Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Heavy on the Testosterone

Over the weekend, I had occasion  to watch a classic film I had somehow never seen before.  The movie was the 1962 classic Lawrence of Arabia.  The movie won numerous awards, including 7 Academy awards, the most prominent of them being awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Cinematography, and Best Original Score.  It is a LONG movie, running 216 minutes. 

While it was not particularly noticeable as I watched the movie, as I reflected back on the movie during the closing credits, I was struck by the fact that despite the movie's length, I could not recall seeing even one woman on the screen during the entire movie.  Certainly not anyone in a significant role, but not even a walk-on.  When I checked on-line resources, it turns out that there was a woman who played a nurse.  But her appearance on screen was so brief and unremarkable, I did not even remember seeing her. 

That prompted me to consider whether this was an anomoly or whether there were other prominent movies that were similarly male dominated if not exclusively male.  Turns out, some of my favorite movies from years gone by fall into that category. 

For other Academy award winning (or nominated) movies, consider Treaure of Sierra Madre (1948).  Two women made brief appearances as uncredited extras.  In The Caine Mutiny (1954) two women also had brief insignificant roles.  In Patton (1970) the only women to appear were uncredited walk-ons who were part of a women's group General Patton was speaking to.  Saving Private Ryan (1998) featured a few women on screen (most memorably the woman playing Ryan's wife in the scene years after the war where he visits his fallen comrades in the cemetary) but there are no significant female roles.  In Bridge Over the River Kwai (1957) no woman is credited, but there were a few native women assisting the men treking in to blow the bridge who had non-speaking roles. 

While not nominated for an Academy award, a favorite movie from my youth was The Great Escape (1963).  It too was entirely devoid of female credited, or speaking roles. 

What all of these movies have in common (save Treasure of the Sierra Madre) is a story set during war.  I am not asserting the fact that these popular movies lack female participation sheds any great light on Hollywood or its audience.  I just thought it might be interesting to consider my reflections on this theme of "macho" male movies. 

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Where Should Ball Carry the Ball?

Later today it appears likely Montee Ball will announce his decision to return to Wisconsin and pass up the NFL draft.  Is it a good decision? Will his stock be higher THIS year, or NEXT year entering the draft?

This year, he tied a long standing and honored record held by Barry Sanders (total touchdowns in a season) that ought to make NFL front office types sit up and take notice.  He was in New York and part of the discussion for the Heisman trophy.  Over the 13 game regular season, Ball carried the ball an average of 24 times per game with an average of 6.3 yards per carry.  His total yards rushing of 1,923 works out to an average of 148 yards per game.  He capped it off by scoring two more touchdowns in the Rose Bowl while gaining 164 yards on 32 carries averaging 5.1 yards per carry.  Ball is one of only 4 runners to have rushed for at least 100 yards in consecutive Rose Bowls.  The others are O.J Simpson, Ron Dayne and Vince Young.  Simpson was an NFL star (as was Barry Sanders) Young was a very high draft pick, and Ball is significantly fleeter of foot than Ron Dayne.  That is a pretty good resume. 

Now, consider what Ball faces if he returns to Wisconsin.  His quarterback will be replaced by one with almost no experience.  At least two of his offensive linemen will be gone (Zeitler & Olesby) and there is a good chance a third will also be gone (Konz).  Since Al Toon will also be gone - and it appears the back-ups likely to take his spot don't seem to be barn burners - defenses won't have to be as respectful of the passing game and are likely to be able to clamp down more against the run at a time when the Badger offensive line will be relatively inexperienced.  On top of that, the Badgers have lost their long time and highly respected offensive coordinator AND offensive line coaches.  This does not suggest a great year for a Badger running back.
  
What I fear is that Ball is set up to have a significantly less impressive senior campaign than the junior one he just completed.  In addition, he should expect an additional 350 carries where he might experience a significant injury that could also drive him down on draft lists, and (given the conventional wisdom that running backs are only good for a finite number of carries before they wear down and become injury prone) that another season of being a college workhorse will make him less attractive a pick even without being injured.
I saw the Journal Sentinel article that suggests Ball is probably only the 6th rated running back in the draft, but I find that questionable (although I don't watch enough college football that does not include the Badgers to have a valid opinion).  Based on that, the projection is that if Ball was in the draft this year, he would probably be the first running back off the board in the third round.
 
Assuming that is accurate, what are the odds Ball would go HIGHER after another year at UW?  In addition, you also have to factor in that waiting a year will likely cause Ball's total NFL career to be 1 year shorter if he stays in college than it would be if he left for the NFL now (meaning he will have a year less of NFL income he can never replace) not to mention that if he went to the NFL NOW, he would be completing his rookie contract at a year younger in age than he would if he waited and thus would be a younger running back with less "tread off the tire" when seeking that second contract (which is where NFL running backs have a chance to really cash in).
  
If he decides to come back I LOVE the decision as a Badger fan.  However, it Ball was my client, I would have to advise him to leave.