Conclusion

Throughout the semester I have learned, heard and read things that gave my a different perspective on topics. I chose to keep my thought in a blog, because I procrastinate just as good as most people. I would do entries a day or two before they were actually do and if I had done that with a 10 page paper, overall I would not have done very well writing it all in the last night. Another reason that I chose to keep a blog is that I could keep all my ideas in one place, that I could not lose them unless I forgot my password. It was also a way for me to give my opinion on topics that were discussed in class and some that were not without offending someone to there face. It also allowed for feedback, which I liked, because it let me the opinions and insight from other people on things that I may not have thought about when I was typing my entries. Overall, this process of keeping a blog has been a positive experience for myself. As for whether or not I would use a blog in my ever day life, probably not. The main reason that I would not is, because I am a private person and if I want people to know what I am doing or how I feel on certain topics I will tell you. Other wise I keep my opinions and feels to myself. That is another reason that I enjoyed blogging. It made me give my opinion, where some classes do not make you do that. Those classes you can get conplacent and just go along with the professor even though he or she might be wrong. For people who have a choice between a blog, a journal or a paper I would recommand a blog for all the reasons that I said above.

Violence in Sports

Violence in society is always a problem that will never go away. Where does it come? That has been debated for numerous years. In high school, I had to debate that television was not the reason for violence in society. There are some things on television that I believe cause more violence than others, sports is one of those that I believe increases violence. I will admit that I like seeing scrums in sports, but there is no place for that especially when the youth of America is watching and looking up to those athletes. You look at young kids playing football, baseball or basketball you see them trying to imitate the professionals. The strike the Heisman pose, wiggle their bat or stick their tongue out, those are things that nobody cares whether or not those are imitated. What happens when kids see a batter charge the mound after getting hit or getting into a pushing match after a hard foul? Yes emotions are flying high in professional sports, but is that really what you want your kids to imitate?

That was just an argument to those who think television is the reason for violence in society. I believe that television adds to it, but is not the top cause for violence. If you are a person who thinks that television shows should not show any violence, you are also saying that sports should not be shown on television. I believe that if you teach your kids that violence is not the solution (which can be hard to do) it should not matter if you watch shows that deal with violence. Here is a question I bring forward, would you rather have someone take their frustration and anger out in a video game or in the real world? Video games are virtual, make believe, not real however you want to describe them. That is why people release their anger through video games in my opinion.

Athletes Relationships

Why do people care about an athlete's relationships? Is there nothing else that deserves more attention? Watching television for most of the day, just about every show on ESPN has talked about Alex Rodriguez and his break up with Kate Hudson. To start, I have noticed that when you hear about athletes and their relationships it is more times than not about male athletes. Second, why should we care who an athlete is dating and breaking up with? These are things that happen everyday outside of sports we do not care about those break ups. This shows me that male athletes are the top dogs in American society, because you do not hear about female athlete's relationships unless they are with a male athlete.

The reason I bring this topic up is, because SportsNation and Around the Horn asked the question will the break up hurt A-Rod's game? The side I heard most was that A-Rod was emotionally changed from being in a relationship and that helped his game. My argument to that is, he was in a relationship when he was struggling in the post-season. I can see how the person that you are in a relationship with can bring about different emotions and it might be possible that Kate Hudson was a reason for his improved game or it could be that the Yankees did not have to depend on A-Rod. Whatever the reason for his improvement in the post-season this topic should not be a top headline in sports, that is what the tabloids are for.

I am by no means have or ever will be a New York Yankees fan, so I am hoping that A-Rod's game goes back to the way it was in the past. I find it a little humorous that male athletes are supposed to be superior and people are saying that A-Rod cannot play good without the help of a female who does not play a sport. Is this attacking his masculinity without directly doing so? I do not think so, but if this topic is being brought in comparing his numbers before and after Kate, then maybe some people are attacking his masculinity.

Tiger Tiger Woods Y'all

Tiger Woods, by now everyone knows about the situation in his personal life. I have many different feels about this situation and the way it has been handled by the media. First, I believe what he did is wrong and something that he should not have done. Why is Tiger the only athlete that gets this treatment from the media, because he is not the only athlete that has had some kind of discretionary actions in his personal life. I do understand that he is Tiger Woods and he is a celebrity. I feel as though the media could have handled it differently and public opinion of Tiger would not have dropped so sharply. Yes, because Tiger is a famous athlete he is going to have the media following him in his personal life. I think the media should have told the story and left it at that, do not start speculating on other parts of the story that you do not know full details about. Leave Tiger alone and he will tell the public what happened when he is ready and if he even wants to tell the public. He does not owe anyone anything except for his wife. Just, because he is always in the public eye does not mean that he answers to the public. That is just nonsense and if you really believe that then maybe you should think about that. How many people still talk about Charles Barkley or even Micheal Jordan's gambling problem? Not in the mainstream any way. These two athletes are big name superstars for their sport, just like Tiger is a superstar to his sport. When reporters say that we live in a forgiven nation, I truly believe that we do live in a forgiven nation. With that being said you have to admit that you did something wrong and Tiger, to a certain degree has admitting to doing "something" wrong. If we as a nation can forgive Michael Vick for the things that he did which is a lot worse than what Tiger Woods has done why can we not forgive Tiger? All Tiger is guilty of is being human and falling into temptation, which he is trying to fix his relationship with his family. I say leave him alone and let Tiger deal with his personal matters behind closed doors and when or if he wants to inform the public he will do so on his own time.

There's no Crying in Sports

Crying is thought to be a feminine emotion. Yet you see male athletes crying after they lose big games or receiving an individual award. Some times these athletes are ridiculed for showing their emotions and some times these athletes are not. When Adam Morrison cried after missing a shot that lost the game in the NCAA tournament the media went after him for showing his emotions. When Tim Tebow cried after losing to Alabama in the SEC championship the media did not look down on Tebow as they had done to Morrison. Why the difference in reaction? I believe that, because Adam Morrison was in the spotlight for a two years at most. Where as Tebow has been in the spotlight all four years his has been at Florida. To go along with that, Tebow is seen as "perfect" through the media. Adam Morrison was a good a college athlete, but never had the reputation in the media that Tebow. When it comes down to it no other college athlete that has accomplished what Tebow has, had the reputation in the media that he has. His reputation in the media as being "perfect" has allowed some people to look the other and move on by saying Tebow is an emotional player and that was just another example of his emotions. That's all fine and dandy, but when Adam Morrison played the same way (with his emotions) and he is ridiculed for crying it does not seem fair.

I think that crying is not as big a deal as some people make it out to be. It is just that persons emotions pouring out. You did not hear people saying that Mark Ingram should not have cried when he won the Heisman trophy. No you heard how "real" his speech was and that he gave his speech with "raw" emotions. So why is it so different to cry when you win and cry when you lose? Personally I do not think there is any difference. If an athlete plays the game with their emotions then they will win and lose with their emotions. The same goes for athletes who do not play with emotions, will not win and lose with their emotions.

The Gay Athlete

I personally did not know of any openly gay athletes at my high school or athletes that I competed against. I would like to hope that an athlete who chooses to come out would get support from his or her team at the very least. The reason that I do not think high school would be the right time for an athlete to come out is, because teens at that age are closed minded and are only comfortable with people that are similar to them. Which is why I believe that a high school athlete that is openly gay will be ridiculed everyday until he or she leaves for college. Gay males on college teams would change the atmosphere of the locker room. A men's locker room has a lot jokes that degard using gay slurs. On team sports, that athlete would be seen as the scape goat for when things go bad for the team. If everything goes well for the time that athlete is enrolled then I feel as though there will not be as big a problem as some people will make it out to be. In individual sports the athlete will be judged on performance too. This time if the athlete does not perform well people will point that it is, because the athlete is gay. I guess the point I am getting at is that there would be a larger support group for athletes in team sports and a smaller support group in individual sports.

With the results to the gear magazine poll, I think that every team in the three sports would have responses to each question. While their answers may not be what happens they will say what they would like to see happen. From a video clip shown in class one of the athletes went back for a reunion with his teammates and was greated with a warm welcome. To me that sounds like society says it is better to be an average person who is gay rather than an athlete who is gay. I feel as though today more people would be more ok with an openly gay athlete, because of the times. More people are opened minded today than 20-30 years ago. The younger generation accept being a something that takes part in society, where as the older generations have lived with the belief that you should not be openly gay no matter who are in the world. With the younger generation beginning to take leadership roles throughout society more organizations will begin to not let someone being gay put a damper on work based performance by that person.

Unsportsman Like Conduct

If you take a look at men's and women's sports you will see a clear difference between the two. Even the expectations for are different for each gender. Women's sports are suppose to be competitive without have much physicality, where as men's sports are suppose to be very physical. A clear example of this difference is Elizabeth Lambert (left) who plays soccer for the University of New Mexico. There is a video of her using dirty tactics against players from the BYU soccer team. She is seen hitting them in the back, kicking the ball into other players faces when they are on the ground and throwing girls to the ground. During the game she received only one yellow card. The next day the NCAA suspended Lambert indefinitely for her actions in the game. On the other hand, men's sports is seen in a different light. The saturday before the Lambert incident, Brandon Spikes a football player at the University of Florida had an incident of his own. During Florida's game that weekend Brandon Spikes was seen trying to reach through the facemask of a Georgia player. His attempt was to reach his finger to the eye of the opposing player. After the tape was reviewed Spikes received only have half-game suspension. Brandon Spikes came out and took responsibility for his actions and took himself out of the second half of the next game. So, a girl who hurts the opposing players with elbows and take downs gets an indefinite suspension. Where as, a guy who tries to blind the opposing player formally gets a half-game, but it turned out to be a 1 game after a self imposed suspension. Personally I see a huge problem with this situation. Someone trying to commit long term damage to someone else gets a lesser penalty then someone just being more physical then need be. Do I think gender had a part in the decision? I cannot say for certain, but the conspiracy theorist in me wants to say that Brandon Spikes did not get a heavy penalty, because everyone that has authority in the matter wants Florida to win. That should not be what is bases for handing down penalties, it should the nature of the incident.