The dumbest political campaign of 2012…

The Senate seat of Texas Republican Kay Bailey Hutchinson is becoming open after Hutchinson announced her retirement a while back.  The seat should be considered a safe Republican hold, but if one Republican candidate gets his way, the Democrats would have a great chance to win the seat.

Craig James, an ESPN analyst, has decided to run for the Texas seat as a Republican.  He is a former running back of the famed “Pony Express” at SMU.  He used that experience to land College Football analyst gigs at ABC/ESPN, and at CBS.  On paper, being an analyst would be relatively safe and not be a polarizing position.  However, James has two problems.  First, James spends most of his time during College Football season outside of the state of Texas, and Texans do have a knack of not trusting people who give the perception that they are out of state.  Second, and more importantly, his actions over the last 30 years may have contributed to the demise of 2 big-time College Football Programs in the Lone Star State, a sin that many consider unforgivable in a Football-crazed state.

First, James’ time at SMU was during SMU’s peak.  It was a National Power to the point that they were a National Title threat in the late 1970s and early 1980s.  But there was a lot of seedy things going on under the surface, such as players getting paid, and shortly after James’ left, SMU was given the NCAA “Death Penalty”—a sanction that destroyed the program and has taken many years to recover from (if they ever recover).  Though James was never implicated in any of the underhanded things going on at SMU at the time, he and other members of the Dallas school during that time have been branded as contributors to SMU’s demise.

What he did a few years ago interfering with Texas Tech, however, is well-known.  Mike Leach had taken the Red Raider program from obscurity into a National power, winning 11 games in 2008.  In 2009, Leach was helping Texas Tech to another winning season, when Craig James and his son, Adam (a sophomore at Texas Tech), leveled charges against Leach that Leach mishandled a concussion that Adam had suffered.  Craig used the ESPN brand, along with Spaeth Communications, who had developed the Swift Boat Campaign to derail John Kerry’s 2004 Presidential Bid to smear Mike Leach.  That smear campaign ultimately led to Leach’s firing before the 2009 Alamo Bowl.  Leach is now suing Texas Tech, Craig James, ESPN, and Spaeth Communications, and evidence suggests that Leach has a reasonable chance to win the case.  Craig James’ handling of the situation has made him a target by many in the Texas Tech community, and stirred up the SMU faithful in the process.

So why in the name of God is James running for Senate?  Besides the reasons James says, ego is involved.  James thinks he has vast support in the state; otherwise, we wouldn’t be running in the first place.  However, many Republicans don’t want the headache of dealing with James as a candidate, and are pushing him to drop out.  Many people think this would be a good opportunity for ESPN to fire James considering he has taken a leave of absence to run.  And others think James should just disappear completely.

So, how long will James continue to run given all the headaches he’s going to have to reckon with?  As many as his ego will allow him, I guess.  Sooner or later, though, reality will catch up with him, maybe while he still has a gig left with ESPN to go back to.

The changing dynamics of education…

Recently a cartoon depicting the change of attitudes among parents, students, and teachers has been making the rounds of Facebook. In 1969, the poor grades a student would have was mostly the fault of the student in the eyes of the parents. In 2009, it was the opposite. The poor grades a student would have was mostly the fault of the teacher in the eyes of a parents.

The change of attitudes have coincided with the changing dynamics of the parent-teacher relationships. A long time ago, most parents worked with teachers to help educate their kids. Parents trusted the teachers to provide their kids with the best education possible, and when the kids were not learning properly, they focused their wrath on the kids and would maybe try to work harder with the kids to improve their grades. But there have been changes to that trust. The pressure of gaining scholarships, the increasing revelations of adult relations between kids and teachers (in real life and in Hollywood), the helicoptering parent attitudes around their kids, the pressure schools face in order to not lose government funding, the increase of social issues creeping into schools, and other factors have contributed to such an erosion of trust between parents and teachers that now the parents blame the teachers for the kids poor grades.

Ironically, many of today’s teachers and school administrators were students not that long ago. And let’s be honest: some of those once-students were not the best of the best students. Many of the once-elite students went off to work in Wall Street, at multi-billion dollar companies, become lawyers or politicians that now dictate rules to schools instead of supporting schools, or work for places that would provide more salary to them than teaching. Teachers are over-worked, underpaid, and underappreciated. So why would a once elite student want to go through their adult lives barely living from paycheck to paycheck, deal with regulations that their predecessors did not, and deal with angry students and parents who think they know better than the teachers on what the teachers should teach? Wouldn’t the elite student feel better off going somewhere else making money and not have to deal with hundreds of parents more concerned with their little Johnny or Susie getting an A?

Parents of today also don’t always pay attention to everything going on with their kids. Many parents have two jobs to work in order to afford the best for their kids and can’t always give their kids the love and support they need. They want everything: money, fame, and smart kids who get scholarships. They feel money and things will buy the kids happiness and help them learn to always get A’s. The kids are unhappy and feel they need attention one way or another. So in some situations, the kids invent the issue to help get them attention.

In short, parents and kids contribute to the problems of today. But there are also teachers who cause problems as well. The pressures of being a teacher today (money, hours, support) sometimes get the better of teachers. Some turn to alcoholism, drug use, and, in some cases, having sexual relations with their students. These extreme examples help further erode the trust parents and teachers once have. Even without extreme examples, teachers are human, too. They can possibly show favoritism in some situations to kids of friends, only helping out those who may or may not need the help, while neglecting those who really need help to learn.

So how do we solve the problems? There is no easy answer, unfortunately. It will take years, maybe even generations of hard work to regain that trust, if it can ever be regained. And it has to be hard work on all sides: from parents who take time to help their kids learn, from teachers getting the support from administrators and who avoid the temptations of the world, and from kids willing to do what it takes to become the best they can be. Maybe we never had a perfect world between students and teachers and maybe we never will, but we won’t know if we don’t try.

Is the GOP deliberately trying to lose in 2012?

As we have finished up the last of the pre-Iowa caucus debates which will begin to determine who will face President Obama on the GOP side in the Fall 2012 Presidential election, a disturbing thought has entered my head… is the GOP trying to lose in 2012 to set up regaining the White House in 2016 with a huge majorities in both houses of Congress?  It’s possible, especially when you consider how weak the GOP field is this time around.  Outside of Mitt Romney, it has largely been the C and D-list GOPers who have been vying for the nomination.  Rick Santorum was last seen getting tossed out of the Senate by an alledged pro-life Democrat.  Michelle Bachmann spends more time demanding apologies from late-night band leaders than campaigning.  Rick Perry is making George W. Bush look smart.  Herman Cain was the leading guy for 10 seconds before sexual misconduct allegations ended his run.  Ron Paul is… well, Ron Paul.  John Huntsman could probably beat Obama… if the guy could get just any love from the GOP and Tea Party folks.  And Newt?  He’s got more baggage on him than an airport claim area, and it keeps growing.

Look at who sat out the 2012 GOP Primary.  Sarah Palin, Chris Christie, Mitch Daniels, Rudy Guliani, and Mike Huckabee all decided to take a pass in this year’s primary-all better candidates than most of the current 2012 choices.  And there are other Governors who were just elected on the GOP side who are very green, but who could make a run in 2016.  Perhaps the GOP wants a Tea Party candidate who would fail against Obama to break the strong will of the Tea Party to a point in 2016 where the Tea Party might be more willing to accept a moderated selection.

Meanwhile, if Obama goes on to win re-election next year, the list of Democratic candidates in 2016 will be thin.  Vice President Biden has indicated he would take a run at President, but he will be older than Reagan when Reagan ran in 1980.  Hillary has indicated she is through running for President.  And there aren’t too many other experienced Democrats who could be a worthy successor to President Obama.  Devall Patrick of Massachusetts is a possibility, but Democrats from Massachusetts haven’t done well since Kennedy.  Martin O’ Malley might have the resources to make a run, but would a liberal from Maryland who needs 75% of Democrats in the Legislature to get anything done in Maryland work on the National Level?  Perhaps Andrew Cuomo of New York may be the ideal choice to run on top of the Democrat ticket in 2016, but they may have to deal with an Occupy group that will force the Democrats to be more liberal than they would.

At this point, the GOP seems content to let Obama win re-election so they can strengthen their position for 2016.  With an aging Democratic leadership in Congress, the Republicans knew the list of likely Presidential options will be so thin that they can focus on taking down just a few people to easily win in 2016.  Is it too difficult to imagine such a scenario?

Predicting Penn State’s fate using the past…

The Penn State University scandal is dominating the Sports World as many people have weighed in.  So far, the scandal has forced the firing of the University President, a legendary Football Coach, the school AD and a VP.  And none of them are involved in the worst of the accusations, which involves a former Assistant Football Coach who was once rumored to be the heir apparent to Joe Paterno.  Jerry Sandusky’s mysterious departure in 1999 now appears to be related to allegations of child molestation, and attempts to hide the situation only made it worse when more allegations of child abuse surfaced after Sandusky left but the program, but was still associated with the program.

Joe Paterno’s firing was consistent with past scandals.  Even when a scandal ultimately turned out to be nothing (as in the case of the Duke Lacrosse team in 2006), the head coach is usually fired in the process.  But this scandal is far worse than the scandals of the past 25 years.  In fact the only scandal that seems to come close in terms of disgust was the Baylor Basketball scandal of 2003, where one player murdered another and the head coach tried to cover up the murder by pinning drugs on the victim.  In the end, the Baylor basketball team was dealt a severe blow for many years, and only the Drew family of Valparaiso, Indiana could restore Baylor to National prominence.

Another far lesser scandal led to the near termination of a Football Power.  In the 1980s, SMU’s team was delivered a severe blow as allegations of repeated paying of football players left the NCAA no choice but to issue a termination of the program for at least a year.  The “death penalty” left the SMU program is such disarray that SMU has not been competitive since.  The NCAA, as a result, has been hesitant to issue another death penalty to any other school since.

A friend of mine, John Brown, suggested that Penn State’s football program should be terminated.  While extreme, the move would not be without precedence.  In the late 1930s, the University of Chicago decided to terminate its football program to prevent the program from descending into the levels that other fellow Big Ten programs and other School had at the time to win National Titles.  It would be nearly 30 years before the University of Chicago would field another Varsity Football Team, and now it operates at the much lower Division III level, never to compete at the National levels it once had.

Still, the NCAA has a chance to do the right thing here.  If the allegations against Jerry Sandusky are proven true, then Penn State is guilty of lack of institutional control, a major violation that should be grounds for the death penalty—if the NCAA had the courage to execute it again.  This may be the best hope for anyone looking for justice in this scandal.  A year or two away from college football may risk Penn State being non-competitive for 30 years, but in the long run, it may be a chance to prove that no school is bigger than the NCAA, and, in the process, it may begin to restore some integrity to college football.

What is needed now is a Kennesaw Landis type of personality to come down hard on Penn State and force the big school into potential reforms to prevent this kind of scandal (or anything else close to it) from ever happening again.  But will we ever see that happen?  We can only hope.

Recap of 4G World

For the last 5 years, I have had the honor of attending one of the most important conferences in the Wireless Communications Industry.  This conference has focused on the present and future of the Wireless Industry, presented by the Yankee Group of Boston.  In 2007 and 2008, the conference was known as WiMAX World, as the conference focused on the future of Computer communications.  WiMAX at that time appeared to have major backing among startups and some incumbants like Sprint.  In 2009, the Conference changed it’s name to 4G World, recognizing the importance of LTE and HSPA+ in the world of communications.  And since that time, the growth of LTE has made the most die-hard WiMAX providers plan to switch over to LTE.

At this year’s conference, WiMAX was not talked about much.  It is clear that LTE has won the ‘4G’ Wars.  The discussions rather focused on how to address the problem of capacity in networks.  It is clear that smartphones, led by the iPhone have been successful—too successful.  The fact that people are using their phones for more than just phone calls and texting has become apparent in the rise of mobile data being used for things such as Web browsing, Social Media, and Streaming video.  In fact, making a phone call on a mobile phone has become only the 4th most used application of a phone.

But this use of Mobile Data on Smartphones has led to a problem.  The networks are being strained.  Already, mobile data offloading to unsecure WiFi mesh networks are occurring in places such as New York and San Francisco.  And the problem is getting worse.  Within 2 years, it is expected that we will have the first smartphone meltdown.  This meltdown will make the Blackberry’s issues last month look like a Sunday picnic.

So, what are Mobile companies planning to do about it?  Aside from data throttling where they could restrict users to a hard cap of data usage, the options are few and not guaranteed to work.  The big idea involves creating heterogeneous networks (or HetNets), where a large macro-cell will be supplemented in its coverage areas by smaller metro-cell (including lightRadio Cubes in neighborhoods and femtocells in homes and businesses).  These smaller cells will increase the capacity of cell coverage areas, while not interfering with the larger macro-cell.  To ensure these smaller metro-cells are connected to the network, backhaul will need to be provided.  The backhaul will either be fiber or microwave in nature.

Obviously, unlimited data plans are also being scrapped.  Contrary to what Sprint says, they announced at the conference that they were eliminating unlimited mobile data in their dongels and hot spots.  They are trying to maintain unlimited data in their phones, but the writing is on the wall that unlimited data will soon end on their phones, particularly as the iPhone makes it’s appearance on the Sprint network.

Speaking of Sprint, in early October they announced that they were going to develop their LTE network at the expense of terminating their Nextel customers and ultimately ending their selling of WiMAX gear.  They also hinted they would end their relationship with Clearwire and be willing to let Clearwire go bankrupt.  At the conference, however, they suggested that they would maintain their relationship with Clearwire’s WiMAX network for as long as possible.  Very few people believed that statement, however, leading to speculation that Verizon or AT&T maybe interested in purchasing some of Clearwire’s valuable spectrum, openly in front of Sprint’s executives.

This conference was a great showcase of what is to come and the dangers that the wireless networks face.  The coming years will show how wireless companies can handle the oncoming Mobile data storm.

Sprint’s hypocritical attempt to destroy a wireless company…

On Oct. 7, Sprint finally announced their future intentions regarding “4G technology”.  While there was no surprise that Sprint has decided to drop WiMAX in favor of LTE (probably the best part of the announcement), Sprint’s plans will result in the termination of it’s Nextel PTT unit and effectively try to bankrupt Clearwire so Sprint can pick up the pieces on the cheap.  Meanwhile, Sprint is suing to block the AT&T-T-Mobile merger, stating that the merger would leave 2 giant wireless companies with Sprint a distant third.  As I’ve said before on this blog, Sprint’s problems aren’t because AT&T and Verizon have an unfair advantage; it’s because Sprint is just incompetent.  I have corroborating information from others in the wireless world.  And this plan of Sprint's shows just how bad their incompetence is.

I’m going to ignore Sprint’s iPhone deal, which suggests that even under optimal conditions, Sprint will not turn a profit on the iPhone until 2014—even if they meet their expectations on the contract.  But, as an aside, Steve Jobs' likely final business decision was a stroke of genius at the expense of Sprint’s CEO, Dan Hesse.  Apple will never get a deal that good ever again.

So let’s sum up Sprint’s LTE plans… They plan to deploy LTE in their 1900-MHz band currently occupied by their CDMA network.  This is far higher in the spectrum range than AT&T and Verizon, which deploy their LTE networks in the 700 MHz band (AT&T will also deploy LTE in the AWS bandwidths of 1.7/2.1 GHz, similar to where Sprint’s network will be).  Translation:  Sprint will need more towers than AT&T and Verizon does to cover the same areas.  Sprint will likely deploy 5x5 MHz LTE Spectrum, far lower than the 10x10 MHz spectrum Verizon and AT&T (in some areas) has for LTE.  Translation:  Sprint’s LTE rate will be slower than Verizon and AT&T, and it may even be slower than its current WiMAX network, which goes up to 10 MHz as well.

As a result of Sprint’s LTE deployment, their CDMA network will move to 800 MHz, which effectively means the end of its Nextel iDEN network.  They will likely sell the iDEN equipment to somewhere else in the world, but all the Nextel PTT users will either be eliminated or forced to join Sprint’s PCS network.

As for Sprint’s WiMAX network it shares with Clearwire, after 2012, Sprint will stop selling WiMAX handsets.  My hunch is that Sprint will stop supporting WiMAX at that time, leaving its WiMAX users out in the dark.  It’s ironic, considering Sprint owns 54 percent of Clear, but Sprint and Clear in recent years has mixed together about as well as oil and water.  Clear is planning to deploy LTE on it’s network, but it needs money and Sprint has no intention of supporting Clear after their current contract with Clear is over in 2012.  In fact, Sprint is hoping Clear goes bankrupt to scoop up the spectrum Clear owns.  Because without Clear’s spectrum, it’s a near guarantee Sprint would be forced to end it’s unlimited data packages, given the limited amount of spectrum they would have minus Clear.

Clear owns spectrum in the 2.6 GHz range, which isn’t ideal for deployment of LTE, but it has huge advantages.  The 2.6 GHz Spectrum was bought by Clear and Worldcom in 2001.  When Worldcom went bankrupt in 2002, Nextel picked up the spectrum for a song ($144 million) and Sprint inherited the Spectrum when they merged with Nextel.  Sprint gave the spectrum to Clearwire in 2008 as part of gaining 54% of the Craig McCaw founded company.  Now Sprint is hoping that a Clear bankruptcy would enable Sprint to reclaim their spectrum and add Clear’s spectrum.  The idea would be that Sprint would claim a huge amount of spectrum with which they could deploy an larger and faster LTE network on the cheap.

But the 2.6 GHz spectrum Clear owns has become the most prized wireless spectrum in the US, and it’s unlikely Sprint would be allowed to take it without a fight.  For one thing, the amount of Spectrum Clear owns is huge (about 120 MHz, maybe even more).  If any major Wireless Company gets a hold of that spectrum, it would alleviate any spectrum crunches those companies would have for a long time.  Second, the 2.6 GHz spectrum has seen many LTE deployments in the world already and could easily be a world LTE standard, making roaming a likely possibility.  So, it Clear goes bankrupt, expect a fight between AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint over the spectrum.  And, even if Sprint won the whole spectrum, I would expect it to pay a huge price for it (certainly above the $144 million Nextel paid for it—I estimate it would cost at least $25 billion for the whole spectrum).  And you don’t think AT&T would love to pay Sprint back for their attempts to block AT&T’s attempt to buy T-Mobile to acquire more spectrum.  With Sprint needing cash, it’s unlikely Sprint would be able to hold on to the entire spectrum without court victories.

Even if Sprint gets everything it wants, the hypocrisy they are showing over the AT&T-T-Mobile merger while they try to snuff out Clear is blatant.  Also, there is no guarantee that Sprint will be able to do anything with that spectrum due to financial issues.  And even if they do, Sprint’s reputation suggests they will deploy an inferior product.  It’s time for the FCC and the DoJ to call Sprint on their hypocrisy and tell Sprint to try and succeed on their own.  Maybe Sprint will survive and maybe they won’t.  But it’s time for Sprint to prove their value in the consumer world and not in the courts.

Liberty for all vs. Justice for all…

Our great nation has forever been divided into two camps since the moment we first declared independence with a third camp that will support the winner in the struggle.  Patriots vs. Loyalists gave way to Federalists vs. Democrat-Republicans which gave away to North vs. South and later Democrats vs. Republicans.  Since the Vietnam War, we have been divided into camps of Conservatives vs. Liberals, but even now these sides have evolved into a new phase that is growing up right before our eyes.  One side is the Tea Party.  The other is a yet to named Party that is now occupying Wall Street.  There is a better way to describe the Two Sides and that description is found in the last five words of our Pledge of Allegiance:  “Liberty For All” vs. “Justice For All”.

The “Liberty for All” side is the Tea Party.  Their belief focuses on that Government is not a solution to the problem; rather, Government is the problem.  Their historical guide is the American Revolution.  They believe individuals have the right to choose their own fate and live their own lives.  Many are successful from the standpoint that they own their own homes and they may even own their own businesses.  Liberty, itself, is viewed as freedom with responsibility in their eyes.  Everyone has the ability to live their own way, and their success and failure is based on their willingness to do what it takes to succeed (usually hard work, although some choose to take short cuts to get ahead).  It is Darwinian in nature, which is ironic considering many on this side also believe in Christianity.

The “Justice for All” side is manifested in the form of those currently occupying Wall Street.  Their belief focuses on that humanity’s elite is corrupt and only a strong force (not necessarily Government, but if Government is the only way to accomplish the goals, that they will push the Government to act) can bring the elite to Justice.  Their historical guide is the French Revolution.  Many in the movement have been hurt by those who they feel have committed crimes or taken short cuts to get ahead at their expense.  Justice doesn’t necessarily focus only on resolving legal conflicts to their satisfaction, but it can also extend to social causes (equal rights, providing for the needs of all, caring for the environment, and making everyone more equal).  Everyone is protected to some degree from humanity’s worst instincts, aka, The “Seven Deadly Sins”, but it is most often at the cost of higher achievement.  These people use the early Christian church as a guide, which is ironic since many on this side shun the Christian faith.

Both have their advantages and disadvantages.  The Liberty for All’s weak spot is apparent lack of compassion (see a recent GOP debate about health care), while the Justice for All’s weak spot is that they are susceptible to a small group of powerful leaders among them that would corrupt the justice into their favor (i.e. Robespierre).  Both sides are genuine in their beliefs and the fact that the media chooses to belittle or ignore many parts of their causes only strengths each group’s passion.

The third side in this debate are those who believe in a little of both.  They realize both sides’ strengths and weaknesses, but are leery of either side gaining too much control in the nation.  In case one side gets too powerful, they throw their weight to the other side to prevent a further erosion of either liberty or justice.  This side faces extraordinary pressure from both sides to make a choice.  Both sides' argue “You’re either with us or against us”, and this third side is beginning to erode away in the face of the withering assaults.

All people need to understand, however, the closing words of the Pledge of Allegiance are “Liberty AND Justice for all”, not emphasis on one or the other.  The Liberty side needs to understand that without a EQUAL balance of Justice, Liberty becomes corrupted.  And the Justice side needs to understand without a EQUAL balance of Liberty, Justice itself becomes vulnerable to those who can corrupt the power of Justice.  And the third side needs to remind both sides of the balance as well as learn the lessons of that balance itself.  Without both an equal amount of Liberty and Justice, this nation will not be the Shining Beacon on a Hill we always have strived for.

Michael Moore Stereotyping Hypocrisy…

Normally, I try to steer away from people making political statements.  It is everyone’s right to state their opinions, even if I don’t agree with them.  But when you call for a boycott of my home state and, in the process, paint the entire state as racist when your home area has had a poor record on race, I’m going to say something about it.

In case you missed it (and given the lack of attention about it, a lot of people probably missed the story), filmmaker Michael Moore called for “all Americans with a conscience to shun anything and everything to do with the murderous state of Georgia”—a response to the execution of Troy Davis.  He has even gone so far as to demand his publisher pull his book, “Here Comes Trouble”, from every bookstore in the state.  If not, then he will “donate every dime of every royalty my book makes in Georgia to help defeat the racists and killers who run that state.”  Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal’s office has responded with the following statement:  “We think it is cute he thinks anyone in Georgia would buy his book, but if any Georgian does, I'm happy to double the royalties and buy a pack of gum for a charity of Michael Moore's choice.”  Ouch!

First of all, Mr. Moore might be confused about whether he is talking about Georgia or his hometown of Flint, MI.  Yes, Georgia has a bad history of racism, but Flint, in case you didn’t know, also has a long history of racism in it as well—like many areas north of the Mason-Dixon line which you never hear about (and anyone who challenges my assumption about that, maybe they should recall Indiana’s history with the Klan or that Boston, MA is still today considered a largely segregated city).  And Flint’s crime rate makes Detroit look like paradise.  Sounds like the pot calling the kettle…never mind.  But painting the entire state of Georgia as racist… do you have any clue, Mr. Moore?  How many of my friends who herald from the Peach State are progressive in their views?  This state brought the nation Jimmy Carter, Ted Turner, and John Lewis—none of them I would consider conservatives.  It also was the adult home of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.—the man most responsible for leading the Civil Rights movement.  What has Flint produced to help the cause of civil rights?

Oh, and I would suggest to keep an eye out on Mr. Moore.  If he donates any money to the Carter Center or King Memorial, he’s a hypocrite.  Also, if you see him drinking a Coke product, eating at Chick-Fil-A, flying Delta, or shopping at Home Depot, that’s showing he doesn’t practice what he preaches.  It’s easy to call for a boycott on South Carolina, which happened many years ago.  But Georgia?  Shows me Mr. Moore wasn’t thinking at all when he opened his mouth to stereotype an entire state while ignoring his problems at home.

Poker’s Darkest Hour

In April, the US Government shut down three of the largest Poker Web Sites—Full Tilt Poker, PokerStars, and Absolute Poker—and indicted the owners of all Websites.  We all thought that the shut down was a little fishy, but as more details began to emerge, we discovered that maybe there was justification for the shutdown.  All three websites were required  to return money to users.  PokerStars was able to return money to its players, but Absolute Poker and Full Tilt Poker did not.  Phil Ivey, one of Full Tilt Poker’s players, decided to skip the WSOP in protest until all the money was repaid.  It wasn’t and Ivey missed the WSOP.  This week the US District Attorney in Manhattan provided a clue as to why Full Tilt Poker did not repay the Money.  In short, the charges against Full Tilt Poker state that it was a Global Ponzi Scheme in disguise and that it’s four largest shareholders, including “The Professor” Howard Lederer and Chris “Jesus” Ferguson, were getting huge amounts of cash from the scheme.  The indictments were the manifestation of Poker Announcer and Newspaper Columnist,Norman Chad’s worst nightmare.  Chad had always feared a Poker Ponzi-like scheme that could spell the end of the Poker Boom.  His column next Monday should be very telling on how bad the problem could be for poker.

As it is, it is becoming clear that “The Professor” and “Jesus”, if convicted, will be spending time in jail.  They also have pretty much played their last professional Poker hands.  How many other Full Tilt Poker players are in the scheme as well?  Is Ivey, Mike “The Mouth” Matusow, Erik Seidel, Jennifer Harmon, John Juanda, and others involved?  What about Greg “Fossilman” Raymer?  He switched from PokerStars to Full Tilt Poker this year—talk about bad timing.  Did he switch because he was promised money?  And does this Ponzi scheme extend to PokerStars and how many other players in PokerStars were involved?

So who are the losers in this situation and who will emerge for the better.  Here’s a quick rundown:

LOSERS:

ESPN-My guess is ESPN Programming on Poker will start to fade because of this crisis.  Sure, it’s cheap to produce, but how many people will still tune in?

Clients of Full Tilt Poker and Absolute Poker-I will guess that the Poker Players that were members of these Websites will never see their money returned.

Poker Pros of Full Tilt Poker and Absolute Poker-The professional players of these Websites will likely be villified and many of them will probably never be allowed to see the inside of a poker room again.  Many of them are some of the biggest names in Poker.

Those wanting Online Poker to be legalized in the US-This setback has probably cost Online Poker legalization nationally in the short run.  Ultimately, Online Poker could be legalized, but it could be sometime.

WINNERS:

Phil Hellmuth-Although the “Poker Brat” was loosely associated with Full Tilt, he left them years ago to work with Ultimate Bet.  So, it appears he is in the clear for now.  And two of the biggest threats to Hellmuth’s WSOP Bracelet record could be in the middle of the controversy.

Mike Sexton-The Poker Ambassador has taken advantage of the legal issues to try and draw people to Club WPT.com.  The question is whether Sexton’s Web Site is legal.  If so, the World Poker Tour may be one of the few Poker Games to survive.

Las Vegas-How does Las Vegas win if Poker loses?  Well, Poker does not build the Casinos in Vegas, other games do!  So, if Poker goes away, more people will go to the games and betting that bring in money to Vegas.

In short, this Scheme may end Big time Poker as we know it, but Vegas will survive are grow.  It may be a long time before Poker gets over this Crisis.

The Meaning of my 9/11 Picture on Facebook

Since I have been on Facebook, every 9/11 I have posted the same picture as my Profile Picture. It is a picture of Manhattan looking towards the Empire State Building. This is a picture I took on March 9, 1995 as part of Valparaiso University's Kantorei Spring Tour. The location is a given--especially considering I deliberately made sure 1 World Trade Center was in the Picture Foreground. It was taken from 2 World Trade Center (a.k.a. South Tower). I took it from the 107th Floor Observation Deck and it was one of 4 pictures I took with a primitive Kodak 35mm Camera. One picture was facing south towards the Statue of Liberty, one picture was facing east at the Brooklyn and Manhattan Bridges, and 2 were facing north towards midtown.

When 9/11 happened, I immediately found the pictures in my closet. I took the pictures facing south, east, and north and put them at my desk at work the first day I returned after 9/11. I put them in the direction I took them. So, the southern part of my desk has the picture facing south, the eastern part of my desk has the picture facing east, and the northern part of my desk has the picture facing north. Those pictures have never left my desk in the 10 years since. And if you know where I work, you may understand why I've done that. Put it simply: it drives my work.

I am grateful to have seen the towers before they fell. On that fateful March morning, I had a choice to visit the Towers or the Statue of Liberty. I chose the Towers because I thought going to the Statue of Liberty was going to take too long and be tight on schedule time--even though our director, "Doc", was going to Lady Liberty. It turned out to be a wise decision, and I am grateful to have seen the Towers up close before the events of that horrible September morning 6 years later.

I hope someday I can return to Lower Manhattan to "Ground Zero"--the new World Trade Center and it's memorial. I hope on that day to bring those pictures from work and leave them at the site as my way of sharing the WTC Experience pre-9/11. The memories of that chilly morning in 1995 when I visited the site the first time will be with me for the rest of my life--long after the significance of 9/11 disappears from most of mankind's memories.

A tale of Three Hurricanes…

In the fifteen years I have lived in Maryland, I have encountered several tropical systems that have dumped rain and wind on the area.  Being that any hurricanes that make landfall in the Carolinas usually have an eventual impact on Maryland weather, we have seen several remnants of hurricanes such as Beryl, Earl, Charlie, and other storms.  But three systems have struck the upper Chesapeake region as either reduced Tropical Storms or Cat 1 Hurricanes.  Those three Hurricanes have also impacted during different times in my life, so my attitude towards these cyclones has differed as the years have progressed.  So, it’s very tough to rate the Hurricanes as to which is the worst.  I’ll try as we briefly go through each of the three storms:

(1)  Hurricane Floyd (1999):  Floyd made landfall near Cape Fear as a Category 2 Hurricane.  Although the storm had at one point been a Cat 4, the storm weakened as it approached the Carolina coastline.  Rapidly going through North Carolina and Virginia it briefly emerged in the Lower Chesapeake Bay before crossing into the Delmarva peninsula as a Tropical Storm and ultimately New Jersey.  The storm caused extensive damage in North Carolina, knocked out power to 500,000 BGE customers in Maryland, and flooded Maryland and New Jersey.

As someone who was a bachelor and living in a apartment at age 25 at the time, I was intrigued by experiencing my first Hurricane.  I had very little invested in a place and I was living in a 2nd floor apartment, so I thought I had very little to worry.  I was at work the day Floyd’s effects hit central Maryland.  It was a lot of rain and some wind, but there was no real concern for the storm.  Most people took the storm in stride and there was little panic.  I never lost power during the storm.  By the time I left work, the worst of the storm had passed.  The next day was one of the cleanest skies I had ever seen and the cool air felt great for several days afterwards.

(2)  Hurricane Isabel (2003):  Isabel made landfall in the Outer Banks of North Carolina as a Category 2 Hurricane, but it had a brief history as a Category 5 storm out in the Atlantic.  It crashed into eastern North Carolina, then rolled into the heart of Virginia as a Tropical Storm driving up into the Western Maryland mountains and Pennsylvania where it became extra-tropical.  Isabel caused massive Power Outages in Virginia (2+ million customers) and Maryland (over a million Pepco and BGE customers lost power).  The storm also brought a tidal surge into the Chesapeake Bay that flooded downtown Annapolis, the Baltimore Inner Harbor, and western Chesapeake Bay ports.

With this storm, I was still a bachelor, but I was now nearly 30 and had a townhouse of my own to call home.  The warnings were clear and everyone was told to prepare for power being out for multiple days.  The tree behind my house was the big concern.  I also locked everything down in the tool shed and inside the house to prevent the wind from blowing everything around.  The storm came through at night, so I slept downstairs in the family room, just in case the tree had come down on top of the bedroom.  The wind did blow substantially to the point of tropical storm force winds.  In the end, I never lost power, and the tree stayed up.  Before I went outside, I didn’t think it was a big deal.  Then I saw several downed trees in my neighborhood and driving around the area showed that power was out across a wide area.  Then I saw the pictures of the Naval Academy and the WTC-Baltimore under water.  That convinced me I made the right decision.

(3) Hurricane Irene (2011):  Irene, like Isabel, struck the Outer Banks as a Category 1 storm, but it had a path similar to Floyd.  Although it was not as strong at its peak as Floyd or Isabel (Cat 3 was the maximum), it was an immense storm with tropical storm force winds extending far out from the center.  By the time it passed near Ocean City, it was a minimum Cat 1, but the winds reached into Baltimore and D.C. and other cities up and down the East Coast.  Flooding, power outages, and downed trees were prevalent up and down the East Coast and damage and deaths extended across an area from South Carolina up to Maine and into Canada.

In this storm, I was a married 37-year old and a father of a two-year old living in a recently bought house.  So my concern was not just for me, but for my family.  I was more worried about this storm than the previous two.  Preparations was more intense.  Everything was battened down, the cars were gassed up and food was bought for the storm specifically.  Thankfully no trees were around.  The rain and wind struck their worst during the nighttime like Isabel.  When morning came, power had briefly gone out, but came back on.  Damage to the house was minimal.  Again, I had dodged the bullet of severe damage.

So, which hurricane was the worst?  By far, Floyd was not the worst of the three.  Flooding was more the concern.  As for Isabel and Irene?  It’s very close, but I give the nod of worst Hurricane to Isabel for two reasons:  First, the tidal surge in the Chesapeake Bay was devastating to areas along the western Chesapeake shoreline.  Second, the hype about Irene has been a little overblown.  Don’t get me wrong, Irene was a terrible storm and caused more damage than Isabel across a wider area.  But in Maryland, Isabel caused just slightly more problems.

The next hurricane to have a direct impact on Maryland will likely occur in the next 4-8 years.  When the next hurricane strikes, will we be ready?  And will the next Hurricane be as bad as the previous three?  Time will tell…

Why Sprint is NOT a victim in a proposed AT&T–T-Mobile merger…

So the DOJ has decided to file suit to block the proposed merger of AT&T and T-Mobile.  I have already laid out the arguments as to the positives, negatives, and why the mergers must go through.  But apparently, the DOJ did not use my reasoning as to why to block the merger, instead focusing on archaic thinking that we are seeing a new AT&T being formed in front of us.  And Sprint has been more than a cheerleader in this effort, basically asking DOJ to file the suit because they would be hurt by a larger AT&T.  But things aren’t what they appear, especially when it comes to Sprint.

It’s time for someone to say it:  Sprint is stuck in 3rd place, not because of AT&T and Verizon superiority, but because Sprint has made mistakes after mistakes in deploying their networks.  Sprint should have long dominated the cellular markets over the last 15 years, but their inability to be honest and their hesitation in massively deploying game-changing technology has destroyed their initial advantages in being first to the field.

Let’s start in 1996.  Sprint Spectrum was established in the DC area, becoming the first cellular carrier to go digital.  Sprint Spectrum used the European created standard called GSM in their digital cellular technology.  But after an initial buildout, Sprint failed to expand the network to meet the new demands of customers who lived outside cities and far from interstates.  Also, there was no way for Sprint Spectrum customers to go back to analog networks, once they left the digital network.

Meanwhile, it appeared that GSM was on it’s way to becoming the first true global communications standard.  But a funny thing happened on the way to GSM dominating the US.  Qualcomm’s dynamic duo of Irwin Jacobs and Andrew Viterbi convinced the US government that instead of putting all their resources towards the European standard, they should focus on their created digital cellular standard called CDMA.  Sprint fell under the allure of this new standard and every metropolitan area created after DC used the CDMA standard.  Ultimately, the DC network became a CDMA network as well.  Sprint initially wanted to drop all customers who were on the Sprint Spectrum network and force them to rejoin on the Sprint PCS network for a higher charge.  However, a lawsuit filed against Sprint eventually forced Sprint to integrate the Sprint Spectrum customers to Sprint PCS for free.

GSM and CDMA are considered 2G cellular technologies.  Worldwide, GSM was the accepted standard in the late 1990s, with the US and South Korea as the lone countries who had CDMA in their countries.  In the US, many cellular companies adopted CDMA, which was superior to GSM.  Only a few companies (Bell South and Omnicron were the main companies) who adopted GSM.  When 3G technologies were developed, the GSM consortium adopted the CDMA-type technologies that Viterbi and Jacobs had created.  However, while the CDMA consortium were settling on technologies that limited spectrum to force ease of being backwards compatible, GSM decided on a wider BW version of the CDMA-type tech.  While this made compatibility initially a challenge, it ultimately made GSM (now known as 3GPP) a better alternative.  So the companies that remained with GSM (Bell South ultimately became part of Cingular and later AT&T Wireless, while Omnicron became part of T-Mobile) had an eventually advantage over the CDMA (now 3GPP2 standard) companies (such as Bell Atlantic-later Verizon, MetroPCS, US Cellular, and Sprint).  So Sprint, in choosing CDMA over GSM won in the short term but lost out in the run with a slower CDMA2k and EV-DO technology.  Meanwhile, AT&T and T-Mobile had faster 3G technology speeds.

At the same time, Sprint failed to properly work with local government regulators to allow them to build their cellular networks out.  They instead tried to sneak their true intentions beside local government.  While it initially worked, eventually local governments got tired of Sprint not telling the full story.  They talked with other local government and realized Sprint was trying to pull a fast one, unlike AT&T and Verizon, who worked with local government in a more honest fashion.

Meanwhile, 4G technology was being developed and Sprint and a startup companies called Clearwire had begun buying spectrum just above the WiFi RF Spectrum to build the next generation network.  Initially the 3GPP2 standards worked on a tech called UMB.  But UMB ultimately was not created.  The 3GPP technology created a standard called LTE, and many 3GPP2 companies (such as Verizon and Metro PCS) adopted the tech.  But IEEE was also interested in developing a 4G tech after the successes of their WiFi tech.  They realized that 4G was going to be all about downloading data at high speeds and they had a better grasp on data-centric networks than the voice-centric networks of 3GPP and 3GPP2.  So, they created WiFi on steroids, also known as WiMAX.  Sprint and Clearwire adopted this standard as their 4G tech, thinking that computers would dominate the technology over cell phone. 

But again, a funny thing happened on the way to 4G dominance.  Apple created the world’s first smartphone, the iPhone.  The iPhone was a game-changer and many realized you didn’t need a laptop to access data at high speed.   Those who were going with the LTE technology now had an advantage.

At the same time, while Clearwire was building their network with a pre-WiMAX technology, Sprint was going through internal turmoil.  Sprint’s CEO at the time realized that building the WiMAX network out quickly was important, no matter the cost.  But Sprint’s Board of Directors and management, led by Dan Hesse, thought the move would bankrupt the company.  In the end, Hesse’s forces won.  Sprint delayed building the WiMAX network as Hesse became the new CEO.  Sprint also sold their spectrum to Clearwire, entering an agreement with the Craig McCaw company that Clearwire would build the WiMAX network and Sprint, Comcast, and other cable companies would share the network.  The WiMAX delay was costly.  As the network was being slowly developed, a 3GPP tech called HSPA+ was close to matching the speeds that WiMAX was projecting.  All the companies that were working with LTE realized that it was cheaper to remain with HSPA+ and wait for LTE technology to mature than to go to WiMAX.  So, WiMAX’s advantage was nullified.  And as time progressed, WiMAX’s time advantage over LTE was reduced to the point that LTE won the 4G tech battle even before they deployed the first US network.  Companies, such as 3GPP stalwarts AT&T and T-Mobile and 3GPP2 converts Verizon and MetroPCS now had the edge.  Even Clearwire started working towards converting to LTE.

As for Sprint?  Sprint has delayed announcing what they will do for 4G until October.  But the answer is obvious.  They will convert from WiMAX to LTE and probably try to force their WiMAX customers to pay to join the LTE network—just like they did with Sprint Spectrum.  They have entered an LTE agreement with Lightsquared, a company focused on LTE nationwide coverage.  And with Clearwire, they will have by far the largest spectrum—even larger than the spectrum a proposed AT&T-T-Mobile company would have.  And Sprint is not shy about talking about this advantage, bragging about it at Telcom Conferences.  But they feel threatened by a larger AT&T?

Sprint’s lack of vision has cost them dearly over the last 15 years.  And while they might have a good relationship with their customers, how long will it last as they have to change course in 4G from WiMAX to LTE?  If it wasn’t for Sprint’s flip-flopping back in 1996, they could be dominating the cellular world right now.  And their failures now will cost them 15 years into the future.  In the end, Sprint’s worst enemy is themselves, not AT&T or Verizon.

And what about a T-Mobile-Sprint merger?  When Sprint bought Nextel years ago, they were never able to resolve the tech differences.  The merger has been a technology headache.  So what do you think would happen if Sprint and T-Mobile merged with all their different cellular techs?  In short, the new company would be paralyzed for years trying to resolve the tech difference and would ultimately die, leaving a weaker AT&T, Verizon, and smaller telcos to pick up the spectrum pieces.

As I said, Sprint is their own worst enemy.  And unless someone comes in there and cleans up Sprint’s act, Sprint will at best stumble along, even though they should be crushing it in the cellular world.  Forget worrying about AT&T and Verizon, and start worrying about doing the right thing.

The AT&T–T-Mobile Merger: Good, bad, and why it must happen…

I have a confession to make:  I am fascinated with wireless networks.  A lot of it has to do with my job.  But the evolution of wireless networks has been an amazing advance to witness, starting with the first analog cell phone networks in the 1980s, moving on to digital cellular networks in the 1990s, the addition of WiFi networks around the turn of the century, and now the convergence of cellular and broadband wireless data in mobile internet devices.  Initially, wireless networks (both cellular and wireless data) were considered a luxury by only the rich and businessman.  However, beginning in the late 1990s, cell phones became affordable, and as more people saw the benefit of laptop computers, WiFi networks became a necessity itself.  Over the last 4 years, with the advent of the iPhone, the cell phone has morphed into a smartphone, and with the iPad, the computer has become smaller and even more portable.

Long ago, the number of wireless phones blew past the number of landline phones, and just recently, the number of wireless broadband data devices surpassed fixed broadband devices.  This is good and bad for users of smartphones and tablets.  It’s good because it is clear wireless broadband and phone is not just the future, it’s now.  The bad is that with wireless, you need one or a combination of three things to prevent rapidly increasing demand from causing a smartphone meltdown:  increased data speeds, more frequency spectrum, and more cell towers/backhaul towers.  In some ways, AT&T’s proposed merger with T-Mobile addresses two of those needs so AT&T can implement the third need and build its LTE network.  T-Mobile has built up their capacity in urban areas (both cell and backhaul towers).  T-Mobile also has the AWS Spectrum which maybe the key reason AT&T has shown interest in buying T-Mobile.

But there are good and bad reasons for the merger to proceed, and it is what Congress is grappling with as they seek to approve the merger:

Good reasons for the merger:  T-Mobile’s parent company is leaving the US Market.  Deutsche Telekom, the German telecom giant who owns T-Mobile, has wanted to leave the US Market to focus on other investments around the globe.  So, the #4 provider, needed a company to buy it.  Also, the merger enables AT&T to develop their LTE network in a much quicker timetable and challenge Verizon for the fastest LTE speeds.  And, as I stated earlier, AT&T needs frequency spectrum.  In cities, such as New York and San Francisco, the capacity has been exceeded by users.  Without additional spectrum, AT&T would be forced to build tens of thousands of cell towers to meet the capacity, which would set AT&T back financially in a down economy.

Bad reasons for the merger:  An AT&T-T Mobile merger means there would be only one telecom company in the US that uses the World’s largest cellular standard, 3GPP.  3GPP encompasses GSM, WCDMA, HSPA/HSPA+, and LTE.  And in the US, AT&T and T-Mobile are the only companies that use this technology.  Sprint, Verizon, MetroPCS, and other regional networks use the 3GPP2 standard, which include CDMA, EV-DO, and LTE/WiMAX.  So, the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile means that most worldwide customers would be forced to AT&T when roaming in the US, meaning AT&T would have a sort of monopoly.  AT&T and Verizon would hold 80% of all US cellular customers, which might mean Sprint and other companies would be at a severe disadvantage.

Why the merger must go through:  No other cellular company could buy T-Mobile and survive the eventually merging of technologies other than AT&T.  There was talk of Sprint and T-Mobile merging, but the integration of all the technologies would be a disaster and would effectively destroy Sprint.  And considering Deutsche Telekom is leaving the US, T-Mobile needed a buyer who could make the transition smoothly.  In the end, if the merger is not approved, you still need a buyer for T-Mobile or else T-Mobile will fail and AT&T will struggle along and still need spectrum.

In the end, the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile has advantages and disadvantages, but ultimately, I believe it will have to go through.  The question is will Congress and the FCC see it the same way.

Steve Williams: Big mouth caddie

As golf approaches its final major of the year (The PGA Championship) near my childhood home in Atlanta, the biggest story in golf is not about the golfers, but about a caddie.  Steve Williams, who until this summer was Tiger Woods’ caddie for the last 12 years, was on the bag for Adam Scott this past weekend at the WGC-Firestone Invitational in Ohio.  Scott won the tournament, but Williams stole the spotlight in his initial Post-Round interview with the entertaining David Feherty and subsequent interviews.  I heard Williams’ initial comments live, and couldn’t believe them.  Williams said this was the biggest win of his career.  OK, you were on the bag for 13 of 14 majors that Tiger has won, including some of the game’s most impressive individual showings and you say this victory was the greatest of your career? 

Caddies are largely silently.  Most people couldn’t name 3 caddies on the PGA Tour.  And for those who can, I’ll bet 2 of those names are “Fluff” Cowan and Steve Williams, both of whom caddied for Tiger.  Quick, somebody name Jack Nickalus’ caddie for most of his life.  Can’t?  For that matter, name Jack’s golf coach.  Can’t do that either?  But I bet you could name Tiger’s golf instructors.  The point is we are in a time where anyone associated with Tiger achieves instant star status.  Steve is not special and, as Tiger proved over the weekend, he can find another bag guy.

Steve was a caddie long before he worked with Tiger, without the successes he enjoyed under Tiger.  And he may enjoy some success with Adam Scott.  But, at the end of the day, Steve doesn’t swing the club or putt.  He can offer advice, but the golfer’s have final say and ultimately provide success or failure.  The caddie at best gets 10% of the winnings, but not much else.  Yet, Steve thinks he helped Tiger win all those years, and now is guiding Adam to becoming a great golfer.

Memo to Steve:  know your role.  You’re a caddie.  At best, give advice when asked and shut your mouth the rest of the time.  Sooner or later, Tiger will probably go back to his old ways and be one of the best again in golf.  And then what, Steve, if Tiger proves he can win without you, or when Adam begins to struggle, which all golfers do?  Oh, and whatever happened to Fluff, Steve?  This may be your future one day, too.

A critique on the ESPN Book

Well, I finally finished the ESPN Book that my wife and son got me for Father’s Day.  It’s a long book (about 745 pages of material), and there was still stuff left on the cutting room floor.  Anyone who has been in the “inner circle” since my college days knows I love to talk Sports, so reading this book was a natural.  With the book now finished, I wanted to share a few thoughts…

Best part of the book:  The fact that the narration did not interfere with the first-person accounts.  The first person accounts were fantastic.  It allowed the reader to hear from the figures involved in ESPN (past and present), as well as a few outside sources.  And those accounts showed a lot about ESPN.

Most unaware part:  The early years of ESPN.  It was fantastic to see behind the curtain in those early days and understand that at any point, ESPN could have fallen apart between 1978 and 1986.  Once ESPN got to cover NFL games in 1987, from that point forward, ESPN never had to worry about going belly up.  It was also interesting to see the turmoil between the Rasmussen family (Bill and Scott came up with the ESPN idea), and Stu Evey, who used the Getty family fortune to prop up ESPN in those first days.  Eventually Stu won out, forcing the Rasmussen family to exit ESPN, and Stu would eventually be forced out as other financial powers took interest and eventually help make ESPN the monster it is today.

One sports story the book missed:  The Mike Leach firing at Texas Tech in 2009.  It is clear ESPN analyst Craig James was instrumental in the firing on Leach and ESPN personalities at the time were more than willing to support James and his son’s accusations against the coach.  Colin Cowherd basically was one of the on-air personalities who led the charge.  True or not, ESPN was probably making up for the Big Ben debacle from earlier that year.  And yet, nothing was said of it in the book.

Two Biggest jerks (based on their accounts and the accounts of others):  Chris Berman comes off as an ass.  He’s first-person account shows him for what he is.  He’ll praise you if you pay homage to him, but he’ll stab you in the back if you get on his bad side and dance on your grave.  And because he’s been with ESPN since the beginning, it’s hard to upend Mount Berman.  Not even fellow-lifer Bob Ley could do it (and Ley doesn’t).  But an even bigger jerk is NBA Commissioner David Stern.  You can tell even in Stern’s comments that he’s a two-faced liar.  The incident at the Palace of Auburn Hills and his accounts are disingenuous and the Stephen A. Smith dismissal also shows how that he doesn’t like criticism.  He tries to smooth everything over, but anyone who can read between the lines sees the truth.

Most entertaining portion of the book:  Any stories involving Keith Olbermann.  No one can take away from the fact that Olbermann is brilliant (no matter if you despise his political perspective), and the stories prove how much of a genius he is.  One question I would ask Keith, though… When are the Yankees going to call you about being their play-by-play guy?

Most sympathetic figure:  Dan Patrick.  I think the stories show Dan could have been a life-long ESPN employee, but his willingness to be the company guy eventually forced him to leave ESPN.  I think ESPN misses Dan more than they care to admit.

Overall, I liked the book, but I understand why there has been criticism about the book.  I’m a Sports fan, so I knew I would naturally like it.   But I wonder… Imagine if we could tell the story of the 54 years of South Gwinnett High School in a similar format.  Or the Class of 1992 at South.  Or the Band of Stars.  Can you imagine what accounts we could get out of that book from various people?  It would be interesting.

The re-booting of Generation X cartoons and a true “golden age” of characters…

Why are we so interested in retelling the legends and myths of our youth.  For thousands of years, mythology has been told and re-told in various stories of heroes.  In one generation, the heroes are without fault and the villains are pure evil.  In the next, the heroes are faulted individuals who must battle their own demons and an evil that appears to be a force of good on the surface.

Granted, the cartoon of Generation X (starting in the 1970s and going into the early 1990s) aren’t the first to have their mythology revised and reborn in numerous ways.  And yet it interesting to note that only a handful of the cartoon characters from our generation are recognize as some of the greatest of all time (at least according to a TV Guide survey in 2002) compared with the mid-to-late 90s successors like the Powerpuff Girls, Rugrats, Spongebob, and Cartman.  And yet, how many times have these cartoons of our generation been celebrated and reborn.  Spiderman, X-Men, Transformers, He-Man, GI Joe, Strawberry Shortcake, My Little Pony, Inspector Gadget, and Voltron are the obvious examples of Generation X cartoons that continue to dominate our psyche and continue to be re-created with new takes on the original storylines—mostly without the critical acclaim.  Now you can add Thundercats and Smurfs to the list of re-created cartoons as Cartoon Network has re-booted the Feline series and the tiny blue creatures have hit the big screen.  The Hub network even shows classic Transformers, GI Joe, and now Jem and the Holograms.

Growing up as a Transformers fans in the 1980s, I have been fascinated as to how the story continues to be retold in new ways.  Since G1 left the airwaves in 1987, we have seen Beast Wars and Beast Masters, Robots in Disguise, Armada, Energon, and Cybertron, Animated, and now Prime as new creations of the old storyline.  That doesn’t even count the three live action movies or the Japanese storylines (such as Headmasters that just reached US shores).  I have my favorites (Beast Wars/Machines was probably the best storyline) and least liked (Animated somehow had to insert every character into the story and did so horribly), but overall I’m happy that Optimus is still Optimus, no matter whether as a tractor trailer, fire truck, or “Primal” ape—and that he deserves to be on the Top 50 list of Greatest Cartoon Characters of all time.

We all have our favorite 1980s cartoons.  What’s yours?  Maybe one day we will see the 1980s cartoon get the respect they deserve and recognized as a golden age of character creation.  I just don’t know how many re-boots its going to take for critics to see how special our cartoons were…

A Dream Poker Final Table

The World Series of Poker has just started the $10,000 WSOP World Championship Main Event on what has been a surprisingly successful WSOP.  I say surprisingly because of the fact that many of the players who might have played in the Main Event have been shuttered out thanks to the U.S. Government shutting down the top 3 Poker Gaming Sites in the country.  That shut down and its effects has led to top poker player Phil Ivey boycotting the entire WSOP and others to reconsider playing in the Main Event of the WSOP.  We do not know who will comprise the Final Table to be held in November in Las Vegas, but we will begin to find out live on ESPN2 and ESPN starting Thursday.  Still, the events of this year’s WSOP has led me to wonder… if there was a final table made up of the greatest poker players in the WSOP era (which began in 1970), who would be the 9 players at that table and how would they be seated?

After some quick thinking, I believe I have comprised a dynamic Final Table, which would be must see TV in any era.  So let’s reveal the table in order of seat position (not to be confused with where they might rank):

Seat 1:  Johnny Moss—One of only two players who can lay claim to 3 Main Event Titles, Johnny Moss’s 9 WSOP Bracelets make him a must have at the Table.  Moss played back in the period when few players could afford to play for the title, so in today’s Internet age, it would be doubtful in Moss could be successful.  Still, he was the WSOP’s first true Superstar, even if he was past his prime at the beginning of the WSOP in 1970.

Seat 2:  Chip Reese—Chip played very few WSOP events in his life, but the fact that he is regarded as the best high stakes cash game player in the modern poker age at any discipline gives him a spot at this table.  That and the fact he won the very first $50,000 HORSE tournament in 2006, the forerunner to the Poker Players Championship.  In fact, the trophy for this WSOP Title is the Chip Reese Memorial Trophy, a testament to how much this player was respected by the poker community.

Seat 3:  Erik Seidel—Erik is one of the greatest players never to win the Main Event title, but he’s done just about everything else.  Erik’s 8 WSOP Bracelets brings him to this table.  He closest chance to the Main Event Title when he finished 2nd to Johnny Chan.  Seidel is still dominant and the recent heater he has been on in 2011 show even today he is one of the greatest players in poker.  Speaking of Chan…

Seat 4:  Johnny Chan—“The Orient Express” was the first player to win 10 WSOP bracelets and was the last player to win back-to-back Main Event Titles in 1987 and 1988.  Johnny’s playing skill was immortalized in the 1990s movie “Rounders”, where Matt Damon broke down Chan’s final hand with Seidel.  At his prime, few players could match wits with this Hall of Famer.  One of those few stopped him from winning 3 Main Events in a Row in 1989, and that player is sitting next to him in Seat 5…

Seat 5:  Phil Hellmuth—The “Poker Brat” became the youngest champion of the WSOP Main Event in 1989 beating Chan heads-up.  He held the youngest Main Event Champion distinction for almost 20 years, and during that time, Phil has gone on to win a record 11 WSOP bracelets, cashed a record 84 times, and holds the all-time record for Final Table appearances.  His greatness is tempered by his temper, especially when he takes a bad beat and also by the fact that all 11 bracelets are in Texas Hold’Em.  He claims if it wasn’t for luck, he’d win all the bracelets and he frequently belittles his opponents.  There is one player, however, that would even intimidate Phil...

Seat 6:  Stu Ungar.  The original “Kid” in Poker, Stu Ungar is the other 3-time WSOP Main Event Winner.  And he was dominant when he was at his best.  There is no question that in this day and age of Poker, Stu would dominate.  The 1997 Main Event is a perfect example of Stu at his greatest.  However, drugs and a hard lifestyle led to his early death in 1998.  Had Stu not encountered drugs, it’s safe to say, he might have 15 bracelets and a 4th Main Event Title.  Stu may have even staved off the Internet boom for a couple of years.

Seat 7:  Scott Nyugen.  If you’re going to have any player play behind Stu, it has to be “The Prince of Poker” Baby!  Scotty succeeded Stu as Champion in 1998, and talkative style and imagination makes him the final player at this table.  Scotty is also the only player in WSOP history to win the Main Event and Chip Reese trophy when he won the 2009 $50,000 HORSE event, although that title was tainted by his unusually angry demeanor at that final table.  Still, you need Scotty at this table to provide some light-hearted trash talking.

Seat 8: Phil Ivey—Considered “The Tiger Woods of Poker”, Phil has dominated the poker game at many disciplines and stakes. Phil is the only Superstar of this group to have been a part of the WSOP November Nine, and his 8 bracelets at such a relatively young age makes him a threat to become the all-time bracelet winner one day. Ivey can intimidate even the best players in the game.

Seat 9:  Doyle Brunson—You really thought I would not include a Final Table of Greatest Poker Players without the Living Legend, “Texas Dolly”?  Brunson is one of the biggest reasons Poker is popular.  His book, “Super System” is the foundation for many of today’s Superstar players.  He is well-respected in the game.  Oh yeah, he’s won 10 WSOP titles, including back-to-back in 1976 and 1977.  So, it’s only appropriate he gets Seat 9.

So how would this Final table go down?  Here’s a likely scenario… 

------------------------

The action at the dream Final Table began fast and furious as many of the all-time greats jockeyed for chip advantage.  Early on, Phil Ivey was eliminated when his A-K was eliminated Stu Ungar, who turned 9-7 suited into a straight.  Almost immediately following Phil was Erik Seidel, who still can’t solve the mystery of Johnny Chan after Chan’s A-10 cracked Seidel’s pockets Queen’s.  Phil Hellmuth followed shortly after.  After being constantly raised and outplayed by Stu Ungar, Hellmuth picked up pocket Jacks, only to be eliminated by Ungar’s pocket Kings.  Hellmuth left muttering under his breath about how Ungar couldn’t play the game the right way.

Johnny Moss was eliminated next.  His tight style was no match for the wild play of today’s players, but he was eliminated by fellow peer Doyle Brunson when the A-Q couldn’t crack the pocket 10’s of Texas Dolly.  Scotty Nyugen was knocked out next.  Despite giving Ungar havoc after Hellmuth’s elimination, Nyugen ran into Stu holding pocket Aces at the worst moment.  Scotty tried to bluff with 8-3 off suit, but got caught.

Down to 4 players, Chip Reese was the next elimination as Johnny Chan’s A-Q bested Chip’s A-J.  Then Doyle Brunson was eliminated when he tried to win holding his favorite hand, 10-2 off suit.  Stu saw that hand coming, and his pocket 9’s survived.

So it came down to heads up with Ungar holding a 3:2 chip edge over Chan.  After a ferocious final table that went back and forth with the chip lead changing hands 12 times during a 6-hour showdown, Ungar finally picked up A-4, then caught the wheel straight on the flop.  Chan’s pocket sixes failed to improve and Stu ended up with the Title of Greatest Poker Player of the Modern Era.

The day when the World met the Peachtree Road Race…

In Atlanta, the 4th of July has meant one thing… one of the world’s best 10K road races, the Peachtree Road Race, is run through the streets of downtown Atlanta in the early morning hours.  Begun in 1970 with just 150 runners, it has grown to well over 60,000 elite and weekend runners racing from the city, nation, and world.  Most of the runners are interested in getting one prize:  the T-shirt that every runner who completes the race gets.  That’s not to say there is prize money involved, and it has drawn the best in the world in the hopes of conquering the 10K hilly course.

For the Walker family, the Race for many years was an annual tradition.  Although my immediate family never raced in the Peachtree, we got many T-shirts through our volunteer work with the Atlanta Track Club, mostly under the leadership of Julia Emmons.  My father volunteered in the 1980s and 1990s, usually working the area around the Colony Square Hotel.  For 7 of those years, I worked with my dad, and both of my sisters also assisted in the race, either pre-race or during the race.  One of cousins ran the course three times, placing in the top 500 in his first trip back in 1981 and being invited to the 1982 Peachtree Road Race.

In the early years, the Peachtree was dominated by American runners, winning 12 of the first 13.  In 1976, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution became the title sponsor of the race.  With the Peachtree T-Shirt firmly entrenched to anyone who finished the race, the Peachtree expanded to 25,000 runners as many people wanted to finish and achieve the coveted wear.  The best American runners started competing in the event.  Between 1979 and 1981, Craig Virgin of Illinois won the race each year, setting the then-course record of 28:03 in 1981.  No other male runner has won 3 Peachtree Road Races. 

It was against this backdrop that an international field started to show interest in the competitive race.  Little was known about the international contingent.  It was rumored that runners from Kenya were invading the Peachtree field, but very little was known about how good these runners really were.  In 1982, the city of Atlanta would get a glimpse of the potential.

That Sunday Morning was a confluence of events.  With my cousin running in the competitive division, my dad volunteering in his first Peachtree, and the biggest threat to Virgin’s dominance, my family gathered near the finish line in Piedmont Park.  It was a long wait, and we first had to cheer on the first ever wheelchair race into Piedmont Park.  As we closed in on 8 am, the first runners began to approach the finish line.  It was clear that Craig Virgin was not in the lead group (he wore 1 in the race), but it was 2 Kenyans and an American battling for the title.  In the end, the American John Sinclair won the race, but the Kenyans had served noticed.  From that moment, Kenya dominated not just in Atlanta, but everywhere.  They were here to stay and one year later, Michael Musyoki won the Peachtree, beginning the Kenyan winning machine that continues to this day.  Musyoki would also become the first runner to break 28 minutes in the Peachtree, winning the ‘85 race in 27:58.  As for my cousin, he struggled in the race and failed to finish in the top 500.

It’s amazing to look back and see that we were seeing the future of long-distance racing on that Sunday morning.  But now looking back, I am proud to say I was there when the Kenyans first invaded the Peachtree and showed the world a glimpse of the future.

The Fall of the Dodgers…

One of the saddest stories in sports today is the fall of the Los Angeles Dodgers as a franchise.  The Dodgers have long been one of the top organizations in Baseball, just below the New York Yankees, and on par with the St. Louis Cardinals, Philadelphia Phillies, and Boston Red Sox.  Yet this season, the Dodgers have been a running joke, starting from the top of the franchise, the McCourts, whose divorce proceedings have exposed the fact that Frank McCourt is a bankrupt clown and that his best chance of holding onto the Dodgers is suing MLB if they attempt to do the right thing and rip the franchise away from the deadbeat.  An opposing fan has been hospitalized since opening day when he was beaten unconscious by a thug dressed in Dodger gear while his children watched in horror.

You want to find out how bad it’s gotten?  Check out the recent column by Bill Plaschke of the LA Times:  http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-0622-plaschke-20110622,0,1723241.column.  It’s not just bad, it’s 1980’s Fulton-County Stadium attendance bad.  You remember Braves games at Fulton-County Stadium back in the mid-to-late 1980s.  On a regular summer night, my dad and I would sit in the upper deck behind home plate and, for the most part had maybe 400 to 500 people in the upper deck with us for Braves games.  Even with the lower deck, attendance on many nights was about 6000 to 9000 until the Braves got good in 1991.  The Dodger attendance on some games have not been much better.

And the team is struggling very badly too.  Now stuck in 4th place in the National League West, the team appears to have no future and may not meet even payroll this week.  It may have to be seized by MLB.  And instead of trying to negotiate an out clause with Bud Selig and leave Baseball, Frank McCourt is trying to lawyer up and squeeze as much money out of the Dodgers’ franchise for himself as he can.  It seems that he learned some tricks from fellow Los Angeles owner Donald Sterling.

As a Braves’ fan, I should be happy that the one-time Atlanta nemesis is hurting.  But then I remember that then-Los Angeles manager Tommy Lasorda sort of encouraged Braves fans to come out when the Braves were good.  Tommy represented the best of Baseball, and the Dodgers franchise he has always supported deserves ownership that will at least be better than the current owner.  But short of Frank McCourt’s heart growing 3 sizes or him departing the scene in a physical sense, the Dodgers will be held hostage.

My experience at the U.S. Open Championship…

Yesterday, I crossed another item off my life goal’s list as I had the chance to attend the U.S. Open Golf Championship at Congressional Country Club near D.C.  What made this day even more special is that my father joined me on this Father’s Day Weekend excursion.

Because we wanted to get to the course when it opened for play, we left for Congressional early (well before 5 am) and arrived a half-hour before the first tee time.  We were able to walk up to the 10th green just in time for the first group to send their tee shots towards the hole.  After watching a couple of groups play through 10, we joined the third group, which featured Bo Van Pelt, Kyung-Tae Kim, and viral video sensation Ben Crane (if you haven’t seen the video, check out pgatour.com, then go to the players’ link, click on Ben Crane, then find videos, and click the Golf Boys “Oh oh oh” video… or you could go to my Facebook page, where I have a link).  It turned out be a terrific decision as only a handful of people followed the group around.

Some thoughts on the group my dad and I followed for 18 holes… Bo Van Pelt was clearly the best player of the group yesterday.  Not only did he shoot 67, he hit 16 of 18 greens in regulation, stayed mostly on the fairway, had 4 birdies & no bogeys, and was the longest hitter of the three.  His only hiccups occurred on the par 5’s, particularly #6 and #9, where he reached both greens in 2, only to 3-putt both times.  Still, he stands at +1 and played his way into the weekend.

Kyung-Tae Kim was among the round 1 leaders when he teed off.  He showed spectacular play on the more difficult holes.  He was the first player to birdie 10 on the round, then birdied 2, 3, and 4, which were 3 of the most brutal holes on the course.  But Kim was erratic all day, being forced to make incredible saves on 11 and 14 on his first 9.  He double-bogeyed two of the shorter par-4s (17 and 8), then failed to get out of the trees at the par-5 6th.  He finished with a 72, but only 26 putts on the day.  Currently at –1, Kim could end with a top-10 finish.

Ben Crane had an unspectacular day when he needed to make a move. He did have an early birdie at 11, but scrambled on a couple of holes to save par.  His chances of making the weekend disappeared when he put his 2nd shot at #6 into the pond.  A 71 combined with a first-round 77, left Crane at +6, 2 shots short of the cut line.

Aside from following the trio around, I had a couple of additional thoughts.  First, we saw the MetLife blimp for the first time at 17, which was quite interesting.  The pin placement at 18 was brutal, and you can ask Phil Mickelson and Rory McIlroy how bad the pin placement was (I watched Phil’s ball roll into the lake and heard the groans as Rory’s ball suffered the same fate).  I thought I might have been on TV when Kim teed off at 8, but it was not to be.  Also, on that same 8th hole, as we were waiting for our group to putt out, three tee shots zipped next to us, with two of the balls nearly hitting us and the ESPN HD cameraman.

After lunch, we sat at the 10th green and watched several of the afternoon groups start their rounds at 10.  Among the golfers we saw were Davis Love III and Jim Furyk.  The last man to win the U.S. Open at Congressional, Ernie Els, was a part of that group, but after a great tee shot, he 4-putted, and went on to miss the cut.  Also, we saw defending U.S. Open champion Grahame McDowell and reigning Open Champion Louis Oosthuizen tee off.  My dad and I left at 2:30, just before the rains came to suspend play.  On the way out, we saw Bob Costas’s golf cart, which is about the closest we came to seeing a media star on the course.

All in all, it was a special day with my dad.  I realized later just how precious that time was with my father.  My dad is 74, and I don’t know how much time I have left with him.  He now has a cane he occasionally uses for his back when he stands for long periods of time.  To see him now and remember how he once was has shown me that I should treasure my times with my dad.  The day will come in the near future when my dad be there only in spirit, so having the ability to enjoy the time he spends with Joshua is something I will remember as long as I live.  And yesterday was icing on the cake for me.

AIDS: 30 years later

Last Sunday marked a somber anniversary.  It was 30 years ago that a report in a weekly publication described cases of a rare form of pneumonia five young Los Angeles men, "all active homosexuals." The cases were noteworthy because the men had previously been healthy, and the pneumonia was only seen in older people with depressed immune systems.  A month later, another report listed 54 gay males with a rare form of cancer seen only in older people.  One summer later, the condition had a name:  AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome).  In 1983, HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) was identified as the virus which caused AIDS.

In those early years, understanding the disease was impossible.  Though it was clear the disease was spread by sexual contact, other methods caused a scare in people.  Blood transfusions, drug needles, and saliva were also initially ways to transmit the disease.  Remember when we thought licking stamps could increase the risk of AIDS?  Or how about the woman who caught the HIV virus in the dentist chair?  Remember when Hollywood stars and musicians started dying from the disease (Rock Hudson, Liberace, Freddy Mercury, etc.)?  Remember the AIDS quilt on the National Mall?  Remember when ACT UP and other AIDS activists groups blamed President Reagan for the disease (like he was out on DC streets at night selling dirty needles or condoms with holes in them)?

We thought awareness of the disease would provide a cure.  Yet, here we are 30 years after the awareness with 30 million worldwide dead from the disease (615,000 in the US over that period) and still no complete cure.  Oh sure, we have an assortment of drug cocktails that can keep the disease in check, but the drugs are expensive.  Africa, where the disease is widespread and is just as prevalent in women as in men, cannot afford the medications.  And here’s the worst part:  the rates of infection are not going down.  The younger people are not heeding the wisdom of their elders and are repeating the mistakes their elders made in the early days of the disease before they learned what steps could hinder the disease.

Like it or not, AIDS is our generation’s disease.  And until a cure is found, re-teaching the lessons learned the hard way will be one of the few chances to prevent the spread of the disease.  Yes, the disease in the US is more of a disease restricted to the same sex relationship community, particularly men.  But heterosexuals are also affected and the rates of infection aren’t going down there, either.  And in other countries in sub-Saharan Africa, heterosexual couples dominate the infected group.  So, this is an everybody problem. 

Even after a cure is found, we will being with the effects of the disease long into the future.  Keep in mind, we haven’t found a cure yet for all the MD diseases, and the fight will go on post-Jerry Lewis there.  We haven’t cured cancer, either.  So an AIDS cure in our lifetime is not a sure thing.

In short, the AIDS epidemic is still there, though no longer on the front pages.  Please keep that in mind especially over the next 30 years or so.

Joplin’s aftermath…

This has been a spring of significant tornado activity. As it stands right now, this year has seen a rash of tornadoes hit small cities and large. Raleigh, NC. St. Louis, MO. Tuscaloosa, AL. Birmingham, AL. Minneapolis, MN. Dallas, TX. Oklahoma City, OK. We suffered a new Super Outbreak of Tornadoes that appears to surpass the 1974 Super Outbreak in terms of tornadoes and fatalities. The death toll for this year has surpassed any year since official death toll stats started being kept in 1950. And yet, as bad as Tuscaloosa got hammered last month, the tornado in Joplin may have been even more of a dagger to the heart.

The Weather Channel was following Tornadoes as part of their “Great Tornado Hunt” programs. Their goal was to study tornadoes in the hopes of unlocking new clues to predicting tornadoes and saving lives. To be fair, the newer HD Doppler radars have helped and new forecasting techniques have saved lives. Having looked at Tuscaloosa, although 1000 people were injured, it was a minor miracle only 42 died there.

As it turned out, when the tornado hit Joplin, Mike Bettes and his Weather Channel crew were in the vicinity. Initially, the tornado damage saw was bad. Then they began to realize that the further into the town they went, the damage was worse. By the time they reached the hospital, they realized how destructive the tornado was. It didn’t take much close-ups of the damage for a casual weather fan to realize Joplin was in deep trouble. One term instantly popped into my head: EF-5. Mike Bettes’ breakdown on TV confirmed this tornado had produced horrific damage. One of the worst parts was that the High School had just completed Graduation exercises. At least 3 or 4 students died just moments after celebrating their greatest accomplishment of their young lives.

You would think that a single tornado would not produce over a 100 fatalities anymore. Then again, I used to think we would never see another hurricane that would cause 1000+ US fatalities until Katrina hit. It’s hard to believe that after how far we have come to try and save lives and that we now live in an age where you can informed 15 different ways, that so many people could die in a weather event.

So, how do we prevent more people from dying in the future? We tell people all the right things of what to do, and yet, people still die. To be honest, it is eating away at weather people what has happened this spring in terms of fatalities, even with all of the advanced warning. Short of trying to make tornadoes not form in the first place (if people can), weather people have done all they can to prevent a significant loss of life. The solutions now aren’t easy or cheap. How much are you willing to pay to ensure you can survive nature’s wrath?

One thing I am glad I haven’t yet heard: the attempt by many “smart people” at attempting to connect the tornado damage and deaths to the cc words. I know it’s coming, though. But, to their credit, neither the weather channel or the New York Times or Washington Post or any other media outlet is doing it—yet. They aren’t willing to stick their neck out that far.

I hope the weather we have seen will provide clues to help prevent the next major disaster. Until then, when the weather turns bad, keep an eye and ear alert for warnings.

Band of Stars present vs. Band of Stars past…

OK, I thought I had addressed the South Gwinnett Band of Stars issue in the last blog, but two recent things have popped up to make me want to address the topic again.  First, a recent Facebook question from a former neighbor and fellow Band of Stars member, Melanie Brown, about the South Gwinnett Wikipedia page came to light.  Second, a recent video post by another former Band of Stars member, Kristi (Moon) Ash, showing the Band of Stars marching at the Snellville Days Parade.

First, addressing the Wikipedia page…  This is directly from South Gwinnett’s Wikipedia page concerning the Marching Band (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Gwinnett_High_School):  “The long-time marching band of over twenty years is known as the South Gwinnett ‘Band of Stars’. Band director Dr. Arvold handed the band down to Erik Mason who led it to win several competitions. Mason, after four years moved to Mill Creek High School and the head passed on to William Owens. Only a short time had passed when Owens was offered a position in the new opening school of Mountain View High. Currently, Jimmie McKinley now heads the band program with his new slogan ‘Sound. Style. Sophistication.’” 

Interesting that history of the Band of Stars began with David Arvold, don’t some of you think?  Here’s a little history lesson about Dr. Arvold’s BOS… In the first year he was Band Director (1993), the South Gwinnett Comets made the State Championship Football Game.  I was at that game and saw the Band of Stars perform at Halftime.  I remembered a couple of things about that performance:  First, there was no Drill Team separate from the Flag Corps at that performance.  What happened?  Second, the Band was more static than its predecessors.  In short, let’s just say the Band of Stars from 1988 would have wiped the floor (marching and playing wise) with their 1993 successors.  And yet, history ignores the directors who proceeded Dr. Arvold, most notably Lavender and Nettleton.

Which leads me to the video Kristi shot at the Snellville Days Parade.  It’s clear the fight song has changed (it’s no longer “Are you from Dixie”, which makes sense).  But also what is clear is that this group is smaller and has a lot more of the Florida A&M style to it.  First impression of marching and playing is not good of this group.  I hope Mr. McKinley is just having a down year and that the Band will be back next year.  In my day, the Snellville Middle School Band would have out-marched and out-played this group.  The Band needs to step their game up in the future.

Maybe it’s time to write the complete Band of Stars story.  I guarantee you, none of today’s members know just how many awards the Band has run over the years.  Many of us can help fill in the blanks…

Twenty years later, a revelation…

A few months ago, I described a chink in the armor.  Events have conspired (or put it another way, an opportunity has opened up) for me to reveal the chink...

What do you do when you run up against a road block?  Can you realize that the road closed is impossible to go through, go over, or around?  What if God is trying to tell you to move in another direction and is using that detour to tell you?  At some points in our life, God intervenes in a manner to tell us to either move in a new direction or not to worry about trying so hard in one area of life because he needs you in another area of life.  Sometimes we don't want to and we try to prove God's path is not the right one.  But like Jonah, God has a way of putting us on the path he wants us to go on.

I had one of those experiences growing up.  I realized years later that there was a plan in place, but at the time I was running up against a road block, I wondered why things weren't going right.  I haven't spoken much on parts of that past to Liz, because it mostly has no bearing on my current life.

That past concerns my 6 years of experience in Middle School and High School band.

Liz knows very little about it.  She sort of knows that I played clarinet, but that’s about it.  Up until now, she didn't know that in 3 of the 6 years I was in band, I was first chair (7th & 8th Grades in Middle School, and Junior year in the Overall High School Band).  She knows very little about the John Phillip Sousa Band Award that has sat on my desk.  There is very little of those days that she can look at. 

In elementary school, I had shown a great amount of musical capabilities.  I played piano and sang in choirs.  Of course, it wasn't easy (the "Camptown Races" moment in 5th Grade is a perfect example), but I did pretty well.  In middle school, I realized that I couldn't march with a piano, so I selected the clarinet as my instrument of choice for band over singing in Chorus.

Those band days were mixed.  I always worked hard to try and be the best clarinet player possible.  I always figured if I put in the effort, I would get a chance to perform some solos in concert band.  But unlike my predecessors or successors, I never had a chance to show my capabilities.  And in most of those six years, those efforts were largely under the radar as a musician.  The lone bright spot was as a freshman in High School Band and for that, I owe a great deal of thanks to the former long time SGHS director, Bill Nettleton, for believing in me.

During a rough Junior year, I began to see signs that staying in the band was proving to be a problem.  Little things here and there began to take a toll both in and out of the band, making the ability to perform at my best difficult.  Even being 1st chair wasn’t as worth it as I thought.  I realized that my Senior Year was going to be an even tougher year, and even though I still could have stuck around to defend the top clarinet spot, the cons of staying outweighed the pros.  So the decision was made during my Junior year to not return for my Senior year.  It was hard to not march or play in 12th Grade.  There was more than one time during that final High School Year that I wanted to play or march, but I kept my word to not march or play in concert band.  I felt all that musical effort I had put in for six years had been for naught. 

In reality (though it took years after the fact to understand), for six years I had ignored God's plan with regards to my musical talents and God had humbled me for it.  I had made a mistake of choosing band over choir.  In college, I had the chance to atone for that misjudgment by joining the Valparaiso University Choir Kantorei and the music fraternity, Phi Mu Sinfonia, as a Junior.  Both turned out to be great decisions.  The Kantorei Tour in Spring was a wonderful tour featuring Bach’s “Jesu, meine Freude” and “The Cry of the Whole Congregation”, a John Stevens Paul work based on Luke’s narrative of Holy Week.  As for the Brotherhood of Music, redemption came four years after leaving band at the Spring Weekend.  Some of you know the story:  The Sinfonians performing the Blues Brothers as an exhibition, Minnie the Moocher, and yours truly slowly descending from the top of the altar steps at the Chapel of the Resurrection doing a modified Cab Calloway.  It was perhaps my finest moment musically.

Since college, I have continued to sing in choirs.  I haven't touched the clarinet in nearly 15 years.  It's now clear that God wanted me to continue musically as a singer.  And I haven't looked back since.  I still have my friends from the band years.  Those friendships will never change.  But my instrumental days are long over.  My musical talents survive, in part because I made a hard decision to let go and embrace God's plan albeit like Jonah--a plan that needed a humbling detour to put me back on course.