Taking Responsibility

Tonight was supposed to be about a certain professional athlete brandishing a gun in a locker room, instead its going to be about something that is possibly just as troubling and could explain why this type of behavior seems to be so common place.

While watching a local high school girl's basketball game a young lady was called for a foul, fair enough, they happen every game no big deal. Until she decides to start yelling at the ref, she is then given the technical. Now according to team rules that denotes the player being benched the remainder of the game. Instead of her taking the bench, she continues to get into a shouting match with the ref for which she is given her second technical and subsequently ejected from the game and no longer permitted near the court. All of this occurred within a five second span in the second quarter. The player goes into the locker room only to emerge during halftime when the rest of the team comes out.

The girls behavior is completely inexcusable and that is evident to every adult in the arena, with the exception of said player's mother. The mother does not seem to realize that her sixteen year old daughter disrespected her team, teammates, school, coach, athletic faculty, and the referees. Instead she blames the coach for being too hard on her child. Twice in the season a player has gotten a technical foul and both times those players sat on the bench the remainder of the game with no issue, but for some reason this mother and this parent seem to think they should be the exception.

I'm not saying this situation is directly related to what recently happened in Washington, but if parents do not hold themselves and their children responsible for these types of actions, then when will they learn what is wrong and what is right? When a player joins a team, there are a certain set of rules they need to follow, if they don't they have to face the consequences. If every parent treated their child like this coach, these referees, and this team treated this player maybe there would not be the issue of athletes attempting to live by a different set of rules. It should be up to the parent to teach this and not high school coaches.

To Play or Not to Play

In the past two weeks the very foundation of the NFL playoff system may have been shaken. The Colts decided not to go for "The Perfect Season" and rested their starters in Weeks 16, giving the 7-7 Jets the chance to stay in the playoff hunt. In Week 17 the Bengals utilized a vanilla game plan and spent much of the second half with backup players playing. In a two week span the New York Jets went from 7-7 and in the back of the pack in the run for a wildcard spot to 9-7 and the fifth seed in the AFC and teams like the Steelers and Texans lost out due to the Colts' and Bengals' treating these games like exhibition games.. Now there are rumblings that these teams should have played there starters and something must be done to uphold the integrity of the league.

A team that does well enough throughout the season has the right to rest players to avoid injuries. That is the luxury of performing well throughout the season, the Colts were 14-0 with nothing to gain from playing their starters down the stretch. The Bengals were 10-5 and guaranteed a home playoff game, they had nothing to gain by risking injury. This is done every season, a team has a great season and knows they will be in the playoffs and have the opportunity to give other players playing time and avoid injury to their stars.

The other side of the argument is the competitive balance that is affected by these teams. Pittsburgh and Houston may have a legitimate argument, but, had Pittsburgh defeated Kansas City or Cleveland or Oakland, teams that combined to go 14-34, they would not have to worry about the tie-breaking procedures or depend on the Jets to lose. Houston on the other hand, could have defeated the Jets when they played in Week One, and they would be in the playoffs rather than readying for free agency.

There are still teams that decide to play to win the game down the stretch, risking injury and fatigue to maintain the team's timing and consistency. The Patriots experienced the ultimate downside to this theory, the loss of the league leader in receptions for the playoffs, Wes Welker.

Resting the starters is no guarantee of a successful postseason, teams seem to be negatively affected by the time off, only one time in the past decade has a team been a top seed and won the Super Bowl (04 Patriots). Over this span teams have been forced to play themselves into the playoffs and ride that momentum to a successful postseason run.

So who is right?

Who knows, the NFL does not like resting starters because hard working fans do not want to pay money to see backups and practice squad players in Week 17. But, what would happen if Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, or Drew Brees were forced to play, only to be injured and miss the playoffs? Would the average fan rather see backups in the regular season and starters in the playoffs or vice-versa? The right answer is...

Whatever the coach decides to do, after all he has positioned his team to have that luxury.