I have no idea what is going on over at ESPN this week. JemeHill wrote an article I actually agreed with and Rick Reilly wrote an article that actually makes sense, though I do have a question or two about it. Let's do a quick run through of this week's most interesting topics that won't go away.
1. It is fitting to start it of with Peter King's Tuesday morning followup to his MMQB.
If Matthew Stafford makes it, he'll owe something to four NFL quarterbacks: Peyton and Eli Manning (he went to the Manning Passing Camp this summer and took away lessons on how being a great decision-maker makes a great quarterback),
If a college quarterback has to go to a passing camp during the summer and needs lessons on how being a great decision maker makes you a great quarterback...I don't even have a punchline here, this just seems like it would be terribly obvious.
Jay Cutler (he was schooled by Cutler at a high-school camp and loved his moxie)
Moxie being defined as "the ability to throw interceptions when trying to do too much at the end of a football game."
and Drew Brees.
I just wanted to take a moment to toot my own horn. I claimed in 2001 the Chargers were geniuses for trading with the Falcons for the rights to the first pick in the draft, because I thought Brees was actually going to be a better quarterback than Mike Vick. I actually thought they should have taken Brees instead of Vick in the #1 spot. You don't have to believe me, and I have no real proof, but I did believed this. Just ignore the fact I really thought Charles Rogers would be the second greatest receiver of all time when he retired. Please also ignore the fact I have a huge grudge against Vick, even in 2001, and wanted him to fail.
I had a good meeting with new Tampa Bay GM Mark Dominik, who's an impressive and bright guy.
"Our goal is to take care of our young, core players. The veterans here are important to our future.
1 day later the Bucs cut Derrick Brooks, Joey Galloway, and Warrick Dunn. Maybe the reason the veterans were so important to the Buccaneers is because they make so much money that you can cut them and save money for good younger, core players. Or maybe I am the only one that thinks it is a contradiction for the GM to come out and say the veterans are important and then cut two of the most respected and decorated veterans in team history.
Saturday makes Manning's job a lot more comfortable. So, yes, I think it is a mistake by the Colts. A rare one.
The Colts never make mistakes, which is why they have won so many playoff games over the years. It's because they never make mistakes on defense personnel choices and let every single free agent linebacker they have go to another team and not resign them. Ok, I am being very picky but they do let a lot of free agent LB's go.
From Brian Woodward of Harrisburg, N.C.: "Thanks for pointing out the incongruity in the Carolina Panthers' decision to lay off 20 employees while at the same time they commit $76.5 million to two players. Charlotte and the surrounding area, like many cities, is feeling the negative impact of the floundering economy. Generally, sports provide an opportunity for us to suspend the challenges of our daily lives while we cheer for our team. In this instance, the Panthers' decision only reminded us of the gloom of the economy. I know that running an NFL franchise is a business, and tough decisions have to be made, but I feel that the Panthers made the wrong decision in this instance. Why not pay the $1 million to $2 million to the 20 people who want to be there rather than $16.5 million to someone who doesn't?''
Hi Brian. You are a moron. Why comment on an issue you clearly do not follow correctly? You are from North Carolina, you should know the Panthers have no intention of keeping Julius Peppers, so they do not intend to pay him $16.5 million for the upcoming year. It sucks that people got laid off, it really does, but if you can't understand why the Panthers committed that much money to Gross/Peppers (and yet another sign you don't understand sports, because they never committed that entire amount, because it is not all guaranteed) then you don't understand sports.
In Magical Happy Land everyone gets to keep their job and the athletes have to go search for work, but in Real Life Land Jordan Gross's/Julius Pepper's jersey sales combine to make more money for the Panthers than two people who got laid off. I don't want to get laid off and I would be unhappy if I was in the situation, but you have to understand how much money an NFL franchise brings to a city.
From Jack Ramey of Washington: "I agree whole-heartedly with your Panthers sentiment ... but tell me, when's the last time anyone paid $60 a ticket to watch those same loyal employees at work?''
Sixty? Try $150.
$150, Peter? I paid $67 dollars to see the Panthers play a little over one month ago. I realize closer tickets where Peter sits are more expensive but you can get good seats for $60.
From David of Philly: "What makes Matt Cassel different from the other quarterbacks who have one decent year. Sure, he played well this year. But A.J. Feeley played well as a starter in Philadelphia but couldn't get anything done in Miami. Derek Anderson had a great year in Cleveland before falling apart this year.
Cassel's done it on a very high, playoff-caliber level already, and Feeley and Anderson haven't, and there's doubt either of them can do it.
Wrong! Matt Cassel has never started at quarterback in the NFL playoffs, so he has not done it on a "very high, playoff caliber level." He led his team to a 11-5 record last year and Derek Anderson's team did not make the playoffs either and he led his team to a 10-6 record. They are very similar, plus Cassel arguably had a better team around him, which makes his feat slightly less impressive.
Just because you love Matt Cassel with all your heart and soul and he makes you tingle in your private places doesn't mean he is more special than any other quarterback. When is Peter King's infatuation with Matt Cassel going to end? How the hell does he get away with saying Cassel has performed at a "very high, playoff-caliber level" when the Patriots did not make the playoffs and Cassel did not make the Pro Bowl? He is indicating Derek Anderson did play at a high level, though Anderson make the Pro Bowl (which does not mean much, but he did make it) and his team barely missed out on a playoff spot, just like the Patriots did. He needs to quit with the biased journalism, it's like he is Cassel's agent.
2. Here is Rick Reilly's actually good column. I will nitpick it though.
His one dream was to take Jake to a Broncos game. Sometimes on the reservation, the dreams come small.
This story is covered in so much sugary sentimentality, I think I am going to get a cavity reading it.
And then, this past October, one of Lil Bob's best friends — a restaurant owner named Christopher Hamlet — decided to make good on an unfulfilled dream: He bought two plane tickets, packed up Jake and flew to Denver. Jake was finally going to a Broncos game.
Lil Bob is Rick's wife's half biological brother. Got that? My question is this...why didn't Rick, who lives in the Denver area if I am not wrong, take Jake to a Broncos football game and set it up for him to meet John Elway? Why did a restaurant owner have to do this? Seriously, Rick Reilly is a big name in sports pseudo-journalism, he could have easily done this.
Also, in the picture of Jake with John Elway, why is Jake wearing a John Lynch jersey? Jake was three when Elway retired, but he still could not find an Elway jersey to wear? Lynch doesn't even play for the Broncos right now. See, I am nitpicking again.
And the next thing Jake knew, he was in John Elway's luxury box at the game, asking him any question he wanted, all with a grin that threatened to split his happy head in half.
Then Elway said, "Comin' to dinner?"
And suddenly Jake was having his lettuce wedge cut for him by the legend, who tousled the kid's cowlick. Like a dad might.
Brett Favre would probably have ended the night asking Jake if he could spot him $5 for some new Wranglers.
A lot of athletes don't want the burden that comes with being a role model. But what I want to tell them is: You don't get to choose.
(Me vomiting on the keyboard) Rick Reilly is right. I think we all learned something today. John Elway is a good guy, Rick Reilly is too cheap to take his nephew to a Broncos game, and Rick Reilly can write a sentimental story like nobody's business. Rick Reilly gets paid millions of dollars to write columns like this.
(Bengoodfella wipes tear from his eye...it is hard to admit he did not hate Reilly's latest work)
3. Gregg Doyel thinks that Jim Calhoun had every right to yell at Ken Krayeske.
I am agreeing with Gregg Doyel too much lately. I wish he would take Alonzo Mourning to task for being an asshole or something. I am much more comfortable with that Gregg Doyel.
For some people, Calhoun's caustic reaction has confused the issue. They see him acting like a bully, and they bludgeon him for it.
That's pretty much exactly what every article I have read says.
and while none (that I've seen) side with the flea-bitten hound, several take Calhoun to task, chastising him for (A) being insensitive in these tough economic times
Gregg Doyel reads Jay Mariotti. I don't know what I would do if he ever took Mariotti to task.
Calhoun was right. What he said was right.
It is pretty clear Krayeske was grandstanding for a cause. If he really had any type of journalistic intentions he would have brought this up in private.
How he said it? Right.
He did come off as a pompous ass.
And before I explain why he's right, please understand there is some history between Calhoun and me. Shocking, right? But there is. And not terribly good. A few years ago I wrote this, and UConn people were furious.
Does anyone like Gregg Doyel? Anyone?
After the game, a win, Muncy snuck me away from The Horde that covers UConn basketball and set up a quiet meeting with Calhoun in an empty locker room. Calhoun said what he wanted to say. I took it. It's over, and we haven't spoken since. There's the history.
Well, that's boring. I was kind of hoping there was a big showdown where Gregg Doyel showed off his newest MMA moves and kicked Jim Calhoun in the throat, then spat on him while cursing Ricky Moore's name. Doyel wrote an article about the way that Calhoun recruited players, or stole them as he perceived it, and really he probably is not wrong.
The incident in the article Doyel wrote is very similar to the time in 1999 when UConn fatass/point guard Khalid El-Amin was able to use a booster's, I am sorry a "friend's," car in exchange for tickets to games. Calhoun runs a borderline clean program like every other successful program in the nation.
Maybe Calhoun was a little loose with his numbers when he told the attention hound that "we make $12 million a year for this university." If by we he meant both himself and UConn women's coach Geno Auriemma, then he nailed it.
Who else would he mean by "we?" The squirrel that he keeps in his pocket?
For his troubles, the attention hound got blown up, which is exactly what he deserved. He's the one, not Calhoun, who walked down the wrong dark alley and picked a fight. Shame on the guy who started the fight -- not the guy who finished it.
I said something very similar yesterday. Krayeske went looking for a fight and he got one.
I am getting tired of agreeing with Doyel.
4. Finally there is some sanity in the NFL Draft process. Don Banks of CNNSI doesn't have a quarterback going first to the Lions.
I am probably the dumbest person in the world for thinking this, but I have never understood a team's fascination with taking a quarterback first in the draft if they have other pressing needs. Don't get me wrong, the Lions need one, but they also need a lot of other things at the same time.
But Curry is now seen as the cleanest prospect in this year's talent pool, and convinced as I am that the Lions aren't taking a quarterback here, getting impact help for the league's bottom-ranked defense two-years running is the option Detroit will choose.
These teams are spending so much money on a pick and if a team, like Detroit, has plenty of other needs then I think they should spend the pick and money on the best player. I think that player is Aaron Curry, though I don't see Ray Maualuga as being that far behind.
It's not like the Lions don't need defense, they have been last two straight years and to pair Aaron Curry with Ernie Sims is really going to help the team get a head start on building a great defense. Sure they need some defensive tackles and pass rushers, but they have 2 first round picks, so they can address that need later. A quarterback does no good if he has no one to throw to (I realize he has Calvin Johnson), no blockers, and the defense can't keep the other offense off the field.
Banks has Sanchez going #8 to the Jacksonville Jaguars. Of all the needs the Jags have, WR, OL, the defense, they are going to choose a quarterback? I am not against drafting a quarterback but this seems highly unlikely Sanchez will go to Jacksonville. I know quarterbacks are "in" because of Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan but Flacco went to a team that had a great defense and at least one good receiver, while Ryan went to the Falcons who were not nearly as bad as their #3 pick indicated. They had a good defense and receivers. I could be wrong but I don't think Jacksonville is the best place for Sanchez.
Banks has the Raiders taking B.J. Raji, a defensive tackle. That is smart but I doubt Al Davis would take a player that is blue collar and plays a blue collar position with Jeremy Maclin on the board.
5. John Smoltz is giving his opinion still...about everything.
That jersey still doesn't look right on him.
Smoltz thinks A-Rod did a tough thing by admitting to steroids and standing up for himself in the press conference. Smoltz is unsure whether he is telling the truth or not.
A-Rod was so brave to admit that he had cheated. What a hero. Is it me or does every reporter have to ask every single MLB baseball player his view on steroids? It's not like the answers are going to change or anything.
He also thinks the other 103 names should be released and that someone who knows they tested positive and should just come clean.
I think the names should be released and if anyone expects the other 103 to come clean they are living in Magical Happy Land with Brian from North Carolina.
The Hall of Fame question is a difficult one because A-Rod and Barry Bonds had the natural skills and ability to make it to Cooperstown. Had they not taken anything, they would've made it on their own skill.
I hate both of these players and I have said, only 200 times, this is the dumbest part about this whole situation. They would have probably made it regardless but they wanted to cheat. I almost think they should be banned based on the fact they could have made it and still cheated.
He also is not angry with the Braves, but disappointed with the way his contract negotiations were handled.
Weren't we all though? Actually, Smoltz had threatened to leave several times so it was not a huge shock that he left, it was just kind of interesting he did not leave to go play for the Tigers and it was the Red Sox who signed him.
They didn't feel his arm to see if it was strong and they didn't make any type of commitment to him. Also, the contract differences between the Sox and Braves was major and the Sox showed him more respect.
I think Smoltz could have his left arm amputated and he would still be a great pitcher pitching left handed, but I also don't have to pay him and he is 40 years old and coming off arm surgery for the 3rd or 4th time. The Sox took a chance on him because their payroll allowed them to do that, while the Braves were saving money for Garrett Anderson and Tom Glavine...seriously.
6. Our resident genius/ex-player Ross Tucker has some things to say about free agency. Please prepare yourself for his brilliance.
As players begin to make their decisions and the pundits talk about factors like scheme, location, and the opportunity to win a championship, remember one important thing: more often than not, all of those other ancillary factors are just that and it comes down to which team is willing to offer the most cold, hard cash.
No fucking way. I am glad Ross is here to tell us that athletes follow the money when it comes to free agency. I wonder how Ross's view of this is affected by the fact Peter King thinks teams should not spend a lot of money on free agents if they have been laying off employees? There won't be that much cold, hard cash available if teams that are having financial trouble don't sign players so they can keep staff and other employees.
Here's my question. Why are NFL teams not supposed to spend money on players but the NFL can lay off employees and no columns have been written about how they need to cut back on expenses? Roger Goodell has taken a pay cut, which is noble, but shouldn't the NFL cut back in other ways? I guess it is only the teams that are expected to do this.
Please. There is no loyalty in the NFL. It is straight business.
Harsh words from Ross Tucker...also this is completely obvious to a lot of people.
If you think about it, NFL players are some of the most restricted employees in our country, rarely having the prerogative to determine where they choose to live and work.
Only someone who has never had a real job thinks this is true. There is a thing called a non-compete agreement and I would guarantee that most of the non-compete agreements employers have are relatively more restrictive than any contract a player could sign. I can't work for another company in my industry that "competes" with us in a 100 mile radius. So pretty much, I would have to leave the state to get another job in the same industry. NFL players are bound by the contract they sign, but that contract also gives them a certain amount of financial security, which the typical worker doesn't get and a legal non-compete agreement can prevent a person from even getting a job in the same industry.
Case in point. As an arbitrary example, if I were a free agent this year and were deciding between the Lions and Colts on a one-year deal, and the Lions offered $100K more, I would be on the next flight to Detroit. In a heartbeat.
See, that is dumb.
Yeah, I know the Lions were 0-16 last year and the Colts are a perennial playoff participant, but what does that really mean to me at the end of the day? I'm not a Colts fan. I'm not from Indianapolis. Likely playing in a playoff game and having some semblance of an opportunity to win a title would be nice, but certainly not worth it. What does that playoff berth do for me and my family when I am 40 years old? Nothing. That $100k, or whatever number you want to substitute in there, could be put in my child's 529 plan for college or be part of a down payment on a house.
I guess it doesn't do much, though the NFL does pay players for when they win playoff games, so it would not be like Tucker was losing that much money in playing for a contender.
Ross Tucker went to Princeton...but I don't feel like he did.
7. Alex Marvez thinks the gag order Jerry Jones put on the Cowboys is a bad idea.
I think Alex Marvez just needs the Cowboys to keep talking so he can keep writing stories and this gag order makes him actually think for column ideas.
Jones told Cowboys beat writers this was being done to thwart the kind of "misinformation" he claims was reported about the team earlier this offseason.
Considering the mayhem that occurred last year between the players and the staff of the Cowboys, I don't know if this is really a bad idea.
Yet any good this new policy will produce has already been overshadowed by the damage it has caused: The further emasculation of Wade Phillips.
I mean seriously, is this really a concern? Everyone knows Wade Phillips is not the real head coach of the Cowboys and just does what Jones wants him to do. He will probably be out this year if the Cowboys don't win the Super Bowl. I don't think a gag order is really going to do him any more harm than players meddling in the game plan, the owner meddling with every aspect of the team, and all the other crap that goes on in Dallas does him harm.
Why should players respect Phillips when there's the ongoing belief — whether true or not — Jones himself is the one calling the shots on almost every level besides Xs and Os?
I would say that the players never respected Phillips regardless of who calls the Xs and Os because they see Jason Garrett and Jerry Jones as being more influential.
His biggest weakness is what should endear Phillips to his players. Phillips depends upon strong leadership to emanate from veterans who want to take ownership of their team a la Ray Lewis in Baltimore (which may be one reason he is reportedly on Dallas' free-agent radar).
Everyone's fascination with the crap-fest that is Dallas annoys the hell out of me. ESPN did a special last night on SportsCenter about Jerry Jones owning the team for 20 years, even though they have not won a playoff game for over half that time and they are the 2nd most dysfunctional team behind the Raiders in the league. Still, Jerry Jones gets a podium to talk about his team and he doesn't ever mention what a bad job he is doing of running the team, and no one asks this either.
This gag order has nothing to do with what is going on negatively in Dallas, it just reinforces the idea Jerry Jones doesn't know what he is doing.
8. Ian O'Connor think the Celtics are crazy for signing Stephon Marbury and I don't get it either.
So the Boston Celtics, defending NBA champs, are preparing to hire Marbury, whose record reeks for itself. Marbury hasn't won a single playoff series in a dozen seasons, didn't even win a single playoff game as a Knick, and stands among the more prominent contributors to the Olympic disaster in Athens.
What I don't get is that Marbury was not even the best point guard available on the market. The Celtics could easily have traded to get a good backup point guard who had a great attitude and could accept playing on the bench. They also could have just kept Sam Cassell. No one has seen Marbury play in over a year and even when he played he wasn't impressive.
So is the Celtics' uniform. Rivers and his players made that jersey special again, and there was no need to dishonor the green by sliding it over Marbury's shoulders.
That's being a little overdramatic about this. I don't think he will shame the uniform, though I hope once he proclaims his turd status for the 900th time, the Celtics will just release him. Marbury is a point guard that has always thought it was all about him, and I compared John Wall to him (though I hope it isn't the case) and I even put up that post about Wall because I think his case is how a player starts to get the Starbury mindset.
Even when Marbury was a good player, I would never have wanted him on my favorite team. He was too selfish and I don't think a good point guard is selfish like Marbury acts.
Marbury won't have his eye on the one-for-all, all-for-one prize, and the smart money says that will manifest itself in a poor decision on the court, or off it, at the worst possible time.
How can anyone trust his decision making ability, especially since he has not played in over a year? I wish I had the time and I would make a list of point guards that would have been much better fits as backups to Rajon Rondo, and I don't think Marbury would even make the list. Yet the Celtics chose him over every other point guard available.
9. The underrated Manny Ramirez got disrespected by another horrible offer from the Dodgers.
The team's proposal would pay Ramirez $25 million this season and $20 million next season if he exercises his player option for 2010.
God, this man is so underrated. Doesn't anyone want to pay for the best RH hitter of all time? That's why I think he is underrated, just because no team wants this guy! (I am being Bill Simmons...I am now me again)
The Dodgers made their offer - their fourth to Ramirez this offseason
Yes, that's right. The Dodgers have made four offers this offseason. Bill, do you have any comment on this?
If the economy did not improve — or if Ramirez suffered an injury or performed below his usual standards — he could return to the Dodgers for the second season and become a free agent after that.
If Manny is serious about playing baseball this offseason, he will accept this offer. This is beyond a fair offer. I am still trying to get in touch with Bill Simmons to see if he still thinks Manny is underrated.
10. Michael Lewis tries to "Moneyball" basketball and it doesn't come off as quite as convincing for me. If I hear one more person describe Shane Battier as the ultimate team player I am going to put a pencil through my eye.
I usually end this on a note about college basketball and after watching Marquette play UConn the last night, I almost felt bad for calling them a pretender a few weeks ago. They looked strong but I still don't think they have enough height to do anything in the NCAA Tournament...and with Dominic James being injured, I feel even less confident about them. I said earlier in the year I thought Kansas and Wake Forest were going to surprise people and UCLA was kind of overrated, which I still think is true. It wasn't exactly a leap, I just thought Kansas still had some talent left over and talented freshmen and they have enough key seniors I could see them making the Elite 8 this year, which would prove me wrong about them being overrated.
Anyway, I am very excited for the NCAA Tournament and this is one of my favorite times of the sports year. Ok enough exposition and sounding like an excited 12 year old girl, I hope Bill Simmons comes out with a column tomorrow that is just crappy so I can make fun of it.
Showing posts with label Alex Marvez. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alex Marvez. Show all posts
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009
6 comments Ten Things I Think I Think Peter King Has Not Thought Of: Mariotti Edition
I have a great problem right now and that problem is that I have a lot of articles bookmarked that I want to delve into. The bad news is I am going to get them all out of my system today and have nothing to deliver tomorrow, so Bill Simmons better not take this Friday off again. I realized that not only did Bill deliver a self proclaimed bad column about Kobe this week for ESPN the Magazine, he hadn't even written anything for ESPN since last Monday and he only writes a maximum of four columns every three weeks, so there was doubly no excuse for it being bad. He has his trade column value column up, so I am hoping maybe we will get three columns this week. Let me dive in to it because I have three Mariotti columns to comment upon...and no I have no vendetta against him, I just disagree with him a lot.
1. Jay Mariotti thinks A-Rod is scum. No word on whether Mariotti has used steroids at any point in his life and is being a hypocrite.
Still, A-Rod's colossal admission, to whatever extent of the truth he is telling, does nothing to make America feel better about his legacy or the enormity of baseball's disease the last 20 years.
Last 20 years? The steroid era actually began maybe 15 years ago...and that is a big maybe. 20 years appears to be an exaggeration. Not a shocking development that Mariotti would exaggerate something.
"When I arrived in Texas, I felt an enormous amount of pressure. I felt like I had all the weight of the world on top of me and I needed to perform, and perform at a high level every day," Rodriguez said.
I wonder why A-Rod felt an incredible need to perform? Could it be the enormous contract offer he signed, which was reportedly almost double what any other team was offering him? Could it be that he brought the pressure completely upon himself and cheated in order to meet the demands of the self inflicted pressure?
It can be debated whether we believe his timeline. If he used steroids for three years in Texas, how do we know he hasn't used steroids throughout his career in New York, where the pressure to excel has been astronomical amid his postseason failures and Page Six lifestyle?
Excellent question actually but a little research shows circumstantial evidence that he is probably not on the juice anymore...and the fact MLB now tests for steroids should appease some minds. Three of A-Rod's highest HR hitting years were between 2001-2003, 3 of his 4 best RBI years were during that time, and basically many of his numbers were at their peak during those three years. This may mean nothing but it is at least circumstantial that he is not on steroids anymore.
I could be wrong though.
But what got me was how easily he was sucked into the steroids culture, providing a rare lens into the mentalty of baseball players and PEDs.
That is really what shocks me, that A-Rod was clearly one of baseball's best players and felt the need to take PEDs. I wonder who else on that list of 104 is a big time slugger and I also wonder how much pressure there was for those who did not use steroids to start using?
Did the commissioner actually say A-Rod would be an admirable successor to Bonds and his tainted home run record -- and did he say it while knowing Rodriguez had tested positive? And what do we make of Orza, the chief operating officer of the Major League Baseball Players Association? As it is, there are suspicions that he tipped off Rodriguez to a drug test. If Rodriguez is to be believed, Orza was less than forthright when he originally informed A-Rod about a possible positive test. "Gene was very specific. He said, 'There's a list with 104 players on it. You might or might not have tested positive,'" Rodriguez said of a supposed 2004 conversation.
The entire culture of baseball and baseball's management was in on this con. They were essentially colluding with the players to put a false product on the field. There are always rumors that baseball knew something about the positive tests but I don't think they did. I think they intentionally turned a blind eye so they could act like they had no previous knowledge and keep their hands clean.
Rodriguez does have an opportunity to salvage the latter stages of his career and -- who knows? -- maybe even garner Hall of Fame consideration.
Mariotti should not act like this is a maybe. A-Rod confessed as soon as he was discovered and played at a HoF level before and after he used steroids. America is a forgiving society and country and A-Rod will make the Hall of Fame, rightly or wrongly.
But mostly, he needs to put together a conclusive nine seasons that prove that he is a wonderful ballplayer without the juice.
I can't accept this argument. A-Rod has proven to me that he is a wonderful ballplayer without the juice. His record before and after he admits to using steroids proves that to me sufficiently. I just need him to prove he is still clean and that he will bounce back from a sub-par (for him) year last year.
We're still waiting for the lords of baseball to do the same. They are the ones who let the steroids culture fester while counting the money, making them the biggest villains of all in the scandal that never will go away.
I never do this, but I agree with Mariotti. While everyone is so busy kicking all the great players from this era out of the Hall of Fame, those truly responsible for the Steroid Era, those who could have had knowledge are not being held responsible.
2. Now Mariotti seems to think that Obama doesn't have enough to do and should get involved with this steroid problem.
extolling the virtues of a Sox guy -- not a Cubs fan -- occupying the world's most powerful political seat. Reinsdorf, a close confidante of commissioner Bud Selig, also has played a significant role in running baseball during 16 years of unmitigated chaos.
Or, the Steroids Era.
Mariotti wrote this column the day after his A-Rod column from above. It went from 20 years of the Steroid Era to 16 years of the Steroid Era...in one day. It's hard to keep these things straight from day to day I guess.
So might this hometown connection be one reason why Obama, facing questions about Alex Rodriguez's confession and Major League Baseball's never-ending steroids crisis, is expressing no interest in confronting lingering mysteries about the sport's sleazy past?
No. The reason Obama is not involved is because this issue is way below his concern level right now. Mariotti wants Obama to focus less on the recession (potential depression?) problem, the war in Iraq, the Stimulus Package, passing a healthcare plan, and many of the other issues that have cropped up lately, and focus more on making sure Major League Baseball, which is a recreational sport, does not have cheaters.
Priorities. It's a good thing Mariotti was not voted President.
But sometimes, the presidency also involves voicing harsh, aggressive statements about secondary problems.
Absolutely. After he has either begun work or has fixed the primary problems. This is like a doctor going in and giving a woman breast implants when she still needs a liver transplant.
Does Obama really care more about the BCS than a steroids mess that has eroded our trust in baseball? That's how he came off when asked about A-Rod and the game at his first prime-time news conference.
Obama talked about the BCS before he was actually the President of the United States. After January 20, his priorities changed dramatically. He is no longer talking about the BCS problem in college football either, so this argument doesn't necessarily apply.
And as the devastating hits keep coming for baseball -- such as Miguel Tejada's expected guilty plea for lying to Congress about an ex-teammate's steroids use -- doesn't Obama realize that Selig and Fehr are STILL in place?
I believe those guys should be held responsible for the Steroid Era, but I don't believe the President should get involved with this. I want to make sure that Obama realizes the current health care system stinks and many of the same terrorist organizations that hate us are STILL in place.
And why isn't Obama outraged?
Because he literally has more important things to do. Like make sure his Cabinet choices are approved by Congress and other Presidential things.
It worked well for his maligned and mocked predecessor, George W. Bush, whose attack on performance-enhancing drugs led to Congressional hearings and an anti-steroids environment that exposed supposed legends -- Mark McGwire, Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Rafael Palmeiro and the rest -- as frauds.
I appreciate that Bush did that, but considering this is what he is best remembered for in regard to his policy successes here in the United States, this is not good. I don't think Obama wants to be known as the guy who hunted down steroid users, he wants to be the guy that prevented America from going into a Depression.
It's no surprise, then, that Rodriguez won't be asked to visit Capitol Hill, which means Selig and Fehr also are off the hook.
Priorities change, doing this is a complete waste of time right now.
The sport has been too dirty for too long, with the same people at the top, for any reasonable person to believe everything is cool now. I'm disappointed that the President of the United States didn't voice the same conclusion.
I am running out of ways to say this...but if Jay Mariotti doesn't understand that President Obama has 1,000 better things to do right now then I don't want Jay Mariotti to ever vote for anyone at any time for any political office.
Next time there's a steroids crisis -- and it's coming, as sure as beer at the ballpark -- Barack the talk-show host needs to be President Obama.
If Mariotti had his way there would be no steroids crisis in baseball, but unemployment would be 14% and America would be in the middle of a Depression where no one could afford to attend baseball games. Baseball was still great in the last Depression though, so at least it would not affect the sport and we know the players are clean...that's Mariotti's thinking.
3. Jay Mariotti wrote an article today taunting me and daring me to write about it.
On the first day of the rest of his life -- and I dare say, the rest of his life -- Brett Favre got on his bulldozer and did some Mississippi-style man things.
He learned to read.
(I am just kidding Mississippi citizens)
The most fun, entertaining football player of our generation was turning into an insufferable diva.
He turned into a diva about 10 years ago. Way to keep up with current events.
But the tone of his voice on a conference call, relaxed and polite, tells me this retirement isn't phony like the others.
This retirement will be different because Favre will announce he wants to come play football the day before the season begins, then demand the Jets give him the starting quarterback job or he wants to be traded.
"Honestly, I think my career in general will overshadow anything negative,'' he said. "It's probably human nature to think about what could have been or what I could have done better, but honestly, I believe I did everything I thought I could mentally and physically. With that, I'm satisfied. I'm proud of everything I have done in my career, and I'll leave it at that. You name it in professional football, I've done it. Very few people can say that.
Favre has accomplished things other players have not. No other player has ever actually thrown the ball to the other team more than he has and he also has as many Super Bowl victories as Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson.
Honestly, since Favre spent the last 3 out of his 4 seasons with only average numbers as a quarterback, especially when he is supposedly an "elite" quarterback, I will always remember him as that quarterback and not what he was before that time.
He arguably has produced the greatest career of any football player ever, departing as the all-time ironman -- 269 consecutive starts -- and the owner of virtually every meaningful NFL passing record.
(Did anyone know that Kerry Collins is 14th all time in passing yardage?...I would never have guessed this)
Yes, Favre is definitely a Hall of Famer one who never cared about his personal statistics and only about how his team did. Why is it whenever someone sums up Brett Favre's career they only talk about his personal statistics and not how many times he led his team to actual team achievements? This always amazes me and this is something I actually have against Favre. He is supposed to be a selfless player but all he seems to focus on, and all those those who compliment him, focus on is his personal achievements. Favre was a great player and I think he was also incredibly selfish as well. His teammates did not always like playing for him and he called out Javon Walker for holding out of camp and then he pulled his retirement bullshit last year. I just see a lot of flaws.
He won a Super Bowl in Green Bay back when you weren't supposed to win in the league's smallest market.
Yes, Green Bay with its 9 NFL Championships and 3 Super Bowl Championships has always been a really hard place to win football games.
We watched him enter the sport as reckless and immature,
Did anyone see his last four games as a quarterback in the NFL and see what his Jets teammates thought about him? Did he really leave the sport any differently than the way he entered it?
"I have no reason to wonder why you would be so skeptical,'' he shot back, laughing lightly. "Because I have family and friends who are like, 'All right, Brett. Is this the real deal?' To me, it is. It is. Believe me, it has been a wonderful career. I couldn't ask for anything more. It was worth a shot for me to go to New York. I wish I could've played better down the stretch. I didn't. It's time to leave.
"I am leaving to play for the Minnesota Vikings. They will definitely want me around June."
In the end, neither the Packers nor Jets made the playoffs, and considering how Favre eroded physically, Thompson was better off allowing Rodgers to gain a year of starting experience.
I feel vindicated because I thought this was the best option all along. No one said I was wrong but I still feel vindicated.
Until then, we'll savor the man who never stopped playing like a little boy.
(Vomiting from an overdose of cliche)
To the very end, even when he drove us crazy, No. 4 kept it entertaining.
Yep, I knew he was always good for one or two absolutely horrid throws per game.
Replacing him as a man-crush won't be easy.
Peter King will wrestle you in a vat of Vasoline for Matt Ryan.
4. Peter King gives us his MMQB follow up.
Peter defends the Steeler's injury report for the Super Bowl.
I don't believe Big Ben needed to be on the injury report. It's simple. Putting him on the injury report as "probable'' would have told the world there was a "virtual certainty'' he'd play in the game. That's the definition of "probable'' in NFL injury-reportage. That sounds like a 94 percent chance he'd play. It was 100 percent. Same with center Justin Hartwig, who was gimpy with a knee injury but was definitely going to play in the game.
Right, but if a guy is injured, he needs to be on the injury report. It seems pretty simple to me. I don't know how he came up with "probable" was a 94% certainty, especially when the definition says that player is definitely playing. It doesn't really matter but if a player is injured, he needs to be on the injury report.
"My problem,'' said Florio, who has been beating the drum for more honest injury reports, "is the injury report focuses only on availability to play without giving full information as to whether a player will be effective. It's called an injury report. Roethlisberger was injured, and he wasn't on the report. I think that's wrong.''
True, with an asterisk. I think if a guy's definitely playing, he doesn't need to be listed.
No, he needs to be listed as "probable" because he is injured and is a virtual certainty to play. That is the definition as Peter kindly pointed out.
"I have a question that no one seems to comment on about the James Harrison touchdown run during the Super Bowl. If you notice during the run back, Larry Fitzgerald goes out of bounds around the 40-45 yard line. Instead of going back in bounds, he runs along the sidelines (clearly out of bounds the entire time) for what appears to be 40 yards and makes the tackle. Shouldn't this be illegal since he is chasing him for a considerable distance from out of bounds. If he chased him from in bounds, chances are he would have never caught up to him. There would have been a major controversy if Harrison would have been tackled short of the goal line. What is the rule for this type of play?"
On kickoffs and punts, players cannot run out of bounds unless they are blocked out of bounds. On all other plays, there is not a rule about where they may run.
I guess that answers our question we had after the Super Bowl.
5. Bill Plaschke thinks Manny Ramirez is up shit creek without a paddle...or a team.
Ramirez doesn't want a one-year contract that would make him baseball's second-highest paid player next season?
What's that? Is that the sound of Bill Simmons being wrong and Manny Ramirez is not only NOT underrated, but teams actually want him?
Ramirez wouldn't take an increased Dodgers offer of two years at $45 million, giving him an identical annual salary of this winter's hottest free-agent slugger, Mark Teixeira?
I don't see how anyone can say with a straight face that Manny is being blackballed for his poor attitude in Boston and that he is underrated because teams don't want him. He is being offered contracts that are enormous, but not lengthy, simply because he is an older player and does have some problems playing LF...and his attitude would be a concern on a 5 year contract.
Yes, his dog behavior in Boston mattered. No, folks don't trust him with a long-term deal anymore.
I am not arguing that Manny is not being slightly affected by his behavior in Boston, he is still being offered a ton of money to play baseball, but he is also not being rewarded for that behavior with a long term contract.
The Dodgers' first offer to Ramirez -- two years, $45 million -- was immediately rejected by Boras, who said he wanted to consider "serious" offers.
This is a side note but why do players sign with Boras again? After the Varitek disaster this offseason, after A-Rod overestimating his ability to get a new contract last year with a team other than the Yankees, after A-Rod admitting to using steroids partially to live down his enormous contract, and now Boras is letting Ramirez sit on the market for a desperate team to grab him up and give him $25 million. Oliver Perez tested the market, there was no market for him, Derek Lowe got less money than he initially wanted, and there was no market for Varitek.
I will say it again, by signing with Boras you limit your options.
In a market where Adam Dunn can't get offers over $11 million, Manny is not getting $25 million per year.
6. Woody Paige finally has a mailbag back up.
Woody - How is it possible that one of the best tight ends to ever play the game was not elected to the Hall of Fame? Is it only prejudice against all things Broncos or are there more sinister things working? -- Bronncohowie, Columbus, Ohio
I always find it silly when people accuse the writers of having biases against certain teams, though there may be, I just don't know about it.
Sharpe will get in next year or the following year. I fought every year to put in the maximum (seven). Some years, some buffoons on the committee vote for fewer men, which just backs up the system and makes it harder for worthy players to make it.
This may be true but this attitude also annoys the hell out of me. When he says voting for fewer players "just backs up the system" it makes me feel like they want to put everyone who is above average in the Hall of Fame. This is probably just me though that worries about this. Is Cris Carter a HoF player? I don't know because I haven't researched it that much but I would have some initial questions about whether he is or not.
The Broncos, though, have to get through free agency: a great lineman (I still say Julius Peppers, although I get e-mails telling me I'm crazy), another quality linebacker and, at the minimum, one safety (should get three).
If you sign Julius Peppers, you will have used almost half of your available cap space on one player. Trust me, he wants a lot of money. I like how the brilliant Woody Paige thinks the Broncos should get three safeties in free agency. I don't know, that just seems like a whole hell of a lot of safeties when I see the biggest need as defensive linemen.
Woody - I think you're wonderful. That being said, you were way out of line saying Pittsburgh could possibly be America's team. There is no America's team. And if so, it wouldn't be Pittsburgh. Everyone loves a winner and that is the sole reason Pittsburgh has such a following right now. Don't forget, it was only about six years ago, Pittsburgh couldn't give tickets away. -- Kate, Ebensburg, Pa.
Kate smacks Woody in the page with some fair weather fan logic. This should be directed right at Snoop Dogg.
But here's why I am so strong on the Steelers. When the steel mills closed in the 1970s in Pittsburgh, and so many jobs disappeared, tens of thousands of Steelers fans moved elsewhere. They remained Steelers fans, and they made their kids Steelers fans, and the pyramid continues, especially with a winning team over the years. There are as many Pittsburgh fans in some cities as there are fans for the local team.
Oh yeah, there is a socio-economic reason the Steelers are a fan favorite and their fans travel from game to game, it has nothing to do with any bandwagon fans. This may be true but I love it anytime Woody Paige tries to explain a socio-economic reason for anything.
7. Rick Reilly gets paid millions to write articles like this.
Our sentence count for this week: 54 sentences and that includes probably 15 four word sentences.
I've been fired more than pottery.
I wish it would happen again.
And how did I react whenever I got canned?
Rick wrote a 13 sentence 2 paragraph letter protesting his firing and then took a nap from being exhausted after this slavish task.
Most of these guys didn't even deserve to lose their jobs, and they're acting like they just got handed a freaking fruit basket.
Dummy, that is because they want to get hired again. No owner is going to hire a guy who flips out at the news he has been fired because they don't want to hire a crazy person.
Me? I'd go triple Sean Penn!
Rick would write an emotional four paragraph letter about how his being fired has affected his family, find a new job quickly, start that new job 6 months after he is hired, and spend the vacation time he has taking pictures with co-eds in exotic locations.
When the certifiably mad Al Davis fired young Lane Kiffin as the Raiders coach this season during a disgraceful and insulting press conference, Kiffin had every right to march over to Davis and rip off his lips. Instead, afterward, Kiffin said, "I'm very appreciative of the opportunity." Then he added, "I felt bad for Al."
And he got a new job a few months later. See the correlation?
Or how about this, Mike? Your new house is only a three-minute drive from Bowlen's, right? Get yourself a massive catapult.
And a whole lot of eggs.
That's how he ends the column. It was all about what Rick would do if he got fired. Next week there will be a column on what Rick would do if he finds termites in his house, the week after that Rick writes an interesting piece on what he does when someone cuts him off in traffic and his big story of the year will be a 100 sentence (it's a two part-er) 12 paragraph expose on what Rick Reilly does when someone uses the handicap stall at a sporting event.
8. Alex Marvez doesn't believe Favre is retired and I am tired of talking about this.
"A lot of guys enjoyed having him in the locker room," Baker said. "I don't think it was as bad as it seemed when some of the comments came out at the end of the season. Obviously, guys were frustrated by the turnovers and interceptions, but that's part of the game.
"Brett has the most touchdowns and most interceptions (in NFL history). That's what you get when you get Brett Favre. Everyone understood that."
Now that is a ringing endorsement of Brett Favre if I have ever heard one. Turnovers and interceptions are not always a part of the game. Jake Delhomme has gotten crucified for making that part of his game, as he rightly should, just like Rex Grossman has gotten crucified. If you have a good quarterback on your team, then this is not so much of an issue.
Favre, though, suffered a torn biceps tendon that was kept quiet by the team until after the season (offering more proof that the NFL needs to revamp its injury report criteria, but I digress).
Not according to Peter King, even when it involves his ex-boyfriend, Brett Favre.
Whether he does the same before applying for NFL reinstatement — Minnesota, anyone? — will be proof whether this old dog is set on pulling the same trick or is ready to roll over permanently.
I don't believe he is done. I will believe that when he actually files his retirement papers and it is June and Brett Favre is not quoted as saying his shoulder feels better and hinting he would come back if someone wanted him.
9. Joe Posanski asks the question I have asked and that is what separates these steroid users from the other guys in baseball's Hall of Fame that have cheated.
"Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contribution to the team(s) on which the player played."
This is the character clause in the Hall of Fame voting. Joe wants this to be gotten rid of and I am not sure how I feel about this. You want the Hall of Fame to include the best of the best players and it is about baseball, but you also want to honor the players that deserve to be honored. It seems the committee has ignored the clause until Pete Rose came along and now it is affecting the players from the steroid era.
Mark McGwire's alleged drug use has been a clause celebre: The guy hit 583 home runs, broke the single-season home run record, is the all-time leader in home runs per at bat, but almost 80 percent of the voters did not vote for him because they believe he cheated the game.
I think I am am more annoyed with the fact he continues to lie about it.
Meanwhile, the Hall of Fame is filled with people who admitted to using drugs (Paul Molitor, Ferguson Jenkins, etc.), who willingly cheated (Gaylord Perry threw spitballs, Don Sutton and Whitey Ford cut baseballs, players undoubtedly corked bats)
Exactly, you can't have an elastic morality clause, where betting on baseball and steroids were wrong, but these offenses are not.
I think the clause should have been changed a long time ago; it makes me queasy to think about sportswriters (or anyone else) trying to judge a man's character.
I think I agree. I write about some of the sportswriters on this site that have a Hall of Fame vote and they are barely qualified to give an acceptable opinion on who should be allowed in the Hall of Fame in regard to baseball skill, much less do I want these people judging ball players based on morality. They would kick Michael Phelps out of any Olympic Hall of Fame at this point.
In the years before Jackie Robinson, there were no black players. Players caroused and gambled and boozed. Many cheated to get ahead. Many took drugs. There have been beanballs and stolen signals and thrown bats. There have been thugs and racists and liars and everything else. And, yes, there have been steroid users, too.
Thugs and racists are fine because that has nothing to do with baseball performance...and gambling goes along with that in my mind. I guess my only problem is that using performance enhancers, like throwing spitballs, and other methods of cheating affect the basic numbers a player can accumulate to be considered for the Hall of Fame. If they have been elevated because of any type of cheating, I am not sure I feel comfortable with that player being in the Hall of Fame. I have no problem with the morality clause being gotten rid of, but it doesn't answer my question about whether a player should make the Hall of Fame based on their statistics or not, which may or may not have been affected by illegal supplements or even cheating. They have let cheaters in the HoF in the past, why stop now though?
10. This is big news in my neck of the woods.
So far this year I have said I would not believe Duke is in the contention to even get past the Sweet Sixteen until they have not collapsed in February (lost 3 of the last 5 games) and beaten a quality team on the road in February (hasn't happened). Neither of those things have happened. I also have predicted that UNC is still going to win the National Championship and come February and March we would read a bunch of articles about how the losses at the beginning of the year really helped UNC get better and that is exactly what this article is.
UNC won this game with Hansbrough not having his typical great game against Duke, which should be scary for the rest of the country. After watching the game last night, it is clear that UNC is the team to beat in the country and I really think they are going to win the National Championship.
For Duke, I have heard a lot of people whining about them losing again. I really chalk this up to Coach K and the fact he is not completely focused on the Duke program and that he tends to take guys out of the rotation later in the year, which leads to the fatigue that sets in and causes the team to lose. Every year he has an excuse for why his team loses. Let's look at them and see whose fault it could be:
05-06- The entire team sat around and waited for Redick and Sheldon Williams to do something instead of taking the lead and trying to score on their own. Coach K designs the offense and coaches the team, this is on him.
06-07- His youngest team ever, get beat in the opening round of the NCAA Tournament. Not much anyone can do.
07-08- The entire team got fatigued down the stretch and began to shoot jump shots when they did not have their legs. Coach K did not play other players due to injury or the other players would be ineffective in the game. You could blame him for this, but there was not much team depth at the time.
08-09- No excuse given yet. This Duke team is deeper than they have been in a while and start sophomores and juniors and have seniors coming off the bench. Coach K is letting two freshman, who while not spectacular, can at least not hurt the team while stealing minutes so the starters can be fresh down the stretch of the year and into the tournament. He has gone from a 11 man rotation to an 8 man rotation, which is only going to increase the fatigue and cause another February Fade. Duke haters are going to have a lot to love down the stretch this year based on the team's inability/unwillingness to drive to the basket and they just shoot jump shots and hang out on the perimeter. There is no penetration. I can only attribute it to fatigue (which the announcers commented on continuously). I believe this falls on the head coach, who needs to change the rotation to prevent this from happening, and there are no excuses for this.
I am done talking about this issue now. Duke has a lot to prove to the college basketball world and I don't think they even realize it.
1. Jay Mariotti thinks A-Rod is scum. No word on whether Mariotti has used steroids at any point in his life and is being a hypocrite.
Still, A-Rod's colossal admission, to whatever extent of the truth he is telling, does nothing to make America feel better about his legacy or the enormity of baseball's disease the last 20 years.
Last 20 years? The steroid era actually began maybe 15 years ago...and that is a big maybe. 20 years appears to be an exaggeration. Not a shocking development that Mariotti would exaggerate something.
"When I arrived in Texas, I felt an enormous amount of pressure. I felt like I had all the weight of the world on top of me and I needed to perform, and perform at a high level every day," Rodriguez said.
I wonder why A-Rod felt an incredible need to perform? Could it be the enormous contract offer he signed, which was reportedly almost double what any other team was offering him? Could it be that he brought the pressure completely upon himself and cheated in order to meet the demands of the self inflicted pressure?
It can be debated whether we believe his timeline. If he used steroids for three years in Texas, how do we know he hasn't used steroids throughout his career in New York, where the pressure to excel has been astronomical amid his postseason failures and Page Six lifestyle?
Excellent question actually but a little research shows circumstantial evidence that he is probably not on the juice anymore...and the fact MLB now tests for steroids should appease some minds. Three of A-Rod's highest HR hitting years were between 2001-2003, 3 of his 4 best RBI years were during that time, and basically many of his numbers were at their peak during those three years. This may mean nothing but it is at least circumstantial that he is not on steroids anymore.
I could be wrong though.
But what got me was how easily he was sucked into the steroids culture, providing a rare lens into the mentalty of baseball players and PEDs.
That is really what shocks me, that A-Rod was clearly one of baseball's best players and felt the need to take PEDs. I wonder who else on that list of 104 is a big time slugger and I also wonder how much pressure there was for those who did not use steroids to start using?
Did the commissioner actually say A-Rod would be an admirable successor to Bonds and his tainted home run record -- and did he say it while knowing Rodriguez had tested positive? And what do we make of Orza, the chief operating officer of the Major League Baseball Players Association? As it is, there are suspicions that he tipped off Rodriguez to a drug test. If Rodriguez is to be believed, Orza was less than forthright when he originally informed A-Rod about a possible positive test. "Gene was very specific. He said, 'There's a list with 104 players on it. You might or might not have tested positive,'" Rodriguez said of a supposed 2004 conversation.
The entire culture of baseball and baseball's management was in on this con. They were essentially colluding with the players to put a false product on the field. There are always rumors that baseball knew something about the positive tests but I don't think they did. I think they intentionally turned a blind eye so they could act like they had no previous knowledge and keep their hands clean.
Rodriguez does have an opportunity to salvage the latter stages of his career and -- who knows? -- maybe even garner Hall of Fame consideration.
Mariotti should not act like this is a maybe. A-Rod confessed as soon as he was discovered and played at a HoF level before and after he used steroids. America is a forgiving society and country and A-Rod will make the Hall of Fame, rightly or wrongly.
But mostly, he needs to put together a conclusive nine seasons that prove that he is a wonderful ballplayer without the juice.
I can't accept this argument. A-Rod has proven to me that he is a wonderful ballplayer without the juice. His record before and after he admits to using steroids proves that to me sufficiently. I just need him to prove he is still clean and that he will bounce back from a sub-par (for him) year last year.
We're still waiting for the lords of baseball to do the same. They are the ones who let the steroids culture fester while counting the money, making them the biggest villains of all in the scandal that never will go away.
I never do this, but I agree with Mariotti. While everyone is so busy kicking all the great players from this era out of the Hall of Fame, those truly responsible for the Steroid Era, those who could have had knowledge are not being held responsible.
2. Now Mariotti seems to think that Obama doesn't have enough to do and should get involved with this steroid problem.
extolling the virtues of a Sox guy -- not a Cubs fan -- occupying the world's most powerful political seat. Reinsdorf, a close confidante of commissioner Bud Selig, also has played a significant role in running baseball during 16 years of unmitigated chaos.
Or, the Steroids Era.
Mariotti wrote this column the day after his A-Rod column from above. It went from 20 years of the Steroid Era to 16 years of the Steroid Era...in one day. It's hard to keep these things straight from day to day I guess.
So might this hometown connection be one reason why Obama, facing questions about Alex Rodriguez's confession and Major League Baseball's never-ending steroids crisis, is expressing no interest in confronting lingering mysteries about the sport's sleazy past?
No. The reason Obama is not involved is because this issue is way below his concern level right now. Mariotti wants Obama to focus less on the recession (potential depression?) problem, the war in Iraq, the Stimulus Package, passing a healthcare plan, and many of the other issues that have cropped up lately, and focus more on making sure Major League Baseball, which is a recreational sport, does not have cheaters.
Priorities. It's a good thing Mariotti was not voted President.
But sometimes, the presidency also involves voicing harsh, aggressive statements about secondary problems.
Absolutely. After he has either begun work or has fixed the primary problems. This is like a doctor going in and giving a woman breast implants when she still needs a liver transplant.
Does Obama really care more about the BCS than a steroids mess that has eroded our trust in baseball? That's how he came off when asked about A-Rod and the game at his first prime-time news conference.
Obama talked about the BCS before he was actually the President of the United States. After January 20, his priorities changed dramatically. He is no longer talking about the BCS problem in college football either, so this argument doesn't necessarily apply.
And as the devastating hits keep coming for baseball -- such as Miguel Tejada's expected guilty plea for lying to Congress about an ex-teammate's steroids use -- doesn't Obama realize that Selig and Fehr are STILL in place?
I believe those guys should be held responsible for the Steroid Era, but I don't believe the President should get involved with this. I want to make sure that Obama realizes the current health care system stinks and many of the same terrorist organizations that hate us are STILL in place.
And why isn't Obama outraged?
Because he literally has more important things to do. Like make sure his Cabinet choices are approved by Congress and other Presidential things.
It worked well for his maligned and mocked predecessor, George W. Bush, whose attack on performance-enhancing drugs led to Congressional hearings and an anti-steroids environment that exposed supposed legends -- Mark McGwire, Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Rafael Palmeiro and the rest -- as frauds.
I appreciate that Bush did that, but considering this is what he is best remembered for in regard to his policy successes here in the United States, this is not good. I don't think Obama wants to be known as the guy who hunted down steroid users, he wants to be the guy that prevented America from going into a Depression.
It's no surprise, then, that Rodriguez won't be asked to visit Capitol Hill, which means Selig and Fehr also are off the hook.
Priorities change, doing this is a complete waste of time right now.
The sport has been too dirty for too long, with the same people at the top, for any reasonable person to believe everything is cool now. I'm disappointed that the President of the United States didn't voice the same conclusion.
I am running out of ways to say this...but if Jay Mariotti doesn't understand that President Obama has 1,000 better things to do right now then I don't want Jay Mariotti to ever vote for anyone at any time for any political office.
Next time there's a steroids crisis -- and it's coming, as sure as beer at the ballpark -- Barack the talk-show host needs to be President Obama.
If Mariotti had his way there would be no steroids crisis in baseball, but unemployment would be 14% and America would be in the middle of a Depression where no one could afford to attend baseball games. Baseball was still great in the last Depression though, so at least it would not affect the sport and we know the players are clean...that's Mariotti's thinking.
3. Jay Mariotti wrote an article today taunting me and daring me to write about it.
On the first day of the rest of his life -- and I dare say, the rest of his life -- Brett Favre got on his bulldozer and did some Mississippi-style man things.
He learned to read.
(I am just kidding Mississippi citizens)
The most fun, entertaining football player of our generation was turning into an insufferable diva.
He turned into a diva about 10 years ago. Way to keep up with current events.
But the tone of his voice on a conference call, relaxed and polite, tells me this retirement isn't phony like the others.
This retirement will be different because Favre will announce he wants to come play football the day before the season begins, then demand the Jets give him the starting quarterback job or he wants to be traded.
"Honestly, I think my career in general will overshadow anything negative,'' he said. "It's probably human nature to think about what could have been or what I could have done better, but honestly, I believe I did everything I thought I could mentally and physically. With that, I'm satisfied. I'm proud of everything I have done in my career, and I'll leave it at that. You name it in professional football, I've done it. Very few people can say that.
Favre has accomplished things other players have not. No other player has ever actually thrown the ball to the other team more than he has and he also has as many Super Bowl victories as Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson.
Honestly, since Favre spent the last 3 out of his 4 seasons with only average numbers as a quarterback, especially when he is supposedly an "elite" quarterback, I will always remember him as that quarterback and not what he was before that time.
He arguably has produced the greatest career of any football player ever, departing as the all-time ironman -- 269 consecutive starts -- and the owner of virtually every meaningful NFL passing record.
(Did anyone know that Kerry Collins is 14th all time in passing yardage?...I would never have guessed this)
Yes, Favre is definitely a Hall of Famer one who never cared about his personal statistics and only about how his team did. Why is it whenever someone sums up Brett Favre's career they only talk about his personal statistics and not how many times he led his team to actual team achievements? This always amazes me and this is something I actually have against Favre. He is supposed to be a selfless player but all he seems to focus on, and all those those who compliment him, focus on is his personal achievements. Favre was a great player and I think he was also incredibly selfish as well. His teammates did not always like playing for him and he called out Javon Walker for holding out of camp and then he pulled his retirement bullshit last year. I just see a lot of flaws.
He won a Super Bowl in Green Bay back when you weren't supposed to win in the league's smallest market.
Yes, Green Bay with its 9 NFL Championships and 3 Super Bowl Championships has always been a really hard place to win football games.
We watched him enter the sport as reckless and immature,
Did anyone see his last four games as a quarterback in the NFL and see what his Jets teammates thought about him? Did he really leave the sport any differently than the way he entered it?
"I have no reason to wonder why you would be so skeptical,'' he shot back, laughing lightly. "Because I have family and friends who are like, 'All right, Brett. Is this the real deal?' To me, it is. It is. Believe me, it has been a wonderful career. I couldn't ask for anything more. It was worth a shot for me to go to New York. I wish I could've played better down the stretch. I didn't. It's time to leave.
"I am leaving to play for the Minnesota Vikings. They will definitely want me around June."
In the end, neither the Packers nor Jets made the playoffs, and considering how Favre eroded physically, Thompson was better off allowing Rodgers to gain a year of starting experience.
I feel vindicated because I thought this was the best option all along. No one said I was wrong but I still feel vindicated.
Until then, we'll savor the man who never stopped playing like a little boy.
(Vomiting from an overdose of cliche)
To the very end, even when he drove us crazy, No. 4 kept it entertaining.
Yep, I knew he was always good for one or two absolutely horrid throws per game.
Replacing him as a man-crush won't be easy.
Peter King will wrestle you in a vat of Vasoline for Matt Ryan.
4. Peter King gives us his MMQB follow up.
Peter defends the Steeler's injury report for the Super Bowl.
I don't believe Big Ben needed to be on the injury report. It's simple. Putting him on the injury report as "probable'' would have told the world there was a "virtual certainty'' he'd play in the game. That's the definition of "probable'' in NFL injury-reportage. That sounds like a 94 percent chance he'd play. It was 100 percent. Same with center Justin Hartwig, who was gimpy with a knee injury but was definitely going to play in the game.
Right, but if a guy is injured, he needs to be on the injury report. It seems pretty simple to me. I don't know how he came up with "probable" was a 94% certainty, especially when the definition says that player is definitely playing. It doesn't really matter but if a player is injured, he needs to be on the injury report.
"My problem,'' said Florio, who has been beating the drum for more honest injury reports, "is the injury report focuses only on availability to play without giving full information as to whether a player will be effective. It's called an injury report. Roethlisberger was injured, and he wasn't on the report. I think that's wrong.''
True, with an asterisk. I think if a guy's definitely playing, he doesn't need to be listed.
No, he needs to be listed as "probable" because he is injured and is a virtual certainty to play. That is the definition as Peter kindly pointed out.
"I have a question that no one seems to comment on about the James Harrison touchdown run during the Super Bowl. If you notice during the run back, Larry Fitzgerald goes out of bounds around the 40-45 yard line. Instead of going back in bounds, he runs along the sidelines (clearly out of bounds the entire time) for what appears to be 40 yards and makes the tackle. Shouldn't this be illegal since he is chasing him for a considerable distance from out of bounds. If he chased him from in bounds, chances are he would have never caught up to him. There would have been a major controversy if Harrison would have been tackled short of the goal line. What is the rule for this type of play?"
On kickoffs and punts, players cannot run out of bounds unless they are blocked out of bounds. On all other plays, there is not a rule about where they may run.
I guess that answers our question we had after the Super Bowl.
5. Bill Plaschke thinks Manny Ramirez is up shit creek without a paddle...or a team.
Ramirez doesn't want a one-year contract that would make him baseball's second-highest paid player next season?
What's that? Is that the sound of Bill Simmons being wrong and Manny Ramirez is not only NOT underrated, but teams actually want him?
Ramirez wouldn't take an increased Dodgers offer of two years at $45 million, giving him an identical annual salary of this winter's hottest free-agent slugger, Mark Teixeira?
I don't see how anyone can say with a straight face that Manny is being blackballed for his poor attitude in Boston and that he is underrated because teams don't want him. He is being offered contracts that are enormous, but not lengthy, simply because he is an older player and does have some problems playing LF...and his attitude would be a concern on a 5 year contract.
Yes, his dog behavior in Boston mattered. No, folks don't trust him with a long-term deal anymore.
I am not arguing that Manny is not being slightly affected by his behavior in Boston, he is still being offered a ton of money to play baseball, but he is also not being rewarded for that behavior with a long term contract.
The Dodgers' first offer to Ramirez -- two years, $45 million -- was immediately rejected by Boras, who said he wanted to consider "serious" offers.
This is a side note but why do players sign with Boras again? After the Varitek disaster this offseason, after A-Rod overestimating his ability to get a new contract last year with a team other than the Yankees, after A-Rod admitting to using steroids partially to live down his enormous contract, and now Boras is letting Ramirez sit on the market for a desperate team to grab him up and give him $25 million. Oliver Perez tested the market, there was no market for him, Derek Lowe got less money than he initially wanted, and there was no market for Varitek.
I will say it again, by signing with Boras you limit your options.
In a market where Adam Dunn can't get offers over $11 million, Manny is not getting $25 million per year.
6. Woody Paige finally has a mailbag back up.
Woody - How is it possible that one of the best tight ends to ever play the game was not elected to the Hall of Fame? Is it only prejudice against all things Broncos or are there more sinister things working? -- Bronncohowie, Columbus, Ohio
I always find it silly when people accuse the writers of having biases against certain teams, though there may be, I just don't know about it.
Sharpe will get in next year or the following year. I fought every year to put in the maximum (seven). Some years, some buffoons on the committee vote for fewer men, which just backs up the system and makes it harder for worthy players to make it.
This may be true but this attitude also annoys the hell out of me. When he says voting for fewer players "just backs up the system" it makes me feel like they want to put everyone who is above average in the Hall of Fame. This is probably just me though that worries about this. Is Cris Carter a HoF player? I don't know because I haven't researched it that much but I would have some initial questions about whether he is or not.
The Broncos, though, have to get through free agency: a great lineman (I still say Julius Peppers, although I get e-mails telling me I'm crazy), another quality linebacker and, at the minimum, one safety (should get three).
If you sign Julius Peppers, you will have used almost half of your available cap space on one player. Trust me, he wants a lot of money. I like how the brilliant Woody Paige thinks the Broncos should get three safeties in free agency. I don't know, that just seems like a whole hell of a lot of safeties when I see the biggest need as defensive linemen.
Woody - I think you're wonderful. That being said, you were way out of line saying Pittsburgh could possibly be America's team. There is no America's team. And if so, it wouldn't be Pittsburgh. Everyone loves a winner and that is the sole reason Pittsburgh has such a following right now. Don't forget, it was only about six years ago, Pittsburgh couldn't give tickets away. -- Kate, Ebensburg, Pa.
Kate smacks Woody in the page with some fair weather fan logic. This should be directed right at Snoop Dogg.
But here's why I am so strong on the Steelers. When the steel mills closed in the 1970s in Pittsburgh, and so many jobs disappeared, tens of thousands of Steelers fans moved elsewhere. They remained Steelers fans, and they made their kids Steelers fans, and the pyramid continues, especially with a winning team over the years. There are as many Pittsburgh fans in some cities as there are fans for the local team.
Oh yeah, there is a socio-economic reason the Steelers are a fan favorite and their fans travel from game to game, it has nothing to do with any bandwagon fans. This may be true but I love it anytime Woody Paige tries to explain a socio-economic reason for anything.
7. Rick Reilly gets paid millions to write articles like this.
Our sentence count for this week: 54 sentences and that includes probably 15 four word sentences.
I've been fired more than pottery.
I wish it would happen again.
And how did I react whenever I got canned?
Rick wrote a 13 sentence 2 paragraph letter protesting his firing and then took a nap from being exhausted after this slavish task.
Most of these guys didn't even deserve to lose their jobs, and they're acting like they just got handed a freaking fruit basket.
Dummy, that is because they want to get hired again. No owner is going to hire a guy who flips out at the news he has been fired because they don't want to hire a crazy person.
Me? I'd go triple Sean Penn!
Rick would write an emotional four paragraph letter about how his being fired has affected his family, find a new job quickly, start that new job 6 months after he is hired, and spend the vacation time he has taking pictures with co-eds in exotic locations.
When the certifiably mad Al Davis fired young Lane Kiffin as the Raiders coach this season during a disgraceful and insulting press conference, Kiffin had every right to march over to Davis and rip off his lips. Instead, afterward, Kiffin said, "I'm very appreciative of the opportunity." Then he added, "I felt bad for Al."
And he got a new job a few months later. See the correlation?
Or how about this, Mike? Your new house is only a three-minute drive from Bowlen's, right? Get yourself a massive catapult.
And a whole lot of eggs.
That's how he ends the column. It was all about what Rick would do if he got fired. Next week there will be a column on what Rick would do if he finds termites in his house, the week after that Rick writes an interesting piece on what he does when someone cuts him off in traffic and his big story of the year will be a 100 sentence (it's a two part-er) 12 paragraph expose on what Rick Reilly does when someone uses the handicap stall at a sporting event.
8. Alex Marvez doesn't believe Favre is retired and I am tired of talking about this.
"A lot of guys enjoyed having him in the locker room," Baker said. "I don't think it was as bad as it seemed when some of the comments came out at the end of the season. Obviously, guys were frustrated by the turnovers and interceptions, but that's part of the game.
"Brett has the most touchdowns and most interceptions (in NFL history). That's what you get when you get Brett Favre. Everyone understood that."
Now that is a ringing endorsement of Brett Favre if I have ever heard one. Turnovers and interceptions are not always a part of the game. Jake Delhomme has gotten crucified for making that part of his game, as he rightly should, just like Rex Grossman has gotten crucified. If you have a good quarterback on your team, then this is not so much of an issue.
Favre, though, suffered a torn biceps tendon that was kept quiet by the team until after the season (offering more proof that the NFL needs to revamp its injury report criteria, but I digress).
Not according to Peter King, even when it involves his ex-boyfriend, Brett Favre.
Whether he does the same before applying for NFL reinstatement — Minnesota, anyone? — will be proof whether this old dog is set on pulling the same trick or is ready to roll over permanently.
I don't believe he is done. I will believe that when he actually files his retirement papers and it is June and Brett Favre is not quoted as saying his shoulder feels better and hinting he would come back if someone wanted him.
9. Joe Posanski asks the question I have asked and that is what separates these steroid users from the other guys in baseball's Hall of Fame that have cheated.
"Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contribution to the team(s) on which the player played."
This is the character clause in the Hall of Fame voting. Joe wants this to be gotten rid of and I am not sure how I feel about this. You want the Hall of Fame to include the best of the best players and it is about baseball, but you also want to honor the players that deserve to be honored. It seems the committee has ignored the clause until Pete Rose came along and now it is affecting the players from the steroid era.
Mark McGwire's alleged drug use has been a clause celebre: The guy hit 583 home runs, broke the single-season home run record, is the all-time leader in home runs per at bat, but almost 80 percent of the voters did not vote for him because they believe he cheated the game.
I think I am am more annoyed with the fact he continues to lie about it.
Meanwhile, the Hall of Fame is filled with people who admitted to using drugs (Paul Molitor, Ferguson Jenkins, etc.), who willingly cheated (Gaylord Perry threw spitballs, Don Sutton and Whitey Ford cut baseballs, players undoubtedly corked bats)
Exactly, you can't have an elastic morality clause, where betting on baseball and steroids were wrong, but these offenses are not.
I think the clause should have been changed a long time ago; it makes me queasy to think about sportswriters (or anyone else) trying to judge a man's character.
I think I agree. I write about some of the sportswriters on this site that have a Hall of Fame vote and they are barely qualified to give an acceptable opinion on who should be allowed in the Hall of Fame in regard to baseball skill, much less do I want these people judging ball players based on morality. They would kick Michael Phelps out of any Olympic Hall of Fame at this point.
In the years before Jackie Robinson, there were no black players. Players caroused and gambled and boozed. Many cheated to get ahead. Many took drugs. There have been beanballs and stolen signals and thrown bats. There have been thugs and racists and liars and everything else. And, yes, there have been steroid users, too.
Thugs and racists are fine because that has nothing to do with baseball performance...and gambling goes along with that in my mind. I guess my only problem is that using performance enhancers, like throwing spitballs, and other methods of cheating affect the basic numbers a player can accumulate to be considered for the Hall of Fame. If they have been elevated because of any type of cheating, I am not sure I feel comfortable with that player being in the Hall of Fame. I have no problem with the morality clause being gotten rid of, but it doesn't answer my question about whether a player should make the Hall of Fame based on their statistics or not, which may or may not have been affected by illegal supplements or even cheating. They have let cheaters in the HoF in the past, why stop now though?
10. This is big news in my neck of the woods.
So far this year I have said I would not believe Duke is in the contention to even get past the Sweet Sixteen until they have not collapsed in February (lost 3 of the last 5 games) and beaten a quality team on the road in February (hasn't happened). Neither of those things have happened. I also have predicted that UNC is still going to win the National Championship and come February and March we would read a bunch of articles about how the losses at the beginning of the year really helped UNC get better and that is exactly what this article is.
UNC won this game with Hansbrough not having his typical great game against Duke, which should be scary for the rest of the country. After watching the game last night, it is clear that UNC is the team to beat in the country and I really think they are going to win the National Championship.
For Duke, I have heard a lot of people whining about them losing again. I really chalk this up to Coach K and the fact he is not completely focused on the Duke program and that he tends to take guys out of the rotation later in the year, which leads to the fatigue that sets in and causes the team to lose. Every year he has an excuse for why his team loses. Let's look at them and see whose fault it could be:
05-06- The entire team sat around and waited for Redick and Sheldon Williams to do something instead of taking the lead and trying to score on their own. Coach K designs the offense and coaches the team, this is on him.
06-07- His youngest team ever, get beat in the opening round of the NCAA Tournament. Not much anyone can do.
07-08- The entire team got fatigued down the stretch and began to shoot jump shots when they did not have their legs. Coach K did not play other players due to injury or the other players would be ineffective in the game. You could blame him for this, but there was not much team depth at the time.
08-09- No excuse given yet. This Duke team is deeper than they have been in a while and start sophomores and juniors and have seniors coming off the bench. Coach K is letting two freshman, who while not spectacular, can at least not hurt the team while stealing minutes so the starters can be fresh down the stretch of the year and into the tournament. He has gone from a 11 man rotation to an 8 man rotation, which is only going to increase the fatigue and cause another February Fade. Duke haters are going to have a lot to love down the stretch this year based on the team's inability/unwillingness to drive to the basket and they just shoot jump shots and hang out on the perimeter. There is no penetration. I can only attribute it to fatigue (which the announcers commented on continuously). I believe this falls on the head coach, who needs to change the rotation to prevent this from happening, and there are no excuses for this.
I am done talking about this issue now. Duke has a lot to prove to the college basketball world and I don't think they even realize it.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
0 comments Random Thoughts
Traffic goes down faster than a boat taking 2,000 adults to fat camp on an island on Thursdays when I do my random thoughts. I am kidding, I just wanted to make a lame joke. There have been a lot of trades, signings, and almost signings in the past 24 hours so of course I have to give opinion that no one cares about. Let's turn it into The Big Lead without the fancy pictures for a day.
-Brian McNamee, who apparently is a Hall of Fame voter AND a baseball expert, does not think Roger Clemens will make it into the Hall.
"He's done. He's not going to the Hall of Fame," McNamee said in a video interview with Web site sportsimproper.com. "There's no chance. Too much damage. Too much trust was broken. Between the people that gave him his career, the people that wrote about his career, and the people that supported his career."
I am at the point where I believe neither McNamee or Clemens. Is that possible? I wish it was. I believe they are both lying but I can't figure out about what. I will bet $10,000 Roger Clemens makes the Hall of Fame. I don't really think the Hall voters care about trust or who supported his career, and I think the only way he is left out is if someone is trying to make an example of him...I don't think it will happen though. I wish all parties involved would just quit talking, the more either one talks, the less I believe that person.
-I am going to start a new column every week and it will be called "Rick Reilly Gets Paid Millions for Writing Things Like This...Once A Week," with excerpts from his weekly column without my comments.
Rick Reilly gets paid millions for writing things like this...once a week.
These four golfers not only fought off an armed robber, they chased him down in a golf cart and held him for police. And all without resorting to a single Big Bertha!
Question No. 1: Why was the man wearing underpants on his head? A: Perhaps he planned to take the money and launder it.
Question No. 2: Was the color of the underpants originally brown or were they …A: "No," answers Flick. "They were not stained from the day before."
Library custodian Bob Brewer, 58, spun the cart around in hot pursuit, with his friend, real-estate agent Reed Madsen, 57, sprinting behind. Next on the Golf Channel: America's Most Unforgettable Cart Chases!
As for those three, they get out of their cart now with a certain bounce, according to Itow. "We say stuff to each other like, 'Go ahead, punk. Make my putt."
Cha-Ching! (The sound of every person who works hard in America weeping violently.)
-I am almost cried when I read this because it was so pathetic...and then I wondered if Scott Boras would have Tex take the offer.
The Washington Nationals made their best New York Yankees impersonation on Wednesday.
According to MLB.com, the team made an eight-year, $160 million offer to free-agent first baseman Mark Teixeira.
I did not find it sad that the Nationals tried to offer Teixeira a contract, I found it sad they actually think they have a shot at him. The Yankees and Red Sox sign contracts like that in their sleep and they sure as hell are not going to be shown up by some crappy fifth place NL East team. They will be damned if some half ass National League team is going to overbid for a player, if anyone is overbidding for mediocre players it is them.
(Theo Epstein and Brian Cashman then write out competing 5 year $200 million contracts for Tex and then Cashman calls Chad Cordero 3 years $100 million just to get back at the Nationals.)
My second thought was me wondering how much different was this from Alex Rodriguez going to Texas? At least Texas had some good players at the time, like Tex and Michael Young, the Nationals have Ryan Zimmerman and.........other people. Are they not concerned at all with pitching? John Patterson is their #1 pitcher. Maybe that money would be better spent on pitching...especially since they have Nick Johnson and Dmitri Young at first already.
My third thought was me wondering if this was the largest offer, and the Angels offered 6 years $100 million, which offer would Scott Boras have Tex take? I think he would take the Nationals offer then try to get traded to the Yankees in three years.
-The Charlotte Bobcats are continuing to tank in the hopes of running another franchise out of Charlotte. My question at this point is whether the UNC Tar Heels could beat the Bobcats. I am going to go with a "yes" on that.
In this entire article there is not one single quote from a Charlotte Bobcat scout, coach, general manager, or anyone involved with the organization that speaks positively about the trade. If anyone wonders what is wrong, that is your answer. There is one Larry Brown quote:
"When you try to get better, you're going to lose some assets," Charlotte coach Larry Brown told The Associated Press. "We're losing a pretty darn good player and the way Phoenix is trying to make their team, they just added an unbelievable piece.
No fucking way. When you are trying to get better, you are going to gain some assets. Gain, not lose dumbass. At what point after the Knicks disaster and the fact none of his players ever like him is he going to begin losing credibility as a good head coach?
"[Richardson] averaged 20 a game for us this year without a true post game. When you put him with Shaq, who can pass the ball and commands double teams, and Stoudemire as well, and you got a guy like Steve Nash, they got a pretty formidable weapon."
I am sorry, then why did you just trade this "formidable weapon" for two role players and a third string point guard?
Wait, here is another dumbass quote from "General Manager" Rod Huggins...or as I like to call him Chief Dumbass of the Organization.
"We needed to become bigger," Bobcats general manager Rod Higgins told The Associated Press.
Again, incorrect. You need to get BETTER, not bigger. You could have a team full of really tall guys who can't play (which you do with Okafor, Sean "Doughboy" May, and now Boris "I am French so that should tell you all you need to know about my toughness and willingness to work hard, because frankly I would rather grow a wispy mustache and smoke a cigarette outside a cafe" Diaw. I do like Tony Parker and think he is tough, please let me play into a French stereotype to mock Diaw, just this once) and it won't matter if you can't win basketball games. Simple as that.
Also, couldn't you have at least dumped some salary or gotten a contract or two that was expiring? This trade was a pretty much even salary swap for the next two years so I don't know how the Bobcats expect to get better when they have acquired expensive players with less talent than they originally had. What a clueless organization.
It makes me long for the days when Charlotte had a wonderful franchise with a strong fan base and George Shinn did not try to fuck anything with a pulse.
As for Diaw, Kerr said: "Boris' contract just didn't fit into our salary structure. I feel much better paying Jason Richardson to play 35-40 minutes a night as a starter than to pay Boris to come off the bench and play a limited role."
It fit into the Bobcats salary structure though. More useless, expensive guys who can sit on the bench and underperform. What a clueless organization.
-Do you think Omar Minaya realizes J.J. Putz is not of Latin/Hispanic origin?
New York shipped reliever Aaron Heilman, outfielder Endy Chavez, lefty Jason Vargas and three minor leaguers to the Mariners for Putz, center fielder Jeremy Reed and reliever Sean Green in the first trade by new Seattle general manager Jack Zduriencik.
I am going to throw up if Jeremy Reed ends up being a great player for the Mets. I saw him play a few times when he was in the White Sox organization and I thought he would be pretty good. I was wrong...but maybe he was just waiting to be in the NL East to piss me off.
Let's sum up the activity in the NL East so far this offseason:
Mets- they have gotten two incredibly good pieces to their bullpen. Intelligently have not traded their best players from last year in a panic move and have the best pitcher in the NL.
Nationals- have offered a larger contract to Tex than the Braves and Mets would offer (????) and now have three above average outfielders by trading for Josh Willingham. Apparently want to be taken seriously.
Phillies- Zzzzzzzz...still sleeping off the World Series hangover.
Marlins- still trying to get Hanley Ramirez to demand a trade.
Braves- have shored up their starting rotation by trading for a .500 pitcher and want an injury prone inconsistent pitcher to be their #1 starter, so they are offering him double the money he deserves...they are also trying to let John Smoltz sign with another team as a free agent, just as a big "fuck you" to the fan base. (I would let Smoltz pitch until his arm falls off, why would anyone bet against him at this point?)
Needless to say, I think the Mets look like the obvious favorite this year in the NL East. Not that they are completely set behind Santana and Maine, but those two pitchers are better than any other combination in the division.
-Speaking of A.J. Burnett, this is really getting out of hand. He is a great pitcher when healthy, well congratulations, but being injured all the time is a major problem. I don't see this ending well for which ever team ends up with him.
Would the Braves guarantee the fifth year to secure Burnett? Probably. Would the Yankees raise their offer to $91 million to approximate Carlos Zambrano's deal with the Cubs? Perhaps.
Look, if there is no pitching available and a team needs pitching, then they are shit out of luck, there is no need to go out there and overpay for someone who is just going to not be very good for the entire length of the contract. Hell, Burnett may never be good at any part of the contract. I have a headache.
-Alex Marvez lists his most overpaid and most underpaid in the NFL. If you are looking for new information you won't find any here. You will find some really questionable opinions on the overpaid list though, where you will find Vernon Gholston (a rookie this year by the way, who is transitioning into the 3-4 defense) and Michael Huff (he plays for the Raiders for God's sake, how he is expected to play well for them?).
Under the underpaid list, you don't find too many surprises either. Though Marvez cheats incredibly well and 50% of the list includes the players who are still playing out their rookie contract, which means they are going to get a huge raise and could end up on the overpaid list next year. What a waste of time, there was no point to this list if you are going to list players who have not hit free agency yet.
-CC Sabathia (shocker!) is going to the Yankees. Huge contract for a huge man. He can opt out though after three years, and yet again a team bid against itself it seems.
The Yankees' first offer to Sabathia was for six years, $140 million. They added the seventh year to further distance themselves from the Brewers and other clubs interested in Sabathia.
The Brewers made the only other known offer to Sabathia — five years, $100 million with deferrals. But the Giants, Angels and Red Sox all showed varying degrees of interest in signing the pitcher.
From what we know the Yankees had the longest contract offer with six years and then they felt the need to tack on another year and $21 million. Do contracts like this ever end well?
Was there any other destination for Sabathia though? Next thing you will tell me Mark Teixeira will sign with the Red Sox. That's predictable as well.
Yep. Bill Simmons' and Scott Boras' one sided feud has to end now so Boras can feed more of his players to the Red Sox. Peace must be met.
-I guess with the Mets trade for J.J. Putz, there is this one little hangup.
J.J. Putz does not want to be a setup man, according to his agent, Craig Landis, but his change in roles could lead to him becoming a free agent one year earlier.
This doesn't change my mind about the trade, though I can't wait to see how this plays out. Can Putz be a setup man for one year?
Putz is signed for $5.5 million next season. The Mets will assume his $9.1 million club option for 2010, and that option could increase to a maximum of $9.6 million if Putz meets all of his appearance-based incentives.
Two years as a setup man and then the Mets will probably not pick up his option. I think it will end up being ok but you would think someone would ask him whether he is willing to be a set up man before the trade is made.
Anything really interesting or anything good by Simmons will go up immediately.
-Brian McNamee, who apparently is a Hall of Fame voter AND a baseball expert, does not think Roger Clemens will make it into the Hall.
"He's done. He's not going to the Hall of Fame," McNamee said in a video interview with Web site sportsimproper.com. "There's no chance. Too much damage. Too much trust was broken. Between the people that gave him his career, the people that wrote about his career, and the people that supported his career."
I am at the point where I believe neither McNamee or Clemens. Is that possible? I wish it was. I believe they are both lying but I can't figure out about what. I will bet $10,000 Roger Clemens makes the Hall of Fame. I don't really think the Hall voters care about trust or who supported his career, and I think the only way he is left out is if someone is trying to make an example of him...I don't think it will happen though. I wish all parties involved would just quit talking, the more either one talks, the less I believe that person.
-I am going to start a new column every week and it will be called "Rick Reilly Gets Paid Millions for Writing Things Like This...Once A Week," with excerpts from his weekly column without my comments.
Rick Reilly gets paid millions for writing things like this...once a week.
These four golfers not only fought off an armed robber, they chased him down in a golf cart and held him for police. And all without resorting to a single Big Bertha!
Question No. 1: Why was the man wearing underpants on his head? A: Perhaps he planned to take the money and launder it.
Question No. 2: Was the color of the underpants originally brown or were they …A: "No," answers Flick. "They were not stained from the day before."
Library custodian Bob Brewer, 58, spun the cart around in hot pursuit, with his friend, real-estate agent Reed Madsen, 57, sprinting behind. Next on the Golf Channel: America's Most Unforgettable Cart Chases!
As for those three, they get out of their cart now with a certain bounce, according to Itow. "We say stuff to each other like, 'Go ahead, punk. Make my putt."
Cha-Ching! (The sound of every person who works hard in America weeping violently.)
-I am almost cried when I read this because it was so pathetic...and then I wondered if Scott Boras would have Tex take the offer.
The Washington Nationals made their best New York Yankees impersonation on Wednesday.
According to MLB.com, the team made an eight-year, $160 million offer to free-agent first baseman Mark Teixeira.
I did not find it sad that the Nationals tried to offer Teixeira a contract, I found it sad they actually think they have a shot at him. The Yankees and Red Sox sign contracts like that in their sleep and they sure as hell are not going to be shown up by some crappy fifth place NL East team. They will be damned if some half ass National League team is going to overbid for a player, if anyone is overbidding for mediocre players it is them.
(Theo Epstein and Brian Cashman then write out competing 5 year $200 million contracts for Tex and then Cashman calls Chad Cordero 3 years $100 million just to get back at the Nationals.)
My second thought was me wondering how much different was this from Alex Rodriguez going to Texas? At least Texas had some good players at the time, like Tex and Michael Young, the Nationals have Ryan Zimmerman and.........other people. Are they not concerned at all with pitching? John Patterson is their #1 pitcher. Maybe that money would be better spent on pitching...especially since they have Nick Johnson and Dmitri Young at first already.
My third thought was me wondering if this was the largest offer, and the Angels offered 6 years $100 million, which offer would Scott Boras have Tex take? I think he would take the Nationals offer then try to get traded to the Yankees in three years.
-The Charlotte Bobcats are continuing to tank in the hopes of running another franchise out of Charlotte. My question at this point is whether the UNC Tar Heels could beat the Bobcats. I am going to go with a "yes" on that.
In this entire article there is not one single quote from a Charlotte Bobcat scout, coach, general manager, or anyone involved with the organization that speaks positively about the trade. If anyone wonders what is wrong, that is your answer. There is one Larry Brown quote:
"When you try to get better, you're going to lose some assets," Charlotte coach Larry Brown told The Associated Press. "We're losing a pretty darn good player and the way Phoenix is trying to make their team, they just added an unbelievable piece.
No fucking way. When you are trying to get better, you are going to gain some assets. Gain, not lose dumbass. At what point after the Knicks disaster and the fact none of his players ever like him is he going to begin losing credibility as a good head coach?
"[Richardson] averaged 20 a game for us this year without a true post game. When you put him with Shaq, who can pass the ball and commands double teams, and Stoudemire as well, and you got a guy like Steve Nash, they got a pretty formidable weapon."
I am sorry, then why did you just trade this "formidable weapon" for two role players and a third string point guard?
Wait, here is another dumbass quote from "General Manager" Rod Huggins...or as I like to call him Chief Dumbass of the Organization.
"We needed to become bigger," Bobcats general manager Rod Higgins told The Associated Press.
Again, incorrect. You need to get BETTER, not bigger. You could have a team full of really tall guys who can't play (which you do with Okafor, Sean "Doughboy" May, and now Boris "I am French so that should tell you all you need to know about my toughness and willingness to work hard, because frankly I would rather grow a wispy mustache and smoke a cigarette outside a cafe" Diaw. I do like Tony Parker and think he is tough, please let me play into a French stereotype to mock Diaw, just this once) and it won't matter if you can't win basketball games. Simple as that.
Also, couldn't you have at least dumped some salary or gotten a contract or two that was expiring? This trade was a pretty much even salary swap for the next two years so I don't know how the Bobcats expect to get better when they have acquired expensive players with less talent than they originally had. What a clueless organization.
It makes me long for the days when Charlotte had a wonderful franchise with a strong fan base and George Shinn did not try to fuck anything with a pulse.
As for Diaw, Kerr said: "Boris' contract just didn't fit into our salary structure. I feel much better paying Jason Richardson to play 35-40 minutes a night as a starter than to pay Boris to come off the bench and play a limited role."
It fit into the Bobcats salary structure though. More useless, expensive guys who can sit on the bench and underperform. What a clueless organization.
-Do you think Omar Minaya realizes J.J. Putz is not of Latin/Hispanic origin?
New York shipped reliever Aaron Heilman, outfielder Endy Chavez, lefty Jason Vargas and three minor leaguers to the Mariners for Putz, center fielder Jeremy Reed and reliever Sean Green in the first trade by new Seattle general manager Jack Zduriencik.
I am going to throw up if Jeremy Reed ends up being a great player for the Mets. I saw him play a few times when he was in the White Sox organization and I thought he would be pretty good. I was wrong...but maybe he was just waiting to be in the NL East to piss me off.
Let's sum up the activity in the NL East so far this offseason:
Mets- they have gotten two incredibly good pieces to their bullpen. Intelligently have not traded their best players from last year in a panic move and have the best pitcher in the NL.
Nationals- have offered a larger contract to Tex than the Braves and Mets would offer (????) and now have three above average outfielders by trading for Josh Willingham. Apparently want to be taken seriously.
Phillies- Zzzzzzzz...still sleeping off the World Series hangover.
Marlins- still trying to get Hanley Ramirez to demand a trade.
Braves- have shored up their starting rotation by trading for a .500 pitcher and want an injury prone inconsistent pitcher to be their #1 starter, so they are offering him double the money he deserves...they are also trying to let John Smoltz sign with another team as a free agent, just as a big "fuck you" to the fan base. (I would let Smoltz pitch until his arm falls off, why would anyone bet against him at this point?)
Needless to say, I think the Mets look like the obvious favorite this year in the NL East. Not that they are completely set behind Santana and Maine, but those two pitchers are better than any other combination in the division.
-Speaking of A.J. Burnett, this is really getting out of hand. He is a great pitcher when healthy, well congratulations, but being injured all the time is a major problem. I don't see this ending well for which ever team ends up with him.
Would the Braves guarantee the fifth year to secure Burnett? Probably. Would the Yankees raise their offer to $91 million to approximate Carlos Zambrano's deal with the Cubs? Perhaps.
Look, if there is no pitching available and a team needs pitching, then they are shit out of luck, there is no need to go out there and overpay for someone who is just going to not be very good for the entire length of the contract. Hell, Burnett may never be good at any part of the contract. I have a headache.
-Alex Marvez lists his most overpaid and most underpaid in the NFL. If you are looking for new information you won't find any here. You will find some really questionable opinions on the overpaid list though, where you will find Vernon Gholston (a rookie this year by the way, who is transitioning into the 3-4 defense) and Michael Huff (he plays for the Raiders for God's sake, how he is expected to play well for them?).
Under the underpaid list, you don't find too many surprises either. Though Marvez cheats incredibly well and 50% of the list includes the players who are still playing out their rookie contract, which means they are going to get a huge raise and could end up on the overpaid list next year. What a waste of time, there was no point to this list if you are going to list players who have not hit free agency yet.
-CC Sabathia (shocker!) is going to the Yankees. Huge contract for a huge man. He can opt out though after three years, and yet again a team bid against itself it seems.
The Yankees' first offer to Sabathia was for six years, $140 million. They added the seventh year to further distance themselves from the Brewers and other clubs interested in Sabathia.
The Brewers made the only other known offer to Sabathia — five years, $100 million with deferrals. But the Giants, Angels and Red Sox all showed varying degrees of interest in signing the pitcher.
From what we know the Yankees had the longest contract offer with six years and then they felt the need to tack on another year and $21 million. Do contracts like this ever end well?
Was there any other destination for Sabathia though? Next thing you will tell me Mark Teixeira will sign with the Red Sox. That's predictable as well.
Yep. Bill Simmons' and Scott Boras' one sided feud has to end now so Boras can feed more of his players to the Red Sox. Peace must be met.
-I guess with the Mets trade for J.J. Putz, there is this one little hangup.
J.J. Putz does not want to be a setup man, according to his agent, Craig Landis, but his change in roles could lead to him becoming a free agent one year earlier.
This doesn't change my mind about the trade, though I can't wait to see how this plays out. Can Putz be a setup man for one year?
Putz is signed for $5.5 million next season. The Mets will assume his $9.1 million club option for 2010, and that option could increase to a maximum of $9.6 million if Putz meets all of his appearance-based incentives.
Two years as a setup man and then the Mets will probably not pick up his option. I think it will end up being ok but you would think someone would ask him whether he is willing to be a set up man before the trade is made.
Anything really interesting or anything good by Simmons will go up immediately.
Monday, September 29, 2008
0 comments Someone Needs to Steal Alex Marvez's Computer Keyboard
It would save us from the pain of having to read things like this.
As the NFL trade deadline approaches, someone desperately needs to make a deal.
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.
I get it. You think he should force another NFL team to trade for a player like he did with the Brett Favre situation? Let me guess, you think Roy Williams or Anquan Boldin should go to the Cowboys? Matt Leinart to the Patriots?
We're not talking players here. We're talking franchises.
You want to replace the St. Louis Rams with the Toronto Argonauts?
Swap an NFC East club with another from the NFC West. It doesn't matter which ones.
Why would you do that? There would be a team in the NFC West that was from the East and a team in the East that was from the West. This idea blows...and I say that sincerely because I know it took you all of five minutes to think about this and write this column.
If you are going to do this idea, why don't you put an NFC East team in the AFC East and switch from there? That would make more sense.
Also, Philadelphia, Arizona, San Francisco, and St. Louis division would be no more exciting than what it currently looks like.
Because as it stands now, an NFC East team will get shafted while a lesser NFC West team heads to the postseason based on the league's playoff format.
What?????? You mean every division in football will not be completely equal in strength throughout the entire year? All teams in the Eastern part of the country should not be of equal strength, that is not why the NFL lined up the divisions that way. It was geography and interdivisional rivalries, it was not all about making the divisions fair every single year.
Actually, I think teams that were in the weakest division should be able to draft earlier in the NFL Draft so the teams in that division can get stronger and all teams will be of equal strength throughout the year. That way the league would be incredibly boring all the time and every team will either go 4-12, 8-8, or 12-4.
Fuck changing divisions, let's just put the team division names in a hat and then draw out teams from that to determine which teams are in each other's division.
Every division must be balanced and must always stay equally balanced. It has to be that way in Alex Marvez's Communist NFL Manifesto.
The NFC West doesn't have any members with a winning record.
This type of thing happens every year, in every sport, in every division at some point. Then that team that stinks gets knocked out of the playoffs early and the big boys can play. That is the price you pay for parity. It really is cyclical as well. The divisions are not always going to be fair, that is life. Ask the Cleveland Browns who went 10-6 last year but missed the playoffs but the 10-6 Giants won the Super Bowl.
The last time the NFC West won the Super Bowl? The year 2000. What a bunch of pathetic losers.
Every year we get to read "this division is not fair, look at how many good teams are in the division, and look at how many bad teams are in the other division" articles. They get really old, especially since if you have the brain power of a hamster you know these type of things are cyclical and not indicative of an overall trend. Hence, Alex Marvez does not understand this.
If Alex Marvez had his way the Golden State Warriors would be in the Eastern Conference...
Auburn University would go to the Pac-10 in college football and basketball, trading places with UCLA...
Alabama would go to the Big East, trading places with Rutgers in college football.
What could make sport any more fun than diluting a good conference/division, and rather than having a competitive game nearly every week, each team gets to play easier teams so rather than the Redskins and Cowboys play twice a year (once at each team's stadium) and potentially once in the playoffs, to decide who is a better team, they meet in the playoffs only once? Nothing could be better.
Less competitive games, more dilution of conferences to ensure fairness! I think all teams should have to use Brett Favre as their QB as well. Then everything would be really equal.
The NFL's beasts are in the NFC East. Washington's 26-24 road upset of Dallas is further proof.
That one game is fucking proof that something needs to be done. What about Kansas City's defeat of the previously unbeaten Denver Broncos, who beat San Diego, who beat the Raiders, who beat Kansas City? Is that proof the AFC West is loaded and is the beast of the NFL?
Alex?
Entering Sunday night's Philadelphia-Chicago game, none of the NFC East's four teams had lost outside the division. The Giants — one of the NFL's four remaining undefeated teams — defeated Washington in the season opener. The Cowboys topped Philadelphia the following week. And on Sunday, Dallas fell from the unbeaten ranks at the hands of a Redskins team that has won three straight.
Conclusive proof. Thanks for that.
The most annoying part about all of this is that these were all competitive games. How irritating that competitive games will decide who gets to be in the playoffs! Wouldn't it be much more fun if each team was separated from each other and got to play teams that were not good and it made for less competitive and exciting football? Alex Marvez thinks so.
Since he is obviously a genius with a foolproof plan, I wonder how Alex would handle the fact each NFL team plays four teams in an AFC Division and NFL Division, where it rotates every year? How would we make that fair every year? Each conference can not be identical in strength to the next one, would there just be no games played between different divisions? The Broncos would play the Raiders, Chiefs, and Chargers 3 times and then play the Philadelphia Eagles, Washingon Redskins, Dallas Cowboys, and New York Giants once each, since they are the beast of the NFL and all.
Yet there are only two wild-card spots in each conference, which makes rivalry games like Cowboys vs. Redskins even more spirited
Boring!!! Besides those games are so spirited because of the fantasy impact and not because of a competitive conference. Right, Bill Simmons?
We need more Arizona v. New York Jet games where the outcome is decided at halftime.
Redskins coach Jim Zorn said the contest was a "brawl," an apt description for a game that wasn't decided until Dallas failed to recover an onsides kick with 1:42 remaining.
A "brawl?" How uncouth!
The competition every time we play each other is at a high level," Cowboys defensive end Marcus Spears said. "You never can rate this game before it starts as one team is going to do such and such.
A high level of competition too? Geez, separate these teams before these games get more exciting. Alex Marvez's idea of boring you to do death with games in equal divisions is so much more exciting.
I HATE it when Duke and UNC play each other twice every year in basketball. It sucks so bad to see two teams that are of equal strength playing each other. I much prefer the UNC-UNC Asheville game. They should actually play 15 times a year so we could get a better gauge of how good UNC is.
Spears has good reason to believe the Cowboys are playoff-bound. But a second- or third-place NFC East finish awaits if the Cowboys stage more mistake-filled performances.
This is not fair but this is bound to happen. Just like a couple mistakes would stop the Tampa Bay Bucs from making the playoffs, it could happen to the Cowboys. The interesting part is that if these teams play each other all year, I doubt they would all go 3-3 against each other, then at some point we could determine who the better team was, and who thereby deserves to go to the playoffs. That is also why you should wait until at least mid season to write an article like this.
But in the future, NFC East teams won't have to pummel each other twice a season if the NFL expands to 34 franchises.
He clearly looks forward to this day.
Divisions could be abolished altogether, replaced by 17-team conferences.
The exact opposite of what baseball has done, which normally seems like a great idea. Not here though.
Squads would reach the playoffs based on records after matchups against every conference foe.
In his brilliance, Alex Marvez does not think about what would happen if one conference, say the AFC is incredibly stronger than the NFC, so a team that is 9-7 in the AFC won't make it, but a team that is 9-7 in the NFC will. Just nevermind this. He is currently trying his damndest to get 4 NFC East teams in the playoffs for some reason.
Ok, let's see how this works in the following situation. We can try to determine who would make the playoffs if the Giants, Saints, and Packers were all 9-7 at the end of the year. We do this using the current tie breaker method from wikipedia:
1. Head-to-head (team with the best record in all games played between the teams tied)
The Giants beat the Saints.
The Saints beat the Packers.
The Packers beat the Giants.
So the Giants were 1-1, the Saints were 1-1, and the Packers were 1-1, so onward we go...
2. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division. (This is for determining Division Champion; also, if there is a tie for a wild-card berth, this is used for breaking ties within a division.)
No divisions, so skip this.
3. Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games (only applicable with a minimum of 4 common opponents)
They all played the same opponents and had the same record. Next...
4. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
This would also be equal. Next...
5. Strength of victory (winning percentage of opponents that were beaten)
Assuming this is not the same for each, this would be the 2nd criteria for determing who should make the playoffs without divisions. I am not good with this happening because say the Giants beat every team they were supposed to beat and did not lose to any teams below them in the standings, other than the Packers, they could not make the playoffs if the Saints beat 2 of the top 3 teams while they were at home, but lost to 2 of the bottom 3 teams playing on the road, and the Saints winning percentage of teams beaten is still higher.
Basically the Saints stink on the road and are wonderful at home. The first playoff game they play is going to be on the road, so they will most likely lose if they are that bad at home. Alex Marvez's plan would only work really well if all games were played at neutral sites.
I realize this is not outstanding evidence Alex Marvez is wrong about this but one of the main advantages of the divisional system is that teams play at each other's home stadium in a given year and you can use this equal playing floor, regardless of how good both teams are, to determine who is more worthy of making the playoffs. Granted the entire playing field is not even, but at least the second tie breaker is not based on strength of schedule. His insane plan would turn the NFL into college basketball, except strength of schedule becomes the end-all be-all of who makes the playoffs.
That system would better reflect the NFL's top teams. But it also isn't something that can help the Redskins, Cowboys, Eagles or Giants in 2008.
Nor would it help every other team in every other sport this has ever happened to. It makes every game that is played be important and makes the games more competitive and exciting to watch. I don't consider that a bad thing. Maybe every once in a while a division will be weak and a team that did not deserve to make the playoffs does, that does not mean the whole system should have an overhaul. It just means one division is boring while the others are exciting.
There have been 4 games so far this year, who is to say the teams that play well the first 4 weeks are the best teams in the league? Buffalo is undefeated for God's sake.
As the NFL trade deadline approaches, someone desperately needs to make a deal.
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.
I get it. You think he should force another NFL team to trade for a player like he did with the Brett Favre situation? Let me guess, you think Roy Williams or Anquan Boldin should go to the Cowboys? Matt Leinart to the Patriots?
We're not talking players here. We're talking franchises.
You want to replace the St. Louis Rams with the Toronto Argonauts?
Swap an NFC East club with another from the NFC West. It doesn't matter which ones.
Why would you do that? There would be a team in the NFC West that was from the East and a team in the East that was from the West. This idea blows...and I say that sincerely because I know it took you all of five minutes to think about this and write this column.
If you are going to do this idea, why don't you put an NFC East team in the AFC East and switch from there? That would make more sense.
Also, Philadelphia, Arizona, San Francisco, and St. Louis division would be no more exciting than what it currently looks like.
Because as it stands now, an NFC East team will get shafted while a lesser NFC West team heads to the postseason based on the league's playoff format.
What?????? You mean every division in football will not be completely equal in strength throughout the entire year? All teams in the Eastern part of the country should not be of equal strength, that is not why the NFL lined up the divisions that way. It was geography and interdivisional rivalries, it was not all about making the divisions fair every single year.
Actually, I think teams that were in the weakest division should be able to draft earlier in the NFL Draft so the teams in that division can get stronger and all teams will be of equal strength throughout the year. That way the league would be incredibly boring all the time and every team will either go 4-12, 8-8, or 12-4.
Fuck changing divisions, let's just put the team division names in a hat and then draw out teams from that to determine which teams are in each other's division.
Every division must be balanced and must always stay equally balanced. It has to be that way in Alex Marvez's Communist NFL Manifesto.
The NFC West doesn't have any members with a winning record.
This type of thing happens every year, in every sport, in every division at some point. Then that team that stinks gets knocked out of the playoffs early and the big boys can play. That is the price you pay for parity. It really is cyclical as well. The divisions are not always going to be fair, that is life. Ask the Cleveland Browns who went 10-6 last year but missed the playoffs but the 10-6 Giants won the Super Bowl.
The last time the NFC West won the Super Bowl? The year 2000. What a bunch of pathetic losers.
Every year we get to read "this division is not fair, look at how many good teams are in the division, and look at how many bad teams are in the other division" articles. They get really old, especially since if you have the brain power of a hamster you know these type of things are cyclical and not indicative of an overall trend. Hence, Alex Marvez does not understand this.
If Alex Marvez had his way the Golden State Warriors would be in the Eastern Conference...
Auburn University would go to the Pac-10 in college football and basketball, trading places with UCLA...
Alabama would go to the Big East, trading places with Rutgers in college football.
What could make sport any more fun than diluting a good conference/division, and rather than having a competitive game nearly every week, each team gets to play easier teams so rather than the Redskins and Cowboys play twice a year (once at each team's stadium) and potentially once in the playoffs, to decide who is a better team, they meet in the playoffs only once? Nothing could be better.
Less competitive games, more dilution of conferences to ensure fairness! I think all teams should have to use Brett Favre as their QB as well. Then everything would be really equal.
The NFL's beasts are in the NFC East. Washington's 26-24 road upset of Dallas is further proof.
That one game is fucking proof that something needs to be done. What about Kansas City's defeat of the previously unbeaten Denver Broncos, who beat San Diego, who beat the Raiders, who beat Kansas City? Is that proof the AFC West is loaded and is the beast of the NFL?
Alex?
Entering Sunday night's Philadelphia-Chicago game, none of the NFC East's four teams had lost outside the division. The Giants — one of the NFL's four remaining undefeated teams — defeated Washington in the season opener. The Cowboys topped Philadelphia the following week. And on Sunday, Dallas fell from the unbeaten ranks at the hands of a Redskins team that has won three straight.
Conclusive proof. Thanks for that.
The most annoying part about all of this is that these were all competitive games. How irritating that competitive games will decide who gets to be in the playoffs! Wouldn't it be much more fun if each team was separated from each other and got to play teams that were not good and it made for less competitive and exciting football? Alex Marvez thinks so.
Since he is obviously a genius with a foolproof plan, I wonder how Alex would handle the fact each NFL team plays four teams in an AFC Division and NFL Division, where it rotates every year? How would we make that fair every year? Each conference can not be identical in strength to the next one, would there just be no games played between different divisions? The Broncos would play the Raiders, Chiefs, and Chargers 3 times and then play the Philadelphia Eagles, Washingon Redskins, Dallas Cowboys, and New York Giants once each, since they are the beast of the NFL and all.
Yet there are only two wild-card spots in each conference, which makes rivalry games like Cowboys vs. Redskins even more spirited
Boring!!! Besides those games are so spirited because of the fantasy impact and not because of a competitive conference. Right, Bill Simmons?
We need more Arizona v. New York Jet games where the outcome is decided at halftime.
Redskins coach Jim Zorn said the contest was a "brawl," an apt description for a game that wasn't decided until Dallas failed to recover an onsides kick with 1:42 remaining.
A "brawl?" How uncouth!
The competition every time we play each other is at a high level," Cowboys defensive end Marcus Spears said. "You never can rate this game before it starts as one team is going to do such and such.
A high level of competition too? Geez, separate these teams before these games get more exciting. Alex Marvez's idea of boring you to do death with games in equal divisions is so much more exciting.
I HATE it when Duke and UNC play each other twice every year in basketball. It sucks so bad to see two teams that are of equal strength playing each other. I much prefer the UNC-UNC Asheville game. They should actually play 15 times a year so we could get a better gauge of how good UNC is.
Spears has good reason to believe the Cowboys are playoff-bound. But a second- or third-place NFC East finish awaits if the Cowboys stage more mistake-filled performances.
This is not fair but this is bound to happen. Just like a couple mistakes would stop the Tampa Bay Bucs from making the playoffs, it could happen to the Cowboys. The interesting part is that if these teams play each other all year, I doubt they would all go 3-3 against each other, then at some point we could determine who the better team was, and who thereby deserves to go to the playoffs. That is also why you should wait until at least mid season to write an article like this.
But in the future, NFC East teams won't have to pummel each other twice a season if the NFL expands to 34 franchises.
He clearly looks forward to this day.
Divisions could be abolished altogether, replaced by 17-team conferences.
The exact opposite of what baseball has done, which normally seems like a great idea. Not here though.
Squads would reach the playoffs based on records after matchups against every conference foe.
In his brilliance, Alex Marvez does not think about what would happen if one conference, say the AFC is incredibly stronger than the NFC, so a team that is 9-7 in the AFC won't make it, but a team that is 9-7 in the NFC will. Just nevermind this. He is currently trying his damndest to get 4 NFC East teams in the playoffs for some reason.
Ok, let's see how this works in the following situation. We can try to determine who would make the playoffs if the Giants, Saints, and Packers were all 9-7 at the end of the year. We do this using the current tie breaker method from wikipedia:
1. Head-to-head (team with the best record in all games played between the teams tied)
The Giants beat the Saints.
The Saints beat the Packers.
The Packers beat the Giants.
So the Giants were 1-1, the Saints were 1-1, and the Packers were 1-1, so onward we go...
2. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division. (This is for determining Division Champion; also, if there is a tie for a wild-card berth, this is used for breaking ties within a division.)
No divisions, so skip this.
3. Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games (only applicable with a minimum of 4 common opponents)
They all played the same opponents and had the same record. Next...
4. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.
This would also be equal. Next...
5. Strength of victory (winning percentage of opponents that were beaten)
Assuming this is not the same for each, this would be the 2nd criteria for determing who should make the playoffs without divisions. I am not good with this happening because say the Giants beat every team they were supposed to beat and did not lose to any teams below them in the standings, other than the Packers, they could not make the playoffs if the Saints beat 2 of the top 3 teams while they were at home, but lost to 2 of the bottom 3 teams playing on the road, and the Saints winning percentage of teams beaten is still higher.
Basically the Saints stink on the road and are wonderful at home. The first playoff game they play is going to be on the road, so they will most likely lose if they are that bad at home. Alex Marvez's plan would only work really well if all games were played at neutral sites.
I realize this is not outstanding evidence Alex Marvez is wrong about this but one of the main advantages of the divisional system is that teams play at each other's home stadium in a given year and you can use this equal playing floor, regardless of how good both teams are, to determine who is more worthy of making the playoffs. Granted the entire playing field is not even, but at least the second tie breaker is not based on strength of schedule. His insane plan would turn the NFL into college basketball, except strength of schedule becomes the end-all be-all of who makes the playoffs.
That system would better reflect the NFL's top teams. But it also isn't something that can help the Redskins, Cowboys, Eagles or Giants in 2008.
Nor would it help every other team in every other sport this has ever happened to. It makes every game that is played be important and makes the games more competitive and exciting to watch. I don't consider that a bad thing. Maybe every once in a while a division will be weak and a team that did not deserve to make the playoffs does, that does not mean the whole system should have an overhaul. It just means one division is boring while the others are exciting.
There have been 4 games so far this year, who is to say the teams that play well the first 4 weeks are the best teams in the league? Buffalo is undefeated for God's sake.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
2 comments We Didn't Listen!
Hindsight truly is the friend of the sportswriter isn't it?
Reggie Bush isn't an every down back!
Rasheed Wallace is a great pickup for the Pistons!
There were all kinds of problems with that Yankee lineup!
But this, this may take the cake.
Patriots weren't prepared for an injury to Brady
not like Alex Marvez. Get ready kids, for the broken record from Marvez "the Pats need a better backup QB", I know, I know. He's always on about this for years. All he could say in the pre-season. I guess now he's finally vindicated huh?
They were the NFL's version of the Flying Wallendas, but the New England Patriots never should have performed their death-defying aerial act without a net.
...playing football?
Keeping a starting quarterback healthy is an offense's most difficult high-wire trick...
enough.
and New England couldn't execute it. The Patriots now look like clowns for not having a better backup plan in place behind Tom Brady, who suffered a season-ending knee injury Sunday during his 2008 debut against Kansas City.
Matt Cassel? Kevin O'Connell? Potential free-agent acquisitions like Chris Simms and Tim Rattay?
All are sideshow attractions compared to Brady, the star of the league's best passing game.
no shit Sherlock. Jesus Christ, enough with the circus shit man, it's not working for you, OK? Once may be kind of cute, this is just irritating. Trust me, I assure you, no one thinks this is clever, and everyone, everyone knows that Matt Cassel is not nearly as good as Tom Brady. Your message has gotten out - Brady > Cassel.
Blame this on New England's ringleader...
WE GET IT - CIRCUS. VERY CLEVER.
For a head coach who pays so much attention to detail, it's unfathomable that Bill Belichick would leave himself susceptible to getting trampled by elephants.
fuck it, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em - you could say no amount of acrobatics can get the Patriots out of this one! Oh yes, I am better at anything you can ever do Alex Marvez.
The 2007 campaign should have inspired Belichick to seek a proven upgrade behind Brady this off-season. There were 64 different starting quarterbacks around the NFL, the highest total in a non-strike year since the league adopted a 16-game schedule in 1978.
The trend shows no signs of reversing. Two other battered first-stringers besides Brady (Kansas City's Brodie Croyle and Tennessee's Vince Young) are already out for this week's games.
Expecting a starter to remain injury-free for an entire season — let alone string together 129 consecutive career appearances a la Brady — is unrealistic. Such is the punishment being inflicted by blitz-crazed defenses.
I don't think many people would disagree with this, but it's not the point at all. People aren't cut because Tom Brady is injured. People are cut up because Tom Brady is injured for the whole season. Big difference. If you asked 10 football fans "will Brady miss a game or two this year?" I think half woud be willing to say yes. That's not the issue, and it, by the way, it would leave New England's reputation as the best team in football entirely unscathed. Expecting Brady to leave, never to be seen again in the first quarter of week one, is absolutely ridiculous, no team can plan for that, nor should they.
The Patriots were one of nine teams last year that never had to deal with the issue. Brady was truly Tom Terrific, throwing an NFL-record 50 touchdown passes en route to winning the league's Most Valuable Player award.
in other words, on the list of teams who need to worry about the status of their backup QB, let's say it starts with like, Carolina, maybe Philly, Norleans, etc. New England were pretty much at the very bottom of that list.
But in a season where New England came within four points of the league's first 19-0 record, backup quarterback play was one of the few signs of imperfection.
Cassel threw only seven passes while mopping up in three games, all of which were lopsided Patriots victories. Yet his performance during a 49-28 victory over Miami should have prompted Belichick to at least seek better competition — if not an outright upgrade — for the spot. Cassel was so dreadful in his one series, misfiring on one pass and seeing another intercepted and returned for a touchdown, that Belichick reinserted Brady into the game.
oh don't remind me! We all remember the reams and reams of stories on this Matt Cassel performance. The media was glued to it. Alex Marvez clearly was - maybe the most important series of 2007? Apparently. The Giants gameplan in the Superbowl? Get to Matt Cassel, bull rush the bench if neccessary - it's the only chance.
Cassel was just as shaky this preseason when he substituted for an injured Brady (foot). More was expected. The Patriots had spent the previous four seasons trying to develop Cassel into more than a clipboard holder — a role he held in college at Southern California as a backup behind Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart.
how could he be "more than a clipboard holder"? Were they going to stage a tryout for the role? See if he could outplay Brady? What could New England have possibly done to make him more than a backup? Seems to me they've done as well as they could, have him there, learn the complicated, pass heavy offense, gel with the team, coach et al.
Alarmingly, the other options were worse.
Matt Gutierrez was waived after failing to best Cassel as a second-stringer. O'Connell — chosen in the third round of this year's draft as a response to Cassel's 2007 struggles —needs more time to develop. And unlike in previous years, there were no proven hands like Vinny Testaverde or Doug Flutie in Patriots training camp.
Belichick was taking Brady and his health for granted. That changed Sunday when Brady crumbled to the Gillette Stadium turf with torn ligaments on a low Chiefs hit.
he was surprised, and let's pretend we pump you full of truth serum, so were you.
Cassel guided a 17-10 victory in relief, completing 13 of 18 passes for 152 yards and one touchdown. But with New England entering as 16-point favorites, oddsmakers felt the Brady-led Patriots shouldn't have needed a goal-line stand to keep the game from going into overtime.
...but it wasn't Brady. That's the whole point of the article right? It was someone else. So, that expectation was artificial. Because the Patriots are worse without Brady. I'll repeat, Brady>Cassel, if that is your point, well done, brave soldier! We understand now, we were all like "maybe this Cassel guy is better than Brady!".
But even Belichick admits the difference between now and then is like comparing "apples to grapefruits." Not only can Cassel be judged from his previous body of work, New England's 2001 offense was designed to emphasize the run and take pressure off Brady. The Patriots might not be able to pull off the same overhaul with the unit so reliant on Brady's passing brilliance.
point - counterpoint. With Alex Marvez and...Alex Marvez.
And then, with one final sweep of stupidity, we realise that Marvez has been totally wasting our time, that this is some draft or stream of consciousness piece and the initial point, that they should have gotten a better backup is ridiculous.
A more talented Patriots team probably won't be that bad, especially with the luxury of facing the NFL's easiest schedule based on 2007 records. New England also could pull off a surprise trade, although trying to land a talented veteran backup like Houston's Sage Rosenfels or Washington's Todd Collins would come at a steep price. Pursuing younger options like Brady Quinn and Leinart seems even less likely. Both players — and their salaries — wouldn't fit into long-term plans with Brady set to return in 2009. The Patriots had only $3.2 million available under the 2008 salary cap before Brady's injury.
right, so pursuing a "proven" backup would be a waste of money, time, and would not fit into the plans, also, they'd have to learn a complex system on the fly, plus, Matt Cassel wasn't bad last week, plus they also have a lot of good players still which means they are still probably a playoff team, plus...
For at least the short term, Cassel is the only viable option under New England's big top. That makes expectations of another Super Bowl run as fleeting as the circus that packs its tent for the next town.
shitty, beaten-into-the-ground metaphors.
Reggie Bush isn't an every down back!
Rasheed Wallace is a great pickup for the Pistons!
There were all kinds of problems with that Yankee lineup!
But this, this may take the cake.
Patriots weren't prepared for an injury to Brady
not like Alex Marvez. Get ready kids, for the broken record from Marvez "the Pats need a better backup QB", I know, I know. He's always on about this for years. All he could say in the pre-season. I guess now he's finally vindicated huh?
They were the NFL's version of the Flying Wallendas, but the New England Patriots never should have performed their death-defying aerial act without a net.
...playing football?
Keeping a starting quarterback healthy is an offense's most difficult high-wire trick...
enough.
and New England couldn't execute it. The Patriots now look like clowns for not having a better backup plan in place behind Tom Brady, who suffered a season-ending knee injury Sunday during his 2008 debut against Kansas City.
Matt Cassel? Kevin O'Connell? Potential free-agent acquisitions like Chris Simms and Tim Rattay?
All are sideshow attractions compared to Brady, the star of the league's best passing game.
no shit Sherlock. Jesus Christ, enough with the circus shit man, it's not working for you, OK? Once may be kind of cute, this is just irritating. Trust me, I assure you, no one thinks this is clever, and everyone, everyone knows that Matt Cassel is not nearly as good as Tom Brady. Your message has gotten out - Brady > Cassel.
Blame this on New England's ringleader...
WE GET IT - CIRCUS. VERY CLEVER.
For a head coach who pays so much attention to detail, it's unfathomable that Bill Belichick would leave himself susceptible to getting trampled by elephants.
fuck it, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em - you could say no amount of acrobatics can get the Patriots out of this one! Oh yes, I am better at anything you can ever do Alex Marvez.
The 2007 campaign should have inspired Belichick to seek a proven upgrade behind Brady this off-season. There were 64 different starting quarterbacks around the NFL, the highest total in a non-strike year since the league adopted a 16-game schedule in 1978.
The trend shows no signs of reversing. Two other battered first-stringers besides Brady (Kansas City's Brodie Croyle and Tennessee's Vince Young) are already out for this week's games.
Expecting a starter to remain injury-free for an entire season — let alone string together 129 consecutive career appearances a la Brady — is unrealistic. Such is the punishment being inflicted by blitz-crazed defenses.
I don't think many people would disagree with this, but it's not the point at all. People aren't cut because Tom Brady is injured. People are cut up because Tom Brady is injured for the whole season. Big difference. If you asked 10 football fans "will Brady miss a game or two this year?" I think half woud be willing to say yes. That's not the issue, and it, by the way, it would leave New England's reputation as the best team in football entirely unscathed. Expecting Brady to leave, never to be seen again in the first quarter of week one, is absolutely ridiculous, no team can plan for that, nor should they.
The Patriots were one of nine teams last year that never had to deal with the issue. Brady was truly Tom Terrific, throwing an NFL-record 50 touchdown passes en route to winning the league's Most Valuable Player award.
in other words, on the list of teams who need to worry about the status of their backup QB, let's say it starts with like, Carolina, maybe Philly, Norleans, etc. New England were pretty much at the very bottom of that list.
But in a season where New England came within four points of the league's first 19-0 record, backup quarterback play was one of the few signs of imperfection.
Cassel threw only seven passes while mopping up in three games, all of which were lopsided Patriots victories. Yet his performance during a 49-28 victory over Miami should have prompted Belichick to at least seek better competition — if not an outright upgrade — for the spot. Cassel was so dreadful in his one series, misfiring on one pass and seeing another intercepted and returned for a touchdown, that Belichick reinserted Brady into the game.
oh don't remind me! We all remember the reams and reams of stories on this Matt Cassel performance. The media was glued to it. Alex Marvez clearly was - maybe the most important series of 2007? Apparently. The Giants gameplan in the Superbowl? Get to Matt Cassel, bull rush the bench if neccessary - it's the only chance.
Cassel was just as shaky this preseason when he substituted for an injured Brady (foot). More was expected. The Patriots had spent the previous four seasons trying to develop Cassel into more than a clipboard holder — a role he held in college at Southern California as a backup behind Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart.
how could he be "more than a clipboard holder"? Were they going to stage a tryout for the role? See if he could outplay Brady? What could New England have possibly done to make him more than a backup? Seems to me they've done as well as they could, have him there, learn the complicated, pass heavy offense, gel with the team, coach et al.
Alarmingly, the other options were worse.
Matt Gutierrez was waived after failing to best Cassel as a second-stringer. O'Connell — chosen in the third round of this year's draft as a response to Cassel's 2007 struggles —needs more time to develop. And unlike in previous years, there were no proven hands like Vinny Testaverde or Doug Flutie in Patriots training camp.
Belichick was taking Brady and his health for granted. That changed Sunday when Brady crumbled to the Gillette Stadium turf with torn ligaments on a low Chiefs hit.
he was surprised, and let's pretend we pump you full of truth serum, so were you.
Cassel guided a 17-10 victory in relief, completing 13 of 18 passes for 152 yards and one touchdown. But with New England entering as 16-point favorites, oddsmakers felt the Brady-led Patriots shouldn't have needed a goal-line stand to keep the game from going into overtime.
...but it wasn't Brady. That's the whole point of the article right? It was someone else. So, that expectation was artificial. Because the Patriots are worse without Brady. I'll repeat, Brady>Cassel, if that is your point, well done, brave soldier! We understand now, we were all like "maybe this Cassel guy is better than Brady!".
In his defense, Cassel should improve as he receives practice snaps with the first-team offense — snaps that had been reserved for Brady. Cassel still has two of the NFL's top wide receivers (Randy Moss and Wes Welker) to work with.
Plus, Belichick has experience in maximizing the skills of an unproven starter. The same doomsday scenarios that are being floated now were there in 2001 when an unproven Brady replaced an injured Drew Bledsoe. Brady shocked the NFL and led New England to the first of three Super Bowl titles this decade.
But even Belichick admits the difference between now and then is like comparing "apples to grapefruits." Not only can Cassel be judged from his previous body of work, New England's 2001 offense was designed to emphasize the run and take pressure off Brady. The Patriots might not be able to pull off the same overhaul with the unit so reliant on Brady's passing brilliance.
point - counterpoint. With Alex Marvez and...Alex Marvez.
And then, with one final sweep of stupidity, we realise that Marvez has been totally wasting our time, that this is some draft or stream of consciousness piece and the initial point, that they should have gotten a better backup is ridiculous.
A more talented Patriots team probably won't be that bad, especially with the luxury of facing the NFL's easiest schedule based on 2007 records. New England also could pull off a surprise trade, although trying to land a talented veteran backup like Houston's Sage Rosenfels or Washington's Todd Collins would come at a steep price. Pursuing younger options like Brady Quinn and Leinart seems even less likely. Both players — and their salaries — wouldn't fit into long-term plans with Brady set to return in 2009. The Patriots had only $3.2 million available under the 2008 salary cap before Brady's injury.
right, so pursuing a "proven" backup would be a waste of money, time, and would not fit into the plans, also, they'd have to learn a complex system on the fly, plus, Matt Cassel wasn't bad last week, plus they also have a lot of good players still which means they are still probably a playoff team, plus...
For at least the short term, Cassel is the only viable option under New England's big top. That makes expectations of another Super Bowl run as fleeting as the circus that packs its tent for the next town.
shitty, beaten-into-the-ground metaphors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)