The Last Warm-up

On this date in 1980, the US Olympic Hockey team, coached by Herb Brooks, played a match at Madison Square Garden, three days before the start of the Olympics.  The match was against the team from the Soviet Union which would represent the USSR in the Olympics at Lake Placid, New York. The United States team would lose this match, in rather convincing fashion, 10 to 3, leading many to conclude that they had little or no chance against the red curtain power houses of the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia.

Soviet Coach Victor Tikhonov

Members of the Soviet team were primarily soldiers within the Red Army.  Of course, their main occupation was not as a soldier, but hockey.  Some teams, like Canada refused to play the Soviets due to the fact that while they may have met the letter of amateurs, they were in fact, professionals. The Soviet team was well renowned as the best team in the world. No training facility matched theirs.  No goal tender could come close to the ones they could put on the ice.  They had power, they had speed, they had skill.  The Soviet program had produced four consecutive gold medal winners in the Olympics from 1964 through 1976.  The 1960 US team would upset the Soviets at Squaw Valley. During this span, the powerful Czechoslovakian team would claim three silver medals, and one bronze.  It would be foolish to think that any team from the west could match up with and play with such juggernauts from behind the Iron Curtain.  

Vladislov Tretiak, was considered the best goal tender in the world

The US team was primarily composed of college students from Minnesota (nine of the twenty played with Brooks at the University of MN), Boston, MA (four played for Boston University), and of course a couple from Wisconsin.  Only one person returned from the 1976 hockey team.  These young men would have competed against each other, but starting the prior July were brought together to form a team.  Animosity was present at first among US team members as college affiliation would, be more important than their intended goal.  The animosity would need to be overcome, and with a hard style of coaching Brooks would see that it was.  As he would say in the movie "Miracle":  "the name on the front is a helluva a lot more important than the name on the back."  With an average age of 21, it was one of the youngest ever US team to play in the Olympics.  it was also the youngest team to play in the 1980 Olympics.  Brooks would introduce a different style of play to these young men, a combination of the North American and European style.  Skills learned during the course of one's life are often difficult to unlearn, but that was what Brooks demanded of his chosen caste.  They may not have been the best, they may not have been the most athletic, but they would come together to undertake a remarkable journey.  Twenty young men who loved to play the game of hockey.

Boris Mikhailov, Soviet team right-wing
Born in 1944.  Contemporary photo.
By contrast most US team members were born a decade or more later

In the movie, during the summer as training began in 1979, the assistant coach asked the trainer if he had ever seen Herb Brooks so hard on the boys who played for him.  The trainer would say, no he had not, but "Herb has a reason for everything he does."  Much to the discontent of the US Amateur Hockey Association Herb Brooks scheduled this game against the Soviets, the last of 61 exhibition games, as a final warm up before the start of Olympic play.  Things did not go well that night for the US team.  Although at least they were not shut out as were NHL all-stars shut out by the same Soviet team.  But, the game had the purpose Brooks desired.  As the Soviet coach would later admit, the game instilled over confidence in his team.  It was a risky move, because it also could have instilled no confidence within his team. One never knows what a situation and opportunity will be presented. One only needs to be prepared to recognize the opportunity and then take advantage of that opportunity.  The 1980 US Olympic Hockey team would do both.  Without this game on February 9, 1980, there would have been no miracle on ice on February 22, 1980.  

Into the Storm

World War II is a major event in the history of the past one hundred years.  It would engulf the world from the islands of the South Pacific to the fjords of Norway.  It called a generation, and more than any other event has shaped the geo-political world in which we live today.  Many will recall Pearl Harbor, D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, and of course the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan.  There were, however, other key events.  One under-realized event is the Allied invasion of Italy.  Italy was, for much of the conflict, associated with the Axis powers through the dictatorship of Benito Mussolini.  The Allied invasion of Italy, beginning in Sicily in July 1943 would be the downfall of Il Duce.  He would be arrested by his own people, imprisoned, rescued by orders of Hitler, and upon the collapse of German troops in northern Italy once again captured and put to death.

Invasion of Italy

Death would come to central Italy.  One of the most difficult circumstances to face the Allies in the invasion of Italy was the river valleys of the Rapido, Liri, and where at their confluence they formed the Garigliano River. Nearby was Highway 6 and upstream of the confluence was the small Italian town of Cassino.  Prior to war, it would have been a picture card of an Italian village; shops and homes built of locally quarried stone sat in a valley and along the lower hillsides. Frank and Marie Barone’s relatives could easily have worked in the town.  The town would become of strategic importance in the Allied move toward Rome.  But, the move was associated with miscalculation, poor assignments and even worse.

British Major General Harold Alexander

 September 1943 saw the Allies advance into the leg of Italy with two major movements from the south, one to the east of the mountain range that forms the bone of the leg, the other on the west side.  The movements were overseen by General Harold Alexander, Lord of Tunis.  Under him, leading the approach from the west side of the bone, was an American, Major General Mark Clark.  Winter in the mountains put the effort to get to Rome solely on the western movement as the forces to the east could not make it through the snow covered passes.  Mark Clark would be thrust into the limelight, and his record as a general would forever be debated.  Two primary routes up the west side of Italy would allow access to Rome.  The primary route, the former Appian Way was inaccessible due to flooding of the roadway in lowland areas.  This was a great defensive move by the Germans, it then required the Allied forces to move up Hwy 6 toward Cassino, and then onto Rome.  But it required crossings of fast flowing mountain snow fed rivers in the valleys among the mountains.  The surrounding hills provided the Germans vantage points for observation and defensive actions; the Germans would form what is known as the Gustav line. 

US General Mark Clark

It took until mid-January 1944 for the Allies to get near this crucial area.  They had sustained 16,000 casualties to advance the last seven miles to reach near the Gustav line.  The soldiers had little time to rest, and the command little time to plan.  Two days after their January 15 arrival, the allies made their first attempt was to cross the Garigliano River.  It was here that the US Commander failed to realize that the German forces in this area were rather thin.  The German commander was asking for reinforcements.  Reinforcements would be pulled from Rome, and by the time of the main attack by US troops on January 20, the German reinforcements had arrived.  Historians continue to debate whether the effect of this lack of decision was a missed opportunity to gain a foothold in the valley to move up the road to Rome.  Whatever it was, part of Clark’s plan worked, as the Germans pulled troops from the defense of Rome.  The central attack would fail and regiments involved in this attack would, for all intents and purposes lose so many men as to fail to exist.  One division lost 2,100 men (killed, missing or wounded) within a 48 hour period.  Lack of preparation did not help as booby traps and mines were not cleared before the advance. 

Allied advance on the Rapido River, just south of Cassino

On January 24, the Allies decided to attempt to move north of Cassio, with the intent of then moving left and coming up behind the German defenses that formed the Gustav line.  Crossing of the fast-moving rivers was difficult and the high water left little room for armor units, thus requiring an exceedingly long time for traction mats to be used on the steep river banks.  Despite the problems, some US troops were able to move south toward Monastery Hill, and by early February were occupying a small hamlet only one mile from the monastery that sat atop an adjoining hill.  By February 7, a battalion was only four hundred yards from the abbey.  Monks would watch Allied and German patrols exchange fire below the abbey walls.  In fact, Rick Atkinson in his book, The Day of Battle notes that a German Corps commander felt that the Allies were within 100 meters of success.  Alexander and Clark had attacked on too broad a front, and failed to prick through cracks in the German defense.  The Allies wanted to take what was a defenseless abbey, but the German defenses well below the walls proved too difficult to break.  Weary US troops would give way to men from New Zealand and India under the command of Lt. General Bernard Fryberg.  Freyberg would essentially desire to continue the plan already in play which was failing miserably.  He would continue the original advance from the south east across the rivers, and at the same time continue the movement to go behind the German lines.

Cassino town after Allied advance

The US was also making another movement toward Rome from Anzio, and US Troops in that location found themselves in a predicament much like they found themselves at Cassino.  Major General Clark, was also in charge of the Anzio attack.  A commander more astute than Clark may have realized the opportunities that were presented early in the battle before German reinforcements arrived at the Gustav line.  A commanding General with a greater sense of purpose than Alexander, may have realized a need to divide command for the two major attacks.  Some historians believe the fault lies with Alexander for having given Clark the duty of arranging advances from both Cassino and Anzio, rather than dividing command.  In contrast, German Field Marshall Kesselring had divided defense of the two areas under separate commands. 

New Zealand Lt. General Bernard Fryberg

War is fraught with failures, and the battle in Italy is no different.  The losses would increase.  Allied troops would find themselves marching into a storm of a strong German defensive line.  The Allied reinforcements commanded by Fryberg would set in motion a series of events that would place taradiddle over truth, and ruination over ingenuity.  Fryberg was a dentist by training, and while he had the ear of General Alexander, an acquaintance, as reported by Atkinson, would say of Fryberg:  “His great fearlessness owed something to a lack of imagination.”  Fearlessness may have allowed his promotion, but his lack of imagination would come into play and enter into one of the most debated decisions of the war.  To find out about that decision, you will need to read the post due on or about February 15 titled:  “That Tomb of Miscalculation”

Touch the Face of God

It was on this date, January 28, 1986 that the nation was reminded that space flight is anything but routine.  We are reminded of that when we look to history.  We see not only the Challenger disaster, but the event of January 27, 1967 when a test of what we now know as Apollo 1 caused a fire in the cockpit.  That fire would kill all three astronauts.  More recently, of course, was the Columbia break-up on re-entry on February 1, 2003.  One could think that winter has not been kind to the US space program.  Although it was Apollo 8, which was launched on December 21, 1968, to  become the first spacecraft to travel beyond low-earth orbit.  Apollo 8 would also give us the famous Earth-rise photo taken on Christmas Eve.  The astronauts would also read from the book of Genesis. Yet, for some reason the Challenger loss, I believe, garnered more of the attention of the nation, and is likely more in our national consciousness and our national soul than the other two.

Earth rise photo from Apollo 8

Why does it seem to be more prevalent in our collective memory?  Perhaps it was because a civilian school teacher, Christa McAuliffe, was one of the seven astronauts. She was chosen from about 11,000 applicants to be the first to leave the classroom for space.  Perhaps it was because, even though this was the tenth flight for Challenger, and the 25th overall for NASA's shuttle program, it would awake us from space flight fatigue.  Few will recall that the Columbia flight that preceded this Challenger flight carried a US Congressman from Florida.  What is amazing is that the flight prior to Challenger had launched just over two weeks earlier.   It makes the ersatz Howard Wolowitz's trip to the International Space Station seem rather ordinary.  Or, perhaps it came at a time when we as a nation had to evaluate our priorities and decide whether or not the risk is worth the reward.  The shuttle program was near its apex.  With the Columbia flight, it was known that the program was near the end of its life space.

The last crew of the Challenger

Space is often said to be the last frontier.  No wilderness on land has gone unexplored.  Although we sometimes forget about the oceans.  We point up when we recognize the refuge of God, angels, saints and our departed loved ones. Space and its amalgamation of stars and comets is associated with the heavens.  Cultural heritage and tradition has ingrained in us a reverent attitude toward space and, in particular, manned human flight.  Astronauts are thought of as heroes.  Many of the early launches were telecast and one could watch the crowds at the Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral crane their head back to watch the powerful sight of man moving beyond the bonds of earth.  The original seven Mercury Astronauts were said to have the "right stuff."  So when a manned space flight is lost, the nation grieves in a collective manner.  The loss of a flight is like a punch to our national stomach.  It takes us down a notch or two reminding us that we are human.  As much as we may not like to hear, we are not omnipotent.  Stuff happens. But that is what makes life interesting.  It makes life challenging.

Lift off

The space shuttle Challenger was originally scheduled to blast off on January 22, but weather forced delay.  While January 28 saw a nice blue sky, it was cold.  NASA engineers knew that some aspects of the space craft did not take well to cold weather.  They understood that critical elements, such as the simple O ring may not take the cold.  Internal calculations of risk and reward may have put the potential danger to the back of their minds.  Yet, as we know it was the O ring.  Richard Feynman, a theoretical physicist and a member of the Rogers Commission (the group entrusted with finding out went wrong), would do a simple experiment and show on national TV how an O ring in the cold was less resilient, and hence not seal as well.  Some knew this after only the second Columbia flight, but the recognition of damage to the O ring in that flight failed to make it to the proper channels.

Explosion

With the first teacher set to go to space, TV sets in classrooms throughout the nation were tuned to watch the liftoff and its ascent beyond the bonds of earth.  Instead they would see an explosion and entrails of white smoke as debris fell to earth.  As the explosion occurred ground control was giving distance and speed measurements of the spacecraft.   Shortly thereafter, ground control was eerily silent for about thirty seconds and would utter the calm, but understated words:  "Flight controllers here looking very carefully at the situation.  Obviously a major malfunction."  An unfortunate introduction to space flight for many in those classrooms.

O Ring uses, the small ring was the main problem

President Reagan was scheduled to give his State of the Union address that evening.  He would postpone that speech.  Yet he would speak in the later afternoon, 5 pm Eastern time,  about the fate of the shuttle Challenger to a nation rattled by loss.   This speech is regarded as one of his best.  Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill after having attended a White House briefing in the morning that day (this occurred before the Challenger accident), would come away disgruntled by what the President planned to say in his State of the Union address that night.  Yet he would later comment that he had seen the worst side of Reagan and had see him at his best within a few hours time on that cold late January day.  Reagan would say it was one of the most trying days of his presidency.

Feynman doing his O ring experiment

Space flight has presented a series of human adventures by which to understand the soul of a nation.  Yet the full understanding of our national character comes from how we deal with disaster.  In this way, the national body is not unlike the personal, individual body.  Our character is set not just by the good but how we react and deal with the bad.  In his Challenger speech, Reagan hit the right themes to assuage a grieving nation.  He reminded us of why we pursue challenges, a duty to recognize those lost, and tie them to the hereafter:  “The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted, it belongs to the brave,” he would say. He would continue that “The Challenger crew was pulling us into the future, and we'll continue to follow them.”  Reagan would then end his 648 word speech borrowing from a sonnet composed during the Second World War:  “We will never forget them, nor the last time we saw them, this morning, as they prepared for their journey and waved goodbye and slipped the surly bonds of earth to touch the face of God.”  It is our belief in the transcendent that often gives our life and our existence meaning. It is a belief in God that allows many of us to go beyond our fears and our losses.  It helps a person deal with the realities of existence.  Loss is difficult, but it makes us grow.

Patch of the last Challenger flight

 Images from Google images

Tippecanoe and Tyler Too

We all can remember from our elementary school lesson in US history, the catchy campaign phrase used by Harrison and Tyler, which is the title of this post. It was on this date, January 18, 1862 that John Tyler died.  Tyler, who hailed from the State of Virginia, was elected to the office of Vice President on the ticket with William Henry Harrison.  At this time they were both members of the Whig party, although Tyler is often recognized for his involvement in the Democratic Party. Harrison was 68 when he took the office of President that March 4 day in 1841 as the ninth President of the United States.  He would only serve one month, as he died April 4.  So, Tyler would assume the presidency for the remainder of the term.  Tyler would, however, become and independent in September of that year, and would later rejoin the Democratic regime.  His movement back to the Democratic party would begin with his declaration as an independent, but it would take time for the Democratic powers that be to once again accept him.

Campaign poster for Harrison and Tyler

Tyler was a busy man in both personal and professional respects.  He fathered 15 children--eight were by his first wife (who died in 1842) and the remainder by his second wife (whom he married in 1844).  Whether or not he fathered more with his slaves, like Thomas Jefferson is not known. No other President is known to have fathered more children.  He served in the US House of Representative, was governor of Virginia, and a United States Senator.  Little known is that he was also elected as a Democrat to the Confederate States House of Representatives, and was a member of the Virginia Peace Commission.  Tyler is often regarded by historians as one of the most inept of US Presidents.  A long career in public service would end with little recognition.

President John Tyler

Even though he proclaimed slavery an evil, he would not free any of his slaves.  In that sense he was not unlike Thomas Jefferson and a number of other slave holding presidents.  His split from the Democratic party began with his dislike for the politics of a predecessor, Andrew Jackson (served as president from 1829-1837).  The parting of ways would begin due to a few issues.  First, Tyler did not support the "spoils" system that Jackson would implement.  Perhaps Jackson, as president, was the first to set up a Democratic Machine of which Richard J Daley, Huey Long, James Curley (and many others) would be proud.  It was from Jackson's election in 1828 which would lead New York Senator William Marcy to coin the well known phrase:  "to the victor belongs the spoils."  Tyler was something of a renegade in the Democratic party at that time, perhaps not unlike what a John McCain is to the Republican party of today.  Second, beyond the ethical issue of patronage and spoils, the break was also due to policy matters.  Jackson, looking as most leaders would to strengthen their powers, would not support South Carolina's Ordinance of Nullification, which declared the tariffs of 1828 and 18323 to have been improperly put in place and were therefore null and void in South Carolina.  Jackson promoted the concept of a strong executive over the abilities of the legislative branch.  Tyler would reject Jackson's claim that he could use military force against South Carolina.  Third, he did not like Jackson's use of recess appointments, an issue that continues between the executive and legislative branches to this day.  Fourth, was Jackson's unilateral movement of funds from a federal to state banks.  His desire to avoid stepping in line with Andrew Jackson would affect his political career.

President Andrew Jackson

The actions of the powerful Jackson would drive Tyler to the Whig party.  Jackson was a man who continues to be held in high regard (think of the Jefferson-Jackson dinners which continue to this day) even though he was a slave holder, was ruthless in his massacres and dealings with Native Americans (today he would be accused of ethnic cleansing), and the continued promotion of the Jefferson ideal of an agrarian economy.  History would prove him wrong on the last point as the nation would become an industrial power.  So, Tyler would join the Whig's who were not against using government to assist the development of the nation--shovel ready projects of the day. Interesting, is that Abraham Lincoln, was also a member of the Whig party near the time of Tyler. Lincoln would be the only Illinois Whig congressman when elected to the House of Representatives in 1846, taking office in March 1847 and serving only one two year term. Lincoln would of course go on to be recognized for having fought to save the Union and free the slaves.  Of course, it was during the course of bleeding Kansas, that in June 1858 Abraham Lincoln would give his famous House Divided speech during a debate for the Illinois US Senate seat against the incumbent Stephen Douglas.  Lincoln would lose that election but gain the far greater prize of  President in the 1860 election.  We all know what happened next.

Lincoln--Douglas Debate poster

But, the victors do not always have the spoils.  Usually, the victor gets to write the history, and control the message.  It has been long thought in US history, however, that there has been a bias toward the south.  A recent example is on History.com where they talk about the death of Tyler and note that he was a member of the Virginia Peace Commission.  The piece simply says on this issue: "this body tried to negotiate a compromise with the Republicans in the North to prevent a civil war.  The attempt failed, as the Republicans were not willing to entertain any proposals that would protect slavery in the Western territories."  Let us forget the common method of referring to the states in rebellion as the Confederate States, but this short explanation seemingly blames the Republicans in the North for the Civil War.

Virginia House of Delegates 1861 Session Bill

My goodness, reading that short sentence one has to think the writer's intent was to the effect that if only those nasty Republicans would have let slavery expand in the west we would not have had a civil war, What human and American history would have turned out if the Rebellious states and the Virginia Peace Commission had their way would be pure speculation.  That sentence ignores the fact that American history is replete with compromises regarding the issue of slavery and the south kept reaching further and further, not unlike a toddler wanting sweets.  The South could never be pleased.  The issue goes all the way back to the US Constitution which recognized slaves as being 3/5 of a person for representation and taxation purposes. Slaves, like women at the time, could not vote, but yet the south wanted the best of both worlds.  There was the fugitive slave law, the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850 and of course, the Kansas Nebraska Act (1854)  Violence between free and slave desires would lead to Bleeding Kansas.

Cover of book on Bleeding Kansas

John Tyler was a son of Virginia.  He was often considered an accidental President who came by office only by the untimely death of Harrison. At the time many thought he should retain the title of Vice President, only to undertake the duties of the office of President. He was a former President being elected to the legislative body of a state in rebellion, and who served on their "Peace" Commission, which should rightfully simply be named "Let's Keep Slavery Commission."  Given that his date of death, January 18, 1862, occurred in the midst of the Civil War, John Tyler is the only person to have served as president to not have had his death officially recognized. After all, he was part of the Confederate States of America.  Perhaps it was a suitable end for a man who has been all but forgotten in history.  His presidency may have been mediocre, his slave holding unforgivable, but at least he did not cower to Andrew Jackson's patronage and pay-to-play system of the early 19th century. Of course, we know that as time has passed there some aspects of the political system are alive and well.

Run it!

"Run it! And let's get the hell out of here."  Those were the words the most renowned coach in football said on a very cold day--December 31, 1967.  The ensuing play would enter NFL lore and perhaps become the most famous play in NFL history.  As time goes by, the telling of this play has become legendary.  It is almost mythical.  It was a day like no other in the NFL. More than two generations have past, and it continues to hold the record of the coldest weather in which an NFL game was held.  But, it is also different for other reasons.   It deserves its status in the history and lore of the NFL.  The opponent of the Green Bay Packers that day was the Dallas Cowboys.  Dallas was coached by Tom Landry.  Landry and Vincent Lombardi had been defensive and offensive coordinators, respectively, under Jim Lee Howell with the New York Giants.  Green Bay meets Dallas once again at Lambeau Field, for a divisional playoff game.  The first meeting of the two programs at Lambeau in the playoffs since the Ice Bowl.

1967 Ice Bowl.  "Down, set...."

Lombardi's larger than life statute while made in Green Bay, really owed much to the sports press of New York.  His connections through Jesuit institutions at which he was educated, and his connections from coaching at West Point and with the Giants, would provide links that would make a man in the obscure small city in Wisconsin a national phenomenon.  The play of the pathetic Packer team for several years before Lombardi arrived, had the powers that be in the NFL thinking of kicking the team from the small city out of the league.  Time, it was believed, had passed them by and they were said to be an anachronism with its title held by the local American Legion Post, when other teams represented the best capitalism could provide by being privately held. The original professional football teams were born in many of the small cities of the Midwest.  Decatur, Akron, Kenosha, Muncie and Green Bay just to name a few.  George Halas, known to many as Papa Bear, realized that the loss of Green Bay would be a loss for the game.  As much as Halas loved the Bears, he loved the game more, and it was his love of the game that led him to recommend to Jerry Vainisi of the Packer organization to hire Lombardi.  Vainisi did a masterful job of searching for a head coach outside the executive committee and then making it seem to the executive committee as if it was their own idea.

Faithful Packer fans that day in 1967

With Lombardi in Green Bay, the Packers began to win championships which led to the self-proclaimed name of title town.  The pull and lore of a small town organization is at play yet today, and it contrasts with that of the Packer's opponent this Sunday, the Dallas Cowboys.  Last weekend Dallas defeated the Detroit Lions at the house that Jerry (Jones, the owner of the Cowboy's) built, ATT Stadium. During that game Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey, a long-time Cowboy fan, was watching the game in the owner's box, and would hug Jerry Jones at the conclusion of the game. Christie would receive a number of comments on his action.  Showing a sense of humor in an ability make a dig, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker would send out a photo of a man wearing a foam cheese-head with the word "Owner" emblazoned on its sides and would tweet:  "This is the type of owner I'll be looking to hug after a #Packers win on Sunday".  The tweet, making a big-time jab at the New Jersey governor, would make news throughout the nation.  Perhaps the two Governors will hug Sunday at Lambeau Field.

Lambeau Field in 2003

Just as the Packers are the only community owned professional sports teams in the United States, so does Lambeau Field have a distinct personality.  This personality developed in large part due to Lombardi.  If it was not for Lombardi and the loyal fan base he created, the Packer organization would likely not be seeing the success it sees today.  It would simply be a smaller more parochial version of Buffalo.  Let us contrast ATT Stadium with Lambeau.  Lambeau is not named for a sponsor.  It simply has been known for almost 50 years as Lambeau Field.  Before being renamed on Sept 11, 1957, it was known as City Stadium.  Showing the importance of tradition to the small town, while Lambeau Field has been enlarged and expanded a number of times since its original construction was completed in 1957; it is the longest serving NFL stadium. Lambeau is the second largest NFL stadium. I know what Bear fans will say--Soldier Field is older.  Yes, it is, but it has not served as the home field for the Bears as long as Lambeau has for the Packers.  Contrast that with ATT stadium, which opened a few years ago.  History and tradition give Lambeau a certain mystique usually played up by the news media.

Lambeau Field in 1965

Part of that mystique goes back to that game on the last day of the year 1967.  Temperatures when the players, at least most of them, went to bed was about 30 degrees.  The next morning it was a negative 13. The temperature would drop through the time of the game.  Lambeau Field had installed, under the watchful eye of the Packer head coach and general manager a heating system.  The prior day, when players did their walk through, even Tom Landry thought the field to be in excellent shape, though possibly a little damp.  Lombardi would give the project engineer a thumbs up on the that Saturday. Come game time it would be a different story.  The field was cold, it was frozen.  By half time it was like concrete.  Small clumps of earth would freeze solid, and make the field, as one player noted, like playing on stucco.  The heating system had been purchased by Lombardi the previous spring from General Electric.  Most interesting is that the GE representative was the nephew of George Halas.  In his biography of Vince Lombardi, David Maraniss would note that people on the field were struck by the odd juxtaposition of a sign reading "THIS FIELD IS ELECTRIFIED" when it was like concrete.  It was this stucco-type field that would lead to the now well-known moniker--"Frozen Tundra."  When Green Bay replaced its field several years ago, they would sell small boxes containing earth from the field.  That is how well the field has become known, how well it has become appreciated, and how well it is thought of here in Wisconsin.  No sponsor would dare have this stadium renamed in their honor.

Giant brain trust.  Landry, Howell, Lombardi

Lambeau is electrified again, but a system that seemingly works better.  They even use grow lights in the late fall and winter to assist with growth of the grass.  It is not a full natural field, the grass is interwoven with artificial threads.  It is technology that makes the differences between 1967 and today.  In 1967 the only gloves worn, and then only by lineman, were the brown cotton gloves.  The common scuba insulated glove used today did not exist.  They did not have the fabrics we have today that better wick away sweat, but keep the body warm.  They did not have heat in their benches, although they had side line heaters.  Hands were stuck in the front of the pants to help keep some semblance of feeling.  Today we have hand warmers that fit in pockets built in a jersey. Packer right guard Jerry Kramer would wear a wool dickie, and cut off his long underwear below the elbow and below the knees that now famous Sunday.  Lombardi would not be in a hoodie, or a parka, but in a shirt with tie, Russian type hat (rather than his standard fedora) in his dress overcoat.  It was a different era than we have today.

Curly Lambeau

That Sunday it was late in the game about 13 seconds left on the clock.  The home team has third and goal from the Dallas one yard line.  No time outs.  They had not scored since the first half.  A pass into the end zone would either be caught and win the game, fall incomplete and stop the clock or of course be intercepted.  Using their last time out Starr would suggest to Lombardi that they use the wedge (dive) play, the most basic play in all of football.  The golden boy, Paul Hornung is standing next to Lombardi and does not think the coach is paying attention to what Starr is saying.  Hornung thinks a roll out pass should be attempted, as if it were incomplete the clock would stop, and they may have time for one last play.  Fullback Chuck Mercein hears the call and thinks this will be his moment--the fullback up the middle.  Film study had shown the Packers that the Cowboy tackle Jethro Pugh tended to go in high, making for a possible block if Jerry Kramer can get good footing.  Not really paying attention to Starr, Lombardi simply says--"Run it! "And let's get the hell out of here."

Winning touchdown

According to Maraniss, as Starr trots on to the field, a member of the Packer staff asks Lombardi what play Starr was going to run, Lombardi, proving Hornung's hunch correct, says:  "Damned if I know."  In a serendipitous moment Kramer would find a foothold for his left foot and change his position to drive off the left, rather than right foot.  Starr would call the 31 (full back in the one hole), but would at the last minute keep the ball not wishing to risk a hand-off.  Mercein would not enter the lore of the NFL. Starr would add to his growing resume.

Lombardi celebrating the touchdown

As you may gather to watch the Packers play Dallas this weekend, much will be said about the ice bowl, showing the pull that game has to the present day.  Not unlike relics of the cross able to build a ship, so too would those who have claimed to have been at the Ice Bowl, be well more than the 50,000 the stadium would actually held.  People may scoff at history, but we all keep going back to it.  History is part of what makes our humanity.  Our stories make our history, they make us.  A thing with as little consequence as a football game still holds large in our human psyche.  It draws our attention.  Lombardi, the high school chemistry teacher was made by tradition and history, and I have to think he would be proud of the way this moment has stood out among many others.

Statue of the "Old Man" at today's Lambeau Field

Note:  Images from Google images

The Longest Fight

It was on this day, January 2, 1865, that perhaps the longest boxing match in US history occurred. The Civil War was only a few months from its conclusion, and Sherman was celebrating his march to the eastern seaboard.  Mining was a popular activity in the western portion of the nation, and men would make their way to find jobs, and perhaps fortunes.  The fight took place in Virginia City in the Montana Territory.  The fight would take place between John Condle Orem and Hugh O'Neil in a two year old building called Leviathan Hall. The long and arduous match would enter the annals of history for more than its length.

Virginia City, Montana Territory  1865

Boxing appeared to start taking off in the late antebellum period often as a matter of ethnic pride doing little to cease the discrimination often occurring to Irish and other Catholic immigrants from the large protestant population.  As the Irish laborers entered the US and its job market, competition for jobs increased as did ethnic tensions.  Bare-knuckle fighting would become prevalent in American cities, and was particularly so among the Irish men with pugilistic tendencies.  For the low-caste Irish, it often became a matter of pride.  One only need recall the scene in "Cinderella Man" with a church full of Irish working class families listening intently to the colorful radio commentary in the fight between working class and part-time pugilant James Braddock and world champion Max Baer. Braddock was to be a foil, an unassuming opponent meant to earn some extra cash for Baer, and provide entertainment to a depression era populace. Braddock was one of the last of the well known Irish fighters that stretched back to the antebellum period of US history.

James Braddock

Ethnic divisions became less pronounced during the Civil War, and more about recreation and relaxation.  Obviously a time before concussion theory was well known and when boys-will-be-boys mentality would promote such a high level activity.  Civil War units would see men fight not only for recreation but to show who had regimental bragging rights. Fighting was a source of pride for men who were seeing carnage on a level never before realized and perhaps never seen again.  The Civil War would introduce old methods of battle with newer weapons introducing a whole new level of killing.

Civil War boxing match

Boxing would also become a form of recreation in the mining towns of the frontier.  It was a mining town in the territory of Montana which would draw John Orem from his native Ohio, via Denver, to fight.  Orem had earned his knuckles fighting in the Colorado territories before moving east, and then heading back west. This would earn him the nickname "Colorado Blacksmith." His level of fighting involved both wrestling and boxing. Although he was a saloon owner, some say he was a teetotaler. Out east Orem would find that wrestling as part of the match would not go over well, and he drew back to the frontier. The fight on this day 150 years ago was arranged by James Nelson.  It was Nelson who had constructed Leviathan Hall in 1863 in Virginia City.  The building was reported by some to be 28' x 100', and have gradual rows of seating to allow an unobstructed view of the arena.  Nelson's main business was not the promoting of fights, ala Don King, but rather running the next door gambling saloon.  Nelson promoted this fight as a way bringing business to his crap and roulette tables.  He was doing what is done in Las Vegas today, providing a show in hopes that people will also fill the gambling room.

Fight at Leviathan Hall

The room that day would fill up as people gathered to watch a rather small, but now local man, John Orem take on the Irish-immigrant/miner Hugh O'Neil.  Orem was 29 years old, five years younger than his opponent, but was smaller in stature at a height of 5' 6.5" compared to O'Neil's 5'8.5", and he weighed about 138 pounds as compared to 190 for O'Neil.  Nelson, the owner of the building would  referee the match and was to follow the London Prize rules, although reports indicate it was a loosely called match.  For three hours and five minutes the two men would fight (although one source says it lasted over 5.5 hours),  185 rounds (some say 192 rounds). A title match today, by comparison, is composed of 15 rounds.  In the end it was called without a clear cut winner.

In another first, Nelson, who put up all the money for the fight, had guaranteed $1,000 in gold to the winner plus the two fighters would equally split the gate receipts.  To Nelson the cost was worth the money he would make in his casino. Little is known of what came of O'Neil, but Orem would seldom fight after this bout, and would move to other lines of activity in the entertainment field.  Boxing has waned in popularity in the United States.  The University of Wisconsin produced a number of collegiate champions, but the sport was banned by the NCAA in 1960 after UW boxer Charlie Mohr died eight days after suffering a blow to the head during a NCAA championship match.  Boxing made its way back to the UW as a club sport when it was approved by the University on December 4, 2013.

Charles Mohr

During the Civil War perhaps boxing was to the population, particularly male population, that football is today.  They are both pugilistic and hard hitting,  Both involve concussions.  But, both also involve a way for a few members of a lower economic class to rise make a name for themselves and some money. For most a dream in the NFL will remain nothing but a dream.  After his match with Max Baer Jimmy Braddock no longer had to water down his milk, or go hungry.  John Orem and Hugh O'Neil were doing the same, finding a method to use their abilities to make money. The 185 round, over three hour match never came to a final conclusion, but in the end both were likely winners for having given their all in such a long fight. Although, I wonder if Nelson split the gold between the two men, or if he called the fight so he could keep the $1,000 gold prize.

Stille Nacht

Imagine it being just after midnight, December 25, in the small community of Oberndorf, Austria 196 years ago, in the year 1818.  Located near Salzburg, the home of one of the world's greatest composers, Obendorf was in the throes of discontent as this was only a few years following the completion of the Napoleonic wars.  Salzburg would lose its independence, and in its larger region would see the Saalach River be a dividing line between the Bavarian section of Germany, and Austria.  In the appropriately named St. Nicholas Church, the assistant pastor, Father Joseph Mohr, and the choir director, Franz Gruber were singing for the first time the song "Stille Nacht," or as we know it in English, "Silent Night."  This song would become one of the most popular in Christendom although myth and tales surround, but add to, its story.

Silent Night Chapel in Obendorf, Austria (Google images)

The song was created to celebrate the birth of Jesus, but we have to think that Bethlehem was not likely very quiet the night Christ was born.  We know that there was no room for Joseph and his very pregnant wife Mary at the Inn, or if your liking goes to a different translation "the place were traveler's lodged."  The owner of this place is unknown and it was either a great act of kindness, or a great act of disdain to place a women in her condition in a barn.  The barn was likely not built out of stone or wood, but probably was a limestone cave, or rock outcropping.  The church of the Nativity is located at a high point, so it may have been a rock outcropping.  At that time even many families lived in caves. Bethlehem was probably not very large in population, making its ability to handle the number of people filing into this community even more difficult.  Besides all the travelers, it would have had soldiers, tax collectors, along with itinerant merchants, and caravans following the mass of humanity.  If the night had been silent, it would have been broken by the cry of a new-born boy then little known, but now highly regarded by Christians today.  This cry would echo off the walls of the limestone cave out to a waiting world.

Birthplace of Jesus, Church of the Nativity (Author photo)

Father Mohr actually had written the words to "Stille Nacht" two years earlier while stationed at the pilgrimage church of Mariapfarr, Austria. His grandfather lived near Mariapfarr, and some believe he first thought of the verses as he made his way to his visit his grandfather from the rectory.  While it is not clear what drove him to write the words it is well established that he wrote this poem while at that small pilgrim outpost, but the world is fortunate that he took his work with him to Oberndorf.

Mariapfarr, Austria (Google images)

Over 2000 years ago, Joseph and Mary would journey to Bethlehem from their home in Nazareth, and then of course their famous trip to Egypt.  The journey to Bethlehem could not have been easy, it is a fair distance south of Nazareth, and the terrain over parts is less than easy to traverse.  It would involve hills and valleys, rocks and more rocks.

Shepherd's Fields Church, Bethlehem.  (Author photo)

It was on Christmas Eve in 1818 that Father Mohr would walk to the teacher--choir master's house hand him his poem, and ask him to write a melody for guitar and accompaniment so that it could be sung at midnight mass.  I am sure Franz Gruber's wife was not too happy of him being assigned this type of chore on such late notice. No one knows why Father Mohr would ask that a melody be created at that point, it could be that he wished a composition to be sung with guitar, rather than the organ.  Others have speculated that a mouse destroyed parts of the organ, so it was not playable, although some say the reports of mouse damage was only popularized in the American press. Whatever, the reason, the two stood in front of he main altar and sung "Stille Nacht! Heilige Nacht!" for the first time.  Their composition would impact the world, and become one of the most famous of Christmas carols.

Franz Gruber and Fr. Mohr  (Google images)
Note the names under the images are not correct

The impact of this composition is directly related to those events on that perhaps not so silent, but yet holy night in Bethlehem so very long ago.  Shepherds would quake at the sight of the young baby lying in a manger, swaddled for protection from a cruel world.  Wise men, following a celestial sign, would pay homage to the young child.Of course, we know that while his birth was important it was his message, his death and his resurrection for which Christians are most grateful.  For God sent his only living son.

Shepherd fields cave where shepherds would live (Author photo)

This composition of Mohr and Gruber would be spread to other parts of Germany and Austria by an organ repairman who would obtain a copy of the song while doing work at St. Nicholas church.  The song is thought to have been popularized by two 19th century versions of the Vonn Trapp Family Singers, who would incorporate it into concerts.  During this stage, the melody was adjusted and some words altered, gradually evolving to the carol we know and sing today.  The changes over time also slowed down the song's tempo.  Originally, it was much more spirited.  For some reason people correlate slow with reverent, to the point that some church music is more laborious than a communist funeral dirge.  Gruber would produce a number of various arrangements of his original composition. A score of the tune signed by Mohr was discovered in 1995.  Analysis puts the date of the discovered copy to between 1820 and 1825, so it was likely a copy of the original, and Mohr appropriately placed a date of 1816--to recognize his original composition.  In the upper right corner Mohr would write:  "Melodie von Fr. Xav Gruber." The song is believed to have had its first English translation of the first few verses by Episcopalian John Freeman Young.  If one were to read the BBC account, you think it was Young, and not Mohr, who should receive the most credit.  So goes the world of English dominance giving credit to an interpreter rather than the original composer.

St Nicholas Church, rebuilt in 1913 (Google image)
Original was destroyed in a flood

It would take time for the world to recognize the impact of the birth of the baby which the carol honors.  Christ may have been born on that one night so long ago, but his church would take years to get a foothold, and many more to see it spread through the world.  Christ's message was first spread by the apostles.  Although most of them would stay within the bounds of the Roman Empire, at least one, Thomas, would move beyond and travel to the Indian Subcontinent.

Church of the Nativity, Manger Square (Author photo)

"Silent Night" has been popular with both Catholic and Protestant congregations, and its rise in popularity may be due to it being favored by the protestant Prussian ruler William IV.  The third line in English, " 'Round yon virgin Mother and Child" was not in the original German instead it seemingly better translates to "Just the faithful and holy pair." This part of Europe was in a time of transition, and Father Mohr and places he had served were adjusting to territory transfers.  Let us look at the wrote the fourth stanza, which in part reads:  "...Brought the world peace tonight, from the heavens' golden height Shows the grace of his holy might...."  Mohr was writing about peace being brought to the world.  Peace is a concept, often relegated to second place in a competitive world.

1820's version of Silent Night in Mohr's hand (Google images)

Christ was born into an occupied territory, although with some semblance of local control, yet still under the domain of the Roman Empire.  Jesus would spend his life within the bounds of the Middle East, a region of the world still in strife.  On the one hand it is ironic that the Prince of Peace would be born in a region so continually torn, but on the other hand perhaps it is fitting as no region on earth needs to strive more for peace.  Christ is the Savior, at least for us Christians, but the world is still occupied by humans who are frail and subject to varied thoughts and temptations.  Christ was born in an unassuming manner to unassuming parents. In this he bears some resemblance to Father Mohr, a man who was born and died in poverty. A man who gave what he had to assist the less fortunate.  He was Francis before their was Pope Francis. The author of the words for this carol was contested until the finding of his copy in 1995.  As much as the English revere John Young, they probably woudl wish to give him the credit.  Austria would finally realize the significance of this song writer. One commentator, notes the meaning of this song, when he wrote about the seeming insignificance of Fr. Mohr:

Perhaps this is part of the miracle of "Silent Night."  The words flowed from the imagination of a modest curate.  The music composed by a musician who was not known outside his village.  There was no celebrity to sign at its world premiere  yet its powerful message of peace has crossed all borders and language barriers, conquering hearts of people everywhere.  (Egan, Bill)

Moon over Bethlehem (Author photo)

The words of Fr. Mohr should occupy our thoughts, as peace begins with each of us.  100 years ago, during the Great War, the German army started to sing "Stille Nacht! Heilige Nacht!" only to hear British soldiers join their singing, The Germans and British would leave their trenches to introduce one act of kindness amid the madness of war; this act would never be repeated during that conflict. The Christmas Truce would not be repeated. The song, sung in the trenches of the Great War 100 years ago was only a catalyst to spread forth an idea of peace.  Peace is perhaps most often thought about this one day a year, but needs to be with us everyday.  We need not be king, president, or pope to bring peace into the world.  The message of this song is that peace begins with each and every one of us.  Simple small acts of kindness can help in a lonely, busy, tired world.  Jesus would preach a message of faith, hope, love and peace.  It is up to us to put those words into action.

Have a Blessed and Merry Christmas!