Davis

Michigan State coach Tom Izzo showed some tough love for one of his former players on Monday night during the Spartans’ blowout victory against USC in East Lansing.

Paul Davis, a standout player for Izzo and the Spartans during the early 2000s, was in the stands at Breslin Center to show support for his alma mater.

Apparently he went too far.

With Michigan State up by 21 midway through the fourth quarter, referee Jeffrey Anderson stopped the game and pointed toward Davis, who was sitting three rows up from the court on the opposite side of the teams’ benches. Anderson then went over to speak with Izzo.

The coaching legend in his 31st year leading the Spartans then looked across the court at Davis with his arms spread open and appeared to shout more than once, “What are you doing?” and adding at least one curse word.

As Henderson walked back across the court, he pointed at Davis again and gestured for him to leave the area. A staffer (identified by ESPN as Michigan State associate athletic director Seth Kesler) approached Davis to escort him out. Davis stood up and looked toward the court while placing his hands on his chest. Izzo could be seen from the sideline apparently motioning for Davis to leave and saying, “Get out of here.”

Davis eventually did as he was told and watched the rest of the game from a suite in the concourse level, according to the Detroit Free Press.

Izzo was asked about the incident by reporters after the 80-51 victory.

“I love Paul Davis. I really do. He’s one of my favorite guys. He’s always calling and doing things. But what he said, he should never say anywhere in the world. And that ticked me off,” Izzo said. “I’m gonna have to call him tomorrow and tell him what I thought of it. And you know what he’ll say? ‘I screwed up, coach. I’m sorry.’

“So he kind of got after the official and he was 150% wrong. And for a guy like me to 150 percent agree with the official, it’s almost illegal.”

Izzo declined to state exactly what Davis said to Henderson.

“Let’s not get carried away,” Izzo said. “It wasn’t something racial, it wasn’t something sexual. It was just the wrong thing to say, and I’ll leave it at that.”

Davis played for Izzo and the Spartans from 2002 through 2006, a span that included a Final Four appearance and another run that ended in the Elite Eight. He currently ranks in Michigan State’s all-time top 10 in several statistical categories, including scoring, rebounds, field goal percentage and free throws made (statistics for all four categories go back to 1966).

Selected by the Clippers in the second round of the 2006 draft, Davis played three years in Los Angeles and one more season with the Washington Wizards before continuing his career in Europe through 2016.

Michigan State did not immediately respond to questions from The Times as to whether there would be any further repercussions for Davis following the incident. But Izzo indicated he wants his former star player back supporting the team.

“I want to tell him he was wrong, like I’d tell my son, my daughter, like I would my player, like I would myself,” Izzo said. “But I don’t want to — I need Paul Davis here. Paul Davis is a very important part of this program because he went through tough times when he was here and he’s really been a good advocate of telling kids how they got to, you know, deal with the process.

“So I’ll go with Paul. He just made a mistake tonight.”

Cameron Norrie, Jacob Fearnley, Lloyd Glasspool and Julian Cash are also in the squad.

The winner will face either Australia or Ecuador in the competition’s second qualifying round in September.

In a post on X late last month,, external Draper described the injury as one of the most “challenging” and “complex” of his career.

He said the decision not to compete in the Australian Open, which begins on 18 January, had been “really, really tough”.

Draper struggled with discomfort in the top part of his serving arm – his left – for several months, eventually shutting down his season after withdrawing from the US Open in August.

It came after a successful first part of the year, with Draper reaching a career-high of fourth in the world in June and also securing a maiden Masters 1000 title with victory at Indian Wells in March.

California has tried all manner of design in choosing its governor.

Democrat Gray Davis, to name a recent example, had an extensive background in government and politics and a bland demeanor that suggested his first name was also a fitting adjective.

Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, by contrast, was a novice candidate who ran for governor on a whim. His super-sized action hero persona dazzled Californians like the pyrotechnics in one of his Hollywood blockbusters.

In the end, however, their political fates were the same. Both left office humbled, burdened with lousy poll numbers and facing a well of deep voter discontent.

(Schwarzenegger, at least, departed on his own terms. He chased Davis from the Capitol in an extraordinary recall and won reelection before his approval ratings tanked during his second term.)

There are roughly a dozen major candidates for California governor in 2026 and, taken together, they lack even a small fraction of Schwarzenegger’s celebrity wattage.

Nor do any have the extensive Sacramento experience of Davis, who was a gubernatorial chief of staff under Jerry Brown before serving in the Legislature, then winning election as state controller and lieutenant governor.

That’s not, however, to disparage those running.

The contestants include a former Los Angeles mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa; two candidates who’ve won statewide office, schools Supt. Tony Thurmond and former Controller Betty Yee; two others who gained national recognition during their time in Congress, Katie Porter and Eric Swalwell; and Riverside County’s elected sheriff, Chad Bianco.

The large field offers an ample buffet from which to choose.

The rap on this particular batch of hopefuls is they’re a collective bore, which, honestly, seems a greater concern to those writing and spitballing about the race than a reflection of some great upwelling of citizens clamoring for bread and circuses.

In scores of conversations with voters over the past year, the sentiment that came through, above all, was a sense of practicality and pragmatism. (And, this being a blue bastion, no small amount of horror, fear and loathing directed at the vengeful and belligerent Trump administration.)

It’s never been more challenging and expensive to live in California, a place of great bounty that often exacts in dollars and stress what it offers in opportunity and wondrous beauty.

With a governor seemingly more focused on his personal agenda, a 2028 bid for president, than the people who put him in office, many said they’d like to replace Gavin Newsom with someone who will prioritize California and their needs above his own.

That means a focus on matters such as traffic, crime, fire prevention, housing and homelessness. In other words, pedestrian stuff that doesn’t light up social media or earn an invitation to hold forth on one of the Beltway chat shows.

“Why does it take so long to do simple things?” asked one of those voters, the Bay Area’s Michael Duncan, as he lamented his pothole-ridden, 120-mile round-trip commute between Fairfield and an environmental analyst job in Livermore.

The answer is not a simple one.

Politics are messy, like any human endeavor. Governing is a long and laborious process, requiring study, deliberation and the weighing of competing forces. Frankly, it can be rather dull.

Certainly the humdrum of legislation or bureaucratic rule-marking is nothing like the gossipy speculation about who may or may not bid to lead California as its 41st governor.

Why else was so much coverage devoted to whether Sen. Alex Padilla would jump into the gubernatorial race — he chose not to — and the possible impact his entry would have on the contest, as opposed to, say, his thinking on CEQA or FMAP?

(The former is California’s much-contested Environmental Quality Act; the latter is the formula that determines federal reimbursement for Medi-Cal, the state’s healthcare program for low-income residents.)

Just between us, political reporters tend to be like children in front of a toy shop window. Their bedroom may be cluttered with all manner of diversion and playthings, but what they really want is that shiny, as-yet unattained object — Rick Caruso! — beckoning from behind glass.

Soon enough, once a candidate has entered the race, boredom sets in and the speculation and desire for someone fresh and different starts anew. (Will Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta change his mind and run for governor?)

For their part, many voters always seem to be searching for some idealized candidate who exists only in their imagination.

Someone strong, but not dug in. Willing to compromise, but never caving to the other side. Someone with the virginal purity of a political outsider and the intrinsic capability of an insider who’s spent decades cutting deals and keeping the government wheels spinning.

They look over their choices and ask, in the words of an old song, is that all there is? (Spoiler alert: There are no white knights out there.)

Donald Trump was, foremost, a celebrity before his burst into politics. First as a denizen of New York’s tabloid culture and then as the star of TV’s faux-boardroom drama, “The Apprentice.”

His pizzazz was a large measure of his appeal, along with his manufactured image as a shrewd businessman with a kingly touch and infallible judgment.

His freewheeling political rallies and frothy social media presence were, and continue to be, a source of great glee to his fans and followers.

His performance as president has been altogether different, and far less amusing.

If the candidates for California governor fail to light up a room, that’s not such a bad thing. Fix the roads. Make housing more affordable. Help keep the place from burning to the ground.

Leave the fun and games to the professionals.