Last week, Aaron Rodgers got into "trouble" with members of the media. Rodgers was on the court after Wisconsin's win over Arizona in the Elite 8. Officially, only official workers, NCAA team members (usually just the winners), and credentialed media are allowed on the floor after games. Rodgers was invited by the Wisconsin team to come down with them. CBSSports.com writer Dennis Dodd called him out on it but only after Rodgers refused an interview with Dodd. Dodd then took to twitter to point out Rodgers wasn't supposed to be on the floor and was being given special privileges that regular fans didn't have.
There is so much stupid shit to respond to in the Dodd complaint and the ensuing arguments the least of which would be to ask if Rodgers had talked to you would you still have acted like a tattling little sibling who didn't get his way? Dodd then said that he should be allowed to attend Rodgers' wedding to Olivia Munn because "he's a fan." I love how Mike & Mike and Colin Cowherd responded to this idiotic false analogy: He was wanted there; you won't be. Then, all this boils down to Rodgers HAD a pass to go on the floor. He was given it by the Wisconsin athletic director. Rodgers has since pointed this out on twitter and called Dodd a joke. Which, really, thanks to Dodd's childish reaction to being blown off by a sports star who was being a fan in a completely different sport, Dodd really is a joke. He committed the sin of making the media the news.
If the media IS the news, then something is wrong with the news and the media. Now, there are obvious exceptions: a special (good or bad) event, the retirement, or death, of a long time prominent personality (Dan Rather breaking down reporting on 9/11, the deaths of Peter Jennings and Walter Cronkite). Media is a lens. It should act like one. It should present the story not make the story. Think of a window. When you're looking outside, the window is showing you outside. The only time you really notice the window is when there is something wrong with the window (cracked, broken, dirty). Media SHOULD function the same way. The only time we notice the media is when something is wrong with the media (Brian Williams' fake story earlier this year which earned him a 6 month suspension without pay).
But when the media MAKES the story about themselves, it seems either grandstanding or petulant (or both). When the media starts reporting about how certain athletes won't talk to the media or certain media members, then the media becomes the story and that defeats the purpose. Don't get me wrong, it is nearly impossible to report without at least some bias coloring the reporting. There are whole classes, journals, and professions dedicated to the analysis of language in media and how it affects perception. I'm not looking at that. I'm looking at the media getting in the way of the story. I'm looking at the window that winds up being so broken or dirty that it is opaque. This is paying attention to the window, not the view.
In addition to the Rodgers story, we only have to go back a couple of months to the phrase "I'm just here so I don't get fined." Remember that? Marshawn Lynch made headlines by talking about not talking to the media. And they ATE. IT. UP. The only stories I remember from the week leading up to Superbowl XLIX were that phrase, Seattle teammates defending Lynch, and Deflate-gate. 2 stories about the media and one manufactured by the media.
Another key example of media stupidity/general uncouthness takes us back to the 1999 World Series between the Yankees and the Braves. Controversial figure Pete Rose was allowed back in an MLB ballpark for the first time since his ban. He was allowed because of his role in the All-Century Team (All-Century (insert noun here) was huge in 1999 and 2000 as an excuse to start conversations and arguments about who had been really good the previous 100 years). Jim Gray, in interviewing Rose, chose instead to focus on Rose's ban, gambling, and his not being in the Hall of Fame. It was uncomfortable to watch as Rose tried to focus more on the good (which is why he was there) rather than the bad (which he had dealt with since his ban began). There was no reason for Gray to press the issue, keeping Rose from enjoying one baby step back into baseball. People responded. NBC was inundated with complaints about Gray. The Yankees did the best thing you can do to punish a reporter, they refused to give him anything to report. As NBC's field reporter to the Yankee dugout, Gray was expected to interview the team before and after the game. As at team, New York took Gray's one purpose for being at the stadium away. They boycotted him. Instead of telling him privately, they did to him what he had done to Rose the night before. They embarrassed him on national TV. When Chad Curtis, who had just hit a walk off home run, was approached by Gray with cameras rolling, Curtis told him that the Yankees weren't going to speak to Gray after his interview with Rose. After seeing the previous night's ambush reporting, Curtis' words offered more than a little schadenfreude at Gray's expense.
Athletes are going to not talk to the media. They're going to want to walk away. Some cases are given a pass, other's aren't. Michael Jordan was famous for not talking to the media during the playoffs--pass. The NFL media rights didn't allow Lynch that luxury and it became the story that shouldn't-have-been. The media gave Lynch a stage and he played them like a fiddle. He said just enough to get his message about not wanting to talk to the media out. The media did the rest by creating a feeding frenzy about nothing.
Sports fans have our favorite announcers and commentators. Dave Niehaus has a special place in the hearts of Mariner fans over radio waves. the way Bob Sheppard was the Voice of God for Yankees fans at the stadium. Those of us who lived and loved the Jordan years associate Marv Albert's "A SpecTACular Move" with Jordan. A lot of us have the announcers we revile. I will mute a broadcast, even the Super Bowl if Joe Buck is announcing. I felt the same way about Bill Walton when he was on the NBA on NBC. We already notice the window because of how the window shows us the view. In most cases, that is impossible to avoid. We are going to agree or disagree with the announcers. It is when they are getting in the way of the game, the news of the game, and the news around the game, that is unacceptable.
AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, STOP SHOWING RANDOM RELATIVES, FRIENDS, AND ASSHOLES IN THE STANDS DURING GAMES! THAT IS THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAD WITH THE WHOLE RODGERS THING! THEY KEPT SHOWING HIM WHEN I WANTED TO WATCH BASKETBALL!
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
I am Finally (Relatively) Calm Enough to Talk about This
Welp, I've calmed down enough to write about the worst play call in the history of the Super Bowl and possibly football. AAAAnd MLB teams have reported! Spring Training is almost here! Opening Day is a little more than a month away!!
The asinine play call. Just for fun, I reread my previous post about the Seahawks @ Chiefs, reminding myself, as if I needed to, about my loathing of Darrel Bevell. Yup, still think he has one of the best teams and has no worldly clue what to do with it, glad I confirmed that. Now, on to the play call. WHAT THE HELL WERE YOU THINKING????
Breakdown: 2nd and goal from the 1. 26 seconds left, down by 4 (so needing a TD), 1 timeout left. 2 plays earlier Kearse made a spectacular catch of a ball literally dropping in his lap (yet another amazing catch that SHOULD HAVE doomed the Patriots to a Super Bowl loss). In the previous play, Lynch rattled off a four yard run to get to the 1 yard line. Everyone at the Sports-in-Laws' house is already celebrating near-victory (maybe we jinxed it, but I still blame Bevell). The Seahawks have arguably the best running back in the league, especially in short yardage situations, and three (at least two, given the clock and a time out) chances to punch it in with Lynch. Darrel f-ing Bevell lines up a shotgun 3 WR, two TE set. I was actually encouraged to see the two TE's as it could (possibly should) have been a read-option. The two WR's on the right side are stacked. Lynch is lined up next to Wilson in the backfield on the left side, he eventually runs a flat route to the area cleared out by the one receiver on the left. The stack formation on the right, however, told New England all they needed to know. Butler, a little used DB, had had enough training to read the formation and know that it was going to be a pick route. With the NFL's rules on pick routes (mostly thanks to Denver's "legal" offensive pass interference plays) limit them to a point that if the DB knows a pick route is coming, there is only a few places on the field it can possibly go (within 5 yards, the front receiver can only make brief contact, etc). On a goal line play, it is almost assuredly going to be a quick slant, which it was. Butler saw it, jumped the route (within 5 yards, you can jam/hit the receiver, especially if playing the ball), hit Lockette while simultaneously picking off Wilson's pass.
Why the play call (and f-ing Bevell) is to blame: This quick slant would have worked wonderfully if Bevell had added the two little letters "PA" to the play call PA=Play Action. Faking a handoff to Lynch would (should) have frozen Butler just long enough for the quick slant to be open. With no trickery whatsoever, other than Bevell's "cuteness" mentioned in my previous post, Butler didn't have to respect a run, especially since the play called for Lynch to immediately sprint to the flat. Making the stack/pick read of the formation (DB 101), no play action to keep the db's honest, especially with Lynch being such a threat in short yardage situations, was beyond asinine. It should cost Bevell his job.
Breaking down the excuses:
"We didn't want to run into the center of that goal line D." So you THREW it into the center of that goal line D? A quick slant, even with the pick play was right into the jaws of the D! Lockette was running RIGHT AT THE CENTER OF THAT FORMATION!
"We were conscious of the clock, it was meant to kill the clock." Then have Wilson scramble out of the pocket and chuck the damn thing safely out of bounds. NOT INTO THE CENTER OF THE DEFENSE. That was a risky play call with some of the best QB's, and while Wilson, up to that point was undefeated against the best of the league, he had never had an amazing stat line against any of them. Marshawn Lynch was undefeated against the best of the league since Wilson had been drafted. The Legion of Boom (banged up, injured throughout the game) was undefeated against the best in the league since Wilson had been drafted. Wilson makes a hurried throw on an undisguised quick slant that was read by a nickelback (no, not that Nickelback), although I bet they could have also read that formation. Also, you were conscious of the clock and you decided to run a play that you had already planned to fail, just not to the magnitude of which it did? You were worried about the clock and still called a wasted play??
"They were in a formation ready for Marshawn."
THEN FUCKING FAKE IT TO MARSHAWN!
I don't have a problem with this being a passing play on the 1 yard line. I am actually a fan of the goal line pass. However, short yardage situations ALWAYS need misdirection. Play action, a draw, fake a handoff to one back and then give it to another, read option...SOMETHING! I will concede, even support, that a pass play here makes sense. The particular play call (shotgun from the 1??), obvious formation (stacked receivers basically holding up signs saying "I'm going to pick" and "I'm going to slant"??) and no trickery at all? Bad move.
The answers:
1. At the risk of repetition: PLAY ACTION
2. Wilson under center, full house or at least FB/RB backfield. Do you think New England could have stopped Lynch from the 1 with a pulling guard, double TEs AND a lead blocker? Maybe, but I put my eggs in that basket over the play called.
3. Wilson under center, full house or FB/RB play action quick slant, play action fade to Chris Matthews who had been picking apart New England's D until he got a trip to Revis Island. I could see a jump ball in the back of the end zone. Matthew is 6'5". Revis 5'11".
This isn't the first time F-ing Bevell has made bonehead calls. This isn't even the first time he's cost them a game. This is the first time he has done it at the most important time on the biggest stage where even casual spectators were wondering WTF. Yet, it appears he will be back next year.
Good Luck with that Seahawks fans.
The asinine play call. Just for fun, I reread my previous post about the Seahawks @ Chiefs, reminding myself, as if I needed to, about my loathing of Darrel Bevell. Yup, still think he has one of the best teams and has no worldly clue what to do with it, glad I confirmed that. Now, on to the play call. WHAT THE HELL WERE YOU THINKING????
Breakdown: 2nd and goal from the 1. 26 seconds left, down by 4 (so needing a TD), 1 timeout left. 2 plays earlier Kearse made a spectacular catch of a ball literally dropping in his lap (yet another amazing catch that SHOULD HAVE doomed the Patriots to a Super Bowl loss). In the previous play, Lynch rattled off a four yard run to get to the 1 yard line. Everyone at the Sports-in-Laws' house is already celebrating near-victory (maybe we jinxed it, but I still blame Bevell). The Seahawks have arguably the best running back in the league, especially in short yardage situations, and three (at least two, given the clock and a time out) chances to punch it in with Lynch. Darrel f-ing Bevell lines up a shotgun 3 WR, two TE set. I was actually encouraged to see the two TE's as it could (possibly should) have been a read-option. The two WR's on the right side are stacked. Lynch is lined up next to Wilson in the backfield on the left side, he eventually runs a flat route to the area cleared out by the one receiver on the left. The stack formation on the right, however, told New England all they needed to know. Butler, a little used DB, had had enough training to read the formation and know that it was going to be a pick route. With the NFL's rules on pick routes (mostly thanks to Denver's "legal" offensive pass interference plays) limit them to a point that if the DB knows a pick route is coming, there is only a few places on the field it can possibly go (within 5 yards, the front receiver can only make brief contact, etc). On a goal line play, it is almost assuredly going to be a quick slant, which it was. Butler saw it, jumped the route (within 5 yards, you can jam/hit the receiver, especially if playing the ball), hit Lockette while simultaneously picking off Wilson's pass.
Why the play call (and f-ing Bevell) is to blame: This quick slant would have worked wonderfully if Bevell had added the two little letters "PA" to the play call PA=Play Action. Faking a handoff to Lynch would (should) have frozen Butler just long enough for the quick slant to be open. With no trickery whatsoever, other than Bevell's "cuteness" mentioned in my previous post, Butler didn't have to respect a run, especially since the play called for Lynch to immediately sprint to the flat. Making the stack/pick read of the formation (DB 101), no play action to keep the db's honest, especially with Lynch being such a threat in short yardage situations, was beyond asinine. It should cost Bevell his job.
Breaking down the excuses:
"We didn't want to run into the center of that goal line D." So you THREW it into the center of that goal line D? A quick slant, even with the pick play was right into the jaws of the D! Lockette was running RIGHT AT THE CENTER OF THAT FORMATION!
"We were conscious of the clock, it was meant to kill the clock." Then have Wilson scramble out of the pocket and chuck the damn thing safely out of bounds. NOT INTO THE CENTER OF THE DEFENSE. That was a risky play call with some of the best QB's, and while Wilson, up to that point was undefeated against the best of the league, he had never had an amazing stat line against any of them. Marshawn Lynch was undefeated against the best of the league since Wilson had been drafted. The Legion of Boom (banged up, injured throughout the game) was undefeated against the best in the league since Wilson had been drafted. Wilson makes a hurried throw on an undisguised quick slant that was read by a nickelback (no, not that Nickelback), although I bet they could have also read that formation. Also, you were conscious of the clock and you decided to run a play that you had already planned to fail, just not to the magnitude of which it did? You were worried about the clock and still called a wasted play??
"They were in a formation ready for Marshawn."
THEN FUCKING FAKE IT TO MARSHAWN!
I don't have a problem with this being a passing play on the 1 yard line. I am actually a fan of the goal line pass. However, short yardage situations ALWAYS need misdirection. Play action, a draw, fake a handoff to one back and then give it to another, read option...SOMETHING! I will concede, even support, that a pass play here makes sense. The particular play call (shotgun from the 1??), obvious formation (stacked receivers basically holding up signs saying "I'm going to pick" and "I'm going to slant"??) and no trickery at all? Bad move.
The answers:
1. At the risk of repetition: PLAY ACTION
2. Wilson under center, full house or at least FB/RB backfield. Do you think New England could have stopped Lynch from the 1 with a pulling guard, double TEs AND a lead blocker? Maybe, but I put my eggs in that basket over the play called.
3. Wilson under center, full house or FB/RB play action quick slant, play action fade to Chris Matthews who had been picking apart New England's D until he got a trip to Revis Island. I could see a jump ball in the back of the end zone. Matthew is 6'5". Revis 5'11".
This isn't the first time F-ing Bevell has made bonehead calls. This isn't even the first time he's cost them a game. This is the first time he has done it at the most important time on the biggest stage where even casual spectators were wondering WTF. Yet, it appears he will be back next year.
Good Luck with that Seahawks fans.
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
Thoughts on: NFL Preview--Seattle Seahawks @ My Kansas City Chiefs (Yes, they're mine now).
I'll fully admit that the Kansas City Chiefs are doing better than I thought they would this year. They've already matched the win total I had predicted for them and they haven't played Oakland at all yet. That being said, they face a very difficult opponent this next week in the Seattle Seahawks. Luckily, they face them at Arrowhead. The Arrowhead from 90-2000 was one of the most dreaded venues for away teams. 1994 was the only season KC didn't have a winning home record (4-4). They had 3 three-loss seasons, 2 two-loss seasons, 3 one-loss seasons, and two undefeated seasons at home during that span. Arrowhead enjoyed sellouts for every game from 1989 until 2009. Last season, Arrowhead vied with CenturyLink for the Guinness World Record for loudest outdoor stadium. CenturyLink claimed it, Arrowhead took it the next week, CenturyLink reclaimed it the following week. It has since been reclaimed by Arrowhead this season in the home game against the New England Patriots.
So, there's some back story. Now on with the prediction. (Well, almost).
This past week's Marshawn Lynch-a-thon of the New York Giants actually does the Chiefs a favor. Why? Glad you asked. Darrell Bevell. Bevell is the Offensive Coordinator for the Seahawks. He is reviled by the Sports-Bro-In-Law the Sports Wife, and the Sports-Cousin-In-Law (okay, these titles are starting to get ridiculous). The Seahawks, interestingly enough for being a defending champion, have some of the same issues as the Chiefs. Their offense is run through the running back (Lynch for Seattle, Jamaal Charles for KC); they both have mobile moderate pro bowl quarterbacks; they both have a dearth of real big name receivers; and they have two of the better defenses in the NFL.
One of the key differences, and an advantage to the Chiefs, is Andy Reid (head coach/offensive play-caller; The Fat Man) vs. the aforementioned Bevell. In Seattle's three losses (two teams of which have lost to the Chiefs later on--San Diego and the St. Louis Rams) Bevell has decided to get cute with the offense and see if he could win without Marshawn Lynch. He can't. In the San Diego loss, Lynch had 6 rushes. The Cowboys game, 10 rushes. St. Louis game, better, 18 rushes, but only 53 yards. He was averaging 6 yards per carry, but wound up with 36 yards in the SD game. Why? Darell Bevell.
Reid, yon the other hand, knows that his offense lives and dies on the legs of Jamaal Charles. In yesterday's win at Buffalo, for example, the Bills were keeping Charles bottled up. He had barely any yards in the first half and not from lack of trying. Reid kept pounding. Then he pounded with Knile Davis (who looks to be a GREAT second option as Charles ages and gets banged up). That constant pounding set up play actions, screens, and eventually receiver Dwayne Bowe started heating up. Buffalo started paying attention to Bowe. BAM Charles reels off a 39 yard TD (on 4th and 1, a rushing down). Reid does get cute, but he does so in a fashion that sticks with bread-and-butter, Charles-and-Davis.
Bevell will rush the hell out of Lynch one game, then completely neglect using him the next. In their week 1 dominance of Green Bay, Lynch rushed 110 yards and 2 TDs. Next week? SD debacle. 6 carries, 36 yards, no TDs. Percy freakin Harvin was the lead rusher for the 'Hawks with 45 yards. More on that later. Week 3 against a retooled Denver defense, Lynch had 88 yards rushing and a TD, 40 yards receiving, and another TD. Seattle squeaked out a victory to hand Denver its first loss. They didn't overuse or underuse Lynch. Next week, similar usage against a worse team, Washington. 17 rushes, 72 yards, 5 receptions, 45 yards and a TD. The offense ran through Lynch, Wilson had less than 200 yards passing to receivers other than Lynch. Then comes the Dallas game. 10 rushes. That's it. And it wasn't like they were getting blown out and had to pass. In the few games they've been behind to a point of not rushing, they've still thrown to Marshawn out of the backfield. The Dallas game? 1 reception, 1 yard. Underutilized. Then comes the Harvin trade (more in a minute), the rumors that Wilson isn't "black enough," that Lynch will be let go at season's end (wonder what next year's Seahawks will look like if they lose Lynch and don't retool their receiving corps). Then St. Louis beats them. Lynch has 18 rushes, more than in the Washington game against an arguably equal to Washington opponent (let's just say they're in rebuilding years), but where Lynch was part of the passing game against Washington, he only caught two balls for 18 yards, still not enough involvement in the offensive game plan.
Let's jump over to Kansas City. Reid is famous for getting results out of his players and building a system to highlight their strengths rather than cram players into his system. He went out and got Alex Smith because Reid wanted to run a West Coast offense and Smith is a West Coast Offense QB. But the offense still runs through Charles. In the Chiefs 3 losses, against Tennessee (which was a really surprising loss to a pretty bad team), at Denver and at San Francisco (two good teams where the Chiefs actually had a chance to win in each game), a variety of factors came into play. Charles was injured early against Tennessee. There goes the offensive game plan. Knile Davis, like I said earlier, is a good option for Charles, but that early in the season, it was difficult to plan for a different style of runner. There were also injuries to starting ILB Derrick Johnson and starting DE Mike DeVito, so the defensive game plan suddenly shifted, too.
Playing at Denver against Peyton Manning, who, fun fact, has never lost to the Chiefs (dammit, retire already!), the Chiefs were on the goal line and missed a touchdown pass that would have tied the game and forced overtime. They can compete. They were also driving against San Francisco, but Smith hurried a throw and threw a game ending pick. Other factors, such as a 12 men on the field giving SF a first down, extending their last drive of the game (one that ended in a TD rather than a loooong FG attempt) was probably the killer more than Smith's pick.
The point is, Reid know what kind of personnel he has and what their strengths and weaknesses are. The Chiefs are 6-3 despite not having any WR receiving TDs (all TD receptions have been tight ends, the running backs, and 1 to fullback Anthony Sherman). They've still been winning. Their defense STILL hasn't allowed a rushing touchdown (we're going into week 11!) However, if you have Chiefs WRs on your fantasy team, I feel bad for you, son. They got 99 receptions but a TD ain't one. But that is working, in a way. The receiving game becomes a threat when it needs to. Against Buffalo, as mentioned before, Bowe rattled off reception after reception, including one that probably would have been a TD if he hadn't fumbled and recovered it himself, while the Bills bottled up Charles and Davis. Once Buffalo started clamping down on Bowe, Kelce, and the other receiving threats, Reid came back with the running game.
Bevell doesn't do that. He tries to cram players into his system rather than adapt a system to the personnel. Remember Harvin? Faster than hell and a great deep threat (see how the Jets have used him in the last two weeks?)? The only times he ran deep routes, the receptions were called back (including 3 touchdowns on the same drive!) due to offensive penalties on the line. Most of the rest of the time, he was either used for jet sweeps or short crossing routes. If you have someone who can blow by the covering corner and sometimes the safety, SEND THAT GUY DEEP! Marty Mornhinweg figured this out. Harvin has 174 of his 307 receiving yards with the Jets, and he's only been there 3 weeks! Doing the math, he had 133 yards in his 5 weeks with Seattle. The Jets are still using him to run, which has been a strength of his going back to his Minnesota days. 69 of his 161 rushing yards are for the Jets vs. 92 through 5 weeks with Seattle. Does he have a better quarterback in Michael Vick? I would say no. He has a better system for his talents.
And that is Bevell in a nutshell. I'm going to do this script this week. Whoa! Marshawn is averaging 6.1 yards per carry (Dallas game)?!?! Pass the ball, and not to Lynch (1 reception). Marshawn is pounding the hell out of San Diego?? Run with Harvin and pass. What do you mean it isn't working?? Welp, let's keep to the script. Yeah, I know it's third and goal from the 2. We're still going empty backfield 5 wide! Don't get me wrong, he does this in wins, too. But his game plans in those games are run heavy, which almost always works with Lynch. Other times, when he's tried to get cute and NOT run with Lynch, were against Washington and a struggling Carolina--teams that probably couldn't have stopped the Seahawks anyway. And Carolina still came close.
That's why I'm encouraged this week. Last season, Seattle was vastly superior to Kansas City, even though they never played. I watched every Seattle game (with the Sports Wife and Sports-Bro-In-Law) and every Chiefs game (because they're mine). Kansas City had their dominant defense for the first half the year (against weak opponents) until teams figured out their blitz packages (after the Denver game) but the offense REALLY struggled, surprisingly until the one playoff game where the defense collapsed (concussions all around, but most devastatingly to Brandon Flowers), the offense came alive and rattled off 44 points without Jamaal Charles. Indianapolis had prepared for Charles. They didn't seem to have any idea about Kniles Davis.
Seattle, on the other hand, was dominant throughout the season culminating in their shellacking of Denver in the Super Bowl. This season, they've been exposed. Poor offensive line play, losses to the defense (DT Brandon Mebane just tore his hamstring and will miss the rest of the season) have made the Legion of Boom lack a little of the Boom. And then the Jekyll and Hyde offensive coordinator, Darrell Bevell. Which script will show up in Arrowhead? Well, they utilized the hell out of Lynch against New York last week, which means it's about time for Bevell to get cute. Even Vegas has this as a pick 'em.
Seattle 15 Kansas City 17 in a nail-biter.
So, there's some back story. Now on with the prediction. (Well, almost).
This past week's Marshawn Lynch-a-thon of the New York Giants actually does the Chiefs a favor. Why? Glad you asked. Darrell Bevell. Bevell is the Offensive Coordinator for the Seahawks. He is reviled by the Sports-Bro-In-Law the Sports Wife, and the Sports-Cousin-In-Law (okay, these titles are starting to get ridiculous). The Seahawks, interestingly enough for being a defending champion, have some of the same issues as the Chiefs. Their offense is run through the running back (Lynch for Seattle, Jamaal Charles for KC); they both have mobile moderate pro bowl quarterbacks; they both have a dearth of real big name receivers; and they have two of the better defenses in the NFL.
One of the key differences, and an advantage to the Chiefs, is Andy Reid (head coach/offensive play-caller; The Fat Man) vs. the aforementioned Bevell. In Seattle's three losses (two teams of which have lost to the Chiefs later on--San Diego and the St. Louis Rams) Bevell has decided to get cute with the offense and see if he could win without Marshawn Lynch. He can't. In the San Diego loss, Lynch had 6 rushes. The Cowboys game, 10 rushes. St. Louis game, better, 18 rushes, but only 53 yards. He was averaging 6 yards per carry, but wound up with 36 yards in the SD game. Why? Darell Bevell.
Reid, yon the other hand, knows that his offense lives and dies on the legs of Jamaal Charles. In yesterday's win at Buffalo, for example, the Bills were keeping Charles bottled up. He had barely any yards in the first half and not from lack of trying. Reid kept pounding. Then he pounded with Knile Davis (who looks to be a GREAT second option as Charles ages and gets banged up). That constant pounding set up play actions, screens, and eventually receiver Dwayne Bowe started heating up. Buffalo started paying attention to Bowe. BAM Charles reels off a 39 yard TD (on 4th and 1, a rushing down). Reid does get cute, but he does so in a fashion that sticks with bread-and-butter, Charles-and-Davis.
Bevell will rush the hell out of Lynch one game, then completely neglect using him the next. In their week 1 dominance of Green Bay, Lynch rushed 110 yards and 2 TDs. Next week? SD debacle. 6 carries, 36 yards, no TDs. Percy freakin Harvin was the lead rusher for the 'Hawks with 45 yards. More on that later. Week 3 against a retooled Denver defense, Lynch had 88 yards rushing and a TD, 40 yards receiving, and another TD. Seattle squeaked out a victory to hand Denver its first loss. They didn't overuse or underuse Lynch. Next week, similar usage against a worse team, Washington. 17 rushes, 72 yards, 5 receptions, 45 yards and a TD. The offense ran through Lynch, Wilson had less than 200 yards passing to receivers other than Lynch. Then comes the Dallas game. 10 rushes. That's it. And it wasn't like they were getting blown out and had to pass. In the few games they've been behind to a point of not rushing, they've still thrown to Marshawn out of the backfield. The Dallas game? 1 reception, 1 yard. Underutilized. Then comes the Harvin trade (more in a minute), the rumors that Wilson isn't "black enough," that Lynch will be let go at season's end (wonder what next year's Seahawks will look like if they lose Lynch and don't retool their receiving corps). Then St. Louis beats them. Lynch has 18 rushes, more than in the Washington game against an arguably equal to Washington opponent (let's just say they're in rebuilding years), but where Lynch was part of the passing game against Washington, he only caught two balls for 18 yards, still not enough involvement in the offensive game plan.
Let's jump over to Kansas City. Reid is famous for getting results out of his players and building a system to highlight their strengths rather than cram players into his system. He went out and got Alex Smith because Reid wanted to run a West Coast offense and Smith is a West Coast Offense QB. But the offense still runs through Charles. In the Chiefs 3 losses, against Tennessee (which was a really surprising loss to a pretty bad team), at Denver and at San Francisco (two good teams where the Chiefs actually had a chance to win in each game), a variety of factors came into play. Charles was injured early against Tennessee. There goes the offensive game plan. Knile Davis, like I said earlier, is a good option for Charles, but that early in the season, it was difficult to plan for a different style of runner. There were also injuries to starting ILB Derrick Johnson and starting DE Mike DeVito, so the defensive game plan suddenly shifted, too.
Playing at Denver against Peyton Manning, who, fun fact, has never lost to the Chiefs (dammit, retire already!), the Chiefs were on the goal line and missed a touchdown pass that would have tied the game and forced overtime. They can compete. They were also driving against San Francisco, but Smith hurried a throw and threw a game ending pick. Other factors, such as a 12 men on the field giving SF a first down, extending their last drive of the game (one that ended in a TD rather than a loooong FG attempt) was probably the killer more than Smith's pick.
The point is, Reid know what kind of personnel he has and what their strengths and weaknesses are. The Chiefs are 6-3 despite not having any WR receiving TDs (all TD receptions have been tight ends, the running backs, and 1 to fullback Anthony Sherman). They've still been winning. Their defense STILL hasn't allowed a rushing touchdown (we're going into week 11!) However, if you have Chiefs WRs on your fantasy team, I feel bad for you, son. They got 99 receptions but a TD ain't one. But that is working, in a way. The receiving game becomes a threat when it needs to. Against Buffalo, as mentioned before, Bowe rattled off reception after reception, including one that probably would have been a TD if he hadn't fumbled and recovered it himself, while the Bills bottled up Charles and Davis. Once Buffalo started clamping down on Bowe, Kelce, and the other receiving threats, Reid came back with the running game.
Bevell doesn't do that. He tries to cram players into his system rather than adapt a system to the personnel. Remember Harvin? Faster than hell and a great deep threat (see how the Jets have used him in the last two weeks?)? The only times he ran deep routes, the receptions were called back (including 3 touchdowns on the same drive!) due to offensive penalties on the line. Most of the rest of the time, he was either used for jet sweeps or short crossing routes. If you have someone who can blow by the covering corner and sometimes the safety, SEND THAT GUY DEEP! Marty Mornhinweg figured this out. Harvin has 174 of his 307 receiving yards with the Jets, and he's only been there 3 weeks! Doing the math, he had 133 yards in his 5 weeks with Seattle. The Jets are still using him to run, which has been a strength of his going back to his Minnesota days. 69 of his 161 rushing yards are for the Jets vs. 92 through 5 weeks with Seattle. Does he have a better quarterback in Michael Vick? I would say no. He has a better system for his talents.
And that is Bevell in a nutshell. I'm going to do this script this week. Whoa! Marshawn is averaging 6.1 yards per carry (Dallas game)?!?! Pass the ball, and not to Lynch (1 reception). Marshawn is pounding the hell out of San Diego?? Run with Harvin and pass. What do you mean it isn't working?? Welp, let's keep to the script. Yeah, I know it's third and goal from the 2. We're still going empty backfield 5 wide! Don't get me wrong, he does this in wins, too. But his game plans in those games are run heavy, which almost always works with Lynch. Other times, when he's tried to get cute and NOT run with Lynch, were against Washington and a struggling Carolina--teams that probably couldn't have stopped the Seahawks anyway. And Carolina still came close.
That's why I'm encouraged this week. Last season, Seattle was vastly superior to Kansas City, even though they never played. I watched every Seattle game (with the Sports Wife and Sports-Bro-In-Law) and every Chiefs game (because they're mine). Kansas City had their dominant defense for the first half the year (against weak opponents) until teams figured out their blitz packages (after the Denver game) but the offense REALLY struggled, surprisingly until the one playoff game where the defense collapsed (concussions all around, but most devastatingly to Brandon Flowers), the offense came alive and rattled off 44 points without Jamaal Charles. Indianapolis had prepared for Charles. They didn't seem to have any idea about Kniles Davis.
Seattle, on the other hand, was dominant throughout the season culminating in their shellacking of Denver in the Super Bowl. This season, they've been exposed. Poor offensive line play, losses to the defense (DT Brandon Mebane just tore his hamstring and will miss the rest of the season) have made the Legion of Boom lack a little of the Boom. And then the Jekyll and Hyde offensive coordinator, Darrell Bevell. Which script will show up in Arrowhead? Well, they utilized the hell out of Lynch against New York last week, which means it's about time for Bevell to get cute. Even Vegas has this as a pick 'em.
Seattle 15 Kansas City 17 in a nail-biter.
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
Minor League Football and the NCAA
In last week's Sports Illustrated, there is a column voicing the opinion that we should take the "student" out of the "student-athlete." The case is made that the athletes, looking at the money-makers, men's basketball and college football, should really just be university workers since they bring in money for the university. This might actually be a good idea, but how do you keep universities from basically being professional sports organizations and going out and, instead of recruiting, offering more money than the next university?
There has also been a proposal of making a minor league system for the NFL, similar to that of the farm system of MLB. One such article is not even 24 hours old at the time of this writing. You can find it here. If we merge these two ideas, the minor league system helps answer the money/signing question for university, like the one voiced in the previous paragraph.
Universities can sign with NFL organizations to become different tiers of their organization. Your SEC teams and other powerhouses would be the equivalent of AAA teams in MLB. Smaller schools can be AA and A teams. There can also be other developmental leagues (D-Leagues) composed of some of the smaller schools. The game of college football would still be a money maker for colleges with support coming (financially and otherwise) from the NFL. The NFL could sign contracts with universities that included stipends/salaries for football personnel including players. The NFL could then also be active in discipline of these personnel as well and have more bearing and power than the NCAA does since there have been athletes and coaches who have left the NCAA ahead of investigations and been rewarded with professional contracts. Having the NFL levy fines and punishments closes the loophole that allows this form of escape.
The NFL could draft athletes out of high school and then send them to different colleges to develop as players. They wouldn't take classes unless they wanted to work toward a degree. They would be University and NFL employees. They would play for the university, but their payments would come from the NFL, taking the burden of policing money policies off of the NCAA and individual universities. This could also free up money for universities to actually use their budgets on education.
Players could then move up or down, similar to the MLB system. Players who are nursing injuries or recovering from surgery could play at the university associated with their NFL team as part of a rehab to make sure they don't try to come back too soon. Players not performing (or who have repeated discipline problems) can be demoted from AAA to AA or A or released. The minor league players would no longer be college players and would therefore be subject to the aforementioned penalties, but also trades, upward and downward movement, release, etc. The universities would simply supply the location. Universities and the NFL teams could also sign with different teams or universities when contracts are completed.
An example: USC becomes a AAA team for the San Diego Chargers of the NFL. The University of San Diego becomes the Chargers' AA team, and Occidental becomes one of the A teams. The Chargers draft players (the NFL draft would be greatly expanded and would target amateur and high school players). These players then go into the minor league system (after graduation in the cases of high school players) at varying levels. Players would play at the universities. In a way, they would still play for the university. These universities would also serve as development and practice for players already in the NFL. Charger players who are not performing to the standards of that team, or who are injured, can be designated to USC, San Diego, or Occidental to practice, re-develop, or rehabilitate. Once they have demonstrated the required improvement, they can then be brought up to the next level (Occidental to San Diego; San Diego to USC; USC to the Chargers). This would also allow greater freedom for trades. The Chargers could make a multi-player trade, receiving, for example, 4 players in exchange for 3. Normally, this may put the Chargers over the roster limit. Under the new proposed system, rather than releasing a player, the Chargers could designate a lower depth chart player for assignment in, but be able to hold them within the organization to be brought up in case of release, retirement, injury, or suspension of another player.
This system would replace the NCAA's oversight of college football. A similar system between the NBA and men's basketball and the WNBA would replace the NCAA in college basketball as well. It would NOT do away with bowl games or March Madness. Colleges would still participate in the different bowl games. One concern may be professional teams sending players down to the college ranks in order to win the bowl games for the organization. Rules to keep from tampering would be put in place. During Bowl Season, the NFL teams are making a push for their own playoffs. Teams are not going to send star players down to the college ranks for a bowl game and risk injury, not to mention missing valuable professional practice time, for a college bowl. For teams that are not fighting for playoffs, who could send players down, putting in deadlines for non-injury movement upward and downward before and after bowl season. Colleges would still provide the entertainment of the holiday bowl season and have the opportunity to make money for the university in the case of bowl invites, wins, and championships.
In the end, making colleges the minor league farm system for the NFL would cut down on NCAA violations (because players could then be paid). It would also take athletes out of the classrooms, making class sizes smaller, and in the case of some universities, eliminate frivolous class offerings engineered to give athletes easier classes, such as those mentioned in the Sports Illustrated article. It would actually allow more players/talent into the NFL system, allowing other athletes, who may otherwise never receive a chance to play, into a professional system, even at the minor league level. This also has a billion dollar industry take over monetary responsibilities from cash-strapped universities. This would also have to include legislation to allow universities to use any money received from donors as they see fit, instead of boosters dictating their money go to football programs that really don't need it. This would also allow the parent organization (the NFL) to police their employees, removing the burden of high-profile punishments, often for stupidly minor and meaningless infractions (such as an athlete using their own given property as barter for services, such as tattoos, rendered) from the domain of the NCAA, eliminating the stupid rules preventing athletes from using their own likenesses. This also deals a with the NCAA hypocrisy of earning money on student athletes when they, themselves, cannot, not to mention the upcoming litigation of NCAA athlete unionization.
Two problems do present themselves within this system. Taking the student out of the student athlete may mean that these individuals may never get an education, instead choosing to focus on the sport (which, I would maintain, most of them are doing anyway). This system could be accused of treating the athletes like a commodity within a large machine, dehumanizing them to worker bees and money makers for the parent organization. The other problem would be the decreased meaning of college bowl games, making them minor league showcases rather than the championship spectacles they are now.
First off, the student athlete is already a dehumanized worker bee money maker for the NCAA, but one of the goals for this proposal is to improve the conditions, not simply sell the same system to the NFL. As minor league players, the college players would then be union represented by the NFLPA (no small organization in itself) and, as such, negotiated and bargained for under collective bargaining agreements. To be sure, the amount of support needed for health care (current and long term) would eat into the NFL's gigantic profit margin. However, the NFL is America's most profitable non-profit organization (yup, it is tax exempt). I think they can spare the money. With representation for the college players, they could then be paid a living wage (probably beyond a living wage), with health care and representation. They would no longer be the yearly contract unpaid employees they are now. Most, if not all, NCAA scholarship agreements are yearly. That means if a player is cut, or worse devastatingly injured, the NCAA is responsible until that player's scholarship runs out at the end of the year (or, in some cases, season). There have been some high profile cases (a series of Sports Illustrated articles on Oklahoma State's using and discarding players) that show schools doing exactly that. The players not only don't get the education, they often return home in worse condition than when they left.
To counter this, the NFL would include something like a G.I. bill for current and former minor league players. If they want to take classes while working for the universities at which they play, they could do so at classified staff rates (at most universities, this comes out to less than $100 per credit). If they do not wish to take classes at the time of their employment at the minor league level, they would then be given a voucher (unexpiring) for four years of full-time education at any of the institutions at which they played. The universities get to negotiate for large contracts with the professional teams, they players get their education without the threat of losing their scholarships. Under this system, they would still be a commodity, but they would be more reimbursed than they are now.
As for the bowl games, yes, they probably will suffer. The colleges and universities participating in the bowls would basically be holding a championship for the best farm team. There really is no equivalent for MLB, even the College World Series tournament A) isn't as big a draw, B) doesn't represent all of the talent of individual teams because players either aren't associated with a team yet or are playing on teams from multiple organizations, or, if they are MLB bound, didn't go to college and went directly into the established minor league system. I would claim that the NCAA bowls may actually get better. Instead of a handful of the players from the colleges in the 30ish bowl games we have going into the NFL, the level of talent would actually be higher. The bowl games would essentially be played by the AAA teams, (arguably, they already are). The difference, is that as an actual AAA team, ALL of these players are one step away from the NFL instead of a handful from each team. That would mean 53 players this close to the NFL squaring up against 53 players this close to the NFL would be playing for the bowl wins. This would also shake up the hierarchy of NCAA football. Instead of an Alabama team loaded with four years of eventual NFL talent at a number of positions, there would be A) more teams with more NFL talent, and B) the possibility of a very high AAA team moving more players to the pros and having more players increasing trade stock, thereby changing teams more often than the four-year starters in today's NCAA. This would possibly do away with the dynastic control teams (or conferences like the SEC) have over the current bowl system, making it more exciting and less predictable.
By instituting the minor league system, the NFL can contract and pay players who now go unpaid. The NFL and universities would share profits. Players would have more security and better opportunities for education without that education being taken away. Universities could return to focusing on what they were originally meant to focus on--educating, not being a life support for a football team. The sport could grow in smaller areas by any player, even those on single A, have the possibility of being called up (Jose Canseco and Dennis Eckersley started their MLB careers in Idaho Falls, of all places). Everyone involved benefits in some way.
There has also been a proposal of making a minor league system for the NFL, similar to that of the farm system of MLB. One such article is not even 24 hours old at the time of this writing. You can find it here. If we merge these two ideas, the minor league system helps answer the money/signing question for university, like the one voiced in the previous paragraph.
Universities can sign with NFL organizations to become different tiers of their organization. Your SEC teams and other powerhouses would be the equivalent of AAA teams in MLB. Smaller schools can be AA and A teams. There can also be other developmental leagues (D-Leagues) composed of some of the smaller schools. The game of college football would still be a money maker for colleges with support coming (financially and otherwise) from the NFL. The NFL could sign contracts with universities that included stipends/salaries for football personnel including players. The NFL could then also be active in discipline of these personnel as well and have more bearing and power than the NCAA does since there have been athletes and coaches who have left the NCAA ahead of investigations and been rewarded with professional contracts. Having the NFL levy fines and punishments closes the loophole that allows this form of escape.
The NFL could draft athletes out of high school and then send them to different colleges to develop as players. They wouldn't take classes unless they wanted to work toward a degree. They would be University and NFL employees. They would play for the university, but their payments would come from the NFL, taking the burden of policing money policies off of the NCAA and individual universities. This could also free up money for universities to actually use their budgets on education.
Players could then move up or down, similar to the MLB system. Players who are nursing injuries or recovering from surgery could play at the university associated with their NFL team as part of a rehab to make sure they don't try to come back too soon. Players not performing (or who have repeated discipline problems) can be demoted from AAA to AA or A or released. The minor league players would no longer be college players and would therefore be subject to the aforementioned penalties, but also trades, upward and downward movement, release, etc. The universities would simply supply the location. Universities and the NFL teams could also sign with different teams or universities when contracts are completed.
An example: USC becomes a AAA team for the San Diego Chargers of the NFL. The University of San Diego becomes the Chargers' AA team, and Occidental becomes one of the A teams. The Chargers draft players (the NFL draft would be greatly expanded and would target amateur and high school players). These players then go into the minor league system (after graduation in the cases of high school players) at varying levels. Players would play at the universities. In a way, they would still play for the university. These universities would also serve as development and practice for players already in the NFL. Charger players who are not performing to the standards of that team, or who are injured, can be designated to USC, San Diego, or Occidental to practice, re-develop, or rehabilitate. Once they have demonstrated the required improvement, they can then be brought up to the next level (Occidental to San Diego; San Diego to USC; USC to the Chargers). This would also allow greater freedom for trades. The Chargers could make a multi-player trade, receiving, for example, 4 players in exchange for 3. Normally, this may put the Chargers over the roster limit. Under the new proposed system, rather than releasing a player, the Chargers could designate a lower depth chart player for assignment in, but be able to hold them within the organization to be brought up in case of release, retirement, injury, or suspension of another player.
This system would replace the NCAA's oversight of college football. A similar system between the NBA and men's basketball and the WNBA would replace the NCAA in college basketball as well. It would NOT do away with bowl games or March Madness. Colleges would still participate in the different bowl games. One concern may be professional teams sending players down to the college ranks in order to win the bowl games for the organization. Rules to keep from tampering would be put in place. During Bowl Season, the NFL teams are making a push for their own playoffs. Teams are not going to send star players down to the college ranks for a bowl game and risk injury, not to mention missing valuable professional practice time, for a college bowl. For teams that are not fighting for playoffs, who could send players down, putting in deadlines for non-injury movement upward and downward before and after bowl season. Colleges would still provide the entertainment of the holiday bowl season and have the opportunity to make money for the university in the case of bowl invites, wins, and championships.
In the end, making colleges the minor league farm system for the NFL would cut down on NCAA violations (because players could then be paid). It would also take athletes out of the classrooms, making class sizes smaller, and in the case of some universities, eliminate frivolous class offerings engineered to give athletes easier classes, such as those mentioned in the Sports Illustrated article. It would actually allow more players/talent into the NFL system, allowing other athletes, who may otherwise never receive a chance to play, into a professional system, even at the minor league level. This also has a billion dollar industry take over monetary responsibilities from cash-strapped universities. This would also have to include legislation to allow universities to use any money received from donors as they see fit, instead of boosters dictating their money go to football programs that really don't need it. This would also allow the parent organization (the NFL) to police their employees, removing the burden of high-profile punishments, often for stupidly minor and meaningless infractions (such as an athlete using their own given property as barter for services, such as tattoos, rendered) from the domain of the NCAA, eliminating the stupid rules preventing athletes from using their own likenesses. This also deals a with the NCAA hypocrisy of earning money on student athletes when they, themselves, cannot, not to mention the upcoming litigation of NCAA athlete unionization.
Two problems do present themselves within this system. Taking the student out of the student athlete may mean that these individuals may never get an education, instead choosing to focus on the sport (which, I would maintain, most of them are doing anyway). This system could be accused of treating the athletes like a commodity within a large machine, dehumanizing them to worker bees and money makers for the parent organization. The other problem would be the decreased meaning of college bowl games, making them minor league showcases rather than the championship spectacles they are now.
First off, the student athlete is already a dehumanized worker bee money maker for the NCAA, but one of the goals for this proposal is to improve the conditions, not simply sell the same system to the NFL. As minor league players, the college players would then be union represented by the NFLPA (no small organization in itself) and, as such, negotiated and bargained for under collective bargaining agreements. To be sure, the amount of support needed for health care (current and long term) would eat into the NFL's gigantic profit margin. However, the NFL is America's most profitable non-profit organization (yup, it is tax exempt). I think they can spare the money. With representation for the college players, they could then be paid a living wage (probably beyond a living wage), with health care and representation. They would no longer be the yearly contract unpaid employees they are now. Most, if not all, NCAA scholarship agreements are yearly. That means if a player is cut, or worse devastatingly injured, the NCAA is responsible until that player's scholarship runs out at the end of the year (or, in some cases, season). There have been some high profile cases (a series of Sports Illustrated articles on Oklahoma State's using and discarding players) that show schools doing exactly that. The players not only don't get the education, they often return home in worse condition than when they left.
To counter this, the NFL would include something like a G.I. bill for current and former minor league players. If they want to take classes while working for the universities at which they play, they could do so at classified staff rates (at most universities, this comes out to less than $100 per credit). If they do not wish to take classes at the time of their employment at the minor league level, they would then be given a voucher (unexpiring) for four years of full-time education at any of the institutions at which they played. The universities get to negotiate for large contracts with the professional teams, they players get their education without the threat of losing their scholarships. Under this system, they would still be a commodity, but they would be more reimbursed than they are now.
As for the bowl games, yes, they probably will suffer. The colleges and universities participating in the bowls would basically be holding a championship for the best farm team. There really is no equivalent for MLB, even the College World Series tournament A) isn't as big a draw, B) doesn't represent all of the talent of individual teams because players either aren't associated with a team yet or are playing on teams from multiple organizations, or, if they are MLB bound, didn't go to college and went directly into the established minor league system. I would claim that the NCAA bowls may actually get better. Instead of a handful of the players from the colleges in the 30ish bowl games we have going into the NFL, the level of talent would actually be higher. The bowl games would essentially be played by the AAA teams, (arguably, they already are). The difference, is that as an actual AAA team, ALL of these players are one step away from the NFL instead of a handful from each team. That would mean 53 players this close to the NFL squaring up against 53 players this close to the NFL would be playing for the bowl wins. This would also shake up the hierarchy of NCAA football. Instead of an Alabama team loaded with four years of eventual NFL talent at a number of positions, there would be A) more teams with more NFL talent, and B) the possibility of a very high AAA team moving more players to the pros and having more players increasing trade stock, thereby changing teams more often than the four-year starters in today's NCAA. This would possibly do away with the dynastic control teams (or conferences like the SEC) have over the current bowl system, making it more exciting and less predictable.
By instituting the minor league system, the NFL can contract and pay players who now go unpaid. The NFL and universities would share profits. Players would have more security and better opportunities for education without that education being taken away. Universities could return to focusing on what they were originally meant to focus on--educating, not being a life support for a football team. The sport could grow in smaller areas by any player, even those on single A, have the possibility of being called up (Jose Canseco and Dennis Eckersley started their MLB careers in Idaho Falls, of all places). Everyone involved benefits in some way.
Friday, August 9, 2013
The Reverse Marxism of Sports
The following thoughts have been bouncing around in my head for a couple of years. They have been formed and sculpted with help, direct and indirect, from David Sigler, Jennifer Ladino, and Patty Cady, among others, like French philosopher de Certeau.
Where is the most expensive property in a city? Usually it is near water or, in a city like New York, famous landmarks or parks, like Central Park. Beyond that, it is higher up. A penthouse apartment in a building that is prime real estate can cost more than a ranch. A Russian billionaire's daughter paid $88M for a two story Penthouse with views of Central Park. You can read more here. De Certeau wrote about the walker and the watcher. The everyday people of the world, in his case, the people in New York City, are the walkers. The people who own the penthouse apartments or have offices in the highest high-rises (again, de Certeau was writing about an office in the former World Trade Center towers) are the watchers. We pay premiums for the view. The Smith Tower in Seattle houses just one residence as of right now. The pyramid at the top of the tower is a 3 story penthouse and arguably the most expensive residence in Seattle.
We don't just spend money to see, but also be seen. The Smith Tower is one of the more recognizable buildings in Seattle. Living at the top of it carries recognition in and of itself. It is like renting a limo. Personally, I think town cars are more comfortable, and, while they do attract some attention, they don't attract as much as a limo. Limos have tinted windows. Those of us outside them can't see who is inside. But we see the limo. The person/people who rented the limo get the attention without getting the attention. That is the nature of the watcher--they are seen, but not seen. We see the penthouses and know that someone lives there. We see the Beverly Hills mansions (or parts of them from the road, beyond the gates) but we don't see the owners. Chances are, they can see us, though, if they desire. The riders in the limo can see us if they care to look out the window.
The bottom line is that the see and be seen but not seen usually commands sweeping views. To achieve those views often requires height. The Smith Tower penthouse is located on floors 36-38. The rules of supply and demand apply here. There are only so many buildings with so many views. The wealthy can afford these buildings and these views. The working class may be able to visit the public viewing deck of the Smith Tower on the 35th floor, but without somehow being invited to visit the artist and her family that lives in the Penthouse, they will never see the exact same view. We will never set foot in the $88M New York penthouse that overlooks Central Park. We can sit in Central Park and look up, as can anyone else. We are separated from the wealthy and the views by the security and exclusivity that comes with that wealth.
But this is reversed in sports. The cheapest seats are the highest up. They have views of the city beyond the ball park. They have views of the entire field. They are the best chances to come away from with a souvenir, whether it is a foul ball or a home run. Take, for example, Pafko at the Wall, the story of the Shot Heard Round the World--the game winning homer by Bobby Thomson in the 1951 National League Playoff Series. The story revolves around the home run ball, caught by a poor child, Cotter Martin, who had sneaked into the ball game. It was the poor who took home possibly the ultimate memento for a New York Giants fan just before the team moved across the country.
There is an element of class difference in the story, though. While Cotter gets the ball, the rich, the famous, and the leader are sitting in the lower seats with a supposedly better view of the game. Frank Sinatra, Jackie Gleason, Toots Shor, and J. Edgar Hoover are also watching the game. When the ball goes over the wall, Cotter gets it and takes off running for the safety of home. Sinatra et al., however, have garbage showered on them during the celebration. The lower class comes away with an experience and an important memento, while the rich/ruling upper class comes away with garbage.
Even today the cheap seats are the furthest away, the highest up. While the most expensive are the lowest in the stadium. President Bush has permanent box seats in the front row, right next to the home dugout in Rangers Ballpark in Arlington. Unlike in a limo, we can see former President Bush, but we're not there to see him, so he goes largely unnoticed. We came to watch the players on the field. He came to watch the players on the field, not be seen. However, there is a difference here from other sports and places. Hollywood is all about image and being seen. People go to Lakers games, sometimes to watch the Lakers, sometimes to see who is in the crowd. New York Knicks games aren't exactly the same, but they're not completely different either. Jack Nicholson is a courtside fixture in LA, while Spike Lee is in New York. They get on TV for being at the game. To be sure other celebrities are there and get on television simply for being there, but Nicholson and Lee are the fixtures courtside. Their motivation probably isn't to simply be seen. Spike Lee is famous for yelling at referees and players alike. Reggie Miller, for example. At courtside, he gets to almost participate in the game. Some celebrities do participate with the referees. It's brief, but you may notice that Jack actually is between the Oklahoma City bench and the scoring table. The opposing players have to walk past him to check into the game. Honestly, outside of LA, I've never seen a seating arrangement like that.
But in the grand scheme of the game, the audience doesn't directly impact individual games. However, as a democratic voting class we are all, in a way, Marx's proletariat. Our work (buying tickets, watching games on TV) supports our teams and our players. Our approval or disapproval influences roster moves and performance. While it is true that the athletes' performance also influences these moves, the public does have a certain play in it. Last season, Kansas City Chiefs fans started attending home games in black until Quarterback Matt Cassel was benched. When he was injured, the home fans cheered (I, myself, offered to by everyone in the sports bar a drink if it was career ending). We have opinions of and support for our favorite players. We have derision for those we don't like whether on our team or someone else's. We get to voice our opinions in blogs like this one or in radio call in shows. The owners, or at least the general managers, pay attention to us because we are the money source. While it is true that when teams are winning, the bandwagon and fair-weather fans fill stadiums, this isn't always true. The Tampa Bay Rays won the division crown in 2010. They also finished 22nd out of the 30 MLB teams in average attendance (according to baseball-reference.com). The San Antonio Spurs have proven that you don't have to have popularity to win championships and that winning championships won't make people watch you. The Spurs have been the team of the decade from 1999 to 2009 with championships in 99, 03, 05, and 07. However, those finals were also some of the lowest in television ratings. Of course they are popular in San Antonio. San Antonio doesn't have any other major league sports. The sports life in the town revolves around Tim Duncan and company. The point is, that we do have opinions on our sports teams and the opinions of the fans do matter.
And that is the problem. Sports is another juxtaposition of Marxism in that we care more about our sports and entertainment than we do in those who we select to rule us. Ask your average sports fan to name as many teams as they can and I'll bet you 10-1 odds that most people you find (outside of politics) will be able to name more pro and college teams than they will be able to name senators and representatives, probably even their own. One of the trick to ruling is if you can keep the proletariat entertained (distracted) then you can do whatever you want as a ruler. If you can keep them entertained and uneducated, then you can rule completely at will.
I picked up the paper today and across the top of the page was the booming teaser about Alex Rodriguez's suspension/appeal and Johnny Manziel's trouble with the NCAA for taking money for an autograph (a big no-no for college athletes). What was the main headline? Don't remember. What was the main story in the politics section? Didn't even look. Did you? Can you remember either? Kudos if you can. One of my main concerns in writing about politics and distraction is that I'm projecting my feelings on the rest of the populace. Looking at the popularity of keeping an eye on whatever celebrities are doing (especially when they aren't really doing anything), I don't think I'm the only one not really paying attention to politics.
But that is one of the things that sports do. The Sports Wife once told me (and still does, quite often) that if I spent as much time on my Master's studies as I do on sports statistics and articles, then I'd be done with both my TESL and literature degrees and probably done with the PhD's as well. Now, I am kind of a stat head, but I've found that I'm at the lower end of the stat fanatic spectrum. I know some of the weird trivia. I know some of the record holders and league leaders in the major sports. Again, in applying this to politics, and the decisions that really affect our lives, I don't know nearly as much as I probably should to make informed decisions about my votes. It is easy in presidential elections, they're fairly open with their ideas. Whether they actually follow through on those ideas/promises is a matter of debate. Doing some research on essentially 2 guys every 4 years isn't all that difficult. But paying attention to the daily operations of our government is a) difficult and b) frightening. The more I do learn about politics and the U.S. government, the more I want to know about sports. Our congress has just attempted for the 40th time to repeal Obamacare. They have also let the student loans protection lapse. The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results. 40 times would count as over and over, I would think. My loans are coming due shortly. I've watched my interest rates. When congress in their in-fighting allowed the student loan protections to lapse, my loans went from 4.5% to 6.8% interest. 2.3% may not seem like much, but when you owe $100,000+ in loans, 2.3% is substantial. That got my attention because it finally affected my bottom line. It was like Safeco's change to flexible pricing last summer. Suddenly, ticket prices that had been the same no matter who the Mariners were playing started jumping and dropping based on the other team. Back when I was a Yankees fan, this affected my ballpark experience because, suddenly, they were the most expensive tickets.
We police our players more closely than our politicians as well. I mentioned that Johnny Football is in trouble for accepting money for autographs. Ohio State University is on probation for some of their team trading game memorabilia for tattoos. Other schools are in trouble for recruiting violations. And then there is the clusterfuck that is Penn State. But the NCAA comes down hard on these offenders. Penn State is crippled for 5 years (4 remaining). Southern Methodist University football got the 2-year death penalty for repeat offenses in the 80s. Conversely, our politicians on either side of the aisle have started even denying corruption. When they have been accused of wrong-doings, especially during an election, they question the timing of the accusation. They don't even bother denying the corruption, they attack their accusers for sitting on the evidence until it could hurt them more!
The idiocy we see in both places is what unites them, unfortunately. The 40 times congress has taken a vote to repeal Obamacare compares with Rodriguez's thinking that by appealing his suspension, he'll a) keep playing (a loophole that needs to be dealt with) and b) possibly have the suspension overturned. Only one player has had a suspension overturned in MLB, Ryan Braun. Turns out it was on a technicality that has been closed...and Braun is currently serving a season ending suspension for the very same offense as Rodriguez. It is turning out that our sports players are receiving the justice that they need to receive to keep the game pure--to a point that they are starting to police their own; there have been reports of pitchers headhunting known "juicers." What would we say if politicians started policing themselves? I doubt any of us would take it seriously, for one. And what is more important to our everyday lives, the purity of college and professional sports, or the purity of a political office? And that is why the more I learn about politics, the less I want to learn about politics.
Where is the most expensive property in a city? Usually it is near water or, in a city like New York, famous landmarks or parks, like Central Park. Beyond that, it is higher up. A penthouse apartment in a building that is prime real estate can cost more than a ranch. A Russian billionaire's daughter paid $88M for a two story Penthouse with views of Central Park. You can read more here. De Certeau wrote about the walker and the watcher. The everyday people of the world, in his case, the people in New York City, are the walkers. The people who own the penthouse apartments or have offices in the highest high-rises (again, de Certeau was writing about an office in the former World Trade Center towers) are the watchers. We pay premiums for the view. The Smith Tower in Seattle houses just one residence as of right now. The pyramid at the top of the tower is a 3 story penthouse and arguably the most expensive residence in Seattle.
We don't just spend money to see, but also be seen. The Smith Tower is one of the more recognizable buildings in Seattle. Living at the top of it carries recognition in and of itself. It is like renting a limo. Personally, I think town cars are more comfortable, and, while they do attract some attention, they don't attract as much as a limo. Limos have tinted windows. Those of us outside them can't see who is inside. But we see the limo. The person/people who rented the limo get the attention without getting the attention. That is the nature of the watcher--they are seen, but not seen. We see the penthouses and know that someone lives there. We see the Beverly Hills mansions (or parts of them from the road, beyond the gates) but we don't see the owners. Chances are, they can see us, though, if they desire. The riders in the limo can see us if they care to look out the window.
The bottom line is that the see and be seen but not seen usually commands sweeping views. To achieve those views often requires height. The Smith Tower penthouse is located on floors 36-38. The rules of supply and demand apply here. There are only so many buildings with so many views. The wealthy can afford these buildings and these views. The working class may be able to visit the public viewing deck of the Smith Tower on the 35th floor, but without somehow being invited to visit the artist and her family that lives in the Penthouse, they will never see the exact same view. We will never set foot in the $88M New York penthouse that overlooks Central Park. We can sit in Central Park and look up, as can anyone else. We are separated from the wealthy and the views by the security and exclusivity that comes with that wealth.
But this is reversed in sports. The cheapest seats are the highest up. They have views of the city beyond the ball park. They have views of the entire field. They are the best chances to come away from with a souvenir, whether it is a foul ball or a home run. Take, for example, Pafko at the Wall, the story of the Shot Heard Round the World--the game winning homer by Bobby Thomson in the 1951 National League Playoff Series. The story revolves around the home run ball, caught by a poor child, Cotter Martin, who had sneaked into the ball game. It was the poor who took home possibly the ultimate memento for a New York Giants fan just before the team moved across the country.
There is an element of class difference in the story, though. While Cotter gets the ball, the rich, the famous, and the leader are sitting in the lower seats with a supposedly better view of the game. Frank Sinatra, Jackie Gleason, Toots Shor, and J. Edgar Hoover are also watching the game. When the ball goes over the wall, Cotter gets it and takes off running for the safety of home. Sinatra et al., however, have garbage showered on them during the celebration. The lower class comes away with an experience and an important memento, while the rich/ruling upper class comes away with garbage.
Even today the cheap seats are the furthest away, the highest up. While the most expensive are the lowest in the stadium. President Bush has permanent box seats in the front row, right next to the home dugout in Rangers Ballpark in Arlington. Unlike in a limo, we can see former President Bush, but we're not there to see him, so he goes largely unnoticed. We came to watch the players on the field. He came to watch the players on the field, not be seen. However, there is a difference here from other sports and places. Hollywood is all about image and being seen. People go to Lakers games, sometimes to watch the Lakers, sometimes to see who is in the crowd. New York Knicks games aren't exactly the same, but they're not completely different either. Jack Nicholson is a courtside fixture in LA, while Spike Lee is in New York. They get on TV for being at the game. To be sure other celebrities are there and get on television simply for being there, but Nicholson and Lee are the fixtures courtside. Their motivation probably isn't to simply be seen. Spike Lee is famous for yelling at referees and players alike. Reggie Miller, for example. At courtside, he gets to almost participate in the game. Some celebrities do participate with the referees. It's brief, but you may notice that Jack actually is between the Oklahoma City bench and the scoring table. The opposing players have to walk past him to check into the game. Honestly, outside of LA, I've never seen a seating arrangement like that.
But in the grand scheme of the game, the audience doesn't directly impact individual games. However, as a democratic voting class we are all, in a way, Marx's proletariat. Our work (buying tickets, watching games on TV) supports our teams and our players. Our approval or disapproval influences roster moves and performance. While it is true that the athletes' performance also influences these moves, the public does have a certain play in it. Last season, Kansas City Chiefs fans started attending home games in black until Quarterback Matt Cassel was benched. When he was injured, the home fans cheered (I, myself, offered to by everyone in the sports bar a drink if it was career ending). We have opinions of and support for our favorite players. We have derision for those we don't like whether on our team or someone else's. We get to voice our opinions in blogs like this one or in radio call in shows. The owners, or at least the general managers, pay attention to us because we are the money source. While it is true that when teams are winning, the bandwagon and fair-weather fans fill stadiums, this isn't always true. The Tampa Bay Rays won the division crown in 2010. They also finished 22nd out of the 30 MLB teams in average attendance (according to baseball-reference.com). The San Antonio Spurs have proven that you don't have to have popularity to win championships and that winning championships won't make people watch you. The Spurs have been the team of the decade from 1999 to 2009 with championships in 99, 03, 05, and 07. However, those finals were also some of the lowest in television ratings. Of course they are popular in San Antonio. San Antonio doesn't have any other major league sports. The sports life in the town revolves around Tim Duncan and company. The point is, that we do have opinions on our sports teams and the opinions of the fans do matter.
And that is the problem. Sports is another juxtaposition of Marxism in that we care more about our sports and entertainment than we do in those who we select to rule us. Ask your average sports fan to name as many teams as they can and I'll bet you 10-1 odds that most people you find (outside of politics) will be able to name more pro and college teams than they will be able to name senators and representatives, probably even their own. One of the trick to ruling is if you can keep the proletariat entertained (distracted) then you can do whatever you want as a ruler. If you can keep them entertained and uneducated, then you can rule completely at will.
I picked up the paper today and across the top of the page was the booming teaser about Alex Rodriguez's suspension/appeal and Johnny Manziel's trouble with the NCAA for taking money for an autograph (a big no-no for college athletes). What was the main headline? Don't remember. What was the main story in the politics section? Didn't even look. Did you? Can you remember either? Kudos if you can. One of my main concerns in writing about politics and distraction is that I'm projecting my feelings on the rest of the populace. Looking at the popularity of keeping an eye on whatever celebrities are doing (especially when they aren't really doing anything), I don't think I'm the only one not really paying attention to politics.
But that is one of the things that sports do. The Sports Wife once told me (and still does, quite often) that if I spent as much time on my Master's studies as I do on sports statistics and articles, then I'd be done with both my TESL and literature degrees and probably done with the PhD's as well. Now, I am kind of a stat head, but I've found that I'm at the lower end of the stat fanatic spectrum. I know some of the weird trivia. I know some of the record holders and league leaders in the major sports. Again, in applying this to politics, and the decisions that really affect our lives, I don't know nearly as much as I probably should to make informed decisions about my votes. It is easy in presidential elections, they're fairly open with their ideas. Whether they actually follow through on those ideas/promises is a matter of debate. Doing some research on essentially 2 guys every 4 years isn't all that difficult. But paying attention to the daily operations of our government is a) difficult and b) frightening. The more I do learn about politics and the U.S. government, the more I want to know about sports. Our congress has just attempted for the 40th time to repeal Obamacare. They have also let the student loans protection lapse. The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results. 40 times would count as over and over, I would think. My loans are coming due shortly. I've watched my interest rates. When congress in their in-fighting allowed the student loan protections to lapse, my loans went from 4.5% to 6.8% interest. 2.3% may not seem like much, but when you owe $100,000+ in loans, 2.3% is substantial. That got my attention because it finally affected my bottom line. It was like Safeco's change to flexible pricing last summer. Suddenly, ticket prices that had been the same no matter who the Mariners were playing started jumping and dropping based on the other team. Back when I was a Yankees fan, this affected my ballpark experience because, suddenly, they were the most expensive tickets.
We police our players more closely than our politicians as well. I mentioned that Johnny Football is in trouble for accepting money for autographs. Ohio State University is on probation for some of their team trading game memorabilia for tattoos. Other schools are in trouble for recruiting violations. And then there is the clusterfuck that is Penn State. But the NCAA comes down hard on these offenders. Penn State is crippled for 5 years (4 remaining). Southern Methodist University football got the 2-year death penalty for repeat offenses in the 80s. Conversely, our politicians on either side of the aisle have started even denying corruption. When they have been accused of wrong-doings, especially during an election, they question the timing of the accusation. They don't even bother denying the corruption, they attack their accusers for sitting on the evidence until it could hurt them more!
The idiocy we see in both places is what unites them, unfortunately. The 40 times congress has taken a vote to repeal Obamacare compares with Rodriguez's thinking that by appealing his suspension, he'll a) keep playing (a loophole that needs to be dealt with) and b) possibly have the suspension overturned. Only one player has had a suspension overturned in MLB, Ryan Braun. Turns out it was on a technicality that has been closed...and Braun is currently serving a season ending suspension for the very same offense as Rodriguez. It is turning out that our sports players are receiving the justice that they need to receive to keep the game pure--to a point that they are starting to police their own; there have been reports of pitchers headhunting known "juicers." What would we say if politicians started policing themselves? I doubt any of us would take it seriously, for one. And what is more important to our everyday lives, the purity of college and professional sports, or the purity of a political office? And that is why the more I learn about politics, the less I want to learn about politics.
Tuesday, July 16, 2013
One of the Greatest Feelings
I just watched Mariano Rivera enter his final All Star Game and pitch a 1-2-3 8th. Everyone thought that Rivera would pitch the ninth for the save--that which he does best. Citi Field, home of the Mets, played Enter Sandman (which I've written about before in Spine Tingling Moments). One of the greatest pleasures I've ever had in sports is seeing one of my sports heroes live. I saw Mariano close in 2006 in old Yankee Stadium against the Texas Rangers. I can't describe the feeling as a Mariano fan hearing Enter Sandman and seeing the bullpen door open and the greatest closer in the over 100 year history of the game run toward the mound. I was nearly heartbroken last year thinking that he might end his career with an injury to his knee. He has come back this year as though it never happened. He has also made no doubt about this being his final year. Even as a Yankees fan, I don't think they will make the playoffs without a miracle or epic collapse of other teams. It would be fitting, though. Mariano would finish his career with the same number of post-season saves as the number he wears--42. Mariano is the last 42 in the Major League. The number has been retired by every team for Jackie Robinson. Mariano was grandfathered in since he already wore the number when it was retired.
But back to seeing him play live. I've never seen my favorite teams win championships in person. I never saw Michael Jordan or Scottie Pippen play in person. I never saw Derrick Thomas or Lawrence Taylor play in person. One of my greatest sports memories, and something I will remember until my mind fades and I call everyone Billy, is seeing that bullpen door open to BUM ba da DA DUM. At the end of this season, my last sports hero will retire. I don't know if I will ever have another one. Puig has had an amazing season so far. Yoenis Cespedes, a player who I thought would be a phenom base on the handful of rookie cards I have, just obliterated the Home Run Derby last night. I admired Brian Urlacher, who retired this NFL offseason, and I like Tamba Hali, but I don't look up to them like I do Rivera, Jordan, Pippen, Thomas, and Taylor. To say the least, it's going to take a fairly epic showing to muscle into a list with those five men.
Of those five, Mariano is also the only one who is squeaky clean. Jordan had his gambling and his over the top competitiveness. Pippen was recently charged with assault for a fight outside a nightclub and had various issues on the court in the twilight of his career. Thomas died from a blood clot due to his own drunk driving, leaving behind children from six different mothers. And Lawrence Taylor, well, just Google "Lawrence Taylor legal issues." Be prepared. The only sports hero I've seen play in person, is the only sports hero who hasn't let me down. Of course, he's blown saves. Of course, he's been beaten in the game. But he has never appeared on a BioGenesis list or any other steroid list. He's never been arrested or had any off the field problems. He's been constantly graceful on-camera and humble to every interviewer. He even said that if he had chosen his music, it wouldn't have been Enter Sandman. He listens to Christian music.
It is increasingly rare to see athletes who are as graceful in life as they are in their sport. In this age of 24 hour sports networks where we find out who is going to jail before the ink from their fingerprints is even dry, a sports hero who has never had his fingers dipped is equally rare. It could be that the negatives get all the hype (see my bitter previous post). It could be that we are becoming a nation of cynics. We've been disappointed with our Jordans, Rodriguezes, Thomases, Taylors, Hernandezes. We've delved into every part of their lives, again, thanks to the 24 hour sports networks and 24 hour news networks that jump all over anything negative on any celebrity, sports or otherwise. To keep your name out of the news while you are in the spotlight is becoming impossible.
Pause: Mariano was just awarded the ASG MVP. Selig mentioned his behavior off the filed. Mariano's family is with him. He just won a sports car. Chevrolet is donating millions in his name to youth baseball programs in a city of his choice. Mariano seemed absolutely surprised the he is being recognized at all. He thanked God, and then the fans. In case you haven't heard, everywhere he's played, he's been sent out with gifts. He threw out the first pitch for an opposing team. Think about that. First pitches are honors. We have our soldiers do them. We have celebrities. We have presidents and leaders. In a game where he would pitch against them, the New York Mets had Mariano throw out the ceremonial first pitch. Tell me when that has happened before. Google it. Go to baseball-reference.com. I'll wait.
Didn't think you'd find anyone. I'm sitting here, typing, with tears in my eyes because I was able to watch my last heroes come into a game for 16 pitches and throw a 1-2-3 8th inning. And because he is someone I can still look up to.
In my closet is a t-shirt. I bought it outside Safeco Field. It has never been worn. It is waiting for an autograph it will probably never get. I would like to frame it an hang it in my eventual man cave. The t-shirt is Yankee blue. On the left breast is the NY of the Yankees. On the back is Rivera and 42.
But back to seeing him play live. I've never seen my favorite teams win championships in person. I never saw Michael Jordan or Scottie Pippen play in person. I never saw Derrick Thomas or Lawrence Taylor play in person. One of my greatest sports memories, and something I will remember until my mind fades and I call everyone Billy, is seeing that bullpen door open to BUM ba da DA DUM. At the end of this season, my last sports hero will retire. I don't know if I will ever have another one. Puig has had an amazing season so far. Yoenis Cespedes, a player who I thought would be a phenom base on the handful of rookie cards I have, just obliterated the Home Run Derby last night. I admired Brian Urlacher, who retired this NFL offseason, and I like Tamba Hali, but I don't look up to them like I do Rivera, Jordan, Pippen, Thomas, and Taylor. To say the least, it's going to take a fairly epic showing to muscle into a list with those five men.
Of those five, Mariano is also the only one who is squeaky clean. Jordan had his gambling and his over the top competitiveness. Pippen was recently charged with assault for a fight outside a nightclub and had various issues on the court in the twilight of his career. Thomas died from a blood clot due to his own drunk driving, leaving behind children from six different mothers. And Lawrence Taylor, well, just Google "Lawrence Taylor legal issues." Be prepared. The only sports hero I've seen play in person, is the only sports hero who hasn't let me down. Of course, he's blown saves. Of course, he's been beaten in the game. But he has never appeared on a BioGenesis list or any other steroid list. He's never been arrested or had any off the field problems. He's been constantly graceful on-camera and humble to every interviewer. He even said that if he had chosen his music, it wouldn't have been Enter Sandman. He listens to Christian music.
It is increasingly rare to see athletes who are as graceful in life as they are in their sport. In this age of 24 hour sports networks where we find out who is going to jail before the ink from their fingerprints is even dry, a sports hero who has never had his fingers dipped is equally rare. It could be that the negatives get all the hype (see my bitter previous post). It could be that we are becoming a nation of cynics. We've been disappointed with our Jordans, Rodriguezes, Thomases, Taylors, Hernandezes. We've delved into every part of their lives, again, thanks to the 24 hour sports networks and 24 hour news networks that jump all over anything negative on any celebrity, sports or otherwise. To keep your name out of the news while you are in the spotlight is becoming impossible.
Pause: Mariano was just awarded the ASG MVP. Selig mentioned his behavior off the filed. Mariano's family is with him. He just won a sports car. Chevrolet is donating millions in his name to youth baseball programs in a city of his choice. Mariano seemed absolutely surprised the he is being recognized at all. He thanked God, and then the fans. In case you haven't heard, everywhere he's played, he's been sent out with gifts. He threw out the first pitch for an opposing team. Think about that. First pitches are honors. We have our soldiers do them. We have celebrities. We have presidents and leaders. In a game where he would pitch against them, the New York Mets had Mariano throw out the ceremonial first pitch. Tell me when that has happened before. Google it. Go to baseball-reference.com. I'll wait.
Didn't think you'd find anyone. I'm sitting here, typing, with tears in my eyes because I was able to watch my last heroes come into a game for 16 pitches and throw a 1-2-3 8th inning. And because he is someone I can still look up to.
In my closet is a t-shirt. I bought it outside Safeco Field. It has never been worn. It is waiting for an autograph it will probably never get. I would like to frame it an hang it in my eventual man cave. The t-shirt is Yankee blue. On the left breast is the NY of the Yankees. On the back is Rivera and 42.
Thursday, July 4, 2013
Anger, Negativity, Media, and Victor Borge
I'm angry.
It's making me feel old.
I can't truly escape this crotchetiness.
I'm frustrated with the way the country is being run and not run. I'm frustrated with the politics being more important than the issues and progress. I'm frustrated that our congressional leaders have a 9% approval rating. I'm even more frustrated that they've earned it.
But I can't get away. I can't turn it off.
It used to be I could turn on sports and at least get away. But I'm angry at sports. Not only are our heroes letting us down again, they are also being over-covered thanks to, apparently nothing else better for the media to do.
I could turn on SportsCenter. Homer Bailey threw the first no-hitter of the season this week. But first, I have to wait through the Hernandez murder investigation. I have to sit through all the coverage of the signing of a third string quarterback who has as sub-.500 completion percentage. I have to sit through the latest steroid scandal. I have to sit through speculation of where Dwight Howard may sign...WEEKS FROM NOW WHEN FREE AGENTS CAN ACTUALLY SIGN.
Steroid scandal notwithstanding, there is some great stuff going on in baseball. Max Scherzer has 13 wins and no losses. The last person to go 13-0 before the fourth of July was Roger Clemens in 1984. This rookie, Puig, is hitting lights out (until he got injured today). The Pirates have the best record in the MLB! I've written blog posts about how historically bad that franchise has been for the last 20 years!
There are great things happening! The problem is that we have to wade through all the crap that is thrown at us just to find them.
Maybe the media should start paying attention to the good in the world instead of barraging us with the bad. Take a minute and open a tab. Go to CNN.com. On the main page, how many headlines are anything close to positive? I just checked it out. When I visited the news site, there were 61 headlines/videos. 15 were not negative. That doesn't mean positive. Of those, 4 were on food, 2 were on how to hang the flag, and 3 were on insipid celebrities. I read the news less and less. I don't watch the news anymore. While I was on the CNN website, I couldn't help myself and had to check a headline on Westboro Baptist.
Friends on Facebook from both Right and Left post "news" stories. We have this need to seek out what we hate. I had to check the latest on Westboro. We seek out what and who don't agree with us. Something I tell my students is that the news reports the negative because the positive isn't news. A plane landing isn't new because thousands do it every day. The unusual is the one that doesn't. However, are we killing ourselves? Anger is good in moderation. Nearly anything is good in moderation, but not being able to escape that which makes us angry can't be good for us.
I raged tonight. I got angry at the news, at SportsCenter, at Facebook, at my insipid iPhone games, at my equally insipid Facebook games. I tried to read a book and couldn't focus. I tried to just sit out on the deck and enjoy the scenery from the house that I am sitting. Finally, I turned to YouTube. I rediscovered Victor Borge. I laughed. I watched his performances on Dean Martin and the Muppet Show. I watched the 5 most surprising Britain's Got Talent shows (Susan Boyle was #3). I felt better. But, somehow, eventually, things like Chong Smokes Fox News and Obama Anti-Christ crept onto the options. And don't even bother reading YouTube comments (or comments anywhere else, for that matter). What has happened to common decency? Does hiding behind a keyboard and computer screen free us to be dicks to each other?
The only thing that I've really enjoyed lately is immersing myself in Mass Effect 3. I want to see how the trilogy turns out. DON'T TELL ME! But even then, I enjoy the game and the escape that it provides, but I also know that there are other things that I need to be doing. I cleaned house today (my apartment and the house I'm house sitting). I went grocery shopping and made dinner. I can't escape into Mass Effect 24/7, although I did sink one of my weekend days into it, since then 2 hours or less, and only after I got my grading done.
The problem with all of this is that while the media covers the negative, there is a reason they cover it. We watch it. We click on it. We read it. Google, YouTube, Amazon, Facebook, they all track what we pay attention to--what we talk about. We ourselves can't help but look at the negative, seek out the negative, talk about the negative. And therein lies our challenge. Tomorrow is the Fourth of July. I don't know what I'm doing because I don't know if I'm still house sitting or not. But I will tell you one thing. I am not going to be on Facebook. I'm not going to be on CNN.com. I'm not going to be reading the negative. I'm not going to talk about the negative. I'm not going to be negative as much as I can possibly help it. I can't control those around me. I can't control you. Most of the time, I have a hard time even controlling me. But tomorrow, I'm not going to be angry. Not because it is the Fourth. Because it is tomorrow. And tomorrow has to be a better day. Friday will be another tomorrow and another better day. I'm going to go as long as I can without paying any attention to the negative. Don't get me wrong, this isn't a sticking my head in the sand and trying to pretend that I'm not sitting in a hand basket and wondering where we're headed. I know that I'm up to my ears in student debt. I know that, thanks to a do-nothing congress, the interest rates on a lot of student loan debt just doubled. I know that the government is watching us. I know that other governments are being overthrown. I know that man feel that parts of our own government are trying to take away our rights. I also know that all of that made me feel powerless in the first place and that led to my rage. I don't need it all 24/7. I don't need to be connected all the time. Tomorrow, I do go up to my parents for a barbecue. I'm not taking my laptop. I'm tempted to not take my phone (the only reason that I will is because my wife is abroad and we only have contact sporadically, so I could miss the one window for the week). Tomorrow, I'm unplugging until I have to grade papers.
Think about what makes you angry. Ask yourself if you are seeking it out. Ask yourself if you can do anything about it. Ask yourself if it matters that you are thinking about it right now. That's what I'm doing.
Now if you'll excuse me, there are still plenty of Victor Borge videos on YouTube.
It's making me feel old.
I can't truly escape this crotchetiness.
I'm frustrated with the way the country is being run and not run. I'm frustrated with the politics being more important than the issues and progress. I'm frustrated that our congressional leaders have a 9% approval rating. I'm even more frustrated that they've earned it.
But I can't get away. I can't turn it off.
It used to be I could turn on sports and at least get away. But I'm angry at sports. Not only are our heroes letting us down again, they are also being over-covered thanks to, apparently nothing else better for the media to do.
I could turn on SportsCenter. Homer Bailey threw the first no-hitter of the season this week. But first, I have to wait through the Hernandez murder investigation. I have to sit through all the coverage of the signing of a third string quarterback who has as sub-.500 completion percentage. I have to sit through the latest steroid scandal. I have to sit through speculation of where Dwight Howard may sign...WEEKS FROM NOW WHEN FREE AGENTS CAN ACTUALLY SIGN.
Steroid scandal notwithstanding, there is some great stuff going on in baseball. Max Scherzer has 13 wins and no losses. The last person to go 13-0 before the fourth of July was Roger Clemens in 1984. This rookie, Puig, is hitting lights out (until he got injured today). The Pirates have the best record in the MLB! I've written blog posts about how historically bad that franchise has been for the last 20 years!
There are great things happening! The problem is that we have to wade through all the crap that is thrown at us just to find them.
Maybe the media should start paying attention to the good in the world instead of barraging us with the bad. Take a minute and open a tab. Go to CNN.com. On the main page, how many headlines are anything close to positive? I just checked it out. When I visited the news site, there were 61 headlines/videos. 15 were not negative. That doesn't mean positive. Of those, 4 were on food, 2 were on how to hang the flag, and 3 were on insipid celebrities. I read the news less and less. I don't watch the news anymore. While I was on the CNN website, I couldn't help myself and had to check a headline on Westboro Baptist.
Friends on Facebook from both Right and Left post "news" stories. We have this need to seek out what we hate. I had to check the latest on Westboro. We seek out what and who don't agree with us. Something I tell my students is that the news reports the negative because the positive isn't news. A plane landing isn't new because thousands do it every day. The unusual is the one that doesn't. However, are we killing ourselves? Anger is good in moderation. Nearly anything is good in moderation, but not being able to escape that which makes us angry can't be good for us.
I raged tonight. I got angry at the news, at SportsCenter, at Facebook, at my insipid iPhone games, at my equally insipid Facebook games. I tried to read a book and couldn't focus. I tried to just sit out on the deck and enjoy the scenery from the house that I am sitting. Finally, I turned to YouTube. I rediscovered Victor Borge. I laughed. I watched his performances on Dean Martin and the Muppet Show. I watched the 5 most surprising Britain's Got Talent shows (Susan Boyle was #3). I felt better. But, somehow, eventually, things like Chong Smokes Fox News and Obama Anti-Christ crept onto the options. And don't even bother reading YouTube comments (or comments anywhere else, for that matter). What has happened to common decency? Does hiding behind a keyboard and computer screen free us to be dicks to each other?
The only thing that I've really enjoyed lately is immersing myself in Mass Effect 3. I want to see how the trilogy turns out. DON'T TELL ME! But even then, I enjoy the game and the escape that it provides, but I also know that there are other things that I need to be doing. I cleaned house today (my apartment and the house I'm house sitting). I went grocery shopping and made dinner. I can't escape into Mass Effect 24/7, although I did sink one of my weekend days into it, since then 2 hours or less, and only after I got my grading done.
The problem with all of this is that while the media covers the negative, there is a reason they cover it. We watch it. We click on it. We read it. Google, YouTube, Amazon, Facebook, they all track what we pay attention to--what we talk about. We ourselves can't help but look at the negative, seek out the negative, talk about the negative. And therein lies our challenge. Tomorrow is the Fourth of July. I don't know what I'm doing because I don't know if I'm still house sitting or not. But I will tell you one thing. I am not going to be on Facebook. I'm not going to be on CNN.com. I'm not going to be reading the negative. I'm not going to talk about the negative. I'm not going to be negative as much as I can possibly help it. I can't control those around me. I can't control you. Most of the time, I have a hard time even controlling me. But tomorrow, I'm not going to be angry. Not because it is the Fourth. Because it is tomorrow. And tomorrow has to be a better day. Friday will be another tomorrow and another better day. I'm going to go as long as I can without paying any attention to the negative. Don't get me wrong, this isn't a sticking my head in the sand and trying to pretend that I'm not sitting in a hand basket and wondering where we're headed. I know that I'm up to my ears in student debt. I know that, thanks to a do-nothing congress, the interest rates on a lot of student loan debt just doubled. I know that the government is watching us. I know that other governments are being overthrown. I know that man feel that parts of our own government are trying to take away our rights. I also know that all of that made me feel powerless in the first place and that led to my rage. I don't need it all 24/7. I don't need to be connected all the time. Tomorrow, I do go up to my parents for a barbecue. I'm not taking my laptop. I'm tempted to not take my phone (the only reason that I will is because my wife is abroad and we only have contact sporadically, so I could miss the one window for the week). Tomorrow, I'm unplugging until I have to grade papers.
Think about what makes you angry. Ask yourself if you are seeking it out. Ask yourself if you can do anything about it. Ask yourself if it matters that you are thinking about it right now. That's what I'm doing.
Now if you'll excuse me, there are still plenty of Victor Borge videos on YouTube.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)