Sports Central | Articles and Columns

« February 2012 | Main | April 2012 »

March 30, 2012

The Ram Triple Crown Challenge

Sports Central and Ram® trucks have partnered to run a very exciting contest. Two sets of lucky winners will receive a free trip for two to a 2012 Triple Crown horse race (Kentucky Derby, Preakness, or Belmont Stakes). This includes airfare, hotel, event tickets, and transportation for two, along with a $400 gift card.

PROMOTION PERIOD

March 30, 2012 — April 6, 2012

HOW TO ENTER THE CHALLENGE

Answer the following questions in the comments section below during the promotion period, making sure to provide a valid e-mail so you can be contacted if you win. (Note that your e-mail will not be shared and will only be used to contact the winner.)

During the promotion period, clues will be posted to Ram's Facebook page, Twitter channel, and on the Ram Zone blog to assist entrants with answering the trivia questions. There is a limit of one entry per person.

Winners will be randomly chosen by Sports Central and contacted by e-mail shortly after April 6.

THE QUESTIONS

1. What three races must a horse win to be a Triple Crown champion?
2. Who awards the garland and the trophy at the Kentucky Derby?
3. What is the age of horses that race for the Triple Crown?

Please see the official rules for complete details.

Good luck!

Posted by Marc James at 10:00 AM | Comments (34)

March 29, 2012

Slant Pattern Mailbag

Welcome to another edition of the Slant Pattern mailbag! As usual, I get no letters for my column, so I will be answering questions directed to other sports sites.

This first letter comes from Robert in Cathedral City, California, to David Ubben's Big 12 blog on ESPN:

"Hey Dave, WVU fan here. Our fan base is sort of unruly and independently outrageous at times. I am wondering how you see us "nestling" into a Big 12 environment. I am sure that we will appall some people, and perhaps make others leery of us. But the thing everyone needs to understand, we are basically good people ... just a little more "boisterous" than other schools. For example, if other Big 12 schools come to WVU, most of them will receive a little trash talk, but then be invited to share our food and drink. I wonder how you see our culture fitting in with the current Big 12 mix?"

Aw, isn't this letter just adorable? Our little West Virginia fan wants the legion of proper, composed, restrained Big 12 fans to know that when they burn couches, they don't mean nothin' by it. It's just their way, is all.

But I've been to a number of big college towns in my life, and I daresay that WVU is likely only slightly rowdier than the average university fanbase. Hell, during my days matriculating at Ohio State, High Street would be a haze of pepper spray amongst the, yes, burning couches, and even the occasional overturned car ... and that was after all big football games, win or lose. Yet I haven't heard of OSU having a rowdy reputation.

But Robert, your concerns are even more misplaced in Big 12 country. As I read once, "If you don't like barbecue, football, and the occasional fistfight, you ain't a Texan, you just live here." And then there was the insane Baylor football riot of 1993, led by David Koresh (that "Branch Davidan" religious stuff was just a phony pretext, a media whitewashing). So don't you worry your pretty little head about it. The Big 12 invited you because they like you. They really, really like you.

My final two questions come from Drew Magary's mailbag at Deadspin. They are both doozies. The first one is from Dan:

"What's the worst crime a surefire No. 1 pick could commit one week before the draft and still go first overall (question void if Bengals have first pick that year)? Let's use this year as an example, and pretend that RG3 doesn't exist/didn't declare. It works well this year because the Colts have already passed the point of no return with [Peyton] Manning, so they need this guy. Luck is clearly the No. 1 guy, and there's no close second.

"Clearly crimes like DUI, assault/bar fight, shoplifting, etc. aren't going to prevent him from being picked first. But what about beating a girlfriend? Date rape? Kiddie porn found on his computer? For the sake of this argument, let's pretend that whatever the alleged crime is, there are lots and lots of vocal witnesses — so we know pretty much without a shadow of a doubt that he's guilty."

I'm going to add a wrinkle to your question, because I think what you're getting at is, "At what point would the moral outrage trump the need for that surefire No. 1 pick?" In fact, if someone committed a serious crime, teams would pass on him not for moral reasons, but practical ones. Namely, who wants to waste a pick on a player that's gonna spend years in jail?

So the wrinkle is he's guilty as hell and everyone knows it, but he got off on a technicality.

It's still hard to know where to draw a line in the sand, because I don't think the NFL outrage-o-meter is a finely-calibrated sliding scale. For example, no one really cares about Leonard Little, who drove drunk and killed a guy and came back to play in the NFL, but multiple books have been written excoriating Michael Vick.

But anyway, I think it'd take a very serious crime to make a team pass on an available player. They'd take a flyer on any and all drug offenses, even serious major-distributor stuff like Sam Hurd (if he had more talent than Sam Hurd, of course). Unless it involved exploiting children in any way, I think all non-violent offenses would also be forgiven if it was a good enough player, unless it was something where the circumstances were particularly vile (like, stealing the government check out of the hands of a quadriplegic that he was taking to the clinic to get life-sustaining treatment).

I think even murdering a man would be forgiven if it was indeed a man, and it was the sort of men-being-men scenario that allows people to not be outraged.

Come to think of it, a good parallel exercise might be to think of movies, and what a protagonist can do in a movie and still be a sympathetic character to root for, because certainly we frequently cheer for murderers in movies, if the murder is seen as just. Or at least, not unambiguously unjust. But we wouldn't pull for any movie character with child pornography, for example. Our stomach for criminal acts depends almost entirely on our view of the victim, not an abstract view of the crime.

Finally, Jed writes:

"Every time I watch an NFL game, I am always amazed at the accuracy of (most) kickers. So, my brother and I have been kicking around the idea of the Middle Pole.

"1. Before either a PAT or field goal, the coach of the kicking team can opt for the Middle Pole. (He can throw a flag or something ... I don't care.)

"2. When the pole is requested, it will slowly rise up in the exact middle of the goalposts. The Middle Pole will be the exact same circumference and height of the other two goalposts. A laser will also shoot from the top of the Middle Pole so that any ball higher than the pole will register a successful conversion. Also, "2001 Space Odyssey" will play over stadium speakers as it slowly rises.

"3. On a PAT, if the kick hits any part of the Middle Pole, the team is awarded 2 points. A field goal will be worth 4 points. Also, sparks will shoot out of the top of the Middle Pole if struck.

"4. If the kicker misses the Middle Pole, NO POINTS ARE AWARDED.

"I think this would change decisions at the end of some games. Throw a 30-yard Hail Mary, or try for the pole? Go for two to tie the game, or go for the pole?

"Plus, it would make the goal posts look like a pitchfork, which is kinda badass!"

You must be watching a different NFL than I am, because I'm not "amazed" at the accuracy of kickers. A third of the teams in the NFL made less than 80% of their field goals in 2011. So out of every five, more than one was missed for those teams.

But that aside, I don't think it would work because I don't think anyone would ever try it. On extra points, as Drew Magary pointed out, teams would just go for two the conventional way, it works about half the time, which would be a greater chance than the kicker hitting the middle upright, even at that close range. Think about it ... it's impossible to back this up, but I'd estimate that even with extra points, less than half are absolutely dead center.

As far as field goals ... well, first of all, teams would only try it if they needed exactly four points. If they needed three or less, they'd obviously go for a "regular" field goal, and if they needed more, it wouldn't be worth the likely goose egg if the kicker doesn't hit it dead center. In fact, your penalty of no-points-if-you-miss-the-middle-upright is really moot, because no team would ever, ever try for it if those missed three points could hurt them in any way.

So, okay, it would only be attempted if a team was down by four. I pointed out that teams would be better off going for two the conventional way than on your tricked-up extra point. But the same applies for field goals. If you're down by 4 with five seconds left, at your opponents 10, are you more likely to score a TD (and get a win to boot, rather than just forcing overtime) or hit a perfect field goal? I'd say the former. And that still applies when a team is on the 25, or the 40, because as they get further away from the end zone, sure, the less likely they are to get that hail-mary touchdown, but to hit a perfect long field goal is even more unlikely.

In summation, I can't see a single instance where it'd be preferable to try this rather than run an offensive play. Not one. It'd only be feasible if you had some sort of robocop kicker who made Morten Andersen look like a high school punter. Which judging by your "amaze(ment) of the accuracy of (most) kickers," you seem to think we have. But we don't.

Posted by Kevin Beane at 9:17 PM | Comments (0)

Goodbye Mr. Chip?

Back in December, I pondered the incumbent class of Hall of Fame candidates, a subject that often brings forth both the best and the worst of thinking, from professional analysts, knowledgeable fans, and the witless alike.

My very favorite of any of those was a response (here at SC, no less) to the previous year's such pondering, when a reader — anxious to make Edgar Martinez's Hall of Fame case (he was and remains a ballot holdover and he has a case, though the DH bias is liable to keep him out of Cooperstown awhile longer) — decided to compare him to, among others, Chipper Jones: "It's pretty clear that Edgar was a model of consistency. And in terms of hitting, it's clear to me that Edgar is a notch above modern-era players like Todd Helton, Frank Thomas, Chipper Jones, and Larry Walker." To which I replied:

"But Edgar Martinez isn't "a notch above" Chipper Jones. Anyone who thinks so isn't reading the real numbers. Jones at this writing has played the same number of seasons now (18) as Martinez did play, and he spent damn near every day of it playing one of the field's most physically demanding positions while still shaking out as a .300/.400/.500 man. Martinez's leverage stats–his averages in situations involving plays potentially more pivotal than others in changing win probabilities, particularly with one dramatic swing–are somewhat better than Jones's, in fact they're pretty damned impressive, but they may be inflated by Martinez's having played on teams in which his were more likely to be those kind of situational at-bats because they weren't as good as Jones's teams. Almost anyone in the lineups of Jones's teams could find himself in those situations.

"If Chipper Jones were to retire this instant, he would retire a) with a .304/.402/.533 line; b) 82.7 [Wins Above Replacement] (we did note … that Martinez's is 67.2); and, c) four incumbent and two in-waiting Hall of Famers, including Mike Schmidt, the no-questions-asked greatest all-around third baseman ever to play the game (George Brett is an extremely tight second), among his top-10 comps. Edgar Martinez has one Hall of Famer in waiting (Magglio Ordonez) among his top-10 comps and a big bunch of not-quites otherwise. Not to mention that Jones through the end of 2011 averaged 212 runs produced per 162 games, compared to 195 for Martinez, with far more overall extra base hits, home runs, and runs batted in in the bargain, and was never considered a true liability in the field.

"No, Edgar Martinez is not a notch above Chipper Jones; he's quite a few notches below Jones. (Comparing Martinez to Frank Thomas is a little on the fatuous side, too–pitchers may not have loved facing Martinez but nobody wanted to run home to his mommy at the mere sight of him in the on-deck circle, either.) Jones hasn't been a markedly great defencive third baseman, but it never once seems to have occurred to anyone that he'd have been better off in a league where he couldn't hurt your team with his glove."

I'm led to think of the foregoing once again because Jones has announced that, yep, this time it's for real, what he merely pondered in 2010 is going to come true at the end of 2012. The no-questions-asked greatest franchise player in the history of the Atlanta Braves (Warren Spahn, Hank Aaron, Eddie Mathews, Dale Murphy, Greg Maddux, and Tom Glavine, after all, did put in time with other clubs) is going to call it a career. And, yes, it's kind of ridiculous that I should have been drawn into pondering Jones's greatness aloud a few months ago based on one fanboi's argument on behalf of Edgar Martinez, who wasn't a few notches above Chipper Jones on the best days of his life, never mind over an entire career.

"Never in my mid-20s would I have given myself a snowball's chance to be in camp and have a job at 40-years-old. But I like to think I've kept myself in pretty good shape over the years," Jones was quoted as telling the Associated Press Thursday, after the Braves announced his retirement plan. "The skills are still there to go out and get it done. I don't know for how much longer, but we're gonna ride it as long as we can." Apparently, unless someone or something wreaks a miracle upon his long-troubled knees, that ride has about six months to go, seven if the Braves make one more postseason for their longtime field anchor.

Even opposition fans had to appreciate him. He'd beat the living hell out of your team but that grin was so damn infectious you just couldn't knock a guy who — in contrast to most of the outward stoics who seemed to become the faces of the Braves over all those winning seasons — actually let you know he loved playing the game. Even through the knee troubles, Jones would not let you think baseball was anything less than fun for all the work (and it was damn near Ph.D. level work) he put into playing the game. Met fans are just one isolated example of opposition who came to admire and even adore him while he was laying the Mets to waste; he was so effusive in his ability to turn Shea Stadium and Citi Field into his own batting practice fields, without rubbing it in, that even Met fans couldn't help liking the guy. It probably didn't hurt that he named one of his children Shea, either.

There's a milestone or two Jones could yet achieve if he has a solid 2012. In theory, anyway. He could become only the second Brave to hit every one of 500+ home runs in the uniform. (Hank Aaron was the first and remains the only one; Eddie Mathews was traded to the Houston Astros seven bombs short of the mark, believe it or not.) Among switch hitters, only Mickey Mantle and Eddie Murray belong in the 500 home run club. Among third basemen, only Mathews and Mike Schmidt are in the club. This assumes, of course, that the skills are still there to go out and hit 46 bombs this year. Jones hasn't hit as many as 29 home runs in any season since 2007. He's also the number two switch-hitting RBI man, ahead of Mantle but still well behind Murray. Even Jones would laugh himself hoarse if you asked him whether he could drive 356 runs in this year.

At this writing, Jones is number 26 all-time on the offensive Wins Above Replacement list, number 31 all-time on the OPS list, number 40 on the all-time RBI list, and number 28 all-time on the extra base hits list. Think about that. On four very critical categories measuring a baseball player's ability to help his teams win Chipper Jones among the 50 greatest baseball players of all-time. Did I mention he's also number 17 all-time in win probability added? Think about that, too. Among all the men whose presence in the lineup gave their teams that much more of a chance to win Jones is top 20.

He doesn't have a lot of black ink on his resume entering this season; in fact, he's only ever led his league in any key offense category four times: he led the National League in OPS and OPS+ in 2007; he led the league in batting and OBP in 2008. He has a small truckload of gray ink even though it shakes out to quite a bit less than the average Hall of Famer might have. But by the Bill James measures known as the Hall of Fame batting standards and the Hall of Fame batting monitor, Chipper Jones pulls up at 178 on the monitor (the average Hall of Famer: 100) and meeting 67 percent of the standards. (The average Hall of Famer: 50.) Slice him any way and if he were to retire this minute, never mind at season's end, Jones would shake out as an above-average Hall of Famer.

All the foregoing accomplished on knees that have bedeviled him ever since he was forced to sit out what should have been his rookie season, after he tore up a knee in spring training of 1994. He ended up number two in the 1995 Rookie of the Year voting and, coincidentally, was a key figure in the Braves' run to their only World Series ring since the franchise relocated to Atlanta. The Braves have been winners for the most part since but they've only had that one ring to show for all those seasons ruling the National League East. Jones would be the last guy to say no if the Braves could get one more crack at that, never mind the prize, this season.

He's been the absolute mainstay for a franchise that has seen, one after the other, various mainstays come and go. He's turned out to be the nugget among number-one draft picks; David Schoenfeld of Sweet Spot has limned that among the number-ones, Jones has the highest WAR with his original team, his 82.7 well ahead of Ken Griffey, Jr. (67.6 with the Seattle Mariners), Joe Mauer (40.3 with the Minnesota Twins), Darryl Strawberry (37.7 as a Met), and Alex Rodriguez (37.1 as a Mariner).

Schoenfeld ranks Jones as the second-greatest third baseman of all time, behind Mike Schmidt and ahead of Eddie Mathews. I used to underrate Mathews myself, and I saw him play in my boyhood, but did you know Eddie Mathews has more WAR (98.3) than George Brett (85.5), whom I used to rank as number two behind Schmidt? Having seen the lot of them play and factoring their final statistics into that, I'm still going to have to rank them this way: Mathews number three (he was a terrific fielder but not as good as Schmidt in the field), Brett and Jones in a dead heat for number two (I might rank Brett higher if injuries hadn't ground him away from third base a little sooner than he should have yielded the position), and Schmidt number one.

It's no knock on Chipper Jones to say he's merely in the top four all-time all-around third basemen. His home runs haven't been the kind of conversation pieces Mike Schmidt could hit almost without effort; he hasn't been a genuinely great or spectacular fielder. But if greatness is not strictly defined as spectacle, Jones has personified it. Defensively, he's been a league-average third baseman who's rarely made truly egregious mistakes with his glove and arm. He's had a decent throwing arm, he's had a knack for being where the ball is without having to extend too arduously to get there, and nobody ever once thought his teams would be in need of emergency services by putting him on third base every day. But every one of them thought the Braves had that much less chance to win if he wasn't in the lineup.

(Did I mention that Jones at this writing has averaged 212 runs produced per 162 games? That's a measly two behind Schmidt's career average.)

Jones has no desire to shake out as a manager after his playing career ends, though, never mind that he'd probably make a good manager. "I think I'd be better off as a specialty coach," he said to reporters a month before announcing his retirement plan. "I have such a passion for hitting. I'm kind of a one-track-mind kind of guy. I can't have my hands in a bunch jars and be delegating responsibility for a bunch of different areas. I'd much rather stay focused on just one area and be able to do that well. While I think I could manage, I really don't have the urge to manage. I'd much rather be a hitting coach than a manager."

If that's true, an awful lot of players to come are going to be getting an awful lot of education they couldn't pay for otherwise. If you don't believe me, perhaps you'll take an old hint from Sports Illustrated's Michael Bamberger: "It helps that [Jones] has some ridiculous gifts. He was in a visiting clubhouse a while back, reading the crawl on a cable channel from about 30 feet away. A teammate said, 'You can read that?' Jones thought, You can't? He can remember hundreds, maybe thousands of at-bats, what he hit off whom. One night last week, after a game in which he saw two dozen pitches, he could remember in detail all but two or three of them: count, pitch, location, result. He watches game tape like a detective, and if a pitcher tends to slightly open his glove before throwing a curve, Jones knows it."

A student like that has a terrific chance of becoming a teacher who bestows the right kind of thinking into his own students. Hopefully, those students won't mind a bit if Jones has to take a brief leave from class for a Cooperstown induction speech in 2018.

* * *

Do You Remember?

When Chipper Jones finished an injury-shortened 2005 campaign, he had his contract reworked to give the Braves another $15 million to spend on appropriate free agents or young talent or both. That idea was his own.

"Nowadays, so many players play the game for the 1st and 15th [pay days], but I never have. Certainly, I want to be compensated fairly for what I do, but I wasn't going to hold the organization over a barrel. And I never wanted to be a player who makes so much money that we can't stay competitive on the field. That was my main concern." — Chipper Jones, signing the extension that turned out to be his final contract, whose 2013 option won't be exercised with his coming retirement. (He's leaving at least $7 million on the table by retiring.)

For the record, Jones never earned more than $16 million a season — he only made $16 million for a single season once in his entire career — and was never even one of the four highest paid players in the National League. He shunned likely millions more in free agency to stay where he was; he never once filed, and made it plain he was playing where he wanted to play. Not that he's going to be dead flat broke, not a fellow who earned $155.6 million in his career through the end of last season. But Chipper Jones apparently wasn't born to be a money-catcher, he was born to be a Brave.

It would be a fine thing if the Braves could muster up around him and send him off the winner he helped make them all the way in his first season in the league.

Note: The foregoing was written before Jones was forced to the arthroscopic surgeon's table yet again, for a tear in his left knee. He was expected to miss three weeks, with the Braves hoping he would be back in time for their April 13 home opener.

Posted by Jeff Kallman at 11:55 AM | Comments (0)

March 28, 2012

Kentucky and Louisville: It's Complicated

To the national audience, Saturday's Final Four matchup between Kentucky and Louisville will be a rivalry game along the lines of North Carolina/Duke or Georgetown/Syracuse, a heated traditional matchup played on a grand stage. But to those who have lived in or around the Commonwealth of Kentucky, it will be something far different than Hatfields and McCoys on the hardwood.

You see, a rivalry suggests some level of equality between two sides. Before 2004, Yankee fans (26 World Series titles) looked down on the notion of a rivalry with the Red Sox (zero World Series titles from 1919-2003). Their "rivalry" was as even as a hammer's with a nail.

Kentucky and Louisville's basketball programs aren't quite that far apart. After all, the Cardinals have won two national championships and been to nine Final Fours. And yet, even in the state with that name, they're not Kentucky.

Louisville is an enclave of Cardinal red cut into the hills south of the Ohio River. Surrounded in-state by Big Blue and Indiana's Big Red across the river to the north, Louisville basketball is like West Berlin in Cold War East Germany.

The Wildcats, by contrast, are basketball royalty — just ask them. The breadth of their success is unrivaled. Their fans dominate whatever "neutral" court they are sent to both in numbers and noise per vocal chord.

Across the decades, Kentucky has mattered. From Adolph Rupp's 27 conference titles in 42 years coaching to lottery-pck-magnet John Calipari, not many chapters of college basketball can be written without the Wildcats. Nobody would suggest Louisville lacks history or tradition; it's just the A-student unlucky enough to be two years younger than his A+ brother.

Consider the 2011-2012 squads that will face each other in New Orleans. Kentucky features not only the likely player of the year and top NBA draft pick, but also a handful of other future pros. In a state where bets are placed on the best pedigrees, these Wildcats are thoroughbred favorites.

Louisville, on the other hand, is a mix of glamour-less young players and battle-hardened veterans. In a sport where "experience" is a euphemism for a lack of pro-caliber talent, three of the Cardinals' top four players in minutes played are juniors or seniors.

For Kentucky, the 2011-2012 season has been a formality at times. The Wildcats showcased their raw talent early in wins against North Carolina and Kansas, and undramatically rolled through their conference slate unblemished. By the time calendars hit January, Kentucky was getting every team's best shot.

The ride was not nearly as smooth for Louisville. The Cardinals went through two separate dry stretches that coincided with the toughest parts of their schedule. The start of Big East play, combined with their first encounter with their intrastate rivals, resulted in a 2-5 stretch for the first few weeks of 2012. Louisville righted themselves against a series of unpredictably soft Big East foes, but closed the regular season with a 2-4 dip. Their only regular season win over a ranked team came against Vanderbilt in early December.

And then there are the coaches.

Rick Pitino was, of course, once one of Kentucky's advantages. His rise to a championship coach came with the Wildcats, and his harrying, aggressive style earned him praise. While those commodities were worthless in his failed NBA endeavor, they made him an ideal fit to return to the Bluegrass, this time in Cardinal Red.

Pitino is a vestige of a dying breed, as strange as it may sound. We all understood when Bob Knight, the humanity-crushing bully became a dinosaur. Expanded media access and a decline in the benefit-of-the-doubt leant to authority figures doomed his ilk to extinction.

But Pitino, the over-active tactician, is treading in endangered territory. While nobody would bestow the title of "player's coach" on him, Pitino is certainly not the non-starter to the modern recruit that Knight became. Whereas Knight was the expert sausage maker, grinding the meat that came to play for him into a homogenous product (or else), Pitino deals in something closer to butchery. His aim is not to to break players down beyond recognition, but the cuts he makes still render the original product indistinguishable.

This is not what today's blue chip recruits want. Pitino's style — defensive pressure, always — does not get guys to the top of the lottery. For stars with just one season to shine, Louisville is an unattractive slaughterhouse. Should the cow really care what kind of filet he turns out to be?

By comparison, John Calipari is a shepherd. He collects, breeds, and nourishes talent. A cynic would assume Calipari's recruiting allure is based on untoward methods. The optimist would believe in something else.

There are schools with better weather. There are schools with nicer campuses. And yet the talent keeps flocking. In a very short time, Calipari's Kentucky has become the way-station on the way to the NBA. Where Pitino places devotion to his system at the top of his players' goals, Calipari prefers to keep his ingredients distinct. If the shift of power to the labor supply in the past decade is any indication, we will see many more Caliparis rising in college basketball than Pitinos.

It will be convenient to preview this game as a neighborhood brawl between two equals separated by a mere stretch of I-64. Don't fall for the simplicity. Two elite programs could not be more different.

Posted by Corrie Trouw at 6:20 PM | Comments (0)

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 5

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Tony Stewart — Stewart won the Auto Club 400 in a race shortened by 71 laps due to rain. Stewart overtook Kyle Busch on lap 85 and held on until the weather forced the race's first caution, and ultimately its cancelation. It was Stewart's second win of the year and seventh in the last 15 Sprint Cup races.

"When there's a sky full of clouds all with silver linings," Stewart said, "should one expect a golden shower? Maybe for Denny Hamlin. I faked, and Denny bought it. That has to hurt, so I guess Denny's 'Stinging in the Rain.'

"But the No. 14 Office Depot team is picking up right where we left off last year. No, I'm not firing my crew chief. I'm winning races. And the 'reign gauge' is full."

2. Greg Biffle — Biffle finished sixth at Auto Club Speedway, following Roush Fenway teammate Carl Edwards, who finished fifth, across the line. Biffle has scored top-10 finishes in four of the season's five races, and leads the Sprint Cup point standings.

"If nothing else," Biffle said, "I'm consistent. And, as Edwards showed last year, consistency will take you places. Unfortunately, it will also leave you there."

3. Kevin Harvick — Harvick finished fourth in California, posting his second top-five result of the year. He remained second in the point standings, and trails Greg Biffle by seven.

"I hear Kyle Busch slapped the wall on Sunday," Harvick said. "Just as I suspected, it didn't leave a mark."

4. Dale Earnhardt, Jr. — Earnhardt continued his solid start to the season, taking third in the Auto Club 400. He improved three places in the point standings, and now trails Greg Biffle by 17.

"I was hoping the race could have been restarted," Earnhardt said. "But, when it rains, it pours. As someone who's riding a 134-race winless streak, I know that better than anyone. Oh yes, they call me 'The Streak.'"

5. Jimmie Johnson — Rain showers salvaged what could have been a disastrous day for Johnson at Auto Club Speedway. After the caution flew when rain started falling on lap 123, Johnson pitted, and the No. 48 Lowe's Chevy started smoking soon after. The race was red-flagged on lap 129, with Johnson's car still spewing smoke.

"If you ask NASCAR," Johnson said, "they'd say those fumes were from the 'smoking gun.' I say the heat that created the smoke could be used to cook 'crow' before you eat it.

"We feel fortunate to finish 10th, and fortunate to have our points reinstated. We're thrilled to be the first beneficiaries of NASCAR's 'Boys, have it back' policy."

6. Matt Kenseth — After a penalty for a loose tire in the pits, Kenseth and the No. 17 EcoBoost Ford limped away from Auto Club Speedway with a 16th-place finish. He fell three spots to sixth in the point standings and trails Greg Biffle by 22 points.

"This is one time," Kenseth said, "that I'm sorry to say 'We were on a roll.' We missed our setup so bad, tires were trying to escape from being attached to the car. I can't say I was impressed with my pit crews' performance, but the Three Stooges were."

7. Martin Truex, Jr. — Truex finished eighth at Auto Club Speedway, recording his third top-10 result of the year. He now stands fifth in the Sprint Cup point standings, 20 out of first.

"Not everyone believed I'd be in the top 10 in points after five races," Truex said. "I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say, "When will this end?" And that was before it started to rain in Fontana."

8. Denny Hamlin — Hamlin started on the pole in California as Joe Gibbs Racing swept the front row, with Kyle Busch on the outside. Hamlin was in second before pitting during the race's only caution, which flew for rain on lap 123. He finished 11th after the race was called on lap 129.

"Tony Stewart threw the fake on me," Hamlin said. "And, like Jeff Gordon's gas man, I got taken for a ride. Ironically, I got hung out to dry. They say there's a sucker born every minute. By that reasoning, I should have a twin, or, better yet, a 'dupe-licate.'"

9. Kyle Busch — Despite scraping the wall late in the race, Busch finished second, earning his first top-five of the year. He led 80 laps on the day, but lost the lead when slower traffic allowed Tony Stewart to pass him on lap 85.

"Without the rain," Busch said, "I'm not sure we could have finished second. The rain was my friend. In fact, the rain may be my only friend."

10. Carl Edwards — Edwards opted to stay out when the caution flew for rain on lap 123, and his decision proved to be the right one. Edwards earned a fifth-place finish when rain halted the race shortly thereafter on lap 129. It was his second top-five finish of the year, and vaulted him three places in the point standings to 12th.

"The No. 99 Subway Ford was good enough to win," Edwards said, "but the rain prevented us from proving that. My car was really fast, possibly faster than the speed of sound. But once the rain came, my shot at winning was gone, having disappeared faster than the 'speed' of Mayfield."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:50 AM | Comments (0)

March 27, 2012

Hammer Comes Down on the Saints

The busy part of the NFL offseason has begun, but three stories stand out. Let's jump right in, starting with the big one.

NFL Punishes the Saints

Last week, the NFL finally announced some of the punishments for the New Orleans Saints' bounty program, and we're not talking slaps on the wrist. The program reportedly offered defensive players $1,000 for causing injuries that led to opponents being carted off the field, and $1,500 for knockouts, in addition to other bonuses for good plays such as interceptions. A thousand dollars isn't a lot of money for someone who makes $1 million a season, but the rewards allegedly grew in the playoffs, to the point that defensive captain Jonathan Vilma is reported to have offered $10,000 to anyone who knocked Brett Favre out of the 2009 NFC Championship Game.

All these bounties constitute a clear violation of the NFL's salary cap, but the larger controversy is that the Saints evidently went out of their way to injure opponents. Forgive my pointing out the obvious, but there's a close relationship between the words sport and sportsmanship. The same way a street fight is not MMA — not even the same as amateur MMA, where there are, you know, rules — deliberate attempts to cause serious injury have no place in the NFL. I get as excited by big hits as the next fan, but only when they're part of the game.

We've known for a while now that the NFL was going to punish the Saints and their former defensive coordinator, Gregg Williams, who organized and ran many aspects of the program. What most of us didn't expect was how hard the league would come down on those involved. Williams is now suspended indefinitely from the league — he might never coach in the NFL again. Assistant Head Coach/Defense Joe Vitt faces a six-game suspension, and the league suspended head coach Sean Payton for the entire 2012 season. Even GM Mickey Loomis is out for half the year, an eight-game suspension. The Saints also have been fined $500,000 and docked a pair of second-round draft picks.

The fines and the draft picks don't come as much surprise, but the NFL is usually so reluctant to suspend anyone other than James Harrison, the severe punishments of the Saints' coaches and front office are not what I anticipated. Not that I disapprove — the kind of bounty program the league has described is totally out of bounds in any sport. What I'm not sure about are the individual penalties, relative to one another. Why are Payton and Loomis suspended for longer than Vitt?

These guys face a combined 1½ years away from the team, unpaid, and owner Tom Benson is just an innocent victim in all this? The league consistently deflects blame from ownership. Not that I think Benson had anything to do with the bounty program, but how do you suspend the GM eight games for such a minimal role in the scandal and then publicly proclaim the owner to be totally innocent?

So I don't believe the league was even-handed about the punishments handed down, but my overall reaction is that their severity is appropriate. The one that really gets your attention is Sean Payton, gone for the whole 2012 season. That affects the team, jolts Payton's career, and involves a non-trivial amount of money: roughly $6 million. That's what I'd like to see the league do when players try to injure opponents. Not suspend them for a year, necessarily, but at least a game or two. It shouldn't take a blatant Thanksgiving Day stomp in front of a national audience to draw more than a fine.

What I'm really curious about now is seeing what the league will do to the players involved. Reports indicate that between 22 and 27 Saints defensive players participated in the bounty program, as well as some of Williams' players when he was with other teams, most notably Washington. If the head coach and GM who were not directly involved get suspended for 8-16 games, logically you'd expect at least that much for the players who were directly involved.

With the possible exception of Vilma, though, I'd be shocked to see it. The players' union will fuss in a way coaches and management did not, and suspending half the defense would wreck the team. Losing a talented coach like Payton hurts, but a good team can overcome that, even use it as motivation. There's no substitute for good players. The league has obvious practical incentives to minimize the penalties on players.

I hate that. If the league goes easy on players after bringing the hammer down on higher-ups, even those with little to no direct involvement, it's not only unfair, to me it actually could be interpreted as racist. Punishing white coaches and GMs while going easy on (mostly) black players is uneven and unfair, plus I think it would imply that the white guys are held to a higher standard, like they should know better and the players can't be expected to. I recognize practical difficulties in applying the same penalties to players that were levied against coaches, but the league can't take the easy way out at this point.

What I don't want to see, and don't expect to, is any attempt to re-write history. I know some fans have argued that the Saints' Super Bowl XLIV victory should be taken off the record books, since the bounty program was active that season. That is nonsense. They won. It's childish and pathetic, and ultimately pointless, when the ham-headed NCAA tries to pretend wins and awards and championships didn't happen. They did happen. The team and its fans have already celebrated; you can't erase that. Pretending they didn't happen is silly. I'm all for harsh penalties to discourage this kind of program in the future, but suspensions are the right method here, not re-writing the record books.

Saints fans have complained, understandably, that many other teams play dirty, and it's likely some of them had a similar program in place. It feels like a double standard to come down so hard on the Saints, while other teams with no proven charges against them escape punishment entirely. I appreciate that position, but the league's actions against Payton and others establish a strong deterrent against this kind of bounty system in the future, and they set a precedent for harsh punishments against anyone who dares continue or establish such a system in the future. Tough luck for the Saints and their staff, but probably the best way to handle things given the situation.

Manning Signs With Denver

A lot of teams were looking for quarterbacks this offseason, and almost all of them were interested in Peyton Manning. His choice to sign with the Denver Broncos came as quite a surprise to me. Several teams were ready to pay him top dollar, and he doesn't need the money anyway; between rich contracts and innumerable endorsements, Manning is probably the wealthiest player in the NFL already. So he needed to choose a team where he would be comfortable and where he'd have a chance to win. The Broncos, really?

A lot of things broke right for the Broncos in their trip to the playoffs last season. Now they'll face a first-place schedule in 2012, and Manning — who has always struggled with the perception that he's not a winner — steps into the capital of Tebow-mania, celebrating a player acknowledged to be of limited talent but recognized as someone who "just wins". If Denver falls short of the postseason this year, many fans and analysts will, fairly or otherwise, blame Manning and compare him unfavorably to Tebow.

The other reason this moves surprised me is that Denver has no wide receivers. The team signed Jacob Tamme and Joel Dreessen in free agency, but here are the wide receivers: Mark Dell, D'Andre Goodwin, Tyler Grisham, Jason Hill, Greg Orton, Demaryius Thomas, and Tim Toone. Those are practice squad players. Dell, Goodwin, Orton, and Toone have never played in a regular season game. Grisham has one career catch, in 2009. Thomas is a promising prospect who has struggled to stay healthy and hasn't developed as quickly as the team anticipated. Hill is the elder statesman of the group, with five seasons of experience and 76 career catches.

Altogether, the Broncos' WR corps combine for 131 career receptions. That's a year and a half for Reggie Wayne. With his pick among at least half a dozen teams, this is where Peyton wanted to play?

Mr. Tebow Goes to New York

Tim Tebow is such a polarizing figure, it's tough to avoid getting drawn into extremes. The line from his supporters that Tebow can somehow "just win" without improving his passing skills is absurd. But it also seems clear that many of Tebow's detractors have undersold his strengths while focusing on his weaknesses. He recognizes some of his own limitations, and he's adapted his game accordingly. He's an effective runner — people ask me all the time if he would be a good running back — and a leader in the huddle whose teammates respond to him positively.

Last season, Tebow did not demonstrate NFL-level skill as a passer. Denver's unconventional offense was effective for a few weeks, faced an easy schedule, and caught some lucky breaks — but over the course of a season, quarterbacks need to throw. They need to read defenses, make good decisions, get the ball out of their hands in time to beat the rush, and throw accurately. Last we saw, Tebow can't do any of those things consistently. That's not to say he can't improve. He's young, he's a hard worker, and he's obviously a good athlete. But right now, he's probably not an NFL-level quarterback, much less a starter.

The Jets didn't give up a lot to bring Tebow in, and I can see where he'd be a good fit for the team if his passing comes along. Mark Sanchez hasn't wowed anyone since being drafted in the first round in 2009, and the Jets are the kind of team that could benefit from Tebow's strengths. But this could easily become a disaster, too, precisely because Sanchez hasn't developed the way the team hoped.

When a team is visibly held back by its quarterback — like the Jets the past three seasons — fans invariably clamor for the backup. This is most true when the backup is a high draft pick or someone with lots of name recognition. Tebow is a celebrity, even among non-sports fans; he's probably one of the five most famous players in the league. Tebow-mania got Kyle Orton benched and released after two straight seasons of 3,500 yards and a passer rating of 87, with twice as many TDs (41) as interceptions (21). If Tebow can do that to an above-average quarterback in Denver, what will happen to a below-average QB in the media firestorm of New York?

Barring a sudden, significant leap in his passing skills, Tebow will be a disaster as QB. But barring a sudden, significant leap in Sanchez's quality of play, that's the direction the Jets are headed. They can't use Tebow just to run the Wildcat two or three times a game. Either he's effective, and fans demand to see more of him, or he's ineffective, and there's no point. This was a risky trade for the Jets, not so much because of what they gave up (a fourth-round pick is hardly a ransom), but because of the situation it creates for the team. There's a lot to like about Rex Ryan, but I don't think he devotes enough attention to team chemistry. The Tebow trade has some definite upside, but there are a lot more ways for it to fail than succeed.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 1:04 PM | Comments (0)

March 26, 2012

Final Four Preview: Red vs. Blue

There are four states in the union where college basketball takes on a cultural and sporting significance unlike the other 46: North Carolina, Indiana, Kentucky, and Kansas. The namesake universities of those four states compose 20 national championships. Other schools in those states are responsible for an additional eight titles. In this year's Final Four, three schools will come from Kentucky and Kansas alone.

Yet college basketball's importance in the Bluegrass State is magnified due to the absence of pro sports or big media markets with pro sports teams. From November until early April, college basketball is front and center among sports in Kentucky, with no NFL or NBA teams to grab the spotlight.

Even if you don't take into account the upper-echelon, big-money-making levels of college basketball, the 2011-12 season has been a banner year for hoops in Kentucky. Murray State lost two games all season and threatened to go undefeated. Western Kentucky was one of the nation's worst teams as late as January before firing its coach and going on a historic run through the Sun Belt tournament.

However, each school's NCAA tournament win in 2012 pales in comparison to what the Commonwealth has felt in the past week with Louisville and Kentucky winning their respective NCAA regions to set up a showdown for the ages in New Orleans.

There's no other way to state this: the game between the Wildcats and the Cardinals will be unlike anything we've ever seen in the Final Four. The college football equivalent would be if Auburn and Alabama could meet in the semifinals of a hypothetical playoff.

Of course, there's the rivalry and what it means to fans. Even if each team were to come into their annual late December meeting winless, the clash would be substantial for bragging rights among UK and UL fans who live, work and play amongst each other. But then there are the added psychological and emotional implications of this game, in this season, with these two teams and these two head coaches.

For Kentucky, 2011-12 has been treated as a title-or-bust campaign from a very early stage. No team in the country is more talented, nor has any team played nearly as well from November until now. It went through the SEC undefeated until losing to Vanderbilt in the final of the conference tournament, in a game John Calipari seemed fairly indifferent about winning. The Wildcats, despite their youth, carry a dominating swagger that isn't seen too often anymore in college basketball. With all due respect to Marcus Camby and Derrick Rose, this is Calipari's best team ever.

Louisville, on the other hand, looked to be anything but a Final Four team through large parts of January and February after starting 12-0. At their worst, the Cardinals looked like a train wreck offensively, and various injuries forced the use of some unconventional lineups. While it wasn't like Louisville was a bubble team by any stretch of the imagination, it still spent the winter months in the relative shadow of the school 80 miles to the east. As I've found out from former Kentucky residents, such an attention deficit is not unique to this season.

Some number of months ago, I asked my friend and grad school classmate Eric (a Kentucky native) about the rivalry. I particularly wanted to know what about how much of the state cheered on each team.

"Unless you're from Louisville or you went to Louisville, you're a UK fan. And even then, you might be a UK fan," he said.

The fact that UK has dominated the season, and dominates basketball in the Commonwealth is the main reason why I find this game so unbelievably fascinating. Simply put, if king Kentucky was to somehow lose to little brother Louisville on Saturday with possibly the best team college basketball has seen in the last 15 years, it would be about as devastating as a result could get for a fan base. And that's not even mentioning the fact that the hated Rick Pitino coaches the little brother.

From a totally objective viewpoint, it's tough to see how Louisville is going to beat Kentucky. It seems as if the Wildcats are just about the perfect basketball team. They score at will and get to the line at an astonishing rate. Their length and defensive acumen makes it impossible to score consistently against them, in the paint or on the perimeter. They can play up-tempo and get easy baskets in transition, as was the case against Indiana on Friday, or they can play methodically in the half court, as they did through much of the SEC season.

For a team that plays three freshmen and two sophomores in what is essentially a six-man rotation, it's downright unreal how high their basketball IQ is. This intelligence could be seen early on in the regional final against Baylor, as Terrence Jones, often maligned for his attitude, had several assists before taking a shot. Statistically speaking, on the year, the one thing Kentucky did not do was force turnovers at a high rate. I dare anyone who watched the Baylor game to tell me that the Wildcats can't.

Despite all of those factors, you just know that there's going to be a point in the game on Saturday where you ask yourself, "Shouldn't Louisville be down by a lot more right now?" It happened in the first game between the Wildcats and Cardinals, it happened on Saturday in the regional final against Florida, and it will probably happen again. There's something about the leadership and heart of Louisville's players that prevents them from getting blown out or quitting, even if the Cardinals are being outshot and outcoached for long periods of time, as they were against Florida. If Saturday's game comes down to the wire, Louisville will have all the confidence in the world in the final possessions, regardless of the talent gap.

While I can't agree with Chris Smith's assertion that Gorgui Dieng is as good as Anthony Davis, or that Chane Behanan is a top three power forward, Dieng and Behanan have certainly been forces in the paint for Louisville. Cardinal guards like Peyton Siva and Russ Smith can be maddening, inefficient and error-prone, but one of the two point guards almost always contributes key plays when a game is to be won.

Where Kentucky resembles six perfectly coordinated, hyper-athletic robots programmed to deliver Calipari his elusive first national title, Louisville is reminiscent of a high school team whose players have known each other for years and love committing to the defensive end of the floor for one another.

It's yet another dichotomy that adds to the intrigue of one of the most anticipated Final Four games in memory.

Posted by Ross Lancaster at 3:49 PM | Comments (0)

Hawk Hell Rises to Stern's Challenge

The theoretically exhausted Washington Wizards will play their third game in three days when they host the Detroit Pistons at the Verizon Center tonight. If past practice is any indication of future performance — and it so rarely is in today's NBA — it could be a long game for the Pistons. Just ask the Utah Jazz.

Yesterday, the Jazz went into Atlanta, where the Hawks looked to wrap up their own back-to-back-to-back run. Atlanta had beaten the Nets by 9 on Friday, then exerted a lot of energy in overcoming a 16-point deficit in Washington on Saturday. In a league notorious for teams taking unscheduled nights off even in seasons not shortened by lockouts and the ensuing panic to recoup as much lost revenue as possible through overloaded dance cards, this figured to be a proverbial lay-up for the Jazz. Instead, they got 68 minutes of Hawk Hell.

Atlanta opened up a 17-point second quarter lead on the Jazz only to lose it all and then some, trailing by as many as 4 in the fourth quarter and 5 in the second overtime. But the Hawks never folded. In a game that featured 14 lead changes and 19 ties, Joe Johnson hit a trey with 7.5 seconds remaining in that second overtime to give his team a third chance. He then added 8 points in the fourth overtime, two coming on a 20-footer with 16.9 seconds remaining that put away Al Jefferson (28 points, 17 rebounds), Paul Millsap (25 points, 13 rebounds, 2 buzzer misses), and the Jazz.

It was the kind of team effort the NBA has not been known for in the post-Jordan era, and is a refreshing glimpse of the mental toughness that has been more the rule than the exception this season. Players have picked up the gauntlet thrown down by the NBA schedule-makers, responding to back-to-back-to-back games with a fury they lacked during the last lockout.

Today, B2B2Bs are a unique phenomenon of NBA labor unrest, a way of greedy owners sticking it to greedy players. But they were once a commonplace occurrence in the NBA. In fact, during the Association's first two decades, teams often played on four or more consecutive days. Hall-of-Famer Dolph Schayes did it 28 times in 14 seasons with the Syracuse Nationals. When the Nationals moved to Philadelphia in 1963, he retired in mid-season, but stayed on to coach the 76ers through an eight-games-in-eight-days stretch that March. The historic run of consecutive game days, believed to be the longest in NBA history, started in St. Louis, went east for "home" games in two Pennsylvania cities not named Philadelphia, then ended on the Left Coast. Eight cities, six road games, albeit only three wins. Of the 42 B2B2Bs this season, 22 are in only two cities and 20 span as many as three cities. Only 10 require three road games.

It should come as no surprise to hear Schayes telling FOX Sports last month that "three in a row was nothing" in his day. He's even called today's players babies who don't know what hardship is. What Schayes regards as "a piece of cake" has seemingly translated into far more of a burden by today's standards, to the point where they should become an effective deterrent to labor unrest to come.

Back-to-back-to-backs were reintroduced in 1999 season, when every team crammed 50 games into a 90-day regular season. So this year, when NBA VP Matt Winick and his cadre of schedulers had 124 days to accommodate 66 games for everyone, the players knew what was coming. Nevertheless, the topic remained a bone of contention in the preseason, and there's been belly-aching in every city leading up to the home team's three-game set. "You've talked about how tough the back-to-backs are," Miami Heat forward Mike Miller told The Sports Xchange during Miami's only three-in-three stretch in mid-February. "Now back-to-back-to-back is just going to make it that much tougher."

Despite the griping, teams have responded. In 1999, 64 B2B2Bs were played, with only 8 teams sweeping all three games. Of the 33 concluded in 2012 to date, there have already been 6 sweeps, including one by Miller's Heat. Not only did the Hawks do it yesterday, but the San Antonio Spurs did, as well. Through last night, teams playing for the third time in three nights are 18-15. Compare that to1999, when third-nighters went only 28-36.

Part of this improvement is that the NBA is a kinder, gentler — make that softer — league than it was 13 years ago. Only 42 B2B2Bs are scheduled this year. That's a third less than in 1999, despite similar demands on time. (Both lockout-shortened seasons required an average of 8 games scheduled per day, up from 7 during normal-length seasons.) Of the 30 teams today, only 12 have more than one back-to-back-to-back stretch, including the Hawks, who played their first in January. In 1999, 22 teams played two or more, with 13 even playing three. Consider the plight of the 1999 Milwaukee Bucks, who played three B2B2Bs in a three-week span between March 8 and 22. They went a respectable 5-4 in those games.

Another part of this year's success is the mail-in factor, which dilutes the competitive factor across the Association and gives the back-to-back-to-backers a much lower fence to hurdle. If you're not familiar with the mail-in factor, just look at San Antonio'a performance against New Orleans on Friday, or the Heat against the Thunder last night.

The Jazz, however, set their Compete Level to '10' yesterday, which makes the Hawks' accomplishment the most stunning and ideological of this entire season, if not of the post-Michael Jordan era. Who knew that something so good could be born of the over-saturated effects of players and owners rescuing every last dollar of revenue in a shortened season that started as a giant middle finger extended to fans?

Posted by Bob Ekstrom at 1:55 PM | Comments (0)

March 23, 2012

Foul Territory: Girlie Dunks, Sainted Punks

Peyton Re-Place, It's Elway and the Highway, or the Broncos Finally Found Their Savior — Peyton Manning will play in Denver in 2012 after choosing to join the Broncos, leaving Tim Tebow as the odd man out. Manning's heavily-anticipated decision came after visits with the Titans, 49ers, Cardinals, and Broncos. Ironically, the last person to learn of Manning's decision was LeBron James.

The "V" is For "Vertical," Chocolate Thund-her, Dunkin' Nonuts, or the Shot Heard Around — Baylor's Brittney Griner dunked in the Bears 76-57 NCAA tournament win over Florida on Tuesday night. She became the second woman to dunk in the NCAA tournament. Slam Dunk Contest judges in attendance universally scored it a "2."

Tim For Tat — In the wake of Manning's signing, Tim Tebow was traded to the New York Jets on Wednesday. Tebow was in no way upset about being uprooted in Denver due to Manning, and was, in fact, elated, because the deal verified the existence of a "supreme being."

Goodell Cleaned Up New Orleans Way Faster Than FEMA Did, or You Don't Get Paid For Taking Hits — Sean Payton was suspended without pay for a year for his role in the New Orleans Saints bounty scandal, while former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams was banned indefinitely. General manager Mickey Loomis was banned for eight games, and the team was fined $500,000 and lost two second-round draft picks. Oddly, though, no beads were awarded in New Orleans for these busts.

Tarred And Fettered, or Right Hand, Man, or Carpel Tar Heel Syndrome — North Carolina point guard Kendall Marshall broke his right wrist late in Sunday's win over Creighton, and had surgery to insert a screw on Monday. It was the second major wrist injury suffered by a Tar Heel, as forward Jon Henson sprained his left wrist in the first round of the ACC tournament. The basketball injuries followed a flurry of similar wrist injuries that befell the UNC football team, most as a result of handcuffs being on too tight.

Uh Oh! There's Another Former Packer Quarterback on the Loose, or For Once, Tarvaris Jackson Didn't Get Benched For His Play — The Seattle Seahawks signed free agent quarterback Matt Flynn, who spent four seasons in Green Bay, to a three-year, $26 million deal. Flynn, in the true fashion of a former Packer quarterback, relayed the news of his contract by sending a text boasting of his "big, fat one."

Steel Curtains — Hines Ward retired after 14 years with the Pittsburgh Steelers, saying it "wouldn't feel right" to play for another team. Ward said a comeback was unlikely, although a crackback was.

Off the Hook, or Points-Counterpoints — NASCAR's penalties against Jimmie Johnson and crew chief Chad Knaus were overturned on Tuesday. Johnson was originally docked 25 points, while Knaus faced a six-race suspension and a $100,000 fine. NASCAR's reversal was an indication of its new "Boys, have it back" policy.

Agent Zero Tolerance, or I Guess This Means He'll Be "Packing," or Hired Gun — The Grizzlies signed former Washington Wizard guard Gilbert Arenas to beef up their 17th–ranked scoring offense. In light of Arenas past transgressions, Grizzlies officials have asked Arenas to maintain a low profile, which would, ironically, make him a "concealed weapon."

When the Starter Becomes the Backup Plan, or Second Choice Words — Alex Smith agreed to remain with the San Francisco 49ers, even after the team seriously courted Peyton Manning. Smith signed a three-year deal that could pay him up to $33 million. At a time when he could have complained about being treated like a dog — first they wanted him to "sit," then they wanted him to "stay" — Smith maintained a professional attitude.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 1:38 PM | Comments (0)

March 22, 2012

Great Players, Great Managers?

Most baseball analysts blurt out observations that beg for further examination here and there. Ken Rosenthal, the FOX Sports writer and commentator, and one of the best analysts of the breed, is one of them. Here he is, musing about Don Mattingly's growth as a manager in light of having had "three strikes" against him when he took the command post for the Los Angeles Dodgers last year: "He had never managed in the majors or minors. He had to exert greater authority over players who knew him only as a coach. And he had been a great player — a drawback, seeing as how great players rarely make great managers."

Rosenthal isn't necessarily wrong, of course. And he could have more coming evidence to join his observation that Mattingly could yet become a great manager. Robin Ventura, too, was a great player whose career was compromised by injuries, and he, too, could become a great manager. (He, too, has never managed in the minor leagues, incidentally.) So how right is Rosenthal that great players rarely make great managers?

Casey Stengel was an okay player, not a great one, who became a great manager, at least when he had the kind of players who could execute (one of his own favorite words) his kind of baseball. Connie Mack was likewise, if you throw in that he also owned the team he managed two dynasties' worth. Like Stengel as a player, a kid named Mel Ott learned the game direct from a master, John McGraw, when McGraw — fearing some know-it-all minor league coach or manager would wreck Ott's outside-the-box but unstoppable swing — kept him on the bench next to him, showing him action in spurts for two seasons, before turning him loose to become the National League's home run king. Unlike Stengel, alas, Master Melvin tanked as a major league manager.

Christy Mathewson was the greatest pitcher in the dead-ball National League; he might have become a great manager, had he lived — his Cincinnati teams improved incrementally during his brief period managing them. Clark Griffith was an excellent pitcher in the dead-ball era but — other than one pennant in his first try as a player/manager (he won the 1901 American League flag with the Chicago White Sox) — an up-and-down manager at best. He'd eventually win two more pennants and an unlikely World Series ... as the owner of the Washington ("First in war, first in peace, and last in the American League") Senators.

Did someone say Rogers Hornsby? The Hall of Fame second baseman won a World Series as the player/manager of the 1926 St. Louis Cardinals, but that's the high spot of his managing career. Hornsby, in fact, was dealt away to the New York Giants (in the deal that made Frankie Frisch a Cardinal) when the streets of St. Louis were barely swept clean from the Series celebration. From the written record it's fair to conclude that Hornsby was a so-so manager (charitably speaking) at best, who managed to alienate his bosses, his players, or both, and without apology, even when it might cost him a shot at another pennant. (Which happened once: he was managing the 1932 Chicago Cubs to a pennant until he got dumped in favor of Charlie Grimm that August.)

Speaking of Frankie Frisch, the Fordham Flash was named the Cardinals' manager during the 1933 season, when the Redbirds decided to dump Gabby Street. Frisch had a better turn of it that Street but he couldn't keep the Cardinals from finishing fifth. The following year, Frisch led the Gas House Gang to the World Series rings following an unforgettable pennant race. It was the only pennant and/or World Series win of Frisch's career as a manager. He would have only three second place finishes the rest of his managing career, he'd finish fourth five times and seventh or eighth four times, with a sixth-place finish in there somewhere. A popular and Hall of Fame player, Frisch's wounding flaw — even more gaping when you consider the Cardinals were turning out a boatload of Hall of Famers in that time — was that, once he quit playing to become a manager alone, he'd make the past the paragon of baseball romance and superiority, treat his own incumbents like interlopers at best, and harangue anyone who'd listen that nobody was quite like the guys he used to play with.

Mickey Cochrane might have secured himself as a great manager after winning two straight pennants and a World Series with the Detroit Tigers, not to mention being the American League's Most Valuable Player in the first of those two seasons. The Hall of Fame catcher, however, was so high strung that he had to be replaced in the interim in 1936 when he suffered a nervous breakdown; the playing side of his career ended in 1937 when he was coned by a fastball from Yankee pitcher Bump Hadley. He ultimately returned to the dugout as manager and finished in second place, but he seems to have lost his thirst for field competition and was replaced for keeps during 1938. His 1934 and 1935 seasons were his only uninterrupted seasons as player/manager; as would prove true of ill-fated pitcher Herb Score two decades later, Cochrane as a manager wasn't great because he might have been great.

Walter Alston had only one major league at bat as a player but won seven pennants and four World Series rings with the Brooklyn and Los Angeles Dodgers. Whitey Herzog was a modestly-endowed (though tenacious) player who became a great manager, with seven division winners, three pennant winners, and a World Series champion on his resume. Billy Martin was a slightly more talented Herzog precursor as a player; he became a great manager for the game you had to win like an hour ago … but a terrible manager for a long-haul winning project. Gene Mauch was a serviceable player who would have been a genuinely great manager — if he didn't know how to outsmart himself too often. Hank Bauer was a valuable Yankee platoon player who won one pennant and World Series managing the Baltimore Orioles, but nothing much otherwise. Harry (The Hat) Walker was a solid if not great player who was probably better suited to coaching, since he was a better teacher than he was a manager.

Pete Rose was a great player (you know the story about why he isn't in the Hall of Fame as well as I do, folks) but a moderate manager at best. He may have managed the Reds to five straight second-place finishes, but he was often out-maneuvered by his opposing number and was somewhat renowned around the league for being unable to handle his bullpen.

("Some managers think if a guy's not actually in a game, he's not pitching. But if he's tossing on the sidelines, man, he's getting hot … [Rose]'d get [Rob] Murphy up in the third; he'd warm him up in the fourth. Then he'd sit him down. He'd get [Norm] Charlton up in the fifth. Sometimes I'd look down there and he'd have both left-handers going at the same time. Why would you warm 'em both up at once? You're only going to use one lefty or the other! Then, after he'd worked 'em out three or four times, Pete would put one in the game and be surprised he had no zip. "He can't be tired," he'd say. "He ain't pitched in three days!" Somebody counted how many times he warmed Murphy up one year, and it was over 200. I like Pete, boy — but I loved managing against him." — Whitey Herzog)

And the freshly-retired Tony La Russa, of course, was a horror as a player but one of the no-questions-asked great managers. Ever.

It may be rare, but great players, or at least well-above-average players, have made great managers now and then. Here are the men I judge to be the best great-players-turned-great-managers:

John McGraw — His image as the emperor of the New York Giants is so profound even now that it's easy to forget what he was as a player. In fact, he was the kind of player the Moneyballers would love: he has the third-highest on-base percentage ever, behind Babe Ruth (.474) and Ted Williams (.482). He was considered an above-average defensive third baseman, was usually good for scoring 100+ runs a year (his average per 162 games: 151) and walking 100+ times a year. (His average per 162 games: 123. And you thought Eddie Yost was the Walking Man?) Did I mention he was impossible to strike out? (His 162 game average: 23.) McGraw's peak playing career was a mere 12 seasons, and his total playing numbers wouldn't have put him into the Hall of Fame as a player, but the Little Napoleon was a terrific player.

Miller Huggins — The field commander of the first Yankee dynasty was actually ranked by Bill James in 2001 (in The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract) as No. 37 among the all-time second basemen. He played in the dead-ball era and pulled up sixth in the voting for what was then the Most Valuable Player award. (The Chalmers Award: Chalmers was an automobile manufacturer who decided to present a car every year, from 1910-1914, to the player with the highest batting average. When the company decided it wasn't boosting sales the way it thought at first, they discontinued it. Huggins finished sixth in 1911. The award's greatest fame: Chalmers ended up giving cars to both Ty Cobb and Nap Lajoie in 1910, when their tie was compromised after the St. Louis Browns were determined to have fed Lajoie extra hits in a bid to beat the hated Cobb, but Cobb finished ahead by a fraction, anyway.) The diminutive Huggins was known particularly for his ability to reach base and steal bases; in fact, he may have invented the delayed steal tactic.

The Mighty Mite took over the also-ran Yankees in 1918 and improved the team each season until he began winning pennants like they were going out of style: six pennants and three World Series titles, and his fourth-place 1918 was the lowest finish the Yankees experienced under his leadership. It didn't always come easily; his Yankee players too often undermined him in the early going. (Babe Ruth once blasted into his office threatening to beat him senseless and, infamously enough, eventually hung Huggins over the rear of a moving train in a bid to get Huggins to rescind a disciplinary fine.) Tragically, he died in September 1929 (Art Fletcher finished out the season; the Yankees finished second behind the launch of the second great Philadelphia Athletics run); the American League cancelled its schedule the following day out of respect for him, and the Yankees erected the first in what became known as Monument Park in his honor in 1932.

It took Hall of Fame voters a lot longer to honor him; he wasn't elected until 1964. Some still thought Huggins may have been the most under-appreciated manager the game had ever known.

Bill Terry — Terry, of course, is a Hall of Fame first baseman; James ranked him at number 26 all-time. He became the player/manager of the Giants after John McGraw's retirement and, after finishing in sixth place in his first such season, led the Giants to the 1933 World Series title over the Washington Senators. He went from there to finish second, third, and then two straight pennants, before his teams dropped to third, fifth, sixth, and fifth again and he'd be succeeded by another player/manager, Mel Ott, for 1942. For awhile, however, Terry did look like a great manager; he had a reputation, in fact, for being a stand-up man when his teams lost.

What probably kept him from managing a little bit longer, however, was his reputation as a cold and sarcastic fellow who had little patience and less trust with anyone he didn't know very well. What's probably helped to obscure his actual worth as a manager, and maybe a player as well, is that, in a much later generation, he would join Frankie Frisch in running a Hall of Fame Veterans Committee that seemed far more interested in getting as many of their Giants and Cardinals buds into Cooperstown as they could get away with, regardless of just how Cooperstown-worthy those buds actually were.

Charlie Grimm — He may have been the best defensive first baseman ever, or at least this side of Keith Hernandez, though he was a below-average hitter for his time and place. If we accept that defense is still terribly underrated in measuring a great player, if not a Hall of Fame player, then it's safe to say Jolly Cholly (he was a classic cutup as a player and, later, a manager) was a great player. He was an even better manager: he took over as player/manager for Rogers Hornsby in 1932, after Hornsby's harshness alienated his players, and won the first of three pennants with a surge that included a fourteen-game winning streak. Grimm also managed the Cubs to pennants in 1935 and 1945, though he resigned in 1938 saying he'd lost control of the team and returned only after a little broadcasting and managing the then-minor league Milwaukee Brewers, where he became yet again a fan favorite.

After he won the 1945 pennant, Grimm had a couple of more lame seasons with the Cubs and the Boston Braves (it probably isn't fair to hang him with the wartime-pennant tag), during which time you could make a case that Grimm, like Stengel, simply lacked the players who could execute his kind of baseball. Jolly Cholly turned things around when the Braves moved to Milwaukee, though, with a new nucleus that included Hank Aaron, Joe Adcock, Del Crandall, and Eddie Mathews, not to mention a pitching staff helmed by Warren Spahn, Lew Burdette, and Bob Buhl. He managed them to four second-place finishes and a third-place finish and basically laid the field groundwork for the Braves' back-to-back pennants in 1957 and 1958; his move to the broadcast booth allowed Fred Haney to step in and finish what he started. After a brief return to the Cubs, as one of the early faculty on Phil Wrigley's infamous "College of Coaches" experiment, Grimm held assorted front office gigs with the Cubs until his death in 1983; his widow was allowed to scatter his ashes around Wrigley Field.

Joe Cronin — Cronin, of course, is a Hall of Fame shortstop; James ranked him as the eighth-greatest shortstop who ever played the game. But he was also a two-time pennant-winning manager, with the 1933 Washington Senators and the 1946 Boston Red Sox. In 13 seasons managing the Red Sox—eleven of which he did while playing shortstop — he finished with only three losing records and six first-division finishes other than the 1946 pennant. He managed the Red Sox to a .539 winning percentage until he moved out of the dugout in favor of former Yankee manager Joe McCarthy after 1947.

Cronin proved far less successful as a Red Sox general manager, however, after a fast enough start. (His aggressive dealmaking helped the Red Sox fight in a couple of memorable pennant races in 1948-49.) He passed on a chance to sign Willie Mays (the Red Sox would be the last major league team to admit an African-American to its major league roster) and ended up as the president of the American League, the first former player to achieve that position. (Bill White would match it in the National League a couple of decades later. But Cronin was the most successful Red Sox manager until the advent of Terry Francona.

Lou Boudreau — Boudreau was ranked the number twelve shortstop of all time by James; he also won the 1948 World Series as the player/manager of the Cleveland Indians. He was a good manager, maybe a great one, and you might care to note James remarking that, in his (James's) opinion Boudreau's Indians may have had the greatest coaching staff in the history of the major leagues: Bill McKechnie, Muddy Ruel, Mel Harder, and (for a short while) Burt Shotton.

Yogi Berra — The greatest catcher who ever played major league baseball (Johnny Bench is his absolute closest rival, and an extreme close at that, but the edge actually goes to Berra) was a better manager than he gets credit for having been. He put in seven years as a manager, won two pennants, and managed both those pennant winners to seventh games in the World Series. Yogi got his first crack at it the year after he retired as a player, handed the Yankee job in 1964. It may have been done in large part out of Yankee desperation to draw back fans who were flocking to the crosstown, tragicomic Mets — thanks in large part to Berra's former skipper Stengel — and, thanks to some of his players getting a little too far out of line with good ol' Yogi, Berra wasn't having a fine time of it until August.

In fact, the Yankees were planning rather deviously to dump Berra at season's end no matter what. They even had St. Louis manager Johnny Keane — himself preparing to leave the Cardinals, thanks to some front-office shenanigans that may have included lining up one-time Dodger and Giant pilot Leo Durocher (who wasn't a great player and was an overrated manager) as his successor — lined up to take the Yankee job if Berra was to become a sacrificial lamb. Leave it to those two star-crossed managers to really screw the pooch. Both the Yankees and the Cardinals surged to win their pennants at practically the last minute; the Cardinals managed to elbow their way in (they almost lost a season-ending set to Stengel's Mets, of all people, before winning the finale for the flag) in the immediate wake of the infamous Philadelphia Phillies collapse. Then the Cardinals won a thriller of a World Series in the bargain.

The following day, Keane jolted a St. Louis press conference at which Cardinal owner Gussie Busch planned to announce his rehiring; instead, Keane handed Busch his letter of resignation. Meanwhile, back in the jungle, Berra walked into the Yankee offices thinking they wanted to talk about 1965, but he walked out with his head on the proverbial plate.

Yogi moved to the Mets as a coach, ultimately getting the manager's job when Gil Hodges died of his second heart attack in spring 1972. He led the Mets (It ain't over until it's over!) to the unlikely "You Gotta Believe!" 1973 pennant (they started that September dead last in the NL East) and damn near won the World Series against the Oakland A's. (The 1973 Mets were the only opponent of that remarkable Oakland run to take the Mustache Gang to a seventh Series game.) Prodigally, he returned to the Yankees after his firing by the Mets in 1975, first as a coach, then as a manager. He managed the 1984 Yankees to third place, then — when the 1985 edition got off to a sluggish (6-10) start, owner George Steinbrenner pushed his customary panic button, dumped Berra after having promised he'd be given the entire season, and announced infamously, "I didn't fire Yogi — the players did." Adding insult to injury, Steinbrenner dispatched reluctant former manager/incumbent advisor Clyde King to perform the execution, causing a rupture between Berra and the Yankees that lasted almost two decades.

Red Schoendienst — Ranked by James as the 28th best second baseman of all time, Schoendienst was signed as a shortstop, but moved to the outfield when he couldn't buck Marty Marion in St. Louis; he led the National League in stolen bases as a rookie. He was moved back to the infield when Lou Klein was injured, then jumped to the Mexican league, and (in James's words) "screwed up his career beyond repair." Schoendiest shone at second base and at the plate; he was a switch hitter who looked the same from either side of the plate. He played on the Cardinals' 1946 World Series champions and, a decade later, helped the 1957-58 Braves to back-to-back pennants while playing maybe his best baseball at age 35. He was knocked out by tuberculosis and sat out 1959; after a kind of off 1960 with the Braves, he returned to the Cardinals and put up a pair of solid seasons as a backup player before becoming a coach.

Schoendienst took the managerial job after Johnny Keane's double switch to the Yankees and won pennants in 1967-68 and a World Series in 1967, managing Cardinal teams whose anchors were Hall of Famers Bob Gibson, Steve Carlton, Orlando Cepeda (who nicknamed the '67 edition "El Birdos") and Lou Brock, supported by such above-average talent as Curt Flood, Tim McCarver, Mike Shannon, Dal Maxvill, Julian Javier, Joe Hoerner, and Nelson Briles. Schoendienst's lifetime record as a manager: 1041-955 in 14 seasons. He was elected to the Hall of Fame himself in 1989, and it may have been a tandem recognition of both his standing as one of the two best second basemen in baseball in the 1950s (with Nellie Fox) and as an excellent manager.

Gil Hodges — Hodges was arguably the best first baseman in an era which didn't produce genuinely great first basemen. (James ranked him number 30 all-time.) As a manager, the longtime Brooklyn Dodgers favorite ("A genuinely beloved player. How many players in each generation are genuinely beloved, all around the country?" — James) trained for his turnaround of the Miracle Mets by managing the Washington Senators to steady improvement in each season he ran the club, even though they still posted losing records. After finishing his playing career with the Original Mets (he was plagued by injuries in 1962 and 1963), Hodges was traded to the Senators in a swap for outfielder/clown Jimmy Piersall so he could take the reins from Mickey Vernon as manager. Poetic justice: He returned to the Mets (to succeed Salty Parker) in a swap for left-handed pitcher Bill Denehy.

After managing them to a ninth-place finish with their best record to date in 1968, Hodges took the Mets all the way to that stupefying World Series conquest. (Asked to explain it all at the end, the usually undemonstrative Hodges grinned, spread his hands, and purred, "Can't be done.") Except for 1968, Hodges never had a losing record managing the Mets, though in 1970 and 1971 they finished with precisely the same record: 83 wins, 79 losses, and a third-place finish in each of those seasons. He collapsed of his second heart attack (he'd suffered one during the 1968 season, too) in spring training 1972 and died at 47. It was said that Hodges, a gentle and decent man renowned for his quiet way, was a terrible stress manager. (As a Dodger player, Hodges was known for strength, once picking two fighting teammates up in each arm and dumping them each in a trash bin … but he was also seen struggling just to light a cigarette because his hands shook so violently.)

He was known for emphasizing fundamental baseball, shepherding (with his coach Rube Walker) solid pitching, using his bullpen as judiciously as his bench, allowing his excellent Met defense to flourish (the World Series wasn't the only time the 1969 Mets looked like the Flying Wallendas in the field), using every last man on his roster (you half expected him to send coach Yogi Berra up as a pinch-hitter in the right situation), playing almost guerrilla-like hit-and-run, and enforcing almost unobtrusive discipline. Which made Hodges's most famous moment outside the Series triumph (and the shoe-polish incident, especially) so memorable: he was once so dismayed by Cleon Jones's apparent lack of field hustle that he pulled Jones from a July 1969 game ... by walking all the way to left field and, without saying a word, escorting Jones to the dugout. The move sent Jones and the Mets a profound message (Jones himself ended up finishing third in the National League batting race with a .340 average and finished seventh in the MVP voting), and they never looked back from there.

Bob Lemon — A Hall of Fame pitcher (Bill James ranked him as number 48 all-time; he was on a Series-winning pitching staff in Cleveland with Lou Boudreau as his manager), Lemon as a manager deserved way better. He was the kind of manager who settled a team down and let them play their game after they'd been through too much turmoil, most notably the 1978 Yankees: Lemon stepped in when Billy Martin yapped his way out of his job ("One's a born liar and the other's convicted," Martin said infamously about Reggie Jackson and George Steinbrenner), ended up winning the pennant and the World Series, then stepped aside to let Martin return during 1979.

Lemon got the call again in 1981, after Gene Michael — fed up with Steinbrenner's threats, veiled or otherwise, challenged The Boss to fire him or knock off the threats — got fired. Again, Lemon got the Yankees to the postseason; he won the second-half title in the strike-interrupted season, but the Dodgers beat the Yankees in the Series. Lemon made his missteps, most notoriously pulling Tommy John with Game 6 tied at one then watching helplessly as the Yankees were murdered, 9-2. His biggest misstep, though, may have been letting sportswriter Bill Madden talk him out of resigning in 1982, when he'd become fed up with Steinbrenner's harassment; he ended up canned again. Lemon had actually had a solid managing career before he walked into the Yankee orbit for the first time, winning two Manager of the Year awards: he'd led the Kansas City Royals to their first winning record in 1971; and, he led the White Sox to a third-place finish in 1977 and a 26-game improvement over the previous season.

There are those — Madden among them — who say Lemon was never quite the same after his 26-year-old son was killed in an automobile accident a month after he won the 1978 World Series, which may or may not have helped exacerbate his coming miseries under Steinbrenner's hammer. After 1982, Lemon never managed again.

Joe Torre — How good was Joe Torre as a player? How does a nine-time all-star (five of them when the fans didn't have the all-star vote) and, statistically, a solid case as an average Hall of Famer strike you? (He won one MVP, finished top twenty six other times, and played several positions above average, though James ranked him as the 11th-best catcher of all-time.) How good was he as a manager, really? Okay, I know the main knock on him is that he wasn't a great bullpen operator (Mariano Rivera notwithstanding), and that he didn't look like anything resembling even a good manager until all those great Yankee seasons. Oh, and let's not forget any and everyone who carped that those Yankee teams really didn't need much of a manager. They said the same things about Casey Stengel, too … at first.

But if you consider that managing probably involves about 65 percent keeping egos in line and massaged at once, you would have to say Torre was a better manager than he looked. He wasn't close to Stengel's league as a tactician or a thinker, but he had this much in common with Stengel: when he had the right players to play his game, he won. (He didn't win the 1982 NL West with the Atlanta Braves by accident, even if you could make a case that that year's Braves were playing way over their own heads — which, if true, would make a case for Torre's managerial expertise.) Clearly, the Yankees saw something in him that made them believe he was the man to continue their resurrection to greatness in the 1990s. Clearly, he had something going for him to lead those teams to four World Series rings in five years (three consecutive), not to mention ten AL East titles and six pennants in 12 years.

Then, after his first second-place finish since 1997 and his ignominious casting-off, Torre took the Dodgers helm and led them to back-to-back NL West titles, before resigning after a fourth-place 2010. It's very, very difficult to look at the record objectively and conclude that Joe Torre wasn't a genuinely great manager when all was said and done. Marry that to a playing career that should have earned him a plaque in Cooperstown in its own right, and Torre won't have much longer to have his induction speech prepared.

Mike Scioscia — The first World Series-winning manager in Angels history was also a very solid major league catcher; James ranked Scioscia as the No. 36 catcher all-time, a distinction he probably earned more with his work behind the plate than at the plate. Scioscia wasn't a fast fellow by any means, but he was an impossible strikeout (in fact, he has the best K/BB ratio as a hitter of any catcher since World War II — it's even better than that of Yogi Berra, who was also an impossible strikeout) and difficult to get grounding into a double play because his bat control was among the best of his time. Remembered mostly as an expert at blocking the plate and as an expert handler of pitching, Scioscia wasn't much of a run producer at the plate, but he did hit one that broke hearts in New York, when he connected against Dwight Gooden and hit one out to tie up Game Four of the 1988 National League Championship Series — after having hit a measly three home runs on the regular season.

He managed in the Dodger system for almost a decade, before realizing the Dodgers weren't going to give him a shot at the parent club, leaving him prone to entreaties from the Angels. He took the helm in 2000 and, two years later, having installed a style of play that included solid pitching and a run-gun-and-stun offense ("If we still have an out, we still have a chance" — outfielder/first baseman Darin Erstad), the Angels barreled into the postseason by winning the American League wild card. Then, they ran roughshod over Torre's Yankees in the division series, upended the Minnesota Twins for the pennant, and out-dueled the San Francisco Giants for the World Series rings. In 12 seasons managing to date, Scioscia has led the Angels to five American League West titles and kept them as a divisional power.

Scioscia has also been a kind of managerial trainer — his former coaches Bud Black, Joe Maddon, and Ron Roenicke have since become respected major league managers, with Maddon already a three-time postseason entrant with the Tampa Bay Rays.

Thus do I make twelve men in baseball history who were both genuinely great players, under one or another definition (regardless of whether theirs was Hall of Fame-level greatness), and genuinely great managers. At this writing, Don Mattingly could become a genuinely great manager in time or the next Mel Ott, a genuinely great player who went genuinely into the tank as a manager. Robin Ventura could go either way, too. And if someone wises up and allows Ryne Sandberg the shot at major league managing he's spent several years earning in the minor leagues, Sandberg, too, could manage his way into a rather exclusive club.

Posted by Jeff Kallman at 6:09 PM | Comments (0)

Injuries Muddy Stanley Cup Playoff Picture

When it comes to the NHL stretch drive and upcoming Stanley Cup playoffs, you often hear the phrase "the best players have to be the best players." But what happens if those best players are in the press box due to injury? Not only does it impact the team's positioning, it also affects the big picture — once players return, there's conditioning, timing, and chemistry, not to mention the fact that there may also be a little bit of a savior complex for teams that are struggling.

Where will this impact be felt? Enough teams have been bit by the injury bug that the epidemic of fallen star players reaches wide. You can't start anywhere except in Pittsburgh, where Sidney Crosby's long-documented concussion/neck issues have kept him out of the majority of this season. He's back now, but the nature of his injury — from symptoms to diagnosis to treatment — will leave a question mark hovering over his name probably until the final shift of his season. The Penguins managed to thrive without Crosby, and his return could go any number of ways. The logical thinking is that the Penguins will be even stronger with their captain back, but there's always a chance that the rest of the Penguins exhale and let their performance dip following the initial adrenaline rush.

Out West, the biggest question comes with Detroit Red Wings captain Nicklas Lidstrom. The ageless wonder may finally be feeling his age — not so much in his performance, but a bone bruise to the ankle has kept him out for nearly a month. During that time, the Wings have hit their roughest stretch in years, and home ice advantage — a certainty during their massive home winning streak — is now in jeopardy. Reports out of Detroit peg Lidstrom's potential return as this upcoming weekend, but there's nothing certain for sure, and there's no guarantee about how the injury will affect Lidstrom's play when he does get back in the lineup. So much of Lidstrom's game comes down to his positioning, something that will probably be affected given the nature of his injury. Still, Lidstrom's mere presence is a steadying influence on the entire Detroit lineup, which could be enough to steady the injury-plagued squad.

In Washington, Nicklas Backstrom's absence has been significant. Playing at more than a point-per-game pace when a concussion knocked Backstrom from the lineup, many pundits have connected Alex Ovechkin's struggles with Backstrom's injury. Ovechkin has recently shown flashes of his old brilliance, but there's no doubt that the Capitals miss their No. 1 center, particularly because the team has struggled to score during much of Dale Hunter's reign. Ovechkin's recent surge may help rectify this situation, but there's no doubting the importance of someone like Backstrom, especially for a team with such high playoff hopes going into the season. Backstrom has started to skate again, but there's no timeline for his return. Recent history has shown us how tricky concussions can be, but if the Caps do make the playoffs and Backstrom is healthy, things are quite different.

Injured players in secondary roles can impact a team just as much as front-line players. The San Jose Sharks have been without Martin Havlat for the majority of the season. When healthy, the shifty Havlat solidifies the second line and the second power play unit. This creates a trickle-down effect, not just slotting players in their proper positions but also forcing opposing coaches to rethink their defensive deployment. Havlat's return has coincided with a jump in San Jose's scoring; whether it's enough to undo their February free-fall remains to be seen, but it does demonstrate the importance of second-line players and role players.

From Detroit's Darren Helm (out 4-6 weeks) to Los Angeles' Simon Gagne (concussed since December), key figures are missing from NHL lineups across the map. A quick review of Stanley Cup winners over the past 20 years or so demonstrates the importance of both luck and health in the lineup, and while injuries will always be part of the game, a complete lineup is certainly a greater threat than one running on spare parts.

Posted by Mike Chen at 11:14 AM | Comments (0)

March 21, 2012

Coaching the Cause Behind Weak First Weekend

I love the NCAA tournament. Let's just get that out of the way. I refuse to work those first two days. I spend countless hours at the bar not talking to my wife and kids (and I really like my wife and kids). In fact, most of March (and a good chunk of February) is spent on the NCAA tournament.

Spreadsheets. I have spreadsheets. Lots of them. I keep track of all kinds of stuff, like the winning percentage of teams with the better efficiency split in second round games (72.9% from 2003 through 2011) and the fact that between 2006 and 2011, only one out of 66 teams with a rebounding margin under 0.5 made the Elite Eight (something to keep in mind, Syracuse fans).

So believe me when I tell you — I love the NCAA tournament.

And that's what makes this that much harder to say:

This year's tournament has sucked.

Okay, maybe "sucked" is a bit harsh. It hasn't sucked like watching "The Voice" sucks, or listening to a couple of grandmothers debate coupons while your football team loses the Super Bowl sucks. But by NCAA tournament standards, the first and second rounds of 2012 have left much to be desired.

I mean, did you see that Cincinnati/Florida State game on Sunday night? Or Texas/Cincinnati? Or South Florida/Temple? Or any of the Thursday games?

One of the main causes of this is the terrible officiating, which has been discussed everywhere over the past few days. Too many of these officials suck at their jobs, and there's really not a whole lot else to say about it.

Another much less talked about cause for the decrease in quality of games has been the coaching. Here are a few notes from the "my wife thinks I'm stupid for tracking this stuff" file:

* Temple's Fran Dunphy is revered, and he does have that good ol' curmudgeonly coach who always looks like he's half drunk appeal to him, but his tournament record sucks. He's won exactly two NCAA tournament game in his career. The first was with Penn in 1994. He's been 12 tournaments since then with a record of 1-11 in first-round games. In two of the last three years, the Owls have been on the wrong end of a 12-5 upset. He's 63. In the corporate world, we'd be working on a succession plan right about now.

* On the other edge of the age spectrum, Memphis coach Josh Pastner is now 0-2 with losses to Arizona in 2011 (coached by a great tournament coach in Sean Miller) and St. Louis in 2012, coached by Rick Majerus (now 11-1 in first-round games). Tough luck, but it might help to start recruiting a little more grit instead of just athleticism.

(That's really the third and probably biggest cause for the drop in play — kids being developed by influence-peddling AAU vultures who cater to stars instead of coaching fundamentals. The game has devolved because the teaching part of coaching has gotten trampled by the marketing part.)

(The fourth reason — no Gus Johnson. You think the lack of OT games or buzzer beaters is a coincidence? No way. We need Gus Johnson back right now.)

(And now back to ripping bad coaches.)

* If I was a Vanderbilt fan, I would hate having Kevin Stallings as my coach. That guy is sooooo good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. It's amazing! His performance down the stretch in the second-round loss to Wisconsin was legendarily bad (not using one of his two timeouts with the ball down two and 17 seconds on the clock). He's now underperformed his seeding in three of their last four tournament appearances.

* One step worse is John Thompson III, who should really just change his name to "John Thank God I'm Legacy Because Otherwise I'd Be Lucky to Work the Ivy League Thompson III." That's four straight years of underperforming his team's seed, and the Hoyas haven't made even a Sweet 16 since the Final Four in 2007. And he's been a two-seed once and a three-seed twice since then.

* Stallings and Thompson are bad, but the real "I can't believe you have one of the highest paid jobs in sports" award is still the property of Texas' Rick Barnes. In fact, we're just going to name the god damned thing for him. From now on, it's the God Damn Rick Barnes Award For Extremely Poor Coaching.

Now I can maybe talk myself around giving Barnes a pass on his team coming out flat against Cincinnati. They're young. It happens. And they were an 11 seed, so they were supposed to lose. (Then again, so was NC State.) But the shoddy management of his team in the final three minutes of that game (when it was tied at 52) is unforgivable. Barnes is now just 10-10 in 20 career first-round tournament games between Providence, Clemson, and Texas. He's over-performed seeding expectations just once in those 20 tournaments (Sweet 16 as a six-seed in 2004), and under-performed eight times.

Barnes has failed to make the second weekend in nine of his 14 tournaments with the Longhorns, and has just one Final Four despite some of the best players in college hoops playing under his leadership.

* Frank Haith. Damn, dude. I don't care who gave you what award, that was an all-time choke job. You're going to need at least a Final Four run, if not an outright title, to keep the opening-round loss to Norfolk State from defining your legacy in Missouri (the state, not just the school). This isn't Duke where they can lean back on their history and trust funds to make themselves feel better. Missouri fans were set up for the greatest run of their lives, the chance to finally equal Kansas in basketball glory. They were all-in emotionally. And you blew it in the worst possible way. Good luck in the SEC.

* Hey, was that Mike Brey going out in the first weekend for the fifth tournament in a row, with three of those losses coming in the first round as the higher seed? It was? Wow. Great job, Mike. Glad to know that in this crazy world of uncertainty, we can always count on you. Don't let them get you down there in South Bend, coach. You and I know consistency is way more important than winning.

(Ah, I feel better now. I really do.)

The good news is that we should have gotten all of the crap out of the way over the weekend. Of course the officials will still be the officials, but the coaches remaining are the cream of the crop.

By my count, five of the remaining 16 coaches are Hall of Fame locks: Jim Boeheim (Syracuse, who is already in), John Calipari (Kentucky), Tom Izzo (Michigan State), Rick Pitino (Louisville), and Roy Williams (North Carolina).

Behind them, four more have a good shot at the all-time greatness depending on whether they can keep up their current level of success: Billy Donovan (Florida), Bo Ryan (Wisconsin), Thad Matta (Ohio State), and Bill Self (Kansas).

(Quick side note from the Louisville/Michigan State game on Thursday: Pitino is a career 9-0 in Sweet 16 games. Izzo is 7-2. Coaching will not be an issue in that one.)

That's nine of the current 16 coaches still active in the NCAA tournament that could potentially end up in the Hall of Fame, and while it's way too early to put any kind of HOF potential label on Chris Mack (Xavier), Buzz Williams (Marquette), Tom Crean (Indiana), Scott Drew (Baylor), and Mark Gottfried (NC State), all five look to be at the beginning of potentially great runs at their current schools.

Hell, even Ohio's John Groce, an assistant at three of the other Sweet 16 schools (NC State, Xavier, Ohio State) before landing the Bobcats job, is now 2-0 in first-round games.

(And then there's Mick Cronin, who is just ... Mick Cronin.)

So there you have it, sports fans. The first weekend may have disappointed, but the cream has risen to the top, and now we're in for some good ball.

Now if we can just get some damn decent officials.

And Gus Johnson.

Posted by Joshua Duffy at 5:38 PM | Comments (1)

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 4

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Matt Kenseth — Kenseth doggedly chased Brad Keselowski to the finish at Bristol, but could never catch the No. 2 Miller Lite Dodge. The runner-up result gave Kenseth his second top-five finish of the year, and boosted him two places in the Sprint Cup point standings to third.

"As his number of followers would suggest," Kenseth said, "Keselowski is fast becoming America's 'Tweet-heart.' And, no, that's not my Ward Button impression. Keselowski even Tweeted a photo from victory lane. That's impressive. He may be the only NASCAR driver who can 'phone it in' and still be successful.

"Contrary to popular belief, I didn't jump a restart midway through the race to get in front of Keselowski. Oh no. I was trying to get as far away from Brian Vickers as possible."

2. Greg Biffle — Biffle started on the pole at Bristol and led 41 early laps before handling issues stymied his efforts to stay out front. He finished 12th and remained atop the Sprint Cup point standings, with a nine-point lead over Kevin Harvick.

"That breaks my string of third-place finishes," Biffle said. "Still, my average finish is sixth. And let's be honest, nothing says 'average' quite like 'Greg Biffle.'"

3. Kevin Harvick — Harvick was caught up in a lap 24 spin between Regan Smith and Kasey Kahne that collected seven cars, including Harvick's No. 29 Budweiser Chevrolet. Despite extensive damage, Harvick salvaged an 11th at Bristol, and remained second in the point standings, nine behind Greg Biffle.

"Say what you will about Kahne," Harvick said, "but he was the only Hendrick Motorsports driver who was a factor in the race. Just a few months ago, he was apologizing to breastfeeding mothers. Now he's apologizing to expectant fathers. No wonder he's the 'red-headed stepchild of HMS."

4. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson finished ninth at Bristol, scoring his third-straight top-10 finish. It was likely Johnson's last race with crew chief Chad Knaus before Knaus serves his six-race suspension.

"NASCAR seems to be unusually vigilant where Knaus is concerned," Johnson said. "Call it an episode of 'Queer Eye For the Not-So-Straight Guy,' if you will. This being March, I'm surprised NASCAR didn't accuse Chad of having an illegal 'bracket' of some sort.

"But NASCAR came to their senses and overturned our penalties, which is kind of disappointing for Chad. He was planning a vacation to a mysterious locale. If NASCAR officials had asked where he was, Chad had instructed us to wink and simply say 'parts unknown.'"

5. Martin Truex, Jr. — Truex finished third at Bristol, leading a parade of Michael Waltrip Racing cars in the top five. Teammates Clint Bowyer and Brian Vickers came home fourth and fifth, respectively, and Truex jumped four places in the point standings to fourth, 18 out of first.

"Michael Waltrip has assembled quite an organization here," Truex said. "And, he's quite entertaining on Showtime's 'Inside NASCAR.' So that's at least two things that Michael's better at being behind than a steering wheel: a desk and a microphone."

6. Brad Keselowski — Keselowski dominated at Thunder Valley, leading 231 laps and holding off Matt Kenseth to win the Food City 500 at Bristol. The young Penske Racing driver proved that last fall's Bristol win was no fluke, and gave Dodge its first win of the year.

"The Sprint Cup championship is obviously a goal," Keselowski said. "But that goal is secondary to reaching 1,000,000 followers on Twitter. As a social media hound, I want to get social medieval on the web's behinds.

"Of course, there are those that say my penchant for social media interaction can only spell my downfall where the Cup is concerned. Those people are on Facebook, and they believe the writing is on the 'wall.'"

7. Tony Stewart — Stewart had a top-10 Bristol finish in sight until he was punted into the wall on lap 479 when Brendan Gaughan's brakes failed. Stewart limped home in 14th, and remained seventh in the point standings, 27 out of first.

"If he continues to wreck superstars like me," Stewart said, "Gaughan will be out of NASCAR before long. That's why he's earned the nickname 'Going, Going' Gaughan."

8. Dale Earnhardt, Jr. — Earnhardt survived a run-in with Hendrick Motorsports teammate Jeff Gordon to post a 15th-place finish in the Food City 500. Earnhardt was nabbed for speeding on pit road late in the race, an infraction that likely cost him a top-10 finish. He is now tied for fifth in the point standings, 20 out of first.

"What's Gordon's biggest complaint about Diet Mountain Dew?" Earnhardt said. "It tastes 'flat.'"

9. Denny Hamlin — Hamlin started 20th at Bristol and finished in the same position, victimized by handling issues and long green runs that left little opportunities for adjustments. He dropped two spots in the point standings to fifth, and trails Greg Biffle by 20 points.

"I'm tied in the point standings with Dale Earnhardt, Jr.," Hamlin said. "I made a race out of going nowhere fast; Junior's made a career of it."

10. Clint Bowyer — Bowyer, in the 5-Hour Energy No. 15 Toyota, finished fourth at Bristol, joining Michael Waltrip Racing teammates Martin Truex, Jr. and Brian Vickers in the top five. Bowyer improved five places in the point standings to eighth and is 31 out of first.

"I'm confident this car will soon be in Victory Lane," Bowyer said. "When that happens, I promise to douse everyone there with 5-Hour Energy drink, which may, in fact, take five hours."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:15 AM | Comments (0)

March 20, 2012

Best Wide Receivers Not in the HOF: 1950s

Who is the best wide receiver eligible for the Pro Football Hall of Fame, but not yet enshrined? When football fans cry "snub," there's a good chance they're talking about a wide receiver. For years, it was Lynn Swann or Art Monk. Now, it's guys like Cris Carter and Mac Speedie. Players at the other stat positions — quarterbacks and running backs — are elected to the PFHOF with much higher frequency than wideouts.

For this project, we'll examine in depth 25 eligible wide receivers with strong backing for the Hall of Fame: Cliff Branch, Tim Brown, Harold Carmichael, Cris Carter, Wes Chandler, Gary Clark, Henry Ellard, Irving Fryar, Charley Hennigan, Harlon Hill, Billy Howton, Harold Jackson, Herman Moore, Stanley Morgan, Drew Pearson, Art Powell, Andre Reed, Andre Rison, Sterling Sharpe, Del Shofner, Jimmy Smith, Mac Speedie, Hugh Taylor, Otis Taylor, and Billy Wilson. I believe only about five of those players deserve induction, but there's a case to be made for all of them.

It's difficult to compare players across eras at any position, and this is particularly true in the passing game, because the rules and statistics have changed so much. Today's wide receivers play 16-game schedules. They can't be bumped more than five yards downfield. Their quarterbacks are protected in ways Y.A. Tittle and Roger Staubach never dreamed of. They play in high-efficiency pass-oriented offenses, as opposed to the exciting but reckless bomb-it-down-the-field passing games of the past, when running was a way of life and throwing a sneaky change of pace or a mark of desperation. But we can certainly compare these players to their peers. Here's my list of 25, ranked by the number of times they were among the top 10 in their league in receiving yards:

Seven: Powell
Five: Brown, Carter, Clark, Jackson, Pearson, Shofner, Smith, Speedie, Wilson
Four: Branch, Ellard, Fryar, Hennigan, Howton, Moore, Sharpe, Otis Taylor
Three: Chandler, Hill, Morgan, Reed, Rison, Hugh Taylor
Two: Carmichael

To keep the statistics from skewing, I used top-five rankings (instead of top-10) for seasons before 1970, when the leagues were 8-16 teams rather than 26-32. This affected Hennigan, Howton, Speedie, Hugh Taylor, and Wilson, once each. The two who stand out on the list, obviously, are Powell and Carmichael. But let's review each player's résumé. We conclude this week with receivers of the late 1940s and the 1950s. If you're here for another era, check out our previous articles in this series:

Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1990s (Brown, Carter, Fryar, Moore, Rison, Smith)
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1980s (Chandler, Clark, Ellard, Morgan, Reed, Sharpe)
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1970s (Branch, Carmichael, Jackson, Pearson)
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1960s (Hennigan, Powell, Shofner, Otis Taylor)

Harlon Hill
1954-62, Chicago Bears, Pittsburgh Steelers, Detroit Lions
233 receptions, 4,717 yards, 40 TD

Hill's career spanned nine seasons. He had three great years to start his career, then three pretty good ones, followed by three where he did almost nothing. Essentially, his Hall of Fame case rests on those first three years.

In Hill's first three seasons, he never ranked lower than 3rd in receiving yards, twice led the NFL in yards per reception, and twice led in touchdowns. He earned All-Pro honors all three seasons, winning Rookie of the Year in 1954 and the Jim Thorpe Trophy, given annually to the Newspaper Enterprise Association MVP, in '55. Statistically, Hill was even better in '56, when he set career-highs in receptions and yardage. We're talking three seriously impressive seasons here.

Limited by injuries the following two years, Hill remained a good player, but he was never again a great one. The argument for Hill rests especially on the greatness of his first and third seasons. Apart from Billy Howton, no other receiver — including Hall of Famers like Dante Lavelli and Crazy Legs Hirsch — had two seasons that good in the 1950s. In Hill's rookie season, when he hauled in 1,124 receiving yards, third-place Pete Pihos had just 872. Hill and Bob Boyd were way ahead of the rest of the league. The Bears, 3-8-1 the year before, improved to 8-4 with Hill on the team.

Hill was probably the best receiver in the league in '55, but statistically, the other year that stands out is '56, when Hill helped the Bears to their first championship appearance in a decade. That season, Hill and Howton both gained over 1,100 receiving yards. No one else had even 900. They scored 11 and 12 receiving TDs, respectively. The third-highest total was 7. They were absolutely alone atop the league. The rest of Hill's career was marred by ankle problems, and in '57 the Bears immediately dropped to 5-7 with their star receiver struggling. Hill still holds the team record for 100-yard receiving games (19) and is one of only three Bears with multiple 1,000-yard receiving seasons. Hill set these marks in 12-game seasons. The NCAA's Harlon Hill Trophy, awarded to the most valuable player in Division II, is named in Hill's honor.

The problem with Hill's HOF case is that it rests almost exclusively upon three brilliant peak seasons. Fans and voters tend to recognize greatness most easily when it lasts for an extended time, often rewarding the light that shines longest rather than the one that shines brightest.

Billy Howton
1952-63, Green Bay Packers, Cleveland Browns, Dallas Cowboys
503 receptions, 8,459 yards, 61 TD

When a 1950s All-Decade Team was chosen in 1969, Howton was not named to the team. Howton had the most receiving yards of any player during the decade, the 2nd-most receptions, and the 3rd-most receiving TDs. He played in four Pro Bowls and was All-Pro three times, twice on the first team. Howton twice led the NFL in receiving yards, joining Hall of Famers Raymond Berry and Pete Pihos as the only players of the decade to lead the league more than once. Howton became the NFL's all-time leading receiver in 1963, and is the only player ever to hold that distinction who is not in the Hall of Fame.

Eleven times in NFL history, a player gained over 1,000 receiving yards in a 12-game season (including Don Hutson in an 11-game season and Wes Chandler in nine games in 1982). The top six:

1. Crazy Legs Hirsch, 1951: 1,495 yards
2. Raymond Berry, 1960: 1,298
3. Billy Howton, 1952: 1,231
4. Bob Boyd, 1954: 1,212
5. Don Hutson, 1942: 1,211
6. Billy Howton, 1956: 1,188

Howton twice gained more yards in a season than Tom Fears or Dante Lavelli or Pete Pihos ever did. In fact, this extends to great players in 14- and 16-game seasons: Fred Biletnikoff, Cliff Branch, Harold Carmichael, Dwight Clark, Tommy McDonald, Drew Pearson, Lynn Swann, Charley Taylor, Paul Warfield ... there actually are 38 wide receivers who made multiple Pro Bowls in 14- or 16-game seasons but never had as many yards in a single year as Howton did in his second-best season.

We could do something very similar with TDs: Howton scored 13 TDs in 1952 and 12 in '56. Players who never had a season of 12 TDs include Tim Brown, Michael Irvin, Charlie Joiner, James Lofton, Art Monk, Chad Ochocinco, Andre Reed, John Stallworth ... NFL players with multiple 1,000-yard receiving seasons before 1961: Tom Fears, Harlon Hill, Billy Howton. Multiple seasons with more than 10 receiving TDs: Cloyce Box, Hill, Howton, and Don Hutson.

Howton ranked among the top five in the NFL in receptions four times, the top 10 eight times, so it's not like all he has are two great seasons. Why hasn't he been elected to the Hall of Fame? Honestly, I think he's just slipped through the cracks. Howton mostly played on teams that weren't very good, he played in tiny Green Bay before the television era, and not many people remember him at this point. He's not on the regular ballot, so he'd have to go in as a Senior Candidate, and that's chosen by a small committee. Statistics from that era don't look very impressive out of context, and not many people are willing to go to the trouble of studying receiving stats from the 1950s.

Howton was also the first president of the NFL Players Association, which earned him ill will in some quarters, and he was traded from Green Bay just two years before the Packers won their first championship under Vince Lombardi.

Mac Speedie
1946-52, Cleveland Browns
349 receptions, 5,602 yards, 33 TD

Mac Curtis Speedie — yes, his real name — began his career in 1946 with the Cleveland Browns, just like Hall of Fame receiver Dante Lavelli. A side-by-side look at their first seven seasons, both spent entirely with the Browns:

Unless all you value is touchdowns, Speedie looks like the more accomplished player. He was first team All-AAFC each of his first four years, and All-Pro in '50 and '52. Lavelli, of course, continued to play for another four years, making two Pro Bowls and winning two more NFL championships. Speedie, who clashed with head coach Paul Brown, bolted for the Canadian Football League, adding two All-CFL seasons before a broken leg ended his career.

Speedie was the most productive receiver in the history of the All-America Football Conference, holding numerous AAFC records.

Most receiving yards:
1. Speedie — 3,554
2. Lavelli — 2,580
3. Alyn Beals — 2,510

Most receptions:
1. Speedie — 211
2. Beals — 177
3. Lamar Davis — 147

Most receiving yards, season:
1. Speedie — 1,146
2. Speedie — 1,048
3. Billy Hillenbrand — 970

Most receptions, season:
1. Speedie — 67
2. Speedie — 62
3. Speedie — 58

Speedie also scored the 3rd-most receiving TDs in AAFC history, trailing only Beals and Lavelli. He led the league in receptions three times and receiving yards twice. He also led the NFL in receptions in 1952, his final season before leaving for the CFL. The shape and span of Speedie's career — three seasons in the NFL, four in the AAFC, and two in the CFL — are probably the primary reason for his exclusion from Canton, but his icy relationship with the legendary Paul Brown certainly hasn't helped his chances. Add in lack of respect for the AAFC and the argument that anyone would have been successful catching passes from Otto Graham, and Speedie has a lot working against him. I doubt he'll ever be enshrined, but he was an exceptional player.

For years, the argument about Speedie's Hall of Fame qualifications has been simple. His advocates point out that Speedie compares favorably to Lavelli, while his detractors cite his short career in the NFL. For years, I've fallen into the first camp. Lavelli is in the Hall, and Speedie was even better than Lavelli, so he should be in, too. But is Lavelli deserving? To me, they're both borderline candidates. Lavelli's in, and I don't have a problem with that, and Speedie's out, and that seems reasonable, too. But Speedie was better than Lavelli.

Hugh Taylor
1947-54, Washington Redskins
272 receptions, 5,233 yards, 58 TD

If there's one player in this study you've never heard of, it's probably Hugh "Bones" Taylor. He played forever ago, on teams that never made the playoffs. Despite the lack of modern-day notoriety, Taylor was one of the greatest receivers of his era. He gained 212 receiving yards in his NFL debut, a record that stood for 56 years (Anquan Boldin broke it in 2003), and was particularly noteworthy as a big-play TD receiver. Four times in his eight-year career, Taylor ranked among the top three in receiving TDs. He was the 2nd player in NFL history with 5,000 career receiving yards (Don Hutson was the first).

Most receiving yards in the NFL, 1947-54:

1. Hugh Taylor — 5,233
2. Tom Fears — 4,779
3. Crazy Legs Hirsch — 4,759
4. Pete Pihos — 4,755

Most receiving TDs in the NFL, 1947-54:

1. Taylor — 58
2. Pihos — 54
3. Hirsch — 39
4. Fears — 36

Fears, Hirsch, and Pihos are all Hall of Famers. Those players were better, in their best seasons, than Taylor — I do believe they all were better. Taylor never had a season like Hirsch in '51, or Fears in '49 and '50, or Pihos in '53. He wasn't a great returner like Hirsch, or a standout defensive player like Pihos, or a record-setting ground-breaker like Fears. But at 6'4", Taylor presented a (literally) huge challenge to defenders, and he was consistently among the top players in the league. Most 750-yard receiving seasons, through 1955:

1. Don Hutson, 5
2. Pete Pihos, 4
t3. Hugh Taylor, 3
t3. Billy Wilson, 3

Whenever you look at a list of the league's receiving leaders in the first decade of the modern era, Taylor is almost always at or near the top of the list. But wouldn't most good receivers lead the league if you matched the timeline exactly to the beginning and end of their careers? Actually, no. Below is a list of every player in the Modern Era who led the NFL in both receiving yards and receiving TDs over the course of his career:

Hugh Taylor (1947-54), Pete Pihos (1947-55), Don Maynard (1958-73), Lance Alworth (1962-72), Steve Largent (1976-89), Jerry Rice (1985-2004), Randy Moss (1998-2010). That's it, though Fred Biletnikoff (1965-78) and Terrell Owens (1996-2010) join the list if you excuse them a tie for the TD lead. Taylor probably is the least dominant player on the list, but he keeps awfully fine company. Pihos, Maynard, Alworth, Largent, Rice, Moss, and Hugh Taylor. Not bad. Everyone Taylor can be compared to is a Hall of Famer, except Billy Wilson...

Billy Wilson
1951-60, San Francisco 49ers
407 receptions, 5,902 yards, 49 TD

For the decade of the 1950s, Wilson ranks 3rd in receiving yards, 2nd in receiving TDs, and 1st in receptions. He made six consecutive Pro Bowls, from 1954-59. That doesn't include the 1953 season, when Wilson ranked 4th in receiving yardage and led the NFL in receiving touchdowns. He led the NFL in receptions three times and was the third player with 400 career receptions (Hutson, Fears). Wilson is tied for the most Pro Bowl selections of any wide receiver prior to the 1970 AFL merger, with Hall of Famers Ray Berry, Tommy McDonald, and Pete Pihos.

If that résumé sounds similar to Howton's, certainly there's a comparison to be drawn. Wilson doesn't have any seasons as mind-blowing as Howton in '52 and '56, but he was at or very near the top of the league every year from 1953-57. Receiver statistics changed dramatically in the '60s, with the birth of the wide-open AFL and the introduction of 14-game schedules, but through 1960, Wilson and Hutson led the NFL in most 40-reception seasons:

t1. Hutson, 7
t1. Wilson, 7
3. Tom Fears, 5
4. four players tied, 4
(Berry, Howton, Lenny Moore, Pihos)

Most 50-reception seasons:

1. Wilson, 5
t2. Berry, 3
t2. Fears, 3
t2. Howton, 3
t2. Hutson, 3
t2. Pihos, 3

Seven different players have led the NFL in receptions at least three times. Four of them are Hall of Famers (Hutson, Fears, Pihos, Berry), one is still active (Wes Welker), and the others are Sterling Sharpe and Wilson. Like Billy Howton and Hugh Taylor, Wilson is a player you compare almost exclusively to Hall of Famers. I noted earlier that Wilson ranks in the top three in every major receiving category of the 1950s, but I didn't show just how large the gap was between 3rd and 4th. Most receptions:

1. Wilson, 404
2. Howton, 342
3. Hirsch, 321
4. Elbie Nickel, 280

Most receiving yards:

1. Howton, 6,091
2. Hirsch, 5,973
3. Wilson, 5,851
4. Harlon Hill, 4,467

Most receiving TDs:

1. Hirsch, 49
2. Wilson, 48
3. Howton, 44
4. three tied, 40
(Hill, Hugh Taylor, Bobby Walston)

It's easy, when you look at receiving stats of the '50s, to conclude that none of the best receivers of this era, save Hirsch, are enshrined in Canton. It's useful to me, in thinking about these issues, to break them down by era. Below, I've organized HOF receivers by the decade in which they most established their greatness.

1945-54: Tom Fears, Elroy Hirsch, Dante Lavelli, Pete Pihos
1950-59: n/a
1955-64: Raymond Berry, Tommy McDonald, Bobby Mitchell
1960-69: Lance Alworth, Don Maynard
1965-74: Fred Biletnikoff, Bob Hayes, Charley Taylor, Paul Warfield
1970-79: n/a
1975-84: Charlie Joiner, Steve Largent, John Stallworth, Lynn Swann
1980-89: James Lofton, Art Monk
1985-94: Jerry Rice
1990-99: Michael Irvin

Some of those assignments are close calls. Hirsch, for instance, was a far more accomplished receiver in his last three seasons (1955-57) than in the late '40s, and could easily fall into the empty 1950s block. From 1946-49, though, he was used not only as a receiver, but a running back (133 carries), defensive back (8 interceptions), an occasional passer (21 attempts), and a star kick returner (27.0 KR avg, 13.6 PR avg, KR TD, PR TD). That's a more important part of his legacy than '55-'57.

Let's break this down a little more, looking at both the Hall of Famers and the contenders we've examined. Starting in the late '40s:

*includes AAFC stats

At this time in history, the NFL was a 12-team league in which offense revolved around the ground game. During the decade, teams passed 43.5% of the time, compared to 54.2% over the last 10 years. Do the 4th-, 5th-, and 6th-best receivers of this era really deserve Hall of Fame recognition? There were 24 starting receivers at this time; there are 64 today, probably closer to 80 when you consider how many teams use three WRs in their base offense. The 6th-best receiver in 1952 is roughly equivalent to the 20th-best receiver in 2011 (by yardage, that's Darrius Heyward-Bey). You have to draw the Hall of Fame line somewhere. I'm more sympathetic to the receivers who came along a few years later. Stats again:

It's tough for me to see how players like Mac Speedie and Hugh Taylor, great as they were, would rank ahead of someone like Howton, who dominated his era. Here's how I rank the best non-HOF receivers of the early Modern Era:

1. Billy Howton — Set all-time records for receptions and receiving yards and had two of the greatest receiving seasons in history.
HOF Qualifications: EXCELLENT. He should be in.

2. Billy Wilson — A six-time Pro Bowler who stands with Crazy Legs Hirsch and Billy Howton alone among the statistical leaders of the '50s.
HOF Qualifications: GOOD. He should probably be in.

3. Mac Speedie — Best receiver in AAFC history and Otto Graham's favorite target, with two 1,000-yard receiving seasons (14 games).
HOF Qualifications: FAIR. He probably doesn't need to be in.

4. Harlon Hill — Better, at his best, than any of these players except Howton. Had two or three really exceptional years.
HOF Qualifications: POOR. He probably shouldn't be in. But he was a tremendous player before injuries derailed his career.

5. Hugh Taylor — Superb in a short career, though he never reached the same heights as some of his peers.
HOF Qualifications: POOR. He probably shouldn't be in. But he was a heck of a player.

***

This is the final article in this series. Here's how I rated each player's HOF qualifications:

EXCELLENT: Tim Brown, Cris Carter, Billy Howton
GOOD: Henry Ellard, Harold Jackson, Billy Wilson
FAIR: Cliff Branch, Harold Carmichael, Gary Clark, Art Powell, Andre Reed, Sterling Sharpe, Del Shofner, Jimmy Smith, Mac Speedie, Otis Taylor
POOR: Wes Chandler, Irving Fryar, Charley Hennigan, Harlon Hill, Herman Moore, Stanley Morgan, Drew Pearson, Andre Rison, Hugh Taylor

Everyone on the list was a terrific player, but the Hall of Fame is pro football's highest honor, reserved for those who stand out not just in their era but in history. No disrespect is intended toward the players whose HOF cases rated as poor. If you'd like to see the rationale for the ratings, read the other articles in this series:

Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1990s
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1980s
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1970s
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1960s

We'll wrap this up next month with a look at the best soon-to-be eligible receivers, including Isaac Bruce, Marvin Harrison, Torry Holt, Keyshawn Johnson, Terrell Owens, and Rod Smith.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 12:18 PM | Comments (0)

March 19, 2012

Maybe Dwight Howard Just Can't Win

In sports, there must be winners and losers. Often the difference between "winner" and "loser" is an inch here, a lucky break there. However, there are a few players over the course of the modern NBA who always seem (or seemed) to end up on the losing side of battles. Enter the "All-NBA Losers." And Dwight Howard is in danger of becoming one.

C Dwight Howard (nominated 2012)

Justification: 1) Holding team hostage for much of 2011-12 season; 2) Claiming to care about winning, but actually just wanting to be "the man" on his team; 3) Refusing to commit to his team beyond the season until he realized his bargaining power was gone. Class act.

PF Karl Malone (inducted 1998)

Justification: 1) Inability to overcome Houston Rockets and Chicago Bulls during the 1990s despite having PG extraordinaire John Stockton at his disposal; 2) Attempted to fast-track his way to a title by joining (and thereby tainting) the 2003-04 Lakers.

Honorable Mention: Shawn Kemp

SF Tyrus Thomas (inducted 2008)

Justification: 1) Thought he was "the guy" on the Bulls; 2) Just lazy.

Honorable Mention: LeBron James. I just don't think he's a loser. He'll eventually win a championship, thereby eliminating him from eligibility. If he doesn't, he'll leap over the high-flying Thomas in a heartbeat.

SG Latrell Sprewell (inducted 2004)

Justification: 1) Choked coach P.J. Carlesimo during practice in 1997, leading to a 68-game suspension;. 2) Literally said, "I have a family to feed … [Timberwolves front office] better cough up some money. Otherwise, you're going to see these kids in one of those Sally Struthers commercials soon" in response to why he rejected a three-year, $21 million contract offer. First-ballot Hall of Fame Loser.

PG Allen Iverson (inducted 2002)

Justification: 1) Practice?

I invented the ANBAL during the 1998 NBA Finals when Karl Malone became the inaugural member. Watching him cough up the ball to M.J. preceding Jordan's famous last shot as a Bull sealed that deal.

Let me be clear, there are many paths to the ANBAL. The only concrete criterion that exists for induction is playing one's entire career without winning a championship. The moniker "loser" is not intended to serve as an insult but, rather, to indicate the fact that these people objectively "lost" when facing the greatest of challenges. Therefore, some of these "losers" could have been among the greatest players in NBA history (e.g., Karl Malone). Dwight Howard is slowly shaping up to be one of these cases.

Though there's only the singular rule for induction, allow me to clarify some other specifics regarding the composition of this team — and why Dwight Howard may end up a member.

1) The individual must either be "the guy" on a team or he must think he's "the guy."

This is the most important distinction for eligibility on this list. Note that Karl Malone is on the roster but John Stockton is not. Of course Stockton did not win either, but having the founding member of the ANBAL on your roster renders your efforts at winning futile. Malone was the scorer on this team. This is also the reason that Gary Payton did not make this list. He had Shawn Kemp on his team for much of the beginning of his career, dragging him down. By the time Payton finally gave himself the best chance (2003-04 Lakers), Malone signed on as a free agent and to destroy Payton's hopes. The Loser Gene is a dominant one and cannot be overpowered by the recessive Winner Gene.

2) The individual's team must not have insurmountable obstacles to winning.

Call this the Reggie Miller Conundrum. The team must have — for all intents and purposes — a roster that should be able to win. His Pacers seemed to overachieve. Iverson's 76ers almost got him off of the hook until I took into account his infamous speech about practice and the fact that late in his career — even when he still had some gas in the tank — no team wanted him.

3) The individual is the clear reason his team didn't win (i.e. lack of clutch ability, failure to be "the guy" that he thinks/thought he is/was).

One player who never won a championship, but always played well under the lights was Patrick Ewing. The Knicks' inability to knock off M.J.'s Bulls was not due to Ewing. He did his part, both statistically and from a "team" standpoint. Name one time that Ewing threw a teammate under the bus.

As you can tell by the aforementioned prerequisites, Dwight Howard is in danger of becoming enshrined — at a very young age — on the ANBAL. He obviously meets the main requirement (zero championships). Not only is he "the guy" on the Magic, but he lacks interest in joining many teams around the league (most notably, Chicago Bulls) arguably out of a fear that his star will be out-shined by another (Derrick Rose).

Winners don't worry about whose star shines brightest — they worry about winning (see: Magic Johnson/Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Larry Bird/Kevin McHale, Jordan/Scottie Pippen, Chauncey Billuos/Richard Hamilton, et al). Though Howard's team is substantially weaker than both the Heat and the Bulls this season, he had an extremely solid core the year he lost the 2009 Finals to Kobe Bryant and the Lakers. With Hedo Turkolgu, Rashard Lewis, Tony Battie, and Jameer Nelson, this team could have competed (heck, they beat LeBron's 66-16 Cavs to get there).

Add to the mix that Howard seems to be suffering from a massive delusion of grandeur. Yes, I admit Howard is the most dominant big man in the game right now. Yes, he is a fantastic defender. His physical gifts are out of this world. And you know what? He seems like a pretty good dude. Having said that, his presence on the court does not alter the game the way a Kobe Bryant, LeBron, D-Rose, Kevin Durant, or any other more versatile scorer.

Since Shaquille O'Neal redefined dominance in the early 2000s, big men have done nothing to negate the argument that the NBA is a point guard league now. I cannot stress enough that Dwight Howard potentially being a loser is not an insult, just a fact. Being a charitable, nice human does not disqualify loser eligibility.

There is the possibility that Dwight Howard is simply going through a loser phase (see: Metta World Peace). I accept that Howard might one day prove to be a winner despite what my judgment tells me. However, if not, his status as the starting center for the ANBAL could become solidified by the end of this season — possibly next — at which point organizations should avoid him at all costs. Lest Dwight Howard does to a new team what Karl Malone did his entire NBA career … put up MVP numbers in losing efforts year after year.

Posted by Louie Centanni at 5:12 PM | Comments (0)

Investigation Casts Cloud Over Marlins

When we think of Miami, Florida, it immediately brings to mind sunshine. Yet even sun seekers might be surprised that it has taken federal Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) subpoenas to shed any type of daylight upon Major League Baseball's Miami Marlins and their financing deal for their soon-to-open brand new stadium, on April 4, 2012, and presently called Marlins Park.

It is perhaps the smoke-and-mirrors approach to keep ardent Miami Marlins fans, as well as fans of MLB, distracted from learning more of or even suspect such a federal investigation is taking place. For Jeffrey Loria — owner of the Florida Marlins since 2002 and his now renamed Miami Marlins — in time for the stadium's bow, went on a spending spree this past offseason, the likes of which had been exclusively reserved previously for the likes of the New York Yankees.

The question regarding the Marlins' finances arose in the mind of this reporter, as to where the millions upon millions of dollars surfaced. The Marlins' $111.8 million payroll for the 2012 season and the $350 million in total new offseason contracts is staggering. The payroll alone for 2012 is double that of 2011's. Anyone with an iota of common sense should have their antenna raised.

And further, since Loria over the past 10 years has described the Marlins as cash-poor, how is it that the organization is plush with dollars for a new stadium complex?

At a cost of $634 million and with cost over-runs estimated to rise as high as $645 million, the answer is somewhere in the details. But that will only be the case if the SEC does its due diligence and even acquires the supposed documents it has requested, in order to make a fair determination.

Unfortunately, this is no mere anomaly afflicting but one lowly MLB franchise. This is once again a perfect storm that involves government, high financiers, and the entity of MLB, Inc., to name but a few players. And during this recession that seemingly will not quit, it is not just the behaviors which resulted in this recession, but the unethical behavior at the very least, including possible criminality, that continues to permeate.

An orchestration of monumental cover-ups, glad-handing, and pay-for-play campaign finance schemes continue to inflict consumers, taxpayers, and the public-at-large, by way of MLB in this case, with civil practices by government officials from the unethical to the criminal in the case of the Marlins.

And the supposed suckers are the residents of the City of Miami, FL and of Dade County, FL.

The SEC investigation was triggered by the flotation of tax-free bonds totaling some $500 million for the stadium construction as well as additional loans, leaving the taxpayers and bondholders on the hook there, too.

In fact, it will take some 40 years for Dade County to recoup the outlay for the stadium and its four parking garages. When all is said and done, Miami and Dade County will have paid out approximately $2 billion, with accrued interest, for the stadium's full cost.

But let us go back all the way to 2002, when Jeffrey Loria was the former majority owner of the Montreal Expos, which he sold to MLB, Inc. and its other 29 franchises. Loria bought the Marlins shortly thereafter for $158 million at that time from John W. Henry, the present owner of the Boston Red Sox.

Forbes, latest valuation as of 2010, has the Marlins worth $360 million, prior to the new stadium being built.

MLB commissioner Bud Selig bent over backwards to allow the deal for both Loria and Henry to occur, as he could realize his plan to relocate the Expos to Washington, DC and to make them the Washington Nationals.

The Marlins won their first of two World Series championships in 1997, only six years after the franchise was awarded by MLB to original Marlins owner Wayne Huizenga.

Yet,management split up its roster and reloaded after its championship. The club went on to win its next World Championship in 2003, when Loria had established himself as the club's third owner. But Loria once again broke up the Marlins roster after the 2003 World Series.

Loria believed that the only way to earn a profit was by erecting a new stadium, with a retractable roof and in no way resembling the Sun Life Stadium used for football, in which the Marlins played all of their home games since the club's inception.

The new stadium would hold luxury suites, restaurants and eateries, concessions, and could thrive by being not just a baseball field, but an event to attend, in order to maximize his potential profits.

Loria followed that up by making deals with politicians, labor unions, construction contractors, all the while lining his own pockets from MLB's revenue sharing system, where healthy revenue generating clubs and especially those who paid luxury taxes such as the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox at the time provided a windfall for him.

From what we now know, Loria benefited from millions of dollars in profits for his club and his own personal war chest, rather than reinvesting in his payroll, as he was required to do so by MLB.

Meanwhile, the county of Dade's commissioners approved the new stadium without a public referendum and gave Loria a sweetheart deal whereby the taxpayers and bondholders would be responsible for no less than 80% of the financing. Loria would chip in $120 million in total costs.

How Miami and Dade County elected officials allowed for approval of a potential $645 million public project without public input, during the height of the Great Recession, where real estate and unemployment rates surged in Florida, remains stunning.

To make matters even worse, county commissioners approved the whole project without seeing any financial records from the Marlins or Jeffrey Loria. They claim that he would not turn them over.

There are, however, two stories in one in this caper by Loria and the politicians who played dumb. To appreciate the dynamics of the SEC probe that began with letters from the SEC dated 12/01/11 to both the City of Miami and the County of Dade, it is important to touch upon the back-story concerning MLB and its lack of checks and balances.

And that story would have remained unknown had it not been for a Wikileaks dump of documents in August 2011, which provocative sports website Deadspin.com picked up, to their credit. Such contained financial data which showed millions of dollars in profits from the previously noted revenue sharing system streams, received by the Marlins, among other clubs, who had previously claimed they could not afford to invest in a reasonable payroll.

But neither MLB, Jeffrey Loria, or Marlin's president David Samson expected to have their dirty laundry publicly displayed for all of the world to see. In fact, Bud Selig's outrage seemed more reserved for the information becoming public rather than any scorn for Jeffrey Loria.
So Jeffrey Loria and David Samson were hardly suffering from a case of poverty, but rather the opposite.

According to a Forbes magazine report in 2008, the Marlins made a pure profit of $35.6 million. But David Samson's response to the reports was that, "It's a shame their readership is forced to read numbers that aren't true." And in 2008 and 2009, according to the leaked financials, the Marlins enjoyed $49 million in sole profit.

It has also been estimated that since 2002, upon the Loria's purchase of the Marlins, that the Marlins have reaped some $300 million in revenue sharing benefits of which $154 million was pure profit.

And regardless of how the figures have leaked, it is safe to conclude that Loria and Samson, at the very least, owe MLB, its other franchises, its fans, and the taxpayers of Miami-Dade.

But the silence is deafening.

A lawsuit was filed by Norman Braman, former owner of the Philadelphia Eagles, and now Miami resident, in order to force Loria's hand in his non-disclosure of finances to the county.

After all, it was but a reasonable request if Miami and Dade County residents were going to foot 80% of the bill, with no remuneration from stadium profits. Unfortunately, and probably predictably, the presiding judge through out Braman's case.

Loria owes a tip of the hat at least to Selig as he used the like-excuse that MLB does that its franchises are private entities, and therefore not legally required to turn over their finances or books to anyone. And technically they are not legally beholden to do so, unless of course they have violated the law in some capacity.

The officials of Miami and Dade County let down the people of their city and county and morally speaking, Loria, Samson, and yes, MLB, did the same. Not even Bob Dupuy, former CEO of MLB at the time, who was a hard-nosed advocate on behalf of MLB to get the Marlins' stadium built, apparently never questioned any of the Marlins' revenue sharing profits, either.

It truly seems that few in positions of power, whether in the government, the finance industry, or in $7 billion businesses such as MLB, have learned little in this Great Recession. In so far as the SEC is concerned, it is very specific in what it wants to know at present, and MLB is not subject to their probe.

Rather, the SEC is primarily trying to get information on whether there was a pay-to-play scheme set up between city and county officials in order to expedite the building of the stadium and whether malfeasances were committed on the bondholders, as a result. Whether payoffs were made to politicians and officials is the crux of the investigation.

Therefore, the structuring of such a lopsided deal to the detriment of the people of Miami and Dade County is not the issue; the possible tax violations by the Marlins as well as for Loria in setting up a dummy corporation called Double Play Co. that he used to squirrel away revenue sharing profits is not the issue. But all of them should be.

And there could be viable complaints by other MLB franchises, by the fans of other MLB clubs who indirectly subsidized the Marlins, and by bondholders from other jurisdictions who purchased the tax-free bonds.

While this story is one of multi-facets, it is made even more complicated due to many gaps in information, or of facts deliberately made unavailable. And there is plenty of room for explanations including by MLB, in order to help to restore a sense of some trust and goodwill.

The 2010 bankruptcy of the Texas Rangers, the current bankruptcy of the Los Angeles Dodgers, the current deal that the owners of the New York Mets just made with the court in order to avoid a trial regarding their alleged willful intent to help defraud other clients of Bernie Madoff's for a mere settlement of $162 million are but a few examples of mismanagement and scandals within MLB by its owners with Bud Selig at the helm. Is it not about time for MLB to get its house in fiscal order?

And sadly, it is no longer unreasonable to conclude that the requisite art of deception and trickery has become a fixture in the world of high finance, government, industry, and not the least of which, professional sports leagues, including the world of Major League Baseball.

Posted by Diane M. Grassi at 1:15 PM | Comments (0)

March 15, 2012

NCAA Tournament: The Little Guys

One of the best things about the Big Dance is the opportunity for schools who normally get little to no publicity — athletic or otherwise — a chance to shine on national television. Here are five schools that will be playing in the Big Dance that you may not know much about.

WESTERN KENTUCKY
Location: Bowling Green, Kentucky
Nickname: Hilltoppers
Enrollment: 20,712

It's been quite an enchanted year for Western Kentucky, where in both major sports they started out awfully only to turn down their seasons in remarkable fashion.

In football, they started out 0-4, including a 44-16 drubbing at the hands of Division 1-AA Indiana State, and they looked very much like the worst team in Division 1-A.

They would go on to lose just one more game, at LSU, a game they were in until late in the third quarter, and they were widely considered to be the biggest bowl snub of the postseason.

A month ago, the basketball team was languishing at 8-17. But something happened, and they rolled off two straight wins to close out the regular season and then won four games in four days to take down the Sun Belt conference tournament. They then beat Mississippi Valley State in the play-in game after rallying from down 15 in the second half.

It's almost as if God is a Western Kentucky fan, and He resists meddling in their affairs until the chips are down. The fans have to be pleased, too, to be playing Kentucky in the first round — er, sorry, the second round, the NCAA is pretending the play-in games are the "first" round now — in a game that has the state buzzing and against a team that a lot of the Hilltopper players grew up rooting for.

They have, in my opinion, a pleasing towel-waving logo and a truly bizarre, Grimace lookalike mascot.

SOUTH DAKOTA STATE
Location: Brookings, South Dakota
Nickname: Jackrabbits
Enrollment: 12,725

There's an old joke that goes like this: a bear and a rabbit are in the forest. The bear turns to the rabbit and says, "Do you have a problem with poop sticking to your fur?" The rabbit replies, "No." So the bear picks up the rabbit and wipes his butt with it.

That is the expected result when the Baylor Bears take on the South Dakota State Jackrabbits in this year's tournament. It is indeed SDSU's first rodeo, having just recently moved up from Division II. Oral Roberts was widely expected to win the Summit League tournament, but an upset at the hands of Western Illinois paved the way for the Jackrabbits. And they might be able to give Baylor a game — they absolutely pounded Pac-12 regular season champs Washington 92-73 earlier in the year.

At SDSU, they call their Homecoming Festivities "Hobo Day" and their university currency is called Hobo Dough.

ST. BONAVENTURE
Location: Olean, New York
Nickname: Bonnies
Enrollment: 2,000

First of all, let me say I hate schools whose nickname is nothing more than a riff on their school name, such as the St. Bonaventure Bonnies. There is a school in Smithville, Ohio, not far from where I grew up, called the Smithville Smithies. Ugh.

Second of all, St. Bona deserved a higher seed than the No. 14 they got. Winning the Atlantic 10 tournament is impressive from a conference that netted two at-large berths.

St. Bonaventure bills itself as the largest undergraduate Franciscan university in the English-speaking world. Considering they clock in at just over 2,000 students, there must not be much competition. And if you thought they were done with puns when they nicknamed their sports teams, let me tell you about their newspaper, The Bona Venture.

Finally, I have a brilliant suggestion for a St. Bona student festival. Since they are located in Olean, which is just an R and an S shy of being "New Orleans" (minus the "New" of course) then why don't they have a spring blowout party called Madi Ga? Get it?

NORFOLK STATE
Location: Norfolk, Virginia
Nickname: Spartans
Enrollment: 5,400

Norfolk State has, for my money, one of the most badass logos in college athletics. The Spartans came out of the gate this year with both guns blazing. In the Virgin Island Paradise Jam tournament, they upset Drexel (probably the biggest snub in this year's Big Dance) and TCU before losing a squeaker to Marquette, the third seed in the West region, by two in the championship game.

Norfolk State has made its mark by recruiting heavily in NYC — ESPN New York had a nice feature on this — and with Kyle O'Quinn, who's in the top 10 nationally in rebounding.

NSU was once a powerhouse Division II program, but this is their first Division I tournament.

DETROIT
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Nickname: Titans
Enrollment: 5,450

How quickly the Horizon League has fallen. From Butler's back-to-back championship game appearances and three teams in the Big Dance a few years ago to only mustering a single No. 15 seed this year.

Detroit is actually the University of Detroit Mercy, a small Jesuit college. Betcha don't know the big university in Detroit. That would be Wayne State, which with 32,000 students is one of the largest schools in the country not to compete in Division I.

UDM is the school that gave us Dick Vitale, and for that, we do not thank them. He coached the school from 1973-77 to much success, which put him on the map.

So what are their chances at beating Kansas? Well, they did knock off St. John's earlier this year, and they played Notre Dame, Alabama, and Mississippi close, so I would expect this to be much closer than your typical No. 2 vs. No. 15 game.

Posted by Kevin Beane at 12:01 PM | Comments (1)

March 14, 2012

NCAA Tournament Bracket Bustier

South Region

Kentucky is obviously the favorite in the South, and should advance to the Final Four on talent alone. The Wildcats have two things going for them: a roster full of NBA skill, and Ashley Judd in tight-fitting t-shirts. Plus, unlike every other team in the tournament, Kentucky players actually boast of the likelihood of going "one and done."

Don't expect Duke to challenge Kentucky — the Devils won't get that far. Sure, Duke has Austin Rivers, a sure-fire NBA lottery pick, meaning there's probably a one-in-a-million chance he makes an impact in the pros, but if the three-pointers aren't falling, the Devils are quite vulnerable.

Intriguing Matchup

With wins in Greensboro on Friday, Notre Dame and Duke will meet on Sunday with a trip to the Sweet 16 on the line. The Irish are coached by Mike Brey, who was an assistant coach under Mike Krzyzewski for nine years. Brey left in 1995, before Krzyzewski's penchant for hiring former mediocre Duke guards as assistants became de rigueur. Expect Duke to advance, then fall to UNLV in the regional semifinals.

Upset Special

UNLV to the regional final

South Champion

Kentucky

East Region

Do the Syracuse Orangemen have the toughest road to the Final Four? Maybe, but please don't tell Jim Boeheim his team will be "tested." The Orangemen went 31-2 this year, which means that of 33 results, 31 were positive. That's pretty much in line with NCAA findings.

That road just got tougher with the announcement on Tuesday that center Fab Melo was ruled ineligible. Melo missed three games earlier this season because of an academic issue. It seems the name "Fab" is definitely spelled with an "F," but no one's quite sure where the "A" and "B" came from.

Syracuse's route to the Final Four is not easy, anyway. A third-round game awaits against Kansas State and acid-tongued head coach Frank Martin, who could pin a number of four-letter words, namely "loss," on the Orange.

Then the Orange could face surging Vanderbilt, who shocked Kentucky in the SEC final. If the 'Cuse isn't shown the Commodore against Vandy, then they will certainly fall in the regional final to the upstart Seminoles of Florida State, who will punch out Ohio State in the regional semis.

Intriguing Matchup

Vanderbilt and Harvard meet in the second round in Albuquerque, New Mexico. These are two of the most storied academic institutions in America, but don't let that fool you — they can play. Sure, the Commodores and the Crimson may not have McDonald's All-Americans, like Kentucky and Syracuse, for example. But they also don't have something those teams do — tutors. "Eligibility" is a word rarely, if ever, uttered on the Vandy or Harvard campuses.

Upset Special

Fifth-seeded Vanderbilt over top-seeded Syracuse

East Champion

Florida State

Midwest Region

Despite a loss in the ACC title game, North Carolina procured the region's No. 1 seed, and with it, the weighty expectations of Tar Heel Nation. That's not unusual — the Heels are championship-caliber on a yearly basis, except those coached by Matt Doherty.

This year, may are questioning UNC's toughness, which is a legitimate doubt. How can you not question the toughness of a Carolina team that couldn't avenge a 33-point loss to Florida State, particularly on the ACC tournament final stage? Carolina's uniform may scare others, but no player wearing it does. What the Heels need is a mean streak, not unlike the one shown by Tyler Hansbrough, who led the Heels to the 2009 title.

Questions remain for the Tar Heels. How will Jon Henson's wrist affect his play? Can UNC find consistent success behind the three-point arc? How much did Michael Jordan wager on Carolina to win it all?

The tournament gets a dream regional final, as the one-seeded Heels faces the two-seeded Kansas Jayhawks. The limp-wristed Tar Heels advance.

Intriguing Matchup

UNC's Harrison Barnes could face high school teammate Doug McDermott of Creighton if both teams win their first game. The selection committee seems to have under-seeded Creighton in order to create this potential matchup.

Upset Special

14th-seeded Belmont over third-seeded Georgetown and 11th-seeded NC State over sixth-seeded San Diego State. NC State could be a dangerous team, provided they choose to howl instead of whine. Note to Wolfpack fans: they don't call fouls on Hail Mary passes in football either.

Midwest Champion

North Carolina

West Region

Michigan State may be the tournament's weakest No. 1 seed, but like their coach Tom Izzo, a favorite of rapper Jay-Z, the Spartans are just so darn likable. Izzo on the bench automatically gets the Spartans to the Sweet 16.

A run to the Final Four will be hampered by the presence of the field's strongest No. 2 seed, Missouri. The Tigers should have been the Midwest's No. 1 seed, especially after rolling in the Big 12 tournament. But it seems North Carolina was rewarded more for their 18-point win over Duke than Missouri was for winning the Big 12 tournament.

Anyway, Mizzou could face a scary third-round matchup with Florida. It's not that the Gators themselves are scary, but first-year Missouri coach Frank Haith was hoping to steer clear of anything in the state of Florida.

Darkhorse

Third-seeded Marquette. It's hard to call a three seed a darkhorse, but Marquette is content to take a back seat to Michigan State, Missouri, and trendy pick Murray State.

Upset Special

12th-seeded Long Beach State over fifth-seeded New Mexico

East Champion

Missouri

Final Four

Kentucky over Missouri

North Carolina over Florida State

Championship

Kentucky over North Carolina

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 4:16 PM | Comments (0)

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 3

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Greg Biffle — Biffle finished third in the Kobalt Tools 400 at Las Vegas and now has three third-place finishes on the year. He assumed the lead in the Sprint Cup point standings, and holds a 10-point lead over Kevin Harvick.

"There are those that think I'm the weak link at Roush Fenway Racing," Biffle said. "Well, I didn't win, nor did I place, but you could say I 'showed' them.

"They say good things come in three's, and bad things come out of Boris Said's mouth. That being said, if I continue to finish in the top-five, I should avoid Said altogether."

2. Tony Stewart — Stewart took the lead on a restart with 36 laps to go, and held off Jimmie Johnson on two late restarts to claim his first-ever victory at Las Vegas Motor Speedway. It was a redemptive victory for the defending Sprint Cup champion, who gave away a win at Vegas last year.

"As you may have seen," Stewart said, "I won a giant wrench. Obviously, that will be presented to my pet monkey, Mojo. Hopefully, he won't throw it into anything.

"I was quite motivated by losing at Vegas last year. I've learned that you can't keep a good man down, although NASCAR's surely tried with Jimmie Johnson. More importantly, I've wiped a 'win at Las Vegas' off my bucket list, and finally, I'm no longer the only person calling Vegas 'virgin territory.'"

3. Kevin Harvick — Harvick faded late after racing in the top five for much of Sunday's race, but still finished a solid 11th to move up one spot in the point standings. He is now second, 10 points behind leader Greg Biffle.

"Despite what you may hear on Twitter," Harvick said, "DeLana and I are not naming our son 'Otis.' We don't have a name yet, but one won't be hard to come by, especially considering all the 'baby' names in NASCAR right now, like 'Kyle,' 'Kurt,' and 'Carl.' I think it's only fitting that my child's name be a four-letter word."

4. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson bid to pass Tony Stewart in the closing laps at Las Vegas failed, but Johnson's runner-up finish was his second-consecutive top-five finish. After his early exit at Daytona, Johnson now seems to be in proper form to reclaim the Sprint Cup.

"I tried everything," Johnson said, "but I couldn't pass Stewart. So just call me 'tape measure,' because I couldn't get around Tony. Sadly, though, Chad Knaus's appeal of his six-race suspension was denied by NASCAR. Eventually, Chad will have to serve the suspension. He didn't get away with it, so now he has to get away from it."

5. Dale Earnhardt, Jr. — Earnhardt led 70 laps at Las Vegas, second only to Tony Stewart's 127, and posted his second top-10 finish of the year with a 10th in the Kobalt Tools 400. He improved one spot to fourth in the Sprint Cup point standings, and is 18 points out of first.

"I led 70 of the first 73 laps," Earnhardt said. "The fans of Junior Nation were thrilled, because the race was 'mine to lose' for only 70 laps, and not all of them. I don't know what I whipped more — the field or Junior Nation into a frenzy."

6. Carl Edwards — Edwards scored his first top-five result of the season, joining Roush Fenway teammate Greg Biffle, who finished third, with a fifth in the Kobalt Tools 500. Edwards leapt four places in the point standings to sixth and trails Biffle by 23.

"I spent the offseason lamenting losing the title to Stewart because he had more wins," Edwards said, "so it pains me to see Tony winning again. But not as much as it pained me to be called 'Second Cousin Carl.'"

7. Denny Hamlin — A week after winning at Phoenix, Hamlin struggled in the Kobalt Tools 400, finishing 20th on a day when Joe Gibbs Racing placed no cars in the top 15. Hamlin fell from the Sprint Cup points lead, and now sits third, 12 out of first.

"You win some," said Hamlin, "and you lose some. That's me quoting Tony Stewart's statement on Sprint Cup championships and crew chiefs. And speaking of Darian Grubb, I won't dismiss him, or his contributions to this team."

8. Matt Kenseth — Kenseth led 22 laps at Las Vegas, and was eyeing a potential top-5 finish before getting shoved into the wall after a lap 263 restart. He finished 22nd and fell one spot in the point standings to fifth, 23 behind Greg Biffle.

"Sunday was my first race with my new sponsor," Kenseth said. "Ironically, it was the first time 'Zest' has been used to describe anything Matt Kenseth. Maybe a more appropriate soap to sponsor me would be Ivory, because I'm white, and 99 44/100% pure."

9. Mark Martin — Martin suffered a brush with the wall after Dale Earnhardt, Jr. bumped Martin's No. 55 Michael Waltrip Racing Chevy. Martin recovered to finish 18th and is now 10th in the point standings, 28 out of first.

"I've finished second in the championship race five times," Martin said, "while Junior's never come close to contending. So I don't know where he gets off running in to me. It did him no good. It did me no good. Of course, we're both well-versed in finding ourselves in no-win situations."

10. Joey Logano — Logano led the way on a disappointing day for Joe Gibbs Racing, placing 16th at Las Vegas, his first finish outside the top 10 this year. He is ninth in the Sprint Cup point standings, 27 out of first.

"The No. 20 Dollar General Toyota was solid," Logano said, "but handling issues got the best of us, despite the work by my dedicated crew, the 'Buck Privates.' After a long day of making adjustments, they were spent."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:49 AM | Comments (0)

March 13, 2012

NFL Offseason: Manning and RG3

An era has ended in Indianapolis, while new ones have begun in St. Louis and Washington.

Last Wednesday, the Colts released longtime quarterback Peyton Manning. The top overall pick in the 1998 draft, Manning played in over 200 consecutive games, led the Colts to 11 playoff appearances and two Super Bowls, won four MVP Awards, set the single-season record for passing touchdowns, and was named MVP of Super Bowl XLI. Last season, a neck injury kept Manning on the sidelines, and Indianapolis — which had won 10 or more games for nine straight seasons — dropped to 2-14 without him. Now he's gone, presumably to be replaced by Andrew Luck.

If the neck injury is career-altering, if Manning never truly recovers, it makes sense for the Colts to rebuild around a new QB, though it's sad to see them part ways with the face of the franchise. If Manning is healthy, the move is a disaster. That would mean the team has parted ways with the most popular player in the history of Indiana professional sports, while he's still one of the top five or so quarterbacks in the game, and entrusted the team to someone who may be great but has never played a down in the NFL. I mean, people thought JaMarcus Russell was going to be great.

I don't know where Manning is going to end up, but it would be neat to see him reunite with Reggie Wayne in a new city. If I were a general manager pursuing Manning — and if I was convinced he was healthy, and I didn't already have Aaron Rodgers, I certainly would pursue him — I would be very interested in adding Wayne, as well. Manning's style of offense is unique, and it would make for a much smoother transition if his favorite receiver is already around, not only to catch passes but to work with the other receivers.

Even if the neck issues are behind him, Manning's about to turn 36, and will probably decline pretty quickly some time in the next few years. His new team will want an immediate return on its investment, try to get the most out of Peyton before that decline begins. A familiar face like Wayne's could go a long way in getting optimal performance from Manning right away. I doubt either player is as valuable by himself as when paired with the other.

It makes sense that Manning's departure from the Colts has been the biggest story of the offseason, but realistically, the more important move this week was the ransoming of RG3. Washington sent three 1st-round draft picks and a 2nd-round draft pick to the Rams in return for the No. 2 overall pick in April's draft, presumably to select Heisman Trophy winner Robert Griffin III.

My initial reaction is that this ranks among the most one-sided trades in the history of professional sports, reminiscent of the disastrous Herschel Walker and Ricky Williams trades. To move up from 6th to 2nd, Washington gave away a 2nd-round draft choice and its next two 1st-rounders. You could even break it down like this: a 2nd-round pick to move from 6th to 5th, a 1st-round choice to go from 5th to 3rd, and another 1st-round selection to get from 3rd to 2nd. That's robbery. It's insane, an incredible price for an unproven player.

Some Washington fans may take solace in knowing that Daniel Snyder probably would have wasted the other picks anyway. Chicago Bears fans comforted themselves that way after the team gave away Kyle Orton and a pair of first-round draft picks in the Jay Cutler trade. Our GM is so bad, we wouldn't have gotten anyone good with the picks anyway. At least this way we're getting a proven high-quality middle-of-the-road quarterback. But Washington has turned its recent 1st-round picks into some pretty promising players: Brian Orakpo and Ryan Kerrigan, Trent Williams ... the 6th overall pick in this year's draft might have brought in someone like LSU cornerback Morris Claiborne or Iowa tackle Riley Reiff.

If Griffin turns out to be the next Peyton Manning, the trade was worth it, no matter who the Rams use those four draft picks to get. But if Griffin turns out to be anything but a huge star, this becomes a huge problem for Washington. Herschel Walker was a good player for the Vikings — good rushing, good receiving, good kick returning. But he wasn't a superstar, and the Vikings had traded five players and six high draft choices to get him. It was a substantial setback for Minnesota, and the foundation of the Cowboy dynasty, with the draft choices yielding impact players like Emmitt Smith, Darren Woodson, and Alvin Harper.

Griffin can't just be good, he can't be late-career Herschel Walker. He needs to be a Hall of Famer, or something very close to it, to justify this trade. If you look at recent history, odds are that he will not. Going back to Manning in 1998, 17 quarterbacks have been drafted in the top three. It's probably too early for any judgement on Matthew Stafford, Sam Bradford, and Cam Newton, or even Matt Ryan, who could become a productive journeyman (Brad Johnson), a minor star (Mark Brunell), or a truly elite quarterback (Drew Brees). That leaves 13 players we can comfortably pass judgement on. From my perspective, it breaks down like this:

Three total disasters (Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, JaMarcus Russell)
Three clear disappointments (Tim Couch, David Carr, Joey Harrington)
Two with more downs than ups (Alex Smith and Vince Young)
Three average to above-average (Michael Vick, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning)
Two legit superstars (Peyton Manning and Donovan McNabb)

Vince Young was Offensive Rookie of the Year. Vick and Palmer and Eli have all had some nice moments — good quarterbacks. But none of them is nearly worth three high draft picks and someone like Claiborne or Reiff. If the Saints could go back to 1999 and trade their whole draft for McNabb instead of Ricky Williams, they'd do it. Well, actually, they'd probably just keep their picks and take Champ Bailey or Torry Holt, but that's the problem here.

I don't dispute that QB is the most important position in football, but 1st-round picks usually yield good players. Sixth overall picks, 1998-2008:

Two Hall of Fame-caliber players (Torry Holt and Richard Seymour)
Three all-stars (Grant Wistrom, Kellen Winslow Jr., Vernon Davis)
Three journeymen who've had their moments (Corey Simon, Pacman Jones, LaRon Landry)
Three disappointments (Ryan Sims, Johnathan Sullivan, Vernon Gholston)

With the picks Washington gave away to get RG3, they probably would have drafted at least one multiple Pro Bowler. Would you rather get Davis, Simon, and Landry, plus a 2nd-rounder, or your choice between Alex Smith and Vince Young? That's the kind of gamble Washington's making. Griffin needs to succeed the way all those can't-miss, huge-upside prospects like Russell and Couch and Young and Vick didn't. He needs to be Peyton Manning, or the trade is a bust for Washington.

Think of the biggest trades in NFL history, the real blockbuster deals. When has the team that gave away the draft picks done better than the team that got them? There's not a single instance in which the team that sacrificed a ton of draft choices would make the deal again if you let them. Probably the best such deal was the Eagles getting Bill Bergey from Cincinnati for two 1st-round picks and a 2nd, but that trade also helped lay the foundation that took the Bengals to Super Bowl XVI. And Washington isn't trading three picks for a proven talent like Bergey, they're trading four for someone who's never played a down in the NFL.

Really, Snyder traded in the wrong direction. Washington went 5-11 last year, its third straight season of 6-10 or worse. This is not a good team. It's not the proverbial "one player away" — there are a lot of needs here, and even some of the stronger positions need to rebuilt with a youth movement. Rather than addressing multiple needs, the team put all its eggs in one basket. Even if RG3 is everything the team hopes, he could struggle without anyone to block for him, anyone to throw to, a running game to take the pressure off, or a defense that creates takeaways to give him a short field.

I'm not ragging on Griffin. He may become a huge star, and if that happens, Washington will be happy with the trade, no matter who the Rams get out of it. I don't know whether or not Griffin will be successful. But based on the unreliable success of other highly-drafted quarterbacks, neither does Washington. And that makes this trade an unconscionable gamble. The winners are St. Louis, who gets a windfall of high draft picks over the next three years, and the Browns, who didn't pull the trigger to move up two spots. Peyton Manning, Kyle Orton, Matt Flynn, Ryan Tannehill, and others are still out there, and you don't have to give anything away to sign them.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 9:36 PM | Comments (0)

"Manolito" Enters Tennis Hall of Fame

It was announced late February that Manuel Orantes, the Spanish left-handed player of the '70s and early '80s will be inducted to International Tennis Hall of Fame. He is not the biggest name to be inducted in the class of 2012; another inductee, the Brazilian Gustavo Kuerten, won three titles at the French Open compared to Orantes' single Slam title in the 1975 U.S. Open, and "Guga" has reached the summit of World Rankings in 2000, whereas Orantes' best ranking was a short stint at No. 2 in 1973.

Nor is he the most famous Spanish tennis player to be inducted in the Hall of Fame; Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario and Manuel Santana are much more likely to be the focus of conversations in tennis club lounges than Orantes.

In fact, his nickname "Manolito" is a reference to the legendary tennis star Manuel Santana being nicknamed "Manolo" because Orantes' success came about a decade after Santana, and thus was nicknamed "Manolito," signifying "little Manolo," in order not to be confused with Manuel Santana, the tennis star of the '60s who won four Slam titles and said one of the most notorious phrases in the history of tennis in 1966: "The grass is just for cows." Orantes' first name was also sometimes modified to "Manuelito" by the media in the '70s and '80s for the same effect.

The modest and "in the background" tennis career of this man born in Granada, Spain in 1949, accompanied by the fact that he is a humble man who has never been involved in a controversy, and was one of the friendliest personalities on the tour according to his peers, shows that it's no mystery after all why he was overlooked for so long.

However, for those who follow tennis closely, his induction was long overdue.

First of all, his title at the U.S. Open 1975 was not just any ordinary title. His run to the title included one of the greatest comebacks in the history of Slams and confirmed the evaporation of Jimmy Connors' image of invincibility. But true to everything else about Orantes, those accomplishments are little known to the main stream fans of tennis. So let me tell a little more about them, if I may.

In the semifinals, Orantes faced Guillermo Vilas, the 23-year old Argentine who was seeded No. 2 behind Jimmy Connors. Vilas was leading two sets to one, and 5-0 in the fourth set, before Orantes made his historical comeback, winning seven games in a row, saving five match points, and extending the match to a fifth set. Orantes triumphed 6-4 in the fifth set and qualified for the finals well after midnight. The match lasted close to four hours and he was due to play the invincible Jimmy Connors in less than 18 hours. Yet it's almost impossible to find extended highlights of one of the greatest matches played at the U.S Open and I am beginning to doubt if the full match even exists somewhere in the archives on any organization.

Jimmy Connors entered 1975 as the king of tennis. This is why Arthur Ashe's 1975 victory over Connors in the finals of Wimbledon was meaningful; it put a dent on his image of invincibility and raised eyebrows of many who came to the realization that Connors could indeed be beaten. However, as Douglas Perry of The Oregonian astutely pointed out in his article of February 24, it was the victory of Orantes over Connors at the U.S. Open the same year that confirmed that "what happened at Wimbledon was no aberration."

The U.S. Open was Connors' backyard, but Orantes outplayed and outsmarted Connors so undeniably that even the then big-mouthed Connors had to admit that Orantes "played unbelievable" and that he did not believe "that it would be possible for him to hit passing shots and play like he did all the way through" and added "but unfortunately for me, he did."

While every year we are reminded by some tennis publication or some TV show how Arthur Ashe dismantled Jimmy Connors in the 1975 Wimbledon finals in four sets, we never hear a word about how Orantes crushed Connors in straight sets two months later at the U.S. Open with as much strategy, wit, and variation, if not more unexpectedly than the way Ashe did it at Wimbledon.

Apart from these accomplishments, there are many stories such as personal anecdotes of tennis legends, media personalities, or simply tennis fans involving Orantes, and none of them are bad! I have yet to hear a story from any tennis personality that does not involve a praise of Orantes, or an anecdote referring to his pleasant personality.

One of those stories involves the 1976 Masters Tournament's final match opposing Orantes to Wojtek Fibak. Fibak is leading the match two sets to one and 4-1 in the fourth set. During the changeover, right behind Orantes, the TV stations interviews Kirk Douglas and his wife. When the interviewer asks Douglas about his prediction for the rest of the match Douglas answers that "at this stage, you have to say that Fibak is the probable winner" right before Douglas' wife Anne interrupted and claimed "you can't count Orantes out — he is a great fighter!"

Intentionally or unintentionally, depending on the source, the interview ended up being shown live on the newly-installed giant screens on each side of the stadium; therefore everyone including Fibak and Orantes heard the comments clearly through the booming loudspeakers. Both players admitted later that the comments did have an impact on them; Fibak admitted that he began thinking about how widely this match was broadcast including in his native Poland, and that he lost his concentration. Orantes admitted that Anne's comments gave him a little extra motivation to come back, visible from the fist that he showed and the smile on his face right after Anne's comments were heard.

Another story is less known and takes place in the very late stages of Manolito's career, in the quarter-finals of Monte-Carlo Open in 1983. On a sunny afternoon, 34-year-old Orantes comes back from a set and a break down, saving two match points, in a quarterfinal encounter against Yannick Noah to win, 2-6, 7-5, 6-3. After the match, a totally dejected Yannick Noah would stay on the court slumped in his chair for several minutes with his head between his hands and journalists hovering a few yards around him this way and that way to get a good photo shot of Noah's depression.

Orantes noticed that Noah was in an undesired position. Looking obviously disgusted with the lack of consideration on the photographers' part, he made his way to Noah, moving few of the photographers back, tapped Noah on the shoulders and offered to walk with him off the court. That was Orantes' last big win. He lost in the next round and never reached the quarterfinals of another tournament. His last win on the tour came seven months later, and he played his last match on the tour in the summer of 1984. Noah, on the other hand, would go on to have the most successful months of his career during those same months, including his French Open title two months later.

On a side story, little after leaving the court following his victory over Noah, the modest man from Spain had to turn down a younger fan who asked him for a wristband, but not neglecting to take the time to hold the young man by the shoulders and smile to him while explaining: "I'm terribly sorry, amigo, I only have two," showing obvious discomfort at having to say no the enthusiastic junior player.

I hope this article sums up why Manuel Orantes will be welcomed in the Hall of Fame even though his main claim to fame is the one Slam title in 1975. Being inducted to the Hall of Fame should mean more than just stats, numbers, and titles, and Manolito being inducted proves that it does indeed mean just that. Nice guys do sometimes win, indeed. Felicitaciones, Manolito!

Posted by Mert Ertunga at 10:16 AM | Comments (6)

March 12, 2012

NCAA Tournament Thoughts and Provocations

I love the NCAA tournament. This week is my favorite week in the entire year. From Selection Sunday until the final game the following Sunday, I am addicted to basketball. There is nothing more thrilling to me in the entire sports world. Where else can you find a better guarantee for closely contested games, overtime, upsets, and pure mayhem? I submit that you cannot. This tournament is the best television I will watch all year. Nobody can deny it. But let's get on with some commentary.

Biggest Snub: Washington

While a lot of attention is going to Drexel, to me Washington is clearly a bigger snub. The teams are actually rather similar in a way. They are nearly identical in RPI (Drexel at 71, Washington at 69). They both won their conferences regular season title, but failed to win the conference tournament title.

The only real difference here is that Washington plays in the Pac-12 and Drexel plays in the … uh … Colonial Athletic Association. I know the Pac-12 is not on par with the ACC, Big East, Big 10, or Big 12 for basketball any longer, but winning the Pac-12 regular season title should mean a bid in the tournament. It's not like it was a bad conference record, they went 14-4. That's good! Washington's problem is the fact that they had some terrible losses in their non-conference schedule … and no decent wins. They lost to Saint Louis: reasonable. They lost to Nevada in overtime: not good. They lost to South Dakota State … by 19 … at home: embarrassing. Not to take away anything from the Jackrabbits, whom I love, but that's a rough loss.

At the same time, the Huskies didn't have the easiest of non-conference schedules. They played tough against Marquette, losing by two, and also well against Duke, losing by six. Put those games into the context of the tournament, Washington scores a hypothetical 11-seed, wins an upset in the first round over a 6-seed, then plays 3-seeded Marquette for a trip to the Sweet 16, and loses by two points. I'd watch that game. Sounds like March Madness to me.

What killed the Huskies — aside from the three bad non-conference losses — was their early exit from the Pac-12 tournament. Their first game loss to Oregon State hurt their chances quite a lot.

On the other side, Drexel lost to Norfolk State, Virginia, and St. Joseph's in non-conference play. They had no games against ranked opponents. I think Drexel's losses are worse than Washington's. Most people just can't see that because Drexel losing to Norfolk State seems, well, reasonable since they are in conferences of similar power. But Washington losing to South Dakota State seems horrendous since Washington is in the Pac-12 and the Jackrabbits are in the Summit League.

Norfolk State is in the tournament, a No. 15 seed in the West, facing Missouri in their first game. South Dakota State is in the tournament, a No. 14 seed, facing Baylor in their first game.

Drexel's strength of schedule was 224; Washington's was 88. As I see it, Washington has the advantage as biggest snub over Drexel in every category save one: Drexel's mascot is way cooler. Dragons will always destroy Huskies.

I think you could also make an argument for Oral Roberts as biggest snub, their big win over Xavier looked pretty good at the time, as Xavier was ranked ninth in the country, but Xavier's fall from the rankings left that win rather impotent.

In the end, 14-4 and regular season champions in the Pac-12 has to be more impressive than 17-1 and regular season champions of the Summit League or 16-2 and regular season champions of the Colonial Athletic Association.

Biggest Surprise: BYU

What? You thought I'd say Iona? Sorry, but Iona didn't shock me. They were 40th in RPI. They lost to Purdue in their opening game by one point. They beat Maryland (who admittedly had a bad year) by 26 in their third game. They had seven losses overall. They played well all season.

In fact, Iona is a truly dangerous team in this tournament. They averaged more points than any other team in Division I at 83.3. They're number one in assists with 19.3 per game. And they are second overall in field goal percentage, shooting over 50% on the season. That is not a team I want to play in the tournament. Marquette better be ready for them.

I like BYU. I didn't think they as a team were a huge surprise. Their body of work was solid. What was surprising is that they made it as the third team from the West Coast Conference. That means the West Coast Conference has more teams in the tournament than the Pac-12.
Yeah, I think Washington should have had BYU's spot.

Too High: Alabama

Can somebody tell me why Alabama is even in this tournament? What is their valuable win in this season? Wichita St.? They were 9-7 in an overrated SEC. Kentucky is great, don't get me wrong, and Vanderbilt is solid, but Florida is not that good and Alabama is worse. Alabama getting a nine seed is at least four seeds too high. They should have been a 13. I'd take every single 12-seed over Alabama.

Too Low: Creighton

Alabama's first round matchup should have been a 5 vs. 12 or a 4 vs. 13. A lot of the best mid-major teams got lower rankings than they should have. Wichita State at a five seed pleased me, but I thought they were a better four seed than Michigan, Indiana, or Wisconsin. I think Creighton was in the same boat. A solid 6-seed if not a 5-seed.

Murray State also got seeded a few too low. I thought they could have been a 3 instead of Georgetown. Memphis was also rather low for my taste.

Geography Fail: UNC and Duke

I thought Missouri should have had UNC's No. 1 seed and that Duke should have been a No. 3, giving way to Marquette or Florida Sate. Neither should have gotten any geographical advantage. They are both playing in Greensboro, a whole one-hour drive away from both campuses. That bothers me.

Most Intriguing Second Round Matchup: Wichita State vs. VCU

In any other tournament, Wichita State would have been the 12, not the 5, and I would have taken them over any power conference school in a 5-seed, but VCU has my attention. Their top five scorers were all on a VCU team that made a run to the Final Four last season. Experience is powerful in the tournament. Think about Butler making consecutive runs to the championship game. Their 2011 team was not as talented as their 2010 team, but that experience from 2010 helped them make another run. Could we see something similar from VCU?

In the end, I think Wichita State simply had a bad draw, the worst draw in the tournament in fact. We'll see what happens.

Most Intriguing Potential Third Round Matchup: Kentucky vs. UConn

The second game for all of the number ones is going to be a little more interesting than I think they'd like, but the defending champion is no fun, especially when we're talking a rematch of one of last year's semifinal matchups. Who knows if the Huskies will even beat the Iowa State Cyclones? But UConn vs. Kentucky sounds much more like a Final four game than a first weekend game.

Biggest Opening Round Upset: No. 12 Long Beach State Over No. 5 New Mexico

Not very bold, I know. I find the 13s rather weak in this tournament. I think 14s are actually stronger than the 13s. I'm on the fence about Belmont beating Georgetown. I may change my bracket before Thursday to an upset. I also won't be shocked if South Dakota State beats Baylor, but that's not an upset for my bracket.

First Number One Out: Michigan State

If Memphis doesn't beat them in their second game, Louisville will get them in their third. Then again, Creighton over UNC sounds pretty good, doesn't it?

Lowest Seed in the Sweet 16: 11 (NC State)

Georgetown looks vulnerable to me. Belmont could beat them in their first game, either San Diego State or NC State would be a tough matchup and I like the Wolfpack making a run in the Midwest.

Toughest Region: West

I truly think Michigan State, Missouri, Marquette, Louisville, Murray State, Memphis, and Long Beach State all have a shot to win this region.

Easiest Region: Midwest

I think UNC's toughest opponent in this region will be Creighton.

Final Four: Kentucky, Florida State, UNC, Missouri

Florida State is playing very well right now. I think they are well coached and good enough on the boards to be in the Final Four. Kentucky and UNC are obvious choices. I struggled with choosing Missouri, but my gut tells me Marquette is going to choke, despite all logic.

Champion: Florida State

To me, this tournament will play out like a mild version of last year's tournament. In 2011, UConn won the Big East tournament, got a 3-seed, and continued on to a national title. In 2012, Florida State won the ACC tournament and will cruise through the bracket, knocking off team after team on their way to cutting down the nets.

Posted by Andrew Jones at 7:31 PM | Comments (1)

Rubio Roller Coaster

I've lived in the Twin Cities for the last five years, and I can tell you that all the talk across the nation is true. Ever since Ricky Rubio stepped foot on the concourse at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, there's been a rock star atmosphere surrounding the Minnesota Timberwolves.

The rookie point guard has teamed up with all-star Kevin Love and new head coach Rick Adelman to create something that hasn't been around much since I took up residence here: hope. I had only been here a few months when Kevin Garnett was traded to Boston in the famed "7-for-1" deal. The result was the result of another famous Minnesota trade (the "Great Train Robbery" Herschel Walker deal). The team with the superstar won instantly, while the rebuilding franchise tumbled for years.

But this season, the mood was different. The power forward the Wolves got in 2008 finally started to play at an all-star caliber. The organization brought in a head coach with a proven record of not only winning, but winning and building young talent. And we finally got the opportunity to see if the Spanish ignitor could actually play at the top level.

Through the first 40 games of this condensed season, it was working. The Wolves had already amassed as many victories in 34 games as they had in each of the last two 82-game seasons. Going into Friday's game (with the Lakers), they were tied for the eighth spot out West. I even got off my duff and shuffled down to Target Center for a game.

This past Monday, the Wolves hosted Lob City (a.k.a. the Clippers). I put some money down and found myself in the upper bowl of the arena, watching the action live. This was my first chance to see the young magician in person. He wasn't at his best. He hadn't been at his best for a couple of weeks. But he still controlled the flow of the game. You could see the hustle. You could feel the effort. And you could hear the enthusiasm from the fans that filled 90 percent of the building (at least). The only way you could get that turnout over the last few years was if LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, or K.G. were traveling through on a road trip.

Rubio was finally the answer to the question, "How many point guards do you have to draft before David Kahn can find a reliable one?" The play of No. 9 had elevated all of his teammates. And the results were showing on the court.

Then it all came crashing down.

With one innocent double team of Kobe Bryant, the lights faded and the fire was extinguished. A torn ACL will keep the rookie on the shelf for the rest of the season. Now I'm sitting here with and early spring on the horizon and a team still at .500. However, the dark clouds of another late-season swoon threatened to hover over Minneapolis.

It's not that the Wolves have trounced the bottom feeders of the league this season. But it seemed that they were a bit more lost while dropping 95-89 home decision to New Orleans on Saturday. Sure, the team has capable backup points (Luke Ridnour and J.J. Berea, if healthy). But the spark won't be as potent, and that's the sad thing.

This town has been in need of some good sports mojo. The Vikings couldn't get any traction in a 3-13 campaign. The Twins suffered through an injury –filled, cellar-dweller season. The Wild reached the top of the NHL standings, only to swan dive out of the postseason picture. There was some life this winter with the Wolves actually becoming relevant again.

Whether this team would have made the playoffs or not with Rubio in the lineup, it would have been fun to see the effort. Now, unless they rally and recover, those hopes have to wait until November.

Pity. I'll miss the hype until then (and you don't get a second chance to make a first impression).

Posted by Jonathan Lowe at 3:54 PM | Comments (0)

March 9, 2012

Sports Q&A: NFL is Too Bounty-licious

The NFL is investigating the New Orleans Saints, alleging that former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams and several defensive players maintained a bounty program to reward players for injuring targeted players. Is this anything to be alarmed about?

The only thing alarming in this whole situation is the inability of players and coaches to keep a secret. You want an alarm? Okay, I'll set it to go off so everyone can wake up and realize that all teams have bounty systems, in one form or another. In the NFL, bounties are like a-holes — everybody's got one, or, in the case of the New York Jets, more than one.

The Saints, however, are likely to take the brunt of the fall because their bounty system was outed. Maybe the Saints should have offered cash incentives to players and coaches who didn't divulge sensitive information about activities that the league strictly discourages. Already, the NFL is played under enough rules and regulations; the last thing the league needs is more "whistle-blowers."

Before reacting harshly, the league needs to take a deep breath and realize that bounties are a part of the game, and have been for decades. They shouldn't condone it, nor should they outlaw it. They should deal with it. Why? Because everybody's doing it, and everybody's been doing it. In fact, every team in the NFL has, and has had, its own unique bounty system, each with a distinctive name and distinctive stipulations.

NFC East

Dallas — In the Big D, the Cowboys "Seeing Stars" bounty system involved targeting the opposition's best players. Was Cowboys owner Jerry Jones in any way a part of the program? Who knows, but Cowboys players often claimed to be "Jonesing" for a bounty payout, some often in excess of the $20,000 placed on the head of former Eagles defensive coordinator Buddy Ryan.

New York Giants — In the Giants bounty program, payments are code-named "Theismann Trophies" in honor of Lawrence Taylor, who was known for offering bounties that only he was eligible to win, often winning them and using the proceeds for a number of illegal activities.

Philadelphia Eagles — Ryan, often called the "godfather" of NFL bounty systems, left a lasting legacy in Philadelphia. He was, however, smart enough not to talk about. Thus, the legend of the "Bounty Bowl Muffle." Nowadays, Eagles players cash in bounties by way of the "Buddy System," and, in true Ryan fashion, are sometimes rewarded for taking shots at their own coaches.

Washington Redskins — In Washington, Redskins players received "Capitol Gains" by cashing in on a bounty.

NFC North

Chicago — For members of the Chicago Bears, making an opposing player "Hibernate" meant you were due a payment from the bounty fund. Hall of Fame linebacker Dick Butkus was a frequent collector, but the hunter became the hunted when officials at NBC offered a bounty to anyone who could get Butkus off 1980s sitcom My Two Dads.

Detroit — If a Detroit player disabled an opponent, he would receive the "Lion's Share" bounty payoff.

Green Bay — When a Packer player knocks out an opponent, he is rewarded with "High Cheese," a payment which includes cash and the option to by purely symbolic stock in the team.

Interesting note: Brett Favre is the only player in NFL history to be a target in the bounty systems of all 32 NFL teams, including Green Bay's.

Minnesota — Minnesota's seldom-talked about bounty system, nicknamed "Mute on the Bounty," was often overlooked in Minneapolis. That's because it was often overshadowed by stories about sex boat scandals, "Whizzonators," Randy Moss-moonings, or Favre.

NFC South

Atlanta — The Falcons "Dirty Bird" bounty encourages injuring opponents by any means necessary.

Carolina — Taking a page from folk singer James Taylor, the Panthers "Carolina On My Mind" bounty system actually condones head shots on opponents.

New Orleans — When a New Orleans opponent was targeted for "Sainthood," that meant he could expect Saints bounty hunters coming after him.

Tampa Bay — It is rumored that Warren Sapp said that any Buccaneer who earned a bounty could collect the money stashed in the Tampa Bay dressing room in "Davey Jones Locker."

NFC West

Arizona — If, say, you are Darnell Dockett and you knocked the opponent's quarterback out of the game, you have earned your "Just Deserts."

St. Louis — In the Show Me State, the Rams "Mo. Money" bounty system not only rewarded players for injuring opponents, but often for just merely making tackles.

San Francisco — If a 49er pulled off a "49 'im," then he earned a bounty payout.

Seattle — In Seattle, where the "12th Man" cheers on the home team, the Seahawks administered the "10th Man" bounty program, whereby a Seahawks was rewarded for knocking out a player, thereby leaving the opposition one man short.

AFC East

Buffalo — What does a Bill receive for KO'ing an opponent? "Buffalo Chips," of course, redeemable for cash, groceries, or lost helmets in the Bills bounty commissary.

Miami — The Dolphins took NFL immorality to new levels with the "Miami Vice" bounty system, which members of the 1972 team still insist was the NFL's best.

New England — Not only does Bill Belichick institute a bounty system, he has video proof that bounty programs exist for 31 other teams. For New England players, making an opponent disappear from a game was rewarded in the "Patriot Missing" bounty program.

New York Jets — In the Jets "Broadway Jolt" system, players can earn a bounty in two ways: by knocking an opponent out of the game, or by correctly naming all of Antonio Cromartie's children. Unfortunately for Mark Sanchez, no bounty is given for crippling the team's playoff chances.

AFC North

Baltimore — Who else but Ray Lewis would be in charge of the Ravens bounty scheme? In the "Dough, Ray, Me" system, players received cash for knockout blows, but only after review and approval from Lewis.

Cincinnati — In Cincinnati, the bounty payments fall under the jurisdiction of the "Jungle Juice" system, whereby Bengals, for a change, received time off for bad behavior, earning days off for injuring an opponent.

Cleveland — In Cleveland, home of the Dawg Pound, Browns players who collected a bounty proudly boast "I've Got a Boner."

Pittsburgh — In Pittsburgh's "Terrible Bowels" bounty program, Steelers can earn money by knocking the you-know-what out of opponents.

AFC South

Houston — Head coach Gary Kubiak may have looked the other way when bounties were mentioned, but there's no mistaking his influence on the system when a Texan collected a "Kubi-Snack."

Indianapolis — One has to be heartless to seek rewards for hurting opponents. That's not a problem in Indy's "Colt Blooded" bounty system.

Jacksonville — If a Jacksonville player were bound by a "Jag Order," then he was seeking to collect on a bounty.

Tennessee — If a Titan player rendered an opponent helpless, he was rewarded by virtue of Tennessee's "Involuntary State" bounty system.

AFC West

Denver — Broncos players looking for bounty glory sought to leave opponents numb. Hence, the "Things to Do in Denver When You're Deadened" bounty system.

Kansas City — Instead of setting bounties, the Chiefs made "Reservations," and a player who accepted these reservations went after the targeted opponent.

Oakland — Of course the Raiders employ a bounty system, and the late Al Davis was all for it. In the "Al-i-money" system, payouts are made in official Raiders currency featuring the head shot of Jack Tatum, a denomination which is easily laundered and practically untraceable.

San Diego — Chargers players who made the big hits got credits to their "Charge Account," and used their cards for purchases at Southern California area package stores, head shops, gentlemen's clubs, and black market supplement dealers.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 10:14 AM | Comments (0)

March 8, 2012

Confusing Geographical Lines

Thanks to college football conference realignment, our elementary school kids might struggle when learning geography, at least if they rely on those conferences to help them remember certain regions.

When I was a kid, I excelled at U.S. geography, partially because I knew my college football conferences like the back of my hand. And they all made sense. The Southwest Conference consisted of teams in the southwest; the Atlantic Coast Conference consisted of teams along the Atlantic seaboard; and the Pacific-8 consisted of teams on the Pacific coast. No longer, though.

With the latest realignment frenzy, teams on the Pacific coast, a la San Diego State, will soon be playing in a conference known as the Big East. Since when is San Diego in the east? The same question can be asked of Boise State and Houston and Southern Methodist. Or what about Missouri and Texas A&M playing in the Southeast Conference? According to my map, neither Missouri nor Texas is in the American southeast.

What about the recent move of Colorado and Utah into the Pac-12? Okay, I can maybe see Utah, since its neighbor to the south has two schools in that conference (Arizona and Arizona State). But Colorado is a two-day drive to the Pacific Ocean, and that's traveling straight through. On a related note, West Virginia will be joining the Big 12, a conference traditionally comprised of schools from the southwest and midwest.

I guess that the NCAA is taking its cue from its pro cousin, the NFL, which has been dysfunctional regarding regional alignments since it placed Baltimore and Atlanta in the Coastal Division with Los Angeles and San Francisco in 1969. (Although in the NFL's defense, it didn't specify which coast it meant when it aligned that division; but it still believes that Dallas is in the east, so...) Once the dust settles with all this collegiate realignment (if it ever does settle), we may be reading about regional conferences and rivalries in the history books.

Just a few years ago, I envisioned a college football landscape dominated by eight "super-conferences" that were aligned regionally. We just might end up with those eight ginormous conferences, but if the current pattern of realignment stays the course, regional conference alignments appear to be a thing of the past. Along with that, some great geographical rivalries are also going along the wayside. In recent years, we've lost Pitt/Penn State, Nebraska/Oklahoma, and Texas/Arkansas. With further realignment, we could lose more great rivalries, like Texas/Texas A&M, Missouri/Oklahoma, and Utah/BYU.

The sad thing is that all these moves spits on the graves of the pioneers and forefathers that made college football what it is today. It was built on strong regional lines, with rivalries cemented by mere miles or adjacent states — Harvard/Yale, Michigan/Ohio State, Alabama/Auburn, etc. I make no apologies about being a "traditionalist" when it comes to sports, especially college football. I've already railed about the recent trend toward androgyny regarding uniform colors and designs, and the seemingly unadulterated erasing of regional lines in the name of money and prestige adds to my displeasure in the direction college football is heading. (First the BCS, and now this?!)

So, in the next couple years, when you're teaching your kids or grandkids about the geography of this fair land of ours, don't be surprised when little Johnny asks, "What's the difference between east and west? If Idaho is in the west, how can its college football team play in the east?" I don't know how you'd answer that question, but I'd be prepared to say, "Well, Johnny, some things are unexplainable, and the only two people I know who know are God and the NCAA. But I don't think either of them could give you a good answer."

Posted by Adam Russell at 11:36 AM | Comments (0)

March 7, 2012

Early Bracket-Busters

Every year after Selection Sunday, the second-guessing of the Selection Committee's decisions begins for fans everywhere. It's so much fun, I just couldn't wait any longer, and compiled a list of teams that will be ranked too high or too low in a couple weeks.

Teams That Will Be Seeded Too High

Duke Blue Devils

They have a virtually identical record within their conference as the Michigan Wolverines do in the Big Ten, with the added caveat that the ACC is not even in the same stratosphere as the Big Ten in the category of top-to-bottom talent. So it's weird to think that Duke will almost certainly be seeded two spots higher than Michigan. The reason? Just because they're Duke — that's all — no other logical argument exists.

Creighton Blue Jays

The MVC tournament champions seem like a sexy pick to be a sleeper team in the coming weeks, but don't be fooled. They've only played 8 games away from home against teams over .500, and gone only 5-3 in those games — and 1-2 in the last month. They'll probably end up with 7 or 8 seed, and depending on the 9 or 10 seed they face, could very easily be bounced in the first round of the tournament. If they're pitted against a truly quality opponent on the opening weekend, make sure you're not caught scribbling down Creighton for a win.

Gonzaga Bulldogs

The Bulldogs are always thought of as a good pick in March, and usually for good reason. But this year's team is 0-2 against quality opponents when playing away from home. There's not much to say here except they just don't have what it takes this year.

Teams That Will Be Seeded Too Low

Murray State Racers

The Racers are simply as good as their record would indicate. The 30-1 team has played two ranked teams this year — one on the road — and won both times. They can play both up-tempo and half-court styles when they need to, and can absolutely shoot lights out when their backs are against the wall. They've proven in the past to be a resilient bunch in the tournament, and don't expect anything different this year. If they're seeded below 4, you may want to pencil them in for a "surprise" Sweet 16 bid.

Wichita State Shockers

The regular season MVC champs may have suffered a setback in their conference tournament, but that has been the exception rather than the rule for a team that has gone 6-1 in road games against winning teams this year. With a seven-foot center and a guard shooting 50% from three-point range on the year, this is a team that — when they play to their potential — is not limited in how far they can go in the tournament.

Kansas State Wildcats

They could easily end up getting knocked out early, but with 3 wins against top-10 teams this year, the Wildcats have proven that they can beat the best teams in the nation. With that as the case, the fact that they're probably looking at either an 8- or 9-seed means two tournaments wins should be less surprising than it would otherwise be. If you're looking for one if the middle seeds that always seems to make noise in the tournament, you might not need to look any further than Kansas State.

Posted by Paul Foeller at 7:34 PM | Comments (0)

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 2

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Denny Hamlin — Hamlin zoomed to the lead on a restart with 59 laps to go at Phoenix, and held off Kevin Harvick, who ran out of gas, to win the Subway Fresh Fit 500. It was Hamlin's first win since last June at Michigan and first under new crew chief Darian Grubb. Hamlin now leads the Sprint Cup point standings with a 6-point lead over Greg Biffle.

"We've got a ton of confidence," Hamlin said. "And, surprisingly, so does Jimmie Johnson. The last time I left Phoenix with the points lead, Johnson won the Sprint Cup title.

"I'd like to thank Toyota for giving me a strong engine. The car from 'The Land of the Rising Sun' won in the 'Valley of the Sun.'"

2. Kevin Harvick — Harvick's charge to overtake Denny Hamlin came to a halt when he ran out of gas on the final lap at Phoenix International Raceway. Harvick still finished second, and is third in the point standings, eight behind Hamlin.

"Hamlin knew I was coming," Harvick said. "This father-to-be was getting ready to say 'Who's your daddy?' That may have very well been Hamlin's first 'pregnancy scare.' There's a bun in the oven. Luckily for Hamlin, there was no gas in the tank.

"But better to lose to Hamlin than Kyle Busch. I've had my differences with Busch in the past, but I now realize we'll soon have one thing in common: we'll both have 'Baby On Board' stickers on our cars."

3. Greg Biffle — Biffle backed up his third at Daytona with an equally-impressive third in the Subway Fresh Fit 500. He stands second in the Sprint Cup point standings, six behind Denny Hamlin.

"I'll take third-place any day," Biffle said. "As a teammate of Matt Kenseth and Carl Edwards, I'm quite used to saying 'There are two drivers better than me.'"

4. Matt Kenseth — Daytona 500 winner Kenseth finished 13th at Phoenix after a crash in practice forced him to resort to a backup car. He now sits fourth in the point standings, 10 points out of first.

"Despite a subpar finish at Phoenix," Kenseth said, "I can't complain. I've won the Daytona 500 and appeared on The Tonight Show. Surely, rumors of a relationship with Kim Kardashian are sure to follow. Even as a driver comfortable with speeds of 200 miles per hour, people will still be amazed at how quickly I deny those rumors. But not before I make the requisite 'loose in the tail' and 'running out of talent' jokes."

5. Brad Keselowski — Keselowski shook off a disappointing finish at Daytona to post a solid finish at Phoenix, charging from the 28th starting position to finish fifth.

"Luckily," Keselowski said, "I have a car owner who supports my use of Twitter. Roger Penske is all for short, concise tweets from my phone. Ironically, he encourages me to be 'curt.' In fact, Roger often refers to me by my Twitter handle '@Keselowski.' Last year, he often referred to Kurt Busch by a name than sounded like a Twitter handle, '@SOB.'"

6. Martin Truex, Jr. — Truex finished seventh in Phoenix, joining Michael Waltrip Racing teammate Mark Martin, who finished ninth after starting from the pole, in the top 10. Truex jumped six places in the point standings to sixth, and trails Denny Hamlin by 18.

"This team is hot right now," Truex said. "As our early-season results can attest, MWR is one of NASCAR's top teams. And we've got Michael Waltrip to thank, mostly because he's not driving. Michael Waltrip Racing is at its best, unless Michael Waltrip's racing."

7. Dale Earnhardt, Jr. — Earnhardt came home 14th at Phoenix, as his winless streak reached 131 races. He is fifth in the point standings, 17 out of first.

"I sincerely believe a win is forthcoming," Earnhardt said. "At least according to the Mayan calendar. Luckily, my fans are always supportive and don't pressure me to win. They don't say 'just win, baby.' They say 'just whenever, baby.'

"Call Junior Nation whatever you want, like 'The Nation if is Lame,' or 'Junior Station-ary,' or 'The Winless Circle,' but they are the best fans in NASCAR."

8. Kyle Busch — Busch led 52 laps at Phoenix and finished sixth on the two-mile oval, scoring his first top-10 finish after a 17th at Daytona. He is now ninth in the Sprint Cup point standings, 23 behind Joe Gibbs Racing teammate Denny Hamlin.

"Inquiring minds want to know," Busch said. "Will 2012 see the 'old' Kyle Busch or the 'new' Kyle Busch? I think you'll see a little bit of both. That's called the 'same' Kyle Busch."

9. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson rebounded from a disastrous week at Daytona to score a solid fourth in the Subway Fresh Fit 500. Johnson finished 42nd after a lap two wreck at Daytona, and was later docked 25 points and crew chief Chad Knaus was suspended for six races after failing inspection after the Gatorade Duels.

"I was once a 'five-time defender,'" Johnson said. "That's in stark contrast to Knaus, who's a '10-time offender.' Knaus was also fined $100,000 in addition to his six-race suspension. Those are pretty stiff penalties. Once again, as a result of what happened in Florida, there's a 'hanging Chad.'"

10. Joey Logano — Logano posted his second top-10 finish of the year with a tenth at Phoenix, joining Joe Gibbs Racing teammates Denny Hamlin and Kyle Busch in the top 10. Logano is 8 in the point standings, 19 behind Hamlin.

"Later this summer," Logano said, "new father Kevin Harvick will 'cut the cord.' Hopefully, my dad can do the same."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 12:55 PM | Comments (0)

March 6, 2012

Are the Knicks Returning to Sanity?

When was the last time you can remember a perpetual .500 team such as the New York Knicks captivating the nation and becoming the biggest story in the sport, the most mesmerizing team to watch?

Well ,the Denver Tebows did it just three months ago. And the Giants were 7-7 before going on a Super Bowl title run. Okay, so maybe it's not as unique as I thought.

While many comparisons have been made between the personal stories of Jeremy Lin and Tim Tebow during this recent rise to stardom by Lin, the effects these two men have had on their respective teams holds up even better. Lin instantly made the Knicks better, driving them to a 7-game winning streak as soon as he began getting major time on the floor. Several of these games required last-minute comebacks and big shots made by Lin in the final seconds. There was also The Statement victory against a stunned Kobe Bryant and the Lakers in Game 4 of Linsanity. The culmination of this came in Toronto when Lin drained a daring three-pointer with just 0.5 seconds left to beat the Raptors to a rare road-standing ovation on Asian Heritage Night.

All this may have impressed the likes of Tim Tebow, but his resume of late-game heroics and comebacks was no less impressive, with the unlikely comeback win over the Miami Dolphins to start his run or the 20-yard touchdown run against the Jets. There was the heart-stopping reversal against the Bears, who only needed to run out the clock properly to ensure victory.

The unsettling thing for Knicks fans is how quickly the streak of dominance has dissolved, much in the same manner it did for Tebow's Broncos, who ended up losing their final three games in ugly fashion, revealing obvious weaknesses in their chosen one's game.

While the Knicks have not fallen apart, they have gone back to being the epitome of a .500 team. Win one night, lose the next. Rinse and repeat. Lin has also been exposed at times as turnover prone and not a strong enough one-on-one defender against a scoring point guard. The Miami Heat limited Jeremy to 1-for-11 shooting with only 3 assists in a 102-88 loss just over a week ago.

And yet on other nights, he has the entire offense finely orchestrated; a ringmaster with the baton. (After all, what better place to host the circus than Madison Square Garden?) Steve Novak knocks down open threes, Landry Fields gets back door passes for easy layups, Carmelo Anthony and Amare Stoudemire get alley-oops and post-up opportunities, Lin takes a few to the rim himself, absorbing whatever contact necessary to draw an and-one, and the opponents cry uncle as they are subdued by too many weapons.

And yet they still have not risen from the waters of .500 since January 12th, when they were 6-5, long before any New Yorker ever heard of Jeremy Lin. It was assumed to be a matter of time before they climbed their way up the eastern conference standings, but they have now alternated wins and losses for eight consecutive games. The last defeat in Boston was particularly painful as a three-pointer from Paul Pierce tied the game with under 5 seconds remaining and the Knicks fell in overtime to the geriatric Celtics. What's worse is this will be followed by a back-to-back Texas two-step: at Dallas, then at San Antonio. The 76ers and Bulls follow shortly thereafter. Suddenly, breaking out over .500 is far from a foregone conclusion.

Last season, the Carmelo Anthony trade generated considerable excitement even as it brought inconsistent play. The feeling was the Knicks were relevant for the first time in many years, at least until they got swept out of the first round of the playoffs. As 'Melo and Stat struggled to play together for much of this season, the Melo trade started to seem in retrospect more like a pathetic blip on the radar in the wasteland of recent Knicks failures. Lin has briefly revitalized that hope of a winner on the horizon.

That hope still hangs in the balance. For basketball in New York to become relevant again, it is not simply enough for the Knicks to win their first playoff game in 11 years, they need to win a playoff series. At the rate they are moving, this may require a highly-unlikely 1-8 seed first round upset if they cannot recapture the consistency of their previous 7-game Lin streak.

The current Knicks squad has talent, diversity, and depth. Stoudemire, Anthony, and Lin hold the keys to potentially usher in a new era of Knicks basketball that could wash away the darkness of the 2000s and even the perpetual playoff heartbreaks of the Patrick Ewing era. Or it could just become another Starbury-sized false alarm.

Posted by Bill Hazell at 8:56 PM | Comments (1)

Best Wide Receivers Not in the HOF: 1960s

Who is the best wide receiver eligible for the Pro Football Hall of Fame, but not yet enshrined? When football fans cry "snub," there's a good chance they're talking about a wide receiver. For years, it was Lynn Swann or Art Monk. Now, it's guys like Tim Brown and Otis Taylor. Players at the other stat positions — quarterbacks and running backs — are elected to the PFHOF with much higher frequency than wideouts.

For this project, we'll examine in depth 25 eligible wide receivers with strong backing for the Hall of Fame: Cliff Branch, Tim Brown, Harold Carmichael, Cris Carter, Wes Chandler, Gary Clark, Henry Ellard, Irving Fryar, Charley Hennigan, Harlon Hill, Billy Howton, Harold Jackson, Herman Moore, Stanley Morgan, Drew Pearson, Art Powell, Andre Reed, Andre Rison, Sterling Sharpe, Del Shofner, Jimmy Smith, Mac Speedie, Hugh Taylor, Otis Taylor, and Billy Wilson. I believe only about five of those players deserve induction, but there's a case to be made for all of them.

It's difficult to compare players across eras at any position, and this is particularly true in the passing game, because the rules and statistics have changed so much. Today's wide receivers play 16-game schedules. They can't be bumped more than five yards downfield. Their quarterbacks are protected in ways John Unitas and Roger Staubach never dreamed of. They play in high-efficiency pass-oriented offenses, as opposed to the exciting but reckless bomb-it-down-the-field passing games of the past, when running was a way of life and throwing a sneaky change of pace or a mark of desperation. But we can certainly compare these players to their peers. Here's my list of 25, ranked by the number of times they were among the top 10 in their league in receiving yards:

Seven: Powell
Five: Brown, Carter, Clark, Jackson, Pearson, Shofner, Smith, Speedie, Wilson
Four: Branch, Ellard, Fryar, Hennigan, Howton, Moore, Sharpe, Otis Taylor
Three: Chandler, Hill, Morgan, Reed, Rison, Hugh Taylor
Two: Carmichael

To keep the statistics from skewing, I used top-five rankings (instead of top-10) for seasons before 1970, when the leagues were 8-16 teams rather than 26-32. This affected Hennigan, Howton, Speedie, Hugh Taylor, and Wilson, once each. The two who stand out on the list, obviously, are Powell and Carmichael. But let's review each player's résumé, in alphabetical order. We continue this week with receivers of the 1960s. If you're here for another era, check out our previous articles in this series:

Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1990s (Brown, Carter, Fryar, Moore, Rison, Smith)
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1980s (Chandler, Clark, Ellard, Morgan, Reed, Sharpe)
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1970s (Branch, Carmichael, Jackson, Pearson)
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1950s (Hill, Howton, Speedie, Hugh Taylor, Wilson)

Charley Hennigan
1960-66, Houston Oilers
410 receptions, 6,823 yards, 51 TD

Probably no one's HOF case is more hindered by disrespect for the early AFL than Charley Hennigan. We can argue about when the American Football League started catching up to the NFL, but all serious analysts recognize that competition in the AFL in the early 1960s was not at the same level as in the NFL, and in particular, that the receiving stats from that era need to be taken with a grain of salt. All of that is true, but it's led some people to completely disregard the statistics of every AFL receiver from the early '60s, except for maybe Don Maynard's. In a project to identify the best wide receiver seasons of all time, Chase Stuart, employing an immense adjustment to AFL statistics, ranked the NFL's Tommy McDonald ahead of Hennigan in 1961. Let's take a quick look at their stats that season:

I realize Hennigan was facing AFL defensive backs, and playing for the Oilers at a time when George Blanda threw on pretty much every down, but how do you downgrade a season like that? Hennigan's 1,746 yards still is the third-highest total ever in a season — the record stood for 34 years — and he did it in 14 games. Hennigan's 272 yards against the Patriots stands as the AFL single-game record, and his single-season record for 200-yard receiving games (3) probably will never be broken. Recognizing that the AFL revolutionized passing and did feature many great receivers, how do you look at maybe the greatest receiving season in AFL history and say it's not one of the top 50 of all time? The top three single-season receiving totals in AFL history:

1. Charley Hennigan, 1961 — 1,746
2. Lance Alworth, 1965 — 1,602
3. Charley Hennigan, 1964 — 1,546

I don't care what league you play in, when a guy is killing you badly enough, you assign extra defenders to him. With a defense's ability to adjust, I believe there's an effective maximum to the statistics a receiver can realistically compile. If you put Jerry Rice on the '61 Oilers, how many yards would he have? I'd bet about the same as Hennigan. Looking at 1961 AFL receiving stats with a skeptical eye makes sense, but there's a certain point at which a receiver can't realistically do any more, no matter his talent.

Hennigan also was the first receiver with more than 100 catches in a season, hauling in 101 in 1964. He was basically done after that. Limited by injures, Hennigan gained under 1,000 yards in 1965-66 combined, then retired. He played in 5 AFL All-Star Games (more than any WR but Alworth), was first-team All-AFL three times, and was a second-team receiver on the AFL All-Time Team, behind only Alworth and Maynard.

There are two major arguments against Hennigan: a very short career, and the quality of opposition in the AFL in the early 1960s. It also bears mention that the Oilers passed much more often than most teams in that era, so Hennigan had many opportunities for receptions. This story was told by Hennigan's old quarterback, Hall of Famer George Blanda, on the 2009 Showtime series Full Color Football: The History of the American Football League.

"[Hall of Fame cornerback Willie Brown] couldn't cover Charley Hennigan in practice, so he was let go, and the Broncos picked him up. The next year we played Denver, and Charley needed nine catches to break Lionel Taylor's record of 100 receptions in a season. Charley got the nine he needed, with Willie covering him. Willie's in the Hall of Fame. Charley Hennigan should be, too."

Art Powell
1959-68, Philadelphia Eagles, New York Titans, Oakland Raiders, Buffalo Bills, Minnesota Vikings
479 receptions, 8,046 yards, 81 TD

Powell is listed with five different teams, but almost all of his career contributions came with the Titans (1960-62) or Raiders (1963-66). He was a return specialist with the Eagles in 1959, a role player for the Bills in '67, and a non-factor on the Vikings in '68. During his seasons in New York and Oakland, though, Powell was among the most productive receivers in football. Paul Zimmerman (Dr. Z) called Powell "the most feared receiver in the early days of the AFL", placing him ahead of Charley Hennigan and Don Maynard. Powell and Maynard were teammates for three years, and the statistical comparison favors Powell:

Powell remains ahead during his years with the Raiders:

The problem is that Powell's career basically ends there, while Maynard played for another seven years, including two of his best seasons. But clearly, Powell was an elite receiver in his prime, measuring up against the best the AFL had to offer. He made the official All-AFL team five times, four as a starter. He twice led the league in receiving yards, and twice in touchdowns. He caught the third-most passes in league history, behind only Lionel Taylor and Maynard, gained the third-most receiving yards (Lance Alworth and Maynard), and scored more touchdowns than anyone but Maynard. He was named to the AFL All-Time Team, joining Hennigan on the second team behind Alworth and Maynard.

Powell was the first player in history with five 1,000-yard receiving seasons. He was eventually tied by Maynard and passed by Alworth, but no one else matched them until Steve Largent almost two decades later (1983). Powell ranked among the top five in the AFL in receiving yardage for seven consecutive seasons (1960-66). With so many positive distinctions working for him, the HOF argument against Powell is the same as Hennigan's:

1. Style of play and quality of defense in the early AFL
2. Short career

Comparing the two players, it's hard not to rank Powell at least slightly ahead. He caught more passes for more yards and more touchdowns, had more good seasons, and sustained his success with two teams, lending credence to the idea that he wasn't simply a product of his system. Powell was also a fine returner when he got the chance.

Del Shofner
1957-67, Los Angeles Rams, New York Giants
349 receptions, 6,470 yards, 51 TD

Delbert Shofner's stats don't look impressive compared to his contemporaries in the AFL, but the passing environment in the NFL during the '60s was substantially different than in the new league. There were basically just five seasons in which Shofner did anything (1958-59, 61-63), but all five years, he made the Pro Bowl and was first-team All-Pro. He was among the NFL's top four in receiving yards all five times, and top-10 in both receptions and receiving TDs all five times. Modern-Era NFL wide receivers with 5 or more first-team All-Pro selections: Del Shofner, Jerry Rice, Terrell Owens. That's it. Shofner led the NFL in receiving yards in 1958, and he was a solid punter early in his career (153 punts, 42.0 average).

A track star at Baylor — where he is still widely regarded as the greatest football player in school history — Shofner was the NFL's premier deep threat while he was active. Hall of Fame quarterback Y.A. Tittle said that of all the receivers he played with, Billy Wilson had the best hands, and Frank Gifford was the smartest, but Shofner "was the best and most dangerous of all" because he could score from anywhere on the field. Throwing short to Shofner, Tittle said, was like asking Mickey Mantle to bunt.

Although he played in three NFL Championship Games, Shofner never had a signature performance. In 1961, he was shut down by his former roommate, Jess Whittenton. In '62, swirling winds and an icy field in the title game took away the deep pass. In '63, when the Giants faced one of the greatest defenses in history, Tittle threw five interceptions and Shofner dropped a pass in the end zone. In 1964, Shofner was coming off his third straight championship appearance, and third straight season of 1,100 receiving yards — the first player in either league to do so — and was still only 29. But that season, and the rest of his career, were cut short by illness and injury. Shofner played only six games in '64, and he never came all the way back after that.

Shofner doesn't have the stats because of his health problems, and he doesn't have the signature moments on a big stage to make up for it. Although there are numerous instances in which he made great plays and led his team to victory, they didn't happen in the right three games. Shofner nonetheless was chosen to the 1960s NFL All-Decade Team, basically just on the strength of three seasons, and he set multiple records during his career.

I mentioned in Powell's summary that he was the first player in history with five 1,000-yard receiving seasons. For almost 20 years, Shofner was the only NFL player with four 1,000-yard receiving seasons (1963-81). He was eventually tied by Hall of Famers Steve Largent and Charlie Joiner. Raymond Berry didn't have four 1,000-yard seasons. Tommy McDonald didn't, Charley Taylor didn't, Cliff Branch didn't ... just Shofner. And yet this guy has been lost to the winds of time.

We can't even blame this on lack of exposure. Shofner played in New York, when the Giants were the best team in the Eastern Conference, making three straight title appearances. But when we evaluate careers, we tend to look (logically enough) at career statistics. And because Shofner only had five productive seasons (seven if you want to be generous), his career stats aren't especially impressive. His best seasons came right before the explosion of televised football and the NFL's surge in popularity, and he's been largely forgotten in favor of players who reached stardom just two or three years later.

Otis Taylor
1965-74, Kansas City Chiefs
410 receptions, 7,306 yards, 57 TD

Otis Taylor has been cited as a Hall of Fame snub basically since 1980, when he first became eligible for induction. He's off the regular ballot now, and would have to be nominated by the Seniors Committee, but here's something odd: Otis Taylor was never a finalist for the Hall of Fame. Not once was he even among the final 15 players considered for enshrinement.

Taylor played in the 1966 AFL All-Star Game and in two Pro Bowls, and he was a first-team All-Pro in 1971. He was also a hero of Super Bowl IV, with 6 receptions for 81 yards, including a 46-yard touchdown to effectively clinch the game. Taylor caught a short pass, then ran 41 yards to the end zone, breaking two tackles along the way. The 6-3, 215-lb Taylor was also regarded as a fine blocker. He led the AFL in receiving TDs in 1967 and led the NFL in receiving yardage in 1971.

There are a hundred stories about Taylor. He was particularly distinguished by his ability with the ball in his hands — sprinter's speed and very hard to bring down. He's one of those guys who passed the eye test but didn't have huge numbers. Paul Zimmerman, for one, was always a vocal advocate for Taylor's HOF case. I hope you'll forgive me a digression, but here's a long excerpt from a post by Joe Posnanski:

"When Charlie Joiner retired, he had the record for most receptions and receiving yards in a career. He was elected into the Hall of Fame 10 years later. He is now 29th all-time in receptions, and many receivers with dramatically better numbers — such as Cris Carter and Tim Brown and Andre Reed — are having a heck of a time getting into the Hall of Fame.

Cris Carter: 1,101 catches, 13,899 yards, 130 TDs
Tim Brown: 1,094 catches, 14,934 yards, 100 TDs
Andre Reed: 951 catches, 13,198 yards, 87 TDs
Charlie Joiner: 750 catches, 12,146 yards, 65 TDs

"Well, we all know, the times have changed in football. Rules have changed. Defenses have changed. Strategies have changed. Football, even more than baseball, should have statistics like OPS+ or ERA+ that are adjusted to the time. For instance, I happen to think that Otis Taylor was a better receiver than all four of them but he played in such a different time and his numbers are so much less impressive (410 catches, 7,306 yards, 57 touchdowns) that he simply cannot get any Hall of Fame momentum."

The thing is, Taylor's numbers are not less impressive because of when he played, or least not exclusively. By the numbers, Taylor doesn't compare particularly well even to his contemporaries. His stats are unimpressive because he played on a run-oriented offense and had a fairly short career. Here are career figures for some of the better receivers who began their careers between 1963-67:

Statistically, Carter and Brown and Reed and Joiner are among the very best of their eras. Joiner set major receiving records, and the others would have if not for Jerry Rice. Otis Taylor simply is not a statistical standout, even in his own era. He's comparable to Roy Jefferson or Gary Garrison, who were very good players, but ... well, you know that joke about the Hall of the Very Good. Taylor's stats, even in context, are nowhere near the level of the other players Posnanski mentioned.

Joe went on to imply that Joiner may not deserve his bust in Canton, that he was enshrined at least partially due to an accident of timing. I'm sure there's some truth in that, but Joiner's career is impressive on several levels. He played for 18 seasons, and you have to be pretty darn good just to last that long. This wasn't holding on as a role player, either — Joiner gained 932 receiving yards in his second-to-last season, the most ever by a 38-year-old, and only Jerry Rice gained more yardage at age 39.

Joiner didn't blow our minds the way Largent and Lofton did, but he was consistently a very good player. We think of Joiner with the record-setting Air Coryell offenses of the '80s, but he was also one of the most accomplished receivers of the '70s, one of only five players to top 6,000 receiving yards in the decade. People forget that Joiner had a 1,000-yard season in 1976, in 14 games and without Don Coryell or Kellen Winslow or John Jefferson or Wes Chandler or Chuck Muncie. The second-leading receiver on that team was fullback Rickey Young (441 yards). The top WR apart from Joiner was Dwight McDonald (161 yds).

Bill Walsh called Joiner "the most intelligent, the smartest, the most calculating receiver the game has ever known." Looking at the length and quality of his career, Joiner is comparable to Isaac Bruce or Don Maynard. Those players were better at their peaks, but neither had as many good seasons as Joiner. Maynard is a solid Hall of Famer, not borderline at all, and I'll support Bruce when he becomes eligible. Joiner belongs.

It's useful to me, in thinking about these issues, to break them down by era. Below, I've organized HOF receivers by the decade in which they most established their greatness.

1945-54: Tom Fears, Elroy Hirsch, Dante Lavelli, Pete Pihos
1950-59: n/a
1955-64: Raymond Berry, Tommy McDonald, Bobby Mitchell
1960-69: Lance Alworth, Don Maynard
1965-74: Fred Biletnikoff, Bob Hayes, Charley Taylor, Paul Warfield
1970-79: n/a
1975-84: Charlie Joiner, Steve Largent, John Stallworth, Lynn Swann
1980-89: James Lofton, Art Monk
1985-94: Jerry Rice
1990-99: Michael Irvin

Some of those assignments are close calls. Mitchell, for instance, was a star running back and kick returner in the '50s; he didn't switch to wide receiver until '62. McDonald was almost as good in the late '60s as the late '50s, and easily could rate with Alworth and Maynard rather than Berry and Mitchell. Let's break this down a little more, looking at both the Hall of Famers and the contenders we've examined. To be fair, we should probably separate the AFL guys.

Looking at the numbers, you can see why Hennigan, Powell, and Shofner aren't in Canton. Their career statistics aren't nearly at the same level as those of their HOF contemporaries. The argument is that these players didn't stick around past their primes to pile up big numbers, but performed at exceptional levels when they were on the field. Hennigan had the greatest prime, Powell the most good seasons, Shofner a combination.

The receivers of the 1960s are already well-represented in Canton, from Berry and McDonald to Biletnikoff and Warfield. How many more receivers of this era do we want to honor? Hennigan was a great player ... for two or three seasons. Powell put up huge numbers ... in the early AFL, where records were broken left and right. I'm most sympathetic, actually, to Shofner, who had five truly great years, helped the Giants to three straight championship appearances, and was a greater standout in the NFL than Powell in the AFL. Stats again, looking at the end of the decade:

There are already four Hall of Fame receivers who began their careers in 1964 or '65. That doesn't mean we can't induct another; Otis Taylor was by all accounts a remarkable player, and if you value quality over quantity, he certainly has a case. To me, though, he's the 5th-best receiver of his own era, and we're turning away guys from other eras who stood out from their peers in a way that Taylor didn't. Here's how I rank the best non-HOF receivers of the '60s:

1. Del Shofner — First four-time 1,000-yard receiver in history, five-time All-Pro.
HOF Qualifications: FAIR. He probably doesn't need to be in.

2. Otis Taylor — Big, talented receiver with all the skills. Made big plays when the stakes were highest.
HOF Qualifications: FAIR. He probably doesn't need to be in.

3. Art Powell — Scored 81 TDs and seven times ranked among AFL receiving leaders.
HOF Qualifications: FAIR. He probably doesn't need to be in.

4. Charley Hennigan — Had two unbelievable seasons and set a single-season yardage record that stood for 34 years.
HOF Qualifications: POOR. He probably shouldn't be in. But he was a heck of a player.

***

Read the other articles in this series:

Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1990s
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1980s
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1970s
Best Wide Receivers Not in the Hall of Fame: 1950s

Posted by Brad Oremland at 12:29 PM | Comments (2)

March 5, 2012

The Battle For No. 1

At first glance, it looks good; three Brits at the top of a sport, all fighting it out to see who is the best in the world. But though the top spot is a prized position in any sport, and one that is well earned, it's not as important as, well, the majors.

Of those top three, only one has won a major, and that same player famously crashed out of the Masters earlier that year, having led by some margin with only one day to play.

That was McIlroy. He's currently No. 2 (as of this writing).

Another has come very close. In 2010, he came second at both the Masters, and the (British) Open Championships. He's also managed third and tied third at the other two majors.

That's Lee Westwood. Currently No. 3.

And last, but not least, Luke Donald. He's won a lot of small tournaments, and a lot of bigger ones, too. But he's never won a major. He's come tied for third twice.

So perhaps there are some underachievers there? It would have been thought that a rivalry, and a fight for the top spot would raise the level of their games, but apparently not. McIlroy can maybe be forgiven, as he is still a youngster who is coming on in leaps and bounds. He has raised his game, but he's proven so far too inconsistent. He can raise his level, and throw it away over two or three days.

But the other two. Even just thinking about them, I'm shaking my head. Even if you're not British, you should well be sitting there tutting.

It's not that these are bad golfers. Not at all. But there is something else.

Donald won seven awards in 2011, including PGA Player of the Year and European Tour Golfer of the Year. He also finished the year as No. 1.

Westwood didn't win any awards in 2011, but has won numerous awards in his career, and has won the European Tour Golfer of the Year three times. He has also won 21 European Tour titles, which leaves him tied ninth on the all-time list with Sam Torrance, who has recently won the Scottish Golf Lifetime Achievement Award.

Should these accolades and achievements be given to those who do not win majors?

Of course they should. And that is the best thing about golf at the moment. There have been seven first-time major winners in a row. They aren't being recognized with by the boards and decision makers because those with the power don't want to give an award to someone who could well turn out to be a flash in the pan.

No doubt if they win another, or two in one year, heads will turn and nod in their direction.

For Luke Donald and Lee Westwood, they don't need to win a major to prove they are exceptionally talented golfers, but I get the feeling they'd really like one on their mantelpiece this year.

For McIlroy, 2012 will surely mean taking the top spot, and securing a second, and maybe third major?

Majors don't define a sport, but they can define a player's career. One extra stroke here and there can send you from being a potential superstar to being "the best of the rest."

This rivalry at the top can be exciting now, and golf is by no means stuck in a rut, but the real excitement comes when one of them steps up and moves head and shoulders above the others. Then we will see who the real superstar is.

Posted by Angus Saul at 11:18 AM | Comments (0)

March 4, 2012

Fantasyland Basketball

As great as this past weekend's All-Star Game was, the NBA really dropped the ball on bringing competition to Saturday's events. The Warriors are shooting a Western Conference best 40%, including three3 players in the top 10, yet were not represented in the three-point contest. Blake Griffin was unable to be swayed by the league to defend his title in the dunk contest, and LeBron stayed consistent by once again toying with the fans saying he might join the contest and then backing out.

I don't know whether it's "uncool" in the NBA nowadays to be in front of a national audience and showoff your insane athletic ability, or if the NBA just doesn't try enough to get these players. Either way, Saturday was not one fraction as exciting as it could have been with the current talent in the NBA. Even the All-Star Game itself seems a bit less exciting because so many big name players play on the same teams now, but it is still the best players in the league doing what they do. Saturday's events are more like a gathering of players who the casual fans haven't heard of yet and are trying to make a name for themselves by launching threes or throwing down windmill dunks.

I tried to think of a way the NBA could spice up Saturday night during All-Star Weekend, but without a way to get the best players to participate, it is forever going to be boring in comparison to 10 years ago when the dunk contest was every bit as hyped as the All-Star Game itself. Without a solution, I resorted to the impossible and came up with "NBA All-Star Saturday: Players in Their Prime." Please come join me in Fantasyland, All-Star Weekend style.

Three-Point Shootout

FIRST ROUND MATCHUPS

Robert Horry vs. Reggie Miller
In the "Captains of Clutch" shootout, Reggie's swagger forces him to be rushed on the final rack and he has to get all five shots off in under 4 seconds. Due to the time constraint, he makes them all and wins in an 18-17 barn-burner to advance to round two.

Sam Perkins vs. Glen Rice
In the "Too Bad I Didn't Use My Size More Often, People Might Still Know My Name" matchup of the first round, Glen Rice knocks down 20 to easily beats Perkins who had to stop for oxygen and water after the third rack, though he still tallied an impressive 12 without jumping once.

Jeff Hornaceck vs. Steve Kerr
In the "Little White Dude Who Played Alongside Two of the Greatest Tandems Ever" contest, Jeff goes wild and notches a round-high 22 to take him into the semis.

Ray Allen vs. Dirk Nowitzki
In the "Why Did the Bucks Trade Me For Pennies?" matchup of evening, Dirk's runs his hands through his hair and in-turn has trouble picking up the balls because of the grease. He eventually gets hot, but Ray stays solid the whole time and knocks down the money ball at the buzzer to win 19-17.

SEMIFINALS MATCHUPS

Reggie Miller vs. Glen Rice
Both players have amazing rounds and with 20 points and one ball left on his rack, Reggie sees that Glen ended early with 21 and lines up the money ball. The buzzer sounds and the ball swishes through. The crowd erupts but a shrill whistle quickly silences them. Esteemed Three-Point Shootout referee Spike Lee calls a shoelace-on-the-line violation on Reggie, so the basket doesn't count. Reggie backhands Spike then Spike calls him Cheryl and both parties are hastily escorted off the premises. Glen Rice wins.

Jeff Hornaceck vs. Ray Allen
Jeff Hornaceck goes stone-cold and posts only an 11. Ray Allen easily wins with a 19-point showing and cruises into the finals. After the match, Hornaceck storms over to the officials and complains about something. Nothing becomes of the complaints and Hornaceck retires to the locker room. Postgame reports would show that Ray Allen's Mom may have used one of her 17 platinum necklaces to divert light from the Jumbotron directly into Hornaceck's eyes. Though very probable, the allegations were never proven. Ray Allen wins.

FINALS MATCHUP

Glen Rice vs. Ray Allen
During pre-finals interviews, Glen Rice calls out Chris Webber on TNT and says, "If it weren't for that 'timeout,' you might be a more revered Wolverine than me!" and Webber replies with, "Remember when you had a post game? Me neither!" Ray Allen doesn't speak, as usual, and the finals begin. Introductions commence. "At 6'5" from the Boston Celtics, Rayyyyy Allennnnn!!!!" The crowd erupts. "At 6'8", from the Los Angeles Clippers (no applause), Los Angeles Lakers (no applause), Houston Rockets (no applause), New York Knicks (a few woos), and Charlotte Hornets! (crowd responds) Gleeeeeeennnnnn Riiiiicceee!"

The applause subdues, the lights go down, and my imagination once again runs rampant.

The round begins. Both players start out hot and by the rack at the top of the key, it is tied 10-10. Both players take a quick glance over their shoulders and the glance once again makes the crowd erupt. On to the shoulder rack. 15-15 heading to the corner. Ray drills his first two, Glen short rims both. Ray finishes miss-make-miss. Glen hits his third, the fourth, and finally, the money ball. 19-18, Glen Rice wins. (It's my fantasy ... I didn't wear No. 41 growing up because Dirk was my favorite foreign high school basketball player.)

Slam Dunk Contest

As the RNBA (Real National Basketball Association) shortened up its dunk contest this year due to a lack of interest from elite players, the FNBA (Fantasyland National Basketball Association) decided to gather the best of the best. Here is your FNBA dunk contest lineup:

Spud Webb
Vince Carter
Jason Richardson
Michael Jordan

There seems to be a formula for great dunkers, as Carter, Richardson, and Jordan are all 6'6". Spud Web breaks the mold, being a whole foot shorter than any of his competitors.

Knowing the level of competition and not wanting to just toss out 50s every time, the judges stiffen their criteria for a perfect dunk and get ready for the show.

Having two minutes to complete a dunk (as in this year's contest) is far too long and even if it does allow for an exceptional dunk to occur, it is anti-climactic during the contest and not truly appreciated until the next day on "SportsCenter." Because of this, the FNBA has shortened the length of time to a simple 24-second shot clock for our competition. It's the three best dunks. No cars. No headcams, just a man and a ball. Best total score wins. Let the high-flying begin.

Spud Webb

1st Dunk: Spud takes a page out of Nate Robinson's book and jumps over Gheorghe Muresan. 9, 10, 9, 9, 9. Billy Crystal is one of the judges and liked that "His Giant" was involved so he notched a 10. Total: 46

2nd Dunk: Spud pulls out a classic from the '86 contest and does a good old 360. 8, 9, 9, 9, 9. Total: 44

3rd Dunk: Spud one-ups the Vince Carter "elbow-in-the-rim" dunk and actually dunks himself. 10, 10, 10, 10, 7. Judge Charles Barkley is jealous that Spud can even fit his head in the rim, let alone his whole body, so he notches a 7. Total: 46

Three-Dunk Total: 136

Jason Richardson

1st Dunk: J-Rich goes back to '04 and throws it off the backboard to himself and then goes between the legs … only this time he does a 360 as well. 10, 10, 10, 10, 10. Total: 50

2nd Dunk: Richardson lines up with a ball in each hand and does a double windmill. 10, 9, 9, 10, 10. Total: 48

3rd Dunk: Knowing a great dunk will probably get him a win, Richardson starts waving his arm to get the crowd involved. He pushes aside a few ball racks and jogs to the other end of the gym. He takes of his jersey to reveal an old-school Michael Jordan jersey and the crowd goes nuts. He makes his break towards the free throw line and right as he takes off the buzzer sounds. Shot clock violation. Sorry, Jason. 2, 5, 4, 4, 0. Total: 15

Three-Round Total: 113

Michael Jordan

1st Dunk: 720. The house explodes with cheers. 10, 10, 10, 10, 10. Total: 50

2nd Dunk: M.J. walks over to his wife, who is holding their infant child. He calls Tim Duncan and his soft hands from the crowd to stand under the hoop. Then Jordan goes '85 dunk contest and does a rock the baby reverse … with an actual child. Tim secures the rebound and the crowd goes nuts. 10, 10, 10, 10, 0. Judge Candace Parker is pregnant and thinks the act was "dangerous." Hormones. Total: 40

3rd Dunk: Jordan parts the crowd, as Richardson does, but being a winner, Jordan glances at the shot clock and starts his run quickly. He takes off from the top of the key and dunks two handed. 10, 10, 10, 10, 10. Total: 50

Three-Round Total: 140

Vince Carter

1st Dunk: Off a pass from Tracy McGrady, Carter catches the ball and goes between his legs … twice. He flushes is home and the crowd explodes again. 10, 10, 10, 10, 10. Total: 50

2nd Dunk: Front-flip dunk. Crowd gets even louder. 10, 10, 10, 10, 10. Total: 50

3rd Dunk: Vince runs to the opposite side of the court and holds up three fingers. The crowd gets so loud in anticipation for a dunk from the three point line that the JumboTron falls onto the floor. Vince jumps over it and throws down a tomahawk. 10, 10, 10, 10, 10. Total: 50

Three-Round Total: 150

Vince Carter is crowned the greatest dunker of all-time and celebrates like he just won a championship. Well, what he imagines what it would be like to win a championship any way. He and Glen Rice head climb the JumboTron for one final bow and the fans shuffle out.

Posted by Gary Flick at 7:25 PM | Comments (0)

March 2, 2012

Foul Territory: Wheelers, Dealers, and Ex-Steelers

* LeBron James Didn't Go to College, or "Finishing" School — With the All-Star Game on the line, the East's LeBron James passed up a shot attempt and instead passed, despite the West's Kobe Bryant urging him to "take the shot." Allegedly, it was the first time Bryant took "no" for an answer.

* Match Playa, or the Hunted Became the Hunter, or Rory, Rory, He's a Loser — Hunter Mahan beat Rory McIlroy 2-and-1 to win the World Golf Championship on Sunday. For those unfamiliar with match play lingo, "2-and-1" means Mahan had a two-hole lead with one hole to play. For those unfamiliar with Tiger Woods lingo, "2-and-1" means a threesome.

* Jordan Still Rules — Kobe Bryant scored 27 points in Sunday's NBA All-Star Game and broke Michael Jordan's scoring record. Bryant now has 271 All-Star points to Jordan's 262, further proof that Kobe Bryant is no Michael Jordan.

* Fortunate-Son, or Me So Corny — Ben & Jerry's apologized for including fortune cookies in its Jeremy Lin-inspired "Taste the Lin-Sanity" frozen yogurt. As a further display of contrition, Ben & Jerry's introduced a new flavor, "Crow."

* Blindsided, or 86'd, or the Steelers Chose Not to Re-Ward Themselves — The Pittsburgh Steelers will release veteran wide receiver Hines Ward sometime in the next two weeks. The decision was not a surprise, as the Steelers are in the midst of a roster-wide salary purge, as well as a youth-movement at wide receiver. In other words, everyone saw it coming, except for Ed Reed.

* If You Build it, They Will Com-plete a 20-62 Season — The Sacramento Kings struck a deal with the city of Sacramento to remain in the city long-term with a new arena planned. Fittingly, the new arena will have a basement.

* "Empty" Promises, or Unhappy Valentine's Day — Red Sox manager Bobby Valentine banned alcohol from the Boston clubhouse in response to last season's uproar over beer consumption by starting pitchers during games in which they weren't appearing. Although the flow of beer into the clubhouse has been nixed, chances are alcohol will flow quite smoothly through loopholes in Valentine's policy.

* It's as Clear as Black and White — Robert Griffin III recorded the fastest 40-yard dash time among quarterbacks, clocking a 4.41 at the NFL Combine, while Andrew Luck posted a 4.67. When asked if the numbers will affect their decision in April's NFL draft, the Indianapolis Colts said they'd "take their time" before answering.

* As if a Driver From Colombia Needed Another Reference to "Blow," or Turn and Burn — Matt Kenseth won the rain-delayed Daytona 500 on Monday night after the race was delayed for two hours after Juan Montoya crashed into the back of a jet dryer during a caution on lap 160. Overnight, Montoya became the face of NASCAR, at least in rear-view mirrors.

* Montreal Expo-nential, or Capitol Building — Washington Nationals third baseman Ryan Zimmerman signed a six-year, $100 million extension that will keep him in the nation's capitol through 2019. With so much cash tied up in the contracts of Zimmerman, Bryce Harper, and Stephen Strasburg, many in the Nationals clubhouse are asking the same question as those in the Red Sox clubhouse: "Can we 'remain liquid?'"

* Advantage, the Other 10 Contestants — Donald Driver and Martina Navritilova will compete on ABC's Dancing With the Stars, joining 10 other celebrity contestants for the show's 14th edition. As the only athletes on the show, Driver and Navritilova are likely to share experiences, as well as a dressing room.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 7:14 PM | Comments (0)

Trying Times For American Tennis

Since the beginning of the year, I have been watching a ton of tennis. I can't really explain why; I've always said I'm happy to follow any sport that gets enough media coverage to follow besides auto racing and cricket. The football season was more or less over, and since I suffered a gap in employment, I had swaths of time during the day to watch sports. Tennis filled these swaths.

Don't get me wrong, I've been following tennis since I was a kid, but mostly as a passive observer. Then I came to realize that tennis is a good sport for someone who likes sports gluttony.

To wit: instead of just 1-2 tournaments a week as in golf, there are typically several (except during the majors) going on at once. In addition to the main men's tour, there's also the quasi-minor league "Challenge Tour." But it's not really a minor league; players who are staples on the main tour will frequently dip down to the Challenger circuit for a variety of reasons (they get an invitation, it's a tournament in their home country, they prefer the surface to the ones on the main tour that week, etc.), which makes the Challenger events eminently watchable.

This week is a great example of the surfeit of tournaments. There are eight tourneys taking place (three on the main tour, five on the Challenger tour) in eight different locales (United States, Dubai, Mexico, France, Morocco, Singapore, Colombia, and Brazil) for the men, which has been my focus (sorry, ladies). How fun it must be for a touring pro who enjoys travel; what country do I want to visit this week?

I tried to give tennis a real "shot" before, a place in my mind-shelves cluttered by other sports, in my teens. It didn't really take at the time.

This time around, there has been one hindrance to overcome: It's a crappy, crappy time to be a fan of U.S. players. Andy Roddick is in the twilight of his career and is getting knocked off frequently by lower-seeded players. Another thing about Roddick: did you know he has won just one major? As that passive observer, with the publicity he gets, I would have figured he's won at least three or four.

Indeed, he's not even the highest-ranked American player anymore. That would be Mardy Fish, at this writing ranked 8th in the world.

He will not be 8th for long. At the Australian Open, he was the only top-10 seed not to make it to the third round. Last week in Rotterdam, he lost to a player ranked in the 300s. This week in Dubai, he was the only seeded (top-eight) player not to reach the quarterfinals. He's also in his 30s.

It's also been a disappointing year, results-wise, for most of the other American mainstays of the tour: Ryan Sweeting, Donald Young, Sam Querrey, Michael Russell. Ryan Harrison has fared only marginally better.

The lone bright spot, at least in terms of the immediate future, is John Isner. Isner registered in the global consciousness two years ago when he played in that Wimbledon match that lasted days and shattered every record for long tennis matches, but he might be close to being famous for titles instead.

He's huge (6'6") with a monster serve, and he was the anchor to the one oasis of accomplishment in a bitterly disappointing start of the year for the Americans.

In the first round of the Davis Cup, the United States played Switzerland, in Switzerland, on a surface (clay) that Americans are known to struggle on. More distressingly, the Swiss have Roger Federer on their side, which pretty much meant that, in this best-of-five matchup, the U.S. would need to win all three of their non-Federer matches, 'cause they had no chance in those two.

Mardy Fish, in The Only Good Thing He's Done This Year, ousted Stanislas Wawrinka, no slouch, in a five-set marathon to give the U.S. a 1-0 lead. The second match was Isner vs. Federer.

Isner handed a Federer a four-set defeat, in what Isner called the greatest win of his career, and the U.S. went on to win all five matches to advance to the second round.

You know I love upsets, and those are very hard to come by in tennis these days. The four semifinalists in the Australian Open? The top four seeds. The finals? The top two seeds, won by the No. 1 seed. So Isner's victory was great for two reasons: it pretty much gave the United States the victory, and has been the only loss suffered so far this year by the top four when not playing each other (those four are Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, Federer, and Andy Murray).

There's one other American who has had some success this year, but it comes with a very large asterisk. Wayne Odesnik won a Challenger event in Colombia, one of only two Americans to win a Challenger-or-above tournament this year (the other was Jesse Levine in Dallas against a mostly American field). Odesnik was arrested in 2010 in Australia after customs officials found 8 vials of human growth hormone on him. He was banned from tennis for 14 months as a result, and upon his return is persona non grata among tennis fans, who cherish a sport where doping offenses are relatively rare.

But I will cheer for him, as I do all Americans, because I like rooting for guys no one else will root for, and I believe in second chances. After all, I gave tennis one.

Posted by Kevin Beane at 6:42 PM | Comments (1)