Breaking Rules: Todd Gurley and Jameis Winston expose flaws in NCAA and in student athletes

The suspension of University of Georgia running back Todd Gurley and the investigation of Florida State quarterback Jameis Winston for violating NCAA rules raise several perplexing questions. Gurley reportedly was paid between $8 and $25 for his autograph, and Winston may have received payment for his signature as well. Hearing and reading of both stories, I’m left to wonder why several times over: why are these student athletes being paid for their autographs? If true, why are they jeopardizing their eligibility? And why do we care?

The fallacy of paying almost famous student athletes for autographs

Paying for an athlete’s autograph, or an athlete being paid for her or his autograph, is a mucky practice at best. I understand the value Walter Payton’s or Babe Ruth’s autograph has since it’s no longer possible to acquire it. I also understand the value that the autograph of iconic living athletes such as Michael Jordan, Peyton Manning, LeBron James hold.

But Todd Gurley and Jameis Winston are now, like Johnny Manziel was last year, student athletes. They are outstanding student athletes and are regarded as excellent professional prospects, but the height and longevity of their fame, and thus the value of their signatures, is far from certain. That they may have been paid for their signatures, and that fans would pay for their signatures, is silly. There’s no other way to put it.

It’s the wrong way to show support and admiration for student athletes. Attend their games and watch them on television. Celebrate their achievement on the field and in the classroom. Donate the money that would be spent on Todd Gurley’s autograph to the University of Georgia. Ultimately, it’s a more meaningful investment that will produce a greater return, both for you and for everyone else.

The it-may-be-a-stupid-rule-but-it’s-still-a-rule-and-you-knew-it-was-a-rule frustration

I’ll address the stupidity of the NCAA regulations in question next, but first, attention needs to be brought to the astonishingly stupid decision-making shown by Gurley and Winston if they did in fact accept money for their autographs. Doing so is a clear violation of NCAA rule, one that other high profile student athletes have been caught breaking in recent years. There’s no fathomable excuse aside from hubris as to why these young men would put themselves in this position.

They knew the rules. They knew the potential consequences, both for themselves and for their teams. If the allegations are true, then both Gurley and Winston gambled potential national championships and Heisman trophy awards for a less-than-significant sum of money. There’s no sympathy to be had for either student.

It’s a stupid rule

It amazes me that whenever an incident like this is reported, it’s used as justification for why we need to pay NCAA student athletes. As if paying athletes will somehow curb such instances of greed. While I continue to find paying student athletes a flawed idea, I do support the deregulation of student life. NCAA student athletes deserve to enjoy the freedoms enjoyed by the students who share their campuses. And they deserve to receive compensation when the NCAA, their schools and their business partners profit off of their achievements.

It’s as stupid that the NCAA limits a student athlete’s ability to earn money on her or his name as it is stupid that the student athlete would be able to earn money simply for her or his signature. Instead of trying to catch student athletes breaking one of far too many nonsensical regulations on their conduct, the NCAA should focus on supporting its student athletes by creating clear, concise rules that make sense and addressing larger issues such as medical coverage, scholarship guarantees, academic integrity and conference realignment.

It’s disheartening as both a college football fan and a higher education administrator to see these student athletes hurt themselves and their teams. Todd Gurley and Jameis Winston may both be excellent NFL players. But right now the primary purpose of their attendance at the University of Georgia and Florida State University is to acquire an education. That of course is not the reality of big time college athletics. We can all do our part to make sure it is.

Te'o hoax is on us

As news of Lance Armstrong's admission of guilt and scheduled interview with Oprah broke last week and details began to emerge, I joked to my girlfriend that, if the story is going to be that a professional cyclist took performing enhancing drugs and lied about doing so, she should wake me when something interesting happens.

Along came news of Manti Te'o's fabricated girlfriend, and I finished last week wide awake.

I don't yet know what to think of the Te'o story, and it's possible I never will. It seems that he lied about how he met the fictitious woman, and embellished details of their online relationship. He was and is, as Notre Dame Athletic Director Jack Swarbrick stated, the victim of an elaborate hoax, but Te'o is also complicit in the hoax. Te'o's naivety enabled Roniah Tuiasosopo to string him along so easily, and Te'o embraced the attention he was receiving, continuing to talk about Lennay Kekua even after he became aware she did not exist.

But Manti Te'o and Roniah Tuiasisopo, and his conspirators, are not the only perpetrators of this hoax.
Ultimately, we are all guilty as enablers of a culture in which a young man could be so easily taken advantage of, and a culture that is too quick to glorify a story to bother making sure it's real.

As Malcolm Gladwell and Chuck Klosterman discuss in a riveting series of emails the two exchanged over the Te'o situation, Te'o isn't a real person to us - he's a symbol of what we want our student athletes to be. We allow ourselves to believe that the athletes we see on TV are the physical embodiments of perfection - practicing and playing hard, studying and achieving in the classroom, making good life decisions and forming meaningful romantic relationships. The truth is that college athletes are students, they're fallible young adults living with the added burden of fame.

College athletics, especially NCAA football and basketball, have grown far too popular for their own good. The spotlight shown on athletes such as Manti Te'o corrupts the amateurism in which the NCAA wants them to exist. Star football and basketball players in Division I programs become on-campus and sometimes national celebrities, garnering equal media attention as their professional counterparts. But Division I college and football players aren't professional athletes. They're students. Unfortunately, the NCAA, the national and local medias, and the fans have stopped treating them as such.

Jason Whitlock underscores this point in his own brilliant column. Manti Te'o, garnering support for his outstanding play on the football field and sympathy for his emotional story, became a symbol of what we're supposed to believe and want to believe student athletes are. In truth, Manti Te'o, who suffered enormous real hardship, proved to be a young man desperately seeking the approval of his family who found comfort, and even pleasure, in a national outpouring of support.

Those expressing outrage upon discovery that Te'o is not what they believed are not truly angry with him. Rather, their anger is an outward expression of their displeasure with themselves for believing in the false symbol of Manti Te'o as easily as Te'o believed in Lennay Kekua. In the end, Kekua was as real to Te'o as Te'o was to us.

mo money, mo problems

Last week, Justin Combs was awarded a full scholarship to be a student athlete at the University of California, Los Angeles. Justin will play defensive back for UCLA's football team next year, and presumably the three (or four) years after that. By all accounts, he is a good student, a standout athlete, and has earned his scholarship. Justin's accomplishment is typical fodder for a local news outlet, but would be unremarkable on a national scale.

However, Justin Combs happens to be the son of recording artist and producer Sean "Diddy" Combs, indicating that he is hardly in need of the $54,000 UCLA is providing him next year to cover the cost of his education. This has drawn the attention of the national media and raised the ire of many who feel that Combs should refuse his scholarship because of his family's financial wealth.

Of course, this argument is lunacy and it is grossly unjust to single out Justin Combs. He has every right to accept the scholarship and be proud of it as any other future NCAA student athlete. However, Combs story does offer us an avenue through which we can engage in a meaningful conversation regarding the role of athletic recruiting in the college admission and financial aid processes.

As more institutions shift student aid priorities towards need-based programs, does it make sense for athletic scholarships to exist, preserving both the best and worst of the merit-aid system? Recruited student athletes receive consideration as such in the college admission process, and rightly so. A student like Justin Combs offers a rare, exceptional talent to the college or university he attends, and that should matter to an admission officer reviewing an application, or an admission committee voting on a decision.

Athletic aptitude may help some students merit admission, just as may standardized test scores, distinguished academic achievement and other extracurricular accomplishments. In the game of merit, isn't admission to an outstanding school such as UCLA enough? Would the resources devoted to athletic scholarships, as well as academic scholarships, not be better served redirected as need-based aid?* Certainly many athletes would still receive aid, but so too would many other students who currently do not enjoy financial aid packages to cover the substantial costs of their educations.

*Harvard and Princeton may likely end up with the best two football teams in the country, but still...

I supposed last summer that student athletes should be given an option regarding scholarship money - to receive the funds as a scholarship or to receive the money as payment for athletic service. That is an outside-the-box notion, as is this. I recognize that both are flawed plans, but I also know that both initiate thoughts of reform for systems that begs for it in so many ways.

Justin Combs should not be singled out - to do so is too small-minded. We need to think big and offer up big ideas, take a high-minded approach to athletic funding and financial aid processes, and find solutions that help more students, rather than chastise a young man who should be congratulated for his accomplishments.

upon further review

Yesterday morning I tweeted that the NCAA should consider imposing its "death penalty" on the Penn State University football team in the wake of the sexual scandal surrounding the program. Less than a minute later I tweeted that my first tweet was too harsh. Having spent the day listening, reading and watching news coverage of the scandal, I changed my mind again. Then I woke up this morning, and found myself torn on the issue.

One one hand, Penn State football had nothing to do with Jerry Sandusky being a perverted, lustful predator. The current players and possibly some members of the coaching, training and athletic administration staffs had no knowledge of and took no part in Sandusky's heinous acts or the keeping quiet that allowed his terrorism of pre-adolescent boys to continue for over a decade.

On the other hand, it was the specter of Penn State football and the insane amount of revenue and worship it generates that motivated those with knowledge of Sandusky's criminal acts to remain silent. Sandusky used Penn State football to lure his victims. Protecting the image of Penn State football was the motivation for keeping the scandal a secret for so long. Students rioted in State College on Wednesday night because of their inane devotion to Penn State football and its fallen icon.

Losing football would cripple Penn State University. It would be awful and unfair to the players on the team, and it would enrage and devastate members of its community and people throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. And yet, being aware of all that, I can't say it would be the wrong thing to do.

Approximately 100,000 people will gather to watch a football game in State College, PA at noon on Saturday. But that game should not take place.

There was a cancer festering in the Penn State football program - one that infected others in the University's administration. It's too soon to know whether or not all of it has been removed. Penn State needs to hit the reset button on their football program. They need to clean house and start fresh with entirely new coaching and administrative staffs next year.

In the meantime, playing football is of little consequence for Penn State. Football has become far too large a part of its culture - it needs to be diminished and the many positive qualities of the University need to be appreciated. It's harsh and unfair, but maybe letting go of the remainder of the season is the best way to do that.

Should this be what Beaver Stadium looks like on Saturday?

not so happy valley

Growing up in central Pennsylvania, I strayed from the social norm - I never cheered for Penn State football. In fact, as I came of age as a sports fan I developed a general dislike for Joe Paterno and the Nittany Lions. I found their style of play to be dated and felt that the Weekend-at-Happy-Valley charade surrounding Joe Pa the better part of the last decade was holding the team back. As a football fan, and a Pennsylvanian, I wanted more from my state's flagship college football program.

But the events that have unfolded in the last week at Penn State have little to do with football. Yes, Joe Paterno was the head football coach at the University for the last 46 years. However, his job, first and foremost, was to be an educator, a leader and a counselor for the young adults inhabiting his campus. In that regard, Joe Paterno failed.

Not only did he fail, he did so in an egregious fashion. The Penn State Board of Trustees fired Joe Paterno last night. He was not allowed to coach out the rest of the year nor was he allowed to resign. He was fired, and appropriately so.

The full extent of the scandal is yet to be known and may never be known. More details will surface in the days and weeks ahead, and if there is any truth to reports like those heard on WEEI radio this morning, then we have merely stumbled upon the tip of the iceberg so far. At the very least we know that then graduate assistant Mike McQueary informed Joe Paterno that he witnessed former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky sexually assaulting a pre-adolescent male in the showers of the Penn State locker room in 2002. Paterno reported the incident to his athletic director, but all three men failed to contact a true authority.

Paterno continued to grant Sandusky, who retired several years prior - apparently under suspicion of illicit behavior with a young boy, access to the Penn State football facilities and allowed him to maintain an office on campus. He knowingly enabled Sandusky to use the grandeur of Penn State football to lure minors to campus, where he reportedly took advantage of them. How much Joe Paterno knew is debatable, but it's an inarguable point that he knew of at least one incident, and that should have been enough.

I applaud the Board of Trustees for acting so swiftly this week, but condemn them and the University's upper-level administration for allowing this situation to fester on their campus for over a decade. I felt years ago that Paterno's dismissal was warranted for football reasons - now I know that his removal, as well as the removal of others, was necessary for the safety and welfare of the many victims of this story.

I'm not the first to write or utter these words, and I won't be the last. After 409 victories as the head football coach at Penn State University, there will be no iconic image of Joe Pa walking off the field for the final time. Instead, the lasting image of Paterno's legacy will be the meandering musings of a confused old man who fails to comprehend the gravity of his failure to act.

But student athletes are paid...

I love college sports, particularly college football, softball and basketball, in that order. Unfortunately, the hypocrisy of amateurism in Division I college football and basketball is taking away from the experience of watching and enjoying these sports.

When watching SportsCenter these days, it seems like there are more stories about scandal in NCAA athletics than highlights of actual NCAA athletics. It makes watching what traditionally has been a wholesome brand of entertainment feel sleazy - like watching Jersey Shore, Real Housewives, Toddlers and Tiaras* or the Miami Heat. Recent revelations about the payoffs and favors given to University of Miami student athletes by booster and convict Nevin Shapiro stand as an exclamation point to a problem that is growing within college sports.

*I enjoy Jersey Shore from time to time, my girlfriend watches Real Housewives and I've seen Toddlers and Tiaras exactly once - which was more than enough.

Even more troubling, the best minds and the most respected leaders in the "business" appear at a loss for any real solutions to the existing problems, including illegal benefits for student athletes, poor academic standards and performance, the increasing influence of recruiting agents and others. So many of the far too many rules that the NCAA places upon student athletes make little to no sense that it's become too difficult for an undersized agency to police the rules and policies of the utmost importance.

Whenever reports surface of the large, illegal payouts made to student athletes, the debate over whether or not NCAA athletes should be paid surfaces. In the past few years, the number of incidents and my growing understanding of higher education have changed my stance on the subject, making me much more open to nontraditional, outside-box-ideas. For instance...

What if NCAA student athletes on scholarship had the option of using their scholarship to fund their educations or using their scholarship to be paid? The likes of Andrew Luck and Perry Jones, who will be either the top or top 5 picks in the next installments of the NFL and NBA Drafts**, could choose to be paid by their school for their participation on an athletic team while taking out student loans, like the rest of us, to pay for their educations.

**I make current odds 50/50 on there being an NBA Draft next June, and I wouldn't dare wager money on the 2011-2012 NBA season starting anytime in 2011.

The 2011-12 estimated cost of attendance at Stanford University is $57,198. I assume Cardinal quarterback Andrew Luck is on a full scholarship. Would it not make sense for him to choose to receive $57,000 from Stanford this year knowing that he's going to sign an NFL contract with millions of dollars in guaranteed money next summer? Any other scholarship student athlete, in any Division I*** could have the same option. The amount of pay they receive would vary depending on school, if they were an in- or out-of-state student at a public school, and if their scholarships are full or partial.

***Division III doesn't allow for athletic scholarships, so it's not applicable there, and I don't see this being as viable an option for Division II sports or even Division I CBS football - though that does create inequities at schools competing in different divisions in different sports.

Andrew Luck may not be the best example - he's going to be fine either way. But what about the student athlete from a low-income background who strikes gold by landing a full scholarship to play Division I NCAA athletics. He may not have professional potential, but this option may still be viable and beneficial to him, or her for that matter. Having the money while in college may enable such a student athlete to help his or her family in the short term. In the long term, the student athlete will be able to use his or her college degree to earn a living and repay college debts, like the rest of us.

In my early 20s, when I was more of a curmudgeon about maintaining the purity and tradition of all things sports, I would have flatly rejected such an idea. And even now, this is not a thought-out concept or something that may have any realistic potential. But the aforementioned best minds and most respected leaders need to start thinking in such veins. It's become a battle trying to ensure that student athletes are going to college first and foremost to earn a degree, and right now it looks as if we're losing that battle.

on life support

It's championship week in NCAA college basketball, which means two things: 1) the year is going by way too fast; 2) I should be coming down with a case of March Madness over my excitement for the start of the NCAA tournament. The first seems to be an undeniable truth on an annual basis nowadays, but the second, sadly, seems like the furthest possible thing from the truth right now.

I find myself almost completely uninterested in college basketball (meaning D-I men's college basketball). I used to enjoy college basketball more than the NBA, but the lack of complete talent* in the collegiate ranks is killing the game.

*There are many physically gifted players in the collegiate ranks, and many players high levels of skill, but there are few, if any, players that combine both.

Too many of the college athletes who one day might become good college basketball players jump to the NBA before realizing any of their potential. And NBA teams are far too eager to draft on physical potential instead of actual basketball talent and production. The result... college basketball is suffering from a lack of skilled players and poor quality of basketball. It's not fun to watch, and I worry that the upcoming NCAA tournament is going to be utterly underwhelming.

College basketball isn't dead yet, but unless the NCAA and NBA can work together to do something to allow college basketball players to develop in college, it's going to need life support to get back on track.

4.48, 4.51, 4.59, 4.35, 4.44, 4.29!

I love the NFL Scouting Combine. Literally, I can sit here and watch guys complete drills, run 40 yard dashes and rep bench presses all day and be totally and completely content. The NFL Network's coverage of the event is outstanding. Rich Eisen and crew are insightful and entertaining. Particularly, I enjoy Mike Mayock's analysis of the many unique scouting drills. It's really fascinating to learn why scouts want to see these athletes complete certain tasks and what they're looking for. It really makes me feel like a more informed and engaged football fan.

I'd love to be able to put myself in the seat of an NFL scout, coach or personnel evaluator. I find the whole process of the NFL draft fascinating. And to me, the best part of any Madden NFL video game is the ability to take control of a franchise and build a team through the draft, trades and free agent signings. I've loved working in college admissions and have a passion for the field of education, but it would be amazing to have an opportunity to work in professional sports, especially football.

Though I never played the game, there is no sport I admire more. The physical effort and sacrifice it takes to play football amazes me. The complex intricacies of the game start the gears in my mind churning and suck me in every time. I think what I really loved about college admissions is that there are many similarly complex aspects of the profession that stimulate the mind in the same way.

Whether in football or higher education, I look forward to returning to a level of intellectual engagement that satisfies me.

To Boise, or not to Boise?

There already has been and will continue to be much discussion among those covering college football, and those looking for a topic of conversation at the water cooler, about whether or not Boise State's football team has a place in the BCS National Championship game. Oregon's leapfrogging of the Broncos after their comeback victory over Stanford seems to have fanned these flames. Obviously it's still premature to engage in such conjecture - most teams have only played four or five games - but the debate persists nonetheless, and it seems to me that in recent years, it's getting carried away.

Though not a fan of the BCS, I am a fan of the bowl system. I feel that there are way too many bowls and that they've become too spread out, but I do prefer the sense of desperation created by knowing that you may need to win every game in order to earn a chance to play for a national championship. And, as someone who enjoys a good sports debate, I like the subjective nature of selecting which teams have earned said right. (Note: this is another area where I am disappointed in the BCS as I feel it gives too much weight to the computer polls and not the human polls. I think technological innovation can be used to account for factors such as strength of schedule, but let's allow coaches and sports media to rank the teams and make their rankings public.)

The question of whether or not Boise St., and TCU, will have the opportunity to play for the 2010 National Championship should either go undefeated during the regular season is fascinating to me. The part of me that roots for underdogs say yes - if Boise St. goes undefeated and the contenders from major conferences have losses, the Broncos should be in the game on January 10th (And yes, it still disgusts me that it's January 10th and not New Year's Day). But the more pragmatic part of me feels compelled to admit that if teams such as Alabama, Auburn, Oregon, Stanford, Ohio St. or Nebraska complete the regular season with one loss, they all have a strong case to make that they are more deserving of a spot in that game - after watching parts of the atrocity that was the Red River Rivalry this year, Oklahoma is clearly not talented enough to make this list, and neither are Iowa, LSU or any teams in the ACC or Big East.

As much as I love this debate, I am willing to display patience and wait for the scenarios to play out this fall. I do feel that it's unfair to the players on Boise St.'s team to discuss their worthiness of a place in the National Championship game and act like they've already won their remaining games when there is a lot of football left to play between now and then. For now, let's just enjoy Boise St. as a talented, well-coached, fun team to watch. And those parts of me that find underdogs appealing and like to stand against establishment, will root for a Broncos-Horned Frogs rematch this year, on January 10th.

the readiness is all

The ESPN documentary series 30 for 30 is truly exceptional. Those responsible for its production have chosen poignant, pertinent moments in sports history and have retold them masterfully. I just finished watching the Guru of Go by Bill Couturie, and it was the most impactful viewing experience I have had in quite some time. And yes, I know impactful isn't an actual word - my sister continually points this out to me - but if after reading this post you can come up with a better word to use to capture my sentiment, then by all means please let me know.

I had some familiarity with Hank Gathers and the uptempo style of basketball played at Loyola Marymount University in the late 1980s. I knew of Gathers' tragic collapse during the course of a game, of Bo Kimble's tributary left-handed free throws and of LMU's improbable run to the Elite 8 of the 1990 NCAA Tournament - it's one of the greatest stories in the history of sports. But I did not know the full story of their coach, Paul Westhead, which is in and of itself something of a Shakespearean tale. But most importantly, I did not know the gripping details of Gathers' death and, quite honestly, was not prepared for the personal connection he and I share.

Earlier in the 1989-90 college basketball season, Hank Gathers collapsed momentarily during a game and it was later discovered that he suffered from hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, one of two strains of the cardiomyopathy disorder - I suffer from the other, dilated cardiomyopathy. While regular exercise is an integral component to any treatment plan for cardiomyopathy, strenuous exercise can and often is detrimental.

Under Coach Westhead, the LMU Lions ran an offense known simply as, "the system." They pushed the ball and blazed up and down the court like no other team. They played as if every possession was a fastbreak. They tormented their opponents, regularly registering scores in the triple digits. And tragically, they ran out the clock on the young life of their brightest star.

During the 1988-9 season, Gathers lead the nation in both scoring and rebounding - only the second time, at the time, that a player had achieved the feat. But unfortunately, Gathers' insistence on pushing himself physically to excel at the game he loved - to the point that he reduced the dosage of his heart medication to reduce the effects of sluggishness - drove him to the brink of death and beyond. Gathers died during the West Coast Conference Tournament just over 20 years ago on March 4, 1990.

There was so much about watching this documentary that struck me personally. I can relate to Gather's fear, frustration and stubbornness. When I first started my medication my energy was gone. I'd wake up in the morning, take my pills and be out again within minutes for several more hours sleep. When I first started working out again, I found the exercise I was accustomed to doing uncomfortable and aggravating. And the uncertainty that confronted me was immense and overwhelming.

I've been working on this post for over an hour now, and my heart is still lurking in the back of my throat from watching this documentary. I'm not sure when it's being re-aired, but it is a must watch film - I watched the Hurt Locker last night and as intense and gripping as that was, the Guru of Go is far more powerful. I feel sad for Paul Westhead. He was eventually dulled out more of the blame for Gathers' death than he deserved. The medical information we have about heart conditions and how to treat them compared to that of 20 years ago is staggering, and I am incredibly grateful for it. It's because of tragic stories such as Gathers' that more attention is paid to these disorders and better treatments are practiced. Hank Gathers will forever be an inspirational figure to me, and like his teammate and friend Bo Kimble, I will find my own way to honor him and his memory.

march madness

I spent much of the first half of this week studying the NCAA Tournament brackets, listening to ESPN Radio and associated podcasts, and watching as much college basketball analysis on ESPN and its family of networks as possible. And the result...

One of my final four and one of my elite eight teams are already eliminated. Not entirely surprising given that, while I do definitely follow college basketball, it ranks behind NFL football, NCAA football, Major League Baseball and NBA basketball, in that order, among my favorite sports. Still, very sad to see Scottie Reynolds, someone of whom I am a big fan and with whom I am personally familiar be eliminated from the Tournament for the final time. However, I am now on the Gaels' bandwagon - how could you not root for a team with five dudes from Australia?!

I watched all of CBS' NCAA Tournament coverage on Thursday - yes, all of it - but Friday my attention was diverted. Early that morning I woke to catch a bus over to St. Elizabeth's hospital in Brighton where I was scheduled for an echo cardiogram at 9:00am. I'd had the test done previously twice - once in August of 2008, at which time my ejaction fraction was down to 45% (unfortunately I moved to Boston shortly after the procedure and my doctor in Virginia never alerted me to the low score), and in January of 2009 I had an echo stress cardiogram, registering an ejaction fraction as low as 37% (I had two different tests conducted on consecutive days and cannot recall the name of the second test, but on one my ejaction fraction was 40% and on the other it was 37%).

2009 was an up and down year for me - actually more of a down, up then down year - physically and personally. 2010 has been great for me personally so far, but physically it's still been a bit up and down. Consequently, I was shocked listening to the voicemail left by my cardiologist on Friday afternoon. My ejaction fraction was 50%!

To put this in context, the ejaction fraction is the ratio of blood pumped out of the heart's ventricles with each beat. A "normal" ejaction fraction for an adult male is 58% and anything in the 55-65% range is considered healthy. Once you dip below 35% percent as a cardiomyopathy patient you qualify to be fitted for a pacemaker. So to gain ten or more percent in a 15 month time period was far above and beyond good news.

And it came at the end of a week in which I hadn't been feeling that great. I'd been experiencing some pressure on the left side of my chest that I associated with water retention and/or heart swelling, both symptoms of my condition. I've also been experiencing some discomfort on the left side of my chest cavity from a lingering rib injury I suffered just before Christmas, and after everything I've been through the past two plus years of my life, it's become incredibly difficult to discern different types of physical pain and what is actual physical pain as opposed to psychological concern.

But this affirmation that the lifestyle changes I've made and the arduous experiences I've endured have not been for nothing has me feeling incredible today - the 70 degree and sunny weather in Boston in the middle of March doesn't hurt either. I've only told two people about my good news so far - there are just a couple of friends with whom I've been able to share details about my condition and my experience living with it. It's overwhelming to talk about and even just think about how good hearing "50%" in a voice message felt, but I look forward to opportunities in the days ahead to enjoy sharing something positive about my health with those who have helped me be strong (well at least not completely wimpy) in the face of so much negative.

why and how NCAA athletes should be paid

Historically, I've not been a fan of payment for college athletes, though I have forever been a strong supporter of the awardance of athletic scholarships. But with maturity - and age - our ideas and perceptions of the world in which we reside often change, and on this issue mine certainly has.

College athletes bear responsibilities and face pressures other college students do not. Their schedules are packed with practices and road trips that take them out of class and away from their peers. It can be difficult for athletes to effectively immerse themselves in their campus communities. And for the star athletes at the major programs in the "big-money" sports, life is far more complex. These young men and women are asked to live celebrity lives on their respective campuses, on a less than meager college student budget. Thus, it's not surprising that prominent college athletes are often involved in scandals involving illegal financial perks.

As a current grad student, I have an assistantship that pays me a modest stipend and offers me enough tuition remission to cover all the credits I'm taking this year. NCAA athletes are often granted the latter, but why not the former. They serve their institutions just as I am serving mine, and dedicate a comparable number of hours per week - 20 in my case - to their sport. If athletes were given a stipend - nothing extravagant but enough to have pizza and "beverage" money and a little pocket change left over - I'd like to think that the temptation to take illegal financial handouts would be lessened. I'm not about to take the leap to believe that it would be negated and do acknowledge that this proposal does not address the dirty side of recruiting at the big time schools.

Ultimately, I do think this is the type of action the NCAA ought to be considering - too often it appears to be a reactionary agency. Also, I want to make clear that if a system of athletic stipends were instituted, there should be no differences made across sport, conference or division. The starting middle linebacker at the University of Texas should receive no more or less financial compensation than the backup left small forward on the women's basketball team at Lebanon Valley College. I know student athletes receive a significant advantage in the admission process, but their admission is complicated by factors the majority of students never have to consider and their value to their institution is one that I feel is unquantifiable, and thus should not be categorically prejudged resulting in the dismissal of such outside-the-box thinking.

Bob Knight just doesn't get it.

(another delayed post - but just by a couple weeks this time and not a few months - progress...)

I sat down this evening in the comfort of my living room to watch ESPN's coverage of the Jimmy V Classic, a night of college basketball from Madison Square Garden in New York City. This is an event I look forward to watching annually because of its celebration of the life and legacy of Jim Valvano and the showing of his incredible speech from the 1993 ESPY awards. If you're not familiar with the man or the speech, google him and look for the speech on YouTube before continuing to read this entry. Jimmy V is an inspirational figure and I dare not attempt to summarize his impact on the world of sports, cancer research and general humanity.

On such a night, all members of ESPN's team covering the games were wearing their best suits; all except for one. Surrounded by four commentators and analysts looking sharp and professional in their attire, effectively honoring the importance of the occasion, there sat Bob Knight, callously donning an ESPN polo and a poorly pressed pair of pants.

Bob Knight was a great coach - I honestly appreciate his passion for defense and commitment to the motion offense - and he's surprisingly entertaining and insightful as a college basketball analyst. But it seems apparent that as Knight aged, he failed to mature. I believe Knight lost his ability to effectively communicate and lead his players, which resulted in the unfortunate "incidents" that lead to the end of his tenure at Indiana. And sitting here watching Bob Knight this evening, it occurs to me that maybe he just doesn't understand how to appropriately and adequately acknowledge the stature of the moment - and maybe that's been his problem all along.

Knight's behavior and the manner in which he carries and presents himself certainly do not diminish his many remarkable achievements as a college basketball coach. However, they do make me less inclined to celebrate them.

vindication

I just got home from being out after the Boston College / Virginia Tech football game. It was an exciting game that wasn't decided until less than 30 seconds remained on the game clock. The Eagles prevailed 28 to 23 over the Hokies; however, having watching the entire game from the stands, I feel compelled to write that that game was the most lopsided 5 point contest I have ever witnessed. BC absolutely dominated VA Tech (cause VT really stands for the University of Vermont) in every aspect of the game - well, except for turnovers. Tech's only offense was the scrambling of their quarterback, Tyrod Taylor, and since that was the only thing they could do effectively on offense, defense (except for return poor Chris Crane interceptions for touchdowns), or special teams, Boston College didn't bother to employ a QB spy defense. In reality, BC scored 48 points to VA Tech's 3, but because of their turnovers 20 of those points were awarded to Tech.

This has become a great rivalry in the ACC, and after the game BC fans acknowledged it as such by storming the field. I was part of that storm and am damn proud I was. So far, this has been a rough year for me, I've sacrificed and lost of lot, unfortunately a lot of myself. Tonight, I feel that the Eagles won a little bit back for me.

defining the underdogs

One aspect of living in Boston I was especially looking forward to was the frenzy surrounding the New England Patriots during the football season. Sadly, that lasted all of about 8 minutes into the season, just as long as Tom Brady lasted. Brady's injury was devastating for numerous reasons, the least of which being that I drafted him in the first round for my fantasy football team (by the way, my second round pick, Marques Colston, also happens to be out - not really a great year for me and fantasy football evidently). But more importantly, the Patriots had established themselves as the NFL's most dominant team, and Tom Brady was their iconic leader. Like them or not, they were the benchmark to which other teams aspired.

With Dallas falling to Washington this past weekend, the NFL is suddenly wide open - there's no clear cut favorite to win or even reach the Super Bowl in either conference. Similarly, thanks to a wild weekend of improbable upsets, the path to college football's BCS Championship is pretty open-ended as well. While I admit that these conditions do make following the NFL and NCAA football seasons exciting - I love that BYU has a legitimate shot at getting to the national championship game - without the dominant team separating itself from the pack, there's just something missing. Teams like the New England Patriots of this decade, the New York Yankees and Chicago Bulls of the 1990's, and the San Francisco 49ers of the 1980's - I was born in 1980 so I'll stop there. Also, I know the Red Wings and maybe even the Pittsburgh Penguins fit in here somewhere, but I never followed hockey closely enough to know exactly where - enhance their sports with their presence. They offer us as fans opportunities to witness greatness. And they also help us define the teams against which they compete.

With New England's dominance in question, and teams like Indianapolis, Dallas and San Diego appearing quite vulnerable at times this season, it become difficult to define which teams are the favorites and which teams are the underdogs, and rooting for the underdog is one of the most sacred acts of a sports fan. Like it or not, the Patriots make the NFL more exciting. Personally, I like to root for them, but those who marvel at them or simply root against them generate a lot of passionate enthusiasm in the process. Whatever role they fill, good guy or bad guy, the Patriots make the NFL better, just as USC makes college football better, Notre Dame makes it even better still when they're one of the top teams, the the Yankees make MLB more interesting when they're on top. Without these teams, great sports stories like George Mason, the 2003 Florida Marlins, and even the 2004 Boston Red Sox lose some of their remarkability. Don't buy it? The Tampa Bay Rays are the sports story of the year, going from last place to first place. But the real reason they're such a compelling story, they had to climb over the heavy favorites the Yankees and Red Sox to win the AL East. Facing the top dogs of baseball, the Rays were the ultimate underdogs, and that's exactly why they're so much fun to watch and root for - unless of course you happen to be a Yanks or Sox fan.

Project Couch Potato

I spent this past New Year's Day driving back to Williamsburg after a fun yet personally dissatisfying New Year's Eve in Washington, D.C. - that's another story for another time. When I finally arrived home and turned on the TV to watch Hawaii attempt to challenge Georgia in the Sugar Bowl - in case you missed it they did not - I felt that throughout the day I had somehow betrayed my roots as a sports fan. My childhood New Year's Days were broken into stints of time spent on our living room sofa, in our backyard, and at our kitchen table. New Year's Day was about one thing and one thing only: college football.

While Division I college football bowl games are now spread out over about a month of time, in my younger days I recall as many bowl games as possible being packed into one glorious day - New Year's Day. It all started off around noon with the likes of the Peach and Gator Bowls. It continued into the afternoon with the Rose and Cotton Bowls, and culminated with the night games, the Orange, Sugar and Fiesta Bowls. I'd watch them all turning the channels back and forth until finally settling on whichever game was most exciting. I'd venture outside during the halftime breaks for an impromptu game of football with whomever else from the neighborhood had the same thought. I'd break during the 4th quarter of the Rose Bowl for the traditional New Year's Day pork and sauerkraut dinner - it's a Pennsylvania thing - but I would of course leave the TV on loud enough to hear just in case there was a sudden reason to run back to the living room. And finally, I would stay up late, way past my bedtime, to watch the best teams battle each other in the biggest games - usually Notre Dame and usually the Orange Bowl.

As I grew older and began to understand the national championship implications of all the games they became even more exciting. New Year's Day annually became a great debate over which school would be #1. Each team took its turn making or breaking its case. There were favorites to win the prize obviously, but I could always count on something unexpected and nearly unbelievable happening. Watching Rocket Ismail return a late 4th quarter punt 91 yards down the right sideline for a touchdown surging Notre Dame towards an Orange Bowl victory over Colorado on Jan. 1, 1991 was one of the most exhilarating moments of my youth. Watching the touchdown be negated because of a clipping penalty on the Irish was one of the most disappointing.

I can appreciate the efforts of the BCS system to match the two best teams together and declare a "true" national champion. I can appreciate the arguments made for Division I college football to institute a playoff system out of frustration with the BCS. But what I cannot appreciate is the manner in which college football players are treated like dollar signs. College football players, like all student athletes, work hard and sacrifice an enormous amount of time to represent their schools. New Year's Day, in addition to being more exciting than it now is, used to be an appropriate celebration of the student athlete, a day on which each player from each team competing for one singular purpose irregardless of what was at stake: pride. I used to be able to flip through the channels from game to game watching and rooting for one team after the another. Now, I flip through the channels from game to Law & Order marathon to Project Runway marathon a bit less enthralled than in the past.

I admit that when all the bowl games had been played there was seemingly never unanimous agreement over which team should be declared national champions. But what's so horrible about that? It's rare in this world to encounter anything important that's decided with absolute certainty, and I would consider college football's national championship to be fairly important. In most instances. cases are presented, opinions are voiced, and resolutions are made based upon all the information that's been put forth. That's how families decide what they're having for dinner, that's how groups of friends decide which movie to go see, that's how the NCAA determines which teams compete in its national championship tournament, and that's how laws are made and how nations elect heads of state. And just in case you didn't already know, that's how we make decisions on college applicants.