|
09 August 2010
We watch them on Sunday when they put on their helmets, pull their 7 irons, and mash their right foot to the floor. Tuesdays and Saturdays go by like a blur as we see them shoot jump shots and throw the ball with 300 pound kids driving through their midsections. The next day we talk about it in the halls at work, at the local bar, over text message, and on our back porches. But do we really realized what we're asking of them?
A recent article in the NY Times, the quarterback battle at the University of Kentucky, and Tiger Woods' struggles have made me reflect on this. What do we really want from our athletes? Should we really expect greatness from them?
I'm not so different from most sports fans. It's habit to check my favorite college and professional sports teams' websites daily. ESPN is always on in the background at my house and ESPN radio blares from an old transistor radio on my desk at work when my office-mate is out. This is all a part of me being a sports "fan." Quotation marks are essential here, because what truly makes someone a "fan?"
The term sports "fan" is a derivative from the word fanatical. A quick google search defines this term as "motivated by excessive, irrational zeal." I can't quite come to terms with that though. Sports fans, to me, are people who keep up with their team daily, go out of their way to experience their teams successes (and failures), and at the end of the day, people who can always pull for their team (or an individual). I've always decried those who called themselves fans, yet they didn't watch their teams play, or worse, turned the broadcast off as their team began to crumble.
Yet, if we look at the more strict definition of the term, sports "fans" are the people who go beyond rational thought. They are the ones that ask everything from their heroes. Anything less than certain victory is considered deplorable. Those, and many others who openly attack athletes, need to take a long look in the mirror.
The recent NY Times article is a good starting point for this analysis. In this piece (which I highly recommend reading) Pat Jordan takes a look inside the life of Dale Earnhardt Jr. Earnhardt is known as the son of one of the greatest NASCAR drivers in history, and his fans have always expected him to carry on the tradition of excellence his father started. What many of his fans can't see is that he is just a man.
Possibly the greatest irony of all is that a large part of Earnhardt's fan base is made up of those who want to identify with someone. They see the guy trying to sell them Wrangler jeans and say, "he's just a guy like me, I'm gonna pull for 'em." The problem is, they forget all about Dale being a common man come Sunday. Anything less than a first place finish leaves them feeling let down. Not one moment's thought goes into thinking about the things that Dale is dealing with at the time, his true level of talent, or what his real ambitions are.
From the NY Times article, it's obvious that Dale Earnhardt Jr. never wanted to be his father. He never expected to be the greatest driver in NASCAR history. Put simply, he realized that he had enough talent, and the luck to be who he was, to allow him to drive a car for a living instead of working under one. People need to realize he is a normal man, and that on any given Sunday his performance will be what it is, but it will not change him.
At the other end of the spectrum we have the case study of Tiger Woods. Tiger was trained, nearly from birth, to be the greatest golfer on the planet. He did not dissapoint. For nearly ten years Woods thoroughly dominated a sport that many feel is the most difficult to excel at for an extended period of time. Then it came crashing down.
Tiger's personal life has been a true media circus for the last year. His professional life has followed suit in the past few months. People everywhere are wondering why Tiger is playing so poorly. There is only one explanation: he has lost his focus.
Woods grew up his entire life with one goal, to become the greatest golfer ever. Not to be good, mind you, but to become the greatest athlete in a sport's history. Along the way he found a personal life, with a wife and children. Unfortunately, he found another personal life that consisted of many transgressions. When these two personal lives collided, he came to where he is now.
Tiger's recent golf performances have nothing to do with age or a lack of skill. It all has to do with his personal life. People follow every word of tabloid and traditional media about his personal life and then have the nerve to ask, "why is he playing so poorly?" Because Tiger isn't the robot that his marketing machine has made him out to be. While he put his family through unspeakable turmoil, at the end of the day he's a person and he cares for his family. He is personally responsible for everything that he's going through, but his fans should understand that he's not going to be emotionally invested in golf right now. Not Thursday, not Friday, not Saturday, and sure as Hell not on Sunday when it really matters.
Tiger's fans should understand this. They don't have to forgive him for what he's done. He's made his own bed. But to get frustrated that he's shooting over par every round is ridiculous. Try going through a public scandal and divorce and continue to work at peak performance in your day job before criticizing this man.
Finally, we come to amateur athletics. Nothing draws my ire more than people who continually bag on 18-22 year-old kids for their performance in an athletic event. The quarterback situation at the University of Kentucky is a shining example.
Mike Hartline is a senior who has been the starting quarterback for the Kentucky football team. He has direct competition from both Morgan Newton (a sophomore quarterback who started at times the previous season) and Ryan Mossakowsi (a redshirt freshman thought to have the best raw throwing talent of the bunch). For two years Kentucky fans have been on Hartline's back, calling him everything from inefficient to an outright bum. What gives them that right?
There is not one single person in my group of friends that played division one college football. 99.9% of the people commenting on Kentucky's quarterback situation have not either. Yet these people feel they have a right to talk poorly about a student-athlete. Why? Well, they attended the school for one. Secondly, they pay for tickets so that gives them the right. I call bullshit on all of that.
I'm not a proponent of sugar-coating anything. If Mike Hartline throws three interceptions against Louisville in week one, I will be the first to say that he played horribly and that one of the other kids should get a look at that position. What I do have a problem with is people personally attacking the kid. People talking about him like he's a used appliance. People booing him in the stadium.
At the end of a hard-fought game this kid has to go back to his dorm room. He has to talk to his parents. Has to eat dinner. Has to look in the mirror. You don't think he has enough questions in his mind about his talent? You need to add to that by going to your blog, your message board, or texting your buddy in section 210 saying, "Hartline's shit, when are we gonna play Newton?" It's senseless, and doesn't do anyone any good.
American society has been focued on winning since its inception. It's what has made this country what it is today.
Winning is very important, but at what cost? Why do we continually ask athletes at both the professional and collegiate level to live up to expectations that we do not on an every day basis? We expect them to be perfect every time they are asked to perform. Can we live up to this expectation? We should ask ourselves this question every time we open our mouths to criticize those that we ultimately turn to as a source of entertainment.
