CAMPBELL IS COMING!
Congratulations to Heinz Kluetmeier on his excellent cover photograph (Dec. 4). It shows not only the probable NFL Offensive Player of the Year ( Earl Campbell) but also the man who, in my opinion, deserves to be named Rookie Defensive Player of the Year—Cincinnati Bengal Defensive Tackle Ross Browner.
Earl Campbell and Ross Browner played against each other in last season's Cotton Bowl. Browner had the edge in that meeting as Notre Dame stopped No. 1 Texas to win the national championship. It looks as if the tables have beau turned.
You know what I like about Earl Campbell? Forget that he blocks like a bridge abutment, that he charges harder than a farrowed sow, that he breaks more tackles than a bull breaks plates. What I like about the man is that he can win without forgetting that he can lose.
In an era in which most superstars merely give off heat, Earl Campbell truly shines.
Your article on the Houston "Earl-ers" revealed Earl Campbell to be the athlete and gentleman that he is. I couldn't agree more that Campbell should be the NFL's Rookie of the Year. But to say that Terry Bradshaw is the "only" player now challenging Campbell as the NFL Player of the Year is going a little too far. Let's not forget Roger Staubach! Roger is having another fine season and is leading the revived Cowboys toward their second consecutive world championship.
CHEERS AND JEERS
Frank Deford's article (As I SEE IT, Dec. 4) upholds the status quo in football when what we really need is a return to the game as a skilled contest. Violent mock heroics and peekaboo cheerleader outfits are the NFL owners' answer to fan boredom with an increasingly unexciting sport. New rules and less PR are needed, not apologies for football eroticism.
As an ex-high school "ette," I can assure Deford that trotting around a freezing football field in boots and Band-Aids can cure one of football heroes forever. As for drink and stadium romancing, I would like to remind Deford that while whiskey warms, it also stupefies.
Yes, firing pro cheerleaders for posing nude is hypocritical, but not because God created the NFL and then said, "Let there be cheerleaders to arouse the fans while the officials pace off yardage." This kind of chicken-and-egg logic just leaves Deford with sexist yolk all over his imaginary shoulder pads.
My sense of humor deserted me as I read Frank Deford's infuriating commentary on women and football. The cheerleaders at football games may well be "there to be looked at," but women spectators certainly are not. I spent the better part of my childhood in Baltimore's Memorial Stadium (in spite of the hard seats and the chill in the air) watching the Colts play, and to this day I am more knowledgeable about football than most men I know. So please don't try to make me believe that "women can't stand the stupid game."
MARCIE N. GREENBERG
Frank Deford's analysis of football reveals the necessity for having guardians of public decency. Frank's justification for the half-naked cheerleaders is an example of the Hustler mentality.