How nice was it to ground the Rocket last night? That's all I have to say about that...
Enough already. Enough with the hype, the coverage, the blowing way out of proportion. I think I speak for everybody when I say we're all tired of it, and we'll all be very glad when the whole thing is over later tonight.
What I am talking about is the coverage, analysis, and general mania being created over the NBA Draft. This event is being way overhyped. I mean, didn't NBA season just end with my correct prediction of the Spurs? The draft, in most sports besides baseball, signals the official start of the next season, and here we are, champagne still drying on the Spurs' jerseys, and already they have to look to next year.
I don't fault the NBA for the overhyping of their draft. I fault the media (of course). The NBA is simply holding a formal ceremony to preserve the future of the league. It's the media that is making this event bigger than any single NBA game, regular or post season. Take, for example, last night at 11:00, ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNews all had NBA draft coverage at the same time! Anybody looking for a little Baseball Tonight to see the highlights of their beloved and beleaguered home team take down the Evil Empire was out of luck (not that I know anybody like that).
So all of this analysis and speculation has led to high drama and suspense, right? Wrong. The Portland Trailblazers signed Greg Oden last night, making him the official first pick, Kevin Durant the official second pick to Seattle, and everybody else some irrelevant pick that will always be remembered for being picked after Oden and Durant.
The reason the NBA draft doesn't need this much coverage is that it is generally unspectacular. There are only two rounds, for starters. Some teams, like the Toronto Raptors, have no picks. And of all the high priced, high profile rookies, few of them actually perform their inaugural season. Take, for instance, last year's draft. High profilers Rudy Gay, Adam Morrison, and Shelden Williams all lost Rookie of the Year to Brandon Roy. Who the hell is Brandon Roy? The logic seems to say that if the top rookie can come from nowhere, then the draft and all it's coverage and analysis must be irrelevant.
I don't mean to pick on the NBA draft and it's overhyped-ness, though. Other sports have drafts that don't make sense, either, and yet still get plenty of coverage. The WNBA draft takes place about a week before play begins. Way to give the rookies a chance there, WNBA. The NHL draft took place maybe a week ago, and for the first time, two Americans went 1 and 2 overall. Quick, name either one, or what them they went to (OK, I know the real reason nobody can name the player or the team is because hockey is irrelevant. An irrelevant league, however, holds an irrelevant draft).
The MLB draft was televised for the first time this year, and quickly, we all found out why it took so long for the draft to reach the airwaves. First, players picked in this draft go through the minor leagues for so long that even die hard fans will forget about them by the time they reach the show. Second, the MLB draft could feasibly go on forever. The MLB will continue having rounds as long as one team wants to keep going. What a way to water down the talent in your league. Can you imagine the end of the draft, when Bud Selig staggers back up to the mic and says, "With the only pick in the 234,345,136,784,856th round of the 2007, now 2008 Major League Baseball draft, the Tampa Bay Devil Rays select Verne Troyer." I know, the prospect of drafting Mini-Me sounds ridiculous, but such is the MLB draft. Players don't declare for the MLB draft, so teams can take and make offers to literally anybody. Many college players and some high school players have been drafted, then returned to school after rejecting the team's offer. I, of course, am still patiently waiting by the phone, yearning for some team to draft a diamond in the rough in the very, very, very late rounds.
There is one league that does the draft right, and of course, it's the NFL (sometimes it's just unfair how much the NFL dominates other leagues). The draft, like all things NFL, is governed by a set of rules that are unflinchingly rigid. As such, the NFL draft is a spectacle in and of itself that trumps the other leagues in TV ratings during two days in April. The NFL requires players to declare for the draft, so teams know exactly who is available. The draft is held long enough after the Super Bowl that the champs have had time to celebrate, and the fans want some football. Players picked go right to work helping to improve their team, and the Rookie of the Year (a la Vince Young) is someone the fans have actually heard of. And even the late rounds are important, as superstars like Joe Montana, Jerry Rice, Shannon Sharpe, Tom Brady, and Adalius Thomas have all come from the late rounds. Every pick is important, entire franchises rest on single picks, the drama is excruciating, and it's so much fun to watch. Other leagues, take notice.
Hopefully, TV ratings for the NHL, MLB, and NBA drafts will be so low that networks will be reluctant to pick them up next year, and we can be relieved from draft mania that seemingly never ends. As for the NFL? This years draft was so popular, yet so long, that there are talks about moving the almighty first round to prime time television on Friday night. Long live the NFL.
Peace.
Showing posts with label NFL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NFL. Show all posts
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Own Up To It
You find the best blog-worthy articles on the entire internet when you don't do anything at work for the first hour...
I read an article today on ESPN.com compiling the opinions of several writers as to who they thought were the best owners in the NFL. Naturally, ESPN only surveyed 4 writers, because they did not want a sample that reflected the true feelings of the population. As such, the vote was split between two owners: New England's Bob Kraft, and $h!++$burgh's Dan Rooney. The latter, of course, did not sit well with me.
The problem I have with this simple survey is that the writers read "Who is the best owner" and voted for who they thought was the best team of the last ten years. I fail to see where either of these two owners strive above and beyond the rest. Kraft has won three Super Bowls recently, but how much of an impact has he really made? All he does is sign the players his coaches and scouts tell him to, and wait for Tom Brady to make another daring and dramatic fourth quarter comeback. Kraft gets the glory and gets to put the Lombardi Trophy on his mantle, but his role in the whole ordeal is truly minor.
Rooney somehow made the list, and he does significantly less than Kraft. Rooney doesn't even make the effort to retain the players they do have. Rooney has let players like Kevin Greene, Kendrell Bell, Jason Gildon, Kordell Stewart, Plaxico Burress, Joey Porter, and Keydrick Vincent depart via free agency because he's too cheap to resign them. Rooney abuses a player until it's time to reward the player for the job they have done, then tosses them out into the street like it didn't even matter. If anything, Rooney has done more to hinder his team than to help them.
Naturally, when 30 out of 32 owners are left out of the discussion, the fans will speak up on their behalf. The message boards were alive with fans demanding to know why Pat Bowlen (Broncos), Jerry Jones (Cowboys), and even Dan Snyder (some delusional nut thought the 'Skins owner was worthy) weren't even included in the discussion. And of course, jokesters were out in full force in mock support of the Ford Family (Lions), Al Davis (Raiders), and the Bidwell Family (Cardinals). One obviously knowledgeable poster even mentioned a Mr. Steve Bisciotti as an up-and-comer to watch.
I know what you're all expecting. You're all expecting me to rant about how Steve deserved to be on the list, and how he's the best owner, and that it's wrong that he's not on there. To be sure, Steve does deserve it, but he's still so young and so fresh as an owner that he should pay his dues before being mentioned as the best owner in the league. That day will come, but it's not here yet.
Instead, I would like to make a case for the owner that should've been #1 with a bullet. Drumroll please.... the best owner in football is.... the owners of the Green Bay Packers. Don't know who it is? Go to Green Bay and ask anybody there, and they will probably tell you that they own the team. And they wouldn't be lying. Green Bay is the only professional sports franchise in the country that is actually owned by the fans. And it's a glorious idea.
Think about it. The city owns the team, so the team can't relocate. The citizens of the city have a genuine vested interest in the team, because they own it. Proceeds from merchandise and tickets and vendor sales all go back to the owners, which is the city. The citizens get to help make the decisions, because they own part of the team. I could go on and on, because this is clearly the best way to own and operate a franchise.
I wish other cities had the gull to run a team like Green Bay does. Truth be told, it's probably the only way the Packers can be run, because they reside in the smallest market of any team. One person can't front enough money to run the franchise on his/her own and keep the team in Green Bay, so why not just draw from the wells of the taxpayers. If Baltimore owned the Ravens, I wouldn't mind paying taxes so much, because I could see the tax dollars being put to a legitimate, good use (OK, I know I barely pay taxes, and I don't technically live in the city, but you get my point).
I know it's just idealistic thinking, and it would never fully happen, but it would be a pretty cool day if all cities owned and operated their sports franchises. People would be so passionate about their teams and players, and care so much more about how things are run and who is playing and coaching. It would be like every pro franchise had the same type of following that a college team does. There are no fans more passionate than college fans, because the team they root for represents them directly. Now everybody take a second and think how great it would be if just one particular, Mid-Atlantic based baseball team were actually owned and operated by the city in which it resides. What a great day that would be.
Peace.
I read an article today on ESPN.com compiling the opinions of several writers as to who they thought were the best owners in the NFL. Naturally, ESPN only surveyed 4 writers, because they did not want a sample that reflected the true feelings of the population. As such, the vote was split between two owners: New England's Bob Kraft, and $h!++$burgh's Dan Rooney. The latter, of course, did not sit well with me.
The problem I have with this simple survey is that the writers read "Who is the best owner" and voted for who they thought was the best team of the last ten years. I fail to see where either of these two owners strive above and beyond the rest. Kraft has won three Super Bowls recently, but how much of an impact has he really made? All he does is sign the players his coaches and scouts tell him to, and wait for Tom Brady to make another daring and dramatic fourth quarter comeback. Kraft gets the glory and gets to put the Lombardi Trophy on his mantle, but his role in the whole ordeal is truly minor.
Rooney somehow made the list, and he does significantly less than Kraft. Rooney doesn't even make the effort to retain the players they do have. Rooney has let players like Kevin Greene, Kendrell Bell, Jason Gildon, Kordell Stewart, Plaxico Burress, Joey Porter, and Keydrick Vincent depart via free agency because he's too cheap to resign them. Rooney abuses a player until it's time to reward the player for the job they have done, then tosses them out into the street like it didn't even matter. If anything, Rooney has done more to hinder his team than to help them.
Naturally, when 30 out of 32 owners are left out of the discussion, the fans will speak up on their behalf. The message boards were alive with fans demanding to know why Pat Bowlen (Broncos), Jerry Jones (Cowboys), and even Dan Snyder (some delusional nut thought the 'Skins owner was worthy) weren't even included in the discussion. And of course, jokesters were out in full force in mock support of the Ford Family (Lions), Al Davis (Raiders), and the Bidwell Family (Cardinals). One obviously knowledgeable poster even mentioned a Mr. Steve Bisciotti as an up-and-comer to watch.
I know what you're all expecting. You're all expecting me to rant about how Steve deserved to be on the list, and how he's the best owner, and that it's wrong that he's not on there. To be sure, Steve does deserve it, but he's still so young and so fresh as an owner that he should pay his dues before being mentioned as the best owner in the league. That day will come, but it's not here yet.
Instead, I would like to make a case for the owner that should've been #1 with a bullet. Drumroll please.... the best owner in football is.... the owners of the Green Bay Packers. Don't know who it is? Go to Green Bay and ask anybody there, and they will probably tell you that they own the team. And they wouldn't be lying. Green Bay is the only professional sports franchise in the country that is actually owned by the fans. And it's a glorious idea.
Think about it. The city owns the team, so the team can't relocate. The citizens of the city have a genuine vested interest in the team, because they own it. Proceeds from merchandise and tickets and vendor sales all go back to the owners, which is the city. The citizens get to help make the decisions, because they own part of the team. I could go on and on, because this is clearly the best way to own and operate a franchise.
I wish other cities had the gull to run a team like Green Bay does. Truth be told, it's probably the only way the Packers can be run, because they reside in the smallest market of any team. One person can't front enough money to run the franchise on his/her own and keep the team in Green Bay, so why not just draw from the wells of the taxpayers. If Baltimore owned the Ravens, I wouldn't mind paying taxes so much, because I could see the tax dollars being put to a legitimate, good use (OK, I know I barely pay taxes, and I don't technically live in the city, but you get my point).
I know it's just idealistic thinking, and it would never fully happen, but it would be a pretty cool day if all cities owned and operated their sports franchises. People would be so passionate about their teams and players, and care so much more about how things are run and who is playing and coaching. It would be like every pro franchise had the same type of following that a college team does. There are no fans more passionate than college fans, because the team they root for represents them directly. Now everybody take a second and think how great it would be if just one particular, Mid-Atlantic based baseball team were actually owned and operated by the city in which it resides. What a great day that would be.
Peace.
Thursday, June 7, 2007
"So Fit, It's Scary"
July is quickly approaching kids, and you know what that means.... FOOTBALL SEASON!!!...
The quote that serves as the title for this post is a quote by Ray Lewis to describe himself after tweaking his offseason workout regimen. In order to lose what little body fat he still had left, Ray added kickboxing, wrestling, and swimming to his routine (I'd hate to have been the guy who had to wrestle Ray Lewis). As a result, Lewis is as lean and as fit as he has ever been in his 11 year playing career. To reiterate, a man who twice won defensive MVP, a Super Bowl MVP, and an 8 time Pro Bowler is in the best shape of his life. That, my friends, might be the definition of scary.
Unfortunately, the world we live in is corrupt, and people can no longer accept accomplishments as just the result of hard work and a passion for your job. I blame this corruption on the over-exposure of obvious cheaters like Barry Bonds. The issue is that ESPN.com posted the story about Ray losing weight and getting fit on it's website. The problem with ESPN.com is that it treats every article like a blog, and allows fans/ haters to post comments to the article, regardless of who wrote it (it was an Associated Press article, for the record). After reading that Ray is now more fit than ever, many of those haters started accusing him of using steroids.
Let me start out by saying that anybody accusing Ray Lewis of substance abuse is stupid and should really be deported. Accusing Ray Lewis of using steroids is like accusing me of working too hard at work (I'm sitting in my cubicle writing a blog post). Ray Lewis is the definition of hard work. He gets to work early, he stays late, and he barely stops during the day. He breaks down tape, practices plays, studies his playbook, breaks down more tape, practices some more, and adds fuel to his considerable fire that he will ultimately unleash on some unsuspecting punk on Sunday. Ray Lewis is a self- made man, who grew up without a father, and helped to raise his siblings just to help his mother out. Everything Ray Lewis has today is a result of the hard work and dedication he has shown throughout his life. He even went back to school during his playing career to finish his degree.
To accuse Ray Lewis of substance abuse just because he got leaner also shows a misunderstanding of what steroids actually do. The last time I checked, steroids build unhealthy amounts of muscle mass. Barry Bonds looked just a little bit bigger than me 10 years ago. Today, at the ripe old age of 42, he looks like the Hulk, and his head is bigger than most watermelons. Ray Lewis, conversely, got leaner, which means smaller. To those accusing him of using, let me restate that: He got smaller. His muscle mass did not grow, and his body fat went down. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it's very possible that the kickboxing, wrestling, and swimming could have contributed to the slimming of his body.
The haters of Ray Lewis need to unite against him for one simple reason: If they unite, there's a slim, slim, slim chance they may be able to stop him. A leaner Ray Lewis will be able to run faster, but it's still Ray Lewis, so when he hits you, there's a 30% you will die. From what I could tell, most of the haters came from two distinct and unsurprising groups: AFC North rivals (which I respect, since you have to hate your rivals), and AFC contenders. To the North rivals, I say good luck, because the Ravens are even hungrier than they were last year, and Ray is just the tip of the iceberg.
To the AFC Contenders (Colts, Pats, Chargers), I say you're all cowards. If you are all as good as you think you are, why does it matter if Ray Lewis has reached all new levels of scary? If the Colts offense "can't be stopped" (0 TDs last year against the Ravens), or the Chargers are the "most balanced team in football" (lost to the Ravens), or the Pats made the "best off season moves" (enjoy your headcase WR), then why are the Ravens even on the radar? The answer is the others are scared. They've always been scared of us, because they know defense wins championships. Now the face of that defense is in such good shape, even he thinks it's scary.
The NFL is in for a big shock this year. Ray Lewis is back, and when he gets loose and starts running roughshod all over the opposing offense, it's not going to be a pretty sight, especially for all you haters out there.
Peace.
The quote that serves as the title for this post is a quote by Ray Lewis to describe himself after tweaking his offseason workout regimen. In order to lose what little body fat he still had left, Ray added kickboxing, wrestling, and swimming to his routine (I'd hate to have been the guy who had to wrestle Ray Lewis). As a result, Lewis is as lean and as fit as he has ever been in his 11 year playing career. To reiterate, a man who twice won defensive MVP, a Super Bowl MVP, and an 8 time Pro Bowler is in the best shape of his life. That, my friends, might be the definition of scary.
Unfortunately, the world we live in is corrupt, and people can no longer accept accomplishments as just the result of hard work and a passion for your job. I blame this corruption on the over-exposure of obvious cheaters like Barry Bonds. The issue is that ESPN.com posted the story about Ray losing weight and getting fit on it's website. The problem with ESPN.com is that it treats every article like a blog, and allows fans/ haters to post comments to the article, regardless of who wrote it (it was an Associated Press article, for the record). After reading that Ray is now more fit than ever, many of those haters started accusing him of using steroids.
Let me start out by saying that anybody accusing Ray Lewis of substance abuse is stupid and should really be deported. Accusing Ray Lewis of using steroids is like accusing me of working too hard at work (I'm sitting in my cubicle writing a blog post). Ray Lewis is the definition of hard work. He gets to work early, he stays late, and he barely stops during the day. He breaks down tape, practices plays, studies his playbook, breaks down more tape, practices some more, and adds fuel to his considerable fire that he will ultimately unleash on some unsuspecting punk on Sunday. Ray Lewis is a self- made man, who grew up without a father, and helped to raise his siblings just to help his mother out. Everything Ray Lewis has today is a result of the hard work and dedication he has shown throughout his life. He even went back to school during his playing career to finish his degree.
To accuse Ray Lewis of substance abuse just because he got leaner also shows a misunderstanding of what steroids actually do. The last time I checked, steroids build unhealthy amounts of muscle mass. Barry Bonds looked just a little bit bigger than me 10 years ago. Today, at the ripe old age of 42, he looks like the Hulk, and his head is bigger than most watermelons. Ray Lewis, conversely, got leaner, which means smaller. To those accusing him of using, let me restate that: He got smaller. His muscle mass did not grow, and his body fat went down. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it's very possible that the kickboxing, wrestling, and swimming could have contributed to the slimming of his body.
The haters of Ray Lewis need to unite against him for one simple reason: If they unite, there's a slim, slim, slim chance they may be able to stop him. A leaner Ray Lewis will be able to run faster, but it's still Ray Lewis, so when he hits you, there's a 30% you will die. From what I could tell, most of the haters came from two distinct and unsurprising groups: AFC North rivals (which I respect, since you have to hate your rivals), and AFC contenders. To the North rivals, I say good luck, because the Ravens are even hungrier than they were last year, and Ray is just the tip of the iceberg.
To the AFC Contenders (Colts, Pats, Chargers), I say you're all cowards. If you are all as good as you think you are, why does it matter if Ray Lewis has reached all new levels of scary? If the Colts offense "can't be stopped" (0 TDs last year against the Ravens), or the Chargers are the "most balanced team in football" (lost to the Ravens), or the Pats made the "best off season moves" (enjoy your headcase WR), then why are the Ravens even on the radar? The answer is the others are scared. They've always been scared of us, because they know defense wins championships. Now the face of that defense is in such good shape, even he thinks it's scary.
The NFL is in for a big shock this year. Ray Lewis is back, and when he gets loose and starts running roughshod all over the opposing offense, it's not going to be a pretty sight, especially for all you haters out there.
Peace.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Bloggin' From Work (Shhhh!)
I feel like I'm stealing company time by blogging from work, but they aren't keeping me busy, so it's their fault. I'm also on my lunch break...
It was announced today that more disillusioned morons with money want to try and test their mettle against the NFL. An investment banker, a VP at Google, and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban have banded together to create an upstart United Football League. The idea? Actually compete with the NFL (a moment will be given to squelch any laughter).
My question for these fellows is why? Why even bother to try and compete with the NFL? It's not possible. It's not even plausible. It's certainly not probable. There are no more p-words to describe the money that will be lost in this endeavor. There are currently 4 major sports in the U.S (football, basketball, baseball, and either hockey or NASCAR, depending on if you live in the North or South). There are, by my count, 7 legitimate (read "air on ESPN") professional sports leagues (the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NASCAR, MLS, MLL [lacrosse, people]). There's no more room for the UFL on ESPN, let alone in the landscape of American sports. And if you are crazy enough to start some upstart league, why go after the NFL, the king, the shah, the sultan, the Grand Poobah of all American sports?
Baseball and basketball are the NFL's closest competitors, and trust me, close is a very loose term. The NFL sold out every game in the first 6 or 7 weeks of the season last year. Even Arizona was enjoying sellouts for a while. Most baseball teams can't even sell out on opening day, and some teams have tickets left over during the playoffs. Basketball fares slightly better because it has fewer games and teams, but it still can't touch the NFL. The NFL steamrolls these leagues every year in TV ratings, merchandise sales, and the all important ticket sales. The most watched sporting event any year? Not the World Series. Not the NBA Finals. It's always the Super Bowl. Even when two teams who nobody cares about are in it, people still watch just to complain that the right teams didn't make it. So if people already care more about the NFL than the MLB and NBA, my next question becomes who is going to watch the UFL Bowl?
The fact that they are challenging the NFL is not even the most fatal flaw that the three investors are making in this costly endeavor. The worst idea they have had so far is that all their franchises will be based in cities without NFL teams. I give them an A for creativity, but an E for results. Going by their logic, they will have Los Angeles, and very little else. If a city does not have an NFL franchise, it is for good reason: the NFL does not want a franchise there (except LA, but they don't support their teams anyway). The NFL has the big markets covered: New York, New England, Washington, Bay Area California, Miami, Green Bay (just kidding). That leaves the UFL with what? LA. Mark Cuban wants to put a franchise in Las Vegas, and will receive no complaint from the NFL. The remaining cities have yet to be announced, but they must be somewhere along the lines of Memphis, Birmingham, Orlando, Portland, San Antonio, and Oklahoma City. These cities are definitely deserving of franchises, but also have NFL teams nearby to crush any UFL competition. Fans wouldn't abandon the Titans or Dolphins or Cowboys or Seahawks to root for lesser caliber teams in a lesser caliber league.
That brings me to my next point: think about who is going to play in this league. It will be full of NFL castoffs, college superstars who couldn't cut it in the real league, and average schmucks who want one last shot at glory. Who wants to watch that? That'll be like watching a high school reunion game or an old timers game. It won't be fast. It won't be fun. There will be very little scoring, and almost zero passing or defense. The players that end up in the UFL also have to be rejected from the mildly successful Arena League, which means they are truly of poor caliber. To recap, it's going to be crappy football played in cities that can't support teams by players who really should have other jobs. Well, let me set my Tivo (shut up, I know I don't have a Tivo).
Other people have challenged the NFL before. When was the last time anybody spoke about the World Football League, the USFL, or the XFL? All of these leagues folded in less than four years, and they had franchises in major markets. The UFL is making an unnecessary attempt to topple a giant that can't be toppled, using tactics that won't work, in cities where it won't happen. The UFL is slated to start play in 2008. Depending on which month it starts, I predict it will be in the annals of bad ideas by late 2008 or early 2009. I just thank God that Art Modell moved the Browns to Baltimore, and we don't have the possibility of getting stuck with a UFL team.
Peace.
It was announced today that more disillusioned morons with money want to try and test their mettle against the NFL. An investment banker, a VP at Google, and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban have banded together to create an upstart United Football League. The idea? Actually compete with the NFL (a moment will be given to squelch any laughter).
My question for these fellows is why? Why even bother to try and compete with the NFL? It's not possible. It's not even plausible. It's certainly not probable. There are no more p-words to describe the money that will be lost in this endeavor. There are currently 4 major sports in the U.S (football, basketball, baseball, and either hockey or NASCAR, depending on if you live in the North or South). There are, by my count, 7 legitimate (read "air on ESPN") professional sports leagues (the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NASCAR, MLS, MLL [lacrosse, people]). There's no more room for the UFL on ESPN, let alone in the landscape of American sports. And if you are crazy enough to start some upstart league, why go after the NFL, the king, the shah, the sultan, the Grand Poobah of all American sports?
Baseball and basketball are the NFL's closest competitors, and trust me, close is a very loose term. The NFL sold out every game in the first 6 or 7 weeks of the season last year. Even Arizona was enjoying sellouts for a while. Most baseball teams can't even sell out on opening day, and some teams have tickets left over during the playoffs. Basketball fares slightly better because it has fewer games and teams, but it still can't touch the NFL. The NFL steamrolls these leagues every year in TV ratings, merchandise sales, and the all important ticket sales. The most watched sporting event any year? Not the World Series. Not the NBA Finals. It's always the Super Bowl. Even when two teams who nobody cares about are in it, people still watch just to complain that the right teams didn't make it. So if people already care more about the NFL than the MLB and NBA, my next question becomes who is going to watch the UFL Bowl?
The fact that they are challenging the NFL is not even the most fatal flaw that the three investors are making in this costly endeavor. The worst idea they have had so far is that all their franchises will be based in cities without NFL teams. I give them an A for creativity, but an E for results. Going by their logic, they will have Los Angeles, and very little else. If a city does not have an NFL franchise, it is for good reason: the NFL does not want a franchise there (except LA, but they don't support their teams anyway). The NFL has the big markets covered: New York, New England, Washington, Bay Area California, Miami, Green Bay (just kidding). That leaves the UFL with what? LA. Mark Cuban wants to put a franchise in Las Vegas, and will receive no complaint from the NFL. The remaining cities have yet to be announced, but they must be somewhere along the lines of Memphis, Birmingham, Orlando, Portland, San Antonio, and Oklahoma City. These cities are definitely deserving of franchises, but also have NFL teams nearby to crush any UFL competition. Fans wouldn't abandon the Titans or Dolphins or Cowboys or Seahawks to root for lesser caliber teams in a lesser caliber league.
That brings me to my next point: think about who is going to play in this league. It will be full of NFL castoffs, college superstars who couldn't cut it in the real league, and average schmucks who want one last shot at glory. Who wants to watch that? That'll be like watching a high school reunion game or an old timers game. It won't be fast. It won't be fun. There will be very little scoring, and almost zero passing or defense. The players that end up in the UFL also have to be rejected from the mildly successful Arena League, which means they are truly of poor caliber. To recap, it's going to be crappy football played in cities that can't support teams by players who really should have other jobs. Well, let me set my Tivo (shut up, I know I don't have a Tivo).
Other people have challenged the NFL before. When was the last time anybody spoke about the World Football League, the USFL, or the XFL? All of these leagues folded in less than four years, and they had franchises in major markets. The UFL is making an unnecessary attempt to topple a giant that can't be toppled, using tactics that won't work, in cities where it won't happen. The UFL is slated to start play in 2008. Depending on which month it starts, I predict it will be in the annals of bad ideas by late 2008 or early 2009. I just thank God that Art Modell moved the Browns to Baltimore, and we don't have the possibility of getting stuck with a UFL team.
Peace.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Thank You, Nashville
Today's post comes directly from my travels. It is also brought to you by Todd Heap and the Campbell's Chunky Soup Curse, which has already reared it's ugly head in the Charm City via the Music City...
One year after the Titans and the State of Tennessee screwed him over by locking him out, Steve McNair was sent another stern message that he is not wanted in Nashville: he was arrested for DUI, while sitting in the passenger seat. This is due to a law in Tennessee that permits the police to arrest the owner of the vehicle for someone driving drunk in their car. So I'll reiterate: Steve McNair was arrested for Driving under the influence when he wasn't driving!
First things first, let's clear up this law. Essentially it acts as a way to prevent people from enabling to drive drunk. The law is that if the owner of vehicle allows another person to drive their vehicle while under the influence, then the owner is liable for the DUI as well. It seems like a good law, because it prevents people from enabling others to drive drunk by holding them accountable. Unfortunately, it came back and bit us in the ass.
McNair was allowing his brother-in-law to drive the vehicle, and the moron apparently went too fast or too reckless and drew the ire of the police (you have to hate an idiot brother-in-law). The brother-in-law then failed a field sobriety test, and when it was discovered that the vehicle belonged to McNair, they were both arrested and charged with DUI. They were both released this morning, just in time for everyone to wake up and hear the great news.
OK, I understand where both were in the wrong. McNair allowed his brother-in-law to drive the vehicle under the influence (after two drinks... lightweight), which is against the law in Nashville. The brother-in-law was in the wrong for driving unsafely while apparently under the influence. But it just seems weird to charge McNair for DUI, and he wasn't D. They should charge him with Enabling, or Allowance, or Being a Passenger Under the Influence. DUI just paints a horrible picture of what actually happened.
It's now in the NFL's hands to figure out if this merits any punishment. I am firmly of the camp that it should not, because, quoth McNair, "I was trying to act responsibly. I have to go through the court process now, and I understand that". McNair knows he technically broke the law, but it was because he was most likely more drunk than his brother-in-law. He figured it would be better to let his less drunk brother-in-law drive, which in theory sets a good example. He is saying "Let other people drive when you're drunk"; he just needs to add a caveat at the end: just make sure they're not drunk too.
The story was a real big deal in Baltimore, I'm sure, but it was also a big deal down here in Nashville. When a service guy at a Dodge dealership in Nashville (exceptionally long story) noticed my and my party's Ravens apparel, he said he couldn't believe McNair was arrested, but also thought it was absurd to charge him with DUI. Nashvillians (Nashvillites? Nashvillains? Nashtrash?) still love McNair for all the great things he did for the Titans and the city, but also realize that he is not above the fundamentally sound albeit slightly odd law.
The NFL knows McNair is a great guy and was not trying to intentionally hurt himself or anybody else. This story seems bigger than it really is, however, in the wake of Josh Hancock's death. In the week when baseball teams are taking alcohol out of their locker rooms in an attempt to curb drinking and driving, McNair really could not have had worse timing. All in all, I blame it on Todd Heap and his Soup friends.
Peace.
One year after the Titans and the State of Tennessee screwed him over by locking him out, Steve McNair was sent another stern message that he is not wanted in Nashville: he was arrested for DUI, while sitting in the passenger seat. This is due to a law in Tennessee that permits the police to arrest the owner of the vehicle for someone driving drunk in their car. So I'll reiterate: Steve McNair was arrested for Driving under the influence when he wasn't driving!
First things first, let's clear up this law. Essentially it acts as a way to prevent people from enabling to drive drunk. The law is that if the owner of vehicle allows another person to drive their vehicle while under the influence, then the owner is liable for the DUI as well. It seems like a good law, because it prevents people from enabling others to drive drunk by holding them accountable. Unfortunately, it came back and bit us in the ass.
McNair was allowing his brother-in-law to drive the vehicle, and the moron apparently went too fast or too reckless and drew the ire of the police (you have to hate an idiot brother-in-law). The brother-in-law then failed a field sobriety test, and when it was discovered that the vehicle belonged to McNair, they were both arrested and charged with DUI. They were both released this morning, just in time for everyone to wake up and hear the great news.
OK, I understand where both were in the wrong. McNair allowed his brother-in-law to drive the vehicle under the influence (after two drinks... lightweight), which is against the law in Nashville. The brother-in-law was in the wrong for driving unsafely while apparently under the influence. But it just seems weird to charge McNair for DUI, and he wasn't D. They should charge him with Enabling, or Allowance, or Being a Passenger Under the Influence. DUI just paints a horrible picture of what actually happened.
It's now in the NFL's hands to figure out if this merits any punishment. I am firmly of the camp that it should not, because, quoth McNair, "I was trying to act responsibly. I have to go through the court process now, and I understand that". McNair knows he technically broke the law, but it was because he was most likely more drunk than his brother-in-law. He figured it would be better to let his less drunk brother-in-law drive, which in theory sets a good example. He is saying "Let other people drive when you're drunk"; he just needs to add a caveat at the end: just make sure they're not drunk too.
The story was a real big deal in Baltimore, I'm sure, but it was also a big deal down here in Nashville. When a service guy at a Dodge dealership in Nashville (exceptionally long story) noticed my and my party's Ravens apparel, he said he couldn't believe McNair was arrested, but also thought it was absurd to charge him with DUI. Nashvillians (Nashvillites? Nashvillains? Nashtrash?) still love McNair for all the great things he did for the Titans and the city, but also realize that he is not above the fundamentally sound albeit slightly odd law.
The NFL knows McNair is a great guy and was not trying to intentionally hurt himself or anybody else. This story seems bigger than it really is, however, in the wake of Josh Hancock's death. In the week when baseball teams are taking alcohol out of their locker rooms in an attempt to curb drinking and driving, McNair really could not have had worse timing. All in all, I blame it on Todd Heap and his Soup friends.
Peace.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Why, Todd, Why?
You can preach and preach, but sometimes the people nearest to you just do not listen...
The marketing gurus at Campbell's announced who will be carrying the cursed banner of Chunky Soup this year. In an effort to really get the name out there this year, the fine folks at Campbell's decided to lower the hammer on an unprecedented eight players this year! Unfortunately, one of the unlucky is someone who needs no help being cursed.
The Unlucky Eight are: LaDainian Tomlinson, Jonathan Vilma, Larry Johnson, Maurice Jones-Drew, Demarcus Ware, Devin Hester, Matt Hasselbeck (some people never learn), and Todd Heap. While the rest can go and get injured and be unlucky all they want, I make this lone request of the football gods: leave the Heap alone. For the love of all things holy, leave the Heap alone.
The seven players who do not don the purple and black can do however they please, because they all represent obstacles that just stand in the way of the Ravens reaching the pinnacle of football. The issue I have with using eight players in a cursed ad campaign is the impact it has on the fantasy footballers of America. LT, LJ, Jones-Drew, and even Hasselbeck all carry some weight when it comes to the only game America loves more than football. LT and LJ are sure to be top 5 picks in every draft, and Jones-Drew will most likely be taken in the late first or second round rounds of most drafts. All of these players now have huge targets on their backs, and join Vince Young as people to be avoided in fantasy drafts.
But how? How do we avoid five premier offensive players in football just because of some goofy curse? The answer is, we can't. I am firmly of the belief that Campbell's is overloading the curse in an attempt to break it. By using eight players, Campbell's is trying to guarantee itself that at least one will escape the season unscathed. They have used a multitude of diverse players in the past, but never all in the same year. Past Soup sponsors have included Donovan McNabb (Mr. Curse himself, falling victim to Campbell's, Madden, and Super Bowl Loser), Reggie White late in his career, John Elway, Terrell Davis, Jerome Bettis, Brian Urlacher, and the official spokesperson of motorcycle safety, Ben Worthlessberger. All of these players experienced unusual amounts of hardship in the year they ate the soup. It's not coincidence, but it might be ending.
This is an unprecedented attempt at breaking a curse. Nobody has ever thought to overload it in an attempt to drown it. The Red Sox beat their curse the only way they know how: get it so overexposed in the media that even the baseball gods couldn't take it anymore. But Campbell's is looking to be a pioneer in curse breaking. They're going to face the demon head on and try to beat it. If this works, maybe next year the Madden cover will feature a group photo of every player in the NFL.
All that aside, what the hell are you thinking, Todd Heap? Do you not hurt your ankle bad enough each year already? Every week you look at the injury report, and it's "Todd Heap, Questionable, Ankle". We don't need more of that, and tempting fate has never been the Ravens' forte. It just seems to me that the Ravens were better suited to fly low under the radar this year, and now Heap has gone and blown that, and for what? Free Soup? Campbell's Chunky isn't even that good. Soup should be smooth and soothing, not chunky. Chunky soup is just a fancy name for stew. If Todd Heap was a faithful reader and knew that Kurt does in fact know best, he would have read the end of the very first post: Here's hoping that the Ravens are eating Progresso this year. So much for that. Thanks a lot, Todd.
Peace.
The marketing gurus at Campbell's announced who will be carrying the cursed banner of Chunky Soup this year. In an effort to really get the name out there this year, the fine folks at Campbell's decided to lower the hammer on an unprecedented eight players this year! Unfortunately, one of the unlucky is someone who needs no help being cursed.
The Unlucky Eight are: LaDainian Tomlinson, Jonathan Vilma, Larry Johnson, Maurice Jones-Drew, Demarcus Ware, Devin Hester, Matt Hasselbeck (some people never learn), and Todd Heap. While the rest can go and get injured and be unlucky all they want, I make this lone request of the football gods: leave the Heap alone. For the love of all things holy, leave the Heap alone.
The seven players who do not don the purple and black can do however they please, because they all represent obstacles that just stand in the way of the Ravens reaching the pinnacle of football. The issue I have with using eight players in a cursed ad campaign is the impact it has on the fantasy footballers of America. LT, LJ, Jones-Drew, and even Hasselbeck all carry some weight when it comes to the only game America loves more than football. LT and LJ are sure to be top 5 picks in every draft, and Jones-Drew will most likely be taken in the late first or second round rounds of most drafts. All of these players now have huge targets on their backs, and join Vince Young as people to be avoided in fantasy drafts.
But how? How do we avoid five premier offensive players in football just because of some goofy curse? The answer is, we can't. I am firmly of the belief that Campbell's is overloading the curse in an attempt to break it. By using eight players, Campbell's is trying to guarantee itself that at least one will escape the season unscathed. They have used a multitude of diverse players in the past, but never all in the same year. Past Soup sponsors have included Donovan McNabb (Mr. Curse himself, falling victim to Campbell's, Madden, and Super Bowl Loser), Reggie White late in his career, John Elway, Terrell Davis, Jerome Bettis, Brian Urlacher, and the official spokesperson of motorcycle safety, Ben Worthlessberger. All of these players experienced unusual amounts of hardship in the year they ate the soup. It's not coincidence, but it might be ending.
This is an unprecedented attempt at breaking a curse. Nobody has ever thought to overload it in an attempt to drown it. The Red Sox beat their curse the only way they know how: get it so overexposed in the media that even the baseball gods couldn't take it anymore. But Campbell's is looking to be a pioneer in curse breaking. They're going to face the demon head on and try to beat it. If this works, maybe next year the Madden cover will feature a group photo of every player in the NFL.
All that aside, what the hell are you thinking, Todd Heap? Do you not hurt your ankle bad enough each year already? Every week you look at the injury report, and it's "Todd Heap, Questionable, Ankle". We don't need more of that, and tempting fate has never been the Ravens' forte. It just seems to me that the Ravens were better suited to fly low under the radar this year, and now Heap has gone and blown that, and for what? Free Soup? Campbell's Chunky isn't even that good. Soup should be smooth and soothing, not chunky. Chunky soup is just a fancy name for stew. If Todd Heap was a faithful reader and knew that Kurt does in fact know best, he would have read the end of the very first post: Here's hoping that the Ravens are eating Progresso this year. So much for that. Thanks a lot, Todd.
Peace.
Friday, May 4, 2007
Dog Gone It
Sorry for depriving my loyal readers of a post yesterday, but give me a break; most of my earthly possessions were in boxes, and I was driving three hours to relocate for the summer. Even though I was resting, stupidity was not...
The Humane Society of the United States has sent a letter to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, asking that any players found guilty of being involved in illegal dog fighting rings be permanently banned from the NFL. One prominent target is Falcon's QB Michael Vick.
For those who don't know what could have prompted the letter, allow me to tell the story. Police were conducting a drug raid last week in Vick's native Virginia. They stumble into one house, and find all the essentials of a dog fighting ring: veterinary supplies, treadmills for training, blood on the carpets, tools to pry apart jaws, and a big sign that said "World Championship Dog Fights" (I made up the last one). Upon further review, it was found that the owner of the house is none other than Michael Vick.
Let me make it clear that I am no apologist for Michael Vick. He gets into many minor scuffles with police, and always plays it out like he is the victim. He is not Pacman Jones, but he's not Tom Brady either. In this case, however, Vick just may be the Vick-tim. It turns out that in his generosity early in his career, Vick bought a house for some family members, and these family members have been abusing the generosity by running the illegal dog fighting ring without Vick's knowledge. For that, I can forgive Vick, because he cannot control his family.
What irks me about this story is the blatant use of the NFL by the Humane Society of the US. The HSUS (official abbreviation) is using this story, couple with the NFL's crackdown on player conduct, to promote its agenda. I have no problem with the agenda, because it is a good one; I have a problem with the way the group is going about promoting it's agenda. Partnering with the NFL is a great idea. It works for the United Way, and many players have their own individually operated charities. But making the NFL seem like the bad guys for not banning players who may be involved in illegal animal activity is not the way to get the NFL on your good side. The HSUS has seemingly offered the NFL an ultimatum that says ban this player (it's just Vick; it's an isolated incident) or we will slander the NFL for being anti-animal rights.
Wayne Pacelle, the CEO of HSUS, was quoted in the letter as saying "We believe that the current situation involving Michael Vick is indicative of a larger subculture within the NFL of dog fighting and other forms of violence against animals." I don't see how that can be the case, seeing as this is the first time any player has been connected with any forms of animal cruelty. Players have been connected to drug rings, prostitution rings, gangs, murders, domestic violence, gambling, and wearing a hat without a license, but this is the first time a player has been connected with an animal cruelty ring. It seems that the HSUS wants to promote its good message, but is attacking the NFL in order to do it, instead of asking for help. It seems that the NFL will deny the request just to prove that it cannot be bullied, and that could send the wrong public message.
Proof of HSUS's blatant abuse of the NFL's high profile can be found later in the letter. Pacelle is again quoted as saying "We hope you will collaborate with The HSUS to combat animal cruelty and animal fighting in order to send a clear message to the public that the NFL does indeed intend to hold its players to the highest standards". Like I said, I believe the NFL and HSUS should become partners, because it's a great opportunity for both organizations to show support for the animal world. I have a problem, however, with HSUS trying to write the new rules regarding player conduct, and it's bullying attempt to make the NFL comply. The NFL cannot be bullied, simply because it is too powerful.
Realistically, Michael Vick will not be banned from the NFL for being associated with this ring. At most, he would get the same four game suspension that Chris Henry received. HSUS has the right idea about including cruelty to animals in the player conduct policy, just the wrong way to get the job done. More rational requests and less bullying tactics could one day lead to ad campaigns where NFL players are hugging all sorts of four legged friends.
Peace.
Droppin' El Whammo: Cleveland Indians
The Humane Society of the United States has sent a letter to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, asking that any players found guilty of being involved in illegal dog fighting rings be permanently banned from the NFL. One prominent target is Falcon's QB Michael Vick.
For those who don't know what could have prompted the letter, allow me to tell the story. Police were conducting a drug raid last week in Vick's native Virginia. They stumble into one house, and find all the essentials of a dog fighting ring: veterinary supplies, treadmills for training, blood on the carpets, tools to pry apart jaws, and a big sign that said "World Championship Dog Fights" (I made up the last one). Upon further review, it was found that the owner of the house is none other than Michael Vick.
Let me make it clear that I am no apologist for Michael Vick. He gets into many minor scuffles with police, and always plays it out like he is the victim. He is not Pacman Jones, but he's not Tom Brady either. In this case, however, Vick just may be the Vick-tim. It turns out that in his generosity early in his career, Vick bought a house for some family members, and these family members have been abusing the generosity by running the illegal dog fighting ring without Vick's knowledge. For that, I can forgive Vick, because he cannot control his family.
What irks me about this story is the blatant use of the NFL by the Humane Society of the US. The HSUS (official abbreviation) is using this story, couple with the NFL's crackdown on player conduct, to promote its agenda. I have no problem with the agenda, because it is a good one; I have a problem with the way the group is going about promoting it's agenda. Partnering with the NFL is a great idea. It works for the United Way, and many players have their own individually operated charities. But making the NFL seem like the bad guys for not banning players who may be involved in illegal animal activity is not the way to get the NFL on your good side. The HSUS has seemingly offered the NFL an ultimatum that says ban this player (it's just Vick; it's an isolated incident) or we will slander the NFL for being anti-animal rights.
Wayne Pacelle, the CEO of HSUS, was quoted in the letter as saying "We believe that the current situation involving Michael Vick is indicative of a larger subculture within the NFL of dog fighting and other forms of violence against animals." I don't see how that can be the case, seeing as this is the first time any player has been connected with any forms of animal cruelty. Players have been connected to drug rings, prostitution rings, gangs, murders, domestic violence, gambling, and wearing a hat without a license, but this is the first time a player has been connected with an animal cruelty ring. It seems that the HSUS wants to promote its good message, but is attacking the NFL in order to do it, instead of asking for help. It seems that the NFL will deny the request just to prove that it cannot be bullied, and that could send the wrong public message.
Proof of HSUS's blatant abuse of the NFL's high profile can be found later in the letter. Pacelle is again quoted as saying "We hope you will collaborate with The HSUS to combat animal cruelty and animal fighting in order to send a clear message to the public that the NFL does indeed intend to hold its players to the highest standards". Like I said, I believe the NFL and HSUS should become partners, because it's a great opportunity for both organizations to show support for the animal world. I have a problem, however, with HSUS trying to write the new rules regarding player conduct, and it's bullying attempt to make the NFL comply. The NFL cannot be bullied, simply because it is too powerful.
Realistically, Michael Vick will not be banned from the NFL for being associated with this ring. At most, he would get the same four game suspension that Chris Henry received. HSUS has the right idea about including cruelty to animals in the player conduct policy, just the wrong way to get the job done. More rational requests and less bullying tactics could one day lead to ad campaigns where NFL players are hugging all sorts of four legged friends.
Peace.
Droppin' El Whammo: Cleveland Indians
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Making the Grade
Well, it's the first week of May, and for many college students like myself, it's finals time. With finals time comes final grades. Young adults are not the only people receiving grades this time of year, however...
Since the NFL Draft is an ancient three days old and its appallingly obvious how good each pick will be in the pros, the pundits have taken it upon themselves to grade each team's draft performance. These same pundits are the ones who will inevitably start making a mold of Brady Quinn's head for Canton, start a campaign to save Matt Millen's job, and actually buy into the fact that the Raiders are improved and Randy Moss will help the Patriots. Remember, these players have not even suited up in an NFL training facility yet, but the "experts" know enough about them to determine their impact on the team, the future, and the history of the league.
All that being said, I'd like to give my grade of one team's draft. That team, of course, is my beloved Ravens. Here is what I will grade on: the team's ability to fill needs; creativity with it's picks; decision making at crunch time. Here is what I will not grade on: projected success of the picks; ability to grab the best player in the draft. With that criteria, I give the Ravens a solid B for their draft performance. They had a very solid draft, but it wasn't their best draft, and they would most likely admit the same thing (this is the team drafted Jon Ogden and Ray Lewis in the same round!).
The Ravens set out in the first round trying to fill the holes throughout the offensive line. They knew a guard and a tackle would be of equal value, and many people thought Justin Blalock or Tony Ugoh would be the man to fill the hole. Lucky for the Ravens, the best guard in the draft, Ben Grubbs, fell to #29, and the Ravens were sensible to nab him while he was there. That's typical Ozzie Newsome; stick to the gameplan, because that's why it's there. The only thing that would have made Ozzie deviate from the gameplan would have been if Brady Quinn actually would have fallen to #29. The Wizard also didn't do anything rash or hasty, like trade next year's number one pick for the chance to take Quinn. We tried that once, ended up with Kyle Boller, and that will probably scare us away from not having a number one pick again.
All of the other rounds were typical Ravens' drafts. Each pick was a position where we had need, and the player filling that need will most likely be a Pro Bowler some day (Yamon Figurs... by the way, when he inevitably returns a punt/kickoff for a touchdown, join me in a nice "Well that Figurs"). We even came away with the steal of the draft in Troy Smith, who, as we all know, could one day be lighting the NFL on fire. The Ravens were sensible, logical, and realistic with each pick, and the few trades we made served to put us in position to draft more talent. We also realized how many picks we had, and how little money we have, and dumped all second day picks except for the compensatory picks that we have to keep. Even from an economic standpoint, this draft made sense.
The national media thought otherwise. The Ravens' average draft grade, as figured by yours truly, comes out to a 2.44 on a 4.0 scale. Folks, that's a C+. A C+. A C+? Apparently the pundits forgot who they were grading. These are the Ravens. We rewrote the book on drafting. When people thought we were going to take Lawrence Philips, we took Jon Ogden. When it comes to the draft, we are the valedictorian and salutatorian, since everybody else is so far behind. Teams like Jacksonville and Cleveland make our personnel assistants their GMs in an effort to try to draft like us. Yet the national media gives us, the originators, a C+?
The only logical reason I can think of for this slap-in-the-face grade is if they compared this draft to all other Ravens drafts, not every other team. In that case, they might actually be right. This draft was average for the Ravens. We probably picked up a Pro Bowler, maybe two, but we didn't break the bank like in 1996 (Ogden, Ray Lewis, Jermaine Lewis), 1997 (Peter Boulware, Jamie Sharper, Kim Herring, Jeff Mitchell), 1999 (Chris McAlister, Brandon Stokely, Edwin Mulitalo), 2000 (Jamal Lewis, Adalius Thomas), 2001 (Todd Heap, Gary Baxter, Ed Hartwell), 2002 (Ed Reed, Anthony Weaver, Chester Taylor), and 2003 (Terrell Suggs, Musa Smith, Ovie Mughellie). The jury is still out on the most recent drafts, since I figure the rookie contracts of the picks should be expired before we judge. The bottom line is, most of our draft picks are solid contributors, many are Pro Bowlers, almost all gain playoff experience, and anybody drafted before 2001 played in and won a Super Bowl. So if that's the criteria, then yes, I guess this was a pretty standard draft for the Ravens.
The highest grade used to calculate the DGPA (draft grade point average) was a B, and it came from Mel Kiper of ESPN, Rick Gosselin of the Dallas Morning News, and Jason Cole of Yahoo.com. Kiper's reputation as the ultimate draft guru speaks for itself, so his grade means a lot. The other two seem to be pretty knowledgeable, seeing as they gave a fair assessment. In Dallas, that guy must have seen what the Ravens did and said "Oh, that's what you're supposed to do during the draft".
So who gave us the grades that yanked the DGPA down? John Czarnecki of FoxSports.com gave us a C-. Who the hell is John Czarnecki, and how does his grading of previous drafts stack up to how the players actually turned out? A C-? Maybe he's new around here and didn't know who he was grading. A C-? For the best drafting team of the decade? If we chose Doink the Clown in the first round he would be a Pro Bowler at something within three years. I've got a good place for John Czarnecki to put that C-.
The most hurtful grade, however, came from our beloved and not in any way out-of-town biased Baltimore Sun. Ken Murray of the Sun (probably some filthy closet Steeler's fan) gave the Ravens a C. He should know better. He has seen Ozzie turn coal to diamond like he has some sort of touch superior to King Midas. If Ozzie looks at you the right way you'll be able to kick a 50 yard field goal before breakfast. But this jackass Ken Murray forgot that he was a) writing for the supposedly hometown Baltimore newspaper and b) writing about the hometown Baltimore team. Don't be like everybody else; we all know picking a guard in the first round isn't sexy, but it's sensible. Throw the fans a bone, and laud the team like the drafting geniuses they are.
The best part of this whole draft grades jazz is that the Ravens don't even care (trust me, I care enough for all of us). They posted the grades as the top article on the team's official website. Why would they do that? Because in three years they can dig up that article and say "Yep, they were all wrong again". The Ravens are too classy to do such a thing, but it's definitely not beneath me. When the time comes, I'll dig up this post again and compare the grades to how the players actually are. The Ravens will simply hang on to the article, and wear it like a badge of honor in their own special way of sticking it to the national media.
Peace.
Since the NFL Draft is an ancient three days old and its appallingly obvious how good each pick will be in the pros, the pundits have taken it upon themselves to grade each team's draft performance. These same pundits are the ones who will inevitably start making a mold of Brady Quinn's head for Canton, start a campaign to save Matt Millen's job, and actually buy into the fact that the Raiders are improved and Randy Moss will help the Patriots. Remember, these players have not even suited up in an NFL training facility yet, but the "experts" know enough about them to determine their impact on the team, the future, and the history of the league.
All that being said, I'd like to give my grade of one team's draft. That team, of course, is my beloved Ravens. Here is what I will grade on: the team's ability to fill needs; creativity with it's picks; decision making at crunch time. Here is what I will not grade on: projected success of the picks; ability to grab the best player in the draft. With that criteria, I give the Ravens a solid B for their draft performance. They had a very solid draft, but it wasn't their best draft, and they would most likely admit the same thing (this is the team drafted Jon Ogden and Ray Lewis in the same round!).
The Ravens set out in the first round trying to fill the holes throughout the offensive line. They knew a guard and a tackle would be of equal value, and many people thought Justin Blalock or Tony Ugoh would be the man to fill the hole. Lucky for the Ravens, the best guard in the draft, Ben Grubbs, fell to #29, and the Ravens were sensible to nab him while he was there. That's typical Ozzie Newsome; stick to the gameplan, because that's why it's there. The only thing that would have made Ozzie deviate from the gameplan would have been if Brady Quinn actually would have fallen to #29. The Wizard also didn't do anything rash or hasty, like trade next year's number one pick for the chance to take Quinn. We tried that once, ended up with Kyle Boller, and that will probably scare us away from not having a number one pick again.
All of the other rounds were typical Ravens' drafts. Each pick was a position where we had need, and the player filling that need will most likely be a Pro Bowler some day (Yamon Figurs... by the way, when he inevitably returns a punt/kickoff for a touchdown, join me in a nice "Well that Figurs"). We even came away with the steal of the draft in Troy Smith, who, as we all know, could one day be lighting the NFL on fire. The Ravens were sensible, logical, and realistic with each pick, and the few trades we made served to put us in position to draft more talent. We also realized how many picks we had, and how little money we have, and dumped all second day picks except for the compensatory picks that we have to keep. Even from an economic standpoint, this draft made sense.
The national media thought otherwise. The Ravens' average draft grade, as figured by yours truly, comes out to a 2.44 on a 4.0 scale. Folks, that's a C+. A C+. A C+? Apparently the pundits forgot who they were grading. These are the Ravens. We rewrote the book on drafting. When people thought we were going to take Lawrence Philips, we took Jon Ogden. When it comes to the draft, we are the valedictorian and salutatorian, since everybody else is so far behind. Teams like Jacksonville and Cleveland make our personnel assistants their GMs in an effort to try to draft like us. Yet the national media gives us, the originators, a C+?
The only logical reason I can think of for this slap-in-the-face grade is if they compared this draft to all other Ravens drafts, not every other team. In that case, they might actually be right. This draft was average for the Ravens. We probably picked up a Pro Bowler, maybe two, but we didn't break the bank like in 1996 (Ogden, Ray Lewis, Jermaine Lewis), 1997 (Peter Boulware, Jamie Sharper, Kim Herring, Jeff Mitchell), 1999 (Chris McAlister, Brandon Stokely, Edwin Mulitalo), 2000 (Jamal Lewis, Adalius Thomas), 2001 (Todd Heap, Gary Baxter, Ed Hartwell), 2002 (Ed Reed, Anthony Weaver, Chester Taylor), and 2003 (Terrell Suggs, Musa Smith, Ovie Mughellie). The jury is still out on the most recent drafts, since I figure the rookie contracts of the picks should be expired before we judge. The bottom line is, most of our draft picks are solid contributors, many are Pro Bowlers, almost all gain playoff experience, and anybody drafted before 2001 played in and won a Super Bowl. So if that's the criteria, then yes, I guess this was a pretty standard draft for the Ravens.
The highest grade used to calculate the DGPA (draft grade point average) was a B, and it came from Mel Kiper of ESPN, Rick Gosselin of the Dallas Morning News, and Jason Cole of Yahoo.com. Kiper's reputation as the ultimate draft guru speaks for itself, so his grade means a lot. The other two seem to be pretty knowledgeable, seeing as they gave a fair assessment. In Dallas, that guy must have seen what the Ravens did and said "Oh, that's what you're supposed to do during the draft".
So who gave us the grades that yanked the DGPA down? John Czarnecki of FoxSports.com gave us a C-. Who the hell is John Czarnecki, and how does his grading of previous drafts stack up to how the players actually turned out? A C-? Maybe he's new around here and didn't know who he was grading. A C-? For the best drafting team of the decade? If we chose Doink the Clown in the first round he would be a Pro Bowler at something within three years. I've got a good place for John Czarnecki to put that C-.
The most hurtful grade, however, came from our beloved and not in any way out-of-town biased Baltimore Sun. Ken Murray of the Sun (probably some filthy closet Steeler's fan) gave the Ravens a C. He should know better. He has seen Ozzie turn coal to diamond like he has some sort of touch superior to King Midas. If Ozzie looks at you the right way you'll be able to kick a 50 yard field goal before breakfast. But this jackass Ken Murray forgot that he was a) writing for the supposedly hometown Baltimore newspaper and b) writing about the hometown Baltimore team. Don't be like everybody else; we all know picking a guard in the first round isn't sexy, but it's sensible. Throw the fans a bone, and laud the team like the drafting geniuses they are.
The best part of this whole draft grades jazz is that the Ravens don't even care (trust me, I care enough for all of us). They posted the grades as the top article on the team's official website. Why would they do that? Because in three years they can dig up that article and say "Yep, they were all wrong again". The Ravens are too classy to do such a thing, but it's definitely not beneath me. When the time comes, I'll dig up this post again and compare the grades to how the players actually are. The Ravens will simply hang on to the article, and wear it like a badge of honor in their own special way of sticking it to the national media.
Peace.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Cut!
Well, it's May, and that really doesn't mean much. Some months start off really well, but it seems like this month started off wrong for one person in particular...
Mere days after saying on national television how excited he was to start the grooming of new Panther's WR Dwayne Jarrett, Keyshawn Johnson had the proverbial rug pulled out from under him. The veteran and vociferous Panther's wideout was cut by Carolina on Monday, thus ending any chance he had of taking young Mr. Jarrett under his wing and raising another in a proud line of loud, annoying, me-first receivers. It just seems unfathomable to see something like this happen to someone who is just so goshdarn likable, but as I dove deeper into the issue, I came to a startling realization: Keyshawn Johnson is one of the few remaining of a dying breed. The time has come where the tall, possession receiver is just not going to cut it anymore.
Keyshawn should not feel bad at his situation, because it is going to happen to a lot of people like him in the coming years, and the reason is because wide receiver turnover from a team standpoint is enormous. Teams go through receivers like the average person goes through cereal, and the last thing you want is a stale box of "Me-shawn Flakes" stinking up your cereal cabinet. Generally speaking, most teams carry 5 wideouts. Ambitious teams carry 6, and stupid teams carry 7. That leaves a lot of room for turnover due to competition, injury, age, the draft, disloyalty, and TO. Wide receivers also suffer from an illness in that they aren't the cure. Teams (the good ones, anyway) do not make it a habit of building the franchise around a wide receiver (Matt Millen!) as much they do a QB, RB, or even some defenders. As such, a dying breed like Keyshawn's is subject to the axe, as good ol' Me-shawn found out today.
So what exactly is Keyshawn's breed that is dying? It's a derivative of the Michael Irvin School of Football and Citizenship. Essentially, the main lesson is that self-promotion is the only way to get ahead in this world. Others may have to suffer, but that's OK, because they're essentially useless anyway. If you aren't catching the ball, the QB is clearly not getting the ball to you, and the coach is not calling enough plays featuring you. When this happens, it is customary to yell at all listeners on the sidelines and embarrass the crap out of your team. If needed, make sure your problems with the team spill over into the locker room; call out teammates by name, challenge the coaches in meetings, and even criticize the city. It may cost you fans, but the media will love you, and that, after all, is how you get ahead for good. You know you can't play football forever, so you have to make sure everybody remembers you during your time in the League, because you never know when ESPN, CBS, NBC, FOX, ESPN2, ESPNews, ESPNU, or ESPNDeportes will come calling.
Aside from the social and mental aspects of the antiquated wide receiver, the Neverus Shutupamus (Latin name) possesses a pretty standard skill set. Since they play a pretty one-dimensional position, it became easy for the taller, stronger men to separate themselves from their shorter and weaker counterparts. As a whole, the Keyshawns of the world fell into the Run Route, Catch Ball, Repeat as Necessary routine, and for a while it worked quite well. The problem was , they couldn't prevent aging.
Soon enough, this type of receiver got old, and started dropping balls (TO), or couldn't run as fast as they once could (Randy Moss). The possession receiver has been replaced by speedier receivers, who, once they catch the ball, can make a defender miss. Pundits call this "explosiveness". These receivers aren't nearly as tall or as strong, but they make bigger plays. Tall receivers like Keyshawn, TO, and Moss can't function in today's high-tech, West Coast offenses because they are deep threats. The West Coast offense is the tortoise's offense, not the hare's, and the deep ball doesn't need to be thrown (which begs the question "why are teams so concerned with their QB's arm strength?"). West Coast offenses would rather throw the safe five yard pass to a speedy receiver, and let their shifty moves, agility, and quickness take the ball the rest of the way.
This safe approach to offense has made short, quick receivers like Steve Smith, Marvin Harrison, Mark Clayton, Anquan Boldin, Torry Holt, and Chad Johnson en vouge. The bonus is that they can all catch the deep ball if need be. That leaves the poor receivers of yesteryear relegated to goal line duty, where their use is to run a route in the back of the endzone that will fool the defense just long enough for the running back to go untouched into the endzone. Every once in a while a ball will be thrown their way, and that ball will have to serve enough to stroke their ego for the time being.
So what happens to Keyshawn now that nobody is going to give him the damn ball? He'll probably be signed by a WR-needy team (or New England, who is trying to hoard up all the WRs), and end up retiring after the season. I'm sure he can find work in the TV studio. He did a great job for ESPN this weekend, except for that part about grooming Dwayne Jarrett...
Peace.
Mere days after saying on national television how excited he was to start the grooming of new Panther's WR Dwayne Jarrett, Keyshawn Johnson had the proverbial rug pulled out from under him. The veteran and vociferous Panther's wideout was cut by Carolina on Monday, thus ending any chance he had of taking young Mr. Jarrett under his wing and raising another in a proud line of loud, annoying, me-first receivers. It just seems unfathomable to see something like this happen to someone who is just so goshdarn likable, but as I dove deeper into the issue, I came to a startling realization: Keyshawn Johnson is one of the few remaining of a dying breed. The time has come where the tall, possession receiver is just not going to cut it anymore.
Keyshawn should not feel bad at his situation, because it is going to happen to a lot of people like him in the coming years, and the reason is because wide receiver turnover from a team standpoint is enormous. Teams go through receivers like the average person goes through cereal, and the last thing you want is a stale box of "Me-shawn Flakes" stinking up your cereal cabinet. Generally speaking, most teams carry 5 wideouts. Ambitious teams carry 6, and stupid teams carry 7. That leaves a lot of room for turnover due to competition, injury, age, the draft, disloyalty, and TO. Wide receivers also suffer from an illness in that they aren't the cure. Teams (the good ones, anyway) do not make it a habit of building the franchise around a wide receiver (Matt Millen!) as much they do a QB, RB, or even some defenders. As such, a dying breed like Keyshawn's is subject to the axe, as good ol' Me-shawn found out today.
So what exactly is Keyshawn's breed that is dying? It's a derivative of the Michael Irvin School of Football and Citizenship. Essentially, the main lesson is that self-promotion is the only way to get ahead in this world. Others may have to suffer, but that's OK, because they're essentially useless anyway. If you aren't catching the ball, the QB is clearly not getting the ball to you, and the coach is not calling enough plays featuring you. When this happens, it is customary to yell at all listeners on the sidelines and embarrass the crap out of your team. If needed, make sure your problems with the team spill over into the locker room; call out teammates by name, challenge the coaches in meetings, and even criticize the city. It may cost you fans, but the media will love you, and that, after all, is how you get ahead for good. You know you can't play football forever, so you have to make sure everybody remembers you during your time in the League, because you never know when ESPN, CBS, NBC, FOX, ESPN2, ESPNews, ESPNU, or ESPNDeportes will come calling.
Aside from the social and mental aspects of the antiquated wide receiver, the Neverus Shutupamus (Latin name) possesses a pretty standard skill set. Since they play a pretty one-dimensional position, it became easy for the taller, stronger men to separate themselves from their shorter and weaker counterparts. As a whole, the Keyshawns of the world fell into the Run Route, Catch Ball, Repeat as Necessary routine, and for a while it worked quite well. The problem was , they couldn't prevent aging.
Soon enough, this type of receiver got old, and started dropping balls (TO), or couldn't run as fast as they once could (Randy Moss). The possession receiver has been replaced by speedier receivers, who, once they catch the ball, can make a defender miss. Pundits call this "explosiveness". These receivers aren't nearly as tall or as strong, but they make bigger plays. Tall receivers like Keyshawn, TO, and Moss can't function in today's high-tech, West Coast offenses because they are deep threats. The West Coast offense is the tortoise's offense, not the hare's, and the deep ball doesn't need to be thrown (which begs the question "why are teams so concerned with their QB's arm strength?"). West Coast offenses would rather throw the safe five yard pass to a speedy receiver, and let their shifty moves, agility, and quickness take the ball the rest of the way.
This safe approach to offense has made short, quick receivers like Steve Smith, Marvin Harrison, Mark Clayton, Anquan Boldin, Torry Holt, and Chad Johnson en vouge. The bonus is that they can all catch the deep ball if need be. That leaves the poor receivers of yesteryear relegated to goal line duty, where their use is to run a route in the back of the endzone that will fool the defense just long enough for the running back to go untouched into the endzone. Every once in a while a ball will be thrown their way, and that ball will have to serve enough to stroke their ego for the time being.
So what happens to Keyshawn now that nobody is going to give him the damn ball? He'll probably be signed by a WR-needy team (or New England, who is trying to hoard up all the WRs), and end up retiring after the season. I'm sure he can find work in the TV studio. He did a great job for ESPN this weekend, except for that part about grooming Dwayne Jarrett...
Peace.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Feeling a Little Drafty
Welcome back. The weekend was dominated by the NFL, which happens most weekends; this one was special, however, because it was draft weekend. I offer my thoughts...
Let me begin by saying that I am not of the camp that thinks that the Draft is the biggest sporting event in America. Its not even close. I'd take any NFL regular season Sunday, the playoffs, the Super Bowl, the NCAA Tournament, and possibly the World Series before the Draft. I do, however, love to watch as much of the Draft as I possibly can, and while I am certainly no Mel Kiper, can hold my own when it comes to predicting who will land where (in the first round anyway), which brings me to my first point...
Let me begin by saying that I am not of the camp that thinks that the Draft is the biggest sporting event in America. Its not even close. I'd take any NFL regular season Sunday, the playoffs, the Super Bowl, the NCAA Tournament, and possibly the World Series before the Draft. I do, however, love to watch as much of the Draft as I possibly can, and while I am certainly no Mel Kiper, can hold my own when it comes to predicting who will land where (in the first round anyway), which brings me to my first point...
What the deuce was Miami thinking? Is locking up a franchise QB in the first round not exciting enough? Would you rather have the drama of selecting an on the fence wide receiver with a gimpy leg who was possibly only good in college because he played for The Ohio State University? Miami will come to regret this decision in years to come, and not for the reasons you'd think. Miami will regret wasting the pick on Ted Ginn, and not taking someone who could've actually provided help. As for Brady Quinn, he would have given Miami every reason to kick itself, if he wasn't drafted by the Brownie Scouts. Sadly, the NFL's answer to the Cubs will probably see Brady fall by the wayside (see Couch, Tim; Brown, Courtney; Warren, Gerard; Green, William; Winslow, Kellen; Edwards, Braylon) and then see what Dallas ends up taking with their first pick in 2008. Phil Savage, the Brown's GM, said that this past Saturday could signal the turning point in the franchise's history, but that's only if the Football Gods finally decide that maybe Cleveland is worthy of a team. For now, the jury is out on Brady Quinn, and as a Raven's fan, I think I speak for everyone when I say "Curse you Phil Savage... for shame!"
In related news, the Cowboys traded their first round pick to Cleveland for the Brownie Scouts' first choice in 2008 (almost assuredly a top ten pick), and then still managed to get back into the first round by somehow convincing Philadelphia that they are no longer in the same division. The Eagles, known for their boisterous and rather mean fans, were most likely greeted by a resounding BOOOO when the trade was announced, and rightfully so. This isn't the same as trading with an inter-Conference team who you might see every four years or so. This is giving the fire power of a first round pick to a team that you will see twice every year until the end of time. The Cowboys chose a defensive end with the pick, and that DE will most likely wreak havoc on Donovan McNabb next year, because that's just how things seem to go for the Iggles. I'd like to think that every time Anthony Spencer drops McNabb next year, three things happen: 1) The Eagles faithful let out a nice BOOOO like only they know how; 2)McNabb looks up at the Owner's Box at owner Jeff Lurie and gives him a "why have you forsaken me?" type look; 3)The announcer calling the game says "Well, Bob, they really brought that sack upon themselves by giving the Cowboys that pick". The other problem with this trade is that the Eagles had plenty to work on within their own team at the draft without helping out the direct competition. The Eagles have no bona-fide wideouts, so they probably could have been very well suited with a Craig Davis or Anthony Gonzalez. Instead, they chose to make their own road to the playoffs that much harder. Oy.
In still other draft weekend news, the Patriots acquired Randy Moss in a trade with Oakland, a day after drafting a PR nightmare in the first round with the selection of Miami (FL) safety Brandon Merriweather. Apparently, the brain trust running the show in New England (coach Bill 'Sweatpants' Belichick and GM Scott Pioli) thought the game of football has become just too goshdarn easy to only worry about the things going on on the field. They want to prove to the world that they can handle any problems that any players can throw at them, even within the team. Moss is basket case. He was TO before being a jackass was cool. He wrote the book on calling out your teammates after a loss, congratulating yourself after a win, and getting your own coach fired (twice). He's the kind of player that's thrilled to death when you're winning, and bored to death when you're losing, and usually yelling at somebody during both. Can Moss still play? I don't think so. He's old, he's not as fast as he used to be, and he takes his baggage everywhere. Defenders aren't scared of him, because they have the speed to keep up with him, and they're pretty sure he's not trying on most plays. Coaches can't stand him because he doesn't listen, and the media loves him because he's a loose cannon.
But things will be different in New England, right? People don't cause problems in the Patriots' locker room. Bill Belichick is the ultimate disciplinarian. People are scared of the wrath of Belichick. This is a franchise that has won three Super Bowls on the strength of team chemistry alone. Never have the Patriots had the best players. Peyton Manning is infinitely better than Tom Brady at QB, but Brady owned Manning up until a little while ago, and why? Chemistry. Not physics, not biology, chemistry. Now the Pats want to test their true mettle with a player that is a regular alchemist, and see if they can still keep up. Many pundits have already penciled the Pats in for the Super Bowl, but I think Moss may be the exact reason they don't make it, not the reason they do. I'd just to say you heard it here first: Randy Moss will be a distraction and a problem in New England just like he was everywhere else; Belichick and the Pats are not above the stupid crap that Randy Moss is capable of.
The steal of the draft was made, of course, by the Ravens and the Wizard that is Ozzie Newsome. At the end of the fifth round, the Ravens grabbed a Heisman Trophy Winner that all 31 other teams had passed on at least twice (the 'Skins finally had their second pick in the fifth round... morons). Troy Smith fell so far because he is only six feet tall. He is only six feet tall. He is only six feet tall. God help us. Troy Smith has already proven that he can play; he was the driving force behind Ohio State's undefeated season and near-National Championship (near, of course, meaning getting shellacked in the Championship Game), and he is a Heisman Trophy winner. He is by no means ready to play right now, but that is where the trade for Steve McNair last year means that much more to the Ravens. Now, the Purple and Black Attack can play McNair, groom Troy Smith, and jettison the debacle that has been Kyle 'Toilet' Boller (gotta love that arm strength, right Oakland?). The team is in the makings of finally having that face-of-the-franchise QB that it has been looking for, and he was acquired in the Wizard's favorite part of the draft. I think Ozzie likes the later rounds better than the first and second, because he can always find a bargain, and if he doesn't who cares, it was a late round pick. There really is no pressure on Smith, because nobody expects anything of him. He can just go to work, learn the offense, and hopefully one day take control and lead the Ravens for years to come. For comparison sake, all of the following QBs are under 6'2": Drew Brees, Tony Romo, Donovan McNabb, Brett Favre, Michael Vick, Jake Delhomme, and David Garrard. All of these QBs are winners (maybe not Garrard, but we'd just be splitting hairs then), and they're all scrappy. If Troy Smith is scrappy just like them, he'll fit in well in Baltimore, because after all, we love the scrappy.
Peace.
Droppin' Los Whammos: Detroit Tigers, Cleveland Browns, Rachel's Office (I apparently take requests now)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
