Contenders in the East?

Today, the Boston Celtics acquired one of the best players in the NBA, Kevin Garnett, from the Minnesota Timberwolves. This past summer Danny Ainge has turned the Celtics from one of the leagues worst to a now contending team in the Eastern Conference. In addition to acquiring Garnett, the Celtics also got sharpshooter Ray Allen from the SuperSonics.

I like this deal for two reasons because 1) the Trail Blazers only have to see both Allen and Garnett only twice a year now, and 2) it is better for the league to have storied franchises in contention. The Boston Celtics are one of the most historic teams in the NBA. It was very sad to see this team be very bad these last couple of years. ( The same can be said for the Philadelphia 76ers and New York Knicks) I believe that it is better for the league for storied franchises to be good. Fans follow the big name teams, with the Celtics suddenly good again the NBA will attract more fans. My question for the blog to comment on is it better for the league to have the storied big name franchises contending or is more exciting for new teams to win?

Faciliation 8/1: Should Sammy Sosa be in baseball's Hall of Fame?

This past weekend baseball held its Hall of Fame induction ceremony. This year two of the classiest and purist players ever to play were the new inductees, Tony Gwyn and Cal Ripken Jr. Both of these players showed hard work during their long careers, and were both loyal to the organizations that brought them up. These players were more than eligible to be inducted.

With the recent steroid scandal hovering over Major League Baseball, many players with Hall of Fame caliber numbers may not get into the Hall of Fame because with the speculation of these players using performance enhancing drugs during their careers. These players include Barry Bonds, Rafael Palmeiro, Mark McGwire, and the player to be debated, Sammy Sosa.

Sammy Sosa is a difficult player to determine whether or not to be in the Hall of Fame because he has never been tested positive for steroid use. However, during the congressional hearing, involving Major League Players, Sosa spoke through an interpreter which was something he had never done when speaking to the media. This was considered a cowardly and questionable move. Below are some bullet point reasons whether or not Sosa should be a Hall of Famer.

Reasons to be in the Hall of Fame:

• Only player in MLB history to hit more than 60 HRs three seasons.
• Has over 600 career HRs
• 1998 NL MVP

Reasons Not to be in the Hall of Fame:

• Used a corked bat in 2003
• Walked out on team in 2004
• No other great stats other than HRs
• Spoke through an interpreter at Congressional Hearings

Would A Dress Code Have Prevented This?

Okay, so some would argue that a dress code in the NBA would help reinforce professionalism, and shape a "cleaner" demeanor within the players. But on November 19, 2004 when the entire arena broke out into a full fledged brawl between players and fans, would a dress code really have made a difference?

The topic I present to you today is really dealing with a number of issues, but in essence I want to keep it focused on just two.

The first being that if the NBA had a dress code for their players, would they really have a greater sense of professionalism; or would they simply be basketball players in suits?

The second and final issue I'd like to present is fans and boundaries. When I watch a game I feel as though there is this 4th wall separating players from fans, which was clearly knocked down after this display. So my question then becomes (in the context of the clip), when fans cross the line and taunt players, is it just as much their fault, as the players involved?

Just a thought.

Who's the Blazers True Point Guard?

The idea that Blake was brought back to Portland because he is a better performer than our current point guards is ludicrous. In my opinion, he was brought back on to the squad because he was the best available role player for our young team. The young players need a seasoned player to help provide direction during the growing pains that the Blazers will more than likely be faced with. Also, Nate trusts Blake to run the offense the way he wants it run.

Blake is not a better one on one player than Jack; Blake has no skill demonstrably better than Jack. Career 3-point averages are meaningless - recent performance and trends are far better indicators of immediate future performance and trends. Even if Blake gets better at some skills, with his one potentially valuable skill being 3-point shooting, Jack is likely to improve faster and be better.

So why Blake again?

Because the Blazers do not trust Jack to run the team like it should be run - which would threaten the development of the rest of the youngsters. If Jack doesn't start, it won't be because he isn't the better basketball player, it will be because Blake will be a more stable, error-free guard. Blake will play the game McMillan wants him to play, while Jack - in my opinion - is more prone to play for the moment.

From a pure performance perspective - Blake is a backup point guard, but he doesn't think he is a backup. Many fans don't believe he is a backup. But lets face it, Steve Blake is a solid backup. What is being over looked is Sergio Rodriguez will be the point guard of the future, and Blake will help Sergio hone the skills necessary to run the team.

Facilitation 7/30: Should sports contracts be guaranteed?

In the NFL, contracts are not guaranteed by owners -- a team can terminate a player's contract and avoid having to pay them. In MLB and the NBA, contracts are guaranteed, so when an athelete signs a $100 million contract, he will get paid that $100 million regardless.

Sports agents, such as Drew Rosenhaus (right), have encouraged NFL players to hold-out, or refuse to play, until they get a large amount of guaranteed money. Many NFL contracts are re-negotiated every year. NFL players often push for large signing bonuses, which they receive immediately, to counteract their lack of contract security.

In contrast, MLB and the NBA have dozens of ridiculously overpaid players that nobody wants. There have been many instances in which players have had career seasons in the last year of their contract, then return to mediocrity after signing a massive deal. This is especially true for high-demand positions such as NBA center and starting pitcher. Some examples: Erick Dampier, Adonal Foyle, Michael Olowokandi, Joel Przybilla, Darius Miles, Carl Pavano, Adrian Beltre, & Russ Ortiz -- but these guys are just the tip of the iceberg. A prime example of the failure of this system is Steve Francis (above), who received nearly $31 million in a buy-out of his 2-year, $34 million contract from the Trailblazers -- they prefered to pay him to leave than pay his salary. Francis recently signed a 2-year, $6 million contract with the Houston Rockets, consequently receiving both a $14 million pay cut and a $17 million raise for the same season . . .

Arguments for guaranteed contracts:

-- They add an element of commitment to the vicious world of sports, in which atheletes are often treated more like commodities than people.

-- Atheletes with guaranteed contracts can relax and play the game without fear of an injury that could end their career and threaten their livelihood.

-- There are many more contract disputes in the NFL compared to MLB and the NBA because of the inequity between the sports related to guaranteed contracts.

Arguments against guaranteed contracts:

-- It reflects the real world, in which a company can fire a person without continuing to pay them.

-- Many professionals risk injury to complete their job responsibilities, such as construction workers, crab fishermen, & military personnel.

-- Just because the NFL is the odd-sport out in this area doesn't make them wrong. If MLB and the NBA didn't guarantee contracts either, there would be far less contract disputes in the NFL than there are currently.

Facilitation 7/30/2007 Salary Cap

In professional sports, a salary cap is a limit on the amount of money a team can spend on player salaries, either as a per-player limit or a total limit for the team's roster (or both). Several sports leagues have made salary caps mandatory, both as a method of keeping overall costs down, and in order to balance the league so a wealthy team cannot become dominant simply by buying all the top players. Salary caps are often the major issue in negotiations between management and players' unions.


The NFL's cap is a so-called "hard cap" (which no team can exceed for any reason under penalty from the league), and a hard salary floor (a minimum team payroll that no team can drop beneath for any reason, 75% of the cap).

The NBA's salary cap is a so-called "soft cap", meaning that teams are allowed to exceed the cap number in order to retain the rights to a player who has already been on the team.


There are ciriticisms of salary cap.
1. Unfair Negotiation Tactic
Salary cap is simply a way for management to get an unfair advantage in labor negotiations with players.

2. Veteran Neglect
Often a team will have to let go of many of its players – frequently, veterans who have been with the club for a long time – in order to comply with the salary cap.

3. Distorting Fan Attitudes
Fans tend to lose interest in a team once it is out of playoff contention.

4. Restricting Free Markets
"There should be no artificial limit on what anyone is able to earn if they have the talent."


MLB has instead implemented the so-called luxury tax, an arrangement by which teams whose aggregate payroll exceeds a certain annually revised figure is taxed on the excess amount (or fined). Unlike the other major North American sports, MLB has no team salary floor. The only minimum limits for team payrolls are based on the minimum salaries for players of various levels of experience.

Then, do you think MLB should introduce salary cap?

Should We Call Him A-Roid?

Alex Rodriguez, Major League Baseball’s pretentious pretty boy, has reportedly fallen into the deep depths of the steroid controversy. Apparently, Stray Rod is an abuser of the synthetic syringe. But, I just cannot fathom A-Rod, the Golden Boy himself, stooping to such unscrupulous measures to guarantee his place in the discussion of Baseball’s best ever.

Well, wait one minute before we castrate the man. Remember the ancient principle, consider the source? This situation is exactly why that rule was created. Wheeler dealer, book peddling Jose Canseco prompted the discussion when he claimed he “had some stuff” on the Yanks third baseman.

Yeah, a really creditable source. NOT!

For anyone who hasn’t stepped into the “scandalous” section at Powell’s lately, Canseco wrote a book called Juiced a few years ago, calling out suspected steroid abusers like Rafael Palmeiro and Mark McGwire. Maybe he was right, but then maybe he was simply bankrupt and thought composing a book to shed light on former friends drug habits would garner enough money to crossover the poverty line. Regardless, where is the loyalty, Jose?

Honestly, I loathe A-Rod as a person. He is a greedy, selfish little brat. However, I have the utmost respect for him as a player. His skill set is about as rare as encountering water in the Sahara Desert. For that reason alone, I doubt he needs to bolster his performance level.

There has been a throng of suspected steroid users in MLB, such as Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, McGwire and Palmeiro, to name a few. Though, of the alleged abusers, Rodriguez is the least likely to be guilty in my mind.

A-Rod has been a consistent power hitter throughout his career. Since breaking into the Major Leagues in 1994, where Rodriguez had zero homers in 54 at bats, he has failed to reach 25 homeruns only twice. His numbers peaked in 2001-02, with 52 and 57 homeruns respectively. However, those were his first two seasons as a Texas Ranger, meaning his home ballpark was The Ballpark in Arlington, where the fourth most homers were slammed in 2002.

A quick glimpse at his physique unveils that he is a natural athlete. His muscles are not bulging out of his uniform like McGwire and he does not have a forehead the size of a melon like Bonds. The consistency argument applies again because, with the exception of his first couple seasons in Seattle, A-Rod has always looked the same. Sure, he has developed muscle mass over the years, but it has been in gradual stages. Reality is he has never arrived at spring training with 40 additional pounds of sheer muscle.

Looks like Canseco finally realized he as good as extinct in the public eye, or maybe he’s just broke again and needs to compose another tell-all book to ensure financial stability.

Facilitation 7/30

Topic : How far do parents of athletics affect their sons and daughters?

Sources : Michelle Wie, Maria Sharapova, the Williams sisters. What is the common thing among these athletics? I guess they share a common thing which is that their parents affect them a lot and help them. This help can be not only a positive effect, but also a negative effect. While their parents affect them, sometimes parents cross the boundary that they should not invade. Some people say that their parents care for them too much.

For example, Yuri Sharapova, who is the father of Maria Sharapova, was blamed for his behavior at WTA Tour Championship in Los Angeles. Russia Fed Cup coach Larisa Neiland was saying “Every time Maria was playing a Russian girl there, her father’s behavior was simply outrageous, nasty and out of control.” Myskina, who was beaten by Maria in the semi-finals, backed up her, “I totally agree with Larisa. I feel his behavior is totally inappropriate, simply rude. I don’t want to be around people like him. He was yelling and screaming instructions to her and I thought he just might jump right on the court at one point in the match.” After the match between Maria and Myskina, Yuri Sharapova received a warning from the chair umpire for coaching his daughter during the Myskina match. (By Gennady Fyodorov, 11/25/2004)

The following article is from “Telegraph.co.kr.” The title of this article is “Do they learn nothing from sad decline of Wie?”
Earlier this year Butch Harmon told the Sunday Telegraph: "The whole Michelle Wie camp is about money. The biggest difference between Earl [Woods, father of Tiger] and BJ [Wie, Michelle's dad] is that Earl didn't worry about money. He knew that it was more important for Tiger to learn to win and then the money would take care of itself. But Michelle Wie wins nothing. You should invite her to the next member-guest competition at your home club and she might actually win something because what's going on now is ridiculous. And it's not good for the game of golf."
Some people say that Michelle should have a professional coach instead of her farther. (but I found that she has a coach, David Leadbetter. I guess the reason why people say ‘she should have a professional coach’ is that David is just a swing coach. I’m not sure.)
Above article it seems like the teaching method of her father is incorrect. That’s because he failed how to raise competitiveness within her.

Question : Should parents train them at all?

Pros – Parents have a good influence on them.
1. Parents can provide comfort and it is important for them.
2. They have a right to do whatever demand to their kids.
3. Even if they are not experts in the field, they are experts in terms of their kids.

Cons – Parents doesn’t have a good influence on them.
1. They are not experts.
2. They desire something to their kids, and it affects them badly.
3. Their meddling have bad influences them to have mental competitiveness.

Facilitation for 7.30.07

Micheal Vick, and the Pit bull Terriers that he allegedly participated in fighting. This is not a picture of an exact dog that him and the people involved allegedly fought, though this was captured after another dogfighting event. So you be the judge, Should Michael Vick be sentenced to prison time for his actions (if found guilty) or be faced with other actions. Along with possible trouble with the law, keep in mind his immage and reputation if found guilty will take a huge hit as well. So also put yourself in his shoes, and figure out what you deserve.

Keep Spending Those Dollars, Boys

I was rudely awoken the other day when my phone rang sometime around 4:00 AM. A friend of mine still living in Boston who is apparently confused by the concept of time difference, decided that we needed talk. This would be fine if it was an emergency, but no, my friend had to call me to talk about a conversation he heard between a couple of Red Sox fans. Mildly irritated, I told him I would call back when it was not 4:00 AM. Besides, what Red Sox talk could be so important that you had to call someone that early in the morning?

The fans were ultimately questioning why the Red Sox spend so much money on players, and how it was stupid and imprudent to do so. If teams can win with less money, why can't the Red Sox? One might argue, they spend because they can. Well, just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. Perhaps the Red Sox actually have to. If John Henry (Red Sox principal owner) had his choice, I'm sure he'd rather spend less than more, but let's look at several reasons why the Sox have to spend so much money.

First, to have a chance at winning the World Series, a team must make the playoffs. In order to make the playoffs, a team must either win the division or the wild card. That being said, the Red Sox are competing with the Yankees for one playoff spot. Yes, they can win the wild card, but in recent years, there is no guarantee that the wild card is going to come from the AL East. Due to the unbalanced schedule, the Red Sox have to face the Yankees 18 times a year. With that many head to head games, the Red Sox need to try to have a lineup that can keep pace with that of the Yankees. This usually means, that they need to go out and spend their fair share of money.

I understand that the Red Sox could just refuse to spend that kind of money, and take a chance that they could win with a lower payroll. But, that brings me to my second point. The Red Sox can't take that chance, because their fans would never let them. The only way to truly understand Red Sox fans is to live amongst them. Red Sox Nation would be ripping management a new one if they decided to cut payroll AND subsequently if the Red Sox did not make the playoffs, or worse yet, came in behind the Yankees. Red Sox Nation expects a quality team that is in contention for the playoffs yearly. That expectation to its fans and customers means management has to spend the money to field a contending team. This expectation has become more prevalent since John Henry took over in 2002.

For now, it is what it is, and while they can, the Red Sox are going to spend the money to buy a good team, just as the Yankees do. Yes, the Yankees set the market, but the Red Sox aren't going to try to shift the market anytime soon. With the amount of fans coming through the gates, and the fact that they've become adept at "rebuilding" while still being competitive, it is unlikely that their payroll will decrease significantly anytime soon.

Why they do not have any responsibilities?

Major League Baseball (MLB) players can be free agents after 6 years. If they show enough ability throughout previous seasons, they can make a huge contract with their original team or the other teams. Ichiro made 90 million dollars for 5 years contract with the Seattle Mariners, and Alex Rodriguez, who will meet FA requirement after this season, already got tremendous attention because people wonder whether he can make another huge contract. Baseball players’ salaries are paid with their previous years’ stats or outcomes. An outstanding ability or result, such as what Ichiro or A-Rod has shown, make the teams willing to invest in them. That’s because these teams need their talent. A high salary is not the target of criticism; at least this society follows the market economy theory. Especially in the professional sports field, if players have enough capacity, they have sufficient qualification to earn such a successful business. However, what if they cannot show sufficient talent for their high salary? Professional players are not like auto dealers. Auto dealers can make income after they sell vehicles, but baseball players contract with teams before players make outcomes. Under the current FA system, nobody takes responsibility even though they don’t do enough work. There are no cut salaries and no fines. The next FA, obviously, will be affected by this awful work. (If this guy wants another huge contraction, then we can call him crazy.) In any case, a team which has already spent large amount of money suffers because of him. Certainly, some big leaguers did such a good (actually terrible) job. In 1999, Maurice Vaughn contracted with the LA Angels for 6 years and 80million dollars. In 2000, Darren Dreifort contracted with the LA Dodgers for 5 years and 57million dollars. And in 2001 Chan-ho Park contracted with the Texas Rangers for 5 years and 65million dollars. They should be shamed with their awful stats for multiple contraction years. Their results were miserable. Who can say that this is a stat of million dollar baseball player? If there were no multiple year contracts, and if they contracted for one year, wouldn’t they prevent this bad result?

Certainly, some players did a good job and their works satisfied their salary. Besides, some of them are evaluated lower than their real talent suggests. I’ve seen some of these undervalued players who did really outstanding work. I’m not sure whether there is another system that can replace FA system. Nonetheless, I can surely say that there is no way to ask a responsibility if high salary players make poor achievement. Actually, professional players, especially among some pitchers, who meet the requirement of FA, try to hide an injury or pitch beyond their ability. Another point of view, isn’t it a sort of cheating?

I doubt whether professional players should take a responsibility for their terrible results. Isn’t MLB worked as a market economy?

What famous people should do with their money...

When people become famous and earn millions of billions of dollars, there are certain responsibilities they should take upon themselves..like save the rest of the world (and give me tuition money). .. It is always depressing to see rich people spend their money in the most non-profitable and criminal ways such as illegal drugs, dog-fighting, and whatever other stupid things they find to do. Especially in the sport world, where at least in my mind, athlete and sport is associated with persistency, excellent health, and a good work ethic....

And when you are making that kind of money, the least you can do is give back to a cause that is in dire need of attention and support. That is why I admire Lance Armstrong and Magic Johnson. These people (there are others of course) took a personal struggle and not only passed it but gave back by using their platform to raise awareness. I think all athletes should follow suit.

So maybe some athletes never went through cancer or aids..there are plenty of other avenues. Raising awareness for Boys and Girls clubs, other diseases, schools, etc. I think the key to saving the world from all its chaos is to unite w/ the people who have all the money to give an example to the rest of us. Not only do they have good financial power to make a change, they also have that zeal and influence over the proles who watch and adore them. By raising awareness, the future can look brighter. People will know and care.

Being famous does not have to be a complete act of selfishness. A lot of good can come w/ the money and attention if directed in the right direction. Stars can make anything look cool. It is their responsibility to use that power wisely. . .

A Not So Shiny Summer for Pro Sports

I have been a rabid sports fan for a pretty long time, during this obsession I have seen many unbelievable games and stories related to sports both positive and negative. But in all of the years I have followed sports, I can not recall a worse time in sports in general than what is happening right now.

In the three biggest professional sports leagues there are major conflicts occurring that is hurting the reputation of there own respective sports league and in all of sports in general. In Major League Baseball there is the on going steroid investigation involving Barry Bonds that has been going on the least few years. This problem has caused many analysts inside baseball to name this period in the majors as the "steroid era." In the NFL, Michael Vick, a star quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons, is being federally investigated for dog fighting. Vick is likely to face a suspension for the upcoming season. And finally in the NBA, official Tim Donaghy is being investigated for betting on league games, and even influencing the outcome to some games he worked.

For the first time in my life I would not willingly admit that I am a sports nut. These problems are not only embarrassing for the leagues, but disheartening to the fans. This situation has caused me to ask, "How can it get this bad?" How do all of these situations reflect on us on society? It will be interesting to see how every one of these stories will progress, as well as, to see what steps every league in professional sports takes to clean up after them selves. Realistically, I do not see leagues getting better before I see them getting worse, but as a fan I will hope that the sun will shine again on the reputation of professional sports.

Summer Sport!

I don't know for sure why Beach volleyball is one of the fastest-growing spectator sport in the United States. I have a feeling that Misty May-Treanor and Kerri Walsh, the players in the picture, are a big reason. They're Olympic gold medalists and the two most popular players on the AVP tour.

Then, there is the controversial issue.

Since its introduction as an Olympic sport in 1996, many of these people argue that beach volleyball as it is currently played in the Olympics is too sexualized to be considered a truly respectable sport. People have pointed out that professional beach volleyball is one of the few sports where athletes are mandated to wear a uniform which does not exceed a certain size, essentially encouraging a "less is best" approach towards attire, and argue that it is simply a ploy to market the game for viewership and sponsors.

In return, some people argue that the attire common in track and field events at the Olympics is barely any more skin covering, and that only beach volleyball is unfairly singled out for criticism. There are also claims that the uniforms are practical for the sport, since more loose clothing would hinder playing ability and professional tournaments often take place during the high heat of summer.

The controversy of the sport hit a new high at the 2004 Olympics, when a DJ played music clips between sets while female dancers in orange bikinis performed for the crowds. This and the requirement that players, especially women, wear skimpy clothing, led to accusations that the sport was less respectful than other Olympic events.

In any case, beach volleyball at the Athens Olympics was a massive success, and some critics point out that the controversy may have even helped the sport become more popular. I don't favor the female dancers in orange bikinis performed between sets, but I think the uniform is still no problem because it is one of the characteristics of beach volleyball.

Los Angels Galaxy introduced David Beckham

I want to add on to earlier post about David Beckham.

David Beckham's much-hyped debut with the Los Angeles Galaxy soccer team drew an average of 1.5 million viewers to ESPN, the largest audience for an ESPN telecast involving a Major League Soccer team.

Beckham, struggling with an ankle injury, played for only 16 minutes during Saturday's game against English club Chelsea, but ESPN's telecast was the night's most-watched program among men 18-49 and men 25-54.

ESPN's previous record was for an April 4, 1996, match between DC United and San Jose Clash -- the league's first game -- that averaged 1.1 million viewers. It also was ahead of U.S. Soccer National Team matches, other than the FIFA World Cup tournament.

ESPN is planning several other Los Angeles Galaxy games featuring Beckham, including two each in August and September and one on October 18. All will be on ESPN2.

As we figured, David Beckham attracts of a lot of attention. He started a small revolution in the US soccer scene.

The question is whether Beckham's 10th or 20th or 50th MLS game will be a big event. I really hope that he make soccer more popular constantly in the U.S.A.

Why do the Pro's make so much money?

These people we idle so much, who drive these fancy cars and date beautiful women, how do they do it? Professional athletes these days should not be able to make the money they do. Most of them barely scraped their way by in school, get to go to some fancy college because they can play with a ball well, and then instantly get promoted to CEO. Now what about the poeple who work their ass off through school, get a great starting job at $45,000, and hope to only excel more in the payroll scale. The thing that even bugs me more, is how stupid they are with their money and their lives after they instantly get millions dumped on them. Now don't get me wrong, their are great professionals who do great things for the community. But it is those dumb few who ruin it for all of them. Why do slackers who don't even barely go to college any more make millions more then us? That just shows you what are nation thrives on, money over mind.

Make a Decision, Bud

With Barry Bonds inching ever closer to Hank Aaron's hallowed home run record, Bud is still riding the fence on whether or not he will be in attendance for the record breaker. He has said that if he has no prior engagements, he will make an effort to make it to the game. Wow. way to take a stand, Bud.

Here's the question: What the hell else does he have to do? I would think that the breaking of the sport's most respected record would weigh rather heavily on the importance scale. Couldn't Bud get out of some other previous engagement by just saying, "I know it's your kid's birthday party, but there's something kind of important I have to go see."

Many have their reasons as to why Selig should not be in attendance (most notably, the suspicions of Bonds' use of performance enhancers), and I can't argue with them too much. I wish Bonds wouldn't break the record. I still find myself hoping for some sort of cataclysmic event that would end his career right now, but I'm not holding my breath.

Barry keeps trying to get everybody's sympathy, comparing his quest with Aaron's in the '70s. (I almost threw up in my mouth writing that) Hank Aaron received death threats because he was a black man about to break the Bambino's longstanding record. That was an era where African-Americans were still fighting everyday for their civil liberties. Barry tries to play the race card, saying the public doesn't want him to break the record because he's black. I've got news for you Barry: the public doesn't want you to break the record, not because you're black, but because we all think you cheated (at least, outside of San Francisco) and because you're a horse's arse. You're a jerk. You treat the media like they're sub-human. You have no regard for your fans (although I'm still amazed you have any). And when the going got really tough, you hid from the TV cameras behind your kids.

These, I think, are the reasons Bud wants nothing to do with your home run chase.

But, he is the commissioner, and the biggest event since the strike-cancelled season is upon us. Bud, I can't blame you for not wanting to go, but you've got to be there.

Too Much Freedom?

Okay, so this class blog is all about discussing sports related topics right? Well, what happens when other issues became part of the mix?

An example of what I'm talking about would be the incident involving Don Imus and the Tennessee/Rutgers women's basketball championship.

After the women's basketball game, Don was conducting an over the phone interview on his morning show, when his input became a little too open for what audiences were ready for. He proceeded to talk about the Rutger's team, and decided it would be okay to call them "Nappy Headed Hoes." This led to a complete media disaster, and he later apologized for his words, and insisted (during the Al Sharpton interview) that at the time, he did not see it as a racist comment, and he wished he had never said it. But as we all know, once its put out there, its out there.

So my question to you is, do you think if a person of color had said the same thing, he have received such scrutiny? Or a better question, what's up with the double standards when it comes to freedom of speech?

When it comes to sports commentating, when do you draw the line?

just a thought.

So long Donaghy...

Tim Donaghy is not a saint. He may be responsible for one of the worst atrocities in the history of the NBA, but his involvement shouldn’t be as much of a surprise as it seems to be. He has a documented history of scandalous events surrounding the NBA. Disputes with neighbors which the league had to get involved in, the threats of violence from Rasheed Wallace after a Blazer game, and his role in the “other” biggest atrocity in the NBA (the pacers-pistons fight); the fact that this man was rated one of the better NBA refs is a joke.

But the question I want to ask is this; is a ref really able to shave enough points to sway a game? What if the team that is supposed to win goes absolutely cold from the field? What if the team that is supposed to lose gets so hot that they can’t be stopped? I question the fact that a mobster would invest substantial amounts of money on games that weren’t entirely open to manipulation. To be successful the acts would have to be so subtle that experts didn’t notice them. The act of paying an official to shave is a disgusting attempt to diminish a great game, but in my opinion it’s not on the same level as paying a player to do the same.

This situation makes me wonder just how often this happens. Either way Donaghy needs to be made an example of. If a harsh punishment is circumvented it may open the door for many more occurrences. My opinion is people need to sleep in the bed they make, and I think Donaghy’s bed is quite uncomfortable right now. He can only hope the punishment is enforced by the league and not his new friends.

Desperate Times Call for Lazy Measures

Has anyone opened the sports page lately? Maybe frequented the most popular sports websites? How about tuned into your favorite sports talk show?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, then you're probably horrified beyond belief at the extensive coverage sports' recent misconduct cases are receiving. Seriously, every time I flip on the tube, pick up the sports page or tune into a sports talk radio show, I cross my fingers and pray that I will not hear the names Michael Vick or Tim Donaghy. Call me crazy, but don't ESPN and publications across the nation have any other material, because this repeating track is getting a bit old.

It may only be at the collegiate level, but I have some experience in sports media. For the most part, all levels of newpapering follow the same core principles, so I understand the excessive coverage to a degree. However, another primary rule of thumb for journalists is to search and probe for the next great story. Personally, I haven't witnessed much scouring for further details or evidence in the Vick or Donaghy cases.

Instead I've observed extended periods of journalists silently sitting on their hands, waiting for the next press release or personal statement to surface. Once NBA Commissioner David Stern speaks or Falcons' Owner Arthur Blank provides his opinion, the writers can snatch their laptops and peck away, producing another story to belabor the point that Vick's acts were heartless and Donaghy is a gambling fool.

From a fellow sports writer's perspective, these journalists and columnists should find another angle, or jump ship and cover a different story all together. It's not that difficult to explore alternatives. Actually, it's quite refreshing. These guys should give it s try, because the stereotype that sports writers are lazy and unmotivated is evolving by the minute.