November 29, 2010 by Jonathan Lowe • Print Story •
The Thanksgiving weekend has now come and gone, and, for one, I certainly am grateful for the chance to express my opinion to be read by thousands ... um, hundreds ... okay, a couple of people. That's why I'm going to veer this column to two different areas. The first deals with a fact of sporing life that has reared its head yet again.
For all that has occurred this season around college football, the major players in the hunt for the BCS championship have all had something go in their favor. No matter how large the student body, everyone had something put in place to keep them alive to this point. So to those left after Saturday's leftovers, what are they thankful for?
Pac-10 Champion Oregon — Cal Offense and Giorgio Tavecchio
The Ducks have speed for days, and that's been too much to overcome for their foes in the Pac-10. The offense is one of the most potent in the nation, and their defense seems to stiffen more as the game goes on. However, Cal found something out. The Bears were undefeated at home going into its showdown two weeks ago, but that didn't make up for the fact that they were 5-5.
Somehow, though, Cal held Oregon to 15 points. They only allowed one offensive touchdown. And for all that ... the Bear offense couldn't take advantage. On the second play of the fourth quarter, Tavecchio lined up for a 24-yard field goal. He made it. But ... there was an inexplicable illegal motion penalty. Tavecchio missed the ensuing 29-yard attempt, and, three drives later, the Ducks ran the final 9:25 off the clock. I'm not saying that Oregon would have ultimately lost had they gone down 16-15, but it would have been interesting to find out how they played under extreme pressure.
SEC West Division Champ Auburn — Lightning in a Tank
No matter what comes to light surrounding the Tigers' quarterback, Cam Newton has been this year's Tim Tebow. The team's uncanny ability to come back from several deficits (including Friday's 24-point difference against Alabama) has been solely based on the play of Newton. Although this may come back to bite the program he plays for later on, he has been close to unstoppable in the present time. South Carolina gets another shot at him this coming Saturday. But hell, the way things go in this sport, who's to say the Tigers don't get their shot at the crown with a loss.
Mountain West Champion TCU — Nevada
What Boise State loses, the Horned Frogs gain. Over the last two seasons, the resurgent Dallas-based program has been one of the most consistent in the country (along with said Broncos). It appeared, though, as if a Boise win would have put the Smurf Turf Boys slightly ahead in the battle of "first team out." Now, the Frogs are clearly in that position. If something were to happen to Auburn or Oregon, Andy Dalton and his crew might just get their chance on the biggest stage.
Pac-10 BCS contender Stanford — A Lucky QB
The Cardinal were a team on the rise last season, but the loss of all-everything running back Toby Gerhart made some wonder if there would be a slight drop-off. However, that just brought out the skills of an all-everything quarterback in Andrew Luck. His stats (2,746 yds, 24 TD, 7 INT, 70.2 comp. %) have kept him in the minds of some of the Heisman voters that hailed him in August.
Big Ten Co-Champs Wisconsin and Ohio State — University of Iowa
Both teams had to visit Iowa City for their showdown with the Hawkeyes this season. Both teams won by very slim margins (the Badgers by 1 and the Buckeyes by 3) on short runs with under two minutes left in the game. Because of this, both teams ended up with identical records. But for this co-champ thing to work, both squads needed one more thing from the Hawkeyes.
They got it when the Black and Gold trounced Michigan State on the Spartans trip to Kinnick Stadium. Not only did this keep Sparty from running through an unblemished season, but it knocked them far enough down the totem pole that they will certainly end up the third wheel in this 11-1 (7-1) trio. Now, with Saturday's results, it appears Bucky will by Rosy and Buckeyes will fill another one of the BCS bowls. Michigan State? I've heard Orlando is lovely this time of year.
Big 12 Co-South Division Champ Oklahoma — Revisionist History
Saturday night, the Sooners continued their dominant ways over Oklahoma State, basically denying the Cowboys a shot at their first Big 12 Championship Game appearance. It also set up a three-way tie between OU, OSU, and blazing-hot Texas A&M. Do you guys remember when the last three-way divisional tie was? Try the Big 12 South, circa 2008.
That year, OU benefited from Texas' last-second loss to Texas Tech, which ended up creating the logjam between the Sooner, Longhorns, and Red Raiders. That year, Texas beat Oklahoma in the Red River Rivalry contest. However, it was early enough for Boomer Sooner to recover.
This year, Texas A&M beats Oklahoma three weeks ago, but it was early enough for them to recover since Oklahoma State started a stretch (on Sept. 30th) that pushed the Aggies under the radar. In the end, it appears that the team that vanquished Oklahoma dreams of sneaking into the Championship Game won't get the chance to realize any BCS dreams of their own.
For teams such as Boise State, LSU, and Oklahoma State, their offerings of thanks were all rebuffed this weekend, even though all will have another game to prepare for. Now, I'm going to invoke the intro to the column, because it's time to give up the feeling of graciousness for a bit.
As pretty much anybody that follows college football knows by now, Ohio State President E. Gordon Gee talked about how teams such as Boise State and TCU don't deserve a shot at the national championship. If you missed the quote, here is a portion of it.
"I do know, having been both a Southeastern Conference president and a Big Ten president, that it's like murderer's row every week for these schools. We do not play the Little Sisters of the Poor. We play very fine schools on any given day.
"So I think until a university runs through that gauntlet that there's some reason to believe that they not be the best teams to (be) in the big ballgame."
First of all, I get it. The man has had the experience of working with these BCS power conferences for years now. I'm certain that most, if not all, of the Presidents of these Universities feel the same way. Personally, I'm a fan of Missouri and an alma mater of Iowa State, two examples (although not the best ones) of teams from a power conference.
However, when you start parsing schedules and pointing to the fact that a tradition or a name means practically everything, then you have to take a second to think. I understand that there may not be as many potholes to navigate in the WAC, or the MAC, or the Sun Belt. But how can you blame them for playing in their own conference, then signing up to supposedly get pummeled by your conference?
After last summer's carousel called Conference Realignment, it's apparent that geography doesn't particularly drive the bus anymore in this sport. In this process, schools sought out the chance to "relocate," but they couldn't just go out and claim that they were shifting to a new home.
Mr. Gee, do you feel these teams need a tougher schedule? Do you believe they wouldn't have an undefeated run through your conference foes? Prove it. Unless you can come up with a new configuration that excludes the lesser conferences, invite tell the Pac-10 to invite Boise State to join. Tell the SEC or Big 12 to sign TCU up. Hell, go tell Jim Delaney to open your conference's doors to Ohio or Temple. All this is doing is inviting these programs to the party and not letting them in the door. You don't think someone would eventually complain or smash a window to get in? Wouldn't you be insulted if you were in that position?
Do I expect you and your buddies to do this? No. That would mean giving up too much of the pie for you guys. But until you extend a solution, might I advise that you please refrain from talking out of both sides of your mouth, sir. It just isn't as well arranged as that bow tie of yours.
Maybe that's why I'm truly grateful for college basketball.
More NBA Sports Commentary11.29.10By Jonathan Lowe end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
Saturday, December 11, 2010
The Five Biggest Things Wrong in MMA
November 29, 2010 by Brad Oremland • Print Story •
I'm a huge NFL fan. Football isn't perfect. There are a lot of rules, strategies, and league policies I hope will change. Most of them probably won't, but some of them will. I'm also a big MMA fan. In this sport, though, I have less confidence that what needs to change will do so.
Organized professional football has been around for about 90 years. Over that time, the game has changed dramatically. Not just with regard to strategy and skill, but to the rules, which are dramatically different than they were in the sport's infancy. In fact, the rules are still changing today; almost every season, there's an important new rule or "point of emphasis."
Go back 20 years in the NFL, and we had six divisions instead of eight, 10 teams in the playoffs rather than 12, no such thing as illegal contact, far less stringent unnecessary roughness regulations, wedges permitted on kickoffs, the current replay and challenge system wasn't in place, so on and so on. The NFL recognizes that problems arise even in a healthy, popular sport, and when those problems arise the league takes action to address them. MMA needs to start doing the same thing.
:
1) Sub-standard judging.
2) Out-of-date rules, particularly those adapted from boxing.
3) Boring fights with little obvious action.
4) Poor officiating.
5) Match-making handcuffed by reluctance to cross-promote.
Sub-Standard Judging
There are three reasons we see immediate rematches in MMA: (1) freak stoppages due to injury, (2) upset of an outstanding champion, (3) bizarre decision by judges or referee. Last weekend at UFC 123, Quinton "Rampage" Jackson won a controversial split decision victory over Lyoto Machida. Rampage was visibly surprised by the verdict, and admitted in a post-fight interview that Machida probably deserved an immediate rematch. UFC commentator Joe Rogan enthusiastically agreed, as did the partisan Detroit crowd, which had supported Jackson throughout the evening.
Earlier on the card, Nik Lentz won a stunning decision over Tyson Griffin. I didn't see the fight, but I haven't seen anyone defend the decision, either. Nothing — nothing — will destroy a sport faster than lack of legitimacy.
View the Original article
I'm a huge NFL fan. Football isn't perfect. There are a lot of rules, strategies, and league policies I hope will change. Most of them probably won't, but some of them will. I'm also a big MMA fan. In this sport, though, I have less confidence that what needs to change will do so.
Organized professional football has been around for about 90 years. Over that time, the game has changed dramatically. Not just with regard to strategy and skill, but to the rules, which are dramatically different than they were in the sport's infancy. In fact, the rules are still changing today; almost every season, there's an important new rule or "point of emphasis."
Go back 20 years in the NFL, and we had six divisions instead of eight, 10 teams in the playoffs rather than 12, no such thing as illegal contact, far less stringent unnecessary roughness regulations, wedges permitted on kickoffs, the current replay and challenge system wasn't in place, so on and so on. The NFL recognizes that problems arise even in a healthy, popular sport, and when those problems arise the league takes action to address them. MMA needs to start doing the same thing.
:
1) Sub-standard judging.
2) Out-of-date rules, particularly those adapted from boxing.
3) Boring fights with little obvious action.
4) Poor officiating.
5) Match-making handcuffed by reluctance to cross-promote.
Sub-Standard Judging
There are three reasons we see immediate rematches in MMA: (1) freak stoppages due to injury, (2) upset of an outstanding champion, (3) bizarre decision by judges or referee. Last weekend at UFC 123, Quinton "Rampage" Jackson won a controversial split decision victory over Lyoto Machida. Rampage was visibly surprised by the verdict, and admitted in a post-fight interview that Machida probably deserved an immediate rematch. UFC commentator Joe Rogan enthusiastically agreed, as did the partisan Detroit crowd, which had supported Jackson throughout the evening.
Earlier on the card, Nik Lentz won a stunning decision over Tyson Griffin. I didn't see the fight, but I haven't seen anyone defend the decision, either. Nothing — nothing — will destroy a sport faster than lack of legitimacy.
View the Original article
Jean-Christophe Baheback Profile
Jean-Christophe Bahebeck is a huge prospect - France Football Federation website Paris Saint-Germain striker Jean-Christophe Bahebeck is one of the most sought-after young strikers in European football. View the Original article
Friday, December 10, 2010
A Beautiful Game Trapped in a Horrible System
November 26, 2010 by Joshua Duffy • Print Story •
I've got to admit I'm at a crossroads with college football right now.
To be frank, the sport is corrupt. This is not a new thing. Cecil Newton allegedly trying to pimp out his kid for 200 grand is only the latest example. Anybody who watched the ESPN documentary on former Oklahoma running back Marcus Dupree knows that the exploitation of young athletes has been a core cultural value in big time college football for a long, long time.
Really, this transcends college football, and even sports in general. Any time you have adults making money off of kids, you will have corrupt individuals serving their own financial interests. These kids aren't kids anymore to these people. They're raw materials to be used in the making of a billion-dollar product. They're a chance at some free cash. And anything else that gets in the way is ancillary to the goal of getting paid.
Compounding the issue is the complete hypocrisy surrounding the NCAA. While boosters and agents and runners flood the sport with cash, the kids themselves are upheld to impossibly high standards. Southern California running back Dillon Baxter was suspended last week for accepting a ride in a golf cart. Granted the school is on ultra high-alert for any signs of impropriety on the heels of the Reggie Bush fiasco, but when catching a ride in a golf cart constitutes an illegal extra benefit, the system is dumb.
Of course this is nothing new to any of you. We all know the issues. We all see the hypocrisy. And yet we tune in anyway. Why? Because the game is great. Just as there is no questioning the seedy underbelly to big time college sports, there is also no questioning the greatness of college football.
From spring ball through the bowl games, hundreds of thousands of fans cheer their guts out from the Deep South to the Great Lakes to the coasts of the Pacific. These people aren't stupid. They aren't just being tricked by a fancy media campaign to dig into their wallets. College football is as much a fabric of the American culture as baseball, and even more so depending on geography. And it's great. It is truly great.
And so this is where my crossroads comes in. I am disgusted by the exploitation that goes on in big time football. Really, it's sickening the way these adults take advantage of kids who have no clue what's going on. These grown men and women don't give a damn about the kids. They just want to serve their own interests, whether it's school prestige for the boosters, a new contract for the coach, a free car for a friend or cold hard cash for the uncle "with influence." It's grotesque, and it makes me want to turn away and never look back.
At the same time, I have to keep reminding myself that the stories we hear are such a minor part of the actual college football landscape. We have a tendency in today's media culture to take an anecdotal story and blow it up into a national trend. Now the anecdotes are adding up in big time college football. Something is definitely rotten. But that doesn't devalue all of college football.
When Army and Navy kick off on December 11, money will have nothing to do with anything. It will be just a bunch of kids playing for their school, their legacy and, most importantly, their teammates. It will be the same all over the country. Most of these kids didn't get offered a nickel beyond scholarship, room and board to go their schools, and many of them not even that. And most of them will never play a down of professional football. Their college careers exist solely for the experience of strapping on the pads, lining up with their teammates and seeing what they can do.
And that's the beauty of sports. When the kids get on the field, everything else disappears. Cam Newton may still be embroiled in the middle of a nasty controversy he likely had nothing to do with creating, but when Auburn faces Alabama on Friday, it will just be 22 kids on the field at a time, fighting for one another. And no matter how nasty the rest of the world gets, the purity of the game can never be truly tarnished.
And so like most of you, I'll continue to hold my nose and tune in. I may hate how college football is run. I may hate the greedy vultures who line their pockets at the expense of mostly poor unsuspecting kids. But I love the game. And on this Thanksgiving week, I'm grateful that love endures.
More NBA Sports Commentary11.26.10By Joshua Duffy end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
I've got to admit I'm at a crossroads with college football right now.
To be frank, the sport is corrupt. This is not a new thing. Cecil Newton allegedly trying to pimp out his kid for 200 grand is only the latest example. Anybody who watched the ESPN documentary on former Oklahoma running back Marcus Dupree knows that the exploitation of young athletes has been a core cultural value in big time college football for a long, long time.
Really, this transcends college football, and even sports in general. Any time you have adults making money off of kids, you will have corrupt individuals serving their own financial interests. These kids aren't kids anymore to these people. They're raw materials to be used in the making of a billion-dollar product. They're a chance at some free cash. And anything else that gets in the way is ancillary to the goal of getting paid.
Compounding the issue is the complete hypocrisy surrounding the NCAA. While boosters and agents and runners flood the sport with cash, the kids themselves are upheld to impossibly high standards. Southern California running back Dillon Baxter was suspended last week for accepting a ride in a golf cart. Granted the school is on ultra high-alert for any signs of impropriety on the heels of the Reggie Bush fiasco, but when catching a ride in a golf cart constitutes an illegal extra benefit, the system is dumb.
Of course this is nothing new to any of you. We all know the issues. We all see the hypocrisy. And yet we tune in anyway. Why? Because the game is great. Just as there is no questioning the seedy underbelly to big time college sports, there is also no questioning the greatness of college football.
From spring ball through the bowl games, hundreds of thousands of fans cheer their guts out from the Deep South to the Great Lakes to the coasts of the Pacific. These people aren't stupid. They aren't just being tricked by a fancy media campaign to dig into their wallets. College football is as much a fabric of the American culture as baseball, and even more so depending on geography. And it's great. It is truly great.
And so this is where my crossroads comes in. I am disgusted by the exploitation that goes on in big time football. Really, it's sickening the way these adults take advantage of kids who have no clue what's going on. These grown men and women don't give a damn about the kids. They just want to serve their own interests, whether it's school prestige for the boosters, a new contract for the coach, a free car for a friend or cold hard cash for the uncle "with influence." It's grotesque, and it makes me want to turn away and never look back.
At the same time, I have to keep reminding myself that the stories we hear are such a minor part of the actual college football landscape. We have a tendency in today's media culture to take an anecdotal story and blow it up into a national trend. Now the anecdotes are adding up in big time college football. Something is definitely rotten. But that doesn't devalue all of college football.
When Army and Navy kick off on December 11, money will have nothing to do with anything. It will be just a bunch of kids playing for their school, their legacy and, most importantly, their teammates. It will be the same all over the country. Most of these kids didn't get offered a nickel beyond scholarship, room and board to go their schools, and many of them not even that. And most of them will never play a down of professional football. Their college careers exist solely for the experience of strapping on the pads, lining up with their teammates and seeing what they can do.
And that's the beauty of sports. When the kids get on the field, everything else disappears. Cam Newton may still be embroiled in the middle of a nasty controversy he likely had nothing to do with creating, but when Auburn faces Alabama on Friday, it will just be 22 kids on the field at a time, fighting for one another. And no matter how nasty the rest of the world gets, the purity of the game can never be truly tarnished.
And so like most of you, I'll continue to hold my nose and tune in. I may hate how college football is run. I may hate the greedy vultures who line their pockets at the expense of mostly poor unsuspecting kids. But I love the game. And on this Thanksgiving week, I'm grateful that love endures.
More NBA Sports Commentary11.26.10By Joshua Duffy end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
Parker Needs More Style When He Cheats
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 36
November 24, 2010 by Jeffrey Boswell • Print Story •
Note: The quotes in this article are fictional.
1. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson finished second at Homestead, easily overcoming Denny Hamlin's 15-point lead entering the race, to capture his fifth-straight Sprint Cup title. Johnson handily outdistanced Hamlin, who finish 14th, by 39 points, and Kevin Harvick, who finished third, by 41.
"It's 'one for the middle finger,'" Johnson said, "as opposed to Kyle Busch's '25,000 for the middle finger.'
But my fifth title is one I'll certainly remember, as well as one that others will find it hard to forget. Five championships is a lot, but I want to remain humble, as well as hungry. Therefore, when people ask me how many Cups I've won, I'll simply say a 'handful.'"
2. Denny Hamlin — Hamlin found trouble early at Homestead, making contact with Greg Biffle on lap 23 and sliding through the infield grass. With his splitter damaged, Hamlin was forced to make numerous pit stops for repairs, and never completely recovered. He finished 14th, and ended the season second in the points, 39 behind Jimmie Johnson.
"I wasn't the only Joe Gibbs driver to slide through the infield grass," Hamlin said, "and see his hopes go up in flames. But there's always next year. Unfortunately, Johnson says the same thing, and as we know, with five titles under his belt, he's always next year."
3. Kevin Harvick — Harvick appeared to have the race lead after pit stops during a lap 187 caution, but NASCAR officials nabbed him for speeding on the entry to pit road. He was sent to the back of the field, but quickly made his way back to the front. However, with Jimmie Johnson's second-place finish, Harvick's third was little to no consolation. Harvick ended the year third in the points, 41 out of first.
"I sent one Joe Gibbs driver and one Kasey Kahne crewman to the infield care center," Harvick said, "and barely turned heads. Yet I'm penalized for exceeding a snail's pace entering the pits. Sounds like I wasn't the only one who got screwed."
4. Carl Edwards — Edwards won the Ford 400 at Homestead, dominating with 190 laps lead on the way to his second straight win. He finished fourth in the Sprint Cup point standings, 229 behind Jimmie Johnson.
"That's what I call ending the season on a high note," Edwards said. "The high note, that is, of the fat lady singing, because as soon as I crossed the line, it was 'over' for everyone but Jimmie Johnson. Now, I hesitate to call myself the favorite to challenge Johnson for next year's Cup. That was the consensus in 2008, when I won nine races and was anointed the next Cup champion. I followed that with a winless 2009 with Aflac as my primary sponsor. Maybe the duck on the hood of my car explains the egg laying."
5. Matt Kenseth — Kenseth finished ninth in the Ford 400, his 15th top-10 result of the year. He finished fifth in the point standings, 328 behind Jimmie Johnson.
"Congratulations to Johnson," Kenseth said. "The 'Drive For Five' is complete. And for all those conspiracy theorists who think NASCAR favoritism helped Johnson to the Cup title, they'll be saddened to know that Johnson's quest in 2011 has unofficially been titled 'The Fix For Six.'"
6. Greg Biffle — Biffle finished 10th at Homestead, posting his 19th top-10 finish of the year. Biffle and Denny Hamlin made contact on lap 23, sending Hamlin's No. 11 FedEx Toyota spinning through the infield grass.
"I vowed at the beginning of the year that I would have an impact in the Chase," Biffle said. "Well, Jimmie Johnson isn't the only one who can say 'mission accomplished.'"
7. Kyle Busch — Busch, seeking his second consecutive weekend sweep of winning all three series races, came up short at Homestead, crashing when Kevin Harvick bumped him into the wall on lap 243. Busch's No. 18 M&Ms Toyota burst into flames, and Busch directed some heated words towards Harvick afterwards.
"Harvick is a reckless buffoon," Busch said. "He's a menace to notoriety. We all know M&Ms melt in your mouth, but it's obvious he wanted to find out if Kyle Busch melts in the M&M's car. I don't. I just boil."
8. Tony Stewart — Stewart scored his first top-10 since winning at California on October 10th with an eighth in the Ford 400. He improved two places in the points to seventh, and completes the season a distant 401 behind Johnson.
"Congratulations to Jimmie Johnson," Stewart said. "He may deserve a hand, but he'll probably need two to indicate Cup titles 6 through 10."
9. Jeff Gordon — Gordon blew his engine on lap 199, ending a disappointing 2010 season with even more disappointment. He was winless this year, his second winless season in the last three, and tumbled three places in the points to ninth.
"Last week," said Gordon, "my attack on Jeff Burton showed just one of the many ways I can 'lose it.' This week, I lost an engine, and another race. But there's a silver lining to Jimmie Johnson's fifth Sprint Cup title. His championship allowed me to reach a milestone, as now I've become the only active four-time Cup champion. Thanks, Jimmie!"
10. Clint Bowyer — Bowyer came home 12th at Homestead, finishing the season tenth in the Sprint Cup point standings, 467 out of first.
"I can certainly share in the disappointment that my teammate Kevin Harvick must be feeling," said Bowyer. "NASCAR obviously has it out for Richard Childress Racing. First, I win in New Hampshire, and the next thing you know, my car has failed inspection. At Homestead, Harvick takes the lead, and boom! Here comes a penalty for speeding. Jimmie Johnson may not, but at least NASCAR recognizes us as a threat to his reign."
More NBA Sports Commentary11.24.10By Jeffrey Boswell end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
Note: The quotes in this article are fictional.
1. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson finished second at Homestead, easily overcoming Denny Hamlin's 15-point lead entering the race, to capture his fifth-straight Sprint Cup title. Johnson handily outdistanced Hamlin, who finish 14th, by 39 points, and Kevin Harvick, who finished third, by 41.
"It's 'one for the middle finger,'" Johnson said, "as opposed to Kyle Busch's '25,000 for the middle finger.'
But my fifth title is one I'll certainly remember, as well as one that others will find it hard to forget. Five championships is a lot, but I want to remain humble, as well as hungry. Therefore, when people ask me how many Cups I've won, I'll simply say a 'handful.'"
2. Denny Hamlin — Hamlin found trouble early at Homestead, making contact with Greg Biffle on lap 23 and sliding through the infield grass. With his splitter damaged, Hamlin was forced to make numerous pit stops for repairs, and never completely recovered. He finished 14th, and ended the season second in the points, 39 behind Jimmie Johnson.
"I wasn't the only Joe Gibbs driver to slide through the infield grass," Hamlin said, "and see his hopes go up in flames. But there's always next year. Unfortunately, Johnson says the same thing, and as we know, with five titles under his belt, he's always next year."
3. Kevin Harvick — Harvick appeared to have the race lead after pit stops during a lap 187 caution, but NASCAR officials nabbed him for speeding on the entry to pit road. He was sent to the back of the field, but quickly made his way back to the front. However, with Jimmie Johnson's second-place finish, Harvick's third was little to no consolation. Harvick ended the year third in the points, 41 out of first.
"I sent one Joe Gibbs driver and one Kasey Kahne crewman to the infield care center," Harvick said, "and barely turned heads. Yet I'm penalized for exceeding a snail's pace entering the pits. Sounds like I wasn't the only one who got screwed."
4. Carl Edwards — Edwards won the Ford 400 at Homestead, dominating with 190 laps lead on the way to his second straight win. He finished fourth in the Sprint Cup point standings, 229 behind Jimmie Johnson.
"That's what I call ending the season on a high note," Edwards said. "The high note, that is, of the fat lady singing, because as soon as I crossed the line, it was 'over' for everyone but Jimmie Johnson. Now, I hesitate to call myself the favorite to challenge Johnson for next year's Cup. That was the consensus in 2008, when I won nine races and was anointed the next Cup champion. I followed that with a winless 2009 with Aflac as my primary sponsor. Maybe the duck on the hood of my car explains the egg laying."
5. Matt Kenseth — Kenseth finished ninth in the Ford 400, his 15th top-10 result of the year. He finished fifth in the point standings, 328 behind Jimmie Johnson.
"Congratulations to Johnson," Kenseth said. "The 'Drive For Five' is complete. And for all those conspiracy theorists who think NASCAR favoritism helped Johnson to the Cup title, they'll be saddened to know that Johnson's quest in 2011 has unofficially been titled 'The Fix For Six.'"
6. Greg Biffle — Biffle finished 10th at Homestead, posting his 19th top-10 finish of the year. Biffle and Denny Hamlin made contact on lap 23, sending Hamlin's No. 11 FedEx Toyota spinning through the infield grass.
"I vowed at the beginning of the year that I would have an impact in the Chase," Biffle said. "Well, Jimmie Johnson isn't the only one who can say 'mission accomplished.'"
7. Kyle Busch — Busch, seeking his second consecutive weekend sweep of winning all three series races, came up short at Homestead, crashing when Kevin Harvick bumped him into the wall on lap 243. Busch's No. 18 M&Ms Toyota burst into flames, and Busch directed some heated words towards Harvick afterwards.
"Harvick is a reckless buffoon," Busch said. "He's a menace to notoriety. We all know M&Ms melt in your mouth, but it's obvious he wanted to find out if Kyle Busch melts in the M&M's car. I don't. I just boil."
8. Tony Stewart — Stewart scored his first top-10 since winning at California on October 10th with an eighth in the Ford 400. He improved two places in the points to seventh, and completes the season a distant 401 behind Johnson.
"Congratulations to Jimmie Johnson," Stewart said. "He may deserve a hand, but he'll probably need two to indicate Cup titles 6 through 10."
9. Jeff Gordon — Gordon blew his engine on lap 199, ending a disappointing 2010 season with even more disappointment. He was winless this year, his second winless season in the last three, and tumbled three places in the points to ninth.
"Last week," said Gordon, "my attack on Jeff Burton showed just one of the many ways I can 'lose it.' This week, I lost an engine, and another race. But there's a silver lining to Jimmie Johnson's fifth Sprint Cup title. His championship allowed me to reach a milestone, as now I've become the only active four-time Cup champion. Thanks, Jimmie!"
10. Clint Bowyer — Bowyer came home 12th at Homestead, finishing the season tenth in the Sprint Cup point standings, 467 out of first.
"I can certainly share in the disappointment that my teammate Kevin Harvick must be feeling," said Bowyer. "NASCAR obviously has it out for Richard Childress Racing. First, I win in New Hampshire, and the next thing you know, my car has failed inspection. At Homestead, Harvick takes the lead, and boom! Here comes a penalty for speeding. Jimmie Johnson may not, but at least NASCAR recognizes us as a threat to his reign."
More NBA Sports Commentary11.24.10By Jeffrey Boswell end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
NFL Weekly Predictions: Thanksgiving Games
7)
Thanksgiving in Detroit gets underway when the 8-2 Patriots pay a visit to Ford Field to face the 2-8 Lions, who have lost three straight and haven't won on Thanksgiving since 2003. Last week, Brady and the Patriots out-dueled Peyton Manning and the Colts, 31-28, and Brady tied Brett Favre's NFL record of most consecutive home starts won by a starting quarterback, at 25.
"I have a lot for which to be thankful," Brady said. "My health, my hair, impeccable jaw lines, domineering supermodels, frumpily-dressed coaches, ambiguous NFL rules defining pass incompletions, unheralded white teammates, timely Manning interceptions, and Thanksgiving games in Detroit. I've been known to benefit from the 'Tuck Rule'; on Thursday, I plan to benefit from the 'Turk Rule,' which says Detroit can't win on Thanksgiving.
Shaun Hill will start again for the Lions, again filling in for injured quarterback Matthew Stafford, whose shoulder injuries have shelved him for seven games this year.
"Luckily," said Jim Schwartz, "Stafford won't need surgery on his shoulder. Matthew's had a ton of MRIs of his shoulder this season, making it the most photographed joint in the NFC North, well ahead of Brett Favre's.
"But does it really matter who's throwing, as long as Calvin Johnson's catching? The simplest play in our playbook is the one in which our quarterback throws the ball up for grabs in the direction of Johnson. We call it the 'Calvin and Lobs.'"
Schwartz is right. It doesn't matter who's throwing for the Lions, particularly when Brady is throwing for the Patriots, and psychotically raging when his teammates don't perform to his expectations. The Lions take a quick 7-0 lead, but the Pats, behind 341 yards passing and 3 touchdowns from Brady, finish off the Lions.
New England wins, 38-21.
New Orleans
View the Original article
Thanksgiving in Detroit gets underway when the 8-2 Patriots pay a visit to Ford Field to face the 2-8 Lions, who have lost three straight and haven't won on Thanksgiving since 2003. Last week, Brady and the Patriots out-dueled Peyton Manning and the Colts, 31-28, and Brady tied Brett Favre's NFL record of most consecutive home starts won by a starting quarterback, at 25.
"I have a lot for which to be thankful," Brady said. "My health, my hair, impeccable jaw lines, domineering supermodels, frumpily-dressed coaches, ambiguous NFL rules defining pass incompletions, unheralded white teammates, timely Manning interceptions, and Thanksgiving games in Detroit. I've been known to benefit from the 'Tuck Rule'; on Thursday, I plan to benefit from the 'Turk Rule,' which says Detroit can't win on Thanksgiving.
Shaun Hill will start again for the Lions, again filling in for injured quarterback Matthew Stafford, whose shoulder injuries have shelved him for seven games this year.
"Luckily," said Jim Schwartz, "Stafford won't need surgery on his shoulder. Matthew's had a ton of MRIs of his shoulder this season, making it the most photographed joint in the NFC North, well ahead of Brett Favre's.
"But does it really matter who's throwing, as long as Calvin Johnson's catching? The simplest play in our playbook is the one in which our quarterback throws the ball up for grabs in the direction of Johnson. We call it the 'Calvin and Lobs.'"
Schwartz is right. It doesn't matter who's throwing for the Lions, particularly when Brady is throwing for the Patriots, and psychotically raging when his teammates don't perform to his expectations. The Lions take a quick 7-0 lead, but the Pats, behind 341 yards passing and 3 touchdowns from Brady, finish off the Lions.
New England wins, 38-21.
New Orleans
View the Original article
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
NFL Weekly Predictions: Week 12
NY Giants (-9)
Tom Coughlin and the Giants face the Jaguars, a team Coughlin coached from 1995-2002, with the hopes of ending a two game skid in which the G-Men have lost divisional games to the Cowboys and Eagles. Four Eli Manning turnovers doomed the Giants in last week's 27-17 loss in Philadelphia, as New York fell out of a tie for the division lead.
"I still question whether the ground can cause a fumble," said Coughlin. "But there's no question whether Eli can cause a turnover. Usually, when a quarterback 'takes a dive,' it benefits the Giants. Just ask Michael Strahan."
Jacksonville nipped the Browns 24-20 last week, buoyed by a 75-yard screen pass to Maurice Jones-Drew that set up Jones-Drew's game-winning 1-yard TD run. The Jags have won three straight, are tied with the Colts for the AFC South lead, and hold the tiebreaker over Indy.
"If I say 'Hail Mary' one more time," Jack Del Rio said, "I'll be legally obligated to sign the Virgin Mary to a contract. It seems we've put the fear of God into our opponents."
Hakeem Nicks is out for three weeks with a leg injury, giving Manning one less receiver to target, and yet another reason to throw interceptions. But this time, Manning limits his turnovers and employs a new trick he learned from Derek Jeter, the feet-first slide, and the Giants end their skid.
New York wins, 27-21.
Tennessee
View the Original article
Tom Coughlin and the Giants face the Jaguars, a team Coughlin coached from 1995-2002, with the hopes of ending a two game skid in which the G-Men have lost divisional games to the Cowboys and Eagles. Four Eli Manning turnovers doomed the Giants in last week's 27-17 loss in Philadelphia, as New York fell out of a tie for the division lead.
"I still question whether the ground can cause a fumble," said Coughlin. "But there's no question whether Eli can cause a turnover. Usually, when a quarterback 'takes a dive,' it benefits the Giants. Just ask Michael Strahan."
Jacksonville nipped the Browns 24-20 last week, buoyed by a 75-yard screen pass to Maurice Jones-Drew that set up Jones-Drew's game-winning 1-yard TD run. The Jags have won three straight, are tied with the Colts for the AFC South lead, and hold the tiebreaker over Indy.
"If I say 'Hail Mary' one more time," Jack Del Rio said, "I'll be legally obligated to sign the Virgin Mary to a contract. It seems we've put the fear of God into our opponents."
Hakeem Nicks is out for three weeks with a leg injury, giving Manning one less receiver to target, and yet another reason to throw interceptions. But this time, Manning limits his turnovers and employs a new trick he learned from Derek Jeter, the feet-first slide, and the Giants end their skid.
New York wins, 27-21.
Tennessee
View the Original article
NFL Week 11 Power Rankings
Many of us travel during the holidays, and U.S. air travel has recently become incredibly invasive. Security need not and should not mean degrading invasions of privacy. Learn more at FlyWithDignity.org and WeWontFly.com, and ask your representative to co-sponsor HR 6416: The American Traveler Dignity Act. You can also sign a petition to investigate the TSA. Some links contain images of the TSA's new full-body scans, which may be NSFW.
View the Original article
View the Original article
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
The NCAA Needs to Get it Right
For the college fans having opinions regarding universities and players connected to illegal benefits, the NCAA showed there’s a double standard in its investigations.
The decision to rule Auburn QB Cameron Newton eligible raises many eyebrows on the conduct of universities in regards to recruiting. It's fair to say the public needs a better understanding what the punishments are if any kid takes money. The end result usually is a suspension and expulsion from the team.
There are many questions to be answered when evidence showed that Cecil Newton, Cameron’s father, took money for his son’s commitment to Auburn. So why did the NCAA rule him eligible for this Saturdays SEC Championship game?
The conspiracy theories have already begun from chat rooms to college football message boards.
Would the NCAA made the same decision if Auburn was 9-2 or 8-3?
Is the Southern Eastern Conference scared in losing a slot in the BCS title game where the two teams would reportedly receive about $16-$18 million each from the sponsors? If Cam Newton was ruled ineligible for Saturday game, the Tigers would not beat the Gamecocks.
Read on South Carolina vs. Auburn Football, Week 4Auburn vs. Mississippi State 2010 Football PreviewConference Expansion Could Change College Football Forever
Auburn played South Carolina on Sept. 25th where they needed Newton’s heroics for a 35-27 victory. It’s hard to imagine the Tigers beating the same opponent twice if its best player wasn’t there.
Make any argument you want, but the ruling doesn't say much for the NCAA and its plans for disciplinary action.
Former U.S.C. running back Reggie Bush took money and benefits from the university during the 2004-2005 seasons. The Trojans punishment was a two-year ban on post-season play and loses of scholarships. The ultimate punishment was Bush giving back his Heisman Trophy on Sept. 14th.
When word leaked out about Cecil Newton taking $180,000 for his son’s commitment to Auburn, people were crawling out of the woodwork when that story broke. Everyday sources were saying they received text messages or written statements on what it would take for his son’s commitment. The evidence was overwhelming and took about five weeks to investigate. Were now expected to believe that Cam Newton had no idea what his father was doing according to the NCAA.
The NCAA sent a strong message during the USC investigation and lost all credibility with today’s ruling on Newton. They had a chance to crackdown what universities and players are doing regarding illegal benefits and blew it a major way.
Copyright Jonathan Cisowski. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication. Print Article
View the Original article
Once Upon a Time on Fast Courts
November 23, 2010 by Mert Ertunga • Print Story •
More than a week ago, the Paris ATP Masters Series tournament ended with Robin Soderling's victory, at the same time bringing the regular tournament calendar of the ATP Tour to a close. It was a fantastic tournament that often lacked thrills in the past years due to its date in the calendar; it is the last tournament of the year before the ATP World Tour Finals, going on this week in London. Some players are tired and exit early, some simply choose not to play it by declaring injury, having guaranteed their spot in the rankings and in London.
This time around, everyone played it except Rafael Nadal, and they gave their best effort, resulting in some mind-blowing matches, including two semifinals that got as close as it gets to a "Super Saturday" version of a non-slam tournament. Gaël Monfils defeated Roger Federer after saving five match-points in a match that saw all three sets go to tiebreakers. In the other semifinals, Robin Soderling defeated in a similar fashion the 30-year-old serve-and-volleyer Michael Llodra in a third set tiebreaker after having saved himself three match-points.
It was a strange Saturday as the Federer/Monfils match featured an overwhelming amount of aces and quick winners for a match that featured two players who usually prefer to win their points from the baseline by setting up the point. The Soderling/Llodra match, on the other hand, featured one big-hitter and a natural serve-and-volleyer who is having his best year on the tour at his late age. One would think that it will be a match of few good shots, short rallies, and not much shot-making. They were wrong. The quality kept climbing throughout the match, climaxing in the final set; both players hit one amazing winner after the other and they even had some breath-taking rallies from the baseline.
In the meantime, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray found themselves left behind. More importantly, the tournament left everyone to wonder if fast courts, a disappearing commodity in tennis, were indeed needed more in the sport. If anything at all, the Paris tournament showed that fast courts do not necessarily result in boring matches and lack of spectacular points. It turned out to be one of the most entertaining tournaments of the year.
Djokovic was the first one to comment on the fast courts at Palais Omnisport de Bercy that Murray later called the fastest that he had ever played on "since joining the ATP Tour." Djokovic admitted that it was refreshing to play on fast courts for a change because it forced the players to go the net more. Case in point: Andy Murray switched to serve-and-volley after falling behind against David Nalbandian, only to come back and win in three sets. He tried the same tactic against Monfils in the quarters after losing the first set. He did come back to tie at one set all, but Monfils proved too tough in the third set. Roger Federer mixed in plenty of serve-and-volley throughout his matches. Even Soderling, who is rarely seen at the net, saved a crucial match point against Llodra by coming to the net, before walking out with a victory.
And then there was Michael Llodra. In a year in which Taylor Dent announced his retirement, Llodra remains perhaps the sole player who is successful on the ATP Tour using a pure serve-and-volley style game. Yet despite being a doubles specialist, he has had a very successful season in singles, climbing to a career-high number 23 on the ATP ranking, playing a major role in France reaching the Davis Cup finals, and defeating Nikolay Davydenko and Djokovic before succumbing to Soderling in Paris to end his great season. Finally, his style of play offered plenty of spectacular points and remarkable athleticism.
So what is it? Is the plug being pulled too soon on fast courts? This is assuming that it is not already pulled (emphasizing the past tense) and that is apparently saying too much. We all know about the much-slower courts at Wimbledon. If you were not aware of it, watch how Roger Federer adjusted his style of playing on the grass courts of Wimbledon over the years. Look at his matches in his first years at Wimbledon versus how he stays back in the later years. And this week in London, Rafa commented already on the courts at London, saying that they play a bit slower this year.
Paris tournament showed that the players themselves would perhaps agree that the plug is effectively being pulled too soon. Djokovic was not the only one finding himself longing for faster courts. Murray added to his above comments that he wished there was more variety of surfaces, and that he likes "the different surfaces and what they bring." Andy Roddick did not stay quite either; with his usual dry humor, he added that it has become "monotonous" and that "it feels like there is a slow court available nine months of the year." Federer also commented on the faster surface, reminiscing that he remembered when Pete Sampras, Goran Ivanisevic, and Cedric Pioline were playing like that on the circuit.
Is this enough to dissipate the precarious image that fast courts bring boring tennis to the table? It is difficult to say, but when some of the top players comment negatively on the slow demise of fast courts within the circuit, when the tournament with the fastest court on the calendar (according to Murray) offers so many thrilling matches coupled with high quality tennis, and finally, when a pure serve-and-volleyer finds the opportunity to go toe-to-toe with the top talents on the Tour, one is left to wonder if that image is indeed nothing but imagination running astray.
More NBA Sports Commentary11.23.10By Mert Ertunga end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
More than a week ago, the Paris ATP Masters Series tournament ended with Robin Soderling's victory, at the same time bringing the regular tournament calendar of the ATP Tour to a close. It was a fantastic tournament that often lacked thrills in the past years due to its date in the calendar; it is the last tournament of the year before the ATP World Tour Finals, going on this week in London. Some players are tired and exit early, some simply choose not to play it by declaring injury, having guaranteed their spot in the rankings and in London.
This time around, everyone played it except Rafael Nadal, and they gave their best effort, resulting in some mind-blowing matches, including two semifinals that got as close as it gets to a "Super Saturday" version of a non-slam tournament. Gaël Monfils defeated Roger Federer after saving five match-points in a match that saw all three sets go to tiebreakers. In the other semifinals, Robin Soderling defeated in a similar fashion the 30-year-old serve-and-volleyer Michael Llodra in a third set tiebreaker after having saved himself three match-points.
It was a strange Saturday as the Federer/Monfils match featured an overwhelming amount of aces and quick winners for a match that featured two players who usually prefer to win their points from the baseline by setting up the point. The Soderling/Llodra match, on the other hand, featured one big-hitter and a natural serve-and-volleyer who is having his best year on the tour at his late age. One would think that it will be a match of few good shots, short rallies, and not much shot-making. They were wrong. The quality kept climbing throughout the match, climaxing in the final set; both players hit one amazing winner after the other and they even had some breath-taking rallies from the baseline.
In the meantime, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray found themselves left behind. More importantly, the tournament left everyone to wonder if fast courts, a disappearing commodity in tennis, were indeed needed more in the sport. If anything at all, the Paris tournament showed that fast courts do not necessarily result in boring matches and lack of spectacular points. It turned out to be one of the most entertaining tournaments of the year.
Djokovic was the first one to comment on the fast courts at Palais Omnisport de Bercy that Murray later called the fastest that he had ever played on "since joining the ATP Tour." Djokovic admitted that it was refreshing to play on fast courts for a change because it forced the players to go the net more. Case in point: Andy Murray switched to serve-and-volley after falling behind against David Nalbandian, only to come back and win in three sets. He tried the same tactic against Monfils in the quarters after losing the first set. He did come back to tie at one set all, but Monfils proved too tough in the third set. Roger Federer mixed in plenty of serve-and-volley throughout his matches. Even Soderling, who is rarely seen at the net, saved a crucial match point against Llodra by coming to the net, before walking out with a victory.
And then there was Michael Llodra. In a year in which Taylor Dent announced his retirement, Llodra remains perhaps the sole player who is successful on the ATP Tour using a pure serve-and-volley style game. Yet despite being a doubles specialist, he has had a very successful season in singles, climbing to a career-high number 23 on the ATP ranking, playing a major role in France reaching the Davis Cup finals, and defeating Nikolay Davydenko and Djokovic before succumbing to Soderling in Paris to end his great season. Finally, his style of play offered plenty of spectacular points and remarkable athleticism.
So what is it? Is the plug being pulled too soon on fast courts? This is assuming that it is not already pulled (emphasizing the past tense) and that is apparently saying too much. We all know about the much-slower courts at Wimbledon. If you were not aware of it, watch how Roger Federer adjusted his style of playing on the grass courts of Wimbledon over the years. Look at his matches in his first years at Wimbledon versus how he stays back in the later years. And this week in London, Rafa commented already on the courts at London, saying that they play a bit slower this year.
Paris tournament showed that the players themselves would perhaps agree that the plug is effectively being pulled too soon. Djokovic was not the only one finding himself longing for faster courts. Murray added to his above comments that he wished there was more variety of surfaces, and that he likes "the different surfaces and what they bring." Andy Roddick did not stay quite either; with his usual dry humor, he added that it has become "monotonous" and that "it feels like there is a slow court available nine months of the year." Federer also commented on the faster surface, reminiscing that he remembered when Pete Sampras, Goran Ivanisevic, and Cedric Pioline were playing like that on the circuit.
Is this enough to dissipate the precarious image that fast courts bring boring tennis to the table? It is difficult to say, but when some of the top players comment negatively on the slow demise of fast courts within the circuit, when the tournament with the fastest court on the calendar (according to Murray) offers so many thrilling matches coupled with high quality tennis, and finally, when a pure serve-and-volleyer finds the opportunity to go toe-to-toe with the top talents on the Tour, one is left to wonder if that image is indeed nothing but imagination running astray.
More NBA Sports Commentary11.23.10By Mert Ertunga end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
Monday, December 6, 2010
The Bane of Auto-Bids
Andrew Jones
This year has been quite an anomaly in college football. TCU and Boise State have been making noise for a few years and everybody seems to keep hoping that they'll finally make the coveted step into the National Championship Game.
Coming from what are considered the weaker conferences of the Mountain West and the WAC, these two teams' undefeated records never carry them very far on their own. They've done everything in their power to get more challenging games on the schedule and have succeeded to some extent, but the impressive, early non-conference wins lose their luster as the conference schedules begin.
Every week it seems TCU and Boise State win 50-something to less than 10. Are people bored with these blowouts? Do they find them continually unimpressive?
I think there has never been enough credit given to teams who make their first games of the season the most challenging. Instead of scheduling a game they are sure to win just so they can work some kinks out, TCU and Boise State both scheduled games against teams that entered the season ranked in the top 25.
Other than their opponents, Oregon State and Virginia Tech, how many other teams had this challenge? Not very many; LSU defeated North Carolina, who was ranked No. 18 at the time and fell off the map completely. That was the only other pairing of top 25 teams in Week 1. It's probably of little surprise that only four teams from the top 25 lost in Week 1, the fourth being Pittsburgh who lost to Utah, who has spent every week other than Week 1 unranked.
TCU is set. After defeated perennial cinderella sister Utah and surviving the scare of San Diego State in their last two games, the Horned Frogs need only to beat a dismal New Mexico team to be assured of a BCS bowl game.
Boise State doesn't have it so easy. They play at the No. 18 Nevada Wolf Pack this coming week and while a win might boost them over TCU in the BCS standings, a loss will most unfortunately mean they'll have no chance at a BCS bowl game and that is just plain sad.
Ohio State lost to Wisconsin. Wisconsin lost to Michigan State. Michigan State lost to Iowa and all of these teams have a legitimate shot at the Rose Bowl or another BCS bowl game, having one loss to a ranked opponent. Why would Boise State not receive consideration despite one loss?
The problem for Boise State and TCU, however, is not the Big Ten; it is the Big East. Come to think of it, the problem for the three one-loss Big Ten teams is the Big East, as well.
The Big East has no teams ranked in the top 25 in any ranking system. West Virginia boasts its best record at 7-3. It looks as though either West Virginia or Pittsburgh will end up representing the Big East in a BCS game against an opponent that will most likely destroy them.
I realized that it is possible in the Big East for a school to win the conference, but not be bowl eligible. They play seven conference games and five non-conference games with no conference championship game. Upon going 0-5 in non-conference games and 5-2 in conference games, a 5-7 team could feasibly win the Big East. What trumps what in this scenario, bowl eligibility or the automatic BCS bid for winning the conference? No information seems to be available on this scenario. If you find some, do enlighten me.
So who is going to make it into the BCS bowl games with one slot of what are supposed to be the top 10 teams in the country goes to the underachieving Big East.
Oregon still has to defeat No. 22 Arizona and Oregon State, neither of which will be cake walks, to attain its No. 1 status and enter into the National Championship Game.
Auburn has an even tougher road, playing at No. 11 Alabama and vs. No. 17 South Carolina at a neutral site.
The breakdown, I believe will be like so:
Pac-10 — Oregon and/or Stanford
Big Ten — Wisconsin and/or Ohio State or Michigan State
Big 12 — Oklahoma State or Oklahoma or Nebraska or Missouri
SEC — Auburn and/or LSU or South Carolina
ACC — Virginia Tech or Florida State or North Carolina State
Big East — West Virginia or Pittsburgh
Mountain West — TCU
WAC — Boise State
Decision makers are going to have a hell of a time deciding who is in and who is out. The Big Ten is already a debacle with three good one-loss teams and only two from a conference can go, so we're very likely looking at a one-loss power conference school that won't be in a BCS game. Reminds me of Missouri a few years back.
Not only that, if Oregon, Auburn TCU and Boise State all win out, we're not only face with one Big Ten one-loss team being left out, but potentially two.
The six conferences will have their automatic bids. TCU and Boise State will have the first at-large bids given to them, then there are only two spots left for four potential one-loss teams, Stanford, LSU, and the two Big Ten teams that didn't win the conference.
What a mess! In some years, one loss schools like Wisconsin, Stanford, LSU, Ohio State, or Michigan State would be considered for the National Championship Game, but this year, they'll be left out of the BCS system completely.
The automatic bid system needs to be reworked. I've pleaded for consistency for conference championship games in the past and it seems like the Pac-10 (soon to be 12) and the Big Ten (really 11, soon to be more) are heading in that direction, but the Big East is still a problem.
A team that wins its conference and has four losses is a team that doesn't necessarily deserve to be a team playing in one of the five premier bowl games.
I think there should be an immediate implementation of a clause that says, "Automatic Bid Conferences that cannot produce a team with three or fewer losses will lose their automatic bid." Perhaps that number should even be changed to two.
More NBA Sports Commentary11.22.10By Andrew Jones end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
This year has been quite an anomaly in college football. TCU and Boise State have been making noise for a few years and everybody seems to keep hoping that they'll finally make the coveted step into the National Championship Game.
Coming from what are considered the weaker conferences of the Mountain West and the WAC, these two teams' undefeated records never carry them very far on their own. They've done everything in their power to get more challenging games on the schedule and have succeeded to some extent, but the impressive, early non-conference wins lose their luster as the conference schedules begin.
Every week it seems TCU and Boise State win 50-something to less than 10. Are people bored with these blowouts? Do they find them continually unimpressive?
I think there has never been enough credit given to teams who make their first games of the season the most challenging. Instead of scheduling a game they are sure to win just so they can work some kinks out, TCU and Boise State both scheduled games against teams that entered the season ranked in the top 25.
Other than their opponents, Oregon State and Virginia Tech, how many other teams had this challenge? Not very many; LSU defeated North Carolina, who was ranked No. 18 at the time and fell off the map completely. That was the only other pairing of top 25 teams in Week 1. It's probably of little surprise that only four teams from the top 25 lost in Week 1, the fourth being Pittsburgh who lost to Utah, who has spent every week other than Week 1 unranked.
TCU is set. After defeated perennial cinderella sister Utah and surviving the scare of San Diego State in their last two games, the Horned Frogs need only to beat a dismal New Mexico team to be assured of a BCS bowl game.
Boise State doesn't have it so easy. They play at the No. 18 Nevada Wolf Pack this coming week and while a win might boost them over TCU in the BCS standings, a loss will most unfortunately mean they'll have no chance at a BCS bowl game and that is just plain sad.
Ohio State lost to Wisconsin. Wisconsin lost to Michigan State. Michigan State lost to Iowa and all of these teams have a legitimate shot at the Rose Bowl or another BCS bowl game, having one loss to a ranked opponent. Why would Boise State not receive consideration despite one loss?
The problem for Boise State and TCU, however, is not the Big Ten; it is the Big East. Come to think of it, the problem for the three one-loss Big Ten teams is the Big East, as well.
The Big East has no teams ranked in the top 25 in any ranking system. West Virginia boasts its best record at 7-3. It looks as though either West Virginia or Pittsburgh will end up representing the Big East in a BCS game against an opponent that will most likely destroy them.
I realized that it is possible in the Big East for a school to win the conference, but not be bowl eligible. They play seven conference games and five non-conference games with no conference championship game. Upon going 0-5 in non-conference games and 5-2 in conference games, a 5-7 team could feasibly win the Big East. What trumps what in this scenario, bowl eligibility or the automatic BCS bid for winning the conference? No information seems to be available on this scenario. If you find some, do enlighten me.
So who is going to make it into the BCS bowl games with one slot of what are supposed to be the top 10 teams in the country goes to the underachieving Big East.
Oregon still has to defeat No. 22 Arizona and Oregon State, neither of which will be cake walks, to attain its No. 1 status and enter into the National Championship Game.
Auburn has an even tougher road, playing at No. 11 Alabama and vs. No. 17 South Carolina at a neutral site.
The breakdown, I believe will be like so:
Pac-10 — Oregon and/or Stanford
Big Ten — Wisconsin and/or Ohio State or Michigan State
Big 12 — Oklahoma State or Oklahoma or Nebraska or Missouri
SEC — Auburn and/or LSU or South Carolina
ACC — Virginia Tech or Florida State or North Carolina State
Big East — West Virginia or Pittsburgh
Mountain West — TCU
WAC — Boise State
Decision makers are going to have a hell of a time deciding who is in and who is out. The Big Ten is already a debacle with three good one-loss teams and only two from a conference can go, so we're very likely looking at a one-loss power conference school that won't be in a BCS game. Reminds me of Missouri a few years back.
Not only that, if Oregon, Auburn TCU and Boise State all win out, we're not only face with one Big Ten one-loss team being left out, but potentially two.
The six conferences will have their automatic bids. TCU and Boise State will have the first at-large bids given to them, then there are only two spots left for four potential one-loss teams, Stanford, LSU, and the two Big Ten teams that didn't win the conference.
What a mess! In some years, one loss schools like Wisconsin, Stanford, LSU, Ohio State, or Michigan State would be considered for the National Championship Game, but this year, they'll be left out of the BCS system completely.
The automatic bid system needs to be reworked. I've pleaded for consistency for conference championship games in the past and it seems like the Pac-10 (soon to be 12) and the Big Ten (really 11, soon to be more) are heading in that direction, but the Big East is still a problem.
A team that wins its conference and has four losses is a team that doesn't necessarily deserve to be a team playing in one of the five premier bowl games.
I think there should be an immediate implementation of a clause that says, "Automatic Bid Conferences that cannot produce a team with three or fewer losses will lose their automatic bid." Perhaps that number should even be changed to two.
More NBA Sports Commentary11.22.10By Andrew Jones end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
Bio and Analysis of Neil Huntington as Pirates GM
William Roberts
How Neil Huntington got into baseball and how he has performed as general manager of the Pittsburgh Pirates.
View the Original article
How Neil Huntington got into baseball and how he has performed as general manager of the Pittsburgh Pirates.
View the Original article
Triathlon Race Day Nutrition: Eat Right for Maximum Performance
The Bike Leg in a Triathlon For Taking on Fluids - Image by Jimmy HarrisTriathlon is the fastest growing endurance sport on the planet. Getting nutrition right on race day can mean the difference between failure and success. View the Original article
Sunday, December 5, 2010
The Job of the Technical Panel Under the IJS in Figure Skating
The technical panel assigns difficulty levels. - Dr. AkomodiThe technical panel, composed of five officials, works with the judging panel in international figuring skating competitions to accurately score programs. View the Original article
A Baseball Negotiation, My Foot
December 1, 2010 by Jeff Kallman • Print Story •
Derek Jeter may have won a 2010 Gold Glove that he doesn't really deserve. But neither does he deserve the apparent negotiating strategy of the New York Yankees, for whom he has been the franchise — don't even think about thinking otherwise — since the day the shortstop job became his to lose. In 1996.
The skinny at this writing is that Jeter would like a five-year deal, likely to be his final Major League Baseball contract (anyone who thinks Jeter would like to finish his career in any uniform other than that of the Empire Emeritus is probably due for a controlled substances test), and that he would like about $20 million a season in that deal.
The concurrent skinny at this writing is that Jeter should probably consider himself fortunate if the Yankees offer him three years at $50 million total, perhaps with a few incentives to sweeten it, since the kind of seasons on which his Hall of Fame case will stand (anyone who thinks Jeter isn't a Hall of Famer in waiting, see the previous paragraph's parenthetic) are behind him to stay.
This is a very peculiar way to negotiate with a man about whom the Yankee brass has spoken, yet again, as the team's modern symbol. Unlike one man to whom he has been compared as a Yankee symbol — a man named Ruth — Jeter hasn't punched a ticket out of town by way of making known unrealistic wishes about becoming a Yankee manager and none too soon.
A New York Daily News poll, as I write, ran 28 percent in favor of Jeter getting the five-year/$20 million a year deal he's said to want, but a whopping 62 percent in favor of Jeter counting his blessings and taking the three and $50 million total.
And the Yankees' front office leadership has been playing the negotiations as business and strictly business. "Different negotiations from 10 years ago," went one quote wafting up from the owners' meetings last week; "a baseball player negotiation," went another.
Both have been attributed to managing general partner Hal Steinbrenner and president Randy Levine. Both could be seen as prospects for coming back to haunt both. Especially if, as some Yankee fans must fear, the Yankees let Jeter cast his line elsewhere while making no secret of their intention to become the high bidders for Cliff Lee. Assuming Lee resists both the kind of crowds in front of which he isn't in a huge hurry to pitch and the pressures of the Major League Baseball Players Association to accept the Yankee fortune on behalf of raising the salary bar for his particular baseball profession.
This wouldn't exactly be the first time that the Yankees allowed business to supersede sentiment or "tradition," actual or reputed. Once upon a time, Thurman Munson was promised he would be a) the Yankee captain for life, or for at least the length of his career; and, b) the highest paid Yankee who wasn't named Catfish Hunter. Those promises were made when Munson's teammates didn't include Reggie Jackson.
Once upon a time, Jackson himself faced the end of his Yankee contract, the one that left Thurman Munson seething for two seasons at least, and received no offer, barely even a whisper, about a new deal, while George Steinbrenner proceeded to sign Dave Winfield to 10 years and $23 million.
Once upon a time, not too long ago, in fact, general manager Brian Cashman put Bernie Williams in the deep freeze as his contract was about to expire while signing Johnny Damon — whom the Boston Red Sox had already told, for all intent and purpose, "Thanks for the memories, but..." while pursuing successor center fielders actively and without even bothering to veil the search while Damon played through injuries — to four years and $52 million.
However, once upon a time Cashman had plans to draw a line with Jorge Posada — three years and that's all, folks. The crosstown Mets were ready to offer Posada five years when the Yankees didn't figure he'd be worth more than three. Only when the Steinbrenner sons took the reins from their father, the Boss, did Posada get a fourth year tacked on.
And only when the Steinbrenner sons took those reins did Alex Rodriguez — whom Cashman was only too willing to tell, "Thanks for the memories, such as they are," when A-Rod opted out of his contract in 2007 (the infamous opt-out, scripted by his now-former agent, Scott Boras, in the middle of the Boston Red Sox's second postseason romp to the roses in three years) — get himself not a reminder not to let the door hit him where the good Lord you-know-what him, but a $275 million extension. Enough to keep A-Rod in pizza, pretty girls, and penthouses, not necessarily in that order, until he's 42, at least. Enough to keep Derek Jeter from possibly considering himself to be a Yankee for life.
Of all the criticism that could be leveled against the Yankees for the manner in which they have spent on free agents since the advent of baseball's free agency, the absolute most truthful criticism is that they've been willing to spend more on somebody else's freshly-minted free agent than on retaining one of their own. Even if they're spending $82.5 million over five years on a pitcher whose stuff still inspires awe, but whose performance still inspires managers to consider deep-sixing him on a postseason roster.
Nobody expects anyone to take pity on a man who has earned an estimated $205 million to date to play shortstop for the Yankees. But don't think for even one nanosecond that Jeter could be thrilled to see A.J. Burnett earning more than the Yankees seem willing or likely to pay him for the last contract of his career as a shortstop.
Nor can Jeter be thrilled to see the Yankees prepared to break the bank on a Cliff Lee who isn't even a lock to be fitted for his pinstripes just yet. Lee may stand to get a bank-breaking offer from the Yankees, who've made no secret of their intentions to spend big on pitching. But Lee isn't thought to be in that big a hurry to leave Texas, where his home park is a mere 40-55-minute flight from his home (about three hours or so by car) and he's found a personal comfort zone, reportedly for the first time in his career.
The Yankees are preparing to spend big for pitching only because their original plan of a homegrown rotation has blown up in their faces in phase one. Of the big four projected to become the next Yankee rotation a few years ago, only Phil Hughes has measured up, and even he had his troubles in the postseason. (Remember this: no Yankee with postseason trouble is likely to remain a Yankee for very long if he doesn't redeem himself post haste — as in, next season.)
Ian Kennedy and Ross Ohlendorf punched their tickets out of town when they proved to be little better than fifth starters by American League East standards. And the jerk-around under which Joba Chamberlain has worked since his ballyhooed-enough arrival has been so profound that you can forget whether he'll ever become a number one or number two rotation presence. Concentrate, instead, on whether the so-called Joba Rules have left him to become any kind of consistent major league pitcher in any role, period.
The Yankees have three well-respected pitching prospects advancing well enough toward Yankee Stadium. The reviews thus far are almost five-star regarding Dellin Betances's breaking balls, Andrew Brackman's cutter, and Manuel Banelos's changeup. But until they finally graduate to the parent rotation, the Yankees will probably find themselves into three established starters mulcted from elsewhere to a $200 million collective price tag over the next three seasons.
All of that and more does not pass Jeter's eyes uncontemplated. Remember: this is a player who has forged a Cooperstown career (he could retire this minute and qualify as a no-questions-asked Hall of Famer) by transcending his limits and hustling into the right place at the right time in the right games, regular and postseason.
He's been a barely-average defensive shortstop who has the knack for making plays ranging from spectacular to supernova to off the charts when the Yankees need those plays the most. He's been a solid hitter who has managed to be 83.7 wins above a replacement player in his career to date. What he's hit lifetime with men in scoring position and two outs (.305 BA; .399 OBP; .429 SLG) would put into the Hall of Fame men who hit that overall.
And he's played the game the right way from the minute he was handed the full-time shortstop job to stay. Whatever criticism he has garnered over the years has never included leaving his head in the clubhouse. Or his brains in bed.
If the Yankees' ethos boils down to asking what has a player done for them lately, the observer to whom here and now performance erases all can point to Jeter's very subpar 2010, a 2010 in which he could have been accused of showing his age at last. But if somewhere in the Yankee heart beats a muscle labeled "What has a player done for us, period?" then Jeter in 2010 was nothing much less than the Jeter of 1996-2010: the one player above all others who was vital to the Yankees' field and clubhouse cohesion, even when he couldn't hit with a hangar door, even when he couldn't field unless driven to the ball by taxi.
Jeter believes he still has baseball enough left in him. Not everybody experiences such a season as his 2010 and believes it a sign that he no longer has it. But a different Yankee management was prepared to pay Joe DiMaggio the same $100,000 for 1952 that he earned in 1951, until the Clipper himself decided, as his elder brother was once quoted as saying, to quit "because he wasn't Joe DiMaggio anymore."
Mike Schmidt eventually saw and raised DiMaggio one. The greatest all-around player of his time, the greatest third baseman ever to play major league baseball, walked away from the game (and about $2 million) early in a dismal 1989 season — despite being among the National League's RBI leaders at the time — because he realized he wasn't Mike Schmidt anymore.
"I could ask the Phillies to keep me on to add to my statistics," Schmidt said in tears when he said farewell, "but my love for the game won't let me do that."
Perhaps a true Yankee fan wishes at bottom that Jeter might decide in the end that it's wisest for him to quit because he isn't Derek Jeter anymore. Just the way one wishes Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Johnny Bench, Carl Yastrzemski, and Steve Carlton had retired before they weren't Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Johnny Bench, Carl Yastrzemski, or Steve Carlton anymore. It might hurt at first to leave them wanting more, but it just might be the way you want Derek Jeter to leave when he does. And there's no guarantee he'll do that if he gets the deal he wants or takes what the Yankees offer him.
But that's a decision even a true Yankee hater might reason to be one that only Jeter can make. And if he is not prepared to make it just yet, he above anyone else wearing The Stripes — with the possible exception of The Mariano — has earned the right not to make it just now.
Jeter's standing at this writing provokes a thought back to what A. Bartlett Giamatti, then a Yale professor but no less passionate a baseball fan then as when he ended up as a baseball executive himself, was moved to write when the Mets ended their contract impasse with Tom Seaver (who was asking even more for the Mets to invest seriously in team improvements, by free agency and otherwise, than he was asking for his own next contract) by making one of the most infamously lopsided trades in New York history.
On June 16, the day after Seaver was exiled to Cincinnati by way of Montreal, a sheet was hung from a railing at Shea bearing the following legend:
I WAS A
BELIEVER
BUT NOW WE'VE
LOST
SEAVER
I construe that text, and particularly its telling rhyme, to mean not that the author has lost faith in Seaver but that the author has lost faith in the Mets' ability to understand a simple, crucial fact: that among all the men who play baseball there is, very occasionally, a man of such qualities of heart and mind and body that he transcends even the great and glorious game, and that such a man is to be cherished, not sold.
— A. Bartlett Giamatti, "Tom Seaver's Farewell," Harper's, 1977; republished in A Great and Glorious Game: Baseball Writings of A. Bartlett Giamatti. (Chapel Hill, North Carolina: Algonquin Books, 1998.)
Yankee fans who don't vote in New York Daily News polls, and even a considerable enough contingent of Yankee haters for whom disdain for the organization does not translate into disdain for some of the men who play in its silks, may well come to construe Giamatti's ancient text, transposed to reference Derek Jeter, and substituting "allowed to walk" for "sold," as a text the Yankees' management is witless to comprehend.
More NBA Sports Commentary12.01.10By Jeff Kallman end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
Derek Jeter may have won a 2010 Gold Glove that he doesn't really deserve. But neither does he deserve the apparent negotiating strategy of the New York Yankees, for whom he has been the franchise — don't even think about thinking otherwise — since the day the shortstop job became his to lose. In 1996.
The skinny at this writing is that Jeter would like a five-year deal, likely to be his final Major League Baseball contract (anyone who thinks Jeter would like to finish his career in any uniform other than that of the Empire Emeritus is probably due for a controlled substances test), and that he would like about $20 million a season in that deal.
The concurrent skinny at this writing is that Jeter should probably consider himself fortunate if the Yankees offer him three years at $50 million total, perhaps with a few incentives to sweeten it, since the kind of seasons on which his Hall of Fame case will stand (anyone who thinks Jeter isn't a Hall of Famer in waiting, see the previous paragraph's parenthetic) are behind him to stay.
This is a very peculiar way to negotiate with a man about whom the Yankee brass has spoken, yet again, as the team's modern symbol. Unlike one man to whom he has been compared as a Yankee symbol — a man named Ruth — Jeter hasn't punched a ticket out of town by way of making known unrealistic wishes about becoming a Yankee manager and none too soon.
A New York Daily News poll, as I write, ran 28 percent in favor of Jeter getting the five-year/$20 million a year deal he's said to want, but a whopping 62 percent in favor of Jeter counting his blessings and taking the three and $50 million total.
And the Yankees' front office leadership has been playing the negotiations as business and strictly business. "Different negotiations from 10 years ago," went one quote wafting up from the owners' meetings last week; "a baseball player negotiation," went another.
Both have been attributed to managing general partner Hal Steinbrenner and president Randy Levine. Both could be seen as prospects for coming back to haunt both. Especially if, as some Yankee fans must fear, the Yankees let Jeter cast his line elsewhere while making no secret of their intention to become the high bidders for Cliff Lee. Assuming Lee resists both the kind of crowds in front of which he isn't in a huge hurry to pitch and the pressures of the Major League Baseball Players Association to accept the Yankee fortune on behalf of raising the salary bar for his particular baseball profession.
This wouldn't exactly be the first time that the Yankees allowed business to supersede sentiment or "tradition," actual or reputed. Once upon a time, Thurman Munson was promised he would be a) the Yankee captain for life, or for at least the length of his career; and, b) the highest paid Yankee who wasn't named Catfish Hunter. Those promises were made when Munson's teammates didn't include Reggie Jackson.
Once upon a time, Jackson himself faced the end of his Yankee contract, the one that left Thurman Munson seething for two seasons at least, and received no offer, barely even a whisper, about a new deal, while George Steinbrenner proceeded to sign Dave Winfield to 10 years and $23 million.
Once upon a time, not too long ago, in fact, general manager Brian Cashman put Bernie Williams in the deep freeze as his contract was about to expire while signing Johnny Damon — whom the Boston Red Sox had already told, for all intent and purpose, "Thanks for the memories, but..." while pursuing successor center fielders actively and without even bothering to veil the search while Damon played through injuries — to four years and $52 million.
However, once upon a time Cashman had plans to draw a line with Jorge Posada — three years and that's all, folks. The crosstown Mets were ready to offer Posada five years when the Yankees didn't figure he'd be worth more than three. Only when the Steinbrenner sons took the reins from their father, the Boss, did Posada get a fourth year tacked on.
And only when the Steinbrenner sons took those reins did Alex Rodriguez — whom Cashman was only too willing to tell, "Thanks for the memories, such as they are," when A-Rod opted out of his contract in 2007 (the infamous opt-out, scripted by his now-former agent, Scott Boras, in the middle of the Boston Red Sox's second postseason romp to the roses in three years) — get himself not a reminder not to let the door hit him where the good Lord you-know-what him, but a $275 million extension. Enough to keep A-Rod in pizza, pretty girls, and penthouses, not necessarily in that order, until he's 42, at least. Enough to keep Derek Jeter from possibly considering himself to be a Yankee for life.
Of all the criticism that could be leveled against the Yankees for the manner in which they have spent on free agents since the advent of baseball's free agency, the absolute most truthful criticism is that they've been willing to spend more on somebody else's freshly-minted free agent than on retaining one of their own. Even if they're spending $82.5 million over five years on a pitcher whose stuff still inspires awe, but whose performance still inspires managers to consider deep-sixing him on a postseason roster.
Nobody expects anyone to take pity on a man who has earned an estimated $205 million to date to play shortstop for the Yankees. But don't think for even one nanosecond that Jeter could be thrilled to see A.J. Burnett earning more than the Yankees seem willing or likely to pay him for the last contract of his career as a shortstop.
Nor can Jeter be thrilled to see the Yankees prepared to break the bank on a Cliff Lee who isn't even a lock to be fitted for his pinstripes just yet. Lee may stand to get a bank-breaking offer from the Yankees, who've made no secret of their intentions to spend big on pitching. But Lee isn't thought to be in that big a hurry to leave Texas, where his home park is a mere 40-55-minute flight from his home (about three hours or so by car) and he's found a personal comfort zone, reportedly for the first time in his career.
The Yankees are preparing to spend big for pitching only because their original plan of a homegrown rotation has blown up in their faces in phase one. Of the big four projected to become the next Yankee rotation a few years ago, only Phil Hughes has measured up, and even he had his troubles in the postseason. (Remember this: no Yankee with postseason trouble is likely to remain a Yankee for very long if he doesn't redeem himself post haste — as in, next season.)
Ian Kennedy and Ross Ohlendorf punched their tickets out of town when they proved to be little better than fifth starters by American League East standards. And the jerk-around under which Joba Chamberlain has worked since his ballyhooed-enough arrival has been so profound that you can forget whether he'll ever become a number one or number two rotation presence. Concentrate, instead, on whether the so-called Joba Rules have left him to become any kind of consistent major league pitcher in any role, period.
The Yankees have three well-respected pitching prospects advancing well enough toward Yankee Stadium. The reviews thus far are almost five-star regarding Dellin Betances's breaking balls, Andrew Brackman's cutter, and Manuel Banelos's changeup. But until they finally graduate to the parent rotation, the Yankees will probably find themselves into three established starters mulcted from elsewhere to a $200 million collective price tag over the next three seasons.
All of that and more does not pass Jeter's eyes uncontemplated. Remember: this is a player who has forged a Cooperstown career (he could retire this minute and qualify as a no-questions-asked Hall of Famer) by transcending his limits and hustling into the right place at the right time in the right games, regular and postseason.
He's been a barely-average defensive shortstop who has the knack for making plays ranging from spectacular to supernova to off the charts when the Yankees need those plays the most. He's been a solid hitter who has managed to be 83.7 wins above a replacement player in his career to date. What he's hit lifetime with men in scoring position and two outs (.305 BA; .399 OBP; .429 SLG) would put into the Hall of Fame men who hit that overall.
And he's played the game the right way from the minute he was handed the full-time shortstop job to stay. Whatever criticism he has garnered over the years has never included leaving his head in the clubhouse. Or his brains in bed.
If the Yankees' ethos boils down to asking what has a player done for them lately, the observer to whom here and now performance erases all can point to Jeter's very subpar 2010, a 2010 in which he could have been accused of showing his age at last. But if somewhere in the Yankee heart beats a muscle labeled "What has a player done for us, period?" then Jeter in 2010 was nothing much less than the Jeter of 1996-2010: the one player above all others who was vital to the Yankees' field and clubhouse cohesion, even when he couldn't hit with a hangar door, even when he couldn't field unless driven to the ball by taxi.
Jeter believes he still has baseball enough left in him. Not everybody experiences such a season as his 2010 and believes it a sign that he no longer has it. But a different Yankee management was prepared to pay Joe DiMaggio the same $100,000 for 1952 that he earned in 1951, until the Clipper himself decided, as his elder brother was once quoted as saying, to quit "because he wasn't Joe DiMaggio anymore."
Mike Schmidt eventually saw and raised DiMaggio one. The greatest all-around player of his time, the greatest third baseman ever to play major league baseball, walked away from the game (and about $2 million) early in a dismal 1989 season — despite being among the National League's RBI leaders at the time — because he realized he wasn't Mike Schmidt anymore.
"I could ask the Phillies to keep me on to add to my statistics," Schmidt said in tears when he said farewell, "but my love for the game won't let me do that."
Perhaps a true Yankee fan wishes at bottom that Jeter might decide in the end that it's wisest for him to quit because he isn't Derek Jeter anymore. Just the way one wishes Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Johnny Bench, Carl Yastrzemski, and Steve Carlton had retired before they weren't Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Johnny Bench, Carl Yastrzemski, or Steve Carlton anymore. It might hurt at first to leave them wanting more, but it just might be the way you want Derek Jeter to leave when he does. And there's no guarantee he'll do that if he gets the deal he wants or takes what the Yankees offer him.
But that's a decision even a true Yankee hater might reason to be one that only Jeter can make. And if he is not prepared to make it just yet, he above anyone else wearing The Stripes — with the possible exception of The Mariano — has earned the right not to make it just now.
Jeter's standing at this writing provokes a thought back to what A. Bartlett Giamatti, then a Yale professor but no less passionate a baseball fan then as when he ended up as a baseball executive himself, was moved to write when the Mets ended their contract impasse with Tom Seaver (who was asking even more for the Mets to invest seriously in team improvements, by free agency and otherwise, than he was asking for his own next contract) by making one of the most infamously lopsided trades in New York history.
On June 16, the day after Seaver was exiled to Cincinnati by way of Montreal, a sheet was hung from a railing at Shea bearing the following legend:
I WAS A
BELIEVER
BUT NOW WE'VE
LOST
SEAVER
I construe that text, and particularly its telling rhyme, to mean not that the author has lost faith in Seaver but that the author has lost faith in the Mets' ability to understand a simple, crucial fact: that among all the men who play baseball there is, very occasionally, a man of such qualities of heart and mind and body that he transcends even the great and glorious game, and that such a man is to be cherished, not sold.
— A. Bartlett Giamatti, "Tom Seaver's Farewell," Harper's, 1977; republished in A Great and Glorious Game: Baseball Writings of A. Bartlett Giamatti. (Chapel Hill, North Carolina: Algonquin Books, 1998.)
Yankee fans who don't vote in New York Daily News polls, and even a considerable enough contingent of Yankee haters for whom disdain for the organization does not translate into disdain for some of the men who play in its silks, may well come to construe Giamatti's ancient text, transposed to reference Derek Jeter, and substituting "allowed to walk" for "sold," as a text the Yankees' management is witless to comprehend.
More NBA Sports Commentary12.01.10By Jeff Kallman end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Buy Board Games Online and Enjoy Family Time Together
Fun Games for the Family - Photo by Marcia ClaessonFavorite board games make family memories. You can find all kinds of board games online, from classic board games to new games. Choose from these fun games. View the Original article
Greg Oden: Biggest Draft Bust Ever?
by Ross Lancaster • Print Story •
Over the years, the NBA has seen its fair share of historically bad draft busts. Many of these players were selected in one of the top two picks. Michael Olowokandi, Darko Milicic, and Kwame Brown all fall into that boat and were all picked within the last 15 years. But none of those players, or any before 1995, may be as colossal a bust as Greg Oden.
Last week, Oden was ruled out for the entirety of the 2010-11 season. Since being drafted No. 1 overall in the summer of 2007, Oden will have missed two whole seasons with two micro-fracture knee surgeries (one on each knee), the vast majority of one season with a fractured knee cap, and part of another with a chipped knee cap. At this point, it is reasonable to question how much Oden can actually put on his knees when he comes back, given his big frame and three knee operations in four seasons.
In total, Oden has played 82 career games, averaging 9.4 points and 7.3 rebounds per game. Accounting for advanced metrics, Oden has been an above-average rebounder (according to rebound percentage) and turnover-prone (according to turnover percentage). However, in the instances where he has been able to play, Oden has never averaged more than 24 minutes a game.
It's inevitable at this point to compare Greg Oden to Sam Bowie. After all, both were highly drafted by the Blazers and play somewhat similar positions, albeit with Bowie more of a passer and outside shooter. At this rate, Oden may have to be mentioned on his own. Through a similar point in his NBA career (four years after being drafted), Bowie had played 119 games, for 10.8 points and 8.5 rebounds per game. However, after his stint in Portland came to an end after the 1988-89 season, he played four seasons with the Nets, never missing more than 20 games in any season with New Jersey, averaging 12.8 ppg and 8.2 rpg in those seasons.
We don't know if Oden will ever put up that type of productivity after he comes back, because he hasn't reached that stage yet. Two bad knees don't bode well, though.
People don't consider Bowie one of the biggest draft busts ever solely based on what Bowie himself did. He's considered as such due to the fact that Blazers passed up on Michael Jordan to take the former Kentucky star. The same holds true for Oden. Kevin Durant is already one of the top five players in the league, and turned 22 less than two months ago. In time, the historical chasm between Oden and Durant could be as wide or wider than that of Bowie and Jordan.
Relativity matters when talking about things like draft busts. Strictly speaking, LaRue Martin is probably the worst player to ever be taken No. 1 overall in an NBA Draft (by the Blazers, as well), averaging just over 5 points a game in four seasons. Hall of Famer Bob McAdoo was picked second, but Durant is probable to be remembered more fondly than McAdoo after his career is over. This is also why we consider Ryan Leaf, who it is said the Colts were debating to take over Peyton Manning in the 1998 NFL Draft, the greatest football bust ever, and not a No. 1 pick like Ki-Jana Carter.
The fall of Oden is even more remarkable when taking into account all the hype surrounding the 2007 draft and his selection. Draft experts were confident that Oden was the sure thing, with Durant being the potential pick more ready to be a star in a few years. Oden was, at a minimum, supposed to evolve into the next Patrick Ewing and his ceiling was assumed to be much higher.
During the 2006-07 college season, Durant vastly outperformed Oden, putting up the most dominant freshman season in the history of the game. Yet, because Oden's Ohio State was a more loaded team with more scoring options and due to his injured right wrist, Oden was still considered the best player on the board. A 25 and 12 performance in an NCAA title game loss to Florida only served to cement that status.
Hindsight is always 20-20, but in Tuesday's game between Ohio State and Florida, Buckeye freshman big man Jared Sullinger showed off about as much offensive skill in the post in 34 minutes of action as Oden did in that whole season in college. Oden's relative lack of offensive game that season should have been a warning, and was pointed out by the few experts who thought Durant would be the better pick.
With Oden on the verge of having his career written off due to injury, Portland has bigger things to worry about, such as Brandon Roy's lingering knee issues. The Blazers are still a quality team, but if Roy, their best player, continues to miss time throughout the season, the team's eventual playoff status could be in major doubt.
More NBA Sports Commentary11.22.10By Ross Lancaster end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
Over the years, the NBA has seen its fair share of historically bad draft busts. Many of these players were selected in one of the top two picks. Michael Olowokandi, Darko Milicic, and Kwame Brown all fall into that boat and were all picked within the last 15 years. But none of those players, or any before 1995, may be as colossal a bust as Greg Oden.
Last week, Oden was ruled out for the entirety of the 2010-11 season. Since being drafted No. 1 overall in the summer of 2007, Oden will have missed two whole seasons with two micro-fracture knee surgeries (one on each knee), the vast majority of one season with a fractured knee cap, and part of another with a chipped knee cap. At this point, it is reasonable to question how much Oden can actually put on his knees when he comes back, given his big frame and three knee operations in four seasons.
In total, Oden has played 82 career games, averaging 9.4 points and 7.3 rebounds per game. Accounting for advanced metrics, Oden has been an above-average rebounder (according to rebound percentage) and turnover-prone (according to turnover percentage). However, in the instances where he has been able to play, Oden has never averaged more than 24 minutes a game.
It's inevitable at this point to compare Greg Oden to Sam Bowie. After all, both were highly drafted by the Blazers and play somewhat similar positions, albeit with Bowie more of a passer and outside shooter. At this rate, Oden may have to be mentioned on his own. Through a similar point in his NBA career (four years after being drafted), Bowie had played 119 games, for 10.8 points and 8.5 rebounds per game. However, after his stint in Portland came to an end after the 1988-89 season, he played four seasons with the Nets, never missing more than 20 games in any season with New Jersey, averaging 12.8 ppg and 8.2 rpg in those seasons.
We don't know if Oden will ever put up that type of productivity after he comes back, because he hasn't reached that stage yet. Two bad knees don't bode well, though.
People don't consider Bowie one of the biggest draft busts ever solely based on what Bowie himself did. He's considered as such due to the fact that Blazers passed up on Michael Jordan to take the former Kentucky star. The same holds true for Oden. Kevin Durant is already one of the top five players in the league, and turned 22 less than two months ago. In time, the historical chasm between Oden and Durant could be as wide or wider than that of Bowie and Jordan.
Relativity matters when talking about things like draft busts. Strictly speaking, LaRue Martin is probably the worst player to ever be taken No. 1 overall in an NBA Draft (by the Blazers, as well), averaging just over 5 points a game in four seasons. Hall of Famer Bob McAdoo was picked second, but Durant is probable to be remembered more fondly than McAdoo after his career is over. This is also why we consider Ryan Leaf, who it is said the Colts were debating to take over Peyton Manning in the 1998 NFL Draft, the greatest football bust ever, and not a No. 1 pick like Ki-Jana Carter.
The fall of Oden is even more remarkable when taking into account all the hype surrounding the 2007 draft and his selection. Draft experts were confident that Oden was the sure thing, with Durant being the potential pick more ready to be a star in a few years. Oden was, at a minimum, supposed to evolve into the next Patrick Ewing and his ceiling was assumed to be much higher.
During the 2006-07 college season, Durant vastly outperformed Oden, putting up the most dominant freshman season in the history of the game. Yet, because Oden's Ohio State was a more loaded team with more scoring options and due to his injured right wrist, Oden was still considered the best player on the board. A 25 and 12 performance in an NCAA title game loss to Florida only served to cement that status.
Hindsight is always 20-20, but in Tuesday's game between Ohio State and Florida, Buckeye freshman big man Jared Sullinger showed off about as much offensive skill in the post in 34 minutes of action as Oden did in that whole season in college. Oden's relative lack of offensive game that season should have been a warning, and was pointed out by the few experts who thought Durant would be the better pick.
With Oden on the verge of having his career written off due to injury, Portland has bigger things to worry about, such as Brandon Roy's lingering knee issues. The Blazers are still a quality team, but if Roy, their best player, continues to miss time throughout the season, the team's eventual playoff status could be in major doubt.
More NBA Sports Commentary11.22.10By Ross Lancaster end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
Sports Central 2010 Pro Bowl Picks
December 1, 2010 by Brad Oremland • Print Story •
Pro Bowl voting has been open for over a month, but now every team has played most of its schedule, so it's finally reasonable to vote for each conference's representatives. Here's a look at my ballot, with AFC players listed first. I didn't vote for anyone who has been placed on injured reserve.
Briefly, before we begin, why does the NFL switch the order of this ballot every single season? At least this year the league lists players alphabetically by last name. If you'd like to vote along as you read, you can do so here.
Quarterback
Philip Rivers (SD), Tom Brady (NE), Peyton Manning (IND); Aaron Rodgers (GB), Matt Ryan (ATL), Drew Brees (NO)
There are four strong candidates in each conference. Kyle Orton (DEN) is having a hell of a year, leads the NFL in passing yards. I should also mention Matt Cassel (KC), who has been on fire, so I don't look like an idiot if he stays hot. In the NFC, Michael Vick (PHI) is obviously playing at a sensational level, and he certainly deserves a vote. But so do Rodgers, Ryan, and Brees. I couldn't decide which one to leave off, so I went with "hasn't murdered dogs" as a tie-breaker, but if you feel like you can't leave him off, that's understandable.
Running Back
Arian Foster (HOU), Jamaal Charles (KC), Peyton Hillis (CLE); Adrian Peterson (MIN), LeSean McCoy (PHI), Michael Turner (ATL)
Frank Gore (SF) was a lock before his injury on Monday night, so Turner sneaks onto my ballot, but the AFC is the stronger conference here. I'd go with my AFC selections from last year — Chris Johnson (TEN), Maurice Jones-Drew (JAC), and Ray Rice (BAL) — as well as Darren McFadden (OAK), over Turner, though he's having a nice season. It's not a pre-requisite, but these are well-rounded players; Turner is the only one without at least 300 receiving yards. If Peterson's ankle injury is serious, I suppose Steven Jackson (STL) or Ahmad Bradshaw (NYG) would be an appropriate substitute.
I know there are a lot of appealing choices in the AFC, but you can't leave Charles off your ballot. He's second in the NFL in rushing yardage, and he's averaging 6.34 yards per carry, which would be 2nd-best all-time (min. 150 att.). The record is 6.40, by Jim Brown in 1963. If you want to sneak CJ2K or McFadden or whoever onto your ballot, you have to either (1) sacrifice Hillis, or (2) hack the NFL's website.
Wide Receiver
Brandon Lloyd (DEN), Dwayne Bowe (KC), Andre Johnson (HOU), Mike Wallace (PIT); Roddy White (ATL), Calvin Johnson (DET), Greg Jennings (GB), Marques Colston (NO)
Let's get right to the obvious omissions, Terrell Owens (CIN) and Reggie Wayne (IND). Both look pretty on paper. But Wayne is having his worst season in memory, with uncharacteristic drops and little of his usual brilliance. The numbers are still big because the Colts throw a ton and everybody else is hurt, but Wayne has not played at a high level. Owens misses my ballot for several reasons. (1) He's dropped off recently, and if that continues, I'll look foolish for taking him. (2) A lot of his numbers have come late in the game when the outcome was already decided. The defense was playing soft and his plays had minimal impact. (3) I question his value as a team player. Carson Palmer is having the worst season of his career, and you expect a great receiver to elevate his quarterback's game, not diminish it.
Fullback
Marcel Reece (OAK); Owen Schmitt (PHI)
An increasingly irrelevant position, and it's easy to fall back on guys like Tony Richardson (NYJ) or Greg Jones (JAC), but let's shake things up a little. Reece has started eight games, scored rushing and receiving touchdowns, and led the way for Darren McFadden's breakout season. Schmitt is a good receiver, and he lead blocks for the most efficient running team in the NFC.
Tight End
Antonio Gates (SD), Marcedes Lewis (JAC); Jason Witten (DAL), Chris Cooley (WAS)
Gates and Lewis lead all tight ends in scoring. Gates has been a monster when healthy, and Lewis is an impact player in the receiving game, as well as a fine blocker. Witten and Cooley are solid blockers and reliable receivers, the NFC's top two in receiving yardage. Vernon Davis (SF) hasn't been a consistent threat in the receiving game this season, and his blocking is a tad overrated. He is a good blocker, but so are Witten and Cooley.
Offensive Tackle
Matt Light (NE), Damien Woody (NYJ), Charlie Johnson (IND); Jason Peters (PHI), Donald Penn (TB), Jeff Backus (DET)
This is my least favorite position to evaluate. Honestly, we're in the midst of a real down period for offensive tackles. At the beginning of the decade, we had Jon Ogden, Willie Roaf, Walter Jones, Orlando Pace, Jon Runyan ... players of historic stature. Who right now looks like a good bet to put together a Hall of Fame career at the position? Maybe Peters, I guess. Some of the young guys might, but it's too early to make predictions on players like Penn, Branden Albert (KC), Demetrius Bell (BUF), Ryan Clady (DEN), Jake Long (MIA), and Marcus McNeill (SD). Charlie Johnson, by my evaluation, has surpassed center Jeff Saturday as the best player on the Colts' line.
Offensive Guard
Kris Dielman (SD), Ryan Lilja (KC), Brandon Moore (NYJ); Harvey Dahl (ATL), Carl Nicks (NO), Chris Snee (NYG)
This is my favorite offensive line position to evaluate. There are a lot of good guards in the league right now, so I had to leave off some guys I like, especially in the NFC. Let's get the list out of the way: Justin Blalock (ATL), Kyle Kosier (DAL), Jahri Evans (NO), Josh Sitton (GB), and Steve Hutchinson (MIN). Maybe I've just seen him on good days, but Antoine Caldwell (HOU) is one of my favorites. He's not starting, though, and he's not on the ballot. I guess Mike Brisiel (HOU) must be pretty good, to start ahead of Caldwell. Floyd Womack (CLE), the old Seattle RT we used to call Porkchop, has re-invented himself as a guard and played well.
Center
Dan Koppen (NE), Nick Hardwick (SD); Todd McClure (ATL), Jonathan Goodwin (NO)
The AFC is stacked. Nick Mangold (NYJ), whom I've chosen as an all-pro each of the last two years, is not having a great season, doesn't really seem 100%. Rookie Maurkice Pouncey (PIT) has generated a buzz, but he makes too many mistakes. Better, though, are Kyle Cook (CIN), Chris Myers (HOU), and J.D. Walton (DEN).
Defensive End
Robert Mathis (IND), Jason Babin (TEN), Mike Wright (NE); Julius Peppers (CHI), Trent Cole (PHI), Osi Umenyiora (NYG)
Aargh. There's just no fair way to do this. The AFC is loaded with 3-4 defenses, which means loads of 3-4 defensive ends, who are kind of hybrid interior/outside linemen. Two of the best defenses, teams with DEs who are Pro Bowl caliber — the Jets and Ravens — list their ends as DTs. The result is that the AFC ballot is really weak at this position. Wright, who leads New England in sacks, is the best of those who are actually listed, with Kendall Langford (MIA) and Randy Starks (MIA) also in the mix. I think Mathis is having a little bit better season than his teammate Dwight Freeney (IND). Babin leads all AFC linemen in sacks (9).
In the NFC, Peppers' impressive numbers (6 sacks, 6 pass deflections, 3 forced fumbles) don't even tell the full story; he draws penalties and double-teams and gets pressure even when he doesn't make the play. I have mixed feelings on Justin Tuck (NYG) and Umenyiora. Tuck has two 3-sack games, but just 1.5 in the other 9 games combined. Umenyiora had 8 sacks after just six games. He still has 8. But he also leads the NFL, by far, in forced fumbles (7). James Hall (STL) has 7.5 sacks and 4 forced fumbles, sort of Umenyiora Lite, but his consistency and lack of supporting cast almost make him a more appealing choice. Jared Allen (MIN) is having a down year, but he's still among the best. Will Smith (NO) could be a good choice as long as he doesn't go to jail. Cullen Jenkins (GB) is a good player in Green Bay's 3-4.
Defensive Tackle
Haloti Ngata (BAL), Antonio Garay (SD), Shaun Ellis (NYJ); Ndamukong Suh (DET), B.J. Raji (GB), Sedrick Ellis (NO)
The hype for Suh is legit. He and Kyle Vanden Bosch have almost single-handedly lifted Detroit's defense, from the worst in the league to merely below-average. The AFC has incredible depth here (see above, DE). It particularly hurt to omit Vince Wilfork (NE) and Tommy Kelly (OAK), both of whom could have made it if Ngata and Ellis were listed at DE. Wilfork probably is better than Mike Wright, whom I did select as an end. Darnell Dockett (ARI) and Jay Ratliff (DAL) were the best in the league last season, but they aren't playing at the same level this season and don't deserve your vote. Barry Cofield (NYG) and Anthony Adams (CHI) are better.
Outside Linebacker
Shaun Phillips (SD), James Harrison (PIT), Terrell Suggs (BAL); Clay Matthews III (GB), Chad Greenway (MIN), Lance Briggs (CHI)
It's hard to get away from the pass rushers. Outside linebackers who can get to the quarterback are impact players, and there are a lot of them right now. Tamba Hali (KC) has 8 sacks. LaMarr Woodley (PIT) has 6.5 sacks, 3 forced fumbles, and an interception. Cameron Wake (MIA), who leads the AFC with 10.5 sacks, is probably on most ballots. He's too inconsistent for my taste, disappears for long stretches and is so aggressive he's vulnerable to manipulation by the offense.
Briggs and Greenway are so good they deflected my obsession with pass-rushers. DeMarcus Ware (DAL) and Brian Orakpo (WAS) have big names and good reputations, but they haven't been able to lift their teams, both of which have losing records and rank near the bottom of the league in defense. It's a shame more people don't know about Greenway, who leads the NFC in tackles. He's been a monster in space for a couple of years now, and he's the best player on Minnesota's defense.
Inside Linebacker
Lawrence Timmons (PIT), Jerod Mayo (NE); Jonathan Vilma (NO), Patrick Willis (SF)
Timmons is 4th in the AFC in tackles, with 3 sacks, 2 fumble recoveries, a forced fumble, 10 passes defensed, and 2 interceptions. No one else is having a season like that. Mayo leads the NFL in tackles. He's very quick and instinctive, crucial qualities in a middle linebacker. Ray Lewis (BAL) somehow continues to be among the best ILBs around, but I don't think he stands out from Kevin Burnett (SD), David Harris (NYJ), and Stephen Tulloch (TEN).
I'm not enthusiastic about Willis, but I can't come up with an excuse not to vote for him. Something about his game just doesn't excite me. If you feel the same way, consider E.J. Henderson (MIN), James Laurinaitis (STL), Barrett Ruud (TB), or Brian Urlacher (CHI). Henderson has 3 picks, Laurinaitis has 3 sacks, I don't need to tell you about Urlacher, and Ruud has more tackles than any of them. Vilma's numbers don't jump off the page — they're fine, same ballpark as the other guys I mentioned — but he's a playmaker, the best ILB in the NFC.
Cornerback
Antonio Cromartie (NYJ), Darrelle Revis (NYJ), Antoine Cason (SD); Asante Samuel (PHI), Charles Woodson (GB), Aqib Talib (TB)
Samuel leads the league in interceptions; Talib is tied for second and gets beat less frequently than most INT hawks. Woodson is starting to play more like a safety, freelancing wherever the ball is. He has 4 forced fumbles, 2 INTs, a sack, and a lot of tackles that aren't the result of his man making a catch. Cason's Chargers lead the AFC in opponent passer rating, followed by the Jets, who now have two shutdown corners.
Nnamdi Asomugha (OAK) has missed some time, and Vontae Davis (MIA) gets beat too often. In the interest of brevity, the closest calls in the AFC: Sheldon Brown (CLE), Brandon Flowers (KC), Kelvin Hayden (IND), Ike Taylor (PIT), and a pair of rookies, Joe Haden (CLE) and Devin McCourty (NE), who are 1-2 in the conference in interception return yards. In the NFC: Terrell Thomas (NYG) leads the NFL in passes defensed, Charles Tillman (CHI) is a turnover machine, and Tramon Williams (GB) is starting to resemble a shut-down corner. DeAngelo Hall (WAS) is having his best season in years, and he's made some big plays, but he plays on the last-ranked defense in the NFL, and that's partly his fault.
Strong Safety
Troy Polamalu (PIT); Quintin Mikell (PHI)
No one else at this position particularly interests me. There are other good players in the AFC, but none of them are Polamalu. Mikell consistently gets to the ball. He's an aggressive tackler, and better in coverage than most strong safeties. LaRon Landry (WAS) is a hitter, and he's made some good plays this year, but he's just useless in coverage.
Free Safety
Michael Griffin (TEN); Earl Thomas (SEA)
Please don't vote for Ed Reed (BAL). He's missed half the season. And don't vote for Brian Dawkins (DEN), either. He's a million years old and he can't play any more. Denver has the worst defense in the league. Also, you shouldn't vote for anyone in the NFC. Everyone good is in the AFC. But Thomas has 5 picks and he gets 8 tackles every week, so since I have to pick someone, there you go. Griffin leads all AFC free safeties in tackles, and he has more passes defensed than any except Reed, who I will remind you has only played 5 games. I also like Antoine Bethea (IND), Patrick Chung (NE), Abram Elam (CLE), and Eric Weddle (SD).
Kicker
Billy Cundiff (BAL); John Kasay (CAR)
No one's really blowing the field away this year, so why not go with a solid field goal guy who is easily the best in the league on kickoffs? That's Cundiff. He's only missed three times this season, and more than half his kickoffs go for touchbacks. Otherwise, I guess I'd say Rob Bironas (TEN), who leads the league in FG%, Dan Carpenter (MIA), who leads in field goals made, or Josh Scobee (JAC), whose last-minute 59-yarder beat the Colts in Week 4. Kasay missed a potential game-winning kick in Week 12, but he hasn't failed from under 40 yards all season and he's tied for the league lead in 50
View the Original article
Pro Bowl voting has been open for over a month, but now every team has played most of its schedule, so it's finally reasonable to vote for each conference's representatives. Here's a look at my ballot, with AFC players listed first. I didn't vote for anyone who has been placed on injured reserve.
Briefly, before we begin, why does the NFL switch the order of this ballot every single season? At least this year the league lists players alphabetically by last name. If you'd like to vote along as you read, you can do so here.
Quarterback
Philip Rivers (SD), Tom Brady (NE), Peyton Manning (IND); Aaron Rodgers (GB), Matt Ryan (ATL), Drew Brees (NO)
There are four strong candidates in each conference. Kyle Orton (DEN) is having a hell of a year, leads the NFL in passing yards. I should also mention Matt Cassel (KC), who has been on fire, so I don't look like an idiot if he stays hot. In the NFC, Michael Vick (PHI) is obviously playing at a sensational level, and he certainly deserves a vote. But so do Rodgers, Ryan, and Brees. I couldn't decide which one to leave off, so I went with "hasn't murdered dogs" as a tie-breaker, but if you feel like you can't leave him off, that's understandable.
Running Back
Arian Foster (HOU), Jamaal Charles (KC), Peyton Hillis (CLE); Adrian Peterson (MIN), LeSean McCoy (PHI), Michael Turner (ATL)
Frank Gore (SF) was a lock before his injury on Monday night, so Turner sneaks onto my ballot, but the AFC is the stronger conference here. I'd go with my AFC selections from last year — Chris Johnson (TEN), Maurice Jones-Drew (JAC), and Ray Rice (BAL) — as well as Darren McFadden (OAK), over Turner, though he's having a nice season. It's not a pre-requisite, but these are well-rounded players; Turner is the only one without at least 300 receiving yards. If Peterson's ankle injury is serious, I suppose Steven Jackson (STL) or Ahmad Bradshaw (NYG) would be an appropriate substitute.
I know there are a lot of appealing choices in the AFC, but you can't leave Charles off your ballot. He's second in the NFL in rushing yardage, and he's averaging 6.34 yards per carry, which would be 2nd-best all-time (min. 150 att.). The record is 6.40, by Jim Brown in 1963. If you want to sneak CJ2K or McFadden or whoever onto your ballot, you have to either (1) sacrifice Hillis, or (2) hack the NFL's website.
Wide Receiver
Brandon Lloyd (DEN), Dwayne Bowe (KC), Andre Johnson (HOU), Mike Wallace (PIT); Roddy White (ATL), Calvin Johnson (DET), Greg Jennings (GB), Marques Colston (NO)
Let's get right to the obvious omissions, Terrell Owens (CIN) and Reggie Wayne (IND). Both look pretty on paper. But Wayne is having his worst season in memory, with uncharacteristic drops and little of his usual brilliance. The numbers are still big because the Colts throw a ton and everybody else is hurt, but Wayne has not played at a high level. Owens misses my ballot for several reasons. (1) He's dropped off recently, and if that continues, I'll look foolish for taking him. (2) A lot of his numbers have come late in the game when the outcome was already decided. The defense was playing soft and his plays had minimal impact. (3) I question his value as a team player. Carson Palmer is having the worst season of his career, and you expect a great receiver to elevate his quarterback's game, not diminish it.
Fullback
Marcel Reece (OAK); Owen Schmitt (PHI)
An increasingly irrelevant position, and it's easy to fall back on guys like Tony Richardson (NYJ) or Greg Jones (JAC), but let's shake things up a little. Reece has started eight games, scored rushing and receiving touchdowns, and led the way for Darren McFadden's breakout season. Schmitt is a good receiver, and he lead blocks for the most efficient running team in the NFC.
Tight End
Antonio Gates (SD), Marcedes Lewis (JAC); Jason Witten (DAL), Chris Cooley (WAS)
Gates and Lewis lead all tight ends in scoring. Gates has been a monster when healthy, and Lewis is an impact player in the receiving game, as well as a fine blocker. Witten and Cooley are solid blockers and reliable receivers, the NFC's top two in receiving yardage. Vernon Davis (SF) hasn't been a consistent threat in the receiving game this season, and his blocking is a tad overrated. He is a good blocker, but so are Witten and Cooley.
Offensive Tackle
Matt Light (NE), Damien Woody (NYJ), Charlie Johnson (IND); Jason Peters (PHI), Donald Penn (TB), Jeff Backus (DET)
This is my least favorite position to evaluate. Honestly, we're in the midst of a real down period for offensive tackles. At the beginning of the decade, we had Jon Ogden, Willie Roaf, Walter Jones, Orlando Pace, Jon Runyan ... players of historic stature. Who right now looks like a good bet to put together a Hall of Fame career at the position? Maybe Peters, I guess. Some of the young guys might, but it's too early to make predictions on players like Penn, Branden Albert (KC), Demetrius Bell (BUF), Ryan Clady (DEN), Jake Long (MIA), and Marcus McNeill (SD). Charlie Johnson, by my evaluation, has surpassed center Jeff Saturday as the best player on the Colts' line.
Offensive Guard
Kris Dielman (SD), Ryan Lilja (KC), Brandon Moore (NYJ); Harvey Dahl (ATL), Carl Nicks (NO), Chris Snee (NYG)
This is my favorite offensive line position to evaluate. There are a lot of good guards in the league right now, so I had to leave off some guys I like, especially in the NFC. Let's get the list out of the way: Justin Blalock (ATL), Kyle Kosier (DAL), Jahri Evans (NO), Josh Sitton (GB), and Steve Hutchinson (MIN). Maybe I've just seen him on good days, but Antoine Caldwell (HOU) is one of my favorites. He's not starting, though, and he's not on the ballot. I guess Mike Brisiel (HOU) must be pretty good, to start ahead of Caldwell. Floyd Womack (CLE), the old Seattle RT we used to call Porkchop, has re-invented himself as a guard and played well.
Center
Dan Koppen (NE), Nick Hardwick (SD); Todd McClure (ATL), Jonathan Goodwin (NO)
The AFC is stacked. Nick Mangold (NYJ), whom I've chosen as an all-pro each of the last two years, is not having a great season, doesn't really seem 100%. Rookie Maurkice Pouncey (PIT) has generated a buzz, but he makes too many mistakes. Better, though, are Kyle Cook (CIN), Chris Myers (HOU), and J.D. Walton (DEN).
Defensive End
Robert Mathis (IND), Jason Babin (TEN), Mike Wright (NE); Julius Peppers (CHI), Trent Cole (PHI), Osi Umenyiora (NYG)
Aargh. There's just no fair way to do this. The AFC is loaded with 3-4 defenses, which means loads of 3-4 defensive ends, who are kind of hybrid interior/outside linemen. Two of the best defenses, teams with DEs who are Pro Bowl caliber — the Jets and Ravens — list their ends as DTs. The result is that the AFC ballot is really weak at this position. Wright, who leads New England in sacks, is the best of those who are actually listed, with Kendall Langford (MIA) and Randy Starks (MIA) also in the mix. I think Mathis is having a little bit better season than his teammate Dwight Freeney (IND). Babin leads all AFC linemen in sacks (9).
In the NFC, Peppers' impressive numbers (6 sacks, 6 pass deflections, 3 forced fumbles) don't even tell the full story; he draws penalties and double-teams and gets pressure even when he doesn't make the play. I have mixed feelings on Justin Tuck (NYG) and Umenyiora. Tuck has two 3-sack games, but just 1.5 in the other 9 games combined. Umenyiora had 8 sacks after just six games. He still has 8. But he also leads the NFL, by far, in forced fumbles (7). James Hall (STL) has 7.5 sacks and 4 forced fumbles, sort of Umenyiora Lite, but his consistency and lack of supporting cast almost make him a more appealing choice. Jared Allen (MIN) is having a down year, but he's still among the best. Will Smith (NO) could be a good choice as long as he doesn't go to jail. Cullen Jenkins (GB) is a good player in Green Bay's 3-4.
Defensive Tackle
Haloti Ngata (BAL), Antonio Garay (SD), Shaun Ellis (NYJ); Ndamukong Suh (DET), B.J. Raji (GB), Sedrick Ellis (NO)
The hype for Suh is legit. He and Kyle Vanden Bosch have almost single-handedly lifted Detroit's defense, from the worst in the league to merely below-average. The AFC has incredible depth here (see above, DE). It particularly hurt to omit Vince Wilfork (NE) and Tommy Kelly (OAK), both of whom could have made it if Ngata and Ellis were listed at DE. Wilfork probably is better than Mike Wright, whom I did select as an end. Darnell Dockett (ARI) and Jay Ratliff (DAL) were the best in the league last season, but they aren't playing at the same level this season and don't deserve your vote. Barry Cofield (NYG) and Anthony Adams (CHI) are better.
Outside Linebacker
Shaun Phillips (SD), James Harrison (PIT), Terrell Suggs (BAL); Clay Matthews III (GB), Chad Greenway (MIN), Lance Briggs (CHI)
It's hard to get away from the pass rushers. Outside linebackers who can get to the quarterback are impact players, and there are a lot of them right now. Tamba Hali (KC) has 8 sacks. LaMarr Woodley (PIT) has 6.5 sacks, 3 forced fumbles, and an interception. Cameron Wake (MIA), who leads the AFC with 10.5 sacks, is probably on most ballots. He's too inconsistent for my taste, disappears for long stretches and is so aggressive he's vulnerable to manipulation by the offense.
Briggs and Greenway are so good they deflected my obsession with pass-rushers. DeMarcus Ware (DAL) and Brian Orakpo (WAS) have big names and good reputations, but they haven't been able to lift their teams, both of which have losing records and rank near the bottom of the league in defense. It's a shame more people don't know about Greenway, who leads the NFC in tackles. He's been a monster in space for a couple of years now, and he's the best player on Minnesota's defense.
Inside Linebacker
Lawrence Timmons (PIT), Jerod Mayo (NE); Jonathan Vilma (NO), Patrick Willis (SF)
Timmons is 4th in the AFC in tackles, with 3 sacks, 2 fumble recoveries, a forced fumble, 10 passes defensed, and 2 interceptions. No one else is having a season like that. Mayo leads the NFL in tackles. He's very quick and instinctive, crucial qualities in a middle linebacker. Ray Lewis (BAL) somehow continues to be among the best ILBs around, but I don't think he stands out from Kevin Burnett (SD), David Harris (NYJ), and Stephen Tulloch (TEN).
I'm not enthusiastic about Willis, but I can't come up with an excuse not to vote for him. Something about his game just doesn't excite me. If you feel the same way, consider E.J. Henderson (MIN), James Laurinaitis (STL), Barrett Ruud (TB), or Brian Urlacher (CHI). Henderson has 3 picks, Laurinaitis has 3 sacks, I don't need to tell you about Urlacher, and Ruud has more tackles than any of them. Vilma's numbers don't jump off the page — they're fine, same ballpark as the other guys I mentioned — but he's a playmaker, the best ILB in the NFC.
Cornerback
Antonio Cromartie (NYJ), Darrelle Revis (NYJ), Antoine Cason (SD); Asante Samuel (PHI), Charles Woodson (GB), Aqib Talib (TB)
Samuel leads the league in interceptions; Talib is tied for second and gets beat less frequently than most INT hawks. Woodson is starting to play more like a safety, freelancing wherever the ball is. He has 4 forced fumbles, 2 INTs, a sack, and a lot of tackles that aren't the result of his man making a catch. Cason's Chargers lead the AFC in opponent passer rating, followed by the Jets, who now have two shutdown corners.
Nnamdi Asomugha (OAK) has missed some time, and Vontae Davis (MIA) gets beat too often. In the interest of brevity, the closest calls in the AFC: Sheldon Brown (CLE), Brandon Flowers (KC), Kelvin Hayden (IND), Ike Taylor (PIT), and a pair of rookies, Joe Haden (CLE) and Devin McCourty (NE), who are 1-2 in the conference in interception return yards. In the NFC: Terrell Thomas (NYG) leads the NFL in passes defensed, Charles Tillman (CHI) is a turnover machine, and Tramon Williams (GB) is starting to resemble a shut-down corner. DeAngelo Hall (WAS) is having his best season in years, and he's made some big plays, but he plays on the last-ranked defense in the NFL, and that's partly his fault.
Strong Safety
Troy Polamalu (PIT); Quintin Mikell (PHI)
No one else at this position particularly interests me. There are other good players in the AFC, but none of them are Polamalu. Mikell consistently gets to the ball. He's an aggressive tackler, and better in coverage than most strong safeties. LaRon Landry (WAS) is a hitter, and he's made some good plays this year, but he's just useless in coverage.
Free Safety
Michael Griffin (TEN); Earl Thomas (SEA)
Please don't vote for Ed Reed (BAL). He's missed half the season. And don't vote for Brian Dawkins (DEN), either. He's a million years old and he can't play any more. Denver has the worst defense in the league. Also, you shouldn't vote for anyone in the NFC. Everyone good is in the AFC. But Thomas has 5 picks and he gets 8 tackles every week, so since I have to pick someone, there you go. Griffin leads all AFC free safeties in tackles, and he has more passes defensed than any except Reed, who I will remind you has only played 5 games. I also like Antoine Bethea (IND), Patrick Chung (NE), Abram Elam (CLE), and Eric Weddle (SD).
Kicker
Billy Cundiff (BAL); John Kasay (CAR)
No one's really blowing the field away this year, so why not go with a solid field goal guy who is easily the best in the league on kickoffs? That's Cundiff. He's only missed three times this season, and more than half his kickoffs go for touchbacks. Otherwise, I guess I'd say Rob Bironas (TEN), who leads the league in FG%, Dan Carpenter (MIA), who leads in field goals made, or Josh Scobee (JAC), whose last-minute 59-yarder beat the Colts in Week 4. Kasay missed a potential game-winning kick in Week 12, but he hasn't failed from under 40 yards all season and he's tied for the league lead in 50
View the Original article
Friday, December 3, 2010
Thursday Night Football Preview: Week 13 Houston vs. Philadelphia
Eagles mascot hopes to have something to cheer for - Kevin BurkettMichael Vick leads the high powered offense of the Philadelphia Eagles will welcome the Houston Texans and Matt Schaub to Lincoln Financial Field. View the Original article
Two Players Reach Quarter Finals at AEGON Masters
Cedric Pioline. First Quarter Finalist at Masters - Paul GilhamCedric Pioline was the first player to book his place in Friday's Quarter Finals at the AEGON Masters at the Royal Albert Hall today (Wednesday). View the Original article
2010 Tennis Comes To an End, Finally
November 30, 2010 by Tom Kosinski • Print Story •
With a thunder of applause, and a bit of ale-driven cheers, the 2010 professional tennis year came to an end yesterday. Roger Federer stood tallest, defeating nemesis Rafael Nadal in three sets at the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals in London. It was a good match, and I for one am glad it's over.
This is the latest I've ever had a tennis season go. It's just a day before December, and I actually had my fill of turkey here over three days before I got to see the last serve of the season. On the Women's Tennis Association (WTA) Tour, 2010 was a year where they began to introduce measures to add excitement to the season and begin to shorten it. The men's tour, on the other hand, wanted to hold on to 2010 as long as it could.
I can't necessarily disagree with the championship itself, as it drew, by most accounts, a quarter of a million fans over the eight-day tournament, which, by just about any account, is a smashing success, pun intended. For most of the world, this time is devoid of a lot of professional sports, so it is easy to view and it is a welcome change to soccer. Here in America, however, it had to compete with the Thanksgiving holiday, a full professional football schedule, and some of the best college football games in years.
This year's men's finals matches were all top-notch, with very good performances by Robin Soderling, Novak Djokovic, and Andy Murray. The tournament got its top two seeds for the final, as well. It's the way I guess you would want 2010 to end, with the two top men playing for the last title of the year.
Federer won the match mostly on the fact he was well rested, having not been truly tested in all his round robin matches. Nadal had a marathon semifinal with Andy Murray and came into the final with about three quarters of a full tank. Federer and Nadal traded shots and games over the first two sets, but in the third and final, it was clear Nadal had run out of steam.
As I sat watching some of the match replays online, I couldn't help but flash back to matches between legends Bjorn Borg and Guillermo Vilas. Federer and Borg are cool, had incredibly complete games, and moved quickly, but with the grace of a ballerina. Vilas and Nadal, well, have the muscle and spin and are like bulls on the court, bludgeoning you with every lefty forehand and every huge backhand. As with Borg/Vilas, in the end, grace beats bulls, and Federer came out on top of Nadal.
One thing I will agree with the English tabloids is that while this is a rivalry, it's the most civil rivalry I've seen since Rod Laver and Ken Rosewall. The tennis was great, but there was at times a missing excitement. You could not feel any fire in the belly. Only blue, icy flames.
So now the season is over. The WTA season changes did little to really help performance of its top athletes and didn't help guarantee the big players, either. Injuries still played their part, including a six-month disappearance of Serena Williams due to an off-court foot injury. Venus, Maria Sharapova, and Justine Henin also suffered physically. This left the game to the young girls, and while it's nice to see the next generation, season-ending No. 1 Caroline Wozniacki still isn't a complete player yet. I'm happy to see Kim Clijsters take another U.S. Open title and also to win the season-ending tour championships over Wozniacki.
I'm still left feeling a little cheated by the women. Serena Williams finished 2010 fourth in the world, although she only played six tournaments all year. That just isn't right. Players like Sammy Stosur and Francesca Schiavone played a full season and their hearts out, both making the French final (Schiavone winning it). Finishing in the season-ending rankings below both Venus and Serena just seems wrong.
Overall, 2010 was a good year internationally for tennis, but the effects of the world financial crisis and the state of the global economy are starting to be felt. I'm glad now that the season is over. Congratulations, Roger. Happy holidays, Kim, Rafa, Caroline, Vera, Andy, Andy, Novak, and the rest of both tours. See you all in six weeks down under.
In the coming weeks, it's that time again: my annual tennis Christmas wish list for 2010. Can you guess what will be on my list?
More NBA Sports Commentary11.30.10By Tom Kosinski end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
With a thunder of applause, and a bit of ale-driven cheers, the 2010 professional tennis year came to an end yesterday. Roger Federer stood tallest, defeating nemesis Rafael Nadal in three sets at the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals in London. It was a good match, and I for one am glad it's over.
This is the latest I've ever had a tennis season go. It's just a day before December, and I actually had my fill of turkey here over three days before I got to see the last serve of the season. On the Women's Tennis Association (WTA) Tour, 2010 was a year where they began to introduce measures to add excitement to the season and begin to shorten it. The men's tour, on the other hand, wanted to hold on to 2010 as long as it could.
I can't necessarily disagree with the championship itself, as it drew, by most accounts, a quarter of a million fans over the eight-day tournament, which, by just about any account, is a smashing success, pun intended. For most of the world, this time is devoid of a lot of professional sports, so it is easy to view and it is a welcome change to soccer. Here in America, however, it had to compete with the Thanksgiving holiday, a full professional football schedule, and some of the best college football games in years.
This year's men's finals matches were all top-notch, with very good performances by Robin Soderling, Novak Djokovic, and Andy Murray. The tournament got its top two seeds for the final, as well. It's the way I guess you would want 2010 to end, with the two top men playing for the last title of the year.
Federer won the match mostly on the fact he was well rested, having not been truly tested in all his round robin matches. Nadal had a marathon semifinal with Andy Murray and came into the final with about three quarters of a full tank. Federer and Nadal traded shots and games over the first two sets, but in the third and final, it was clear Nadal had run out of steam.
As I sat watching some of the match replays online, I couldn't help but flash back to matches between legends Bjorn Borg and Guillermo Vilas. Federer and Borg are cool, had incredibly complete games, and moved quickly, but with the grace of a ballerina. Vilas and Nadal, well, have the muscle and spin and are like bulls on the court, bludgeoning you with every lefty forehand and every huge backhand. As with Borg/Vilas, in the end, grace beats bulls, and Federer came out on top of Nadal.
One thing I will agree with the English tabloids is that while this is a rivalry, it's the most civil rivalry I've seen since Rod Laver and Ken Rosewall. The tennis was great, but there was at times a missing excitement. You could not feel any fire in the belly. Only blue, icy flames.
So now the season is over. The WTA season changes did little to really help performance of its top athletes and didn't help guarantee the big players, either. Injuries still played their part, including a six-month disappearance of Serena Williams due to an off-court foot injury. Venus, Maria Sharapova, and Justine Henin also suffered physically. This left the game to the young girls, and while it's nice to see the next generation, season-ending No. 1 Caroline Wozniacki still isn't a complete player yet. I'm happy to see Kim Clijsters take another U.S. Open title and also to win the season-ending tour championships over Wozniacki.
I'm still left feeling a little cheated by the women. Serena Williams finished 2010 fourth in the world, although she only played six tournaments all year. That just isn't right. Players like Sammy Stosur and Francesca Schiavone played a full season and their hearts out, both making the French final (Schiavone winning it). Finishing in the season-ending rankings below both Venus and Serena just seems wrong.
Overall, 2010 was a good year internationally for tennis, but the effects of the world financial crisis and the state of the global economy are starting to be felt. I'm glad now that the season is over. Congratulations, Roger. Happy holidays, Kim, Rafa, Caroline, Vera, Andy, Andy, Novak, and the rest of both tours. See you all in six weeks down under.
In the coming weeks, it's that time again: my annual tennis Christmas wish list for 2010. Can you guess what will be on my list?
More NBA Sports Commentary11.30.10By Tom Kosinski end moreSportsCommentary --
View the Original article
Thursday, December 2, 2010
NFL Week 12 Power Rankings
The Hall of Fame has announced this year's semifinalists. My preferences to advance: Tim Brown, Cris Carter, Don Coryell, Dermontti Dawson, Chris Doleman, Marshall Faulk, Kevin Greene, Lester Hayes, Curtis Martin, Willie Roaf, Ed Sabol, Deion Sanders, Shannon Sharpe, Aeneas Williams, George Young.
View the Original article
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Djokovic looking to bounce back by beating Roddick at ATP World Tour Finals
After a comprehensive victory in his opening match, the Serb seemed to hold his own against Rafael Nadal until he required treatement for a complaint related to his right contact lens, which seemed to irritate Djokovic.
"I really feel sick talking about it because it's just incredible that this happened to me. It never happened to me in my life," said Djokovic.
"I'm really annoyed something like this can really affect the match. It did because my right eye got irritated and from the 5-5 I could not play. I could not see a ball, especially on the return. It was just terrible.
"I don't want to find any excuses for my loss, but the fact of the matter is that I just could not play. I could not play. These things happen. It's out of my control. Unfortunately, it happened in a very important match, in a very important moment."
Hopefully, the problem would have cleared up in his forthcoming match with Roddick, who is attempting to avoid three straight defeats in the tournament.
The American has looked downbeat as of late and has obviously began to affect his performance.
"I don't think he came into the match with a lot of confidence," stated Roddick.
"Being able to get through game 10 in the first set definitely raised his confidence level. He played well in the second set."
View the Original article
Vince Russo - Most Talked About Man In Pro Wrestling History?
Vince Russo is the human equivalent of Marmite – you either love him, or you hate him. In most instances, he's hated.
I was one of the people who jumped on the “Vince Russo killed WCW!” bandwagon without knowing much of the detail behind it. I have since read both Eric Bischoff's Controversy Creates Ca$h and more recently, Vince Russo's very own Rope Opera: How WCW Killed Vince Russo and my opinion has changed.
Many people reading this will have either given up or will be thinking “There's no way I'm changing my mind on that guy!” Russo doesn't help himself, just look at the title of his book, he loves confrontation. And he really hates being blamed for things, hence the rather direct title for his second book.
Being blamed for things has become commonplace when it comes to Russo. Squash match? Blame Russo. Rushed heel/face turn? Blame Russo. Bad storyline? Blame Russo. Interference in the main event? Blame Russo. Staff at McDonald’s given you the wrong order? Blame Russo. Your internet stream cut out? Blame Russo. Yeah, you get the idea.
The IWC (Internet Wrestling Community) can be an angry beast at times. Well, most of the time actually. But when the IWC starts to dislike a guy, no matter what they do, he's to blame. To this day, you still get people moaning about how Vince Russo killed WCW. I can talk from experience here when I say that if you seriously think that – go and do some research.
No one factor can completely be blamed for taking away the best (in my opinion, of course) wrestling promotion of all time. If the men that worked in the company for years (Bischoff and Russo to name but two) can't say then who are we, as outsiders, to claim we know the answer? That's where the IWC comes back in, or “smarks” as people often refer to them as.
They've read the dirtsheets and the message boards and because they might have said in passing that Russo was involved in WCW, bang, the seeds of Russo hate have been planted and they're something which is extremely hard to get rid of.
The main problem for WCW was the corporate structure, something which a lot of WCW employees mention as being a big problem. Before, you could go and talk to Eric Bischoff and your problem would be sorted, but not now. After the AOL-Time Warner merger, wrestling was seen as embarrassing to the company and WCW had no chance of surviving in that sort of climate.
In the ring, Bischoff was as much to blame as Russo, if not more. Yes, Bischoff created the best, most bad-ass group in Professional Wrestling history but it went on for far too long and got stale. The top guys were given stupid contracts, something which Bischoff more or less had to do to make WCW what it was. To give a guy complete creative control over his character is just asking for trouble and that's what he got.
Those guys didn't want to give up their spot. Many people think it's solely down to money but as Russo says in Rope Opera, wrestling is full of paranoia and wrestlers didn't want to put others over, especially in WCW as they saw it as them being buried. They were giving somebody else the spotlight, soon they'd run off with their wife and file for custody of their kids. Yeah, it really was that bad.
It wasn't as bad in the WWF as Vince McMahon was running a tight ship. He had the last say over everything. Russo is the first port of call or all wrestling disasters, but what about the good things? Does he ever get given credit? Do we ever hear “Vince Russo killed WCW! But he also helped build the foundations of the Attitude Era.” Of course we don't, it's all one-sided.
The native New Yorker originally started to write for the WWF magazine and later became the editor. Russo then got on to the creative team and later became head writer for the WWF as Vince McMahon sought a solution to the bad ratings RAW were getting.
Russo took over as head writer after RAW's all time low rating of 1.8 and within three years managed to overtake WCW and make RAW the number one wrestling programme on TV. Russo was the main man behind what many fans see as the golden age of Pro Wrestling – The Attitude Era. He helped create the Stone Cold vs. Mr McMahon feud as well as Kane vs. Undertaker and the creation of D-Generation X to rival WCW's nWo.
The one thing Russo likes to point out is that he is a writer and not a booker. Bookers are usually seen as men who have been in the wrestling business before, often as wrestlers. Writers are normally from a non-wrestling background and though this isn't the case when it comes to Russo, he still sees himself as a writer.
The main difference is that writers normally look far more into the future than bookers. Sometimes this can be detrimental but bookers will generally write in the present and think about how to further the storylines as they go.
With the WWF firmly on top in the Monday Night Wars and with the introduction of SmackDown, Russo decided it was time to jump ship. He was sick of the workload Vince forced upon him and received an offer from WCW which he accepted.
Russo and his partner in crime – Ed Ferrara, not only managed to stop Nitro's rating from declining, they actually improved it by some margin. The head-to-head ratings between Nitro and Raw changed an average of 0.5 in WCW's favour within the first three months.
He was obviously doing something right, going from a 2.9 rating to a 3.5 almost immediately is something which is extremely hard to accomplish. The focus was put more on the mid-card talent and less on the main eventers who refused to move out of the spotlight.
Two men Russo had problems with were Hulk Hogan and Goldberg. I'll get onto Hogan in a minute but Goldberg didn't do Russo any favours. He had been made into some sort of monster by Bischoff and famously went on the longest ever undefeated streak in Pro Wrestling history. Russo wanted to rebuild Goldberg's character but that involved taking a loss. Something which Goldberg really didn't want to do.
The fact of the matter was that the guys were too used to doing what they wanted, demanding what they wanted and getting what they wanted when Bischoff was in charge. Russo tried to come in and do what he did with the WWF (break Nitro's 84 week winning streak) and revolutionize the company but the chances of him doing that were near enough zero.
One man who was really underutilized by Bischoff was Bret Hart. He and Russo had a suprisingly good relationship considering what happened that night in Montreal (if you don't know about that then why the hell are you reading this?!) and the whole Owen Hart tragedy. Bret was WCW Champion and was going to help carry the company.
Russo's bad luck continued though, just before the Souled Out PPV in 2000, he received phone calls from both Hart and then US Champion Jeff Jarrett. Both said they were injured and couldn't wrestle. That's going to hurt any PPV from any company and Russo planned to put some punch (excuse the pun) into the event by having MMA star Tank Abbott win the World Title. The plan never actually happened but word got around that he was planning it and he was subsequently removed as head writer.
After refusing to work as part of a booking team, Russo took some time off. As soon as he left, Nitro's rating went straight back down to 2.4. Doesn't that tell you something?
Russo returned three months later to work with Bischoff as they tried to rebuild WCW but the two often locked horns and they weren't getting anywhere. Both men wanted total control and that was something you simply couldn't have after the corporate merger ruined WCW.
The biggest talking during his short WCW tenure was Bash at the Beach. I mentioned that Russo had trouble with Hogan, most people do. Not because he's a bad person, he's just an ego maniac. And who can blame him? The man more or less built sports entertainment. I'm sure you know what happens (again, if you don't then do your research, I won't bore you with the details) and Hogan more or less tried to screw Russo over.
A lot of things that are said about Russo do have some truth in them but he is not a liar. He had run through the match and ending with Hogan and Bischoff beforehand and even edited it after Hogan refused to lose to Jeff Jarrett. Creative control ruining things yet again. Jarrett laid down for Hogan and he and Bischoff left the building. Later in the PPV, Russo came out and 'fired' Hogan from WCW thus nullifying his title and this set up an impromptu match between Jarrett and Booker T.
Hogan tried to sue Russo for defamation and after a lengthy, drawn out struggle, the case was thrown out. He, Russo and Bischoff have since been re-united at TNA and apparently have a much better relationship.
The main thing that has changed Russo over the years is his new found religious beliefs. He is a born again Christian. If you read Rope Opera, you may get a bit sick of his references to God but it's obviously a big part of his life, something you can't blame him for.
Over the years, I've always had a bad opinion of Russo. I genuinely disliked the guy and thought Pro Wrestling would be a much better place without him. However, after doing research and reading his book, I've now come to respect the man. A man that suffered depression doing what he loved doing. That's how screwed up WCW was, way before Russo was anywhere near it. A man that although claims he could walk away from wrestling, obviously loves the sport. A sport that he has had such a massive influence on, often more positive than negative.
Sometimes wrestling fans can be ruthless and there are often casualties along the way. Vince Russo is one of those casualties and I hope more people will look at Russo and think: “Hey, I don't agree with everything he does but he's done so much for the rasslin' business, I respect him.”
View the Original article
Looking Ahead to 2011: San Diego Padres Bullpen
A major reason why the San Diego Padres are so successful during the 2010 season is that their bullpen is outstanding. There is very little to suggest that it San Diego can not to do it again next even with a couple of defections.
Heath Bell
Bell does have classic closing hard stuff. His fastball reaches as high as 98 mph and a nasty hard slider as well. That stuff plays very well in every ballpark not just Petco Park. His 2010 season is very dominating (6-1 47 saves 1.93 ERA 1.2 WHIP over 70 innings). Bell does have excellent control as well (3.07k/bb ratio), and is almost impossible to hit a home run against (only 1 given up in 2010). He also generates a lot of swing and misses when he comes, and his strikeout rate certainly reflects that (11.06k/9). All of this adds up to being an elite closer for San Diego. However, that also makes Bell too expensive for the Padres to make any sort of long term commitment to. That is why his name is constantly in the trade rumors. It is not a question if the Padres will trade Bell, but rather a matter of when it will happen. Bell will start the season as the Padres closer, but how long he does remain in San Diego is anyone's guess.
Luke Gregerson
Gregerson is one of the few consistent relief pitchers from year to year. Of course, his major league career only spans two seasons but they are very good seasons. His 2010 season establishes him as a future closer in waiting (4-7 2 saves 3.22 ERA .83 WHIP over 78.1 innings). At first glance at his scouting report, Gregerson seems like a typical sinker/slider setup man. However, his sinker bores in on hitters bats causing them to shatter, and his slider is a true wipeout pitch. Gregerson does have better control than Bell (4.94 K/BB ratio in 2010) and is almost as dominant at getting hitters to strikeout (10.23k/9). Opponents do find a bit easier to take out of the ballpark than Bell (8 homers given up in 2010), but that is a small quibble in the grand scheme here. Gregerson is the top candidate to replace Bell as a closer when the Bell trade happens.
Mike Adams
The one time future closer of the Milwaukee Brewers is now one of the best setup men in major league baseball these days. Adams, along with Bell and Gregerson, forms one of the best trios at the end of the game which shortens the game up for San Diego opponents. Adams does have a power sinker that induces a lot of ground ball outs, but also a 4 seam fastball that can use to get the strikeout when he needs it. Adams 2010 season just reaffirms his standing (4-1 1.76 ERA .933 WHIP over 66.2 innings). He does have a very good strikeout rate (9.84k/9) along with excellent control (3.17k/bb ratio), and is near impossible to take him yard as well (only 2 homers given up in 2010). Adam is coming back to the Padres and is a top setup man for them in 2011.
Joe Thatcher
Thatcher is the resident LOOGY (Lefty One Out GuY) in the Padres bullpen, and that is a role that he is very good at. His 2010 number indicate that he borders on dominating in that role (1-0 1.29 ERA .857 WHIP in 65 games). Thatcher's sinker is almost unhittable to left handers. His strikeout rate is excellent (11.57) as is his control (6.43k/bb). Thatcher will have the same role in 2011 for San Diego.
Tim Stauffer
Tim Stauffer can give a course on pitcher abuse on the college level (College coaches can burn out a pitcher looking at the short term interest of keeping the head coaching job and not thinking of the pitcher's future). His stuff never recovers from the abuse he takes his final two years in college. Now his fastball rests in the low 90s, and Stauffer makes do changing speeds while mixing in his curveball and an above average changeup. He is a candidate for the rotation, if the Padres can not bring back Jon Garland this offseason. Still, his best role looks like as along man out of the pen getting some spot starts here and there.
Trevor Hoffman
Hoffman is the all time leader in saves for major league baseball. The 2011 season looks like it is going to be his last one, and he is no longer the consistent closer anymore. However, there is considerable talk that Hoffman is going to sign with San Diego so the circle is complete. It does make a nice story, but the real question is if the Padres can afford the sentimental journey.
View the Original article
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)