This page is a gallery of major detractors of Kentucky Basketball over the years. It's purpose is to provide a historical perspective and information concerning events, people and places in this regard. To be sure, Kentucky has had its share of problems over the years and fully deserves a number of the criticisms such as the infractions cited in the 1985 Lexington Herald-Leader articles and the infractions leading to probation in the late eighties. Many of these "detractors" have criticized UK for these and other perceived problems but to their credit most of them have also commended UK at times when they felt it was deserved. Especially recently, guys like Bobby Knight, Denny Crum, Jock Sutherland and Dale Brown, who may have gone overboard from a Kentucky fans perspective in the past, have been very complimentary of the program of late. Even Sports Illustrated was fairly positive about UK after the Cats won the National Championship in 1995-96. The notable exception is John Feinstein. He remains a stubborn critic of Kentucky, even taking what can only be a positive aspect about the program and turning it into a negative.
Disclaimer: The intention of this page is simply as a source of information and/or amusement. It's intention is not to personally attack the members included on this list, only to point out occasions in the past where some UK fans felt these people have used their positions as public figures to criticize UK. Admittedly an odd theme for a web page but based on responses from basketball fans of all loyalties, it's proven to be a fertile place for reliving and analyzing some important moments in time concerning Kentucky and college basketball in general. The page is written from the perspective of a UK fan but that in no way implies that this perspective is the only one or even correct.
That also doesn't mean to imply that these "detractors" criticized UK unfairly on all occasions or that UK didn't deserve the criticism. (In fact, some parts of the page consist of information that isn't a "criticism" at all, including interesting or background information, humorous moments and even evidence against Kentucky to support their claims.) It also doesn't mean to imply that these people are still critical of UK. Many of these beliefs, by myself or other UK fans, are highly subjective and most likely wouldn't be considered a slight by anyone else besides a UK fan. It is ultimately up to the reader to decide what is valid and what is not. While this page is not intended to slam the members of the top-10 list, in my estimation, it will have done some good if it alerts them to their perceived tendencies to overtly criticize one particular institution over another. If that leads to more balanced reporting, more professional journalism, or better understanding, I'll happily count that as a positive result.
Although the page is written from the perspective of a Kentucky fan, it is hoped that all fans will read it in the sentiment it was intended and be able enjoy it or learn from it in some way. If you disagree with any part of it, if you find that some part of it is inaccurate or if you would like to add an anecdote, quote or have suggestion, please mail me. I trust you'll find that I have been very accommodating to the views of those who have written, both pro and con. Unfortunately, John Feinstein has shown to be incapable of appreciating the intent of this page and chose to pen a lame and apparently pointless editorial against this page without attempting to contact or correct me. I felt it was important for me to respond which is included on a separate page.
 |
Here are some excerpts from Forever's Team:
"They [Arkansas] were coached, ironically, by Eddie Sutton, who would become Kentucky's coach seven years later and eventually resign after getting caught up in the swirling scandal that was bound to catch up with Kentucky's program sooner or later." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 154.
"Perhaps never in the history of the NCAA basketball tournament have two teams that were so radically different met in the final. Kentucky was the ultimate basketball factory. There was no business bigger or more important in the state of Kentucky than Kentucky basketball. People there honestly thought their program incomparable, even though Adolph Rupp had won the last of his four national titles in 1958 and UCLA had won ten of them in the ensuing twenty years." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 154.
"Joe B. Hall, Rupp's successor, was a bland, humorless man who could keep the Kentucky fans happy only by winning the national championship." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 154.
"The Blue Devils were Cinderella; the Wildcats were the ugly sisters. Hall was the wicked witch; Foster was Prince Charming." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 155.
JPS Note: Anyone who witnessed Duke's 1978 Championship march with Foster's plaid pants would beg to differ.
Before the championship game, a St. Louis television station received a phone call with the message that Duke standout Gene Banks wouldn't live to see the end of the game if he stepped on the floor for the Blue Devils. Coach [Bill] Foster and Banks were consulted and while extra security was added, Banks didn't hesitate to play. Feinstein treats the subject in a round-about way but there's no doubt he blames all Kentucky fans for the incident.
Of course, it wasn't a basketball game to Kentucky, it was a crusade. Two days later, writing in The New York Times, columnist Dave Anderson would make reference to the "sick Kentucky fan" who had called in the threat. In response, Anderson would be deluged with mail from Kentucky people infuriated that he would assume the call had been made by a Kentucky fan. Certainly, it could have been someone else. But Anderson's logic wasn't flawed, especially given that Kentucky people were proud of calling UK basketball "a religion." After all, how many people have been killed in the last two thousand years in the name of religion ? - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 157-158.
"The script written for this game was clear and neat: the big bad boys from Kentucky versus the nice boys from Duke." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 160.
During the description of the game, Feinstein resorts to blaming the loss on the officials, in particular Jim Bain. Unfortunately, it seems that Feinstein must have been writing this part from memory because the majority of the plays and exchanges he describes are incorrect or out of sequence, a few of which are illustrated below.
"The last thirty seconds had been disastrous for Duke. Two calls [by official Jim Bain] that could have gone either way - the apparent travel on [UK Player Jack] Givens and the block/charge between Givens and Banks - had gone Kentucky's way. Even a split of the two calls and the lead would have only been three. What's more, a third foul on Givens would have given Hall some serious questions to deal with during the intermission. But none of it had happened." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 161.
JPS Note: The "apparent travel" by Givens was actually Givens taking a dribble down the lane and jumping up to take a shot over Duke center Mike Gminski. Duke guard Bob Bender reached from the side and slapped the ball away. Givens reclaimed the loose ball in mid-air, landed and without missing a beat, pump-faked and jumped back up to score before his defenders could react. Granted, it was not the kind of play one sees everyday, but it was no travel, simply an incredible heads-up play on Givens part, even under scrutiny of slow-motion. The block/charge between Givens and Banks was a close call but upon replay, it was clear Givens had position. After watching the replay in slow-motion, analyst Billy Packer said at the time "Banks go in. He pulls up going to try to fly through. Givens was there. Good call by the official. . . . He [Givens] was in position."
"But because he [UK guard Truman Claytor] had his head turned, he didn't have time to think that way. Instead, as often happens, he panicked for a split second. In that moment, having caught the pass with his front foot anchored, he instinctively made a fake using that front foot. He had changed pivot feet, a common mistake made by players when a defender jumps in front of them when they aren't looking. At the end of the Duke bench, Bell and Hardy leaped into the air screaming, "Yeah" when they saw Claytor travel. The Kentucky fans let out an audible gasp, the kind you hear when a player had made an obvious error. Spanarkel screamed 'Walk!' Claytor actually stopped moving waiting for the whistle. And Jim Bain, right on the play, never blew his whistle. He just stood there. 'I think they had a travel there,' [Al] McGuire's co-analyst, Billy Packer said, clearly surprised there had been no call." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 162.
JPS Note: A frame-by-frame replay of the play shows that Claytor caught the pass with his right [back] foot as the pivot and was going forward with his left foot toward Spanarkel. (Which is opposite of what Feinstein claims. In fact when you consider Feinstein's claim, it is almost imposible to imagine a case where the player is moving forward, catches the ball with his forward foot as the pivot, then switches pivot feet to his back foot, all without reversing momentum. The replay shows that Feinstein's version is nonsense.) The question about a travel concerns Claytor's right [back] foot as his body was moving forward, the momentum caused his foot to lift up and forward about a centimeter off of his back [right] foot briefly. The angle of the replay does not clearly show whether Claytor lifted his foot completely off the ground or not. (Although the camera angle was close to the ground and the play occurred directly in front of the cameraman who was stationed on the near sideline.) Claytor stopped moving because he was looking for someone to pass to. Packer actually said "They [Duke's bench] thought they had a travel call."
"Calls do not come much worse than that one [a technical on Foster]. If Bain had called the travel, Duke would have had the ball with a chance to cut the lead to three. Instead, [Kyle] Macy went to the line, made two free throws to make it 53-46, and then Givens quickly hit a jumper to push the lead to 55-46 [sic]. Courtesy of Jim Bain, Kentucky had its biggest lead of the night." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 162-163.
JPS Note: UK Center Rick Robey scored on a dunk to give UK a 55-46 lead, followed by a Gene Banks put-back and then Givens' jumper.
"Beginning with the technical, it [Kentucky] went on a 15-4 run, widening the lead to 66-50. The highlight of that spree was a Givens jumper from the corner that somehow banked in." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 163.
JPS Note: The famous "bank shot" by Givens did not occur during the run described by Feinstein. It happened with approximately three and a half minutes remaining in the game. The shot put Kentucky ahead 86-73.
"There were still thirty-two seconds left and the lead was now 90-86. Except it wasn't because there was a whistle. Enter that man Bain [sic] again. He called Dennard for a charge. No basket. 'No way was that a charge,' Dennard said. 'The contact we had was after I shot the ball. The foul should have been on him [Scott Courts]. But if the guys wants to make the call on me, he's got to count the basket.'" - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 163
JPS Note: Roy Clymer, not Bain, made the call, which also happened to be the most obvious charge of the night and clearly before the shot was released. The fact that Feinstein was reduced to asking Dennard himself about the call is telling in this instance.
"Bender quickly stole the ball from Dwane Casey, who ten years later as an assistant coach would be at the center of the scandal that would bring Kentucky down. Now, Casey was a scared benchwarmer. Bender stripped him and fed Gminski [sic]. His basket made it 92-88 with eleven seconds left." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 164.
JPS Note: Actually, Bender stripped Casey and was immediately fouled. Bender then sank two free throws. Kentucky botched an inbounds play [but got the ball back because the ball went out of bounds off of Bender] after which Hall called timeout and put some of his starters back in. On the next play, Jay Shidler was fouled but missed the front end of his one-and-one. That led to the play described by Feinstein where "Bender fed Gminski."
 | "For a brief moment, it looked like [Kyle] Macy might not get the ball inbounds in the required five seconds. But then [James] Lee flashed toward mid-court. He was open. Macy threw him the ball [sic] as Bender lunged [sic], first for the ball and then for Lee. He got neither." - by John Feinstein, Forever's Team, Villard Books, 1990, pg. 164.
JPS Note: The "brief moment" described by Feinstein was pure fantasy as it took Macy about one second to inbound the ball after he received it from the official. And it went to Rick Robey, who broke towards Macy, rather than Lee. Robey gave the ball back to Macy and then headed downcourt on the near-sideline where he received a second pass from Macy. Robey was then able to throw over to Lee near half-court, who was able to race in for the left-handed power slam. Bender wasn't even near Lee when he received the ball as Feinstein implies. Lee received the ball near half-court on the near sideline while Bender was retreating back from the collapsing press and was near the center circle. Bender didn't get into the vicinity of Lee until Lee was already past the extended free-throw line and even then, could only attempt a wrap-around swipe to try and poke the ball away as Lee was coming down the left-hand side of the court and was dribbling left-handed, which effectively shielded Bender from making any kind of real play on the ball. |
Here are some excerpts from Raw Recruits:
"What a scenario: Kentucky, bastion of cheating, facing Indiana, bastion of honesty, and who had the NCAA suspended ? Indiana's best player." - by John Feinstein, A Season on the Brink, MacMillan, 1986 pg. 123.
"The Kentucky fans were lying in wait. Many of them had listened to Knight's comments on the pregame show, and that, added to their general dislike for someone who had beaten them often over the years, brought out the worst in them. There were catcalls about the false rumors that had been spread since Nancy Knight had been away at Duke. The crowd was, in a word, ugly." - by John Feinstein, A Season on the Brink, MacMillan, 1986 pg. 128.
JPS Note: Feinstein apparently felt Knight should be received with open arms after his comments, not to mention the irony of a Duke fan complaining that a crowd's demeanor towards opponents was ugly
"But [Official Tom] Rucker wasn't going to give it to him. once, twice for good measure, he pointed towards Kentucky's basket to indicate it was Kentucky's ball. The crowd screamed. Knight, hands on-hips, just stared at Rucker. When you spend a career getting on officials, there are going to be moments when one of them turns on you and says, in effect, 'Take that.'. This was Tom Rucker's moment. Much later that night, the game tape would show that Harden had still been moving when the contact was made. Rucker had missed the call. . . . . That call was the ballgame." - by John Feinstein, A Season on the Brink, MacMillan, 1986 pg. 130-131.
JPS Note: Generally officials from your own conference have been accused of being lenient to their own teams but this is the first instance I've heard where this is a liability. Seems to say more about Bobby Knight than Kentucky.
The replay shows that Ricky Calloway stole the ball from Ed Davender and drove down the right hand side of the floor toward the far goal. He passed to a streaking Stew Robinson near the top of the key. Robinson was on a direct path toward the basket and never deviated. Roger Harden slid over and secured position before Robinson left the ground. When contact occurred, Harden had excellent position as did the official to make the call. The move to the basket by Robinson was so premeditated that Winston Bennett, who had been trailing the action, was able to read the play and come up from behind and on the side of Harden to cleanly block the ball immediately after it left Robinson's hands. The charge/block call is often one of the toughest calls to make in the game of basketball but this particular play was not one of them. After the call, Kentucky went on to score a lay-up by Harden and the next play down the court, Indiana had the ball stolen on a lazy entry pass which sealed the victory. To claim the call was the ballgame as Feinstein states is disingenuous at best.
"Kentucky ran the clock down to thirty seconds before Harden drove the baseline for a layup. Harden was a mouthy kid from Indiana who had earlier in the week 'guaranteed' that Kentucky would beat Indiana. Having him score the basket that nailed the game for Kentucky was like being spit on when you've already been flattened." - by John Feinstein, A Season on the Brink, MacMillan, 1986 pg. 123.
"The road atmosphere in Louisville could not have been more different than Kentucky. Before the game, Knight and Alford were presented with plaques from the school as a tribute to their Olympic involvement. Knight received a standing ovation, a marked contrast to the ugliness of Lexington." - by John Feinstein, A Season on the Brink, MacMillan, 1986 pg. 144.
During the investigation by the NCAA of Kentucky in the late eighties, Feinstein must have been getting restless. He was supposed to write up a description of a game between UK and U-of-L. He did write a few sentence description of the action on the court but then spent the rest of the article devoted to what seems to have been his main objective, to help move along the investigation. Feinstein wrote:
"Speaking of Kentucky, you may have noted that the NCAA nailed Cleveland State for two years of probation, mostly because of violations involving Manute Bol, who never played for the school. It now has been 26 months since the Lexington Herald-Leader quoted 26 Kentucky players on the record as saying they took payoffs while at the school. Kentucky's presence on national TV is worth lots of ratings points and lots of dollars to the NCAA."
In response, a UK official stated: "it's frustrating" to hear that Feinstein had brought up the on-going investigation before the NCAA was ready to make any announcements - by Jeffrey Marx, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Feinstein: Whatever Became of UK Probe ? NCAA says not much," December 15, 1987.
Here are some excerpts from Feinstein's 1988 book A Season Inside:
"Not only was his team [Rollie Massimino's Villanova Wildcats] an underdog, it was facing a team [Kentucky] so arrogant it did not believe it could lose." - by John Feinstein, A Season Inside, Villard Books, 1988, pg. 392.
"The Big Bad Blue was in trouble." - by John Feinstein, A Season Inside, Villard Books, 1988, pg. 395.
"When the buzzer sounded, [UK guard Rex] Chapman stood at center court, hands on his head, clearly in shock that his team had actually lost." - by John Feinstein, A Season Inside, Villard Books, 1988, pg. 395.
"Of course, two months earlier the NCAA had proven that it did believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny - and maybe the Wizard of Oz, too - when it had let Kentucky off the hook in the aftermath of the Lexington Herald-Leader stories detailing payoffs to at least twenty-six Kentucky players. Now, the NCAA was faced with Kentucky being caught once again red-handed and, naturally, denying, denying, denying. What would it [the NCAA] do ? Rex Chapman, the Boy King decided not to wait for an answer. On May 13th, he announced he was passing up his last two years of eligibility to turn pro. Chapman insisted the Mills investigation had nothing to do with his decision. If you believe in that then you believe in Santa Claus and ... you know the rest." - by John Feinstein, A Season Inside, Villard Books, 1988, pg. 460.
Submitted by David Hubbard
Here are just a few of the anti-UK rants that Feinstein has embarked upon:
1) Before the 1991-1992 season, Feinstein said that it was an outrage that UK was in a position to possibly go to the Final Four because they had just come off of probation. This in spite of the fact that UK had overcome MAJOR sanctions (e.g. AD gone, coach gone, 3 star players gone, no TV, etc.).
2) On a broadcast of ESPN's "Sports Reporters", Feinstein was in rare form..."[UK's] fans think that God put them on this earth to win championships and since 1958 they've been on probation more times than they've won the NCAA Tournament" (paraphrase). The latter is (was) true but the former is just mean spirited. Needless to say, he gave UK no credit for cleaning things up.
Finally, Feinstein is a partisan. He's a Duke grad and a fan. That's fine but my problem is that it colors his reporting. Be a fan when you're off-camera or not writing a column but when you're on the job, keep the rah-rah stuff under wraps.
"The numbers on Pitino remain the same: two autobiographies, no national titles" - by John Feinstein, Washington Post, "Fisher's Brains, Carolina's Brawn Seize Day," April 4 1993, Sec. D pg. 11 Col. 1.
After an incident against Vanderbilt during the 1993-94 season where the wrong player took a free throw, resulting in a suspension of three players by Kentucky coach Rick Pitino after the game, Feinstein wrote:
"And then of course there is Little Ricky Pitino, Mr. Grandstand himself. If you think for one minute that Pitino would have suspended the tricky trio if his team was going to Arkansas or Florida this week, I have some oceanfront land in Lexington I would like to sell you. It is very easy to stand up for principles when you're going to play a Tennessee team that may finish 13th in the 12-team Southeastern Conference."
"But it also didn't warrant the public humiliation Pitino put his players through. What it warranted was a stern talking-to and several dozen extra sprints at the end of practice. Or a 6 a.m. session up and down the steps of the gym. Nothing more. No chest-pounding, no screaming and yelling, 'look at me, standing up for what's right'." - by John Feinstein, Washington Post, "Reviewing Crime and Punishment," February 26, 1994.
After the Duke-UK game in the East Regionals in Philadelphia, Feinstein was one of the few reporters to take Christian Laettner's side of the story (Bill Walton was another) and suggested that it was called for to stomp on UK player Aminu Timberlake.
JPS Note:The exact reference for this is not known at this time. It is believed Feinstein mentioned the incident on "Sports Reporters" either the Sunday after the game or in the following weeks although it may have been through another source. Walton made his remark before a game the following day. [If anyone has the exact source, please let me know.] More information is available about the game and the stomping incident and what really happened to cause it.
The occasion of Rodrick Rhodes transferring to Southern California during the summer of 1995 provided Feinstein with what he thought was damaging material to hold against Rick Pitino. Unfortunately Feinstein apparently never figured out the facts and went ahead and started making up his own ideas about what happened.
"Three years ago Rodrick Rhodes was one of the highest recruited players in the country. He went to Kentucky. At the end of his junior year, Rick Pitino basically said you don't have a place on this team next year. We've got too many players coming in. Too many scholarship players. So I think you should turn pro. Well the NBA wasn't interested in Rhodes. So he tried to come back to Kentucky [sic] but wasn't welcome there [sic] and ends up of all places at Fresno State [sic] where the new coach is Jerry Tarkanian." - by John Feinstein, National Public Radio, November 14, 1995.
"Well the stud, the star, who transferred Rodrick Rhodes was sort of pushed very hard out the door by Rick Pitino in order to clear room for Ron Mercer. And that's what happens now in college basketball if you're not really good at these top programs the coaches are going to find some way to get you out of there to get a younger player who they think is better to come in behind you." - by John Feinstein, National Public Radio, April 2, 1996.
The 1995-96 National Championship must have been an extremely hard time for Feinstein. In preparation for a possible UK championship, he took a jab at the fans writing: "Kentuckians feel it's their right to win the national title." - by John Clay, Lexington Herald-Leader, April 1, 1996.
Even before the season began, Feinstein was busy sowing his seeds of dissension:
"If they [Kentucky] don't win this year, it will be very interesting because he has been King Rick the First ever since he arrived in Kentucky seven years ago. But he hasn't won a national championship yet. He keeps writing books. But he hasn't won a national title yet. And if Kentucky doesn't win this year. There might actually be a few people saying the Emperor has no clothes." - by John Feinstein, National Public Radio, November 14, 1995.
After the championship game, Feinstein, obviously hard pressed to find a valid criticism, chose to ridicule the Cats because of their uniforms.
Coincidently, Newton left as Sports Illustrated's John Feinstein presented the other inductee, Dave Kindred of The Sporting News. Newton headed for the door when Feinstein said that Kentucky would win the championship "in Carolina blue." As he eyed Newton's exit, Feinstein said, "There goes C.M. outta here." - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, April 2 1996.
Feinstein's response to the above citation on this page was the following:
"It's true, Newton did get up and stalk out and I pointed out to everyone there that he was leaving. Of course the uniforms were Carolina blue and the clothing rep who came up with them just happened to be Newton's son -- not that there was any nepotism involved. Not that Newton was just a tad sensitive on the topic. Boy, did he show me getting up and leaving like that." - by John Feinstein, Basketball America, "And the Winner Is ...", December 30, 1997.
Submitted by Bob Bratcher
In the 1996 April 30th issue of Basketball America after Kentucky won their sixth national championship, John Feinstein in his Final Four wrap-up column wrote these gems
"So Kentucky won. And no one, other than Pitino and his loyal (for now) subjects really much cared."
"Even in defeat, they (UMASS) were somehow the more admirable team."
"...maybe the Pitino-style of mayhem-ball has been copied in just enough places to take the charm from the game."
"This was the season that will be remembered for not being remembered. Except, of course, in Kentucky. Even there, the memories won't be savored for long. No doubt, they're already worried about next year."
"Kentucky winning is nothing more than a triumph for all the things that are wrong about college sports. The sport is just too damn important to Kentucky people."
Feinstein did grudgingly give Pitino some praise after the championship game, however his remarks showed a remarkable amount of ignorance about Rick Pitino's system, including the common misconceptions about Kentucky's offensive system and their use of the three-point shot.
"[Pitino learned] how to run a half-court offense. Which his previous teams often didn't do. They would just fire up three pointers and when they didn't go in Kentucky would lose to a good team." - by John Feinstein, National Public Radio, April 2, 1996
Feinstein did end the segment with this gem:
"I would be remiss if I didn't mention that in the last 38 years they've [Kentucky] now won as many [National Championships] as your [Bob Edward's] alma mater Louisville and my alma mater Duke." - by John Feinstein, National Public Radio, April 2, 1996
Late in the 1997 season, Kentucky found out that Derek Anderson, the team's leading scorer before blowing out his knee had recovered miraculously from his ACL surgery and was cleared to play by multiple doctors. Rick Pitino was so impressed with his play in practice that he stated before a game against St. Joseph's that Derek would see some action. After some further medical advice, a doctor informed Pitino that a recent medical symposium had debated just such an issue. Since no one has recovered so quickly from an ACL injury before, there was no medical data to indicate how risky playing would be. 83% of the doctors attending the symposium voted that the player should be kept out of competition. So Pitino, even though Derek was cleared and was willing to play, decided that it was better after all to keep Anderson sidelined and not risk reinjury. Kentucky went on to make the NCAA final, losing in overtime to Arizona. Anderson was able to make a cameo appearance in the semifinal game against Minnesota where he sank two free throws after a technical foul was called on the Minnesota coach and there was no possibility of game action occurring. (Jerry Rice, San Francisco 49er receiving legend, attempted a quick comeback from a serious knee injury in 1997 and promptly reinjured himself.) Here is what Feinstein had to say about the UK matter.
"After Derek Anderson, who is Kentucky's leading scorer, had knee surgery two month's ago, they said he'd be out six months. He's back practicing this week, and people thought he might play tonight. Rick Pitino made what was probably a smart decision keeping him out, because his team is playing well and I don't think he wants to mess with the chemistry right now."
"Of course Rick had to make it into a human rights issue. Saying that I'm trying to protect his NBA career by keeping him out."
"Why . . .?, why. . .?, You know him well, Bob. Why can't he just tell the truth ? Just once ?"
National Public Radio, March 20, 1997 - John Feinstein talking with Bob Edwards
JPS Note: - One can only imagine what Feinstein would have said if Pitino had decided to play Anderson.
On ESPN's Sportscenter before the NCAA Tournament (March 6, 1997), Feinstein mentioned a scoop of "Pitino to Boston, PJ Carleisimo to Kentucky." At the time, it was common knowledge that Boston was coveting Pitino (as seems every year with at least one NBA team) and that PJ was having trouble in Portland with the Trailblazers. Also, Feinstein brought up the common knowledge that C.M. Newton had considered P.J. in 1989 when he was originally looking for a coach, suggesting Newton was still interested. So the "scoop" sounded plausible but upon further scrutiny can only be surmised as fabricated. Feinstein would have to had access to the person(s) making the decision about who would be considered for the coaching position in the event that Pitino left. That person turns out to be Kentucky A.D. C.M. Newton, who, as noted above, doesn't put up with Feinstein's act. And even if C.M. was thinking about coaches in the event Pitino left, he has too much integrity to allow that type of information to be passed to anyone else, much less someone like Feinstein. It basically comes down to one question. Who has more integrity, C.M. Newton to keep that type of information to himself or John Feinstein to report the truth about Kentucky ?
In this light, a better explanation would be that Feinstein took some commonly accepted rumors, put them together in a way which fit his desires and then put on his "journalist" masquerade to report his "scoop". The fact that it occurred on the eve of the NCAA Tournament and thus would put UK Coach Rick Pitino and his team under more pressure must have made it even more appealing.
Kentucky went on to make the final that year, despite losing four players to the NBA the previous year, their leading scorer in Derek Anderson to knee injury and having Allen Edwards barely able to play on a broken foot. Kentucky was relying heavily on former walk-ons (Cameron Mills, Anthony Epps*) and lightly recruited players (Nazr Mohammed, Scott Padgett) in key roles. An amazing coaching effort was in evidence, yet what did John Feinstein write about on the eve of the championship game ?
"Although Kentucky is considered one of the programs in college basketball history, the Wildcats had won one title since 1958 (in 1978) before last year. Many thought the program had lost considerable luster, since it had been involved in more NCAA investigations than Final Fours in the recent past." - by John Feinstein, ESPNet, "For both Wildcat teams, History in Making," March 29, 1997.
JPS Note: - At the time of the article, Kentucky was in its third final four in five years (and fifth elite eight in six years). Unless Feinstein is privy to secret NCAA investigations of Kentucky in the 1990's that I don't know about, I have to call into question Feinstein's use of the term "recent past." That may have been considered witty by some when Feinstein originally started to use variations of the above in the late eighties (Kentucky had only made the final four in 1984 since the championship in 1978) but it really doesn't wash now. I wonder if ESPN appreciates going to the trouble of paying for special commentary that not only is suspect factually, it also might as well have been mailed in a decade previously.
(* Note - Anthony Epps signed with Kentucky and was intended to be a walk-on, yet received a scholarship when Jamal Mashburn left early for the NBA in 1993.)
When Dean Smith retired from coaching just prior to the beginning of the 1997-98 season, he had surpassed Adolph Rupp in all-time career victories with 879. The day after he announced his retirement, John Feinstein couldn't resist the temptation to denounce UK's legendary coach.
Host Alex Chadwick: "He [Smith] retired after beating Adolph Rupp's record for wins. Was that an important thing for him ?"
Feinstein: "No. If he would have had 875 wins, one short of Rupp, he would have still retired. He was never about numbers. And he was uncomfortable being mentioned in the same sentence with Rupp Because Rupp, of course was a segregationalist. Throughout much his coaching career. He was sort of dragged kicking and screaming to integrate his teams. He was never comfortable with that connection." - National Public Radio, October 10, 1997.
JPS Note: - Neither Feinstein, nor any of his Sports Illustrated buddies have provided an explanation for why a "segregationalist" would choose to coach black players as early as the 1920's.
As far as the assertion that Smith didn't care about the record, that's IMO simply wishful thinking on the part of his supporters. According to a conversation between Smith and Rupp's son, Herky, Smith indicated that this was exactly why he had continued to coach. "He told me, 'I have no desire to break your father's record,' " Herky Rupp remembered Smith saying. "If not for Larry Brown, Roy Williams and Eddie Fogler, I would have retired this year or earlier. They insisted on me going on and tying the record or breaking it." - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Smith Lauded by Colleagues in Kentucky," October 10, 1997.
The hiring of Orlando Smith in 1997 signaled the first time an African-American was named as head coach of the men's basketball team. (Bernadette Mattox was previously hired as the women's basketball coach.) The media has had a field day starting with their preconceived beliefs about the Kentucky program and fans and their reaction to having a black head coach. In what I consider to be an insult to the University, Coach Smith and others, many in the media dwelled on this "issue" rather than report on the fact that UK hired the most qualified candidate for the job. Feinstein, to his credit, has not been one of the worst offenders in this aspect, recognizing the fact that Kentucky fans are simply interested in winning. In an article before the 1997 season, Feinstein wrote that,
"If Kentucky wins, no one is going to care whether Tubby Smith is African-American, Asian-American, Caucasian-American or Latin-American. He will be a hero throughout the state. If Tubby Smith loses, the same will not be true. He will be run out of the state on a rail, not because of his race, but because he hasn't won the SEC race." - by John Feinstein, Basketball America, "Coaching Confusion: Things Are All Mixed Up," Fall 1997.
However, despite this refreshing bit of perspective from Feinstein, he does muddy the waters somewhat with vague and unattributed references to racism at UK.
"Tubby Smith at Kentucky has already been told by some that he has no chance to succeed in his new job due to the color of his skin." - by John Feinstein, Basketball America, "Coaching Confusion: Things Are All Mixed Up," Fall 1997.
"And yet, the reaction to his hiring in some quarters might have made you think the year was 1967, not 1997." - by John Feinstein, Basketball America, "Coaching Confusion: Things Are All Mixed Up," Fall 1997.
JPS Note: - I'll give Feinstein the benefit of the doubt and assume that one of the persons he was citing who suggested that Smith would not be welcome in Kentucky was black columnist Merlene Davis, who wrote a piece in the Lexington Herald-Leader suggesting that accepting the job at UK would be a mistake for Smith (May 9, 1997). Other than that one article, I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that Coach Smith has had any problems with regards to this issue, something which he has stated in numerous interviews by the media. The article has actually seemed to be a positive influence by putting the issue on the table early. Even the long-time UK critic Alexander Wolff had to admit that the reaction in Lexington has been good.
Yet in the two weeks since that debacle [a loss to Louisville], Smith tells me he hasn't had a single comment, letter or phone call directed his way with the slightest racial slant to it.
. . .
But Smith says the column "was like a challenge. As if she were saying to people, 'Prove me wrong.'" So far, the good citizens of the Commonwealth have. - by Alexander Wolff, CNNSi, "Smith, Kentucky made the right choice," January 13, 1998.
While the community of Lexington has seemed to take the coaching change in stride, the only people who have continued bringing up the issue seem to be the media (and media from outside the Commonwealth at that). I'll leave it to Feinstein to back up his above statements with any substantial evidence, other than relying on what the media themselves have created. Until then, I consider this simply to be a classic example of a contrived story by a few ignorant and malicious members of the media.
Here are some excerpts from Feinstein's book, A March to Madness. In the book, Feinstein continues his fixation with Rick Pitino but also launches into a number of attacks on the old Kentucky coach Adolph Rupp, who happens to have already been dead for over twenty years. After looking at the topic [bashing of Rupp] in detail, I've come to the conclusion that continued criticism of this man has more to say about the respect he earned (and envy he generated) during his career than anything he may or may not have done off the court.
"[Rick] Pitino had turned a floundering program around [Providence] and taken the Friars to an unlikely Final four in his second year. Then he had promised not to leave Providence and, about fifteen minutes later, had left to become coach of the New York Knicks." - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 32.
"It was Rick Pitino who wrote the modestly titled book Born to Coach (at the age of thirty-seven, without a championship to his name), but the title seems more suited to [Dean] Smith." - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 32.
"Dean Smith is the exception to that rule. In 1977, when Kentucky's Rick Robey accused Smith of calling him a sonofabitch, Smith vehemently denied the charge saying, 'I smoke and I drink. If I cursed too my parents would never speak to me again.' Smith doesn't curse." - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 37.
Sidebar: - The incident in question occurred during the 1977 East Regional final at College Park Maryland in which North Carolina won 79-72. With 22 seconds remaining and Carolina leading 75-72, Robey committed a hard foul on UNC's John Kuester in order to stop the clock and force UNC to win the game at the line. (UNC was running the four corners and did not take a shot from the field in the final 9:35 of the game.) Smith ran out 75 feet to the other side of the court (supposedly to check on Kuester) but instead started shouting and shaking his finger in Robey's face.
 |
Robey moved away, saying something, at last waving a hand as if to tell him he'd made a fool of himself. . . . "On that Kuester foul, Coach Smith came up to me and called me a 'cheap son of a bitch,' " Robey said later. "He said, 'All you do is throw elbows.' I told him to look at the films and show me where I ever threw an elbow meaning to hit somebody." - by Dave Kindred, St. Paul Pioneer Press, October 19, 1997.
Later that year, Robey and Smith put the incident behind them.
"The way I look at it is we were both in the heat of battle," said Robey, now a businessman in Louisville. "It happened. Later that year, I tried out for the World Invitational Games in North Carolina. He came up to me and said, 'Rick, I don't think that I said what you think I said, but I do apologize for what I said.' That was good enough for me." - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Smith Lauded by Colleagues in Kentucky," October 10, 1997.
When later pressed about the incident Robey said.
"I don't know if I want to get that started again." he said. "He (Smith) was in my face, pointing a finger at me. I pushed him away. I guess he felt it was a cheap shot. With a few second left, it was the only thing I could do." . . . Asked whether he might have been mistaken about Smith calling him a "cheap S.O.B.," Robey said: "No. I know exactly what he said." Did Smith call him a "cheap S.O.B. ?" "That's right," Robey said. - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Last Tourney Meeting: War of Words," March 25, 1995.
It is amusing to note that during an earlier regular season game in 1975, Robey and Smith got into a shouting match during that game. Smith had thought Robey hit Mitch Kupchak, causing the UNC big man to fall to the ground clutching his stomach. Dean Smith became animated and started pointing towards Robey which later led to Robey, Smith and Kupchak yelling and pointing at each other on the court. It soon became apparent that it was another UK big man Dan Hall who had caused the contact although Hall claimed it was incidental and that Kupchak had flopped. Smith is quoted as saying he knew it was Hall all along. After the game, UK coach Joe Hall objected to, "Dean's apparent attempt to intimidate a young player by pointing his finger. I didn't like that. Let him jump all over me or the official." (Louisville Courier Journal, December 9, 1975).
Feinstein also got in some anti-UK shots while discussing a number of the ACC coaches. Although these criticisms could be attributed more to the coaches themselves rather than Feinstein (Feinstein already criticized me for the way excerpts from A Season on the Brink were broken up between himself and Bobby Knight in what were much more clear cut examples), the fact that Feinstein went off-topic just to take digs at UK justifies in my mind their inclusion in this section.
"There was one other reason - unspoken - that [Wake Forest coach Dave] Odom wanted to play Kentucky. When he and his coaches had watched the tape of the Midwest Regional final, which Kentucky had pulled away to win, 83-63, they had counted 38 fouls committed by the Wildcats against Tim Duncan. Not ticky-tack stuff, but hard, solid fouls. The officials had called seven of them." - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 106.
JPS Note: - The game between Kentucky and Wake Forest was a true clinic by Kentucky in utilizing the double-down defense. Every time Duncan received the ball, he was double or triple-teamed immediately. The Kentucky players were quick and well-coached enough to cover the shooters on the perimeter and cut down the passing lanes. If Odom wants to blame anyone for not being able to compete at a championship level, perhaps he should blame himself for not recruiting, over the four years Duncan was a Demon, any players who could take his man off the dribble and penetrate (thus breaking down the defense which would draw defenders off of Duncan, leading to opportunities for him to score or for kick-backs to one of Wake's many spot-up shooters). Massachusetts had such players in Dontae Bright and Dana Dingle and that aspect caused UMASS to be a much more formidable opponent to Kentucky than Wake Forest ever was. Odom also should have learned from the massacre in 1993 that in order to compete with Kentucky, you need guards and wing players who can handle and hold onto the basketball (another item UMASS possessed and Wake did not).
As far as the fouls, it was a rough game certainly, and one which probably should have been called more tightly by the officials. But then it is well known that tournament games can be rough and that teams in different conferences are often rougher than those in the ACC. Perhaps Odom should have considered this when he concocted Wake Forest's typically weak non-conference schedules. The next year, in what was supposed to have been Tim Duncan's crowning title run, Wake failed to advance past the second round when they couldn't handle Stanford's physical play.
In the next paragraph, Feinstein does sort of touch the subject of Wake's schedule, mentioning that in the following year, Wake wanted to play Kentucky in the Great Eight but Kentucky refused.
"He didn't get it because Pitino didn't want it. Like a lot of coaches, Pitino doesn't like competing against friends except when he has to. He asked to play someone else, and his wish was granted." - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 106.
That reason is true enough but on top of that was the fact that Kentucky had already played Wake Forest twice in the NCAA's over a relatively short time period while winning both times handily. Kentucky had been stuck in a rut of always having to play the same teams (Utah, Wake Forest, Massachusetts) time and again and it was due to compete against other teams. Coincidentally, later that year, Kentucky, Utah and Wake Forest were all placed in the same regional by the NCAA selection committee.
Gary Williams was in the building that night [UK-Texas Western 1966 National Championship]. He was a Maryland junior at the time, and he remembers wandering among the Kentucky fans before the game and hearing the word 'nigger' over and over. Two of his Maryland teammates, - Billy Jones and Mike Johnson - were black and the word upset Williams. "We sat there all night and rooted like hell for Texas Western," he said. "Then, after the game, I remember hearing the Kentucky people saying, 'We gotta get us some of them.'" Four years later, Adolph Rupp finally broke down and recruited a black player, Tom Payne. - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 128-129.
JPS Note: - It is a matter of public record that Rupp recruited Wes Unseld in 1964 and continued to recruit many black players from that point on. Feinstein's implication that Rupp didn't recruit a black player until Payne (who signed in 1969) is completely inaccurate.
"Recruiting started later in those days, but the letters started coming in during his junior year. [Virginia coach Jeff] Jones was interested in schools like Louisville and Evansville, but not Kentucky. He had too many memories of his father's players, many of whom were black, telling him that they would have liked to have played for Kentucky but couldn't because Adolph Rupp wouldn't recruit black players." - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 161.
JPS Note: - Jones can claim this as the reason he didn't consider UK if he wants but the fact is that when Jones was looking for colleges in the late 70's, Rupp was dead, Kentucky was well-integrated and Kentucky had just recently won a championship on the shoulders of black star Jack "Goose" Givens. Given the time frame, it leads me to question whether Jones was really trying to "punish" Kentucky for deeds which might have happened decades before or if, more likely, he simply wasn't recruited by UK. If true, he certainly wouldn't have been the first or only promising high school player from the state of Kentucky who felt disappointed or bitter from such a rebuke. If Jones wants to solely blame Kentucky for racism in college basketball at the time, I'd suggest he check out the chapter "Pioneers of the Game" in the book Inside Sports: College Basketball 1998 Edition by Mike Douchant and determine just how much better most of these other Southern schools which he did consider attending really were. (For example, Jones might be surprised that the school he did sign with, Virginia suited up a black player (Al Drummond in 1971) AFTER Kentucky did!)
Sidenote: Despite the perception hoisted upon the public by Sports Illustrated and others, Kentucky was a leader in helping integrating the South including being the first major white southern university to invite an integrated team to play on its campus (St. Johns in 1951), the first SEC school (along with Vanderbilt) to recruit a black basketball player (Wes Unseld in 1964), and the first to award a scholarship to a black athlete (Nat Northington in football in 1967).
"The [N.C. State coach Herb] Sendek who ran practice and in-game huddles was a lot different from the Sendek who analyzed the game for the media when it was over. The latter always had that deer-in-the-headlights look, a kid with prominent teeth and a receding hairline who someone had dressed up in a suit. The former could easily have been a young Pitino - without the histrionics and preening." - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 251.
"The media has boiled the entire Smith-Rupp story down to an issue of race. Smith, the ardent civil rights activist against Rupp, whose all-white Kentucky team had lost the famous 1966 NCAA final to all-black Texas Western. It had been widely reported for years that Rupp asked local newspaper editors to put asterisks next to the names of black players so he would know who not to recruit. Only in 1969, kicking and screaming, did Rupp finally recruit a black player." - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 420.
JPS Note: - The claim by Feinstein about putting asterisks next to players names might be true if 1.) you count New York City as local to Lexington, 2.) you count newspaper editors as a single editor (Jimmy Breslin for the New York Journal-American) and 3.) you define "widely reported for years" as Alexander Wolff repeating the exact same charge in virtually every piece he wrote about Kentucky over a period of years from the late eighties to the mid-nineties.
As far as recruiting, once again, Feinstein remains incorrect, just as he was earlier in the same book. He also probably owes his readers some evidence for "kicking and screaming" by Rupp since he's continued to repeat this charge in print and in media interviews.
"What most people missed was the fact that Smith's feelings about Rupp went beyond the issues of civil rights. Kentucky basketball has long been the symbol of the excess and obsession that Smith has tried not to be sucked into as the coach of a powerhouse program. Kentucky's basketball history is as much about NCAA investigations and allegations of payoffs and being shut down for an entire season for point shaving as it is about winning championships." - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 420.
"Coach you've admired Adolph Rupp for so many years," she [CBS (and former WDIV Detroit) Reporter Andrea Joyce] said. "What does it mean to you to tie this record ?" It was on the word "admired" that Smith visibly flinched. If Joyce had stuck a knife into his ribs he probably would not have reacted any more obviously. Then he gathered himself to answer the question: "Well, I've admire a lot of coaches. I admired Henry Iba and my old coach Phog Allen and Bob Spear. [Pause] I admire Bob Knight. [Pause, groping] I admire all coaches who do things the right way." Not a single mention of Adolph Rupp. Absolutely no implication that Rupp was one of those coaches he admired who did things the right way. Smith is too honest to look into a camera and say he admired someone he didn't admire. - by John Feinstein, A March to Madness, Little Brown and Company, 1998, pg. 420.
JPS Note: - In the above two excerpts, Feinstein has taken a turn at being a mind-reader for Coach Smith. If he wants to provide some direct evidence or quotes, he should. Otherwise, he might consider that Smith is on record as having said a number of good things about Rupp over the years.
What many journalists have failed to realize is that Dean and Rupp are really not that different in many respects. Most notably they were both fierce competitors who are driven to be the best. Some differences are that 1.) to Smith's credit, he is much more supportive and publicly caring for his players and 2.) Smith cared about and was much more attuned to the image of him reflected by the media. Rupp could have cared less if people hated him, just as long as he got to beat them on a basketball court.
I believe that Dean Smith is so much more competitive than people are generally led to believe by the media that he most certainly wants to be considered more favorably than Rupp. I don't blame him for wanting to beat Rupp's record (anyone who has worked hard enough to come close to 876 wins certainly deserves it). However, while both Smith and Rupp have both had legendary careers, one is not demonstrably better than the other.* Understanding that, I can also understand if Smith wants to situate himself in a more favorable light than Rupp. If this can be accomplished by simply remaining silent and allowing gullible reporters to interpret his silence as a disgust for Rupp, I completely understand. Many journalists have already decided to forsake any true comparison between the two men's careers in favor of Smith, largely based on the off-the-court evidence (much of it incorrect) which has propagated and has attempted to deify Smith and vilify Rupp. Smith hasn't had to comment on anything concerning the matter because, quite frankly, "reporters" like John Feinstein seem so eager to do it for him.
* Notes: Smith would never have been able to match Rupp's winning percentage and really his effect on the game, and that would leave doubt about who was a better coach** despite Smith winning more games and playing against tougher competition. (While journalists have been lauding Smith for his four corner atrocity and such inane "innovations" as color-coordinating sweatbands, holding hands before free throws, and demanding that a player point to the assist-man after a field goal [Smith did contribute some important innovations such as utilizing multiple defenses and screening against zones], Rupp travelled all over the nation to introduce a fast-break style of play which was decades ahead of its time and helped to shape modern basketball, perfected the interior screen, pioneered big-time basketball in the South and pressured the NCAA into creating a national tournament which eventually galvanized the nation and led to college basketball as a major American pastime.
** Notes: Although IMO, the title of best coach clearly belongs to UCLA icon John Wooden.
In preparation for the 1998 tournament, Bob Edwards questioned John Feinstein on his picks for the contenders for the National Championship. After discussing the widely acknowledged favorites in Kansas, Arizona, North Carolina and Duke, Edwards mentioned "They won't like these picks in the Bluegrass [Kentucky]." to which Feinstein cracked "No, are they still playing basketball down there ?" - John Feinstein and Bob Edwards, National Public Radio, March 2, 1998.
JPS Note: - Kentucky ended up winning the national title.
In preparation for a seventh national title by Kentucky in 1998, Feinstein didn't disappoint in saying:
"Kentucky has been sort of THE program, both in terms of winning and in terms of bending or breaking rules throughout history to make sure that they win." - by John Feinstein, National Public Radio, March 30, 1998.
On a February 14, 1999 edition of The Sports Reporters, Feinstein was complaining about the lax treatment by the NCAA on the Louisville and Alabama basketball teams after they had been found to have committed rules violations. He then proceeded to drag Kentucky into the fray, citing something to the effect that Jerry Tarkanian had once suggested that the NCAA would punish Cleveland State for the $10,000 which Kentucky sent in the Emory envelope.
JPS Note: I don't have the complete quote for this as I didn't see the program and frankly quit watching that show long ago. If anyone can provide the complete quote, I'd appreciate it. But assuming that this was the gist of what he said, I should point out that the reported amount of money was $1000, not $10,000. It should be noted that this factual deficiency occurred during a time when Feinstein had already seen on this page that he is consistently wrong regarding the facts concerning the Kentucky program. Apparently, he hasn't been very attentive.
On March 16, 1999, Feinstein wrote in the Washington Post a synopsis of each region in the 1998-99 NCAA Tournament. I think he was actually trying to pay the Kentucky team a compliment but did it in his typical Feinstein fashion.
"The favorite here is not Michigan State, the top seed. It is Kentucky because Kentucky is Dracula. It is going to take a team with a wooden stake to kill these guys, and no one heading for St. Louis appears to have one." - by John Feinstein, Washington Post, "True to Form, South Region Keeps Course With Compelling Matchups," March 16, 1999; Page D06.
Of course, Feinstein apparently couldn't surprise us and NOT take a shot at Rick Pitino along with way.
"They [Kentucky] win those games because Wayne Turner, Scott Padgett and Heshimu Evans simply don't believe they're going to lose and because Tubby Smith is every inch the coach Rick Pitino was and maybe a little bit more because he doesn't have to be the star." - by John Feinstein, Washington Post, "True to Form, South Region Keeps Course With Compelling Matchups," March 16, 1999; Page D06.
John Feinstein was invited by NPR's Morning Edition to comment on Texas Western coach Don Haskins' retirement announcement in late August of 1999. Here are his remarks:
JPS Note: - The claim that Rupp said he would never recruit a black player at Kentucky is one which has never been substantiated. It's really time for Feinstein and Rupp's other critics to put-up or shut-up about this, since none of them have been capable of even attempting to provide an original reference to it. Beyond that, Feinstein still has not explained why a "segregationalist" would coach a black player in the 1920's, in addition to coaching black players in numerous all-stars games etc. during an era when segregation and Jim Crowe laws were still in effect. Finally, as far as the claim that Rupp didn't recruit a black player until three years later (presumably Tom Payne), that is absolutely false, and something which John Feinstein has been directly confronted with in the past. (It's a matter of public record that Rupp started formally recruiting black players once he was given permission by the University. His first official black recruit was Wes Unseld in 1964, and continued every single year after that.) Why any sane person would continue to repeat a charge when he has been directly contradicted in the past, and his "professional" credibility is at stake, is unexplainable.
In preparation for the 1999-2000 Final Four, Feinstein began attacking Florida Gators' head coach Billy Donovan. He was apparently miffed by the fact that the Gators beat the favored Duke Blue Devils handily in the regional semifinals and seemed to transfer his dislike of Rick Pitino onto Pitino's protege (Donovan both played and was an assistant coach under Pitino.)
"Donovan is a Rick Pitino wannabe, every bit as smart and slick and disingenuous as his ex-boss and coach." - by John Feinstein, Washington Post, "Florida, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Michigan State: Is That Your Final Answer ?," March 27, 2000.
No attempt was even made to explain how Donovan is "disingenuous". In the article, Feinstein also tries to downplay the system Donovan uses, which takes its cues from Pitino and which Feinstein openly despises.
"Florida did not beat Duke, as most of the talking heads have asserted, because of its depth and its full-court press. It beat Duke because Billy Donovan took a calculated risk with five minutes to go, switching to a zone defense, and it worked. Donovan was smart enough to know that Duke was shooting miserably from the outside (2 for 17 from three-point range against Kansas, 3 for 19 against Florida), but was still good enough to cut up his man-to-man defense. The zone forced Duke outside, the Blue Devils continued to miss threes (most notably Jason Williams's open jumper that would have put them up by seven points) and Florida won." - by John Feinstein, Washington Post, "Florida, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Michigan State: Is That Your Final Answer ?," March 27, 2000.
The above excuse continues to confirm that Mr. Feinstein has absolutely no grasp of the "Pitino system". He says the depth and full-court press had no effect, yet the fact is that it did tire out Duke's short rotation and the first thing to go when players are tired is the long jump-shot. As far as Duke's poor shooting, it's really not surprising, given that Coach K has never seemed to grasp a basic tenant of the "Pitino system" and that is that a three-point shot is NOT taken unless it is an open shot. Duke, and really most every ACC team in the 1990's, seem to have never learned this basic concept and its players chuck up closely-guarded three-point attempts on a regular basis. It's good to hear that Feinstein is still hopelessly confused. It is interesting to note, however, that slowly, Coach K at Duke has started to press and trap on a more regular basis (another part of the "Pitino system"), something Feinstein claims to abhor, yet he has yet to acknowledge its utilization by the Blue Devils. Wonder why ?
In February of 2001, Feinstein was speaking at an event at Wake Forest University concerning the overbearing influence of college basketball on the rest of society and provided an example of Kentucky.
"He gave the example of a star basketball player at the University of Kentucky who was implicated in a hit-and-run case. The prosecutor was a Kentucky fan and put off court proceedings until after basketball season, saying that he didn't want to jeopardize the teams's potential." - by Michelle Johnson, Winston-Salem Journal, "Game ? College Hoops Too Big, Author Says," February 15, 2001.
JPS Note:While the above is for the most part true (although I haven't seen anywhere state that the prosecutor was a UK fan, it's a reasonable guess considering he works in Lexington) the real story is what Feinstein didn't mention.
The case Feinstein cites was regarding Wayne Turner who early in the 1997-98 season was suspected of a hit-and-run in Lexington. Turner claimed innocence yet circumstantial evidence pointed toward him (the car in question was his). Despite their suspicions, the police had difficulty in putting together a strong case against Turner (who had an alibi, saying he was spending the evening with his girlfriend) and the case stalled for a number of months due to a lack of evidence and witnesses. All the while, media types including John Feinstein, who automatically assumed Turner was guilty, intensified their cries for 'justice' and questioned the authorities slowness in the case, accusing them of dragging their feet in the matter.
With the off-the-court situation getting more and more intense, it began to take a toll on Turner and the team. Being low on money and not able to afford legal representation, Turner decided he wanted to put the case behind him and move on with his life. He came forward to authorities voluntarily a few weeks before the NCAA Tournament and agreed to plead guilty to a lesser charge of "failing to file an accident report." At the time, the district attorney's office saw that the timing was right before the tournament and delayed the proceedings until after the tournament was over. (Kentucky won the national title that year, with Turner at the point) The prosecutor cited that the violation Turner was being charged with was a misdemeanor and because he was so high profile, there was little risk of flight.
When the time came, Turner did plead guilty in court to the lesser charge, yet still claimed he was innocent of a hit-and-run, saying he only pleaded guilty to the lesser charge to put the case behind him. The critics scoffed at this and only criticized Turner more viciously. Some national media outlets, most notably Sports Illustrated, flat out called Turner a liar in addition to claiming that the Lexington police and DA office went out of their way to go easy on him.
Only later did it come to light that Turner was not present at the accident, and in fact it was a teammate, Myron Anthony who was the culprit. [Anthony subsequently spent most of his time in Tubby Smith's doghouse before transferring to Texas Christian where he was kicked off the team a number of times, his senior year for failing drug tests multiple times.] Turner had been truthful all along and had been put through an emotional wringer at the hands of the national media, most who never took the time to look closely at the case in the first place and who never issued an adequate apology, if any, let alone a retraction for their libelous accusations.
John Feinstein was one of the notable critics at the forefront of this whole debacle; someone who willingly put an innocent college student through financial and emotional torture, mainly because he didn't have the ability to follow the assumption in our country that someone is innocent until proven guilty. Turner was guilty all-right, only his crime was that he played basketball for a team John Feinstein couldn't stand. Feinstein never apologized and yet years later, is relating stories to audiences which no doubt leave the impression that the player in question was guilty.
Truly Pathetic.
In November of 2001, a Duke fan who proclaims himself as "The CourtMaster" wrote a guest column on a Duke fan site discussing what teams should be considered an 'Elite Program.' According to the author, after explaining his standards and limiting the timeframe to the past ten years, he concluded that Duke, North Carolina and Kentucky are elite.
The author was able to contact some nationally known writers for their opinions. According to Mike DeCourcey of the Sporting News "The notion of 'elite' can shift with time. Right now, I would say that Duke, Michigan State, Kentucky and Florida are 'elite' because they've had enormous recent success. But if you'd asked the same question in 1995, then Arkansas, North Carolina and Kansas would have joined Duke and Kentucky." He added, "If you're talking about the elite programs, the places where you practically have to try to screw up the situation and beg fans not to come, I think there are but a few: North Carolina, Kansas, Indiana, Kentucky for certain, and possibly UCLA and Duke. The difference with the latter two is the lack of statewide support."
John Feinstein had a slightly different view but when it came to Kentucky, predictably taking a different tact. "To me, an elite basketball program is one with a winning tradition -- multiple Final Fours; conference titles etc.; a great coach; at least one or two superstar players through history and perhaps, a great moment or two that people remember," he said. He went on later to say, "To me, Kentucky is NOT an elite program because of their lurid history ?"
JPS Note: - I discussed Feinstein's remarks with "The CourtMaster" and expressed my displeasure with his reliance on Feinstein as a source, given Feinstein's abysmal track record. The author related to me that Feinstein actually included a lot more in his note about Kentucky, however it was so obtuse that the above is the only part that made it into the article.
It is also noteworthy that of the six programs generally considered to be the top basketball programs of all-time (UCLA, North Carolina, Kentucky, Duke, Indiana and Kansas), ALL have had major NCAA violations in the past, with Duke still waiting for a ruling from the NCAA on its use of an ineligible player (Corey Maggette) in the 1999 NCAA Tournament.
On January 1, 2002, Feinstein wrote an Op-Ed piece in the Washington Post discussing the return to normalcy in sports after the tragedy of September 11 terrorist attacks. To Feinstein, this return of normalcy included a return to "Unsportsmanlike Conduct". He mentions three examples of this in the article, the first two he devotes a total of three sentences where he mentions in passing two disturbing outbreaks of violence by fans at professional football games, where literally hundreds of beer bottles etc. were thrown onto the field by angry fans, and a near-riot ensued.
The next 14 paragraphs by Feinstein are then devoted to the case where Kentucky fans actually booed their former coach, Rick Pitino, because he had chosen to take the head coaching position at arch-rival University of Louisville. Feinstein tries to make the argument that Kentucky fans should have welcomed Pitino with open arms, given that Pitino had experienced a personal loss when his brother-in-law Billy Minardi died in the World Trade Center collapse (although as even Feinstein unwittingly relates in the article, even Pitino fully expected a negative reaction from UK fans if he was to become the Louisville coach, even before he even decided to take the job.)
JPS Note: -On the surface, this might appear (to someone who didn't know any better) a valid argument, however given Feinstein's history, the article falls apart as a transparent attempt to once again degrade Kentucky and it's fans. Here are some reasons why:
Of course Feinstein has to get his shots in at the UK fans, when he makes the ridiculous claim "To many, if not most, who live in Kentucky, UK basketball is slightly more important than the state of the national economy and world peace."
With Feinstein's penchant for recycling old, outdated (and in many cases untrue) material, I've personally got to wonder whether Feinstein even waited until the game was played to write the bulk of his op-ed. Obviously if all he was looking for was booing at a game as an example of poor sportsmanship, he could have found that and more at any college game well before the UK-UL game occurred, including notably his own alma mater (Duke) where the fan behavior is some of the rudest and personally invasive anywhere.
In 2002, Maryland moved on to bigger and better things and said farewell to their beloved Cole Fieldhouse, a stadium which Kentucky and Adolph Rupp helped dedicate in 1955. John Feinstein was asked by NPR to give an appreciation of the venerable stadium. In addition to talking about Maryland, he also decided to add a bit about Kentucky and Rupp by mentioning the 1966 championship game which was played by Kentucky and Texas Western in Cole. Of course he continued to get the facts wrong.
"Texas Western won the championship 72-65. Within two years, Kentucky coach Adolph Rupp had recruited his first black player. Soon after, all southern schools had desegregated their basketball teams. To this day, Texas Western-Kentucky is referred to as the Brown V. Board of Education of college basketball." - John Feinstein, NPR, March 4, 2002.
JPS Note: Once again, Feinstein's claim that Rupp didn't recruit a black player until years after the game in 1966 are inaccurate. In fact, Rupp was one of (if not THE) first coach in the SEC or ACC to offer a scholarship to a black player. That fact may not sit well with Feinstein's anti-UK agenda but that's an issue he needs to sort out.
In March of 2003, Feinstein was writing about a rash of corruption cases in college basketball (at Georgia, St. Bonaventure and Fresno State) which reached all the way to the University president. Feinstein tries to make a point about the NCAA not always treating each school the same, and he manages to drag Kentucky into the fray.
"Of course there's no guarantee the NCAA will step in and do the right thing in any of these cases. Tarkanian best summed up the NCAA's approach to justice 14 years ago, after a package from the Kentucky basketball office to the father of a recruit popped open and $10,000 fell out. 'The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky,' Tarkanian said, 'that it's going to put Cleveland State on probation for three more years.'" - by John Feinstein, Washington Post, "A March Into Madness," March 11, 2003.
JPS Note: As mentioned before, the amount in question was $1,000 not $10,000, a fact that Feinstein has been made well aware of many times in the past. Beyond that, the quote by Tarkanian did not occur at the time mentioned by Feinstein, but years earlier in relation to a different situation where the Lexington Herald-Leader published a story on corruption at UK. The NCAA did investigate, however none of the former players mentioned in the story would cooperate with the NCAA and no case could be brought. This inability of the NCAA to punish UK was what prompted Tarkanian's quote.
The situation with the $1000 was one which the NCAA investigated and for which UK did indeed receive severe penalties, completely opposite to what Feinstein seems to claim above. In fact, if Feinstein truly was looking for an example of NCAA indifference in the face of a credible violation, he needs look no further than his own alma mater in Duke, which used an ineligible player in the 1999 NCAA Tournament (proven by testimony in Federal Court), but never received any type of ruling (much less sanction) on the matter.
On the February 13, 2004 edition of Morning Edition, Feinstein was discussing with Bob Edwards the upcoming NBA All-Star game. He apparently took the situation of star rookies LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony not being named to the game as an adequate opportunity to take a shot at former Kentucky center Jamaal Magloire, who was invited.
JPS Note: Feinstein singles out Jamaal Magloire, but the fact of the matter is that it wasn't Magloire who kept James off of the roster. Each squad must be represented by a minimal number of positional players. Magloire is a center and was the East's backup to Ben Wallace (who himself is severely undersized as a center). If there was anyone who was put in place of James, it was Michael Redd who plays the same position. As it was, Magloire played an excellent game in limited minutes, leading the East squad in points (19), was second in rebounds (8) and often was the only player strong enough, big enough and willing to challenge the formidable Western front-line of Yao Ming, Shaquille O'Neal, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett and others. Said East coach Rick Carlisle. "He played great. He came out aggressive. He was hitting shots and gave us a presence around the basket."
To address Feinstein's point, if the NBA fans were so intent on seeing LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony play, they would have voted them into the starting lineup in the first place. That didn't happen. There's always next year for these talented teenagers. Also, I wouldn't be so quick to assume that no one wanted to see Jamaal Magloire play. He did, after all, play for the most watched and followed collegiate basketball program in history to go along with the most dedicated fans around. In Feinstein's whining about LeBron, he could have found a better and more appropriate example than Magloire; IF he knew what he was talking about and was in any way impartial, that is.
A few years before his death, a book by Arnold "Red" Auerbach with John Feinstein was published about his life. In it, Auerbach took up the issue of Adolph Rupp and the common claim that Rupp was racist. Auerbach knew Rupp well through the years and disagreed with this assessment.
"Let me tell you something about Rupp. All I ever hear from people is that he was a racist. You know what ? He did hate black guys - who couldn't play ! He also hated white guys who couldn't play, blue guys who couldn't play, and green guys who couldn't play, and Muslims who couldn't play. That was it. All these people who never met the guy said he was a racist. I knew the guy. I traveled with him, I spent time with him. I never saw any sign from him or heard anything from him that indicated to me that he was a racist or a bigot in any way. Now cheap, that was another story. . ." Let Me Tell You a Story: A Lifetime in the Game by Red Auerbach and John Feinstein, Little-Brown, 2004 pp. 83-84.
JPS Note: So far so good. Maybe Feinstein through his contact with someone who actually was around and knows what he's talking about has finally turned a corner? Alas, it didn't last. After some more discussions of Rupp, Bob Cousy, and others, Auerbach goes on to discuss the fact that Rupp did recruit black players etc. and saying he thought Rupp "got a bad rap" (page 86). The very next paragraph after the topic of Rupp is discussed and Auerbach confirms his assertion that Rupp was not racist, Feinstein turns around and accuses Rupp of being just that when he writes:
"Red also defended another legendary racist, longtime Washington Redskins owner George Preston Marshall. . ." (page 86)
Again, here is a person who was there saying that Rupp was not racist (and providing a number of pertinent examples), and Feinstein stating just the opposite (without any justification of his own). It was good while it lasted anyway.
During an interview in September 2006 on NPR discussing the passing of golf legend Byron Nelson, Feinstein was asked to put Nelson's accomplishments in perspective. Feinstein mentioned Nelson winning an amazing 11-straight golf victories and compared it accomplishments in other sports. Not surprisingly he got his facts messed up, forgetting that Adolph Rupp did indeed win four titles.
Said Feinstein "The 11 straight is right up there with Cy Young's 511 wins as a pitcher, no one came within a hundred of that, or Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak or John Wooden winning ten basketball titles when no other coaches won four." - National Public Radio, "Golfer Byron Nelson's Shining Record," September 27, 2006.
While on Tony Kornheiser's radio show June 5, 2007, the issue of Florida coach Billy Donovan changing his mind at joining the NBA's Orlando Magic to return to the Gators came up. Kornheiser asked the question to ESPN Commentator Jay Bilas as to whether Donovan regretted not taking the Kentucky job earlier, which later went to Billy Gillispie. Feinstein, who was also sitting in the studio, felt the urge to interrupt. The exchange went as follows:
Tony Kornheiser: Jay, let me get back to you on something, and Wilbon shouted me down on this a thousand times, but I think you and I are were in agreement that if you're going to take a college coaching job, that none offers the vast possibilities that Kentucky does.
John Feinstein: (interrupting) : WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Wilbon's right.
Tony Kornheiser: OK, well let me ask Jay then, and you can talk after that.
Do you think that Billy Donovan has any, given the circumstance now, might have any regrets at not taking Kentucky ?
Jay Bilas: I doubt it. I do think Kentucky is a better job than Florida, but I don't think that he's second-guessing that one. I mean, he's built a great program at Florida, they do have really good, really good resources and facilities, and you know, they've gotten over the last several years a very good following.
It doesn't compare to Kentucky's. I mean, Kentucky they get 24,000 people to show up at a practice. So, Kentucky's got more resources, it's got better facilities, the whole thing. I mean, Kentucky's built to be great. And Billy Gillispie's going to do a great job there, I'm convinced of that. But I do think Kentucky is the better job, but I don't think he's second-guessing that one.
John Feinstein: I agree that he's not second-guessing the move, and the reason he didn't make the move is because he won two national championships at Florida. That's the goal, is to win national championships. They're building new facilities at Florida that will be palatial. And I have always thought that the Kentucky job, frankly, is a TERRIBLE job, because 24,000 people come to practice, because you can be 25-4, and have someone call your radio show, as I heard someone once do to Tubby Smith and say, 'Coach, I want you to know I haven't given up on this team yet.'
I think that you have to be somewhat insane, a la Rick Pitino to enjoy coaching at Kentucky. And Billy Gillispie is a heck of a coach but let's see in three or four years if they haven't won a national championship YET, if he's enjoying himself at Kentucky.
JPS Note: Feinstein has a point, in that the UK job does bring a lot of expectations for whoever is the head coach. It's not a job for everyone. But to say the job is 'terrible' is just moronic. With the expectations comes a lot of positive things to the UK job, many which other programs simply can't match.
Also to the point about the caller saying he still supported the team after a 25-4 start, a little context might be useful. This was a case where Kentucky in 2004-05 was having an excellent season but had just been blown out by an unranked Florida team by 17 points in the Southeastern Conference tournament. The loss was a demoralizing one. The caller was obviously trying to remain positive in light of the loss and trying to express his support for the team, although in hindsight the comment could have been expressed better and could appear to be ridiculous given UK's excellent season leading up to the game.
Certainly, some can choose to pluck a single comment out of the multitude of comments made on call-in shows and try to point to it as an example of Kentucky fans being unreasonable, as Feinstein tries to do. I personally think it's a relatively tame example, which given the context really isn't that noteworthy to begin with. If that's the best example Feinstein can provide, then that's pretty lame. [Of course it's virtually a given Feinstein himself never actually heard this exchange himself, since it's highly doubtful he spends his time listening to UK call-in shows. This particular exchange was reported by others (Jerry Tipton I believe) at the time and Feinstein likely just repeated it].
In an article February 17, 2008 where he discusses Indiana's program imploding under the NCAA infractions of Kelvin Sampson, Feinstein repeats yet again his Emery-Jerry Tarkanian-Cleveland State story, and yet again gets it wrong.
The best description of NCAA justice came from, of all people, Jerry Tarkanian, who seemed to be battling the NCAA throughout his coaching career. When $10,000 fell out of the air-express envelope sent from the Kentucky basketball office to Kentucky recruit's father in 1989, Tark shook his head sagely and said, "The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky, it's going to put Cleveland State on probation for another two years." ("Stalling Game Helps Indiana -- and the NCAA," Washington Post, February 17, 2008.)
JPS Note: Of course Feinstein is wrong again on all counts, as already mentioned on this page and elsewhere. Feinstein has been corrected numerous times that it was not $10,000 but $1,000 that was allegedly in the package, among other inaccuracies. And the NCAA DID put Kentucky on probation, despite Tark's 'sage' beliefs. Yet again, Feinstein flaunts the journalistic integrity of whatever news organization (in this case The Washington Post) is dumb enough to pay him.
In an article in the Washington Post on August 24, 2009, John Feinstein once again repeated one of his pet lies when he wrote:
"It is always worth remembering Jerry Tarkanian's famous description of NCAA justice. Upon learning that $10,000 had fallen out of an envelope headed to a Kentucky recruit's father, Tark said: 'The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky it is going to put Cleveland State on probation.'"
This time, however, his cut-and-paste special got him in hot water as the Washington Post finally forced him (after nearly a decade of dragging their integrity through the mud) to correct his mistake, although it took the ombudsman at the paper to finally make it happen.
Predictably, Feinstein didn't simply correct the mistake and move on, instead he chose to make a personal attack against me, for pointing out his mistake. Wrote Feinstein on his blog entry on August 28, 2009:
|
One other Kentucky note I've been meaning to get to all week: In writing my Washington Post column earlier this week I repeated a mistake I've made for years. I always thought it was $10,000 that fell out of the envelope en route to Chris Mills' father. It was actually $1,000. I apologize for the mistake I wish it was my first, I'm pretty sure it won't be my last. I will say this though: it seems to me that sending that kind of money is even STUPIDER than sending 10 grand. If you're trying to buy a player, BUY him for crying out loud. There's a guy who runs a website listing the all-time enemies list for Kentucky basketball. (Talk about needing a life). I'm proud to report I've been number one on that list for many years ahead of such villains as Sports Illustrated, Billy Packer and Bob Knight. He was absolutely right to complain about me getting the dollar figure wrong. I'd also say he's sort of missing the forest for the trees but that's another story for another day. |
JPS Note: This was an interesting but completely predictable response from Feinstein, since he already had written an article attacking me with personal insults over 10 years previous to this personal attack. He can whine all he wants but it really doesn't take much effort for me to periodically document his lies. If anything, I treat it as a public service to anyone who erroneously presumes that Feinstein holds any type of professional standards when it comes to UK. Not to mention a word of warning to anyone thinking of entering the profession of journalism that truth and accuracy still count for something.
I did go ahead and wrote an open response (my second with the first coming after the personal attack back in 1998) for Feinstein to mull over, which is available here. Although in this particular case, the Washington Post did finally do a credible job by forcing him to make a correction, it does beg the question as to how low the state of journalism has sunk that it took them so long to do so, given how consistently and incessantly Feinstein has lied. Why he's still employed by anyone, I frankly can't explain it.
 |  |  |  |
| Four examples of modern reporters who have been exposed for their lies. Of these, only John Feinstein is allowed to continue impersonating a professional journalist, revealing just how low integrity in Sports Journalism in particular has fallen. | |||
During Tony Kornheiser's show on February 11, 2010, Feinstein was asked about rumors that Louisville coach Rick Pitino was interested in the New Jersey Nets job. The discussion led to reasons why Pitino would consider leaving his job as head man of the Louisville Cardinals which consisted of his illicit encounter with Karen Sypher and the fact that Kentucky's new coach John Calipari had in short time brought Kentucky back to become the juggernaut it was in the past, which threatened Pitino's stature.
This led to the following exchange:
 |
John Feinstein: Is now ranked #2 in the country.
Tony Kornheiser: And now being coached by a guy who can get great recruits, even if they're there only one year, can get them year after year after year. Right ?
John Feinstein: I made a comment to somebody, maybe even Andy and Steve because they were asking me about why Duke has been, you know, good but not great the last five years and hasn't been to a Final Four since 2004. And I said, you know, in most programs, you cannot just have four-year players, because you need a couple of those superstar types who are only going to stay a year or two. And you cannot just have one-and-dones, unless you're John Calipari. John Calipari can win with one-and-dones. He did it at Memphis and he's doing it again this year at Kentucky.
Tony Kornheiser: It's pretty amazing isn't it ?
John Feinstein: Well, you know, a coach who I will not name, said to me not that long ago that he thinks John Calipari is, this are his words, 'Is the most dangerous coach in college basketball.'
And I said 'why'.
And he said 'Because he's a hell of a coach, he's a nice guy, everybody likes him and he cheats his butt off.'
Tony Kornheiser: Well he's certainly been involved in scandals.
John Feinstein: He's had two. Yeah, you know, if you want to go and lawyer up the whole thing, he was never technically implicated either at UMASS or Memphis. That said, both of those final Fours were vacated.
My theory has always been, the head coach gets the credit and he gets the big bucks when things go well, he needs to take the blame when they don't.
And I like John too, I've known John since he was working for Larry Brown for Kansas in the 80's and I first met him actually at Five Star, and I like him, and I do think he's a hell of a coach.
But I think Wilbon had a pretty good description, years ago, (obviously he and John were never close, otherwise he'd be writing that John should be in the Hall of Fame) when he said: "We all know John tends to color outside the lines." And I think that's probably a pretty fair assessment.
JPS Note: Nice journalism there on Feinstein's part. Making vague and unsupported claims based on innuendo and unnamed sources. Good thing for Calipari that Feinstein likes him [sarcasm]. Seriously, it's professionally irresponsible for someone to publicly slur someone and insinuate they are a cheater without providing any evidence whatsoever to support it.
In the case of Marcus Camby at UMASS!!! taking money from street agent John Lounsbury (who incidentally also admitted to giving money to Camby's teammate Michael Williams and Connecticut star Ray Allen), there is no evidence after an investigation by both the school and the NCAA that Calipari or his staff knew of such payments. Unfortunately, if an athlete is intent on ignoring the NCAA rules and ignoring the warnings given by the coaches and administrators, illegal payments from street agents can't be completely prevented by anyone.
In the case of Derrick Rose and his questionable SAT score, again there was no evidence after an investigation was held by the NCAA that Calipari was aware of, much less had a role in, Rose's test score. In fact, the only thing the NCAA investigation did accomplish was to once again bring into question the fairness of the NCAA itself, given that they completely went against their own precedent (which they established when they gave Duke University a free pass from having their records expunged despite admissions in open court that Corey Maggette had been paid illegal inducements) when they decided to strip Memphis of their NCAA victories in which Rose played [a decision which is currently under appeal]. The NCAA did this not because of anything Memphis did but because of what they supposedly should have known, despite the fact that Rose was given the green light to play by the NCAA Clearinghouse.
Beyond that, it brings into question the competence and sincerity of the NCAA when it was found that they simply assumed the worst after their investigation of the validity of Rose's test were inconclusive. Instead the NCAA chose to declare Rose ineligible in essence because Rose did not respond to inquiries which ETS claims to have sent him (which were reportedly mailed to a home in Chicago despite the fact that anyone in America knew that he was in Memphis at the time the letters were sent.) Even a intern in his first week could have done a better job locating Rose if they truly were intent on getting their questions answered. Rose, BTW, has said on the record to reporters that he himself took the test.
Regardless, the point remains that Feinstein and others have referred to Calipari as a 'cheater', yet have continually failed to provide any specific examples of him cheating, which includes the above two examples since neither of them implicates Calipari directly. Simply referring to the two Final Fours that were vacated under Calipari's tenure, without any specific examples of wrong-doing is not only sloppy journalism but irresponsible in the worst way.
As a Kentucky fan, who has lived through the probation years of the late 80's and early 90's, I fully expect the Kentucky coach and staff, whoever they may be, to abide by the NCAA rules, to ensure the athletes are receiving an education and not to jeopardize Kentucky's ability to compete on the court. If John Calipari was to be found to be cheating at Kentucky, I would be one of the first to want him out of town.
However, the point that Feinstein and others seem to fail to acknowledge is that just because Calipari or any coach at Kentucky might sign good recruits does not automatically mean he is cheating. Believe it or not, there are a lot of perfectly valid reasons that a basketball recruit would choose to attend the University of Kentucky over other schools. In the case of John Calipari, having someone who has a track record of getting players prepared for the NBA is a big plus, as is the fact that he has good rapport with the players and employs an exciting and effective style of basketball which is effective in winning games. Beyond that, the national exposure, the facilities, the fan support, the tradition, the academic resources etc. that UK affords are all top-notch, and all valid factors.
Kentucky is a special place for basketball and it's not a surprise that a coach can be successful in Lexington, in fact it's entirely expected and predictable. The expectation is that John Calipari will be successful and compete on a national level without resorting to cheating. If that turns out not to be the case, Calipari will be out and someone else will get the opportunity to lead the program.
Feinstein and his ilk can (and no doubt will) continue to insinuate all they want, but until they actually come out with concrete evidence for their claims, the only thing they will accomplish is to continue to sully their own 'reputations', such as they are.
As for his 'theory' about the coach taking the blame when things turn bad, I won't be holding my breath waiting for the hypocrite Feinstein to attack Coach Krzyzewski of Duke for not stepping down for playing Corey Maggette. [something that Feinstein should have done if his claims about the coach taking the fall for wayward players and their mistakes was actually sincere, which it obviously isn't.]
In an article for CBS Sports Radio ("John Feinstein Blog: John Calipari Has Changed for the Worse," March 12, 2014), Feinstein seized on the fact that John Calipari's highly touted group of freshman appeared to be struggling to live up to the hoopla they entered school with.
Wrote Feinstein:
"This year was going to be different. Calipari really LIKED the new freshman group. They were tough. They were hugely talented. They were tabbed by the so-called experts as the best recruiting class since The Fab Five. (Which, NCAA sanctions aside, never won a championship). There were whispers about 40-0, which Calipari didn't discourage.
"Fast forward four months. Kentucky is 22-9 and lucky to have played in a weak SEC. Maybe they will make a March run in the NCAA Tournament - because they will be in the field this year. Their one quality win all season? Louisville and Pitino, naturally.
"Calipari hasn't handled the disappointing regular season very well. He's sniped at his team publicly - accusing the players of not 'taking ownership,' even though he's now paid $5.5 million a year to 'own,' and lead the players HE recruited. He's whined about how young the team is - that's the way he PLANS it each season, no? He's accused the players of not buying in, of not being emotionally committed. A couple weeks ago he got thrown out during an embarrassing loss to South Carolina and then ducked the media afterwards claiming he had to do his radio show. As if the media wouldn't have waited until he finished his (paid) radio bit."
JPS Note: Good thing Feinstein counts Calipari as a personal friend, otherwise he really would have let him have it. [/sarcasm]
/
Anyway, yes Calipari struggled with his young team early in the season, and yes their record wasn't as good as people were expecting/hoping.
Feinstein seems to want to get upset because the players weren't coddled by Calipari. As a Kentucky fan I expect that if the players are underperforming that they shouldn't be coddled. Or at least the coach should try different approaches during the season to find a formula that works.
And you know what ? Calipari to his credit, and no thanks to Feinstein's advice, was finally able to get his team back on track. They did go on a March run, making it to the N.C.A.A. championship game after beating a gauntlet of quality opponents to get there.
In August 2014, Kentucky Sports Radio host Matt Jones was at the Valhalla Golf Club for the PGA tour and found himself across from John Feinstein in the media tent, while each was doing their radio shows.
Jones took the opportunity to interview Feinstein on his attitude toward Kentucky fans, among other things. The full transcript is at this link although below are some snippets from some parts of the exchange which are particularly relevant to this webpage:
|
That there are things about Kentucky basketball through history that I have disapproved of and not liked, that is fair to say.
|
JPS Response: It's interesting to hear Feinstein claim that he didn't dislike Kentucky going back to 1978. His writing in his book Forever's Team suggest otherwise. But who's to quibble?
What Feinstein says later on is more interesting, and hypocritical. Feinstein claims that a reason why he doesn't like Kentucky is due to the information suggested in the 1985 Herald-Leader articles.
He then goes on to absolve Duke of any and all responsibility for their scandals (which not only included Corey Maggette but more recently Lance Thomas who received a nearly $70,000 loan for purchase of jewelry while Thomas was still playing for Duke.)
Feinstein seems to pin his conclusion on the fact that the N.C.A.A. failed to penalize Duke for this benefit, yet what Feinstein failed to recognize is that Kentucky was not penalized for any of the potential violations mentioned in the Herald-Leader either. Yet he still wants to hold this against UK? Seems like a double-standard on his part.
Feinstein did get something right: the scandals aren't comparable, as nothing at Kentucky approached $70,000 worth of benefits.
As far as the comment about Kentucky having been shut down for an entire season, that was back in the early 1950's. This is discussed in detail on the 1952-53 page. There's a lot more details and angles to that story than can be adequately described here, and certainly not in Feinstein's abbreviated statement. Suffice to say that UK's season was wiped out largely because UK allowed it to be, by choosing to not appeal the N.C.A.A.'s decision but instead to take the punishment as-is.
|
And this isn't going to make Kentucky fans happy, but I'm going to say it anyway because it's what I believe. I think there are places, Kentucky is ONE of them, where sports is too important. In this case it's basketball. I think football is too important in the entire ... ,college football, is too important in the entire Southeast.
Kentucky fans can see me anyway they want. But the answer always is: 'Oh, well isn't everyone else guilty?'
|
JPS Response: I'm not a UK fan who always answers with the 'Everyone is guilty' line of defense. That's intellectually dishonest of Feinstein to suggest that this is ALWAYS the answer.
Kentucky has made mistakes in the past and has been punished for it. I don't have a problem with that.
Where I have had problems is in some cases where I believe the N.C.A.A. handed down punishment without sufficient proof, or even a plausible explanation for their conclusions. I also believe the N.C.A.A, a few times, has overstepped their authority.
Beyond that I have had problems when the N.C.A.A. and yes, some reporters, have skewed their investigations toward particular schools, to the exclusion of others.
North Carolina is a perfect example. Feinstein himself talks about how he's been a great admirer of the University of North Carolina program, but we're now learning that the entire UNC program was a sham, and has been for decades due to institutionalized cheating done in order to keep their athletes eligible.
Feinstein also obviously holds a lot of respect for Dean Smith, but it was under Smith's regime that this cheating was created and was fostered to the point that players were graduating from the school without being truly educated.
That is exploitation at its worst, and Feinstein has no response but to feel 'disappointed'. If this had gone on at Kentucky I have to believe he would have been significantly more outraged. I'm pretty sure he would have penned an article or two about it. But for the cherished Tar Heels ? Not a peep from him.
The fact that the African American Studies Department was used as the primary vehicle to commit this fraud and to cheat predominantly black athletes out of an education is especially galling and a travesty.
Where the 'everybody does it' line I think is valid, is when asking why reporters such as Feinstein fixate on criticizing one school (in his case Kentucky) to the exclusion of others. There are many examples shown on this very page where Feinstein digs back 10, 20, 50 years to take a shot at Kentucky when there are more recent, and frankly more valid, examples right in front of him, yet he fails to acknowledge them.
|
All those kids go to school there, their parents end up with great jobs in the city. I think the things that happen in Durham are the same things that happen everywhere else, yet somehow he is so ... it's considered more pristine because Duke is considered a 'good' school. And so we look aside that Sheldon Williams and all these people's parents end up working, they end up moving from Alaska, in Carlos Boozer's case and end up with ...
You all never bring that up, and I don't understand that. That happens everywhere, but at Duke we look past it...
And see, the point here ... and what bothers me is you've got a tweet today, from somebody saying that I had said: 'You can tell the Kentucky fans, because they're loud and out of place?' |
JPS Response: I believe Feinstein that he talked personally with Duke Coach Mike Krzyzewski at some point over his concerns, but I don't believe for a second that he openly criticized Duke (via a national medium such as writing an article) over Carolos Boozer's dad, or Chris Duhon's mom etc. getting a high paying job from Duke boosters in the Triangle while their sons were playing basketball there.
If he did, then he or a reader can kindly point me to such an article and I'll gladly retract this.
To me this is yet another clear case of hypocrisy on the part of John Feinstein. If something like this had happened at Kentucky, Feinstein would be all over it and would certainly have written an article or two with national reach. (More likely he'd likely be repeating himself for the next 20+ years, oftentimes getting the actual details mangled along the way as is his custom.)
It is interesting to note that Feinstein quickly tried to divert the conversation to a completely different topic, and one which he knew had no substance and was a misunderstanding. IMO he switched topics for good reason, since mentioning Duke's issues reveals his double-standards.
|
And I was: 'Why wouldn't he just talk about what a hell of a basketball player he was?'
|
JPS Response: I find it insincere that Feinstein was so baffled by John Calipari's remarks.
To me it was clear what Calipari's motives were, and that was to directly challenge the mindset of many sportswriters (including John Feinstein) present and others who automatically assume that just because someone is a good basketball player that they don't attend classes, or don't work hard in the classroom.
And to Matt Jones' point this assumption was often made directly against Kentucky, when the reality is that by-and-large the opposite is true.
John Wall was not a great student (i.e. certainly compared to the likes of Brandon Knight), but he was certainly capable and when he came to Kentucky he made a commitment to not only his family but to Kentucky to do his classwork and finish out the semester, even though he had decided to enter his name into the NBA draft. To his credit he made good on that commitment and Calipari was recognizing him for such.
Under Calipari nearly every other basketball player has done the same (the lone exception being Daniel Orton, who wasn't even a Calipari recruit). This, along with other initiatives to bring back players who have exhausted their eligibility to return to school and finish their degrees etc., shows a commitment to education by Calipari, the basketball program, the athletic department and the school.
So when Bobby Knight, or John Feinstein or some other naysayer makes a remark insinuating that these players don't go to class, or skip out taking any classes the second semester (yes some have erroneously claimed this), it's not only untrue, but it's insulting to the players who are putting in the time and effort, and a sign of sheer ignorance on the part of the critic.
|
You can't sit here Matt, and tell me that their history is PERFECT. It's not!
|
JPS Response: It's nice to hear that Feinstein can at least admit that Kentucky is 'good'. Still doesn't explain his obsession with criticizing them disproportionate to any other school, however.
And nice straw-man argument by trying to assume Matt claimed UK's history was perfect. I don't know of anyone who has made such an argument. UK's history isn't perfect, and most serious UK fans are fully aware of that fact. But then neither are any of the other schools, who Feinstein treats differently than he does UK, perfect either.
|
In the semi-finals, who did Kentucky beat?
|
JPS Response: This is illuminating to me to learn that John Feinstein still actually holds the belief that Rupp "had a history of saying he didn't want black players."
Not only is there no first-hand evidence of this, if anything it's the opposite as there is plenty of evidence which illustrates that Rupp was working diligently to integrate UK's basketball program, despite the fact that at the time no one else in the SEC had made any effort and was in fact largely hostile to the idea. Rupp was outspoken enough in favor of integration that he and the University were the targets of hate mail and death threats.
First of all, Rupp coached black players in the 1920's while he was a high school coach of basketball and track.
 |
For example the photograph above shows Rupp (far right side second row) with the Freeport track team, including David Lipscombe (seated on first row third from left) and William Moseley (fourth from left). They, along with Moseley's younger sister Katherine were the only black students in the entire school (of about 800 students) at the time.
Beyond that, Rupp went out of his way to coach black players in exhibitions, to instruct black coaches at coaching clinics etc. even during a time period when it was against state law for blacks and whites to be educated together in the same classroom.
Rupp was vocal in the national press indicating his willingness and desire to sign black players to his basketball team. When the University finally gave him the authority, that is exactly what he did, starting with offering a scholarship to Wes Unseld in 1964 and continuing every year thereafter for the remainder of his career.
Where I think Feinstein and others likely gets misled on this issue is the often-repeated claim with respect to Texas Western's coach Don Haskins telling his players before the 1966 National Championship game that Rupp had said something to the effect of 'no five black players could beat my team'.
The problem with this supposed quote is that there's no evidence whatsoever that Rupp ever said this. Through the years as reporters picked up and repeated the claim, Haskins distanced himself more and more from it to the point that he refused to speak of it. Unfortunately, very few reporters had the curiosity or fortitude to investigate whether there was any substance behind the remark, or whether it was simply a motivational ploy by Haskins to get his players psyched up for the game (which is what Dan Wetzel hints at in Haskins biography, Glory Road.)
Another claim which Rupp critics have taken out of context and run with is a remark in UK assistant coach Harry Lancaster's book about Rupp where Lancaster describes a meeting between Rupp and then-president of the University John Oswald, with Oswald reportedly wanting UK to sign black players and Rupp apparently refusing.
What is misleading about this is that the issue wasn't over whether Kentucky should recruit black players (indeed Rupp was already recruiting black players at the time), the issue was over whether they should partake in 'tokenism.'
Kentucky had already determined to allow their coaches to recruit black players under Frank Dickey, Oswald's predecessor. By the time Oswald was in office UK and Rupp were already actively recruiting black players. However Rupp was going after bona-fide players who he knew could succeed both on the court and off. He did this after consulting with Branch Rickey, who through Jackie Robinson successfully integrated the Brooklyn Dodgers and Major League Baseball.
Rupp did not agree with the idea of tokenism, and felt that taking a black player who it was not clear could succeed would put the player under undue scrutiny and would potentially place him in physical harm when travelling to the South and placing him on the bench where he would be a sitting duck for slurs and objects thrown from the stands. (which Kentucky already endured on the road, even being all-white.)
Oswald was apparently more interested in signing ANYONE, in order to tick off a box that the team was integrated and thus eligible for additional Federal funding for the school.
Rupp's critics (including apparently Feinstein) have seized on this exchange to claim that he did not want to recruit black players, when the actual facts during that time period demonstrates the exact opposite.
By the way, I don't know who Feinstein is referring to when he says there were TWO black players on the Duke freshman team in 1966. One was C.B. Claiborne. Who the other is I have no idea, who he's referring to. (and a quick look at Duke's 1966 freshman team photo doesn't appear to support his claim.) Even if Feinstein is correct (not a given with his poor track record with facts), this mystery player didn't stick around to play varsity.
Claiborne is actually an example of what I am talking about with respect to tokenism. Claiborne was known as a good student, but not a particularly good basketball player.
Claiborne endured a number of slights during his time in Durham, including not being able to attend the team's banquet due to it being held in a country club that did not allow black guest. It's not certain, BTW, that Duke ever awarded him a scholarship. This was a common tactic among some schools during that time period (both northern and southern), i.e. to not only adhere to a quota of black players on their team but oftentimes to not provide a scholarship to them while providing them to white players.
Maybe what Matt Jones should have asked Feinstein is whether he supports tokenism? Because this is exactly what he's praising Duke for when he claims that they were measurably ahead of Kentucky with respect to the issue of integration of their teams.
For the record, while I wish that Rupp had been more aggressive and more successful in recruiting black players during that era, I think he was correct to shun tokenism as a quick fix. He was correct at the time and still correct even looking back 50+ years with the advantage of hindsight.
Feinstein and the other Rupp critics either 1.) don't really understand what the real issues were at the time or 2.) believe that tokenism is laudable and a legitimate means of saying you accomplished something.
|
... both talking at same time...
Will you do me a favor and say, racist UK Rupp AND Duke?
Rupp is the symbol. Everybody gets to be a symbol for good and for bad.
|
JPS Response: It's nice for Feinstein to recognize that there were other institutions who struggled with integration and the issue of race beyond Kentucky.
But it is interesting to me that he still holds this sort of sacred trust when it comes to Dean Smith and North Carolina. For the record, Dean Smith was head coach at UNC for SIX seasons before he had a black player (Charlie Scott) on the varsity team. (and more if you count Smith's time as assistant coach).
Smith did try the token route at one point by having a black player (Willie Cooper) on the freshman team earlier, but he wasn't offered a scholarship and never ended up playing varsity.
It's noteworthy to me that Feinstein heaps praise on Dean Smith when neither he nor Rupp were successful in terms of integrating their teams during the early 60's.
Yet at the time Rupp was actively offering scholarships to black players (when Smith was not), Rupp was hosting black players in Lexington (going back to the early 1950's both during the regular season and for events such as the Olympic trials) when UNC was still not hosting integrated teams on their campus more than a decade later, and Rupp was quoted nationally saying he was in favor of integration, when there have been no such quotes seen from Dean Smith. [If anyone knows of any please let me know. I've looked and asked numerous persons and have been unsuccessful.]
Much has been made of an occurrence when Dean Smith was an assistant coach that he took a black student with him to The Pines restaurant. That's to his credit, but it was only that one afternoon. The stunt did not result in any fundamental change in policies at the restaurant or in the town of Chapel Hill. In fact, a number of years later that very same restaurant was the scene of organized sit-ins, which resulted in protesters getting doused with bleach and urine.
In comparison, Rupp (who is vilified by Feinstein and many others) was instrumental in arranging hotel accommodations for St. John's in 1951, which had black player Solly Walker. This began a parade of integrated opponents who travelled to Lexington in the 1950's and 1960's to play and were accommodated at local Lexington Hotels (such as the Phoenix and the Lafayette) as a matter of course.
I don't know for a fact if Rupp was the first to secure accommodations for blacks in Lexington hotels but he certainly made it commonplace, and this set the stage for broader integration among other businesses in the city.
There were some instances of problems, such as in the late '50s when someone at one of the hotels refused to serve an integrated Temple team in the hotel's dining room. This prompted Rupp to drive down to the hotel to personally ream out the manager and ensure that the team was served.
Yet despite this, Rupp is still labelled as evil by Feinstein and others. Note that the above examples are not meant to criticize Dean Smith, as much to contrast one person (Smith) who is nearly universally lauded for his stance/accomplishments on race, and in fact has been awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom largely based on this.
In contrast, a second person (Rupp who by many measures did appreciably more positives with respect to race prior to and during that exact time period than Smith did) is generally scorned.
The remainder of the exchange starts to get to the crux of the matter. That is that Rupp is a convenient symbol for Feinstein. He is singled out because he was so successful. The actual facts don't seem to matter.
This desire to scape-goat Kentucky and Rupp is so strong that Feinstein refuses to agree to name anyone else. It's kind of a step forward that Feinstein is willing to acknowledge and generalize the numerous other schools and throw them under the bus as well for not doing more with respect to integration (which IMO is largely justified)
But it does beg the question why he feels the need to single out UK, when in many aspects they were the leader. [For example it was UK who first took the step to open their athletic programs to black players without the SEC's consent and prior to the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (which in theory assured accommodations for black persons in the South.)]
So what are the takeaways from this interview ? I took away that:
1.) Feinsein judges Kentucky using criteria that he refuses to hold against other schools, in particular his own alma mater Duke.
2.) Feinstein judges Rupp based on a false premise (i.e. that he didn't want to recruit black players). This reveals either Feinstein ignorance of history or his willingness to set aside facts to push his own agenda.
3.) Kentucky and Rupp are singled out for criticism because they have been so successful.
I actually consider this progress. Baby steps... But progress.
A few months later, in January 2015, Jones had Feinstein on his show again to discuss some comments that Feinstein made to Louisville writer Rick Bozich, in relation to Feinstein being the only sportswriter in the country to vote Virginia #1 in the Associated Press poll, when everyone else in the poll voted Kentucky #1.
Beyond that, Feinstein made some interesting comments regarding a proposed game in 2016 between Kentucky and University Texas El-Paso to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the 1966 National Championship game. Feinstein wrote to Bozich "Far more relevant (than the AP vote) is Kentucky's refusal to play UTEP on the 50th anniversary of the most important college game ever played. Kentucky people always yammer about how Rupp was unfairly cast as a racist, villain. Fine, let's play the game and let the story be told from BOTH sides. THAT matters, not my stupid vote in the AP poll..." ("Bozich: Feinstein on Voting Virginia #1 -- and the Kentucky comparisons," WDRB.com by Rick Bozich, January 28, 2015.)
Note that the interview itself can be heard at this link and a full transcript of their discussion is at this page.
First of all, the whole debate about whether Kentucky or Virginia deserved to be #1 is frankly academic. It's an opinion. (A poor one on the part of Feinstein, but still an opinion.)
About the only noteworthy take-away from the whole back-and-forth is that Feinstein admits that he really doesn't take his role as an AP voter very seriously, including admitting that he regularly uses his 25th pick NOT for the team who he thinks is the 25th best team in the country but instead for a team he thinks could use a little publicity. None of that is particularly surprising, especially given the casual and sloppy ways he's approached the rest of his supposedly professional work, to go along with his elitist attitudes.
The more relevant parts of the discussion, at least in terms of this page, are with respect to Feinstein's attitudes toward the 1966 National Championship game and Rupp. Below are some of the more germane parts:
|
You said to me last August, when we talked both on, and I think off the air, that it was unfair that people made Rupp out to be a racist, that the Duke team that lost to Kentucky, and you're 100% right, was all-white too back in 1966. Kentucky happened to be, as it turned out, in the wrong place at the wrong time. So why not play that game again, play it at Maryland. You know it would be great for college basketball and allow the story to be told on both sides?
First of all I would not have minded if they played it. Initially it got sort of rumored, I was for it. But I also understand, I'm here in a store full of Kentucky fans, I also understand that in that story, people like you, and it's not just you, believe me. But people have always painted us as the villain. Not just as a participant in a historic game. You've painted us as Bull Connor. And why if we were Bull Connor, do we show up for our national beating again?
I can sit here and explain why I think Rupp's reputation is unfair, and I do think it is somewhat unfair. I don't think he's the gold standard that some Kentucky fans do, but I also think it's somewhat unfair. But it doesn't really matter, because in the national consciousness, he's Bull Connor. So why show up to get beaten by the media again? And then to say do you think the media is going to give John Calipari, who most of the media hate, credit? No. We're showing up to get whipped again. Why would we do that?
|
JPS Response: Like Jones, I personally have mixed feelings about a potential rematch as well. While I think it would be interesting and historically significant, and would like very much to attend such a game in person if possible, I also completely understand how this game will be portrayed by the media, given their abysmal and frankly shameful performance to date.
Jones makes a valid point that Kentucky would be placed in the role of the bad guys by the media, regardless of how much time has passed and regardless of the fact that none of the players were around then. Too bad Feinstein chose to avoid answering the question by using the Calipari claim to go off a tangent, in effect using that to avoid actuallly answering the central question that had been posed. But that's Feinstein for you.
|
If Kentucky were to play UTEP, next year or whenever would you write an article ...
|
JPS Response: It's hilarious to hear Feinstein claim that he hasn't tried to paint Rupp as a one-dimensional racist figure. All it takes is to read some of the many quotes above from Feinstein on this topic to see that this is EXACTLY what Feinstein's done for many years.
One thing Matt Jones is incorrect on, is that Feinstein did not make these types of comments in his book about the '78 Duke team, or really for many years after that.
Although he certainly has hated Kentucky for many decades, based on his quotes earlier in this page it doesn't appear that he really bought into (or at least publicly embraced) the whole 'Rupp is racist' narrative until after North Carolina coach Dean Smith passed Rupp in the all-time wins list around 1997.
Feinstein has gone on to not only become a huge critic of Rupp, but has also become a huge cheerleader for North Carolina's Dean Smith, which is somewhat strange given that Duke and UNC are supposedly huge rivals.
It's also kind of interesting given the more recent events which have revealed that much of the 'Carolina Way' and mystique that was largely germinated under Dean Smith (and cultivated by a generation of sportswriters and media members including John Feinstein) has largely proven to be a complete sham, with the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill guilty of institutionalized fraud which not only gave UNC an unfair advantage in the athletic realm, but it served to cheat student-athletes (many of them minorities) out of a legitimate education!
Maybe instead of falling back on his tired bogeyman in Rupp, Feinstein should get down on his knees and beg forgiveness for being a part of one of the biggest frauds in this country's history. In hindsight, UNC's massive cheating should have been uncovered decades ago, if anyone in the media had cared to dig, which apparently none did.
(As an aside, in the early 1990's when the Raleigh News & Observer published average entering SAT scores of incoming football and basketball players for the ACC schools and compared them to school's graduation rates of those athletes, there was largely a direct relationship between the quality of the student entering these schools and their ability to graduate. A direct correlation, that is, except for a single school, the University of North Carolina, which had a completely inverse relationship. At UNC-Chapel Hill, the athletes entered the school with the absolute lowest average scores of any ACC school, yet miraculously had the absolute highest graduation rate in the league!)
That should have been a huge red flag to someone in the media, but apparently most of them had bought into the 'Carolina mystique' so much that they'd literally believe anything about the school (no matter how illogical) that put it in a superior light. And Feinstein, along with many of his comrades in the media, were not only at the forefront of this blissful ignorance, they were some of the prime instigators in spreading this ignorance to the general public.
But back to the exchange; Feinstein is disingenuous in his claims that he has been fair to Rupp and painted him as anything but a one-dimensional caricature. That's not unusual, given that many in the media have resorted to making Rupp the symbol and scape-goat for segregation in college basketball. Part of the reason for this, IMO, is that it's far easier to point fingers at a designated scape-goat than it is to take a serious look at your own house.
Beyond this, Feinstien makes the rather astounding admission that he has "never delved into this in detail beyond as a reader"! So he's spent all these documented times disparaging Rupp and making serious conclusions and charges against the man, yet he's never actually researched the topic himself!
That would be amazing, except for the fact that this is John Feinstein we're talking about. As evidenced by the information detailed in this page, Feinstein has never been a talented, nor a serious researcher. He's a prolific author, yes, but facts and accuracy have never been his strong suit.
It is good that two of the people Feinstein knows personally also knew Rupp well (Dave Kindred and Arnold "Red" Auerbach), and they have both been vocal defenders of Rupp over this very issue. One would like to think that would be enough to give Feinstein pause, and maybe it has caused him to open his mind up a little more of late, but clearly Feinstein has rushed to judgement over an issue which he is willfully ignorant.
Of course that's no excuse. On this particular topic (Rupp and integration), this page by itself has provided enough factual evidence to directly contradict and call into question most all of what Feinstein has claimed in the past. Beyond that there's certainly additional information on this topic readily available to anyone who has an interest in learning more and actually educating yourself on the topic to the point that even if you disagree, you can make intelligent and factual comments, rather than ignorant and inaccurate statements as Feinstein has done many times.
|
|
JPS Response: As with the interview in August, once John Feinstein gets uncomfortable with the discussion, he habitually deflects and turns the conversation to how he believes he's been mistreated by UK fans.
Pathetic, given the way he's treated UK fans over the years.
Beyond that, even when confronted by the mere mention of this page, which goes into painstaking detail detailing many of his ridiculous rants about UK, he has nothing to say in his defense beyond once again trying to deflect the blame by saying it's due to 'people in Kentucky who make WAY too much out of college basketball' rather than his own actions.
Kind of rich coming from someone who's entire adult life has been based on coverage of sports. It literally makes zero sense for himself to be so invested in sports and then to cry when someone takes issue with his (many) mistakes.
Beyond that, of course the presence of this page (and in particular the lengthy section about Feinstein which continues to grow and grow year after year) can be traced to one person, and one person only: John Feinstein.
If Feinstein wants to stop being badgered by UK fans, or not thought of as a 'hater', then all he has to do is to stop making idiotic, mean spirited and above all ill-informed claims about UK's basketball program. It's really not that difficult to comprehend.
Until such time that Feinstein finally recognizes this basic concept, then this page will continue to document his idiocy, and will continue to grow accordingly.
JPS Note: Anyone who is tired of Feinstein's garbage might consider letting media outlets such as NPR, the the Washington Post and ESPN know about his mockery of the position which they have inexplicably afforded him.
| Synopsis | |
| Current Irritation Score |
- 8 |
| Height of Irritation |
- 10 |
| Notes: Feinstein is one class act (NOT). It's going to bite him in the ass some day. | |
Back to top.
Sports Illustrated has been a consistent detractor of Kentucky. After UK went on probation for recruiting and other violations, SI ran a cover of a dejected player with the title "Kentucky Shame" (May 29, 1989). Their writers including Curry Kirkpatrick and Alexander Wolff have all consistently written anti-UK material. Wolff in particular wrote Raw Recruits which devotes approximately one-third of its length to Kentucky. Much of what these writers have written has dealt with legendary UK coach Adolph Rupp and his alleged racist attitudes. SI has played a major role in advancing this idea to the country. The amazing thing is that SI writers tend to include these shots at Rupp even when an article's subject has nothing to do with Rupp whatsoever.
| Article Title | Date | Writer | Premise of Story |
|---|---|---|---|
| Obligatory Shot at Rupp/UK | |||
 | |||
| Kentucky's Shame | May 29, 1989 | Curry Kirkpatrick | Kentucky is hit with NCAA violations |
| "Rupp's problems weren't as much with the NCAA as with the changing times. he dragged his heels on using black players until near the end of his career and that created grave difficulties for his successor, Joe B. Hall" "Proud, elegant Kentucky stood threadbare, stripped of its medals and conceits, dispossessed of image and reputation, exposed as a common NCAA felon." | |||
| |||
| The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down | April 1, 1990 | Curry Kirkpatrick | Adolph Rupp was the biggest racist in college basketball |
| "Rupp was usually a charming p.r. rogue, brimming with diplomacy and psychology, regrettably, his politics leaned more toward the KKK." | |||
| |||
| On the Scene | Spring 1996 | Alexander Wolff | Kentucky wins Sixth National Championship |
| "And it's where, one day in the early '60s, Jimmy Breslin, then a young clerk on the sports desk of the New York Journal-American, took a phone call from Wildcats coach Adolph Rupp during which the Kentucky coach asked if the paper would kindly indicate 'colored' high school players with asterisks so Rupp would know where not to bother to send recruiters." | |||
| |||
| Dean of Coaches | Spring 1997 | Alexander Wolff | Dean Smith is the Greatest |
| "But there's a more meaningful contrast between Smith and Kentucky coach Adolph Rupp, whose alltime victory record Smith broke. In 1964, at a time when Smith was joining a pastor and a black theology student to integrate The Pines, a Chapel Hill restaurant, Rupp was asking a sports editor to affix an asterisk to the names of black players in high school box scores so he might know where not to bother to send his recruiters." | |||
| |||
| Courtside at the NCAA Tournament | March 1997 | Seth Davis | Dean Smith is the Greatest |
| "Dean Smith has been a paragon of grace, integrity and class. That is in stark contrast to the man he replaced as college basketball's alltime winningest coach, Kentucky's Adolph Rupp, who was the game's George Wallace when it came to integrating black players. For most of his career, Rupp fought tooth and nail against the inclusion of blacks into the game. His all-white team's loss to all-black Texas Western in the 1966 NCAA championship games has often been called the Brown v. Board of Education of college basketball. Smith, meanwhile, was at the vanguard of that movement. . . . Garnering win No. 877 was a remarkable achievement for Dean Smith, but in my mind, when it comes to the things that really matter, Dean Smith surpassed Adolph Rupp a long, long time ago." | |||
| |||
| Comeback Cats | April 6 1998 | Alexander Wolff | Kentucky wins Seventh National Championship |
| "But for the man [Tubby Smith] who took [Rick] Pitino's place, success is more like an imperative, at least to a black man coaching at a place that rose to prominence under [Adolph] Rupp, who well into his retirement was telling sportswriters that the game suffered from having too many blacks playing it." | |||
JPS Note: Adolph Rupp coached a black player in 1927, four years before Dean Smith was even born. He also recruited a black player, Wes Unseld (in 1964), before Dean Smith recruited his first black scholarship player, Charlie Scott.
In 1995, a story was included in the Scorecard section which blasted Kentucky for not standing by idly when Rodrick Rhodes made good on his predetermined and ill-advised leap to the NBA draft.
"'Overbooking' is a hoary tradition at Air Wildcat - remember the 1986 comment by Eddie Sutton, Kentucky's coach at the time: 'I'll bring in a whole new team each year if I want to' - and running players off is a lamentable consequence of that practice. It seems unlikely that an NBA team will want someone a college team doesn't, but Rhodes can only hope one does." - by Alexander Wolff and Christian Stone, "Hitting the Rhode," Sports Illustrated, April 10, 1995.
JPS Note: Rhodes was not run off. He ignored Pitino's advice to stay in school. The fact that Kentucky did not allow that setback to affect the program but instead went out and signed a better player may irritate people like Alexander Wolff, but that's not exactly a valid reason for UK to stop recruiting players to fill their needs. Wolff can allude to Kentucky running off players but the fact is that he can't point to any case where a player was run off from Kentucky. If he wants to point to an example of overbooking, he should look no further than his alma mater, UNC-Chapel Hill, which regularly signs and maintains far more high school All-Americans than any other program in the nation.
In 1996, Sports Illustrated ran a story entitled "A Man Possessed" which cast Rick Pitino as an obsessed man with no compassion or redeeming qualities, only a self-absorbing inner drive to achieve basketball greatness . Pitino was incensed at the characterization, especially at the illustrations which seem to suggest that he is a wife abuser.
"I felt in this day and age of spousal abuse, tying your wife to a backboard was criminal (on the magazine's part), " Pitino said. "I thought making me look like I was possessed by the devil... if they said obsessed it would be one thing, but possessed." - by Scott Cain, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, January 26, 1997.
In response to this, Pitino asked for a public apology from the magazine but has yet to receive it.
"I thought that they lowered their character. I think they lowered everything about the magazine. I always had a great respect for the magazine. I lost total respect. - Rick Pitino, by Scott Cain, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, January 26, 1997.
Sports Illustrated, unlike many of the others on this list, continues to be detractors of Kentucky at times. To their credit, they did do a fairly positive piece after Kentucky won the championship in 1996 and their occasional use of William F. (Billy) Reed for special articles has somewhat softened their overall position. With the ascension of Dean Smith as all-time winningest coach and his later retirement along with the hiring of Tubby Smith at UK however, SI has recently jumped back into their old ways of bashing UK.
There is a ray of hope though. In a January 19, 1998 article, Alexander Wolff wrote on Tubby Smith's move to Lexington. In the article, Wolff stuck to the facts and produced a quality piece of work. Although since that time, Frank Deford rejoined the magazine and the tone has apparently regressed back to previous times with their coverage of Kentucky's seventh national title in 1998.
In a May 11 Scorecard, Sports Illustrated covered the strange case of a hit-and-run by a Kentucky player which occurred in September of 1997. Police initially thought that Wayne Turner was the driver of the car based on the fact that the vehicle belonged to Turner's godfather and other circumstantial physical evidence. Turner, who had filed a stolen-vehicle report, denied that he was the driver of the car during the accident. Due in part to the lack of evidence against Turner and his denials of guilt, they didn't feel it was necessary at the time to press charges. Only later in 1998, did any legal action occur when Turner came forward to try and put the case behind him. Although he still denied any guilt in the incident, he knew the case looked strong against him and the possible consequences (a year in jail) were serious. Also, he did not have much money and could not afford a lengthy legal battle. When the opportunity presented itself for a plea-bargain, with Turner pleading guilty to a reduced charge of "failure to file an accident report," along with paying $97.50 in court fines and fees, Turner agreed.
The media jumped all over the incident, castigating Turner publicly and decrying what they perceived to be preferential treatment of him by the prosecutor's office. Sports Illustrated outlined the basics of the case in its brief, entitled "Hit-and-Run Offense" but beyond that, stated that Turner "admitted that he lied to police and filed a false stolen-vehicle report." The only problem is that Turner did no such thing. SI assumed that because Turner agreed to the plea bargain, that he was indeed guilty of the larger crime (hit-and-run) which he always denied. They went on to deduce that since Turner was guilty of the hit-and-run, he was also guilty of filing a false stolen-vehicle report, and guilty of lying to police because he denied responsibility in the matter.
After intense media scrutiny on Turner, the guilt finally caught up to the real driver of the car, Myron Anthony, who was Turner's teammate. Anthony came forward to coach Tubby Smith and then to the Lexington prosecutor to admit his guilt in the incident. It turns out that Turner was not present at the incident, but was indeed with his girlfriend at the time, as he claimed all along. Anthony later pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and received a $250 fine and 50 hours of community service. In response to this change in events, Sports Illustrated again revisited the saga a few weeks later in the May 25 (1998) issue in the Scorecard section. They now criticized Anthony but fell short of retracting their prior accusations that Turner was a liar. Beyond that, they still maintained in the follow-up article that Turner had admitted to police that he was the driver of the car during the hit-and-run. "Wayne Turner pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of failure to file an accident report after admitting to Lexington police that he was driving when a car owned by his godfather was involved in a hit-and-run accident last September." (Sports Illustrated, "Bad Rapping in Kentucky," May 25,1998.) Again, this was a basic fact that Turner had denied all along and which turned out to be the truth, yet Sports Illustrated still couldn't get it right even on their second attempt.
Many news organizations initially allowed their presumption of guilt on the part of Turner to suggest that he had lied to police, but only Sports Illustrated made the same mistake twice, and after sufficient time had elapsed to be able to write a factually solid article. Sports Illustrated also stands out in that they went beyond reporting the facts and delved into their typical denunciations of the Kentucky program which they seem to jump on at every opportunity, along with criticizing the Lexington prosecutors and court system.
JPS Note: I would suggest that Sports Illustrated master the art of journalism before they jump into and dictate how they believe the judicial system should operate. If SI had it's way, they would probably have had an innocent man behind bars by now.
In a May 10, 1999 article, Sports Illustrated took UK-Athletic director C.M. Newton to task for complaining about the transfer from Kentucky of two players late in the recruiting season. While SI does have some valid points concerning the inordinate power college coaches have over their players, the tone of the article was disrespectful toward Newton (calling him a "windbag") along with misrepresenting what he said.
Newton was voicing his concern because the players didn't make their decision to leave until a time when the recruiting season was nearly over and there was no time left to recruit a replacement. SI makes the counterargument that Newton is a hypocrite because Kentucky has benefitted from transfers to the program over the years. However, they ignore the fact that their counterargument doesn't address Newton's original point.
The author goes on write,
"Where was fairness when Kentucky made it clear to Rodrick Rhodes that there was no place for him on the team, forcing him to transfer to USC and sit out a year ?" - by Greg Kelly, Sports Illustrated, "High-handed Hoopocrites," May 10, 1999, pg. 27.
JPS Note: This is yet another example of someone not understanding the situation with Rhodes. While it's true that Kentucky didn't hold his scholarship once he decided to give it up, they did not tell Rhodes there was no place for him on the team. He could have redshirted or played without a scholarship if he wanted. Instead, he chose to transfer.
On June 1, 2004, Sports Illustrated's on-line web magazine SI.com ran a story about the sad tail of basketball player Michael Southall. Southall was a All-State player from Wisconsin who had been recruited by Kentucky in 2000, but was then arrested and convicted for delivery and possession of marijuana. With the arrest, Kentucky dropped Southall's scholarship offer. He went on to Georgia Tech but there again was dismissed before ever playing for the school. He was arrested in April 2001 for violating his bond by running away from police officers. Finally, the big man caught on at the University of Louisiana-Lafayette where he showed promise and was named the Sunbelt Conference Freshman Player of the Year. But he later ran afoul of his probation terms and in 2004 was ordered to spend a year in jail for these violations. It was this sentence which prompted the article by SI.
The headline of the article was "Former Kentucky recruit to spend year in jail." Apparently the fact that Southall actually played and was successful at UL-Lafayette had little bearing on the headline. Nor the fact that after Southall was released from his offer to UK, Georgia Tech chose to pursue Southall also. Georgia Tech in 2004 was the NCAA Tournament runner-up.
It seems to be a fact or life that whenever a player has played at Kentucky, they are always associated with the school first and foremost, even if they go on and transfer elsewhere. (for example Rodrick Rhodes and Michael Bradley.) But this is ridiculous, given that Southall never even made it to UK's campus.
| Synopsis | |
| Current Irritation Score |
- 6 |
| Height of Irritation |
- 10 |
| Notes: Sports Illustrated has its good days and bad. | |
Back to top.
Jock Sutherland was a one-time high school coach (after being an assistant coach at the University of Alabama) at Lexington-Lafayette (KY) during the late seventies. In 1979 he had a team which was one of Kentucky's best ever, going 35-1 and which included Dirk Minniefield, Junior Johnson and Tony Wilson. When Minniefield came to UK for college, it was thought by some that Jock wanted to acquire an assistant coaching job at UK (something Sutherland denies) but he never received the offer. Jock did publicly follow Minniefield's career at UK and thought he was mishandled by then UK coach Joe B. Hall at times.
The infamous Jock Sutherland-Joe Hall feud started in 1980. He had been doing some high school games and the state tournament for WVLK radio when he started appearing each Monday on Sports Line 59 with host Dick Gabriel. And after Kentucky opened with a 62-57 win over East Tennessee State, Sutherland began knocking the UK offense, saying it was out of date, behind the times, all wing tips and Lawrence Welk in the age of disco, man.
Cat fans freaked. "No one had really gone on the air and ripped Joe B. Hall like that before," says Gabriel now. WVLK freaked, too, after a month or so politely asking Jock to tone it down. "Can't do it," said Sutherland and he was gone, first to a cross-town station, then on to WHAS in Louisville. - by John Clay, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Jock Sutherland: The Man Wildcat Fans Love to Hate," December 12, 1987.
"I've learned now that there are three things in the world that you just don't do," Sutherland said last night. "You don't scream that there's a bomb scare in an airport. You don't say you're going to assassinate the president of the United Sates in Washington D.C. And you don't criticize the Big Blue in Lexington." - by Gene McLean and David Reed, Lexington Herald-Leader, Jock Sutherland Finds Out About Messing with UK," January 22, 1981.
Jock found a job doing color for WHAS radio on University of Louisville basketball broadcasts along with hosting call-in shows where he became quick to make jabs at the University of Kentucky. It was during this time that he earned the moniker "the man Kentucky fans love to hate."
"After a couple of games," says Van Vance, Jock's on-air partner, "we realized that Jock was not an announcer." No, in his own words, he is "a natural born show-off."- by John Clay, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Jock Sutherland: The Man Wildcat Fans Love to Hate," December 12, 1987.
Things became so bad at one time that the general manager of the station had to step in.
(WHAS general manager Bob) Scherer denied that, but said that he did instruct Jock not to jab the University of Kentucky during broadcasts of U of L games."But when Jock is on our call-in show, he can do anything he wants to," Scherer said. - by Earl Cox, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Sometimes you need to guard the referee," March 15, 1987.
In an amusing scenario, before a UK-U of L game in 1997 won by the Cardinals, Jock Sutherland received a surprising request to deliver a message to the UK coach. His 6-year old granddaughter Michelle wrote a note to Kentucky coach Tubby Smith with the words "Dear Tubby - Thanks for being such a good coach and making our team win." Upon reading it, Jock told her "Michelle, you've got the wrong colors, sweetie." to which she replied. "I love you, Grandpa, but I love Tubby too." Jock handed the note and some blue-and-white colored beads to Smith the day before the game. - based on an article by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, December 28, 1997.
An unsubstantiated story suggests that the Sutherland-Joe Hall feud actually started much earlier than previously thought. According to the source, in the fall of 1948, both Hall and Sutherland were competing to make Rupp's squad, which later went on to win a national championship. Hall made the team but Sutherland didn't. According to the source, the bad blood between the two started then.
| Synopsis | |
| Current Irritation Score |
- 2 |
| Height of Irritation |
- 10 |
| Notes: Sutherland really had the Commonwealth riled in the early eighties. | |
Back to top.
Robert Montgomery Knight was the head coach of Indiana University (currently he is retired from coaching after moving on to Texas Tech where he became the leader in NCAA coaching wins). While at Indiana he was a long-time critic of Kentucky and the basketball program as well as a very strong rival over the years. The two teams generally match up early in the season and have led to some memorable games. Early in his career, Knight seemingly got along well with the Kentucky coaches, Adolph Rupp and Joe B. Hall. He even reportedly went on fishing trips with Hall, including one that lasted three weeks.
After one significant game, however, this attitude changed forever. In 1974-75, Knight had his best team and one of the greatest college basketball teams of all-time. On their way to their preordained crown, UK ambushed IU 92-90 in Dayton Ohio in the Elite Eight. The game went down as one of the greatest games in college basketball. Kentucky went on to lose in the championship game to John Wooden and the UCLA Bruins. To underscore how awesome the 74-75 team was, IU won the championship the following year with a perfect record (the last time this feat has been accomplished), even though the 75-76 squad was not as highly regarded.
After that game, Bob Knight's relationship to Joe B. turned sour. Joe B. was already smarting from a slap to the head he received from Knight during an earlier loss to the Hoosiers 98-74, December 7, 1974. Near the end of the game, Bobby went to the Wildcat bench where the official was standing to complain about a call. Before he left, Knight hit Hall in the back of the head. UK's assistant coach Lynn Nance, a former FBI agent who was about 6-5, had to be restrained by Hall from decking the general. Hall later said, "It publicly humiliated me." (Atlanta Constitution Journal, February 28, 1982).
Below is how the incident was described in the book Bob Knight: The Unauthorized Biography by Steve Delsohn and Mark Heisler, Simon & Schuster, 2006.
|
IU won by 24 points with [Kent] Benson going for 26 and [Bobby] Wilkerson keeping Kentucky star Kevin Grevey from touching the ball for the first four minutes. However, with less than a minute left, Knight was still fully engaged, going all the way down to the Wildcats' bench to rail at the referees for a call against IU. "The situation was, he was yelling at the officials from in front of my bench, in front of me," Hall says. "And as he turned to go back to the bench, I said, 'Way to go, Bob, give 'em hell.' Good-naturedly, because this was a friend of mine. "And he turned and broke down, almost like an attack position, and he screamed at me, 'Don't ever talk to me during a game! Why don't you coach your own motherfucking team?' "And his facial expression was - what do I want to say? - distorted in anger so that I felt moved to do something. So, I followed him up and I said, 'Hey, Bob, I didn't mean anything by that. You know I hope you're not upset by what I said because I didn't mean anything by that. You know I hope you're not upset by what I said because I didn't mean anything personal to you. You've kicked our butts soundly, you've got a great team.' "And I turned to walk away and he popped me with an open hand at the back of the neck. Pretty strongly. And I turned in response and he again broke down in attack mode and he said, 'I didn't mean anything by that, either.'" Knight insisted he meant it as an affectionate pat, like the ones he gave his players as they came off the floor. Of course, with Knight, it could be hard to tell affection from aggression. It didn't look friendly to Hall's assistant, Lynn Nance, a just-retired FBI agent whom Knight later described as "some son-of-a-bitch jerk .... I don't even know his name." Nance bounded off the bench and jumped into Knight's face. They stood there snarling at each other until referees and players pulled them away. "I told him, 'Hey, try that shit with me, pal! Try that on me, you son of a bitch,'" says Nance. "There was always an intimidation factor with Knight. Knight picked that up at West Point. And I think what he discovered is what the military teaches - that you can intimidate and control a lot of people by overreacting to a situation and just being very raucous. And Bobby Knight has become pretty good at it." Hall refused to shake Knight's hand after the game or to walk off the floor with him. "All I want is another chance to play them," Hall said. "Knight personally humiliated me and I'll never forget it." (from Bob Knight: The Unauthorized Biography by Steve Delsohn and Mark Heisler, Simon & Schuster, 2006, pg. 95-96.
|
Knight said the slap to the head was something he has done, "affectionately" to his own players for years. "But maybe someone would not like that," he said. "If Joe didn't like it, I offer an apology. I don't apologize for the intent." ... "Hall and I have been friends for a long time," Knight said. "If he wants to dissolve the friendship, that's up to him." - by Tev Laudeman, Louisville Courier Journal, December 8, 1974.
Knight blamed the furor on Hall, noting in his inimitable style, "If it was meant to be malicious, I'd have blasted the fucker into the seats." - by Steve Delsohn and Mark Heisler Bob Knight: The Unauthorized Biography, Simon & Schuster, 2006, pg. 96.
As mentioned, Hall did get his chance to play again and beat the General later that season in the NCAA Tournament.
In the late eighties, John Feinstein wrote a book about Knight and Indiana basketball called "A Season on the Brink." The book mentions UK extensively and suggests that the program was filled with corruption and that during the particular game covered in the book between IU and UK, that Kentucky received preferential treatment which was the reason the Wildcats won.
To Knight this irony was more infuriating than delicious. "For Alford not to play when all their kids are playing kills me," he said. "There are kids on that team right now who have gotten more crap from alumni than any players in the country. I suppose [star forward] Kenny Walker's never gotten anything. Anyone who believes that is either stupid or blind." - by John Feinstein, A Season on the Brink, MacMillan, 1986 pg. 123.
Walker, now a rookie for the New York Knicks, read that passage for the first time on Friday while flying into Lexington. He smiled and shook his head. "He sure uses harsh language," Walker said politely. "I guess he was pretty mad when he said that." The Herald-Leader series did not mention Walker. - by Michael York, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Sportswriter basks in notoriety, popularity of book about Knight," February 8, 1987.
Halfway through the interview (Kentucky announcer Cawood) Ledford asked Knight about the Kentucky-Indiana rivalry. "These games are special, aren't they ?" Ledford asked innocently. Knight couldn't resist. "You know, Cawood, with all the crap that has gone on down here over the years with recruiting and all, these games are not nearly as special to me as you might think." Zap, Take that, Kentucky. - by John Feinstein, A Season on the Brink, MacMillan, 1986 pg. 127.
"This team will be better than Kentucky," he [Knight] said. "I mean that. They are good athletes and they aren't spoiled assholes like Kentucky." - by John Feinstein, A Season on the Brink, MacMillan, 1986 pg. 133.
Another instance where Knight and UK had a run-in dealt with the transfer of Lawrence Funderburke. Funderburke was a 6-8 power forward out of Ohio who was attracted to the Big Blue.
"(Kentucky was) somewhere I always wanted to go coming out of high school. It was a dream I always wanted to fulfill." - Lexington Herald-Leader, "Almost-Cat Funderburke Anxious for Shot at UK," December 22 1993.
Kentucky recruited him hard, apparently too hard, and allegations surfaced that he was being illegally enticed to Lexington. Other allegations soon surfaced concerning other recruits including Shawn Kemp, Chris Mills and Eric Manuel and Kentucky found itself in deep trouble with the NCAA which eventually led to major violations and probation. Meanwhile, Funderburke decided to enroll at IU under the disciplinarian Knight. It seemed an odd-mix and Funderburke later described the decision to go to Indiana as "a very quick and irrational one." (Lexington Herald-Leader, "Funderburke 'Back Home in Indiana' as Buckeye," January 14 1992.) It was soon apparent that the two did not get along well together and after being kicked out of practice and told not to return (a common Knight intimidation tactic) Funderburke took Knight a little too seriously and decided to leave the team. This was nothing new to Knight as many excellent players had left the program in the mid- to late- eighties including Mike Giomi, Marty Simmons, Tracy Foster, Delray Brooks, Andre Harris and Ricky Calloway among others.
What was different was that Funderburke started showing up at Kentucky games and it became apparent that he was still interested in the Wildcats. Knight went ballistic and refused to grant a release to Funderburke. Finally C.M. Newton, UK athletic director, made a public announcement that due to the image it would cast on the program, Funderburke would not be accepted onto the UK team and he publicly forbade UK's new head coach Rick Pitino from recruiting him. This caused some feeling of abandonment on the part of Funderburke.
"It was a slap in the face" Funderburke said. "Who really cares about him ? That's basically what it was. He (Newton) just didn't say it that way. But I know, definitely 100 percent, that Pitino did want me." - Lexington Herald-Leader, "Almost-Cat Funderburke Anxious for Shot at UK," December 22 1993.
Funderburke transferred to St. Catherines in Springfield Kentucky where he never played and ended up dropping out. In a gutsy move, he actually returned to Indiana in the fall of 1990 to take enough credits to fulfill his letter of intent by completing his freshman year. Indiana initially refused to release Funderburke from his letter of intent because of the money and time that invested in him according to then athletic director Ralph Floyd. (Lexington Herald-Leader, "Funderburke's Future is Still Shrouded in Fog," December 18, 1990.)
JPS Note: It seems odd that Indiana would claim that they invested an overt amount of money in Funderburke in relation to the many other players who routinely received their release from IU. In fact, it would seem the opposite since apparently Indiana didn't actively recruit Funderburke until extremely late in the recruiting process and the decision to come to IU was very sudden and a shock to many who followed his recruitment.
Later Indiana offered him a compromise whereby Funderburke could obtain his release and thereby enroll at the University of Missouri but hold his national letter of intent to ensure that he remained at the school and did not leave immediately for Kentucky or any other school. (Lexington Herald-Leader, "Funderburke Isn't Giving IU the Credit it Deserves," January 21, 1990.)
Even though Funderburke had now completed the requirements of his letter of intent to Indiana. Knight still refused to grant him his release so that he could receive financial aid from a new school. Knight's refusal left the NCAA in unchartered waters.
"The NCAA has never dealt with a situation like this before, where a kid left a school, enrolled at a junior college, and then came back to the school he left. They've been wrestling back and forth with it." - Funderburke's lawyer Bret Bearup, by Billy Reed, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Funderburke's Future is Still Shrouded in Fog," December 18 1990.
Knight kept trying to meddle with the youngster. In December 1990, Knight told Funderburke's advisor (former UK player and lawyer) Bret Bearup that Funderburke could only be free to play for Tennessee. Funderburke had been considering Tennessee, Kansas, Louisville and Cincinnati (Lexington Herald-Leader, "Funderburke Reportedly Given OK to Play for Vols," December 22, 1990.) Knight's attempt to dictate Funderburke's future only served to anger Funderburke further. Knight then agreed to add Cincinnati and Southern California to the list of acceptable schools. (Lexington Herald-Leader, "Knight Reportedly Wants Funderburke to Transfer to USC," January 6, 1991) Soon afterwards, Funderburke decided to rebel against Knight's wishes and attend Big-Ten rival Ohio State.
"Lawrence is so upset about Coach Knight not releasing him to Louisville, that if he had to pay his way to school, he might as well stay at home and pay in-state tuition," said Bearup. "Also, he'll get to play Bobby Knight twice a year now." - Lexington Herald-Leader, "Funderburke May Enroll at Ohio State," January 8, 1991.
 |
"I've never been in a situation during my 14 years at ESPN that has hurt me more. I say hurt, but I deserved to be hurt. I was wrong." - Lexington Herald-Leader, "Time for Dicky V. to Meet Detractors at Ohio State, Baby," December 22, 1992.
Ohio State provided a place where Lawrence had a respectable, albeit abbreviated career. He put together productive seasons, but before his senior year he had surgery on both knees to deal with tendonitis and then went on a potato diet which ended up sapping his strength and quickness. This killed his chance of immediate work in the NBA (although he signed with the Sacramento Kings in 1997 after a number of years in Europe)
In the end, it seems that Knight was so upset and/or paranoid about Funderburke possibly going to Kentucky that he went to unprecedented lengths to dictate his future. Knight attempted to ruin the young man's career and reputation and probably succeeded in doing so. The moral of the story seems to be that if you are considering transferring from IU, it's best not to consider Kentucky. (Or maybe, the moral should be don't go to IU in the first place :-) ).
Knight continued to jab at Kentucky: - from Bobby Knights Most Outrageous Quotes
"I like to think of C.M. Newton [University of Kentucky Athletic Director] as the school's director of corrections." - referring to UK's reputation for putting less-than-outstanding public citizens on the team, Herald Times, October 1990.
The series between Kentucky and Indiana has been an intense one and very tight most every year. The two used to play on each other's home courts, however due to the financial incentives and the incentive to play a high-profile game in Louisville, the teams more often than not started to play either in Indianapolis or Louisville. Unfortunately for Kentucky, somewhere in the shuffle, they lost a home date which could have been played in Rupp Arena. The last game Knight coached against Kentucky in Rupp Arena was in 1988. When asked about the series in 1999, Knight claimed that it would be fine if the series were returned to the home courts and added, "Pitino complained because we didn't play in Rupp Arena. Rick had a tough time understanding that it was a game between Kentucky and Indiana, not between him and me." (Quote from Billy Reed, Lexington Herald-Leader "UK-Indiana Rivalry Too Big to Stay in One City," December 3, 1999.
JPS Note: The lure of money will virtually ensure that the series will not come back to the campus (unless both UK and IU built new megastadiums). As it stands now, there's talk to move the series permanently to Indianapolis where the most revenue can currently be generated.
To the General's credit, he seemed to mellow considerably over the 90's and did not seem to hold the same resentment toward Rick Pitino and Tubby Smith and the way they ran the UK program as he did for Eddie Sutton and Joe B. Hall. When UK athletic director C.M. Newton announced his retirement, Knight had glowing words for him.
"There's nobody I've met in all of athletics that I respect more or like more than C.M. He was one of the very best coaches in my, or any other era. He has gone on to become the very best administrator in all of college athletics, although I'm not sure there are that many great administrators. When he was an assistant coach on the 1984 Olympic basketball team he made the whole Olympics summer a great experience, from coaching to fundraising to all of the other things that he did. He's just a great, great person."
Knight was also supportive of UK player Saul Smith, after he came under criticism by some Kentucky fans.
"And before I answer any questions I'll tell you I would take Saul Smith in a heartbeat. All that call-in bullshit that's ridiculous for a kid to have to put up with any crap. This is a really, really good kid. He's a kid who plays his ass off, plays harder than hell. He scrambles, scratches and scrapes. People down there ought to realize what kind of a kid this is and get off his ass because he's just a great kid. Send him up here. Damn it I'll play him Tuesday night." - Bob Knight postgame comments after Indiana beat Kentucky 83-75, December 4, 1999.
Unfortunately for Knight, after he retired from coaching, he reemerged from the anonymity of working in Lubbock and took a job with ESPN, where he could put his boorish behavior on full display.
During a fundraiser for the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame on December 17, 2009, Knight lamented the changes in the college basketball landscape and took aim directly at Kentucky and their new coach John Calipari. Said Knight, ""We've gotten into this situation where integrity is really lacking and that's why I'm glad I'm not coaching. You see we've got a coach at Kentucky who put two schools on probation and he's still coaching. I really don't understand that."
JPS Note: It's almost hilarious to hear Bobby Knight talking about integrity. If anyone should be accused of lacking integrity, it's Knight who demanded accountability from his players yet unfailingly never held himself to similar standards, nor did he ever take responsibility for his own actions. (which included verbally and physically abusing his own players.) Knight is the classic bully who thinks the rules apply to everyone except himself.
As far as Calipari, not surprisingly, Knight got his facts wrong. First of all, Massachusetts had to vacate their NCAA run after it became known that Marcus Camby had accepted money from an agent, but the program was not put on probation as Knight claimed. Beyond that, Calipari did not put them in that position, rather it was Camby and unscrupulous agents who were to blame. By all accounts, Calipari and Massachusetts were not aware of the payments at the time, and when they did become aware promptly reported them to the NCAA. The NCAA found that Calipari had no personal responsibility as part of their investigation of the matter.
As for Memphis, again the NCAA investigated and didn't find Calipari responsible for what the NCAA claimed happened (that Derrick Rose was ineligible based a decision by the testing service made, citing that Rose failed to respond to a letter sent to his home in Chicago, while he was in Memphis). If anything, the most questionable aspect of the NCAA's decision with respect to Memphis was why they decided to reverse themselves on their own precedent when they earlier absolved Duke of having to vacate their NCAA victories in light of findings that Duke's Corey Maggette had been paid illegally which forfeited his amateur status. In contrast, the NCAA chose to hold Memphis accountable for playing an ineligible player, despite the fact that the NCAA Clearinghouse itself had cleared Rose to play. (and despite the fact that the NCAA or the ETS never actually proved Rose cheated on his test).
As to Knight's point about holding a coach responsible for what occurs under his watch, I do agree in principal that a coach should take responsibility for much of what occurs under his watch, as it is the head coach who sets the tone for the program, sets and administers many of the rules, and is expected to lead by example. [BTW I don't remember Knight making a big deal about this issue when his good friend, Dave Bliss was caught trying to frame one of his former players, who tragically had been murdered, as a drug dealer in order to cover up Bliss' own misdeeds. If there ever was a time to talk about (a lack of) integrity among college coaches, it would be then.]
Calipari does deserve (and has certainly received) criticism for some of the things that occurred under his watch, but I don't agree with Knight that it rises to the level of preventing him from coaching, especially since the NCAA did investigate and explicitly cleared him of any wrongdoing. If such a standard was in place, then certainly Knight would not be allowed to have coached for so many years as he did, after the numerous examples of Knight not being able to control his own actions which he had direct control over, much less all parts of the program which may or may not be under his control.
The truth of the matter, as a UK fan, is that Calipari (or anyone taking the head coach position at UK) will be under tremendous scrutiny in Lexington, not only from those outside the program but from those within, the media and the fans. He also has great opportunity and resources available to him and there is absolutely no reason to cheat to get ahead. If it were to happen that Calipari is found to be cheating at UK, then I would be one of the first fans of the program to want him gone. If history has proven one thing, it is that no one person is bigger than the program and the program is strong enough to weather tough times, even circumstances which have destroyed lesser programs. But unless or until such a day occurs, Knight might be better off keeping his hypocritical and self-serving comments to himself.
Postscript: Later in the season after the attack on Kentucky, Knight failed to appear at Kentucky's Gameday event with ESPN against Tennessee where he would have had to face the wrath of 24,000 fans who packed Rupp Arena for the show, shattering any previous showing by other schools. Apparently Knight is emboldened enough to talk smack in front of a handful of Hoosier sycophants, but isn't a big enough person to face Big Blue Nation on his own.
 |
After the 2010-11 season, Knight once again found himself talking to a group of Indiana supporters (this time in Wabash, IN) and once again found himself making inaccurate claims about UK. In response to a question about UK Coach John Calipari and whether he was good for college basketball, Knight initially made a good joke saying "I'm sure if I was a Kentucky fan I would [be happy with Calipari] .... well I'm not a Kentucky fan."
But later on during the question and answer session, Knight made the baseless claim that "Kentucky, year before last started five players in the NCAA tournament games that had not been to class that semester. And that's that one-and-done philosophy that we have now." It should be noted that this was not the first time Knight had said something like this. He has in the past criticized NCAA rules which make it possible for players to register for classes the second semester and not actually attend any classes with no consequences to the player. He had made this point about Kevin Durant (University of Texas) and during the winter of 2009-10 insinuated on national television that John Wall would do the same thing.
The only problem with Knight's claim was that it was absolutely incorrect. In fact every single one of UK's starters not only attended classes that semester but they returned from the NCAA tournament and finished out the semester in good academic standing. Patrick Patterson not only finished the semester but used it to graduate. John Wall was the #1 pick in the NBA draft but not only returned from the NCAA tournament to finish school, he was earned a 3.5 gpa for the semester. Likewise DeMarcus Cousins and Eric Bledsoe also fulfilled their commitments by returning to classes and finishing the semester in good academic standing. The fifth starter, sophomore Darius Miller returned to UK the following fall semester, which requires that he remain in good academic standing.
JPS Note: - It's noteworthy, that the only UK player who didn't finish his classwork that semester was non-starter (and non-Calipari) recruit Daniel Orton who declared for the NBA draft and despite assurances to the contrary, stopped going to classes. It was this behavior (among other things) which led to severe criticism of him by UK fans, and which was a detriment to Kentucky's APR.
Another aspect of this that should be mentioned is the little reported and often overlooked fact that a UK Athletics rule is in effect that players (no matter the sport) are not allowed to participate in games if they have skipped classes. This was a rule that Calipari did not have to abide by when he was coach at the University of Memphis but is under at Kentucky. So actually by the mere fact that a player is participating in games during the season, by athletic department policy it's an indication that they are attending class. (and it also potentially explains some rare situations where players did not see game action.) If Knight and other critics of the NCAA loopholes were really intent to bring to light abuses of academic integrity, I have to question why they don't question the numerous schools where it actually is allowed to not attend classes while playing basketball games, and by all indications it does happen. But that would make too much sense, and wouldn't further their narrow agenda apparently.
Knight's false statements this time made national news, as twitter and blogs blew up, many of the UK players responded directly to the false claims, and a number of journalists from across the country felt compelled to wake up from their off-season naps and comment on the situation. The UK athletic director Mitch Barnhart released a statement saying "The University of Kentucky, our student-athletes and their families take great offense to the blatantly erroneous comments made by Bob Knight that 'Kentucky, year before last, started five players in the NCAA Tournament games that had not been to class that semester', . . . Academic performance has always been a priority at UK and it's unfortunate that, although every starter from the 2010 season finished the spring semester in good academic standing, these myths exist. Our men's basketball team's APR score reflects our attention to academic progress and our student-athletes take great pride in representing the University of Kentucky on and off the floor."
Whereas at other times when Knight would make ridiculous fact-challenged remarks they were quickly swept under the rug, this time with the groundswell of attention paid to it, ESPN apparently felt it necessary to release a statement addressing the quagmire their employee placed them in. Later the following day after the original quote became public, ESPN released a statement attributed to Knight that read, "My overall point is that 'one and dones' are not healthy for college basketball. I should not have made it personal to Kentucky and its players and I apologize."
JPS Note: - Of course it's interesting to note that Knight, assuming he actually said this, never did apologize for lying about or for demeaning a group of young players who actually did put in the work and fulfilled their obligations to the university, something Knight supposedly would be supportive of. Instead he 'apologized' for singling out UK.
Personally I had been waiting for Knight to apologize to John Wall from the previous year's slander, but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for him to be a man and apologize to the entire starting five this time around. Knight frankly doesn't have the integrity or honesty to own up to his own mistakes. He never has in the past and apparently based on this latest episode never will.
I'd also like to add, given the topic at hand, that the coach and University do have some control over a player while the season is in progress to ensure that they are meeting the academic requirements and expectations, and they should. Once the season is over, however, if a player is intent on entering the draft and skipping classes, there's not a whole lot that can be done (by the coach or school) to stop it. There's numerous cases of that happening at many schools, although as already stated, to the credit of UK's starters on the 2009-10 squad, they all returned from the tournament and finished out the semester. It is telling that Knight chose to erroneously single these UK players out, when with a little digging he could have found much more relevant and appropriate examples, some of which would have hit much closer to the Big-12 home that Knight finds himself in.
| Synopsis | |
| Current Irritation Score |
- 4 |
| Height of Irritation |
- 8 |
| Notes: Unfortunately for the General, now that he's joined ESPN, he's started to demonstrate the exact same habits he's criticized the media throughout his career. | |
Back to top.
 |
| Digger Phelps: Always the fashion statement |
It appears that tension between the two programs was apparent from the beginning of Phelp's career as evidenced by this story.
In his rookie year, his [Phelps] makeshift squad lost 83-67 to the immortal Adolph Rupp. That defeat had been almost easy to swallow after the two sound drubbings that preceded the Wildcat game. Indiana had annihilated Notre Dame by sixty-five pints, 94-29, and then the UCLA Bruins had picked up where the Hoosiers left off with a 114-56 victory. Surprisingly, the Irish were within sixteen points of Rupp's charges and Digger looked at the Kentucky game as an improvement - until he received a phone call back at his hotel. It was Adolph Rupp and Digger expected some encouraging words for the struggling upstart. Instead, he was floored.
"Rupp was at a victory party and he said there was something he couldn't figure out," Digger recalls with a smile. "He said, 'You've lost to Bobby Knight by sixty-five and John Wooden by fifty-eight points, so how come we were able to beat you by only sixteen points ?' Rupp worried about his club." - by Pat Scanlon, Digger Phelps and Notre Dame Basketball, Prentice Hall, pg. 79, 1981.
Submitted by Dr. J(effrey Neil Burch)
My favorite story about Digger was back in the Joe Hall era, when UK was in trouble for football recruiting violations, yet Phelps attacked Kentucky basketball for offering unfair inducements. A football recruit had apparently been offered part interest in a race horse if he came to UK, but Phelps thought it had been offered to a basketball recruit.
Phelps was given an Adolph Rupp signature basketball. He wanted something else.
'Where's my horse, Joe?' he shouted.
Hall had a smile fixed on his face.
'When do I get my horse?'
The smile never moved.
Hall later told a friend, 'I almost said, "Digger, I'll get you
the front half of a horse. You've already got the back half."'
No smile then.
by David Kindred, A Year with the Cats, Jim Host and Associates Inc, 1977. Pages 42-46.
After Kentucky received NCAA sanctions in 1989 that would bring almost any program to its knees, Sports Illustrated asked a number of coaches about the sentence. While Georgia Tech coach Bobby Cremins remarked, "The sentence is definitely harsh enough," Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim added, "As far as I'm concerned, Kentucky did get the death penalty," and UCLA coach Jim Harrick said "as strong a penalty as anyone has ever received, except the death penalty." This is what Digger Phelps said,
Notre Dame's Digger Phelps, however, points out a loophole that might hasten the Wildcats' healing process. "[Kentucky] can redshirt the incoming freshmen and it won't be affected as much," says Phelps. "And next year's recruits can be told they'll be redshirted and then still play in four NCAA Tournaments. The TV sanctions also penalize schools like us. When we're the home team against Kentucky, we also have to lose a TV appearance." - by Curry Kirkpatrick, Sports Illustrated, "Kentucky's Shame," May 29, 1989.
JPS Note: - Kentucky did not have the luxury of redshirting their recruits during the 89-90 or 90-91 seasons, due to the acute lack of players. The only redshirts during that time period were Henry Thomas, who suffered a serious knee injury and never was able to return to competition at full strength, and Travis Ford, who was in the midst of transferring from Missouri. As for lack of television exposure for Notre Dame, Digger has no one to blame but himself by not getting the Fighting Irish into a conference sooner.
As an analyst for ESPN, Phelps rarely said anything positive about UK. During UK's quest to repeat as national champions in 1996-97, Phelps picked Kentucky's opponent, Arizona, to win the championship game. After Arizona claimed the victory, Digger was seen proudly waving a newspaper with the headline "Arizona Wins" on it. What he neglected to mention was that he also picked (incorrectly) Iowa, Utah and Minnesota all to beat the Wildcats. I guess Digger has the right job where he can go 1-3 in front of a national audience and be proud of it.
During halftime of a 1997 game, ESPN ran a heartwarming piece on new coach Orlando "Tubby" Smith, his move to Lexington and having two sons (Saul [UK] and G.G. [Georgia]) playing in the same league. After the piece, when provoked to comment, Phelps blurted out "Opponents are no longer afraid of Kentucky."
JPS Note: If you believed Phelps in the few seasons previous when he consistently described how Kentucky's press could be broken, you would have thought that opponents weren't afraid of Kentucky then either.
Later that same year, Phelps stated before the NCAA Tournament seedings were announced that "Kentucky will be a #3 seed in the NCAA Tournament, at best." This despite Kentucky winning the SEC regular season conference with a 14-2 mark, enjoying a 26-4 record, having an RPI rating of #4 in the nation and being ranked in the top eight for most of the season. Kentucky ended up with a #2 seed although many commentators, former North Carolina coach Dean Smith included, stated that Kentucky was one of five teams deserving a #1 seed.
As the 1998 tournament progressed, Phelps started making a habit of picking UK's opponents to beat them on ESPN. Normally, this wouldn't invite inclusion on this list, however the consistency and sheer outrageousness of the early games in particular makes it warranted IMO.
On UK vs. South Carolina State: "South Carolina State has just the kind of team that gives Kentucky trouble. I look for an upset here."
On UK vs. St. Louis: "This [Larry] Hughes kid from St. Louis is unstoppable ... and I believe he will make the difference in a St. Louis upset over Kentucky."
On UK vs. UCLA: "UCLA has shown that they can play with anybody; I give them a slight edge over the Wildcats."
On UK vs. Duke: "What can I say about Duke ? The number 1 team in the nation for a good part of the year. The freshman and Duke's depth will wear down Kentucky in this one."
On UK vs. Stanford: "I don't think Kentucky has played a team as big and as physical as Stanford. I pick Stanford over Kentucky."
On UK vs. Utah: "Depth is not an issue in the NCAA Tournament. Given Utah's performances in the tournament, I think you're going to see an unhappy bunch of Wildcats after this one."
During an interactive chat session during the 1998-99 season (ESPN, January 5 1999), a fan questioned Digger about his attitude toward Kentucky.
Todd: It's a common assumption here in the state of Kentucky that you have some sort of a grudge against the Kentucky basketball program. Many suspect it goes back to your coaching days at ND and your lack of success against the UK program. Is there any truth to that assumption ?
Digger Phelps: Not true. I've always had respect for Kentucky, even when I coached at Notre Dame. Playing in Louisville every year would be like the Wildcats playing in Elkhart, Indiana every year ! But that agreement to play at Freedom Hall was before I got to Notre Dame. Once we played at South Bend as well as Indianapolis. We got our wins.
I'm a big Tubby Smith fan. I was the one who picked them over Duke to get to the Final Four last season. Yes, I picked Utah in the title game, based on Kentucky always coming from behind as they did against Duke and Stanford in the semifinals. Yet Kentucky's bench and nine-man rotation could keep the hot players on the floor proved again vs. Utah that the game is for 40 minutes.
This season, it is no secret about their perimeter shooting. Whereby their losses to Pittsburgh, Duke and Louisville, the perimeter shooting again came back to haunt them. I think that's why (Tuesday) you will see the big lineup playing the power game, going with Michael Bradley and Jamaal Magloire up front as Twin Towers, leaving Scott Padgett outside shooting as small forward and Wayne Turner and Heshimu Evans contributing. There is still the potential to reach the Final Four this season. A lot will depend on how the conference tournament ends up. They need to get no lower than a No. 2 seed in defense of their national title.
JPS Note: - It's good to see that Digger is at least paying lip service to being objective as a commentator. As far as the quote about Notre Dame getting their wins after getting out of Freedom Hall, it's true they won two games but it should probably be remarked that the two wins were against two of the weaker UK teams ever; the 13-19 lame duck Eddie Sutton year and Rick Pitino's inaugural 14-14 club. As far as picking Kentucky to win against Duke, this is a case of sitting on both sides of the fence. Digger made the above quote about Kentucky not being able to hang with Duke along with making the choice of UK winning during a different telecast. I think this is just a matter of ESPN liking their two commentators, Phelps and Dick Vitale, to take opposing viewpoints about who they think will win a game.
On Dick Vitales 1999-2000 College Preseason show (Slam Jam Bam Basketball Preview, ESPN), Digger took a swipe at Coach Tubby Smith and C.M. Newton by saying that "the fans control the program" (November 9, 1999).
 |
The only concern for Vanderbilt officials and fans was that the local Nashville UK alumni club decided to participate in the festivities and organized an "Occupy Memorial" rally, inviting local Wildcat fans to show up early in the morning at a local McDonalds and then 'march' to Memorial for the morning taping.
Fueled by free sausage biscuits, Kentucky had a great turnout for the early morning event. Vanderbilt officials opened up three sections, Vanderbilt students nearest the taping on the floor, Vanderbilt fans in the lower level and 'others' (which consisted primarily of Kentucky fans) in the top section, out of sight.
This was somewhat unusual since GameDay events historically have been events with mixed fan loyalties in the crowd. This is especially true in football where it is common to have both fanbases in the crowd screaming for Lee Corso to don their mascot's gear etc. Basketball may be somewhat different, since it's not often that an opposing fanbase would be on hand early in the morning a good 12 hours prior to tip-off.
Unfortunately for Vanderbilt, their crowd turnout was extremely poor, and would have been one of the worst turnouts in the history of the event; except for the presence of the Kentucky fans. To make it not appear as weak as it actually was, Vanderbilt officials invited other Vandy fans from the second section to join the students nearer the cameras, although they didn't extend the same invitation to the Kentucky fans in the upper deck. Despite this snub, if anything the UK fans added to the energy in the building as their chants forced the Vanderbilt fans to respond with chants of their own.
Prior to the taping, Digger Phelps unfortunately decided to lecture Kentucky fans in an extremely paternalistic and condescending manner, even suggesting that they could 'ruin' the event with 'incidents'.
JPS Note: - The whole episode was a ridiculous overreaction on the part of Digger. By all accounts the Kentucky fans were just happy to be there, despite the snub from the Vanderbilt administration. There were no reports of any 'incidents' etc.
After video of Digger's speech became public, Phelps refused to comment on his actions, nor why he felt it was necessary to lecture fans in the way he did, much less apologize. In the end, it turned out well for Kentucky fans anyway as later that night UK won the game, despite Digger's prediction of a Commodore victory.
| Synopsis | |
| Current Irritation Score |
- 3 |
| Height of Irritation |
- 8 |
| Notes: It's kind of difficult to stay irritated with a guy who Kentucky beat on such a consistent basis. :-) To his credit, he seems to have made a concerted effort of late to not appear biased against Kentucky. | |
Back to top.
Billy Packer is a television commentator for CBS along with doing ACC telecasts. He is a former player at Wake Forest and is perhaps the biggest cheerleader for the Atlantic Coast Conference. Unfortunately, he also has a national audience and tends to make his biases known. CBS generally televises the UK-Indiana, UK-Louisville and sometimes UK-Arkansas games along with tournament games. Packer has demonstrated a consistent bias against Kentucky during these games. Of course, this can be difficult for the casual viewer to detect since a game commentator often simply has no choice but to provide some positive comments during the course of a game. It is interesting, however, to watch a UK game or tape he does because he never goes out of his way to genuinely say anything good about Kentucky (as happens at least occasionally during typical broadcasts of any school.) If he is forced to make a compliment, it is often in a back-handed way and without enthusiasm compared his work on other games. If Kentucky makes a good play, it's because their opponents "missed an assignment" or "didn't do what their coaches taught them." It is also interesting to listen to the tone in Packer's voice during critical points of the telecast. When the opposing team makes a great play, Packer's voice rises in excitement. When Kentucky does something similar, Packer seems annoyed. It may not be apparent to the casual observer but after watching over fifteen years of Packer covering UK games, the pattern becomes all too obvious.
"It's hard to believe that Kentucky can ever match up in this game. Louisville is just so much bigger and stronger." - Packer commenting during the 1986-87 UK-Louisville game with U of L leading 2-0. (Kentucky somehow managed to win the game 85-51.)
In 1984, Kentucky signed Gunther Behnke, a 7'4" center from West Germany. Billy Packer cried foul and berated UK for looking abroad for basketball talent. As ACC teams such as North Carolina, Duke and his alma mater Wake Forest increasingly signed and became dependent on foreign players beginning in the late eighties, however, Packer has become silent on the issue. As for UK, they ended up losing Behnke to homesickness before the season had even started and subsequently never suited up a foreign player until Jamaal Magloire in 1996.
Despite covering at least two UK games a year, Packer failed to grasp Rick Pitino's up-tempo offensive and defensive system. (Something you would expect from someone who likes to think of himself as a basketball mind. ) One particular comment he makes every game happens in the first ten minutes when the other team scores some easy baskets after beating the press. Packer will mention that the opponents broke the press with ease and therefore UK should pull it off, suggesting that the other team will continue to ride the advantage throughout the game. He has never realized that the UK press does not really take effect until the second half after the opponents have been playing at a pace which was entirely too fast. That is when UK's continued pressure leads to points and the other team becomes physically and emotionally exhausted. Packer is also hopelessly stuck in an ACC frame of mind and thus unfairly criticizes Kentucky for its style of play. For instance, when UK has attained a substantial lead, Packer believes (and states during the telecast repeatedly) that the game should be slowed down in order to run out the clock. This is textbook Dean Smith. Rick Pitino has never subscribed to this philosophy and opts instead to play UK's game plan, regardless of the score (and usually opponent), and that means attacking and running. Packer either fails to understand that a different philosophy is at work or believes the traditional method is superior. (Despite UK's biggest leads blown in a game under Pitino being 10 points to Clemson in 1996-97 contest and 9 points to Arkansas in a 1994-95 contest to my knowledge while Billy's man Dean Smith has had more numerous and more spectacular flameouts during the same time span, not to mention the classic embarrassing defeats in the 1970's NCAA Tournaments.)
Another point that Packer never grasped was the idea of pushing the ball and taking an open shot. He often comments during Kentucky games that UK shoots "too quickly," even when they have a wide-open shot or have a delayed fast-break. Packer seems to be comfortable with the slower, walk-up the court style of play found in the ACC. According to Packer, the way to win if you have a talent-laden team is not to push the ball and accentuate the difference in talent level but to play down to the level of your competition and give them an opportunity to beat you. Again, textbook Dean Smith.
Sidenote: - Since Billy Packer and CBS telecasts are being discussed, I'd like to throw in my $0.02 about one annoying habit that has bothered me for years. I wish that the producers of the telecast would prepare for the particular teams that are playing, much like the coaches, players and even announcers have to. CBS seems to love to show close-ups of players, the bench, the coach, some player's mother or father, seemingly anything besides the action on the court. This may work for slow-paced teams which don't press as there are a few seconds of dead-time for such things as the ball is being walked up the court. During a Kentucky game (and particular a Kentucky-Arkansas game) however, these cut-aways too often lead to missed action on the court. The annoying thing being that despite these snafu's, CBS in particular continues to repeat them year after year.
Packer was especially reluctant to give Rick Pitino praise for his coaching job. After Bobby Cremins, coach of the Georgia Tech Yellowjackets, mentioned that he thought Rick Pitino was "the man" in college basketball, Packer bristled:
"On what basis would you make that comment ? I think he's certainly one of the outstanding coaches in any era, but to say that he is the man would be, I think, an overstatement."
On the face, this is a valid response, but when it is understood that Packer has never given Pitino any real praise, especially when it comes to his effect on the game, it further demonstrates Packer's bias. Perhaps Packer is upset that Pitino has found a formula where the players play hard throughout the game, play unselfishly despite having a very talented group, always take only open jump shots, are well-prepared for the NBA, are exciting to watch, and dominate their opponents on the court. Rick Pitino is a true innovator in collegiate basketball. He was able to build on a base of teamship and unselfishness. To that he melded the full-court pressure defense of the great UCLA and Louisville teams of the past, the athleticism of a running, pro-type system which included the deliberate creation of matchup imbalances on offense and quick double-teaming on defense, and the stingy half-court defense learned from his mentors Jim Boeheim and Hubie Brown. To top it off, he embraced the three-point shot, spacing and patient precision found in international teams such as the old Russian and Brazilian Olympic teams. The result being a fun, entertaining, effective and dominating system which got the most out of his teams and demonstrated how the whole can be greater than the sum of its parts. More than a few opposing coaches and professional announcers and sportswriters couldn't seem to comprehend how the system worked, much less devise a strategy to overcome it. Pitino's system and methods are being copied all over the country in one form or another.
Coaches such as Dean Smith and Mike Krzyzewski, both in the ACC and for whom Packer holds in higher esteem than Pitino are certainly great coaches and have been highly successful but can not be considered innovators in the game. Krzyzewski is well-respected and a coveted commodity, whose teams have played expertly at times, but cannot be considered a true innovator. Smith's biggest contribution to the game was the use of the stall and four-corners offense. Something which threatened to destroy the modern game and was thankfully killed off with the introduction of the shot clock. So it's not surprising that Packer is touchy about the subject of Pitino and his increasingly important influence on the modern game.
During a 1998 tournament game against UCLA, Billy Packer made a point of harping on Wayne Turner's ballhandling to the exclusion of any other action which was occurring on the floor at the time.
Packer: "That's illegal dribble."
[Jim] Nantz: "He palmed it, didn't he Billy ?"
Packer: "Yeah, illegal dribble. It's one of those dribbles that a lot of kids use where they just go ahead and have the ball suspended, then push it on through."
Later in the second half, Billy was at it again.
"And there's that, again, in my estimation, illegal dribble that Turner used. And the officials let him to continuously get by with it. And that's supposed to be a point of emphasis this year in the NCAA."
JPS Note:It's fair game to point this out, but in my opinion, the focus on Turner was not fair to him. For one, neither time did the officials feel that the move warranted a violation being called so Packer was overstepping his bounds of commenting on the game at hand, which he ignored. Secondly, Billy never seemed to be overtly concerned during the other games he called that year, where most guards use that move from time to time. It almost seemed like Billy was trying to point this out in anticipation of the looming showdown with Duke in the next round. Turner, incidentally, was whistled for this in later games.
In the next game against Duke, Jamaal Magloire and Steve Wojciechowski got tangled up fighting for a loose ball with 14:45 remaining in regulation time. Magloire had lost the handle on the ball near his feet and Wojciechowski dived right in, knocking Magloire over in the process. As Jamal fell backwards, Wojciechowski apparently having his arm stuck was pulled along. The fact is that it was Wojciechowski was the one who initiated the contact, forced the momentum and it was Wojciechowski who would not get off of Jamaal, either because he couldn't or didn't want to. The replay showed that while the two were tangled briefly, Magloire did nothing to cause it in the first place or did nothing to make the situation worse. He was simply trying to get up and away from Wojciechowski, however, the small guard was seemingly permanently glued to him. Billy Packer viewed the scene differently during the action and started to shout hysterically.
"What is he [Magloire] doing here ? What is Magloire doing ? Magloire wouldn't let him go ! That was crazy ! . . . I don't know why Magloire just didn't relax, he had him twisted up inside ! . . . See he has him right here. All he had to do was relax and let him alone ! It's ridiculous !
JPS Note: The replay shows that it was Wojciechowski who wasn't relaxed. Magloire for his part was calm and collected the entire time, despite having Wojciechowski first trying to bowl him over at the knees and then having the tiny Duke guard cling to him and scream as if having a seizure. Again, whether this was due to some freak-of-nature spasm on Wojciechowski's part or whether he was simply acting is apparently open to debate among some, however the fact remains that Magloire did nothing to warrant any of the cries that Packer sent his way. Magloire has been interviewed about this incident and is quoted "I wasn't sure why he was yelling. He was lying across me. Fortunately, the officials didn't buy his screaming." When asked what he was thinking during the play, Jamaal replied "I was thinking, 'Is he having a seizure?'" (Interview on 11/16/99, Wildcat Faithful) Wojciechowski has not gone on record concerning this strange incident.
After it was clear no foul would be called, Wojciechowski jumped up and walked around as if nothing had happened, pumping his fist to the crowd to which Packer and Nantz started joking fondly about how tough and feisty the little guard was.
One could only imagine how Packer would have reacted if Magloire had been the one who got off the floor and strutted around pumping his fists after the play.
JPS Note: Packer has improved slightly over the last few seasons. From my perspective, this has led to a more professional performance on his part and the quality of the CBS telecasts are better because of it. It seems that around the time Kentucky won the championship in 95-96, Packer began to better appreciate the rationale, intensity, and execution found in Kentucky teams of the 90's. ESPN analyst Dick Vitale figured this out very early on. Other sportscasters still haven't discovered it, their loss.
| Synopsis | |
| Current Irritation Score | 0 |
| Height of Irritation |
- 7 |
| Notes: Packer has warmed to Tubby Smith and Kentucky, so much so that he's actually started praising Rick Pitino recently. Some of his gushing during the 1998-99 tournament was actually embarrassing. But eventually Packer always has something to say to piss people off. | |
Back to top.
Denny Crum is the former head coach of the Louisville Cardinals. In the late 70's and early 80's, Louisville became a national basketball power but was still overshadowed by the University of Kentucky in terms of exposure and fan support. Denny knew the only way to gain the respect the Cardinals deserved was to play and beat UK on a regular basis. Unfortunately, Kentucky and their coach, Joe B. Hall refused to play the Cardinals (or any state schools for that matter). The atmosphere was heated and there was much name calling in the press. Kentucky often didn't help matters by suggesting that U of L was on a lower level than Kentucky. For example, in 1986, Eddie Sutton referred to the defending national champion Cardinals as "little brother" in relation to the Big Blue in the state of Kentucky. In 1975, the two teams made it to the final four and were expected to meet in the National Championship game. UCLA, however, upset the Cardinals by one point and went on to beat Kentucky in what would become John Wooden's last game. The next year, UK and Louisville almost met again in the NIT semi-finals in New York but Dave Gavitt's Providence upset the Cardinals for the second time in the same season 73-67. Kentucky went on to win the NIT crown by beating the Friars (79-78) and later UNC-Charlotte (71-67).
The NCAA saw a great chance to stage a dramatic confrontation and began to try and set the two teams up to meet in the NCAA Tournament. In 1982, UK stumbled in the first round against Middle Tennessee State 44-50 to prevent a meeting. In 1983, the NCAA got their wish and UK and Louisville finally met up in Knoxville Tennessee in the Mideast Regional final. The game was tight and went to overtime, but it was there that the athletic Louisville team pulled away and came up with a 80-68 point win. The next year, Kentucky and Louisville finally agreed to play on a regular basis. Indications were promising for U of L at the time as the Cardinals possessed a number of gifted athletes, played a style of basketball ahead of its time and had something to prove. However, the series quickly turned sour. The first regular season game, Sam Bowie returned after a number of injuries and the Cats stomped the Cards 65-44 on national cable television. That set the tone for the series and the Cards have never recovered. Soon after, the three-point shot came into effect and the Wildcats used that to their advantage for a number of years until Denny Crum realized the significance of the rule change on the game. By that time, Louisville no longer possessed overwhelming athletes. Since the regular season series has resumed, Kentucky as a 11-5 record against the Cards. This has included some memorable blowout victories including a 32-point demolition in which Rex Chapman, Ed Davender and James Blackmon torched the Cards.
Being in such close proximity, UK and Louisville have had some intense recruiting battles. The city of Louisville has historically been a fertile area for basketball talent, yet Kentucky has had very little success in recruiting black players from the city, having lost a number of Kentucky Mr. Basketball's from the city to U-of-L including Wes Unseld (1964), Wesley Cox (1973), Darrell Griffith (1976), Tony Kimbro (1985) Dwayne Morton (1990) and Jason Osborne (1992). Winston Bennett is one of the very few high profile players from the city of Louisville to play for UK along with UK's first black player, Tom Payne. Derek Anderson is another exception of a Louisville player who ended up at UK. Derek was not heavily recruited by UK coming out of high school and ended up at Ohio State under Randy Ayers. After knee surgery, problems relating to team chemistry and a potential NCAA penalty, Derek transferred and chose UK over Louisville. While there, he helped win a national championship for the Cats in 1995-96 before blowing out his knee mid-way through the following season.
Two recent examples of competition between the two schools for recruits are John Pelphrey and Troy Smith. Pelphrey was a thin player from Paintsville Kentucky with questionable athletic skills. Vanderbilt was recruiting him hard while Kentucky dragged its feet on signing the player who became Kentucky Mr. Basketball in 1987. That was until Louisville invited Pelphrey to their post-season banquet which spurred Eddie Sutton into action. Pelphrey signed with UK and went on to become an integral member of "The Unforgettables." In 1989, Troy Smith, a strong athletic 6-8 player, committed to Kentucky only to change his mind and sign with the Cardinals the next day. - (by John Clay, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Pitino, Crum Forget Facts Behind Feud," April 23, 1992.)
The two schools went hard after forward Dwayne Morton from Louisville Central. Rick Pitino had convinced the player to visit UK and offered their lone remaining scholarship only to read in the newspaper that Denny Crum had gone to dinner with Morton's mother and coach during the two-day "dead period" prior to the national signing day. Crum claimed that the contact was initiated by the two and he was unaware that meeting during a "dead period" was in violation of NCAA regulations. Pitino thought at the time that Morton was seriously considering the Wildcats, as he had talked as late as 9:30 AM on the day of Morton's press conference to Morton's coach, Ralph Johnson, who informed Pitino that Morton was still unsure of his choice. (by John McGill, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Justice is Served in Morton Case," March 4, 1990.) It was later found that at 6:00 AM of that same day, Morton had informed Louisville coach Denny Crum that Morton had decided to be a Cardinal. (by John McGill, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Morton Saga Raises Larger Question," November 11, 1989.)
Unfortunately for Pitino and Kentucky, the truth about Morton's college choice was not revealed to them until after the press conference and Kentucky was left holding their final scholarship for Morton. Kentucky's back-up prospect, Stephen Davis from Corinth Mississippi, grew impatient with the deafening silence out of Lexington and signed with Ole Miss a few hours before Morton's press conference. Davis cited a "lack of commitment" on Kentucky's part for not signing with the Wildcats. Morton announced for Louisville.
"I'm not upset at all with the young man going to Louisville," Pitino said. "but I'm upset that I lost the other player [Davis] because nobody was honest with me." - by John McGill, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Morton Saga Raises Larger Question," November 11, 1989.
When Pitino read later in the week of the illegal dinner in the newspaper, he became upset and pointed it out during a press conference. This raised the attention of the NCAA which investigated and found some troubling inconsistencies in Louisville's version of events. Crum was asked later that week whether he had had dinner with Morton and his mother which he correctly denied. He, however, was not forthcoming in admitting that he had dinner with Morton's mother and coach. The NCAA also determined that Crum knew of the violation as early as November 7. This was in direct conflict with a later assertion by Crum that he had no knowledge of it until after Morton signed on November 8 and with U of L's appeal which stated the same. (John McGill, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Justice is Served in Morton Case," March 4, 1990.)
The NCAA ruled in March of 1990 that Morton was ineligible to play for the Cardinals although he was free to sign with any other school and play in the upcoming season. This drew the ire of Morton's mother who blamed Kentucky and coach Pitino for the situation. When asked by a reporter whether Morton might consider playing for Kentucky after the decision, she retorted, "Are you kidding ? You've turned my kid's dream upside down." She later added, "I think it's wrong . . . My only thing is I hope Pitino is happy . . . Tell everybody in Lexington congratulations." - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Morton's Mother to UK: Don't Even Think About It," March 5, 1990.
Perhaps surprising to Morton's mother, Rick Pitino had supported Dwayne Morton's desire to play for the Cardinals after he found out that Morton was really not interested in Kentucky.
"As we stated all along, we wanted no harm to come to the young man," Pitino said in a statement. "We hope the appeals process proves favorable so the young man can attend U of L." - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Morton's Mother to UK: Don't Even Think About It," March 5, 1990.
"The bottom line is Kentucky did nothing to get the young man ineligible," Pitino said. "Kentucky did not turn Louisville in. Kentucky's done nothing but support the man's innocence. We will continue to fight for the young man. We believe in the end, he'll play for Louisville." - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "UK Has Acted to Help Morton, Pitino Says," March 7, 1990.
It turns out that Pitino had been truthful, many months before he was accused by Morton's mother of sabotaging her son's career. Pitino wrote letters to the NCAA soon after the issue came to light in November of 1989 supporting Morton's wish to play for U of L. These were included as part of Louisville's response to the NCAA.
"This young man was going to Louisville without question," Pitino said. "For some reason, we were told otherwise." - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "UK Has Acted to Help Morton, Pitino Says," March 7, 1990.
In April of 1990, the NCAA reversed its earlier decision and restored Morton's eligibility to play with Louisville. They determined that Morton had committed to the Cardinals as early as his junior year in high schol and that U of L did not gain a recruiting advantage in this situation from the dinner. The NCAA said that their initial ruling was based in part on statements by Ralph Johnson which suggested that the Morton decision was still up in the air, indicating that the dinner most likely did represent a recruiting advantage. The NCAA also found that Johnson knew about the early commitment and had mislead the media and UK about the situation. (by Associated Press, Reprinted in Lexington Herald-Leader, "Morton Can Play for U of L, NCAA Says," April 18, 1990.)
Another recruiting altercation between the two schools occurred later when Pitino voluntarily quit recruiting North Carolina transfer Clifford Rozier (6-10 forward) over a minor NCAA violation in 1991. Sean Woods and Reggie Hanson were hosting Rozier and took him to a Kentucky Derby party in Louisville. This was more than 30 miles away from UK's campus which is in violation of an NCAA rule.
Rather than attempt to keep recruiting Rozier, Pitino and athletics director C.M. Newton decided to drop out of the recruiting race.
"There are two ways to think of the problem," the UK coach said at a news conference. "You can say you did not know, it was an honest mistake and get the young man anyway." Louisville based a successful appeal on such an argument last year in retaining high-profile prospect Dwayne Morton, Pitino said. "I think the best way to handle the situation is to pay the penalty, which is not to have a great player in the program and to no longer recruit him," the Kentucky coach said. - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Cats Quit Rozier Recruiting Race. Pitino, Newton Rule Out Possibility of Filing Appeal," May 8, 1991.
"The penalty we'll face is the penalty of not having a great player in the program who could make a big impact," Pitino said. We've experienced about as high a moment and about as low a moment as you can experience in recruiting. On Sunday, Clifford Rozier told me he was coming to the University of Kentucky." - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Cats Quit Rozier Recruiting Race. Pitino, Newton Rule Out Possibility of Filing Appeal," May 8, 1991.
Upon hearing of Kentucky's decision, Louisville coach Denny Crum said, "From our standpoint. I'm sorry for what happened. Obviously, I can't control it anymore than Rick did. I'm sure he didn't intentionally have his team or anybody violate a rule in the recruitment. That's not normal." - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Rozier Decision Not Tied to Past, Newton Says," May 12, 1991.
After the visit to Lexington, Rozier continued on to Louisville for a visit. He denied that he had made a verbal commitment to Kentucky. "No, I had liked Pitino; I had liked what he was saying." Rozier told WHAS, "but I had not made up my mind." He later added that he liked what Denny Crum and the Cardinals but would need to "evaluate carefully" before he made his decision. - (Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Rozier Visits Louisville, Denies UK Commitment," May 8, 1991.) Amazingly, there was evidence of rules violations by Louisville during Rozier's visit. A videotape showed Coach Crum in a gym with Cardinal team members during a time when such contact was prohibited. Crum responded that he was present briefly to check with an injured player. There was also media present when Rozier was met by Louisville Assistant coach Larry Gay, a possible violation of another NCAA rule. (by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Ex-UK Recruit Rozier Will Transfer to U of L," May 16, 1991.) No sanctions were levied by the NCAA for these minor infractions.
Finally, after official visits to Kentucky, Louisville and Florida, Rozier announced his decision on May 15, 1991. He would become a Louisville Cardinal. Rozier was asked if Kentucky had been his first choice, Rozier responded, "I hate to do that. That would make Louisville look bad and that's the school I'm going to." (Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Ex-UK Recruit Rozier Will Transfer to U of L," May 16, 1991.)
In 1992, Kentucky thought they had signed 6-11 center Rodney Dent from a junior college, but before he had faxed his letter of intent to the UK office, there were rumors that Dent was considering visiting Louisville. Kentucky coach Rick Pitino was irate and thought UL was tampering with his recruit. Crum denied any tampering, insisting that Dent had made overtures to Louisville and suggested that Pitino "call me and find out the facts before he pops off. He doesn't know the truth." (Lexington Herald-Leader, "Pitino, Crum Forget Facts Behind Feud," April 23, 1992.)
Denny Crum harassed Kentucky to compete against his team but saw his desire turn sour once the series he coveted so much only led to domination on the court. The Louisville program has seen itself fall from the national elite to that of a respectable, but not dominating team. At the same time, Kentucky under Rick Pitino, rose back to national prominence with an attacking, physical, pressing style of play which used to be a Louisville staple.
With the retirement of Crum, Louisville went out and offered the job to none other than Rick Pitino of all people. So much of the bad blood which may have existed between Pitino and Crum has been smoothed over, at least publicly. But even before he retired, Crum (like Bob Knight) had mellowed considerably and generally had more good things to say about Kentucky and their program than bad.
| Synopsis | |
| Current Irritation Score |
- 1 |
| Height of Irritation |
- 8 |
| Notes: Crum's had so many problems with his own program in the last seasons of his career that he wouldn't have been able to take a swipe at UK, even if he wanted to. | |
Back to top.
Bob Ryan and the East Coast Media
Bob Ryan is a columnist for the Boston Globe and typifies the East Coast media attitude toward UK's program. One memorable remark he made dealt with his love affair with UMASS during the 95-96 season
After UMASS won an early season contest, Ryan wrote:
"Beating Kentucky is always great fun. Rick Pitino has McDonald's All-Americans. He's got Burger King All-Americans. He's got Wendy's All-Americans. He's got Pizza Hut All-Americans. He's got Subway All-Americans. He's got High School All-Americans backing up High School All-Americans . . ." - excerpted in article by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Boston Columnist Got Kick Out of Deeps Cats' Dive," Sunday, December 3, 1995.
JPS Note: See the page on talent.
"If UMass wins, it will be a tribute to taking a conventional approach (a solid six or seven, augmented by happy-to-be-here subs), then playing textbook two-way basketball. If Kentucky wins, it will be a tribute to gluttonous recruiting. John Calipari wants to construct a nice basketball team. Rick Pitino wants to overwhelm you with athleticism." - by Bob Ryan, Boston Globe, "He'll Take the Team (UMASS) Over the Talent," March 30, 1996.
He and his cohort, Mark Blaudschun also enjoy taking pot shots at Kentucky fans. Boston is known for having great sports fans but I guess when they're from Kentucky, it's different.
"No Kentucky team has won an NCAA championship in 18 years, and this is a violation of the laws of nature and the state constitution - Ryan hypothesizing what a UK fan would supposedly think. - by Bob Ryan, Boston Globe, "He'll Take the Team (UMASS) Over the Talent," March 30, 1996.
"If the Wildcats lose the title game with this collection of athletes, the people of Kentucky might -- OK, will -- do something rash. They will forget the 32 wins and zero in on this one loss, forgetting that the objects of their wrath are kids who are capable of having a bad night." - Ryan, obviously searching for something to criticize so he makes up hypothetical situations, assumes some response based on his biases and then criticizes people for it (Real professional there), - by Bob Ryan, Boston Globe, "They're Programmed for Success, But It's Easy to Compute the Toll Playing for Kentucky Takes," March 1, 1996.
"Lately, however, Pitino has been somewhat disingenuous. He has talked about how losses in the pros were actually worse than losses in college (utter nonsense, when the school you're coaching is Kentucky)." - by Bob Ryan, Boston Globe, " ... but Pressure's All on Pitino and Kentucky," March 25, 1996.
"Rick Pitino was hired for one reason -- to bring a national championship to a constituency for whom college basketball is far bigger than life itself. He now has a team his fans have been waiting for. If he doesn't deliver, he might as well charter a plane for Seychelles." - by Bob Ryan, Boston Globe, " ... but Pressure's All on Pitino and Kentucky," March 25, 1996.
"Dont misunderstand: Coach Cal has some very good players. But Little Ricky has celebrities. If he loses to UMass again, that's going to be some postgame press conference." - by Bob Ryan, Boston Globe, " ... but Pressure's All on Pitino and Kentucky," March 25, 1996.
More East Coast Media Knocks
''They [the New Jersey Nets] lose hardly anything by losing Rick Pitino, ending up with John Calipari instead. Everybody is always talking about the job Pitino did from the time he got to Kentucky, at a time when Kentucky was so deep into NCAA probation that all the Bluegrass yahoos walked around wearing snorkels. It was some job, that's for sure. Almost as good as the one Calipari did at the University of Massachusetts. . . ," - by Mike Lupica of the New York Daily News, in article by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "Nets Applauded,", June 9, 1996.
When Kentucky played Duke in the 1988 Tipoff Classic, the teams woke up the morning of the game to read a [Charles] Pierce column in the Boston Herald. In it, Pierce referred to the Wildcat program as "the 30th best profesional basketball team in North America." and "approximately as amateur an operation as General Motors." - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "View of Cats has Improved, Though Some Doubts Remain," November 17, 1991.
JPS Note: Kentucky lost that game 80-55.
Note that after the point shaving scandal of 1951, the New York Media turned against Adolph Rupp, who had regrettably boasted that 'gamblers couldn't touch my boys with a 10-foot pole' just before some of his own players were arrested.
A few years after the scandal, Rupp was asked about the East Coast media. His reply:
Another interesting quote from Rupp about the media.
| Synopsis | |
| Current Irritation Score |
- 5 |
| Height of Irritation |
- 6 |
| Notes: The East Coast Media has been and will always be critical of those in the heartland. It's a fact of life. | |
Back to top.
Bob Gibbons is a high school talent evaluator. He attended the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and currently lives in North Carolina. To suggest that he is a detractor is difficult and high subjective since he really has never said anything critical of the UK program to my knowledge. The reason he was included stems from the belief that, in some cases, he has adjusted his player rankings, not based on the tools of his trade, but simply by which school the player chose. A few Kentucky fans who follow recruiting closely, have suggested that this has been the case.
Submitted by a reader
Gibbons has always had a pro-Dean Smith/UNC and anti-UK slant, even when it comes to rating players. Gibbons occasionally makes public personal attacks on players, but seemingly more frequently when they appear bound for UK. Shawn Kemp and Antoine Walker both have felt the sting of Gibbons' diatribes. Gibbons ranked Antoine Walker only around #25 coming out of high school, citing his poor attitude, selfish play, and penchant for showmanship. Other recruiting analysts had far better impressions of Walker. In fact, Clark Francis rated Walker second only to Allen Iverson in his class and stated that Walker would thrive in Pitino's system. Fortunately, Pitino proved Francis correct. While denigrating the character of Walker, Gibbons was strangely silent about the problems of UNC-bound Rasheed Wallace, even after he became the only player ever disqualified from a McDonald's All-American Game on the basis of technical fouls. Of course, time told the true story as Walker led UK to the championship last season while Wallace led UNC in elbows before bolting to the pros.
Many people expressed doubts about [UK Recruit Ryan] Hogan's talents. UK associate coach Jim O'Brien erased his own doubts by asking Gibbons if Hogan was good enough to play for Kentucky. "Hogan's good enough to be recruited by Dean Smith," Gibbons told O'Brien. - by Jerry Tipton, Lexington Herald-Leader, "UK Recruit Named Hogan, not Grevey," September 24,1996.
To Gibbons credit, he has seemed to change his tune since Rick Pitino left for the Boston Celtics and Tubby Smith was hired. Gibbons believes that Smith is more genuinely interested in recruiting than Pitino was, and therefore predicted that Smith will be very successful in obtaining the players he wants. It also seems that Gibbons likes Smith personally so one can only assume that his player evaluations will no longer be colored by biases although they still surface every once in a while.
"[Tubby] knows the worst thing he can do is over-recruit. Never take more than you need, but take as good as you can get. That's wise. That's Dean Smith's philosophy." - Bob Gibbons, commenting on Kentucky's 1998 recruiting class, April 1998.
JPS Note: If Dean Smith didn't overrecruit while at UNC (with by far the most number of McDonalds All-Americans over the last twenty years of any program in the nation), I've got to question who did ?
In 1999, Gibbons apparently yielding to the changing face of basketball recruiting in light of the popularity of the internet, opened his own website, Bob Gibbons' All-Star Report. The results however, were eye opening as Bob was obviously ill-at-ease with the format and clumsy in interacting with others on-line. Like many media people, he seemed unused to having the public at-large be able to question and second-guess his work and often acted threatened by its power. He and his cohort Rob Mantera got into an ill-advised public squabble with another recruiting guru, Mike Sullivan. Gibbons and Mantera wrote some sophomoric messages designed to belittle Sullivan, to which many fans, chief among them Kentucky fans, became outraged. Some of the responses seem to shed light on the true nature of the man with regards to his views on UK.
Fan Message:
biddy posted on 11/28 4:59 am
Title: Article about Sullivan is a low blow
Rob, that article you wrote about Mike Sullivan is totally uncalled for. I for one will no longer visit your site.
And I hope other people here boycott you until you apologize to Mike for this low blow.
Gibbons Response:
bobgibbons posted on 11/28 11:24 pm
re: Article about Sullivan is a low blow
A real honest to goodness boycott? Wow! Why not organize a lynch mob? Get your other "WCC friends," that's "Wacky Cats Cult" headed by Jim Jones, I mean Steve John, to get a rope. Let's hang the suckers. And, fire Tubby Smith while you're at it. How could he lose to Arizona. And, let's lynch Saul Smith, too. Get 'em all. The WCC will rule the universe!
Fan Message:
cathat posted on 11/28 8:10 pm
A view on Sullivanfollies from a UK fan......
I want Rob and Bob to know they have stooped to the level of Kurt Oneal. I am a member of WCC. I never FLAME or cause problems on other boards. I come to this site very often. So do other WCC members. I can't speek for them but I can for me. I'll never visit this site again. You guys acted like three year olds. I will do everything in my power to make sure UK fans don't come to this site. You had a UK live chat last week. There were a lot of members from our site there. I bet you won't have very many at your next UK live chat.
You dug a hole with one of the largest fan based teams in the US. How dumb are you guys?
Thank you Mike Sullivan for being the best source for recruiting info on the net.
Darren
Gibbons Response:
bobgibbons posted on 11/28 11:03 pm
re: A view on Sullivanfollies from a UK fan..
Good riddance. Stay with the "Wacky Cats Cult."
Bob Gibbons
Gibbons was interviewed by the Louisville Courier Journal about recruiting and the effect of the internet had provided these quotes:
| Synopsis | |
| Current Irritation Score |
- 1 |
| Height of Irritation |
- 3 |
| Notes: Gibbon's tendency to rate UNC recruits too high comes and goes. The net effect is to make the UNC program look like a lot of underachievers which can't be all that bad for UK :-) | |
Back to top.
Kevin "Mad Dog" O'Neill is the former coach of Northwestern, having previously been head coach at Marquette University and the University of Tennessee. He first became known to Kentucky fans after the infamous free throw incident during the 93-94 year when Travis Ford and others intentionally substituted the wrong players to take free throws. During a call-in show, O'Neill questioned Pitino's knowledge of the situation.
"Pitino didn't know it was going on ?" O'Neill said. "Hey, I'm going to tell you this right now. I know who was supposed to shoot every free throw in every game. . . . I bet they have been pulling that crap all year." - by Jerry Tipton, "With 'Mad Dog' O'Neill at UT, South May Not Be Same," Lexington Herald-Leader, November 4, 1994.
To add fuel to the fire, O'Neill's Marquette Warrior team met UK later that season in the second round of the NCAA Tournament. Kentucky was a third-seed looking ahead to the next game against Duke. Unfortunately for the Cats, Marquette showed up to play and demonstrated they were the better team that day, winning 75-63. The Warriors had two big players, Damon Key and Jim McIlvane, who exposed Kentucky's weakness in the paint. This weakness was largely due to a freak injury which occurred to UK center Rodney Dent in mid-season and ended his career as a Cat. The steady play of guard Tony Miller and a tenacious defense spelled doom for Kentucky which finished the year at 27-7.
O'Neill moved on the next season to take the head coaching job at Kentucky's oldest rival, Tennessee. He immediately instituted a ball-control, grinding offense with a non-gambling defense which was the polar opposite of Kentucky. He did soften his comments, clarifying his quote about the free-throw incident to Pitino personally and suggested he meant that the opposing coach [Vanderbilt's Jan Van Breda Kolff] should have known who the shooter was supposed to be.
O'Neill was also gracious in defeat. After a 90-50 demolition in Knoxville, O'Neill said
"That was apples and orange playing out there. There's that much difference. I'm just glad it wasn't 120 or something like that." - by Jerry Tipton, "Rocky Top This: UK 90, Vols 50," February 18, 1996.
The Cats and Vols did squabble over recruits as they are located in the same region of the country. Tennessee has also been a much more fertile state in terms of basketball talent than Kentucky in recent years.
Kentucky did land a great recruit in Ron Mercer. The player, from Nashville TN, was seriously considering both schools (after Vanderbilt decided not to admit him) but finally decided on UK after a bruising recruiting battle. It almost didn't happen though. Mercer was playing in a tournament in Louisville when five Kentucky players came to visit him in the locker room after the game. Although they had cleared the trip beforehand with UK and the NCAA, it appeared on the surface to be a violation and was reported as such to the NCAA. Initially, Pitino and UK thought that O'Neill had reported the incident but after the two coaches talked, it was found not to be the case. It was later determined that an assistant athletic director at Florida, Jamie McCloskey, turned them in and confirmed that the NCAA had given clearance beforehand. Mercer eventually signed with Kentucky and again, O'Neill was gracious in defeat.
"I won't lie. He was our No. 1 focus in every way. We went after him as hard as we could, and we lost the battle. I'm taking nothing away from Kentucky. They did a good job recruiting him. They answered his questions down the stretch about playing time and other things. . . . Bottom line, they're coming off a 28-win, championship season. And we're coming off an 11-win, rebuilding season." - by Jerry Tipton, "Vols' O'Neill Calls Mercer Loss Setback but Tips Hat to UK," Lexington Herald-Leader, April 22, 1995.
Isiah Victor, a 6-10 forward from Hopkinsville KY, signed with Tennessee but was ineligible to play his freshman year. O'Neill suggested that Pitino had turned Victor in to the NCAA, something that Pitino denied. That year, Kentucky thought they had signed center Charles Hathaway but were shocked to learn that he too was going to UT.
O'Neill coached at Tennessee for three seasons before moving on to Northwestern. His record against Kentucky over that span was 0-6.
| Synopsis | |
| Current Irritation Score | - 0 |
| Height of Irritation |
- 4 |
| Notes: Out of sight, out of mind. O'Neal left UT for the wasteland that is Northwestern basketball. After putting in his time as an assistant in the NBA, he somehow miraculously convinced an NBA team (the terrible Toronto Raptors) that he is head coaching material. He's a good enough salesman to get the job, but it never seems to last. | |
Back to top.
Please send all additions/corrections to
Return to Kentucky Wildcat Basketball Page.
Compiled by and unattributed sections written by Jon Scott
Matt Jones: Let's get right to it. I've always thought, and you tell me if I'm wrong. Do you... You seem to really dislike Kentucky basketball, probably going back to the '78 when you covered that Duke team. Is that fair to say?
John Feinstein: No, No I mean. '78 is not fair to say.
John Feinstein: I don't understand why this is such a big deal, my vote. And I said what should be a big deal is the fact that UTEP offered Kentucky the chance to play the game again to remember history.
Matt Jones: Because we're the villain John. I mean aren't you just showing up if you're Kentucky.
