Thursday, February 12, 2009

Two Stories I'd Be Happy to Hear Nothing More About

Exhibit A: A-Rod & Roids

This whole A-Rod thing has made me a bit reflective. I have found that I no longer care about this crap anymore. I don't want to hear about it, and I want it to go away. I know that won't happen, so maybe it's time for me to go away. But I can't do that - not with the Phillies being defending champs.

So - what conclusions can we draw from A-Rod? His actions will not hurt baseball in the slightest. His numbers will stand - and they should, as should the numbers of Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire and Roger Clemens - because MLB has a long history of looking the other way, and making A-Rod the sacrifical lamb is a bit silly, considering he is not the first roider and will not be the last.

ESPN's Mike & Mike have been whining and arguing about this all week, and it's getting kind of annoying. The local Philly radio guys (who are tools) have been wondering why roids in football is not a big deal, but it is in baseball. I am not really sure why that does seem to be true, but I have my half-assed theories.

I think that the two things that come to play here are baseball's holier-than-thou attitude. Simply put, I've always felt that baseball believed it was better than all other sports. This is just my perspective. It's likely that many will disagree, and that's fine. But when MLB has a problem, I think that people love to tear them down...and I think it's due to this attitude.

The other thing is that when someone in baseball gets popped, it's like a celebration. It's usually someone with a big name, someone who rubs fans or reporters the wrong way or someone who plays/played for the Yankees. What do Pettitte, Clemens and A-Rod all have in common? Pinstripes. The idea that winning is expected in pinstripes. Win at any cost. No judgment here - many teams should adopt this philosophy. But the Yanks are a lightning rod when it comes to fans. There doesn't seem to be much middle ground - they're either loved or hated. They're a great team just for their ability to spark such passion.

And as for the idea that it's a bigger deal in baseball and not so much in football...I think that if a roid guy was exposed in the NFL, and he played for the Cowboys....then there would be a pretty decent uproar.

And so it goes...I'll just wait for this to blow over, as these things always do, and wait for the season to start. Go Phils!

Brett Favre retires - part two

This is getting out of hand. So he retired. What else is new? He did that last year, and talked about doing it every year for the five or six seasons prior to this one.

He was a great player, and lots of fun to watch. He won a lot of games and genuinely seemed to enjoy playing football. The Packers are a much better franchise for having had him in their midst.

The Pack moved on, and so should fans and sports experts. Say your piece, and get on to other matters. Stop trying to rank his place in history. It's too soon - why not wait until he is inducted into the hall of fame? It's not really something that can be quantified anyway.

Brett Favre was an excellent football player, and was great for the game. He had many memorable moments and always seemed to say the right thing. He seems like a good guy. Really, what else is there to say? Farewell, Mr. Favre. It's been real.

Monday, February 2, 2009

Screw Yahoo's "blogger"

I normally go with the idea that one shouldn't write when angry, but this tool ticks me off.

I am tired of hearing about the officiating in Super Bowl 40. it's over - the Steelers won, get over it. That goes for you too, Mike Holmgren (aka Walrus).

Now there are jerks like this putz (Chris Chase) moaning about the officiating in Sunday's just-ended Super Bowl:

* "officiating controversy threatens to overshadow the stellar play on the field."

Ridiculous. The game was fantastic and the officiating doesn't overshadow anything.

* "Frankly, it's remarkable that there was no booth challenge to review the play. It was certainly close enough to warrant a look from upstairs. In all probability, the call on the field would have been confirmed. But why not appease the masses and nip any talk of controversy in the bud?"

It's not remarkable at all. I'm quite sure that the guys in the booth looked at the play a number of times after it occurred and determined that it was a fumble and there was no need to review the play. To "appease the masses"? What the hell is that? "nip any talk of controversy in the bud" ? I suppose he thinks the NFL is covering something up? This guy's been reading too much Dan Brown.

* "disparity in penalties (106 yards for the Cardinals against just 56 for the Steelers)"

What disparity? 106-56 is not really all that unequal. And, quite frankly, I saw about 110 holds committed by the Cards O-line that were not called.

* "a preposterous roughing the passer penalty on a play that wouldn't have been uncommon in touch football"

A preposterous attempt to write an article. Please, somebody take this guy's keyboard away before he drops his wittle baby bottle on it.

Don't try to stir up controversy where there is none. The officials called a tight game, and they nailed the Steelers as well. They took away a touchdown, after all. Oh, wait - they got that call right, didn't they?

Chris Chase, please do me a favor - stop writing. There's enough pollution in the environment already.

Rant over. Enjoy the win, Steelers fans.