I'm not a person who gives a lot of money to charity.  I don't know what sounds worse; that sentence or the title of the column.  I do try to give as much as possible by doing different things that I think is charitable, but I'm not usually one to help out at the soup kitchen or try and raise money for a cause.  I'm not going to try and pretend I do because I don't want to be seen as something I'm not.  I can say if I had lots of money I would, but who knows then either.  Either way I guess I prioritize other expenditures and other time induced activities over charity work.  I guess I'm just not that philanthropic, so be it, at least I can admit it.  But guess what?  I donated to Haiti!

I donated to Haiti.  I don't know if it was really the earthquake and all the casualties that made me want to give or if it was the public response to the situation that I felt I should give, but either way, I did.  I don't want any praise though.  I don't want any good job, that was nice of you, or any sort of statement projected towards me for doing a good deed, that I'm still not sure why I actually did it.  Why should I be complimented?  Because for one time in my life I went beyond my normal ways and donated money to help the needy?  Does someone like me actually deserve a compliment?  Now let's get this straight.  I'm not a bad person by any means.  I constantly am helping people in various sorts of ways.  Usually it's fixing computer problems or finding out information for people.  Friends, family, and acquaintances know that if they contact me for anything I will try my hardest to do whatever I can for them.  Even when I do that sort of "charitable" work I don't want any money or praise.  I like knowing I did something nice for someone.  I fixed a computer problem that's easy for me to do, but very complex for the person who needed help.  I like knowing that I'm needed.

This is why I don't think we should be praising these athletes for their charity work towards Haiti.  One day Gilbert Arenas is a bad person for being stupid and bringing an unloaded gun with him to the arena and the next day he's Pope Gilbert John Arenas the Zero.  People flock out of the woodwork in times of catastrophe.  I saw a celebrity phone bank on Larry King last night and we've all seen the messages flying around Twitter and Facebook to text to donate $10 to Haiti.  This is great by all involved, but there doesn't need to be any praise.  Now I'm not pointing out all athletes.  I don't really know which ones do more charity work then others, but I do know that I've turned a blind eye to it if it's been in front of my face before.  I just hope we don't see these celebrities on television who are working for Haiti and immediately think that they are the greatest people in the world.  People put on facades and people are ruthless.  I'm sure some of these people are doing this for their own public image and don't care anything about charity.  Then again, I still don't know why I donated.

All I'm trying to say is let's look at the situation for what it is.  A catastrophe, a tragedy, a natural disaster, whatever you want to refer to it as, it's still an unsettling event that will take many years or decades to recuperate from.  We can be somewhat thankful for the celebrities who are trying to help or who have donated millions of dollars to try to help, but lets' not focus on that.  We love to focus on the people who are helping instead of the people who need help.  I just want people to focus on what needs to be done and not what has been donated.  Like I said above, I like knowing that I'm needed.  I like being a person who can help.  I didn't donate money because Jay-Z or Lebron James was doing it and I didn't donate any money because I felt it was the right thing to do.  Maybe I finally decided to donate money to charity because for once it felt like they really needed me.

I hate when I hear analysts or ex-coaches talk about how a loss for a team was a good thing; it came at the perfect time or it will prepare the team better for the future.  I don't buy it.  I don't think losing is ever a good thing.  Anyone can lose, not everyone can win.  I think our country as a whole might have lost some of that winning at all costs attitude within the last couple decades due to the increased attention on political correctness.  You can't talk about this, say this about that, and don't ever refer to or mention this to those types of people?  We have all these unwritten rules that tell us how to speak to different people and act different towards different people just so we don't hurt their feelings.  We wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings in 2010.  No way!  In 2010, that would mean that the person you made fun of would probably charge you with harassment, file a slander lawsuit against you, and then go and seek counseling for the grief that was caused.  People just go to the extremes these days and it seems like it's not just in common situations, it's in football games too.

We've seen it before and we saw it yesterday.  A football team scores a late touchdown and the losing team gets all upset and blames the other team for being classless.  I think it's classless for the loser to complain.  I think someone like Keith Brooking is a bigger loser because after letting the Vikings run rampant on your defense you finally get upset because they scored a late touchdown.  It's ridiculous in my mind and something that is increasing in sports these days.  Losers can't just accept a loss they have justify their losing on another team's actions.  It's never their total fault for losing.  It's the refs, the coaches plays, the ball was thrown bad, the weather, etc..., etc...

This is why I think that you don't learn anything from losing.  It's too easy to lose.  Everyone can easily have the feeling of losing and feeling upset against the person or team that put you into that melancholy feeling, but not everyone can be a winner.  Most people probably don't know what it's like to continually win.  The type of confidence that can be seen with the way that some players run with the ball, some players throw the pass, and some players just have that happy grin; knowing nothing is going to stop me.  Winning is a disease; it's an attitude and a way of life.  Losing is a feeling and a predicament.  I don't know why anyone would feel that they want that feeling or predicament, I'd much rather always feel like a winner.

Losing is never a good thing.  All losing does is turn you into the person who catches feelings when someone says anything negative against you.  Winners take the hate and use it to win more.  The tough part about it all is that losing is inevitable.  It's going to happen to everyone.  The difference is that some players lose classy and respect the other team for winner, while others can't accept the loss and move on.  So I may not feel like I learn anything from losing, but I guess I can learn something.  I can learn what players lost who will someday be a winner and I learn what players will continually be losers.

There's been a lot of debate in the past few weeks about teams benching players and how it's unfair to the fans and to the competitiveness of the sport to bench players for whatever reason there is.  The biggest controversy was the Indianapolis Colts benching their starters in the 3rd quarter against the New York Jets.  On one side we had the people complaining that the Colts could've achieved history, that they were losing their edge by doing so, that the fans shouldn't be succumed to watching a half ass performance, that it was just unfair to the game.  The other side of the ladder rationalized what they were doing by saying that they were only preparing themselves for the ultimate goal of a Super Bowl championship, that they needed to rest their players, that they earned the right to do whatever they wanted, and that they don't owe anyone anything and should do what's in their best interest.

My take on what the Colts should've done is this.  There's no such thing as perfection.  One person's perception of perfection is different than another person's perception of it.  The Colts could've achieved the 19-0 season and would've been placed on a pedestal, but for how long?  The next thing we know we would have a team that blows everyone out and runs the gauntlet easily and now they're considered the best.  Then we have a change in the NFL where games are increased to eighteen a year and someone goes 21-0 and now they're the best.  It's a never ending road to find perfection  so I don't think it matters either way what their decision is.  All of that doesn't matter though.  What I think is ridiculous it's acceptable for a team that has wrapped up the division to bench players, but it isn't okay for teams that are completely out of the race to bench players.  I guess this is just the hypocrisy of benching players.

Everyone thinks it's unfair to lose on purpose, but when you look at the whole picture, is it really that bad?  I just explained above how people justify for the winning teams.  Now I'm going to justify it for the losing teams.  Sports are a game and sports are a business.  In both aspects it makes sense for losing teams, that have no chance of the playoffs, to bench players, and even intentionally lose the game.  First of all the game aspect.  Every game has strategy involved.  There's no right and wrong strategy; there's only strategy that works and strategy that doesn't.  Each team should be able to decide their own strategy and sometimes it may work and sometimes it won't.  If a team is not going to make the playoffs then they should do what is in their best interest.  Benching players that could become injured is in their best interest.  Losing games to better themselves for draft pick position is in their best interest.  Just like the teams that win the division earn the right to decide, the teams that are horrible have also, in their own sort of way, earned the right to decide.

On the business side of things there are plenty of variables that go into the decision to tank the season or night.  Businesses are about making money, but you're not going to achieve that without bringing fans in.  Tanking the season isn't really going to hurt your fan base.  You're already losing consistently and playing to lose won't hurt you profit wise.  By positioning yourself to obtain a top draft pick you are actually getting the fan base more excited to see a star player and probably making your team better.  You will also have to pay that player more so it could also cost you financially.

The business side is much harder then the strategy side due to the fact that every decision will be effecting one person negatively and one person positively.  Strategy wise it works.  The season doesn't matter and you will be improving your team for the future.  This is the dilemma that teams should have the power to have, but instead we consider unmoral to lose on purpose.  Maybe we just don't analyze the situations from all sides.  When teams win and they bench players we consider it smart; teams that are bad and bench players are looked at as cheaters and bigger losers.  Maybe that's the problem with losing teams.  They're too scared to do what is actually right for the team because it looks bad so they continually keep doing the wrong thing.  Either way, we're all hypocrites towards the situation.

I hate Lane Kiffin.  Alright, I don't really hate the man, but I dislike him a great deal.  I actually can't even pinpoint why I feel this way about him.  Yeah he's smug and a little arrogrant; probably has a sense of entitlement, but those don't even bother me.  I think what bothers me the most is that he just isn't that good of a coach.  He hasn't done anything as a head coach in the NFL or in the NCAA that would make me change my mindset.  I just don't get it why he is on some sort of pedestal, basically because he's outspoken and a son of a great defensive coordinator.  Speaking of coordinators.  Why do people feel like if a team is successful then the coordinators will be successful head coaches.  There's always the cases where it works out, but there's also plenty of cases where the coaches were horrible.  It just seems like Lane once again got to a position he didn't earn with USC and turned it into a head coaching gig in Oakland where he ended with a record of 5-15.  Then comes the Tennessee head coaching job where he goes 7-6 in his first year and trades it in immediately to take over as coach of USC.  I guess the world is Lane's stepping stone.  So in my mind he's an average at best coach who has gained these positions not by merit and still I don't think he did anything wrong.  I think he did what any smart person would've done and not only moved to the position he's always wanted, but also helped his chances to achieve.

Lane Kiffin made the right move.  Call him a traitor or a crappy person for doing it, but what he did was the best move for his career.  I wrote a column in December called College Coaching Leap Frog that basically explained how as each coach moves on the next coaches in line keep on moving and it's an annual event in college football.  It's the state of college football that forces these coaches to make the moves.  We live in a win now society and I don't think Tennessee was going to grab an SEC title over Alabama or Florida in the next few years.  Kiffin moving to USC allows him to get out of the SEC and the highly competitive recruiting territory of the South, while allowing him to head to a top of the line program that basically picks anyone they want from California and half of who they want from the rest of the country.  He will be facing less talented teams while allowing his powerhouse program to continue to excel like USC has done for the past decade.  Lane Kiffin will be successful at USC.

That last sentence really shouldn't be much of a surprise.  I could be successful at USC.  Lane bringing along some friends with NFL experience won't hurt his chances at all either.  So for as much as I bash Lane and still don't think he's a good coach at all I do think he did what was right for him.  He took over the perfect program to take over, while also coming to the program he's always coveted.  I see nothing wrong with that.  There's going to be ill feelings if you're a Tennessee fan, but we need to accept that it's the state of college football we live in.  I'll see if my opinion changes in a few years when Lane has 18 NCAA violations coming at him and he jumps for the NFL again.

Most people who say they live for the moment mean they're living for each day.  They're trying to carpe diem the shit out of the week and showing the world that nothing can phase them.  You know what I say to those people?  Anything I want because even if I piss them off they'll still make some good out of it won't they?  I'm pretty optimistic as well, trying to make glum things glorious and melancholy feelings miraculous.  I don't try to live for the moment though.  I want some moments in my life to feel more special then others and by trying to make everything feel so perfect at all times of the day just makes all situations blend together and the moments that should be unforgettable are just another page in the scrapbook.  So I may not live for the moment in my everyday life, but I do live for the moment; the moment in sports when everything comes together to give us the perfect play at the perfect time in the perfect setting.

These special moments in the sports world that are unforgettable to us.  They take us back to a time where we can remember exactly who we were with and where we were.  These moments can bee unexpected, but most of the time they are built up throughout the course of an event.  When it finally happens you almost can't believe; you kind of don't want to believe it, because you know these moments only happen so often and it could be a long time until another one comes.  The moments can be different for different people.  Some of my moments were seeing Big Ben pass to Santonio Holmes for a TD in last year's Super Bowl, watching every minute of all six overtimes of the Syracus/UConn game, witnessing Michael Phelps win by a .001 of a second in a fingertip finish that I still can't see on a replay, Sean Dockery's half court heave to beat Virginia Tech, and one of the biggest moments ever in this country in sports. Mark McGwire breaking the home run record.

Can't you all still see that ball line driving over the left field wall; just barely getting over it and watching Mark McGwire round first base while tripping.  The ovation was amazing as he touched home plate and hugged his son.  It was truly a classic moment that will never be forgotten.  This was a moment that will be remembered by all the fans witnessing it in the stadium, all the fans watching at home, the game of baseball, the sports world, and America as a whole.

So Mark McGwire finally admitted to taking steroids.  It was finally his time for him to find some solace in what seemed an obvious guilt that was inside of him.  As we saw from his interviews he doesn't really feel like he did anything wrong.  He understands it was wrong because it was illegal, but he still doesn't feel like he cheated the game in any sort of way.  I'm fine with that.  I'm sure we all do things were not proud of and justify them in ways that they feel right.  The steroid issue is a whole different column at a whole different time that I will probably never write because everyone else writes about it.  How much did it help him?  Were pitchers he faced on it? Are other drugs just as bad?  Did it allow him to hit all those home runs?  How many should've he had?   Did his career end early because of PED's?  I don't care about any of these questions.  All I care is that I got to witness a moment I will never forget.

You can judge anyone you want in any sort of manner you want in sports.  I don't care.  You can try and take away some of Mark McGwire's accomplishments and try to determine how great he actually was if you want.  I don't care.  All I care about is that you don't take away my moments.  Let's not forget how memorable these moments are to so many people around the country.  So pick Mark McGwire apart.  Keep him out of the Hall of Fame if you want; antagonize him for his misdoings, but lets let the moments live on.  We can judge a person and their actions down the road, but we can only judge a moment when it actually happens.