I think I am one of the few people that actually wants the World Baseball Classic to succeed.  Yes, it's a big money making scheme for MLB.  Yes, the whole Cuba thing was a bunch of political chest-thumping nonsense.  But, as a whole, I think it's a cool idea, and an idea that is way overdue.  After soccer, baseball is probably the most popular game in the world.  The only place it really has no foothold is in Europe and Australia -- it has taken root and flourished in North America, Latin America, and Asia over the last 50 years.  It's a worldwide corporate juggernaut, as well as a game beloved by billions.

Just for giggles, I thought I might go crazy and not offer a inflammatory opinion here on FoxSports.com for once.  What I have is a question:  is anybody the least bit uncomfortable with so many players who, after making millions of dollars and reaping the subsequent fame in the United States, decide to fly the coop and go play for their native land in the World Baseball Classic?

I can go either way.  I understand that most of them still have citizenship in their home country (or do they?  I'm just assuming), that they have intense pride in where they come from, and they want to help the teams from their birthplace do well and flourish.  They also realize that American MLB is the cream of the crop, and the U.S. team will still have plenty of American superstars without them.  And, likewise, the teams in their homelands will have much less of a chance to win without them.

On the other hand, isn't playing for another country a slap in the face to the country that made them the millionaire superstars that they are?  And without the superior facilities and coaches in MLB, would they even have the level of talent that they have?  All foreign players now in MLB are great talents, otherwise they wouldn't be here.  But if the Pujols-es of the world hadn't been snatched up as teenagers and developed in the U.S., would they have the level of talent (and therefore salaries and celebrity) that they have today?  Maybe, but probably not.

Just a few examples: Alfonso Soriano, Miguel Tejada, Albert Pujols, David Ortiz, Manny Ramirez, Vladamir Guerrero, and Pedro Martinez will all be playing for the Dominican team.  Andruw Jones will be playing for the Netherlands, although I can't imagine why they even have a team.  Carlos Beltran, Javy Lopez, and Ivan Rodriguez will be playing for Puerto Rico.  The U.S. will still have superior pitching with the likes of Roy Halladay, Tim Hudson, Dontrelle WIllis, Brad Lidge, and Billy Wagner.  From looking at the initial rosters, it seems that the U.S. and Dominican teams are the favorites to play in the championship.  But is it really the Dominican team, when probably 8 of their starting 9 are staples of American MLB? 

I've been thinking about this one for a while, and I'm still not sure where I stand.  What do you think?  Does this ship-jumping get under anybody's skin?

A "blogger" (I put that in quotes because this person has no blog you can actually go to -- he just writes comments & randomly calls people racists for no reason whatsoever, I guess) named Padre_slugger had this to say:

" Roger- your blog seems like it's a bash-fest for other bloggers that actually made the final 4."

While it does seem like I've been on the Hater-ade with my last few posts, I've only had consistently negative things to say about two bloggers:  the_Doc, because he was a proven plagiarist who was subsequently disqualified, and now mustangj.  I've written positive comments and given consistently high ratings to HiPlainsDrifter, Jon_Mano, and tyhillenbrandt.  I also did the same for DC_domer, crookdnose, and norcalfella.  Why?  Because they're talented writers. 

I only get all hate-y when people deserve it, which has only happened with two people, and I spread the love around when it's deserved, as well, which has happened many more times.

I can't wait until this contest is over so I can write about sports again.

I don't want to do this, but I said I would.  It's just a little note about finalist mustangj -- he's deleting criticisms from his blog.  As I promised him I'd do, here are my original comments on his last assignment post (Part 1), which were deleted:

"No, I couldn't spend the two weeks pointing out your misspellings and random grammatical errors -- it would take at least a month.  My problem with your constant syntax abuse has gone past a morality/darn-these-kids-today type of angst.  It's gone past the feeling of "How can a person who is aspiring to call himself a 'writer' have such blatant disregard for the language?"  I've stopped gritting my teeth at bloggers who don't even bother to use spellcheck, much less actually proofread their work.  At this point, it's mostly bothersome because it makes your writing clunky and difficult to understand.  It took me a couple of tries to understand that by saying "Onset fire Millen chants", you really meant "Incite 'Fire Millen' chants".  Again, the sentiment was funny, it just didn't make any sense at first.  If I have to read and re-read your statements several times per post, just to make sense of it, it makes for a very choppy read.

Also, from the beginning, your basic thesis made sense until you tacked on the Patriots reference.  I didn't understand what you were getting at exactly.  Did you mean the Pats wouldn't have won without the two weeks to prepare?  It needed slight clarification, and wasn't necessary to accentuate your basic position.  Also on the subject of clarification -- your choice of photo placement was misguided.  A photo can be used well to clarify an obscure reference for the casual fan, and doesn't help much otherwise.  For instance, I didn't need a pic of Keifer Sutherland when you mentioned "Jack Bauer", or weird gold teeth on a pillow when you were talking about Chad Johnson's grill.  The casual fan, however, might need a pic of A.I. when you referenced "we talkin' 'bout practice, man..."  Or, a pic would have helped to clarify "8 Mile", "Kimo von Oelhoffen", "Mather", and "Marshall and Kim", because many people (including me) have no idea what any of that is.

Bonus points for humor, and for having a clear stance.  Minus points for misusing and overusing pics -- again, I didn't see half of them, because your blog takes a half hour to load because of them.  I just hit "stop" so I can actually read your post, and it stops loading pics.  Your efforts in that regard are wasted on anyone with dial-up.  Also, minus points for wrestling references.  Come on, man.  Really.

More minus points for the ending -- there was no summary or re-stating of your position, just a slam on Detroit's mayor that had nothing to do with whether or not there should be two weeks before the Super Bowl.  It seemed more like you were just tired of writing and just stopped, rather than actually ending the piece cohesively.  I'll reiterate what I've said before about your stuff:  "Decent blogging, poor writing."  Every blogger here, myself included, has listened to suggestions and honed their skills since this contest began.  You, on the other hand, seem to have kept that immature "I do what I do, and if you don't like it, tough" attitude in your writing.... errr... blogging."

Yes, it was way too long.  My bad.  I really don't care that much about any of this, I just get all in a tizzy when success comes to the undeserving.  After I posted it, and realized he had completely changed the ending of his assignment, I also commented "By the way, making changes to your blog after you post it is cheating in my book.  You been kickin' it with Doc?"  Unfortunately, I wasn't able to salvage the original post, as I had done with the_Doc.  I hate computers.

He posted this reply:
"RogerCWallace: If it takes to long to load get a new internet service. It's 2006 big guy. 

Other than that I'd like to say I enjoy constructive criticism but your 500 word critiques are borderline pyscho. I deleted them after not even reading most of what you had to say because it was so spiteful. Get off your high horse.

I realize I have mistakes in these blogs because many times I post from work where I am unable to use microsoft word/spell check. But see that is why I made fun of myself. Because I can realize my own error.

By the way I didn't mean incite. I meant onset. You know to begin something. But just for you I cheated again. and I changed it... this time I dumbed it down for you and used the word start.

As in start finding a hobby other than ragging ona 20 year old for putting too many pictures in his blog." 

To which I commented:
"Some of don't get to use Mommy & Daddy's money to pay for our internet service, little fella.

If you can't take criticism, you'll never make it as a professional anything, much less in an art-based field.  The fact that you deleted my comments just proves the immaturity I was speaking of.  I do hope the judges will take that into consideration when choosing the winner of this contest.  And yes, I have these weird things called "complete sentences" and "fully formed thoughts" that make my comments long-winded sometimes, and for that I apologize.  But that one was only so long because there was so much to criticize.

I think you show promise as a writer with your ideas, but they just need maturing.  Right now your stuff is juvenile, but funny in that "doo-doo-fart-and-booger-jokes" kind of way.  You have a lot of energy, but I don't think you take writing seriously if you're posting assignment blogs from work, with no proofreading at all.

Sorry if you think I'm on a high-horse, but I've been making a living with words for half your lifetime.  And I've been reading books longer than you've been alive.  Your age is no excuse, though -- the writing of arabchickencurry is proof of that -- you just need to mature as a writer.  I'm sure you'll delete this one, too, but no worries.  If you do, I'll just post them both on the judges' blog and mine."

All of my comments were deleted from his page.  How many others has he done this to?  Every other blogger has at least some small criticisms on their blogs -- he has none.  And I feel relatively confident that it's not because he's such a great writer.  As I said before, he's a funny blogger.  Not a good writer.

One more little aside -- he's also engaging in the "fake blogging" that has ruined the judging in this contest.  Immediately after our little exchange, and his subsequent deletion of my comments, I got these comments from a blogger named x72charger on my post "Living The Rose Bowl In Austin..." (which hadn't been commented on in a week):

" since we are in the mood of critiquing:

Gorfge myself? When you say gorge it works fine. Gorge yourself makes it redundant. What are you going to gorge someone else?

In the opening line you also used the word usually? You don't need that its a verb modifier. It slows down your writing...... (2nd entry) and tension can't be high. It isn't temperature. There can be a lot of it. But we aren't talking about snowfall.... (3rd entry) you also have no right to make those comments about detroit. Texas sucks."

Come on, kiddo.  Mustang?  Charger?  Car themes... that's really a mind-bender, you nutty huckster you.  You're not fooling anybody.  And if it's not you, it's a buddy you put up to it.  Here's my reply:

"Nice try, mustangj.... I mean, x72charger. Do you really think you're fooling anyone? Also, you're going to have to try harder than that to point out my grammar mistakes. I'm not saying there aren't any; those just aren't them. Are you really a journalism major? All that money your poor parents are spending, down the drain. Have fun working at Wal-Mart. That little red vest will look super-tight on you.... (2nd entry)  Hey Detroit lovers: Maybe if Detroit would stop burning down their city when they win/lose championship games, that characterization wouldn't apply. But you do, so it does."

Take all that for what it's worth to you.  Maybe it means nothing to you.  Maybe you think I'm wasting way too much time and space on this.  You'd be right on that one.  But I can't help myself -- no way should a person this silly possibly win this contest.  I imagine our illustrious judges are feeling the same way, and I hope the rest of you voting bloggers see mustangj for what he is: a kid with a cute blog.  Not a professional sportswriter.

I usually prefer to watch games at home, where I can curse, jump around like a buffoon, and gorge myself on chips and queso at my inexpensive leisure.  For this year's Rose Bowl, however, I realized that no self-respecting Austinite and Longhorn fan could watch this game apart from his compatriots -- I watched the "best college football game ever" at Ginny's Little Longhorn Saloon, my home away from home in Austin.

First, some background on Ginny's:  I could write volumes on Ginny's Little Longhorn, but suffice to say it's the quintessential honky-tonk, a kick-ass little shotgun beer joint, that some would call a modern mecca for real country music.  It's world-famous in roots music circles, and has continuous visitors and fans from all continents.  It's also the place where I've played most of my gigs for the last 10 years, and I'm proud be a part of the "1st generation" of staple acts at Ginny's.  And to top all that, Ginny herself (everyone picture your Grandma, or your Mom's favorite Aunt -- that's Ginny) is one of the biggest Texas Longhorn fans on the planet, as evidenced by the burnt-orange and white decor, and the very name of her bar.  

Ginny decided to rent a big-screen TV for the Rose Bowl, turn all the other TV's to the right channel, and cancel the night's enetrtainment, the Wednesday-night virtuoso Justin Trevino (the first time this has ever been done there to my knowledge, even as big a fan as Ginny is).

The place was jammed with intensely focused 'Horns fans, some of whom were good friends, and some I'd never seen before.  There was a bizarre orange and white, craggly-old-football-encased-in-glass trophy standing on a table, obviously somebody's souvenir good luck charm for God knows how long.  There was a huge crowd around the big screen on the bandstand, so my girlfriend and I settled at an odd angle at the bar and watched the first half on the smaller TV overhead, contorting ourselves to try and not block the view of those at the tables who had the decency to get there on time.

We all cheered, jeered, hung our heads, and slammed our beer bottles throughout the first half, with half the bar (thanks to the recent anti-smoker facism in Austin) making the trek outside during commercial breaks to cuss and discuss the game's progress.  We also were successful in our most important venture, which was to not watch Big & Rich in the halftime show.  Whew.... thank God.... that crap causes seizures in small children and pets, not to mention almost makes everyone in Ginny's Little Longhorn wretch.

Luckily, we were able to squeeze in by the big screen for the second half, my girlfriend hunkered cross-legged on the floor, myself squatting between friends and strangers on a couple of overturned crates.  And yes, I did offer her my seat, but she preferred the spot she had, about a foot and a half from the screen.

As the second half progressed, the score climbed higher and tighter, as did the mood inside the bar.  There was a palpable sense of either upcoming jubilation or crushing disappointment -- either way, there was going to be a ruckus at Ginny's Little Longhorn that night.  There's a sign above the bar at Ginny's that reads "No Fussin', No Cussin', No Hasslin', No Rasslin'", but that all went right out the window...errr... front door (there are no windows) every time a big play was made, or if there was a controversial call.

As the 'Horns made their final drive, ending with the now-infamous 4th down play with 19 seconds on the clock, the tension in that bar was higher than I had ever seen in 8 years of gigging, drinking, and practically living there.  This was it.  You don't get any more "for all the marbles" than this.  The ball is snapped, Young fades back.  He scrambles.  We all leap to our feet.  A spontaneous and simultaneous crescendo that went something like, "RUUUNTHROWITZONEREADLOOKOUTGORUNRUNRUNTHROWITDAMMITGOVINCE GOVINCEGOGOGOGOGOGO!!!!!!!!!!" whooshed upward in a plea to the football gods.  And in he scoots, like he's playing touch football in the street.  Touchdown, Texas.  Ball game.  WE RULE.

The melee that followed is indescribable -- mostly because I didn't see it.  I was locked in a hopping, screaming, euphoric embrace with my big bald friend William and an Asian guy I didn't even know.  When we finally disentagled, I grabbed my girlfriend and almost lopped her head right off in the ceiling fan, picking her up over my head and shaking her in my glee.  I hugged Ginny.  I hugged Sharon. I socked my buddy Tim (he's an Aggie) and his homemade USC shirt right square in the gut.  I hugged more people I didn't know, and high-fived a little kid who had undoubtedly increased his vocabulary ten-fold over the course of four hours.

What a night.  I think we would've gone all "Detroit" and set fire to the shed out back and turned over some cars -- but them pickup trucks is dang heavy.  So we celebrated heartily for another half hour or so, but the crowd quickly dispersed, most folks being completely exhausted and having to get up for work in a few hours.  On the way home, we got to see the campus tower lighted orange, soon to have the giant white-lit "1" in the middle.  There was spontaneous honking of car horns, strangers waving at strangers and driving with one arm out the window, holding up a proud "#1" finger.  Of course, that's a common occurence in Austin, except with a different finger....

'Horns rule.  SoCal drools.  And the eyes of Texas (and now the NFL) are on Vince Young.  It's mighty good to be a 'Horn these days.

My name is Roger C. Wallace.  I only have one blog site on here.  If you want to know who I am and what I do for a living, my web site address is in my bio.  I am not "having fun" with anyone, nor am I trying (or would I even have the ability) to sabotage anyone.  I have a pitiful old PC, I'm on dial-up, and I graduated with a degree in speech communication, not computer science.  I can check email, surf the web, and write these silly blogs.  The_Doc's assertion that someone hacked into his computer to sabotage him is pretty ridiculous.  I hate that some people on here have created multiple blogs (That's extremely childish and chickens***t), and I agree that "FooFoo" and "RidingHood" may be one of them.  I also doubt that Kolokhov and Vegas Dave are actually Dave Kolokhov.  It is a problem that people can create multiple personalities (the_Doc, savedoc, and the_dOC?  hmmm...), and nobody knows who anybody really is.  It creates a lot of unnecessary confusion and mistrust. 

I feel confident that The_Doc plagiarized (and I do mean copied word-for-word) the askmen.com piece in his ORIGINAL article -- because I saw it!  I also commented on it, as did several other people, as well as Doc himself.  The article that he has up there now, the one that most of you have seen, is not the article he originally posted.  Here I'll quote my blog on the matter: "Last night I read and posted a comment (along with 14 others) on The_Doc's Assignment #2 blog entitled, "Top 10 Out-of-this-World Moments in Sports History".  This morning, I went to see if there were more responses, and an extremely revised new version of the blog had been posted, and all previous comments erased."

I didn't save the original article -- it was still on the window I left up overnight.  My blog "To The NGS Family, Part II..." was the most current page in the window when I woke up, and I read crookdnose's comment where he alerted me to the Golokhov article.  He also said that he had posted a comment on The_Doc's original blog, asking him if he was Dave Golokhov, which was apparently deleted.  I then clicked on Doc's page to see what was up, or if there were any new comments, or if Doc had answered mine, and saw that the article had been completely changed and all of the previous night's comments had been deleted.  I then hit "back", to back up a few pages, and the original article that he had posted the previous evening was still there in the window.  I copied it and pasted it onto a word program, and went to askmen.com to find the Golokhov article. 

To my astonishment, the Kolokhov article was EXACTLY the same as Doc's original post.  Virtually word for word, verbatim.  OK, he flipped #3 and #5 on his list.  He may have added or subtracted a word or two at the most.  But otherwise, it was EXACTLY the same -- not the post that he has up there now.  If he had written a real, un-plagiarized post, and somebody, somehow, posted a plagiarized one on his site, then what is up there now would be nowhere close to the askmen.com article, save for some of the obvious events that would make anybody's list of "craziest sports things ever".  But the article that is there now is still similar to the askmen.com article, even after the alleged edit.    

There are three possibilities to what's going on here:

1)  The_Doc found a bunch of top 10 lists on an obscure website he thought no one would ever find.  He then copied & pasted an article, as is, onto his own blog as his next entry into the contest.  The very definition of plagiarism, for which he should obviously be disqualified.  He then got busted, and tried to cover it up by reposting a new, similar-but-not-close-enough-to-be-plagiarism article.

2) There is some bizarro connection between Doc, Dave Kolokhov, and/or the judges.  Doc is 25 or so years old -- he could be a judge's son or nephew (which would explain his posting complete, lengthy, "well-researched" blogs an hour or so after the subject is announced), and they put him in the finals (and are looking the other way on this) as a favor.  He also could be Dave K.'s son or nephew, and he just said, "Here, kid, use this."  That's all very Oliver Stone-esque, and I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories.  This theory is possible, but not likely.

3)  Crookdnose (who alerted me to the whole thing), or some other finalist, is actually a hacker-genius who hacked into Doc's computer and posted the askmen.com article late at night. This is even more far-fetched, yet still possible.  Although, the fact that Doc himself posted responses to the comments on the original blog disproves the idea that someone posted it on his blog without his knowledge.  So the "hacker" theory is pretty much shot down, unless the alleged hacker-genius stayed on Doc's site long enough to post bogus comments as well.  I also have those responses, along with the "original" blog post, on my blog on this subject. There is also the more troubling idea that someone created a blog with a name almost exactly like his (with an extra underscore or something), posted the plagiarized article, and duped us all.  I truly don't remember how the blog name was written, or if there were any more posts on the blog.  Although, I do think I would have noticed something fishy like that, and I think I even remember voting on it.  Again, though, if he had written an honest post, it (the alleged edited version that's posted now) would not have been so similar to the askmen.com article.  The original post, however, was not just similar, it was exactly the same.                

Unless you are a paranoid conspiracy theory person, which I am not, you have to concede that theory #1 is the most likely.  The fact that I'm the only one who was lucky (or unlucky) enough to still have the original blog (and the comments & responses) on my computer is the sticking point -- as far as I know, the only proof that the original plagiarized post ever existed is on my blog.  You either have to believe that I saw what I saw, or don't believe me.  If you don't believe me, you have to think that I went to all the trouble of finding a top 10 list on some website I'd never heard of, sat around making up other bloggers' comments and Doc's responses, and posted it to my site just to be a big meanie.  Yes, I'm creative, but not that creative.  No, I don't much care for Doc, but I really don't care enough about him or this contest to go to all that trouble just to sabotage him - I'm not even a finalist, so there's nothing in it for me.  And I'm not the only one who saw it -- where are all the others who commented on the original post?  Detpack, TravisDW, The Dan, James Morisete, Mack The Knives, HiPlainsDrifter, socalsportsfan, James, RioBound, InTikiITrust, and Vivica all posted resposes to the original article.  Where are you guys??  Please read my blog on the matter, and tell us all if you saw the original article and posted those comments.  Judges, if you want more answers, I would suggest asking those guys as well. 

I honestly hope the truth, whatever it is, comes out in all this.  If Doc has been sabotaged somehow, then that sucks, and whoever did it is a worthless jerk.  If Doc really did plagiarize that article, then he's a jerk too.  Somebody obviously did something really messed up here -- and as a person who makes part of his living through songwriting, I take plagiarism very seriously.  And anyone who thinks that I, or anyone who posted what they honestly saw, is being legally slanderous, then you have no idea what slander is.  I doubt savedoc is really an attorney anyway, judging by the language of his post.  All I can say is, if you're not guilty, then you have nothing to hide.  Doc's reaction of entirely closing up his blog reeks of someone who has just gotten busted and is trying to hide.  He's a kid, and it looks like he made a stupid mistake.  And why would he plagiarize, after writing so many "good" posts?  Here's why: everybody wants to get ahead, everybody gets greedy sometimes, and sometimes people take it too far by cutting corners if they think they won't get caught.  Just ask Jayson Blair, formerly of the New York Times.  Ask Janet Cooke, formerly of The Washington Post.  Ask ex-New Republic writer Stephen Glasse, or ex-Boston Globe writer Patricia Smith.  Even talented, accomplished, professional reporters plagiarize, or outright invent information, and are subsequently fired.  Wow, who knew our little blog was in such elite company?