After Atalanta

{I was going to run one post about all the columns, articles, etc. that reflect on 2007 or predict 2008 but there are so many--not even including all the ones local papers are running about people and events no one outside these small towns and cities know or care about. So I am dividing this up into two posts.} 'Tis the season for trotting out predictions, reflecting on the past year and wondering exactly how current players, teams, athletes, conflicts, etc. will play out. In other words there are no shortage of sports writers (and others) playing Nostradamus and patting themselves on the back for how well they did as Oracle of 2007. I am not going to do that. [Well a little bit I am.] Mostly I am going to comment on what everyone else thinks will happen because it's easier to critique than to come up with some grand predictions on my own. (It's lazy, I know. But I have ^%$# to get done this break.) In the International Herald Tribune , Christopher Clarey has some thoughts...

We all knew it was coming. The plans for Imus to go back on the radio have been in the works for a while. Rumors about negotiations with WABC, we knew, we more likely truer than not. And so it will be that Don Imus will return to the airwaves on December 3. Coach Stringer says she knew Imus would work again but she's still angry at the comments, though she reiterates that she has forgiven him. She also seems to think this experience has humbled him and that he will emerge a changed man when he shows up for work in a month. Does she really believe that or is it just what she says to the press? I hope the latter because I really think Stringer is smarter than that. Imus had his already slightly sketchy reputation tarnished a little more. He did not have his consciousness raised. And speaking of the Imus situation. It has been a hot topic here in Pittsburgh where the annual North American Society for the Sociology of Sport conference is being held. [The conference is also the reason f...

Kia Vaughn of the Rutgers basketball team has filed a lawsuit against Don Imus and CBS citing slander in regards to Imus's comments following the Rutgers loss to Tennessee in the NCAA championship last spring. Most do not consider the lawsuit to be viable. Sports Law Blog posted this immediately after knowledge of the lawsuit became public. Michael McCann does not see the charge of slander holding up in court but also predicts a settlement because of the further damage a lawsuit might do. (Remember, Imus is looking to land another job and CBS has put in his former slot another questionable character.) A follow-up post by Howard Wasserman on morality and the law notes that despite the lack of moral judgement on Imus's part, it is not a situation that can be remedied by the judicial system. McCann did an interview with SI.com discussing the merits of the suit. He does an excellent job explaining what slander is, the standards Vaughn's representation will have to meet to prove...

Am I the only person (well me and Carrie , anyway) who had a problem with Nike's "thank you, ignorance" ad that came out last week? (There was a print version in April 15's NYT in addition to the various websites it was posted on.) The impetus for the ad, according to this source , was a self-questioning Nike wondering whether it was doing enough to promote women's sports. Apparently they are according to the Advertising Women of New York who will present Nike with an award called "10 Years of Getting It" this week. Unless "it" means lots of money from women buying their stuff (and in the interest of full disclosure, yes I do own Nike apparel), I am not sure what it is that Nike gets about women's sports. The article cites one of the most well-known campaigns: "if you let me play." That campaign, about which much critical scholarship has been done, does, I suppose, show that Nike gets that women's sports are always subordinat...

Imus has been doing the apology tour. I have to say it's far more extensive than any other celebrity-says-something-bad apology binge. And his remarks about the Rutgers basketball team have earned him a two-week suspension . But there is speculation that when one is required to apologize repeatedly and for 13 minutes at a time, one is not long for the public airwaves. So please keep (or start) writing letters. Create enough noise to show MSNBC and others that the privilege of speaking on the airwaves is not one that Don Imus deserves. As always the power is with those who hold the purse strings. If advertisers begin to pull their support of the show MSNBC may be forced to drop Imus. I have only found three of the show's sponsors: The New York Stock Exchange. Simon and Schuster, and Random House. The only contact information I could find for S&S is this link to a customer service form . At Random House you can try emailing customerservice@randomhouse.com . [Ebuz noted the em...

I beseech anyone who listens to Don Imus--and I know most regular readers of this blog do not but....--to stop immediately. Better yet for any of us: email, phone, write, picket to the powers-that-be why Don Imus is an affront to the human race. Because it is beyond conservative political discourse and can in no way be construed as funny to call the women "nappy-headed hos" and then, in the next breath, compare them to men (consistent discourse has never been the conservative's strength). This is what Imus did a few days ago when he brought up the women's championship between Rutgers and Tennessee. It was the women on the Rutgers team to which Imus directed his misogynist, racist, homophobic remarks. I know these sentiments exist and I know Rutgers with its predominantly African-American team has been the target of racist remarks. I actually saw them play against a predominantly white team in a very white state. The old white man next to me wondered how we were suppo...

Christine Brennan takes on a not-too-popular issue in her USA Today column : naming practices for women's teams. And Brennan comes down on the right side of this argument somewhat making up--in my mind at least--for her closing remarks at the Billie Jean King luncheon last week. As I mentioned the other day, I rooted for Rutgers for a myriad of reasons, one of which was that Tennessee persists in calling itself the Lady Vols. Brennan's article actually points out that when coach C. Vivian Stringer took over at Rutgers she took the "lady" away from the Scarlet Knights. She told Brennan: "...with all due respect, I just believe that basketball is basketball and you don't need to make a distinction. ... I think that it's time to just drop the 'lady' thing. Let's play basketball." My level of respect is significantly less than Stringer's. I think it's just wrong. I think teams that persist in this "tradition" are a little s...

Rutgers versus Tennessee tonight. This NBC Sports article shares the history behind this games which pits two of the winningest coaches against one another. The sentimental favorite has to be Rutgers headed by C. Vivian Stringer but those going for more of a sure thing will be rooting for Pat Summitt of Tennessee. I am a Rutgers fans myself. I find it difficult to root for any team that persists in calling itself the Lady ___. What's worse is that they have it written all over their uniforms. Regardless of who you are rooting for, it is bound to be a great game.

A serious discussion on coaches' salaries that is. As I mentioned yesterday, the NCAA is looking into ways to control the exponential increases in coaches' salaries that account for a large chunk of athletic department budgets; salaries that cannot be sustained, usually, under current athletic department configurations and thus lead to cuts of both women's and men's teams. Cuts, that Dr. Christine Grant noted, have nothing to do with Title IX but rather poor financial management. This point could not be clearer when looking at the case of Rutgers University . Rutgers has opted to cut 6 athletic teams this year. It is also giving "hefty raises" to its football coaches (plural because football has many coaches). Rutgers president Richard McCormick is not accepting his raise this year--a year where the New Jersey state university is trying to deal with an $80 million budget shortfall. The athletic director defends the raises noting Rutgers football had a successf...