Spent a little time this morning reading the excerpts from Tom Donaghy’s book Blowing the Whistle that currently is without a publisher.

It is important to remember while reading the excerpts — which cannot be described as anything other than explosive and damning, but not totally unexpected — that Donaghy is a convicted felon who seemingly spent a good portion of his career engaged in deceitful, unethical professional acts.

Thus, weigh how much validity his word carries.

It is also important to remember, however, that the NBA has been dogged by claims of rigged games and less-then-objective officiating for years. In fact, I’m sure my friends down here in Dallas will have a thing or two to say about Donaghy’s book as they recall Dwyane Wade’s star-making appearance against the Mavs in the NBA Finals…which was, of course, marred by controversial officiating.

Either way, the excerpts are intriguing enough to pass along, in addition to a terrific music video retrospective on one of the most controversial NBA games ever, and the subject of one of the excerpts: the 2002 Western Conference Finals between the LA Lakers and Sacramento Kings.

As mentioned above, Donaghy’s book does not have a publisher, purportedly due to some intimidation tactics by the NBA.

This could get very interesting in the coming weeks and months.

Look, I don’t know if everything or anything included in these excerpts is true, nor will I try to lead you to a conclusion one way or the other. Read it for yourself, consider Donaghy’s background, and make up your own mind.

But here is the problem for the NBA: not one word in these excerpts seems outlandish to me. To put it another way, if we somehow got verified proof that all this were 100% true, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised.

And that’s a big problem for the league.

A huge problem.

And it’s been an albatross around the neck of the NBA for as long as I can remember. Certainly, this is not going to help matters.

Here are a few choice excerpts from Tim Donaghy’s book Blowing the Whistle. You can also use that link to jump to Deadspin, where you can read the complete selection of excerpts that have been made available.

On gambling refs:

To have a little fun at the expense of the worst troublemakers, the referees working the game would sometimes make a modest friendly wager amongst themselves: first ref to give one of the bad boys a technical foul wouldn’t have to tip the ball boy that night. In the NBA, ball boys set up the referees’ locker room and keep it stocked with food and beer for the postgame meal. We usually ran the kid ragged with a variety of personal requests and then slipped him a $20 bill. Technically, the winner of the bet won twice-he didn’t have to pay the kid and he got to call a T on Mr. Foul-Mouthed Big-Shot Du Jour.

After the opening tip, it was hilarious as the three of us immediately focused our full attention on the intended victim, waiting for something, anything, to justify a technical foul. If the guy so much as looked at one of us and mumbled, we rang him up. Later in the referees’ locker room, we would down a couple of brews, eat some chicken wings, and laugh like hell.

We had another variation of this gag simply referred to as the “first foul of the game” bet. While still in the locker room before tip-off, we would make a wager on which of us would call the game’s first foul. That referee would either have to pay the ball boy or pick up the dinner tab for the other two referees. Sometimes, the ante would be $50 a guy. Like the technical foul bet, it was hilarious-only this time we were testing each other’s nerves to see who had the guts to hold out the longest before calling a personal foul. There were occasions when we would hold back for two or three minutes-an eternity in an NBA game-before blowing the whistle. It didn’t matter if bodies were flying all over the place; no fouls were called because no one wanted to lose the bet.

We played this little game during the regular season and summer league. After a game, all three refs would gather around the VCR and watch a replay of the game. Early in the contest, the announcers would say, “Holy cow! They’re really letting them play tonight!” If they only knew…

During one particular summer game, Duke Callahan, Mark Wunderlich, and I made it to the three-minute mark in the first quarter without calling a foul. We were running up and down the court, laughing our asses off as the players got hammered with no whistles. The players were exhausted from the nonstop running when Callahan finally called the first foul because Mikki Moore of the New Jersey Nets literally tackled an opposing player right in front of him. Too bad for Callahan-he lost the bet.

I became so good at this game that if an obvious foul was committed right in front of me, I would call a travel or a three-second violation instead. Those violations are not personal fouls, so I was still in the running to win the bet. The players would look at me with disbelief on their faces as if to say, “What the hell was that?”

On the 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Lakers and Kings:

Studying under Dick Bavetta for 13 years was like pursuing a graduate degree in advanced game manipulation. He knew how to marshal the tempo and tone of a game better than any referee in the league, by far. He also knew how to take subtle-and not so subtle-cues from the NBA front office and extend a playoff series or, worse yet, change the complexion of that series.

The 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Sacramento Kings presents a stunning example of game and series manipulation at its ugliest. As the teams prepared for Game 6 at the Staples Center, Sacramento had a 3–2 lead in the series. The referees assigned to work Game 6 were Dick Bavetta, Bob Delaney, and Ted Bernhardt. As soon as the referees for the game were chosen, the rest of us knew immediately that there would be a Game 7. A prolonged series was good for the league, good for the networks, and good for the game. Oh, and one more thing: it was great for the big-market, star-studded Los Angeles Lakers.

In the pregame meeting prior to Game 6, the league office sent down word that certain calls-calls that would have benefitted the Lakers — were being missed by the referees. This was the type of not-so-subtle information that I and other referees were left to interpret. After receiving the dispatch, Bavetta openly talked about the fact that the league wanted a Game 7.

“If we give the benefit of the calls to the team that’s down in the series, nobody’s going to complain. The series will be even at three apiece, and then the better team can win Game 7,” Bavetta stated.

As history shows, Sacramento lost Game 6 in a wild come-from-behind thriller that saw the Lakers repeatedly sent to the foul line by the referees. For other NBA referees watching the game on television, it was a shameful performance by Bavetta’s crew, one of the most poorly officiated games of all time.

A quick interlude here for a little more on that Lakers-Kings game. In the comment section of the Deadspin post I found this sublimely done video retrospective of that game. It’s worth the 4:30 to watch it.

More on Dick Bavetta:

The 2002 series certainly wasn’t the first or last time Bavetta weighed in on an important game. He also worked Game 7 of the 2000 Western Conference Finals between the Lakers and the Trail Blazers. The Lakers were down by 13 at the start of the fourth quarter when Bavetta went to work. The Lakers outscored Portland 31–13 in the fourth quarter and went on to win the game and the series. It certainly didn’t hurt the Lakers that they got to shoot 37 free throws compared to a paltry 16 for the Trail Blazers.

Two weeks before the 2003–04 season ended, Bavetta and I were assigned to officiate a game in Oakland. That afternoon before the tip-off, we were discussing an upcoming game on our schedule. It was the last regular-season game we were scheduled to work, pitting Denver against San Antonio. Denver had lost a game a few weeks prior because of a mistake made by the referees, a loss that could be the difference between them making or missing the playoffs. Bavetta told me Denver needed the win and that it would look bad for the staff and the league if the Nuggets missed the playoffs by one game. There were still a few games left on the schedule before the end of the season, and the standings could potentially change. But on that day in Oakland, Bavetta looked at me and casually stated, “Denver will win if they need the game. That’s why I’m on it.”

I was thinking, How is Denver going to win on the road in San Antonio? At the time, the Spurs were arguably the best team in the league. Bavetta answered my question before it was asked.

“Duncan will be on the bench with three fouls within the first five minutes of the game,” he calmly stated.

Bavetta went on to inform me that it wasn’t the first time the NBA assigned him to a game for a specific purpose. He cited examples, including the 1993 playoff series when he put New Jersey guard Drazen Petrovic on the bench with quick fouls to help Cleveland beat the Nets. He also spoke openly about the 2002 Los Angeles–Sacramento series and called himself the NBA’s “go-to guy.”

As it turned out, Denver didn’t need the win after all; they locked up a spot in the playoffs before they got to San Antonio. In a twist of fate, it was the Spurs that ended up needing the win to have a shot at the division title, and Bavetta generously accommodated. In our pregame meeting, he talked about how important the game was to San Antonio and how meaningless it was to Denver, and that San Antonio was going to get the benefit of the calls that night. Armed with this inside information, I called Jack Concannon before the game and told him to bet the Spurs.

To no surprise, we won big. San Antonio blew Denver out of the building that evening, winning by 26 points. When Jack called me the following morning, he expressed amazement at the way an NBA game could be manipulated. Sobering, yes; amazing, no. That’s how the game is played in the National Basketball Association.

Once you’ve read this post, and the rest of the excerpts from Tim Donaghy’s book at Deadspin, chime in below. Are you buying it?

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Though some reasonable people feel that it isn’t a story worthy of discussion, Deadspin’s decision to publish stories about the sexual exploits of certain ESPN employees has been one of the hottest stories in the sports blogosphere over the past 24 hours.

If you’re late to the party, here’s a recap and then some examples of the ensuing reaction to get you up to speed.

We have withheld published judgment to this point, but have been very interested observers at the many angles of this story. One of those angles is what motivated Deadspin editor AJ Daulerio to go ahead with the posting of these stories.

AJ was kind enough to join us on the podcast this afternoon and to provide his answers to some of the criticism Deadspin has received in the wake of yesterday’s events, as well as some of the general criticism he has received since taking over for Will Leitch as editor.

MSF Podcast: Interview with AJ Daulerio

Here are some of the highlights that stood out to me after our discussion:

• The decision to publish the stories was “completely” his.
• AJ admits that a major factor in his decision to post the stories was, as he stated in his original post yesterday afternoon, a dissatisfaction with how ESPN (in particular Josh Krulewitz) handled his initial requests for information about the Steve Phillips story in early September. He characterizes their responses to his inquiries as “a little deceitful” in telling him there was nothing there, when obviously there was.
• “I really like Josh a lot…but I really didn’t think that he handled himself with the code that we’d established there.”
• “Was it like a temper tantrum there in some ways? A little bit, but there is a larger issue at hand here…these public relations people can’t lie.”
• A big issue for AJ is why Steve Phillips is being suspended. “It seems that this policy that they have there is very arbitrary.”
• Interestingly, he also explains that the stories he printed yesterday was not just “from the inbox” but rather stories that had been vetted…”especially the Kuselias item”.
• “It’s the worst kept secret in sports media as to what goes on over at ESPN…this has been going on for years.”
• Was not surprised by the wide spectrum of reaction that the posts have received from the blogosphere and elsewhere.
• “I don’t really consider myself beholden to the blogosphere in terms of what kind of actions we take.”
• “I think it brings up a legitimate issue as to what ESPN’s policy is. It’s not like we don’t provide hyper-coverage of ESPN.”

I’ll leave you with those quotes and encourage you to listen to Daulerio in his own words.

In addition to the specifics of his decision to publish the stories, he responds to a few specific critiques levied at him, debunks one hypothesis that he went forward with the posts to undermine and “stick it to” Sean Salisbury, talks about how we would handle being confronted by one of the individuals he outed, and how the site is different because of differences between he and Will Leitch and because of the natural maturation of the blogosphere.

It was a very interesting discussion that we were certainly happy to host, and hopefully you enjoy it as well.

And we’ll leave the poll up to continue tallying the general reaction to this story.

In what should be a surprise to no one, there are strong reactions popping up across the blogosphere this morning regarding Deadspin’s decision to post various rumors about ESPN employees that it has received over the years.

In case you’re just now becoming aware of this story, the posts by Deadspin editor AJ Daulerio, written in the immediate wake of the breaking story of Steve Phillips’ affair and subsequent leave of absence, detailed explicit rumors of sexual depravity and quid pro quo at the World Wide Leader.

I am using this space to provide my own judgments and opinions right now, as I have a pending interview request with AJ for later this morning and would like to speak with him first (so stay tuned for that).

But others have made their feelings known, with some in the sports blogging community decidedly not in Deadspin’s favor on this one.

Deadspin acts like professionals after getting scooped…or, you know, the complete opposite of that — (Stupid Sports Blog)

If you’re looking to ruin someone’s life, I suggest you set up a fake e-mail account and e-mail Deadspin with a tasty sex rumor about whoever you like at ESPN. Get your friends to do it too so it seems more credible. Tell them Stuart Scott tried to work a three-way with Cindy Brunson and the corpse of Tom Mees. They’ll print it and be right to do so since they didn’t get the Steve Phillips story.

No one tries to get the best of A.J. Daulerio by telling him the story he’s calling about isn’t true! He’ll learn ya real good!

Scorched Earth = Page Views — (Cousins of Ron Mexico)

My point is, it was like Daulerio was just doing these posts today…because.

Of course, its not just because. I imagine this has been a long time coming. These are items that have been saved for a rainy (or vengeful) day. Finally, after who knows how much prodding, AJ started to empty his inbox and unloaded on people that lots of readers have probably never heard of.

Deadspin’s barrage on ESPN raises legal questions — (Clay Travis, FanHouse)

In the process of making these posts Deadspin raised many interesting issues for the blogosphere, major media corporations, and the legal rules that govern online writing. Despite the growing popularity of blogs, most of these issues have not been adequately examined. So here we go.

As a preliminary, the stormy relationship between ESPN and Deadspin is, I think, illustrative of the simultaneous attraction and revulsion that large media feel with more independent blog sites in today’s Internet age.

Has Steve Phillips’ cock written a check ESPN cannot cash? — (Can’t Stop the Bleeding)

OK, I actually have no idea what the above headline really means.  One of the joys of writing a sports blog as opposed to being Neil Best, however, is that I can publish such a thing. Just because I can do something, however, is flimsy justification for doing so…at first glance, anyway.

Is Deadspin making ESPN a sympathetic figure? — (Sports by Brooks)

Really, if someone were to carry out a plan to make Deadspin look bad and ESPN good, there’d be few better roadmaps than this stilted attack on the network. Sure, the last post purportedly clued readers in to specific lingo for making adultery happen, but… is the short-term benefit in pageviews really worth it? At the end of the day, Deadspin only seems farther away from a trustworthy, noteworthy source on these matters – that is, anyway, unless your opinion of ESPN hinged directly upon whether Katie Lacey is a faithful lover.

The biggest on-field news in the sports world yesterday obviously revolves around the Philadelphia Phillies beating the LA Dodgers to reach the World Series.

The biggest off-field news in the sports world yesterday involved ESPN, Deadspin, and some pretty lurid tales of sex, ego, and quid pro quo. We discussed this as it was happening, but there have also been new developments in the “ESPN Horndog Dossier” since we signed off yesterday.

But that was yesterday. It’s now Thursday, and we already have the most important news of today and it’s not even 6:30 CT yet: Ozzie Guillen will be working for Fox as a studio analyst during this year’s World Series. Yep, this is going to be great.

And now the rest of What You Need To Read for Thursday, October 22nd, brought to you by…Kate Beckinsale.

Hot topics

It wans’t just Deadspin throwing out the salacious ESPN stories. The Big Lead got in on the action as well, although they weren’t quite as upfront with the names.

Last note about the Steve Phillips’ story. Answer this question honestly: if someone had told you a week ago that one of the three people pictured here would be involved in a sex scandal with Steve Phillips, who would you have guessed it would be? I would have guessed the one on the right.

Times are tough for SEC officials. The crew that blew calls in the Florida v Arkansas game has been suspended.

A-Rod is definitely the story of the playoffs so far this year.

Sam Bradford appears headed for season-ending surgery.

This one shouldn’t surprise anyone: Tiger Woods is the most popular athlete in the world.

It’s NFL Power Rankings time. Go here, here, here, and here.

You’ve probably heard by now that Steve Largent defended his friend Jim Zorn against the crimes being committed against him by Dan Snyder, Vinny Cerrato, and the gods of the NFL. But who really cares. You should click on this link simply for the unintentionally hilarious picture of Largent and Zorn from yesteryear. And if the words “Brokeback Seahawks” or “Brokeback something” don’t pop into your head…well, you’re lying. Or Jim Zorn.

Midwest sports news

In Big Ten news, the Purdue-Notre Dame series has been extended to 2021 while the buzz builds for the Boilermakers 2009-10 basketball team. Also, Terrelle Pryor’s teammates apparently think he has hit rock bottom and Joe Paterno is not intimidated by the Big House.

In Browns news, not only does half the team apparently have the flu, but the good folks at Cleveland Frowns are wondering why Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone is so obsessed with Eric Mangini.

In Bengals and Bears news, former Bears bust Cedric Benson apparently feels emboldened by his strong start to the 2009 season and has forgotten just how bad he sucked in the Windy City. The guy who would now be Benson’s QB, had Benson not sucked so bad and been jettisoned from Chicago, just got an extension that the guys at NQTC think was a good move for all involved.

In Packers news, the team has dipped into its past to sign Ahman Green again. And amazingly, Green is only 46 yards away from setting the franchise record for career rushing yards. The guys at Rumors and Rants regale us with a list of things that were popular back when Ahman Green was relevant.

Blogging, social media, and other stuff

Here is a fun dare — do something different! — from one of my favorite non-sports bloggers.

Ha, ha, ha

There really is nothing more entertaining than walking through Wal-Mart and people watching. The fine folks at Uncoached have compiled some of the best Wal-Mart people photos ever, including gems like a shirt that says “While you were reading this…I farted” and a guy that I would swear is KVB if I didn’t know better.

The guys at Gunaxin have broken down the ten best TV commercials of the always funny Sir Charles.

Tirico Suave gives us other shirts that Jeff Fisher might be wearing soon.

And a little something extra for the fellas

More from Uncoached, some interesting photos of women communing with the outdoors.

Asylum has broken down ten stupid things girls like.

Luckily, Gunaxin counters with the decidedly non-stupid things that guys like: hot girls.

And in case you didn’t know, Kate Beckinsale was recently dubbed the “Sexiest Woman Alive” by Esquire. Here is the video evidence they have put forth in support of their claim. You decide.

And that’s it. Have a great Thursday everyone, and remember to send your tips here.

**********

* – Kate Beckinsale photos credit: Girls.Pic

If I were an ESPN exec or employee, and I read the latest post by Daulerio over at Deadspin, I’d be shaking in my boots a little right now. Excerpt after the jump.

I just emailed Daulerio to ask if they were really going to be emptying the vault of all the tips and accusations they received regarding sexual craziness at ESPN. His response: “Stay tuned…”

Will do.

My, my, my Steve Phillips. Looks like you may have directly and indirectly screwed up a whole lot of peoples’ lives.

“However, there are many, many, many other people employed at the WWL who have (allegedly) boned assistants, interns, on-air talent, executives, etc…Chances are, at this point, there’s some truth to them…We’ll just throw ‘em out there and see how many “no comments” or, you know, actual comments or “you would be completely wrongs” there are about these situations. Consider this one giant all-day version of “Deleted Scenes” or something.”

The first well-known ESPN personality who will purportedly be “outed” for some kind of clandestine activity is revealed in the post.

Head over to Deadspin for the name…and it sounds like you may want to be tracking the Deadspin feed this afternoon.

Update: And here’s the first one. Yeah, looks like the gloves are coming off today at Deadspin. Something tells me that Ken Rosenthal would not approve.

Update: And the Deadspin-ESPN bridge burning continues. This one deals with a female marketing exec and how she purportedly slept her way to the top.

Update: Based on the Twitter reaction, Deadspin’s decision to publish these accusations and rumors may actually be making ESPN seem…sympathetic? What do you think?

**********

* – Steve Phillips photo credit: Deadspin

[Editor's note: This post is dedicated to Ryan Russell and Nick Gerlach.]

Hands down on the best running series in the sports blogosphere is Drew Magary’s incomparable Why Your Team sucks series at Deadspin. No, it is not the kind of material that I would ever forward to my mom or dad to read…but that is precisely what makes it so sublime.

Here is the description that opens up every one of these posts, to give you an idea of their purpose: “Some people are fans of the [insert team name]. But many, many more people are NOT fans of the [insert team name]. This 2009 Deadspin NFL team preview is for those in the latter group.”

Today, Drew finished off the series by regaling Deadspin readers with funny, sophomoric, and expletive-filled prose describing the many ways why the Pittsburgh Steelers, their fans, and their city unequivocally suck.

Needless to say, I thoroughly enjoyed reading it, and it is today’s link of the day.

Why Your Team Sucks: Pittsburgh Steelers — (Drew Magary via Deadspin)

6. The Steel Curtain is the worst metaphor ever. They’re curtains. They either open in the center, or they can be drawn upwards to allow you to pass through. That is the function of a curtain. It doesn’t matter what material it’s made from: steel, adamantium, chiffon. ALL CURTAINS ARE EASILY PENETRATED SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THEY ARE DESIGNED THAT WAY. Call it the Steel Wall. Or the Steel Monolith. Call it something that connotes impenetrability. A curtain intimidates no one…

And then there is this, from the smorgasboard of write-in comments included at the end of each Why Your Team Sucks post. This guy is definitely a Browns fan:

Dave V.:

So many Pittsburgh fans are from Ohio, and they are the biggest bandwagon fans in the world. These troglodytes have never even been to Pennsylvania, and yet they adorn their overweight, uneducated bodies with gaudy yellow and black, and call themselves true Steeler fans.

Also published today where the Why Your Team Sucks posts for the Baltimore Ravens and Cleveland Browns. Both of these are equally, if not moreso, hilarious as well as surprisingly insightful.

And that we have that out of the way, onto the rest of today’s links.

Sports:

• Allen Iverson meets with Memphis Grizzlies — (MoonDog)
• Mark May wears ridiculous ties to honor the ridiculous things he says — (Sports Hernia)
• The best signs from the first college football Saturday of the year — (College Game Balls)
• Another vote for Chris Carpetner for NL Cy Young Award — (But The Game Is On)
• Apple gets free advertising at new Cowboys Stadium — (Sports By Brooks)
• Bears’ depth chart proves flowers more important than skill — (Not Qualified to Comment)
• David Thompson to present Michael Jordan and HOF induction — (Yahoo! Sports)
• Why your team sucks: Cleveland Browns — (Drew Magary at Deadspin)
• Early look at Bears-Packers — (i94 Sports)
• The Week That Was in College Football — (Sparty and Friends)
• Good, classy move by Daunte Culpepper — (Pro Football Talk)
• BYU students go crazy after OU win — (Busted Coverage)
• Random Retro Cubs: Scott Sanderson — (The Friendly Blogfines)

Non-Sports:

• 15 people who should never be allowed to dance — (Hail Mary Jane)
• Dad’s rants become a Twitter hit — (WSJ about @shitmydadsays)

**********

* – Hilariously-named “Randy Beefsmith” photo credit: The Sports Hernia

As the 24-48 hour sports news cycle chews up and spits out the Raul Ibanez story that I’ve unexpectly found myself at the center of this week, the debate is now shifting to far more important topics that whether speculating about individual players being on steroids is valid or how bloggers and the mainstream media will ever co-exist.

And the most important question was recently posed by a commenter over at Awful Announcing in their take on the current steroids speculation debate, in reference to the picture above (courtesy of Awful Announcing):

shacky316 said…
Who is the freaky one on the left???

I’m going to assume that I was in the process of talking at the point where that screenshot was taken, because I don’t remember hawking a loogie at the camera at any point during the interview.

Either way, I’d like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to Daulerio over Deadspin for shining a bright light on my most sensitive of insecurities: that rather then being your garden variety white guy from the Midwest, I appear to be bordering on a skin pigmentation of clear during the OTL interview. While making many relevant and important points about the OTL interview, Daulerio makes perhaps his most relevant when he says:

Jerod Morris has to go outside. Seriously, son, you’re making us all look bad if you don’t spray tan yourself before you go on national television to get yelled at.

I also have to say that I personally found their screenshot of the OTL interview to be far more amusing, for a number of reasons. Poor John Gonzalez does not appear to be as intense as me or in quite the state of ecstacy as our dear friend Ken Rosenthal.

I would like to personally thank my friends over at Cleveland Frowns for chalking up my “freaky” appearance to the obvious lack of makeup that was offered to me before the interview in their post earlier today. However, the truth is that I probably wouldn’t have worn any anyway, and would have been better served by getting a haircut sometime in the last three months and, as Daulerio suggests, emerging from beneath my laptop to behold the glory of the sun every once in a while.

I guess if I’d known that I’d end up on ESPN I would have been more proactive about these issues. But the truth is that I probably would have procrastinated about doing anything about them to analyze a White Sox draft pick or have some unnecessary fun with Photoshop.

And I mean really, when you’re just a blogger who is living in the glorious age of the MLB Network, Gamecast, and Hot Clicks, who needs the sun?

On Monday, Ryan over at Inside the Hall encapsulated the Hoosier bashing that permeated the sports blogosphere that day. He cites FOMSF Josh Q. Public’s article about Indiana basketball, as well as the initial Deadspin take on the issue from Rick Chandler. As you can see in the comments section of the Josh Q. Public post, I took exception to points being made by both.

Anyone who knows me knows that I am like a papa bear protecting his cub when people pile on Indiana basketball. I realize that a certain amount of piling on is warranted right now given the way our administration has allowed the IU basketball program to sink to the depths it has fallen to this season. But when you start unnecessarily disparaging Bloomington, or making claims that IU basketball is finished as a national powerhouse, I feel the need to stand up and lend some perspective.

The greatest memories of my childhood involve going to IU games at Assembly Hall with my dad, and then heading right out to the driveway afterwards to pretend that I was Calbert Cheaney or Damon Bailey or Brian Evans. You mess with IU basketball and you’re messing with me. As Colin Cowherd likes to say, “fan is short for fanatic.” Well, that is definitely true in this case.

Rick Chandler, mentioned above, posted about Indiana basketball again yesterday. It took the form of a response to the criticism that he received in many corners of the sports blogosphere. And while I did enjoy the post for reasons I will get to in a second, I wholeheartedly disagree with the following assertion that Rick made in his original post and reiterated yesterday:

Oh, Bloomington will still be a great basketball town, but what I mean by basketball backwater is that the Hoosiers will always take a back seat to Duke and North Carolina and UCLA and even Wake Forest and UConn. They’re no longer special. Email me the next time Indiana reaches the Elite Eight. I’ll be waiting.

He frames this point with a terrifically entertaining anecdote of himself as a young reporter getting a surprising 20-minute interview with Bob Knight. He also describes what must have been a surreal scene in Bedford watching Damon Bailey play in high school. While I obviously do not endorse his pessimistic view of the future of IU basketball, I highly recommend reading the post for an entertaining journey back to, admittedly, the old glory days of IU basketball and Coach Knight.

After reading the article, I decided that if Coach Knight had seen enough of the young Rick Chandler to grant him an interview that surprised everyone Rick told the story to later, I could at least offer up the respect of considering his arguments. Maybe he is onto something, and Indiana basketball as I once knew it is like a dinosaur: legendary and powerful in its day, and still worthy of remembering and appreciating with both fondness and awe; but extinct and no longer relevant for contemporary purposes.

I fully realize that I am supremely biased when it comes to IU basketball. I feel like I can rationally analyze the team’s performance and not make predictions or statements that are too outlandish and blinded by fanaticism, but I know that what I consider to be objectivity can sometimes be imbued with the conflict between head and heart that all die-hard fans experience.

So after reading Rick’s article yesterday I decided that for once I would make my best effort to analyze the current state of IU basketball solely with my head, while fully knowing that it would be impossible to totally remove my heart from the proceedings.

Let’s get a few things out of the way that are and have been well established:

1. Indiana basketball still has amazing fan support. I moved from Indianapolis to Dallas last April, so I have to watch IU from afar this year, but the crowds at Assembly Hall have been outstanding this season. I knew that IU fans would rally around this year’s team if they played hard and showed heart. They have.
2. Tom Crean is the right man to get IU basketball headed in the right direction. When a program has sunk to the depressing depths that IU currently wallows in, you need a coach who is pathologically optimistic and positive, almost bordering on irrationality. Tom Crean’s boundless energy and enthusiasm, and his belief in IU basketball, are exactly what we needed in the aftermatch of the coach who will not be named.
3. You can still recruit to Indiana. Considering his late start, I think Tom Crean did an amazing job of bringing in the freshman class that he did this year. Nick Williams was the Player of the Year in Alabama last year, and came with Crean to IU after committing to Marquette. Sure, he mainly followed the man that recruited him, but the idea of playing for a program as historically prestigious as Indiana had to have a little something to do with it. Even Verdell Jones, while not a superstar by any means, was a top-150 recruit who decided to come to Bloomington late in the recruiting season. And we know about Indiana’s outstanding recruiting class coming next year, led by Christian Watford and Maurice Creek. Any rating service you find has it rated in the top-10. And this is a brand new coach recruiting to a school mired in recruiting violations, probation, and very little tournament success since 2002. The Indiana brand must not be completely dead yet.

All of this being said, I am not foolish enough to think that Indiana is still currently on the same level as UCLA, North Carolina, or even Duke, which itself has played below its previously established standards in recent seasons. Even in the Big Ten, Michigan State is now the alpha dog. While teams like Purdue, Wisconsin, Ohio State, and Illinois have joined Indiana in a rotating wheel of top-level Big Ten competitiveness this decade, Michigan State is always at or near the top.

But we all know that Indiana basketball once was among the elite of the elite. Between 1975 and 1987, Indiana won three national championships, made eight Sweet 16s, had two undefeated regular seasons, and won six Big Ten titles. Expand that to 1993, the last truly great Indiana team, and there were twelve Sweet 16 appearances, seven Elite 8 appearances, and nine Big Ten titles.

Since 1993? The Hoosiers had a magical run to the National Championship game in 2002, and “only” missed the NCAA tournament twice, but only got to the Sweet 16 one other time (1994) and tied for a Big Ten championship in 2002. That’s it. Considering the greatness that IU fans had become accustomed to, the last 15 and now going on 16 years have been pretty down.

So what basis, if any, is there for IU fans to say that Rick Chandler or any number of other non-believers is wrong to say that Indiana basketball as we once knew it is essentially dead? Is there another college basketball program out there that fell on comparably hard times but was rejuvenated?

Let’s consider UCLA as an example. We know about their greatness under John Wooden, but the last season of Steve Lavin’s tenure and the first season of Ben Howland’s tenure produced a record of 29-36. Over the last three seasons, UCLA has been rejuvenated and reached the Final Four every time. But between 1993 and 2002, the Bruins won a National Title, and played in six Sweet 16s. So while they had a momentary blip of failure, there was not such a systematic and consistent decline as we have experienced in Bloomington. Plus, I don’t think even Rick Chandler would consider UCLA’s campus to be “backwater”, thus rendering UCLA moot for purposes of this comparison.

Kentucky is a proud basketball powerhouse that has fallen on more modest times recently, finishing the last three seasons unranked. But before that Kentucky finished #1, #2, and #7 from 2003-2005. There is not really a comparison to be made here, as Kentucky is currently mediocre but certainly not at the depths of Indiana.

Admittedly, I have not dug as far as I could, but I do not have a perfect college basketball comparison to make that suggests Indiana can reclaim its pre-1994 stature among the elite. Perhaps this absence of a direct comparitive college basketball argument to Rick Chandler’s article can be seen as implicit acknowledgment of the validity of his point; but I ask you to hold on for just a minute. While there is a not an obviously perfect basketball comparison to make (at least that I can find), there could be a pretty solid comparison to make from the world of college football.

The program I will reference and explore is Oklahoma. Let’s do some quick analysis:

National Championships:

• Oklahoma has 7
• Indiana has 5
• Both schools are among the top 5 in history in their respective collegiate sports’ record books.

Conference Championships:

• Oklahoma has 42
• Indiana has 20
• Oklahoma is first in Big 12 history, Indiana is second only to Purdue’s 21 in Big Ten history.

All-Time Wins

• Oklahoma has 791 all-time wins, good for #8 in college football history. The Sooners have won approximately 72.8% of their games.
• Entering this season, Indiana had 1,635 all-time wins, good for 10th all-time heading into this season. (They are 11th now, with Notre Dame vaulting over the Hoosiers). Indiana has won 64.8% of its games.

Legendary Coaches

• Bud Wilkinson followed up a very good coach in Bennie Owen and established Oklahoma as a true national power with 145 wins and 3 National Titles between 1947 and 1963. Barry Switzer continued the tradition with 157 wins and 3 more National Titles between 1973 and 1988.
• Branch McCracken followed up a very good coach in Everett Dean and established Indiana as a true national power 364 victories and 2 National Titles between 1938 and 1965. Bob Knight continued the tradition with 661 wins and and 3 National Titles between 1971 and 2000.

Just looking at these raw numbers, there is certainly a comparison to be made. Yes, Oklahoma has the advantage in each category, other than the striking similarities in coaching history, and if you were comparing Oklahoma football to Indiana basketball, the edge would be to Oklahoma; but that is not the goal here. The goal is to establish the comparison of a national powerhouse, located in a so-called “backwater” college town, that has experienced great success, then fell on hard times, but the resurrected itself back to national prominence.

Consider the performance of Oklahoma in the aftermath of the controversial final few years of Barry Switzer’s tenure. Gary Gibbs took over and won 65% of his games, going to 3 bowl games over half a decade. Howard Schnellenberger coached one disastrous season in which he went 5-5-1. Then John Blake coached the team for two years, going 12-22 and Oklahoma fell off the national radar. Then the Sooners hired Bob Stoops away from Florida, everyone hailed him as the perfect fit for Oklahoma, and the program did a complete 180. Stoops has won 82% of his games, brought another National Title to Norman, and has Oklahoma among the nation’s elite again.

Now consider the performance of Indiana in the aftermath of the controversial final few years of Bob Knight’s tenure. Mike Davis took over and won 59% of his games, reaching four NCAA tournaments and had the one magical run to the title game during his half decade. Then the lying snake who shall not be named coached the team to a 43-15 record over two seasons, but was fired in the middle of last season, after which Dan Dakich coached the team to a disastrous 3-4 finish. Now Tom Crean has taken over, and everyone has hailed him as the perfect fit for Indiana. The team is still struggling with the disaster left behind by the coach who shall not be named however, so the 180 has not been as immediate for Crean and IU as it was for OU under Bob Stoops.

The way I see it, the years after the departure of Bob Knight in Bloomington are following a very similar path to the years after the departure of Barry Switzer in Norman. Right now, Indiana is in the midst of its “John Blake years”, so to speak; with the obvious difference being that Blake was not the long-term answer, but Tom Crean is. Crean has taken over a once elite program that returned all of 30 points last season. This year’s Hoosiers are one of the youngest and least experienced teams in college basketball history. The Hoosiers’ performance this year certainly is not an indictment of Tom Crean, and he should not really be judged by wins and losses until probably two seasons from now, next year at the absolute earliest.

So why can’t Indiana experience the same phenomenal resurrection that Oklahoma has experienced? The fan support of the two school is similar, the strength of the historical brand is similar, and both schools’ administrations are committed to fielding elite-level basketball and football programs, respectively. Plus, Oklahoma’s turnaround was marked by the arrival of a high-energy, high-enthusiasm coach known to be a good recruiter. Tom Crean has arrived in Bloomington with obvious energy and enthusiasm, and is also known as a good recruiter. Plus, unlike Stoops when he came to OU, Crean has head coaching experience and has been to a Final Four. You don’t think the status that comes with being Dwyane Wade’s college coach and having a Final Four on your resume won’t help him on the recruiting trail? Look at next year’s class; it already has.

Plus, if Bloomington is “backwater” then what, exactly, is Norman? As referenced by Ryan over at Inside the Hall, Forbes recently rated Bloomington as one of the top-10 college towns in America. (As an alum, I wholeheartedly concur.) And while no one is claiming that the Forbes list is the be-all end-all, I don’t see Norman on there. Yet Bob Stoops consistently signs top-10 recruiting classes. Additionally, Tom Crean has the opportunity to recruit to a “better” academic institution than Bob Stoops, at least according to the prestigious U.S. News and World Report rankings. Indiana was rated #71 out of all U.S. universities while Oklahoma came in at #108.

Again, let me reiterate: my purpose here is not to try to say that Indiana basketball is better than Oklahoma football, and I’m not trying to tell you that Bloomington and Indiana University are necessarily better than Norman and Oklahoma University. The entire purpose of this breakdown of the two programs and the schools is to show you the similarities, and is my best effort to provide solid evidence that Rick Chandler is wrong to believe that my beloved Indiana Hoosiers basketball program can no longer reach elite levels.

After going through this entire exercise (and completely blowing off work this morning), I feel confident in asking Rick Chandler and any other IU basketball non-believers one very simple question:

If Oklahoma could do it, why can’t IU?

I do not dismiss offhand the possibility that there could be compelling counter-arguments to what I have presented today. But, what I can say is that the process of writing this post has made me even more excited about the Tom Crean era of IU basketball and even more fervent in my belief that the Hoosiers can once again become a consistent national contender. At the very least, the story of Oklahoma football has given me a legitimate and very comparative example to grasp onto as I search for reasons to believe as much in the block IU, the candy-stripe warmups, the banners, and the cream & crimson as I did back in 1993.

Who knows, maybe cream & crimson just happen to be the official colors of college sports powerhouse resurrection? Bob Stoops did it in Norman and I see no reason why Tom Crean cannot do it in Bloomington.

You can assess for yourself whether I am making that judgment more with my heart or with my head. I feel pretty good that it’s a healthy combination of both.

And despite all the naysaying, I feel great about future of the Crean & Crimson.

What do you think?

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

It is spot on. Here is my favorite excerpt:

“But I also owe much of this site’s success to many people I’ve met along the way. Again, like anyone that’s been in blogging for a year or so, most all of us can point to several friends or any number of sites that have frequently linked to us, bringing attention upon our work.

Without those friends and the support of fellow site owners, many sports blogs get lost in the shuffle.

In order to get that support, you’ve got to write something worth linking to. In addition, you’ve got return those favors and publicly note the support of those that have helped you.

I don’t believe this relatively new member of the blogosphere understood – like I’ve come to understand – you have to pay your dues.”

If I sat down to write a post about what I have learned in the five months that Midwest Sports Fans has been up and running, I could only hope to be able to articulate it so perfectly.

And after reading MoonDog’s post, it occurred to me that there is a long list of people I need to thank for helping Midwest Sports Fans achieve the modest but exciting amount of success that we have had. Obviously blogrolls and links are the best way for a blogger to do this, and I plan to be much more proactive in doing so moving forward, but if any of our supporters are reading this I want to give them the proper shout outs.

First and foremost, I have to thank the writers who have contributed content to the site. People like MidnightWriter, KVB, Kaner, Plough, Chad, Stephanie, Josh, Squizz, MJ, Ryan Russell, Gerlach, Coop, Fraschetti, EJ, Joe, Rick Reuben. Hopefully you all know how much I appreciate your contributions, both in terms of new posts and comments. You keep the action happening at MSF, especially on those days when I’m burnt out, busy, or write something that totally sucks.

And to all of the regular readers and subscribers, you have my deep gratitude as well. My goal, and the goal of our writers, is to produce something informative or entertaining, or both. There would be no reason to do so without eyes to read it. So thank you for keeping us on your regular rotation. And to people MNRC, even though all of the Browns fans hate you because you’re a Steelers fan, you are our most loyal commentator, and much appreciated because of it.

I also have to give a special shoutout to Dash and the rest of the Deadspin crew. As any sports blogger knows, there is website whose link carries more power than Deadspin. Traffic always spikes, and any SEO nerds like me know the value of links from high authority sites. For all of the inclusions in the Blogdome, I am truly, truly appreciative.

There have been many other sites in addition to Deadspin who have linked to our content as well. I won’t list every single one out by name obviously, but almost all of them have found their way into the Blogroll (or should soon). Special thanks go to Ryan at Cowher09.com and SaveLeBron.com, ClevelandFrowns.com, KVB and the Flash Sports Tonight crew, and we have to give a special shoutout to Kornheiser’s Cartel. We got started about the same time and exchanged links right off the bat. I’ve definitely been impressed with what you guys have created.

I don’t want to go on and on. Obviously I’d like to thank everyone who has done something to support what we are doing here at MSF. One way we will accomplish that is to start regular link roundup posts. I’ve been, admittedly, a little lazy in not putting these together. But after reading MoonDog’s article, it reminded me that you can’t expect to create a successful sports blog without sharing the love that others have given you. I’m not sure we’re really big enough yet to have as huge impact on other sites as they have had on us, but it’s time to start trying — and doing one more thing to pay dues and be an active part of the sports blog community.

So thank you to Moon Dog for writing such a great post, and thank you again to everyone who has supported us here at Midwest Sports Fans. The first five months has literally been one of the fun and exciting experiences I’ve ever had, and I’m looking forward to bigger and better things in 2009.

And maybe, just maybe, the Browns can become consistent winners and Indiana’s athletic department can show signs of competence.

Now I’m just being ridiculous.

(Update 6:00 PM ET – Phil Savage has acknowledged that the rumored email exchange occurred.)

Before I even begin explaining this story, let me just say right now, with my credibility on the line I suppose, that I absolutely do not believe the following rumor.

I was not going to post anything about it, so as not to further the rumor, but I know how these stories spread like wildfire across the web; and with dissing Phil Savage being a popular pasttime for many football writers and bloggers (even those on this site), I figured a voice of dissension could add some value to the conversation.

On now with the rumor.

Rumors began circulating on the Internet today that Phil Savage sent a terse and profane email response to a frustrated fan who had emailed him. Per Deadspin.com, who originally broke this story, Phil Savage received the following email during Monday night’s Browns-Bills game:

You are easily the worst GM in the NFL. Chud, Crennel and Tucker should
NOT have jobs. How the hell do you play prevent defense the entire
game? How do you NOT use Jerome Harrison more? Why the hell would you
throw the ball with 6 minutes left? This is officially a regime that is
worse than Butch Davis’. By the way, just like last week – this email
was written while the Browns still had the lead.

And according to the Deadspin.com account of the story, Phil Savage responded with this:

Go root for Buffalo-f#@* you-

I only decided to post about this once I saw it picked up by ProFootballTalk.com and other major sports blogs in addition to Deadspin. And I don’t want to throw Deadspin.com under the bus or cast aspersions upon their credibility — but their post about the Phil Savage email certainly leaves me with more questions than it does answers.

I am assuming that Deadspin has some sort of journalistic criteria that they follow before posting an item. At least, I hope they do. This is the type of blog post that grow crazy legs and take on a life of its own pretty quickly; it’s the kind of thing that could make an owner wonder about the mindset and conduct of his General Manager.

I can’t say for certain one way or the other if this rumor is true. I have no knowledge either way. What I can say is that it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, for many reasons:

1. People who know Phil Savage tell me that this is completely out of his character, that he does not talk or communicate that way. I’ve only met Phil Savage once and gleaned the rest of my impression of him from newspaper articles and radio appearances, but I have to say that an email like this flies in the face of every impression I’ve had of him.
2. As of posting this, the Cleveland Plain-Dealer has no mention of this story on their website. I have to believe that if there was truth to it, that the Plain-Dealer would have had time to investigate it and report something. The Deadspin article came out around 5 or 6. That there is not even a mention on the Plain-Dealer website leads me to believe that there is not anything to the story. No chance that they just leave this hanging in the sports blogosphere if it’s really a story.
3. More importantly, it just seems completely ludicrous to think that the General Manager of an NFL team would a) even respond to a rambling, negative fan email; and b) respond in such a way that is basically indefensible and would surely result in a fine, punishment, or even the loss of his job.

Forget any impression I have of Phil Savage. I met him once, have heard positive things from family members who have met him and from friends in the Browns organization, but I suppose he could curse like a sailor and be a totally nasty and miserable man behind closed doors. You never really know with public figures who we only know through their media persona.

But to send that kind of email?

I realize that many Browns fans have questioned some personnel decisions made by Phil Savage (while lauding some as well, to be fair); but I don’t think anyone has ever honestly considered Phil Savage to be legally insane or masochistic. To send an email like this would basically be akin to firing yourself, and would kill any chances of latching on as a GM elsewhere in the present or the future.

Without anything more to back this up than just a supposedly verbatim transcript of an email, we are supposed to believe that Phil Savage was this nuts? I don’t buy it.

If they had a screenshot of the email, I might be more likely to think it could be true. But how easy would it be to send an email saying “I said this to Phil Savage and look what he typed back!” And then type whatever you want. For a disgruntled Browns fan, a boored Steelers fan, or a drunk idiot looking to cause trouble, it wouldn’t be too difficult to do.

This just doesn’t smell right to me. It doesn’t make sense. If it’s true, this will be the biggest piece of drama yet for the Browns in a season of drama, and will no doubt make like pretty difficult for Savage and the team. But without more to go on, I’m going on record as saying that I don’t believe it. I’ve had the same questions for Phil Savage as any other Browns fan this season regarding his handling of the Kellen Winslow situation, the defensiveness of his radio appearance in the aftermath of the Kellen saga, the quarterback troubles, etc. So calling me a Phil Savage apologist, if you are so inclined, would not be accurate.

But I try to use common sense to decide what is right and what is BS. On the one hand, I am a daily visitor to Deadspin and I can’t believe that they would post something like this without being sure it was true. And on the other hand, I simply cannot believe, no matter how frustrated Phil Savage is, that he would do something this short-sighted, vulgar, and idiotic.

With the information I have now, I’m calling BS on this one. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out, but I’m not buying into this story without more proof than what we have right now.

(Update: The original Deadspin post has been updated, and now includes the following quote: “So until I can find out whether or not this is the real deal — which may be hard, let’s just keep this in the ‘might be a prank’ file.“ So not a confirmation, nor a retraction. ProFootballTalk has put out a couple of new stories about the Savage email this morning as well.)

(Side note: It is ironic that the original post about this story from Deadspin included a link to Midwest Sports Fans. For a new blog trying to make its name on the web, this is not small deal. I never thought I’d be refuting the story that our first Deadspin link came from, but here we are. Still love the site, I just can’t buy into this story without a little more than what’s there. Thanks for the link though…always sincerely appreciated.)