NFL College Sports

I noted this morning that the Chicago Sun-Times had a report on its front page about Husain Mahmoud, who was recently fired from his job as the baseball coach at Chicago State University.

The front-page story says "a Sun-Times examination" uncovered that Mahmoud had lied on his resume, but in reality, that "examination" consisted of reading a couple of blogs that uncovered the story weeks ago.

The blogs Babes Love Baseball and The College Baseball Blog reported in mid-June that Mahmoud had fabricated details like having been drafted by the Cincinnati Reds and having led a defunct football league in passing. The Sun-Times story basically rehashes those blog posts, without noting that the blogs reported the news first.

Obviously, the Sun-Times should have credited the blogs in question. When the two blog posts were called to my attention, I e-mailed Sun-Times reporter Dave Newbart to ask for an explanation; if he replies I'll post his explanation here. UPDATE: His reply is below.

UPDATE: Sun-Times 'Scoop' Broken Weeks Ago at Babes Love Baseball, College Baseball Blog

This is the front page of today's Chicago Sun-Times, where the top story is the firing of Chicago State University baseball coach Husain Mahmoud. It's an embarrassing story, both to Mahmoud and the school.

Mahmoud was fired, the Sun-Times reports, after an examination of his resume found a multitude of false claims. Perhaps the most outrageous was that he played with the Indianapolis Capitals of the Continental Football League for five years, leading the league in passing in 1977 and 1978.

Slight problem: The league didn't exist in 1977 and 1978. It took me about two seconds to type "Continental Football League" into Google and find the league's Wikipedia entry, which reveals that it folded in 1969. Apparently that kind of background check would have been too much work for the folks at Chicago State.

I would imagine that most Duke students, alumni and fans reacted similarly to Kristin Butler, a writer for DU's The Chronicle, when they heard that North Carolina Central University awarded Crystal Mangum a degree in "police psychology".

Mangum is the woman that made national news for an entire summer when she accused a varying number of Duke lacrosse players -- eventually settling on three -- of raping her. These accusations ended up being false, and Mangum's character was tarnished, to say the least, when a number of different and unknown DNA samples were found in her underwear, in addition to her admissions that she frequently abused drugs.

But now, she is a graduate of North Carolina Central University. Which, as Butler points, out is a bit contradictory.

Unsurprisingly, those actions constitute flagrant violations of NCCU's honor code, which prohibits:
'lewd, indecent or obscene conduct (whether public or private)'; 'violation of the alcohol policy, including binge drinking, use or personal possession of alcoholic beverages by undergraduate students;' and the real doozie, 'knowingly making in public a false [oral or] written or printed statement with the intent to deceive and/or mislead or injure the character or reputation of another.'

NCCU also touts itself as a 'drug-free academic community,' a claim that's hard to take seriously when one of the college's own students admits to turning tricks and getting high four or five nights per week. In fact, Mangum had overdosed on flexeril and booze when she was first picked up by police the night of March 14.

Mangum is probably not the first, or most flagrant offender, of the honor code and drug policies that Central (or any other university, for that matter) adheres too. That does not make it any less excusable. The real stomach churner is that two of the accused lacrosse players failed to graduate on time because of the investigation and public spectacle that ensued.

H/T: B. Brown

After every Saturday night game in the Western Collegiate Hockey Association, the two competing teams line up for a handshake.

It's probably not much to most of the guys, but it is tradition and custom, having been a part of college hockey for many years. You show some respect to the opponent that you just battled for two nights, and you show respect to the sport.

In the minds of the North Dakota Fighting Sioux and Minnesota Gophers, it was simply another opportunity to fight. The handshake line starts at about 1:44 on this video, which comes from the FSN North telecast.



The fight that preceded the postgame handshake, along with the shenanigans in the handshake line, led to nearly 100 minutes of penalties. Two players, Darcy Zajac of North Dakota and Tony Lucia of Minnesota (son of Gopher coach Don Lucia) were given game disqualifications for fighting and will sit out their team's next game. Joe Finley of North Dakota and Blake Wheeler of Minnesota got into it in the line.

Oh, and that's not the only embarrassing moment from Saturday night's game. Read more after the jump.

Gerald Poindexter, the Virginia prosecutor who could file dog fighting charges against Falcons quarterback Michael Vick, said he's moving slowly in the Vick case because he's chastened by the three innocent Duke lacrosse players who were accused of raping a stripper at a team party:

Poindexter said he is reminded every day of Durham, North Carolina Prosecutor Mike Nyfong who went public with accusations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players that turned out to be untrue.

"I go back to that. He was pushed by politics. I'm not going to be driven by that," explained Poindexter.

Restraint is certainly a quality the Durham prosecutor lacked, but let's make one thing absolutely clear: Michael Vick is nothing like Duke lacrosse defendants Reade Seligmann, Colin Finnerty and David Evans (pictured). In fact, it would be hard to come up with two cases more different.

In the Duke lacrosse case, the only evidence was the eyewitness testimony of one accuser, who turned out to be lying. There was no physical evidence whatsoever against the three Duke defendants. In the Vick case, investigators have mounds of physical evidence: bloodstained carpets, treadmills, rape stands, restraints and the dogs themselves. The only thing we don't know yet is whether an accuser can provide eyewitness testimony against Vick.

Furthermore, in the Vick case, the defense strategy has been to keep completely silent: Vick won't say anything, even whether he'll be exonerated. (And that's fine, he's entitled to keep silent.) In the Duke lacrosse case, the defendants said they were innocent.

Finally, no one who knows Vick is coming forward to say, unequivocally, that there's no way he's involved in dog fighting. Some friends of Vick are saying privately that he's involved in dog fighting. In the Duke case, dozens of people who personally knew the defendants came forward to say there was no way they were rapists. That included friends, family, and the entire women's lacrosse team at Duke.

Is Vick still innocent until proven guilty? By law, of course he is. But don't mistake him for the demonstrably innocent Duke lacrosse players.

(Photo: Getty Images)