Bill's Guide to Gambling (alternate title: How to Lose Money By Being Stupid), Part 1

[DISCLAIMER: I'm about to write a lot about NFL gambling, and criticize Bill heavily for his gambling analysis and picks.  I enjoy gambling on the NFL.  I am also terrible at it, and freely admit this.  I would never pretend otherwise.  I would never tell anyone, whether in person or in writing, that I had some kind of a system or set of rules that was going to help me win this season or ever.  I will always happily talk about what I think are good bets to make for the coming weekend's games.  I will always admit as part of that discussion that my advice is probably terrible and should not be followed by anyone.  Now that I have that out of the way, let's begin.]

Bill makes no secret about how much he loves gambling, and he probably writes about gambling on the NFL more than anything else these days.  (A close 2nd: speculation as to how we will look back in ten years on certain regular season NBA games that were kind of exciting.)  However, despite his passion for it, Bill is objectively goddamn treefuckingly awful at picking NFL games.  That's where the rest of us get to have some fun.  

Since 2010, and through 3 weeks of the 2014 season, Bill is 516-529 picking against the spread.  (He has a number of pushes as well, of course, which I'm not going to list because fuck you I don't want to.  This is why the season totals below add up to fewer than the 256 regular season games that make up an NFL season.)  That means that if you had followed his picks and put down $10 on every single game, and the payout was -110, as it almost always is for an NFL ATS pick, you would have lost just under $600 over that period of time.  The numbers break down like this:

2010: 131-119.  Bill's picks broke almost exactly dead even for the season; after factoring in the house edge (explained below if you don't know about it), betting $10 a game would have left you up $0.91 at season's end.

2011: 120-127.  Betting $10 a game would have left you down $179.

2012: 132-120.  Betting $10 a game would have left you exactly spot on dead even.

2013: 108-140, yes that's right, he was 108-140.  Betting $10 a game would have left you down $418.

2014: So far, he's 25-23.  Betting $10 a game would have left you down $2.72 so far.

(For those of you who don't have experience losing money on sports gambling like I do, -110 means you have to bet $110 to win $100, or $11 to win $10, etc.  In other words if you bet wins, you don't double your money--you win about 90% of the amount of the bet, on top of getting your original bet back.  This is how the house makes money on sports gambling--they set/adjust lines to get an even amount of money on each side of the spread, and the winning side gets less than double their money back, leaving the casino with a small profit.  Anyone who tells you sports books try to operate in any other fashion is a fucking moron.)  

Now, for the average person, there is no shame in this.  It's hard to pick games consistently.  While theoretically a monkey flipping a coin should pick 50% of game correctly over a large enough sample size of games, and Bill has only picked 49.4% of them correctly since 2010, that's not a big deal.  Then you factor in the -110 house edge, and it gets extremely hard to beat the house consistently.  The vast vast majority of gamblers don't beat the house in the long term, which is why casinos and bookies exist.  If your friend is down $600 on football bets in the last few seasons, you should not automatically give that friend a bunch of shit about it unless they hold themselves out as some wunderkind gambling expert.  

And that's the problem with Bill: he absolutely holds himself out, in a very public forum, as a wunderkind gambling expert.  He very, very, VERY clearly is not.  Even in his best years, he's picking 52.5ish% of games correctly, and breaking even on money.  This does not stop him from 1) talking about NFL gambling all the time, including running his picks column every week every year, 2) but more obnoxiously, regularly publishing "manifestos" and other articles that claim to have cracked some kind of secret code such that following the advice therein should lead to fabulous riches, and most obnoxiously, 3) throwing arrogant little quips to the effect of "THIS LINE IS THREE POINTS TOO HIGH, THANKS FOR THE FREE MONEY VEGAS" into his columns left and right.  It would be one thing if he was a self-professed gambling enthusiast who loves picking NFL games, but had the self-awareness to acknowledge that he wasn't very good at it.  But as anyone who has read him since about 2002 knows, "Bill Simmons" and "self-awareness" are two things that do not exist together.  

So, enough blabbing and introducing.  Let's get to the meat.  What follows is Bill's latest example of #2 in the list in the previous paragraph; here we have the official, top secret, no holds barred Bill Simmons 2014 NFL Gambling Guide.  If the breakdown of his success rate above wasn't enough to make you want to find him and try to become his personal bookie, this article should push you over the edge.

Football, football, football, football!

FOOTBALL!!!!!!!!

Superb exposition from America's most popular "sports" "writer."

If you missed my Thursday column about Roger Goodell’s NFL That Never Sleeps (featuring my winning Seahawks minus-6 pick!), here’s the link.

Sure won't be clicking on that.  Thanks for the offer though!  Also, most people with brains have known for years that Roger Goodell is a complete shithead with no redeeming qualities.  In that "NFL That Never Sleeps" column (which was published on September 5, just a few days before the Ray Rice inside the elevator video dropped), Bill does jump on Goodell for several things, including his fumbling of the Rice suspension proceedings.  But then Bill decides that ol' Rog does have several things going for him.  First among those:

First, his multi-scene cameo in Draft Day was fantastic. I loved his chemistry with Frank Langella.

DIE.  

If you want to send along a mailbag question for my Friday NFL Picks column this season (and I’m going to need good ones as always), here’s the link.

Don't bother--he's just going to make them up and assign them to fictitious fans (most of them women) anyways.

If you want to listen to my Guess the Lines podcasts with Cousin Sal every Monday, here’s the link.

I would rather listen to 45 minutes of a squeaky ceiling fan.

If you want to make fun of my five weekly LVH Supercontest Picks on my Facebook page, here’s the link.

A shred of self awareness!  We will touch on this later, because he does make a couple other cracks at his own expense.  Don't worry (and I know you weren't), it's not going to ruin the line of thought behind this blog post.

If you want to pick games against me, Ian Ziering, David Hasselhoff, Gary Busey, Mark McGrath and other well-known celebs in the 2014 Celebrity Picks Challenge Presented by Fireball Whisky, here’s the link.

"Ian Ziering" "Mark McGrath" "well-known celebs"

OK.

Here’s the good news: My Friday picks column is now old enough to vote for president, fight for our country and maybe even be someone’s freshman roommate in college. That’s right … it’s Year 18. And you think so little of me at this point that you clicked on the link in the previous paragraph. 

HE'S CALLING YOU OUT, READERS.  PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS, AND DO YOUR BEST TO TAKE ON THIS GUY WHO IS NOT AS GOOD AT PICKING GAMES AGAINST THE SPREAD AS PAUL THE OCTOPUS WOULD HAVE BEEN (R.I.P, Paul the Octopus).

Now you have that detestable “Rude” song running through your head for the rest of the day. 

Now he's just going out of his way to be annoying to his readers.  But I certainly do agree with him.  That song is ass herpes in audio form.

And you deserve it. I thought we had something. I hope you feel bad.

I feel bad that I'm still blogging about how dumb you are, seven years into this blog's existence.  Mariotti got fired (more than once).  Rick Reilly stepped down/was quietly fired.  Joe Morgan got fired.  Why are you still there?

Anyway, way back in September of 1997, I was living in Boston and writing for my self-created “Boston’s Sports Guy” website for millions and millions of readers. Fine, it was hundreds and hundreds. 

#humblebrag

But that was the year I unleashed my first batch of mostly mediocre picks on an unsuspecting America. It’s been trial and error ever since. Mostly error. 

Again, some humility/self awareness.  Let's see how quickly he can reverse course and set flame to any goodwill those last few sentences might have generated with unassuming readers who think Bill is anything but a self-absorbed know-it-all asshole.

I juggled a handful of handicapping laws before eventually settling for the Gambling Manifesto That’s In My Head.

First of all, before we get to the substance of this, don't use the word "manifesto."  It generally has a negative/terroristic connotation, and even when it doesn't, if you suck at the thing about which you're writing some kind of master plan, it's super embarrassing.

Why abandon a tried-and-true manifesto? 

Because it never worked, was never going to work, and had no utility whatsoever?

I learned the hard way that football changes too much from year to year to survive too many enduring rules. 

Bill, for 17 years: "I have it all figured out!  The magic formula that leads to NFL gambling success!  THIS season it's going to be different!"
Bill, year 18: "I have come to the conclusion that football changes from year to year.  Therefore, I have a whole NEW magic formula that will lead to NFL gambling success!  THIS season, it's going to be different!"

For instance, the gambling gods conspired in 2013 to ruin everyone who fancied himself a handicapping expert. 

No, they didn't.  There are no gambling gods.  You just had a shitty season.  Like you did in 2011.  And probably many, many other seasons since 1997.

Every sharp and every degenerate will remember the devastating Great Gambling Train Wreck of 2013 years and years from now, 

HOW WILL WE LOOK BACK ON THIS MOMENT IN THE FUTURE WHEN WE ARE WONDERING WHAT IT WAS LIKE TO CONTEMPLATE WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE TO LOOK BACK ON A PARTICULAR MOMENT MAN I AM SO DEEP.

the same way we’ll remember earthquakes, political scandals and unauthorized Saved by the Bell movies. 

Dude, you're like 45.  You were too old for Saved by the Bell during its original run.  You don't get to complain about its direction since.

My B.S. Report buddy and future Gamblers Anonymous roommate, Cousin Sal, 

I hate Cousin Sal.  I have never once listened to a B.S. Report or Pick the Lines podcast and I still hate him with all my heart.  Cousin Sal sucks.

recently sent me an invaluable link from The Sporting News. The three most relevant quotes from that piece, along with my notes in parentheses.

I'm leaving that link in, because even if it just says "pick the team that seems to you like it probably will do better," it is more helpful to prospective NFL gamblers than anything Bill has to say.

“In 2013, NFL favorites covered the spread at a 52.2 percent clip, the highest rate since 2005 and the third highest in the last 25 years … since 1990, NFL favorites covered an average of just 48.7 percent of games.”

Right, so, last year was a good year for favorites.  Better than any year since... not that long ago.  In other words, it wasn't some kind of unprecedented catastrophe for underdogs.  Weren't we just hearing about how GAMBLERS WILL TALK ABOUT THE GREAT UNDERDOG SLAUGHTER OF 2013 WHILE GAMBLING ON MOON FOOTBALL FROM THEIR MOON BASES?  Why don't we hear anything about the GREAT UNDERDOG SLAUGHTER OF 2005 today?  Most likely this is became Bill Simmons is a fucking dunderhead.

Anyways, brace yourself for what comes next.  This is one for the record books, folks.  It doesn't get much better than this.

(That’s bad. That’s very, very, very bad. Every “smart” gambler is trained to grab the points and go against the public as much as we possibly can. That’s how we butter our bread. Swing our luck by 3.5 percentage points and we’re in major trouble ranging from “Crap, I have to reload my off-shore betting account for the third time this month?” to “If I don’t meet some guy named Big Al in the parking lot behind Target on Main Street by 7:30 on Wednesday night, I’m gonna be walking with a limp.”)

DIE
DIE
DIE

Not sure which is worse--his conflation of "going against the public" with taking underdogs, or his use of "we" after referring to "smart gamblers," because hey, what says "smart" like beating the house once (by a minuscule amount) once every five seasons?  And yes, I understand that there's a kernel of truth to the taking the points/going against the house part, as nobodies who gamble once a year when they happen to be in Vegas for a business conference are probably slightly more likely to bet good/favored teams; but first of all the house will adjust the line accordingly, second of all the amount of action coming from people with such an unsophisticated view of a game is going to be pretty low unless it's a playoff game, a Thanksgiving game, etc., and third of all, seriously, read that paragraph again and see if you can talk yourself into thinking Bill even understands that much.  I sure can't.

“(For) seasons in which NFL favorites covered more than 51.5 percent (since 1990) … the average for those five seasons was 53.3 percent. In years following those seasons (highlighted in green), favorites covered, on average, just 47 percent of games. That’s a 6.3 percent swing (from 53.3 percent to 47 percent).”

(Wait, this is good! Is that why The Sporting News made the real headline for this column “The Year of the Dog”? I think it is!)

Any evidence that trend is somehow a result of causation (maybe some quote from a guy who runs a book about how the casinos then to overcorrect after a particularly favorite heavy year, or something)?  Because if there isn't any such evidence, then basically, the "swing back" phenomenon to heavy underdog wins the year after heavy favorite wins is no more reliable than saying "Hey look!  After this roulette wheel hits three black numbers in a row, a red number usually comes next!  TIME TO TAKE OUT A SECOND MORTGAGE!"  I mean, I could totally see it being causal, rather than random chance.  But it's good to see Bill isn't thinking that far.  HE'S JUST LOOKING FOR TRENDS, GANG.  GOTTA FOLLOW THE TRENDS.  THAT'S HOW "SMART" GAMBLERS BUTTER THEIR BREAD.

“In 2006, the year after the best NFL season for favorites in the last 25 years (57.8 percent of favorites covered in 2005), 

I STILL REMEMBER THOSE DAYS.  THOSE WERE DARK DAYS FOR J-HENCH AND I.  WE LOST EVERYTHING BETTING ON DOGS THAT FALL.  EVERYTHING.  CARS, WATCHES, KIDS.  IT WAS A BLOODBATH.

dogs ruled, with favorites covering just 44.6 percent. After the second best season for favorites (52.9 percent in 1998), dogs again cleaned up, as favorites went just 46.5 percent ATS. The third best year for NFL favorites was last season.”

(Translation: Year of the Dog, Part Three!!!!!!!)

IT'S FREE MONEYYYYYYY!  As noted above, Bill is 25-23 so far this season.  He has picked 21 dogs and 26 favorites (1 game has been a pick 'em).  To his credit, his dog picks are 13-8!  That's good!  Dogs are 27-20 overall!  IT'S THE YEAR OF THE DOG!  (Note: this probably will not continue, and even if it does, only Bill would be stupid enough to write a column about what a good idea it is to take dogs and then only take dogs 45% of the time.)

So let’s make that one of our 2014 rules: “When in doubt, always, always, ALWAYS take the points.”

I mean, through three weeks, that's actually great advice.  Unfortunately he's been unable to follow it.

Some other rules that I plan on abiding by in 2014 …

Rule: Diligently avoid taking shaky QBs on the road, bad coaches against good coaches, and, especially, bad coaches coaching shaky QBs against good coaches on the road.

WOWIE ZOWIE.  This is groundbreaking strategy, ladies and germs.  No gambler has ever been so bold as to theorize that when a bad QB backed up by a bad coach goes on the road to face a team with a good coach, you might want to gamble on the good team.  IT'S SO CRAZY IT MIGHT WORK.

This year’s group of shaky QBs in no particular order: EJ Manuel–Kyle Orton; Geno Smith; Johnny Football; Jake Locker Unless He Shows Us Something Early; Chad Henne; Ryan Fitzpatrick; Derek Carr–Matt Schaub; Matt Schaub A Second Time; Robert Griffin III (sorry, D.C. fans, but it’s true and you know it); Tony Romo During Any Week In Which He’s Just Had An Epidural; Matt Cassel; Shaun Hill; Carson Palmer; Just About Any Shaky Backup.

Games so far this year that implicated this rule to some extent:

Week 1
BUF at CHI (Bill went with the rule and lost)
JAX at PHI (Bill went against the rule and lost)

Week 2
JAX at WAS (Bill went against the rule and lost)
ARI at NYG (Bill went with the rule and lost)
NYJ at GB (Bill went with the rule and lost)

Week 3
HOU at NYG (Bill went with the rule and lost)
OAK at NE (Bill went with the rule and lost)

I barely need to summarize that data.  It speaks for itself.  The rule was right 2 out of 7 times.  Bill couldn't even track that, because none of these rules matter and they all contradict themselves so fuck everything.  Bill was right 0 out of 7 times.  (Note: I excluded games where the Titans went on the road because Jake Locker had a great Week 1; then again, he's been crappy since.  But I think he reached Showed Us Something Early status by clobbering the not-bad Chiefs at Arrowhead.  I also counted the OAK at NE game even though Derek Carr is mentioned both here and below, since NE is theoretically good at home.  I did not count the OAK at NYJ game because the Jets are terrible.  Bill did pick that one right, but only by going against his rule, which adds to the comedy.  Anyways, why is Carr on both the "I don't trust" and the "I do trust" lists?  Because Bill refuses to be edited, because he is a colossal prick.)

Not on that list for now: Brian Hoyer (I’m a semi-fan); 

Quasi-support.

Josh McCown (I’m a believer); 

You're an idiot.

Kirk Cousins (I’m a fan); 

You're an idiot, as we will see in coming weeks.

Teddy Bridgewater (I’m a HUGE fan); 

You're a HUGE idiot, as we will see in coming weeks.

Blake Bortles or Derek Carr Unless They’re Playing Somewhere Scary Like Seattle (I don’t mind either of them); 

Is Gillette Stadium Somewhere Scary Like Seattle?  Carr covered there.  In any case, he's on the other list too, so fuck you, Bill.

and Jimmy Garoppolo (my son’s first future football hero).

With the way Brady is playing, we just might see him make some starts before the season is over.

Anyways, verdict on this rule: it's dumb, and Bill is dumb.

Rule: Don’t go against Seattle, Denver, New Orleans, Green Bay or New England at home with a spread under 8½.

Games so far this year that implicated this rule:

Week 1
GB at SEA (Bill went with the rule and won)
IND at DEN (Bill went with the rule and lost)

Week 2
(GB and DEN both played home games, but had spreads over 8.5; Bill went against the Broncos and won, and with the Packers and lost)

Week 3
DEN at SEA (Bill went with the rule and won)
(NO and NE both played home games, but had spreads over 8.5; Bill went with the Patriots and lost, and against the Saints and lost)

Well, unless you have an amazing reason on the level of “Sports Illustrated just put Aaron Rodgers on the cover holding 10 black cats while standing under a ladder and posing with his new girlfriend Caroline Wozniacki.”

Verdict on this rule: not enough data yet.  Odds are it's a pretty good rule to follow, which is something a 9 year old with a vague interest in football could have told you.

Rule: Don’t go against the Pats after a loss and/or when they’re getting points.

After the Pats lost to Miami in week 1, they walloped the Vikings in week 2, covering easily.  I'm pretty sure the University of Minnesota could give the Vikings a game this year.

We have a 13-year Belichick-Brady track record at this point. In the situation I just described, they are 97,567-2 against the spread (all numbers approximate).

And then the following week, the Raiders came into Gillette and covered, and damn near forced overtime (having a game tying TD in the final minutes called back for holding, and then throwing an interception that was the receiver's fault a few plays later).  Verdict on this rule: DURRRRRRR BILLY B TOM TERRIFIC GREATRIOTS YAY!  I hope the Pats finish 2-14 and Jimmy Garopollo retires after the season is over.

More later.

So in my last post

I called it "the stupidest fucking thing I have ever heard" when Steve Wulf rhetorically asked if anyone else had rhetorically asked if the Yankees should disregard their 2000 and 2009 championships because Clemens and A-Rod played on those teams.  Well, Bill Simmons is not a man to let anyone else hold the title of "having said the stupidest fucking thing Larry B has ever heard" for long.  From a column published today about Duncan and the Spurs (which, by the way, is only the 50,000th "THE SPURS WERE NOT AND ARE NOT APPRECIATED FULLY" column written by anyone in the last 15 years, making it pretty clear that they are well appreciated):

The San Antonio Spurs picked Tim Duncan on June 25, 1997, about seven weeks before Matt Stone and Trey Parker launched their new animated series on Comedy Central. Sixteen years later, the Spurs and South Park are still chugging along like kindred spirits; in a goofy twist, Duncan's only fun nickname ("Timmaaaaaaaay") comes from that show. Both the Spurs and South Park generated so many classic moments over the years, they practically blend into each other now. They were lavished with critical acclaim while being overshadowed by more popular network shows (the Lakers and The Simpsons, respectively). Parker and Stone should have burned out years ago; Duncan should be washed up by now. Nope and nope. Every time they seemed ready to lose their relevance, they rallied back. You know, like right now.

And there you go.  THAT is now the stupidest fucking thing I've ever heard.  Congratulations, Steve Wulf.  You're off the hook for now.

Both the Spurs and South Park generated so many classic moments over the years, they practically blend into each other now.

Both the Spurs and South Park generated so many classic moments over the years, they practically blend into each other now.

Both the Spurs and South Park generated so many classic moments over the years, they practically blend into each other now.

Remember, everyone: sports are not actually sports.  Sports are pop culture are sports.  

WMTMQR: With a Special Guest Appearance by Jarrett!

Just to clarify, this is about Gregg's column from allll the way back on Tuesday the 19th. Yeah. Two TMQs ago. So he's talking about games that happened during week 6 of the NFL season. Yup, I'm posting this that late. Fortunately I can get away with it because I'm so handsome. Kind of like how I cut in lines outside of exclusive clubs and never have to wait at the emergency room.

First, a special celebrity guest appearance by onetime semi-quasi-sorta-regular FireJay blogger Jarrett, who has a bone to pick:

As a Lindenwood University alum, imagine my surprise when my brother told me a national columnist had taken my alma mater to task.

Lindenwood 90, Culver-Stockton 19. Lindenwood gained 721 yards on offense and scored 13 touchdowns against winless Culver-Stockton, which has previous losses of 70-0 and 63-10.

A track record of futility against other teams from the NAIA that go unnamed because it would be too difficult to list schools like "Missouri Valley" (70-0) or "Baker" (63-10). I Googled the same thing that Gregg did, but maybe he just had to keep his word count down.

Apparently sportsmanship is not on the curriculum at Lindenwood University which, leading 48-3 at the half, came out passing in the third quarter, then kept starters on the field until the margin was 62-10.

Sportsmanship is surprisingly absent from the curriculum at Lindenwood University, because they dispense diplomas and not anecdotes. Sure, my diploma is crooked, but at least my name is spelled right. But let's move on to the Holier Than Thou segment of the paragraph.

Coach Patrick Ross, does bullying a weak opponent make you feel like a man?

What is this? Is this a joke? Gregg, does bullying a coach of an NAIA football team make you feel like a man? He's coaching in the NAIA in Saint Charles, Missouri. You know what else St. Charles is known for? Antiques. A casino. It's not like he's looking to get that dream job in the NFL with this gig.

Lindenwood president James Evans, your school owes collegiate athletics an apology.

Amazingly, it looks like Gregg made it back to www.lindenwood.edu after his brief stop at the athletics page. Gregg, nobody cares. Not a soul. Dear collegiate athletics, sorry you were brought in on this soap box, but this guy is a total dunderhead. XOXO, Lindenwood University. P.S. - Can we have money?

Located in Canton, Mo., Culver-Stockton College forbids incense in its dorms.

A school forbidding flammable items from dorms? How quaint! Forbidden from Lindenwood Dorms: Alcohol, microwaves, hot plates, and members of the opposite sex. I lived in a house owned by the University for three semesters and girls were forbidden from being on my lawn. So if you're looking for a University that accepts out of state students based on a slightly-above-average ACT scores, come to Lindenwood University, home of Bullying Athletic Programs!

Give him a hand(job?) folks. Moving on to the rest of the column: Gregg, like every single other fucking journalist on the planet, thinks he has some novel and original thoughts about the recent outbreak of concussions in the NFL.

The sports media need to change, too. Most football announcers either avoid discussion of neurological danger, laugh it off as getting "jacked up,"

That was the best ESPN bit ever. It gave Michael Irvin something to do that he didn't suck at.

or pretend not to see what's directly in front of their eyes.

It's not like a big hit is obvious neurological damage right in front of your eyes unless the person who got hit ends up lying motionless in an awkward position. If they're moving at all, and especially if they walk off the field under their own power (which often happens after a nasty helmet-to-helmet hit), celebrating the hit isn't exactly an insensitive showing of total ignorance.

When Cribbs was hit in the head by Harrison, Kevin Harlan of CBS, calling the game, said, "Wow what a hard-hitting rivalry the Steelers and Browns have," not mentioning head trauma.

The reason that's a dumb comment isn't that it was a bad thing to say from a concussion awareness standpoint; it's because the Steelers and Browns don't have much of a rivalry. I think the Browns have won like 3 of the past 30 meetings or something.

When Massaquoi was hit in the head later in the same game, Harlan said with enthusiasm, "He was drilled, Harrison was really laying the wood!" To young viewers -- and the 95 percent of football players who are high school boys -- this kind of commentary makes helmet-to-helmet hits sound cool.

I'm pretty sure watching the hit happen is about 100 times "cooler" and more influential in the minds of kids than what Kevin fucking Harlan has to say about it. Complaining about how a hit was called by the announcers is like complaining about the way an actor smoking in a movie was blowing his smoke rings.

Making helmet hits sound cool to the young is doubly worrisome because while most orthopedic injuries heal, some neurological injuries cannot be treated.

Again, watching the hits happen: responsible for 99% of how impressionable youngsters react to them. Hearing Kevin Harlan say it was a big hit: responsible for 1%.

After Joseph Addai took two deliberate blows to his helmet -- first a helmet-to-helmet hit from Kedric Golston, then a forearm-to-helmet hit from London Fletcher -- and collapsed in the Indianapolis-at-Washington game, Cris Collinsworth of NBC said, "That is a perfectly clean hit, blows to the head are allowed on running plays."

Really -- it's "perfectly clean" to slam your forearm into another player's helmet?

Yes. I can't tell if the question is worded this way because Gregg thinks Collinsworth was wrong, or because he can't believe Collinsworth was right- I hope it's the latter. Because Collinsworth was right.

Existing rule 12, 2, 7g bans "using any part of a player's helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/hairline parts) or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily," and also states, "violent or unnecessary use of the helmet is impermissible against any opponent." Any opponent, including the ballcarrier. So it's not legal to ram your helmet into the ballcarrier's helmet. But many in the football world think it is -- a reason the rules must become clearer.

Collinsworth (MORE LIKE COLLINSWORTHLESS AM I RIGHT. Actually he's pretty decent in the booth) didn't say that helmet to helmet hits were legal. That straw man is in pieces on the ground, though. Good for Gregg.

ESPN deserves blame, too, for poor coverage of neurological harm. On Monday, the noon Eastern edition of "SportsCenter" showed both the vicious hits in the Pittsburgh-at-Cleveland game as highlights, without context about helmet-as-a-weapon fouls or concussions. "That James Harrison is a dangerous player, you better account for him," Merril Hoge said, as if young players should emulate dangerous tactics.

I actually think kids somehow probably care less about what Merril Hoge says than what Kevin Harlan says. Hard to imagine but I bet it's true. Really, if ESPN were being responsible in the way Gregg expects them to be, it wouldn't show any clips of these hits or discuss them at all. Mmmmmm hmmmm. I'm holding my breath too.

Most important, Rodney Harrison said on NBC that players guilty of deliberate helmet-as-a-weapon hits should not just be ejected but suspended.

Ah, Rodney HGHarrison- champion of all that is good and wholesome in professional sports. Now THERE'S a role model kids can look up to, and who can steer them away from making decisions that affect their long term health.

This week is a critical moment for football as a sport, and as a business. If the league really does crack down in a meaningful way -- and if sportscasters, including on ESPN, start being honest about the risks and downsides of football -- then the game will become safer, and a good example will be set for high school players. If the league is just blowing smoke, or the sports media return to boosterism,

Or trying to make money, the business they've been in since they came into existence.

then Congress should step in and regulate the playing standards of professional sports.

Jesus H. Christ, Gregg. No. Congress has about 500 more important problems to tackle (PUN INTENDED) and they're lucky if they get through ten or so in any given year.

Stat of the Week No. 1: Tom Brady has won 26 of his past 27 starts at Gillette Field, including playoffs.

He's also lost 7 of his last 11 road starts. The one home loss was also in a playoff game in which he threw three picks and averaged 3.7 yards per attempt.

Cheerleader of the Week: Liam Carter of Fort Collins, Colo., nominates Jocey of the Tennessee Titans who, according to her team bio, is a lawyer who works as a public defender. If you had an NFL cheerleader as your criminal defense counsel, here is the closing argument the jury might get:

Two, four, six, eight Whom should we exonerate? My client! My client! Aaaaaaaa-CQUIT!

Yep. He's still trying to do this kind of bit. I think he tries it about twice a year. Sad.

Sweet Play of the Week: New England ran a "flip" reverse -- a risky action in which a tailback chucks the ball into the air -- to Brandon Tate for a 22-yard gain, setting up the Patriots' first touchdown in what would become an overtime win. But the sweetest play of the game, if not of Week 6, was 5-foot-9 undrafted free agent Danny Woodhead, out of Division II Chadron State, picking up Ray Lewis on a blitz block.

The sweetest play. Of the week. Was a small white guy making a relatively inconsequential block. Maybe Gregg has a little more Patriots fan in him than he'd like to admit. DANNY FACKIN' WOODHEAD! I NEED HIS JAHHHH-SEY!

Sour Sets of Plays: With Detroit trailing 21-10 at Jersey/A in the fourth quarter, Calvin Johnson caught a go route and both defensive backs on his side fell, leaving nothing but green for an 87-yard touchdown. Johnson began waving the ball in the air at the Giants' 45!

And would go on to score a touchdown just a few seconds later!

Not only did Johnson risk blowing the touchdown with a self-inflicted fumble,

That's a risk in the same sense that it's a risk to take a commercial flight because the plane might crash and kill you. Calvin Johnson can probably palm two basketballs simultaneously with the same hand.

not only did he show poor sportsmanship by mocking the home team,

It's really more of a celebration of your accomplishment than a mocking gesture. Going out to their logo at the 50 and slamming the ball down, a la T.O.? That's mocking the home team.

not only was Detroit riding a streak of 23 consecutive road losses --

Completely irrelevant.

which isn't really that much to strut about -- but after the touchdown, the Lions were still behind.

I'm getting sick and fucking tired of this presumption on the part of Gregg and other stuffy commentators that all celebrations are automatically tacky/classless/horrible/WORSE THAN GENOCIDE. Look- in some circumstances they are the first three of those things. Like if they result in a fumble and reversal of the course of an ongoing play, draw a penalty in a close game, come after a really inconsequential play (see: the defensive linemen who pose for the camera after a 2 yard sack on 1st and 10) or aggressively and personally insult someone on the other team. Everything else is fucking fair game as far as I'm concerned. If you hot dog it on your way into the end zone and there are no consequences (besides the ever-unquantifiable “Oh he totally fired the other team up!!!!”), I say go nuts. The players might as well have fun- last I checked we were all watching sports for a little escapism.

Houston got sour payback when, with 36 seconds remaining, the Chiefs allowed Andre Johnson -- one of the league's best players -- to get open in the end zone for the winning touchdown. On the play, Kansas City had seven defenders dropping back to cover four receivers -- yet one of the league's best players got open.

And maybe, just maybe, the fact that he got open in that situation has something to do with the fact that he's one of the league's best players. It's so crazy- teams continue to let Albert Pujols hit game winning home runs, even though he's one of the best players in the league!

Creep alert! It was a particularly lame week for that item.

Tam Tran of Kansas City reports, "On a business trip to New Orleans, I read a newspaper story about the Gulf oil spill and how it might affect the restaurant business of the 'quickly approaching' Lent season. Lent begins March 9, 2011."

And maybe, just maybe, the Gulf ecosystem won't yet be back to fully healthy at that point.

Jon Frosch of New Orleans reports, "Walking to school at the University of New Orleans, I spotted a car in the parking lot of Ben Franklin High School, which shares the same campus, that had written in the windows, 'Congrats, Class of 2011.' New Orleans Public Schools do not graduate for another eight months."

Pretty much every high school has cars painted with windows celebrating the current senior class at all points during any school year. This is the least creeping instance of creep ever.

Thomas Bender of Chicago writes, "I just received an e-mail for the U2 concert in Chicago at Soldier Field -- on July 11, 2011. Tickets on sale now."

What? They want to sell out the event as far in advance as possible to get paid as soon as possible? (Something snarky about the time value of money)? MADNESS.

Erik Kneebone of Genoa, Ill., writes, "Henry Kravis just donated $100 million to Columbia to expand its business school. Not only is Columbia Business School's main contribution to society the Wall Street sharks who caused the 2008 financial meltdown --

Yeah let's go ahead and single them out. Good plan. Harvard/Stanford/Chicago/Every Other Business School grads, you're off the hook! Also- no Columbia Business School grads have ever done anything good for society with their degrees. (Note: I have no affiliation with Columbia or Columbia Business School and I think NYC is a hole.)

Washington countered with the Times Square defense -- the front seven milling around at random, like tourists in Times Square.

Ohhhhhhh. IIIIIIII get it.

Manning couldn't predict where the front seven would be because the defenders themselves didn't know; they were instructed to move randomly. Manning wasn't fazed, burning this defense for 469 yards.

But let's just remember that Manning went to Division I Tennessee, was drafted first overall, was never cut, and has an enormous contract and a pretty sizable ego. Gregg conveniently doesn't mention these things when a player like Manning succeeds, but OH MY GAWD DID YOU SEE DANNY WOODHEAD ON THAT 3RD DOWN BLITZ PICKUP IT WAS THE CAT'S MEOW

Eternity with Rachael Ray -- the Third Circle of Hell: The autumn edition of the Rachael Ray promotional vehicle "Everyday with Rachael Ray" declares in its main headline "Recipes you'll keep forever!" Like 'til the end of time?

Taking things literally makes them easy to pick on! (I try to only pick on people who do this when they actually say literally, like "I'm so hungry I could literally eat a horse.")

GOD: I command that the temporal world cease.

THE LAST MAN: Wait a sec while I grab my Rachael Ray recipes.

Ooooooooooof.

Last week's column proposed that giving players in Division I football and men's basketball (the only college sports that don't lose money) stipends of a few thousand dollars per year would remove the temptation to take cash from agents while treating players no differently from college newspaper editors, stage crew and graduate teaching assistants, who also receive small stipends.

It's a novel idea, and I hate the NCAA and its retarded rules, but I don't think a few grand a year is going to remove much temptation. Not that I'm saying a football player's contribution to his university is 10 times that of a newspaper editor- I'm just saying that monthly $300 checks aren't really going to stop the agent-to-player cashflow.

Back to Saban. He proposed that any agent who causes a college player to lose a year of eligibility should lose his agent's license for an equal period.

Nick Saban is a legendary asshole who has exactly zero room to talk about who's exploiting who when it comes to college football.

This is a fine suggestion. The agent can't claim not to know eligibility rules; it is his business to know. Saban is correct to say that agent behavior will not change until agents receive the same punishments as NCAA athletes.

Yeah, I'm fine with the suggestion, as long as we also have a policy that coaches who graduate like three players a year are suspended without pay for the next decade.

If Alabama football, or any similar big-deal program, were pure and academics-focused, Saban would be justified in saying the agents and NFL scouts should stay away from his student-athletes. But Saban himself, and many other football-factory coaches, takes advantage of his players by pressuring them to concentrate on football above classroom work. Saban knows he will be rewarded with money for wins but never penalized if players don't get an education.

I hate agreeing with TMQ. I HATE IT. But at least he's vindicated himself here somewhat.

Many college football athletes enjoy a four- or five-year dreamworld of going on to the NFL and cut classes with the coaching staff's tacit or even active approval. When their college days end and the NFL doesn't call, and they haven't earned a diploma, they are shafted. Don't blame agents and scouts for this. Blame colleges and coaches.

Hooray! This could have been presented without giving Saban any credit for anything, as he deserves none (except for exploiting NCAA recruiting/discipline rules and putting solid FOOTBALL teams on the FOOTBALL field on a yearly basis). (Note: I am in no way affiliated with LSU, Auburn, or any other SEC school and have no team-based bias against Alabama or Saban. He's just a cunt.)

As for Saban's pimp analogy, he said of agents who hand out money, "How are they any better than a pimp? I have no respect for people who do that to young people. How would you feel if they did it to your child?" This from a coach whose football program graduates only 55 percent of its players. (Look up any Division I graduation rate here.) Saban uses up young people's college years to win games and big paydays for himself -- then graduates barely more than half of them. To use his own words, how is he any better than a pimp?

Look at Gregg, bringing the noise. Well alright then.

Cowboys' Low Football IQ: You're trailing with less than three minutes remaining -- Why are you punting? That's what Dallas did, if for no other reason than to shift the blame away from Wade Phillips, who would have been denounced if a fourth-down try had failed, and onto his defensive players.

And then he had to go and say something like this.

When will I post about this week's TMQ? (The one that came out today.) Honestly, who knows or cares.

I Like Karl Ravech. Having Said That-

Put him on the list of people who literally make me angry. Earlier, on Baseball Tonight, Karl said

The use of instant replay in the Little League World Series is literally a watershed moment.

Failure.

Long Post? Nope, Short Post

I was going to cover the latest pile of shit to stumble off of Simmons's unfunny fingertips, but it's so long-winded and terrible that I couldn't finish the post tonight. So instead I thought you might find it hilarious that FOX hired Kevin Millar to call baseball games. And similarly hilarious that he said this on Saturday during the Reds/Braves game:

Drew Stubbs has great speed. I was watching him during spring training, and he beat out a routine ground ball to the shortstop. Literally beat it out.

Did he kick the ball out of the stadium? Did he masturbate on it? I'm not sure how you literally beat out a grounder to short, and sadly, Kevin probably doesn't either. But hey, at least he doesn't look like a complete dumbass, right?




Oh. Frowny emoticon.

Bill Simmons Has No Idea How Stuff Works

Bill loves him some Bill. He especially loves him some Bill in situations which call for what he perceives to be common sense. Thus his long standing proposal that NBA teams hire vice presidents of such, who would presumably just sit around, looking smug, telling stories about their kids/dad/friend BugHouse, and asking their team's general manager "Hey... is that REALLY a good idea?" whenever the GM decided to make a move. It's such a good idea, it couldn't possibly not fail to not work. And it's very indicative of Bill's attitude towards teams/leagues involved in pro sports: they are dumb, and he is not.

Which brings us to his recent treatise regarding the NBA's current revenue problems. Here's the good part, for him: he's pretty much correct with his overall premise. The NBA is (and many of its teams are) poorly run. Here's the good part, for the rest of us: pretty much everything he says to build on that basic premise and add detail to it is dripping with retardery.

When the Writers Guild of America went on strike in 2007, something fascinating happened: The networks, production companies and movie studios slowly realized their infrastructure made no real sense. They had been handing out too many developmental deals, green-lighting too many pilots and overpaying for too many movies for far too long.

And even then, you couldn't get a project going, That's why you moved out there, right? Don't pretend like you just did it to write for Jimmy Kimmel. We both know you had (and probably still have) a bigger plan that failed (or is still failing) in spectacular fashion.

It was a broken model. Only when that massive overhead was removed for a few months and Hollywood didn't collapse did everyone realize, "Wait a second, were we doing this the right way?"

We can only dream of FOX doing the same with Joe Buck.

The answer, clearly, was no. The old way was like watching two people battle over entrée choices for dinner, then playing it safe by ordering everything on the menu. When the strike ended right as the economy was turning, new Hollywood tightened its belt, stopped overdeveloping and aimed for a higher batting average.

Which explains "Valentine's Day," I suppose.

In the NBA, the owners are headed for a similar, "Wait a second, were we doing this the right away?" realization, if it hasn't happened already. They arrived at this specific point after salaries ballooned over the past 15 years -- not for superstars, but for complementary players who don't sell tickets, can't carry a franchise, and, in a worst-case scenario, operate as a sunk cost. These players get overpaid for one reason: Most teams throw money around like drunken sailors at a strip joint.

And we're already in "Bill knows best" territory- a scary place to be. Look, many teams misspend and have been doing so for a while. But you can put a little more effort into explaining why. For a while, it was because they had the money and the marginal gain was worth the marginal cost. Sure- guys were getting contracts they didn't deserve. But the books were still balancing, and maybe that overpaid 7th man would end up being the difference between making or missing the playoffs. Plus, most dopey fans (by which I mean most fans are dopey) like it when their team makes moves. It drums up interest in the team, increases ticket sales, increases jersey sales, increases hype, increases revenue. I guess if you didn't know who wrote this article, you could say these explanations are really just sub-explanations underneath the "drunken sailor" theory. But since it's Bill, you'd have to be fucking crazy to think he meant anything other than "NO ONE RUNNING AN NBA TEAM HAS ANY SENSE OR SMARTS AT ALL! HELLO? WHY HASN'T THIS BEEN ADDRESSED? WATCH ME COMPARE WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE LEAGUE TO THE JERSEY SHORE!"

This isn't about improving the revenue split between players and owners. It's about Andre Iguodala, Emeka Okafor, Elton Brand, Andrei Kirilenko, Tyson Chandler, Larry Hughes, Michael Redd, Corey Maggette and Luol Deng making eight figures a year but being unable to sell tickets, create local buzz or lead a team to anything better than 35 wins.

Right, it's arguable that most of those guys are overpaid. Some (Hughes, Brand) to a much greater extent than others (Iguodala, Deng). But again, most of those deals made decent sense at the time they were signed. NBA teams are in the business of winning. This isn't MLB, where the Pirates and Marlins owners are singularly focused on trimming payroll and cashing their revenue sharing check every winter. With the NBA's salary cap and revenue structure, it's a much more results-oriented league. No one is out there signing questionable players to big contracts because they're dumb. They're doing it because in their minds, it's a risk worth taking. You can pick on the list of players above, but you should also take the time to make a list of non-superstars signed to big deals who are worth every penny (or perhaps more) like Chauncey Billups or Manu Ginobili. Pretty much every team in every sport has some guys making a ton of money. Not all of them are going to be worth what they're paid. Yes, there are some abysmal contracts out there. But that happens in every sport. It doesn't mean every owner/GM is a complete moron who couldn't run a hot dog stand, much less an NBA franchise.

Like I said at the beginning of this post- Bill's right, the league has problems. And at the same time- Bill's a moron, because he's doing a horrible job of explaining them.

It's about Jermaine O'Neal making more money this season than Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, James Harden, Serge Ibaka, Eric Maynor, Thabo Sefolosha and Jeff Green combined.

Right, because Jermaine O'Neal is a veteran who signed a huge deal when he was a perennial all star, and most of those guys have been in the league less than four years so they're not eligible for a big payday yet. CAN YOU BELIEVE CARLOS ZAMBRANO IS MAKING MORE MONEY THAN TIM LINCECUM AND ZACH GRIENKE COMBINED THIS YEAR? (That's true, right? I didn't look it up. Substitute someone else just as washed up as Zambrano if necessary.)

It's about Tracy McGrady making $22.4 million, being unhappy coming off the bench, then convincing his team to let him disappear until it traded him.

Yeah, I mean, again- that was a contract signed back when McGrady was one of the 10 best players in the league. He's overpaid at the end of it; which is what happens at the end of most contracts superstars in any league sign. And maybe McGrady is a mopey asshole. But this isn't the problem except to the extent that players signing deals that are too long are the problem. The right explanation here is "no team should sign a swingman in his mid 20s to a seven or eight year deal." Not "OMG TRACY MCGRADY IS OVERPAID THIS YEAR."

It's about Gilbert Arenas hogging one-third of Washington's salary cap next season even though he brought guns into the Wizards locker room and had to plead no contest to a felony.

Captain hindsight strikes again! How did Washington not see this coming? After all, Arenas had a rap sheet miles long before this weird gun incident! And it's not like he was an enormous fan favorite who was capable of singlehandedly carrying a team into the playoffs or anything.

It's about Brian Cardinal, Darko Milicic, Bobby Simmons, Eddy Curry, Kenny Thomas, T.J. Ford, Mark Blount, Etan Thomas, Andres Nocioni, Tony Battie, Adam Morrison, Marcus Banks, Marko Jaric, Matt Carroll, Jerome James, Mike James, Jason Kapono, DeSagana Diop and Dan Gadzuric making more than $120 million combined this season to dole out high-fives.

Nice job italicizing combined there. As if that makes this even more staggering. Personally I would be more shocked if those guys were making $120 million each this season to dole out high-fives. Can you believe that the US, China, India, the UK, and Japan have GDPs which add up to over a gazillion dollars combined?

This is how the NBA's situation differs from Hollywood three years ago. Hollywood stumbled by accident into the realization that things were broken. But the NBA already knows. The league wants a system more beneficial to owners that features a hard salary cap, no long-term deals (only three or four years guaranteed at most)

See, there we go. That was all you had to say.

and no luxury tax. The players will dig their feet in and fight. We will have a lockout or a strike. It will last for months. And months. And months. Start preparing yourself mentally now. It's going to happen.

It could happen. It happened in 1998- for a few months. I'm not buying this "it's going to happen" shit just yet. About a year ago, Simmons put out a similarly doomsdayish column proclaiming that something like eight NBA teams were going to fold/shut down in the next couple of years. START PREPARING YOURSELF. IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. EXCEPT THAT THE LEAGUE WOULD NEVER LET THAT HAPPEN, EVER.

OK, now that we're past that part, let's get to the "Bill is an entitled little shit" part.

And really, I would be fine with this. I would.

Just one problem ...

No one will hire you as a VP of Common Sense if there's a lockout?

Let's say the owners get their way and the new system is better than the old one. Great. Awesome. Answer these questions for me:

1. Why should I care?

Because you're an NBA fan?

2. Why should you care?

Because I'm an NBA fan.

3. Why should either of us care that owners might not lose as much money in 2013 as they did in 2010?

I don't care about the intricacies of what happens between the owners and the players. I care that the league continues to operate so I can watch games on TV and have something besides hockey (not my thing) and college basketball (lame, too corrupt and exploitative to enjoy) to distract me during the winter from the miserable life I lead. Look, I don't have strong feelings either way on the labor disagreement. The players could end up better off after the new CBA. The owners could end up better off. They could both end up significantly worse off. I don't give a shit. I just want to watch basketball and talk about it with other people who like to watch basketball. Stop acting like you're a fucking shareholder, Bill. You have no financial stake in the league other than the Clippers season tickets you keep buying because you're a dumbass (more on that later). Playing this "I don't care what happens! I'm too upset about how they got here!" card just absolutely stinks of dickheaded entitlement. PRO SPORTS TEAMS/LEAGUES DON'T OWE YOU SHIT. HANDLE YOURSELF.

Does it mean ticket prices will drop? I doubt it.

So? You'll keep buying them. So will lots of other people. The tickets will presumably continue to be priced at or very near the point at which they maximize revenue and profits for the teams. If you can't deal with the invisible hand and its effect on a multi-billion dollar industry, go watch high school games in person. I only go to one or two NBA games per season, but I can usually find tickets in the nosebleeds for around $15-$20. I think that's pretty reasonable. The more important question here, though, is would a new CBA (of any kind) mean that games will continue to appear four or five nights a week on basic cable? Well how do you like that, it does! Works just fine for me.

Does it mean franchises with older arenas aren't in danger of having their team hijacked like the Sonics were stolen from Seattle? I doubt it.

Yeah, it totally blows for the city of Seattle and all that, but it's business. Cities in all sports lose teams from time to time. I'll shed a few tears for Winnipeg and Quebec City before I spend too much time worrying about Seattle. Just like Minneapolis and Cleveland, I'm sure they'll get a new team sometime in the near future anyways. But why are we even discussing this- HOW DOES THIS HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH MY REASONS FOR CARING ABOUT THE LEAGUE AND THE PLAYERS HAMMERING OUT A NEW LABOR AGREEMENT?

Does it mean failing teams won't continue to tank down the stretch for lottery picks, or dump some of their best players to contenders for 40 cents on the dollar to save a few bucks? I doubt it.

Again- happens in every professional sport. Every one of them. At least it's not the NFL, where teams can cut some of their best players for zero cents on the dollar to save a few bucks. And one last time- I care about these problems because...

So I ask you again ... why should we care?

No wait, I was asking you that. My answer is that I care about avoiding a lockout because I like watching and talking about the NBA. If the new agreement makes things a little more financially stable, hey! I'm down with that. And if it doesn't? Hey! I'll still watch. On the other hand, why the fuck should I care about whether or not teams with shitty arenas and cuntbrained owners can move teams, or whether or not ticket prices go down?

For instance, let's say you root for the Wizards like my buddy House. Over the last two years, House watched his team overpay Arenas ($111 million; nobody else could have offered more than $85 million at the time)

They wanted to make him happy so he wouldn't feel insulted by a strategic lowball offer. It just so happened that no one had the cap space to offer more than $85 MM, but if that version of Arenas (pre felony, obviously) were a free agent this summer, there's no question at least one team would throw a max deal (which is $121 MM, I believe) at him. So in that sense, he was worth what they paid him. Was it dumb to not try to save that money, since, after all, he couldn't get a max deal anywhere else? Probably. But it's far from indefensible.

and Antawn Jamison (a $41 million extension for someone about to reach his mid-30s)

It was a four year deal, probably below market value in terms of cost per year, for a 32 year old who consistently puts up 20 and 9. It's further from indefensible than the Arenas signing. It's probably closer to smart than indefensible.

in a bizarre attempt to keep together the nucleus of a noncontender.

They made the playoffs each of the four seasons prior to those signings. They hadn't really gone anywhere, but were they a noncontender? Hardly. They were the #5 seed in the east in 2005, 2006, and 2008. In 2005 they won their first round matchup. They weren't on the verge of winning a title, but they were only a piece or two away from being serious contenders. Bill, at that point, would rather blow things up and start all over (a slight variation on the exact practice he just decried).

Those contracts forced the Wiz to package the No. 5 pick in the 2009 draft, along with a couple of lousy contracts, for immediate help (Randy Foye and Mike Miller).

Foye arrived a year or so late- he's now a major contributor who will be a starter in the league for a long time. So... yeah, they got some almost immediate help. If Arenas doesn't go schizo they might be in the running for a top 4 seed this year. And again- WHO DIDN'T SEE THAT COMING? It was so obvious that this guy who was very active in the community and widely regarded as a good (if eccentric) guy, with no prior criminal history, would go and get himself suspended for the season!

When that move backfired and Arenas went child actor on us, the team called an audible and dealt three of its four best players (Jamison, Caron Butler and Brendan Haywood) for expiring contracts and the No. 30 pick in the 2010 draft.

And it would have been so much smarter and less damaging to the fan base to just let Arenas and Jamison walk during the summer of 2008! Yeah, the Wizards got themselves into trouble. It happens. That's sports. One more time- this happens in every sport. Even the very owner-friendly NFL with its non-guaranteed contracts. Using this as your prime example is like saying that MLB is completely out of control, and then only breaking down the 2009/2010 Tigers.

Second, the Wizards will have a ton of cap space this summer, only this summer's top free agents won't be saying, "Man, I'd love to play on a young team that's built around Gilbert Arenas."

The VP of common sense knows this. I mean, it may well be true, but it's a fucking useless point. From a player personnel perspective, why would they want to go to the Knicks, the team that's been planning for this summer since 2007? So they can play on a team built around David Lee and Wilson Chandler? Money is money. Teams are good at making sales pitches to players who want it. I can't tell if Bill's angle is "the Wizards have no one besides Arenas" or "the Wizards have Arenas and that's bad because he's already a highly paid superstar so no one will play with him." Either way, it's dumb. Money is money and cap space is cap space. It may not work out for Washington, but it's not a flawed plan coming out of the game.

So it's a flawed business plan coming out of the gate.

No it's not.

The Wizards shouldn't even mention the words "cap space" to their fans again. It's like promising your kids an ice cream at the end of a long drive when you know there's nothing in the fridge.

Oh! More Simmons' daughter anecdotes, please! THERE IS NO WAY SHE'S GOING ON A DATE BEFORE AGE EIGHTEEN. DADDY BILL WON'T ALLOW IT. Bill Simmons- probably the least intimidating father figure I can imagine.

Third, they actually tried to sell their fans that one benefit of the Jamison trade was dipping the Wizards under the luxury tax threshold. As House hissed afterward, "What the [bleep] do I care if the Wiz aren't paying the tax? How does that affect me? Does that mean they're lowering ticket prices for the rest of the year then?"

No, and that's probably an irrelevant angle to sell fans on, but it may establish to them that you're less likely to take further cost cutting measures in the coming years. A cold comfort to be sure, and I'm not sure why (or to what extent) the team "sold" the angle to fans (rather than just using it as an explanation when asked), but it's not like it's irrelevant. Also- House- ticket prices. Economics. Priced in a way that benefits teams the most. Deal with it. The rest of us are.

Nope. Over the past five years, half the league's franchises crapped on their season-ticket holders at least once with mismanagement, salary dumping and/or tanking for lottery picks.

OH, THOSE POOR SEASON TICKET HOLDERS! WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE PEOPLE WITH PLENTY OF DISPOSABLE INCOME?!?!?! This makes me sick. First of all, you fucking hypocrite, you're the one who keeps buying Clippers season tickets. If you hate they way they operate so much (again, more on this later), stop being a fucking pussy and do something about it. Second of all, I'll turn the implicit question around on you again: why should I care that season ticket holders are being "crapped on?" If I'm not one of them, as is the case with 99.99% of NBA fans, then I don't give a rotten flying pile of fuck what happens to them. Fuck 'em. Let them keep subsidizing my interest. Unless there's some kind of mass revolt, which there never will be because most season ticket holders are as waterheaded as Bill, they're really not a part of this discussion.

Guess what happens when you get continually crapped on? It kinda makes you not want to support your team anymore. You know, because you have a big pile of crap on your head. Teams don't seem to understand this; apparently, neither does the league.

And yet- even though the league is losing money and certainly has some financial problems to deal with- this same system is still in place, and probably will face no revisions (specifically to ticket price) at all once the new CBA is established and its effects trickle down through the business.

For instance, I have Clippers season tickets. At last week's deadline, the Clippers dumped Marcus Camby, the league's second-leading rebounder and their best defensive player,

This is my favorite part of the article, because it's where he stops being an idiot about everything else, and does what he does best- be an idiot about sports. Marcus Camby is the best defensive player of no team. He probably wouldn't be the best defensive player on most D-I college teams. He's a great help shot blocker- AND ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE. He cannot defend anyone in the post, he's too light. He's horrible on pick and rolls. And he goes for too many help blocks, leaving his man wide open for offensive rebounds and tips. I say this without hyperbole- he is certainly the most overrated defensive player in the NBA in the last decade; and he's probably in the running for most overrated defensive player of all time. No hyperbole. Look at what happened to Denver after he left- they went from worst defensive team in the league to something at least a little bit better than that. Every dipshit pundit raked the Nuggets over the coals for that move, because like Bill, they all think Marcus Camby is a great defensive player. He's not. He blocks a lot of shots, and does nothing else at even a mediocre level. The end. Man I am furious about this.

for two expiring contracts and $1.5 million in cash. I had tickets last Wednesday to watch Atlanta kick the butts of the suddenly depleted/lousy/rebuilding Clips. Did the price of those tickets change? Of course not. Hey Mr. Billionaire Housing Discriminator Who Owns The Clippers, I'm glad you pocketed that extra $1.5 million. Really, I am. But what did that do for me? Why didn't you use that savings to discount my last two months of tickets?

Kill yourself. Immediately.

And what about the other "customers" who bought season tickets because you promised a good product and didn't deliver for the 17th time in the last 18 years?

They're all welcome to do the same. Actually- wait! No! It's idiots like those people (well, I mean, they're idiots if like Bill they think that every time the team saves some money they're entitled to a cut of it) who help subsidize my fandom. And again, the fandom of 99.99% of the rest of us out here.

Also, Bill, I don't have an MBA, but let me explain something to you. When you own a business, and it's losing money, and then you cut costs to try to get out of the red, you know what you don't do? Immediately add a new cost to balance out the old one you got rid of. Does that make sense? Let's say you own an ice cream shop (the kind you can lie to your kids about during a long drive!) and it's losing money. So you fire a couple workers and operate with a leaner staff to save money. What's your next move? Start giving away ice cream for free because you just saved some cash? Better hire a VP of Common Sense if you really think that's how it works. You entitled bag of shit.

Now, here's where you say, "Simmons, you're an idiot for buying tickets for that septic tank of a franchise in the first place." Great point. I still own Clips tickets for two reasons: I like seeing the other teams, and there's a puncher's chance that someone like LeBron or Wade might be dumb enough to sign here. Stupid, I know. I'm delusional.

Ah. It's so nice, I think I'll read it again.

Now, here's where you say, "Simmons, you're an idiot for buying tickets for that septic tank of a franchise in the first place." Great point. I still own Clips tickets for two reasons: I like seeing the other teams, and there's a puncher's chance that someone like LeBron or Wade might be dumb enough to sign here. Stupid, I know. I'm delusional.

Oh, and I just realized, this is also an answer to his question about why ticket prices don't go down when the team saves money. Because he likes seeing other teams, wants to stay on board in case a superstar signs there via free agency (WHAT WILL THOSE FREE AGENTS SAY- "HEY, I WANT TO GO PLAY ON A TEAM BUILT AROUND BARON DAVIS AND CHRIS KAMAN?" SO IT'S A FLAWED BUSINESS PLAN FROM THE START!!!!). That's why.

But I have owned Clips seats for the past six years; in five of them, the season was over in mid-February.

Does the NBA care that I feel like an idiot for continuing to renew these seats? I don't know.

Sheesh, I hope not. That's really no way to run a successful business.

Does the NBA care about all the loyal customers in every failing city who feel like idiots for continuing to renew their seats? I don't know.

Why would they?

Shouldn't I know?

No. You should shut up and do one of two things: 1) put your money where your mouth is and bail on the tickets if they're not worth it to you, or 2) sit back, enjoy watching the other teams who play against the Clippers, and dream about Lebron and Wade signing there this summer. Oh, and regardless of which option you pick, you should definitely stop acting like the NBA and the Clippers owe you anything more than to hold games on the nights they're scheduled and make sure no one else is sitting in your seat. You entitled cunt.

Here's what we do know ...

Teams survive on TV money, season-ticket revenue and luxury suites. They don't care about the upper decks. They care about getting fat checks in March and April for the following season, then banking that money for a few months and collecting interest on it. They care about getting us to pay for a spring's worth of playoff tickets up front even though our team might survive only eight days in the postseason.

And although revenue is down right now (in a terrible economy), apparently that model has been working pretty well for some time!

A noncontender needs to convince its fans every spring, You better lock down another year of your seats, because if you don't, you're gonna miss out when we kick ass and make the playoffs and it's going to be impossible to get good seats and you'll be jealous! Hell, look at me. I want to break up with the Clippers ... but what if they get LeBron and I miss out? I would regret it. Every minute. Every day.

And that's why the Clippers don't have to lower season ticket prices.

Sure, they have about as much of a chance of getting LeBron as I have of becoming the WNBA commissioner. Doesn't matter. I can't miss even the 3 percent chance that it might happen. Which leads me to this moment in April ...

"Here's another check, Mr. Billionaire Housing Discriminator Who Owns The Clippers. I'll keep my fingers crossed for another year. I hate you."

It's not like it's a big deal or anything, but I hate you.

I do it every spring. I have no protection. Neither do any of the other season-ticket holders for any of the other screwed-up franchises.

They do, actually. It's called running your life in the way you see fit.

In Cleveland, the Cavs asked for 2010-11 renewals last month under the guise of an "Early Bird Special." Cavs season-ticket holders will have to decide before the 2010 playoffs start, "Am I keeping my tickets next year? Am I rolling the dice that LeBron comes back?" If they keep them, and LeBron doesn't come back, it's going to feel like getting tipped over in a port-o-john. And yes, the Cavs would be doing the tipping.

And all the people in that metaphorical port-o-john (shouldn't that be capitalized?) will have been in there because they chose to be in there.

So why don't fans have protection? As a failing business -- and, really, a league that loses $400 million in a single year has to qualify as "failing" -- doesn't the NBA have an obligation to win customers back?

HOLY SHIT. YOU ARE A FUCKING DUNCE. YOU ARE THE BIGGEST DUNCE TO EVER WRITE FOR ESPN.COM, WHICH OF COURSE IS REALLY SAYING SOMETHING. THE NBA DOES NOT OWE YOU HAPPINESS AND RAINBOWS AND A PAT ON THE BACK AND A DETAILED APOLOGY. THE NBA OWES TO YOU A SEASON'S WORTH OF BASKETBALL GAMES THAT YOU GET TO WATCH FROM THE SEAT YOU PURCHASED. TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT. You have money to spend on season tickets. Congratulations! I wish I did. If I did somehow come across that kind of money, and then decided that the team in my hometown wasn't good/entertaining enough, or if they said "hey, actually we're only going to play seven home games this year" or "hey, you're going to have to cagefight someone for your seat- we're selling doubles of every ticket this year," then I probably wouldn't but those tickets! I'd spend my money on something else! Or save it. You can't go wrong with saving money. See how that works?

If I were running the NBA, eliminating the illusion of regret would be my biggest initiative.

If you were running the NBA, the sport of basketball in the USA would be dead within five years. Hey, at that point, maybe the MLS would step up and take over or something. That'd be kind of cool. I like soccer. There, I said it.

And sure, like with the Hollywood strike, an NBA lockout will end up working in favor of the owners. It will lower operating costs, protect teams from overspending and create a system in which A-listers get rewarded (the LeBrons and Wades) and the working class (the Goodens and Farmars) gets screwed. Costs will drop, franchise values will increase, and the owners will believe all the acrimony was worth it. The ship will have been righted. Or so they will say.

Will the games still be on TV? Can I go see a few games a year for around $20 a pop? Will the best basketball players in the world still want to play in the league? Well alright then. Sounds good.

I hope they're right.

I still don't know how it benefits you and me.

Your perspective boggles my mind to an extent I can't describe. You are an ass. You are a walking, talking, typing, eight-podcasts-and-one-print-article-which-is-usually-a-shitty-mailbag-per-month ass. The premise of this article was totally acceptable. Your attempt to build a column around that premise is one of the biggest failures in journalism I've seen in almost three years of living in my parents' basement and operating this blog. How you have acquired a nation wide fanbase of sycophants is beyond me. You. Are. An. Ass.

I hope the Clippers sign Rudy Gay to a max deal this summer, then proceed to go 18-64 next season. And I hope you renew your tickets for 2011-2012 anyways.

I Hate to Bury My Last Post

Given the pretty coherent and entertaining commenting going on, but I didn't want to wait too long to let you know what ESPN's Olympic blog had to say about what you should have been watching yesterday:

Speedskating: Men's 500M
It seems long distances belong to Dutchman Sven Kramer, middle distances to American Shani Davis. But there is no clear favorite for Monday night's sprint at the Richmond Olympic Oval. The hometown crowd will try to will Jeremy Wotherspoon, of Humboldt, Saskatchewan, to gold in his last Olympic hoorah.

His last hurrah? Too bad.

Wotherspoon won a silver medal in Nagano, his first Olympics, but has crashed and burned -- sometimes literally -- in each Olympics since.

Oh my! You'd think eventually he'd stop catching fire at some point, even if he did keep crashing- it just seems so unlikely in a speed skating competition.

DEAR EVERYONE WHOSE WRITING WILL BE PUBLISHED ON A MAJOR SPORTS WEBSITE: PLEASE LEARN HOW TO USE "LITERALLY" PROPERLY. THANKS A BUNDLE IN ADVANCE.