Saban the worst person in sports

[WAR-MATT 2]

Thoughts Bama fans?

Link

Saban's Comments and BCS Both Prove Baffling

By John Feinstein

Special to washingtonpost.com

Tuesday, November 27, 2007; 11:55 AM

There was certainly plenty to talk about in sports this past weekend. Arkansas beat LSU and Missouri beat Kansas, jostling the BCS standings yet again. The Arizona Cardinals and Denver Broncos managed to lose games they couldn't possibly lose. There were so many college basketball games on television that even Dick Vitale may have seen enough. The Boston Celtics are 11-1 and some of us can only wish that Red Auerbach was here to see it.

And yet, sadly, it is impossible not to begin today with one of the worst people in all of sports -- and this takes in a lot of territory -- Alabama football coach Nick Saban.

Saban is the highest paid coach ($4 million a year) in college football, having taken the Alabama job last winter after categorically denying he was leaving the Miami Dolphins.

Okay, coaches do that. They shouldn't do that but they do. Saban was failing miserably in Miami, he had already proven he could win big in the Southeastern Conference and he was clearly someone who was meant to coach at the college level where tyrants are applauded as long as they win.

Alabama finished the season 6-6, losing its last four games after coming within a play of upsetting LSU (Saban's old team) when the Crimson Tide was 6-2. At that point, even after the LSU loss, Saban was being treated the way he likes to be treated: as the savior.

Then came losses to Mississippi State and Louisiana-Monroe. That's not a typo, Alabama, coached by the savior, lost to Louisiana-Monroe at home, in the stadium named for Bear Bryant.

A few days after the ULM loss Saban, who can't stand the media, spoke to the media. In talking about the losses to Mississippi State and ULM he brought up 9-11. And Pearl Harbor.

That's right, in talking about two lost football games he brought up 9-11 and Pearl Harbor. In Saban-world, those were "catastrophes." So too were the back-to-back losses in football games. Saban went on to say that catastrophes could be turning points in history and this "catastrophe," would be, he hoped, a turning point in the history of Alabama football.

Okay, let's just say this: NO ONE should be allowed to mention catastrophes in which thousands of people died when talking about football -- or any sport. Not ever. And certainly not someone who is working at what is supposed to be an institution of higher learning. What kind of message is he sending to his players? If he makes a comment like this in public, what in the world is he saying to his players behind closed doors?

And yet, there has been no outcry coming from the President's office at Alabama, no discussion of Saban being fired or even being asked to apologize. Saban did put out a statement -- through his PR people of course -- "clarifying," what he said. Some things simply can't be clarified. If you listen to the tape there is no taking it, "out of context," or misunderstanding what he was saying. He put two lost football games into the same sentence as 9-11 and Pearl Harbor.

A couple of months ago the right wing media become apoplectic when a liberal organization took out an ad criticizing the leader of the American forces in Iraq. How, they screamed, can you be critical of the man who represents the men and women who are putting themselves in danger every day in Iraq?

Where are those people right now? Why aren't they screaming about a football coach comparing lost football games to thousands of lost LIVES? Where is the perspective?

Answer: nowhere.

Most people are already saying the media is making too much of this and, if Saban turns Alabama around next year or the year after, there will probably be people who will say his analogy was right on target. Sure it was. Because football really is life and death, right?

On to happier topics. Everyone now knows that if Missouri beats Oklahoma on Saturday and West Virginia beats Pittsburgh that they will play for the national championship on January 7th in New Orleans. Okay, fine. It still says here that any system that allows a team to go undefeated (Boise State last year; Hawaii, at the moment, this year) and not have a chance to play for a championship, it should be blown up. Plus, it really gets old hearing the network apologists for the BCS conferences shrugging off Hawaii as having not beaten anybody. One of those apologists was heard to say last weekend in a dismissing, condescending tone, "Please don't tell me Hawaii belongs in the top twenty-five."

Question: how does he know where Hawaii belongs? None of his -- or his network's -- beloved power teams will play Hawaii or Boise State in the regular season. How'd Boise State do against Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl last January? Hawaii might be a fraud or it might be George Mason. The problem is, under the current system, we'll never know.

Here's what else is wrong with the system: If Missouri or West Virginia loses Saturday, Ohio State will be in the championship game. Why? Ohio State's one loss was at home to a three loss Illinois team. Kansas lost on a neutral field to the current No. 1 team in the country. Neither team beat anyone out of conference and Kansas played in a better conference.

So why is Ohio State automatically better than Kansas? Because it lost sooner than Kansas? Because the BCS poll says so? Why is Ohio State's 11-1 better than Kansas's 11-1? Who exactly did Ohio State beat in a Big Ten that might have been as mediocre as the incredibly mediocre ACC? Does anyone think Ohio State is as good as USC now that the Trojans are healthy?

But it doesn't matter. The Buckeyes will go if either team loses and, if BOTH should somehow lose all hell will break loose picking the second team.

More from the silly people who run the bowls: After Maryland crushed North Carolina State on Saturday to become "bowl-eligible," bowl officials were falling all over themselves to talk about what an attractive team Maryland was. The Terrapins have six wins. Two of them are over Villanova (a mediocre 1-AA team) and Florida International. They beat Rutgers -- exposed as overrated as the season wore on -- and went 3-5 in a down ACC. Wow, what an attractive team.

That's not so much a knock on Maryland, which was riddled with injuries all season, as the ridiculous system and ridiculous people who allow the system to exist.

Here's how college football's postseason should be put together every year: One committee chooses 12 teams to play for the national championship and seeds them -- top four get byes; next four home field for the first round.

Then, a separate committee selects the teams that play in the secondary bowls. There are no conference tie-ins, no eighth place teams with 6-6 records guaranteed spots. The bowls with the highest payout get top priority down to the bowls with the lowest payout getting the final selections. Of course the bowl people will say the following: "if we can't pick teams based on how many tickets they will buy or on potential TV ratings we may not survive."

Fine. There are too many bowls and too many 6-6 teams getting there by playing lousy non-conference schedules. If a bowl can't draw then it should go away. The guess here is the college football world will continue to spin on its axis if the R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl or the Chick-fil-A Bowl were to go away. Not to mention the GMAC Bowl or the always unforgettable Papajohns.com Bowl.

Doing all this would, unfortunately take some leadership. There's none in the NCAA where Myles Brand hides under his desk every time talk of a playoff comes up. There's certainly none among the college presidents. So, this lousy unfair system will continue -- sort of like the war in Iraq -- with no end in sight.

What's most frustrating is that everyone always has excuses; everyone has reasons why change won't work. Nothing is perfect in the world but just because you can't achieve perfection doesn't mean you don't try to get better. The other day during a discussion of the war someone said, "Well, if you started today, it would take a year to get our troops safely home," as if that was a reason the war can't end, instead of saying, "let's start today."

The same is true, on a FAR less important level, of college football. A playoff system won't be exactly right and maybe some bowls would go away. It would still be much better for everyone -- most important it would be better for the players and it would be better for the fans.

But why should anyone care about them? What's really important is filling those coffers and making sure the University of Alabama can keep paying Nick Saban to be a leader of young men.

[AUChizad 0]

Sick burn!

Proving once again it's just us Aubs that think he's anything but great.

[mcgufcm 4,109]

two things: the 9/11 and pearl harbor references came up at the press conference following the game, not days later. this guy is a chump. he's trying to make the references sound more pre-meditated than they were. i'm no $aban apologist. i just like to spot crappy, sensationalist journalism where i see it.

AND, i take exception to this, "at the college level where tyrants are applauded as long as they win." as if that doesn't happen in the nfl. the league that wraps its arms around belicheck and parcells and coughlin... dictators and/or cheaters one and all. gimme a break.

other than those, he's okay. over the top and holier than thou? sure. but he's right about $aban being a douche.

[AuburnChopper1 0]

You can agree or disagree with motives, or even context when it comes to some of these articles, but the one GLARING thing that can't be denied, is that Alabama has added the one of the most hated and egotistical jerks to a program that needed anything BUT that.

...and best of all, it's all being shown by people OUTSIDE of the state of Alabama.

I think it's just perfect.

[AU Tailgating Rules 0]

two things: the 9/11 and pearl harbor references came up at the press conference following the game, not days later. this guy is a chump. he's trying to make the references sound more pre-meditated than they were. i'm no $aban apologist. i just like to spot crappy, sensationalist journalism where i see it.

AND, i take exception to this, "at the college level where tyrants are applauded as long as they win." as if that doesn't happen in the nfl. the league that wraps its arms around belicheck and parcells and coughlin... dictators and/or cheaters one and all. gimme a break.

other than those, he's okay. over the top and holier than thou? sure. but he's right about $aban being a douche.

Actually, I believe the statement was made at his Monday press conference and not directly after the game. He had 2 days to come up with this gem. Had note cards and everything. This was not an off the cuff thing

[BamaGrad03 0]

What does it matter? His analogy was more than clear. And he NEVER equated losing a football game with war or 9/11.

Why is it wrong to reference tragedies in an analogy? Are we THAT PC and touchy feely that even analogies are taboo?

[WarEagle007 1]

What does it matter? His analogy was more than clear. And he NEVER equated losing a football game with war or 9/11.

Why is it wrong to reference tragedies in an analogy? Are we THAT PC and touchy feely that even analogies are taboo?

Because it is a stupid thing to say. Whether he made the correlation or not is depending on how you read it. However, there is NO EXCUSE to mention tragedies in the same sentence as losing football games. At the base of it he makes a very good statement, I believe, but his delivery was unacceptable. Rather than reference the two most devastating things to ever happen on US soil in the modern era, he could have simply said they hit rock bottom and it can only make the TEAM stronger if they stick together in the trying time.

Nobody expects Saban to be especially friendly or patient with the media. So why even try to fancy up your conference with parallel references? It was a bad, BAD move. Aight?

[whitelite99 0]

Does anybody else remember the negative press kellen winslow received when said he was a soldier? I know Saban hadn't just been informed that he had injured another player but it's the same principle.

[SouthLink02 8]

Oh Kellen....what a foolish thing to say at the end....

[Legionfield 0]

I think he is great. Recruit, Nick, Recruit.....

[sogaaufan 27]

I think he is great. Recruit, Nick, Recruit.....

Saban had better recruit! He darn sure can't seem to "coach up".