0 comments What A-Rod Has Done Wrong Today: He Didn't Take PED's to Help the Yankees Like Andy Pettitte Did

As part of the ongoing commitment from the media to be as obsessed with A-Rod as possible, which not ironically means I sound obsessed with A-Rod by writing about their obsession with A-Rod, I have put together all of the things the sports media sees that A-Rod has done wrong. Today, Johnette Howard says that Andy Pettitte and Alex Rodriguez are not the same. Pettitte took PED's to help the Yankees, while A-Rod took PED's to soothe his own ego and antagonize others. Apparently "intent" is now a part of the PED judgment that the media will make. Simply taking PED's isn't a huge issue as long as the player's intent was good. A player took PED's to make enough money to help support his child dying from a rare disease? It's perfectly acceptable to cheat and profit from it. Taking PED's just to enhance your performance in a selfish manner? Well, you are an asshole, liar, and cheater. I might need a chart to help differentiate what reasons are and are not acceptable to take PED's. Of course, some in the media are trying to be easier on A-Rod now that he is playing well. Success cures all.

The debate this week that the Yankees and everybody else should treat Andy Pettitte no differently than Alex Rodriguez because both players were admitted performance-enhancing drug users is so absurd it makes my head hurt.

It's absurd because they both took PED's and there shouldn't even be a discussion based on that. One guy is nice and the other is an asshole. That's mostly how I feel that the media views the difference in Pettitte and A-Rod, no matter how often they protest otherwise.

There is no disconnect at work here. Saying Pettitte and Rodriguez are the same is a false equivalency.

A false equivalency is defined as, "a situation where there is a logical and apparent equivalence, but when in fact there is none." It's based on measuring different information the exact same way and oversimplification of this information. Pettitte was busted one time for PED use and is seen as good guy. A-Rod was busted twice for PED use and is an asshole. The difference in these two situations are that one player got busted once more than the other player and is seen as an asshole. I'm not sure that means the end result, that both players cheated and should be treated the same way, is a false equivalency or not. Nelson Cruz got busted one time for PED's and he's a pretty nice guy from all appearances. So should he be treated in the same manner that Andy Pettitte is treated, like a nice guy who just a made a mistake? If so, someone alert the media they are treating Cruz as a PED user when they shouldn't be.

Pettitte isn't just getting a Nice Guy discount because the Yankees announced a few days ago that they're retiring his number and giving him a plaque in Monument Park, two honors that A-Rod will never experience in New York.

A-Rod's habitual PED recidivism, lying and character assassination attempts against his accusers make Pettitte's PED use look like a fender bender.

Pettitte isn't getting a Nice Guy discount, it's just A-Rod is so much more of an asshole compared to Pettitte that he should be treated more harshly than Pettitte is treated. Got it. There's no Nice Guy discount because it's called something else. It's not like Pettitte had conflicting testimony when brought up on the stand to accuse his friend Roger Clemens of HGH use. If A-Rod would only misremember some things then maybe he wouldn't assassinate so many people's character.

Pettitte's actions aren't totally excusable, but again, they hardly rise to the level of what A-Rod finally admitted to, or how he's continued to exacerbate his problems with clumsy grabs for the forgiveness Pettitte has enjoyed because of how he behaved before and after he was exposed.

But remember, Pettitte is not getting a Nice Guy discount. Not at all. His actions regarding the use of PED's gets some forgiveness from the media because Pettitte acted kindly before and after he was exposed. Again, it's not a Nice Guy discount if you just call it something else.

A-Rod's latest stunt, the handwritten apology letter he released Tuesday, instantly led to photos of mock letters being posted on Twitter with handwritten lines like, "Sorry! I got caught!"

An apology is only as sincere as the audience wants it to be. People want to believe Pettitte, so they do believe he is sincere.

Yankees management is giving Pettitte a pass for his PED use, which Pettitte has always insisted was a one-time mistake. He's said he did it only to rehab an injury so he could hurry back to help the team, and you can choose to accept that or not.

And intent apparently matters now. Pettitte was trying to enhance his performance to help the team, while A-Rod enhanced his performance to help himself hit home runs, none of which counted as helping the Yankees team in any way. This is a kind of funny argument since intent really shouldn't matter and either way the player helps the team by helping himself. The only difference is how the media wants to shade the apology and the reason given in the apology.

But let's be completely frank and grown-up here.

Oh, it's super-serious time. I'll put my Serious Face on when talking about the Nice Guy discount that doesn't exist by the name "Nice Guy discount."

The decision to not disqualify Pettitte because of his PED use isn't really an enormous shift for the team.

The Yankees profited greatly from employing a large cast of other PED users during the steroid era such as Roger Clemens, Gary Sheffield, Jason Giambi, Chuck Knoblauch, and Mike Stanton. The Mitchell report and BALCO trials revealed that.

Regardless of whether it is an enormous shift in how the team works or not, none of these players are represented in Monument Park like Andy Pettitte will be. No matter how hard Johnette Howard tries to differentiate Pettitte from A-Rod or claim that Pettitte isn't being treated differently despite being a PED user, the facts simply don't represent Pettitte as being as different as she claims him to be.

The Yankees profited from PED users, but Pettitte is the only one in Monument Park. Pettitte used PED's "to help the team," but his intent shouldn't matter, because A-Rod's PED use helped the team as well. It's just he doesn't hide behind the "it's for others, not me, because I felt a huge obligation to help my teammates out" excuse. The sports media wouldn't buy it anyway when this excuse came from A-Rod.

The Yankees' ethical squishiness on PED use is nothing new. Nor was it unique in baseball during the steroid era. Or since.

Oh, so now everyone was doing it, so it's not such a big deal if Pettitte took part as well. I guess everyone quit using PED's around the time A-Rod started using them. That's just like A-Rod, he's so detached from reality that he doesn't know it isn't cool to use PED's anymore.

The Yanks signed Giambi -- McGwire's and Jose Canseco's former training pal with the Oakland A's -- to a $120 million contract seven months before Caminiti's tell-all.

Is Jason Giambi in Monument Park? He isn't? So how is Pettitte not being treated differently from other PED users again? He was a Yankee for a longer span of time than Clemens and is closely tied to the organization, but Johnette Howard is trying to draw a firm line as to why Pettitte isn't being treated differently as a PED user for any other reason than he's a nice guy. She's only going to prove the point that he is treated a little differently, because every other PED user she has mentioned is being treated differently by the media and the Yankees than Pettitte has been treated.

Yet when asked directly at Giambi's mea culpa news conference if possible steroid use by Giambi was ever part of discussions about whether to sign him to such an enormous deal, Yankees general manager Brian Cashman said no, no, the issue "wasn't in the winds" back then.

So really, it is the fault of the Yankees organization that Pettitte used PED's. They created an atmosphere where taking PED's was acceptable, so naturally a nice guy like Pet  a person who treats other with such respect and reverence like Pettitte would find it acceptable to take PED's. It was for the team, you know. Pettitte would NEVER take PED's to help himself like other PED users did. Other PED users like A-Rod wanted to enhance their performance for selfish reasons, while Pettitte wanted to enhance his performance, but so he can come back from injury quicker and help the team he loves so dearly (tear falls down his face).

A-Rod, who played with Caminiti in Texas in 2001, one of several Rangers teams that might've had one of the greatest collections of juicers of all time (Juan Gonzalez, Rafael Palmeiro, Ivan Rodriguez, et al.), was already with the Yanks for one season when Caminiti's SI story came out. But that didn't stop the Yanks from buying the storyline that A-Rod was the exception, The Last Natural, when they first traded for him, or when they re-signed him to the $275 million deal they're now stuck with.

This is some revisionist history right here. There was nothing tying A-Rod to PED's prior to his being traded to the Yankees. That Caminiti story from "SI" came out in 2002 according to the "Sports Illustrated" site. A-Rod joined the Yankees in 2004, so he was not with the team when that story came out. Good effort, good job. Who cares about facts when there is an opinion needs to be proven correct?

But remember this, too, about that Nice Guy premium Pettitte is getting vs. A-Rod: Contrary to the bitterness Knoblauch expressed on Twitter on Monday about Pettitte's kid-glove treatment by the Yanks, the Yankees actually have treated Pettitte poorly in the past.

Oh, so the Yankees ARE giving Pettitte a Nice Guy discount now? Previously in this column they weren't doing this, but now they are. But it's okay for him to get the Nice Guy discount because the Yankees were mean to Pettitte one time, so that means...umm...well, actually I'm not sure what the hell it has to do with the present discussion about how Pettitte isn't like A-Rod for reasons that supposedly have nothing to do with Pettitte being a nice guy.

It hasn't been all rainbows and syrupy sentimentalism.

But two facts remain that Pettitte is being given a plaque in Monument Park and he did use PED's. So the fact his relationship with the Yankees hasn't been all rainbows and syrupy sentimentalism has nothing to do with the difference in how he and A-Rod are treated.

In 2003, the team let Pettitte walk off to Houston years before his PED use ever surfaced. 
 
Johnette Howard moves those goal posts again. She doesn't seem to know when the Caminiti story came out in "Sports Illustrated" and then describes the Yankees as having let Pettitte go to Houston "years" before his PED use ever surfaced. Let's pretend for a second that there is an even playing field. Pettitte went to Houston in 2003 which was "years" from his being found out for using PED's in December 2007. A-Rod started playing for the Yankees in 2004 and his PED use came to light originally in July 2007, but proof of his PED use wasn't public until February 2009.

So Howard thinks four years is "years" before Pettitte's PED use surfaced, while being kind and saying Jose Canseco's suggestion A-Rod used PED's served as proof at the time, it was three years before A-Rod's PED use surfaced. In reality, it was five years. So Howard thinks the Yankees should have known about A-Rod's PED use three years before it became public when trading for him, despite the fact he had never used PED's while a member of the Yankees until that point, but gives the Yankees credit for getting rid of Pettitte because it was "years" before his PED surfaced. Of course Howard doesn't expect the Yankees should have known Pettitte used PED's while a member of the Yankees team. Naturally. The Yankees should have been on to a guy who didn't even play for them as a PED user, but how would they ever know one of their current players had used PED's? Three years prior to information becoming public means that information should have been known in the case of A-Rod, while four years is "years" in the case of Pettitte. She just keeps moving the goal posts all around the field.

Pettitte had just won 21 games and already had a clutch reputation. Yet the Yankees asked him to take a pay cut -- a pay cut! -- from $11.5 million to $10 million a year. George Steinbrenner was still around and vital then, and The Boss personally negotiated deals with career-long bad boys like David Wells and Sheffield. Yet Pettitte didn't hear from the Yanks for six weeks after their initial offer.

Johnette Howard can try to muddy the water all she wants. The bottom line is that Pettitte has a plaque in Monument Park and he used PED's. He's being treated differently from A-Rod and most of it has to do with his reputation versus A-Rod's reputation. She can deny this all she wants, but the only differences in A-Rod and Pettitte are their reputations, their supposed intent for taking PED's, and A-Rod has been busted twice not once. They both used PED's. She can mealy-mouth around it all she wants, but Pettitte has a better reputation as a nice guy and that helps him tremendously.

Even their final offer asked him to accept $5.1 million less in guaranteed money to stay with them rather than go home to play for Houston -- a risk he wasn't willing to take.

In short, the Yanks gave Pettitte the same unsentimental treatment that Giambi and A-Rod got when the team explored voiding the millions left on their ill-gotten contracts, and that Joe Torre got with the one-year contract extension offer that left him so "insulted" he left to manage the Dodgers.

Only a person with an agenda could really write with a straight face that offering a new contract to a pitcher that involves taking $5.1 million less in guaranteed money than another team is offering is the same thing as a team trying to void $61 million of another player's contract. These are two completely different things. The Yankees were offering Pettitte a contract with $5.1 million less money, while they were trying to take $61 million away from A-Rod. Ignoring they offered a contract to one player and was voiding a contract from another, I think the difference of $55.9 million in the money (attempting to be) voided from A-Rod's contract shows the difference in these two situations. Again, Johnette Howard is trying so hard to differentiate and it's not working.

Even Jeter was publicly told to "smoke the reality pipe" by an unnamed Yankees official during his last contract talks.

People forget.

Keep moving those goal posts. The issue isn't whether the Yankees have ever been mean to Andy Pettitte. The issue is whether A-Rod and Andy Pettitte, both PED users, are being treated the same way by the Yankees organization. The answer is they are not. What has been said in contract negotiations is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Pettitte and A-Rod admitted to using PED's and Pettitte is getting a plaque while A-Rod is fighting to avoid his contract from getting voided.

All of it is also influenced by the fact that Pettitte and A-Rod are dramatically different men and they handled being caught as PED users in significantly different ways.

Remember that Howard insists Pettitte isn't getting a Nice Guy discount when she discusses how each man handled being caught as PED users.

Pettitte held a news conference to make a blanket apology, and sat there till every last question was asked. Then he made the rounds for weeks behind the scenes, personally repeating his apology to one person after another after another. His behavior was impeccable before and since, even when Clemens called him a liar. He didn't cook up some phony lawsuit against the Yanks' team doctor, as A-Rod did, or lie again and again on national TV, smear the reporter who unearthed his PED use, sell out a cousin who is now suing him, or backslide into PED use, as far as anyone knows.

So Pettitte is getting a Nice Guy discount. He apologized correctly and to everyone involved. I get it. His behavior was impeccable and he took responsibility for what he did, except for the fact he's never really taking responsibility for why he took HGH. He's hidden behind the whole "I was trying to help the team and took HGH to recover from injury" reasoning, as if this is more noble than simply taking PED's to improve one's performance. Good for him, I bear no ill will that he uses this reasoning. Pettitte has only come as clean as he's needed to come clean and as much as the media has made him come clean. Pettitte claimed after the Mitchell Report came out that he took PED's for a couple of days in 2002. Then when he was in front of Congress and they provided examples of his additional PED use, he admitted while under oath that he used them again in 2004. So he didn't lie, unless you want to count withholding information as lying. He didn't cook up a phony lawsuit, despite the fact he consistently has hidden behind a phony story that plays on the media's need to show him as a good guy. He did use PED's to help the team and come back from injury, while A-Rod used PED's to improve his performance. Six of one, half dozen of the other.

People sometimes do make grievous mistakes in life. Pettitte's story, until proved otherwise, is he cheated, then asked for forgiveness, and earned it with his actions. Meanwhile, A-Rod keeps setting himself up to be seen as an incorrigible fraud.

I understand one of the differences is that A-Rod has been busted twice for PED use. Of course, Pettitte admits to using PED's twice himself, but really only got busted once. Maybe A-Rod hasn't earned forgiveness, but the media and MLB didn't come at Andy Pettitte as hard as they have come after A-Rod. So Howard takes offense to the idea A-Rod and Pettitte should be treated the same, but not because Pettitte is seen as a nice guy, but because of Pettitte's nice guy actions. No wonder she likes Pettitte so much, she's his target audience for the "I used HGH to help the team, not myself" excuse. She wants to believe Pettitte was pure of heart in his actions.

And now, all of that has determined how each man is treated?
Good.
It should.

But the bottom line is that they are both PED users, while Pettitte is being forgiven because he's a nice guy who apologized the right way. He's getting a plaque in Monument Park even though he admitted to using PED's. There is no other reason other than him being a nice guy and the media wanting to believe him that he is treated as he is treated compared to other PED users. I have to wonder if A-Rod had written his letter of apology after the first time he was busted for using PED's if he would be treated the same as Pettitte. I think I know the answer.

2 comments Johnette Howard Thinks the Yankees Trade Deadline Acquisitions Are All Smoke A---Wait, the Yankees Are Winning Games? Nevermind

Johnette Howard wrote a column  on August 1 titled, "Yankees' deals all smoke and mirrors." She did not approve of the Yankees' acquisitions at the trade deadline. Welp, then the Yankees started winning games and so the very next column she wrote is titled, "Bye, bye Bombers...hello playoffs?" I love it when sportswriters come in hard with a hot sports take and then write another column that contradicts that hot sports take like it never happened. It happened here. 

And yet the Yanks still went out and outdueled Tigers Cy Young candidate Rick Porcello 1-0, with some terrific pitching and defense, defense and pitching.

This is who the Yankees are now. And if they do sneak into the playoffs this season, despite all that's gone wrong, this is how they're going to have to play.

It's almost like the Yankees front office might know this already. What Howard said previously (and "previously" will be the August 1 column I linked above),

What Cashman's deals essentially told manager Joe Girardi is he'll have to keep trying to win with smoke and mirrors 'til further notice.

"Smoke and mirrors" or "terrific pitching and defense." You know, it's all the same in the end.

"It's huge," Yankees manager Joe Girardi said of the starters he threw out in response: Brandon McCarthy, Hiroki Kuroda, Chris Capuano, and now Greene. "I think [this series] was the best four starts in a row we had all year long. They knew who they were facing. They weren't the guys being talked about. But they went out and did the job."

There's still a long, long way to go in this season. But the Yankees have the making of a remarkable story if they can keep doing the sort of things they did over the past seven days.

Wait, so the Yankees' front office did a good job of bringing in Capuano and Brandon McCarthy? I'm wondering because a week earlier Howard said this,

Girardi and the players the Yanks still have deserve a lot of credit for doing as well as they have this year, especially after losing four-fifths of the starting pitching rotation.
But the Yanks' front office? Not so much.

I'm sure Brian Cashman had nothing to do with the Capuano and McCarthy moves. After all, he's incompetent you know. All of a sudden, Cashman may deserve some credit.

But look: After watching the Red Sox's ability to pull in a talent like Cespedes for Lester, it was hard not to feel dissatisfied with a lot of things about the Yankees kingdom. Starting with how the Yanks are still haunted by their inability to swallow hard and trade Robinson Cano in the 2013 offseason or at last year's trading deadline for proven talent or hotshot prospects if they had no intention on paying him what the open market could bring. Which they didn't.

This is just a funny line in this August 1 column. As if the Yankees trading Robinson Cano wouldn't have resulted in the New York media flipping the fuck out and talking about how the Yankees aren't George Steinbrenner's team anymore and Brian Cashman has given up on the Yankees team. Basically, the New York media would do the same thing the Boston media is currently doing when reacting to the trades the Red Sox made at the deadline. But using total hindsight, I'm sure it was a brilliant idea to trade Robinson Cano at the trade deadline last year. After all, the Yankees already knew the market for Cano was more than they were willing to pay and they knew this using their predictive powers.

Greene's start was the 50th by a Yankees rookie pitcher this year, nearly double any other team's total. The Yanks are a shimmering 31-19 in those games. Overall, the Yanks have already relied on a revolving door of 30 pitchers, a franchise record. And yet they moved six games over .500 again with this win, matching their high-water mark this season.

It's almost like the Yankees moves at the trade deadline aren't the only the only issues the team is having this year. Those "smoke and mirrors" moves certainly deserved some scolding though.

What they've got instead after the flurry of July deals they made is a club full of guys who are experienced and versatile and, in some cases, playing like they're fully aware the Yankees' usual pattern is to go out and buy bigger names. But they're here now. And they're playing with the sort of urgency that suggests they badly want to stay.

Interesting. On August 1, this was Howard's take on these players,

Cashman sent disappointing Kelly Johnson to Boston for shortstop Stephen Drew, a free agent the Yankees and everyone else could've signed well past this season's start, but didn't...Drew has never played anywhere except shortstop, and he was already having a dreadful offensive season hitting .176 with four home runs and 11 RBIs in Boston. Now, on top of that, the Yanks will be asking him to change positions, too.

He also sent minor league infielder Peter O'Brien and cash to Arizona for Martin Prado, who is hitting .270 with 42 RBIs in 106 games this season...Prado can play second and third base, where he made the majority of his starts this season. But now that the Yanks have Headley, Prado will instead be asked to be, uh, the Yanks' starting right fielder?...And he gives the Yanks another right-handed bat, which they can use. But power? Nope. He has only five home runs in 106 games.

See what I mean? Underwhelming.

And just a week later Drew is no longer a guy who can't play another position that isn't shortstop, he's now "versatile." Prado is no longer a player with little power who can't really play right field. He's "versatile" and "playing with a sort of urgency."

Quick! Re-write the narrative! And that's exactly what Johnette Howard is doing. It's not that she might have been a little wrong, she was just using negative words with negative connotations that have turned into positive words with positive connotations.

Other people look at them as placeholders. But so what? They look at this as an opportunity that doesn't often come along, especially for young guys. Not here.

But...you...you...you are the one who was looking at them as placeholders. As part of the "smoke and mirrors" game that Brian Cashman was playing. You said,

the Yankees wound up looking like a team that badly needs an infusion of fresh thinking, not just fresh talent, after their cap-gun moves.

after the Yankees didn't sell off any other players and didn't trade for any big name players. What was once a lack of fresh thinking is now acquiring players who are completely ready to take advantage of their opportunity.

The other thing you notice about this team is although it's barely August, the Yankees are already talking daily about October, doing whatever it takes to get to October, how nail-biters like this one are the sort of games you have to be able to win in October. 

It's amazing what a "smoke and mirrors" trade will do for a team.

But look: Chase Headley, who has been terrific since joining the Yanks, was languishing in San Diego but he seems rejuvenated here. Martin Prado, who made a couple of nice defensive plays to help Greene, including a stab of a hot liner by Rajai Davis though he was playing in on the infield grass,

This is the same Martin Prado that Johnette Howard was really worried couldn't play right field because,

Prado will instead be asked to be, uh, the Yanks' starting right fielder?

This though he's played a total of just two innings there in his career.

Amazingly, the same player who has played every infield position and has played left field was able to adjust to playing right field. Who would have thought this would be possible? Certainly not Johnette Howard. To her, Martin Prado was a left fielder who couldn't play right field before he became the guy playing right field who could make a couple nice defensive plays.

Stephen Drew, who had the winning hit, didn't even sign until May. Before that, he was trying to stay sharp taking batting practice against high school kids.

Or as Johnette Howard put it a week earlier when she didn't have the chance to react to Drew getting a winning hit for the Yankees,

a free agent the Yankees and everyone else could've signed well past this season's start, but didn't.

The guy anyone could have signed this past offseason, but didn't, is the guy who didn't sign until May but stayed sharp playing batting practice against high school kids. While Drew was once characterized as a guy no MLB team really wanted until May, he is now characterized as a motivated athlete who wanted to choose his MLB team and worked hard to stay in shape until he found the perfect MLB team for him. Where did a discussion of the terrible offensive season Drew was having in Boston go? I guess it went out the window a full week after Johnette was full of negativity. It's funny what winning a few games will do.

And defense? You want more defense? Thursday, Yanks center fielder Jacoby Ellsbury covered so much ground, ranging far into left-center field to make two nice running catches 

Is Ellsbury one of those players Johnette described in her August 1 column as,

Worse, each Yanks move was necessitated by the domino effects of a constellation of other bad choices -- namely, the Yanks' same old pattern of signing aging vets to go with the long-term contracts they're already locked into, and then regretting it when said older vets break down or underperform,

I just wonder if Howard considers Ellsbury to be an "aging vet" or a "long-term contract they've already locked into"? Maybe it's both.

Afterward, Headley, like McCarthy, was talking about the sort of attitude that is overtaking this team, even if it has been assembled out of necessity and on the fly.

This is as opposed to those MLB teams playing during the 2014 season that were carefully assembled five years ago without necessity.

(Hank Steinbrenner) "You know what, five years from now we should trade for Chase Headley. Even if we have A-Rod playing third base, fuck it, let's just trade for Headley in five years."

(Brian Cashman) "But he's only currently played one season in the majors. You think he can be the third baseman of the future?"

(Hank Steinbrenner) "Absolutely, we need to start assembling our 2014 team now, so we don't have to fill roster spots on that team out of necessity and on the fly." 

Now we see if the Yanks can keep it up. But they know who they are and how they have to play. And that's a good start.

Now the front office gets kudos based on the "good start" they put together for a winning Yankees team. A week ago, the future wasn't so bright,

Expect more bench time for Ichiro Suzuki and Carlos Beltran, who will still DH most days but isn't likely to play outfield until his elbow improves. Alfonso Soriano was released weeks ago.

What Cashman's deals essentially told manager Joe Girardi is he'll have to keep trying to win with smoke and mirrors 'til further notice.

They could neither bring themselves to give up on the playoff race like Tampa -- a hotter team -- did, nor could they swallow hard and show the daring vision that Boston, which won the World Series just a half season ago,

Next to all that, the two late-developing moves that Yanks general manager Brian Cashman made with less than an hour to go before the 4 p.m. deadline were underwhelming.

The Red Sox made the same determination on Lester. But instead of standing pat, they went ahead and flipped him for Cespedes, who is precisely the sort of corner outfielder with power the Yanks badly need.

See what I mean? Underwhelming.

That certainly didn't sound like "a good start" at the time did it? It's funny what an overreaction to winning a few games can do to a previous column which overreacted to the Yankees (lack of) moves at the trade deadline. I think Johnette Howard would sound a lot less silly in print if she simply could not be so extreme and hot or cold based on what happened over the previous few days. But what's the fun in that? Who even remembers what she wrote a week ago? Obviously she doesn't. 

Because something Girardi said after the game is tried and true.

"If you get pitching and play defense, you're going to win a lot of games."

This from the sportswriter who a week earlier was bemoaning the Yankees not having enough power in the lineup, since apparently that was the tried and true way to win a game on August 1. On August 8, defense and pitching sound like the best way to win a game. The wind blows, Johnette Howard's opinion changes. 

1 comments Derek Jeter Has Feelings Too You Know

The Derek Jeter Farewell Tour has begun and is in full swing, which means the "Constant Updates about Derek Jeter on his Farewell Tour" has begun as well. This means never-ending updates on what Derek Jeter is doing, how he feels and whether his last meal in Houston as a member of the Yankees was memorable or just super-memorable. Today, Johnette Howard informs her readers that Derek Jeter has feelings and he isn't a superman, but just a typical man. I think maybe she and her media brethren who fawn over athletes such as Jeter for any little thing they do might be better served to heed this reminder as opposed to being the ones handing out this reminder. Jeter is just a master of hiding his feelings, no matter how many times these brainless sportswriters ask him about his feelings. These sportswriters like Johnette Howard want Derek Jeter to open up to them so badly, it's borderline pathetic. Just give us a tear Derek, just one tear!

Derek Jeter knows full well a great swath of his legend is built upon the idea that he's superhuman when it comes to shrugging off the feelings or pressure that rock other players.

This legend was created and furthered by the national media, who feel the need to subscribe professional athletes the personal characteristics they feel these athletes should have, regardless of whether these personal characteristics are true or not. It's all about making sure the attributes the media wants that athlete to have are reflected in how the public sees that athlete. That's why the downfall of an athlete like Tiger Woods or Lance Armstrong is met with such vitriol and shock, because the attributes the media has subscribed to them are not seen as being true anymore. Armstrong is a cheat who dragged other people down in his efforts to continue cheating, while Tiger Woods isn't a family man who is dedicated to his lovely model wife. Woods' competitive nature apparently extended to off the golf course where he tried to have as many mistresses as possible, while Armstrong's competitive nature led him to using PED's. Those aren't the attributes the media had subscribed to these two athletes though.

So it was interesting that Jeter took great pains to make something clear before he took the field Monday for his last Opening Day at Yankee Stadium.

Derek Jeter stated something of substance! Quick, let's report on it and over analyze what he said!

He was asked twice about the assumption that the fanfare around his season-long goodbye tour would be a pain, not a joy, for him. And it seemed uncharacteristically important for Jeter to correct public opinion.

He's probably tired of being asked about it. I'm annoyed with all the stupid questions about whether he enjoys the fanfare so I can only imagine how he feels.

"The perception is wrong -- I will enjoy it," Jeter said. "Every city I go to, every game I play, I will enjoy it. So what they think, how they 'think' I feel, they're wrong on that one. But at the same time, I get the fact that I have to play a game,

Now Johnette Howard must immediately parse out what Jeter REALLY means in making this statement. Much like how Bob Klapisch took comments Jeter made about PED's in the way he wanted to perceive these comments in order to make Jeter an anti-PED's poster boy, Johnette Howard tells us what Jeter really means in order to inform us that Jeter has feelings and describe what Jeter is really meaning to say. Because, his comments can't just stand alone, they have to have a deeper meaning other than "I enjoy the farewell tour and will miss baseball."

It was Jeter's roundabout way of telling people not to underestimate how much he loves baseball or how badly he's going to actually miss playing, even if he hasn't yet wiped away a tear.

Oh, is that what he was saying? Because it sort of sounded like Jeter was saying, "People think they know how I feel but they are wrong. I try to focus on playing the game." The irony that Jeter's statement was basically saying other people think they know how he feels and Johnette Howard is currently stating that she knows how he feels is too much for me. Howard is parsing what Jeter was really saying by ignoring what Jeter was really saying and doing exactly what Jeter states "people" are doing. I might pass out from this irony. 

He's smart enough to know that every day marks more steps in his long goodbye.

But Johnette Howard isn't smart enough to know that she's doing exactly what Derek Jeter has stated sportswriters tend to do by assuming they know how he feels.

It was the last first day of hearing the Bleacher Creatures call out his name -- just a little louder than usual -- during roll call.

"The last first day." Not that this year is going to be interminable with the countdown to Jeter's final game or anything.

It was seeing Andy Pettitte, Jorge Posada and Mariano Rivera walk out in street clothes for the ceremonial first pitch to honor him, struck by the sight of him being the last of them still in uniform -- another reminder of the passage of time.

These are all things that Derek Jeter feels because this is how Johnette Howard would like to believe this is how Derek Jeter feels.

And it was the sight of Jeter at the pregame news conference microphone, patiently listening to someone remind him how Joe Torre, his longest big league manager, told him not to let success go to his head after he had a terrific season and won his first World Series in their first season together.

And Jeter did not let success go to his head. He upgraded the quality of the attractive brunette he dated and that's the only big change Jeter made after winning his first World Series. Well, there was also that whole situation where George Steinbrenner thought Jeter was staying out too late at the clubs and not focused enough on the Yankees, but that's to be forgotten during the farewell tour. Only good memories allowed.

Smirking a little now, Jeter cracked, "Well, the part of the story you're missing is that I told him the same thing: 'We won a championship, you had a great year managing. Don't screw it up after this.'"

Please Johnette Howard, translate what Jeter actually meant when he said this. We must know.

But Orioles manager Buck Showalter, the Yanks' manager the first year Jeter arrived in the big leagues, put a lot into perspective before Jeter went 1-for-4 in the Yankees' 4-2 win over Baltimore. Like current Yankees manager Joe Girardi (who said, no, he didn't look at Jeter the rookie way back when and just know he'd get 3,000 hits), Showalter scoffed prior to Monday's game about "these scouts who say, 'I knew exactly what he [Jeter] was going to be.'"

Buck Showalter looks like he scoffs at least 30 times per day, so I'm not sure this really means something.

But as for how Jeter did turn out, Showalter deadpanned, "We're excited to see him retire. Same as Mo." Was he happy to be here for such a memorable occasion?

No, he's not happy at all. "Fuck Derek Jeter," says Buck Showalter. Showalter has no interest in being there for this occasion. Great question. This reader feels more informed.

Another Showalter wisecrack: "I'd rather him not be playing today. I mean, seriously. It's like your grandmother making you go out and get switches to whip your own butt with."

Great point. My grandmother always shops for her own switches and would never trust me to go get a switch at Target that would be used to whip my own butt. I would just choose the Switch-o-matic 3001 which has the rubber grip but a soft coating around the actual part of the switch used to beat my ass. That switch is useless when it comes to teaching me a lesson.

And everyone laughed.

Heartily? Did everyone laugh heartily?

But Showalter's overarching point was an important one: To take for granted that Jeter was always destined to become great ignores the rest.

So basically this entire column about Jeter having feelings is really about Johnette Howard wanting to do the typical cookie-cutter fluff piece on Jeter. Great.

It wasn't dumb luck that made Jeter great. Nor was it some total absence of what Jeter called "nerves" or "butterflies" in the "wow moments" of his career. Rather, Jeter emphasized Monday, it was that he felt all of that, but "I hide it well."

WHAT DOES JETER REALLY MEAN BY THIS? TELL US JOHNETTE HOWARD!

"You know, I came up in a culture where you were never promised a job," Jeter reminded everybody. "We had to perform in order to keep our job.

Which differs from today's environment how again? I didn't realize baseball players, especially rookie prospects, were promised jobs without earning those jobs. I must have missed this happening.

That's the mindset that we had going into every season. ... If you didn't do your job, The Boss would get rid of you. So every spring training, every offseason, we trained and prepared.

Again, how is this different from today's game again? I must be missing something. Perhaps this is why Derek Jeter doesn't say much all the time, because if he did then what he did say would sound like the typical cliches coming from an athlete. 

There are folks who wonder if a star as big as Jeter can really be as grounded as all that sounds. Him, have to win a job?

Jeter is talking about when he was a rookie, not talking about right now, you dipshit. Jeter wasn't a big star prior to his first season when he had to fight to win a job. It's like Johnette Howard isn't even listening to what Jeter is saying, probably because she KNOWS what Jeter really means.

Not invoking his superstar privilege Monday when confronted with repeated questions about initially not running hard out of the box in the fifth inning when a ball he hammered down the left-field line turned out to be a double off the wall, not the home run he thought it was?

That's probably because the media didn't batter him into the ground for not hustling because they are too busy deciphering what he really means whenever he speaks and asking the same questions about how it feels to be retiring after this season.

Rather than preen like a sacred cow, Jeter instead acknowledged he screwed up with a series of droll jokes -- each of them funnier than the last.

It seems Robinson Cano's downfall was that he didn't know any jokes. If he knew jokes, the New York media would have totally laid off him for not hustling every time ran to first base. Tell jokes, make the people happy so they lay off you. That's apparently the rule.

The best one? Responding to an unrelated question about whether it's going to be awkward to see fans applaud him just for grounding into a double play. Jeter circled back to the ribbing for having to leg out the double and dryly cracked, "Maybe they were cheering for me hustling."

Oh Jetes, you kidder! Let's all have a good laugh, go get a drink and hope the 40,000th question about his retirement will get Derek Jeter to cry a little. THE SEASON DOESN'T END UNTIL THE JETER IS CRYING LIKE A BABY!

But Jeter has said self-deprecating things like that forever. And it's hard to fake being something you're not for 20 years.

Which is why Jeter is clearly a robot without feelings, despite Howard's protestations to the contrary. For 20 years Jeter has been an unemotional robot. It can't be an act. He must really be a robot who has no emotions. I'm just glad Johnette Howard has gotten to the bottom of this issue and this article wasn't just an excuse to write a fluff piece about Jeter.

Jeter has feelings, all right. And high personal standards.

Especially in women. If he wakes up one day looks at Minka Kelly, sees the beginning of fat around a thigh, then it's onto the next attractive brunette. The Jeter doesn't play around with bitches wearing cellulite. Cellulite is never in fashion.

Like those other Yankees icons, he has loved this ride. He will dearly miss this. He gets how special it's been.

Jeter doesn't even have to say this, Johnette Howard knows it's true because that's what she wants Jeter to say. Now cry, Jeter, cry and make Johnette Howard happy. It's all that's left to give the people, just one tear.

"Everybody's human," he said. "It's just ..."

Yeah, we know.

"I've got a job to do," he repeated.

I think what Jeter is really wanting to say is, "Stop asking me the same dumbass questions about whether I will miss baseball."

So even if this is his long goodbye, the takeaway Monday was this: Jeter is just determined not to let it become maudlin.

But even so, the media will be damned if they don't write the same "Jeter is going to miss baseball even though he won't say he will baseball" column that is just a cheap excuse to write a boring, by-the-numbers Jeter fluff piece. 

4 comments John Lackey's Career-Threatening Elbow Surgery is a Good Thing?

Sportswriters run out of story ideas at times. There's no doubt about that. Sometimes what results from this is an article that probably isn't well-thought out. Sportswriters also like to take a contrarian point of view on topics in order to make the audience "think" or challenge the traditional point of view. JemeHill is famous for creating a false argument no one is really furthering and then writing a contrarian article based on that. (Example: "Dwight Howard is the best center in NBA history")

Today, Johnette Howard explains why John Lackey's Tommy John surgery is actually a good thing. See, because Lackey is having Tommy John surgery he gets a "do-over" in Boston. I guess Howard's belief is the Red Sox faithful will look at Lackey on the mound during the 2013 season and forget all about how he has struggled during his time in Boston. I just don't see how elbow surgery followed by 9-12 months of rehab can be considered a good thing and it isn't like Red Sox fans will forget Lackey has struggled during his time in Boston. When he comes back to pitch in 2013, he may get a round of applause, but he will still have to pitch effectively.

Someone needed to tell Red Sox pitcher John Lackey how lucky he is even before he got out of that hospital gown he was wearing this week.

(Doctor) "Johnette, I have a bad news. You have two blocked arteries. We have to perform open heart surgery on you as early as next week."

(Johnette Howard gets up and starts cheering) "Fan-fucking-tastic! This is the best news all day. I'm so lucky to get a chance to do my entire life over after I recover."

(Doctor) "I'm not sure you understand. People will still remember you and you will have the exact same life. So it really isn't a do-over---"

(Johnette Howard) "Do you know how lucky I am? I get a do-over. I wrote a terrible article a few weeks ago and now I have a chance to make people forget that and come back a new woman...if I even choose to come back as a woman. Perhaps I will be a dog or a wealthy socialite from the Midwest, it's really too early to make that decision. I have six months to rest and then everyone will forget how badly I have written at times in the past. Also, no one will talk anymore about that time I punched a baby at an awards banquet."

(Doctor) "I read that article. It was bad. Please remember this is a risky procedure and you may never been the same after the surgery. You will have to monitor what you eat and how---"

(Johnette Howard begins cutting on chest with a scalpel in order to begin the procedure right now. She starts singing "If I Could Turn Back Time")

(Doctor) "We weren't scheduling the procedure for another week, so you don't need to do that right now. It's very non-sterile and frankly I am disgusted...mostly by your song choice. People are going to remember you punched a baby and people are going to remember that bad article. You have a new lease on life, but the surgery will not make you a better writer and you will still work for ESPN."

(Johnette Howard) "You're such a kidder! Is there a way you can teach me Spanish while I am in surgery? I'd love to come back knowing Spanish. I wonder if I will even come back as a human or maybe a tree or perhaps a butterfly? Now, do I have control over what I come back as, or is that purely up to the fates?"

(Doctor now giving up) "We'll bring you back as a human. A human with an extremely keen sense of smell that can solve crimes by imagining what happened at the crime scene, even when you aren't in the same vicinity as the crime committed. Then you can write about this and be a successful wealthy woman."

(Johnette Howard) "Really? I'm so thankful I get this life-threatening procedure done. What a break for me. Who can I thank for becoming a bilingual psychic crime solver with a keen sense of smell?"

(Doctor) "Thank the Cheez-Its lining your arteries."

Can you imagine if Bill Buckner had another chance to get his glove around that damn ground ball in 1986, or if the long drive to left by Aaron (Freaking) Boone that sent the Yankees to the 2003 World Series had curled foul instead and Tim Wakefield was able to throw another pitch? What if Carl Crawford had reached that sinking liner on the last play of Boston's 2011 season instead of stumbling around in left field as if he were on roller skates, making yet another epic Red Sox collapse complete?

Mostly, can you imagine if another sports team other than the Red Sox had terrible individual plays happen to them. What would the world look like if the Red Sox weren't the only team with bad luck?

Also, these are individual plays, not entire seasons. So it isn't like Lackey made a play that lost a game. He wasn't very good for an entire season. John Lackey's surgery isn't a good thing because he will come back from the surgery still getting paid a lot and will have to work hard to rehab from the surgery. Maybe it is a good thing for Red Sox fans they don't have to see Lackey pitch in 2012, but I don't see how this is good for Lackey. What would be happy is if Lackey pitched most of the 2011 year with a minor elbow injury which caused his struggles and got it fixed in the offseason. That's not the case. Now he's just the underachieving pitcher who needs major arm surgery.

You think any of them wouldn't welcome the unexpected do-over that Lackey is about to get?

None of them would want Tommy John surgery.

Major surgery rarely seems like a welcome thing for anybody. But Lackey was a pariah and in danger of getting the ax in Boston until he had to go under the knife.

So does Johnette really think when Lackey comes back he isn't going to be a pariah and won't be criticized if his performance is bad? If Lackey had played well without elbow surgery he would no longer be a pariah in Boston. Either way, he has to pitch well. Also, Lackey was in danger of getting the ax, meaning getting traded, but now he has little trade value until it is seen how he pitches after the surgery. So Lackey is stuck on a team with fans that hate him and the Red Sox have to wait a year to trade Lackey and what trade value he had has been diminished. I'm not sure how this is good for Lackey.

Now, everything people thought they knew about him last season might need to be recast, or at least challenged after what we learned on Friday.

If anything, this is a good thing for the Boston Red Sox, not John Lackey. The Red Sox now have Lackey's 2015 option triggered for the league minimum. So for Lackey, he gets to miss a year and make everyone cool down from his poor performance in 2011, but he also gets to work for the league minimum in 2015 as a 36 year old. Yay!

Until then, Lackey had been derided as a big-money bust, a chronic complainer, a combative contrarian and worse.

So assuming everyone cools down and forgives Lackey after he misses an entire year, what happens if he comes back and still doesn't pitch well? Maybe I am underestimating the ability of Red Sox fans to forgive and forget how poorly Lackey pitched over the last two years, especially considering he had an elbow problem down the stretch of the 2011 season. I don't claim to be a genius, but it seems to me many of the problems Lackey would have had in 2012 will be delayed until 2013. Maybe all will be forgotten at that point.

Lester eventually confirmed that on nights they didn't pitch, he, Lackey and Beckett sometimes sat in the Red Sox clubhouse drinking "rally beers" and/or occasionally sent a clubhouse boy off to Kenmore Square for Popeye's chicken during the season as games were going on -- even as the Red Sox were folding in September.

Because everyone knows fried chicken is a contributor to a negative performance on the field.

But, Lester added, that doesn't necessarily make them "bad people."

Yeah, well, try telling that to the folks who wanted all three of them run out of town. Try telling that to Curt Schilling, the former Red Sox postseason hero who scolded the pitching trio for their lousy performances down the stretch, and blamed it on their failure to stay in top shape.

We can all trust Curt Schilling's own overly-opinionated hypocriscy on this issue since he admitted he played for the Red Sox while overweight. It never ceases to amaze me the amount of hypocrisy athletes speak out of their mouths at times. If anyone can criticize Lester, Lackey, and Beckett for playing out of shape, that person is not Curt Schilling. Because he did the exact same damn thing while with the Red Sox.

So it is also hilarious to me the balls Curt Schilling has to criticize the Red Sox under Francona for a lack of structure when he took advantage of that lack of structure to gain a few pounds. Of course the Red Sox didn't happen to collapse down the stretch while Schlling was out of shape, so nobody gave a shit and nobody remembers Schilling admitting he was out of shape while Francona was the manager.

(On second though, since the general public has a memory that lasts about two weeks, maybe Lackey could come back in 2013 and no one will remember his 2010 and 2011 performances)

Lackey seemed the most likely player to go in the offseason purge that's already seen Francona resign in disgust and Theo Epstein leave to run the Chicago Cubs.

But now the Red Sox get to keep Lackey and get to add one season missed at the age of 32 while he is making $15+ million, in exchange for a season of Lackey making $500,000 at the age of 36. Lackey probably won't get another chance to be a free agent until he is 37. It's a win/win!

But Cherington's announcement that Lackey needed surgery recasts at least some of all that, doesn't it?

It now looks like Lackey might have actually been gutting out the 2011 season with a bum elbow, unbeknownst to everyone else.

So let me get this straight:

If Lackey eats fried chicken and drinks beer in the clubhouse, pitches poorly and the Red Sox collapse down the stretch...but does so while needing major elbow surgery, then this means he is a warrior and all is forgiven?

If Lackey eats fried chicken and drinks beer in the clubhouse, pitches poorly and the Red Sox collapse down the stretch...but is completely healthy, then this means he is a lazy, fat asshole who needs to earn his contract?

So while I understand the idea a player who pitches poorly through an injury is a warrior, the result is the same with the Red Sox missing the playoffs. Lackey still ate fried chicken and drank beer in the clubhouse, which is independent of any injury he suffered, and pitched terribly on the mound. It just turns out he simply did this with an elbow injury. It's admirable, but the same idiots crucifying him for drinking beer and eating fried chicken would then have to forgive him because he was hurt?

Sometimes the reasoning of the world confuses me. The very thing Lackey was (stupidly) criticized for doing, eating fried chicken and drinking beer, is separate from his pitching poorly anyway. The potential reason Lackey pitched terribly was he had an elbow injury, but those who argue his clubhouse eating habits in-game reflected poorly on his dedication to the game will now assume he was dedicated because he pitched injured. I think I'm confused now.

So was Lackey a good teammate, or a bad one? Is he a lousy pitcher and a whiner who can't handle the crucible the Red Sox play in, or a man whose 2011 performance can be explained away by personal problems that none of us would wish on anybody and a barking elbow he might have pushed to the breaking point because he knew the team was in a pennant race?

We just have to wait over a year and Lackey has to go through major elbow surgery before this is resolved. I still fail to see how this is a positive thing.

That means he won't be back on Opening Day to face the music like Crawford will for his own subpar 2011 season.

Which is a good thing apparently.

But he won't have to wait decades to see if he can make peace with the Red Sox faithful like Buckner did, either.

Shut up about having to "make peace" with the Red Sox faithful as if Lackey perpetrated some terrible crime on the entire city. He had a bad year and hasn't "earned" his contract yet. He's been an underachiever like every franchise ends up having at some point or another. Simply because he had a bad year for the Red Sox doesn't mean he has to "make piece" with the fans or his underachieving affected the fans personally in some fashion.

Lackey didn't just get Tommy John surgery the other day.

He gets a mulligan.

Not really. He still has to pitch well for the Red Sox in 2013, as well as he loses a year of his career, and while gaining another year with the Red Sox at the league minimum. This isn't really a mulligan for Lackey anymore than he is essentially giving people time to cool off and delaying his next start until the 2013. He also gets to rehab for 9-12 months from major elbow surgery. I just can't call having major elbow surgery a "mulligan."

He gets the sort of gift second chance most people would do anything not to blow.

It's not really a second chance. It's a major injury which will involve months of rehab and then eventually Lackey will try to prove he can play up to the standard Red Sox fans expect him to play up to. I think proving he can pitch well would have been easier without elbow surgery and in no way should this be considered a second chance.

5 comments Johnette Howard May Have a Semi-Point, But This Isn't a Pervasive Issue

We all know how things work in the NFL, just like it works in real life. Nothing gets changed until someone important feels the pain of a problem. The NFL won't seriously alter the overtime rule during the regular season until a playoff spot is ultimately decided by the current regular season overtime rules. Protecting the quarterback became a bigger deal after the NFL realized quarterbacks are among the most popular players in the NFL and it may be in their best interests to prevent them from being hurt. It's the same way in sports journalism. Team X could go through three quarterbacks due to injury during the season, but few writers pay attention to what practice experience with the first-team offense the backup quarterback has. Once a guy like Peyton Manning gets hurt, well then the question starts to get asked why doesn't the backup quarterback get more reps with the first-team in practice?

Johnette Howard has asked that question today. She may have a semi-point about backup quarterbacks deserving more first-team snaps in practice, but the reason they don't also makes sense. Using Curtis Painter as the example doesn't help the argument either. This is how it works though. Peyton Manning gets hurt, so it causes sportswriters to focus on issues like how many snaps the backup quarterback gets in practice, which leads to a possible overreaction to a smaller problem. Howard takes an issue one team may be having and then turns it into a league-wide epidemic.

Other than recalling that he was the rookie who was abruptly thrown into a game on his own 10-yard line when the Indianapolis Colts were playing the fire-breathing Jets' defense two seasons ago, and basically told, "Don't blow our perfect 14-0 season, kid'' I don't know much about Curtis Painter.

Why was Painter thrown in the game? Did Peyton Manning suffer an injury that didn't allow him to continue? No, he did not. Painter was thrown into the game because the Colts wanted to rest Manning and prevent him from getting injured. Manning was pulled from the game. If they had truly wanted to keep their 14-0 record they would have kept their completely not-injured, Hall of Fame quarterback in the game. So Painter wasn't really told not to blow the 14-0 season, he was put in the game purely to prevent Manning from getting hurt and the Colts probably had an idea they weren't going 15-0.

To me, he just looks like Kurt Cobain in shoulder pads.

He has long hair. He's a non-conformist like Kurt Cobain!

But I do know the poor guy doesn't deserve what he seems to have become now that Colts star Peyton Manning is out indefinitely: the poster boy for all that's wrong with NFL backup quarterbacks.

Let's not ignore all evidence presented that Curtis Painter may be a terrible NFL quarterback regardless of how many snaps he gets in practice with the first-team. He has been in the Colts system, by the side of Peyton Manning, for two seasons and the Colts had to sign Kerry Collins a couple of weeks before the 2011 season to be their starter. After two seasons this shouldn't happen to a quality backup quarterback.

Johnette Howard is preparing to suggest that backup quarterbacks get more first-team snaps in practice using Curtis Painter as Example #1 for why this should happen. Painter has been in the Colts system for two years and has practiced with the Colts second team for at least one of these years. Sure, he hasn't taken too many practice snaps with the Colts first-team, but I question whether if he received more practice snaps with the first-team if this would have made him a better NFL quarterback.

And it's already been applied to Vince Young, Michael Vick's new backup in Philadelphia, who was so maligned early in the preseason for not instantly picking up the Eagles' playbook, coach Andy Reid finally defended him by saying, "It's like learning French in four days."

Vince Young didn't know the playbook well. That's the bottom line. 100 hours of practice with the first-team offense isn't going to help Vince Young learn the playbook better. Studying the playbook more would help Young more than throwing to the first-team instead of the second-team would. I can't think of a good reason why a quarterback who doesn't know the playbook should get more reps in practice with the first-team at the expense of the starting quarterback getting these snaps.

Actually, what NFL teams ask of their backup quarterbacks is even more ridiculous than that.

They have to learn the offense and on game day wear a headseat WHILE ALSO WEARING A BASEBALL CAP. It’s not the difficulty so much, but just getting used to having something on your head and over/in your ears at the same time.

In the NFL, a backup quarterback is routinely asked to master the offense and save games in emergencies despite getting no practice snaps -- or reps, in NFL-speak -- with the first-team offense at all week after week, month after month.

It is possible to master the offense without throwing to the first-team offense on a weekly basis. Would it help to work with the first-team offense more often? Probably. A team’s game plan can change on a weekly basis, so the starting quarterback often needs as many reps with the first-team as he can get. A backup quarterback can master the offense and come in and save the game while working with the second-team in practice or standing on the sidelines at practice. I am sure it is a handicap of sorts, but they are running the same offense as the first-team, just with less talented players on the second-team and no one is stopping the backup from staying after practice with individual players on the first-team to practice. So I don’t see this as some huge NFL emergency issue because Peyton Manning’s backups all seem to be average or below average. I know it is fine to overreact and blame the Colts quarterback problems on a lack of practice reps with the first-team offense.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but this is sheer lunacy, isn't it?

No, it is not really sheer lunacy. Given the short time teams have to prepare for opposing defenses and implement the game plan then it makes sense for the quarterback expected to take all of the snaps during a game to take all of the snaps during practice. Second-team offensive linemen, receivers, and running backs also don’t get to work with the first-team as much in practice. They tend to come into the game more often than backup quarterbacks do, so couldn’t a case be made they should practice more often with the first-team as well? This goes especially for first-team offensive linemen.

It makes sense for the first-team quarterback to get more reps in practice and if the concern is the backup quarterback doesn’t know the playbook then playing with the first-team offense will just highlight this problem rather than correct it.

Baseball teams don't tell their backup second basemen they can't take part in pregame infield practice, do they?

If you can’t recognize the difference in how often a backup quarterback plays and how often a backup second baseman plays then I really can’t help you.

NBA teams don't tell their No. 2 point guards to imagine what it would be like to run the offense while the starters run up and down the practice court nine or 10 months a year.

Again, basketball is different. The starting point guard doesn’t play every minute of the game, unlike the starting quarterback for an NFL team, who plays 99% of his team’s offensive snaps during a game. In the NBA, the backup point guard gets to play every single game. The backup quarterback doesn't play every game.

No NHL team would ever tell its backup goaltenders to go off to the side and just pantomime making saves.

Yet again, NHL backup goaltenders start games when the regular starter is resting. It’s completely different. No NFL team gives their starting quarterback a game off to rest.

So why do NFL teams -- who like to brag that football is the ultimate team game, a beautifully synchronized ballet of 11-on-11 that plays out each Sunday on the emerald chessboard down on the field, and blah blah blah -- do this to backup quarterbacks who are just one hit away from having to step in and play the sport's most important position?

Because the starter needs as much time to learn and implement the game plan for the upcoming game as possible. It isn’t expected for the starter to miss time during the game, so the amount of time used for practice is given to the starting quarterback with the first-team offense. Why would a team give 15% of the practice time with the starters to a player who isn’t expected to play in the upcoming game?

What makes how NFL teams prepare their backup QBs even worse is no one seems quite sure how it became standard procedure.

It doesn’t matter because it isn’t a terrible policy. Does the coach of an NFL team really want the backup quarterback to get some snaps in practice while the starter stands there and watches? Does this really make sense simply because Peyton Manning got hurt and his backups suck? That seems to be the entire reason for this column being written. Curtis Painter isn’t very good and this is being blamed on his lack of first-team reps.

"When I was with the Steelers, Bradshaw took every rep, too," Moore says. "That's why -- and I know this sounds funny -- to me, being a backup quarterback is one of the toughest jobs in pro football. You have to prepare yourself every single week just exactly like the starter.

This isn’t a discussion of whether being a backup quarterback is difficult or not. Everyone knows it is not an easy job, but it does make strategic sense to use practice time on the players actually anticipated to appear in the upcoming game. Sure, it would be great to get the backup quarterback reps in practice during the week, but it doesn’t make sense for this to happen on a weekly basis.

Rather than ask why more NFL backups don't play well, the better question is how do any NFL quarterbacks succeed at all when brought in as an emergency fill-in?

Because they know the offense and realize running the first-team offense may end up being easier than running the second-team offense given the potential talent disparity between the two? Backup quarterbacks coming in the game and struggling because they didn’t get to work with the first-team offense enough doesn’t seem to be a huge epidemic in the NFL. The biggest issue when a backup quarterback comes in is the difference in talent from the starter to the backup. I realize now that Manning is hurt and his backups stink we want to make this a huge issue, but I honestly don’t believe it is. If a guy doesn’t know the playbook, then it doesn’t matter what team he works with in practice.

If you really think about what they're up against, it doesn't seem entirely fair to write off backups as pretty faces with visors and clipboards, or mock them by saying you hold a damn fine extra point, sir.

I really don’t know specifically who mocks backup quarterbacks like this. My joke previously in this column about wearing a headset and a baseball cap aside, everyone knows a quality backup quarterback is very useful.

The real hothouse flowers are the pampered No. 1 quarterbacks who fret about not having an entire training camp to "perfect" their timing with their receivers,

Many backup quarterbacks do get time in training camp to work with the first-team receivers. They just don’t get the majority of the snaps if a team already knows who their starting quarterback is going to be. This exaggeration from Johnette Howard aside, it is important for quarterbacks and receivers to work on timing. There is a reason quarterbacks and receivers will stay after practice to work on route-running. This reason is when implementing a new game plan during the week it is better for the starting quarterback to get the reps during practice.

or talk about successfully handling the snap when their backup center is forced into a game as if they just defused a nuclear bomb with BBQ grill tongs.

Shockingly, a new center does snap the ball differently to the quarterback. Of course, I would agree there is no reason the starter wouldn’t have worked with the backup center some on snapping the football.

"It is kind of silly when you think about it," says Jim Sorgi, who used to be Manning's backup in Indy when Moore was still there and Manning's 227-game consecutive starts streak was intact.

Yes, let’s ask a career backup whether the starting quarterback should get all of the reps during the weekly practices. That’s an unbiased opinion right there. How about also asking Tom Brady or Matt Schaub if he would mind giving 15% of his weekly snaps to their backup quarterback and standing on the sidelines for a little bit? Maybe they would have insight into why it may not be as silly as Johnette Howard thinks for the starter to get all the first-team reps in practice.

Yes, backup quarterbacks do appear in games during the season, and yes, it makes sense to have the backup in good rhythm with the first-team offense. That’s what training camp is for and during the year, unless it is a bye week, the first-team offense needs time together to implement the game plan for the coming week. It may seem so simple, like they are just playing a big game of catch, but the same reason the backup needs snaps in practice, to help his rhythm with the first-team offense, is why the starting quarterback gets the majority of the snaps.

"Some years I'd get lucky because Peyton would lock up the division so early, I'd get to play a game or two at the end of the season, which was nice. But there were other years, like our Super Bowl season, when I'd go from last game of the preseason through the whole regular season and never take a snap until the last game of the regular season. Not one snap from late August to January. It's like taking a whole season off.

I do feel sympathy for Sorgi. I really do because it has to be tough to not get game snaps and then go out there and play well. Manning is the outlier among starting quarterbacks because he rarely gets injured and is a great quarterback so there isn’t a need to see Sorgi’s skill set with the first-team in practice.

"Then we were playing the New England Patriots in the AFC title game, and Peyton hit his hand on a helmet throwing the ball. As he came off to sideline he looked at me and said, 'Be ready.'"

"I take a lot of pride in preparing every week like I'm going to start, and you tell yourself you can do it … but it was the most nerve-wracking moment of my career," Sorgi admits with a laugh.

In fairness, wouldn’t playing in your first AFC Championship game be a nerve-wracking moment in Sorgi’s career anyway? It’s a pretty important game and I would imagine even if he had started the game then he would have been nervous. I would imagine he would be a little nervous about his work load up to that point. Should Peyton Manning have gotten fewer reps in practice with the first-team leading up to the AFC Championship game so Sorgi could have felt more prepared? I don’t know if many would agree this should have happened.

Weinke says. "Everybody watches the game on TV and to them it looks so easy: 'How did you not see this guy? How did you not see that guy?' But think about it: You're running out into the game [in an emergency] and you're not loose. You've been sitting around all day and now you're running with the bulls. You're running for your life, and you have to process all this information, you know you haven't had any physical reps with the first team, and it's like you're strapped into the worst car crash you've ever been in –

I don’t doubt this is how it feels. Regardless of how many practice reps with the first-team the backup quarterback has had during the week, this is all still true when entering the game. The backup quarterback will always not be loose, be coming into the game in an emergency, and have to process all this information quickly. The only difference is the backup quarterback hasn’t had any physical reps with the first-team. But as Weinke himself said, it is an emergency when the starting quarterback goes down, so possibly giving first-team reps to the backup quarterback in practice isn’t the best utilization of practice time.

I don’t know, maybe it is smart to give the backup reps with the first-team. I’d love to see a team do this and then report back on how it works. My initial guess would be the starting quarterback wouldn’t appreciate losing reps when he has to prepare for the game ahead.

Some NFL backups will never be terrific no matter how much practice they get.

(coughs) Curtis Painter.

Others are talented enough to win.

They should be talented enough to win when called upon and having not received a bunch of first-team reps in practice. This is all an overreaction to the Colts losing Peyton Manning for a majority of the season and none of the backup quarterbacks on the Colts roster being good enough to win games. The real issue is the quality of the backup quarterbacks for the Colts, not how many reps Curtis Painter or Dan Orlovsky got with the first-team when Manning was healthy.

Would it kill NFL teams to make their starting quarterbacks start sharing a few more reps?

Probably not. When a team performs poorly on offense it will immediately be blamed on the starting quarterback not having as many reps with the first-team offense as other NFL teams give their starting quarterback.

Or, failing that, at least tell the rest of us to get off Curtis Painter's back?

Because he can’t perform well? I could make a list of backup quarterbacks that have stepped up when the starter got injured and performed well, despite not having first-team reps in practice. I’ll let you as the reader make your own list of these backups who performed well from the teams you cheer for. Suffice to say, while it would be nice for a backup quarterback to get reps with the first-team offense, for many teams this rightfully isn’t their highest priority in practice during the week.