Thanksgiving Day was one of those days when you experience the irony of some people's arguments.
As I trolled newspapers across the country, and read text messages from friends throughout the day, I noticed the utter irony in people's complaints that the Detroit Lions were playing on Thanksgiving Day.
The Lions, now 0-12 after getting trounced by the Titans yesterday, are one of those teams people would rather not watch. But I found it ironic that on Thanksgiving -- a day in which us Americans are supposed to give thanks for what we have in our lives -- people would complain about a trivial topic like which football team they had to watch on TV.
Isn't it enough for people to just have a house to live in, a couch to sit on and a TV on which to watch a game? Are we so spoiled with our lives that in the midst of our country's economic turmoil, at a time when many Americans are losing their homes (and others in Iraq and Afghanistan are losing their lives), that we have to complain about which friggin' football team we get to watch?
More to the point, why don't we just stay thankful that the NFL is not embroiled in a labor dispute -- something that we might not be able to say in two years with the owners currently opting out of their collective bargaining agreement with the players -- and that we are privleged enough to spend our time stuffing our faces with food and watching a football game in the warmth and privacy of our homes?
Friday, November 28, 2008
Monday, November 17, 2008
Pujols wins
He has a funny-sounding last name, but Albert Pujols is a damn good baseball player. He won his second MVP today, and deservedly so. A buddy asked me if Pujols should have won the award. There is discussion from time to time of whether players on non-playoff teams should be considered. Of course, the answer is YES!
It seems that in leagues like the NBA, a player must be on a top two or three team in his conference to get serious consideration. In MLB, a player can win it even if his team finishes fourth in their division.
Pujols has MVP-like numbers (.357/.462/.653, 44 2B, 37 HR, 116 RBI), and along with his truly outstanding defense, it is easy to make the case that Pujols was more valuable to the Cardinals' 86 wins than Ryan Howard (the second-place finisher) was to the Phillies' 92 wins and World Series crown.
Let's just hope Pujols heals correctly from elbow surgery this off-season and is back in the St. Louis lineup on Opening Day.
It seems that in leagues like the NBA, a player must be on a top two or three team in his conference to get serious consideration. In MLB, a player can win it even if his team finishes fourth in their division.
Pujols has MVP-like numbers (.357/.462/.653, 44 2B, 37 HR, 116 RBI), and along with his truly outstanding defense, it is easy to make the case that Pujols was more valuable to the Cardinals' 86 wins than Ryan Howard (the second-place finisher) was to the Phillies' 92 wins and World Series crown.
Let's just hope Pujols heals correctly from elbow surgery this off-season and is back in the St. Louis lineup on Opening Day.
Yanks overbid? Say it ain't so
Let's all welcome Doug Melvin to the modern world. The general manager of the Milwaukee Brewers stated last week that the Yankees were "overbidding" in their attempt to sign free agent starting pitcher CC Sabathia. Right, because it is so out of the ordinary for the Yankees to overbid on players.
Melvin obviously is invested in Sabathia's free agent negotiations since Melvin himself presented Sabathia with his first contract offer this off-season: a five year deal totaling $100 million, some major cheddar from a mid-market team in Wisconsin. But Melvin doesn't understand why the Yanks don't offer Sabathia just $110 million, instead of the reported $140 million or so they did offer. Who's the cheesehead now?
Firstly, why is Melvin surprised that the Yanks offered Sabathia so much more money? The franchise has spent gobs of money on free agents during the George Steinbrenner Era, dating back to the late 70s. It was widely reported that the Yanks would offer Sabathia a contract 30 to 40 percent higher than any other team. If the $140 million is true, then that would represent a 40 percent increase over the Brewers' offer, the only other official contract on the table.
Secondly, Sabathia has stated he has two glaring preferences: to stay in the National League (where he can hit, and, presumably, face lighter-hitting offenses), and to play in California. Considering the Yanks play in the American League and along the East Coast, there has to be something else they can offer which make up for their not meeting the lefty's two preferences. In their case, it's to bring an extra briefcase of money to the table. Money talks, the Yanks have lots of it and why should they be ashamed?
To suggest that they should offer Sabathia just $10 million more than the Brewers is an ignorant and almost amateurish way of looking at the situation. Nobody will confuse Melvin with the word "savvy." If he's frustrated that the Yanks can offer so much more money than his team, well, join the club. That's why the Red Sox owners labeled the Yanks the Evil Empire.
But the Yankees are doing what they have to do to stay in negotiations with a player whom they want. Now maybe Melvin is just trying to play mind games with the Bombers. It's difficult to fathom a MLB general manager truly feeling surprised that the Yanks, the richest team in American sports, would spend more money than other teams to get the player they want. That's how the world works, and a man who is glued in to the infrastructure of MLB should've seen this offer coming from a mile away.
Melvin obviously is invested in Sabathia's free agent negotiations since Melvin himself presented Sabathia with his first contract offer this off-season: a five year deal totaling $100 million, some major cheddar from a mid-market team in Wisconsin. But Melvin doesn't understand why the Yanks don't offer Sabathia just $110 million, instead of the reported $140 million or so they did offer. Who's the cheesehead now?
Firstly, why is Melvin surprised that the Yanks offered Sabathia so much more money? The franchise has spent gobs of money on free agents during the George Steinbrenner Era, dating back to the late 70s. It was widely reported that the Yanks would offer Sabathia a contract 30 to 40 percent higher than any other team. If the $140 million is true, then that would represent a 40 percent increase over the Brewers' offer, the only other official contract on the table.
Secondly, Sabathia has stated he has two glaring preferences: to stay in the National League (where he can hit, and, presumably, face lighter-hitting offenses), and to play in California. Considering the Yanks play in the American League and along the East Coast, there has to be something else they can offer which make up for their not meeting the lefty's two preferences. In their case, it's to bring an extra briefcase of money to the table. Money talks, the Yanks have lots of it and why should they be ashamed?
To suggest that they should offer Sabathia just $10 million more than the Brewers is an ignorant and almost amateurish way of looking at the situation. Nobody will confuse Melvin with the word "savvy." If he's frustrated that the Yanks can offer so much more money than his team, well, join the club. That's why the Red Sox owners labeled the Yanks the Evil Empire.
But the Yankees are doing what they have to do to stay in negotiations with a player whom they want. Now maybe Melvin is just trying to play mind games with the Bombers. It's difficult to fathom a MLB general manager truly feeling surprised that the Yanks, the richest team in American sports, would spend more money than other teams to get the player they want. That's how the world works, and a man who is glued in to the infrastructure of MLB should've seen this offer coming from a mile away.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
MLB awards too late for my taste
If you haven't noticed, Major League Baseball is rolling out its big season awards this week. Rookies of the Year, Cy Youngs, Coaches of the Year...it's all leading up to the Most Valuable Players (obviously, each award has an National League and American League participant).
But my question is, do sports fans really care about end-of-season MLB awards this deep into the fall? Would it hurt MLB to push up its end-of-season awards up to the first round of the playoffs?
The NBA announces its big regular season awards during the first round of its playoffs. The NFL does the same in the week preceding its postseason. Why must MLB wait until two weeks after its postseason to announce its regular season award winners?
MLB could argue that fans are as locked in as ever into the sport now that the offseason trades and free-agent signings are beginning to ramp up, especially with the Winter Meetings slated for the second week of December. But the problem there is offseason moves encourage fans to look toward next season.
By mixing regular season award winners in the same time period that teams are beginning to frantically -- and in some cases, drastically -- reshuffle their rosters, MLB fans are caught between shifting their thoughts back and forth between the 2008 and 2009 seasons.
If MLB were to announce its regular season winners during the first-round Wild Card series, fans would enjoy the benefit of having the regular season fresh in their minds. That might make Evan Longoria's Rookie of the Year award seem more acceptable than it does now, two weeks after he went 1-for-20 (.050) with one RBI in the World Series.
Fans don't care less about the MLB MVP, an award endlessly debated in the NBA and NFL, for two reasons: 1) there are two MLB MVPS, one for each league, which is a rule that should be eliminated to make room for one overall winner, and 2) most sports fans are spending their valuable time tracking the NBA, NFL, college football and the impending college basketball seasons.
Considering that MLB, like every other major sports league, caters itself to casual fans (they already know they'll reel in the die-hard fans at any time), it might serve the league better to announce its regular season winners while most fans can still remember the season.
But my question is, do sports fans really care about end-of-season MLB awards this deep into the fall? Would it hurt MLB to push up its end-of-season awards up to the first round of the playoffs?
The NBA announces its big regular season awards during the first round of its playoffs. The NFL does the same in the week preceding its postseason. Why must MLB wait until two weeks after its postseason to announce its regular season award winners?
MLB could argue that fans are as locked in as ever into the sport now that the offseason trades and free-agent signings are beginning to ramp up, especially with the Winter Meetings slated for the second week of December. But the problem there is offseason moves encourage fans to look toward next season.
By mixing regular season award winners in the same time period that teams are beginning to frantically -- and in some cases, drastically -- reshuffle their rosters, MLB fans are caught between shifting their thoughts back and forth between the 2008 and 2009 seasons.
If MLB were to announce its regular season winners during the first-round Wild Card series, fans would enjoy the benefit of having the regular season fresh in their minds. That might make Evan Longoria's Rookie of the Year award seem more acceptable than it does now, two weeks after he went 1-for-20 (.050) with one RBI in the World Series.
Fans don't care less about the MLB MVP, an award endlessly debated in the NBA and NFL, for two reasons: 1) there are two MLB MVPS, one for each league, which is a rule that should be eliminated to make room for one overall winner, and 2) most sports fans are spending their valuable time tracking the NBA, NFL, college football and the impending college basketball seasons.
Considering that MLB, like every other major sports league, caters itself to casual fans (they already know they'll reel in the die-hard fans at any time), it might serve the league better to announce its regular season winners while most fans can still remember the season.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Giants should sign CC
Buster Olney was dead-on in his blog post yesterday: The Giants should think very strongly about signing CC Sabathia.
Barry Zito's awful $126 million contract aside, the Giants are a team with no identity. You could make the case that Tim Lincecum is talented enough to be the face of the franchise, but he doesn't seem to carry the charisma to be The Man.
The Giants are a team lacking offense, but their youthful pitching staff is envied around the league. Lincecum, Matt Cain and Jonathan Sanchez have all experienced different levels of success, and they have appear to have very bright futures. What better veteran could they have to learn from than Sabathia, the epitome of a "pro's pro."
Giants fans would flock to AT&T Park to watch Sabathia every fifth day, with the excitement of Lincecum pitching the day after.
Sabathia would be back in the area in which he grew up, pitching half his games at pitcher-friendly AT&T Park, not to mention the opportunity to throw similarly friendly ballparks in Los Angeles and San Diego.
The only glaring downside from Sabathia's point of view would be the unlikelihood of reaching the playoffs. The Giants, even with an outstanding pitching rotation if Sabathia were to join the squad, would need to vastly improve their offense and bullpen to be a playoff contender.
Still, the Giants need a face to their franchise to move beyond the Barry Bonds Era and Sabathia has emphasized the appeal of playing in California and being able to hit, as a NL pitcher. All the Giants need to do is realize Zito's contract is a sunk cost. Even if Sabathia costs an arm and a leg, his dominant pitching, leadership and vivacious personality could bring the Giants just what they need: an identity.
Barry Zito's awful $126 million contract aside, the Giants are a team with no identity. You could make the case that Tim Lincecum is talented enough to be the face of the franchise, but he doesn't seem to carry the charisma to be The Man.
The Giants are a team lacking offense, but their youthful pitching staff is envied around the league. Lincecum, Matt Cain and Jonathan Sanchez have all experienced different levels of success, and they have appear to have very bright futures. What better veteran could they have to learn from than Sabathia, the epitome of a "pro's pro."
Giants fans would flock to AT&T Park to watch Sabathia every fifth day, with the excitement of Lincecum pitching the day after.
Sabathia would be back in the area in which he grew up, pitching half his games at pitcher-friendly AT&T Park, not to mention the opportunity to throw similarly friendly ballparks in Los Angeles and San Diego.
The only glaring downside from Sabathia's point of view would be the unlikelihood of reaching the playoffs. The Giants, even with an outstanding pitching rotation if Sabathia were to join the squad, would need to vastly improve their offense and bullpen to be a playoff contender.
Still, the Giants need a face to their franchise to move beyond the Barry Bonds Era and Sabathia has emphasized the appeal of playing in California and being able to hit, as a NL pitcher. All the Giants need to do is realize Zito's contract is a sunk cost. Even if Sabathia costs an arm and a leg, his dominant pitching, leadership and vivacious personality could bring the Giants just what they need: an identity.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Knicks still an exercise in futility
A change in management, from the front office to the basketball court, still hasn't represented a shift towards common sense in the New York Knicks organization.
The stubbornness of general manager Donnie Walsh and head coach Mike D'Antoni to keep Stephon Marbury on the squad despite their declaration that he won't play is same old, same old for fans alienated by poor decision after poor decision from this franchise. Hey, maybe Walsh and D'Antoni are trying to play it cool, and actually are seeking trade possibilities for Marbury. After all, Marbury is an above-average player whose $21 million salary this season can help a prospective trade partner eliminate a healthy chunk of salary cap space after the season.
But if Walsh and D'Antoni expect that their team can remove itself from all the controversy of the past few years by essentially hiding Marbury at the end of the bench, then they have another thing coming. D'Antoni's remarks yesterday that the New York press would become tired of this story and would stop reporting about it since they'd be "beating a dead horse" shows just how out-of-touch D'Antoni is with the media in his new home city. He might have enjoyed dealing with the laid-back West Coast media in Phoenix, but the Philly-NYC-Boston media triangle torches decisions like the one Walsh and D'Antoni made yesterday.
There is no way the Knicks will create a new team culture as long as perpetrators of the past few years still show up for work every day. It's bad enough that overpaid stiffs like Jerome James and Eddy Curry are still on the team. But declaring that Marbury won't play for the remainder of the season, and then trying to sell fans and the media on the fact that Marbury won't create a disturbance, is about as irrational and unrealistic as you can get.
The stubbornness of general manager Donnie Walsh and head coach Mike D'Antoni to keep Stephon Marbury on the squad despite their declaration that he won't play is same old, same old for fans alienated by poor decision after poor decision from this franchise. Hey, maybe Walsh and D'Antoni are trying to play it cool, and actually are seeking trade possibilities for Marbury. After all, Marbury is an above-average player whose $21 million salary this season can help a prospective trade partner eliminate a healthy chunk of salary cap space after the season.
But if Walsh and D'Antoni expect that their team can remove itself from all the controversy of the past few years by essentially hiding Marbury at the end of the bench, then they have another thing coming. D'Antoni's remarks yesterday that the New York press would become tired of this story and would stop reporting about it since they'd be "beating a dead horse" shows just how out-of-touch D'Antoni is with the media in his new home city. He might have enjoyed dealing with the laid-back West Coast media in Phoenix, but the Philly-NYC-Boston media triangle torches decisions like the one Walsh and D'Antoni made yesterday.
There is no way the Knicks will create a new team culture as long as perpetrators of the past few years still show up for work every day. It's bad enough that overpaid stiffs like Jerome James and Eddy Curry are still on the team. But declaring that Marbury won't play for the remainder of the season, and then trying to sell fans and the media on the fact that Marbury won't create a disturbance, is about as irrational and unrealistic as you can get.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Buffalo, Cleveland have it worse than Philly
You know, Philadelphia hasn't been that deprived of sporting excellence. The Phillies might have broke a 25-year championship drought amongst Philly's Big Four teams (Flyers, Phillies, Eagles, Sixers), but 25 years isn't that long of a time. In fact, it's as old as me. And any "drought" which is as old or younger than me just isn't enough to justify the absurd amount of national attention Philly's championship-less streak drew during the recent World Series.
Think of it this way: In the past 25 years, Philadelphians got to watch five more MVP-like years from one of MLB's greatest all-time third baseman (Mike Schmidt), the greatest power hitter in post-steroids MLB (Ryan Howard), two of the greatest NBA scorers of all-time (Dr. J and Allen Iverson), two of the more exciting and productive NFL QBs ever (Randall Cunningham and Donovan McNabb), one of the Top 10 NFL defenses of all-time (the Reggie White, Jerome Brown, Eric Allen Eagles), three new sports stadiums (Eagles, Phillies, Sixers) and I guess that Eric Lindross guy from the NHL (a league which used to be a big deal.) What I'm saying is Philly has had a few things to cherish over the years. Let's take a look at two other cities which haven't.
We'll start in Cleveland, a city which last celebrated a major sports championship (we're talking major basketball, football, baseball and hockey here). Cleveland is an ugly, industrialized city which brags about hosting the Rock N' Roll Hall of Fame as its main non-sports attraction. The Indians haven't won a World Series since 1948 and although they have appeared in three World Series since then ('54, '95 and '97), there were times when they were the flat-out embarrassment of baseball. How else do you explain a major motion picture (Major League) dedicated to profiling their miserable existence? Talk about a punch in the face followed by a punch in the stomach. How depressed would you get if a movie was made essentially making light of the inept state of your team?
As if this wasn't bad enough, Cleveland's beloved Browns -- who were dominant in the '40s and '50s and won an NFL Championship in 1964 -- were moved to Baltimore after the 1994 season. After a rich history in the NFL, including the great Dogg Pound days of the '80s, Art Modell decided that he felt like ripping the guts out of a city by heartlessly moving the entire team, history be damned. And even when the Browns returned to the NFL, in 1999, it's not like they've done much to build on their rich tradition.
The Cavaliers haven't won an NBA title since expanding into the NBA in 1970, although they did make an appearance two seasons ago during the ongoing LeBron James Era. And Bron Bron is the main reason why Cleveland can't be considered the most tortured city in American professional sports. He's a joy to watch, a potentially transcendent player who can bring the Cavs -- and Cleveland -- NBA titles. Too bad he'll likely leave for the riches and spoils of a New York franchise in two seasons. His departure would pit Cleveland at the bottom of the sports city totem pole. No city would have less fan confidence.
Unless, of course, you include Buffalo. As if being tucked away in a snowy town along Lake Erie in western New York weren't bad enough, Buffalo is one of the poorest major towns in the U.S. The fans there have two pro sports teams -- the NHL's Sabres and the NFL's Bills -- although they are originally the home of the Los Angeles Clippers, one of sport's most laughable franchises.
Anyway, the Sabres are 0-3 in the Stanley Cup in their 38 years of existence, so Buffalo hasn't truly connected with them. Does anyone really count the NHL anymore, though? Can't we just say that there are the Big Three (NFL, NBA, MLB) and a lot of other influential sports leagues (PGA Tour, NASCAR, NHL and WTA, MLS, WNBA to lesser degrees)? I think so.
But the crux of Buffalo's discontent has been the Bills. The squad which won back-to-back AFL Championships from 1964-65 has been wildly frustrating since. How about the O.J. Simpson-led squads of the '70s which battled between respectability and downright hopelessness? And how can one forget the early '90s squads, which lost four consecutive Super Bowls.
We take for advantage now that the Bills had to be one hell of a team to make four straight Super Bowls (this, the NFL era immediately preceding free agency), but those Bills teams ran into bad luck (Scott Norwood's Wide Right in SB XXV against the Giants), a dynasty on its last legs (SB XXVI against the Redskins) and a terrorizing mini-dynasty (SBs XXVII and XXVIII against the Cowboys).
And that's not to mention the Music City Miracle, one of the most controversial NFL moments ever. But, hey, when O.J. Simpson is probably your city's greatest professional athlete, even four straight Super Bowl losses and a freakish game-ending play don't seem so bad.
No matter how much Philadelphians would like to sulk in their sorrows, they have nothing on the downtrodden fans of Cleveland and Buffalo. If Philly wants to throw 25 years at America, Cleveland and Buffalo can retort with 44 and 43 years of championship-less pro sports, respectively. For that, Philadelphians can shove a cheesesteak up their asses. Enjoy your World Series you bunch of whiners!
Think of it this way: In the past 25 years, Philadelphians got to watch five more MVP-like years from one of MLB's greatest all-time third baseman (Mike Schmidt), the greatest power hitter in post-steroids MLB (Ryan Howard), two of the greatest NBA scorers of all-time (Dr. J and Allen Iverson), two of the more exciting and productive NFL QBs ever (Randall Cunningham and Donovan McNabb), one of the Top 10 NFL defenses of all-time (the Reggie White, Jerome Brown, Eric Allen Eagles), three new sports stadiums (Eagles, Phillies, Sixers) and I guess that Eric Lindross guy from the NHL (a league which used to be a big deal.) What I'm saying is Philly has had a few things to cherish over the years. Let's take a look at two other cities which haven't.
We'll start in Cleveland, a city which last celebrated a major sports championship (we're talking major basketball, football, baseball and hockey here). Cleveland is an ugly, industrialized city which brags about hosting the Rock N' Roll Hall of Fame as its main non-sports attraction. The Indians haven't won a World Series since 1948 and although they have appeared in three World Series since then ('54, '95 and '97), there were times when they were the flat-out embarrassment of baseball. How else do you explain a major motion picture (Major League) dedicated to profiling their miserable existence? Talk about a punch in the face followed by a punch in the stomach. How depressed would you get if a movie was made essentially making light of the inept state of your team?
As if this wasn't bad enough, Cleveland's beloved Browns -- who were dominant in the '40s and '50s and won an NFL Championship in 1964 -- were moved to Baltimore after the 1994 season. After a rich history in the NFL, including the great Dogg Pound days of the '80s, Art Modell decided that he felt like ripping the guts out of a city by heartlessly moving the entire team, history be damned. And even when the Browns returned to the NFL, in 1999, it's not like they've done much to build on their rich tradition.
The Cavaliers haven't won an NBA title since expanding into the NBA in 1970, although they did make an appearance two seasons ago during the ongoing LeBron James Era. And Bron Bron is the main reason why Cleveland can't be considered the most tortured city in American professional sports. He's a joy to watch, a potentially transcendent player who can bring the Cavs -- and Cleveland -- NBA titles. Too bad he'll likely leave for the riches and spoils of a New York franchise in two seasons. His departure would pit Cleveland at the bottom of the sports city totem pole. No city would have less fan confidence.
Unless, of course, you include Buffalo. As if being tucked away in a snowy town along Lake Erie in western New York weren't bad enough, Buffalo is one of the poorest major towns in the U.S. The fans there have two pro sports teams -- the NHL's Sabres and the NFL's Bills -- although they are originally the home of the Los Angeles Clippers, one of sport's most laughable franchises.
Anyway, the Sabres are 0-3 in the Stanley Cup in their 38 years of existence, so Buffalo hasn't truly connected with them. Does anyone really count the NHL anymore, though? Can't we just say that there are the Big Three (NFL, NBA, MLB) and a lot of other influential sports leagues (PGA Tour, NASCAR, NHL and WTA, MLS, WNBA to lesser degrees)? I think so.
But the crux of Buffalo's discontent has been the Bills. The squad which won back-to-back AFL Championships from 1964-65 has been wildly frustrating since. How about the O.J. Simpson-led squads of the '70s which battled between respectability and downright hopelessness? And how can one forget the early '90s squads, which lost four consecutive Super Bowls.
We take for advantage now that the Bills had to be one hell of a team to make four straight Super Bowls (this, the NFL era immediately preceding free agency), but those Bills teams ran into bad luck (Scott Norwood's Wide Right in SB XXV against the Giants), a dynasty on its last legs (SB XXVI against the Redskins) and a terrorizing mini-dynasty (SBs XXVII and XXVIII against the Cowboys).
And that's not to mention the Music City Miracle, one of the most controversial NFL moments ever. But, hey, when O.J. Simpson is probably your city's greatest professional athlete, even four straight Super Bowl losses and a freakish game-ending play don't seem so bad.
No matter how much Philadelphians would like to sulk in their sorrows, they have nothing on the downtrodden fans of Cleveland and Buffalo. If Philly wants to throw 25 years at America, Cleveland and Buffalo can retort with 44 and 43 years of championship-less pro sports, respectively. For that, Philadelphians can shove a cheesesteak up their asses. Enjoy your World Series you bunch of whiners!
Monday, October 20, 2008
Deja vu for the Cowboys
I just finished reading the book Boys Will Be Boys by Jeff Pearlman, a fantastic read about the early-mid '90s Dallas Cowboys. One of the more interesting angles in the book is how hard-ass extraordinaire Jimmy Johnson shaped a team that would win three Super Bowls, two of which were at his helm. The third was won by Barry Switzer, a laid-back, "player's" coach who replaced Johnson after the team's second Super Bowl win.
Although Switzer won the dynasty's third Super Bowl, the team culture he introduced was quite a respite from that of Johnson's.
Johnson came in more as a dictator than anything else. He was an extremely good talent evaluator who had a knack for understanding what parts of his team's roster needed help. Despite alienating many players by yelling at them like a drill sergeant and making examples out of some of the team's lower-profile players, Johnson was a great motivator who knew how to take the temperature of his team, so-to-speak. Although many of his players hated his ego and arrogance, there is no denying his success with the team. They won two Super Bowls under Johnson and essentially won the third (Deion Sanders notwithstanding) largely with players traded for, signed and drafted by Johnson.
Switzer came into the fold in '94, an old buddy of owner Jerry Jones. Although his open demeanor and buddy-buddy philosophy with his players proved a welcome change-of-pace after Johnson's regime, Switzer didn't install the one characteristic critical to the 'Boys' downfall in the mid-90s: accountability. He ran light training camps and in-season practices, but his most glaring downfall was his inability to instill discipline and accountability to the team.
Although the '94 and '95 Cowboys seemed relieved to be removed from high level of pressure and anxiety that permeated through the locker room during the Jimmy Johnson Era, a level of remorse and subtle reflection settled amongst some of the players. They realized that even though Johnson was a mean, stubborn and unrelenting S.O.B. at times, he helped produce a winning attitude. He kept the players motivated and hungry to win. Switzer's laisezz-faire attitude promoted a lazy, content attitude that took down the 'Boys.
Now, sound familiar? Just replace Jimmy Johnson with Bill Parcells and Barry Switzer with Wade Phillips. The similarities aren't entirely accurate. Neither the Parcells- nor Phillips-led Cowboys have even competed in an NFC Championship game, much less a Super Bowl. And Phillips hasn't created quite as undisciplined an environment as Switzer.
But there's no doubt Parcells assembled the core of this team, although he wasn't around to forsee Romo's development into an elite NFL quarterback. But Phillips isn't near the disciplinarian that Parcells was, and perhaps it's more evident than ever that with the 'Boys embroiled in a difficult stretch, they might need a Parcells-style coach who demands only the best out of his players. The players don't fear Phillips, as was smartly noted today by ProFootballTalk.com. And the teams that win championships are those that fear letting down each other and their coaches.
Although Switzer won the dynasty's third Super Bowl, the team culture he introduced was quite a respite from that of Johnson's.
Johnson came in more as a dictator than anything else. He was an extremely good talent evaluator who had a knack for understanding what parts of his team's roster needed help. Despite alienating many players by yelling at them like a drill sergeant and making examples out of some of the team's lower-profile players, Johnson was a great motivator who knew how to take the temperature of his team, so-to-speak. Although many of his players hated his ego and arrogance, there is no denying his success with the team. They won two Super Bowls under Johnson and essentially won the third (Deion Sanders notwithstanding) largely with players traded for, signed and drafted by Johnson.
Switzer came into the fold in '94, an old buddy of owner Jerry Jones. Although his open demeanor and buddy-buddy philosophy with his players proved a welcome change-of-pace after Johnson's regime, Switzer didn't install the one characteristic critical to the 'Boys' downfall in the mid-90s: accountability. He ran light training camps and in-season practices, but his most glaring downfall was his inability to instill discipline and accountability to the team.
Although the '94 and '95 Cowboys seemed relieved to be removed from high level of pressure and anxiety that permeated through the locker room during the Jimmy Johnson Era, a level of remorse and subtle reflection settled amongst some of the players. They realized that even though Johnson was a mean, stubborn and unrelenting S.O.B. at times, he helped produce a winning attitude. He kept the players motivated and hungry to win. Switzer's laisezz-faire attitude promoted a lazy, content attitude that took down the 'Boys.
Now, sound familiar? Just replace Jimmy Johnson with Bill Parcells and Barry Switzer with Wade Phillips. The similarities aren't entirely accurate. Neither the Parcells- nor Phillips-led Cowboys have even competed in an NFC Championship game, much less a Super Bowl. And Phillips hasn't created quite as undisciplined an environment as Switzer.
But there's no doubt Parcells assembled the core of this team, although he wasn't around to forsee Romo's development into an elite NFL quarterback. But Phillips isn't near the disciplinarian that Parcells was, and perhaps it's more evident than ever that with the 'Boys embroiled in a difficult stretch, they might need a Parcells-style coach who demands only the best out of his players. The players don't fear Phillips, as was smartly noted today by ProFootballTalk.com. And the teams that win championships are those that fear letting down each other and their coaches.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Mannywood needs to end
As a lifelong Dodgers fan, part of me will always feel indebted (unwillingly) to Manny Ramirez. It's tough to say that any one player can ever put a baseball team on his back, but Ramirez's presence with the Dodgers was the most important reason why they broke free of a season-long .500 record and climbed the National League mountain to the NLCS.
After getting traded to the Dodgers on Aug. 1, Ramirez ended the regular season with a bang, hitting .396 with 17 home runs, 53 RBIs and an astounding 1.232 OPS (including a ridiculous .489 on-base percentage) in 53 games. And his numbers might not have been his most valuable contribution to the team. His light-hearted personality and willingness to take media attention and pressure away from his teammates enabled the entire team to loosen up, have fun and play confidently. And the hot hitting didn't stop once the Dodgers reached the postseason. Manny went 13-for-25 in the playoffs with four home runs and 10 RBIs.
But even in a game of numbers such as baseball, there are other factors -- aside from statistics -- that one should consider before signing a player to a long-term contract. The crux of the Dodgers' decision to meet Ramirez's contract demands is affordability -- and not just in economic terms.
Sure, Ramirez's agent, Scott Boras, has set the market price at a minimum of 5 years/$20 million per. Boras has even stated that 6 years/close to $25 million per is a more realistic plan for Ramirez, something that might be out of the ballpark for nearly every team. Ex-Dodgers general manager Fred Claire stated in the Los Angeles Times recently that the Dodgers should consider a deal for 3 years at $20 million per year, despite Andruw Jones earning $18 million next season in the back-end of his two-year deal and Juan Pierre heading into Year 3 of his 5 year/$45 million contract. And that obviously excludes Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier, two young and ultra-productive players who should (actually, who need) to play every day.
So even if the Dodgers can fiscally afford to sign Ramirez (no given, considering their willingness to take on Ramirez and third baseman Casey Blake only if their former teams picked up their contracts), then they will be creating a situation where someone else needs to be moved. Of course, Jones does just have that one year left and it's unknown whether he will ever return to his All-Star form after an extremely disappointing 2008. In fact, Ramirez never would have been on the Dodgers' radar had Andruw Jones produced as was expected.
Anyway, there are no sure signs that the Dodgers can afford Ramirez monetarily. Can they even afford him in the sense of having his presence on the team? The Red Sox may have won two World Series with Ramirez in the lineup, but they ultimately ridded themselves of him because his teammates demanded it. Do the Dodgers want to reward a player who has such a controversial -- and quite unnerving -- past with his old ball club?
The beautiful thing about acquiring Ramirez this season was that the Dodgers basically didn't owe Ramirez a thing. They used him for his hitting ability and drawing power, with the Dodgers reaping tens of millions in extra merchandise and attendance (they were already the top drawing team in the NL without Ramirez) because of Ramirez's "charm."
Now, the Dodgers have to decide if that "charm" will have an extended shelf life. The fear is Ramirez was on his best behavior because he wants a new contract, and no matter how much Ramirez and Boras might refute his inspired play had something to do with his quest for a new deal, how many athletes have we seen over the years play better and shut up when they want to improve their bank account? And while there may be no doubt that Ramirez, even at 36, can continue to rake the ball with the best in the game, what about his porous fielding? How many runs, and games, might the lazy left fielder cost the Dodgers? He won't exactly become more spry as he nears 40.
While Angelinos might love Ramirez because he's the first true Dodger superstar since Mike Piazza, and they might love Ramirez for helping lead the Dodgers to the NLCS, the truth is the Dodgers are a team filled with exciting, young players who need to grow on their own. They don't need to play under the cloud that Ramirez might cast if he were to sign a long-term deal with the squad. With Manny, there is always risk for controversy, so why would a team with youngsters like Russell Martin and Matt Kemp and Clayton Kershaw take an unnecessary risk on a player who can fracture a clubhouse? Why not just let the younger players learn from the playoff experience they received this year, and let them take control of the squad beginning next season? The Dodgers don't need Manny to move on and improve as a team, so there's no reason to sacrifice their long-term balance sheet and their overall team pysche with a player like Manny Ramirez.
After getting traded to the Dodgers on Aug. 1, Ramirez ended the regular season with a bang, hitting .396 with 17 home runs, 53 RBIs and an astounding 1.232 OPS (including a ridiculous .489 on-base percentage) in 53 games. And his numbers might not have been his most valuable contribution to the team. His light-hearted personality and willingness to take media attention and pressure away from his teammates enabled the entire team to loosen up, have fun and play confidently. And the hot hitting didn't stop once the Dodgers reached the postseason. Manny went 13-for-25 in the playoffs with four home runs and 10 RBIs.
But even in a game of numbers such as baseball, there are other factors -- aside from statistics -- that one should consider before signing a player to a long-term contract. The crux of the Dodgers' decision to meet Ramirez's contract demands is affordability -- and not just in economic terms.
Sure, Ramirez's agent, Scott Boras, has set the market price at a minimum of 5 years/$20 million per. Boras has even stated that 6 years/close to $25 million per is a more realistic plan for Ramirez, something that might be out of the ballpark for nearly every team. Ex-Dodgers general manager Fred Claire stated in the Los Angeles Times recently that the Dodgers should consider a deal for 3 years at $20 million per year, despite Andruw Jones earning $18 million next season in the back-end of his two-year deal and Juan Pierre heading into Year 3 of his 5 year/$45 million contract. And that obviously excludes Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier, two young and ultra-productive players who should (actually, who need) to play every day.
So even if the Dodgers can fiscally afford to sign Ramirez (no given, considering their willingness to take on Ramirez and third baseman Casey Blake only if their former teams picked up their contracts), then they will be creating a situation where someone else needs to be moved. Of course, Jones does just have that one year left and it's unknown whether he will ever return to his All-Star form after an extremely disappointing 2008. In fact, Ramirez never would have been on the Dodgers' radar had Andruw Jones produced as was expected.
Anyway, there are no sure signs that the Dodgers can afford Ramirez monetarily. Can they even afford him in the sense of having his presence on the team? The Red Sox may have won two World Series with Ramirez in the lineup, but they ultimately ridded themselves of him because his teammates demanded it. Do the Dodgers want to reward a player who has such a controversial -- and quite unnerving -- past with his old ball club?
The beautiful thing about acquiring Ramirez this season was that the Dodgers basically didn't owe Ramirez a thing. They used him for his hitting ability and drawing power, with the Dodgers reaping tens of millions in extra merchandise and attendance (they were already the top drawing team in the NL without Ramirez) because of Ramirez's "charm."
Now, the Dodgers have to decide if that "charm" will have an extended shelf life. The fear is Ramirez was on his best behavior because he wants a new contract, and no matter how much Ramirez and Boras might refute his inspired play had something to do with his quest for a new deal, how many athletes have we seen over the years play better and shut up when they want to improve their bank account? And while there may be no doubt that Ramirez, even at 36, can continue to rake the ball with the best in the game, what about his porous fielding? How many runs, and games, might the lazy left fielder cost the Dodgers? He won't exactly become more spry as he nears 40.
While Angelinos might love Ramirez because he's the first true Dodger superstar since Mike Piazza, and they might love Ramirez for helping lead the Dodgers to the NLCS, the truth is the Dodgers are a team filled with exciting, young players who need to grow on their own. They don't need to play under the cloud that Ramirez might cast if he were to sign a long-term deal with the squad. With Manny, there is always risk for controversy, so why would a team with youngsters like Russell Martin and Matt Kemp and Clayton Kershaw take an unnecessary risk on a player who can fracture a clubhouse? Why not just let the younger players learn from the playoff experience they received this year, and let them take control of the squad beginning next season? The Dodgers don't need Manny to move on and improve as a team, so there's no reason to sacrifice their long-term balance sheet and their overall team pysche with a player like Manny Ramirez.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Random thoughts...While craving a Silo burger and fries
What would an impending NBA season be without the Shaq Man threatening a player, coach or entire franchise? Shaq says the Spurs were "cowardly" in fouling him in last year's playoffs while maintaining a lead. I say the Spurs played smart basketball by exposing a glaring weakness of their opponent. As depressing as it is to see Shaq hobble up and down the floor, it's even more gut-wrenching to read him talk trash. The big fella's bark is much louder than his bite these days, so I'm not expecting any of his vintage 30/15 efforts against the Spurs this year...
Fantasy owners, prepare for frustration in owning a Dallas Cowboy receiver. With Tony Romo out for at least a few weeks, Brad Johnson and his linguine arm will have a tough time throwing downfield to T.O. and Roy Williams. Add Jason Witten (probably the most likely to be consistent) and Pat Crayton, and you have yourself a full-fledged cluster-you-know-what. And when Romo gets back, will he feel more indebted to making T.O. happy, welcoming Roy to the team by targeting him, targeting Crayton to let him know he won't get lost in the shuffle or going to Witten, his best bud? Some might say Romo holds the key to unlocking the treasure chest that is the Cowboys' receiving core, but no NFL quarterback will be under more pressure to diversify his passes...
Actual Article That One Would Suspect to Find on The Onion: Dan Quayle gave Sarah Palin some vice presidential-advice. That's like Pacman Jones advising an NFL rookie on how to conduct one's self in public...
In the end, Rays-Phillies is probably for the better. The teams have been more consistently superior all season than the Red Sox and Dodgers, and they really have the more complete teams. There's enough star power among Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, Jimmy Rollins, B.J. Upton, Evan Longoria and Carl Crawford for MLB to promote. The obvious storylines would be Tampa Bay emerging as an elite team, ala the Cleveland Indians in Major League. And then there's Philadelphia's quest to end the 26-year professional sports team championship drought. And, no, Philly's Arena Football League's title this year doesn't count...
Fantasy owners, prepare for frustration in owning a Dallas Cowboy receiver. With Tony Romo out for at least a few weeks, Brad Johnson and his linguine arm will have a tough time throwing downfield to T.O. and Roy Williams. Add Jason Witten (probably the most likely to be consistent) and Pat Crayton, and you have yourself a full-fledged cluster-you-know-what. And when Romo gets back, will he feel more indebted to making T.O. happy, welcoming Roy to the team by targeting him, targeting Crayton to let him know he won't get lost in the shuffle or going to Witten, his best bud? Some might say Romo holds the key to unlocking the treasure chest that is the Cowboys' receiving core, but no NFL quarterback will be under more pressure to diversify his passes...
Actual Article That One Would Suspect to Find on The Onion: Dan Quayle gave Sarah Palin some vice presidential-advice. That's like Pacman Jones advising an NFL rookie on how to conduct one's self in public...
In the end, Rays-Phillies is probably for the better. The teams have been more consistently superior all season than the Red Sox and Dodgers, and they really have the more complete teams. There's enough star power among Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, Jimmy Rollins, B.J. Upton, Evan Longoria and Carl Crawford for MLB to promote. The obvious storylines would be Tampa Bay emerging as an elite team, ala the Cleveland Indians in Major League. And then there's Philadelphia's quest to end the 26-year professional sports team championship drought. And, no, Philly's Arena Football League's title this year doesn't count...
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Replay eliminates great plays
Instant replay has helped correct numerous poor calls over the years, but there are times when even great plays are nullified due to their illegality.
During the Cowboys-Cardinals game today, Cardinals quarterback targeted wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald on a fade route in the right corner of the end zone. Warner threw a beautiful, arching pass towards the corner, where only Fitzgerald could grab it. And Fitzgerald did, contorting his body with his back to the crowd, placing his left foot down as his momentum was taking him out the side of the end zone. However, he tried landing his right foot just inside the side white line, the line that is the right boundary of the end zone.
At first glimpse, it appeared that Fitzgerald got his right foot down, but replay showed that the right edge of his right foot touched the white line, indicating that he was out-of-bounds and nullifying his touchdown.
The call was correct, since Fitzgerald was out-of-bounds. But it was still a spectacular combination of balance and grace for the wide receiver to attempt to place both his feet in the end zone. And considering that his right foot, barely, just barely, was out-of-bounds, it was disappointing to see a wonderful effort stripped away and essentially lost forever in the ever-expanding list of NFL touchdown plays.
I understand that black and white issue that replay attempts to solve (either a foot is in or out, a ball is dropped or caught), but it seems that some plays are so close to being technically legal. As a fan, I just wish some plays could be left alone as a means of rewarding an outstanding effort from a player.
Of course, the Cardinals received another chance at scoring a touchdown. And guess what the scoring play was? A fade route by Fitzgerald for a touchdown.
During the Cowboys-Cardinals game today, Cardinals quarterback targeted wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald on a fade route in the right corner of the end zone. Warner threw a beautiful, arching pass towards the corner, where only Fitzgerald could grab it. And Fitzgerald did, contorting his body with his back to the crowd, placing his left foot down as his momentum was taking him out the side of the end zone. However, he tried landing his right foot just inside the side white line, the line that is the right boundary of the end zone.
At first glimpse, it appeared that Fitzgerald got his right foot down, but replay showed that the right edge of his right foot touched the white line, indicating that he was out-of-bounds and nullifying his touchdown.
The call was correct, since Fitzgerald was out-of-bounds. But it was still a spectacular combination of balance and grace for the wide receiver to attempt to place both his feet in the end zone. And considering that his right foot, barely, just barely, was out-of-bounds, it was disappointing to see a wonderful effort stripped away and essentially lost forever in the ever-expanding list of NFL touchdown plays.
I understand that black and white issue that replay attempts to solve (either a foot is in or out, a ball is dropped or caught), but it seems that some plays are so close to being technically legal. As a fan, I just wish some plays could be left alone as a means of rewarding an outstanding effort from a player.
Of course, the Cardinals received another chance at scoring a touchdown. And guess what the scoring play was? A fade route by Fitzgerald for a touchdown.
Red River officiating
It seems that we're in a sports world littered with writers proclaiming every player, play, game and team to be the "greatest" or "worst" ever. Part of this is probably meant as a way to generate interest in one's column and perhaps even provoke thought in the reader. Another reason for this may be that, as human beings, we probably act with a greater level of emotion to an event we have just witnessed, since we are able to recall a greater number of details from a game or play we've just watched than from a game or play 1, 5 or 10 years ago.
So, I will join in the "best" or "worst" foray -- that I typically despise. But yesterday's Texas-Oklahoma game was seemingly a contest among the referees in "worst calls of all-time." The two roughing the passer calls against Oklahoma linebacker Travis Lewis on Texas quarterback Colt McCoy were unforgivably horrendous. There is something to be said for protecting the health of quarterbacks, but throwing a flag (or two) on a defender who is visibly letting up on running down a quarterback headed for the sidelines is asinine. If the calls were made because McCoy was running along the Texas sidelines, the calls were still atrocious. What difference should it make what sideline a player is running along? The refs should've taken in account that Lewis slowed down and even tried to help prop up McCoy as he ran into him.
The Oklahoma interception in Texas' endzone which was ruled a dropped pass was equally frustrating. The player clearly caught the ball in the endzone, held onto it as he fell to the ground and let it fall from his grasp only after he hit the ground. Television viewers were able to see this as it happened in realtime, so why couldn't the refs, even with the benefit of replay?
I'm not implying that there was a conspiracy against Oklahoma (there were some very bad calls made against Texas), but one would hope the quality of officiating in such a big game would be much better.
So, I will join in the "best" or "worst" foray -- that I typically despise. But yesterday's Texas-Oklahoma game was seemingly a contest among the referees in "worst calls of all-time." The two roughing the passer calls against Oklahoma linebacker Travis Lewis on Texas quarterback Colt McCoy were unforgivably horrendous. There is something to be said for protecting the health of quarterbacks, but throwing a flag (or two) on a defender who is visibly letting up on running down a quarterback headed for the sidelines is asinine. If the calls were made because McCoy was running along the Texas sidelines, the calls were still atrocious. What difference should it make what sideline a player is running along? The refs should've taken in account that Lewis slowed down and even tried to help prop up McCoy as he ran into him.
The Oklahoma interception in Texas' endzone which was ruled a dropped pass was equally frustrating. The player clearly caught the ball in the endzone, held onto it as he fell to the ground and let it fall from his grasp only after he hit the ground. Television viewers were able to see this as it happened in realtime, so why couldn't the refs, even with the benefit of replay?
I'm not implying that there was a conspiracy against Oklahoma (there were some very bad calls made against Texas), but one would hope the quality of officiating in such a big game would be much better.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Cubs wise to keep Harden
The Cubs exercised a $7 million option on Rich Harden today, acting before a deadline which would have allowed the pitcher to become a free agent. Even though the injury-prone righty is expected to have his right elbow checked out soon, the Cubs made the correct decision in ensuring his presence in their pitching rotation next year.
Harden managed to get through 148 innings over 25 starts this season, his highest totals in each category since 2004. This past season was actually the first time he remained healthy for most of the season since 2005, a victory in-and-of itself. Many baseball fans had wondered what types of numbers Harden could put up if he simply stayed healthy. Well, how do 181 strikeouts (for a 11.0 K/9 rate), a 2.07 ERA and a 1.06 WHIP sound?
After a midseason trade to the Cubs, Harden would have garnered Cy Young-talk for his spectacular numbers with the Cubbies (5-1, 89 Ks in 71 innings, 1.77 ERA, 0.97 WHIP) if not for CC Sabathia, another American League pitcher traded to a National League Central Division team.
When you look at Harden's production, you would suspect that a pitcher that effective at his age (he'll turn 27 later this year) could garner a truly daunting per year salary, something in the range of $15 million-plus. That's his upside. The downside is teams will always be risking whatever salary they pay for the reward of him staying healthy long enough to have a sizeable positive impact on his team.
For a big-market club such as the Cubs, who have had annual World Series ambitions for a few years now, $7 million is a small price to pay for a pitcher who can be a true difference-maker when he stays healthy. And considering the Cubs should bring back most of the squad that was supposed to win the Series this year, making sure Harden sticks around for another year at a very reasonable salary (by ace pitcher standards) is well worth the gamble, injury risk be damned.
Harden managed to get through 148 innings over 25 starts this season, his highest totals in each category since 2004. This past season was actually the first time he remained healthy for most of the season since 2005, a victory in-and-of itself. Many baseball fans had wondered what types of numbers Harden could put up if he simply stayed healthy. Well, how do 181 strikeouts (for a 11.0 K/9 rate), a 2.07 ERA and a 1.06 WHIP sound?
After a midseason trade to the Cubs, Harden would have garnered Cy Young-talk for his spectacular numbers with the Cubbies (5-1, 89 Ks in 71 innings, 1.77 ERA, 0.97 WHIP) if not for CC Sabathia, another American League pitcher traded to a National League Central Division team.
When you look at Harden's production, you would suspect that a pitcher that effective at his age (he'll turn 27 later this year) could garner a truly daunting per year salary, something in the range of $15 million-plus. That's his upside. The downside is teams will always be risking whatever salary they pay for the reward of him staying healthy long enough to have a sizeable positive impact on his team.
For a big-market club such as the Cubs, who have had annual World Series ambitions for a few years now, $7 million is a small price to pay for a pitcher who can be a true difference-maker when he stays healthy. And considering the Cubs should bring back most of the squad that was supposed to win the Series this year, making sure Harden sticks around for another year at a very reasonable salary (by ace pitcher standards) is well worth the gamble, injury risk be damned.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Follow the yellow brick road...created by TNT
One of the most frustrating aspects of sports coverage today is the bloated set of most pre- and post-game football shows. This doesn't seem to occur often in baseball or basketball, just football. Perhaps it's because most games are played on one day, so TV networks feel that a higher number of analysts will somehow give the viewer a greater depth of knowledge about all the players and teams that encompass the NFL.
Although FOX (Howie Long, Terry Bradshaw, Jimmy Johnson) and CBS (Dan Marino, Boomer Esiason, Shannon Sharpe) have held steady with their studio cores, each has added another member (Michael Strahan on FOX, Bill Cowher on CBS) to their sets in the last two years. Instead of the idea of more great football minds contributing to a higher amount of football intellectualism, all viewers seem to get is a discombobulated and incohesive group of individuals.
NBC has taken this to another level by housing seven (I think) people on their "Football Night America" set on Sundays. The fact that I literally had to count on my fingers the number of guys on the set indicates how overwhelming the show can be. There are three "football" guys (Cris Collinsworth, Jerome Bettis, Tiki Barber) and four "media" guys (Bob Costas, Dan Patrick, Keith Olberman, Peter King), although King plays more of the "insider" role while Collinsworth can cross over into the "media" and "insider" roles himself.
Costas is supposed to be the primary host of the show while DP and KO bring back memories of their fantastic ESPN days by co-hosting game highlights packages. They're all in different rooms, on different sets, with different opinions (and sometimes the same) on different topics. It's mind-numbingly awful television. There is no rhythm, no chemistry, no sense that these guys would actually hang out off of the set. So, I have an idea to break up this seven-man crew. Style it after TNT's "Inside The NBA," which offers a three-man set which sometimes expands to four.
First, pick a host. I would drop Olberman out of contention since he is a blithering, self-indulgant smart-ass. Patrick is a great choice, although I've found him to be immensely funnier and more personable as a radio voice than a studio host. I'm probably one of the few who feel that Costas is less a preppy, New Yorker-type elitist than just a very solid, intelligent and objective studio host. Costas would be my choice to take charge.
Collinsworth is a must, as he would play the Kenny Smith-role: a former player who has connections everywhere and is funny and hip enough to relate to old and young audiences alike.
Some might pick Bettis as the outgoing, charming player who would fill the Charles Barkley role, but I'd go with Barber. He is superior at expressing his thoughts and I feel he has a smaller chance of falling into the Tim Hardaway/Emmitt Smith trap than does Bettis. Barber could take a course in growing some balls and lightening up, but I'd give him a chance with Costas and Collinsworth.
If nothing else, you would at least have a smart triumvirate of broadcasters who won't embarrass themselves. Sometimes, that's better than going for a home run with "funny" guys who aren't funny.
Lastly, King could play the "insider" role incredibly well, and he has a personality to go with his great football insight and Rolodex-like knowledge of the NFL.
Bob Costas, Cris Collinsworth, Tiki Barber and (occasionally) Peter King. That's the group NBC should go to battle with every Sunday. And that's the group I would actually spend my time watching instead of what I do now when "Football Night America" comes on: anything else.
Although FOX (Howie Long, Terry Bradshaw, Jimmy Johnson) and CBS (Dan Marino, Boomer Esiason, Shannon Sharpe) have held steady with their studio cores, each has added another member (Michael Strahan on FOX, Bill Cowher on CBS) to their sets in the last two years. Instead of the idea of more great football minds contributing to a higher amount of football intellectualism, all viewers seem to get is a discombobulated and incohesive group of individuals.
NBC has taken this to another level by housing seven (I think) people on their "Football Night America" set on Sundays. The fact that I literally had to count on my fingers the number of guys on the set indicates how overwhelming the show can be. There are three "football" guys (Cris Collinsworth, Jerome Bettis, Tiki Barber) and four "media" guys (Bob Costas, Dan Patrick, Keith Olberman, Peter King), although King plays more of the "insider" role while Collinsworth can cross over into the "media" and "insider" roles himself.
Costas is supposed to be the primary host of the show while DP and KO bring back memories of their fantastic ESPN days by co-hosting game highlights packages. They're all in different rooms, on different sets, with different opinions (and sometimes the same) on different topics. It's mind-numbingly awful television. There is no rhythm, no chemistry, no sense that these guys would actually hang out off of the set. So, I have an idea to break up this seven-man crew. Style it after TNT's "Inside The NBA," which offers a three-man set which sometimes expands to four.
First, pick a host. I would drop Olberman out of contention since he is a blithering, self-indulgant smart-ass. Patrick is a great choice, although I've found him to be immensely funnier and more personable as a radio voice than a studio host. I'm probably one of the few who feel that Costas is less a preppy, New Yorker-type elitist than just a very solid, intelligent and objective studio host. Costas would be my choice to take charge.
Collinsworth is a must, as he would play the Kenny Smith-role: a former player who has connections everywhere and is funny and hip enough to relate to old and young audiences alike.
Some might pick Bettis as the outgoing, charming player who would fill the Charles Barkley role, but I'd go with Barber. He is superior at expressing his thoughts and I feel he has a smaller chance of falling into the Tim Hardaway/Emmitt Smith trap than does Bettis. Barber could take a course in growing some balls and lightening up, but I'd give him a chance with Costas and Collinsworth.
If nothing else, you would at least have a smart triumvirate of broadcasters who won't embarrass themselves. Sometimes, that's better than going for a home run with "funny" guys who aren't funny.
Lastly, King could play the "insider" role incredibly well, and he has a personality to go with his great football insight and Rolodex-like knowledge of the NFL.
Bob Costas, Cris Collinsworth, Tiki Barber and (occasionally) Peter King. That's the group NBC should go to battle with every Sunday. And that's the group I would actually spend my time watching instead of what I do now when "Football Night America" comes on: anything else.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Catching up with Random Thoughts
I'm beginning to find out how time-consuming Life can be, even moreso than College. I thought I had no time to do everything I wanted in College, but Life moves just as quickly. Maybe I should call it ACL (After-College Life). Or PCL (Post-College Life). Anything acronym that sounds like a knee ligament should work. Anyway, random thoughts, some of which I will try to detail in greater depth sometime this week...
The Dodgers are in the NLCS!!! For the first time since that magical year of 1988!! It's been an up-and-down year for me as a sports fan, with UCLA reaching the Final Four for the third straight year (yet going home without a ring), the Lakers reaching the Finals again (yet losing to the Celtics, an agonizing defeat that finally linked my generation of Lakers fans to previous generations) and now the Dodgers are four wins away from the World Series. Of course, in a year filled with the Pats-Giants Super Bowl, Tiger winning the U.S. Open in five days on a torn knee, Chalmers sending a great college basketball final into overtime, a Lakers/Celtics NBA Finals match, the Federer/Nadal Wimbledon final, the Rays making a postseason run, Sabathia in Milwaukee/Manny in Los Angeles, AND a Summer Olympics highlighted by Phelps winning eight Golds and the U.S. regaining its basketball superiority culminating in a C-L-A-S-S-I-C Gold Medal match that started at 2:30 in the morning on the East Coast, there is only so much we as sports fans can bitch and moan about...
Lamar Odom at point guard. Wrong offensive system, but nice thought...
Reason No. 5,423 why fantasy football sucks. DeAngelo Williams finally pulls a three-touchdown game out of his ass, just when fantasy owners least expect it. Jonathan Steward had all but wrapped up the sole starting role, but now Williams has reached back and re-gained fantasy relevance. How can fantasy owners ever predict what will happen in football?...
Carson Palmer is throwing like his sister...
Why do so many USC offensive players from the Pete Carroll Era flame out in the NFL? Palmer, Leinart, Reggie Bush, LenDale White, Mike Williams, Dwayne Jarrett. Those are six powerhouse collegiate players from the last few years, but they have been disappointing to terrible in their NFL careers...
The Dodgers are in the NLCS!!! For the first time since that magical year of 1988!! It's been an up-and-down year for me as a sports fan, with UCLA reaching the Final Four for the third straight year (yet going home without a ring), the Lakers reaching the Finals again (yet losing to the Celtics, an agonizing defeat that finally linked my generation of Lakers fans to previous generations) and now the Dodgers are four wins away from the World Series. Of course, in a year filled with the Pats-Giants Super Bowl, Tiger winning the U.S. Open in five days on a torn knee, Chalmers sending a great college basketball final into overtime, a Lakers/Celtics NBA Finals match, the Federer/Nadal Wimbledon final, the Rays making a postseason run, Sabathia in Milwaukee/Manny in Los Angeles, AND a Summer Olympics highlighted by Phelps winning eight Golds and the U.S. regaining its basketball superiority culminating in a C-L-A-S-S-I-C Gold Medal match that started at 2:30 in the morning on the East Coast, there is only so much we as sports fans can bitch and moan about...
Lamar Odom at point guard. Wrong offensive system, but nice thought...
Reason No. 5,423 why fantasy football sucks. DeAngelo Williams finally pulls a three-touchdown game out of his ass, just when fantasy owners least expect it. Jonathan Steward had all but wrapped up the sole starting role, but now Williams has reached back and re-gained fantasy relevance. How can fantasy owners ever predict what will happen in football?...
Carson Palmer is throwing like his sister...
Why do so many USC offensive players from the Pete Carroll Era flame out in the NFL? Palmer, Leinart, Reggie Bush, LenDale White, Mike Williams, Dwayne Jarrett. Those are six powerhouse collegiate players from the last few years, but they have been disappointing to terrible in their NFL careers...
Friday, October 3, 2008
Plans for the weekend
Writing, writing, writing on this. What a hectic week, but I have a plethora of topics in my head which need to be squeezed out through my fingers and onto this blog. That didn't make sense.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
The final day
It's Sunday, which means a day of recovering from boozing on Saturday, a day of NFL football and, being that it's the last week of the MLB regular season, a day of tracking fantasy baseball for the last time until April. If I were able to insert those little face moods that you usually see on message boards, I'd post a :(.
That said, I can end the season on a :) note IF the Cokers maintain their 6-3-1 lead. I'm only up four RBIs heading into today, but a tie with wins, a narrow ERA lead and narrow WHIP defecit are the stats to track today. Slutty Tom can actually win if his four starting pitchers notch him just one win and lower his ERA below mine.
Sunday's potential win would be even sweeter since it would be a back-to-back title for me. And that means my fellow competitors in the RedZone will not hear the end of it, if it happens.
Looking forward to a comfortable Sunday on the couch, contributing nothing good to the world. :).
That said, I can end the season on a :) note IF the Cokers maintain their 6-3-1 lead. I'm only up four RBIs heading into today, but a tie with wins, a narrow ERA lead and narrow WHIP defecit are the stats to track today. Slutty Tom can actually win if his four starting pitchers notch him just one win and lower his ERA below mine.
Sunday's potential win would be even sweeter since it would be a back-to-back title for me. And that means my fellow competitors in the RedZone will not hear the end of it, if it happens.
Looking forward to a comfortable Sunday on the couch, contributing nothing good to the world. :).
Friday, September 26, 2008
Still surviving
And now we're in the stretch run. There's just three days left in the RedZone baseball season, and my lead looks strong if you were to just look at the overall score. 7-3 always looks great in head-to-head play.
Of course, one of my fears heading into this week has come to fruition: my relievers are crapping Colonel Coker's bed. A night after Luis Ayala gave up three earned runs in another Mets collapse, J.J. Putz served up a two-run homer to boost my ERA to 5.00 (.34 better than Slutty Tom) and my WHIP to 1.59 (.06 worse). The silver lining is that my boy Vladdy Guerrero hit that homer, helping me take over the RBI lead, 20-19.
Not only is my ERA lead slim, but I have one "point" leads in counting stats such as wins (3-2), saves (same) and RBIs (20-19). This baby can shift at any moment. That said, I have six closers rearing to go today and Slutty has two starters, Andy Sonnanstine and Scott Richmond. Two good outings could give Tom the tie or lead in wins while also lowering his ERA below mine. That would create a 5-5 or 5-4-1 score, offensive stat changes notwithstanding.
This shapes up to be quite a Friday night, spent inside my apartment (my last weekend there, actually) tracking the match and HOPEFULLY watching our two presidential candidates debate.
Of course, one of my fears heading into this week has come to fruition: my relievers are crapping Colonel Coker's bed. A night after Luis Ayala gave up three earned runs in another Mets collapse, J.J. Putz served up a two-run homer to boost my ERA to 5.00 (.34 better than Slutty Tom) and my WHIP to 1.59 (.06 worse). The silver lining is that my boy Vladdy Guerrero hit that homer, helping me take over the RBI lead, 20-19.
Not only is my ERA lead slim, but I have one "point" leads in counting stats such as wins (3-2), saves (same) and RBIs (20-19). This baby can shift at any moment. That said, I have six closers rearing to go today and Slutty has two starters, Andy Sonnanstine and Scott Richmond. Two good outings could give Tom the tie or lead in wins while also lowering his ERA below mine. That would create a 5-5 or 5-4-1 score, offensive stat changes notwithstanding.
This shapes up to be quite a Friday night, spent inside my apartment (my last weekend there, actually) tracking the match and HOPEFULLY watching our two presidential candidates debate.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
More Random Thoughts from Championship Week
Score through two days: I'm up 5-4-1. I'm ahead by one in four different counting stats (HR, SB, W, SV) with a .08 lead in WHIP. Slutty Tom is leads RBIs by 1, Ks by 5, OPS by .11 and ERA by a relatively healty .88 margin. We're tied in runs...
Living on the East Coast, there are plenty of late-night MLB games which I don't stay up for. I had to get to bed early last night, missing three or four West Coast games in the process. So it was somewhat of a surprise this morning when I awoke to find that J.J. Putz secured a save, putting me up by 1 in that cat. Troy Tulowitzki added on to what was a 2-for-2 night when I went to bed with a home run and RBIs to give me the lead in homers and put me one RBI short of Slutty. Waking up to notice these late-night stats the next morning is like finding $20 in the back pocket of a pair of pants you haven't worn in a week. I might go to bed at 10 tonight...
Slutty Tom is at it again. Wandy actually did well last night, striking out seven batters in five shutout innings (even though he had been assigned an earned run after the second inning). Evidently that performance gave Slutty the confidence to start the vaunted Edwin Jackson/Jonathan Sanchez duo tonight. They've actually been very productive pitchers this year, so I can't knock Slutty's hustle...
I start Clayton Kershaw and Adam Wainwright tonight. I'm going with my starters this week for unknown reasons, even to myself. I guess part of me wants to play the strikeout/win game with Slutty Tom this week. I was able to beat Kevin last week by relying solely on my relievers to rack up saves and keep down my ERA and WHIP. I just don't have the confidence in my relievers that they will be as stellar as last week, so I'm trying to be proactive in attaining strikeouts and, possibly, wins. It's a gamble that hopefully will pay off, but I'm banking on this matchup going down to the wire on Sunday.
Living on the East Coast, there are plenty of late-night MLB games which I don't stay up for. I had to get to bed early last night, missing three or four West Coast games in the process. So it was somewhat of a surprise this morning when I awoke to find that J.J. Putz secured a save, putting me up by 1 in that cat. Troy Tulowitzki added on to what was a 2-for-2 night when I went to bed with a home run and RBIs to give me the lead in homers and put me one RBI short of Slutty. Waking up to notice these late-night stats the next morning is like finding $20 in the back pocket of a pair of pants you haven't worn in a week. I might go to bed at 10 tonight...
Slutty Tom is at it again. Wandy actually did well last night, striking out seven batters in five shutout innings (even though he had been assigned an earned run after the second inning). Evidently that performance gave Slutty the confidence to start the vaunted Edwin Jackson/Jonathan Sanchez duo tonight. They've actually been very productive pitchers this year, so I can't knock Slutty's hustle...
I start Clayton Kershaw and Adam Wainwright tonight. I'm going with my starters this week for unknown reasons, even to myself. I guess part of me wants to play the strikeout/win game with Slutty Tom this week. I was able to beat Kevin last week by relying solely on my relievers to rack up saves and keep down my ERA and WHIP. I just don't have the confidence in my relievers that they will be as stellar as last week, so I'm trying to be proactive in attaining strikeouts and, possibly, wins. It's a gamble that hopefully will pay off, but I'm banking on this matchup going down to the wire on Sunday.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Tom gets Slutty
The dude I'm competing against this week is named Tom Patterson. We know him as Slutty Nuns, a team name that is supposed to be witty because it's an oxymoron. We all know who the real moron is, though.
Slutty Tom added Wandy Rodriguez today as a probable starter, and this is what you have to love about fantasy baseball championship week: Wandy Rodriguez is viewed as a welcomed addition. In Slutty's fairness, Wandy has been wonderful at home (Houston's Minute Maid Park) in his last two starts, posting a 14/1 K/BB ratio with just one earned run allowed in 12 2/3 innings. Those starts did come at the end of August, so will that success at home translate over to his start today, in late September? There's no telling what can happen when Wandy Rodriguez starts.
I'm currently up 5-3-2 after one day, with ERA and WHIP shaping up to be true battles. I'm ahead in ERA 4.66 to 5.14, but behind in WHIP 1.76 to Slutty's 1.43. And the rotation flux will continue as Slutty Tom and I decide which crappy starters we think might have a chance of helping us win the RedZone crown.
Slutty Tom added Wandy Rodriguez today as a probable starter, and this is what you have to love about fantasy baseball championship week: Wandy Rodriguez is viewed as a welcomed addition. In Slutty's fairness, Wandy has been wonderful at home (Houston's Minute Maid Park) in his last two starts, posting a 14/1 K/BB ratio with just one earned run allowed in 12 2/3 innings. Those starts did come at the end of August, so will that success at home translate over to his start today, in late September? There's no telling what can happen when Wandy Rodriguez starts.
I'm currently up 5-3-2 after one day, with ERA and WHIP shaping up to be true battles. I'm ahead in ERA 4.66 to 5.14, but behind in WHIP 1.76 to Slutty's 1.43. And the rotation flux will continue as Slutty Tom and I decide which crappy starters we think might have a chance of helping us win the RedZone crown.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)