Showing posts with label Brian Urlacher. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brian Urlacher. Show all posts

Monday, March 19, 2007

Lately, I've been rising and sleeping under some vague, undefinable feeling of security, as if a cosmic injustice were about to be righted. Then late last week, I learned with the rest of America that the most dangerous threat to the safety and stability of Second City since Al Capone walked the streets of the South Side is soon to enter a correctional facility. Finally, it's safe to walk the streets of America. Terry "Tank" Johnson's going to jail for four months.

I must say, I don't really know why I spend so much of my time in this blog defending people whose actions seem indefensible. Maybe it's a ghost in my machine, or maybe the majority of the people kicking Tank Johnson could do us all a favor and wait to inveigh against him in the full force of righteous indignation. After all, Tank Johnson is going to prison for violating his probation, not having killed some one.

I am not saying that Tank Johnson should not be subject to due process of the law, tried, sentenced and sent to prison for probation violations. For what he has done, it seems like he deserves some jail time. It makes sense that the prison officials are going to keep him out of general population. The amount of attention and trouble he would attract would not be good for any one. And in the long run, depriving him of a chance to work out will be as big a punishment as any.

As a big, athletic defensive tackle Tank Johnson could command a lot of money on the open market, even with a red flag in the character area. For the record, Johnson is signed through the end of the 2008 season, but productivity in the upcoming season is the key to positioning himself for a big contract year. It will be hard to produce at a high level in the NFL with 4 months away from the weight room and proper speed and agility training. He better do a hell of a lot of push ups and crunches.

Yes, Tank Johnson has a history of legal trouble. But a few weapons possession charges are disturbing, but not as serious as a history of DUIs. And in one of the incidents, he was arrested after a night club valet informed the authorities that Tank had a handgun concealed in his glove compartment. This, to me is as troubling for the manner in which the crime was discovered as it is in the nature of the crime.

First of all, when did America's night club valets as a body become a sort of posse comitatus empowered to police American society? More importantly, why was the valet looking around under in patron's car? It seems to me that there is an implied trust in handing over your car to a parking attendant that should give you the right to throw a hellacious beating on said parking attendant if they invade your privacy. Those of you who read this space occasionally will know that I abhor violence, but even more than that, I hate people who mind my business and touch my stuff without permission.

Reading Jay Mariotti's diatribe in praise of Tank's incarceration got me more than a little bit upset. I hate Mariotti. He brings nothing more than bitter, small minded barbs to his column and television appearances. Worse than that, as a person who enjoys good writing (whether it's within my grasp is not for me to decide) and tries to be funny and at least occasionally fair and honest, he gets paid good money to write while I (and better men than I am) operate on the fringe of the writing business pro bono.

It's bad enough that Jay accuses Urlacher and Lovie Smith of rallying around Johnson to perpetuate the jockocracy. It is far worse that he uses these inelegant epithets to do it: "he of the mega-popular No. 54 jersey" and "he of the freshly minted contract and stoic manner." Homer wishes he could have come up with epithets like that on the poem-writing-est day of his life. Or he/she/it would have had Homer the person existed, instead of a name given to a multi-generational oral tradition.

And far be it for me to parse his words, since I'm sure as little thought went into their composition, but I think Jay meant the defense asked Lovie Smith to vouch for Tank, not vow for him (since I don't think you can vow for a person, place or thing in the King's English). And Tank isn't rehabilitated yet. The prison term and concomitant counseling are supposed to do that. Or didn't they teach that at Ohio University? But it's a grand job they do in the editing department of the Sun Times, or is Jay God on the throne over there and, as such, untouchable. At least I'm a one man show (not entirely, but my budget only covers a good friend who labels my posts and monitors my traffic patterns pro bono).

Also, it is somewhat irresponsible to commend the prosecution and the judge for their adroit handling of this case without providing examples of how these type of cases are handled when the defendant is just a man off the street with a public defender and not a professional athlete. Since I don't know, and don't have the time (and, to be perfectly frank, the inclination) I can only be so critical of Jay on this point.

What offends me most in this piece of poorly written drivel is this paragraph and the rehashing of a Super Bowl week column I already shredded that follows it:

Maybe Propes wouldn't have felt so wronged had she been standing beside me weeks earlier at Dolphin Stadium. On Media Day at the Super Bowl, Johnson was given a wonderful opportunity to show remorse, apologize and prove himself worthy of a court-arranged release from home confinement to make a business trip in Miami. Surrounded by cameras and reporters, all he had to say were the things he tried to convey Friday in the courtroom, that he never should have had guns in his house and that he has learned from his errors. Instead, Johnson went full-blown attitude on us, blaming his problems on racial stereotypes.


The fundamental dishonesty of that passage sickens me. Any reader even slightly familiar with Mariotti and his modus operandi could tell you, that criticism is a poorly veiled gambit (the chess move where a player entices his opponent into a trap by offering up a piece as sacrificial lamb in hopes of snaring a more powerful piece in return, not the tool from the X Men). This is a neat trick, and one which requires very little effort to churn out as many columns as the writer desires.

Since Tank did not avail himself of the opportunity to apologize at the media circus that is the Super Bowl, he does not show sufficient contrition to merit compassion. However, had Tank apologized, then Jay would have had the perfect opportunity to rail against another celebrity making an insincere, stage-managed apology to hoodwink a naive public into welcoming them back into the fold. Sometimes, I wish I were that kind of writer. I wonder, though, whether the financial remuneration would be adequate compensation for the permanent damage it would do it my soul.

Tank Johnson needs to understand that this is his last chance. The compassion people like me feel for him in the wake of his friend's tragic death will not last much longer if he keeps getting himself arrested. At a certain point, you cease no longer a decent guy in the wrong place at the wrong time and you become a blight on society. I hope Tank takes stock of his life and the chance he has to be a great defensive tackle in the greatest professional sport known to man.

I wish him well, and I think the overwhelming majority of Bears fans do too. For my part, it's not because he can rush the passer and stop the run. I like to see people get their lives together and succeed in spite of past mistakes. And I'd like to believe that most people feel that way too. I hope Tank can do it.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Well, the first weekend of the NCAA tournament is over. And the bracket challenge disaster I predicted in the last post of last week not only happened, but happened twice over. I know I shouldn't do it, after the last 15 years of doing it, but I choose teams based on hatred or lack thereof and it kicks my brackets ass all the time. I picked Texas Tach to go to the Elite Eight because I hate BC and Georgetown. I picked Notre Dame to go to the Final Four because I hate Florida, Wisconsin and Oregon. And now my bracket needs teams from the NBA to lose, three of the original cast of MASH to die and four or five country wonders to occur for me to win.

For the record, I didn't really think that ND could win. I thought they were the first team that had a snowball's chance in the infernal region of beating Florida that I didn't hate. And even then I didn't like that pick. I love ND as a football school, but I've never been a big fan of their basketball team. I don't know why. But I think it has a lot to do with the fact that Mike Bray looks like a bad lounge singer with the slicked back hair and the mock turtleneck with the blazer. I just can't get behind the lounge lizard coaching the team. But I picked them, and they killed me.

And all of that was before Texas lost. That was a defensible pick, though. With the best single player in the tournament and a point guard that could play, they had a chance to get hot. Unfortunately, they didn't. But I'm not at the point in my life where I'm willing to forsake my hatred for the sake of a NCAA tournament bracket sheet. I am a sad, small, bitter, bitter man, but I'm fine with it, which makes me a good person.

One of the surprising stories of the tournament so far was the lack of an upset in the 5-12 matchup. Personally, I think there was an upset. When the officials swallowed the whistle as Virginia Tech played what resembled rugby more than basketball, that was an upset. Illinois got jobbed, and America's least coherent and honest columnist took entirely too much satisfaction in the defeat of his new mortal enemy Bruce Weber. By the way, can an Illini team that didn't deserve to be there in the first place actually choke? These are questions that trouble responsible writers, but not Jay the total fraud.

To be fair, Illinois could have been more aggressive offensively down the stretch. I understand that there is a natural impulse to go to your strong suit when you need to close out a game. Illinois played good defense, so they tried to take the air out of the ball, milk the clock and hope the 13 point lead was sufficient. And maybe it was a good thing for Brian Randle that the final foul was ignored. If he missed two more freethrows that would have tied the game, I shudder to think what the poor kid would have done to himself or the community at large.

At some point, it is probably as effective to sprint down the court and fire up a bad shot as it is to walk the ball up, run 25 screens, rotate the ball from side to side for 34 seconds and then take a bad shot. If you aren't scoring, you aren't scoring. Might as well be interesting while you're doing it. As far as the 9 turnovers VT forced, Brian Urlacher doesn't hack half as much to force a fumble in the NFL (a contact sport, for the record) than the VT press did. That loser the Grizzly Man experienced less contact in being mauled to death by a grizzly bear than the Illinois guards did in bringing the ball up court.

I was rooting for Illinois. I thought they deserved to win. I wish the refs called fouls on some of the VT contact, but that's life. But it got me thinking about something. And the Southern Illinois game vs. Holy Cross got me thinking too. Based on the score, the Holy Cross game was closer than the Virginia Tech game. Now does that mean Holy Cross was a better team and could have beaten Virginia Tech? The obvious answer is, hell no.

However, Southern Illinois likes to play tight defense and make the most of their opportunities on offense. That's how Holy Cross likes to play, which led to the tight game. Virginia Tech didn't play that way, Southern Illinois stifled VT and crushed them handily. But on the Southern Illinois-HC game, it was clear as day that SIU was much, much, much more athletic than Holy Cross. If they ran, the cross between Tarantino, Boo Radley and the Missing Link would have been gasping for air and out of the game.

So my question is, is it better to stick to your style or adapt and exploit the opponent's weaknesses? I think it's better to adapt, but SIU could have easily adopted a run and gun approach, lost discipline and fallen apart. Plus the first two paragraphs of this post are all about what an idiot I am and the shambles that once was a proud bracket challenge entry. Take that with my record for picking games (I have to count the SIU-HC game as a loss, since I predicted a bigger victory and the humiliation of double zero, neither of which happened).

By the way, I found out that Danny Ainge's birthday is March 17. I would wish him many happy returns, but I hate him. But what kind of Mormon is born on the biggest drinking day of the year? You know there's no way the stars were smiling on him. That's why he's mad such a shambles of the Celtics. He was born unlucky.

PS - I may seem insensitive in ridiculing the Grizzly Man, but he got what he deserved. It may be bad karma, and tempting fate, but that's how I feel. If grizzly bears are going to maul me, they're going to have to come to my apartment and maul me here. I'm sure as hell not going to go out and hang out with apex predators like they were my buddies.

PPS - I appreciate the Anti-Jay people for reading me and commenting on these posts. But I must ask the question, what has Boise done to you? I've never been to Boise, and God willing, I never will. But I'm pretty sure that the good people of Boise don't deserve him. He needs to go. Chicago is the best city in the world not named Boston, and he is a blight on its landscape. How about banishing him to Siberia? Or a research station in the Antarctic? While we're dreaming, let's dream big.