SMTMQR: Gregg is a Batman movie series hipster

We turn now to Gregg's AFC preview. BUT WAIT! First, more anti-Christopher Nolan contrarianism from the sports media's most outspoken critic of a series of movies that's as universally loved by both audiences and critics as any in the last several decades. BUT THOSE MOVIES ARE SO UNREALISTIC (more on that later)!

There have been 11 Batman theatrical-release films, beginning in 1943 and ranging from super-straight to camp to semi-serious to preposterous to the recent dark, brooding iterations. At the end of last season, Tuesday Morning Quarterback promised to reveal his favorite Bat-flick.

What a tease that was! Holy shit, move over, "Who Shot J.R."

It's "Mask of the Phantasm," the sole theatrical-release cartoon in the series.

BWAHAHAHAHAH (not that I've seen it, but come the fuck on)

"Mask of the Phantasm" hit theaters on Christmas Day 1993, and promptly bombed, though it enjoyed a second life as a cult hit on VCR 

Yeah, VCR, it's this old way of watching DVDs, you've probably never heard of it.

and now DVD. In the flick, Bruce Wayne and Batman are voiced by Kevin Conroy, whose deep tones are perfect for the character and a refreshing change from the obviously fake synthesized Batman voice in the movie "The Dark Knight."

Cartoons: known for their realistic and not at all fake or synthesized voices.

Other roles in "Mask of the Phantasm" are voiced by Dana Delaney, who in 1993 could smolder even if you couldn't actually see her,

Gregg thinks cartoon chicks are hot. Gross.

Mark Hamill (Luke Skywalker),

Have you ever noticed how fake and synthesized Darth Vader's voice was? Dealbreaker for that whole
series of movies if you ask me. Also, we're just supposed to believe that spaceships can go faster than the speed of light?  I'm pretty sure it's scientifically established that you can't do that.  YOU SUCK GEORGE LUCAS BOOOOO

Stacy Keach, Efrem Zimbalist and Abe Vigoda. Delaney's character is first a love interest, then foe, then a vital ally for Batman: the formula for the Anne Hathaway character in "Dark Knight Rises."

And for like every chick in every Bond movie ever, and thousands of other mysterious female roles throughout movie history.

In Tuesday Morning Quarterback news, all good things must end. Two perennial items are being retired,

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!  BRING BACK WACKY WINE OF THE WEEK!

or at least put into storage to be curated by future historians of sports columns: Christmas Creep

BUT IT HAD SO MUCH UTILITY! AND WAS NEVER REPETITIVE!

and Cheerleader of the Week.

WHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET WILL I FIND PICTURES OF ATTRACTIVE WOMEN?

In a mere decade, Christmas creep as a social phenomenon has gone from outrageous to common to all but required by federal law.

Over that same span of time, the people who enjoy pointing it out have gone from not interesting to even less interestinger.

The amusement value of noting Christmas creep has

never existed.

worn off.

Potato/po-TAH-toe.

The Unified Field Theory of Creep item will continue.

Whew! I was worried we were getting rid of ALL the worthless horseshit clutter in this column!

A decade ago, when TMQ began the Cheerleader of the Week item, many people didn't realize that NFL team websites were posting photos of scantily clad gorgeous women,

The median age of this group of people was 84.

and selling bikini calendars. Now everyone knows that.

Everyone continues to be very uncomfortable with the mini-scripts Gregg likes to write in which the cheerleader of the week leads a cheer related to her full time profession. OOH HOW CLEVER! SHE'S A TEACHER, SO HE'S PRETENDING SHE IS CHEERING HER STUDENTS TO GOOD TEST RESULTS! (He also pointed out that by being a cheerleader and a teacher, she's fulfilling two common male fantasies! CHEEKY!)

But now that many sports websites run NFL cheerleader photos -- usually just cheesecake pics, with the woman not even identified --

FOR SHAME, BLEACHER REPORT! THESE WOMEN SHOULD BE TREATED WITH RESPECT! I DEMAND TO KNOW THEIR NAME, FAVORITE BAND, AND FAVORITE PART ABOUT BEING A BUFFALO JILL!

TMQ's take is no longer distinctive.

Holy shit, you thought that giving readers the cheerleader of the week's name and profession made your take "distinctive?" Gregg may be a dunce, but he's usually not noticeably full of himself like this.

That I did it better doesn't matter.

Dude.

Since NFL cheerleaders are part of the entertainment -- pretty dancing girls have a long history in entertainment, at least as far back as vaudeville -- the cheerleaders will continue to be discussed and shown, as circumstances merit. Just no more regular items.

I like the way he's explaining this in explicit detail, let we really need to know the specifics of his "post pictures of cheerleaders" policy. Then again, people are fucking idiots, so I suppose if he said he was discontinuing cheerleader of the week but then posted a picture of a cheerleader in a subsequent column, he's get like 500 emails that said DUR U SAID NO MOAR CHEERBABEZ, U R A LYER and I can't fault him for wanting to avoid that.

Why do the Ravens sputter in January? TMQ's journalist pal Jim Fallows speaks of the Dull Ray, an evil ray gun that editors fire at interesting stories to make them dull.

Why do the Giants have New England's number in the Super Bowl? Let me tell you a story about my journalist friend and his vivid imagination.

Baltimore coaches seem to possess a Dull Ray, and they fire it at Ravens game plans in the postseason.

Baltimore's AFC title game loss last January: 36 passes and 31 runs.

During the fall, the Nevermores perform with swagger and take risks.

You know, having read his columns these last two weeks, I'm starting to feel like football season is here again. But it wasn't until I read that sentence and was reminded of his utterly thoughtless "taking more risks is always better for every team in every scenario ever" stance that I really could picture the leaves changing color and falling off the trees and imagine the crisp fall breeze blowing against my skin. 

In the 2011 season opener versus Pittsburgh, gaining a 27-7 lead to start the third quarter, the Ravens went for the 2-point conversion and iced the contest.

That was the key to their victory! Not the 20 point lead they already had!

Fortune favors the bold!

It sure does, on occasion, and fortunate also sometimes favors playing conservatively!

But when January rolls around, Baltimore goes into a shell.

Examples? Support? No? Super.

Does Coach Harbaugh/East get the yips when the pressure is on?

I like how that's phrased as a question, in the same way tabloids phrase damaging accusations about celebrities as questions to avoid libel suits. Did Craig James kill five hookers while at SMU? (James, of course, being the least sympathetic "celebrity" to ever fall victim to that dirty tactic.)

Maybe a moved-franchise curse is at play.

Great point. Also, maybe a "teams that wear purple" curse is at play. Maybe a "teams that play in Maryland" curse is at play. Maybe I will start shitting gold bricks tomorrow. Let's not rule out any possibilities.

Reader Jay Lenrow of Baltimore notes, "The Baltimore Colts had an iconic quarterback named Johnny Unitas and the Indianapolis Colts had an iconic quarterback named Peyton Manning. Both were released by members of the Irsay family. The football gods don't like that sort of thing."

Except for the fact that the Baltimore Colts are not the same franchise as the Baltimore Ravens, and Indianapolis Colts won a Super Bowl after releasing Unitas, and Manning was released after the 2012 postseason so that wouldn't have anything to do with anything that has happened to the Ravens in the playoffs in the last 5 or so years if curses did exist, and to the extent that Baltimore Colts could have left behind a curse for the Ravens to assume, the Ravens have ALSO won a Super Bowl since Unitas, yeah, I think that guy might be onto something. He is onto one thing, though: in order to get published in a TMQ column, all you have to do is send him an email blaming something bad that happened to a team on a curse that is the result of a different team having done something 35 years earlier. Jay from Baltimore: throw yourself off the highest building you can find, please.

Buffalo Bills: The Bills may have paid too much for Mario Williams, who is good-not-great with 53 sacks in six seasons, and has not been a star since 2008.

He went to the Pro Bowl after the 2009 season. Not that Pro Bowls are the perfect indicator of stardom, but since Greggggg is the kind of guy who seems to place a pretty heavy emphasis on number of sacks (Williams was averaging one per game before getting hurt last season, btw, if you think sacks are the end all be all statistic for an OLB/DE), you'd think he'd also care a lot about Pro Bowl appearances.

But Buffalo may benefit from overpaying for Williams, because his signing added a sense of excitement to the season.

That's just good solid management right there. Team sucks? Fans disgruntled? Best thing to do:
overpay for a free agent! Also, let's not forget that Williams is a high-drafted GLOREE BOY who has NEVER BEEN CUT.

The Bills' run of 11 years without a playoff appearance is worst in the NFL, and during much of that time they seemed content to lose on the cheap, cutting costs and pocketing the guaranteed network money. This offseason, Buffalo spent freely on Williams and Mark Anderson. Plus late in the draft, the Bills chose the sole kickoff specialist selected this April. A kickoff specialist makes sense only for a team that expects to score a lot.

Well, with OLB/DE Mario Williams and DE Mark Anderson on board, shouldn't they?

Final Score: Ohio State Nil, Penn State Nil: Reader Andrew Fournaridis of Pittsburgh notes

something uninteresting that every college football fan has already had pointed out to them 100 times by various media outlets and coworkers in the last couple of months.

that last year when Ohio State vacated its 2010 victories owing to the Jim Tressel scandal, that made Penn State the winner of the 2010 Buckeyes-Nittany Lions contest, previously viewed as a 38-14 Ohio State win. But now Penn State has vacated all victories from 1999 to 2011, owing to the rape cover-up scandal. That, Fournaridis observes, "means no one won the 2010 Ohio State-Penn State game."

OMG FASCINATING! TELL ME, ANDREW, DID THE OLYMPICS PRODUCE ANY HEARTWARMING STORIES ABOUT DISABLED SPRINTERS FROM SOUTH AFRICA? I'D LOVE TO HEAR MORE, IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT INDEED HAPPENED.

In the 2011 offseason, the Browns banked draft choices for the future, and the result was a 4-12 record.

[joke about how that's a good season in Cleveland here]

This offseason Cleveland spent its banked choices plus used the team's second-rounder in 2013 to get Josh Gordon, who did not play anywhere in 2011. Cleveland bid a second-round choice for Gordon in the supplemental draft. Adam Schefter reported the Browns were the sole team to offer a second-round pick, and that many teams bid nothing, meaning they thought Gordon was not worth a seventh-round selection.

Right, or they were already set at the WR position. If one team thinks a guy is worth a 2nd round choice, I think it's reasonable to think that the other 31 teams all think that guy is at least worth a 4th or 5th rounder. Then again, that one team is the Browns in this case, so maybe Gregg is right.

Denver Broncos: When the Packers made their wrenching decision to show Brett Favre the door, soon Green Bay was happy and the teams that snagged Favre were troubled. Post-Packers, Favre managed in three seasons to get two head coaches -- Eric Mangini and Brad Childress -- fired.

Both of those guys should have been fired years earlier. I hate giving Favre credit, but he was also the best or second best QB in the league in 2009. He got the Vikings within a play of the Super Bowl, and then spoiled the whole thing in typical Favreslinger fashion. Still, it's silly to say that Favre brought nothing but misery to the Jets and Vikings. Their other QB options at those times were Chad Pennington and Tavaris Jackson.

Will a similar scenario play out with the Broncos?

Probably! It's the curse of the HOF QB who switches teams! Also, I like how he pointed out that Green Bay was soon successful after getting rid of Favre without giving that fact any analysis. Hmm, wonder if things went down that way because of the presence of a more than capable successor waiting in the wings? Watch, Andrew Luck will be an All Pro within a couple of years, and Gregg (should he still be writing this column, God help us all) will be like LOOK AT GREEN BAY POST 2007 AND INDIANAPOLIS POST 2011, IT'S A SCIENCE FACT: CUTTING YOUR OLD QBS LEADS TO SUCCESS!

Now coaching the great Peyton Manning, John Fox will be expected to win big.

Whereas up until this point, Broncos fans were just hoping he could win 7 or 8 games a season and be
affable during his press conferences.

But Manning is on a 1-5 streak versus the Chargers, and now will face them twice a season.

He hasn't faced them since 2010, and they suck now. He'll be fine.

When the stats dust settled on the 2011 season, to TMQ one of the biggest questions was: Why did Denver, with the league's best rushing attack -- No. 1 in yards per game, the only NFL offense of 2011 with more net yards rushing than passing -- constantly punt on fourth-and-short?

Because like 30% of their rushing yards came on Tebow scrambles on passing downs, making that statistic a poor indicator of their likely ability to convert 4th and short?

Katie Sharp of ESPN's research desk reports the Broncs punted 23 times on fourth-and-2 or less, most in the league; their fourth-and-2 or less punt percentage of 72 percent also was highest in the league. Denver had an awesome running game, yet kept booming the ball back to the other side on fourth-and-short. Had Fox shown even a little guts on fourth-and-short, Denver's offense might have been more effective.

The fact that a team QBed by Kyle Orton and Tebow made the divisional round of the playoffs is sports miracle on par with the 1980 US Olympic hockey team. It's not that this what Gregg is saying is ridiculous or unfair criticism, but I think you could play the 2011 Broncos season out with that roster 100 times and they might make it as far as the divisional round once, lose in the wild card game twice, and miss the playoffs the other 97 times. Let's not get too picky about how they got where they went.

Houston Texans: The Texans jumped on teams early in 2011, with a 217-117 first half scoring edge. The Texans jumped on the season early, at one point being 10-3, then going 1-4 down the home stretch. Three of those four loses were close games, and of course Matt Schaub was injured.

DIAGNOSIS: NOT ENOUGH 4TH DOWN CONVERSION ATTEMPTS

There were times in 2011 when the Texans looked like Super Bowl contenders, and times when they looked like a team that lost to Indianapolis, which finished 2-14.

Yeah, like you already pointed out, there's a pretty strong correlation between that first set of games and Matt Schaub and Mario Williams being healthy.

So many Houston starters departed in free agency over the winter that it's hard to guess how the Moo Cows

Another season in the books and that's still hilarious!

will look in 2012.

That's the whole thing.  Great season preview. Last year they played better when their best players were healthy, and this year they have some new players, so who the fuck knows what will happen?

Indianapolis Colts: The Colts did not just use the first overall choice of the 2012 draft on a player from Stanford University, they used the second overall choice of the 2012 second round on a player from Stanford University, too. Four of the first 42 players chosen in the draft were from Stanford, where 87 percent of football players graduate. Alabama, Auburn, LSU, South Carolina, other big football programs with atrocious graduation rates -- what's your excuse?

Those schools are just trying to make as much money as they can off their football program, and know their fans/alumni don't care how many players graduate? Is it that hard to figure out?

Hoping to discourage celebration penalties, coach Mike Mularkey announced he and the team would donate $500 to charity each time a Jacksonville player who scores a touchdown simply hands the ball to an official.

While that is the most disgustingly "crusty white coach who is trying to please crusty white fans" move of all time, I do have to give them a modicum of credit for making it into a charity thing. Might as well have something good come out of that dumbass policy. In a related story, REMEMBER WHEN JOHN WALL DID THE DOUGIE DURING PREGAME WARMUPS AND UNDID EVERYTHING MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. WORKED TO BUILD????

Taking into account that Jax recorded a league-low 12 touchdowns in 2011, had the offer then been in force and no celebrations occurred, the Jaguars would have donated $6,000 to charity, or about 0.0002 percent of a typical NFL team's annual revenue. Make that 0.00016 percent after the tax deduction.

I'm sure the Jaguars have other charity initiatives.

Considering that nearly everyone involved with the Jaguars as players, coaches and in ownership is a millionaire, an offer of a miniscule donation to the underprivileged seems more like self-promotion than altruism.

No, it's just Mularkey being a crusty obnoxious white guy. The charity aspect of it is kind of insidious, because it's like an enforcement mechanism; tell the players not to celebrate and some of them will celebrate anyways, but put charity money behind it and they probably won't lest they hear about it from fans and crusty white pundits. YOU JUST TOOK A MEAL AWAY FROM AN ORPHAN WITH THAT SPIKE, JUSTIN BLACKMON. HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT? This is the kind of move that should thrill an asshole like Gregg, but I really don't think it's about self-promotion.

Jacksonville wants good publicity in return for doing just shy of nothing. Jags fans, get the message?

If you're not going to donate millions to charity, don't bother donating anything at all. That's the message I got.

Kansas City Chiefs: The Chiefs play three of their final four contests away, which, being on a 29-51 road streak, does not bode well for the season's home stretch. Then again since the 1970 merger, just four NFL clubs having winning records on the road -- Miami, Pittsburgh, San Francisco and Dallas.

He added some other bullshit about their drafting habits, but really, this was somehow even less insightful than his Texans preview.

Miami Dolphins: The "authentic games" metric is not kind to the Marine Mammals either -- they went 0-4 in 2011 against teams that reached the postseason. Miami becomes the eighth "Hard Knocks" contestant, and no "Hard Knocks" team has made the Super Bowl that season.

CONCLUSION: CURSE OF HARD KNOCKS

And here's the good stuff. I'm not even going to add any analysis. I'll just let Gregg's asshattery and bizarre grudge against Christopher Nolan (Is Nolan a Jew? Is that where this comes from? I'm too lazy to Google whether he is or not) speak for itself.

Spoiler Alert: 3,000 Police Officers Were Held Prisoner in the Gotham Sewers for Months, and When They Escaped, Their Uniforms Were Clean:The Christopher Nolan Batman movies were overblown comic-book flicks plus faux-philosophizing, which obviously is a lot more popular than the serious kind of philosophy. But since these movies have been lauded as contributions to cinema, the enormous width of the plot holes bears mention.

Despite hours of exposition in episodes one and three of the trilogy, viewers never found out why the League of Shadows was obsessed with destroying Gotham City. To "restore balance"? There was no hint of why a small army of highly skilled, super-competent and, in a few cases, super-wealthy people believed that killing everyone in America's largest city would "restore balance." Audiences never found out why Bane and Talia al Ghul wanted to commit suicide by setting off a nuclear bomb in Gotham City while they themselves were there.

Audiences never found out how the League of Shadows could place hundreds of tons of explosives around Gotham without anyone noticing. A dozen long bridges into Gotham Island (roughly modeled on Manhattan) explode during the League's takeover. Since 153 pounds of blasting material were needed to take down this small bridge, huge amounts would have been required for what's shown in the movie, and the reference to a truck that pours "exploding concrete," whatever that is, is no explanation of how large quantities of munitions were hidden on bridges that were already built or underneath a stadium that was already built. Demolition of Three Rivers Stadium required 4,500 pounds of explosives. How could a similar amount have been hidden beneath Heinz Field, as depicted in the movie, without anyone noticing?

In all the Nolan movies, Batman gets to the roofs of skyscrapers, or the tops of communication spires, in mere seconds. Does he use the elevator? When daredevil Alain Robert climbed the outside of Portland House, a 29-story building in London, it took him 40 minutes; climbs of higher buildings have taken Robert an hour or more. In Nolan's flicks, Batman requires seconds to go from street level to the tops of skyscrapers, without explanation.

Then there's Miranda Tate plot hole. Bruce Wayne's love interest and seeming benevolent philanthropist trying to save Gotham, Tate is revealed in the last reel to be the sinister Talia al Ghul, leader of the League of Shadows. The big shock is that she has always hated Bruce and always been Bane's boss! But then why does Bane treat her as a captive until the final minutes of the movie? The League of Shadows is depicted as controlling Gotham in a reign of terror that lasts months, with the entire U.S. military suddenly unable to remember how its smart bombs work and Batman believed out of the picture. Yet rather than revel in her moment of control of the city she has plotted all her life to seize, Talia spends these months making it seem she is Bane's prisoner. In order to fool who? Like a lot of Hollywood last-reel surprise twists, once the secret villain's true motivation is revealed, her previous actions make no sense.

This goes one for like another 1,000 words.  Is this guy not the biggest asshole of all time?  AND WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH THE BAD GUYS? THEY SHOOT A LOT BUT NEVER SEEM TO HIT ANYONE!!!!

San Diego Chargers: Norv Turner is 111-117, the NFL's only active head coach who has coached at least 10 seasons and has a losing career record. What does this man have on Bolts' team ownership that he is still employed?

Mere sentences from the end of his column, Gregg finally stumbles into some correct analysis.

Marc Williams of Bloomsburg, Pa., writes, "You stated, 'Wall Street managers are about as ethical as sharks circling.' This is unfair to sharks. Sharks do not deceive, they make it abundantly clear that they are there to eat you."

In other words, besides being bad at analysis, you're also bad at writing.

Embarrassing

ESPN employs a few legal analysts whose job is ostensibly to explain complicated judge-y court-y crime-y stuff to viewers/readers. It's a practice that makes sense in theory, but is utterly worthless in reality if they're going to let lawyer/writers like Lester Munson run wild with editorial commentary that's full of total horseshit. That's what happened here. I have no idea who Munson's dog in this fight is; could be federal investigator Jeff Novitsky, could be someone on the prosecution team, or maybe he just hates the judge who oversaw the trial and sentencing. In any case, I don't have much time to break it down but if you want to read the whole thing, just know that it reads like something a government PR rep might write in the aftermath of an expensive and relatively fruitless investigation/prosecution.

Q: Isn't a sentence of 30 days of home confinement a sign that the agents and the prosecutors failed in their pursuit of Bonds?

A: No. His sentence is not the result of any failures by federal agents and prosecutors.

Wrong.

There is no doubt that Bonds used steroids, and there is no doubt that he lied to the grand jury about his use. The problem that led to the conviction on only one count and a deadlocked jury on three counts of perjury was not the quality of the work of the agents and prosecutors.

Some of the work they did was quality. Much of it was shitty. If you're looking for some light reading that might make you think that the investigation was perhaps I suppose not handled quite as professionally as it could have been I guess, try this.

The problem was the refusal of Bonds' personal trainer, Greg Anderson, to testify against him.

If you can't close a case against someone without a key adverse witness's testimony, and you fail to get that testimony, you have fucked the dog. You did not conduct a quality prosecution. This is like saying "We didn't lose to the other team, they just scored more points than us."

For reasons that are not yet known, Anderson went to jail twice instead of offering evidence against Bonds.

Here's a theory for you, Columbo: maybe Anderson's refusal to testify has something to do with money changing hands between him and Bonds (and the fact that the two of them are buddies, sure). Anderson didn't feel comfortable perjuring himself in front of the grand jury so he figured he'd just do his time for contempt of court instead. I'm sure he sleeps soundly at night, and I'm sure Bonds made sure he was taken care of financially during, between, and after his two stints in prison.

Anderson's refusal to testify prevented the prosecutors from connecting Bonds to positive drug tests and other compelling evidence of Bonds' use of steroids. If Anderson had testified, Bonds would have been convicted quickly on all four charges.

But don't follow Occam's Razor on this one, people Munson desperately wants to fool: this is absolutely not the fault of the investigators and prosecutors involved.

In the face of Anderson's conduct, the prosecutors -- who occasionally stumbled --

Yeah.

rallied brilliantly

Brilliantly?

at the conclusion of the Bonds trial and obtained the conviction for obstruction of justice

Which is just as good as a conviction for perjury, as long as you don't care about establishing that Bonds actually lied under oath.

and were one vote shy of a conviction for perjury.

Put that one on your resume, prosecutors involved.

This outcome, even with the light sentence, is a triumph for investigative agent Jeff Novitzky and prosecutors Jeff Nedrow and Matt Parrella.

Jesus Christ. This sounds like a North Korean newspaper reporting on its soccer team's performance in the 2010 World Cup.

The government will not be asking a higher court to change this outcome.

No fucking shit, you fucking spin artist. They already have the option to retry Bonds on the perjury charges the jury deadlocked on. Bonds hasn't been let off the hook for those yet, so there's no need for the government to appeal. Not that they'd be able to buttfuck their way to a conviction the second time around anyways (should they get the chance). If the outcome of the trial was "guilty on obstruction of justice, but not guilty on perjury," you can bet your sweet bippy they'd be appealing along with Bonds.

It is Bonds who will be filing the appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The fact that he's appealing a relatively insignificant charge to avoid spending 30 days under house arrest because he has the money to do it is, again, not something over which the feds should be high-fiving each other. Read the rest if you want. It's fucking bizarre. And sad.

For The Last Time, America: Baseball Still Isn't Dead

For those of you scoring at home, this is my record-tying third straight post about the same goddamn issue. Sports media just cannot stop themselves from writing more and more whiny claptrap about how bad this World Series was and how baseball is dying and about how cold those players looked. Gregg Doyel chimes in on the "OMG WORLD SERIES IMPLOSIONS" issue. Even more amusingly, Gregg drew an air of intelligence by citing this mind-blowingly idiotic article by a "Bill Livingston" living in "Cleveland".

Since I already hate Sportsline and Doyel has been a target here before, I'll stick to his crap. Warning: idiot typing and stale ideas ahead. The whole article is basically a rewrite of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s claim that "Baseball is dead, nobody plays it, it's too boring". It's just found a new place to spawn. And it's still the same old tripe. Let's look at some of the worst claims.

The truth of the matter is ... baseball just isn't that important anymore.

As I previously cited in this post last February, MLB's revenues indicate that quite a lot of people still care. For example, for 2007 (figures not available yet this year) MLB's revenues approach the oh-my-god-best-professional-league-ever NFL's. Besides money? I don't see appreciable decline in other metrics which might measure the lack of baseball importance. Yes - before you comment - the lousy ratings for this year's World Series are hardly a useful metric.

In 2008, MLB had its second highest attendance ever: "The total of 78,614,880 fell short of 2007's record of 79,503,175" (source).

Baseball purists and constipated gripers -- same thing, if you ask me --

Sportsline.com journalists and uninformed self-aggrandizing windsocks - same thing, if you ask me --

want to blame the 2008 World Series' tepid television ratings on the schedule and the network and the weather,

Or the one small-market team?

all of which they sum up with the words "Bud Selig." And they're complaining that next year it will get worse, what with the World Series starting in late October and ending in early November and WHIP and VORP and the world coming to an end. Not to mention on-base plus slugging.

Yes! Now we get to the real problems! WHIP and VORP and OPS! That's why baseball is too irrelevant: it has a small core of actually intelligent fans! Again with the eschatological overtones: clearly baseball stats are bringing recorded time to a standstill!

Thesis: baseball's core of intelligent fans distinguishes it from every other sport, which is comprised almost exclusively of hordes of morons. Discuss.

But the truth is, baseball just isn't that important anymore in this country,

Six billion dollars suggest otherwise. Lotta tax dollars going to lotta communities. At a fairly-conservative 5% sales tax, that's 300 million tax dollars... and that's not even counting the income tax, which probably runs about 9 million a year for Alex Rodriguez alone. *shrug*

and there's no going back. I'm not sure how many people, other than the purists and the owners and (maybe) the players, even want to go back.

Actually, as a card-carrying purist, I kind of like the present. I really do. Except for the fact that the Reds haven't had a winning season since 1999, a record or two is steroid-tainted and the American League still has the DH, I'm just about fine with the present. And I don't mean that with any sarcasm whatsoever.

We like baseball where it is, behind football and ahead of soccer and log-jammed in there with basketball, golf, auto racing and combat sports.

That must be the royal "we" of smarmy assholes who write for Sportsline and like to think baseball is doomed when it isn't. Seriously: combat sports? COMBAT SPORTS?

What an idiot.

... regarding the (obviously idiotic) idea of a neutral-site Series:

Only in football are tens of thousands of fans willing to spend a small fortune to traipse across the country to watch one winner-take-all game.

I am not sure of an exact stat here, but I once read somewhere that some huge percentage of SB tickets go to corporate sponsors and interests, with another percentage available to the public of the host city. Readers?

Oh, right, like people who "traipse" (traipse?) across the country to go to the Super Bowl go there to watch the game.

Football is passionate. Football is fun.

Apparently eighty million turnstiles clicked this past summer to go to events that were not fun. I think this is a sign of national depression. Why the hell did people go to baseball games eighty million times in order to not have fun? Put America on suicide watch.

Later:
With baseball, that means wrapping up the 162nd game and then looking back and studying the statistics, seeing which players got better or worse (or, like Adam Dunn, both).

Besides being a blatant and pointless baseball homer, you're uninformed to boot! As far as writers go, this year you got worse!

I think this is a joke? Like maybe Adam Dunn somehow got better or worse? Even though he had exactly as many homers as he's had for each of the previous three seasons, or that his OPS+ was exactly his career OPS+?

Gregg doesn't know his head from his ass. I wish Dunn would start hitting Gregg Doyel instead of 40 home runs a season or his wife after games in Chicago.

[Note: this is an inside joke between me and two other bloggers. I am not actually suggesting that Adam Dunn commits domestic violence.]

***********************

Baseball isn't dead. Baseball isn't dying. The World Series isn't dead. The World Series isn't dying. Can we all just get over the ONE RAINOUT in the ONE HUNDRED YEARS of World Series baseball and go back to debating about something useful, like how many DHs can dance on the head of a pin?

Seriously, people have been whining about how baseball is dead for the last thirty years. I once read a Charlie Brown comic strip from like 1974 or some shit where Linus declared baseball to be dead. It's not true, it hasn't been true, and no useful metric suggests that it's going to be true.

So CBS has a bunch of "NEW RULES OF BASEBALL"

Pretty exciting stuff. Purportedly these are ideas to make the game more exciting. Instead they are just a bunch of really stupid or impractical rules.

Rule #1 (By Editor Eric Kay):

No stadiums, not listed in media guides as residing on Yawkey Way, are permitted to play Neil DIamond's "Sweet Caroline," or any cover rendition or spoof.

Yeah. Wonderful. The #1 priority in revising baseball rules--preserve the not-so-sacred tradition of Red Sox fans obnoxiously singing some stupid song that has nothing to do with baseball. I know this should signal a sort of levity on the rule-makers part, but having investigated the rest of the rules, which they take pretty seriously, I've noticed these obnoxious "new rules of baseball" fall into three categories:

1.) PWESERVING TWADITION!
2.) TOO MANY HOME WUNS!
3.) PLAYERZ R LAZY/MEAN/WIMPS/DON'T RESPECT THE GAME

Obviously this is meant to qualify in category 1.)

Rule #2 (By MLB Producer Adriane Rosen):

No team, stadium, or minor league affiliate can have cheerleaders, dancers, or baton twirlers before, during or after a game.

Frankly, I don't mind this rule at the major league level--baseball doesn't need to be like basketball or football (although, do any MLB teams really have cheerleaders?), but what the hell is up with the minor league provision? You mean it's ok to have parachuting guys dressed up like Aliens on "Roswell Night" or have douchebags shoot T-shirts out of cannons but it's not ok to have dancers or baton girls like pretty much every SEC college baseball team does? I um...I don't get it.

Rule #3 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Unless you're sitting in a box seat or bleacher seat in Wrigley Field in Chicago, or you're sitting on a rooftop seat across the street, there will be no tossing a baseball onto the field following an opponent's home run. You do this in Wrigley Field, where they invented it, it's cool. You do it in any other park in the United States, you're simply an unoriginal copycat.

Ok look: The intention behind this rule is fairly noble: Keep douchefucks in, say, Anaheim from throwing balls on the field like cocksuckers. But guess what: You're still a cocksucker if you do it at Wrigley. In fact you're doubly a cocksucker because it's most likely that YOU'RE THROWING BACK A FAKE BALL

Also, does anyone else find it funny that he says "sitting in a box seat or a bleacher"? As in, "you're not a douchebag if you're throwing back foul balls at Wrigley".

Anyway, all claims to "Rookie of the Year" being a sweet movie will not be considered in the comments section, so don't fucking try me.

Rule #4 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Guys get into the game, rooting on their teammates. Maybe it will even sound like girls' softball at times. If you hear this, you should shut up and pitch.

Huh? I mean...huh? Does this refer to something I'm missing? There's a picture of Pedro, so.... Huh? I'll chalk this one up to cw just don't get it.

Rule #5 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Joba's fist pumps. K-Rod gyrates and points to the heavens. That's fine. But you give up a homer and the batter dances a jig all the way to first, no griping about the batter showing you up. And if you drill him with a pitch after that, you're ejected.

Rule #5: Things should be exactly as they already are.

Rule #6 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Move a hitter off the plate. But if you intentionally drill him after a homer, you're ejected. The answer to a home run is this: Make a better pitch next time.

Rule #6: Things should still be exactly as they already are. Apparently Scott Miller is of the mistaken impression that if an ump knows you hit a batter on purpose you WON'T be ejected...as long as he hit a homer the last time up.

Rule #7 (By Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Body armor? No. Not for anyone. NO grand-fathering it in. Barry Bonds' elbow pad was as big as a mid-sized sports car. A-Rod's is as large as a rhinoceros. No more. It's past time to give the pitchers a break.

Ho-hum.

Rule #8 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

The mound will be raised to Bob Gibson-era levels. And the designated hitter will be eliminated. And any pitcher hitting lower than .200 will be required to take extra BP every day.

Everyone knows baseball attained perfection in the 60's.

Let's ignore the DH debate. I'm bored by it. But seriously--raise the mounds? Remember in the late-90's early -00's before everyone woke up to the obvious fact that Sosa and McGwire were juicing? Remember when people suspected the balls might be juiced and that's why hitters were dominating? Do you remember that?

Now do you remember: Did people think it would have been a GOOD thing if the balls were juiced?

Now imagine an era where pitching is as dominant as hitting was in the late-90's early-00's. Imagine that nearly every pitcher in the league has an ERA below 3.50 and the best pitchers are putting up 1.80 ERA's. Most games end 2-1 and the batting champ in the NL (or AL, doesn't matter, since the DH's been abolished) has a .289 average.

Now imagine that people could be so inured to this good pitching that they could be blase about a pitcher winning 30 games or clearing 300 strikeouts. NOW imagine that this came to be because the league DECIDED TO ARTIFICIALLY INCREASE PITCHER DOMINANCE BY RAISING THE FUCKING FOOL ASS MOUNDS.

Sounds like a recipe for success! Or how about this: how about we look at 2008 and see that both hitters and pitchers are having incredible, but not unrealistic success and realize that 2008's talent dispersion is pretty awesome and at least has the appearance of not being artificially manufactured, and let's think about how maybe WE DON'T NEED TO CHANGE THAT.

Also: Pitcher's taking batting practices? Now I've seen EVERYTHING (except maybe an alligator wearing sunglasses.

Rule #9 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Any pitcher who doesn't think he can drag his pretty little self into the batter's box without being humiliated will be required to watch video of Micah Owings, Carlos Zambrano and CC Sabathia.

Man Scott Miller's on a roll isn't he? Well, this definitely isn't a logical fallacy, right?

Let's take a look at the thought process here:

1.) Pitchers, as a rule, are generally poor hitters.
2.) The league average for BA by pitchers is, year in and year out, substantially worse than any other position
3.) Micah Owings, Carlos Zambrano and (huh) CC Sabathia have hit fairly well (Mike Hampton too, I suppose)
4.) If a pitcher thinks the odds are stacked against him hitting, well, whatever would give him THAT idea?

This is sort of like saying "For the average Sunday golfer who thinks he can't break 90, just watch a video tape of Tiger Woods, Ernie Els, and, jeez, I dunno, Jean VanDeVelde, and TELL ME you can't shoot a front-nine 34"

Also: CC Sabathia has 12 hits in his 8 year career. Just saying.

Also: Is this really a rule? Like...is it enforceable? Is Bud Selig really going to impose a judgment that Greg Maddux needs to watch tape of Carlos Zambrano (This is obviously a hypothetically flawed situation as everyone knows Bud Selig never does anything). But the point remains.

Rule #10 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

There will be no more pointing to the sky upon crossing home plate following a home run. We have--or supposedly have--separation of church and state in this country. The least we can do is have a separation of church and baseball.

Three potential ways I considered going with this one.

1.) "Hey douchebag: baseball is not an institution of the state"

2.) "Hey douchebag: what is a greater violation of the establishment clause--allowing people to express their religious beliefs in a non-state sponsored event, or forbidding them from expressing their religious beliefs in a non-state sponsored event?"

3.) "Hey douchebag: BASEBALL IS MY CHURCH!" [/wpkinsella]

Rule #11 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Each player shall be required to explain the importance of Jackie Robinson and list his 10 favorite Hall of Famers, complete with reasons why. We cannot appreciate who we are and the blessings we have without a working knowledge of our past

Wowee, Scott's on a gravy train with biscuit wheels. Seriously, he's crapping out gems like they were corn niblets.

Who doesn't know who Jackie Robinson was? Latin players maybe. Does Scott think the Latin players are ruining baseball? I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I think it's clear that he definitely does.

"Those [anti-latino epithet]s probably are all like Jackie who? But then they all love Roberto Clemente. Ohhhhh man it makes me so sick I want to vomit like the time I went to [some Mexican restaurant] and puked all over [some chick who never called him again] and then went home and cried into my pillow all night thinking about how MLB players today don't appreciate Pie Traynor or Home Run Baker."

--something Scott Miller undoubtedly did (or did not) say.

Seriously. Who cares? I mean, I kind of care. It would be nice if A-Rod understood who Honus Wagner was and looked up to him and stuff. That might help me appreciate the game a little more. But inevitably, I don't give a shit. Because I like, you know, baseball, not a fucking soap opera drama in which my favorite players are fucking human interest stories. Unless they are a human interest story. Like for instance, did you know that Melvin Mora has quintuplets? That's totally interesting.

I think all MLB players should be required to have quintuplets. Even Mike Piazza.

Rule #12 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Ernie Harwell and Vin Scully will broadcast the All-Star game every year, without exception. Jon Miller can join them if he would like.

Fine. Vin Scully and Ernie Harwell are great. Jon Miller's even a pretty great broadcaster despite his tendency to overpronounce Latino names at the expense of pronouncing them accurately (I'm reminded of a SNL skit from the awful early 90's where a white bread news team would pronounce latino names ridiculously to the chagrin of the latino newsman alongside: Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrodrrrrrrrrrrrrrriguez. And so on).

Scott Miller hits this rule out of the park though, to get back on track. VIN SCULLY GOOD! Oh sure, the rule's completely impractical and has almost nothing to do with being a "rule of baseball" (RULE OF BASEBALL: CAMERAS USED TO FILM THE GAME SHOULD BE 1080p!!!!!!! RULE OF BASEBALL: AFLAC TRIVIA QUESTIONS MUST NEVER USE WIKIPEDIA TO CONFIRM THEIR ACCURACY!!!!!!). But still. Vin Scully is quite excellent.

Rule #13 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Hank Steinbrenner shall be required to issue a statement about something every day at 10 a.m. during the season. Simply for our entertainment.

Fuck you Scott Miller.

Rule #14 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miler):

There will be no umpire warnings after a batter is hit by a pitch--until the score is even. You intentionally hit my slugger, I get a free shot at your slugger. But only one. And then we're even.

Big eyeroll for Scott Miller. To people who don't get baseball this seems reasonable. But there's two major problems.

a.) A warning is not issued when an umpire KNOWS a batter is hit intentionally. It's issued when an umpire THINKS a batter's been hit intentionally. If he KNEW a batter were hit intentionally he can and WOULD throw that pitcher out.

b.) The purpose of a warning is, and ONLY IS, to prevent retaliatory plunkings. Period. If you're going to say "well I like the warning system, but only AFTER a retaliatory plunking is allowed" then you're an idiot. That's like saying "well I like the fact that a batter gets a hit if Lenny Randle gets on his hands and knees and blows a slow roller foul, but maybe he should have to go back to the batters box and try again to get that hit, with an additional strike credited against him. But then if he gets a hit it should count."

This is stupid. I am with Scott in THEORY--get rid of the warning system. I've seen my White Sox get plunked myriad times (usually by the A's) only to have the warnings thrown out, even after it happens in the third straight game. Either throw the dude out or let us get our shot, but this warning shit is bullshit. But that's all a warning's good for. Scott Miller doesn't get it. But at least he's MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller.

Rule #15 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

The strike zone will be enlarged and actually called as laid out in the rule book. Yes, this means the high strike at the letters. And there will be no bitching about it.

Sure, dude. Let's widen the strike zone UP. What exactly are you trying to accomplish? It's not going to improve pitching and it's not going to improve hitting. How bout we just leave the fucking strike zone the way it fucking is.

Rule #16 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

No hot dog will cost more than $2 and no beer will cost more than $5. Especially in the new ballparks.

Scott Miller likes high ticket prices!!!!

Rule #17 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Wine and sushi no longer will be permitted at concession stands.

But Scott Miller does not like you frou-frou nancy boys!

Rule #18 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

Each team will schedule two doubleheaders a season. These will not be day-night, split-gate doubleheaders. They will be the old-fashioned, two-for-the-price-of-one affairs.

But Scott Miller DOES like high ticket prices!

Rule #19 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

"Glory Days" is banned from stadiums. It was a great song before it was played to death. Now, if Bruce will please write another rocker with a verse about baseball, I'll order stadium personnel around the league to play that one every night.

But Scott does NOT like Glory Days. Do not get Scott wrong though: Scott does love THE BOSS.

ps: Does anyone think it's odd that Bruce Springsteen calls a fastball "the ol' speedball"? I've heard a lot of euphemisms for a fastball (the heat, the biz, the cheddar, the pill, the dark one [if there are two strikes]) but I don't think I've ever heard "the ol' speedball")

Rule #20 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

There will be volunteers available throught the park to teach every kid how to score a game, if the child does not already know.

Ok. To sum up:

Scott wants teams' incomes to be cut in the following ways:
1. Teams will cut concession costs, by up to 20% for beer and up to 50% for hot dogs
2. Teams will no longer be able to appeal, especially in places like SF/LA, to the female/metrosexual population by selling sushi and wine for huge profit
3. Teams must sacrifice the revenue for at least one home game (~1.5% of their annual revenue) in order to provide a 2:1 double header

Furthermore teams must increase expenses by putting a bunch of douchebags around the park to teach a bunch of fatherless bastards to keep score.

HOWEVER teams will make up that increased expenditure/lost income by cutting all royalties to Bruce Springsteen...unless he writes another totally ripping song about BASEBALL! (which is not a church)

That's dookie! Meaning that's really the shit.

Rule #21 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

There will be at least one afternoon World Series game each fall so that everyone will have a chance to actually watch a Fall Classic game from start to finish by the time they're 20.

Ok. Whatever. Couple things though:

"by the time they're 20"? What the fuck. Does he think that 19 year old's have a 10:30 bedtime?

Furthermore, the reason the WS usually starts at 8et is so that everyone can see it. You know....those people who couldn't possibly watch an afternoon game because, they're, like, you know at school or work?

Weekend afternoon game, fine. Why not. Sure. You win MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller.

Rule #22 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

No more alternate uniforms. This one especially goes out to the Houston What-Were-You-Thinking Astros. No...more...orange...and...red...rainbow...uniforms.

Yeah. Totally. You know what fans really hate? Alternate uniforms. They...are...completely...ruining...the...game.

Rule #23 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott Miller):

For those lucky enough to catch home run balls, the player who hit it will make time to sign it for the fan before he or she goes home.

Yeah, what could possibly go wrong with this one?

Hey! Why did some of the letters turn blue?

Rule #24 (By MLB Senior Writer Scott MIller):

From now on, when a pitcher commits an error, if that runner scores, it will be an earned run, not an unearned run.

Well, it's your best proposed rule by far, but you know. Whatever. I won't critique this. Yeah. Totally. WHY ISN'T IT AN EARNED RUN.

Lousy pitchers.

In conclusion, I think it's pretty safe to say that this list rules.