Never Thought I’d Say This, But…
March 2, 2010
I’m really starting to get pretty much sick of ESPN, and for that matter, to some degree, sports in general. Understand, I’ve been a sports fan all my life, and still am, but the thing that’s annoying me these days is this (seemingly) incessant urge to made predictions about future happenings.
I first noticed it several years ago when networks carrying NASCAR would, in the middle of races starting sometime in July, it seemed, began carrying “if the race ended right now, these guys would be in the ‘Championship Chase’.” Well who gives a rip? The race isn’t ending right now. And there will be a lot more races to come. And what comes across is that these folks have so little to talk about, or more accurately, to display, that they feel they must pump us with useless “knowledge”.
But now, it’s gotten worse. A few years ago ESPN began making a pretty big deal of the NFL Draft. OK, I admit, I have an interest in that–it’s kinda fun. But now, it’s incessant–and it began in mid-February, more than two months before the actual draft. Last week–or is it this week? I couldn’t care less–they were talking about the NFL Combine, what guys ran what times in the “40″, or who did how many reps at what weight, and how all of this might project into where guys ought to go in the draft, who’s “stock is falling” and whose is rising–and all this, as I said, better than two months before the draft. Starting talking about it a week out, and I’d have some interest, but February? It’s asinine.
And then the other “gem” of ESPN coverage is guys speculating incessantly–there’s a “guru” now, the “Mel Kiper” of college basketball, I guess–who’s pontificating on which teams are “in” the tournament and which are “out”, but if that’s not bad enough, there’s a ticker that runs on the bottom of the screen, regularly, which lists “last four teams in”, as well as “last four teams out”. I’m honestly trying to figure out if there could be a more worthless piece of information given to us in February than this “news”.
And you put all this together, and it really, really turns me off to ESPN, and to some degree, to sports in general, because while for years we’ve been saying that sports occupies too great a position of importance in our society, this is really so far over the top as to make ESPN not enjoyable watching, at least to a point. Ironically, after our “contract” with DirecTV runs out in September, and we pay the last dime of our lifetimes to that awful company, we’re strongly considering getting “minimum cable”, like 12 or 13 channels, the package they don’t advertise but which they are required to carry by law. That would mean no more ESPN.
At this point, that’s sounding pretty good…
P.S. Somebody’s going to write and say, “why not just switch the channel?” Fair question, of course–to which the response is, “to what?” Note so self: check out what the History Channel is playing tonight…
A Few Thoughts about Tiger
February 19, 2010
I’ve not written a single word on the Tiger Woods scandal, partly because it broke during a time I wasn’t writing much of anything; partly because everything that could be written has probably been written by somebody; partly because there’s a fine line to walk. But with his impending “news conference” scheduled for 11:00 today, a few random thoughts in no particular order, as they come to me:
1. It’s ridiculous–preposterous is an even better word–that NBC, ABC, and CBS are going to preempt their regular programming in order to cover Tiger’s statement live. You’ve got to be kidding. You’ve got to be kidding. Now, I’ll concede that there’s probably little that they ordinarily broadcast at that time of day–or any other time of day, truth be told–that’s worth watching, but the fact remains that the networks are breathlessly awaiting the pre-arranged, carefully-scripted, no-questions-allowed words to be uttered by a guy who makes a living smacking a ball into a hole. I say that as a golfer and sports fan, and I say that recognizing that Tiger is the eminently-watchable, greatest golfer of all time (IMHO). But still, there’s little in the way of rational perspective going on when you shut everything down to hear a golfer apologize for his indiscretions.
2. Does Tiger owe us an apology? I submit “no”. He owes his wife a massive apology, his kids, his mistresses, his enablers, etc.; he doesn’t owe us anything. We are not personally harmed one bit by his actions.
3. Piggybacking on that, if Jason Bohn (a no-name regular on the PGA Tour) were found out to be doing this, it’d be a yawner (news-wise, not to his wife), something that might rate a back-page blurb. Nobody would care. The sin is the same; the difference is that it’s the most visible athlete in the world rather than some second-tier hack.
4. Tiger Woods never should have been made a role model by anybody. Period. Those who made him such might feel they owe him an apology, but why would we make of Tiger a role model in the first place? I say this not to be mean to Tiger, nor to try to hold him to a (Christian) standard when he professes no faith in Christ (we have no warrant to do that), but the fact is that he lived with Elin before marriage, cusses a blue streak when shots go awry, and can be surly and even mean. Do I want my kids to grow up to be like Tiger? Nope, and that’s true even if none of this stuff ever came out. Do I appreciate some things about the man? Without question: his determination, his discipline, his sportsmanship, his commitment to excellence; these are certainly praiseworthy qualities. But a role model? Uh, no. And anybody foolish enough to lift him up as such deserves the letdown they felt a few months ago. He’s never been a role model I’d have ever encouraged (not that there aren’t some in sports–though of course we have to be careful; Kurt Warner comes to mind as one example, as does Tony Dungy, both committed believers).
5. The carefully-scripted nature of this news conference does raise questions about what’s going on here. At the same time, let me suggest two seemingly-contradictory thoughts that aren’t: one, it’s really not the business of the press to get the intimate details of his philandering. Their prying appeals only to our prurient interests, as the press encourages–and we play along with–this hellish spectatorism that causes us to think that things that are in no way “our business” in fact are. When I was first blogging, one of my semi-regular posts said something like this: “it’s been (insert time period here) since Laci Peterson was murdered, and it’s still none of our business.” Two, though, is this: if Tiger is truly repentant–and why would he understand what that even means, particularly in this warped society that doesn’t understand repentance, and in light of the fact that he’s not a believer–he’d not so carefully script things in such a way that no questions can be asked. Now, I’d suggest that if he opened up to reporters, he ought to rightly reserve the right to refuse to answer certain particular questions, but repentance is characterized, among other things, by a willingness to allow appropriate transgressions to come to light to the appropriate degree. There are questions that could be asked that would be appropriate for Tiger to answer, it seems to me; his unwillingness to allow such raise real questions about the nature of his “repentance”.
6. I wish the best for Tiger Woods. I have exactly zero faith in the “sex addiction rehab” he’s undergoing; I expect it to yield only temporary results at best; if his “rehab” isn’t grounded in a new relationship with Jesus Christ, then what’s the point? Appeals to change, strategies to change, power to change: all of these will be grounded in the shifting sand of philosophies and ideas found “under the sun”, and will amount to “vanity” in the end. Yeah, it’s possible, though, that he’ll be so concerned about his “public image”, or “the effect that his actions have on others”, or his bank account, that he’ll stop chasing every female that breathes. That isn’t totally without merit; given the fact that we as believers live in this world, and there are many more unbelievers than believers, I prefer it if unbelievers behave decently as opposed to indecently (though I have no right to expect it), but in the end, even if he maintains from this day ’til his dying day unswerving devotion to his wife (if she’ll have him back, which I doubt), but doesn’t become a follower of Jesus, he’ll go to hell a faithful man. And that, I submit, would be the worst thing of all.
Greatest NFL Quarterbacks, Revisited
February 8, 2010
Because I love sports and numbers, and the intersection of the two, I did a statistical analysis three years ago to determine who was the greatest QB of all time. This won’t be a long post, but to review, my scoring system relied on two things: passer rating relative to other QBs playing in the era of the QB in question, and championship games played in and won. This married objective statistics with that highly-overrated category of “did he win a Super Bowl” in determining who was the best of all time. A brief disclaimer: this system doesn’t–indeed no system can–identify with perfect accuracy who the greatest QB is. What it can do, and do very well, I think, is let us know who ought to be (Len Dawson and Sammy Baugh, for instance)–and who ought not to be (John Elway and Brett Favre, for instance)–in the conversation, and the relative rankings of each.
The system gave 1 point for finishing in the top half of all eligible passers in a given year, another point for finishing in the top quarter, and a third point for being the NFL’s top-rated passer in a given year. I gave one more bonus point for that rare, off-the-charts season wherein there was a greater gap between positions 1 and 2 than between positions 2 and 5. That’s happened 4-5 times in NFL history, if memory serves. Then, I gave a point for appearing in the league championship game, and another point for winning the thing. The idea of all of this, of course, is to eliminate the subjective (“Brett Favre plays the game with grit and verve”), and look purely at results.
And thus, without further ado, the up-to-the-minute point totals of the top 20 NFL quarterbacks of all time:
- Joe Montana 35
- Sammy Baugh 32
- Otto Graham 31
- Len Dawson 30
- Bart Starr 30
- Johnny Unitas 28
- Fran Tarkenton 28
- Sid Luckman 28
- Peyton Manning 28
- Roger Staubach 24
- Bob Griese 23
- Ken Anderson 23
- Brett Favre 23
- Steve Young 22
- Dan Marino 22
- Kurt Warner 20
- Y.A. Tittle 19
- John Elway 18
- Charlie Conerly 18
- Tom Brady 18
Four more words: first, note where Peyton Manning finds himself currently. Though he did himself no favors by failing to win the Super Bowl last evening, it’s still true that Peyton will, if he leads the league in passing once more and wins a second Super Bowl, already be tied for second all-time by this analysis. It is safe to assume, given his age and his playing level, that when it’s all said and done, Peyton Manning is likely to supplant Joe Montana from the top of the list.
Second, as I said, this doesn’t say definitively that “Joe Montana is the greatest QB of all time”, though I think a strong case can be made for that. My personal, subjective opinion is the Otto Graham holds that distinction, and the best evidence I can give is this: currently, Otto Graham ranks 16th in all-time passer rating. That may not sound impressive until you realize how grossly slanted that system is toward QBs who are currently playing the game. Quick, without looking, who would you guess is the current leader? I’ll tell you that at the end of the column. Eight of the all-time Top Ten are active today, Steve Young and Joe Montana being the only exceptions. At any rate, Otto Graham played and retired before I was born (1960). The greatest testament to Graham’s greatness is the difference between him and the second-highest-rated passer who retired before I was born: Sid Luckman. Sid Luckman ranks 97th in all-time QB rating. Incidentally, Graham is tied with Brett Favre for 16th–and that places Favre 14th among current passers. So much for Favre being the greatest QB of all time…
Third, remember that all this system does is suggest who ought to be in the discussion, and roughly where those folks would rank. Ken Anderson, for instance, far and away the most underrated QB of all time, had roughly as good a career as Dan Marino (who played in one less Super Bowl than did Anderson; neither won one); Anderson was a significantly better QB than Joe Namath, who roughly grades out as Marc Bulger in panty hose with a big mouth and a girl on each arm.
Finally, if you’re wondering who among active QBs could break onto this list soon, Drew Brees now has 14 points, which ties Ben Roethlisberger; Donovan McNabb has 13. It seems likely to me that Big Ben will prove to be easily a top 20 all-time QB, and perhaps even a top 10, by the time his still young career is over. My guess is that Brees will land toward the bottom of that top 20. Having played as long as he has, though, McNabb isn’t going to make the list–frankly, he’s near the top end of “average NFL quarterbacks”.
Oh, the current all-time NFL passing leader is Aaron Rodgers. Yep.
My Super Bowl Call
February 7, 2010
Indianapolis 38, New Orleans 21
It’s hard to root against the feel-good story of the year–and it’s not so much that I’m rooting against the Saints, though I do like the Colts a tad better and am a big Peyton Manning fan. But here’s the deal: the Saints aren’t playing against a quarterback who’ll do the dumb things that Brett Favre tends to do in clutch situations; they’re playing a guy who may end up as the greatest of all time when it’s all said and done.
The Saints were fortunate to beat a team that turned the ball over 5 times in the NFC Championship Game, and it seems obvious to me that Peyton and his Colts will not turn it over 5 times. Granted, the Colts D isn’t as formidable as the Vikings D, and Drew Brees may have a nice game against them. Still, I just don’t think the Saints, as deserving as they are of being here and as great a season as they have, have the team to win this thing.
Football’s All-Time Top Ten
February 3, 2010
ESPN is asking fans to have a crack at it. Unfortunately, fans demonstrate their ignorance of history in their rankings–but I won’t spoil it for you. They give you ten choices and ask you to rank at least five; I ranked all ten. Here are my Top Ten All-Time NFL Players:
1. Jerry Rice
2. Jim Brown
3. Otto Graham
4. Walter Payton
5. Joe Montana
6. Sammy Baugh
7. Barry Sanders
8. Johnny Unitas
9. Don Hutson
10. Lawrence Taylor
Who’d they leave off, football fans? I’m sure somebody is going to say “Emmitt Smith”, but no, he’s probably the next RB in line, but a notch below Brown, Payton, and Sanders. The other player that I might put on this list ahead of one or two of these guys is Reggie White. What think ye?
And in five years, high up on that list will be Peyton Manning, probably at least 5th.
WahooWA!!
January 31, 2010
I don’t CARE that Carolina is having an off year; going into the DeanDome and handing the defending NCAA champs a smackdown is a beautiful thing. This team was picked for dead-last in the ACC, and they abused the Tar Heels. How sweet it is!
This phrase comes from the 1978 "Jonestown massacre" in which most members of the Peoples Temple cult, blindly following their leader Jim Jones, committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid.
Osborne: A Contrarian's Guide to Knowing God
Schlossberg: Idols For Destruction
