Drew Magary had a pretty good time -- as did we all! -- with my Jaguars fandom in his "Why Your Team Sucks" Jaguars post on Deadspin this morning.
It's probably worth a brief review of how all this happened:
September 2006: I have just left ESPN.com and started DanShanoff.com. Will Leitch was collecting NFL team previews written by their fans for Deadspin, then a year old. I did not have a favorite NFL team. I grew up a huge -- huge -- Bears fan, but things atrophied when I got to college (ironically, in Chicago). A job stint with the NFL didn't help my passion for the NFL. But I felt like the time was right to find an NFL team to call my own. I wanted a team to call my own.
Anyway, Will helpfully mentioned that the Jaguars were unaccounted for, one of maybe two teams not claimed to be written by a "real" fan. (I think the other one might have been the Ravens, which might have worked, given my suburban Maryland roots.)
I thought becoming a Jaguars fan made a lot of sense -- it was right in line with my new-ish (5-year-old) fandom of all things North-Central Florida; the Jaguars were the closest NFL team to Gainesville, and -- unlike many, apparently -- I had experienced some nice moments in Jacksonville. I also liked the fact that not a lot of people were Jaguars fans. But let's be honest here: I'm rationalizing. The selection was mostly serendipity -- the whim of an editor and a heaping plate of whatever leftovers I could find in the fridge.
And so I filed my 2006 Deadspin Jaguars preview. I enjoyed having an NFL rooting interest, although geography and my nominal ambivalence toward the NFL (beyond fantasy) probably didn't make me the most obsessive fan. However, I liked the taste and signed back up for 2007, both a Deadspin preview and fandom.
Last season, I felt my Jags interest begin to wane. I *wanted* to like the Jaguars -- I wanted to love the Jaguars. But I really was investing all of my energy into my Gators fandom. I think a lot of huge college football fans have the same experience; the NFL is a distant second.
In fact, while I root for Jaguars success, I think it is offensive for me to describe myself as a fan -- based on my casual attitude and behavior about the team. I wasn't checking Jags blogs obsessively or reading newspaper coverage. I couldn't tell you who they were playing. I didn't watch games beyond the ones available on national TV.
At this point, my being a fan of the Jags wasn't fair to me, wasn't fair to the team and especially wasn't fair to *real* Jags fans -- Drew's playful insults this morning were hilarious; I found myself much more self-conscious about being labeled the Jags' most notable fan.
I'm not worthy. Check out the Jags blogs for folks who are worthy of the title. Hey, maybe Tim Tebow -- who is from Jacksonville -- is a Jaguars fan. Which is a nice segue...
At some point midway through the 2006 season -- my first with the Jaguars -- I recognized that Tim Tebow was my favorite athlete of all time. Don't need to get into that; it's exhaustively covered elsewhere.
And I recognized, for better or worse, that given my overall lack of organic passion for any NFL team that I would undoubtedly find my rooting interest based on where Tebow was drafted. It will be an easy -- if completely absurd -- transition.
This is why I am so certain that Tebow will be drafted by the Patriots. In addition to actually having some pretty good circumstantial evidence, I am simply convinced that the karmic payback for my lack of soul-gripping faith in one NFL team -- perhaps my earnest but shallow fandom of the Jaguars -- is that Tebow end up on my least-favorite NFL team.
Because while I'm not sure if there is an NFL team I love (yet), there are plenty that I dislike intensely -- led by the Patriots.
There is a happy ending available here: If Tebow is drafted by the Jaguars -- and that would be the team's absolute best play, regardless of need -- then my nominal recent NFL fandom and my most sincere college fandom converge.
Until then, I tip my cap to the *real* Jaguars fans out there.
-- D.S.
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
RIP, AFL
I wasn't much of an Arena Football League fan, but I did love the IDEA of Arena.
When I was getting my MBA, if I ever had "one shining moment," it was "cracking" the case study of the failure of the XFL -- using Arena League as a contrast of what COULD work.
Why did Arena work? The product wasn't a watered-down NFL (see XFL, UFL) but had well-defined differentiation, with an emphasis on video-game like scoring.
They had a serious commitment to customer service; they saw taking care of the fans -- especially at games -- as a top priority.
They went into markets that were underserved by the NFL. They got a nice distribution deal (and investment) from ESPN. They had celebrity owners like Jon Bon Jovi.
So what happened? Why did Arena fail? I think you can see at least one core reason in the detail that Arena's MINOR-league ("a2") continues to succeed.
The game rules remain interesting, and the scores eye-popping. The commitment to serving fans is there. They were in much smaller markets -- sort of like low-level minor-league baseball.
Ironically, Arena probably failed -- among other reasons, like the overall economy -- because they tried to be too big and collapsed under their own weight.
What a lesson, and you see it with "niche" sports all the time: Just do what you do best and make a tidy little business for yourself. You ain't gonna be a "big" sport and don't even try.
Related: My problem with the set-up of the UFL is that they are following the XFL's path to irrelevancy through mediocrity. Who wants to watch players who can't make the NFL cut?
My idea for the UFL is simple: If they really want to be pro football's (read: the NFL's) "development league," then allow underclassmen ineligible for the NFL Draft into the league.
Give them better preparation for a pro career than college will give them and the NFL, UFL and fans are all best-served. College football will be fine with the 97 percent of players that remain.
I appreciate that the UFL is starting small, with contained costs and locations in underserved NFL markets. But the product differentiation isn't there. That's where the AFL was the best.
-- D.S.
When I was getting my MBA, if I ever had "one shining moment," it was "cracking" the case study of the failure of the XFL -- using Arena League as a contrast of what COULD work.
Why did Arena work? The product wasn't a watered-down NFL (see XFL, UFL) but had well-defined differentiation, with an emphasis on video-game like scoring.
They had a serious commitment to customer service; they saw taking care of the fans -- especially at games -- as a top priority.
They went into markets that were underserved by the NFL. They got a nice distribution deal (and investment) from ESPN. They had celebrity owners like Jon Bon Jovi.
So what happened? Why did Arena fail? I think you can see at least one core reason in the detail that Arena's MINOR-league ("a2") continues to succeed.
The game rules remain interesting, and the scores eye-popping. The commitment to serving fans is there. They were in much smaller markets -- sort of like low-level minor-league baseball.
Ironically, Arena probably failed -- among other reasons, like the overall economy -- because they tried to be too big and collapsed under their own weight.
What a lesson, and you see it with "niche" sports all the time: Just do what you do best and make a tidy little business for yourself. You ain't gonna be a "big" sport and don't even try.
Related: My problem with the set-up of the UFL is that they are following the XFL's path to irrelevancy through mediocrity. Who wants to watch players who can't make the NFL cut?
My idea for the UFL is simple: If they really want to be pro football's (read: the NFL's) "development league," then allow underclassmen ineligible for the NFL Draft into the league.
Give them better preparation for a pro career than college will give them and the NFL, UFL and fans are all best-served. College football will be fine with the 97 percent of players that remain.
I appreciate that the UFL is starting small, with contained costs and locations in underserved NFL markets. But the product differentiation isn't there. That's where the AFL was the best.
-- D.S.
Drew Magary KOs My Jaguars Fandom
I think your measure as a person can be gauged by the level of ass-kicking criticism you receive from Deadspin's Drew Magary.
If that's the case, then based on this withering post from Drew about the Jaguars -- leading with my Jags fandom -- I am a very very VERY quality person.
I will be the first to admit my Jaguars fandom was tenuously achieved -- it had actually eroded, pending my inevitable conversion to whatever team drafts Tim Tebow. (Come on: What else would you expect?)
Mostly, I offer my apologies to all REAL Jaguars fans out there -- and I have heard from many of you over the years, especially the top-notch Jaguars bloggers. I salute your fandom.
Even if you cringe at mine.
-- D.S.
PS: Bethesda Bagels ARE superior.
If that's the case, then based on this withering post from Drew about the Jaguars -- leading with my Jags fandom -- I am a very very VERY quality person.
I will be the first to admit my Jaguars fandom was tenuously achieved -- it had actually eroded, pending my inevitable conversion to whatever team drafts Tim Tebow. (Come on: What else would you expect?)
Mostly, I offer my apologies to all REAL Jaguars fans out there -- and I have heard from many of you over the years, especially the top-notch Jaguars bloggers. I salute your fandom.
Even if you cringe at mine.
-- D.S.
PS: Bethesda Bagels ARE superior.
Tuesday 08/04 Quickie: Urban, Plax,
Sox-Rays, Maclin, Tiger, Walk-Offs, More
This was a weirdly slow morning in sports. I feel like today's brief Red Sox-Rays series in Tampa is the most interesting thing going on.
I led today's SN column with Urban Meyer -- for lots of reasons, but mainly because in college football (and perhaps college basketball), the elite coach is worth the money.
$4 million a year is nothing. Nothing compared to the revenue the program will bring in. Compared to the difference between 2 national titles in 3 years and bowl-eligibility. Compared to the scalable impact a great coach can have on their program.
Is there a number where the college coach's salary becomes ludicrous? I'm not sure there is. When Saban was hired at Alabama, the prudes kind of freaked. His impact on the program was undeniable (and fast). Now, he's not even the highest-paid coach in the SEC.
(If I was involved in today's ESPN.com gimmick of picking the Top 40 college football programs and putting themselves in their own elite conference, I would make "coach" a big factor -- or, alternatively, you'll see a correlation between coach and making the cut. It's a big reason I would urge Forde et al to put Northwestern -- and Pat Fitzgerald -- into the 40, even if Northwestern isn't a perennial Top 40 team... yet. I suspect Forde will have NU in his 40.)
$4 million for Urban Meyer is a bargain.
More you'll find in today's column:
*Plax: Shoulda copped a plea.
*Maclin good; Crabtree bad.
*The Pats get a backup QB!
*Sox-Rays: Series of the Week
*Big East football: Cincy-tastic!
Lots more where that came from. Check it out here. More later.
-- D.S.
I led today's SN column with Urban Meyer -- for lots of reasons, but mainly because in college football (and perhaps college basketball), the elite coach is worth the money.
$4 million a year is nothing. Nothing compared to the revenue the program will bring in. Compared to the difference between 2 national titles in 3 years and bowl-eligibility. Compared to the scalable impact a great coach can have on their program.
Is there a number where the college coach's salary becomes ludicrous? I'm not sure there is. When Saban was hired at Alabama, the prudes kind of freaked. His impact on the program was undeniable (and fast). Now, he's not even the highest-paid coach in the SEC.
(If I was involved in today's ESPN.com gimmick of picking the Top 40 college football programs and putting themselves in their own elite conference, I would make "coach" a big factor -- or, alternatively, you'll see a correlation between coach and making the cut. It's a big reason I would urge Forde et al to put Northwestern -- and Pat Fitzgerald -- into the 40, even if Northwestern isn't a perennial Top 40 team... yet. I suspect Forde will have NU in his 40.)
$4 million for Urban Meyer is a bargain.
More you'll find in today's column:
*Plax: Shoulda copped a plea.
*Maclin good; Crabtree bad.
*The Pats get a backup QB!
*Sox-Rays: Series of the Week
*Big East football: Cincy-tastic!
Lots more where that came from. Check it out here. More later.
-- D.S.
Monday, August 03, 2009
Urban Meyer Gets Paid
That's a new 6-year deal at $4 mil per, making him the highest-paid coach in the SEC (and, notably, the highest paid coach of any public university in the country). As it should be.
This deal does a couple of things. No. 1: It should end all the claptrap about Meyer leaving for Notre Dame -- at least in the next six years.
No. 2: Does nothing to derail my conspiracy theory that Meyer will end up as the coach of the New England Patriots.
Six years is plenty of time for Meyer to finish proving he rules college football (I'll go with a Beano/Paulus-style prediction of 4 national titles in the next six years), plus get his son Nate out of the stable Meyer house in Gainesville and into college.
It is also enough time for Bill Belichick to be ready to retire from coaching -- at least actively. Belichick's tight relationship with Meyer is well-documented -- both coaches lean on the other for inspiration for their "programs." Further, Pats owner Bob Kraft is a huge Meyer fan.
And so in 2014 -- coming off another national title -- Urban Meyer will be hired to succeed Bill Belichick as the head coach of the Patriots. (Tim Tebow's place on the Pats roster is optional.)
In the meantime, what's $4 million a year when you are paying for the best college football coach in the country?
-- D.S.
This deal does a couple of things. No. 1: It should end all the claptrap about Meyer leaving for Notre Dame -- at least in the next six years.
No. 2: Does nothing to derail my conspiracy theory that Meyer will end up as the coach of the New England Patriots.
Six years is plenty of time for Meyer to finish proving he rules college football (I'll go with a Beano/Paulus-style prediction of 4 national titles in the next six years), plus get his son Nate out of the stable Meyer house in Gainesville and into college.
It is also enough time for Bill Belichick to be ready to retire from coaching -- at least actively. Belichick's tight relationship with Meyer is well-documented -- both coaches lean on the other for inspiration for their "programs." Further, Pats owner Bob Kraft is a huge Meyer fan.
And so in 2014 -- coming off another national title -- Urban Meyer will be hired to succeed Bill Belichick as the head coach of the Patriots. (Tim Tebow's place on the Pats roster is optional.)
In the meantime, what's $4 million a year when you are paying for the best college football coach in the country?
-- D.S.
Behold the Power of Google Trends: Tiger Woods Fart Is Your Sports Meme of the Day
It appears we have our sports meme of the day: "Tiger Woods Fart."
SO much better -- and less windy! -- than "Brett Favre Decision."
-- D.S.
SO much better -- and less windy! -- than "Brett Favre Decision."
-- D.S.
Mountain West Commish Craig Thompson:
Banish Harris, Coaches Polls from BCS
I've been hard on Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson. I mocked his playoff proposal because his big idea seemed to be "Let the MWC into the BCS." I mocked that he ripped the BCS cabal yet subordinated playoff to payoff to remain on the outside looking in.
But, in the face of new evidence, I am going to flip-flop my opinion of Thompson: Good man!
Why? Because he is the first commissioner to point out that both the Harris Poll and Coaches Poll are TERRIBLE ways to pick a BCS title-game pairing, let alone account for 60 percent of the vote. Per the Palm Beach Post's Ben Volin:
(That said: The computer polls need to be WAY more transparent. Every computer-poll administrator should be forced to lay out -- and even defend -- his system. If they don't want to do that, they don't have to be part of the BCS equation.)
But kudos to you, Commissioner Thompson.
-- D.S.
But, in the face of new evidence, I am going to flip-flop my opinion of Thompson: Good man!
Why? Because he is the first commissioner to point out that both the Harris Poll and Coaches Poll are TERRIBLE ways to pick a BCS title-game pairing, let alone account for 60 percent of the vote. Per the Palm Beach Post's Ben Volin:
In our conversation, Thompson said he would like to see the Harris and Coaches polls removed from the BCS equation, because they amount to little more than opinion polls, he said. And most of the voters only know about college football what they see on ESPN at the end of their Saturday night.For Thompson, the system would best be left up to the computers. I agree 100 percent. Perhaps you have a small selection committee to reality-check the computer data -- like the NCAA Tournament selection committee basically does -- but I like the computers more than the BCS' human components.
...
"I’ve never been a great fan of the opinion polls. That's all they are" Thompson said. "Just the Tim Tebow story from last week is the perfect example. Coaches aren't filling those (ballots) out, and those that do, aren’t they kind of busy on Saturdays?"
(That said: The computer polls need to be WAY more transparent. Every computer-poll administrator should be forced to lay out -- and even defend -- his system. If they don't want to do that, they don't have to be part of the BCS equation.)
But kudos to you, Commissioner Thompson.
-- D.S.
Monday 08/03 Quickie: Phelps, Tiger,
Lee, V-Mart, Rachel, Carr, More
You know it's a weird weekend in sports when the lead stories are about a swim race, a non-major golf tournament and a horse race.
Yes, there was Victor Martinez's terrific 2nd-day with the Red Sox. Yes, there was the widespread opening of every NFL training camp (except the Giants, who start today).
But I remain pretty blown away by Phelps' race on Saturday. That said, does he win my "Weekend's Biggest Winner" award? NO HE DOES NOT. See the winner in today's SN column.
More in today's column:
*OK, so the Patriots AREN'T interested in Vick.
*I make Lloyd Carr sound like a complete fool.
*Do you think Obama will wear Peavy's No. 44 Sox jersey?
There's a lot more beyond that. Check out the column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Yes, there was Victor Martinez's terrific 2nd-day with the Red Sox. Yes, there was the widespread opening of every NFL training camp (except the Giants, who start today).
But I remain pretty blown away by Phelps' race on Saturday. That said, does he win my "Weekend's Biggest Winner" award? NO HE DOES NOT. See the winner in today's SN column.
More in today's column:
*OK, so the Patriots AREN'T interested in Vick.
*I make Lloyd Carr sound like a complete fool.
*Do you think Obama will wear Peavy's No. 44 Sox jersey?
There's a lot more beyond that. Check out the column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Sunday, August 02, 2009
Sunday 08/02 (Very) Quickie
Phelps edges Cavic in 100 fly: I'm a big fan of NBC Olympics reporter Alan Abrahamson, and if he says that this was the best non-Olympic race in the history of swimming, I believe it -- and not just because I love that kind of superlative. Check out the race video here.
(What a great visual: Phelps popping his jersey -- or, um, swimsuit -- and he wasn't repping "USA" -- he was repping "Speedo," as in: "I don't need your silly super-suit." I didn't see a whole lot of joy from Phelps in winning this race -- just the most intense look of pure competitiveness I think I've ever seen.)
Vick to the...Steelers? I love the "Vick seen in [Fill-in-training-camp-region-here]!!!" The latest: Latrobe, PA -- home of the defending champs?
There is a reason that the Steelers and the Patriots are among the best fits for Vick: On the defending champs, the team culture is strong enough to give Vick the support system he needs. And on the defending champs, it is a mark of legitimacy that will make it hard for the media to rip him -- or the team.
MLB Studs: Andrew McCutchen is kind of awesome -- 3 HRs yesterday vs. the Nats... Matt Holliday: 2 HR in Cards W vs. Astros... Damn, is Tim Lincecum good (just utterly shut down the defending champs last night)...
Tiger's 65 at the Buick: Wow, was I really talking Friday about Tiger being at the edge of the cut. He's playing with that old killer instinct now.
-- D.S.
(What a great visual: Phelps popping his jersey -- or, um, swimsuit -- and he wasn't repping "USA" -- he was repping "Speedo," as in: "I don't need your silly super-suit." I didn't see a whole lot of joy from Phelps in winning this race -- just the most intense look of pure competitiveness I think I've ever seen.)
Vick to the...Steelers? I love the "Vick seen in [Fill-in-training-camp-region-here]!!!" The latest: Latrobe, PA -- home of the defending champs?
There is a reason that the Steelers and the Patriots are among the best fits for Vick: On the defending champs, the team culture is strong enough to give Vick the support system he needs. And on the defending champs, it is a mark of legitimacy that will make it hard for the media to rip him -- or the team.
MLB Studs: Andrew McCutchen is kind of awesome -- 3 HRs yesterday vs. the Nats... Matt Holliday: 2 HR in Cards W vs. Astros... Damn, is Tim Lincecum good (just utterly shut down the defending champs last night)...
Tiger's 65 at the Buick: Wow, was I really talking Friday about Tiger being at the edge of the cut. He's playing with that old killer instinct now.
-- D.S.
Saturday, August 01, 2009
Worlds Collide: Shanoff, Tebow, Deadspin
- "A George divided against itself cannot stand!"
Because there is Deadspin Dan: Who wrote the weekly 2007 college football column; who guest-edited Deadspin for a weekend in June 2007; who Zerkle mocked when I offered to let Tim Tebow perform the circumcision on my newborn son last October; who posts on this site you're on now.
And, now, there is Teblog Dan: Who launched a blog exclusively dedicated to coverage of Tim Tebow -- yes, out of fanboy appreciation, but also because it was an interesting business concept; who throws out theories that the Pats will sign Mike Vick (likely correct!) because they want to test the single-wing before they draft Tim Tebow next April (likely crackpot!)
And last night, those two Dans met in the hallowed ground of Deadspin's DUAN, partly at the mercy of Dash Bennett and the Commenters (what else is new?) but partly in some kind of unholy union when my worlds finally collided.
The sun still came up today -- but am I the same Dan?
-- D.S.
Full Seinfeld dialogue, referenced above:
George: "You have no idea of the magnitude of this thing. If she is allowed to infiltrate this world then George Costanza as you know him ceases to exist.
- You see, right now I have Relationship George. But there is also Independent George. That's the George you know, the George you grew up with... Movie George, Coffee Shop George, Liar George, Bawdy George."
- Jerry: "I love that George."
- George: "Me too, and he's dying. If Relationship George walks through this door, he will kill Independent George.
- "A George divided against itself cannot stand!"
Cliff Lee for NL Cy Young: Why Can't Cliff?
Is it too early to start a Cliff Lee for NL Cy Young bandwagon?
Considering I tried the same thing with CC Sabathia when he came over to the Brewers a year ago, I think not.
It is based on Rick Sutcliffe's successful '84 Cy campaign when he went from the Indians to the Cubs.
Last night, Lee got off to a pretty good start: Complete-game 4-hitter with 6 Ks (to only 2 BBs) and 1 earned run, on only 109 pitches (79 for strikes).
Lee for NL Cy. (Yes, yes: Tim Lincecum. Save it. If the Giants make the playoffs, OK. Otherwise, if Lee keeps pitching like this for the Phillies, "Why can't Cliff?")
-- D.S.
Considering I tried the same thing with CC Sabathia when he came over to the Brewers a year ago, I think not.
It is based on Rick Sutcliffe's successful '84 Cy campaign when he went from the Indians to the Cubs.
Last night, Lee got off to a pretty good start: Complete-game 4-hitter with 6 Ks (to only 2 BBs) and 1 earned run, on only 109 pitches (79 for strikes).
Lee for NL Cy. (Yes, yes: Tim Lincecum. Save it. If the Giants make the playoffs, OK. Otherwise, if Lee keeps pitching like this for the Phillies, "Why can't Cliff?")
-- D.S.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Michael Vick to the Patriots, Updated
So there's this rumor -- I guess it's nearly an urban legend, at this point -- that Michael Vick was spotted at Logan Airport, which -- combined with his brief assertion that he's close to signing a deal with an NFL team -- MUST mean that he is signing with the Patriots. (Sarcasm, but still...)
Let's review why this makes sense for all involved:
Mike Vick: "Moss Theory" (instant credibility, stable environment)
Bill Belichick: Itching to experiment with the single-wing (w/o risking Brady)
Tom Brady: Can get 6-10 single-wing plays off per game (those add up)
Pats fans: You know that Vick is going to succeed wildly. (See Moss.)
Pats haters: One more reason to hate the Patriots.
Fantasy GMs: Scared to be the douche who DOESN'T draft him.
Tim Tebow: Single-wing test with Vick sets stage for Pats drafting Tebow.
"Dual-threat" college QBs: Instantly improve NFL draft value.
There is no NFL situation that Vick could land in better than the Patriots. There is no move more brilliant for the Patriots to make than to bring in Vick. This is the ultimate no-brainer.
-- D.S.
Let's review why this makes sense for all involved:
Mike Vick: "Moss Theory" (instant credibility, stable environment)
Bill Belichick: Itching to experiment with the single-wing (w/o risking Brady)
Tom Brady: Can get 6-10 single-wing plays off per game (those add up)
Pats fans: You know that Vick is going to succeed wildly. (See Moss.)
Pats haters: One more reason to hate the Patriots.
Fantasy GMs: Scared to be the douche who DOESN'T draft him.
Tim Tebow: Single-wing test with Vick sets stage for Pats drafting Tebow.
"Dual-threat" college QBs: Instantly improve NFL draft value.
There is no NFL situation that Vick could land in better than the Patriots. There is no move more brilliant for the Patriots to make than to bring in Vick. This is the ultimate no-brainer.
-- D.S.
Friday 07/31 Quickie: MLB Trades, Papi,
Brady, NFL Camps, USC, Canseco, More
I feel like I said my piece about David Ortiz in yesterday's post (below). You also get the sense that fans -- as always -- REALLY don't care (aside from schadenfreude value) and would much rather talk about the MLB Trade Deadline. I agree.
So let me summarize this morning's lead argument from today's SN column:
Remember when I presented my "Two NBAs" theory? The gist: Like 10 total NBA teams seem to truly be playing to win a championship right now -- this season.
OK, compare that to MLB: There are 10 teams NOT taking the season seriously enough to compete for the 2009 playoffs. (8 teams for the NL Wild Card, alone!)
2/3 of the NBA is either tanking, faking, hiding or evading payroll; in MLB, 2/3 of the league is in playoff contention -- and it shows.
Consider the conventional wisdom about the Giants or Rangers or Mariners before the season started. Now consider that they are BUYERS, not sellers at the trade deadline. Amazing.
Maybe it is the lucky vagaries of baseball's anything-can-happen playoff system that has teams at the periphery of contention saying, "Why not us?" Whatever it is: It works.
If you're not making moves today -- or at least this week -- you're falling behind. Or you're that majority part of the NBA that doesn't seem to think competing THIS season matters.
Meanwhile, if you do want more Papi analysis, it's in the column -- including what I think is a pretty good approximation of how Papi's "fact-finding" mission will end up:
"That milkshake my 'friend' handed me was laced with PEDs? I'm shocked! I always thought my ballooning home run totals in 2003 were a result of my emerging talents!"
Oh, and file that Canseco quote away. He's a world-class d'bag, but more than anyone -- players, media, owners, MLB execs, politicians -- he has been right about all this stuff.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
So let me summarize this morning's lead argument from today's SN column:
Remember when I presented my "Two NBAs" theory? The gist: Like 10 total NBA teams seem to truly be playing to win a championship right now -- this season.
OK, compare that to MLB: There are 10 teams NOT taking the season seriously enough to compete for the 2009 playoffs. (8 teams for the NL Wild Card, alone!)
2/3 of the NBA is either tanking, faking, hiding or evading payroll; in MLB, 2/3 of the league is in playoff contention -- and it shows.
Consider the conventional wisdom about the Giants or Rangers or Mariners before the season started. Now consider that they are BUYERS, not sellers at the trade deadline. Amazing.
Maybe it is the lucky vagaries of baseball's anything-can-happen playoff system that has teams at the periphery of contention saying, "Why not us?" Whatever it is: It works.
If you're not making moves today -- or at least this week -- you're falling behind. Or you're that majority part of the NBA that doesn't seem to think competing THIS season matters.
Meanwhile, if you do want more Papi analysis, it's in the column -- including what I think is a pretty good approximation of how Papi's "fact-finding" mission will end up:
"That milkshake my 'friend' handed me was laced with PEDs? I'm shocked! I always thought my ballooning home run totals in 2003 were a result of my emerging talents!"
Oh, and file that Canseco quote away. He's a world-class d'bag, but more than anyone -- players, media, owners, MLB execs, politicians -- he has been right about all this stuff.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Today on TimTeblog
What slow offseason?
*OK, so maybe it's the Jags and not the Pats testing Vick before drafting Tebow.
*QB recruit Trey Burton is like Tim Tebow in at least ONE way.
*Don't hand Tebow the 2009 Heisman yet. (No, really.)
*OK, so maybe it's the Jags and not the Pats testing Vick before drafting Tebow.
*QB recruit Trey Burton is like Tim Tebow in at least ONE way.
*Don't hand Tebow the 2009 Heisman yet. (No, really.)
Why Leach's 64-Team Playoff is the Health Care "Public Option" of College Football
Mike Leach frames the college football playoff debate correctly: Playoffs are "mainstream." To not have a playoff is not mainstream.
But I think everyone agrees that college football needs a playoff. Where Leach proves himself even smarter is when he advocates a 64-team playoff. This is the bold innovative thinking needed to reform the system.
A widespread playoff is the college football equivalent of a "public option" in health care, the transformative step that would break the chokehold that the special interests have on something so necessary to us: College football.
Folks who propose a 4-team, 8-team or 16-team option are mere incrementalists who don't really want to see a playoff, because in all those scenarios, they end up with as many problems as they claim to solve. "It's better than nothing" is, in this case, not better than nothing.
Let's start with this: The "Plus-One" idea -- a title game after the bowls are over, re-ranking the teams -- is ridiculous, unless you can match 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 in a "semifinal" bowl pairing. That would be, I suppose, the "4-team" playoff option.
So let's look at the 4-team option: Even assuming you could match 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3, let's take an easy example: What would happen last year? Let's say Florida is 1. I guess that makes Oklahoma No. 2. Who's No. 3: Texas? So we get a rematch. OK. And who's 4? Alabama, you say? We saw that game a week earlier. Maybe USC has a claim. Or, oh right, there's unbeaten Utah, which proved itself to be a Top-4 team when it was all said and done. So Plus-One and/or the 4-team option doesn't really help.
How about the 8-team playoff? More teams involved? Great. Let's be naive and think that we would be able to select the 8 best teams, rather than the champs of 6 conferences, plus two "at-large" teams -- maybe from the power conferences, maybe from the non-power conferences. So that's one issue: Good luck when 4 of the Top 8 are from the SEC or Big 12 and a bunch of conferences are shut out. Even if you could pick your Top 8, it's easy to know that Florida, Oklahoma and Texas should have been part of an 8-team playoff field a year ago; once you get past those obvious choices, the decision-making is a LOT murkier, even if you have your choice of any team, regardless of conference.
(If we were going to do an 8-team playoff, it would need way more innovative thinking, such as the plan I proposed here, to "open source" the playoff. I actually loved this idea.)
How about the 16-team playoff? First, every power conference would insist on being given an automatic bid -- and the not-so-power conferences would probably demand the same treatment, which would be insane in a 16-team field -- too many great teams left out. (Try this thought experiment: Eliminate the 31 at-large bids of the NCAA basketball tournament and see how enjoyable it is to have the "small school" factor.) Meanwhile, if you thought picking between teams 4th-12th was hard for 8 spots, try picking between teams 12th-30th for 16 spots.
Which is where Leach comes in: The 64-team playoff makes sense. Every conference can have an automatic bid, but we can include enough at-large teams that it would be very hard to claim you were "snubbed" (and, like the NCAA Tournament, most folks would have no sympathy for you). Reduce the regular-season and put the games at neutral sites -- let cities bid for them and let local fans join die-hard travelers the stands for a playoff game, like they do at NCAA sub-regionals.
But I'd even be willing to walk it back: How about 32 teams? You can play the first three rounds in between conference-championship weekend and New Year's Day, then the semis and finals in the two weeks after New Year's Day. Every conference can have a slot, with plenty of room left for great at-large teams. Because every non-power-conference has a guaranteed spot, there will be no griping when every at-large bid goes to a power-conference team. And no guarantees for Notre Dame; join a conference or earn your way as an at-large.
The fact is: 4-, 8- and even 16-team playoff scenarios just won't solve the problem -- worthy teams being left out, the debate continuing to rage.
In the end, I would still stick with my old "everyone-in-the-pool" concept that proposes we let EVERY team into the Tournament -- like Indiana high school basketball used to be.
But the truth is that Leach is closer to being right than other playoff proponents, who just don't go far enough.
College football needs its "public option."
-- D.S.
But I think everyone agrees that college football needs a playoff. Where Leach proves himself even smarter is when he advocates a 64-team playoff. This is the bold innovative thinking needed to reform the system.
A widespread playoff is the college football equivalent of a "public option" in health care, the transformative step that would break the chokehold that the special interests have on something so necessary to us: College football.
Folks who propose a 4-team, 8-team or 16-team option are mere incrementalists who don't really want to see a playoff, because in all those scenarios, they end up with as many problems as they claim to solve. "It's better than nothing" is, in this case, not better than nothing.
Let's start with this: The "Plus-One" idea -- a title game after the bowls are over, re-ranking the teams -- is ridiculous, unless you can match 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 in a "semifinal" bowl pairing. That would be, I suppose, the "4-team" playoff option.
So let's look at the 4-team option: Even assuming you could match 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3, let's take an easy example: What would happen last year? Let's say Florida is 1. I guess that makes Oklahoma No. 2. Who's No. 3: Texas? So we get a rematch. OK. And who's 4? Alabama, you say? We saw that game a week earlier. Maybe USC has a claim. Or, oh right, there's unbeaten Utah, which proved itself to be a Top-4 team when it was all said and done. So Plus-One and/or the 4-team option doesn't really help.
How about the 8-team playoff? More teams involved? Great. Let's be naive and think that we would be able to select the 8 best teams, rather than the champs of 6 conferences, plus two "at-large" teams -- maybe from the power conferences, maybe from the non-power conferences. So that's one issue: Good luck when 4 of the Top 8 are from the SEC or Big 12 and a bunch of conferences are shut out. Even if you could pick your Top 8, it's easy to know that Florida, Oklahoma and Texas should have been part of an 8-team playoff field a year ago; once you get past those obvious choices, the decision-making is a LOT murkier, even if you have your choice of any team, regardless of conference.
(If we were going to do an 8-team playoff, it would need way more innovative thinking, such as the plan I proposed here, to "open source" the playoff. I actually loved this idea.)
How about the 16-team playoff? First, every power conference would insist on being given an automatic bid -- and the not-so-power conferences would probably demand the same treatment, which would be insane in a 16-team field -- too many great teams left out. (Try this thought experiment: Eliminate the 31 at-large bids of the NCAA basketball tournament and see how enjoyable it is to have the "small school" factor.) Meanwhile, if you thought picking between teams 4th-12th was hard for 8 spots, try picking between teams 12th-30th for 16 spots.
Which is where Leach comes in: The 64-team playoff makes sense. Every conference can have an automatic bid, but we can include enough at-large teams that it would be very hard to claim you were "snubbed" (and, like the NCAA Tournament, most folks would have no sympathy for you). Reduce the regular-season and put the games at neutral sites -- let cities bid for them and let local fans join die-hard travelers the stands for a playoff game, like they do at NCAA sub-regionals.
But I'd even be willing to walk it back: How about 32 teams? You can play the first three rounds in between conference-championship weekend and New Year's Day, then the semis and finals in the two weeks after New Year's Day. Every conference can have a slot, with plenty of room left for great at-large teams. Because every non-power-conference has a guaranteed spot, there will be no griping when every at-large bid goes to a power-conference team. And no guarantees for Notre Dame; join a conference or earn your way as an at-large.
The fact is: 4-, 8- and even 16-team playoff scenarios just won't solve the problem -- worthy teams being left out, the debate continuing to rage.
In the end, I would still stick with my old "everyone-in-the-pool" concept that proposes we let EVERY team into the Tournament -- like Indiana high school basketball used to be.
But the truth is that Leach is closer to being right than other playoff proponents, who just don't go far enough.
College football needs its "public option."
-- D.S.
David Ortiz Used Steroids Back in 2003: Come On, Are You Really Surprised?
Please -- PLEASE -- tell me that you're not shocked to find out that David Ortiz used PEDs back in 2003. (Obviously, to find out Manny was is hardly a shock at this point.)
I have never been much of a PED hysteric -- I'm more of a realist: Everyone was using PEDs in some way, either steroids or amphetamines, so it is what it is.
But you can bet that a hot meme will quickly become: "Well just how delegitimized is Boston's 2004 title now?" We're not taking the banner away, obviously. But it's certainly tainted.
And that's the point: Everything is tainted. Therefore: In a twisted way, nothing is tainted.
I think what should offend fans more than the cheating is Big Papi's lying. He has consistently denied using steroids. Which makes him a Hall of Fame hypocrite.
It's always the cover-up, never the actual crime. I don't blame Ortiz for the cheating; I blame him for lying about the cheating.
-- D.S.
UPDATE: Because I am more concerned about the lying than the cheating, can we please agree to have a one-day window where anyone who ever used PEDs can admit to it without punishment (aside from taint, I guess). After that, if it came out you used, we would know you were a liar and in the best interests of baseball, you'd be banned. So clean! And when we figure out that EVERYONE did it, it wouldn't be a big deal anymore.
I have never been much of a PED hysteric -- I'm more of a realist: Everyone was using PEDs in some way, either steroids or amphetamines, so it is what it is.
But you can bet that a hot meme will quickly become: "Well just how delegitimized is Boston's 2004 title now?" We're not taking the banner away, obviously. But it's certainly tainted.
And that's the point: Everything is tainted. Therefore: In a twisted way, nothing is tainted.
I think what should offend fans more than the cheating is Big Papi's lying. He has consistently denied using steroids. Which makes him a Hall of Fame hypocrite.
It's always the cover-up, never the actual crime. I don't blame Ortiz for the cheating; I blame him for lying about the cheating.
-- D.S.
UPDATE: Because I am more concerned about the lying than the cheating, can we please agree to have a one-day window where anyone who ever used PEDs can admit to it without punishment (aside from taint, I guess). After that, if it came out you used, we would know you were a liar and in the best interests of baseball, you'd be banned. So clean! And when we figure out that EVERYONE did it, it wouldn't be a big deal anymore.
Books: Beckham Experiment by Grant Wahl
Apparently, it's Summer Reading Week here! Today: "The Beckham Experiment," by Grant Wahl.
Deadspin beat me to the punch yesterday with its excerpt (and chat!) with Grant Wahl, who wrote the recently published "Beckham Experiment," which is exactly what it sounds like: In-depth reporting and analysis of David Beckham's attempt to turn soccer in America into a "major" sport.
Beckham's goal was that audacious and both Wahl's book premise and execution match it -- even if the goal itself has fallen short. (Perhaps way short, if last week's Beckham Revolt was any indication.) But, for me, that makes the book all the more interesting. Success is never as interesting as failure.
Like my post about "Cooperstown Confessional" yesterday, I am still mid-way through Wahl's Beckham book, but it is already one of my favorite sports books of the past few years. I am constantly looking for the "If you read only ONE book about this sport, make it X." ("Sunday Money" is my gold standard.)
I hesitate to compare "Beckham Experiment" to "Fever Pitch" (memoir of fandom) or even "Among the Thugs" (sociology of fandom). As a book purely about the sport -- the business, the inner-workings, really -- of soccer, Wahl's book is a must-read, if just to be soccer literate as a sports fan (as you should be).
I even got Wahl to give me my own "exclusive" Q&A -- literally, one question of mine, via email, for which he was gracious enough to answer:
Q: Youth soccer participation is huge -- and feels like it has been for at least 30 years, since I was a kid. And there's a strong argument to be made that you develop fan affinity by actually playing a sport as a kid. (That is certainly an argument that MLS has made for at least 15 years, if not longer.) At what point -- if ever -- will this youth participation translate to widespread, "mainstream" (ie, up there with MLB, NBA, NHL, NASCAR) fan interest in soccer within the U.S.? Star-wattage apparently won't do it. What will? Wahl's reply:
He and I were both assigned to cover the 1999 Final Four -- he wrote the magazine's cover story, I did stuff like this (which, frankly, helped crystallize my thinking for the Daily Quickie, so it sort of worked out) -- and he couldn't have been nicer to me, despite being under a ton of pressure himself. I have always appreciated that -- even as I have marveled at his writing and reporting talents, which are among the best not just at SI, but in all of sports media. I had sort of been waiting for him to write his Book -- "Beckham Experiment" is probably the purest representation of Wahl's abilities fulfilled.
You can get the book here. Your summer reading diet -- and sports-book library -- will be better for it.
-- D.S.
Deadspin beat me to the punch yesterday with its excerpt (and chat!) with Grant Wahl, who wrote the recently published "Beckham Experiment," which is exactly what it sounds like: In-depth reporting and analysis of David Beckham's attempt to turn soccer in America into a "major" sport.
Beckham's goal was that audacious and both Wahl's book premise and execution match it -- even if the goal itself has fallen short. (Perhaps way short, if last week's Beckham Revolt was any indication.) But, for me, that makes the book all the more interesting. Success is never as interesting as failure.
Like my post about "Cooperstown Confessional" yesterday, I am still mid-way through Wahl's Beckham book, but it is already one of my favorite sports books of the past few years. I am constantly looking for the "If you read only ONE book about this sport, make it X." ("Sunday Money" is my gold standard.)
I hesitate to compare "Beckham Experiment" to "Fever Pitch" (memoir of fandom) or even "Among the Thugs" (sociology of fandom). As a book purely about the sport -- the business, the inner-workings, really -- of soccer, Wahl's book is a must-read, if just to be soccer literate as a sports fan (as you should be).
I even got Wahl to give me my own "exclusive" Q&A -- literally, one question of mine, via email, for which he was gracious enough to answer:
Q: Youth soccer participation is huge -- and feels like it has been for at least 30 years, since I was a kid. And there's a strong argument to be made that you develop fan affinity by actually playing a sport as a kid. (That is certainly an argument that MLS has made for at least 15 years, if not longer.) At what point -- if ever -- will this youth participation translate to widespread, "mainstream" (ie, up there with MLB, NBA, NHL, NASCAR) fan interest in soccer within the U.S.? Star-wattage apparently won't do it. What will? Wahl's reply:
I love soccer, and I've been covering it for 12 years for Sports Illustrated, but I still have no idea if it will ever be one of the top three spectator sports in America. I do find it fascinating, though, that so many wealthy businessmen--billionaires, in fact--continue investing so much money in trying to make pro soccer matter on a regular basis in this country. I don't think there's any magic bullet that will suddenly skyrocket pro soccer's popularity, but I do think that a combination of factors have already made soccer bigger here: the advent of MLS, the infrastructure that has come with it (read: soccer stadiums), the changing demographics in America (most notably the huge population increase of Hispanic-Americans, many of them soccer lovers) and the improvement of the U.S. men's national team (five straight World Cups after going 40 years without one). I hope the soccer failure (so far) of the Beckham Experiment doesn't prevent MLS owners from opening their wallets for future stars, because I do think that star power will help MLS, but MLS's slow-growth strategy has worked in some ways. The league isn't in any danger of folding, and new expansion cities like Seattle have seen soccer be a rousing success. The continued growth of pro soccer here is a slow process, one that might take decades, and it may never compete with the Top Three. But it is here to stay.It is here that I should add that during my brief tenure at SI from 1998-1999 (working on the SI.com side, then CNNSI.com), Wahl was probably my favorite person on the magazine side. As you can imagine back then, most SI magazine staff thought we dot-com staffers were second-class citizens. Not Grant -- he "got" the Web, as his terrific mailbags (mostly about college hoops, which I got to edit) were evidence. He was also a congenial person to work with.
He and I were both assigned to cover the 1999 Final Four -- he wrote the magazine's cover story, I did stuff like this (which, frankly, helped crystallize my thinking for the Daily Quickie, so it sort of worked out) -- and he couldn't have been nicer to me, despite being under a ton of pressure himself. I have always appreciated that -- even as I have marveled at his writing and reporting talents, which are among the best not just at SI, but in all of sports media. I had sort of been waiting for him to write his Book -- "Beckham Experiment" is probably the purest representation of Wahl's abilities fulfilled.
You can get the book here. Your summer reading diet -- and sports-book library -- will be better for it.
-- D.S.
Thursday 07/30 Quickie: Top Coach Ever?
Favre, Vick, Lee, Halladay, Urlacher, More
Who is the best team-sport coach ever? What a debate-starter. SN's panel picked John Wooden, and it's hard to argue. In today's SN column, I break down their Top 50, including:
*Pat Summitt was screwed. She's Top 3 all-time.
*Bill Belichick may end up in the Top 10.
*Of coaches not on the list, Urban Meyer is most likely to crack it one day.
There seemed to be a formula to being Top 50: Longevity. Consistent winning. Championships. Media myth-making (which tends to follow the first three things).
It's a fun list to argue over, particularly when you break it down by sport or think about snubs or think about who will eventually make the list a decade from now.
Meanwhile:
*I told you: Brett Favre isn't going to stay retired.
*Mike Leach is so awesome. More on that later today.
*The Phils win, the Jays lose.
*Look at the Mariners and Giants dealing like contenders!
*Vick to the Jaguars? (Makes sense.)
*Urlacher hates Cutler? (Makes sense, sort of)
*I have no problem with Marvin Williams.
*Who will USC unexpectedly lose to THIS year?
*I couldn't feel more awful for Erin Andrews.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
*Pat Summitt was screwed. She's Top 3 all-time.
*Bill Belichick may end up in the Top 10.
*Of coaches not on the list, Urban Meyer is most likely to crack it one day.
There seemed to be a formula to being Top 50: Longevity. Consistent winning. Championships. Media myth-making (which tends to follow the first three things).
It's a fun list to argue over, particularly when you break it down by sport or think about snubs or think about who will eventually make the list a decade from now.
Meanwhile:
*I told you: Brett Favre isn't going to stay retired.
*Mike Leach is so awesome. More on that later today.
*The Phils win, the Jays lose.
*Look at the Mariners and Giants dealing like contenders!
*Vick to the Jaguars? (Makes sense.)
*Urlacher hates Cutler? (Makes sense, sort of)
*I have no problem with Marvin Williams.
*Who will USC unexpectedly lose to THIS year?
*I couldn't feel more awful for Erin Andrews.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Book Club: "Cooperstown Confidential" by Zev Chafets
Longtime readers know my general disdain for the process related to entry into the Baseball Hall of Fame -- mostly for the overly clubby, overly opaque clique of arbiters of Hall-worthiness from the Baseball Writers Association of America. I think the selection process is inherently flawed, and that -- at a minimum -- the current voting system should be imploded. (The late Red Smith agrees with me, by the way.) I would even suggest fans would do a better job than the BBWAA.
Because of that, I was thrilled to get a review copy of "Cooperstown Confidential" by Zev Chafets, which I have been enjoying as a fun bit of myth-busting about the Hall. I was going to do a post about it later this summer, but there is a terrific review of the book in today's New York Times, so it seemed appropriate to bring it up now. (FWIW, I have a stack of books from this summer that I am trying to work through simultaneously to post about here. Bear with me.)
-- D.S.
Because of that, I was thrilled to get a review copy of "Cooperstown Confidential" by Zev Chafets, which I have been enjoying as a fun bit of myth-busting about the Hall. I was going to do a post about it later this summer, but there is a terrific review of the book in today's New York Times, so it seemed appropriate to bring it up now. (FWIW, I have a stack of books from this summer that I am trying to work through simultaneously to post about here. Bear with me.)
-- D.S.
Why Vick Will End Up With the Patriots
Michael Vick will end up with the Patriots. And not just because of the lazy "image-rehab" comparisons to Randy Moss. No, because it also fits neatly into my "Patriots draft Tebow" theory.
In the end, it would be a win for Vick, a win for Belichick, a win for Brady, a win for the Patriots, a win for Patriots-haters, a win for Tebow... and it is the theory behind today's big post at the Teblog.
(UPDATE: Fanhouse has a handy list of teams who have made some kind of remark on the record about Vick -- may be legit, may be standard NFL deception. Note who isn't on the list: Pats.)
In the end, it would be a win for Vick, a win for Belichick, a win for Brady, a win for the Patriots, a win for Patriots-haters, a win for Tebow... and it is the theory behind today's big post at the Teblog.
(UPDATE: Fanhouse has a handy list of teams who have made some kind of remark on the record about Vick -- may be legit, may be standard NFL deception. Note who isn't on the list: Pats.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
