We (Only) Know Drama

There was nothing more telling about tonight's Heat vs Cavaliers game than what happened before it even started. TNT, the station broadcasting LeBron's return to Cleveland, decided to air a rerun of "Bones" - a show that roughly 9 people have ever watched - instead of running a massive pregame extravaganza. This angered sports fans, who on most days, love to poke fun at ESPN's attempts to make even the most mundane of events into all-day telethons.

But that's the kind of fervor that surrounded this game. Everybody wanted something. Some wanted LeBron to fall flat on his face. Others wanted to see a historical showing from The King. And then there were those who wanted blood; to see Cleveland fans riot or throw beers onto the court.

One thing is clear: nobody tuned in to watch basketball.

It was a casual fan and sports writer nightmare; a Heat blowout, where LeBron neither destroyed the court nor failed to show. He did what LeBron does, although, at times, he was so dominant that you had to feel he was crushing Cavs defenders on purpose. Scoring 38 points in three quarters, he could have put up 50+ if he was so inclined*, but the LeBron we now know did what was expected: sit out the final quarter of a meaningless regular season game.

*A prominent, nationally syndicated sports radio host Tweeted that Michael Jordan would've gone for the 50+, alluding to the fact that James doesn't have it in him. I casually tweeted back that rooting for 50+ is rooting for entertainment, not basketball. He then sent me a direct message stating "I forgot more about sports during lunch than you've learned in your entire life". The lesson, as always: where you stand on LeBron is serious stuff, and that most people in the sports business are pricks.

This failed to satisfy a soul except for the hardcore NBA fan. The American public that drove up TNT's ratings Thursday night wanted something extraordinary, a mix between Kobe hanging 81 points on Toronto and Ron Artest jumping into the crowd and clocking a Pistons fan. They wanted entertainment that had little to do with sports. A reality show where either LeBron or Cleveland leaves the island alive. For things to remain the same on Friday morning would be a travesty.

Sorry, fair-weather NBA fans, nothing to see here. No drama, no violence, no answers. Just a December game where the home crowd had a little more juice than usual. Sorry you were strung along by the majority of the sports media, who led you to believe you were to be a Witness of something greater than you were actually going to see.

Now you know how it feels to be a Cavs fan, because this is likely the last NBA game you'll watch with interest before June. I'll give you one more look at LeBron to vent your frustrations. Then you have to get over it.

read more...

Real Soccer

I am not a soccer guy. Sure, I get into the World Cup like everyone else, but I never follow the sport outside that particular event. In other words, I am all-American. And what has strained Major League Soccer from its inception is how to make soccer popular to Americans. The answer?

Make it less American.

The Kansas City Wizards have announced that they are changing their name to Sporting Kansas City. Just about everyone I know thinks this is lame. Not surprising. Our sports teams follow a simple formula: State or City + Team Name (preferably plural). But it's not like the KC club is breaking ground here. We have Real Salt Lake, D.C. United, Toronto FC, Chivas USA, etc.

Still, the name change hasn't gone over very well. Even Dead Spin came out against it, stating "the trend of naming teams in European and Latin American styles has to stop." I say this trend is exactly what the MLS needs, and to not stop there.

The problem with the MLS is that they tried making soccer an American sport. It isn't, and it will never be. What they need to do is promote the sport as an influx of European and Latin American athletics. Embrace the foreign aspect of it. With the mass migration of Latin Americans into America, what better way to reach out to that growing demographic than to give them a piece of their home?

My proposal? Create two conferences, one of "European" teams and one of "Latin" teams. I don't mean by segregating players, but by segregating atmospheres. The Euro league would consist of teams with the names of "United" and "FC" attached, with the Latin league including "Real" and "Sporting" names.

And let's keep running with this. Euro stadiums would blare English and German fight songs, only serve Warsteiners and Heinekens, etc. Latin stadiums would do the same with their respective heritage. It would add a little fun to the game. Everyone can be a part of the global game for one afternoon. Audience participation is the key.

I mean, let's face it; the game ain't attracting a whole lot of people in this country. So why not make it a cultural event? Imagine an NFL game mixed with Disney World and a touch of Beer Fest, if you will. If successful, the fan bases could even get a little Euro vs Latin hate going on. Why wouldn't this work?

read more...

The Art of Diversion

The end of Sunday's Chiefs/Broncos massacre left a lot of different angles for Kansas City sports media to dissect. The defense put the Chiefs in a hole that was nearly impossible to dig out of. Matt Cassel was horrible, yet was able to put up over 400 yards, and in essence, keep fan favorite Brodie Croyle off the field. The coaching staff got run over. There were endless possibilities for writers and radio hosts to tackle.

But then, at the very end, Todd Haley snuffed Josh McDaniels for all the world to see. And now all of the city has to hear about it.

There was finger-pointing, yelling and more than likely some harsh words. It was a perfect television snapshot. Drama, suspense. It's the kind of story the media loves to run with. The game all of a sudden didn't matter. This was Haley vs McDaniels. It will get higher ratings than Pacquiao vs Margarito.

Only, I've seen this before. I remember the 17th of September. 2006. The Belichick-Mangini shake that shook the world. But it never really shook anything. The Hoodie is still the mastermind of the Patriots. Mangini is now heading the impressive Cleveland Browns. The handshake that wasn't never meant a thing. It was as meaningless as a preseason game or a Boise State regular season game.

Make no mistake, the Kansas City and Denver media will latch onto this like their own little version of Brangelina. You will hear words like "classless" and "unsportsmanlike". Those who step on their soap box to proclaim Todd Haley is a jerk will also praise him if he wins the AFC West. This whole episode will be long forgotten, as was Belichick and Mangini's.

I, for one, don't care about handshakes or finger-pointing or any of that. I care about football. Unfortunately, a squabble between two coaches will take away from any insight sports media members, with all their access and contacts, could possibly give us. It is a lazy way out. Much easier to discuss photographed bitchery than break down a game.

Sadly, this will divert eager Chiefs fans from the analysis they desire. After all, analysis is a loser's game; every wrong prediction will be remembered, every right call blown off. This is a way for media to consume a topic that is purely sensational.

Shame on anyone who tries to make this a story. I want sports, not a soap opera.

read more...

Antiweis Superstar: How Todd Haley is becoming the new Marilyn Manson

Note: this article is lengthy and requires the reader to learn a little bit about a non-sports subject to get the overall point. If you'd like to skip straight to the sports stuff, just scroll down past the dotted lines and you'll see it. But I highly suggest you read the entire thing.

I have been a Chiefs fan since the day I was born. Every year, I follow the team like a hawk, spending so much time dissecting every little aspect of the game that I question my sanity. But this year is different. The Todd Haley Era is confusing me. It wasn't until I pulled myself away from football and delved into some of my other interests that I encountered a possible explanation.

That other interest was Marilyn Manson.

I am a huge Manson fan. Put aside for a second what you think you know about the man or the band. I'm sure images of Satanism and kids in makeup come to mind, but understand that Marilyn Manson - or Brian Warner, as his mother named him - is what I consider a musical genius.

The Reflecting God

His finest album, Antichrist Superstar, is a misunderstood masterpiece. I have always felt that ACS was a concept album chronicling the life of a weak, timid person who becomes a famous rock star who believes in too much of his power. This also happens to be the exact same concept of Pink Floyd's The Wall. That, by itself, is probably more thought than most people put into Manson's records. But then I came across an article that took it further.*

*For in-depth look into Antichrist Superstar, read this essay by Paula O'Keefe.

On Manson's official message board, someone had posted an essay by Jeff Cohn, which is a kind of conspiracy theory behind the singer's motives.

In short, (but I'd ask you to read the whole thing), Cohn suggests that the band Marilyn Manson has been, well, made up. The claim is, that from its inception, that every album, song and lyric Manson has written has been just a clue pointing to some greater point.

Marilyn has woven a complicated web of clues to catch him...we must all be forensic psychologist’s now. This is our “Seven” our “Silence of the Lambs” (One of Marilyn’s all time fav. movies) . We as fans must all continue to question everything and think deeper than the obvious surface level.

At first glance, this seems nearly impossible. It reminds me of claims that Pink Floyd's Dark Side Of The Moon was written to coincide with The Wizard Of Oz.* To achieve something so great - in this case, starting a band and writing songs to become one puzzle piece at a time that would take the highest amount of fame to work - just sounds crazy to imagine. But perhaps many artists have tried this very thing, but only Manson has been able to reach the highest point of popularity necessary to make it work. Maybe, instead being the only one to try this and it working at first strike, he is just one out of a thousand, and was the only one to be successful.

*Don't think I haven't noticed the parallels between Manson and Floyd. The same themes seem to occur in both bands, which may point to Cohn being closer to the truth than one might be comfortable with.

Mister Superstar

The idea that an art form, or an entire life, might be one that was preconceived and then actually achieved isn't an idea that a person can just accept. This makes the listener accept two things. One, that somebody can actually morph the perceptions of others to what that artist wants you to think is real, and two, that you are one of those people.

This takes a level of belief in one's self and belief that others will allow you to go on long enough to make the dream happen that is unrealistic to most. When it comes to Manson, he needed to make non-music that posed as actual rock and roll to start his puzzle, if Cohn's theory is correct. But that also had to be good enough to get him to where he needed to be, which is rock stardom. It's extremely hard to make good music, but to make good music that actually isn't music at all? Manson would have to be in the top 1% of musical minds to achieve this.

Then he would need to catch all the breaks (grab an AR man's attention, get airplay, etc.), or else this is just crap music that nobody ever hears. Again, it is entirely possible that Manson is just one out of many who has tried this, but only he has achieved it. But the master planning involved is mind-blowing. It takes a great leap of faith to acknowledge.

But it is fun to imagine that somebody out there had what it takes to create this. It's what has always drawn me to Marilyn Manson's music. So what does this have to do with sports, and specifically, the Chiefs? Please allow me to explain.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Beautiful People

All was going right in Kansas City. The Chiefs were winning. The running game was on fire, the defense was playing well, special teams was flourishing. In the back of everybody's mind was the thought, "Why isn't Jamaal Charles getting the ball?" But we suppressed that thought. After all, you don't change a winning formula.

Even with losses to the Colts and Texans, and a near disaster to the Bills, the 5-2 Chiefs couldn't be questioned. This was a team that was expected to do nothing and be nothing, and yet here they were, controlling their division and their own destiny.

But then Sunday happened. The Raiders happened. A 15 penalty, 3 turnover debacle that most NFL teams would've put away at halftime. The Chiefs, however couldn't put it away. They gave the ball to their average-at-best quarterback rather than their 5.3 yards-per-carry superstar. It didn't make any sense.

So the question is: why? Why try to feature your limited quarterback and not the one guy who has proved to be the best player on the team?

Perhaps Todd Haley is putting together the pieces of a puzzle that we don't quite yet understand.

Man That You Fear

The theory, as far as I know, was first proposed by sports radio host Nick Wright here in Kansas City; that Haley and offensive coordinator Charlie Weis are consciously trying to convince people that quarterback Matt Cassel is better than everybody thinks he his. The idea is that Haley and Weis are purposely "highlighting" Cassel during regular season games. This basically means that the coaching staff is going away from the best game plan possible. The reasons for this can be only one of two things:

1. Haley and Weis are so stubborn, that they rather die with swordplay rather than bust out their guns.

2. They are giving Cassel meaningful reps to help build his talent and confidence, even if that means losing meaningful games.

Now think: there are only 32 human beings on the entire planet who are NFL head coaches. Would one of them risk losing his job just out of pure pride and stubbornness? Insane as it sounds, it actually makes more sense that one of them has devised such a complex plan that he truly believes in - a plan that includes wasting a possible playoff season to build towards a grander goal.

It's the same creation of illusion that, theoretically, Manson has built. The idea here is that the team is not ready for Super Bowl contention just yet, so it's better to let Cassel have real-game experience of shouldering the load, while at the same time limiting Jamaal Charles' touches to save him from injury. The crazy thing about it is that in these times coaches are expendable and you must have total faith that this plan will work, and work quickly.

So the question becomes. do you have the patience and faith that Haley, Weis and general manager Scott Pioli can pull this thing off?

Irresponsible Hate Anthem

Of course, there is the argument that everyone on Twitter has been sending my way: it is what it is. Thomas Jones is just more dependable, audibles are being called for passes because of defensive looks, etc. And that is entirely possible. But Charles has been limited the entire season, and when he does get the ball, he explodes. The only way that in-game strategy could be at fault would be that if Haley and Weis knew the exact times when the defense wasn't expecting Charles, which is completely false. There is obviously a premeditated strategy here, right?

That kind of out-of-the-box thinking is rare and dangerous in today's NFL. It also points to a thousand-point-plan that can't be trusted with today's media scrutiny. To take it back to Manson, would his low quality "Marilyn Manson and the Spooky Kids", and it's lack of popularity, give him the chance he needed in today's iTunes-heavy, single-oriented music landscape?

Of course not. But this is the same kind of deceit and faith that Haley and Company seem to be operating on. But you have to believe that these kind of men exist; men that are so self-confident that they dare to change the way the game is played solely because they have a vision.

I'm willing to accept that Marilyn Manson was this kind of person, and so too is Todd Haley. I can let go of what I think I know about the entertainers that are in front of me. After all, isn't the belief that great, visionary men are amongst us that keeps life interesting?

If this is just imaginary, and Haley really is just stubborn, then so be it. But I will now watch the Chiefs as I listen to Manson's music; an experience that I can draw my own interpretations to, letting me better understand the world I'm living in. After all, that is basically the point of entertainment, and sports is entertainment.

The Chiefs are my new Marilyn Manson, And just like the singer, I'm sure everybody will hate me and ridicule me for being a fan. So be it.

Rock on, Todd Haley.

read more...

The Illusion of Caring

Every Christmas, there is a unique sociology experiment that I think everybody should partake in. Go to a Wal-Mart, stand outside, and watch the creative ways in which people try to ignore the Salvation Army workers. Some will pull out their cell phones, acting like they are checking a message. Some will spark up a conversation with whoever is accompanying them. We all have our strategies.

Yet, if confronted individually, every one of them would say that they cared about charities, and the Salvation Army specifically. And in their heart of hearts, they would truly believe that. Even if shown a video of them blowing off a SA volunteer, most people would make up some kind of excuse, and go on believing they are a caring person.

This is pretty much the behavior of the average NFL fan.

Joe Sports Fan would lead you to believe that he cares about football players. He'll tell you that he's against helmet-to-helmet contact and "illegal hits". He'll tell you that the players need more protection. And in his heart of hearts, he believes this. But Joe Sports Fan has been blowing off the brutality of the NFL for years.

Every football fan knows, and had always known, that the game ruins its players. We've heard story after story about Player X being diagnosed with dementia at age 45, or how the every day blows an offensive linemen endures takes twenty years off his life. This is not news. Anyone who watched just one football game in their life could understand the severity of the violence taking place.

Yet, we all watched. And we paid. And we cheered. While news leaked out about how the NFL basically discards its former players and their health, we screamed about how something should be done, and then continued to tune in to watch current players getting their brains mashed in. When a player went down with his third concussion in six weeks, knowing that those injuries will haunt him for the rest of his life, we responded with concern and teary eyes - that is, until the medical staff scraped him off the field and the next play began.

Fact is, football fans rank entertainment over the well-being of the players. 99% of fans kept paying the NFL and supporting the game even as guys got bigger, stronger and faster. The violence was never bloody enough for us to put down our foam fingers or sell off our fantasy teams.

But now Roger Goodell and the NFL say that the game needs to be safer; that it's worth taking away some of the most exciting plays of the game to help the players. Just about everybody is in agreement with this. They care about safety too, they say. They care about the players.

Because if they really did care, what they are admitting is that their own trivial entertainment is more important then something they feel deeply and emotionally about. And this might be true for some. Some people might actually wince and get a sick feeling in their stomach when there's a brutal hit. At best, these people just have extremely screwed up priorities. The kind that put their car or boat ahead of their own children, which we usually agree is a type of horrible human being.

I feel that most fans fall into a different group. Most people never think about injuries or overall health of athletes until it is presented to them. They are the Salvation Army ignorers. They watch with tunnel-vision; never able to see past what is on their screen or what they are already looking for. Football is always about the game, nothing more. Injuries are a part of that game.

To sit there watching and holding the knowledge that what it is you are seeing will eventually end the lives of the athletes, is in and of itself an unmoral, primitive thing. To enjoy something that is so violent is nearly evil. And to say afterwards that you care about the lives being ruined on the field is wholly dishonest, and in a way more unmoral and evil than admitting that you are unmoved at all.

If video of me at Wal-Mart ever surfaces, you'll see this: someone who just walks past the volunteer like he doesn't exist. If presented with a documentary or still photos of those in need, the human emotion in me would probably break down and give a little something. But that isn't the real me. That is a version of me reacting to guilt.

I don't feel guilty about liking big hits, because I don't pretend to care about those who suffer the blows. And for three hours (or six, or nine) on Sundays, I walk right pass the sad reality to enjoy some cheap entertainment. I'm okay with this, because I never concern myself with issues like morality, or more accurately, what definition of morality society has designed for me.

But you do. So you care. At least, you care when someone is watching. I say let us that truly enjoy the game for what it is have the game that we grew up watching. If you want safety, you need to move on to a safer form of entertainment. Don't let your guilt drag the rest of us down with you.

read more...

NCAA, Inc.

"Reality doesn't bite, rather our perception of reality bites" - Anthony J. D'Angelo

I've never been comfortable when people talk of concussions in the NFL. I'm alright when they wheel out ex-players or show a crime scene when some athlete with brain damage murders his entire family. But I squirm when some fan or writer stands on his soapbox and declares how the violence of football must stop.

After all, we knew that football is violent and destroys the bodies and minds of its players. But we set that reality aside because, well, it's not something we like to think about, just like we don't think of African miners whenever we buy a diamond at Zales. We lie to ourselves so we can enjoy our simple pleasures.

I am always conscious of these things. When I see a big hit, part of the satisfaction is knowing the guy might be carted off. This might make me sick and depraved to most, but it also makes me honest. Football players are our gladiators, and all I want is blood.

So earlier this week when Sports Illustrated came out with an article revealing the secrets of sports agents, it didn't surprise me when everybody in the sports world acted shocked. Former agent Josh Luchs spilled the beans about agents routinely paying NCAA athletes. As if that's something we all didn't figure was happening anyways.

We just didn't talk about it, because well, it got in the way of us enjoying our perceived reality of collegiate sports. Football can't mean as much is it's rigged and dirty. The dirt is what killed boxing in this country.

But now it's out in the open, so we put up a front of ignorance. We all know this is the way the world works. Those with the money wheel and deal behind the scenes to get what they want. It's politics. It's business. It's the reason why the BCS still exists even though nobody likes it.

The innocence and charm of amateur sports is gone. ESPN shows high school football and little league baseball and break them down like they're pro athletes. Sports at all levels are big business. We either accept this as fact and move on or keep pretending it's not happening and meet boxing's fate.

I know this is the last thing we want to face. The fear of violence is hurting the NFL right now, but there is no turning back. The cat is out of the bag. Personally, I care about the sport and the players can be getting under the table deals or Nike endorsements, doesn't really matter. But you do, or at least you say you do. Just pick one, and stop acting like a child who just learned that Santa isn't real.

read more...

Review: One Night in Vegas

I've been constantly impressed by ESPN's "30 for 30" documentary series, even if it was conceived by someone who I think is flailing artistically.* But it has been mostly entertaining and thought-provoking. When I heard there was going to be an episode about the night Tupac was shot, and the parallels between the rapper and Mike Tyson, my DVR couldn't be set fast enough.

*Two things here. First, Bill Simmons has been an idol of mine and is the reason I got into sports writing, along with Hunter S. Thompson. I still read him and enjoy his columns. But my second thought is that he has given up and been generally lazy since becoming semi-famous. He has replaced columns with podcasts, and lost a ton of respect from me since I learned that he blocks anyone on Twitter that says anything remotely bad about him. I'm not bitter, I just disagree with the thought process there. The only other person I know that does this is Jason Whitlock. I fear for Simmons' career.

I was very excited for "One Night In Vegas". Gauging from the other docs, I was ready for some inside info and details I never knew about concerning Tupac's death.

None of that was there.

Basically, "One Night In Vegas" was nothing more than stylistic masturbation, trying hard as hell to force the white audience to accept as many urban stereotypes as possible. Testimonials from leaders in the black community such as Maya Angelou and Michael Eric Dyson served little purpose other than to shout "THIS IS ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE". Same was the reasoning for interrupting the story with less-than-impressive "poets", who evoked images of auction blocks during Def Poetry-esque rants that brought nothing to the narrative at all.

I know a lot of these "30 for 30" episodes are about posturing and embellishment (such as last week's "Little Big Men", who tried to persuade us that Little League baseball saved America in the 80s), but damn. Anyone who has ever been remotely interested in Tupac* knows all of the facts presented here. What was the point?

*As someone who doesn't listen to a lot of rap, Tupac has always been my favorite artist. I completely buy into the fact that he was a misguided and misunderstood philosopher of sorts. I also believe he was an extremely important figure in black culture at the time. But not everything written or filmed about him is as deep as the man himself.

There is no point, as I can see. The film spent most of its allotted hour explaining to us who Tupac and Tyson were (again, proving that this was directed towards a white audience). The night of importance was merely a fact getting in the way of the director's intention: shoving Tupac and Tyson's culture in the face of ESPN viewers.

This was a disservice. I would love to know more about what happened that night, more about the feuds between Death Row Records and gangs, and how it all came crashing down on that fateful night. But this film wasn't about that. This film wasn't about anything.

read more...

You Don't Know What You Think You Know

When I graduated high school, I made it a point to become as politically involved as possible. I joined a political message board (dude, I was 18, give me a break) and talked about campaigns, war and everything under Washington's sun all day long. Eventually, I became a moderator on the site and spent every waking minute discussing and researching what I believed to be important issues.

Except I wasn't. As I delved deeper into the political arena, I realized that everything important happens behind closed doors. Everything. And they stay behind those doors forever.

Of course, there are those Watergate moments that make the common person believe that injustices within politics eventually see the light of day, but those are rare occurrences. In fact, conspiracy theorists might say that scandals are leaked on purpose to give citizens that exact feeling of security. Believe what you will.

I'm no conspiracy theorist, but I do know one thing for sure: wherever there is money and power, there is a whole lot of dirty shit going on that you will likely never know about. And here's another thing I know: there is a lot of money and power in collegiate sports.

I am never surprised when I hear of some behind-the-scenes scandal regarding the NCAA. Reggie Bush receiving gifts is about as shocking as hearing another Senator got caught with his pants down. It happens, it's a part of the game. What does surprise me (but probably shouldn't, when you look at people's political knowledge), is the reactions from the fans.

When the Lew Perkins scandal broke out, you would think that the guy was apart of an assassination cover up based off the general amazement of commentators. It was simply inconceivable to Joe Sports Fan that a school's AD had overseen ticket fraud and accepted free exercise equipment. People who react this way are surely not into politics.

I, for one, would be shocked if this was the worst thing Perkins has over done. I am quite certain that the athletic departments at USC and Memphis are dirtier than we imagine, and the same goes for any school who has had big-money success in recent years. You simply do not gain that much money and power without leaving a trail of dead in your wake.

But so it goes, as we see nearly every month with Senator X or Governor Y who gets caught with illegal funds from lobbyists or whatever other scandal that finds its ways to newspapers. With the millions upon millions that get shoveled around in NCAA sports, you would be very naive to believe that the movers and shakers are nothing more than savvy businessmen with nothing to hide.

This is why I haven't paid much attention to the Lew Perkins or Reggie Bush story, because it's the same story the has been and will be told. I know these things go on every day, I just don't know the specifics. There is no knowledge to be gained from the details, only reputations and programs to destroy. If that's your idea of justice, go for it, lynch 'em. Just don't act like Perkins is a scumbag and not the norm, because you're wrong about that.

If you're reading this, more than likely you are a sports fan. You're not a political junkie with inside information. If this scandal surprised you at all, then you know less about the going-ons in the world than 18 year olds who frequent message boards.

Stick to Saturdays, stick to what you know.

read more...

Repeating History

If there is one thing left that baseball has going for it, then that one thing would surely be history. The NBA's past is violent and archaic compared to today's game. The NFL barely resembles the league it used to be, even as late as the 1980s. But baseball, by and large, is the same game now as it was in 1997 or 1897. Except, you know, that it isn't.

For some reason, Major League Baseball, its fans and sports writers as a whole, like to pretend that the Steroid Era didn't change anything; that with "The Year of the Pitcher" and the decline of Roger Clemens and Mark McGwire, the whole black period is behind us. As if somehow we can just slice that piece of baseball's history off like a tumor, and hope that it didn't spread to the rest of the body.

Which is why, I presume, there is outrage when you entertain the idea that Jose Bautista could be on steroids. It's unfair, they say. Just because he is having a career year doesn't mean he should be lumped into a group of cheaters in the 1990s.

But career years aren't usually defined by hitting 250% more home runs than your previous season high, which was 4 years ago, and it's only August. This stands out like a sore thumb. As did McGwire, Barry Bonds and Sammy Sosa stood out when they started murdering baseballs and breaking decade old records like it was old hat. Nobody stood up then to ask any questions. It's unfair, they said.

I'm not even suggesting that Bautista is using. But shouldn't we at least be asking the question? The reason the Steroid Era was allowed to thrive was because nobody would point out the obvious. I thought the lesson learned was to point out statistical anomalies so that this would never happen again.

Of course, you can't just flat out test the guy because he's smashing the ball. But we should look to next year. If he trends back towards his career average, then chalk it up to a fluke. But if he approaches 40 home runs again, and then again? Time to investigate.

Yes, it is unfair, but the Steroid Era is to blame. The game simply is not the same. Not yet, anyway. And until every sign and stench from that period is washed away, current players will have to suffer the consequences of their predecessors. Either that, or we turn a blind eye and repeat the tainted history that led us here.

Knowing baseball people, pretending like the game is fine is the likeliest of scenarios. They just better pray, and pray hard, that Jose Bautista is clean.

read more...

Contract Killers

I am pro-celebrity. While others stand around the water cooler making fun of Tom Cruise and Lindsey Lohan, I understand how they and other crazy famous people got that way. When gossipers proclaim their disgust when the rich and famous complain about, well, being rich and famous, I side with the faces I see on the magazines. I rarely ever bitch about those who have it all.

So when I cringe upon hearing guys like Darrelle Revis say they aren't making enough millions, it's not because I can't relate to disputing over two or four million dollars. It's because the simple fact that millions are on the table is what makes every decision in sports life or death. Getting rid of Revis would cripple the Jets, and he knows that. He holds all the leverage. Well, he would if there wasn't a lockout looming anyways.

Nothing makes this more clear than what's happening in St. Joseph, Missouri.

Last week I attended my first Chiefs training camp. I was pumped. If I was still sixteen, I might have even been stoked. There was little that could have happened that would drain my excitement. Except, of course, seeing Matt Cassel.

In a word, the Chiefs' #1 quarterback has been awful. He just doesn't look like a starting NFL quarterback. Since he was eighteen years old, the only time Cassel has looked good as a starter was when he was paired with the likes of Randy Moss and Wes Welker. Last year's struggles were mainly blamed on the team as a whole being bad. But with nobody near him, simply running drills, he looked like he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. If nobody knew who he was, not one person attending would've figured he was the de facto starter.

But we do know who he is, and most importantly, what he makes. He is the $63 million dollar man, and you don't let that much money rot on the bench, even if it helps your team.

The Oakland Raiders know this. They continually trotted out JaMarcus Russell, though it was obvious to everyone that he didn't belong on the field. But Russell was the Raiders' #1 pick, and they couldn't justify letting his contract sit. The result was an okay Raiders team being sent to the slaughter every week because the most important position was being occupied by a purple drank drinking bust. If everyone on the team made equal pay, or drastically less, then the decision to say "we screwed that pick up" could have been made.

And I fear Matt Cassel will be the Chiefs' JaMarcus Russell. At this point, Brodie Croyle is the far superior quarterback, but will play second fiddle because of all the money tied up in Cassel. The same goes with defensive lineman Tyson Jackson, who, excluding this year's rookies, is the 13th highest paid player in the league. If anyone has looked worse than Cassel, it's Jackson. But you don't sit the 13th highest paid player. Not even if he's horrible.

I could care less about holdouts and gold digging rookies. The players can get paid, so they do everything in their power to get paid more. I get it. What kills me is how much power that money gives players, and how it strips decisions from coaches. The 2010 Chiefs will be worse because of those two contracts, and there is nothing coach Todd Haley or anyone else can do about it. If he sits Cassel and Jackson, he may get fired. If he plays them and the team tanks, he could get fired as well, and we'll all think of him as a bad coach, when in reality he was doing all he could to win.

This is not sports, it's economics, and bad economics at that. It's also the way it will always be from here on out. I just hope Haley has the balls to play the best players, not the highest paid. But I'm not holding my breath.

read more...

The Resurrection of Beavis and Butthead

Since it's a slow sports day, I'm sharing this here. For all my non-sports articles, click on the Facebook line above.


I'm not sure how many people can say this and be telling the truth, but my life would probably be completely different if it weren't for Beavis and Butthead. The show aired from 1993-1997, at which time I was between seven and eleven years old. I had just graduated from the childhood developmental stages and was on my way to becoming an actual person. My parents also got divorced during these four years. Needless to say, this was probably the most important time of my life, as I spent more time by myself than ever before and was starting to understand the world around me.

And that world's epicenter was MTV. I was an MTV addict. Whenever the phrase "spring break" is uttered, I still think of Pauly Shore and the "Spring Break Moment" theme (do they still do that?). I consumed everything. I still have debates on who was the best Singled Out co-host (Jenny McCarthy). But the one show that caught my attention more than any other was Beavis and Butthead.

By the time the show was canceled, I had already became a die-hard Metallica fan, a full-fledged heavy metal junkie. Mind you, I was still in grade school, and most of my classmates' idea of music was whatever songs teachers made us sing in class. It wasn't like it is today, where nine year olds are already on their third cellphone and second iPod. My mother forbid me to watch it (fat chance) when I almost burned the house down my making a bonfire in my bedroom. Ah, the good ole days.

The show had a serious impact on my life, as funny as that sounds. Though I barely knew what half the references were, the idea of kids who did nothing but watch MTV, eat nachos and listen to Megadeth seemed like a dream. I wanted to be Beavis. How big of a fan am I? The backdrop on my phone is from the Halloween episode where Beavis turns into Cornholio, and my ringtone is the show's theme song. Yeah.

So it would seem only natural that when rumors started to swirl about a possible revival, I would be stoked. This is all speculation, but if there is a revival of the show, it sounds like it will be modernized. Not in a way that makes the boys more 2010 (I don't even think that's possible), but the world around them will be. From what I hear, the videos they mock won't be that of Helmet and Bruce Willis, but of Lady Gaga and Fall Out Boy. At first glance, this seemed like a horrible idea. After all, what holds B&B dear to my heart is the fact that they were so 1990s.

The only thing that makes me hesitant is MTV. I don't care whether or not they air it (currently no deal is in place, and the new episodes may be internet-only), but that MTV no longer shows music videos. What made the show cool for kids like me was that Beavis and Butthead were kids like me. They hung around and just watched MTV all day. But MTV today is all reality shows. No eleven year old can in 2010 can relate to watching music videos all day. At least not on television.

The ironic thing is that B&B paved the way for successful non-music programming on MTV. The "M" no longer stands for "Music", but rather "Mainstream". It simply cannot resonate with this new generation. All a revival can do is satisfy the kids of the 90s who have pined for more episodes for over a decade. But is that worth it? What's the point if you can't engage a new audience?

I see this failing hard. Not in my eyes, but that of the public, and that will ruin its legacy. If this will truly work, have the boys' Mystery Science Theater inspired commentary be in front of a computer, making fun of YouTube videos. Oh wait, Tosh.0 already does that.

Time to face it: the reign is over. Beavis and Butthead is nothing more than a piece of my past and I couldn't ever explain it to my children any more than I could explain the importance of the Black Album; you either get it or you don't. I want more of the show, but I don't need it.

With that being said, if the genius that is Mike Judge somehow pulls this off, and make B&B not only funny but also relevant, it may be one of the greatest achievements of the new decade. I just have my doubts. Recreating the past is usually just the masking of lack of new ideas. I really, sincerely hope I am wrong.

read more...

Obey Your Master

I am white. Like, really white. My skin resembles that of Edward's in "Twilight". I like heavy metal and whiskey. My tattoos have colors. So it goes without saying that 99% of the time, I cannot stand and am vehemently against the words that come out of Reverend Jesse Jackson's mouth.

Let me present to you, that rare occurrence of the 1%.

I know I am in the minority here (no pun intended), when I say that I actually agree with Jackson's take on LeBron James. Well, not completely. Let me explain.

In case you didn't hear, the Rev. had this to say about Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert, and his tirade over LeBron choosing Miami over Cleveland:

He speaks as an owner of LeBron and not the owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers. His feelings of betrayal personify a slave master mentality. He sees LeBron as a runaway slave. This is an owner employee relationship - between business partners - and LeBron honored his contract.

Ah, the race card. Expect nothing less. You also should expect each and every individual in the country to come out to bash Jackson, and his love affair with making any issue about race. Of course, the LeBron James Fiasco (as I like to call it) has little to do with racism. But the idea of sports owners having a "slave master mentality" hit a chord with me. It made me think. Is he right?

I don't mean to suggest that owners think of their players as slaves. But why is it that Dan Gilbert reacted so strangely and violently to Lebron leaving? I am of the opinion that Gilbert took the whole thing personally, as if James was saying to him: "You are not good enough. You made me do this. You cannot run a business. I am better than you". And while I'm sure Mr. Gilbert has heard this before in his lifetime, I doubt he's heard it from a 25 year old black man who just proclaimed it in front of ten million people.

The problem here is role reversal, not just between blacks and whites, but of all owners and players. Long gone are the days of teams just buying and trading players, like, ahem, slaves. Now you must kiss the feet of King James. And in Gilbert's case, you might get kicked in the teeth afterwards. That is a hard pill for a rich and powerful man to swallow. So instead Gilbert spit back at the King. Wrong move, Dan.

I suspect what Rev. Jackson was trying to say, albeit poorly, was that Dan Gilbert felt entitled have LeBron James, a sentiment echoed by every sports fan in the state of Ohio. And why would he/they feel that way? It is a fact that Cleveland horribly managed their team, failing to put anything remotely resembling a championship roster around LeBron. So this sense of entitlement means that Ohioans believed that James belonged to them, whether he liked it or not; that it was not his choice to not want to play in Cleveland. They had already written his script. But LeBron freed himself of what they wanted and what we as sports fans wanted. He went after what he wanted.

Granted, when you consider the mouthpiece those quotes came from, and how scared Americans get when race is interjected in any conversation (especially sports), the common reaction will be "there he goes again...". But I see the validity in Jackson's overall point. LeBron James is an athlete who may have tarnished his legacy and his hero-status in his hometown to win basketball games. Not only that, but he rubbed it in our faces as well. He did exactly what everyone wanted him not to do. And we responded with disgust that he would dare not play by our rules.

But we play by LeBron's, and any other star athlete's rules now. He has set the precedent. He is our master.

read more...

Defending LeBron

Wow, I guess everyone hates LeBron James. How could you not? The guy gets nothing but praise, yet couldn't win a championship with Antwan Jamison and Mo Williams. And instead of just choosing a team to sign with this summer, he forced teams to come to him, and -gasp- show him why he should sign there. And when all of the hype got to the boiling point, and it seemed everybody was fed up with the speculation, he had the gall to tell us all the exact time and place we would learn his new destination.

Can you sense my sarcasm?

I'd like to thank the sports fans of America for completely ruining the Summer of LeBron. I've been excited for this for awhile now, just waiting to immerse myself in talks about sign and trades, cap room and player movement. And for the most part, it was as good as I thought it would be. But the misdirected hate towards LeBron has soured it. I can't take it anymore. It's disgusting and completely ill-informed.

Take Yahoo NBA analyst Adrian Wojnarowski, who wrote the following:

The Championship of Me comes crashing into a primetime cable infomercial that LeBron James and his cronies have been working to make happen for months, a slow, cynical churning of manufactured drama that sports has never witnessed. As historic monuments go, this is the Rushmore of basketball hubris and narcissism. The vacuous star for our vacuous times. All about ‘Bron and all about nothing.

James is throwing a few foosball tables at Boys & Girls Clubs, an empty gesture out of the empty superstar. He’s turned free agency into the title of our times, a preening pageant of fawning, begging and pleading. Hard-working people are dragged into municipalities and told to hold signs, chant scripted slogans and beg a diva who doesn’t care about them to accept a $100 million contract.

This just about sums it up; everything is LeBron's fault. He has "dragged" people into this, made them "beg". Except, you know, he hasn't really done anything. He was in the position to ask NBA teams to pitch to him. Those teams were more than happy to oblige. Once the media showed fans where these meetings would be held, they took it upon themselves to come out in droves and show James their support. Wow, what a monster!

Writers like Wojnarowski are who you should direct your disdain towards. He has spent all this time regurgitating the same speculations and rumors everybody else has, and is getting paid for it. His Twitter account has gained in popularity. He has, in fact, talked it about more than most LeBron supporters. He is a hypocrite and is partly responsible for Thursday's circus.

The truth remains that James' decision is the single most important event concerning the future of the NBA. That's why the media is covering this in the first place. And it is they, along with Mr. Wojnarowski, who have beaten it into us 24/7 ever since the end of Game Seven. All any NBA fan needed was the rumors and inside information. And yes, ESPN might have taken it further, but it was the naysayers who first started talking about non-basketball related issues, like what LeBron was wearing during these interviews.

Don't be mad at LeBron going through the motions of what is not only a huge decision for his life, but for the welfare of the league of which he plays in. The NBA with him in New York is a different NBA than if he stays in Cleveland. And mind you, this is a 25 year old making this decision. You were probably doing Jager-bombs with chubby college girls when you were his age. So shut it.

If you don't like how this whole thing has played out, remember: LeBron has no control on how he is perceived. He holds a lot of power, but as this hate-fest has showed, he cannot shape our opinions. That's what newspapers and television do. And what New Media and the internet age does now, is break apart our heroes and beat them down into dust. We no longer want our athletes to be bigger than life, rather, we want somebody to show us why they are no better than we are.

Well, LeBron is better than you. I'm guessing he's better than you in just about everything. He is definitely more accomplished as a 25 year old than most people, more mature as well. His response to people saying enough was to push this whole fiasco into one hour on a Thursday night. He's giving us what we want without dragging it out any longer.

Save your hate for the media. There was a time when they would champion the best, now they want to become part of the story. Don't let 'em.

Just know that when this is all over, James' decision will still matter in the NBA while the media's coverage of this last few weeks will be long forgotten. The King will write his own book. Let's just hope Adrian Wojnarowski doesn't write one any time soon.

read more...

The Future Is Now

Since young stars such as LeBron James and Dwayne Wade took over, the league has grown in popularity. As I have been saying for a while now, basketball will replace baseball as the #2 sport in America, and will one day replace football as #1. Every monumental change such as this must start somewhere, and while the seeds were already sown, we will all look back to one day as Day One of the New NBA.

That day is July 1st, 2010.

Tomorrow, the biggest free agency period in the history of sports will start. LeBron, Wade, Chris Bosh, Joe Johnson, Carlos Boozer, David Lee - and now Ray Allen, Paul Pierce and Dirk Nowitzki - will all be eligible to choose where their careers will end up. Never before has a sport had so many stars being courted at the same time. With James, he is the future of the league. And where he goes, the NBA goes with him.

This is something the NFL and MLB doesn't have. For whatever reason, NFL free agency is rarely filled with big names. The Bradys and Mannings of the world are set for their careers until they become too old and are given up on or they simply retire. In baseball, only the big market teams have any chance of signing star players.

I know what you're thinking. With LeBron's suitors being Miami, New York, Chicago and Los Angeles, isn't that just like baseball? The difference with the NBA is that big markets don't have the edge because of money, but because of venue. Those are just the places that big names want to play in. You can't fix that. Well, I guess James could if he stayed in Cleveland, but that seems unlikely at this point.

But the fact that the biggest basketball star since Michael Jordan not only could choose a small market, but would get paid more money by doing so, is what makes the NBA so great, and this summer so important. By staying with the Cavaliers, LeBron could effectively change the league. Wherever he goes, that city will have the biggest spotlight. All of a sudden, Miami could be basketball land. Now, that is power.

With football and baseball, one guy doesn't make that much of a difference. But in basketball, in changes everything. It makes the league much more volatile and entertaining. By adding James, New Jersey could go from one of the worst teams in NBA history to a favorite to win the East. One CNBC analyst estimated that LeBron's worth in an uncapped league could be manifested in a $500 million contract. $500 million!!!

I am telling you, the NBA is about to assume some serious staying power in American sports. Baseball is dying quickly. Considering the country's growing minority population, I would seriously want to sell my MLB stock and buy the NBA's while it's still relatively low.

Unless, that is, LeBron James decides to stay in Cleveland.

I could see a scenario where he stays put, and the remaining free agents scatter to various teams and the league loses some luster. Not that it will kill the league, but the progress of its popularity might be put on hold for a little while. But if King James becomes the King of New York? Well, get used to hearing his name a lot.

If you're not an NBA fan, but still reading, I implore you: BECOME A FAN NOW. Get in when the gettin's good. This is the perfect time to join. The future of the NBA is about the be formed. America's #2 sporting marriage is about to get engaged. Don't miss the reception.

Fireworks are coming on July 1st this year.

read more...

Soccer is the Death of America

Note: Originally written on July 9th, 2009.

Alright, so in the wake of the Team USA win against Spain, I wrote how the match meant nothing in terms of Americans embracing soccer. I still feel I am right about this. I mean, how many friends do you have who have become soccer fans this summer? I'm guessing zero. I also wrote that soccer could succeed if America becomes an international futbol powerhouse. I am wrong about this. Actually, all that needs to happen is rapid social progression. And not in a legalizing pot kind of way. Let me explain.

The reason we hate soccer is because we suck. We are the foam finger-wavers, top dog. Vietnam was so damning to this country because we, gasp, actually lost. We don't lose, we're winners. We don't partake in activities, from sports to war, in which we won't succeed. Well, that was the old America, born 1776, and dead about 200 years later. The country post-Vietnam is taking the shape of a global participant, though admittedly still at or near the top.

But what if we start dwindling down towards the middle? Think about it: our economy sucks, the population is more of a true melting pot than ever before, and while we were batting 1.000 in wars for the first 200 years, we are on the verge of losing two in the last forty. This is New America.

And New America has no boundaries. See, this country, while accepting anybody from everywhere, still drew lines. The Southern Gentleman, the East Coast Elite, the Midwest Farmer. Those are generalities. Then you dissect certain districts, like New York City or Boston, who had clearly defined lines of not far removed ancestry; tight-knit groups of similar races and backgrounds. We were diverse as a whole, but not in our parts. Now we are. The poor and rich, white and black - they live close to each other and go to the same schools. To quote Bill Murray in Stripes, "We are the wretched refuse. We're the underdog. We're mutts."

We are true mutts now. The election of Barack Obama was called the changing of the guard, out with the old and in with the new. Of course, to keep with overused phrases, it was meet the new boss, same as the old boss. But it did show a possible path for future America. We elected a mutt President who wanted to be a part of the global society, not its leader. Winning wasn't the priority, simply just being involved was. You know, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

So where am I going with this? The New America, concerned with being a global participant, culturally and economically, is the type of country who could enjoy soccer. It is THE international sport. Since 1776, the USA has been a virtual island. Think about soccer's two types of players - the European and South American. What they have in common is that they are interconnected. Brazil/Argentina, Spain/Italy/France. It is a community, and we've been separated. But hey, the coach doesn't bunk with his players. It comes with being king of the mountain. But in all facets, we are dissolving as that #1 team.

I'm not saying that this is a bad thing. Social progression is good, and empires never last. All I am saying is that it is change. And not Obama change, but real change. It'll be difficult to knock down our walls and let the world in. Just be ready. Because our football is based on the fact that we, and only we, can do it. We are the best. But international futbol involves everybody. It's sharing. The love of soccer could signal the death of America. The Old America.

Of course, I don't believe this will happen. We are much too stubborn for that.

read more...

Winning Isn't Everything

For the first time in my life, I don't care about my favorite team winning. This is the end result of the entire Big 12 fiasco; a mind-numbing cash grab between rich universities that has left such a trail of disgust amongst the Midwest, that I find myself actually wanting Kansas to join a mid-major. In the words of David Byrne, well, how did I get here?

When Missouri first started threatening to move to the Big Ten, I was one of the few Kansas fans to say good riddance. Hey, I love history and tradition as much as the next guy, but I'm not married to it. The inability to move beyond tradition is what has made college football such a joke and ideas like the BCS a reality. I love the rivalry, but I can move on. No big deal.

And when Colorado and Nebraska jumped ship for greener pastures, leaving the Big 12 dangerously close to collapsing, I heard very few voices of optimism. The fear was to be left out of a BCS conference, which would cripple every Big 12 team not named Texas, leaving them basically incapable of winning a football championship and hurting their respective basketball programs.

Nobody stopped to think about anything other than winning. Every radio host and internet columnist (and newspaper columnist, if you still hold on to that archaic tradition as well) looked only for the pros and cons in terms of the Big 12 schools' athletic success. Nobody asked the question: couldn't this be sorta fun?

As a Kansas fan, I'm tired of playing the same schools year in and year out. I find it exciting that there's a possibility of forming new grudges, whether that be with UCLA in the Pac 10, Boise State in the Mountain West, whatever. I want sports to be fun again. A fresh start in another conference, even if it does hurt Kansas' chance of competing for titles, would help. I'd get to learn about new schools, new coaches, new fan bases. What's so wrong with that?

Everyone is so obsessed with winning that I feel they have lost sight of things. College athletics is fun even when your team isn't very good. This isn't professional sports, where athletes are paid millions to win. These are college kids, who you can always root for, good or bad.

But it's going to be hard to root for the Big 12 10 when I'll always be aware that this conference is really just the Texas Ten, with the only reason for its existence is the fear of being left behind. Texas is getting the cash, their own network and an even bigger advantage.

Every Saturday I'm going to see Colorado and Nebraska in their new conferences, happy as can be. It's like seeing your ex-wife once a week having a great time with her new husband, while you're stuck with a fat girl from the South who bullies you around.

I say bring on the Mountain West. I'd rather be in a fair conference that wants my team than a league based solely on making Texas more money. This isn't college athletics, it's big corporate business. This is not why I watch sports. I'm willing to sacrifice winning for enjoyment. But sadly, just about everyone disagrees with me.

To quote Mr. Byrne again, it'll be the same as it ever was.

read more...

The Harm of Progress

Baseball is a nineteenth-century pastoral game

Football is a twentieth-century technological struggle

-George Carlin

I have forever been an advocate of instant replay. Not just in football, but in all sports. When a Ray Allen jump shot is changed from a two-pointer to a three-pointer minutes after it goes through the hoop, I'm glad they got it right. Replay has completely changed the NFL, so much so that teams hire guys whose only job is to watch every play from the booth to decide whether or not the coach should throw the red flag.

So, like most of the sports world, I too have been clamoring for baseball to adopt more replays. And now after the Armando Galarraga/Jim Joyce fiasco, the voices are louder than ever in favor of not just home runs being reviewed, but safe calls, fair and foul balls, etc. Last October, I even proposed a way for balls and strikes to be called from a booth.

I think I was wrong. When it comes to discussing the idea of progression, whether it's social, political or in the realm of sports, it is very easy to become hypocritical or lose sight of what really matters. I consider myself a very progressive person. I am pro-drugs, pro-gay, anti-war, etc. In other words, I am young. But while I value evolution, I also understand that sometimes, the unfair, old-school ways are sometimes the best ways to garner results.

For example, I hold a philosophy that is unpopular with about 99% of the people I know. I believe that the Feminist Movement of the 1950s and 60s hurt America. Let me explain.

Do I believe that women should be seen as equal to men? Absolutely. Do I believe women can and should hold the same jobs as men and be paid the same? Of course. But that doesn't necessarily mean that a coed working society breeds the best kind of people. You look at children today, and they are being raised by housekeepers, babysitters and daycare centers, not their parents. This is because both parents work. There isn't any time to actually raise their kids. And don't tell me both parents work because they have to financially. While true, that is a product of a flooded job market that is a result from twice as many people working than there used to be.

With that being said, I don't think we should strip women, or men for that matter, the right to work. It's simply not fair. But fair doesn't always lead to a desirable outcome. You see, a woman's role in early America was to raise the children, keep the house in order, cook the food, etc. Are those not needs anymore? That job is nearly extinct, yet the demand for those services is still as high as what it once was. So we are left without those services, which is crippling.

Women needed to be granted the right to earn their keep, but the Feminist Movement convinced everyone that a women should want to work, and that being a homemaker wasn't important. This is why are kids grow up in households without the sensitive, loving parent at home, and the dominant, disciplinary figure out in the work force. The cat's out of the bag, there is no turning back now.

So what does this have to do with instant replay? The cry for more replays in baseball is the MLB's Feminist Movement. Does it promote fairness? Yes. Is it an act of progression that future generations might laugh at because we didn't have it sooner? Yes. But will it turn out to hurt the game? Probably.

We simply do not have to be progressive about everything. It's okay if some things stay arcane and unfair, all in the name of preserving what works. The dichotomy between housewife mom and worker dad worked. Whether or not it was the right thing to do, you can not argue the results. And while instant replay may be the right thing to do with baseball, we also can not argue that the way the game has been played for ever a century has worked.

Baseball is outdated, but that's what we love about it, isn't it? It's slow and simple, like how life used to be. There's a reason why it's called the national pastime. I don't think it's in the MLB's best interest to try to out-advance the NFL. That's a losing battle. I think that I now understand what purists are talking about when they praise the "human element" of baseball. It's a game that is unfair and foolish but ultimately fun. That's how life not only used to be, but will always be. I say we embrace it.

read more...

Serving 8-10

Royals fans put up with a lot of shit. Really, you have to give them credit for going to Kauffman Stadium year after year, subjecting themselves to the pains of loving a horrible team. Unlike a lot of fan bases, Royals fans are very informed of their minor league affiliates, mostly because that's the only place they can find some optimism. They understand the realities of a small-market baseball team and why it is that their beloved team sucks.

However, they are now pass the point of frustration. Nobody wants to wait anymore. Can you blame them?

It's not just that the Royals haven't been to the postseason since they won the World Series in 1985, or that they've only had one winning season since 1994. It's not that the team isn't winning, it's that they are embarrassing themselves while losing.

From the front office, you have bad signings, failure to build up the minors and failure to keep the studs that you have (Damon, Dye, Beltran). On the field, the players routinely drop infield fly balls, seemingly have no idea how to run the bases or work the counts, and think OBP is a type of doctor. After twenty-plus years of enduring this type of pathetic ball play, it's no wonder why Royals fans are fed up.

And then you add this: GM Dayton Moore has publicly announced that it will take 8-10 years (from 2007, when he was hired) to build this team into any kind of contender. Well, the fans aren't liking that. Not. One. Bit.

I understand them, I really do. But the fact is that Moore is right. When you have an organization that is as depleted as the Royals were, it takes a lot of work to get them rolling again, especially when they're owned by David Glass, who extends slashing prices from one of his many Wal-Mart stores all the way to the Royals' payroll. You can't just cash out on veteran free agents for a one year run - two years at the MOST - and then be bankrupt for the next decade. You have to build from the ground up. And that takes time.

What makes it hard for Royals fans to swallow can be summed up in two words: Zack Greinke. Here you have a bona fide Ace, a top-5 pitcher and Cy Young winner, a guy you can build around. Unfortunately, the Royals aren't in any position to build a contender right now. Don't blame Dayton Moore, blame the prior administration.

Really, it's just bad luck. What this team needs is to freeze Greinke, à la Austin Powers, so we can thaw him out when he's really needed. There's no use for a Cy Young winner right now. As much as it pains me to say it, the Royals need to trade him. Get some young, can't miss talent, and just stockpile as much as you can. The plan is for everyone to come up at the same time. It's what Tampa Bay did, and right now they are the best team in baseball.

I know the fans deserve a winning team right now, but it is just not happening. We have to trust that Moore knows what he's doing. Yes, it's like being proposed to right after you got out of a relationship where you were beaten severely for twenty years. I never said it would be easy. There's still a few really tough years to endure. But if the Royals' fan base pressures this team into making stupid, win-now decisions, then they deserve all the losing that they are getting.

read more...

Rick Reilly & The Mothers of Inventing Stories

The transition between spring and summer can provide a lull for some sports fans. Baseball is just getting under way. The Red Sox are under .500 and the Nationals are above .500; it's a little too early to know anything. The NBA isn't for everybody and the playoffs can get dragged out. Golf? Only if Tiger is in contention on Sunday.

It is in times like these where stories that would never see the light of day in October or March surface. Stories like whether or not Dez Bryant's mother was a whore.

Honestly, I don't really care about Dez Bryant. My team didn't draft him and I don't care to pick him up in fantasy football. But I do find it interesting/comical/sad that so many people are outraged that Jeff Ireland, GM of the Miami Dolphins, was curious to find out if the wide receiver's mom was a prostitute under his pimp of a dad.

The most shocked people say that his upbringing doesn't really matter. Leading this charge is ESPN's Rick Reilly, who hasn't put two seconds of thought in any article he has written since joining the World Wide Leader. Reilly seems to think that you shouldn't be wary of someone because of their upbringing, an asinine idea that The Big Lead's Tyler Duffy immediately strikes down.

It's almost hard to believe that someone has to come out and prove that kids raised by pimps, whores, drug dealers and criminals actually turn into - wait for it - pimps, whores, drug dealers and criminals. I know this country loves the underdog stories of growing up hard and blossoming out of it against all odds. But these are the exceptions, not the rule.

Now, just because you have a shady background doesn't mean you can't be successful. But if you are Jeff Ireland and thinking about spending millions of dollars on a prospect, wouldn't you want every bit of information you could find? Believe me, children of pimps and crack dealers are far less likely to be stable adults than kids of Duke graduates. It's a red flag, to be sure.

There are two lessons to be learned here. First is that Rick Reilly is about as relevant anymore as Royals playoff hopes. The second is that we need to accept reality. It's alright to say that Dez Bryant has a lot going against him due to his upbringing. Nothing against him personally, but that is a lot of baggage. Most middle-classers still bitch to their therapists about their parents getting divorced forty years after the fact. You can't act like it doesn't matter.

Add that to the fact that Bryant was thought of as a malcontent before this story even broke, and that in his best season he had only one touchdown on the road, then it paints not such a pretty picture. If he ends up being a great wide receiver, fine. But the big business of the NFL has every right to vet rookies.

The past matters. As the saying goes, "those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it". The NFL learned from the histories of Pacman Jones and others. The only question now is will Dez Bryant learn from his parents' history. Will we see.

read more...

My Degeneration

Thousands of raving, stumbling drunks, getting angrier and angrier as they lose more and more money. By midafternoon they'll be guzzling mint juleps with both hands and vomitting on each other between races.

- Hunter S. Thompson, "The Kentucky Derby is Decadent and Depraved"

There are only four days per year where everyone acts like me. Being a drinker, gambler and someone who is attracted to the dark alleys of life, these days are New Year's Eve, St. Patrick's Day, Halloween and the Kentucky Derby.

The first two holidays are what I call "Amateur Nights". Every year on December 31st and March 17th, people all over America do what I do all the time: drink. Even if you are sober for nearly every day of the year, it's hard to resist a green beer or a glass of champagne. It's also impossible to get a beer at a bar during these days. I do not enjoy these holidays.

Other than sports, I have two passions; heavy metal music and horror movies. While I delve into dark territories almost every day, Halloween is the one time a year where it's okay to decorate your house in skulls and cover your children in blood. Also, women dress like prostitutes. I enjoy this holiday.

Then there is the Kentucky Derby. On one hand, it is the only time where rich white people can drink their asses off and gamble, which I do on a daily basis. However, seeing these people is a reminder of how embarrassing and wretched drunken gamblers are. It's pretty much the basis for Hunter S. Thompson's "The Kentucky Derby is Decadent and Depraved", which in my opinion is the single greatest sports article ever written.

So, if you want to know just how bad the Derby can be, read that article, because I couldn't do it justice. What interests me is why. Why is the Kentucky Derby a mainstream media event?

First of all, nobody cares about horse racing. If Super Saver, this year's winning Derby horse fails to win the Preakness (thus failing to win the Triple Crown), the level of interest in the sport for 2010 will fall to 0% for most of America. We simply do not care.

While horse racing falls into the category of apathy, three other defining aspects of the Derby are more repelling to middle America; excessive drinking, gambling and looking like an idiot. But for one day a year, these behaviors are not only accepted, they are celebrated. During the day-long coverage on Saturday, every picture from the race was of disgustingly drunk rich people walking around looking like this. And I don't know if you've ever been to a track before, but believe me, even a nun can't be present without making some kind of wager.

So why this day?

The answer is simple: the patrons are wealthy. There is no difference between the Derby and any other race except for two things. One, the Derby is the first leg of the Triple Crown, but as I've already discussed, people don't really care about horse racing. The second discrepancy is in other races, the drunkards are degenerate gamblers, while the Derby is home to the rich and powerful. When the top 1% are doing it, it's all gravy.

And that's why I probably lean towards loathing the Kentucky Derby. I take it personally when people condemn the acts I partake in, only to celebrate the same behavior when the rich decide to do it. I know the argument here is that it's just one day where squares like to get loose and have a little bit of raunchy fun. A kind of fun release valve. Well, if drinking and gambling is so much fun to these people, then why are those known as drinkers and gamblers shunned?

Look at poker, for example. It was a backroom game for most of its existence, reserved for cowboys and the scum of the Earth. Then money got involved. Big money. And television. Now your grandma hosts a weekly Texas Hold 'Em game.

The fact of the matter is, what is right and what is wrong has nothing to do with truth and more to do with what you're told. These people decided that Derby Day is an acceptable time to engage in lewd behavior. So shall it be written, so shall it be done. I say that every day is an acceptable day. Only difference is, I am not rich nor powerful. Nobody wants to imitate me. My life is not a blueprint for high success.

What they won't tell you though, and what you won't see on television, is that the behavior seen last Saturday is not a one day per year event for these people. They are drunks and they are gamblers. I drink whiskey, they drink martinis. I gamble on sports, they gamble on the stock market. They only thing that really separates us? I don't wear stupid fucking hats.

read more...

The People vs. LeBron James

If there's one thing that everyone in this country has in common, it is this: nobody knows what they want. This rings true in Who-like loudness when it comes to sports. We want Tiger Woods to be more human, but cry foul when he makes human mistakes. We bash Michael Jordan for his obsessive competitiveness off the court, but laud him for it with the ball in his hand. We never know what we want out of our athletes.

Really, we've asked for them to be perfect. To be funny but not cartoonish, confident but not arrogant, not a thug but also not smug, etc. Well, the NBA has this superstar. You might have heard of him. His name is LeBron James.

LeBron is as perfect as any athlete you will ever see. On the court, he scores, he dishes the ball, he hustles on defense. He simply makes his entire team better. Take Kobe Bryant off the Lakers, and they are still a very good team. Take LeBron off the Cavs, and you go from #1 team in the league to picking in the lottery every year.

But off the court is where he excels even more dramatically. There have been no rumors of drugs, alcohol abuse, treating people like crap or anything that could destroy his character. In an age where we are obsessed with the sex lives of celebrities, have you ever heard of one story about James with multiple groupies like Wilt or hitting up bars for skanks like Roethlisberger? None.

While I'm sure LeBron has employed an entire staff devoted from keeping his name strictly on the sports page, let's be honest here - you can't hide anything from the internet. If he truly was a ladies' man or a party animal, we would know. The truth is, James is a basketball phenom who is not only charismatic and likeable, but a stand up guy who knows his responsibilities.

And America hates this. Why else would we eat up scandals like Woods and Sandra Bullocks'? We love it when people that have more than us fall from grace. Though we pine for celebrities with just a smidgen of respectability, when someone like that actually comes around, we punish them for it.

First, there was Lebron James getting dunked on by a college kid, and the ensuing "controversy" of Nike stealing all documented footage. Either you have never heard of this event or you completely forgot about it. That's because it is, and was, a non-story. But at the time, it fueled the agendas of people like Skip Bayless, who put all their eggs in the "LeBron will never be the greatest basketball player" basket before he even entered the league.

Then there was the scandal of James not shaking hands with the Orlando Magic after being ousted in last year's Eastern Conference Finals. I wrote at the time and then reiterated my point a few months later how this was Jordan Part II. It's just being a competitive guy. Now we think of LeBron as a great guy and an ambassador of the league. Try again, haters.

Try, they did. Leading into this year's playoffs, James was railed for sitting out games. One writer even went as far as saying he owes his fans a refund and refused to vote for him as MVP. Now with LeBron banged up and the entire city of Cleveland holding their breaths for the series against Boston, let me ask the question: do you think he should have played all of those meaningless games?

Anything short of a 40/15/15 throughout the playoffs will leave the door open for people to call him out. The facts are there. He is the best player on the court and a truly respectable human being off it. This is what we all wanted. What more can LeBron James possibly do? And don't say win a championship, because if it's not against the Lakers with a healthy Kobe on the floor, the excuses will keep coming.

He is the NBA evolved. Get over it.

read more...

Divorcing the Royals

I am in a very bad relationship. She beats me, hurts me, leaves me emotionally scarred almost every single night. Sometimes it can ruin my whole day just thinking about her. And yet, I keep coming home. I endure. My friends and family tell me to leave, that I deserve better. But I can't.

She, of course, is the Kansas City Royals. We've been together for 24 years now. Sadly, the last time she was even somewhat of a decent person was the year before we met. I do love her, but the pain has increasingly become much higher than the pleasure. I'm thinking of divorcing the Royals.

It's the most dreadful thing a sports fan can think about. There is no turning back once you let go of a sports team, because if you return when things start going well, then you become the worst kind of fan there is. It's permanent. No remarriages.

But enough is enough. It's one thing not to spend money. A lot of teams have small payrolls. Actually, there are ten teams that spent less this year than Kansas City did. One of those teams, Tampa Bay, might be the best team in baseball, and made a World Series appearance two years ago. It's not about the money, honey.

It's about the lack of caring. When you trot out the likes of Kyle Farnsworth and Bruce Chen to ruin the careers of Zack Greinke and Luke Hochevar, then there is a problem. When you lead the league in batting average, but come in dead last in team ERA, then you are wasting talent. Joe Posnanski tweeted the other day that since August of 2008, Greinke has had an ERA of 2.11, and in those games, the Royals are 22-24. This is unacceptable.

It seems that every decision this organization makes is the wrong one. The youth never pans out, the veterans are already washed up. I can get over the fact that we couldn't keep Jermaine Dye, Carlos Beltran and Johnny Damon; we're a small market team, it happens. But when you do have those guys and let them waste away and get bitter because you're unable to surround them with anything resembling a major league ball club? That is when it gets hard to swallow.

The scouts are never right, and somehow, through regime changes and everything, still this team seems incapable of understanding how to put a decent team on the field. Bad luck is one thing. Not every high draft pick will be a Hall of Famer. But to ignore stats, ignore history and ignore the windows of opportunity when they appear is just offensive to me. Why the hell should I support a team who at worst doesn't care about winning, and at best is completely ignorant and helpless?

I'm not breaking up with you yet, Royals, but I'm definitely taking some time away. Perhaps see some other people (don't worry, not your sister, the Cardinals. I hate that bitch). When I come back next Spring, you have better changed your ways. I simply cannot take any more of this. I don't want to, but I will divorce your ass. And if I'm lucky, I'm taking the kids, Zack and Billy, with me.

read more...