Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Grab bag post featuring an idiot, a complete dipshit, and a guy who won't stick to his guns

None deserve their own post. All deserve some ridicule.


First, you may not have heard, but Penn State had a pederast in their midst. Fortunately they dealt with the terrible situation swiftly and properly by contacting law enforcement. I think that's what happened anyways. Proving that he has his finger squarely on the throbbing pulse of America, Rick Reilly chimes in with an important message:

This is not about Joe Paterno.

No fucking motherfucking shit.

If these boys really were molested, groped and raped by a middle-aged ex-Penn State football coach, then whatever misjudgment Paterno made will be a single lit match compared to the bonfire these boys will walk in for years to come.

Many of them won't be able to trust. Won't be able to love. Won't be able to feel -- nor trust or love themselves.

Yes, everyone think of the children. And they already are. We don't need to be reminded of that in this situation; even the most callous or clueless person understands that the kids are the victims here. Paterno may be in the spotlight but it's for sensible reasons. He's the most powerful and visible person involved and the only one besides Sandusky who's nationally known. The fact that it's about the kids and not about Paterno doesn't mean the media is obligated to focus their attention on the kids or the crimes. That's an angle that's just too grisly and sad for a lot of people. The Paterno angle carries with it the possibility of some kind of justice, or at least so a lot of people will think. In short, it makes sense that a lot of the water cooler talk about this mess focuses on Paterno rather than the crimes/victims.

But of course that doesn't mean it's "about" him. The people who really do think this is about Paterno are mouth-breathing PSU alums or students who live for nothing but college football and could give a damn about anything else, including prevention of child rape. They probably (hopefully) make up less than one percent of the population.

Don't feel sorry for Paterno. He's had his life. Feel sorry for these boys, because they may never get one.

The people who feel sorry for Paterno are an even tinier subset of the tiny set of people who think this is about him. Those in that tiny subset are not worth addressing. They should be herded into a mine and sealed inside with concrete. I believe we have a label for articles like the one Rick wrote here. It should appear first in the list at the bottom of the post. He also threw this in, seemingly in an attempt to confuse me:

No, this isn't about 84-year-old Joe Paterno not taking more steps that might have stopped it. It's about everybody not taking more steps that might have stopped it. Not parents, not teachers, not uncles,

Uncles?

Enough of that uplifting story. Let's talk about Big League Stew. Yahoo's MLB blog is written by a mongoloid who goes by 'Duk and thinks that this is clever, useful analysis.

For the purposes of this post, let's say that I have just traded the ten-dollar bill that I just found on the ground for a fast-food meal at a chain burger joint.

It's nothing fancy, but it will get the job done. I hadn't eaten in days.

Furthermore, let's also suppose that I decide to walk home from the restaurant in an attempt to work off the caloric impact I have just foisted upon my system.

[two paragraphs spent extending this painful and worthless analogy snipped; don't worry, you don't need the full bit to appreciate how mind-numbingly stupid this is]

So I tell you that I'm perfectly willing to take your doggy bag if you don't want it. I might take it all the way home, but I might also throw it away. It doesn't matter, though, because you've already paid the bill. I'm on the hook for nothing.

I've also just perfectly described the strategy that Dayton Moore and the Kansas City Royals are taking in their attempts to resurrect a winner.

Are you fucking kidding me?

Finally, an article that's not truly abhorrent but just kind of bothered me as I read it because of Mark Schlabach's unwillingness to commit to his initial stance. It's a stance that I think is stupid and wrong but certainly defensible, and I'd like to see a capable writer like Schlabach fully support. Unfortunately he backpedals. Backpedals like a bitch.

LSU and Alabama are clearly the best two teams in the country and are head and shoulders above the rest. It's a shame they can't play each other again in the SEC championship game.

You want a plus-one playoff? Let the Tigers and Crimson Tide play three times this season, with the best-of-three winner claiming a national championship.

That's not how a plus one would work. Just nitpickin'.

LSU and Alabama are that much better than everyone else this season.

And we know that for sure, without any doubt; just ask an SEC fan.

If LSU wins out and wins the SEC West, critics will suggest Alabama shouldn't play for a national championship because it didn't win its conference. But when the dust settles on the college football season, the two best teams should play for a national championship, no matter the circumstances.

Strong stance. One that I think is dumb. Even if we could be sure that Alabama is better than Okie State or Stanford, Bama had its chance and blew it. If they were to rematch with LSU in the title game and win, it's kind of like... well, OK, we know both those teams are awesome and we know which was playing better in January. Can we say for sure that Bama was the best? I understand that you can never really say who the best of the best is unless they've all played each other, and a win by (not THE) OSU or Stanford over LSU doesn't forever end the debate. But to me, a rematch with a different outcome than the regular season matchup is wholly unsatisfying. And a rematch with the same result if/when OSU or Stanford was undefeated but got shut out of the title game feels even worse. I dunno, I just really don't want to see Bama play LSU again unless there are no other big conference undefeateds left.

History suggests that the odds of an LSU-Alabama rematch in the BCS title game are slim. After No. 1 Ohio State defeated No. 2 Michigan 42-39 in their 2006 regular-season finale, the Wolverines argued they deserved another chance at facing the Buckeyes in the BCS title game. But No. 3 Florida jumped the Wolverines in the final BCS standings, and the Gators routed Ohio State 41-14 in the BCS Championship Game.

Here's the difference, though: At the end of the 2006 regular season, you could argue that Florida was better than Michigan. But if Alabama wins out this season, you couldn't argue that another one-loss team -- or even undefeated Boise State -- is better than the Crimson Tide.

Sure you could. What if Stanford's only loss is by a field goal to Oregon in overtime? What if OSU's only loss is by a field goal to Oklahoma in overtime? There's definitely a debate to be had there.

Especially not after SEC teams won the past five BCS national championships.

Fucking SEC people. You cockswabbers, chanting your conference's name. GMAFB.

If Oklahoma State wins out, it will deserve a chance to play LSU for a national championship.

Wait, what?

The same goes for Stanford, if the Pokes slip up along the way.

OK. So that whole thing about Alabama clearly being the second best team out there, and them definitely deserving a rematch... tempered. Significantly tempered.

But if those two teams lose somewhere down the line, Alabama would be the most deserving team to play LSU for a national title.

And you just sucked all the controversy out of your article. That makes me angry because the ESPNiverse has trained me to zone out if a journalist isn't being intentionally contrarian or simply a straight-up asshole. Although you've let me down, Schlabach, you're still OK in my book. Just don't get my hopes up like that again.

13 comments:

Biggus Rickus said...

As an SEC fan, I agree with your SEC tribalism hatred. Yes, I think it's the best conference right now. Most any metric backs it up. There's more talent and generally better coaches (or at least more money spent on coaches). However, I really don't understand SEC fans who chant S-E-C and feel good just because the conference is successful in bowls or because Alabama wins a national title. I'm a Georgia fan. I want Georgia to win. I get some small pleasure from teams not from Florida, Alabama, South Carolina, or Knoxville winning games outside the conference. But mostly, I just want Georgia to win. When Georgia doesn't win, I want the world to burn. Fuck off S-E-C chanters.

Chris W said...

As you probably knoe, Ruck, a lot of that solidarity or whatever comes from the early 00's when the SEC was less clearly the best conference in CFB and LSU and Auburn both got absolutely jobbed out of a shot at the national title.

I would argue that the time to get over that has long passed, however

Anonymous said...

I'll never understand blogs that soley exist to yell at popular, succesful creators. They're mean and boring.

Adam said...

Talk about mouth breathing PSU alums and students...

Holy shit.

Jack M said...

Anonymous,

I agree. I would also take it one step further and say that I don't understand why some sports journalists exist solely to yell at successful athletes/coaches. They're mean and boring.

Larry B said...

Do you guys think that was Anonymous or anonymous? Yep, just recycled a joke from 2009.

Chris W said...

One of the interesting things Anonymous helpfully points out is the epistemological quandary for the nebulous ontology of the universe. To wit, why are we here?

I'm waiting with bated breath for Anon's further inquiry into why sports exists as a pursuit and further (and perhaps more puzzling) why pursuits exist at all. If we are put here to shit and fuck as Schopenhauer suggests, then why this elaborate Darwinian shadow play to establish naturalistic superiority?

These are the questions that keep me up at night until I realize, "Hey wait a minute, this is a very very small blog that exists to entertain its authors--most of which are friends with one another--and small group of readers, and if it doesn't appeal to someone it's not because its existence is suspect but because that person doesn't like it."

dan-bob said...

Oh man, the Reilly column ends with a real doozy:

If all these charges turn out to be true, though, soon [a youth hockey coach who abused NHL greats] and Sandusky will both be going to prison -- a place where, with any luck, they will feel most unwelcome.

Oh my lord. Was that a reference to prison rape? I don't even understand what it means. Is Reilly hoping that Sandusky will get back what he allegedly gave out?

Woah. Rick Reilly: *&^%& the heck?

Chris W said...

Stand down, Dan-Bob. It's pretty well known that the bad treatment of sex criminals in prison isn't just shower-rape-related

dan-bob said...

You know what hurts the most is the... the lack of respect. You know? That's what hurts the most. Except for the other thing. That hurts the most. But the lack of respect hurts the second most.

Larry B said...

I wonder if Anonymous goes to blogs where writers pick on Michael Bay and Nickelback and stands up for those popular, successful creators.

Also, Rick Reilly (seemingly) endorses prison rape. You heard it here last.

Chris W said...

You know who else endorses prison rape? The rock band Tool

Chris W said...

Also: My theory is that Anonymous is actually Petcheskey and he has been deploped by Tommy Craggs