Month: August 2003

The bottom fell out for the Manassas High School football team last Friday as Mitchell whipped them 81-0.

And the season has just begun. Only 18 players, barely half the team, showed up for practice Monday on the old baseball outfield that serves as the school’s football field. The barren infield is hard as concrete. There isn’t a goalpost or yardline marker in sight.

“I just want you to know I appreciate you all coming out here to practice,” Coach Danny Pogue tells his players before leading them in a prayer and splitting them up into groups by position. The backs work on footwork and pitchouts. The receivers run pass patterns over the remnants of second base. The linemen Ñ all three of them Ñ take turns blocking each other.

Manassas, which opened in 1899, has heart, guts, and history. Entertainer Isaac Hayes and school board member Sara Lewis are among its distinguished graduates. But it has a serious numbers problem both on the football field and in the classrooms, with a total enrollment of about 350 students.

For incoming schools superintendent Carol Johnson and the school board, the looming question is whether to close Manassas or try to save it by building a new school. On the one hand, Manassas is just minutes from downtown, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, and the government-subsidized Hope Six housing development that will soon replace the demolished public-housing projects on Danny Thomas. On the other hand, it is directly across the road from a long-abandoned Firestone factory and acres of buckling concrete and an industrial wasteland.

Assistant principal Glen Chapman has been at Manassas for 29 years. But even when he arrived, the school had only 800 students, including middle-schoolers. At its peak, Manassas had nearly 2,000 students who filled the current building as well as an annex torn down several years ago. Students look at the pictures of the old campus in Chapman’s office and barely recognize their school.

“Kids in this neighborhood need this school,” he says. “Without it they would be lost. I would rather see them whittle down the mega-schools. I know most of the kids here by name already.”

Manassas loses students to other city schools with more courses and extracurricular activities, but it has little advantages too. Last week a girl asked Chapman how to get to a class. Instead of giving her directions, he walked her there himself.

“I would hate to see this school closed,” he says. “There is a point where you have to close a school, but I don’t know what it is.”

What he does know is that Manassas has clout on the school board and alumni chapters in New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. His hope is that the board will follow through on plans to build a new school, which could cost $25 million or more.

“A few years ago, Mitchell High School was in the same boat we are, but they got a new building and have 1,200 kids now,” he says. He admits, however, that the growth came at the expense of older schools like Westside.

Westside lost 71-0 to Carver last week. “When we play Westside,” Chapman says half-joking, “it ought to be a good game.”

In the football locker room, Coach Pogue isn’t laughing. His team was 1-9 in each of the last two seasons and had not won in 30 outings before that. Handsome, young, and physically fit, Pogue doubles as waterboy and equipment manager. On the Saturday after the 81-0 loss, he called a practice, but only eight boys showed up.

“After 81-0, what can you say?” he asks. “They’re getting beat up. If the game is 85 percent mental, then these kids are getting beat up. I think we could be a real good team if our kids would accept the fact of having a program.”

Manassas has some athletes, just not enough of them. The running backs are husky and run through drills with agility and speed. But they have to play the entire game. Sophomore quarterback Derrick Vaughn, 6-2 and 195 pounds, was a star on his undefeated middle-school team and is used to being on the other end of lopsided games.

“No sir, I hope it don’t happen again,” he says with a smile as he lofts 45-yard spirals. “I couldn’t go to sleep after that loss.”

His teammates who have showed up for practice are equally determined.

“The people who ain’t here might be discouraged,” says a smiling Alexie Smith.

Assistant coach Bo Phillips exhorts them to stay positive.

“We’re going to turn it around!” he shouts.

“Hope so,” comes a tentative voice from the back of the little huddle.

“Ain’t no hopin’ about it,” Phillips snaps. “We’re going to do it. You’re going to see a different ballclub, I guarantee it. You’re going to be proud to be Manassas.”

HELMETS ON

The last time the University of Memphis met Tennessee Tech on the gridirion, the Tigers edged the Golden Eagles 12-6. The Memphis touchdowns were scored by Dave Casinelli (the first of 11 he’d score that season) and former Central High standout Russ Vollmer. All three extra points were missed. The year was 1962, home field was Crump Stadium, and those Tigers had to muster all their strength to avoid looking a week ahead to their showdown with the third-ranked Ole Miss Rebels.

Fast forward to this Saturday, when Memphis will again open a season at home against I-AA Tennessee Tech and — again — have to avoid looking a week ahead to a nationally televised showdown with the Ole Miss Rebels (and their star quarterback, Eli Manning). The Tiger faithful may appear a little sleepy-eyed as they tailgate in the late-August heat. After all, this season’s opener won’t make anyone forget recent curtain-raisers against Ole Miss, Mississippi State, or Miami. And while it affords the U of M an opportunity to get the kinks out before facing the Rebs, keep in mind last year’s squad put a Nebraska on Murray State (52-6), only to drop nine of their next eleven.

A few areas Tiger Nation will be watching as the 2003 season unfolds:

¥ D as in Defense . . . and Dunn. The 2002 Tigers gave up 362.8 yards per game and yielded an average of 27 points per contest (their most in four years). For any chance at the program’s first .500 season since 1994 (and with it, precious bowl eligibility), these numbers are going to have to drop. The unit just may be in the right hands, as Joe Lee Dunn returns to Memphis after 12 years in the SEC (most recently at Mississippi State). Unlike West’s awkward season under Rip Scherer in 2000, this defensive coordinator doesn’t bring any head-coaching aspirations to the Tiger sideline. Dunn knows his job, and understands the need for improvement. An experienced group of linebackers — Shaka Hill, Greg Harper, and Coot Terry have earned a combined 8 letters — should be complemented by improved play on the corners (emerging star O.C. Collins and juco transfer Lee Hayes will be worth watching). The squad’s best athlete may well be senior Derrick Ballard, who has moved from outside linebacker to strong safety. If Dunn’s D can shave a touchdown off that 2002 scoring average, this could be a fun season.

¥ D as in . . . DeAngelo. Memphis will suit up a record-breaking quarterback, but I know where my eyes will be when the Tigers have the ball. Sophomore DeAngelo Williams may be undersized by NFL standards (only 175 pounds), but his quickness and breakaway skill could be an explosive asset in Conference USA. Having shared tailback duties with Dante Brown last season, Williams must rise to a leadership position, even as a sophomore. Mark this down: the more Williams is on the field, the better the Tigers’ chances. If the U of M is forced into comeback (read: passing) mode early, things could get ugly. If Williams gets 200 carries this fall, the Tigers will be a .500 team.

¥ D as in . . . Danny. Junior quarterback Danny Wimprine will be going places no Memphis passer has ever gone before. With 33 pass attempts, 5 completions, and 163 yards, Wimprine will own every major passing record in the U of M book, and he’ll have almost two seasons to build on the standards. Before he’s through, he’ll probably double the second-most touchdown passes in school history (31 by Steve Matthews). As impressive as the numbers are, we still have to see Wimprine add to the most impressive quarterback statistic of them all: wins.

¥ D as in . . . dependable? Football’s a simple game to analyze, really. If your team gets solid line play, it wins. If it can’t push the other team back, it doesn’t win. Memphis must replace four members of its offensive line. On the surface this may seem to be an Achilles heel of sorts, but remember that last year’s line pushed the squad to all of three wins. Junior guard Andrew Handy (6’3”, 285) started nine games in 2002 and will be the leader of this green quintet. All five juniors, the line averages 277 pounds per man, relatively light by Division I-A standards. They could make the difference between a winning and losing season.

By the way, those ‘62 Tigers? They lost to Ole Miss, but proceeded to win their next seven games (outscoring their opponents 242-40) to finish 8-1 and ranked 17th in the country. Maybe the U of M schedule-makers know something we don’t.

THE ONLY-CASE SCENARIO

I have a friend who is betting money that George W. Bush will not be the Republican nominee for president in 2004. He believes that the American electorate will finally recognize that Bush has deceived them about Iraq and led the nation into a hopeless guerilla war that we cannot “win” in any meaningful sense, leaving young American soldiers to be picked off one by one in a desert far away.

My friend also believes that the American electorate will finally start blaming Bush for the sluggish economy, for joblessness, and for a deficit that is preemptively bankrupting our children and grandchildren. My friend believes that Bush will soon plummet in the polls and that the behind-the-scenes Republicans who really choose the party’s presidential candidate will be forced to nominate someone who actually possesses both brains and integrity. My friend at one point declared that the 2004 election will be between Republican Colin Powell and Democrat Wesley Clark.

I envy my friend his childlike ability to believe that his wishes can come true. And I can only smile at his confidence in the American voter.

I, on the other hand, lack both hope and confidence. I foresee a different scenario–one that ends with Bush getting another four years in the White House and the United States being saddled with 1) a generation of federal judges who care nothing about defending our civil rights, 2) a Congress that cares nothing about protecting the poor from the rapaciousness of the rich, and 3) a White House that cares nothing about engaging the rest of the world effectively in our foreign policy.

Here’s what I think will happen over the next 14 months:

First, the American economy will rebound, as it always does after a downturn, regardless of who is president. Presidents have almost no effect on the economy. I don’t blame Bush for the current recession or for current unemployment. Nor will I credit him for the next upturn in the economy. But his timing is just right. We’re about to burst out of the slump we’ve been in–if only because companies have laid off about all the employees they can and have depleted their inventories are far as they need to, so it’s time things picked up. Bush, of course, will take credit for the economic rebound. The American people aren’t stupid enough to buy it, I don’t think, but the rebound will remove the economy as the strongest issue for the Democrats next year. Advantage Bush.

Second, there will be another terrorist attack somewhere in the United States. There is bound to be. There have always been terrorist attacks, and there will be more. But 9/11 created a kind of triphammer paranoia among Americans, so the next attack–whether a downed airliner or a bombed building or a madman with a machine gun in Grand Central Station–will trigger a national shudder and screech, and the Republicans, as they always do, will fuel the fear in order to exploit it, because Republicans can talk tougher than Democrats. Republicans talk missiles, police, and revenge; Democrats talk negotiations, United Nations, and detente. The American electorate understands missiles, police, and revenge better. Advantage Bush.

Third, Iraq will slowly recede into the inside pages of our newspapers and into the final twelve minutes of our newscasts, much as Afghanistan has already. This will happen because the American media, as has often been noted, cannot stay with a subject for more than a few months without needing to move on, lest they appear to be in reruns. If there is a terrorist attack on U.S. soil, Iraq will retreat even faster into oblivion. At some point, Bush may even declare victory there, pull out our troops, and let the faux government council we’ve installed there deal with the terrorists who are streaming over the borders toward Baghdad. Our special ops people in Iraq will probably even find Saddam himself (and almost certainly will find a dump of unconventional weapons, even if they have to plant them there themselves), giving Bush the excuse he needs to say, “We won! I was right! Now we can get out!” If Bush can get Colin Powell to talk the U.N. into sending other nations’ troops to Iraq in our place, the cut-and-run scheme will go even smoother.

Whatever happens, the American public’s inability to focus on a single news story for very long unless it involves O.J. Simpson or Jennifer Lopez will take the troubles in Iraq off the table during the next election, as long as no more than one or two American boys dies there each day. Already, one dead American soldier a day is relegated to the inside pages of our newspapers, and it is certain that Rumsfeld and the field commanders will keep our boys behind the sandbags as the election approaches so that the death toll does not reach critical mass. Even if things are still awful in Iraq in the fall of 2004, the Republicans will generate another crisis somewhere else, to take attention away from Baghdad. (Look to Indonesia, the next source of real Islamic terrorism, or the ever-ready North Korea. A trumped-up little war we can win in the Philippines or Bali would serve Bush well.) In any case, Iraq will no longer be the big issue come November 2004. Advantage Bush.

Fourth, the Republicans will use their convention in New York City on the anniversary of 9/11 to leverage their perceived strength in the tough-on-terror game.

Fifth, the Democrats will nominate somebody so boring or so shrill that he will seem even less presidential than the Shrub himself.

Sixth, the American electorate–especially the thoughtful Left–will be so tired and disgusted with it all that they will simply stay home on election day, leaving the field to the neoconservative fanatics, who, bless their hearts, do go out and vote.

Advantage Bush. Advantage Bush. Advantage Bush.

Finally, it’s clear that the neocons behind the throne will never nominate a person with brains and integrity, because such a person–a Colin Powell, a John McCain, an Olympia Snowe–would be beyond their control. For the invisible Republican power structure, it’s not about being in ostensible power themselves so much as having control over those who seem to be in power. We all know that Dick Cheney and Karl Rove and the moneyed men behind them pull George W. Bush’s strings. Does anybody really think Arnold Schwarzenegger has a single policy to call his own? He’s simply Ronald Reagan with an accent–someone to speak the lines written for him. George W. is perfect in that role, even if he can’t pronounce “nuclear.”

So I’m sorry, my friend, Bush will be the nominee, and he will win. The only consolation is that sooner or later–probably by 2008–the American public will see the moral bankruptcy, not to mention the literal fiscal bankruptcy, that the W generation in the White House has led us to, and they will elect a good and decent Democrat along the lines of Jimmy Carter.

But by then, given what will be left of our reputation in the world and our liberties in the courts, it may be too late.