Tuesday, January 29, 2008


Curtis was no angel, most insiders knew that, and we also were aware of the problems he was having in his marriage, and with his academics. You just heard one side of the story from Curtis's wife, and you will never have a chance to hear Curtis's side of the story. As I said Curtis was no angel, but there is also a lot more to the story.

Williams could certainly play. The question was: Why was the UW allowing him to?

Society in general usually throws kids like Curtis into the scrap heap. Despite his shortcomings he kept trying, and when Neuheisel took over he had straightened his life out enough to be able to contribute to the team. Right, or wrong that straightening out happened after his wife moved to Alaska and he was able to concentrate completely on academics, and football.

When you accept students, or recruit athletes to an institution you are taking them on as human beings. They all come with baggage, some more than others. As educators, coaches, and counselors you try your best assist them in becoming the best people they can be in their four to five year stay.

If you think athletes are the only students at UW who get second and third chances think again. Same thing with the overloaded court system. You can tell a story any way you want, but the story in the Times is far from complete.

The one thing about athletics is that some who are recruited are ill equipped to deal with the responsibility that comes with being a student athlete. Anthony Kelley was also one of those kids, he should never have been admitted to a school like Washington. Athletics were his saving grace, and while at Washington he had the chance to blossom into one of the better academic success stories ever associated with the team.

As far as UW athletes are concerned, or athletes in general there are way more success stories than there are failures. That of course does not make as interesting reading as the train wrecks do. The Times is focusing on the bad associated with the 2000 team, but what about all the success stories which by the way make up over 90% of the team?

The point is when you give kids from disadvantaged backgrounds the chance to succeed, and they do succeed, you are helping society in general. Athletics gives a lot of these kids the only chance they will ever have.

Curtis was no angel, but he was starting to get it before he was injured, he was back on the right track. Athletics gave him the chance to make something out of his life, and begin the journey toward becoming a better person.

On a side note....Curtis continued to work for his degree from his wheelchair till the day he died. In the end Curtis was one of those success stories.


t9odawg said...

The Times should be included in the same rack as "The Star" and the "National Enquirer" if they are going to resort this type of "journalism" to sell papers. It's all old news rehashed as "investigative" reporting. I think the short term gains in readership will offset by the long term losses in advertising revenue because of the volume of Husky fans and alumni in the Seattle area. Advertisers pay the bills. I worked at a newspaper for a couple of years and we had enough equiptment redundancy to always get a paper out, it might be late but it got out because advertisers don't pay for ads that don't get published.

8 to 10 years after the fact the people in question aren't being given credit for turning their lives around, as some did, but they are only being hammered for their misdeeds.

The good citizens on that team are being trashed by association and there were some great people on that team

John Berkowitz said...

So true T90....the times had tha chaoice to package it any way they wanted. In my opinion they took the cheap route of tabloid journalism.