Wednesday, June 29, 2005

The Philosophy of Sam: Part I

A pot-stirer is just a glorified dip-stick.

Saturday, June 25, 2005

Sigalet for Comeback ESPY

Normally I pay no attention to the ESPYs. Not saying it is a bad idea, it is just something I really don't care about-- just like the Oscars, Emmys, and Grammys (is it me, or do those names make you think of old people?), what happens there really has no effect on my life whatsoever. Besides, they are all political. It is nothing but a popularity contest. If you have really pissed someone off, you don't stand a chance.

But out of all of this, there is a great senitmental story... and it comes from the CCHA. Bowling Green State goaltender Jordan Sigalet. Most of us know his story. His bout with MS, and the support he has gathered in his fight. For him, this must be the best honour yet.

I'm sure many people out in TV-land who saw Sigalet's name come up are going... who? What sport? That is a shame, because there is so much more to the guy. This is the guy who should win the award.

I don't think it is a mystery how hard it is to play goalie in hockey. It certainly isn't as easy as it looks. And Sigalet has done it consistently for the last 3-1/2 years at BGSU. He is a Boston Bruins draft pick, and one hell of an athlete.

Don't believe how good he is? I can sum it up with one comment: I was interviewing UNO Head Coach Mike Kemp, and a member of the Red Army for a television show (which is still in post-production). The topic of enemies of the state (to the Red Army came up). Coach Kemp's answer: Jordan Sigalet, because he's that good.

Sigalet has earned that much respect from his competition, and that was before we found out about his condition.

That said, it is not easy to be a goalie. Now try it with a handicap. Try to stop a puck that travels nearly 100-mph, and do it when your body doesn't exactly do everything you want it to. I'm sure we have all taken our bumps and bruises, and played thrugh injuries-- but this is the epitome of injuries, and it is one that won't go away. He has battled through it, and will continue to do so.

Of course there will be some nay-sayers who will say-- well, he only missed a handful of games. To those people, I say go to hell. Yes, he missed a handful of games... and there will probably be more times that he misses a handful of games because of this. But think about the emotion he had to go through, the consideration that he might never play again, and just the mental toughness it takes for him to step on the ice. The rebounding he had to make is tougher than coming back from a bad night at the office. And there are not many who can relate to him.

And then there is the person Jordan is off the ice. Jordan is a very knowledgable person, and a true diplomat. The first game I ever dressed for UNO, was against Bowling Green. As I walked into the building, standing in the hallway was Jordan-- who stuck out his hand to me and said "congratulations on joining the team." I was clueless, I assumed it was just a local Omaha person, maybe someone I had met before-- wasn't thinking it was an opponent, let alone Jordan. I said "thanks", shook his hand, and continued into the UNO locker room (where I would find the equipment manager ripping the name plate off the #33 sweater).

During the post game handshake, Jordan again came up to me, shook my hand again, and said "welcome back to college hockey". Realizing who had tracked me down before the game, I was a bit embarrassed-- and then add to it the fact that he knew I had played somewhere before. All I could to was blush and smile. It was one of those moments you sorta take for granted, not realizing what is going on until much later. When I found out Jordan had MS, that was the first moment that came back to me-- and then it hits you-- it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

So I now reach out, to honour Jordan once again. Please vote for Jordan for the ESPY.

http://espn.go.com/espy2005/s/05bestcomebacknominees.html?POLL209=3000000000001

The ESPY is where the fans vote really counts. This is not a presidential election. It is OK to vote, and your vote will count. No electoral colleges. No campaign promises that will never be kept. Just a vote for the best comeback of the year. And you don't even have to declare a political party. Vote!

Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Leave the Officials Alone

I am really getting tired of seeing broadcasters second-guess game officials (umpires, referees, linesmen) when it comes to close calls in a game. I recently witnessed Sportscenter (once a great way to ease into the morning, with highlights and scores) run a segment on how baseball umpires have messed up of late. Give it a rest.

It is just wrong. Not only am I a former player in several sports, I am a former baseball umpire and former soccer linesman, and currently worker as a hockey official. And I will be the first to admit we make mistakes from time to time. Some will turn the tide of the game, others will have no overall effect on the game.

Let's think about this. Officials have no time to think, we must see a play, call it fair, foul, safe, out, onside, offside, legal, illegal, heads, tails, good, bad, whatever. And we have to do it immediately. If we pause to think, everyone is all over us because we didn't look sure that we made the right call. At the highest levels, we must also do this with thousands of people telling us what they think of the call. We see it, we render our judgement-- that should be the end of it. Like it or love it, as I like to say-- there is no room for discussion with a coach or player. Our conversations with players and coaches should be restricted to simply to rules clarification-- asking us under what rule we moved the faceoff to the neutral zone.

The ability of television broadcasts enable viewers at home to see a play in super-duper-so slow a turtle can see the play clearly-motion frame-by-frame with definative results. The officials on the field do not have that option. We see it in real time, and we see it only once. If we missed the call, we appologize, but we don't need you blaming us for your teams 0-27 season simply because the pitcher and the runner got to the base at the same time, or we didn't call a trip at center ice with a second to play in the game. It is a moot point. We are not there to be scapegoats.

If you want perfection, build robots who will give you the results you desire. Use Ques-tech to call balls and strikes at home plate. Put electronic sensors in the balls and bases so you know if the ball got there before the runner.

Instant replay isn't the answer either. There is nothing worse for the momentum of a game, or more boring for the fans than to sit in a cold arena for 7 1/2 minutes while a guy (the same guy whom many of you just called blind and deaf) looks closer at a play through a television set to decide what happened. The naked eye should suffice-- if they are wrong... oh darn, work around it. We are not going out of our way to screw you over-- we are simply calling it as we see it.

OK, there are a few rotten apples out there who are bound to screw someone over. But what do you want me to do about someone else? If there are two or three of us, we can try to overrule him, or ever try to straighten him/her out. But we can't make promises, and among those promise we can't make is perfection.

Home teams around here hate me as an official. Why? Because I do not give the "home field advantage". I stick to what I see, as it is outlined in the rules. The home team does not get the benefit of an extra inch here, or the bending of a rule there. We are trained, that if we even think we need to end the play-- the play is over, we blow our whistle, and attempt to maintain the status quo.

A few of those little myths are also dead. The tie NEVER goes to the runner-- the honus is on the fielder to make the play, and if they are able to make that play, give them the out. Reward defense.

In a few years I hope to find myself in a broadcasting booth somewhere-- baseball, hockey, soccer... somewhere, I wouldn't mind toiling away in the minors. But, if I ever have the opportunity to broadcast a game, you will never hear me criticize an official for a close call-- and if I'm on television, you will never hear me ask to see the play in an instant replay. It is wrong to use tools that are not available to the officials to criticize them. There is so much going on during a play it is almost impossible to be perfect-- believe me, if we could, we would.

Please back off the officials, if it is blatant, they will be reprimanded or a protest can be carried. You can not expect another person to be more perfect than you are.

Monday, June 20, 2005

F1 Drops Ball by Dropping Green Flag

Very rarely do I follow Formula One racing. But I do make it known that I am an open-wheel racing fan, and so when something of note happens, I can't help but take notice. Let's put it this way-- something went afoul at Indy, and for once I can't blame Tony George (or can I?).

For those of you who don't follow F1, for those of you who don't care, and for those of you who didn't catch Sportscenter... here's what happened. The Formula One Grand Prix of the United States is run at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway-- home of the Indianapolis 500. The race is run on a "road" course through the infield of IMS. The road course was built about 7 years ago, and uses Turn One of the 2 1/2-mile oval track as Turn 13 of the road course. It is the only banked turn that F1 drivers see all season.

During practice/qualifying on Saturday, a couple Michelin tires failed in Turn 13-- one failure causing driver Ralph Schumacher (Michael's brother) to miss the race due to injury. After the second tire failure, Michelin technical personnel declared their tires "unsafe" to run in Turn 13. The move by Michelin started a series of events and discussions about provisions for the race.

One suggestion was that a "chicane" (if you've driven through a West Omaha neighbourhood, you know what one is) before turn 13, to slow the cars. Allegedly, 9 of 10 teams agreed to the change in the course-- the only team holding out is perrenial favourite Ferrari (who have struggled this season, despite a budget larger than most third-world nations). Without Ferrari's permission, no change was made. And the seven teams using Michelin tires (Ferrari and two other teams use Bridgestone tires) withdrew their cars from the race, in unified protest, after the warmup lap on Sunday-- leaving just the six cars on Bridgestone tires to race. The result was a bigger mockery of a race than anything Tony George could have come up with (what-- you couldn't expect me to leave TG out of this).

What we are now left with are a bunch of alienated fans-- many of whom probably turned to F1 after Tony George destroyed North American open-wheel racing by creating the IRL because he didn't like CART, and their rules. Fans left after 10 laps, others booed, and in the end Michael Schumacher and Ferrari drove on to the checkered flag.

So where is the problem? The problem is the wreckless abandon for which F1 has just shown its drivers. This was not an issue of inadaquate equipment-- this was a safety issue. And when it comes to open-wheel racing (especially in CART and the IRL), safety ALWAYS comes first. Had Ferrari voiced a concern over safety, you had better believe that EVERYONE would have listened. Instead we are faced with racing doubletalk that sure Tony George was taking notes of-- quotes like "Apparently, none of the Michelin teams brought a backup to Indianapolis."

Wrong answer, guys. Michelin had a back up tire at Indianapolis. Teams are allowed two bring two different types of tires to the track. And all of them do-- a set of tires for dry conditions, and a set of tires for wet conditions. Is F1 or Bridgestone suggesting that the Michelin teams run on tires for wet conditions? That is not safe, as wet tires can not take the heat created by friction as well as dry-condition (or slick) tires. Running on wet tires would have created more problems, more malfunctions, and who knows what else.

What F1 should have done was postponed the race, or simply cancelled the event citing the unsafe conditions. This is not unprecidented-- back in 2001, CART cancelled a race at Texas Motor Speedway when drivers were complaining of blackouts caused by the high G-forces applied to their bodies in the corners. Yes, it was a very unpopular decision among fans-- but it was the right thing to do in the interest of safety. If you want to see death and destruction in a 32-car pile up (and not be in the damn thing)... go watch NASCAR.

There is no shame in admitting there is a problem. And it is not like F1 was racing on a "street"-circuit, where diverting traffic during the event weekend is a problem-- this was at Indianapolis, a track that hosts 3 events every year. They certainly could have rescheduled THIS race. Knowing the concern of the majority of teams, the best thing to do would have been to address the concern, not turn F1 (which until this year had simply been a bunch of parades run behind Michael Schumacher) into more of a farce than it is.

But maybe we can blame Tony George for this. Think about. Every F1 team has run at Indy before-- they are aware of the banked turn. But nobody is allowed to test at Indy for F1, and there has been a change at Indy in the past year. The track, run by Tony George, underwent a grinding process to the 2 1/2-mile oval track (which turn 13 is a part of). The process changes the driving surface does it not? It was a move made to creat more grip for Indy Car racing tires (which are provided by Firestone-- owned by the same company as Bridgestone). Bridgestone had the advantage of knowing the track condition and the effects on the tires from providing tires for the Indy Racing League, and could bring a tire compound acceptable to use on that surface. Michelin did not have that benefit, and probably came to the race with a compound similar to the one used for last year's race.

The long and the short of it is, the pooch got screwed here. F1 should not have allowed the race to go on. Or even sent teams over here to test tires after IMS changed the settings of the track. Now we have to listen to the soap opera of NAPCAR (yes, I said Nap) proportions. The whining, the bitching, the moaning-- all because f1 failed to put safety first. I applaud the Michelin teams for sticking to their guns, and coming together for the good fight.

Do we really need to lose another Ayrton Senna or Tony Renna before we address safety concerns?

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

Where Have All the Flags Gone?

Wow, Flag Day. Just another day on the calendar. Just another part of the patriotic time of the year that starts with Memorial Day, and ends with Independence Day. As I look out my window, I can see only one American Flag-- and it's the one on my front porch. What the hell people, believe it or not, Flag Day is considered a holiday-- sorry, no time off work, not holiday pay, but it's still a holiday. And even if you do not fly the American Flag everyday (in good weather), they ask that it be displayed for state and special holidays: New Year's Day, Presidential Inauguration Day, Lincoln's Birthday, Washington's Birthday, Easter, Mother's Day, Armed Forces Day, Memorial Day, Flag Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Constitution and Citizenship Day (17 September), Columbus Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving, and Christmas. Bet you didn't know that.

Do I think people are unpatriotic for not flying the flag today? No. I think their patriotism is misguided. Following 9/11, we witnessed an outpouring of patriotism... we united as a nation-- white, black, hispanic, asian, male, female, adult, child-- we came together as one. And it's a shame it took such a moment for that to happen. In the days and months after, you couldn't turn without seeing a flag. We have since fallen back on those displays, which is fine-- and you will still see the flag flying in front of the houses of the wives and parents of our military servants-- but on a day like Flag Day you have to ask, where are they at? Are we becomming non-chalant about who we are again?

Now, don't get me wrong when I say this. But we are bucking for another ass-kicking at the hands of someone on the other side of the world. Think about it. For 40 years, thanks to the Soviets, we feared that the world was going to end before the next commercial break. We took nothing from granted. Then the Cold War ended, and we stopped fearing attack from the world, and damn if we didn't get bitch-slapped.

[DISCLAIMER: I am not saying that I agree with the ongoings of the attacks of 9/11. They were wrong, and they (whoever really did it-- I know many parties took credit for it) went about it the wrong way. Then again, the attack on the USS Cole didn't really grab our attention. We must realize that there are people in the world who do not agree with our views, and the way we conduct our business... and they actually do have a right to tell us what they think. We've been a nation for just over 200 years. Places like Iraq, Arabia, China have been around over 2,000 years. The United States dictating the policy of the world it kinda like your 5-year-old telling you, the parent, that he should make the rules for the house. That said, yes, we are the most powerful nation in the world (at least we like to think that), and sometimes we must flex our military muscle to ensure the greater good. That doesn't mean that we need to go out and force policy. The best way for us to demonstrate our position of power, is for us to return to our policing state-- emerging occaisionally in a display of our military force that demonstrates that yes, we are still the most powerful nation in the world. We have become aggressors of late, and it is eating up our military resources-- again, I ask you to think... we are dealing with 20 or 30 problem areas in the world, and using bullets and missiles and bombs and ships and aircraft to do it-- don't you think we are spreading ourselves a little thin, I mean, our RESERVES and NATIONAL GUARD are in the battlefields of the world right now, when they are really supposed to be back home filling the role the military needs to domestically. If someone wanted to, they could take advantage of us, and we'd be pretty much powerless to do anything. Fortunately, since 9/11, the world has been kind enough not to attack the innocent businessmen here in the United States. As I said, they way the attacks of 9/11 went down was wrong. Am I saying we deserved the attacks? No, but we should have expected someone to vent their frustrations on us. And they should have done so through our military channels. Give us a chance to defend ourselves, don't go after a 3rd year accountant on the 85th floor of an office building because you don't like our government's policy-- if your beef if with the government, go for them, if your beef is with the military, there's your target. A lot of people died in an unnecessary cause-- something they had no part of, other than living in this great nation.]

But once again, we are lulling ourselves into our laxidasical ways. Back to our internal hatred for each other, back to our individuality-- and that's not what this nation is about. Things the flag represents... OUR FREEDOM. We need wake up once again, and not take what we have for granted. And it starts by knowing what we are doing, and why. Even the colours of our flag stand for something-- they just don't make the flag look good. Red is for hardiness and courage, white is for purity and innocence, and blue is for vilgilance, perseverance, and justice-- and suddenly my little disclaimer rant makes a lot more sence, doesn't it? Those 13 stripes, they represent where we started, and the the 50 stars are what we have become-- ONE NATION, UNDER GOD (or whatever you want to call him), INDIVISIBLE.

Thursday, June 09, 2005

Parents Who Need To Stop Living Through Their Kids

From the same network that brings you "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy", "Showbiz Moms and Dads", and "Showdog Moms and Dads"... we now bring you "Sportskids Moms and Dads". This is so wrong on so many levels. And it started being wrong with "Showbiz M & D". I have a message for all you parents out there. Leave your kids alone, let them be kids. Don't force them to be something they aren't.

I'm sure many of us like watching people make complete asses of themselves on television-- it's entertaining to see how moronic someone can be for something as mundane as a bit of cash. But isn't that what we have "Fear Factor" and "Americas Funniest Home Videos" for?

OK, let's start with "Showbiz Moms and Dads". We know there are over the top parents who think the darlings are just sooooooooo cute. Shut up. All babies are cute when they are born. Nobody walks up to a new parents and goes "my god, what a pug-fugly baby that is!" Everybody goes ga-ga over babies. That's fine, their so full of joy, and eventually so full of energy-- they are just a bundle of joy. But then kids grow up-- if their parents let them. But when they start to learn to talk, they lose some of that charm. All of a sudden, "oh, what a beautiful baby!" becomes "my, what a cute kid." And I don't ever want to hear the term "six-year-old beauty queen" again. No six-year-old is eligible to be a beauty queen. Beauty queen need to be old enough to drink somewhere in the world-- giving us, the average slob a chance to catch them on a drunken crawl and dupe them into our lives. Only kidding. But still, until you have curves, you can't be a beauty queen.

Jon-Benet Ramsey: Did her parents kill a six-year-old beauty queen? Hell no. They killed a six-year-old spoilled brat who was probably so self-centered and so annoying that the parents felt it only right to rid the world of her and the misery she was bringing everyone else. It's as simple as this: your mother brought you into this world... she can certainly take you out of it. J-B Ramsey probably became a monster of her family's creation-- parents building up her confidence, wildly spending money on her, a jealous brother-- so much so that she started to believe she was above everyone else. My, what a harsh come down it must have been for her.

And this brings us to the sportskids portion of our rant. May I ask wht parents are thinking putting some much pressire on their kids to play sports well? I mean, the pressure they get from their littel friends is probably unbearable-- and that's just at recess, why would you tell your child they need to be a superstar at the ripe old age of seven?

I just have to laugh at these parents who spend so much money to send their kids to camps, pay for private coaches, have to buy the most recent models of equipment, and play the politics just so their kids can make a select travel team. I got news for you freaks-- it guarentees nothing. In fact, you're probably going to burn your kids out by the time they are 15-- rendering you little plan for the big bucks when they turn pro, useless.

Are you ready for this? (I really wish 'ellisfan' was here for this one) I grew up with the realistic dream of playing Division-1 college hockey. In the fourteen years I played hockey before I went to college, I played a half-season of travel select hockey-- and that was my senior year of high school when I played for a team made up of house league all-stars. Right out of high-school, I went on to play college hockey. I went back played a couple years in juniors, took a couple years off, and then returned to the college game, at the Division-1 level. It doesn't matter to me that I didn't play a minute at the D-1 level, but I proved to myself that I could get there. That's all I wanted. And that is a big difference in my mindset, and the mindset some of you parents have enstilled in your children. You have them thinking they are god's gift to whatever. I hate to fight, and claw, and scratch to get where I am... I set a realistic goal for myself, and I reached it. There were some setbacks along the way, but I fought through and attained my goal. But here's the bigger part of it-- someone once asked me how it felt to play D-1 hockey. My answer: "no different than watching the game from section 123-- I just got a major seat upgrade, that's all."

I got to the highest levels of amateur hockey. And I got there with people with more money, better equipment (I was getting hand-me-downs from my brother until my junior year of high school), and you putting me down because I grew up playing on an outdoor rink. Gasp, and outdoor rink? Yea, you know, how they learn to play in Minnesota and Canada.

Something you don't know about me, is that when I was in sixth-grade, I had college coaches asking where I would be playing high school baseball. But just a couple months later, I had one of those moments where I had to decide if it was worth it. I decided it wasn't worth playing the politics anymore, and I walked away from baseball. I might have gone back and played in high school, but a move out to Nebraska where baseball season and soccer season are the same made me choose. Soccer won out.

And believe me, there were setbacks. Injuries galore. With the exception of a few minor concussions in high school, I had been relatively injury-free. That changes when I got to college this first time. You show up for your first ice time with a college team, you're playing great, as you know you can, and then suddenly you split to make a save, and feel that burn-- the wheels are coming off. Or it's playing roller hockey in the offseason, with your friends, and you take a hit-- and for a several minutes, your friends wonder if you'll ever walk again. What they don't know about is the back pain has become the norm for you since that incident. Just one injury can derail a promising career-- there are still no guarentees. And it can all be summed up by your brother, who after seeing you in action last week says, "I haven't seen you play like that since high school" (the last time you were fully healthy and in shape). The only difference was-- I was pushing myself. My parents had told me to take a rest. I just didn't listen, and they understood it was my choice, not theirs. My parents are proud of me for never giving up, they are proud of my making a D-1 team-- they don't care if I never played, they're just glad I applied myself to reaching a goal, a realistic one I set for myself.

Things happen that you can't control. You can spend all the money you want. Pressure your kids to do well all you want. You can't force them to become something they aren't. And your driving them to wherever before an after school, while other kids are out with their friends, that doesn't help either. Let them be kids.

Parents, the pressure you are putting on your kids is too much. Let them develop naturally. We are not glorifying you by putting you on TV. We are making a mockery of you. We sit back and say "my god, what a flippin moron", or "I hope I never become that obsessive over something my kids do, cuz this lady needs to be shot." It maybe entertaining for us to watch, but when you look back on yourselves is it really worth embarrassing yourself and your family? What is more embarrassing: the fact that you pushed your kid to the point of rebellion where you never get to see the end of the potential, or the fact that we now have the video evidence of what a monster you've become?

Tuesday, June 07, 2005

Darin Erstad: Baseball Goon

I'm sure we've all seen it-- those of us who watch Sportscenter, or even the local news (especially in Nebraska-- after all it involves a beloved former Felon, er... Husker), or just watch baseball. I saw it while watching the Cardinals beat up on the Red Sox eight months too late. It is the talk of baseball. It is, Darin Erstad barrelling over Johnny Estrada in Atlanta last night.

Erstad's play in the eighth inning of the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim-Southern California-India-Australia-New Zealand-and any other land no longer claimed by the British/ Boston-Milwaukee-Atlanta Braves game was the grossest display of roid rage I have every seen. It was dirty hit. It was unnecessary. I would have been flagged for fifteen yards in football, and certainly would have garnered at charging call in hockey. So why is it legal in baseball? Actually, in some levels, it's not.

Youth baseball has a must slide rule at any base where there is a play (except when running from home to first, where they have a no slide rule). Even college baseball has a rule mandating that if a player bowls over a catcher, he is immediately ejected and subject to suspension.

Now, I know the peoples of the world are split on a mandatory slide rule. Some don't want to see the contact. Other, want to see the contact, and cheer it. Even Erstad's manager, former Dodgers catcher Mike Scioscia said "it's baseball."

No Mike, it's not. And you need to get with the times.

Baseball players have gotten bigger and stronger-- some with the help of steroids. Gone are they days of Willie McGee and Lou Brock running wild on the bases. Erstad is 6'-2", 215 lbs. And a former two sport athlete. Erstad is a former college football player, and while he was only a punter, a punter in college is not like the ESL, (English as a second language, for those of you outside of the education business) illegal aliens who kick our extra points. Erstad would have fit in nicely as a safety or even outside linebacker. Any catcher in the league would have outweighed McGee or Brock by a good 20 lbs., which is probably why you didn't see collisions at the plate as often. Now, at the tale of the tape, Estrada weighed even with Erstad, but gives up two inches-- and those of you who have seen both players know Erstad had more muscle mass than Estrada.

I was a catcher in little league baseball, recruited to play prep ball as early as sixth-grade, until a move to Nebraska made me choose between soccer and baseball-- soccer won out, but that's another story, another rant.

Only twice had it ever been attempted to jar the ball lose from me-- I won both battles. The second got a response from a close friend who after picking himself up off the dirt looked at me and said, "I should have known better than to try and bowl over a hockey player." He appologized for the feable attempt, no harm done.

Now what I really have a problem with is Erstad going out of his way to blow Estrada off the face of the earth. Watch the replay-- Estrada is actually several feet up the first base line when he catches the ball, and Erstad missed the plate completely, and had to go back to tag the base. It is so evident that Erstad was going out of his was to knock Estrada over, and possibly hurt him. Then again, he went to "the (Nebraska State) Pennitentiary", if you know what I mean. So we know he didn't get an education-- and might be brain-dead enough to make a dumb baserunning play like that.

And this is nothing like Pete Rose essentially ending Ray Fosse's career at an All-Star Game. While I don't agree with Rose knocking Fosse over in an exhibition. Fosse was in the baseline, and Rose didn't go out of his way to get to him.

The good news of this is, while Estrada was knocked from the game, he is currently listed as day-to-day. That is lucky for both parties. But it is dirty plays such as that, which alter careers. Erstad needs to be suspended. If Estrada only misses a couple games, the minimum punishment for Erstad should be five games. But if Estrada has to go on the DL, well then Erstad deserves to sit out the same 15-game minumum Estrada will face.

I certainly hope the young baseball players in the world no longer look up to Erstad. He's not a hero, he's a goon. He has brought great shame to himself, and set a piss-poor example for those young players. Get him out of the game, actions like that are intolerable and have no place in sports.

Sunday, June 05, 2005

Bringing Competition Back to Sports

So I have recently witnessed my friend AJ's rant on why the Kansas City Royals suck to the point that his is no longer a fan (AJ, do you have a new team yet?). I have also witnessed a day full of soccer on TV. It got me thinking. And now I have the answer to the major issue in sports-- competitive balance. Hate soccer all you want (I love, I played in HS-- set a state record for saves in a season, though it has since been broken), but they have it done right. The answer is the same in soccer and most international sports: relegation.

We need to restructure the five major sports in North America (baseball, basketball, football, hockey, soccer) to a relegation/promotion-based system. For those of you not familiar with the system, here is how it works. The best teams in the nation (we'll call it the nation-- I know North American leagues cross international borders, but bear with me) are placed in the top division-- Division 1 of you will. The next group of teams (usually the same number of teams) make up the second division, and so on and so forth. The teams play within their divisions-- though I'm sure they can schedule exhibitions outside of them. At the end of the season the top team (sometimes two) is promoted to the next level up, with the exception the top division whose winner is the league champion. The last place team in each division is relegated to the next division down. Sometimes the team being promoted plays the team being relegated for the right to play in the higher division.

Now there are a ton of details that would need to be sorted out, like the absence of a draft, and player transfers. But who gives a damn about that?

I am just so tired of Bill Wirtz and the Chicago Blackhawks pinching pennies, and not facing any punishment. In fact, they way things are, they stand to be rewarded by having top prospects available to them in the draft. Screw that-- make Wirtz get off his fat ass, and dig his wallet out of the fat roll to sign a 16 year old-- you know, the way the Blackhawks got Bobby Hull. Could you imagine the embarrassment for Wirtz when the Chicago Wolves beat the Blackhawks to move up a level?

This is also good for expanding the sports into new markets. I am still not a fan of "sun coast" hockey. But if they can bring in fans and be competitive-- fine, welcome to the show. But what about some markets consistently overlooked? Edmonton, Calgary, Hartford-- places we know can handle top level teams, they just don't get the opportunity (except for the one team they have. Better yet, could you imagine a team from Bangor fighting their way from the lowest level to the top? Who would have thought about a major sports team in Bangor flippin' Maine?

Let's bring sports into a similar system. 16 teams in the top division-- the Premiership, if you will. Maybe 20 teams for every level below that.

Better yet-- use it for college sports. It is flippin' assinine for the Nebraska Felons (Cornhuskers) football program to schedule Division 1-AA Maine, just so they can make money off of a walkover. The game won't be competitive-- but wouldn't it be great if they lost to the Black Bears? Screw that... you have to play a team you can be compared to. And all those precious bowl games you have? Fine... your Five major bowls can stay for placement purposes. But those minor bowl games-- those are your battles to move up.

Nebraska (0-15) in Division 3, plays Wartburg College (15-0) in Division 4 in the Tidy Bowl at Tacoma, Washington (to those of you from Seattle, you're welcome). Or Illinois Wesleyan (13-2) in Division 6 plays Temple (5-10) in the Humanitarian Bowl (yes, on the blue turf of Boise State).

It allows for bad teams like Temple and Nebraska to play in the occaisional meaningful game.

It is a great system, and opens the games on so many levels. With the non-existence of the NHL, hockey has a chance to start over, and to do it right. For soccer (MLS), it's been a rumour, and may not be very long off in the future. It makes sense for everyone involved-- teams, players, fans. I see no loss-- at least under this format we'll have an excuse to only see 5 teams on ESPN.

Thursday, June 02, 2005

Originality: The Lost Art

I have to ask-- what the hell has happened to originality? Why am I flipping through TV channels only to see the same show under 3 different names? Why am I looking for a good date movie, only to find movies I didn't want to see in their original release? And why are these so-called big star singers sampling songs, or making their own versions? And why do we classify sports players into forms? I just have to ask-- is nothing unique any more?

Television-- what the hell? Do we need more than one American Idol? Hell, we don't even need one. If these people had talent, they should be able to go straight into an office in Los Angeles, sing, and have a record deal. Nothing good has come from American Idol-- it jumpstarted Ryan Seacrest's career, it has given a platform for Kelly Clarkson to wear clothing that exposes most of her flat chest, it resulted in a record deal for William Hung (and I want an explanation for that one-- how the hell does that no talent hack get a record deal? Did it end up on the comedy racks?), and it has now gotten to the point where a no-talent, ex-convict has tarnished the name of an '80s sex icon. But that's not the end of it. We also have Nashville Star, and Fame and Fourtune on the local Omaha level.

And it's not just so-called reality TV like American Idol, Survivor, and Big Brother. Anybody remember the early '90s? In the same season we have ER and Chicago Hope. I mean, come 'on people, would is have been so hard to place one of those shows in another city? Why not St. Louis Hope? And there will only be one true CSI, and one true Law and Order. That said, I am also tired of seeing Law and Order on 12 different channels, all at the same time. We know you are trying to move off of the constant M*A*S*H reruns, but please, air something else (the worst part of it is, my mother spends 23 hours of the day watching said re-airings of Law and Order... and I'm sure she can recite all of them verbatum. I'm plastered when she claims to have never seen this episode-- OK, mom... I'll call the home.)

And you can all fuck right off with the Real Gilligan's Island. Stop bastardizing decent television shows! The show ran its course, and we knew it wasn't real, and that it wouldn't last forever. But thanks to syndication, we can continue to watch. That said-- we need TV Land to star showing more than Bonanza, Gunsmoke, and other Westerns? What happened to St. Elsewhere? and Hill Street Blues? and WKRP in Cincinnati, or even the Greatest American Hero for my brother. How about some cult favourites? Due South or Sportsnight, anyone?

Also-- stop broadcasting your softcore porn. Personal lives are just that, personal. We don't need to see a ditzy blonde fucking 15 guys and deciding which one is the best lay. Nor do we need to see the no-talent brother of a drama star, or the fourth-string quarterback of the New York Giants trying to kiss as many women as possible. All of your shows, the Bachelor, the Bacherlorette (again, no originality-- you're not fooling anyone), Fifth Wheel, Dream Date-- television has glorified prostitution. It's illegal you morons! And I hope some over-the-top, middle-aged, housewife with nothing better to do than bitch because she's afraid her unsupervised (unsupervised because she's busy looking for a quick fix for money) children might stumble across one of these shows takes you to court for it.

Movies-- Amityville Horror... need I say more? Didn't see it the first time, not going to watch it this time.

Music-- OK, we know Jessica Simspon is a very good-looking woman, but lets let her write her own music. I don't want to hear her singing songs by Berlin. A side note-- message for Jessica's sister Ashlie-- you can't sing, you need to pick a hair colour, and STOP LIVING OF YOUR SISTER'S POPULARITY. Some people were meant for stardom, others weren't. Ashlie, you weren't. I also do want to hear Eminem ruin anymore good songs. Sampling Martika's "Toy Soldiers"-- that was a great song til your filthy convicted hands got on it. Jessica Simpson did it too-- she stole John Cougar's "Jack and Diane". And don't think Canadian's are safe for a minute-- Snow, you piece of shit anal-rapist, did you not learn anything from Vanilla Ice pretending to be black (and cool for that matter).

OK, there are a set of people who are safe from my rampage. Anyone who remixes a Crowded House song. Don't get me wrong-- Crowded House have some great songs, for other people to sing. Sixpence None the Richer greatly improved "Don't Dream (It's Over)"... and for those of you who have never hear Jesse Cook's version of "Fall At Your Feet", they make you want to forget that Crowded House ever existed.

But I will give credit where credit is due. I have fallen in love with a voice, and it took a remake of a solid Roxette song to do it. Edmee Daenen (lead vocals of Belgian group Danger Hardcore Team-- better known simply as DHT), you are a sweetheart. If you have not heard DHT's remake of "Listen To Your Heart", you are missing out. The single version of the remake ups the ante for the song, but to truly appreciate the song and Edmee's talents, you must track down Edmee's accoustic version. She sings it the way it was meant to be-- by a sweet, innocent, soulful young woman (who is just so cute), not by a butch, gap-toothed, lesbian from Sweden.

Edmee has the best singing voice I have ever heard. One of those voices that just makes you melt everytime you hear it. I don't think there will ever be a time that I wouldn't want to hear that voice. Amy Lee has a set of lungs, and there are not many who can match the soul of Rick Astley's voice. But, Edmee you have them trumped-- I must have you.

If you can improve the song, please do so. But unless you have that talent, do something we can't compare you to. For fuck's sakes, I will never forgive Madonna for ruining "American Pie".

Sports-- Now we have just gone overboard. Butterfly goaltenders in hockey, "Slap" hitters in baseball, and option quaterbacks. What ever happened to improvisation?

Goaltenders, just stop the puck-- who cares how you look in doing so. I loved Hasek when he was a Blackhawks-- he was a novelty. Now, I hate it. He's probably more lucky than anything else, but all the kids want to be like him. As a coach, I hate that. Like I said... lucky. How about making the save, and being in position for the rebound. I'm not saying you have to have a stand-up form, or even a butterfly form-- but some form would be nice.

And quarterbacks, every play should be the option. But not in the Nebraska sense. Drop back to pass, and if the recievers aren't open, you have be able to pull the ball down and run-- not scramble... run. Or maybe pitch it like a rigby player. Put first things first, know how to throw the football-- if you can't throw the ball down field, you have no business play the quarterback position. Jamal Lord, Eric Crouch, Scott Frost, I doubt any of you could throw the ball more than 15 yards beyond the line of scrimmage-- and hence, you don't play QB in the NFL. And a sidenote for that Eric "Crotch"-- you're a crybaby, and you never deserved the Heisman (but at least it means you will be a colossal failure at the NFL level). Stop sniffin the genitalia of your teammates, keep yours in your pants, and go back under to the rock your crawled out from (for those of you who are stickler's for the Queen's preferred English: go back, thee, from wence thou came).

And baseball... does everyone have to swing for the fences, or be labled a slap hitter? And why do we all look like robots on the mound? I want to see more guys pitching like Dontrelle Willis and Paul Byrd. Willis, has a high leg kick that reminds you vaguely of Juan Marichal (if only he straightened his leg out, so his ankle came up above his head). And Byrdie, if the only pitcher who still uses a free-wheeling wind up. He is a throwback, and it would make Bob Feller and Warren Spahn proud. You get a little bit of Luis Tiant in Kevin Brown and Hideo Nomo turning their backs to the hitter. David Cone would occaisionally break it out, too. But nobody will ever do it like Tiant.

And what about hitters? Some teams actually have a mandated look-- either uniform, or their stance at the plate. We are not all alike. Why can't a young speedster in the minors hold hit bas parallel to the ground like Rod Carew? Or how about letting a player stand like Stan Musial, who used to give the impression he was looking around the corner at the pitcher?

While we're at it, enfore the rules you have-- making left-handed pitchers step TOWARDS first on a pick off (none of this 45 degree bullshit). But bring back the spitter, let the pitchers scuff the ball, and it a pitcher's arm can take it, let them have that hesitation like Satchel Paige, who would just totally stop his momentum for a moment, then finish the delivery. You don't need high scores to keep the fans happy. I'd love to see more 1-0 pitcher's duels.

Last thing, pickoff throws are redundant and boring. You want to be original-- get the ball and throw it. Mark Buehrle and Greg Maddux work quickly, but not as quick as Dizzy Dean. I swear, Dizzy's catching the ball from the catcher was part of his windup (talk about rhythm)-- you couldn't time that as a hitter or a baserunner. He got the ball, and got rid of it.

People have become zombies. Everyone wants to be uniform, and it sucks. It's boring. Show some originality, spice up the world. Don't be afraid to go back to an older time, but also don't be afraid to revolutionize and start a new trend.

Always remember, you're unique-- just like everyone else.