I AM THE SOOTHSAYER

I know you all adhere closely to my gambling manifesto at all times. Always take the spread against a rookie QB on the road, unless it's Vince Young or Ben Roethlisberger or Andy Dalton or another rookie QB capable of covering on the road. Never count on Norv Turner or another shitty coach after Thanksgiving, unless it's one of those seasons where Norv Turner actually has some momentum going and his team is playing well. And of course, always make sure to lose to your sports-ambivalent wife in your annual gambling competition. Yes, I'm a brilliant prognosticator. That's why last post I said (about Bill):

I get that basketball is your thing, and that it's exciting that the US is great at it. But come on--we get amazing basketball for like 7 months out of every year here. You're no better than NBC, cramming basketball, gymnastics and swimming down our throats.

So what did he do next? Wrote a 3,000 word breakdown of swimming and gymnastics. I am a brilliant genius.

You never think of swimming and gymnastics as Summer Olympics rivals in the Magic-Bird sense,

Because they aren't individual athletes with a cool backstory competing against one another at two different levels of their profession for an extended period of time

much less the Tupac-Biggie sense,

And because they aren't artistic non-rivals who happened to peak at roughly the same time and die tragically within 9 months of each other

but that's exactly what they are.

They definitely aren't. Then again, Simmons's cultural knowledge runs about as deep as my knowledge of how to interact with women, so why shouldn't he choose Bird/Magic and Tupac/Biggie for this analogy?

They peak in the splashiest way possible for just two weeks every four years.

Just like two basketball players who wrote a new chapter for their rivalry pretty much every year for a decade, or two musicians who were really only in the public eye for a few years each!

During that precious window, they battle for worldwide attention, television ratings, prime-time real estate,

Pretty sure NBC finds time to show us each and every second of everything that happens in both of them. At the expense of anything else happening during the Olympics.

SNL cameos,

In order to remain podcast buddies with Seth Meyers, Bill is contractually obligated to pretend that SNL is still relevant.

SportsCenter commercials,

If you can find me a Sportscenter commercial featuring a swimmer besides Phelps or any gymnast, please drop a link in the comments.

patriotic pride,

No.

the affection of horny teenage boys,

No.

pop-culture relevancy

You already tried to say that in other ways, and still, no.

and tens of millions of dollars in endorsements.

No.

If swimming and gymnastics were people, they would absolutely despise each other while pretending publicly that everything was totally fine — you know, kind of like Michael Phelps and Ryan Lochte.

JUST LIKE LARRY LEGEND AND MAGIC, EXCEPT THAT THOSE TWO ACTUALLY LIKE EACH OTHER, OR TUPAC AND BIGGIE, EXCEPT THAT THOSE TWO NEVER PRETENDED TO LIKE EACH OTHER!

Look, I know most of my posts these days pick on Simmons, and that most of the time I just mock him for constantly recycling material and being unfunny, and you feel like you've read this all before blah blah blah. But let me take a step back and riff on the bigger topic here. This is unfathomably shitty writing. It really is. He wants to compare gymnastics and swimming, which is dumb, but whatever, it's better than a lot of other garbage he's written about, so I'll allow it. But he can't just say "I'm going to break down these two sports for you." No. He's got to try to (poorly) analogize them to two recent rivalries (one of which isn't really a rivalry), then provide no support for the analogies, then try to change the analogies midstream, all the while cracking pathetically terrible jokes. Look, sportswriters aren't necessarily supposed to be good writers. They don't have to be master essayists, they don't have to wow me with their prose. But holy dogshit on a stick: this man sucks asshole at writing. It's astonishing just how bad he is.

Just know that I have no dog in this race. I don't care who captures the imaginary Summer Olympics title.

How convenient! Neither do we.

But after seeing swimming and gymnastics in London, I feel qualified to answer a question that you always secretly wanted to know:

I feel qualified to answer a question Klosterman has always kind of secretly wanted to know, just because each sport is so overunderrated:

"What's more fun to watch in person … Olympic swimming or Olympic gymnastics?"

I hate to be a party pooper but I'm going to guess that it depends on whether you find swimming or gymnastics more interesting. Sorry.

(Thinking.)

Yep, he's still using that device.

Wait, this sounds like the perfect topic for one of my favorite old-school gimmicks … that's right, it's the Dr. Jack Breakdown!!! 

Please don't use three consecutive exclamation marks in your columns!  Why are you writing like a 15 year old texts!

Let's do this.

Let's present some very brief lowlights of this, because I want to go to bed.

VENUES
They're holding swimming in a 17,500-seat venue with seating on just two sides, so for many fans, they could have called this Noseblood Arena. When IOC members, sponsors and heavy hitters with quality seats started no-showing events, they earned the collective ire of everyone in London. (We never totally knew who to blame, but one thing's for sure — the Olympics should definitely consider using seat fillers à la the Oscars.) Even if you dropped some coin for a night of swimming, there's a good chance you ended up watching tiny dots thrash in the pool from the 137th row. There's definitely a "haves vs. have-nots" vibe for swimming.

You know where else that vibe exists?  Between people who can afford to travel to London for the games and get any tickets at all and people who are watching at home on TV.  You oblivious fucking cuntball.

Meanwhile, gymnastics is in a 20,000-seat, state-of-the-art arena 

The swimming venue is the same age and same state-of-the-artness.  It opened in July 2011.  I get that you're doing a breakdown/competition piece, but Jesus, given that there are absolutely no rules and nothing at stake, you could at least try to minimize the spin.

in North Greenwich that doubles as the site for basketball's medal round games, and eventually, the Memphis Grizzlies, Sacramento Kings, Charlotte Bobcats or NBA Expansion Team X. Tickets were similarly tough for gymnastics despite an equivalent number of annoying no-shows, but at least there were more seats and you could enjoy the action from any section 

Watching tiny little dots on gymnastic apparatuses is WAY better than watching tiny little dots in a pool!

(especially with the big video screen).

I don't know this to be true for sure, but I'd bet good money that the swimming venue has one of these too.

So what should you like more — an inclusive sport that accommodates as many fans as possible, or an exclusive sport that operates like a snotty nightclub with a bouncer who reeks of chlorine? 

What I would like most is for you to stop being an entitled little taint hair who has it better than 99.99% of all sports fans and still thinks he doesn't have enough access.

EDGE: GYMNASTICS

(Confused as to why I am supposed to give a shit.)

As usual, Bill's ability to write outpaces my ability to point out how godawful he is at writing.  

Bill reminds you that you didn't enjoy the Summer Olympics between 1988 and 2000

Do you remember any of those games?  I was too young to know or care about Seoul in '88, but I enjoyed the fuck out of Barcelona and Atlanta.  Sydney not so much, but between Atlanta and then I turned 16 so I probably had better things to do than watch (like hang out in the parking lot of the local 7-Eleven).  Anyways I could swear I really had a great time following those 1992 and 1996 games.  Could swear.  Fortunately Bill's here to set me straight and make me realize that my memories are completely wrong.  Those Olympics actually sucked.

We wouldn't remember the next four Summer Olympics nearly as fondly. Seoul happened during my first year in college; like my freshman year,

Cue up Johnny Carson as Carnac the Magnificent.  Well, this is his bit reversed, but you know what I mean.

 it was tainted by drugs, cheating and a series of unexpected second-place finishes. 

HI YOOOOOOO

(I'm still angry at John Thompson, by the way.) 

I'm sure he's sorry.

Barcelona happened right after I miraculously graduated with a 3.04 — the biggest upset of the 1990s

Add to the list of "That Guys" who Bill is: That Guy who thinks you will think he's cool if he tells you he got mediocre grades.  

— with the Dream Team effectively hijacking every other Olympic memory that summer. 

Yeah, didn't it suck when the best basketball team ever assembled put on a magnificent show for us over the course of two weeks?  Wasn't that just the worst?  Ugh, we should have boycotted those games like we boycotted Moscow in 1980.

Magic and Bird's farewell felt strangely fitting for me, like they were ushering in the official end of my childhood. 

OMG IT'S SO FITTING!  LOOK AT THAT BUILT IN NARRATIVE!  Now that I think about it, even though I was still in elementary school then, it was also kind of like the end of my childhood!  Basketball Jesus is at the center of my life and I'm not afraid to admit it!

The '96 Olympics in Atlanta were a massive letdown, 

Yeah, wasn't it terrible when the US cleaned up the medals (44 gold and 101 total; next closest in each category were 26 and 65) and we got to witness amazing moments from Michael Johnson, Amy Van Dyken, Andre Agassi, Carl Lewis (4th long jump gold for my main man Carl!  UH OH!), and yes, I hate to admit it, but Kerri Strug?  WHAT A LETDOWN.  BOO.  The only thing that actually sucked about these Olympics was that they were held in the south in July and August, but fortunately the atrocious summer weather didn't affect the 99.999% of us watching on TV.

marred by the frightening bombing (and ensuing witch hunt of Richard Jewell), an embarrassing level of overcommercialization, 

That started well before 1996.  Also, he's about to praise the Beijing games, so yeah, either they stopped commercializing the ever-loving shitpiss out of the Olympics, or Bill's head is in his ass as usual. 

NBC's relentlessly sappy puff pieces and a generally contrived vibe that everyone despised 

Read: that I despised

and that had absolutely nothing in common with the dutifully ironic, brooding, me-first attitude of Generation X. 

Yes, there is definitely a connection to be made between the stereotype of Americans born during the 60s and whether or not the Olympics were broadcast in an enjoyable fashion.  

What?

In the span of 12 short years, it was hard to say what changed more — the Olympics or us. 

(staring)

(barfing)

Meanwhile, I wasn't even writing anymore, just bartending, waiting tables, partying, brooding and staying up until 4 a.m. every night. My life sucked. So did the Atlanta Olympics.

Fuck you.  Die.

By the time Sydney rolled around in 2000, I had my own website and a snarky forum to poke fun of never-ending tape delays, 

WHY COULDN'T THEY JUST SHOW EVERYTHING LIVE FROM 9 TIME ZONES AWAY?  WHO SAYS NO?

puff pieces and everything else … you know, just like 10 million other frustrated, underpaid writers on the Internet. (Really, that was our first Internet Olympics.)

And boy did they suck!  Or something!  Bill has abandoned his incredibly self-centered and shoddy thesis.  It's almost like he put no thought into it in the first place.

During 2004's games in Athens, I had graduated to writing the "Sports Guy" column for ESPN.com, making decent coin 

Fuck you twice.

and breaking down Team USA's Basketball collapse with Unabomber-length manifestos. Americans digested that particular Summer Olympics the same way we digested everything else in 2004: inhaling everything while complaining the entire time. 

Almost as worthless and out of place as his Gen-X comment.  You wonder how he writes such dog shit, then you read the ESPN book and find out that he whines to his editor's boss when his editor tries to edit anything, and ultimately writes "stet all changes" on the manuscript and sends it back.

With 500 channels and dozens of Internet-related ways to distract ourselves, the idea of tape-delaying anything sports-related just seemed prehistoric. 

Yeah, who DIDN'T want to watch the events live from like 5 AM til 4 PM?  People with regular jobs? Pity for them.  They didn't have the idea of writing about sports on TV to an audience that liked everything about TV, with the silver spoon benefit of a very helpful AOL blog platform.  

We were pissed off. 

You were pissed off.

I don't even remember enjoying those Olympics, just being bitter about how badly that franchise had been screwed up. 

Now watch him gush all over the Beijing games.  The cognitive dissonance is staggering.

Athens was like watching Clooney as Batman and Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze.

Leave Mr. Freeze out of this.  Arnold did a great job.

Four years later, I passed up a chance to cover Beijing so I could write my 700-page monstrosity of a basketball book. Once upon a time, I had dreamed of covering a Summer Olympics, envisioning it as something of the Super Bowl for sports columnists. You zipped around, attended as many events as possible, ripped off pieces and tried to stand out. 

By pointing out that many Olympic level female athletes are attractive, and then by bringing up The Client List every three paragraphs.  

After 1996, 2000 and 2004, I just didn't care. Those days were dead. Or so I thought. Because Beijing rejuvenated the Olympics franchise, with NBC taking better advantage of its resources (cable and Internet) to show more events as they happened. Suddenly the viewer experience wasn't much different than attending in person — you jumped around and devoured as much as you could.

Of course you did!  Between midnight and 9 AM!  What, it's not like there was anything ELSE going on during those hours.  Thanks, NBC!  What a self-centered cunt this man is.  This is just like that article he wrote about how NBA coaches need to be more mindful of the feelings of season ticket holders.  HOW DARE YOU REST ANY OF YOUR STARS WHEN YOU COME TO MY CITY! I PAID GOOD MONEY FOR THESE SEATS!  SOMEBODY THINK ABOUT ME FOR ONCE!

It helped that Michael Phelps submitted an iconic performance, breaking out as a genuine superstar instead of a manufactured one. 

Which Olympic stars are of the manufactured variety?  99% of them are nobodies until they win something, and the other 1% play pro basketball and tennis and are already stars.

Somewhere between his fourth gold medal and his 27th, I started second-guessing myself for missing Beijing. When our hoops team barely fended off Spain in one of this decade's most underrated dramatic sporting events (no, seriously), 

I get that basketball is your thing, and that it's exciting that the US is great at it.  But come on--we get amazing basketball for like 7 months out of every year here.  You're no better than NBC, cramming basketball, gymnastics and swimming down our throats.

the Summer Olympics moved back atop my Sports Column Bucket List. I could have been there. I should have been there.

But I was too busy writing a book!  (Me!  I wrote a book!  A whole one!)

London is the 11th Summer Olympics of my lifetime and the 30th overall, making it the XXX Olympics (and if you think that's not going to be funny for three straight weeks, you're fooling youself). 

The funniness kind of seeped out of that one for me about 15 seconds after I first realized it.  I guess I'm either fooling myself or no longer in the seventh grade.

Ripping through those checkpoints again: 1972 (no memory),1976 (happy kid), 1980 (parents' divorce), 1984 (the patriotism/pop culture/TV/herofest), 1988 (college freshman), 1992 (college graduate), 1996 (bitter slacker), 2000 (Internet), 2004 (ESPN), 2008 (book), 2012 (here).

Thanks for the recap, news/talk radio host, but no one gives a shit.

That's right … I finally made it to the Summer Olympics.

There are so many parallels to Game of Thrones here, it's uncanny!

According to Bill Simmons, the universe continues to revolve around Bill Simmons

Bill wrote an article about the Olympics.  As is the case with any subject he covers, that really means he wrote an article about himself.

You get older and older, and older, and suddenly, the Summer Olympics become a series of four-year checkpoints for your life. 

No.  No they do not.  You get older and older, and the Olympics continue to be a gigantic competition featuring athletes from all over the world run by a comically corrupt organization. 

This only happens to people who remember just about everything through the lens of sports. 

No, it only happens to self-obsessed fuckholes who cannot stop thinking/talking/writing about themselves.

That's where the word "fanatic" came from. Ever looked that word up? 

Everyone board the train to Clevertown!  No one, least of all some kind of gigantic bore like Bob Costas or Jim Nantz, has even talked about the "'fan' comes from 'fanatic'" thing before.

Here's the actual definition:

"Marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion."

Translation: "Someone who, technically, is a freaking lunatic."

Mind asplode.

When I interviewed Larry Bird earlier this year, 

NO BIG DEAL, YOU KNOW, JUST DOING MY JOB NOW PLEASE LISTEN TO MY PODCAST

I half-jokingly told him that, of the 25 best moments in my life, he was probably involved in 10 of them. 

Some highlights from the other 15:  the moment he realized that proclaiming his devotion to the Patriots was probably a good idea because they were seconds away from kicking the game winning field goal against the Rams in the Super Bowl, the moment he appointed himself official guru of the ESPN trade machine, and that one time Jimmy Kimmel publicly acknowledged that he hired Simmons as a writer for some reason.

He quickly quipped, "You need a better life." He's right. We shouldn't care about sports this much … but we do, and that's just the way it is. 

You are writing without saying anything.  Please provide substance.

I watched my first Summer Olympics back during a time when we didn't have cable television, video games, DVDs, iPads or the Internet. What did we have? 

ROCKS!  AND THEY WEREN'T EVEN GOOD ROCKS!  ALL WE WERE ALLOWED TO DO WAS LOOK AT 'EM!  

Books, toys, board games, a handful of TV networks and a phenomenal amount of spare time. Trust me, we needed Montreal in 1976. 

Kids grew up without electronic gadgets for like 10,000 years before 1976.  I'm pretty sure you didn't "need" those Olympics.

I watched everything. Nadia Comaneci supplanted the Bionic Woman as my biggest crush. I bought loads of Sugar Ray Leonard stock and kept it through the 1980s. Bruce Jenner became just as big of a hero for me as Rocky Balboa a few months later. I even bonded with future heavyweight champion Leon Spinks because we were both missing our front teeth. That couldn't have been a more perfect first Olympics for a budding sports nut.

Pretty much every Olympics ever has a bunch of cool storylines and heroes.  1972 had Mark Spitz and Olga Korbut (to serve as Bill's crush, wokka wokka!).  1968 had Bob Beamon, Dick Fosbury and Charles Hickcox.  For what seems like the millionth time, you fucking asshole: stop inventing narratives.

From there, the Summer Olympics became an eerie reflection for whatever was happening in my life. In 1980, my parents divorced and we sold our house; naturally, that was the summer we boycotted Moscow. 

1980 was also the year of the Lake Placid winter games, which were awesome for reasons we're all pretty familiar with.  Unfortunately that doesn't fit his thesis.

In 1984, I was just a typical dorky teenager who loved sports and pop culture … and somehow, the great sports/pop culture year of all time basically fell out of the sky. 

Jesus Christ.  Holy Jesusballs.  To the extent that 1984 was the greatest sports/pop culture year of all time (it isn't), how else would it arrive other than by falling out of the sky?  Do people look two or three years into the future and say "You know, 2013 is probably going to suck, but man, 2015?  STRAP YOURSELVES IN FOLKS, THE POP CULTURE THAT YEAR WILL BE EXCELLENT!!!"  

We went from "barely any TV options" to "dozens of TV options" almost overnight, with MTV, ESPN and HBO leading the way. 

That's not sports or pop culture.  That's technological innovation.  

What better entertainment climate for Carl Lewis, Mary Lou Retton, Edwin Moses, MJ's Olympic hoops team and everyone else? Throw in the Cold War and a heavy dose of patriotic pride — remember, we dominated the L.A. games because none of the "evil" countries showed up — and Los Angeles became another way to regain our country's collective swagger after an era marred by Watergate, Vietnam, Iran, Nixon's resignation and Carter's punchless presidency. 

Three of those events were more than a decade old by 1984.  The 1976 Olympics could have just as easily been our chance to bounce back from them, but that wouldn't fit Bill's little story about 1984 being THE ONE AND ONLY YEAR in which the Olympics helped the US "regain [its] swagger." 

1984 somehow renewed everyone's faith in America as a superpower while maintaining an unparalled lack of self-awareness, with Bruce Springsteen hitting both elements (even if it wasn't intentional) in just two videos: "Born in the USA" and the now-mortifying "Dancing in the Dark."

Born in the USA is not a pro America song.  Listen to the lyrics some time, you fucking dolt.  Also HAW HAW HAW people in the 80s dressed and danced funny!

Within a year, patriotism became something of a career move for celebrities 

I'm pretty sure showing patriotism has almost always been a good career move for celebrities since whenever we first started having celebrities.

(most notably: Rambo: First Blood Part II and Rocky IV), politicians (like Reagan's second presidential campaign) 

Another dolt who thought Born in the USA was patriotic.

and even wrestlers (with Hulk Hogan changing his entrance theme from "Eye of the Tiger" to "Real American"). So 1984 was the last summer when the Olympics felt, for lack of a better word, pure. 

Maybe to 15 year old Bill (born in 1969)--not to anyone with a brain.  From a "pure competitors" standpoint, steroids had been a part of the games for decades at that point.  From a raw commercialization standpoint, things wouldn't really get out of control until the 90s.  But again, what we're working with here is the idea that as Bill's life goes, the Olympics go.  When you're 15, high school might suck but you're probably not going to be too cynical about the world.  When you're 19, that cynicism is a whole lot more likely to be part of your views.

We couldn't hear the national anthem enough that summer. We didn't care that the Russians and Eastern Europeans skipped L.A., just that our gold medals were piling up. When Mary Lou pulled off her famous vault, you weren't calculating the value of her endorsement potential like you did with a teeth-gritting Kerri Strug 12 years later. 

I don't think anyone saw Strug and thought "CASH COW!"  She was probably on a Wheaties box or something, but she wasn't Michael Phelps.  Sorry, I keep letting facts and perspective get in the way of Bill's little story.  I'll stop.

We were collecting American heroes like baseball cards that year, whether they came in the form of Springsteen, Hulk Hogan, Bird, Joe Montana, Pete Rose, Huey Lewis, or everyone the Olympics were force-feeding us. We just wanted more and more heroes. I remember feeling like a true American during the '84 Olympics. That was my favorite one, hands down, bar none.

(not nodding.)

We wouldn't remember the next four Summer Olympics nearly as fondly. 

No, goddammit, no.  NO.  YOU wouldn't remember the next four Olympics as fondly.  GRRRRRRRRRRRRR SOMEONE PLEASE PUSH THIS MAN IN FRONT OF A TRAIN.

More later.

I sent an email to Simmons begging him to do a mailbag column, because I am a complete and utter fucking box of tools

SIKE, I actually did NOT send such an email, but apparently dozens of mouth-breathers around the world do every day. Bill always makes sure to lead of his mailbags with a few of those emails just so we all know that the people like him, they really like him! To wit:

Q: I'm having a rough patch in my life. I am a broke college student home for the summer and can't find a job. I deposited $6 to my bank account today and the teller literally laughed at me when she saw that my balance was $13. Then I went home and cut my nipple when I was shaving my chest. All I ask for is a mailbag. I need this.

— Jono, St. Louis

Based on the stories he's told about his upbringing, there is no way in hell Bill can relate to the idea of being broke. The nipple thing? Possib-lye.

Q: Which will last longer: The NFL lockout, or the time between Simmons mailbags?
— David C., NYC

Unfortunately the answer was not "the latter, because Simmons has been strapped to a leftover space shuttle launch rocket and shot towards the sun."

Q: Please do a mailbag before Sasha Vujacic marries Maria Sharapova and the world ends.
— John, Omaha, NE

SG: I'll do you one better — how 'bout a mailbag every Friday for the next six weeks?

Yayyyyyy

As always, these are actual e-mails from actual readers.

Some of the questions are so WACKY you'd think they were made up! But nope, turns out there are plenty of people out there who go to Vegas and pretend to have an invisible friend in their midst the whole time, or who think it's hilarious to scream and yell while doing everyday things because that makes you similar to Kevin Garnett or something.

Anyways this mailbag isn't really anything special, relative to the tired and trite crap he usually churns out. In fact, now that he's officially doing it for Grantland, it's about 5% less obnoxious that most of the questions and answers deal with mindless pop culture bullshit rather than sports. (Prominently featured in this edition: how about that Princess Kate? And how about her less attractive sister who is predictably declared to be the hotter sister by prongs like Bill who worship Klosterman and emulate his practice of pointing out secretly super sneaky and counterintuitive stuff that is actually either 1) not sneaky/counterintuitive or 2) just plan wrong? Pretty compelling stuff, no?) Anyways, it's not an excessively horrid mailbag and I don't have a ton of time so there are just a couple things I'd like to bring to your attention.

Q: Grant Wahl thinks we should play the Women's World Cup every two years. You down with that idea?

SG: Absolutely. I couldn't get my 6-year-old daughter to watch the Women's World Cup until the second half of the final game … and by extra time, she was totally hooked.

Absolutely! Have I ever mentioned that I have kids?

She won't watch another meaningful women's soccer game until she's 10. How shortsighted is that?

How do the people in charge of FIFA sleep at night, knowing that they're depriving my not-caring-about-soccer daughter of the opportunity to watch more soccer?

In general, we need to reconfigure these schedules: The Olympics and the World Cup should happen every three years so we could have something this&

Typo alert! Grantland's editors don't hold a candle to the big boys at the parent company. But hey, it's a minor miracle the site is still running at all given the people who are behind it. I'll cut them some slack. Also, I've already talked about how breathtakingly dumb this idea is, but it's been a year. I'm happy to do it again.

2012 (summer): Summer Olympics
2013 (summer): Men's World Cup
2014 (February): Winter Olympics
2014 (summer): Women's World Cup
2015 (summer): Summer Olympics
2016 (summer): Men's World Cup
2017 (February): Winter Olympics
2017 (summer): Women's World Cup

Beyond the entertainment value of having at least one major event every year, did you ever wonder why we decided on the "every four years" thing in the first place?

Because it's a fantastic international spectacle that's difficult to plan, extremely expensive to execute, should have the "specialness" associated with having to wait four years for the next one, and because the ancient olympics took place every four years?

The modern Summer Olympics started in 1896 and settled on a four-year format for one simple reason … it was 1896!

And because the ancient games were on an every four years schedule and the modern organizers wanted to replicate that. AND BECAUSE THEY WERE CONSPIRING TO DEPRIVE BILL'S CHILDREN OF PRECIOUS CHILDHOOD MEMORIES OF SPORTS THEY DIDN'T KNOW EXISTED.

There were no airplanes! Back in 1896, it was really, really, REALLY hard for anyone to get to Athens unless, you know, they lived in Greece. The Games took time to catch on because of travel and the no-television thing; when St. Louis hosted the 1904 Summer Olympics, 580 of the 650 athletes were Americans. In 1921, they decided it was weird to include figure skating and hockey in the Summer Olympics, so they spun those events off into a Winter Olympics (along with new events such as skiing, speed skating, ski jumping, etc.) that launched in 1924 in France with the same every-four-years format because, again, we didn't exactly have United and Virgin around back then.

Look, I can summarize what I read on Wikipedia! And of course, because we CAN do something differently now because of technology, that definitely means that we should. I for one am tired of umpires- let's get an automated strike zone set up ASAP. There is no way that system will have any problems or make baseball less enjoyable.

The Olympics didn't really become THE OLYMPICS until 1936, when Berlin hosted the Summer Games during Hitler's Nazi regime, leading to America's whole "should we boycott?" debate (it didn't), Jesse Owens' laying the smack down (as Hitler watched from the stands) and the Olympics finally reaching its athletic/political/cultural/social potential... only we were stuck with the every-four-years gimmick at that point.

Tommy Craggs thinks you're a fucking dunderhead for pretending that anything at all relevant or interesting happened during the Berlin Olympics.

And it's been that way ever since. Why? Because of the always-dangerous, "That's the way we've always done it!" logic.

No, it's been that way for many other compelling reasons and should not change. But let's get to the apex of the dumbfuckery in this mailbag, presented by Bill Foster Wallace in a footnote to the preceding sentence.

I wrote this in my NBA book when I was trying to blow up the Basketball Hall of Fame: "Few arguments cause more problems than this one: Come on, that's the way we've always done it! When those nine words become the sole reason for keeping something intact, it's a bigger red flag than the one Nikolai Volkoff waved. Change is good. Change leads to hockey masks for goalies,

So having more Olympics because that would be fun for Bill, which means it's a perfect analog to a change that was made to keep guys from being hit in the eye sockets with hockey pucks.

wheels for suitcases,

And a change made because of innovation in the realm of consumer goods

baby seats for little kids

And a change made to prevent people from dying

and seats atop the Green Monster.

SEATS ON THE MONSTAHHHH! BRETT FACKIN' GAHHHHDNAHHHH CAN HEAR US TAUNTING HIM ALL GAME FROM UP THEY-AH BUT HE CAN'T DO SHIT ABOUT IT! This is a change made because it helps the people who made it make more money. In that sense it's almost identical to the idea of having the olympics more often, as long as you replace the word "make" with "lose." (And yes I know the IOC probably has the power to make the games happen every three years if they want, and that the members of the governing body could gain from that. But given what a bunch of greedy twats they are, don't you think they might have already done that if they could get away with it?)

Change leads to iTunes, breast implants, 'Madden' video games, Tommy John surgery, plasma televisions, BlackBerrys, podcasts …"

People who spend money on personal items have the ability to generate change in the markets for those items by demanding certain products and being willing to pay a certain amount for them. So all we need to do is turn the Olympics into a publicly traded company, have the shareholders demand that they happen every three years, and we can expect to see the exact same results that the cell phone and video game markets have seen in the last 20 years! Swell.

Going every three years would be more entertaining, generate more money,

Sound effect goes here

give us a better measure of who mattered the most during a 10-year window,

No one except idiots like you who know nothing about sports think this is important.

and do a better job of capturing athletes as they're peaking.

Oh brother.

Here's a great example: Carl Lewis started peaking in 1982, dominated the 1984 Olympics (when Russia and so many others never showed), then got robbed of his rightful glory in 1988 when Ben Johnson showed up in Seoul with more drugs in his system than every 1999 Home Run Derby contestant combined. By the 1992 Games, Carl Lewis wasn't totally Carl Lewis anymore; from 1983 to 1991, he won six golds in the Olympics and another eight at the World Championships (nailing the 100-meter dash and the 4x100-meter relay every time, and long jump every time except 1991), then two golds in the 1992 Olympics and one gold in 1996. So really, the apex of someone who has to be considered the best sprinter/long jumper ever only coincided with two tainted Olympics and that's that. How was that fair?

And of course, sports should be all about being fair towards athletes. You know, Dan Marino never got to play in a Super Bowl during his prime. Ken Griffey Jr. never got to play in the World Series at all. Every World Cup qualifying period, a top UEFA team chokes away a game or two ends up missing the main draw while some crappy CONCACAF team makes the draw and gets embarrassed in all three of their group stage matches. None of those things seem fair, you know? I think we should change the rules so that none of those injustices can ever happen again. Sorry, Red Sox/Yankees/Rangers- we're putting the Mariners in the World Series this year because if we don't King Felix might never get to play there during his prime. Tough nuts to you guys, you had your chance during the past four seasons. We're all about fairness now.

Every four years gives little flexibility for someone getting screwed over by an injury or accident (Mary Decker), a fluke stinker of a performance (Dan and Dave), a boycott (any of the 1980 Summer Olympians) or even a random attack by a competitor (Nancy Kerrigan). Just watch Without Limits, for God's sake — how was it fun for us as sports fans to watch Steve Prefontaine get boxed in during his gold-medal race in 1972 and settle for fourth, then wait another four years for his redemption (which never came)? If you can come up with a good reason why it shouldn't be every three years, I'm all ears.

So stupid that my mind is boggling as I contemplate even beginning to formulate a specific response. Saying that the Dan O'Brien/Dave Johnson rivalry failure in 1992 means that we should have the Olympics more often is perhaps the worst possible argument you could make in support of this awful position. I'm truly flabbergasted. Dave didn't qualify for the Olympics... which shows that (that year at least) he didn't belong at the damn Olympics. You can't accept a hyped-up advertising campaign as the basis for your position and then reason that because the hype wasn't fulfilled, there is something wrong with the system. The system is not in place to reinforce hype. It's there to make things MORE fair. Holy Jesus on a fucking pogo stick, how fucking clueless is this guy? Probably about as Clueless as Alicia Silverstone! /high fives self

One last point before I go.

Q: You tweeted a link to Kobe's Turkish Airlines ad and asked "'Why does Kobe peek at the chef's ass?' has replaced 'Why does MJ have a Hitler mustache?' as No. 1 weirdest ad subplot." You realize Kobe was actually watching the guy limp away, right? Or do you just hate Kobe so much that you see what you want to see?
--JB, Van Nuys, CA

SG: I just watched the clip 24 straight times. Six of the times, it seemed like he was watching the guy limp away. You might be right, JB. You might be right.

If there is a better example of pathetic trash talk than Bill's BURNTASTIC roasting of Kobe for shooting 25% from the field in a game in which 1) the two teams combined to shoot 35% from the field and score 162 points 2) only one starter on each team shot above 46% from the field 3) Kobe scored 23 points, grabbed 15 rebounds, and 4) also made a bunch of clutch FTs down the stretch as his team clinched a motherfucking title after being down at the half in a game seven, I haven't come across it. It's not just a really sad train wreck of bullet trains full of sour grapes. It's patently unclever. LOL SIX FOR TWENTY FOUR HARF HARF HARF WHY DID HE WIN MVP THAT'S SO DUMM

Kobe can eat a fucking dick and all, but Bill makes me smile a little every time Kobe succeeds.

Actual Firings Might Happen Because of This

In the spirit of a blog whose title purports to encourage the removal of incompetent persons from their occupations, I bring you this post. In the aftermath of Vancouver, Russian President Dmitri Medvedev has decided he's had enough.

Those in charge of preparing Russian athletes for the Vancouver games "should take the brave decision and submit their resignations," he said.

I wish I knew an actual Russian person who could help me unlock the Russian Presidential code that. I lost my Putin decoder ring. So, is this code for:

"The men and women in charge might consider graciously and bravely stepping down from their positions to allow others the chance to help the athletes prepare for the next Olympics"

or

"They better get the fuck out before we disappear their asses to Yakutsk"?

"If they cannot do it, we will help them," Mr Medvedev added.

Looks like the latter.

Russia - traditionally a winter sports powerhouse - ended 11th in the medals table, with just three golds.

It's worth noting that they did finish sixth in the overall medal count, but 11th in gold medals. Still, it's hard to hang your hat on anything when you're managed fewer gold medals than the Netherlands, which has a tenth of your population. [Side note: I just learned that Nigeria is more populous than Russia. No kidding. And they didn't medal at all!] But seriously: Russia still has the advantage of having the most cold weather in the entire world, a HUGE advantage in the per-capita cold weather rankings... and they still didn't win much.

"Fuck Yakutsk!" said Mr. Medvedev under his breath. "We're sending them to Irkutsk!"

"For a long time we have benefited from Soviet achievements, at some point they ran out," President Medvedev said at a meeting of the governing United Russia party on Monday.

I don't know anything about Russian politics. But this still seems a bit silly to me - to publicly call out your atheletes' coaches. But I also imagine this has to do with wanting to save face because his own country is slated to host the next winter Olympics.

If they don't do well in 2014, those coaches better start learning the local lingo in northern Kamchatka.

I'm Not a Hockey Expert

Nor have I ever watched a hockey match, because hockey is the lamest sport this side of soccer, amirite?

/guy at a party who thinks he's clever and funny because he makes fun of sports that aren't football

But seriously now. I know that the U.S.'s win over Canada tonight was an upset. But anyone who wants to compare it to the 1980 Miracle on Ice is probably stretching things, don't you think? Ignoring the Cold War backdrop, you're still trying to compare a bunch of college players beating a team of full time professionals who hadn't lost in forever to a team of NHL players beating a team of better NHL players who didn't even medal at the last Olympics. I mean, hey- I love that highlight. Good for Al Michaels and all that. I welcome any excuse to break it out. I just really think it's silly to compare these two wins. They have a team of superstars... we have a team with some superstars and some regular stars. Let's try not to suck our own dicks too hard on this one. But I'm sure every sports media outlet will be doing just that for the next few days. Awesome.

Sportscenter got an early start on that by leading tonight's show with the 1980 highlight. Hilariously, because they refuse to pay whatever exorbitant price NBC has put on video licensing, they led the show with "DO YOU BELIEVE IN MIRACLES... YEEESSSS" and then just showed stillframe photos from tonight's game. You could really feel the energy and excitement though! And then they showed the box score. I don't know who to hate more- Dick Ebersol and his team of selfish fucktards at NBC, or the ABC/ESPN axis of morons who are responsible for "Who's Now?" and the idea that it's OK to lead your highlight program with a series of still photographs. I'll just go with both.

Pat Forde: Columnist/Grand Marshal for Coach K Pity Parade

Pat Forde wrote this article prior to USA winning the gold medal in men's basketball titled such:

Coach K didn't have to take this gig, which is why he should lauded for it

Wait, Coach Kredibility wasn't forced to participate in the olympics? That means that he's like oh I don't know, maybe about 100% of the other people involved in the USA olympic teams.

They introduce the United States basketball team before each game, and every time it's the same.

Roars for Kobe Bryant and LeBron James. Enthusiastic cheers for the rest of the roster. Silence for coach Mike Krzyzewski.

Egads, the coach didn't get the same level of applause as two of the most skilled, exciting, charismatic, etc. players of all time? What is wrong with olympic basketball fans?

It's a long way from the collegiate love bubble of Cameron Indoor Stadium to NBA-crazy China. The idolatry Krzyzewski is accustomed to at Duke is lost in translation here.

As it is in literally every other arena in America.

A billion Chinese really don't give a damn who coaches this collection of superstars.

Nor should they, as that orang from Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back could probably coach this team to a gold medal.

Coach K's mission was to go from college basketball emperor to Olympic facilitator. From the guy with every answer to the guy with everything to lose.

Just note what Forde says here, and then read this next paragraph.

They've called this the Redeem Team, but Krzyzewski needed no redemption. His basketball legacy is secure: three national titles, Hall of Fame membership, status as the most accomplished and authoritative active coach in college basketball. He's in the thick of the debate over who is the all-time greatest college coach not named John Wooden.

So in other words, he really has nothing at all to lose.

Despite all that, the 60-year-old voluntarily stepped out of his considerable comfort zone and put his rep on the line alongside the 12 guys wearing the uniforms.

Again, he was risking NOTHING. If they didn't win the gold, everyone would say that NBA players just can't play international basketball even with the greatest coach ever in the history of sports. Or, if they won, people would say that it had a lot to do with Coach Komendable's incredible koaching.

If the U.S. does win the gold medal Sunday against Spain, the credit will go to the players, who have done everything right these Games. They'll deserve it. They've played with passion, togetherness, respect for the ability of their opponents and appreciation for what the Olympics are all about.

Krzyzewski? He'll receive some ancillary praise for his caretaker's role.

Which of the following was an ancillary reason for the US winning the gold medal:

A. Team USA being so insanely stacked that Dwayne Wade, Chris Paul, Chris Bosh, and Darrent Deron Williams came off the bench.

B. The head coach, who had 5 college/NBA coaches working under him. The Koach who's won all of 1 NCAA national championships in the past 15 years despite consistently having teams filled to the brim with McDonalds' All-Americans.

But if the U.S. loses, repudiation will rain down on the college guy who somehow found a way to screw up a royal flush of professional talent. These days, the loser always gets killed for being out coached -- and if the loser has LeBron and Kobe, he definitely won't be the guy with lesser talent.

Or much more likely, he would dodge blame, just like he does in every year where Duke under performs. Meanwhile, Kobe and Lebron would get raked over the coals by dumb fucks like Skip Bayless who would say crazy shit like "Kobe and Lebron are holding Team USA back."

So far, so very good. The U.S. has won its seven games by an average margin of 30.3 points, and there are no signs of unhappy campers on the American roster. Hell, the All-Star subs are on their feet and cheering as much as the walk-on Dookies Krzyzewski coaches during the winter.

Ubuntu, thy name be Team USA.

And now he's 40 minutes away from joining his former mentor, Bob Knight, as the owner of three NCAA titles and one gold medal. Only a monumental collapse could stop the completion of this redemption mission.

So even Forde realizes it's harder for this team to lose than win.

When America does beat Spain on Sunday, there once again doesn't figure to be any appreciable applause for Mike Krzyzewski in Beijing. But he'll deserve it, for taking a greater risk and accepting a lesser reward.

Jeez, what's that weird ringing sound? It's getting closer. Oh shi--

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMbulance.

FireJay writers can spot the stupidity in a TMQ article in 1/100th of a second

If you're one of our twelve readers, you may remember this entry by Larry B, where he points out Easterbrook's inane rejection of decimal times for measuring speed at the NFL Combine. Now that pretentious d-bag is at it again (Easterbrook, not Larry B):

In other Olympic news, the timer said Michael Phelps swam the 100-meter butterfly in 50.58 seconds, Milorad Cavic swam it in 50.59 -- can anyone seriously believe either finished one-hundredth of a second different from the other?

I think most people find it much easier to believe that two different swimmers didn't finish at the exact same fucking time.

The timer said Britta Steffen swam the 50-meter freestyle one-hundredth of a second faster than Supermom Dara Torres.

Allowing for a winner and loser to be determined. Damn this backward system!

Tenths of seconds are absurd enough, as Tuesday Morning Quarterback noted a few months ago.

Noted with completely idiotic logic, mind you.

A hundredth of a second is too fleeting to have any common-sense relevance, let alone decide an athletic event;

TMQ is therefore in favor of a large number of swimming and track events ending in 3 way ties.

and this is setting aside whether a mechanical device splashed with water (the touch pads) can be accurate to the hundredth of the second.

Technologies Easterbrook is willing to put his faith in:

1. A brake pedal that slows your car down as you apply pressure to it.
2. Keyboards, which make letters appear as you type them.
3. The snooze button on an alarm clock which instantly cuts the sound off when touched.

Technologies Easterbrook does not believe in:

A giant stop watch connected to a touch pad.

Yet numerous clocks in Beijing show hundredths of seconds, as if these splinters of time can be measured meaningfully.

Again, Easterbrook doesn't think that assigning winners and losers is meaningful for Olympic games.

Reader Fred Ruonala notes that as the Phelps result was announced, one of the NBC announcers said viewers could "clearly see Phelps touched first." Now Olympics announcers can perceive hundredths of seconds.

Or as you point out, they probably can't. Therefore, we need some other system besides the naked eye. How about, oh I don't know, maybe a giant stopwatch connected to touch pads? Nah.

Scoop Jackson gets into the Olympic spirit by writing a horrendous Olympic themed article

There's this theory I learned about in college called "The Banality of Evil," that essentially says that that most people in the world who do evil things (ethnic cleansing, drug cartels, Matthew McConaughey/Kate Hudson movies) are completely oblivious to the lack of morality in their actions.

Therefore, I present to you Scoop Jackson as proof of my thesis: "The Banality of Stupidity."

USA basketball is missing something ... or someone

They looked good, didn't they? Flashes of '92, right? Like we 'bout to get that ol' thing back.

I would never phrase it that way, but yes.

But something still doesn't feel right, right? There's still something wrong, isn't there? It's like something is missing, but you just … can't … put … your … finger on it.

Perhaps it's the fact that the '92 team had 10 of the top 50 NBA players of all time, along with the fact that basketball wasn't the international sport it is today. A wild guess; I know.

Let me help. There was a point in the third quarter of USA's final pre-Beijing tune-up against Australia (which was playing without Andrew Bogut, mind you) when Chris Bosh took over. The U.S. lead had fallen to single digits. But, off a pass from Dwyane Wade, Bosh came down the lane doing his best David Robinson impersonation and threw one down.

David Robinson: previously the only American to take a pass and dunk it in Olympic competition.

But after that, the Australians scored with ease. And often. They never flinched; they acted as if Bosh's dunk was nothing more than two points.

When in reality the dunk had been worth 7 points because Bosh had taken off from an NBA JAM Hot Spot.

Another national team, scared by us in a basketball game? Not anymore. Not even facing the best team the U.S. has been able to assemble in eight years.

Not like in '92 when it was routine for the US's opponents to sneak out of bathroom windows during halftime.

But Chris Bosh is not the issue here. He just exposed the void that might just hinder the Redeem Team's quest for gold. What's missing on this team is an intangible that, on his best day, Bosh (or Dwight Howard, or Carlos Boozer, or anyone else on the team) can't provide -- the intangible that would make this feeling that's gnawing at the bottom of our stomachs like leftover ceviche go away.

Please note that he says that the team is missing an intangible.

On the eve of the opening ceremony, it's too late to do anything about it. This team has other concerns too -- like occasional apathetic defense, intensity lapses and not having anyone besides Michael Redd to drop needles from 30 feet or anyone besides Tayshaun Prince to lock down a player like Spain's Juan Carlos Navarro if he gets warm. But what's missing is …

Amare Stoudemire.

So apparently Amare Stoudemire is now a phantasm because he can be listed as an intangible. What other wisdom can you impart upon us, oh brilliant basketball sage?

Even though Chris Anstey of Australia believes the fear factor is still there ("I think a lot of teams get intimidated by that [U.S.] team"), the truth is, if the intimidation factor was there, none of us would have that feeling in our stomach.

Even though there's evidence to prove the intimidation factor is still there, it actually isn't because I get nervous (and therefore, assume everyone else does) while watching the games.

Nothing against anyone on this squad, but Stoudemire -- who elected not to participate, concerned about the health of his surgically-repaired knees -- is the only player who was available to the United States who could have taken that feeling inside of us away. His presence, his demeanor, his anger, his power, his meanness, the messages he sends when he plays … that's what is missing.

How could he be so selfish? He led the NBA in MORP (Meaness Over Replacement Player) and Messages Sent During Games, but he didn't come to Beijing. Benedict Stoudemire if you ask me.

The U.S. team is made up of great players, but none are mean. They're all too nice. No one is going to elbow an Angolan in the chest for no reason.

Nor should they have to.

There's no one who makes other teams think twice about whether they really want to win; that player who can knock the will and ambition out of a team without throwing a punch;

Like Stoudemire did to his own team in the '07 playoffs when he got suspended for leaving the bench during a fight.

that player who can do something on offense that is so intimidating to the opposing squad, the U.S. doesn't have to play defense for two or three trips down the floor because its opponent is so shook up.

Not even Professor Xavier has that sort of mental dominance over people, so please shut the fuck up already.

Had that been Stoudemire instead of Bosh on the other end of that pass from D-Wade against Australia, flying down the lane for a flush, that game is over. Shrinkage sets in on the other side. Their shots stop falling. Confidence exits their souls as if someone yelled, "Fire!"

No one in the world believes that would've happened, and for you to insininuate that it would is both negligent and insulting.

But after watching the U.S. get past Turkey and Lithuania like they were AAU squads, and then be challenged by Russia and Australia, it is glass-cubicle clear that once the games begin in Beijing, no one is going to be afraid of the U.S. team. Or anyone on it.

Except for the guys who already said that they were intimidated.

True, LBJ can go nuts. Kobe can lose his mind offensively. And those things may reduce an opponent's chances of winning.

Sure, the Redeem Team can score all the points they like, but will that intimidate the other team into losing? No, no, no, and more no.

But they won't crush an international team's spirit the way they do in the NBA. The Wizards and Spurs may be scared, but the world ain't.

Ready yourselves for this week's "Jack's Lesson on Logical Fallacies:"

IF Kobe can intimidate the Spurs and beat them in the Western Conference Finals
AND One of the Spurs best players is on Argentina (one of the better teams in the world)
THEN Kobe's intimidation factor is useless in the Olympics

BUT

IF Amare Stoudemire is so unintimidating that his team lost to the Spurs in the playoffs 2 years in a row
AND One of the Spurs best players is on Argentina (one of the better teams in the world)
THEN The US is considerably worse off without Stoudemire's intimidation factor

QED

Stoudemire's ability to do things by sheer force -- force no other international player, or any other player in the NBA for that matter, possesses -- could have been the difference between this team simply winning the gold medal and this team winning the gold medal while never having less than a 25-point lead after halftime. The difference between destiny and dominance. Redemption and resurrection.

The difference between tomatoes and the French Revolution. Ferarris and cell phone towers.

So as you watch this team go for the gold, pay close attention to what is missing. Visualize the difference Amare Stoudemire would've made. Not that we are looking for perfection, but we are in search of something damn close. And if we're looking for this team to re-establish our true place in the game, by having other nations straight scared of us when they have to go against us, then we may have to wait until 2012 -- when Team USA might be able to convince Stoudemire just how necessary he is.

Or the US could just play defense and unselfish offense, and let Stoudemire stay at home every year.

Because in this sport we call basketball,

Atencion! Si hables espanol, El Scoopo Jackon-o dice "Baloncesto."

in which we are trying to redeem ourselves, why just go for the gold when instilling fear is a much greater reward?

Because the gold medal means we won, and we're better than every other country at basketball. Amare Stoudemire didn't come, so we have no shot at the fear award anyway.

Please clear out your desk and remove all personal effects from your office as soon as possible.

Rick Reilly Is a Proffesional Sports Writer

Rick Reilly is paid makes around a million bucks a year as a sports journalist and enjoys a celebrity status held by few others in his industry. He also hates people who write on blogs, as they do not have the perspective and access to write the in-depth pieces that he produces. With hard hitting articles like this one, it's hard not to agree with him:

My Favorite Olympic Sport? Translating the Anthems.

Facial IOC, total facial.

Here come the Olympics, when we are reminded of the unquenchable spirit of the athlete, the true fellowship of nations through sport—and the Spam-brained quality of most national anthems.

National anthems are anachronistic holdovers from an ugly part of world history. No one need spend any amount of time analyzing them.

It's so sad when bad anthems happen to good countries. America, for one. Ours goes up and down so many octaves only certain German shepherds can hear all of it.

Really sticking your neck out there, Rick.

Andorra. I look forward with great zeal to the day when a 350-pound Andorran shot-putter with phone booths for arms stands on the podium and sings: "I was born a princess, a maiden!" Hey, with today's medical breakthroughs, it's possible.

A man singing a line as if he was a woman? LOLZ!

Ukraine. I love it because it asks so little. The first line: "Ukraine has not perished." I call that managing national expectations: "We're not dead, okay? Give us that."

1. I'm sure that as with all these anthems, the translations are not perfect. My guess would be "perished" is translated from a word that doesn't exist in English.
2. Just off the top of my head, Ukraine has been under the brutal oppression of the following countries: The Mongolian Horde, Tsarist Russia, Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, and Soviet Russia again. So the fact that Ukraine has survived is actually a pretty big deal.
3. You rip on their anthem for bragging about its nation's survival, whilst our anthem brags about a battle that we didn't win (we survived an attack) in a war that we pretty much lost (War of 1812, Washington was burned to the ground).

This anthem is played each day at 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. It declares, "Every inch of Thailand belongs to the Thais." Odd.

Yeah, not a lot of disputes going on in the world over land and which nation has legitimate claim to it. Not Cyprus, the Balkans, Northern Ireland. Nowhere .

Was anyone under the impression it belonged to Diddy?

Obligatory reference to Sean Combs to prove article is topical - check.

Algeria. "We have taken the noise of gunpowder as our rhythm and the sound of machine guns as our melody." This is why no one invites your band anywhere.

That is kind of funny.

Sweden. Here is a national anthem that has almost nothing to do with the country it honors. It's mostly about the Nordic way of life. Swedes are like that. Once, at an Olympic soccer game, I listened to Swedish fans chanting and singing. Finally, I asked one what they were urging their players to do. "The players?" she said. "We simply chant: 'We are from Sweden, we have come a long way and we are drunk!'"

Hey, this has nothing to with the topic I've laid out, but this one time this Swedish person told me about a hilarious phrase they were chanting.

China. The Chinese change their national anthem about every other Tuesday, but the latest, approved in 2004, talks about putting up a "new Great Wall!" If I'm Chinese, and I'm looking at the 4,500-mile one that took 19 centuries to build, I'm thinking, Look, we'll do a Good Wall, but Great? No way.

Why oh why did no one consider Rick Reilly for replacing Leno?

The national anthem of Spain is easy to learn. It contains no words. Don't you wish the same could be said of Imus?

Don't you wish Don Imus didn't contain any words? Holy shit that makes a lot of sense.

Hate to admit it, but France's "La Marseillaise" is very good. Remember how it drowned out the Nazis in Casablanca?

Remember in that fictional movie about a story that never happened, when that song drowned out the Nazis? It totally ruled!

(Watch out Simmons)

The best, though, is Great Britain's "God Save the Queen."

It's embarrassing for Andorrans to sing "I was born a princess, a maiden," but not for England, a country stereotyped for effemine acting men, to say "God save the QUEEN." Just throwing it out there.

For catchiness it ranks only slightly behind "It's a Small World (After All)."

And since it is the catchiest song I have ever heard in my life, "Girlfriend" by Avril Lavinge is the indisputable best song of all time.

There's a bit more, but there's no point. Here are some things to ponder:

1. Rick Reilly writes 1 column a week, and this is what he came up with.
2. Exactly how many minutes of research did this require? 15? 10?
3. Which took longer, the "research" or the writing? Could the total time spent on the article be anywhere over 30 minutes?
4. If this were a post on joeblowsportsblog.blogspot.com, is there any shot in hell that it would get linked on Deadspin or The Big Lead?
5. This article was posted on the front page of the most frequented sports site in America.