So, I'm at work the other day and the subject of John Wooden comes up. My friends at work are, like me, die hard UK fans, with the exception of one very partisan UofL fan.
I found out immediately that each of them, to a man, were very enamored of John Wooden. They spoke of his "love for his players" and that he was "the greatest X's and O's basketball coach to ever live" that he did things "the right way" and that modern college basketball could "really learn something from him."
I completely burst their bubble by saying that I had zero, absolutely no respect for Wooden as a coach or a human being. I explained that Wooden was actually a good example of everything that is wrong with college sports in general: the use of power and prestige to trump what everyone knows is right. For years, Wooden turned a blind eye to boosters paying his players. Late in his career, it wasn't a question of "did he know?" it was, "how is he covering it up?" He used his considerable pull to bully UCLA officials and perhaps even NCAA officials. The obliged him because tearing down his facade would damage their reputations as well, since they too fueled the myth of Wooden as the patron Saint of Basketball Holiness. All the time, Wooden cultivated his reputation for basketball piety and life-affirming goodness, writing books and spinning folksy maxims that he former (well paid) players would echo on TV and in print. He was a walking definition of the term "hypocrite".
I explained to them that this was by no means a secret. Several books and countless newspaper and magazine articles have covered this material many times. No one who was at UCLA at the time denies it. The man flat out cheated, end of story.
When confronted with the evidence, my co-workers simply shrugged their shoulders. "I don't care what he did," stated on of my friends, "that man could flat out coach." (BTW, you might want to check yourself when you state sentences with "I don't care what he did"). They made it clear to me that they found it unsettling that I would "deny" Wooden's greatness, even questioning my character.
I was flabbergasted; it was like living in bizzaro world. Is the Wooden myth this pervasive? Has it infected even UK fans to the point that we can't openly criticize a man who shameless cheated to win? I don't defend Eddie Sutton, and I'm sure as hell not going to defend John Wooden.
Thoughts on this matter?
I found out immediately that each of them, to a man, were very enamored of John Wooden. They spoke of his "love for his players" and that he was "the greatest X's and O's basketball coach to ever live" that he did things "the right way" and that modern college basketball could "really learn something from him."
I completely burst their bubble by saying that I had zero, absolutely no respect for Wooden as a coach or a human being. I explained that Wooden was actually a good example of everything that is wrong with college sports in general: the use of power and prestige to trump what everyone knows is right. For years, Wooden turned a blind eye to boosters paying his players. Late in his career, it wasn't a question of "did he know?" it was, "how is he covering it up?" He used his considerable pull to bully UCLA officials and perhaps even NCAA officials. The obliged him because tearing down his facade would damage their reputations as well, since they too fueled the myth of Wooden as the patron Saint of Basketball Holiness. All the time, Wooden cultivated his reputation for basketball piety and life-affirming goodness, writing books and spinning folksy maxims that he former (well paid) players would echo on TV and in print. He was a walking definition of the term "hypocrite".
I explained to them that this was by no means a secret. Several books and countless newspaper and magazine articles have covered this material many times. No one who was at UCLA at the time denies it. The man flat out cheated, end of story.
When confronted with the evidence, my co-workers simply shrugged their shoulders. "I don't care what he did," stated on of my friends, "that man could flat out coach." (BTW, you might want to check yourself when you state sentences with "I don't care what he did"). They made it clear to me that they found it unsettling that I would "deny" Wooden's greatness, even questioning my character.
I was flabbergasted; it was like living in bizzaro world. Is the Wooden myth this pervasive? Has it infected even UK fans to the point that we can't openly criticize a man who shameless cheated to win? I don't defend Eddie Sutton, and I'm sure as hell not going to defend John Wooden.
Thoughts on this matter?
