Earlier, on NFL Live, John Clayton anxiously revealed that the Dallas Cowboys have re-signed offensive lineman Flozell Adams. Clayton, who appeared to be fighting the urge to interrupt Trey Wingo in order to break the story, reported that the deal will be worth $42 million over six years. My thoughts:
1) Let’s hope that damn knee holds up.
2) Do not, I repeat, do not put another playoff win in jeopardy* with brain-dead false start penalties, okay Flozell?
3) All in all, taking my first two points into consideration, I’m happy with this move. Good linemen are a necessity, and Adams is coming off a Pro Bowl year.
At the other end of the football spectrum, the St. Louis Rams decided against re-signing veteran wide receiver Isaac Bruce and have instead released him. Hmm… Would you care to hear my dream scenario? No? Too bad, because this would be the ideal situation:
Given the amount of bad blood that has manifested itself between the Rams and the Patriots over the past few weeks (thanks for stirring the pot, Senator Sphincter), it would be delicious (paging Dennis Rodman) if he were willing to take a slight pay cut to play for New England. If the Patriots can only re-sign one of their three free agent receivers (Randy Moss, Donte Stalworth, and Kelly Washington), and it appears they have got Moss back (three years/$30 million), Bruce would seem perfect as the third or fourth option. After all, a receiving corps led by Moss, Welker, and Bruce would pack a pretty powerful punch, especially if Bruce is playing with a chip on his shoulder (he’s given his heart and soul to the Rams, and this is how they repay him?). I defy you to name a team that could better harbor a player who feels as if he has been wronged than the Patriots. This has to happen.
*I do realize that ‘in jeopardy’ makes it seem like the Cowboys actually won against the Giants. Still, I do not feel comfortable with pinning the loss entirely on Flo. While it is debatable, the Cowboys were screwed up in every phase of the game that day, so it really is not fair to simply call out Adams.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Get Back to Where You Once Belonged
Upon seeing that the Kansas City Chiefs had released Ty Law (courtesy of ESPN’s bottom line, a lifesaver, as always), I immediately turned to my roommate and said “he’s going back to New England.” I have nothing to base this on. I do not know if it is already the consensus around the league that Law will once again be a Patriot. I just know three things about the man:
1) He was a great fit in his first stint with the Patriots (just ask Peyton Manning).
2) He still has some game.
3) He has become a wily old veteran.
Law will fit right back in with New England; there is no doubt in my mind. When you consider his past success coupled with the success the Patriots have had with signing seasoned players, it is an absolute no-brainer. It would be nice to see him end up in Dallas (for the right price, that is), but I can not see him with any logo other than the Flying Elvis on his helmet next season.
1) He was a great fit in his first stint with the Patriots (just ask Peyton Manning).
2) He still has some game.
3) He has become a wily old veteran.
Law will fit right back in with New England; there is no doubt in my mind. When you consider his past success coupled with the success the Patriots have had with signing seasoned players, it is an absolute no-brainer. It would be nice to see him end up in Dallas (for the right price, that is), but I can not see him with any logo other than the Flying Elvis on his helmet next season.
You Call Yourself a Christian, I Think That You're a Hypocrite
Well, well, well. It looks like somebody left the house without their WWJD bracelet this morning. Tony Dungy, cover-boy for EA Sports’ Head Coach 09, granted an interview to the online gaming service Gametap to discuss the aforementioned video game. When asked about potential cheat codes within the game, Dungy provided a very interesting answer:
“I don't know about any cheat codes. They say that's really a big secret around here, it's like Spygate. I don't know if they put that in there or not or what the penalty would be if you entered any cheat codes, but we'll probably only let New England have cheat codes.”
So, I guess this means that God finds it okay to exploit the pain of others, kick our neighbors when they are down, and gossip about people. After all, Tony Dungy is Jesus: The Sequel. So if this saintly man finds it funny to crack inconsiderate (and, let’s not forget, unoriginal and marginally humorous) jokes about Bill Belichick, who are we to criticize him?
In fact, since Tony Dungy is the gold standard for football coaches, nay, human beings, are we going to see any new features implemented into Head Coach 09 to tailor the game to his preferences? Will there be an option to hold your team hostage at the end of every season? Think about how revolutionary this could be! You could put up the façade of being a family man, ask for special perks (taking a private jet to your son’s high school football games in Florida, for example), and give ownership the ‘will I or won’t I’ treatment every year. And you could even make it to where fans and media alike will worship the ground you walk on, because, by slacking off on the job that pays you millions, you are a true family man whose life is not solely rooted in football.
Or, you could have football derail your first marriage. Then, find Jesus after the divorce. And finally, build up a reputation as “Mr. Nice Guy” around the league. People will forget about the phantom first wife and will consequently treat you like a god. But you are not God, but close…as you will no doubt reinforce, by continually reminding people of your holiness, simultaneously trying to put up a front of humble piety.
What? You mean that both of these features apply to Dungy? Oh, I guess that EA will just have to implement a cheat code to be able to do this. Shoot! I forgot, that will not work either. After all, Saint Tony has made it clear that cheats are reserved for New England. And it must be true, because surely this great man would not take delight in seeing one of his fellow human beings in an uncomfortable situation. After all, judge not lest ye be judged (Matthew 7:1).
“I don't know about any cheat codes. They say that's really a big secret around here, it's like Spygate. I don't know if they put that in there or not or what the penalty would be if you entered any cheat codes, but we'll probably only let New England have cheat codes.”
So, I guess this means that God finds it okay to exploit the pain of others, kick our neighbors when they are down, and gossip about people. After all, Tony Dungy is Jesus: The Sequel. So if this saintly man finds it funny to crack inconsiderate (and, let’s not forget, unoriginal and marginally humorous) jokes about Bill Belichick, who are we to criticize him?
In fact, since Tony Dungy is the gold standard for football coaches, nay, human beings, are we going to see any new features implemented into Head Coach 09 to tailor the game to his preferences? Will there be an option to hold your team hostage at the end of every season? Think about how revolutionary this could be! You could put up the façade of being a family man, ask for special perks (taking a private jet to your son’s high school football games in Florida, for example), and give ownership the ‘will I or won’t I’ treatment every year. And you could even make it to where fans and media alike will worship the ground you walk on, because, by slacking off on the job that pays you millions, you are a true family man whose life is not solely rooted in football.
Or, you could have football derail your first marriage. Then, find Jesus after the divorce. And finally, build up a reputation as “Mr. Nice Guy” around the league. People will forget about the phantom first wife and will consequently treat you like a god. But you are not God, but close…as you will no doubt reinforce, by continually reminding people of your holiness, simultaneously trying to put up a front of humble piety.
What? You mean that both of these features apply to Dungy? Oh, I guess that EA will just have to implement a cheat code to be able to do this. Shoot! I forgot, that will not work either. After all, Saint Tony has made it clear that cheats are reserved for New England. And it must be true, because surely this great man would not take delight in seeing one of his fellow human beings in an uncomfortable situation. After all, judge not lest ye be judged (Matthew 7:1).
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Hold Me Closer Tiny...Gold...Man?
First off, let me just say that I have been jotting little notes over the past few days in an effort to keep track of points of interest for future columns. For the first of these posts, I have decided to combine my Academy Award observations with some television and music bits. This way, I can keep the pop culture discussion within one post. Granted, it has nothing to do with pro sports, but it is not like this has stopped me before. So, enjoy.
Thoughts on the Oscars
--I did a complete 180 during the announcement of the Best Actress winner. I was pulling for Ellen Page, simply because I really enjoyed Juno. Oh, and she’s cute (emphasis on the word cute; the jury is still out on whether I found her to be gorgeous). Then, I saw Marion Cotillard walk on stage (oh, and don’t worry if you are confused, I don’t think she knows who she is either). Let me just say ‘Knockout!’ And she had the sexy French lady thing going on. From that moment on, I decided I was happy with Best Actress decision.
--Speaking of gorgeous women, two actresses (that I saw, keep in mind that I was flipping between the awards and the Lakers/Sonics game virtually the entire night) really stood out to me: the always beautiful Katherine Heigl was bringing her A-game (Tilda Swinton, not so much)…as usual (is that redundant?). As was the perplexingly hot Anne Hathaway. Both ladies were rocking red dresses. Coincidence?
--Going on a bit of a tangent, but keeping it within the ‘hot actress’ category, what happened to Neve Campbell? As of a couple of years ago, she still looks great. And she was always a tad underrated. We need to unearth her and treat her like the goddess that she truly is.
--Swinging it back to the Oscars, take a wild guess who presented one of the awards.
…
Owen Wilson! In his first public appearance since…y’know…the incident. What is ironic is that he presented right after the in memoriam slide show. It would have been funny, and in incredibly poor taste, if Wilson presented said slide show. After the final deceased Hollywood figure (which was Heath Ledger, in case you were wondering), Owen could have paused…turned to the audience with a wry smile…and say “and almost…ME!”
--Now that we are on the subject of Owen Wilson, what is the deal with TBS all of a sudden? Usually they recycle the same circa 1991 two-star movies, but now the channel is trotting out Wedding Crashers, Four Brothers, and The Wedding Date (quick, which one of these movies doesn’t belong?). I think the oldest of these is Wedding Crashers, but we are still only going back about two and a half years! This is shattering my mind! I need some Cliffhanger, pronto!
--Using the TBS talk to segue to Jonathan Lipnicki (hey, they show Jerry Maguire all the time!). I despise this kid. I don’t know what he looks like now, but to me, he will forever be the creepy looking Drew Carrey Mini-me. I mean, did you see this kid? He called his erie little squirms and grunts acting!? His performances have always had a powerful effect on me…I get a strong urge to punch him in the face.
--Yet another brilliant segue (wink, wink): I am going to rant about Jackie Chan. He is actually going to provide a character voice in the film Kung-fu Panda.
…
HE CAN’T FUCKING SPEAK ENGLISH!
I don’t care if he is providing a voice for a character who is amazing at karate; the only reason American audiences flock to his movies is to see him perform amazing fight sequences. Either that, or they go for the comic relief provided by his co-star. But, if it’s anything, his mastery of the English language is humorous at best. Half of the reason they show deleted scenes during the credits of his movies is to make light of the fact that he butchers lines constantly. Was he honestly the best choice for an animated film? Do the producers really need a token Asian voice in their karate film? These are the types of questions that churn through my mind on a daily basis.
--Bringing it back home to Oscar, guess who was sitting in the front row? Why it was Jack Nicholson of course! Why is this important? Well, I was sifting through some archived Bill Simmons columns the other day, coming across this hidden gem:
“You're not officially a writer until someone interrupts you while you're typing, and you try to be nice about it, but you secretly want to start screaming like Nicholson in The Shining.”
Why is this funny? Because I was trying to write a blog post, but I had someone in the background chattering incessantly. I finally gave up on concentrating, deciding to read some Simmons posts. I wanted to snap at the person, but I was trying to be nice. Almost immediately, I came across this bit. It seemed so appropriate.*
--And now, one final Oscar note to get tend to: I refute anyone (I’m looking at you, TIME) who claims that the original Rocky is undeserving of the Best Picture. Are you fucking kidding me? Raging Bull was a great movie, but to say that it was the only boxing movie worthy of the Oscar (over Rocky, again, what the hell, TIME?) is ludicrous. Look at how influential Rocky has become. First of all, it has become a seminal film series. More importanly, however, it has changed the way sports movies (and some movies in general) are made. How many Rocky clones have you seen in your lifetime? Not only has it made the underdog dynamic a must, but it also integrated the “chick flick” subplot which pleases all audiences. It’s one of the most influential and inspiring movies ever made, but you are telling me that it was a mistake to give it an Oscar? I call bull shit.
*In case you haven’t actually seen The Shining, the scene in question features Nicholson on an F-bomb laced tirade directed towards his wife for interrupting his writing.
Thoughts on the Oscars
--I did a complete 180 during the announcement of the Best Actress winner. I was pulling for Ellen Page, simply because I really enjoyed Juno. Oh, and she’s cute (emphasis on the word cute; the jury is still out on whether I found her to be gorgeous). Then, I saw Marion Cotillard walk on stage (oh, and don’t worry if you are confused, I don’t think she knows who she is either). Let me just say ‘Knockout!’ And she had the sexy French lady thing going on. From that moment on, I decided I was happy with Best Actress decision.
--Speaking of gorgeous women, two actresses (that I saw, keep in mind that I was flipping between the awards and the Lakers/Sonics game virtually the entire night) really stood out to me: the always beautiful Katherine Heigl was bringing her A-game (Tilda Swinton, not so much)…as usual (is that redundant?). As was the perplexingly hot Anne Hathaway. Both ladies were rocking red dresses. Coincidence?
--Going on a bit of a tangent, but keeping it within the ‘hot actress’ category, what happened to Neve Campbell? As of a couple of years ago, she still looks great. And she was always a tad underrated. We need to unearth her and treat her like the goddess that she truly is.
--Swinging it back to the Oscars, take a wild guess who presented one of the awards.
…
Owen Wilson! In his first public appearance since…y’know…the incident. What is ironic is that he presented right after the in memoriam slide show. It would have been funny, and in incredibly poor taste, if Wilson presented said slide show. After the final deceased Hollywood figure (which was Heath Ledger, in case you were wondering), Owen could have paused…turned to the audience with a wry smile…and say “and almost…ME!”
--Now that we are on the subject of Owen Wilson, what is the deal with TBS all of a sudden? Usually they recycle the same circa 1991 two-star movies, but now the channel is trotting out Wedding Crashers, Four Brothers, and The Wedding Date (quick, which one of these movies doesn’t belong?). I think the oldest of these is Wedding Crashers, but we are still only going back about two and a half years! This is shattering my mind! I need some Cliffhanger, pronto!
--Using the TBS talk to segue to Jonathan Lipnicki (hey, they show Jerry Maguire all the time!). I despise this kid. I don’t know what he looks like now, but to me, he will forever be the creepy looking Drew Carrey Mini-me. I mean, did you see this kid? He called his erie little squirms and grunts acting!? His performances have always had a powerful effect on me…I get a strong urge to punch him in the face.
--Yet another brilliant segue (wink, wink): I am going to rant about Jackie Chan. He is actually going to provide a character voice in the film Kung-fu Panda.
…
HE CAN’T FUCKING SPEAK ENGLISH!
I don’t care if he is providing a voice for a character who is amazing at karate; the only reason American audiences flock to his movies is to see him perform amazing fight sequences. Either that, or they go for the comic relief provided by his co-star. But, if it’s anything, his mastery of the English language is humorous at best. Half of the reason they show deleted scenes during the credits of his movies is to make light of the fact that he butchers lines constantly. Was he honestly the best choice for an animated film? Do the producers really need a token Asian voice in their karate film? These are the types of questions that churn through my mind on a daily basis.
--Bringing it back home to Oscar, guess who was sitting in the front row? Why it was Jack Nicholson of course! Why is this important? Well, I was sifting through some archived Bill Simmons columns the other day, coming across this hidden gem:
“You're not officially a writer until someone interrupts you while you're typing, and you try to be nice about it, but you secretly want to start screaming like Nicholson in The Shining.”
Why is this funny? Because I was trying to write a blog post, but I had someone in the background chattering incessantly. I finally gave up on concentrating, deciding to read some Simmons posts. I wanted to snap at the person, but I was trying to be nice. Almost immediately, I came across this bit. It seemed so appropriate.*
--And now, one final Oscar note to get tend to: I refute anyone (I’m looking at you, TIME) who claims that the original Rocky is undeserving of the Best Picture. Are you fucking kidding me? Raging Bull was a great movie, but to say that it was the only boxing movie worthy of the Oscar (over Rocky, again, what the hell, TIME?) is ludicrous. Look at how influential Rocky has become. First of all, it has become a seminal film series. More importanly, however, it has changed the way sports movies (and some movies in general) are made. How many Rocky clones have you seen in your lifetime? Not only has it made the underdog dynamic a must, but it also integrated the “chick flick” subplot which pleases all audiences. It’s one of the most influential and inspiring movies ever made, but you are telling me that it was a mistake to give it an Oscar? I call bull shit.
*In case you haven’t actually seen The Shining, the scene in question features Nicholson on an F-bomb laced tirade directed towards his wife for interrupting his writing.
Friday, February 22, 2008
The Fool on the Hill
***Note: I present the long overdue analysis of the Roger Clemens deposition. However, considering its length and the time of day that it was written, I would once again like to preface a post with a request to excuse any potential crappy writing. Thanks!
Thanks to a break in my class scheduling, as well as a lack of quality daytime television programming, I watched roughly three hours of the mammoth Roger Clemens congressional hearing. I watched mainly to gain amusement from seeing Clemens squirm under pressure (you know, like he does when he pitches in big games), and as a result, I did not so much as jot down notes. Therefore, as you could probably imagine, this particular post will have a very disjointed feel, due to the fact that I’m writing this post recalling facts…in a piece that was already going to be based on recalling random facts.
First of all, as was painfully obvious for anyone who actually found time to watch the proceedings; it was absolutely pathetic that congress made performance-enhancing drugs in baseball a partisan issue. The committee members each were able to spend a few minutes to give their two cents, and it seemed to flip-flop back and forth between a Republican and a Democrat. So, whenever a Republican member posed a question, it was either an attack on Brian McNamee or a pat on the back for Roger Clemens. Likewise, the Democrats followed suit, only vice versa.
Granted, no party should receive a free pass for the blatant side-choosing, but I will admit that the Republicans were the worst of the offenders. The Democrats, unprofessional as it was to favor McNamee, were at least polite to Clemens. They may have mocked his testimony here and there when he was trapped in a corner, but for the most part, the Rocket was never verbally attacked.
The Republicans, however, acted a bit differently. They were borderline abusive to McNamee from the get-go, all the while praising Clemens for his character on and off the field. Tom Davis (a congressman from Indiana, no doubt making my fellow Hoosiers proud) even acknowledged the line in the sand when he said to McNamee that “they (the Democrats) are focused on him (Clemens), so I guess I’ll go ahead and talk to you…” Thank you for being so selfless, Mr. Davis. ‘I could take the highroad, but I think I’ll just continue this immature trend.’ Oh, and I like the “they” reference. Could you at least attempt to make it look like our legislative branch is somewhat united?
Aside from a few glaring examples of pro-Rocket bias from the Republicans (one member went so far as to call Roger Clemens a baseball “titan”) and an uncomfortable, homo-erotic moment in which Rep. Davis repeatedly mentioned Clemens’ buttocks, the most obvious case of one-sidedness came when yet another Hoosier, the charming Dan Burton, decided to grill McNamee. To start, he decided that the best way to fill most of his ten minute block was to read aloud past fallacious statements attributed to McNamee, even though these fallacies had already been documented. He then asked McNamee if “we are supposed to believe that you are telling the truth now.” An affirmative was given, followed with an articulate “gee-whiz!” from Burton. This was all chased by the congressman concluding his allotted time to speak by admitting that he didn’t know what to believe, but that he surely didn’t believe McNamee.
Why wouldn’t he, or any of the other Republicans, believe McNamee…if not for Clemens’ close ties to the Bush family? Based on the evidence produced, party loyalty would be the only explanation as to why Clemens earned a free pass from the Republicans. McNamee’s contributions to the Mitchell Report have been backed up by all the named players…except Clemens. McNamee has DNA evidence from used gauze pads and needles. Clemens has either been ratted out by someone (McNamee, Andy Pettite), changed his story (my wife took HGH in 1999, no wait, 2003, no…), or had someone come forth with a tale out of the blue (his wife admitted to using HGH without his knowledge).
And really, Andy Pettite puts the biggest hole in Clemens’ case. He fessed up for his actions (and displayed a load of guts and class by giving an uncensored press conference) and made it clear that Brian McNamee was telling the truth. Very clear. Under Oath clear. He also admitted that he and Clemens had talked about HGH use. This is (well, probably ‘was,’ now) Roger Clemens’ best friend. Pettite says he came clean about his and Clemens’ use because one day he “would have to answer to God.” Would he go out of his way to perjure himself and anger God just to screw the Rocket? Who, I would like to reiterate, was his best friend!
If you believe Clemens, apparently so. But, politically correct Roger says it’s okay: ‘He’s still my friend, he just misremembers and mishears things.’ I swear to God, if I heard him say misremember one more time, I was prepared to throw the television out the window (this would also involve giving my roommate money for a replacement; you know what they say, discretion is the better part of valor). It seemed like any time evidence was brought against him, Clemens would either have a semi-believable excuse (wouldn’t hold up in court, but was able to work at the deposition), throw a friend or family member (his wife, notably) under the bus, or simply say that whoever brought up an allegation “misremembered.”
The one thing working in the favor of Clemens: the infamous Jose Canseco pool party. Pretty much everything else McNamee has claimed seems to hold up. Yet, he stands by his assertion that he and Clemens attended this party (and more importantly, the potential ‘popping of the HGH cherry’ for Clemens). The Rocket has countered with evidence of his own (a golf receipt from the day of the party and a television broadcast featuring a discussion of Clemens’ lack of attendance at the party). This looked to be Roger’s way out, but a new development put a hold on that pipedream: the introduction of Clemens’ former nanny.
The nanny, who as far as I know was not named, testified that not only was Roger Clemens at the pool party, but that she, Mrs. Clemens, and their children spent the night. If this held up, McNamee’s entire deposition would be validated and Clemens would be left hanging in the balance.
What I find more interesting about the nanny is how she was introduced to congress. The committee asked Clemens to provide her name on a Monday and were not able to come in contact with her until the following Monday. Clemens’ lawyers claimed to have fully cooperated, but the nanny noted in her testimony that she flew in to meet with Roger the day before her meeting with the committee. When accusations of tampering with a witness were hinted at, Clemens’ lawyers went berserk (as did ESPN legal consultant Roger Cossack, who was disturbingly pro-Clemens), claiming it was normal procedure. In my studies (a.k.a. perusing CNN.com), I have discovered that normal procedure dictates that the lawyers meet with the nanny, not Clemens. Did he tamper with the witness? Not for me to say, but I certainly have a hunch (hint: it starts with ‘y’ and ends with ‘es’).
Now, did the testimony of the nanny sway the opinions of any committee members who initially believed Clemens? Not exactly. Our good friend, Mr. Burton, brushed aside her comments, because Jose Canseco, the party’s host, has been on record as saying that Clemens was not there. Don’t get me wrong, this is a very valid point. But, I would lend it more credence if:
a) Jose Canseco was not a D-Bag.
and
b) Canseco was not just cited for extortion (you may or may not have heard, but Jose is slaving away on another tell-all steroids book; he discovered some info on Magglio Ordonez, and like any other reputable journalist he…offered to omit his scandalous deeds in exchange for millions of dollars; hmm, maybe I’ll think twice before I take his word as gospel in the Clemens situation).
Aside from the revelation of the nanny, the deposition was a major waste of time. As you can see above, each party had its mind made up ahead of time about who was to be believed and who was not. Still, I did not get the sense that I had wasted three hours of my life watching it, based solely on three things:
1) I saw Roger Clemens squirm (as well as emit a confused chuckle when asking what a ‘vegan’ was…I’m pretty sure he thought it was part of the female anatomy).
2) I saw Henry Waxman, the committee chairman, whip out the old gavel to quiet Clemens down when he repeatedly interrupted his closing remarks (an absolute bitchslap!).
3) I saw Waxman end the proceedings with an apology to McNamee for the harsh treatment he received from the Republicans (the camera was not on him, but I’m pretty sure that after he said this, he turned to the men he called out and gave them the “dick-grab”).
Also, my devotion to this deposition allowed me to see the Q&A session between Clemens’ lawyers and the media immediately following the event. Why so noteworthy? Because I witnessed the two men get trapped in one of the Rocket’s lies. One lawyer answered a ‘why did he meet with the nanny before…’ question by saying that woman had been a family friend for years. Later, the other lawyer noted that the woman has not associated with the Clemens family in almost eight years. I suppose the fact that Clemens’ reunion with his long-lost BFF occurred the night before she was to meet with the committee to answer questions about him was a coincidence? Yeah…I’m not buying it. Of course, the lawyers (who are making big bucks for a reason) were able to skate through the potential controversy. Nevertheless, this moment, and the three listed above, were enough to validate lending my attention to the deposition for three hours.
Now, after this analysis (which turned out to be longer than I expected), you might be wondering where I stand on the issue. Yes, I think Roger Clemens is a phony piece of shit who only cares about himself, and yes, I think the Republicans were way, way, way too hard on McNamee. But the fact of the matter remains that I really do not give a rat’s ass about performance-enhancing drugs in baseball. Granted, I think the drugs (specifically HGH, the main culprit in this case) help pitchers out a lot more than they do hitters (which is why people need to get off Barry Bonds’ ass immediately), but at this point, I’m reserving judgment until a later date. I may delight in seeing Roger Clemens foolishly perjure himself, but do I want to see him go to jail? No. Do I think he (or Bonds) should be singled out in an era when “clean” players were probably in the minority? No.
So amazingly, I do not want Clemens to be reprimanded for his actions (which now could be a lying under oath charge)…at least for now. That’s not to say that I do not enjoy watching him make a fool of himself. Because, let’s be honest, it’s still Roger Clemens…
Thanks to a break in my class scheduling, as well as a lack of quality daytime television programming, I watched roughly three hours of the mammoth Roger Clemens congressional hearing. I watched mainly to gain amusement from seeing Clemens squirm under pressure (you know, like he does when he pitches in big games), and as a result, I did not so much as jot down notes. Therefore, as you could probably imagine, this particular post will have a very disjointed feel, due to the fact that I’m writing this post recalling facts…in a piece that was already going to be based on recalling random facts.
First of all, as was painfully obvious for anyone who actually found time to watch the proceedings; it was absolutely pathetic that congress made performance-enhancing drugs in baseball a partisan issue. The committee members each were able to spend a few minutes to give their two cents, and it seemed to flip-flop back and forth between a Republican and a Democrat. So, whenever a Republican member posed a question, it was either an attack on Brian McNamee or a pat on the back for Roger Clemens. Likewise, the Democrats followed suit, only vice versa.
Granted, no party should receive a free pass for the blatant side-choosing, but I will admit that the Republicans were the worst of the offenders. The Democrats, unprofessional as it was to favor McNamee, were at least polite to Clemens. They may have mocked his testimony here and there when he was trapped in a corner, but for the most part, the Rocket was never verbally attacked.
The Republicans, however, acted a bit differently. They were borderline abusive to McNamee from the get-go, all the while praising Clemens for his character on and off the field. Tom Davis (a congressman from Indiana, no doubt making my fellow Hoosiers proud) even acknowledged the line in the sand when he said to McNamee that “they (the Democrats) are focused on him (Clemens), so I guess I’ll go ahead and talk to you…” Thank you for being so selfless, Mr. Davis. ‘I could take the highroad, but I think I’ll just continue this immature trend.’ Oh, and I like the “they” reference. Could you at least attempt to make it look like our legislative branch is somewhat united?
Aside from a few glaring examples of pro-Rocket bias from the Republicans (one member went so far as to call Roger Clemens a baseball “titan”) and an uncomfortable, homo-erotic moment in which Rep. Davis repeatedly mentioned Clemens’ buttocks, the most obvious case of one-sidedness came when yet another Hoosier, the charming Dan Burton, decided to grill McNamee. To start, he decided that the best way to fill most of his ten minute block was to read aloud past fallacious statements attributed to McNamee, even though these fallacies had already been documented. He then asked McNamee if “we are supposed to believe that you are telling the truth now.” An affirmative was given, followed with an articulate “gee-whiz!” from Burton. This was all chased by the congressman concluding his allotted time to speak by admitting that he didn’t know what to believe, but that he surely didn’t believe McNamee.
Why wouldn’t he, or any of the other Republicans, believe McNamee…if not for Clemens’ close ties to the Bush family? Based on the evidence produced, party loyalty would be the only explanation as to why Clemens earned a free pass from the Republicans. McNamee’s contributions to the Mitchell Report have been backed up by all the named players…except Clemens. McNamee has DNA evidence from used gauze pads and needles. Clemens has either been ratted out by someone (McNamee, Andy Pettite), changed his story (my wife took HGH in 1999, no wait, 2003, no…), or had someone come forth with a tale out of the blue (his wife admitted to using HGH without his knowledge).
And really, Andy Pettite puts the biggest hole in Clemens’ case. He fessed up for his actions (and displayed a load of guts and class by giving an uncensored press conference) and made it clear that Brian McNamee was telling the truth. Very clear. Under Oath clear. He also admitted that he and Clemens had talked about HGH use. This is (well, probably ‘was,’ now) Roger Clemens’ best friend. Pettite says he came clean about his and Clemens’ use because one day he “would have to answer to God.” Would he go out of his way to perjure himself and anger God just to screw the Rocket? Who, I would like to reiterate, was his best friend!
If you believe Clemens, apparently so. But, politically correct Roger says it’s okay: ‘He’s still my friend, he just misremembers and mishears things.’ I swear to God, if I heard him say misremember one more time, I was prepared to throw the television out the window (this would also involve giving my roommate money for a replacement; you know what they say, discretion is the better part of valor). It seemed like any time evidence was brought against him, Clemens would either have a semi-believable excuse (wouldn’t hold up in court, but was able to work at the deposition), throw a friend or family member (his wife, notably) under the bus, or simply say that whoever brought up an allegation “misremembered.”
The one thing working in the favor of Clemens: the infamous Jose Canseco pool party. Pretty much everything else McNamee has claimed seems to hold up. Yet, he stands by his assertion that he and Clemens attended this party (and more importantly, the potential ‘popping of the HGH cherry’ for Clemens). The Rocket has countered with evidence of his own (a golf receipt from the day of the party and a television broadcast featuring a discussion of Clemens’ lack of attendance at the party). This looked to be Roger’s way out, but a new development put a hold on that pipedream: the introduction of Clemens’ former nanny.
The nanny, who as far as I know was not named, testified that not only was Roger Clemens at the pool party, but that she, Mrs. Clemens, and their children spent the night. If this held up, McNamee’s entire deposition would be validated and Clemens would be left hanging in the balance.
What I find more interesting about the nanny is how she was introduced to congress. The committee asked Clemens to provide her name on a Monday and were not able to come in contact with her until the following Monday. Clemens’ lawyers claimed to have fully cooperated, but the nanny noted in her testimony that she flew in to meet with Roger the day before her meeting with the committee. When accusations of tampering with a witness were hinted at, Clemens’ lawyers went berserk (as did ESPN legal consultant Roger Cossack, who was disturbingly pro-Clemens), claiming it was normal procedure. In my studies (a.k.a. perusing CNN.com), I have discovered that normal procedure dictates that the lawyers meet with the nanny, not Clemens. Did he tamper with the witness? Not for me to say, but I certainly have a hunch (hint: it starts with ‘y’ and ends with ‘es’).
Now, did the testimony of the nanny sway the opinions of any committee members who initially believed Clemens? Not exactly. Our good friend, Mr. Burton, brushed aside her comments, because Jose Canseco, the party’s host, has been on record as saying that Clemens was not there. Don’t get me wrong, this is a very valid point. But, I would lend it more credence if:
a) Jose Canseco was not a D-Bag.
and
b) Canseco was not just cited for extortion (you may or may not have heard, but Jose is slaving away on another tell-all steroids book; he discovered some info on Magglio Ordonez, and like any other reputable journalist he…offered to omit his scandalous deeds in exchange for millions of dollars; hmm, maybe I’ll think twice before I take his word as gospel in the Clemens situation).
Aside from the revelation of the nanny, the deposition was a major waste of time. As you can see above, each party had its mind made up ahead of time about who was to be believed and who was not. Still, I did not get the sense that I had wasted three hours of my life watching it, based solely on three things:
1) I saw Roger Clemens squirm (as well as emit a confused chuckle when asking what a ‘vegan’ was…I’m pretty sure he thought it was part of the female anatomy).
2) I saw Henry Waxman, the committee chairman, whip out the old gavel to quiet Clemens down when he repeatedly interrupted his closing remarks (an absolute bitchslap!).
3) I saw Waxman end the proceedings with an apology to McNamee for the harsh treatment he received from the Republicans (the camera was not on him, but I’m pretty sure that after he said this, he turned to the men he called out and gave them the “dick-grab”).
Also, my devotion to this deposition allowed me to see the Q&A session between Clemens’ lawyers and the media immediately following the event. Why so noteworthy? Because I witnessed the two men get trapped in one of the Rocket’s lies. One lawyer answered a ‘why did he meet with the nanny before…’ question by saying that woman had been a family friend for years. Later, the other lawyer noted that the woman has not associated with the Clemens family in almost eight years. I suppose the fact that Clemens’ reunion with his long-lost BFF occurred the night before she was to meet with the committee to answer questions about him was a coincidence? Yeah…I’m not buying it. Of course, the lawyers (who are making big bucks for a reason) were able to skate through the potential controversy. Nevertheless, this moment, and the three listed above, were enough to validate lending my attention to the deposition for three hours.
Now, after this analysis (which turned out to be longer than I expected), you might be wondering where I stand on the issue. Yes, I think Roger Clemens is a phony piece of shit who only cares about himself, and yes, I think the Republicans were way, way, way too hard on McNamee. But the fact of the matter remains that I really do not give a rat’s ass about performance-enhancing drugs in baseball. Granted, I think the drugs (specifically HGH, the main culprit in this case) help pitchers out a lot more than they do hitters (which is why people need to get off Barry Bonds’ ass immediately), but at this point, I’m reserving judgment until a later date. I may delight in seeing Roger Clemens foolishly perjure himself, but do I want to see him go to jail? No. Do I think he (or Bonds) should be singled out in an era when “clean” players were probably in the minority? No.
So amazingly, I do not want Clemens to be reprimanded for his actions (which now could be a lying under oath charge)…at least for now. That’s not to say that I do not enjoy watching him make a fool of himself. Because, let’s be honest, it’s still Roger Clemens…
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Keep Talking
Bill Walton has created a minor controversy with his on-air comments regarding the recent NBA trades turned to Shaquille O’Neal: “Shaq’s arrogance is an insult to people who think.” And, speaking in place of the Big Diesel: “I can’t play at all, (but) now I’m going to win the championship (in Phoenix)—which is ludicrous.”
Shaq, who has a long history with Walton (he tutored the big man when he attended LSU), countered that the analyst’s “resume isn’t quite good enough to speak on what I’ve done. I look at what Mr. Walton has done and what he’s said—and one thing I hate is a hypocrite.”
First off, this only adds to the Lakers/Suns rivalry as now not only is it Shaq vs. Kobe, but it might also be Shaq vs. Luke Walton. Secondly, I am really hoping we get a classic Bill Walton sound byte to rebut O’Neal’s comments. You know, something like…
“Shaquille O’Neal, what a player, but what a human being! Mr. O’Neal, you know I mean nothing personal by my criticism; I just want you to be you. We know what you’ve done in the past; we know what you are all about! You could turn yourself into a Greg Ostertag-esque presence down in the paint! I mean, you are working with Steve Nash. And wow, Steve Nash! He won’t blow you away with any athleticism, but I haven’t seen a man shoot the ball and deliver passes in the manner that he does in quite some time. Did Magic Johnson and World B. Free get together and have a baby? I think that they did. And that’s why I like Steve Nash and the Suns to do some damage this year in the Western Conference.”
Now, all of this nonsense about verbalizing the perfect quote has got me thinking. What are the funniest sports sound bytes of all time? Why not make a list? So, with this in mind, I give you some of my favorite sports quotes:
(Note that these quotes are not in any particular order, save the top five, which are ranked accordingly. I’ve also removed quotes that are hilarious when viewed, yet aren’t funny in print—so no coaching tirades.)
“This is the second most exciting indoor sport, and the other one shouldn't have spectators.”-- Dick Vertleib
"The only thing that keeps this organization from being recognized as one of the finest in baseball is wins and losses at the major league level."-- Devil Rays GM Chuck Lamar on his team
"Because there are no fours."-- Colossal waste of talent Antoine Walker when asked why he shoots so many three pointers
"I am the most loyal player money can buy." --Baseball player Don Sutton
"People think we make $3 million and $4 million a year. They don't realize that most of us only make $500,000." --Baseball player Pete Incaviglia
"They shouldn't throw at me. I'm the father of five or six kids."--Baseball player Tito Fuentes, after getting hit by a pitch
"I want all the kids to do what I do, to look up to me. I want all the kids to copulate me." --Chicago Cubs outfielder Andre Dawson on being a role model
"I don't care what the tape says. I didn't say it."--Football coach Ray Malavasi
"Hawaii doesn't win many games in the United States." --Football analyst Lee Corso
"Any time Detroit scores more than 100 points and holds the other team below 100 points, they almost always win." --Doug Collins
"I've won at every level, except college and pro." --Shaquille O'Neal, on his lack of championships
"We're going to turn this team around 360 degrees."--Jason Kidd
"I'm glad you're doing this story on us and not on the WNBA. We're so much prettier than all the other women in sports." -Martina Hingis in Detour Magazine
"I can sell out Madison Square Garden masturbating."
--Mike Tyson
"I am the most ruthless, brutal champion ever. There is no one who can match me. I want your heart. I want to eat your children." --Mike Tyson to Lennox Lewis
"I might just fade into bolivion. I am going to chill with my children and fly my birds."
--Mike Tyson (attempting to say oblivion) after a loss to Lennox Lewis
"Ah, isn't that nice, the wife of the Cambridge president is kissing the cox of the Oxford crew."-Harry Carpenter during a BBC TV Boat Race 1977
5) "I'm trying to be a good teammate here … let's just say we had some problems with protection."
--Peyton Manning, in reference to his offensive line after a playoff loss to the Pittsburgh Steelers. (What? It’s not funny? I think this is hilarious!)
4) "This is Gregoriava from Bulgaria....I saw her snatch this morning and it was amazing."--Pat Glenn, a weightlifting commentator
3) “You’re with me, leather.”
--ESPN commentator (as well as a husband and father) stealing an attractive, leather-clad woman from a fellow sportswriter at a bar during a past Super Bowl week
2) "The girls danced, started fondling me, I got aroused, they performed oral sex. I hung around a little bit and talked to them, then I left."
--Patrick Ewing in an official court testimony
1) "[He] called me a 'rapist' and a 'recluse'. I'm not a recluse."--Mike Tyson, on writer Wallace Matthews
Shaq, who has a long history with Walton (he tutored the big man when he attended LSU), countered that the analyst’s “resume isn’t quite good enough to speak on what I’ve done. I look at what Mr. Walton has done and what he’s said—and one thing I hate is a hypocrite.”
First off, this only adds to the Lakers/Suns rivalry as now not only is it Shaq vs. Kobe, but it might also be Shaq vs. Luke Walton. Secondly, I am really hoping we get a classic Bill Walton sound byte to rebut O’Neal’s comments. You know, something like…
“Shaquille O’Neal, what a player, but what a human being! Mr. O’Neal, you know I mean nothing personal by my criticism; I just want you to be you. We know what you’ve done in the past; we know what you are all about! You could turn yourself into a Greg Ostertag-esque presence down in the paint! I mean, you are working with Steve Nash. And wow, Steve Nash! He won’t blow you away with any athleticism, but I haven’t seen a man shoot the ball and deliver passes in the manner that he does in quite some time. Did Magic Johnson and World B. Free get together and have a baby? I think that they did. And that’s why I like Steve Nash and the Suns to do some damage this year in the Western Conference.”
Now, all of this nonsense about verbalizing the perfect quote has got me thinking. What are the funniest sports sound bytes of all time? Why not make a list? So, with this in mind, I give you some of my favorite sports quotes:
(Note that these quotes are not in any particular order, save the top five, which are ranked accordingly. I’ve also removed quotes that are hilarious when viewed, yet aren’t funny in print—so no coaching tirades.)
“This is the second most exciting indoor sport, and the other one shouldn't have spectators.”-- Dick Vertleib
"The only thing that keeps this organization from being recognized as one of the finest in baseball is wins and losses at the major league level."-- Devil Rays GM Chuck Lamar on his team
"Because there are no fours."-- Colossal waste of talent Antoine Walker when asked why he shoots so many three pointers
"I am the most loyal player money can buy." --Baseball player Don Sutton
"People think we make $3 million and $4 million a year. They don't realize that most of us only make $500,000." --Baseball player Pete Incaviglia
"They shouldn't throw at me. I'm the father of five or six kids."--Baseball player Tito Fuentes, after getting hit by a pitch
"I want all the kids to do what I do, to look up to me. I want all the kids to copulate me." --Chicago Cubs outfielder Andre Dawson on being a role model
"I don't care what the tape says. I didn't say it."--Football coach Ray Malavasi
"Hawaii doesn't win many games in the United States." --Football analyst Lee Corso
"Any time Detroit scores more than 100 points and holds the other team below 100 points, they almost always win." --Doug Collins
"I've won at every level, except college and pro." --Shaquille O'Neal, on his lack of championships
"We're going to turn this team around 360 degrees."--Jason Kidd
"I'm glad you're doing this story on us and not on the WNBA. We're so much prettier than all the other women in sports." -Martina Hingis in Detour Magazine
"I can sell out Madison Square Garden masturbating."
--Mike Tyson
"I am the most ruthless, brutal champion ever. There is no one who can match me. I want your heart. I want to eat your children." --Mike Tyson to Lennox Lewis
"I might just fade into bolivion. I am going to chill with my children and fly my birds."
--Mike Tyson (attempting to say oblivion) after a loss to Lennox Lewis
"Ah, isn't that nice, the wife of the Cambridge president is kissing the cox of the Oxford crew."-Harry Carpenter during a BBC TV Boat Race 1977
5) "I'm trying to be a good teammate here … let's just say we had some problems with protection."
--Peyton Manning, in reference to his offensive line after a playoff loss to the Pittsburgh Steelers. (What? It’s not funny? I think this is hilarious!)
4) "This is Gregoriava from Bulgaria....I saw her snatch this morning and it was amazing."--Pat Glenn, a weightlifting commentator
3) “You’re with me, leather.”
--ESPN commentator (as well as a husband and father) stealing an attractive, leather-clad woman from a fellow sportswriter at a bar during a past Super Bowl week
2) "The girls danced, started fondling me, I got aroused, they performed oral sex. I hung around a little bit and talked to them, then I left."
--Patrick Ewing in an official court testimony
1) "[He] called me a 'rapist' and a 'recluse'. I'm not a recluse."--Mike Tyson, on writer Wallace Matthews
Most Likely Jason Will Go His Way and Devin Will Go Shine
--When asked about his feelings on moving to Dallas to play for the Mavericks, Jason Kidd replied that he looks forward to being able to play with his new teammates, but the biggest perk is “being able to beat my family in a state that is a lot more understanding of this sort of thing.”
--Speaking of big trades, I was perusing foxsports.com this morning and came across Mike Kahn’s analysis of all the wheeling and dealing that is taking place in the NBA right now. I present an excerpt from his breakdown of the Los Angeles Lakers:
“… now if [those] Lakers fans calling for general manager Mitch Kupchak’s head will please step forward, grab your ankles and take your medicine, we can get this over with. Mitch, will you please take the big paddle with the holes in it? And when we’re finished, the knuckleheads in L.A. will have no alternative but to look at you and respond, ‘Thank you sir, may I have another.’”
Can we take a closer look at this?
“…will please step forward, grab your ankles, and take your medicine…”
Okay, I realize that I write a sports blog, so I should not be in a position to dole out advice to anyone who gets paid for their work. Nevertheless, in my humble opinion, I don’t believe that using the term ‘grab your ankles’ is the smartest thing in the world. I realize he ultimately referred to receiving a spanking (which is still a little iffy in the acceptable department), but when I first read this, my initial thought was “where in the hell is he going with this?”
--While we are on the subject of Mitch Kupchak (sans the creepy S&M image provided by Mr. Kahn), I would like to ask a question: is there any way at all that he is not executive of the year? He went against the grain to hold on to Andrew Bynum (which is paying dividends), his draft picks from the past few years are molding into one of the best supporting casts in the NBA, he unloaded Kwame Brown’s contract and got Pau Gasol in return...he has basically gone about his business, quietly assembling a championship contender, all the while being chastised by anyone and everyone. Maybe you give the award to Danny Ainge, but keep in mind, Ainge assembled his team by mortgaging the future to win now. Kupchak has laid out a blueprint to make Los Angeles a contender for (at least) the next five years. So tell me, who is better than who?
--My roommate and I were discussing NASCAR, surprisingly, and we came to a realization: NASCAR could have an “all-star weekend.” Think about it this way, everybody bitches and moans about restrictions and regulations on specs that limit the cars, so why not have a Friday/Saturday/Sunday showcase, throwing the rules aside? You could have a 100 mile, no regulations race for the Busch (or is it Nationwide now?) guys on Friday, have the ten highest guys in the points standings at the time of the event get together on Saturday for a timed obstacle course of sorts, and have the Sprint Cup racers have their own 100 mile no regulations race on Sunday. Some potential safety issues aside, this could be amazing. So much so that even I would be inclined to watch.
…
Okay, maybe not.
--While on the topic of NASCAR, I would like to mention this comical segment that aired on CNN. It showed a myriad of racers defending the idea of racing being a sport. I’m not going to argue the merits of that logic, but I will say that they are kidding themselves if they think they are bigger athletes than football or basketball players. Two of my favorite comments:
“I’d like to see those guys play the entire game in an unbearably hot chamber…” (My personal favorite “NASCAR is a sport” argument. Are you saying that if I turn my car heater all the way up on a 100 degree day that I’m an athlete?)
and
“Yeah, those guys don’t exactly have it easy, and last time I checked, we don’t get to go to the sideline for timeouts…” (What exactly do you call a pit-stop? Oh! I forgot that you don’t get to leave your unbearably hot chamber, so it doesn’t count.)
--I was listening to the Elvis Presley song “In the Ghetto” the other day, and while it is a great song, you could easily make the case that it has very racist undertones. It never mentions skin color, but what do you think the songwriter (Scot Davis) had in mind when he set out to tell the tale of a boy who grows up, starts to fight and steal, and is ultimately shot and killed “in the ghetto?” I’m just saying…
--Okay, bear with me on this next thought. I’d like to make reference to a couple of television shows that I absolutely love. The first comes from an episode of Roseanne. In it, the family is unable to pay the electric bill in time, finds out at the last minute that they will be cut off, and scrambles to gather flashlights and candles in preparation of the darkness. When the lights finally go out, Roseanne looks to her husband, Dan, and, with a shrug, wryly says: “Well, middle class sure was fun.”
The second thought is actually an observation that I came up with while watching yet another rerun of Scrubs a few nights ago. In season one, then-intern Elliot Reid befriends a frequent, and very neurotic, patient, Jill Tracy. Jill is featured in a couple of episodes, the second of which alludes to her growing close to Elliot. In season four, Jill passes away and, while J.D. feels immense guilt about the death, Elliot is alarmingly unaffected. Would you not think that the writers would at least have Elliot acknowledge her death to validate the blossoming friendship as seen is season one? Am I reading way too much into this television show? Are you wondering what I’m talking about because you don’t watch Scrubs? If you answered yes to the either of the two final questions, fear not. I am switching gears back to sports for one more thought.
--I would just like to make it known that the Jason Kidd joke that kicked off this post was initially the centerpiece of an elaborate press conference parody. After a clumsy opening, it dawned on me that it might not be such a great idea to create a 2500 word post based solely around one joke. Here is a taste of what could have been, were I foolish enough to grind the blog entry out:
1) I was going to make Jeff Schwartz (Jason Kidd’s agent) out to be a Drew Rosenhaus-type character. While I have every right to assume that Schwartz is an asshole (he is a sports agent, after all), I can’t assume that his douchiness reaches Rosenhaus levels. Thus, I can’t depict him as a surly moderator at a press conference.
2) Keeping with the “prick agent” stereotype, I initially had Scwhartz use a derogatory term for Keith Van Horn, only to be lectured by a reporter. Schwartz would then have the reporter thoroughly embarrassed and then removed. It would later be discovered that the reporter’s eight year old son was watching the entire incident, because he was “proud to finally see Daddy on T.V.”
3) I was then going to depict Jason Kidd as a lackadaisical half-wit (mainly because it always seems like he just smoked a blunt right before every interview), going so far as to have him analyze Devean George’s trade embargo with a Beastie Boys reference (“he just had to fight for his right to party”), with Scwartz jumping in and explaining that “by party, he meant (legalese pertaining to the trade).”
Boy, was I reaching with this or what? You should all thank me that I decided to scrap the post. Why am I posting some of the details? So you can get some amusement out of my embarrassment.
--Speaking of big trades, I was perusing foxsports.com this morning and came across Mike Kahn’s analysis of all the wheeling and dealing that is taking place in the NBA right now. I present an excerpt from his breakdown of the Los Angeles Lakers:
“… now if [those] Lakers fans calling for general manager Mitch Kupchak’s head will please step forward, grab your ankles and take your medicine, we can get this over with. Mitch, will you please take the big paddle with the holes in it? And when we’re finished, the knuckleheads in L.A. will have no alternative but to look at you and respond, ‘Thank you sir, may I have another.’”
Can we take a closer look at this?
“…will please step forward, grab your ankles, and take your medicine…”
Okay, I realize that I write a sports blog, so I should not be in a position to dole out advice to anyone who gets paid for their work. Nevertheless, in my humble opinion, I don’t believe that using the term ‘grab your ankles’ is the smartest thing in the world. I realize he ultimately referred to receiving a spanking (which is still a little iffy in the acceptable department), but when I first read this, my initial thought was “where in the hell is he going with this?”
--While we are on the subject of Mitch Kupchak (sans the creepy S&M image provided by Mr. Kahn), I would like to ask a question: is there any way at all that he is not executive of the year? He went against the grain to hold on to Andrew Bynum (which is paying dividends), his draft picks from the past few years are molding into one of the best supporting casts in the NBA, he unloaded Kwame Brown’s contract and got Pau Gasol in return...he has basically gone about his business, quietly assembling a championship contender, all the while being chastised by anyone and everyone. Maybe you give the award to Danny Ainge, but keep in mind, Ainge assembled his team by mortgaging the future to win now. Kupchak has laid out a blueprint to make Los Angeles a contender for (at least) the next five years. So tell me, who is better than who?
--My roommate and I were discussing NASCAR, surprisingly, and we came to a realization: NASCAR could have an “all-star weekend.” Think about it this way, everybody bitches and moans about restrictions and regulations on specs that limit the cars, so why not have a Friday/Saturday/Sunday showcase, throwing the rules aside? You could have a 100 mile, no regulations race for the Busch (or is it Nationwide now?) guys on Friday, have the ten highest guys in the points standings at the time of the event get together on Saturday for a timed obstacle course of sorts, and have the Sprint Cup racers have their own 100 mile no regulations race on Sunday. Some potential safety issues aside, this could be amazing. So much so that even I would be inclined to watch.
…
Okay, maybe not.
--While on the topic of NASCAR, I would like to mention this comical segment that aired on CNN. It showed a myriad of racers defending the idea of racing being a sport. I’m not going to argue the merits of that logic, but I will say that they are kidding themselves if they think they are bigger athletes than football or basketball players. Two of my favorite comments:
“I’d like to see those guys play the entire game in an unbearably hot chamber…” (My personal favorite “NASCAR is a sport” argument. Are you saying that if I turn my car heater all the way up on a 100 degree day that I’m an athlete?)
and
“Yeah, those guys don’t exactly have it easy, and last time I checked, we don’t get to go to the sideline for timeouts…” (What exactly do you call a pit-stop? Oh! I forgot that you don’t get to leave your unbearably hot chamber, so it doesn’t count.)
--I was listening to the Elvis Presley song “In the Ghetto” the other day, and while it is a great song, you could easily make the case that it has very racist undertones. It never mentions skin color, but what do you think the songwriter (Scot Davis) had in mind when he set out to tell the tale of a boy who grows up, starts to fight and steal, and is ultimately shot and killed “in the ghetto?” I’m just saying…
--Okay, bear with me on this next thought. I’d like to make reference to a couple of television shows that I absolutely love. The first comes from an episode of Roseanne. In it, the family is unable to pay the electric bill in time, finds out at the last minute that they will be cut off, and scrambles to gather flashlights and candles in preparation of the darkness. When the lights finally go out, Roseanne looks to her husband, Dan, and, with a shrug, wryly says: “Well, middle class sure was fun.”
The second thought is actually an observation that I came up with while watching yet another rerun of Scrubs a few nights ago. In season one, then-intern Elliot Reid befriends a frequent, and very neurotic, patient, Jill Tracy. Jill is featured in a couple of episodes, the second of which alludes to her growing close to Elliot. In season four, Jill passes away and, while J.D. feels immense guilt about the death, Elliot is alarmingly unaffected. Would you not think that the writers would at least have Elliot acknowledge her death to validate the blossoming friendship as seen is season one? Am I reading way too much into this television show? Are you wondering what I’m talking about because you don’t watch Scrubs? If you answered yes to the either of the two final questions, fear not. I am switching gears back to sports for one more thought.
--I would just like to make it known that the Jason Kidd joke that kicked off this post was initially the centerpiece of an elaborate press conference parody. After a clumsy opening, it dawned on me that it might not be such a great idea to create a 2500 word post based solely around one joke. Here is a taste of what could have been, were I foolish enough to grind the blog entry out:
1) I was going to make Jeff Schwartz (Jason Kidd’s agent) out to be a Drew Rosenhaus-type character. While I have every right to assume that Schwartz is an asshole (he is a sports agent, after all), I can’t assume that his douchiness reaches Rosenhaus levels. Thus, I can’t depict him as a surly moderator at a press conference.
2) Keeping with the “prick agent” stereotype, I initially had Scwhartz use a derogatory term for Keith Van Horn, only to be lectured by a reporter. Schwartz would then have the reporter thoroughly embarrassed and then removed. It would later be discovered that the reporter’s eight year old son was watching the entire incident, because he was “proud to finally see Daddy on T.V.”
3) I was then going to depict Jason Kidd as a lackadaisical half-wit (mainly because it always seems like he just smoked a blunt right before every interview), going so far as to have him analyze Devean George’s trade embargo with a Beastie Boys reference (“he just had to fight for his right to party”), with Scwartz jumping in and explaining that “by party, he meant (legalese pertaining to the trade).”
Boy, was I reaching with this or what? You should all thank me that I decided to scrap the post. Why am I posting some of the details? So you can get some amusement out of my embarrassment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)