By now, Terrell Owens new reality show that apparently will air on VH1 is old news. I'm sure everyone has heard about it and formed his/her opinion already. Of course, that's not gonna stop me from weighing in. In case you haven't heard, the cameras will follow TO around with his two best gal pals as they try to find someone even less stable than Owens for the man-child to date.
Hmmm, I can just picture the lucky girl out there. She's all atwitter at the thought of finding true love with the mercurial wide receiver, just itching to get the straight jacket off.
As always seems to be the case with Terrell—where to begin, where to begin, oh, where to begin?
First, I love that this show is being billed as a way to give his fans a glimpse into his life away from football. That's a fantastic bit of salesmanship. Raise your hand if you think anyone—even his fans—need to know more about Owens' off-field antics. With the exception of the National Football League player-du-jour who finds himself in some sort of legal (or otherwise) scandal, Terrell Owens is the most over-exposed athlete in the League (not commercially, cough, Peyton Manning).
On-field and off-field. Regular season and off-season.
Second, am I the only one who thinks it's odd that TO's best friends are two females and he's broadcasting this fact? To me, that sounds like the crazy-but-hot chick everyone knows who has ZERO girlfriends because she's either too attractive or too insane for any other girl to deal with. Consequently, all her best friends are guys except they all are hanging around her in hopes of finding their way out of the friend-zone.
I always feel oddly sad when I see those girls and, yet, Terrell is advertising that he's a dude in this situation. Do you know how nuts a guy has to be before no other men want to associate with him? Whoa.
Third (and most importantly), what the &*$! are the Dallas Cowboys thinking?
Here is a team that almost every observer of the NFL agrees was one of the most talented—if not the most talented—squads in the League in 2008. Likewise, almost all observers agree that their locker room chemistry and lack of on-field focus combined to submarine the Cowpokes' campaign. There has been hew and cry about all the soap opera bullsh*t that follows the franchise like that stink could followed Pigpen in the old Peanuts cartoons.
So what do they do? Jerry Jones signs of on that Michael Irvin show where the winner will get a shot at making the Dallas roster. Then, Owens goes off and inks this Hindenburg of a deal.
I don't even like the Cowboys, and I still think ignoring Troy Aikman is a bad idea.
He put it perfectly when addressing Tony Romo's failures (thus far): "You better worry about perception, because it's a big part of making it through some very difficult times."
That's infinitely more true when you play under the microscope of huge media markets like Dallas (for football), New York, Boston, and the kind. It's not to say that you should be beholden to what people say and write about you. But it is to say that, when the rough times come a-callin' as they do for every player in every sport, it's an enormous asset to be able to fall back on the confidence that you have done everything possible to prepare and perfect your talent.
That confidence is a lot easier to maintain (for most everyone) when it isn't being called into question over and over. And over. And over.
So, think of the 2009 NFL regular season. Imagine we're getting down to the end, the public scrutiny is zeroing in on the contending teams, Dallas faces a couple staunch opponents in late November/early December (games that they shouldn't necessarily win), and the Cowboys lose one or two.
Maybe they were in one, even had the lead, and let it slip away.
What do you think the media's gonna do? What do you think the public response will be? How do you think Dallas will react?
Sure, it could all work out. These are professional athletes and adults after all. It shouldn't be impossible for them to shake off the distraction and vultures circling the organization as it starts to lose blood. It isn't impossible because we've seen teams do it before.
But we haven't seen Dallas do it recently. And the franchise has had a bunch of chances.
Thanks to Jerry Jones and Terrible Owens, the Dallas Cowboys seem destined for another.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Monday, January 26, 2009
SF Roundtable 2
Question One:
Which youngster will have the biggest impact this upcoming season? This can be anybody who came up in the last year or so. Fred Lewis is eligible considering he barely played until last season.
Hmmm. I see three options here plus a dark horse: Fast Freddie, Pablo Sandoval, and Jonathan Sanchez (I know, he's kind of cheating, but he's in the same boat as Freddie). But I'm going with the dark horse.
Fab Five Freddie's too easy.
First, a man with so man cool nicknames is too obvious a pick. Second, he's 28 and played in 133 games last year—that's kind of a stretch for youth in terms of years or experience. Third, Lewis tallied the following totals: 81 runs, 25 doubles, 11 triples, 9 homeruns, a .359 on-base percentage, and a .286 average in 468 at-bats.
That's already some substantial impact so his margin for improvement just isn't that big.
Sanchez is also too easy.
He's younger than Freddie (26), but has a full season starting under his belt as well as 90 other innings in the pros. Since experience counts for more than age, I say he's an even bigger stretch than Fast Freddie. Furthermore, he needs to get a handle on consistency and that's too unpredictable for my prognosticatory tastes.
Little Money is a closer call.
He's the biggest baby of the group—by age (22) or experience. With only 145 Major League ABs, Sandoval's resume is the thinnest and yet it still works against him. The buzz over his volcanic start—10 doubles, three HRs, a .357 OBP, and a .345 average—has me a little worried.
Worried enough that the hype (not to mention new position/positional uncertainty) will wear on him and possibly slow him down a bit.
So I'm going with the dark horse: Emmanuel Burriss.
He just turned 24 and has only 240 ABs in the Show. Obviously, his numbers weren't quite as gaudy as Little Moneys, but check 'em: 37 runs, 13 steals, a .357 OBP, and a .283 average. That's not too shabby considering how quietly he put them up and how little you hear his name.
That won't hurt him. Nor will the move from shortstop to second base (which, even if unfamiliar, should be easier than short). Nor will his reputation as a diligent worker.
I like the kid and I say we see big things from him. Of course, I'm always seeing big things in athletic middle infielders in San Francisco Giant uniforms.
Question Two:
If you didn't know, Brian Sabean is again in a contract year. The question here: Do you think the Giants should retain Sabean after 2009? Do you think he is doing a good job of building around kids while trying to win at the same time? Feel free to go explain yourself in any way you want.
That's a tough call.
I actually like Brian Sabean and give him more leash than most. Even his most infamous trade—Francisco Liriano, Joe Nathan, and Boof Bonser for AJ Pierzynski plus cash (with cash being the far more productive baseball player for SF in 2004)—I think gets too much grief. Contrarily, he's made some fantastic trades and perhaps deserves more credit for really springing the Giants on the National League (due to Matt Williams for Jeff Kent and parts).
Sabean also brought in guys like Rob Nen, Jason Schmidt, Kenny Lofton, Andres Galarraga, and Ellis Burks. Those guys made some significant contributions and really didn't cost the Orange and Black much.
Furthermore, he made good faith and logical moves that failed to bear fruit—grabbing youngster Damien Moss from the pitching-savvy Atlanta Braves and an effective Sidney Ponson from the Baltimore Orioles, who subsequently went tits up (semi-literally) despite moving to the less offensively-rugged NL West.
I can't hold those against him, especially since they (again) didn't cost SF much.
Unfortunately, that's the good and a lot of it's stale.
The bad is much fresher, but it's not as extreme.
Sabean's free agent signings have been poor, he's been overly-enamored of older players, he's been stubbornly reluctant to invest in youngsters via the draft, and the boys have been struggling in a weak division for several years now.
Ultimately though, I shake down on the side of consistency in an inconsistent business being an advantage. It would be one thing if Sabean were a total abomination and/or he was showing no signs of righting the ship. But neither of those is the case.
Brian Sabean's most recent offseason (the one we're still technically in) has given me hope that he's back on track. He's brought in some older veterans, like usual, but they weren't the priciest ones on the market. In fact, both Edgar Renteria and Randy Johnson have considerable potential to be steals while not subjecting SF to much risk.
Additionally, Sabean has shown that most of his focus remains on building around the young core without mortgaging future transactional flexibility.
I say keep him around for another several years as long as this year continues to move in the direction the offseason has been heading: forward.
Which youngster will have the biggest impact this upcoming season? This can be anybody who came up in the last year or so. Fred Lewis is eligible considering he barely played until last season.
Hmmm. I see three options here plus a dark horse: Fast Freddie, Pablo Sandoval, and Jonathan Sanchez (I know, he's kind of cheating, but he's in the same boat as Freddie). But I'm going with the dark horse.
Fab Five Freddie's too easy.
First, a man with so man cool nicknames is too obvious a pick. Second, he's 28 and played in 133 games last year—that's kind of a stretch for youth in terms of years or experience. Third, Lewis tallied the following totals: 81 runs, 25 doubles, 11 triples, 9 homeruns, a .359 on-base percentage, and a .286 average in 468 at-bats.
That's already some substantial impact so his margin for improvement just isn't that big.
Sanchez is also too easy.
He's younger than Freddie (26), but has a full season starting under his belt as well as 90 other innings in the pros. Since experience counts for more than age, I say he's an even bigger stretch than Fast Freddie. Furthermore, he needs to get a handle on consistency and that's too unpredictable for my prognosticatory tastes.
Little Money is a closer call.
He's the biggest baby of the group—by age (22) or experience. With only 145 Major League ABs, Sandoval's resume is the thinnest and yet it still works against him. The buzz over his volcanic start—10 doubles, three HRs, a .357 OBP, and a .345 average—has me a little worried.
Worried enough that the hype (not to mention new position/positional uncertainty) will wear on him and possibly slow him down a bit.
So I'm going with the dark horse: Emmanuel Burriss.
He just turned 24 and has only 240 ABs in the Show. Obviously, his numbers weren't quite as gaudy as Little Moneys, but check 'em: 37 runs, 13 steals, a .357 OBP, and a .283 average. That's not too shabby considering how quietly he put them up and how little you hear his name.
That won't hurt him. Nor will the move from shortstop to second base (which, even if unfamiliar, should be easier than short). Nor will his reputation as a diligent worker.
I like the kid and I say we see big things from him. Of course, I'm always seeing big things in athletic middle infielders in San Francisco Giant uniforms.
Question Two:
If you didn't know, Brian Sabean is again in a contract year. The question here: Do you think the Giants should retain Sabean after 2009? Do you think he is doing a good job of building around kids while trying to win at the same time? Feel free to go explain yourself in any way you want.
That's a tough call.
I actually like Brian Sabean and give him more leash than most. Even his most infamous trade—Francisco Liriano, Joe Nathan, and Boof Bonser for AJ Pierzynski plus cash (with cash being the far more productive baseball player for SF in 2004)—I think gets too much grief. Contrarily, he's made some fantastic trades and perhaps deserves more credit for really springing the Giants on the National League (due to Matt Williams for Jeff Kent and parts).
Sabean also brought in guys like Rob Nen, Jason Schmidt, Kenny Lofton, Andres Galarraga, and Ellis Burks. Those guys made some significant contributions and really didn't cost the Orange and Black much.
Furthermore, he made good faith and logical moves that failed to bear fruit—grabbing youngster Damien Moss from the pitching-savvy Atlanta Braves and an effective Sidney Ponson from the Baltimore Orioles, who subsequently went tits up (semi-literally) despite moving to the less offensively-rugged NL West.
I can't hold those against him, especially since they (again) didn't cost SF much.
Unfortunately, that's the good and a lot of it's stale.
The bad is much fresher, but it's not as extreme.
Sabean's free agent signings have been poor, he's been overly-enamored of older players, he's been stubbornly reluctant to invest in youngsters via the draft, and the boys have been struggling in a weak division for several years now.
Ultimately though, I shake down on the side of consistency in an inconsistent business being an advantage. It would be one thing if Sabean were a total abomination and/or he was showing no signs of righting the ship. But neither of those is the case.
Brian Sabean's most recent offseason (the one we're still technically in) has given me hope that he's back on track. He's brought in some older veterans, like usual, but they weren't the priciest ones on the market. In fact, both Edgar Renteria and Randy Johnson have considerable potential to be steals while not subjecting SF to much risk.
Additionally, Sabean has shown that most of his focus remains on building around the young core without mortgaging future transactional flexibility.
I say keep him around for another several years as long as this year continues to move in the direction the offseason has been heading: forward.
The Power of Christ Compels You...to Win By 100 Points
Normally, I have no problem with running up the score.
At the professional level, there is no such thing—if you're getting paid to play and you can't muster an effective counterattack, you deserve to get your head kicked in. If management hasn't assembled the talent necessary to compete, too bad.
In the pros, it's a job and one that's compensated very nicely. There ain't a violin small enough.
In the college ranks, the bar for sportsmanship gets raised a bit because the kids aren't getting paid (directly, anyway). But there are still acceptable ways to rout your opponent. If your third string happens to be infinitely better than the opponent's starters, I say let the massacre begin.
First, it would be insanely unfair and counterproductive to put your scrubs in and then tell them to dog it. These are the ones who toil in obscurity for the majority of the season, helping the team by being the practice punching bags. They are the dark matter necessary for the team to form around its stars and they are either in need of experience for growth or as a reward for years of unappreciated effort.
No way a coach should tell those kids to dial it back in their (possibly only) moment for glory.
Second, let's be honest about this—there are millions upon millions of dollars trading hands because of these "amateur" athletic events; they are pseudo-professional sports. As such, the Citadel cannot sign up for the huge payday against Florida and then cry foul when the Gator walk-ons run them out of the arena. Not unless the school was forced into the game...and financial windfall.
If you want to dance, you gotta pay the piper.
Once you get down below college though, it's a whole different story. Especially at the high school level, these are real amateur athletes. This is the level where the VAST majority of participants are playing for some reason other than money—to learn life lessons, for exercise, for love of the game, to stay out of trouble, whatever. And they are all young kids, not a single one matured beyond his/her teen years.
So when I stumble across a story like this, I hit the red almost instantaneously and without remorse.
For those of you not into clicking links, a quick recap: some truly exceptional piece of humanity named Micah Grimes allowed his Covenant School of Dallas high school girls varsity basketball team to beat Dallas Academy 100-0. Not only that, after being rightly fired, he sent an email to a newspaper reiterating that he did nothing wrong and refusing to apologize for the wide margin because his "girls played with honor and integrity."
Let me repeat: high school girls varsity basketball, 100-0.
But Grimes wasn't through: "We played the game as it was meant to be played. My values and my beliefs WOULD NOT ALLOW ME TO RUN UP THE SCORE ON ANY OPPONENT, and it will not allow me to apologize for a wide-margin victory."
What a stand-up fella.
I guess his values and beliefs don't prevent him from lying like a flea-ridden, stinking mutt. According to spectators, Covenant's girls were still launching three-pointers in the fourth quarter of a game it led 59-0 at HALFTIME. Since they managed to score 100 points, I'm betting some were going in.
The kicker?
Dallas Academy's varsity squad has eight—EIGHT—girls and the entire school only has 20. They haven't won a game in four years. See, Dallas Academy caters towards high-income families who have children with special learning needs (I'm guessing about the high-income part).
So this priceless "man" and molder of young attitudes allowed his team to score 100 points on a school that probably doesn't have enough interested bodies to field a softball team. He had his girls preserve a shutout for four quarters against a bunch of kids who already suffer from social stigmatization due to a learning disability (sad, but true since kids are cruel).
And, to top it all off, he refuses to admit his error and has the audacity to try to shift the focus onto his girls.
I have no doubt that those Covenant girls played with honor and integrity. Unfortunately, that means they were listening to Micah Grimes because that's what good kids do—they listen to their coaches.
Clearly, this disgusting individual was NOT telling his girls to ease up. He was NOT telling them to play "ole" defense. He was NOT teaching them greater life lessons about sportsmanship and humility.
In the words of Covenant's administration, Grimes was not reflecting a "Christlike and honorable approach to competition."
I'm not religious and haven't been to church except for weddings and funerals since my family moved to the Bay Area in 1987. Nor am I a biblical scholar so I'm no expert on Jesus Christ. But, from what I've heard about the guy, I don't think he would've been rooting for mental-midget Micah.
In fact, I think he'd've been throwing down some pretty hellacious D for Dallas Academy.
Covenant's powers-that-be called the dung beetle's stunt "shameful and an embarrassment." I say it was downright stupid.
I've been to Dallas and I've seen how seriously Texans take their sports. Even the good Christians.
Grimes is lucky some irate parent didn't beat him senseless (a logical impossibility since Micah clearly already lacks any sense). Lord knows I would've been tempted if one of my little nieces had been out there getting shellacked like that and soldiering on.
If it had been my own daughter (of which I have none so I'm imagining here) and she was already self-conscious/sensitive because of dyslexia or dysgraphia? Whoo boy, there better be some able bodied sailors in between me and Grimes or I'm gonna need me a good criminal attorney.
And it'd be worth every cent.
At the professional level, there is no such thing—if you're getting paid to play and you can't muster an effective counterattack, you deserve to get your head kicked in. If management hasn't assembled the talent necessary to compete, too bad.
In the pros, it's a job and one that's compensated very nicely. There ain't a violin small enough.
In the college ranks, the bar for sportsmanship gets raised a bit because the kids aren't getting paid (directly, anyway). But there are still acceptable ways to rout your opponent. If your third string happens to be infinitely better than the opponent's starters, I say let the massacre begin.
First, it would be insanely unfair and counterproductive to put your scrubs in and then tell them to dog it. These are the ones who toil in obscurity for the majority of the season, helping the team by being the practice punching bags. They are the dark matter necessary for the team to form around its stars and they are either in need of experience for growth or as a reward for years of unappreciated effort.
No way a coach should tell those kids to dial it back in their (possibly only) moment for glory.
Second, let's be honest about this—there are millions upon millions of dollars trading hands because of these "amateur" athletic events; they are pseudo-professional sports. As such, the Citadel cannot sign up for the huge payday against Florida and then cry foul when the Gator walk-ons run them out of the arena. Not unless the school was forced into the game...and financial windfall.
If you want to dance, you gotta pay the piper.
Once you get down below college though, it's a whole different story. Especially at the high school level, these are real amateur athletes. This is the level where the VAST majority of participants are playing for some reason other than money—to learn life lessons, for exercise, for love of the game, to stay out of trouble, whatever. And they are all young kids, not a single one matured beyond his/her teen years.
So when I stumble across a story like this, I hit the red almost instantaneously and without remorse.
For those of you not into clicking links, a quick recap: some truly exceptional piece of humanity named Micah Grimes allowed his Covenant School of Dallas high school girls varsity basketball team to beat Dallas Academy 100-0. Not only that, after being rightly fired, he sent an email to a newspaper reiterating that he did nothing wrong and refusing to apologize for the wide margin because his "girls played with honor and integrity."
Let me repeat: high school girls varsity basketball, 100-0.
But Grimes wasn't through: "We played the game as it was meant to be played. My values and my beliefs WOULD NOT ALLOW ME TO RUN UP THE SCORE ON ANY OPPONENT, and it will not allow me to apologize for a wide-margin victory."
What a stand-up fella.
I guess his values and beliefs don't prevent him from lying like a flea-ridden, stinking mutt. According to spectators, Covenant's girls were still launching three-pointers in the fourth quarter of a game it led 59-0 at HALFTIME. Since they managed to score 100 points, I'm betting some were going in.
The kicker?
Dallas Academy's varsity squad has eight—EIGHT—girls and the entire school only has 20. They haven't won a game in four years. See, Dallas Academy caters towards high-income families who have children with special learning needs (I'm guessing about the high-income part).
So this priceless "man" and molder of young attitudes allowed his team to score 100 points on a school that probably doesn't have enough interested bodies to field a softball team. He had his girls preserve a shutout for four quarters against a bunch of kids who already suffer from social stigmatization due to a learning disability (sad, but true since kids are cruel).
And, to top it all off, he refuses to admit his error and has the audacity to try to shift the focus onto his girls.
I have no doubt that those Covenant girls played with honor and integrity. Unfortunately, that means they were listening to Micah Grimes because that's what good kids do—they listen to their coaches.
Clearly, this disgusting individual was NOT telling his girls to ease up. He was NOT telling them to play "ole" defense. He was NOT teaching them greater life lessons about sportsmanship and humility.
In the words of Covenant's administration, Grimes was not reflecting a "Christlike and honorable approach to competition."
I'm not religious and haven't been to church except for weddings and funerals since my family moved to the Bay Area in 1987. Nor am I a biblical scholar so I'm no expert on Jesus Christ. But, from what I've heard about the guy, I don't think he would've been rooting for mental-midget Micah.
In fact, I think he'd've been throwing down some pretty hellacious D for Dallas Academy.
Covenant's powers-that-be called the dung beetle's stunt "shameful and an embarrassment." I say it was downright stupid.
I've been to Dallas and I've seen how seriously Texans take their sports. Even the good Christians.
Grimes is lucky some irate parent didn't beat him senseless (a logical impossibility since Micah clearly already lacks any sense). Lord knows I would've been tempted if one of my little nieces had been out there getting shellacked like that and soldiering on.
If it had been my own daughter (of which I have none so I'm imagining here) and she was already self-conscious/sensitive because of dyslexia or dysgraphia? Whoo boy, there better be some able bodied sailors in between me and Grimes or I'm gonna need me a good criminal attorney.
And it'd be worth every cent.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Have You Ever Heard of Fedor Emelianenko?
Fedor Emelianenko is a son of a b*tch. He's the best damn fighter in the world. Oh yeah, he's a big guy—6'7", 350. I once saw him scissor kick Angela Landsbury. He wears a live rattle snake as a condom. I heard Fedor grew a third arm and keeps it in a vault. He showers in vodka.
To Fedor Emelianenko! A big fella, goes about 7'8", 530. Anyway, he once got his wife pregnant and she gave birth to a delicious 16-ounce steak. The afterbirth was sauteed mushrooms. Fedor's ranked 18th in the AP college football poll. He taught his son to drive by entering him into the Indy 500.
I have no doubt Fedor would be the last man standing in a three-man free-for-all involving the Last Emperor, Bill Brasky (or here), and Chuck Norris.
The man personifies terror if you are an elite mixed martial artist in the heavyweight division. Fedor looks physically soft, is quiet, and shows no emotion whatsoever. He isn't amazingly big in reality and he isn't amazingly fast. He isn't incredibly precise or technically sound.
Of course, none of that matters because another thing he doesn't seem to be is human.
Emelianenko is a machine to which the laws of our universe do not apply.
I've watched almost every fight he's ever had. Yet, the Last Emperor in my mind's eye is about 6'8" and 300 pounds of cut muscle. Despite having seen the real thing on numerous occasions, the truth simply doesn't compute with logic and my brain makes up the difference.
The way he dominates the most talented men in his sports' most colossal weight class demands that he be more to the naked eye. But he's not.
So it's always a shock to see him being towered over by an opponent like Andrei Arlovski. It's always a shock to see him being outstruck by more technical strikers or caught off-guard by tremendous wrestlers (Kevin Randleman anyone?). It's always a shock to find myself thinking how small and vulnerable Fedor looks.
And damn if it isn't always a shock when the Last Emperor finally has had enough and ends the fight.
It took the Last Emperor three Pride fights to become its heavyweight king (and he did it without being propelled by pro wrestling hype). From there, the legend has only grown.
Randleman drove him headfirst into the mat with a crushing suplex, and Fedor didn't even seem to notice. Submitted the Monster about 15 seconds later.
Marko Filopovic landed several kicks that would have killed most mortals. Fedor walked right through them for a unanimous decision over Cro Cop.
In his most recent bout against Arlovski, Fedor was pretty much dominated and had just suffered the most damaging blow yet from the Pitbull (a solid kick to the body that drove Emelianenko several steps backwards). A split-second later and Andrei was out cold, face first on the mat.
His critics will tell you that Fedor was lucky, that the Pitbull's jaw is notoriously weak. The latter may be true, but that right hand would have put anyone down. ANYONE.
Doubt him if you will. But I've learned my lesson.
Next fight, I'll know it's coming. I'll keep telling myself that Fedor is always the smaller man and the more dominant. I'll keep telling myself that, what I think are signs of trouble, seem to be signs the Fedor is right where he wants to be. I'll keep telling myself that's really bad news for his prey.
To Fedor Emelianenko! A 10-foot-tall, two-ton son of a b*tch who could eat a hammer and take a shotgun blast standing!
To the Last Emperor, forever may he reign.
To Fedor Emelianenko! A big fella, goes about 7'8", 530. Anyway, he once got his wife pregnant and she gave birth to a delicious 16-ounce steak. The afterbirth was sauteed mushrooms. Fedor's ranked 18th in the AP college football poll. He taught his son to drive by entering him into the Indy 500.
I have no doubt Fedor would be the last man standing in a three-man free-for-all involving the Last Emperor, Bill Brasky (or here), and Chuck Norris.
The man personifies terror if you are an elite mixed martial artist in the heavyweight division. Fedor looks physically soft, is quiet, and shows no emotion whatsoever. He isn't amazingly big in reality and he isn't amazingly fast. He isn't incredibly precise or technically sound.
Of course, none of that matters because another thing he doesn't seem to be is human.
Emelianenko is a machine to which the laws of our universe do not apply.
I've watched almost every fight he's ever had. Yet, the Last Emperor in my mind's eye is about 6'8" and 300 pounds of cut muscle. Despite having seen the real thing on numerous occasions, the truth simply doesn't compute with logic and my brain makes up the difference.
The way he dominates the most talented men in his sports' most colossal weight class demands that he be more to the naked eye. But he's not.
So it's always a shock to see him being towered over by an opponent like Andrei Arlovski. It's always a shock to see him being outstruck by more technical strikers or caught off-guard by tremendous wrestlers (Kevin Randleman anyone?). It's always a shock to find myself thinking how small and vulnerable Fedor looks.
And damn if it isn't always a shock when the Last Emperor finally has had enough and ends the fight.
It took the Last Emperor three Pride fights to become its heavyweight king (and he did it without being propelled by pro wrestling hype). From there, the legend has only grown.
Randleman drove him headfirst into the mat with a crushing suplex, and Fedor didn't even seem to notice. Submitted the Monster about 15 seconds later.
Marko Filopovic landed several kicks that would have killed most mortals. Fedor walked right through them for a unanimous decision over Cro Cop.
In his most recent bout against Arlovski, Fedor was pretty much dominated and had just suffered the most damaging blow yet from the Pitbull (a solid kick to the body that drove Emelianenko several steps backwards). A split-second later and Andrei was out cold, face first on the mat.
His critics will tell you that Fedor was lucky, that the Pitbull's jaw is notoriously weak. The latter may be true, but that right hand would have put anyone down. ANYONE.
Doubt him if you will. But I've learned my lesson.
Next fight, I'll know it's coming. I'll keep telling myself that Fedor is always the smaller man and the more dominant. I'll keep telling myself that, what I think are signs of trouble, seem to be signs the Fedor is right where he wants to be. I'll keep telling myself that's really bad news for his prey.
To Fedor Emelianenko! A 10-foot-tall, two-ton son of a b*tch who could eat a hammer and take a shotgun blast standing!
To the Last Emperor, forever may he reign.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Jeff Kent and the Major League Baseball Hall of Fame: Not a Question of If But When
"I hate to see you go, but I love to watch you leave."—John Travolta, Face/Off
Let's be clear here: I'm not saying Jeff Kent has a nice caboose. That may very well be true, but I don't happen to swing that way—I've got no beef if you do, just not my thing (sorry, it's the San Franciscan in me that feels the need to qualify these things). Anyway, back to Kent..er, I mean.
Whoo boy, just a minefield of Freudian slips and puns. Let's just move on.
I'm referring to the love/hate relationship that even Kent's most loyal fans developed with him and I count myself in that group due to his exceptional service for my beloved San Francisco Giants.
The fact that the man left the Orange and Black to eventually enlist with those Bums in Los Angeles is the perfect metaphor for Jeff Kent. He is the essence of enjoying your greatest and most prolonged success with one team, then signing with its archrival in one of the most acrimonious tete-a-tetes in Major League Baseball.
Kent would deliver clutch hit after clutch hit, and then bark at some fan favorite for a seemingly inconsequential flub. This is a man who was so ill-tempered (at times) towards teammates that he once moved one Barry Lamar Bonds to physical confrontation in defense of David Bell.
So, when Jeff Kent announced his retirement, Travolta's line jumped to mind.
As Chris Haft pointed out, Kent will always have a special place in the heart of true Giant. But he was Anakin gone to the Dark Side. He had been a Dodger for several years and had delivered his share of crushing blows while in that vomitous Blue (OK, so it's gorgeous—it's still the ugliest pretty color I've seen).
Of course, while I was fighting myself on the issue, the baseball-watching world apparently lost its freakin' mind. Is Jeff Kent a Hall-of-Famer? IS JEFF KENT A HALL-OF-FAMER?
Can this be serious?
I can see asking the question as a perfunctory way of praising Kent's fabulous career, but that's not the case. This question has inspired sincere (although misguided) debate and some participants have actually come out in the negative.
That's right, some observers decided Jeff Kent didn't deserve enshrinement in Cooperstown.
Wow. A quick perusal of three areas will show just how unfortunate that decision is:
1. Raw data
Kent played in 2298 games, had 8498 at-bats, scored 1320 runs, registered 2461 hits, knocked 560 doubles, launched 377 HRs, drove in 1518 runs, hit to a .290 average, reached base at a .356 clip, and finished his career slugging .500.
He is the all-time leader in homeruns for second basemen and is 21st on the all-time doubles leaderboard. He also makes the list of top 100 MLB players in history for career RBI (47th), homeruns (tied for 62nd), hits (96th), and slugging percentage (tied for 98th). Jeff is a five-time All-Star, won the National League Most Valuable Player award in 2000, and finished in the top 10 of the MVP voting three other times (despite sharing his team with perennial winner Bonds).
2. His defense at second base
No, Jeff Kent was not a Gold Glove second sacker; he wasn't particularly close. But he was not a trainwreck, contrary to growing popular opinion. I can honestly say that I saw the vast majority of games Kent played while he was with the Giants and I never once thought Kent was particularly bad.
I never thought he was particularly good either. But you could never convince me Jeff Kent was anything short of above-average defensively—to argue such would be an exercise in lunacy. The guy just wasn't that bad. His range wasn't great and his hands were always a work in progress.
But his footwork was good and he turned a slick doubleplay. Plus, his courage at the pivot was unparalleled.
However, you don't have to take my word for it—just look at the Gents during Kent's tenure. Any juggernaut third basemen jump out at you? Or any other position for that matter? If Kent's defense were so awful, San Francisco could have easily moved him to the hot corner and gone with defense at second.
Except the Giants didn't.
SF kept Kent at second because his defense was never a problem and his offense from a traditionally weak spot on the field gave the franchise the potential for an additional big bat in the lineup from a more traditional power position.
That it never found one can't be put on Kent.
3. Lack of individual accolades
This one really makes me laugh. I've actually read some people saying that Kent doesn't deserve to go to Cooperstown on MLB's buck because he only won a single MVP and made an All-Star trip five times.
Well, he only won a single MVP because his career coincided with that of Mr. Bonds' and they toiled in the same league. Indeed, they toiled on the same team for Kent's peak years. How many other players were able to wrest the award from Barry's death grip during his reign?
I think we can all agree that Albert Pujols (barring injury or scandal) is destined for the Hall-of-Fame, possibly first ballot. Yet he had quite a time beating out Barry.
That Kent received MVP votes so regularly despite playing alongside Bonds and even managed the one win speaks volume as to how special he was.
The All-Star thing can be dismissed with even more ease.
Forget that the game is at midseason so it's hardly a good barometer of season-long success.
Consider that Jeff Kent was an All-Star in 1999-2001, 2004, and 2005. If he made the All-Star team in 1997, 1998, and 2002, then he would have made the team in eight of nine years.
In 1997, the All-Star second basemen were Craig Biggio (a fellow Hall-of-Famer so no shame there) and Tony Womack (the Pittsburgh Pirates' lone representative). Jeff Kent finished 1997 with 29 HRs (Womack six), 90 runs (Womack 85), 121 RBI (Womack 50), 38 doubles (Womack 26), a .316 OBP (Womack .326), and a .250 average (Womack .278). So who was the better player?
In 1998, the All-Star second basemen were Biggio, Bret Boone (the Cincinnati Reds' lone rep), and Fernando Vina (the Milwaukee Brewers' lone rep). Jeff Kent finished 1998 with 31 HRs (Boone 24, Vina seven), 94 runs (Boone 76, Vina 101), 128 RBI (Boone 95, Vina 45), 37 doubles (Boone 38, Vina 39), a .359 OBP (Boone .324, Vina .386), and a .297 average (Boone .286, Vina .311). So who was the best player?
In 2002, it was really ridiculous. The All-Star second basemen were Jose Vidro (VOTED in by the fans of Montreal), Junior Spivey (one of several questionable Arizona Diamondbacks to be chosen for the team by Diamondback manager Bob Brenly), and Luis Castillo (one of two Florida Marlins inexplicably on the team). Jeff Kent finished 2002 with 37 HRs (Vidro 19, Spivey 16, Castillo two), 102 runs (Vidro 103, Spivey 103, Castillo 86), 108 RBI (Vidro 96, Spivey 78, Castillo 39), 42 doubles (Vidro 43, Spivey 34, Castillo 18), a .368 OBP (Vidro .378, Spivey .389, Castillo .364), and a .313 average (Vidro .315, Spivey .301, Castillo .305). So who was the best player?
Still think that All-Star argument should be held against Kent?
Having addressed these three pressure points and shown how strong Jeff Kent really is where his critics think him most vulnerable, there's one last thing that needs attention: the name Barry Lamar Bonds pops up with regularity whenever discussing Kent.
His critics say he wouldn't have been half the player he was without Barry.
To which I say, so what?
That's probably true, but he did have Barry and it still took quite a bit of work and ability on his part. Many men played with Barry Bonds and many hit in front of him. Few produced the career Jeff Kent did.
A Hall-of-Fame career. Without a doubt.
(as for the argument that Kent wouldn't have been the player without
Let's be clear here: I'm not saying Jeff Kent has a nice caboose. That may very well be true, but I don't happen to swing that way—I've got no beef if you do, just not my thing (sorry, it's the San Franciscan in me that feels the need to qualify these things). Anyway, back to Kent..er, I mean.
Whoo boy, just a minefield of Freudian slips and puns. Let's just move on.
I'm referring to the love/hate relationship that even Kent's most loyal fans developed with him and I count myself in that group due to his exceptional service for my beloved San Francisco Giants.
The fact that the man left the Orange and Black to eventually enlist with those Bums in Los Angeles is the perfect metaphor for Jeff Kent. He is the essence of enjoying your greatest and most prolonged success with one team, then signing with its archrival in one of the most acrimonious tete-a-tetes in Major League Baseball.
Kent would deliver clutch hit after clutch hit, and then bark at some fan favorite for a seemingly inconsequential flub. This is a man who was so ill-tempered (at times) towards teammates that he once moved one Barry Lamar Bonds to physical confrontation in defense of David Bell.
So, when Jeff Kent announced his retirement, Travolta's line jumped to mind.
As Chris Haft pointed out, Kent will always have a special place in the heart of true Giant. But he was Anakin gone to the Dark Side. He had been a Dodger for several years and had delivered his share of crushing blows while in that vomitous Blue (OK, so it's gorgeous—it's still the ugliest pretty color I've seen).
Of course, while I was fighting myself on the issue, the baseball-watching world apparently lost its freakin' mind. Is Jeff Kent a Hall-of-Famer? IS JEFF KENT A HALL-OF-FAMER?
Can this be serious?
I can see asking the question as a perfunctory way of praising Kent's fabulous career, but that's not the case. This question has inspired sincere (although misguided) debate and some participants have actually come out in the negative.
That's right, some observers decided Jeff Kent didn't deserve enshrinement in Cooperstown.
Wow. A quick perusal of three areas will show just how unfortunate that decision is:
1. Raw data
Kent played in 2298 games, had 8498 at-bats, scored 1320 runs, registered 2461 hits, knocked 560 doubles, launched 377 HRs, drove in 1518 runs, hit to a .290 average, reached base at a .356 clip, and finished his career slugging .500.
He is the all-time leader in homeruns for second basemen and is 21st on the all-time doubles leaderboard. He also makes the list of top 100 MLB players in history for career RBI (47th), homeruns (tied for 62nd), hits (96th), and slugging percentage (tied for 98th). Jeff is a five-time All-Star, won the National League Most Valuable Player award in 2000, and finished in the top 10 of the MVP voting three other times (despite sharing his team with perennial winner Bonds).
2. His defense at second base
No, Jeff Kent was not a Gold Glove second sacker; he wasn't particularly close. But he was not a trainwreck, contrary to growing popular opinion. I can honestly say that I saw the vast majority of games Kent played while he was with the Giants and I never once thought Kent was particularly bad.
I never thought he was particularly good either. But you could never convince me Jeff Kent was anything short of above-average defensively—to argue such would be an exercise in lunacy. The guy just wasn't that bad. His range wasn't great and his hands were always a work in progress.
But his footwork was good and he turned a slick doubleplay. Plus, his courage at the pivot was unparalleled.
However, you don't have to take my word for it—just look at the Gents during Kent's tenure. Any juggernaut third basemen jump out at you? Or any other position for that matter? If Kent's defense were so awful, San Francisco could have easily moved him to the hot corner and gone with defense at second.
Except the Giants didn't.
SF kept Kent at second because his defense was never a problem and his offense from a traditionally weak spot on the field gave the franchise the potential for an additional big bat in the lineup from a more traditional power position.
That it never found one can't be put on Kent.
3. Lack of individual accolades
This one really makes me laugh. I've actually read some people saying that Kent doesn't deserve to go to Cooperstown on MLB's buck because he only won a single MVP and made an All-Star trip five times.
Well, he only won a single MVP because his career coincided with that of Mr. Bonds' and they toiled in the same league. Indeed, they toiled on the same team for Kent's peak years. How many other players were able to wrest the award from Barry's death grip during his reign?
I think we can all agree that Albert Pujols (barring injury or scandal) is destined for the Hall-of-Fame, possibly first ballot. Yet he had quite a time beating out Barry.
That Kent received MVP votes so regularly despite playing alongside Bonds and even managed the one win speaks volume as to how special he was.
The All-Star thing can be dismissed with even more ease.
Forget that the game is at midseason so it's hardly a good barometer of season-long success.
Consider that Jeff Kent was an All-Star in 1999-2001, 2004, and 2005. If he made the All-Star team in 1997, 1998, and 2002, then he would have made the team in eight of nine years.
In 1997, the All-Star second basemen were Craig Biggio (a fellow Hall-of-Famer so no shame there) and Tony Womack (the Pittsburgh Pirates' lone representative). Jeff Kent finished 1997 with 29 HRs (Womack six), 90 runs (Womack 85), 121 RBI (Womack 50), 38 doubles (Womack 26), a .316 OBP (Womack .326), and a .250 average (Womack .278). So who was the better player?
In 1998, the All-Star second basemen were Biggio, Bret Boone (the Cincinnati Reds' lone rep), and Fernando Vina (the Milwaukee Brewers' lone rep). Jeff Kent finished 1998 with 31 HRs (Boone 24, Vina seven), 94 runs (Boone 76, Vina 101), 128 RBI (Boone 95, Vina 45), 37 doubles (Boone 38, Vina 39), a .359 OBP (Boone .324, Vina .386), and a .297 average (Boone .286, Vina .311). So who was the best player?
In 2002, it was really ridiculous. The All-Star second basemen were Jose Vidro (VOTED in by the fans of Montreal), Junior Spivey (one of several questionable Arizona Diamondbacks to be chosen for the team by Diamondback manager Bob Brenly), and Luis Castillo (one of two Florida Marlins inexplicably on the team). Jeff Kent finished 2002 with 37 HRs (Vidro 19, Spivey 16, Castillo two), 102 runs (Vidro 103, Spivey 103, Castillo 86), 108 RBI (Vidro 96, Spivey 78, Castillo 39), 42 doubles (Vidro 43, Spivey 34, Castillo 18), a .368 OBP (Vidro .378, Spivey .389, Castillo .364), and a .313 average (Vidro .315, Spivey .301, Castillo .305). So who was the best player?
Still think that All-Star argument should be held against Kent?
Having addressed these three pressure points and shown how strong Jeff Kent really is where his critics think him most vulnerable, there's one last thing that needs attention: the name Barry Lamar Bonds pops up with regularity whenever discussing Kent.
His critics say he wouldn't have been half the player he was without Barry.
To which I say, so what?
That's probably true, but he did have Barry and it still took quite a bit of work and ability on his part. Many men played with Barry Bonds and many hit in front of him. Few produced the career Jeff Kent did.
A Hall-of-Fame career. Without a doubt.
(as for the argument that Kent wouldn't have been the player without
Dallas Roundtable
I don't know if y'all want an intro or anything (assume Robert's handling that) so I'm just hitting the questions....
1. Bob Hayes is the lone Dallas Cowboy of this year's 17 Hall of Fame finalists. Do you believe that he belongs in the Hall, and if so, should he be inducted this year?
Yes and yes. Remember, I'm no fan of the Dallas Cowboys. They are—without a doubt—my least favorite team in the National Football League. But Bullet Bob deserves the NFL's highest honor and it seems looooong overdue.
As with any hall of fame, the selection criteria are vague—a bunch of stuff that usually amounts to an outstanding contribution to whatever sport. The wording may be different, but the bottom-line is that the player must have been very good and in a unique or spectacular way.
So let's see....
Bullet Bob entered the 1964 NFL Draft fresh off Olympic gold in the '64 Games (incidentally, I'd vote for him because of this clip alone). The 'pokes took a flier on him in the seventh round and he proceeded to become the first Dallas player to ever surpass 1000 receiving yards. Hayes did it in his rookie year.
In his 11-year career, the man amassed 371 receptions for 7414 yards and 71 touchdowns. That's no typo, Hayes averaged 20.0 yards per catch for his career. He wasn't a bad return man either—23 kickoff returns for 581 yards and 104 punts for 1158 yards (and three TDs). In 1968, he was actually the best punt returner in the NFL with a 20.8 yard per return average and two touchdowns, including a 90-yarder.
Bullet Bob enjoyed great individual and team success. He garnered three Pro Bowls (something I don't put much stock in) and four All-Pro team inclusions (something I put a great deal of stock in). His Dallas teams won five National Football Conference East titles, two NFC crowns, and the first Super Bowl in franchise history.
Still not unique and/or spectacular enough for you?
OK, how about this: many respected historians of the game credit Bob Hayes with the invention of the zone defense.
The Bullet was so fast that defenses were forced to abandon the traditional man coverage because no single individual could keep up with him. He revolutionized the game and, in the process, opened the field for the rest of his teammates. As the defense was perfected on the fly, teams (focused on Hayes' every move) were vulnerable to the other receivers and rushing attack.
Bob Hayes is the only NFL player to have a Super Bowl ring and Olympic gold. He put up dazzling numbers until the entire League adapted to stop him (and future echos of him) and still finished with some impressive totals. Hayes made his teams better and helped them reach great heights.
His list of personal accolades is long and should get one longer with enshrinement this year.
2. The Cowboys enter the offseason after finishing one of the most, if not the most, disappointing seasons in franchise history. It would probably be naive to think that there is one sole reason for their failures this past season, but if you had to identify the Cowboys' biggest problem-area, what would you say that is?
Easy, it's the locker-room.
There's no way there's anything wrong with the talent or effort. I don't believe either of those can get much better. Sure, the offensive line under-performed and there were other frailties that came to light on the field. But I just don't buy that it was a problem with the talent side of personnel.
Maybe I'm naive, but I truly believe that talent—even supreme talent—cannot get the job done in a team sport when brought to bear in an individual way i.e. because it's your job and you want to do it well for your own pride.
Since football is the ultimate team sport, it stands to reason that this statement is truest in football.
And I think there was so much nonsense going on that the only way guys could show up for work was to put their heads down and just do their jobs. That's fine except your opposition is coming to work as if it's showing up for battle—all for one and one for all (or at least much closer to that than Dallas).
I'm not advocating the removal of Terrell Owens from the picture (as much as I'd like to). What I am advocating is the removal of all the cheaper imitations of Owens i.e. Pacman Jones (check), Tank Johnson (check), and Jerry Jones (just kidding). I'm also suggesting that Tony Romo needs to take Troy Aikman's suprisingly profound words to heart.
I'm paraphrasing, but he said that perception doesn't matter except when you need to rely on it to get through the hard times that are sure to come in Dallas. That was amazingly concise and eloquent for a guy who made a career out of blunt force head trauma.
The Cabo trip was a perfect example—of course it wasn't the reason Dallas lost the subsequent game, but it did lose and Romo was in Mexico with his sexpot. That's a rough time and Tony couldn't rely on the perception that he did everything he needed to to.
With only Owens as a distraction and Romo playing the good general, the Cowboys are just fine.
3. What are your thoughts on the Cowboys draft? What is their biggest need, and will they need a first round pick in order to get it? If so, what should they be willing to give up for the first round pick?
Since baseball is my area of expertise (in my opinion), I'll go there for this one. The Dallas Cowboys are like the New York Yankees: the draft is really just a bonus since they can go out an buy whatever they want anyway.
With that in mind, I'd say Dallas should always be drafting for highest immediate upside regardless of how slim it is or more offensive linemen since those are like pitchers—you can never have too many good ones because they always go down to injury.
Of course, I have a non-sexual-male-crush on Brad Davis from Ball State. If I were Dallas (depending on who were available when my pick came), I'd snag Davis as a two-year project in case Romo's case of big-game jitters doesn't clear up (as I expect it to).
My ultimate answer—the best offensive lineman available, then the best athlete available, and I'd take Brad Davis a little early (within reason).
4. In the early weeks of the Cowboys' offseason, we have seen both Bruce Reed and Brian Stewart collect their pink-slips. Many experts and fans alike still maintain that the Cowboys will not get any better until Wade Phillips, Jason Garrett, or even both are shown the door. What are your thoughts on the Cowboys' coaching staff?
This goes back to the locker-room being the biggest problem. Personally, I don't see how Garret goes from illuminati one year to a moron the next. I put the offensive problems on the players so this question boils down to Wade Phillips, should he stay or should he go?
I say he's gotta go unless you can bring in a player (a la Ray Lewis) would can take over the team and move it in a positive direction (i.e. the anti-TO). I don't see Lewis coming to Dallas and I don't see Romo becoming that guy so I say Phillips must walk the plank.
Too bad since he seems like a good dude, but a tiger's not gonna change his stripes this late in the day.
5. The Cowboys have made the news again this week. It has been announced that the Cowboys will have their own reality show similar to American Idol, hosted by none other than ex-Cowboy, Michael Irvin. In this show, six defensive backs and six wide receivers will compete for a roster spot in the Cowboys' training camp this summer. Does this move help or hurt the Cowboys?
This is ridiculous. Absolutely freakin' ridiculous.
And it makes me thing that the core problem in Dallas is Jerry Jones and his ego. I'm honestly beginning to think the man lusts after attention and publicity more so that victory (which he's already had).
Seriously, the consensus around the NFL is that your team had more talent than just about anyone else and yet you missed the playoffs because of all the off-field bullsh*t. So what do you do? Pledge not to change coaches, cut a little of the distraction, and then sign up for what could turn into an even bigger one than Dallas ever saw in 2008.
You'll have a reality show where the winner actually gets to try-out for Dallas. Hmmm. Think that'll drum up interest in Dallas Cowboy training camp? Think that's gonna make it feel like getting down to basics or an episode of whatever that tripe on HBO is called?
Bring in the clowns and prop up the tent. Jerry Jones is bringing the circus back to town. Idiot.
6. Plain and simple: How will the Cowboys do next year?
Why bother? This is the most unpredictable team in the entire League. I was convinced they would make the playoffs until the very last day. I thought the talent would finally get the wakeup call in time to face the Philadelphia Eagles. Guess not.
I'd say they'll compete for the NFC East crown since they figure to at least run in place while the other East teams are taking on water. That puts them in the playoffs and, from there, I'd figure the talent has to show up. I say they finally win their first playoff game next year with an inspired Tony Romo putting the kibosh on Owens' attempt to dereail yet another Super Bowl contender.
No Super Bowl title though; I say they bow out in the NFC Championship game. Gotta walk before you run.
Of course, I wouldn't mind seeing them miss the postseason again ;-)
7. Super Bowl Prediction?
Hmmm, my head says Pittsburgh Steelers and that defense finally puts the clamps on the Arizona Cardinals. But I'm going with my heart and gut, which lie in the NFC. I say Kurt Warner gets another shot of divine insiration and keeps throwing it up to Larry Fitzgerald, who nobody can stop.
If a secondary were going to blanket Leapin' Larry, it would've been Philly's.
Arizona Cardinals 27, Pittsburgh Steelers 24
1. Bob Hayes is the lone Dallas Cowboy of this year's 17 Hall of Fame finalists. Do you believe that he belongs in the Hall, and if so, should he be inducted this year?
Yes and yes. Remember, I'm no fan of the Dallas Cowboys. They are—without a doubt—my least favorite team in the National Football League. But Bullet Bob deserves the NFL's highest honor and it seems looooong overdue.
As with any hall of fame, the selection criteria are vague—a bunch of stuff that usually amounts to an outstanding contribution to whatever sport. The wording may be different, but the bottom-line is that the player must have been very good and in a unique or spectacular way.
So let's see....
Bullet Bob entered the 1964 NFL Draft fresh off Olympic gold in the '64 Games (incidentally, I'd vote for him because of this clip alone). The 'pokes took a flier on him in the seventh round and he proceeded to become the first Dallas player to ever surpass 1000 receiving yards. Hayes did it in his rookie year.
In his 11-year career, the man amassed 371 receptions for 7414 yards and 71 touchdowns. That's no typo, Hayes averaged 20.0 yards per catch for his career. He wasn't a bad return man either—23 kickoff returns for 581 yards and 104 punts for 1158 yards (and three TDs). In 1968, he was actually the best punt returner in the NFL with a 20.8 yard per return average and two touchdowns, including a 90-yarder.
Bullet Bob enjoyed great individual and team success. He garnered three Pro Bowls (something I don't put much stock in) and four All-Pro team inclusions (something I put a great deal of stock in). His Dallas teams won five National Football Conference East titles, two NFC crowns, and the first Super Bowl in franchise history.
Still not unique and/or spectacular enough for you?
OK, how about this: many respected historians of the game credit Bob Hayes with the invention of the zone defense.
The Bullet was so fast that defenses were forced to abandon the traditional man coverage because no single individual could keep up with him. He revolutionized the game and, in the process, opened the field for the rest of his teammates. As the defense was perfected on the fly, teams (focused on Hayes' every move) were vulnerable to the other receivers and rushing attack.
Bob Hayes is the only NFL player to have a Super Bowl ring and Olympic gold. He put up dazzling numbers until the entire League adapted to stop him (and future echos of him) and still finished with some impressive totals. Hayes made his teams better and helped them reach great heights.
His list of personal accolades is long and should get one longer with enshrinement this year.
2. The Cowboys enter the offseason after finishing one of the most, if not the most, disappointing seasons in franchise history. It would probably be naive to think that there is one sole reason for their failures this past season, but if you had to identify the Cowboys' biggest problem-area, what would you say that is?
Easy, it's the locker-room.
There's no way there's anything wrong with the talent or effort. I don't believe either of those can get much better. Sure, the offensive line under-performed and there were other frailties that came to light on the field. But I just don't buy that it was a problem with the talent side of personnel.
Maybe I'm naive, but I truly believe that talent—even supreme talent—cannot get the job done in a team sport when brought to bear in an individual way i.e. because it's your job and you want to do it well for your own pride.
Since football is the ultimate team sport, it stands to reason that this statement is truest in football.
And I think there was so much nonsense going on that the only way guys could show up for work was to put their heads down and just do their jobs. That's fine except your opposition is coming to work as if it's showing up for battle—all for one and one for all (or at least much closer to that than Dallas).
I'm not advocating the removal of Terrell Owens from the picture (as much as I'd like to). What I am advocating is the removal of all the cheaper imitations of Owens i.e. Pacman Jones (check), Tank Johnson (check), and Jerry Jones (just kidding). I'm also suggesting that Tony Romo needs to take Troy Aikman's suprisingly profound words to heart.
I'm paraphrasing, but he said that perception doesn't matter except when you need to rely on it to get through the hard times that are sure to come in Dallas. That was amazingly concise and eloquent for a guy who made a career out of blunt force head trauma.
The Cabo trip was a perfect example—of course it wasn't the reason Dallas lost the subsequent game, but it did lose and Romo was in Mexico with his sexpot. That's a rough time and Tony couldn't rely on the perception that he did everything he needed to to.
With only Owens as a distraction and Romo playing the good general, the Cowboys are just fine.
3. What are your thoughts on the Cowboys draft? What is their biggest need, and will they need a first round pick in order to get it? If so, what should they be willing to give up for the first round pick?
Since baseball is my area of expertise (in my opinion), I'll go there for this one. The Dallas Cowboys are like the New York Yankees: the draft is really just a bonus since they can go out an buy whatever they want anyway.
With that in mind, I'd say Dallas should always be drafting for highest immediate upside regardless of how slim it is or more offensive linemen since those are like pitchers—you can never have too many good ones because they always go down to injury.
Of course, I have a non-sexual-male-crush on Brad Davis from Ball State. If I were Dallas (depending on who were available when my pick came), I'd snag Davis as a two-year project in case Romo's case of big-game jitters doesn't clear up (as I expect it to).
My ultimate answer—the best offensive lineman available, then the best athlete available, and I'd take Brad Davis a little early (within reason).
4. In the early weeks of the Cowboys' offseason, we have seen both Bruce Reed and Brian Stewart collect their pink-slips. Many experts and fans alike still maintain that the Cowboys will not get any better until Wade Phillips, Jason Garrett, or even both are shown the door. What are your thoughts on the Cowboys' coaching staff?
This goes back to the locker-room being the biggest problem. Personally, I don't see how Garret goes from illuminati one year to a moron the next. I put the offensive problems on the players so this question boils down to Wade Phillips, should he stay or should he go?
I say he's gotta go unless you can bring in a player (a la Ray Lewis) would can take over the team and move it in a positive direction (i.e. the anti-TO). I don't see Lewis coming to Dallas and I don't see Romo becoming that guy so I say Phillips must walk the plank.
Too bad since he seems like a good dude, but a tiger's not gonna change his stripes this late in the day.
5. The Cowboys have made the news again this week. It has been announced that the Cowboys will have their own reality show similar to American Idol, hosted by none other than ex-Cowboy, Michael Irvin. In this show, six defensive backs and six wide receivers will compete for a roster spot in the Cowboys' training camp this summer. Does this move help or hurt the Cowboys?
This is ridiculous. Absolutely freakin' ridiculous.
And it makes me thing that the core problem in Dallas is Jerry Jones and his ego. I'm honestly beginning to think the man lusts after attention and publicity more so that victory (which he's already had).
Seriously, the consensus around the NFL is that your team had more talent than just about anyone else and yet you missed the playoffs because of all the off-field bullsh*t. So what do you do? Pledge not to change coaches, cut a little of the distraction, and then sign up for what could turn into an even bigger one than Dallas ever saw in 2008.
You'll have a reality show where the winner actually gets to try-out for Dallas. Hmmm. Think that'll drum up interest in Dallas Cowboy training camp? Think that's gonna make it feel like getting down to basics or an episode of whatever that tripe on HBO is called?
Bring in the clowns and prop up the tent. Jerry Jones is bringing the circus back to town. Idiot.
6. Plain and simple: How will the Cowboys do next year?
Why bother? This is the most unpredictable team in the entire League. I was convinced they would make the playoffs until the very last day. I thought the talent would finally get the wakeup call in time to face the Philadelphia Eagles. Guess not.
I'd say they'll compete for the NFC East crown since they figure to at least run in place while the other East teams are taking on water. That puts them in the playoffs and, from there, I'd figure the talent has to show up. I say they finally win their first playoff game next year with an inspired Tony Romo putting the kibosh on Owens' attempt to dereail yet another Super Bowl contender.
No Super Bowl title though; I say they bow out in the NFC Championship game. Gotta walk before you run.
Of course, I wouldn't mind seeing them miss the postseason again ;-)
7. Super Bowl Prediction?
Hmmm, my head says Pittsburgh Steelers and that defense finally puts the clamps on the Arizona Cardinals. But I'm going with my heart and gut, which lie in the NFC. I say Kurt Warner gets another shot of divine insiration and keeps throwing it up to Larry Fitzgerald, who nobody can stop.
If a secondary were going to blanket Leapin' Larry, it would've been Philly's.
Arizona Cardinals 27, Pittsburgh Steelers 24
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
The Modern Wide Receiver AKA The Most Dangerous Men in (and to) the NFL
Many (perhaps most) Americans list football as their sport of choice. In particular, the National Football League reclines in the seat of honor at the table of professional sports. Major League Baseball spent almost the entirety of our Nation's history in that hallowed chair, but—like so many things on this Inauguration Day—its reign is over.
Football is our sport and the NFL is its foremost ambassador.
However, my heart still lies with baseball and it always will. As a boy and then a teenager, I can remember two first loves more vividly than all the rest: that of baseball and that of a girl. It has been many years since the girl moved on and forced me to do the same. Fortunately, baseball will never knife me like that (or maybe it will).
Regardless, my enduring love for the game gives me an advantage when discussing the NFL. Since it does not rule my little sports universe, I don't see the League in soft focus. I see it in high-def, warts and all.
That comes in handy at a moment like this because, f you look closely, you can see the seeds of its demise taking root. Even now, as it summits the mountain of sports popularity, the League's future death rattle can be seen at one position.
Frailty, thy name is Wide Receiver.
Check out this list of offenders that spans the gamut; I can't even say with certainty it's complete:
Lesser idiots don't even come close to making the cut. Idiots like Freddie Mitchell, who tried to give himself a nickname harder than he ever worked on the field. Idiots like Limas Sweed, who dropped an easy touchdown on Sunday that could've put the game away, but later had no problem celebrating a comparatively meaningless first down like he just won the Super Bowl.
Of course, there's one guy I've saved until now because he's the most recent offender and he deserves his own section. I'm looking at you, Anquan Boldin.
Yeah, Anquan Boldin.
I know, I know. He showed great courage taking that brutal, knock-out hit and then returning to make virtually the same sort of catches. Wonderful. I gave him all the respect in the world for that sort of mental and intestinal fortitude.
And now I take it all back.
Though I didn't see it at the time, apparently Boldin was throwing a temper tantrum on the sidelines during the National Football Conference Championship game on Sunday. No big deal, except it was IN THE FOURTH QUARTER!
WHILE THE CARDINALS WERE DRIVING FOR THE WINNING SCORE!!!!
Is that a joke? I've got to assume this happened because that's the sort of false accusation that ends a reporter's career.
I don't care if it was competitive juices as Ken Whisenhunt tries to explain. There is simply no excuse for a player on any team to pull that kind of weak stunt at such a critical juncture in such a big game.
And this is the Arizona Cardinals we're talking about.
They've barely won a playoff game. Forget about going to the Super Bowl. The sports world has had several days to get accustomed to the idea and we still don't believe it.
I guess that sort of momentous possibility for a team, franchise, and city wasn't quite enough to quell Boldin's inner infant.
Not only that, Anquan was so ecstatic about the trip to Tampa with his teammates that he couldn't even take the excitement. That's right. He didn't participate in the onfield celebration.
Anquan Boldin rejoiced in the Cardinals' (and his) first trip to football's grandest stage by leaving the locker room early. So much for that warm, cuddly feeling of camaraderie after the biggest win in your organization's history. And many of those players' careers.
Here is a guy who started the year by demanding a trade, showed up to play, had a great season going, got annihilated, came back to play with his jaw wired shut without missing a beat, continued to play through the pain of a hurt hamstring, and then blew the whole thing up.
And that's the bigger problem. Guys like Ocho Sinko and TO hurt the NFL, but it's the escapades of dudes like Harrison and Boldin that are truly terrifying.
Because, if it can happen to seemingly stellar guys like Harrison and Boldin, that raises a strong presumption that it can happen to anyone. Left unchecked, anyone could easily become everyone.
And even the NFL couldn't survive that.
Football is our sport and the NFL is its foremost ambassador.
However, my heart still lies with baseball and it always will. As a boy and then a teenager, I can remember two first loves more vividly than all the rest: that of baseball and that of a girl. It has been many years since the girl moved on and forced me to do the same. Fortunately, baseball will never knife me like that (or maybe it will).
Regardless, my enduring love for the game gives me an advantage when discussing the NFL. Since it does not rule my little sports universe, I don't see the League in soft focus. I see it in high-def, warts and all.
That comes in handy at a moment like this because, f you look closely, you can see the seeds of its demise taking root. Even now, as it summits the mountain of sports popularity, the League's future death rattle can be seen at one position.
Frailty, thy name is Wide Receiver.
Check out this list of offenders that spans the gamut; I can't even say with certainty it's complete:
- Michael Irvin—in 1996, pled no contest to cocaine possession after being busted during a snowy party celebrating his 30th birthday; in 1998, allegedly left a two-inch gash in a teammate's neck while giving haircuts; generally brash and arrogant (arrived to his '96 court appearance in a full-length white mink coat).
- Rae Carruth—in 1999, had his pregnant girlfriend gunned down near his home; participated in the shooting by blocking her car from escaping and then driving off without calling for help; woman was found to be carrying twins, but she and one twin died as a result of the shooting; the other was born prematurely and in distress, resulting in cerebral palsy; Carruth posted bail and then tried to flee, but was caught hiding in the trunk of a car.
- Randy Moss—in 1999, squirted a ref with a water bottle after a perceived blown-call; in 2002, bumped a meter-maid with his car and a small amount of marijuana was recovered in the subsequent arrest; in 2004, walked off the field before the game was over because he felt the game was decided; in 2005, got traded to the Oakland Raiders and proceeded to dog his was out of town; plagued by complaints of lack of effort due to dissatisfaction (though these've largely disappeared since taking his talents to the New England Patriots).
- Chris Henry—the offense's version of Pacman Jones; in 2005, arrested for marijuana possession, driving without a license, and driving without insurance after being pulled over for speeding; in January of 2006, arrested on multiple gun charges including concealment and aggravated assault with a firearm while wearing his own Cincinnati Bengals' jersey; in June of '06, arrested for drunk driving; in January of 2007, pled guilty to charges of providing alcohol to minors; in 2008, allegedly punched an 18-year old kid and threw a bottle through the window of the kid's car in a case of mistaken identity (Henry apparently thought this an appropriate method of reclaiming a debt owed him by another man).
- Terrell Owens—originated the theory that you could destroy a team without actually getting arrested and then put it into practice; blew up the San Francisco 49ers back when they were perennial playoff contenders; blew up the Philadelphia Eagles after almost delivering on all his bluster; now threatening to derail the Dallas Cowboys with the sheer momentum of his reputation; generally behaves as if he's a proven winner despite the ample evidence to the contrary.
- Chad Ocho Sinko—in truth, deserves to get co-authorship credit for Owens' theory since they both were developing it in concert; everyone's well aware of all the onfield nonsense and me-me-me antics; changed his name in a pathetically transparent attempt to drum up attention; threatened to sit out the entire 2008 season because of hurt feelings; publicly (though implicitly) campaigned for trades at various points during the season.
- Matt Jones—arrested at gunpoint and charged with felony cocaine possession; avoided felony charges by submitting to drug court.
- Steve Smith—in 2002, got in a fist-fight with a teammate that left said mate in the hospital for a couple days due to a broken nose; in 2008, virtually the exact same thing happened except the teammate avoided the hospital.
- Marvin Harrison—currently under investigation for his role in a shooting that left a man wounded near one of Harrison's businesses; police have confirmed it was his gun, but have yet to say who pulled the trigger.
- Plaxico Burress—this one happened in New York City so there's no need to do an extensive recap; shot himself in the leg while at a crowded nightclub in Manhattan; effectively torpedoed the New York Giants' season.
Lesser idiots don't even come close to making the cut. Idiots like Freddie Mitchell, who tried to give himself a nickname harder than he ever worked on the field. Idiots like Limas Sweed, who dropped an easy touchdown on Sunday that could've put the game away, but later had no problem celebrating a comparatively meaningless first down like he just won the Super Bowl.
Of course, there's one guy I've saved until now because he's the most recent offender and he deserves his own section. I'm looking at you, Anquan Boldin.
Yeah, Anquan Boldin.
I know, I know. He showed great courage taking that brutal, knock-out hit and then returning to make virtually the same sort of catches. Wonderful. I gave him all the respect in the world for that sort of mental and intestinal fortitude.
And now I take it all back.
Though I didn't see it at the time, apparently Boldin was throwing a temper tantrum on the sidelines during the National Football Conference Championship game on Sunday. No big deal, except it was IN THE FOURTH QUARTER!
WHILE THE CARDINALS WERE DRIVING FOR THE WINNING SCORE!!!!
Is that a joke? I've got to assume this happened because that's the sort of false accusation that ends a reporter's career.
I don't care if it was competitive juices as Ken Whisenhunt tries to explain. There is simply no excuse for a player on any team to pull that kind of weak stunt at such a critical juncture in such a big game.
And this is the Arizona Cardinals we're talking about.
They've barely won a playoff game. Forget about going to the Super Bowl. The sports world has had several days to get accustomed to the idea and we still don't believe it.
I guess that sort of momentous possibility for a team, franchise, and city wasn't quite enough to quell Boldin's inner infant.
Not only that, Anquan was so ecstatic about the trip to Tampa with his teammates that he couldn't even take the excitement. That's right. He didn't participate in the onfield celebration.
Anquan Boldin rejoiced in the Cardinals' (and his) first trip to football's grandest stage by leaving the locker room early. So much for that warm, cuddly feeling of camaraderie after the biggest win in your organization's history. And many of those players' careers.
Here is a guy who started the year by demanding a trade, showed up to play, had a great season going, got annihilated, came back to play with his jaw wired shut without missing a beat, continued to play through the pain of a hurt hamstring, and then blew the whole thing up.
And that's the bigger problem. Guys like Ocho Sinko and TO hurt the NFL, but it's the escapades of dudes like Harrison and Boldin that are truly terrifying.
Because, if it can happen to seemingly stellar guys like Harrison and Boldin, that raises a strong presumption that it can happen to anyone. Left unchecked, anyone could easily become everyone.
And even the NFL couldn't survive that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)