I am not going to write anything about Tiger Woods today because, let's be honest, he isn't going to say anything of substance at his press conference. Writers are going to accuse him of not really coming clean and just the typical stuff like that no matter what he says. I think I will let it sit for a few days before I comment on it, if I do.
I absolutely love college basketball. Because of the NFL and other professional sports, I don't pay as much attention to college basketball as I really want to on this blog. Not to mention it is really hard to follow 347 (I think) Division I teams as a hobby and not sound like a dumbass sometimes trying to talk about it. I can't watch all of those games. It's easy for me to follow the NBA, NFL, and MLB because they only have 30-something teams, but there are just a lot of college basketball teams so I don't always feel like I can speak even halfway authoritatively about each team. I would never want to be a sportswriter, but if there was one sport I would love to write about, and get paid for it, is college basketball. That's a sport I would be willing to travel all over and cover. Now that I have expressed my undying admiration for the sport, I want to talk about it today.
I also want to just throw this at you all really quickly. Remember that Duke Lacrosse rape case that many mainstream writers just jumped all over (I am talking to you Selena Roberts) and never apologized for their quickness in assumption of guilt? Look at what the accuser is up to nowadays. I like how Mike Nifong refused to initially believe she had been arrested. I am so glad that case didn't occur while I was writing on this blog. There is a good chance my head might have exploded.
Ok, back to the college basketball post for the day. This column by Pat Forde isn't terrible but he ranks each conference and there are definitely parts I disagree with.
The buzzword today is "embarrassment." Maybe UConn coach Jim Calhoun (2) should announce his embarrassment more often if it's going to prompt his Huskies to beat a top-five team on the road.
Perhaps Pat Forde should also recognize that UConn matches up incredibly well with Villanova, rather than just say Calhoun being embarrassed motivated the team. UConn has tall frontcourt players and athletic guards. That is not a good matchup for Villanova who doesn't have the low post depth they need to play well against a team like UConn. Villanova's 2nd leading rebounder is Taylor King, who is a 6'6" perimeter player who is 6th on the team in minutes per game. That can't be a good thing.
Not that any team with height can beat Villanova, just teams with athletic height like UConn has. The three big guys that play the most for UConn combined for 27 points, 17 rebounds, and 7 blocks. Of course I am completely ignoring the monster game Kemba Walker had, but those three guys only had 9 less rebounds than the entire Villanova team.
I picked Villanova to play in the NCAA Championship Game against Kansas before the season began and I am really regretting that pick right now. They have great guard play but they have very little skilled height. I don't think this is a death knell for them but Antonio Pena tends to get in foul trouble and there isn't a whole lot behind him. I am sticking with my pick of Villanova in the championship game, reluctantly, because I have to at this point.
And maybe Mississippi State (3) students who got hold of DeMarcus Cousins' cell number should feel some embarrassment after, according to Cousins, they phoned in racial epithets (and other salutations) to the Kentucky center.
The term "asshole" was invented for how the MSU fans acted at home on Tuesday night against Kentucky. The officiating was terrible but that doesn't excuse the actions of the crowd. Down the stretch there were 10 foul calls against MSU and 0 against Kentucky (see, college basketball officiating is terrible like the NBA), but that's no reason to act like jerks. There are two things that annoy me the most about college basketball fans:
1. Rushing the court. I don't want to turn into Bill Simmons but there are rules for rushing the court. I think fans can only rush the court when:
a. An unranked and unheralded team beats a team ranked in the Top 10 of the country. The more highly ranked one team and the more unheralded the other team are can be inverse from each other as to whether the crowd can rush the court.
Example #1: #2 Pittsburgh losing on the road at South Florida. This is acceptable for the USF crowd to rush the court...barely.
Example #2: #17 Texas losing on the road to Washington State. This is not acceptable for Washington State fans to rush the court.
Example #3: #17 Texas losing on the road to Alcorn State. This is absolutely acceptable for Alcorn State fans to rush the court.
b. You can NEVER rush the court when playing a team in your conference. I know it sounds harsh and very strict. This is just embarrassing and I don't care how bad your team is or has been, you are in the same conference as the team you beat...you need to learn to beat the teams in your conference. Rushing the court says, "we aren't very good and didn't expect to win this game." That attitude is for losers.
Exception to this rule: If a team has been in the conference for less than 3 years. If South Florida joined the Big East two years ago and beats #8 Georgetown at home, rushing the court is acceptable. Just that once though.
c. Extenuating circumstances.
Example #1: The recent death of a player, coach, or other member of the school and then your team as the underdog beats a far superior team at home...then rushing the court is fine.
Example #2: There is a fire in the stands and all exits in the stands are closed.
As you can tell, I hate it when teams rush the court. Have some pride in your program and act like you expect to beat good teams. I have seen a ranked team win a home game and rush the court after beating another ranked team. I have seen this happen. This is absolutely unacceptable and I think NCAA sanctions should be initiated against the school that rushed the court and perhaps the students should be expelled.
I am sure there are other examples of when it is fine to rush the court, but I just made those up and couldn't think of any others. Those are the reasons that stick out in my mind.
2. I also hate it when fans act like jerks towards players. Here are some examples of what is acceptable and unacceptable:
Acceptable: Loud noises from a non-game affecting device. Keys, etc.
Unacceptable: Whistles or anything that sounds remotely like a whistle or shot clock buzzer.
Acceptable: Chanting J.R. "Can't" Reid. Sorry, that's just amusing. There is no need to bust out with SAT scores to prove J.R. Reid did better than Danny Ferry on the SAT. I am talking to you Dean Smith.
Unacceptable: Chanting "Phil Ford's wife" when a player reportedly slept with the assistant coach's wife. Even if it is reportedly true, that is not cool.
Acceptable: Yelling things at players within their earshot. Depending on the people around you, expletives may/may not be acceptable.
Unacceptable: Throwing shit on the court. This is never acceptable, except in hostage situations.
Acceptable: Getting a player's cell phone and waking that player up and just being annoying.
Unacceptable: Calling that player and saying anything that would have that player kick your ass if you were 10 feet in front of him.
Now that I have rambled some, back to the column...
Then Pat Forde starts talking about teams/coaches/players that would make good Winter Olympics athletes.
Saint Louis coach Rick Majerus (4) as a curler. He'd be a terrific skip -- that's the guy who pushes the stone, then yells at everyone else to sweep. And as a Milwaukee native, he's from the Curling Belt of Minnesota-Wisconsin-Michigan.
I think Rick Majerus would make a better Paraolympic athlete or coach. That way he could yell at them for being cripple and have Gene Wojciechowski write another book about this experience with him.
Kansas (5) as hockey players. The Jayhawks are plenty willing to fight; just ask the Kansas football team. Center Cole Aldrich already is down a tooth, and he's shown some goon potential by leveling Texas' Damion James with an elbow to the chops and sending Texas A&M's Dash Harris to the locker room with a hard foul.
Speaking of Cole Aldrich, Bill Simmons asked one of the ESPN college basketball guys on Twitter about who will be better between Aldrich and Ed Davis in the NBA. I think it ended in a toss-up. It is not a toss-up. Ed Davis is going to be a much better NBA player than Cole Aldrich. Aldrich should be a serviceable center, but I look at Ed Davis and see Chris Bosh. At worst, I see Udonis Haslem, though obviously Davis is currently a little smaller. I look at Aldrich and see Andrew Bogut or Chris Kaman...maybe. At worst, I see every white center that has done well in college basketball because he is just tall and skilled enough to do well against people shorter than him.
Plus, he's from Minnesota -- he has to know how to skate. (That alone gives him an advantage over elbow-throwing Alabama native Cousins for the enforcer spot.)
There you go Pat, great stereotyping. African-Americans can't skate. Real funny.
Duke guard Jon Scheyer (6) is perfect for biathlon. He's a great shooter, and averaging 36.6 minutes per game shows he has the stamina to handle the cross-country skiing, too.
I don't know how Scheyer would do. In the biathlon, he can't fall down and pretend like he got fouled and get a 1 minute headstart on his competitors because of this.
Syracuse forward Wes Johnson (11) is a natural for cross-country skiing, since he's already crisscrossed much of the country, going from Corsicana, Texas, to Ames, Iowa, to Detroit to Syracuse.
I realize Forde typed "much" but I still don't think leaving out the entire west half of the United States from Texas on is really even "much" of the country. Johnson hasn't crisscrossed any of the Northwest, the Pacific, the Southwest, nor any states west of Detroit. Yes, it is ultra-specific day here at Bottom of the Barrel.
North Carolina coach Roy Williams (14) would feel right at home in the kiss-and-cry area adjacent to the figure-skating rink. College basketball's resident drama queen teared up -- again -- during a recent interview with Yahoo! about the Tar Heels' struggles this season. Get the man a sequined jump suit, please.
I haven't bashed Roy Williams in a few days, so here we go. He did an interview on Wednesday where he said he has been offered or invited to interview for "11 to 12" NBA jobs over the years including the Celtics and Lakers. Ironically those are the two NBA teams that have had the most public interest in Coach K in the past. I am sure that is just a coincidence. The Celtics wanted Coach K in 1990 and the Lakers really wanted him in 2004. I like how Roy just threw that out there to let everyone know he has had job offers from the NBA like Coach K has.
For a guy who doesn't "give a damn" about other coaching jobs when he is currently at a school, when asked a question he isn't really shy in sharing private interest by NBA teams with the general public.
Roy is a hell of a basketball coach, but he is also a bit of a drama queen. The Heels are having a tough year, they will bounce back next year. They have a great recruiting class coming in and these current players are getting great experience this year. Every great college basketball program has to deal with young teams at some point, especially after winning the National Championship the year before.
The Minutes went into this exercise believing the Big East is the best league. That belief hasn't changed -- but the Big 12 is a very close second.
There are two ways to rank a conference. A conference can be ranked top-to-bottom or a conference can be ranked based on how many NCAA Tournament bids that conference will get (basically how many good teams are in the conference). I prefer the 1st method personally, but I am still not sure which method Pat Forde likes. He just sort of ranks the conferences based on their record against the other conferences, which could be misleading depending on the matchups of the teams between conferences...or he ranks them based on projected NCAA Tournament bids. I am not 100% how he did it exactly to be honest.
1. Big East (17). We know the league is good at the top, but how about some Valentine's Day love for the bottom? Rutgers, St. John's and Seton Hall all won Sunday -- and according to Tom Luicci of the Newark Star-Ledger, that hasn't happened on the same day since Feb. 12, 2002.
The fact those three teams all won on the same day is an example of how STRONG the conference is? Who did these teams play? DePaul, Syracuse and Georgetown. That does look impressive, but it also brings up my longest running problem in figuring out if a team is good or not when playing teams in-conference.
The problem is, do these losses mean the Big East is a tough conference or supposedly "good teams" like Georgetown can't win on the road, so they may not be that good? Georgetown is currently 3-3 on the road in-conference, including a loss to unranked Marquette. The other losses have been to Syracuse and Villanova, both of which are good teams, but those weren't even really close games. Villanova was up 15 points at halftime. So it is the eternal problem of whether the Big East (or any conference) is deep or the "good teams" aren't that good in the Big East (or that conference) when playing on the road.
League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 5-7 vs. ACC; 17-5 vs. A-10; 2-1 vs. Big 12; 2-5 vs. Big Ten; 7-1 vs. C-USA; 2-0 vs. MVC; 0-1 vs. MWC; 3-0 vs. Pac-10; 7-8 vs. SEC. Total: 45-28.
So the Big East has losing records against Pat Forde's #3, #4, #5, and #6 conferences? Against the #2 conference, the Big 12, they are 2-1. I don't have time to see which teams played against each other in these conferences, but to rank the Big East #1 in conference ranking doesn't sound very persuasive when the conference has a losing record against 4 of the 5 conferences ranked below them.
NCAA teams as of now: Syracuse, Villanova, West Virginia, Georgetown, Pittsburgh, Marquette, Louisville.
7 NCAA Tournament teams as of right now. I consider the Big East the best conference just based on the fact they have the Big 4 teams at the top of the standings in Syracuse, Villanova, West Virginia, and Georgetown, and the rest of the conference is pretty good as well. Still, that record against other conferences makes me wonder if the Big East is really the #1 conference or not.
2. Big 12 (18). This league has the nation's No. 1 team in Kansas, one of the nation's biggest surprises in Kansas State, and then a large pack of pretty good pursuers. There might not be as many Final Four contenders here and the bottom of the league is probably worse than the bottom of the Big East, but all seven prospective NCAA teams could be first-round winners.
I would say any team that makes the NCAA tournament could be a first-round winner. I would argue that point in regard to Texas A&M and Oklahoma State, because they are going to most likely draw a #7, #8, #9, #10 seed which could beat them, but I won't argue right now.
League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 2-1 vs. ACC; 8-3 vs. A-10; 1-2 vs. Big East; 6-1 vs. Big Ten; 6-4 vs. C-USA; 3-3 vs. MVC; 5-4 vs. MWC; 13-4 vs. Pac-10; 6-4 vs. SEC. Total: 50-26.
The conference has a winning record against every conference ranked in Pat Forde's rankings except for the Big East, which are #1.
NCAA teams as of now: Kansas, Kansas State, Texas A&M, Baylor, Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma State.
7 NCAA Tournament teams as of right now. I think an argument can be made the Big 12 is the best conference in college basketball.
3. ACC (19). Duke is the class of the league --
That's like saying "I date the prettiest girl in Phi Mu at Appalachian State University." Or saying, "I am the most athletic player on the Duke basketball team."
and Duke was drilled by Georgetown just a couple of weeks ago.
Saying Duke was "drilled" is being polite. They were destroyed. Georgetown is a good home team against Duke, which is a crappy road team. Not to make excuses for the loss, but I don't know if this is the best way to compare these two teams since there is such a discrepancy in how these two teams play at home and on the road.
League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 5-4 vs. A-10; 1-2 vs. Big 12; 7-5 vs. Big East; 7-7 vs. Big Ten; 5-0 vs. C-USA; 0-1 vs. MVC; 0-0 vs. MWC; 2-2 vs. Pac-10; 7-5 vs. SEC. Total: 34-26.
The ACC has a winning record against every conference except the Big 12 (#2 in Forde's rankings) and the MVC (#10 in Forde's rankings).
NCAA teams as of now: Duke, Maryland, Wake Forest, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech.
The ACC has 7 NCAA Tournament teams as of now. I don't think it is an especially good conference this year. I do have to say Florida State is the team I think may do well in the NCAA Tournament among this list of NCAA Tournament teams in the ACC. They are going to be a tough draw for some other NCAA Tournament team. Of course Maryland has the best player in the ACC, Greivis Vasquez, and a good team around him with great coaching so I think they are going to do well in the NCAA Tournament. I wouldn't call those two teams "sleepers" but they are two teams that could do well in March.
4. Big Ten (20). The top half is really good, with Purdue, Ohio State, Michigan State and Wisconsin all having Final Four potential. But the bottom half is miserable, thanks primarily to Penn State, Iowa and Indiana. Michigan's underachieving season offsets Wisconsin's overachieving.
That really didn't all make sense to me. Whatever, let's move on.
League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 7-7 vs. ACC; 3-2 vs. A-10; 1-6 vs. Big 12; 5-2 vs. Big East; 0-1 vs. C-USA; 2-3 vs. MVC; 0-2 vs. MWC; 3-0 vs. Pac-10; 3-5 vs. SEC. Total: 24-28.
The Big 10 has a losing record against the Big 12 (#2), C-USA (#9), MVC (#10), MWC (#6), and SEC (#5). This appears to be the epitome of a top heavy conference. I like top-to-bottom strength so I am not impressed by this.
NCAA teams as of now: Ohio State, Michigan State, Purdue, Wisconsin, Illinois.
The Big 10 conference has 5 NCAA Tournament bids as of right now. I like Wisconsin and am not entirely on the Purdue bandwagon at this point.
5. SEC (21). Stop The Minutes if you've heard this before: It's Kentucky and everyone else.
League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 5-7 vs. ACC; 5-4 vs. A-10; 4-6 vs. Big 12; 8-7 vs. Big East; 5-3 vs. Big Ten; 8-3 vs. C-USA; 2-1 vs. MVC; 1-1 vs. MWC; 3-3 vs. Pac-10. Total: 41-35.
The SEC has a losing record against the ACC (#3) and that is it. For a conference that supposedly doesn't have a whole lot more than Kentucky this is fairly impressive. It's really not a good conference in reality so this comparison Pat Forde uses between conferences is misleading.
How does John Calipari always end up in a conference that sucks? First it's the A-10, then Conference USA, and now the SEC. It's like he is afraid to coach a team in a good conference. Just once I want to see him coach in the Big East, Big 10, Big 12 or the ACC.
NCAA teams as of now: Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Tennessee.
The SEC conference has 3 NCAA Tournament bids as of right now. I only think one of these teams is any good.
6. Mountain West (22).
League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 0-0 vs. ACC; 1-0 vs. A-10; 4-5 vs. Big 12; 1-0 vs. Big East; 2-0 vs. Big Ten; 4-2 vs. C-USA; 4-5 vs. MVC; 5-6 vs. Pac-10; 1-1 vs. SEC. Total: 22-19.
The MWC has a losing record against the Big 12 (#2), MVC (#10), Pac-10 (#8).
NCAA teams as of now: BYU, New Mexico, UNLV.
The MWC has 3 NCAA Tournament bids as of right now.
7. Atlantic 10 (23).
League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 4-5 vs. ACC; 3-8 vs. Big 12; 5-17 vs. Big East; 2-3 vs. Big Ten; 4-2 vs. C-USA; 3-2 vs. MVC; 0-1 vs. MWC; 0-1 vs. Pac-10; 4-5 vs. SEC. Total: 25-44.
The A-10 has a losing record against the ACC (#3), Big 12 (#2), Big East (#1), MWC (#6), MVC (#10), Pac-10 (#8), and SEC (#5).
NCAA teams as of now: Richmond, Xavier, Temple, Dayton, Charlotte.
The A-10 has 5 NCAA Tournaments teams of right now. That's a lot of teams from a conference that only has a winning record against 2 other conferences Pat Forde compared them to. This is more evidence conference records against each other may not be a good way to judge the overall strength of a conference.
8. Pacific-10 (24).
League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 2-2 vs. ACC; 1-0 vs. A-10; 4-13 vs. Big 12; 0-3 vs. Big East; 0-3 vs. Big Ten; 1-0 vs. C-USA; 0-0 vs. MVC; 6-5 vs. MWC; 3-3 vs. SEC. Total: 17-29.
The Pac-10 has a losing record against the Big 12 (#2), Big East (#3), and Big 10 (#4). So basically if a conference is "Big" the Pac-10 will lose to that conference. This is the opposite of what happens in college football.
NCAA teams as of now: California.
The Pac-10 has one team on pace to make the NCAA Tournament. Pathetic.
9. Conference USA (25).
League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 0-5 vs. ACC; 2-4 vs. A-10; 4-6 vs. Big 12; 1-7 vs. Big East; 1-0 vs. Big Ten; 1-2 vs. MVC; 2-4 vs. MWC; 0-1 vs. Pac-10; 3-8 vs. SEC. Total: 14-36.
Conference USA has a losing record against the ACC (#3), A-10 (#7), Big 12 (#2), Big East (#1), MVC (#10), MWC (#6), Pac-10 (#8), and SEC (#5). In other words, this conference sucks.
NCAA teams as of now: UTEP, UAB.
Conference USA has 2 teams in the NCAA Tournament as of right now. I don't like either of these teams.
10. Missouri Valley (26).
League record against the rest of the top 10 conferences: 1-0 vs. ACC; 2-3 vs. A-10; 3-3 vs. Big 12; 0-2 vs. Big East; 3-2 vs. Big Ten; 2-1 vs. C-USA; 5-4 vs. MWC; 0-0 vs. Pac-10; 1-2 vs. SEC. Total: 17-17.
The MVC has a losing record against the A-10 (#7), Big East (#1), and SEC (#5).
NCAA teams as of now: Whoever wins the conference tournament.
The MVC is on pace to get one NCAA Tournament bid.
This is one of the reasons I think the field should not be expanded to 96 teams, because they will probably still get one bid and some of the major conferences above them would get more bids. It wouldn't benefit the mid-majors much, but the major conferences would get most of the benefit, and I am not sure those major conference teams deserve to make the NCAA Tournament. For example, undeserving teams from a conference like the Pac-10 would probably make it over a more deserving team in the MWC, Atlantic-10 or MVC.
Here are my arbitrary rankings of the conferences:
1. Big East
2. Big 12
3. ACC
4. SEC
5. Big 10
6. A-10
7. MWC
8. Pac-10
9. MVC
10. Conference USA
Now Pat Forde takes a look at the teams that get the coveted, yet somewhat unimportant, #1 seeds (Teams that are #2 seeds really don't have that much more of a difficult road than a #1 seed in my mind).
Kentucky (28). What's to like: Stayed unbeaten longer than anyone else, and the lone loss was a six-pointer on the road in league play.
Kentucky is a strong team and they will get a #1 seed, but they have a scary combination for me when it comes to playing well in the NCAA Tournament. That combination is, they are a fairly young team that has played a fairly easy schedule so far. They aren't traditionally tested every night with some of the teams they are playing. Here's a theory I have and it is based on Calipari's teams at Memphis. My theory is that because Calipari's squad played in an easier conference they weren't as used to playing tight basketball games, so when it comes time to play a tough basketball game they aren't as well-equipped to pull the game out in the end. It's a stupid theory, but Calipari's teams have a reputation for falling apart in important games they should win (i.e. 2008 National Championship Game). College basketball teams that have played in tight games know how to manage the end of the game and pull the game out. Kentucky is more used to playing tight games, but they also rely on 3 freshman as part of their core, so they are a young team in regards to the most talented players on the roster.
I think Kentucky is going to be a #1 seed but I am going to be interested to see how they do against a more experienced team like Michigan State.
Syracuse (29).
Syracuse surprised me this year. I didn't know Wes Johnson would be this good and I didn't know they would be this good as a team. The formula I like for a good NCAA Tournament team: Strong point guard, athletic wing player, and a competent center (or two competent power forwards)...they have all of that. I didn't know Scoop Jardine would run the point like he has nor did I know Wes Johnson could be that athletic wing player this year. Throw in the zone defense that befuddles teams, and this is a good Syracuse team that is built for playing late in March.
Kansas State (33).
Every year a team looks like a great team around this time of the season and they end up taking an early loss in the NCAA Tournament. Last year it was Wake Forest. I nominate Kansas State for that team this year. They aren't a bad team, I just believe they have peaked too early in the season and the toughest road game they have played all season is either UNLV or Missouri...and they lost to Missouri. I don't hate them, I just don't think they will end up with a #1 seed.
Even their best win, Texas, doesn't look so hot right now. After that, the best win is either Texas A&M or Dayton. I reserve the ability to change my opinion on them, but for right now I am suspicious of their ability to get a #1 seed.
Of course, now that I have said this, look for them to make the Final Four.
West Virginia (34).
What's to like: Of the eight contenders, nobody has played a tougher schedule (rated fourth nationally by Lunardi's InsideRPI) than the Mountaineers, who have scads of quality wins both in and out of conference.
I really like the Mountaineers, but I don't like Bob Huggins. So it is hard for me to be high (or drunk as the case may be for Huggins) on West Virginia. They have quality wins and I think it will benefit them if they get an earlier exit in the Big East Tournament. Not that they are tired, but they have played some tough games so far. They have the formula I like in a good NCAA Tournament team, they may not have a competent center, but they do have Jones and Eubanks as the two power forwards that can rebound (in lieu of a competent center) and Butler as the athletic wingman. This is a team I really like...begrudgingly.
My #1 seeds: Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, Syracuse.
Duke doesn't deserve it, but they have an easier schedule and a good chance to run the table, so I think they will back into the #1 seed slightly over Purdue, who still has to play Michigan State.
My #2 seeds: West Virginia, Villanova, Purdue, Michigan State.
My #3 seeds: Kansas State, Georgetown, Gonzaga, Ohio State. (I was going to put Wisconsin here but then they lost on the road to Minnesota)
Final Four: Kansas, Kentucky, West Virginia, Villanova
I am still sticking with my Villanova-Kansas National Championship until I see the bracket (and they end up on the same side) or I get up the courage to change my mind. Of course, most of the picks I just made will change once I get a chance to see the brackets and the season is actually completed. For now, I feel 99% comfortable saying Kansas is the National Champion though.
I would love to talk about college basketball all-day-everyday, but I just don't have the time to watch all the games I want to. March is my favorite month of the sports year simply because of the NCAA and conference tournaments and the fact baseball is right around the corner.
Showing posts with label Roy Williams. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Roy Williams. Show all posts
Friday, February 19, 2010
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
16 comments Three Things For Tuesday
I haven't done a three-for-one special in one day in a while, so I thought I would go ahead do one of those today. These articles didn't deserve one entire long, encyclopediac post so I thought I would wrap them into one neat little package of one post for the day.
1. Today I start it all off with Roy Williams (the UNC Tar Heels coach, not the wide receiver or the safety who play and semi-underachieve in the NFL) and his need to show the world what an asshole he can be. For just one minute he dropped his "aw shucks" demeanor and turned into the world class assassin and recruiter we know he really can be. Basically, he kicked a Presbyterian College fan out of a UNC Tar Heels basketball game because they heckled one of his players. How dare an opposing fan dare to cheer against the Tar Heels in the Dean Dome!
During the post-game press conference, Williams puts on his best shit-kicker car salesman smile and explains to reporters that he had the fan removed because he doesn't think that "anybody should yell anything negative at our players. Period."
Especially a fan of the opposing team who had the audacity to purchase a ticket in the crypt, I mean arena, that is the Dean Dome. How dare a Presbyterian College fan yell during free throw attempts! Doesn't this unruly person know that if he screams too loud he might wake up the wealthy UNC boosters who are trying to take a nap during the game? And what's with the yelling anyway, it's a basketball game, not a football game. Silence is appreciated in the Dean Dome at all times.
Here's a quick thought: You are the head coach of an NCAA basketball team. You are at home in a game against an opponent who is about as strong as an above average high school team. If you are able to hear one person in the crowd yelling against your team during the game then perhaps your home crowd should get a little bit more pumped up and make some noise. Shouldn't the home crowd be loud enough to where hecklers for the other team can't be heard? It's not this fan's fault he was cheering for Presbyterian College and no one was making noise when he yelled something non-abrasive. If the arena isn't loud enough, don't blame the heckler, blame the extremely quiet crowd that can't seem to get into the game sufficiently, no matter what the score of the game is or how many national championships the school has won.
One reporter continued to probe about what the fan said — "was it vulgar?" — but Roy just summarily disposed of the question and threatened to end the presser if there were anymore questions about it.
We all know my feelings towards UNC, but I like Roy Williams. He is a good, clean coach who recruits better than pretty much any modern day coach and generally seems like a good guy. He was nice to my fiance at a golf tournament a few years ago, so I won't burn his image in effigy. What irritates me though is that the media fails to see what a cutthroat asshole Roy Williams really can be. Coach K of Duke is seen as a guy who manipulates referees, curses too much and is just an overall evil guy. Mostly he is seen this way by opposing teams. Gary Williams is the guy who sweats a lot and can't recruit against teams like Georgetown and the rest of the Big East (not true) so he gets whoever he can for his team and works his magic. Sidney Lowe is the lazy head coach of the NC State Wolfpack who can't seem to recruit a team that plays together well, which is moderately true. Roy Williams is the nice guy coach who yells at his players just to make them better, is a marketer's dream come true because he is wholesome as white bread, and just wants to see his team succeed.
Outside of Sidney Lowe, Gary Williams and Coach K are seen as guys who are fairly cutthroat, but no one ever sees Roy Williams that way. This isn't true at all though. He can be a jerk and he does the "indignant anger" thing better than any other NCAA coach. This incident goes to show this. Roy Williams is clearly in the wrong, he basically kicked this person out of the game for not cheering for UNC which is (a) a very dictator-esque sort of thing to do and (b) incredibly rude to do to a person who was not unruly and had actually paid to watch the game. If this fan doesn't want to cheer for UNC, it's his seat and money, he doesn't have to.
Then to make matters worse, Roy Williams refuses to acknowledge he overreacted, acts like a 5 year old when he is even questioned about his actions and threatens to cancel the press conference if he is asked the question again. You know what? It's Roy's right to do that because he is the head coach, but this just goes to show me Roy Williams is a master at putting up a facade of genial kindness and will do anything to show he is in control of his program, including taking a "my way or the highway" approach to second guessing him. Roy has a temper and has a real problem with controlling it, yet we still see him as a gentle kind guy. We've seen him lose his temper before on national television.
Think about Bonnie Bernstein asking Roy Williams about the open UNC job after his Kansas team lost to Syracuse in the 2003 National Title game. He cursed at her and told her he didn't give a damn about that (the UNC) job, he was worried about his guys in the locker room. He acknowledged it wasn't her asking the question, but knew it was the guys in the control booth who wanted it asked, but he did take his anger out on her. Of course a few weeks later, the job he didn't give a damn about ended up being his new job and he has been quite successful at it. Roy Williams is not a bad guy, but he is just like every other coach of a great and successful NCAA basketball team and can be a real jerk. Sometimes the media forgets that.
Before I get done rambling about this, imagine if Coach K, Jim Calhoun or Bob Knight had done this. People would flip out about it. We would never hear the end of this story, but Roy is seen as a nice guy so even someone who follows NCAA basketball fairly closely like me only hears about this incident a couple days after it happens.
Let's see what horrible thing the fan said that drew the ire of Roy Williams:
According to one reader, the disruptive Presbyterian fan yelled — brace yourselves — "Don't miss, Deon!" when Deon Thompson was at the free-throw line.
Oh the horror! I can't imagine how Deon Thompson, a senior by the way, could take such verbal abuse. I could see if the fan had cursed or acted unruly the entire game, but that wasn't the case. I am not bashing or being down on Roy Williams, he is just like every other coach though I don't know if any other coach would have a fun removed for such a comment, but he always gets the reputation for being super nice even though this isn't true.
2. Jemele Hill doesn't think Tiger Woods should take a leave from golf.
This is a sucka move, Tiger.
Oh shit, JemeHill is talking urban talk. That's how you know she means business.
I can't believe you're running. Can't believe you've allowed these alleged mistresses and tabloids to run you off your job.
How dare you quit playing golf, as your wife reportedly asked you to, so that you could focus on your marriage. What a selfish bitch move...sucka.
But announcing Friday that you'll take an indefinite leave of absence from golf is, by far, your worst idea yet.
Porking cocktail waitresses, escorts, and pornstars that number in the double digits was not as bad an idea as temporarily stopping playing golf to undue some of the damage done? I just want to make sure I understand JemeHill's patented backwards-ass premise. I think I do get it.
If this was a scheme concocted by your handlers, get some new people. One of the reasons you're in this mess is because your handlers helped you craft an image that wasn't really you.
Tiger Woods should blame his handlers that he is marketable. They should have concocted an image for Tiger that included him screwing a pornstar in the backseat of a Buick or gotten a deal with Verizon to advertise for the new "Cheat Phone" which immediately erases all text messages, phone calls, and correspondence from select phone numbers. You know, to make it the more "real" Tiger the public sees in his commercials.
But if stepping away from golf is a calculated public relations stunt meant to generate some empathy, that means you've learned nothing from this entire ordeal.
Obviously Tiger is not subscribing to the Kobe Bryant school of making up with his wife after he cheats by purchasing her a massive diamond ring and looking really, really sorry. The media loves that so much more because they get to see the athlete grovel. Which is all they really want.
Based on her comments here, I don't know if JemeHill should ever be a public relations person for anyone in the world. EVER. She would somehow manage to be worse at PR than she can be at journalism.
Despite the clamoring for you to come clean -- a laughable idea, because it's as if people expect you to pass out a list containing the name of every woman you've had a sexual encounter with since getting married -- the only people you owe an apology to are Mrs. Woods and your business partners.
So JemeHill doesn't think Tiger Woods should come clean nor should he take some time off from golf to get his life back in order. JemeHill also believes it is not really the media's business who and what Tiger Woods is screwing...yet here she is, writing an entire article about Tiger Woods and giving him suggestions telling him what to do.
If you play, and especially if you win, it will remind people why they were drawn to you in the first place.
Distract the masses with golf! They are gullible and will believe absolutely anything you say. People are stupid JemeHill says. What JemeHill doesn't seem to recognize is that Tiger's wife wants him to take this sabbatical from golf...perhaps now is the time to listen to what she wants?
I know some of my media brethren are pretending you patented creepin', but a lot of people in this country can identify with your situation.
More urban talk, this means JemeHill means MORE business now. Her new advice: Be a role model to cheaters everywhere.
According to a recent Marist poll, seven out of 10 people think you should deal with your personal crisis privately.
I like how JemeHill quotes this statistic and then fails to realize taking a sabbatical from golf is Tiger Woods dealing with the personal crisis privately.
The best revenge is success.
"The best revenge?" Tiger is not the victim here. He is the person who did the victimizing...to his family...which he is now trying to rectify.
In other words, stop acting like a prisoner and behave more like a man who is truly ready to face his problems. Act like you're the face of golf.
Act like a pompous asshole. That will turn the tide your way in a heartbeat!
That way women will say, "Well he doesn't seem sorry because he is acting like he is the king of the world. I don't like him."
Men will say, "I can't like Tiger because my wife will kill me and he does seem like a sleaze."
Sponsors will give him the "We want him as our sponsor but he doesn't seem apologetic enough at this point, so best not touch him for a couple of years...then we will quietly give him a contract to sponsor our products" treatment.
Elin Woods will say, "I can't wait to divorce his ass and take 50% of everything, plus the kids."
Acting like he is the face of golf, showing his face in public before his wife wants him to, and being cocky doesn't seem to be the best move at this point. I'm not PR person, but neither is JemeHill.
Use this situation to your advantage. Your buddy Michael Jordan used any slight, no matter how small, to drive him. And this personal failing and the fallout from it should motivate you for the next decade.
Pretend you are a victim and delude yourself into believing the world is holding you down for your transgressions. More non-brilliant advice from JemeHill.
The people who disapprove of you because of that will still disapprove of you even if you save a child from a burning building tomorrow. And the people who love you are going to love you regardless.
Ever so untrue. Tiger will survive this if he acts contrite (which he has), shows he cares about his marriage (which he is trying to do), and kicks ass at golf when he comes back (not quite here yet). If Tiger tries to skip any of these steps, I don't know how this will work out for him. Many of his fans feel pretty let down right now...mostly because they are pathetic and for some reason thought he was a god, but that's a different story.
You wouldn't tell the public the whole truth anyway; and once again, the tabloids would have the upper hand.
The media is well-known for just accepting answers and not doing any research? When did this media show up in America and no one told me? I am only used to the media that hears an apology and then spends the next 2 weeks trying to poke holes in the apology.
Bottom line: JemeHill is wrong that Tiger is making a mistake by taking a sabbatical from golf.
3. Tracy "The Cowboy" Ringolsby thinks Edgar Martinez is the test case for DH's in the Hall of Fame.
Can Martinez speed up the process for the designated hitter?
I think the case of Edgar Martinez is not a case for Designated Hitters, but more of a case for borderline players who can get in. I don't think it really matters if Martinez was a DH or not, other than the fact the Hall of Fame electors can't take his defense into account when looking at his candidacy. I don't like the DH, simply because I am a National League guy, but I understand it's purpose for those that don't like to watch pitchers bat.
The validity of his candidacy will hinge on how dominant voters feel a one-dimensional player needs to have been.
I don't see how Edgar Martinez's case is any different than another player who may make the Hall of Fame but wasn't the strongest fielder in the world. Clearly a player being only a DH is a little bit different from a player who plays the field exceptionally poorly, but I see them as nearly the same thing in the long run. I don't think Edgar Martinez deserves to be in the Hall of Fame just based on merits unfortunately, he probably deserves to be in the hyperbolic "Hall of Very Good" in my mind. He was a great hitter but I am not sure he was one of the best hitters of all-time. As far as him being a DH for the majority of his career, that is probably going to hurt him in the minds of some voters.
A guy like Mike Piazza isn't going to be precluded from the Hall of Fame because he wasn't the strongest fielding catcher, under that similar premise I don't see how a guy who was a full-time DH could be not included in the Hall of Fame because he was a full-time DH.
One other thing and I do hate to bring this up...but Edgar Martinez did play right smack dab in the middle of the "Steroid Era" of baseball. I don't think this should be held against him because he never actually was accused or caught using any type of PED. Still, I like to keep this in mind.
Here is Martinez in the early 90's.
Here is Martinez towards the end of his career.
Obviously, I am not saying he used steroids, but it is pretty obvious he hit the weight room at some point during those years and PEDs were prevalent in baseball. I am not saying he used steroids, I am just saying we should think about these things.
While Martinez did have a career .312 average in more than 18 seasons with Seattle, will the fact he didn't come close to 3,000 hits (he had 2,247), 400 home runs (he had 309) nor 1,500 RBI (1,261) work against him?
Not specifically because of those numbers, I just don't know if Martinez deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. His numbers looked great, I just don't know if they were good enough to be in the Hall of Fame.
How voters respond to Martinez will create a baseline for future DH candidates.
That could happen, but I think the DH should be treated like every other player based on his numbers. The DH situation is not like the reliever situation in regards to whether each group should make the Hall of Fame. How many times is a power hitting player's defensive prowess even mentioned when talking about whether he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame? The DH should still have Hall of Fame type numbers to make it based on the "older" criteria, while relievers sort of have "new" categories like saves being considered for their candidacy.
I don't think Martinez should be treated any differently than another borderline Hall of Fame candidate. No matter whether he is a DH or not, he should be inducted based on his merits. Should the prospective DH Hall of Fame candidates be held to a higher standard? Possibly, but I think regardless of whether he was a DH or not Edgar Martinez may not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. Maybe I am showing some East Coast Bias, I don't know, but he was a great hitter...just probably not one of the best hitters of all-time in my mind.
Of course I am a Hall of Fame snob...
1. Today I start it all off with Roy Williams (the UNC Tar Heels coach, not the wide receiver or the safety who play and semi-underachieve in the NFL) and his need to show the world what an asshole he can be. For just one minute he dropped his "aw shucks" demeanor and turned into the world class assassin and recruiter we know he really can be. Basically, he kicked a Presbyterian College fan out of a UNC Tar Heels basketball game because they heckled one of his players. How dare an opposing fan dare to cheer against the Tar Heels in the Dean Dome!
During the post-game press conference, Williams puts on his best shit-kicker car salesman smile and explains to reporters that he had the fan removed because he doesn't think that "anybody should yell anything negative at our players. Period."
Especially a fan of the opposing team who had the audacity to purchase a ticket in the crypt, I mean arena, that is the Dean Dome. How dare a Presbyterian College fan yell during free throw attempts! Doesn't this unruly person know that if he screams too loud he might wake up the wealthy UNC boosters who are trying to take a nap during the game? And what's with the yelling anyway, it's a basketball game, not a football game. Silence is appreciated in the Dean Dome at all times.
Here's a quick thought: You are the head coach of an NCAA basketball team. You are at home in a game against an opponent who is about as strong as an above average high school team. If you are able to hear one person in the crowd yelling against your team during the game then perhaps your home crowd should get a little bit more pumped up and make some noise. Shouldn't the home crowd be loud enough to where hecklers for the other team can't be heard? It's not this fan's fault he was cheering for Presbyterian College and no one was making noise when he yelled something non-abrasive. If the arena isn't loud enough, don't blame the heckler, blame the extremely quiet crowd that can't seem to get into the game sufficiently, no matter what the score of the game is or how many national championships the school has won.
One reporter continued to probe about what the fan said — "was it vulgar?" — but Roy just summarily disposed of the question and threatened to end the presser if there were anymore questions about it.
We all know my feelings towards UNC, but I like Roy Williams. He is a good, clean coach who recruits better than pretty much any modern day coach and generally seems like a good guy. He was nice to my fiance at a golf tournament a few years ago, so I won't burn his image in effigy. What irritates me though is that the media fails to see what a cutthroat asshole Roy Williams really can be. Coach K of Duke is seen as a guy who manipulates referees, curses too much and is just an overall evil guy. Mostly he is seen this way by opposing teams. Gary Williams is the guy who sweats a lot and can't recruit against teams like Georgetown and the rest of the Big East (not true) so he gets whoever he can for his team and works his magic. Sidney Lowe is the lazy head coach of the NC State Wolfpack who can't seem to recruit a team that plays together well, which is moderately true. Roy Williams is the nice guy coach who yells at his players just to make them better, is a marketer's dream come true because he is wholesome as white bread, and just wants to see his team succeed.
Outside of Sidney Lowe, Gary Williams and Coach K are seen as guys who are fairly cutthroat, but no one ever sees Roy Williams that way. This isn't true at all though. He can be a jerk and he does the "indignant anger" thing better than any other NCAA coach. This incident goes to show this. Roy Williams is clearly in the wrong, he basically kicked this person out of the game for not cheering for UNC which is (a) a very dictator-esque sort of thing to do and (b) incredibly rude to do to a person who was not unruly and had actually paid to watch the game. If this fan doesn't want to cheer for UNC, it's his seat and money, he doesn't have to.
Then to make matters worse, Roy Williams refuses to acknowledge he overreacted, acts like a 5 year old when he is even questioned about his actions and threatens to cancel the press conference if he is asked the question again. You know what? It's Roy's right to do that because he is the head coach, but this just goes to show me Roy Williams is a master at putting up a facade of genial kindness and will do anything to show he is in control of his program, including taking a "my way or the highway" approach to second guessing him. Roy has a temper and has a real problem with controlling it, yet we still see him as a gentle kind guy. We've seen him lose his temper before on national television.
Think about Bonnie Bernstein asking Roy Williams about the open UNC job after his Kansas team lost to Syracuse in the 2003 National Title game. He cursed at her and told her he didn't give a damn about that (the UNC) job, he was worried about his guys in the locker room. He acknowledged it wasn't her asking the question, but knew it was the guys in the control booth who wanted it asked, but he did take his anger out on her. Of course a few weeks later, the job he didn't give a damn about ended up being his new job and he has been quite successful at it. Roy Williams is not a bad guy, but he is just like every other coach of a great and successful NCAA basketball team and can be a real jerk. Sometimes the media forgets that.
Before I get done rambling about this, imagine if Coach K, Jim Calhoun or Bob Knight had done this. People would flip out about it. We would never hear the end of this story, but Roy is seen as a nice guy so even someone who follows NCAA basketball fairly closely like me only hears about this incident a couple days after it happens.
Let's see what horrible thing the fan said that drew the ire of Roy Williams:
According to one reader, the disruptive Presbyterian fan yelled — brace yourselves — "Don't miss, Deon!" when Deon Thompson was at the free-throw line.
Oh the horror! I can't imagine how Deon Thompson, a senior by the way, could take such verbal abuse. I could see if the fan had cursed or acted unruly the entire game, but that wasn't the case. I am not bashing or being down on Roy Williams, he is just like every other coach though I don't know if any other coach would have a fun removed for such a comment, but he always gets the reputation for being super nice even though this isn't true.
2. Jemele Hill doesn't think Tiger Woods should take a leave from golf.
This is a sucka move, Tiger.
Oh shit, JemeHill is talking urban talk. That's how you know she means business.
I can't believe you're running. Can't believe you've allowed these alleged mistresses and tabloids to run you off your job.
How dare you quit playing golf, as your wife reportedly asked you to, so that you could focus on your marriage. What a selfish bitch move...sucka.
But announcing Friday that you'll take an indefinite leave of absence from golf is, by far, your worst idea yet.
Porking cocktail waitresses, escorts, and pornstars that number in the double digits was not as bad an idea as temporarily stopping playing golf to undue some of the damage done? I just want to make sure I understand JemeHill's patented backwards-ass premise. I think I do get it.
If this was a scheme concocted by your handlers, get some new people. One of the reasons you're in this mess is because your handlers helped you craft an image that wasn't really you.
Tiger Woods should blame his handlers that he is marketable. They should have concocted an image for Tiger that included him screwing a pornstar in the backseat of a Buick or gotten a deal with Verizon to advertise for the new "Cheat Phone" which immediately erases all text messages, phone calls, and correspondence from select phone numbers. You know, to make it the more "real" Tiger the public sees in his commercials.
But if stepping away from golf is a calculated public relations stunt meant to generate some empathy, that means you've learned nothing from this entire ordeal.
Obviously Tiger is not subscribing to the Kobe Bryant school of making up with his wife after he cheats by purchasing her a massive diamond ring and looking really, really sorry. The media loves that so much more because they get to see the athlete grovel. Which is all they really want.
Based on her comments here, I don't know if JemeHill should ever be a public relations person for anyone in the world. EVER. She would somehow manage to be worse at PR than she can be at journalism.
Despite the clamoring for you to come clean -- a laughable idea, because it's as if people expect you to pass out a list containing the name of every woman you've had a sexual encounter with since getting married -- the only people you owe an apology to are Mrs. Woods and your business partners.
So JemeHill doesn't think Tiger Woods should come clean nor should he take some time off from golf to get his life back in order. JemeHill also believes it is not really the media's business who and what Tiger Woods is screwing...yet here she is, writing an entire article about Tiger Woods and giving him suggestions telling him what to do.
If you play, and especially if you win, it will remind people why they were drawn to you in the first place.
Distract the masses with golf! They are gullible and will believe absolutely anything you say. People are stupid JemeHill says. What JemeHill doesn't seem to recognize is that Tiger's wife wants him to take this sabbatical from golf...perhaps now is the time to listen to what she wants?
I know some of my media brethren are pretending you patented creepin', but a lot of people in this country can identify with your situation.
More urban talk, this means JemeHill means MORE business now. Her new advice: Be a role model to cheaters everywhere.
According to a recent Marist poll, seven out of 10 people think you should deal with your personal crisis privately.
I like how JemeHill quotes this statistic and then fails to realize taking a sabbatical from golf is Tiger Woods dealing with the personal crisis privately.
The best revenge is success.
"The best revenge?" Tiger is not the victim here. He is the person who did the victimizing...to his family...which he is now trying to rectify.
In other words, stop acting like a prisoner and behave more like a man who is truly ready to face his problems. Act like you're the face of golf.
Act like a pompous asshole. That will turn the tide your way in a heartbeat!
That way women will say, "Well he doesn't seem sorry because he is acting like he is the king of the world. I don't like him."
Men will say, "I can't like Tiger because my wife will kill me and he does seem like a sleaze."
Sponsors will give him the "We want him as our sponsor but he doesn't seem apologetic enough at this point, so best not touch him for a couple of years...then we will quietly give him a contract to sponsor our products" treatment.
Elin Woods will say, "I can't wait to divorce his ass and take 50% of everything, plus the kids."
Acting like he is the face of golf, showing his face in public before his wife wants him to, and being cocky doesn't seem to be the best move at this point. I'm not PR person, but neither is JemeHill.
Use this situation to your advantage. Your buddy Michael Jordan used any slight, no matter how small, to drive him. And this personal failing and the fallout from it should motivate you for the next decade.
Pretend you are a victim and delude yourself into believing the world is holding you down for your transgressions. More non-brilliant advice from JemeHill.
The people who disapprove of you because of that will still disapprove of you even if you save a child from a burning building tomorrow. And the people who love you are going to love you regardless.
Ever so untrue. Tiger will survive this if he acts contrite (which he has), shows he cares about his marriage (which he is trying to do), and kicks ass at golf when he comes back (not quite here yet). If Tiger tries to skip any of these steps, I don't know how this will work out for him. Many of his fans feel pretty let down right now...mostly because they are pathetic and for some reason thought he was a god, but that's a different story.
You wouldn't tell the public the whole truth anyway; and once again, the tabloids would have the upper hand.
The media is well-known for just accepting answers and not doing any research? When did this media show up in America and no one told me? I am only used to the media that hears an apology and then spends the next 2 weeks trying to poke holes in the apology.
Bottom line: JemeHill is wrong that Tiger is making a mistake by taking a sabbatical from golf.
3. Tracy "The Cowboy" Ringolsby thinks Edgar Martinez is the test case for DH's in the Hall of Fame.
Can Martinez speed up the process for the designated hitter?
I think the case of Edgar Martinez is not a case for Designated Hitters, but more of a case for borderline players who can get in. I don't think it really matters if Martinez was a DH or not, other than the fact the Hall of Fame electors can't take his defense into account when looking at his candidacy. I don't like the DH, simply because I am a National League guy, but I understand it's purpose for those that don't like to watch pitchers bat.
The validity of his candidacy will hinge on how dominant voters feel a one-dimensional player needs to have been.
I don't see how Edgar Martinez's case is any different than another player who may make the Hall of Fame but wasn't the strongest fielder in the world. Clearly a player being only a DH is a little bit different from a player who plays the field exceptionally poorly, but I see them as nearly the same thing in the long run. I don't think Edgar Martinez deserves to be in the Hall of Fame just based on merits unfortunately, he probably deserves to be in the hyperbolic "Hall of Very Good" in my mind. He was a great hitter but I am not sure he was one of the best hitters of all-time. As far as him being a DH for the majority of his career, that is probably going to hurt him in the minds of some voters.
A guy like Mike Piazza isn't going to be precluded from the Hall of Fame because he wasn't the strongest fielding catcher, under that similar premise I don't see how a guy who was a full-time DH could be not included in the Hall of Fame because he was a full-time DH.
One other thing and I do hate to bring this up...but Edgar Martinez did play right smack dab in the middle of the "Steroid Era" of baseball. I don't think this should be held against him because he never actually was accused or caught using any type of PED. Still, I like to keep this in mind.
Here is Martinez in the early 90's.
Here is Martinez towards the end of his career.
Obviously, I am not saying he used steroids, but it is pretty obvious he hit the weight room at some point during those years and PEDs were prevalent in baseball. I am not saying he used steroids, I am just saying we should think about these things.
While Martinez did have a career .312 average in more than 18 seasons with Seattle, will the fact he didn't come close to 3,000 hits (he had 2,247), 400 home runs (he had 309) nor 1,500 RBI (1,261) work against him?
Not specifically because of those numbers, I just don't know if Martinez deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. His numbers looked great, I just don't know if they were good enough to be in the Hall of Fame.
How voters respond to Martinez will create a baseline for future DH candidates.
That could happen, but I think the DH should be treated like every other player based on his numbers. The DH situation is not like the reliever situation in regards to whether each group should make the Hall of Fame. How many times is a power hitting player's defensive prowess even mentioned when talking about whether he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame? The DH should still have Hall of Fame type numbers to make it based on the "older" criteria, while relievers sort of have "new" categories like saves being considered for their candidacy.
I don't think Martinez should be treated any differently than another borderline Hall of Fame candidate. No matter whether he is a DH or not, he should be inducted based on his merits. Should the prospective DH Hall of Fame candidates be held to a higher standard? Possibly, but I think regardless of whether he was a DH or not Edgar Martinez may not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. Maybe I am showing some East Coast Bias, I don't know, but he was a great hitter...just probably not one of the best hitters of all-time in my mind.
Of course I am a Hall of Fame snob...
Thursday, October 30, 2008
1 comments I Disagree With Everything In This Column
Pretty rare feat! I mean, everything, at least for the first half, which I will cover below. Not a single well made argument, all of them are the result of placing a "wtf" sandwich in a blender and drinking the whole thing down with breakfast. Introducing Mr. Bizarro himself, Mike Florio.
10-Pack: Biggest blunders at NFL season's midpoint
There's enough crazy for this post in just the first four.
1. Giants giving Plaxico Burress a new contract.
It wasn't much of a surprise to learn that the defending Super Bowl champs had given a contract extension to their star wideout on the afternoon of the first game of the regular season. After all, Plaxico Burress had been clamoring for a new deal (despite having three years left on his current contract) for most if not all of the offseason, and there was a chance that, unless the team placated Plax, he'd begin to act like a bigger idiot than we'd ever before seen.
let me be perfectly clear here - Plaxico Burress was fucking awesome last year. Shockey was out, Jacobs was frequently hurt, Manning was generally shaky, and they were not a particulary good pass blocking team. Burress was the one consistant shining light for the offense, and he did it without practising all season due to a practically broken ankle. He finished tied for fourth in receiving TD's and all above him (Housh, Moss, Owens, Edwards) all had other elite offensive players - that was just not true for Burress. You know who was second in receiving TD's (Burress had 12)? Amani Toomer. He had three.
He had 151 of Manning's 251 passing yards in the NFC Title game (let that sink in for a bit), while Brandon Jacobs ran for just 67 yards. Saying he single handedly willed them to the Superbowl is a bit of a stretch, but it's plausable. This guy was an unsung hero, in the truest sense, if any team owes any player, anything in the NFL, it's the Giants and Burress, let's make that perfectly clear. He also leads his team in yards and TD's, despite missing a game.
Then, several weeks later, we learned that Burress already had been acting that way, as evidenced by reports of 40 or 50 fines since he joined the team, which culminated in a two-week suspension (later reduced to one week) after he didn't show up for work the day after a game.
So why did the Giants give the guy more money?
because he's AWESOME. I am willing to give Burress a massive benifit of the doubt based on last year, and you know, you just know, there's another side to this story.
At a time when the Giants aren't afraid to hold firm even if it means missing out on the services of guys like Michael Strahan and Tony Gonzalez, it's amazing that the team rewarded Burress in light of all the things the team knew -- and that the rest of us generally didn't.
raise your hand if you would prefer Tony Gonzalez or Michael Strahan (a RETIRED Michael Strahan I might add) to Plaxico Burress? You are the Sarah Palin's of the NFL, congratulations.
Most recently, the Giants benched Burress for more than a quarter of Sunday's win at Pittsburgh due to missing injury treatments. Unless he finally figures out the connection between his actions and the consequences for them, he'll continue to be more of a liability than an asset.
leads a 6-1 team in yards and TD's, I think the Giants will live. Thanks.
2. Saints trading for Jeremy Shockey.
The Giants' misguided decision to pay Burress was counterbalanced by a grifting of the Saints, who sent a second- and fifth-round pick to New York for unwanted tight end Jeremy Shockey.
and so we begin the worship at the alter of draft picks.
It's like having someone pay you $1,000 to take away your trash.
it's nothing like that, at all. Ugh, so condescending and self satisfied.
Shockey, when healthy, is a talented player. But he never has functioned effectively as a member of a team.
Really? Really? Really?
"But it highlights the sizable void that the injured Shockey has left behind as a player and a fiery leader, a space that the unsung and understated Boss will try to partly fill...Boss called Shockey “a great friend and a great mentor...It’s not the ideal situation with our starting tight end going down, our team leader going down like that”
Shockey"He's one of our leaders, one of the guys that comes to practice every day,'' quarterback Eli Manning said. "It's going to be tough to overcome that, and we need someone to step up and hopefully one of these rookie tight ends can do that.''
"It's part of the business, part of the risk you take when you go out there, that you can get injured,'' defensive end Michael Strahan said. "Losing Shockey is definitely going to hurt because he's not only an emotional leader and all those things, but he also makes plays for you. He's one of our guys that other teams make sure they account for, and that helps other guys out. I know as much of a competitor he is, it's really going to kill him to watch.''
"Another big issue was the absence of Shockey, which left the question of who would step up as the vocal leader of the offense."
*yawn* Your wrongness bores me Florio, fetch me a new reporter!
Shockey has recently popped off about the handling of his hernia surgery, has already missed several games due to the condition and has not delivered strong performances on the field. The Saints should have kept their draft picks -- especially since an unprecedented number of underclassmen are poised to make a cash grab in 2009, before the NFL imposes a rookie pay scale.
Shockey has not been great, but this is such 20/20 hindsight rubbish, and Florio knows it. So easy to criticise after the fact, and there is still plenty of time to turn it around.
3. Cowboys trading for Roy Williams.
Speaking of squandering picks in next year's talent-heavy draft, the Cowboys gave up a first-, third- and sixth-round pick for a receiver they simply don't need.
Miles Austin is the best receiver ever. Eddie Royal for Andre Johnson! Lack of depth at receiver was a massive need! Maybe the biggest! The defense is awesome, everywhere basically. They have two excellent, well complimented running backs. Until recently the QB position is solid, and the temporary loss of Romo isn't the end of the world (despite what the Chicken Little's of the media). Their O-Line is arguably the best in the league. The one downspot is receiver, they rely very heavily on Owens and Witten, Barber isn't much of a threat out of the backfield (despite the TD last week), Crayton is still inconsistant and Austin et al are thoroughly unproven. The receivers certainly aren't terrible, but relatively, this is a weak link. It's understandable that the Yankees of the NFL would buy now, they wanna win now, if you didn't pick up the subtle hints Einstein.
There's only one football, and the Cowboys have a healthy throng of guys who want to catch it and/or run with it. Adding another guy to the mix made no sense.
something like 60% of all passes went to Owens or Witten last year, I think defenses might have an eye on them man. Might need another target, even occasionally. Good players = good. The Cowboys want to win now, it's fair enough too seeing as they are good, and not many teams look unbeatable, in fact, for the first four weeks, they looked the best team in football, fucking have some balls and go for this championship. You, Florio, are a pussy.
4. Lions firing Matt Millen.
oh yes. Oh God yes. That's the good stuff...ooooooooooooh yeaaaaaaaah.
What's that, you say? How can it have been a blunder for the Lions to fire the guy who should have been fired at least three years ago?
The problem here isn't Detroit's decision to part ways with Millen. It's the timing of it.
No one fires a GM three games into a season. The move does nothing to help the team in the short term.
this is like saying that you shouldn't stop building your lunar rocket ship out of cardboard because it does nothing to help you to get to the moon. Technically it's true, but the cardboard ship sure as fuck wasn't gonna get you there, you may as well get to trying something else.
The early-season dismissal of Millen has given the front-office folk -- who should have been fired with him -- a three-month head start on getting themselves ensconced for 2009.
...what?
Fortunately for Lions fans, the team keeps losing...
oh! Now your column makes sense! You think the goal is to lose games! Now I see! No, sorry man, it's to win them, the answer is - to win games. Thus, Shockey is good, so is Burress, Matt Millen is a millstone on the neck of the Lions and Roy Williams also, a good pickup. Winning = good. Losing = bad. Home Runs = good. Outs = bad. Dunn = good. Eckstein = bad.
Everyone on board? Awesome.
Mike Florio? You're on notice - you just made the list.
10-Pack: Biggest blunders at NFL season's midpoint
There's enough crazy for this post in just the first four.
1. Giants giving Plaxico Burress a new contract.
It wasn't much of a surprise to learn that the defending Super Bowl champs had given a contract extension to their star wideout on the afternoon of the first game of the regular season. After all, Plaxico Burress had been clamoring for a new deal (despite having three years left on his current contract) for most if not all of the offseason, and there was a chance that, unless the team placated Plax, he'd begin to act like a bigger idiot than we'd ever before seen.
let me be perfectly clear here - Plaxico Burress was fucking awesome last year. Shockey was out, Jacobs was frequently hurt, Manning was generally shaky, and they were not a particulary good pass blocking team. Burress was the one consistant shining light for the offense, and he did it without practising all season due to a practically broken ankle. He finished tied for fourth in receiving TD's and all above him (Housh, Moss, Owens, Edwards) all had other elite offensive players - that was just not true for Burress. You know who was second in receiving TD's (Burress had 12)? Amani Toomer. He had three.
He had 151 of Manning's 251 passing yards in the NFC Title game (let that sink in for a bit), while Brandon Jacobs ran for just 67 yards. Saying he single handedly willed them to the Superbowl is a bit of a stretch, but it's plausable. This guy was an unsung hero, in the truest sense, if any team owes any player, anything in the NFL, it's the Giants and Burress, let's make that perfectly clear. He also leads his team in yards and TD's, despite missing a game.
Then, several weeks later, we learned that Burress already had been acting that way, as evidenced by reports of 40 or 50 fines since he joined the team, which culminated in a two-week suspension (later reduced to one week) after he didn't show up for work the day after a game.
So why did the Giants give the guy more money?
because he's AWESOME. I am willing to give Burress a massive benifit of the doubt based on last year, and you know, you just know, there's another side to this story.
At a time when the Giants aren't afraid to hold firm even if it means missing out on the services of guys like Michael Strahan and Tony Gonzalez, it's amazing that the team rewarded Burress in light of all the things the team knew -- and that the rest of us generally didn't.
raise your hand if you would prefer Tony Gonzalez or Michael Strahan (a RETIRED Michael Strahan I might add) to Plaxico Burress? You are the Sarah Palin's of the NFL, congratulations.
Most recently, the Giants benched Burress for more than a quarter of Sunday's win at Pittsburgh due to missing injury treatments. Unless he finally figures out the connection between his actions and the consequences for them, he'll continue to be more of a liability than an asset.
leads a 6-1 team in yards and TD's, I think the Giants will live. Thanks.
2. Saints trading for Jeremy Shockey.
The Giants' misguided decision to pay Burress was counterbalanced by a grifting of the Saints, who sent a second- and fifth-round pick to New York for unwanted tight end Jeremy Shockey.
and so we begin the worship at the alter of draft picks.
It's like having someone pay you $1,000 to take away your trash.
it's nothing like that, at all. Ugh, so condescending and self satisfied.
Shockey, when healthy, is a talented player. But he never has functioned effectively as a member of a team.
Really? Really? Really?
"But it highlights the sizable void that the injured Shockey has left behind as a player and a fiery leader, a space that the unsung and understated Boss will try to partly fill...Boss called Shockey “a great friend and a great mentor...It’s not the ideal situation with our starting tight end going down, our team leader going down like that”
Shockey"He's one of our leaders, one of the guys that comes to practice every day,'' quarterback Eli Manning said. "It's going to be tough to overcome that, and we need someone to step up and hopefully one of these rookie tight ends can do that.''
"It's part of the business, part of the risk you take when you go out there, that you can get injured,'' defensive end Michael Strahan said. "Losing Shockey is definitely going to hurt because he's not only an emotional leader and all those things, but he also makes plays for you. He's one of our guys that other teams make sure they account for, and that helps other guys out. I know as much of a competitor he is, it's really going to kill him to watch.''
"Another big issue was the absence of Shockey, which left the question of who would step up as the vocal leader of the offense."
*yawn* Your wrongness bores me Florio, fetch me a new reporter!
Shockey has recently popped off about the handling of his hernia surgery, has already missed several games due to the condition and has not delivered strong performances on the field. The Saints should have kept their draft picks -- especially since an unprecedented number of underclassmen are poised to make a cash grab in 2009, before the NFL imposes a rookie pay scale.
Shockey has not been great, but this is such 20/20 hindsight rubbish, and Florio knows it. So easy to criticise after the fact, and there is still plenty of time to turn it around.
3. Cowboys trading for Roy Williams.
Speaking of squandering picks in next year's talent-heavy draft, the Cowboys gave up a first-, third- and sixth-round pick for a receiver they simply don't need.
Miles Austin is the best receiver ever. Eddie Royal for Andre Johnson! Lack of depth at receiver was a massive need! Maybe the biggest! The defense is awesome, everywhere basically. They have two excellent, well complimented running backs. Until recently the QB position is solid, and the temporary loss of Romo isn't the end of the world (despite what the Chicken Little's of the media). Their O-Line is arguably the best in the league. The one downspot is receiver, they rely very heavily on Owens and Witten, Barber isn't much of a threat out of the backfield (despite the TD last week), Crayton is still inconsistant and Austin et al are thoroughly unproven. The receivers certainly aren't terrible, but relatively, this is a weak link. It's understandable that the Yankees of the NFL would buy now, they wanna win now, if you didn't pick up the subtle hints Einstein.
There's only one football, and the Cowboys have a healthy throng of guys who want to catch it and/or run with it. Adding another guy to the mix made no sense.
something like 60% of all passes went to Owens or Witten last year, I think defenses might have an eye on them man. Might need another target, even occasionally. Good players = good. The Cowboys want to win now, it's fair enough too seeing as they are good, and not many teams look unbeatable, in fact, for the first four weeks, they looked the best team in football, fucking have some balls and go for this championship. You, Florio, are a pussy.
4. Lions firing Matt Millen.
oh yes. Oh God yes. That's the good stuff...ooooooooooooh yeaaaaaaaah.
What's that, you say? How can it have been a blunder for the Lions to fire the guy who should have been fired at least three years ago?
The problem here isn't Detroit's decision to part ways with Millen. It's the timing of it.
No one fires a GM three games into a season. The move does nothing to help the team in the short term.
this is like saying that you shouldn't stop building your lunar rocket ship out of cardboard because it does nothing to help you to get to the moon. Technically it's true, but the cardboard ship sure as fuck wasn't gonna get you there, you may as well get to trying something else.
The early-season dismissal of Millen has given the front-office folk -- who should have been fired with him -- a three-month head start on getting themselves ensconced for 2009.
...what?
Fortunately for Lions fans, the team keeps losing...
oh! Now your column makes sense! You think the goal is to lose games! Now I see! No, sorry man, it's to win them, the answer is - to win games. Thus, Shockey is good, so is Burress, Matt Millen is a millstone on the neck of the Lions and Roy Williams also, a good pickup. Winning = good. Losing = bad. Home Runs = good. Outs = bad. Dunn = good. Eckstein = bad.
Everyone on board? Awesome.
Mike Florio? You're on notice - you just made the list.
Monday, July 21, 2008
2 comments Being The Gosh-Darn Favorites
I want to thank J.S. for putting up two great posts this weekend. It was nice to have something up on this blog that I actually enjoyed reading. He seems to have a prodigious output of posts like I sometimes tend to do, so this is going to be a lot of fun.
Let me share something with the world here. I hate UNC-Chapel Hill. I hate the people, I hate the attitude they have, and mostly I hate the sports teams. My sister actually went there and I did not speak to her for 4.5 years and we are just getting to know each other again. So just remember that as I mock them mercilessly and just think of it as sour grapes. One of the reasons I hate UNC is the coach, Roy Williams. I don't hate him personally, I hate his "gosh, we just do the best darn things we can to win and if we don't win I am going to buy the whole team some pop and we can talk on the front porch" demeanor. He is really a basketball killing machine but wants to pretend to be down home. He can go to Hell. I also hate how Duke is considered the Yankees of college basketball while the Tar Heels are not universally hated, despite the fact UNC has won more championships and are always a national powerhouse. They are still loved by most people, except Duke fans, it is insane. I want this to change.
Andy Katz has provoked Roy Williams' downhome demeanor and it is going to give me a seizure. Also, watch for a link-o-rama fest.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/columns/story?columnist=katz_andy&id=3493057
North Carolina coach Roy Williams made it clear to his Tar Heels that if they don't put the team first in their quest for a national title, they won't play for him next season.
I guess putting the team first means recruiting violations that are never punished?
http://www.fanhouse.com/2007/09/30/did-unc-break-recruiting-rules/
Sean May was putting the team first even AFTER he left school to sit the bench for the Bobcats.
Of course UNC did an internal "investigation" and found they did not break any rules. They were also putting the team first.
http://carolinabball.blogspot.com/2007/10/unc-finds-no-recruiting-violations.html
You want more blatant violation of NCAA rules that went unpunished?
http://ncaabasketball.fanhouse.com/2008/04/30/obama-scrimmages-with-unc-tar-heels-but-did-it-violate-ncaa-ru/
I realize every team does things like this, supposedly, but why don't people hate UNC? This bothers me. They commit violations, minor as they are, have an annoying good white player, and get a lot of calls from the refs. I am vexed.
"If I feel that someone is out for themselves, I don't give a darn who it is, they won't play," Williams said last week in Akron, Ohio
I don't give a darn! He does not curse, how high and mighty of him! Golly gee, buddy.
North Carolina is the overwhelming favorite to win the 2009 national title.
As they should be, they lost only one player from the team last year that made the Final Four and have an absolutely loaded bench. I have prepared myself for this fact. This is team is like the 1991 UNLV, 1997 Kansas, and 1999 Duke teams in that if they don't win the National Championship there is really, really something wrong and should be investigated fully.
"I didn't think [there was] any way in Hades that we'd have all three back," Williams said of getting Lawson, Ellington and Green to return on the deadline to withdraw from the NBA draft.
If you don't think "no way in Hades" is something fucking stupid to say then I don't know what to say to you. Just imagine if someone came up to you and said that phrase, and tell me you would not want to punch them in the face and then scream in their ear. You would immediately do it.
I wish Andy Katz would just misquote him and throw the word "hell" in there.
"The '05 team had six or seven guys, but this team has a chance to go much deeper," Williams said. "On the '05 team, we won just 19 games the year before so there was no reason to be fat and happy. None of those guys thought about the NBA and the NBA had no interest in them. They were hungry to show people they were a big-time basketball team.
Gollllllllllllllllllllly, that is a great point Roy. I am sure Marvin Williams the 6th man on that team was not thinking about the NBA when he was ranked the #10 recruit in his class.
http://www.insidehoops.com/high-school-2004.shtml
Oh and Roy, that team also had 3 of the 10 recruits from the 2002 class as well in Raymond Felton, Sean May, and Rashad McCants. I would say the NBA had their eye on them as well.
http://scouthoops.scout.com/a.z?s=75&p=9&c=4&pid=88&yr=2002
Quit with the "little old me, I just get the best players I can and do what I can with them" act. Andy Katz should have included in the article that this quote by Roy Williams was insanely incorrect and pointed out every starter for that team was highly recruited and would have fit in well in the NBA. I would argue that UNC is the premier recruiting factory in the nation and Roy just continues to pretend he gets very few talented players, but mostly just farm boys from East Indiana who shot on peach baskets when they weren't busy working in the fields.
Williams said the "high character" of this Tar Heels team is a reason he's not concerned that he has "too many guys."
Yeah that 2005 National Championship team had no character. Now someone is not being a team player and trying to sell his ring.
http://ncaabasketball.fanhouse.com/2008/07/18/tar-heels-2005-championship-ring-is-being-auctioned-on-ebay/
What Williams is talking about is the high character of players like Ty Lawson.
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6189197
How many other UNC players were in the car when he got arrested? If you know Ty Lawson, and know what a high character person he is, then you would know the answer is zero. High motherfucking puppie petting baby kissing character. That's all Ty Lawson is.
The only thing Williams still doesn't have a handle on from last season is the perplexing first half against Kansas in the national semifinal.
You get your ass kicked sometimes, I don't see how this is tough to get a handle on. They got out to a 40-12 lead because your team played poorly. This is why I don't like good ol' Roy Boy, he can't just say, "we got our ass kicked." Google it. You will never see him say it.
"It's the most dumbfounded I've ever been as a coach," Williams said of the Kansas loss. "In the locker room, we prepared like we did every game in the ACC and in the NCAA. They'd all been the same and the kids appeared to have a good focus. I'm just dumbfounded, still dumbfounded. Kansas just came in and hit us in the mouth."
I am dumbfounded too Roy. You didn't have your team practice by riding mules around the gym shooting heads of cabbage into a wooden box, pointing out shiny objects in the stands to your players, or putting your shoes on their hands? I have no idea what happened either. Gosh, Roy, I am dumbfounded also.
Maybe Kansas kicked your ass.
UNC won't back down in scheduling once again.
They are the best team in the country and the odds on favorite to win the National Championship. Why would they back down?
Williams is taking the Tar Heels on the road, too, against lower-level teams that could cause problems, like UC Santa Barbara on the way to Maui and Valparaiso in Chicago
How are you going to write an article about how good this team is and then say UC Santa Barbara and Valparaiso are going to give the Tar Heels problems? Andy Katz is playing perfectly into Roy's aw-shucks persona and it kills me. UNC has no business losing more than 2 games this upcoming year. What problems do UC Santa Barbara and Valparaiso reasonably give them?
"The league is so much better and experienced," Williams said. "And in playing Kentucky, Michigan State and the Maui games, I think those kinds of games will get us ready."
How can you write an entire article about how awesome UNC, including things like this:
With those three back, UNC will return its top six scorers, who combined to score 78.7 points, which is more than 319 Division I teams averaged last season.
Add in returning forwards Deon Thompson and Marcus Ginyard, guard Bobby Frasor (coming back from a knee injury) and the infusion of even more talent with ready-to-contribute freshman guards Larry Drew and Justin Watts and forwards Tyler Zeller and Ed Davis, and the Tar Heels are as loaded as any team in recent memory to be challenging for the title.
then even pretend there is another team that is in the same class? UNC is the clear favorite and they deserve to be, I just wish someone would start hating on them for the fake modesty and "aw shucks, look at us" mentality.
I will try to write something less angry later today. We'll see how that goes, without Simmons around, I am running on anger fumes right now.
Let me share something with the world here. I hate UNC-Chapel Hill. I hate the people, I hate the attitude they have, and mostly I hate the sports teams. My sister actually went there and I did not speak to her for 4.5 years and we are just getting to know each other again. So just remember that as I mock them mercilessly and just think of it as sour grapes. One of the reasons I hate UNC is the coach, Roy Williams. I don't hate him personally, I hate his "gosh, we just do the best darn things we can to win and if we don't win I am going to buy the whole team some pop and we can talk on the front porch" demeanor. He is really a basketball killing machine but wants to pretend to be down home. He can go to Hell. I also hate how Duke is considered the Yankees of college basketball while the Tar Heels are not universally hated, despite the fact UNC has won more championships and are always a national powerhouse. They are still loved by most people, except Duke fans, it is insane. I want this to change.
Andy Katz has provoked Roy Williams' downhome demeanor and it is going to give me a seizure. Also, watch for a link-o-rama fest.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/columns/story?columnist=katz_andy&id=3493057
North Carolina coach Roy Williams made it clear to his Tar Heels that if they don't put the team first in their quest for a national title, they won't play for him next season.
I guess putting the team first means recruiting violations that are never punished?
http://www.fanhouse.com/2007/09/30/did-unc-break-recruiting-rules/
Sean May was putting the team first even AFTER he left school to sit the bench for the Bobcats.
Of course UNC did an internal "investigation" and found they did not break any rules. They were also putting the team first.
http://carolinabball.blogspot.com/2007/10/unc-finds-no-recruiting-violations.html
You want more blatant violation of NCAA rules that went unpunished?
http://ncaabasketball.fanhouse.com/2008/04/30/obama-scrimmages-with-unc-tar-heels-but-did-it-violate-ncaa-ru/
I realize every team does things like this, supposedly, but why don't people hate UNC? This bothers me. They commit violations, minor as they are, have an annoying good white player, and get a lot of calls from the refs. I am vexed.
"If I feel that someone is out for themselves, I don't give a darn who it is, they won't play," Williams said last week in Akron, Ohio
I don't give a darn! He does not curse, how high and mighty of him! Golly gee, buddy.
North Carolina is the overwhelming favorite to win the 2009 national title.
As they should be, they lost only one player from the team last year that made the Final Four and have an absolutely loaded bench. I have prepared myself for this fact. This is team is like the 1991 UNLV, 1997 Kansas, and 1999 Duke teams in that if they don't win the National Championship there is really, really something wrong and should be investigated fully.
"I didn't think [there was] any way in Hades that we'd have all three back," Williams said of getting Lawson, Ellington and Green to return on the deadline to withdraw from the NBA draft.
If you don't think "no way in Hades" is something fucking stupid to say then I don't know what to say to you. Just imagine if someone came up to you and said that phrase, and tell me you would not want to punch them in the face and then scream in their ear. You would immediately do it.
I wish Andy Katz would just misquote him and throw the word "hell" in there.
"The '05 team had six or seven guys, but this team has a chance to go much deeper," Williams said. "On the '05 team, we won just 19 games the year before so there was no reason to be fat and happy. None of those guys thought about the NBA and the NBA had no interest in them. They were hungry to show people they were a big-time basketball team.
Gollllllllllllllllllllly, that is a great point Roy. I am sure Marvin Williams the 6th man on that team was not thinking about the NBA when he was ranked the #10 recruit in his class.
http://www.insidehoops.com/high-school-2004.shtml
Oh and Roy, that team also had 3 of the 10 recruits from the 2002 class as well in Raymond Felton, Sean May, and Rashad McCants. I would say the NBA had their eye on them as well.
http://scouthoops.scout.com/a.z?s=75&p=9&c=4&pid=88&yr=2002
Quit with the "little old me, I just get the best players I can and do what I can with them" act. Andy Katz should have included in the article that this quote by Roy Williams was insanely incorrect and pointed out every starter for that team was highly recruited and would have fit in well in the NBA. I would argue that UNC is the premier recruiting factory in the nation and Roy just continues to pretend he gets very few talented players, but mostly just farm boys from East Indiana who shot on peach baskets when they weren't busy working in the fields.
Williams said the "high character" of this Tar Heels team is a reason he's not concerned that he has "too many guys."
Yeah that 2005 National Championship team had no character. Now someone is not being a team player and trying to sell his ring.
http://ncaabasketball.fanhouse.com/2008/07/18/tar-heels-2005-championship-ring-is-being-auctioned-on-ebay/
What Williams is talking about is the high character of players like Ty Lawson.
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6189197
How many other UNC players were in the car when he got arrested? If you know Ty Lawson, and know what a high character person he is, then you would know the answer is zero. High motherfucking puppie petting baby kissing character. That's all Ty Lawson is.
The only thing Williams still doesn't have a handle on from last season is the perplexing first half against Kansas in the national semifinal.
You get your ass kicked sometimes, I don't see how this is tough to get a handle on. They got out to a 40-12 lead because your team played poorly. This is why I don't like good ol' Roy Boy, he can't just say, "we got our ass kicked." Google it. You will never see him say it.
"It's the most dumbfounded I've ever been as a coach," Williams said of the Kansas loss. "In the locker room, we prepared like we did every game in the ACC and in the NCAA. They'd all been the same and the kids appeared to have a good focus. I'm just dumbfounded, still dumbfounded. Kansas just came in and hit us in the mouth."
I am dumbfounded too Roy. You didn't have your team practice by riding mules around the gym shooting heads of cabbage into a wooden box, pointing out shiny objects in the stands to your players, or putting your shoes on their hands? I have no idea what happened either. Gosh, Roy, I am dumbfounded also.
Maybe Kansas kicked your ass.
UNC won't back down in scheduling once again.
They are the best team in the country and the odds on favorite to win the National Championship. Why would they back down?
Williams is taking the Tar Heels on the road, too, against lower-level teams that could cause problems, like UC Santa Barbara on the way to Maui and Valparaiso in Chicago
How are you going to write an article about how good this team is and then say UC Santa Barbara and Valparaiso are going to give the Tar Heels problems? Andy Katz is playing perfectly into Roy's aw-shucks persona and it kills me. UNC has no business losing more than 2 games this upcoming year. What problems do UC Santa Barbara and Valparaiso reasonably give them?
"The league is so much better and experienced," Williams said. "And in playing Kentucky, Michigan State and the Maui games, I think those kinds of games will get us ready."
How can you write an entire article about how awesome UNC, including things like this:
With those three back, UNC will return its top six scorers, who combined to score 78.7 points, which is more than 319 Division I teams averaged last season.
Add in returning forwards Deon Thompson and Marcus Ginyard, guard Bobby Frasor (coming back from a knee injury) and the infusion of even more talent with ready-to-contribute freshman guards Larry Drew and Justin Watts and forwards Tyler Zeller and Ed Davis, and the Tar Heels are as loaded as any team in recent memory to be challenging for the title.
then even pretend there is another team that is in the same class? UNC is the clear favorite and they deserve to be, I just wish someone would start hating on them for the fake modesty and "aw shucks, look at us" mentality.
I will try to write something less angry later today. We'll see how that goes, without Simmons around, I am running on anger fumes right now.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
0 comments Ten Things I Think I Think Peter King Has Not Thought Of- Dumbed Down Blogger Version
I am just a stupid blogger who writes nothing but filth, and I provide no analysis, so if you are looking for bad jokes (Woody Paige), an in depth interview with Brett Favre via telephone (Peter King), the display of a vendetta against individuals (Jay Mariotti) or Boston sports updates (William G. Simmons) then you are in the wrong place. Lower the IQ and expectations please...
1. Smart move by Buzz to flip out and give deadspin.com more page views and hits than ever before and publicize the site he absolutely hates. If you really think it is filth would it not have been smarter to not flip out and make sure the episode was boring? No one remembers boring episodes of any show where nothing happens. When the people want controversy and you give them that controversy, then it possibly could work out to what is called "publicity."
2. Good article by Jason Whitlock on the incident. (I am being sarcastic here). I actually enjoy Whitlock but still...
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8092720/Buzz-off-base-vs.-blogger-at-media-town-hall-
See?
I'm not afraid of blogs. I enjoy them. I post on message boards using my real name. I respond to the e-mails of bloggers. They don't threaten me or the newspaper/journalism industry I love.
How does he know a blogger's email address? Is it especially coarse and has a picture of a donkey fucking a coconut? I love how he talks about blogs like they are different from any other type of literature and uses special code language only bloggers can understand.
He is also tolerant of us! See?
He told me on the ride over that he hated blogs. I told him that blogs weren't going anywhere and we might as well learn to live with them and enjoy them.
I am glad he can learn to live with us. Just like we have had to live with bullshit analysis and journalism for the past 100 years from the media. Thanks Jason for understanding and stopping by today! Horribly injure Woody Paige on the way out will you?
Bloggers might be inspired by their loathing of traditional media, but they are not the cause of our growing irrelevance.
So close...but not quite right. I am personally inspired by the fact I have an informed opinion I would like to make public. I don't loathe the media necessarily, I watch ESPN all the time, but yell at the television from time to time because of the ignorant ideas propagated. I say blame the Women's Suffrage Movement, they just went and gave a voice to EVERYONE.
To his credit, Russo explained that his show is for fans, not athletes or journalists.
You could actually say the same thing about bloggers. We just have a keyboard and not a radio station to broadcast to the world.
I guess bloggers do have a personal vendetta sometimes against writers and spit vitriol that seems kind of cheap and classless. At least writers don't do that:
Some of us don't have the time, patience or inclination to help promote Leitch's book, which spends an inordinate amount of time telling prominent, successful, well-spoken African-Americans that they're not really black.
That's just one comment, no big deal. I can see past it.
Leitch's site troubles a lot of journalists, traditional newspaper writers and broadcasters because we are often the target of his humiliation.
So that is why you don't like him? Common sense, good journalism, rationality, and my sanity have been the target of many journalists opinions, so that is why I have a blog.
I'd like to see David Simon (creator of "The Wire"), Dan LeBatard (Miami media personality), Bill Simmons (ESPN's Sports Guy) and Dr. Richard Lapchick invited to the follow-up discussion to add some diversity. And, of course, people such as Dr. Harry Edwards, Bill Russell, Jim Brown, etc. should be invited too.
And maybe Will Leitch can come along and tell us if we're all acting black enough.
Two problems:
A. Bill Simmons would have nothing fruitful to say about race because he only knows Vegas (which is so overrated according to him), the Boston sports teams and bad 80's movies.
B. Cheap shot again at Leitch. At least Whitlock is staying out of the fray.
3. Stephen A. Smith said on SportsCenter this morning about Avery Johnson's firing:
"Mark Cuban seems to think he has a championship caliber team and they should have performed well in the playoffs in the past two years. Why he thinks this no one in the league really knows."
Oooo! I know, I know! Could it be because the past two years his team has been expected to win both playoffs series they lost and had a #1 seed in the "loaded" West one of those years? As hyped as the West is, for a team to have a #1 seed for the playoffs you would have to assume that team is going to be an NBA Title contender wouldn't you? That is why! Give me my gold star!
4. As often as I hear UNC fans bitch about all the recruiting violations other coaches in the NCAA commit, like filming commercials and coaching USA teams, it is really funny to see them commit a flagrant violation with Barack Obama playing pickup ball and Roy Williams watching, but then be forgiven because it was a "learning experience."
Also, I wish Psycho T and his bff Bobby Frasor would jump off more buildings in the future.
5. My take on the Buzz v. Blog issue is that they need to learn to co-exist with blogs and online writers because they are not going away anytime soon. (Hey, that is the same thing Whitlock said!) Maybe there are blogs that have foul language and present nothing favorable to society, but you don't have to read them. I have never seen an episode of The Simpsons, the Andy Griffith Show, CSI and many others that are plenty popular. You know why? I have free will to turn the television off and not watch those shows I don't care to watch. If you don't like the blogs, don't pay attention to them.
I know you did not ask for my opinion, but I did not ask for Skip Bayless' opinion on anything, and I am subjected to that if I want to watch a daytime sports channel. I think that's the point.
Honestly, this is all giving me a headache.
6. I was going to schedule a vacation to Atlanta around John Smoltz's pitching schedule, so I could see him pitch before he retired. I've seen him close 2 games and I am not sure I am going to get a chance to see him start a game in person.
That was my Peter King note of the week.
7. http://thebiglead.com/?p=5647#more-5647
Read that article and then just think about the free speech issues that go with it. What Mike (or is it Mad Dog? I don't listen to the radio at all, I have these things called "CD's" I listen to) does not realize is that in comparison to the radio and television, where there are fewer options for a viewer, vulgarity is a bigger deal because of the lack of options to choose from. It's not like you or I can start a radio station/television station tomorrow and start showing programming. There is an actual need for the FCC on radio/television because there are so few channels and they can not all show vulgarity, so there needs to be some regulation. There is no need to control the Internet because you don't have to go to the sites that are "vulgar" to enjoy the Internet. There are plenty of "clean" sites.
8. Also, why the fuck is everyone so worried about bad blogging on the Internet and think THAT is the reason to patrol the Internet. Which of these could perceivably have a worse effect on our society:
A. Bad blogging that contains curse words and criticisms of sportswriters.
B. 40 year olds stalking 13 year olds on Myspace
C. The massive amounts of pornography that is readily available on the Internet for those who choose to partake.
This is like saying the FCC should crack down on talk shows because Keith Olbermann or Bill O'Reilly is acting like an ass again. I love how certain individuals take the smallest problem associated with the Internet and use THAT as the reason to get government intervention. Humans fucking donkeys on the Internet is fine, as long as there is no sports vulgarity.
9. I am blowing this all out of portion aren't I? So is everyone else, so consider it a parody of their behavior if you would like.
10. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8089770
So, so, true. I always thought that Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire should start lawsuits against those who defamed them if they never took steroids. To me, because they never defended themselves, they were guilty. Sounds stupid but if a person was saying untrue things about me, the first thing I would do is try to put a lid on it as fast as possible to clear my name. Roger Clemens took the lawsuit approach, but it does not seem to work as well when you are actually guilty of the crime. Not to mention, if you have skeletons in the closet, they will come out as well.
My conclusion is that if you are guilty of steroid use, then admit it and go on. If you are innocent and have no skeletons, then fight it. If you are guilty and have skeletons in your closet, DO NOT refuse to admit you are guilty and try to play a game of hardball with your accuser.
Simmons has a new column. I have always thought his material was vulgar overall. Needless to say, it offends me.
1. Smart move by Buzz to flip out and give deadspin.com more page views and hits than ever before and publicize the site he absolutely hates. If you really think it is filth would it not have been smarter to not flip out and make sure the episode was boring? No one remembers boring episodes of any show where nothing happens. When the people want controversy and you give them that controversy, then it possibly could work out to what is called "publicity."
2. Good article by Jason Whitlock on the incident. (I am being sarcastic here). I actually enjoy Whitlock but still...
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/8092720/Buzz-off-base-vs.-blogger-at-media-town-hall-
See?
I'm not afraid of blogs. I enjoy them. I post on message boards using my real name. I respond to the e-mails of bloggers. They don't threaten me or the newspaper/journalism industry I love.
How does he know a blogger's email address? Is it especially coarse and has a picture of a donkey fucking a coconut? I love how he talks about blogs like they are different from any other type of literature and uses special code language only bloggers can understand.
He is also tolerant of us! See?
He told me on the ride over that he hated blogs. I told him that blogs weren't going anywhere and we might as well learn to live with them and enjoy them.
I am glad he can learn to live with us. Just like we have had to live with bullshit analysis and journalism for the past 100 years from the media. Thanks Jason for understanding and stopping by today! Horribly injure Woody Paige on the way out will you?
Bloggers might be inspired by their loathing of traditional media, but they are not the cause of our growing irrelevance.
So close...but not quite right. I am personally inspired by the fact I have an informed opinion I would like to make public. I don't loathe the media necessarily, I watch ESPN all the time, but yell at the television from time to time because of the ignorant ideas propagated. I say blame the Women's Suffrage Movement, they just went and gave a voice to EVERYONE.
To his credit, Russo explained that his show is for fans, not athletes or journalists.
You could actually say the same thing about bloggers. We just have a keyboard and not a radio station to broadcast to the world.
I guess bloggers do have a personal vendetta sometimes against writers and spit vitriol that seems kind of cheap and classless. At least writers don't do that:
Some of us don't have the time, patience or inclination to help promote Leitch's book, which spends an inordinate amount of time telling prominent, successful, well-spoken African-Americans that they're not really black.
That's just one comment, no big deal. I can see past it.
Leitch's site troubles a lot of journalists, traditional newspaper writers and broadcasters because we are often the target of his humiliation.
So that is why you don't like him? Common sense, good journalism, rationality, and my sanity have been the target of many journalists opinions, so that is why I have a blog.
I'd like to see David Simon (creator of "The Wire"), Dan LeBatard (Miami media personality), Bill Simmons (ESPN's Sports Guy) and Dr. Richard Lapchick invited to the follow-up discussion to add some diversity. And, of course, people such as Dr. Harry Edwards, Bill Russell, Jim Brown, etc. should be invited too.
And maybe Will Leitch can come along and tell us if we're all acting black enough.
Two problems:
A. Bill Simmons would have nothing fruitful to say about race because he only knows Vegas (which is so overrated according to him), the Boston sports teams and bad 80's movies.
B. Cheap shot again at Leitch. At least Whitlock is staying out of the fray.
3. Stephen A. Smith said on SportsCenter this morning about Avery Johnson's firing:
"Mark Cuban seems to think he has a championship caliber team and they should have performed well in the playoffs in the past two years. Why he thinks this no one in the league really knows."
Oooo! I know, I know! Could it be because the past two years his team has been expected to win both playoffs series they lost and had a #1 seed in the "loaded" West one of those years? As hyped as the West is, for a team to have a #1 seed for the playoffs you would have to assume that team is going to be an NBA Title contender wouldn't you? That is why! Give me my gold star!
4. As often as I hear UNC fans bitch about all the recruiting violations other coaches in the NCAA commit, like filming commercials and coaching USA teams, it is really funny to see them commit a flagrant violation with Barack Obama playing pickup ball and Roy Williams watching, but then be forgiven because it was a "learning experience."
Also, I wish Psycho T and his bff Bobby Frasor would jump off more buildings in the future.
5. My take on the Buzz v. Blog issue is that they need to learn to co-exist with blogs and online writers because they are not going away anytime soon. (Hey, that is the same thing Whitlock said!) Maybe there are blogs that have foul language and present nothing favorable to society, but you don't have to read them. I have never seen an episode of The Simpsons, the Andy Griffith Show, CSI and many others that are plenty popular. You know why? I have free will to turn the television off and not watch those shows I don't care to watch. If you don't like the blogs, don't pay attention to them.
I know you did not ask for my opinion, but I did not ask for Skip Bayless' opinion on anything, and I am subjected to that if I want to watch a daytime sports channel. I think that's the point.
Honestly, this is all giving me a headache.
6. I was going to schedule a vacation to Atlanta around John Smoltz's pitching schedule, so I could see him pitch before he retired. I've seen him close 2 games and I am not sure I am going to get a chance to see him start a game in person.
That was my Peter King note of the week.
7. http://thebiglead.com/?p=5647#more-5647
Read that article and then just think about the free speech issues that go with it. What Mike (or is it Mad Dog? I don't listen to the radio at all, I have these things called "CD's" I listen to) does not realize is that in comparison to the radio and television, where there are fewer options for a viewer, vulgarity is a bigger deal because of the lack of options to choose from. It's not like you or I can start a radio station/television station tomorrow and start showing programming. There is an actual need for the FCC on radio/television because there are so few channels and they can not all show vulgarity, so there needs to be some regulation. There is no need to control the Internet because you don't have to go to the sites that are "vulgar" to enjoy the Internet. There are plenty of "clean" sites.
8. Also, why the fuck is everyone so worried about bad blogging on the Internet and think THAT is the reason to patrol the Internet. Which of these could perceivably have a worse effect on our society:
A. Bad blogging that contains curse words and criticisms of sportswriters.
B. 40 year olds stalking 13 year olds on Myspace
C. The massive amounts of pornography that is readily available on the Internet for those who choose to partake.
This is like saying the FCC should crack down on talk shows because Keith Olbermann or Bill O'Reilly is acting like an ass again. I love how certain individuals take the smallest problem associated with the Internet and use THAT as the reason to get government intervention. Humans fucking donkeys on the Internet is fine, as long as there is no sports vulgarity.
9. I am blowing this all out of portion aren't I? So is everyone else, so consider it a parody of their behavior if you would like.
10. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8089770
So, so, true. I always thought that Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire should start lawsuits against those who defamed them if they never took steroids. To me, because they never defended themselves, they were guilty. Sounds stupid but if a person was saying untrue things about me, the first thing I would do is try to put a lid on it as fast as possible to clear my name. Roger Clemens took the lawsuit approach, but it does not seem to work as well when you are actually guilty of the crime. Not to mention, if you have skeletons in the closet, they will come out as well.
My conclusion is that if you are guilty of steroid use, then admit it and go on. If you are innocent and have no skeletons, then fight it. If you are guilty and have skeletons in your closet, DO NOT refuse to admit you are guilty and try to play a game of hardball with your accuser.
Simmons has a new column. I have always thought his material was vulgar overall. Needless to say, it offends me.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
0 comments I Want a Sticker!
Roy Williams wore a Kansas sticker 10 rows behind the Kansas bench at last night's National Championship game, 48 hours after his current team the UNC Tar Heels lost to that same Kansas team. I spoke with the 10,000 UNC fans I know and they all feel pretty much feel this way:
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/04/08/roy-williams-finally-sees-kansas-win-a-title-wearing-a-jayha/
If you are illiterate or don't want to read it, basically it says, "don't worry about it, no big deal." Remarkably, that is the same reaction I get from most UNC fans along with, "We beat ourselves, we could not rebound or get any shots inside, Kansas did not beat us," and "Next year, we have blah blah blah..."
First off, if you speak with a Tar Heel fan, they have never lost a ball game to another team, they always just beat themselves. It is a case of denial, I think. I am astounded at this reaction from this blogger though. How the hell can a fan not be angry when Roy is behind the bench with a Kansas Jayhawk sticker on? How would they feel if Tyler Hansbrough had a UCLA hat on? Not too good. Tar Heel fans are blindly loyal, and I don't mean that in a good way necessarily, but I am sure they would be angry with Psycho T.
Frankly, it doesn't bother me that much. I just looked as if someone threw the sticker on his shirt. It wasn't as if he came in decked out with KU gear and shaking pom-poms for them. And, really, without a dog in the fight ... why shouldn't he root for the school he coached for all that time? Why wouldn't he want to see the team eliminate his Heels win the whole thing?
How the hell can you tell someone threw it on his shirt? Why the hell did he not take it off then? I hate it when people just start throwing shit on me, like that time Billy Porter threw a snake on my back during gym class. I was almost eaten by that snake, but really, he just put it on me and there was nothing I could do. The whole point is that Roy really did have a dog in the fight, his second favorite team in the whole wide universe, the Kansas Jayhawks. That is what should make you nervous or wonder if he is really dedicated to his team. One reason he would not want to see Kansas win the whole thing is because, maybe, just maybe, he should be sulking for the shitty coaching job he did and watching Kansas play would only give him a headache thinking if he had done things differently his team could have been out there playing for the National Championship. Not to go Simmons on you, but it is like watching the girl you broke up with win homecoming queen. You can't really be happy to see it, you have to have some regret.
Really, that is point though, Tar Heel fans are not bothered,
It also seems more like an olive branch being extended to Jayhawk Nation to stop booing him.
Tar Heel fans should wonder why the hell he cares if they boo him. If it were my favorite team, I would be wondering if Roy really cares as much as I do about the Tar Heels. Roy is a nice guy and will survive this but how can he really look at his players in the eye and say he cares 100%? How would Tar Heel Nation (cringe at that fucking name) react if the players started showing up at their second favorite college team's games?
This is how I would feel if I were a Tar Heel fan,
http://pocketpresence.blogspot.com/2008/04/quick-word-about-roy-williams.html
Again for those who don't like to read, it is bashing Roy Williams. Probably a bit too much but I think personally this is the appropriate reaction. I don't like it when my favorite college basketball team's coach coaches a certain National USA team or does commercials. Sports are not life and death but to see your coach reveling in the victory of a team that beat you should feel like a stab in the back in some ways. I wonder why it does not to Tar Heel fans.
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/04/08/roy-williams-finally-sees-kansas-win-a-title-wearing-a-jayha/
If you are illiterate or don't want to read it, basically it says, "don't worry about it, no big deal." Remarkably, that is the same reaction I get from most UNC fans along with, "We beat ourselves, we could not rebound or get any shots inside, Kansas did not beat us," and "Next year, we have blah blah blah..."
First off, if you speak with a Tar Heel fan, they have never lost a ball game to another team, they always just beat themselves. It is a case of denial, I think. I am astounded at this reaction from this blogger though. How the hell can a fan not be angry when Roy is behind the bench with a Kansas Jayhawk sticker on? How would they feel if Tyler Hansbrough had a UCLA hat on? Not too good. Tar Heel fans are blindly loyal, and I don't mean that in a good way necessarily, but I am sure they would be angry with Psycho T.
Frankly, it doesn't bother me that much. I just looked as if someone threw the sticker on his shirt. It wasn't as if he came in decked out with KU gear and shaking pom-poms for them. And, really, without a dog in the fight ... why shouldn't he root for the school he coached for all that time? Why wouldn't he want to see the team eliminate his Heels win the whole thing?
How the hell can you tell someone threw it on his shirt? Why the hell did he not take it off then? I hate it when people just start throwing shit on me, like that time Billy Porter threw a snake on my back during gym class. I was almost eaten by that snake, but really, he just put it on me and there was nothing I could do. The whole point is that Roy really did have a dog in the fight, his second favorite team in the whole wide universe, the Kansas Jayhawks. That is what should make you nervous or wonder if he is really dedicated to his team. One reason he would not want to see Kansas win the whole thing is because, maybe, just maybe, he should be sulking for the shitty coaching job he did and watching Kansas play would only give him a headache thinking if he had done things differently his team could have been out there playing for the National Championship. Not to go Simmons on you, but it is like watching the girl you broke up with win homecoming queen. You can't really be happy to see it, you have to have some regret.
Really, that is point though, Tar Heel fans are not bothered,
It also seems more like an olive branch being extended to Jayhawk Nation to stop booing him.
Tar Heel fans should wonder why the hell he cares if they boo him. If it were my favorite team, I would be wondering if Roy really cares as much as I do about the Tar Heels. Roy is a nice guy and will survive this but how can he really look at his players in the eye and say he cares 100%? How would Tar Heel Nation (cringe at that fucking name) react if the players started showing up at their second favorite college team's games?
This is how I would feel if I were a Tar Heel fan,
http://pocketpresence.blogspot.com/2008/04/quick-word-about-roy-williams.html
Again for those who don't like to read, it is bashing Roy Williams. Probably a bit too much but I think personally this is the appropriate reaction. I don't like it when my favorite college basketball team's coach coaches a certain National USA team or does commercials. Sports are not life and death but to see your coach reveling in the victory of a team that beat you should feel like a stab in the back in some ways. I wonder why it does not to Tar Heel fans.
Friday, April 4, 2008
0 comments Five Things I Think I Think Peter King Has Not Thought Of
1. Roy Williams wants it both ways and he can't. That makes him sad but Kansas is really hurt about him leaving. Here's how you mediate this bitch fight Dr. Phil style:
Roy- you went to UNC because that is where you are from and love the school a lot...just say it and quit fucking whining and bitching because you had to make a tough decision. Most decisions are tough and you did what you wanted to do when you wanted to do it, quit pretending it was heart wrenching. You wanted to go back to UNC and you did. Good, done.
Kansas- you are still hurt because Roy left you for a superior school. Seriously, nobody gives a shit or understands your whining because Kansas never won a title with Roy as the coach and it has always been obvious Roy was going to leave when UNC called. You should be happy Roy left so that you could try to get rid of the stigma that your school underachieves. If you spent less time on "I Hate Roy" shirts and more time thinking of ways to double team Tyler Hansbrough and not let the outside players of UNC beat you, maybe you would actually have a chance to win a championship. No one likes a cry baby. By the way, you are going to lose this weekend, start thinking of excuses now.
2. Brett Favre may unretire? So he retired because he did not want to play for a team that could win the championship and he is coming back to play for a shitty team? Why? Let's do this Jim Rome style.
Brett- you had one last good year in the league. Go home to your Mississippi mansion, mow some grass, and watch your kids grow up. Because the one thing that is more pathetic than watching a legend in a different uniform play, is watching a legend in a different uniform play poorly and destroy his legacy. You are a great quarterback and will always be considered one, stick with that and we will see you in Canton in 2013. Up next our new correspondent...(sorry, I put the Jim Rome voice in my head and it had a hard time leaving).
3. Bill Simmons has another mailbag up. I am not dissecting it but I will say, mailbags are great and all for the fans, but at some point you will have to write another column. Also, you are a sissy for not having comments available in your columns. Take some criticism, man.
4. http://www.insidesocal.com/tomhoffarth/archives/2008/04/strap_on_your_l.html
Rick Reilly at his best AND you get a sneak peek at what he is going to be like working for ESPN. Not everyone can write sappy, people oriented columns people!
My favorite part:
"It’s all over the map," Reilly says about sports journalism on the dot.com world. "There's some good journalism, and some really horrible crap on there from guys holding down the couch springs in their mother's basement that have never been in a lockerroom but are pining on this and that.
"On the other hand, you see the solid writers they have on ESPN.com, who check their facts, go places, see people ... People who are classically trained in journalism are harder to get used to (on the Internet). It's like, for some of these, the faster you type, the better you're supposed to be? It's like the old days of sending a Western Union telegram.
Yeah, checking facts, going places and seeing people...that is the classical training? So if I go to Boise, Idaho on a train (fuck airplanes, they are too fast and don't let you enjoy the ride) to cover the rodeo, research the bull and rider's history and interview Billy Bob Johnson about who his bull is going to mate with (Blue Manchu, of course), then I am a journalist who was trained in the classical ways. ESPN writers always check their facts, which is why Les Miles is at Michigan and Bill Parcells is the GM in Atlanta. Also, "the solid writers" at ESPN routinely steal their scoops from Internet sites such as Profootballtalk.com. I am talking to you Len Pastabelli. I am eager to hear more about the Rick Reilly Revolution at ESPN.
Did you know he chisels his articles out of stone and is not planning on posting his internet articles after that, but mailing them by Pony Express to ESPN headquarters?
5. It is funny because the common criticism of bloggers is that they are jealous of the mainstream media and just want the position to write for a major newspaper or network themselves so they criticize the mainstream media out of jealousy. I think the mainstream media is a little nervous because the Internet allows others to have a point of view that can not be controlled. They are for freedom of speech, but only on their terms. So to say the bloggers are jealous is fair only if you consider the possibility the mainstream media is jealous there may be more talented writers out there who chose not to become full time writers.
I am not among those talented non full time writers, but the attacks from people like Rick Reilly are hilarious for how much ignorance and fear you can sense in their voice about the changing medium of sportswriting.
Roy- you went to UNC because that is where you are from and love the school a lot...just say it and quit fucking whining and bitching because you had to make a tough decision. Most decisions are tough and you did what you wanted to do when you wanted to do it, quit pretending it was heart wrenching. You wanted to go back to UNC and you did. Good, done.
Kansas- you are still hurt because Roy left you for a superior school. Seriously, nobody gives a shit or understands your whining because Kansas never won a title with Roy as the coach and it has always been obvious Roy was going to leave when UNC called. You should be happy Roy left so that you could try to get rid of the stigma that your school underachieves. If you spent less time on "I Hate Roy" shirts and more time thinking of ways to double team Tyler Hansbrough and not let the outside players of UNC beat you, maybe you would actually have a chance to win a championship. No one likes a cry baby. By the way, you are going to lose this weekend, start thinking of excuses now.
2. Brett Favre may unretire? So he retired because he did not want to play for a team that could win the championship and he is coming back to play for a shitty team? Why? Let's do this Jim Rome style.
Brett- you had one last good year in the league. Go home to your Mississippi mansion, mow some grass, and watch your kids grow up. Because the one thing that is more pathetic than watching a legend in a different uniform play, is watching a legend in a different uniform play poorly and destroy his legacy. You are a great quarterback and will always be considered one, stick with that and we will see you in Canton in 2013. Up next our new correspondent...(sorry, I put the Jim Rome voice in my head and it had a hard time leaving).
3. Bill Simmons has another mailbag up. I am not dissecting it but I will say, mailbags are great and all for the fans, but at some point you will have to write another column. Also, you are a sissy for not having comments available in your columns. Take some criticism, man.
4. http://www.insidesocal.com/tomhoffarth/archives/2008/04/strap_on_your_l.html
Rick Reilly at his best AND you get a sneak peek at what he is going to be like working for ESPN. Not everyone can write sappy, people oriented columns people!
My favorite part:
"It’s all over the map," Reilly says about sports journalism on the dot.com world. "There's some good journalism, and some really horrible crap on there from guys holding down the couch springs in their mother's basement that have never been in a lockerroom but are pining on this and that.
"On the other hand, you see the solid writers they have on ESPN.com, who check their facts, go places, see people ... People who are classically trained in journalism are harder to get used to (on the Internet). It's like, for some of these, the faster you type, the better you're supposed to be? It's like the old days of sending a Western Union telegram.
Yeah, checking facts, going places and seeing people...that is the classical training? So if I go to Boise, Idaho on a train (fuck airplanes, they are too fast and don't let you enjoy the ride) to cover the rodeo, research the bull and rider's history and interview Billy Bob Johnson about who his bull is going to mate with (Blue Manchu, of course), then I am a journalist who was trained in the classical ways. ESPN writers always check their facts, which is why Les Miles is at Michigan and Bill Parcells is the GM in Atlanta. Also, "the solid writers" at ESPN routinely steal their scoops from Internet sites such as Profootballtalk.com. I am talking to you Len Pastabelli. I am eager to hear more about the Rick Reilly Revolution at ESPN.
Did you know he chisels his articles out of stone and is not planning on posting his internet articles after that, but mailing them by Pony Express to ESPN headquarters?
5. It is funny because the common criticism of bloggers is that they are jealous of the mainstream media and just want the position to write for a major newspaper or network themselves so they criticize the mainstream media out of jealousy. I think the mainstream media is a little nervous because the Internet allows others to have a point of view that can not be controlled. They are for freedom of speech, but only on their terms. So to say the bloggers are jealous is fair only if you consider the possibility the mainstream media is jealous there may be more talented writers out there who chose not to become full time writers.
I am not among those talented non full time writers, but the attacks from people like Rick Reilly are hilarious for how much ignorance and fear you can sense in their voice about the changing medium of sportswriting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)