Pre-Show

I like the idea of a live Pre-Show before the PPV, but just like the NFL, Pre-Shows are always better in theory. Renee Young hosted, and she was fine, but then Wade Barrett and Titus O’Neil started talking, and … they’re not good at that. At least not in this forum. Titus in particular struggled. I longed for the days of Pancake Patterson.

Cody Rhodes vs. The Miz

The bell rang at 7:49 EST, and with the PPV starting at 8, It probably wouldn’t have been wise to expect a 20-minute match here. As it turned out, Cody tapped to the Figure Four in under five. To my slight surprise, there were some pretty good pops for The Miz. Hm.

Chris Jericho vs. Fandango

Summer Rae, the Fandango dance partner who can’t really dance, came out wearing a green dress with one of the sides cut out, showing off full hip and side-boob. And while I usually shake my head at how horny Jerry Lawler is, well … that was a nice dress.

Jericho got the clean pin after a sequence with a (successful!) Lionsault, the Walls of Jericho, Fandango getting to the ropes, then going up top, and taking a sharp Codebreaker on the way down. Under 10 minutes.

It was the right finish. Fandango comes out of the feud going .500 with a future Hall of Famer in Jericho, including the most important win at Wrestlemania. Had Jericho lost, he’d have been skunked by a new guy who isn’t going to be near a major title anytime soon. That would’ve rendered Jericho pretty much useless. He retains a bit of legitimacy here, and Fandango isn’t hurt.

Dean Ambrose vs. Kofi Kingston (United States Championship)

Ring Gear Watch: Kofi had new light blue tights with black spots on them, making him look like a Smurfy Dairy Cow. Ambrose, for the first time, went with a white t-shirt under his tactical vest. I don’t know why these things matter to me.

Ambrose gets the pin in 6:53 after the Headlock Slam thing that probably has a name that I don’t know. He also broke out a Crossface Chicken Wing on Kofi, which was nice.

The subplot here, amplified by JBL on commentary, was that Kofi Kingston is kind of dumb. He hit Ambrose with the Trouble in Paradise as Ambrose stood on the ring apron, and instead of leaving him for the countout, Kofi went out and dragged him back into the ring. And year ‒ DERRRRRRRR.

I’m fine with this feud continuing for a little bit. Kofi’s earnestness makes a good foil for Ambrose’s crazy. Let’s get him on the mic a little bit more.

Sheamus vs. Mark Henry (Strap Match)

Before the match, they showed a video package of all the events leading up to this match, and when you watch them all at once, boy does it make Sheamus look like an asshole. He quit on a tug-of-war he couldn’t win, which made Mark Henry fall down, and then quit again on an arm wrestling match he couldn’t win, sucker-punching Mark Henry in the face.

And why does he keep calling Mark Henry “Lumpy”? After the tubby kid on “Leave It To Beaver”? That’s smart, because Sheamus’s fans loved “Leave It To Beaver” when they were negative 58 years old. Is it “Lumpy the Space Princess?” Does anyone get either of those? Sheamus is a racist and hates fat people.

So, in this match, the competitors are to be tethered together with 12 feet of what appears to be leather-colored sponge. Henry straps up then tosses the other end to Sheamus, who just kicks it away. IT’S A STRAP MATCH, YOU GOON, PUT ON THE DAMN STRAP. Also: wrestling a strap match without a shirt is dumb.

Sheamus won in under 8 minutes. A strap match. Eight minutes. Wahoo McDaniel vs. Rick Rude, this was not. It wasn’t terrible ‒ in fact, about 30 seconds before it ended, I started thinking “Hey, this could get good.” And then it died. Sheamus killed it, because he is an awful person.

AJ and Kaitlynn Conversation

I guess the strap match had to end quickly so we could get to this. They end up punching each other in the face. They’re probably going to wrestle at some point.

Jack Swagger vs. Alberto Del Rio (I Quit Match, winner is the #1 Contender for the World Title)

Zeb Colter talked Jack Swagger to the ring in some of his best work yet, harping on the current IRS scandal, as well as the alleged FBI wiretapping. For the coup de grace, he said the St. Louis Cardinals should be the Caribbean Cardinals because of all the Caribbean players on the roster. Zeb even used the term “lamestream” media. He went full Palin.

Frankly, I didn’t understand any of it, but then Jack Swagger yelled, “WE … THE PEOPLE,” and it really brought everything into perspective. That young man has exceptional timing.

Good news: It looks like this is going to be one of those “I Quit” matches where the ref keeps asking the guys if they want to quit. Ninety seconds in, Mike Chioda has already asked four times. Obviously, he’s been paying attention to the match times so far.

Del Rio found himself in the Patriot Lock, with Ricardo on the outside, contemplating throwing in the towel. Alberto urged him not to. I liked the tension there … they could’ve dragged that out a little longer. Zeb took the towel and threw it himself a couple of seconds later. Chioda thought Ricardo threw it, and he rang the bell and gave the decision to Swagger.

“I Quit” matches ending with something screwy are the worst. It’s the best stipulation in wrestling ‒ one man has to say “I Quit” to another man, which is about the cleanest, purest way to end a match or, ideally, a feud. It’s a pretty big pay off. To begin with, it shouldn’t be wasted on a throwaway “feud” like this one, and then to schmozz it up, on top of that? For shame.

But apparently, we have instant replay now. NBA-style, Chioda goes over to the video monitors, sees that it was Zeb who throw the towel, and orders the match restarted. Under a minute later, Swagger was tapping to the Cross Armbreaker. 11:16, total match time. Magnum TA vs. Tully Blanchard, this was not.

The standout performer in this match? Mike Chioda. I’m not kidding. He was the most charismatic presence through the entirely of this match.

Team Hell No vs. Seth Rollins and Roman Reigns (Tornado Rules, for the WWE Tag Team Titles)

Another short one ‒ under eight minutes ‒ but they were eight pretty good minutes. The Shield has a sweet finisher in which Roman Reigns puts an opponent up in the Torture Rack, and then Rollins comes off the top with a knee to their head.

This is probably the best thing to happen to the WWE tag division since … I don’t know, 2001? I expect a few return matches with Team Hell No, which is fine, and then maybe The Usos get a bit of a push, at least to the point where they can give The Shield a decent match. Come on, tag team division. Make hay.

Randy Orton vs. The Big Show (Extreme Rules match, which is called just no rules, or no DQ and no countout, on the other 364 nights in a year)

It’s good news for The Big Show that there are no rules in this match, because I’ve heard that when rules start getting broken, he starts questioning his faith. No one wants that.

Things didn’t go that well for Show. There were 4 or 5 major spots in the match, depending on whether or not you want to call the draped-on-the-ropes DDT “major.” Big Show missed a Swagger bomb and landed on a ladder when Orton got out of the way. Orton hit one RKO. Then he hit another RKO on a steel chair. Then he hit the big punt to the head. Then he pinned him.

That’s a pretty thorough asskicking. To his credit, though, Show did break two Kendo sticks. Don’t worry about the WWE, though ‒ their Kendo stick guy gives them a price.

Ryback vs. John Cena (Last Man Standing Match for the WWE Title)

About the first five minutes or so were spent establishing Ryback as the stronger and more dominant guy, which is exactly how it should’ve went. At one point, Ryback hit a spear on Cena, prompting Cole to say, “I don’t know if that was a spear, or just a shoulder to the gut.” So I have no idea what a spear is now.

There were some good spots here. Ryback took an AA through a table. Cena took a Shellshock. Ryback tore off a section of a hockey wall, like he tore off the penalty box door or something, and nailed Cena with it. Cena put Ryback on a table and splashed him through it with a leap out of the crowd.

Along with The Shield’s finisher, these were three of the four best spots of the night. And that’s good for this match, but at a pay-per-view called “Extreme Rules,” shouldn’t we be awash in big spots?

At that point, we weren’t. But there was one brewing. Cena and Ryback fought their way back to the stage, and after countering out of an AA, Ryback picked Cena up in spinebuster position and drove him through the lower portion of the video display. BOOM, BABY.

This was the show’s money shot. It looked awesome, and I’m comfortable calling it a legitimate “Good God Almighty” spot. From the impact itself, to the setup by Ryback and Cena, to the improvised pyro … just brilliant all the way around.

After thirty seconds or so, they got cameras to the scene in back. Cena was stretchered out, while two officials helped Ryback walk away. He was technically on his feet before Cena, so I’d expect him to mention this at some point. No decision on the match was ever announced, which I was fine with, because it sells the idea that going through the video board was some massive, dangerous, unforeseen thing.

Maybe the St. Louis crowd didn’t like it, and I might’ve felt the same way live, but at home on my couch, it played. Oh, it played.

Brock Lesnar vs. Triple H (Steel Cage Match)

Coming in, I didn’t know if this match would go last, or if it’d be Cena vs. Ryback, but I’m glad they chose this one because YOU DO NOT MESS WITH A MAN’S 1994 IBM THINKPAD.

Triple H does a real Pearl Harbor job (©Gorilla Monsoon) on Lesnar during his entrance, which is a shame, because I like Brock’s entrance and I like Triple H’s entrance, and now they’re both ruined. But shortly into the match, Cole says that Triple H is going into “Game Mode”, which sounds an awful lot like “Gay Mode”, which would be a truly exciting stipulation. So there’s hope.

This wasn’t a great match, but it was a solid, sensible, entertaining match ‒ kind of a throwback, which probably isn’t what Paul Heyman meant when he said an “old school cage match,” but it turned out to be true. Lesnar banged his knee on the cage early in the match, and then continued selling that injury throughout the match, which it seems like no one does anymore. It felt old school. It felt classic ‒ not in the sense that it was a classic match, but it was done in the classical style. Lesnar sold the knee better than most guys on the roster would have.

Triple H had a sledgehammer taped to the side of the cage, because that’s the kind of thing a Cerebral Assassin does. And it was an all-metal sledgehammer, so if nothing else, at least Brock Lesnar’s office attack exposed the shoddy quality of Triple H’s sledgehammers, so Triple H should thank him for that.

For this finish, Lesnar jacked Triple H’s jaw with the sledgehammer, hit him with an F5, and pinned him clean as a whistle. Feud resolved. Brock triumphs as the supreme asskicker. Again ‒ old school. Classic. Satisfying.

Epilogue

I really hate being the “That was soooo predictable” guy, but the first seven matches went as I expected they’d go ‒ which isn’t bad, necessarily, it just doesn’t make for a pay-per-view that feels special in any way. Adding to that was that the matches were so short, which, again, isn’t always bad, but it makes it harder to establish anything as truly memorable.

The last two matches yanked this show out of mediocrity. The big spot in the Cena/Ryback match was magnificent ‒ I’m not even sure I’m stressing it enough. And then the cage match, while not always action-packed, was satisfying. And I love it when pay-per-views end with the bad guy walking away as a triumphing beast.

The post The WWE Extreme Rules Sort of Smorgasbord appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

I don’t have anything new to add to the outpouring of Pat Summerall tributes in the wake of his passing. I loved him for the same reasons everyone else loved him ‒ his economy of words, the way he complemented a game, his understated nature, and his calm, but still invested tone.

If it were up to me, Summerall, even in his late 70s and early 80s, would’ve been calling more than just the Cotton Bowl in recent years. At his age, the edge may have dulled a bit, but the style was still on point. I would happily exchange the occasional old-age flub age in exchange for a likeable, sensible game companion.

But that’s just me. That’s the style I prefer, which, unfortunately, might mean that I’m out of luck, because that style died with Pat Summerall.

It’s not that there aren’t good play-by-play commentators today ‒ of course there are. It’s a job that’s difficult to do well, and anyone who has trained themselves to talk for three hours while keeping the portion of the audience who would like to stab them in throat under, say, 45%, has a gift that I don’t have.

No one does it like Pat Summerall did it, though. I miss it.

Not that Summerall’s way was the “right” way or the “best” way ‒ everyone has their own style, and it’s possible to do a brilliant job while not being Pat Summerall. A lot of guys do it. It’s just curious and unfortunate, though, that it no longer seems to be anyone’s preferred approach.

Why that is, I’m not sure. The theory I’m leaning toward is that play-by-play people are usually guys who majored in sports broadcasting in college, and most of the guys who majored in sports broadcasting in college are guys who really like to talk. With time and experience, they train themselves to be as likeable as possible.

Summerall wasn’t a trained commentator, though ‒  he was an athlete who happened to have a smooth voice, and that smooth voice happened to land him in a broadcasting chair. Once there, he just let his easygoing, comfortable, genial nature take over. I believe that’s the only secret ‒ be likeable and don’t try too hard. He never took himself too seriously, and, as a result, it felt like he was watching the game with you, not telling the game to you.

For various reasons, none of today’s top play-by-play guys strike that same note.

And again, this is not a sweeping condemnation of the play-by-play industry today. I don’t mean for this to be the broadcasting equivalent of “Grrrumph, basketball is better when teams are comprised exclusively of 5’9″ white men with buzzcuts, and shorts are tight enough to make out individual testicles!” There are plenty of broadcasters I like today. In fact, I’d say I like most of them.

I’m just noting mourning the passing of Summerall and his understated, affable style. I just wish someone had that club in the bag today.

Marv Albert probably comes the closest. He’s got his little catchphrases and idiosyncrasies, but he never attempts to take over a broadcast. And the way needles, and is needled by, his color analysts give the feeling that Marv is just a pleasant man enjoying a game.

Brent Musburger is probably the next closest. He’s also seems like a pleasant fellow enjoying a game, though he loves his own voice way more than Pat Summerall did. Which is fine, because it is an awesome voice and Brent might just be an awesome guy ‒ It’s just not quite the same.

Those two, and maybe Dan Shulman and Sean McDonough, are the only ones today with anything even resembling a Pat Summerall vibe.

If remembering Pat Summerall is going to inspire a complaint, though, it’s this: the guys at the very top of the field are thigh-deep in the one thing you’d never hear in a Pat Summerall broadcast: self-importance.

I’m not saying Jim Nantz and Al Michaels don’t have their laudable qualities, but they both absolutely believe they’re a part of the reason you’re watching.  Al Michaels can’t resist his own opinion, and (man, I bet he’d really hate this criticism) often sounds just like the drunkard at the end of the bar screaming, “THAT’S TERRIBLE CLOCK MANAGEMENT!” He is also very aware that he is a celebrity and that he is important.

Jim Nantz has lost his lifelong battle with smugness. In a rout. He is the living embodiment of the Masters theme song. He tries to seem like your pal with his “Hello, friends” bit, but off camera, I can’t picture him saying “Hello, friends” to anyone who doesn’t have a white sweater tied around his neck.

This isn’t a commentator bitchfest, though. I offer those examples only to illustrate what we’ve been missing since Pat Summerall left the booth.

Play-by-play goes on, though, and by and large, it will still be very good. There will be guys who do it well, but who do it nothing like Pat Summerall did it ‒ Kevin Harlan, Mike Tirico, Gus Johnson, Shulman, McDonough, Jim Ross ‒ but we’re not going to see another Summerall. Maybe it wasn’t so much the style that was unique, but the man himself.

The post The literal and figurative death of the understated play-by-play guy appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

Good morning there. Having a rough Monday? It’ll get better, friend. And hey, at least no one’s relentlessly badgering you to relive the worst moment of your life.

That’s what’s happening to Chris Webber on this fine Monday. Courtesy of Jalen Rose.

As you are likely aware, the Michigan basketball Wolverines are, for the first time since Chris Webber did this, playing for a national championship tonight. This year also happens to mark the 20th anniversary of that Webber-led Michigan team, known to history as “The Fab Five,” a group of five highly-touted recruits who qualified for back-to-back national championship games as freshmen and sophomores.

Word on the street (internet) is that four of the Fab Five ‒ Rose, Jimmy King, Ray Jackson and Juwan Howard ‒ will be renewing acquaintances in the Georgia Dome for tonight’s game. It will be as close to a reunion as the Fab Five has ever had, and they’re hoping for a fifth ‒ Chris Webber, of course, to round out the five.

Rose is still holding out hope. If it turns out that we don’t get a full reunion, it’s probably going to be because Chris Webber, against the very strong wishes of the public, opted against participating, which wouldn’t strike me as weird at all.

I don’t like speculating about someone else’s opinion (despite that, here’s an entire column of just that), but if Chris Webber did want nothing to do with Michigan basketball, ever ever ever again, would it really be that much of a surprise?

Chris Webber might think the following things:

• Calling that timeout in the championship game was a horrible mistake, and one that burdened him emotionally for years, if not decades. It resulted in untold ridicule from fans and media, which just might, you know, hurt a fellow’s feelings.

• When the Ed Martin scandal went down, the University not only did not have Webber’s back, they cut him loose and scapegoated him pretty thoroughly. The University let him take the biggest fall in the scandal, and completely erased Webber from their record books, almost gleefully.

• The University profited enormously from The Fab Five, of which Webber was a major part, and it was unfair for Webber and the other players to not profit from that themselves (which is a whole gigantic separate issue, but for now, I’m just saying, maybe Chris Webber feels used by the whole college basketball system).

• It’s unfair that the University didn’t have his back in the Ed Martin scandal, that they didn’t compensate him for what he brought to the school, that they threw him under the bus when someone else compensated him for what he brought to the school, that they forbid him from having contact with the university for ten years, and now, that they’re demanding an apology before they ever do recognize Webber again.

• And lastly, if someone on the current Michigan team makes a crucial error late in this game, does Chris Webber really want to be there for the 85 close-up shots of him accompanied by the soundtrack of a somber Jim Nantz soliloquy on the worst night of his life?

I’m not arguing that any of that’s justified, right, or the whole and absolute truth. I’m not arguing that it’s not, either.  I’m only saying that Chris Webber might think some of that’s pretty messed up.

I’m also not arguing that Webber shouldn’t be there with his Fab Five teammates tonight. In fact, personally, I’d love to see it. I’m just saying, if he doesn’t show up, I get it. For him, there’s a definite downside to being there.

Now, in a perfect world, he’d be over the timeout.  It would be something he’d talk about and discuss, he’d accept it as part of his past, and it’s not something that could bother him anymore. He’d be able to show up, support Michigan and enjoy the company of his former teammates, with no more awkwardness or apprehension than any of the other five.

And for all I know, Webber, despite Jalen Rose’s speculation on the B.S. Report, has made the timeout a comfortable part of his past. My guess is that this goes beyond the timeout. If you were digging for reasons Chris Webber might not be getting a “Go Blue” tattoo anytime soon, you wouldn’t have to dig very deep.

For us, the issue goes as deep as, “Reunion! YAY!”, but there might be a little more to it for Chris Webber. Going back to that era, to that time in his life, to ask him to be a friend to the University of Michigan ‒ that might be a pretty soul-jarring thing.

If Webber had any interest in participating on Monday night, Rose and everyone else would know it. It wouldn’t take a public plea on an emergency podcast. Webber has a phone. Between this and his refusal to participate in ESPN’s Fab Five documentary, let’s take the hint.

He doesn’t want this spotlight, so what’s the benefit of publicly hounding him to show up? Doesn’t that just intensify the spotlight, and in fact, set him up to be the bad guy if the other four guys show up and he doesn’t? I don’t know if Rose is getting us closer to a reunion or an even more complete alienation.

The very request puts Webber in a vice grip. I’m glad that Rose has the warm fuzzies about this Michigan squad, but he didn’t go through the same things at Michigan that Webber did, and doesn’t that make it somewhat ‒ what’s the word here? Thoughtless? Insensitive? Inconsiderate?  ‒ to attempt to coerce him into showing up on Monday night?

One day, we might get to see Chris Webber once again in the company of Jalen Rose, Ray Jackson, Jimmy King and Juwan Howard. And hopefully, they’ll have a blast and tell some great stories. I hope, selfishly, that cameras will be on. It doesn’t have to happen live on CBS, though. Anyone’s home, or the VIP lounge of any bar would do just as nicely, and it wouldn’t require Webber to relive a Michigan national championship game or to celebrate the University of Michigan. Maybe one day that will happen.

I don’t think we’re ever going to see Chris Webber make a public display of support for anything related to Michigan, though. And maybe he’d prefer it if we didn’t ask.

The post Let’s Just Leave Chris Webber Alone appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

2013 NCAA Tournament Least Valuable Players, Through The First Weekend

5. Tray Woodall, G, Pitt

Pitt’s senior point knows he’s a candidate for such lists. He’s aware that he didn’t play well in Pitt’s first round lay-down to Wichita State ‒ so aware, in fact, that he sobbed his way through the post-game press conference.

That’s difficult to watch, which doesn’t make it unlike the rest of Tray Woodall’s Thursday afternoon. After leading Pitt in scoring this year, Woodall was held to just two points against the Wheat Shockers on 1-of-12 shooting, including 0-for-5 from three-point range.

That’s life, though. As low as this low is, Woodall’s highs at Pitt have also been pretty high. He’s had a fantastic four years at Pitt, leading the team in assists for the last two. And, let’s face it, when you sign up to play at Pitt, you’ve also signing up to eat it in the tournament.  Tray will be fine.

4. John Thompson III, Head Coach, Georgetown

And speaking of perennial NCAA tournament calamities originating from the Big East, let’s welcome back John Thompson III and Georgetown, everybody.

Do you think coaches of teams who know they’re going to be seeded between 10th and 16th in the NCAA tournament sit around hoping they get to play Georgetown? Maybe that’s what we should be looking for, too. CBS should move it to the end of the selection show. “We now know the one-seeds in the tournament, and we’ve seen which bubble teams made the field. When he come back, the big question on everyone’s mind ‒ what lucky future Cinderella team gets to kick Georgetown in the ass on the first weekend of the tournament? We’ll tell you when we get back … on CBS.”

In their last five NCAA tournament appearances, when the Hoyas have been seeded 2nd, 3rd, 6th, 3rd and 2nd, they’ve  lost to teams seeded 15th, 11th, 11th, 14th and 10th, respectively. That’s an average seed of 3.2, losing to an average seed of 12.2.

Does it help Thompson III any that they lost to Florida Gulf Coast, who went on to prove that they weren’t a one-trick pony? After beating Georgetown ‒ by double digits, by the way ‒ the Eagles moved on to the Sweet 16 and became America’s darlings. They beat San Diego State by double digits, too.

3. Kendall Williams, New Mexico

Like Tray Woodall, Kendall Williams also led his team in scoring during the season, and then gave birth to a pile of bricks in the first round of the tournament. Williams, also the Mountain West conference’s player of the year (though that title may not be as esteemed today as it once was) did have eight points, which beats Woodall’s two, but Williams’ team was a three-seed and they lost to a group of guys who read books.

Of course, it’s not all on Williams. New Mexico’s second-leading scorer, Tony Snell, was also held to single digits, and un-ripe point guard Hugh Greenwood didn’t score at all. And then there’s head coach Steve Alford, who has now led New Mexico to the tournament as a three-seed twice, and both times, has failed to get to the Sweet 16 (in 2010, the Lobos lost to 11th-seeded Washington in the second round).

Also, New Mexico makes reporters quit. That may have more to do with the reporter than Kendall Williams, though.

2. Adam Morrison, ???

Adam Morrison doesn’t play for Gonzaga anymore, but it was his extended bath in the spotlight that officially transformed the Zags from a scrappy gang of underdogs to the West Coast basketball elite. In general, we feel like the elite deserve a good punch in the face, and lots of people seemed really happy when Wichita State clubbed Gonzaga in the mouth.

So, this is Morrison’s fault? Sort of. Matt Santangelo, former Zag and current radio analyst, said this to the New York Times: “After Adam, that expectation was set. Now you’re the big dog, the big fish.”

And sometimes, life as a big dog isn’t as much fun. With no big dog in it, the West Coast Conference doesn’t offer much that demands national attention, so no one paid any attention. Then, when someone would emerge in the tournament, they were new and novel and we couldn’t wait until they punched some elite team in the face.

When someone does that enough years in a row, they become a big dog, and people pay attention year round. Then they tend to notice that, outside of you, the West Coast Conference isn’t all that great, and people start to get excited about what will happen when you can’t beat up on Pepperdine anymore, and you have to play someone capable of mouth-punching you.

1. Pretty much everyone who isn’t Andy Enfield

Here’s something I’d like you to try. Go make yourself into a multi-millionaire. Then find yourself a Victoria’s Secret model, buy her a taco and marry her. Then, see if you can make yourself universally beloved.

If you pull off the first two, you’re probably not going to have a lot of luck with the third, because everyone will hate you for doing the first two. But that’s why you aren’t. Andy Enfield. He did all those things.

He started a company that eventually became worth $100 million. He married Maxim cover girl Amanda Marcum after taking her to Taco Bell on their first date. And now everyone is in love with him because he coaches the Florida Gulf Coast Eagles, a 15-seed that has torn through the NCAA tournament with an up-tempo, high-flying, rim-attacking, giant-killing style.

He is the perfect man and an ideal human being and he makes the rest of us look like garbage. I hope he gets crabs and wins a national championship.

2013 NCAA Tournament Most Valuable Players, Through The First Weekend

5. Jeff Withey, C, Kansas

Like most teams seem to be in 2013, the Kansas Jayhawks are prone to offensive droughts. On Sunday, they had one that lasted, oh, about the first 20 minutes of the game.

The Jawhawks remedied that in the second half, of course, but they didn’t do it because their offense came alive, and they certainly didn’t do it because Ben McLemore found his stroke. They did it because their defense locked UNC into a vicious abdominal stretch, which let the Jayhawks get out in transition and do what they do. That started with Jeff Withey and his five blocks. This one was my favorite:

I’m with Bill Self, though ‒ it seemed like Withey had more than five. It seemed more like the 7 he had against Western Kentucky. Two games, twelve blocks. And of course, this, which I didn’t know he had in him.

4. Tommy Amaker, Head Coach, Harvard

By the time the 14th-seeded Harvard Crimson took the court against third-seeded New Mexico on opening Thursday, we were in dire need of an upset. Gonzaga held off Southern, Marquette outlasted Davidson, and Cal beating UNLV didn’t count.

Our hopes rested pretty much solely on Tommy Amaker, who does not have a long track record of NCAA tournament success. Amaker’s Harvard bunch had to be rebuilt after they lose their two best players to an academic cheating scandal, which probably wasn’t easy to do, especially when you consider that Harvard can’t give out basketball scholarships.

There they were, though, moving the ball and making open shots against a lethargic and perhaps overconfident New Mexico team. The talent disadvantage was obvious, but it was also obvious that Harvard had been well-coached and well-prepared.

3. Khalif Wyatt, G, Temple

Khalif Wyatt played the best twenty minutes of basketball you’re likely to see from an individual in this year’s NCAA tournament. If Indiana didn’t have the nation’s best perimeter defender in Victor Oladipo, and head coach Tom Crean didn’t have the sense to sic Oladipo on Wyatt, the Hoosiers would probably be sitting at home on Thursday while Temple prepared to play Syracuse.

Doug Gottleib says Wyatt has an “old man’s game,” which could be complimentary, but might not be. Wyatt’s not the best athlete in college basketball ‒ he’s not the kind of guy Roy Williams would ever recruit ‒ but he’s a master of his craft. He creates space for himself with an arsenal of fakes, and has crafted his shot so that it doesn’t need much space.

“Old man’s game” may imply a lack of athleticism, but it also implies intelligence, creativity and experience, which are all more reliable, and are also enough to score 20 points on Indiana in one half of basketball. It’s also wildly entertaining.

2. Brett Comer, G, Florida Gulf Coast

This spot was originally going to go to one of FGCU’s primary rim-murderers, Eric McKnight or Chase Fieler, but as I watched this Deadspin video compendium of FGCU postseason dunks, I noticed point guard Brett Comer at the front end of nearly all of them.

Comer currently leads the tournament with 24 assists, and no one else is even close. Duke’s Quinn Cook is second with 17, while no one else has more than 14. If anyone else’s dunks have even as much as 25% of the entertainment value of the Comer-created dunks, I will eat a shoe. I will eat all of Tray Woodall’s shoes.

1. Aaron Craft, G, Ohio State

The tournament is about nothing if not entertainment value, and Aaron Craft packed about a month’s worth of ups and downs into six minutes of play on Sunday.

The “charge” and the game-winner are what will be remembered ‒ the game-winner by Ohio State fans, and the “charge” by Iowa State fans. But if you find yourself annoyed that it was Craft, the much-resented Caucasian point guard, who walked out the hero on Sunday, maybe it comforts you that he was also very, very close to being the tournament’s sad sack.

Just minutes before that three went in, Aaron Craft experienced a personal lowlight reel. He missed the front of two one-and-one situations at the line. He committed two turnovers. He blew a lay-up. Michigan fans were wondering what it was that they did that made them God’s favored children.

Then he remembered how much fun it was to make you hate him, got a fortuitous call, and stuck a gorgeous three-ball just before time expired. He went from Fred Brown straight to Bryce Drew, in just seconds.

The post The Five Most And Five Least Valuable Players Of The Tournament Thus Far appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

Dear Buffalo Wild Wings,

If you’re going to call your establishment “The Official Hangout of March Madness,” which I’m sure you’ve paid a great sum of money to do, I believe you should show March Madness games on the televisions in your establishments.

This is a merely a genial suggestion from me. I am requesting no consulting fees.

The last two nights, I’ve gone to “The Official Hangout of March Madness” with the intention of watching “first round” NCAA Tournament games. On both occasions, the NCAA tournament games weren’t on a single television in the establishment until after halftime of the first game.

At plenty of bars, this would be fine. Examples of such bars are piano bars, gay bars, wine bars, and biker bars. You are a sports bar, though. The NCAA tournament falls under the category of “sports.”

I assumed that when an establishment proclaimed themselves “The Official Hangout of March Madness,” that implied that March Madness games would actually be shown on the televisions at said establishment.

Now, maybe I misread that. Maybe Buffalo Wild Wings simply wants people to hang out there while only thinking about, or talking in theory about, March Madness, with no actual viewership implied.

And if that is the case, hey, Buffalo Wild Wings: My bad. In fact, while at your place, I did think about March Madness (Say, I wonder why March Madness isn’t on the fucking television) and talk about March Madness (Say, fellow bar patron, do you know why the fuck March Madness isn’t on the fucking television?). So in that way, Buffalo Wild Wings was indeed a March Madness hangout.

That’s probably not what you meant, though. And listen, I don’t want to be a bitchy customer. I wouldn’t mention it if this wasn’t an ongoing Buffalo Wild Wings problem. One Sunday, I watched a lengthy portion of “60 Minutes” at Buffalo Wild Wings, with sound! Most employees don’t know how to change the channels, but that wouldn’t even really be a problem if there was anyone there, a manager, for example, who spent two minutes of every hour making sure that the “sports” part of “sports bar” was not a total misnomer.

The other reason I mention it is that over the next four days, there will be multiple NCAA tournament games on at the same time ‒ as many as four, in fact ‒ and I can envision the confused look in a waitress’s eye when someone asks to see the Southern vs. Gonzaga game, as she looks around and wonders why you can’t just watch one of the other games.

One game at a time is (for some) easy. It’s about to get harder. Don’t act like you aren’t nervous.

I see two possible solutions: One, stop paying so many millions of dollars for the right to call yourself “The Official Hangout of March Madness,” and with the money you save, print new menus with lower prices on your decent, but extremely overpriced chicken wings. Everyone wins, and then you can just call yourself “The Official Hangout Where Sports May Or May Not Be On,” for free, which totally takes the pressure off of you. Everyone wins.

Or two, you could maybe start paying attention to what’s on your televisions. At least for these few days in March.

The post A Quick Word On Buffalo Wild Wings, “The Official Hangout Of March Madness” appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

The two most captivating figures in sports this weekend are Danica Patrick and Ronda Rousey. They are both female. This seems like a big deal.

As much as social progress and gender equality are important to me, I can’t claim to be any kind of activist or role model in the promotion of women’s sports. I don’t watch women in sports very often.

Is it because I’m a sexist prick? I hope not, but if I’m being honest, I have to acknowledge that I live in a sex-dripping, hyper-masculine culture that tells me constantly that, as a man, women exist as objects to be used for my enjoyment. For me to believe that I’ve overcome all of that and not let a single drop seep in would be at least optimistic, and possibly egomaniacal.

At the very least, I can promise you that I don’t look at female athletes and think, “Ewww, keep your weird ovary things and your cycles away from my sports.” I embrace sports as both entertainment and as a healthy, character-building endeavor, for all people.

But that, perhaps unfortunately, doesn’t mean that I love watching women’s sports. I do not. I could point to excuses that take me off the sexist hook ‒ they’re not as readily-available, and the media doesn’t hype their storylines, so I don’t care as much ‒ but the fact is that I have watched, and I have tried, and most of the time, I don’t find women’s sports to be much fun to watch. Sorry.

Mostly, I’m a fan of the major team sports in North America: football, basketball, baseball and hockey. Of these, only basketball is readily available in a female variety, and I’m sorry, but it’s difficult for me to watch one group of college-aged people play the game, and then watch another group of college-aged people play the same game with a fraction of the strength, speed, size and agility. It’s hard to make that step down. Again … sorry.

That’s just me. I do watch women’s tennis, soccer, and golf, but this isn’t a referendum on what women’s sports I find entertaining and not entertaining. I just want to tell you where I’ll be coming from as I watch three female athletes compete this weekend. It’ll be about three more than I usually watch.

On Saturday night, Ronda Rousey and Liz Carmouche will headline UFC 157 ‒ an event I’d probably watch with or without female headliners because I dig the sport. On Sunday, Danica Patrick, pole-sitter, will be the only lady in NASCAR’s Daytona 500, and if she’s competitive in the later stages of the race, I will almost certainly watch that, too. (If she’s not, I’m probably not going to care much. I struggle to embrace NASCAR. Sorry.)

Which makes for an unusual little confluence. Outside of the Olympics, when’s the last time we’ve gone into a weekend where the two most compelling athletes, on a national level, were female? Even better, these two aren’t competing in “women’s sports”, per se, but they are instead the most interesting figures in sporting events that, without them, would be dominated in participation and audience by men.

So what does that make this weekend? A banner weekend in women’s sports? A big achievement? Something with historic implications?

Those projections seem a little dramatic. Even if things go as well as they possibly could, and Patrick grabs a checkered flag, while Rousey finishes a bloody, crowd-pleasing fight with a flying armbar, where are we on Monday morning?

Miss Sprint Cup is still going to exist as a “prize” for future NASCAR race winners. Advertisers will still see female breasts as purposeless flesh orbs that exist to sell Coors Light. There will still be a major wage gap between genders. People like Rex Reed will still exist. There will still be people who see Danica Patrick as an undeserving annoyance who only won because she’s not weighed down by strapping thighs and hairy, bountiful balls.

And I am still not going to watch the (5) Duke vs. (8) Maryland women’s college basketball game on Sunday, even if it is, by ranking, the best match-up in college basketball this weekend. As great as they may be, I don’t think there’s anything Patrick, Rousey or Carmouche could do to make that game interesting to me.

Women have made this a highly-anticipated sports weekend. As a fan, I’m excited for it ‒ not because they’re women, but because they’re compelling sports figures. It will be fun, but I don’t know that it will be historic. It will not be some kind of watershed moment for women, because it’s unlikely to fundamentally change how (or who) we watch, nor do I see it changing or advancing the sports landscape. It’s great and it’s exciting, but I don’t think it will prove to be historic. This is not a step forward so much as it’s a reflection of where we are right now.

Patrick and Rousey are both world class at what they do. That’s why they get to do what they’re doing this weekend. Whether or not they deserve the media attention they’ve gotten this week, or they deserve to be actually headline a card, I can’t say; nor does it matter. The concept of “deserving” so rarely has anything to do with big-time American sports.

They’ve earned their spots and are getting the spotlight. They will keep it as long as they’re bumping Neilsen ratings and pay-per-view buys, which I suspect both will do this weekend. As long as that continues, they will be used for that purpose and the spotlight will keep shining.

But no one’s really going out on a limb here. These women are not here because NASCAR, Dana White, or any corporate interests, want to do anyone any favors. They’re not here as a result of anyone’s push for gender equality. Patrick’s on the pole because she ran the fastest in qualifying, she gets attention because the media can sell it, and White readily admits that Rousey’s fighting because he thinks she can make him money.

Rousey and Patrick are here because of what they’ve accomplished, and they will make money commensurate with the eyeballs they attract. They are, like everyone else in sports, commodities. The interest they generate determines how and for how much they can be sold. Just like Adrian Peterson, LeBron James, Phil Mickelson, Tony Stewart or Anderson Silva.

I suppose that commoditization is some sort of equality, but it’s still commoditization. I will watch and enjoy it, because that’s what sports are. I can’t see it as social progress to celebrate, though.

The post Danica! Rousey! Carmouche! What’s Really At Stake In This Women’s Weekend Of Sports appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

Do Everyone A Favor, Lakers, And Send Dwight Howard Somewhere Else

Kobe Bryant, according to recent reports, wouldn’t mind if the Lakers shipped Dwight Howard out of town. I don’t buy these reports.

It’s the phrase “wouldn’t mind” with which I quibble. I think it’s probably more accurate to say that Kobe “wouldn’t mind” if Dwight Howard was abducted and waterboarded by a Panamanian drug cartel. A Dwight Howard trade? “Wouldn’t mind”? Kobe would drive to Staples, personally pack up Dwight’s locker and give him a piggyback ride to the airport.

Unfortunately for just about everyone, though, a trade seems unlikely. Lakers’ GM Mitch Kupchak has said all along, and reiterated again today, that he won’t trade Howard. He’s got this vision of Howard etching his name alongside those of George Mikan, Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Shaquille O’Neal in the pantheon of great Lakers centers.

Which seems to me like a borderline insane vision.

It’s not that Dwight Howard isn’t good enough. When healthy and motivated, he might be one day deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as some of the all-time great centers.

One of the great all-time Lakers centers, though? Not happening. Because he’s not going to be a Laker.

That’s the thing ‒ Howard’s contract is up at the end of the season, and there’s not a single reason he’d re-up with the Lakers. You think he’s going to voluntarily rejoin this current hellscape?  Why would he? The team isn’t very good. He is not well-liked. The media scrutiny is intense. He does not fit the coach’s system. That coach is going nowhere. What in God’s name could have possibly been enjoyable to Dwight Howard about this season? Why would he want to do it again?

The one carrot that LA offers is the legendary Laker status, but there’s no indication that Howard has any interest in that. He’s never indicated any reverence for the tradition behind the purple and gold. Kobe once wanted to give Howard the Lakers kingdom, but now doesn’t care if he’s traded or not. In  judging someone else’s competitiveness and drive to be great, there may be no one on the planet better qualified than Kobe Bryant, and he has found Howard wanting.

Howard will walk at the end of this season. And even if he didn’t, he can’t fulfill Mitch Kupchak’s grand vision of a Dwight Howard statue someday sitting outside Staples Center, certainly not under the tutelage of Mike D’Antoni.

Howard doesn’t want the history or the expectations. He doesn’t want Kobe’s shadow, which will exist for a long time even after Kobe’s retired. He’s better off, and will contribute more to the game of basketball, somewhere else.

It’s better for the Lakers, too. It may sound like a bad idea to trade a potentially great 27-year old athletic center, but it’s a better idea than letting him walk away and getting nothing in return.

What We Learned From Indiana vs. Michigan State

I’m not sure if there was as much learning as there was reinforcing. Indiana was a favorite for the national title before the game, and that point was certainly hammered home. Michigan State’s stock didn’t drop, either. It would not be a surprise to see them in the Final Four.

I see two takeaways from the game: One, that Indiana might have the top two contenders for the Wooden Award in Victor Oladipo and Cody Zeller, and two, just how big a deal it is that Indiana won this game on the road.

The Spartans don’t lose at home. Their losses this year have been at Indiana, at Minnesota, at Miami and in Germany in the season opener against UConn. Indiana had not won there in their last 17 tries. And with the place at its absolute rowdiest, in a conference where home court means everything, Indiana walked in, made pressure shots, made hustle plays, and even took some knuckles to the junk. And they walked out with a big-boy win.

As far as the Wooden Award goes, Oladipo is, justifiably, everyone’s darling at the moment. He was spectacular last night, with 19 points, nine boards and five steals. It doesn’t hurt that it was a much-hyped national television game, either, nor does it hurt that he did it on a bad ankle. He’s a great story, too, going from good last year to spectacular this year.

I’m not saying you can’t make a case for Zeller, Trey Burke or Mason Plumlee, but it’s going to take something pretty damn miraculous to derail the Oladipo train right now.

Allen Crabbe’s Parents Move On From Mike Montgomery’s Shove

Cal head coach Mike Montgomery continues to apologize for putting his hands on junior point guard Allen Crabbe, and there continues to be no punishment. Montgomery’s saving grace continues to be that Crabbe is simply moving on, and his parents, via Jeff Faraudo at MerceryNews.com, are following his lead.

Neither parent was willing to say anything stronger than they “don’t respect what [Montgomery] did”. Crabbe’s mother even sympathizes with Montgomery.

“How many of us have said something, and as soon as the words left your mouth you regret it? That doesn’t make you a bad person, it makes you human.”

And Crabbe’s father thinks the whole thing got blown out of proportion by the reaction of Crabbe’s teammates.

“I think a lot of people overreacted. All that holding him back … Allen’s not going to hit the coach. He’s been raised to respect. He was just shocked that Montgomery did it.”

So was everyone else, but no one was actually shocked enough to do anything about it. Public reprimands came from the school and from the conference, but I wouldn’t even call those a slap on the wrist. More like a gentle “tsk tsk.”

I’m not calling for the guy to be drawn and quartered. He’s been a head coach in college and the NBA since 1977, all that shouldn’t be erased by one moment of weakness. I’m finding it really hard to grasp, though, that nothing has happened. Allen Crabbe is not a professional. He is a student-athlete. Mike Montgomery’s job is to educate and mold him and many other young people, the same as it is for any professor on Cal’s campus. Montgomery got frustrated with a student, and was not able to control himself to the point where he could stop himself from putting hands on him.

That’s not okay. No one would accept it in a classroom and no one should accept it on a basketball court, either. These are students.

And all the apologies from Montgomery sound good, but when trying to read what’s actually in his heart, I’ll trust what he said immediately after the game, as opposed to what he said a day afterward when the public relations machine kicked into gear. After the game, he flippantly said, “Worked, didn’t it?”, as if he was proud of himself for his brilliant coaching tactic. That’s more concerning than the shove.

That Crabbe is okay with things shouldn’t save Montgomery from punishment. He’s a young guy under a lot of pressure and he doesn’t want to make waves. He’s got a team to think about, and he wants to win and not be a disruption.

But he shouldn’t be the one deciding Montgomery’s fate. That should be an adult, concerned with the welfare of all parties involved, who can look at the incident objectively from the outside. You can’t put that burden on a student who was forced into the national spotlight just because he happened to be within arm’s reach of a coach in a bad mood. He’s got enough on his plate right now.

Video Of The Day

If this isn’t cute to you, I think it’s time for some self-evaluation. Find your heart, brother.

Video Of The Day II

The opening round of the WGC Accenture Match Play Championship was postponed due to snow. I believe that’s the first time I’ve ever seen snow on a golf course, mainly because I don’t go to golf courses when there might be snow on the ground. The tournament is in Marana, AZ, an hour and a half south of Phoenix.

Quote Of The Day

“LeBron [James] is playing at a ridiculously high level right now, but for several years he was criticized for everything he did. When he won a championship, everything changed. That’s just the way it’s going to be. With Dwight, when he wins his first championship — and he will — people will look at him differently.”

- Lakers GM Mitch Kupchak on ESPN Radio, talking about Dwight Howard’s future

Recommended Reading:

• Robert Weinreb at Grantland looks at the declining pace of college basketball, and a successful coach at a small college in West Virginia who believes that slow basketball is kind of dumb.
• Gregg Doyel at CBS thinks NFL draft prospects should band together and refuse to take the Wonderlic test. I’ve wondered myself what would happen if a player did that, and I truly believe the answer is “absolutely nothing.” Loved this column.
• Jason Whitlock at Fox Sports thinks Paul George of the Pacers is the only real threat to Lebron James’ reign.
• Ray Lewis will indeed by joining ESPN.

BOOM BOOM BOOM

• Patriots defensive back Alfonzo Dennard allegedly assaulted a police officer.
• The University of North Dakota has suspended their play-by-play announcer for using the term “choke job” in a post-game interview with the head coach on Saturday. I’m not sure what their particular problem is. Maybe they don’t like the violent imagery, maybe they feel it was disrespectful to the coach … I couldn’t tell you.
• I love the idea of Gregg Popovich cursing at Dwight Howard while trying to coach him in an All-Star game.
• Lindy Ruff is out as coach of the Buffalo Sabres after sixteen years. Since he was hired in 1997, according to Greg Wyshynksi, 170 other NHL head coaches have been hired.

This Evening’s Television Options:

College Basketball:
7:00, Big Ten Network: Minnesota @ Ohio State
7:00, ESPN2: Providence @ Syracuse
7:30, ESPNU: Oklahoma @ Texas Tech
9:00, ESPNU: Iowa State @ Baylor
9:00, ESPN2: Kansas @ Oklahoma State
10:00, CBS Sports: Colorado State @ UNLV
11:00, ESPN2: Washington @ Arizona
11:00, ESPNU: Santa Clara @ Gonzaga

Women’s College Basketball:
8:00, CBS Sports: St. John’s @ Marquette

NHL:
7:30, NBC Sports: Flyers @ Penguins
10:00, NBC Sports: Blues @ Avalanche

NBA:
8:00, ESPN: Hornets @ Cavaliers
10:30, ESPN: Celtics @ Lakers

The post The Take Home: Dwight Howard, Shoving Students and OLADIPO! appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

As Ray Lewis has mentioned, the most influential person in this year’s NFL playoffs has been God, or as you may know him, The Almighty, Jehovah, or Yahweh. I was able to catch up with God for an exclusive one-on-one interview after He had finished crafting His friend Ray Lewis’s holy football swan song.

mjd: Hi God. Thanks for taking the time.

God: You bet.

mjd: Can You share with us Your thoughts on last night’s Super Bowl?

God: The Super Bowl? That silly little athletic contest that receives an embarrassing amount of attention and resources?

mjd: Yes.

God: Twenty innocent people were killed and 35 others wounded in an attack by a suicide bomber in Iraq yesterday. You know that, right?

mjd: No, actually, I didn’t. Geez, I feel just terrible. I’m really sorry I brought up something as ‒

God: Ah, relax ‒ I didn’t know either until I checked the prayer box this morning. Of course I watched the Super Bowl, man.

mjd: You watched the Super Bowl? So You weren’t paying attention to Iraq? Is that why that horrible thing happened and all those people died?

God: I don’t know. Maybe. Listen, I thought you wanted to talk about the Super Bowl.

mjd: Yes. Yes, about that. Can you explain, maybe, why You had such an interest in the Super Bowl when so many other more important things were happening in the world?

God: Well, Ray Lewis prays a lot. And he likes to shout My name to Sal Paolantonio, and I like that. It’s the least I can do.

mjd: So You’re a fan of Ray Lewis?

God: He’s a dear, dear friend.

mjd: So it’s true that you were on Ray’s side yesterday?

God: Oh yeah. Yesterday, and all throughout the playoffs.

mjd: So it’s fair to say that You bestowed blessings upon Ray that You didn’t bestow upon, for example, Andrew Luck, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, or Colin Kaepernick?

God: Son, are you familiar with the term, “Scoreboard”?

mjd: Yes. Yes I am.

God: Scoreboard.

mjd: I’m a little stunned, God, by the fact that You take such an active interest in determining the outcomes of professional football games. Why do You do that?

God: Well, I don’t all the time. But it’s Ray, you know? What am I going to do instead, help the impoverished? The destitute? The truly desperate?

mjd: That doesn’t sound like the worst idea ‒

God: That was rhetorical, son. Let’s not overthink this.

mjd: Okay. Lately, God, Ray has been talking a lot about how You work and why You do the things You do. Would You mind if I ran some recent Ray Lewis quotes past You, so You can confirm or deny them?

God: Sure. Ray speaks for Me in all things, but sure, knock yourself out.

mjd: After the Ravens beat the Broncos, Ray said this: “When you sacrifice something for God, He will give you anything that his heart desires, if it aligns with His will.” Is this true?

God: Yeah, that’s true.

mjd: God, why is it such a big deal to give someone something that aligns with your will? How much of a sacrifice is it, really, if your will is unhindered in any way?

God: Listen, it’s just a nice little quote. You’re still overthinking this.

mjd: Okay. Here’s another one from Ray. “God kept telling me, No weapon formed against me shall prosper. No weapon formed against my team shall prosper’.” Did you tell Ray that?

God: Well, it’s in the Bible, sort of. I don’t remember mentioning the Ravens, specifically, but sure, I said something like that.

mjd: What weapons, specifically, were formed against Ray?

God: What do you mean?

mjd: I’m just not sure what weapons Ray had to face here. What’s he talking about, the Denver offense? Does that count? Because that was formed against at least a dozen other teams, too. Is he talking about Vegas point spreads that were perfectly reasonable, given the Ravens performance in the regular season? What weapons is he talking about here?

God: You really can’t just let a nice man say something that kind of sounds good, can you?

mjd: I’m just trying to understand how ‒

God: Listen, you know how you’ve been capitalizing every pronoun referencing Me, whether they come from Me or you, and it’s kind of annoying?

mjd: Yes.

God: I want you to capitalize every pronoun referring to Ray, too.

mjd: I’m not going to do that.

God: Charlatan.

mjd: Another Ray quote here for you. After his Ravens triumphed in the Super Bowl, Ray said, “It’s simple: When God is for you, who can be against you?” Do you have any thoughts on that?

God: Yeah. Yeah, I heard that. Listen, I like Ray, but I can recall one or two instances in history when people believed I was on their side, and they were persecuted somehow.

mjd: Hm.

God: Yeah. It really happens pretty often, if you think about it. Not everyone who believes in me gets to be a beloved Super Bowl champion. Some of them just die. Sometimes in unpleasant ways.

mjd: Yeah. Seems like your son Jesus was pretty strongly in favor of You, and things didn’t go that well for him.

God: If only that boy had a little more Ray Lewis in him.

mjd: One more quote from Ray?

God: Why not? Football season’s over. Ray’s retired. I’ve got nothing else to do now.

mjd: Okay. As you know, Ray was charged with obstruction of justice in the 2000 murder case of Jacinth Baker and Richard Lollar. In an interview this week, speaking of the families of the two men murdered, Ray said the following: “To the family, if you knew — if you really knew — the way God works, he don’t use people who commits anything like that for his good. No way. It’s the total opposite.” Is that true? Is that the way You work?

God: If Ray said it, it’s true.

mjd: So You’re saying that people who have gone on to have success in their field, or have achieved wealth and fame, can be assumed to never have done anything bad?

God: I don’t know. I guess.

mjd: And the inverse is true? That if Ray Lewis had been an average linebacker with a short and unremarkable career after 2000, we could them assume that he was a cold-blooded murderer? And that all poor people have done something bad? Because that’s the way that You work?

God: You really make it sound ridiculous.

mjd: I’m just asking.

God: There’s no proof of anything except that this guy is a sensational athlete.

mjd: You’re quoting Jerry Maguire now?

God: It’s a really good movie.

mjd: It is.

God: Yeah.

mjd: One last question, God. If you had to say one way or the other, has it historically worked out well when people claim they know Your will and Your methods, and they use that as a justification or an explanation for their actions?

God: I’d have to say … generally not, no.

mjd: But it’s worked out for Ray Lewis.

God: Well, there is no greater tribute to Me than to shout my name to Sal Paolantonio.

The post An Interview With God About Ray Lewis’s Super Bowl Journey appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

Sadly, no, Bill Callahan did not throw Super Bowl XXXVII

The accusations are fun, and believe me, I’d love for them to be true. I abhor Raiders football and believe that every decent American should do the same, so I’d love to be able to point at the Raiders and say, “Look, this team is so unlikeable that their own head coach would sacrifice immense personal gain in order to ensure they wouldn’t win a championship.”

But there’s just no way that happened.

That’s the story that former Raiders wide receivers Tim Brown and Jerry Rice are selling right now. Both men said on Tuesday that they believe Callahan, motivated by a dislike of the Raiders organization and a fondness for opposing head coach Jon Gruden, intentionally got his boys creamed by the eventual champions, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in Super Bowl XXXVII. They believe Callahan’s method of sabotage was a drastic change to the Raiders’ game plan at the last minute.

So, just to make sure I’m processing this correctly, the accusation is this: Bill Callahan, because he hated the Oakland Raiders organization so much, was the offensive coordinator there for four years, took the head coaching job in 2002, won 11 games in the regular season, including seven of the last eight, blew out two teams en route to the Super Bowl, got there and then intentionally took a dive that made him and his team laughingstocks. He willingly gave up the chance to put “Super Bowl Champion” on his résumé, which would’ve tremendously increased his own earning potential and future job prospects, and assumed the risk of being labeled a cheat, simply because he didn’t like the Raiders.

That’s the contention? That’s what they’re asking people to believe?

Bill Callahan might hate the Raiders, but I promise you that his love of Bill Callahan trumps his hate of the Raiders. The list of coaches who have won the Super Bowl is short and exclusive (though somehow Barry Switzer got on there). A guy who wins it increases his future negotiating power by a factor of ten, and that doesn’t even mention the cash to be made from future endorsements and speaking gigs. I’m supposed to believe that Callahan gave that up because he didn’t like the Raiders?

That doesn’t make sense. What does make sense, though, is that Jerry Rice and Tim Brown have a lingering dislike of Bill Callahan and wanted to maybe do a little damage on the day that Callahan was reportedly given offensive play-calling duties for the Cowboys.

I’m not even saying that Brown and Rice are in the wrong if that is the case. Maybe they’ve got a perfectly legitimate beef with Callahan. Maybe there’s a good reason to dislike the guy. Maybe they’re mad that Callahan comically mismanaged the game and, in their view, cost them both a shot at a Super Bowl ring. And maybe they’re not wrong about that.

Pure, intentional sabotage, however? Didn’t happen.

Today in Manti Te’os Tremendous Public Shame

A television interview should stop all this publicity.

There were no real developments in the Te’o story on Tuesday, except that Diane O’Meara, the woman in the pictures that were supposedly of “Lennay Kekua”, talked to “The Today Show” on NBC. Guess what? She’s not happy.

O’Meara is pretty much the only person in the situation who seems to 100% a victim. Her only crime seems to have been being Facebook friends with at least one pathological liar. How she’s been troubled or inconvenienced, I don’t know, but I’m sure life’s thrown her a few curveballs over the last few weeks. Maybe she caught a dude staring into her window and touching himself, who then said, “Oh, don’t worry. I’m thinking about Lennay.”

O’Meara says she can’t imagine why Ronaiah Tuiasosopo picked her pictures for his alleged scam on Te’o. She was a high school classmate of Tuiasosopo, but says they were never close friends. She also says she’s never met Te’o, and while that’s not always a dealbreaker for Manti, she has no relationship with him, either.

And now, for one more cheap Manti Te’o joke …

… but this one’s not mine. We turn to the Cleveland Cavaliers, via Twitter user @SoleCollector:

Rough night for Irish-themed sports teams at Quicken Loans Arena last night. Manti gets clowned, and the Cavs sent the Celtics to their 4th straight loss behind Kyrie Irving’s 40.

Thunder tops Clippers in matchup of NBA’s best

The results are somewhat tainted because Chris Paul is still out nursing a knee boo-boo, but the Thunder, owners of the NBA’s best record, went into Los Angeles and gut-punched the Clippers, owners of the NBA’s second-best record, 109-97.

One thing Chris Paul couldn’t have done is guard Kevin Durant, which is something no other Clipper could do in the second half, either. Can I interest you in seeing Kevin Durant light an entire defense on fire?

That’s Matt Barnes who was beaten off the dribble. It looks like he thought he’d get help from Blake Griffin on the screen. If either of them were looking for help from Lamar Odom, they were disappointed, because Odom did what was probably the smart thing, and just stood there and enjoyed the show.

Again courtesy of Daily Thunder, here are a couple of other fun highlights: Serge Ibaka goes up for a jumper, and Caron Butler blocks it from behind, spiking the ball off a referee’s head. Earlier, Ibaka had engaged in some navel-gazing. And sniffing, evidently.

A fine for Tom Brady? PERISH THE THOUGHT.

Could the coddled become the condemned? Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, the ruggedly-handsome, chiseled face of the league, could soon be the subject of a fine or suspension. The league says they’re looking into Sunday’s fourth-quarter play when Brady slid, spikes-up, into Ravens safety Ed Reed.

Tom Brady and slides are never a good combination.

Of course, the perception is that when the league issues fines or suspensions, the purpose is usually to protect Brady or some other skirt-wearing, pretty-boy, pantywaste quarterback. I don’t totally see it that way ‒ I would agree that Brady and other quarterbacks are the league’s most-protected species, but I believe the league should protect their skirt-wearing, pretty-boy, pantywaste quarterbacks  ‒ but it’s a common criticism of the league’s powermongers.

So will the league turn around now and condemn the man they’ve traditionally protected like they were Superman and Tom Brady was Lois Lane? I think they sort of have to. Brady’s damn near indefensible here. In no way did that slide look natural or germane to the game of football. It looked like he was trying to slice Ed Reed’s femoral artery with the miniature weapons affixed to the bottom of his feet.

There has to be a fine here. A suspension seems like a long shot ‒ a really long shot ‒ but a fine is absolutely necessary. Not only is it the right call on an inexcusable play, but if there is no fine, the league makes themselves look like Tom Brady’s personal shine boys.  And they really would rather keep that a secret.

As for Ed Reed, he’s taking the high road and holding no grudge against Brady, which is probably the right route to take for a guy who has been fined over $80,000 in his career.

BOOM BOOM BOOM

• Cowboys defensive lineman Jay Ratliff was arrested and charged with driving while intoxicated. His car plowed into a tractor trailer and a highway barrier. I’m so glad we’ve learned from Josh Brent and Jerry Brown Jr.
• The Sacramento Kings aren’t the new Seattle Supersonics just yet. The Sacramento Bee reports that a couple of rich fellows have stepped up with a proposal to buy the team and keep them in SacTown.
• Ravens wide receiver Torrey Smith tweeted that some Patriots fans taunted him on Twitter about the September death of his younger brother. Ouch.
• Two failed quarterbacks are mounting comebacks: JaMarcus Russell and Pat White. If there was a way to combine the best attributes of either of them into one guy, I think we’d have a good quarterback.
• Phil Mickelson, the 7th-highest paid athlete in the world, realized that not everyone likes to hear insanely rich people complain about money, so he apologized. I bet I know who Phil Mickelson voted for.
• The brilliant yellow first-down line could soon be a part of the live stadium experience. It seems like maybe there were one or two other problems that science should have addressed first.

Quote of the Day:

“I really only feel good — confident — in one guy. I think (West Virginia quarterback) Geno Smith’s going to be a first-round pick no matter what happens going forward. But when you watch Geno Smith, it’s almost like all these guys. I watch them on tape, I get excited, I like what I see. I go to the Pinstripe Bowl: He struggles, takes bad sacks, has a couple safeties, you question his awareness.

“Then I go down and watch him work at the IMG Academy and you see all the arm talent, you get back excited again, but it’s just kind of a roller-coaster ride, and it’s like that with all these quarterbacks. It’s just hard to find a consistent performer.”

- Daniel Jeremiah, NFL Network analyst, on Geno Smith and the 2013 quarterback draft class

Your Wednesday Sporting Television Options:

Your Wednesday Sporting Television Options:

NHL Hockey:
7:30, NBC Sports: Boston Bruins @ New York Rangers

NBA Basketball:
10:30, NBATV: Oklahoma City @ Golden State

Barclay’s Premier League Soccer:
2:30, Fox Soccer: Arsenal vs. West Ham

NFL Replay:
8:00, NFL Network: Baltimore Ravens @ New England Patriots

Tennis:
9:30, ESPN2: Australian Open, Women’s Semifinals: (6) Na Li vs. (2) Maria Sharapova, and (1) Victoria Azarenka vs. (29) Sloane Stephens

College Basketball:
7:00, ESPN: Duke @ Miami
7:00, ESPNU: South Florida @ Seton Hall
7:00, Big Ten Network: Penn State @ Indiana
7:30, ESPN2: TCU @ West Virginia
8:00, CBS Sports Network: Colorado State @ New Mexico
9:00, ESPN: Georgia Tech @ North Carolina
9:00, ESPNU: Iowa State @ Texas Tech
9:00, Big Ten Network: Minnesota @ Northwestern
10:00, CBS Sports Network: San Diego State @ Nevada
11:00, ESPNU: Denver @ New Mexico State

Other:
10:00, Discovery: Moonshiners

The post The Debriefing: Bill Callahan did not throw the Super Bowl, he just sucked appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

On Thursday, a man who could have once claimed to be America’s favorite son will tell Oprah Winfrey, in front of the world, that he was a doper. It will possibly be the last act in Lance Armstrong’s spectacular nosedive from sainthood, and it will leave everyone feeling dirty, except for maybe Oprah.

It can be a good thing for you, though.

Now, there won’t be anything to celebrate from Thursday night’s tape-delayed confession. At best, it’ll be a sad lowpoint in Armstrong’s career, and has the potential to be significantly more depressing if you’re inclined to doubt Armstrong’s sincerity.

None of it’s good, so if you were hurt or stunned by Armstrong’s fall from grace, don’t beat yourself up over it. Armstrong fooled a lot of people, including people who made it their life’s work to catch him doping.

If you’re still hurt or stunned, though, it’s time to get over it, because you’re not six.

Make an opportunity of it. We’ve never seen anything quite like this. Dopers have been disgraced before, but this case is exceptional because of the guy doing the doping. Between his accomplishments on the bike, his cancer diagnosis, his inspirational return, and the way he was persecuted by jealous foreigners, has there ever been anyone in American sports as beloved as Armstrong? We believed him when we didn’t believe anyone else.

It’s a perfect confluence of hero worship and hero shaming, and it’s a perfect opportunity to examine the nature of sports fandom. This story asks us every philosophical question that’s important about our relationship to sports. On Thursday night, let Lance and Oprah help you learn why you watch sports, what exactly it is that you’re looking for, and why any of this matters to you. Lance’s life of deception can be your pathway to sports fan self-discovery.

However you feel, by all means, feel it ‒ cling to your adoration or set your Livestrong bracelet on fire. In any case, you’re 100% justified, and maybe you can learn something from it, too. Maybe understanding how you feel about Armstrong will help you understand why you love these silly games at all.

Play along at home on Thursday night, and answer some of these questions for yourself. The right and wrong answers are whatever you want them to be.

•  What do you expect from your favorite athletes?

Maybe you can’t root for someone with obvious moral failings. Maybe the second there’s reason to believe that someone’s a cheater, criminal, or some other kind of miscreant, you can no longer wish success for that person. A lot of people feel like that.

Or maybe you care only about the athletic performance. No one wants to hear (or say), “Hey, as long as this guy’s scoring 35 points a night, I don’t care what he does after the game.” But maybe that’s a very practical attitude. Maybe ignoring morality in sports doesn’t make you immoral, but just makes you a realist. You’re never going to know your favorite athletes as people. You’re certainly never going to get a 100% factually accurate account of an encounter that got an athlete in trouble.

Since access to relevant knowledge here is so limited, maybe it’s better to just eschew judgment at all. Which leaves us back at “I don’t care what else you do, just keep scoring.” Maybe that’s not as bad as it sounds.

•  Where do you draw the line on performance enhancement?

Maybe it’s as simple as “drugs are bad.” Millions of innocent little eyeballs are focused on superstar athletes every day, and maybe it’s unforgivable if they set the example that it’s okay to use drugs to get ahead.

Or maybe it’s not so bad if, as in in Armstrong’s case, he needed to do it just to compete because everyone else was doing it, too.

Or maybe it’s not bad at all. If a man is a professional cyclist, and there’s a pill or procedure that can make him a better cyclist, then sure, why not? Maybe it’s up to him if he wants to endanger his health for an advantage on the course. Maybe we don’t get to tell him what to put in his body.

Or maybe the rules are the end-all, be-all. Sports have rules, and life has rules. Those have to be followed, or chaos and immorality take over. Is it not a worthwhile pursuit to set the example that rules should be followed?

And if, to you, it is a matter of cheating vs. fair play, then where do we draw the line here? Drugs only? What about a technological equipment advantage a rich American cyclist has over a poor Honduran one? That tips the race in someone’s favor, too, does it not? And what about a surgical procedure that would enhance someone’s eyesight? Is that fair?

•  What do athletes owe you?

Maybe the answer is “nothing”, but if you felt disappointed in Armstrong, there had to have been something in your mind that he didn’t live up to.

By simple virtue of being a public figure (a requirement in order for Armstrong to pursue the highest level of his chosen profession) does he have responsibilities that non-famous people do not? Does he owe you good behavior? Does he owe that to the innocent, bright-eyed children out there watching him?

Or is his private life 100% his business? If he’s just a man pursuing a personal goal and he owes you nothing, then why in the world would anyone be upset that he’s now an admitted doper? Maybe the actions are his, the consequences are his, and we should all just go on about our days.

•  Doesn’t philanthropy top sporting achievement?

Maybe you arrive at the conclusion that Lance Armstrong is the worst kind of cheater and fraud ever to exist in sports. He doped, he lied about it, and he chastised those who questioned him, all while holding himself up as a beacon of purity.

Does $470 million for the fight against cancer trump that? Because that’s how much the Livestrong foundation, founded by Lance Armstrong in 1997, has raised. No athlete, no matter how beloved, decorated or morally sound, is likely to match a number like that. Isn’t that more important than anything that happens in a sport? And if it is, shouldn’t we all just leave Armstrong alone, keep applauding, and hope the money to help cancer patients keeps pouring in?

If those questions are easy for you to answer, great ‒ you know what’s important to you when you follow sports. If you don’t see any clear-cut answers, that’s okay, too. Maybe this, like just about everything else in life, has a million shades of gray.

Sports are meant to entertain. If you’re getting entertainment out of being a fan, then you’re doing it right. You may enjoy things differently than your I do, and that’s fine. It’s the same with a painting, a song, a movie, a book or a play. No two people will ever experience them exactly the same way.

Maybe you just enjoy seeing a once-beloved hero wrecking-balled off his pedestal. I couldn’t say you were in the wrong there, either.

I’m certain of little here, aside from the fact that the Lance Armstrong story is significant. It’s unlike anything else we’ve ever encountered, and it shoves so many big philosophical sports questions right into our faces. Even if it’s the saddest fall from grace in sports history, there are lessons there ‒ maybe about sports, maybe about humanity, maybe about ourselves.

The post Watching Lance Armstrong Confess Doesn’t Have To Be Depressing appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

Can be found here (at Kissing Suzy Kolber, since the link doesn’t turn into a link here on the home page). Just in case you were wondering. Thanks.

The post The Week 13 Smorgasbord … appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

I can’t criticize the decision to go ahead with the Carolina Panthers vs. Kansas City Chiefs game tomorrow as scheduled. Who knows the right thing to do after an NFL linebacker kills his girlfriend, and then does the same to himself in front of the team’s head coach and general manager?

If you know of anyone with years of experience in dealing with that specific situation, please call Roger Goodell and make an introduction.

All I know is that I’m going to see the Chiefs and Panthers on television tomorrow, and I’m going to feel awful. I’m going to wonder how many of the Chiefs players are playing through tears as they instinctively look around for #59 and he’s not there. I’m going to look at head coach Romeo Crennel and wonder how many times he’s replayed that horrific scene in his head. I’m going to wonder if some guy’s Range Rover is parked on a blood stain in a stadium adjacent lot.

I’m going to wonder what Crennel could possibly have said during a pre-game speech.

There’s just too much happening emotionally right now. And again, it’s not like I can put myself in anyone shoes here, but for me, for my own personal preferences, I’d just rather not see that game tomorrow.

I know a postponement or cancelling causes logistical nightmares. And I know it would suck for people who depend on Chiefs games to make a living ‒ vendors, scalpers, people who sell parking, bars and restaurants around the stadium. It is, in a thousand ways, the more difficult decision to make.

I just don’t know how I could look at Romeo Crennel and Scott Pioli and say to them, “Yeah, I know you watched one of your linebackers kill himself yesterday morning, but you’re still going to have to work tomorrow.”

And to be clear, for all I know, Crennel and Pioli could’ve been the ones pushing for the game to go on as scheduled. I don’t know what they wanted, and as fans, we’re likely to never know who made the call, or why they made it. My hope is that wherever the decision came from, it was made for human reasons and not logistical or financial ones.

For example, the need to refund ticket money, I would consider a bad reason to decide to play this game. Television obligations would be a bad reason to decide to go ahead with this game. Keeping a balanced NFL schedule would be a bad reason to go on with this game. Mollifying the fantasy football players of the world would be a really bad reason to decide to play this game.

My hope is that none of those things factored into the decision.

There are so many people who are going to be feeling unfathomable things during this game, and it’s an unfortunate fact that those feeling most intensely are also charged with entertaining us at the same time. Are you comfortable with that? Someone who had two absolutely devastating nightmares come true yesterday ‒ one, losing a friend and co-worker to suicide, and two, learning that that friend was also capable of murder ‒ is going to be on television tomorrow, playing a game that, at the end of the day, exists for your amusement.

He’ll have television cameras on him all day. He’s going to be right there, front and center in the fishbowl, for everyone to see.

At the very least, participation should be optional for the Chiefs tomorrow. Some guys ‒ maybe even most ‒ are going to want to play, maybe because it takes their mind off the tragedy, or maybe just because that’s what they do. Obviously, there’s nothing wrong with either of those things.

There would also be nothing wrong with a player or coach having a heavy heart and needing tomorrow to mourn and process. And if that was the case, there shouldn’t be any repercussions for that person.

Imagine this scenario: With 1:44 to play in the second quarter, the Chiefs are down 41-0. Members of the defense are confused and wounded, and they can’t concentrate on the game. The Panthers offense slices right through them, time and time again. The despair, due both to the tragedy, and now the shellacking, spreads, and the Panthers are absolutely kicking the Chiefs all around the football field with little or no resistance.

Would we call the game then?

It’s really not that far-fetched a scenario. The Chiefs often struggle to look like an NFL team under normal, happy circumstances. Is it crazy to think that something this sudden and tragic could devastate them? Is it worth risking this scene actually coming to fruition?

This is a game that we don’t need. Not that we need any of them, but this one in particular, we really don’t need. The Chiefs are not going to the playoffs. The Panthers are not going to the playoffs. This game has no bearing on the playoff race or anything else that seemed like it was important a day ago. It will also not be a thing of football beauty. We will not miss out on greatness if this game were to cease to exist. If there was ever a game we could be comfortable letting go, it would be this one.

Unsurprisingly, though, we’re not letting it go. Brady Quinn and Cam Newton will take the field tomorrow, and at some point, it will settle into something like a real football game that isn’t being played amidst unthinkable circumstances.

I don’t know if that’s the right thing. I hope it’s at least being done for good reasons.

The post I wish the Chiefs/Panthers game wasn’t happening appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

Steroids and gambling and are two of sport’s most notorious and most reliable scandal makers. The common ingredient in the two is that they have the potential to compromise the competitive integrity of sport, which is generally treated as sacred.

It’s the one thing that we, as sports fans, can’t live without. We need the results to be pure. The athletes on the playing surface and the coaches guiding them are the only people who should have an influence.

We need wins and championships need to be determined by the relative skill and might of the competitors, and/or tactical advantages gained by coaches, because that’s what sports are. That’s what they measure.

When steroids and gambling enter the mix, other people gain influence, and then it’s not just about athletes and coaches. It becomes about unscrupulous pharmacists, and mobsters to whom a point guard owes money. Results become impure. And when results are impure, it ceases to be a sport.

And now, apparently, we have to worry about commissioners, too.

On Thursday night, NBA Commissioner David Stern announced that “substantial sanctions” awaited the San Antonio Spurs because head coach Gregg Popovich decided to give some players a night off. Tony Parker (30 years old), Manu Ginobili (35) and Tim Duncan (114) all sat out a game against the Miami Heat.

And now the Spurs are going to be punished for that, because … why, exactly? it was bad for TV ratings? The really tan guy wearing the salmon-colored shirt in the second row feels like he didn’t get his money’s worth?

A punishment here is absurd, and is, in fact, an attack on competitive purity. Gregg Popovich, one of the smartest basketball people to ever walk the planet, made a basketball decision. He made a decision aimed at giving his team their best chance to win a championship.

That is his job, right? To coach his team in the way that he feels gives them the best chance to win the championship?

Of course, David Stern has a job here, too. His job is to grow the sport, and I suppose having Duncan, Ginobili and Parker on the floor Thursday night grows the sports more than not having them on the floor.

But when a coach’s ability to make basketball decisions is taken away for the sake of the fans’ jollies, then we don’t have a sport anymore. We might have happy fans, but we don’t have real competition. What we have is a traveling exhibition where fans are promised not a team’s best effort to win a championship, but instead, the sight of their favorite superstars, live and up close. LeBron James! Tim Duncan! Dwyane Wade! Manu Ginobili! Chris Bosh! Tony Parker! All LIVE at the American Airlines Arena tonight!

We already have an organization that promotes like that. It’s called the WWE.

I have no idea how Stern will begin to justify this. Fans deserve to see superstars? Tell that to everyone who bought tickets to Trailblazers/Wizards on Wednesday night. Fans deserve to see high quality basketball? Tell that to Cleveland Cavaliers season ticket holders. That fans deserve to see a team’s best effort, every single night? Have you ever seen an NBA game in November?

It’s an 82-game season. It’s about twice the length it should be. Rest is essential. There’s no team that plays as hard as they can every night, and no player who gets substantial minutes plays as hard as he can every single minute of every single game. They’re humans. They rest sometimes (and please, don’t read that as a shot at NBA players ‒ this is a fact in every sport that has a season that’s way too long).

What we have is a commissioner blatantly, directly, and of his own volition, contaminating the purity of competition. He’s actively punishing honest competition. It’s mind-boggling. Every other commissioner in sports will protect their game’s purity any cost. Stern’s going out of his way to assault his sport’s credibility.

The commissioner has to protect the sport, and in the process, try to remember that it is a sport. It’s not a parade of stars, and it doesn’t exist to supply SportsCenter with highlights. It’s competition. That’s what Gregg Popovich does.

What should David Stern do? Maybe he’s better suited to take this person’s job.

The post If David Stern punishes the Spurs, he should be fired before breakfast appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

A one-game suspension is weak, but that’s okay ‒ a five- or ten-game suspension would’ve been weak, too.

After all, we’ve never managed to come to a consensus on the proper punishment for a teacher who puts hands on a student. We have never agreed on what should happen to a grown man who can’t resist the urge to get physical with someone under his supervision.

I have my opinion, and you have yours. I happen to think it’s embarrassing and childish behavior, but that doesn’t matter. You may think it’s the only tried and true way to shape a wayward young man into a productive member of society.

What did Woods’ employers, Morehead State think? I can’t say they thought, but what they did was suspend Woods for a single game. One of 30.

Too harsh? Too lenient? Absurd that this is even a conversation we’re having?

Doesn’t matter.

What it looks like is that Morehead State handed Woods the minimum possible punishment that also qualified as socially acceptable. But who knows ‒ maybe the Morehead State people really believed that a one-game suspension was a stern and severe rebuke that will teach this rogue coach a lesson.

Again: Doesn’t matter.

Ultimately, Woods is going to write his own punishment on this one. In fact, if he writes it well enough, he might be write his way out of punishment all together. He could turn it into reward. Like any other issue in college sports, this will be decided by money and wins.

The last coach at Morehead State, Donnie Tyndall, got the Eagles to the NCAA tournament twice in the last four years, which is a tremendous accomplishment at a school like Morehead State. It earned him a job with a higher profile and a higher salary. He’s at Southern Mississippi now.

Say Woods spends the next five years doing the same ‒ getting the Eagles into the NCAA tournament with some regularity. He’ll get the same rewards Tyndall did. Wins will earn him a better job. And if he keeps winning games at the new job, he’ll get an even better job.

And this little incident? The one where the teacher didn’t like a student’s behavior, so he had an impulse to shove him, and he couldn’t control that impulse?

Well, that’ll turn into evidence of Coach Woods’ passion and intensity. It’ll be an illustration of the value Coach Woods places on discipline. It’ll be teaching a young man ‒ anyone remember his name, by the way? ‒ a valuable life lesson. It’ll be everything that’s good about college basketball, and any condemnation of the act by outsiders will be further evidence of the United States becoming a nation of spoiled pantywaste sissies.

That’s if he keeps winning. That’s the script he can write. If he fails to win, though, that next job will be a little harder to come by. Someone will always hire an abusive coach, so long as he’s bringing home that tournament money. For abusive coaches who lose, though, it’s a little more of a buyer’s market.

So in the event that Woods’ scream-y and shove-y style of coaching doesn’t turn Morehead State into an Ohio Valley dynasty, you probably won’t hear the name Sean Woods much again. You’ll maybe hear something like, “Hey, do you remember that one crazy coach at Morehead State who shoved a kid that one time?” But not much else.

For Woods and any other coach, winning is the apology that will always be accepted. Winning can absolutely make this go away. If Morehead State wins the OVC this year, Woods can shove another kid next year, no problem.

And the next year, if the Eagles happen to make a Cinderella run to the sweet sixteen, Woods can do it again. He can do more, even. A sweet sixteen appearance buys him a license to choke a small forward of his choosing. By that point, Coach Woods will be a real no-nonsense disciplinarian, you know? He’ll be someone who can get tough on his kids when they need it. Coach Woods will be the kind of coach we need more of.

So at this moment, things are about the same for Woods as they were a week ago. Sure, he’ll be talking to more reporters than usual for a few more days, but that’ll die down. When it does, he’ll be left with the same truth that existed before the shove ‒ wins will make him and losses will break him.

He might break a little easier with this incident, or even rise a little faster, but this incident doesn’t begin to change the way decisions are made in college basketball. It still all turns on wins and the money they bring.

Sean Woods’ fate is still in his own hands ‒ all but one game of it.

The post Sean Woods was punished, but not really ‒ not yet appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.

The absurdly premature playoff picture presents one man’s projection for the NFL playoffs, at each given week in the season — even if that week is unreasonably early.

AFC:

First-Round Bye: Houston Texans
First-Round Bye: Denver Broncos
Division Champion: Baltimore Ravens
Division Champion: New England Patriots
Wild Card: Pittsburgh Steelers
Wild Card: Cincinnati Bengals

NFC:

First-Round Bye: Atlanta Falcons
First-Round Bye: San Francisco 49ers
Division Champion: Chicago Bears
Division Champion: New York Giants
Wild Card: Green Bay Packers
Wild Card: Seattle Seahawks

• We’re going to start at the bottom, because I pride myself on my power from the bottom. In the AFC, the bottom is pretty nasty, though ‒ one of the Wild Card teams will be starting Charlie Batch this weekend, and the other is the third best team in a relatively weak division. The top alternative just lost by 35.
• I’ll the Bengals in and push the Colts out, despite the Bengals trailing the Colts by a game. The Bengals last two have been equal-opportunity thumpings ‒ the first one against the aristocratic Giants, and the other against the dirty serf Chiefs. Andy Dalton’s been in a groove, and Cincy’s next four are not murderous ‒ Oakland, @San Diego, Dallas, @Philadelphia.
• Why am I down on the Colts? I’m not really; in fact, I’m pretty high on them ‒ but as a pretty average team that’s overachieving, not a playoff team that’s struggling a bit. The fact is that they just played a good team for the first time since about week five, and they got their heineys paddled. It looked so easy for the Pats. I’m supposed to like that? And the Colts still have to play the Texans twice ‒ Indy fans will object, of course, but I’m calling those losses. Aside from that, the schedule is soft ‒ Buffalo, @Detroit, Tennessee, @Kansas City. But one loss from that group would put them at 9-7. Two would put them at 8-8. In the NFL, sometimes even the good teams struggle to win four games that they “should” win.
• At the top, the Ravens currently have a game over the Patriots and Broncos for the second first-round bye, but of that group, they also looked the scruffiest this weekend. That win against Pittsburgh was the least convincing win since the Soviet basketball team won the gold in ’72, and Baltimore’s got games left against the Steelers, Broncos and Giants. Meanwhile, check out Denver’s last six: @KC, Tampa Bay, @Oakland, @Baltimore, Cleveland, Kansas City. I’d be very surprised if they didn’t win five of those. Six seems pretty doable as well.
• The Patriots, because they are good and because they got to address a major need with the gift of Aqib Talib, deserve a mention. Two factors push them down to the lower Divisional Champion spot, though ‒ one, their schedule isn’t as agreeable as Denver’s, and should they end up in a tie with Baltimore, they’d lose that tiebreaker. I continue to believe that they are actually better than Baltimore, though.
• With just a ½ game lead, I’m going to stick with the 49ers as the two-seed in the NFC. It’s possible that I’m overreacting to a national TV game in which Colin Kaepernick, in one night, erased all memories of Joe Montana and Steve Young. Am I overstating? HELL NO. Well, yes, I am, but the 49ers looked awesome last night. Like, “Best Team in Football” awesome. Most other teams near the top of the heap struggled this week. One of them, in fact, was ground into a fine powder by these 49ers.
• That leaves Bears vs. Packers as the next question to be answered, and that’s a tougher call. Sure, they were down Jay Cutler last night, but they weren’t going to compete in that game with Cutler, Jason Campbell or mini-Ditka at quarterback. But just as I’ve come around on the Bears, the Packers have come around on everybody. Remember their 2-3 start? Yeah, neither do I. They’ve won five straight now. A lot of that’s been against softer competition, but they’ll smash their head into a nice barometer this week when they play the Giants coming off a bye.
• At any rate, I’m sticking with Chicago as the division champion. It’s a tenuous hold they’ve got on it, but the official ruling now is that they’re entitled to an off week against the Kaepernickus juggernaut.
• While the AFC basement is a struggle to find anyone worthy of entrance, in the NFC, we need to hire a bouncer to screen teams at the door. Minnesota, Tampa Bay and Seattle are all 6-4, with New Orleans and Dallas both at 5-5 and on winning streaks. If there is to be a charge mounted against Seattle, I believe it’ll come from New Orleans or Dallas.
• Minnesota and Tampa Bay both have pretty nasty schedules remaining. So do the Saints (next three are San Fran, @Atlanta and @NYG), but their three-game win streak at least provides hope. Dallas has the nicest path, with six games that are winnable, and four of them at home. But what am I going to do, count on consistency from Dallas? I’ll take my chances with Seattle.

The post The Absurdly Premature Playoff Picture: Week 11 appeared first on the mighty mjd sports blog.