I apologize for my lack of posting here at the blog, but that whole work thing was keeping me occupied over the past month and when I got home I didnt feel much like posting, and usually just went to bed. But enough about my problems, onto more pressing matters.
Matt Holliday just got traded a few days ago, and from where I sit it seems to be a fair trade for both sides. The Cardinals got a quality bat in Holliday, who is sure to be much improved now that hes moving out of the unfriendly hitters park that is Oakland and into a more neutral park. The A's got the 2nd best prospect from the Cardinals system, another player with very high upside, and some other guy. Not a bad haul for someone who is struggling like Holliday is...or was.
I'm not really sure why, but there are some writers out there who have it in for Billy Beane. I guess its because he came off as kind of cocky in "Moneyball", but thats not his fault. I mean, its not like he wrote the book or anything. I have a feeling Tracy Ringolsby is one of those people. For some reason he thinks The A's just got taken to school by the Cardinals, which I dont think is anywhere close to the truth, but lets examine this further, shall we?
St. Louis general manager John Mozeliak played the waiting game — and won.
The Cardinals were after Matt Holliday last winter.
The Rockies asking price was steep.
Oakland outbid the Cardinals.
Eight months later, the A's had to salvage what they could, and sent Holliday to St. Louis.
It's a win-win for Mozeliak
You know an article is getting off to a bad start when the writer starts doing his best Plaschke impression. I dont understand why writers do this, it doesnt add anything, its just annoying, and I think its kind of lazy. Look at how easy it is.
I wake up in the morning.
I go brush my teeth and shave.
I drive into work.
My boss was a douche.
God how I hate him.
What I'm doing right now is adding no substance and it is annoying.
I miss my Moms basement...it was nice.
Okay, I'll stop now. But yes, I hate when writers do that. So all you writers reading take note: Unless you want to be ridiculed by poor grammar and run on sentences, dont write like Bill Plaschke.
He avoided the temptation last winter, when the Rockies were looking at a return on Holliday of big-league outfielder Ryan Ludwick, second baseman/outfielder Skip Schumaker, and right-handed pitcher Mitchell Boggs, who spent time in the Cardinals rotation earlier this season.
A 30 year old coming off a year there is no way he will ever replicate, a 2nd baseman with a career 100 OPS+(who they have playing LF now for some reason that year), and a 24 year old (at the time) with a career 1.828 WHIP is asking too much? Okay, fine. Do carry on.
Without Holliday, the Cardinals still found themselves in first place in the NL Central, leading by a game on Friday morning.
Then they got Holliday from Oakland. As well as bringing a legitimate bat to compliment Albert Pujols, Holliday also provides an emotional lift to his new teammates because the organization stepped up and added the right-handed slugger. The cost? Three prospects, none of which showed promise of having an impact in St. Louis.
That last sentence is what caught my eye when I was skimming over the article. I had heard of Brett Wallace before, but I figured I would find out a little more about him, which is something Mr. Ringolsby did not do. After a quick search of Google This was the first thing to pop up. Yeah, his ETA to the majors is 2010. Not to mention he is ranked 42nd best prospect IN THE WHOLE LEAGUE. Why is Mr. Rigolsby making him sound like a scrub?
(quick break to watch Entourage)
Okay, where was I?
The uncertainty about the free agent market this offseason, however, created the possibility that agent Scott Boras could call Beane's bluff and accept arbitration from Oakland, like he did once for Kevin Millwood in Atlanta
Maybe I'm not remembering this right, but I could've sworn it was Maddux that accepted arbitration from Atlanta. Maybe Millwood did, too.
A key reason that the Rockies are where they are is they dealt Holliday. That's not a knock on Holliday, but rather a statement of what Huston Street has meant to the Rockies. The question Rockies fans are left to ponder is where they would have been without Street
Yes, the guy that pitches for 1 inning is more valuble than the corner outfielder who OPS's 1.000 at coors field. Makes sense to me.
I think my favorite part to the article is reading the comments. Some choice ones:
From Gleek: Beane and the A's are a bunch of losers. It's too bad that used to be a good team before Beane and his cheap ball sabermetrics crapola got a hold of it.
Beane has been GM since 1998. They have had some success between now and then. Probably the biggest mistake Beane made is giving Michael Lewis so much access to how they ran things. That took away his competitive advantedge, because after the book came out, everyone knew what he was doing. He pretty much had his whole strategy published.
Anyone who honestly believes Beane shouldn't have traded Holliday, or that he received less than he traded is a m.o.r.o.n.Beane absolutely had to trade Holliday, because he certainly wasn't going to resign in the off-season. Holliday is likely going to be Type-A, but ultimately that didn't matter because the package Beane received was significantly better than one extra first round pick in the draft.Both Wallace and Mortensen have relatively high ceilings...in fact, Wallace was the best position prospect in the Cards system. Eric Chavez now has an heir apparent in Oakland.And it's not as if the A's traded 2007 Holliday. Holliday has been grossly under-performing in Oakland this season, so i would imagine his value was substantially lower than it was 1-2 years prior.And the argument comparing Carlos Gonzalez to Brett Wallace is silly, really. Gonzalez isn't half the prospect Wallace is. Huston Street is the only player of value from that deal.I'm no fan of the A's, but Ringolsby doesn't have a clue. Beane did just fine.
I think this commenters thoughts are about in line with what the majority of people thought of the deals Beane made. I dont know if I agree with Wallace being Chavezs heir to 3rd base, but I agree with the rest of what he said.
From Gleek again: Let's see the A's got rid of a proven MLB talent for noobs. Beane once again shows that he is a cheapskate and doesnt want to win.
Noobs? Is Billy Beane playing online computer games? I dont think this dude realizes that Beane does not set the payroll (I know he has a part ownership, but its a relatively small share).
Slapshot2003: Hey riingolsby, Beansie did the best he could with what was being offered out there. I'm sure it's a better deal than you could've gotten.And BTW: Tracy is a girls name!!!!
Apparently slapshot either is a middle school kid or he just isnt very bright. I mean......come on, dude. Thats your best insult? He might as well have gone the whole 9 yards and thrown in "Tracy is a girls name, so that means you have cooties!!!!!!"
I think this one is my favorite one
What_Eva_34 7/26/2009 12:36:01 AM
THE WRITER OF THIS ARTICLE IS AN ID.I.OT. THEY GAVE UP THEY'RE BEST HITTING PROSPECT, AND HE WROTE THEY GOT HOLLIDAY FOR NEXT TO NOTHING. STICK TO WRITING, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS SKILLS. WHAT MAY BE GOOD TODAY, MAY TURN OUT TO BE A DISASTER TWO SEASONS FROM NOW.
............ I'm going to take this sentence by sentence.
THE WRITER OF THIS ARTICLE IS AN ID.I.OT.
okay, first off, he left a period out. Second, why is he spelling out Idiot like it stands for something?
THEY GAVE UP THEY'RE BEST HITTING PROSPECT, AND HE WROTE THEY GOT HOLLIDAY FOR NEXT TO NOTHING.
so they gave up "they are" best hitting prospect?
STICK TO WRITING, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS SKILLS.
Perhaps Tracy doesnt, but at least he can write coherently.
WHAT MAY BE GOOD TODAY, MAY TURN OUT TO BE A DISASTER TWO SEASONS FROM NOW.
I just cant believe that this person sat down at his computer, typed the comment, looked at it and thought "yeah, that awesome. This comment brings a lot to the table."
YAWN. Well its about 1230 around here and I have to be up in 5 hours so I'm going to stop here. I was going to do another article, but I'm too tired right now. I'm a bitch like that.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Saturday, July 25, 2009
13 comments Let's Make Fun of Two Pretty White Boys Who Smile A Lot
I woke up today and realized I haven't made fun of Jeff Francouer or Furman Bisher lately. I also have NEVER made fun of Tim Tebow and I was wondering how can I fix this. Fortunately good ol' Japanese hating Furman has given me an opportunity to fix part of this and I will fix the Tebow part myself. Francouer failing as an Atlanta Brave was an especially hard hit for Furman because Francouer is white, from the United States and came from the Braves farm system. It is like the Armageddon of failures for Furman. Let's see how he is holding up.
Sad to say, that in this fairy tale, nobody lives happily ever after.
Oh no, the Braves got some type of value for Francouer, they are living quite happily ever after. He's actually hitting better for the Mets and they still hate him.
“The Natural” has been cast off by the team that brought him in from the suburbs, gloated over him through those first two seasons when he was a steady producer, and then, suddenly, when he lost his game, there was no one to help him.
They used him dammit! When he was no longer of use to the team, or was actually hurting the team just by being in the lineup, they traded him. How dare a team look to win games and not keep a player that is dragging the team down with his inability to do his job halfway effectively! This is America dammit...people should be able to keep their job even if they suck at that job, especially if they make millions of dollars in return for sucking.
So Jeff Francoeur went searching on his own. I don’t understand how it came to that.
When there is no one in an entire MLB organization that can help you hit the ball better, that should tell you something about your prospects as a baseball player.
Neither do I understand just why a hitting slump can’t be cured like the common cold.
Apparently Furman is not aware there actually is no cure for the common cold either. I wouldn't expect him to know this, he is young and impressionable, he probably just forgot.
Mark DeRosa was one, rejected by the Braves, signed by the Rangers and under Jaramillo, as the story goes, found a swing that eventually led to a $13-million contract with the Cubs. Then Mark Teixeira passed that way, and need I say more?
Actually yes, you do need to say more. Like get the timeline correct. DeRosa started playing for the Rangers in 2005 and Tex started playing there in 2003. Not to mention Tex was the 5th pick in the draft and was a guy who got a huge bonus to play for the Rangers. He didn't need Rudy Jaramillo's help in any fashion. Mark DeRosa was also a good hitter prior to going to Texas, I think being able to play full time allowed him to get more at bats and get comfortable at the major league level, which allowed him to hit the ball better. Atlanta did not sign him, not rejected him, because they knew they could not offer him an everyday job.
So yes, you could have gotten this all much more correct.
So the season opened, Francoeur’s swing still showed some lack of discipline and his average hovered around .250.
That doesn't sound too bad, but what was his OBP Furman?
2007- 0.338
2008- 0.294
2009- 0.282 (with the Braves)
Yes, he took hitting lessons and his OPS dropped to a pathetic 0.634. How would he have hit without the hitting lessons? He was awful. Just awful and if Rudy Jaramillo and the Braves organization can't fix him, why keep him?
He became a target.
Yes, he was a victim of the organization looking to rid itself of bad baseball players.
Meanwhile, back in Atlanta, you wonder. How would Cox have reacted if Francoeur had told him of his Jaramillo plan? What if he had come back to the Braves hitting .300 with a generous sprinkling of home runs? Would he ever have been traded?
If he hit .300 and had home runs he probably would not have been traded. This is an incredibly stupid point to try and prove the Braves did not stick with him or should have done more to help him.
The Braves traded him because he did not have success as a hitter in the major leagues, if he had success then he would not have gotten traded most likely. I don't think the organization would have cared if he sacrificed kittens to hit the ball well, just as long as he contributed to the team in some other fashion other than playing above average defense.
Frank Wren, of course, handled the deal, but it had to be approved by Cox. And there went the hometown hero, who could have been a Clemson Tiger, but chose the Braves and their sweetened pot of $2 million or so. Now, all that remains of that class of golden prospects is Brian McCann.
Furman is still bemoaning the "golden days of the Braves minor league system," which was 2005 apparently. You can't just keep players around because they are from Georgia and came from the Braves' system. I know this is a difficult principle for Furman to accept, but it's true.
So Francoeur was dealt to the Mets and his name is misspelled on the lineup card.
Those fucking New York Mets, insulting Francouer for last the time by misspelling his name.
Big deal. I once walked into the Milwaukee Braves clubhouse and Henry Aaron’s name was misspelled. Besides, Francoeur isn’t easy to spell, anyway.
Nevermind, Furman forgives you.
Nor is it easy to say goodbye.
It was actually incredibly easy for me to say goodbye and it should have been for anyone who wasn't a horny woman or Furman Bisher.
-I am officially becoming annoyed with the media's obsession with Tim Tebow. I actually don't hate Tebow, which is odd since I do hate the University of Florida and pretty much anything that is related to the school. I don't know why, I have never liked the school. There have been two controversies this week concerning Tebow.
The first is SEC VoteGate.
The assembled media in the Wynfrey Hotel ballroom are trying to find the perp among the league's coaches. The crime against football reason: failing to vote for Florida's Tim Tebow as the first-team all-Southeastern Conference quarterback.
How dare someone not vote Tim Tebow first team All-SEC! Tim Tebow is a Christian man of God, by not voting for him you are pissing God himself off. Tim Tebow delivers babies for underprivileged mothers and steals orphans from poor villages and then drops them on the doorstep of wealthy and famous celebrities...then stares down the celebrity until they formally adopt the baby. Who would dare smite Tebow and not vote for him?
Well, it turns out it was Steve Spurrier who did not vote him for him, but it was an "oversight." Damn right it was, even Steve Spurrier is afraid to piss off Tebow and God.
What is the media's fascination with Tim Tebow? Who cares if someone did not vote for him first team All-SEC?
Nobody wants to admit publicly he didn't vote for Tebow. But somebody didn't.
I thank God/Tebow that Steve Spurrier stood up and said he did not vote for Tebow...but then he bitched out and said it was an "oversight." Have some balls and say you did not vote for Tebow and voted for Jevan Snead, who is actually a great quarterback in his own right, though he doesn't smile as much or have a camera in front of him as often when he is doing good deeds.
"Will it give me a little bit [of motivation]?" Tebow asked. "Yeah, I guess. But I have enough that gives me motivation right now. I honestly think it's funny."
Yeah, the fact Spurrier thought you were the second best quarterback in the SEC should really motivate you to prove him wrong. I have always thought it was a little egotistical for a player to get offended when people don't vote that player an unanimous choice for any All-Conference team. How big can your ego be that you can't accept there may be someone as good as you in the conference?
The Tebow-mania is overboard because everyone ignores the fact there are great skill players all around Tebow who can make him look good, guys like Louis Murphy and Percy Harvin....they have made Tebow's job a lot easier in the past. Tebow is great but his great teammates get ignored.
I got my Sports Illustrated for this week and Tebow was on the cover. I don't hate him but I am over all this adulation he receives.
The second controversy stirred up almost as much heat. Want to hear something else about Tebow that makes him so great? He's a virgin. I am not sure everyone heard about it.
It doesn't matter if the question what out of line or not, my favorite part is where reporters will write an entire column saying the question did not matter and was out of line...yet it is important enough to write an entire column about. Here is what Tebow-mania turns people like Dennis Dodd of CBS Sportsline into, when he should be covering the SEC meetings and talking football:
His latest job is with AOL Fanhouse. The site currently employs some of my favorite writers. Clay Travis is not one of them. Not now, because it sickens me to be reminded again that journalism has become a hobby instead of a vocation. Radio talk-show hosts who have never set foot in a locker room call themselves "journalists." Give an out-of-work linebacker an analyst job, and suddenly he's the "media."
Yes, I am not sure this is entirely an appropriate response to the question that was asked. This sounds a little bit like an off the topic rant...but this is what Tim Tebow does to sportswriters. It turns them into angry yellers who rant off topic. Who cares if Tebow was not affected by the question, when you can use that question to go off on a tangent?
But he wasn't done:
Nice day at work. Rest up and come back fresh tomorrow, Clay. There will be plenty of chances on Friday to ask a player if he has herpes. I'm sure the public is dying to know if Lane Kiffin ever "read" Playboy or if Les Miles watches HBO after midnight?
Somebody needs to take a nap.
Dan Wetzel wants us to all know that Tebow is in fact perfect.
The gushing from the media through the years – the latest being a Sports Illustrated cover appearance this week – is well-earned.
What can anyone say though? What’s his negative – that he’s too earnest? He’s too polite? Does Tim Tebow do anything wrong?
I think Tim Tebow is 1,000 times more mature than most college students and I applaud him for making choices to help out those less fortunate and do whatever he chooses to do in his personal life, but isn't this a bit much?
I find it fascinating the media is so fascinated with Tim Tebow. I am not even going to talk about the comment Thom Brennaman made during the National Championship about how "five minutes with Tim Tebow will change your life."
There is a difference between having respect for a college football player and fawning all over him. I think it has gone more to the "fawning over Tim Tebow" side of coverage of late. What is it about this smiling God fearing guy that turns sportswriters into little teenage girls gushing over the newest boy band? Other than the fact he is perfect of course...
Sad to say, that in this fairy tale, nobody lives happily ever after.
Oh no, the Braves got some type of value for Francouer, they are living quite happily ever after. He's actually hitting better for the Mets and they still hate him.
“The Natural” has been cast off by the team that brought him in from the suburbs, gloated over him through those first two seasons when he was a steady producer, and then, suddenly, when he lost his game, there was no one to help him.
They used him dammit! When he was no longer of use to the team, or was actually hurting the team just by being in the lineup, they traded him. How dare a team look to win games and not keep a player that is dragging the team down with his inability to do his job halfway effectively! This is America dammit...people should be able to keep their job even if they suck at that job, especially if they make millions of dollars in return for sucking.
So Jeff Francoeur went searching on his own. I don’t understand how it came to that.
When there is no one in an entire MLB organization that can help you hit the ball better, that should tell you something about your prospects as a baseball player.
Neither do I understand just why a hitting slump can’t be cured like the common cold.
Apparently Furman is not aware there actually is no cure for the common cold either. I wouldn't expect him to know this, he is young and impressionable, he probably just forgot.
Mark DeRosa was one, rejected by the Braves, signed by the Rangers and under Jaramillo, as the story goes, found a swing that eventually led to a $13-million contract with the Cubs. Then Mark Teixeira passed that way, and need I say more?
Actually yes, you do need to say more. Like get the timeline correct. DeRosa started playing for the Rangers in 2005 and Tex started playing there in 2003. Not to mention Tex was the 5th pick in the draft and was a guy who got a huge bonus to play for the Rangers. He didn't need Rudy Jaramillo's help in any fashion. Mark DeRosa was also a good hitter prior to going to Texas, I think being able to play full time allowed him to get more at bats and get comfortable at the major league level, which allowed him to hit the ball better. Atlanta did not sign him, not rejected him, because they knew they could not offer him an everyday job.
So yes, you could have gotten this all much more correct.
So the season opened, Francoeur’s swing still showed some lack of discipline and his average hovered around .250.
That doesn't sound too bad, but what was his OBP Furman?
2007- 0.338
2008- 0.294
2009- 0.282 (with the Braves)
Yes, he took hitting lessons and his OPS dropped to a pathetic 0.634. How would he have hit without the hitting lessons? He was awful. Just awful and if Rudy Jaramillo and the Braves organization can't fix him, why keep him?
He became a target.
Yes, he was a victim of the organization looking to rid itself of bad baseball players.
Meanwhile, back in Atlanta, you wonder. How would Cox have reacted if Francoeur had told him of his Jaramillo plan? What if he had come back to the Braves hitting .300 with a generous sprinkling of home runs? Would he ever have been traded?
If he hit .300 and had home runs he probably would not have been traded. This is an incredibly stupid point to try and prove the Braves did not stick with him or should have done more to help him.
The Braves traded him because he did not have success as a hitter in the major leagues, if he had success then he would not have gotten traded most likely. I don't think the organization would have cared if he sacrificed kittens to hit the ball well, just as long as he contributed to the team in some other fashion other than playing above average defense.
Frank Wren, of course, handled the deal, but it had to be approved by Cox. And there went the hometown hero, who could have been a Clemson Tiger, but chose the Braves and their sweetened pot of $2 million or so. Now, all that remains of that class of golden prospects is Brian McCann.
Furman is still bemoaning the "golden days of the Braves minor league system," which was 2005 apparently. You can't just keep players around because they are from Georgia and came from the Braves' system. I know this is a difficult principle for Furman to accept, but it's true.
So Francoeur was dealt to the Mets and his name is misspelled on the lineup card.
Those fucking New York Mets, insulting Francouer for last the time by misspelling his name.
Big deal. I once walked into the Milwaukee Braves clubhouse and Henry Aaron’s name was misspelled. Besides, Francoeur isn’t easy to spell, anyway.
Nevermind, Furman forgives you.
Nor is it easy to say goodbye.
It was actually incredibly easy for me to say goodbye and it should have been for anyone who wasn't a horny woman or Furman Bisher.
-I am officially becoming annoyed with the media's obsession with Tim Tebow. I actually don't hate Tebow, which is odd since I do hate the University of Florida and pretty much anything that is related to the school. I don't know why, I have never liked the school. There have been two controversies this week concerning Tebow.
The first is SEC VoteGate.
The assembled media in the Wynfrey Hotel ballroom are trying to find the perp among the league's coaches. The crime against football reason: failing to vote for Florida's Tim Tebow as the first-team all-Southeastern Conference quarterback.
How dare someone not vote Tim Tebow first team All-SEC! Tim Tebow is a Christian man of God, by not voting for him you are pissing God himself off. Tim Tebow delivers babies for underprivileged mothers and steals orphans from poor villages and then drops them on the doorstep of wealthy and famous celebrities...then stares down the celebrity until they formally adopt the baby. Who would dare smite Tebow and not vote for him?
Well, it turns out it was Steve Spurrier who did not vote him for him, but it was an "oversight." Damn right it was, even Steve Spurrier is afraid to piss off Tebow and God.
What is the media's fascination with Tim Tebow? Who cares if someone did not vote for him first team All-SEC?
Nobody wants to admit publicly he didn't vote for Tebow. But somebody didn't.
I thank God/Tebow that Steve Spurrier stood up and said he did not vote for Tebow...but then he bitched out and said it was an "oversight." Have some balls and say you did not vote for Tebow and voted for Jevan Snead, who is actually a great quarterback in his own right, though he doesn't smile as much or have a camera in front of him as often when he is doing good deeds.
"Will it give me a little bit [of motivation]?" Tebow asked. "Yeah, I guess. But I have enough that gives me motivation right now. I honestly think it's funny."
Yeah, the fact Spurrier thought you were the second best quarterback in the SEC should really motivate you to prove him wrong. I have always thought it was a little egotistical for a player to get offended when people don't vote that player an unanimous choice for any All-Conference team. How big can your ego be that you can't accept there may be someone as good as you in the conference?
The Tebow-mania is overboard because everyone ignores the fact there are great skill players all around Tebow who can make him look good, guys like Louis Murphy and Percy Harvin....they have made Tebow's job a lot easier in the past. Tebow is great but his great teammates get ignored.
I got my Sports Illustrated for this week and Tebow was on the cover. I don't hate him but I am over all this adulation he receives.
The second controversy stirred up almost as much heat. Want to hear something else about Tebow that makes him so great? He's a virgin. I am not sure everyone heard about it.
It doesn't matter if the question what out of line or not, my favorite part is where reporters will write an entire column saying the question did not matter and was out of line...yet it is important enough to write an entire column about. Here is what Tebow-mania turns people like Dennis Dodd of CBS Sportsline into, when he should be covering the SEC meetings and talking football:
His latest job is with AOL Fanhouse. The site currently employs some of my favorite writers. Clay Travis is not one of them. Not now, because it sickens me to be reminded again that journalism has become a hobby instead of a vocation. Radio talk-show hosts who have never set foot in a locker room call themselves "journalists." Give an out-of-work linebacker an analyst job, and suddenly he's the "media."
Yes, I am not sure this is entirely an appropriate response to the question that was asked. This sounds a little bit like an off the topic rant...but this is what Tim Tebow does to sportswriters. It turns them into angry yellers who rant off topic. Who cares if Tebow was not affected by the question, when you can use that question to go off on a tangent?
But he wasn't done:
Nice day at work. Rest up and come back fresh tomorrow, Clay. There will be plenty of chances on Friday to ask a player if he has herpes. I'm sure the public is dying to know if Lane Kiffin ever "read" Playboy or if Les Miles watches HBO after midnight?
Somebody needs to take a nap.
Dan Wetzel wants us to all know that Tebow is in fact perfect.
The gushing from the media through the years – the latest being a Sports Illustrated cover appearance this week – is well-earned.
What can anyone say though? What’s his negative – that he’s too earnest? He’s too polite? Does Tim Tebow do anything wrong?
I think Tim Tebow is 1,000 times more mature than most college students and I applaud him for making choices to help out those less fortunate and do whatever he chooses to do in his personal life, but isn't this a bit much?
I find it fascinating the media is so fascinated with Tim Tebow. I am not even going to talk about the comment Thom Brennaman made during the National Championship about how "five minutes with Tim Tebow will change your life."
There is a difference between having respect for a college football player and fawning all over him. I think it has gone more to the "fawning over Tim Tebow" side of coverage of late. What is it about this smiling God fearing guy that turns sportswriters into little teenage girls gushing over the newest boy band? Other than the fact he is perfect of course...
Friday, July 24, 2009
7 comments Hat Guy Has a Hankering For Hal and Hank (Plus A Bad College Football Column)
See what I did there? That's our Woody Paige headline for the day. All that was missing was a Dr. Seuss reference and a word that rhymed with Hank in the title and I could be qualified to be Woody Paige's editor. I waited all morning for Simmons to put out a mail bag but he hasn't done it yet so I am going to put up the Saturday post here for Friday. Don't worry, which I know you all are, I still plan on putting something up for the weekend. You can call me a lot of things like a bad writer or stupid, but you can't say I am not a prolific machine.
I have decided to cap the Yahoo Fantasy League at 12 teams. We already have 9 teams so we have 3 more open spots. I think 12 teams is a good number.
You never really know what is on the mind of Hat Guy, or as his family calls him Mike Celizic. You know literally, in the picture that he has taken for NBC Sports, it is a hat that is on his mind, but other than that you never really know. Since he tends to only write in depth about the Yankees, you could take a wild guess and say it's the Yankees...which it is in this case. Hat Guy is writing about the Steinbrenner clan, which is another favorite topic of his. You can Google "Steinbrenner and Celizic" and you get quite a few hits.
Let's just say Celizic has had a mini-infatuation with the Steinbrenner family. Whether it means writing articles telling George to fire himself, saying George is soft, or saying George has not been in charge of the Yankees, it's all about the Steinbrenner family for Hat Guy. This week he came to the revelation that baseball is not the same without the first (semi-incompetent) family of baseball...especially when they are really annoying.
No matter how well the Yankees were playing, no matter how many home runs flew out of their new building, no matter much fun they had in the clubhouse, no matter how smoothly their season was going, there was something missing.
I think I have heard this one before, let me guess...Is it the Yankee mystique in the new ball park, the unselfish attitude of Jeter rubbing off his teammates, or the lack of a power hitter like Scott Brosius at third base?
Maybe you didn’t consciously think of it, but it was in the back of your mind. You couldn’t quite put your finger on what it was.
Could it be that the farm system is not completely dry but is getting there fairly quickly if the Steinbrenner's have their way? If that's not it, could it be that AJ Burnett is due to be on the DL any day now?
And then like a gift from a passing pigeon, it hit you splat on the head
A passing pigeon? That's so New York!
a blustering Steinbrenner. That’s what was missing.
You mean an annoying Steinbrenner, I think that's what you meant. The Steinbrenners are a unique breed of human and owner. They singlehandedly pick out the best players each off season to sign, micromanage every aspect of the organization, and then blame someone else when the team is not winning...namely the players or manager they themselves chose. The Steinbrenner's version of running a business is buying every one of their competitor's best idea men and hoping they have a good idea...because the Steinbrenner's certainly don't. Getting their competitor's best idea men, that WAS their good idea.
Until Hal Steinbrenner showed up in New York this week to disgorge his opinion of the team he and his brother, Hank, inherited from their father, I’d actually forgotten how vital a meddling owner is to the Yankee experience.
Hold on, is this article tongue in cheek? I will just assume it is not and carry on mocking Hat Guy.
Oddly enough, Hank and Hal tried to begin their stewardship with something utterly foreign to the Steinbrenner DNA — patience.
So far in the Hal and Hank era they have let Joe Torre go because he did not win another World Series, spent nearly $50 million on a 36 year old catcher, $250 million on a third baseman who opted out of his contract and had no other suitors, and nearly half a billion dollars this off season on two pitchers and a hitter. I don't know what Hat Guy's definition of "patience" is but spending all that money to win now is not my definition of patience. Maybe Hat Guy thinks "patience" is drafting Andrew Brackman in 2008, a college pitcher who needed Tommy John surgery. I don't know if that is "patience" either, that just seemed sort of dumb regardless of his potential.
And thank the ever-vigilant New York tabloid media for rushing to print the instant Hal Steinbrenner showed up this week to deliver his opinion of his team.
“I believe we have a team that can win the championship," he opined.
I am not sure if the fact they have the highest payroll in the major leagues, their team is in first place in one of the toughest divisions in baseball, or the simple fact the Steinbrenners say this every year caused this comment, but it's not unexpected. I would hope the Yankees could win a championship with the roster they have.
This is what I love about the Yankees. There is nothing so banal and insignificant that it can’t be turned into a major headline. It just needs to issue from a Steinbrenner's mouth and it takes on the gravitas of a papal encyclical.
I have come to the conclusion the New York media is a bunch of morons who get overly excited over things that really aren't news stories. Why is it the media capital of the United States, which also has a large population living in it, always talks about stories that really aren't that exciting? I would think the media would not have time to focus on small stories, but its actually quite the opposite, they take small stories and blow them up into huge big deals. I can't believe there aren't better things to talk about.
Let’s be honest here. In Kansas City, this would be meaningless.
I am not sure Kansas City even knows they have a baseball team to be honest. This may be the first they have heard of it.
It would hardly draw a raised eyebrow even in Boston, where folks take their baseball more seriously than they do anywhere on earth.
Best fans in the world. NO ONE DENIES THIS!!
In Cleveland, it wouldn’t make any sense — none at all.
Probably half the fans can't see the games anyway for the midges and birds that fly on the field. The fans can't see the field for all the wildlife, so they may actually need the owner to tell them how the team is doing.
We need these things in New York. Yankee fans need them. The newspapers need them. They’re a comforting connection to the past, a sign that Steinbrenners still walk the land and they demand victory.
When a team has a payroll in excess of $200 million do the fans really need a reminder the owner demands victory? I would hope not.
I fail to see how see saying anything less than a World Series title is a disappointment and vaguely threatening the manager's job is comforting...but I also don't live in New York and I am not a Yankees fan.
(On a personal note, I think Yankees fans really don't like all the drama. I just base this on a couple comments I hear from Yankees fans like: {referring to Bobby Cox} "It's nice to have some stability in the clubhouse and not think he will get fired by the next game.")
Don’t know what we’d do without you. Don’t know what baseball would do without that irreplaceable Steinbrenner touch.
If a Steinbrenner never talked again, it would be too soon. I can quickly become annoyed by them and their demands of their team. They choose the team (or have a large hand in it) and then give everyone else ultimatums because the team is not performing. Anytime the Steinbrenner's say something, ESPN and other media give it more respect than anything the President may say.
-I was done typing for the day but I am going to pull a Peyton Manning and call an audible at the line because I just found a bad college football article. This gets no introduction. It's by Dave Curtis.
Hello, and welcome to the first look at this year's nightmare Armageddon BCS scenario, sponsored by the congressional delegations of Utah and Texas (motto: "screaming into the abyss since 2008").
"Hey, I have an idea. Why don't I make up fake scenarios that haven't happened yet and be really dramatic about it so everyone will think there is a huge problem that will happen for sure in college football this year? Ok, I will do it."
Do you know why there is still a BCS in college football? It gets people talking about the sport and the debates never end. If there was a tournament, I don't think the hype would be as high because there would be fewer debates about which teams deserve what bowl.
It's the end of July and already morons are worry about Armageddon scenarios for the BCS. It's too much. Let the damn football year start first before telling society to panic over the BCS, please.
So how's this for making those fans come close to "TILT"? Six teams will finish this regular season undefeated.
No freaking way. No way. There is no chance of six D-1 teams finishing the season undefeated. Two years ago we had zero teams finish undefeated and last year we had one team finish undefeated and they did not even win the National Championship. In fact there have only been seven undefeated college football teams since 2002.
The last time there were six undefeated teams in one season was 1944, during WWII, and the teams were Ohio State University, Randolph Field, Army, Fort Pierce, NAS Norman, and USNTC Bainbridge. It ain't happening.
Here's the Big Six, from most likely to play perfect football to least:
Why say six teams WILL go undefeated and then only list six teams that COULD go undefeated. It seems like you are putting all of your eggs in one basket.
Florida, SEC champs.
I don't think there is a good chance Florida makes it through the SEC undefeated, no matter whether this is a "down year" for the conference or not.
A lackluster SEC East helps the Gators; the return of Tim Tebow and a dynamite defense help more. Beat LSU, maybe twice, and then enjoy the trip to Pasadena, fellas.
When looking at Florida's schedule, I wouldn't sleep on Georgia this year and they are playing AT LSU this year, which is always a tough game. I don't see the Gators beating LSU at their home. I know we all love Tebow and want him to do well but the SEC is always tough to go undefeated in conference...at least in football.
Penn State, Big Ten champs.
I think they either lose at Michigan this year or lose to Ohio State at home. They do have a good chance to go undefeated if they win both games but I still don't see it happening.
Oklahoma, Big 12 champs.
Sure, they may go undefeated if they beat Texas this year...but again, what are the odds SIX teams go undefeated this year? That's just insane...or stupid, take your pick on which word to describe this prediction.
I like how Dave Curtis just assumes that Oklahoma is going to beat both Miami and BYU on the road and focuses on the one game against Texas as being the one that could trip up Oklahoma. This article should have been called, "Six Teams Could Go Undefeated If You Focus On Each Team Only Having To Win One Important Game...And Then It Still Won't Happen."
Boise State, WAC champs.
They have to win like one or two tough games a year. They may go undefeated. This may be the one team for the year to go undefeated.
Georgia Tech, ACC champs.
But the Hokies come to Atlanta in October, by which time Paul Johnson's triple-option attack should be thriving as the nation's No. 1 rushing unit. Nice knowing you, VT.
I am not saying the triple option is a fad or won't work in a major conference all year like the ACC, but doesn't anyone remember how LSU stopped the triple option last year in the Chick Fil-A Bowl and blew out Georgia Tech? You don't think there were teams in the ACC taking notes on that? There is no way they go undefeated, not with Virginia Tech, NC State and UNC having gotten stronger this year. I would put Georgia Tech's odds at 1000-1.
Listing teams like Georgia Tech on this list as having a chance to go undefeated this year is what makes me think Dave Curtis was stretching for an idea. There is no way 6 teams go undefeated.
Notre Dame.
They can't even lose to USC by less than 30 points. How are they going to beat them this year? I look at the schedule and see them potentially losing to Nevada, Michigan (seriously), USC, and maybe Boston College. I could be wrong but there is no way Notre Dame goes undefeated.
Of their 12 opponents, only three will be consensus picks to finish in their league's top three. Luck of the Irish, or genius scheduling by the ND administration?
It doesn't stop the big question of whether Notre Dame is even going to be any good or not this year. They SHOULD be good because of all the recruits they get but will they ACTUALLY be any good? That's my question.
Everything hinges on Oct. 17, when nemesis USC rolls into town (the Trojans have won seven straight in the series by a combined 284-95).
Nothing hinges on that date because Notre Dame will probably have two losses by then. Look at that series score...what makes anyone think Notre Dame will even beat USC, much less go undefeated? Absolutely nothing.
And the country can wade through college football's great championship mess.
It is way too early to do any type of BCS panic journalism, not to mention six teams will never go undefeated. Why write a story like this that creates a problem when there is not a problem present? Explain this to me. People who hate the BCS just write stuff like this to make it seem like the bowl picture will be convoluted when in fact it will be a little muddled, but will never even be close to this bad. There will never be six undefeated college football teams. Now BCS haters are going to use articles like this as proof of what could happen, when it never will happen. Thanks Dave Curtis.
I have decided to cap the Yahoo Fantasy League at 12 teams. We already have 9 teams so we have 3 more open spots. I think 12 teams is a good number.
You never really know what is on the mind of Hat Guy, or as his family calls him Mike Celizic. You know literally, in the picture that he has taken for NBC Sports, it is a hat that is on his mind, but other than that you never really know. Since he tends to only write in depth about the Yankees, you could take a wild guess and say it's the Yankees...which it is in this case. Hat Guy is writing about the Steinbrenner clan, which is another favorite topic of his. You can Google "Steinbrenner and Celizic" and you get quite a few hits.
Let's just say Celizic has had a mini-infatuation with the Steinbrenner family. Whether it means writing articles telling George to fire himself, saying George is soft, or saying George has not been in charge of the Yankees, it's all about the Steinbrenner family for Hat Guy. This week he came to the revelation that baseball is not the same without the first (semi-incompetent) family of baseball...especially when they are really annoying.
No matter how well the Yankees were playing, no matter how many home runs flew out of their new building, no matter much fun they had in the clubhouse, no matter how smoothly their season was going, there was something missing.
I think I have heard this one before, let me guess...Is it the Yankee mystique in the new ball park, the unselfish attitude of Jeter rubbing off his teammates, or the lack of a power hitter like Scott Brosius at third base?
Maybe you didn’t consciously think of it, but it was in the back of your mind. You couldn’t quite put your finger on what it was.
Could it be that the farm system is not completely dry but is getting there fairly quickly if the Steinbrenner's have their way? If that's not it, could it be that AJ Burnett is due to be on the DL any day now?
And then like a gift from a passing pigeon, it hit you splat on the head
A passing pigeon? That's so New York!
a blustering Steinbrenner. That’s what was missing.
You mean an annoying Steinbrenner, I think that's what you meant. The Steinbrenners are a unique breed of human and owner. They singlehandedly pick out the best players each off season to sign, micromanage every aspect of the organization, and then blame someone else when the team is not winning...namely the players or manager they themselves chose. The Steinbrenner's version of running a business is buying every one of their competitor's best idea men and hoping they have a good idea...because the Steinbrenner's certainly don't. Getting their competitor's best idea men, that WAS their good idea.
Until Hal Steinbrenner showed up in New York this week to disgorge his opinion of the team he and his brother, Hank, inherited from their father, I’d actually forgotten how vital a meddling owner is to the Yankee experience.
Hold on, is this article tongue in cheek? I will just assume it is not and carry on mocking Hat Guy.
Oddly enough, Hank and Hal tried to begin their stewardship with something utterly foreign to the Steinbrenner DNA — patience.
So far in the Hal and Hank era they have let Joe Torre go because he did not win another World Series, spent nearly $50 million on a 36 year old catcher, $250 million on a third baseman who opted out of his contract and had no other suitors, and nearly half a billion dollars this off season on two pitchers and a hitter. I don't know what Hat Guy's definition of "patience" is but spending all that money to win now is not my definition of patience. Maybe Hat Guy thinks "patience" is drafting Andrew Brackman in 2008, a college pitcher who needed Tommy John surgery. I don't know if that is "patience" either, that just seemed sort of dumb regardless of his potential.
And thank the ever-vigilant New York tabloid media for rushing to print the instant Hal Steinbrenner showed up this week to deliver his opinion of his team.
“I believe we have a team that can win the championship," he opined.
I am not sure if the fact they have the highest payroll in the major leagues, their team is in first place in one of the toughest divisions in baseball, or the simple fact the Steinbrenners say this every year caused this comment, but it's not unexpected. I would hope the Yankees could win a championship with the roster they have.
This is what I love about the Yankees. There is nothing so banal and insignificant that it can’t be turned into a major headline. It just needs to issue from a Steinbrenner's mouth and it takes on the gravitas of a papal encyclical.
I have come to the conclusion the New York media is a bunch of morons who get overly excited over things that really aren't news stories. Why is it the media capital of the United States, which also has a large population living in it, always talks about stories that really aren't that exciting? I would think the media would not have time to focus on small stories, but its actually quite the opposite, they take small stories and blow them up into huge big deals. I can't believe there aren't better things to talk about.
Let’s be honest here. In Kansas City, this would be meaningless.
I am not sure Kansas City even knows they have a baseball team to be honest. This may be the first they have heard of it.
It would hardly draw a raised eyebrow even in Boston, where folks take their baseball more seriously than they do anywhere on earth.
Best fans in the world. NO ONE DENIES THIS!!
In Cleveland, it wouldn’t make any sense — none at all.
Probably half the fans can't see the games anyway for the midges and birds that fly on the field. The fans can't see the field for all the wildlife, so they may actually need the owner to tell them how the team is doing.
We need these things in New York. Yankee fans need them. The newspapers need them. They’re a comforting connection to the past, a sign that Steinbrenners still walk the land and they demand victory.
When a team has a payroll in excess of $200 million do the fans really need a reminder the owner demands victory? I would hope not.
I fail to see how see saying anything less than a World Series title is a disappointment and vaguely threatening the manager's job is comforting...but I also don't live in New York and I am not a Yankees fan.
(On a personal note, I think Yankees fans really don't like all the drama. I just base this on a couple comments I hear from Yankees fans like: {referring to Bobby Cox} "It's nice to have some stability in the clubhouse and not think he will get fired by the next game.")
Don’t know what we’d do without you. Don’t know what baseball would do without that irreplaceable Steinbrenner touch.
If a Steinbrenner never talked again, it would be too soon. I can quickly become annoyed by them and their demands of their team. They choose the team (or have a large hand in it) and then give everyone else ultimatums because the team is not performing. Anytime the Steinbrenner's say something, ESPN and other media give it more respect than anything the President may say.
-I was done typing for the day but I am going to pull a Peyton Manning and call an audible at the line because I just found a bad college football article. This gets no introduction. It's by Dave Curtis.
Hello, and welcome to the first look at this year's nightmare Armageddon BCS scenario, sponsored by the congressional delegations of Utah and Texas (motto: "screaming into the abyss since 2008").
"Hey, I have an idea. Why don't I make up fake scenarios that haven't happened yet and be really dramatic about it so everyone will think there is a huge problem that will happen for sure in college football this year? Ok, I will do it."
Do you know why there is still a BCS in college football? It gets people talking about the sport and the debates never end. If there was a tournament, I don't think the hype would be as high because there would be fewer debates about which teams deserve what bowl.
It's the end of July and already morons are worry about Armageddon scenarios for the BCS. It's too much. Let the damn football year start first before telling society to panic over the BCS, please.
So how's this for making those fans come close to "TILT"? Six teams will finish this regular season undefeated.
No freaking way. No way. There is no chance of six D-1 teams finishing the season undefeated. Two years ago we had zero teams finish undefeated and last year we had one team finish undefeated and they did not even win the National Championship. In fact there have only been seven undefeated college football teams since 2002.
The last time there were six undefeated teams in one season was 1944, during WWII, and the teams were Ohio State University, Randolph Field, Army, Fort Pierce, NAS Norman, and USNTC Bainbridge. It ain't happening.
Here's the Big Six, from most likely to play perfect football to least:
Why say six teams WILL go undefeated and then only list six teams that COULD go undefeated. It seems like you are putting all of your eggs in one basket.
Florida, SEC champs.
I don't think there is a good chance Florida makes it through the SEC undefeated, no matter whether this is a "down year" for the conference or not.
A lackluster SEC East helps the Gators; the return of Tim Tebow and a dynamite defense help more. Beat LSU, maybe twice, and then enjoy the trip to Pasadena, fellas.
When looking at Florida's schedule, I wouldn't sleep on Georgia this year and they are playing AT LSU this year, which is always a tough game. I don't see the Gators beating LSU at their home. I know we all love Tebow and want him to do well but the SEC is always tough to go undefeated in conference...at least in football.
Penn State, Big Ten champs.
I think they either lose at Michigan this year or lose to Ohio State at home. They do have a good chance to go undefeated if they win both games but I still don't see it happening.
Oklahoma, Big 12 champs.
Sure, they may go undefeated if they beat Texas this year...but again, what are the odds SIX teams go undefeated this year? That's just insane...or stupid, take your pick on which word to describe this prediction.
I like how Dave Curtis just assumes that Oklahoma is going to beat both Miami and BYU on the road and focuses on the one game against Texas as being the one that could trip up Oklahoma. This article should have been called, "Six Teams Could Go Undefeated If You Focus On Each Team Only Having To Win One Important Game...And Then It Still Won't Happen."
Boise State, WAC champs.
They have to win like one or two tough games a year. They may go undefeated. This may be the one team for the year to go undefeated.
Georgia Tech, ACC champs.
But the Hokies come to Atlanta in October, by which time Paul Johnson's triple-option attack should be thriving as the nation's No. 1 rushing unit. Nice knowing you, VT.
I am not saying the triple option is a fad or won't work in a major conference all year like the ACC, but doesn't anyone remember how LSU stopped the triple option last year in the Chick Fil-A Bowl and blew out Georgia Tech? You don't think there were teams in the ACC taking notes on that? There is no way they go undefeated, not with Virginia Tech, NC State and UNC having gotten stronger this year. I would put Georgia Tech's odds at 1000-1.
Listing teams like Georgia Tech on this list as having a chance to go undefeated this year is what makes me think Dave Curtis was stretching for an idea. There is no way 6 teams go undefeated.
Notre Dame.
They can't even lose to USC by less than 30 points. How are they going to beat them this year? I look at the schedule and see them potentially losing to Nevada, Michigan (seriously), USC, and maybe Boston College. I could be wrong but there is no way Notre Dame goes undefeated.
Of their 12 opponents, only three will be consensus picks to finish in their league's top three. Luck of the Irish, or genius scheduling by the ND administration?
It doesn't stop the big question of whether Notre Dame is even going to be any good or not this year. They SHOULD be good because of all the recruits they get but will they ACTUALLY be any good? That's my question.
Everything hinges on Oct. 17, when nemesis USC rolls into town (the Trojans have won seven straight in the series by a combined 284-95).
Nothing hinges on that date because Notre Dame will probably have two losses by then. Look at that series score...what makes anyone think Notre Dame will even beat USC, much less go undefeated? Absolutely nothing.
And the country can wade through college football's great championship mess.
It is way too early to do any type of BCS panic journalism, not to mention six teams will never go undefeated. Why write a story like this that creates a problem when there is not a problem present? Explain this to me. People who hate the BCS just write stuff like this to make it seem like the bowl picture will be convoluted when in fact it will be a little muddled, but will never even be close to this bad. There will never be six undefeated college football teams. Now BCS haters are going to use articles like this as proof of what could happen, when it never will happen. Thanks Dave Curtis.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
16 comments What's Irritating Me Today
I have finally set up the Yahoo Fantasy Football League and I wanted to give everyone the breakdown of the league real quick today. First, the information for the league is as follows:
ID: 316018
Password: eckstein
As I said yesterday I realize the stupidity of posting a password on the Internet but there is no other way I can think of to convey this information to those that need it. Again, anyone is free to join (we have five right now and have two more coming on, so we can definitely use a couple more to make the league a little deeper and more competitive) if they care to but if someone gets in the league just to be an asshole and pull some bullshit, I will politely (or unpolitely) remove their team from the league.
Here's the set up of the league and if someone doesn't like something about the league, just tell me, I am pretty adaptable. We can discuss concerns in the comments if you want. The set up is pretty standard for a Yahoo football league:
2 QBs
2 RB
2 WR
1 TE
1 W/T
2 W/R
1 K
The league also has individual players on defense, which I prefer over just choosing a team defense. I don't really like the team defense idea but I am in leagues that play it that way so it doesn't bother me if everyone wants to switch to that. I just find individual defensive players to be more fun to play with, so those in the league just tell me which way you prefer it. Anyway, if anyone else wants to join feel free to do so, fantasy football doesn't take a whole lot of time every week and it is my favorite sport to play fantasy. The winner gets a jumbo box of Goldfish crackers. That should be enough to entice everyone.
There are several articles on the Internet that have irritated me today and I feel the need to discuss them.
-I don't even want to bring this up but Jay Mariotti talked about it and irritated me. I am sure everyone has heard about the incident with a certain ESPN sideline reporter and a camera that taped her in a hotel room. I am going to call her EA because I am not in the mood to see if just mentioning her name does a traffic spike for sites or not. I have heard it definitely does and you end up with an obvious amount of increased traffic. That's not what I want. I want to disagree with Jay Mariotti. Mariotti chimes in on the issue and of course blames bloggers for the whole incident.
So shamefully, too much focus shifted toward an immature and sometimes creepy blogosphere obsession with, oh, I don't know, the women in Matt Leinart's hot tub, the woman on Scott Van Pelt's voice-mail machine, Hannah Storm's outfits, Chris Cooley's penis, an attractive female high-school pole vaulter and, of course, Erin Andrews.
Thankfully I only know what 3 of those references are referring to and have seen only two of those, and thankfully the one I heard the reference to and did not see was Chris Cooley's penis. I wasn't particularly paying attention to the girls in Matt Leinart's hot tub either, I was more paying attention to the fact he was with young girls when he should have been focusing on football and it was very obvious to me my thoughts about him before he was drafted are correct, that he was a party boy who did not have the focus for the NFL. Yes, I am one of those weird people who if given a picture of an NFL quarterback in a hot tub with a bunch of girls will wonder what this means for the QB's chances to have a good season. I am focused on sports in that way. I also have seen Hannah Storm's outfits and did not understand the big deal because she is on ESPN and is therefore of no interest to me. Plus she is old(er).
I have not seen the EA video and have no interest in seeing it. It is a clear invasion of privacy and I feel like even talking about it serves the means of the asshole who filmed it.
Occasionally glancing at such junk through the years, I was whisked into a cross between a frat boy's porn fantasies and a sports remake of Revenge of the Nerds.
So begins Jay's hypocrisy. He has seen these things as well but everyone else who has seen them, those people are all creeps...but not him. He was doing it for research and to stay with the times I bet.
And wasn't there bound to be a cyberspace version of a nuclear explosion, a boiling point where one of the frequent blog subjects became a victim of some sick act?
A second-guess, this is not. I've been saying it for years. And sadly enough, I've feared it would involve Andrews
Of course, Jay Mariotti predicted this exact event. Seeing as how this is not in print or in any form on the Internet, it's kind of hard to prove. Trust Jay though, he predicted this. Just like he predicted Sammy Sosa was on steroids. Yet somehow these Nostradamus predictions are always heard AFTER the fact.
But am I blaming bloggers for helping create the daily sex-and-objectification culture that turned Andrews into an ongoing peep show on their Web sites?
Damn right I am.
One of the most popular topics this week has been, "Who's fault is this?" and everyone outside of the Pope has taken some blame. It is the person who filmed this video's fault. I am sure there is a market for a video taken like this but that doesn't make it the fault of every blogger and person who has watched an ESPN sporting event or ever looked at a picture of EA. I see the difference and Mariotti does not. He lumps the EA weirdos in with everyone else.
Here's my blame chart:
60% Guy(s) who filmed the video
20% Sites that show ANY picture of EA and created a hysteria around her
20% Weirdo commenters who instinctively flocked to any mention of her like the salmon of Capistrano. Then wrote about her and created web sites dedicated to her.
Fortunately, I am not putting myself in any categories like these, not because I am above it, but because I am not among these groups, as I would imagine 95% of bloggers are not.
But by smiling everywhere and saying hi to everyone -- from the face-painted freshman at Michigan State to, yes, even the very bloggers who exploit her -- she only fed the monster and left the absurd impression that she actually might dig them.
No one is exploiting her...except the asshole who filmed this video and posted it. It actually really pisses me off to be sort of lumped into the category with these people because, and I am going to get killed for saying this maybe, I don't think she is that attractive. I have never understood the world's infatuation with her. I think she is a good sideline reporter and I have a soft spot for her because she used to do the Braves in-game reports and anything that is related to the Braves I like...I still wonder what happened to Marc Fein, the guy who succeeded EA as doing the in-game reports. Other than that though, she is a sideline reporter who actually does a good job getting access to players and she shows good rapport with the announcers for the game, which I always appreciate when watching a game.
I actually don't even want to talk about this on this site but I hate that Jay lumps everyone in together who has seen a picture of her as if we are all culpable for this crime that was commited against her.
Wrote Christine Brennan, the USA Today columnist: "I wish it didn't happen to Erin, but I also would suggest to her if she asked (and she hasn't) that she rely on her talent and brains and not succumb to the lowest common denominator in sports media by playing to the frat house.''
If a man had said this, then there would be an absolute outrage among the media for denegrating EA during this trying time for her. Because it is some dumbass woman columnist, it gets a pass. I think this is a completely indefensible comment.
Just a few months ago, USC linebacker Ray Maualuga approached her from behind on the sideline and did a grind dance, which invites other athletes to do the same.
Jay knows that is no way to pick up a woman. Here is his technique.
See, these dweebs can dish out the criticism but can't take it. Rather than take on an almighty sports executive -- the real test of a sportswriter in an age when leagues and media are frequent bedfellows -- they go after media people.
No one can take criticism as well as Jay Mariotti who usually writes a column the next day about someone who has taken a shot at him, throws in a few cheap shots, and then calls extra security to escort him around for a few weeks. Did I forget the part where Mariotti also throws cheap shots and then cowers in a corner and refuses to face those people who he has a problem with?
When a blog gets something right about me, for instance, I'll be the first to say so. To date, they're batting way under the Mendoza line, about .150.
Since you just accused the entire Internet and blogging community of being at fault for the EA incident you are batting 0.045 right now.
A blog said I brag endlessly about our TV show in bars; when people ask about Around The Horn, I'm friendly and answer all questions or else I'm called a jerk.
Notice he does not exactly deny the story I linked. Also, I would call him a jerk no matter what he did...because he IS a jerk or at least writes like one.
A few years ago, after the blogs had their way with me during another Ozzie Guillen meltdown, I had death threats in Chicago. The newspaper ordered me to have a driver take me to U.S. Cellular Field so I would avoid possible violence in the stadium parking lots.
Notice how he always gets a shot in at those he doesn't like. Jay Mariotti has no idea what "taking the high ground" means. Ozzie Guillen probably doesn't even remember Jay, but Jay is still talking about Ozzie's meltdowns.
While I'm more Jim Belushi than George Clooney, I think I'll take a good, long look at the peephole the next time I'm in a hotel room.
Seriously? There may be -100 people in the world who want to see you on any video with anything less than fully dressed.
I am not going to deny the massive amount of EA love on the Internet created a market for a video such as this but Jay just can't blanketly blame the entire blogging community who has seen a picture of her for this horrible incident. Blame the perpetrator(s) and blame sites who ran pictures of EA at every opportunity to boost traffic but don't just blanket blame us all. This has been irritating me all week, I have talked about it, and I am not going to mention it again.
-As for the controversy where Ben Roethlisberger was sued for sexual assault, he is lucky it came out the same week as the above topic did.
I am frequently on a SBN Carolina Panthers site and when this lawsuit was announced people started calling the accuser "a money grabber" and then began arguing with me when I said she had psychiatric problems from a previous relationship she had with a man who turned out to not exist. I said this showed something wasn't right with her but she had a pretty reputable lawyer who probably would not have taken the case for just publicity, so overall I was undecided on the accuracy of the accusations. This caused a minor furor. My point is these people had just assumed Roethlisberger was not guilty because there were no criminal charges filed. It certainly is suspicious but many times when a woman has been violated sexually she doesn't just bounce back up and start filing charges against that person.
Throw in the fact Roethlisberger has said they did consensually have relations and it is either a HUGE misunderstanding or someone is lying. I just don't think we should automatically assume it is the accuser.
-Rick Reilly has double irritated me over the past couple of weeks. First he wrote this column about the 10 best sporting events to see live.
Because everyone has enough time off work and money to just go traveling around and seeing sporting events.
10. Home Run Derby -- Better than the All-Star Game because it's never ended in a tie. Besides, it's everything real baseball is not. Guys swing at every pitch. Every third ball is a souvenir. And you don't have to wait 45 seconds while Nomar Garciaparra re-Velcros his entire uniform between pitches.
I think I have made my feelings on the HRD apparently previously but I would rather watch the ASG or any game than the HRD. Sure, it would be fun to catch a fly ball but if I wanted to do that I would show up for batting practice before a game.
Remember, Rick Reilly hates baseball. He pretty much said so in his article about what he would change if he were commissioner. I don't think Reilly has ever watched the HRD because GUYS DO NOT SWING AT EVERY PITCH! They swing at every third pitch and then take another break before finding a 60MPH to swing at. It is tedious, long and overhyped. At least attempt to get your facts straight when writing a column about something.
5. Tour de France --
Spend 23 days in France! It should be easy to get that much time off work.
3. Wimbledon
2. Kentucky Derby
1. Masters
His top 3 events are all known for being elitist mostly white people attending events. Good job racist! This list took what, 15 minutes to put together? It's good to know that Rick Reilly doesn't put a lot of thought into his columns. I wouldn't want him to hurt himself as he collects his millions.
Reilly has another column up where he takes shots at Tiger Woods for behaving like a child on the golf course.
When will he outgrow his temper?
The only reason Rick Reilly focuses on Tiger Woods' temper is because his Tiger Woods and we watch his every shot during a tournament. If Tiger was Bob Castillo then this would not even be an issue.
And yet he spent most of his two days at Turnberry last week doing the Turn and Bury. He'd hit a bad shot, turn and bury his club into the ground in a fit. It was two days of Tiger Tantrums -- slamming his club, throwing his club and cursing his club. In front of a worldwide audience.
He had one of his worst outings as a PGA golfer at one of the 4 golf "major" events and he missed the cut. I would not advocate anyone slamming golf clubs but when you are Tiger Woods and used to being on the leaderboard for every tournament, the possibility of missing the cut in a major tournament is something that is unacceptable to you.
A whole lot of that worldwide audience is kids. They do what Tiger does. They swing like Tiger, read putts like Tiger and do the celebration biceps pump like Tiger. Do you think for two seconds they don't think it's cool to throw their clubs like Tiger, too?
He is also not the only player does that have meltdowns or temper tantrums. Here is a message board discussing Paula Creamer's tantrums on the golf course. John McEnroe has pretty much made a living out of his "Are you serious" temper tantrums he had on the tennis court and everyone seems to think it is funny. When a manager starts arguing an umpire's call the entire stadium will start to rise up and get excited. It happens in all sports. I am not saying it is right, I am saying Tiger Woods getting upset on the golf course is not going to lead to an increase in golf related accidents involving golf clubs being thrown or broken. I broken two golf clubs out of anger before I had even heard of Tiger Woods.
It's disrespectful to the game, disrespectful to those he plays with and disrespectful to the great players who built the game before him. Ever remember Jack Nicklaus doing it? Arnold Palmer? When Tom Watson was getting guillotined in that playoff to Stewart Cink, did you see him so much as spit? Only one great player ever threw clubs as a pro -- Bobby Jones -- and he stopped in his 20s when he realized how spoiled he looked.
This article from 2001 seems to list a few big golf names, including Woods, who threw temper tantrums on the golf course. Some of these guys could be considered good golfers who have a large following. I am not saying it is right, I am saying Rick Reilly is stupid if he thinks Tiger Woods is the only guy who does throw temper tantrums.
Woods has been this way for years: swearing like a Hooters' bouncer,
There are no bouncers at Hooters. At least I don't think so.
I can still remember the 1997 Masters -- arguably the most important golf tournament ever played. Woods, then 21, was playing the 15th hole on Sunday. He had just hit a fairway wood out of the rough and was watching it. A young boy came up from behind just to touch him -- just to pat the back of this amazing new superhero. That's when Tiger pulled the club way back over his head and slammed it down, nearly braining the kid he couldn't see behind him.
What? I can't believe Tiger Woods at the old age of 21 almost unknowingly hit a kid with a golf club when the kid tried to go onto the course and make physical contact with Tiger. The only way I can think to prevent this from happening again is to keep spectators the hell out of a golf course and try not to let them touch the golfers.
Look, in every other case, I think Tiger Woods has been an A-plus role model. Never shows up in the back of a squad car with a black eye. Never gets busted in a sleazy motel with three "freelance models." Never gets so much as a parking ticket.
Exactly. Lay off him if this is his one flaw. Golf is his job and he takes his job very seriously, so he gets angry when he plays poorly. If parents are really concerned their children will throw a tantrum and start breaking golf clubs because Tiger Woods does this then those parents probably also need to get their children some sort of anger management as well or maybe just do actual parenting and let their child know this behavior is not acceptable.
I know what you're saying. We see more Tiger tantrums because TV shows every single shot he hits. And I'm telling you: You're wrong. He is one of the few on Tour who do it.
I am telling you, Rick Reilly, that you are wrong. Probably every golfer has thrown a mini-tantrum or a tantrum on the golf course at some point. They all have not been caught on camera. Tiger's tantrums tend to be more focused upon because we see every shot he hits. I don't know how you can deny this is true. If you see more of Tiger Woods shots, you see him break down into a tantrum more, therefore the odds are that his tantrums will be in the spotlight and focused upon more.
One day, when Tiger was just a kid, he was throwing his clubs around in a fuming fit when his dad said something like "Tiger, golf is supposed to be fun." And Tiger said, "Daddy, I want to win. That's how I have fun."
Well, it's not fun to watch.
I have no problem with it. It shows Tiger intensity and passion for the sport he plays. Should he calm down? Probably, but I don't think it should be overblown like Reilly has done here.
-It irritates me that more sportswriters don't write what they think and in the process not give a shit how it affects their access to the team they cover. It may be career suicide but is fun to read.
Jennifer Engel doesn't look like your typical sportswriter but that doesn't matter, what does matter is that she doesn't buy the smoke the Mavericks are blowing up the public's ass about their off season moves and their positive effect on the team's chances next year in the playoffs.
So how has Gortat suddenly become why this Mavs off-season has been a big, fat fail? Like losing him is why this off-season is screwed up. He ranks a distant, distant No. 3 on screw-up factor behind re-signing J-Kidd and giving Shawn Marion a five-year deal.
It's never a good thing when a guy who has been a career backup and had one good game as a professional is your team's big loss in the off season. Ok, Gortat is young but he hasn't proven that much in his career yet. If it was 2003 Shawn Marion and Jason Kidd being signed to the same team would be exciting, unfortunately it is 2009.
She then goes into list form of what Dallas did wrong.
(1) Way overpay to re-sign our way-over-the-hill point guard out of sheer desperation because we have no alternatives.
Do not mention we have no alternatives because of the trade for J-Kidd.
In fact, do not mention Devin Harris at all, because who really wants to hear that we went for it and it blew up in our faces. No draft picks, no bona fide youth like Harris, no championship, not even close.
Instead sell "all good teams have age" to local media. Hope aforementioned media ignores fact that examples we use (Boston, LA Lakers and San Antonio) already have at least a championship to show for said age. Done.
I may be the only one enjoying this, but this is great. I wish more sportswriters would talk like this.
(III) Trade for and way overpay an aging, show-me-the-money, with a history of me-first malcontent-ism undersized power forward in Shawn Marion, hoping fans remember him from his Phoenix days when he had a younger and MVPier Steve Nash setting him up. Done.
(IIIa) Take away any likability of this deal (and some existed because Marion brings an added dimension to this team) by signing him to a five-year, $38.5 mil deal. Done.
I am not as down on this Shawn Marion contract right now but I also don't exactly know how well he fits in with the Mavericks and I think the Mavericks will regret this deal in two years.
(IIIb) Say still in a position to go big in summer of 2010 because big-name free agents will want to play with J-Kidd. Practice saying this with straight face at least 20 times a day. Done.
(Double-A) Lie to self about how close this Mavs team actually is to championship caliber. Also lie to The Big German, fans and anybody else buying that Marion + J-Kidd = Chance to Beat LA. Done.
I wish more sportswriters would have the guts to write things like this about the local team. We don't need anything like Mariotti writes, which is basically journalistic tabloid bullshit, but fact based criticism like this.
-From Bill Simmons twitter:
Q: Are Nippert & Mathis ... A) a 70's soul act, B) gay lion tamers, or C) 2 Texas P's who shut Boston down for a sweep? (Answer: C.)
There is no way these guys can be good pitchers because Bill Simmons has not heard of these guys. If ESPN doesn't talk about a team or pitchers they can't be good right? That must be Bill Simmons' point here. It is in no way possible the Rangers are a good team and the only reason we haven't heard more about their pitching staff is because the team is not located in the upper right hand quandrant of the United States. That would never happen.
-Peter King is back on Monday for his MMQB. I am excited more than I should be.
-I love the irony of Landon Donovan (rightly) accusing David Beckham of not focusing enough on his American team to go play overseas and now Donovan is reportedly going to go play in Italy.
Regardless of whether this is a short term thing for Donovan or not, to criticize a teammate for his lack of dedication to his American team and his focus being divided by playing overseas and then you yourself going to play overseas less than a month later is a bit hypocritical. His intentions may be good but I can't help but wonder if his Galaxy teammates think his attention will be divided as well.
-On a pop culture note, I have never hated a reality show contestant more than I hate Joseph on Hell's Kitchen. He has every stereotypical feature of a New England area young adult. He IS Tommy from Quinzee.
ID: 316018
Password: eckstein
As I said yesterday I realize the stupidity of posting a password on the Internet but there is no other way I can think of to convey this information to those that need it. Again, anyone is free to join (we have five right now and have two more coming on, so we can definitely use a couple more to make the league a little deeper and more competitive) if they care to but if someone gets in the league just to be an asshole and pull some bullshit, I will politely (or unpolitely) remove their team from the league.
Here's the set up of the league and if someone doesn't like something about the league, just tell me, I am pretty adaptable. We can discuss concerns in the comments if you want. The set up is pretty standard for a Yahoo football league:
2 QBs
2 RB
2 WR
1 TE
1 W/T
2 W/R
1 K
The league also has individual players on defense, which I prefer over just choosing a team defense. I don't really like the team defense idea but I am in leagues that play it that way so it doesn't bother me if everyone wants to switch to that. I just find individual defensive players to be more fun to play with, so those in the league just tell me which way you prefer it. Anyway, if anyone else wants to join feel free to do so, fantasy football doesn't take a whole lot of time every week and it is my favorite sport to play fantasy. The winner gets a jumbo box of Goldfish crackers. That should be enough to entice everyone.
There are several articles on the Internet that have irritated me today and I feel the need to discuss them.
-I don't even want to bring this up but Jay Mariotti talked about it and irritated me. I am sure everyone has heard about the incident with a certain ESPN sideline reporter and a camera that taped her in a hotel room. I am going to call her EA because I am not in the mood to see if just mentioning her name does a traffic spike for sites or not. I have heard it definitely does and you end up with an obvious amount of increased traffic. That's not what I want. I want to disagree with Jay Mariotti. Mariotti chimes in on the issue and of course blames bloggers for the whole incident.
So shamefully, too much focus shifted toward an immature and sometimes creepy blogosphere obsession with, oh, I don't know, the women in Matt Leinart's hot tub, the woman on Scott Van Pelt's voice-mail machine, Hannah Storm's outfits, Chris Cooley's penis, an attractive female high-school pole vaulter and, of course, Erin Andrews.
Thankfully I only know what 3 of those references are referring to and have seen only two of those, and thankfully the one I heard the reference to and did not see was Chris Cooley's penis. I wasn't particularly paying attention to the girls in Matt Leinart's hot tub either, I was more paying attention to the fact he was with young girls when he should have been focusing on football and it was very obvious to me my thoughts about him before he was drafted are correct, that he was a party boy who did not have the focus for the NFL. Yes, I am one of those weird people who if given a picture of an NFL quarterback in a hot tub with a bunch of girls will wonder what this means for the QB's chances to have a good season. I am focused on sports in that way. I also have seen Hannah Storm's outfits and did not understand the big deal because she is on ESPN and is therefore of no interest to me. Plus she is old(er).
I have not seen the EA video and have no interest in seeing it. It is a clear invasion of privacy and I feel like even talking about it serves the means of the asshole who filmed it.
Occasionally glancing at such junk through the years, I was whisked into a cross between a frat boy's porn fantasies and a sports remake of Revenge of the Nerds.
So begins Jay's hypocrisy. He has seen these things as well but everyone else who has seen them, those people are all creeps...but not him. He was doing it for research and to stay with the times I bet.
And wasn't there bound to be a cyberspace version of a nuclear explosion, a boiling point where one of the frequent blog subjects became a victim of some sick act?
A second-guess, this is not. I've been saying it for years. And sadly enough, I've feared it would involve Andrews
Of course, Jay Mariotti predicted this exact event. Seeing as how this is not in print or in any form on the Internet, it's kind of hard to prove. Trust Jay though, he predicted this. Just like he predicted Sammy Sosa was on steroids. Yet somehow these Nostradamus predictions are always heard AFTER the fact.
But am I blaming bloggers for helping create the daily sex-and-objectification culture that turned Andrews into an ongoing peep show on their Web sites?
Damn right I am.
One of the most popular topics this week has been, "Who's fault is this?" and everyone outside of the Pope has taken some blame. It is the person who filmed this video's fault. I am sure there is a market for a video taken like this but that doesn't make it the fault of every blogger and person who has watched an ESPN sporting event or ever looked at a picture of EA. I see the difference and Mariotti does not. He lumps the EA weirdos in with everyone else.
Here's my blame chart:
60% Guy(s) who filmed the video
20% Sites that show ANY picture of EA and created a hysteria around her
20% Weirdo commenters who instinctively flocked to any mention of her like the salmon of Capistrano. Then wrote about her and created web sites dedicated to her.
Fortunately, I am not putting myself in any categories like these, not because I am above it, but because I am not among these groups, as I would imagine 95% of bloggers are not.
But by smiling everywhere and saying hi to everyone -- from the face-painted freshman at Michigan State to, yes, even the very bloggers who exploit her -- she only fed the monster and left the absurd impression that she actually might dig them.
No one is exploiting her...except the asshole who filmed this video and posted it. It actually really pisses me off to be sort of lumped into the category with these people because, and I am going to get killed for saying this maybe, I don't think she is that attractive. I have never understood the world's infatuation with her. I think she is a good sideline reporter and I have a soft spot for her because she used to do the Braves in-game reports and anything that is related to the Braves I like...I still wonder what happened to Marc Fein, the guy who succeeded EA as doing the in-game reports. Other than that though, she is a sideline reporter who actually does a good job getting access to players and she shows good rapport with the announcers for the game, which I always appreciate when watching a game.
I actually don't even want to talk about this on this site but I hate that Jay lumps everyone in together who has seen a picture of her as if we are all culpable for this crime that was commited against her.
Wrote Christine Brennan, the USA Today columnist: "I wish it didn't happen to Erin, but I also would suggest to her if she asked (and she hasn't) that she rely on her talent and brains and not succumb to the lowest common denominator in sports media by playing to the frat house.''
If a man had said this, then there would be an absolute outrage among the media for denegrating EA during this trying time for her. Because it is some dumbass woman columnist, it gets a pass. I think this is a completely indefensible comment.
Just a few months ago, USC linebacker Ray Maualuga approached her from behind on the sideline and did a grind dance, which invites other athletes to do the same.
Jay knows that is no way to pick up a woman. Here is his technique.
See, these dweebs can dish out the criticism but can't take it. Rather than take on an almighty sports executive -- the real test of a sportswriter in an age when leagues and media are frequent bedfellows -- they go after media people.
No one can take criticism as well as Jay Mariotti who usually writes a column the next day about someone who has taken a shot at him, throws in a few cheap shots, and then calls extra security to escort him around for a few weeks. Did I forget the part where Mariotti also throws cheap shots and then cowers in a corner and refuses to face those people who he has a problem with?
When a blog gets something right about me, for instance, I'll be the first to say so. To date, they're batting way under the Mendoza line, about .150.
Since you just accused the entire Internet and blogging community of being at fault for the EA incident you are batting 0.045 right now.
A blog said I brag endlessly about our TV show in bars; when people ask about Around The Horn, I'm friendly and answer all questions or else I'm called a jerk.
Notice he does not exactly deny the story I linked. Also, I would call him a jerk no matter what he did...because he IS a jerk or at least writes like one.
A few years ago, after the blogs had their way with me during another Ozzie Guillen meltdown, I had death threats in Chicago. The newspaper ordered me to have a driver take me to U.S. Cellular Field so I would avoid possible violence in the stadium parking lots.
Notice how he always gets a shot in at those he doesn't like. Jay Mariotti has no idea what "taking the high ground" means. Ozzie Guillen probably doesn't even remember Jay, but Jay is still talking about Ozzie's meltdowns.
While I'm more Jim Belushi than George Clooney, I think I'll take a good, long look at the peephole the next time I'm in a hotel room.
Seriously? There may be -100 people in the world who want to see you on any video with anything less than fully dressed.
I am not going to deny the massive amount of EA love on the Internet created a market for a video such as this but Jay just can't blanketly blame the entire blogging community who has seen a picture of her for this horrible incident. Blame the perpetrator(s) and blame sites who ran pictures of EA at every opportunity to boost traffic but don't just blanket blame us all. This has been irritating me all week, I have talked about it, and I am not going to mention it again.
-As for the controversy where Ben Roethlisberger was sued for sexual assault, he is lucky it came out the same week as the above topic did.
I am frequently on a SBN Carolina Panthers site and when this lawsuit was announced people started calling the accuser "a money grabber" and then began arguing with me when I said she had psychiatric problems from a previous relationship she had with a man who turned out to not exist. I said this showed something wasn't right with her but she had a pretty reputable lawyer who probably would not have taken the case for just publicity, so overall I was undecided on the accuracy of the accusations. This caused a minor furor. My point is these people had just assumed Roethlisberger was not guilty because there were no criminal charges filed. It certainly is suspicious but many times when a woman has been violated sexually she doesn't just bounce back up and start filing charges against that person.
Throw in the fact Roethlisberger has said they did consensually have relations and it is either a HUGE misunderstanding or someone is lying. I just don't think we should automatically assume it is the accuser.
-Rick Reilly has double irritated me over the past couple of weeks. First he wrote this column about the 10 best sporting events to see live.
Because everyone has enough time off work and money to just go traveling around and seeing sporting events.
10. Home Run Derby -- Better than the All-Star Game because it's never ended in a tie. Besides, it's everything real baseball is not. Guys swing at every pitch. Every third ball is a souvenir. And you don't have to wait 45 seconds while Nomar Garciaparra re-Velcros his entire uniform between pitches.
I think I have made my feelings on the HRD apparently previously but I would rather watch the ASG or any game than the HRD. Sure, it would be fun to catch a fly ball but if I wanted to do that I would show up for batting practice before a game.
Remember, Rick Reilly hates baseball. He pretty much said so in his article about what he would change if he were commissioner. I don't think Reilly has ever watched the HRD because GUYS DO NOT SWING AT EVERY PITCH! They swing at every third pitch and then take another break before finding a 60MPH to swing at. It is tedious, long and overhyped. At least attempt to get your facts straight when writing a column about something.
5. Tour de France --
Spend 23 days in France! It should be easy to get that much time off work.
3. Wimbledon
2. Kentucky Derby
1. Masters
His top 3 events are all known for being elitist mostly white people attending events. Good job racist! This list took what, 15 minutes to put together? It's good to know that Rick Reilly doesn't put a lot of thought into his columns. I wouldn't want him to hurt himself as he collects his millions.
Reilly has another column up where he takes shots at Tiger Woods for behaving like a child on the golf course.
When will he outgrow his temper?
The only reason Rick Reilly focuses on Tiger Woods' temper is because his Tiger Woods and we watch his every shot during a tournament. If Tiger was Bob Castillo then this would not even be an issue.
And yet he spent most of his two days at Turnberry last week doing the Turn and Bury. He'd hit a bad shot, turn and bury his club into the ground in a fit. It was two days of Tiger Tantrums -- slamming his club, throwing his club and cursing his club. In front of a worldwide audience.
He had one of his worst outings as a PGA golfer at one of the 4 golf "major" events and he missed the cut. I would not advocate anyone slamming golf clubs but when you are Tiger Woods and used to being on the leaderboard for every tournament, the possibility of missing the cut in a major tournament is something that is unacceptable to you.
A whole lot of that worldwide audience is kids. They do what Tiger does. They swing like Tiger, read putts like Tiger and do the celebration biceps pump like Tiger. Do you think for two seconds they don't think it's cool to throw their clubs like Tiger, too?
He is also not the only player does that have meltdowns or temper tantrums. Here is a message board discussing Paula Creamer's tantrums on the golf course. John McEnroe has pretty much made a living out of his "Are you serious" temper tantrums he had on the tennis court and everyone seems to think it is funny. When a manager starts arguing an umpire's call the entire stadium will start to rise up and get excited. It happens in all sports. I am not saying it is right, I am saying Tiger Woods getting upset on the golf course is not going to lead to an increase in golf related accidents involving golf clubs being thrown or broken. I broken two golf clubs out of anger before I had even heard of Tiger Woods.
It's disrespectful to the game, disrespectful to those he plays with and disrespectful to the great players who built the game before him. Ever remember Jack Nicklaus doing it? Arnold Palmer? When Tom Watson was getting guillotined in that playoff to Stewart Cink, did you see him so much as spit? Only one great player ever threw clubs as a pro -- Bobby Jones -- and he stopped in his 20s when he realized how spoiled he looked.
This article from 2001 seems to list a few big golf names, including Woods, who threw temper tantrums on the golf course. Some of these guys could be considered good golfers who have a large following. I am not saying it is right, I am saying Rick Reilly is stupid if he thinks Tiger Woods is the only guy who does throw temper tantrums.
Woods has been this way for years: swearing like a Hooters' bouncer,
There are no bouncers at Hooters. At least I don't think so.
I can still remember the 1997 Masters -- arguably the most important golf tournament ever played. Woods, then 21, was playing the 15th hole on Sunday. He had just hit a fairway wood out of the rough and was watching it. A young boy came up from behind just to touch him -- just to pat the back of this amazing new superhero. That's when Tiger pulled the club way back over his head and slammed it down, nearly braining the kid he couldn't see behind him.
What? I can't believe Tiger Woods at the old age of 21 almost unknowingly hit a kid with a golf club when the kid tried to go onto the course and make physical contact with Tiger. The only way I can think to prevent this from happening again is to keep spectators the hell out of a golf course and try not to let them touch the golfers.
Look, in every other case, I think Tiger Woods has been an A-plus role model. Never shows up in the back of a squad car with a black eye. Never gets busted in a sleazy motel with three "freelance models." Never gets so much as a parking ticket.
Exactly. Lay off him if this is his one flaw. Golf is his job and he takes his job very seriously, so he gets angry when he plays poorly. If parents are really concerned their children will throw a tantrum and start breaking golf clubs because Tiger Woods does this then those parents probably also need to get their children some sort of anger management as well or maybe just do actual parenting and let their child know this behavior is not acceptable.
I know what you're saying. We see more Tiger tantrums because TV shows every single shot he hits. And I'm telling you: You're wrong. He is one of the few on Tour who do it.
I am telling you, Rick Reilly, that you are wrong. Probably every golfer has thrown a mini-tantrum or a tantrum on the golf course at some point. They all have not been caught on camera. Tiger's tantrums tend to be more focused upon because we see every shot he hits. I don't know how you can deny this is true. If you see more of Tiger Woods shots, you see him break down into a tantrum more, therefore the odds are that his tantrums will be in the spotlight and focused upon more.
One day, when Tiger was just a kid, he was throwing his clubs around in a fuming fit when his dad said something like "Tiger, golf is supposed to be fun." And Tiger said, "Daddy, I want to win. That's how I have fun."
Well, it's not fun to watch.
I have no problem with it. It shows Tiger intensity and passion for the sport he plays. Should he calm down? Probably, but I don't think it should be overblown like Reilly has done here.
-It irritates me that more sportswriters don't write what they think and in the process not give a shit how it affects their access to the team they cover. It may be career suicide but is fun to read.
Jennifer Engel doesn't look like your typical sportswriter but that doesn't matter, what does matter is that she doesn't buy the smoke the Mavericks are blowing up the public's ass about their off season moves and their positive effect on the team's chances next year in the playoffs.
So how has Gortat suddenly become why this Mavs off-season has been a big, fat fail? Like losing him is why this off-season is screwed up. He ranks a distant, distant No. 3 on screw-up factor behind re-signing J-Kidd and giving Shawn Marion a five-year deal.
It's never a good thing when a guy who has been a career backup and had one good game as a professional is your team's big loss in the off season. Ok, Gortat is young but he hasn't proven that much in his career yet. If it was 2003 Shawn Marion and Jason Kidd being signed to the same team would be exciting, unfortunately it is 2009.
She then goes into list form of what Dallas did wrong.
(1) Way overpay to re-sign our way-over-the-hill point guard out of sheer desperation because we have no alternatives.
Do not mention we have no alternatives because of the trade for J-Kidd.
In fact, do not mention Devin Harris at all, because who really wants to hear that we went for it and it blew up in our faces. No draft picks, no bona fide youth like Harris, no championship, not even close.
Instead sell "all good teams have age" to local media. Hope aforementioned media ignores fact that examples we use (Boston, LA Lakers and San Antonio) already have at least a championship to show for said age. Done.
I may be the only one enjoying this, but this is great. I wish more sportswriters would talk like this.
(III) Trade for and way overpay an aging, show-me-the-money, with a history of me-first malcontent-ism undersized power forward in Shawn Marion, hoping fans remember him from his Phoenix days when he had a younger and MVPier Steve Nash setting him up. Done.
(IIIa) Take away any likability of this deal (and some existed because Marion brings an added dimension to this team) by signing him to a five-year, $38.5 mil deal. Done.
I am not as down on this Shawn Marion contract right now but I also don't exactly know how well he fits in with the Mavericks and I think the Mavericks will regret this deal in two years.
(IIIb) Say still in a position to go big in summer of 2010 because big-name free agents will want to play with J-Kidd. Practice saying this with straight face at least 20 times a day. Done.
(Double-A) Lie to self about how close this Mavs team actually is to championship caliber. Also lie to The Big German, fans and anybody else buying that Marion + J-Kidd = Chance to Beat LA. Done.
I wish more sportswriters would have the guts to write things like this about the local team. We don't need anything like Mariotti writes, which is basically journalistic tabloid bullshit, but fact based criticism like this.
-From Bill Simmons twitter:
Q: Are Nippert & Mathis ... A) a 70's soul act, B) gay lion tamers, or C) 2 Texas P's who shut Boston down for a sweep? (Answer: C.)
There is no way these guys can be good pitchers because Bill Simmons has not heard of these guys. If ESPN doesn't talk about a team or pitchers they can't be good right? That must be Bill Simmons' point here. It is in no way possible the Rangers are a good team and the only reason we haven't heard more about their pitching staff is because the team is not located in the upper right hand quandrant of the United States. That would never happen.
-Peter King is back on Monday for his MMQB. I am excited more than I should be.
-I love the irony of Landon Donovan (rightly) accusing David Beckham of not focusing enough on his American team to go play overseas and now Donovan is reportedly going to go play in Italy.
Regardless of whether this is a short term thing for Donovan or not, to criticize a teammate for his lack of dedication to his American team and his focus being divided by playing overseas and then you yourself going to play overseas less than a month later is a bit hypocritical. His intentions may be good but I can't help but wonder if his Galaxy teammates think his attention will be divided as well.
-On a pop culture note, I have never hated a reality show contestant more than I hate Joseph on Hell's Kitchen. He has every stereotypical feature of a New England area young adult. He IS Tommy from Quinzee.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
10 comments A New Entry In My New Favorite Feature
I have a new summer favorite feature that no one else but me seems to like, but it doesn't bother me. I love doing the chats ESPN has with Joe Morgan. I know now why FJMorgan liked doing them so much, because they really are fun to mock. The best part is there is a surprise in the JoeChat for everyone to read AND Joe was seemingly coherent for the entire 25 minute chat. Yes, he only chatted for 25 minutes. I think that breaks his own record for shortest chat ever at ESPN.
First, I wanted to cover Bill Simmons' last article with ESPN the Magazine. I make it a habit of not picking on family members, because I think it is kind of cheap, so I am not going to make fun of the article Bill wrote that was a tribute to his father. We even get a picture of his father as an added bonus and I won't make fun of that either. An email conversation with Fred did lead me to want to comment on a couple of things though.
1. I think it is pretty clear Bill Simmons is clearing the way for his eventual exit from ESPN. Fred asked me if Bill was leaving ESPN, which was not made entirely clear in the magazine article if he was leaving ESPN or ESPN the Magazine, but I knew that Bill had quit writing the ESPN Magazine columns. I don't want to re-write what I wrote to Fred, so here I am quoting myself, and this is what I think is happening. My thoughts:
"It was quietly announced a few weeks ago that Simmons would not be writing for ESPN the Magazine anymore. I don't think it means he is leaving ESPN, though I think his contract is up in 2010 and he is planning on leaving ESPN at that time. I think that is why he is publicizing his book so much and trying to be so apparent on Twitter and all of that, he is preparing for life after ESPN. I think he will be gone soon, but not quite yet. I have no inside information on this, it just seems like this is the direction is going to go."
I believe Bill Simmons will leave ESPN in 2010 when (I think) his contract is up and I think this is the first step to making sure he is able to break free from the daily grind of ESPN and allow himself more time to do other things. I don't think he is going to go the entertainment angle again, but I think he may try to do a little free lance writing and write some books in his free time. He will probably sell a lot of books so this may be a good move for him.
His dedication column to his father also sounded a little bit like a self realization that he may want to move in a different direction at some point. This is obviously speculation but I do think Bill Simmons won't be long for ESPN after his latest contract runs out due to creative constraints and the demands the job requires, like actually writing columns every week. He has his blog, his Twitter and I think he believes he could very well do exactly what he is doing now except without ESPN holding him back on what he can say and do. I actually believe this too, so its probably a good move for him.
2. I was looking at Bill's picture of him and his father and I couldn't figure out who his dad looked like. I immediately saw it and thought Bill took a picture with a hippie or the Monopoly guy. He could also be David Crosby if he lost a bunch of weight, quit having children with lesbians, and had not drunk alcohol and done drugs for several decades. I can't figure out who he looks like. I may need help on this. Let's see who can come up with the best idea of who Bill's dad looks like. Nothing offensive please.
3. Bill said on his Twitter that picture was taken at the 2 minute mark of the Super Bowl against the Giants. What you see in their faces are dreams of a 4th Super Bowl ring. I bet Bill thinks he jinxed the Patriots by posing for this picture.
4. I don't like it when Bill posts something about his family but I certainly prefer it to another mail bag or anything commenting on gambling or his favorite teams.
Let's do a JoeChat! I am not sure it is actually Joe doing the chat because he is remarkably coherent at times.
Buzzmaster
We're getting Joe right now!
This probably has to be the hardest chat for the Buzzmaster to get everyone excited about. You know he wants to start it off with "You know you are not getting your question answered so why do you even bother showing up?"
But he can't do that.
JM: This Sunday Jim Rice and Rickey Henderson will be elected into Baseball's Hall of Fame. I've been thinking about the future of the Hall of Fame. I've been thinking about it because I'm Vice Chairman of the board and a Hall of Famer.
Joe gives a little shout out to himself here. What an interesting way to start off a chat. He brings up a question for discussion that never actually gets discussed. I am not sure Joe still understands the complete idea behind having a chat. A chat is not exactly a roundtable discussion where the host brings up a topic and everyone discusses that topic.
I also enjoy Joe's three short sentences that read like he is a 5th grader writing a paper.
"I have been thinking about soup a lot lately. I like to have soup every night for dinner but I do get tired of it. My dad works for Campbell's Soup Company so I get all the soup I want."
I'm having a real problem with trying to decide with guys that have tested positive or admitted using performance enhancing drugs. I can't come to a definitive conclusion or solution to what should happen. I'm sure this is something that will continue to bother me until someone who has admitted to using performance enhancing drugs is put in front of the baseball writers.
Are the baseball writers like a Congressional Committee in that they get to ask players questions before they enter the Hall of Fame? If not, then the baseball writers will never have a chance to quiz the steroid users. I like how Joe is the Vice Chairman of the Board and he still doesn't exactly know how the Hall of Fame process works. He thinks he can interview each candidate.
(They don't get to do that do they? If so, ignore what I just wrote. I couldn't find anything pertaining to this on the Internet.)
I wonder when discussing player's candidacy for the Hall of Fame if Joe refrains from voting because "he hasn't seen enough of the player to vote for or against him."
This brings me to another problem...Joe always says he never sees teams or players play, yet he has a Hall of Fame vote. How does he judge the player's candidacy if he never sees them play? Am I overthinking this?
Matt (New Jersey)
Hey Joe. Other than Pujols, is there any 1B better than Justin Morneau? What a fantastic player he is...
Great non-question Matt!
JM: He's considered an offensive player as much as anything. He doesn't run as well as Pujols, but he's a great hitter.
Pujols career stolen bases: 55
Morneau career stolen bases: 4
Joe is right! This can't be Joe writing this.
Prince Fielder and Justin Morneau are the future stars at that position, though Pujols is still young.
Justin Morneau's age: 28
Albert Pujols's age: 29
Yes, it is still Joe Morgan. Only Joe Morgan could get (guess) which player has more stolen bases in their career but completely whiff and say that Morneau is the future of the 1B position when he is only 1 year younger than Albert Pujols.
Michael (Houston)
Do you think the Astros can really do it?
Great non-specific question where a normal person would have no clue what is being referred to. Maybe this is the way to speak to Joe to get an answer.
JM: Yes. I don't know what's the in water there in Houston, but it seems to energize these guys in the second half every year. I thought they could have made the playoffs last year, except for the hurricane that moved those three games from Houston to Milwaukee.
The Astros ended the season 3.5 games behind the Brewers. Yes, the Astros could have made the playoffs if they had swept the Brewers at home and then won the final game of the year against the Cubs. That game was never played because it was not necessary. Though Joe is yet again factually correct, (which is a shock in itself), it is a little bit of a stretch to think the Astros would have swept the Brewers, even in Houston, and then beaten the Cubs as well to in the Wild Card spot.
Matt (Jacksonville)
Joe, the Cubs can't seem to get on a consistent roll. Is there anyway for them to get any consistency this year?
Another Fire Joe Morgan plant. Matt from Jacksonville seems to write to Joe every week and use the word consistency many times in a sentence when asking a question about the Cubs.
JM: Last year there was something about the Cubs personality of the team. There was something different. They were a fun team to watch. I enjoyed watching them. I enjoyed talking to them.
This sentence is much more enjoyable to read if you do it in the voice of Champ Kind from Anchorman when he is melting down in the anchor room because Ron Burgundy is not hanging out with the gang anymore. Do it once and I promise you will enjoy it.
THere just seems to be a different personality of the team this year. In addition, the confidence level has fallen a little bit.
It could be the fact the team has had a ton of injuries and they are losing baseball games. Losing baseball games tends to dim a team's confidence just a little bit.
Everyone talked about DeRosa and he's one of my favorite players, but Jason Marquis is also gone.
I like how Joe takes this year's performance by Jason Marquis and assumes he has pitched like this with the Cubs so the Cubs miss him due to this.
Marquis numbers this year:
12-6, 3.49 ERA, 1.264 WHIP
Marquis numbers his two years with the Cubs:
2007- 12-9, 4.60 ERA, 1.388 WHIP
2008- 11-9, 4.53 ERA, 1.449 WHIP
The Cubs miss the 2009 Jason Marquis but he never pitched that well for the Cubs. He was a pretty much average pitcher for them. So yes, if they could predict the future they would miss Jason Marquis.
Kevin (Rochester, NY)
With the trade deadline a little more than a week away, does the mood of a clubhouse change with the impending deadline?
JM: Those kinds of things interfere with their concentration and focus. It's something that happens every year and you can't get away from it. To put Roy Halladay's name out there this early, I thought, was a mistake by the Blue Jays.
It was a huge mistake to try and drum up some competition for Halladay's services in order to get the best and largest package available back in return? Does Joe think the Blue Jays should have decided at the last minute to trade Halladay and then take the first thing offered? If he is going to be traded, then they need to do their due diligence and get something substantial in return and that often takes time.
But he's a competitor and he's kept it from changing his focus on the field. But he's a star, a big star. If the trade doesn't happen, you can't go back to him and just say you were kidding. So, Halladay has to be traded.
Halladay seems to be pitching pretty well right now knowing he may be traded, so yes, they could very well say they were kidding and keep him for the rest of the year. He is under contract for next year and the Blue Jays can still try to trade him in the off season. I don't see how Joe figures Halladay HAS to be traded.
Ben (Greensboro, NC)
Now that the Braves have played more consistently after the All Star break, do you seem them being able to overtake the Phillies for the NL East title? If not, do you think they have a shot at the Wild Card spot?
Here's your wonderful surprise! I snuck into a JoeChat and asked him a question. It was a last minute thing so I did not have a great question to ask but I felt victorious seeing it posted.
JM: The Braves are a team that always seems to find good pitching and they're always lacking offensive punch. When Chipper Jones is healthy, he adds the punch that they need and the stabilizing force they need in the lineup. But any time he's injured, that lineup becomes offensively challenged. I just don't think they have enough offense to challenge the Phillies. THey have good pitching, but not enough offense. Pitching is great, but you still have to score runs to win.
Then Joe hit me with a coherent and well thought out answer. I can't mock him on the very question I asked because it is exactly correct. I think it is coherent because he called their game Sunday night, where they scored a lot of runs but that is beside the point, so I think that is why the answer is coherent. Give him a week and he won't be able to answer this question.
Ben (Lincoln, NE)
So Mr. Morgan, are the White Sox legit contenders? Because it seems most analysts still only think the Tigers or Twins have a real shot at the AL Central... and I'm not sure why they ignore the southsiders...
JM: I definitely believe the White Sox have a chance. Any time you have Dye, Thome, Ramirez, you have a good team. I don't know when Carlos Quentin is coming back, but if they can get healthy, I think they definitely have a chance.
Here goes Joe not paying attention again. Carlos Quentin was activated on Monday...this chat was on Tuesday. Maybe I am being nitpicky but if knowing baseball was my job, I would know this.
john (cincinnati)
thanks joe, it seems like each team could be given challenges to use throughout a game on close calls.
I thought John From Cincinnati got cancelled, I guess not (waiting for someone to get this bad and corny joke).
He is talking about instant replay here.
The only problem with that, the games would last 10 hours. Guys would use up their challenges just to use them. One problem with instant replay, let's say the bases are loaded and a player catches it, but the umpires say he didn't catch it and there are runners going everywhere. Then they go and look at it and they find he did catch it, so what do they do with all those runners that scored? The play continues. It's a very difficult thing to use replay in baseball.
There is no way this is Joe Morgan typing this. It's too educated and knowing to be Joe. I do have to say if each manager was given one challenge it would not hold up the game that long, but he brings up a valid point that would need to be resolved before using instant replay on non-home runs. It would be harder to use instant replay in baseball.
It's not like football. Football is segmented. Here's a play, here's a play. But baseball has one play following another.
Actually baseball is also segmented between pitches so it is a very similar principle. Maybe Joe IS typing this. Say there is a play called in football and the play starts, a player fumbles the ball and the defensive player runs the ball to the end zone for a touchdown but the officials whistle the play dead because they say it was not a fumble...well the defense is just shit out of luck if on instant replay it shows there was a fumble because the play was whistled dead.
It's very similar to the example Joe just gave in baseball. If a ball is trapped and is called a catch, how do you account for the runners that would have scored if the play was called correctly? Do you call it a single and let the runners move up accordingly or do you call it a ground rule double and let the runners move up accordingly? Would it depend on the play? The plays in baseball are segmented by pitch, while they are segmented by snap in football. They are similar.
Gary (Warren, MI)
To your comment about HOF admission of steroid players: When did the substances that they used become illegal within the sport? When McGwire was found with Andro in his locker, wasn't it being sold over the counter at nutrition stores? (Now, the lying is a different issue,) but if it was not illegal, should they have a legit shot at the HOF?
JM: McGwire's situation is different. I was talking about guys that have admitted to using or tested positive. That's what I was referring to. Not guys that we suspect or guys that we think might have done it. It's hard to convict someone without proof.
To get Joe's Hall of Fame vote, just don't get caught or admit to using steroids and you are going to be fine. Basically he is saying McGwire gets his Hall of Fame vote because nothing has been proven, though McGwire almost admitted to using steroids at the Congressional hearings, that's not enough to convince Joe because he never actually said it.
Mike (LA)
In your opinion where is Halliday at years end?
There is no way Joe can answer this.
Well, everyone seems to be talking about the Phillies. But I think the Phillies need him less than some other teams. The Phillies are widening their gap. And they don't need to give up their future prospects to get him.
Every team needs a pitcher like Roy Halladay and the Phillies still need another pitcher, even given their current 10 game winning streak. I also like how Joe thinks they should sit pat because they are currently on a winning streak. I think it is smarter to look at the overall makeup of the team and judge from there because this winning streak is going to end at some point and I think they still need pitching.
Also, what are "future prospects?" Are they kids still in high school who haven't been drafted yet? If so, I think a lot of teams would love to start trading those players for Halladay.
"I want to trade Collin Hernandez and Jon Martinez from West Dade High School for Halladay. Will you accept that trade?"
There are several teams that I think he could go to that would make them instant World Series contenders. The Yankees for one. Their starting pitching is suspect. Milwaukee. THey could get what they got from Sabathia. The Mets.
I think the Mets fans will be really surprised to learn if they trade for Roy Halladay they will become instant World Series contenders. I was under the impression many Mets fans think the season is over regardless if they trade for Halladay or not. The Mets have been hit incredibly hard with injuries in regard to their position players, I don't know if Halladay can make up for that problem.
JM: I'm looking forward to going to the hall of fame this weekend. I always have a good time and rubbing elbows with other hall of famers. I always have some good stories. Looking forward to sharing some with you next week.
Stories about his conversations with players from the Big Red Machine AND stories about how he believes Tony Perez should be in the Hall of Fame? I will not look forward to this.
There are still 7 total spots left for the Fantasy league and one more spot left to hit the minimum of 8 players I want. If anyone wants to join, just tell me. Here is the information for the Fantasy League on Yahoo for those that expressed interest. If you do have interest, feel free to use this information to sign up:
League ID: 316018
Password: eckstein
I do realize the pointlessness of having a password and then posting it on the Internet. so if some random assholes decide to take all the spots in the league or something just to be a dick, I will delete the team and let the 7 people who have expressed interest already in the league instead. Otherwise, anyone is free to join of course. I will go over the set up more tomorrow.
First, I wanted to cover Bill Simmons' last article with ESPN the Magazine. I make it a habit of not picking on family members, because I think it is kind of cheap, so I am not going to make fun of the article Bill wrote that was a tribute to his father. We even get a picture of his father as an added bonus and I won't make fun of that either. An email conversation with Fred did lead me to want to comment on a couple of things though.
1. I think it is pretty clear Bill Simmons is clearing the way for his eventual exit from ESPN. Fred asked me if Bill was leaving ESPN, which was not made entirely clear in the magazine article if he was leaving ESPN or ESPN the Magazine, but I knew that Bill had quit writing the ESPN Magazine columns. I don't want to re-write what I wrote to Fred, so here I am quoting myself, and this is what I think is happening. My thoughts:
"It was quietly announced a few weeks ago that Simmons would not be writing for ESPN the Magazine anymore. I don't think it means he is leaving ESPN, though I think his contract is up in 2010 and he is planning on leaving ESPN at that time. I think that is why he is publicizing his book so much and trying to be so apparent on Twitter and all of that, he is preparing for life after ESPN. I think he will be gone soon, but not quite yet. I have no inside information on this, it just seems like this is the direction is going to go."
I believe Bill Simmons will leave ESPN in 2010 when (I think) his contract is up and I think this is the first step to making sure he is able to break free from the daily grind of ESPN and allow himself more time to do other things. I don't think he is going to go the entertainment angle again, but I think he may try to do a little free lance writing and write some books in his free time. He will probably sell a lot of books so this may be a good move for him.
His dedication column to his father also sounded a little bit like a self realization that he may want to move in a different direction at some point. This is obviously speculation but I do think Bill Simmons won't be long for ESPN after his latest contract runs out due to creative constraints and the demands the job requires, like actually writing columns every week. He has his blog, his Twitter and I think he believes he could very well do exactly what he is doing now except without ESPN holding him back on what he can say and do. I actually believe this too, so its probably a good move for him.
2. I was looking at Bill's picture of him and his father and I couldn't figure out who his dad looked like. I immediately saw it and thought Bill took a picture with a hippie or the Monopoly guy. He could also be David Crosby if he lost a bunch of weight, quit having children with lesbians, and had not drunk alcohol and done drugs for several decades. I can't figure out who he looks like. I may need help on this. Let's see who can come up with the best idea of who Bill's dad looks like. Nothing offensive please.
3. Bill said on his Twitter that picture was taken at the 2 minute mark of the Super Bowl against the Giants. What you see in their faces are dreams of a 4th Super Bowl ring. I bet Bill thinks he jinxed the Patriots by posing for this picture.
4. I don't like it when Bill posts something about his family but I certainly prefer it to another mail bag or anything commenting on gambling or his favorite teams.
Let's do a JoeChat! I am not sure it is actually Joe doing the chat because he is remarkably coherent at times.
Buzzmaster
We're getting Joe right now!
This probably has to be the hardest chat for the Buzzmaster to get everyone excited about. You know he wants to start it off with "You know you are not getting your question answered so why do you even bother showing up?"
But he can't do that.
JM: This Sunday Jim Rice and Rickey Henderson will be elected into Baseball's Hall of Fame. I've been thinking about the future of the Hall of Fame. I've been thinking about it because I'm Vice Chairman of the board and a Hall of Famer.
Joe gives a little shout out to himself here. What an interesting way to start off a chat. He brings up a question for discussion that never actually gets discussed. I am not sure Joe still understands the complete idea behind having a chat. A chat is not exactly a roundtable discussion where the host brings up a topic and everyone discusses that topic.
I also enjoy Joe's three short sentences that read like he is a 5th grader writing a paper.
"I have been thinking about soup a lot lately. I like to have soup every night for dinner but I do get tired of it. My dad works for Campbell's Soup Company so I get all the soup I want."
I'm having a real problem with trying to decide with guys that have tested positive or admitted using performance enhancing drugs. I can't come to a definitive conclusion or solution to what should happen. I'm sure this is something that will continue to bother me until someone who has admitted to using performance enhancing drugs is put in front of the baseball writers.
Are the baseball writers like a Congressional Committee in that they get to ask players questions before they enter the Hall of Fame? If not, then the baseball writers will never have a chance to quiz the steroid users. I like how Joe is the Vice Chairman of the Board and he still doesn't exactly know how the Hall of Fame process works. He thinks he can interview each candidate.
(They don't get to do that do they? If so, ignore what I just wrote. I couldn't find anything pertaining to this on the Internet.)
I wonder when discussing player's candidacy for the Hall of Fame if Joe refrains from voting because "he hasn't seen enough of the player to vote for or against him."
This brings me to another problem...Joe always says he never sees teams or players play, yet he has a Hall of Fame vote. How does he judge the player's candidacy if he never sees them play? Am I overthinking this?
Matt (New Jersey)
Hey Joe. Other than Pujols, is there any 1B better than Justin Morneau? What a fantastic player he is...
Great non-question Matt!
JM: He's considered an offensive player as much as anything. He doesn't run as well as Pujols, but he's a great hitter.
Pujols career stolen bases: 55
Morneau career stolen bases: 4
Joe is right! This can't be Joe writing this.
Prince Fielder and Justin Morneau are the future stars at that position, though Pujols is still young.
Justin Morneau's age: 28
Albert Pujols's age: 29
Yes, it is still Joe Morgan. Only Joe Morgan could get (guess) which player has more stolen bases in their career but completely whiff and say that Morneau is the future of the 1B position when he is only 1 year younger than Albert Pujols.
Michael (Houston)
Do you think the Astros can really do it?
Great non-specific question where a normal person would have no clue what is being referred to. Maybe this is the way to speak to Joe to get an answer.
JM: Yes. I don't know what's the in water there in Houston, but it seems to energize these guys in the second half every year. I thought they could have made the playoffs last year, except for the hurricane that moved those three games from Houston to Milwaukee.
The Astros ended the season 3.5 games behind the Brewers. Yes, the Astros could have made the playoffs if they had swept the Brewers at home and then won the final game of the year against the Cubs. That game was never played because it was not necessary. Though Joe is yet again factually correct, (which is a shock in itself), it is a little bit of a stretch to think the Astros would have swept the Brewers, even in Houston, and then beaten the Cubs as well to in the Wild Card spot.
Matt (Jacksonville)
Joe, the Cubs can't seem to get on a consistent roll. Is there anyway for them to get any consistency this year?
Another Fire Joe Morgan plant. Matt from Jacksonville seems to write to Joe every week and use the word consistency many times in a sentence when asking a question about the Cubs.
JM: Last year there was something about the Cubs personality of the team. There was something different. They were a fun team to watch. I enjoyed watching them. I enjoyed talking to them.
This sentence is much more enjoyable to read if you do it in the voice of Champ Kind from Anchorman when he is melting down in the anchor room because Ron Burgundy is not hanging out with the gang anymore. Do it once and I promise you will enjoy it.
THere just seems to be a different personality of the team this year. In addition, the confidence level has fallen a little bit.
It could be the fact the team has had a ton of injuries and they are losing baseball games. Losing baseball games tends to dim a team's confidence just a little bit.
Everyone talked about DeRosa and he's one of my favorite players, but Jason Marquis is also gone.
I like how Joe takes this year's performance by Jason Marquis and assumes he has pitched like this with the Cubs so the Cubs miss him due to this.
Marquis numbers this year:
12-6, 3.49 ERA, 1.264 WHIP
Marquis numbers his two years with the Cubs:
2007- 12-9, 4.60 ERA, 1.388 WHIP
2008- 11-9, 4.53 ERA, 1.449 WHIP
The Cubs miss the 2009 Jason Marquis but he never pitched that well for the Cubs. He was a pretty much average pitcher for them. So yes, if they could predict the future they would miss Jason Marquis.
Kevin (Rochester, NY)
With the trade deadline a little more than a week away, does the mood of a clubhouse change with the impending deadline?
JM: Those kinds of things interfere with their concentration and focus. It's something that happens every year and you can't get away from it. To put Roy Halladay's name out there this early, I thought, was a mistake by the Blue Jays.
It was a huge mistake to try and drum up some competition for Halladay's services in order to get the best and largest package available back in return? Does Joe think the Blue Jays should have decided at the last minute to trade Halladay and then take the first thing offered? If he is going to be traded, then they need to do their due diligence and get something substantial in return and that often takes time.
But he's a competitor and he's kept it from changing his focus on the field. But he's a star, a big star. If the trade doesn't happen, you can't go back to him and just say you were kidding. So, Halladay has to be traded.
Halladay seems to be pitching pretty well right now knowing he may be traded, so yes, they could very well say they were kidding and keep him for the rest of the year. He is under contract for next year and the Blue Jays can still try to trade him in the off season. I don't see how Joe figures Halladay HAS to be traded.
Ben (Greensboro, NC)
Now that the Braves have played more consistently after the All Star break, do you seem them being able to overtake the Phillies for the NL East title? If not, do you think they have a shot at the Wild Card spot?
Here's your wonderful surprise! I snuck into a JoeChat and asked him a question. It was a last minute thing so I did not have a great question to ask but I felt victorious seeing it posted.
JM: The Braves are a team that always seems to find good pitching and they're always lacking offensive punch. When Chipper Jones is healthy, he adds the punch that they need and the stabilizing force they need in the lineup. But any time he's injured, that lineup becomes offensively challenged. I just don't think they have enough offense to challenge the Phillies. THey have good pitching, but not enough offense. Pitching is great, but you still have to score runs to win.
Then Joe hit me with a coherent and well thought out answer. I can't mock him on the very question I asked because it is exactly correct. I think it is coherent because he called their game Sunday night, where they scored a lot of runs but that is beside the point, so I think that is why the answer is coherent. Give him a week and he won't be able to answer this question.
Ben (Lincoln, NE)
So Mr. Morgan, are the White Sox legit contenders? Because it seems most analysts still only think the Tigers or Twins have a real shot at the AL Central... and I'm not sure why they ignore the southsiders...
JM: I definitely believe the White Sox have a chance. Any time you have Dye, Thome, Ramirez, you have a good team. I don't know when Carlos Quentin is coming back, but if they can get healthy, I think they definitely have a chance.
Here goes Joe not paying attention again. Carlos Quentin was activated on Monday...this chat was on Tuesday. Maybe I am being nitpicky but if knowing baseball was my job, I would know this.
john (cincinnati)
thanks joe, it seems like each team could be given challenges to use throughout a game on close calls.
I thought John From Cincinnati got cancelled, I guess not (waiting for someone to get this bad and corny joke).
He is talking about instant replay here.
The only problem with that, the games would last 10 hours. Guys would use up their challenges just to use them. One problem with instant replay, let's say the bases are loaded and a player catches it, but the umpires say he didn't catch it and there are runners going everywhere. Then they go and look at it and they find he did catch it, so what do they do with all those runners that scored? The play continues. It's a very difficult thing to use replay in baseball.
There is no way this is Joe Morgan typing this. It's too educated and knowing to be Joe. I do have to say if each manager was given one challenge it would not hold up the game that long, but he brings up a valid point that would need to be resolved before using instant replay on non-home runs. It would be harder to use instant replay in baseball.
It's not like football. Football is segmented. Here's a play, here's a play. But baseball has one play following another.
Actually baseball is also segmented between pitches so it is a very similar principle. Maybe Joe IS typing this. Say there is a play called in football and the play starts, a player fumbles the ball and the defensive player runs the ball to the end zone for a touchdown but the officials whistle the play dead because they say it was not a fumble...well the defense is just shit out of luck if on instant replay it shows there was a fumble because the play was whistled dead.
It's very similar to the example Joe just gave in baseball. If a ball is trapped and is called a catch, how do you account for the runners that would have scored if the play was called correctly? Do you call it a single and let the runners move up accordingly or do you call it a ground rule double and let the runners move up accordingly? Would it depend on the play? The plays in baseball are segmented by pitch, while they are segmented by snap in football. They are similar.
Gary (Warren, MI)
To your comment about HOF admission of steroid players: When did the substances that they used become illegal within the sport? When McGwire was found with Andro in his locker, wasn't it being sold over the counter at nutrition stores? (Now, the lying is a different issue,) but if it was not illegal, should they have a legit shot at the HOF?
JM: McGwire's situation is different. I was talking about guys that have admitted to using or tested positive. That's what I was referring to. Not guys that we suspect or guys that we think might have done it. It's hard to convict someone without proof.
To get Joe's Hall of Fame vote, just don't get caught or admit to using steroids and you are going to be fine. Basically he is saying McGwire gets his Hall of Fame vote because nothing has been proven, though McGwire almost admitted to using steroids at the Congressional hearings, that's not enough to convince Joe because he never actually said it.
Mike (LA)
In your opinion where is Halliday at years end?
There is no way Joe can answer this.
Well, everyone seems to be talking about the Phillies. But I think the Phillies need him less than some other teams. The Phillies are widening their gap. And they don't need to give up their future prospects to get him.
Every team needs a pitcher like Roy Halladay and the Phillies still need another pitcher, even given their current 10 game winning streak. I also like how Joe thinks they should sit pat because they are currently on a winning streak. I think it is smarter to look at the overall makeup of the team and judge from there because this winning streak is going to end at some point and I think they still need pitching.
Also, what are "future prospects?" Are they kids still in high school who haven't been drafted yet? If so, I think a lot of teams would love to start trading those players for Halladay.
"I want to trade Collin Hernandez and Jon Martinez from West Dade High School for Halladay. Will you accept that trade?"
There are several teams that I think he could go to that would make them instant World Series contenders. The Yankees for one. Their starting pitching is suspect. Milwaukee. THey could get what they got from Sabathia. The Mets.
I think the Mets fans will be really surprised to learn if they trade for Roy Halladay they will become instant World Series contenders. I was under the impression many Mets fans think the season is over regardless if they trade for Halladay or not. The Mets have been hit incredibly hard with injuries in regard to their position players, I don't know if Halladay can make up for that problem.
JM: I'm looking forward to going to the hall of fame this weekend. I always have a good time and rubbing elbows with other hall of famers. I always have some good stories. Looking forward to sharing some with you next week.
Stories about his conversations with players from the Big Red Machine AND stories about how he believes Tony Perez should be in the Hall of Fame? I will not look forward to this.
There are still 7 total spots left for the Fantasy league and one more spot left to hit the minimum of 8 players I want. If anyone wants to join, just tell me. Here is the information for the Fantasy League on Yahoo for those that expressed interest. If you do have interest, feel free to use this information to sign up:
League ID: 316018
Password: eckstein
I do realize the pointlessness of having a password and then posting it on the Internet. so if some random assholes decide to take all the spots in the league or something just to be a dick, I will delete the team and let the 7 people who have expressed interest already in the league instead. Otherwise, anyone is free to join of course. I will go over the set up more tomorrow.
Monday, July 20, 2009
10 comments Two For One Tuesday
I updated it kind of late yesterday but if anyone is interested in a BotB Fantasy Football League please tell me. I am looking to get a league of a max of 12 teams together. So email me or put in the comments you will be interested and I will get the ball rolling. We need 2 more spots to be filled for the minimum of 8 teams and we need 6 more spots for the maximum of 12 teams. Though if there was enough interest, I guess we could go to 14 teams.
Everyone get very excited, because it is two for one Tuesday! I tell you what, for a guy like me who likes to put up a post every single day these are some dry times. It's pretty much the off season for nearly every sport, except baseball, so I am having to dig a little bit to find examples of bad articles. Fortunately, Tim Keown actually has a back log of bad articles for us to enjoy.
-When we last left Tim Keown was upset because he did not like that the NBA did not have personalities.
Before that (in one of our highest viewed posts ever...go figure huh?) we found he hated Kobe's face.
Before that he was informing us that a quarterback's skill has nothing to do with success in the NFL, it's purely a matter of which team you play for.
Today, Tim sets his misguided eye on Twitter and how it is ruining journalism.
Holly Robinson Peete has no business being part of the Steve McNair discussion, but she was.
As opposed to everyone else, your current writer included, who have given their opinion who have their business in being a part of the discussion? From Tim Keown's point of view we all have business opining over McNair's death, but not Holly Robinson Peete, as the wife of an ex-NFL quarterback she has nothing to do with this discussion.
Her opinions were either inane ("Will the Steve McNair tragedy scare married men straight like the '87 film 'Fatal Attraction' did for a while?")
Watch the movie and then think about cheating on your wife/loved one. You will think twice. Robinson-Peete was just making an off the cuff comment, it is not ruining journalism as a whole. Why is it journalists think anyone who is not a journalist giving their opinion in a public fashion is ruining journalism?
or distasteful ("i told hubby if i get a call some 20 yr old waitress he was doin offed him - me n kids boycotting funeral - not EVEN joking").
How distasteful to threaten to boycott her husband's funeral if he was murdered by his mistress! Show a little respect to the dead Holly! So what if your husband cheated on you and your children, it doesn't matter, it's more important to show respect for him than it is to have any self respect.
I know the whole Twitter/Facebook social-networking revolution is supposed to transform the way we communicate with each other. But for the most part it looks to me like just another way to avoid human interaction while tossing out meaningless tidbits of minutiae.
Absolutely it is. I have never thought it would transform the way we all communicate, I think it is just another way of communicating.
It is not a reason to avoid human interaction. I can't just call Shaq and find out what he is doing right now, there is no way I can personally do that, but I can look at his Twitter and see what he is up to. That is neat for some people. If it weren't for Twitter, there would be ZERO interaction between normal people and many high profile people, so it is not a way to avoid interaction, it is a way of communicating with those individuals we normally would not be able to communicate with.
I have no interest in being given 140-character opinions or observations or updates -- even from people I know and like.
I don't either, that is why I am not on it. Fortunately, the United States is not a dictatorship where Tim Keown is in charge of monitoring all communications. Otherwise, each person's scope of effect on others would be limited to discussing Kobe's facial expressions.
If its use was limited to people boring each other into stupefaction with their whereabouts and their moods and their shopping habits, it would be the equivalent of an inside joke at the high school cafeteria.
It is used exactly this way for 99% of the world.
The problem is, there is a widespread attempt in the media to bring validity to the enterprise.
This widespread attempt for validity occurs when celebrities and insiders like Peter King and Ric Bucher tweet about something sports related and it has a hint of validity to it. Why would the world NOT take something these people have tweeted seriously? It's not the message format but the messenger people take seriously.
(And I'll say it before you do: There are exceptions, and the election protests in Iran are a big one. Without Twitter, the amount of useful information leaving that country would be minimal at best.
This is a valid way to use the technology.
I don't believe Holly Robinson Peete, a successful actress with a solid reputation, would have told a newspaper reporter the same things she wrote on Twitter.
For one thing, no one would have called Holly Robinson Peete and asked her opinion on the subject. She probably would have told her friends the same thing she put online though...therein lies the appeal of Twitter, we get her personal thoughts without knowing her.
One of the first McNair-related Twitter items that gained widespread circulation came from CNBC reporter Darren Rovell, who cited WSMV-TV in Nashville as confirming that McNair was shot and killed by his wife.
A legitimate reporter citing a legitimate television station reporting a story they had found out about. There is no difference in the information being disseminated over Twitter and WSMV breaking into the scheduled programming to break the news. I could see the problem if a non-reporter was the first to break the story, but that did not happen. The facts were a little bit wrong on this, that is a problem, but ESPN has never had a problem in the past breaking news stories that were just a little bit wrong. The only problem the network and it's writers seem to have is when someone else breaks the story first, but wrong. Then writers like Keown start screaming foul. You won't hear him get upset when Chris Mortensen breaks a story wrong though.
But since he is more well-known and considered more reputable than WSMV, his decision to publicly lend his name to it -- consciously or not -- gave it more credibility and a bigger audience than it deserved.
Actually the story was basically correct in its structure. Steve McNair was killed, and you can forgive someone for not thinking the woman he was with was his wife. I don't think this is a case where Twitter was a problem in destroying serious journalism, but a case where a reporter was in a race to be the first to break a story and did not have all his facts straight.
It's all right to admit, and it's all right for people who have nothing to do with investigating or reporting the event -- the wife of an ex-quarterback or a reporter -- to stay out of it until more is known.
At that point all of the facts were known and she was just giving her opinion on the situation. It may have been a rough, off the cuff opinion but she is not a journalist and she was not attempting to be a journalist. Everyone has a right to an opinion and Twitter allows individuals to give that opinion publicly. Twitter may be ruining privacy but it is not ruining journalism.
But from a journalistic sense, it seems like Twitter -- and whatever technology comes next -- is becoming a place that you can be wrong without consequences.
What is Keown talking about? I am not going to link the amount of stories that ESPN or any other news outlet has gotten wrong over even the past year and there have been no consequences for this. ESPN hired Adam Schefter because they got tired of breaking stories incorrectly through Chris Mortensen. Besides the consequences for constantly incorrectly reporting a story is that the person starts to lose credibility. This really has nothing to do with Twitter because it is merely the medium through which the story was reported.
Again as I always say, the only thing destroying journalism are the journalists themselves.
-As I am sure everyone has heard by now, Mike Vick has been released from jail, which means it is time to let the speculation begin on where he will play, how much he will get paid, and whether he even deserves to play again. Begrudgingly, I believe in second chances so I think he should get a chance to play again. I say begrudgingly because I really do love animals more than humans and Vick was involved with an entire dog fighting operation, he did not carry out a single event. I wish he would not get a second chance but it seems fair to me that he does.
The title of Jim Trotter's article is "Michael Vick Deserves Opportunity to Play in the NFL Again."
I am not sure if he deserves an opportunity to play in the NFL again, but he is going to get another chance to play in the NFL so I need to learn to deal with it. I love animals more than I love humans, but I also recognize Vick has served his sentence and paid a fairly high price. It doesn't make me happy to let him play again.
The arguments used by Jim Trotter in this article would not be enough to convince me Vick deserves a second chance if I didn't already believe it.
My wife has a huge heart when it comes to animals, dogs in particular. She has given our 11-year-old German Shepherd so many belly rubs that it rolls onto its side when it sees her coming. On hot days she'll put large chunks of ice into Ruby's water pan, and at dinner she'll mix in grilled steak or baked chicken because, in her opinion, dry kibble just isn't good enough by itself.
My wife also is among those who believe Michael Vick should get a second chance in the NFL now that his 23-month prison sentence for bankrolling an illegal dog-fighting operation is over.
Because Jim Trotter's wife loves her dog very much, this means that she is an expert on whether Mike Vick deserves to play again in the NFL? I think Jim Trotter should call Roger Goodell and tell him that his wife loves animals and thinks Vick should be able to play again, I am sure it would make all the difference in the world in his decision on whether Vick should be allowed back in the NFL.
I hate arguments that start like this...relying on a person who normally hates something but doesn't in this specific, like this one exception for one person should prove anything.
"My grandmother normally hates action movies but she liked Transformers 2, so therefore it is a good movie."
"Ban him from owning a dog," she told me last weekend. "But let the man earn a living."
Yes, treat Vick like a child molester and keep him away from dogs, that makes perfect sense. What a wonderful way to show the United States prison system has rehabbed him...by not allowing him to own a dog.
Vick has done his time, lost most of his money and been publicly disgraced. His name has been indelibly stained by the admission that he tortured and killed dogs.
All of these are absolutely true and I can not argue with this. I will say that he brought all of this on himself.
If Vick knocks on the office door of each of the league's 32 owners and, one by one, is turned away, so be it.
This will not happen.
But to unilaterally prevent the former star quarterback from playing because of fears about how fans or sponsors might react would be hypocritical at best, shameful at worst.
The NFL is a billion dollar business that relies on corporate sponsors to buy commercial time and these corporate sponsors like to be attached to a product that consumers can relate to the NFL and it's business. When I think of erectile dysfunction pills, I think of football commercials because that is when they are mostly run by drug companies. The fans reaction is important as well. An individual team is a business in itself and relies on fan support to continue, and without this fan support it leads to less than sold out stadiums, lower revenues, and so on. That's not good for a team.
It is not shameful for the NFL to protect its financial interests by worrying about how the fans and the sponsors might react to Vick coming back. It's perfectly natural. The NFL is not in a position where they should have to make an ethical and public statement about the redemption of a human being. The NFL is in a position where they need to make sure Mike Vick coming back will not adversely affect the NFL as the #1 sport in the United States. It's the same reason Roger Goodell cracked down on misbehaving players, to get the appearance of the NFL being a thug league out of everyone's mind. He learned from the NBA's mistakes in that aspect.
So no, it is not shameful to worry about the bottom line because that is how the NFL judges itself and is judged by others.
If the NFL can give second chances to gamblers (Art Schlichter), drug traffickers (Tamarick Vanover and Bam Morris) and those who commit vechicular homicide while driving drunk (Leonard Little) -- yes, I consider killing someone while driving drunk to be murder, even if the law doesn't -- it should give Vick the opportunity to resume his career.
I hate this argument as well. Simply because the NFL has been lenient in the past does not mean they should continue to be lenient in the future. The line has to be drawn somewhere and just because these players were allowed back into the game in the past doesn't mean the bar should be lowered for the future.
This annoys me like the Hall of Fame comparisons annoy me. "Well, we have to let Y player in the Hall of Fame because X player is already in the Hall of Fame and Y is a much better player than X." Just because the Hall of Fame lowered it's standards and may have made a mistake in the past doesn't mean it should base future decisions on the low level the "mistake player" played the sport at.
It's true that none of the aforementioned transgressions took place on Goodell's watch, but it's also accurate that none of those players, prior to reinstatement, was punished as severely as Vick.
It's accurate to say none of those players were punished as severely as Vick because they did not happen on Goodell's watch. You can't separate these two events because they are completely linked together.
We all know how I feel about Leonard Little. He should be in jail in my mind. Donte Stallworth got an indefinite suspension after running over a pedestrian while he was high and drunk but I am not sure if this is going to be a precursor to the Vick decision. Stallworth got off incredibly light in the judicial system for what he did, especially since he was intoxicated and on illegal narcotics at the time, and this light judicial sentence may be why he got an indefinite suspension. Vick has paid his price in the judicial system already and he has also paid a financial price as well.
The argument that Vick's return would cause a loss of fans or sponsors is laughable. The NFL is the Gulliver of professional sports leagues. Its game is bigger than any one individual, including Vick.
I don't find this as laughable as Jim Trotter does. I don't think Mike Vick being reinstated would tear down the entire NFL or anything, but it could lead to an eventual change in perception for the league combined with other events. Fans are not going to grow tired of the league and the player's antics all at once, it will be a gradual thing, and combine it with the poor economy and looming lockout in 2010 and I think there should be some really trepidation at alienating any fans.
No fans are going to wake up tomorrow and say they hate the NFL because of the Vick situation, but if you combine a Vick reinstatement with a few other negative NFL player related events, including a lockout, the league could look at a sponsor and fan problem at some point in the future.
Vick isn't the first player to participate in dog-fighting and he won't be the last
He didn't participate in dog-fighting, he ran the entire operation and made money off of the operation. It's not like he was only standing around and watching the fighting, he was also the one financing the dog-fighting and actively taking part in "punishing" those dogs that lost.
Where was this type of outrage when former members of Congress admitted to being members of a group that committed the same heinous acts on African-Americans that Vick did on some of his dogs?
This is a completely different topic that is not related to the discussion being had about Mike Vick and dog-fighting. To even bring this up is a sign of a weak argument in my mind.
Goodell should heed the words President Bush said in his 2004 State of the Union address while discussing legislation to help convicted criminals re-enter society.
That is absolutely true and that is why I think Vick should get a chance to play in the NFL again, against my true wishes.
You can't downplay the effect a Vick reinstatement will have on fans and sponsors. The second the NFL starts to believe it is bulletproof is the very second the fans and sponsors will take an opportunity to show that it's not. Everyone who owns a animal thinks what Vick did was horrible, that is almost a given, but as simple as reinstating him to the NFL would seem to be, there is a bigger picture the NFL has to look at. You can't simply ignore that. I never liked Vick as a person or a quarterback but he gets a second chance in the NFL because America believes in second chances, but it doesn't mean that second chance should not come without some hesitation on the part of the NFL.
Everyone get very excited, because it is two for one Tuesday! I tell you what, for a guy like me who likes to put up a post every single day these are some dry times. It's pretty much the off season for nearly every sport, except baseball, so I am having to dig a little bit to find examples of bad articles. Fortunately, Tim Keown actually has a back log of bad articles for us to enjoy.
-When we last left Tim Keown was upset because he did not like that the NBA did not have personalities.
Before that (in one of our highest viewed posts ever...go figure huh?) we found he hated Kobe's face.
Before that he was informing us that a quarterback's skill has nothing to do with success in the NFL, it's purely a matter of which team you play for.
Today, Tim sets his misguided eye on Twitter and how it is ruining journalism.
Holly Robinson Peete has no business being part of the Steve McNair discussion, but she was.
As opposed to everyone else, your current writer included, who have given their opinion who have their business in being a part of the discussion? From Tim Keown's point of view we all have business opining over McNair's death, but not Holly Robinson Peete, as the wife of an ex-NFL quarterback she has nothing to do with this discussion.
Her opinions were either inane ("Will the Steve McNair tragedy scare married men straight like the '87 film 'Fatal Attraction' did for a while?")
Watch the movie and then think about cheating on your wife/loved one. You will think twice. Robinson-Peete was just making an off the cuff comment, it is not ruining journalism as a whole. Why is it journalists think anyone who is not a journalist giving their opinion in a public fashion is ruining journalism?
or distasteful ("i told hubby if i get a call some 20 yr old waitress he was doin offed him - me n kids boycotting funeral - not EVEN joking").
How distasteful to threaten to boycott her husband's funeral if he was murdered by his mistress! Show a little respect to the dead Holly! So what if your husband cheated on you and your children, it doesn't matter, it's more important to show respect for him than it is to have any self respect.
I know the whole Twitter/Facebook social-networking revolution is supposed to transform the way we communicate with each other. But for the most part it looks to me like just another way to avoid human interaction while tossing out meaningless tidbits of minutiae.
Absolutely it is. I have never thought it would transform the way we all communicate, I think it is just another way of communicating.
It is not a reason to avoid human interaction. I can't just call Shaq and find out what he is doing right now, there is no way I can personally do that, but I can look at his Twitter and see what he is up to. That is neat for some people. If it weren't for Twitter, there would be ZERO interaction between normal people and many high profile people, so it is not a way to avoid interaction, it is a way of communicating with those individuals we normally would not be able to communicate with.
I have no interest in being given 140-character opinions or observations or updates -- even from people I know and like.
I don't either, that is why I am not on it. Fortunately, the United States is not a dictatorship where Tim Keown is in charge of monitoring all communications. Otherwise, each person's scope of effect on others would be limited to discussing Kobe's facial expressions.
If its use was limited to people boring each other into stupefaction with their whereabouts and their moods and their shopping habits, it would be the equivalent of an inside joke at the high school cafeteria.
It is used exactly this way for 99% of the world.
The problem is, there is a widespread attempt in the media to bring validity to the enterprise.
This widespread attempt for validity occurs when celebrities and insiders like Peter King and Ric Bucher tweet about something sports related and it has a hint of validity to it. Why would the world NOT take something these people have tweeted seriously? It's not the message format but the messenger people take seriously.
(And I'll say it before you do: There are exceptions, and the election protests in Iran are a big one. Without Twitter, the amount of useful information leaving that country would be minimal at best.
This is a valid way to use the technology.
I don't believe Holly Robinson Peete, a successful actress with a solid reputation, would have told a newspaper reporter the same things she wrote on Twitter.
For one thing, no one would have called Holly Robinson Peete and asked her opinion on the subject. She probably would have told her friends the same thing she put online though...therein lies the appeal of Twitter, we get her personal thoughts without knowing her.
One of the first McNair-related Twitter items that gained widespread circulation came from CNBC reporter Darren Rovell, who cited WSMV-TV in Nashville as confirming that McNair was shot and killed by his wife.
A legitimate reporter citing a legitimate television station reporting a story they had found out about. There is no difference in the information being disseminated over Twitter and WSMV breaking into the scheduled programming to break the news. I could see the problem if a non-reporter was the first to break the story, but that did not happen. The facts were a little bit wrong on this, that is a problem, but ESPN has never had a problem in the past breaking news stories that were just a little bit wrong. The only problem the network and it's writers seem to have is when someone else breaks the story first, but wrong. Then writers like Keown start screaming foul. You won't hear him get upset when Chris Mortensen breaks a story wrong though.
But since he is more well-known and considered more reputable than WSMV, his decision to publicly lend his name to it -- consciously or not -- gave it more credibility and a bigger audience than it deserved.
Actually the story was basically correct in its structure. Steve McNair was killed, and you can forgive someone for not thinking the woman he was with was his wife. I don't think this is a case where Twitter was a problem in destroying serious journalism, but a case where a reporter was in a race to be the first to break a story and did not have all his facts straight.
It's all right to admit, and it's all right for people who have nothing to do with investigating or reporting the event -- the wife of an ex-quarterback or a reporter -- to stay out of it until more is known.
At that point all of the facts were known and she was just giving her opinion on the situation. It may have been a rough, off the cuff opinion but she is not a journalist and she was not attempting to be a journalist. Everyone has a right to an opinion and Twitter allows individuals to give that opinion publicly. Twitter may be ruining privacy but it is not ruining journalism.
But from a journalistic sense, it seems like Twitter -- and whatever technology comes next -- is becoming a place that you can be wrong without consequences.
What is Keown talking about? I am not going to link the amount of stories that ESPN or any other news outlet has gotten wrong over even the past year and there have been no consequences for this. ESPN hired Adam Schefter because they got tired of breaking stories incorrectly through Chris Mortensen. Besides the consequences for constantly incorrectly reporting a story is that the person starts to lose credibility. This really has nothing to do with Twitter because it is merely the medium through which the story was reported.
Again as I always say, the only thing destroying journalism are the journalists themselves.
-As I am sure everyone has heard by now, Mike Vick has been released from jail, which means it is time to let the speculation begin on where he will play, how much he will get paid, and whether he even deserves to play again. Begrudgingly, I believe in second chances so I think he should get a chance to play again. I say begrudgingly because I really do love animals more than humans and Vick was involved with an entire dog fighting operation, he did not carry out a single event. I wish he would not get a second chance but it seems fair to me that he does.
The title of Jim Trotter's article is "Michael Vick Deserves Opportunity to Play in the NFL Again."
I am not sure if he deserves an opportunity to play in the NFL again, but he is going to get another chance to play in the NFL so I need to learn to deal with it. I love animals more than I love humans, but I also recognize Vick has served his sentence and paid a fairly high price. It doesn't make me happy to let him play again.
The arguments used by Jim Trotter in this article would not be enough to convince me Vick deserves a second chance if I didn't already believe it.
My wife has a huge heart when it comes to animals, dogs in particular. She has given our 11-year-old German Shepherd so many belly rubs that it rolls onto its side when it sees her coming. On hot days she'll put large chunks of ice into Ruby's water pan, and at dinner she'll mix in grilled steak or baked chicken because, in her opinion, dry kibble just isn't good enough by itself.
My wife also is among those who believe Michael Vick should get a second chance in the NFL now that his 23-month prison sentence for bankrolling an illegal dog-fighting operation is over.
Because Jim Trotter's wife loves her dog very much, this means that she is an expert on whether Mike Vick deserves to play again in the NFL? I think Jim Trotter should call Roger Goodell and tell him that his wife loves animals and thinks Vick should be able to play again, I am sure it would make all the difference in the world in his decision on whether Vick should be allowed back in the NFL.
I hate arguments that start like this...relying on a person who normally hates something but doesn't in this specific, like this one exception for one person should prove anything.
"My grandmother normally hates action movies but she liked Transformers 2, so therefore it is a good movie."
"Ban him from owning a dog," she told me last weekend. "But let the man earn a living."
Yes, treat Vick like a child molester and keep him away from dogs, that makes perfect sense. What a wonderful way to show the United States prison system has rehabbed him...by not allowing him to own a dog.
Vick has done his time, lost most of his money and been publicly disgraced. His name has been indelibly stained by the admission that he tortured and killed dogs.
All of these are absolutely true and I can not argue with this. I will say that he brought all of this on himself.
If Vick knocks on the office door of each of the league's 32 owners and, one by one, is turned away, so be it.
This will not happen.
But to unilaterally prevent the former star quarterback from playing because of fears about how fans or sponsors might react would be hypocritical at best, shameful at worst.
The NFL is a billion dollar business that relies on corporate sponsors to buy commercial time and these corporate sponsors like to be attached to a product that consumers can relate to the NFL and it's business. When I think of erectile dysfunction pills, I think of football commercials because that is when they are mostly run by drug companies. The fans reaction is important as well. An individual team is a business in itself and relies on fan support to continue, and without this fan support it leads to less than sold out stadiums, lower revenues, and so on. That's not good for a team.
It is not shameful for the NFL to protect its financial interests by worrying about how the fans and the sponsors might react to Vick coming back. It's perfectly natural. The NFL is not in a position where they should have to make an ethical and public statement about the redemption of a human being. The NFL is in a position where they need to make sure Mike Vick coming back will not adversely affect the NFL as the #1 sport in the United States. It's the same reason Roger Goodell cracked down on misbehaving players, to get the appearance of the NFL being a thug league out of everyone's mind. He learned from the NBA's mistakes in that aspect.
So no, it is not shameful to worry about the bottom line because that is how the NFL judges itself and is judged by others.
If the NFL can give second chances to gamblers (Art Schlichter), drug traffickers (Tamarick Vanover and Bam Morris) and those who commit vechicular homicide while driving drunk (Leonard Little) -- yes, I consider killing someone while driving drunk to be murder, even if the law doesn't -- it should give Vick the opportunity to resume his career.
I hate this argument as well. Simply because the NFL has been lenient in the past does not mean they should continue to be lenient in the future. The line has to be drawn somewhere and just because these players were allowed back into the game in the past doesn't mean the bar should be lowered for the future.
This annoys me like the Hall of Fame comparisons annoy me. "Well, we have to let Y player in the Hall of Fame because X player is already in the Hall of Fame and Y is a much better player than X." Just because the Hall of Fame lowered it's standards and may have made a mistake in the past doesn't mean it should base future decisions on the low level the "mistake player" played the sport at.
It's true that none of the aforementioned transgressions took place on Goodell's watch, but it's also accurate that none of those players, prior to reinstatement, was punished as severely as Vick.
It's accurate to say none of those players were punished as severely as Vick because they did not happen on Goodell's watch. You can't separate these two events because they are completely linked together.
We all know how I feel about Leonard Little. He should be in jail in my mind. Donte Stallworth got an indefinite suspension after running over a pedestrian while he was high and drunk but I am not sure if this is going to be a precursor to the Vick decision. Stallworth got off incredibly light in the judicial system for what he did, especially since he was intoxicated and on illegal narcotics at the time, and this light judicial sentence may be why he got an indefinite suspension. Vick has paid his price in the judicial system already and he has also paid a financial price as well.
The argument that Vick's return would cause a loss of fans or sponsors is laughable. The NFL is the Gulliver of professional sports leagues. Its game is bigger than any one individual, including Vick.
I don't find this as laughable as Jim Trotter does. I don't think Mike Vick being reinstated would tear down the entire NFL or anything, but it could lead to an eventual change in perception for the league combined with other events. Fans are not going to grow tired of the league and the player's antics all at once, it will be a gradual thing, and combine it with the poor economy and looming lockout in 2010 and I think there should be some really trepidation at alienating any fans.
No fans are going to wake up tomorrow and say they hate the NFL because of the Vick situation, but if you combine a Vick reinstatement with a few other negative NFL player related events, including a lockout, the league could look at a sponsor and fan problem at some point in the future.
Vick isn't the first player to participate in dog-fighting and he won't be the last
He didn't participate in dog-fighting, he ran the entire operation and made money off of the operation. It's not like he was only standing around and watching the fighting, he was also the one financing the dog-fighting and actively taking part in "punishing" those dogs that lost.
Where was this type of outrage when former members of Congress admitted to being members of a group that committed the same heinous acts on African-Americans that Vick did on some of his dogs?
This is a completely different topic that is not related to the discussion being had about Mike Vick and dog-fighting. To even bring this up is a sign of a weak argument in my mind.
Goodell should heed the words President Bush said in his 2004 State of the Union address while discussing legislation to help convicted criminals re-enter society.
That is absolutely true and that is why I think Vick should get a chance to play in the NFL again, against my true wishes.
You can't downplay the effect a Vick reinstatement will have on fans and sponsors. The second the NFL starts to believe it is bulletproof is the very second the fans and sponsors will take an opportunity to show that it's not. Everyone who owns a animal thinks what Vick did was horrible, that is almost a given, but as simple as reinstating him to the NFL would seem to be, there is a bigger picture the NFL has to look at. You can't simply ignore that. I never liked Vick as a person or a quarterback but he gets a second chance in the NFL because America believes in second chances, but it doesn't mean that second chance should not come without some hesitation on the part of the NFL.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)