When Mariotti attacks Simmons, everybody loses, part 2 of 2

Honestly, for an article written by this blog's third most frequently cited moron (and the inspiration for the blog's name for crisesakes), about this blog's most frequently cited moron, this really isn't much to work with here once you get past Jay's own-shit-smelling hatred of bloggers. Let's see what else we can have some fun with.

The network has only itself to blame, enabling Simmons and turning him loose to the point he was uncontrollable.

Except that the only thing that finally got him shitcanned was his direct and pointed insults towards the NFL, the biggest revenue producer (and probably the most powerful entity) in American sports. It's not like ESPN is looking back at how they enabled and supported Simmons and saying "My God, we should have seen this coming! This was obviously the way this would end!" He picked what is probably the one and only insult target that would get him canned, and even still, it took multiple incidents for ESPN to decide they'd had enough.

There is a difference between covering sports with fierce independence — my philosophy —

Hahahahahahahahahahaha. Go play in traffic, you twatmunch. It's pretty easy to be "independent" when no one will hire you because your own misconduct makes you toxic as fuck.

and being a megalomaniacal jackass like Simmons,

No argument here.

who never took a law class

Jay Mariotti, Esq., here to opine on defamation jurisprudence. Oh wait, never mind, he's just got his head up his own colon as usual.

and, thus, didn’t understand why the company suspended him for referring to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell as “a liar.”

I'm sure he understood. Also, it takes about 90 seconds on Wikipedia to learn that under 1st Amendment caselaw, since Goodell is inarguably a "public figure," Simmons’s remark would only create liability if it 1) was incorrect, which, with a generic insult/accusation like “He’s a liar” is very hard to prove, and 2) was made with "actual knowledge" of the fact that the statement wasn’t true (or "reckless disregard" for the truth, which is inapplicable here since Bill doesn't, like, work in the NFL executive offices and have access to Roger's personal files or whatever). But Simmons (and anyone in America with a brain) legitimately felt that Goodell really WAS a liar. Bill’s mistake wasn’t failing to stay within the boundaries of defamation law. It was publicly insulting a gigantic cash cow that helps make ESPN into a gigantic cash cow.

Goodell may have lied about what he knew in the Ray Rice case, but Simmons did not have incontrovertible proof,

This is not how libel works. At all. ESPECIALLY with public figures. You don’t need “incontrovertible proof” to accuse your fucking neighbor of being a liar. If that were the legal standard (especially for public figures) that would lead to no one ever bringing scandals to light due to fear of owing large sums of money if a court deemed the proof of the scandal to fall short of “incontrovertible.”

which means the league could have sued the network for megamillions —

No. Also, I think you should just say “millions;” Megamillions is the popular multistate biweekly lottery, and really, that’s just good clean fun.

and may have done so if ESPN wasn’t a broadcasting bedfellow.

Yes, they may have sued, but they’d know they didn’t have a case. They’d do it just to rattle ESPN’s cage, because if there’s anything that would make ESPN panic, it would be the possibility of lost profits resulting from a deteriorating relationship with THE SHIELD.

Simmons also was unequipped to be editor-in-chief of Grantland.com — his insensitivity was appalling when he approved a piece that unnecessarily outed a transgender person, who, because of the outing, committed suicide.

Well, I’ll take Jay’s side here. I still can’t believe he can’t find (or perhaps correctly read) a Wikipedia page about libel.

Anyone else would have been fired after the Goodell and transgender mistakes.

Probably not, actually. Definitely not the Dr. V putter story, anyways. And he got suspended for the Goodell remarks. A pretty big deal for a guy with his profile.

Simmons kept his job both times only because ESPN president John Skipper doesn’t acknowledge his own errors until he must.

This is true—Jay knows firsthand. He probably waited about five years too long to ban Jay from appearing on Around the Horn.

Friday was that day, hours after Simmons had appeared on the radio show of another ESPN pariah, Dan Patrick, with another over-the-top rip job of Goodell.

There is no such thing as an over-the-top insulting of Goodell. Goodell and his dumb shiteating fat fucking face are immune to hyperbolic vitriol.

Simmons destroyed the commissioner because he didn’t immediately announce a suspension in the Tom Brady deflated-balls scandal, and while it’s fair to wonder why Goodell is waiting, his weekend pause doesn’t warrant a nuclear explosion.

No, it probably doesn’t, but 90% of everything else he does.

Clearly, Simmons is immature.

Time for one of my favorite old gags—post a hilariously moronic comment multiple times because it’s so enjoyable to read.

Clearly, Simmons is immature.

Clearly, Simmons is immature.

Clearly, Simmons is immature.

Clearly, Simmons is immature.

Clearly, Simmons is immature.
An excellent point from Jay, paragon of maturity.

Once a fanboy, always a fanboy.

Once a man who is convinced that Ozzie Guillen is responsible for all the evils of the world, always a man who... that.

I’ve had my squabbles with corporate management.

OH HAVE YA

But my complaints were legitimate —

/dying

a Chicago radio station demanded I sign a sheet of paper that I wouldn’t criticize the Bulls or White Sox, which would have painted me into an ethical corner had I agreed.

I’m sure that is about 25% of the story, or possibly less, but I do have to agree that working in sports media probably loses a shitload of its appeal once you get muzzled.

When I refused, I was fired the day after Christmas.

If only you could have been fired while eating dinner with your family ON Christmas, via an in-person visit from your boss, like the end of Christmas Vacation except without the boss changing his mind.

My bosses at the Chicago Sun-Times had business ties with certain sports owners in town, and when they asked me to soften my opinions about those owners, I said no.

Partly because of the whole ethics issue, but mostly because Jay is a petulant baby who hates Jerry Reinsdorf like most people hate Hitler.

Had Simmons used another description for Goodell, he’d probably still be working at ESPN.

No, he would not.

By calling him a liar, and then challenging the network to reprimand him after doing so, Simmons no longer was fighting a free-speech war.

Actually, he was, but it was also a war of “which of these relationships is worth more money to ESPN,” and he lost, badly.

He was leaving himself vulnerable to a mountainous lawsuit.

No, you fucking retard. No. And were that the case, the NFL could just sue Bill directly and bleed him dry, but that’s not happening even though the NFL is endlessly insecure and vindictive, because that’s not how libel law works.

Before he works again, the fanboy needs to take a law class or two.

/still dying

The Internet has enabled recklessness by idiot entrepreneurs — such as the assclown at Gawker Media — who think they can publish lies about anyone because it’s difficult for a public figure to win a libel suit against a web publication.

Wait—what??????? I thought Goodell had an AIRTIGHT case against Simmons! How is Gawker publishing (true) things about Mariotti any different than Simmons saying (true) things about Goodell, then?

So the entrepreneurs hire clueless kid losers for $15 a story and order them to drive traffic, resulting in sleazy techniques and wild inaccuracies.

Hey, much better than paying Jay whatever he made at the Chicago Sun-Times while using sleazy techniques to publish wild inaccuracies. Speaking of wild inaccuracies, Jay needs to take a law class or two.

I told a college journalism class 

shortly before being removed by campus security so the professor could continue their lecture

that you’d be better off cleaning sewage plants than working for something called Deadspin.com,

True from an income standpoint, I’m sure, but those sewage-cleaning plant jobs are probably union and difficult to get unless you know someone. You can probably work for Deadspin, at least on a freelance basis, based solely on your own skills and merit.

where you’re being paid less than a janitor to basically pick up garbage and place it on the Internet. Another website, Bleacher Report, has somewhat higher standards yet also pays peanuts to kids who don’t know what they’re doing. Why? Because entrepreneurs think you don’t have to pay for good sportswriting.

And sadly, as Bleacher Report’s content continues to get less shitty (I know, I know) and Deadspin continues to occasionally publish cool shit alongside all its terrible unfunny shit, they’re right! This is a systemic problem in the journalism industry, driven by supply and demand in both the media and journalism labor markets, and has very little to do with DURR HURR BILL SIMMONS WASN’T ONE OF THE COOL KIDS IN THE PRESS BOX.

The Bleacher Report entrepreneurs, too, are sports fans, making them fanboys much like … Bill Simmons.

OH MY GOD! CONSPIRACY! ALL THE PIECES FIT! JET FUEL CAN’T MELT STEEL BUILDING SUPPORT BEAMS!

One of America’s best sportswriters, Bob Kravitz,

Bob Kravitz is a shitty writer with shitty opinions. We should have posted much, much more about him when this blog was still quasi-active.

broke the Deflategate story in his new position at an Indianapolis TV station/website.

Did he? Did he "break" it? Maybe he did (I’m sure he has sources galore in the Colts organization, which, good for him), and guess how many sports fans give a flying cunt about that? This isn’t the 20th century, Jay, when one newspaper might get a scoop and be the place to read about a story while another has no idea about it until the first newspaper publishes. It doesn’t matter how much you hate the internet—it has reduced the value of breaking a story to essentially nothing. Deal with it, or GTFO of the industry and stop bothering people.

After the Ted Wells report was issued, Kravitz wrote of unprofessionalism he encountered in the New England media the last few months:

Well, come on, what do you expect? It’s the Boston media.

“The people who disappointed me most were the folks at The [Boston] Globe’s website, Boston.com. They are renowned pom-pom wearers, so it wasn’t a surrpise.

Typo is [sic], left in because Jay is such a big fan of professionalism.

But I was struck at the enthusiasm they displayed while carrying the Patriots’ water. It shocked me that a great newspaper like the Boston Globe would employ such rank amateurs and cheerleaders. Sad.”

Because it’s not the 20th century, Bob and Jay, and pretty much all newspapers are shit and are desperate for access. They’ll cut their own dicks off to curry favor with popular local teams. I know it’s hard for you fucking dinosaurs to understand that times have changed, but maybe if everyone else seems out of touch, you’re the out of touch ones.

Where did Simmons grow up? Boston.

HOLY SHIT ANOTHER LEVEL TO THIS WHOLE THING! NO ONE IS SAFE! THE CLOCK STRIKES AT MIDNIGHT!  THE ILLUMINATI ARE ABOUT TO TAKE OVER!

From who did younger Boston.com sportswriters learn? Simmons.

And I’m sure it was only the young Boston.com writers carrying water for the Pats. I’m sure that Dan Shaugnessy, Jackie MacMullan, etc. were NOWHERE near that practice.

Shame on ESPN for empowering Simmons for so many years.

Oh wow, that’s got to sting. “Shame on you.” Go easy, Jay!

ESPN also killed sportswriting when it gave a major platform to a statistics geek, Nate Silver, failing to realize that sport is best covered via the exploration of human emotion, not the joyless crunching of numbers.

BWAHHHHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

SHUT IT DOWN

I DON’T THINK WE NEED TO GO ANY FURTHER

Oh wait, yes we do:

In the process, the network chased off Rick Reilly, only the greatest sportswriter of his generation

Rick Reilly couldn’t sportswrite his way through a wet piece of toilet paper. Fuck him and fuck Jay for cheerleading for him. Die, both of you.

and someone who broke news responsibly,

HEY YOU’RE GONNA SAY I HAD THIS ON TWITTER FIRST, RIGHT???????

covered games and press conferences on site, interviewed subjects, understood libel law and carried the profession with savvy.

/dead

Next, ESPN is trying an African-American site with an editor, Jason Whitlock, who isn’t liked by many African-American writers and is more comfortable in a strip joint than in any mentoring position. The site’s marquee hire so far was a white journalist, Mike Wise.

Come on Jay, don’t half-ass it. Tell us how you really feel. Heat up that taek, it’s a little lukewarm for you.

I appreciated my eight years at ESPN; the TV show was fun,

I’ll bet he signed a settlement agreement with ESPN that prevents him from saying the show's name.

and when I was on, the ratings were much higher and the banter much livelier.

Kill yourself.

But the culture is not conducive to doing one’s best work. It’s a political loony bin where Skipper, like Goodell, can’t maintain consistency in issuing disciplinary punishments. Seems he finally got one right Friday.

Again, as in the case with Jay, it was a mere five-to-ten years late.

And, no, I would not hire Bill Simmons at this news organization if he applied. Our standards are too high.

Aw, you mean the San Francisco Examiner, the country’s 58th most important newspaper, wouldn’t hire Bill? Pity. My guess is he lands at Bleacher Report and continues to grab a whole fucking shitload of eyeballs and pageviews.

Jay Mariotti is sports director and lead sports columnist at the San Francisco Examiner. He can be reached at jmariotti@sfexaminer.com. Read his website at jaymariotti.com.

Never. Never ever ever.

Simmons and Easterbrook square off in a Thunderdome of inanity

Unless you consider this entire format to be a gimmick (which you probably should), we really don't do a lot of gimmicky posts here.  THAT CHANGES TONIGHT.  THINGS ARE ABOUT TO GET SILLY.  I'll bring you some highlights from Greggggggg's and Bill's most recent efforts, but I'll mix them up, switching back and forth, and I won't tell you which one of them said what.  If you've read this blog for more than a month you will have absolutely no trouble assigning blame to the correct party for each logic and/or comedy blimp crash you read.  I mean, it's all kind of pointless because Gregg's column mostly looks back and speaks in past tense while Bill's mostly looks forward and predicts (and gives us example after example of his horrific gambling skills).  But bear with me.  Pretend it's fun.  Lord knows I've been pretending that writing these posts is fun for like three or four years now.

Last week, I hammered Greg Schiano for having his defense charge the offense on a final-snap kneel-down at the end of the Giants-Bucs game. 

So that pretty much gives it away right there.  Still, this is so good that it's worth highlighting even if it's super obvious which nimrod said it.

Schiano has since defended himself by claiming this tactic actually works. Schiano told "Mike & Mike in the Morning" that charging the victory formation "caused fumbles several times" at Rutgers. Schiano told Pro Football Talk the tactic "actually created a fumbled C-Q exchange four times in the past four or five years. It does work."

Schiano did not add: Rutgers never got a turnover. I asked Jason Baum, associate athletic director of Rutgers, what happened when the Scarlet Knights attacked kneel-downs under Schiano. Baum said that four times the quarterback fumbled -- against North Carolina in 2011, against Pitt and West Virginia in 2009 and against Cincinnati in 2007. Rutgers recovered once, but the play was nullified by a Rutgers offside. Any defense can cause the quarterback to fumble by jumping offside and slapping the ball before the snap! The other three times, quarterbacks covered their own fumbles.

So in other words, Schiano was absolutely right, and while he may ruffle some feathers by using this tactic, it seems justified from a "WE DO ANYTHING WE CAN TO WIN FOOTBALL GAMES ON THE FOOTBALL FIELDS OF THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE OF FOOTBALL" perspective.  Which is the perspective of pretty much every FOOTBALL coach who's ever been successful so I can't really fault him for having it.  Considering the way Schiano's tactic has twisted panties into bundles all over the league, I encourage him to keep doing it.  The kind of people who are complaining about it (both inside the game, as well as among the media) are generally the kinds of people who deserve to be tied to rockets and shot into space.

Atlanta is 8-1 all-time versus San Diego.

GOTTA TAKE THE FALCONS AND THE OVER THIS WEEK, AMIRITE?  Nah just kidding, that's one of Gregg's ever-captivating stats of the week.

Wouldn't you rather have that on Baltimore's résumé than a frightening riot? Let's add that to the "Welcome to Baltimore" sign on whatever the highway is there: "WELCOME TO BALTIMORE: HOME OF THE WIRE AND THE WORLD'S LOUDEST BULLSHIT CHANT."

Yeah, not like anyone who has grew up on the East Coast should know that every big city between Boston and Washington is on I-95, right?  And that's certainly not something Google Maps could help with.  Whatever your highway is, Baltimore (if you even have one!), here's an unclever slogan for it.  NOW, LET ME TELL YOU MORE ABOUT UBUNTU SINCE YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD SO MUCH ABOUT IT.   THE NATIONAL DISCUSSION SURROUNDING IT IS INTENSE, I KNOW.

Twice a year, I stumble across a stupendously good reader e-mail and think about stealing it, then pretending I never saw it, before ultimately deciding against it for karmic reasons.

Could have been either of them, I know, except that Gregg's readers are merely unfunny whereas Bill's are unfunny AND mirror images of their fuckbag columnist (a columnist who loves to navel gaze, at that).  Thus you know he wrote that because Gregg would never dream of stealing anything his readers send him; I'm sure he considers himself much smarter than all of them.

When Detroit reached fourth-and-1 on the Tennessee 7 in overtime, trailing by three, the Lions botched a first-down try, ending the game with a Titans win. The coach was immediately mocked by the sports press: "Jim Schwartz's Risky Call Costs Detroit Lions in OT Loss" read a typical headline. Schwartz said afterward his offense was supposed to try to draw Tennessee offside; failing that, he planned to kick the short field goal to continue overtime. Botched communication between center and backup quarterback caused the ball to be snapped while most of the Lions stood around. (It was a botched play, not an attempt at the silent sneak.) Schwartz had to supplicate in his postgame comments, apologizing for defying orthodoxy.

But fortune favors the bold!  Even if the coach never actually intended to try for the first down, shouldn't the Football Gods have rewarded the team for accidentally going for it anyways?  I'm so confused.

For that matter, the Lions could have gone for the win on the untimed try that ended regulation. A fake kick for two would have been maybe 75 percent likely to succeed -- and then there would have been no overtime.

That's just fucking awesome.  Breaking news, everyone: fake extra point attempts, particularly those attempted with your team trailing by one and with no time left on the clock, are 75% likely to succeed.  Source: SCIENCE.  (Correction: MAYBE 75% likely to succeed.  So, also, maybe only 4% likely to succeed.)

The Dolphins threw incomplete toward the sidelines three consecutive times, then kicked a field goal and went on to lose in overtime. But Miami had all three timeouts, why not throw down the middle? The Dolphins acted as if it was critically important to stop the clock, despite holding three timeouts. At least the unused timeouts can be donated to charity.

That joke is so bland and non-awful, you can be sure Bill didn't write it.

Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees are 2-9; Kevin Kolb is 3-0. Norv Turner is guaranteed to end this September with at least as many wins as Bill Belichick, and probably one more. The NFC West is in the conversation for the best division in football. And fans are talking reverently about the real NFL referees. Does anyone doubt the Mayans anymore?

CURVEBALL MOTHERFUCKERS.  That's actually one of Bill's readers who happens to sound a lot like Gregg.  BEWARE THE MAYAN NON-FOOTBALL GODS; THEY ARE VENGEFUL.

I'm feeling good about the Seahawks pick and see this week being "The Russell Wilson Breakout You-Wouldn't-Want-Him-In-Fantasy-But-At-Least-You'd-Halfheartedly-Look-Up-His-Stats-On-The-Waiver-Wire Game."

A week after having a not very good game against a nothing special Green Bay defense, Wilson went for 160 yards, 0 TDs and 3 INTs against a nothing special St. Louis defense.  

Suppose you were a father and mother who knew all technology was about to stop working -- you'd buy more than one bag of groceries! You wouldn't wait until the last conceivable instant to draw water or copy the magic software. 

Hmmm... is this Bill using a tortured analogy to make a point about what Aaron Hernandez means to the Patriots' offense, or is it Gregg pointing out that characters in a TV show or movie do not behave exactly like a perfectly rational person would?  Of course it's the latter, you knew that.

Here's my theory on the day after Thanksgiving in 2009: I think Jack Nicklaus heard the news, went out and bought a bottle of 20-year-old Pappy Van Winkle, found an antique shotgun with 300 rounds of ammo, then drove to a secluded spot in the woods 25 miles away from any other human being. He got out of his car, started jumping around and screaming like he won the Super Bowl, did this for 20 solid minutes, then started swigging whiskey and shooting at things while whooping it up. Eventually, he drank the entire bottle, got back into his car and just started happily ramming into trees until the car stopped moving. Then he passed out in the driver's seat, woke up the next morning and walked home.

Bill Simmons: somehow, not employed as a Hollywood comedy writer.

Canceled by Christmas; lucky to make it to Thanksgiving.

If only that were an internal ESPN memo referring to the employment prospects of both these clods.

Sportsmanship note: Leading 24-14, Buffalo reached first-and-goal on the Cleveland 1 at the two-minute warning. Bills coach Chan Gailey ordered his charges to kneel. The football gods should reward this.

New England beat them by 24 today, throwing the ball long after the outcome was in question.  Conclusion: the Football Gods will definitely have their revenge on the Patriots at some point!  Probably!

Democrats would have been happier had Romney claimed every possible deduction, lowering his tax rate even further and embarrassing him politically. Unspoken in all this -- not claiming deductions is admirable behavior!

Holy shit, I definitely do not want this blog to get political, but I will say this: only someone as sheepfucking clueless as Gregg could fail to connect the dots and realize that it's very likely Romney didn't claim all his available deductions because he anticipated a Democratic attack on that point, not because he wanted to be Mr. Charitypants.  Christ, Easterbrook fancies himself some kind of Beltway Insider.  Simply pathetic that this is his take on the situation.

But the need for higher tax rates on the rich should not stop anyone from being impressed that Romney voluntarily paid more than current law requires. Voluntarily paying more than required is not being a sucker. It's being civic-minded.

No, in this case, it's neither.  It's being an image-conscious politician.  Holy Christ, Gregg.  I think someone wrote "gullible" on the bottom of that swimming pool over there.  You should go check it out.

Sorry again, I just couldn't let that one slip.  Let's end on a lighter note.

I would NOT advise taking kids to this week's Giants-Eagles game … especially if it goes the way I think it's going to go. You realize the Giants are 33-17 in their last 50 regular season road games, right?

Road performance of the 2006 Giants: definitely relevant in 2012. With the Monday night game still to come, Bill's picks ATS are 6-8 this week, and he's now 30-31-2 on the season. ESPN pays this man millions of dollars per year. Other than his somewhat substantial number of NBA columns, these NFL pick columns are pretty much the only writing that is actually about sports. You would have lost money by following his picks nearly every year for the past decade. I will now light these copies of "Now I Can Die in Peace" and "The Book of Basketball" on fire.

MMTMQR: Gregg ends the season about as well as Tom Brady did HEY-OHHH

A fair assessment of Brady's overall performance in the playoffs and the Super Bowl? A timely joke given that I'm finally getting around to writing this on Sunday night? No and no. Well, no and maybe. Also, before I dive into this crap, big ups to reader James B. He's one of the six people out there still regularly checking in (and sent me an email to that effect), so I owe him a shout out. Yes I know no one else reading this cares. Man, I feel like Peter King right now.

It would be easy to say New England's nemesis is the Giants -- but Lady Luck has been as big a factor for the most accomplished football team of the 21st century. Whenever a football game ends with a margin of less than a touchdown, the contest might have gone either way based on a bounce of the ball.

Worst possible starting point for analysis. Worst. Wurst. Blurst. Blurworst.

In New England's three Super Bowl victories, the critical bit of luck favored the Patriots. In New England's two Super Bowl loses, the critical bit of luck favored the Giants.

Put on your aluminum foil hats, everyone. Keep the brainwaves flowing so you can comprehend the nothingness coming off of this simpleton's keyboard. "If a game is close, basically we can just boil it down to luck and call it a day. ALSO, CAN YOU BELIEVE HOW UNREALISTIC BABYLON 5 WAS?"

Consider:

In the 2002 Super Bowl against the St. Louis Rams, New England was outgained by 160 yards. But Rams quarterback Kurt Warner had an unblocked rusher in his face and short-armed a pass that Ty Law cut in front of and returned for a touchdown. New England went on to a three-point victory.

Great defensive gameplanning and playcalling? Luck, because on this one specific play it just so happened that the right defenders were in the right places to generate a defensive TD. Another hugely lucky play from recent Super Bowl history: the pick six by Nick Collins in the first quarter of last year's Super Bowl (he just as easily could have run the wrong way for a safety after catching the Roethlisberger pass!).

In the 2004 Super Bowl against the Carolina Panthers, the Panthers tied the score with 1:08 remaining. But the Panthers' place-kicker honked the kickoff, which went out of bounds. Taking possession on their 40, the Patriots moved into position for the winning field goal just ere the clock struck midnight.

But the Patriots outgained the Panthers in that game. Those lucky Panthers were lucky they had a chance to win the luckiest game in the history of luck.

Midway through the 2005 Super Bowl against the Philadelphia Eagles, New England safety Eugene Wilson went out injured, which sent a rookie into the game. But the Eagles' coaching staff did not realize there was a backup at safety until about five minutes remained.

And Reid? Shitty in-game coach? NEVER.

Then the Eagles, who had only one receiver per side most of the second half, lined up with double wides and ran a deep post at the new defender -- touchdown. The Patriots held on to win by three. Had Philadelphia attacked the novice safety earlier, the outcome could have been different.

Still not luck. Good fortune, perhaps, or more accurately a reflection of complete dumbassery on the part of your opponent. It's worth noting that he's probably completely bullshitting about this whole situation; sort of like how according to Gregg, if you watch any play in which someone scored a touchdown, there were AT LEAST seven defenders STANDING AROUND DOING NOTHING AT ALL!

In the 2008 Super Bowl versus the Giants, perhaps you have heard about a long catch a Jersey/A player made against his helmet. New England lost by three.

Yes, that is actually luck. Or at least a much better example of it than "the Patriots called a successful blitz which led to a duck of a pass which was picked off- it's just like winning the lottery!"

And with four minutes remaining in Sunday's Super Bowl, Wes Welker, among the most reliable receivers in football annals, dropped a pass that would have put New England in position to ice the game. New England went on to lose by four.

Welker's drop was 10% of the reason that play didn't work. Brady's awful throw was the other 90%. The dearth of analysts willing to confront that reality doesn't surprise me, but does disappoint me. One of the few I've seen who acknowledge it? None other than Simmons (probably because he's decided that Brady IS NAWT A TRUE BAWSTONIAN and used Brady as a whipping boy in his pity party wrap-up column).

In many aspects of life, luck is a bigger factor than we care to admit.

Watch out, here comes social scientist Gregg! He's only marginally less of a stumpfucker than football analyst Gregg.

We want to think some become rich and others poor based on merit, not luck.

And what's up with Jews getting rich off of violent movies? HAVE THEY NO SHAME?

We want to think some teams win and others lose because the winner "deserved" laurels.

Which is very, very often the case.

In a 20-point football win, the winner did deserve to win. In games that come down to the final snap, either team might have prevailed: luck calls the ultimate shot.

(Holding my head in my hands, considering pulling out my hair.)

TMQ praises the "all-unwanted NFL player who was undrafted or waived or both, yet never gives up. Eleven undrafted free agents started in the Super Bowl, versus 10 first-round draft choices.

Those GLORY BOY failures! Nevermind that at any given point in time, there are only maybe 150-200 1st round picks on rosters in the entire league, versus hundreds and hundreds more undrafted players. Titillating news flash for everyone, from the brain of football savant Gregg: sometimes, 1st round draft choices flame out. Other times guys who didn't get drafted, perhaps because they were injured their senior year of college, succeed in the NFL. You're welcome.

Undrafted Chase Blackburn made the game's most important play;

First overall pick Eli Manning and 3rd round draft choice Mario Manningham made the game's most important play.

Blackburn wasn't even on an NFL roster this season until Thanksgiving. Undrafted Victor Cruz from Division I-AA Massachusetts scored a touchdown,

He's now asking to be highly paid. TRAITOR!

undrafted Danny Woodhead from Division II Chadron State scored a touchdown. No first-round draft choice scored a touchdown.

Riveting stuff. Very valuable information, from which you can draw tons of non-worthless conclusions. Such as: getting rid of first round picks is the key to reaching the Super Bowl. And: Gregg Easterbrook's brain must rattle around the inside of his skull if he walks too quickly.

If not Lady Luck, did the football gods determine Sunday's outcome?

Nope!

This being the season of Roman numerals,

What?

I will state my view in the Roman tongue, with thanks to Josh Rasmussen, a Latin teacher at Bishop Dunne Catholic School in Dallas:

Caelicoli mortales puniunt, nam eos desidera paene adipisci sinunt; tum demum haec eripiunt. Di pilae calciatae New England Patriots semper punient, dum Bill Belichick se in Spygate fefellisse confiteatur.

Still not as pretentious as the "Wacky Wine of the Week" bit he ran a few times.

Brady looked deep and saw Rob Gronkowski, with the most touchdowns in the NFL this season, streaking deep with no safety in sight, covered only by undrafted linebacker Chase Blackburn. Watching at Lucas Oil, I thought when Brady escaped the rush and spied Gronkowski, the Patriots were about to make the deciding play. Brady heave-hoed -- just as Jason Pierre-Paul hit him hard. The ball was underthrown, Blackburn intercepted and the momentum swung to the Giants. Sweet.

LUCK! IT WAS ALL LUCK!

Think about the coaching situation. New England had a two-point lead and faced second-and-11 on the Jersey/A 44 with 4:06, the Giants already down to one timeout. Two straight incompletions stopped the clock, keeping Jersey/A alive. On the downs that became the Welker and Branch incompletions, had New England simply rushed for no gain, Jersey/A would have gotten the ball back on its 12 with one timeout and less than three minutes. Maybe the Giants would have won anyway,

Well yeah, seeing as how their game winning TD drive took 2:49, I'm pretty fucking sure the whole "just run up the middle for no gain!" thing wouldn't have made a difference here. Not that it ever does. How fast must Gregg's heart be pounding when a team runs up the middle with an undrafted/unwanted RB like Woodhead? I feel dirty just thinking about it.

but the situation on the Jersey/A sideline would have been more tense.

Yeah, it would have gone from a 9.7 to a 9.9 on a 1 to 10 scale.

Yes, the New England offense is good at completing passes. But Belichick's disdain for the rush

"Yes, this team has built its wildly successful offense around a historically great QB and his high percentage passing game for a decade now. BUT STILL, THREE YARDS AND A CLOUD OF DUST DERP DERPY DERP"

hurt the team in a Super Bowl clock-killer situation. The Giants' defense had its linebackers backed off, expecting pass, on both downs.

Shame on you, Perry Fewell! You should refuse your ring and give your SB bonus check to Victor Cruz!

And on procedurals, the police always catch the bad guy. Actually a significant number of homicides are never solved, while most burglaries never even lead to an arrest. Of course, procedurals are just Hollywood nonsense.

These are just three sentences from a 4000+ word rant (I copied and pasted it into Word just to verify the length) in this column about how unrealistic CSI-type shows are. Words fail me, and they will fail you should you choose to read it. He sounds like Keith Law complaining about Moneyball, noting that actual police work is much less exciting than it's portrayed on TV. Wouldn't advertisers line up around the block to sponsor a show that features cops mindlessly searching a crime scene for clues that probably don't exist, and then filling out mountains of paperwork?

Final State Standings: Tuesday Morning Quarterback's annual State Standings are based on the states in which teams actually play: Maryland teams are the Ravens and Redskins, and so on. California, Pennsylvania and Texas, traditional football hotbed states, finished a respectable 69-48; the other traditional football hotbed states, Florida and Ohio, limped in at 28-53. The year's Super Bowl was held in the state that finished last in the State Standings.

Wisconsin: 15-2

Massachusetts: 15-4

Louisiana: 14-4

Pennsylvania: 20-13

California: 30-20

New Jersey: 21-15

Georgia: 10-7

Michigan: 10-7

Texas: 19-15

Tennessee: 9-7

Maryland: 18-16

Colorado 9-9

Arizona 8-8

Illinois 8-8

Washington: 7-9

Ohio: 13-20

North Carolina: 6-10

New York: 6-10

Florida: 15-33

Missouri: 9-23

Minnesota: 3-13

Indiana: 2-14

Anybody learn anything from that? (Waits for nodding.) (Sees none.) (Nods in approval.)

Plus ca Change, Plus C'est la Meme Chose: Only 13 of the 44 starters were the same as when the Patriots and Giants met in the Super Bowl four years ago; three of the four coordinators had changed, too.

If you are surprised or fascinated by that, you either don't follow the NFL at all or are Peter King.

Super Bowl Postscripts: Giants offensive coordinator Kevin Gilbride elaborately warmed up on the field pregame, including doing standing and prone hurdlers' stretches. Do you need to be warm and loose to call passes?

How dare he enjoy that moment!

Reader Mike Jones of Indianapolis notes, "If Tom Brady's career was happening in reverse, the way Merlin lived going backward in time, the media would be saying right now that Brady just can't win the big game."

Someone in Indianapolis key that guy's car please.

New England was the home team of record, meaning its choice of what to wear. Belichick chose the teams' blues -- the same color New England was wearing when it lost to the Giants in their previous Super Bowl meeting. OK, sports superstitions lack a certain factual grounding.

You have to be fucking kidding me. You. Of all people. In this column. No fucking way.

But New England could have opted to wear its whites.

The Giants are super lucky they didn't!

As usual, I recommend you employ the offseason to engage in spiritual growth. Take long walks. Exercise more and eat less. Perform volunteer work. Appreciate the beauty of nature. Attend worship services of any faith. Read, mediate, serve others. Do these things, and you will feel justified in racing back to the remote, the swimsuit calendars and the microbrews when the football artificial universe resumes in the autumn.

First of all, I don't think anyone is racing (or racing back) to swimsuit calendars in August/September. That aside, I will agree to do all those things during the next six months as long as you agree to do one: try to learn a single fucking thing about how football is played. Kthx.

Somehow, "WRONG" Just Isn't A Strong Enough Word....

It's a quickie from Mariotti's 24/7 EXCLUSIVE ONLINE COLUMN DUUUDES!

Torre would revive fading Sox

No. Good players and centerfielders not named Jerry would revive fading Sox. Signing A-Rod. Getting Rowand back. These things. Not Torre.

If the White Sox hired Joe Torre, I'd like their chances of winning 90 games next year.

For those of you new to this site, this sentence is why us crazies believe that Jay Mariotti should be fired on the spot.

Considering the best White Sox are either in their prime or past it (and their young players have very little upside), an extra year of aging would peg the same team to do a little worse this year. This means that Jay Mariotti thinks that Joe Torre's handwriting on the lineup sheet is worth more than 18 wins.

He would re-focus them, lead them like men, manage with dignity and end the circus-like silliness that has dogged this team the last season and a half.

Ah, there's the issue. Jerry Owens isn't bad at baseball....he's just not focused! Juan Uribe doesn't walk because he thinks he's in the circus! Jose Contreras can't get people out because he's not being led like a man! Bravo sir, nail on the head!

Torre would turn underachievement

*exact, spot-on, predicted achievement.

into purpose and have the Sox right back in contention, even with the Indians and Tigers in the same division.

The Indians are better at every position except right field, (Dye > Gutierrez) first base (Konerko > Garko) and third base (healthy Crede > Blake). Thome vs Hafner is essentially a wash over past 3 years. Indians have better starters, Indians have a better bullpen.

The Tigers are better everywhere but first (Konerko > Casey), DH (Thome > Iron Sheff) and left (Fields > black hole). Inge v Crede is basically a wash. The Tigers have better starters, the Tigers have a better bullpen.

None of this matters because the Sox would have: Torre.

But, oh, I forgot. They gave Ozzie Guillen an extension through 2012.

Rats. They did? You should write a really bad article about that sometime.

Torre is class. Torre is a winner who won four World Series championships and six American League pennants.

Torre won them. Not Jeter, not Bernie, not Posada, not Pettitte, not Mariano, not Scotty-B (looool!), not Tino, not D-Cone, the Rocket, Spence, or Chuck Knobby-knees. It was all because of Torre's winnery-ness.

Torre is a good man who made the clubhouse a comfortable place for most players, a near-impossibility in New York.

For this he deserves credit, but he is not worth 20 wins.

Torre is a no-nonsense professional who completely would transform the image of the franchise from the current tone of immature, hot-tempered, blustery idiocy.

It's ironic because most of Jay's writing can be classified under one or more of the following: (1) immature, (2) hot-tempered, (3) blustery idiocy. This one is just (3). My favorite example of (1) was when he devoted an entire column to talking about how some comedian called Rex Grossman a "retarded vagina".

But, oh, I forgot. They gave Ozzie Guillen an extension through 2012.

Heard you the first time. Jay is under the false pretense that repeating the same sarcasm makes his writing better.

Someone will hire Torre to manage. It was time for him to go in New York, but not before he showed us the size of his heart by pulling a Johnny Paycheck and telling George Steinbrenner and Sons, ``Take this job and shove it.'' Shame on the Steinbrenner clan for first making Torre twist in the wind, then offering him a paycut after all his fine duties in reaching the playoffs 12 straight years. How wonderful to see Torre prioritize pride over pinstripes and pay. After all those years of maniacally firing managers -- to be precise, 20 changes between 1973 and 1995, including Billy Martin more times than we can count -- The Boss and his kids had it shoved up their tails. A lot of people lived vicariously through the gumption of Torre, the first manager ever to fire Steinbrenner.

Can someone check some sports news sites and see if any of this actually happened? I've been watching ESPN for 3 days straight and I haven't heard a thing about it.

I'd love to have that kind of man's man on the South Side.

But, oh, I forgot. They gave Ozzie Guillen an extension through 2012.

Fools.

For the love of shit. Ozzie doesn't hit. He doesn't pitch. He doesn't field. There aren't any plays to draw up in baseball. All he does is decide when to bunt (poorly), decide who bats where in the order (poorly), and decide when to pull certain pitchers to insert certain others (very well). He's not a good manager. He's also 0% of the reason the White Sox took a dive. Got it?

I suppose we should have a parade at this point. This is the first article Jay has written about the White Sox in months that did NOT make a nonsensical reference to July 2, 2006!

Guys, I've Done Everything I Can, He Won't Shut Up

Yesterday, the White Sox signed Ozzie Guillen through 2012.

You all know what this means.

Uh oh.

I haven't even read this article yet. I can tell you in advance that it's bad enough for posting.

Well, it was nice knowing the Chicago White Sox, who officially have become an irrelevant laughingstock after turning a one-hit wonder into a long-term blunder.

You mean that they signed Carl Everett, Scott Podsednik, Neal Cotts, Cliff Politte, and Jose Contreras long-term? Those crazy White Sox....those guys are one-hit wonders!

Oh sorry. You meant the manager. He doesn't play.

They've handed a five-year contract to their clown act of a manager, Ozzie Guillen, even though he presides over what is dollar-for-dollar and loss-for-loss the most underachieving, unwatchable team in Major League Baseball history.

Jay's definition of "unwatchable" should be discarded, seeing as how he never watches any sports games. And as for underachieving, what was that PECOTA record of the Sox again? All together now, we've heard me say it soooo many times. Don't scroll down, I bet you can get it from memory.

...

...

..

.

72-90.

See how he just writes the same article over and over again?

They've entrusted him with the keys to the asylum even though their record since July 2 of last year, in one of the monumental flip-flops we've seen in sports, is a revealing 98-129.

July 2, 2006

Scene: Jay's Office

Jay Mariotti: How long has it been, Justina?

Jay's Receptionist: Since when?

Jay Mariotti: Since he called me a fag.

Jay's Receptionist: Hmmm....June 20th was almost 2 weeks ago, why?

Jay Mariotti: I need to get back at him.....maybe I should mock his performance somehow? No. That won't work. I don't watch baseball. I need to find a way to show the world he's a lousy manager while knowing nothing about how he affects the team.

Jay's Receptionist: I....just kind of like, answer the phone.

Jay Mariotti: Dammit Cristina, you're no help!

Jay's Receptionist: Yeesh! Well why don't you just draw two columns on a piece of paper and start putting one tally in the left column for a win and one tally on the right for a loss? Then count them all up every day you want to write, and if it's bad for Ozzie Guillen....then....you have your story!

Jay Mariotti: You're a life saver, Christy!

Jay's Receptionist: I'm Rachel......

They've reanointed him the face of the franchise even though the Sox, failing miserably to capitalize on what now can be termed an aberrational 2005, have resumed their traditional identity as the distant No. 2 team in this Cubs fortress.

Here's a thought....ummm....the Cubs....play in a different divison and league, than....the Sox!

(This means, Jay, that the fact that the White Sox are last in the AL Central means more to them than whether or not they are worse than the Cubs)

They've conveniently ignored that a $109 million payroll, without major injuries or calamity, has produced a ghastly 61 wins this season -- way down there with Florida ($30 million) and Tampa Bay ($24 million) among the majors' worst records.

No major injuries. Huh.

White Sox Players Who Have Been Hurt in 2007

Scott Podsednik
Darin Erstad
Jim Thome
Jermaine Dye
Joe Crede (missed almost the whole year!)
Pablo Ozuna (ditto!)

But other than 5 starters and their most used bench player....nah, no major injuries. To be fair, none of those people called you a fag (as far as you know!), so there was no real reason for you to be paying attention to them anyway.

They've stood behind him even when he has embarrassed a city, a sport and two nations, including his native Venezuela, with his immature, insensitive and vapid ramblings.

Not only does this mark the 143rd time that Jay has used this sentence since July 2 of last year, it's complete and utter bullshit hyperbole as well!

And in the biggest of blind spots, they've extended Guillen despite the probable offseason availability of Tony La Russa, who never would have allowed the Sox to collapse the last two seasons and surely would point a talented team toward the playoffs next year. If La Russa can keep the St. Louis Cardinals in contention through their constant storm of tragedies and crises, imagine how he might whip the Sox into quick shape.

Excuse me, Jay, but in what way did La Russa keep the St. Louis Cardinals in contention? Did La Russa have something to do with Rick Ankiel coming back and OPS-ing the life out of the baseball? Did La Russa use his magnetic personality to drag the Milwaukee Brewers and Chicago Cubs down from the peak of their season to the dregs of the NL Central? La Russa did this? Really?

To La Russa's credit, the Cardinals are outperforming their Pythagenport by 5 games. But let's not confuse his efforts with "regression to the mean of the Brewers and Cubs".

As I've written and said often, Guillen and Williams -- and, of course, Reinsdorf -- are too concerned with what is written and said. But the Blizzard lost me Tuesday when he acknowledged he altered his managing style and became softer this year because of criticism directed at him last year. In what generally is a town of benign sports media, Guillen has only one regular critic: me.

Yes, Jay, you're the only person in Chicago that consistently says negative thing about Ozzie. All hail Jay Mariotti, defender of all that is true! This is possibly the most blind and egotistical claim that you've ever made. A lot of people criticize him in Chicago, and almost ALL of them do a better job than you. Here's a good example of why.

Nationally, where sports media are less boosterish, he has more critics. How stunning to see a man with opinions on everything -- a loudmouth willing to take on the world -- tone down his act behind closed doors because he couldn't take the heat.

And they're rehiring him for five more years?

Okay, what do you want the man to do? You tell him over and over that he's a vulgar, despicable loudmouth, and then now, in response to that criticism, he's toning down his act. And now you're criticizing him for that too??? You've gone beyond not making sense. This is fucking pathetic. The worst part is, you only wrote it because you're a fucking baby who couldn't let Ozzie's insults from last year slide. Who is it again that can't take the heat???? Keep firing bullets from the cheap seats Jay, I fucking can't wait for the next one.

(I HATE defending Ozzie Guillen)

I Mean, It IS the Title of the Site, Right?

My apologies for hitting the same guy twice in one day. But as soon as I finished the last post, I noticed he had published this garbage. I'm starting to agree with Jay/Chris W. on the "Fire Ozzie" issue, so his point is right, but Jay sinks ridiculously low in this one. I'll save time and just cut out the highlights.

I am genuinely concerned that Ozzie Guillen is about to say or do something that will shame him and his bosses forever. Hey, have I been wrong about him yet?

You are constantly wrong about him. I can think of maybe two things in the past you have said about Ozzie that were not wrong.

Not only is this man-child a poor loser, he's a scary loser, capable of who knows what as the $108 million White Sox stumble to one of the most underachieving and farcical seasons in baseball history.

Again, Williams paid the wrong players too much. Preseason predicted record: 72-90. I am starting to repeat myself as much as Jay.

[Please] note that the more he lights into his ballplayers, the further they go into the tank. After their 18th loss in 23 games Thursday evening, there is only one sensible conclusion about Guillen's leadership breakdowns amid a 94-122 nosedive since July 2 of last year.

Record of the Sox since July 2 of last year. There it is again. People, this is getting ridiculous. I bet most of you thought I was exaggerating last time when I said he mentions this in every single White Sox column.

He must be fired. Now, today, yesterday -- before the Sox lose every fan they cultivated two years ago.

You openly said last week that you weren't advocating firing him right now.

''Don't like me but win for me, and everything will be fine,'' he said. ''I'd rather they say that than, 'Oh, Ozzie is great, he's my friend, he love my kids and we're in last place.' [Expletive] that. When they see my wife, I hope they say, 'Look at that [expletive], that's Ozzie's wife, she's [married] to a piece of [expletive] like him.' Good, as long as in October we have the trophy. That's what I want.''

My God, is nothing sacred in his life? Yes, it's clubhouse boys' talk, but it's also another example of how clueless he is about handling adversity.

You are a fat, white, middle-aged man in a suit with a cushy job writing about sports. And you have the fucking nerve to tell someone belonging to an ethnic minority who is under the public eye and criticized constantly that he has no idea how to handle adversity. Mariotti, you have no fucking clue what adversity is.

Wednesday, he sounded hideous when he said, here in the 21st century, that his team is ''killing'' him, ''killing'' his family, ''killing'' his coaching staff, ''killing'' the fans, ''killing'' the owner and ''killing everyone.'' No one is dying here, chief. If the Sox have faded into their usual irrelevance, after a brief and aberrational run as champs, let's keep in mind that no lives have been spared.

Jay's Editor: Uhhh, Jay, you might want to change the last word of that paragraph.

Jay: Shut up Jeffrey. I don't need an editor.

Jay's Editor: But you see, you just wrote that no lives were spared, which means everyone is dead, the exact opposite of your point. I think you meant "no lives have been lo-"

Jay: Dammit Jeffrey, you've pissed me off more times since July 2nd of last year than I can even count. Get out of my face, you're fired.

Jay's Editor: Fine! You smell awful! I wonder if Mike Celizic needs an editor.....

But what really should bother us about his latest tirade is that Guillen, more strongly than ever, continues to harshly deflect blame onto his players. In truth, he is primarily responsible for the dismal, lifeless culture that has produced a 28-games-under-.500 reversal since the Sox ruled the baseball world.

You could put the best leader in history in charge of the White Sox, and they would still be awful. I don't know how else to explain it.

Just so you know, the perfect replacement could be available, too. Don't you think La Russa would whip them into shape? You may remember him as a young buck who managed the Sox to a division title in 1983. He was fired three years later by Hawk Harrelson, who somehow was dumber as a general manager than as a Reinsdorf-bobo broadcaster, and he went on to a Hall of Fame career in Oakland and St. Louis. This would be a nice way to rectify one mistake.

And eliminate another.

Right. OK. Sure. Tony La Russa could fix the White Sox. Totally uncrazy. Normal. Sane. Cool. That has about the same chance of happening as Michael Jackson fixing the national debt or Paris Hilton stopping the war in Iraq.

When the "Fag" Fires Back at the "Blizzard"

I've been quieter lately here, because last Saturday I moved out of my parents' basement and into an apartment (which is basement-less, so clearly, less blogging), and setting it up has been kinda hectic. But as long as Jay writes stuff like this, I can take a break from the toils and tribulations of apartment life and get angry enough to throw some disapproval his way. Again, it's about the Sox being bad, so the buzzwords are 1) "Blizzard of Oz" and 2) Record of the Sox since July 2 of last year,

No farewell to Ozzie?
The Sox failure of 2007 should put Guillen on a short leash, but Jerry's kid could get an extension. Sometimes, loyalty is bad business.


Mariotti's failure of 2007 to focus on any aspect of the White Sox besides Ozzie Guillen should put the Chicago Sun-Times on a short leash, but Mariotti could be around for years. Sometimes, stupidity and ignorant ramblings are a bad business.

I mean come on, even ESPN has paid a ton of attention to the Sox and the reasons they're faltering this year. Even if a lot of it had to do with the trade deadline, we have a network that usually ignores the less-popular teams and has to cover the entire league that has been a better source of informed opinions about the White Sox than a columnist that writes for the city's newspaper. No, Ozzie is not a good manager, but the best manager in baseball would not turn the White Sox into a good team, or even a .500 team.

They are, in a word, rotten. Not only have the White Sox underachieved like no other team in baseball, they've sunk to the crusty bowels of the American League Central, now trailing a small-market club in Kansas City that has spent $40 million less. Since July 2 of last season, the Sox are 91-114, meaning Jerry Reinsdorf is getting the least bang for his buck of any owner in the majors.

Obligatory reference #2. I'm going to second Mariotti's motion that whether or not a team makes the playoffs should not be determined by a single-season won/loss record, but by "team record since July 2 of last season" (for the non-frequent readers, of me/Jay, this appears in pretty much every White Sox article he writes).

Oh, and just so you know, the White Sox have not underachieved worth shit. Projected preseason record: 72-90. Winning percentage: .444 Current winning percentage: .443 They have not significantly over or under achieved. They have simply "achieved".

And yet, Jerry still loves Ozzie. You almost want to carve that into a tree and surround it with a heart, or scribble it in marker inside a bathroom stall.

You know what was even better? That time when Ozzie carved "Jay Mariotti <3 Men" into our minds last year!

''I can tell you that right now. Oswaldo Guillen, I love him,'' Reinsdorf said at the owners meetings, reaffirming that his manager's job is safe.

The fact Reinsdorf was asked by an out-of-town reporter, in Toronto, verifies that the Blizzard of Oz's shoddy performance the last two seasons is relevant beyond Chicago.

No, it verifies that news reporters outside of Chicago are still doing their jobs and trying to find news to report on the news for the purpose of news-reporting.

And that's the first of what will be many "reference #1"s. Ozzie Guillen is a Blizzard that lives in the fictional land of Oz. He's the mysterious witch of the south that didn't appear in the movie, where it is always cold, because he's always blowing snow in your face.

How many other managers allow a large-payroll, high-talent team to collapse into a lifeless, embarrassing blob?

Jose Contreras: 6.18 ERA. Old?: Yes
Nick Masset: 7.09 ERA
Mike MacDougal: 5.40 ERA
Matt Thornton: 5.45 ERA
David Aardsma: 6.40 ERA

So LIFELESS.

Bobby Jenks: Weight: 275

So BLOBBY.

(These things are all Ozzie's fault).

If this were happening in New York, Joe Torre's job status would be a constant subject, despite his four World Series titles. If this were happening in Boston, Terry Francona's hide would be smoking, despite his curse-breaking World Series championship. In most large-market situations, no manager can miss the playoffs in successive seasons and waste $100 million payrolls without being held accountable.

Maybe it's Kenny Williams' fault for spending that money where it isn't merited? Ever think of that? Maybe Kenny Williams paid too much for bad players! Kenny Willaims chooses where to spend the money. Kenny Williams. Kenny-Dub.

Jose Contreras: .7 WARP1
Scott Podsednik: .3 WARP1
Alex Cintron: -.7 WARP1

Total salary on the above 3 players who were projected to be bad this year: $13.8M
Total wins contributed: .3 above what 3 minor league players would have done.

But Jerry still loves Ozzie, like Romeo loved Juliet and Desi loved Lucy. But Jerry still loves Ozzie, like Romeo loved Juliet and Desi loved Lucy. Only on the South Side, apparently, does one World Series ring in 88 years of trying merit a free pass for the manager. Never mind that the Sox have lost eight straight games for the first time since the Jerry Manuel era -- he eventually was fired, I believe -- and just finished their first winless road trip involving six-plus games in 16 years. The beloved Blizzard couldn't possibly have anything to do with his team quitting like dogs, even though the manager is responsible for maximizing his talent. Not that the Blizzard agrees with that sports truth.

He doesn't have anything to do with the players being bad. That group of players was projected to lose 90 games this year by PECOTA. They're right on pace.

Except for a flash of destiny in October of 2005, the Sox have been a disappointing team in three of Guillen's other three seasons. I'm not declaring that he necessarily should be fired now -- I repeat: I'm not declaring that he necessarily should be fired now -- but for an owner to openly convey his unconditional love to a manager is dumb business.

You have been declaring that he should "necessarily be fired now" all season long. You have gone home every night and prayed to statues of Jerry Manuel and Terry Bevington that he would be gone. You've purchased a Jerry Reinsdorf voodoo doll to try to get it to happen. You have blamed every single failure of the White Sox on that man. Why are you trying to pretend that these things aren't true now? And you haven't qualified why an owner saying he loves his manager is bad business, not like I'd expect you to explain anything coherently anyway.

Reinsdorf seems to be more interested in protecting Guillen than evaluating the job he's doing. This isn't Milwaukee, Jerry. When a team is in Chicago, the World Series should be an annual expectation, not once in a lifetime.

Yes, for some reason, in Chicago, a city where exactly one World Series has been won in the past 89 years, the World Series should be an annual expectation. Not like in Milwaukee, where they just dick around all day and have sausage races. Chicago is one of those "trying" cities. Making perfect sense as usual, Jay!

And if the Sox keep losing in '08 at the same .443 clip, right down there with some of baseball's sickliest clubs, how can an owner of sound mind possibly bring back Guillen for several more seasons?

If the Sox are projected to lose more than 90 games next year, which is entirely possible, then a lot of sound minds would refuse to fire a manager of an overperforming team.

The Sox likely will try to trade Garland in the offseason, now that the free-agent market has been weakened by the signings of Mark Buehrle and Carlos Zambrano, and my guess is, he'll return to top form with his next team. Why? He never has seemed particularly happy with the Sox, recalling the day last year when Guillen wanted Garland to play OzzieBall -- that is, plunk a Texas batter in juvenile tit-for-tat warfare -- and he responded by twice missing Ian Kinsler.

So....Garland has never been happy with the White Sox because Guillen, one time last year, asked him to hit a guy. And....this lack of happiness is the reason that Garland was very good in the early part of this year and very bad in recent memory, even though the early part of this year was closer time-wise to the event in question that supposedly traumatized him. Cool. Glad I'm on the same page with your completely sane, sensible logic.

You'll hear much about the Sox pursuing Torii Hunter or Aaron Rowand in the offseason. But one free-agent signing won't solve what ails them. The Blizzard has lost his mojo, and whether you take seriously his immature phone calls to radio stations or irresponsible slurs of his imagined enemies, you must acknowledge that the entire package has been turned stale by losing. I've always said Guillen's act would be accepted if he won and rejected if he lost.

Yes, good free agents won't help a team that's like 50% full of minor-league quality players, because the manager has "lost his mojo".

Also: Guillen is losing, and his act is accepted, because he's possibly getting an extension. Accepted by who...you? You are possibly the least relevant thing in the world to the mainstream line of thinking. People don't like you Jay, all I hear when I bring up Jay Mariotti's name is "Ugh, I hate that guy, he should be fired. There should be a blog of some sort on the internet that says he should be fired." Chicago, and the world in general, does not share your line of thinking, regardless of what stupid mental images exist in your head of people being mindless drones that drool when you speak and cling to your every word.