Jay Mariotti is a hypocrite because he has smoked pot and is condemning Michael Phelps for doing the exact same. Jay Marotti is vindictive because he has already broached the "Michael Phelps as a pothead" story with his readers and refuses to let it drop. Jay Mariotti is a hack because he is not a good writer. Now that we have the basis of my feelings out of the way, let's delve into his column.
So now he's threatening to seek an escape hatch, not compete in the 2012 Olympics -- you know, take his Speedo LZR Racer trunks and 14 gold medals and swim home.
He has accomplished more than any other Olympic swimmer has accomplished and maybe he is tired of the scrutiny from shithead columnists like...Jay Mariotti. I can't say I blame him. When I am defending Michael Phelps, who is probably a douchebag, you know Jay Mariotti has gone over the edge with his constant hypocrisy and cowardly journalism.
That would be a regrettable and rather cowardly backstroke by Michael Phelps, who finds himself at an unexpected crossroads in his charmed life and needs to make a mature decision to counter his reckless immaturity.
How many people died/were injured because of Phelps' decision to smoke pot: 0
Who his decision to smoke pot affects: Michael Phelps
Calling this one incident and his DUI arrest four years ago, reckless immaturity is being an absolute drama queen about this situation. Our President has smoked pot, Jay Mariotti has smoked pot, and about 90% of America has smoked pot, yet somehow Jay Mariotti believes he is in the perfect position to judge. Why is he in the perfect position? Because he has a computer and can type, so he feels he can judge Michael Phelps for his decisions.
Mr. America has soiled himself, making us wonder if he has become another burned-out stoner who can't control his partying.
He's 24, wealthy, and popular. He worked hard to get where he is now, if Michael Phelps wants to quit swimming he can. He doesn't need to give a reason because he has accomplished more than anyone else can imagine they would like to accomplish in the sport of swimming.
It just infuriates me that a person who admitted to smoking pot in his last column now thinks after one picture of Phelps smoking pot, he is a "burned-out stoner." I don't like Michael Phelps, but gutless and audacious comments like this should get Jay Mariotti punched in the face by a grizzly bear.
Maybe you and I plunged into the same sort of activities in our early 20s, but none of us was Sportsman of the Year and the most acclaimed Olympian ever.
Seriously, it doesn't matter who he is or what he has done. He is still human. He should never have put himself in this situation, but to jump all over him and hold him to a higher standard because he has done more for kids and charity than Mariotti ever will is outrageous.
He can go one of two ways, either turning a negative into a positive or letting the negative bury him by retiring from competition.
Sure if he keeps swimming, he says, "hey kids, you can smoke pot and still be a great swimmer," and if he quits he says, "hey kids, I have worked hard for 8 years and achieved things others can only dream of, but I am quite tired of assholes like Jay Mariotti trying to make me seem like Pablo Escobar."
To Phelps' credit, he apologized quickly and didn't try to cover up the bong photo, which inevitably was published by a sleazy London tabloid.
I like how Mariotti calls the London tabloid "sleazy," but is still freaking out over the picture, wondering if Michael Phelps is a "burned out stoner," and giving even more credence to the picture from the "sleazy" tabloid by talking about the picture as if it were the smoking gun that buries Michael Phelps forever in the minds of children everywhere.
Jay Mariotti: Where Hypocrisy and Leaps in Logic Happen
Then why run away from 2012? The last time Phelps slipped up, with a drunk-driving arrest following his Athens medal haul in 2004, he vowed to overcome it by focusing on his swimming.
Because he will be 8 years older, has achieved the goals he wanted to achieve, wants to pursue other options, realized the media scrutiny over his life is not what he wants, or just doesn't feel like training for 2012 and is such a competitor that if he can't win more gold medals he doesn't want to be there.
Those are some good reasons.
But now he has a dope issue, too, which means he might have a problem much larger than a guy getting high one night at the University of South Carolina.
It's not like he is fucking rehab right now. He made a mistake one time and someone took a picture of it. That's it. He may be a potential douchebag but he is not a douchebag with a severe drug problem.
This is not a dope issue Phelps has, it's a public perception problem. He does want to be a role model and doesn't want kids to think it is fine to smoke pot.
I wish someone would punch Mariotti in his fat face. What I would give to allow Ozzie Guillen 10 minutes alone in a locker room (Mariotti may not know where the locker room is, so someone could show him), and just see what kind of damage he could do to this self righteous prick.
That reflects the divided opinion surrounding Phelps, who also is backed by Dara Torres, the 41-year-old comeback star who won a silver medal in Beijing. "I see him as a kid trying to grow up in the most intense spotlight known to any athlete. He has apologized, and what else can he do?" she told the Associated Press. "The thing I hope is that people realize Michael is still a person and not just a swimming hero.
Let's look at this divided opinion on Michael Phelps:
Those for Michael Phelps still being a good person: All of his sponsors except for one and the rest of the world.
Those against Michael Phelps and think he is a pothead who should go to rehab and take 300 lashes on the back as punishment: Kellogg's Company and Jay Mariotti.
Since Beijing, his doings have been fodder for TMZ.com and other Internet sites, which have shown him on the party scene, hanging out with various women and enjoying life. There's nothing wrong with any of that until he goes bong-hit on us.
This is not like this criticism is coming from the Reverend Billy Graham or the Pope. This is coming from Jay Mariotti, a guy has admittedly smoked pot on more than one occasion. It's not a big deal for Jay to smoke pot and he is not a hypocrite because he has never held himself up to be a role model. Jay has always held himself up to be a vindictive man who takes out his vengeance with a pen and computer, then hides when anyone tries to call him on it.
In Jay's bizarre world, if you give everyone low expectations for yourself then start smoking pot and drinking excessively, it is no big deal. If you dare to try to change kids and the world for positive and do those things then you are a hypocrite and a horrible person. All that you have ever done has been washed away by this one incident.
Never mind the double standard: If the sheriff, Leon Lott, busted every kid who smoked pot at the university, there wouldn't be much of a student enrollment. Because the smoker was Michael Phelps, it opens the door to an avalanche of hassles.
Nevermind Jay doesn't see the double standard: If Michael Phelps was Pacman Jones, he would never have written an article about him, but because it is a Phelps who was a national hero and has tried to get kids into swimming, Jay unloads on him.
But sometimes, the best friends in troubled times are those unafraid to state the truth. And the truth about Phelps is, he let his country down when a little discretion could have gone a long way.
I don't feel let down because I knew he was a 24 year old kid who has faced more scrutiny and fame than he had ever seen before.
"Once we're allowed to call ourselves U.S. Olympic athletes, there are certain guidelines and protocols that go along with that," said the legendary U.S. speedskater, Apolo Anton Ohno. "I think it's important to represent what you'd like your mom to see or what you'd like little kids to see. It's important to be aware of your surroundings and the choices you make."
Apolo Anton Ohno's answer to his post-Olympic career to represent what the kids and his mother want to see?
Dancing With the Stars!
I can imagine the kids were around the television set in breathless awe at Ohno's ability to dance around a stage with a shitty wanna-be country music singer. I also can imagine the kids were inspired to see him beat the world class athlete Joey Fatone to get the Dancing With the Stars crown. Now that is some inspiring stuff.
The most obvious choice for Michael Phelps is to dive into that pool and keep swimming for three years, all the way to London.
Phelps smoking pot is a completely separate issue from the Olympic games in London. If Phelps wants to quit swimming, it may not be just because he had a picture taken of him smoking pot, it may be because he has dedicated his life to swimming and may be ready to quit. Just because Mariotti wants to be able to write 1,256 "Michael Phelps has redeemed himself stories" doesn't mean Phelps should have to train for 2012 if he doesn't want to.
That way, you teach the children well about correcting a mistake. To run from it would be legacy suicide.
He could also teach kids through his words and by helping them get into swimming. I don't know if kids can see the correlation Jay sees, between having a picture taken of Phelps smoking pot from a bong and Phelps competing in the 2012 Olympics to prove.................something that I haven't figured out quite yet.
Quitting swimming would be a career decision, not a decision based on one stupid picture that was taken of him at a compromising time. (While I am typing this, The Authority Song came on my ITunes...I am not kidding. The first lyrics are: "They like to get you in a compromising position, They like to get you there and smile in your face, They think they're so cute when they got you in that condition, Well I think, its a total disgrace." I wish I could make this up.)
Is there a better way to end a post than with John Mellencamp lyrics? Only one way...
Jay Mariott is a hypocritical hack writer who got too many wedgies in high school and now feels the need to take it out on everyone by writing daily columns that combine his own unique blend of piss poor journalism and cheap shots at those who have wrong him. I take solace in knowing he will one day pass from this life before I do and I will one day get peace and not have to be burdened with the knowledge he is walking the same earth I am.
Showing posts with label Michael Phelps. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Phelps. Show all posts
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Thursday, February 5, 2009
9 comments Ten Things I Think I Think Peter King Has Not Thought Of: Derek Jeter You Are A-Rod's Only Hope Edition
I am not sure how I am going to top yesterday's post with Gregg Easterbrook's idiotic analysis on the Super Bowl, but I am sure going to try. I still have no idea what game he was watching Sunday night, because I am pretty sure it was not the Super Bowl 100 million other people watched. The sad part is that he was actually attending the Super Bowl, so he was probably at an intermural women's softball game and was so busy looking at the heavens for the aliens to come get Kurt Warner he did not know where he was. Regardless, I have a build up of articles I want to comment or mock, so here we go. By the way, if anyone out there has suggestions on how to stop a full court press, please send them to me and I will forward them along to my favorite college basketball team. They need help with this.
1. Much like Princess Leia needing Obiwan Kenobi (I'm a blogger and that is a Star Wars reference...cliche alert!), Wallace Matthews thinks Derek Jeter is Alex Rodriguez's only hope. Hope for what? I have no idea what the problem is, let's see what Wallace thinks.
The official story is that nearly eight years ago, Alex Rodriguez implied in a magazine story that Derek Jeter's place in a batting order coincided perfectly with the number on his back. Jeter was a No. 2 hitter, A-Rod seemed to be saying to Esquire back then, nothing more and nothing less, and to this day, Jeter hasn't forgiven him for it.
As the Yankees Turn, will return in a minute, but first a message from our corporate sponsors...
I think the New York writers feed off the Bronx Zoo personality the Yankees seem to have and they also try to perpetuate this idea as much as possible. Any little thing gets blown up, and I used to think it was because it was New York and there is so much media located there, but now I just think the writers like the drama.
Because only Jeter can clean up the mess Joe Torre has made of the Yankees' clubhouse.
Yes, only Derek Jeter can do this......b-b-but why only Derek Jeter and not Joe Girardi, Mariano Rivera, or Jorge Posada? Simply because he is the captain of the team?
The book is out today. Time to start reading. And he doesn't even have to read it to come out and say, simply: "Alex is my teammate. Alex is our guy. Everyone in this clubhouse stands behind him."
Here's the thing, maybe Jeter doesn't feel like he needs to start defending A-Rod against what Joe Torre said in the book or maybe his teammates used to call him A-Fraud, but they do not anymore, and Jeter does not want to bring this up again. I don't get why everyone has to deny every allegation and silence means people get to assume what they want.
Jeter is supposed to be the captain of all the Yankees, not just of Jorge Posada and Mariano Rivera and whichever other guys he happens to like.
Maybe Jeter has told A-Rod all of these things that Wallace seems to think A-Rod needs to hear. My real question is why does Jeter have to do this? Why should anyone in the Yankee clubhouse really care if the general public thinks they like A-Rod or not, as long as A-Rod knows the team supports him?
The answer I have is if someone doesn't come out and make a statement, the media in New York is going to keep hounding Jeter and A-Rod on this issue. It's almost like Wallace Matthews knows the media is going to blackmail those two with articles about how they don't get along, unless Jeter comes out and publicly supports A-Rod. This is all very stupid.
The Yankees can win without Torre but not without A-Rod.
Actually the Yankees won 4 World Series with Joe Torre as manager and have won zero with A-Rod as a player on the team. So this assumption is actually very, very wrong.
For the good of his team, Captain Jeter had better choose which side of this argument he is on in a hurry.
Sure, Jeter has come out and defended other players on the team, but I don't see the need to come out and immediately defend A-Rod on this issue. To come out and make a public statement means there was some sort of truth potentially to Joe Torre's book in regards to the treatment and feelings about A-Rod when he came to the Yankees. Maybe Jeter doesn't like A-Rod so he doesn't feel like defending him. Either way, this is going to have a small effect on the team this year when it comes time to playing games, unless the media doesn't let the issue drop, which it looks like will not happen.
But it's the right thing to do, especially if, like Jeter, you call yourself a captain and fancy yourself a leader.
Maybe Jeter is being a leader and by not coming out and supporting A-Rod he is leading the other 23 guys in the locker room to show he is on their side.
Time, at long last, for the No. 2 hitter in the Yankees' lineup to be the cleanup hitter in the Yankees' clubhouse.
Is A-Rod really this fragile that Jeter not coming out and supporting him would ruin his self esteem or does the New York media just want to hear Jeter say he likes A-Rod because it will give them another weeks worth of stories? I vote for the latter.
At some point, maybe everyone can realize that Jeter possibly is not that great of a captain. Not only when A-Rod came to New York did he not volunteer to play third base, but he also has supported Jason Giambi and Roger Clemens publicly and not A-Rod publicly. It doesn't really matter in the long run, but Jeter cares too much about how he is perceived, at least that is what I think, and I think he has some natural rivalry going with A-Rod and if he supported him publicly, it may make him seem weak. My theory probably sucks but I still don't see why it really matters if Jeter publicly supports A-Rod and I am not 100% sure why A-Rod needs support.
2. Peter King tends to be a huge apologist for others (i.e. Brett Favre), so I don't know why it shocks me he plays company man for the NFL in talking about the Kurt Warner "fumble."
McGrath had around 90 seconds from the time of the loose ball to examine the replays to see if McAulay needed to examine the call himself -- and McGrath judged, and was later backed by the league, that officials on the field made the correct judgment that Warner fumbled before his arm started going forward.
Oh, I didn't know McGrath's decision was backed by the NFL, that makes my opinion completely different. The NFL has no reason to not back the guy, McGrath, who decided the head referee should not review the final play of the game that decided the winner of the Super Bowl. It was only the last play in the biggest game of the year. No review needed for that.
I am being sarcastic, but seriously, would anyone expect the NFL to come out and not back the decision not to have this play reviewed? If the NFL second guesses the decision all hell breaks loose and thousands of columns are written about how instant replay needs to be changed and the Cardinals could really have won the Super Bowl. The fact the NFL supported the decision doesn't tell me anything that would change my opinion. It changes Peter King's though.
I wish McGrath had given McAulay a look. But I don't believe McGrath made the wrong call.
Seriously, if you wish McAulay had gotten a look at the play, then you don't believe McGrath made the right call. If Peter wished McAulay had gotten a look at the play, there is no way he can actually believe McGrath made the right call.
The Giants' 20-19 stunner of Buffalo in Supe XXV was a keepaway game with great strategic stuff by Bill Parcells and his coordinators, Bill Belichick and Ron Erhardt, but a missed field goal as the signature play isn't how the best Super Bowl game should be remembered.
Peter thinks the greatest Super Bowl ever should be remembered by a controversial fumble call, that is so much better than the best game ever being decided by an actual football play.
This game had Roethlisberger emerging as a no-doubt, unquestioned clutch star; he has the body build of Terry Bradshaw with the play-making escapability of Steve Young.
Roethlisberger: 6 foot 5 inches, 241 pounds
Bradshaw: 6 foot 3 inches, 215 pounds
They are not exactly similar...and I don't believe Roethlisberger is 241 pounds. Maybe 10-15 pounds heavier than that.
As one of the MVP voters, I changed three times in the last 10 minutes.
If this does not instill confidence in his ability to choose an MVP for the Super Bowl, nothing should.
I went from Harrison when the Steelers were up 20-7 to Fitzgerald when it was 23-20, Arizona, with more than a few thoughts about Warner. Then, as Pittsburgh went downfield for the winning score, I had dueling thoughts of Roethlisberger and Holmes in my head.
It's weird how a player's value goes up and down as the game goes along. All of a sudden Warner is not the most valuable player on the field, not because of anything he did, but because his team was no longer winning. I guess that is how it goes but it still feels arbitrary to me.
It's probably crazy, but I would have picked Roethlisberger had Holmes made a simple catch in the end zone.
Not probably crazy, definitely crazy. If Roethlisberger had thrown a simple pass, he would have been more valuable, but because he threw a more difficult pass and Holmes caught the ball, now Holmes is more valuable.
Roethlisberger doesn't get credit for scrambling around and keeping plays alive but Holmes gets credit for a defender falling down earlier in the game.
Completing 70 percent in any Super Bowl is magnificent, but completing two of his throws after circus-type escape acts from the Cardinal D, and then driving his team 88 yards in the 58th, 59th and 60th minutes on the biggest drive of his life ... huge. Just huge.
But not as huge as catching the game winning catch. This is like giving John Taylor the MVP award in 1988 for catching the game winning catch and ignoring what Jerry Rice did that day.
From Hari Kannan of Nashville: "Thanks for your column every week Peter. I'm wondering how the outcome of this game will affect Kurt Warner's Hall of Fame credentials in your eyes. Before the game, several writers implied that if he won the Super Bowl, it would make him a serious contender for the Hall.
He's had five terrific, Hall-caliber seasons, and a five-year donut hole in the middle in which he did nothing, in essence, to merit consideration. He's played a full season three times. I'll say two things: I have been tremendously swayed by what he's done in this postseason (and the fact that in three Super Bowls, he's thrown for more yards than any player ever, including Joe Montana in four of them and John Elway in five), and his play in three Super Bowls is awfully persuasive.
Call me crazy, but I don't think Kurt Warner should be in the Hall of Fame. His career is not over yet so I could change my mind, but I tell you what will not change my mind, and that is the fact he has thrown for more yards in the Super Bowl than anyone ever. Just because his team did not have a running game this year and his previous teams had little interest in running the ball in the Super Bowl does not, in my opinion, warrant more HoF consideration.
I prefer to look at regular season statistics more intently than postseason.
3. Everyone has heard about Michael Phelps being a "temporary" pothead by now. The big question everyone has, is what Jay Mariotti thinks about all of this.
"I wonder how he's going to handle all of this,'' I said then and there to a writer pal, recalling how a few nights earlier, with the temperature a steamy 81 outside the arena, Phelps had arrived at intermission of a U.S. Redeem Team game with a hoodie pulled over his head and a blanket wrapped around his body.
As usual, Jay Mariotti is all over this and predicted that Michael Phelps would become a recreational drug user. Jay just knew...of course he did not write an article during the Olympics because he was working for the big, bad newspaper and they would not let him. At least that is what he would say.
Much as we want to understand why Phelps would act like any young guy smoking marijuana at a party -- Barack Obama has admitted to inhaling, and so will I -- there is no defense here. The reason: Phelps has openly and eagerly embraced being a reliable role model (his words) for America's youth, and once you accept that monumental responsibility on a high-profile level, you simply cannot be doing the dumb things that other 23-year-olds do.
So Phelps' act would have been defensible if he had not held himself out as a role model for kids, but because he did that, there is no defense for his smoking pot and everything he has done should be wiped away. Jay thinks if Phelps held himself out as a loser and someone who did not want to be accountable for his actions, then no harm no foul.
Once he was committed to that path, Phelps had no recourse but to stay on the straight and narrow. Obviously, he hasn't, with his Gamecock Country slip-up following numerous reports of hard partying. So what does he say now to the nine-year-old who fell in love with him in August and was told to dream, plan, reach?
I think Michael Phelps looks like a douchebag and from seeing him partying around the United States, I get the feeling he may be one as well. I don't get why Mariotti is being harder on him because he said he wants to be an example to kids, then makes a mistake like this. Anyone that thought he was not human was really fooling themselves.
Phelps already had a DUI and I believe he was not even old enough to drink at that time. So that is really two mistakes he made...theoretically.
To be fair, a bong photograph is tame compared to the criminal problems of other athletes. But Phelps isn't just any athlete. He was supposed to be the biggest on the planet, Sportsman of the Year, a shining hope for an ailing country, a savior to flush away steroids and sports' various scandals of recent years.
Here is what really is happening. The mainstream media portrayed Michael Phelps as a real American hero and someone who was a role model everyone could look up to, they put him on the cover of magazines, told stories about how dedicated he was to his craft of swimming and tended to leave out the fact he had a previous DUI and have never written about the various exploits those who follow TMZ have seen, because that has never fit the story they wanted to write. Now he has made them look stupid for holding him up to a high standard and they are going to try and crucify him.
But nothing is real funny about this, not as a wobbly America launches a new presidency with Phelps as our reigning symbol of sports greatness.
The only reason he is the reigning symbol of greatness is because he was an exceptional athlete, so they wanted him to be an exceptional person and tried to portray him in that fashion.
4. As part of this week's Rick Reilly gets paid millions of dollars to write stories like this, here is the new entry.
I used to think the worst jobs in sports were: (1) Thong wrangler for John Daly. (2) Mark McGwire's injector. (3) Detroit Lion.
(4) Rick Reilly's editor. You can't edit anything or there would only be 12 sentences per column.
Here is how a typical conversation probably goes:
(Reilly) "Here you go, my report on playing basketball with nuns."
(Editor) "Rick, this is a paragraph and contains 3 quotes. You only have two original sentences in this."
(Reilly) "Listen, my BMW is acting funny, where do I pick up my paycheck again?"
(Editor) "I am going to need a few more sent...(sound of Reilly walking out of the room whistling showtunes and the door slams shut)...just a couple more sentences is what I needed, I guess I have to do it the hard way. (Googles Rick Reilly's name and spends 15 minutes combing through Reilly's 24 other columns, reading each of them thoroughly, then cuts and pastes the same jokes he used in the Charles Barkley interview, sends it off to be published and hangs himself by his tie).
What the 2,000 found out is: The "on-field audience" doesn't get "paid." They don't get a ticket to watch the game. They don't even get a T-shirt. They can't bring cameras or cell phones—unless they're a group leader. They'll be bussed in and bussed out. They will be on the field for 12 minutes and have to sign a release that they won't sue in case they're flattened by a forklift.
Rick must have been very disappointed they did not get paid. He figures at his current rate ESPN pays him, if he spent 15 minutes on the field, they would owe him at least $95,000.
I didn't even think of the idea until after the two rehearsals had happened. Thank God. "On Thursday, we stood in the rain for eight straight hours," one woman complained.
There were two rehearsals, both of which Reilly missed. At this point, his only responsibility is to run on the field when Springsteen started performing, listen to the music for 12 minutes and then run off the field. That's it. He wrote a column about this but "missed" the two day 10 hour each rehearsals. He gets easy assignments and then is too lazy to even carry out the entire assignment.
Turns out the field for a Super Bowl halftime is Audio Nowhere, Springsteen Unplugged. All the speakers are set in front of the paying customers in the seats, leaving you at a Marcel Marceau concert.
What? After all that work running and that is it...you can't even hear the performance?
Telling you: Don't. Be. One.
It. Involves. Work. But. Not. Really.
Afterward, I was sullenly ignoring Cynthia's exhortation to "Run! Run people!" when I saw my favorite all-time guitarist, Nils Lofgren, Springsteen's lead, walking off the field, one arm around his mystical guitar and the other around an hourglass blonde.
So to be one of the people on the field, you had to attend a two day, 10 hour each rehearsal, run on the field, stay there for 12 minutes, then run off the field.
Rick Reilly only ran on the field and then listened to the performance. That's it...and he bitched about it.
That sound you just heard was 65,000 people losing their job while Rick Reilly gets a new car for what amounts to 15 minutes of work.
5. Jason Whitlock thinks the referees are the MVP of the Super Bowl.
But on a play-to-play, quarter-to-quarter basis, no one influenced the greatest Super Bowl in history more than McAulay and his crew of black-and-gold-wearing, I mean, black-and-white-wearing officials.
That may not be true because the 2006 Super Bowl between Seattle and Pittsburgh was pretty bad as well.
But the 11-7 penalty disparity was actually much worse when you consider McAulay and Co. turned flag-happy in the fourth quarter, dropping six yellow ones on the Steelers (Arizona declined one) to close the gap.
I don't think the officials had a plan to screw over the Cardinals and Mike Gandy was holding on almost every play it felt like. I don't like the idea that both teams should have the similar amount of penalty yardage. Some teams commit more penalties than others, just like in basketball some teams commit more fouls than others. I focus more on the flags that were called and whether they were legitimate or not and also on what obvious calls were not made.
The eye in the sky caught McAulay's crew favoring Pittsburgh twice, overturning two bad calls after replay review.
Those calls were both bad calls, I have to admit.
And then there were the things the refs didn't call. Big Ben got away with an obvious intentional grounding. On the series after the refs handed Pittsburgh a 16-play, clock-killing third-quarter drive with a bogus roughing-the-passer call and a should-have-been-ignored roughing-the-holder penalty, McAulay ignored Harrison's brutal (and late) head shot on Kurt Warner. Holmes could've been penalized for his theatrical end-zone celebration. And Warner's fumble should've been thoroughly reviewed.
I can only disagree with one of these statements and that is that I believe the roughing the holder penalty should have been called. Otherwise, I do agree.
Pittsburgh's last two championships have been hand-delivered by overzealous officiating crews.
Apparently Jason Whitlock is not a Pittsburgh Steelers fan. This is strong language even for him.
6. Gregg Doyel publicly calls out a Woody Paige column.
Freeman and I are giggling over the worst, the absolute worst, lede to a column of the week. Think about that. Think about the number of stories and columns that have been written from Super Bowl week. I just found the worst.
I won't name names, but it ran in Denver. OK, in the Post. OK, it was Woody Paige.
Though I am not a huge Gregg Doyel fan, it is funny to see one MSM columnist outright laugh at another's column heading.
Here is the link to the article.
Steel is blast-furnace tough. Steel is durable. Steel is heavy-duty. Steel is strong. Steel is iron.
Steel is the Pittsburgh football team.
That is pretty bad, but really no worse than anything else Woody Paige has ever done, including quoting Dr. Suess and all the other drivel he pours out.
And as for you, Woody, sorry -- but if you're going to be a big-time media star, deal with the criticism. Plus your fake tan gives me the willies. And this lede flat out sucked.
I wish more public figures, not including Bill Simmons and Dane Cook, would take shots at each other in print. It makes it so much more fun to read the articles.
7. Barack Obama (has anyone ever heard of this guy before?) has made Gregg Doyel said because he is a bandwagon fan.
Turns out, President Obama is as full of crap as the next guy.
This clearly concerns the fact Obama has attempted to appoint several of his potential Cabinet members to posts when they have had legal/IRS troubles that could conflict with their jobs.
Why? He was rooting for the Steelers in the Super Bowl.
Or maybe not.
"Other than the Chicago Bears," Obama said days before the game, "the Steelers are probably the team that's closest to my heart."
I hate to agree with Gregg Doyel, but I agree with Gregg Doyel. It drives me crazy when I see Snoop Dogg on television in a Steelers uniform when just a few years ago he had a Raiders uniform on. Pick a team and go with it.
Obama mimicked the infamous intro to Monday Night Football, and I was in love. How could I not be? Here's a guy who gets it. Not a political animal or an intellectual egghead, but a real guy. Running for president. And rooting for his favorite team. Loved it.
I do like the fact Obama is a Chicago sports fan and makes it known. I like that and I don't like how he used the Super Bowl as a way to appeal to Pittsburgh/Pa. voters...which is really what he was doing.
Either that or he really hates Arizona because of John McCain.
This is you-scratch-my back at its finest. To win the presidency, Obama needed to win Pennsylvania. He needed those electoral votes and the momentum they represented, and guess who helped deliver that state? The popular owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers, Dan Rooney.
I don't know if Dan Rooney was the sole reason Obama won Pennsylvania, but everyone knows (partially because Peter King has brought it up 900 times) Dan Rooney stumped for Obama in the last election. I don't know if we need to take this too seriously because it is just sports after all and Obama is clearly just cheering for Dan Rooney's team. The sports fan in me doesn't like this though.
Either you follow your heart, or you don't. Obama's heart is with the Bears. So what was he following to Pittsburgh? He wasn't following his heart. He was following electoral votes.
The jaded part of me agrees with this. The logical part of me has quit reading by now.
You're reading about the sports fan, what it means to be a member of this club and the requirements of membership. And one of the requirements is this: Other than your favorite team, thou shalt have no other teams "close to your heart."
I agree 100% with this but I hope Gregg Doyel was being overdramatic and doesn't really think Obama is a bad person for this. It just means he wants to be popular and most Presidents tend to enjoy being popular.
8. Bill Plaschke worries the Lakers won't make the NBA Finals without Andrew Bynum, even though they made the NBA Finals last year, without Andrew Bynum.
Andrew Bynum's right knee may have just cost the Lakers a championship.
Yeah maybe, but the Lakers were able to do pretty well last year without Bynum and they could always make a trade.
Last season, he was finally reaching his potential when the injury pulled the chair out from under a Lakers team that, even with the addition of Gasol, was never the same.
They were never the same last year in that they won the Western Conference and only lost the NBA Finals 4-2? Seems like the Lakers almost won the Finals without Bynum, and sure it will hurt to not have him, but everyone is a year older now and a year wiser. Don't crap your pants quite yet.
Lacking either home-court advantage or frontcourt advantage, they then would probably not be able to withstand an improved Cleveland team or a tough Boston team in the Finals.
In Bill Plaschke's worst case scenario, which is if Bynum is out the rest of the season, the Lakers will lose in the NBA Finals. That is his worst case scenario.
Until we know about any of this, Lakers fans can only imitate the injured on-court reaction of the hero whose loss they are now mourning.
You know, scream.
Remind me to never be around Bill Plaschke in an emergency situation. I get the feeling he would freak out.
9. Mike Freeman wonders if the Rooney Rule is necessary.
"I never thought I'd say this in my lifetime," said a black assistant coach, "but the playing field is getting even faster than I thought was possible. We're getting to an equal point very quickly. I didn't think we'd be here for another 20 years."
Teams are smart to hire the best coach for their team and not just hire someone they know really well and has failed a few other times. I think it is good news that coaches like Jim Fassel are not getting second chances but coordinators and other coaches are getting the interviews for head coaching jobs.
Last season there were seven black head coaches while. In 2002, six percent of the head coaches were black. In 1980, according to numbers obtained by CBSSports.com, there were 14 total African-American coaches in all of football. That number was 186 in 2008.
The only problem that still lies around is the fact some teams are only giving interviews to minority candidates to comply with the rule, which makes the rule a joke in some cases. I was never against the Rooney Rule but I also think that a team should look out for its own continued success and the only way to do that is to look at every candidate. It would be stupid to hire a guy less qualifed than another candidate just because he is white.
The question is how much of the progress is simple coincidence, how much is societal progress in general and how much is it the teeth of the Rooney Rule having an impact. Some black coaches seem to think it's a combination of everything.
What the rule did was make the Good Ol' Boy Network more inclusive so now minority coaches are able to get opportunities for head coaching jobs because someone knows someone who thinks that person would be a great coach or that person has worked under a great minority coach. I say give the rule five more years.
10. Pat Forde has a recommendation at the end of his column.
When hungry and thirsty in the oddly interesting town of Winston-Salem, N.C.,
That town is where Wake Forest University is located and is 30 minutes from where I live. It is oddly interesting because I think it has no nightlife, while others think it is great. That is about all that is interesting to me.
The Minutes recommends a visit to the excellent Village Tavern (39). The New York strip and hot crab dip are tremendous, and the locals swear by the meat loaf.
Actually, we call it "VT" for short, but regardless I would stop by between 4-6pm when they have half priced wine and appetizers...and they have good appetizers. I just turned into Peter King.
Pair your meal with a locally brewed Red Oak (40) lager and thank The Minutes later.
I know this has nothing to do with sports but Red Oak is a pretty badass beer. The only depressing part is that it is not served in bottles and you can't buy it in a store, it is only on tap. That depresses me.
I can't wait to see Bill Simmons column for tomorrow. I hope it is full of juicy, incredibly incorrect tidbits.
1. Much like Princess Leia needing Obiwan Kenobi (I'm a blogger and that is a Star Wars reference...cliche alert!), Wallace Matthews thinks Derek Jeter is Alex Rodriguez's only hope. Hope for what? I have no idea what the problem is, let's see what Wallace thinks.
The official story is that nearly eight years ago, Alex Rodriguez implied in a magazine story that Derek Jeter's place in a batting order coincided perfectly with the number on his back. Jeter was a No. 2 hitter, A-Rod seemed to be saying to Esquire back then, nothing more and nothing less, and to this day, Jeter hasn't forgiven him for it.
As the Yankees Turn, will return in a minute, but first a message from our corporate sponsors...
I think the New York writers feed off the Bronx Zoo personality the Yankees seem to have and they also try to perpetuate this idea as much as possible. Any little thing gets blown up, and I used to think it was because it was New York and there is so much media located there, but now I just think the writers like the drama.
Because only Jeter can clean up the mess Joe Torre has made of the Yankees' clubhouse.
Yes, only Derek Jeter can do this......b-b-but why only Derek Jeter and not Joe Girardi, Mariano Rivera, or Jorge Posada? Simply because he is the captain of the team?
The book is out today. Time to start reading. And he doesn't even have to read it to come out and say, simply: "Alex is my teammate. Alex is our guy. Everyone in this clubhouse stands behind him."
Here's the thing, maybe Jeter doesn't feel like he needs to start defending A-Rod against what Joe Torre said in the book or maybe his teammates used to call him A-Fraud, but they do not anymore, and Jeter does not want to bring this up again. I don't get why everyone has to deny every allegation and silence means people get to assume what they want.
Jeter is supposed to be the captain of all the Yankees, not just of Jorge Posada and Mariano Rivera and whichever other guys he happens to like.
Maybe Jeter has told A-Rod all of these things that Wallace seems to think A-Rod needs to hear. My real question is why does Jeter have to do this? Why should anyone in the Yankee clubhouse really care if the general public thinks they like A-Rod or not, as long as A-Rod knows the team supports him?
The answer I have is if someone doesn't come out and make a statement, the media in New York is going to keep hounding Jeter and A-Rod on this issue. It's almost like Wallace Matthews knows the media is going to blackmail those two with articles about how they don't get along, unless Jeter comes out and publicly supports A-Rod. This is all very stupid.
The Yankees can win without Torre but not without A-Rod.
Actually the Yankees won 4 World Series with Joe Torre as manager and have won zero with A-Rod as a player on the team. So this assumption is actually very, very wrong.
For the good of his team, Captain Jeter had better choose which side of this argument he is on in a hurry.
Sure, Jeter has come out and defended other players on the team, but I don't see the need to come out and immediately defend A-Rod on this issue. To come out and make a public statement means there was some sort of truth potentially to Joe Torre's book in regards to the treatment and feelings about A-Rod when he came to the Yankees. Maybe Jeter doesn't like A-Rod so he doesn't feel like defending him. Either way, this is going to have a small effect on the team this year when it comes time to playing games, unless the media doesn't let the issue drop, which it looks like will not happen.
But it's the right thing to do, especially if, like Jeter, you call yourself a captain and fancy yourself a leader.
Maybe Jeter is being a leader and by not coming out and supporting A-Rod he is leading the other 23 guys in the locker room to show he is on their side.
Time, at long last, for the No. 2 hitter in the Yankees' lineup to be the cleanup hitter in the Yankees' clubhouse.
Is A-Rod really this fragile that Jeter not coming out and supporting him would ruin his self esteem or does the New York media just want to hear Jeter say he likes A-Rod because it will give them another weeks worth of stories? I vote for the latter.
At some point, maybe everyone can realize that Jeter possibly is not that great of a captain. Not only when A-Rod came to New York did he not volunteer to play third base, but he also has supported Jason Giambi and Roger Clemens publicly and not A-Rod publicly. It doesn't really matter in the long run, but Jeter cares too much about how he is perceived, at least that is what I think, and I think he has some natural rivalry going with A-Rod and if he supported him publicly, it may make him seem weak. My theory probably sucks but I still don't see why it really matters if Jeter publicly supports A-Rod and I am not 100% sure why A-Rod needs support.
2. Peter King tends to be a huge apologist for others (i.e. Brett Favre), so I don't know why it shocks me he plays company man for the NFL in talking about the Kurt Warner "fumble."
McGrath had around 90 seconds from the time of the loose ball to examine the replays to see if McAulay needed to examine the call himself -- and McGrath judged, and was later backed by the league, that officials on the field made the correct judgment that Warner fumbled before his arm started going forward.
Oh, I didn't know McGrath's decision was backed by the NFL, that makes my opinion completely different. The NFL has no reason to not back the guy, McGrath, who decided the head referee should not review the final play of the game that decided the winner of the Super Bowl. It was only the last play in the biggest game of the year. No review needed for that.
I am being sarcastic, but seriously, would anyone expect the NFL to come out and not back the decision not to have this play reviewed? If the NFL second guesses the decision all hell breaks loose and thousands of columns are written about how instant replay needs to be changed and the Cardinals could really have won the Super Bowl. The fact the NFL supported the decision doesn't tell me anything that would change my opinion. It changes Peter King's though.
I wish McGrath had given McAulay a look. But I don't believe McGrath made the wrong call.
Seriously, if you wish McAulay had gotten a look at the play, then you don't believe McGrath made the right call. If Peter wished McAulay had gotten a look at the play, there is no way he can actually believe McGrath made the right call.
The Giants' 20-19 stunner of Buffalo in Supe XXV was a keepaway game with great strategic stuff by Bill Parcells and his coordinators, Bill Belichick and Ron Erhardt, but a missed field goal as the signature play isn't how the best Super Bowl game should be remembered.
Peter thinks the greatest Super Bowl ever should be remembered by a controversial fumble call, that is so much better than the best game ever being decided by an actual football play.
This game had Roethlisberger emerging as a no-doubt, unquestioned clutch star; he has the body build of Terry Bradshaw with the play-making escapability of Steve Young.
Roethlisberger: 6 foot 5 inches, 241 pounds
Bradshaw: 6 foot 3 inches, 215 pounds
They are not exactly similar...and I don't believe Roethlisberger is 241 pounds. Maybe 10-15 pounds heavier than that.
As one of the MVP voters, I changed three times in the last 10 minutes.
If this does not instill confidence in his ability to choose an MVP for the Super Bowl, nothing should.
I went from Harrison when the Steelers were up 20-7 to Fitzgerald when it was 23-20, Arizona, with more than a few thoughts about Warner. Then, as Pittsburgh went downfield for the winning score, I had dueling thoughts of Roethlisberger and Holmes in my head.
It's weird how a player's value goes up and down as the game goes along. All of a sudden Warner is not the most valuable player on the field, not because of anything he did, but because his team was no longer winning. I guess that is how it goes but it still feels arbitrary to me.
It's probably crazy, but I would have picked Roethlisberger had Holmes made a simple catch in the end zone.
Not probably crazy, definitely crazy. If Roethlisberger had thrown a simple pass, he would have been more valuable, but because he threw a more difficult pass and Holmes caught the ball, now Holmes is more valuable.
Roethlisberger doesn't get credit for scrambling around and keeping plays alive but Holmes gets credit for a defender falling down earlier in the game.
Completing 70 percent in any Super Bowl is magnificent, but completing two of his throws after circus-type escape acts from the Cardinal D, and then driving his team 88 yards in the 58th, 59th and 60th minutes on the biggest drive of his life ... huge. Just huge.
But not as huge as catching the game winning catch. This is like giving John Taylor the MVP award in 1988 for catching the game winning catch and ignoring what Jerry Rice did that day.
From Hari Kannan of Nashville: "Thanks for your column every week Peter. I'm wondering how the outcome of this game will affect Kurt Warner's Hall of Fame credentials in your eyes. Before the game, several writers implied that if he won the Super Bowl, it would make him a serious contender for the Hall.
He's had five terrific, Hall-caliber seasons, and a five-year donut hole in the middle in which he did nothing, in essence, to merit consideration. He's played a full season three times. I'll say two things: I have been tremendously swayed by what he's done in this postseason (and the fact that in three Super Bowls, he's thrown for more yards than any player ever, including Joe Montana in four of them and John Elway in five), and his play in three Super Bowls is awfully persuasive.
Call me crazy, but I don't think Kurt Warner should be in the Hall of Fame. His career is not over yet so I could change my mind, but I tell you what will not change my mind, and that is the fact he has thrown for more yards in the Super Bowl than anyone ever. Just because his team did not have a running game this year and his previous teams had little interest in running the ball in the Super Bowl does not, in my opinion, warrant more HoF consideration.
I prefer to look at regular season statistics more intently than postseason.
3. Everyone has heard about Michael Phelps being a "temporary" pothead by now. The big question everyone has, is what Jay Mariotti thinks about all of this.
"I wonder how he's going to handle all of this,'' I said then and there to a writer pal, recalling how a few nights earlier, with the temperature a steamy 81 outside the arena, Phelps had arrived at intermission of a U.S. Redeem Team game with a hoodie pulled over his head and a blanket wrapped around his body.
As usual, Jay Mariotti is all over this and predicted that Michael Phelps would become a recreational drug user. Jay just knew...of course he did not write an article during the Olympics because he was working for the big, bad newspaper and they would not let him. At least that is what he would say.
Much as we want to understand why Phelps would act like any young guy smoking marijuana at a party -- Barack Obama has admitted to inhaling, and so will I -- there is no defense here. The reason: Phelps has openly and eagerly embraced being a reliable role model (his words) for America's youth, and once you accept that monumental responsibility on a high-profile level, you simply cannot be doing the dumb things that other 23-year-olds do.
So Phelps' act would have been defensible if he had not held himself out as a role model for kids, but because he did that, there is no defense for his smoking pot and everything he has done should be wiped away. Jay thinks if Phelps held himself out as a loser and someone who did not want to be accountable for his actions, then no harm no foul.
Once he was committed to that path, Phelps had no recourse but to stay on the straight and narrow. Obviously, he hasn't, with his Gamecock Country slip-up following numerous reports of hard partying. So what does he say now to the nine-year-old who fell in love with him in August and was told to dream, plan, reach?
I think Michael Phelps looks like a douchebag and from seeing him partying around the United States, I get the feeling he may be one as well. I don't get why Mariotti is being harder on him because he said he wants to be an example to kids, then makes a mistake like this. Anyone that thought he was not human was really fooling themselves.
Phelps already had a DUI and I believe he was not even old enough to drink at that time. So that is really two mistakes he made...theoretically.
To be fair, a bong photograph is tame compared to the criminal problems of other athletes. But Phelps isn't just any athlete. He was supposed to be the biggest on the planet, Sportsman of the Year, a shining hope for an ailing country, a savior to flush away steroids and sports' various scandals of recent years.
Here is what really is happening. The mainstream media portrayed Michael Phelps as a real American hero and someone who was a role model everyone could look up to, they put him on the cover of magazines, told stories about how dedicated he was to his craft of swimming and tended to leave out the fact he had a previous DUI and have never written about the various exploits those who follow TMZ have seen, because that has never fit the story they wanted to write. Now he has made them look stupid for holding him up to a high standard and they are going to try and crucify him.
But nothing is real funny about this, not as a wobbly America launches a new presidency with Phelps as our reigning symbol of sports greatness.
The only reason he is the reigning symbol of greatness is because he was an exceptional athlete, so they wanted him to be an exceptional person and tried to portray him in that fashion.
4. As part of this week's Rick Reilly gets paid millions of dollars to write stories like this, here is the new entry.
I used to think the worst jobs in sports were: (1) Thong wrangler for John Daly. (2) Mark McGwire's injector. (3) Detroit Lion.
(4) Rick Reilly's editor. You can't edit anything or there would only be 12 sentences per column.
Here is how a typical conversation probably goes:
(Reilly) "Here you go, my report on playing basketball with nuns."
(Editor) "Rick, this is a paragraph and contains 3 quotes. You only have two original sentences in this."
(Reilly) "Listen, my BMW is acting funny, where do I pick up my paycheck again?"
(Editor) "I am going to need a few more sent...(sound of Reilly walking out of the room whistling showtunes and the door slams shut)...just a couple more sentences is what I needed, I guess I have to do it the hard way. (Googles Rick Reilly's name and spends 15 minutes combing through Reilly's 24 other columns, reading each of them thoroughly, then cuts and pastes the same jokes he used in the Charles Barkley interview, sends it off to be published and hangs himself by his tie).
What the 2,000 found out is: The "on-field audience" doesn't get "paid." They don't get a ticket to watch the game. They don't even get a T-shirt. They can't bring cameras or cell phones—unless they're a group leader. They'll be bussed in and bussed out. They will be on the field for 12 minutes and have to sign a release that they won't sue in case they're flattened by a forklift.
Rick must have been very disappointed they did not get paid. He figures at his current rate ESPN pays him, if he spent 15 minutes on the field, they would owe him at least $95,000.
I didn't even think of the idea until after the two rehearsals had happened. Thank God. "On Thursday, we stood in the rain for eight straight hours," one woman complained.
There were two rehearsals, both of which Reilly missed. At this point, his only responsibility is to run on the field when Springsteen started performing, listen to the music for 12 minutes and then run off the field. That's it. He wrote a column about this but "missed" the two day 10 hour each rehearsals. He gets easy assignments and then is too lazy to even carry out the entire assignment.
Turns out the field for a Super Bowl halftime is Audio Nowhere, Springsteen Unplugged. All the speakers are set in front of the paying customers in the seats, leaving you at a Marcel Marceau concert.
What? After all that work running and that is it...you can't even hear the performance?
Telling you: Don't. Be. One.
It. Involves. Work. But. Not. Really.
Afterward, I was sullenly ignoring Cynthia's exhortation to "Run! Run people!" when I saw my favorite all-time guitarist, Nils Lofgren, Springsteen's lead, walking off the field, one arm around his mystical guitar and the other around an hourglass blonde.
So to be one of the people on the field, you had to attend a two day, 10 hour each rehearsal, run on the field, stay there for 12 minutes, then run off the field.
Rick Reilly only ran on the field and then listened to the performance. That's it...and he bitched about it.
That sound you just heard was 65,000 people losing their job while Rick Reilly gets a new car for what amounts to 15 minutes of work.
5. Jason Whitlock thinks the referees are the MVP of the Super Bowl.
But on a play-to-play, quarter-to-quarter basis, no one influenced the greatest Super Bowl in history more than McAulay and his crew of black-and-gold-wearing, I mean, black-and-white-wearing officials.
That may not be true because the 2006 Super Bowl between Seattle and Pittsburgh was pretty bad as well.
But the 11-7 penalty disparity was actually much worse when you consider McAulay and Co. turned flag-happy in the fourth quarter, dropping six yellow ones on the Steelers (Arizona declined one) to close the gap.
I don't think the officials had a plan to screw over the Cardinals and Mike Gandy was holding on almost every play it felt like. I don't like the idea that both teams should have the similar amount of penalty yardage. Some teams commit more penalties than others, just like in basketball some teams commit more fouls than others. I focus more on the flags that were called and whether they were legitimate or not and also on what obvious calls were not made.
The eye in the sky caught McAulay's crew favoring Pittsburgh twice, overturning two bad calls after replay review.
Those calls were both bad calls, I have to admit.
And then there were the things the refs didn't call. Big Ben got away with an obvious intentional grounding. On the series after the refs handed Pittsburgh a 16-play, clock-killing third-quarter drive with a bogus roughing-the-passer call and a should-have-been-ignored roughing-the-holder penalty, McAulay ignored Harrison's brutal (and late) head shot on Kurt Warner. Holmes could've been penalized for his theatrical end-zone celebration. And Warner's fumble should've been thoroughly reviewed.
I can only disagree with one of these statements and that is that I believe the roughing the holder penalty should have been called. Otherwise, I do agree.
Pittsburgh's last two championships have been hand-delivered by overzealous officiating crews.
Apparently Jason Whitlock is not a Pittsburgh Steelers fan. This is strong language even for him.
6. Gregg Doyel publicly calls out a Woody Paige column.
Freeman and I are giggling over the worst, the absolute worst, lede to a column of the week. Think about that. Think about the number of stories and columns that have been written from Super Bowl week. I just found the worst.
I won't name names, but it ran in Denver. OK, in the Post. OK, it was Woody Paige.
Though I am not a huge Gregg Doyel fan, it is funny to see one MSM columnist outright laugh at another's column heading.
Here is the link to the article.
Steel is blast-furnace tough. Steel is durable. Steel is heavy-duty. Steel is strong. Steel is iron.
Steel is the Pittsburgh football team.
That is pretty bad, but really no worse than anything else Woody Paige has ever done, including quoting Dr. Suess and all the other drivel he pours out.
And as for you, Woody, sorry -- but if you're going to be a big-time media star, deal with the criticism. Plus your fake tan gives me the willies. And this lede flat out sucked.
I wish more public figures, not including Bill Simmons and Dane Cook, would take shots at each other in print. It makes it so much more fun to read the articles.
7. Barack Obama (has anyone ever heard of this guy before?) has made Gregg Doyel said because he is a bandwagon fan.
Turns out, President Obama is as full of crap as the next guy.
This clearly concerns the fact Obama has attempted to appoint several of his potential Cabinet members to posts when they have had legal/IRS troubles that could conflict with their jobs.
Why? He was rooting for the Steelers in the Super Bowl.
Or maybe not.
"Other than the Chicago Bears," Obama said days before the game, "the Steelers are probably the team that's closest to my heart."
I hate to agree with Gregg Doyel, but I agree with Gregg Doyel. It drives me crazy when I see Snoop Dogg on television in a Steelers uniform when just a few years ago he had a Raiders uniform on. Pick a team and go with it.
Obama mimicked the infamous intro to Monday Night Football, and I was in love. How could I not be? Here's a guy who gets it. Not a political animal or an intellectual egghead, but a real guy. Running for president. And rooting for his favorite team. Loved it.
I do like the fact Obama is a Chicago sports fan and makes it known. I like that and I don't like how he used the Super Bowl as a way to appeal to Pittsburgh/Pa. voters...which is really what he was doing.
Either that or he really hates Arizona because of John McCain.
This is you-scratch-my back at its finest. To win the presidency, Obama needed to win Pennsylvania. He needed those electoral votes and the momentum they represented, and guess who helped deliver that state? The popular owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers, Dan Rooney.
I don't know if Dan Rooney was the sole reason Obama won Pennsylvania, but everyone knows (partially because Peter King has brought it up 900 times) Dan Rooney stumped for Obama in the last election. I don't know if we need to take this too seriously because it is just sports after all and Obama is clearly just cheering for Dan Rooney's team. The sports fan in me doesn't like this though.
Either you follow your heart, or you don't. Obama's heart is with the Bears. So what was he following to Pittsburgh? He wasn't following his heart. He was following electoral votes.
The jaded part of me agrees with this. The logical part of me has quit reading by now.
You're reading about the sports fan, what it means to be a member of this club and the requirements of membership. And one of the requirements is this: Other than your favorite team, thou shalt have no other teams "close to your heart."
I agree 100% with this but I hope Gregg Doyel was being overdramatic and doesn't really think Obama is a bad person for this. It just means he wants to be popular and most Presidents tend to enjoy being popular.
8. Bill Plaschke worries the Lakers won't make the NBA Finals without Andrew Bynum, even though they made the NBA Finals last year, without Andrew Bynum.
Andrew Bynum's right knee may have just cost the Lakers a championship.
Yeah maybe, but the Lakers were able to do pretty well last year without Bynum and they could always make a trade.
Last season, he was finally reaching his potential when the injury pulled the chair out from under a Lakers team that, even with the addition of Gasol, was never the same.
They were never the same last year in that they won the Western Conference and only lost the NBA Finals 4-2? Seems like the Lakers almost won the Finals without Bynum, and sure it will hurt to not have him, but everyone is a year older now and a year wiser. Don't crap your pants quite yet.
Lacking either home-court advantage or frontcourt advantage, they then would probably not be able to withstand an improved Cleveland team or a tough Boston team in the Finals.
In Bill Plaschke's worst case scenario, which is if Bynum is out the rest of the season, the Lakers will lose in the NBA Finals. That is his worst case scenario.
Until we know about any of this, Lakers fans can only imitate the injured on-court reaction of the hero whose loss they are now mourning.
You know, scream.
Remind me to never be around Bill Plaschke in an emergency situation. I get the feeling he would freak out.
9. Mike Freeman wonders if the Rooney Rule is necessary.
"I never thought I'd say this in my lifetime," said a black assistant coach, "but the playing field is getting even faster than I thought was possible. We're getting to an equal point very quickly. I didn't think we'd be here for another 20 years."
Teams are smart to hire the best coach for their team and not just hire someone they know really well and has failed a few other times. I think it is good news that coaches like Jim Fassel are not getting second chances but coordinators and other coaches are getting the interviews for head coaching jobs.
Last season there were seven black head coaches while. In 2002, six percent of the head coaches were black. In 1980, according to numbers obtained by CBSSports.com, there were 14 total African-American coaches in all of football. That number was 186 in 2008.
The only problem that still lies around is the fact some teams are only giving interviews to minority candidates to comply with the rule, which makes the rule a joke in some cases. I was never against the Rooney Rule but I also think that a team should look out for its own continued success and the only way to do that is to look at every candidate. It would be stupid to hire a guy less qualifed than another candidate just because he is white.
The question is how much of the progress is simple coincidence, how much is societal progress in general and how much is it the teeth of the Rooney Rule having an impact. Some black coaches seem to think it's a combination of everything.
What the rule did was make the Good Ol' Boy Network more inclusive so now minority coaches are able to get opportunities for head coaching jobs because someone knows someone who thinks that person would be a great coach or that person has worked under a great minority coach. I say give the rule five more years.
10. Pat Forde has a recommendation at the end of his column.
When hungry and thirsty in the oddly interesting town of Winston-Salem, N.C.,
That town is where Wake Forest University is located and is 30 minutes from where I live. It is oddly interesting because I think it has no nightlife, while others think it is great. That is about all that is interesting to me.
The Minutes recommends a visit to the excellent Village Tavern (39). The New York strip and hot crab dip are tremendous, and the locals swear by the meat loaf.
Actually, we call it "VT" for short, but regardless I would stop by between 4-6pm when they have half priced wine and appetizers...and they have good appetizers. I just turned into Peter King.
Pair your meal with a locally brewed Red Oak (40) lager and thank The Minutes later.
I know this has nothing to do with sports but Red Oak is a pretty badass beer. The only depressing part is that it is not served in bottles and you can't buy it in a store, it is only on tap. That depresses me.
I can't wait to see Bill Simmons column for tomorrow. I hope it is full of juicy, incredibly incorrect tidbits.
Friday, December 19, 2008
10 comments Bill Simmons Power Polls It
Has anyone else noticed that since Bill Simmons unveiled his "how to gamble by Bill and I am qualified to write this because I am a genius column three weeks ago" the Sports Gal is slowly catching up to him in the standings? She is only 7 behind him with two weeks to go. I am in a state of frenzy wondering if she will catch up, though to be honest, I am not 100% sure she is actually picking anymore since we have not heard from her in months it seems. Maybe Bill is jealous she has better writing skills than him.
Bill apologizes for not doing a power poll more often in the year and no one cares because he should apologize for mailing in last week's column and the one about how the NBA has its "curves" back. Those were just bad, much worse than not putting a power poll up.
I love power polls because it gives Bill a chance to show off his lack of knowledge.
Due to the struggling economy, we were forced to reduce my number of 2008 NFL Power Polls from four to three. All right, that's not true. I just screwed up. We did one in Week 4, we did one in Week 10 … and now it's Week 16. Really, only one Power Poll over a 12-week span? That's just me failing at my job.
Really...you need to apologize for the NBA having its curves back and the gift columns from the past month. Those were just bad.
(One silver lining in the Rust era: The Patriots bottomed out so badly that I broke my gambling cherry to maintain my interest in the '89 season. A future degenerate was born. Right now, somewhere in America, there's at least one Lions fan on a college campus who owes $2,000 to a bookie. And he's nodding.
It took two paragraphs for Bill to encourage reckless gambling by college students.
The Sports Guy: Convincing gambling away your parent's money is the cool thing to do since 1998.
30. Cincinnati Bengals
During last week's anti-gifts column, I wondered why Bengals fans hadn't sent in any suggestions and worried whether they were still alive. Cincy reader Andy Collins quelled my fears: "We Bengals fans are still here. We just don't care anymore." Oh.
Ask a Redskins fan about the Bengals and how good they think that person thinks the Bengals are. I guarantee you, you will either get flipped off or cursed at.
There are five open secrets in the NFL right now.
Not to turn into a 9th grade English teacher here on Bill here, but there is no such thing as "open secret" just like there is no such thing as being a "born again virgin." Sorry, it doesn't happen that way.
Romeo Crennel is getting fired after the season. Like, right after it ends. Quite possibly as he's walking off the field in Week 17. They might not even let him get into the locker room; they might just have his stuff waiting outside in a box.
Seriously with Romeo Crennel and Charlie Weis' records as head coaches, shouldn't someone be looking at Josh McDaniels with a little bit of hesitation? Just a little bit?
So here's my question: Why not do it right now? Why was the decision made that it's OK to fire your coach within the first two months of the season, but after that, you have to let him suck the life out of your players and your fan base until the bitter end, no matter how depressing those last few weeks might be? Couldn't the Browns have fun with this? Why not let Browns legend Jim Brown coach the team these last two weeks? Or LeBron? Or Grady Sizemore? Or make Willie McGinest the player-coach? Or, even better, replace Crennel with Art Shell and see whether anyone notices?
My guess would be the reason they don't do this is because none of these people (except Art Shell) have coached a football team before and the team does not want to make a mockery of the coaching process and the team. What coach in his right mind is going to want to be hired by an organization that let Jim Brown or Grady Sizemore coach the team? Bill knocks Al Davis all the time but this is an idea that Davis would actually think of and implement and now Bill jokingly/non jokingly, I can't always tell, suggests it.
Here's my wild theory: The Patriots will franchise Matt Cassel in fear that Tom Brady might not make it back in time for the 2009 season. By mid-July, when it becomes clear Brady is fine, Cassel quietly will go on the market … and, of course, the Niners will be sitting there waiting for him. As soon as Cassel becomes available, San Fran will toss the Pats a 2010 No. 1 and a 2011 No. 2, then rip up his contract and give him something like $55 million for seven years with a $24 million signing bonus. Everybody wins.
Believe it or not, I have nothing against Matt Cassel but I definitely would not do this if I were the San Francisco Niners. Ever...which means they are probably going to do this. For once, Bill is right about what is going to happen and the Patriots are going to get a ton of draft picks or a high draft pick because they already have a fantastic QB. The Patriots are actually geniuses when they do things like this, which makes me dislike them more. If this happens, I can't wait until my favorite team plays the NFC West again, there won't be a .500 team in that division in two years.
Something to watch for, my gambling friends: The Saints are done. They're out.
Yep, they still scare me though.
Then the Saints finish the season with a home game against the Panthers that will mean nothing to Carolina because its playoff seed gets decided this Sunday night (either it's No. 1 or No. 2).
Simmonsologists know that Bill has to have at least one bit of information completely wrong when it comes to the NFC/any division that Patriots are not in. The Saints game could mean absolutely everything to Carolina in two weeks. Ignore completely what Bill just said, gamblers because if the Panthers lose this weekend, and the Cowboys, Bucs, and Falcons all win, the Panthers will miss the playoffs on conference record if they lose to the Saints in Week 17 and those three teams all win again (the Cowboys play the Eagles while the Bucs play the Lions and the Bucs play the Raiders...those are three easy win games). In summary, if that situation occurs the Panthers have to win against the Saints or will not make the playoffs as a 11-5 team, despite one victory against the Giants this weekend could get them homefield advantage throughout the playoffs. Trust me, I know these things. Bill is wrong, I am right.
(I want to know from my reader(s), has there ever been a situation one of your teams has been in where if they lose one game they could miss the playoffs entirely, but if they win that game, they get homefield advantage throughout the playoffs? Not to sound like Bill Simmons, but is this unprecedented? No one cares about my personal life but let's just say if the Giants beat my favorite team (fine, its the fucking Panthers if no one has figured that out), a certain person who lives with me will receive a phone call potentially from her father who will be bragging, potentially, followed by me immediately regretting grabbing the phone, potentially, and words could follow.)
Just know that if a gutty 11-5 Pats team is forced to sit out the playoffs because NFL rules demand that one of these two crappy AFC West teams be included, I'm sending a special homemade batch of holiday turd egg nog to the NFL offices with the note "ATTN: Roger Goodell." Damn it all.
Followed by a homemade batch sent by me if Arizona makes it and my favorite team does not. Though I have vowed not to bitch because it is the rules, it still would really, really suck...especially since they beat the Cardinals.
You might remember that I made Tarvaris Jackson's replica jersey my 48th-worst NFL gift last week. When he threw for four touchdowns against the Cards on Sunday, I braced myself for a slew of "Ha ha you suck, Tarvaris rules!" e-mails from the Minnesota area. Nope. I didn't get a single one. Now what does THAT tell you?
That tells me you are lying. At least one person had to email that you suck to you. I don't believe this at all.
This could also could tell me what I actually suspect, that most people read your column to dissect it with sarcasm, like I am doing, and don't actually read it and care about what you write.
(My favorite headline of the week: "JACKSON? FREROTTE? THE INTRIGUE BUILDS." Um … it does? Should I move to the edge of my seat just so I don't feel left out? I've watched "Scooby Doo" episodes with my daughter that had more building intrigue than Jackson versus Frerotte. I'm not kidding.
I never knew Bill Simmons had offspring! Why does not ever mention this? Where does he live again, isn't it Colorado or is it Texas? I need to have him mention these things more often so I feel like I know him better.
What ever happened to Bill saying he would never mention his family in his columns? I have no proof he ever said it, but I do remember it pretty well for some reason.
Remember when Richard Dreyfuss was scuba diving in "Jaws," and he was looking through a hole in a sunken boat and a waterlogged head floated in front of him? The face the waterlogged head had … that's what parents look like after they have twins. For like three years. Anyway, I'm not buying the McNabb twins theory. Sorry.
Ooooo...an interesting discussion about parents who have twins. The only way to have me want Bill to talk more about his favorite Boston teams!
Do you think Bill's page views are rising or falling? I honestly have to think they are falling at this point. It seems Bill is becoming more angst filled and ESPN seems to care about him less, leading me to believe Bill is blaming the fall on ESPN, while they don't give a shit. I blame the decline in my page views on poor writing on my part. I take responsibility in that way.
(Speaking of T.O., I wrote in September that Chad Johnson had reached the Saturation Zone for me -- in other words, they could show footage of him doing ANYTHING on "SportsCenter" -- screaming at his coach, yelling at his teammates, wearing a weird outfit, fighting a walrus, getting caught on a security camera doing lines with Amy Winehouse -- and I just wouldn't care. I wouldn't be interested. I wouldn't want to talk about it. I just want him to go away and never come back. Three months later, I have reached the same point with Owens. And Michael Phelps, you're getting there -- even Ronald Miller handled being cool better. Take a deep breath, do some laps, get a hold of yourself, dip out of the limelight for a few weeks and try to find a girlfriend who isn't a Vegas strip-club waitress with a tattoo on her back bigger than your eight gold medals. That's my advice.)
For the second time this year, I agree with Bill on this one. I need more people on the "Michael Phelps is a douchebag" bandwagon. Look at him, how he acts, and pretty much everything about him, including listening to Eminem as he gets ready to swim, and it all adds up for me. He is a great swimmer, but also a Grade A douchebag.
7. Baltimore Ravens Total points scored in their past four games against the Colts, Titans, Steelers and Giants: 33.
Number of times Joe Flacco has topped 200 yards passing this season: four.
Number of 90-yard days by a Ravens running back this season: three.
Number of 100-yard receiving days by a Ravens receiver this season: three.
(See where I'm going with this?)
Yet, he ranks them #7 on his power poll. This tells me what I always have thought: power polls are completely and utterly useless...but a great way to build debate and pass on actually writing a good weekly column. I am surprised Rick Reilly has not tried one yet.
4. New York Giants
Dear Giants fans,
Did you notice that Eli suddenly stinks? This is what happens when an ordinary QB doesn't have the benefit of throwing against an eight-man front that's stacking the line while his best wide receiver is getting double-covered. Keep looking up -- you don't want him landing on you at 540 mph as he finishes his fall back to earth. Also, keep telling yourself that your seventh-string wide receiver catching a pseudo-Hail Mary off the top of his helmet with your season on the line wasn't the single luckiest play in sports history. In fact, David Tyree himself just admitted this to me. I'm writing this at an IHOP right now, and he just brought me a plate of blueberry pancakes. Did you know you can work at IHOP when you're on injured reserve? Apparently so. I have to go because I'm going to throw a cannister of boysenberry syrup at him as hard as I can and see whether he catches it off his head. Worst of luck in the playoffs.
Sincerely,
Bitter Guy
I am not going to even bring up the New England Patriots here. I am wondering if Bill's bitterness will ever end over this? Lucky plays happen all the time and that was just one catch in the game, granted it was crucial, but how about Plaxico Burress being wide open for the touchdown, was that luck also? Or the Giants defense shutting down the Patriots offense after seeing them a second time. Was that luck?
Now, we're like five weeks away from a solid hour of awkwardness at Lucas' booth with questions like, "Are you afraid to joke with Steve in the locker room because he might punch you?" and "Do you ever get the urge to just walk over to Steve's locker and punch him in the face to get him back?" from troublemaking bloggers and radio personalities dressed in goofy football jerseys.
Hypocrite alert! What trouble about making bloggers and radio personalities? Wasn't Bill the same person bragging a few years ago when he and Kimmel played a joke on John Kasay at the Super Bowl that pissed him off? It's right here. Funny, how easy it is to forget you did the exact same thing you are up on your high horse saying others would do.
As usual, when Bill Simmons makes a joke or does something it is the funniest thing in the history of the world, but when others do it, he feels the need to take cheap shots at people as troublemakers or tries to demean them in some other fashion.
Luck is a major part of football, whether we like to admit it or not … but at the same time, you make your own luck to a certain degree.
Says the guy who wrote "jokingly" the Giants were lucky in the Super Bowl last year five paragraphs ago.
I wish Bill Simmons would write a column everyday, my life would be so much more full of joy and I would be much happier with my choices of bad journalism to mock. That's what I want for Christmas.
Bill apologizes for not doing a power poll more often in the year and no one cares because he should apologize for mailing in last week's column and the one about how the NBA has its "curves" back. Those were just bad, much worse than not putting a power poll up.
I love power polls because it gives Bill a chance to show off his lack of knowledge.
Due to the struggling economy, we were forced to reduce my number of 2008 NFL Power Polls from four to three. All right, that's not true. I just screwed up. We did one in Week 4, we did one in Week 10 … and now it's Week 16. Really, only one Power Poll over a 12-week span? That's just me failing at my job.
Really...you need to apologize for the NBA having its curves back and the gift columns from the past month. Those were just bad.
(One silver lining in the Rust era: The Patriots bottomed out so badly that I broke my gambling cherry to maintain my interest in the '89 season. A future degenerate was born. Right now, somewhere in America, there's at least one Lions fan on a college campus who owes $2,000 to a bookie. And he's nodding.
It took two paragraphs for Bill to encourage reckless gambling by college students.
The Sports Guy: Convincing gambling away your parent's money is the cool thing to do since 1998.
30. Cincinnati Bengals
During last week's anti-gifts column, I wondered why Bengals fans hadn't sent in any suggestions and worried whether they were still alive. Cincy reader Andy Collins quelled my fears: "We Bengals fans are still here. We just don't care anymore." Oh.
Ask a Redskins fan about the Bengals and how good they think that person thinks the Bengals are. I guarantee you, you will either get flipped off or cursed at.
There are five open secrets in the NFL right now.
Not to turn into a 9th grade English teacher here on Bill here, but there is no such thing as "open secret" just like there is no such thing as being a "born again virgin." Sorry, it doesn't happen that way.
Romeo Crennel is getting fired after the season. Like, right after it ends. Quite possibly as he's walking off the field in Week 17. They might not even let him get into the locker room; they might just have his stuff waiting outside in a box.
Seriously with Romeo Crennel and Charlie Weis' records as head coaches, shouldn't someone be looking at Josh McDaniels with a little bit of hesitation? Just a little bit?
So here's my question: Why not do it right now? Why was the decision made that it's OK to fire your coach within the first two months of the season, but after that, you have to let him suck the life out of your players and your fan base until the bitter end, no matter how depressing those last few weeks might be? Couldn't the Browns have fun with this? Why not let Browns legend Jim Brown coach the team these last two weeks? Or LeBron? Or Grady Sizemore? Or make Willie McGinest the player-coach? Or, even better, replace Crennel with Art Shell and see whether anyone notices?
My guess would be the reason they don't do this is because none of these people (except Art Shell) have coached a football team before and the team does not want to make a mockery of the coaching process and the team. What coach in his right mind is going to want to be hired by an organization that let Jim Brown or Grady Sizemore coach the team? Bill knocks Al Davis all the time but this is an idea that Davis would actually think of and implement and now Bill jokingly/non jokingly, I can't always tell, suggests it.
Here's my wild theory: The Patriots will franchise Matt Cassel in fear that Tom Brady might not make it back in time for the 2009 season. By mid-July, when it becomes clear Brady is fine, Cassel quietly will go on the market … and, of course, the Niners will be sitting there waiting for him. As soon as Cassel becomes available, San Fran will toss the Pats a 2010 No. 1 and a 2011 No. 2, then rip up his contract and give him something like $55 million for seven years with a $24 million signing bonus. Everybody wins.
Believe it or not, I have nothing against Matt Cassel but I definitely would not do this if I were the San Francisco Niners. Ever...which means they are probably going to do this. For once, Bill is right about what is going to happen and the Patriots are going to get a ton of draft picks or a high draft pick because they already have a fantastic QB. The Patriots are actually geniuses when they do things like this, which makes me dislike them more. If this happens, I can't wait until my favorite team plays the NFC West again, there won't be a .500 team in that division in two years.
Something to watch for, my gambling friends: The Saints are done. They're out.
Yep, they still scare me though.
Then the Saints finish the season with a home game against the Panthers that will mean nothing to Carolina because its playoff seed gets decided this Sunday night (either it's No. 1 or No. 2).
Simmonsologists know that Bill has to have at least one bit of information completely wrong when it comes to the NFC/any division that Patriots are not in. The Saints game could mean absolutely everything to Carolina in two weeks. Ignore completely what Bill just said, gamblers because if the Panthers lose this weekend, and the Cowboys, Bucs, and Falcons all win, the Panthers will miss the playoffs on conference record if they lose to the Saints in Week 17 and those three teams all win again (the Cowboys play the Eagles while the Bucs play the Lions and the Bucs play the Raiders...those are three easy win games). In summary, if that situation occurs the Panthers have to win against the Saints or will not make the playoffs as a 11-5 team, despite one victory against the Giants this weekend could get them homefield advantage throughout the playoffs. Trust me, I know these things. Bill is wrong, I am right.
(I want to know from my reader(s), has there ever been a situation one of your teams has been in where if they lose one game they could miss the playoffs entirely, but if they win that game, they get homefield advantage throughout the playoffs? Not to sound like Bill Simmons, but is this unprecedented? No one cares about my personal life but let's just say if the Giants beat my favorite team (fine, its the fucking Panthers if no one has figured that out), a certain person who lives with me will receive a phone call potentially from her father who will be bragging, potentially, followed by me immediately regretting grabbing the phone, potentially, and words could follow.)
Just know that if a gutty 11-5 Pats team is forced to sit out the playoffs because NFL rules demand that one of these two crappy AFC West teams be included, I'm sending a special homemade batch of holiday turd egg nog to the NFL offices with the note "ATTN: Roger Goodell." Damn it all.
Followed by a homemade batch sent by me if Arizona makes it and my favorite team does not. Though I have vowed not to bitch because it is the rules, it still would really, really suck...especially since they beat the Cardinals.
You might remember that I made Tarvaris Jackson's replica jersey my 48th-worst NFL gift last week. When he threw for four touchdowns against the Cards on Sunday, I braced myself for a slew of "Ha ha you suck, Tarvaris rules!" e-mails from the Minnesota area. Nope. I didn't get a single one. Now what does THAT tell you?
That tells me you are lying. At least one person had to email that you suck to you. I don't believe this at all.
This could also could tell me what I actually suspect, that most people read your column to dissect it with sarcasm, like I am doing, and don't actually read it and care about what you write.
(My favorite headline of the week: "JACKSON? FREROTTE? THE INTRIGUE BUILDS." Um … it does? Should I move to the edge of my seat just so I don't feel left out? I've watched "Scooby Doo" episodes with my daughter that had more building intrigue than Jackson versus Frerotte. I'm not kidding.
I never knew Bill Simmons had offspring! Why does not ever mention this? Where does he live again, isn't it Colorado or is it Texas? I need to have him mention these things more often so I feel like I know him better.
What ever happened to Bill saying he would never mention his family in his columns? I have no proof he ever said it, but I do remember it pretty well for some reason.
Remember when Richard Dreyfuss was scuba diving in "Jaws," and he was looking through a hole in a sunken boat and a waterlogged head floated in front of him? The face the waterlogged head had … that's what parents look like after they have twins. For like three years. Anyway, I'm not buying the McNabb twins theory. Sorry.
Ooooo...an interesting discussion about parents who have twins. The only way to have me want Bill to talk more about his favorite Boston teams!
Do you think Bill's page views are rising or falling? I honestly have to think they are falling at this point. It seems Bill is becoming more angst filled and ESPN seems to care about him less, leading me to believe Bill is blaming the fall on ESPN, while they don't give a shit. I blame the decline in my page views on poor writing on my part. I take responsibility in that way.
(Speaking of T.O., I wrote in September that Chad Johnson had reached the Saturation Zone for me -- in other words, they could show footage of him doing ANYTHING on "SportsCenter" -- screaming at his coach, yelling at his teammates, wearing a weird outfit, fighting a walrus, getting caught on a security camera doing lines with Amy Winehouse -- and I just wouldn't care. I wouldn't be interested. I wouldn't want to talk about it. I just want him to go away and never come back. Three months later, I have reached the same point with Owens. And Michael Phelps, you're getting there -- even Ronald Miller handled being cool better. Take a deep breath, do some laps, get a hold of yourself, dip out of the limelight for a few weeks and try to find a girlfriend who isn't a Vegas strip-club waitress with a tattoo on her back bigger than your eight gold medals. That's my advice.)
For the second time this year, I agree with Bill on this one. I need more people on the "Michael Phelps is a douchebag" bandwagon. Look at him, how he acts, and pretty much everything about him, including listening to Eminem as he gets ready to swim, and it all adds up for me. He is a great swimmer, but also a Grade A douchebag.
7. Baltimore Ravens Total points scored in their past four games against the Colts, Titans, Steelers and Giants: 33.
Number of times Joe Flacco has topped 200 yards passing this season: four.
Number of 90-yard days by a Ravens running back this season: three.
Number of 100-yard receiving days by a Ravens receiver this season: three.
(See where I'm going with this?)
Yet, he ranks them #7 on his power poll. This tells me what I always have thought: power polls are completely and utterly useless...but a great way to build debate and pass on actually writing a good weekly column. I am surprised Rick Reilly has not tried one yet.
4. New York Giants
Dear Giants fans,
Did you notice that Eli suddenly stinks? This is what happens when an ordinary QB doesn't have the benefit of throwing against an eight-man front that's stacking the line while his best wide receiver is getting double-covered. Keep looking up -- you don't want him landing on you at 540 mph as he finishes his fall back to earth. Also, keep telling yourself that your seventh-string wide receiver catching a pseudo-Hail Mary off the top of his helmet with your season on the line wasn't the single luckiest play in sports history. In fact, David Tyree himself just admitted this to me. I'm writing this at an IHOP right now, and he just brought me a plate of blueberry pancakes. Did you know you can work at IHOP when you're on injured reserve? Apparently so. I have to go because I'm going to throw a cannister of boysenberry syrup at him as hard as I can and see whether he catches it off his head. Worst of luck in the playoffs.
Sincerely,
Bitter Guy
I am not going to even bring up the New England Patriots here. I am wondering if Bill's bitterness will ever end over this? Lucky plays happen all the time and that was just one catch in the game, granted it was crucial, but how about Plaxico Burress being wide open for the touchdown, was that luck also? Or the Giants defense shutting down the Patriots offense after seeing them a second time. Was that luck?
Now, we're like five weeks away from a solid hour of awkwardness at Lucas' booth with questions like, "Are you afraid to joke with Steve in the locker room because he might punch you?" and "Do you ever get the urge to just walk over to Steve's locker and punch him in the face to get him back?" from troublemaking bloggers and radio personalities dressed in goofy football jerseys.
Hypocrite alert! What trouble about making bloggers and radio personalities? Wasn't Bill the same person bragging a few years ago when he and Kimmel played a joke on John Kasay at the Super Bowl that pissed him off? It's right here. Funny, how easy it is to forget you did the exact same thing you are up on your high horse saying others would do.
As usual, when Bill Simmons makes a joke or does something it is the funniest thing in the history of the world, but when others do it, he feels the need to take cheap shots at people as troublemakers or tries to demean them in some other fashion.
Luck is a major part of football, whether we like to admit it or not … but at the same time, you make your own luck to a certain degree.
Says the guy who wrote "jokingly" the Giants were lucky in the Super Bowl last year five paragraphs ago.
I wish Bill Simmons would write a column everyday, my life would be so much more full of joy and I would be much happier with my choices of bad journalism to mock. That's what I want for Christmas.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
8 comments Ten Things I Think I Think Peter King Has Not Thought Of: Tuesday Edition
I am not planning on doing my "Ten Things I Think..." on every Tuesday but today feels like a great day to do it again and I honestly enjoy doing it. My brain is very scattered and I have a lot to say about a lot of things and this lets me do it. So if you hate it, I am sorry.
1. Woody Paige is being tongue in cheek. Maybe. I thought that originally and then I read the entire article and found it did not seem like he really was. Woody seems to think the Broncos should be lauded for currently winning their division by three games. They are 7-5 and are the AFC West version of the Arizona Cardinals. They are in a weak division and they have an above average team. Congratulations should not be in order for this.
What do the New York Giants (11-1), the Tennessee Titans (11-1), the Arizona Cardinals (7-5) and the Denver Broncos (7-5) have in common?
They are the four most dominant division leaders in the NFL.
I had a friend in graduate school who described the girls at my graduate school in this way, and no I am not trying to be Bill Simmons, this actually has a point.
"These girls are at best a bunch of 5's and 6's walking around the campus like they are 10's. What happens anytime we go out? They immediately become the 5's and 6's who have to go up against the 10's and they get pissy and leave the bar to go home and watch Sex and the City re- runs on TBS." Not very insightful at all but the Broncos are a team that is a six on a scale of 1 to 10. There is really no reason to call them dominant.
Win out and they'll be 11-5, my preseason prediction. Lose out, and they will be below .500. If the Broncos win two, the Chargers (4-8) definitely will be shut out of the playoffs. Win one, and that game in San Diego will be significant. The division-common opponents-conference records tiebreakers would basically be even (based on results until now). Winner take all.
When your closest division rival is 4-8 and you are actually worried they may catch you, your team does not deserve to make the playoffs. I know these are the rules but if I were Woody Paige I would be embarrassed to write about this scenario.
Speaking of Woody Paige and bad journalism, if you go along the right side of his archive and see how many times he has dumped on the Broncos or said Mike Shanahan should be fired, you have to wonder how he can just jump right on the bandwagon like he seems to be doing in this column. Journalists are supposed to be neutral observers who reports what they see and use what little insight they may have to inform the reader, but it is disconcerting to read how Woody seems to think the Broncos go from a good team to a bad team from week to week.
2. I was watching part of Monday Night Football last night and when they were previewing next week's Tampa Bay v. Carolina game, Mike Tirico mentioned both teams have a 9-3 record and said, "I guess that is what you get when you draw the AFC West," and then Tony Kornheiser laughed. This is bad journalism and shows how little research these assholes really do.
Based on the season ending today, Tampa Bay has played or will play 6 games against playoff teams, which does not include a game against Dallas who could make the playoffs easily.
Carolina has played or will play 8 games against playoff teams.
I am not saying these are bad ass tough schedules or anything of the like but Carolina and Tampa Bay are in a division where the third place team has an 8-4 record in Atlanta. Just like the case of the Broncos, a team's record is pretty much what decides whether that team gets in the playoffs or not, regardless of who these teams have played. The AFC West stinks, I would agree with that, but I would hate to have a team in the NFC South division right now that is my favorite because it is very competitive no matter who they play out of the division.
3. Bob Klapisch doesn't seem to think the Mets have gotten their money's worth with Pedro.
Now, 32 wins and no world championships later, it's fair to ask: Was Pedro really worth the money? Not if the Mets are honest with themselves. Despite the projected success, Martinez broke down just as the Red Sox predicted after 2005 and was unable to deliver a single pennant, let alone a Series ring.
If anyone remembers correctly the Red Sox made Pedro a three year deal worth about $38 million and the general consensus was that a four year deal was one year too much for Pedro. If Pedro can't perform well in a contract year, he is never going to perform well. That's just a note to other teams in the MLB.
The Red Sox worried about his durability -- his shoulder, in particular -- hesitating just long enough to allow the Mets the chance to both overpay and over-commit.
The Mets actually knew they were overpaying and overcommitting to Pedro, so I am not sure how they could have expected to get the value out of Pedro they paid for.
Plucking away Martinez was an enormous public-relations coup, but today the Mets' hierarchy admits Pedro fell short of their expectations. "We thought we'd get three [good] years from him," one senior official said. "Turns out we got 2½."
What I don't get is why the Mets did not sign him to a three year deal for a larger yearly amount and try to forgo a fourth year on the contract? They clearly expected him to pitch well for three years so offer him the contract for that length, if he accepts great, if he does not accept then they could have signed Derek Lowe, who actually outperformed Pedro over the four year span.
This is why the Mets are constantly in second place in the NL East, they try to get public relations coups rather than signing players who are actually going to help the team.
If Martinez hadn't given the Mets instant credibility by taking his career to Shea, Beltran -- and later Billy Wagner and Johan Santana -- would never have ended up as Mets.
Maybe this is true but I find it hard to believe these players would have turned down going to the Mets because Pedro Martinez is not there. It's not like Santana, Beltran and Wagner were only looking to play for the same team as Pedro Martinez.
Indeed, no one got close to the seven-year, $119 million deal the Mets dropped in front of Beltran. But even after he was entering the final round of negotiations, Beltran still wasn't sold; agent Scott Boras secretly told the Yankees the center fielder would accept less money if the Bombers would make an offer.
So apparently the last sentence of this column was a complete lie. What kind of writing is this? Bob writes one sentence and then contradicts it with the next sentence. It's like he has multiple personalities.
You couldn't blame the Wilpons for revisiting Pedro's $53 million contract and asking themselves: Where did the money go?
Considering the Mets admit they overpaid and overcommitted to Pedro, they got exactly what they bargained for when they signed him. Why would you write questions and then answer them or contradict them? That's not writing a column, that is insanity.
4. Jemele Hill talks about charm school for athletes. Usually when Jemele writes the nation mourns the loss of intelligent and cohesive writing. This week the nation falls asleep due to boredom.
And so on. Goolsby and chef Robert Hewitt put them through a dining exercise. They practiced table manners through a three-course meal. They learned the different forks, which wines go with which foods and that if they're having a bad experience at a restaurant, they should talk to the manager privately instead of causing a disturbance.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZz..............................................
When the five hours were up, the rookies couldn't say they hadn't received a complete education. They practiced writing thank-you notes to Lions owner William Clay Ford. They practiced making proper introductions and shaking hands: Lock the V of your hand with the other person's. Wrap the hand and thumb. Squeeze. Pump.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..............
You might be thinking the winless Lions should have been studying film instead of salad forks, coverages instead of personal stationary. But consider the bigger picture. Today's professional athlete is under a lot of pressure to perform because he's representing billion-dollar corporations 24 hours a day.
Fantastic point Jemele! Next year instead of being the poorly behaved athletes who exhibit poor performance on the field and a lack of skills they currently are, they will be well behaved ex-athletes who work at Foot Locker.
I understand the premise but many of these rookies are not going to be on a roster in a few years and the only billion dollar corporation Gosder Cherilus is going to be representing in the future is Wal-Mart when he begins his job as a greeter at the age of 34 when he has blown through his millions. Gosder Cherilus sucks and the Lions do too.
I am surprised dumbass Jemele Hill did not call the article "Such Well Behaved Lions."
5. David Schoenfield, whose picture looks like he should get his ass kicked immediately and his Dunk-a-roos stolen at lunch, grades Scott Boras' free agent clients of the past.
He gave grades on a scale of 1-5 Scott Boras heads. How fucking creative! Now give me your lunch.
He gives Kevin Brown's deal two Boras heads and A Rod's deal two Boras heads. Really I have nothing else to add, other than the fact he thinks the Dodgers and the Yankees have gotten the same return on their free agent contracts with Kevin Brown and Alex Rodriguez.
The final tally: Umm, yeah … maybe a little pitching would have been nice. The Rangers have had one winning season in the eight years since the original signing and were so desperate to trade him they actually paid a portion of his Yankees salary. Despite A-Rod's productivity, the size of the deal proved disastrous.
You can't knock A Rod's Boras heads down because of the lack of pitching for the Rangers. Sure they could have used some pitching instead of hitting, but Alex Rodriguez was voted once as MVP with the Rangers and once as MVP with the Yankees. He got paid like the best player in the league and he played like it.
The fact neither team had any good pitching was not A Rod's fault. He also probably accounted for tons of money in merchandising and ticket sales. Why is everyone so down on A Rod?
He gave Andruw Jones' 2001 signing with the Braves three Boras heads despite the fact Scott Boras had nothing to do with the negotiation and the Braves were able to secure one of the best hitting and fielding centerfielders in MLB at below market price. Then he gives the signing of Beltran for $17 million per year three Boras heads. I think if you looked it up, which I did not, Jones probably performed at the same level as Beltran over the length of the contract...and clearly Jones was a better centerfielder.
I realize these are all objective but I love arguing with stupid measurements like this. They mean nothing, yet somehow some editor greenlights an article about it.
6. I have no real problem with the BCS mess. I know everyone likes a nice happy ending with no loose ends and one true champion but it's not going to happen with the current system. Everyone needs to just accept this.
I don't know what it says about the games that are played during the year when Texas beat Oklahoma on a neutral field and yet Oklahoma is still seen as a better team by the BCS computers and the voters. I have heard people say that game was earlier in the year and Oklahoma has proven themselves to be a better team than when these teams played originally. Maybe, but if you can discount early season losses then what about Florida or USC? They lost early in the year and now are clearly better teams than they were then. Why don't they get a shot at the national championship? It seems the current system does dilute the outcome of early season games.
I don't think a playoff is ever going to happen and I really don't know how it could be implemented correctly either. There is just too much money in the BCS and it will always create interest in college football, regardless of negative or positive press, college football always gets coverage.
My biggest beefs are the one month wait for the championship games and the fact all one loss teams that lost early in the year are not considered for the National Championship based on the principle Oklahoma leapfrogged Texas.
7. For fear of agreeing with Gregg Doyel, this would help decide which team is better.
The problem isn't the BCS system that would rate the Sooners ahead of the Longhorns, even by a margin as slim as 45-35 the .0128 that separates them in the BCS rankings.
Tell me, please, what Missouri has done to earn its place in the Big 12 Championship Game. Won the Big 12 North?
I do have to agree another game between the teams with the best BCS rankings, despite division separation, would help decide whether Oklahoma or Texas deserved to be in the National Championship game. They are the two best teams in the Big 12 and another game would give one team two losses and make the decision easier as to who the best team is.
A "conference championship game" that doesn't pit the best two teams in the conference. Brilliant innovation.
I have to agree. Missouri is very weak, though if they beat Oklahoma, that will decide Texas was the better team definitely...and Texas did beat Texas Tech, so they would deserve it.
I have a headache.
8. Michael Phelps is Sportsman of the Year. I don't care what anyone says, I still think he looks like a douchebag. I laugh a little bit at the thought of him pumping himself up to the tunes of Eminem and Lil' Wayne...simply because he looks like the goofiest, whitest guy in the world. I look at him and think, now THIS is a guy who will hit on your girlfriend at a bar and then try to start a fight with you, but only long enough for his security to pull him away.
9. This is the funniest thing I have read on Foxsports.com in a while. I can not look at Chris Fowler in the same way again. We all know Jason Whitlock has a bone to pick with ESPN but this is an absolute classic.
10. Today's UNC Tar Heels fan note of the day: Same guy as last week came in my office yesterday and asked if I had seen UNC defeat UNC-Asheville, and said I did not. He described it in great detail to me, which I did not appreciate, and was bragging that UNC had their scrubs in the game at the beginning of the second half. Here's the conversation from there:
(Me) "They are #1 in the country, so they should therefore beat every single team in the country. You should expect this type of performance."
(Man I work with) "I don't think they are #1 in the country really, I don't know how they came about."
(Me) "A team of experts, coaches and sportswriters all agree UNC is the best team in the country. Don't lower expectations for your team pretending they are just some 'little team that could' when you have 7 players that could play in the NBA on the roster."
(Man I work with) "I don't know about that." ---then he left the room and this is why I have no friends.
You can't come bragging about how great your team is and then try to backtrack and lower expectations immediately after that. UNC should not lose a game this year, they are that good.
1. Woody Paige is being tongue in cheek. Maybe. I thought that originally and then I read the entire article and found it did not seem like he really was. Woody seems to think the Broncos should be lauded for currently winning their division by three games. They are 7-5 and are the AFC West version of the Arizona Cardinals. They are in a weak division and they have an above average team. Congratulations should not be in order for this.
What do the New York Giants (11-1), the Tennessee Titans (11-1), the Arizona Cardinals (7-5) and the Denver Broncos (7-5) have in common?
They are the four most dominant division leaders in the NFL.
I had a friend in graduate school who described the girls at my graduate school in this way, and no I am not trying to be Bill Simmons, this actually has a point.
"These girls are at best a bunch of 5's and 6's walking around the campus like they are 10's. What happens anytime we go out? They immediately become the 5's and 6's who have to go up against the 10's and they get pissy and leave the bar to go home and watch Sex and the City re- runs on TBS." Not very insightful at all but the Broncos are a team that is a six on a scale of 1 to 10. There is really no reason to call them dominant.
Win out and they'll be 11-5, my preseason prediction. Lose out, and they will be below .500. If the Broncos win two, the Chargers (4-8) definitely will be shut out of the playoffs. Win one, and that game in San Diego will be significant. The division-common opponents-conference records tiebreakers would basically be even (based on results until now). Winner take all.
When your closest division rival is 4-8 and you are actually worried they may catch you, your team does not deserve to make the playoffs. I know these are the rules but if I were Woody Paige I would be embarrassed to write about this scenario.
Speaking of Woody Paige and bad journalism, if you go along the right side of his archive and see how many times he has dumped on the Broncos or said Mike Shanahan should be fired, you have to wonder how he can just jump right on the bandwagon like he seems to be doing in this column. Journalists are supposed to be neutral observers who reports what they see and use what little insight they may have to inform the reader, but it is disconcerting to read how Woody seems to think the Broncos go from a good team to a bad team from week to week.
2. I was watching part of Monday Night Football last night and when they were previewing next week's Tampa Bay v. Carolina game, Mike Tirico mentioned both teams have a 9-3 record and said, "I guess that is what you get when you draw the AFC West," and then Tony Kornheiser laughed. This is bad journalism and shows how little research these assholes really do.
Based on the season ending today, Tampa Bay has played or will play 6 games against playoff teams, which does not include a game against Dallas who could make the playoffs easily.
Carolina has played or will play 8 games against playoff teams.
I am not saying these are bad ass tough schedules or anything of the like but Carolina and Tampa Bay are in a division where the third place team has an 8-4 record in Atlanta. Just like the case of the Broncos, a team's record is pretty much what decides whether that team gets in the playoffs or not, regardless of who these teams have played. The AFC West stinks, I would agree with that, but I would hate to have a team in the NFC South division right now that is my favorite because it is very competitive no matter who they play out of the division.
3. Bob Klapisch doesn't seem to think the Mets have gotten their money's worth with Pedro.
Now, 32 wins and no world championships later, it's fair to ask: Was Pedro really worth the money? Not if the Mets are honest with themselves. Despite the projected success, Martinez broke down just as the Red Sox predicted after 2005 and was unable to deliver a single pennant, let alone a Series ring.
If anyone remembers correctly the Red Sox made Pedro a three year deal worth about $38 million and the general consensus was that a four year deal was one year too much for Pedro. If Pedro can't perform well in a contract year, he is never going to perform well. That's just a note to other teams in the MLB.
The Red Sox worried about his durability -- his shoulder, in particular -- hesitating just long enough to allow the Mets the chance to both overpay and over-commit.
The Mets actually knew they were overpaying and overcommitting to Pedro, so I am not sure how they could have expected to get the value out of Pedro they paid for.
Plucking away Martinez was an enormous public-relations coup, but today the Mets' hierarchy admits Pedro fell short of their expectations. "We thought we'd get three [good] years from him," one senior official said. "Turns out we got 2½."
What I don't get is why the Mets did not sign him to a three year deal for a larger yearly amount and try to forgo a fourth year on the contract? They clearly expected him to pitch well for three years so offer him the contract for that length, if he accepts great, if he does not accept then they could have signed Derek Lowe, who actually outperformed Pedro over the four year span.
This is why the Mets are constantly in second place in the NL East, they try to get public relations coups rather than signing players who are actually going to help the team.
If Martinez hadn't given the Mets instant credibility by taking his career to Shea, Beltran -- and later Billy Wagner and Johan Santana -- would never have ended up as Mets.
Maybe this is true but I find it hard to believe these players would have turned down going to the Mets because Pedro Martinez is not there. It's not like Santana, Beltran and Wagner were only looking to play for the same team as Pedro Martinez.
Indeed, no one got close to the seven-year, $119 million deal the Mets dropped in front of Beltran. But even after he was entering the final round of negotiations, Beltran still wasn't sold; agent Scott Boras secretly told the Yankees the center fielder would accept less money if the Bombers would make an offer.
So apparently the last sentence of this column was a complete lie. What kind of writing is this? Bob writes one sentence and then contradicts it with the next sentence. It's like he has multiple personalities.
You couldn't blame the Wilpons for revisiting Pedro's $53 million contract and asking themselves: Where did the money go?
Considering the Mets admit they overpaid and overcommitted to Pedro, they got exactly what they bargained for when they signed him. Why would you write questions and then answer them or contradict them? That's not writing a column, that is insanity.
4. Jemele Hill talks about charm school for athletes. Usually when Jemele writes the nation mourns the loss of intelligent and cohesive writing. This week the nation falls asleep due to boredom.
And so on. Goolsby and chef Robert Hewitt put them through a dining exercise. They practiced table manners through a three-course meal. They learned the different forks, which wines go with which foods and that if they're having a bad experience at a restaurant, they should talk to the manager privately instead of causing a disturbance.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZz..............................................
When the five hours were up, the rookies couldn't say they hadn't received a complete education. They practiced writing thank-you notes to Lions owner William Clay Ford. They practiced making proper introductions and shaking hands: Lock the V of your hand with the other person's. Wrap the hand and thumb. Squeeze. Pump.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..............
You might be thinking the winless Lions should have been studying film instead of salad forks, coverages instead of personal stationary. But consider the bigger picture. Today's professional athlete is under a lot of pressure to perform because he's representing billion-dollar corporations 24 hours a day.
Fantastic point Jemele! Next year instead of being the poorly behaved athletes who exhibit poor performance on the field and a lack of skills they currently are, they will be well behaved ex-athletes who work at Foot Locker.
I understand the premise but many of these rookies are not going to be on a roster in a few years and the only billion dollar corporation Gosder Cherilus is going to be representing in the future is Wal-Mart when he begins his job as a greeter at the age of 34 when he has blown through his millions. Gosder Cherilus sucks and the Lions do too.
I am surprised dumbass Jemele Hill did not call the article "Such Well Behaved Lions."
5. David Schoenfield, whose picture looks like he should get his ass kicked immediately and his Dunk-a-roos stolen at lunch, grades Scott Boras' free agent clients of the past.
He gave grades on a scale of 1-5 Scott Boras heads. How fucking creative! Now give me your lunch.
He gives Kevin Brown's deal two Boras heads and A Rod's deal two Boras heads. Really I have nothing else to add, other than the fact he thinks the Dodgers and the Yankees have gotten the same return on their free agent contracts with Kevin Brown and Alex Rodriguez.
The final tally: Umm, yeah … maybe a little pitching would have been nice. The Rangers have had one winning season in the eight years since the original signing and were so desperate to trade him they actually paid a portion of his Yankees salary. Despite A-Rod's productivity, the size of the deal proved disastrous.
You can't knock A Rod's Boras heads down because of the lack of pitching for the Rangers. Sure they could have used some pitching instead of hitting, but Alex Rodriguez was voted once as MVP with the Rangers and once as MVP with the Yankees. He got paid like the best player in the league and he played like it.
The fact neither team had any good pitching was not A Rod's fault. He also probably accounted for tons of money in merchandising and ticket sales. Why is everyone so down on A Rod?
He gave Andruw Jones' 2001 signing with the Braves three Boras heads despite the fact Scott Boras had nothing to do with the negotiation and the Braves were able to secure one of the best hitting and fielding centerfielders in MLB at below market price. Then he gives the signing of Beltran for $17 million per year three Boras heads. I think if you looked it up, which I did not, Jones probably performed at the same level as Beltran over the length of the contract...and clearly Jones was a better centerfielder.
I realize these are all objective but I love arguing with stupid measurements like this. They mean nothing, yet somehow some editor greenlights an article about it.
6. I have no real problem with the BCS mess. I know everyone likes a nice happy ending with no loose ends and one true champion but it's not going to happen with the current system. Everyone needs to just accept this.
I don't know what it says about the games that are played during the year when Texas beat Oklahoma on a neutral field and yet Oklahoma is still seen as a better team by the BCS computers and the voters. I have heard people say that game was earlier in the year and Oklahoma has proven themselves to be a better team than when these teams played originally. Maybe, but if you can discount early season losses then what about Florida or USC? They lost early in the year and now are clearly better teams than they were then. Why don't they get a shot at the national championship? It seems the current system does dilute the outcome of early season games.
I don't think a playoff is ever going to happen and I really don't know how it could be implemented correctly either. There is just too much money in the BCS and it will always create interest in college football, regardless of negative or positive press, college football always gets coverage.
My biggest beefs are the one month wait for the championship games and the fact all one loss teams that lost early in the year are not considered for the National Championship based on the principle Oklahoma leapfrogged Texas.
7. For fear of agreeing with Gregg Doyel, this would help decide which team is better.
The problem isn't the BCS system that would rate the Sooners ahead of the Longhorns, even by a margin as slim as 45-35 the .0128 that separates them in the BCS rankings.
Tell me, please, what Missouri has done to earn its place in the Big 12 Championship Game. Won the Big 12 North?
I do have to agree another game between the teams with the best BCS rankings, despite division separation, would help decide whether Oklahoma or Texas deserved to be in the National Championship game. They are the two best teams in the Big 12 and another game would give one team two losses and make the decision easier as to who the best team is.
A "conference championship game" that doesn't pit the best two teams in the conference. Brilliant innovation.
I have to agree. Missouri is very weak, though if they beat Oklahoma, that will decide Texas was the better team definitely...and Texas did beat Texas Tech, so they would deserve it.
I have a headache.
8. Michael Phelps is Sportsman of the Year. I don't care what anyone says, I still think he looks like a douchebag. I laugh a little bit at the thought of him pumping himself up to the tunes of Eminem and Lil' Wayne...simply because he looks like the goofiest, whitest guy in the world. I look at him and think, now THIS is a guy who will hit on your girlfriend at a bar and then try to start a fight with you, but only long enough for his security to pull him away.
9. This is the funniest thing I have read on Foxsports.com in a while. I can not look at Chris Fowler in the same way again. We all know Jason Whitlock has a bone to pick with ESPN but this is an absolute classic.
10. Today's UNC Tar Heels fan note of the day: Same guy as last week came in my office yesterday and asked if I had seen UNC defeat UNC-Asheville, and said I did not. He described it in great detail to me, which I did not appreciate, and was bragging that UNC had their scrubs in the game at the beginning of the second half. Here's the conversation from there:
(Me) "They are #1 in the country, so they should therefore beat every single team in the country. You should expect this type of performance."
(Man I work with) "I don't think they are #1 in the country really, I don't know how they came about."
(Me) "A team of experts, coaches and sportswriters all agree UNC is the best team in the country. Don't lower expectations for your team pretending they are just some 'little team that could' when you have 7 players that could play in the NBA on the roster."
(Man I work with) "I don't know about that." ---then he left the room and this is why I have no friends.
You can't come bragging about how great your team is and then try to backtrack and lower expectations immediately after that. UNC should not lose a game this year, they are that good.
Friday, September 19, 2008
0 comments Bill "Banana Hammock Underwear" Simmons' Fantasy Blowout
I play fantasy sports and enjoy them a whole lot. I am a little scared though by people like Bill Simmons who pay more attention to fantasy sports than the real sports. I really enjoy fantasy sports but they are just a sidetrack to the real thing for me and I don't get into them to write a 10,000 word essay on them. Bill Simmons does.
Simmons' fantasy dream game!
I get told constantly that I pay more attention to my favorite teams than normal fans do, and that is true, I try to know everything about the sports I am watching. I don't get overly wrapped up in fantasy sports and I worry about those that do. I worry about Bill Simmons.
Monday's Eagles-Cowboys game was the highest-rated telecast in cable history.
Both have large fan bases and have moderately successful teams that play in the same division, it is a bit of a shock to me as well, but that is how it turned out.
I went to sleep that night believing "Dallas 41, Philly 37" was the most influential fantasy game ever played.
Seriously, get a fucking life. Rather than going to bed thinking what a great game, Dallas does have a great team, or Philly almost pulled one out, Bill Simmons thought about fantasy sports.
This is my great worry with where fantasy sports are going, where they are going to become bigger than the sport itself. This column causes me to worry even more. I take fantasy sports seriously on a scale of 1-10 at a 7, it is the 10s the really cause me to worry.
When Westbrook (irony alert!) scored right after Jackson's boner, that two-play sequence ended up swinging two of the five matchups in my West Coast league.
Ironic because he knelt down last year...I guess. I had no problem with Westbrook falling down on the one yard line last year because he wanted to make sure his team won a REAL football game and that is how it should be, in my opinion.
It startles me that he knows when one play, even as widely discussed as that one, affects several football teams. I pay attention to my team and what happens to it, I ignore everyone else. Maybe I am alone on this.
You know what has swung my matchups the past couple weeks in my leagues? Carson Palmer, Larry Johnson, and T.J. Housemedhahahzhahahah putting up 4 points a week combined. Me starting Greg Olson because the Panthers can't cover a tight end, except at a strip club, and then watching him get negative fantasy points. That is what really swung my matchup.
When the play happened, I started an e-mail chain with my friends at 9:53 p.m. ET:
SUBJECT HEADING: If I lose by 3 because of DeSean Jackson …
BODY: Would that be the worst loss in the history of our league?
I bet his friends hate him. Everything always has to be the greatest ever, the worst loss ever, the biggest blowout ever. He is not satisfied with sitting down and drinking a fruity little drink, you know he likes them, and enjoying some football.
Everyone disagreed, pointing out that my season was already cooked. After all, I lost my first-round pick, Tom Brady, in eight minutes, thanks to Sammy Morris going low on a 224-pound defensive back.
This was the real response.
"What the fuck are you talking about Bill? It is one game, if you did not draft Patriots every single year, then maybe you would not have this problem. Please stop emailing me late at night like that, it makes my Blackberry go off at 12:30am. I know your wife does not care but my wife and I have to be up in the morning to go to work and make sure the kids eat before they go to school. You email me, the Blackberry goes off, the wife wakes up, the baby hears the wife, and the next thing you know I am walking around the house shushing a child because you had to make a mountain out of a simple football game. Your team sucks anyway, so I am sure this one game did not ruin your year."
Again, it was an extraordinary game.
Two popular teams, Terrell Owens has that feud with Donovan McNabb, and it could help decide the division. Pretty important early season game.
But it wasn't more dramatic or memorable than Baltimore blowing its chance to end New England's undefeated season on a Monday night last December, right?
Absolutely Bill. Nothing in the world was more important than that game. Here is the thing. It was not more dramatic or memorable than that game, but there were more people watching regardless. Unlike you, mortal humans can not tell the future beforehand, so everyone can not know this game is going to be dramatic and memorable before the game is actually played. See? So there is no way more people watched because, as learned afterwards, it was dramatic, it was because more people wanted to watch this game than wanted to watch the Ravens-Patriots game. Do you get it?
The more I thought about it, I decided the fantasy subplots propelled the Philly-Dallas game to its record numbers. That had to be it.
I have a couple Philly defensive players, and two offensive players from both teams, and played a team called "Cowboys" in one of my fantasy leagues this week, which consisted of pretty much the entire Dallas Cowboy roster. I did not watch the game. I doubt the fantasy subplots had anything to do with it.
Maybe you are right though...not really.
My first team was called the Banana Hammocks -- named for me by our commissioner, Camp, who couldn't get over the fact that I refused to wear boxer shorts in college.
If I were Jim, from the tv show "The Office," I would be giving Bill the "Jim is shocked by what was just said and shows you he is by a slight head tilt."
So Bill Simmons is a tighty whitey man? Or does he like banana hammocks? Or man thong underwear? I am afraid he has overshared with the world at this point. I have no personal problem with any of these underwear types, but I have to say this definitely makes Bill beyond uncool that he is admitting this.
(Note: I had reasons. Let's just say I never wanted to be the Levi Johnston of my school.)
You wanted to have a low sperm count? If that is your reason, that is the single worst reason I have ever heard in my life for wearing tighty whiteys. I like how Bill is inferring in this passage he was getting a lot of action in college, so he did not want to get a girl pregnant. Saying this was probably even dumber than admitting his first fantasy team was called the Banana Hammocks. Not by a whole lot though.
For some reason, we totally trusted Camp's scoring, even though he was probably doing it after 12 beers and eight Marlboro Lights.
Last time I checked, which was three years ago last June, Marlboro Lights do not affect one's judgment. 12 beers do though.
When I worked for the Boston Herald in 1995, I pitched a weekly fantasy column to my editors that August; I might as well have been pitching a column about drinking and driving or trying to sleep with underaged girls.
Simmonsologists know that Bill has thought of everything first. We can now add a weekly fantasy column to this list. I don't think the Boston Herald was stupid for not liking the idea of a weekly fantasy column in the paper, fantasy was too underground at that point to generate any readers on the idea and the Internet had not advanced enough to where keeping score was easy.
At least Banana Hammock Simmons knows if he had pitched a column about drinking and driving and sleeping with underage girls, he would not have gotten any of them pregnant due to his underwear selection.
Bill just goes on and on about the impact fantasy football has made on the world in the past five years, which I can't argue with. I can argue with the premise that the Eagles-Cowboys game got such high ratings because of fantasy football. I don't think there is a correlation between two popular teams playing a nationally televised game and people watching with concern over the fantasy stats.
Couple more tidbits in this inoffensive but still very incorrect Bill Simmons column:
Although part of me wonders whether Cassel is the Johnny Doe to Brady's Dirk Diggler -- yeah, we can film a decent porn movie with him, but every game ends with Ricky J impassively looking at the tapes and telling Jack Horner, "It is what it is."
That reference to Boogie Nights is here to remind you the movie is now almost 10 years old. Bill has a good 15-20 years of use in quoting it though.
Courtney Taylor, Logan Payne and Jordan Kent sound more like the gang of bitchy girls on the new "90210" than Hasselbeck's new targets." In a related story, they're 0-2 and look worse than Shannen Doherty in HD.
Ba...da...dum. Please remember you can read this type stuff all week in his columns.
If you made an All-Star team for "Athletes with Latino Names Who Look Like Their Name Should Actually Be Something Like Jimmy Scott or Rick Stevens," would you call it the Jeff Garcia All-Stars or the Anthony Gonzalez All-Stars?
He is making up more team names for his incredibly loyal fans to discuss among themselves and then send to him in an email so they can be just like him.
In a related story, Bill Simmons just made my All Star team for "Columnists Who Try So Hard To Be Hip and Cool but Come Off Like They Are That Creepy Dad Who Wants To Go To The Shins Concert With You Because He Likes The Music But You Have a Feeling He Is Checking Out The Girls."
Gregg Doyel welcomes you Bill.
I'm fascinated by this Phelps-as-a-celebrity thing because he doesn't follow the Ali-Jordan-Mantle-Tiger model even remotely. I mean, would any of those guys have been caught drinking Corona out of a can on live television? What about his awkward SNL appearance? Or all the pictures of him and Hollywood babes, in which he always looks like the little brother of a college sophomore who showed up for a weekend and ended up puking outside the football stadium all night?
This is actually true and funny. I think Michael Phelps looks like a douchebag. Great swimmer, seems like he would be a douche.
I decided San Diego's last two losses had to be the toughest back-to-back defeats in football history.
Well, he did experience it firsthand, so it has to be up there. Well all know if Bill Simmons experiences something firsthand, it automatically makes it an important event.
Hey, here's my theory on Favre's comeback that I've been waiting to spring for two months: I think the retirement was legitimate. He wanted to quit. Then, he was probably running errands for his wife, stopped to buy some groceries, then got chewed out at home because he forgot to buy half and half. And as his wife was yelling at him, he thought to himself, "Wait a second, what did I just do? I could keep playing!"
Those crazy women! I bet that is exactly what happened! Bill should write a sitcom about how men and women don't get along. It would do great!
That's all I can handle for the time being.
Simmons' fantasy dream game!
I get told constantly that I pay more attention to my favorite teams than normal fans do, and that is true, I try to know everything about the sports I am watching. I don't get overly wrapped up in fantasy sports and I worry about those that do. I worry about Bill Simmons.
Monday's Eagles-Cowboys game was the highest-rated telecast in cable history.
Both have large fan bases and have moderately successful teams that play in the same division, it is a bit of a shock to me as well, but that is how it turned out.
I went to sleep that night believing "Dallas 41, Philly 37" was the most influential fantasy game ever played.
Seriously, get a fucking life. Rather than going to bed thinking what a great game, Dallas does have a great team, or Philly almost pulled one out, Bill Simmons thought about fantasy sports.
This is my great worry with where fantasy sports are going, where they are going to become bigger than the sport itself. This column causes me to worry even more. I take fantasy sports seriously on a scale of 1-10 at a 7, it is the 10s the really cause me to worry.
When Westbrook (irony alert!) scored right after Jackson's boner, that two-play sequence ended up swinging two of the five matchups in my West Coast league.
Ironic because he knelt down last year...I guess. I had no problem with Westbrook falling down on the one yard line last year because he wanted to make sure his team won a REAL football game and that is how it should be, in my opinion.
It startles me that he knows when one play, even as widely discussed as that one, affects several football teams. I pay attention to my team and what happens to it, I ignore everyone else. Maybe I am alone on this.
You know what has swung my matchups the past couple weeks in my leagues? Carson Palmer, Larry Johnson, and T.J. Housemedhahahzhahahah putting up 4 points a week combined. Me starting Greg Olson because the Panthers can't cover a tight end, except at a strip club, and then watching him get negative fantasy points. That is what really swung my matchup.
When the play happened, I started an e-mail chain with my friends at 9:53 p.m. ET:
SUBJECT HEADING: If I lose by 3 because of DeSean Jackson …
BODY: Would that be the worst loss in the history of our league?
I bet his friends hate him. Everything always has to be the greatest ever, the worst loss ever, the biggest blowout ever. He is not satisfied with sitting down and drinking a fruity little drink, you know he likes them, and enjoying some football.
Everyone disagreed, pointing out that my season was already cooked. After all, I lost my first-round pick, Tom Brady, in eight minutes, thanks to Sammy Morris going low on a 224-pound defensive back.
This was the real response.
"What the fuck are you talking about Bill? It is one game, if you did not draft Patriots every single year, then maybe you would not have this problem. Please stop emailing me late at night like that, it makes my Blackberry go off at 12:30am. I know your wife does not care but my wife and I have to be up in the morning to go to work and make sure the kids eat before they go to school. You email me, the Blackberry goes off, the wife wakes up, the baby hears the wife, and the next thing you know I am walking around the house shushing a child because you had to make a mountain out of a simple football game. Your team sucks anyway, so I am sure this one game did not ruin your year."
Again, it was an extraordinary game.
Two popular teams, Terrell Owens has that feud with Donovan McNabb, and it could help decide the division. Pretty important early season game.
But it wasn't more dramatic or memorable than Baltimore blowing its chance to end New England's undefeated season on a Monday night last December, right?
Absolutely Bill. Nothing in the world was more important than that game. Here is the thing. It was not more dramatic or memorable than that game, but there were more people watching regardless. Unlike you, mortal humans can not tell the future beforehand, so everyone can not know this game is going to be dramatic and memorable before the game is actually played. See? So there is no way more people watched because, as learned afterwards, it was dramatic, it was because more people wanted to watch this game than wanted to watch the Ravens-Patriots game. Do you get it?
The more I thought about it, I decided the fantasy subplots propelled the Philly-Dallas game to its record numbers. That had to be it.
I have a couple Philly defensive players, and two offensive players from both teams, and played a team called "Cowboys" in one of my fantasy leagues this week, which consisted of pretty much the entire Dallas Cowboy roster. I did not watch the game. I doubt the fantasy subplots had anything to do with it.
Maybe you are right though...not really.
My first team was called the Banana Hammocks -- named for me by our commissioner, Camp, who couldn't get over the fact that I refused to wear boxer shorts in college.
If I were Jim, from the tv show "The Office," I would be giving Bill the "Jim is shocked by what was just said and shows you he is by a slight head tilt."
So Bill Simmons is a tighty whitey man? Or does he like banana hammocks? Or man thong underwear? I am afraid he has overshared with the world at this point. I have no personal problem with any of these underwear types, but I have to say this definitely makes Bill beyond uncool that he is admitting this.
(Note: I had reasons. Let's just say I never wanted to be the Levi Johnston of my school.)
You wanted to have a low sperm count? If that is your reason, that is the single worst reason I have ever heard in my life for wearing tighty whiteys. I like how Bill is inferring in this passage he was getting a lot of action in college, so he did not want to get a girl pregnant. Saying this was probably even dumber than admitting his first fantasy team was called the Banana Hammocks. Not by a whole lot though.
For some reason, we totally trusted Camp's scoring, even though he was probably doing it after 12 beers and eight Marlboro Lights.
Last time I checked, which was three years ago last June, Marlboro Lights do not affect one's judgment. 12 beers do though.
When I worked for the Boston Herald in 1995, I pitched a weekly fantasy column to my editors that August; I might as well have been pitching a column about drinking and driving or trying to sleep with underaged girls.
Simmonsologists know that Bill has thought of everything first. We can now add a weekly fantasy column to this list. I don't think the Boston Herald was stupid for not liking the idea of a weekly fantasy column in the paper, fantasy was too underground at that point to generate any readers on the idea and the Internet had not advanced enough to where keeping score was easy.
At least Banana Hammock Simmons knows if he had pitched a column about drinking and driving and sleeping with underage girls, he would not have gotten any of them pregnant due to his underwear selection.
Bill just goes on and on about the impact fantasy football has made on the world in the past five years, which I can't argue with. I can argue with the premise that the Eagles-Cowboys game got such high ratings because of fantasy football. I don't think there is a correlation between two popular teams playing a nationally televised game and people watching with concern over the fantasy stats.
Couple more tidbits in this inoffensive but still very incorrect Bill Simmons column:
Although part of me wonders whether Cassel is the Johnny Doe to Brady's Dirk Diggler -- yeah, we can film a decent porn movie with him, but every game ends with Ricky J impassively looking at the tapes and telling Jack Horner, "It is what it is."
That reference to Boogie Nights is here to remind you the movie is now almost 10 years old. Bill has a good 15-20 years of use in quoting it though.
Courtney Taylor, Logan Payne and Jordan Kent sound more like the gang of bitchy girls on the new "90210" than Hasselbeck's new targets." In a related story, they're 0-2 and look worse than Shannen Doherty in HD.
Ba...da...dum. Please remember you can read this type stuff all week in his columns.
If you made an All-Star team for "Athletes with Latino Names Who Look Like Their Name Should Actually Be Something Like Jimmy Scott or Rick Stevens," would you call it the Jeff Garcia All-Stars or the Anthony Gonzalez All-Stars?
He is making up more team names for his incredibly loyal fans to discuss among themselves and then send to him in an email so they can be just like him.
In a related story, Bill Simmons just made my All Star team for "Columnists Who Try So Hard To Be Hip and Cool but Come Off Like They Are That Creepy Dad Who Wants To Go To The Shins Concert With You Because He Likes The Music But You Have a Feeling He Is Checking Out The Girls."
Gregg Doyel welcomes you Bill.
I'm fascinated by this Phelps-as-a-celebrity thing because he doesn't follow the Ali-Jordan-Mantle-Tiger model even remotely. I mean, would any of those guys have been caught drinking Corona out of a can on live television? What about his awkward SNL appearance? Or all the pictures of him and Hollywood babes, in which he always looks like the little brother of a college sophomore who showed up for a weekend and ended up puking outside the football stadium all night?
This is actually true and funny. I think Michael Phelps looks like a douchebag. Great swimmer, seems like he would be a douche.
I decided San Diego's last two losses had to be the toughest back-to-back defeats in football history.
Well, he did experience it firsthand, so it has to be up there. Well all know if Bill Simmons experiences something firsthand, it automatically makes it an important event.
Hey, here's my theory on Favre's comeback that I've been waiting to spring for two months: I think the retirement was legitimate. He wanted to quit. Then, he was probably running errands for his wife, stopped to buy some groceries, then got chewed out at home because he forgot to buy half and half. And as his wife was yelling at him, he thought to himself, "Wait a second, what did I just do? I could keep playing!"
Those crazy women! I bet that is exactly what happened! Bill should write a sitcom about how men and women don't get along. It would do great!
That's all I can handle for the time being.
Monday, August 25, 2008
3 comments Fuck you Michael Phelps
Seems to be the "in" thing after these Olympics, to downplay what Michael Phelps has done. Some people have mentioned that a track athelete would have to win like, the long jump as well as every possible racing thing to equal eight medals. That the eight medals is as much about opportunity as anything, that Phelps has done something very similar each time. I have some time for these stories, but much of it seems to be unnecessarily contrarian and just raining on the world's parade.
Some have taken the form of comparison, especally with uber-sprinter Usain Bolt, who was pretty amazing, I never ever thought I'd see Michael Johnson's record beaten, truly. I'm more or less fine with this, albeit riddled with the absurdities of comparing sprinting to swimming. After all, both are amazing, both beat world records, both are, statistically speaking, undoubtedly the best at what they do. We're lucky.
I don't have an easy segueway to this, by Mike Freeman. It's just the definition of wrong.
Redeemers Better Story than Phelps
The basketball gold medal game was stunning, the officials absolutely awful but in the end the Redeem Team lived up to its name.
It wasn't their best night. The Americans at times played defense with the intensity of a Sunday afternoon jogger.
fine, although for all their lauded expertise, it's amazing how lazy and boring sports writers metaphors are. You'd think for all the practice they get they'd be as proficient at them as a bug is in winter.
That's why I am humble blogger.
Maybe not so humble.
...overall in these Olympics the Americans were spectacular, particularly Kobe Bryant and LeBron James.
fuck you Dwayne Wade (27 points, 4 steals in the gold medal game). Seriously, Wade led the team in scoring throughout, I think he ended up in the low twenties despite coming off the bench, including many spectacular plays. If you are going to single anyone out (and I kind of think the whole point of this has been not to do that Mike), he would without question be the story - Wade is back!
They enabled you to root for USA basketball again, they rebuilt our image, and they mostly handled themselves with class and dignity. If you can't be proud of what they did -- and the women as well -- then you're more cynical than I am. Which is impossible.
how dare you even hypothetically suggest it! Fuckers.
While these Olympics will be remembered for Michael Phelps what the basketball team did was far more impressive. Yes. Far more.
it's just not at all. The American basketball team clearly has the greatest pool of players to draw on, the best coaching, facilities, largest population of the major contenders, so on and so forth. Phelps enjoyed some of these advantages too, but he was competing against other Americans, and he was in an individual sport. Ugh, first Tiger Woods not retiring because of Brett Favre and now US basketballers eclipsing US swimmers. At the end of the day, Phelps swam in seventeen races in like eight days, broke six world records, I don't really think if I flew to the moon in a box with "SPACESHIP" written on the side and touched back down safely, with evidece of extra-terrestrial life, it would be more impressive. Let alone far more. No, that emphasis wasn't arbitary, he meant it.
The reason why is pressure. If Phelps had earned five gold medals instead of eight he wouldn't have been called a failure.
that's opportunity not pressure. I admit he's in more events, so it's harder for him to fail as abjectly as the basketball team could have, but to suggest Phelps was under less pressure is totally unfair. As much as I trust your "pressure meter", I think Phelps being the great hope for the US medal charge (he one one in every eight gold the states won) comes along with a ton of pressure. *sigh* Can't we just say being an Olympic athelete is very impressive? Do we have to downplay the achievements of these men and women? Do we have to be douches about it? According to Mike Freeman, yes we do.
If the United States won a silver or bronze the players would've been treated like total losers. They'd be called embarrassing. Media and fans would be screaming for massive changes.
their lives would be totally over you guys! OMG they'd be so devastated, they'd never be able to show their faces around the cafeteria again. They'd be pelted with tomatoes. Put in the stocks. Be despised, outlaws, chased from county to county with pitchforks.
Give me a fucking break. It'd be a dissapointment, just like Phelps losing, and he had eight opportunities to fail, don't forget.
The world and many people in this country waited for the Redeemers to fail so everyone could wag their fingers and portray the Americans as street ballers incapable of playing the precision International game.
no one was saying that that I heard. Some, maybe even many, were hoping the US would fail because it's way more interesting if they look human, and it's generally more fun and a better story (that's right, this was supposed to be the best story) if the underdog wins. Redemption, yes, but they were still massive favourites.
You don't think the Americans knew this? You don't think they felt this pressure and it didn't weight on their chests like Shaquille O'Neal's backside?
ZING!
Phelps had only Mark Spitz to worry about.
...b-but what about the athetes that were trying to beat him? There were like a hundred. And seven others each time. Are we going to disrespect them too? Why not huh? It's not like winning swimming medals is hard or anything right?
The basketball team was fighting the failures of the recent past as well as our cynicism.It's late on the East Coast and the game just ended. My eyes are barely open but I'm nevertheless giddy. Actually, I'll say it, as corny as it sounds, I'm proud as hell.
it's not corny, it's fine, it's one of the things the Olympics are for. I have no problem with your being corny, I have a problem with you disrespecting one of the greatest athletes of our time.
Some have taken the form of comparison, especally with uber-sprinter Usain Bolt, who was pretty amazing, I never ever thought I'd see Michael Johnson's record beaten, truly. I'm more or less fine with this, albeit riddled with the absurdities of comparing sprinting to swimming. After all, both are amazing, both beat world records, both are, statistically speaking, undoubtedly the best at what they do. We're lucky.
I don't have an easy segueway to this, by Mike Freeman. It's just the definition of wrong.
Redeemers Better Story than Phelps
The basketball gold medal game was stunning, the officials absolutely awful but in the end the Redeem Team lived up to its name.
It wasn't their best night. The Americans at times played defense with the intensity of a Sunday afternoon jogger.
fine, although for all their lauded expertise, it's amazing how lazy and boring sports writers metaphors are. You'd think for all the practice they get they'd be as proficient at them as a bug is in winter.
That's why I am humble blogger.
Maybe not so humble.
...overall in these Olympics the Americans were spectacular, particularly Kobe Bryant and LeBron James.
fuck you Dwayne Wade (27 points, 4 steals in the gold medal game). Seriously, Wade led the team in scoring throughout, I think he ended up in the low twenties despite coming off the bench, including many spectacular plays. If you are going to single anyone out (and I kind of think the whole point of this has been not to do that Mike), he would without question be the story - Wade is back!
They enabled you to root for USA basketball again, they rebuilt our image, and they mostly handled themselves with class and dignity. If you can't be proud of what they did -- and the women as well -- then you're more cynical than I am. Which is impossible.
how dare you even hypothetically suggest it! Fuckers.
While these Olympics will be remembered for Michael Phelps what the basketball team did was far more impressive. Yes. Far more.
it's just not at all. The American basketball team clearly has the greatest pool of players to draw on, the best coaching, facilities, largest population of the major contenders, so on and so forth. Phelps enjoyed some of these advantages too, but he was competing against other Americans, and he was in an individual sport. Ugh, first Tiger Woods not retiring because of Brett Favre and now US basketballers eclipsing US swimmers. At the end of the day, Phelps swam in seventeen races in like eight days, broke six world records, I don't really think if I flew to the moon in a box with "SPACESHIP" written on the side and touched back down safely, with evidece of extra-terrestrial life, it would be more impressive. Let alone far more. No, that emphasis wasn't arbitary, he meant it.
The reason why is pressure. If Phelps had earned five gold medals instead of eight he wouldn't have been called a failure.
that's opportunity not pressure. I admit he's in more events, so it's harder for him to fail as abjectly as the basketball team could have, but to suggest Phelps was under less pressure is totally unfair. As much as I trust your "pressure meter", I think Phelps being the great hope for the US medal charge (he one one in every eight gold the states won) comes along with a ton of pressure. *sigh* Can't we just say being an Olympic athelete is very impressive? Do we have to downplay the achievements of these men and women? Do we have to be douches about it? According to Mike Freeman, yes we do.
If the United States won a silver or bronze the players would've been treated like total losers. They'd be called embarrassing. Media and fans would be screaming for massive changes.
their lives would be totally over you guys! OMG they'd be so devastated, they'd never be able to show their faces around the cafeteria again. They'd be pelted with tomatoes. Put in the stocks. Be despised, outlaws, chased from county to county with pitchforks.
Give me a fucking break. It'd be a dissapointment, just like Phelps losing, and he had eight opportunities to fail, don't forget.
The world and many people in this country waited for the Redeemers to fail so everyone could wag their fingers and portray the Americans as street ballers incapable of playing the precision International game.
no one was saying that that I heard. Some, maybe even many, were hoping the US would fail because it's way more interesting if they look human, and it's generally more fun and a better story (that's right, this was supposed to be the best story) if the underdog wins. Redemption, yes, but they were still massive favourites.
You don't think the Americans knew this? You don't think they felt this pressure and it didn't weight on their chests like Shaquille O'Neal's backside?
ZING!
Phelps had only Mark Spitz to worry about.
...b-but what about the athetes that were trying to beat him? There were like a hundred. And seven others each time. Are we going to disrespect them too? Why not huh? It's not like winning swimming medals is hard or anything right?
The basketball team was fighting the failures of the recent past as well as our cynicism.It's late on the East Coast and the game just ended. My eyes are barely open but I'm nevertheless giddy. Actually, I'll say it, as corny as it sounds, I'm proud as hell.
it's not corny, it's fine, it's one of the things the Olympics are for. I have no problem with your being corny, I have a problem with you disrespecting one of the greatest athletes of our time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)