The race for October is heating up, and here's how the standings look with about 35 games remaining for each team.
AL East
Boston 73 - 54, -
Yankees 67 - 60, 6 games out
Toronto 66 - 61, 7 games out
Tampa Bay 49 - 77, 23 1/2 games out
AL Wild Card
Yankees 67 - 60, need one win to clinch playoff birth
White Sox 0 - 127, disqualified
Minnesota 0 - 127, disqualified
After last night's humiliating loss to the Blue Jays, can we finally stop talking about the Yankees as contenders?
Teams in the playoffs, if the playoffs started today:
Tampa Bay
Chicago White Sox
Anaheim Angels
New York Mets
Chicago Cubs
Milwaukee Brewers
Arizona Diamondbacks
Teams not in the playoffs, if the playoffs started today:
Boston Red Sox / Minnesota Twins (one game play-in)
New York Yankees
Los Angeles Manny Being Mannies
Friday, August 22, 2008
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Newsflash: ESPN sucks
John Buccigross, during Sportscenter's highlights of the epic Indians-Royals game, speaking about Cleveland shortstop Jhonny Peralta:
"If he played anywhere else, they'd be talking about him as an elite shortstop."
Who's they, dipstick? Maybe your network could, if you weren't trying to force feed us the antics of 12 year olds non-stop.
"If he played anywhere else, they'd be talking about him as an elite shortstop."
Who's they, dipstick? Maybe your network could, if you weren't trying to force feed us the antics of 12 year olds non-stop.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
"Going yard" with the Little League World Series
Sometime in October, the Milwaukee Brewers or the Tampa Bay Rays will win their league's pennant, and many of us will not even know their lineups or entire pitching rotations. Sports media types will talk about these "surprise teams" as if it wasn't obvious they would be making the playoffs in August.
And why couldn't they inform us about these teams in August you ask? Because they were too busy showing us the home runs of snot-nosed kids with an overinflated sense of self thanks to these same overhyping whoring morons. Thanks.
And why couldn't they inform us about these teams in August you ask? Because they were too busy showing us the home runs of snot-nosed kids with an overinflated sense of self thanks to these same overhyping whoring morons. Thanks.
Monday, August 18, 2008
An order of Turd pudding and a side of BROWN pants?
Yes, nothing like hearing know-nothings like Tony Kornheiser talk about how bad your football team is for an hour during their first nationally televised appearance of the year. Almost as good is having the ESPN announce team pronounce that the Browns had no chance against the Giants in the rematch later in the season because of the results of one quarter of one preseason game. Good thing the Giants didn't show up for the NFC title game in Lambeau after getting dominated by the Packers last regular season, I'll tell you that.
And nothing like seeing D.A. leave with a concussion.
And nothing like seeing Brown pants. WTF??? Look, either bring back the Brian Sipe orange pants, or stick with the white shirt white pants look. And God help us if they ever went all Brown...
Anyway, clearly the team is just lulling the rest of the league into a false sense of security. Yuck.
And nothing like seeing D.A. leave with a concussion.
And nothing like seeing Brown pants. WTF??? Look, either bring back the Brian Sipe orange pants, or stick with the white shirt white pants look. And God help us if they ever went all Brown...
Anyway, clearly the team is just lulling the rest of the league into a false sense of security. Yuck.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Arizona's Acquisition of Adam Dunn makes the Mets the team to beat in the NL East
A guest column by ESPN's Buster Olney
At the time of his trade, Adam Dunn had mashed 32 home runs. This tied him with Carlos Quentin of the Chicago White Sox of the American League for the Major League Lead. This is major news, because as any encyclopedia of baseball can tell you, no one who has ever led their league in home runs has ever been traded before. It's also interesting because Dunn is the first name player ever to be traded to the Diamondbacks, who play way out there in the NL South. When Arizona's not serving its purpose as the Yankees' farm system, they're playing through a futile attempt to hold off the amazing Dodgers and the incredible Manny, who has been Manny enough to lead the Dodgers to a record two games over .500. In the brief history of the division (2004), this is the highest winning percentage any team has ever had. I give Arizona a 0% chance of holding them off.
Now, let me tell you who the real winner between this trade of the Reds and Diamondbacks was. The New York Mets. The Mets, who entered play Tuesday at 62 - 56, sit a mere four games in front of Philadelphia for the NL East lead. The Mets have already finished their season series with Arizona, and I'm pretty sure the Phillies still have to play them - so the advantage here goes to the Mets. New York has also already finished their season series with the Reds, preventing anyone from claiming that the Mets' 9th straight division title was earned by beating teams that had already given up on the season. Thirdly, Arizona's a ridiculously small market. I don't know how they can possibly even have a baseball team, but they do. There's no way they'll be able to keep Adam Dunn for more than these two months - and at that point, the Mets will be able to sweep in and grab both Dunn and CC Sabathia of the Brewers, making sure that in 2009 we'll be able to see the league championship series that we all want: Red Sox - Yankees and Mets - Cubs. Those four clubs have more tradition than the other 26 combined, and quite frankly it's a crime that they're not the last four teams standing every year - but the trade of Adam Dunn to the Diamondbacks changes everything. This trade is the thing that puts the Mets over the top in the National League East.
This has been a special guest column by ESPN's very own Buster Olney
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Welcome to the Weekend
It's the weekend, so you know what that means: another Indy car race where the television networks attempt to portray Danica Patrick as a sex symbol and fail miserably. Here's a tip to all future racing promoters: sex symbols should be attractive and not look like men. Also, if they're going to be the only racer you're going to talk about, they should have a winning percentage better than .011.
This has been Ja Doe, once again. Where are the other guys, anyway?
This has been Ja Doe, once again. Where are the other guys, anyway?
Friday, August 8, 2008
Chris Mortenson Is A Clown
It’s unbelievable. After Brett Favre unretired, this genius, who is most notable for telling us that Bill Parcells would retire after the 2003, 2004, 2005, AND 2006 seasons and then tooting his own horn when he was finally right, made several Favre-related predictions.
1) Brett would be welcomed back to the Packers.
WRONG.
2) Brett would be traded within the division, most likely to the Minnesota Vikings.
WRONG.
3) Brett Favre would be traded to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
WRONG.
4) Brett Favre was considering taking the Packers’ 25 million dollar marketing offer. Of course, Ed Werder reported the next day that Favre was considering spurning it as ESPN covered all the bases.
Mortenson was (surprise!) wrong again.
He predicted four different outcomes for the 2008 Brett Favre unretirement saga in the span of two months. All four were WRONG. Naturally, ESPN refuses to acknowledge this clown ever made these mistakes. After Favre was traded to the Jets, ESPNNews had the gall to actually have Mortenson on and ask him how he thought this trade would affect the Packers and Jets after he had proven without a shadow of a doubt that he had no idea what he was talking about.
Maybe I’m just still bitter about the 2006 NFC Championship game, when Mortenson, Sean Salisbury and five other ESPN experts predicted the Saints would prevail over the host Chicago Bears, ignoring just about every sign along the way. Mortenson was wrong about that too, as you may have guessed.
Ja Doe attended his first major league game at Municipal Stadium in Cleveland during August of 1992. The Indians beat the Rangers 6 – 2 on a Paul Sorrento home run.
1) Brett would be welcomed back to the Packers.
WRONG.
2) Brett would be traded within the division, most likely to the Minnesota Vikings.
WRONG.
3) Brett Favre would be traded to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
WRONG.
4) Brett Favre was considering taking the Packers’ 25 million dollar marketing offer. Of course, Ed Werder reported the next day that Favre was considering spurning it as ESPN covered all the bases.
Mortenson was (surprise!) wrong again.
He predicted four different outcomes for the 2008 Brett Favre unretirement saga in the span of two months. All four were WRONG. Naturally, ESPN refuses to acknowledge this clown ever made these mistakes. After Favre was traded to the Jets, ESPNNews had the gall to actually have Mortenson on and ask him how he thought this trade would affect the Packers and Jets after he had proven without a shadow of a doubt that he had no idea what he was talking about.
Maybe I’m just still bitter about the 2006 NFC Championship game, when Mortenson, Sean Salisbury and five other ESPN experts predicted the Saints would prevail over the host Chicago Bears, ignoring just about every sign along the way. Mortenson was wrong about that too, as you may have guessed.
Ja Doe attended his first major league game at Municipal Stadium in Cleveland during August of 1992. The Indians beat the Rangers 6 – 2 on a Paul Sorrento home run.
Tim Tebow Is Terrible
Now that I've successfully grabbed your attention, allow me to state that this is not exactly how I feel. I just feel that Tim Tebow is doomed to failure as an NFL quarterback, and it would be a terrible move to draft him as such. Here's why.
The Scrambling Quarterback OR Tim Tebow Sucks
The NFL has gone through some changes throughout the years. In 1977, defense was at its most recent peak – teams were allowing (and likewise scoring) less points than in any year since the NFL was hampered by World War II (in 1942, for example, the Lions (who else) went 0 – 11 and somehow only scored 38 points all year). In 1977, the Atlanta Falcons set a modern day record when they allowed only 129 points in 14 games. Of course, they only scored 179 points and went 7 – 7. Rules were liberalized in 1978, and the NFL has seen an explosion of offense since then – especially passing offense.
The Chicago Bears are in a precarious position – they have to win this year, or blow up their offense and start over. Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton will both have to go if the Bears fail to win at least 9 games. At the start of this season, however, it appears that no quarterbacks will be available in the 2009 NFL draft worth making a franchise signal-caller.
There is one guy that a lot of people like, and I can’t figure out the reason. If the Bears drafted him and played him at quarterback, it would torpedo their organization for a good eight or ten years. I am, of course, referring to 20-rushing touchdown / 20-passing touchdown one-time national champion Tim Tebow out of Florida.
Tim Tebow will not be a good NFL quarterback. Tim Tebow will not even be a serviceable NFL quarterback. Tim Tebow is going to fail in the NFL as a quarterback. This should be apparent to anyone who watches football, but it isn’t. The NFL is not built for running quarterbacks. The only way to be a successful quarterback in today’s National Football League is to be a pocket passer. It helps to be mobile, sure, but if a quarterback uses his running and passing abilities to equal measure, he will not succeed in the NFL. Michael Vick, for all of his faults, had the greatest scrambling ability of any NFL quarterback ever. He broke Bobby Douglass’ 34-year-old record of 968 rushing yards for a quarterback in 2006 when he rushed for 1,039 yards. What did it get his team? It got them a 7 – 9 record. Vick had one NFC title game appearance, in 2004 – a 27 – 10 loss to the Eagles. If Michael Vick’s scrambling ability could not usher in a new paradigm where scrambling quarterbacks led the way and pocket passers were left in the dust, it cannot be done. At least, it cannot be done without a change in rules making it easier for quarterbacks to scramble and more difficult for them to pass. As presently constructed, NFL rules render running quarterbacks unviable. How many quarterbacks must fail, and how many college QBs must have a potential career wasted because their college coach doesn’t force them to learn how to be a pocket passer? Hey Terrell Pryor – I’m watching you, and I’m going to watch you be awful in the NFL, too.
People think Tim Tebow is different for some reason. Here’s why – it’s because he’s a white scrambling quarterback. Oddly, people (white and black) tend to think that pocket passing is a “white man’s” method of passing, while it is more natural for black quarterbacks to use their athletic ability and scramble. This is ridiculous, and perpetuated by (who else?) the media. Just ask Hall-of-Famer (and pocket passer) Warren Moon what the most effective strategy is. It’s not a black thing or a white thing, it’s a “pocket-passing works and scrambling doesn’t” thing. Tim Tebow is not going to succeed where the others failed because he’s more talented, or a better runner, or a better passer, or because he’s white where all the other running QB’s weren’t. He’s not going to succeed at all because he’s a running quarterback. Hopefully, Tim Tebow - as a white running QB spectacularly failing in the NFL - will put this myth to bed once and for all. I just hope he doesn’t put it to bed while playing for the Chicago Bears.
This brings me back to the Bears, as was my goal. If Rex Grossman flops, it’s likely that the Bears’ fan base will not want to see them draft another quarterback out of Florida anyway (a school that has produced an astounding number of quarterback flops in recent years, actually). Another option they could go for is Curtis Painter, a pocket passer, out of Purdue… except that Kyle Orton also attended Purdue, and they might want to stay away from that school too. So what options do they have? Their only option, really, is to succeed this season and make it irrelevant. Hopefully that loss to the Chiefs was just preseason jitters and not a harbinger of a terrible year to come.
As a youth, Ja Doe attended 15 Norwich Navigators games. He saw a loss, two wins, eleven consecutive losses, and a win before the team became a San Francisco Giants affiliate and he ceased going out of principle.
The Scrambling Quarterback OR Tim Tebow Sucks
The NFL has gone through some changes throughout the years. In 1977, defense was at its most recent peak – teams were allowing (and likewise scoring) less points than in any year since the NFL was hampered by World War II (in 1942, for example, the Lions (who else) went 0 – 11 and somehow only scored 38 points all year). In 1977, the Atlanta Falcons set a modern day record when they allowed only 129 points in 14 games. Of course, they only scored 179 points and went 7 – 7. Rules were liberalized in 1978, and the NFL has seen an explosion of offense since then – especially passing offense.
The Chicago Bears are in a precarious position – they have to win this year, or blow up their offense and start over. Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton will both have to go if the Bears fail to win at least 9 games. At the start of this season, however, it appears that no quarterbacks will be available in the 2009 NFL draft worth making a franchise signal-caller.
There is one guy that a lot of people like, and I can’t figure out the reason. If the Bears drafted him and played him at quarterback, it would torpedo their organization for a good eight or ten years. I am, of course, referring to 20-rushing touchdown / 20-passing touchdown one-time national champion Tim Tebow out of Florida.
Tim Tebow will not be a good NFL quarterback. Tim Tebow will not even be a serviceable NFL quarterback. Tim Tebow is going to fail in the NFL as a quarterback. This should be apparent to anyone who watches football, but it isn’t. The NFL is not built for running quarterbacks. The only way to be a successful quarterback in today’s National Football League is to be a pocket passer. It helps to be mobile, sure, but if a quarterback uses his running and passing abilities to equal measure, he will not succeed in the NFL. Michael Vick, for all of his faults, had the greatest scrambling ability of any NFL quarterback ever. He broke Bobby Douglass’ 34-year-old record of 968 rushing yards for a quarterback in 2006 when he rushed for 1,039 yards. What did it get his team? It got them a 7 – 9 record. Vick had one NFC title game appearance, in 2004 – a 27 – 10 loss to the Eagles. If Michael Vick’s scrambling ability could not usher in a new paradigm where scrambling quarterbacks led the way and pocket passers were left in the dust, it cannot be done. At least, it cannot be done without a change in rules making it easier for quarterbacks to scramble and more difficult for them to pass. As presently constructed, NFL rules render running quarterbacks unviable. How many quarterbacks must fail, and how many college QBs must have a potential career wasted because their college coach doesn’t force them to learn how to be a pocket passer? Hey Terrell Pryor – I’m watching you, and I’m going to watch you be awful in the NFL, too.
People think Tim Tebow is different for some reason. Here’s why – it’s because he’s a white scrambling quarterback. Oddly, people (white and black) tend to think that pocket passing is a “white man’s” method of passing, while it is more natural for black quarterbacks to use their athletic ability and scramble. This is ridiculous, and perpetuated by (who else?) the media. Just ask Hall-of-Famer (and pocket passer) Warren Moon what the most effective strategy is. It’s not a black thing or a white thing, it’s a “pocket-passing works and scrambling doesn’t” thing. Tim Tebow is not going to succeed where the others failed because he’s more talented, or a better runner, or a better passer, or because he’s white where all the other running QB’s weren’t. He’s not going to succeed at all because he’s a running quarterback. Hopefully, Tim Tebow - as a white running QB spectacularly failing in the NFL - will put this myth to bed once and for all. I just hope he doesn’t put it to bed while playing for the Chicago Bears.
This brings me back to the Bears, as was my goal. If Rex Grossman flops, it’s likely that the Bears’ fan base will not want to see them draft another quarterback out of Florida anyway (a school that has produced an astounding number of quarterback flops in recent years, actually). Another option they could go for is Curtis Painter, a pocket passer, out of Purdue… except that Kyle Orton also attended Purdue, and they might want to stay away from that school too. So what options do they have? Their only option, really, is to succeed this season and make it irrelevant. Hopefully that loss to the Chiefs was just preseason jitters and not a harbinger of a terrible year to come.
As a youth, Ja Doe attended 15 Norwich Navigators games. He saw a loss, two wins, eleven consecutive losses, and a win before the team became a San Francisco Giants affiliate and he ceased going out of principle.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
BREAKING NEWS- FAVRE TO THE JETS
Well, thank God for that. Now, the Mainstream Sports Media have another overrated player and New York sports team to talk about for the next six months that won't be making the playoffs to replace the Yanks and the injured Joba Chamberlain. Pheeeeeee-ew.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Is Green Bay Really In The Wrong?
On the possibility that the Green Bay Packers are actually making the correct decision in regards to their quarterback competition between Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers.
Brett Favre is a pretty good quarterback. Three-time MVP, winning quarterback of Super Bowl XXXI, the NFL’s all-time leader in passing yards, touchdowns, and numerous other categories. You’ve heard all of that. He just had a pretty good season – the Packers went 13 – 3 and won their fourth NFC North title in the six years of the division’s existence. So why are the Packers so eager to see him gone?
Let me preface this post by saying that I root for the Chicago Bears, and while I usually don’t have the Packers’ best interest in mind, I will attempt to be objective throughout this piece. BUDawg and Nat Turner do not root for the Bears, and the views expressed are mine and mine alone.
Mike McCarthy has been the coach of the Packers for the last two seasons. In 2006, he went 8 – 8, and 2007, he went 13 – 3, both seasons coming with Brett Favre at the helm. He has had the opportunity to watch Aaron Rodgers in practice time and time again, whereas our only real glimpse of Aaron Rodgers came in a 37 – 27 loss to the Dallas Cowboys, who also went 13 – 3 last season. While overrated by the media, Dallas was still a pretty good team last year, and losing to them in Dallas by 10 points was not a terrible loss. Was this performance, along with what he saw in practice, really enough to convince McCarthy and the higher-ups that Aaron Rodgers gave Green Bay a better chance at winning the Super Bowl? Evidently, it must have.
“But wait!” you cry. “Brett Favre has one losing season and one super bowl ring! He’s a three-time MVP! He gives the Packers way more of a chance to win the Super Bowl!” He is all of those things, but does he give the Packers a better chance? We don’t know. We’ve only seen Aaron Rodgers once. He could be the Steve Young to Brett’s Joe Montana. We just don’t know, and there’s only one way to find out. In these situations, it’s better to be a year too early than a year too late. Brett Favre is 38. Even with the advances in medicine, not many quarterbacks are effective when they reach 38 or 39. How long are they supposed to keep Brett? Until he can’t play anymore? Aaron Rodgers could be out of his prime by that point, and the Packers would have to draft a new quarterback, and the franchise could be absolutely torpedoed.
The Packers need to know what they have in Aaron Rodgers before the uncapped year. With the way the Green Bay ownership system works, it is impossible for them to compete with the Dan Snyders or the Jerry Joneses or the Robert Krafts… or even the Fords, if the Lions ever decide to do anything. With Ryan Grant and AJ Hawk, among others, the Packers have a talented young nucleus. What if Brett plays until the uncapped year, and then we find out Aaron Rodgers is a bust? Green Bay can’t afford to go after any high-priced quarterbacks. They’d have to develop one through the draft and waste the prime years of their best players with a brand new quarterback – and all of the losing seasons to follow would be just to see if a 40-year old man can lead a team to a Super Bowl championship. Or maybe Brett will pull the whole retirement-non-retirement charade again after this next season. Will the Packers be at fault again? What are they supposed to do?
“But wait!” you cry again. “If Aaron Rodgers is so much better than Brett Favre, then the Packers should let Brett go elsewhere and let other cities see his love of the game. He does love the game of football, you know.” No, they shouldn’t. The Packers don’t think Brett Favre is terrible at this stage of his career – they just think Aaron Rodgers gives them a more viable shot at a super bowl ring. But they don’t know how durable Rodgers is. If your starting QB gets injured, would you rather have Brett Favre come in, or Craig Nall? I thought as much. And even if Green Bay thinks Favre isn’t as good as Rodgers at this point, they probably think Brett is better than Tavaris Jackson, Rex Grossman, or Kyle Orton, and that the addition of #4 would be enough for Chicago or Minnesota to leapfrog the Packers in the NFC North pecking order. That would leave Green Bay competing for a Wild Card spot, and while they could beat out two of Dallas, Philly, the defending champion Giants, Saints, Bucs, or Panthers, as well as the other of Minnesota and Chicago, it won’t be easy. Why risk making one of your rivals better when you could put together the best QB/backup combo in the league, if your hunch on Aaron Rodgers is right?
And that seems to be where the debate is – how can Green Bay possibly think Aaron Rodgers is better than Brett Favre at this point, especially after last season? Again, McCarthy has seen more of Aaron Rodgers play than anyone since Rodgers left Cal. If anyone is fit to make that decision, it’s McCarthy. Perhaps Green Bay is tired of the high risk Favre and wants to go to a more conservative Rodgers, focus the offense on Ryan Grant and ride an above-average defense to the NFC North championship, which will probably be won with a mere 10 victories.
Going conservative could be a good option for Green Bay. The last pass Favre threw in an NFL game was a killer interception in overtime of the NFC championship game that led to the Giants’ game-winning field goal. As mentioned by the Cold Hard Football Facts, Brett’s “gunslinger” mentality was also responsible for the Packers first ever home playoff loss (against the Atlanta Falcons in January of 2003, a game in which he threw two interceptions), a loss to the Rams in January of 2002 where he threw SIX interceptions (though the defense certainly did not help in that one), and a four-interception game against an 8 – 8 Minnesota squad in January of 2005, making Green Bay only the second team ever to lose a playoff game to a team without a winning record. And let’s not forget 2005, where the Packers at one point were 3 – 10 despite scoring just as many points as their opponents. Again, the Cold Hard Football Facts come through with the reasons this occurred, and summarize it far better than I ever could:
“But wait!” you cry for the third time. “2005 and 2006 were an aberration! Last year was the real Brett!” How sure are we that 2007 was not the aberration, as opposed to 2005 and 2006? Remember, Favre is 38 years old. Before his resurgence, his average season was as follows: 337 of 548 for 3,833 yards, 27 touchdowns, and 18 interceptions. Let’s assume that he avoids a letdown (and ignore how suspicious a career resurgence at 38 happens to be), and posts career-average numbers. That’s one less TD and three more interceptions than 2007, and that is effectively worth one loss. The Packers’ defense gave up 344 points in 2005, 366 in 2006, and 291 in 2007. The Packers gave up only 30 points last season, once in the 37 – 27 loss to Dallas in which Favre was hurt, and again in the completely inexplicable 35 – 7 loss to the Bears, in which Brett Favre threw an interception returned for a touchdown – so the Packers’ defense only gave up 30 points once. Will they stay at a high level, be even better, or will they regress towards the mean? And what of Ryan Grant? He wasn’t the starting running back at the beginning of last season. He really didn’t get set into the lineup until weeks 8 – 10. That means he was running his best against the weakened offensive lines late in the season. How will he hold up against a full 16-game beating? Will he play as hard now that he’s not playing for a contract? We don’t know the answer, but again, it’s an area in which the Packers will most likely be worse than they were in 2007. Don’t forget that the other teams try too: Chicago will have a healthy defense and offensive line, and everyone agrees that Minnesota will be improved. Green Bay doesn’t have to fall as far as you think to miss the playoffs, and the difference could be one Brett Favre “gunsling”.
One final point I would like to make is the media’s (especially ESPN and noted Favre sycophant Peter King) absurd treatment of this entire story. Ignoring the fact that they constantly complain about the circus atmosphere which is entirely their own creation, they have all taken the side of Brett Favre. No one has taken the side that “Hey, maybe Green Bay is making the right choice.” They are taking Brett’s side for five reasons. He is a quarterback, he puts up gaudy statistics (or did in the past), his opponent is a faceless conglomerate or corporation, he is personable (and white), and most importantly, he is nice to the media. I will not delve into the news media’s distaste for faceless conglomerates, whether they be Wal-Mart, Microsoft, Big Oil, or the Green Bay Packers – well, not very much. If there’s not a face that can go with the title, that entity is deemed “bad”, or “evil”. As soon as the average person can put a face to the product, as soon as the human element is added to these media-created villains, they cease to be evil in the mind of the average person. They become somewhat sympathetic, because hey, they’re people trying to make a buck too. Since every story needs a good guy and bad guy for reasons unknown to me, this is unacceptable. There is no one person responsible for the Packers’ dilemma (okay, there is, but it’s Brett Favre, and he’s the unquestioned hero), so it becomes the faceless entity known only as “The Packers”, or as the more foreboding “The Packers’ brass”. Brett Favre cannot be the villain, again, because he’s a white quarterback who puts up numbers while being nice to the media – in other words “A down to earth guy”, despite making over $7 million a year.
Brett Favre was carrying the Packers as recently as 2004. That year, the Packers went 10 – 6 and won the NFC North. They finished 5th in points scored and 3rd in yards gained. However, they also finished 23rd in points allowed, and 25th in opponents’ yards gained. They also finished an abysmal 27th in turnover margin. It took a great season by the offense (and a terrible division) for the Packers’ to get out of that muck and post 10 wins. Since then, however, the defense has improved significantly. Even though the Packers were 31st in turnover margin in 2005 (mainly thanks to Brett’s 29 interceptions, the most by anyone in over two decades), they improved to 17th in that category in 2006 and 10th last season. They were 4th in points scored, 2nd in yards gained, 6th in points allowed, and 11th in opponents yards gained last season. It was an all-around team effort that led the Packers to a 13 – 3 record, but none of that mattered to the media, who had their story by week 3. It was a career resurgence for Brett. That’s what it was, and no evidence to the contrary could change that. When Dallas defeated Green Bay, the story was that if Brett had been in, then Dallas wouldn’t have won. It wasn’t that Green Bay’s normally sturdy 2007 defense gave up 37 points, a tough hurdle for any quarterback to overcome – it was that Brett wasn’t there. When the Bears torched the Packers in week 16, it was because of the weather and the fact that the Bears were playing “for pride” against a hated rival, not because Brett wasn’t at 100% anymore after 15 weeks of playing better than he had in over two years. Of course, it wasn’t the last time that inclement weather would be Brett’s undoing. When he “led” the Packers to a 42 – 20 victory over the Seahawks in the snow (Ryan Grant’s 201 yards rushing notwithstanding, of course), his problems in Chicago were quickly forgotten. Brett was the master of the elements – until the very next week, when the ridiculous cold in Green Bay affected his aging body more than any other players, and he threw the absolutely horrid interception allowing the Giants to kick the winning field goal, as mentioned earlier. But that wasn’t Brett’s fault, of course. Brett is a good guy who was just trying to win it for the team on a risky play. He just loves the game. If you listened to it, it was if no other quarterback apart from Tony Romo (who is overrated), Tom Brady (whose team allegedly cheats), and Peyton Manning (who is named Peyton), even tries to win half as hard as Brett Favre does. It’s absurd.
Brett was great in the past. From 1995 – 1997 he put up amazing numbers. In those three years, he had 12,179 passing yards, 110 touchdowns against 42 interceptions, and a 37 – 11 record. In 1996 he was the offensive cog of one of the 15 best single season teams since 1950 (you may remember some guy named Reggie White on defense). That team scored 456 points and allowed only 210 en route to Green Bay’s first Super Bowl championship since the Vince Lombardi days. As mentioned, Favre was producing as late as 2004. But Mike McCarthy is betting that 2007 was a fluke, and father time is going to take its toll on Brett this season. It has to eventually. That’s why he’s going to town with Aaron Rodgers under center. And as I said earlier, he needs to know what he’s got in the Cal product. Does Green Bay have a two-year window, or a ten-year window? Right now, there are four possibilities. They may look incredibly stupid this season if Rodgers falls flat on his face and goes 5 – 11 and Brett goes 14 – 2 for the Vikings (or god forbid the Bears) and wins the Super Bowl, or they may look incredibly smart and ESPN will have to eat crow when Rodgers goes 12 – 4 and gives the Packers their fifth NFC North title in seven years while Brett finally ages, and throws 15 TDs and 24 INTs for the 6 – 10 Vikings.
There’s also the possibility that McCarthy is banking on, and the reason the Packers don’t want to trade Favre: Rodgers could go 11 – 5, and so could Favre and the Vikings or Bears or Bucs, and Green Bay would miss the playoffs on a tiebreaker (why risk it? Keep Favre, even if it does take $12 million on the bench), or the possibility that I as a Bears fan am hoping for – that Rodgers turns out to be a bust, goes 6 – 10, and Favre ages 10 years in one offseason and also goes 6 – 10 for Minnesota.
Only the Packers can weigh those four possibilities. They have decided that possibilities 2 and 3 outweigh the probability of possibilities 1 and 4, and that means that Aaron Rodgers is the better option at starting quarterback. He could be the next Steve Young. He’s the devil we don’t know and Brett is the devil that we do. Green Bay is in the unenviable position of needing to know both devils (as opposed to Chicago, with no devils in sight) in order to succeed. It’s not all about instant history. Green Bay cannot compete with the major markets, so they need to look farther into the future than your average squad. This is what they’re doing. As long as Brett Favre doesn’t win a super bowl with his new team, then the Packers have the advantage. Despite Minnesota’s improvement and Dallas’ continued overratedness and the Giants’ upset, the AFC’s overall superiority makes this unlikely if Favre’s window is three years at most (he’ll be 41, and there will come a time where he just won’t be a serviceable NFL QB). As much as people like Brett Favre, the right move is to see what you’ve got in Aaron Rodgers. Wasting one season is much more preferable to wasting five or six, and wasting the prime of your current nucleus.
Believe it or not, Green Bay is actually making the correct decision regarding their quarterback controversy. Despite what you hear from the talking heads, the goal is not to win now, the goal is to remain a solvent business enterprise. While winning now helps in this regard, mortgaging the future to win now doesn’t. A team that goes 13 – 3, 10 – 6, and then has nine straight losing seasons because they held onto a former MVP quarterback too long isn’t going to help finances. A team that goes 13 – 3, and then 5 – 11, but then has nine seasons where they average a 9 – 7 record and make six playoff appearances will. That’s what Green Bay is aiming for, and if they happen to go 10 – 6 this year because their quarterback isn’t 38 years old and throwing 20 interceptions a year, then more power to them. Brett Favre thinks he can help Green Bay win now. Mike McCarthy thinks Aaron Rodgers can help Green Bay win now AND later – and that’s the right move.
Ja Doe spent his formative years in New England in the early 1990's, meaning he roots for the Chicago Bears and has since 1993. He also follows the Blackhawks and Bulls, as well as the Colorado Rockies in baseball. College Basketball is #1 in his book though, and he pulls for the Maryland Terrapins.
Brett Favre is a pretty good quarterback. Three-time MVP, winning quarterback of Super Bowl XXXI, the NFL’s all-time leader in passing yards, touchdowns, and numerous other categories. You’ve heard all of that. He just had a pretty good season – the Packers went 13 – 3 and won their fourth NFC North title in the six years of the division’s existence. So why are the Packers so eager to see him gone?
Let me preface this post by saying that I root for the Chicago Bears, and while I usually don’t have the Packers’ best interest in mind, I will attempt to be objective throughout this piece. BUDawg and Nat Turner do not root for the Bears, and the views expressed are mine and mine alone.
Mike McCarthy has been the coach of the Packers for the last two seasons. In 2006, he went 8 – 8, and 2007, he went 13 – 3, both seasons coming with Brett Favre at the helm. He has had the opportunity to watch Aaron Rodgers in practice time and time again, whereas our only real glimpse of Aaron Rodgers came in a 37 – 27 loss to the Dallas Cowboys, who also went 13 – 3 last season. While overrated by the media, Dallas was still a pretty good team last year, and losing to them in Dallas by 10 points was not a terrible loss. Was this performance, along with what he saw in practice, really enough to convince McCarthy and the higher-ups that Aaron Rodgers gave Green Bay a better chance at winning the Super Bowl? Evidently, it must have.
“But wait!” you cry. “Brett Favre has one losing season and one super bowl ring! He’s a three-time MVP! He gives the Packers way more of a chance to win the Super Bowl!” He is all of those things, but does he give the Packers a better chance? We don’t know. We’ve only seen Aaron Rodgers once. He could be the Steve Young to Brett’s Joe Montana. We just don’t know, and there’s only one way to find out. In these situations, it’s better to be a year too early than a year too late. Brett Favre is 38. Even with the advances in medicine, not many quarterbacks are effective when they reach 38 or 39. How long are they supposed to keep Brett? Until he can’t play anymore? Aaron Rodgers could be out of his prime by that point, and the Packers would have to draft a new quarterback, and the franchise could be absolutely torpedoed.
The Packers need to know what they have in Aaron Rodgers before the uncapped year. With the way the Green Bay ownership system works, it is impossible for them to compete with the Dan Snyders or the Jerry Joneses or the Robert Krafts… or even the Fords, if the Lions ever decide to do anything. With Ryan Grant and AJ Hawk, among others, the Packers have a talented young nucleus. What if Brett plays until the uncapped year, and then we find out Aaron Rodgers is a bust? Green Bay can’t afford to go after any high-priced quarterbacks. They’d have to develop one through the draft and waste the prime years of their best players with a brand new quarterback – and all of the losing seasons to follow would be just to see if a 40-year old man can lead a team to a Super Bowl championship. Or maybe Brett will pull the whole retirement-non-retirement charade again after this next season. Will the Packers be at fault again? What are they supposed to do?
“But wait!” you cry again. “If Aaron Rodgers is so much better than Brett Favre, then the Packers should let Brett go elsewhere and let other cities see his love of the game. He does love the game of football, you know.” No, they shouldn’t. The Packers don’t think Brett Favre is terrible at this stage of his career – they just think Aaron Rodgers gives them a more viable shot at a super bowl ring. But they don’t know how durable Rodgers is. If your starting QB gets injured, would you rather have Brett Favre come in, or Craig Nall? I thought as much. And even if Green Bay thinks Favre isn’t as good as Rodgers at this point, they probably think Brett is better than Tavaris Jackson, Rex Grossman, or Kyle Orton, and that the addition of #4 would be enough for Chicago or Minnesota to leapfrog the Packers in the NFC North pecking order. That would leave Green Bay competing for a Wild Card spot, and while they could beat out two of Dallas, Philly, the defending champion Giants, Saints, Bucs, or Panthers, as well as the other of Minnesota and Chicago, it won’t be easy. Why risk making one of your rivals better when you could put together the best QB/backup combo in the league, if your hunch on Aaron Rodgers is right?
And that seems to be where the debate is – how can Green Bay possibly think Aaron Rodgers is better than Brett Favre at this point, especially after last season? Again, McCarthy has seen more of Aaron Rodgers play than anyone since Rodgers left Cal. If anyone is fit to make that decision, it’s McCarthy. Perhaps Green Bay is tired of the high risk Favre and wants to go to a more conservative Rodgers, focus the offense on Ryan Grant and ride an above-average defense to the NFC North championship, which will probably be won with a mere 10 victories.
Going conservative could be a good option for Green Bay. The last pass Favre threw in an NFL game was a killer interception in overtime of the NFC championship game that led to the Giants’ game-winning field goal. As mentioned by the Cold Hard Football Facts, Brett’s “gunslinger” mentality was also responsible for the Packers first ever home playoff loss (against the Atlanta Falcons in January of 2003, a game in which he threw two interceptions), a loss to the Rams in January of 2002 where he threw SIX interceptions (though the defense certainly did not help in that one), and a four-interception game against an 8 – 8 Minnesota squad in January of 2005, making Green Bay only the second team ever to lose a playoff game to a team without a winning record. And let’s not forget 2005, where the Packers at one point were 3 – 10 despite scoring just as many points as their opponents. Again, the Cold Hard Football Facts come through with the reasons this occurred, and summarize it far better than I ever could:
* Week 1: Trailing 10-3 midway through the fourth quarter at Detroit, Favre is intercepted by Kenoy Kennedy. The Lions score a touchdown on the ensuing drive to make the final margin 17-3.
* Week 2: Trailing 12-7 late in the third quarter against Cleveland, Favre is intercepted by Gary Baxter. The Browns score a touchdown on the ensuing drive and go on to win 26-24.
* Week 3: Trailing 17-16 versus Tampa Bay with just over five minutes remaining, Favre is intercepted by Will Allen for the second time in the quarter. The Buccaneers run out the clock to preserve the victory.
* Week 8: Trailing 14-7 in the second half at Cincinnati, Favre throws four interceptions on four consecutive drives in the third and fourth quarters. The last one, Odell Thurman’s second pick of the day (and Favre’s fifth), is turned into a touchdown by the Bengals, propelling them to a 21-14 win.
* Week 9: Trailing 13-10 in the fourth quarter against Pittsburgh, Favre is intercepted by Tyrone Carter. The Steelers score a touchdown on the ensuing drive and secure a 20-10 victory.
* Week 11: Trailing 17-14 in the fourth quarter versus Minnesota, Favre is intercepted by Brian Williams. Each team adds a field goal for a final score of 20- 17.
* Week 12: Trailing 19-14 at Philadelphia with less than a minute remaining, Favre is intercepted by Roderick Hood. The Eagles take one knee to run out the clock.
* Week 13: Trailing 12-7 in the second half, Favre is intercepted by Nathan Vasher, who returns the ball 45 yards for the deciding score. This is Green Bay's first loss at Soldier Field since Brett Favre joined the team.
“But wait!” you cry for the third time. “2005 and 2006 were an aberration! Last year was the real Brett!” How sure are we that 2007 was not the aberration, as opposed to 2005 and 2006? Remember, Favre is 38 years old. Before his resurgence, his average season was as follows: 337 of 548 for 3,833 yards, 27 touchdowns, and 18 interceptions. Let’s assume that he avoids a letdown (and ignore how suspicious a career resurgence at 38 happens to be), and posts career-average numbers. That’s one less TD and three more interceptions than 2007, and that is effectively worth one loss. The Packers’ defense gave up 344 points in 2005, 366 in 2006, and 291 in 2007. The Packers gave up only 30 points last season, once in the 37 – 27 loss to Dallas in which Favre was hurt, and again in the completely inexplicable 35 – 7 loss to the Bears, in which Brett Favre threw an interception returned for a touchdown – so the Packers’ defense only gave up 30 points once. Will they stay at a high level, be even better, or will they regress towards the mean? And what of Ryan Grant? He wasn’t the starting running back at the beginning of last season. He really didn’t get set into the lineup until weeks 8 – 10. That means he was running his best against the weakened offensive lines late in the season. How will he hold up against a full 16-game beating? Will he play as hard now that he’s not playing for a contract? We don’t know the answer, but again, it’s an area in which the Packers will most likely be worse than they were in 2007. Don’t forget that the other teams try too: Chicago will have a healthy defense and offensive line, and everyone agrees that Minnesota will be improved. Green Bay doesn’t have to fall as far as you think to miss the playoffs, and the difference could be one Brett Favre “gunsling”.
One final point I would like to make is the media’s (especially ESPN and noted Favre sycophant Peter King) absurd treatment of this entire story. Ignoring the fact that they constantly complain about the circus atmosphere which is entirely their own creation, they have all taken the side of Brett Favre. No one has taken the side that “Hey, maybe Green Bay is making the right choice.” They are taking Brett’s side for five reasons. He is a quarterback, he puts up gaudy statistics (or did in the past), his opponent is a faceless conglomerate or corporation, he is personable (and white), and most importantly, he is nice to the media. I will not delve into the news media’s distaste for faceless conglomerates, whether they be Wal-Mart, Microsoft, Big Oil, or the Green Bay Packers – well, not very much. If there’s not a face that can go with the title, that entity is deemed “bad”, or “evil”. As soon as the average person can put a face to the product, as soon as the human element is added to these media-created villains, they cease to be evil in the mind of the average person. They become somewhat sympathetic, because hey, they’re people trying to make a buck too. Since every story needs a good guy and bad guy for reasons unknown to me, this is unacceptable. There is no one person responsible for the Packers’ dilemma (okay, there is, but it’s Brett Favre, and he’s the unquestioned hero), so it becomes the faceless entity known only as “The Packers”, or as the more foreboding “The Packers’ brass”. Brett Favre cannot be the villain, again, because he’s a white quarterback who puts up numbers while being nice to the media – in other words “A down to earth guy”, despite making over $7 million a year.
Brett Favre was carrying the Packers as recently as 2004. That year, the Packers went 10 – 6 and won the NFC North. They finished 5th in points scored and 3rd in yards gained. However, they also finished 23rd in points allowed, and 25th in opponents’ yards gained. They also finished an abysmal 27th in turnover margin. It took a great season by the offense (and a terrible division) for the Packers’ to get out of that muck and post 10 wins. Since then, however, the defense has improved significantly. Even though the Packers were 31st in turnover margin in 2005 (mainly thanks to Brett’s 29 interceptions, the most by anyone in over two decades), they improved to 17th in that category in 2006 and 10th last season. They were 4th in points scored, 2nd in yards gained, 6th in points allowed, and 11th in opponents yards gained last season. It was an all-around team effort that led the Packers to a 13 – 3 record, but none of that mattered to the media, who had their story by week 3. It was a career resurgence for Brett. That’s what it was, and no evidence to the contrary could change that. When Dallas defeated Green Bay, the story was that if Brett had been in, then Dallas wouldn’t have won. It wasn’t that Green Bay’s normally sturdy 2007 defense gave up 37 points, a tough hurdle for any quarterback to overcome – it was that Brett wasn’t there. When the Bears torched the Packers in week 16, it was because of the weather and the fact that the Bears were playing “for pride” against a hated rival, not because Brett wasn’t at 100% anymore after 15 weeks of playing better than he had in over two years. Of course, it wasn’t the last time that inclement weather would be Brett’s undoing. When he “led” the Packers to a 42 – 20 victory over the Seahawks in the snow (Ryan Grant’s 201 yards rushing notwithstanding, of course), his problems in Chicago were quickly forgotten. Brett was the master of the elements – until the very next week, when the ridiculous cold in Green Bay affected his aging body more than any other players, and he threw the absolutely horrid interception allowing the Giants to kick the winning field goal, as mentioned earlier. But that wasn’t Brett’s fault, of course. Brett is a good guy who was just trying to win it for the team on a risky play. He just loves the game. If you listened to it, it was if no other quarterback apart from Tony Romo (who is overrated), Tom Brady (whose team allegedly cheats), and Peyton Manning (who is named Peyton), even tries to win half as hard as Brett Favre does. It’s absurd.
Brett was great in the past. From 1995 – 1997 he put up amazing numbers. In those three years, he had 12,179 passing yards, 110 touchdowns against 42 interceptions, and a 37 – 11 record. In 1996 he was the offensive cog of one of the 15 best single season teams since 1950 (you may remember some guy named Reggie White on defense). That team scored 456 points and allowed only 210 en route to Green Bay’s first Super Bowl championship since the Vince Lombardi days. As mentioned, Favre was producing as late as 2004. But Mike McCarthy is betting that 2007 was a fluke, and father time is going to take its toll on Brett this season. It has to eventually. That’s why he’s going to town with Aaron Rodgers under center. And as I said earlier, he needs to know what he’s got in the Cal product. Does Green Bay have a two-year window, or a ten-year window? Right now, there are four possibilities. They may look incredibly stupid this season if Rodgers falls flat on his face and goes 5 – 11 and Brett goes 14 – 2 for the Vikings (or god forbid the Bears) and wins the Super Bowl, or they may look incredibly smart and ESPN will have to eat crow when Rodgers goes 12 – 4 and gives the Packers their fifth NFC North title in seven years while Brett finally ages, and throws 15 TDs and 24 INTs for the 6 – 10 Vikings.
There’s also the possibility that McCarthy is banking on, and the reason the Packers don’t want to trade Favre: Rodgers could go 11 – 5, and so could Favre and the Vikings or Bears or Bucs, and Green Bay would miss the playoffs on a tiebreaker (why risk it? Keep Favre, even if it does take $12 million on the bench), or the possibility that I as a Bears fan am hoping for – that Rodgers turns out to be a bust, goes 6 – 10, and Favre ages 10 years in one offseason and also goes 6 – 10 for Minnesota.
Only the Packers can weigh those four possibilities. They have decided that possibilities 2 and 3 outweigh the probability of possibilities 1 and 4, and that means that Aaron Rodgers is the better option at starting quarterback. He could be the next Steve Young. He’s the devil we don’t know and Brett is the devil that we do. Green Bay is in the unenviable position of needing to know both devils (as opposed to Chicago, with no devils in sight) in order to succeed. It’s not all about instant history. Green Bay cannot compete with the major markets, so they need to look farther into the future than your average squad. This is what they’re doing. As long as Brett Favre doesn’t win a super bowl with his new team, then the Packers have the advantage. Despite Minnesota’s improvement and Dallas’ continued overratedness and the Giants’ upset, the AFC’s overall superiority makes this unlikely if Favre’s window is three years at most (he’ll be 41, and there will come a time where he just won’t be a serviceable NFL QB). As much as people like Brett Favre, the right move is to see what you’ve got in Aaron Rodgers. Wasting one season is much more preferable to wasting five or six, and wasting the prime of your current nucleus.
Believe it or not, Green Bay is actually making the correct decision regarding their quarterback controversy. Despite what you hear from the talking heads, the goal is not to win now, the goal is to remain a solvent business enterprise. While winning now helps in this regard, mortgaging the future to win now doesn’t. A team that goes 13 – 3, 10 – 6, and then has nine straight losing seasons because they held onto a former MVP quarterback too long isn’t going to help finances. A team that goes 13 – 3, and then 5 – 11, but then has nine seasons where they average a 9 – 7 record and make six playoff appearances will. That’s what Green Bay is aiming for, and if they happen to go 10 – 6 this year because their quarterback isn’t 38 years old and throwing 20 interceptions a year, then more power to them. Brett Favre thinks he can help Green Bay win now. Mike McCarthy thinks Aaron Rodgers can help Green Bay win now AND later – and that’s the right move.
Ja Doe spent his formative years in New England in the early 1990's, meaning he roots for the Chicago Bears and has since 1993. He also follows the Blackhawks and Bulls, as well as the Colorado Rockies in baseball. College Basketball is #1 in his book though, and he pulls for the Maryland Terrapins.
Monday, August 4, 2008
People will watch anything & my idea for the Mummy IV
I received a call from a couple of friends over the weekend asking if I wanted to join them in watching the new "Mummy" movie, "Tomb of the Dragon Emperor". I respectfully declined, saying that I wouldn't enjoy it, given I have a background in Asian history and just recently had surgery on my funny bone, and didn't want the stitchings to rupture from such hilarious lines as, "I hate mummies. They never play fair."
So anyway, my friends did go and see it and unsurprisingly reported back that it was idiotic and unfunny. This does nothing to dissuade me from my view that people will watch anything these days, even if Hollywood just resorted to having George Clooney take a dump on screen. So long as that dump could talk and then finish the film by exploding in a magnificent fireball of CGI awesomeness, I mean.
And I must admit that the total butchering and bastardizing of Chinese history present in this turkey annoyed me, as well as the fact that the majority of the audience didn't know the difference anyway. Well, I'll just cover the basics now and say that Qin Shi Huang, the First Emperor of China, was not called "Emperor Han" did not invent the Great Wall, did not fly or have mystical powers, and that his tomb was discovered about thirty years after the time they suggested it was in the Mummy. (One of my friends thought that they had at least placed the discovery of the tomb at the right time, but sorry, no.)
It's absurd and embarrassing to me that hacks like Alfred Gough and Miles Millar, who wrote this steaming pile of garbage, can find work through the utter rewrite of one of the lives of one of the most famous people in world history, and a paying audience would find nothing wrong with it. But hey, it's a game so easy that anyone can play it, and since it's clear that no one cares a wit about historical accuracy in filmaking, without further ado, I present to you BUDawg's submission for the Mummy IV: The Tomb of the Eagle King.
Virginia, 1940
Deep beneath the earth's surface
Annoying British sidekick: "I hate the dark. It never plays fair."
Brendan Fraser (pausing for audience laughter): "Quiet, Niles. You know we've got to find the Tomb of the Eagle King before the Nazis do. Ever since the Italians bombed Pearl Harbor last year, this has been the highest priority mission of the government."
Niles: "I hate Nazis too. They never play fair."
Suddenly and without warning, our heroes find that which they have been seeking.
Brendan Fraser: "Unbelievable. We've actually found the Tomb of the Eagle King. Now we've just got to open it so the Eagle King will grant us our three wishes."
Niles: "Three wishes? That's awesome. I gotsta get me one of the these!!!!"
Brendan Fraser (one minute pause here, waiting for side splitting laughter to subside): "Stand back, Niles! I'm opening the sarcophagus!"
After much struggle, Brendan succeeds in opening the sarcophagus, awakening the Eagle King!!!!!
Eagle King: "Who dares summon John Washington??!!! I, who am the great Eagle King and also first President of the United States???"
Brendan Fraser: "I do, your excellency. I ask now that you grant my three wishes."
Eagle King: "Insolent fool!!!! Who are you to ask this of John Washington, who pulled Excalibur from Niagara Falls and chopped down the mighty Cherry Tree???? I, who along with my knights of the round table, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, and Daniel Boone, defeated the great dragon and granted independence to the United States of America????? I, who built the Washington Monument????? To gain your three wishes, we must battle!!!!"
The Eagle King emerges and transforms into a an enormous and terrifying CGI Eagle creature, who if you saw now, would make your head explode from its unrivaled awesomeness. So, instead, here is a picture of Crouching Tiger: Hidden Dragon co-star Zhang Ziyi:
Niles: "Damn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
A great battle ensues, and Brendan Fraser emerges victorious. I would give you the details, but given it will be rendered in CGI, you wouldn't be able to follow what was going on anyway, so it doesn't matter.
Eagle King: "You have defeated me in battle, Brendan Fraser. I will grant your three wishes and return to an eternal slumber beneath the City of Richmond."
Brendan Fraser: "I do this not for myself, Great King, but for all of humanity. And so, in this year of 1940, I ask that you do these three things which are the greatest concern to all mankind. Bring us world peace, end the genocide in Darfur, and stop Global Warming."
Movie ends with Niles making a joke about playing "Gin Mummy" and Smashmouth or band of equal staying power singing a song over the closing credits.
So anyway, my friends did go and see it and unsurprisingly reported back that it was idiotic and unfunny. This does nothing to dissuade me from my view that people will watch anything these days, even if Hollywood just resorted to having George Clooney take a dump on screen. So long as that dump could talk and then finish the film by exploding in a magnificent fireball of CGI awesomeness, I mean.
And I must admit that the total butchering and bastardizing of Chinese history present in this turkey annoyed me, as well as the fact that the majority of the audience didn't know the difference anyway. Well, I'll just cover the basics now and say that Qin Shi Huang, the First Emperor of China, was not called "Emperor Han" did not invent the Great Wall, did not fly or have mystical powers, and that his tomb was discovered about thirty years after the time they suggested it was in the Mummy. (One of my friends thought that they had at least placed the discovery of the tomb at the right time, but sorry, no.)
It's absurd and embarrassing to me that hacks like Alfred Gough and Miles Millar, who wrote this steaming pile of garbage, can find work through the utter rewrite of one of the lives of one of the most famous people in world history, and a paying audience would find nothing wrong with it. But hey, it's a game so easy that anyone can play it, and since it's clear that no one cares a wit about historical accuracy in filmaking, without further ado, I present to you BUDawg's submission for the Mummy IV: The Tomb of the Eagle King.
Virginia, 1940
Deep beneath the earth's surface
Annoying British sidekick: "I hate the dark. It never plays fair."
Brendan Fraser (pausing for audience laughter): "Quiet, Niles. You know we've got to find the Tomb of the Eagle King before the Nazis do. Ever since the Italians bombed Pearl Harbor last year, this has been the highest priority mission of the government."
Niles: "I hate Nazis too. They never play fair."
Suddenly and without warning, our heroes find that which they have been seeking.
Brendan Fraser: "Unbelievable. We've actually found the Tomb of the Eagle King. Now we've just got to open it so the Eagle King will grant us our three wishes."
Niles: "Three wishes? That's awesome. I gotsta get me one of the these!!!!"
Brendan Fraser (one minute pause here, waiting for side splitting laughter to subside): "Stand back, Niles! I'm opening the sarcophagus!"
After much struggle, Brendan succeeds in opening the sarcophagus, awakening the Eagle King!!!!!
Eagle King: "Who dares summon John Washington??!!! I, who am the great Eagle King and also first President of the United States???"Brendan Fraser: "I do, your excellency. I ask now that you grant my three wishes."
Eagle King: "Insolent fool!!!! Who are you to ask this of John Washington, who pulled Excalibur from Niagara Falls and chopped down the mighty Cherry Tree???? I, who along with my knights of the round table, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, and Daniel Boone, defeated the great dragon and granted independence to the United States of America????? I, who built the Washington Monument????? To gain your three wishes, we must battle!!!!"
The Eagle King emerges and transforms into a an enormous and terrifying CGI Eagle creature, who if you saw now, would make your head explode from its unrivaled awesomeness. So, instead, here is a picture of Crouching Tiger: Hidden Dragon co-star Zhang Ziyi:
Niles: "Damn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"A great battle ensues, and Brendan Fraser emerges victorious. I would give you the details, but given it will be rendered in CGI, you wouldn't be able to follow what was going on anyway, so it doesn't matter.
Eagle King: "You have defeated me in battle, Brendan Fraser. I will grant your three wishes and return to an eternal slumber beneath the City of Richmond."
Brendan Fraser: "I do this not for myself, Great King, but for all of humanity. And so, in this year of 1940, I ask that you do these three things which are the greatest concern to all mankind. Bring us world peace, end the genocide in Darfur, and stop Global Warming."
Movie ends with Niles making a joke about playing "Gin Mummy" and Smashmouth or band of equal staying power singing a song over the closing credits.
Gordie Howe Blues
I tend to get irritated by people's constant whining about how hockey has been ruined, how Bettman is a tool, etc. It's gone far beyond being redundant, just like people bitching about the gas prices. Even worse is listening to a bunch of whippersnappers longing for "good old days" that they can't even remember.
That being said, it's time I added my own voice to the chorus of whiners.
My grandparents were season ticketholders for the Hartford Whalers back in the early, early eighties, and used to bring me to games all the time when I was about five years old, and I have many fond memories from those early days of the Whalers' NHL existence. I remember my grandfather booing the hell out of John Garrett every time he let a soft one in. I remember attending Junior Whalers conventions, and had my picture taken with luminaries like Pierre LaRouche and Ray Neufeld. I was even there on Gordie Howe night, and remember seeing his number lifted up into the rafters.
Around that time, Gordie was attending Whalers games regularly. Between periods, my grandmother would bring me over to where Gordie was sitting (no private booth, just seated in the crowd), and I'd get to say hello to Gordie. We went to his public appearances. We even ate at his restaurant. The man probably got sick of seeing me, but he was always gracious and kind.
Fast forward to a month or two ago. I stumble upon an ad in the paper - Gordie Howe is doing an in-store appearance at some store at the Westfarms Mall that upcoming Saturday. It's an hour away, but if I leave early enough, I should be able to get there and back with plenty of time to get to work later that day.
I was jazzed, to say the least. I'm notoriously sentimental about things from my childhood, and my fond memories of Mr. Hockey's kindness still inspired warm, fuzzy feelings. So that Saturday, my best friend and I set out on our quest to meet him.
We got there, and located the sports memorabilia shop that the appearance would be taking place at. We take our place at the back of a fairly short, albeit slow-moving line. Peering through the window, we spot him, and I'm grinning like a goofy little kid again. It's Gordie!
Ten or fifteen minutes later, we're still waiting in line, which hasn't moved all that much. "Right on," I think to myself, "That means that they're not rushing people out, and that Gordie's taking the time to interact with everyone." My anticipation grows, and I wonder if I'll have time to thank Gordie for his kindness back in the day, and explain what he'd done for me.
I'm snapped out of my reverie when my buddy gets a gander at the sign near the entrance to the store, and breaks me the bad news - the starting price is $100, just for an 8x10. If you want him to sign your jersey (sold seperately!) it's $250.
I'm not into this as a hobbyist, nor am I looking to make an investment. I have little doubt that, due to his impact on the sport, and his very status as the personification of the sport of hockey, that his signature would be worth more than I was willing to pay. However, wasn't interested in acquiring a pricey status-symbol, and I have zero interest as to what Mr. Howe's signature would fetch on eBay. As corny as it sounds, I was just hoping to re-live a little of the magic of my childhood, and I frankly had no business paying that kind of dough for a non-essential.
I figured I'd at least console myself by purchasing some of the awesome Whalers items they had for sale at the shop, as such memorabilia isn't common in my neck of the woods. To add insult to injury, they wouldn't even sell me anything, unless I was willing to pay to have it signed.
I turned on my heels, and I walked away. Better to have only blown $30 bucks on gas and gotten out of the house, than to have paid an extra $100 bucks that I couldn't afford, only to go home with the guilt having spent too much, on top of the hollow feeling that ruined the whole experience for me to begin with. The memories of the time he took with me 26 years ago meant far more to me than a pricey souvenir, and I was forced to console myself with that.
I know that the spiritual rape of major league sports has been old news for some time, but I hadn't expected it to have even spread into the obscure Whalermania fringe. My whining about this probably seems redundant, but since I am not an avid collector of high-end memorabilia, it took something like this to open my eyes.
Hoo boy, did it ever. In the days of my childhood, the business end of things was limited to the arena and concession stands. Thanks to these bloodsuckers that promote these meet-and-greets, the warmth of the interaction between fan and athlete has been replaced by the cold indifference of a paid public appearance.
Guess it's time to get over it, and find something else to be sentimental about.
That being said, it's time I added my own voice to the chorus of whiners.
My grandparents were season ticketholders for the Hartford Whalers back in the early, early eighties, and used to bring me to games all the time when I was about five years old, and I have many fond memories from those early days of the Whalers' NHL existence. I remember my grandfather booing the hell out of John Garrett every time he let a soft one in. I remember attending Junior Whalers conventions, and had my picture taken with luminaries like Pierre LaRouche and Ray Neufeld. I was even there on Gordie Howe night, and remember seeing his number lifted up into the rafters.
Around that time, Gordie was attending Whalers games regularly. Between periods, my grandmother would bring me over to where Gordie was sitting (no private booth, just seated in the crowd), and I'd get to say hello to Gordie. We went to his public appearances. We even ate at his restaurant. The man probably got sick of seeing me, but he was always gracious and kind.
Fast forward to a month or two ago. I stumble upon an ad in the paper - Gordie Howe is doing an in-store appearance at some store at the Westfarms Mall that upcoming Saturday. It's an hour away, but if I leave early enough, I should be able to get there and back with plenty of time to get to work later that day.
I was jazzed, to say the least. I'm notoriously sentimental about things from my childhood, and my fond memories of Mr. Hockey's kindness still inspired warm, fuzzy feelings. So that Saturday, my best friend and I set out on our quest to meet him.
We got there, and located the sports memorabilia shop that the appearance would be taking place at. We take our place at the back of a fairly short, albeit slow-moving line. Peering through the window, we spot him, and I'm grinning like a goofy little kid again. It's Gordie!
Ten or fifteen minutes later, we're still waiting in line, which hasn't moved all that much. "Right on," I think to myself, "That means that they're not rushing people out, and that Gordie's taking the time to interact with everyone." My anticipation grows, and I wonder if I'll have time to thank Gordie for his kindness back in the day, and explain what he'd done for me.
I'm snapped out of my reverie when my buddy gets a gander at the sign near the entrance to the store, and breaks me the bad news - the starting price is $100, just for an 8x10. If you want him to sign your jersey (sold seperately!) it's $250.
I'm not into this as a hobbyist, nor am I looking to make an investment. I have little doubt that, due to his impact on the sport, and his very status as the personification of the sport of hockey, that his signature would be worth more than I was willing to pay. However, wasn't interested in acquiring a pricey status-symbol, and I have zero interest as to what Mr. Howe's signature would fetch on eBay. As corny as it sounds, I was just hoping to re-live a little of the magic of my childhood, and I frankly had no business paying that kind of dough for a non-essential.
I figured I'd at least console myself by purchasing some of the awesome Whalers items they had for sale at the shop, as such memorabilia isn't common in my neck of the woods. To add insult to injury, they wouldn't even sell me anything, unless I was willing to pay to have it signed.
I turned on my heels, and I walked away. Better to have only blown $30 bucks on gas and gotten out of the house, than to have paid an extra $100 bucks that I couldn't afford, only to go home with the guilt having spent too much, on top of the hollow feeling that ruined the whole experience for me to begin with. The memories of the time he took with me 26 years ago meant far more to me than a pricey souvenir, and I was forced to console myself with that.
I know that the spiritual rape of major league sports has been old news for some time, but I hadn't expected it to have even spread into the obscure Whalermania fringe. My whining about this probably seems redundant, but since I am not an avid collector of high-end memorabilia, it took something like this to open my eyes.
Hoo boy, did it ever. In the days of my childhood, the business end of things was limited to the arena and concession stands. Thanks to these bloodsuckers that promote these meet-and-greets, the warmth of the interaction between fan and athlete has been replaced by the cold indifference of a paid public appearance.
Guess it's time to get over it, and find something else to be sentimental about.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
BREAKING NEWS!!!!
Pennant race update:
Red Sox, Yankees both win; remain neck and neck in first and second place in AL East;
Mets lose in Houston; NL East lead shrinks to minus 2 1/2 games pending Sunday night baseball.
Red Sox, Yankees both win; remain neck and neck in first and second place in AL East;
Mets lose in Houston; NL East lead shrinks to minus 2 1/2 games pending Sunday night baseball.
Bill Simmons, don't even pretend you understand sports suffering
I am hardly the first, or the last, blogger out there that will point out the obvious fact that Bill Simmons is nothing more than an insufferable, self-absorbed clown on ESPN.com these days. That being said, his ridiculous post-Celtics championship piece in ESPN the Magazine demanded a response. The article can be read in its entirety here.
Short story long, Mr. Simmons is feeling the dreaded "My teams have won (or cheated their way to, or bought, whichever word you prefer use here) six championships since January of 2002, and I don't know if I can ever really care about sports again" blues. That in itself is moronic and illustrates just how out of touch he's gotten with the majority of his readers and the sporting public, but fine, whatever.
The problem begins when ol' Billy decides to make this statement:
Look, I have an astounding amount of empathy for fans from Philly, Cleveland, Buffalo and every other tormented sports city. Remember, I'm a Sawx fan. I know what it's like to be tortured by your team. I know how it feels to spend hours and hours wondering, Why does God hate me so much? and, If I just stop following sports, will I be happier? So as the fates of my beloved Boston teams turned, I never for a second stopped appreciating it. You have to believe me.
Are you serious? Are you freakin' kidding me? Your stupid baseball team doesn't win a World Series for the first 25 years of your fanhood and you're actually going to suggest that you know what it's like to be a fan of Cleveland or Buffalo sports teams? Bill Simmons has written a lot of stupid crap over the last six years, but this is without a doubt the most mind-numbingly idiotic sports related comment of them all.
On those off days when he slips and acknowledges that he's a Bruins bandwagon jumper, Bill will remind us of how he suffered through the heartbreak of the B's 1979 conference final loss to the Canadiens. So, without knowing anything else about our champion we know that he was following sports by the age of 10.
So, how long did Bill have to wait to ease the pain with a championship? Why, all the way until 1981 when the Celtics won!!! Oh, the humanity. Assuming Bill knew nothing of sports until 1979, he had to wait an entire TWO YEARS before one of his teams won something! Can you imagine? Waiting until you're 12 before attending your first championship parade? The horror.
Indeed, though the Red Sox, Patriots, and Bruins would not win a championship in the 1980s, each of them would make an appearance in their respective sports final game or series during that decade. So, all told, by the time Billy was 20, he had seen his teams win 3 world championships, and play in 8 league finals. My goodness! Why even keep watching sports when you're rewarded with that little success???? It's a question I certainly cannot answer.
Oh, and lest I forget, of course I must address the issue of Game Six of the 1986 World Series. You know, "That Game" (TM, 2008, Bill Simmons is an ignorant schmuck enterprises, LLC). Where 17 year old Bill watched in horror as for the only time in the history of sports, a team came close to winning a championship and then failed to in spectacular fashion. I mean, a World Series crown that's lost in part due to an error in the late innings? Clearly that could only happen to the Red Sox and their more devoted than any other fanbase ever in the universe supporters.
Having been devastated by that loss, and having only the 1986 NBA championship the Celtics won that June to comfort himself with, Bill then had to wait an unbelievable 15 years before another one of his teams won a championship!!! The man's loyalty is something we should all aspire to as we head out to the ballpark to watch a team that is nowhere near as important or historically significant as the Red Sox.
And speaking of the Sox, we all know that in 2004 Bill and the rest of New England was rewarded with that World Series that they richly deserved. Having had to survive off of only 2 Super Bowl victories in the past three years prior to that October, I know that I, like all of America, rejoiced alongside Bill and Red Sox Nation as they finally slayed the dragon that was the Yankees with homegrown talent like Pedro Martinez, Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz, Keith Foulke, Tim Wakefield, and Curt Schilling. Yes, score one for the little guys at last. And, thankfully, Bill has been able to see the Patriots, Red Sox, and Celtics win again since that October so that he need not "give up on sports" so he might be "happier." And likewise, it seems clear that abandoning the Bruins unless they're doing good has also helped Bill to recognize that God doesn't "hate him", even though in almost 30 years of following pro sports, Bill has only seen his teams win a paltry 9 world championships. Poor thing.
All that said, obviously all of the above is dripping with sarcasm and I am incredibly annoyed that Simmons would even pretend to understand sports suffering. Try being born in Cleveland and see how that works out for you, jackass.
Like Bill, my first sporting memory was a bummer for the hometown team. For me, it was Red Right 88, where the Browns lost the 1980 AFC Divisional playoffs to the Raiders on Brian Sipe's interception in the final minute. But unlike Bill, I didn't wash that bad taste out of my mouth with a championship twenty-four months later. It took me another---hmm, how long did I have to wait? Oh, that's right, no Cleveland team has a won a championship in my lifetime! Oh, but you understand what that's like, Bill. Of course you do. After all, you had to wait a whole seven years before you even saw the Red Sox in the World Series!
My annoyance with Simmons' idiotic statement grows as I write this column. I mean, as most of you know, the Browns have never even reached the Super Bowl. In 1986, a long awaited championship that Clevelanders thought was finally theirs was ripped away from us by John Elway and the Drive. A year later, Ernest Byner fumbled 2 yards from the tying score in the AFC Championship Game rematch. 20 plus years later, the Browns are only now even beginning to get back to that level of competitiveness. But Bill had to sing along to "New England, the Patriots, and We!" back in 1985!!! Yeah, that's the same.
Also, it's exactly what you think it is.
And then of course we have the Indians. I think most everyone recognizes how pathetic the Tribe was from 1960-1993. You should, they made a movie about it called Major League, people. But can't complain about it too much now, because after all, after a 41 year drought, the Indians finally made the World Series in 1995. Of course they didn't win, but like Bill, we Clevelanders could just console ourselves with what else was happening in Cleveland sports that year.
Hmm, what was happening in Cleveland sports that year?
Oh yeah. THE BROWNS WERE STOLEN FROM US AND MOVED TO BALTIMORE.
So frankly, I don't even need to get into the Cavs, and the Shot, and the fact that we finally have the best player in a given sport and all the media can do is whine about how he should leave Cleveland and go to garbage franchises like the Knicks and the Nets.
No, I'm just going to stick with the fact that we lost a World Series and then lost the most beloved game in town within the span of a month, as well as the fact that no one born since 1965 has had a Cleveland sports team win a championship in their lifetime. Yes, suffice it to say, it is not possible for Bill Simmons to empathize with the sports fans of Cleveland. If he put up with the junk we have, I have no doubt he would have stopped watching sports twenty years ago. I also doubt it's possible for him to empathize with the fans of Buffalo, either, but I'm not going to pretend I know their full range of emotions on their Super Bowl defeats and the like as he claims to be able to do. Hopefully a Buffalo fan will write about how stupid his column was in the near future.
So, in closing, I'll just ask that as Mr. Simmons prepares for his upcoming columns on the 2008 NFL season, that he try to stick to what he knows and understands. Tell us all about the Patriots "juggernaut". Tell us all about how the Colts are ducking a team that hasn't won anything in four years. Tell us about how a team without a running game, a mediocre secondary, and lousy linebackers is the most perfect team of all-time.
But whatever you do, don't tell us that you understand what it's like to root for three teams that have accounted for three finals appearances total since 1966. Don't tell us you understand what's it like to have the equivalent of your beloved Red Sox moved to Washington D.C. even as you supported them to the last. Don't tell us that your '86 choke is somehow unique and more painful than our '97 choke. In short, Bill Simmons, don't even pretend you understand sports suffering.
Short story long, Mr. Simmons is feeling the dreaded "My teams have won (or cheated their way to, or bought, whichever word you prefer use here) six championships since January of 2002, and I don't know if I can ever really care about sports again" blues. That in itself is moronic and illustrates just how out of touch he's gotten with the majority of his readers and the sporting public, but fine, whatever.
The problem begins when ol' Billy decides to make this statement:
Look, I have an astounding amount of empathy for fans from Philly, Cleveland, Buffalo and every other tormented sports city. Remember, I'm a Sawx fan. I know what it's like to be tortured by your team. I know how it feels to spend hours and hours wondering, Why does God hate me so much? and, If I just stop following sports, will I be happier? So as the fates of my beloved Boston teams turned, I never for a second stopped appreciating it. You have to believe me.
Are you serious? Are you freakin' kidding me? Your stupid baseball team doesn't win a World Series for the first 25 years of your fanhood and you're actually going to suggest that you know what it's like to be a fan of Cleveland or Buffalo sports teams? Bill Simmons has written a lot of stupid crap over the last six years, but this is without a doubt the most mind-numbingly idiotic sports related comment of them all.
On those off days when he slips and acknowledges that he's a Bruins bandwagon jumper, Bill will remind us of how he suffered through the heartbreak of the B's 1979 conference final loss to the Canadiens. So, without knowing anything else about our champion we know that he was following sports by the age of 10.
So, how long did Bill have to wait to ease the pain with a championship? Why, all the way until 1981 when the Celtics won!!! Oh, the humanity. Assuming Bill knew nothing of sports until 1979, he had to wait an entire TWO YEARS before one of his teams won something! Can you imagine? Waiting until you're 12 before attending your first championship parade? The horror.
Indeed, though the Red Sox, Patriots, and Bruins would not win a championship in the 1980s, each of them would make an appearance in their respective sports final game or series during that decade. So, all told, by the time Billy was 20, he had seen his teams win 3 world championships, and play in 8 league finals. My goodness! Why even keep watching sports when you're rewarded with that little success???? It's a question I certainly cannot answer.
Oh, and lest I forget, of course I must address the issue of Game Six of the 1986 World Series. You know, "That Game" (TM, 2008, Bill Simmons is an ignorant schmuck enterprises, LLC). Where 17 year old Bill watched in horror as for the only time in the history of sports, a team came close to winning a championship and then failed to in spectacular fashion. I mean, a World Series crown that's lost in part due to an error in the late innings? Clearly that could only happen to the Red Sox and their more devoted than any other fanbase ever in the universe supporters.
Having been devastated by that loss, and having only the 1986 NBA championship the Celtics won that June to comfort himself with, Bill then had to wait an unbelievable 15 years before another one of his teams won a championship!!! The man's loyalty is something we should all aspire to as we head out to the ballpark to watch a team that is nowhere near as important or historically significant as the Red Sox.
And speaking of the Sox, we all know that in 2004 Bill and the rest of New England was rewarded with that World Series that they richly deserved. Having had to survive off of only 2 Super Bowl victories in the past three years prior to that October, I know that I, like all of America, rejoiced alongside Bill and Red Sox Nation as they finally slayed the dragon that was the Yankees with homegrown talent like Pedro Martinez, Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz, Keith Foulke, Tim Wakefield, and Curt Schilling. Yes, score one for the little guys at last. And, thankfully, Bill has been able to see the Patriots, Red Sox, and Celtics win again since that October so that he need not "give up on sports" so he might be "happier." And likewise, it seems clear that abandoning the Bruins unless they're doing good has also helped Bill to recognize that God doesn't "hate him", even though in almost 30 years of following pro sports, Bill has only seen his teams win a paltry 9 world championships. Poor thing.
All that said, obviously all of the above is dripping with sarcasm and I am incredibly annoyed that Simmons would even pretend to understand sports suffering. Try being born in Cleveland and see how that works out for you, jackass.
Like Bill, my first sporting memory was a bummer for the hometown team. For me, it was Red Right 88, where the Browns lost the 1980 AFC Divisional playoffs to the Raiders on Brian Sipe's interception in the final minute. But unlike Bill, I didn't wash that bad taste out of my mouth with a championship twenty-four months later. It took me another---hmm, how long did I have to wait? Oh, that's right, no Cleveland team has a won a championship in my lifetime! Oh, but you understand what that's like, Bill. Of course you do. After all, you had to wait a whole seven years before you even saw the Red Sox in the World Series!
My annoyance with Simmons' idiotic statement grows as I write this column. I mean, as most of you know, the Browns have never even reached the Super Bowl. In 1986, a long awaited championship that Clevelanders thought was finally theirs was ripped away from us by John Elway and the Drive. A year later, Ernest Byner fumbled 2 yards from the tying score in the AFC Championship Game rematch. 20 plus years later, the Browns are only now even beginning to get back to that level of competitiveness. But Bill had to sing along to "New England, the Patriots, and We!" back in 1985!!! Yeah, that's the same.
Also, it's exactly what you think it is.
And then of course we have the Indians. I think most everyone recognizes how pathetic the Tribe was from 1960-1993. You should, they made a movie about it called Major League, people. But can't complain about it too much now, because after all, after a 41 year drought, the Indians finally made the World Series in 1995. Of course they didn't win, but like Bill, we Clevelanders could just console ourselves with what else was happening in Cleveland sports that year.
Hmm, what was happening in Cleveland sports that year?
Oh yeah. THE BROWNS WERE STOLEN FROM US AND MOVED TO BALTIMORE.
So frankly, I don't even need to get into the Cavs, and the Shot, and the fact that we finally have the best player in a given sport and all the media can do is whine about how he should leave Cleveland and go to garbage franchises like the Knicks and the Nets.
No, I'm just going to stick with the fact that we lost a World Series and then lost the most beloved game in town within the span of a month, as well as the fact that no one born since 1965 has had a Cleveland sports team win a championship in their lifetime. Yes, suffice it to say, it is not possible for Bill Simmons to empathize with the sports fans of Cleveland. If he put up with the junk we have, I have no doubt he would have stopped watching sports twenty years ago. I also doubt it's possible for him to empathize with the fans of Buffalo, either, but I'm not going to pretend I know their full range of emotions on their Super Bowl defeats and the like as he claims to be able to do. Hopefully a Buffalo fan will write about how stupid his column was in the near future.
So, in closing, I'll just ask that as Mr. Simmons prepares for his upcoming columns on the 2008 NFL season, that he try to stick to what he knows and understands. Tell us all about the Patriots "juggernaut". Tell us all about how the Colts are ducking a team that hasn't won anything in four years. Tell us about how a team without a running game, a mediocre secondary, and lousy linebackers is the most perfect team of all-time.
But whatever you do, don't tell us that you understand what it's like to root for three teams that have accounted for three finals appearances total since 1966. Don't tell us you understand what's it like to have the equivalent of your beloved Red Sox moved to Washington D.C. even as you supported them to the last. Don't tell us that your '86 choke is somehow unique and more painful than our '97 choke. In short, Bill Simmons, don't even pretend you understand sports suffering.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
