ESPN has SOME shame? Oh wait, no, ESPN has zero shame

The title is a quote from Chris W, uttered when I linked him to this story. It wasn't that big a deal on its own, nor is event that is the subject of this post, but if you put all these little puzzle pieces together they form a giant mosaic of questionable decisions that contains the phrase WE ARE A BUNCH OF CHODES when you step back and look at it.

There's a great quote from Those Guys Have All the Fun that I literally spent 25 minutes trying to find tonight. For the life of me I couldn't. It's from one of ESPN's top executives, perhaps John Skinner, and the essence of it is "We absolutely do not let our business relationships color our editorial and reporting decisions. No way. The two sides of the network are completely separate from one another." Again, I'm not quoting exactly, but the phrasing is somewhat similar; it's got a "methinks the lady doth protest too much" tinge to it.

Obviously the above link is a nice little anecdotal rebuttal to the exec's claim. An even better anecdote comes from an editorial decision ESPN made last week. If you frequently read internet weblogs on the world wide web you've already heard about it, but I had to make my own post on it so I could use that terrible and unclever mosaic metaphor in the first paragraph. If you somehow hadn't heard about it yet, here's the gist: every late December Sportscenter does a big "year in review" episode. Among the items in said episode is a tribute to those in sports who have passed away in the previous 12 months. Pretty standard stuff. This year, however, ESPN didn't include any hockey players. None.

Now granted the list of people they did include is reasonably short and has some legendary figures like Joe Frazier. But there are also some not-that-famous names on the list. Hideki Irabu? Walt Hazzard? Both guys who left a mark on their sport but were not marquee names. Derek Boogaard didn't have a very long or storied career but his death was sensational and brought some pretty troubling sport-wide issues to light. A couple other active players died, and some dudes who are in the HOF. Meanwhile, the Lokomotiv Yaroslavl plane crash was about as devastating and brutal as sports-related deaths get. Not a single peep from the Four Letter. Hmmmm. Could it have anything to do with this? Five will get you ten that it did. Of course, by the time the Stanley Cup Finals roll around and WNBA highlights are leading SportsCenter, it'll be a distant memory.

I'm back from vacation, and while I was on it I read that ESPN book that came out back in May

God, look at how proud of myself I am for having done something that literally billions of people are capable of doing on any given day. I couldn't wait to tell the six of you who still read this blog. I had to put it in the title of the post, didn't I? I feel like Jim Gaffigan, shoehorning it into conversation. "Hey, how's it going?" "I READ A BOOK!!!"

Anyways "Those Guys Have All the Fun" is a pretty decent read. It certainly had its boring and slow parts HOLY BALLS I REALLY COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT THE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF HAVING YOUR CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS THREE HOURS FROM NEW YORK CITY RATHER THAN IN NEW YORK CITY but it's largely entertaining. (To be fair, the story of why ESPN originated in Bristol CT in the first place is actually very cool. The book follows the network's history chronologically and I think the first 150 pages were probably my favorite.)

Predictably (and with good reason) it gives ESPN the kid gloves treatment, failing to mention some of its biggest failures while glossing over the rest, but obviously I expected that. It was still reasonably candid on some topics that I thought might be considered taboo. I also learned to see some ESPNers in a new light. While Mitch Albom and Jemele Hill are obviously incredibly stupid people, they come off as very down to earth and normal in the book. Their egos seem to be under control. And while Stephen A. Smith is a jackass whose ego is out of control, he comes off as extremely smart. I didn't see that coming.

While I could probably do five huge posts about some of the shit ESPN's biggest and brightest said in there, for tonight I will simply share with you a series of quotes from one man. His identity should be immediately obvious. The samples below represent about 3% of the insanely obnoxious things he says throughout the book.

If you put my professional tombstone up, the first sentence would be: "He did [name of show]." First one. That show made [sport that was already one of the most popular sports in America before the show existed, if not not the most popular] famous. I would always hear "You guys made me a [name of sport] fan! Now I can watch a whole game!" or "We watch [show] together as a family."

I'll give you a hint as to which sport he claims to have helped make palatable for the average American sports consumer in the 1980s/90s- it's played with a ball, and you use your foot to kick that ball sometimes, and it's not soccer, and Trent Dilfer is really good at identifying guys who play it, teams that play it, and fields upon which it is played. So yeah. That's a reasonable thing to say.

Re: Cal Ripken Jr.'s 2,131th consecutive game, which this guy announced:

In early August, I started reading a book on Lou Gehrig, which I thought would be a nice way to prepare. No one told me to do it; that was my contribution, all by myself.

Now he's got the same problem Gaffigan and I do. OOH OOH FAWN OVER ME I USED MY EYEBALLS AND BRAIN TO COMPREHEND THE WRITTEN WORD! GIVE ME A MEDAL!

I looked him straight in the eye and said "Cal, do you think you might get in tonight?" And he just lost it. Cracked up . . . He thanked me later. I'm the only person who put him at ease the whole couple of days-not that that's what I was trying to do.

NOT THAT IT'S A BIG DEAL OR ANYTHING!

Re: obnoxious former ESPN producer/manager Mark Shapiro, who is such a legendary fuckass that he probably deserves his own post later this week:

We would meet quite a bit. I was pretty secure in where I was and what I was doing. I had been there at that point for over twenty years, from the beginning, and I wasn't about to leave because this guy was there. I have the public. I walk down the street and it's like "Thanks for twenty years!"

Oh brother.

Here's my favorite:

I've been treated unfairly by the TV sports critics. They say I'm a clown. It's an act. When they use the word "act," it's like "aaact." "Act" would be playing a character who you're clearly not, by definition in Webster's. To act is to take on the characteristics of someone else. "We don't like Berman's style." Fine "Don't like Berman's act" is "WHAT ACT?!" What is that? What would that be? Or that he's a clown. You mean I don't come prepared? Stop. Stop. The most hurtful thing they write is that I'm just out there making events be about me.

Oops, did I leave his name in up there? Or did your brain just fill it in where I used a placeholder since it's so fucking obvious that this is who I'm quoting? It's a mystery. But in either case, have you ever heard a person be this blissfully self-unaware and so patently self-absorbed before? You think that people say you're a clown and in doing so mean that you don't prepare for your work? You think that your show (NFL Primetime) "made football famous?" FUCK. YOU. Christ, he makes Simmons sound like the Dalai Lama.

More to come later this week. Specifically stuff from Simmons (he claims to have "thick skin"- lollerskates), that obnoxious whiner Kornheiser, and a cast of thousands.

I think we have a label for this

From ESPN:






In the words of Chris W, who brought this article to my attention, "Psh. Good luck trying to get people to watch the Super Bowl."

The article itself is reasonably inoffensive; it's basically just a note that Jets fans hate the Steelers a lot right now and Giants fans have hated the Packers since the Packers drubbed the Giants in week 16 and then a list of Steelers/Packers players who have a connection to the Giants or Jets. Although I do appreciate the "New York is the figurative and literal center of the world and if something doesn't involve New York in any way then it's irrelevant" douchiness of the title. Saying the Super Bowl still matters even though [team X] isn't a part of it is like saying that a cold-blooded murder is still sad even though the victim wasn't [name any super kindhearted and generous person].

But yeah, the first label below says it all.

This is horrible

Seriously. Was the editor really not be content with either "Road Block" or "Block Party"? Was it really necessary to awkwardly fuse together two different puns to form one long pun that won't make sense to anyone who doesn't know that the Patriots were the road team and blocked a field goal?

Also, what would a road block party even be if such a thing were to exist? That's a question I don't want to have to answer.

Another Reason why ESPN.com Sucks

So ESPN.com has this thing called "Hot Stove U" where they put out content about baseball during the offseason. It's only for ESPN Insiders, which I am not, so we won't go into the articles here, which is okay, because they are probably terrible. Anyways, here are the titles in the series so far:

• Why baseball needs Joe Mauer in Minnesota

Baseball doesn't need Joe Mauer in Minnesota. Minnesota needs Joe Mauer in Minnesota. Keep reading.

• Why the frugal Twins remain competitive

Good lord, ESPN.com's writers have the usual devotion to the Minnesota good-old-American-dream-family-values-moral-goodness Twins. What a load of bullshit. The Twins play in the 16th largest metro area in the USA - larger than Denver, St. Louis, Baltimore... and they drew 2.5 million fans-(14th in the league) last year to one of the worst stadiums in all of baseball... and yet they're still treated like a little old town of hard-workin' lumberjacks who are the opposite of the Yankees.

The Twins surely have a good business model - they're able to generate effective value in wins and attendance without spending a zillion bucks. Maybe the Mets should take note. But still - I'm so tired of hearing how unfortunate it is that the Twins can't afford to keep their star players. Their owner

• Why the Cubs have a bad contract situation

Overexposure of the Cubs. Who cares, 102 years, Cubs fans are boorish drunkards, etc, etc.

• Why the Red Sox are making "old school" cool

This article is about how the Red Sox are straying from the principles of Moneyball and going back to 'old-school' methods. No doubt other teams might be doing this as well, but these writers know that the Red Sox generate more hits than anyone else. Apparently MLB teams follow the Red Sox's popular methods just as much as the one douche in your history class who was born and lived two years in Woonsocket and just wants to tell everyone on the internet how he has always been a Red Sox fan.

• Why Derek Jeter is second-greatest SS all time

Ugh. I saw a shorter headline for this same article that said, "Jeter Consistent". Good lord, these articles hurt.

• Why game's best arms hate to face Ryan Braun

Hey! An interesting article about something vaguely new! I am astonished!

Uh Oh, Someone Taught an Idiot a Big Word

Those who are stupid enough to watch NFL Live at 1 in the morning for no good reason (read: me) know that Trent Dilfer is in a dead heat with Ron Jaworski for being the analyst who most obnoxiously overuses the word "football" as a qualifier/adjective. By which I mean that whenever he's discussing highlights, they're always about football players making football plays on football fields for their football teams in a football game, etc., rather than players making plays on the field for their team in a game. You know what I mean.

Well apparently some asshole at ESPN, knowing that Trent is a guy who likes to sound smart but in reality is too dumb to tie his own shoes, decided to teach Trent the word "dynamic." Now, I know what your next question is. And the answer is no. No, they did not teach him the word's meaning. Just the word itself- which sounds pretty long and smart when you say it. Go ahead, just say it now. Listen to all those syllables. You sound like someone giving a presentation at a big corporate meeting, with a big posterboard with some pie charts and bar graphs behind you on an easel! Dynamic pie charts and bar graphs.

So I'm sitting here, wasting my night listening to Trey Wingo try to be even more annoying than Stuart Scott, and in about 10 minutes of color commentary Trent has used "dynamic" approximately 750 times. Teams are dynamic. (They're dynamic football teams, in fact.) Players are dynamic. Schemes are dynamic. Game plans are dynamic. Audibles are dynamic. Hell, even some coaches and referees are dynamic. The way certain guys tackle or run routes or block is dynamic. He even referred to someone's explosiveness as dynamic. Is that possible? Can you have explosiveness which varies in nature and is capable of changing and progressing while taking on different forms? Anyways, thanks to this anonymous word-spreading asshole (or perhaps a "365 Cool Words!" daily calendar) and Trent, everyone and everything in the NFL is now dynamic. This blog and all its readers might as well be considered dynamic at this point. Nothing would make Trent happier.

Brett Favre Throws Perfect Game

As most of you know, Mark Buehrle threw a perfect game on Thursday. I know it's happened about 4,421 times before, but still kind of a big deal. I woke up on Friday morning, excited to watch the beginning of SC on ESPN to get a look at the highlights.

First story: Brett Favre having some misgivings about returning to play for the Vikings.

Second story: Michael Vick will find out next week whether he will be reinstated into the NFL.

After spending 5 minutes apiece on these two "stories" we hit White Sox / Rays.

It's like ESPN is a 15-year-old girl, and Brett Favre is her overly dramatic best friend.

FUCK YOU ESPN.

John Kruk's Tiny Brain Tries to Analyze Baseball

I try to avoid writing posts about my favorite teams. I really do. Even my favorite sports blog, the dick joke-tacular Kissing Suzy Kolber, suffers from occasional unfunniness as its writers spend too much time on lame jokes and irrelevant news stories about their favorite teams (OMG apparently the Redskins are going to sign a new long snapper!). But sometimes a dick-for-brains fatso like John Kruk takes a horrifically analyzed shot at the squad you live and die for. And that's when you're allowed to break your own rules.

So I'm sitting there in my mom's basement last night, watching Lord of the Rings, eating Funyuns, and playing Stratego against my stuffed animals like usual, when I realize that Baseball Tonight is on. The Rockies have just finished off an 11-1 drubbing of the Angels. Since there were only a handful of games because it was a Monday, and because the Rox have now won 17 out of 18, I realize that there's actually a good chance they're going to get some airtime! It only happens about once a month (usually in the context of "How can the Cubs/Dodgers/Mets/Phillies lose to a team like the Rockies? Impossible") so if you're a Rockies fan you don't want to miss it. As soon as I flip the channel to ESPN, I see a screen displaying the following graphic:

Dexter Fowler 77
Chris Iannetta 233
Troy Tulowitzki 345

And who is talking about this mysterious set of numbers but everyone's favorite unitesticle, Mr. Kruk. I quickly realize the numbers indicate each Rockie's career games played. What's John's angle? Unfortunately I don't have the exact quotes, but what follows are reasonably accurate representations of what he had to say.

I mean, as you get going deep into the season, you don't know how these guys are going to play. They're inexperienced. These guys just aren't known quantities.

It quickly becomes apparent that Krukie's mission for this segment is to tell the nice people at home why the Rockies suck and have absolutely no chance at getting to the playoffs this year. Now, here's the thing. Any analyst can hold that opinion if they want to and it won't bother me. Go right ahead. I'm not some kind of zealot, sitting here saying "If you don't think the Rockies are going to win the World Series then you can just shut the fuck up right now." It's not like that, I promise.

But if you're going to say that they're not a playoff contender, try to pick a reason for doing so that makes some vague semblance of sense. Seriously. Go way, way, way out on a limb and find something better than this. The back of their rotation is shaky. Their pen is leaning on castoffs from other teams like Joel Peralta and Josh Fogg. Even with Brad Hawpe's monster season, they're not getting much offensive production from their outfield. Fine! Great! Go ahead and say those things. But this? So Fowler is young and inexperienced, true. I'll give you that. He may crumble down the stretch. But Iannetta and Tulowitzki are in their fourth fucking years in the bigs. They've both missed time due to injury, which is why their games played totals are relatively low, but it's not like they're a couple of unseasoned 21 year olds who were in AA last year. THEY WENT TO THE FUCKING WORLD SERIES TWO YEARS AGO. They're not experienced enough for you, Kruk? Go fuck yourself with a fucking soup ladle. Asshole. Oh, and here's another great point from Sir Tubsalot:

They won't be able to win the wild card because they have too many teams to pass in the standings.

Here's your current NL wild card standings, which John apparently hasn't checked since Memorial Day. Two teams, leading them by a half game, with only three months left in the season? No way can they climb that mountain!

His latest entry in the "Baseball Tonight Clubhouse" print article series is dedicated to finding other nonsensical reasons as to why the Rockies are doomed. I can only imagine how long it would take him to type all this up. He must have dictated it to an ESPN intern, and then eaten said intern.

I've been in the middle of a couple of firings, and it always seems as if you play better immediately after. When you're a player and your manager gets fired, most players feel responsible. I've been a part of a couple of similar situations,

Wait, have you ever been in that situation before? You only said so twice in the last three sentences. He then goes on to say that their recent hot streak is attributable to the firing of Clint Hurdle and the arrival of new manager Jim Tracy, and that the bump they're experiencing as a result of a change in leadership won't last. That's all well and good, but let me just apply a classic FireJay label to this post: managers don't do that much. This is (almost) the exact same team of 25 players Hurdle was managing. Clearly they have a lot of talent, having beaten up on legitimate teams like the Cardinals, Brewers, and Rays during this stretch. The fact that Hurdle wasn't getting much mileage out of them and Tracy is doesn't mean they're only playing better because of Tracy. It's obviously a number of things, Tracy's arrival being one of them. A manager can't make a team that started the year 20-32 go on a 17-1 streak. He can help, but the players have to play the games. And it's pretty obvious at this point that the Rockies have a collection of players who are at the very least capable of winning the wild card.

Colorado's run is just that, a run. In my mind, this team is not a threat to win the wild card. Even though the Mets and Phillies have played terribly lately, the wild card is still going to come out of the NL East.

There you have it, folks. Why can't the Rockies do it? Because the WC is going to come out of the NL East, that's why. Duhhhhh. No analysis. No explanation. John Kruk is a fucking simpleton among simpletons. And again, if you want to say Colorado won't win the WC, that's fine. But to say they're not even "a threat?" With the second best run differential in the NL (trailing only the Dodgers, thus obviously ahead of the Mets and Phillies), they're not even a threat? What are you, fucking nuts? Why won't Florida repeat as NCAA football champions this year? Because Alabama is going to win it all. How's that for an airtight explanation?

Both teams are almost unwatchable at the moment, but I'm still certain the Phillies will win the division and the Mets will take the wild card. [no further explanation given; end of article; beginning of John's nightly run to 7-11 for as many hot dogs as they happen to have on the rollers when he gets there]

Possible reasons Kruk feels this way:
1) He played most of his career with the Phillies, so he'll naturally favor any playoff scenario which ensures they'll get in
2) He's felt this way since the beginning of the season (and felt that the Rockies were no good), and simply refuses to change his opinion out of stubbornness. Of course, as we learned from the Cleveland "2009 AL Central Champs in Waiting" Indians, early season groupthink can be a dangerous thing
3) Standard east coast bias- Kruk (and the other the media members with whom he associates) can name more players on the Phillies and Mets than on the Rockies, and they play in cities with which he is very familiar while the Rockies play in one of those flyover states, so there's no way the Rockies can contend
4) He genuinely believes that because Chris Iannetta and Troy Tulowitzki have only played about 250 and 350 MLB games respectively (and because they trail two teams by a half game each in the current wild card standings, surely an insurmountable lead) Colorado will not make the playoffs. Nevermind the fact that the Mets are depending heavily on Daniel Murphy and Fernando Martinez, who have combined for fewer than 150 career games played. The Phillies, to John's credit, are indeed a team chock full of seasoned veterans. Their rotation is a complete and total fucking joke, but hey, at least they don't have any inexperienced players

It doesn't really matter which answer is correct. All I know is this: John Kruk is a card carrying horse's ass. There isn't a lobotomy complete enough to save ESPN viewers from his retardery. The next time I have reason to believe the Rockies will be on Baseball Tonight (which might be some time after the All Star break, assuming they don't lose any games between now and then) I'm not going to bother watching.

Before I go, here's some bonus moron-speak from Baseball Tonight's Chris Singleton about the Rockies:

I think they're making their run too early.

Yeah, you know, he's got a point. Wins are worth double in September as compared to June. The Rockies would be much better holding back, staying a good 5 or 6 games out of the WC, and then hoping they can put together another 11 game winning streak during the last two weeks of the season. It's not a fucking bike race, Singleton. You don't choose when to make your fucking push. If you win your first 100 games and lose your last 62, you'll make the playoffs. If you lose your first 62 and win your last 100, you'll make the playoffs. Good thing you share a set with John Kruk- otherwise I would have wasted a lot more of the time spent on this post ripping you apart as opposed to him.

I never thought I'd say this, but relative to some of his coworkers, that Steve Phillips is kind of an OK dude.

OMG! Who Would U Want 2 B Ur New BFF?

Sportscenter continues its downward descent into retardery. I understand turning this kind of thing into a simple internet poll, but how insulting is it to make the lead story on a Thursday night edition of the nation's premier sports news program: "TO, A-Rod, or Manny- who would you want to be your teammate?" Because that's what happened tonight. Here's my answer to that, anonymous ESPN program director: who gives a shit? What is this, an "Us Weekly" poll? How about instead of asking dumb and meaningless questions like that, you instead just report the news (the relevant news) and show some fucking highlights. Now, I'm not saying that those three guys aren't all relevant stories right now. They are. But why must they all be packaged together, in an invitation to the masses to pick which of the three would make the best teammate? That's the worst possible way to present those stories. The absolute worst. Sportscenter is quickly becoming worse than chlamydia.

The sad part is, there are millions of cable viewers out there tonight who thought this was a totally relevant and fun way to look at the stories surrounding these three guys. These pinheads thrive off of comparing apples to oranges to bananas, particularly when there's absolutely no need to make the comparison in the first place. Fuck this country. I don't mind our politics, or wealth disparity, or any of that stuff a lot of people cite as reasons for disliking us. I just hate 90% of the people who live here. Jesus fucking Christ, people. Stop pandering to this shit. SAVE US, LE ANN SCHREIBER. Dear Lord.

Oh, and for what it's worth, if I had a vote, I'm going for Manny. He seems like a cool dude! TO and A-Rod are selfish, and more importantly they aren't "winners!" Yay for useless polls!

Post-Holiday Bonus Bonanza Post

OK, I've been accumulating several things that need to get posted over the course of the past few days. Let's cut to the chase.

1. Buck Martinez, supposedly a baseball "expert" as he is employed by XM to comment on various baseball matters during its most listened-to timeslots, has this to say about the prospects of Pedro Martinez pitching anywhere this year.

Now this is a guy who I think still has a few starts under his belt.

You're right. As of the publishing of this post, he has exactly 400 of them "under his belt." And he will continue to have 400 or more of them, no matter how many years pass. If you're talking about his potential ability to pitching the majors in 2009, and referring to how many starts he has left in the tank, a figure of speech which is pretty common and should probably not be bungled by a guy employed in talk radio, that's up for debate. Please do not confuse "left in the tank" with "under his belt." It's not that hard.

2. ESPN's Doug Gottlieb, a guy who I usually like, lays a real egg in his summation of everything that's wrong with the media's interpretation of baseball in this soundbite re: Mark Teixeira (prior to his signing with the Yankees):

See, what I don't understand is why he would consider the Nationals or Orioles over the Red Sox. If you go to Baltimore, you're irrelevant. If you go to Washington, you're irrelevant.

This is, as I said above, exactly what's wrong with the media's interpretation of baseball today. According to Doug and the many writers and commentators who think exactly like him, if you don't play for the Yankees/Red Sox/Cubs/maybe the Dodgers or Mets, you might as well not be playing at all. And that's just fucking sad. What? Baltimore and DC each have millions of people, many of whom are fans of the hometown baseball team? Fuck it- if you're not playing for RED SOX NATION, you might as well be sitting at home and eating junk food.

Fucking gag me.

3. Here's a hot tip for all you announcers out there- puns are fucking lame. Don't use them. Ever. During Notre Dame's Christmas Eve win over Hawaii in the Hawaii Bowl, ESPN's play-by-play guy (who will remain unnamed due to my laziness) dropped the following two lines after commercial breaks:

It's Jimmy "Santa" Clausen and Golden "Frankinscence and Myrrh" Tate who are the story for Notre Dame today!

For the Irish, it is indeed "A Wonderful Life" here in Honolulu!

To put it simply: STOP. NO. FUCK YOU. No one worth pandering to enjoys this kind of monkey shit.

Somehow, ESPN Has Messed Up the SportsCenter Formula

As I continue to live out my dream of one day studying law, I happen to be stuck in the middle of finals right now. Thus I have not been posting much. But I thought I would take a brief study break to bitch and moan for just a second.

Sunday nights in December are big for SportsCenter. The NFL is America's most popular sport, and there were 14 NFL games today and not much else going on in the world of sports. Many of these games were exciting and important. I have been watching tonight's SportsCenter for 26 minutes now- do you know how many games I've seen highlights from? Two. 2. The integer between 1 and 3. FUCKING TWO. (Dallas/New York and Indy/Detroit.) And why is that? What has ESPN been showing, instead of highlights from any of the twelve other games that happened today (including Pittsburgh/Baltimore, Buffalo/New York, and Atlanta/Tampa Bay, all of which had cool endings and playoff implications)? Because apparently it's absolutely critical that we watch each and every single fucking minute of Wade Phillips, TO, and Tony Romo's postgame press coferences. Of the (now) 28 minutes I've wasted watching this, about 16 of them have been spent watching reporters lob softball at those idiots, and then watching the idiots lob cliches right back. How compelling.

Fuck. This.

As far as I can tell, ESPN's line of thinking is as follows: there are two types of people who may watch SC. Those that are general sports fans, and those who are only fans of a certain team (relevant to their concerns, we're talking specifically about the Red Sox, Yankees, Cubs, Cowboys, Lakers, Notre Dame, and maybe a couple others). Now, granted, that first group would be happiest if we spread our coverage around and actually showed highlights from a large variety of games. But the second group will lose interest unless we're talking about their teams. So here's the key: if we devote a painfully disproportionate amount of time to those "chosen" teams, we'll pick up a ton of viewers from that second group. And while that's happening... viewers from the first group will begrudgingly stick around. After all, they're sports fans! Even if they hate the Yankees, they'd rather watch 10 minutes of John Kruk talking about how C.C. Sabathia is a good pitcher who will help New York than change the channel. And you know what? At least in my case, they're right. I hate to admit it, but I'm a member of that first group and they have my preferences absolutely pegged. Good for them.

It's pretty sad, really. If my TV had a Nielsen ratings box, I'd have to change my viewing habits and stop playing along with their games. As things stand, I'll just have to get the anger out of my system by posting stuff like this on teh blogoblogs. Hopefully it's as therapeutic for you as it is for me.

Before I go- We're now at 35 minutes and counting. Still no new highlights, just four minutes of Trent Dilfer telling me why this game showed what kind of a football team the Cowboys are, for going out with all their football players and making football plays on the football field to win this football game. Oh, and I wish I were making this up, but they're also now showing the Cowboys/Giants highlights again... and... wait for it... recapping the TO interview footage.

Fuck you with the useful end of a rake, SportsCenter producers.

I Hope Steve Young Dared Stu Scott to Do This

Working on a TMQR. In the meantime...

Because otherwise, Scott and his producer should be placed in a crate and mailed to Mongolia. After Houston's 30-17 win over Jacksonville last night, Sportscenter had a "transition shot" (or whatever you want to call it; a "fun" little cut scene they shoot somewhere in the city that's hosting MNF, and then show before or after commercial breaks during and after the game) coming back from break featuring a dude in SCUBA gear in the shark tank of Houston's city aquarium. Said dude was wearing a Santa outfit over the gear, and holding a Texans helmet. Take it away, Stu:

(singing)
Saaaaaaaaaanta Claus is comin' to town!
Saaaaaaaaaanta Claus is swimmin' to town!
San-ta Claus was swimmin' (shoehorn this last part in to fit the rhythm of the song) intheTexans'win!

Douchechills. Nothing but douchechills.

Like I said, I really hope this idea originated with Scott's fellow MNF pregame commentator Steve Young. That's the only way it wouldn't automatically become the worst moment in the history of televised sports commentary.

Let's Evaluate Which One of These Occurences Matters Most

There is a serious problem with the ordering of the headlines on ESPN's front page today (Friday).

Here are the first 7, in order.

Report: Two Saints test positive for water pills
Report: Manning had staph infection in Colts camp
Goodell: Rehabbed 'Pacman' could return
Suggs says he 'misspoke' using the word 'bounty'
Ballesteros brain operation finished, eases swelling
Brady has more surgery to battle infection
Shields, Price hold back Phillies for Game 2 win.

THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT HAPPENED IN THE ENTIRE FUCKING WORLD OF SPORTS YESTERDAY (Thursday) IS YOUR # 7 NEWS ARTICLE.

But who cares about the World Series? The Yankees aren't in it, the Red Sox aren't in it, and ESPN's not covering it. Big who cares? You know why?

Because Terrell Suggs said there was a 'bounty' on Hines Ward.

That's news, baby.

FUCK YOU ESPN.

Sad (or Happy?) Bill Simmons-Related Thought For the Day

It's Wednesday. As in the day that's three full days after Sunday. And yet, Bill's NFL picks from last week are still on the front page of ESPN.com. They're the featured Page 2 link. The last of the week's games finished almost 36 fucking hours ago. Since then, ESPN's other writers have put out plenty of material. But when the site's editors make their decisions as to what will generate the most traffic, they choose to keep a column in the spotlight that at this point is relevant for no other purpose besides noting how awful Bill is at making gambling picks. (5-9-1 against the spread last week, now 11-19-1 for the season.) So my point, of course, is that this is pretty tragic. Or at least appears to be on the surface. Is this guy really this popular? Really? The average ESPN.com visitor wouldn't rather read something else? Even TMQ's brand new article (which I will attempt to parse tonight, as long as it doesn't give me an aneurysm) takes a back seat to Bill's rotting leftovers.

Now, the reason I say it appears to be pretty tragic on the surface is that there's a chance Bill is slowly approaching the Mariotti zone. You know what I mean- where a columnist generates a ton of traffic, but the majority of it comes from people who hope he gets crushed in a revolving door accident. When Mariotti left the Sun-Times, commenter Larry (no relation to me, but great name anyways) posted a link to a poll on their website in which the split of people said they'd miss Jaybird vs. those who said they wouldn't was something like 23% to 77%. I'm sure Bill's disapproval rating isn't that high yet... but I'm holding out hope that he's on his way there. Hoping and hoping and hoping. That's the same way I tried to solve the problem of being a fuckbag of a loser in high school, and look where I am today!

Sunday Night Baseball Liveblog #2: Joe Morgan Likes Manny Ramirez... A Lot

PNoles and I are watching the game again tonight. Should be a real bundle of laughs.

7:14 CST: I just turned on the game, like 45 seconds ago, and Joe has already praised Joe Torre for calling a hit and run with Manny Ramirez on first and James Loney at the plate. He mentioned that if the Dodgers want to make the playoffs, they're going to need to do more of that and stop "waiting around for the home run." Sending Manny Ramirez: pretty much asking for an out. (Too bad it worked and Loney managed to slap a single through the left side. Bah humbug.)

7:21 CST: Casey Blake clubs a 3 run bomb on a pitch that K Zone shows as being about three inches above the knees. Joe insists that it was "up in the zone... for a sinkerballer." Maybe he missed his location and wanted it to sink out of the zone, but buddy, it doesn't matter what kind of pitcher you are. Three inches above the knees is three inches above the knees.

7:22 CST: Jon Miller praises Blake for "coming through in the clutch!" I don't know how clutch you can possibly be in the top of the first, but I guess whatever the upper limit of that categorization is, Blake hit it.

7:31 CST: Stephen Drew gets thrown out trying to steal second. Joe does not approve. Well, which is it, Joe? You don't want them to wait around for the three run bomb, do you? (Actually, Joe's probably right here. It's just funny to hear him not approve of a SB attempt, regardless of context.)

7:35 CST: Joe's analysis re: Brandon Webb's struggles: "Make no mistake about it... when you're going for your 20th win, a lot of things go through your mind. Especially in this day and age, when so few guys get there." I'm awarding him zero points for this one.

7:40 CST: According to Joe, the name of the Diamondbacks' starting pitcher is actually Brandon Wells.

7:47 CST: Joe, re: the Brewers' petitioning of the league to change the scoring of the Pirates' only hit in today's game to give C.C. Sabathia a no hitter: "I've always thought it was in the rulebook, from back in my umpiring days, that the first hit had to be a clean hit."

1) Can you imagine how awful Joe would be as an umpire, what with his complete inability to make tough decisions?
2) That's not in the rulebook.

7:55 CST: Jon praises Casey Blake for squibbing a grounder past Webb (Wells?), allowing Matt Kemp to advance from 2nd to 3rd. He calls it good "situational hitting, to get the ball past the pitcher like that!" Call my crazy, but I don't think there's a situation in the whole game of baseball where your goal ISN'T to hit the ball past (or away from, in the case of bunting) the pitcher.

8:04 CST: Joe is sure that acquiring David Eckstein will help the Diamondbacks because they "need a little more leadership on the field." Hopefully they also need more mediocre defense and poor hitting, because Lil' Eck will be bringing those to Phoenix as well.

8:13 CST: OK, guys. Webb isn't keeping his sinker down in the zone and Lowe is. We get it. You can only talk about that for so many straight half-innings (going on five at this point) before it gets stale.

8:17 CST: Joe, re: Andre Ethier's RBI double with 2 strikes: "Well, with two strikes, he changes his mindset and just wants to drive the run in." What was his mindset before he had 2 strikes? Try not to drive the run in? Foul off as many pitches as possible? Check out the hot girl sitting behind the dugout?

8:26 CST: And Webb is out of the game. Earlier today, the front page headline on espn.com was his picture, with the headline "Oh, What a Webb!" Any guesses about that one? Anybody? Is it a play on that oldies hit "Oh, What a Night?" What am I missing here?

8:33 CST: Jon has a theory as to why Joe Torre is such an effective manager: "He has the ability to phrase something, and not make it sound like a cliche!" (I use an exclamation mark because Jon always sounds like he's excited about everything.) If it even exists, I'm not sure that ability is more or less important to a manager's ability level than filling out a lineup card. We'll call it a push for now.

8:50 CST: PNoles's apartment has several visitors in it right now, so I'm having trouble hearing Jon and Joe over the awful racket going on in here. It is helping me enjoy the game a lot more, though. Every cloud has a silver lining.

8:57 CST: Going back to the Eckstein trade: how the hell did he clear waivers? The whole AL let him get away? Really? Haven't these teams ever heard of winning?

8:59 CST: Since I'm grasping at straws here, I might as well offer commentary on the commercials. I kind of enjoy these Mike's Hard Lemonade spots that are obviously ripping off Tommy Boy, but what demographic are they going after? There can't be a huge overlap between Chris Farley fans and sugary malt beverage drinkers.

9:05 CST: Speaking of how excited Jon gets when pretty much anything happens, Tony Clark just missed a catch in foul ground during an 8-0 game. "HE DROPPED IT! HE HAD IT, AND IT BOUNCED OUT!" Easy, tiger. Easy now.

9:12 CST: As the third out is recorded in the top of the 6th, Joe reveals that he'll be pressing Jon for Jon's MVP and Cy Young picks during the next half inning. Hopefully Joe is willing to give his own opinions as well- I'm already getting tingly thinking about the possibilities.

9:15 CST: Obviously Jon has his finger squarely on the pulse of pop culture; after a brief K Zone montage of Lowe's sinker tonight, he manages to funkily blurt out "Derek Lowe, 'get down' tonight!" Hopefully Kool and the Gang will be visiting the booth later in the evening.

9:19 CST: Joe finally settles the age-old debate about the relative levels of passion for baseball expressed by fans on America's two coasts. "A lot of people say people on the east coast care more about baseball. But I'm a west coast kind of guy! I really think the guys in Los Angeles... the fans in San Francisco... I think fans on the west coast really care about baseball too." Good to have that all cleared up.

9:27 CST: Jon has told Joe to back off the end-of-the-year award questions. Oh nooooo!

9:28 CST: Wait, wait, wait, wait.... whoa. We're back on topic. Jon says some wishy washy crap about the Cubs' whole lineup. Joe then takes the reins. He helpfully reminds us that we won't know until the season is over (thanks a lot), but then reveals his dark horse candidate: Carlos Delgado. His OPS+: 122. Pujols' OPS+ (not that I'm saying he's necessarily the best pick, just that he's one of many potential better picks): 191. Cue up the laugh track.

9:41 CST: Jon and Joe discuss NL Cy Young candidates without saying anything especially dumb. Of course, Joe was quick to point out that many guys have had excellent seasons. As opposed to 2007, when one and only one guy had an excellent season.

9:44 CST: I am shocked MLB didn't bring Dane Cook back for their playoff promos. Why not? Part of advertising is getting people to remember your message, and I don't think Dane could possibly have done a better job in that capacity. Everyone say it with me: there are only how many Octobers?

9:58 CST: I just realized, we didn't have any Joe-less half innings tonight. Either he's holding it, or tonight he managed to take his bathroom break(s) during a commercial break(s).

10:01 CST: Joe and Jon wax poetically about the alleged HOF credentials of one Maury Wills. The comedy of this doesn't really need to be expanded upon much: let's just leave it at his career OPS+ of 88. Although, I have to say I'm surprised that Joe would be in his corner. It's not like Wills was part of the Big Red Machine.

10:11 CST: Sorry, I kind of tapered off at the end there. That's enough nerdery for tonight. We'll be back next Sunday as Joe and Jon continue their elaborate dance of idiocy. Remember, as unfunny as I am, at least I have two working eyes! (I really wanted to end on a high note, and taking a shot at Stu Scott seemed like the way to do it.)

LiveBlog!

Good evening folks! Larry B will be over shortly, and we'll be liveblogging Sunday Night Baseball. I know it's already the middle of the 3rd inning, but we've gotta start somewhere. Nothing just yet, so enjoy Jack M's post below while we supplement this intro with loads of stupidity that we'll surely hear over the next 6-6.5 innings. Get excited!

All these quotes are obviously as close as possible.

EDIT: Top of the 4th

Jon Miller: (on the Diamondbacks) Well they'd be 12 games behind the Cubs if they had that record in the Central Division

Joe Morgan: (laughing) Well maybe that record would be even better because they wouldn't have to play all the tough teams in the West so much!

...

You know what? Everyone reading this blog already knows exactly why this is such a stupid thing to say. But you know what? I don't fucking care! This is happening anyway.

NL West Winning Percentages, non-Diamondbacks:

.504
.462
.446
.369

AL Central Winning Percentages

.615
.580
.553
.508
.438
.435

Fine. Get out of the insanely tough NL West as soon as possible, DBacks. Must be tough seeing things like Kevin Correia and Cha Seung Baek more than other teams.

(I did not mistype. Kevin Correia and Cha Seung Baek are not pitchers. They are things.)

EDIT, still top of 4th

Jon Miller: It would be hard to imagine Jeff Kent not making the Hall of Fame.

Really Jon? That's your idea of a slam-dunk Hall of Famer?

He has the 2nd best projected career of all the 2nd basemen playing in this game.

EDIT: Bottom of the 5th

Emmy Award Winning Analysis:

Joe Morgan: Good piece of hitting by Utley, who is certainly a good hitter.

EDIT: Bottom of the 5th

(On Geovany Soto's dark-horse MVP candidacy)

Joe Morgan: People are going to toss his name around because he plays for the Cubs, who don't have any one outstanding player.....that's why they're such a good team

Reason Yankees suck: Too much Alex Rodriguez
Reason Indians suck: Too much Cliff Lee
Reason Cardinals suck: Too much Albert Pujols

I've gotta say, Joey. This is holding water.

So far this season, Evan Longoria has been the most valuable Ray. But the Rays need to be careful that he doesn't get toooooo much better than everyone else on that team....else they're gonna plummet in the standings.

EDIT: Bottom of the 6th

We're in and out of the bottom of the 6th inning, and Joe didn't say a word. Larry and I are positive that he's in the can.....

EDIT: Top of the 7th

(J.C. Romero tries a pretty deceptive pickoff throw to nab Juan Pierre at 1st base)

Joe Morgan: And that's useful, because it prevents the runner from getting a big lead

larry b: Most pickoff moves are there strictly to entertain the umpires and paid attendance. Romero's, however, is there to limit a baserunner's lead.

EDIT: Top of the 7th

J.C. Romero has just picked Juan Pierre off of 1st base. I guess we should just dismantle this blog.

EDIT: Top of the 7th

Jeff Kent just knocked in the go-ahead run. We're actually going to sell our URL to some carpet salesmen from Morocco.

EDIT: Bottom of the 7th

From the Dept. of "Really??"

Jon Miller: Both teams have an incentive to win this game.

Ya don't say, Gramps.

Joe Morgan: It kind of seems like we have a long way to go, but we do not. It kinda goes quickly here at the end

larry b: Everybody knows that September is a much shorter month than April.

pnoles: Shut up Larry. You're a mean, sarcastic meanie.

EDIT: Top of the 8th inning

Ryan Howard makes a routine catch in foul territory (he made a much better one in the 6th).

Joe Morgan: Not many first basemen have that kind of range.

Oh boy. A compliment to Ryan Howard's defense. This is playing with hot coals, Joe, so careful with how you proceed.

Joe Morgan: He's never been a Gold Glover, but he can help you out in other ways,

larry b: Like hitting 40+ HR and just being an awesome hitter?

like chasing those balls down the right field line.

Oh.

"Ryan Howard has never been the best fielder at his position, but he can help you out in other ways, like fielding."

There's only so much Joe you can listen to in one night. Larry and I are calling it quits here after the 10th. We'll see you next Sunday.

Someone Got Paid to Pick This Out

I'd like to personally thank ESPN for their implementation of the "Conversation" feature on their website. Never before have cynical people like me had access to the flat out dumb opinions of thousands of other sports fans worldwide. Better still, they're now reading select Conversation comments on Sportscenter! What does it take for your comment to make the cut and be seen and heard by millions of viewers nationwide? Well, you could offer the kind of analysis Landon from Wellington, New Zealand did this morning:

Jim Thome, Paul Konerko, Alexei Ramirez, Juan Uribe; 4 consecutive home runs, awesome!

Seriously? Really? Fucking Kiwis. Shouldn't you be herding sheep or playing rugby or something? Actually, a quick check of the Google Analytics shows we have had 5 visitors from New Zealand in the last month. So I guess I shouldn't be so harsh. You guys are alright with me; you're nothing like those fucking Lithuanians.

Monday Night Reader Extra Participation: A Life or Death Situation

I halfway mentioned this in the comments section of an earlier post, but since it's kind of a slow sports night, I felt compelled to turn it into a full post. Here's the situation: you're on a plane that's minutes away from crashing. The pilots and other passengers have already parachuted to safety. The only two other beings on said plane besides yourself are none other than Brett Fav-ruh and Barbaro. (Pretend he's alive; after all, he'll live forever in our hearts.) It's the three of you... and only two parachutes. You're in control. What do you do? Are you selfish enough to deprive America of one of its true heroes? Are you crazy enough to deprive it of both? Will you try to wear a chute while holding onto Barbaro in order to save all three of you? Please, let me know. I'm curious.

(Hint: unless you want to get really creative, this basically boils down to who sucks more between the two celebrities.)

Doug Gottlieb- Colin Cowherd Lite?

Probably not. But listening to him is occasionally similar to being "in the herd." Today he was railing on the recently launched Tampa Bay Rays bandwagon.

Now, I'm not saying we should immediately cancel the rest of the season and crown them world champs. But I am saying that they look legit. Their run differential is solid. Their rotation is legit, pending Edwin Jackson and Matt Garza's abilities to continue being slightly better than mediocre. Kazmir and Shields will hold down their end of things just fine. The lineup is meh, but good enough. Longoria has been better than expected and may come back to Earth, but Crawford and Pena have performed well below expectations and could easily end up having good second halves. Their one real concern should probably be their bullpen, which is tenuously leaning on Troy Percival and J.P. Howell.

ANYWAYS- If you want to go ahead and predict that they're going to implode after the break and finish with 83 wins, I have no problem with that. Just don't do it like Doug:

Here's a dirty little secret about this team: they're a lot better at home than on the road.

Really? Wow. I've never heard of a successful sports team like that before. Forget all those nice things I just said about them- they play better at home than on the road! For shame.

Seriously, their road record currently sits at 19-19, so it's obviously not a huge problem for them (so far). Write this down and remember it: if the Rays keep their pace and win 40 road games this season, they're in the playoffs.

And then you look at their schedule, and you see that they play 17 of their final 24 games on the road. So I think that's going to be their undoing.

OK. I see that. I also look at the rest of the schedule and note that they will end up playing exactly 81 home games and 81 road games, same as everyone else in the league. They might lose a couple games on the Red Sox or Yankees during that tough September, sure, but by then there's at least some chance they'll be able to absorb that kind of rut and still make the postseason.

In conclusion: saying a team that's .500 on the road will not make the playoffs because of the disparity between their home and road records is dumb.

Also in conclusion: there's no point in really paying attention to a guy who got kicked off his first college basketball team for committing credit card fraud.

Hey Chris

Maybe if you actually read my posts in their entirety you'd know when to not expect anything from me. Anyways-

1. Sportscenter is obviously the most important TV show in the history of, well, sports. Yet its recent transition from comprehensive highlight show to ABC cross promotional tool was so subtle that many undiscerning viewers might have missed it. Actually, scratch that- pretty much anyone whose head is not being stored inside their ass probably noticed. It's just really sad that a 90 minute Sunday night edition of the show doesn't include highlights from every baseball game played that day, but does include a 6 minute Sunday Conversation with Jason Taylor which focuses primarily on his "Dancing With the Stars" appearance. Way to know your audience, idiots. I'm sure there's a real significant demographic overlap between the kind of person who watches Sportscenter and the kind of person who might be interested in a celebrity dancing show. Slightly more interestingly, but causing just as much frustration for those of us who didn't get to see our baseball team's highlights from the night before, was the 6 minute segment on the resurgence of Rollerderby. How'd that make the cut? My guess is that ABC is about to buy the rights to some Rollerderbies and start airing them on Friday nights or something. Stay tuned for that. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

2. This is a little bit late, but work with me here- did anyone watch the Sunday Night Baseball telecast featuring the Yankees and Mets? Two gems in there, neither of which I have verbatim transcripts for, but both of which are worth complaining about-

a) In the top of the 4th, the Mets' Carlos Delgado hit an opposite field home run just a couple inches over the left field fence and off the very base of the foul pole. The third base umpire originally got the call right, then conferenced with his colleagues and incorrectly changed it. That's not the real story, however. The real story involves both Joe Morgan and Jon Miller (bless his Joe Morgan-dealing-with soul) spending a good 15 minutes watching replays from a couple camera angles and then concluding that the foul pole was actually installed incorrectly, i.e. not in alignment with the foul line. They were shocked that in one of baseball's oldest and most historic parks, a massive mistake like that could have slipped through the cracks for so many years! The comedy here being, of course, that there is no mistake. Just like in baseball's 29 other parks, the foul poles at Yankee Stadium line up correctly with the foul lines. You fucking dummies. Looking at a camera angle aimed straight down the third base line later on in the game allowed the guys to realize that fact and amend their statements. Still pretty hilarious in the moment, though.

b) At one point, in order to analyze a taken pitch's location, Joe (or Joe's producer, bless his Joe Morgan-dealing-with soul) decided to bring up ESPN's "K Zone" feature. He explained why K Zone is helpful to any fans who might not be familiar with it, and that explanation went something like this:

So now let's got to K Zone to see where that pitch ended up. The reason we need K Zone is because the camera angle you watch the game on doesn't actually come from directly behind the pitcher. It's kind of off to the side a little bit, so you can't really trust what you see from that angle. The reason we have to show you the pitches from that angle is because if we put a camera right behind the pitcher, you wouldn't be able to see the catcher's target or the strike zone! So that's why we have K Zone.

Ohhhhh.... is that how the placement of objects in 3 dimensional space works? Thanks Joe. If I'm in the neighborhood, I'll be sure to drop in for your guest lecture on physics at MIT. Also, it doesn't really need to be said, but K Zone is a joke.

3. You know what Gregg Easterbrook said about the Patriots in this piece has to be dumb if my response to it amounts to a quasi-defense of the Patriots. (The article as a whole isn't terrible at all, and makes some good points, but this particular one stinks on ice.)

"Cheaters! Cheaters!" the crowd at Radio City Music Hall chanted when New England's name went on the clock at last month's draft. "Cheaters! Cheaters!" crowds will chant next fall when New England takes the field, if the cheater Belichick is still running the show. The way to stop that, and bring Spygate to a close, is to suspend the person responsible. The $500,000 fine assessed against Belichick is a token sanction at his income level. The draft choice fine against the Patriots penalizes mainly the team's fans, who are not responsible for what happened.

Saying that voiding a draft choice primarily punishes a team's fans is like claiming when a business is broken into and robbed, it primarily punishes their regular customers. Are the fans very disappointed about that situation? Undoubtedly. Are they being punished harder than, you know, the team itself? Of fucking course fucking not. That ruling hit the team hard, and definitely changed their offseason plans significantly. Even for Easterbrook, this is horrifically dumb.

OK... sorry about the pu-pu platter... but at least you got a post centered around something besides photoshopping a 20 year old video game.