super bowl...w/e # it is....

still not the least bit interested.  it's pretty sad when the ONLY story the media wants to talk about is "bootgate".  seriously, did anybody think for even 1 second tom brady wasnt going to play in this game?

i mean, i believe he's only been listed on bill belicheat's injury report every week for the past 4 years or so.  i didnt buy it, and shame on you if you did.

the milwaukee bucks...

forget it.  david stern, if you're reading this, i'm begging you to kick this team out of the league.  we managed 69 points against the sixers....and allowed them 112.  do us all a favor and just end our misery already.

american gladiators....

does anybody watch this garbage?  holy cow, i thought joe "snap" theismann was bad, but hulk "rogaine" hogan is 10 times worse.....and this thing is on prime time television?

lebron calling for jason kidd trade to the cavs....

forget the debate over whether he's throwing his teammates under the bus (whomever would be shipped out in order to acquire the aging kidd) for a moment..

how well did it work out with larry hughes?  or not keeping carlos boozer?  or re-signing big Z AND anderson "carlito" varajao (sp?)?  werent all these moves made in part based on lebron's wishes?

hughes has stunk, boozer is a star for the jazz, big Z is about as mobile as a trailer home, and varajao looks like friggin sideshow bob from the simpsons.

boston celtics...

ok, first many of us didnt believe the big 3 concept would work, if not for selfishness, then because they werent deep enough beyond those 3.

then, they started out on fire with 15 or so wins in a row and many were handing them the trophy.

recently, after losing 2 in a row, some members of the media were claiming they were right all along, and knew the C's would hit the wall.

while i still dont believe they'll win the championship, i have admitted being wrong about how the big 3 would be able to play together, and that they've gotten more than i thought they ever could from the rest of the roster.

can we at least wait until say, the end of the regular season before making the NEXT premature assumption about them?

johan santana deal...

this is a perfect example of why small market clubs, even with the supposed "level playing field", are not really on a level playing field at all.

not only could the twins not afford to keep santana around (which is somewhat debateable, considering the huge piles of money they've given to other players this offseason), but they got hosed in the trade.

even worse, like i've said before, there were really only a handful of teams that could even think about trading for him, based not only on what they had to offer in return, but also because small market teams cant afford to trade their future for a 1 year rental, OR sign him to an extension.

however, i feel we need to take a moment of silence for both the yankees and red sox, since neither of them got their hands on the 2 time cy young winner.

............................................................

ok, enough of that....

barbaro...isnt he dead?

i thought we beat this story into submission shortly after the horse was put down, but i've seen at least 2 blogs and i'm pretty sure there was a story on the main page of foxsports.com in the last few days about this.

i had more, but....

apparently, my brain decided this was a good time to go on vacation.  i'm sure i'll think of whatever it was 5 minutes after i click to post this drivel.

p.s.

edclinch, i passed on to Merc that you have been wondering where he is, and he wants you and everyone else to know that he's fine.  he opted not to buy a new home PC, and spend the money on a family vacation instead.  he would have gotten one, but decided that since all the raider, chiefs, and other nfl fans who swore their teams were playoff bound this year have crawled back into their holes, there simply wasnt enough motivation to return to this site  (his words, not mine).

this is out of left field, but i thought it would be fun to write about (and start a huge debate over) the idea of "level playing field" in sports.

no, i'm not talking about flattening the uneven turf at texas stadium, or removing that ridiculous hill in the outfield of that baseball field (cant think of which one).

i'm talking about the idea that all teams, especially baseball (even though there's no salary cap), having an equal chance at being competitive year in and year out.

lets first set aside the fact that some owners are cheap (kansas city...for the most part) or getting back at his team's fans for not agreeing to build HIM a new stadium (florida marlins).

instead, lets focus on the fact that certain teams have a seemingly endless amount of money to throw at players (yankees, red sox, etc).  this does 2 things.  it absolutely leaves 85% of the other teams out in the cold in terms of even attempting to sign a specific player.  2nd, it drives up the "market value" of every other player in the game, regardless of talent level, age, etc.

we must also look at another cold, hard fact.  players simply dont want to play in various cities for one reason or another.

i had a big debate going with someone who thought they had it all worked out on how the milwaukee bucks could become relevent again.  i wont go over every detail, but his main objective was to free up cap space and sign shawn marion as a free agent.  i said there was no way marion would come to milwaukee, as he already found a way out of being TRADED to minny and boston, and that there was no way he'd willingly sign a free agent contract for a team that has nothing to offer in terms of potential playoff appearances (no need to rub it in JDizz).

this person went on to say that marion would sign here because we'd be one of maybe 3 teams with enough money to lure him in.  i'm sorry, but shawn marion is not going to sign with a COLD WEATHER team just because they can offer him more money.  he'll sign with the team that gives him a) the best chance to win, b) the most money to go along with that, and c) the starting position he wants at the position he wants to play (in a warm city....which i think goes without saying).

anyway, that's the point i'm trying to make.  players dont just sign with whoever throws them the most money.  thats the beauty of free agency from their perspective.  they get to choose who to sign with and for the most part, for how much money.

why would a player sign with a lousy team when he already has a butt load of money, but hasnt managed to get his hands on the one thing he ultimately is playing for....a championship?

thats why, in baseball, even with revenue sharing and owners willing and able to dish out big amounts of cash (at least somewhat comparable to the big boys), that players normally dont sign deals with the twins, royals, d-rays...oooops, rays, and the like.  they want to win, and would rather join a contender and possibly not be an every day player if it means a better chance at winning a championship.

so, while the term "small market" may not hold water in the sense that those teams have money to spend, it doesnt mean they have ENOUGH money to lure top players into signing with them.

now, in the nfl, teams have managed to skate around the salary cap by throwing signing bonus money at top players.  again, some owners have more money to throw around than others (dallas, washington for example), and therefore have the chance to sign a player for LESS money (that goes against the cap), yet still give them more money overall than the next team could.

this might be my homerism talking now, but that's why what the green bay packers have been able to do since the start of free agency is so amazing.  sure, they have revenue that can be used as signing bonus money, but not nearly to the extent that jerry jones or daniel snyder has.

they also play in an extremely small, remote city where the weather is lousy (see: nfc championship game 2008) and there's not much of a night life or whatever it is players are looking for.

sure, reggie white was instrumental in helping lure some free agents up to green bay once he joined the club, as brett favre has been also.  but honestly, with the weather and everything else, it still amazes me how well the management there has done (with the exception of mike sherman when he was GM) to keep the team competitive for most of the past 15+ years.

my overall point of this is that just because a team has funds available does not mean they can or will be able to sign big name talent like the big boys can. 

so every time i see a red sox or yankee fan telling a brewers, royals or rays fan that 'mlb has revenue sharing so dont blame our team for spending 3 times what yours does in payroll' i dont buy it for one second.  because as long as the yankees and sox have the ability to spend ANY amount on not just 1 or 2 players, but an entire roster, the playing field will never be "level."

for the field to truly be level, every sport needs to institute not only a salary cap ceiling, but also a minimum team payroll, and the two need to be relatively close in order for it to work, and for all teams (especially the small market ones who really dont have the revenue sources) to be competitive.

it really does kill the "level playing field" theory every time a superstar ends up getting traded midway through the final season of his contract because everyone knows the team he was with has no chance at all to re-sign him.  and it buries the theory when the yankees or red sox trade a bunch of prospects to not only rent said player for half a season, but manage to re-sign that player in the offseason for way more than his former team could even think about paying him.

it fills in the hole where that theory is buried 4 years later when those prospects team A received are being traded back to the yankees/red sox because now they too are going to be way too expensive to re-sign.

Super Bowl...(whatever roman numerals we're at now)

Aside from the fact that I don't have a Fox channel here at home (I think that's the network covering the game), I have no interest in watching this game.  Had that Packers won, I still wouldn't be watching even if I did.  Less than 24 hours after the matchup was decided, I'm already sick of the "let's just hand the Patriots the trophy" hype.

All I will say about this game is.....Go Giants!  I don't like you, but you are the lesser of 2 evils.

To all those Giants fans who buried your team before their game vs. Green Bay...

Smart move having no faith whatsoever in your team.  Other than having a broken down defensive backfield, what exactly led you to believe the G-men had no chance?

The weather?  Both teams played in it.  Playing in Green Bay?  Here's a newsflash for you...Atlanta beat Green Bay at GB in the playoffs.  So did Minnesota.  Neither were given a chance to win.

To all those Packer fans who believed the Giants weren't a threat...

Are you enjoying eating your Crow and Humble Pie today?  Try washing it down with a little milk...chocolate is my recommendation.

Newsflash for you (and those Giants fans who didn't think they could beat Lord Favre in the cold)....Favre has 18 INT's in his last 8 playoff games (if my source is accurate).  He's great, we get it....but apparently he's not so great when it matters most.

That 43-5 record when the temperature is 34 or below?  Great, except that he's been terrible in the past 5 years or so (see: the Minnesota, Atlanta and now Giants home playoff losses).

Plenty of blame to go around though.  I recall one drive where at least 4 defensive penalties bailed out the Giants.  2 on 3rd downs and 2 offsides penalties inside the 1 yard line.  (that brings me to the clown jim fassel's comments on the radio after those to offsides calls....'you have to take a chance in guessing the snap count there, if you get it right you could blow up the play...if you get it wrong you only lose a foot or so...'  yeah, but when that happens twice and the ball is now a whisker away from the goal line and the ball carrier has to do is lean forward to score, you just screwed yourself).

To those now talking trash (and even those Packer fans who were doing so prior to the game)....

STFU.  Please

It's comical to me that so many who claim to not be trash talkers feel the need to do so after your team wins (or the team that beat your team last week loses this week) just because the other guy was gloating before.

What's incredibly stupid is that they always use the "I wouldn't be doing this if only they hadn't done it first" excuse.  That doesn't get you off the hook for acting childish and petty, it makes you MORE childish and petty.  Take the high road.  Lose with dignity, win with it.

To those chalking the loss up to poor officiating (and that female still b*!ching about Green Bay getting away with non-calls)....

Give it up already.  Green Bay got bailed out on that TD run late in the 4th quarter on a holding call.  Don't bring up those 4 penalties on one drive as the reason you lost the game.  They certainly didn't help, but they were legit calls.

As for the blogger whining about Green Bay having the officials in their pockets...if they did that, don't you think the officials would have followed through completely and found a way to hand them the victory?

GB had more penalties (7 to the Giants' 6) than NY did.  the only reason they had fewer penalty yards (37 to 50) was because 2 of the penalties occurred inside the 1 yard line, and a pass interference call happened 2 yards from the line of scrimmage.  I guess that whole "they had the refs in their pocket" argument really doesn't hold much water now does it?

In other news...

North Carolina lost their 1st game of the season on saturday.  Yet somehow, they're still #1 on the foxsports.com fan poll (unless they haven't updated theirs yet).

Even though they dropped in the other 2 polls, the feeling I'm getting is that most still think they're the best team, and the two remaining unbeatens are overrated, overhyped, and soon to free-fall.

NASCAR starts already....?

That 37 minute "offseason" took forever this year, didn't it?

Jermaine O'Neal...

Is this guy worth a plug nickel anymore?  Every time I see his name in print anymore, it's to talk about his latest injury or trade rumor.

Note to the Lakers:  If I'm your GM, I don't want to touch this guy unless it's to flip him right back to the Eastern Conference in a place they call New York.

On the other hand, if he's just dinking around because he doesn't want to play for the Pacers anymore...well..I still wouldn't want him on my team.  The only thing I like less than a guy who always seems to be injured is a guy who uses injuries as an excuse to back his way out of playing for the team he voluntarily signed with (for a HUGE pile of money I might add).

Fearless Predictions for '08

1. brett favre will not make up his mind (for sure) about playing next year until he realizes he has already thrown for 2000 yards, 12 TD and 5 INT's at midseason.

at this point he will announce his retirement at halftime of a game at minnesota, in front of a sellout crowd with 75% packer fans.

2.  roger clemens will weasel his way out of trouble, and once again come back to pitch in the majors.  unfortunately, the only team interested is the pirates.  he'll go 2-15 with a 6.3 ERA, and will also be 50 lbs lighter.

3. jerry jones will sign pacman jones when the league surprisingly announces his reinstatement in april.  he will then hire nate newton and michael irvin to share their tips on staying/getting out of trouble with the law.

4. dale earnhardt jr., jeff gordon and that other guy on their team will announce their upcoming weddings...to each other.

5. the miami dolphins will go 1-15 again next season, but they'll win their 1 game in september, thus somehow making the story not quite as embarrassing as this past season. 

this means everyone will get to keep their jobs on the coaching staff and front office, but bill parcells will retire (again) and proclaim (again) that he's accomplished all there is to do in football.

6.  peyton manning, now that his colts are out of the playoffs, will have plenty of time to do more commercials, including ones for viagra, hooked on phonix and copenhagen (there's a reason he talks like he does, and i think it has something to do w/one of the above mentioned products....)

7. tony romo will dump jessica simpson in favor of kelly pickler, then dump her in favor of taylor swift, then dump her in favor of jamie lynn spears and her newborn baby.

8. the remaining 3 hair bands from the 80's that havent already reunited and gone on tour (or have one planned) will, and 1 of them will be the halftime entertainment for next year's super bowl.

9. somehow, some way, vince mcmahon and the WWE stars will continue to be allowed to use all kinds of performance enhancers and the government wont do anything about it, and the fans wont care.  (except for maybe me...i'm still shaking my head at the fact that none of the alleged violators of their own testing policy were actually suspended...to my knowledge anyway)

10. the oakland raiders will finish under .500 again, sign at least 3 overpriced free agents, and at least 1 of them will immediately be suspended by the league for a minimum of 4 games for....well, pick a violation.

Bold ideas to make sports more betterer

1. set a hard salary cap in all sports.  not just team, but individual as well as signing bonus caps.  this will stop players from saying "i know you can only pay me $XXXXXXXX in salary, but i want at least $1 million more in bonus money than the highest paid player in the game, and a clause to always keep me that way."

2. for officials in the nba to make calls because they happen, not because the star players whine and beg for them.

3. drop all the "speculation as truth" in reporting.  granted, alot of it ends up coming true, but how much of it because of the frenzy created by the media? 

4. for all "national" sports networks to break down into regional channels.  we've got satellite tv with east and west channels for hbo, cinemax, etc.  why not for espn, fsn and the like?

it would give us all a chance to watch sports coverage, but not have to suffer through 37 minutes of new york/boston baseball hilites for the 30 second blurb on the brewers/cardinals game.

Brett Favre is NOT God

Don't take this wrong, he had a very good game yesterday.  What ticks me off is that so few people can give anyone but Favre credit for a Packer victory.

Without a terrific game by the offensive line to protect him, he would not have had time to make good throws.

Without good recievers, his passes would have fallen incomplete.

Without a GREAT rushing performance by Ryan Grant, the defense would have sat back and jumped on more of his throws.

Without a solid performance by the defense (we might as well throw out Seattle's first "drive" of a whopping 1 yard), Green Bay likely would have been forced to throw much more frequently, and with the weather conditions and Favre's tendancy to try and do too much when his team is trailing, it would not have been a pleasant outcome.

But Seriously, What is it with "Fans" who only show up to brag about Lord Favre?

I just don't get it.  I looked at the NFL section on the main blog page, expecting to find 37 posts (ok, so there are only a handful listed) bragging up the Patriots (like there's anything left to say about them at this point), and what I found were 3 posts about Favre.

Wait, what am I thinking?  Had he played terrible and the Packers lost, there would probably still be posts about him, excusing his lousy play with the same old nonsense.

"His receivers ran the wrong routes."  (while that may happen from time to time, why do no other QB's get the benefit of this excuse on 75% of their incompletions/interceptions?)

"But, he HAD to throw on 37 consecutive plays, we were TRAILING." (yeah, by 7, until he threw 2 INT's that were turned into TD's by the other team)

"It's ok to throw a shovel pass to a guy who is double covered, 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage, while you're in the process of being tackled."  (no its not, especially if the other team catches the ball...thats called an interception.  its also quite stupid to throw a pass to anyone 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage if he's not WIDE open)

Honestly, I have gotten so sick of hearing Favre get ALL the credit when Green Bay wins, and be defended to the death of any wrongdoing when they lose that I really wish the Packers win the SB this year, so he can ride off into the sunset and I don't have to hear it anymore...Oh who am I kidding?  Then I'll just have to hear how the next 37 guys who take a single snap for Green Bay can't possibly live up to his legendary status.

.....Isn't that how it should be?  That, if he truly is the greatest, that you can't fill his shoes with the next guy or the guy after that?  Yes, he's a once-in-a-lifetime performer, and his personality on the field is contagious, and that's almost impossible to ever replace.  Not just for Green Bay, but for the entire league.

I've gotten off course a little here.  My point is that, in yesterday's game, if he was the only player who performed well, the Packers lose by 3 TD's.  What seems to be getting lost is perhaps the most important thing he did all game....giving Ryan Grant a pep talk after fumbling twice in the opening minutes.

I love the way Favre plays, and his personality.  I guess it's the fans and media's worshiping him that just turns me off.

Football is a team game people.  Yes, one player can make a huge difference in whether you win or lose, but be a little more objective regarding individual performance then.