Mailbox: Reader doubles down on opinion that all Ohio State coaches should be paid the same
Have more comments, questions? Reach out to me at firstname.lastname@example.org.
On coaches' salaries
To the editor: I applaud Mr. Nowland of Worthington for his well researched and erudite response to my suggestion that the pay of coaches at OSU should be in parity whether they coach men or women. Mr. Nowland argues the capitalistic approach, that the sports that generate more revenue should pay the coaches more. This justification is reasonable but misses the forest for the trees, which is probably my fault for not being clearer in my letter to Mr. White.
My point for parity is that a coach should make the same salary no matter the gender of the sport or the revenue production. This equality is the fair and right thing to do from a moralistic, Platonian and equality point of view. OSU should be at the forefront of economic parity and fairness and let the business school debate the merits of why a CEO coach of a male sport should be paid more than a female sport. After all, tuition at OSU is the same whether you major in art and have no prospects of gainful employment after graduation or a graduate of nuclear engineering and have a six-figure starting salary upon graduation.
Michael N. Oser, Columbus
To Michael: If Ohio State takes the lead on that economic parity and fairness effort, then it will also be at the forefront of never being able to hire a top-level football or basketball coach.
On the SEC
To the editor: You all really hate the SEC, don't you? One would think you'd be over Georgia by now. Did biased officiating help the SEC win all the other championships over the past 20 years or so? Every team has their fair share of sore losers, but you guys seem to be above all others. Success in the past doesn't necessarily mean success now.
To Mike: We don't all hate the SEC. I, for one, don't. But I'm getting the feeling that 99.98% of Ohio State fans do.
On NCAA women's basketball final
To the editor: Your pathetic article regarding Iowa women’s basketball and references to the officials is not only classical sore losing but also for me speaks to white privileged narratives and it is absolutely pathetic. Iowa lost in what was a classic beat down, and the way their team and coach disrespected others on their way to championship game had them deserving of the losing outcome.
They were overconfident, and statements made about the other team needing to pray made by the Iowa coach and barroom brawling from South Carolina game were not only disrespectful but also totally uncalled for. I am very happy Iowa lost the game, and not only lost but took a shellacking, and it had nothing to do with the refs. Matter of fact, the calls that went Iowa’s way in first quarter sending LSU starters to the bench for remainder of first half were questionable at best. But Iowa could not take advantage of that and LSU’s Carson came off the bench and outshined everyone on the floor with her amazing shooting. Get over it and accept that the better team won the game and the championship.
To Dan: To be clear, the "article" you reference was a collection of letters from readers. I personally have no opinion on the refs in that game, because I did not watch it. And readers of this space know I'm averse to ref-blaming.
To the editor: Bob Young writes in blaming the refs for Iowa losing to LSU. If you believe that, I’d invite you to re-watch the game. The first thing you might notice is that LSU’s three top players sat out the entire second quarter in foul trouble and that LSU’s bench players administered a shellacking in that quarter with Caitlin Clark in the game. The second thing to see is Clark repeatedly using a forearm shiver to free herself from LSU’s defenders - clear fouls. Then you might witness excessive dribbling by Iowa vs. quick accurate passing to open players by LSU - clearly better coaching. Then, on defense, see how LSU shut down Iowa’s go-to pick and rolls - coaching again. It was a matter of a very proficient team against one great player. Hats off to Mulkey and LSU.
To Brian: Michael Arace is probably right about Major League Baseball's upgrades, since he's a student of the game. Over time, he compares the stats, observes the debates and weighs the calls for change. I think the pitch clock will be an improvement, but eight innings alone would satisfy me. And that would often mean 7½ (if the home team wins). Further, I see nothing wrong with pitchers hitting or having a pinch hitter fill the ninth spot like the current DH. Just allow the pitcher to stay in the game. I'll come more often if I can get a $1 dog on a steamed bun with onions, mustard and cool sour cream.
Larry Cheek, Dublin
To Larry: I strongly recommend Columbus Clippers games for all of the above, plus cost savings. On Tuesdays, hot dogs cost a dime. Real good baseball at old-time prices.
On youth sports
To Brian: With spring, many children return to outdoor sports, and I hope those coaching intramural level teams remember that's what it is and not Game 7 of the World Series, which I saw too much of in my day. Obviously the better players will pitch and play shortstop the most; but don't just play players with limited ability only in right field and only the minimum time. Encourage them not to be afraid to fail and give them some helpful tips and instill confidence in them and see what happens. Trying and failing is not failure; failing to try is.
Dennis Singleton, Dayton
On Senate Bill 83
To Brian: I don't know if I am woke or unwoke, or if I'm addressing this issue to the right section of The Dispatch, but I'm only concerned about Ohio college sports (particularly OSU), not politics. From what I have read and heard about Senate Bill 83, I fear that it would be terrible for recruiting for Ohio colleges. Right or wrong, I can see out of state coaches who reach for any advantage, telling recruits, "Why would you want to go to a school where the state tells the school what they can teach, particularly about subjects that concern your family history?" One reactionary opinion: The Buckeyes can kiss any more national title hopes goodbye. Am I overreacting? Maybe your staff or partners could get some input from college coaches. The Dispatch has already printed reactions by many academics.
On Aaron Rodgers
To the editor: Aaron Rogers is a terrific quarterback and probably a Hall of Famer, but he is a looney-tunes kook. He would be the best New York Jet quarterback since Joe Namath, but the Jets should walk away from the potential trade for him. Sometimes the baggage that a superior athlete lugs with them is not worth it. Just think of Johnny Manziel and Kyrie Irving and just say all that glitters is not gold.
Michael N. Oser, Columbus
More from the Mailbox:
Did SEC favoritism help LSU in hoops the way it helped Georgia top Ohio State?
Readers sound off on Ohio State football coaches' salaries
Readers don't like timing of 'obscene' raises for Ohio State football coaches
Praise for The Dispatch's Adam Jardy; and does March Madness have correct format?
Here's hoping Ohio State football's new quarterback runs more than CJ Stroud did
Blue Jackets remain a mystery; and would Aaron Craft save Ohio State basketball?
Can Les Wexner fix Ohio State men's basketball?
Ohio State basketball's Chris Holtmann, Kevin McGuff under fire from readers
Readers unhappy about Ohio State lending $48M to athletic department
A vote to keep Chris Holtmann; and why do refs hate everything about Ohio?