It's unanimous, and it's about damn time

The 2019 Baseball Hall of Fame class was announced yesterday, and it features names that surely are deserving in Edgar Martinez, Roy Halladay, Mike Mussina, and Mariano Rivera. How deserving each of them are is another question for another day, but what I found to be the biggest news of the day was that Mariano Rivera became the first player ever to be elected unanimously. Why it has taken this long for someone to receive 100% of the votes is the result of many things, but I am glad that Rivera was the first one to appear on every ballot, because I think it will open doors for future Hall of Famers, and eventually shine the light on how foolish it is that some voters have refused to do this before.

I thought that the first player to receive 100% of the votes would be Derek Jeter, but the fact that it was Rivera is totally fine in my eyes. The only reason I believed that Rivera might not be selected unanimously is because he spent his entire career as a closer, and that was really a position that didn't exist decades ago. While it is no doubt a very important position in the game today, relief pitchers in the early 20th century were usually just the guys who were not good enough to be starting pitchers, and I thought that a few old, crotchety voters would therefore see that as reason enough to leave Rivera off their ballots. Thankfully though, I was wrong.

Mariano Rivera is easily the best closer of all time, as he is the career leader in saves, has a career ERA of 2.21, and an amazing career postseason ERA of 0.70. It isn't like he only pitched a few innings in the postseason either. He was a member of the New York Yankees during a run in which they won multiple World Series championships, and he was a staple of the team. If you think Rivera isn't a Hall of Famer, then you simply just don't know baseball. The fact that he received 100% of the votes shows that.

Baseball fans everywhere might have their beliefs about why no other player has ever been selected to the Hall of Fame unanimously, and I think there are multiple reasons this has happened. The first reason is probably the easiest, and that is simply because most players just aren't good enough to be selected by every voter. There are borderline Hall of Famers, there are the good ones, and then there are the immortals. The immortals don't come around as often as those other ones, but Rivera certainly fits into that category. You can't mention the best players in the history of the game without eventually bringing up his name. His numbers show it, his accomplishments show it, and his character shows it.

Obviously, there are the steroid era players like Rafael Palmeiro and Barry Bonds who easily have the numbers, but have a glaring hole in the character category, and that has kept them out of the Hall of Fame so far. The same goes for Pete Rose and Joe Jackson, who are two of the greatest hitters to ever play, but were banned from the sport for gambling. You could make a legitimate argument that Ty Cobb is the greatest all around player in the history of the sport, but his temper and attitude, both on and off the field, turned many people in the game against him. Burleigh Grimes is a Hall of Famer, but was known for throwing a spitball, which is now outlawed, even though when he was playing, it was actually a legal pitch. You could even say that Willie Mays and Mickey Mantle could possibly have small flaws because they worked at casinos after their careers were over, even though it was in a very limited and innocent fashion. Outright racism could be another factor, as even though Jackie Robinson is a surefire Hall of Famer, some of the voters still did not like him only because of his skin color. The same goes for other black and Hispanic ballplayers. Thankfully though, Rivera's unanimous selection has finally broken down one of the barriers that has marred Hall of Fame voting for decades.

The initial elections that took place in 1936 were very loosely organized, and even though the first Hall of Fame class in 1939 contained nothing but all-time legends, none of them actually received 100% of the votes. Originally, some voters were chosen to elect 20th century players, while some were chosen to elect 19th century players. Also, there were no rules governing whether or not you could vote for active players. While the first class (Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Christy Mathewson, Walter Johnson, and Honus Wagner) contained nothing but legends of the game, because there were no standardized rules, no one actually received the vote of every writer, although they all did receive over 80% of votes, with Cobb receiving nearly unanimous selection, at 98%. Another reason that some of those old, crotchety voters throughout history had never selected anyone with 100% of the vote until yesterday was because none of those legends in the initial class received 100%, so therefore they believed no one should receive 100%, since in the eyes of many, Ruth or Cobb still could today be considered better than anyone on all the ballots after that.

Another reason I have heard discussed today is that ballots can be made public now, which was not the case in the past. Therefore, over the years, someone could be a contrarian and leave a legend off their ballot, and no one would know they did so. Now, voters can reveal their ballots, so the public can see who it is that may not have voted for someone who is clearly a Hall of Famer, and the embarrassment of being exposed would be bad for the careers of those stubborn voters.

I think a combination of all of these things is why Rivera was the first person to be unanimously elected yesterday, and I hope that it opens the door for it to happen in the future, maybe even starting next year with Derek Jeter. If Rivera, as a pitcher who did not play every day in a position that did not exist at the dawn of the sport, is elected by every voter, I really have no idea how any of these same people could justify not voting for Jeter next year. As I look ahead to future ballots, I think Ichiro Suzuki might have a chance to receive 100% of the vote, and maybe Albert Pujols could as well. It is too early to tell on guys like Clayton Kershaw and Mike Trout, but they could potentially be unanimous selections as well.

That tier of Hall of Famers I spoke about before really has broken the ground on an even higher level now, and that is the unanimous Hall of Famers. The first class will obviously always be special, and the first ballot inductees deserve to be separated from the rest as well. It is far too late to turn back the hands of time and place the legends of the game who deserve to be there in their earned place as unanimous inductees, but at least that place now exists. It by no means should be a large group, but there is a group of people who will live on long after their time as the best of the best. Rivera is now the first, but my hope is that when the next ones are up for election, they can join Rivera in the class that he has now created.

Daily Rangers Update: No more games until after the All Star break, so it will be about a week before the Rangers are back in action.

Daily NBA Update: Trade deadline talk has begun, and it seems like the Memphis Grizzlies, who are in the midst of a very disappointing season, will be sellers. Carmelo Anthony was also dealt away by the Houston Rockets in a somewhat surprising move, and might end up as a free agent who can sign with another team, most likely one with hopes of a deep playoff run. I think this says a lot about Anthony, and it also brings about something that I am not really a fan of, as star players are dealt and then their contracts are bought out. I will have to write about those things another time, maybe if or when Anthony signs with a contending team.

Daily NFL Update: The Pro Bowl is this Sunday, and it is surely my least favorite game of the entire season. I would rather watch preseason games than the Pro Bowl. We are still over a week away from the Super Bowl, so it will be a long wait until we get that final taste of the NFL season.

The best overtime in football

The NFL conference championship games yesterday certainly lived up to expectations, and we now have a Super Bowl matchup set between the New England Patriots and Los Angeles Rams. With the top two seeds facing off in both the AFC and NFC, the potential for a great day of football was there, and we got even more than we could have expected, as both games were decided in overtime. However, the day after overtime games is often when we get people complaining about the format of overtime in the NFL, and today has been no different.

In my opinion, games that go to overtime in the postseason, when you need to have a winner, should be decided by playing the actual game as it has been played throughout regulation. It is why I do not like penalty kicks in soccer. They might be exciting, especially on the biggest stages, but you aren't deciding a winner based on one team being better than the other. You are deciding the outcome based on something that isn't really soccer.

It is also why I hate the contrived, joke of an overtime that happens in college football, where teams are given the ball already in field goal range. Penalty kicks in soccer are at least exciting. What college football does in overtime isn't even exciting. In my opinion, it is easily the worst overtime format in all of sports.

On the other hand, baseball, hockey, and basketball overtime/extra inning games are all decided by playing the game exactly as it had been played in regulation time. They all get it right. There is nothing more exciting than overtime in playoff hockey. Play for as long as it takes, and the first team to score wins.

In the middle of this spectrum is the NFL. Football in general is a bit different because the nature of the game isn't totally similar to basketball and hockey, where possession changes hands so often. For that reason, people who say that NFL overtime rules are unfair always point to that. The Patriots won yesterday after they scored a touchdown, and the Chiefs offense never got to possess the ball in overtime. Those calling this unfair will say that the Chiefs should have gotten a chance at a possession. But in my opinion, those people are dead wrong. The Chiefs and Patriots played football yesterday after regulation ended, and the Patriots won fair and square.

Football isn't just about offense vs offense. Both teams pay players to play defense as well. If the Chiefs defense couldn't stop the Patriots offense, then that's on them. The Patriots weren't given the ball at the 25 yard line, already in field goal range, like they would have been under the college format. The Chiefs kicked off, and the Patriots had to drive the length of the field to score. New England converted multiple third downs on that drive. Kansas City had plenty of chances to stop the Patriots and force a punt or a turnover, but their defense didn't do it. They could have even forced a field goal and still gotten a chance to get the ball back, but that didn't happen either.

If New England scored a touchdown and then the Chiefs had gotten the ball back in the name of "fairness," then what happens if the Chiefs score a touchdown? The Patriots get the ball back again and it turns into sudden death then? If New England scored on that drive, then is it all of a sudden "fair" even though New England had two possessions and the Chiefs only had one?

The argument that each team should get an equal amount of possessions in overtime makes zero sense. The teams had plenty of time for plenty of possessions in the 60 minutes of regulation they had just played. Why should that change suddenly just because it's overtime and for some reason now you have to be fair to both teams?

The Chiefs could have stopped the Patriots just like the many times that happened during regulation time. It isn't like they had to dig deep into the history books to find the last time a defense made a stop on the first possession of overtime either. It had just happened about three hours earlier. The Saints won the coin toss in overtime of the NFC game, but the Rams intercepted a Drew Brees pass and then went on to win. People who want to knock the overtime rules just conveniently left that part out. It was "fair" earlier in the day, but I guess that doesn't matter when you are blindly trying to prove a point that isn't a good one.

I actually went back and looked at the regular season games that went to overtime for a bigger sample size, and the results were even more one-sided than I thought they would have been. Fifteen games went into overtime in the regular season. Out of those 15, three of them ended after one possession because the team that initially received the kickoff scored a touchdown. That means 12 times, defenses stepped up and did their jobs, and three times the losing teams complained about the format after their defenses didn't do their jobs.

The NFL extended an olive branch to bad defenses when they instituted the rule requiring a touchdown on the first overtime possession to end the game, and allowing the team with the failing defense to get a shot if the opening drive ends with a field goal. In my opinion, even that was too far, but just like the longer extra points, everyone seems pretty accustomed to it now, so the only time we hear complaints is when the losing team has a defense that can't make a stop. And don't tell me it isn't fair because the defense is tired either. Everyone was out there playing 60 minutes of football. The offenses are tired too.

This is a debate that will never end, no matter what the format of overtime is. The winning teams won't complain because their guys did their jobs, and the losing teams will complain because their guys didn't do their jobs. You know how you make it not matter? Do what the Rams did. Make a play, and don't let the other team march right down the field and score.

Both games were ended yesterday by playing football. There wasn't some stupid, artificial semblance of football being played like college, and there wasn't a shootout like regular season hockey and there wasn't penalty kicks like soccer. Play the same game in overtime that you played during regulation time. Force an interception like the Rams did. Don't allow multiple third and longs to be converted like the Chiefs did. It's how football is played in the first quarter, and it's how football should be played in overtime.

I have no sympathy for Chiefs fans or players complaining they were treated unfairly or the game was decided because of a coin toss. The game was decided by New England's offense being better than Kansas City's defense for the entire game. And because of that, the Patriots are going to the Super Bowl and the Chiefs are going home.

Daily NFL Update: Aside from sore losers complaining about overtime, yesterday was a great day of football. Now, the long wait for the Super Bowl begins.

Daily Rangers Update: After losing five straight, the Rangers have now won four of five going into the All Star break. Hopefully this week off can refuel the team because they are going to need a very strong finish to the season if they want to make the playoffs.

Daily NBA Update: If you want to really appreciate how great LeBron James is, you just need to look at the history of the Cavaliers over the past decade. When he is on the team, they are good. When he is playing somewhere else, they are awful. After making the NBA Finals last season, Cleveland now has the worst record in the league this year.

Experience really is the best teacher

There are many adages out there about young people not respecting their elders, or being ignorant about things that you never really understand when you hear them as a child. The only way you can learn about how true some of these adages are is simply to get older and experience them.

This is true in nearly all facets of life. You don't have to be a sports fan to learn that experience can indeed be the best teacher in many cases. You could play the tuba or install kitchen sinks or work at a factory that produces shoes. I have learned how experience can be the greatest teacher of all, and I probably still have much more to learn about it as well.

I'm sure this happens with athletes all the time. When you are a college football player, you aren't as experienced or knowledgeable as you are when you have played in the NFL for a decade. And just because I'm not a football player doesn't mean as a fan I can't learn this same lesson.

The middle of January is a good time for this lesson to be taught, and as I read or hear news about sports today, I realize that my perspective on what I am consuming is much different than it was not too long ago.

With conference championship games coming up this weekend in the NFL, television and radio hosts hype up their predictions and wait until the last part of the show to give the great reveal of who they think will win the games this weekend. Writers wait until the day before the games to give their predictions so their readers will hang on their every word until finally we get to find out who all the local sports columnists think will come out victorious.

For the sake of their shows and their columns, I understand why things are done this way. Hardcore listeners or readers will continue to boost the ratings of the shows and generate more clicks on their websites. It's how things work, and I am not criticizing these people for doing things like this. What I do realize though, and this goes back to that experience thing, is that none of these predictions by any of these people matter one bit.

What am I gaining from hearing or reading what these predictions are? Nothing. They don't have any bearing on how I will watch these games, and they don't have any bearing on how the games will be played either. Just because some local television host in Waco, Texas thinks the Patriots will win means absolutely nothing to me and it means absolutely nothing to anyone who will be playing in Kansas City on Sunday. So these predictions that are happening around the country really don't matter to the four teams still standing.

For the other 28 teams and their fans, aside from Sunday, the focus has mostly shifted to the NFL Draft this upcoming April. It is just the beginning of mock draft season. We will have expert after expert predict what players will be selected by what teams, and endless tapes and measurements will be analyzed again and again. All of this will be done by people who, in the end, will have absolutely nothing to do with what actually happens on the night of the draft.

When it comes to mock drafts, I must say that I do find them useful simply for reading about the players, most of whom I have never seen play before. I don't really need that information now though. It is actually the most useful after the draft ends. Then I can go back and find the analyses of the guys drafted. Even then though, it is often times useless because it is very hard to predict how these players will end up performing as pros. I used to worry about what expert had what prospect going to what team, but I realize now that all of these predictions pretty much mean nothing. I don't care who Expert A or Expert B says the Giants will select, because unless they happen to be Dave Gettleman or Pat Shurmur, it has no bearing on what will actually happen.

The next thing I have listened to and read about over the past few days that I used to worry about, but now could not care less about is All Star voting. Right now, Derrick Rose is second in the Western Conference of NBA All Star voting, and I hear people making a big fuss about it. How could he have more votes than James Harden or Russell Westbrook? That's outrageous! In reality, maybe it is. Harden and Westbrook are certainly having better seasons than Rose, but Rose has more votes than both of them. That's what happens when fans vote on the starters for these games though. The most popular players get the most votes. It's that simple.

It isn't like Harden and Westbrook aren't going to make the All Star team either. They are both having great years. The All Star teams have more than five spots on them. When the NBA All Star Game is played, both of those guys are going to be there. And right now, it appears that Rose will be there as well. And you know what? That's totally fine. Good for Derrick Rose. Being second in voting in the Western Conference means that fans like him, and the All Star game doesn't have any bearing on the standings, so what is so bad about him being a starter?

Many years in the future, when we look back on the careers of current players, we might use All Star appearances as a means of comparing them. And when we look at who was an All Star in 2019, I'm sure Westbrook and Harden will be on that list, as well as Rose. Twenty years from now, we aren't going to care who started the game in 2019, we are going to see that all three of them made the team, and then move on. We aren't going to check the box score to see how many minutes each of them played and how efficiently they shot the ball and who turned the ball over the most. They all were All Stars in 2019, that's it. Then we'll move on.

In all honesty, the likelihood that I won't watch the NBA All Star game this year is probably much higher than the likelihood that I will watch the game. It isn't the NBA Finals. It isn't even Game 1 of the first round of the playoffs. What happens in the All Star game has absolutely nothing to do with what will happen in those games, so why do we care so much about who will be on the floor to start the All Star Game?

I don't remember who won any All Star games in any sport last year, and I'm totally fine with that. I could probably guess many of the starters for the games. They are probably many of the same players that will start the games this season, because the fans usually vote in the same players year after year. If I wasn't able to guess them all though, I really wouldn't care. As the years go by, the starters become less and less important anyway, and they really aren't important at all to begin with.

So listen to your favorite writers and analysts predict what will happen in the football games this weekend. Read all the mock drafts you want. Stuff the ballot boxes with your All Star votes. I will just enjoy the games and draft without having to worry about looking like I knew what was going to happen when what I thought didn't matter at all in the first place. Experience as a fan has taught me that none of that stuff matters one bit, and when the games are played and the draft is complete, all of those predictions will have not affected the outcomes one bit.

Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers got a nice win at home against a struggling Blackhawks team last night, and will play the Bruins tomorrow night. They have been able to recover a little bit from a very rough stretch, but still sit on the outside looking in on the playoffs right now, and will need a strong second half to even get into the postseason.

Daily NBA Update: DeMarcus Cousins will make his season debut for the Warriors tonight, and it is pretty crazy to think that a team already stacked with so much talent hasn't even played a game all season yet with a player the caliber of Cousins. I don't care about who fits where or who gets the ball when. Adding Cousins is only going to make the best team in the NBA even better.

Daily NFL Update: Weather seems like it might be a factor this weekend in Kansas City, as the temperatures are supposed to be in the single digits. If you look at the history of bad weather games though, often times it doesn't play as big a role as you might believe, so we will have to see what happens on Sunday and just hope that the games are exciting.

If you can dish it out, then you better be able to take it as well

Many fans of football would say that what we have coming up in two days is the best weekend of the season. The Divisional round of the playoffs is the first time we get all of the best teams playing against each other. The first round byes have given the top seeds a week to rest, and the Wild Card weekend winners are looking to make it two straight postseason wins. There were interesting and exciting games last weekend, and hopefully this weekend is no different.

The final game of the weekend will be the defending Super Bowl champion Philadelphia Eagles heading into New Orleans to play the top seeded New Orleans Saints. The two teams played earlier this season, and the Saints won convincingly by a score of 48-7. Obviously, the game wasn't very close, and Eagles' offensive tackle Jason Peters came out a few days ago and said he and some of his teammates were angry because they believed New Orleans ran up the score at the end of the game. Drew Brees hit Alvin Kamara for a 37 yard touchdown pass in the fourth quarter to take the score from 38-7 to 45-7, and Peters claimed it was disrespectful for the Saints to do that. I never played football, so maybe I don't have perfect perspective on this, but I think his claims are ridiculous.

The Eagles won the Super Bowl last year. Peters was on the team. So, obviously they have had targets on their backs all season. When you see the defending champs on your schedule, you get up for the game, and that is what the Saints did. The Saints had a great year, but no matter how good your team is, you treat a game against the reigning champs a little bit differently. The Eagles had plenty of fun last season with their dog masks and that asinine outfit that Peters' fellow lineman, Jason Kelce wore during the Super Bowl parade. I'm sure as they were celebrating all of those wins, they weren't very worried about the feelings of the players on the teams that they beat to get to that parade.

When Kamara scored the touchdown that Peters was talking about, there was 13:15 remaining in the game. The drive that ended with that touchdown actually began in the third quarter. Does scoring on a pass with less than two minutes gone in the fourth quarter really count as running up the score? I can't agree with Peters that it does. Like I said, they are the defending champs, so teams were ready to play them all season. It wasn't like the Saints were going for a touchdown on 4th down with 10 seconds left in the game from the one yard line. I would consider that running up the score. Is scoring on a 37 yard pass on a drive that didn't even begin in the fourth quarter so bad that Peters should still be insulted by it months later? I don't think so.

I can't believe I'm going to use the Cowboys as an example here, but I looked at Philadelphia's schedule from last season and found a game in Week 11 (the same week that the Eagles and Saints game was this year) and found a case of what Peters must consider running up the score then too, and I don't believe he apologized for it a year ago.

The Eagles began a drive in the third quarter that went into the fourth quarter and ended with the Eagles scoring on a 17 yard touchdown pass to Alshon Jeffrey to go up by three touchdowns. There was 12:02 left on the clock when they scored that touchdown, so there was actually less time on the clock than when Kamara scored against Philadelphia this year. To make Peters' claim even more laughable, the Eagles actually tried to convert a two-point conversion after that touchdown instead of kicking an extra point, but failed to score.

What does Peters think teams should do? Run the fullback up the middle every play once a team gets ahead by a few touchdowns? Take a knee for the entire fourth quarter so the other guys don't get their feelings hurt? This is professional football. You're supposed to be tough both physically and mentally when you play. If you can hand out a beatdown and celebrate and dance, then don't be mad when the other guys do the same thing.

I feel the same about pitchers in baseball who complain and get angry when they give up home runs. You know how to stop the other guys from celebrating? Stop them. Strike them out. Don't complain that you aren't good enough, because you are getting paid to be good enough just like your opponents are.

Peters is a very good player. When he retires, I think he could possibly be a Hall of Famer. That makes it even more ludicrous that he claims the Saints were running up the score with nearly an entire quarter of football left to play. Peters has played plenty of games in his career, and he should know that crazy things can happen. Crazy like a huge fourth quarter comeback, or crazy like a team wanting to beat up on the team that beat up on the entire league the season before. It's easy to be on top, but when you aren't there is when you need to be even tougher.

Peters is certainly using that game and what he perceived to be disrespectful as motivation for the game this Sunday. And he should. He should also be happy that his team is getting a chance to avenge that loss. When the Eagles scored 51 points against Denver last year, the Broncos never got a shot at revenge. I'm sure everyone on Denver was pissed off about that. But they had to deal with it.

Now, Peters has to do the same thing. If they throw a pass that ends up resulting in a touchdown with 13:15 remaining in the game to put his team up by four touchdowns, I'm sure he won't be writing an apology letter to the Saints. He is going to be celebrating and most likely rubbing it into the faces of everyone on the New Orleans sideline. And he will have earned the right to do that. If you want to dance and pose for the cameras when you win, then don't be upset when the other team does the same thing. Go ahead and win this weekend Jason. If that is happening and you want the team to run up the score, then that's perfectly fine. We'll see if that happens on Sunday.

Daily Rangers Update: The All Star break cannot come soon enough for this team, as it has now been six losses in the past seven games after a 4-3 loss to the Islanders last night.

Daily NBA Update: LaMarcus Aldridge had a huge game in a double overtime thriller against Oklahoma City, and Nikola Jokic continues to be really good as well.

Daily Giants Update: Kyler Murray, despite my advice, seems like he is headed into the NFL Draft. I hope he does well, but I also really hope the Giants do not take him because, in my opinion, he is way too small to be a quarterback that lasts long in the NFL.

All of the guts, none of the glory

After a dominant victory by the Clemson Tigers last night to win the college football national title, Trevor Lawrence is a name that literally might not ever be more popular and praiseworthy than it is today. The true freshman led Clemson to a convincing win over the Alabama Crimson Tide, the big, bad, bullies on the block. 

We love to see dynasties fall and underdogs win. It's why everyone outside of Massachusetts cheers against the Patriots and everyone outside of California cheers against the Warriors. It's also why we love March Madness. The underdog stories are always the best ones. They are the ones that turn into movies years later and no one would believe if they didn't see it happen with their own eyes. And while Dabo Swinney referred to his team as "little old Clemson" after last night's win, I think we are getting to the point where there are two bullies on the block, and there is no such thing as "little old Clemson" anymore. 

That is a subject for another day though, because watching last night's game, I thought of something else as Lawrence was making throw after throw, play after play, converting third downs with ease, keeping cool, and smiling all the way to a 44-16 victory. 

I thought he started the game a little overhyped, but for a 19 year old true freshman, that shouldn't really have surprised anyone. What could have surprised a lot of people though was how he settled down and played the game of his life on the biggest stage of all. After a close first quarter, Clemson was completely dominant, outscoring Alabama 30-3 the rest of the way. 

Lawrence finished the game 20 for 32, with 347 passing yards and 3 touchdowns, as well as 27 yards rushing. Those are very impressive numbers, and watching the game made them even more impressive. He was making NFL-caliber throws against a defense filled with NFL-caliber talent. He stood in the pocket and got hit a few times, but he kept making plays, and I don't know how anyone could watch that game and not come away extremely impressed by what he did.

After the game, Lawrence said he wanted to come back to Clemson and win more titles, and I'm sure that was music to the ears of Clemson fans everywhere. He won't be eligible for the draft until 2021, so he could at least win two more championships. That made me think though, why should that be the case? Lawrence's stock is probably as high as it will ever be right now. Today. 

Could he win titles in 2020 and 2021 at Clemson? Sure, he could. No matter how good he is though, the odds of that are not very high, and it could be through no fault of his own that the Tigers don't win two more consecutive titles. However, because of the NFL rule stating that any player entering the draft must be three years removed from high school, Lawrence really has no other choice. 

I have never been a fan of the one-and-done rule in college basketball, but that's what the rules are, so that's just what we are used to now. I did believe, and still do believe, that if a player thinks he or she is ready to play professional basketball at the age of 18, then they should be able to enter the draft. If the player has the abilities, then they will succeed. If not, then they made the wrong decision. It shouldn't be anyone else's place to prevent someone from making a bad decision if that person really wants to. LeBron James and Kevin Garnett were 18 years old and made good decisions. Sebastian Telfair and Robert Swift were 18 years old and made bad decisions. It's the way of the world. 

I have said it before, and I will say it again. If an 18 year old fresh out of high school wants to try to become a world-famous violinist or mechanic instead of going to college, they have the right to do just that. And if an 18 year old fresh out of high school wants to try to become a world-famous athlete, they should have that same right.

Whenever I argue that point though, and I think whenever sports fans in general argue that point, they use basketball as their prime example. We have seen Hall of Fame players jump straight from high school to the NBA and succeed. Hockey isn't as popular a sport, but we do see very young players succeed. Sidney Crosby was only the fourth player in league history to score 100 points as an 18 year old. Bryce Harper won National League Rookie of the Year as a Major League Baseball player at 19 years old. These cases are rare, but it doesn't mean they are impossible.

Football has always been different though. For a variety of reasons, we don't see players that young in the NFL. The NFL has had the three years removed from high school rule for a while now, and we all seem to simply have accepted it. I always just thought the NFL game was too violent for players so young, so I never really questioned the rule. As I watched Lawrence last night though, I wondered why it was that I never even thought about how unfair the rule might actually be.

Why should Lawrence have to stay in school two more years? He was making NFL throws last night, he is 6'6" tall, and weighs 210 pounds, so he already has a body at least suitable for an NFL quarterback. 210 pounds might be a little light, but on an NFL diet and workout plan, he could add weight and have an NFL quarterback prototype shaped body pretty soon. 

He can increase his stock and value by playing two more years in school, but can it really get much higher than it is right now? If he entered the draft this year, I think he would have a legitimate chance to be the first quarterback taken. You can't get any higher than that. But, it doesn't matter, because he won't be able to enter the draft anyway. That brings into question why the NFL has this rule in place. I can't claim to know for sure, but I can make some assumptions that I would like to believe are at least somewhat possible. 

The NFL and the NCAA are two separate entities. They are controlled by two completely independent groups of people who have their own best interests at heart. However, Lawrence is a great example of how both the NFL and the NCAA can benefit from this draft rule. Since the NCAA does not pay its players (a subject for another day), they need guys like Lawrence to make money. Hardcore college football fans with serious rooting interests put their team colors first, but that doesn't mean they don't root for the players in those colors as well. Clemson is a big university with a big fanbase, but Lawrence only helps the Tigers brand grow by playing like he did last night. Where he helps even more though, is by bringing in the casual fan like myself and many others who watched the game last night.

I don't root for a specific college football team, but I do watch the sport, and stars like Lawrence are attractions that are more likely to make any causal fan spend money that eventually makes its way to the NCAA. Because Lawrence has no choice but to play in college for another two years, the NCAA can use his face to generate a whole lot of revenue and give him none of it. It seems pretty unfair, but until the draft rules change, that isn't going to change.

On the other hand, while the NFL wouldn't admit it, what we really watched last night was the championship game of their minor leagues. If you want to play in the NFL, you basically have only one option to get there, and that is by playing college football. So college football in that sense is like minor league football. Baseball players and hockey players get drafted and go through minor league systems before being called up to their professional teams. For the NFL, those minor league teams are really Clemson, Alabama, and all of the other college football teams throughout the country.

The difference between the Clemson Tigers and the Reno Aces or Hartford Wolfpack though, is Clemson plays on national television in front of the country, while Reno and Hartford play in places no one even knows. So before Lawrence ever even steps foot on to an NFL field, his face is going to be familiar. It's why the NFL Draft has become a prime time television event. We know the names and faces of most of the guys before they are even on professional rosters. 

The Giants were able to sell Saquon Barkley jerseys for $75 each before he had ever even played a game because the nation knew him from Penn State. The Detroit Tigers selected Casey Mize first overall this past year in the MLB Draft, and I guarantee you that he could walk through Detroit and not even be recognized, so there is no way the Tigers could sell his jersey for $75 because he isn't playing college baseball on national television. These football rookies are making millions of dollars for the NFL before even playing a single game.

That is why this rule preventing guys like Lawrence from turning pro until three years after high school is beneficial to everyone but the player. If he plays at this level for two more seasons, Clemson fans will continue to spend money to watch him, and the NFL will get a money-making star before he ever puts on a helmet. If his play declines, or even worse, if he gets hurt between now and the 2021 draft, then the NCAA will be on the hook for zero money since he wasn't getting paid to begin with, and the NFL will probably have plenty of other quarterbacks who can replace him and make them money, and they won't have paid him a penny either.

Just because this rule has been in place for many years now does not make it fair for everyone involved. The NFL has hidden under the guise of their sport being too violent for 19 and 20 year old kids and honestly, we have all just accepted it.

What Lawrence did last night was pretty close to unprecedented. I think that most NFL fans would agree that two of the biggest "guaranteed" superstar quarterbacks coming out of college were John Elway and Peyton Manning. When Elway was 19 years old, he was a freshman at Stanford who was probably closer to playing professional baseball than professional football. 

When Manning was 19, he actually led the Tennessee Volunteers to the third overall ranking in the country and came in sixth in Heisman Trophy balloting. His career obviously did ascend from there, but if he could have entered the draft after that season, maybe he would have at least considered it. The first quarterback taken in the draft the following season was Tony Banks, and Manning certainly had a better career than Banks, so why shouldn't he have been able to turn pro then? With a quarterback starved class like the one in 1996, he could have started earning a paycheck a few years earlier than he actually did.

Elway and Manning are two of the best quarterbacks to ever play the game. At 19 years old, neither of them had accomplished anything close to what Lawrence just accomplished last night. Beating Alabama by four touchdowns to win the national title is literally probably as good as it can get for a 19 year old quarterback. Because he is a football player though, he is going to be exploited for two more years.

Some young basketball players have counteracted the one-and-done college rule by going overseas and playing professionally in other countries. It isn't ideal, but it at least does allow them to earn money playing the sport they will eventually try to turn into a career. In football, that isn't the case though. There are some American football leagues overseas, but the competition is nothing close to NCAA football. Therefore, Lawrence really has no option other than playing for Clemson for two more seasons.

Other quarterbacks like Tua Tagavailoa and Jake Fromm have to deal with the same thing. Tagavailoa won a national championship last year, and Fromm had a great season this year. Just like Lawrence though, they will have to wait to be drafted. 

Maurice Clarett did attempt to challenge this rule years ago, and it seemed like he might have a case, but legal problems and a decline in his play on the field really didn't give him a chance. Lawrence might be a new case with a better chance to win an appeal of this, but he has not given any indication that he would even think about doing that, and no one else I know of has given it any thought either.

Unfortunately, it seems like the players have just accepted the rules as they currently stand, just like fans have. If Lawrence's play declines over the course of the next two seasons, then even if he did try to take legal action against the NFL, he would have much less leverage than he does right now. If he were to get injured between now and 2021, the NFL could just toss him aside like they do with so many other injured players, and we would forget about him. 

A 6'6" kid with NFL talent should make teams in need of a quarterback salivate. And watching him play last night, I'm sure that NFL GM's and coaches were doing just that. I know as a Giants fan, I certainly was. Some of the quarterbacks coming out of school this year seem pretty good, but the ones I like the most all have to go back to school just because the NFL says so. They know kids will be lining up year after year to play in their league, so the more anticipation we have, the better it is for them. At the same time, Lawrence's situation greatly benefits the NCAA because they have two more years to make millions of dollars off him and not have to sign one paycheck for him. 

When two groups as powerful as them both benefit from the same thing, then why would they ever consider changing it? The answer is, they just won't. The only thing that might change this is a superstar player turning to the legal system to challenge it. As it stands now though, I cannot see that happening any time soon. 

At this point, I think Lawrence is much more likely to focus on Clemson defending their title in his sophomore year, and with all of the celebrations going on in South Carolina right now, he is probably already behind schedule, because I can guarantee you that Nick Saban is already on the recruiting trail and drawing up plays for next season in order to prevent Clemson from embarrassing them again. 

I can also guarantee you that the NCAA is thrilled because they know Lawrence is going to put a whole bunch of money in their pockets for the next two seasons. And the NFL is thrilled as well because after the NCAA loses him, that money will start going into their pockets. The 19 year old kid here is not going to earn a dime, but the people around him who already have plenty of money are just going to have to find somewhere else to put the boatloads of cash Lawrence is going to make for them. It sure isn't fair, but as we stand today, we all seem content to let it happen as long as we can get exciting football games because of it.

Daily Giants Update: Dwayne Haskins is officially entering the draft, and it appears that the Giants do have him on their radar with the sixth pick. Barring a trade, he will most likely be available when the Giants pick too. I do like some of the younger quarterbacks more than him, but he certainly does have the talent to be an NFL quarterback. I still don't really have a feel for what the team is going to do in the draft, and I'm not sure they even do because we are still months away from that. Until then though, we will have a million mock drafts to discuss before draft day. Once that day does actually come, one team will make some crazy trade or unpredictable pick and all of the mock drafts we spent months analyzing will be completely wrong. So basically, I have no idea what the Giants are going to do. At this point, all I do know is that Haskins might be available for them. Or he might not.

Daily Rangers Update: The Rangers are in the process of losing yet another game right now in Las Vegas, as the poor stretch they have been on looks bound to continue.

Daily NBA Update: Houston beat Denver in a showdown of two of the top teams in the Western Conference, and Giannis had another big night in a year that I think could be his first legitimate chance to win league MVP.

How ignorance has turned into carelessness

Mike Peluso might not be a name that is commonly known among sports fans in the United States, but if you were a hockey fan during the 1990's you might know him. It is likely though, that you only really think of him for one reason, and it isn't being a Stanley Cup Champion with the New Jersey Devils.

Like most teams during the 80's and 90's, everyone had an enforcer, and that job was often assigned to Peluso. In those days, many fans would refer to those guys as the "goon." The goons weren't on the team to score goals or play solid defense against the top scorers on the opposing teams. They were basically there for one reason, and that was to fight.

If you look at the single season totals for most penalty minutes, you see names like Joey Kocur, Tie Domi, Marty McSorley, and Mike Peluso. And if you do recognize those names, it isn't because they were leading the league in points, it's because they were some of the biggest goons in the NHL. So, that's why Peluso's filing of a lawsuit this past weekend against the league and the Devils should not come as a surprise to anyone.

Over the past decade, the sports world has certainly made significant strides in, at the very least, acknowledging that head injuries are a major concern for the leagues and the players. The NFL, as the most popular league in the country, has been at the forefront of this revelation, but that does not mean that it is the only league in which head trauma and CTE exists.

Peluso's lawsuit claims that in a 1993 game against the Quebec Nordiques, he suffered serious head injuries during a fight with Tony Twist, another well known goon. It doesn't take long to search for video of the exact fight that was mentioned, and it doesn't take a doctor to realize that his claim is certainly realistic, and most likely completely accurate. Twist hits him with multiple punches in the head, Peluso falls to the ice, and then Twist hits him again while he is on the ice. As Peluso is helped up, he clearly is dazed and injured. Yet, in the world of the NHL in 1993, that just came with the territory, and the game continued.

Peluso's lawsuit claims that the Devils hid information about the seriousness of his injuries from not only him, but other teams that Peluso played for in his career as well. Despite the claims of doctors, team trainers simply said he was fine to go back out on the ice. He played games without remembering them, and showed serious signs of head trauma that were ignored by the team.

If this sounds familiar, it's because we have heard it before. The class-action lawsuit filed by former football players against the NFL cites almost identical examples of how the teams and the league covered up things that have ended up causing serious long term damage to its players. The only difference between those and Peluso's case is he was playing in a sport that was much less popular then, and is also much less popular now.

Fighting in the NHL occurs much less than it did 20 years ago. In those days, games were advertised almost secondarily to fights. If Detroit was playing Toronto, it wasn't the Red Wings against the Maple Leafs, it was Bob Probert against Tie Domi. It is similar to NASCAR. Fans go to see the race, but they really won't go home happy if they don't see an accident as well. Sure, Detroit and Toronto might be a competitive game, but it wasn't complete unless Domi and Probert dropped the gloves and fought. Then the hockey fan got the true experience.

Because, as I mentioned before, the NHL is far less popular than the NFL, concussion issues and head trauma usually don't center around the league. Often times, sports fans actually claim that hockey does the best job as a sport of policing itself, because if two players have a problem with one another during a game, they can simply square off and fight one-on-one.

It isn't like baseball where a pitcher might throw at a batter because of something another person did, or football where a defensive player might try to take out a quarterback because that is the position that is usually the most important on a team. In the NHL, two guys can go at one another while everyone else watches, and then head to the penalty box for five minutes, and it seems like everyone is happy and the matter is ended.

Just like the NFL, the NHL offered to help Peluso, but it was on their terms. They recommended a doctor for him, but the doctor was in a different state, and because of the head injuries Peluso previously suffered, and continued to suffer from, it was suggested that Peluso not travel from state to state. Therefore, Peluso often times spoke with doctors via Skype, but that obviously cannot be considered a true examination, since the doctor and patient are not even in the same state as one another, let alone the same room.

What I found to be even worse here was when I saw reports that the NHL was willing to recognize its sport did cause head trauma, but to remain in the background because the NFL was taking the brunt of the blame on this issue. Then, after reading about Peluso's lawsuit, I went to the official website of the NHL, and I could not find anything mentioning it. I saw the story for the first time on January 5th, and all I could find on NHL.com about January 5th was a "This Date In History" mention of the 62nd anniversary of the first professional hockey game being broadcast on network television in the United States.

If you think these health issues are going away any time soon, then it seems to be an almost accepted fact that you are either wrong or unwilling something that can now be medically proven as true. And, if you think these leagues are going to all of a sudden begin to pull the curtains back and air all of their problems, then you are wrong there too.

Thanks to players like Peluso, as well as others involved in class-action lawsuits against both the NHL and NFL, the general public is starting to finally become fully aware of the every day struggles some of these athletes have to deal with long after they are retired and out of the public eye.

I think testimonials and books and movies can make fans more aware of things like CTE and head trauma and long term brain damage. It is up to the fans to decide what they want to do with that information though. Teams and leagues being exposed for withholding substantial, sometimes life-altering information, is undoubtedly a significant step in the process of changing the minds of the public, but if we choose to still ignore cases like Peluso's, then I think athletes should be less willing to pursue careers in such dangerous games.

Game Five of the Stanley Cup Finals last season was the highest rated Game Five since NBC began airing the Finals in 2006 though, and there were more viewers during four of the five Finals games in 2018 than there were in 2017. Television ratings were also up significantly during this past weekend's NFL playoff games.

I think what that shows us is that even though many of us are at least somewhat aware of the risk these players are putting themselves through for our entertainment, we simply choose to ignore it. If we can get competitive, entertaining action for a night or a weekend, we will continue to disregard the years of pain that might occur because of it. I place myself squarely in that category too. I watched Game Five of the Stanley Cup Finals last year, and I watched all four NFL playoff games this weekend. I will watch every game of the playoffs next weekend, and all of the Stanley Cup Finals this summer as well.

Now that these leagues are being outed for information that they previously hid from the public, I almost feel as though the blame is falling less and less on them, and more and more on the fans. If leagues acknowledge the dangers of their games, but people still flock to both play and watch them, then what else can the leagues do? They are exposing themselves, but in most cases, we as fans don't even care.

Does that mean the onus is on the leagues anymore? Or has it shifted to the consumers? Cigarette and alcohol companies literally list the dangers of their own products on their labels, but they still continue to sell by the billions. Maybe if instead of names on the backs of jerseys, we listed injuries those same players sustained, or would sustain in the future it mind change our minds. Until the fans choose to turn off their televisions or stop buying tickets, and as soon as young athletes choose to stop playing though, then I'm not sure any of this can really come to a complete stop.

And at this point, I think these leagues and owners have to be surprised to see that even as we learn about what can happen when we give them our money, we continue to give it to them game after game, week after week, and year after year.

Daily NFL Update: It seems quite cynical to write this after what I just spoke about, but here we go anyway...
There were some very good games this past weekend. Sadly though, two of them ended with the Cowboys and Eagles winning. The Eagles victory in Chicago was another example of how we literally have no idea what to predict in the NFL, and that the sport literally comes down to inches, as Cody Parkey's attempt at a game-winning field goal hit both the upright and the crossbar before bouncing out and ending the Bears' season. The big boys join the party next week, as the Divisional round begins and the top seeds in each conference will be back in action.

Daily Rangers Update: It has been an absolutely awful stretch for the Rangers, as they were beaten soundly by the Coyotes, who have one of the worst records in the entire league.
Tomorrow, the team will play in Las Vegas against the defending Western Conference champs, so things do not get any easier.

Daily NBA Update: The Toronto Raptors beat the Indiana Pacers in a showdown between two very good Eastern Conference teams last night, and tonight we get two very good Western Conference teams squaring off with Denver heading into Houston.

A fracture in the process?

I have spoken before about how the NBA has empowered it players to speak out publicly, and this has usually proven to be a good thing. However, sometimes it has not been, and we might be seeing an example of that in Philadelphia right now. The 76ers motto for years now has been "trust the process." What that basically entailed was multiple years of obvious tanking in order to secure high draft picks with the idea that the accumulation of a lot of young talent would eventually lead to success.

You can say what you want about whether or not that is good for the game, but over a three year stretch, Philadelphia had a record of 47-199. That is good for a .191 winning percentage, and it was by far the worst in the league over that span. It did allow them to select at or near the top of the draft for several years, and now is when the results of the process were supposed to be showing.

The team selected Joel Embiid and Ben Simmons, two players who are centerpieces of the current team, but they also drafted Jahlil Okafor, who is now playing in Brooklyn, and Markelle Fultz, who has all kinds of problems, and is honestly in contention for one of the biggest draft busts ever, although that could still change. So, the plan to tank did indeed work, but turning all of those years of failure into success has not happened yet.

The team is still very young for the most part though, and they are coming off a nice year in 2018. They are currently 25-14, and three games behind Milwaukee for the top spot in the Eastern Conference, so they are certainly much improved. Part of the plan for this process was to be able to use all of their young talent to lure one or more big name free agents to Philadelphia, and the biggest name they could have asked for was LeBron James. I do believe that James probably did consider going to Philadelphia, but in the end, he ended up in Los Angeles. Even so, the 76ers were recently able to add Jimmy Butler in a trade with Minnesota, and while he is not on the level of James, he is still a talented player who the team planned would give them a boost in the race for the Eastern Conference crown.

Butler has had a pretty good career in Chicago and Minnesota, and has made multiple All-Star teams, while also winning the league's Most Improved Player award in 2015. Not a multiple time MVP and champion like James, but still worthy of moving the needle in terms of the standings. One problem with Butler though, is he has not been known as a teammate who fits in smoothly wherever he plays. It was the case in Chicago after a few years there, and it was also the case in his short stay in Minnesota. Now, it seems like that trend is continuing in Philadelphia.

The threesome of Butler, Embiid, and Simmons was worthy of excitement when Philadelphia made the move to get Butler from Minnesota. All three had different skill sets, and it seemed as though the 76ers were legitimate contenders in the East, and maybe even frontrunners. You can never really predict chemistry on a team though, and despite the talents of all three of those players, they do all have various weaknesses as well, and it seems like somewhat of a reticence by Butler to completely adapt his game to fit in with the rest of the team might be turning into something of a problem, and his biggest weakness.

Recent reports surfaced that Butler challenged 76ers coach Brett Brown on his role in the offense, and things may not be all fun and games behind the scenes in Philadelphia. Butler and Embiid are two strong personalities, and they may not be meshing perfectly on and off the court. The organization and head coach Brett Brown have tried to downplay Butler's claims, and they still remain steadfast in saying that they want Butler to re-sign with the team after this year and be a 76er for a long time. For now that might be nice, but if the team does not live up to expectations this season, I'm not sure this will all work out.

Embiid has a very strong personality and is more than willing to speak his mind about pretty much anything and everything. I'm not a huge fan of it, but he is confident in himself and his abilities, so I can't fault him for that. The lack of shooting prowess of Simmons is well known, but he does a lot of other things on the court that make him and his teammates better. Butler does many things well, but I am starting to wonder whether or not he is worth the trouble that seems to follow him.

Butler rose from a relatively unknown player to stardom in Chicago, but late in his career there, he publicly criticized some of his teammates and was fined and benched because of it. He wasn't exactly universally liked by the rest of his team when he left the Bulls to join the Timberwolves, but both sides moved on.

The addition of Butler to his former coach Tom Thibodeau's team in Minnesota to play with a young and talented group of players placed high expectations on the team, and they failed to live up to them, losing to the Houston Rockets in the first round of the playoffs last year. However, the team was still young and growing, and it seemed like better times might be ahead. Then, at the beginning of this season, Butler expressed displeasure with his situation in Minnesota, and said he would not re-sign with the team in the summer of 2019. Therefore, Butler's short stay with the Timberwolves ended as he was traded to Philadelphia. He had left Chicago under questionable terms, and talked his way out of Minnesota in a short period of time.

Now, it seems like he is struggling to adjust to life in Philadelphia as well. So, my question is this: What is Butler's problem? Minnesota underachieved last year, and it didn't take Butler long to try to get out of there. They traded him to a better team in a weaker conference, and it seemed like, for better or worse, his frustrations had gotten him into a better situation. Yet, it has only taken a short time for him to seemingly fail to fit in again.

Good players on championship teams are able to adapt. Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant put aside differences to win multiple titles with the Lakers. Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, and LeBron James all made sacrifices on and off the court to mesh in Miami and win two titles. Kevin Durant did the same when he went to Golden State, and it has paid off for him. Not only is Butler not on the level of any of those guys in terms of talent, but it seems like he is much less willing to make sacrifices in the name of making his team better on the court.

76ers fans have been subjected to a lot of losing over the past decade. Brett Brown does not get enough credit for being a very good head coach. He was stuck with little to nothing on his roster, but he stuck in there, "trusted the process," and has a pretty successful team now. They undeniably made some missteps in the draft with Okafor and Fultz, but the 76ers are still contenders in the Eastern Conference. Many of the guys on that team have lost together and grown together over the past few seasons. They have all made sacrifices.

If Butler wants to fit in with this team, it is on him to be able to make some changes to his game. It isn't like they are asking him to sit on the bench and only play 10 minutes per night. The team acquired him with the idea that he would step right in and help them improve. If he has problems with the way the team is being coached or how he is being used, then that is on him.

I am reminded of Rajon Rondo when I see how Butler is acting right now. Rondo is a talented player, but he has been known to wear out his welcome in places throughout the league. When he did win a title, he had Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, and Ray Allen, all veterans and future Hall of Famers on his team. They were the alpha personalities, and Rondo was forced to fall in line. He did, and he has a championship ring because of it.

The difference here is Rondo was the young player on that Boston team. The 76ers brought in Butler because he was good, but also because it seemed like he might bring a veteran presence to the locker room and be able to step up as a leader. Criticizing the coach and the system of the team is not something that leaders do publicly though, and it doesn't seem like Butler understands that.

He got himself dealt out of a situation he didn't like to join a contender. This is seemingly what he wanted to happen, and he made it happen. If he fails now because of his own attitude and unwillingness to make some changes both on and off the court, then I am past the point of blaming other things around him. If he can't succeed where he is now, then I think we have to point the finger at him and wonder whether or not he will ever be able to change and experience success at the highest level in the NBA.

Daily Rangers Update: After allowing 7 goals to Pittsburgh, the Rangers followed that up by allowing 6 on the road to Colorado last night. I'm not sure a goaltender gives up 6 goals but is still the best player on the ice for his team very often, but that was the case for Alexander Georgiev yesterday. He got no help from the team in front of him, as it was a constant stream of penalties and poor defense that gave Colorado an easy win. Hopefully the team can recover tomorrow night, when they will be in Arizona to play a bad Coyotes team.

Daily Giants/NFL Playoff Update: Nothing new on the Giants front, but the first playoff games start today and I will be cheering for the Cowboys to lose. Aside from that, I hope we get some good games this weekend.

Daily NBA Update: You hear almost nothing about the Indiana Pacers, but following another win last night, they currently have a record of 26-12, and actually have a better record than Golden State. We still have more than half the season to play, but I think it is time to start mentioning them as real contenders in the Eastern Conference.