Logo

Look Out Below!

March 27, 2018

Here are the kinds of statements that should send chills down the spines of thoughtful leaders of school-based basketball:

  • From Maverick Carter, business manager for LeBron James and CEO of Springhill Entertainment: “... the system is broken at the base, the foundation of it, which is youth basketball ... And if youth basketball is broken, then that’s part of his (NBA Commissioner Adam Silver’s) job, too, because those kids are quickly in his league.”
    “... the NCAA has these stupid-ass rules that are so archaic, so you have to fix that whole thing and figure out a way to do it. I own a piece of Liverpool football club, in European soccer, because clubs have a system all the way down to youth.”

  • From Michelle Roberts, NBA Players Association executive director: “... we need to go younger, and we’re now plotting ways to do that.”

  • From Draymond Green, formerly of Michigan State and now of the NBA’s Golden State Warriors: “You talk to the European guys who I’ve played with, and they’ve been making money since they were 15 years old ...”

  • From Michael Singer of the Commercial Appeal, Memphis, TN: “... the NBA is indeed exploring avenues to connect with elite high school players and improve the developmental system ... Part of the NBA’s plan could hinge on working with elite prospects throughout high school, whether at tournaments or at summer camps.”

So, at minimum, this is what school-based sports can expect as a result of NBA and NCAA efforts to fix what’s broken in college basketball:

  1. Additional pressures on students to specialize in basketball year-round from a very early age.

  2. Further distraction from the masses of players toward elite players.

  3. An attack on amateur standing rules in school-based basketball.

Tools of Thought

July 13, 2018

(This blog first appeared on MHSAA.com on May 11, 2012.)


I am famous at home and office for my lack of keyboarding skills. The only “C” grade I received in high school was a summer school course in what was then called “typing.” At Dartmouth I paid a woman who worked at the dining hall to type my college papers. In an early job at the University of Wisconsin I typed the play-by-play of Badger football and basketball games with a clumsy “hunt-and-peck” approach.

Today, with the same lack of style, I pound out dozens of emails daily, hammering the keys like my first manual typewriter required four decades ago.

But for any document of great length or importance, I do as I’ve always done: take up pencil (my software) and legal pad (my hardware). There is no question that, for me, the nature of the equipment I’m using for writing affects the nature of the thinking.

With his eyesight failing late in his life, Freidrich Nietzsche bought his first typewriter, changing from pen and paper to the new technology of the 1800s. According to a 2008 article in Atlantic Monthly by Nichols Carr, a friend wrote to Nietzsche in a letter that, since adapting to the telegraphic style, Nietzsche’s terse prose had become even tighter. To which Nietzsche replied: “You are right, our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts.”

Which makes one wonder where all today’s tweeting and texting may take us.