John Feinstein Is Wrong About Len Bias

[Reisen]

But 22 year olds routinely make bad judgments. You bring up Bobby Hurley, but I was actually thinking of Jason Williams when I read this article. God forbid his high speed motorcycle accident ended up being fatal, I cannot in a million years imagine someone making a heartless argument that he should be divested of his Duke honors. And frankly, I think the facts show that reckless driving is just as dangerous (if not more dangerous) than using cocaine. Bias lost his life because of a tragic mistake he made when he was young. I can't understand why anyone would want to punish him (or his family) more. And by the way, are we even having this argument if he was arrested for cocaine possession, received some type of sentence, and ended up being an All-Star for the Celtics? No, we are not. Somehow he is more blameworthy because he died.

I'm not buying this argument. This is a great thread, a great debate, and while I'm no Feinstein fan (far, far from it), I thought it was a great article. I guess Julio and Olympic Fan have my proxy here (and a few others).

But I don't think you can compare Jason Williams and Len Bias any more than you can compare Shane McConkey or Steve Irwin with Bias. Williams, McConkey, and Irwin were engaged in activities that were risky, but other than insurance or contractual clauses, were perfectly defensible (riding motorcycles, skiing off cliffs, and diving with stingrays are perfectly acceptable activities). No one would say their misfortune was from tragic character flaws, even if you question their judgement or risk taking.

Bias, on the other hand, along with, say, Ryan Dunn, was guilty not just of questionable judgement or engaging in risky behavior, but also of illicit activities that are illustrative of serious character flaws. I could have brought Steve Irwin to my kid's school and had him talk about swimming with stingrays, and while parents might not have wanted their kids to follow in his footsteps, I could be proud of the association. Dunn, on the other hand, I would probably not let talk to children about the rush of driving 180 mph drunk in a sportscar. Bias and celebrity coke habits (think Lindsay Lohan) fall in the latter camp, not the Williams/Hurley/McConkey/Irwin camp.

Your last point about redemption is an interesting one. Had Bias learned from his flaws and turned his life around, I agree, it could have been celebrated. Perhaps Dunn could have done likewise, and I suppose Lohan still might. But unfortunately, he never had that chance at redemption.

[Thurber Whyte]

Len Bias did not harm Maryland’s basketball program. Maryland’s basketball program was harmed by (1) the decision to fire Lefty Driesell and (2) the decision to hire Bob Wade.

The first had a plausible basis. His decision to have his players clean up Bias’s room involved poor judgment even though I believe it was motivated by a desire to protect Bias’s image rather than that of his program. However, as much as I love the Lefthander, if Maryland was not going to fire Lefty for his conduct during the Herman Veal investigation, I do not think it could plausibly take umbrage here. The program’s academic deficiencies were, much like Jim Valvano’s situation at N.C. State, merely a pretext to fire the coach during a period of adverse media scrutiny. Like N.C. State, the fact that many players did not graduate was certainly already known to the University if not an open secret. This was an era where fewer people cared if players at a state university graduated as long as the team won. In any event, things were kind of back to the same place by the end of Gary Williams’s tenure with Maryland’s APR problems and nobody really seemed to care then either.

The second was inexcusable. Bob Wade was the coach at Dunbar High School in Baltimore, which had produced many future NBA players and won the mythical high school national championship. Despite having never coached at the college level, a number of local politicians intervened to pressure the University to hire him, wanting an African American and local hero to have the position. Maryland’s leadership seemed happy to go along. When the feel good story imploded, these same people disappeared back into the woodwork and Bob Wade’s supporters concocted a storyline of how it was Bob Wade who had been betrayed by the University rather than the other way around. The result was that Maryland could never recruit in Baltimore City ever after and probably still cannot to this day.

Yes, Len Bias’s death triggered all this. Yes, his decision to use drugs was a bad one and indefensible. However, the resulting fiasco was the product of actions taken by many other people afterward and that is where the blame should lie. In law, this is difference between but for and proximate causation. Len Bias was not the proximate cause of Maryland’s problems. Indeed, he was several links removed in the causal chain.

Or he could have gone the way of Phil Ford and David Thompson (both of whom killed their career's but somehow survived it all). We will never know. But I fully believe we should remember Bias the great player with the great smile, fondly, and view his death as tragic.

He should absolutely be honored at Maryland in my opinion.

These are good examples. If we do not begrudge UNC and N.C. State celebrating the achievements of Phil Ford and David Thompson despite their chemical dependency and/or drug use and, particularly in the case of David Thompson speak of him with awe and reverence ourselves, and if we speak of sadness and regret for what it did to their lives after college basketball, and then it would seem odd to be more critical of Len Bias for dying as a result drug use.

[peteandpete]

I have no opinion as to who some lame Big Ten school should or should not honor. That's their business.

But please don't try to tell me Len Bias was some innocent victim of something a lot of people did.

Isiah Austin was an innocent victim of something beyond his control. Bobby Hurley's pro career was wrecked by a drunk driver. That was not his fault.

Len Bias died because he took an overdose of an illegal drug. Yeah, a lot of other people did coke and got away with it, but in my mind, that does not absolve his responsibility for his own death. There is a reason that cocaine is an illegal drug ... not only is it dangerous in itself, the use of cocaine has brought a lot of misery to this country. It's not some innocent pastime that he was engaged in.

And FWIW, OldphiKap and I will just have to disagree on Pete Rose and Joe Jackson. Two scumbags -- one of whom bet on games that he could influence ... the other took money to throw a world series. There's not place for them in the HOF.

A little harsh on Mr. Jackson considering his performance during the series and research into the scandal over the years.

[Olympic Fan]

A little harsh on Mr. Jackson considering his performance during the series and research into the scandal over the years.

Don't want to hijack the thread, but what research are you talking about?

Joe Jackson 1) admitted under oath in open court that he agreed to throw the series for $20,000; and 2) admitted that he received $5,000 for his role in the fix (all of the players were short-changed by the gamblers). Long after the fact -- and after he had spent the money -- he invented a story about trying to give the money back.

For a fairly comprehensive look at the facts and speculation as we know it, check out Rob Neyer's story for 2012:

https://espn.go.com/classic/s/2001/0730/1232950.html

Long before the court case and trial, Chicago newspaperman Hugh Fullerton -- assisted by Christy Mathewson --detailed the poor plays that Jackson made in left field (especially in Game 1). He hit significantly better in the games the fixers were trying to win than the games they were trying to lose.

Jackson is a cheating scumbag and should forever be banned from the Hall.

If you want to feel sorry for anybody, save your pity for Buck Weaver, who refused to participate in the fix, but was nevertheless banned for not ratting out his friends.

PS As I think about this, it's not really so off-topic ... the OP was about Feinstein arguing that Bias should not be honored by Maryland. He was unquestionably a great player, whose mistakes hurt the university badly. Isn't that the same argument for and against Jackson? He was a great player whose greed hurt baseball badly and forever tainted his name. As I said earlier, I don't care about Maryland so I don't care who they honor. But I do care about baseball and I would be furious if they ever honored Jackson (or Rose ... or any of the steroid cheaters).

[sagegrouse]

Len Bias did not harm Maryland’s basketball program. Maryland’s basketball program was harmed by (1) the decision to fire Lefty Driesell and (2) the decision to hire Bob Wade.

.

I don't disagree with your first sentence, but I have a different opinion on Lefty and Wade.

Lefty had to be fired -- he committed an arguably criminal act in sending his assistants to Bias's dorm room to find and suppress incriminating evidence. Lefty! Lefty! I know major hoops coaches are deities on campus, but you were a total idiot to act independent of law enforcement.

The proponent for Bob Wade, I thought, was the U. of Maryland president John B. Slaughter, who wanted an African-American in the HC position. He asked John Thompson Jr. whether another HS coach could succeed at the college level. (JT had no college experience when hired by Georgetown.) JT, of course, readily agreed that Bob Wade could succeed at Maryland. Gee, which basketball program in the Baltimore-Washington area stood to benefit if the Maryland program foundered?

[Wahoo2000]

It really seems to just come down to whether or not you believe excessive cocaine use to be a major character flaw or an indicator of poor moral terpitude (sp. pun intentional).

I can see both sides of the argument, but probably come down with those who believe Bias SHOULDN'T be honored. But then, I'm the kind of guy that thinks WAY too many athletes get honored. We should save the statues, et. al, for those that are in the top 1% BOTH on and off the field. If you don't have Jordan's skills and Lincoln's/Ghandi's humanitarianism, don't plan on getting recognition.

[Henderson]

Mickey Mantle died in 1995 two months after a liver transplant. Alcohol. Just saying.

[arnie]

Mickey Mantle died in 1995 two months after a liver transplant. Alcohol. Just saying.

At age 65 vs 22 or so for Bias. However, I don't really agree with Feinstein on this one. Despite this Board's overall dislike for John, I usually agree with him.

[ncexnyc]

The OP writes, “I don't know how you could look at what happened to Len Bias as anything other than a great tragedy, and would hope that if something similar ever happened to a Duke great, that we would respond only with compassion.”

I’m sorry, but what happened to Andre Dawkins with the loss of his sister is what I consider a great tragedy. What happened to Len Bias is a great waste, similar to Whitney Houston.

Should we feel compassion towards Len Bias just, because his drug use cost him his life? Had he lived and gone on to have a career in the NBA derailed by drug use, would we still be talking about compassion?

There’s a fine line between showing people compassion due to their circumstances and what constitutes enabling.

[Atlanta Duke]

It really seems to just come down to whether or not you believe excessive cocaine use to be a major character flaw or an indicator of poor moral terpitude (sp. pun intentional).

I can see both sides of the argument, but probably come down with those who believe Bias SHOULDN'T be honored. But then, I'm the kind of guy that thinks WAY too many athletes get honored. We should save the statues, et. al, for those that are in the top 1% BOTH on and off the field. If you don't have Jordan's skills and Lincoln's/Ghandi's humanitarianism, don't plan on getting recognition.

Which eliminates, among others, Jordan

[Tom B.]

These are good examples. If we do not begrudge UNC and N.C. State celebrating the achievements of Phil Ford and David Thompson despite their chemical dependency and/or drug use and, particularly in the case of David Thompson speak of him with awe and reverence ourselves, and if we speak of sadness and regret for what it did to their lives after college basketball, and then it would seem odd to be more critical of Len Bias for dying as a result drug use.

Heck, why even look to UNC and N.C. State? We don't begrudge Maryland for honoring John Lucas -- and apparently, neither does Feinstein. Lucas is in Maryland's Hall of Fame, so why should there be any issue if they want to honor Bias the same way? The only difference between them is dumb luck, as Lucas managed to live long enough despite his "major character flaw" that he eventually went through rehab.

What Feinstein's really saying is not that Bias should be blackballed for doing coke, but that he should be blackballed for dying and, as a result, having his drug use to become public in a way that was inconvenient for the university. So that's the dividing line between worthy and unworthy of being honored? Really? Win the game of Russian roulette and you're OK, but lose it and you're out? Sorry, I'm not buying it.

[Newton_14]

I have no opinion as to who some lame Big Ten school should or should not honor. That's their business.

But please don't try to tell me Len Bias was some innocent victim of something a lot of people did.


Len Bias died because he took an overdose of an illegal drug. Yeah, a lot of other people did coke and got away with it, but in my mind, that does not absolve his responsibility for his own death. There is a reason that cocaine is an illegal drug ... not only is it dangerous in itself, the use of cocaine has brought a lot of misery to this country. It's not some innocent pastime that he was engaged in

I never said Bias was either innocent, a victim, nor an innocent victim. I never said that anything absolves his responsibility for his own death. He was not an innocent victim of anything, and he alone owns the consequences for his reckless and stupid choice to ingest cocaine. That is an undisputed fact. I said he was a young kid who made a really bad choice one night to ingest a really bad drug, and he got burned. I did say he had bad influences in his life that played a role. There is zero proof that he was a frequent cocaine user (no prior arrests or run ins with the law for example) and I would argue that given his high level of play throughout his career, that points to the fact that at most he was an occasional user. No way a heavy user plays at that level. However, even as a casual user, my personal belief, is that yes, it is not showing good character to participate in that activity. I was simply trying to say that using cocaine that night, and dying, does not automatically translate into "dude was of low character". Sorry if I did not convey that properly in my post here or the other thread.

.

You say Bias wasn't immoral, and I'm not about to make the case that he was immoral to the core - I didn't know him that well. But, in my book, when he chose to use an illegal drug and when he chose to continue using it (to the extent that it was a voluntary choice, given the possibility of addiction), those were immoral decisions. That immoral decision damaged Maryland's program, devastated its fans, and led to Lefty's departure. That was significantly damaging to the program. Maryland made the mistake of hiring Bob Wade, who did further damage through his own immoral choices. But he wouldn't have had that opportunity if Bias hadn't died in the first place.

You may be right in that Bias might have cleaned up his act in the pros and found a way to redeem himself from his immoral choice, but we'll never know that, will we? That's part of what makes his death tragic.

So, does a player who makes an unredeemed immoral choice that leads directly to damage to his alma mater, and indirectly to even greater damage, deserve to be honored? That's what I'm not sure about. Of course, it's Maryland's choice, not mine.

I'm also curious about the timing of the move. My opinion is that it's a sop by the Maryland administration to fans objecting to the Big 10 move. Honor a part of their ACC past to shut some of those folks up, at least for a while.

Like above, I never said Bias wasn't immoral. At all. I said that ingesting cocaine that night and dying did not automatically indicate to us Bias was an immoral person. Good character/moral people make bad choices sometimes, especially in the teenage and early 20's years of there life. I could be wrong but with everything I have ever read about it, I am not convinced at all that Bias was a bad person of low character.

I also want to clearly state I do not at all condone the use of cocaine or any other illegal drug. Never will. It also bothers me that our society celebrates and applauds alcohol use, until someone has a problem with it and it ruins their career or life. Then we rip them if they are seen out an about having a beer or mixed drink. It's hypocrytical. I mentor addicts voluntarily often from a local halfway house/rehab center. They come from all walks of life. Most try hard to overcome. SOme make it, some don't. They face struggles brought on by their own choices and most realize that. Some are simply low character guys who will never overcome. Others are actually good people trying like heck to overcome an addiction they never intended to land in. A lot of those guys do beat it.

As for Bias, I will just always feel showing compassion is in order, being respectful of the dead is in order, and attacking his character is just of no value. He died so young we will never know how he would have turned out. I choose to honor his memory, his great acheivements, and view his death as tragic and a huge loss to a sport I love.

I fully respect those who view him differently. I just politely choose to agree to disagree.

My last post on the matter.

[Thurber Whyte]

I don't disagree with your first sentence, but I have a different opinion on Lefty and Wade.

Lefty had to be fired -- he committed an arguably criminal act in sending his assistants to Bias's dorm room to find and suppress incriminating evidence. Lefty! Lefty! I know major hoops coaches are deities on campus, but you were a total idiot to act independent of law enforcement.

The proponent for Bob Wade, I thought, was the U. of Maryland president John B. Slaughter, who wanted an African-American in the HC position. He asked John Thompson Jr. whether another HS coach could succeed at the college level. (JT had no college experience when hired by Georgetown.) JT, of course, readily agreed that Bob Wade could succeed at Maryland. Gee, which basketball program in the Baltimore-Washington area stood to benefit if the Maryland program foundered?

Yeah, there is that whole obstruction of justice dimension to Lefty’s actions. If I recall correctly, the subsequent law enforcement investigation was focused on who might have supplied the drugs that killed Bias, but Lefty might not have thought about that (or been thinking much at all). I agree that Slaughter championed the idea of Wade as coach. However, my recollection is that members of the legislature were also pushing the idea and that the idea originated with them or in the newspapers and a hive mind formed. Politics and University of Maryland System governance tend to merge together in this state. This was 30 years ago and no one was taking credit for the idea three years later so I am going by memory here, but Slaughter was definitely enthusiastic.

John Thompson may have also thought highly of Bob Wade because of relationships formed during recruiting. Two of Wade's best players, David Wingate and Reggie Williams ended up at Georgetown.

[-bdbd]

Feinstein states that Bias made poor judgements in terms of his associates, and implies that it wasn't Bias's first use of cocaine. Yes, his death was tragic, but no one held him down and forced cocaine up his nose or forced him to inject himself. And his death had pretty terrible consequences on the Maryland basketball program and the broader university as a whole.

I don't know that I agree with Feinstein here, but I think his argument is valid. Bias and Rose were both undone by their own choices, and while the heights they achieved while playing were spectacular, so were their falls, and the consequences to those around them. Does that mean that they shouldn't be honored? He argues yes.

I think I'm going to line up with JB here. It is certainly "defensible" to argue that a player who surrounded himself with bad characters, and who was reported to have been a frequent drug user, and who killed himself with those drugs, should NOT be held up as a good role model or similarly honored. But I cannot say that I was at all surprised by MD doing it, given their track record of insecurities, demands for respect, and even the retirement of a player's jersey who played for them for just one year (Francis).

But I also agree that JF's arguments ring as a bit insensitive, harsh and even arrogant. But as a very long-time resident of DC, and a sports reporter for the Wa. Post, and with a lot of experience reporting on the Terps, it isn't like he's some random schmo voicing an uninformed, loose opinion either...

[Tom B.]

But I cannot say that I was at all surprised by MD doing it, given their track record of insecurities, demands for respect, and even the retirement of a player's jersey who played for them for just one year (Francis).

A quibble, but I don't think Maryland "reitres" jerseys. They "honor" players by putting their numbers in the rafters, but the number isn't actually retired, and players who come along later can use them.