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...