I sit around lately. OK, no I’m not usually sitting. Truthfully, I’m hiking, running, skating, or walking when I think most of the time. Why don’t athletes spend more time being people of high morals or character? Why isn’t there more focus put into their training regime at all levels, high school, college, and professional; on integrity, honesty, health and reputation?

Is winning and making huge money more important than the kind of person we become? More important than the image we portray? More important than our CHARACTER?

Bill Belichick (right) and the Patriots haven’t been back to the White House since the league caught them videotaping opponent practices. By Eric Draper [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Lance Armstrong

Pete Rose

Barry Bonds

Tonya Harding

Alex Rodriguez

Manti Te’o

Chinese gymnasts

Bill Belichick

Tim Donaghy

Ben Johnson

John Calipari

Rosie Ruiz

Danny Almonte

Donald Crowhurst…

These are the first that come to mind. But, it’s not about those folks specifically, it’s about what we’re teaching our young people. I’m not a parent or an educator. But, I give a crap about what our children become and how our world will look to them later.

If we gave less attention to unintelligent people who’ll do ANYTHING to get ahead and more on the ones that teach our children life lessons about truth, honesty, character and respect, wouldn’t our world be that much better? Maybe it sounds Pollyanna, or too idealistic. You may say I’m dreaming. But, but, but, I’d rather live this way, without desperation for success.

Cheating, lying, or hurting others should NEVER have a reward or payoff. I’m afraid for our world when we give so much attention to the negative, the crime, the dark. Where did we go wrong when we started worshipping the winners only or the richest only or the “best” only, the Hiltons, Lohans, the Kar-somethings? Reality TV is poisoning our youth. The reality of our sports stars is poisoning our youth. Irresponsible TV and movies are poisoning our youth! When oh when will we stop the MADNESS???

C.J. Silas is the host of the C.J. Silas Show on ESPN Radio 1280 Wednesday nights at 7:00.

There has just been too much material.

Betwen Manti Te’o and Lance Armstrong, last week was filled with an over-hyper media, once again simultaneously covering a story and covering themselves as part of a story in a sort of snake eating its own tail kind of a way. Weeks like this are the stuff legends are made of.

As consumers of sports, the last seven days have, like a political race, either opened our eyes to new and fresh ideas or further cemented our sports media allegiances.

Bill Simmons’ “malibag” columns were made for situations like Manti Te’o. By David Shankbone (Own work) via Wikimedia Commons

For some, a daily dose of Grantland.com is necessary even in a pre Te’o scandal world. Post Te’o, I would argue that there are few things more salacious or tasty to read than a Bill Simmons Manti Te’o mailbag post. Sure, the sports guy runs Grantland.com and had a podcast bigger than his ego, but the way he got to the top of that mountain was through columns like the mailbag he put out on Manti Te’o last week. This scandal was made for Simmons.

If you’re looking for someone with a strong alternative opinion, I recommend Jason Whitlock. Whitlock describes himself as “agenda free, honest, and unpredictable,” and if you like someone who tries to “stick it to “the man” on a regular basis, Whitlock is the guy to read. His twitter feed is constantly updated and his views, while extreme sometimes, are usually healthy to have in the sports ether. If you want someone who is not afraid to criticize anyone, Whitlock is your guy.

The Te’o story provided lots of targets for Whitlock’s wrath including mainstream media, ESPN, and Notre Dame. His take on Manti is one that I think lots of people didn’t know they had until they read the article, and that’s probably the biggest compliment I can give Whitlock.

More local writers, like Bill Plaschke of the LA Times, pondered a specific part of the story — namely the media’s inability to do it’s job as watchdogs. Perhaps this was a more mainstream, less intense version of Whitlock’s view, but it was a solid piece for a west-coast paper.

In the midst of Te’o “tooling out” (as C.J. Silas would put it), Lance Armstrong remained in the midst of a 15-year “tool-out.” For Armstrong, TJ Simers of the LA Times wrote a nuanced Lance Armstrong column. Simers is more the king of sarcasm and making himself a story usually, but it’s gems like the Armstrong column that keep bringing me back.

I guess, this time, it’s because I have mostly the same opinion on the matter as Simers. Does what Armstrong says now have the ability to take away all the people who found some inspiration or positive message in what he did?

I would argue that Armstrong’s consecutive Tour de France wins put more people on bikes than Tiger put on golf courses. Those people have burned millions of calories and, I would argue, are probably healthier than they were before Armstrong put the Tour de France at the top of SportsCenter. An entire industry has gone from something that was a niche sport to something more mainstream. I have ridden 3 century (100 mile) rides over the past two years and rode over 2000 miles in 2012 while losing a little weight and getting my astronomical cholesterol numbers in-check, all of which came from having a bike — and I can’t be the only one. Without Lance Armstrong’s rise I think it would have been unlikely that I would have ever gotten into cycling in the first place.

As Simers said regarding Armstrong’s confession:

… But what difference does it make today to those who found hope so long ago in his own cancer story?

His story was alive and brimming with inspiration when those afflicted at the time needed it the most.

How many took what Armstrong had to say as the gospel, finding common resolve in their own yellow wristband, only now to have to watch Oprah?

I have no interest in watching. Who cares what Armstrong has to say now? Who cares how this story plays out, with his athletic career over and his influence now old news?

Like so many other athletes and celebrities, he had the ability to uplift, did so for a time, but ultimately wasn’t up to the task.

None of it changes the power of inspiration and what it means to some — even if under false pretenses.

Would you lie to someone dying if you thought it would bring them some peace?

Where someone gets their news and opinion says something about their fansmanship. By Cortega9 (Own work), via Wikimedia Commons

Point made. I wasn’t dying, but I did use Lance as an inspiration at some level and that’s not something that even his confession can take away from me — and I’m not ashamed of it either.

So what website did you visit last Wednesday when the Te’o story broke? Even though the Te’o story was only related to sports and the Armstrong story potentially outdated in its relevance, we can learn something about our fansmanship by thinking about where we look for our information about sports and about which outlet has the information in its most relevant and useful form.

While the LA Times and Grantland are staples for me already, I think I’ll be reading a little more Whitlock and a little less ESPN.com this week (and yes, I know ESPN owns Grantland…). Whatever I’m reading about though, I just hope it has a little more to do with what’s happening on the field than off it.

I like to make predictions. Sometimes they are right. More of the time they are not. It’s fun though, so I do it anyway.

Here’s my latest prediction: Lance Armstrong will confess to doping when he is interviewed by Oprah (airing) on January 17th. I’ve written about Lance Armstrong before. Things have gotten even worse for him since then.

When it comes to baseball’s steroid users or anyone in the public eye who do anything bad like this, the almost-cliche response about what they should do is, “Go on Oprah and come clean.”

Alex Rodriguez did it. Instead of Oprah, Rodriguez chose ESPN’s Peter Gammons to come clean with. He wore a blue sweater, sat-down in a homey environment, and came clean. He came off as mostly honest, admitting that he used steroids and saying he was sorry.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WSwiYnSBis

Lance Armstrong is riding his way straight to a confession, I believe. By Daniel Norton (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons

What does this have to do with Lance Armstrong? Well, if he was smart he would be studying the A-Rod confession. He would also be looking at the respective sideshows that Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa, and Rafael Palmiero participated in. All those guys look like clowns now. Rodriguez may be perceived negatively, but not like those three.

Another great role model for Armstrong might be Mark McGwire. Big Mac vehemently denied use for years and finally capitulated and came clean, and has been better-respected for it over the past two years, serving as hitting coach for the Cardinals and now the Dodgers. He wanted to be back in the public eye and had to pay the price to do so.

Armstrong has also denied PED use with about as much force as a person can. He has been tested hundreds of times and always pointed to the always-outmoded tests as proof he didn’t do it.

If you are not easily offended, aren’t worried about foul language and are a fan of South Park, Lance Armstrong, and/or the Sneetches, you’ll probably want to look at the South Park episode HERE. South Park’s Trey Parker and Matt Stone are the kings of modern satire. The sports world and its reflection on society are so easy to make fun of sometimes…

Anyway, back to Lance and Oprah. It is happening at Lance Armstrong’s home, so the “softer” non-studio, private environment is already in-place. I’m sure Lance will have lots to say. I’m sure millions will watch.

I play two scenarios in my head:

Scenario 1: Lance goes all Rafael Palmeiro on Oprah. “I never did any of that,” he says. “My teammates were forced to lie by USADA and WADA. Everyone is turning on me.”

Scenario 2: Lance goes all A-Rod: “I did it, it was the culture, everyone was doing it and I got caught-up in it. I’m sorry for any hurt I’ve caused.”

I just don’t think there’s a third scenario. I cannot imagine that, 10 years from now, Lance wants to have an embarrassing Palmeiro-like moment on tape when definitive proof emerges that, beyond any shadow of a doubt, he doped. I can’t imagine anyone would put themselves in that position, and because of that, I think Scenario 2 happens. I think Lance admits he doped. Two years ago, some people would have been surprised. Not anymore.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAxo4pCITRM

I can’t imagine Lance letting himself have a Palmeiro moment, especially with Oprah.

Lance Armstrong giving a talk in 2007 – Photo by Cpl. William Howard, Combat Aviation Brigade, 1st Infantry Division via commons.wikimedia.org

“A forger of lies is a physician of no value.” – Job 13:4

Today, 1 in 4 children live in poverty.  They get ready for school and set out to dodge gang warfare — hungry ,but surviving. When they concede, they find a safety net in the gang life — lose sight of transcending their position and fall deeper into the life of drugs, prostitution and firearms.

Today, Lance Armstrong wakes up in his Malibu penthouse overlooking the sprite of sunshine bursting from the blue of the bikini spread waves. He’s wearing Prada and eating the best of organic food, fueling his suntanned physique. He’s safe and warm and full of wellness, having defeated cancer with a will unparalleled by many.

Seven-time Tour de France champion.

Billion-dollar Philanthropist.

King of the “Livestrong” bracelet, a national emblem of hope.

But he’s a liar.

And while I’m the first to practice the art of forgiveness, even I am losing my love in lieu of Lance’s other-Lance — the Lance who forced the members of his famed cycling team to dope if they wished to stay employed. And that just pisses me off.

If you ever saw the Denzel Washington-led film, American Gangster, you probably saw what a man of complexion looks like. Washington played the famed Frank Lucas — former cocaine kingpin of New York City — former inner city philanthropist, funding small businesses and turkey feeds. Lucas was a dicatator with a kind heart buried beneath brutality. He was a charitable-murderer.

Lance Armstrong is not a murderer. Don’t go that far. But he is a lying-philanthropist. And though he’s done great things — raised a billion dollars for cancer patients since 1998 — he is also the man who force-fed drugs down his employees’ mouths and covered over his lie with a blatant disrespect for his fans.

And now that his former employees are coming out one by one, admitting to Armstrong’s shady business, he stubbornly denies use of steroidal drugs. At least Lucas came clean. And though he lost an entire kingdom in the wake of his words of honesty, he relinquished, at least partly, the wrongs that swallowed his rights.

Armstrong is becoming the Pete Rose of cycling and that is just sad. Who would of thought a billion dollars would fade far into the background of such an abstract life-painting?

His seven championships and billion dollar project of hope mean less and less as the reports continue to come out. Because a man is measured by his integrity, not by words or his money, because everyone — whether wrong or right, holy or hateful —  will rot in a box in the bottom of the earth, so will Armstrong — billion dollars, good deeds and all.

So, if the answer is that Lance DID dope, I think the question should be, “Was it worth it?”

In a field of cyclists who were basically all doping, Armstrong was at the top. For seven straight years he dominated the Tour de France like nobody has or probably ever will. Will all of Roger Clemens’ pitching records be stripped because he used performance-enhancing drugs during the steroid era? But I’m getting off-topic.

If all of Armstrong’s records fall, it was probably worth it. It has to be. If the price of winning 7 Tours de France and having the pulpit from which to grow the Lance Armstrong Foundation is to have those titles stripped later on, don’t the ends justify the means?

Look at all the great work the LAF has done.

Millions of dollars for programs for people affected by cancer. Millions of people inspired by Lance’s story of survival. Are those people any less alive now that it comes out that Lance probably doped? Will the support for cancer survivors have been undone?

For a man who looked death in the face, I would imagine the ends justified the means.

In a sport where everyone was cheating, Lance Armstrong probably did too. And it helped him to do immeasurable good for the field of cancer research.

And while fair play in sports is something I think is REALLY REALLY REALLY important, I think that, for Lance (IF HE DID DOPE) the resulting contribution to cancer awareness surely justified doping at a time when “everyone was doing it.” If that’s how this thing goes down, he’ll have to live with that. And I think I’ll be good with it.