The Great American Conversation Piece

College football conference craziness

2010-06-09T10:37:00.001-07:00

I'm still betting that things will most likely stay the same. But, all it takes is one shake-up and the doomsday scenario takes place. Ok, maybe not, but everything changes.

Here's what's going on: The Big 10 wants to expand to 12 teams to have a conference championship game so they don't have like two months off between the end of their season and bowl games, and have an extra week of games like everyone else so their teams don't drop in polls for not playing the final weeks. The big 10 would love to get an east coast team (ie a NYC area team) to boost its ratings, but no large fbs school fits their scholastic standards.

The Pac-10, seeing the potential seismic shift, and the power conference with the most insecurities (after being weaker than the MWC last year, or at least close to it), wants to add not 2, but 6 teams. Why? They want to skip over all the schools near the Pacific ocean or the west, and head for the fertile football state of Texas. For the Pac-10 it's about money and ratings as well, but most of all recruiting. Their plan is basically the pac-10 plus the Texas and Oklahoma schools.

The SEC, perennially the strongest conference, sees this as a chance to shore up the ACC and Big East teams that, in some cases (Florida State) should be in the conference, and make an even stronger case for being the strongest of the power conferences. What we may end with is three super conferences of 16 teams: The Pac-16, the Bigger Ten (they'll keep their non-mathematical title; they have currently 11 teams), and the Big SEC.

My gripes? If this happens the NCAA needs to either pay or create a pay upon graduation program for its football players. The big leagues, long trips and travel times, and TV exposure basically cements the NCAA as the minor leagues of the NFL. And if you think Austin to Seattle is a big of a trip for a conference game, think about what loose coalitions will be made by the left-over schools (the MWC, WAC, the weak links of the big 12, the remnants of the ACC and Big East).

And for these left-over's, they essentially are designated FBS division 2 schools, not strong enough to be apart of the big three conferences. Even if the MWC adds Boise State, it's still not a power conference, and the mid-major schools will be increasingly ghetto-ized, playing and beating each other, with less chance of playing the big boys.

Never seen a pitcher do that before

2010-03-11T10:59:00.001-08:00

Breaking sports news video. MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL highlights and more.

On Rivalries or Why the BYU/Utah game isn't quite there yet

2009-11-30T12:40:00.000-08:00

BYU/Utah, the ill-named Holy War, is one of the most competitive rivalries, and this decade it may be the closest. But the reaction to Max Halls anti-everything U of U tirade makes me wonder if the rivalry isn't quite to where other rivalries are. Sure, BYU and Utah aren't your average schools, and I hope the religious aspect will be toned down a lot if not go away, as its essentially two majority LDS schools playing each other. Plus anytime you get religion involved in anything someone is bound to take it too far and do something crazy.

Hall,s statements were rough, but he also had some pointed comments at BYU fans. This was a senior who has been criticized his career pulling a Michael Jordan HOF speech and taking out anyone and everyone who'd doubted him while hes on top.

However, his reaction has drawn criticism from everyone, on both sides in the Beehive state. What they need to realize is that Football rivalries aren't civil, by there very nature they cant be, and that's not a bad thing. In fact, its probably therapeutic. In-state or cross state frustrations are manifest for 3-4 hours, played out in a relatively safe arena providing emotional release. The ability to project abstract personal angst, and release it at an annually given time and place to a specific non-personal group (a helmet clad football team), is healthier than leaving it bottled up, and then projecting it onto a person, usually a sexualized or racialized Other.

Take for instance the Border War game: Kansas and Missouri. The name isn't, like most rivalry "wars" hyperbole that was added after the fact. The war came first, then the football game. These are two states that fought each other, killed innocent civilians in each others states, burnt down cities, etc. Basically provided the kindling for the fire that was the Civil War. When football came in at the end of the 19th century, only about 30 years after the real wars, it was seen as a way to provide a sort of reconciliation.

While the political aspects and the war itself were around longer, it wasn't nearly as bloody as the aptly named Bleeding Kansas era, the Ohio St. v Michigan rivalry also finds its roots in pre-civil war fighting; the Toledo War, to be specific.

Another pre-football rivalry resulting from political and economic disputes is the Clemson/S.Carolina game. I mean hate is celebrated in the "Clean, Old-fashioned hate" game between Georgia Tech and Georgia.

As long as the game doesn't erupt into or cause physical violence outside of the controlled environment of the football field, I don't see anything wrong with it. In the end, schools need their rivals. Usually a rivalry is created when two competitive programs perceive what is lacking in their institution or program in another institution or program. By confronting their rival, they confront what is absent in their own psyche. What Max Hall was saying should be considered a compliment. He was saying that without Utah he wouldn't have a person or thing to project his own inadequacies onto, and either he,d never get around to facing them, or do so in an unhealthy manner.

Embrace rivalry football as a carnivalesque occurance that we take for granted. Certainly Bahktin would be fascinated by the pageantry surrounding the Oklahoma v. Texas game, or the Georgia v. Florida game. Rivalries allow for things which may not be normally acceptable, to be done or said, without being considered, in a larger framework outside of the sports arena and its extension into the public sphere of discourse around sports. They provide a bizarre conversation filled with nuance and ritual (in speech and action) that brings people together, and more importantly brings people to confront what they otherwise would not have.

From an OU Fan: Stoops, feel free to go to South Bend

2009-11-30T09:32:00.001-08:00

Notre Dame really isn't a great job. And the program is only relevant to people who remember their glory days, or in how it takes up a disproportionate amount of talk show space. A victim of unrealistic expectations, its looking for another new coach. Charlie Weiss will find a nice job in the NFL and have success as an Offensive Coordinator.

The rumors are flying, and Bob Stoops appears to be one of the dream hires for Notre Dame. And, I really think that's a great idea. I was born and raised a Sooner fan. But his leaving for ND may solve both our problems. What sort of problem could OU, a perennial top 10 team have?

Well, Bob Stoops is great at dominating the oft-overrated Big-12. But his Nickname of Big Game Bob is now said rather ironically, if not with a bit of anger. He's lost 5 of his last 6 bowl games, including 2 National title games. Currently he has a 3-game BCS losing streak.He's turned the Sooners into the Buffalo Bills of the NCAA. Dominant in the regular season, able to get to the title game, and then blowing it. And who can forget that loss to K-state in the Big 12 title game a few years back. These have not all been loses in great efforts. Most of the time it looks like Stoops didn't prepare his team, and he's made his share of bad calls. He's also lost players to rules violations.

Now, those may not be fire able offenses and he's done a great job, but I think its time for a change. Am I crazy? Possibly. But we need a coach who can win the big games, not blow them.

College football review

2009-10-25T08:28:00.000-07:00

My top 15
1 Texas: winning that big on the road after a tough rivalry win and before a big game is pretty impressive.
2 Florida: The defense is carrying this team. Unimpressive win, but withstood a challenge on the road.
3 TCU: Destroyed BYU on the road. And that win at Clemson looks really good now. They barely beat Air Force, but then again Air Force took Utah to OT.
4 Alabama: Did they deserve to win? I'm not so sure. But they did.
5 Iowa: They keep winning close, hard fought games.
6 Cincinatti: They won big with their backup QB. But it was against a lousy Lousiville team.
7 Boise St: Only here because they beat Oregon.
8 Oregon
9 LSU
10 Georgia Tech
11 USC: They barely beat Oregon St. at home. They lose next week against Oregon on the road.
12 Oklahoma St. Could they be the best team in the Big 12 south? At times they look like it. But that Houston loss suggests some consistency problems.
13 Penn State
14 West Virginia
15 Pitt

Games of next week: A slew of top 25 teams have some cake games next week, here are some exceptions:

USC @ Oregon: Upset alert: I go Oregon.
Texas @ OSU: Texas can tentatively cement a championship game appearance with this win.
Kansas @ Texas Tech: Two prolific passers will battle it out.

My predicts last week: 6-4

Playoffs

2009-10-21T12:06:00.000-07:00

Since 2003 there really hasn't been an exciting post-season in MLB. Sure the Red Sox and White Sox provided added interest by breaking generations long droughts but those weren't very close series either. I was hoping that this would be the year that baseball would be exciting again in the post season. But some quick exits, awful base running, blown saves, bad calls, and four ultra-budget teams left, makes things a bit hard to watch. The only hope that remains is that Phillies-Yankees has potential to be a great world series.

Replay:
Baseball shouldn't replay every play from a booth like they do in college football. They should be more like the NFL and have coaches challenges, and only on certain plays (ie. No balls and strikes). Give Managers 2 challenges and like the NFL if they're right they don't lose them. Managers can still run out and argue, but this time they can actually do something about it with a red bag to toss down, or maybe at the ump (that would be something). It seems that of all the sports baseball replay would take the shortest amount of time, except for the home run/fair-foul calls and seeing if a batter actually got hit by a pitch. Every other call is a bang-bang play in a specific location (a bag) and unlike football you don't have to take into consideration the yard marker or the clock. Also, the umps are relatively close to each other and a potential dugout monitor, as opposed to NBA or NFL refs which are usually several yards apart. The one call that could potentially take a while to decide is if an outfielder catches a low flying line-drive off the turf.

Why is A-rod doing so well? Is it that he's off the 'roids? That he was due? Maybe. Or perhaps its that he's seeing better pitches because of Mark Tiexiera.

BCS Breakdown

2009-10-18T20:33:00.001-07:00

This shows the problems in a computer doing the tabulating. Anyone who watched the games on Saturday saw a Florida team which should have lost, if it had not been for two awful calls which should have been no-calls, and two missed field goals.

Alabama, dismantled S. Carolina. Texas did its best to lose against Oklahoma, but managed a win, and seemingly locked a spot in the Texas vs. Alabama/Florida title game. I really don't see any change in that unless the unthinkable happens and they all lose 2 games. USC really doesn't look good enough to deserve a shot. Iowa, I think does.

This is my main argument here: a one loss MWC team should be higher than an undefeated Boise St. Team. Yep. I said that. Why? Boise State has played 2 teams with winning records: Oregon, and Tulsa. They won those games by a combined 18 points. Not bad, but not impressive. They don't play anyone else of note, including 2 of the worst teams in the nation (Utah State and San Jose st a combined 2-10). Now, TCU could well go undefeated. But even a loss to Utah or BYU, they'd still have beat Clemson and Virginia on the road, and another top 25 team (either Utah of BYU). If BYU wins out, they will have beaten 3 top 25 teams (two of them top 10). Utah has a tougher road if they were to lose, simply because their sole loss was on the road to Oregon, who of course Boise St. beat, and share Utah State and San Jose State on the schedule. But if they win out, they will have beaten BYU and TCU at home.

Now, to more circular logic, the kind that makes us pull our hair out when the BCS comes into play: Georgia Tech's only loss came to Miami. Miami's only loss came to Virginia Tech. Virginia Tech lost to Alabama and...Georgia Tech.

Usually the call for a play-off comes with a load of one loss or unbeaten teams. This year may be the year when its because none of these teams really seem that dominant and all seem untested so far. It may become more clear over the rest of the season. But as history has shown, it will become even more muddled.

Games of next week ( a bit of a down week after this last week with the exception of the top 2):
TCU @ BYU
Oregon @ Washington
South Florida @ Pittsburgh
Penn St. @ Michigan
Uconn @ West Va.

Upset alert:
Texas @ Missouri: Has trap written all over it. Missouri suffered its first two loses of the season back to back in the last two weeks, and Texas is coming off of a win against Oklahoma and may be looking ahead at $15 Oklahoma State.

College Preview

2009-10-07T16:40:00.000-07:00

Here's my college football challenge picks of the week (essentially fantasy college, but since college players don't get paid, its a little bit awkward).

Last week: I scored 105 points, the avg. was 61.7. My ranking is now an even 75,255.

I guess I'm in italics all of a sudden. Oh well. Just tilt your head a bit.

QB 1: Last week: Taylor Potts, TTU. He really underpreformed for me.
This week: Case Keenum, Hou v. Miss. St. He was insane in a huge loss, and will be looking to get back on track against a team giving up an avg of 27 pts per game.

QB 2: Last week: Max Hall, BYU. Despite having turned into an interception machine, he still put up a lot of points. This week: I'm sticking with him against a horrid UNLV team in what is essentially BYU's second home game of the season in Vegas.

RB 1: Last week: Ralph Bolden, Pur. Yeah, I know bad choice there.
This week: Evan Royster, Penn St. vs. Div II Eastern Ill.

Rb2: Lst week: Mark Ingram, Alabama, was my man putting up huge numbers.
This week: I'll buy the hype and go with Toby Gerheart at home against a struggling Oregon st. team.

WR 1: Eric Page, Toledo WR 2: Eric Decker, Minn.

Team Kicking: Auburn Defense/St: Iowa, should shut down Michigan at home, or at least force some turnovers.

The Beauty of the One-Game Playoff

2009-10-07T16:23:00.000-07:00

Playoffs in baseball are ok, but there's something special about the 163rd game. The last three have been extraordinary. Last night's was no exception, a long back and forth battle with ups and downs for both teams. There were close-calls, errors, redemption, plays at the plate, great defense; it was baseball at its very best. I should have expected nothing less from the Twins in what could have been the metrodome's final baseball game. Sure, its not the prettiest place to watch a game, but it did play host to some very memorable moments, including two world series game sevens, and the second of those was part of the greatest world series ever played, 1991.

One-game playoff's can either be ugly, one-sided affairs: of the 9 since the tie-breaker format went from 3 games to 1, 4 teams have won by five or more runs, or all-time classics. Of those other five games, one was ok, the cubs/giants in 98, and last years was pretty great (the Twins losing a two-hitter). But three of those games, including last night, are on my shortlist of the best games I've ever seen. 1978: The Bucky Dent game. And the 2007 Rockies edged the Padres 9-8 in what may be the most exciting game I've ever seen. Of course the most famous tie-breaker game was the 1951 Giants/Dodgers game, aside from the 1980 Hockey team beating Russia, the most mythical sporting event in American History with Robby Thompson's "Shot Heard Round the World."

These games are great because everything is on the line and everyone is on board. And since it's a regular season game the rosters are still 40 man not 25, so these games can go for a long time, allows for more strategy among the managers with pinch runners/hitters and pitching matchups, and allows for some unknown September call-up to become a hero.

The last few post-seasons have been a bit boring (tie-breaker games are counted as regular season games). Let's hope that this is a sign of things to come, that this October will continue to be something special. And here's to the metrodome, a bland building that's given us some of the most exciting moments in baseball.

College Weekend Review

2009-10-04T12:54:00.001-07:00

Once again, in the form of my top 15:

1 Florida
2 Alabama- I was underimpressed
3 Texas
4 Iowa
5 Virginia Tech
6 Cincinnati
7 TCU
8 South Florida
9 Boise st.
10 Ohio State
11 LSU- Should have lost that game at Georgia
12 USC
13 Auburn
14 Kansas
15Missouri

Games of the Week:
Cincinnati @ South Florida
Wisconsin @ Ohio State
Florida @ LSU

College Football

2009-09-28T12:03:00.000-07:00

So, there are a number of reasons I've never been on the Tebow band-waggon. First, wasn't Tebor the name of that guy Homer always blamed thing on at the Power Plant? Ok, first, for real, the media's worship of him. He's a great player, he's a nice guy, but stop using him as some sort of American ideal. Second, he's a physical specimen that can do what he wants in college, but I've literally worried about his mortality if he doesn't change his style of play in the NFL. Half the things he does in college that throw off defenses, would result in him being injured in the NFL. Tebow got drilled Sat, and it was actually on a normal play. I really am not sure why he was playing in the first place. Sure, he may have not had the flu, but he wasn't 100% and they'd beat Kentucky with their second stringer easily. This was Urban Meyer trying as he always has, to throw up numbers. But, this adds to my theory that in the NFL he is going to get crushed.

Now, I was horribly wrong about my top 15 last week. Then again this has been a strange year, and nobody really has either stepped it up against quality opponents, or played anyone yet. I really think they need to get rid of pre-season rankings. Sure, it helps reward teams that did well last year, but players graduate in College football, so a team may be great one year, then lose everyone the next. Each year brings a new team, so it should be assumed that everyone is untested until the games are played.

So here's my top 15 this week:
1 Alabama: crushed a decent Arkansas team. They also beat a Va Tech team that looked amazing against Miami.
2 Virginia Tech: The only team to have won against two ranked teams, their only loss coming against Alabama
3 Iowa: Sure, they beat PSU, but also were the 1 loss for two 3-1 teams (AZ and Iowa St.)
4 Florida: It doesn't all depend on Tebow. Their backup is pretty good. That said they still looked unimpressive in their only real test so far vs Tenn.
5 Cincinnati: They've played two mediocre teams and two lousy teams, but they look amazing.
6 Boise St.: That win v. Oregon looks really good now. The problem is that may have been their only test this season. The rest of their schedule is a walk in the the park. I wouldn't be surprised if a one-loss MWC team jumps them in the BCS. See #8.
7 Texas: They still haven't played anyone.
8 Houston: Their schedule strength is not good from here on out, but better than Boise St. They barely beat Texas Tech, but still that's more than a lot of other teams can say.
9 Oklahoma. We'll find out next week what sort of team this is. That BYU loss is starting to look more and more like a fluke that happened without Bradford.
10 USC
11 TCU: Beat Clemson on the road.
12 Kansas: They haven't played anyone, but they look like their firing on all cylinders.
13 South Florida: Sure they're opponents have a record of like 1-18 so this is only based on what I saw on Saturday, but they looked really good. And, to be fair, they crushed those lesser opponents.
14 Oklahoma St. They beat Georgia, lost to Houston and played Rice and Grambling. Your guess is as good as mine.
15 Georgia: Would be much higher had they not lost to Oklahoma St.

Games of the Week (Week 5)
Oklahoma At Miami
LSU @ Georgia
USC @ Cal

Upset Watch of the week:
Ohio St @ Indiana

College Week in Review

2009-09-20T19:07:00.000-07:00

This week's winner? Boise St. who are rid of their two biggest BCS busting rivals, Utah and BYU losing Saturday.

The top 15
1) Miami
Not only did they beat Ga. Tech, but that Florida St. team they edged out looked like better team than we thought.
2) Cal
3) Alabama
4) Texas
Still not impressing me
5) Florida
They looked very mortal against an ok Tenn. team. Tebow had some troubles.
6) Penn St.
7) LSU
8) Oklahoma
Landry Jones set the OU record with 6 Td's.
9)USC
Sure, they lost to Washington, but they didn't have their starting QB.
10)Cincinnati
11) Boise St.
12) Kansas
13) TCU
14) Virginia Tech
15) Michigan

My CFB Top 20

2009-09-13T14:04:00.000-07:00

It's too early to do a true top 25.

1 Alabama why? Florida hasn't played anyone. USC really didn't look good against OSU.Texas hasn't played anyone, and looked lethargic against Wyoming.
2 Florida. They're good. But they really have a weak schedule this year with only 2 ranked opponents: LSU and Georgia. If they beat LSU @ LSU they should have no excuse for losing a game.
3 Cal. Jahvid best is a beast, and they've played two decent schools, more than most of the teams on here can say.
4 BYU. The Cougars have been executing like this on offense for years, but great defense, that's something new.
5 Penn State. They look good. Then again they've only really played Syracuse.
6 Texas. They just haven't played anyone yet. They have a great QB but they just don't impress me like past Longhorn teams.
7 USC. They beat OSU on the road. But some questionable play calling by Jim Tressel didn't hurt either, and they looked mortal, something USC isn't supposed to be this early in the season.
8 Ole Miss
9 Boise State
10 Kansas. They beat a really good Utep team and people forget they still have Todd Reesing.
11 TCU
12 Georgia Tech
13 Houston. They've scored a combined 100 points in their first two games.
14 Oklahoma
15 Virginia Tech
16 Miami
17 Utah. Beware, this Utah team has started out the way the last two BCS Ute teams, barely beating sub-par schools.
18 Cincinati
19 Ohio State. Sure they should have beat USC. Their other win: Navy. We'll have to wait and see.
20 Missouri.

Too early to tell:
Nebraska: Has allowed 12 total points, against FAU and Arkansas State. We'll find out this week against Va. Tech.

Oklahoma State. They beat Georgia but got spanked by Houston. Which team will show up next week?

UNC: Barely beat Uconn.

Oregon State: Barely beat UNLV. Yes, UNLV.

Michigan: Beat an overrated (aren't they always) Notre Dame team, and won't have much of a challenge until they play @ Iowa.

Games to watch next week:
Virginia Tech v. Nebraska
BYU v. Florida State
Texas v. Texas Tech

Upset Watch:
Minnesota vs. Cal
Fresno St. v Boise St.

Notes

2009-08-06T22:38:00.000-07:00

I wish I had been wrong about Big Papi, but I think this further proves that we need all the names on the list in order to move on. It's unfair to the players who weren't using. Right now we have to assume everyone was.

Is anyone else getting tired of the Sawx/Yankees Rivalry? I mean seriously, its only so big because its in two large media-markets and has two bandwagon teams. I've seen too many tools with Red Sox hats on the last few years. Looking in terms of evenness over a long period of time the best rivalry in baseball is the Dodgers/Giants. The Sawx/Yanks rivalry has really has been one-sided until about six or seven years ago. And neither city; Boston or New York, can claim to be the best baseball city in the US. That's a title which belongs to St. Louis.

Don't Suspend Vick

2009-07-27T11:28:00.000-07:00

What? Yep, that's right. I'm not defending Michael Vick. But he got what he deserved, and it seems to me that suspending him for several games this season makes things worse for the league. Not letting him play four games or so isn't going to help him at all. He's not gonna change his attitude all of a sudden. Instead let him try to get back in the league. If he does he'll hear it from the fans. If he doesn't he'll have to realize that it was his bad decisions that got him into the UFL or CFL or Arena ball or whichever of those is still in business. Suspending him further only postpones having to deal with the fact that eventually he'll be back on a football field.

HR Derby thoughts

2009-07-14T10:04:00.001-07:00

Some thoughts:

First: Who thought it'd be a good idea to have the Cubs/Cards play a double header on Sunday in Chicago? Woudln't you want the team hosting the all-star game to be rested? Maybe Albert would have done a little better last night?

SHORTEN THE THING! I love watching it as much as the next baseball fan, but when it goes longer than the all-star game itself you have a problem. Nelson Cruz went 2 hours between at bats.
Either cut the field to 6. Or cut the amount of outs down to 5. Because by the third round, and after a swing-off, it just gets painful to watch.

Now, for a more absurd idea:
You know how they tried to have nationalized teams a few years ago? Well how about implicated steroid users versus clean guys. So you'd have a team with Manny, Arod, Jason Giambi, and Miguel Tejada versus Fielder, Howard, Pujols, and Mauer (Fielder and Mauer being the only two there I feel pretty solid about being clean, but still...). Tell me that would not be entertaining and probably cathartic for baseball.

And a less-absurd idea:
one of the more entertaining parts of all-star weekend is seeing the kids of the players hang out with their dads. So why not have a super-duper futures game. Get Prince's kids, Inge's kids, Albert's kids, and a bunch of others and have them play five innings. You can say you saw them over a decade before they hit it big.

More Roid talk

2009-07-09T10:23:00.000-07:00

I've not been one for this drastic measure, but after seeing how easily Manny's not only been able to be forgiven, but embraced after his use of PED's has been rather disconcerting. Players have been forgiven before, Jason Giambi for instance, but they usually take a significant hit to their career, and only after much apologizing and coming clean. Manny's done none of that. Then again neither did A-rod.

I had not been a proponent of this measure because I thought that the court of public opinion would kill the careers of those who not only cheated in the game they loved, but also lied to their fans. For a while I was proven right. Palmiero, McGwire, Bonds, Clemens...all never recovered because of public outrage. But suddenly, out of just resignation to the fact that everyone was doing it, or because they're so good (not the old liabilities that Raffy or Barry were when their revelations came out) and in Manny's case likable.

This leaves me no choice. Those who are revealed to have used steroids, or test positive for steroids, get a lifetime ban. Sure, they'll get to appeal, plead their case, but other than that, no second chances. Think about this: who are the two most famous players who have lifetime bans in baseball? Pete Rose, who gambled on games, that he didn't play in, and Shoeless Joe Jackson who was guilty by association. Both cases were not widespread, and patholigical cases of cheating for a long period of time. Defrauding the game, the fans, its history.

If Manny gets away with it. If A-Rod gets away with it. Then we start to let the bar lower and lower until Baseball has as much credibility as the WWE.

Slammin' Game Idea

2009-06-17T14:10:00.001-07:00

I've been unpacking and finding all sorts of things I forgot I had, and finding my old ps1 I found this game, which gave me an idea. After last week's news of Sammy's steroid use, I decided I should get to posting my idea.

It's not really about this baseball game. It was hardly playable. No, this made me think of creating a baseball game which was true to the experience. I thought about calling Jose Canseco to see if he'd put his name on it, but before that happens, here's the prototype:

STEROID ERA BASEBALL

GAMEPLAY:
Like most baseball games currently on the market this game has several layers of play. First, there is the traditional in-game controls, where you pitch, hit, etc. these would be pretty similar to most other games. It's in the larger scheme of things where this game differs.

Player mode:
Chose or create your own player. Work on their training, choose which drugs and masking agents to use in an ever-changing landscape. Out-do other players. You must do all you can to pass drug tests, deal with the media, mistresses and ex-trainers. Even face a congressional panel. Don't get caught or you're done!

Franchise mode:
You take the role of a trainer, working inside any of the major league clubhouses. Work the players, gain clients, keep clients, avoid letting them get tested positive.

All in all, its a baseball game that's also a strategy game. Get the right combination of drugs to make your player the best in the big leagues!

baseball gets drafty

2009-06-10T16:32:00.001-07:00

No, I'm not talking about the New Yankee Stadium, but the Amateur draft which occurred yesterday. Stephen Strasburg, who if you listen to scouts is the greatest right-handed pitcher since Walt went number one to the Nationals, but it looks like he may not even sign. And I think it's time that baseball does something to take care of one rather large problem it has. The NFL and NBA drafts are nearly bigger than actual sporting events. But nobody, not even people in baseball, care about the MLB draft. Why? Well, it's really not a draft. Players have so many options to get out of a contract, its bigger news when a player signs, than when he refuses. Which Stasburg probably will, since he may not want to play for a perennial loser and since his agent is $cott Bora$. He'll play ball somewhere else, get drafted next year; rinse and repeat if neccesary. I mean its normal for players to be drafted like 3 times. Semi-pro and even other pro leagues are so much more prevelant in baseball than in the NFL and NBA (I mean where else is an NBA pick gonna go?). Sure, it's happened in both sports, but not as much as in baseball. The MLB needs to put a clause in its draft declarations. Once you declare you're in or out. No more milking of small market teams for ridiculous contracts; you play who you're drafted for or you don't play.

Magic-aly Bad Idea

2009-06-02T15:45:00.000-07:00

Sure Jameer Nelson was an All-star, but he I don't think he's played a game since he suited up for the East in the aforementioned game. He may be a better player than Rafer "Rafer Madness (my nomination for his new nickname)" Alston but the Magic shouldn't play J-Nel over Skip to My Lou. Skip's been playing out of his mind every other game, then disappearing but still, playing his best so far this post-season. The Magic don't need Nelson to win the series, and risk doing damage to the team's chemistry throwing in a new player who's missed almost 5 months. That, and the key to beating the Lakers isn't with guard play. It's stopping Gasol, Bynum, and Oden; the bigs. Kobe can score all he wants, but if one of those three guys doesn't show up, the Lakers won't win. Nelson can give them some solid minutes, but looking at his comeback as the salvation for a team which I think has a shot even without him, could be potentially harmful.

I still say Lakers in 6.

Finals preview (or is it a preview if I won't be viewing it?)

2009-06-01T11:04:00.000-07:00

This seemed like the year that Lebron would become the chosen one. To lead his team to the title after having the best record in the NBA, winning the MVP, and sweeping their first two series.

Instead, they ran into the Orlando Magic, and looked helpless. And what the Cavs do now is more interesting to me, than the Finals. I'm, of course rooting against Kobe. I don't like the guy. He's a great player. I just don't like him. Or Phil Jackson. Or Luke Walton. Or the team's attitude. They had a "we can lose a few games, we're good enough to win at home." attitude; they didn't show up for a number of games, and now they'll most likely win a championship.
Not because of Kobe. I think that the Magic won't find an answer to Gasol and Bynum. No other team they've played in the playoffs has had a big man capbable of scoring, and the Lakers have two. This will cause Superman all sorts of problems, most pertinently in the foul department.

But the Cavs questiosn are many and juicy.
Can Mike Brown be fired after being the coach of the year? I mean who lost the series for them? It looked to me like they didn't make any adjustments. They should have put Lebron in the post more, they couldn't find an answer for something as simple as a pick and roll, and their defense still doubled Dwight Howard, even though it left them open to the Magic's Three-o-rama. Brown said why adjust something that worked so well in the season, but isn't that what a coach is there for? To make adujustments in a playoff series?

Will Lebron be in Cleveland after 2010? Did losing this year make that more likely or less likely? Will the Cav's get him any help? If so who and how?

The problem with Cleveland is that they are trying to build a Jordan like crew for a Magic Johnson type player. They tried to give Lebron a garbage type post player, the Rodman equivalent in both Varejao and Wallace, and a three point specialist in Pavlovic or Wally or even Mo, but nothing's really worked. That's because that's how Jordan won. He had a guy who made clutch threes (Paxson and Kerr) and a garbage man down low. Oh, and some guy named Pippen.
Magic, on the other hand, had James Worthy to knock down the big shots as a small shooting forward and Kareem down low, a scoring big man. The Cav's most likely need that the most. Z's a great player, but he's a finesse big who's more comfortable shooting an 8-10 footer than pounding it in. They need a second player who can make high percentage shots. Wally and Gibson live or die by the 3, and while I think Mo works and that eye injury may have effected him more than we know, he's more of an outside shoter also. I'm not sure about Delonte. He's always been a streaky player who takes low percentage shots, and he was definately cold most of the series.

The Cav's definately have to do something. And while it may be easy to say if it ain't broke, this was essentially the same team he took to the finals a few years ago with the addition of Mo Williams. It's championships Lebron wants. They'll probably have to do something drastic or they'll be needing to find someone to replace the King in a couple of years.

I may not be interested in watching the finals. But I'll aways have the MVPuppets.

Big Papi

2009-05-11T14:43:00.000-07:00

There's an ESPN feature on how big of a slump he's in. But the timing of this couldn't be worse. The ESPN article gives possibilities, but doesn't mention what everyone reading the article is thinking; he used just like Manny did. Big Papi, as lovable as he is, fits the profile perfectly. Before he was picked up by Boston, after essentially the Twins gave up on him, he had not hit over 20 home runs in a season, nor did he have a season with more than 80 RBIs or an average higher than .282. His first 4 years in Boston he hit 173 homers, hit over 130 RBI's in 3 of those seasons, and had averages of 288, 301, 300, and 287. Since 2007 his numbers have declined , hitting 35 and 23 homers the last two years. The numbers haven't nose-dived like some other players, and this steady decline is consistent with aging players. Except the timing of his decline, and the revelation that Manny used PED's, really makes one wonder who else in the Sox dugout was using as well.

I love baseball. But I don't see why they don't release the names (sure it was done under the promise of secrecy but they can always "accidentaly" let someone leak it). That's really the best thing they can do for the game to move on. That way we can deal with the revelations of the big names who did use, and not wrongfully speculate about players who have not tested positive (note I don't say didn't not use; I'm of the opinion that at least 60% of big leaguers used and if I had to guess I'd say the number was more like 80%).

And what should be done with the all important sats? Treat them similar to stats from the dead-ball era. That from, let's say 1987 to 2007 (roughly) baseball was a different game played under different rules, where players juiced. While that may seem naive, it makes things a bit easier to manage. It would seem only fair to treat the stats as such. Dead ball players stats should be read with the knowledge that some of them played in ballparks with crazy dimensions, like a 600 foot outfield, or used a softer ball. Read like this, a player having 11 home runs can be seen in context. Similarly we can treat steroid stats by not giving a player who was an average player with gaudy stats in the roid era (ie. Palmiero) precedence because of his numbers.

Playoffs? Playoffs? Playoffs. Playoffs?

2009-05-05T14:12:00.001-07:00

This was brought up on Around the horn (presented by Nissan) today. Has the NHL playoffs been better than the NBA playoffs? My answer? probably. What kind of answer is that? The best answer I can give since I don't get the channel most of the games are on. The fact that you have had 2 first round series go to seven games, one decided on a last second shot, and now two great second round series.

Outside of the Bulls/Celts series in the NBA you had the worst 7 game series in NBA history in the Hawks/Heat series where the avg margin of victory was 19 points. Cleveland, LA, and Houston all had relatively easy times.

The second round of the NBA playoffs may even be less interesting matchup wise than the first. Other than Magic/Celts and LA/Houston the other two (Denver/Dallas and Hawks/Cavs should be over pretty quickly).

Some pretty intense footage from the Cowboy's Practice Bubble Collapse

2009-05-03T21:08:00.000-07:00

Boston/Chicago and the teams gon' fishin'

2009-05-01T12:51:00.000-07:00

Is it the best first round playoff series ever? Its a great series, yesterdays game was an instant classic, but how great was it? First, was a game that really didn't need to be that close. If Vinny Del Negro has his team foul Ray Allen off the inbounds pass and force him to shoot free throws at the end of the 4th, the game's over. Instead he rolls off a screen and forces the first of 3 OT's.

Second, it was a game not marked by made shots, but missed shots. Paul Peirce missing 2 game winners, Salmons missing another. The best play of the game, if not the playoff's was Joakim Noah's steal and dunk that pretty much sealed the deal, though 2 Rose misses on the charity stripe and a missed buzzer shot gave the Celtics a chance to fall short again. In my mind a great game is more when two teams are making those shots to put their team into overtime. The one person who made the big shots: Brad Miller. How huge was he last night? That was one gutsy performance.

Not to take anything away; this is one of the most exciting first round series, and in the marathon that is the NBA playoffs the only first round series that's got me watching; but it isn't the greatest. If Garnet was playing and Chicago was doing this, and if they were making those shots and not turning the ball over in big situations, then I'd be ready to say it was one of the best. Though, one great part of this series was that by the time most games ended it was already half-time in the Rockets/Blazers series so I could decide if it was worth watching the game or not.

My prediction for game 7? The Bulls finally run out of gas; they hang in for three quarters, but Pierce has a big game and the Celts win by double digits.

Seriously, how bad must Tmac feel? What did the Rockets need to get into the 2nd round? For Tmac to be in a suit on the bench.

And Stephon "Starbury" Marbury disappeared in last night's game. And when he did show up he was awful. He's not coming back with the Celts next year; and the way he's playing I'm not sure anyone would be interetested. He may be the most overrated player in NBA history. Andrei Karilenko is up there as far as overpaid.

Teams no longer in the playoffs and what they need:
Nola: The Hornets are in a bad situation. You've got Chirs Paul, one of the elite players in the league at his prime, but also a shrinking budget which requires dumping salary. So, how do you get Paul more help while getting rid of contracts? That's the decision right now that will make or break this team for years to come.

Sixers: AI (not Iverson) has proven he's capable of carrying the team, so the franchise should feel lots better about their situation. If Dalembert steps up, they really only have one hole to fill, and that's at the 2 guard. They could use some depth as well.

Detroit: Darko!!! Ok, maybe not, but a youth movement nonetheless. The problem with winning consistently is that you don't get to draft very high (see Utah, below) and so when all your players reach the end of the road, as this team has, you're in a rough place. They've got to start rebuilding. I'd keep Prince and Stuckey and start from there.

Utah: They have a similar problem as Detroit. Though they did have that one year they got D. Will and Millsap, so they have great young talent, and as a whole are quite a bit younger. They'll lose Boozer, which may not be a bad thing. They need to get rid of AK but no one's gonna take that contract. They could use a solid post man. Okur is more of a shooting forward more than a center and he is better when he's able to get outisde. They also need another player capable of creating a shot off the dribble. Right now it's just Dwill. Brewer and Korver are more catch and shoot guys. If they can take the pressure off Dwill to create points good things will happen.

Spurs: I don't think things are over for the quietest dynasty in basketball history. Duncan has at least another year or two in him. Their core players are older, but not too old, and while they have lots of miles on them Parker and Manu are fine for now. What does need to get younger is their bench and specifically their role players. But other than that they just need Manu back.

Portland: Experience, which is something they got this year. They weren't supposed to be at this point so quickly, so they're a year ahead of where they were projected to be. A big part of their problem was that in crucial situations they didn't have a go to guy or the go-to-guys didn't seem to want to take the shots themselves. Getting rid of Raef would be nice, but it's not realistic. They may also have a decision to make at the small forward spot. They have a lot of good options, but nothing stands out right now. The other question is how to play Oden. His fowl-a-thon versus Yao showed some holes in his game that could call for a new approach to what they do with him.

Weekend Wrapup

2009-04-26T20:57:00.000-07:00

The Draft:

Gutsy move by the Jets to at least send a message by getting Sanchez.
Though, all in all the Pats and the Bengals had a great draft.
Al Davis further demonstrated he's the Howard Hughes of NFL Football...in case we had forgotten how crazy he is he drafts some guy nobody's heard of from Maryland; which first is a bad sign, if its a nobody from the MEAC that's understandable. Second, he may be mad fast, but that doesn't do him much good if he can catch the ball.
The Dolphins picked up Pat White, so look for more Wildcat, and that means John Beck's out of a job. I really do not get how the Wildcat works in the NFL.
Speaking of BYU Alumnus, Austin Collie went to Indy in the 4th Round which may give him a good shot to succeed.
And as for guys I went to High School with, and a BYU Alumnus, Fui Vakapuna went in the 7th to Cinci. I'm a little surprised, he wasn't the best RB on BYU last year, but I doubt you'd be able to find a tougher guy in the draft than Fui.
Juaquin Iglesias was something of steal to Chicago in the 3rd round.
One name that came out of left field, also with Oklahoma connections was former not starting QB and former not used car dealer Rhet Bomar was drafted by my Gmen in the 5th round out of Sam Houston St.
No stand outs in the funny name department; though there are some ones that come close in the prospects from the secondary: Stoney Woodson, Captain Munnerlyn, at CB and at Saftey: Darcel McBath, Al Afalava.
Mr. Irrelavent? Ryan Succop the SC kicker who went to KC.

Basketball:

This year's Blazer team I think has found itself among the great Blazer teams of all-time. They're talented, fun to watch, nice guys who work hard; but here's what they also have in common with the great Blazer teams in the past: they don't show up in the third quarter and lose heartbreakers in the 4th.
Is it me or is, for the most part, the NBA getting boring to watch? You get one guy who has the ball, and 4 guys standing around doing nothing. And it seems players have only a handful of shots anymore that they take: the corner three, the dunk off the baseline dish, and the 15 footer.
I wonder what's worse for T-mac: not getting out of the first-round of the playoffs, or your team finally getting to the second round the one year you're injured?

Video: Jacoby Ellsbury Steals Home

2009-04-26T20:53:00.001-07:00

Video: Jacoby Ellsbury Steals Home

Did I mention he was Native? Just making sure.

Lions have new logo; new QB for opposing teams to sack.

2009-04-25T12:01:00.000-07:00

One of the biggest mistakes a team can make is drafting for need instead of talent. That's when you get yourselves into trouble. The other mistake is over thinking the risk potential. Both of this happened when Adrian Peterson inextricably fell into the Vikings laps in 2007.

What the Lions have done with Stafford is like falling in love because you want to fall in love. They need a quarterback. But with the money they're paying a decent quarterback they could get a number of other good players to fill in the many gaping holes in their team. Stafford is not worth $72 million dollars. You can always get a QB in the NFL and often get some old guy for cheap to get you through a rebuilding effort, which the Lions desperately need. Using so much cap room for a guy who needs time to develop isn't the best road to take. They should have traded the pick. The NFL is the one league where quantity often trumps quantity, especially nowadays, where to be taken seriously a team needs a solid backup QB and 2 good RB's.

I say this just from seeing this happen pretty much every year. But what makes me especially worried is that Stafford is the "best option" out there. Nobody's jumping through the roof at the guy's talent like they did for J. Russell, or his possible game-changing ability like Alex Smith (and yes, I guess you could say he did provide game changing plays for the opposing defense). He's just the best of what's around. When you look at the 23 QB's taken in the first round since 2000, 2 have Super bowl rings, which is pretty good (Big Ben and Eli). Ten have winning records (one of those, Michael Vick is in prison) and only 8 are current starters (Flaco, Palmer, Cutler, Pennington (maybe?), Rivers, Ryan, Big Ben, Manning). Not only does every other QB have a losing record, but 5 have thrown more interceptions than touchdowns, and 8 (not counting the draftees of the last two seasons) have started less than 30 games.

I think Stafford will be lucky to have JP Lossman type stats. (10-23; 33 td 34 int), simply because he's playing for the reigining champs of futility, the 0-16 Detroit Lions.

And our national pasttime is...

2009-04-24T11:10:00.000-07:00

Speculation.

This has gotten way out of control. I got worried when they started showing the combine on TV. Now everyone seems to think they're experts on Matthew Stafford's arm strength, knows all about Mark Sanchez's dad, Crabtree's 40 time, the results of Aaron Curry's urine tests, and every follicle on Mel Kipper Jr's crazy head.

As you know they have the draft here at Radio City Music Hall, so I was looking to go tomorrow morning, and boo for the fun of it. But as I read and talked to people its a massive ordeal lining up early, then rushing to get the free seats. But if that's not for you the NFL is selling, get this, VIP packages starting around $375. I kid you not. All to see a dozen football players or so not play football and put on hats of teams they most likely won't be playing for in 5 years. And to hear names called out for the next few hours. You could get a weekend package I assume and hear a whole weekend of names being called. People you've never heard of or seen play, who you'll probably never see play live and have a slim chance of seeing play on TV.

If you don't want either you could just go to a nearby college campus a few minutes before the hour, and go from classroom to classroom and hear roll being taken until you've got your fill of names being called for the day.

We Americans love speculation. Our politics in this country isn't really politics in that its not about issues or anything but a specific type of speculation where the 24 hour networks (well not Fox, they're trying to start a populist uprising on behalf of scared rich white folk ) are talking 2012 already. Basically, sports for people who don't like sports or look like Wolf Blitzer. We love all of the drafts, except Baseball's, which makes no sense (players get drafted like 5 years in a row before they play. The top pick may be some 12 year old Dominican kid). Fantasy sports are bigger than their real life counter parts because we like to speculate on statistics. People don't care if its a good game anymore, just as long as their player gets their OPS up, or some other stat that they have no idea what it is. Like the all important DICE for pitchers. What is it? I don't know, Drug Intake Count Equivalent? I think its ERA for innings of games they got no decisions in.

So, when our national obsession, nay religion, the NFL, has its biggest speculative event, the draft, we need a full half-year of coverage. I've not even tried and I've seen about 6 or 7 mock drafts.

We also love celebrities, and especially to see them fail. Admit it, part of us watches the NFL draft to see how the Lions or Bengals screw up another draft, or who may be the next Ryan Leaf, who I could argue has done more to draw attention to the NFL than Peyton Manning has. The speculation is often even more about who are the potential busts, rather than who has the most "upside." Upside is the sporting equivalent of mainstreet/wallstreet phrase in politics. If I hear either of them again I'm not sure what I'll do. I would lay out a drinking game based on how many times Mel Kiper uses the word upside, but you'd die of alcohol poisoning halfway into the first round, and I don't want to be complicit in that; unless you used the mainstreet/wallstreet comparison recently.

2009-04-19T21:21:00.000-07:00

How is it not possible to lose interest in the NBA playoffs? They last like 3 months, and games are only every 2-3 days. Seriously, the last few years I've forgotten teams are still playing. The 7x4 format is too long for me. It should be 5/7/7.

What hat to wear?

2009-04-18T06:58:00.000-07:00

After Gary Sheffield hit #500 last night is he a lock to go to the HOF? Apparently so, according to Tim Kurkjain at ESPN. The 500 hr mark shouldn't be the magic number it once was, besides would they really have thought less of him for 499? Maybe. For me the stat that really jumps out is the 250 stolen bases. Now sure, Rickey Henderson got that in like a year, but he's one of three players I think to have 250 sb and 500 hr's, along side Willie Mays and Barry Bonds.

There are two complications, now that I've brought up Barry. The first is that on a personal level Gary is perhaps less liked than Barry was amongst players. Note that Barry managed to stay on two teams, while Gary's played 8 different teams (Florida twice) in his 21 year career, almost two years per team. His clubhouse problems could hurt him. And the whole steroid era thing. There's no proof, and that's one of the frustrating things about this whole mess, is that there never is any real concrete evidence unless they come out and say it or are caught lying about it in court. Other than that we can just speculate. But here's what looks bad for Gary. Before 1998 he only hit over 30 home runs twice. Which puts that at the exact midpoint of his career and that all-important year of 1998 in the steroid era. From 1998 on he's hit over 30 in 7 of his last ten seasons, and from 2006 on has been plagued by injuries and only able to play one full, healthy season. Because pictures and numbers are all we have it looks bad. Then again other than an implicit admission before congress that's all we have on Mark McGwire as well.

This brings me to my other point. Sheffield's contemporaries, those about to go into the Hall, are the first to be products of the widespread use of free-agency; the Scott Boras era. Which made me wonder, for what teams will these players enter the hall for?

Griffey? I'd hope he goes in as an Mariner but he spent half his career (ok, the sad part) in Cincinnati which is sort of his home town. Returning to the M's may be a good sign for the first Mariner to be in the HOF, unless Edgar gets his due first.

Pedro? He played for the Sawks for 7 years, the Expos for 4, and working on his 5th season as a Met where he might be for another year or so.

Mike Piazza? His career is divided evenly between the Dodgers 7 years and the Mets 8 years, with some filler teams here and there. Now he'll probably be a Met, but I'd argue his best seasons were with the Dodgers. I mean look at the crazy numbers he put up in '97.

Randy Johnson? Spent 9 years as a Mariner. Won his ring during the 8 seasons he was with the D'backs.

Manny? 8 years with Cleveland, 8 with Boston. He won his rings with the Sawks, but his best two seasons (98/99) were with Cleveland.

Maddux? 10 seasons as a Cub 11 with Atlanta. This may be an easier case since he was dominant with Atlanta.

The Bird flies away

2009-04-14T12:46:00.000-07:00

He was one of the great personalities in baseball history. A history full of and built on colorful, tragic, and legendary personalities. His story was all three; the eccentric kid who came from nowhere to became the biggest name in sports, who's career ended as quickly as it started from a plague of injuries. His story ended in further tragedy yesterday. RIP Mark.

what are the chances of this shot

2009-04-11T23:12:00.000-07:00

proliferation of video cameras=best thing to happen to sports

Masters Par 3

2009-04-08T19:42:00.000-07:00

Tim Clark one the day-before 9-hole par-3 Masters tournament (sort of what the golden globes are to the oscars) on this hole in one. It was a dramatic situation, though nothing was on the line really, to win on the final hole with an ace, but this is one of the more boring hole in one's I've seen. It's really a shot that stuck, stopped, and then gravity inevitably put it out of its misery.

And nobody's won both this tourney and the Masters in the same year in 50 years. Which makes sense; I mean wouldn't you want to rest up?

Winners/Losers, etc.

2009-04-08T15:01:00.000-07:00

Well my curling streak came to an end as China edged Denmark this morning. I didn't even know China had a team.

Who knew that the women's final was going to be a (relatively) closer game than the men's? The men's final was a fitting cap to the most boring chalk-a-thon in recent memory. One that had some people questioning if March Madness had lost its charm.

Who won the other spring Basketball Tourneys?

Penn State won the NIT. Now, I think that winning the NIT is nothing to be ashamed of. There's history there, and its a solid step forward for a program, unless you're South Carolina and win it twice in a row. Defending your NIT championship is like making a film with the hopes of winning the Razzie.

Old Dominion beat Bradley in the CIT, news I had to put forth some effort into finding. While the CIT is the newest of the tournaments, having two pretty good teams in the final, which was a good game from what I read, certainly helps.

The CBI, on the otherhand, has no credibility; then again it was a joke to begin with. Oregon State, that is the team which was 13-17 upon entering the tournament, who only got in the tournament because its coach is the President's Brother in law, ok maybe not but how does a 13-18 team get into a post-season tournament anyway? The Beavers, and yes I grew up in Oregon and as an OSU fan, finished at 500 (18-18). It only took winning a tournament to do so. I love the Beavs, and was rooting for them, but partly out of the morbid desire to see a losing team win a post-season tournament.

I mean do you celebrate that? That you're like the 135th best team in the country? Now maybe if the CIT or CBI or whatever else is created added division 2 teams and had some soccer action going on where the chance to go up, or down a division was on the line, that would be something worth watching.

Marcus Jordan

2009-04-07T10:42:00.001-07:00

Yes, that's Jordan as in Michael Jordan's son. Not sure about the goggles though. He signed to UCF today. His other offers were Davidson and Toledo. Which makes me wonder what his skill level is. I can't imagine the pressure he must be under. He has the biggest basketball shoes to fill possible.

construction work

2009-04-07T10:12:00.001-07:00

well, I decided to go back to a simpler template. I couldn't figure the html on the one I was trying to work out.

Blake Griffin

2009-04-07T09:53:00.001-07:00

I say this as a partial analysis; as a Sooner fan I think Blake should stay another year. But also from what I saw this year he is still too raw of a talent to fully reach his potential in the NBA. Right now he'd go high in the draft, if not first, and have a decent career. But he could be a really special player, and the two skills he could improve upon are ones which are best suited to be worked at on the college level. First, his decision making. Too often he'd go for shots that weren't there. In college he was able to power his way in and get a lot of those points. But in the NBA he'd find that to be much more difficult. Second, his post game. His strength is driving to the lane or working off of rebounds. He has trouble on the block, as seen in the UNC game, against a tough defender. He needs to work on facing the basket, and using his speed to accelerate off of the block once he gets the ball, instead of trying to pull out and shoot, or dribble down where he can get into trouble.

Streaking

2009-04-06T13:56:00.001-07:00

So for the last few months I've been doing ESPN's streak for the cash, where they give you several different matchups and you pick the one you think will occur.

My longest winning streak is 5, which is also my longest losing streak.
This month, I'm 7-5.

I'm 3-5 in basketball. And 4-0 in sports I know nothing about: 3-0 in men's curling, and 1-0 in men's bowling.

This goes back to the last round where I did quite well in Hockey and golf.

Initially I thought I was overthinking the sports I new and just going with the favorites in sports I didn't. But upon further review I was 0-for in picking the favorites in basketball, and had twice correctly picked the underdog in curling.

It could be just that I picked more with sports I knew, than sports I didn't, so if I did pick the sports I didn't know at an equal rate then there'd be similar outcomes.

Or else I need to start getting into the curling gig.

Take me out to the ball-game

2009-04-06T00:30:00.000-07:00

Fitting that the first real post of this site goes with the start of baseball's regular season. Despite the fact that the game's biggest star (Arod) admitted to using 'roids, that the US lost again in the WBC, and the Yankees once again bought the world series on paper, I'm excited. Because no matter what its baseball.

My predictions:

AL
West: LAA (really there's nobody who can beat them out there. Oakland will be ok, but they're still not a complete team)
Central: Cleveland (KCwill surprise people, but not come close. The Twins will get great offensive production but have pitching depth issues, while the White Sox have the opposite problems. The Tigers seem on their way down.)
East: Red Sox ( I think this year the Sawks really feel the void that Manny left for them offensively, and David Ortiz isn't getting any younger. That said, they have one wicked good rotation and bullpen. The Yankees once again have a lot of older players who could significantly drop off in production or get injured and parts which haven't been tried together yet, and could not work out. The Rays are the same team from last year, one year more mature, Longoria and Upton are ready to burst out, and add Pat Burrell and you have a team to take seriously. Or one which will choke under its own pressure.)
Wild Card: Yankess

NL
West: D'backs. (While there's more parity and the teams are better, the NL Worst still isnt' a real division. The Dodgers have the lineup, but the D'backs have the rotation and the pen. That will make all he difference in late August.
Central: Cubs (The Brew crew will put up a fight. I still don't like Soriano as a lead-off hitter. I think they really would do well to get a true lead-off man who can get on base. That's really their only weakness.)
East: Phillies (the Mets really helped themselves in the off season. While they did beef up their awful bullpen, after Johan they've got an inconsistent rotation. While I do see the Phillies as being worn out from last year, especially when you've got some key players who are getting up there in age: Jamie Moyer's threatening Satch's age record I think. He's what like 56 now? They do have a great rotation and a solid lineup with all the intangibles)
Wild Card: Brewers

Playoffs (I can never figure out how they align these things so here's my best guess)

ALCS
Red Sox v. Angels
Adding Abreau will really help the Angels, as will playing in an easier division. A lot depends on which Vlad shows up.

NLCS
Phillies v. Cubs

World Series
Red Sox v. Cubs

The Cubs don't have the power to keep up with the Sox, and need one more strong left handed arm in the bullpen. Then again most teams do.

Winner: Red Sox

To win a world series you need:
1) 3 solid starters
2) men who can get on base at the top of the lineup
3) a nasty bullpen

construction work

2009-04-06T00:13:00.000-07:00

Oh, and since I'm trying something a bid advanced for me, this site is still under construction. Excuse our mess.

Welcome

2009-04-06T00:11:00.000-07:00

"Say this much for big league baseball - it is beyond question the greatest conversation piece ever invented in America."
-Bruce Catton, (Pulitzer Prize-winning author, Civil War historian).

I decided to start a sports blog. It felt right to have it be its own blog, apart from my creative site, and my more news-type site. Unlike my other sites, this will just be my take on sports plain and simple.