- 04:27 AM
- 11/07/09
| Name: | Chris Eisenberg |
|---|---|
| Location: | Born and raised in New York. Resident of Sherman Oaks, CA |
| Gender: | Male |
| Member since: | February 17, 2006 |
| Last visit: | November 06, 2009 |
cjets has posted 12 links and 662 comments to SportsFilter and 0 links and 38 comments to the Locker Room.
Dodgers owner Frank McCourt and his wife Jamie, the team's chief executive, have separated: raising questions about the potential effect of their rift on the ownership of the franchise as the Dodgers prepare to start the National League Championship Series against the Philadelphia Phillies today at Dodger Stadium.
posted by cjets to baseball at 10:25 AM on October 15 - 15 comments
Babe Ruth the way you've never seen him before: MLB productions releases film of Babe Ruth never publicly seen.
posted by cjets to baseball at 08:27 PM on October 08 - 7 comments
$50 grand buys a playoff win: According to Mark Kiszla and an unidentified member of the Denver Nuggets.
posted by cjets to basketball at 08:16 PM on May 28 - 11 comments
Garnett expected to miss entire playoffs: If the Celtics are to fulfill their quest for a second consecutive NBA championship, it appears they will have to go the distance without star forward and emotional leader Kevin Garnett.
posted by cjets to basketball at 01:16 PM on April 16 - 19 comments
With Nine Mouths to Feed, Travis Henry Says He’s Broke: Travis Henry was rattling off his children’s ages, which range from 3 to 11. He paused and took a breath before finishing.This was no simple task. Henry, 30, a former N.F.L. running back who played for three teams from 2001 to 2007, has nine children — each by a different mother, some born as closely as a few months apart.
posted by cjets to football at 07:57 PM on March 12 - 25 comments
The Yankees paid the "small-market clubs" $26.9 million this year. Find out where that money went, then explain how MORE revenue sharing is any kind of solution.
Establish a salary cap with a reasonable floor as well as a maximum and that should solve that problem.
posted by cjets at 10:08 PM on November 05
Maybe, maybe not. Cheat mode isn't really cheating in videogames -- it's exploiting a special advantage.
OK. I think Posnanski wants to have his cake and eat it too. But I see your point. Let me take it a step further.
I think that the Yankes should be commended for making a commitment to winning the world series every year. Isn't that what every fan wants? To sign every great free agent? Wouldn't they be betraying their fans if they didn't "exploit their special advantage?"
Would you rather they were buying up adjoining Malibu mansions (the McCourts) or paying for divorce attorneys (The McCourts again) or investing with Bernie Madoff (The Mets) or investing their money in their team?
Don't get me wrong. Baseball needs more revenue sharing and a salary cap. But until that time, I don't think the Yankees can be faulted for spending like champions.
posted by cjets at 07:55 PM on November 05
I don't think anyone is saying they are cheating as in breaking the rules, but they're saying that the present situation is unfair.
Here's the quote I pulled from the Posnanski article: You have one team (and only one team) playing the video game on cheat-mode.
It sure sounds like he's calling them cheaters. And I agree that the situation is unfair. But the emphasis should be on MLB for allowing this, not the Yankees.
posted by cjets at 06:42 PM on November 05
You have one team (and only one team) playing the video game on cheat-mode.
As I said earlier, I think baseball should have more revenue sharing as well as a salary cap.
But that being said, how are the Yankees cheating? Because they spend way more money than other teams? Where in the MLB by-laws is that illegal?
As I also said earlier, this is a systemic problem. I think that you have a point. I just think the problem lies with the MLB, not with the Yankees.
And until MLB changes its rules to allow for a more even playing field, why shouldn't they do everything they can to win the World Series every year?
In 2004, the Yankees spent $57 million more in payroll than any other team. I mean, it's ridiculous from the start but this is pure absurdity. Basically, this is like the Yankees saying: "OK, let's spend exactly as much as the second-highest payroll in baseball. OK, we're spending exactly as much. And now let's add the Oakland A's. No, I mean let's add their whole team, the whole payroll, add it on top and let's play some ball!"
In 2005, the Yankees spent $85 million more than any other team. Not a misprint. Eight five. In 2006, the Yankees spent $74 million more than any other team. In 2007, the Yankees spent $40 million more than any other team cutbacks, you know. In 2008, the Yankees spent $72 million more than any other team. In 2009, the Yankees spent $52 million more than any other team.
And yet, with all that spending, the Yankees couldn't get out of the ALDS in 2005-2007 and didn't even make the playoffs in 2008, so all that money doesn't always buy championships.
posted by cjets at 06:07 PM on November 05
I just would say it's the revenue sharing and not the salary cap that makes the league even
I'd suggest that the revenue sharing and the salary cap go hand in hand. And without a salary cap, you could have the big market teams dominate the league (with the exception of Dan Snyder, of course).
I'd further suggest that the successful teams are the ones with great team management. The Rooneys, for example. Or the Patriots since Kraft purchased them. OTOH, the Redskins are supposedly the highest valued team in the NFL, yet what does that get them?.
unless your theory also encompasses why the Royals and Chiefs are equally inept.
In the fifteen years since the salary cap was instituted, The Chiefs have had a winning record 8 of those years and have made the playoffs 5 of those years (and made it as recently as 2006). The reason the Chiefs stink now has a lot more to do with team management than the fact that it is a small market city. I'd bet that the Chiefs make the playoffs again in the next 5-7 years. That would be extremely unlikely for the Royals. So I'd suggest the coincidence is the Royals and Chiefs both playing poorly, not the disparity between the Steelers and the Bucs.
posted by cjets at 01:41 PM on November 05
I think I would prefer real revenue sharing.
Agreed.
The bulk of team revenue comes from national TV contracts which they all split equally. Additionally, they NFL splits gate receipts pretty evenly. So that all means teams are closer to even footing, but try telling Bills fans they have just as much chance as the Giants.
You seem to be making my argument for me regarding the revenue sharing. And why don't the Bills have as much chance as the Giants? I think team management is much more important than a big market-small market difference.
I think a more fitting comparison is the world champion Steelers and the perennial also-ran Pirates.
posted by cjets at 12:04 PM on November 05
But fans of the team should admit that maybe, quite possibly, the massive financial advantage of the team plays a role in that.
I think many Yankee fans will admit that. What they won't admit is the Yankees are doing something wrong. The Yankees make a massive amount of money and reinvest it in the team. Would you prefer that the Steinbrenners hoard it instead?
I'd agree that there is a financial imbalance in MLB. But it's a systemic problem that needs to be addressed by MLB, not by the Yankees.
One of the reasons that the NFL is so popular is the salary cap and revenue sharing. Any team, regardless of market size, has a legitimate opportunity to win the super bowl.
posted by cjets at 11:29 AM on November 05
I don't understand why the Mets, Dodgers, Cubs and teams in other big markets can't spend money.
The Mets claim that they lost a bundle to Madoff. Frank McCourt leveraged everything he owned to buy the Dodgers (and now with the divorce the Dodgers are really f**ked). The Cubs? I don't know. Didn't they just get sold by the Tribune?
posted by cjets at 11:17 AM on November 05
The everyday people she's referring to that have to find a way to struggle on despite all odds? That's not the Yankees, for god's sake.
I'd bet that there are just as many poor and unemployed Yankee FANS as there are fans of any other team. And for these fans, the win was a brief bit of good news.
posted by cjets at 10:04 AM on November 05
I don't agree that its one thing to have a physical altercation with another man in the testosterone-fueled world of the NFL and another to hit a women. It shows a pattern and a tendency towards violence that Cable obviously has trouble controlling.
While I'd agree that it shows a pattern on the part of Cable, domestic violence and getting into a fight with another coach are very different things.
Domestic violence is a major societal problem. Over 500,00 women are stalked by an intimate partner each year. 5.3 million women are abused each year. 1,232 women are killed each year by an intimate partner.
Every time an athlete/coach gets away with beating his wife/GF, it sets a very ugly precedent for society. For that reason alone, the domestic violence should be treated more seriously.
But I can't help but think that beating a woman is worse than going after another football coach, someone that you would expect could defend himself (I reserve the right to rescind these remarks if Cable hit him in the back of the head or otherwise sucker punched him).
rcade, I left my judgement wood in the deleted graph
posted by cjets at 06:38 PM on November 04
Why is Ann Killion giving Cable a pass for assaulting Randy Hanson?
She's not giving him a pass. She's saying it's a lot worse that he has a history of beating women. I'd agree with that.
posted by cjets at 12:09 PM on November 04
As a cyclist in L.A. I've followed the case with some interest. Here's the L.A. Times article.
This wasn't the first time he's tried this:
But prosecutors alleged Thompson had a history of run-ins with bike riders, including a similar episode four months before the 2008 incident, when two cyclists told police that the doctor tried to run them off the road and braked hard in front of them. Neither of the riders was injured.
And, at the end of the day, this is nothing more than a road rage incident:
Prosecutors alleged that Thompson stopped his car after passing the two cyclists and shouting at them to ride single file. The cyclists testified that they began maneuvering to ride one after the other when they noticed Thompson's car approaching fast behind them but that the driver passed dangerously close before abruptly stopping.
Ron Peterson, a coach for USC's and UCLA's cycling team, was flung face-first into the rear windshield of the doctor's red Infiniti, breaking his front teeth and nose and lacerating his face. Christian Stoehr, the other cyclist, hurtled to the sidewalk and suffered a separated shoulder.
A police officer testified that Thompson told him soon after the accident that the cyclists had cursed at him and flipped him off, so he slammed on his brakes "to teach them a lesson."
The road where this happened, Mandeville Canyon, is an extremely wealthy, exclusive area. I have no doubt the cops would be more than happy to respond to complaints from residents about cyclists.
As a non-cyclist driver, I don't want to shoulder any blame for all the morons driving cars either.
Exactly. Just as there are good cyclists and bad cyclists, there are good drivers and bad drivers (And none of the good drivers live in L.A.).
Every time I've ridden my bike in L.A. some moron driver has done something to put me at risk. It's much more ignorance than maliciousness but cyclists certainly do not have a monopoly on moving violations.
And in L.A., bicycle lanes are few and far between so a cyclist rides at his own peril, usually sandwiched between parked cars and cars doing 50 MPH in a 30 zone.
I'm all for everyone following the traffic laws, drivers and cyclists alike.
posted by cjets at 03:16 PM on November 03
Fox sports never ceases to amaze me.
posted by cjets at 06:21 PM on November 01
And, plaintiff's attorneys can definitely not be blamed for any vaccine related problems because you absolutely cannot sue a company for a defective vaccine. There is a special quasi-judicial, federal system that sets reimbursements for injuries from vaccines, and it is intentionally set for fairly low reimbursement rates.
The vaccine courts do exist. But there is case after case after case brought in state and federal courts trying to get around the vaccine courts. And Andrew Wakefield, noted anti-vaxxer and fraud was funded by attorneys.
The London Sunday Times reported that some of the parents of the 12 children in the Lancet study were recruited via a UK lawyer preparing a lawsuit against MMR manufacturers, and that the Royal Free Hospital had received 55,000 from the UK's Legal Aid Board (now the Legal Services Commission) to pay for the research into what happened to their normally developing children who regressed into autism.
RFK Jr. is another noted anti-vaxxer and trial attorney on the hunt for the deep pockets of big pharma.
Autism's false prophets is a great read on how plaintiff's attorney's fund this bad science.
END SECOND DERAIL
posted by cjets at 06:52 PM on October 30
Yankees Win World Series
That an intelligent sports community should ignore what is measurable and real and instead discuss AJ throwing pies, well, again, seems comical.
Why can't the community discuss both? The Yankees have had this enormous financial advantage for several years. Why is this the first time they've won? Maybe good team chemistry did have something to do with it. And why should Yankee fans be banished to another site to discuss it?
The Payroll is certainly worthy of discussion but it shouldn't be the whole discussion.