died, or when a dog gave up. According to documents, losing dogs were sometimes put to death by drowning, strangulation, hanging, gunshot, electrocution or body-slamming them to the ground.
“This has become bigger, much larger than Michael Vick,” said Christopher A. Bracey, a professor of law and an associate professor of African-American Studies at Washington University in St. Louis. “He has become a poster child for animal rights and animal fighting, for conspicuous consumption, for bad judgment and for what happens when you give someone too much too soon.”
How do young, newly created millionaires react when wealth allows them to indulge their dark side? We have to embrace the presumption of innocence, but the sad truth is that no matter what happens now, this indictment has thrown Vick for the greatest loss of his career.
Friday, October 10, 2008
HW # 4, Due Tuesday, October 14th!
For Tuesday, Read "Vick Pleads Guilty in Dog Fighting Case". In 5-7 sentences, explain what Vick did and what is happening to him now. Also, talk about how the commissioner of the NFL feels about Vick.
For those who did not write the "mini-column", be sure to write it for Tuesday. The assignment is below in homework assignment #3.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Vick Pleads Guilty in Dog-Fighting Case
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT
RICHMOND, Va., Aug. 27 — Michael Vick formally accepted a plea agreement from the federal government today at the United States District Court here, pleading guilty to a felony charge stemming from a dog fighting ring run from a property he owned.
On Friday the star quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons was suspended indefinitely without pay by the National Football League hours after the plea agreement was filed here.
Within the statement of facts, which accompanied the agreement, Vick admitted to funding the dog fighting operation and the gambling associated with it and to being complicit in the killing of at least six dogs that underperformed.
“I was ashamed and totally disappointed in myself, to say the least,” Vick said at a press conference at the Omni hotel here after the hearing. He added: “Dog fighting is a terrible thing. I reject it.”
Vick, 27, faces up to five years in prison on the charges of conspiring to travel in interstate commerce in aid of unlawful activities and conspiring to sponsor a dog in an animal-fighting venture. The United States attorney’s office will recommend a lighter sentence, between a year to 18 months, as long as Vick continues to cooperate with authorities. Although the government can argue for a lighter sentence, United States District Judge Henry E. Hudson, who is overseeing the case, is not bound by its recommendation, and Vick cannot appeal his decision.
“We hope Judge Hudson will see the real Mike Vick,” Vick’s lawyer, Billy Martin, said to reporters after the hearing. “What you have seen is an aberration and we think Judge Hudson will get it right when he sentences him.”
Sentencing, Hudson said today, is scheduled for Dec. 10.
In the plea agreement Vick said he would cooperate with the federal government’s investigations regarding any criminal activity. This includes testifying in front of grand juries, on behalf of the government at trial and even taking a lie detector test.
In the statement of facts, Vick said that he agreed to the killing of “approximately 6 to 8 dogs that did not perform well in ‘testing’ sessions,” adding that “all the dogs were killed by various methods, including hanging and drowning.”
Vick said that he did not place side bets on any of the fights and did not share in the purses that were won by Bad Newz Kennels, but that he funded the betting and was present when his co-defendants placed bets.
“I will redeem myself,” Vick said at the news conference. “I have to.”
In a written statement, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Chuck Rosenberg, said that although a first time offender would have avoided jail time under the sentencing guidelines, the government saw the behavior of Vick and two of his co-defendants as “heinous, cruel, and inhumane,” and thought they should face more time behind bars.
The government required two of Vick’s co-defendants, Purnell A. Peace, and Quanis L. Phillips, 28, who both pleaded guilty on Aug. 17, and Vick to accept an additional provision in the plea agreement that they “indeed understated the severity of their conduct and that a sentence substantially above what would otherwise be called for by the guidelines would be appropriate.”
“The parties thus agreed to recommend to the judge that the advisory sentencing range for these three defendants (assuming no prior criminal record) should be 12 to 18 months in prison, rather than zero to six months in prison,” Rosenberg said. Tony Taylor, the other co-defendant, was the first to accept a plea agreement from the government and is not likely to face any prison time.
N.F.L. Commissioner Roger Goodell told Vick in a letter on Friday that his actions were “cruel and reprehensible” and that Vick’s involvement in gambling was a violation of the N.F.L.’s personal conduct policy.
Vick said today: “I want to personally apologize to Commissioner Goodell, Arthur Blank, Coach Bobby Petrino, and my Atlanta Falcons teammates, for I was not honest and forthright in our discussions.”
He also said: “What I did was very immature. That means I need to grow up.”
Goodell said that he would review the suspension after legal proceedings were concluded. He said that in reviewing the suspension, he would take into consideration the possibility of new charges; Vick’s conduct; his sentence, and how much Vick cooperated with the league and the law enforcement officials.
Goodell could decide to reinstate Vick after his incarceration ends, or the suspension could continue indefinitely. But if Vick serves a year in prison he would not be eligible to play again until 2009, at the earliest. Vick would be 29 years old.
Even if he is reinstated and is available for the 2009 season, he would not have played for two seasons, and would have surely lost some of his speed — his best weapon — likely making him unattractive to all but the most risk-taking teams.
The suspension frees the Atlanta Falcons to pursue, before an arbitrator, a portion of Vick’s signing bonus because he is now in default of his contract. The Falcons could also decide to release the player who, only four months ago, was the face of the franchise.
It has become clear since then that Vick lied to Goodell and to Falcons owner Arthur Blank when they asked him in April about his involvement in dog fighting. Blank has indicated that he feels personally betrayed by a player he had once felt close to and on whom he had lavished a 10-year, $130 million contract in 2004.
For those who did not write the "mini-column", be sure to write it for Tuesday. The assignment is below in homework assignment #3.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Vick Pleads Guilty in Dog-Fighting Case
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT
RICHMOND, Va., Aug. 27 — Michael Vick formally accepted a plea agreement from the federal government today at the United States District Court here, pleading guilty to a felony charge stemming from a dog fighting ring run from a property he owned.
On Friday the star quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons was suspended indefinitely without pay by the National Football League hours after the plea agreement was filed here.
Within the statement of facts, which accompanied the agreement, Vick admitted to funding the dog fighting operation and the gambling associated with it and to being complicit in the killing of at least six dogs that underperformed.
“I was ashamed and totally disappointed in myself, to say the least,” Vick said at a press conference at the Omni hotel here after the hearing. He added: “Dog fighting is a terrible thing. I reject it.”
Vick, 27, faces up to five years in prison on the charges of conspiring to travel in interstate commerce in aid of unlawful activities and conspiring to sponsor a dog in an animal-fighting venture. The United States attorney’s office will recommend a lighter sentence, between a year to 18 months, as long as Vick continues to cooperate with authorities. Although the government can argue for a lighter sentence, United States District Judge Henry E. Hudson, who is overseeing the case, is not bound by its recommendation, and Vick cannot appeal his decision.
“We hope Judge Hudson will see the real Mike Vick,” Vick’s lawyer, Billy Martin, said to reporters after the hearing. “What you have seen is an aberration and we think Judge Hudson will get it right when he sentences him.”
Sentencing, Hudson said today, is scheduled for Dec. 10.
In the plea agreement Vick said he would cooperate with the federal government’s investigations regarding any criminal activity. This includes testifying in front of grand juries, on behalf of the government at trial and even taking a lie detector test.
In the statement of facts, Vick said that he agreed to the killing of “approximately 6 to 8 dogs that did not perform well in ‘testing’ sessions,” adding that “all the dogs were killed by various methods, including hanging and drowning.”
Vick said that he did not place side bets on any of the fights and did not share in the purses that were won by Bad Newz Kennels, but that he funded the betting and was present when his co-defendants placed bets.
“I will redeem myself,” Vick said at the news conference. “I have to.”
In a written statement, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Chuck Rosenberg, said that although a first time offender would have avoided jail time under the sentencing guidelines, the government saw the behavior of Vick and two of his co-defendants as “heinous, cruel, and inhumane,” and thought they should face more time behind bars.
The government required two of Vick’s co-defendants, Purnell A. Peace, and Quanis L. Phillips, 28, who both pleaded guilty on Aug. 17, and Vick to accept an additional provision in the plea agreement that they “indeed understated the severity of their conduct and that a sentence substantially above what would otherwise be called for by the guidelines would be appropriate.”
“The parties thus agreed to recommend to the judge that the advisory sentencing range for these three defendants (assuming no prior criminal record) should be 12 to 18 months in prison, rather than zero to six months in prison,” Rosenberg said. Tony Taylor, the other co-defendant, was the first to accept a plea agreement from the government and is not likely to face any prison time.
N.F.L. Commissioner Roger Goodell told Vick in a letter on Friday that his actions were “cruel and reprehensible” and that Vick’s involvement in gambling was a violation of the N.F.L.’s personal conduct policy.
Vick said today: “I want to personally apologize to Commissioner Goodell, Arthur Blank, Coach Bobby Petrino, and my Atlanta Falcons teammates, for I was not honest and forthright in our discussions.”
He also said: “What I did was very immature. That means I need to grow up.”
Goodell said that he would review the suspension after legal proceedings were concluded. He said that in reviewing the suspension, he would take into consideration the possibility of new charges; Vick’s conduct; his sentence, and how much Vick cooperated with the league and the law enforcement officials.
Goodell could decide to reinstate Vick after his incarceration ends, or the suspension could continue indefinitely. But if Vick serves a year in prison he would not be eligible to play again until 2009, at the earliest. Vick would be 29 years old.
Even if he is reinstated and is available for the 2009 season, he would not have played for two seasons, and would have surely lost some of his speed — his best weapon — likely making him unattractive to all but the most risk-taking teams.
The suspension frees the Atlanta Falcons to pursue, before an arbitrator, a portion of Vick’s signing bonus because he is now in default of his contract. The Falcons could also decide to release the player who, only four months ago, was the face of the franchise.
It has become clear since then that Vick lied to Goodell and to Falcons owner Arthur Blank when they asked him in April about his involvement in dog fighting. Blank has indicated that he feels personally betrayed by a player he had once felt close to and on whom he had lavished a 10-year, $130 million contract in 2004.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
HW #3, Due Friday, October 8th!
Bring in a rough draft of your opinionated "mini-column" discussing Barry Bonds and the accusations surrounding his steroid use. (minimum 300 words)
Pick one of the questions about Bonds to focus from the list below, and then incorporate the others into your column as needed.
Remember, you need to start with a 20-25 word lead to interest you reader in your column. After you write your lead, you should be sure to get directly to your argument.
Please email me if you are having a hard time writing this piece: mr.donohue@gmail.com
For more information to work with, you can look at the articles we read in class from homework assignments #1 and #2 (posted below this post).
You can find links to statistics we used in class by clicking on the following names:
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Jason Giambi
The questions for this column are:
1) If found guilty, should Bonds/Clemens have their records stripped? What about everyone else who used steroids?
2) Should Major League Baseball just accept steroids and move on?
3) Should Bonds and other suspected/confirmed steroid users be allowed in the Hall of Fame?
4) Should a baseball team sign Bonds?
Pick one of the questions about Bonds to focus from the list below, and then incorporate the others into your column as needed.
Remember, you need to start with a 20-25 word lead to interest you reader in your column. After you write your lead, you should be sure to get directly to your argument.
Please email me if you are having a hard time writing this piece: mr.donohue@gmail.com
For more information to work with, you can look at the articles we read in class from homework assignments #1 and #2 (posted below this post).
You can find links to statistics we used in class by clicking on the following names:
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Jason Giambi
The questions for this column are:
1) If found guilty, should Bonds/Clemens have their records stripped? What about everyone else who used steroids?
2) Should Major League Baseball just accept steroids and move on?
3) Should Bonds and other suspected/confirmed steroid users be allowed in the Hall of Fame?
4) Should a baseball team sign Bonds?
Monday, October 6, 2008
HW #2, Due Tuesday, October 6th!
For Tuesday, read “Clemens must be judged the same way as Bonds.” What is the writer's opinion? Find 3-5 places where you agree or disagree with what he has written. Explain why.
Clemens must be judged same way as Bonds
Wallace Matthews
December 14, 2007
For the past 10 years, one guy has been treated like he's Nicky Barnes, the other like he's John Wayne.
But in fact, they are very much the same guy. Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, forever linked by a single word. Cheater.
Their career arcs have been nearly identical since 1998, two men defying Father Time, the one opponent no one can get around on or throw a fastball by. But somehow, both managed to do it at an age when most men have trouble playing catch with their kids.
And somehow, while Bonds was (rightfully) suspected for it, investigated because of it, and ultimately scorned, Clemens was (inexplicably) admired, enriched and celebrated.
Or maybe not so inexplicably. Because there is only one real difference between the two, and that is the color of their skin.
If, in light of allegations in the Mitchell Report regarding use of steroids to revitalize his career, Clemens is not subject to the same kind of treatment Bonds has endured, then we know that for most of the public, this whole steroid mess has not been about cheating or preserving "the integrity of the game" or the sanctity of the records after all.
It has been about race, pure and simple, a witch hunt solely in search of a black witch.
How else to explain why for a decade, Clemens has been held up as a physical marvel, while Bonds has been vilified as a chemically altered freak? In a truly just and color-blind world, they will now pose together, arm in artificially pumped up arm, poster boys for the most shameful era in the history of any sport, their unholy pact signed not with a pen, but with a syringe.
Because you can excuse the difference in the treatment of the two with all the justifications you like -- Clemens is a pitcher, he's been a workout freak his whole career, he didn't suddenly go from throwing 85 to 95 at 40, the rough equivalent of Bonds going from 49 homers to 73 virtually overnight -- and it still comes down to the same thing.
The man who was admired is white. The man who has been vilified is black. There's simply no getting around that.
This is not to say that Bonds has not deserved every bit of the hell he brought upon himself. He wasn't brought down by BALCO or Victor Conte or an investigation. Bonds was brought down by his own character flaws, his own insecurities, his own illegal actions.
So, too, was Clemens.
The problem is that for roughly the same period that Bonds has been under scrutiny, Clemens has been praised. Clemens is two years older than Bonds, and has matched him, year for year, award for award, contract for contract. And yet, despite press-box snickers, there hasn't been a fraction of the suspicion and outrage heaped upon Bonds.
Well, now there'd better be. Every question we ask about Bonds -- How many homers would he have if he played clean? Should his "record" come with an asterisk? Does he deserve the Hall of Fame? -- must now be asked of Clemens, too.
How many wins? How many Cys? How many Ks?
Neither Clemens nor Bonds has ever failed a Major League Baseball drug test, which has a lot more to do with the integrity of the testing than the integrity of the athletes. But suspicion alone has been enough to convict Bonds in the court of public opinion. Why shouldn't it be the same with Clemens? No doubt, today people will be saying we have to wait until all the facts are in before judging Clemens.
The fact is, you don't need a positive drug test to pinpoint when Clemens went over to the dark side, or the testimony of a "personal trainer" turned rat, or a canceled check or a syringe full of his blood, any more than you do with Bonds.
It's all right there on the back of his baseball card. By 1996, when the Red Sox, after two seasons of declining wins and rising ERA, decided he was a punched ticket, Clemens was 192-111 with about 2,500 strikeouts -- about the same as Dwight Gooden, no one's idea of a Hall of Famer.
After that, he took off like, well, a Rocket, putting up better numbers at 41 than he had at 25. Four of his seven Cy Youngs came post steroids, plus another 2,400 strikeouts. If we are inclined to disregard all of Bonds' accomplishments after 1999, when he crossed over, shouldn't we do the same with Clemens?
Of course we should. It shouldn't even be a question. Why, it should be as plain as black and white.
Which, of course, is a big part of the problem.
Clemens must be judged same way as Bonds
Wallace Matthews
December 14, 2007
For the past 10 years, one guy has been treated like he's Nicky Barnes, the other like he's John Wayne.
But in fact, they are very much the same guy. Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, forever linked by a single word. Cheater.
Their career arcs have been nearly identical since 1998, two men defying Father Time, the one opponent no one can get around on or throw a fastball by. But somehow, both managed to do it at an age when most men have trouble playing catch with their kids.
And somehow, while Bonds was (rightfully) suspected for it, investigated because of it, and ultimately scorned, Clemens was (inexplicably) admired, enriched and celebrated.
Or maybe not so inexplicably. Because there is only one real difference between the two, and that is the color of their skin.
If, in light of allegations in the Mitchell Report regarding use of steroids to revitalize his career, Clemens is not subject to the same kind of treatment Bonds has endured, then we know that for most of the public, this whole steroid mess has not been about cheating or preserving "the integrity of the game" or the sanctity of the records after all.
It has been about race, pure and simple, a witch hunt solely in search of a black witch.
How else to explain why for a decade, Clemens has been held up as a physical marvel, while Bonds has been vilified as a chemically altered freak? In a truly just and color-blind world, they will now pose together, arm in artificially pumped up arm, poster boys for the most shameful era in the history of any sport, their unholy pact signed not with a pen, but with a syringe.
Because you can excuse the difference in the treatment of the two with all the justifications you like -- Clemens is a pitcher, he's been a workout freak his whole career, he didn't suddenly go from throwing 85 to 95 at 40, the rough equivalent of Bonds going from 49 homers to 73 virtually overnight -- and it still comes down to the same thing.
The man who was admired is white. The man who has been vilified is black. There's simply no getting around that.
This is not to say that Bonds has not deserved every bit of the hell he brought upon himself. He wasn't brought down by BALCO or Victor Conte or an investigation. Bonds was brought down by his own character flaws, his own insecurities, his own illegal actions.
So, too, was Clemens.
The problem is that for roughly the same period that Bonds has been under scrutiny, Clemens has been praised. Clemens is two years older than Bonds, and has matched him, year for year, award for award, contract for contract. And yet, despite press-box snickers, there hasn't been a fraction of the suspicion and outrage heaped upon Bonds.
Well, now there'd better be. Every question we ask about Bonds -- How many homers would he have if he played clean? Should his "record" come with an asterisk? Does he deserve the Hall of Fame? -- must now be asked of Clemens, too.
How many wins? How many Cys? How many Ks?
Neither Clemens nor Bonds has ever failed a Major League Baseball drug test, which has a lot more to do with the integrity of the testing than the integrity of the athletes. But suspicion alone has been enough to convict Bonds in the court of public opinion. Why shouldn't it be the same with Clemens? No doubt, today people will be saying we have to wait until all the facts are in before judging Clemens.
The fact is, you don't need a positive drug test to pinpoint when Clemens went over to the dark side, or the testimony of a "personal trainer" turned rat, or a canceled check or a syringe full of his blood, any more than you do with Bonds.
It's all right there on the back of his baseball card. By 1996, when the Red Sox, after two seasons of declining wins and rising ERA, decided he was a punched ticket, Clemens was 192-111 with about 2,500 strikeouts -- about the same as Dwight Gooden, no one's idea of a Hall of Famer.
After that, he took off like, well, a Rocket, putting up better numbers at 41 than he had at 25. Four of his seven Cy Youngs came post steroids, plus another 2,400 strikeouts. If we are inclined to disregard all of Bonds' accomplishments after 1999, when he crossed over, shouldn't we do the same with Clemens?
Of course we should. It shouldn't even be a question. Why, it should be as plain as black and white.
Which, of course, is a big part of the problem.
Friday, October 3, 2008
HW #1, Due Monday, October 6th!
For Monday,read the Bonds Vs Giambi article. What is the opinion given in this column? What is your opinion of the subject? Respond in 5-7 sentences.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Cheers for Giambi, but Silence for Bonds
By WILLIAM C. RHODEN
Barry Bonds must be kicking himself.
As he watches Jason Giambi morph from pariah to hero, being feted with mustache day at Yankee Stadium in support of a failed All-Star candidacy, Bonds has to be thinking, “You mean, all I had to do was say I did it.”
All Bonds had to do, it seems, was throw himself at the mercy of Commissioner Bud Selig, confess to George J. Mitchell and admit to the national news media, as Giambi did, that he should not have “messed with that stuff.”
Giambi on at least three occasions all but admitted he cheated, that he used performance-enhancing drugs to get an edge. That admission, coupled with cultivated personal charm, has been enough to earn Giambi — a mediocre power hitter — a Major League Baseball pass.
While Giambi has become a media darling, Bonds, the greatest home run hitter of our time, can’t get a job.
Why, with so many major league teams desperate for help, is Bonds being boycotted?
The pat answer is the so-called baggage Bonds might bring.
News media baggage is what is weighing him down. And let’s dispense with the “Little Timmy needs a role model” guff.
Role model?
Why were the Yankees passing out Giambi mustaches — to adults and children — in honor of an admitted drug cheat? So fans could stuff the ballot and get Giambi on the All-Star team. What’s the message here? That you can do wrong and make it right — after you’re busted — by groveling, granting media access, begging for mercy by playing ball with the powers that be? Then you, too, can get back.
Thanks to the Mitchell report, the public now knows that scores of players were using performance-enhancing drugs. Giambi was frequently mentioned in the report.
How does Bonds get back in baseball? How do we end the owners’ apparent unholy conspiracy to keep Bonds out of uniform?
Which team will have the courage to step up to the plate?
In 2004, Bonds told reporters that he could see himself ending his career in the American League as a designated hitter.
The time has come. Bonds belongs in the American League; he belongs in Boston.
Boston has a great legacy of hitters: Ted Williams, Carl Yastrzemski, Jim Rice, David Ortiz. Bonds is the greatest of them all.
This makes sense for Boston in light of Ortiz’s wrist injury, which could prevent him from being a power hitter for the rest of the season.
Imagine the impact Bonds’s presence will have on the already-volatile Yankees-Red Sox rivalry. Imagine the force he could be in the Red Sox’ push for a second consecutive championship. Bonds’s agent, Jeff Borris, said his client would need just 10 days to prepare.
Bonds in Boston sounds preposterous — at first.
Four years ago, Bonds made some unflattering remarks about the city.
At the time, he could not see himself in Boston.
“Boston is too racist for me,” he told The Boston Globe. “I couldn’t play there.”
But that was in 2004. Massachusetts has an African-American governor. Boston, thanks to the Celtics — Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce — made a significant transformation in perception. The Celtics, and by extension Boston, are seen as hip and cool and soulful.
Critics say Bonds is over the hill as a hitter, but the reality is that he is still the most feared slugger of any era. No one has been walked intentionally as often as Bonds; Bonds has broken Williams’s record for on-base percentage and Babe Ruth’s record for slugging percentage.
Yet Bonds can’t get a job, while Giambi has a day.
“I can’t believe he doesn’t have a job,” Borris told USA Today recently. “No one has offered even the minimum salary. He made the All-Star team last year, and there’s no reason to believe he wouldn’t have a repeat performance in 2008, except for the conspiracy against him.”
Why is Bonds having such a hard time re-entering? The common response is Bonds’s federal indictment and pending trial in March on perjury and obstruction of justice charges.
But the resistance to Bonds goes beyond suspected steroid use. What still rubs the news media the wrong way is Bonds’s “attitude,” that multi-layered word with an assortment of connotations. Bonds has to do a complete media makeover, and he’s fully capable: smiles, charm, gratitude and home runs. Lots of home runs.
In no time, he’ll have a mustache day of his own.
See you in class!
-Mr. Donohue
Cheers for Giambi, but Silence for Bonds
By WILLIAM C. RHODEN
Barry Bonds must be kicking himself.
As he watches Jason Giambi morph from pariah to hero, being feted with mustache day at Yankee Stadium in support of a failed All-Star candidacy, Bonds has to be thinking, “You mean, all I had to do was say I did it.”
All Bonds had to do, it seems, was throw himself at the mercy of Commissioner Bud Selig, confess to George J. Mitchell and admit to the national news media, as Giambi did, that he should not have “messed with that stuff.”
Giambi on at least three occasions all but admitted he cheated, that he used performance-enhancing drugs to get an edge. That admission, coupled with cultivated personal charm, has been enough to earn Giambi — a mediocre power hitter — a Major League Baseball pass.
While Giambi has become a media darling, Bonds, the greatest home run hitter of our time, can’t get a job.
Why, with so many major league teams desperate for help, is Bonds being boycotted?
The pat answer is the so-called baggage Bonds might bring.
News media baggage is what is weighing him down. And let’s dispense with the “Little Timmy needs a role model” guff.
Role model?
Why were the Yankees passing out Giambi mustaches — to adults and children — in honor of an admitted drug cheat? So fans could stuff the ballot and get Giambi on the All-Star team. What’s the message here? That you can do wrong and make it right — after you’re busted — by groveling, granting media access, begging for mercy by playing ball with the powers that be? Then you, too, can get back.
Thanks to the Mitchell report, the public now knows that scores of players were using performance-enhancing drugs. Giambi was frequently mentioned in the report.
How does Bonds get back in baseball? How do we end the owners’ apparent unholy conspiracy to keep Bonds out of uniform?
Which team will have the courage to step up to the plate?
In 2004, Bonds told reporters that he could see himself ending his career in the American League as a designated hitter.
The time has come. Bonds belongs in the American League; he belongs in Boston.
Boston has a great legacy of hitters: Ted Williams, Carl Yastrzemski, Jim Rice, David Ortiz. Bonds is the greatest of them all.
This makes sense for Boston in light of Ortiz’s wrist injury, which could prevent him from being a power hitter for the rest of the season.
Imagine the impact Bonds’s presence will have on the already-volatile Yankees-Red Sox rivalry. Imagine the force he could be in the Red Sox’ push for a second consecutive championship. Bonds’s agent, Jeff Borris, said his client would need just 10 days to prepare.
Bonds in Boston sounds preposterous — at first.
Four years ago, Bonds made some unflattering remarks about the city.
At the time, he could not see himself in Boston.
“Boston is too racist for me,” he told The Boston Globe. “I couldn’t play there.”
But that was in 2004. Massachusetts has an African-American governor. Boston, thanks to the Celtics — Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce — made a significant transformation in perception. The Celtics, and by extension Boston, are seen as hip and cool and soulful.
Critics say Bonds is over the hill as a hitter, but the reality is that he is still the most feared slugger of any era. No one has been walked intentionally as often as Bonds; Bonds has broken Williams’s record for on-base percentage and Babe Ruth’s record for slugging percentage.
Yet Bonds can’t get a job, while Giambi has a day.
“I can’t believe he doesn’t have a job,” Borris told USA Today recently. “No one has offered even the minimum salary. He made the All-Star team last year, and there’s no reason to believe he wouldn’t have a repeat performance in 2008, except for the conspiracy against him.”
Why is Bonds having such a hard time re-entering? The common response is Bonds’s federal indictment and pending trial in March on perjury and obstruction of justice charges.
But the resistance to Bonds goes beyond suspected steroid use. What still rubs the news media the wrong way is Bonds’s “attitude,” that multi-layered word with an assortment of connotations. Bonds has to do a complete media makeover, and he’s fully capable: smiles, charm, gratitude and home runs. Lots of home runs.
In no time, he’ll have a mustache day of his own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
