- 05:46 PM
- 05/17/08
A dazzling Manny being Manny moment I saw this on ESPN this morning and burst out laughing as soon as I saw the high-five. There are few players who could get away with doing something like that.
posted to Baseball at 11:18 AM CDT
Relax! Cleveland Cavaliers' LeBron James now has mom as an enforcer Why was anyone ever worried about the hard fouls issued to LeBron James? Cleveland fans don't have to worry about James as long as his mom is in the house.
posted to Basketball at 5:54 AM CDT
I don't think it's being overhyped at all. "Mom, sit your ass down!" and "I can't afford for my mom not to be at the rest of my games" are two of the greatest sports quotes of all time.
Agreed. This is hilarious stuff. Reminds me of my little league days. Overhyped? I can't remember one other instance in my life time that's similar, so I fail to see it.
posted at 10:41 AM CDT on May 14
posted to Baseball at 1:48 AM CDT
Those were decent...
posted by Hal Incandenza
Oh come on. You're insane. Those throws were spectacular by any measure. It's not even debatable.
I guess we can both be right.
Correct (I had 5 paragraphs explaining why you're both half right and half wrong, dammit).
posted at 2:10 PM CDT on May 8
Well, they were impressive throws, but I just don't see them as spectacular- certainly not the second throw. The first throw was incredible- dead on strike- but the second was just a typical "good" throw.
Well, you said decent, which basically means average. We'll disagree on the second throw. You wouldn't believe the amount of games I watch on my extra innings package and I'm not seeing these typically good throws.
that second link WAS the famous throw from Ichiro
Great throw, but I fail to see how it was more impressive than Ankiel's. You had me believing he was throwing from the warning track.
posted at 12:33 AM CDT on May 9
Looking at all 3 again we're just on different wave lengths. Ankiel's second throw (the one you called typical) is the most impressive one by far to me. Ichiro's throw is a bullet, but possible because of the shorter distance.
posted at 12:56 AM CDT on May 9
PGA Dresses Down John Daly for Golfing Topless A video of John Daly golfing in Branson, Mo., with no shirt or shoes has prompted this response from PGA Commissioner Tim Finchem: "There are certain things about presentation that we must insist on."
posted to Golf at 6:35 AM CDT
Anyone who's ever actually been to Branson knows better than to take this too seriously. Sure, sure, sure, decorum, being a professional and all that but seriously to make a stink over this when it happened on course he owns in a redneck backwater....please.
posted by Tinman
I've played on and been around golf courses my entire life all over the south. No matter the class of the golf course I've never seen anyone play shirtless and shoeless. I've never been on a course where you wouldn't be thrown off for this. This isn't daly fitting in with his surroundings. I have no opinion on daly and his love of playing shirtless, but this is on daly. His choice. Your idea that hey, this is the south, what do you expect, is BS.
And from your tone, yes, I realize I'm wasting my breath.
posted at 1:11 AM CDT on May 8
Yankees fan kills Red Sox fan.
posted to Baseball at 2:44 AM CDT
I guess the only good thing about ticket prices being so high, is that the average sports nut guy or girl that might do this kind of thing can't afford to go to the ballpark anymore. Unfortunately, they can still afford to go to the bar.
Rich people don't fight? Really? I learn something every day. Thank you.
posted at 4:39 PM CDT on May 6
Tejada Delivers on Promise When he came to the plate in the sixth inning Friday night, Miguel Tejada wanted more than anything to keep his promise to 8-year-old Jacob Scott, a muscular dystrophy patient the Astros shortstop met at a luncheon hours earlier.
posted to Baseball at 11:04 AM CDT
At least Tejada didn't promise two. Calling one is amazing.
posted at 1:30 PM CDT on May 3
posted to Baseball at 9:03 PM CDT
I looked at it and thought "I love baseball, but not this much" and didn't read it.
Yeah, definitely not a link for everyone. I love stuff like this but even I had to break it down into several readings.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
posted by shudacudawuda
SCW we cover a lot of topics here. From this to simply top ten lists. If you don't enjoy a topic or a link please skip it without comment. Thanks.
posted at 12:27 AM CDT on May 3
Clemens reportedly had affair with country star Roger Clemens has another potential scandal he's already denying. He reportedly had a affair with country singer Mindy McCready in a decade-long relationship that began when she was 15 and Clemens was a 28-year old with the Red Sox. This could be especially damaging as Clemens' defamation suit against Brian McNamee proceeds.
posted to Baseball at 9:54 AM CDT
From what I've heard, this is all specualation. Clemens has confirmed that he knows Mindy McCready and that she is a family friend and has been for quite some time. All of this information has been given out by Brian McNamee's lawyer, Richard Emery in order to make Clemens out to be a scumbag and also to make their case against Clemens that no one should believe what he has to say. This is a classic case of mudslinging that we've see in politics but of course this is just a ploy to misdirect people's attention into believing McNamee and not Clemens.
Why do people still insist on treating clemens as a victim? How do people still give clemens the benefit of the doubt at this point? I'm not talking court of law here. I'm talking common sense. I don't give a damn about clemens cheating, but this isn't a shocker. There is almost nothing that could come out regarding clemens that I wouldn't at least give a large chance of being true. It's like clemens is this awful child that constantly lies but the fans are the clueless parents that believe him every single time. And even if proven wrong, gosh darn it he meant well.
Is the idea that maybe clemens isn't a great family man that hard to believe? Hell, he's married to a woman that had a website preaching about staying fit and beautiful the natural way and doing it by was shooting up and getting breast implants (not that there's anything wrong with that). So maybe his family life, like most people's, isn't quite what it appears on the surface.
Richard Emery isn't making clemens look like a scumbag; clemens is doing that all by himself.
The only difference between Brian McNamee and Roger Clemens is that one has a great arm. Sure it's mudslinging, but Clemens would have done the same thing.
After throwing everyone and his mother under the bus at the hearing and painting himself as someone with one fault, trusting too much, I'm positive that he'll eventually claim he was simply trying to help a young girl in tough times and he has not idea why she's turning on him.
He's quite the humanitarian.
posted at 4:31 PM CDT on April 29
I thought it was run-of-the-mill misogyny
Not the judgement of the action, but that he did it at all.
Clemens just has this texas-matter-of-fact-in-your-face personality that people just seem to eat up. He's proof that if you deny-deny-deny in the face of all common sense some people will be swayed. He's turned it into an art form.
posted at 4:51 PM CDT on April 29
Miley Cyrus denies claims Vanity Fair photos were originally proposed by Clemens.
See? That sounds completely plausible to me.
posted at 5:25 PM CDT on April 29
Who said anything about treating Roger Clemens as if he was the victim?
Bperk said it better than I did in far fewer words:
The immediate jump to the conclusion by several posters that McNamee's lawyer was responsible for the story without evidence to support it is most definitely giving the benefit of the doubt to Clemens. The idea that McCready was blackmailing Clemens was mentioned. Posters stated that they flat out didn't believe the story or that Clemens wasn't that dumb.
As someone that's followed clemens' career pretty closely there's not much that he could be accused of that I wouldn't at least think possibly could be true. From your first post you said "clemens said...". I wouldn't trust anything that came out of clemens' mouth, and I don't see how you can quote him as if it holds water at all. It doesn't. The man lies so much he wouldn't recognize the truth if it was injected into his ass.
If I was McNamee, and was able to prove, without a doubt, that I am "innocent", then I'd want my lawyer to concentrate on that, and that alone. And I would not want my name anywhere near an allegation that involves the plaintiff and a 15 year...
That may be noble, but as already pointed out that's not really based in reality. It's not often in court someone can prove without doubt they're innocent. If they could, it probably wouldn't be going to court.
McNamee is facing someone with more resources and money than he can imagine. Clemens will use anything and everything; McNamee would be a fool not to do the same.
posted at 4:58 PM CDT on April 30
Where exactly did I "quote him"?
You didn't quote him verbatim, but you gave his comment, which came right after "From what I've heard, this is all specualation". And then went on to blame it on Emery for mudslinging.
Maybe my reading comprehension is failing me, but it reads as if you're saying there's nothing to it and one reason is what clemens stated.
If you didn't mean that, my apologies. Though in that case I have no idea why you mentioned what clemens said. It seems that you've been running from this:
Richard Emery in order to make Clemens out to be a scumbag and also to make their case against Clemens that no one should believe what he has to say. This is a classic case of mudslinging that we've see in politics but of course this is just a ploy to misdirect people's attention into believing McNamee and not Clemens. Good job though.
From the moment you said it (or perhaps from the moment we knew the claims were true?).
Clemens cops to affairs but still denies doping.
He will never admit it. Remember, he's only guilty of being too trusting.
posted at 4:47 PM CDT on May 6
Jays release Frank Thomas: After a slow start, and a dispute over benching the aging star, the Blue Jays release Frank Thomas
posted to Baseball at 11:28 PM CDT
Thank God. /Manny Delcarmen
posted at 1:40 AM CDT on April 21
Have we returned to the days of 'Gladiators'? The ice at Montreal's Bell Centre, home of the Canadiens, will be replaced tonight by an eight-sided, chain-link cage that will hold two incredibly fit men using an arsenal of fighting skills and raw violence to pummel the other into submission. Watching the men in the cage - their muscles clenched and red-faced with adrenalin - it is easy to see the comparison to the blood sport of ancient Rome.Mixed martial arts, and especially UFC, the largest purveyor of the sport, is moving from cult interest into the mainstream. Tickets to tonight's event sold out within a minute. CBS is to begin airing fights in prime time next month.
posted to Culture at 12:31 PM CDT
Close. Not all, of course. Just those who don't give a shit about our violence or worse, cheer it on. You might add hefty and uneducated to that statement.
posted by afl-aba
Hefty and uneducated? Please try and stay on topic. If you have an axe to grind please take it elsewhere.
posted at 9:29 PM CDT on April 19
Fukudome doesn't find racist T-shirts in Wrigleyville funny A Fukudome T-shirt with a racist image is the hottest-selling item at a souvenir stand that sells unlicensed Cubs-related merchandise across Addison Street from the ballpark.......... The Cubs front office was flooded with angry emails from fans in response to a Sun-Times story about a controversial T-shirt being sold outside of Wrigley Field. The ballclub does the right thing (update inside) after the uproar, for those of you who feel we've licked the problem of Racism in America, Guess Again!
posted to Baseball at 10:43 AM CDT
Would the same outrage occur if it was an image of a shirtless, hairy, bib-overalled, southern, white guy spitting tobacco juice saying, "Shazam!"?
No, it wouldn't. But that's another problem all together, and doesn't make this one right.
You mean like Larry the Cable Guy, who makes millions playing that very stereotype? I doubt it.
So some guy makes millions playing on the stereotype and that gives everyone free reign to do the same? That is an amazingly dumb statement.
Not to mention that larry the cable guy is from nebraska; not exactly the deep south.
posted at 2:11 PM CDT on April 19
Say it ain’t so, George! Report: Boston Red Sox T-shirt buried in new Yankee Stadium by construction worker.
posted to Baseball at 10:12 AM CDT
the Yankees are and have been cursed for a long time.
26 Championships?
Oh to be so cursed.
posted at 4:23 PM CDT on April 13
Whats with Sawx fans since they broke their own curse? Have they always been this petty and i just didn't notice?
Even if this story is true we're talking about the actions of one man, hardly representative of all 'sawx fans'. Or have you always been that shortsighted and I didn't notice?
posted at 8:25 PM CDT on April 13
there comes a time where a team needs to move to better facilities.
Blasphemer!
posted at 8:49 PM CDT on April 13
Kansas Wins National Title... ....although to read the article you would think that Memphis had it gift wrapped.
posted to Basketball at 12:04 AM CDT
I was pulling for memphis. They were the most impressive team I saw during the tournament. That said, it's hard to feel sorry for them. Hit a couple of free throws, they win. It was in their hands. Not much more they could ask for.
Memphis looked crushed after the three. They had no chance in over time. They had blown it, and they knew it.
posted at 2:14 AM CDT on April 8
Yea they needed to hit the free throws and all but what about Kansas never giving up. They could have easily said at 2:12 that it is over we can't come back. Instead they did exactly what they needed to do to win.
Pointing out that Memphis killed themselves with missed free throws is not taking away from Kansas. Free throws are a part of the game. Memphis failed at that part of the game. If they succeed they come away victorious. To not acknowledge that would be to ignore the truth.
Kansas did what a championship team does. They took advantage. And in over time took over. They still had to make the plays, the shots, to win. And they did.
Though no credit for not giving up. Giving up? There was plenty of time on the clock. You might as well give them credit for showing up.
posted at 11:27 AM CDT on April 8
Putting Memphis on the free throw line was, as Coach Self mentioned, strategic. I think that makes it more of a Kansas doing a positive thing than Memphis doing a negative thing.
Putting a team with weak free throw shooting at the line to try and get back into a game with time running out is a strategy a bad high school coach would employ. Nothing special about it. Basketball 101.
I'm always surprised at the defensiveness that comes out when missed free throws are brought up. If I said "memphis could have won if they weren't out rebounded so badly" no one would bat an eye. I'm guessing because in that example the other team would have something to do with it. But with missed free throws it falls only on the losing team. The other team had nothing to do with it.
If memphis hits their free throws, they win. That doesn't mean they gave it away. It's a facet of the game they failed at. It could have been rebounding, or 3-point shooting, but in this case it was free throws. Kansas did what it took to win the game. The missed free throws wouldn't have meant anything if they hadn't been almost perfect at the end. It doesn't take away from the kansas victory to admit the truth. There's no need to try and spin the missed free throws into something positive for kansas. It was a negative for memphis. Taking advantage of it is what was positive for kansas.
I think a fundamentally solid basketball team will beat a group of superior athletes that have basketball ability any day of the week.
If that were the case the best coached team would win every year. The team that wins usually consists of fundamentally solid superior athletes.
the Kansas players just had more heart and guts to win that game.
Did their heart and guts cause memphis to miss free throws?
The game was decided on a 3 pointer that probably wouldn't go in 50 percent of the time. If it clangs off the rim does that mean they lacked heart? Complete BS.
posted at 1:07 AM CDT on April 10
Maybe good coaching puts a team on the more positive side of luck or fate when the game is on the line.
Probably so. I'm not devaluing the importance of good coaching in general or in this game. In such a tight game decided by so little it's tough to point to any one thing, but in the broad sense I do agree with you.
An earlier comment in the thread mentioned that Kansas didn't win, Memhis gave it away. And I just didn't see it that way.
I think that's the minority view, and I agree, lame. Every game, especially with two teams so evenly matched, one team does what it takes to win, one to lose. Same here. The winner deserves to win, the loser deserves to lose.
posted at 11:02 AM CDT on April 10
How to Tell When a College Basketball Game is Out of Reach Take the number of points one team is ahead. Subtract three. Add a half-point if the team that is ahead has the ball, and subtract a half-point if the other team has the ball. (Numbers less than zero become zero.) Square that. If the result is greater than the number of seconds left in the game, the lead is safe.
Or you could just use the handy Bill James Lead Calculator.
posted to Basketball at 4:56 PM CDT
14 points down with three minutes to play is only 73% safe? Should be more like 95% IMHO.
posted by Landis
Yeah, it's kind of a pointless exercise, and wrong to boot. For example, I put in an 8 point lead with 10 seconds left, and it said that was "100% safe". Mostly safe, yes- but certainly not "100%".
posted by Hal Incandenza
First, it's certainly not a pointless exercise. Knowing when the game is actually over can be valuable information to a coach. As James says in the article if a coach pulls the starters too early there's a chance the other team could make a game of it, leave them in unnecessarily and you risk injury.
Secondly, he came to his little equation after 40 years of testing it. Through research his editor found one game, ONE, where a lead that was 100 percent safe didn't hold. So with all due respect I fail to see how any merit at all can be given to someone randomly saying 73% should be 95% or simply calling it wrong with no proof. In fact, I'm not sure how you can say it with a straight face if you actually read the article.
You're taking an NBA game Hal, with different rules and players of a different skill level in a situation that is different than the one you're comparing it to. It doesn't prove anything.
Anyone can say a 10 point lead with 2 seconds is safe, and a 5 point lead with 10 minutes left is not. It's picking the exact time when a lead is safe or not that is impressive. 8 points in 10 seconds. Sounds doable. But really, how often has it been done? I'm betting as james says it's right at 100 percent.
Of course, it's safe meaning it would take an improbably series of events to overcome the lead. Just the one game he found where a safe game went the other way means it's not literally 100 percent.
Ergo... Bill James should stick to baseball.
He's not giving secrets on how to guard michael jordan. He's dealing in numbers. He's good at numbers regardless if its baseball, basketball, or football.
posted at 12:54 AM CDT on March 25
The Red Sox and Oakland open the season in Japan with Dice-K returning home to start. Usually these trips result in a lot of grousing by the players (most famously, Mike Mussina), but there's not a lot of sympathy when you're getting $40,000 for your troubles. Except if you're not: the MLB has announced that while players and managers will receive the stipend, coaches will not. Red Sox players are threatening to walk off the field today if the MLB does not reverse its reversal of its original stance.
posted to Baseball at 9:03 AM CDT
With the nationally televised game no doubt helping the Sox’ cause, Major League Baseball and the Players Association worked frantically to broker a deal. Around noon, MLB proposed to pay $20,000 per employee, but the Red Sox players rejected that.
“Half isn’t equal,” third baseman Mike Lowell said.
Lowell said that Red Sox brass then stepped in and agreed to temporarily subsidize the remaining $20,000 per employee. *
It sounds like a complete screw up in communication.
Oh, and before anyone gets all pissy about Pete Abraham's comments about the Sox being greedy and whatnot, he's being sarcastic.
Yeah, but that's his Shtick, isn't it? Fenway's a dump, all red sox fans are drunk, red sox players are loud mouths and yankee players are colorful. Which is fine. There's plenty of sox sites that play that same game (though most aren't getting paid gigs). Regardless if there's truth in any of those statements he knows they're going to bring angry sox fans to the board. Then he complains about boston trolls and ugly emails? Either he's simply trying to drive traffic to the site or he doesn't grasp how the internet works. It's no wonder the comment section is such a wasteland. He leads by example. /off topic
posted at 11:24 AM CDT on March 20
But do these guys need $40,000 for what amounts to a week in Japan? Really? What an odd universe.
Hookers and blow.
posted at 4:24 PM CDT on March 20
Come on weedy. Aren't you in Canada? Japan is expensive. So I've heard.
posted at 5:12 PM CDT on March 20
Union to examine why Bonds has no offers The lack of offers to Barry Bonds will be examined by the baseball players' association as part of its annual review of the free-agent market. Less than two weeks before opening day, the 43-year-old home run king remains unsigned.
posted to Baseball at 4:21 PM CDT
From a study just released:
It revealed that HGH did not help athletic performance in any way. The lead author of the study, Dr. Hau Liu of Santa Clara Valley Medical Center in San Jose, California, even stated it may worsen athletic performance.
What they found was that HGH does add muscle, but in terms of aiding actual performance in athletic exercises, it did nothing. The added muscle was merely found to be cosmetic, as it did not help with strength increases either.
It also was found to lead to side effects including swelling and extreme fatigue.
posted at 7:37 PM CDT on March 19
I love the argument that steriods have no benefit whatsoever for a player like Bonds. If there was no benefit, why did Bonds/McGwire/etc take them?
People take all kinds of drugs that do them no good. Notice all the drugs advertised on tv as "studies show drug X 'may' help".
Roger Clemens and others have taken massive amounts of B12 and doctor after doctor has claimed it does nothing for a healthy person.
I'm not saying they don't every help. I have a feeling in some cases they do. But the fact that people take them is no proof whatsoever that they actually work.
posted at 8:10 PM CDT on March 19
it was for recovering from injury.
True, but I would think the swelling and extreme fatigue also mentioned would come into play when recovering from injury.
I'm not throwing my weight behind this study and I'm sure it's one of many to come. But even flawed it goes beyond just assuming HGH is a magic pill.
posted at 8:32 PM CDT on March 19
The review couldn't consider long-term effects
True, but if someone like pettitte is telling the truth, that he used HGH a couple of random times, the lack of long term use doesn't really come into play.
posted at 11:30 AM CDT on March 20
What Part Of "Spring Training" Don't You Guys Get? Spikes go high and benches clear between the Yanks and Rays. To paraphrase, Man, we talkin' practice here! With nifty spikes-to-crotch photo action!
posted to Baseball at 4:00 PM CDT
I think this is all related to the new manager and Steinbrenner. Guys aren't sure what is to be expected in the post-Torre/George era. The team looks wound a little tight right now.
Maybe if this happens in the regular season, but it's a bit silly to buy into it now. I rarely if ever agree with Pete Abraham, but I thought he put the whole thing in perspective pretty nicely:
The idea that this somehow represents the “new” Yankees under Joe Girardi is laughable. Let’s review for a second:
A Class A catcher with a .261 career batting average and six home runs in 247 games got run over and broke his wrist. Most of the regular players were home when this happened. I would venture that most of them couldn’t pick Francisco Cervelli out of a lineup.
A non-roster left-hander who practically none of the regular players have ever spoken to grazed one of Tampa Bay’s players with a pitch.
Then Shelley Duncan, who has played in 34 big league games, decided to go all Rambo with his slide into second base.
Just so you know: Jeter, A-Rod, Damon, Giambi, Rivera, Mussina, Pettitte, Hughes, Chamberlain, Kennedy, Wang and Farnsworth weren’t in St. Pete today. That’s half the roster. They were back in Tampa cracking jokes with Billy Crystal, not looking to avenge Cervelli.
posted at 2:32 PM CDT on March 14
Are You Smarter Than a Tenth Grader?
posted to Baseball at 1:45 PM CDT
That's what I get for copying and pasting.
posted at 3:05 PM CDT on March 5
Only in this instance the ball hit pitcher's foot before sailing over the Yankees dugout and into the stands.
Jesus, seems like it would break the pitchers foot.
posted at 11:42 PM CDT on March 5
Andrew Symonds escapes punishment after tackling streaker Ogilvie had been drinking when he decided to strip and run on to the field.
posted to Other at 1:17 PM CDT
posted at 1:19 PM CDT on March 5
Five Greatest Fictional TV Bowlers
posted to General at 11:52 AM CDT
Nobody fucks with jesus.
posted at 12:04 PM CDT on March 4
Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss? This NYT profile of the Brothers Steinbrenner by the author of The Bronx is Burning includes Hank's insistence that "Red Sox Nation" is a media creation. Login info for the NYT
posted to Baseball at 8:29 AM CDT
Dealing with his comments:
1. The term red sox nation wasn't created by espn, or bostons new ownership.
2. I travel quite a bit, and I see red sox gear everywhere. Hanks correct, there will always be more yankee gear, but that has more to do with the giant pull of new york than anything else. Boston's a small town compared to ny.
3. The whole espn loves the sox angle is rampant among many yankee fans. They truly believe that ESPN hates the yankees. They'll eat that comment up.
Hank hasn't been able to shut his mouth about the red sox the entire off season. This is just one of many times he's blabbered about the yankees superiority over the sox (Lucchino took a ton of grief from yankee fans for saying far less). He's a giant windbag that talks before thinking. It has nothing to do with any sox comments (as dyams insinuates).
This is what happens when one side of the rivalry finally steps up to the plate. The side that really never thought of the red sox (as I often hear) suddently can't get the sox off their minds. Ironically, this coincides with the opposite happening.
If he was a red sox owner I'd be embarrassed but most yankee fans seem to be rooting him on. Which means he won't stop. This will end in one of two ways. The yankees will win a championship and hank will take all the credit, or they will not and he'll have a melt down. Should be interesting.
They want to make money, spend money, and win.
And run their mouths. The first three don't necessitate the fourth. The yankees didn't lose last year because Cashman wasn't running his mouth. They lost because their offense couldn't score as many runs as their pitching gave up. If they win this year it won't have anything to do with Hank bringing up the sox every few minutes.
This reminds me of 2 or 3 years ago when george guaranteed a championship before the season. didn't happen, but no one called him on it because no one took him seriously to begin with. You can only run your mouth so often before you become something of a joke, a seinfeld character.
I much prefer Henry's subtle response, though considering his intelligence advantage over hank that may be an unfair comparison.
posted at 5:01 PM CDT on March 2
I just don't understand why he's so shocked and upset about the comments Steinbrenner made.
Come on. Shocked? He's George's son trying to live up to daddy's image. Probably a little too hard as one of the minor yankee owners said in the article. And upset? I couldn't care less what Hank has to say. Not only doesn't he know where the term came from, he doesn't know what it means. That's funny stuff.
Here's what I feel strongest about (but again, not upset):
1. Schilling has always had a loud mouth, especially when it comes to the yankees. Yankee fans (and many sox fans) hate that schilling comes across as a blowhard. Schilling is also a borderline hall of fame player who has pretty much back up his words on the field. Lucchino is famous for his evil empire remark. Again, much hated by the yankees. He's also part of the ownership that brought two championships to boston after 86 years.
You have no idea, unless you read a lot of blogs, which I do, how much yankee fans and pundits hate both of them for their frequent comments. Yet, here comes Hank. He's had nothing to do with the yankees until this off season. He's accomplished nothing at the Major League level, and yet I'm hearing nothing but praise for the guy that simply says whatever comes to his mind.
But that's fans, isn't it? We're hypocritical on both sides.
2. The rivalry is intense because of what happens on the field. The outcome is determined on the field. If the yankees had won in 04 and 07 would hank have ever made those remarks? No. The sox wouldn't be on his radar. The rivalry depends on both teams being good, not on the words of a guy that just showed up running his mouth.
He comes across, at least this off season, as a guy that loves attention finally getting his moment in the sun. Maybe he'll lead the yankees to 10 championships in the next 20 years. I don't know. But right now he's coming off too stupid for me to care about.
posted at 10:51 AM CDT on March 3
I have to agree in part because it seems the thing the Yanks are missing is intensity, no matter how it's generated.
But can a guy who just shows up create it? Can a guy who has had nothing to do with the ball club come in and create intensity for guys like arod and jeter? I doubt it. Now Girardi, that might be different since he has a track record they respect (though I feel with all this intensity talk we're getting close to 'firejoemorgan' territory).
And if the yankees are successful this year it should be remembered that hank wanted half of your young arms traded for santana.
The fans, front office, media, etc. have almost as much of a hand in the rivalry.
All those are a product of what happens on the field. If the sox finish in last there is no rivalry, no matter what the media does. If the yankees finish forth hank can flap his gums all day long, it won't matter. No rivalry. Those things matter only because of what happens on the field, and because of that fall far below in terms of importance. Everything feeds off what happens on the diamond.
And yes, some fans would hate the other team no matter what the records of the teams, but a true rivalry in the sense that we have today.
posted at 11:18 AM CDT on March 3
I'm still not all that sure. He was dangling these guys, but only as long as the Sox were also dangling Lester, Buchholz, Ellbury, whoever.
Well, I'm only going on whats been written, and his comments since have kind of had a 'I'm not sure we did the right thing' edge to them, and that's after it was all done with santana going to the mets.
If things don't work out this year I can see hank pretty much taking over. That would probably not be a good thing for new york.
posted at 4:56 PM CDT on March 3
ESPN.com sure does. If by "ESPN.com" you're actually talking about Peter Gammons and Bill Simmons. There might be a dog in that fight.
Yes, if you eliminate the entire face of ESPN to those two people, if ESPN = Gammons and Simmons I might see your side.
That's not quite the grassroots fandom it purports to be. Were I a Red Sox fan, I'd probably be a tad disgusted by this yankee-ish move.
Every club has a fan club. Blue Jays. The twins. The cardinals have Cardinals Nation.
The only difference, and the gripe among boston fans, is that 'red sox nation' was used long before they decided to take the name.
but I was one of the SpoFites who complained earlier about the percentage of pro New England threads.
My front page goes down to feb 11. There is not a single red sox thread, unless you consider this one about the yankees about the red sox. The only other new england threads are about belichick 'cheating'. That's not really pro, is it?
Your front page must be very different than mine. So please, can you give me a percentage so that we can try and correct it?
posted at 8:09 PM CDT on March 3
Just how long was it, exactly?
From what I've read 1986. I didn't say that because I don't care. I'm not one of the ones up in arms over the name.
this is a pretty cheezy way to shoot down an observation that Red Sox and Yanks get more than their fair share of front page play.
Oh whatever. He just threw out an observation. He didn't back it up, gave no proof, but I'm suppose to give a statistical analysis to disprove his point?
For pete's sake. February, gary.
And he's complaining in FEBRUARY. What month should I look at? August? O.k. Here's august. How many red sox threads do you see? I see zero. Is that good enough?
I've heard this complaint enough that I'm basically numb to it. On a board where anyone can post whatever they feel like posting this shouldn't be a problem. If it's a good link, it's a good link. But if there are complaints I'd like to see someone back it up. But I never get that. Instead I hear the same complaints over and over.
Edit: Checked Jun 07. Zero sox threads also.
There was 2 in July. Unless I missed any, and I could have missed one or two, that's 2 in 3 months. There is no problem.
posted at 9:13 PM CDT on March 3
I think we'll be missing this rivalry when one or both of the teams goes in the crapper.
And so will baseball. The fact that they inspire either love or hate is something few other teams bring to the table.
Really? That surprises me. I moved to Boston in '88, lived there until 2000, and read the Globe daily, but perhaps I somehow managed to overlook it.
I don't think it came into prominence until the late 90s early 2000, so that's not surprising.
In my list I failed to include yankee universe, though it hasn't caught on very well.
Why not just ignore it, then?
You're right, I should. And this isn't the place to debate it anyway. It's simply frustrating to hear this complaint over and over without anything to back it up. So until someone can I'll just assume it's a figment of their imagination and ignore it.
posted at 11:47 AM CDT on March 4
posted at 12:54 PM CDT on March 4
Ah, I said it sounded familiar. I didn't read the follow ups.
That said, neither one of those articles is conclusive. They're simply going by what one of the accused said.
But I'll leave it alone. I'm not sure what dyams link was doing here anyway other than trying to stir up shit.
posted at 2:05 PM CDT on March 4
I suppose it really only affects the hardcore fan.
That's where I disagree. I'm a hard core fan. It doesn't affect me. It's stupid and silly, and I would never join, but I'm not losing sleep over it.
Then again I don't piss and moan over the 'pink hatters' either, so I'm probably in the minority.
posted at 3:34 PM CDT on March 4
So I try to "stir up shit" and, of course, you have to post something similar? From one shit-stirrer to another, I guess.
You're completely right. It was my mistake to respond to your shit stirring.
posted at 6:15 PM CDT on March 4
I put it in because people earlier in this thread wanted to label individuals as "haters" due to their comments, of all things, when this stuff pales in comparison to the cruelty and B.S. of real haters.
My fault for assuming. I apologize.
posted at 6:30 PM CDT on March 4
Gary, I'd say it's significantly easier to not be bothered from a thousand miles away, simply because you don't have to see them everywhere you go out
You're right. I have a different experience. Anyone I see with a boston cap immediately wants to know where I'm from (if I'm wearing a 'B' somewhere). 8 out of 10 times they're from the boston area. After talking to them for a while about half of that 8 knows nothing about the team, though they say they're big fans. It seems to be their connection to their past. The other 4 know every detail.
The biggest problem I'd have with fake fans if I lived near boston is the demand for tickets that they cause, not that I could afford it anyway.
7 out of the 8 tell me how they love boston and would love to return but couldn't take the weather any longer. Wimps.
posted at 11:54 PM CDT on March 5
"The chief executive officer of Tribune Company says he won't hesitate to sell the naming rights to Wrigley Field -- even if baseball purists don't like the idea. Zell has a suggestion for the makers of DoubleMint and Juicy Fruit.
'Perhaps the Wrigley Company will decide after getting it for free for so long that's time to pay for it,' he said."
posted to Baseball at 8:36 PM CDT
Everybody who has been fighting me all day, look at what steelgirl put down here. This is what i was talking about.
Oh come on, that's a load of crap. Good comment by steelergirl, but you simply wanted to argue. She listed historic occurrences that you could have found simply by going to the Wrigley Field website. But you were too busy arguing to do that. It's a hundred year old park. Did you not realize some important events and milestones probably happened there? Someone had to explain that to you?
You didn't realize that over the hundred years generations of fathers would take their sons to games? You simply wanted to argue and blaming it on answers not up to your standard is comical.
posted at 5:00 PM CDT on February 29
Steeler announcing great dies at 79 He was Pittsburgh's Harry Carry. You loved or hated him. Very rarely did he make sense but more times then not, you found youself turning down the TV and turning up the radio to hear Cope announce the game. He was a legend in Pittsburgh and he will not soon be forgotten. If you never heard him, you missed a great one. Pop open an Iron City at Cope's Cabana and drink to one of the greats.
posted to Football at 1:14 PM CDT
Welcome to sportsfilter Scorpia184. We require at least the most basic of punctuation so we can easily read your comments. Thanks.
posted at 3:07 PM CDT on February 27
posted at 11:10 AM CDT on February 28
Basketball's Best Kept Secret: Revealed. While cruising Amazon one day, I found something curious: a 1994 hip-hop album from Immortal Records called Basketball’s Best-Kept Secret featuring the flows of ten of the day’s brightest NBA stars.... In the Pantheon of Hilariously Bad Athlete Rap, it’s the missing link between “The Super Bowl Shuffle” and Kobe Bryant’s abysmal “Thug Poet.” Is there anything musically redeeming about it? Not at all. Is it worth listening to if you’re an NBA fan? Absolutely. Features playable sound clips from such awesome MCs as Dana Barros, Brian Shaw, and Gary Payton.
posted to Basketball at 6:26 PM CDT
Wow, some are better than others, but they all sound so dated (which I guess is because they are dated) and monotone in their sameness. Thanks for the laughs.
posted at 5:10 PM CDT on February 27
You can help ease New Orleans' pain David Stern saw a city in pain, and I think he wanted to help, and I think he wouldn't have been able to forgive himself if he didn't help.
posted to Basketball at 9:35 AM CDT
but I can't help but remain cynical about the self-serving angle of Stern's actions (seriously, could they have found any photographs that looked any more PR-approved and self-congratulatory than the ones that ran with this piece?
Yeah, I know what you're saying. And I have no idea if it was all PR. But not backing out of the event was big, even if done for partly selfish reasons.
The part of the article that struck was Simmons' comments on New Orleans. I visit often and he nailed the feeling of walking down the street. Saturday feels like thursday, etc.
posted at 12:38 PM CDT on February 26
I just wonder who's left there to keep that work up this week.
And you're probably right. I wouldn't give credit for any work done without seeing proof that it has continued.
It's the actually coming to new orleans that's important. And probably more important in that they didn't not come, if that makes any sense. For a city that lives on tourism the league deciding not to go, for whatever reason, would have had a negative impact.
It's been three years, and there are still entire neighborhoods that are not only unlivable
True, but they've made quite a bit of progress also, and that doesn't get the press that the shortcomings get. Much of New Orleans is back and I don't think most people realize that. Getting people to realize that and return with money would certainly not hurt the work that still remains.
Though I doubt that the city will ever return to the size it was before meaning some of those neighborhoods might never return.
posted at 2:46 PM CDT on February 26
Well, Mr. Cynical, have you gone there and looked at the still remaining devastation?
You may want to reread chicobangs' comment.
I had an amazing time and I really hope that New Orleans can return to its previous state, if it was so much better than it is now. Otherwise, I will still love New Orleans as it is now, and if no one else can see its greatness, then I will get to enjoy it with fewer people.
It wasn't that it was better. It still feels like new orleans. It still is new orleans. It's a matter of scale. In many ways I prefer this new orleans with less people crowding popular establishments. But new orleans thrives on tourist dollars, so it's basically a catch 22. I'd rather enjoy new orleans crowed than watch it fade away.
I have no doubt it will be fine.
posted at 5:22 PM CDT on February 27
Tony Kornheiser Hates Sportsfilter If a huge dumpster landed on their mother's house, and got all the way into the basement and crushed them, nobody would care. Nobody would miss them. They provide nothing good, no service that's any good at all.
posted to General at 3:56 PM CDT
Like him or not, this just seems like baiting.
If you're saying I'm baiting you're wrong. I find sports personalities worried about bloggers pretty funny. This comes after Stephen A. Smith's comments:
And when you look at the internet business, what’s dangerous about it is that people who are clearly unqualified get to disseminate their piece to the masses. I respect the journalism industry, and the fact of the matter is ...someone with no training should not be allowed to have any kind of format whatsoever to disseminate to the masses to the level which they can. They are not trained. Not experts. More important are the level of ethics and integrity that comes along with the quote-unqoute profession hasn’t been firmly established and entrenched in the minds of those who’ve been given that license.
It was a crazy rant that was not sports-related
Sure it's sports related (related being the key word), and no one's forcing you to read it.
posted at 6:06 PM CDT on February 25
Did I miss the part where he says he hates Spofi?
He hates bloggers. Sportsfilter is a blog. Honestly, I can't believe I'm defending this or that you're complaining about it.
So when Kornheiser says he hates bloggers, I'm guessing he's referring to the moronic, ill informed blogger whose post consists of "Your team sucks. My team rules." or various references to mother jokes and dead donkey dicks that I often run across in these blogs. Do we really think that these bloggers would be missed?
No, that's not what he's said in the past (this isn't his first rant on the topic) and not what he's saying here.
Those that had cushy jobs writing columns for the local market that wouldn't be read by anyone outside of 100 miles are now forced to nut up and come up with something better.
I would hope so, but it seems that the loudest columnists, much like the loudest bloggers, generally come out on top.
posted at 7:00 PM CDT on February 25
Furthermore, dismissing my opinion with "no one's forcing you to read it" is just being obtuse.
No it's not. It's how the site works. If your opinion is that this post shouldn't be here, which you've already stated, take it to the locker room.
posted at 7:07 PM CDT on February 25
It was not a complaint. It was a semi-rhetorical tongue in cheek comment cleverly designed to cover my ass in case I missed the part where he said "I hate sportsfilter."
I doubt he's every heard of sportsfilter.
One site that had the Smith comments titled it "Stephen A. Smith hates the first amendment". Of course, he never said that. I never took it literally.
If I had known people would actually take my title seriously, which I thought was completely over the top, I would have never used it.
posted at 8:16 PM CDT on February 25
What we are not is experts, with a few possible exceptions. I have never coached, played, or done play-by-play in an NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL, or any other sports-related acronym, event. It doesnt mean i dont know sports, but my "experties goes only so far, and as much as i do sometimes think he rode the short bus to school as a kid some times, TK knows a lot more than me about sports. And he knows more than the overwhelming majority of you too.
Kornheiser has never played sports.
"Mike Golic, an ESPN colleague of Kornheiser's, who had expressed skepticism regarding his prospects as an on-air analyst because he was never an athlete "
So I'm not sure what you're getting at. As far as this idea that you have to be an athlete to understand sports, I couldn't disagree more. There are plenty of example of ex players being awful analysts with non-players being fantastic.
On topic, the part of the article that stuck out to me was the 'bloggers have no sources' comment. That's his trump card. In reality he doesn't need sources for the majority of what he does because he does exactly what most bloggers do; just give opinions off the top of his head. But the sources comment is designed to draw a line between him and the bloggers.
posted at 12:58 AM CDT on February 26
Dammit, here I was thinking Kornheiser actually said he hated SportsFilter specifically.
I thought of emailing him the site url in hopes of impending hatred but his wikipedia entry says that he rarely uses the internet or computers. Of course, that raises other questions.
posted at 8:36 AM CDT on February 26
The Ten Best Individual Sports Rivalries Men's Vogue lists what they believe are the ten greatest individual sports rivalries in history.
posted to General at 3:59 PM CDT
Please keep the discussion on topic. In general, we don't do "is it a sport or not", especially when it has nothing to do with the link.
posted at 9:12 AM CDT on February 25
Belichick and Pioli speak out. A Boston Globe report on Walsh's videos and his firing. Also Belichick speaks about why he taped other teams and it's prority in his preparation.
posted to Football at 4:55 AM CDT
wiped off of Bilicheats face when that Pats were spanked by the more physical Giants Defense.
Spanked? Last second touchdown = spanked? I have no dog in this fight, but I'm still amazed at how patriot hate clouds so many opinions.
posted at 2:17 PM CDT on February 18
And still had them in position to win. I guess he's pretty good even when 'spanked'.
posted at 2:22 PM CDT on February 18
After re-reading Andy Pettitte's press conference, I know we have an example of a stand up guy.
Who said he did not consider what he did cheating. Did you miss that part?
posted at 7:13 AM CDT on February 19
Belichick has been taping since 2000, Goodell tells Specter
posted to Football at 3:42 PM CDT
Agreed. While applicable here, it shouldn't be in quotations if it doesn't appear in the piece.
Fixed.
posted at 4:38 PM CDT on February 14
The NY Times real time blog of the Clemens hearings. The NY times blogs today's hearings. A follow up story from the Times is here.
posted to Baseball at 3:24 PM CDT
The problem McNamee had today, and probably the reason there will be no perjury trial, is his past. That's really the only thing Clemens has to go after. Other than that Clemens, for someone that's had quite a while to prepare, came off awful.
And he should make a large donation the the republican party very soon.
posted at 4:53 PM CDT on February 13
McNamee would be destroyed if he ever had to testify in a trial against Clemens. His shady past, previous lies, etc. means his credibility is zilch.
In a trial yes, logically no.
Accused Pettitte: confirmed.
Accused Knoblauch: confirmed.
Accused Clemens' wife: confirmed.
Dead on so far.
posted at 5:06 PM CDT on February 13
My point is McNamee has screwed up way too much in his past to ever be a credible person to put on the stand in a trial.
Probably so. I think it's going to be hard to convict Clemens on perjury, where all he needs is reasonable doubt, with McNamee's past. They would probably need a strong case from Pettitte and he obviously wants nothing to do with the matter.
In the court of public opinion however, unless something else comes along in support of clemens, I'd say he's done (done meaning a convincing majority believes him guilty).
If you believe MacNamee lied about Clemens, despite being correct about 3 others, you also have to believe Clemens when he says that Pettitte misheard him while ignoring that their conversation happened several years before Clemens' wife used HGH.
Other than attacking MacNamee's character and being his normal defiant self the one piece of evidence he was pushing, that he was not at canseco's house, was taken apart by his own nanny, which is exactly what MacNamee said would hapen.
posted at 8:07 PM CDT on February 13
In his entire life, Roger Clemens has never met someone he couldn't back down, with his mouth or muscles or talent or his money. He accepted this hearing because he clearly figured he could do exactly the same thing here, to Congress.
At first I was surprised at how bad clemens looked, especially with several members kissing his ass, but I guess it was predictable. Nothing from his baseball career translates well to that type situation. His bluster and BS didn't hide the facts nor the holes in his story. His heart felt remarks at the beginning, his talk about the children, his pride in playing for the U.S., none of it hid the facts. His autograph signings all week long only worked on some members of congress. He couldn't say 'how dare you question me' and then storm off. He couldn't fake an injury tweak a hamstring and get out of the heat.
It seems almost every body expert has come away praising MacNamee while killing Clemens. And MacNamee isn't use to cameras and questions as Clemens, and it was Clemens, not MacNamee that had 2 lawyers whispering to him the entire day and speaking up for him at others.
Clemens also threw everyone under the bus while only admitting to being a trusting guy in almost every situation. And now it seems the nanny is coming to clemens side, and yet it carries much less weight since clemens invited her over to his house before turning over her name. And his response? "I thought I was doing you a favor". Just unbelievable.
Clemens was right on when he said in his opening statement that, and I'm paraphrasing, if he didn't say anything, he would look guilty and now that he's doing exactly what an innocent person usually does and that's scream to the heavens and anyone else that would listen that he never took steriods and still, he'll never be able to clear his name.
In the beginning when he first came out so strong, sure. That statement made sense. Now? It doesn't. Throw it away.
There's a difference between yelling your innocence and stomping your feet, and yelling your innocence while backing it up. He doesn't look guilty because he's fighting it. He looks guilty because of the testimony against him. Clemens quote ignores that, which is what he wants, of course.
posted at 1:41 PM CDT on February 14
That's the classic "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario.
Clemens' has used this line for a while. When the mitchell report first came out it has some validity. Some thought clemens showed guilt by not coming out strong in his denials from the start (my thoughts). And then some criticized him when he finally came out strong that he came off too strong.
Now I think part of his problem is he waited too long before finally coming out with forceful denials. He didn't pick one or the other, he did both, just at different times. Either he needed time to decide to fight it, get his story straight, or he felt the criticism for not coming out strong and changed tactics. So this isn't a clear example of that statement. Still, it has some merit.
But now it's being used for smoke and mirrors. Clemens even used it in his opening statement. But that time has passed. I've read a ton of opinions on the hearing, and not a single opinion was formed from how hard he attacked the claims. There's too many inconsistencies, too much there now to simply play the victim, which is what that statement is doing at this juncture, and something clemens does very well.
Does all this keep Clemens out of MLB"s Hall of Fame?
Even though I think clemens should be in the hall, I don't share grums opinion that it will happen. In fact, if the vote was tomorrow I don't see him even being close. But it's too early. Who knows what else will come out, or how opinions on this era will change.
posted at 7:17 PM CDT on February 17
Pedro Martinez, Juan Marichal filmed at cock fight A video of Martinez and Marichal at a cockfight was posted this week on YouTube and it showed the two laughing before releasing the roosters. They took part as honourary "soltadores," the word used to describe the person who puts the animal to fight. The fight takes place in their home country, the Dominican Republic, where cockfighting is legal and popular. It is banned throughout the United States
posted to Culture at 6:12 AM CDT
Sportsfilter: money can be made if you have a big strong pecker with a steal spur
posted at 7:16 PM CDT on February 8
posted to Football at 9:07 PM CDT
Uh, no. For 3 quarters, it was a bit of a snoozer.
-grum@work
I'll be the lone guy in your corner grum. I was reading about what a great superbowl it was on other sites but dismissed it as the clueless opinion of fans that only watch the superbowl. But after this thread it's clear I'm in the minority. Maybe it's because I didn't have a strong rooting interest, but the first three quarters were brutal. Going into the 4th I thought to myself 'yet another letdown of a superbowl'.
And I still hold that opinion. I think it was a mediocre game saved by the bigger story (david and goliath), a great ending, and the low bar of excitement set by other superbowls.
Other thoughts-
- What happened to Randy Moss during the playoffs? Obviously every team wanted to take him away. But wow did he vanish.
- Eli as MVP is a mistake. It should have gone to the giant defensive line.
- Other than the yankees I don't think I've ever seen a team get as much hatred as the patriots from anyone not their fan. I know there were reasons behind both (salary, cheating) but damn do people love to hate success.
- For all the talk of the patriots choking they were within one play several times of taking hold of the game. And if not for the miraculous Eli escape and throw in the 4th quarter the patriots are probably celebrating 19-0. A lot of luck goes into 18-0. They were outplayed by the giants, but also ran out of luck.
but challenging such a minute thing regarding a player who had no impact in the play was so bush league that it killed their karma.
One, calling it bush league is a joke. Two, karma, really? Are you sure it wasn't brady forgetting to wear his favorite socks? Or maybe a witch doctor put a curse on moss?
As an aside, one of the hottest search terms on Google this morning was "how old is Tom Petty". Ouch.
Which is funny, because as soon as he appeared on stage I looked his age up online. I'm a tom petty fan, but I have to disagree with garfield. I thought he was decent, but pretty damn boring. I thought prince last year, and I hate on prince a lot, was off the chart better.
Lastly from the NY Daily News:
And it’s especially sweet as a Yankee fan to know that Red Sox Nation went to bed in tears last night.
Mmm, smell the class.
posted at 2:12 PM CDT on February 4
What's with the PC view of class as it pertains to not letting the Pats have exactly what they deserve?
Have we forgotton so quickly these topics?
-prophite
If you can't see the difference between what I quoted and the comments that you quoted then I don't know what to tell you.
If you think this:
Really, at this point- with the Colts out of it- those not fans of San Diego, Green Bay, Dallas, or New York should be rooting for the Patriots: this is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to see perfection.
equals this:
And it’s especially sweet as a Yankee fan to know that Red Sox Nation went to bed in tears last night.
then you don't understand what you're reading.
One is admiring a team, the other is simply enjoying and living vicariously through the pain of another fan base. Though I find that childish, bitter and classless, others might not. But your comparison is nonsense.
On preview, why didn't I recognize that tone? You should change it up once in a while Bishop
posted at 3:47 PM CDT on February 4
I don't see how the Patriots deserve mention among the best teams of all-time. The Giants were the No. 5 seed in the NFC and the lowest-ranked wild card team to ever reach a Super Bowl.
I don't see the number 5 seed as a big deal. The giants got hot at the right time. The cowboys, the number one seed, looked awful down the stretch. The seeds at playoff time are basically meaningless.
As far as one of the best of all time, you can't put them in the mix, but how can they not be logically? If the patriots win that game they're certainly in the running for the best of all time, right? So the difference between being the best of all time and not even being considered is a play where the guy catches the football on his head?
Come on. The patriots simply did not play well in their last game. But the idea that they're not a great team, that they were over-rated when the difference may well have been a play that wouldn't be duplicated in a hundred years is ludicrous.
posted at 11:00 AM CDT on February 5
Defensively, they were just a sharp as the Giants, and offensively, they looked great on their first offensive possession as well as their final drive.
Both defenses played well, yes. But the giants were going against one of the greatest offenses of all time with a quarterback many consider one of if not the best of all time. So saying the New England defense played as well as New York's is true if you take out those details.
I don't think you can say that they did not play well, they did play well against a very tough and committed team. The Giants just played a little bit better when it counted.
I'm not saying New England played a terrible game. But I don't think they played well. Give credit to the giant offensive line. That doesn't mean blame can't be put on the Patriot defensive line.
When you say that the difference in the whole game was that catch, you do a disservice to the great game the Giants played.
No I'm not. I'm saying that play could have gone either way. It was a pivotal play and had a huge mark on the game. I'll bet 9 out of every 10 times (and that's being generous) that ball falls to the ground. That's not taking anything away from the giants. That's simply the truth. It was a close game that could have gone either way. That play went the giants way. If it had gone the patriots way I'd say the same thing. So my point, with the game so close, and such a decisive play, it's nonsense to call the patriots over-rated when they were so close to a win and 19-0.
This was not the immaculate reception. Manning threw the ball right to Tyree. He didn't have to move his feet, just elevate. It went a little high but not too high for Tyree to get both hands on it. It was a great play and evokes memories of Montana to Clark, if anything. I don't recall anyone calling them lucky.
Because there wasn't a single thing lucky about it that play. No, sunday's play wasn't the immaculate reception, but it wasn't montana to clark either. It was somewhere in between. This might be where we agree to disagree, because I can't fathom how you can look at those two plays and not see how one might be considered slighly more lucky than the other.
posted at 2:39 PM CDT on February 5
I would agree with that especially because I never called them overrated. I just said that they're not one of the best ever because they didn't win the Super Bowl.
True, you never did. What you said was:
But if you want respect for the Pats, you should show the same respect for the Giants and the game they played.
Which, not showing respect for the giants was not my point, and not anything I said. So I was trying to make my point clearer.
The giants played a great game, showed no fear, and seemed to have more energy than the patriots. Saying that the game could have gone either way and hinged on an improbable play, which it did, doesn't take away from that.
posted at 12:39 AM CDT on February 6
Without the championship ... it a wait until next year choke.
You go on and on praising the giants in every way possible and then end claiming the patriots choked?
That makes absolutely no sense. Did the giants win the game? Or did the patriots let the pressure get to them and give it away? Because you can't have it both ways.
One question. How did the defense of the Giants let Moss get behind everybody with a couple of seconds left? Brady throws that ball a little sooner or 5 yards further and the Giants loose with 9 seconds on the clock.
And then the 'not even close (your words)' to best team ever becomes just that. Funny how that works. Not even close = 5 yards. 5 more yards and the patriots go from chokers not even close to the best of all time to become one if not the best of all time. I should have had you defend my opinion.
posted at 11:13 AM CDT on February 6
I don't see how these two are mutually exclusive.
To a degree no. But when saying one team choked you're saying they crumbled under pressure. You're taking the loss and putting it on the patriots instead of the victory on the giants.
Patriot fans are funny.
Well, if you're referring to me I'm not a patriots fan.
But we'll agree to disagree. When listing the best teams of all time you can't include the patriots because of the super bowl loss. I'll give you that. They lost the right to that claim. And I realize that the only true way we have to measure greatness is to win or lose. Patriots lost = not great.
That's fine. But looking at it in the big picture it's not nearly that simple. It reminds me of the OJ verdict. Some people will look at 'not guilty' and that's good enough for them. It's black and white. I choose to look beyond that. I can accept the not guilty verdict and still believe he did it.
In this case, as I said before, the patriots can't be considered one of the greatest because they didn't prove it on the field. But that doesn't change the fact that they were one of the most dominant teams in league history. That doesn't mean that if they played the giants 10 times they wouldn't win 7. That doesn't mean they wouldn't wipe the floor with the 72 dolphins. It's just two different outlooks. I can see your side, but I have confidence in mine.
Where I don't get your outlook at all is your claim that they were no where near the greatest when you admitted they were 5 yards from a perfect season. Where the victory depended on a play that could have gone either way. If they were no where near the greatest they simply wouldn't have been in that position.
The Giants could have scored more points, but they kept screwing up inside the Patriots 30 in the first half. They could easily have had at least two field goals.
Let's be consistent. If we're going to give credit to the giants defense give credit to the patriots. Either that or let's also subscribe the patriots' offense to 'screwing up'.
posted at 2:02 PM CDT on February 6
Chris Berman provides good case for destroying video tape as he asks the question, "hasn't anyone here worked in TV before?"
He - could - go - all - the - way....
posted to General at 8:40 PM CDT
Not as entertaining as the Casey Kasem tape, but still pretty damn funny.
posted at 9:14 PM CDT on February 1
All the Super Bowl Logos, from I to XLII. An implicit mini-history of American design, good and bad.
posted to Culture at 11:55 AM CDT
All you're doing so far is building up quite the dossier of worthless comments.
Sadly, that will conclude his body of work here at sportsfilter.
posted at 3:42 PM CDT on January 31
Mets Get Santana Pending a 24-48 hour window for ironing out a contract extension and completing a player physical, Johan Santana is headed to the Mets for four prospects - outfielder Carlos Gomez , pitchers Phil Humber, Deolis Guerra, and Kevin Mulvey.
posted to Baseball at 4:22 PM CDT
I had mixed feelings on Santana. Was the past year simply a blip on the radar or is he starting to show chinks in his armor? But now going to the national league, facing one less batter a game, I'm sure he's going to dominate.
posted at 10:00 PM CDT on January 29
ESPN's Dana Jacobson learns the Internet is always listening I didn't even learn about this until Jacobson apologized on her show Monday morning, but the question remains: Was one week away from the job that ESPN gave Dana enough of a consequence? Swilling vodka straight from the bottle at the podium and cursing Jesus?
posted to Culture at 9:11 AM CDT
Get over yourselves, forgive, and get back to the lords work of bashing gays, and opressing women.
There's no ban on discussing how sports and life intertwine, but we're crossing the line here. Let's pull it back to sports. If you feel the need to continue this type of discussion take it to email.
posted at 10:17 PM CDT on January 29
The Birdman of New Orleans. In 2006 Chris Andersen was kicked out of the league for violating the drug policy. Its now two years later, and he's applying to be reinstated.
posted to Basketball at 1:34 PM CDT
Tarpley's application was denied and he sued the NBA last September in federal court in Houston claiming the league violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by refusing to reinstate him.
Wow that seems so long ago. I can't believe it's still going on in some way.
Considering how much goes into trying to be reinstated, it's hard to believe there's no appeal process.
posted at 10:04 PM CDT on January 27
The Joy of Six The six worst sports movies ever. "Stumbling around seemingly high on botox, Stallone spends his time mulling over snippets of cod philosophy - "The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows, it's a very mean and nasty place" - and comes to the conclusion that, by losing, one can actually become ... wait for it ... a winner". The ensuing comments are lively.
posted to Culture at 1:59 PM CDT
I'll buck the trend and say I absolutely loved Talladega Nights. Perhaps because the two lead characters were exact recreations of two of my more country relatives. I have no opinion on how well they treated NASCAR, but they were dead on in many other respects.
I thought blades of glory seemed like a rushed, second rate attempt at another Talladega Nights, but still found it funny.
posted at 6:53 PM CDT on January 25
Inside Man: A Bronx Tale Bronx Banter's Alex Belth profiles Ray Negron. His life in baseball began in 1973, when Steinbrenner himself caught the teenager spray painting an "NY" logo on the outside of the Stadium and gave him a job as a bat boy. "Negron has done everything from shine the players' shoes and collect their dirty jockstraps, to bring them food from their favorite restaurants and park their cars. He has been an agent, an actor, an advisor, and a liaison; a confidant, a sounding board and a whipping boy to some of the biggest egos in the game. He is whatever he needs to be." [parts two, three, & four]
posted to Baseball at 11:25 PM CDT
Thanks goddam. Alex Belth is one the few baseball writers that can flat out write. Great article.
posted at 9:56 PM CDT on January 27
Goose cooks up HOF induction, but Rice is not on the menu this year.
Only one player was chosen for the class of 2008, "Goose" Gossage.
posted to Baseball at 10:24 PM CDT
Don Mattingly gets into the Hall of Fame, I quit.
posted at 2:23 PM CDT on January 9
Clemens Files Defamation Suit Roger Clemens beat Brian McNamee to court, filing a defamation suit against the former trainer who claimed to have injected him with performance-enhancing drugs.
posted to Baseball at 9:55 AM CDT
One of the main reasons why i posted this is that everyone said that if clemens was truly innocent he would have sued mcnamee. I think that argument is bull
Everyone? I think that's bull. That would be number 100 on why I believe he's guilty. Not to mention we'll have to see where this goes before giving it any great weight.
It depends on whether Clemens drops the suit or not. If he allows it to get to depositions, where McNamee's attorneys will be able to question him under penalty of perjury, it's time to start considering the possibility that Clemens is telling the truth.
I hate the guy, and I think he's guilty, but I think there's a possibility he's not guilty. And if he's not guilty, I wish that would come out so we could move on to other topics like his record in decisive playoff games /snark.
And just as I'm willing to consider the possibility that he didn't do it now I disagree with the idea that if he testifies under oath it changes everything. If he truly believes that there's no hard evidence that can back up the charges, no way to prove he's not lying, then he's hard headed enough to go through with it.
posted at 12:45 PM CDT on January 7
I guess my question to all is can MLB ever recover again and be the sport it once was
I posted a link not too long ago that pointed to ticket sales going through the roof. Baseball is fine right now. The idea that it's in trouble is only in your head.
posted at 12:47 PM CDT on January 7
There is no smoking gun ..... at least yet. If a smoking gun turns up, then that would convince me... Until then, he said, she-said, he-said without corroboration has got to come down in the favor of Clemens.
But this isn't a court of law, and I'm betting most people don't require a smoking gun. You can believe bonds didn't use steroids, that OJ is innocent, and rose didn't bet on his own team (until he admitted it), that clinton didn't lie until you saw the blue dress if you wish. But most people will use the gifts of logic and common sense to choose a side.
A lawsuit is not a bad move by Roger's legal team it will limit what if anything either side can say to Congress. Strike one for team clemens.
The theory that you're referring to is that he makes the lawsuit, then can't testify for congress, and then later drops the lawsuit after everything has blown over. And you think people won't realize that? You don't think sportswriters won't jump on that? Strike one for team clemens sure, if they're at bat.
posted at 3:19 PM CDT on January 7
How interesting it will be, on the other hand, if it is shown that McNamee did lie - or cannot prove his claims. That would undermine the Mitchell report's credibility significantly in my opinion.
So you think the mitchell report has to be 100 percent accurate? Let's say tomorrow McNamee says he only gave clemens because he thought he needed a big name to stay out of jail. How can you throw out the report when it was correct on pettitte? I can think of at least 3 or 4 players that have admitted that the report is correct. How would Clemens being proven innocent change that?
posted at 5:47 PM CDT on January 7
And by the way, just today there are rumors are flying that the fine up standing Mr. Mitchell threatened Mcnamee if he did not mention Clemens when he was being questions for his input to the report.
It's very strange that you demand a positive test for a player but then just throw out that line as a 'rumor' about mr. mitchell.
There is no consistency in your view points.
posted at 6:20 PM CDT on January 7
Source: Roger Clemens' private eyes asked Brian McNamee to recant
"He told them they were in the report," said a source in the McNamee camp who asked not to be identified. "And he told the (private) investigators he had told the truth to the feds and couldn't change his story."
It was unclear if that conversation with the private investigators was taped or not, but Earl Ward, one of McNamee's attorneys, called for the release of the full contents of the tape this afternoon, if one exists.
"It appears that these investigators may have recorded the interview," Ward said. "And we hearby demand the tape be released in its entirety immediately."
If true, that would make things interesting.
posted at 6:27 PM CDT on January 7
Can't get holden's video to work, but here's another one that shows reaction from players viewing the play in the dugout plus a recreation by manny for ortiz. Also here's some more pictures.
Also, I love manny.
Manny's reaction:
I think that’s how you get your All-Star vote. I’m pretty sure that guy’s going to vote for me. One at a time, that’s how it’s going to happen.
-----------------
The high five was cool and it was a good catch, but dazzling? Amazing? Any MLB left fielder should make that catch, Manny just made it exciting by turning the wrong way. Let's say he didn't get the ball back to the cut-off in time to double the runner off, then what. "Oh, sorry coach, I would've just thrown it back in but I had to high-five a cute guy in the stands.
I haven't really seen any claims that the catch was amazing. The post title says "dazzling manny being manny moment". There were probably better catches that day.
That said, the whole play is amazing in the sense that I doubt it's ever been done before and probably won't be again. Would every left fielder make that catch? Maybe, but I see far easier catches screwed up often. It was a good catch, and by manny's standards, a very good catch. The throw was also spot on. No way does damon make that throw.
He climbed the wall to stop. He does that all the time. I think the high 5 was spur of the moment. It was made within the momentum of the play.
but the whole scenario could've been on a blooper reel, lucky for Manny that the runners mis-read the ball too.
You've lost me further here. Every play could be on a blooper reel. And how is manny lucky? No luckier than any fielder that doubles a runner off.
I also don't get how manny turned the wrong way. From every replay I've seen he turns the correct way. He almost over runs it and has to reach back.
It may very well be forgotten in a week.
No way. It's going to be on every manny highlight reel you'll ever see. At least among sox fans it's going to be talked about for a long time.
Sorry, but Ankiel had a genuine "great catch" for the Cardinals last night against the Pirates.
Honestly, if you think the post/topic is about a great catch you should read more carefully.
Here's a video collection of manny being manny.
Here's an interview with the guy who was the recipient of the high five.
Call off the wolves, gees, I figured I'd get attacked for not sucking Manny's nuts because of that play.
Naa, I love me some manny but I'd be the first to criticize him if needed. He's done plenty that makes me shake my head. This just isn't one of them.
O.K. it made me shake my head but in a good way.