I will never like Eli Manning.  Under any circumstances.  No.  Matter.  What.  He could set the NFL all-time passing records (unlikely) and I would begrudge him not a thing.  He could win ten superbowls, and still, I would not bedgrude him one ounce of respect.  Why you ask, do I harbor such a grudge for the man who just "Trent Dilfered" himself to a ring?  He will never be more to me than a bum.  Pure and simple.  If the Giants had Phillip Rivers they would have stormed the NFC two years ago. 

Yet Why, you may query again, do I hold such a grudge against one player?  The truth is, I hold many grudges: Texas (in all capacities), The Calgary Flames, Colorado Avalanche, New York Rangers, New York in general, Steve Francis and last, but certainly not least, Bryant "Big Country" Reeves.  But why, why do I dislike Eli above all else?  It is certainly not his hangdog expression on the field that makes you wonder if he is slow, and it is definitely not his grating, hickish southern accent.  Nor is it his theme music (certainly the dueling banjos from Delieverance).  No, not at all.  In fact, it all goes back to a man named Steve Francis and a city called Vancouver.

For my generation, the "I won't play there" game began with Eric Lindros, but for me the most vivid example remains Steve Francis.  Back when he was coming out of University, Vancouver was in the early stages of developing a fine nucleas of promising if as yet unspectacular, young players.  The Antonio Daniels debacle was over.  We needed an exciting point guard to push the ball to Big Country and Shareef Abdur-Rahim.  We certainly got the man we needed when we drafted Steve Francis aka "Stevie Franchise".  Then, he killed all the Grizzlies fans when he stated, "I will never play in Vancouver".  This guy, this guy, who had just been drafted into the league was making demands.  He should have been happy to play anywhere, the inmates do not run the asylum.  He said "no" to Vancouver.  What he did was completely devalue the entire franchise and make players who were out there giving their all, like Shareef, feel terrible.  Being Canadians we didn't do much, but had he said that in a US city?  He would have been punched repeatedly, and deserved every second of it.  When he failed to win in city after city, I cheered, always a little louder.  It is nice to see when guys like that get their comeuppance.  I mean, sure he's a multi-millionaire but he's never won anything more important than a scrabble match.  And that makes me smile.  His attitude makes me and I hope others, respect a guy like Chris Bosh even more.  He plays as hard as he can for the team that drafted him, and has been richly rewarded.  The team has seriously developed and got a star (TJ Ford) who actually wanted to go there!  Will wonders never cease? 

So, then, the reason I hate Eli Manning is because he did the same thing.  He said "no" to San Diego.  He traded on his name, as he has his entire career, and forced a draft day trade.  It is not right.  He was the first overall pick, and yet acted like it was the worst moment of his life.  What. A. Tool.  Worse still, San Diego went on to succeed while he failed, but this is a huge slap for them, and in the face of a very nice, and talented young star: Philip Rivers.  Athletes can be prima donnas, but what Eli, Eric Lindros and Steve did was absolutely, morally wrong.  Hold out for more money, leave after three seasons, take the money and play for some team wherever you want, but go where you are drafted and be damned happy about it.  Teams have to stop giving into the demands of unproven players, and the players have to learn to play where they belong.  That is what free agency is all about!  And now Eli's defence won him a Superbowl.  Oh well, has anyone seen Steve Francis anywhere? 

Viewers are dropping hockey faster than water through a sieve, something drastic has to be done to bring in new fans.  The NHL is trying, they really, really are.  New streamlined jersey's come out next year.  Sidney Crosby is almost 1/30th as overexposed as Peyton Manning (*note: That's still alot).  Gary Bettman needs a new approach.  It is getting drastic, as some sportswriters have predicted the potential folding of the NHL within the next 15 years.  So, without further ado: I have a suggestion that I strongly urge the NHL to take into consideration.  Add a 7th player to the ice for each team, and equip him with a eight-foot wooden lance.  Stick a hockey glove at the end of the lance and off we go!

Now, before you stop reading, hear me out.  A player gets a breakaway, he is skating down the ice without fear when...suddenly he is taken out from nowhere by an eight foot lance with a hockey glove stuck at the end ( for cushioning the blow).  The playing field has officially been levelled.  The days of the dominance of the Red Wings is over!  Having a lancer would be great because it would allow hockey to keep the lovable goons who are quickly becoming antiquated in the kinder, gentler, post-lockout NHL.  George Laraque could play for another ten years.  Tie Domi could make a comeback (watch out Rona Ambrose!).  Better yet, the game would become more unpredictable than Mike Tyson hanging out with Dennis Rodman.  Announcers would have to get used to the change, but saying "Federov gets lanced from behind!" would probably make up for it.  So please, NHL, do something.  Do something drastic!  We need the NHL because it is truly a joy to watch the hardest working athletes around (Try playing basketball with knives strapped to your feet).  So consider my plan NHL owners, coaches and fans.  The time for drastic is rapidly approaching.  If the lancers catch on we can go to part II of my plan to save the NHL...blindfolded lancers. 

Time and again, the expert prognosticators ignore the Canadian teams as a viable Stanley Cup option.  Edmonton was going out in the first round, then the second, then the third.  Calgary was the same.  These are teams that won or survived the toughest division in the NHL (hands down).  Now Vancouver is the latest getting little or no respect.  Although, that may change after a gutsy, 4 overtime victory over the "favored" Dallas Stars.  Don't get me wrong, Dallas is a great team, but the Canucks have been given no legitimate shot. 

NHL experts are much more willing to give a chance to the New Jersey Devils who have, for the most part, a team of defensive minded forwards backed by the greatest goalie in the NHL.  The Canucks, are a team of defensive minded forwards backed by one of the best goalies in the league.  Forget the fact Bobbie Lou shut down a Dallas attack in the second game of the night (man, do we need shootouts in the playoffs!).  Some argue the Canucks are "not balanced enough to win".  Hmmm, I guess we inflate the stat of 50 goals their defencemen scored this year, or the 23 goals Taylor Pyatt scored (who?).  Marcus Naslund (20+ goals) is not even on the first line, yet they lack balance?  Fact is all they need is two goals to win with their defensive abilities (the Sedin's take care of that). 

The Devils, keep in mind, are proven winners.  The Canucks are simply the best team in the league since January.  Kind of like Carolina last year...

The pick is probably going to blow up (given my Superbowl pick of the Chargers and Bears) but I stick with what I said in January: Vancouver Canucks and Atlanta Thrashers (who win in 7 games).

The San Diego Chargers lost this weekend.  The Ohio State lost last week.  Florida won two NCAA titles without being the consensus number one in either sport all season.  New York has been defeated time and again.  So have the Detroit Red Wings.  Last season Indy lost to the Steelers.  The season before that the Steelers lost.  Where have you gone wire to wire champion? 

No team that wins a championship is the wire to wire champion anymore.  Take Ohio State, they had the consensus number one team in the national all year.  They beat Michigan, and had the runaway Heisman winner.  Then they lost.  Sound familiar?  It should.  The previous season USC did the exact same thing in their loss to Texas.  The Yankees and Tigers both lost last season in the baseball playoffs.  The Mets were the team to beat all year and they could not get through.  Come to think of it, when is the last time that the runaway team of the year actually won the championship? 

College basketball?  Not quite.  Florida, a team that was not even number one in its own conference, won.  In the NBA, the Pistons were the team to beat on one side, with the Suns and Spurs on the other.  Who won?  Miami. 

Even hockey is not safe anymore.  The days of the Detroit/Colorado dominance are done.  Teams keep sneaking through to knock off the best regular season teams.  Ottawa got a harsh comeuppance despite being the favorite last season.  In the NFL the Steelers were a wildcard entry and they beat just about everyone to take the title.  The intresting thing with them is the year before they were hands down the best team in the league.  They lost.  In the following year, they won.  If that pattern repeats you can just go ahead and crown Indy the champ.  It just does not appear to pay anymore to be the team at the top.  Teams are having a great deal more success sneaking into the playoffs and then upsetting all the perennial contenders.  Case and point, the Carolina Hurricanes won the Stanley Cup.  The Florida Gators are national champions in two sports and the Steelers who won the Superbowl last season did not even make the playoffs this season with virtually the same team. 

Do not get me wrong, this is the single greatest thing to ever happen in the history of sports.  No one is safe.  When the Yankees, Red Sox, Red Wings, Colts, Buckeyes, Patriots, Pistons win it is boring.  We crave the upset.  Everyone wants the underdog to win, not hear another speech from Tom Brady about how his teammates inspired him to great heights.  No sir.  We want to see a hook and ladder, wide reciever pass and statue of liberty within five minutes of one football game.  We need to see some guy who has waited so long to win get his chance.  Or some young kid with his whole career ahead of him standing before us with a deer in the headlights look.  Most know they will probably not repeat this miracle again.  So keep it up gods of sports.  Keep shocking us by knocking off number ones.  Although I think you may have spoiled us just a little bit with that whole Boise State thing. 

About a month ago I made several NFL predictions, and I will now look back and see how well they have turned out:

1) Matt Leinart is good.  He has the potential to be even better.  He's certainly better than Jay Cutler at this point, but...and this pains me...right now Vince Young has a slight advantage on him.  The only reason being the whole beating up on the Manning's thing.  I still stand by the fact that Leinart will one day be better than any other Quarterback from the 2006 Class.

2) Apparently, Rex Grossman is human!  Apparently, so are the Chicago Bears.  They may still win the Superbowl but they most definitely are not going to storm undefeated.  Well, thats kind of 1-1on the picks. 

3) Roy Williams has a chance to be the NFL's Leading Reciever and he currently ranks 2nd, behind only Chad Johnson.  Who is only in first because of his monster last three weeks I would like to point out.  Oh, and Jon Kitna has passed for 3190 yards (thats more than Eli, Carson or Phil).

4) Bruce Gradowski is flaming out, even faster than Shaun King.  Ka-ching! 

5) Don't want to brag or anything, but the Giants suck.  So does Eli Manning.  Just because he had the world handed to him doesn't mean that he is going to be the best.  After the way he treated San Diego, it would be perfect poetic justice to see him fail.  At some point, athletes need to be put in their place and realize that transcendant talent counts for nothing if you're a ####.  Sigh, if only...

6) The Superbowl pick remains the same; but I think San Diego takes it on the strength of their all world RB.

-NHL observation: I am a Vancouver Canucks fan, but the whole Rory Fitzpatrick for All-Star thing is ridiculous.  The power should not be in the hands of the fans at this point.  If Fitzpatrick makes it, that means that someone else is left off the team.  That person is almost certainly more deserving than a fourth-line grinder who is not only borderline on ice time, but is borderline NHL.  Period.  This guy would be freezing his #### off in Manitoba if it wasn't for the huge money the Canucks had to tie up in multiple players.  It is terrible to think o####uy who has played his heart out and earned a shot at the All-Star game, missing out on his only chance to get there because of some ridiculous fan campaign.  That just does not sit right, and while fan voting can be a good way to make them feel involved, it leads to problems.  Players who are undeserving get into the All-Star Game year after disappointing year (See Carter, Vince) just because they were good seven years ago.  For the most part the NHL voting is pretty good, but if Fitzpatrick gets in, someone more deserving is out and that just is not fair any way you shake it.

 

It finally hit me; the BCS is inherently flawed.  Sure, it works when two top conference teams with strong schedules are 12-0.  Otherwise it collapses faster than the Texas defense.  This year for example a great mess is just waiting to be made.  Should Michigan be punished because it lost late in the year?  What if the score were reversed, and Michigan had won 42-39, would anyone in their right mind rank Ohio State lower than #2?  The sad answer is a resounding "no".  So how can everyone be so sure that there won't be a rematch between these two teams?  If USC beats Notre Dame then they could get in.  But, Michigan also beat Notre Dame.  And if Notre Dame beats USC, then they still lost to Michigan who lost only to Ohio State.  Confused yet?  It gets worse.  Florida and Arkansas are in the picture, and they have to play in the SEC championship game, and if Arkansas wins then some will clamour for them to be in the National Title picture...but hold on a second, they lost 50-14 to USC.  Now, we are confused.  However, this is not even the most irksome thing, some people have suggested that even if Michigan beats (yes beats) Ohio State for the National Title, becuase Ohio State beat them earlier they will share it.  Excuse me?  So if a team wins a "playoff" style game, they still share the title with the losers?  Oh. My. God.

What the BCS needs, and there have been no shortage of advocates for this, is a playoff system.  The NCAA basketball has it.  In the tournament your record for the year basically goes out the window.  The Champ is the champ, it doesn't matter if your record is equal to Duke or you lost previously to UCLA.  If the BCS system was to be imposed in college basketball, well Florida might as well share the title with all the teams that beat them.  Certainly all the final four could make a claim as well.  The great thing about the BCS is that it would be so perfect for a BCS system, and it would kill complainers who can say that even if a #1 team loses in the championship game they still deserve a share of the pie.  Take a hockey style playoffs for example, the top 8 teams in the country play, or even the top 10 if they all have 1 loss.  Seed them 1-8 and then have them play for the national title.  1 plays 8, 2 plays7 and so on.  It would be great football, plus no team can complain that they didn't get an equal shot.  The worst thing is the controversary over winners, because if the Detroit Red Wings beat the Vancouver Canucks 4-0 in the season series, but Vancouver beats them in the playoffs, no one complains.  If you are going to have a system of split titles, why have playoffs at all?  If the Colts beat the Patriots during the regular season and lose in the playoffs to them, they don't demand a share of the Superbowl because that is the whole point of the playoffs!  There is no room for split titles in any sport. 

The BCS fights against having a playoff because they thrive on controversy.  It sells tickets, and makes them money.  It keeps fans coming back and debating all year long.  A playoff system is a win-win though.  Two teams, lets say Arkansas and Ohio State would play as the number 1 and number 8 teams.  Ohio State loses, and they are out.  They are not the national champion.  A huge upset, people dancing in the streets, glued to see what happens in the next set of games.  Then the remaining top seeded team plays the low seeded team in the second round.  Finally, the final.  It would be like March Madness, but with football!  The other bowls could still take place, but they would be more of a pride thing for the teams.  The real fun would be to be in the top 8, or 10, or 12.  Play in the season would determine your rank.  The NCAA would make money on televising the additional games, the players would learn to play in a real big game and best of all a real winner emerges for once. 

Two incredible feats were accomplished in the past week, one set a record that appeared to be able to withstand the test of time, and the other shockingly broke it.  The two oldest hitters in baseball history both had their at-bats in the same week.  They were both over eighty...and they had a professional baseball-at bat.  A pattern has emerged and it has nowhere to go but down.  Imagine if you will;

Owner: How old does that guy in section 10 look?

Manager: Maybe, sixty?

Owner: Too young, hell, Julio Franco is way older than that!  Find me a guy who needs oxygen just to take two steps.

What if other sports choose to follow the example of baseball?  These guys may be in great shape for their age, but I do not think one should throw a pass in the NFL.  Can you picture some wise gentleman needing his depends when Bryan Urlacher comes barrelling down on him?  Or Pat Riley subbing some ninety-year old for Shaq to shoot a free throw?  Age is relative but in athletes it goes to the extreme.  Most careers are over by mid-thirties and often they have severe health problems by 40.  Players will never be able to play longer because the size and brutality of the game is always going to keep up.  Players are going to get meaner, stronger and faster. 

These old timers could get seriously hurt up there against the supermen who play today so some rules need to be in play.  Instead of a minumum age there should be a maximum one.  For the NFL it could be 55, for basketball 75 seems an appropriate number, baseball you can play forever and for the NHL it should be set at Gordie Howe.  These guys are living their dream late, but what if one of them actually did something that changed the game?  Like smack a homer or (gasp) actually hit the ball?  The stadium would have a collective heart attack.  Not to mention the poor man who got up and took his cuts only to watch an older guy take his record away.  Well, I guess its something to work for.

 

Caucks GM Dave Nonis has shown an incredible ability to get rid of players, but almost none in retaining them.  He got rid of massive headache Todd Bertuzzi and potential problem Dan Cloutier which is all well and fine, the only problem is that the Canucks are losing players like a sieve loses water.  Ed Jovanoski signed with Phoenix, Nolan Baumgartner with Philly and worst of all Anson Carter with the best potential suitor.

Nonis has retained some players to be totally fair but they are without a doubt not the right ones.  He has kept Brendan Morrison which is a collossal mistake, the guy has  pretty much been slumping since Christmas 2002.  He kept the Sedin twins which many might argue is a great move and it is on the surface.  However, should the team continue their current stance of not signing Anson Carter, then it will be a huge waste of money.  With Carter, everyone had career years, without him, everyone on that line may go back to amazingly talented but underachieving.  Nonis says that Carter does not financially fit into the teams plans, because of course they signed the Sedins to $10 million each and they signed Brendan Morrison for $3.5 million.  Memo to Nonis: Carter probably would have taken the $3.5 million you so generously gave to reward Morrison for his 56 points last year.  Carter will quietly take his 78 points (as the Canucks leading scorer) and happily accept $3.1 somewhere else. 

What Dave Nonis needed to do was dynamite the Canucks core and sweep away the players that simply could not win in the playoffs and he is well on his way to doing that.  He is neglectful though to the players who never had a shot.  WIthout Jovo, Bryan Allen and Baumgarter our defence is in the hands of Willie Mitchell who cannot run the point with any great skill but is a teriffic stopper, Sami Salo, and Jovo's dejected partner Mattias Ohlund.  Nonis instead chose to ignore the Canucks top line and the player who completed it.  Carter gave Daniel Sedin twenty extra points this season and helped Henrik become a better player.  Not to mention his whole leading the team in goals thing.  Yet Nonis is content to let one third of his top line walk while retaining players he could have got at a major discount.  Its like finding half your dinner already eaten, the whole thing is just ruined for you.  The Canucks desperately want to find a way to become the next Oilers or Flames and they just might do it, but a stronger goaltender is not the only puzzle piece the team is missing.

 

Althletes are completely expendable and totally replaceable.  Like the modern business world, sports thrives on the constant upgrade and frequent downsizing of althletes.  It just happens to be to a much higher extreme than at your local accounting firm.  Rarely, outside of George Costanza, does one get suddenly traded to the other side of the country in the middle of a Sunday.  It happens sure, when you move to another office with the same company, but in sports it goes so much further.  Families are uprooted at the drop of a hat.  Teams are torn asunder by the whims of the owner, coach and general manager.

No one is safe from the onlslaught of the trade deadline.  You could be the best pitcher in the world, or the top point guard, but if something of better value comes along then you had better pack your bags.  Teams have been completely dynomited overnight, the core shipped away in a series of neat little 2-5 player packages.  Take the Vancouver Canucks and Florida Panthers, as some would argue that was a stupid trade.  I'm still on the fence.  There is a feeling that too much was given up for Luongo, who had to leave his wife and home and was just tickled about it, but it was necessary for the team to unload Todd Bertuzzi.  Bertuzzi for his part was totally relieved to be traded.  He gets a chance at a fresh start in a place where the hockey market is almost non-existant.  A team like the Canucks needs to detonate and cut loose most of the core players.  Bertuzzi, Markus Naslund and Brendan Morrison at one point formed the best line in the league.  They failed to pull the Canucks out of the mire of the West and lead them to the promise land of a Stanley Cup victory.  The Canucks were more than willing to part with Bert, but losing Alex Auld was a mistake.  He at times single handedly kept the Canucks in games, and he was still learning to be a great goalie.  With the luck of the ex-Canucks goaltenders he will go on to become a star. 

A bigger part of trades is exposed, as in many cases it is just a temporary stop gap that covers major problems.  Chris Pronger led the Oilers to Game 7 of the cup but he's on his way out already.  Many times it is like placing a band-aid on a gaping head wound.  The 76er's got Chris Webber but all he did was implode the team chemistry.  Happens to the Yankees all the time.  Amazingly enough, most of the teams that trade to become stacked end up losing in the end.  The Ottawa Senators, Yankees, and the Jail,er Trailblazers of the late 90's, all failed to win anything.  More than anything people want instant results that they are not going to get with quick trades.  For the Canucks and their newly signed goalie, I'm hoping it works out.  As for the incredibly complex European soccer mega-deals, those trades I am not even going to begin to touch. 

There is a trend in sports right now that is playing out to incredible results.  Teams that were supposed to win championships the year before are suddenly grabbing them now!  It has happened in basketball where last year the Heat were considered the favourite in the Eastern Conference.  They didn't make it to the finals, but were instead pushed aside by Detriot.  Last night, a year after they were the undisputed best in the NBA's regular season in the East, they raised the Championship trophy.  It gets weirder.

Last year, the Pittsburgh Steelers were 15-1 and picked by many prognosticators to come out on top of the NFL in the playoffs.  They got close but a horrible performance by Big Ben against the Pats left them with a sour taste in their mouth.  This year, after getting into the playoffs by the skin of their teeth, the boys from Steeltown won the whole show.  Their opponent, the Seattle Seahawks were picked the year before to win it all by Sports Illustrated.  They didn't, until this year when they came so close. 

This theory does not cross all borders though, as it does not apply to the NHL where the favourites have the distinction of being knocked out early in the playoffs year after year.  Or baseball where as long as the team makes it to the playoffs they can win, provided of course they are from the American League (excluding all Florida Marlins). 

More than anything it proves that despite the free agent frenzy, good teams take time to come together.  Owners and General Managers constantly want winning results. The fans practically demand it.  When players do not know the guy who has the locker next to them, or do not want to get to know him for fear he will be traded, it is the wrong approach.  The world of sports has suddenly taken an ADD approach to everything, shipping players around before they have a chance to become great together.  Teams rarely stay in rebuilding mode for more than one year (excluding all Kansas City Royals, Florida Marlins, Arizona Cardinals, Portland Trailblazers and Columbus Blue Jackets).  The pressure to win is superceding all, and is ruining great teams down the road.  Who knows what great combinations we are missing out on?  Players are so rarely becoming big with the team that drafted them it is shocking.  Society and our lack of attention span is partly to blame, so is the fruitfull financial offerings of a winning club.  Hell, Steve Nash was drafted by the Phoenix Suns, shipped to Dallas, and then resigned with Phoenix where he has become a megastar, but that one does not count.

 

Sidney Crosby and Alexander Ovechkin have the chance to have an incredible rivalry that will last for years, but you have to look outside of hockey to find a great analogy for it as they could battle as did Bird and Magic before them.  In the NBA, a sport that is admittedly possibly the least like hockey in the world, Bird and Magic enthralled a decade and won 8 championships between them.  Magic won five with his talented Laker squad and Bird won three with a very good team.  Sid the Kid and Alex the Great just finished their rookie years, and neither came away as a Stanley Cup Champ.  In a different era when a rookie could make all the difference, Magic won his first title in 1980.  The big question is who is Magic and who is Bird?

The argument could be made that Sidney Crosby is the Magic Johnson of this scenario.  He came into the league young, as one of the highest rated players in recent history.  The hype was defeaning and sold tickets but not much else.  He was supposed to play a season with one of hockey's greatest legends Mario Lemieux,  but that was cut all too short by injuires to the fading Magnificent One.  The similarities exist between Crosby's 2005-2006 Penguins and Magic's circa 1980's Lakers.  Both teams have a star center, in Magic's case it was Kareem Abdul Jabar, for Crosby it was Lemieux.  Both ahve exciting young talent to build around, as the Pens have young up and comers named Ouellet and perhaps the second most exciting addition to the league since well Crosby himself; Egyeny Malkhinin.  The rumor is that Malkhinin is very special, so perhaps the analogy is correct and the two will form a Magic and James Worthy type game.  They may dominate immediately and Crosby will perhaps find himself taking the Kareem role. 

That leaves Ovechkin as Bird.  His team is more veteran than Crosby's, and relied heavily on him to inject life into drifting journeyman.  Yet he did it.  They were not quite lifted out of the cellar, but the Caps came close.  They have a good up and coming goalie in Brent Johnson and some solid players who are just out of their prime.  With a couple pickups this team could go places.  Perhaps not as far as Crosby's Penguins, but still capture some Stanley Cups along the way.  The older core of the Capitals means that they have less time to grow together, when they do the league should watch out.  Just as it took Bird a few years to attain championship level.  Or you could argue the complete opposite and say that Ovechkin's team is much more playoff ready and has a solid goalie in Olaf Kolzig who has already made a championship run.  As soon as they gel the rookie will help the vets win.  Whereas Crosby is on a young team that will take years and good off-ice moves to be ready for a cup run. 

A great rivalry has begun that should continue through the next dozen years.  Whether or not one of the players fizzles in completely unpredictable but given the way they came storming into the league unlike any other rookies this decade that is unlikely.  Crosby and Ovechkin are incredible talents, and the best scenario would be if one could move to the Western Conference so they could battle in the Stanley Cup, instead of the most incredible Conference Finals since the Avs and Red Wings in the late 90's.  It should happen, because these two talents deserve the ultimate stage for their showdown, not seven games a year on ESPN 3.

 

The Vancouver Canucks should hire recently fired Leafs coach Pat Quinn for next season.  It wouldn't be the first time a team rehired a coach based on the former glory which was heaped upon the organization during a contract run.  For the Canucks, that was during the Pat Quinn era.  He guided them to their second ever Stanley Cup appearence and they nearly won in what is considered by many to be the greatest Stanley Cup series of all time.  It also happens to be the "in" thing to do.  In the NFL teams are rehiring coaches based on their glory, and pulling others out of their not so satisfactory retirements. 

The Washington Redskins and Oakland Raiders rehired Joe Gibbs and Art Snell respectively in an attempt to bring back fans and to get to the playoffs.  There has been modest success.  In the second year of Gibbs return he did bring about a triumphant return to the playoffs, for Snell success remains to be seen.  There is a larger question at work though; why can coaches never stay retired?  Well, its not only coaches!  Broadcasters seem to have a difficult time hanging it up as well.  Blame the generation.  This generation is going to work long past their pensions because they fear retirement like kids fear the boogeyman.  It is hard to think about ways to fill a day, and they are all twenty-four hours.  That drags on people, having nothing to do all day every day is hard.  These old timers simply cannot enjoy it.  Bill Parcells came out of his comfy chair for that reason, as did Jimmy Johnson(who Dallas also tried to hire, he now lives at Fox NFL Sunday), even Barry Switzer was mentioned for the Dallas job.  Who is next?  Is Vince Lombardi going to be dug up by some deranged Packers fan and subjected to many rounds of voodoo? 

Coaches cannot retire either, especially in the College Football ranks.  Joe Paterno (80) was left for dead until his team went 11-1 this year and made it back into the national rankings.  Bobby Bowden (70) cannot leave Florida State despite the fact that several of his mid-forties sons are coaching or in broadcasting.  What would he go home to?  No recruiting and short days, and none of these coaches can stomach that.  Retirement sits there and they do not want it.  The prospect of sailing off into the sunset has become more taboo than Eve reaching for the apple.  Some like broadcaster Keith Jackson tried, but even he returned to the booth for Pac-10 games on ABC.  He recently announced his third (or is it fourth?) retirement saying "I don't want to die in a stadium parking lot".  Here's hoping he does not and is able to stay in that nice comfy chair.  Even baseball coaches are getting older like the 70+ Tigers skipper.  But these teams are winning, so how can one fault the coaches or cite their age?  When things are good, not much can be said.  When they are bad, that is another story.  Then the coach is too old, past his prime, outdated and ready for the grave.  Joe Pa and many others will probably die on national television simply because they cannot stomach the idea of not being busy and relaxing.

The Canucks should hire Pat Quinn because he brought them the closest to glory.  If the Raiders can approach John Madden (who actually briefly considered returning to coaching) then surely Pat Quinn will accept the job.  It would be the hip thing to do, and the Canucks should make the right call.  Better keep an extra ambulence on standby outside the stadium just in case.

 

Every year an unlikely Canadian team seems to make a miraculous run through the Stanley Cup Playoffs but is always unable to come away with the ultimate prize.  Last year it was the Calgary Flames who came the closest of any Canadian team since the Montreal Canadians in 1993, and the Vancouver Canucks who got to Game Seven in 1994.  This year the randomly selected Canadian team is the Edmonton Oilers who have marched through the playoffs with reckless abandon dismantling top ranked foes with relative ease.  They destroyed the Red Wings who proved too old and not deep enough, they dismantled the red-hot Sharks who were riding on the back of the NHL's best player Joe Thornton, and they blew away the Ducks who many thought had the luck to go all the way.  The big question is how in the bloody hell are they doing this?  After all, they haven't had a great team since 1990 when Mark Messier was in his prime.  So how did a team of mostly underrated guys beat the best the league had to offer?  The answer is not as simple as the question.

At the beginning of the year anyone who picked the Hurricanes, Sabres and Oilers to be the three teams battling for the Stanley Cup would have been locked away in a mental institution (well, anyone outside of Edmonton anyway).  Not many people picked them to even make the playoffs!  The Oilers have come out of the deepest conference on the planet and the Sabres and Hurricanes continue to surprise. Yet these three teams have shown depth and grit.  They have shown an amazing propensity to win games with luck and with smart, controlled play.  The losers in their wake all had their fatal flaws exposed; Detroit and Dallas have always fallen victim for the most part to first round collapses, the Sharks were a purely offensive team.  The Ducks, well, they weren't balanced enough?  The real reason the Oilers beat them is that they have become Canada's team.  Every year one team does this; beats several higher seeded opponents and has an entire nation behind them.  The cheers are defeaning.  In Canada, teams are seperated by gigantic geographical distance but the heartbeat of the nation is still the sound of slapping pucks.  Canadians do not care, to some extent, which Canadian team wins the cup.  The crowd does make a difference, maybe more so in hockey than any other sport.  The Oilers may be the first Canadian team to win the Cup since Montreal but there isn't really an explanation as to why.  They aren't the best team in the Western Conference by any  stretch of imagination.  In fact they are an 8th seeded team, having scraped into the playoffs on the carcasses of the much better Vancouver Canucks and the lackadasical Kings. 

If the Oilers win the Cup the country will rejoice and many stories will be written about the grand return of the championship to its home nation.  Then, it will probably return to bouncing between American cities before truimphantly returning back to Canada once again years from now.  People thought Ottawa had a strong chance to win it all this year, but we must learn that the high ranked Canadian team will never be the one to win the Cup, always the underdog, the unappreciated.  Maybe next year it can be Vancouver's turn again?

 

The Phoenix Coyotes are going to make a great decision when they keep the Great One, Wayne Gretzky as their coach.  The first great move was to decide to hire Gretzky in the first place.  No one can rejuvinate hockey anywhere, like the Greatest Player in the history of sports.  He turned around Canadian hockey after things looked bleak, leading them to a gold medal in 2002.

Wayne Gretzky is the Greatest not only for his stats but for the way he played the game and the impact that he still has.  There should not be a debate, but their is the argument that Michael Jordan epitomized all that is basketball and winning.  Sportsmanship though has always been seen in the form of the boy from Branford.  The numbers in our stat crazy society cannot lie and Gretzky's are incredible.  He is the top scorer ever, won 4 almost 5 Stanley Cups and dominated right up until his first and only retirement.  Jordan won 6 NBA championships but he is not the NBA's all-time leading scorer, that distinction belongs to the man formerly known as Lew Alcindor.  One of the greatest sportswriters of all time, Rick Reilly, helped Gretzky out with his autobiography showing the level of respect that the sporting community has for the man. 

Gretzky has always been unassuming and selfless which is exactly why he isn't thought of as the greatest ever.  His 2857 points will probably never be topped and he owns every single scoring record.  For the playoffs he set a record with 47 points.  Assists in a season?  Gretzky has it and proclaimed it his most satisfying record.  Four times in NHL history 200 points has been topped, all four times it was Wayne Gretzky including his all-time record of 215.  There was a time in the not too distant past when no one topped 100 points, let alone dreamed of 200.  Gretzky has 1963 assists more than the next highest point scorer.  Yes, thats right, if he never scored one goal in his entire career he is still the top point scorer in history.  But, he did score at such a frantic pace that it was like he was a non-steroid version of Barry Bonds.  He (naturally) holds the record at 894 goals including 92 in a season.  That stretch included 50 in 39 games.  For Jordan to have the chance to assault the record books like Gretzky did he would have had to average 70 points per game.  Not only that but become John Stockton. 

Gretzky has helped cities become hockey meccas where suddenly fans realize that they do indeed have a team.  He brought LA to its only Stanley Cup final, and has helped Phoenix challenge for the playoffs year in and year out.  His decision to coach was a natural move and he is at his best when helping mentor young players.  Time and again Gretzky has put hockey on his narrow shoulders and helped carry it to prominance but it is a reluctant role.  He was always more comfortable setting teammates up then being the glory hog.  The recent gambling scandal was a blow to his solid reputation but once again the unassuming star quietly emerged from the circus unscathed.  His reputation was not even slightly tarnished.  The Olympic Hockey loss made almost no headlines in Canada because Gretzky took all the heat.  He could easily withstand it and simply moved past it with a gentlmanly smile.  Gretzky doesn't want the spotlight but he takes it, not with the arrogance of an NBA star but with the quiet strength of someone who is supremely confident and heartbreakingly humble of what they have accomplished.  Gretzky will save hockey again, after the lockout ended, his return to the game as a coach helped bring the fans back and for that we should all be thankful.