At least that was the tone from the e-mail I received from him today.[photopress:foley_big.jpg,full,alignright] Whereas I asked “Sean Foley: Canada’s Top Swing Doctor or Pretentious Wanker,” Foley, not surprising, didn’t see pick the wanker side. He felt Lorne Rubenstein’s article on him characterized the conversations the pair typically have — which often involve more Chomsky than Hogan.
[Lorne] did an article on a discussion we were having about what we were currently reading, and just basically printed what we talked about. I have a high regard for Lorne and his work and always appreciate his intellect. I guess sometimes intellects in society are perceived as pretentious. I guess people condemn what they don’t understand, and I am fine with that.
Okay, so maybe wanker was a little strong. I’m not comdemning Foley — and perhaps Lorne’s article is aimed at demonstrating Foley is a THINKER with a capital T. This is a guy who can analyze the swing and mass media theory all in a single bound. And good on him. Everyone needs other interests. I’m reading “John A.: The Man Who Made Us,” about John A Macdonald, if anyone cares. But I haven’t read Chomsky since j-school and I’m not about to now.
As far as the Stack and Tilt comment goes, Andy and Mike have a new name for what was previously called Geometry, Physics and Biomechanics. We have always seen eye to eye and are used to having stones thrown at us by the masses of old school teaching pros on tour who are no more than marketing experts.
So apparently Foley is down with the S&T gents. I always suspected that from Ames’ discussion on the subject. Apparently Foley doesn’t call it that. Interesting nonetheless. I personally know a lot of Grade A instructors that have difficulties with S&T, but it appears to have worked for several who have tried it.
As teachers we are making a living off of the players talent, it is not the other way around, and I am very aware of that.
Very true indeed. Next story.