Script: /divineswine/blog/page/5
Owner:
Subdir: divineswine

    Juiced II - a reason to celebrate

    Wednesday, January 2, 2008, 09:40 AM EST [General]

    What's that I hear? It's the sound of baseball groaning again as word spread of Jose Canseco's upcoming sequel to "Juiced".

    Although the working title is reportedly "Vindication", here are some other suggestions for the title:

     

    1.    "More Juice: First you got the liquid and now you're getting the pulp"

    2.    "Juiced part Duhhhh"  [spelling "Deux" is not as easy as some might think]

    3.    "Juiced II: how I squeezed more money out of the publishers"

     

    A lot of people are tired of Canseco. They think he's a buffoon and a rat.

    Here's the thing about Canseco, he's doing it for the same reason that a lot of players leave great situations on a good team to descend into the lowly ranks of the non-contenders: the money.

    However, there is another possible motivation: he's looking to stick it to the American public and MLB. Great drama.

    Here is the general flow of criticism over time about his first book: 

     

    1st        Canseco is a rat

    2nd       Canseco is a lying rat

    3rd        Canseco is a juiced lying rat.

     

    Only the first seems to be completely true, and I'm not even sure that it was deserved. So we want the truth, but we're going to call them a "rat" if they give it to us?

    Whatever the reason for his first book (and I'm not entirely sure that it was only about money), a large number of his claims were true. For fans clamoring to clean up the sport, you should be supporting Canseco. You should be telling everyone criticizing him to shut up.

    Some may be suspicious and wonder, "Why didn't he just name everyone in his first book?" You might as well ask hy J.K. Rowling why she didn't reveal everything about the Harry Potter storyline in the first book of that series. You keep the audience coming back for more.

    Canseco may be a publicity hound, but so far there is nothing to indicate that he's lied about other MLB steroid users, and that's why you can be sure that when his new book comes out, every MLB player who ever used steroids will either read the book or have someone else read the book and give them a synopsis. Hey, some people don't like reading.

    If you can separate all the other negative stuff about Canseco's personality from his claims (a Herculean task for most), you'll find that he's refreshingly honest. He's confessed to his own steroid use without having been caught first, and he's accurately named several players who used steroids. At least he's far more honest than every one of his thousands of his MLB peers who know the truth and aren't talking.

    0 (0 Ratings)

    Who Gets The Ball? The Football Hall of Fame

    Wednesday, January 2, 2008, 08:47 AM EST [General]

    Okay, the Patriots are perfect this season. That's a big 16-0 for those of you not paying attention. All four records that could have been broken were broken. Those records include most points scored by a team, most touchdown receptions by a player (Randy Moss), most touchdowns thrown (Tom Brady), and most wins in an undefeated season (sorry '72 Fins, 16 is still more than 14).

    Of course someone is going to try and stir up the pot amongst the Patriots because there are a lot of people who are tired of seeing the Patriots win all the time.

    One potential place of divisiveness is the 2nd touchdown ball that Randy Moss caught.

    That ball could be one of the most historic game balls in the history of the NFL.

    Why?

    Two records were broken with that single ball:

     

    a)      Randy Moss set the single-season touchdown reception record

    b)      Tom Brady set the single-season passing touchdown record

     

    So, who gets the ball? Moss? Brady? Do they split it in half? Do they have joint custody of it?

    My guess is that you're going to see that ball end up in Canton at the Football Hall of Fame. It really should go there, especially as the ball was part of the record-setting 16-0 regular season. And if Canton doesn't want it, then the Patriots should ask for it to be displayed somewhere in the Gillette Stadium/Patriot Place Complex.

    Maybe before this year, I would have predicted that Randy Moss would selfishly take it for himself. But he's really bought into the Patriots "team first" attitude.

    So, for those of you who might think that Brady and Moss will fight for ownership of that ball, forget it. You forget that the Patriots prepare for just about everything, and it wouldn't surprise me if Brady and Moss had already discussed this possible scenario prior to the game and mutually decided that they would donate the ball to either the Hall of Fame or the Patriots. That's just another reason amongst many why the Patriots are special.

     

    P.S. don't let Jonathan Papelbon's bulldog near that ball!!!!!!!!!

    0 (0 Ratings)

    Time To Forgive The Anabolic Cheaters - a New Year's Thought

    Monday, December 31, 2007, 12:21 PM EST [General]

    And you wonder how people are getting anabolic steroids so easily?

     

    Just utter the word "steroids" and a thousand knives suddenly appear. Almost every single professional sportswriter (and most amateur ones as well) believes that definitive proof of steroid use should ban a player from the Hall of Fame.

    There are also others who think that players like Roger Clemens are guilty based on a preponderance of circumstantial evidence (e.g. Brian McNamee's testimony, Clemens shocking improvement as he got older) combined with long-standing suspicions that maybe the Rocket was using a different type of fuel than his peers to propel his career.

    But there are a few things people should know about steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs), because far too many out there have the wrong perception of them.

     

    Myth 1: steroids or other PEDs can't make you hit a fastball.

    Anabolic steroids have been shown to increase reflex speed in both animal and human studies.

    What is probably just as important is that they can dramatically reduce the amount of breakdown (catabolism) that normally occurs when muscles undergo the stress of exercise. Less breakdown means faster recovery. When you consider how many musculoskeletal injuries a ballerina sustains despite the graceful nature of her art, then you can better imagine the damage that occurs in baseball players while violently and repeatedly swinging a bat, especially when they miss.

    All of that damage will slow down bat speed. This is where steroids really help. If you recover faster to baseline, you'll be able to more consistently hit pitches with power.

     

    Myth 2: steroids are inherently bad for you.

    There are several studies about people with low testosterone, and the trend is clear: low testosterone levels put you at a significantly increased risk of dying younger.

    Now don't go start shooting up on steroids because of that last sentence. The point is that exogenous steroids may be beneficial for our overall health. One of the problems is that good solid prospective studies are lacking on how a person with normal testosterone levels might use steroids properly to gain benefits and minimize side effects. The reasons for this are administrators being too close-minded.

    That situation probably won't change until people stop immediately associating steroids with former East German women, NFL and MLB players, and weightlifters.

     

    Myth 3:  injecting steroids automatically makes a person stronger.

    This is completely false. The simple act of injecting steroids will not make you stronger. It's not like getting bit by a radioactive spider like Spider-man or being injected with Super Soldier Serum like Captain America.

    People look at MLB athletes like Mark McGwire, Roger Clemens, and Barry Bonds, and they completely frown on those athletes for using steroids.

    But a fact that's been forgotten in all of the finger-pointing is that each of them was an elite athlete who worked hard. Name me one hitter who worked harder than Mark McGwire or Barry Bonds off the field? Name me one pitcher who had a tougher workout regimen than Roger Clemens? Their workout routines are the stuff of legends, and that was before they took steroids.

    But time has a funny way of demonstrating diminishing returns. At first it's a few days here or there where you just can't bench as much as usual or your timed sprints are a bit slower or you can't catch up to the fastball or the radar gun objectively tells you that you're losing a few mph off your fastball. Then those few days turn into weeks and then months.

    Then suddenly, you start seeing younger guys who are not working anywhere nearly as hard as you starting to catch up to you. To maintain the edge, you try steroids. And one way that you justify it to yourself is that the steroids only work because you yourself are putting in a tremendous amount of time and energy to stay in top shape. You reason that the steroids don't and won't work for you without you adding your own sweat and commitment. And you know what? You're right.

    Heck, even Captain America needed help (from low-level radiation exposure in his case) to make the injected substance work. People using steroids are similar: energy in the form of exercise is needed to see the true athletic benefits of anabolic steroids.

    While people are crucifying Bonds, Clemens, and McGwire, just remember that these guys were already way ahead of the curve in terms of their workout routines. I remember reading a Sports Illustrated article during McGwire's magical home run season. The thing that impressed me was how much time he spent working out. Also, I remember Clemens' intense workouts even on non-pitching days while he was with the Red Sox.

    Folks, these weren't guys looking to gain an edge for free. They had been and were willing to continue paying the price in terms of sweat to stay on top.

     

    Does this excuse what they did? No.

    But is what they did understandable? Yes.

    If we were in their position and stood to make millions of dollars a year playing a game and receive adoration from hundreds of thousands of people, would we not do everything in our power to keep things going?

    The general public is sounding like a lynching mob when it comes to stringing up any MLB athlete who used illegal substances like steroids and HGH. Was it 100% illegal? Yes. But it's become a bit crazy. Trust me, I know union workers who have resorted to outright violence to prevent people ("scabs") from breaking the picket lines. That violence is also 100% illegal and far more damaging to others, but I don't hear the general public tearing down the walls to put those violent people out of commission.

    If we demand that MLB players or any other athlete open their eyes and minds to the dangers of anabolic agent use, then shouldn't we try and open our minds a bit as to the reasons why they feel compelled to use such things?

    Many of us think, "Heck, I would never inject that junk into me." But unless we've been in a similar situation, it's tough to tell what we're capable of doing.

    So, MLB players flouted the law and cheated because they thought that following the rules would endanger their continued livelihood in baseball. Funny, wasn't this country's independence created by people who flouted authority, because they believed that their livelihoods were being threatened by unfair rules? Didn't those same revolutionaries also go against the common rules of military engagement and instead "cheat" by using "cowardly" guerilla tactics?

    I'm not trying to equate MLB players with the brave revolutionaries that created an independent America. But I'm trying to show you that Americans looking to for some way to better their circumstances is an inherent part of our personalities. It's impossible to deny this.

    The point is that when people are looking at the end of the road (and for an athlete facing the grim realization of retirement, it feels like the end of the road), it's a terrible time. Are we so completely unable to understand why pro athletes like Andy Pettitte resort to using steroids or other PEDs to prolong their careers, especially when they know that most of the other guys around them are doing it?

    In the past, I've written several blogs about steroids and the people who use them. I've never ridiculed anyone for making the choice to use steroids. It violates federal law (and now MLB rules) and it's unsportsmanlike. But I can separate those facts from the other fact that we all should try placing ourselves in other people's shoes.

    Yes, they make big money, but for the majority of them, their whole life has been devoted to sports. I can understand why they would try steroids or HGH or other PEDs. I don't condone it, but I understand where they are mentally to make that choice.

    However, I have no problem ridiculing athletes who lied about their use. That's why I have some respect for a guy like Andy Pettitte and complete disdain for Paul Byrd and his ridiculous story about using HGH that was prescribed by an online dentist for his supposed brain tumor.

    As the year comes to a close, here's a thought. Maybe it's time to give the illegal drug users a break and let them come forth and confess everything without fear of retribution. Maybe we need an Amnesty Period where players are guaranteed that anything they confess about receiving steroids and other PEDs will not be used against them legally or for Hall of Fame balloting consideration.

    In a lot of ways, this steroid saga has wearied me and left me thinking the same thing I thought when my best friend was lost at sea while saving his wife after their boat was obliterated in a destructive storm: regardless of what the truth is, I just want to know the truth.

    I would rather let a player confess completely that he used steroids his entire career and then let him walk away unscathed then stay in this limbo where we are all left guessing whether he did it or not.

    Also, I don't believe that it's all about greedy players just trying to stay on the big high-salary gravy train of the MLB.

    A person's ego and feeling of self-worth is partially tied to their income, but it's more heavily connected with a feeling of contributing to something greater than himself or herself. Every one of us should try to imagine having a job that we absolutely love; a job where we receive praise and respect from our boss and coworkers. Then imagine how we'd feel if our boss came to us tomorrow and said, "We have to let you go, because there are younger faster people we want to replace you with." Imagine the sadness and panic that might immediately well up in you.

    Then suppose that I come up to you and whisper, "Hey, I have this stuff called Adderall which will allow you perk up, outperform any new person, and allow you to keep your job." The catch is that it's illegal to use this drug unless you have medically diagnosed attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. What if I also told you that I could get it to you without a prescription and that there were no real side-effects? Would you try it? Of course you would. It's as much a part of our DNA as Eve biting from the forbidden apple.

    And folks, just an fyi, Adderall abuse is rampant in universities and even amongst competitive high school students. What is Adderall? It's a type of amphetamine. That's right, it's "speed".

    Now, that I've shared that true tidbit about Adderall being used illegally by a lot of American university students, are you still not going to try it to keep your job, especially when you most likely will be replaced by someone who is using it?

     

    If you say that you would still not try it, then you are an incredibly moral person, lying to yourself, or you don't need money and job happiness as much as normal people do.

    None of this is to say that we should excuse the guys who cheated. But unless we can find a way to ensure a clean and level playing field, can you really blame guys who are trying it to keep their jobs against other players who very well might also be users?

    Sen. Mitchell proposed that we should not focus on punishing those who cheated in the past, but rather focus on the present and the future. I agree, and that's why MLB steroid users need to catch a break. Let's wipe the slate clean.

    For people who have been arguing that letting such cheaters off the hook sullies the records of many of our MLB sports heroes, here is a sobering fact: Synthetic testosterone was first introduced into sports during the 1940s and 50s. There is no definitive way to know whether or not records achieved since that time are also tainted. So, let's drop the charade that all players 20 and 40 years ago were clean. Let's have an Amnesty Period where players can confess everything without fear of retribution and let them know that from that moment on they must stay clean or face being wiped out of all record books.

    Let's do this to save ourselves the time and agony of having to hear a lot of players lie to save themselves because that's the only option left to them. Let's do this to save the money we would have used on investigating athletes and devote that money to better testing in the future. Let's not allow ourselves to get stuck on the idea of punishment and miss the greater good of finally knowing the whole truth.

    Finally, let's give the MLB anabolic steroid and HGH users a break so we can all move forward, because as the saying goes, you can't advance to second base if you keep your foot on first.

    HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!!!

     

    P.S.  the picture at the top of this post is not Photoshopped. that's an original advertisement found 2 days ago. obviously i didn't include the phone number and web address.

    0 (0 Ratings)

    BRAINWASHING CENTRAL - The Patriots DO NOT need to go 19-0 !!!!!

    Monday, December 31, 2007, 07:18 AM EST [General]

    To the brainwashed souls out there, the Patriots do not need to win the Super Bowl for this season to be labeled as a success. Even if they don't win the Super Bowl, they still proved themselves to be the greatest team that ever existed in the regular season.

    Listening to a lot of people everywhere including the Patriot players themselves is a bit nauseating, and I'm as devoted a Patriots fan as there is. At least when Patriots players say that the season won't mean anything if they don't win the Super Bowl, I understand that they have to say it. They're still playing football, and since they have a game coming up, it's no time to rest on laurels.

    But that doesn't mean that there are no laurels to rest on already.

    Let's figure out the reasons why the Patriots winning season has already surpassed the '72 Dolphins.

    1) length of season. If we want to compare apples with apples, then let's look at overall games. The Dolphins won 14 regular season games (17 overall) and the Patriots so far have won 16 straight. Last time I checked 16 was a higher number than 14, but some of you may be using the "new math" to figure things out so you may come to a different conclusion.

    2) the competition. Here are the teams that each played, the season records, and their conference standings.

                          2007 Patriots                              1972 Dolphins 

    @NYJ    4-12       3rd   AFC East                @KC    8-6       2nd   AFC West

    SD          11-5       1st    AFC West              HOU     1-13     4th    AFC Central

    BUF        7-9        2nd   AFC East                @MIN  7-7       3rd    NFC Central

    @CIN     7-9        3rd   AFC North              @NYJ   7-7       2nd   AFC East

    CLE        10-6       2nd  AFC North              SD         4-9        4th    AFC West

    @DAL   13-3       1st    NFC East                BUF       4-9-1    4th    AFC East

    @MIA    1-15       4th   AFC East                @BAL    5-9       3rd   AFC East

    WAS        9-7       3rd   NFC East                @BUF    4-9-1   4th    AFC East

    @IND    13-3       1st    AFC South              NE          3-11     5th    AFC East

    @BUF     7-9        2nd  AFC East                 NYJ       4-9        4th    AFC East

    PHI          8-8        4th   NFC East                 STL       4-9        4th    NFC East

    @BAL    5-11       4th   AFC North              @NE      3-11      5th    AFC East

    PIT         10-6        1st   AFC North             @NYG    8-6       3rd    NFC  East

    NYJ        4-12       3rd   AFC East                BAL        5-9-2    3rd    AFC East

    MIA        1-15       4th   AFC East                          67-124-2  = .360 winning %

    @NYG   10-6       2nd   NFC East 

                120-145  =  .453 winning 

                     

    The overall winning percentage of the teams the Patriots played was 0.453 vs. 0.360 for the Dolphins.

     

    note: I counted games against divisional rivals as if they were separate teams to be merciful to the Dolphins. How so? Calculating it this way helps the Dolphins. Don't believe me? Here are the standings 

     

         AFC East in 2007                                AFC East in 1972                              

    TEAM     W-L     Win%                       TEAM     W-L-T   Win%                    

    NE          16-0     1.000                        MIA        14-0-0    1.00                      

    BUF          7-9     0.438                        NYJ          7-7-0    0.500                     

    NYJ          4-12   0.250                        BAL          5-9-0    0.357                    

    MIA          1-15   0.063                        BUF          4-9-1    0.321                     

                                                                 NE            3-11-0  0.214

     

    Still think that the '72 Dolphins had a better regular season than the 2007 Patriots?

    Let's rearrange the season records according to division rankings and then overall records:

     

                 2007 Patriots                                     1972 Dolphins 

    @DAL  13-3     1st  NFC East                            ----

    @IND   13-3     1st  AFC South                          ----

    SD         11-5     1st  AFC West                          ----

    PIT         10-6    1st  AFC North                         ----

     

    CLE       10-6     2nd  AFC North           @KC    8-6       2nd  AFC West

    @NYG  10-6     2nd  NFC East              NYJ     7-7        2nd  AFC East      

    BUF       7-9       2nd  AFC East                           ----

     

    WAS      9-7       3rd  NFC East             @NYG   8-6      3rd  NFC East

    @CIN    7-9       3rd  AFC North           @MIN   7-7       3rd  NFC Central

    NYJ       4-12     3rd  AFC East              BAL       5-9      3rd  AFC East)

     

    PHI         8-8       4th  NFC East              SD         4-9      4th  AFC West

    @BAL    5-11     4th  AFC North           BUF       4-9      4th  AFC East

    MIA       1-15     4th  AFC East              NYJ       4-9       4th  AFC East

    STL        4-9       4th   NFC East             HOU    1-13      4th   AFC Central

                                                                   NE       3-11      5th   AFC East*

     

    [* in 1972 both the AFC East and NFC East had an extra team. sorry about the alignment problem. the NE score is obviously for the 1972 Dolphins column, but i can't get it to align correctly.]

     

    Kind of brutal for the '72 Dolphins.

     

    Also, they beat 2 teams tied for the 2nd best record in the entire NFL while playing them on the road.

     

    Folks, it's not even close. Now how about the rest of the reason?

     

    3)   the players. No offense meant to guys playing in 1972, but the players today are bigger, faster, and more athletic. Not by a little but by a lot.  

     

    4)   the parity. Today's NFL was created with parity as a major underpinning. The '72 Dolphins never had to worry about it. Parity was created by introducing the salary cap (in 1994) and free agency (in 1989). Therefore, in 1972, a team like the Dolphins had a far easier time keeping key players.

     

    5)   the drugs. Any team with a sharp enough trainer could get their hands on drugs to make the team play better. For the NFL amphetamines and steroids were common friends until drug testing began in 1987. Does this mean that any or all of the '72 Dolphins were using them? Nope. But it's a factor in considering the nature of the game.

     

     

    Only an idiot (and maybe not even an idiot) would try to argue that it was harder to play in the NFL in 1972 than today.

     

    In this age of "we're just taking it one game at a time" and "it don't mean nothing unless we win the Super Bowl", it's easy to brainwash ourselves into not appreciating what has been accomplished.

      

    As my stat friend UltraMega likes to point out, regular season and post-season stats are kept separate for a reason. So be it. We keep the stats separate because the regular season and post-season are different.

     

    The idea that "records don't mean nothing if we don't win the Super Bowl" has become a mantra, but we all know it's a lie. Regardless of what happens, Tom Brady should be proud of owning the single-season record for passing touchdowns, Randy Moss should be proud of getting the single-season record for touchdown receptions, and the Patriots should be proud of setting the single-season record for most points scored.

     

    Any Yankee and/or A-Rod fan who points out that he's the greatest offensive player at this point in his career should keep quiet at this point. You should be supporting this post, because if there was ever a guy who epitomized why the regular and post-seasons should be kept separate, it's A-Rod. He's a regular-season wonder and a post-season miss.

     

    Probably a lot of Patriot fans will be angry about this post, because they too have been brainwashed into thinking that anything less than a Super Bowl is failure. As for me, I "gather (my) rosebuds where (I) may".

     

    Here is another couple of things to chew on. First, to the naysayers out there who think that anything less than 19-0 is complete failure, let me remind you that since the advent of the 16-game regular-season schedule, do you know how many years a team has won the Super Bowl? EVERY YEAR. During that same time frame and until this season, do you know how many teams have gone 16-0? ZERO!!!!! You tell me which one is more precious.

    Second, Manning did not get his single-season touchdown passing record and his Super Bowl victory in the same season. How many people really care that he did it in two separate seasons? ZERO. We honor his accomplishment for exactly what it was. No matter what happens in this postseason, for a long long time QBs will be chasing Brady, wide receivers will be gunning to beat Moss's record, and all teams will be trying to break the 2007 Patriots single-season points record and undefeated regular season record. See? 16-0 really does mean something.

     

    Regardless of how the Patriots do in the post-season, they are indisputably the greatest team to ever take the field during the regular season. When you combine overall record, strength of schedule, scoring and defense, it's undisputable.

     

    Congratulations Patriots!!!!!! Now let's go win the Super Bowl.

     

    P.S. for all of you who think that this season was marred by "spygate", get a life. I'm sure they really needed to cheat against the hapless Jets.

    P.P.S. And if the Patriots were to go 19-0, then they would not share the perch with the '72 Dolphins, they would be a notch above them for the same reasons that they are already in a higher plane for the regular season record.

    P.P.S.S. this is a repost due to a slightly altered state this morning leading to an accidental deletion.

    P.P.P.S.S. does anyone know how to work with the alignment on this blogsite?  

    0 (0 Ratings)

    The Biggest Winner of the Patriots-Giants Game is....

    Saturday, December 29, 2007, 09:28 PM EST [General]

    So, who really was the biggest winner of the Patriots-Giants game tonight? The NFL!!!!

    Not only was the game highly entertaining and well-played for the most part, but the score was close and it came right down to the final minutes of the game. It's the type of game which makes people want to watch more football.

    Also, the game was historic on far more levels than just what happened on the field.

    Let's count the ways:

    1)  For the first time that I can remember (other than the State of the Union Address) all 3 original major networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) were broadcasting the exact same game. They were all broadcasting the NFL Network. Talk about maximal expsosure

    2)  For the first time ever, all three of the networks were broadcasting the exact same commercials (except during the half).

    3)  For the first time ever, all three networks had the same annnouncers

    Trust me, such a thing will never ever happen again, and I hate using "never".  It was a historic moment in television history that will never again be equaled.

     

    Other winners:

    1)  The broadcasting squad of the NFL Network. Gumbel was not great but he wasn't terrible. Collinsworth is just Collinsworth.

    2)  All the companies that paid for ad time on the NFL Network for this game. Imagine thinking that you were going to be advertising to a few hundred thousand households and instead you get to millions of houses. Just amazing.

    3)  The Patriots for obvious reasons

    4)  The Giants. they didn't win, but they almost beat the best team in football. For Manning, he needed a game like this one to show that he can compete and excel against the best. For Tom Coughlin, he needed a close game like this to show his team that the coaching staff really do know what's going on.

    Sure, the Giants lost the game, but this is one of those times where everyone actually won and both teams benefitted.

    0 (0 Ratings)