Here is why Moss can work out in Tennessee: Jeff Fisher. In the last few weeks, many people have realized that Moss' relationship with Patriots head coach Bill Belichick was much healthier than once thought soon after he was traded to the Vikings. Just like Belichick had enough status and respect in the locker room to control potential problem players, so can Fisher.
Even more than that, Fisher is more prone to keep problem players around and handle things in house. He has already handled players like Albert Haynesworth with rebellious streaks. The Titans image as a tough, no prisoners football team is well known. Moss improves the Titans immensely from a football standpoint, and Fisher will have no trouble dealing with any behavior issues that may arise.
November 3, 2010
November 2, 2010
Brief Note on a Playoff Bracket
I love reading ESPN's Pat Forde. Particularly, his Forde Yard Dash. Every Tuesday, I look forward to reading it between two of my classes. Those of you who have read Forde will know that he is most likely Boise State's most prominent promoter for the BCS title game. I couldn't agree with him more. I absolutely agree that Boise State deserves a shot as an unbeaten team over any one loss team. Yes, even a one loss Alabama who redeems its only loss to South Carolina in a potential SEC Championship game. But, this week, Forde took the opportunity in Forde Yard Dash to promote a playoff bracket. This bus, I cannot jump on.
Forde used the example of the Butler basketball team which came so close to winning the NCAA tournament this year after winning the Horizon league. Forde argues that just like basketball, football should have a playoff. When the heck are people going to realize that football and basketball are not the same sport! A basketball team plays over 30 games throughout a season. Going undefeated through a 20 game regular conference schedule, even if that schedule is weaker than in automatically qualifying conferences is much more telling of a basketball team's success than a 8 to 10 game conference season like that of football.
It also needs to be considered how much more likely upsets are in college basketball. Nearly every week of the basketball season features a small school upsetting the mammoth powerhouse schools. And, more importantly, many great teams will occasionally lose to lesser competition, yet still end an incredible season with a winning tournament. But, think about the last few years of upsets in college football. Almost all of the championship subdivision upsets over big schools come over schools that are having down years. In 2007, when Michigan lost to Appalachian State, the Wolverines ended 9-4. While this is not a terrible record by any stretch, no one was barking for the Wolverines to be in the title game, and wouldn't have done so if you had wiped away the loss to Appalachian State. The NCAA basketball season ends perfectly with a thrilling postseason tournament. But, tournaments fit basketball better than they do football.
One final note. The column features a quote from Butler basketball coach Brad Stevens saying that Boise's schedule is different because everyone expects perfection out of them but not others, putting the Broncos under a unique pressure. I couldn't disagree with this more. When any football team loses a game in the regular season, what is the immediate reaction for all of the pundits? Oh yeah, that's right... to talk about which teams are left in the title picture. 8 of the 12 teams that have been crowned BCS champions have been undefeated. Additionally, in only 2 of the years where a BCS champion has had a loss has there been an undefeated team. The point is that the voters do expect perfection out of the football teams. In basketball, they don't.
I'm fine with entertaining notions of a playoff system in college football, though I will continue to stand behind the BCS system. That said, arguing that a football playoff is logical because a playoff is effective in crowning a basketball champion is absurd.
Forde used the example of the Butler basketball team which came so close to winning the NCAA tournament this year after winning the Horizon league. Forde argues that just like basketball, football should have a playoff. When the heck are people going to realize that football and basketball are not the same sport! A basketball team plays over 30 games throughout a season. Going undefeated through a 20 game regular conference schedule, even if that schedule is weaker than in automatically qualifying conferences is much more telling of a basketball team's success than a 8 to 10 game conference season like that of football.
It also needs to be considered how much more likely upsets are in college basketball. Nearly every week of the basketball season features a small school upsetting the mammoth powerhouse schools. And, more importantly, many great teams will occasionally lose to lesser competition, yet still end an incredible season with a winning tournament. But, think about the last few years of upsets in college football. Almost all of the championship subdivision upsets over big schools come over schools that are having down years. In 2007, when Michigan lost to Appalachian State, the Wolverines ended 9-4. While this is not a terrible record by any stretch, no one was barking for the Wolverines to be in the title game, and wouldn't have done so if you had wiped away the loss to Appalachian State. The NCAA basketball season ends perfectly with a thrilling postseason tournament. But, tournaments fit basketball better than they do football.
One final note. The column features a quote from Butler basketball coach Brad Stevens saying that Boise's schedule is different because everyone expects perfection out of them but not others, putting the Broncos under a unique pressure. I couldn't disagree with this more. When any football team loses a game in the regular season, what is the immediate reaction for all of the pundits? Oh yeah, that's right... to talk about which teams are left in the title picture. 8 of the 12 teams that have been crowned BCS champions have been undefeated. Additionally, in only 2 of the years where a BCS champion has had a loss has there been an undefeated team. The point is that the voters do expect perfection out of the football teams. In basketball, they don't.
I'm fine with entertaining notions of a playoff system in college football, though I will continue to stand behind the BCS system. That said, arguing that a football playoff is logical because a playoff is effective in crowning a basketball champion is absurd.
October 28, 2010
We've Been Here Before
The Texas Rangers have been here before. Yes, Cliff Lee was not the impetus of the last Game 1 loss. Yes, Cliff Lee has been an incredible leader for this team during this postseason, mostly due to the fact that everyone seemed to think he would infallibly have a good game, even a great game. But the fact is, that the Rangers have reached the World Series on more than just Cliff Lee's pitching.
Against the Yankees, the Rangers could not take advantage of Lee's first good outing. This is exactly why it is incredibly important for them to realize that they got here together. Without their aggressive hitting, their other starters, and the improvement of the bullpen, the team would not have beaten the Yankees in the ALCS. Today, it seemed as if everyone was dismissing the team because of Lee's bad outing. Many people cited that this reflects some new comfort that the Giants' hitters have found with Texas pitching, but the reality is they are hitting .231 this postseason.
Everyone has treated the Giants' hitting last night as if was their normal production. They have scored more than 4 runs in a whopping 1 other game since September! They have scored 41 runs, with 38 RBI this postseason. The Rangers on the other hand are batting .283, and have scored 66 runs with 62 RBI. The truth is that last night was an aberration, and the Rangers only have to go out and be the TEAM that they have been throughout this postseason. Even more comforting should be the fact that the Rangers scored 4 runs in 5+ innings on Lincecum, the Giants' own ace. The Rangers continued their normal rhythm of aggressive hitting last night, the Giants had a great game. Credit to them for that, but it is important to realize that the Giants in no way took the Rangers out of their game. The Giants are now playing the Rangers game, and even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and again. The Rangers aren't going to win every slugfest, but they will win the majority of them, and as a team, they will keep up this great postseason, and return to their winning ways.
Against the Yankees, the Rangers could not take advantage of Lee's first good outing. This is exactly why it is incredibly important for them to realize that they got here together. Without their aggressive hitting, their other starters, and the improvement of the bullpen, the team would not have beaten the Yankees in the ALCS. Today, it seemed as if everyone was dismissing the team because of Lee's bad outing. Many people cited that this reflects some new comfort that the Giants' hitters have found with Texas pitching, but the reality is they are hitting .231 this postseason.
Everyone has treated the Giants' hitting last night as if was their normal production. They have scored more than 4 runs in a whopping 1 other game since September! They have scored 41 runs, with 38 RBI this postseason. The Rangers on the other hand are batting .283, and have scored 66 runs with 62 RBI. The truth is that last night was an aberration, and the Rangers only have to go out and be the TEAM that they have been throughout this postseason. Even more comforting should be the fact that the Rangers scored 4 runs in 5+ innings on Lincecum, the Giants' own ace. The Rangers continued their normal rhythm of aggressive hitting last night, the Giants had a great game. Credit to them for that, but it is important to realize that the Giants in no way took the Rangers out of their game. The Giants are now playing the Rangers game, and even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and again. The Rangers aren't going to win every slugfest, but they will win the majority of them, and as a team, they will keep up this great postseason, and return to their winning ways.
October 20, 2010
Inspiration
Honestly, I started this blog in an effort to legitimize all of the time that others thought I wasted watching sports. Yes, I watch sports, all the time. It has been something I have warned nearly every girlfriend of mine about. In some distant memory, sports has always been the lost regret of my high school career, always wishing I had played. But when I started this blog, it was something different inspiring me. There was another pull beside my time-wasting and my regrets of my past: it was the brilliance of writers who evoke an experience of sports.
The other day I watched the interview between Buster Olney from espn.com and Cliff Lee after Game 3 of the ALCS, and I was struck by the admiration Buster had for Lee's performance. After his first question, you'll notice that Buster cracks an immense smile. Some might consider this a lack of journalistic integrity. I call it an appreciation for the beauty of the game. Buster clearly grasped the tremendous accomplishment of Lee's postseason, and recognized how it glorified the sport he loved. After all, isn't a no-hitter, 14 K's, and multiple shutouts the essence of complete dominance in pitching! Buster understood not only that this was the year of the pitcher, but that with every great postseason pitching performance, this postseason becomes more magical. Not only do I not consider this a biased perspective from Olney, I consider it a refreshing reminder of the beauty of America's greatest game. (The interview can be found by searching Buster Olney on espn.com)
Tonight, I read Joe Posnanski's blog post about Cliff Lee's game (Labeled "Natural Lee" at joeposnanski.blogspot.com), and was again struck by the brilliance of Posnanski's words. Joe, unlike any other sportswriter right now, makes you believe in the glory and goodness of baseball. I hate the Yankees more than any other team in baseball, and yet when Joe writes about Mariano Rivera's brilliance, I can't help but appreciate how much Rivera has accomplished in his career. When I read Joe's columns or blogposts, I absolutely forget all my preconceived notions of baseball. I get lost in the beauty of the world that he describes, whether I love or hate the player or team Joe is talking about. Joe has an ability to transform your understanding as a reader. He enables you to see your mistakes and provide you with new information without making you feel like you are trading in all of your feelings. When I reflect on what it means to make sports important, to make them mean something, I look at the writers I admire most.
I don't know what it is about sportswriting, but there is an ability in a good sports journalist to evoke an experience out of the reader. When I read Joe Posnanski's column on the 32 Greatest Calls in History, I didn't just admire his retelling of these stories, I loved that Joe enabled me to better experience each call. When I hear Joe talk about Vin Scully's calls, I gain an appreciation for the artistry of Scully as well as Posnanski. I will never understand this gift of great sportswriters, but I will certainly always cherish it.
And I think the most important influence of mine has been seeing what the "little guys" can do in sportswriting. To this day, one of my favorite sports columns is my best friend and ex-roommate Blake's article about a Truman basketball player (http://www.trumanindex.com/2.10112/from-cameroon-to-kirksville-1.1461402). The thing I love about this article is the way it inspires the reader. I can honestly say that if I had had 20 negative experiences with Patrick Fandja before that column, I think that column would have erased that resentment. There is something about good sportswriting that can inspire a person to think better of someone after reading about that person.
When people ask me why I have a blog about sports, the easy answer is to say that it is my way of legitimizing all of the time I spend watching sports. But the truth is, it is my small attempt at emulating the sportswriters who I have read and admired so immensely. And it is important to make it clear that my goal has never been to provide others with my experience of the sports world, but to allow them to have their own experience with that world, just like the sportswrters I admire have allowed me to do.
The other day I watched the interview between Buster Olney from espn.com and Cliff Lee after Game 3 of the ALCS, and I was struck by the admiration Buster had for Lee's performance. After his first question, you'll notice that Buster cracks an immense smile. Some might consider this a lack of journalistic integrity. I call it an appreciation for the beauty of the game. Buster clearly grasped the tremendous accomplishment of Lee's postseason, and recognized how it glorified the sport he loved. After all, isn't a no-hitter, 14 K's, and multiple shutouts the essence of complete dominance in pitching! Buster understood not only that this was the year of the pitcher, but that with every great postseason pitching performance, this postseason becomes more magical. Not only do I not consider this a biased perspective from Olney, I consider it a refreshing reminder of the beauty of America's greatest game. (The interview can be found by searching Buster Olney on espn.com)
Tonight, I read Joe Posnanski's blog post about Cliff Lee's game (Labeled "Natural Lee" at joeposnanski.blogspot.com), and was again struck by the brilliance of Posnanski's words. Joe, unlike any other sportswriter right now, makes you believe in the glory and goodness of baseball. I hate the Yankees more than any other team in baseball, and yet when Joe writes about Mariano Rivera's brilliance, I can't help but appreciate how much Rivera has accomplished in his career. When I read Joe's columns or blogposts, I absolutely forget all my preconceived notions of baseball. I get lost in the beauty of the world that he describes, whether I love or hate the player or team Joe is talking about. Joe has an ability to transform your understanding as a reader. He enables you to see your mistakes and provide you with new information without making you feel like you are trading in all of your feelings. When I reflect on what it means to make sports important, to make them mean something, I look at the writers I admire most.
I don't know what it is about sportswriting, but there is an ability in a good sports journalist to evoke an experience out of the reader. When I read Joe Posnanski's column on the 32 Greatest Calls in History, I didn't just admire his retelling of these stories, I loved that Joe enabled me to better experience each call. When I hear Joe talk about Vin Scully's calls, I gain an appreciation for the artistry of Scully as well as Posnanski. I will never understand this gift of great sportswriters, but I will certainly always cherish it.
And I think the most important influence of mine has been seeing what the "little guys" can do in sportswriting. To this day, one of my favorite sports columns is my best friend and ex-roommate Blake's article about a Truman basketball player (http://www.trumanindex.com/2.10112/from-cameroon-to-kirksville-1.1461402). The thing I love about this article is the way it inspires the reader. I can honestly say that if I had had 20 negative experiences with Patrick Fandja before that column, I think that column would have erased that resentment. There is something about good sportswriting that can inspire a person to think better of someone after reading about that person.
When people ask me why I have a blog about sports, the easy answer is to say that it is my way of legitimizing all of the time I spend watching sports. But the truth is, it is my small attempt at emulating the sportswriters who I have read and admired so immensely. And it is important to make it clear that my goal has never been to provide others with my experience of the sports world, but to allow them to have their own experience with that world, just like the sportswrters I admire have allowed me to do.
October 19, 2010
Yankees Pitching
The way I see it, you put your best guy out there. I still don't understand how Joe Girardi cannot go to CC Sabathia on short rest for tonight's game. The TBS commentators went on forever about how that wouldn't work because it would put Hughes and Pettite on short rest as well. But, as TBS broadcasters do, they neglected the apparent idea of pitching Sabathia tonight to even the series, and then Burnett with the possibility of a good boost and a lead in the series. I'll never understand why a TBS producer was not yelling in the ear of the commentators, whose names I regrettably do not recall, this impossibly easy puzzle to solve. Enjoy the game, but my money is on the Rangers to exploit an ability to be aggressive with Burnett.
Chiming In on the Tackling Controversy
Here is my opinion on the whole suspension for devastating hits controversy: Yes, the NFL is probably overreacting, but I think the new policy has the possibility to be effective. Yes, the whole thing is very subjective. But, I think that the NFL respects the mentality of a defensive player more than it gets credit for.
The talking heads have frequently pointed out that many of the thousands of hits on any given Sunday are perfectly legal. Yes! And those aren't going to get looked at. I think it is fair to say that only those hits penalized under the defenseless receiver rule now will apply along with helmet to helmet collisions. And I am going to give the NFL the benefit of the doubt that they are going to punish those that were clearly intentionally rough.
While I readily agree that football is a naturally rough sport, and find the argument that those who choose a career in professional football accept the risks along with that convincing, I also feel that hard hits in the past few years have grown increasingly malicious, and especially more prone to cause injury. In one of the few moments of truly great dialogue left on ESPN, last night's sportscenter featured a great debate between Matt Millen, Steve Young, and Trent Dilfer. To be honest, I think all brought up great points.
I have two key things that will completely nullify any faith that I have in this new system: ticky-tacky helmet to helmet hits, and clean, hard hits. I believe that the NFL needs to reiterate the focus of this rule in preventing HEAD injuries caused by the hit. I believe that concussions derived from hitting the ground should not be penalized under this rule, just as I believe a player who hurts a rib from a form tackle should not apply. The helmet hits thing applies to any hand to head contact, specifically to the quarterback, and to any helmet-to-helmet collision that occurs AFTER the original contact was somewhere on the torso.
If the NFL keeps away from those two exceptions, I will support them completely in this rule. I don't support the attitude of players like James Harrison, who openly promoted inflicting pain, even if it occasionally causes injury. Defense in the NFL should involve a fear factor, but a form tackle is more telling of a good NFL defensive player than a head blow on a defenseless receiver
The talking heads have frequently pointed out that many of the thousands of hits on any given Sunday are perfectly legal. Yes! And those aren't going to get looked at. I think it is fair to say that only those hits penalized under the defenseless receiver rule now will apply along with helmet to helmet collisions. And I am going to give the NFL the benefit of the doubt that they are going to punish those that were clearly intentionally rough.
While I readily agree that football is a naturally rough sport, and find the argument that those who choose a career in professional football accept the risks along with that convincing, I also feel that hard hits in the past few years have grown increasingly malicious, and especially more prone to cause injury. In one of the few moments of truly great dialogue left on ESPN, last night's sportscenter featured a great debate between Matt Millen, Steve Young, and Trent Dilfer. To be honest, I think all brought up great points.
I have two key things that will completely nullify any faith that I have in this new system: ticky-tacky helmet to helmet hits, and clean, hard hits. I believe that the NFL needs to reiterate the focus of this rule in preventing HEAD injuries caused by the hit. I believe that concussions derived from hitting the ground should not be penalized under this rule, just as I believe a player who hurts a rib from a form tackle should not apply. The helmet hits thing applies to any hand to head contact, specifically to the quarterback, and to any helmet-to-helmet collision that occurs AFTER the original contact was somewhere on the torso.
If the NFL keeps away from those two exceptions, I will support them completely in this rule. I don't support the attitude of players like James Harrison, who openly promoted inflicting pain, even if it occasionally causes injury. Defense in the NFL should involve a fear factor, but a form tackle is more telling of a good NFL defensive player than a head blow on a defenseless receiver
October 14, 2010
Taking Chances
Tomorrow the American League Championship Series starts, pitting the familiar Yankees against the long lost Rangers. The Rangers are riding great pitching performances from Cliff Lee and C.J. Wilson into this series, while the Yankee bats overwhelmed the Twins in their division series.
But the difference in this series will be the Ranger batters. The Rangers are an uncompromisingly aggressive hitting team. Yes, they strike out, but they don't apologize for it. They have enough team speed to use it as a wrinkle, but not enough to consider it a team strength like the Rays they just defeated. What they do have is the ability to frustrate pitchers by hitting anything thrown at them.
In the regular season, the Rangers took 3 of 4 games from the Yankees, all of which were high scoring slugfests. While it will be critical for at least Lee and Wilson to post quality outings, look for the Ranger hitters' aggression to enable the Rangers to outslug the Yankees.
But the difference in this series will be the Ranger batters. The Rangers are an uncompromisingly aggressive hitting team. Yes, they strike out, but they don't apologize for it. They have enough team speed to use it as a wrinkle, but not enough to consider it a team strength like the Rays they just defeated. What they do have is the ability to frustrate pitchers by hitting anything thrown at them.
In the regular season, the Rangers took 3 of 4 games from the Yankees, all of which were high scoring slugfests. While it will be critical for at least Lee and Wilson to post quality outings, look for the Ranger hitters' aggression to enable the Rangers to outslug the Yankees.
October 12, 2010
Just Like the Blog, The Big Ten is Back
It might be surprising that the Big Ten Conference is leading the nation in teams with one loss or better. 6 of the 11 teams in the Big Ten, and if you throw in the soon-to-be Big Ten Nebraska Team, that would be 7 of 12 teams, with 3 undefeated teams. Additionally, 3 of the 4 losses for the 1 loss teams were to teams still in the Top 25. 2 of those 3 were on the road.
Yes, the Big Ten has had an abysmal record in bowl games. In 2008, Iowa was the lone winner for the conference, which put up a 1-6 record. But that performance improved to 4-3 in 2009. Look for that record to improve this bowl season as well. In fact, it is quite likely, with the slight emergence of Illinois and the reemergence of Michigan, that the Big Ten has 8 of its 11 teams bowl eligible by the end of the year. 6 teams are either already eligible, or are 1 win away from eligibility.
It has been easy to harp on the Big Ten the last few years, but this year the conference has visibly turned the tide, and proven why a team like Nebraska should be proud to join a prestigious conference that once again will see a day at the top of the conference bowl standings.
Yes, the Big Ten has had an abysmal record in bowl games. In 2008, Iowa was the lone winner for the conference, which put up a 1-6 record. But that performance improved to 4-3 in 2009. Look for that record to improve this bowl season as well. In fact, it is quite likely, with the slight emergence of Illinois and the reemergence of Michigan, that the Big Ten has 8 of its 11 teams bowl eligible by the end of the year. 6 teams are either already eligible, or are 1 win away from eligibility.
It has been easy to harp on the Big Ten the last few years, but this year the conference has visibly turned the tide, and proven why a team like Nebraska should be proud to join a prestigious conference that once again will see a day at the top of the conference bowl standings.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
