Square in the Middle

By Michael O'Neill, SPM IN Writer
Posted Wednesday, August 15, 2007

AUGUST 15 - For someone who has said she was upset about being asked about Don Imus, Kia Vaughn sure seems apt at bringing more attention to the controversy.

But the wording and the reasoning behind this lawsuit just don’t pass the smell test.

The junior center from Rutgers was one of the focal points of an April media circus that erupted after Dom Imus infamously called the Scarlet Knights women’s basketball team “nappy-headed hos” after their runner-up finish in the NCAA Women’s Basketball Tournament. Sponsors of Imus’ morning radio show pulled their advertising support in wake of the unanimous outcry from the media and the public, leading to his dismissal from the CBS Radio airwaves.

Four months after the fact, Vaughn is now suing Imus for his remarks, claiming that her reputation has been damaged as a result of his remarks. In a recent AP story, Vaughn’s lawyer, Richard Ancowitz, was quoted as saying that the lawsuit was “about Kia Vaughn’s good name. She would do anything to return to her life as a student and respected basketball player — a more simple life before Imus opened his mouth on April 4."

Really? I’d find it hard to believe that anyone who could be admitted as a university student would think that any lawsuit would simplify her life, even without the media attention she’s about to receive.

Vaughn has made good points ever since Imus’ comments were made. Imus’ words were reprehensible and without excuse. They (and the media attention thereafter) took the shine off of one of the best seasons in Rutgers history, and will add scrutiny to a team that promises to be one of the best in the country. I agree with all of that, and think that Imus’ firing was deserved.

But the wording and the reasoning behind this lawsuit just don’t pass the smell test. One of the key points is that Vaughn’s reputation has been damaged, and I honestly don’t think that’s the case here. Nearly every media outlet in the country gave their two cents about the issue, and not one of them that I saw agreed what Imus had to say. Quite the contrary, really – while the main stories inevitably focused on Imus, others further emphasized how well Rutgers had done in the previous season as well as how maturely the team was responding in this new face of adversity.

I would understand the need of the lawsuit of the general consensus agreed with Imus, if in fact we saw stories that said, “Well, sure he shouldn’t have said that, but hey – he’s got a point!” Everyone saw the comment either as a joke or an undue insult to the players – no one had their perception of Kia Vaughn tarnished because of it. Instead, she found support wherever she turned, with writers turning their ire toward Imus while talk show hosts across the country (notably Oprah Winfrey, who had Vaughn on her show) talked about the strength that Vaughn and her teammates had shown. Nowhere in the discussion was anyone calling Vaughn’s reputation as a woman or a basketball player into question.

So you have to scratch your head at the grounds of this lawsuit, and why, if Vaughn yearned for the simple life, she would thrust herself back into the spotlight to get there, especially after so much time has passed since Imus’ dismissal. Some may wonder if the idea of the suit was hers or her lawyer’s, a question that is not without merit. But regardless of whose intentions are behind it, the lawsuit will have her name it, the media will want to ask her the questions, and the cameras will be on her.

To me, that just doesn’t sound like the first step on the road back to the simple life.

MAY 11 -- I know that most people feel that the NBA is vastly superior to the WNBA because of factors like better players and the faster pace, both of which usual result in more scoring.

I just wanted to compare a couple facts from last night's activity, specifically two games:
1. the NBA's Detroit Pistons at the Chicago Bulls, and
2. the WNBA's LA Sparks at the Indiana Fever.

Total first-half scoring: NBA -- 72 points; WNBA -- 73.
Total second-half scoring: NBA -- 83 points; WNBA -- 84.

So, despite being the "superior league", and despite having four more minutes than the women in each half, the NBA players were unable to provide as much offense as those of the WNBA. Oh, yeah -- the NBA game was a play-off game. The WNBA game? Pre-season exhibition.

Just sayin'.

(Following up my last blog, how's A-Rod doing these days? One homer in his past 15 games, and hitting .264 in that span. Again, just sayin'.)

**********************************
APRIL 20 - The New York Yankees kept pace in the AL East yesterday afternoon thanks to a two-out walk-off home run by none other than Alex Rodriguez. It was A-Rod’s second walk-off this season, and his tenth homer in his team’s first 14 games. While those are great stats, I can’t say that was the most striking part of the season yesterday at Yankee Stadium.

Too often we in the media rush to judgment based on a limited number of instances, an ongoing trend that is halted for sort period of time, or a salacious story that absolutely oozes with impropriety.

What impressed me the most was that Rodriguez was able to round the bases with the lips of so many writers and columnists firmly attached to his rear end.

Now, I’ve never been an “A-Rod Hater” or a closet Red Sox fan, but it was plain to me that the coverage stemming from yesterday’s game bordered on the ridiculous. It’s good to see that the much-maligned third baseman is starting to do well in the clutch and that the Yankee fans have finally begun to embrace him. I’ll even go so far as to say it’s an impressive start to the season, if not one of the best in decades.

But, folks, that’s just what it is – an impressive start.

Baseball has long been a game of statistics, and the start of any season makes it easy to pull up stats quickly – fastest start, huge projected stats based on the first 10% of the season, etc. But one example of the over-reaction we saw yesterday was the outlandish “firsts” that we’ve seen from A-Rod. Some of the milestones that were brought up are ludicrously obscure, including this gem:

A-Rod has become the first person to hit a walk-off three-run homer and a walk-off grand slam in the same month.

Why is this more impressive than simply having two walk-offs in a month? Let’s remember that A-Rod has no control over how many runs any of his home runs will score – that’s up to the batters ahead of him. So, unless the AL institutes a “Ghost Man” rule from our playground days stating that batters get to hit twice and can thereby knock themselves in, let’s realize that a walk-off homer is a walk-off homer, no matter how many people are on base. The only runner that matters is the one that gets to stomp on the plate and be mobbed by his teammates.

But no, we’re coming up with weak justification like that to extol the virtues of the hero that was once jeered in the Bronx. Some writers have even gone so far as to say that A-Rod will become the greatest hitter that has ever played the game. Sounds awfully familiar to what we heard about Ken Griffey, Jr. during his heyday with the Seattle Mariners. Griffey was then beset with injuries after moving to the Cincinnati Reds, and while everyone still realizes that he’s a great hitter, rarely will you hear “the greatest” idea floated around.

Then there’s Barry Bonds, who followed his 73 HR season with a superb hitting-for-average season. Again, the writers jumped on the bandwagon, telling us of how no one has had such a mix of power and hitting capability since Ruth, and possibly ever! Bonds must be the greatest of all time! Good luck finding those same sentiments these days.

It just amazes me that in as wide a spectrum of opinions and viewpoints that this new age of sports media allows, everyone is often saying the exact same thing. Let’s face it – A-Rod was under so many magnifying glasses after yesterday that I’m surprised his uniform didn’t catch fire.

Too often we in the media rush to judgment based on a limited number of instances, an ongoing trend that is halted for sort period of time, or a salacious story that absolutely oozes with impropriety. We have to be the first to crown someone as “the greatest of all time” in whatever they do, then quickly recant that as soon as something else shiny distracts us (or, God forbid, contradicts us).

So, yes, we should congratulate Alex Rodriguez on a great start, but let’s keep it from getting extreme. Make him show us that he’s not just having a great season while his team struggles yet again (the Yankees are only two games above .500, after all), or that he can actually lead a legitimate contender throughout the entirety of a season. Until that happens, I’ll be playing devil’s advocate to over-reaction, looking for the real story beneath all the hype, and staying put where others rush to judgment. In short, you’ll always find me as the Square in the Middle.