Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Exclusive interview Bob Arum: Two-handed Manny Pacquiao will defeat Juan Manuel Marquez



Bob Arum joins The Telegraph for an interview in Las Vegas ahead of Manny Pacquiao – Juan Manuel Marquez III this weekend at the MGM Grand Garden Arena.


Arum has seen most things in boxing in the last five decades. How does he see the promotion of Pacquiao vs Marquez III as a contest ?


"Well it's certainly a lot bigger than the last two fights, but essentially what makes this fight unique is that in the two prior fights, there was very little to differentiate the two fighters. The difference now is that Manny fights with two hands. His right hand is as good as his left. But you've got to understand that Marquez and Nacho [Beristein] are brilliant guys and the style of Manny is made for Marquez because he's a counter-puncher."



"The question is – can he fight with that right hand ? Everybody sees these Hispanics like Cotto and Margarito, they don't know about quitting. When Manny fought Clottey and when he fought Moseley, what made these fighters quit is that they were trained to fight the southpaw, then when they got clocked with the right hand, they couldn't believe it."




Arum: Mayweather fears Pacquiao because of right hand development


"They were like – how are we going to defend ourselves ? That's the problem fighting Pacquiao now. That's the problem Mayweather has… that's why Mayweather doesn't do it. Because if Manny, as a one-handed fighter, goes after Mayweather he can throw that lead right and give Manny trouble, but he can't throw the lead right if Manny is attacking him at the same time with the right hand, because then he'll get knocked out."


"That's the problem. So how that plays out in this particular fight we have to see, because everyone else. Half these people don't understand, Moseley didn't understand… Nazeem Richardson didn't understand that you cannot look at Manny Pacquiao as the typical south paw. The typical south paw throws a jab with his right hand and then uses his power hand. So that's for me what's going to be very interesting against Marquez."


Trilogy fights pass into boxing folklore. The most famous of them all, involving Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier, was on everyone's lips this week, with the passing of Smokin' Joe, taken too early at 67. May he Rest In Peace. A lion of a heavyweight division.


Can the Pacquiao-Marquez trilogy honour that great heavyweight battle this weekend at the MGM Grand Garden Arena, Las Vegas ?


"Yeah, I think so because the first two were fairly equally spaced. I never expected Marquez to be as good as he was in that second fight. A lot of these writers missed the point completely. They talk about how Marquez was dead at the weight when he fought Mayweather. But he wasn't… he looked dead at the weight because he is a great counter-puncher and Mayweather isn't an attack guy, so he couldn't go after Mayweather and make the fight so it was a non-event because of the styles. [Mayweather] he's a great fighter, there isn't any question about the fact he's a great fighter but fighting a guy like Marquez is a no-contest for Mayweather. Not for Manny, but for Mayweather. That style is very tough. I think the right hand is going to make the difference though."


Arum, of course, has been involved in a few trilogies down the decades. "Ali-Frazier, yeah, that was an incredible trilogy and then Morales and Pacquiao, Morales-Barrera, Ali-Norton."


How does Arum see the buy rate on the Pacquiao-Marquez fight ?


Manny Paquiao fights you and he'll sell 500,000-600,000 pay per views. Mayweather fights you, he'll sell 400,000 pay per views. Hopkins fought Dawson and they didn't sell 50,000. Marquez is an easier sell than the Shane Moseley fight, because people said that Moseley was shot. The Mayweather fight [against Victor Ortiz], because of the way it transpired, left such a bad taste in people's mouths that they may, as a reaction, decide not to buy this fight. That's what I'm worried about. I mean I don't give a s*** about the theory that 'in boxing protect yourself at all times'. It's still entertainment. It's still sportsmanship. You don't throw those two punches you do not throw the two punches against a defenceless guy."


"In football it's like the equivalent of taking a cheap shot at the receiver unprotected. When I saw that fight, I was watching it on television, I was outraged. I never focused on whether it was illegal, I was outraged, the referee lost control of that fight, and this kid [Ortiz] is a doofus. That being said, it was not something that would please people who spent 60 dollars to watch it on pay per view."


The November 12 clash will be screened live and exclusive in the UK on Primetime (Channel 480 on Sky) for £14.95 by calling 08712004444, by visiting www.primetimelive.co.uk or Virgin Media customers can purchase using the ‘On Demand’ menu. Customers on Sky must register the first time they use Primetime and once registered can purchase using the ‘Box Office’ menu.



Week 9 Film Review: Palmer vs. Tebow

A closer look at Week 9, with the benefit of film analysis:

Raiders O vs. Broncos D

Raider fans who are worried about their team’s new franchise quarterback can actually feel optimistic. Carson Palmer was, for the most part, impressive in this game. His three interceptions were all explainable: the first was a case of a superstar cornerback, Champ Bailey, dominating a  callow wideout, Denarius Moore, in bump-and-run coverage. On the second interception, Moore tipped the ball over the middle (the throw was a tad high). The third pick was in garbage time in hurry-up mode, with Palmer being hit as he threw. These were not like the Palmer misreads that led to turnovers against the Chiefs two weeks ago. He showed poise, great pocket mobility and good touch. There were minor chemistry issues with the receivers. But keep in mind, Moore is young and still learning. Jacoby Ford (who was excellent in the first half) has missed some time, and T.J. Houshmandzadeh is a newcomer (who supplanted Darrius Heyward-Bey in the rotation but had trouble all afternoon getting separation).

Oakland’s run game was strong in the first half but tailed off after center Samson Satele’s injury reshuffled the interior front line (Stefan Wisniewski had been playing well at left guard but struggled after sliding over to center). This, along with a flood of penalties, compromised the flow of the offense. For the Broncos, a few notes: Von Miller was used as an inside blitzer, which proved to be a highly successful new wrinkle for this defense. The box score says that Elvis Dumervil, with his first 1.5 sacks of the season, came out of his slumber. He didn’t. The half-sack was produced by Miller and the full sack was a classic coverage sack. Dumervil was, however, part of a Broncos front seven that bogged down the run fairly well in the second half.

Broncos O vs. Raiders D

The Raiders will kick themselves after watching this film. Their run defense was outstanding for much of the game but fell apart late. They gave up two big runs to Tim Tebow and two to Willis McGahee on shotgun read options. Oakland’s linebacking group seemed completely unprepared for the read option, which is inexcusable given Denver’s limited passing weapons. It’s surprising that the Raiders did not shadow Tebow the way the Dolphins did. His scrambles were difference-making. Hard to fathom how a defense can be ill-prepared for Tebow’s runs. Daryl Blackstock, starting for injured middle linebacker Rolando McClain, was particularly bad. He was easily manipulated by the offense’s tactical deceits and lacked the speed to get outside or recover from his mistakes. The Broncos’ coaching staff did a great job of building a pro-Tebow game plan – and he responded. Tebow ran well, protected the football and, on three occasions, properly executed a throw that made the Raiders pay for mistakes in man coverage. Whether this sort of plan can work week to week remains to be seen.

Redskins O vs. 49ers D

The respective approaches seemed to suggest that both teams realized that the injury-riddled Redskins did not have enough firepower to outgun a staunch Niners defense. The Redskins did not even attempt to push the ball downfield (though John Beck, who seemed to play a tad hurriedly, did pass up a few open opportunities to do so). They also abandoned their run game after falling behind by two scores (they maybe would have abandoned it anyway considering their O-line could not get movement against nose tackle Isaac Sopoaga & Company). The Niners were equally conservative. They blitzed sparingly and dared the Skins to defeat basic 3-4 defensive zones. A great illustration of Washington’s aerial limitations was the fact that running back Roy Helu set a franchise record with 14 receptions. Helu is far from an accomplished receiving back. Niners inside linebackers Patrick Willis and NaVorro Bowman both stood out, as usual. They’re the first- and second-best 3-4 inside linebackers in the N.F.C. (the hard part is determining who is 1 and who is 1-A.)

49ers O vs. Redskins D

The Niners are still using the same high school-style offense that they were criticized for in our earlier film reviews this season. Yours truly asserted that it was not a sustainable winning formula. Obviously, yours truly has been proved wrong. Sunday’s game at Washington was the epitome of effective ball-control offense. Alex Smith managed the game extremely well. He was not able to push the ball downfield – save for a 30-yard touchdown to fullback Bruce Miller on a wheel route that linebacker Rocky McIntosh incorrectly guessed would be a curl in the flats – in large part because the Niners sent only three receivers on routes and kept extra guys in to pass protect. When the throws weren’t there – and they often weren’t – Smith bought himself a little time and threw the ball away. In San Francisco, this is considered good quarterbacking. The Niners can afford to play this way because they have a great defense and meat-and-potatoes run game. They showcased an array of different run-play alignments and motions out of 22 personnel (two backs, two tight ends). They knew the Redskins would be a tough defense to run against, so they manufactured yards through creative design. Smart coaching, sound execution. That’s the 2011 Niners in a nutshell.

Texans O vs. Browns D

This was one where you watched two series and wondered why you decided to break down this game. The stats book told the story. Houston rushed for an easy 261 yards. Their offensive line had no trouble moving Cleveland’s front four off the ball. Right guard Mike Brisiel looked like an All-Pro in the first half, and center Chris Myers won battle after battle inside. As a defender, if you can’t hold your ground and force Myers to play in a phone booth, you’ll fall victim to his shrewd ability to create angles on lateral movement in the run game. He’s tailor-made for a zone scheme. The Browns should be concerned about their linebacking corps and really concerned about their pass rush. When Jabaal Sheard gets neutralized (as he was all afternoon), there’s absolutely no pressure on the quarterback. Another concern is the first-round rookie defensive tackle Phil Taylor. He has not shown up on film all season despite frequently facing blockers one-on-one.

Browns O vs. Texans D

This game was essentially over as soon as Houston scored its second touchdown. No team is less equipped to play from behind than Cleveland. Their quarterback lacks top-level arm strength, their receivers’ speed is bankrupt and the offensive line’s lack of athleticism at left guard and on the right side becomes problematic when opposing pass rushers tee off. This is what happened Sunday. In the first half, Texans backup defensive linemen Earl Mitchell and Tim Jamison stood out in the way they got off blocks. In the second half, outside linebackers Connor Barwin and Brooks Reed (especially Reed) took over. They’re a fast,  energetic duo. No games are easy supposed to be easy in the N.F.L., but this one was.

Titans O vs. Bengals D
(Time did not permit review of Titans D vs. Bengals O)

After a very solid first half, the Titans were taken out of rhythm and frustrated throughout the last 30 minutes. The Bengals’ defensive line, led by Domata Peko as he defeated one-on-one blocking in the middle, stonewalled the Titans’ offensive line and kept Chris Johnson bottled up. Johnson had looked like his old self in the first half, turning the corner outside, juking defenders in the open field  and eating up yards with relatively quick acceleration. The Bengals blitzed infrequently, played a lot of traditional coverage and dared the Titans’ receiving targets to beat them. At face value, Tennessee does not have a good downfield pass game. None of the wideouts have the proper combination of speed and route running polish, and Matt Hasselbeck is not a great precision passer beyond the underneath/intermediate levels. They’ve been able to manufacture a few big plays thanks to creative route combinations drawn up by offensive coordinator Chris Palmer, but those can only take you so far. In the end, it’s about having the players. The setting was favorable for Tennessee, as Cincy’s pass rush was quiet until the fourth quarter.

Cowboys O vs. Seahawks D

DeMarco Murray looks like the real deal. He has a subtle suddenness to his game and can quickly drum up forceful downhill momentum when he hits the accelerator. He’s a true north/south runner with some faint hints of east-west mobility. For the second time in three weeks, Murray benefited from excellent blocking. Left guard Montrae Holland stood out on a few pull blocks, and throughout the game, all of the Dallas linemen were able to successfully make contact with Seattle’s second level defenders. Tackles Doug Free and Tyron Smith rendered Seattle’s pass rushers, including Chris Clemons, irrelevant. Seahawks corners Richard Sherman and Brandon Browner did a solid job in press coverage, but Tony Romo made just enough big plays through the air. It was not a great game for Seattle’s safeties.

Seahawks O vs. Cowboys D

It has been the same issue week in and week out with this offense: an inability to mount sustainable drives through the air. The Cowboys, with their incredibly wide-ranging assortment of personnel packages and presnap looks, made Tarvaris Jackson think too much. Jackson likes to see the receiver get open in order to pull the trigger. He doesn’t anticipate throwing windows well. Normally that leads to sacks. But in this one, Seattle’s front five did a good job…so Jackson’s  progressions instead led to more incompletions. The one time the Cowboys did blitz and pressure Jackson, he underthrew a blanketed Sidney Rice, resulting in an interception. The Cowboys shouldn’t feel completely content with their performance. Their defensive line did not quite make enough big plays, and their inside linebackers, playing without Sean Lee, looked out of place a few times in coverage and were consistently handled in the run game.

Andy Benoit is an NFL analyst for CBSSports.com and founder of NFLTouchdown.com. He can be reached at andy.benoit@NFLTouchdown.com or @Andy_Benoit.

 

Joe Paterno reportedly losing support at Penn State

Fabforum

Joe Paterno's support among the Penn State board of trustees was described as "eroding" Tuesday amid the sex abuse scandal involving former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky.

A person familiar with the trustees' discussions told the Associated Press it was unclear what the consequences for Paterno will be and that a decision could be rendered before the board meets on Friday.

Penn State President Graham Spanier also has lost support among the board of trustees, the person said.

FULL COVERAGE: Penn State sex scandal

"No one has asked Joe to resign," Scott Paterno, Joe's son, told AP in a text message.

Earlier Tuesday, Penn State officials canceled Paterno's weekly news conference during which he was expected to field questions about the Sandusky sex abuse scandal.

"I know you guys have a lot of questions. I was hoping I could answer them today. We'll try to do it as soon as we can," Joe Paterno said to a group of reporters as he got into his car. About a dozen students stood nearby, chanting, "We love you, Joe."

RELATED:

Document: The grand jury report

Should Joe Paterno resign over the Sandusky scandal? [Poll]

Two Penn State officials face arraignment in Sandusky scandal

-- Houston Mitchell

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Photo: Penn State coach Joe Paterno's son, Scott, speaks briefly to reporters outside the coach's home Tuesday in State College, Pa. Credit: Ralph Wilson / Associated Press

Is Terry Francona the next manager of the Cardinals?

Fabforum

The Associated Press is reporting that former Boston Red Sox Manager Terry Francona has interviewed with the St. Louis Cardinals for their manager opening.

Francona managed the Red Sox for eight seasons and left after they blew a nine-game September lead in the AL wild-card race.

St. Louis is seeking a replacement for Tony La Russa, who retired two days after winning his second World Series in 16 seasons with the Cardinals.

More interviews are planned for Wednesday, believed to be with third base coach Jose Oquendo and Hall of Fame second baseman Ryan Sandberg, who managed the Phillies' Triple-A team last season.

After Francona left the Red Sox, there were reports players drank beer and ate fried chicken in the clubhouse during games rather than root on their teammates.

Boston ended an 86-year championship drought in 2004, Francona's first season, when the Red Sox swept the Cardinals in the World Series. Francona also managed the Red Sox to a sweep of Colorado in the 2007 Series.

Francona is the second-winningest manager in Red Sox history with a 744-552 record and 8-0 mark in the World Series.

Francona and Cardinals general manager John Mozeliak did not respond to requests for comment.

ALSO:

Manny Pacquiao: This will be the fight of the year

Floyd Mayweather offers to pay for Joe Frazier's funeral

Penn State scandal: School reportedly planning Joe Paterno's exit

-- Houston Mitchell

Photo: Terry Francona with the Red Sox last season. Credit: Carlos Osorio / Associated Press.

Greatest sports figures in L.A. history, No. 1: Sandy Koufax

FabforumConcluding our countdown of the 20 greatest figures in L.A. sports history, as chosen in voting by our online readers, with No. 1, Sandy Koufax.

No. 1 Sandy Koufax (320 first-place votes, 8,720 points)

Considered by many the greatest left-handed pitcher in baseball history, former Dodger Sandy Koufax was the runaway winner in reader voting, receiving 57 more first-place votes than Vin Scully, and 90 more than Magic Johnson.

Koufax's career peaked with a run of six outstanding seasons from 1961 to 1966, before arthritis in his left elbow ended his career at age 30. He was named the Cy Young Award winner in 1963, 1965, and 1966 by unanimous votes, making him the first three-time Cy Young winner in baseball history. In each of his Cy Young seasons, Koufax won the pitcher's triple crown by leading the league in wins, strikeouts and earned-run average.

Koufax was the first major leaguer to pitch four no-hitters, one of them a perfect game.

Because he retired so young, he became the youngest player ever elected to the Hall of Fame when he was inducted at the age of 36 in 1972.

Koufax won Game 7 of the 1965 World Series, pitching on two days' rest and throwing a three-hit shutout against the Minnesota Twins.

In his 12-season career, Koufax had a 165–87 record with a 2.76 ERA, 2,396 strikeouts, 137 complete games and 40 shutouts. He was the first pitcher to average fewer than seven hits allowed per nine innings pitched in his career (6.79) and to strike out more than nine batters (9.28) per nine innings pitched in his career. 

RELATED:

No. 2: Magic Johnson

No. 3: Vin Scully

No. 4: John Wooden

No. 5: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

No. 6: Jerry West

No. 7: Chick Hearn

No. 8: Kobe Bryant

No. 9: Fernando Valenzuela

No. 10: Jackie Robinson

No. 11: Tommy Lasorda

No. 12: Wayne Gretzky

No. 13: Walter O'Malley

No. 14: Don Drysdale

No. 15: Merlin Olsen

No. 16: Jerry Buss

No. 17: Elgin Baylor

No. 18: Marcus Allen

No. 19: Jim Murray

No. 20: Wilt Chamberlain

Your votes are in: The 20 greatest sports figures in L.A. history

-- Houston Mitchell

Photo: Sandy Koufax in 1966. Credit: Malcolm Emmons / US Presswire

 

Manny Pacquiao: This will be the fight of the year

Manny Pacquiao is only days away from his third fight against Juan Manuel Marquez.

At a recent media day, the members of Pacquiao's training camp said that he's become more of a complete fighter since their first two bouts. That he's more motivated. And that he has developed a strong disdain for his competitor.

"It's such a personal thing to him that I think he's using that as his motivation," said Alex Ariza, Pacquiao's strength and conditioning coach. "He's using this dislike for Marquez as motivation."

Their first fight in 2004 ended in a draw and Pacquiao won their last bout in 2008 by a split decision. Marquez believes he was cheated out of two victories and wore a shirt last November that said, "Marquez beat Pacquiao twice!!"

Pacquiao found that disrespectful.

"The different of this training camp is I'm very motivated," Pacquiao said.

Pacquiao's promoter Bob Arum said that he's become more technically sound since he last fought Marquez.

"I look for Manny to win because of the improvement in his right hand," Arum said. "When he fought Marquez the first two times, he was a one-armed fighter. He attacked him with the left hand. Now you can't just concentrate on Manny's left because he hits you just as hard with the right hand."

When asked how many rounds the fight would last, Arum said he didn't know. Ariza said Pacquiao will deliver a knockout punch within the first three rounds.

Said Pacquiao: "This is our last fight. It's going to be the fight of the year."

Pacquiao has a secret weapon.

She's blond and rivals his speed (her hips may shake faster than he can deliver a punch.)

It's Shakira.

According to Ariza, Pacquiao listens to her music whenever he works out. He knows all of her songs by heart and sings and dances to them while warming up.

"I love the Shakira album," Pacquiao said.

When asked what's his favorite song, Pacquiao said, "All of the songs of Shakira."

Even though Pacquiao is the consummate hard worker, Ariza said that being his coach is anything but easy.

"Manny is a natural litigator by nature," he said. "Everything that you discuss with him or want him to do, it has to be an argument in it. It has to go back and forth for 15 to 20 minutes before he feels satisfied to do it."

Ariza said that when he tells Pacquiao to eat four eggs, the fighter will insist on eating three.

"We're always arguing something with Alex, but it's part of our joke," Pacquiao said with a smile.

One of Pacquiao's greatest challenges is maintaining weight.

"Its hard to do that," Pacquiao said. "I have to eat a lot every day, morning and afternoon."

Ariza said the fighter can burn up to 2,500 calories in a workout and can consume up to 6,000 calories in a day.

"I wish he had more cheat days," Ariza said. "Anything to keep the calories up."

As for his diet, Ariza said Pacquiao eats red meat three to four times a week and consumes a lot of eggs.

MORE:

Manny Pacquiao prepares for Marquez

Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez, round three

Bob Arum: I haven't seen Pacquiao train this hard since he fought Oscar De La Hoya

--Melissa Rohlin

George Foreman pays touching tribute to Joe Frazier

Former heavyweight champion George Foreman, who inspired Howard Cosell's legendary call, "Down goes Frazier!" in dethroning Joe Frazier as world heavyweight champion, has just distributed a statement on Monday night's death of Smokin' Joe.

"The term 'one and only' has been widely used to introduce many a celebrity, athlete and politician.  Generally they've appeared in print, TV or movies.

"With most of these folks, 'one and only' is the last definition they deserve. [Because when] you see them at home, at work, on the TV, campaigning, visiting the poor -- [and then] in the presence of the rich and famous -- you might see a different person.

"One hello for the rich, a goodbye for the poor.

"Even a special handshake for the haves and the have nots.

 

Joe Frazier: Where does he rank among all-time heavyweights?

Question_640
Writers from around the Tribune Co. weigh in on boxing great Joe Frazier, who died Monday at age 67 after a brief battle with liver cancer. Check back throughout the day for more responses and join the discussion with a comment of your own.

Barry Stavro, Los Angeles Times

Frazier's greatness and immortality can be measured easily because you can't say Ali without saying Frazier, any more than you could say Dempsey without Tunney or Robinson without La Motta.

Frazier gave Ali the two worst beatings The Greatest suffered in his prime. In their first epic bout in 1971 Frazier, with one of the great left hooks in history, dumped Ali on the canvas in the 15th round to give Ali his first loss. Their third bout, "The Thrilla in Manila," in 1975 was the most punishing long fight I ever saw. Ali won it -- barely.

Both men continued to fight afterward but they weren't any good in the ring because they'd used up all their talent fighting each other. "Fight of the Century" is now a cliche in boxing, but Frazier and Ali genuinely produced two of them.

Where does Frazier rank? Easily among the best heavyweight champs of the modern era: along with Ali, Foreman, Liston and Tyson.

RELATED:

Photos: Joe Frazier through the years

Frazier vs. Ali: Fight of the century [Video]

Floyd Mayweather offers to pay for Joe Frazier's funeral

Photo: Joe Frazier, left, hits Muhammad Ali during the 15th round of their heavyweight title fight at New York's Madison Square Garden in 1971. Credit: Associated Press

Pac-12 basketball: Who is the conference favorite?

A group of reporters who cover Pacific 12 Conference schools, including The Times' UCLA beat writer Ben Bolch, recently gathered for a virtual roundtable to discuss pertinent issues as the college basketball season opens this week:

Pac-12 logoTrue or false: The Pac-12 is destined for a disappointing season after losing so much talent to the NBA.

Bolch: True. It's another hodgepodge of mediocrity, with no team poised to earn the national spotlight for a third consecutive season. Even the conference favorites have severe flaws that likely will be exposed during the NCAA Tournament. UCLA and coach Ben Howland have shaky wing players. Cal has a nice starting five but questionable depth. Arizona? Two words: Seattle Pacific.

Percy Allen, Seattle Times: False. I think 2010, when the Pac-10 sent two teams to the NCAA Tournament, was an aberration and won't occur again any time soon. Last season four conference teams made the 68-team tournament. I predict five will receive invitations in March, although four is a safer bet.

Bob Clark, The (Eugene, Ore.) Register-Guard: I'm saying false, on the basis that not much is expected, so with the bar set low, there's a chance for the league to exceed expectations.

Jeff Faraudo, Contra Costa Times: False. I think the league has lots of intrigue this season, partly because traditional powers UCLA, Arizona and Washington saw players defect to the pros. Cal has great experience, Oregon is coming on and there is plenty of young talent. I predict a great conference race, where no team avoids losing at least two or three times.

Doug Haller, Arizona Republic: False. There may not be a Final Four contender among the bunch, but 1-through-8 this conference should be pretty competitive. Outside of the big four, Oregon, Stanford and Oregon State are poised to make an upper-division push, and I wouldn't be surprised if Kevin O'Neill finds a way to keep USC relevant, even without injured point guard Jio Fontan.

Who's the conference favorite?



 

Jerry Sandusky was on the Penn State campus last week

Fabforum

A person familiar with Jerry Sandusky's relationship with Penn State says the former coach accused of child sex abuse maintained an office in Penn State football team's building, and was on campus a week ago working out.

The person, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk about the matter publicly, told the Associated Press that the ex-defensive coordinator worked out at the Lasch Football Building last week.

Sandusky also held summer football camps at a satellite campus for six years after he was banned from taking youths onto the university's main campus by the athletic director and the senior vice president.

Sandusky was prohibited from holding his youth sports camps on campus in 2002, the year a graduate student claimed to see him assault a child in a locker room shower. But Sandusky held the camps through his Sandusky Associates company from 2000 to 2008 at a satellite campus just outside Erie, Penn State Behrend spokesman Bill Gonda said.

"We provided the facilities for it," Gonda said. "There were no allegations, no complaints during his tenure here."

School spokeswoman Lisa Powers said Penn State Erie and Penn State Harrisburg provided facilities for Sandusky to run the camps.

The camp was aimed at students from fourth grade through high school.

Sandusky has been aware of the accusations against him for about three years and has maintained his innocence, his lawyer said.

RELATED:

Is Joe Paterno's reputation tarnished by the Sandusky scandal?

Bill Plaschke: In wake of Sandusky scandal, Joe Paterno needs to resign

Penn State's Joe Paterno saddened by allegations of sexual abuse by former coach

-- Houston Mitchell

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Photo: Jerry Sandusky is put in a police car in Bellefonte, Pa. on Saturday. Credit: Associated Press.

Penn State scandal: Joe Paterno news conference abruptly canceled

Paterno_640
Penn State Coach Joe Paterno's weekly Tuesday news conference was abruptly canceled as writers from all over the country descended on State College, Pa., in the wake of an alleged sex scandal involving former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky.

The news conference was scheduled for 12:20 p.m. EST, but reporters were told they would only be allowed to ask football-related questions regarding Saturday's home game against Nebraska.

[Updated at 9:22 a.m.: Paterno's son, Scott, told the Associated Press that his father was prepared to take questions concerning the scandal but that university President Graham Spanier's office decided instead to cancel the news conference.

It would have provided the press its first opportunity to ask Paterno what he knew about the allegations against Sandusky, who was indicted on charges of sexually abusing eight boys over 15 years. Paterno is not a target of the investigation, but the state police commissioner has said the legendary coach and other school officials should have done more to try to stop the suspected abuse.]

Also canceled was Paterno's regularly scheduled segment on the Big Ten coaches' conference call.

The pressure continues to mount on the school in the wake of the scandal. A Harrisburg Patriot-News editorial Tuesday called for Penn State President Graham Spanier to resign immediately and for Paterno to resign at the end of the season.

"Paterno should be allowed to finish out the year and retire with the honor and admiration he has earned since taking over as head coach in 1966," the editorial stated. "It might always be honor with an asterisk, admiration with a shake of the head. Joe will have to live with that."

RELATED:

Columnists nationwide slam Penn State response

Should Joe Paterno resign over the Sandusky scandal? [Poll]

Two Penn State officials face arraignment in Sandusky scandal

-- Chris Dufresne

chris.dufresne@latimes.com     

Photo: Joe Paterno. Credit: Jim Prisching / Associated Press

The True Measure of a Pass-Heavy Offense

The popular perception is that the Green Bay Packers are great because of Aaron Rodgers and the passing offense. And for good reason: Rodgers (and by extension, the entire Green Bay passing offense) is on a record-breaking pace. Rodgers leads the league in completion percentage, touchdowns, touchdown percentage, yards per attempt, adjusted net yards per attempt and adjusted yards per attempt. He’s averaging 11.2 adjusted yards per attempt, the highest mark after a team’s first eight games of any quarterback in over 50 years.

But did you know that the Packers rank 21st in pass attempts this season? I doubt that that jibes with your impression of the Packers as a passing team. The 2007 Patriots — the year Tom Brady carved up opposing defenses nearly every week — barely passed more frequently than the average team that season. The 1999 Rams won the Super Bowl and earned the nickname the Greatest Show on Turf, as Kurt Warner, Marshall Faulk, Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt led one of the great  passing attacks in football history. That year, the Rams ranked 15th in the league in rush attempts and 19th in pass attempts.

In all of these cases, the statistics did not tell the true story. Those teams passed so successfully that they frequently found themselves in run-favorable situations. Every N.F.L. fan knows that trailing teams tend to pass more frequently than winning teams, and the disparity is stronger the larger the lead or deficit. For example, teams this season are passing on 74 percent of plays when trailing by 17 to 24 points, but that  drops to 44 percent when leading by such a margin. How a game unfolds has a large impact on the ultimate run/pass ratio of a team. To truly understand a team’s offensive philosophy, you need to take into account the scoring flow of the game.

I looked at the play-by-play logs of every game this season, courtesy of Footballguys.com. I excluded all plays in which a team was winning or losing by over 24 points because those plays reveal little about a team’s gameplan (for example, the Colts called 23 pass plays and 23 runs in their 62-7 loss to the Saints; plays in those types of games are counted, but only until the games get out of hand). I also decided to exclude all rushing plays where the runner was the quarterback; many of those plays were probably designed pass plays, but others were designed runs or draws, along with quarterback sneaks and kneeldowns.

Finally, I noted how much the team with the ball was leading or trailing by at the start of each play; that will help to give us a general sense of whether it is a passing or running situation. For example, when the Lions came back from a 20-point deficit against the Vikings, the average scoring margin on Detroit plays was -8.5; not surprisingly, the Lions passed on 74 percent of plays in that game (passing plays include sacks). This past weekend, the Texans jumped out to an early lead against the Browns. Houston’s average offensive play was run with a 14.3-point lead; the Texans ran on 37 of 60 plays (this excludes the Matt Schaub touchdown run and his two kneeldowns at the end of the game). Both Arian Foster and Ben Tate rushed for over 100 yards.

The table below shows the average scoring margin for each “play” by each team this season. Remember, the scoring margin excludes plays where a team has a lead of 25 points or more or trails by such a  margin; it also excludes plays that end with the quarterback running. The table will loosely correlate with team strength, but there are several reasons (outside of the scope of this article) to hesitate before using these numbers as a sort of power ranking:

[Note: All statistics in this article are from before the Monday Night Football game between the Bears and Eagles.]

As you’d expect, the Packers have been in front most of the time this season. That helps  explain why they haven’t passed as frequently as you might think. As you can see, they rank just 13th in percentage of plays that were called passes:

So we know teams like the Steelers and the Packers have played with large leads, and pass more frequently than a team like the Texans. But how would we compare the 49ers to the Falcons? Or the Patriots to the Redskins? We need to convert “margin” and “pass percentage” to equivalent units. We can do that by looking at each team’s standard deviation in each category.

As you may recall from math class, standard deviation measures how spread out the observations are in a particular set of data. The actual standard deviations aren’t all that interesting here, but the key is that by finding out how far from average (as measured by standard deviation) each team is in each category, we can get a true sense of offensive philosophy. On average, the 32 teams ran offensive plays while trailing by 1.2 points (we would expect the average to be negative, because teams kick off after a touchdown or field goal).

The Texans were 1.8 standard deviations above average in the scoring margin category during Houston’s average play; the Packers were 1.7 standard deviations above average, the Steelers 1.6, and so on. At the bottom of the list, of course, would be the Rams at -1.9 standard deviations from the average (taking the standard deviation won’t change the order of the list; it simply measures the variance in the group.)

What about in the pass percentage category? The average team passed on 61 percent of its plays, using the definition of plays from this article. The Bucs were 1.5 standard deviations above average in percentage of plays that were passed; the Texans were -2.1 standard deviations from the average.

Once we have the “margin” category in the same unit as the “pass percentage” category, the rest of the math is easy. If a team has a low margin, that means it has frequently played from behind. If it is high in the pass percentage category, that means it tends to pass often. To measure how frequently a team passes after accounting for game situation, we simply add the standard deviation number in the margin category to the pass percentage standard deviation number.

The table below presents the results. After the team name, the first two columns are just the earlier data reprinted. The next two columns show how many standard deviations above or below average each team was in scoring margin and percentage of passes called. Finally, the last column shows how pass-heavy the offense truly is, after adjusting for average scoring margin.

Lo and behold, the Packers now look to be the most pass-happy team in the league. The Steelers and the Patriots are also in the top four, and the Saints are not far behind. Not surprisingly, the Jaguars and Chiefs lead the way when it comes to run-heavy offenses, regardless of situation. The Jets have actually been relatively run-heavy this season, but their game situation (trailing often) has somewhat distorted the numbers.

Perhaps the most interesting team? The Ravens. A couple of weeks ago, Terrell Suggs said the Ravens needed to pass less and run more; it’s hard to disagree with him. The Ravens have been extremely pass-heavy this season, once you factor in the game situation. Consider that against the Rams, when Baltimore raced out to a 21-0 lead before the first quarter ended, Joe Flacco threw 48 passes while the running backs had just 17 carries. Suggs’s comments came after the Jaguars loss, when Baltimore had 41 dropbacks against just 12 rushes in a game that was close throughout. Against the Steelers this weekend, Baltimore called 50 passing plays despite leading for a majority of the game.

Chase Stuart is a contributor to SmartFootball.com, Footballguys.com and Pro-Football-Reference.com. 

The Case for Not Paying Matt Forte

Brian Burke of Advanced NFL Stats had a suggestion for the Titans in August, when the team was locked in a contract dispute with running back Chris Johnson: “Take the $12 million per year, put it into your offensive line, and draft a couple 4th round RBs. You’ll thank me later.”

The free advice was ignored, and Tennessee appeared to make an expensive mistake by signing Johnson to a contract extension. Johnson has rushed for a measly 366 yards, averaging 3.0 yards per carry.

Now Burke has turned his attention to Matt Forte and “whether the Bears are better off locking him up for 6 years and $20 million guaranteed or spending that money elsewhere.” The advice is the same:

On one hand, Forte is having a career season as the epicenter of the Bears offense. On the other hand, he’ll be a 26-year old running back next season.

CJ2k, or CJ0.7k as he might be better known after this season, has highlighted the folly of handing over 10% of a team’s cap space to single RB. That’s just too many eggs in one basket for a position that simply does not drive wins and losses except in rare instances.

We don’t need to look at Chris Johnson or DeAngelo Williams to see the danger of giving huge guaranteed contracts to RBs. We only have to look at Forte himself. As we’ve seen with several RBs, they can go from thermonuclear hot one year to cold as a fish the next, even without injuries or switching teams, and Forte is no exception.

Forte went from one of the top performing RBs in 2008 to one of the worst in 2009. He then had a mediocre year in 2010, the year CHI made it to the NFC Championship Game. And now he’s back on top in 2011. Forte already had a Chris-Johnson-in-2011-like season in ’09, and there’s no reason he won’t do it again. In ’09, Forte gained 905 yards on 252 carries for a 3.6 YPC. He fumbled 6 times.

I know what you’re saying. The team around him was bad. His offensive line played awful. They didn’t “use him right.” He had some bad fumble luck. But that’s exactly my point. RB performance is highly variable and greatly dependent on offensive lines.

The Bears would be much better off franchise-tagging Forte and then moving on with a younger, cheaper back. That might seem unfair, but Forte still pockets millions of dollars, and with any luck will make a few million more down the road. Some might argue that there is value in “keeping him happy,” but I’m not so sure there is an reliable link between large guaranteed contracts and future performance. Just ask the Titans.

Extra point Is the Forte case different than the Johnson one? And could the Bears withstand a lengthy holdout from Forte before next season?

Should Joe Paterno resign over the Sandusky scandal? [Poll]

Joe Paterno's reputation has taken quite a hit in the last 24 hours, with many people calling for him to step down as Penn State football coach in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky scandal.

As our own Bill Plaschke wrote:

A day after witnessing the assault, [graduate assistant coach Mike] McQueary drove to Paterno's home and told him what he had seen. Paterno then informed [Penn State Athletic Director Tim] Curley of the incident.

And then, nothing.

Nearly two weeks after the incident, Curley and [school vice-president Gary] Schultz met with Sandusky and told him he could no longer bring any Second Mile children onto the campus. But the officials did not alert the police, and Sandusky continued to work as a welcomed member of the Penn State football family.

Curley and Schultz resigned Sunday while Paterno issued a statement.

"If this is true, we were all fooled, along with scores of professionals trained in such things," read part of the statement. "While I did what I was supposed to do with the one charge brought to my attention, like anyone else involved, I can't help but be deeply saddened these matters are alleged to have occurred."

Paterno was fooled? He was informed that a former longtime assistant coach was "behaving inappropriately" while taking a shower with a boy in his locker room. Surely he couldn't have been less fooled.

Paterno did what he was supposed to do? No, as the most powerful and influential figure on the Penn State campus, he should have done more. ...

At some point after informing the athletic director of the report, Paterno should have gone to Curley and said, "If you don't do something, I will."

Although this is not a gesture mandated by state law or school handbook, it is a fact of simple humanity.

"If you don't do something, I will," is a statement that now needs to be directed at the coach by the school's board of trustees.

For the sake of a university whose continued association with him would damage its success and stain its honor, if Joe Paterno doesn't quit, they should fire him.

So, should he step down? Vote now and let us know what you think.

ALSO:

Is Joe Paterno's reputation tarnished by the Sandusky scandal?

Ex-Penn State assistant football coach accused of sexual abuse

No. 1 LSU wins 'Game of the Century' — but which century is it?

-- Houston Mitchell



Joe Frazier vs. Muhammad Ali: Fight of the century [Video]

Boxing legend Joe Frazier died Monday of liver cancer at age 67. He was a heavyweight champion during the golden age of heavyweight boxing in the 1970s.

Smokin' Joe became the first fighter to defeat Muhammad Ali when they faced off in 1971 in the first of three epic battles. "That was the greatest thing that ever happened in my life," said Frazier, who knocked Ali to the canvas in the 15th round.

Here's how Bill Dwyre described the "fight of the century" in his tribute to Frazier in Tuesday's Times:

They met for the first time on March 8, 1971, in New York's Madison Square Garden, with each fighter guaranteed $2.5 million. Ali, then 31-0, had been stripped of his heavyweight titles when, as Cassius Clay, he refused to be inducted into the military after being drafted for the Vietnam War. Frazier, at 26-0, had captured the title of undisputed heavyweight champion in 1970 with a technical knockout of Jimmy Ellis.

It was a brutal battle, rated by many as the "fight of the century" and considered the best boxing match of all time at any weight. When Frazier knocked Ali down in the 15th and final round and won on points, both received rave reviews for their performances. Both also went immediately to the hospital.

Take a moment today to watch an amazing bout from a time when the top boxers would actually get in the ring and fight each other.

RELATED:

Photos: Joe Frazier through the years

Former boxing champion Joe Frazier has liver cancer

-- Chuck Schilken

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Days when Joe Frazier and Muhammad Ali were kings of the ring are long gone


The era of Joe Frazier was one when the heavyweight champion of the world really was THE champion of the world. The title was considered 'the richest prize in sport' and as such, brought with it not just monetary riches, but global recognition.


The heavyweight champion was an iconic figure in American life. Frazier fought in arguably the greatest era of heavyweight boxing: there were challenges to pit yourself against, with the greatest to grow against. Frazier was just as responsible for Ali's name, as George Foreman was for the other two renowned boxers.


Frazier, Foreman and Muhammad Ali – then Cassius Clay - had all triumphed as gold medallists at successive Olympic Games. It meant a conveyor belt of styles and characters looking to be the dominant alpha male in an American culture beginning to open up to liberalism. The trio – along with the likes of Ken Norton, and later Larry Holmes – had different blood. The blood of pure warriors.


Compare that to the current era, with the likes of Britain's own Audley Harrison emerging as a gold medallist from the Games, yet hapless in the ring. The heavyweights of today bare no comparison to the generation which bestrode the world.


Today, there isn't an American heavyweight worthy of comparison to any of the great American heavyweights of the late 60s and 70s. The titles are dominated by two Ukrainians by the name of Klitschko, and the big American athletes have long since moved into basketball and American Football, where they do not have to get hit in the face for a living.


The proliferation of titles, the dilution of what being 'a world champion' means has inured a global public to all but the biggest fights in modern boxing. Time was when the entire planet knew the name of the world heavyweight champion.


The Trilogy between Ali and Frazier captured the entire world's imagination at a time when television was being more widespread, and the characters in the sport were embraced as super-heroes. Boxing does not hold such standing today, either in the media, or in the public consciousness.


But Frazier's era was a special one, there is no doubt about that. Perhaps we are seeing in the ravages of certain of those individuals now in their sixties, and in the late, great Frazier, that what they gave then, cost them later in life.


The iconic images of that era will remain forever. And boy, were they men's men. RIP Joe.



Comment

Comment