With a new MLB commissioner ready to take over following this season, we have seen a lot of analysis recently of the tenure of soon-to-be former commissioner, Bud Selig. In my opinion, Selig did a very good job during his time as the man in charge of the sport. There were surely ugly points during his tenure, like the strike in 1994 and the steroid era, but I really think that Selig did a great job in responding to those stains. Since 1994, Major League Baseball has reveled in nothing but labor peace, while we have seen the NBA and NFL lose parts of seasons, and the NHL lose an entire season. Surely, the steroid epidemic was something that, in retrospect, damaged the image of the game, but when we were in the midst of it and seeing balls fly out of the parks left and right, I didn't hear anyone complaining. Selig came back with a drug policy that has been one of the best and most strict in all of sports, and the steroid era is a thing of the past. So despite those two failures on his part, his responses were unbelievably good for baseball.
On the positive side, Selig has overseen a true growth in the game in many different ways. First and foremost, the growth is due to the addition of four teams under his regime. Before Selig became commissioner, we had never heard of the Florida Marlins, Colorado Rockies, Tampa Bay Rays, and Arizona Diamondbacks, but because of him, they are now fully operational (and somewhat successful) franchises. The game has also seen such an enormous profit that more than half of the franchises in the league have been able to build new stadiums during Selig's tenure. Instead of the dregs of places like Three Rivers Stadium, the Metrodome, Riverfront Stadium, and Candlestick Park, we now have beautiful facilities like PNC Park, Target Field, Great American Ballpark, and, in my opinion, the most beautiful stadium in all of baseball, AT&T Park.
Interleague play has meant the chance for fans to see each and every team, while an unbalanced schedule has at the same time allowed fans to see its team play rivals more and more often. Although it took a lot longer than it should have, baseball also finally implemented instant replay under Selig. He also officially declared April 15 as Jackie Robinson Day, which will forever bring about recognition of one of the most important players of not only baseball history, but the history of American sports in general. One thing that sometimes goes overlooked is how well he handled the events of September 11, 2001 as well. The league halted play for a week, but anyone who is a fan of the sport will remember Mike Piazza's dramatic home run against the Atlanta Braves at Shea Stadium following the resumption of games, and what was (for completely biased and obvious reasons on my part) the greatest World Series ever played, the 2001 World Series. We have seen magnificent World Series games and moments throughout the history of baseball, but the 2001 Series featured three of the most unbelievable games in the history of the sport, and considering the circumstances under which those games were played, Selig should be proud of how well the games represented not only the game of baseball in general, but the entirety of American culture as well.
However, if you asked most fans of baseball what Selig's greatest accomplishment as commissioner of baseball was, the most common response would likely be the addition of the Wild Card to the MLB playoffs. As opposed to two divisions in each league, Selig split the leagues into three divisions, and introduced a Wild Card team that would bring about four playoff teams in each league, and in doing so, the excitement of the MLB playoffs has grown exponentially.
The biggest difference between Major League Baseball and all of our other professional sports is the length of the season. The NBA and the NHL regular seasons consist of 82 games. The NFL regular season consists of 16 games. The MLB regular season consists of 162 games. The differences in these lengths all make each sport unique, and I think that the addition of a Wild Card team to the Major League Baseball playoffs has really paid off for Selig.
We all love the NFL because a 16 game schedule means that each and every game matters. With one game per week, the drama is at its highest every Sunday, and it is what makes the sport the most popular in our country today. However, the 82 game schedule in the NBA and NHL sometimes brings about unsatisfactory results come postseason time. In both sports, we often see borderline mediocre teams in the postseason each and every year and it often times makes the playoffs unwatchable for the opening rounds. Baseball however, is the true definition of a marathon and not a sprint, and I truly believe that the addition of the Wild Card has made success in the marathon that is the regular season more rewarding to those teams who truly deserve recognition.
In the 1970's and 1980's, before Selig took over as commissioner, we saw truly great seasons by great teams not even result in playoff berths. The mid-to-late 70's were littered with teams who won over 90 games and did not even reach the postseason. In 1980, the Baltimore Orioles actually won 100 games and still did not reach the postseason. After a marathon of a regular season, shouldn't those teams at least have a chance to lift the World Series trophy? If a team can finish below .500 in the NBA and still reach the postseason, then a team that wins 90 games in a 162 game season surely deserves a shot at the postseason in Major League Baseball.
Since the Wild Card was introduced to the game of baseball, we have seen 10 Wild Card teams reach the World Series, with five of them winning the Series, so clearly the Wild Card teams have not exactly been pushovers. A Wild Card team in baseball is surely more likely to contend for a World Series title than a #8 seed is in the NBA.
So, while the introduction of the Wild Card has surely been one of Bud Selig's signature moves as commissioner of baseball, when he introduced another Wild Card team two seasons ago, I was a bit skeptical. A one game playoff between the best two non-division winning clubs in each league seemed a bit too much like the NCAA tournament for my liking. After the marathon season, was a one-and-done game really good for the sport? I had my questions, but what we saw last night surely helped in pointing me more in the direction of "yes" than "no."
Is the MLB season a long and arduous one? Yes. Does that mean that the postseason should be an extended equivalent of that? Yes. However, when we look at the sport through the lens of the commissioner, we can really see why this one-game Wild Card playoff makes total sense. Last night, the entire country watched the Kansas City Royals battle the Oakland Athletics for a chance to reach the MLB postseason. If not for the one-and-done fashion of the game, it would be likely that we would have paid little attention to it. However, because of the new stipulations brought about by Commissioner Selig, the game meant the season was on the line for both teams, and the game did not disappoint. The Royals won a 12 inning affair, as Salvador Perez drove in the winning run to break the hearts of Oakland fans and bring about a postseason aura that has not been felt in the Kansas City baseball world since 1985. The Royals, for so long a laughingstock in the AL Central, now march on to the playoffs to face the Anaheim Angels tomorrow night.
Was it a terribly unsatisfying end to a great season for the Oakland Athletics? Yes, it was. But was it great for the game of baseball in general? The answer is undeniably yes. So, from the perspective of the commissioner of baseball, that is an overwhelming success. The National League play-in game is tonight, and on the heels of a thrilling game last night in Kansas City, I'm sure the energy will be just as high in Pittsburgh tonight.
In reality, the commissioner works for the team owners, and what the owners want to do is make a profit. Though it may seem unfair to Oakland fans and other detractors of the American way, it is a simple fact, and last night proved why Bud Selig achieved true success in the eyes of the 30 owners of MLB franchises. After the thrilling finish last night, we can only hope for more of the same tonight. First pitch in Pittsburgh is less than three hours away.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: Following the inevitable ouster of GM Kevin Towers and manager Kirk Gibson, we have seen Dave Stewart arrive as the new general manager, while the manager's spot is still vacant. With Tony LaRussa (a great baseball mind) now in the mix in the front office, I feel like the organization will rely upon him to put a strong input into the selection of the next manager. Names like Jose Oquendo, a long-time MLB coach, and Terry Steinbach, a former minor league manager, have come up, but I really have no idea where the team will go, so I am eager to find out who the job ends up going to. No matter what, I expect improvement in 2015.
Daily Giants Update: The Giants dominated the Redskins this past Thursday and will now have an extended period of rest coming into a home game against Atlanta this Sunday. First round pick Odell Beckham might finally see his first regular season action, and the new offense seems to be coming into its own, and the addition of Beckham could really prove to be a huge asset with his ability to run after the catch. The Giants are a game behind the Cowboys and the Eagles after four weeks, so wins are still definitely at a premium. 1:00 this Sunday can not come soon enough.
Daily Rangers Update: The preseason is underway, and like most preseasons, the results have absolutely zero bearing on the regular season. The games start to count in just over a week though, and in any sport, following a loss in the championship usually means regression, but hopefully the Rangers can reverse that trend. The journey begins at 8:00 PM on October 9 in St. Louis.
Daily Nets Update: The preseason schedule for the Nets is pretty much unwatchable, as it consists of basically the Celtics, the Kings, and a team from Turkey. The regular season is still just under a month away from beginning, so we still have quite a bit of time before the games begin to matter.
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Friday, September 26, 2014
A rare tribute to the Yankees
With the Major League Baseball season entering the final days, we have separated the good from the bad through the marathon 162 game season. Playoff spots are mostly all filled, with only the AL Wild Card spot still having to be decided. We have seen a whole bunch of great stories so far in 2014. Clayton Kershaw has had one of the most dominant seasons a starting pitcher has ever had. The Kansas City Royals are on the verge of clinching their first playoff spot in nearly 20 years. Youngsters like Jose Abreu and Giancarlo Stanton have proven that despite opinions to the contrary, pitching is not in total control of the game. However, one of the best stories that has been ongoing throughout the season came to a climax last night in Yankee Stadium. After a career spanning two decades, Derek Jeter hit a walk off single in his last at bat at Yankee Stadium, and gave us a seemingly perfect ending to a great career.
The New York Yankees are likely the most polarizing team in American professional sports. They are either loved or hated in the baseball world. There are Yankee fans all over the country, so their fandom really has no geographical boundaries, but most baseball fans have strong feelings about the Yankees. If I were to place myself on a "Yankee spectrum," I would probably be somewhere in the middle, which is not very typical of baseball fans. I guess I would consider myself closer to "hating" the Yankees than "loving" them, but in all honesty, I am mostly neutral. The old argument about the Yankees having so much more money than everyone else is officially bereft of merit now that so many teams have budgets that continually grow exponentially. Alex Rodriguez, who is certainly a very polarizing player, has basically been forgotten, and I think that has softened the stance of many people toward the Yankees. And probably most importantly, the Yankees have simply not played deep into October year after year like they had been doing for so long. In recent years, teams like the St. Louis Cardinals, San Francisco Giants, Boston Red Sox, and Detroit Tigers (among others) have found more consistent success in the postseason than the Yankees. However, through all of this, there has been one unwavering centerpiece of the team, and that has been Derek Jeter.
As Jeter's career is coming to an end, a debate has been sparked about just how good Jeter is, and how he should be viewed from a historical point of view. Some people have pointed to a lack of individual achievements as evidence that he was not a truly great player, and I cannot say that they are wrong. Yet others claim that he is the greatest Yankee of all time thanks to the entirety of his career. When we look at the comparisons to former Yankee greats, we see that he does not lead the way in any major categories across the board.
Lou Gehrig was a career .340 hitter, while Jeter's career average was .309. Jeter didn't win as many World Series titles as guys like Joe DiMaggio or Yogi Berra. Jeter was nowhere close to others like Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle in terms of power. He never won an MVP award either. Doubters point to things such as these and discount Jeter's achievements. But when you actually sit back and think about it, isn't being compared to legends like those enough to warrant praise? The Yankees, more than any other franchise in all of American sports, is littered with all time greats. Berra, Mantle, Ruth, DiMaggio, Gehrig. All of those men are some of the best to ever play the game. Just comparing Jeter to all of them should be enough to afford him all kinds of historical acclaim.
What the doubters and skeptics choose to overlook is what Jeter did when the stakes where at their highest. There is something to be said for coming up big when it matters most. Some athletes are able to do so, and others simply are not. Talent aside, there is just something deep down inside an athlete that brings out the best in tempestuous circumstances. Despite their individual greatness, guys like Peyton Manning, LeBron James, and Karl Malone just didn't have it. Are those three men all-time greats? Yes, they are. However, they just did not, or do not, seem to have the reliability to consistently deliver when the stakes are at their highest.
On the other hand, guys like Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, Usain Bolt, and Yogi Berra just continually deliver, or delivered, when they absolutely needed to. And if we were to put Derek Jeter into one of those categories, he would without question fit into the latter, and last night was just another example of why. Sure, the game did not mean a whole lot as the Orioles had already clinched a playoff berth and the Yankees will miss the playoffs this year. However, in the most dramatic of circumstances, Jeter delivered, and that is what his doubters continually overlook. Sure, Jeter may never have won an MVP award, but all-time greats like Al Kaline, Honus Wagner, Nap Lajoie, and Tony Gwynn never won the award either. Does that make them any less significant in the annals of baseball history? No, it does not.
So really, what my point is, is that we should appreciate greatness when we see it, and we should not try to nitpick and find fault with each and every individual that we watch play the games we love. Jeter will not go down as the greatest Yankee ever, but he surely deserves consideration for the top five (although I cannot place him in the top five because of the legends I mentioned before). But once again, let us put this into some sort of perspective. The fact that Jeter is even mentioned in the same breath as some of the greatest to ever play the game should be praise enough. The man will go down as a Yankee legend, and a baseball legend as well. He is a certain Hall of Famer, and some day, he will have his jersey retired and a plaque erected in his honor in center field at Yankee Stadium. In an era of free agency and nine digit contracts, Jeter was a mainstay. Whoever it is that replaces Jeter as the Opening Day shortstop for the Yankees next year will face a basically impossible task of filling the shoes of one of the greatest Yankees ever. So how about we stop trying to downplay what Jeter did in his career and just take a moment to embrace his place in baseball history. Whether you are a Yankee lover or a Yankee hater, I think you at least owe the game that much.
Daily Giants Update: Last night was one of the most dominant performances the Giants have put on in recent memory, as a 45-14 win in Washington really made me feel a whole lot better about the team. The new offense seems to be finding its groove, as Eli Manning played a great game, and Larry Donnell seems to be ready to make a name for himself among NFL tight ends. A 31 point win in a divisional game is surely never a bad thing, and now we get an extra few days of rest before the Atlanta Falcons come to Giants Stadium next Sunday. Both Dallas and Philadelphia have tough games coming up this weekend, so hopefully at least one of them loses. If that happens, our prospects in the division will look a whole lot better than they did two weeks ago.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: It is almost a given that Arizona will finish 2014 with the worst record in all of baseball, so obviously, it is hard to find positives here. The staff is being completely overhauled, as Kevin Towers was let go earlier in the week, and Kirk Gibson was let go today. I liked Gibson, but I am beyond excited to see Towers shown the door, as he has done nothing but make bad deals since he took over as our GM. Obviously, with a season as bad as 2014, changes needed to be made, and they have been. We are just playing for pride at this point, and the offseason will be all about getting healthy (Daniel Hudson, Paul Goldschmidt, Patrick Corbin) and getting ready for 2015.
Daily Rangers Update: The NHL preseason is officially underway, and the Rangers are in the midst of a game with the Chicago Blackhawks tonight. We are actually less than two full weeks away from the beginning of the regular season, and the Rangers will open in St. Louis against a formidable Blues team. It seems like it has come out of nowhere, but get ready for hockey!
Daily Nets Update: The NBA season is still over a month away, but it is close enough to start getting excited about the 2014-15 Nets. Brook Lopez will be back and healthy, new additions like Jarrett Jack, Cory Jefferson, and Markel Brown will be intriguing, and mainstays like Deron Williams, Joe Johnson, and Kevin Garnett will be back as well. I was also happy to see Mason Plumlee get a lot of work with the U.S. national team earlier this summer, and I think that will be great for his mindset coming into 2014. My expectations are not of championship levels, but I think the Nets should be in store for a pretty good season.
The New York Yankees are likely the most polarizing team in American professional sports. They are either loved or hated in the baseball world. There are Yankee fans all over the country, so their fandom really has no geographical boundaries, but most baseball fans have strong feelings about the Yankees. If I were to place myself on a "Yankee spectrum," I would probably be somewhere in the middle, which is not very typical of baseball fans. I guess I would consider myself closer to "hating" the Yankees than "loving" them, but in all honesty, I am mostly neutral. The old argument about the Yankees having so much more money than everyone else is officially bereft of merit now that so many teams have budgets that continually grow exponentially. Alex Rodriguez, who is certainly a very polarizing player, has basically been forgotten, and I think that has softened the stance of many people toward the Yankees. And probably most importantly, the Yankees have simply not played deep into October year after year like they had been doing for so long. In recent years, teams like the St. Louis Cardinals, San Francisco Giants, Boston Red Sox, and Detroit Tigers (among others) have found more consistent success in the postseason than the Yankees. However, through all of this, there has been one unwavering centerpiece of the team, and that has been Derek Jeter.
As Jeter's career is coming to an end, a debate has been sparked about just how good Jeter is, and how he should be viewed from a historical point of view. Some people have pointed to a lack of individual achievements as evidence that he was not a truly great player, and I cannot say that they are wrong. Yet others claim that he is the greatest Yankee of all time thanks to the entirety of his career. When we look at the comparisons to former Yankee greats, we see that he does not lead the way in any major categories across the board.
Lou Gehrig was a career .340 hitter, while Jeter's career average was .309. Jeter didn't win as many World Series titles as guys like Joe DiMaggio or Yogi Berra. Jeter was nowhere close to others like Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle in terms of power. He never won an MVP award either. Doubters point to things such as these and discount Jeter's achievements. But when you actually sit back and think about it, isn't being compared to legends like those enough to warrant praise? The Yankees, more than any other franchise in all of American sports, is littered with all time greats. Berra, Mantle, Ruth, DiMaggio, Gehrig. All of those men are some of the best to ever play the game. Just comparing Jeter to all of them should be enough to afford him all kinds of historical acclaim.
What the doubters and skeptics choose to overlook is what Jeter did when the stakes where at their highest. There is something to be said for coming up big when it matters most. Some athletes are able to do so, and others simply are not. Talent aside, there is just something deep down inside an athlete that brings out the best in tempestuous circumstances. Despite their individual greatness, guys like Peyton Manning, LeBron James, and Karl Malone just didn't have it. Are those three men all-time greats? Yes, they are. However, they just did not, or do not, seem to have the reliability to consistently deliver when the stakes are at their highest.
On the other hand, guys like Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, Usain Bolt, and Yogi Berra just continually deliver, or delivered, when they absolutely needed to. And if we were to put Derek Jeter into one of those categories, he would without question fit into the latter, and last night was just another example of why. Sure, the game did not mean a whole lot as the Orioles had already clinched a playoff berth and the Yankees will miss the playoffs this year. However, in the most dramatic of circumstances, Jeter delivered, and that is what his doubters continually overlook. Sure, Jeter may never have won an MVP award, but all-time greats like Al Kaline, Honus Wagner, Nap Lajoie, and Tony Gwynn never won the award either. Does that make them any less significant in the annals of baseball history? No, it does not.
So really, what my point is, is that we should appreciate greatness when we see it, and we should not try to nitpick and find fault with each and every individual that we watch play the games we love. Jeter will not go down as the greatest Yankee ever, but he surely deserves consideration for the top five (although I cannot place him in the top five because of the legends I mentioned before). But once again, let us put this into some sort of perspective. The fact that Jeter is even mentioned in the same breath as some of the greatest to ever play the game should be praise enough. The man will go down as a Yankee legend, and a baseball legend as well. He is a certain Hall of Famer, and some day, he will have his jersey retired and a plaque erected in his honor in center field at Yankee Stadium. In an era of free agency and nine digit contracts, Jeter was a mainstay. Whoever it is that replaces Jeter as the Opening Day shortstop for the Yankees next year will face a basically impossible task of filling the shoes of one of the greatest Yankees ever. So how about we stop trying to downplay what Jeter did in his career and just take a moment to embrace his place in baseball history. Whether you are a Yankee lover or a Yankee hater, I think you at least owe the game that much.
Daily Giants Update: Last night was one of the most dominant performances the Giants have put on in recent memory, as a 45-14 win in Washington really made me feel a whole lot better about the team. The new offense seems to be finding its groove, as Eli Manning played a great game, and Larry Donnell seems to be ready to make a name for himself among NFL tight ends. A 31 point win in a divisional game is surely never a bad thing, and now we get an extra few days of rest before the Atlanta Falcons come to Giants Stadium next Sunday. Both Dallas and Philadelphia have tough games coming up this weekend, so hopefully at least one of them loses. If that happens, our prospects in the division will look a whole lot better than they did two weeks ago.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: It is almost a given that Arizona will finish 2014 with the worst record in all of baseball, so obviously, it is hard to find positives here. The staff is being completely overhauled, as Kevin Towers was let go earlier in the week, and Kirk Gibson was let go today. I liked Gibson, but I am beyond excited to see Towers shown the door, as he has done nothing but make bad deals since he took over as our GM. Obviously, with a season as bad as 2014, changes needed to be made, and they have been. We are just playing for pride at this point, and the offseason will be all about getting healthy (Daniel Hudson, Paul Goldschmidt, Patrick Corbin) and getting ready for 2015.
Daily Rangers Update: The NHL preseason is officially underway, and the Rangers are in the midst of a game with the Chicago Blackhawks tonight. We are actually less than two full weeks away from the beginning of the regular season, and the Rangers will open in St. Louis against a formidable Blues team. It seems like it has come out of nowhere, but get ready for hockey!
Daily Nets Update: The NBA season is still over a month away, but it is close enough to start getting excited about the 2014-15 Nets. Brook Lopez will be back and healthy, new additions like Jarrett Jack, Cory Jefferson, and Markel Brown will be intriguing, and mainstays like Deron Williams, Joe Johnson, and Kevin Garnett will be back as well. I was also happy to see Mason Plumlee get a lot of work with the U.S. national team earlier this summer, and I think that will be great for his mindset coming into 2014. My expectations are not of championship levels, but I think the Nets should be in store for a pretty good season.
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
Who really needs to solve these problems?
With the NFL season fully underway, mid-September is usually a great time for sports fans. Baseball races are coming down to the wire, and real football has finally arrived. However, 2014 seems to be different. The NFL is making headlines, but it isn't for the games on the field; it is for the behavior of the players off the field, and it is bringing national attention to the NFL for all the wrong reasons.
Usually, the dawn of a new NFL season steals headlines in the world of sports, but the fact that it is stealing headlines in the world of national news broadcasts has not necessarily been a good thing for the league.
Before I delve into the current problems facing the NFL and the game of football, I would like to provide some kind of context as to how our country views the sport that we all love. We love baseball because of the marathon-like mentality of the game. It is a daily grind that truly separates the best from the worst. We love hockey and basketball because of the pure athleticism that those sports demand. Football is in a realm of its own though. It is viewed as the sport of warriors, and the pinnacle of masculinity. To succeed in the NFL is to pass the ultimate test of manhood. Each and every Sunday, we spend hours watching our beacons of toughness battle one another in a sport where only the strong survive. Sundays during football season are like religion to millions of people across the country. However, what has recently come to the forefront and brought the NFL into the national spotlight, sadly, has nothing to do with Sunday. It has to do with each and every other day of the week, and the league has taken a gigantic publicity hit because of how it has represented itself on those other six days of the week.
Names like Ray McDonald and Greg Hardy may not be familiar to casual football fans. However, if you are even the faintest follower of the league, you surely are familiar with names such as Adrian Peterson and Ray Rice, and those are two names that have headlined national news stories from coast to coast in recent weeks. Video of Ray Rice physically assaulting his wife in an Atlantic City casino surfaced, and people were disgusted. How could an NFL player strike a woman he supposedly was in love with for the world to see and claim that he did nothing wrong?
Charges were levied against Adrian Peterson claiming that he had abused his own children, and Peterson responded that while he may not be a perfect parent, he was surely not a child abuser. What followed that? What followed was more claims that Peterson had abused a different child of his, and his image took even more of a hit (no pun intended).
As two of the stars of the league, and the faces of the Baltimore Ravens and Minnesota Vikings were being thrown under the bus of public scrutiny, the NFL seemed to be enabling its stars. Rice was given a soft punishment by the league, and only after a public uproar was he suspended indefinitely by the NFL. Until the video of Rice physically striking his wife emerged, it seemed as though the NFL was being extremely lenient in its punishment of a man who had no hesitation to abuse his fiancée.
While there is no actual video evidence of Peterson physically abusing his children, the fact that these charges arose only days after the videos of Rice arose only brightened the spotlight on the NFL and its recent displays of social deviancy. National news outlets ran stories about how the NFL was a league full of thugs, and organizations for the support of the rights of women and children felt as though it were open season to fire unimpeded shots at the most popular sport in the country. And while I am in no way condoning the actions of Rice, Hardy, McDonald, Peterson, and any other man in any walk of life who chooses to abuse women and/or children, there is one thing I find troubling about this whole situation.
Dissimilar upbringings, faiths, ethnicities, races and religions are not only represented in the NFL, but they are represented in the general makeup of the American population at large. What makes the league so great is that it is a meritocracy. Those who find the most success are those who combine talent and work ethic to turn into superstars. In the democratic state that is our country, individual talent and work ethic bring about societal elites. Status is based upon merit. If you work hard enough, then you will receive a status worthy of your perseverance. Yet, despite all of that talent and work ethic, we as sports fans completely compartmentalize the men we idolize on the field from the men that they might be off the field. If our favorite basketball player goes out on the court and scores 50 points, then we overlook any sort of personal flaws and celebrate his on-court ability. If our favorite baseball player goes out and hits a game-winning home run, we do the same thing, and such is the case for our favorite football players as well. However, what the developments and events of recent months has shown us is that despite what we see on the field, our favorite athletes may in fact be flawed more than most of us could ever imagine, and it seems as though we are placing the blame for this squarely upon not only the sport of football, but the NFL itself, and that is where I find an enormous fault with this belief.
As I said before, the American sports society views the NFL differently than it views any other sports league we know. Games on Sundays are wars. Whether it be wars between offensive and defensive linemen, wars between Raiders and Chiefs fans, or whether it be simply wars between opposing fantasy football owners, Sundays in the fall bring out the most temerarious feelings from deep down inside us, and we expect the same from the players we cheer on the field. For those three hours, we want to see our heroes dig down as far as they can and summon each and every waking breath they have to put it all on the line in the name of our team. Yet, when the game is over, we want them to make a 180 degree turn and fall into line until next Sunday comes. In theory, this seems simple, but is it actually a realistic expectation? What we have seen in recent weeks has been a true illustration that it surely is not realistic.
Before they even enter the league, professional football players must be of a different breed. Battling in the trenches and going mano a mano is something that only a select few can do. There is a reason that sprained joints and broken bones are only minor setbacks in the NFL. The players in the NFL are viewed by most fans as superhuman. Broken nose? Suck it up and play. Pulled muscle? Tape it up and get back in the game. These men are modern day gladiators, and we lionize them for being so. If their physical ability on the field is celebrated on Sundays, should we really expect them to be able to tone back that physicality from Monday through Saturday? I think it is a fair question to ask.
What men like Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson have done is 100% inexcusable. Grown men striking women and children is unacceptable, no matter the circumstances. However, I think that looking to the NFL to guide our society in general toward a solution to this problem is unfair. Despite the pressure that the league has been under in recent weeks to stiffen its policies on domestic violence, I think if we really want to stop domestic violence, we need to start at a place far from the National Football League. I am happy that what has gone on in the league has brought domestic violence issues to the forefront of our national concerns, but I have sincere reservations about using the NFL as the leading force in combating these issues.
Without question, in many cases, the NFL can definitely be used to gauge the feelings of the American society as a whole, but I think in this particular case, the NFL should really have little, if any, bearing on how we as a society view domestic violence. Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson should be celebrated for their on-field merits, but their behavior off the field should equate to ostracism and condemnation. What amounts to a great "football mentality" should be celebrated on Sundays, but we need to draw a line between on-field idols and off-field idols. There are lines that men should never cross, and despite an occupation that may seem contrary to socially acceptable lines of thinking, the actions of players like Hardy, Rice, McDonald, and Peterson are unworthy of any sort of festivity, and unfair to expect. However, I think it is also unfair to expect an organization such as the National Football League to be at the forefront of a movement towards peaceful and tranquil relationships. The NFL is still a league of warriors, and I think that recent weeks have proven the fact that the league is unable to be at the forefront of a societal movement that should have started years and years ago.
I am all for the eradication of domestic violence in our society, but I am also aware of the fact that this is a problem that will surely not be solved overnight. If in any way the NFL can help expedite these evolutions, then I am all for it, but I do not think that looking at an organization that is based upon violence is the best way to suggest a mainstream solution to a problem that has been rooted within our culture for centuries.
We use the NFL for many things, but I think that attempts to use Peterson and Rice's indiscretions as a gateway into the resolution of domestic violence is wrong. The game of football is inherently violent, so in order to solve real world problems dealing with real world violence, I will never believe that the NFL should be our primary source of inspiration.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: At this point, it is basically a race to stay out of last place in the National League. The DBacks hold a 2.5 game lead on the Rockies for that position, but trying to finish 14th as opposed to 15th surely is nothing to celebrate. Opening Day 2015 cannot come fast enough.
Daily Giants Update: Speaking of bad teams, an 0-2 start surely does not have me encouraged about the Giants this season. Through the first two weeks, there have been a whole lot of negatives and not too many positives. However, the Giants started 0-2 in 2007 and won the Super Bowl, so it is surely too early to give up hope, especially for a die-hard fan like myself. Houston comes to Giants Stadium this Sunday. Let's Go G-Men!
Usually, the dawn of a new NFL season steals headlines in the world of sports, but the fact that it is stealing headlines in the world of national news broadcasts has not necessarily been a good thing for the league.
Before I delve into the current problems facing the NFL and the game of football, I would like to provide some kind of context as to how our country views the sport that we all love. We love baseball because of the marathon-like mentality of the game. It is a daily grind that truly separates the best from the worst. We love hockey and basketball because of the pure athleticism that those sports demand. Football is in a realm of its own though. It is viewed as the sport of warriors, and the pinnacle of masculinity. To succeed in the NFL is to pass the ultimate test of manhood. Each and every Sunday, we spend hours watching our beacons of toughness battle one another in a sport where only the strong survive. Sundays during football season are like religion to millions of people across the country. However, what has recently come to the forefront and brought the NFL into the national spotlight, sadly, has nothing to do with Sunday. It has to do with each and every other day of the week, and the league has taken a gigantic publicity hit because of how it has represented itself on those other six days of the week.
Names like Ray McDonald and Greg Hardy may not be familiar to casual football fans. However, if you are even the faintest follower of the league, you surely are familiar with names such as Adrian Peterson and Ray Rice, and those are two names that have headlined national news stories from coast to coast in recent weeks. Video of Ray Rice physically assaulting his wife in an Atlantic City casino surfaced, and people were disgusted. How could an NFL player strike a woman he supposedly was in love with for the world to see and claim that he did nothing wrong?
Charges were levied against Adrian Peterson claiming that he had abused his own children, and Peterson responded that while he may not be a perfect parent, he was surely not a child abuser. What followed that? What followed was more claims that Peterson had abused a different child of his, and his image took even more of a hit (no pun intended).
As two of the stars of the league, and the faces of the Baltimore Ravens and Minnesota Vikings were being thrown under the bus of public scrutiny, the NFL seemed to be enabling its stars. Rice was given a soft punishment by the league, and only after a public uproar was he suspended indefinitely by the NFL. Until the video of Rice physically striking his wife emerged, it seemed as though the NFL was being extremely lenient in its punishment of a man who had no hesitation to abuse his fiancée.
While there is no actual video evidence of Peterson physically abusing his children, the fact that these charges arose only days after the videos of Rice arose only brightened the spotlight on the NFL and its recent displays of social deviancy. National news outlets ran stories about how the NFL was a league full of thugs, and organizations for the support of the rights of women and children felt as though it were open season to fire unimpeded shots at the most popular sport in the country. And while I am in no way condoning the actions of Rice, Hardy, McDonald, Peterson, and any other man in any walk of life who chooses to abuse women and/or children, there is one thing I find troubling about this whole situation.
Dissimilar upbringings, faiths, ethnicities, races and religions are not only represented in the NFL, but they are represented in the general makeup of the American population at large. What makes the league so great is that it is a meritocracy. Those who find the most success are those who combine talent and work ethic to turn into superstars. In the democratic state that is our country, individual talent and work ethic bring about societal elites. Status is based upon merit. If you work hard enough, then you will receive a status worthy of your perseverance. Yet, despite all of that talent and work ethic, we as sports fans completely compartmentalize the men we idolize on the field from the men that they might be off the field. If our favorite basketball player goes out on the court and scores 50 points, then we overlook any sort of personal flaws and celebrate his on-court ability. If our favorite baseball player goes out and hits a game-winning home run, we do the same thing, and such is the case for our favorite football players as well. However, what the developments and events of recent months has shown us is that despite what we see on the field, our favorite athletes may in fact be flawed more than most of us could ever imagine, and it seems as though we are placing the blame for this squarely upon not only the sport of football, but the NFL itself, and that is where I find an enormous fault with this belief.
As I said before, the American sports society views the NFL differently than it views any other sports league we know. Games on Sundays are wars. Whether it be wars between offensive and defensive linemen, wars between Raiders and Chiefs fans, or whether it be simply wars between opposing fantasy football owners, Sundays in the fall bring out the most temerarious feelings from deep down inside us, and we expect the same from the players we cheer on the field. For those three hours, we want to see our heroes dig down as far as they can and summon each and every waking breath they have to put it all on the line in the name of our team. Yet, when the game is over, we want them to make a 180 degree turn and fall into line until next Sunday comes. In theory, this seems simple, but is it actually a realistic expectation? What we have seen in recent weeks has been a true illustration that it surely is not realistic.
Before they even enter the league, professional football players must be of a different breed. Battling in the trenches and going mano a mano is something that only a select few can do. There is a reason that sprained joints and broken bones are only minor setbacks in the NFL. The players in the NFL are viewed by most fans as superhuman. Broken nose? Suck it up and play. Pulled muscle? Tape it up and get back in the game. These men are modern day gladiators, and we lionize them for being so. If their physical ability on the field is celebrated on Sundays, should we really expect them to be able to tone back that physicality from Monday through Saturday? I think it is a fair question to ask.
What men like Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson have done is 100% inexcusable. Grown men striking women and children is unacceptable, no matter the circumstances. However, I think that looking to the NFL to guide our society in general toward a solution to this problem is unfair. Despite the pressure that the league has been under in recent weeks to stiffen its policies on domestic violence, I think if we really want to stop domestic violence, we need to start at a place far from the National Football League. I am happy that what has gone on in the league has brought domestic violence issues to the forefront of our national concerns, but I have sincere reservations about using the NFL as the leading force in combating these issues.
Without question, in many cases, the NFL can definitely be used to gauge the feelings of the American society as a whole, but I think in this particular case, the NFL should really have little, if any, bearing on how we as a society view domestic violence. Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson should be celebrated for their on-field merits, but their behavior off the field should equate to ostracism and condemnation. What amounts to a great "football mentality" should be celebrated on Sundays, but we need to draw a line between on-field idols and off-field idols. There are lines that men should never cross, and despite an occupation that may seem contrary to socially acceptable lines of thinking, the actions of players like Hardy, Rice, McDonald, and Peterson are unworthy of any sort of festivity, and unfair to expect. However, I think it is also unfair to expect an organization such as the National Football League to be at the forefront of a movement towards peaceful and tranquil relationships. The NFL is still a league of warriors, and I think that recent weeks have proven the fact that the league is unable to be at the forefront of a societal movement that should have started years and years ago.
I am all for the eradication of domestic violence in our society, but I am also aware of the fact that this is a problem that will surely not be solved overnight. If in any way the NFL can help expedite these evolutions, then I am all for it, but I do not think that looking at an organization that is based upon violence is the best way to suggest a mainstream solution to a problem that has been rooted within our culture for centuries.
We use the NFL for many things, but I think that attempts to use Peterson and Rice's indiscretions as a gateway into the resolution of domestic violence is wrong. The game of football is inherently violent, so in order to solve real world problems dealing with real world violence, I will never believe that the NFL should be our primary source of inspiration.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: At this point, it is basically a race to stay out of last place in the National League. The DBacks hold a 2.5 game lead on the Rockies for that position, but trying to finish 14th as opposed to 15th surely is nothing to celebrate. Opening Day 2015 cannot come fast enough.
Daily Giants Update: Speaking of bad teams, an 0-2 start surely does not have me encouraged about the Giants this season. Through the first two weeks, there have been a whole lot of negatives and not too many positives. However, the Giants started 0-2 in 2007 and won the Super Bowl, so it is surely too early to give up hope, especially for a die-hard fan like myself. Houston comes to Giants Stadium this Sunday. Let's Go G-Men!
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
The No Defense League
It's been quite a while since I have posted, but a subject has arisen in recent days that I really felt strongly about, and I decided it was time to let my keyboard do the talking once again, and hopefully this will be the impetus I need to finally get back to regularly posting my thoughts on the world of sports to be read by the people out there in the internet world.
I have never been a huge fan of the NFL preseason, but I certainly do watch some games. I watch most of the Giants games, and I will try to catch some other games when I can, but preseason football is nowhere close to regular season football, and we have learned that preseason results have absolutely zero bearing on records once the real games actually kick off. However, this is not to say that 100% of the preseason is a complete waste of time.
Obviously for the starters, it is a chance to get in work in game situations, and develop a rapport with your new units. For the fringe players, the preseason is extremely important, as their performances decide whether or not they get a spot on any of the 32 NFL rosters. The league has also begun to use the preseason as a time to experiment with new rules changes. In 2014, extra points are now taken from 33 yards away, as opposed to 20 yards away. It is actually pretty strange to see, but once the regular season starts, the extra points will be taken from 20 yards away like we are so accustomed to seeing. While a bit odd, this is not really a big change. Yet, there is one change that will supposedly not be swept away once the regular season begins, and it is a change that I am not in favor of one bit.
NFL officials have been told by the league to put a much stronger emphasis on contact between defensive backs and wide receivers down the field, and the result has been an exponentially larger amount of penalty flags being thrown on down the field on passing plays. In the 2013 regular season, there was an average of 12.7 penalties called per game. That means each team committed around six penalties per game (bear in mind, this means accepted penalties, and does not factor in declined penalties). So far during this preseason, the average amount of penalties called per game is up to 23.7, which is just about double the number from last season. I can think of a plethora of reasons that this is bad for the game, and pretty much no reason that this is good for the game, and in no particular reason, I would like to address some of them.
Critics of baseball often times point to the length of the game. They say that football has surpassed baseball as our national pastime because baseball games simply take too long. Is that really true though? On average, we figure that a baseball game takes about three hours of real time to play. Is football really that different? No, it is not. There is a reason that we refer to "early" NFL games as ones that begin at 1:00, and "late" games as ones that begin at 4:00. However, that is technically not exactly accurate. The early games kick off at 1:05. Until recently, the late games kicked off at 4:15, but that was changed, and they now kick off at 4:25. The league executives in the NFL are certainly not fools, and they made that change for a reason. Games were taking longer than they used to take. Now, with double the amount of penalties being called, won't that only add on to that time? If the current trend of this preseason holds true, then it surely will not be long before those 4:25 start times turn into 4:35 start times. If that happens, then baseball games will look like sprints in comparisons to the marathons that are football games.
Since we are so enthralled with the NFL in this country though, could that not also be a good thing for the league? Longer games equates to longer hours of viewership. Does the NFL really need that though? On a normal Sunday during football season, I can watch purely football programming from 10 AM until around midnight. That is 14 hours of nothing but football. More than half of a calendar day. That is far longer than I could watch any other sport, and it isn't even a close margin of which sport would finish second. An increase in the amount of penalties called will make games drag on longer and longer, and there is only so long that I will take before I just want to tune out of a game.
Next, let's talk about the stop-and-go nature of football. Once again, we can compare it to baseball and see that it really isn't as different as we think. People complain about baseball because of the length of time between pitches. Batters step out of the box and continually adjust their equipment. Pitchers shake off signs and elicit visits to the mound from catchers and/or pitching coaches. Sometimes, the time between pitches seems to drag on and on. However, is football really too much different? If you factor in huddles, personnel changes, and adjustments at the line of scrimmage, the time between football plays is quite similar to the time between pitches in a Major League Baseball game. Factor in timeouts and far longer replay challenge times, and the NFL lags behind Major League Baseball. So are we really watching football games that move faster than baseball games? Quite simply, the answer is no.
While the problems I have discussed thus far are more concerned with off-field issues, now let's move to actual issues on the field. Over the last decade, the league has put an extremely strong emphasis upon the safety of players. No longer are defensive players like Mel Blount and Ronnie Lott allowed to blast ball carriers in any way they see fit. Because of a much higher awareness of the dangers of football, the league has come down hard on players hitting other players in the head and neck area now that we have seen how many former NFL players have to deal with medical issues long after their playing days are over. Even though it has taken away some of the aggression and belligerency of the game that is part of the reason we love it, I completely understand the reasoning of the league for doing so. Former NFL players are suffering severe mental and physical issues because of the hits they took as a player, and I certainly do not want to see the players I cheer for today end up not being able to remember their own names and walk around limping for the entirety of their lives like we see some former players do today. However, there is a line between protecting players and simply going over the top, and I think these new rules that the league is trying to enforce certainly qualify as over the top. It is one thing to be called for helmet to helmet collisions by a defensive player on an offensive player, but do we really need harmless (and often times unintended) bumps of offensive players down the field penalties? No. We don't.
The NFL has already (in my opinion) gone far past fairness in favoring offense over defense. Plays that used to be perfectly acceptable (and perfectly safe) have been called penalties in recent years, and what we are seeing this preseason is exponentially worse. It has come to the point that it is almost pointless to run the ball. Why run the ball when you could have a receiver run down the field, intentionally bump into a defensive back, and be rewarded with an illegal contact penalty and an automatic first down? While surely the running game is still important, all of these downfield penalties have made it less and less appealing to do anything but pass. When incidental contact between a receiver and defensive back not even involved in the play results in an automatic first down, who needs a running back? How about we just pass on every play and have the other team penalize itself all the way down the field? I understand that this is an "old-fashioned" point of view, but with the way that penalties have been called during this preseason, it is becoming closer and closer to a reality. I know that defensive battle that result in 10-6 games may not be as appealing to viewers as offensive shootouts, but do we really want to see teams just continually move down the field because of yellow flags? No.
As I stated before, I understand that this is just the preseason, and often times the preseason has no bearing on the regular season whatsoever. However, we know that 33 yard extra points will be gone once the regular season begins. We don't know if all of these penalties will be gone. Is it just a façade by the league to attempt to eliminate downfield contact, or is it what we are actually going to see once the games really count? With no disrespect meant to guys like Jeff Triplette, Ed Hochuli, and Mike Carey, who are great at what they do, the overwhelming majority of football fans do not tune in to games to see the officials. We tune in to games to see the players. Therefore, I just hope that all of these penalties we are seeing is just an anomaly, and come September 4th when the Seahawks begin defense of their championship, we get to watch the players, and only get a sparse showing of the officials, as opposed to being overwhelmed by yellow flags and penalties that make our favorite sport less enjoyable.
Daily Giants Update: I was not impressed by the showing of the Giants in their last preseason game against the Colts. The defense looked pretty good at times, but the offense was terrible. The offensive line was mediocre at best, and the passing game was very poor. Despite a 3-0 record in the preseason, I have seen far more negative than positive from the players who will actually be on the field once the regular season gets underway. Week 3 of the preseason is usually the dress rehearsal for the regular season, so on Friday we will get a real extended look at the starting units. If the defense can continue to improve, I think it could be pretty good. However, the offense has shown me very little to believe that it will be successful once the games count.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: It has been a very bad season for the DBacks in 2014, as they now sit at 19 games under .500. A few positives have come about recently, but the season was really over before it started with the horrible start the team got off to. David Peralta and Ender Inciarte have been impressive, and it has been nice to see Miguel Montero bounce back from a down year in 2013. Aside from that, Patrick Corbin was done before the season even began and Paul Goldschmidt won't see the field for the rest of the season. Didi Gregorius has proven that he deserves a spot somewhere in our infield, and Chase Anderson seems like he will be a capable mid-to-late rotation starter. Aside from that, I honestly think nothing will get better until General Manager Kevin Towers is shown the door. First pitch tonight is in an hour and a half. The bad times make the good times feel even better, and as of today, we are surely mired in the bad times. However, my support is with the team 100% because that is what real fans do.
I have never been a huge fan of the NFL preseason, but I certainly do watch some games. I watch most of the Giants games, and I will try to catch some other games when I can, but preseason football is nowhere close to regular season football, and we have learned that preseason results have absolutely zero bearing on records once the real games actually kick off. However, this is not to say that 100% of the preseason is a complete waste of time.
Obviously for the starters, it is a chance to get in work in game situations, and develop a rapport with your new units. For the fringe players, the preseason is extremely important, as their performances decide whether or not they get a spot on any of the 32 NFL rosters. The league has also begun to use the preseason as a time to experiment with new rules changes. In 2014, extra points are now taken from 33 yards away, as opposed to 20 yards away. It is actually pretty strange to see, but once the regular season starts, the extra points will be taken from 20 yards away like we are so accustomed to seeing. While a bit odd, this is not really a big change. Yet, there is one change that will supposedly not be swept away once the regular season begins, and it is a change that I am not in favor of one bit.
NFL officials have been told by the league to put a much stronger emphasis on contact between defensive backs and wide receivers down the field, and the result has been an exponentially larger amount of penalty flags being thrown on down the field on passing plays. In the 2013 regular season, there was an average of 12.7 penalties called per game. That means each team committed around six penalties per game (bear in mind, this means accepted penalties, and does not factor in declined penalties). So far during this preseason, the average amount of penalties called per game is up to 23.7, which is just about double the number from last season. I can think of a plethora of reasons that this is bad for the game, and pretty much no reason that this is good for the game, and in no particular reason, I would like to address some of them.
Critics of baseball often times point to the length of the game. They say that football has surpassed baseball as our national pastime because baseball games simply take too long. Is that really true though? On average, we figure that a baseball game takes about three hours of real time to play. Is football really that different? No, it is not. There is a reason that we refer to "early" NFL games as ones that begin at 1:00, and "late" games as ones that begin at 4:00. However, that is technically not exactly accurate. The early games kick off at 1:05. Until recently, the late games kicked off at 4:15, but that was changed, and they now kick off at 4:25. The league executives in the NFL are certainly not fools, and they made that change for a reason. Games were taking longer than they used to take. Now, with double the amount of penalties being called, won't that only add on to that time? If the current trend of this preseason holds true, then it surely will not be long before those 4:25 start times turn into 4:35 start times. If that happens, then baseball games will look like sprints in comparisons to the marathons that are football games.
Since we are so enthralled with the NFL in this country though, could that not also be a good thing for the league? Longer games equates to longer hours of viewership. Does the NFL really need that though? On a normal Sunday during football season, I can watch purely football programming from 10 AM until around midnight. That is 14 hours of nothing but football. More than half of a calendar day. That is far longer than I could watch any other sport, and it isn't even a close margin of which sport would finish second. An increase in the amount of penalties called will make games drag on longer and longer, and there is only so long that I will take before I just want to tune out of a game.
Next, let's talk about the stop-and-go nature of football. Once again, we can compare it to baseball and see that it really isn't as different as we think. People complain about baseball because of the length of time between pitches. Batters step out of the box and continually adjust their equipment. Pitchers shake off signs and elicit visits to the mound from catchers and/or pitching coaches. Sometimes, the time between pitches seems to drag on and on. However, is football really too much different? If you factor in huddles, personnel changes, and adjustments at the line of scrimmage, the time between football plays is quite similar to the time between pitches in a Major League Baseball game. Factor in timeouts and far longer replay challenge times, and the NFL lags behind Major League Baseball. So are we really watching football games that move faster than baseball games? Quite simply, the answer is no.
While the problems I have discussed thus far are more concerned with off-field issues, now let's move to actual issues on the field. Over the last decade, the league has put an extremely strong emphasis upon the safety of players. No longer are defensive players like Mel Blount and Ronnie Lott allowed to blast ball carriers in any way they see fit. Because of a much higher awareness of the dangers of football, the league has come down hard on players hitting other players in the head and neck area now that we have seen how many former NFL players have to deal with medical issues long after their playing days are over. Even though it has taken away some of the aggression and belligerency of the game that is part of the reason we love it, I completely understand the reasoning of the league for doing so. Former NFL players are suffering severe mental and physical issues because of the hits they took as a player, and I certainly do not want to see the players I cheer for today end up not being able to remember their own names and walk around limping for the entirety of their lives like we see some former players do today. However, there is a line between protecting players and simply going over the top, and I think these new rules that the league is trying to enforce certainly qualify as over the top. It is one thing to be called for helmet to helmet collisions by a defensive player on an offensive player, but do we really need harmless (and often times unintended) bumps of offensive players down the field penalties? No. We don't.
The NFL has already (in my opinion) gone far past fairness in favoring offense over defense. Plays that used to be perfectly acceptable (and perfectly safe) have been called penalties in recent years, and what we are seeing this preseason is exponentially worse. It has come to the point that it is almost pointless to run the ball. Why run the ball when you could have a receiver run down the field, intentionally bump into a defensive back, and be rewarded with an illegal contact penalty and an automatic first down? While surely the running game is still important, all of these downfield penalties have made it less and less appealing to do anything but pass. When incidental contact between a receiver and defensive back not even involved in the play results in an automatic first down, who needs a running back? How about we just pass on every play and have the other team penalize itself all the way down the field? I understand that this is an "old-fashioned" point of view, but with the way that penalties have been called during this preseason, it is becoming closer and closer to a reality. I know that defensive battle that result in 10-6 games may not be as appealing to viewers as offensive shootouts, but do we really want to see teams just continually move down the field because of yellow flags? No.
As I stated before, I understand that this is just the preseason, and often times the preseason has no bearing on the regular season whatsoever. However, we know that 33 yard extra points will be gone once the regular season begins. We don't know if all of these penalties will be gone. Is it just a façade by the league to attempt to eliminate downfield contact, or is it what we are actually going to see once the games really count? With no disrespect meant to guys like Jeff Triplette, Ed Hochuli, and Mike Carey, who are great at what they do, the overwhelming majority of football fans do not tune in to games to see the officials. We tune in to games to see the players. Therefore, I just hope that all of these penalties we are seeing is just an anomaly, and come September 4th when the Seahawks begin defense of their championship, we get to watch the players, and only get a sparse showing of the officials, as opposed to being overwhelmed by yellow flags and penalties that make our favorite sport less enjoyable.
Daily Giants Update: I was not impressed by the showing of the Giants in their last preseason game against the Colts. The defense looked pretty good at times, but the offense was terrible. The offensive line was mediocre at best, and the passing game was very poor. Despite a 3-0 record in the preseason, I have seen far more negative than positive from the players who will actually be on the field once the regular season gets underway. Week 3 of the preseason is usually the dress rehearsal for the regular season, so on Friday we will get a real extended look at the starting units. If the defense can continue to improve, I think it could be pretty good. However, the offense has shown me very little to believe that it will be successful once the games count.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: It has been a very bad season for the DBacks in 2014, as they now sit at 19 games under .500. A few positives have come about recently, but the season was really over before it started with the horrible start the team got off to. David Peralta and Ender Inciarte have been impressive, and it has been nice to see Miguel Montero bounce back from a down year in 2013. Aside from that, Patrick Corbin was done before the season even began and Paul Goldschmidt won't see the field for the rest of the season. Didi Gregorius has proven that he deserves a spot somewhere in our infield, and Chase Anderson seems like he will be a capable mid-to-late rotation starter. Aside from that, I honestly think nothing will get better until General Manager Kevin Towers is shown the door. First pitch tonight is in an hour and a half. The bad times make the good times feel even better, and as of today, we are surely mired in the bad times. However, my support is with the team 100% because that is what real fans do.
Monday, June 2, 2014
The joke that is the possible 2022 World Cup
With the 2014 World Cup now less than two weeks away, international soccer is reaching that one point every four years when it is front page news worldwide. The tournament will be in Brazil this year, and I am really looking forward to watching as much as I possibly can. As an American, I am not too confident about the chances of our country to make much noise at all, but in my estimation, the World Cup symbolizes more than simply cheering for your country.
Don't get me wrong, seeing Americans who have little or no interest at all in soccer 99% of the time dressed in red, white, and blue on the edge of their seat watching my favorite sport is surely something that makes me happy. However, during the one month period that the World Cup does take place, it is really a celebration of how a game can, at least temporarily, put the crises of the everyday world on the back burner. It may sound hyperbolic or zany, but during the World Cup, countries across the globe are united by one thing: soccer. Forget politics, religion, economics, and even missing airplanes. For the next month, let's just all focus on the beautiful game.
So, with that said, now what I really want to focus on is a World Cup that is still eight years away. In 2010, it was revealed that Qatar had been chosen as the host country for the 2022 World Cup. At first, I was stunned when I heard this. Qatar? I wasn't sure, but I didn't think Qatar had ever even qualified for a World Cup, and when I looked it up to be sure, I was correct. Why then, would a country with relatively zero history of international soccer be chosen to host the biggest tournament in international soccer? I just could not think of a reasonable answer.
However, after giving the subject some deeper thought, I realized that maybe FIFA and the soccer world were opening new doors in helping its game grow even larger. The 2010 World Cup was being held in South Africa. Until that time, no World Cup had ever been hosted by an African nation. In fact, only three times prior to that had a tournament ever been held outside of either Europe or South America. Mexico hosted the even in 1970 and 1986, the United States hosted in 1994, and South Korea and Japan co-hosted in 2002. So, with the tournament now moving to Africa for the first time, maybe then, was FIFA attempting to truly make the World Cup a global game? It seemed like that was entirely possible. My beliefs that this was actually true were only strengthened when South Africa did an admirable job of hosting a great tournament in 2010. The stadiums looked beautiful, the cities were abuzz, and there was a whole lot of great soccer. Maybe then, after all, countries that were not perennial international soccer powers should be given an opportunity to host the World Cup, because doing so can be a significant economic stimulant, and there are surely many countries throughout the world that could use something like that. However, now that international soccer is back in the news, I just have to say that there are too many suspicions I have about the World Cup in Qatar, and I am surely not the only one who feels that way.
For the sake of this piece, I will compare soccer in Qatar to soccer in South Africa a lot, but we need to remember that the World Cup is a truly global stage, and we also need to look at Qatar through the same lens as other host nations such as Brazil, France, Italy, the United States, and many others. Prior to 2010, South Africa had actually qualified for two World Cups. Though they did not make it past the group stage either time, they at least had some kind of history in the tournament. Qatar has never qualified for a World Cup. Their highest level of international success came in 2004 when they won the Gulf Cup of Nations. A quick look at the Gulf Cup of Nations pretty much says all you need to know about the significance, or lack thereof, of the tournament. It was actually held in Qatar in 2004, but the fact that the stadiums were "generally full" and the fact that other sports such as handball and basketball had to be added to bring in more fans does not come close to lending any sort of credence to a legitimate basis for Qatar hosting a World Cup. So, when it came to a history of success at the top international level, South Africa at least had some. Qatar has none at all.
Next, let's take a look at the logistics of what it takes for a country to host a World Cup. Because the tournament is condensed into about a month, there is a need for multiple venues to play the games. There will be 12 host cities in Brazil later this month. In South Africa, there were 10 host cities. Sure, some of the cities that were hosting games in South Africa were far from worldwide metropolitan hubs, South Africa still does have some cities of international significance such as Johannesburg, Pretoria, and Cape Town. When I considered what kind of cities would host games in Qatar, I didn't know where to start, and the main reason for that was that I could not name one city in the entire country. In fact, I had to look up a world map to even find where in Asia Qatar actually was. When I did find it (which, even looking at a map of Asia, is still pretty hard to do), my belief that the country was anywhere close to equipped to handle hosting a World Cup shrunk even more. Qatar is a miniscule peninsula of a country surrounded on three sides by the Persain Gulf, and on one side by Saudi Arabia. In totality, it is 4,468 square miles. To put that into perspective, that means Qatar is smaller than every U.S. state other than Rhode Island and Delaware. So far, not too good.
Next? How about the climate of the country hosting the tournament. Soccer games last 90 minutes, and therefore the athletes we watch take the field will all be highly conditioned. However, even the best training and conditioning has its limits. As I sit here in New York writing this, I must say I highly enjoyed the weather here today. It was about 75 degrees and sunny. A bit hot, but after a cold winter, I was not complaining. However, if I were to be out playing in a World Cup game in this weather, I would have to say that it would definitely be a struggle. However, like I said, these are highly conditioned athletes at the top of their games, so they would be able to deal with it.
So, if 75 and sunny is a good indication of what the weather is like here during the time the World Cup is about to take place, then I think the soccer world would be just fine with that. Now, how about the climate in Qatar? Right now, it is just past 3:00 AM in the capital of Qatar, a city named Doha. At 3:00 AM in Doha, it is 88 degrees. The forecast for tomorrow after the sun rises is 111 degrees. The "lowest" forecasted temperature for the next 10 days in Doha is 82 degrees, and it is almost a guarantee that the temperature will rise above 100 each day, and the chance for any sort of precipitation is very, very low. I read a story today about an Australian reporter who visited Qatar saying that simply walking down the street was almost unbearable because of the heat. If players will be hard-pressed to maintain their stamina for 90 minutes when the temperatures reach into the 80's in Brazil this month, how would they react when the temperature is at least 30 degrees higher? I don't know, but the human body can only take so much, and 90 minutes of soccer at the highest level in temperatures approaching 120 is most likely too much. So again, Qatar looks really bad here.
I could certainly just stop there and I think my point of why Qatar has no business hosting the World Cup would be well proven, but I am on a roll, so why stop now? Next up, let's take a look at the politics and policies of the country. Qatar is considered a "constitutional monarchy," and it has been led by the same family since gaining independence in 1971. The leader of the country is known as the Emir, and the Emir pretty much has the final say on any and all political matters in Qatar. Obscene gestures and "indecent phrases" by the citizens of Qatar are sometimes punishable by a jail sentence of up to six months. The citizens are continuously warned that clothing should cover everything from the shoulders down to the knees, despite the fact that the temperature is above 100 degrees pretty much all the time. How in the world would that policy ever be enforced if soccer fans from around the world came to the country in the dead of summer? It literally would not be possible. And although soccer is known as the "beautiful game," sometimes soccer fans do not exactly embody the definition of beautiful. So obscene gestures and indecent phrases? Yes, I think there might be more than a few.
Again, I could stop, but since technically this is the internet and anyone has access to what I write, you never know, Sepp Blatter, the president of FIFA might come across this piece and want to read about why considering holding the 2022 World Cup in Qatar is a joke, so let me throw a few more logs on to the fire.
It is surely bad enough to read about Qatar mistreating its own citizens, but it only gets worse when you find out about some of their foreign policies. One of the most well-known terrorist groups of its time is a Palestinian group known as "Hamas." Hamas is highly involved in governing the Gaza Strip, and has allied itself with Iran, one of the most antagonistic nations in the entire world. Apparently, Hamas has some support in Qatar as well, as in 2006, Qatar helped support Hamas by giving the group of gift of $50 million. Qatar's government also has aligned itself with government opposition groups in Libya and Syria, both supporting the groups financially, as well as helping arm them. This is not even about sports anymore. This is just a general assault on the country of Qatar as a whole.
The fact that FIFA would even consider allowing Qatar to host the 2022 World Cup, let alone actually confirm it is just downright preposterous. There has been talk of bribery on the part of Qatar, or some kind of hidden agenda on the part of the governing body of FIFA being some of the reasons that Qatar won the bid for the 2022 World Cup. I don't care what the reason or reasons were. FIFA needs to do us all a favor though, and move the 2022 World Cup to another location, and the non-existent history of soccer in Qatar should be the last reason for which they do so. The World Cup is an international showcase of the best soccer players and teams in the world, and FIFA is kidding itself by thinking that Qatar is up to the challenge of hosting such an event. I don't need a reason or an explanation from FIFA, I just need the 2022 World Cup to be moved. There is still eight years left to decide a new site, so it is not like this is going to be a last minute decision either. Just get it done, for the sake of the best sporting event in the world.
Daily Rangers Update: Well, it doesn't get much bigger than this. Game One will be in Los Angeles on Wednesday night, and the greatest piece of championship hardware in American sports will be on the line. The Rangers and the Kings for the Stanley Cup. That's really all that needs to be said.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: A loss yesterday dropped the DBacks to 15 games behind the San Francisco Giants in the division, and we haven't even played 60 games yet. Obviously, that means there is still plenty of baseball left to be played, but most hope of competing for a playoff spot is out the window. Chase Anderson takes the mound tomorrow night in Colorado after an off-day today.
Daily Giants Update: The Giants released safety Will Hill today after he failed another drug test and was facing a six-game suspension to begin the year. Hill has been serviceable when he has played, and was forecasted to have a bigger role on the defense this year, but he was just not worth the trouble he was causing, so I cannot say that I'm surprised by the move. Eli Manning is far ahead of schedule in his return from ankle surgery, so that is good news. However, it is still far too early in the offseason to get a real concrete feel for how this team will look going into the 2014-2015 season.
Don't get me wrong, seeing Americans who have little or no interest at all in soccer 99% of the time dressed in red, white, and blue on the edge of their seat watching my favorite sport is surely something that makes me happy. However, during the one month period that the World Cup does take place, it is really a celebration of how a game can, at least temporarily, put the crises of the everyday world on the back burner. It may sound hyperbolic or zany, but during the World Cup, countries across the globe are united by one thing: soccer. Forget politics, religion, economics, and even missing airplanes. For the next month, let's just all focus on the beautiful game.
So, with that said, now what I really want to focus on is a World Cup that is still eight years away. In 2010, it was revealed that Qatar had been chosen as the host country for the 2022 World Cup. At first, I was stunned when I heard this. Qatar? I wasn't sure, but I didn't think Qatar had ever even qualified for a World Cup, and when I looked it up to be sure, I was correct. Why then, would a country with relatively zero history of international soccer be chosen to host the biggest tournament in international soccer? I just could not think of a reasonable answer.
However, after giving the subject some deeper thought, I realized that maybe FIFA and the soccer world were opening new doors in helping its game grow even larger. The 2010 World Cup was being held in South Africa. Until that time, no World Cup had ever been hosted by an African nation. In fact, only three times prior to that had a tournament ever been held outside of either Europe or South America. Mexico hosted the even in 1970 and 1986, the United States hosted in 1994, and South Korea and Japan co-hosted in 2002. So, with the tournament now moving to Africa for the first time, maybe then, was FIFA attempting to truly make the World Cup a global game? It seemed like that was entirely possible. My beliefs that this was actually true were only strengthened when South Africa did an admirable job of hosting a great tournament in 2010. The stadiums looked beautiful, the cities were abuzz, and there was a whole lot of great soccer. Maybe then, after all, countries that were not perennial international soccer powers should be given an opportunity to host the World Cup, because doing so can be a significant economic stimulant, and there are surely many countries throughout the world that could use something like that. However, now that international soccer is back in the news, I just have to say that there are too many suspicions I have about the World Cup in Qatar, and I am surely not the only one who feels that way.
For the sake of this piece, I will compare soccer in Qatar to soccer in South Africa a lot, but we need to remember that the World Cup is a truly global stage, and we also need to look at Qatar through the same lens as other host nations such as Brazil, France, Italy, the United States, and many others. Prior to 2010, South Africa had actually qualified for two World Cups. Though they did not make it past the group stage either time, they at least had some kind of history in the tournament. Qatar has never qualified for a World Cup. Their highest level of international success came in 2004 when they won the Gulf Cup of Nations. A quick look at the Gulf Cup of Nations pretty much says all you need to know about the significance, or lack thereof, of the tournament. It was actually held in Qatar in 2004, but the fact that the stadiums were "generally full" and the fact that other sports such as handball and basketball had to be added to bring in more fans does not come close to lending any sort of credence to a legitimate basis for Qatar hosting a World Cup. So, when it came to a history of success at the top international level, South Africa at least had some. Qatar has none at all.
Next, let's take a look at the logistics of what it takes for a country to host a World Cup. Because the tournament is condensed into about a month, there is a need for multiple venues to play the games. There will be 12 host cities in Brazil later this month. In South Africa, there were 10 host cities. Sure, some of the cities that were hosting games in South Africa were far from worldwide metropolitan hubs, South Africa still does have some cities of international significance such as Johannesburg, Pretoria, and Cape Town. When I considered what kind of cities would host games in Qatar, I didn't know where to start, and the main reason for that was that I could not name one city in the entire country. In fact, I had to look up a world map to even find where in Asia Qatar actually was. When I did find it (which, even looking at a map of Asia, is still pretty hard to do), my belief that the country was anywhere close to equipped to handle hosting a World Cup shrunk even more. Qatar is a miniscule peninsula of a country surrounded on three sides by the Persain Gulf, and on one side by Saudi Arabia. In totality, it is 4,468 square miles. To put that into perspective, that means Qatar is smaller than every U.S. state other than Rhode Island and Delaware. So far, not too good.
Next? How about the climate of the country hosting the tournament. Soccer games last 90 minutes, and therefore the athletes we watch take the field will all be highly conditioned. However, even the best training and conditioning has its limits. As I sit here in New York writing this, I must say I highly enjoyed the weather here today. It was about 75 degrees and sunny. A bit hot, but after a cold winter, I was not complaining. However, if I were to be out playing in a World Cup game in this weather, I would have to say that it would definitely be a struggle. However, like I said, these are highly conditioned athletes at the top of their games, so they would be able to deal with it.
So, if 75 and sunny is a good indication of what the weather is like here during the time the World Cup is about to take place, then I think the soccer world would be just fine with that. Now, how about the climate in Qatar? Right now, it is just past 3:00 AM in the capital of Qatar, a city named Doha. At 3:00 AM in Doha, it is 88 degrees. The forecast for tomorrow after the sun rises is 111 degrees. The "lowest" forecasted temperature for the next 10 days in Doha is 82 degrees, and it is almost a guarantee that the temperature will rise above 100 each day, and the chance for any sort of precipitation is very, very low. I read a story today about an Australian reporter who visited Qatar saying that simply walking down the street was almost unbearable because of the heat. If players will be hard-pressed to maintain their stamina for 90 minutes when the temperatures reach into the 80's in Brazil this month, how would they react when the temperature is at least 30 degrees higher? I don't know, but the human body can only take so much, and 90 minutes of soccer at the highest level in temperatures approaching 120 is most likely too much. So again, Qatar looks really bad here.
I could certainly just stop there and I think my point of why Qatar has no business hosting the World Cup would be well proven, but I am on a roll, so why stop now? Next up, let's take a look at the politics and policies of the country. Qatar is considered a "constitutional monarchy," and it has been led by the same family since gaining independence in 1971. The leader of the country is known as the Emir, and the Emir pretty much has the final say on any and all political matters in Qatar. Obscene gestures and "indecent phrases" by the citizens of Qatar are sometimes punishable by a jail sentence of up to six months. The citizens are continuously warned that clothing should cover everything from the shoulders down to the knees, despite the fact that the temperature is above 100 degrees pretty much all the time. How in the world would that policy ever be enforced if soccer fans from around the world came to the country in the dead of summer? It literally would not be possible. And although soccer is known as the "beautiful game," sometimes soccer fans do not exactly embody the definition of beautiful. So obscene gestures and indecent phrases? Yes, I think there might be more than a few.
Again, I could stop, but since technically this is the internet and anyone has access to what I write, you never know, Sepp Blatter, the president of FIFA might come across this piece and want to read about why considering holding the 2022 World Cup in Qatar is a joke, so let me throw a few more logs on to the fire.
It is surely bad enough to read about Qatar mistreating its own citizens, but it only gets worse when you find out about some of their foreign policies. One of the most well-known terrorist groups of its time is a Palestinian group known as "Hamas." Hamas is highly involved in governing the Gaza Strip, and has allied itself with Iran, one of the most antagonistic nations in the entire world. Apparently, Hamas has some support in Qatar as well, as in 2006, Qatar helped support Hamas by giving the group of gift of $50 million. Qatar's government also has aligned itself with government opposition groups in Libya and Syria, both supporting the groups financially, as well as helping arm them. This is not even about sports anymore. This is just a general assault on the country of Qatar as a whole.
The fact that FIFA would even consider allowing Qatar to host the 2022 World Cup, let alone actually confirm it is just downright preposterous. There has been talk of bribery on the part of Qatar, or some kind of hidden agenda on the part of the governing body of FIFA being some of the reasons that Qatar won the bid for the 2022 World Cup. I don't care what the reason or reasons were. FIFA needs to do us all a favor though, and move the 2022 World Cup to another location, and the non-existent history of soccer in Qatar should be the last reason for which they do so. The World Cup is an international showcase of the best soccer players and teams in the world, and FIFA is kidding itself by thinking that Qatar is up to the challenge of hosting such an event. I don't need a reason or an explanation from FIFA, I just need the 2022 World Cup to be moved. There is still eight years left to decide a new site, so it is not like this is going to be a last minute decision either. Just get it done, for the sake of the best sporting event in the world.
Daily Rangers Update: Well, it doesn't get much bigger than this. Game One will be in Los Angeles on Wednesday night, and the greatest piece of championship hardware in American sports will be on the line. The Rangers and the Kings for the Stanley Cup. That's really all that needs to be said.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: A loss yesterday dropped the DBacks to 15 games behind the San Francisco Giants in the division, and we haven't even played 60 games yet. Obviously, that means there is still plenty of baseball left to be played, but most hope of competing for a playoff spot is out the window. Chase Anderson takes the mound tomorrow night in Colorado after an off-day today.
Daily Giants Update: The Giants released safety Will Hill today after he failed another drug test and was facing a six-game suspension to begin the year. Hill has been serviceable when he has played, and was forecasted to have a bigger role on the defense this year, but he was just not worth the trouble he was causing, so I cannot say that I'm surprised by the move. Eli Manning is far ahead of schedule in his return from ankle surgery, so that is good news. However, it is still far too early in the offseason to get a real concrete feel for how this team will look going into the 2014-2015 season.
Tuesday, May 6, 2014
Some franchises just do not get it
The Golden State Warriors announced today that they had fired head coach Mark Jackson after three seasons leading the team. There had been some talk about his job status recently, but I really paid it no mind because I thought it would be ridiculous to even think that Jackson's job would be in jeopardy. Despite coming off a seven-game series loss to the Los Angeles Clippers, the Warriors were certainly one of the up and coming teams in the NBA. They are led by Stephen Curry, who is a budding superstar, and Curry was supplemented by a very nice cast of players. While they were not truly title contenders this season, the improvement the team had shown since Jackson took over as coach was undeniable, and not only were they exciting to watch, but they were becoming a force to be reckoned with in the Western Conference. Why then, would they fire Jackson? Honestly, I cannot find a reasonable explanation to that question.
Prior to Jackson taking over in 2011, the Warriors had a losing record in 15 of the previous 17 seasons. They had made the playoffs once in that time span, and had pretty much been the model of putridity. That means that in 17 seasons prior to his being hired, Golden State had two winning seasons. In three years under Jackson, the Warriors had two winning seasons and they made the playoffs in both of those years.
In 2013-14, the Warriors went 51-31. The last time the Warriors won that many games was 1992. In 1992, the Warriors were led by Chris Mullin, and they lost to the Seattle SuperSonics in the first round of the playoffs. In 2014, the SuperSonics do not even exist. They are known as the Oklahoma City Thunder and left Seattle six years ago.
So why then, would the team fire Jackson? Rumor has it that he had problems with the front office, and I have to believe that that is sadly, a legitimate possibility. Through the years, in all sports, we have learned that the executives are in charge. That is not just the case in sports, but it is the case in all professions as well. Good employees might bring about success or profits within a company, but at the end of the day, the executives are in charge, and challenging them is a recipe for disaster. We have not heard of any particular incidents between Jackson and the Warriors organization, but I have to think that must have had something to do with this move.
Following the expulsion of Jackson, owner Joe Lacob, president Rick Welts, and general manager Bob Myers have all released statements praising Jackson for his work, but citing the organization's desire to move in a "different direction." Jackson had the Warriors moving in a steeply uphill direction, so in my opinion, the statements of those men are far from credible. Supposedly, the Warriors are possibly interested in Lionel Hollins and Steve Kerr as replacements for Jackson, but I find it to be laughable that the organization would think either of those men could step in and pick up right where Jackson left off. Jackson not only had the team on a path to success, but he had the support of his players as well.
What this all boils down to is the fact that under Jackson, the Warriors have experienced far more success and improvement than they have in decades. They may not have won their first round series against the Clippers, but it went to seven games and it was a damn exciting seven games. The Clippers are legitimate contenders for the Western Conference crown, and the Warriors took them to the brink of elimination. However, the organization wanted to "move in a different direction."
It is things like this that make me realize that there are just some organizations in sports that do not put winning before anything else, and the Golden State Warriors have to fit into that category. Whether it is ownership, management, or some combination of both, there is a reason that the Warriors will never be on the level of the San Antonio Spurs or the Los Angeles Lakers. When those teams are down, they put everything else aside to try to rise up and win championships. When organizations like the Golden State Warriors are down, they seem to be content, and winning seems to be far from the top priority. The Red Sox want to win. The Astros do not. The Steelers want to win. The Lions do not. The Red Wings want to win. The Panthers do not. It is just a fact. No matter what the executives of each and every organization admits, we just have to accept the fact that some are in it for the long haul, and some are in it for nothing more than a profit.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers were overwhelmed at home last night by the Penguins, and they now find themselves down 2-1 in the series. A win in Game 4 is essential, because if they head back to Pittsburgh down 3-1, we have a big problem. Someone needs to step up in Game 4.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: Arizona lost last night in Milwaukee thanks to yet another uninspiring pitching performance. J.J. Putz was placed on the DL and Mike Bolsinger was demoted to AAA today, while Chase Anderson and Evan Marshall were promoted to the big league squad. At 11-24, we are pretty much looking for any possible kind of jump start, but hope seems to be growing dimmer and dimmer by the day.
Daily Nets Update: Game 1 in Miami is less than two hours away, and the Heat should be well rested and ready to go. Brooklyn could really use an unheralded player to step up tonight. Maybe someone like Marcus Thornton or Mirza Teletovic could step in and provide points off the bench. Either way the Nets will be facing an uphill challenge to take one of the first two games of the series in Miami.
Daily Giants Update: Nothing new to report since yesterday, except that the draft is one day closer. As I have already said, the Giants need to select some players who can impact the team for years to come, so the pressure will be on Jerry Reese & Co. to get that done.
Prior to Jackson taking over in 2011, the Warriors had a losing record in 15 of the previous 17 seasons. They had made the playoffs once in that time span, and had pretty much been the model of putridity. That means that in 17 seasons prior to his being hired, Golden State had two winning seasons. In three years under Jackson, the Warriors had two winning seasons and they made the playoffs in both of those years.
In 2013-14, the Warriors went 51-31. The last time the Warriors won that many games was 1992. In 1992, the Warriors were led by Chris Mullin, and they lost to the Seattle SuperSonics in the first round of the playoffs. In 2014, the SuperSonics do not even exist. They are known as the Oklahoma City Thunder and left Seattle six years ago.
So why then, would the team fire Jackson? Rumor has it that he had problems with the front office, and I have to believe that that is sadly, a legitimate possibility. Through the years, in all sports, we have learned that the executives are in charge. That is not just the case in sports, but it is the case in all professions as well. Good employees might bring about success or profits within a company, but at the end of the day, the executives are in charge, and challenging them is a recipe for disaster. We have not heard of any particular incidents between Jackson and the Warriors organization, but I have to think that must have had something to do with this move.
Following the expulsion of Jackson, owner Joe Lacob, president Rick Welts, and general manager Bob Myers have all released statements praising Jackson for his work, but citing the organization's desire to move in a "different direction." Jackson had the Warriors moving in a steeply uphill direction, so in my opinion, the statements of those men are far from credible. Supposedly, the Warriors are possibly interested in Lionel Hollins and Steve Kerr as replacements for Jackson, but I find it to be laughable that the organization would think either of those men could step in and pick up right where Jackson left off. Jackson not only had the team on a path to success, but he had the support of his players as well.
What this all boils down to is the fact that under Jackson, the Warriors have experienced far more success and improvement than they have in decades. They may not have won their first round series against the Clippers, but it went to seven games and it was a damn exciting seven games. The Clippers are legitimate contenders for the Western Conference crown, and the Warriors took them to the brink of elimination. However, the organization wanted to "move in a different direction."
It is things like this that make me realize that there are just some organizations in sports that do not put winning before anything else, and the Golden State Warriors have to fit into that category. Whether it is ownership, management, or some combination of both, there is a reason that the Warriors will never be on the level of the San Antonio Spurs or the Los Angeles Lakers. When those teams are down, they put everything else aside to try to rise up and win championships. When organizations like the Golden State Warriors are down, they seem to be content, and winning seems to be far from the top priority. The Red Sox want to win. The Astros do not. The Steelers want to win. The Lions do not. The Red Wings want to win. The Panthers do not. It is just a fact. No matter what the executives of each and every organization admits, we just have to accept the fact that some are in it for the long haul, and some are in it for nothing more than a profit.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers were overwhelmed at home last night by the Penguins, and they now find themselves down 2-1 in the series. A win in Game 4 is essential, because if they head back to Pittsburgh down 3-1, we have a big problem. Someone needs to step up in Game 4.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: Arizona lost last night in Milwaukee thanks to yet another uninspiring pitching performance. J.J. Putz was placed on the DL and Mike Bolsinger was demoted to AAA today, while Chase Anderson and Evan Marshall were promoted to the big league squad. At 11-24, we are pretty much looking for any possible kind of jump start, but hope seems to be growing dimmer and dimmer by the day.
Daily Nets Update: Game 1 in Miami is less than two hours away, and the Heat should be well rested and ready to go. Brooklyn could really use an unheralded player to step up tonight. Maybe someone like Marcus Thornton or Mirza Teletovic could step in and provide points off the bench. Either way the Nets will be facing an uphill challenge to take one of the first two games of the series in Miami.
Daily Giants Update: Nothing new to report since yesterday, except that the draft is one day closer. As I have already said, the Giants need to select some players who can impact the team for years to come, so the pressure will be on Jerry Reese & Co. to get that done.
Monday, May 5, 2014
The least important position in the draft?
With the NFL Draft only a few days away now, there has been all kinds of speculation about which players will go where, and what teams will try to do. It is no different than any other week leading up to the draft. Supposition is rampant, and each team, fan, and player has dreams of the best-case scenario, as well as nightmares of the worst-case scenario.
This year, the Houston Texans will pick first overall, and it seems that the most likely scenario is that they draft defensive end Jadeveon Clowney. While their biggest weakness is not defensive end, most people seem to think that Clowney is just too good to pass up, and I believe that as well.
Another possibility that I think is less likely is that Houston trades out of the first overall spot, down a few spots, in an effort to acquire a few more picks, while still staying in the top ten overall. The team most mentioned here is the Atlanta Falcons, who hold the sixth pick. If Houston were able to swap spots with Atlanta, as well as acquire additional picks (either in 2014 or in the future), they appear open to doing so. Since Houston already has a Pro Bowl caliber defensive end in J.J. Watt, they might believe that they are better off passing up on Clowney in lieu of more picks, and help at another position. One of the positions that certainly jumps off the page as a weakness for Houston is quarterback. In the current NFL, the belief seems to be that without a "franchise quarterback," it is impossible to win, and we see that in how teams draft.
The quarterback class this year is considered by many to be mediocre. There do not seem to be any surefire superstar QB's ready to take the reins of a team right out of the gate, but we are still hearing talk about guys like Blake Bortles and Johnny Manziel possibly going first overall, but at least both going in the top ten. Among the other likely top overall picks, we see defensive lineman/pass rushing linebackers (Clowney, Khalil Mack), offensive lineman to protect the QB's (Greg Robinson, Jake Matthews), and wide receivers to catch the passes from those QB's (Sammy Watkins, Mike Evans). It seems more and more each year that these positions are the ones that are the most sought after when draft day rolls around. This trend really reflects how the league has changed over the past decade. Quarterbacks and left tackles need to be cornerstones, and stud pass rushers and receivers are needed to supplement them. However, that leaves out on position that has somewhat fallen off the map in terms of significance, and that position is running back.
If we look at the regular season statistics from 2013, it becomes even more clear that there has been a significant decrease in value at the running back position when it comes to the top of the draft. Of the top 10 rushers last season, only three (Adrian Peterson, Marshawn Lynch, and Ryan Mathews) were first round picks. Out of the top ten passers last season, only three (Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Andy Dalton) were not first round picks, and in reality, Brady was the only one who was truly a late round gem. Brees was taken with the first pick in the second round by San Diego, and Dalton was taken with the third pick in the second round by Cincinnati. When we look even deeper, this trend only becomes more and more apparent.
Of the top 25 passers from last season, 16 were taken in the first round. Of the top 25 rushers from last season, eight were taken in the first round. Of that group of 25 passers, only one was undrafted. Of that group of rushers, four were undrafted, and one was taken in the final round of the draft. Likely the best example of this trend is how many of these top players were taken first overall in the draft. Seven of those 25 QB's were selected number one overall, and none of those running backs were first overall. Add in the fact that Robert Griffin III only went second overall because he was behind Andrew Luck, and it is obvious how important the quarterback position is on draft day.
The seemingly "can't miss" exception to this rule was in 2012, when Trent Richardson went #3 overall to the Cleveland Browns. The league had already become more of a passing league, but Richardson was supposedly too good to pass up at the very top. Since then, he has been benched and then traded, and this probably makes teams feel even less compelled to spend a high pick on a running back, even if they did not feel very compelled to do so in the first place. The last running back taken first overall in the draft was Ki-Jana Carter, and unless you are an avid football fan, you would probably be hard-pressed to be able to name where he went to college and what team drafted him.
In 2013, the first running back taken was Giovani Bernard, 37th overall. In 2012, as I mentioned, Richardson was the first back taken, and he has been a gigantic dud in his first two seasons in the league. In 2011, the first running back taken was Mark Ingram, 28th overall. None of those players have ever been the lone, number one back on their respective teams. Of the top four rushers in 2013, we had two second round picks, one third round pick, and one sixth round pick. Of the top four passers, we had three first round picks, and Brees, who was the first pick of the second round.
Mock drafts for 2014 show that teams are still thinking the exact same way. The first quarterback could potentially go as high as #1 overall, but it is certainly possible that three could go in the first round, and as many as five or six could be off the board by the time the first running back is selected. Does that mean that all of those QB's will have better careers than the first running back taken? Of course not. But in 2014, it seems like the focus has moved to which of those players will have longer careers, and you have to say that the chances for that definitely favor the QB's.
Eddie Lacy went in the second round last year, and was very good for Green Bay as a rookie, but I remember watching him for the first time and thinking that he is going to be very good in the short term, but I just really do not think he will last more than five years as an elite back because of the punishment he takes. The chances of finding a solid running back in the late rounds are far better than the chances of finding a solid quarterback in the late rounds. Adrian Peterson was drafted high, and he has lasted, but he seems to be the outlier at the running back position. Tom Brady was drafted late, and is a Hall of Famer, but he is the outlier at the quarterback position.
So, if your team needs a quarterback in 2014, then expect to hear his name called sooner rather than later. If your team needs a running back, you are probably going to have to wait a while before you hear his name called. In all honesty, a player at every position except fullback, punter, and kicker will probably be drafted before the first running back comes off the board. Years ago, that would be inconceivable. Guys like Earl Campbell and Jim Brown and Emmitt Smith might not like it, but running backs are just not nearly as important in the present day as they were in the past.
Daily Nets Update: Brooklyn won Game 7 in Toronto yesterday, so that means they will head to Miami to face a rested Heat team. Obviously, this would be an extremely tough series no matter the circumstances, but I just couldn't help but feel underwhelmed by not only Brooklyn's performance yesterday, but by their play during much of the Toronto series. I can't say that I expect the Nets to get past the Heat, but I'm not sure they would even be able to do so if the entire roster was at the top of its game right now either. Game 1 is tomorrow night.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers were shut out last night in Pittsburgh, so the series is even at one. Splitting the first two games on the road is always the goal against a higher seed, and the Rangers were able to do so in Pittsburgh. There is no time to rest though, as Game 3 will be tonight at Madison Square Garden. Let's Go Rangers!
Daily Diamondbacks Update: Despite losing yesterday, Arizona has won three of four, and in the grand scheme of things, after a horrific start, it is a small step in the right direction. The DBacks will begin a three game series in Milwaukee tonight against a Brewers team that has come flying out of the gate to start the year. Mike Bolsinger will be on the mound to face off against Matt Garza.
Daily Giants Update: The Giants have a lot of holes to fill this weekend, and there seem to be plenty of options for them in the first round, so I really would not be surprised to see them go in any number of directions. I have heard names like Eric Ebron, Taylor Lewan, Aaron Donald, and Zack Martin, but the team might also look at guys like Anthony Barr or C.J. Mosley as well. As I said, the team needs to address a lot of areas. I was not really blown away by most of the free agent signings, as the team seemed to choose quantity over quality, so the draft is going to be important in finding guys who might truly be able to step up and be stars on this team.
This year, the Houston Texans will pick first overall, and it seems that the most likely scenario is that they draft defensive end Jadeveon Clowney. While their biggest weakness is not defensive end, most people seem to think that Clowney is just too good to pass up, and I believe that as well.
Another possibility that I think is less likely is that Houston trades out of the first overall spot, down a few spots, in an effort to acquire a few more picks, while still staying in the top ten overall. The team most mentioned here is the Atlanta Falcons, who hold the sixth pick. If Houston were able to swap spots with Atlanta, as well as acquire additional picks (either in 2014 or in the future), they appear open to doing so. Since Houston already has a Pro Bowl caliber defensive end in J.J. Watt, they might believe that they are better off passing up on Clowney in lieu of more picks, and help at another position. One of the positions that certainly jumps off the page as a weakness for Houston is quarterback. In the current NFL, the belief seems to be that without a "franchise quarterback," it is impossible to win, and we see that in how teams draft.
The quarterback class this year is considered by many to be mediocre. There do not seem to be any surefire superstar QB's ready to take the reins of a team right out of the gate, but we are still hearing talk about guys like Blake Bortles and Johnny Manziel possibly going first overall, but at least both going in the top ten. Among the other likely top overall picks, we see defensive lineman/pass rushing linebackers (Clowney, Khalil Mack), offensive lineman to protect the QB's (Greg Robinson, Jake Matthews), and wide receivers to catch the passes from those QB's (Sammy Watkins, Mike Evans). It seems more and more each year that these positions are the ones that are the most sought after when draft day rolls around. This trend really reflects how the league has changed over the past decade. Quarterbacks and left tackles need to be cornerstones, and stud pass rushers and receivers are needed to supplement them. However, that leaves out on position that has somewhat fallen off the map in terms of significance, and that position is running back.
If we look at the regular season statistics from 2013, it becomes even more clear that there has been a significant decrease in value at the running back position when it comes to the top of the draft. Of the top 10 rushers last season, only three (Adrian Peterson, Marshawn Lynch, and Ryan Mathews) were first round picks. Out of the top ten passers last season, only three (Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and Andy Dalton) were not first round picks, and in reality, Brady was the only one who was truly a late round gem. Brees was taken with the first pick in the second round by San Diego, and Dalton was taken with the third pick in the second round by Cincinnati. When we look even deeper, this trend only becomes more and more apparent.
Of the top 25 passers from last season, 16 were taken in the first round. Of the top 25 rushers from last season, eight were taken in the first round. Of that group of 25 passers, only one was undrafted. Of that group of rushers, four were undrafted, and one was taken in the final round of the draft. Likely the best example of this trend is how many of these top players were taken first overall in the draft. Seven of those 25 QB's were selected number one overall, and none of those running backs were first overall. Add in the fact that Robert Griffin III only went second overall because he was behind Andrew Luck, and it is obvious how important the quarterback position is on draft day.
The seemingly "can't miss" exception to this rule was in 2012, when Trent Richardson went #3 overall to the Cleveland Browns. The league had already become more of a passing league, but Richardson was supposedly too good to pass up at the very top. Since then, he has been benched and then traded, and this probably makes teams feel even less compelled to spend a high pick on a running back, even if they did not feel very compelled to do so in the first place. The last running back taken first overall in the draft was Ki-Jana Carter, and unless you are an avid football fan, you would probably be hard-pressed to be able to name where he went to college and what team drafted him.
In 2013, the first running back taken was Giovani Bernard, 37th overall. In 2012, as I mentioned, Richardson was the first back taken, and he has been a gigantic dud in his first two seasons in the league. In 2011, the first running back taken was Mark Ingram, 28th overall. None of those players have ever been the lone, number one back on their respective teams. Of the top four rushers in 2013, we had two second round picks, one third round pick, and one sixth round pick. Of the top four passers, we had three first round picks, and Brees, who was the first pick of the second round.
Mock drafts for 2014 show that teams are still thinking the exact same way. The first quarterback could potentially go as high as #1 overall, but it is certainly possible that three could go in the first round, and as many as five or six could be off the board by the time the first running back is selected. Does that mean that all of those QB's will have better careers than the first running back taken? Of course not. But in 2014, it seems like the focus has moved to which of those players will have longer careers, and you have to say that the chances for that definitely favor the QB's.
Eddie Lacy went in the second round last year, and was very good for Green Bay as a rookie, but I remember watching him for the first time and thinking that he is going to be very good in the short term, but I just really do not think he will last more than five years as an elite back because of the punishment he takes. The chances of finding a solid running back in the late rounds are far better than the chances of finding a solid quarterback in the late rounds. Adrian Peterson was drafted high, and he has lasted, but he seems to be the outlier at the running back position. Tom Brady was drafted late, and is a Hall of Famer, but he is the outlier at the quarterback position.
So, if your team needs a quarterback in 2014, then expect to hear his name called sooner rather than later. If your team needs a running back, you are probably going to have to wait a while before you hear his name called. In all honesty, a player at every position except fullback, punter, and kicker will probably be drafted before the first running back comes off the board. Years ago, that would be inconceivable. Guys like Earl Campbell and Jim Brown and Emmitt Smith might not like it, but running backs are just not nearly as important in the present day as they were in the past.
Daily Nets Update: Brooklyn won Game 7 in Toronto yesterday, so that means they will head to Miami to face a rested Heat team. Obviously, this would be an extremely tough series no matter the circumstances, but I just couldn't help but feel underwhelmed by not only Brooklyn's performance yesterday, but by their play during much of the Toronto series. I can't say that I expect the Nets to get past the Heat, but I'm not sure they would even be able to do so if the entire roster was at the top of its game right now either. Game 1 is tomorrow night.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers were shut out last night in Pittsburgh, so the series is even at one. Splitting the first two games on the road is always the goal against a higher seed, and the Rangers were able to do so in Pittsburgh. There is no time to rest though, as Game 3 will be tonight at Madison Square Garden. Let's Go Rangers!
Daily Diamondbacks Update: Despite losing yesterday, Arizona has won three of four, and in the grand scheme of things, after a horrific start, it is a small step in the right direction. The DBacks will begin a three game series in Milwaukee tonight against a Brewers team that has come flying out of the gate to start the year. Mike Bolsinger will be on the mound to face off against Matt Garza.
Daily Giants Update: The Giants have a lot of holes to fill this weekend, and there seem to be plenty of options for them in the first round, so I really would not be surprised to see them go in any number of directions. I have heard names like Eric Ebron, Taylor Lewan, Aaron Donald, and Zack Martin, but the team might also look at guys like Anthony Barr or C.J. Mosley as well. As I said, the team needs to address a lot of areas. I was not really blown away by most of the free agent signings, as the team seemed to choose quantity over quality, so the draft is going to be important in finding guys who might truly be able to step up and be stars on this team.
Monday, April 28, 2014
The Donald Sterling situation
I have the day off, and I have spent the entire morning listening to the opinions of numerous people about the statements made by Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling. I am not sure when exactly the statements he made took place, but a conversation between Sterling and his girlfriend were recorded in which he made multiple racist statements about black NBA players, and black people in general. If you want to find the audio of his statements, it is not hard to do, but what they basically did was make public the fact that he had racist feelings about African-Americans.
The story has exploded over the past few days, and the reaction of NBA players, coaches, owners, fans, and analysts have all been voiced.
The immediate reaction of the Los Angeles Clippers players was to shed their warm-ups that displayed the team name, and wear their shoot around shirts inside out before their game last night in Oakland against the Golden State Warriors. They then proceeded to lose by 21 points, and the series is now tied at two and heading back to Los Angeles. The players also declined to speak to the media about Sterling's comments, and head coach Doc Rivers was the lone member of the organization to address the media about the comments. He said that he was not involved in the decision of the Clippers' players, and was not a fan of it, but he felt that it was their right to do whatever they wanted.
What will be even more interesting to see is what the atmosphere in the Staples Center will be like for Game 5, which in terms of basketball, is a very important game. However, Sterling's racist remarks have seemingly overshadowed a very good series, and that will surely be the lead story leading into Game 5.
Obviously, there has been outrage about Sterling's remarks. People like Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, LeBron James, and even President Obama have weighed in and voiced their disapproval. James said that he would never play for Sterling, and I'm sure there are plenty of players throughout the league who feel the same way, but obviously James' statement means the most because he is the face of the league right now. While what Sterling said was clearly ignorant and dismaying, he said it, and it is now out there for the world to hear. That cannot be changed. The dilemma now is addressing what he said, and dealing with its impact on the Los Angeles Clippers, and the NBA in general.
As is the case in the world we live in, people are calling for immediate crucifixion of Sterling. Jeff Van Gundy said that every member of the Clippers roster and coaching staff should become free agents at the end of the season. Stephen A. Smith said that Sterling should be forced to sell the team to a black man. In my mind, not only are those opinions ludicrous, but they are also unrealistic.
If the players and coaches all became free agents, would their contracts be voided? If so, that would mean that they would be denied money that they rightfully earned. Then, would there even be teams who wanted to sign them? Obviously, the stars of the team like Chris Paul and Blake Griffin would be wanted, but how many other teams would be able to afford them? We don't know.
Paul and Griffin would be able to sign with other teams, but what about players like Ryan Hollins and Jared Dudley at the end of LA's bench? Who is to say that they would even be signed by another team? By making guys like them free agents, you would deny them money that they might never be able to make again, and that is completely unfair to them.
With that aside, what kind of Pandora's Box would that then open? Would an NBA owner charged with some kind of crime immediately be forced to let his entire roster go? Sterling has not even been charged with any crime, and he will not be. Would offensive statements made by an owner then qualify him to face the same punishment? It would be the beginning of an extremely slippery slope that the NBA should want no part of.
Then, let's look at Stephen A. Smith's suggestion of Sterling being forced to sell his team to a black man. I see a whole lot of flaws in this "punishment" as well. First, and most importantly, is the fact that anyone could call being forced to sell the Clippers a "punishment." Sterling bought the Clippers in 1981 for $12.5 million. $12.5 million. Right now, Sterling's estimated net worth is $1.9 billion. That means that Sterling's net worth is over 150,000 times what he bought the Clippers for. If he were to be "forced" to sell the team, it is likely that he would get upwards of $500 million for it, and that is a low estimate. That means, after buying the team for $12.5 million, his profit would be exponentially enormous. So how in the world is that a "punishment?" Plus, if Sterling were "forced" to sell the team to a black man, how would that man be viewed in not only the black community, but the American public in general. He would have just given an outright racist hundreds of millions of dollars. Is paying a known racist that much money a good way to start a tenure as a black owner? Surely not. Would that hurt Sterling's pockets? No. It would make them larger than most people could ever imagine. So again, we have a proposed "punishment" that is extremely nonsensical.
People like Sterling are concerned with only one thing; the bottom line. The ineptitude of the Clippers over the past few decades have proven that point. Even before these comments were made public, Sterling was known as a bad owner. His teams have been putrid for years, and until very recently, have been a non-factor when it comes to contention for an NBA title. However, as I just pointed out, Sterling has still profited from his initial purchase, so why then should it bother him? There are owners that genuinely care about the success of their franchise. Men like George Steinbrenner, Mark Cuban and, despite my hatred for him and his team, Jerry Jones exemplify that.
To a knowledgeable basketball fan, Sterling has been the complete opposite of that since he took control of the Clippers 33 years ago. He dabbles in the day-to-day activities of the team, but for the most part, he is only interested in how much money the team can make him. 2014 is probably the best chance that the Clippers have ever had to win an NBA title, and it is a shame that what Sterling said has overshadowed that.
Therefore, I am really not sure if there is a legitimate way to punish Sterling for making the racist remarks that he made. Can commissioner Adam Silver suspend Sterling? Sure. But what does that really do? Instead of watching Clippers games from courtside, he will watch them from the mansion that he lives in? Not much of a "punishment." Can he fine Sterling? The maximum fine that Silver and the NBA would be able to levy would be $1 million. Will that be a significant financial loss for Sterling? Surely. However, would it cripple his finances? No. I really think that it is impossible to "punish" Sterling in the short term, and if he will actually feel any sort of effect from what he said, it will not happen until years down the road.
As I have said before, Sterling is most concerned with the bottom line. While I am not sure, I am assuming that all tickets to Game 5 have already been sold. Therefore, Sterling is profiting from the game before it even happens. If fans do not show up, the team will obviously lose money from less concessions and merchandise sales, but is that loss, for one game, going to seriously affect Sterling's pockets? No, it is not. If the series between the Clippers and the Warriors goes to a Game 7, that game would be held in Los Angeles. Could fans refuse to buy tickets to that game? Absolutely. However, the monkey wrench in this all is the fact that this may actually the best Clippers team that has ever existed. Will every Clippers fan boycott a Game 7 because of what the owner of the team said? I'm sorry, but the answer to that is no. Long suffering Clippers fans have waited for this moment, and now that it is actually here, I cannot fault them for wanting to experience it.
The fans go to the games to cheer for the players, they don't go to the games to cheer for the owner of the team. The players play the games for each other, as well as for the fans. When they are on the court, I find it very hard to believe that the owner of their team is their prime motivation. The owner signs the checks, but he is not giving his blood, sweat, and tears on the court each and every day. The coach does his job with the team in mind, and by team, I don't mean owners and executives. Doc Rivers gives 100% day in and day out for his staff and his team.
The only way that Sterling can truly be hurt by his statements is through his pockets. If he remains as the owner, fans can refuse to buy tickets. Players can refuse to join his team as free agents. Businesses and companies can refuse to support him. A company named CarMax has already severed its relationship with the Clippers. Some guy named Tank (I'm sorry that I have no idea who that is) has refused to sing the national anthem at Game 5. Those are the things that will hurt Sterling. Those are the things that he is most concerned about.
We have seen men like Alex Rodriguez, Tiger Woods, and Lance Armstrong lose sponsorship deals because of their personal indiscretions, but in reality, have they actually been sincerely affected by those losses? Probably not. Now, take into account the fact that those men are millionaires. Donald Sterling is an 81-year old billionaire. Is there really a way to truly punish him in a way that will seriously hurt him? I do not think so.
So, in realistic terms, I find it hard to believe that there is any kind of sufficient "punishment" that Sterling could face. He is a racist. According to the first amendment of our Constitution, even though most may not agree with him, his feelings are completely legal. He cannot be forcibly removed from his position as owner of the Clippers unless he sells the team and makes an exponentially larger profit than he originally invested in the franchise. Sterling actually has legal grounds to sue whoever recorded his conversation with his girlfriend that exposed his feelings, because it is illegal to record a conversation without all parties knowingly being involved. Therefore, if he does decide to sue, he could make even more of a profit than he would make if he only sold the Clippers franchise.
We might not agree with Sterling, but unless I am missing something, I don't think that there is any way he would be unable to profit from whatever happens to him. In the court of public opinion, he may be forever smeared, but in terms of his money, there is little to no chance that he will take a significant hit. It might be sad, but it is true.
There are many people who have died as rich racists before, and there will be many men who will die the same way in the future. It might anger a whole lot of basketball fans in 2014, but it seems to me that it is unavoidable that Donald Sterling, whenever he does pass away, will be a clear member of that fraternity.
Daily Nets Update: The Raptors won last night to tie the series at 2, and the teams will travel to Toronto for Game 5. Obviously, it will be a huge game, and the winner will come out ecstatic, while the loser will come out in a huge hole. Hopefully, the Nets can be the ecstatic ones.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers got a huge win at home last night to take a 3-2 edge in the series against the Flyers. Game 6 will be tomorrow night in Philadelphia, and it sure would be nice to get a win then as opposed to going to a Game 7, where anything can happen, regardless of the location.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: After three straight wins, the DBacks blew a 5-0 lead against the Phillies on Saturday and followed that up by getting shut out yesterday. They now stand at 8-20 overall, and are a truly putrid 2-13 at home. The Rockies come to town starting tonight with Wade Miley taking the mound against Franklin Morales. At this point the motto is pretty much, "hope for the best, but expect the worst."
The story has exploded over the past few days, and the reaction of NBA players, coaches, owners, fans, and analysts have all been voiced.
The immediate reaction of the Los Angeles Clippers players was to shed their warm-ups that displayed the team name, and wear their shoot around shirts inside out before their game last night in Oakland against the Golden State Warriors. They then proceeded to lose by 21 points, and the series is now tied at two and heading back to Los Angeles. The players also declined to speak to the media about Sterling's comments, and head coach Doc Rivers was the lone member of the organization to address the media about the comments. He said that he was not involved in the decision of the Clippers' players, and was not a fan of it, but he felt that it was their right to do whatever they wanted.
What will be even more interesting to see is what the atmosphere in the Staples Center will be like for Game 5, which in terms of basketball, is a very important game. However, Sterling's racist remarks have seemingly overshadowed a very good series, and that will surely be the lead story leading into Game 5.
Obviously, there has been outrage about Sterling's remarks. People like Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, LeBron James, and even President Obama have weighed in and voiced their disapproval. James said that he would never play for Sterling, and I'm sure there are plenty of players throughout the league who feel the same way, but obviously James' statement means the most because he is the face of the league right now. While what Sterling said was clearly ignorant and dismaying, he said it, and it is now out there for the world to hear. That cannot be changed. The dilemma now is addressing what he said, and dealing with its impact on the Los Angeles Clippers, and the NBA in general.
As is the case in the world we live in, people are calling for immediate crucifixion of Sterling. Jeff Van Gundy said that every member of the Clippers roster and coaching staff should become free agents at the end of the season. Stephen A. Smith said that Sterling should be forced to sell the team to a black man. In my mind, not only are those opinions ludicrous, but they are also unrealistic.
If the players and coaches all became free agents, would their contracts be voided? If so, that would mean that they would be denied money that they rightfully earned. Then, would there even be teams who wanted to sign them? Obviously, the stars of the team like Chris Paul and Blake Griffin would be wanted, but how many other teams would be able to afford them? We don't know.
Paul and Griffin would be able to sign with other teams, but what about players like Ryan Hollins and Jared Dudley at the end of LA's bench? Who is to say that they would even be signed by another team? By making guys like them free agents, you would deny them money that they might never be able to make again, and that is completely unfair to them.
With that aside, what kind of Pandora's Box would that then open? Would an NBA owner charged with some kind of crime immediately be forced to let his entire roster go? Sterling has not even been charged with any crime, and he will not be. Would offensive statements made by an owner then qualify him to face the same punishment? It would be the beginning of an extremely slippery slope that the NBA should want no part of.
Then, let's look at Stephen A. Smith's suggestion of Sterling being forced to sell his team to a black man. I see a whole lot of flaws in this "punishment" as well. First, and most importantly, is the fact that anyone could call being forced to sell the Clippers a "punishment." Sterling bought the Clippers in 1981 for $12.5 million. $12.5 million. Right now, Sterling's estimated net worth is $1.9 billion. That means that Sterling's net worth is over 150,000 times what he bought the Clippers for. If he were to be "forced" to sell the team, it is likely that he would get upwards of $500 million for it, and that is a low estimate. That means, after buying the team for $12.5 million, his profit would be exponentially enormous. So how in the world is that a "punishment?" Plus, if Sterling were "forced" to sell the team to a black man, how would that man be viewed in not only the black community, but the American public in general. He would have just given an outright racist hundreds of millions of dollars. Is paying a known racist that much money a good way to start a tenure as a black owner? Surely not. Would that hurt Sterling's pockets? No. It would make them larger than most people could ever imagine. So again, we have a proposed "punishment" that is extremely nonsensical.
People like Sterling are concerned with only one thing; the bottom line. The ineptitude of the Clippers over the past few decades have proven that point. Even before these comments were made public, Sterling was known as a bad owner. His teams have been putrid for years, and until very recently, have been a non-factor when it comes to contention for an NBA title. However, as I just pointed out, Sterling has still profited from his initial purchase, so why then should it bother him? There are owners that genuinely care about the success of their franchise. Men like George Steinbrenner, Mark Cuban and, despite my hatred for him and his team, Jerry Jones exemplify that.
To a knowledgeable basketball fan, Sterling has been the complete opposite of that since he took control of the Clippers 33 years ago. He dabbles in the day-to-day activities of the team, but for the most part, he is only interested in how much money the team can make him. 2014 is probably the best chance that the Clippers have ever had to win an NBA title, and it is a shame that what Sterling said has overshadowed that.
Therefore, I am really not sure if there is a legitimate way to punish Sterling for making the racist remarks that he made. Can commissioner Adam Silver suspend Sterling? Sure. But what does that really do? Instead of watching Clippers games from courtside, he will watch them from the mansion that he lives in? Not much of a "punishment." Can he fine Sterling? The maximum fine that Silver and the NBA would be able to levy would be $1 million. Will that be a significant financial loss for Sterling? Surely. However, would it cripple his finances? No. I really think that it is impossible to "punish" Sterling in the short term, and if he will actually feel any sort of effect from what he said, it will not happen until years down the road.
As I have said before, Sterling is most concerned with the bottom line. While I am not sure, I am assuming that all tickets to Game 5 have already been sold. Therefore, Sterling is profiting from the game before it even happens. If fans do not show up, the team will obviously lose money from less concessions and merchandise sales, but is that loss, for one game, going to seriously affect Sterling's pockets? No, it is not. If the series between the Clippers and the Warriors goes to a Game 7, that game would be held in Los Angeles. Could fans refuse to buy tickets to that game? Absolutely. However, the monkey wrench in this all is the fact that this may actually the best Clippers team that has ever existed. Will every Clippers fan boycott a Game 7 because of what the owner of the team said? I'm sorry, but the answer to that is no. Long suffering Clippers fans have waited for this moment, and now that it is actually here, I cannot fault them for wanting to experience it.
The fans go to the games to cheer for the players, they don't go to the games to cheer for the owner of the team. The players play the games for each other, as well as for the fans. When they are on the court, I find it very hard to believe that the owner of their team is their prime motivation. The owner signs the checks, but he is not giving his blood, sweat, and tears on the court each and every day. The coach does his job with the team in mind, and by team, I don't mean owners and executives. Doc Rivers gives 100% day in and day out for his staff and his team.
The only way that Sterling can truly be hurt by his statements is through his pockets. If he remains as the owner, fans can refuse to buy tickets. Players can refuse to join his team as free agents. Businesses and companies can refuse to support him. A company named CarMax has already severed its relationship with the Clippers. Some guy named Tank (I'm sorry that I have no idea who that is) has refused to sing the national anthem at Game 5. Those are the things that will hurt Sterling. Those are the things that he is most concerned about.
We have seen men like Alex Rodriguez, Tiger Woods, and Lance Armstrong lose sponsorship deals because of their personal indiscretions, but in reality, have they actually been sincerely affected by those losses? Probably not. Now, take into account the fact that those men are millionaires. Donald Sterling is an 81-year old billionaire. Is there really a way to truly punish him in a way that will seriously hurt him? I do not think so.
So, in realistic terms, I find it hard to believe that there is any kind of sufficient "punishment" that Sterling could face. He is a racist. According to the first amendment of our Constitution, even though most may not agree with him, his feelings are completely legal. He cannot be forcibly removed from his position as owner of the Clippers unless he sells the team and makes an exponentially larger profit than he originally invested in the franchise. Sterling actually has legal grounds to sue whoever recorded his conversation with his girlfriend that exposed his feelings, because it is illegal to record a conversation without all parties knowingly being involved. Therefore, if he does decide to sue, he could make even more of a profit than he would make if he only sold the Clippers franchise.
We might not agree with Sterling, but unless I am missing something, I don't think that there is any way he would be unable to profit from whatever happens to him. In the court of public opinion, he may be forever smeared, but in terms of his money, there is little to no chance that he will take a significant hit. It might be sad, but it is true.
There are many people who have died as rich racists before, and there will be many men who will die the same way in the future. It might anger a whole lot of basketball fans in 2014, but it seems to me that it is unavoidable that Donald Sterling, whenever he does pass away, will be a clear member of that fraternity.
Daily Nets Update: The Raptors won last night to tie the series at 2, and the teams will travel to Toronto for Game 5. Obviously, it will be a huge game, and the winner will come out ecstatic, while the loser will come out in a huge hole. Hopefully, the Nets can be the ecstatic ones.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers got a huge win at home last night to take a 3-2 edge in the series against the Flyers. Game 6 will be tomorrow night in Philadelphia, and it sure would be nice to get a win then as opposed to going to a Game 7, where anything can happen, regardless of the location.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: After three straight wins, the DBacks blew a 5-0 lead against the Phillies on Saturday and followed that up by getting shut out yesterday. They now stand at 8-20 overall, and are a truly putrid 2-13 at home. The Rockies come to town starting tonight with Wade Miley taking the mound against Franklin Morales. At this point the motto is pretty much, "hope for the best, but expect the worst."
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Football "games" that I cannot stand
As I write this, on April 22nd, the NHL and NBA playoffs have gotten underway, and we are about a month through the Major League Baseball season. Three of our major four sports are in the spotlight, and this is really their time to shine. While the baseball season is still young, its presence still brings about daily viewing pleasure to people throughout the country. The NBA playoffs (despite the seemingly unending length) are at the forefront, and the NHL playoffs are also in full swing, and this is one of the few times that the NHL gets continual national media coverage.
Since our sports world has become one that is clearly dominated by football, this is a time that football should take a back seat to the rest of our sports. However, in some places, that just simply is not the case. If we thought that we could go more than a week without seeing any football in our national news, then we were wrong. I love the game of football, and most of the country does as well, but the fact of the matter is, this is not football season. The NFL Draft is still a month away, and then the preseason doesn't begin for three months. It is time to focus on our other sports. Yet, it just seems that we are unable to do so.
Collegiate football teams begin their offseason activities before NFL teams, and sadly, these offseason activities are more important in some places than anything else going on in the sports world. Just over the past week, the "spring games" of teams like Auburn, Oklahoma, Alabama, and others were televised, and their results were broadcast to a national audience. For those who don't understand what spring games are, I will give you a quick synopsis. They are basically glorified scrimmages that hold the attention of millions of people throughout the country.
Right now, the Oklahoma City Thunder are in the midst of a playoff run that might eventually lead them to an NBA championship. Yet, it seems like the majority of Oklahoma is more invested in the spring game of the Oklahoma Sooners than they are in the playoff run of the Thunder. In Ohio, the Columbus Blue Jackets will have a chance to even their series at two with the highly ranked Pittsburgh Penguins, but the focus is still on the spring game of the Ohio State Buckeyes. In my opinion, this is absolutely ludicrous. This is the height of the season for the Thunder. This is the height of the season for the Blue Jackets. The height of the season for the Sooners and Buckeyes is months away. Why should we place focus on scrimmages more than playoff games? If you ask me, I would be unable to come up with an answer.
Down south, I understand that things are different. In Alabama, the only thing that they have is college football. There are no major sports teams in Alabama, and therefore, college football rules. The rivalry between Auburn and Alabama dates back to long before I was born, and its flame still burns as much today as it did decades ago. Therefore, I will afford fans of the Tigers and the Crimson Tide a bit more leeway than I do for other schools, but I still cannot help but feel like these spring games are blown exponentially out of proportion.
What these games are, is basically an intrasquad scrimmage. Sometimes it is "offense vs. defense," sometimes it is "red vs. white," but no matter what, these games have zero bearing on the upcoming college season. If you thought spring training statistics meant nothing when predicting a baseball season, then multiply that belief by ten and attach it to the results of a college football spring game. The fact that tens of thousands of fans attend these games make it even more laughable. Is there really nothing better to do in Alabama than watch what is basically a team practice? Sure, it might be interesting to some to see who will replace A.J. McCarron at quarterback for the Crimson Tide. But do we need to turn out in droves to witness a portion of the battle for that position? No.
It is April right now. As sports fans, we should be focused on the NBA and NHL playoffs, as well as the MLB regular season. This is one of the few times each year that football takes a back seat, and broadcasting these spring games across the country is in complete contrast to that. We are all at fault for glorifying football to the point of sainthood, but can we please forget about it for a little while? There is a reason we have four major sports in this country, and it is time to give those "other three" sports the respect that they deserve.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers head to Philadelphia tonight after splitting the first two games of the series at Madison Square Garden. Winning at least one of the next two games is absolutely essential if the Rangers want to move on to the second round, so what better way to start than winning tonight?
Daily Nets Update: After taking Game One away from the Raptors on the road, the Nets are in a great position right now. At worst, the Nets will return to Brooklyn with the series tied at one game apiece. However, since the playoffs are officially underway, it is time for our veterans to step up, and Paul Pierce led the way in Game 1. A win tonight would be enormous, but even if the Nets lose, they should still be in good shape heading back to the Barclays Center.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: I'm not sure if hitting rock bottom is possible in April, but if it is, then the Diamondbacks are there. At 5-17, Arizona is clearly the worst team in baseball, and it is hard to see any light at the end of the tunnel. The offense has been at least serviceable, but the pitching, from top to bottom, has been absolutely horrendous. Arizona is already 8 games out in the division, and the promising signs are few and far between. I was close to writing a piece about how bad this team has been, but I figured that no one would really be interested in it. Either way, the DBacks face the Cubs in about two hours, and I really have no expectation aside from not getting blown out.
Since our sports world has become one that is clearly dominated by football, this is a time that football should take a back seat to the rest of our sports. However, in some places, that just simply is not the case. If we thought that we could go more than a week without seeing any football in our national news, then we were wrong. I love the game of football, and most of the country does as well, but the fact of the matter is, this is not football season. The NFL Draft is still a month away, and then the preseason doesn't begin for three months. It is time to focus on our other sports. Yet, it just seems that we are unable to do so.
Collegiate football teams begin their offseason activities before NFL teams, and sadly, these offseason activities are more important in some places than anything else going on in the sports world. Just over the past week, the "spring games" of teams like Auburn, Oklahoma, Alabama, and others were televised, and their results were broadcast to a national audience. For those who don't understand what spring games are, I will give you a quick synopsis. They are basically glorified scrimmages that hold the attention of millions of people throughout the country.
Right now, the Oklahoma City Thunder are in the midst of a playoff run that might eventually lead them to an NBA championship. Yet, it seems like the majority of Oklahoma is more invested in the spring game of the Oklahoma Sooners than they are in the playoff run of the Thunder. In Ohio, the Columbus Blue Jackets will have a chance to even their series at two with the highly ranked Pittsburgh Penguins, but the focus is still on the spring game of the Ohio State Buckeyes. In my opinion, this is absolutely ludicrous. This is the height of the season for the Thunder. This is the height of the season for the Blue Jackets. The height of the season for the Sooners and Buckeyes is months away. Why should we place focus on scrimmages more than playoff games? If you ask me, I would be unable to come up with an answer.
Down south, I understand that things are different. In Alabama, the only thing that they have is college football. There are no major sports teams in Alabama, and therefore, college football rules. The rivalry between Auburn and Alabama dates back to long before I was born, and its flame still burns as much today as it did decades ago. Therefore, I will afford fans of the Tigers and the Crimson Tide a bit more leeway than I do for other schools, but I still cannot help but feel like these spring games are blown exponentially out of proportion.
What these games are, is basically an intrasquad scrimmage. Sometimes it is "offense vs. defense," sometimes it is "red vs. white," but no matter what, these games have zero bearing on the upcoming college season. If you thought spring training statistics meant nothing when predicting a baseball season, then multiply that belief by ten and attach it to the results of a college football spring game. The fact that tens of thousands of fans attend these games make it even more laughable. Is there really nothing better to do in Alabama than watch what is basically a team practice? Sure, it might be interesting to some to see who will replace A.J. McCarron at quarterback for the Crimson Tide. But do we need to turn out in droves to witness a portion of the battle for that position? No.
It is April right now. As sports fans, we should be focused on the NBA and NHL playoffs, as well as the MLB regular season. This is one of the few times each year that football takes a back seat, and broadcasting these spring games across the country is in complete contrast to that. We are all at fault for glorifying football to the point of sainthood, but can we please forget about it for a little while? There is a reason we have four major sports in this country, and it is time to give those "other three" sports the respect that they deserve.
Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers head to Philadelphia tonight after splitting the first two games of the series at Madison Square Garden. Winning at least one of the next two games is absolutely essential if the Rangers want to move on to the second round, so what better way to start than winning tonight?
Daily Nets Update: After taking Game One away from the Raptors on the road, the Nets are in a great position right now. At worst, the Nets will return to Brooklyn with the series tied at one game apiece. However, since the playoffs are officially underway, it is time for our veterans to step up, and Paul Pierce led the way in Game 1. A win tonight would be enormous, but even if the Nets lose, they should still be in good shape heading back to the Barclays Center.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: I'm not sure if hitting rock bottom is possible in April, but if it is, then the Diamondbacks are there. At 5-17, Arizona is clearly the worst team in baseball, and it is hard to see any light at the end of the tunnel. The offense has been at least serviceable, but the pitching, from top to bottom, has been absolutely horrendous. Arizona is already 8 games out in the division, and the promising signs are few and far between. I was close to writing a piece about how bad this team has been, but I figured that no one would really be interested in it. Either way, the DBacks face the Cubs in about two hours, and I really have no expectation aside from not getting blown out.
Monday, April 14, 2014
A tradition unlike any other
There are many sports fans who feel like Opening Day is the unofficial beginning of summer, and while it does not actually begin during summer, I do believe that it at least signals that summer is not far away. The Major League Baseball season is about two weeks old, and I have been very interested in the young season so far.
Then, there are many other sports fans who feel like the unofficial beginning of summer is The Masters. After the cold winter months, seeing all of the best golfers in the world gather in Augusta, Georgia on the sprawling green course is another indication that the summer is soon to come. While I am certainly not a big fan of golf by any stretch of the imagination, I do usually at least watch the four major tournaments in parts, and The Masters is one of those tournaments. However, this past weekend, I just had hardly any interest at all in watching, and I was not the only one.
There are a lot of things that I do not like about the Augusta National Golf Club. The club only admitted its first black member after another professional golf club in Alabama (Shoal Creek) denied entry to black players, and in doing so, almost lost its chance to host the PGA Championship. Fearing similar repercussions, Augusta accepted black males into its club before they faced any significant protests from the outside world.
Augusta was however, at the middle of controversy in 2002 when their exclusion of females was brought to the forefront of the sports media world. It was not until 2012 that females were actually allowed entry into the club. I have heard many people say that the south is "behind the times," but not allowing females membership to the club until 2012 is really pathetic. I understand that these clubs have their own policies, and technically, they can run their establishments however they please. I also understand that golf is not exactly a sport that is shrouded in modernity. Many would say that golf is a game played by, and for, old white males. Therefore, combine that with the fact that we are talking about golf in Georgia, and it makes it a bit easier to see why they have such antiquated policies. The Augusta National Golf Club is different though, and there are multiple reasons for that.
There are four major PGA tournaments played each year. The Masters, The U.S. Open, The British Open, and The PGA Championship. The latter three are played in different locales each year. The only one played in the same spot every year is The Masters, and that is why Augusta is different from every other golf club in the country. Having racist and/or sexist policies might not be newsworthy, and might not really matter, for a little known golf club somewhere in middle America, but when a golf club is at the center of the PGA world for one week each year, they need to loosen up.
Despite all of these things I dislike about the club, I still usually tune in to watch at least some of The Masters, but this year I just didn't feel any compulsion to at all, and according to television ratings, there were many people around the country who felt the same way. The ratings were down by at least one million viewers per day, and this in turn caused ticket prices to drop, meaning that The Masters did not generate nearly as much money for Augusta National Golf Club as it did last year. People may try to deny the reason for this, but in my opinion, there is one main reason, and that is the absence of Tiger Woods.
I don't need to document the history of Woods' impact on the game of golf, because we all know it has been tremendous. As he has gotten older, his level of play has declined, but unlike most other professional sports, in golf, you can play well into your 40's and 50's. So, in actuality, Woods is not going anywhere, but the longer the game needs to rely on him to be the main attraction at each tournament, the worse it is for the PGA Tour.
In my opinion, Woods' best years are well behind him. He will still win tournaments in the future, but the chances of him winning any more majors seem to be shrinking by the minute. All of the sports we watch can usually be marked by some kind of esoteric era. These eras are not set concretely in terms of beginning, ending, structure, or length, but ardent sports fans can pretty much identify them in each sport.
In the NBA, we had the era of Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls. After that, the power shifted to the west, as we saw the Spurs and Lakers dominate for long stretches of time. And now, despite the futile denials of his detractors, we are squarely in the middle of the era of LeBron James.
In the NFL, the mid to late 1980's were dominated by the 49ers. The Cowboys followed that with a stretch of dominance, and soon after that, Tom Brady, Bill Belichick, and the New England Patriots had a stranglehold on the league. Now, while there is no real singularly dominant team (I know, yes, my Giants have won two of the last seven Super Bowls, but their down years in between cannot really support anyone calling them a dynasty), I think many would say that we are in the middle of the era of the quarterback. Quarterbacks are getting paid the most money, they are winning Super Bowl MVP's, they are breaking records left and right, and they are the face of the league right now.
In Major League Baseball, the game was known so long as one that was best able to support "dynasties." Teams like the Cardinals, Giants, Dodgers, and Reds experienced long stretches of success, and then of course, there is the Yankees. The Yankees seemed to own the 1990's into the turn of the century, and after that "Yankee era" ended, we saw the steroid era. Home runs were flying out of ballparks on an inning-by-inning basis, and long-standing records were being shattered. What we are in right now may not be an era marked by a singular team, but in comparison to what we were used to seeing in baseball, you might be able to call it an era of parity, with recent years possibly becoming a new era of pitching.
There have been numerous World Series champions since the steroid era ended, and that is why it might be called an era of parity. The Red Sox, Cardinals, Giants, Rays, Yankees, Phillies, Rangers, and Tigers, among a few other teams, have enjoyed long runs of success recently, and most teams have enjoyed at least some success in terms of playoff participation over the past decade. Pitching has also thrived as of late, with a seemingly inane number of perfect games, no hitters, and general dominance.
However, the game of golf has been immersed in the era of Tiger Woods now for far too long. Woods won his first major (The Masters) in 1997. Since then, all of the sports I just mentioned have seen eras come and go, but golf still is clinging to the era of Tiger Woods. It is like the game is waiting for a new face to step forward and lead it, but no one has been able to do so. Have we seen flashes? Sure. Phil Mickelson is certainly a big draw, and the fact that he failed to make the cut at The Masters this year definitely did not help the television ratings. However, he just doesn't quite have the flair of Woods. Bubba Watson just won his second Masters, and he seems to be approaching the prime of his career, but the fact that I am only just mentioning his name now and he won the tournament makes it seem as though his name is inconsequential. Adam Scott? Rickie Fowler? They just don't seem to do it.
In my opinion, the closest the golf world has come to replacing Tiger Woods is Rory McIlroy. McIlroy is young and talented, and he seems to have a personality that is at least somewhat able to handle the bright lights. He has two major wins to his credit, and he has won numerous other tournaments as well. However, at this point in his career, McIlroy is still known by some more for his collapse at the 2011 Masters more than anything else. McIlroy went into the final day at the top of the leaderboard, but went on to shoot an 80 and drop into a tie for 15th place. I remember it being painful to watch on television as he struggled so badly. Two major wins are certainly great, and more than most PGA players will ever have, but no one remembers Tiger Woods for cracking under the pressure, and McIlroy still has not done enough to make us completely forget about the time he did fold when the cameras were squarely on him.
So, to sum it all up, I have to say that our society in America, as far as sports goes, is one craving the spectacular. We loved seeing baseball players hit balls farther than we could ever imagine, and pitchers throwing perfect games. We love Johnny Manziel winning the Heisman Trophy and then going out and being photographed with a bottle of champagne in each hand and a girl under each arm. We love seeing NBA players winning titles and then partying with celebrity actors and musicians. We love seeing NFL players winning the Super Bowl and then declaring "I'm going to Disney World!" Right after Bubba Watson won The Masters this year, where did he go? Disney World? A celebrity-laden party? To the front of a parade of heroes? No. He went to a waffle house. I'm sorry, but that just is not what we want to see.
So then, what is the golf world to do? Honestly, I cannot answer that question. The guys we see winning tournaments right now might be great golfers, but they are not attention grabbers. The next great, attention grabbing golfer might be right under our nose and ready to break out, or he might be a 12-year old on a public municipal golf course somewhere in South Dakota. So, maybe it is fitting that golf is a sport that is beloved and played by older men, because at this point, the game seems to be clinging to an era that has passed. The game needs someone to step up and begin a new era, and as of April 14, 2014, that has not happened. If you don't believe me, just ask ESPN, CBS, and Augusta National Golf Club. Their wallets will prove me right.
Daily Rangers Update: The playoffs will be in full swing right out of the gate on Thursday with the Flyers visiting Madison Square Garden. The NHL playoffs, more so than any other sport, are usually very wide open, and a hot streak from the team could mean we still have a lot of Rangers hockey ahead of us. Hopefully, that is the case. Let's Go Rangers!
Daily Nets Update: Even with only two games left to play in the regular season, Brooklyn's postseason road is far from clear. Chicago and Toronto are now tied at #3 and #4 in the Eastern Conference, and the team that ends the season at #4 will be the one to face the Nets in the first round. After that (hoping the Nets can pull off a win in that series), they will have to go up against (barring a major upset), the #1 team in the conference, and that spot is still undecided, as it could be either Indiana or Miami. No matter who they end up playing, I think if Brooklyn makes it out of the first round, they should consider it a good showing, but if that were to happen, things will be extremely tough in round two.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: Things are not looking good in the desert. After taking two out of three from the Giants in San Francisco, the DBacks were swept at home by the Dodgers and now stand at 4-11. The Mets come to town to open a three-game series tonight, and Josh Collmenter will get the start against Zack Wheeler. Collmenter will be making his first start of the season, as the team has already decided to give up on Randall Delgado in the starting rotation. Collmenter has been superb in long relief over the past year and a half, but was not too great when he was used as a starter prior to that. Multiple starting pitchers have gotten off to fast starts in the minor leagues, and Archie Bradley is only one of them. Obviously, we still have a ton of games to play, but this has been anything but a promising start, and the young guys would be hard-pressed to actually pitch worse than our staff has thus far.
Daily Giants Update: Voluntary workouts begin in a week, and OTA's are still over a month away. Thus far, the team has seemingly tried to address their weaknesses through quantity and not quality, but it wouldn't be fair to judge the offseason before the draft, which is now less than a month away.
Then, there are many other sports fans who feel like the unofficial beginning of summer is The Masters. After the cold winter months, seeing all of the best golfers in the world gather in Augusta, Georgia on the sprawling green course is another indication that the summer is soon to come. While I am certainly not a big fan of golf by any stretch of the imagination, I do usually at least watch the four major tournaments in parts, and The Masters is one of those tournaments. However, this past weekend, I just had hardly any interest at all in watching, and I was not the only one.
There are a lot of things that I do not like about the Augusta National Golf Club. The club only admitted its first black member after another professional golf club in Alabama (Shoal Creek) denied entry to black players, and in doing so, almost lost its chance to host the PGA Championship. Fearing similar repercussions, Augusta accepted black males into its club before they faced any significant protests from the outside world.
Augusta was however, at the middle of controversy in 2002 when their exclusion of females was brought to the forefront of the sports media world. It was not until 2012 that females were actually allowed entry into the club. I have heard many people say that the south is "behind the times," but not allowing females membership to the club until 2012 is really pathetic. I understand that these clubs have their own policies, and technically, they can run their establishments however they please. I also understand that golf is not exactly a sport that is shrouded in modernity. Many would say that golf is a game played by, and for, old white males. Therefore, combine that with the fact that we are talking about golf in Georgia, and it makes it a bit easier to see why they have such antiquated policies. The Augusta National Golf Club is different though, and there are multiple reasons for that.
There are four major PGA tournaments played each year. The Masters, The U.S. Open, The British Open, and The PGA Championship. The latter three are played in different locales each year. The only one played in the same spot every year is The Masters, and that is why Augusta is different from every other golf club in the country. Having racist and/or sexist policies might not be newsworthy, and might not really matter, for a little known golf club somewhere in middle America, but when a golf club is at the center of the PGA world for one week each year, they need to loosen up.
Despite all of these things I dislike about the club, I still usually tune in to watch at least some of The Masters, but this year I just didn't feel any compulsion to at all, and according to television ratings, there were many people around the country who felt the same way. The ratings were down by at least one million viewers per day, and this in turn caused ticket prices to drop, meaning that The Masters did not generate nearly as much money for Augusta National Golf Club as it did last year. People may try to deny the reason for this, but in my opinion, there is one main reason, and that is the absence of Tiger Woods.
I don't need to document the history of Woods' impact on the game of golf, because we all know it has been tremendous. As he has gotten older, his level of play has declined, but unlike most other professional sports, in golf, you can play well into your 40's and 50's. So, in actuality, Woods is not going anywhere, but the longer the game needs to rely on him to be the main attraction at each tournament, the worse it is for the PGA Tour.
In my opinion, Woods' best years are well behind him. He will still win tournaments in the future, but the chances of him winning any more majors seem to be shrinking by the minute. All of the sports we watch can usually be marked by some kind of esoteric era. These eras are not set concretely in terms of beginning, ending, structure, or length, but ardent sports fans can pretty much identify them in each sport.
In the NBA, we had the era of Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls. After that, the power shifted to the west, as we saw the Spurs and Lakers dominate for long stretches of time. And now, despite the futile denials of his detractors, we are squarely in the middle of the era of LeBron James.
In the NFL, the mid to late 1980's were dominated by the 49ers. The Cowboys followed that with a stretch of dominance, and soon after that, Tom Brady, Bill Belichick, and the New England Patriots had a stranglehold on the league. Now, while there is no real singularly dominant team (I know, yes, my Giants have won two of the last seven Super Bowls, but their down years in between cannot really support anyone calling them a dynasty), I think many would say that we are in the middle of the era of the quarterback. Quarterbacks are getting paid the most money, they are winning Super Bowl MVP's, they are breaking records left and right, and they are the face of the league right now.
In Major League Baseball, the game was known so long as one that was best able to support "dynasties." Teams like the Cardinals, Giants, Dodgers, and Reds experienced long stretches of success, and then of course, there is the Yankees. The Yankees seemed to own the 1990's into the turn of the century, and after that "Yankee era" ended, we saw the steroid era. Home runs were flying out of ballparks on an inning-by-inning basis, and long-standing records were being shattered. What we are in right now may not be an era marked by a singular team, but in comparison to what we were used to seeing in baseball, you might be able to call it an era of parity, with recent years possibly becoming a new era of pitching.
There have been numerous World Series champions since the steroid era ended, and that is why it might be called an era of parity. The Red Sox, Cardinals, Giants, Rays, Yankees, Phillies, Rangers, and Tigers, among a few other teams, have enjoyed long runs of success recently, and most teams have enjoyed at least some success in terms of playoff participation over the past decade. Pitching has also thrived as of late, with a seemingly inane number of perfect games, no hitters, and general dominance.
However, the game of golf has been immersed in the era of Tiger Woods now for far too long. Woods won his first major (The Masters) in 1997. Since then, all of the sports I just mentioned have seen eras come and go, but golf still is clinging to the era of Tiger Woods. It is like the game is waiting for a new face to step forward and lead it, but no one has been able to do so. Have we seen flashes? Sure. Phil Mickelson is certainly a big draw, and the fact that he failed to make the cut at The Masters this year definitely did not help the television ratings. However, he just doesn't quite have the flair of Woods. Bubba Watson just won his second Masters, and he seems to be approaching the prime of his career, but the fact that I am only just mentioning his name now and he won the tournament makes it seem as though his name is inconsequential. Adam Scott? Rickie Fowler? They just don't seem to do it.
In my opinion, the closest the golf world has come to replacing Tiger Woods is Rory McIlroy. McIlroy is young and talented, and he seems to have a personality that is at least somewhat able to handle the bright lights. He has two major wins to his credit, and he has won numerous other tournaments as well. However, at this point in his career, McIlroy is still known by some more for his collapse at the 2011 Masters more than anything else. McIlroy went into the final day at the top of the leaderboard, but went on to shoot an 80 and drop into a tie for 15th place. I remember it being painful to watch on television as he struggled so badly. Two major wins are certainly great, and more than most PGA players will ever have, but no one remembers Tiger Woods for cracking under the pressure, and McIlroy still has not done enough to make us completely forget about the time he did fold when the cameras were squarely on him.
So, to sum it all up, I have to say that our society in America, as far as sports goes, is one craving the spectacular. We loved seeing baseball players hit balls farther than we could ever imagine, and pitchers throwing perfect games. We love Johnny Manziel winning the Heisman Trophy and then going out and being photographed with a bottle of champagne in each hand and a girl under each arm. We love seeing NBA players winning titles and then partying with celebrity actors and musicians. We love seeing NFL players winning the Super Bowl and then declaring "I'm going to Disney World!" Right after Bubba Watson won The Masters this year, where did he go? Disney World? A celebrity-laden party? To the front of a parade of heroes? No. He went to a waffle house. I'm sorry, but that just is not what we want to see.
So then, what is the golf world to do? Honestly, I cannot answer that question. The guys we see winning tournaments right now might be great golfers, but they are not attention grabbers. The next great, attention grabbing golfer might be right under our nose and ready to break out, or he might be a 12-year old on a public municipal golf course somewhere in South Dakota. So, maybe it is fitting that golf is a sport that is beloved and played by older men, because at this point, the game seems to be clinging to an era that has passed. The game needs someone to step up and begin a new era, and as of April 14, 2014, that has not happened. If you don't believe me, just ask ESPN, CBS, and Augusta National Golf Club. Their wallets will prove me right.
Daily Rangers Update: The playoffs will be in full swing right out of the gate on Thursday with the Flyers visiting Madison Square Garden. The NHL playoffs, more so than any other sport, are usually very wide open, and a hot streak from the team could mean we still have a lot of Rangers hockey ahead of us. Hopefully, that is the case. Let's Go Rangers!
Daily Nets Update: Even with only two games left to play in the regular season, Brooklyn's postseason road is far from clear. Chicago and Toronto are now tied at #3 and #4 in the Eastern Conference, and the team that ends the season at #4 will be the one to face the Nets in the first round. After that (hoping the Nets can pull off a win in that series), they will have to go up against (barring a major upset), the #1 team in the conference, and that spot is still undecided, as it could be either Indiana or Miami. No matter who they end up playing, I think if Brooklyn makes it out of the first round, they should consider it a good showing, but if that were to happen, things will be extremely tough in round two.
Daily Diamondbacks Update: Things are not looking good in the desert. After taking two out of three from the Giants in San Francisco, the DBacks were swept at home by the Dodgers and now stand at 4-11. The Mets come to town to open a three-game series tonight, and Josh Collmenter will get the start against Zack Wheeler. Collmenter will be making his first start of the season, as the team has already decided to give up on Randall Delgado in the starting rotation. Collmenter has been superb in long relief over the past year and a half, but was not too great when he was used as a starter prior to that. Multiple starting pitchers have gotten off to fast starts in the minor leagues, and Archie Bradley is only one of them. Obviously, we still have a ton of games to play, but this has been anything but a promising start, and the young guys would be hard-pressed to actually pitch worse than our staff has thus far.
Daily Giants Update: Voluntary workouts begin in a week, and OTA's are still over a month away. Thus far, the team has seemingly tried to address their weaknesses through quantity and not quality, but it wouldn't be fair to judge the offseason before the draft, which is now less than a month away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)