"All of us have heard this term 'preventive war' since the earliest days of Hitler......A preventive war, to my mind, is an impossibility today. How could you have one if one of its features would be several cities lying in ruins, several cities where many, many thousands of people would be dead and injured and mangled, the transoprtation systems destroyed, sanitation implements and systems all gone? That isn't preventive war, that is war. I don't believe there is such a thing as preventive war; and frankly I wouldn't even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked about such a thing."
Dwight Eisenhower
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
A Republican Forest Preserve
A Republican Forest Preserve:
I love forest preserves, botanical gardens, redwood forests, giant canyons and other such ilk. To me each is a home away from home, the best place for contemplation, to relax, to feel contented, and to be in some kind of connection with the God created evolutionary process. For the most part, if I am not home I am out in nature somewhere wandering around lolligagging, reading, musing, or napping. Some people in my condo have 2 or 3 homes. I can't imagine why anyone would want to keep up more than one home. When someone tells me about their three homes I tell them about my 3 cats. I don't think it impresses them. I actually do have 2 other homes, but professional care takers keep them up, not me. One is named Cantigny and the other is named Morton Arboretum. I never take anyone with me to these other two homes, too much of a distraction. Maybe I am just selfish, let them find their own heaven on earth. If they married right they probably have.
When I moved here one of the attractions was the nearby access to several forest preserves. I like forest preserves, a chance to enjoy plants, trees, birds and wildlife. The forest preserves where I used to live---in Will and Cook County, were fun to walk through, teaming with wildlife. Thus it was a shock to find that the forest preserves here in DuPage County, a Republican stronghold of the state, are sterile. There are plants and trees, nice pathways, but nothing else. Any kind of wildlife noticeable by humans has been exterminated for being a public nuisance. It just seems Republicans, if I can generalize loosely here, find living nuisances everywhere---locally, statewide, nationwide, and world wide. All nuisances must be exterminated and that, in short suit, is their political dictum.
I suppose one might argue that a forest preserve, as named, is there to preserve the natural components of a forest. Humans, unfortunately, by their very nature, are not all that sharing. Any real sharing takes a labored effort, tolerance, compromise, appreciation of diversity. If there is any place left where wildlife belongs, it seems a forest preserve is the place. It used to be. Of course Republicans don't cleanse, exterminate, terrorize, subjugate or jail other living things without 'good' reason. If reasons can't be extracted from selected religious scripture then it becomes a matter of public safety, property rights, and when all else fails---majority rules.
While I see but rare instances of rabbits, squirrels, chipmunks, most birds etc. the most noticeable absence are the deer. When Americans years ago slaughtered Vietnamese the manufactured reason was freedom. When DuPage County slaughters virtually the entire deer population in a forest preserve they coin the term Deer Management Program. Now who can argue with proper management of anything? Certainly not I. Deer populations can grow past the point of any forest being able to handle such a large population of deer. Uncontrolled growth is a disaster to the forest itself. Culling herds is a necessity. But exterminating herds is unconscionable. Deer, of course, can be traffic hazards. So are humans driving cars or crossing streets, kids playing in streets etc. Management means minimizing the risks while at the same time preserving the wildlife in a forest preserve, keeping the population of deer down so that there is minimal need for deer to go elsewhere to seek food.
In Cook County and Will County they probably don't cull the herds enough. To be honest it probably has less to do with Republican or Democrat then it does with finances. DuPage County is a rich county and has more money available to simply exterminate nuisances of any sort. In Cook or Will County people know, if you buy a house near a forest preserve, that deer are going to nibble at bushes in your yard. You expect it and are selective in the kind of bushes you plant. In Dupage County you don't have to make any adjustments in your yard plantings if you buy a house near a forest preserve, you simply demand the deer be exterminated. Of course the word exterminated sounds too selfish and blunt so the word management is used and grossly abused.
Still, one might think that anyone in charge of a forest preserve would try their best to strike a reasonable balance between the the rights of the wildlife in a forest preserve and the rights of citizens who pay their salary. But is doesn't work out that way. Waiting in the wings, like vultures, is a small cabal of fanatical illusionary hunters, who love to kill animals and think they are hunting. Killing deer in a suburban forest preserve is about as technically challenging as being given a license to shoot all the dogs in some neighborhood. I guess the challenge comes when there are only a handful of terrorized deer left in the preserve. Luckily, there are all kinds of devices these days to track and attract even the last remaining deer. Before sunrise and around dusk these 'yahoos' pull into the forest preserves with their oversized vehicles with oversized tires driven by undersized brains, and the hunt, if I can use the term absurdly, is on. Crack open the beer, set up a tailgate party and let the killing fun begin. If these yahoos really wanted a manly hunting challenge, you know---something which required any real courage and toughness----they would be out in the mountains of Afghanistan or the deserts of Iraq where there would be ample risk and daring forays into the killing fields. But shooting hapless deer in a forest preserve, then mounting antler racks on walls as proof of some kind of phony manliness is pitiful. A real stretch. Probably they get to keep the deer meat to eat, sell, or just give away as gifts.
Frankly, I don't understand why people of this sort are allowed to have any role in protecting a forest preserve. The Dupage County forest preserves are now nothing more than personal hunting preserves, no different than commercial game farms where you can pay a certain amount of money to go out and shoot, for example, a buffalo. That is ok. On these game farms the animals are not terrorized in the process, and no one running a game farm is pretending they are preserving a forest.
The forests, in any real sense of the term, are gone now from DuPage County. Any wildlife, like deer, have been driven to private tracts of land and into many neighborhoods where it is too congested to shoot them. Instead of a few homes bordering a forest preserve being subjected to deer as pest, it then becomes a lot more homes in a lot more areas which become targeted by the deer. Where the deer should be, they can't go, where the deer shouldn't be is their last refuge. Why the rabbits and squirrels and most birds are gone is still a mystery to me. Maybe these 'yahoos' shoot them too, or maybe they are poisoned, or maybe when the natural chain of wildlife is broken, other forms vanish too. Being in a DuPage County forest preserve is like being at a battlefield graveyard. Correction: more like being at a Jewish Holocaust Museum.
In Cook County and Will County I found the forest preserves teeming with families out to enjoy nature along with those seeking exercise via biking or jogging or walking. In the DuPage country forest preserves only the bikes and joggers can be found in any numbers. I mean, why else would anyone go into a DuPage County forest preserve? All that remains is a silent sterile shell of a forest---a skeleton of what once was. It will not change because that is the way the majority of people in a Republican County want it. Majority rules. Case closed. Obligation is not a big word in Republican circuits these days.
No need to feel sad for nature though. The future of today's kids is another thing. Nature always bats last. Always. From so many directions, the chickens are coming home to roost. In some parts of the world, and soon in all parts of the world, it will be nature terrorizing humanity for the many and varied ways humans have exploited the very environment which sustains us. In the not too distant future, Nature is about to 'manage' us in the manner DuPage County 'manages' life in a forest preserve. It will be us who will be terrorized and exterminated in great numbers. And like the deer in the forest preserve there will be absolutely nothing the next generation can do about it. I guess, in this amazing God created evolutionary process, what goes around comes around. We can really see it all coming, but like the deer staring into oncoming headlights, we will remain blinded and unconcerned until the splat.
I love forest preserves, botanical gardens, redwood forests, giant canyons and other such ilk. To me each is a home away from home, the best place for contemplation, to relax, to feel contented, and to be in some kind of connection with the God created evolutionary process. For the most part, if I am not home I am out in nature somewhere wandering around lolligagging, reading, musing, or napping. Some people in my condo have 2 or 3 homes. I can't imagine why anyone would want to keep up more than one home. When someone tells me about their three homes I tell them about my 3 cats. I don't think it impresses them. I actually do have 2 other homes, but professional care takers keep them up, not me. One is named Cantigny and the other is named Morton Arboretum. I never take anyone with me to these other two homes, too much of a distraction. Maybe I am just selfish, let them find their own heaven on earth. If they married right they probably have.
When I moved here one of the attractions was the nearby access to several forest preserves. I like forest preserves, a chance to enjoy plants, trees, birds and wildlife. The forest preserves where I used to live---in Will and Cook County, were fun to walk through, teaming with wildlife. Thus it was a shock to find that the forest preserves here in DuPage County, a Republican stronghold of the state, are sterile. There are plants and trees, nice pathways, but nothing else. Any kind of wildlife noticeable by humans has been exterminated for being a public nuisance. It just seems Republicans, if I can generalize loosely here, find living nuisances everywhere---locally, statewide, nationwide, and world wide. All nuisances must be exterminated and that, in short suit, is their political dictum.
I suppose one might argue that a forest preserve, as named, is there to preserve the natural components of a forest. Humans, unfortunately, by their very nature, are not all that sharing. Any real sharing takes a labored effort, tolerance, compromise, appreciation of diversity. If there is any place left where wildlife belongs, it seems a forest preserve is the place. It used to be. Of course Republicans don't cleanse, exterminate, terrorize, subjugate or jail other living things without 'good' reason. If reasons can't be extracted from selected religious scripture then it becomes a matter of public safety, property rights, and when all else fails---majority rules.
While I see but rare instances of rabbits, squirrels, chipmunks, most birds etc. the most noticeable absence are the deer. When Americans years ago slaughtered Vietnamese the manufactured reason was freedom. When DuPage County slaughters virtually the entire deer population in a forest preserve they coin the term Deer Management Program. Now who can argue with proper management of anything? Certainly not I. Deer populations can grow past the point of any forest being able to handle such a large population of deer. Uncontrolled growth is a disaster to the forest itself. Culling herds is a necessity. But exterminating herds is unconscionable. Deer, of course, can be traffic hazards. So are humans driving cars or crossing streets, kids playing in streets etc. Management means minimizing the risks while at the same time preserving the wildlife in a forest preserve, keeping the population of deer down so that there is minimal need for deer to go elsewhere to seek food.
In Cook County and Will County they probably don't cull the herds enough. To be honest it probably has less to do with Republican or Democrat then it does with finances. DuPage County is a rich county and has more money available to simply exterminate nuisances of any sort. In Cook or Will County people know, if you buy a house near a forest preserve, that deer are going to nibble at bushes in your yard. You expect it and are selective in the kind of bushes you plant. In Dupage County you don't have to make any adjustments in your yard plantings if you buy a house near a forest preserve, you simply demand the deer be exterminated. Of course the word exterminated sounds too selfish and blunt so the word management is used and grossly abused.
Still, one might think that anyone in charge of a forest preserve would try their best to strike a reasonable balance between the the rights of the wildlife in a forest preserve and the rights of citizens who pay their salary. But is doesn't work out that way. Waiting in the wings, like vultures, is a small cabal of fanatical illusionary hunters, who love to kill animals and think they are hunting. Killing deer in a suburban forest preserve is about as technically challenging as being given a license to shoot all the dogs in some neighborhood. I guess the challenge comes when there are only a handful of terrorized deer left in the preserve. Luckily, there are all kinds of devices these days to track and attract even the last remaining deer. Before sunrise and around dusk these 'yahoos' pull into the forest preserves with their oversized vehicles with oversized tires driven by undersized brains, and the hunt, if I can use the term absurdly, is on. Crack open the beer, set up a tailgate party and let the killing fun begin. If these yahoos really wanted a manly hunting challenge, you know---something which required any real courage and toughness----they would be out in the mountains of Afghanistan or the deserts of Iraq where there would be ample risk and daring forays into the killing fields. But shooting hapless deer in a forest preserve, then mounting antler racks on walls as proof of some kind of phony manliness is pitiful. A real stretch. Probably they get to keep the deer meat to eat, sell, or just give away as gifts.
Frankly, I don't understand why people of this sort are allowed to have any role in protecting a forest preserve. The Dupage County forest preserves are now nothing more than personal hunting preserves, no different than commercial game farms where you can pay a certain amount of money to go out and shoot, for example, a buffalo. That is ok. On these game farms the animals are not terrorized in the process, and no one running a game farm is pretending they are preserving a forest.
The forests, in any real sense of the term, are gone now from DuPage County. Any wildlife, like deer, have been driven to private tracts of land and into many neighborhoods where it is too congested to shoot them. Instead of a few homes bordering a forest preserve being subjected to deer as pest, it then becomes a lot more homes in a lot more areas which become targeted by the deer. Where the deer should be, they can't go, where the deer shouldn't be is their last refuge. Why the rabbits and squirrels and most birds are gone is still a mystery to me. Maybe these 'yahoos' shoot them too, or maybe they are poisoned, or maybe when the natural chain of wildlife is broken, other forms vanish too. Being in a DuPage County forest preserve is like being at a battlefield graveyard. Correction: more like being at a Jewish Holocaust Museum.
In Cook County and Will County I found the forest preserves teeming with families out to enjoy nature along with those seeking exercise via biking or jogging or walking. In the DuPage country forest preserves only the bikes and joggers can be found in any numbers. I mean, why else would anyone go into a DuPage County forest preserve? All that remains is a silent sterile shell of a forest---a skeleton of what once was. It will not change because that is the way the majority of people in a Republican County want it. Majority rules. Case closed. Obligation is not a big word in Republican circuits these days.
No need to feel sad for nature though. The future of today's kids is another thing. Nature always bats last. Always. From so many directions, the chickens are coming home to roost. In some parts of the world, and soon in all parts of the world, it will be nature terrorizing humanity for the many and varied ways humans have exploited the very environment which sustains us. In the not too distant future, Nature is about to 'manage' us in the manner DuPage County 'manages' life in a forest preserve. It will be us who will be terrorized and exterminated in great numbers. And like the deer in the forest preserve there will be absolutely nothing the next generation can do about it. I guess, in this amazing God created evolutionary process, what goes around comes around. We can really see it all coming, but like the deer staring into oncoming headlights, we will remain blinded and unconcerned until the splat.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
A Nondescript Enigmatic Meeting
A Nondescript Enigmatic Meeting
In a way the meeting seemed destined to be. Several years ago I received a call from the former Dept in which I taught. A former student of mine had come by and asked for my telephone number. It was a new Department Secretary. I explained my long standing past policy remained in effect---I was retired and my phone number was not to be given out. Phone calls of that sort usually mean someone has a problem or it is sad news. I remembered the student, it went way back to the early 70's, a long time ago. I will call the student Darrell but that is not his real name. End of matter.
Then came a ride on the Chicago River Water Taxi, and as I stated in a previous musing, the boat Captain recognized me. It was Darrell. After embarrassing me with praise over a PA system during the trip to a boat load of people, I chatted briefly with him and agree to have lunch with him. I wrestled with this, and really didn't want to do it. He offered to come to Woodridge for the lunch. Fearful of him becoming a pest I didn't want him to know my address so told him I preferred lunch in Chicago.
The time came and I went, on this cold dreary drizzling day. I remembered Darrell because he was different: endless energy, inquisitive about everything, pushy, prone to exaggeration, and unpredictable. He was a decent student capable of B's but not a top student. He hung around my lab on his own and I finally hired him, much to the chagrin of most faculty. My philosophy back then was to routinely hire 1 long shot in the lab. Even so Darrell was a stretch. For many faculty Darrell was hard to control. To me Darrell couldn't thank me enough or put in enough extra hours or offer enough to do this or that for me. Many of his suggestions in the lab were off the wall, creative but too often ignorant. I once took him and another student to some physiology meetings in California, where Darrell, with his gift of gab, managed to bend the ears of many presenters. I also had to take his flute away because the first night there he spent the whole night in this park playing his flute. Part of me always wanted to get rid of Darrell as he seemed stuck at a certain grade point level, and aggravated many of the faculty by always using something I might have said to him to make a point. Plus I got tired of hearing other faculty express their frustrations with Darrell to me, especially stuff like "could you talk to Darrell and get him to......."
Darrell picked me up in Chicago at the right time and place so it got off to a good start. He has 5 kids and 11 grandchildren. He is a cruise boat captain, he ferries boats to Mexico for the owners, he works for Cook County training election judges, has taught Biology, Chemistry, and Computer Science at community colleges, and started up his own Foundation. He told me right off the bat that he has been searching for several years to contact two people, I being one of them. Like I say Darrell is a bit off the wall. Right then and there I stopped him. "Darrell, have you kept yourself out of trouble?" Even though I told him to call me Reid (he is 51 years old now) he refused and so his reply was, "Dr. James, you don't know my background and the stress that comes with it. I have been a dope addict and in prison. Out of my 7 closest friends from the neighborhood, I am the only survivor. I used to lie in prison thinking about things you and one other person told me." That first person approached Darrell in high school and urged him to go to college. But according to Darrell he had all D's and just laughed. But the guy was persistent and got Darrell in a program called Chance. He then found out Darrell couldn't read unless reading at the fourth grade level is reading. But he worked with Darrell and got his reading level up. Darrell indicated he has tried to locate this person to thank him but he has had no luck.
I didn't ask Darrell what he was in prison for, or how long. For some reason I didn't want to know. He got into drug treatment for his addiction but after a month, insurance wouldn't pay any more so he feigned suicidal to get continued treatment. They literally tied him down for a month. Even with my background I don't have any brilliant insights into any of this. He is a survivor and can be proud of that. His foundation works with prisoners released from jail. I have no idea whether the foundation is worth a damn in terms of results. I doubt it though. As far as I can determine, he has been a good husband and father to his kids. He claimed it was very important to him that he find me and thank me for saving his life. He claimed he wrote down in jail all the things he remembered my telling him about life and it helped him get his life together. I said earlier Darrell tends to exaggerate and is quite creative. I wonder how much he claims I told him I ever did? But I guess it is of no matter, really.
I never did regret hiring Darrell or letting him yap away. He was more of a burden than any real help in the lab. Ok, I take that back, he was of help in the lab, but a burden came with it. He never did offend me with his behavior, it kind of just amazed me. It still does. In a weird sort of way I have real respect for Darrell. And besides he survives by being an energetic 'operator'. He told me that he once leased a cab by the week, but just used it as needed to get some money. If the family wanted pizza he would just pick up passengers until he had enough money to pay for the pizza. If he went to the grocery store he did the same thing. I think I will lease a cab starting next week!
For all his zaniness Darrell has a good moral compass. He is honest, hard working, fair, loyal, and helpful to others. At the end of lunch I told Darrell: "You know Darrell, I am glad you caught up with me, but you really are on your own now. Don't even think about bringing any problems my way, and I am dead serious about that." He promised me he wouldn't and that he really did have his act together now. I wondered if he will ever run out of energy.
As you can see, it really was a nondescript enigmatic meeting. But it made for an interesting day. On the train ride back to Woodridge my thoughts about this country grew heavy. There are 2.2 million people in this country in prison. That represents 22% of the people in prison across the whole world. Why is it that our society leads the world in jailing people? Absent some sort of criminal genes loose in our population it seems something is not right about the atmosphere in which so many are raised in this country. It isn't just at home either---we are a very violence oriented society with 750 military bases in 130 countries. What other country remotely approaches this? Why, at this point in our history do we need to maintain some sort of global empire at gun point? We have spent, with no end in sight, $648 billion dollars to kill hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Iraqians and leave over 2 million homeless. It has made Hussein look like some sort of Saint. What has all this violence accomplished except place us front and center for all sort of terrorists across the globe? Probably, deep down, most of us know eventually terrorists of some sort are going to find ways to really hurt us in great numbers. If foreign terrorists don't, then it won't be long before the disaffected in our own country become terrorists. If the poor get any poorer while the rich get richer and richer we are certainly doomed. What kind of Christian nation allows itself to grow into such a military monster with so much indifference to the hapless in our own country?
The latest released statistic blows my mind. A relatively modest, as massacres occur across the globe go, 3000 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq. But here is the kicker. Over 6000 American soldiers have committed suicide during or after their Iraq assignment. I know they signed up to make money as soldiers, but they clearly must be seeing something or feeling something dreadful to commit suicide in such numbers at such a young age. That guy Dennis Kuchinech (Sp) is the only candidate serious about putting a stop to all this military craziness and he is considered a joke in the election. I fear the joke is on us, but I just can't seem to laugh about it.
But ah, life is personally good to me. I put on my blinders, live in an affluent community, look out from my 11th floor balcony----and as far as my eye can see, all is well in this best of all possible worlds. After all, seeing is believing. I guess.
In a way the meeting seemed destined to be. Several years ago I received a call from the former Dept in which I taught. A former student of mine had come by and asked for my telephone number. It was a new Department Secretary. I explained my long standing past policy remained in effect---I was retired and my phone number was not to be given out. Phone calls of that sort usually mean someone has a problem or it is sad news. I remembered the student, it went way back to the early 70's, a long time ago. I will call the student Darrell but that is not his real name. End of matter.
Then came a ride on the Chicago River Water Taxi, and as I stated in a previous musing, the boat Captain recognized me. It was Darrell. After embarrassing me with praise over a PA system during the trip to a boat load of people, I chatted briefly with him and agree to have lunch with him. I wrestled with this, and really didn't want to do it. He offered to come to Woodridge for the lunch. Fearful of him becoming a pest I didn't want him to know my address so told him I preferred lunch in Chicago.
The time came and I went, on this cold dreary drizzling day. I remembered Darrell because he was different: endless energy, inquisitive about everything, pushy, prone to exaggeration, and unpredictable. He was a decent student capable of B's but not a top student. He hung around my lab on his own and I finally hired him, much to the chagrin of most faculty. My philosophy back then was to routinely hire 1 long shot in the lab. Even so Darrell was a stretch. For many faculty Darrell was hard to control. To me Darrell couldn't thank me enough or put in enough extra hours or offer enough to do this or that for me. Many of his suggestions in the lab were off the wall, creative but too often ignorant. I once took him and another student to some physiology meetings in California, where Darrell, with his gift of gab, managed to bend the ears of many presenters. I also had to take his flute away because the first night there he spent the whole night in this park playing his flute. Part of me always wanted to get rid of Darrell as he seemed stuck at a certain grade point level, and aggravated many of the faculty by always using something I might have said to him to make a point. Plus I got tired of hearing other faculty express their frustrations with Darrell to me, especially stuff like "could you talk to Darrell and get him to......."
Darrell picked me up in Chicago at the right time and place so it got off to a good start. He has 5 kids and 11 grandchildren. He is a cruise boat captain, he ferries boats to Mexico for the owners, he works for Cook County training election judges, has taught Biology, Chemistry, and Computer Science at community colleges, and started up his own Foundation. He told me right off the bat that he has been searching for several years to contact two people, I being one of them. Like I say Darrell is a bit off the wall. Right then and there I stopped him. "Darrell, have you kept yourself out of trouble?" Even though I told him to call me Reid (he is 51 years old now) he refused and so his reply was, "Dr. James, you don't know my background and the stress that comes with it. I have been a dope addict and in prison. Out of my 7 closest friends from the neighborhood, I am the only survivor. I used to lie in prison thinking about things you and one other person told me." That first person approached Darrell in high school and urged him to go to college. But according to Darrell he had all D's and just laughed. But the guy was persistent and got Darrell in a program called Chance. He then found out Darrell couldn't read unless reading at the fourth grade level is reading. But he worked with Darrell and got his reading level up. Darrell indicated he has tried to locate this person to thank him but he has had no luck.
I didn't ask Darrell what he was in prison for, or how long. For some reason I didn't want to know. He got into drug treatment for his addiction but after a month, insurance wouldn't pay any more so he feigned suicidal to get continued treatment. They literally tied him down for a month. Even with my background I don't have any brilliant insights into any of this. He is a survivor and can be proud of that. His foundation works with prisoners released from jail. I have no idea whether the foundation is worth a damn in terms of results. I doubt it though. As far as I can determine, he has been a good husband and father to his kids. He claimed it was very important to him that he find me and thank me for saving his life. He claimed he wrote down in jail all the things he remembered my telling him about life and it helped him get his life together. I said earlier Darrell tends to exaggerate and is quite creative. I wonder how much he claims I told him I ever did? But I guess it is of no matter, really.
I never did regret hiring Darrell or letting him yap away. He was more of a burden than any real help in the lab. Ok, I take that back, he was of help in the lab, but a burden came with it. He never did offend me with his behavior, it kind of just amazed me. It still does. In a weird sort of way I have real respect for Darrell. And besides he survives by being an energetic 'operator'. He told me that he once leased a cab by the week, but just used it as needed to get some money. If the family wanted pizza he would just pick up passengers until he had enough money to pay for the pizza. If he went to the grocery store he did the same thing. I think I will lease a cab starting next week!
For all his zaniness Darrell has a good moral compass. He is honest, hard working, fair, loyal, and helpful to others. At the end of lunch I told Darrell: "You know Darrell, I am glad you caught up with me, but you really are on your own now. Don't even think about bringing any problems my way, and I am dead serious about that." He promised me he wouldn't and that he really did have his act together now. I wondered if he will ever run out of energy.
As you can see, it really was a nondescript enigmatic meeting. But it made for an interesting day. On the train ride back to Woodridge my thoughts about this country grew heavy. There are 2.2 million people in this country in prison. That represents 22% of the people in prison across the whole world. Why is it that our society leads the world in jailing people? Absent some sort of criminal genes loose in our population it seems something is not right about the atmosphere in which so many are raised in this country. It isn't just at home either---we are a very violence oriented society with 750 military bases in 130 countries. What other country remotely approaches this? Why, at this point in our history do we need to maintain some sort of global empire at gun point? We have spent, with no end in sight, $648 billion dollars to kill hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Iraqians and leave over 2 million homeless. It has made Hussein look like some sort of Saint. What has all this violence accomplished except place us front and center for all sort of terrorists across the globe? Probably, deep down, most of us know eventually terrorists of some sort are going to find ways to really hurt us in great numbers. If foreign terrorists don't, then it won't be long before the disaffected in our own country become terrorists. If the poor get any poorer while the rich get richer and richer we are certainly doomed. What kind of Christian nation allows itself to grow into such a military monster with so much indifference to the hapless in our own country?
The latest released statistic blows my mind. A relatively modest, as massacres occur across the globe go, 3000 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq. But here is the kicker. Over 6000 American soldiers have committed suicide during or after their Iraq assignment. I know they signed up to make money as soldiers, but they clearly must be seeing something or feeling something dreadful to commit suicide in such numbers at such a young age. That guy Dennis Kuchinech (Sp) is the only candidate serious about putting a stop to all this military craziness and he is considered a joke in the election. I fear the joke is on us, but I just can't seem to laugh about it.
But ah, life is personally good to me. I put on my blinders, live in an affluent community, look out from my 11th floor balcony----and as far as my eye can see, all is well in this best of all possible worlds. After all, seeing is believing. I guess.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Reunions et al:
Reunions:
For the most part, I don't attend reunions so my expertise here is nonexistent. Just one of many shortcomings on my part. Still, reunions intrigue me. Ok, I guess most things intrigue me, preferably from a distance. It all started well enough---my mother's side of the family had family reunions a couple of times a year. Back in those days relatives tended to live close by, not scattered all over the country. A trip any distance back then would put you into a really new world. Now you get off a plane and head down the highway and it would be hard to guess you were far away from home---same looking hotels, restaurants, expressways etc. And if you try to get off the beaten path to get a really local flavor, it is probably too dangerous. Of course there are exceptions and these exceptions attract crowds and the crowds themselves become the main standout. It is easy to feel crowded in these days.
On my mother's side I had 7 aunts and uncles and 16 cousins. These youthful reunions I always looked forward to, and the cousins near my age I got to know quite well. But then I took off to college way up in the state of Maine and it all changed. I never saw many of them again until last year. But last year's reunion was a pleasant experience. Every one looked quite familiar to me. I say fun----maybe it was mostly just curiosity to see what they looked like now. And to pull off that reunion took an extraordinary effort on the part of one cousin. Some people make me look like a social retard. I probably am.
I have never gone to a high school reunion, a college reunion, or any kind of reunion except my old neighborhood 'gang' reunions which took place about every year. I did go, a couple of years ago, to the reunion of a high school class I taught back in the 60's. That was a disappointment.
The noise was unbearable, I simply didn't remember most of the students I had in class back then, and the athlete's I coached, who I did remember well, were very kind to me---BUT the distant connect was just that---distant---almost unreal with no current meaningful connect. You can never go home again.
I suppose, if they held a high school or college class reunion right here in Woodridge, IL I might go. But likely I would regret it. Nothing about me in high school or college created any aura of outstanding memories. You wouldn't find my name or picture cluttering up any yearbook. No best this or that, most likely to become this or that, President of this or that, etc. One time, on a major NYC radio station some disk jockey identified me by name on the radio and remarked, "He's a swinger". Unfortunately, he didn't even know me. On the other side of the coin I probably didn't have any enemies either. In some sense I think only fools think they have any real importance in life. It is mostly one damn thing after another, you struggle, you succeed, you lose, you have a few happy moments surrounded by a lot more stressful moments, you age, and if you live long enough you become physically and mentally decrepit, with most of those you knew best already dead. Nevertheless, the really smart find ways to accept the totality of existence, be grateful for good fortunes, and with time, go gently down the stream having learned not to take life or death too seriously, ready to embark on one's last voyage---a giant leap in the dark.
I guess it is not just reunions which are low on my list of preferred attractions. If you see me at weddings, anniversaries, birthday parties, seasonal celebrations, graduations, church socials, work related parties, etc.---well you are mistaken, you didn't see me. Part of this is just my nature. Early in my life I just decided I am not going to be dragged around here and there, along the way buying gifts for an endless mob of nice people for an endless number of celebratory occasions. Once you start it would never end, and even more important where the hell on whom do you draw the line? I envy those who thrive on this stuff as an important part of their social life. My hat goes off to them. Most people I know are not in need of any gifts. What they really want, they buy for themselves, just like I do. The most absurd is Christmas gift exchanges where all the parties involved let each other know what they want. Sometimes they go so far as to list the make, the model number, the color, etc. When I was a child an Aunt and Uncle on my father's side, who I had never met, sent me a Christmas present every Christmas. I am sorry to admit I didn't appreciate it at all. Most of the time it was nothing I wanted. Then my mother made me write a thank you note: " Dear------thank you for the present. How are you? I am fine....blah, blah, blah" as short as possible. One time I wrote, "next year please ask what I want first" but my mother made me take that out and rewrite the note. Pushy little brat I guess.
As a young adult I took all this, in my mind a lot of 'silliness', by the horns and made it clear to anyone remotely likely to expect a present from me that I wasn't sending presents to anyone for anything and neither was I accepting presents from anyone either. Whatever relationship I have with anyone I don't want it to involve gift giving. My attitude was that if anyone wanted to eliminate me as a friend because I wouldn't buy them gifts, they were not anyone I needed for a friend anyway. The plus of this kind of attitude is this: there are times you have a meaningful relationship---temporary or otherwise----with someone who needs financial help in a crises, and it is easier to financially help them since, if you didn't spend money on gift giving to those not in need of any gift, you have an obligation then to spend that money on those who do need financial help. The truth is I don't think I really lost friends very often on this gift giving issue. My operation isn't foolproof. When people collect money for a gift to someone whom I know, I usually cave in and contribute. I feel on the spot. While they clearly would not expect a gift from me, they hardly would appreciate a public statement from me that I refuse to contribute toward any gift to them. But that's ok, at least I didn't have to go shopping and pick out a gift, wrap it up, send it etc.
Group gatherings have limitations to me. Unless through gossip, a most unreliable source of valid information, group gatherings seldom provide real insight into others. Everyone is on stage projecting whatever image of themselves they wish to project. I can spend 6 hrs at a large gathering and come away knowing little more of importance about anyone after the gathering then I knew before. Cleverisms and feigned affections blossom more profusely than galloping gonorrhea. Add some liquor and someone will gush out with something ill appreciated by someone else and just like that, hard feelings are generated. I am capable of that minus any liquor, another reason to skip such events. The devil in me sometimes feels the urge to enter a large gathering, launch into diatribes about religious beliefs, political leanings, and sexual experiences or judgments, then go home and let the the angry upset attendees put each other's noses out of joint. But I don't do this, frankly feeling if I can do no good with my presence, at least do no harm.
The purpose of reunions, I think, is to recreate the past. Forget it, the past is past. With precious few exceptions when I leave a job or move to a new location I just break ties then and there. It is difficult enough to establish meaningful relationships with those you currently come in contact without trying to do such a thing with those you will hardly ever have contact again. I don't consider this an act of hostility but a reflection that both parties need concentrate on matters and people at hand; you can never forever be all things to all people. The best you can probably do is harm no one, and selectively assist those genuinely in need of help. The world is full of people being treated unfairly in life and to come to the aid of someone with no or little support base in life is as good a way to justify your own good fortune as any. People build People was a sign I hung in my office at the University. To this day it is one of the few generalizations which seems to contain some universal truth.
But when all is said and done (being done is not my specialty) everyone is truly different. Reunions do mean a lot to many people, they love the things, and all of my above babble, even if it were polished and logical, is simply inapplicable to others, probably most others. If I believe in anything, I believe in live and let live to the extent there are no victims. People can re-unionate to whatever extent they enjoy it, and old curmudgeons like myself should just get out of their way.
Getting out of the way is the best dance step to learn for those my age. Failing at this brings on a pattern of mumbling, whining, fretful squawking, and useless personal attacks fired in the manner of shotgun buckshot at demons everywhere. Not I, musings hidden out of sight, off the beaten path, suffice to dissipate the fussiness of a terminal age.
For the most part, I don't attend reunions so my expertise here is nonexistent. Just one of many shortcomings on my part. Still, reunions intrigue me. Ok, I guess most things intrigue me, preferably from a distance. It all started well enough---my mother's side of the family had family reunions a couple of times a year. Back in those days relatives tended to live close by, not scattered all over the country. A trip any distance back then would put you into a really new world. Now you get off a plane and head down the highway and it would be hard to guess you were far away from home---same looking hotels, restaurants, expressways etc. And if you try to get off the beaten path to get a really local flavor, it is probably too dangerous. Of course there are exceptions and these exceptions attract crowds and the crowds themselves become the main standout. It is easy to feel crowded in these days.
On my mother's side I had 7 aunts and uncles and 16 cousins. These youthful reunions I always looked forward to, and the cousins near my age I got to know quite well. But then I took off to college way up in the state of Maine and it all changed. I never saw many of them again until last year. But last year's reunion was a pleasant experience. Every one looked quite familiar to me. I say fun----maybe it was mostly just curiosity to see what they looked like now. And to pull off that reunion took an extraordinary effort on the part of one cousin. Some people make me look like a social retard. I probably am.
I have never gone to a high school reunion, a college reunion, or any kind of reunion except my old neighborhood 'gang' reunions which took place about every year. I did go, a couple of years ago, to the reunion of a high school class I taught back in the 60's. That was a disappointment.
The noise was unbearable, I simply didn't remember most of the students I had in class back then, and the athlete's I coached, who I did remember well, were very kind to me---BUT the distant connect was just that---distant---almost unreal with no current meaningful connect. You can never go home again.
I suppose, if they held a high school or college class reunion right here in Woodridge, IL I might go. But likely I would regret it. Nothing about me in high school or college created any aura of outstanding memories. You wouldn't find my name or picture cluttering up any yearbook. No best this or that, most likely to become this or that, President of this or that, etc. One time, on a major NYC radio station some disk jockey identified me by name on the radio and remarked, "He's a swinger". Unfortunately, he didn't even know me. On the other side of the coin I probably didn't have any enemies either. In some sense I think only fools think they have any real importance in life. It is mostly one damn thing after another, you struggle, you succeed, you lose, you have a few happy moments surrounded by a lot more stressful moments, you age, and if you live long enough you become physically and mentally decrepit, with most of those you knew best already dead. Nevertheless, the really smart find ways to accept the totality of existence, be grateful for good fortunes, and with time, go gently down the stream having learned not to take life or death too seriously, ready to embark on one's last voyage---a giant leap in the dark.
I guess it is not just reunions which are low on my list of preferred attractions. If you see me at weddings, anniversaries, birthday parties, seasonal celebrations, graduations, church socials, work related parties, etc.---well you are mistaken, you didn't see me. Part of this is just my nature. Early in my life I just decided I am not going to be dragged around here and there, along the way buying gifts for an endless mob of nice people for an endless number of celebratory occasions. Once you start it would never end, and even more important where the hell on whom do you draw the line? I envy those who thrive on this stuff as an important part of their social life. My hat goes off to them. Most people I know are not in need of any gifts. What they really want, they buy for themselves, just like I do. The most absurd is Christmas gift exchanges where all the parties involved let each other know what they want. Sometimes they go so far as to list the make, the model number, the color, etc. When I was a child an Aunt and Uncle on my father's side, who I had never met, sent me a Christmas present every Christmas. I am sorry to admit I didn't appreciate it at all. Most of the time it was nothing I wanted. Then my mother made me write a thank you note: " Dear------thank you for the present. How are you? I am fine....blah, blah, blah" as short as possible. One time I wrote, "next year please ask what I want first" but my mother made me take that out and rewrite the note. Pushy little brat I guess.
As a young adult I took all this, in my mind a lot of 'silliness', by the horns and made it clear to anyone remotely likely to expect a present from me that I wasn't sending presents to anyone for anything and neither was I accepting presents from anyone either. Whatever relationship I have with anyone I don't want it to involve gift giving. My attitude was that if anyone wanted to eliminate me as a friend because I wouldn't buy them gifts, they were not anyone I needed for a friend anyway. The plus of this kind of attitude is this: there are times you have a meaningful relationship---temporary or otherwise----with someone who needs financial help in a crises, and it is easier to financially help them since, if you didn't spend money on gift giving to those not in need of any gift, you have an obligation then to spend that money on those who do need financial help. The truth is I don't think I really lost friends very often on this gift giving issue. My operation isn't foolproof. When people collect money for a gift to someone whom I know, I usually cave in and contribute. I feel on the spot. While they clearly would not expect a gift from me, they hardly would appreciate a public statement from me that I refuse to contribute toward any gift to them. But that's ok, at least I didn't have to go shopping and pick out a gift, wrap it up, send it etc.
Group gatherings have limitations to me. Unless through gossip, a most unreliable source of valid information, group gatherings seldom provide real insight into others. Everyone is on stage projecting whatever image of themselves they wish to project. I can spend 6 hrs at a large gathering and come away knowing little more of importance about anyone after the gathering then I knew before. Cleverisms and feigned affections blossom more profusely than galloping gonorrhea. Add some liquor and someone will gush out with something ill appreciated by someone else and just like that, hard feelings are generated. I am capable of that minus any liquor, another reason to skip such events. The devil in me sometimes feels the urge to enter a large gathering, launch into diatribes about religious beliefs, political leanings, and sexual experiences or judgments, then go home and let the the angry upset attendees put each other's noses out of joint. But I don't do this, frankly feeling if I can do no good with my presence, at least do no harm.
The purpose of reunions, I think, is to recreate the past. Forget it, the past is past. With precious few exceptions when I leave a job or move to a new location I just break ties then and there. It is difficult enough to establish meaningful relationships with those you currently come in contact without trying to do such a thing with those you will hardly ever have contact again. I don't consider this an act of hostility but a reflection that both parties need concentrate on matters and people at hand; you can never forever be all things to all people. The best you can probably do is harm no one, and selectively assist those genuinely in need of help. The world is full of people being treated unfairly in life and to come to the aid of someone with no or little support base in life is as good a way to justify your own good fortune as any. People build People was a sign I hung in my office at the University. To this day it is one of the few generalizations which seems to contain some universal truth.
But when all is said and done (being done is not my specialty) everyone is truly different. Reunions do mean a lot to many people, they love the things, and all of my above babble, even if it were polished and logical, is simply inapplicable to others, probably most others. If I believe in anything, I believe in live and let live to the extent there are no victims. People can re-unionate to whatever extent they enjoy it, and old curmudgeons like myself should just get out of their way.
Getting out of the way is the best dance step to learn for those my age. Failing at this brings on a pattern of mumbling, whining, fretful squawking, and useless personal attacks fired in the manner of shotgun buckshot at demons everywhere. Not I, musings hidden out of sight, off the beaten path, suffice to dissipate the fussiness of a terminal age.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Terrell Articles (4)
Since I am a big Terrell Owens fans because of his unique background and personality I appreciate supportive articles about him and dump them in here for safe keeping. Posting anything good about Terrell can be risky. It can destroy one's credibility with those who have a well developed visceral dislike for him. That's an interesting study too.
#4.
With Sherman, Dallas Cowboys receivers are in good hands
01:54 AM CST on Wednesday, November 28, 2007
By CALVIN WATKINS / The Dallas Morning News
cwatkins@dallasnews.com
IRVING – The sun was setting on Dolphin Stadium on Sept. 16 when Terrell Owens scored the Cowboys' third touchdown of the day against Miami.
Fans threw popcorn onto the field as Owens stood next to the goal post and started pretending as if he was filming. He was mimicking the New England Patriots, who had been caught by the NFL for improperly video taping opponents' sideline signals.
Cowboys/NFL
Free Cowboys e-mail newsletter: Archive | Sign up
With Sherman, Cowboys receivers are in good hands
Jones: Game with Packers is big
Sean Taylor's sudden death hits Cowboys hard, too
Video: Game preparation | Cowboys-Packers preview
Meeting with history
Tell Us: Result of Cowboys-Packers?
All-time vs. Packers
A&M officials talk with Cowboys about stadium use
Cowboys Blog | Forum
More Cowboys
After Owens' celebration, the Cowboys were penalized 15 yards for unsportsmanlike conduct. When a smiling Owens arrived to the sideline, offensive coordinator Jason Garrett hugged him.
There were no hugs coming from wide receivers coach Ray Sherman. Just a stern lecture.
"I think the thing is, there's a time to do certain things and a time not to," Sherman said. "So, I just told him, you have to be careful what you do because those penalties can haunt us as a team. You have to be smart about what you do, and in his own mind, he didn't realize that was a penalty."
Last year, such a lecture spelled potential chaos, especially if former receivers coach Todd Haley was involved. The two didn't get along.
Now, thanks to Sherman's influence, Owens and the rest of the Cowboys' receivers are having a peaceful and productive season.
"It's night and day from what I had," Owens said. "My thing is, I cherish people like that. That was the relationship I tried to have here with Todd last year. I really tried to make a concerted effort for that to happen, and it didn't happen. So I'm very fortunate for Ray."
And it's showing on the field.
Owens has recorded five 100-yard receiving games this season and is on a pace for a career-high 1,590 yards.
Wide receiver Patrick Crayton is also on pace for career highs in catches, yards and touchdowns. Tight end Jason Witten is on pace for a career-high 1,090 receiving yards, which would make him the first tight end in team history to finish a regular season with more than 1,000 yards. They all praise Sherman, whom they call mentor, father figure and uncle. A man they respect.
And it's not just the receivers.
Running back Marion Barber, center Andre Gurode and safety Roy Williams have taken to Sherman.
"It's almost like a big uncle," Owens said. "They often refer to him as that guy on Nutty Professor, the Klumps or something like that. We all joke around and have fun with Ray. The thing is, as receivers, we're not the only ones who have fun with the guy. That tells you a lot about his personality."
Sherman, who has coached with nine NFL teams, is beloved across the league because he doesn't berate players, refrains from using profanity and talks in a calm manner when the games start. During practices, Sherman is louder, and that's because he wants the players to concentrate on working at their craft.
"I had a blast with Ray," said Packers quarterback Brett Favre, who worked with Sherman from 2000-04, when Sherman was Green Bay's receivers coach. "I've got a tremendous amount of respect for Ray. I thought he did a fine job for us. I had a lot of fun with him. Great guy, very bright, very knowledgeable. He's bounced around a lot of teams, but everywhere he goes, he has success and guys just kind of cling to him."
Following the Cowboys' victory over Washington on Nov. 18, Owens was so touched by Sherman's encouraging words during the game he sent a text message thanking him. Owens finished with eight catches for 173 yards and four touchdowns.
"It was an emotional game for him," Sherman said. "He wanted to have the ball in his hands, and I told him to relax and stay patient and stay focused."
Sherman's presence is also felt away from the field.
The wide receivers have a special meeting called Keepin' It Real Thursdays.
It's a day when the receivers meet with Sherman and talk about anything.
Miles Austin said whatever is said in the room stays in the room.
"Have you heard anything about our meetings?" Owens asked.
Nope.
"Well, then," he said.
Owens and Austin said the receivers respect Sherman's ability to keep what's said in the meetings in-house.
A month ago, the coach gathered the wide receivers to his house for fellowship.
MICHAEL AINSWORTH / DMN
Thanks to Ray Sherman (left), Terrell Owens (front right) and the rest of the Cowboys' receivers are having peaceful and productive seasons.
There were chips and dip and other appetizers with a pot roast as the main dish.
For dessert: a chocolate cake – made by Sherman's wife, Yvette.
In some ways, the Cowboys' receivers are like Sherman's sons.
Sherman lost his son, Ray II, in 2003 to an accidental gunshot wound. Sherman said he doesn't look at his current group as a replacement of his son, but he wants to be more than a coach to his unit.
If anything, he wants his players to know he respects them.
And they do, too.
"Man, he's a boost," Crayton said. "He treats us like men and he talks to us like me and you are having a conversation. He will get on you about making your routes, and he won't belittle you, and that's what you want."
#3. T.O. deserves place among the best ever
Antics aside, wide receiver has delivered and won with every team
By Jonathan Comey
Coldhardfootballfacts.com
updated 12:18 a.m. MT, Mon., Nov. 19, 2007
It’s time to give Terrell Owens his due respect.
Too long, T.O. has been short for Totally Overexposed, or Tantrum Overload, or Terrible Oaf.
But if anything, Owens' achievements have been a Tad Overlooked.
His four-TD performance against Washington today (Owens 28, Redskins 23) was the latest in a long line of successes for Owens, great achievements that have largely been overshadowed by media blowups and childish infighting.
The Cold, Hard Football Facts are clear, however: Terrell Owens, far from being a “cancer,” has been a prodigious winner everywhere he’s been and one of the greatest producers in NFL history.
Let’s cut right to the chase, shall we?
Over his career, T.O. has now started 154 regular season games – and this noted divider of teams, this distraction on the field and off, has won 100 of those games.
Repeat: 100 wins, 54 losses, a 64.9 winning percentage.
Curious how that compares with other great players?
Well, Brett Favre, Mr. Winner himself, who has the all-time record for wins as a starting QB, has a career winning percentage of 63.2 – behind T.O.’s 64.9.
And here’s the clincher: in the 32 games T.O. didn’t start over his career, his teams are a combined 11-21 without him. That’s a 34.3 percent winning percentage, not so good.
Yet Owens has continued to have this ridiculous rep as a “team killer.” Does a team-killer help a club win 65 percent of the games that he starts?
No.
The only thing that’s killed his teams has been his absence – usually by injury, although he was basically blackballed by the Eagles in 2005. Was it for good reason? Perhaps. He's always been a handful, and the Eagles decided that they’d rather lose without him than win with him – a puzzling choice, and one that came to direct fruition. The 2005 Eagles were 4-3 with him, 2-7 after he was forced exile.
But Owens has been to the playoffs with all three of his teams (San Francisco, Philly, Dallas), and has been to the postseason in seven of his 11 seasons as a pro (with trip eight coming in a few weeks).
Including playoffs, he’s scored 118 touchdowns over what amounts to the last 10 seasons, and went over the 1,000-yard mark Sunday for the eighth time in his career (he was well on his way to 1,000 in 2005 before getting benched).
For his entire career, he's scored 128 TDs in 168 regular-season games. His 126 TD receptions in those 168 games averages a clean 0.75 TDs per game.
That's the third best TD-catching pace in the entire history of NFL football. The only two players ahead of him are Hall of Famer Don Hutson (99 TD catches in 116 games; 0.85 per game), who played for the Packers in the 1930s and 1940s and remains the most dominant receiver in history; and Owens contemporary Randy Moss (113 TD catches in 147 games; 0.77 per game).
Does T.O. have some emotional issues? Yes. Is he an ass at times? Sure.
But he’s also one of the greatest players and winners in NFL history, and no amount of media overexposure should deflect from that basic truth.
When it’s all said and done, history isn’t going to remember sit-ups in the driveway, shouting matches on the sidelines – it’s going to remember incredible catches in big games, and numbers that will be among the best ever.
Terrell Owens.
Terrific. OK?
#2. T.O. grabbing headlines for all right reasons
Formerly controversial WR seems comfortable, relaxed with Cowboys
Al Bello / Getty Images file
Terrell Owens, right, celebrates with Sam Hurd after scoring a touchdown in the second quarter against the Giants last Sunday.
IRVING, Texas - His coach calls him “our resident superstar,” meaning it as a compliment.
His quarterback is riding a dazzling wave of success, much of it for throwing him the ball.
And his team, the Dallas Cowboys, is 8-1, the chic pick to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl.
Could life be any better for Terrell Owens? Why, yes, it can — and it is.
T.O. is not only among the league leaders in catches, yards and touchdowns, he will be in top 10 on the career lists in all three categories in the next few weeks, likely before he turns 34 in early December.
But that’s still not all.
Owens also can proudly note that this deep into a story about what kind of season he’s having there is not a single mention of trouble. Because there hasn’t been any. It’s nothing but smiles from Owens and praise from his bosses and teammates.
“I’m focused this year,” he said. “I know we have something special here with this team. We’re not 8-1 for a fluke. I’m just trying to do my part.”
Skepticism is understandable considering T.O.’s past. Besides, it’s hard not to be happy on a team doing as well as the Cowboys.
Yet his explanation of why he’s changed makes perfect sense, especially when you remember that nearly all the negative headlines in his career come from personality clashes.
“I’m just fortunate to play with a group of guys that believe in me and with a group of coaches that believe in me,” he said.
That certainly wasn’t the case last year, when Cowboys owner Jerry Jones signed Owens and coach Bill Parcells made it pretty clear he didn’t want the guy around, constantly referring to Owens as “the player.” Owens made a bad situation worse with how he handled some things, then health became a factor, including an accidental overdose.
Once Parcells left, Jones never hesitated bringing back Owens. After all, if a disgruntled Owens led the NFL in touchdown catches last year, Jones wondered what a happy Owens could do.
Then Jones made several Owens-friendly hires. He turned the team over to Wade Phillips, guaranteeing a relaxed atmosphere. He turned the offense over to Jason Garrett, who played in Dallas with Michael Irvin, so he knows all about talented, flamboyant receivers. And Jones turned the receivers over to Ray Sherman, who is respected and even beloved by players.
The moves weren’t strictly to appease T.O., but they definitely were made with him in mind. The numbers show it was a good strategy.
Owens leads the NFC with 855 yards receiving and his eight touchdown catches are tied for the conference lead. His 50 receptions are seventh in the conference and have him on pace for his most since a career-high 100 in 2002.
Using T.O. as a target or a decoy, Tony Romo has become the top-rated quarterback in the NFC and the yardage leader. He also just signed a $67.5 million contract. Romo has risen from obscurity to stardom by throwing 18 of his 42 career TDs to Owens; no one else has more than eight.
“I trust him, and the fact that he’s going to try and get open every play,” Romo said. “He just wants to win and be a great player.”
It hasn’t all gone smoothly, though.
After opening the season with three strong games, defenses seemed to figure out how to slow Owens. His numbers went way down the next three games. But in the three games since, Owens has produced 103, 174 and 125 yards and four touchdowns, including a 45-yarder and a 50-yarder. His work in a 31-20 win over the Giants last Sunday was decisive.
How did Owens handle the lull? With zipped lips.
“That is me maturing, me growing up,” Owens said. “In the past, I have said things out of frustration. I didn’t feel like my voice was being heard. With these coaches, I don’t really have to do that. They understand the player that I am and what I can do.”
Phillips came into his relationship with Owens with only one preconceived notion. It was a good one, too, regarding the way Owens recovered from a severe leg injury in time to play in the Super Bowl for the Eagles.
“Every doctor said he wasn’t going to make it back, but he came back and played, and played really well,” Phillips said. “That tells me a lot about the individual, as far as being a team player.”
Now that he knows him, Phillips is impressed that Owens works as hard in practice as he does in games.
Before dismissing that as lip service to appease a star player, consider the coach’s actions that support his words.
When Dallas played Philadelphia a few weeks ago, Phillips took the unusual step of making Owens a captain for the week. It wasn’t just a ceremonial thing for the coin toss, either, as he had Owens speak to the entire team after every practice leading up to the game. Owens responded with 10 catches, 175 yards and two touchdowns in a blowout win.
Still not convinced? Then consider this insight from Pro Bowl tight end Jason Witten, who has seen Owens’ demeanor in the locker room change from last year to this.
“He’s just more open,” Witten said. “It wasn’t bad last year, he was just guarded. He’s got his guard down now. He’s just one of our teammates.”
The irony about Owens’ bad-boy image is that he’s never been in trouble with the law and he’s always kept himself in great shape. (According to promotional material, you can too through his new fitness product, Bodylastics Terrell Owens Super Strong Man Edition.)
A byproduct of his longevity is his career statistics, which place him among the best receivers in NFL history.
With his next catch, Owens will be alone in 10th place on the career list. He’s about two games from cracking the top 10 in yards and already is No. 4 in touchdown catches. With Marvin Harrison hurt, Owens’ next trip to the end zone will tie them for third place.
Speaking of touchdowns, there is one subject that still gets T.O.’s blood boiling: the NFL’s crackdown on celebrations.
His latest run-in with the league was over a personalized towel he held out for the cameras. His faux pas was that it isn’t licensed by the NFL; it’s only available on his Web site. At $6.99 each; he’ll have to sell more than 1,400 to cover his $10,000 fine.
But what really rankles Owens is that the league-owned NFL Network has used video of his towel-waving to hype the Cowboys-Packers game it will be broadcasting.
“That’s crazy,” Owens said. “It’s like a double-standard. They fine me for it, but then they’re promoing my towel for viewers to watch their games. It’s ridiculous.”
See how much things have turned around? When Owens says something salty these days, he’s right.
#1. Owens separates Dallas Cowboys from the Pack
09:44 PM CST on Monday, November 12, 2007
By Tim Cowlishaw, Newspaper Columnist
When word first leaked out in March 2006 that Terrell Owens was, indeed, about to become a Dallas Cowboy, I thought (and wrote) two things.
One was that it would be the end of Bill Parcells and Jerry Jones. In a lot of ways, it was.
Two was that Owens wouldn't be a difference maker for Dallas because there wasn't enough talent here, particularly at quarterback, to keep him happy.
And last year that was still true, especially when the team limped along with Drew Bledsoe to a 3-3 record. Then we saw the potential of Tony Romo, but it didn't really change things for Owens.
His numbers were gaudy enough, but he didn't have a major impact in victories other than the win at Atlanta. The votes of players, coaches and fans didn't even send a 14-touchdown receiver to the Pro Bowl.
His dropped balls and off-the-field misadventures, which ranged from falling asleep in meetings to passing out on pills, caused owner Jerry Jones to pause before bringing him back for Year Two.
Jones clearly made the right call. And if you believe the Cowboys are now the best team in the NFC, you have to admit that the No. 1 reason is Terrell Owens.
It's true.
It's not Tony Romo, because what separates Romo from Brett Favre? He leads the NFC's other 8-1 team that is trying to lock down home-field advantage for the playoffs.
Romo, who has three more NFL starts than his Green Bay idol has years as an NFL starter, owns a slightly better passer rating. Favre has thrown for a few more yards. But you can't say you like the Cowboys better than the Packers because of the quarterback position, even if Romo has youth on his side.
Romo's motivation to get to his first Super Bowl cannot be any stronger than Favre's desire to get to his last one.
And you're not going to pick Dallas' advantage in the running game as the reason you like the Cowboys better, either. The Cowboys' backs have better numbers for the year. But Marion Barber's last two games have not been his best.
Meanwhile, Green Bay appears to have found something in Ryan Grant. In three starts against Denver, Kansas City and Minnesota, Grant has 66 carries for 278 yards. His 119 Sunday against Minnesota, one of the league's best run-stuffing teams, signaled the arrival of a new back on the block.
As for defense, there's no need even to break it down. Green Bay has allowed 53 fewer points this year than the Cowboys. Even if things have settled down in the secondary with the return of Anthony Henry, you can't give the Cowboys a defensive edge on the Packers.
Owens is where you find the Cowboys' big advantage on the Packers. Favre spreads the ball around to a number of receivers. Even though Favre has passed for the most yards in the NFL, his go-to guy, Donald Driver, isn't in the top 20 in receiving yards.
Owens is posting staggering numbers now – 50 catches for 855 yards and eight touchdowns. He has more 20-yard plays than New England's Randy Moss. You see less of Owens fighting the ball with his hands this year.
My guess is that Cowboys fans who reluctantly cheered for him last year embrace him now. They see where he has a chance to lead the team.
Sure, there are some out there who aren't going to give it up for Owens under any circumstances. Doesn't matter.
What does is that he has a special rapport with Romo that sets him apart from the rest of the NFC. The only other receiver in the conference with more than 700 yards is Arizona's outstanding young Larry Fitzgerald. He has 811 yards. He also has three fumbles.
Owens has none.
Coach Wade Phillips called him a Hall of Famer. I think that's what you call someone with a career line of 851 catches, 12,570 yards and 122 touchdowns.
Dallas Cowboys receiver Terrell Owens (right) was hard to stop Sunday, catching six passes for 125 yards and two touchdowns.
They call Michael Irvin a Hall of Famer, and he can't touch those totals, especially the touchdowns (65).
Owens has never had a 1,500-yard season. He is on pace for one this year.
Love him, like him or can't stand him – it all gets you to the same place.
The reason the Cowboys look like something more than a mirror image of the NFC's other 8-1 team is Terrell Owens.
I laughed when agent Drew Rosenhaus sat there in Valley Ranch and called it a "match made in heaven."
I figured anything hatched between Rosenhaus, Owens and Jones had to derive from some venue other than heaven.
And I am in the midst of being proven wrong.
#4.
With Sherman, Dallas Cowboys receivers are in good hands
01:54 AM CST on Wednesday, November 28, 2007
By CALVIN WATKINS / The Dallas Morning News
cwatkins@dallasnews.com
IRVING – The sun was setting on Dolphin Stadium on Sept. 16 when Terrell Owens scored the Cowboys' third touchdown of the day against Miami.
Fans threw popcorn onto the field as Owens stood next to the goal post and started pretending as if he was filming. He was mimicking the New England Patriots, who had been caught by the NFL for improperly video taping opponents' sideline signals.
Cowboys/NFL
Free Cowboys e-mail newsletter: Archive | Sign up
With Sherman, Cowboys receivers are in good hands
Jones: Game with Packers is big
Sean Taylor's sudden death hits Cowboys hard, too
Video: Game preparation | Cowboys-Packers preview
Meeting with history
Tell Us: Result of Cowboys-Packers?
All-time vs. Packers
A&M officials talk with Cowboys about stadium use
Cowboys Blog | Forum
More Cowboys
After Owens' celebration, the Cowboys were penalized 15 yards for unsportsmanlike conduct. When a smiling Owens arrived to the sideline, offensive coordinator Jason Garrett hugged him.
There were no hugs coming from wide receivers coach Ray Sherman. Just a stern lecture.
"I think the thing is, there's a time to do certain things and a time not to," Sherman said. "So, I just told him, you have to be careful what you do because those penalties can haunt us as a team. You have to be smart about what you do, and in his own mind, he didn't realize that was a penalty."
Last year, such a lecture spelled potential chaos, especially if former receivers coach Todd Haley was involved. The two didn't get along.
Now, thanks to Sherman's influence, Owens and the rest of the Cowboys' receivers are having a peaceful and productive season.
"It's night and day from what I had," Owens said. "My thing is, I cherish people like that. That was the relationship I tried to have here with Todd last year. I really tried to make a concerted effort for that to happen, and it didn't happen. So I'm very fortunate for Ray."
And it's showing on the field.
Owens has recorded five 100-yard receiving games this season and is on a pace for a career-high 1,590 yards.
Wide receiver Patrick Crayton is also on pace for career highs in catches, yards and touchdowns. Tight end Jason Witten is on pace for a career-high 1,090 receiving yards, which would make him the first tight end in team history to finish a regular season with more than 1,000 yards. They all praise Sherman, whom they call mentor, father figure and uncle. A man they respect.
And it's not just the receivers.
Running back Marion Barber, center Andre Gurode and safety Roy Williams have taken to Sherman.
"It's almost like a big uncle," Owens said. "They often refer to him as that guy on Nutty Professor, the Klumps or something like that. We all joke around and have fun with Ray. The thing is, as receivers, we're not the only ones who have fun with the guy. That tells you a lot about his personality."
Sherman, who has coached with nine NFL teams, is beloved across the league because he doesn't berate players, refrains from using profanity and talks in a calm manner when the games start. During practices, Sherman is louder, and that's because he wants the players to concentrate on working at their craft.
"I had a blast with Ray," said Packers quarterback Brett Favre, who worked with Sherman from 2000-04, when Sherman was Green Bay's receivers coach. "I've got a tremendous amount of respect for Ray. I thought he did a fine job for us. I had a lot of fun with him. Great guy, very bright, very knowledgeable. He's bounced around a lot of teams, but everywhere he goes, he has success and guys just kind of cling to him."
Following the Cowboys' victory over Washington on Nov. 18, Owens was so touched by Sherman's encouraging words during the game he sent a text message thanking him. Owens finished with eight catches for 173 yards and four touchdowns.
"It was an emotional game for him," Sherman said. "He wanted to have the ball in his hands, and I told him to relax and stay patient and stay focused."
Sherman's presence is also felt away from the field.
The wide receivers have a special meeting called Keepin' It Real Thursdays.
It's a day when the receivers meet with Sherman and talk about anything.
Miles Austin said whatever is said in the room stays in the room.
"Have you heard anything about our meetings?" Owens asked.
Nope.
"Well, then," he said.
Owens and Austin said the receivers respect Sherman's ability to keep what's said in the meetings in-house.
A month ago, the coach gathered the wide receivers to his house for fellowship.
MICHAEL AINSWORTH / DMN
Thanks to Ray Sherman (left), Terrell Owens (front right) and the rest of the Cowboys' receivers are having peaceful and productive seasons.
There were chips and dip and other appetizers with a pot roast as the main dish.
For dessert: a chocolate cake – made by Sherman's wife, Yvette.
In some ways, the Cowboys' receivers are like Sherman's sons.
Sherman lost his son, Ray II, in 2003 to an accidental gunshot wound. Sherman said he doesn't look at his current group as a replacement of his son, but he wants to be more than a coach to his unit.
If anything, he wants his players to know he respects them.
And they do, too.
"Man, he's a boost," Crayton said. "He treats us like men and he talks to us like me and you are having a conversation. He will get on you about making your routes, and he won't belittle you, and that's what you want."
#3. T.O. deserves place among the best ever
Antics aside, wide receiver has delivered and won with every team
By Jonathan Comey
Coldhardfootballfacts.com
updated 12:18 a.m. MT, Mon., Nov. 19, 2007
It’s time to give Terrell Owens his due respect.
Too long, T.O. has been short for Totally Overexposed, or Tantrum Overload, or Terrible Oaf.
But if anything, Owens' achievements have been a Tad Overlooked.
His four-TD performance against Washington today (Owens 28, Redskins 23) was the latest in a long line of successes for Owens, great achievements that have largely been overshadowed by media blowups and childish infighting.
The Cold, Hard Football Facts are clear, however: Terrell Owens, far from being a “cancer,” has been a prodigious winner everywhere he’s been and one of the greatest producers in NFL history.
Let’s cut right to the chase, shall we?
Over his career, T.O. has now started 154 regular season games – and this noted divider of teams, this distraction on the field and off, has won 100 of those games.
Repeat: 100 wins, 54 losses, a 64.9 winning percentage.
Curious how that compares with other great players?
Well, Brett Favre, Mr. Winner himself, who has the all-time record for wins as a starting QB, has a career winning percentage of 63.2 – behind T.O.’s 64.9.
And here’s the clincher: in the 32 games T.O. didn’t start over his career, his teams are a combined 11-21 without him. That’s a 34.3 percent winning percentage, not so good.
Yet Owens has continued to have this ridiculous rep as a “team killer.” Does a team-killer help a club win 65 percent of the games that he starts?
No.
The only thing that’s killed his teams has been his absence – usually by injury, although he was basically blackballed by the Eagles in 2005. Was it for good reason? Perhaps. He's always been a handful, and the Eagles decided that they’d rather lose without him than win with him – a puzzling choice, and one that came to direct fruition. The 2005 Eagles were 4-3 with him, 2-7 after he was forced exile.
But Owens has been to the playoffs with all three of his teams (San Francisco, Philly, Dallas), and has been to the postseason in seven of his 11 seasons as a pro (with trip eight coming in a few weeks).
Including playoffs, he’s scored 118 touchdowns over what amounts to the last 10 seasons, and went over the 1,000-yard mark Sunday for the eighth time in his career (he was well on his way to 1,000 in 2005 before getting benched).
For his entire career, he's scored 128 TDs in 168 regular-season games. His 126 TD receptions in those 168 games averages a clean 0.75 TDs per game.
That's the third best TD-catching pace in the entire history of NFL football. The only two players ahead of him are Hall of Famer Don Hutson (99 TD catches in 116 games; 0.85 per game), who played for the Packers in the 1930s and 1940s and remains the most dominant receiver in history; and Owens contemporary Randy Moss (113 TD catches in 147 games; 0.77 per game).
Does T.O. have some emotional issues? Yes. Is he an ass at times? Sure.
But he’s also one of the greatest players and winners in NFL history, and no amount of media overexposure should deflect from that basic truth.
When it’s all said and done, history isn’t going to remember sit-ups in the driveway, shouting matches on the sidelines – it’s going to remember incredible catches in big games, and numbers that will be among the best ever.
Terrell Owens.
Terrific. OK?
#2. T.O. grabbing headlines for all right reasons
Formerly controversial WR seems comfortable, relaxed with Cowboys
Al Bello / Getty Images file
Terrell Owens, right, celebrates with Sam Hurd after scoring a touchdown in the second quarter against the Giants last Sunday.
IRVING, Texas - His coach calls him “our resident superstar,” meaning it as a compliment.
His quarterback is riding a dazzling wave of success, much of it for throwing him the ball.
And his team, the Dallas Cowboys, is 8-1, the chic pick to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl.
Could life be any better for Terrell Owens? Why, yes, it can — and it is.
T.O. is not only among the league leaders in catches, yards and touchdowns, he will be in top 10 on the career lists in all three categories in the next few weeks, likely before he turns 34 in early December.
But that’s still not all.
Owens also can proudly note that this deep into a story about what kind of season he’s having there is not a single mention of trouble. Because there hasn’t been any. It’s nothing but smiles from Owens and praise from his bosses and teammates.
“I’m focused this year,” he said. “I know we have something special here with this team. We’re not 8-1 for a fluke. I’m just trying to do my part.”
Skepticism is understandable considering T.O.’s past. Besides, it’s hard not to be happy on a team doing as well as the Cowboys.
Yet his explanation of why he’s changed makes perfect sense, especially when you remember that nearly all the negative headlines in his career come from personality clashes.
“I’m just fortunate to play with a group of guys that believe in me and with a group of coaches that believe in me,” he said.
That certainly wasn’t the case last year, when Cowboys owner Jerry Jones signed Owens and coach Bill Parcells made it pretty clear he didn’t want the guy around, constantly referring to Owens as “the player.” Owens made a bad situation worse with how he handled some things, then health became a factor, including an accidental overdose.
Once Parcells left, Jones never hesitated bringing back Owens. After all, if a disgruntled Owens led the NFL in touchdown catches last year, Jones wondered what a happy Owens could do.
Then Jones made several Owens-friendly hires. He turned the team over to Wade Phillips, guaranteeing a relaxed atmosphere. He turned the offense over to Jason Garrett, who played in Dallas with Michael Irvin, so he knows all about talented, flamboyant receivers. And Jones turned the receivers over to Ray Sherman, who is respected and even beloved by players.
The moves weren’t strictly to appease T.O., but they definitely were made with him in mind. The numbers show it was a good strategy.
Owens leads the NFC with 855 yards receiving and his eight touchdown catches are tied for the conference lead. His 50 receptions are seventh in the conference and have him on pace for his most since a career-high 100 in 2002.
Using T.O. as a target or a decoy, Tony Romo has become the top-rated quarterback in the NFC and the yardage leader. He also just signed a $67.5 million contract. Romo has risen from obscurity to stardom by throwing 18 of his 42 career TDs to Owens; no one else has more than eight.
“I trust him, and the fact that he’s going to try and get open every play,” Romo said. “He just wants to win and be a great player.”
It hasn’t all gone smoothly, though.
After opening the season with three strong games, defenses seemed to figure out how to slow Owens. His numbers went way down the next three games. But in the three games since, Owens has produced 103, 174 and 125 yards and four touchdowns, including a 45-yarder and a 50-yarder. His work in a 31-20 win over the Giants last Sunday was decisive.
How did Owens handle the lull? With zipped lips.
“That is me maturing, me growing up,” Owens said. “In the past, I have said things out of frustration. I didn’t feel like my voice was being heard. With these coaches, I don’t really have to do that. They understand the player that I am and what I can do.”
Phillips came into his relationship with Owens with only one preconceived notion. It was a good one, too, regarding the way Owens recovered from a severe leg injury in time to play in the Super Bowl for the Eagles.
“Every doctor said he wasn’t going to make it back, but he came back and played, and played really well,” Phillips said. “That tells me a lot about the individual, as far as being a team player.”
Now that he knows him, Phillips is impressed that Owens works as hard in practice as he does in games.
Before dismissing that as lip service to appease a star player, consider the coach’s actions that support his words.
When Dallas played Philadelphia a few weeks ago, Phillips took the unusual step of making Owens a captain for the week. It wasn’t just a ceremonial thing for the coin toss, either, as he had Owens speak to the entire team after every practice leading up to the game. Owens responded with 10 catches, 175 yards and two touchdowns in a blowout win.
Still not convinced? Then consider this insight from Pro Bowl tight end Jason Witten, who has seen Owens’ demeanor in the locker room change from last year to this.
“He’s just more open,” Witten said. “It wasn’t bad last year, he was just guarded. He’s got his guard down now. He’s just one of our teammates.”
The irony about Owens’ bad-boy image is that he’s never been in trouble with the law and he’s always kept himself in great shape. (According to promotional material, you can too through his new fitness product, Bodylastics Terrell Owens Super Strong Man Edition.)
A byproduct of his longevity is his career statistics, which place him among the best receivers in NFL history.
With his next catch, Owens will be alone in 10th place on the career list. He’s about two games from cracking the top 10 in yards and already is No. 4 in touchdown catches. With Marvin Harrison hurt, Owens’ next trip to the end zone will tie them for third place.
Speaking of touchdowns, there is one subject that still gets T.O.’s blood boiling: the NFL’s crackdown on celebrations.
His latest run-in with the league was over a personalized towel he held out for the cameras. His faux pas was that it isn’t licensed by the NFL; it’s only available on his Web site. At $6.99 each; he’ll have to sell more than 1,400 to cover his $10,000 fine.
But what really rankles Owens is that the league-owned NFL Network has used video of his towel-waving to hype the Cowboys-Packers game it will be broadcasting.
“That’s crazy,” Owens said. “It’s like a double-standard. They fine me for it, but then they’re promoing my towel for viewers to watch their games. It’s ridiculous.”
See how much things have turned around? When Owens says something salty these days, he’s right.
#1. Owens separates Dallas Cowboys from the Pack
09:44 PM CST on Monday, November 12, 2007
By Tim Cowlishaw, Newspaper Columnist
When word first leaked out in March 2006 that Terrell Owens was, indeed, about to become a Dallas Cowboy, I thought (and wrote) two things.
One was that it would be the end of Bill Parcells and Jerry Jones. In a lot of ways, it was.
Two was that Owens wouldn't be a difference maker for Dallas because there wasn't enough talent here, particularly at quarterback, to keep him happy.
And last year that was still true, especially when the team limped along with Drew Bledsoe to a 3-3 record. Then we saw the potential of Tony Romo, but it didn't really change things for Owens.
His numbers were gaudy enough, but he didn't have a major impact in victories other than the win at Atlanta. The votes of players, coaches and fans didn't even send a 14-touchdown receiver to the Pro Bowl.
His dropped balls and off-the-field misadventures, which ranged from falling asleep in meetings to passing out on pills, caused owner Jerry Jones to pause before bringing him back for Year Two.
Jones clearly made the right call. And if you believe the Cowboys are now the best team in the NFC, you have to admit that the No. 1 reason is Terrell Owens.
It's true.
It's not Tony Romo, because what separates Romo from Brett Favre? He leads the NFC's other 8-1 team that is trying to lock down home-field advantage for the playoffs.
Romo, who has three more NFL starts than his Green Bay idol has years as an NFL starter, owns a slightly better passer rating. Favre has thrown for a few more yards. But you can't say you like the Cowboys better than the Packers because of the quarterback position, even if Romo has youth on his side.
Romo's motivation to get to his first Super Bowl cannot be any stronger than Favre's desire to get to his last one.
And you're not going to pick Dallas' advantage in the running game as the reason you like the Cowboys better, either. The Cowboys' backs have better numbers for the year. But Marion Barber's last two games have not been his best.
Meanwhile, Green Bay appears to have found something in Ryan Grant. In three starts against Denver, Kansas City and Minnesota, Grant has 66 carries for 278 yards. His 119 Sunday against Minnesota, one of the league's best run-stuffing teams, signaled the arrival of a new back on the block.
As for defense, there's no need even to break it down. Green Bay has allowed 53 fewer points this year than the Cowboys. Even if things have settled down in the secondary with the return of Anthony Henry, you can't give the Cowboys a defensive edge on the Packers.
Owens is where you find the Cowboys' big advantage on the Packers. Favre spreads the ball around to a number of receivers. Even though Favre has passed for the most yards in the NFL, his go-to guy, Donald Driver, isn't in the top 20 in receiving yards.
Owens is posting staggering numbers now – 50 catches for 855 yards and eight touchdowns. He has more 20-yard plays than New England's Randy Moss. You see less of Owens fighting the ball with his hands this year.
My guess is that Cowboys fans who reluctantly cheered for him last year embrace him now. They see where he has a chance to lead the team.
Sure, there are some out there who aren't going to give it up for Owens under any circumstances. Doesn't matter.
What does is that he has a special rapport with Romo that sets him apart from the rest of the NFC. The only other receiver in the conference with more than 700 yards is Arizona's outstanding young Larry Fitzgerald. He has 811 yards. He also has three fumbles.
Owens has none.
Coach Wade Phillips called him a Hall of Famer. I think that's what you call someone with a career line of 851 catches, 12,570 yards and 122 touchdowns.
Dallas Cowboys receiver Terrell Owens (right) was hard to stop Sunday, catching six passes for 125 yards and two touchdowns.
They call Michael Irvin a Hall of Famer, and he can't touch those totals, especially the touchdowns (65).
Owens has never had a 1,500-yard season. He is on pace for one this year.
Love him, like him or can't stand him – it all gets you to the same place.
The reason the Cowboys look like something more than a mirror image of the NFC's other 8-1 team is Terrell Owens.
I laughed when agent Drew Rosenhaus sat there in Valley Ranch and called it a "match made in heaven."
I figured anything hatched between Rosenhaus, Owens and Jones had to derive from some venue other than heaven.
And I am in the midst of being proven wrong.
Monday, November 12, 2007
THUGS WIN
Thugs Win:
Tank Johnson and Randy Moss, along with a small army of experienced or would be street thugs, are doing just fine in the NFL. So is Bill Bellicheat, a smart but ethically clueless coach. The three mentioned are all making an impact on Superbowl contending teams. That is conceptually ok, I guess, since Tank has done his jail time, Randy mostly just mouths out his thugness, and Bellicheat's exposed actions are a threat to the power's that be in the NFL. No forfeiture of any game for Bellicheat, or anything for punishment expect monetary fine, the one measure of punishment emminently affordable and tolerable to him. The goal is always to protect the image of football. No need to be fair, open, or ethical about matters that relate to corporate management---management of a very secret sort. Meanwhile, Ricky Williams is still in exile, with no end in sight.
Conclusion: ganstas over ganja. This is the NFL in '07. Sign of the times.
Tank Johnson and Randy Moss, along with a small army of experienced or would be street thugs, are doing just fine in the NFL. So is Bill Bellicheat, a smart but ethically clueless coach. The three mentioned are all making an impact on Superbowl contending teams. That is conceptually ok, I guess, since Tank has done his jail time, Randy mostly just mouths out his thugness, and Bellicheat's exposed actions are a threat to the power's that be in the NFL. No forfeiture of any game for Bellicheat, or anything for punishment expect monetary fine, the one measure of punishment emminently affordable and tolerable to him. The goal is always to protect the image of football. No need to be fair, open, or ethical about matters that relate to corporate management---management of a very secret sort. Meanwhile, Ricky Williams is still in exile, with no end in sight.
Conclusion: ganstas over ganja. This is the NFL in '07. Sign of the times.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Reigning Oneself In
Reigning Oneself In:
I guess we all have particular interests and particular favorites in sports, politics, entertainment, etc. For varied reasons we all find heroes or people to root for here and there throughout our life. Some, like myself, get so wrapped up in the process that we get overbearing---sometimes to the point of obnoxiousness. How obnoxious depends to a large degree on how popular or universally liked our admired one is. If someone likes Payton Manning things go smoothly, not a lot of spirited opposition to be found. But if someone likes a more controversial public figure, say a Terrell Owens, then a defensive mode sets in. Of course time usually resolves most of the controversial points in question but the act of rooting strongly for or strongly against a sport figure leaves objectivity in the dust. It seems if we are strongly for or strongly against someone, rarely is there any change in our emotions about the person, regardless of any objective enlightenment about the issues with time.
Sometimes the object of our support gets beaten or fades or fails our expectations and sometimes the object of our support becomes a winner or blossoms or exceeds our expectations. The whole process becomes some sort of vicarious experience in our own lives. Like so many things in life, in the end we are saddened, angered, or happily energized. These objects of our affection or disaffection impact on our own sense of values, priorities, ethics, and attitudes. We are what we are not just because of genetics or our own environment, but also because of our own 'heroes'.
We often call our heroes role models. Like so many other terms role model is not some kind of neatly defined term. Different people are in need of different role models. To make everyone on a team dress alike, think alike, talk alike, behave alike, etc. is to meet the needs of some fans or culture, but ignore the needs of others. The emphasis is often on the need of role models for kids. Sure kids need role models, but the effect of heroes on adults should not be discounted. Good role models, it becomes apparent, can be quite out of the main stream. I still remember Steve Kerr, a member of the Michael Jordan team years, stating in an article that when the team had family get-to-gethers, all the kids spent the entire time with Dennis Rodman. Dennis, who rarely spoke to his teammates and behaved bizarrely in his private life, was a gentle funny giant with kids, and---according to Phil Jackson----was the player who related best to all the peripheral 'little' people who worked around the training facilities. All the nobodies and kids were Rodman's friends. It does make you wonder, which would be better for your kid, to spend some time around Dennis Rodman or some corporate CEO. Life abounds with mysteries.
Active interest in sports may or may not be therapeutic or rational. Emotions dominate in sports, for both players and fans. Watching Barry Bonds fans cheer robustly for him is a good illustration of blind allegiance to a team or particular player. The media can often create a good image or a bad image for a player, often for varied reasons. Depending on who you listen to, a guy like Terrell Owens is the Devil himself or a stellar example of a good citizen, interesting personality, and a product of self improvement. Often, for a fan to achieve maximum happiness, it is not enough for his/her favorite athlete or team to succeed, but someone else must fail.
The reasons why a person roots for a particular team or player piques my interest. In many instances I guess it is simply the home town team or a player on the home town team. Of course home town is deceptive. The city does not own the team and most of the team members are not local products. In some sports most of the team may not even be native born Americans. Some sports are dominated by particular ethnic groups. Thus, in reality the home town team is essentially a bunch of non home region players from other areas hired to play in a home town arena which is not owned by the city in question. In that sense the word 'home' is kind of meaningless. Still, at least the name of the team is home town and a fan can have access on TV to see most of the games. Defense of home town players is a lot like a defense of your own kids. Objectivity goes out the window. Try convincing someone their own genetic kid is not much of 'winner'. It is like trying to convince home town fans that Barry Bonds is a 'loser'.
For the above reasons I tend to seek out players or coaches who stand out in some remarkable way and root for them plus the team for whom they play or coach. The home town team is usually included in the mix unless I find the coach or several players unlikable. This kind of selectivity hardly is objective. The traits anyone admires most will differ from person to person. Some just use athletic talent as the basis for whom they choose to be a big fan. In general, a player with a lot of talent is often given a lot of slack on any other personal attributes. For some people, personality or ethnicity or dress or verbal skills, or attitude play a large role on who their 'heroes' are. In general we want our sport 'heroes' to reflect the same values and priorities we ourselves think we possess. But this is hardly simple. Most professional athletes have been coached and advised ad nausea what to say---and when necessary, public scripts are written for them. Consequently, what kind of person one is rooting for might not be so obvious.
At any rate sport fans root for someone for particular reasons and find others rooting against the same person for different reasons. The intensity of rooting for or against particular players varies considerably. The problem arises in the consequences. Overbearing supporters of a particular player can be offensive to others. A simple case of enough is enough. Enough is the key word on both sides. For the supporter it is usually not enough for his/her 'hero' to win, but others need to lose, especially their public detractors. It's the old "I win you lose". In most cases the 'losers' are as likely to admit 'losing or being wrong' about as often as parents admit one of their kids is a 'loser'. In the process of rooting against someone, especially if they are a bit different in some way, there is no way, in the mind of the detractor, that they can ever be a winner, regardless, period.
Now that I am growing slightly ancient it seems best to accept the success of a rooted for figure in sports without hammering over the head those who just don't like the player. For the player in question to succeed ought to be satisfaction enough. There has to be some age at which a person finally has no need to prove a damn thing to others, or any need to flaunt at anyone who wins what in the arena of sports. Those parents who try to cram the 'wonderfulness' of their kids or grandchildren down the throats of others will find themselves endlessly upset about the thinly veiled disrespect, or at best disinterest, of others toward their cherished offspring. It is not much different with sport heroes. The difference in the two cases is that two people will argue over sport heroes, and just stifle themselves about anyone's kid. It takes a lot of years to find stifling a form of peaceful liberation. These kind of bad habits are hard to break. If someone you root for is able to clear the hurdles and run the table en route to success, that in itself ought to be ample reward. Those who rooted against the player will be upset enough. Let them live with their own feelings of disgust/anger/whatever. Attack a wounded dog and you are likely to get bit. It is as old as human history. If you can't win, you can at least get the winner angry..So who is the fool here---clearly the one who attacked the wounded dog.
I guess we all have particular interests and particular favorites in sports, politics, entertainment, etc. For varied reasons we all find heroes or people to root for here and there throughout our life. Some, like myself, get so wrapped up in the process that we get overbearing---sometimes to the point of obnoxiousness. How obnoxious depends to a large degree on how popular or universally liked our admired one is. If someone likes Payton Manning things go smoothly, not a lot of spirited opposition to be found. But if someone likes a more controversial public figure, say a Terrell Owens, then a defensive mode sets in. Of course time usually resolves most of the controversial points in question but the act of rooting strongly for or strongly against a sport figure leaves objectivity in the dust. It seems if we are strongly for or strongly against someone, rarely is there any change in our emotions about the person, regardless of any objective enlightenment about the issues with time.
Sometimes the object of our support gets beaten or fades or fails our expectations and sometimes the object of our support becomes a winner or blossoms or exceeds our expectations. The whole process becomes some sort of vicarious experience in our own lives. Like so many things in life, in the end we are saddened, angered, or happily energized. These objects of our affection or disaffection impact on our own sense of values, priorities, ethics, and attitudes. We are what we are not just because of genetics or our own environment, but also because of our own 'heroes'.
We often call our heroes role models. Like so many other terms role model is not some kind of neatly defined term. Different people are in need of different role models. To make everyone on a team dress alike, think alike, talk alike, behave alike, etc. is to meet the needs of some fans or culture, but ignore the needs of others. The emphasis is often on the need of role models for kids. Sure kids need role models, but the effect of heroes on adults should not be discounted. Good role models, it becomes apparent, can be quite out of the main stream. I still remember Steve Kerr, a member of the Michael Jordan team years, stating in an article that when the team had family get-to-gethers, all the kids spent the entire time with Dennis Rodman. Dennis, who rarely spoke to his teammates and behaved bizarrely in his private life, was a gentle funny giant with kids, and---according to Phil Jackson----was the player who related best to all the peripheral 'little' people who worked around the training facilities. All the nobodies and kids were Rodman's friends. It does make you wonder, which would be better for your kid, to spend some time around Dennis Rodman or some corporate CEO. Life abounds with mysteries.
Active interest in sports may or may not be therapeutic or rational. Emotions dominate in sports, for both players and fans. Watching Barry Bonds fans cheer robustly for him is a good illustration of blind allegiance to a team or particular player. The media can often create a good image or a bad image for a player, often for varied reasons. Depending on who you listen to, a guy like Terrell Owens is the Devil himself or a stellar example of a good citizen, interesting personality, and a product of self improvement. Often, for a fan to achieve maximum happiness, it is not enough for his/her favorite athlete or team to succeed, but someone else must fail.
The reasons why a person roots for a particular team or player piques my interest. In many instances I guess it is simply the home town team or a player on the home town team. Of course home town is deceptive. The city does not own the team and most of the team members are not local products. In some sports most of the team may not even be native born Americans. Some sports are dominated by particular ethnic groups. Thus, in reality the home town team is essentially a bunch of non home region players from other areas hired to play in a home town arena which is not owned by the city in question. In that sense the word 'home' is kind of meaningless. Still, at least the name of the team is home town and a fan can have access on TV to see most of the games. Defense of home town players is a lot like a defense of your own kids. Objectivity goes out the window. Try convincing someone their own genetic kid is not much of 'winner'. It is like trying to convince home town fans that Barry Bonds is a 'loser'.
For the above reasons I tend to seek out players or coaches who stand out in some remarkable way and root for them plus the team for whom they play or coach. The home town team is usually included in the mix unless I find the coach or several players unlikable. This kind of selectivity hardly is objective. The traits anyone admires most will differ from person to person. Some just use athletic talent as the basis for whom they choose to be a big fan. In general, a player with a lot of talent is often given a lot of slack on any other personal attributes. For some people, personality or ethnicity or dress or verbal skills, or attitude play a large role on who their 'heroes' are. In general we want our sport 'heroes' to reflect the same values and priorities we ourselves think we possess. But this is hardly simple. Most professional athletes have been coached and advised ad nausea what to say---and when necessary, public scripts are written for them. Consequently, what kind of person one is rooting for might not be so obvious.
At any rate sport fans root for someone for particular reasons and find others rooting against the same person for different reasons. The intensity of rooting for or against particular players varies considerably. The problem arises in the consequences. Overbearing supporters of a particular player can be offensive to others. A simple case of enough is enough. Enough is the key word on both sides. For the supporter it is usually not enough for his/her 'hero' to win, but others need to lose, especially their public detractors. It's the old "I win you lose". In most cases the 'losers' are as likely to admit 'losing or being wrong' about as often as parents admit one of their kids is a 'loser'. In the process of rooting against someone, especially if they are a bit different in some way, there is no way, in the mind of the detractor, that they can ever be a winner, regardless, period.
Now that I am growing slightly ancient it seems best to accept the success of a rooted for figure in sports without hammering over the head those who just don't like the player. For the player in question to succeed ought to be satisfaction enough. There has to be some age at which a person finally has no need to prove a damn thing to others, or any need to flaunt at anyone who wins what in the arena of sports. Those parents who try to cram the 'wonderfulness' of their kids or grandchildren down the throats of others will find themselves endlessly upset about the thinly veiled disrespect, or at best disinterest, of others toward their cherished offspring. It is not much different with sport heroes. The difference in the two cases is that two people will argue over sport heroes, and just stifle themselves about anyone's kid. It takes a lot of years to find stifling a form of peaceful liberation. These kind of bad habits are hard to break. If someone you root for is able to clear the hurdles and run the table en route to success, that in itself ought to be ample reward. Those who rooted against the player will be upset enough. Let them live with their own feelings of disgust/anger/whatever. Attack a wounded dog and you are likely to get bit. It is as old as human history. If you can't win, you can at least get the winner angry..So who is the fool here---clearly the one who attacked the wounded dog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)