It happens all the time. If it's not one school, it's another. Now it's Auburn -- again. According to reports, their football program is being investigated by the NCAA for violations in recent years. Cash or other goodies given to players, grades fudged to keep them academically eligible, improper recruiting -- you know -- the usual laundry list in big time college football. So far, nothing but denials out of the Auburn folks. What will come out of it, nobody knows. Likely the worst that can happen to Auburn is forfeiting some baubles in their trophy case, banners taken down, loss of a few scholarships, being bowl ineligible for a year and, of course, the dreaded probation, which is pretty much a joke anyway.
Like the IRS tax code, and "code" is a very good name for that behemoth of a manual, because nobody seems to be able to completely decipher it -- the NCAA has got rules on top of more rules. All the member schools, including their administrations, coaching staffs, and players are expected to toe the line, lest they be "audited". Despite how confounding it may be, "ignorance of the law" is no excuse, as they say.
Though I wouldn't advise it for taxpayers, what if several major college football schools banded together, went "rogue", and decided to throw off the oppressors of the NCAA? Consider the following scenario:
Grabbing a few random names, let's say Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska, Georgia, LSU, Oklahoma, Texas, USC, UCLA, Oregon, Alabama, a couple of the major Florida schools, and assorted others decided to fire the NCAA and form their own superconference? Such a conference to be devoid of all those pesky NCAA rules and regulations. What's to keep them from doing it?
Certainly they all have the stadiums to play in. They already handle their own travel and endorsements with various companies. Dividing the conference into east/west divisions or the like could be sorted out. Setting schedules wouldn't be that big of a problem. And tell me the TV folks wouldn't climb all over each other trying to throw huge piles of money at them for broadcasting rights. Plus it would have the added benefit of eliminating those annoying "patsy" games so many of them frontload their schedules with.
The rule book goes out the window. Want to pay the players? Go ahead. The star quarterback needs a new SUV? The boosters would be happy to cough up such chump change. It's not like it's illegal. Only the NCAA currently stands in the way. Taxes on such income? Let the rich alumni, boosters or sponsors pony up for that too. Hey, if I wanted to pay my neighbor's taxes, I'm pretty sure the IRS wouldn't care as long as they got their money one way or the other. What's the difference? And who cares about grades? For that matter, why even make them go to class at all? Most of their curriculums (or is that curriculi?) are a joke, as well.
There would be no worries about revenue sharing in such a conference. Who needs revenue sharing when every school has a huge stadium and every game would be sold out? The only thing they would have to decide on is years of eligibility. Let them pick their own number. Heck, nowadays a lot of these so-called "student athletes" manage to hang around for 6 years supposedly pursuing a 4 year degree. Who's kidding who?
Currently, the NCAA is like border patrol agents. For every "illegal" they catch, another 100 sneak by. Their rules are about as effective as building an 800 mile fence across a 2000 mile long border. Hmm. That sounds familiar, but either way, it's akin to a screen door on a submarine.
The universally disliked bowl system and "national championship" set-up? History. Forget the computers and human pollsters. Any conference this forward-thinking would surely initiate a playoff system.
It could be very interesting if a few high-profile schools started such an uprising and fired the NCAA.
Will it ever happen? Probably not, but if it did, at least there wouldn't be any more dopey rules about how many phone calls a coach can make. Please.
Thursday, April 4, 2013
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Mike Rice and the Rutgers affair
Somehow this sounds vaguely familiar. A northeastern based school, physical abuse, a fired coach, the athletic director and university president embroiled in what some might call a cover-up, and folks clamoring for their heads to roll as well. But in this case there is indisputable video evidence. And it ain't pretty.
Today, Rutgers men's head basketball coach Mike Rice was fired, and justifiably so. The video clip(s) of his misconduct, which have quickly gone viral, leave no doubt that Rice stepped WAY over the line with his players on multiple occasions. Grabbing them, pushing them down, throwing basketballs at them, and screaming ethnic slurs. In today's day and age, any of the above is a fireable offense, let alone all of them. In the real world, Rice would likely be in jail facing multiple counts of assaultive behavior and perhaps even hate crimes. By those standards, the fact he was merely terminated from his employment at Rutgers (so far) would seem quite lenient.
But there are some interesting sub-plots afoot as well. It's been documented the above mentioned AD and Prez were aware of this abuse months ago, yet elected only to fine Rice $50,000, suspend him for three games, and require him to take anger management classes. Other than that, the beat pretty well went on in Scarlet Knight land.
Which leaves one to contemplate a few what-ifs? First, though Rutgers has a fine reputation as an academic institution of higher learning, their men's basketball program isn't exactly what one would consider high-profile, much less a powerhouse. Indeed, during Rice's 3 year tenure, they compiled a record of 44-51, including 15-16 this year and 5-13 in the Big East conference. Of course, any such stats should be totally irrelevant given the whole picture of the debacle that has been brought to light, but would a more famous program have handled it any differently? One would certainly hope so, and further hope this was but an "isolated incident". But we really don't know, do we?
More importantly, can we dare assume that if the damning video evidence hadn't been made public, that Rice would still be there as the head coach? The way things have played out with the latest statements put forth by the AD and Prez -- it appears to be a definite possibility. Worse yet, when originally apprised of Rice's obvious misbehavior months ago, it seems they terminated the guy that brought it to their attention, while Rice was allowed to go merrily on his way. If so, something is horribly wrong with that picture. It took the pressure of public outrage for these guys to act? And what of the "whistle-blower" that tried to do the right thing? Where is his justice? If it hasn't happened already, yours truly suspects a wrongful termination law suit could be on the horizon.
Whether Rice had changed his ways since the videoed abuses actually took place is unknown, at least to the public. Also, Rice freely admitted his wrongdoing, apologized, and appeared genuinely remorseful over his actions when he eventually faced the press. However, there are some offenses that don't warrant a second chance. Presented with such overwhelming evidence last year, the AD and/or Prez were clearly remiss in their duties by allowing Rice to stay on. He should have been fired within the hour, not months later when public outrage boiled over.
Here's hoping Mike Rice has indeed seen the light and changed his ways, and he eventually finds another niche in life that will be rewarding. Regarding his being fired from Rutgers, later is better than never, but he had to go.
And, in my opinion, so do the AD and Prez for ever countenancing such egregious behavior. All the spin in the world isn't going to make it go away.
Today, Rutgers men's head basketball coach Mike Rice was fired, and justifiably so. The video clip(s) of his misconduct, which have quickly gone viral, leave no doubt that Rice stepped WAY over the line with his players on multiple occasions. Grabbing them, pushing them down, throwing basketballs at them, and screaming ethnic slurs. In today's day and age, any of the above is a fireable offense, let alone all of them. In the real world, Rice would likely be in jail facing multiple counts of assaultive behavior and perhaps even hate crimes. By those standards, the fact he was merely terminated from his employment at Rutgers (so far) would seem quite lenient.
But there are some interesting sub-plots afoot as well. It's been documented the above mentioned AD and Prez were aware of this abuse months ago, yet elected only to fine Rice $50,000, suspend him for three games, and require him to take anger management classes. Other than that, the beat pretty well went on in Scarlet Knight land.
Which leaves one to contemplate a few what-ifs? First, though Rutgers has a fine reputation as an academic institution of higher learning, their men's basketball program isn't exactly what one would consider high-profile, much less a powerhouse. Indeed, during Rice's 3 year tenure, they compiled a record of 44-51, including 15-16 this year and 5-13 in the Big East conference. Of course, any such stats should be totally irrelevant given the whole picture of the debacle that has been brought to light, but would a more famous program have handled it any differently? One would certainly hope so, and further hope this was but an "isolated incident". But we really don't know, do we?
More importantly, can we dare assume that if the damning video evidence hadn't been made public, that Rice would still be there as the head coach? The way things have played out with the latest statements put forth by the AD and Prez -- it appears to be a definite possibility. Worse yet, when originally apprised of Rice's obvious misbehavior months ago, it seems they terminated the guy that brought it to their attention, while Rice was allowed to go merrily on his way. If so, something is horribly wrong with that picture. It took the pressure of public outrage for these guys to act? And what of the "whistle-blower" that tried to do the right thing? Where is his justice? If it hasn't happened already, yours truly suspects a wrongful termination law suit could be on the horizon.
Whether Rice had changed his ways since the videoed abuses actually took place is unknown, at least to the public. Also, Rice freely admitted his wrongdoing, apologized, and appeared genuinely remorseful over his actions when he eventually faced the press. However, there are some offenses that don't warrant a second chance. Presented with such overwhelming evidence last year, the AD and/or Prez were clearly remiss in their duties by allowing Rice to stay on. He should have been fired within the hour, not months later when public outrage boiled over.
Here's hoping Mike Rice has indeed seen the light and changed his ways, and he eventually finds another niche in life that will be rewarding. Regarding his being fired from Rutgers, later is better than never, but he had to go.
And, in my opinion, so do the AD and Prez for ever countenancing such egregious behavior. All the spin in the world isn't going to make it go away.
Ladies' NCAA basketball
Like the men, the women's NCAA Final Four is now set. Off they'll go to New Orleans where Cal will face Louisville, and Notre Dame will take on UConn in the semis. Considering the physical stature of some of these student-athletes, and festive atmosphere and nightlife this city is well known to offer, it is hoped none of them indeed add to the lore of the "Big Easy". Ahem.
Also like the men, a few major upsets have taken place along the way, plus too many of their nicknames are screwed up. What is it with Stanford and this Cardinal thing, as in singular? You'd think that particular institution, with such a glowing academic reputation, located in the heart of "silicon valley", and home of Yahoo, Google, Hewlitt-Packard, and so many other geniuses running around, would at least comprehend Grammar 101 and get their name right. Maybe not. It reminds me of the "Borg" of Star Trek fame. Regardless, in a huge upset, they themselves were assimilated by the Georgia Lady Bulldogs in the regional semis. And hey, in real life, how many women do you know that would be proud to be called bulldogs? Besides, that could easily lead to another not-so-good name for adult female canines -- but it probably wouldn't be appropriate here.
Per usual, Geno Auriemma's UConn Lady Huskies have breezed into the Final Four. Nothing wrong with lady huskies. Seems to me there's been a few of them that were the lead dogs on Iditarod winning sled teams. These girls are highly coached and disciplined, smart, mentally tough as nails, and never seem to run out of gas. Geno's 2-legged variety of Huskies are much the same way.
But next they have to face their recent nemesis. The ladies' version of the Fighting Irish. Yours truly has yet to figure out how that school came up with that particular name, considering the original Notre Dame in a cathedral in Paris, but perhaps the "Fighting French" moniker left something to be desired. At any rate, I've known a few women of Irish heritage, and getting them riled up is usually a very bad idea.
Nevertheless, Geno has to go up against little miss Muffet McGraw of Notre Dame once again. She's sat on his tuffet 3 times already this year. Once in Storrs, the home of UConn, once in South Bend, and again in Hartford, Conn, all but a home court advantage to UConn in the Big East tournament. Will the 4th time in New Orleans be the charm for Auriemma or will it be another case of Genocide?
Louisville has been the surprise of the tournament. They did the unthinkable by knocking off #1 overall seed Baylor. At least they call themselves the Cardinals, as in plural, unlike those so-called brainy Palo Alto folks mentioned above. Then they beat Tennessee to make the Final Four. It appeared the Lady Vols were bewitched by the style of play they confronted. Perhaps this is what happens when a school hires a warlock, oops, Warlick as their coach to replace the legend of Pat Summitt.
Though no doubt very talented, the Louisville women play a very physical game. They're not above doing whatever it takes to get the job done. Even their head coach Jeff Walz fondly referred to his players as the "ugly ducklings" in the wake of the victory over UTenn.
Indeed, though she shall remain nameless, in my opinion Louisville has one player on its team that isn't so good looking. I'm not saying she's ugly but...
Looking at that girl's face could turn Medusa into stone.
She could glance at falling bird poop and make it stop -- in mid air.
She almost makes ME look good. Almost.
No matter. The Louisville ladies join their male counterparts in the Final Four. Quite an accomplishment for a single school in the same year.
As mentioned above, next up they'll face the Golden Bears of California in the semis. Wait a minute. Golden Bears? Cal named it's teams after Jack Nicklaus? I thought he was from Ohio.
This sure gets confusing sometimes.
Also like the men, a few major upsets have taken place along the way, plus too many of their nicknames are screwed up. What is it with Stanford and this Cardinal thing, as in singular? You'd think that particular institution, with such a glowing academic reputation, located in the heart of "silicon valley", and home of Yahoo, Google, Hewlitt-Packard, and so many other geniuses running around, would at least comprehend Grammar 101 and get their name right. Maybe not. It reminds me of the "Borg" of Star Trek fame. Regardless, in a huge upset, they themselves were assimilated by the Georgia Lady Bulldogs in the regional semis. And hey, in real life, how many women do you know that would be proud to be called bulldogs? Besides, that could easily lead to another not-so-good name for adult female canines -- but it probably wouldn't be appropriate here.
Per usual, Geno Auriemma's UConn Lady Huskies have breezed into the Final Four. Nothing wrong with lady huskies. Seems to me there's been a few of them that were the lead dogs on Iditarod winning sled teams. These girls are highly coached and disciplined, smart, mentally tough as nails, and never seem to run out of gas. Geno's 2-legged variety of Huskies are much the same way.
But next they have to face their recent nemesis. The ladies' version of the Fighting Irish. Yours truly has yet to figure out how that school came up with that particular name, considering the original Notre Dame in a cathedral in Paris, but perhaps the "Fighting French" moniker left something to be desired. At any rate, I've known a few women of Irish heritage, and getting them riled up is usually a very bad idea.
Nevertheless, Geno has to go up against little miss Muffet McGraw of Notre Dame once again. She's sat on his tuffet 3 times already this year. Once in Storrs, the home of UConn, once in South Bend, and again in Hartford, Conn, all but a home court advantage to UConn in the Big East tournament. Will the 4th time in New Orleans be the charm for Auriemma or will it be another case of Genocide?
Louisville has been the surprise of the tournament. They did the unthinkable by knocking off #1 overall seed Baylor. At least they call themselves the Cardinals, as in plural, unlike those so-called brainy Palo Alto folks mentioned above. Then they beat Tennessee to make the Final Four. It appeared the Lady Vols were bewitched by the style of play they confronted. Perhaps this is what happens when a school hires a warlock, oops, Warlick as their coach to replace the legend of Pat Summitt.
Though no doubt very talented, the Louisville women play a very physical game. They're not above doing whatever it takes to get the job done. Even their head coach Jeff Walz fondly referred to his players as the "ugly ducklings" in the wake of the victory over UTenn.
Indeed, though she shall remain nameless, in my opinion Louisville has one player on its team that isn't so good looking. I'm not saying she's ugly but...
Looking at that girl's face could turn Medusa into stone.
She could glance at falling bird poop and make it stop -- in mid air.
She almost makes ME look good. Almost.
No matter. The Louisville ladies join their male counterparts in the Final Four. Quite an accomplishment for a single school in the same year.
As mentioned above, next up they'll face the Golden Bears of California in the semis. Wait a minute. Golden Bears? Cal named it's teams after Jack Nicklaus? I thought he was from Ohio.
This sure gets confusing sometimes.
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Drug testing and Mayberry's Aunt Bea
Most of us at least know somebody that has got into trouble over some form of either alcohol or drugs, which has taken on the rather all-encompassing generic title of "substance abuse". Certainly, we read and hear about such things in the news all the time. Whether it's a DUI, or perhaps getting caught with some weed or pills of various nature, almost always such people will eventually go through some sort of "probation". During this time, they will have to "blow" and "drop" to prove they are "clean".
Just as certainly, the world of sports has clamped down as well. From the various shenanigans of Tour de France cyclists, to Olympic athletes, to major league baseball's dark ages of the "steroid era" and beyond, the powers that be have decreed they won't tolerate it any more. Currently, random drug testing seems to be the growing order of the day -- even in the "off-season" for many athletes. There's two very different ways of looking at that.
First, if they monitor everybody, then chances are we won't see another freaky fast climb up an Alp somewhere, medals awarded to druggies, or baseball's hallowed records continue to fall, etc.
But there's a flip side. What of the totally clean boys and girls that have risen to a high level by god-given talent, sacrifice, hard work, and sheer perseverance? Why should they be subjected to the terms of probation when they've never done anything wrong? It's like they have to prove themselves innocent to compete, instead of somebody else proving they've "violated" and should be disqualified. Somewhere along the line the benefit of the doubt got tossed out the window like the baby in the bathwater. These days, if Beaver Cleaver and Opie Taylor ran a 100 yard dash at the county fair with a blue ribbon on the line -- they might have to "drop". Off to the lab the specimens would go, to be thoroughly analyzed for any sort of slightly raised level of testosterone, human growth hormone, and who knows what else? Yet somehow that seems to be the direction we're headed in. Everybody's monitored for everything.
Next thing you know, the mad scientists could start manipulating DNA samples to unleash armies of clones on the world. An Eddie Haskell on every block. A Barney Fife driving every patrol car. This could get out of control.
And, excuse me, but I find something very scary about that. Yet on the other hand, a lot more Aunt Beas in the world couldn't hurt. Turn a few thousand of those loose and all this alcohol and drug nonsense would quickly stop. Forget sports related drug agencies, special panels, and even Senate hearings flapping their gums and churning out mountains of paperwork that get about as much respect as Rodney Dangerfield ever did by the athletes. If they had to answer to an Aunt Bea, they'd sit up and pay attention.
Hmm. It seems I've segued from a valid topic into the world of make believe. Given that, why not one more gigantic leap into the absurd?
Aunt Beas good. Other Beas bad. As in Bea Arthurs. Can you imagine legions of Maudes patrolling the world? Brrr. Substance abuse would be the least of our worries.
Just as certainly, the world of sports has clamped down as well. From the various shenanigans of Tour de France cyclists, to Olympic athletes, to major league baseball's dark ages of the "steroid era" and beyond, the powers that be have decreed they won't tolerate it any more. Currently, random drug testing seems to be the growing order of the day -- even in the "off-season" for many athletes. There's two very different ways of looking at that.
First, if they monitor everybody, then chances are we won't see another freaky fast climb up an Alp somewhere, medals awarded to druggies, or baseball's hallowed records continue to fall, etc.
But there's a flip side. What of the totally clean boys and girls that have risen to a high level by god-given talent, sacrifice, hard work, and sheer perseverance? Why should they be subjected to the terms of probation when they've never done anything wrong? It's like they have to prove themselves innocent to compete, instead of somebody else proving they've "violated" and should be disqualified. Somewhere along the line the benefit of the doubt got tossed out the window like the baby in the bathwater. These days, if Beaver Cleaver and Opie Taylor ran a 100 yard dash at the county fair with a blue ribbon on the line -- they might have to "drop". Off to the lab the specimens would go, to be thoroughly analyzed for any sort of slightly raised level of testosterone, human growth hormone, and who knows what else? Yet somehow that seems to be the direction we're headed in. Everybody's monitored for everything.
Next thing you know, the mad scientists could start manipulating DNA samples to unleash armies of clones on the world. An Eddie Haskell on every block. A Barney Fife driving every patrol car. This could get out of control.
And, excuse me, but I find something very scary about that. Yet on the other hand, a lot more Aunt Beas in the world couldn't hurt. Turn a few thousand of those loose and all this alcohol and drug nonsense would quickly stop. Forget sports related drug agencies, special panels, and even Senate hearings flapping their gums and churning out mountains of paperwork that get about as much respect as Rodney Dangerfield ever did by the athletes. If they had to answer to an Aunt Bea, they'd sit up and pay attention.
Hmm. It seems I've segued from a valid topic into the world of make believe. Given that, why not one more gigantic leap into the absurd?
Aunt Beas good. Other Beas bad. As in Bea Arthurs. Can you imagine legions of Maudes patrolling the world? Brrr. Substance abuse would be the least of our worries.
Monday, April 1, 2013
Kim Mulkey and sour grapes
Jeez, I thought Geno Auriemma of the UConn Lady Huskies was bad with his whining when his team lost. He's now got company. Enter head coach Kim Mulkey of the Baylor Lady Bears. Riding a long winning streak and slightly favored to win another national title -- her nationally #1 ranked team got edged out and eliminated by 1 point in the NCAA women's tournament by Louisville, merely a #5 seed -- and a whopping 24 point underdog at that.
In the post-game press conference the lovely, if hardly gracious, Ms. M tried to blame the refs, even at her admitted risk of being fined for doing so. She even went so far as to encourage reporters to ask questions in that regard. This, despite her also admitting she couldn't see a controversial play late in the game because it happened at the other end of the court from where she happened to be standing. Well gee. If she couldn't see it, but the call went against her team, then it must be wrong somehow -- right?
Watching and listening to Mulkey chewing on her sour grapes, y'all, perhaps we're supposed to believe this was a massive conspiracy against Waco, the likes of which hasn't been seen since David Koresh and his Branch Davidians got smoked out by the feds in 1993.
Or maybe there's another possibility, however remote. Heaven forbid, could it be the Lady Bears, despite all their talent and expectations, just got beat fair and square? It happens.
Mulkey also went on to lecture the reporters they better not question, much less put any responsibility on the players for the loss, but rather put it all on her shoulders. That sounded a lot like some good old-fashioned Texas yee-hah logic at work again. If you're not fer us, you must be agin us. We don't lose. We get jobbed by those with other obvious biases. And even if we lose -- under no circumstances shall the people that actually played the game take any responsibility.
Well, guess what? That might work in high school where the coaches take the heat while shielding their youthful players from too much negative scrutiny after a bad game. Only compliments are allowed, and perhaps justifiably so. But a head coach of a high profile college program should know better. If they want to dance on the big stage and accept all the accolades that come with success, then they have to be willing to face the not-so-good music when things don't go their way. It goes with the territory and the reporters have a job to do too. Mulkey was horribly misguided when she tried to prompt the hopefully unbiased press in attendance into seeing things her way. She should be ashamed of herself.
Thing is, it seems there's no such thing as shame in Texas. In recent years past -- consider a world famous cyclist, perhaps the most dominant baseball pitcher of our time, and even a few very high ranking politicians, to name a few. Despite mountains of evidence against them, much of it gathered by totally impartial and objective people -- they will never flat-out admit they were wrong.
Yippee-ki-ay, and the beat goes on.
Given that apparent on-going pervasive attitude in the Lone Star state, we likely shouldn't expect any better from Mulkey.
Ah heck. Once her 6'8' freak and superstar player Brittney Griner disappears into women's pro basketball somewhere, Mulkey's currently vaunted program might well fade into oblivion faster than the above mentioned Branch Davidians.
But I'd still pay big bucks to see her and Geno in a mud wrestling contest.
In the post-game press conference the lovely, if hardly gracious, Ms. M tried to blame the refs, even at her admitted risk of being fined for doing so. She even went so far as to encourage reporters to ask questions in that regard. This, despite her also admitting she couldn't see a controversial play late in the game because it happened at the other end of the court from where she happened to be standing. Well gee. If she couldn't see it, but the call went against her team, then it must be wrong somehow -- right?
Watching and listening to Mulkey chewing on her sour grapes, y'all, perhaps we're supposed to believe this was a massive conspiracy against Waco, the likes of which hasn't been seen since David Koresh and his Branch Davidians got smoked out by the feds in 1993.
Or maybe there's another possibility, however remote. Heaven forbid, could it be the Lady Bears, despite all their talent and expectations, just got beat fair and square? It happens.
Mulkey also went on to lecture the reporters they better not question, much less put any responsibility on the players for the loss, but rather put it all on her shoulders. That sounded a lot like some good old-fashioned Texas yee-hah logic at work again. If you're not fer us, you must be agin us. We don't lose. We get jobbed by those with other obvious biases. And even if we lose -- under no circumstances shall the people that actually played the game take any responsibility.
Well, guess what? That might work in high school where the coaches take the heat while shielding their youthful players from too much negative scrutiny after a bad game. Only compliments are allowed, and perhaps justifiably so. But a head coach of a high profile college program should know better. If they want to dance on the big stage and accept all the accolades that come with success, then they have to be willing to face the not-so-good music when things don't go their way. It goes with the territory and the reporters have a job to do too. Mulkey was horribly misguided when she tried to prompt the hopefully unbiased press in attendance into seeing things her way. She should be ashamed of herself.
Thing is, it seems there's no such thing as shame in Texas. In recent years past -- consider a world famous cyclist, perhaps the most dominant baseball pitcher of our time, and even a few very high ranking politicians, to name a few. Despite mountains of evidence against them, much of it gathered by totally impartial and objective people -- they will never flat-out admit they were wrong.
Yippee-ki-ay, and the beat goes on.
Given that apparent on-going pervasive attitude in the Lone Star state, we likely shouldn't expect any better from Mulkey.
Ah heck. Once her 6'8' freak and superstar player Brittney Griner disappears into women's pro basketball somewhere, Mulkey's currently vaunted program might well fade into oblivion faster than the above mentioned Branch Davidians.
But I'd still pay big bucks to see her and Geno in a mud wrestling contest.
Sunday, March 31, 2013
Another mass killing!!! Bodies everywhere
Luckily, I escaped relatively unscathed. It was absolutely gruesome. Thousands of spectators watched on in horror. No one should ever have to witness others, much less those they are fond of, being subjected to such atrocities. The helpless wide-eyed victims were systematically tortured and toyed with before they were methodically mowed down. These are the sort of terrible things that can haunt a person for life with recurring nightmares.
Others had warned me of the dangers of visiting such a high-risk zone with a recent history of so many godawful abuses, but I thought I could handle it. I was wrong. The sheer magnitude of it happening right in front of my eyes overwhelmed me. Never again, or at least until some semblance of order and common decency replace the merciless tyranny that is currently going on.
Yep, I went to a Detroit Pistons game at the Palace a while back. They got slaughtered. It was brutal.
What? You thought I was talking about something else?
April Fools.
PS. That "relatively unscathed" part was my wallet. They had a special going on that night.
Others had warned me of the dangers of visiting such a high-risk zone with a recent history of so many godawful abuses, but I thought I could handle it. I was wrong. The sheer magnitude of it happening right in front of my eyes overwhelmed me. Never again, or at least until some semblance of order and common decency replace the merciless tyranny that is currently going on.
Yep, I went to a Detroit Pistons game at the Palace a while back. They got slaughtered. It was brutal.
What? You thought I was talking about something else?
April Fools.
PS. That "relatively unscathed" part was my wallet. They had a special going on that night.
2013 Detroit Tigers. Perception, expectations, and reality
The Detroit Tigers once again present us with a sports paradox that has long
been there, but few take heed of. Specifically the differences between
expectations, perceptions, and reality.
This year the perception of the fans is the Tigers are amongst the best, if not the best team in the American League. They are expected to do very well. After all, they made it to the World Series last year and, having supposedly upgraded their roster in the off-season, visions of their first world championship since 1984 no doubt dance in the heads of the Tiger faithful. But the reality is baseball can be a very fickle game.
Look at last year. With only about a month to go in the season, the Tigers' playoff chances were slim at best. Yet somehow they got hot, the White Sox took a nose dive, and the next thing you know -- presto -- the Tigers were in the World Series. Sure, they got broomed by San Fran in the Big Dance, but as late as Labor Day they were thought to be all but out of contention. Funny things can happen. For all the excitement in Detroit, there was likely an equal amount of frustration on the south side of Chicago as it unfolded.
But whether it's the 2013 Tigers or most any other team in pro sports over the years, there's a trap their fans, usually egged on by their local media, never cease to walk into. Sometimes they'll emerge unscathed, never knowing the trap was there -- and other times the trap will indeed snap shut with a painful reality. Such folks will look at the best player performances from the previous year and take for granted they will repeat themselves. At the same time, they'll look at the sub-par performances and further assume those players must have had an off-year and will be better in the next campaign. Those sort of win-win expectations sound great in theory, but reality doesn't always work out that way. It's just as likely quite the opposite will happen. One need only remember the expectations of Detroit fans and scribes after the Lions went 10-6 in 2011. Talk of the Super Bowl being within their reach the following year was in the air. How did that work out?
This year the Tigers' starting pitching staff is generally credited as being amongst the best in baseball. Yet a hard look might suggest otherwise. Yes, Justin Verlander is one of the top pitchers in the game, but it's not an automatic win just because he takes the mound. The guys he'll pitch to are major league hitters for a reason. There will be times JV will get lit up. Last year, Max Scherzer became almost a co-ace. Is it reasonable to expect the same of MS in 2013? Anabal Sanchez seemed to pitch well towards the end of 2012 and is locked into a spot in the rotation. His career record is 48-51, including 4-6 last year. Doug Fister was 10-10 in 2012 and is 30-41 lifetime. Rick Porcello was 10-12 and is 48-42 over his career. Even if Verlander and Scherzer perform at their best, the other three projected starters offer a career record of 126-134. They could get collectively better, collectively worse, or stay collectively mediocre. Who knows?
Besides perennial sluggers Prince Fielder and Miguel Cabrera, the Tigers got Victor Martinez back, but will he return to his old .300 productive form after missing a year? Maybe. Maybe not. For that matter, expecting Cabrera to turn in another Triple Crown worthy season is far from a given. He could slide. They also added aging Torii Hunter for a little pizzazz and leadership. Has he still got it or is he on his last legs? We'll see.
About to break spring training, the Tigers, with the media fanning the flames, would have us believe their only possible weaknesses are a back-up left fielder and who will be the designated "closer", though their collective bull-pen is highly touted as well, as is manager Jim Leyland for supposedly knowing how to get the most out of his relief pitchers.
And of course, none of the above takes any sort of injury factors into consideration -- always a possibility.
Yet in the end, the perception is the Tigers are an elite club. The expectation is they will go far. With the American League Central Division again being projected as the weakest in all of baseball, the Tigers should easily win it.
They'd better at least do that, or the reality is they'll join their football brethren that play their home games across the street from them as one of the biggest flops since the Edsel. Come think of it, wasn't that a Detroit product too?
This year the perception of the fans is the Tigers are amongst the best, if not the best team in the American League. They are expected to do very well. After all, they made it to the World Series last year and, having supposedly upgraded their roster in the off-season, visions of their first world championship since 1984 no doubt dance in the heads of the Tiger faithful. But the reality is baseball can be a very fickle game.
Look at last year. With only about a month to go in the season, the Tigers' playoff chances were slim at best. Yet somehow they got hot, the White Sox took a nose dive, and the next thing you know -- presto -- the Tigers were in the World Series. Sure, they got broomed by San Fran in the Big Dance, but as late as Labor Day they were thought to be all but out of contention. Funny things can happen. For all the excitement in Detroit, there was likely an equal amount of frustration on the south side of Chicago as it unfolded.
But whether it's the 2013 Tigers or most any other team in pro sports over the years, there's a trap their fans, usually egged on by their local media, never cease to walk into. Sometimes they'll emerge unscathed, never knowing the trap was there -- and other times the trap will indeed snap shut with a painful reality. Such folks will look at the best player performances from the previous year and take for granted they will repeat themselves. At the same time, they'll look at the sub-par performances and further assume those players must have had an off-year and will be better in the next campaign. Those sort of win-win expectations sound great in theory, but reality doesn't always work out that way. It's just as likely quite the opposite will happen. One need only remember the expectations of Detroit fans and scribes after the Lions went 10-6 in 2011. Talk of the Super Bowl being within their reach the following year was in the air. How did that work out?
This year the Tigers' starting pitching staff is generally credited as being amongst the best in baseball. Yet a hard look might suggest otherwise. Yes, Justin Verlander is one of the top pitchers in the game, but it's not an automatic win just because he takes the mound. The guys he'll pitch to are major league hitters for a reason. There will be times JV will get lit up. Last year, Max Scherzer became almost a co-ace. Is it reasonable to expect the same of MS in 2013? Anabal Sanchez seemed to pitch well towards the end of 2012 and is locked into a spot in the rotation. His career record is 48-51, including 4-6 last year. Doug Fister was 10-10 in 2012 and is 30-41 lifetime. Rick Porcello was 10-12 and is 48-42 over his career. Even if Verlander and Scherzer perform at their best, the other three projected starters offer a career record of 126-134. They could get collectively better, collectively worse, or stay collectively mediocre. Who knows?
Besides perennial sluggers Prince Fielder and Miguel Cabrera, the Tigers got Victor Martinez back, but will he return to his old .300 productive form after missing a year? Maybe. Maybe not. For that matter, expecting Cabrera to turn in another Triple Crown worthy season is far from a given. He could slide. They also added aging Torii Hunter for a little pizzazz and leadership. Has he still got it or is he on his last legs? We'll see.
About to break spring training, the Tigers, with the media fanning the flames, would have us believe their only possible weaknesses are a back-up left fielder and who will be the designated "closer", though their collective bull-pen is highly touted as well, as is manager Jim Leyland for supposedly knowing how to get the most out of his relief pitchers.
And of course, none of the above takes any sort of injury factors into consideration -- always a possibility.
Yet in the end, the perception is the Tigers are an elite club. The expectation is they will go far. With the American League Central Division again being projected as the weakest in all of baseball, the Tigers should easily win it.
They'd better at least do that, or the reality is they'll join their football brethren that play their home games across the street from them as one of the biggest flops since the Edsel. Come think of it, wasn't that a Detroit product too?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)