Simmons defenders always say "At least he knows a lot about the NBA!"

Well, not really. He watches a lot of NBA games. He has lots of opinions about the NBA, most of which are wrong. Neither of those is a good substitute for actual knowledge.

Hey, you know what's popular right now? The National Basketball Association.

Joke riffing on the Dilfertarded "National Football League" phenomenon, or copycat crime? You decide, America.

After antagonizing basketball fans for five solid months

Wait, what?

(the lockout),

Oh THAT'S what you were referring to. "In 9 months, there's going to be a big political event in the United States (the presidential election)..."

barely avoiding a potential catastrophe (a nearly canceled season)

Terrible, terrible writing and use of parentheticals (take it from someone who really overuses them).

and suffering a public relations semicatastrophe

6 FOR 24 LOLOLOLOLOL

(the voided Chris Paul trade),

Oh.

the NBA weathered the storm, regrouped and delivered a uniquely entertaining first month.

I'm starting to realize that this is the premise for most Simmons columns. He's That Guy who makes everything into a bigger deal than it is because it makes him feel wise to have such a profound perspective on every MASSIVELY IMPORTANT AND SPECIAL thing he's observing. As such, he's also probably That Guy who tells stories about any old average night out drinking as if that night were a recreation of The Hangover, but I'd rather not think about partying with him.

NBA TV's ratings are up 68 percent and an estimated 6.7 million people have uttered the words, "I can't understand Shaq."

1995 would like its joke back when you get a chance.

Here's the weird part: The product itself hasn't been good.

Completely unnecessary use of italics, except that we're dealing with someone who thinks every little observation he makes is as important as the discovery of penicillin.

Blame the owners for this one: Instead of playing 60 games over 120 days (fairly reasonable), they crammed 66 games into those 120 days (unreasonable).

Based on my extensive 45 seconds of research into how many games my favorite team played between Nov. 1 and Feb. 28 the past three seasons, a normal NBA season has about 58 or 59 games per 120 days. His stance that 66 is unreasonable isn't completely stupid, but at the same time, probably also based on the fact that his favorite team is old and has no bench and is getting run off the court every few nights this time around. IT'S NAWT FAY-UH! If he were a fan of a young team with a lot of depth? THIS IS A GREAT PR PLAN! WAY TO WIN BACK THE FANS WITH EXTRA GAMES, NBA!

Why do it that way? Hold on, I'll give you a second to think about it. (Twiddling my thumbs.) (Humming to myself.)

(Nodding.) (Trimming my fingernails.)

And … time! The answer: Money!!!!!! You were expecting another reason?

HAHA! GOT ME! I CERTAINLY WAS! Or wasn't. I don't know. Why are you pretending like we're in the same room, having a conversation? You lost your everyman "voice of the fan" appeal like eight years ago.

Players were paid for six extra games, owners received three extra home games apiece, and fans were treated to a slew of, "We know you paid to see Derrick Rose tonight, but playing in his place, here's John Lucas III!!!!" moments because nicked-up players have no time to heal.

Fans were also treated to several more games per night than they usually get, and close to an extra game a week from their favorite teams. They'll live. I also like how his populist "someone think about the fans!!!!" platform is built around people who pay big money for tickets. THE 1% OF BASKETBALL FANS, IF YOU WILL HAR HAR HAR. Told you he lost his everyman appeal a long time ago. Does anyone like me, who goes to maybe one or two games a season and watches the rest on TNT and ESPN, really feel slighted and insulted by this schedule? I hope not.

Screw the fans, right? We're just in the way.

Yeah! Screw us! We hate watching more games per week! I paid several hundred bucks for these seats, someone pamper me!

Throw in a missing training camp (deadly for teams with new coaches or too many new players) and the lack of practice time and … I mean, how did these first five weeks have a chance?

Because these are the best players in the world? Sure, some games have been ugly, but is it really some kind of travesty?

Which teams struggled the most? Let's see … painfully untalented teams (Charlotte, Washington),

A class of teams that thrives under a normally-paced schedule.

rosters that experienced too much turnover (Sacramento, New Orleans),

Same. My God, he has the longwinded analytical skills of a self-important college freshman.

teams handpicked by Joe Dumars or Bryan Colangelo (Detroit, Toronto), teams brazenly gutting their roster for a 12.65 percent chance at Dwight Howard (New Jersey), and teams that sabotaged their rosters while refusing to do the dignified thing and trade their signature player even though he's a good guy and would rather sink with the Sarvertanic over selling out his teammates by asking out (Phoenix) all morphed into something between "an unequivocal mess" and a "first-class shitshow."

Older contenders (Dallas, San Antonio, Boston)

THERE'S the real complaint. TELL ME WHY THIS IS FAY-UH!!!! (Waiting for you to tell me.) IT'S NAWT!

and top-heavy rosters (New York, the Lakers) struggled to get going, while young legs (Philly, Denver, Oklahoma City), roster depth (Indiana, Minnesota, Chicago) and even altitude (Utah, Denver again) mattered a little too much.

The hell does that mean? Utah and Denver always have great home records because of the altitude. Utah went like 39-2 in their building a couple years ago.

I haven't decided whether this year's title winner will come with a permanent asterisk — like the 1999 Spurs, for example — but we could be headed that way.

No one with a brain puts an asterisk on that title, much as the Spurs deserve asterisks for all of their titles for employing such shithead players year after year after year. How Greg Popovich's reputation remains so sterling after more than a decade of enabling the Bruce Bowens and Ginobilis of the league is beyond me. Sure, he should be recognized as a great coach... who encourages his players to play like complete cunts. Somehow that second part isn't in the basketball fan collective consciousness. Bothers me.

"Hold on a second," you're saying. "This doesn't make sense. You're crapping on the same season that everyone seems to be enjoying … including you! Explain yourself."

(Shaking my head no.) I wasn't saying that. I don't care about this awkward, imaginary tension you're trying to force on me.

The easy answer: We haven't had this much top-shelf talent and this many storylines in nearly 20 years (since the iconic 1992-93 season). Here, check this out …

1993: Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley, Hakeem Olajuwon, David Robinson, Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing (superstars); Scottie Pippen, John Stockton, Mark Price, Larry Johnson, Shaquille O'Neal (franchise guys); Tim Hardaway, Kevin Johnson, Drazen Petrovic, Chris Mullin, Dominique Wilkins (entertaining All-Stars); Joe Dumars, Dan Majerle, Reggie Lewis, Reggie Miller, Mitch Richmond, Danny Manning, Larry Nance, Derrick Coleman, Dennis Rodman, Brad Daugherty (All-Stars); Isiah Thomas, Clyde Drexler, James Worthy (tenured All-Stars); Kenny Anderson, Shawn Kemp (entertainment X-factors); Gary Payton, Latrell Sprewell, Christian Laettner, Tom Gugliotta, Dikembe Mutombo, Alonzo Mourning (up-and-comers); Horace Grant, Detlef Schrempf, Sean Elliott, Glen Rice, Terry Porter (have to be mentioned). 2012: LeBron James, Kevin Durant, Derrick Rose, Dwyane Wade, Dwight Howard, Dirk Nowitzki, Kobe Bryant (superstars); Chris Paul, Russell Westbrook, Carmelo Anthony, Kevin Love, LaMarcus Aldridge (franchise guys); Rajon Rondo, Blake Griffin, Steve Nash, Manu Ginobili (entertaining All-Stars); Tony Parker, Deron Williams, Paul Pierce, Rudy Gay, Chris Bosh, Zach Randolph, Marc Gasol, Pau Gasol, Amar'e Stoudemire, Andrew Bynum (All-Stars); Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan (tenured All-Stars); Ricky Rubio, Kyrie Irving, Stephen Curry (entertainment X-factors); John Wall, Tyreke Evans, Ty Lawson, Eric Gordon, DeMarcus Cousins, Andrea Bargnani (up-and-comers); Kyle Lowry, Monta Ellis, Andre Iguodala, Josh Smith, Tyson Chandler (have to be mentioned).

Another old favorite from the Simmons playbook- act like the current situation is incredibly unusual and noteworthy, when it's not. Go look at some stats and check out the 40ish best players in the league in any season between 1993 and now. Other than the fact that four of the first six have the greatest player of all time, kind of making them seem a little more badass, guess what? Yyyyyup.

Look, I'd still take the 42 signature names from 1993 over the 42 signature names from 2012. But it was closer than I expected,

When I began to approach this non-comparison that I made up and am trying to sell to you as worthy of thought,

We already witnessed dozens of games like the ones I attended on Wednesday and Thursday night, when the Clippers split hard-fought, overly physical and undeniably sloppy games against the Lakers (loss) and Grizzlies (win).

I'm surprised they even let you into the arena, seeing as how the league clearly hates its richest fans! Did they make you wait in line to get in? Were there not free t-shirts draped across your seat when you arrived?

Did I enjoy those games?

BARELY. Once I got over the fact that Chris Paul and Blake Griffin couldn't play 48 minutes each because there are too many games on the schedule this year.

Absolutely. Would you have called it "good" basketball? Hell, no. But each night, both teams fought off fatigue and slugged it out. They gave a crap.

He has way more in common with Easterbrook than either would admit.

That's the biggest reason why the 2011-12 NBA season managed to remain so compelling.

No, the biggest reason is that these are 299 of the 300 best basketball players in the world (J.R. Smith! Come back before your whole family gets justifiably beaten courtside by an angry mob!) and they're fun to watch even when they're a little out of shape and out of sync.

You know what else helped? The league shut down for five months, made its staunchest supporters believe the season was getting canceled … and then, BOOM! Suddenly we were playing hoops again! The NBA crammed its entire signing period into four whirlwind (and genuinely fun) weeks, launched on Christmas (and owned that day like never before), then rolled out seven to 12 games night-after-night-after-night. I don't know anyone who loves the NBA and doesn't secretly (or openly) love this season.

No one secretly loves it. No one is being coy about liking great basketball.

It's a quantity-over-quality thing — and remember, the NBA's regular season was never great, anyway.

Unless you like basketball, in which case, it's always been pretty great. But Simmons and ESPN make a great match (I chuckle every few years when either ever acts like they'd ever let the other one go over some dumb contract dispute or something) because he doesn't actually like sports. He just likes Boston sports, really exciting moments in sports, and anything that involves celebrities getting involved with sports.

Like six months of halfhearted foreplay. Now? It's four months of furious, energy-sapping foreplay; we're just hoping everyone has enough left for the playoffs; and there's a dangerous edge because it could lead to real disaster. In other words, it's the Eyes Wide Shut sex party of regular seasons.

Great reference to a 13 year old movie no one enjoyed.

Two other factors really helped …

Yet another standard Simmons construct: "Let me give you the complete and comprehensive list of explanations for this phenomenon. Since I know everything let me be your guide to everything as I show you how everything works. Isn't it completely insane how there are three factors contributing to this secretly astonishing season?" What a fucking chode.

1. The League Pass/Twitter/Texting/iPhone/iPad Era These are fairly amazing times for technology. At my cousin Kristin's wedding reception in Boston two Saturdays ago, 10 guests huddled around me watching the fourth quarter of Saints-Niners on my iPhone (via Slingbox).

I don't care if it was the last thirty seconds of the coolest Super Bowl ever, no way am I watching a game on a 4" screen with that man.

At one point, someone said to me, "Should I walk to my car and get my iPad so we can have a bigger screen?"

"Any chance I can send you to get the iPad for me? And maybe just not come back?"

We debated whether it would be worth the walk outside (in freezing weather),

More abuse (of parentheticals)

ultimately deciding against it. The following night in our hotel room, my wife decided she wanted to watch the first episode of Downton Abbey on Netflix Streaming (to see if she liked it).

Tell me more! What happened next? Did you use technology to entertain yourselves?

We hooked up the iPad to our bedroom TV with a special HDMI cable, and within a few minutes we were watching poor Bates get crapped on by Lord Stanley's staff … although really, I was only half watching it, because I was also watching a League Pass replay of Saturday night's Lakers-Clippers game on my iPad.

Holy shit, you're like Howard Hughes! How is your life story not a 12 hour HBO series yet?

Read that last paragraph again.

It's that engaging, I agree.

How did we get here? Did you ever think we would be able to do things like watch football games on a phone at a wedding reception or watch our own on-demand shows on a hotel TV while also watching NBA games?

As of when? 1990? Probably not. 2004? Yeah. This isn't like telling someone in the dark ages that one day most of the population will live to be 70 years old. It's really not that unimaginable unless, well, you're like 70 years old now and grew up during the Eisenhower administration.

The technology boom has been fantastic for NBA fans —

Back to the college freshman who can't wait to tell you about shit everyone knows, but with the attitude that he's letting you in on the secret to the JFK assassination.

with an onslaught of games every night, you can watch two games at once (one on your TV, one on your computer or iPad), catch up on games you missed (through those valuable League Pass replays), sneak peeks on your iPhone (hopefully not while going 75 miles an hour on the highway) or attend one game while watching another on your iPhone (depending on the arena's cell reception).

If the teams even let you take use your phone while you're there! I hear this season they're confiscating them all at the door and breaking the thumbs of anyone who tries to bring in a spare!

You always hear about players wanting to play in bigger markets, but here's the reality: Once technology progressed to a certain level, markets stopped mattering as much. Yeah, the Lakers and Knicks will always outspend everyone else because of their ticket/cable revenue, and yeah, players will always gravitate toward big cities,

One more time.

You always hear about players wanting to play in bigger markets, but here's the reality: ... markets stopped mattering as much. ... and yeah, players will always gravitate toward big cities,

Awesome.

warm weather or tax-free states. But from a visibility standpoint, it doesn't matter where you play in 2012. Our marquee contenders are Miami, Chicago … and Oklahoma City. Our marquee superstars are LeBron, Wade, Kobe, Rose, Howard, Nowitzki … and Kevin Durant.

Worst parallel sentence structure in the history of written language. Awesome fun cities : dust bowl sprawl with shitty weather :: awesome players : other awesome player.

The best example of things changing: The MinnesotaTimberwolves Rubio Loves

(Laughing uproariously!) Those are their two best players!

improbably morphing into America's Team. This couldn't have happened 15 years ago, 10 years ago, or maybe even five years ago, but the League Pass/Twitter/Texting/iPhone/iPad Era has been a phenomenal asset for them. Any time something is brewing with Minnesota — the T-Wolves trying to upset another contender, Rubio approaching a triple-double, Love going for a 30-20, you name it — word spreads quickly enough to catch crunch time. You know, assuming you weren't watching it, anyway.

Their two best players are white. You know Simmons will be always watching.

2. The Christmas Day Launch If we learned anything these first five weeks, it's that nobody can provide a reasonable answer for the question, "Everyone loved the NBA season starting on Christmas Day … so, um … why wouldn't the NBA season always start on Christmas Day?" Hmmmmmmmmm. You can't answer that one without first answering the question, "Why has the NBA always gone from October to April?"

Because the league likes to jump into the televised sports fray as soon as baseball ends? Because back in the day, it was insane to let the playoffs get deep into June because the arenas would heat up to like 110 degrees during the playoffs?

Here's the answer: Because that's the way we've always done it.

The NBA should only play 16 regular season games a year, like the NFL! And teams that wear green should get 20 free points per game! Think outside the box, folks- stop being sheep!

That's right, the eight most dangerous words in sports are back! Our first champions (the Philadelphia Warriors) started their season on November 7, 1946, played 60 regular season games (winning 35), then played another 11 playoff games and won the then-BAA title on April 22, 1947. That paved the way for the league's eventual October-to-April road map, a savvy idea in 1947 because baseball ruled everything back then.

All right, so let's go back to 1947 … you know, when it made sense to mirror college basketball's schedule, avoid America's pastime and position the future NBA as a winter sport. Does that still make sense in 2012, a good 25 years after football replaced baseball as America's most popular sport?

Yes.

Wouldn't you want to avoid as much of the National Football League as you possibly could?

That's a fair point, except that the NFL dominates everything through early February these days, so it's not really avoidable. Starting the NBA season later just gets it further lost in the late season NFL playoff push. The Christmas launch was a big hit this year, but I think Simmons underrates the "post lockout euphoria" aspect of it.

By launching around Halloween every year, the NBA gets lost in the shuffle because of the baseball playoffs (running through October),

In the last few years the WS has run into November, but baseball is working to avoid that now. Game 7 in 2011 happened on October 28, and the series could have been over as early as the 23rd. Expect more of the same going forward. Meanwhile the NBA season usually starts on the 26th or after. But researching all that would be hard. Took me a good two minutes.

college football (cresting toward the conference championships in mid-November),

Every conference championship that people care about happens on the first weekend in December.

the NFL (in full swing at this point)

The NFL is in full swing from mid September until late January, or maybe even longer. It's 100% asinine to act like the problem "The NFL is taking all our viewers!" can be helped or solved by moving the NBA's open weekend from Halloween to Christmas.

and even November sweeps (when networks stack their best programming).

Yes, the NBA is apparently competing for eyeballs with CBS's atrocious sitcoms.

Three weeks pass … suddenly it's Thanksgiving, then Black Friday weekend, then everyone shifts into Christmas/Hannukah/holiday party/shopping/vacation/final exams/NFL stretch-run mode, then it's Christmas Eve, then most people wake up the next day, open presents, turn on their TVs and say, "Hey look — it's the NBA! Who's good this year?"

What?

That's why the NBA smartly turned Christmas into its first signature day of the season.

Or maybe it had something to do with the fact that the NFL never played on Christmas until 1989, and of course now only does so when Christmas is a Sunday. But putting pieces like that together takes special Googling skills, skills that apparently I have but Bill lacks.

So why not own it? If the NBA launched every Christmas and played a 75-game season

Which would be mo-ah fay-uh to some of the oldah teams in the league.

over the next 160 days, that takes us to Memorial Day weekend and pushes the playoffs far enough away from baseball's first month

As a fan whose favorite sport is baseball, I can promise you that almost no one gives a shit about baseball in April after opening day.

(and that "new car smell" baseball always has),

Horrendous.

the NFL draft (always the lead story for that last week in April),

Right, no getting around that worthless volcano of hype and idiotic analysis.

the heart of May sweeps (the other time networks stack their shows),

What?

the first two rounds of the NHL playoffs (always frenetic),

I don't mean to dog on hockey, but I don't think the first two rounds of the playoffs are generating all that much buzz.

that crazy first sports weekend in May (which features the Kentucky Derby and a marquee boxing match)

Who the hell watches the Kentucky Derby for more than 4 minutes?

and even college exams.

College kids are always prioritizing exams above sports. It's a tragedy.

Conceivably, the NBA could own those next nine weeks (say May 29 through July 31), bang out its draft and free agency signing period in August (remember, those first three weeks in August are deadly boring from a sports/entertainment standpoint), then take the next 10 weeks off right as college and pro football are taking off. So … why wouldn't that make sense? I keep asking People in the Know this question and get the following rebuttals:

"How did you get this number? Can you please stop calling?"

"People go on vacation in July; our season-ticket holders don't want to be worried about planning a vacation if their team might be in the Finals." (News flash: I'm pretty sure they can plan a different time to vacation and/or sell their seats.

That's great. "NEWS FLASH!" Pardon your zinger, sir. Also: isn't this the guy who just bitched about how the league doesn't care about the ticket-buying fans?

And by the way, only four of the 30 teams would even be playing in July.)

Fuck those fans!

"You can't do it because of the Summer Olympics." (News flash: The 2016 Summer Olympics happen from August 5 to August 21. We could easily get creative that year and end the NBA season in mid-July so there's enough time to regroup.)

"Why aren't we doing things the way I envision them working? Sure, it would be a logistical nightmare subject to constant retinkering and disastrous inefficiency, but come on! I mean, COOOOME ONNNNN!"

"That would suck for NBA employees — they wouldn't get a summer vacation basically." (News flash: Neither do Major League Baseball employees.

Right. They get 4 months off during the winter. See how that works?

Also, can't you just take the last two weeks of August off stretching into Labor Day? You'll be fine.)

I'm not saying working for a pro sports team is hard or something, but come on. You're not really going with apples to apples here.

"We can't chop seven games from the regular season — it would cost teams too much money." (News flash: Every player says, "I wish the season was shorter. It would be better for us." Why not listen to them?

Because the market for player labor will easily bear the 82 game season?

Don't you care about your product?)

Don't you realize that pro sports franchises are not NPOs?

"Because that's the way we've always done it." (News flash: Those are the eight worst words in sports.)

"Because Simmons thinks we need to change things." Your move.

You're not going to believe this, but I spent waaaaaaaaaaay too much time trying to figure out something that will never actually happen. And here's the reality: It would be too radical for the NBA to launch on Christmas every year. At least right away. Which is why I'm offering the following plan …

I hope you didn't actually want to hear about it, because I certainly didn't want to bother with picking it apart. Just imagine a really drunk person explaining their airtight plan to rob a bank and flee to a non-extradition country. It's about that coherent, but way less entertaining.

This article is almost as stupid is Chris W's last post (and face)

Uh oh, Chris W got me good! Watch out! Here come the hypocrisy police! Almost as frightening as the cyber police! Simmons post coming tomorrow night. In the meantime enjoy this half-hearted effort.

Now that I'm done burning the hell out of Mr. Thinks-He-Can-Burn-But-Actually-Can't with the burniest of burnsauces, time to turn my attention to LZ Granderson. He wrote one of the most embarrassing examples I've ever seen of an article that 1) has just one point to make, a point which is brain-liquefyingly stupid; 2) the author realizes that fact; 3) which prompts the author to claim that they are in fact not making said brain-liquefyingly stupid point; 4) leaving the author with no point at all. It's a fantastic combination of WRONG and an article that didn't need to be written. Given the popularity of those two labels over there in our left hand sidebar, this seemed like a good article to bitch about while I work on this Simmons novel. Say what you will about how shitty that guy's writing is, but he's also very longwinded.

I will admit, as a lifelong Detroit Tigers fan, when I first heard we snagged Prince Fielder, I was ecstatic.

Victor Martinez had blown out his knee just days before -- lost for the upcoming season -- and replacing his offensive production wasn't going to be easy. A step back, after an amazing 2011, seemed inevitable. Then out of nowhere Detroit landed Fielder and life was good.

And I said to myself, what do you think the Tigers had to pay him to get him to sign? A couple hundred thousand a year? Couldn't be more than that, right? MAYBE THEY COULD PAY HIM WITH FOOD LOL

Then I saw the price tag and thought, "What the hell?"

He signed for about as much as he was expected to sign for when the offseason began! This is bananas!

All we hear about in the news these days is the struggling global economy, but in the middle of all this downbeat chatter a sports team bearing the name of one of the poorest cities in the country signs a baseball player to a nine-year deal worth $214 million.

How dare the Tigers ruin Detroit's reputation as a broke-ass city.

Talk about a disconnect.

Talk about the most worthless fucking article you could ever write. A thousand Jay Mariottis, confined to a warehouse, typing away on a thousand extra-smug typewriters, couldn't do any better. I'm pretty sure the "Isn't it WILD how much athletes are paid??? All for playing a ballgame!!! It ain't right I tell ya!!!" angle is the most played out, boring, unnewsworthy, uncommentaryworthy one in sports journalism. I'd rather read about Brett Favre. I'd rather read about how great Boston's sports scene is. Fuck it, I'd rather read about Simmons's most recent trip to Vegas.

Granted, the Tigers' budget and the city's budget are not related.

Admission #1 that this article should not exist.

But doesn't it bother you that the new first baseman will make more money this year ($23 million) than what's individually budgeted for all but one of the city's police precincts?

It does bother me that Detroit and many other cities have no money. It does not bother me that the market for baseball players has determined that a guy like Fielder is worth $23 million, because the private organization that is the Detroit Tigers has that money and is going to pay him that money.

Now I do not want to start an Occupy Comerica Park movement.

Fucking occupy references. Fucking dammit.

/waits for comment along the lines of "occupy Larry B's vagina harf harf harf"

I do not have a problem with the mechanics of capitalism nor do I begrudge Tigers owner Mike Illitch or anyone else for being rich and spending their money any way they want to.

Admissions #2 and #3 that this article should not exist.

In fact, I hope to join their exclusive club one day. Preferably with my crunchy granola idealism intact but who knows … I'm not making any promises.

You and me both. The difference is, I don't sit around saying/typing things like "Gee golly gosh, you know, garbagemen and crossing guards are the REAL heroes. Why don't we pay THEM $23 million a year?" I know it's fucking criminal how little teachers and social workers are paid in this country. I also know baseball salaries have not a fucking thing to do with that.

Anyway, my point:

My editor told me I had 8 minutes to come up with a new angle on the Fiedler signing and I'm high as hell as I'm typing this. How am I doing?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Fielder's contract.

Admission #4.

he problem is the environment in which a $214 million contract in today's wider economic landscape is even possible. Why are we so crazy about our favorite teams that the demand for better schools or roads takes a backseat by fiscal comparison?

Like I said, he's fucking baked. Hey man, you ever thought about... what if ATHLETES paid to see US work? What if PETS owned US?

Sure, no one wants to hear and see and read about bad news all of the time. But is distracting ourselves from everyday life so critical that we'll ignore the financial solvency of the games we love is much stronger than many of the communities in which they are played?

God yes. Yes a million times. As soon as you have a way to fix the mind-bogglingly complex political, structural, monetary, racial, and sociological problems that cause cities, states, and entire countries to go broke, I'll happily tune out the sports and listen to you flap your gums. Until then shut up or write something else.

Yes, I recognize the inherent hypocrisy of a sportswriter complaining about the insane amount of money connected to the sports industry. But as I said earlier, I want to move on up like George and Weezy and cannot guarantee my crunchy granola idealism is going to make the trip. The reality is there is more than one reality. I want to make a good living so I need billions to continue to flow through sports. I also want the Tigers to continue to be successful and that comes at cost. In 2003, the Tigers lost an American League-record 119 games. This year, thanks to Fielder, we are World Series favorites.

That's probably the worst paragraph of sportswriting I've ever read. In case you couldn't identify it on your own, the worst part of all is the final sentence.

Blogger Big Shot is Huge Hypocrite.

Pic sez it all

Chairman of giant company shows JoePa mourners how giant companies placate the public after shit goes down

Nike's Phil Knight spoke at Paterno's memorial service. He delivered a message about where blame should go for the Sandusky debacle that's pure, sweet, delicious corporate PR bullshit. It's amazing.

Commenting on those events, Knight said, "it turns out (Paterno) gave full disclosure to his superiors, information that went up the chains to the head of the campus police and the president of the school.

And when they didn't do anything, Paterno's duty remained fulfilled. Nope, nothing else to do at that point. No reason to follow up , go to the cops, confront Sandusky or ban him from your facilities. Once you've talked to a few people about the problem it's time to sit back, pop a few cold ones, and unfurl the "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner.

The matter was in the hands of a world-class university, and by a president with an outstanding national reputation."

World-class universities being well known as the kind of entities that are outstanding at conducting internal investigations into important and respected members of the football program.

Knight added,

With all the empathy Tony Hayward used when discussing the Gulf oil spill,

"...this much is clear to me. If there is a villain in this tragedy, it lies in that investigation and not in Joe Paterno."

/standing ovation

You see everyone, there's no PERSON at fault here. Certainly not the person you're all here to celebrate today. No no no, this scandal is much bigger than any one identifiable human. The problem is with the system! It's the process that's really to blame for all the rape and continued enablement of rape that happened here! It's really all about the way stuff happened and specifically not the humans that let it happen. Put another way: mistakes were made, specifically not by your hero. But isn't it time for the healing to begin? Let's start that healing process by pretending like Paterno didn't do anything wrong. That'll make everyone (except the rape victims) feel better.

To be fair to Knight, he pretty much had to address the scandal in his speech at some point. And saying "Joe screwed up" would have been met with a loud barrage of gasps, boos and fainting women. But this is just comically brilliant message-shaping from a guy whose job demands that he excel at it. I hope the people in that crowd appreciate the magic they witnessed in that moment.

How about nobody writes about Joe Paterno for a while

There are way too many people out there acting like he endorsed child rape or something, people who want to brand him as only a half step worse than an actual pederast. Those tend to sensationalize the story of Paterno's passing by saying things like HOW CAN YOU CELEBRATE THE DEATH OF A GUY WHO WAS BASICALLY THE WORST PERSON EVER????? Those people are idiots.

On the other hand, people who insist that Paterno was a saint and that his gargantuan mistakes should not be held against him at all are equally idiotic and even more out of touch. Many of these people, like Ivan Maisel, have their fingers in their ears and are yelling LA LA LA 409 WINS LA LA LA CAN'T HEAR YOU. It's fucking sad.

A man's death demands that we look to his life -- not just the last 12 weeks, swollen and inflamed by the heat of the vengeful -- but 62 years of coaching young men at one university. A legacy covers more than 12 weeks.

Yeah. It covers all 62 years, the last 10 of which Paterno spent with direct knowledge of Sandusky's crimes. And yet Sandusky's access to PSU facilities was never revoked. Paterno never did more with what he was told than talk to some higher-ups and call it a day. Fuck you, Maisel, for trying to frame the problem as being one that only matters since it came to light 3 months ago. It's nearly an implication that the real tarnishing of JoePa's legacy is that Sandusky was eventually caught. "A legacy covers more than 12 weeks." Yeah, no shit it does. Fuck you.

The crimes at stake here are two clicks past heinous. Penn State, not to mention the entire State College community, mishandled the Sandusky case in a way that will haunt town and gown for many, many years. People are angry. They want a pound of flesh.

Sure. And some of that flesh should come from the guy who was in charge of the football program this whole time, don't you think?

And that anger has fueled the pumps that continue to spew vitriol at Paterno, even as the justice system in Pennsylvania continues to exonerate him.

This is the most laughable sentence in the whole article. "Has the justice system charged him with a crime? No. Conclusion: LEAVE JOE ALONE, HE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG!"

The Sandusky case has rubbed raw all of us who have children, or once were children. Paterno, the most powerful man on campus, is one more person who looked and did not see, who listened and failed to hear.

He's one of the three or four most important and powerful people who looked and did not see, who listened and failed to hear. He's not some campus security guard who heard a third hand rumor that child rape was happening somewhere on campus and failed to unearth it. He's the guy who was told who was raping someone when and didn't do anything about it. Don't try to blend everyone at PSU who isn't Sandusky into one amorphous blob of "aw shucks, we done goofed, too bad!" It's pathetic.

But it should not cancel all that came before it.

No one worth listening to is saying it should.

It should zero out neither Paterno's six decades of achievement at Penn State nor his lifetime of leadership and beneficence at the university.

Notice which one is listed first. Say Paterno is at the pearly gates right now (or whatever your mind's manifestation of a place where you get judged in some kind of afterlife is, I don't give a shit) and whoever's working the door is giving him a hard time about how he mishandled this debacle. Which do you think he's going to bring up first, that he was a good leader who shaped and improved a lot of lives, or that he was good at getting other people to be good at a fucking sport? I hate to be preachy about it. But if you're someone who's very pro Paterno and you want to defend him from his attackers/celebrate his life, you'd sure as fuckballs better not start by bringing up anything related to football.

Yet a legion of men, who know him much better than any of his critics, continues to defend him. Some are gray of hair and round of stomach, others are younger than Paterno's five children. All of them wore blue and white. They arose to stand by his side when Paterno no longer could stand up for himself. Paterno was the coach who molded them. He instilled a beacon of light to guide them in their lives. He was the man who made them men.

All of that is very good and important stuff, and it's the kind of stuff that makes Paterno someone who will probably one day be remembered more for good than bad. At the same time, no fucking shit his former players are defending him. It's not exactly a slam dunk argument-ending accomplishment to point out that the guys who were recruited by him and lived and died with him for 3 or 4 or 5 years think he's great. JUST SO YOU KNOW, HIS FAMILY KNOWS HIM BETTER THAN YOU DO AND THEY ALL STILL THINK HE'S SWELL! THAT OUGHTA TELL YOU SOMETHING RIGHT THERE!

The Sandusky scandal has revealed that Joe Paterno missed in real time what may be seen so plainly in hindsight.

It should have been plain as fucking day in real time. That's the problem here.

The scandal has cast a shadow over a brilliant coaching life.

Stop bringing that up.

The 409 victories, while record-setting, are not the full measure of the man.

Jesus fucking Christ.

The young men he left behind, the campus to which he devoted his life, a campus whose leaders shoved him aside in the panicky, feverish days after the scandal broke,

Great drive-by pot shot at those on campus who realized "Oh shit, our coach could and should have stopped a bunch of child rapes and didn't. We're going to have to fire him I think."

also give testimony to the life of Joseph Vincent Paterno.

The whole of his life renders the seismology of modern-day journalism moot.

No, it's not moot. It's one aspect of his legacy. All the good stuff he did is another aspect. As time goes on the media and public will balance them. Paterno fanboys and people who hate ugly truths can say that the pesky media's insistence on reporting the scandal is rendered moot by all the good stuff Paterno did, but fortunately they're completely wrong.

The facts of a 62-year coaching career

Again.

were shaken. They did not topple over.

No, they didn't and shouldn't topple over. On the other hand, to the extent that they were shaken, they will probably remain that way forever (as they should). And the Ivan Maisels of the world will keep sticking their heads in the sand like Bob Costas any time someone says something bad about Mickey Mantle. Fucking sad.

Wow, this was really just an angry downer of a post. Can't wait to see what Simmons writes about the Super Bowl this week. Maybe if I beg and plead with him he'll do a whole mailbag about it (and Tom Cruise, and how good he is at gambling, and how much his readers love him).

Simmons mailbag that was written a week ago? Don't mind if I do

I can't do any more TMQRs. Not this season. I'm done beating my face against that razor-sharp wall. (Sorry about the line spacing issues. Unlike Murray Chass I am not a professional blogger so I don't really know how to fix stuff like that in html.)

I wasn't planning on writing another all-NFL playoff mailbag until Nate in Phoenix sent me the following e-mail:

"Congrats on your great start in your eternal quest to go 11-0 against the spread in the playoffs. Of course, last weekend's success now means that you'll have to do a second straight all-NFL mailbag. Don't upset the applecart. You have been repeatedly warned."

PLLLLLEEEEAAAAASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE BILL WE LOVE YOU, YOU'RE JUST LIKE US

Q: A thousand years from now, will people build scenes of the 2010 NFL-Draft in front of their houses just like they do with the nativity play now? In the Pittsburgh game, they played in the stadium that's closest to heaven (Mile High). Tebow threw for 316 yards. Rothlisberger's interception came on 3rd and 16. Pittsburgh's time of possession was 31 minutes and 6 seconds. Tebow's average yards per completion was 31.6. Someone named John told Tebow to pull trigger on the final TD. And Demaryius Thomas, the target for Tebow's game winner, was born on Christmas.
— Matthias Lahn, Germany

People who think like this and feel the need to point out their thoughts like this to others should be sterilized. We don't need more unclever people making unprofound observations about mildly interesting coincidences. The world is already stupid enough thanks to the [insert political party of your choice here]s!!!!!

Simmons's answer to that question is kind of funny, it's 600 words about how terrified he was of the Broncos. While it's easy for me to mock that viewpoint five days after the game took place, none of the Pats fans I know were even remotely worried about that game. I have no idea what that means but I suspect it has something to do with Simmons being a fuckass.

Q: The Saints/Lions game is happening as I'm writing this — in fact the Lions are up 14-7 with just under four minutes to play.

In the first half. PROOFREAD YOUR EMAILS, AMERICA.

Game over, Saints win. Why? The camera just showed Stafford with his hat on backwards. Brim-to-the-Back Guy cannot win a Super Bowl, and I don't think there's any way Brim-to-the-Back Guy out-duels Drew Brees in the Superdome.

What a great Simmons premise. I'll bet he loves it. Hey, this has nothing to do with sports- let's break it down!

Has any Brim-to-the-Back Guy won the big game?

Roethlisberger, twice.

Some'll claim Big Ben,

They'll be right.

you can't exactly say he was the leader of those Super Bowl teams.

Aw, he already forgot his own question. Kinda feel sorry for the fella.

You've got your finger on the pulse; you've the mighty combined forces of Grantland and ESPN's crack research teams. What say you?
— Michael Keeney, Madison, WI

SG: This was such a brilliant observation

Exactly.

that, for about nine seconds, I thought about stealing the point entirely and pretending I never heard of Michael Keeney of Madison, Wisconsin. We don't need a crack research team for a verdict here: The only elite QB with less of a chance in a big game than Brim-to-the-Back Guy is Brim-to-the-Side Guy.

Marky Mark? Non-responsive answer that's even less interesting and relevant than the original question. Nnnnice. Quick, bring up Tom Brady!

In fact, the secret of Tom Brady's maturation into a franchise QB wasn't dropping to the sixth round; it was when he decided to stop being Brim-to-the-Back Guy, Your move, Matthew Stafford.

He's too busy banging sorority girls to care.

Q: Please stop referring to defensive backs as "d-backs." It's "db's" or "Defensive Backs." I'm sick and tired of listening to podcasts where you ramble on about how bad the "d-backs" are in the Patriots' secondary. On second thought … nevermind. Keep up the good work.
— Chris B., Sacramento

SG: Thanks, d-bag.

Pwned! Oh Chris B., how does that burn taste? Burny? It's cute how Bill flirts with his readers by making fun of them.

Q: I re-read your 2011 NFL Preview column and counted up your "Relatively Bold Predictions." You had at least one per game, and some with multiple parts, which I counted separately. By my math, you're currently 6 of 24. I'm naming you my "NFL Preseason Preview MVP."
— Alex, Centreville

SG: (Searching for a comeback.)

Oh my! Speaking of the burniest of burnsauce, there it is again! Kobe, Bill will not sleep until everyone out there realizes your probably-deserved 2010 finals MVP was not at all deserved. LOL 6 FOR 24 MORE LIKE ZERO FOR A MILLION

Q: Can we say that a top running back is no longer needed to win a Super Bowl? Here are the last 10 Super Bowl winners and their running backs:

It all adds up pretty reasonably. None of the past 10 winners had what you might call an elite RB except maybe the Patriots in 2004 with Corey Dillon or the Colts in 2006 with Joseph Addai. And Addai is a real stretch. Good point, emailer. Now quit while you're ahead.

Also, the Colts, Giants, Saints, and Packers all won the Super Bowl AFTER losing Edgerrin James, Tiki Barber, Deuce McAllister, and Ryan Grant. Does this make the case that having a top running back, if you are a contender for the Super Bowl, actually hurts your chances?
— Brian R, Dubai

You are the stupidest person alive and I hope you wander into the Arabian Desert and disappear forever.

Q: I just read your newest mailbag. I was disappointed because I spent most of it reading the bold text. You are an excellent and intelligent writer.

Heh heh heh

Your readers, typically, are not.

Boy, I'll say!

I would like to hear more from you and less from them.

Can I interest you in a podcast featuring Bill and his friends guessing point spreads?

Please consider my concerns.
Sincerely, Finney.
— Finney, Clemson

The ironing is delicious.

SG: I'm guessing Finney didn't enjoy the last few e-mails. And for the record — the mailbag is my favorite column to write and has been since 1997. So there.

What?

Q: An idea for the 18-game schedule: each team plays 18 games, but (except for kickers and punters), no player can play in more than 16 games during the regular season. And this should be strongly enforced — if a player plays in even one play in a game, that [truncated for stupidity]

Your weekly solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

Q: Every mailbag I find myself hoping I can make it through without you incorporating the term "nodding" in some way, shape, or form into your response. I have yet to come across someone who overuses "nodding" as much as you. Perhaps for the new year you can find a new phrase to express yourself with (you used "nodding" in the the first mailbag of 2012 — i was holding out out hope it would be "nodding" free, but it's never too late to change, heck, just put it to bed for a month even!). If you do this, I will "nod approvingly." Thanks.
— Edward R., Washington DC

My God. This man needs a job, several hobbies, and some recreational drugs.

The mailbag ends after he makes his picks; no "Yup, these are my WACKY readers!" emails. While I think that probably makes the column better, I kind of missed reading some chode's sex story that almost certainly didn't happen. I WAS BANGING TWO MODELS, I LOOK OUT MY BEDROOM WINDOW, AND THAY-UH'S JON FACKIN' LESTAH, WALKIN' HIS UNICAWRN! I'm also worried about Amy from Jacksonville. How is that poor made-up woman going to know that the mailbag is over?