Tilting at Windmills

The first Nobel Peace Prize went to Henri Dunrant, the person acknowledged for proposals that led to the Red Cross and the Geneva Convention (agreements concerning humanitarian treatment of victims of war). For Dunrant, not everything was fair in love and war–he spent his life espousing a level of decency for one’s opponent as well as one’s friend.

American football provides our current day prime-time gladiators. Football is war without death, a full-contact chess match between some of the world’s best athletes and most insightful coaching staffs. But to retain the desired competition of both violence and beauty, we need a certain code of conduct on both sides of the ball, a certain attitude to prevail during the contest. We
need sportsmanship.

With more technology to provide scrutiny than ever before, you would think that character and integrity would reign supreme among the nations college football teams. Unfortunately, sportsmanship in the BCS age isn’t so cut and dry. A cheap shot meant to inflict pain or injury is an obvious no-no, but what do we make of flying banners over a fellow conference-member in the hopes of passing them in the polls? College football is one of the few sports that includes a penalty for “unsportsmanlike conduct”, and yet you would be hard-pressed to find a consensus on what constitutes unsportsmanlike conduct among any large group of present-day college football fans.

Part of the problem rests in our vague notion of what constitutes a good sport. A few items seem non-controversial:

Any action designed to inflict injury to another player or sideline observer. This should include using the helmet as a weapon and not as protection–if you lead a tackle or block with your helmet it should be a penalty. I would also penalize blindside hits away from the ball — especially on plays like interceptions and fumble returns.
Any unfair tactic to gain advantage by circumvention or disregard to the rules.

Yet, to this old-school writer there are areas of college football that are baffling, or worse, inconsistent. One person’s “dirty” is another person’s “clean”. Among the do’s and don’ts within the NCAA rulebook are these jewels:

Offensive and defensive holding. We understand the blocker must have arms parallel, hands open, and not contact above the opponents shoulders or to his back (except during an opponents spin move). Still this judgment call varies widely from conference to conference. Let’s get some clarity and consistency please.
Uncomplimentary remarks about officiating by team or coaches. The NCAA Rules Committee has added this prohibition to their most recent rules book (although they do not establish consequences for a transgression). To me, this borders on being un-American. In fact, to the contrary — we Americans feel a certain patriotic sense to right injustices. I understand the NCAA suffers when a coach from a school in Lubbock speaks his mind about poor officiating, but why not let the public decide? I believe it is healthy for the NCAA to admit that, why they are trying to make college football better, there may be room for improvement. Why does the Big12 allow someone that lives in Austin to officiate Big12 games–in this day of convenient and relatively cheap air travel, shouldn’t all Big12 referees reside outside of Big12 states and have no affiliation with member schools? (Yeah–I’m talking to you Jon Bible and Randy Christal.) And why does the Pac10 allow officials to reverse the winner of a game without serious financial or career consequences? Here, I would argue that candid comments are good, comments intended to ridicule are bad, and comments intended to incite misbehavior are punishable.
Talking to a player in a manner that is demeaning or belittling (unsportsmanlike conduct). I don’t have a problem with smack talk, something that’s occurred at contests since David & Goliath. Yet, referees need to have a rule for flagrant conduct. Once again, we have the dreaded judgment call.
Celebrations (unsportsmanlike conduct). As long as football is played by humans (and not robots) I hope to see celebration. Yet I agree that some actions disturb the flow of the game. Another dreaded judgment call.

Sportsmanship extends beyond the bounds of the rules book. For instance, what do we make of coaching strategy in this computer-judged and computer-ranked sport? Last year, Mack Brown and UT players whined about OU running up the score against inferior opponents. (In truth, UT had a much easier schedule than OU last year, and UT scored much more 4th quarter points than OU; OU scored only 5 points more than their opponents in the 4th quarter (100 to 95), and UT scored 46 points more than their opponents (122 to 76).) But the argument assumes that offensive production and defensive production are bad things once the game is decided. I feel that a coach’s first responsibility is to his team. If the goal is to develop a few key 2nd team players, it seems to me that the best course of action is to let one or two 2s play with the other 1st team players with the standard play selections. If I’m trying to develop Landry Jones, I want him in with the rest of the 1st team making the correct play calls for efficiency and production. If the opponent cannot stop Landry Jones, they should get better — not complain. Other considerations might dictate that a coach performs mass substitution to give the 2s or 3s playing time, but the decision should not be based on trying to hold back offensive or defensive production.