It's safe to say Roger Goodell's reputation isn't the greatest.
However, I have an idea for him that will instantly raise his standing among football fans, even here in New England, where he's the devil incarnate if he doesn't rescind Tom Brady's Deflategate suspension yesterday and grovel for forgiveness for daring inconvenience him in any way.
He can ask the Pro Football Hall of Fame to let Sydney Seau speak.
We learned today that no one will be allowed to speak on Junior Seau's behalf during the Hall's induction ceremony, not even his daughter Sydney, who was listed as his presenter. According to the Hall, it's their call, not the NFL's, and it's simply a fairly new policy that deceased honorees get a longer-than-normal highlight video, but no speakers.
Let's give them the benefit of the doubt ... really, let's swallow hard and do it ... and assume there was no pressure at all from the NFL to sweep aside the whole "unpleasantness" of how and why Seau died and that it's just policy.
There's no way they wouldn't let Sydney speak if Goodell asked them to, policy or not.
But we all know that's not very likely.
It's not even as simple as whether Sydney would have called out the NFL about its concussion problem, and the fact that its players are destroying their bodies and their brains. She has said that wasn't her plan.
No, it's that every second spent on Junior Seau is a reminder that he's not there, and why he's not there, no matter the content.
So it's in the interest of both the NFL and the Pro Football Hall of Fame -- which is, after all, an institution that primarily honors the greats of the NFL and therefore has something to lose if the league's reputation is sullied -- to make sure that time is as short as humanly possible.
Friday, July 24, 2015
Sunday, July 19, 2015
What if Pedro's right?
According to Pedro Martinez's estimate, 60 percent of Major League Baseball players were using performance-enhancing drugs during his career.
I have no idea if he's right, but let's say he is. Instead of focusing on how great he was to have been so dominant during the Steroid Era, consider that if 60 percent of players were juicing, we know only a fraction of them (and only really care about the ones that trigger the selective outrage machine: A-Rod, Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire, etc.) ... which means the odds are good that some juicers will end up with Pedro in the Hall of Fame.
That's bad news for the keep-the-cheats-out crowd, unless they want to argue that everyone already in the Hall from that era was clean and that no one else should be inducted ... you know, just to be sure.
I have no idea if he's right, but let's say he is. Instead of focusing on how great he was to have been so dominant during the Steroid Era, consider that if 60 percent of players were juicing, we know only a fraction of them (and only really care about the ones that trigger the selective outrage machine: A-Rod, Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire, etc.) ... which means the odds are good that some juicers will end up with Pedro in the Hall of Fame.
That's bad news for the keep-the-cheats-out crowd, unless they want to argue that everyone already in the Hall from that era was clean and that no one else should be inducted ... you know, just to be sure.
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
Today in silly A-Rod arguments
Jon Paul Morosi writes that Alex Rodriguez shouldn't be in this year's All-Star Game, even though he's worthy.
It's not that he doesn't have the numbers, because he does, and Morosi points out that the numbers should be the thing.
It's not even the PEDs, as he notes that his fellow Biogenesis list members Nelson Cruz and Jhonny Peralta were elected starters, by the fans -- many of whom I'm sure would throw A-Rod out of the game if they could -- this year. (That whirring noise you hear in the background? That's the selective outrage machine. Don't worry; you get used to it after a while.)
No, in addition to the fact that no one elected him to the game -- which I'm sure had nothing to do with the selective outrage -- the problem is that he'll be (cue drama-sting music here) ... a distraction.
But "dominate much of the pregame discussion," to the point where Trout, Harper, Bryant and the other great young stars of baseball would be overshadowed? Now who would be responsible for that if it happens?
Between Monday and Tuesday, the whole of the baseball media is going to decamp in Cincinnati. Surely MLB Network will have wall-to-wall coverage, and I'm guessing the various Fox Sports networks will give the game quite a bit of airtime, since their network is covering it. ESPN will probably also make an appearance.
And while they're there, they can literally cover anything they want. They can devote hours to Brock Holt if they want to. They can spend as much time as they like on the guy who's banned from the game for life but is still being allowed to participate in the festivities in spite of recent reports that he bet on baseball while he was still playing. (And Alex Rodriguez is a distraction?)
As for the game itself, A-Rod is a DH. He wouldn't be in the field and likely wouldn't get more than a couple at-bats, so the only time anyone would have to talk about him is when he hits. Sure, he could do something huge with his at-bats and be chosen MVP, except that wouldn't happen even if he hit grand slams every time.
In other words, Alex Rodriguez would be as much of a distraction as Morosi and his fellow media members let him be.
It's not that he doesn't have the numbers, because he does, and Morosi points out that the numbers should be the thing.
It's not even the PEDs, as he notes that his fellow Biogenesis list members Nelson Cruz and Jhonny Peralta were elected starters, by the fans -- many of whom I'm sure would throw A-Rod out of the game if they could -- this year. (That whirring noise you hear in the background? That's the selective outrage machine. Don't worry; you get used to it after a while.)
No, in addition to the fact that no one elected him to the game -- which I'm sure had nothing to do with the selective outrage -- the problem is that he'll be (cue drama-sting music here) ... a distraction.
"If A-Rod had been named to the All-Star team, he'd dominate much of the pregame discussion in Cincinnati. Would the debate draw greater attention to this year's Midsummer Classic? Perhaps. But it would drain plenty of oxygen from what people who love the game should be discussing: the tremendous influx of young talent to the sport.
The All-Star Game has a complicated identity: It determines home-field advantage for the World Series, yet its heritage is as a summertime exhibition for fans. It's supposed to celebrate the greatest players in the game, while also leaving room on rosters to honor breakout stars of the first half. In some years, the Midsummer Classic does an admirable job of satisfying its many constituencies. In other years, it doesn't.
But in 2015, with a new commissioner and evolving sports preferences in the U.S., it is paramount that MLB leverage its All-Star Game into a stage for Mike Trout and Bryce Harper, Kris Bryant and Joc Pederson, Manny Machado and Nolan Arenado. We need to learn more about their stories. By now, we're familiar enough with the tale of Alexander Emmanuel Rodriguez."If Alex Rodriguez was selected to the All-Star Game, he would be a story, and oh by the way, he should be. After all, he missed an entire year because of a suspension to come back and play any better than anyone expected. And so far, he has managed to do it without (so far) doing anything dumb.
But "dominate much of the pregame discussion," to the point where Trout, Harper, Bryant and the other great young stars of baseball would be overshadowed? Now who would be responsible for that if it happens?
Between Monday and Tuesday, the whole of the baseball media is going to decamp in Cincinnati. Surely MLB Network will have wall-to-wall coverage, and I'm guessing the various Fox Sports networks will give the game quite a bit of airtime, since their network is covering it. ESPN will probably also make an appearance.
And while they're there, they can literally cover anything they want. They can devote hours to Brock Holt if they want to. They can spend as much time as they like on the guy who's banned from the game for life but is still being allowed to participate in the festivities in spite of recent reports that he bet on baseball while he was still playing. (And Alex Rodriguez is a distraction?)
As for the game itself, A-Rod is a DH. He wouldn't be in the field and likely wouldn't get more than a couple at-bats, so the only time anyone would have to talk about him is when he hits. Sure, he could do something huge with his at-bats and be chosen MVP, except that wouldn't happen even if he hit grand slams every time.
In other words, Alex Rodriguez would be as much of a distraction as Morosi and his fellow media members let him be.
Sunday, June 14, 2015
It's the Baseball Hall of Fame ... that should be enough
 |
| A shrine for everyone to see. |
"It would be virtually impossible for a true Boston fan not to fall immediately into a state of awe and wonder over all the Hall’s offerings specific to the Sox. It blends the good and the bad, the splendor and the horror, including exhibit odes to such icons as Cy Young, Babe Ruth, and (Ted) Williams, along with other greats such as Carl Yastrzemski, Bobby Doerr, Carlton Fisk, Jim Rice, and others."
'“It’s not unusual to see adults walking around in baseball uniforms here,'’’ said (Hall of Fame president Jeff) Idelson, noting the Hall’s ability not only to turn back time, but turn adults into kids. 'It’s like you or me going out on Halloween and wearing our Carl Yastrzemski Little League uniform. Hey, this is the place to do it. This is the ultimate fantasy camp for baseball.'
Especially for those who wear their Red Sox."
 |
| People actually sent this stuff to Jackie Robinson |
But then again, the night of the Kentucky Derby, it was one of the lead stories on a local newscast, not because it was the Kentucky Derby, but because a bunch of Patriots players partied there!
 |
| I met Nolan Ryan in the days before he was enshrined. You can imagine how I felt about this. |
We live in a world where more sports are available than ever before ... until the next thing that happens to make even more available. As a whole, this is, of course, awesome. However, I think a side effect is that you don't actually have to be a fan of a sport anymore; you can be a fan of a team.
Baseball seems especially vulnerable in this regard. Thanks to regional sports networks, which draw big ratings even as national ratings are low, and MLB.TV, most people can watch all 162 games of their favorite team (unless you're a Dodgers fan in Los Angeles, which is cruel, because you miss out on Vin Scully).
I even find myself mostly watching Yankees game these days, even with my online package.
 |
| Pete Rose is in the Hall of Fame, even if he's not. (And I think he will be eventually.) |
 |
| Do you know what you'll be doing an August weekend five years from now? He does. |
Monday, May 25, 2015
Sitting around ... talking sports
I was at a family wedding the other day, and during the reception, my brother, cousin and I got talking about sports.
We talked about the Yankees (especially Alex Rodriguez and PEDs), the Buffalo Bills (my brother has to get used to liking Rex Ryan), college basketball (my cousin was a star basketball player in high school, his daughter has done some coaching, and her boyfriend is a young college assistant coach) and probably a couple other topics I can't think of right now.
This lasted 15 minutes or so, maybe a little longer, and ended when my cousin got up, smiled, patted me on the shoulder and said, "Listen to us, solving everything!"
Yup ... because that's what sports fans do.
We talked about the Yankees (especially Alex Rodriguez and PEDs), the Buffalo Bills (my brother has to get used to liking Rex Ryan), college basketball (my cousin was a star basketball player in high school, his daughter has done some coaching, and her boyfriend is a young college assistant coach) and probably a couple other topics I can't think of right now.
This lasted 15 minutes or so, maybe a little longer, and ended when my cousin got up, smiled, patted me on the shoulder and said, "Listen to us, solving everything!"
Yup ... because that's what sports fans do.
Sunday, May 17, 2015
Calling BS on a Tom Brady story
In case you weren't aware, when a person becomes rich and famous, he or she frequently moves to more-spacious housing, it's harder to go out in public and easy to become isolated.
If any of that was a surprise, allow me to share this from today's Boston Globe about Tom Brady, which has the undeserved honor of sharing Page A1 space with a wonderful piece by Kevin Cullen (although there's not really any other kind) about the Boston Marathon bombing. In addition to the above, you'll learn that a supermodel wife is one of the "trappings of fame" like endorsement deals or large houses.
Because, you know, it's not like Gisele Bundchen is a person or anything. She doesn't even talk that much! (Of course, when she does, people in Boston hate her for it.)
As usual, sports was the first section I dove into this morning -- although I read the Cullen piece when I saw it was at the top of A1 -- while I was watching soccer and eating pancakes in the living room. My wife, who usually reads the rest of the paper in the time it takes me to read sports because I spend a lot of time with the sports section, read out loud for me from the dining room.
I know this will seem crazy for any readers I have outside of Boston, but Tom Brady wearing a New York Yankees hat was once actually a thing people cared about.
And it wasn't just the local media. Around that time, my wife and I were house-hunting, and I got into a discussion about it with the real estate agent who was showing us around. I said it shouldn't be a big deal what baseball team Tom Brady likes in his spare time, but she disagreed, punctuating her argument by proclaiming that the quarterback of the New England Patriots wearing a Yankees hat would be like an American wearing an "I love Iraq" T-shirt.
I don't remember if I came up with the retort that the "bombs" referred to in "Bronx Bombers" were a different type right then or afterwards, but I figured I'd better not push it too far.
After all, she was our ride. (We wound up not buying a house with her, but that was because life circumstances changed and we didn't buy one until quite some time later, and in a different town. Other than her unfortunate views on the Patriots and patriotism, she was actually very nice.)
P.S. -- Regarding Deflategate itself, since I don't like the Patriots, of course I think that not only were they deflating footballs, Brady absolutely knew about it and perhaps even ordered it.
If I'm right, he might want to perhaps rethink the possibility of federal court should his appeal not work out. It might be tough if the information he wouldn't give the league was requested under subpoena or he was asked to tell all he knew under penalty of perjury.
If any of that was a surprise, allow me to share this from today's Boston Globe about Tom Brady, which has the undeserved honor of sharing Page A1 space with a wonderful piece by Kevin Cullen (although there's not really any other kind) about the Boston Marathon bombing. In addition to the above, you'll learn that a supermodel wife is one of the "trappings of fame" like endorsement deals or large houses.
Because, you know, it's not like Gisele Bundchen is a person or anything. She doesn't even talk that much! (Of course, when she does, people in Boston hate her for it.)
As usual, sports was the first section I dove into this morning -- although I read the Cullen piece when I saw it was at the top of A1 -- while I was watching soccer and eating pancakes in the living room. My wife, who usually reads the rest of the paper in the time it takes me to read sports because I spend a lot of time with the sports section, read out loud for me from the dining room.
"... after all these years we’re no closer to knowing Tom Brady.Fair enough.
Boston is partially to blame. People here treat sports like a religion and Brady like a deity. Fans, and some in the media, get on bended knee when the handsome face of the NFL appears in front of a camera."
"They fiercely defend the QB to critics who say he should have cooperated more during the Deflategate investigation."Indeed.
"They even bite their tongues when No. 12 dons a dreaded Yankees cap.""Bull ... s--t," I replied through a mouthful of pancakes. "Bull ... f---ing ... s--t."
I know this will seem crazy for any readers I have outside of Boston, but Tom Brady wearing a New York Yankees hat was once actually a thing people cared about.
And it wasn't just the local media. Around that time, my wife and I were house-hunting, and I got into a discussion about it with the real estate agent who was showing us around. I said it shouldn't be a big deal what baseball team Tom Brady likes in his spare time, but she disagreed, punctuating her argument by proclaiming that the quarterback of the New England Patriots wearing a Yankees hat would be like an American wearing an "I love Iraq" T-shirt.
I don't remember if I came up with the retort that the "bombs" referred to in "Bronx Bombers" were a different type right then or afterwards, but I figured I'd better not push it too far.
After all, she was our ride. (We wound up not buying a house with her, but that was because life circumstances changed and we didn't buy one until quite some time later, and in a different town. Other than her unfortunate views on the Patriots and patriotism, she was actually very nice.)
P.S. -- Regarding Deflategate itself, since I don't like the Patriots, of course I think that not only were they deflating footballs, Brady absolutely knew about it and perhaps even ordered it.
If I'm right, he might want to perhaps rethink the possibility of federal court should his appeal not work out. It might be tough if the information he wouldn't give the league was requested under subpoena or he was asked to tell all he knew under penalty of perjury.
Sunday, March 15, 2015
If I were in charge of sports
I have finally decided to do it -- to list the things I would do if I became Supreme Ruler of the Sports World, capable of making decisions by fiat. I am willing to be a benevolent dictator, in that if the people remember the "dictator" part, I'll try to remember the "benevolent" part.
And we'll start with the development in sports that has been making me pull my hair out all week ...
All NFL contracts would be fully guaranteed -- I've always considered the concept of the "non-guaranteed contract" to be someone oxymoronic. Isn't a contract by its very nature a guarantee that a player will play for a certain amount of time, and in exchange, the club will pay a certain amount of money?
Instead, what we have now in the NFL is a situation where if a team doesn't want to pay a player any more, it demands he rework his contract or cuts him outright. Strangely enough, it doesn't work the other way, that a player can demand more money, and if the club doesn't comply, he becomes a free agent.
Sure, it'll mean lots of bad contracts for aging players whose pay doesn't match their performance. Oh well, too bad ... players are expected to live up to contracts, and so should teams.
Of course, none of this could matter if ...
No salary caps -- Players are the game. Sports is the business it is because of them. No one buys tickets or turns on the TV to watch owners own. They deserve all the money they can get.
"But the rich teams will buy all the best players and win everything!!!" you cry. I know I certainly enjoyed that Dodgers-Yankees World Series last year, but I am willing to consider revenue plans that make sure everyone has a chance, although I don't think it's as big a problem as some claim.
Speaking of deserving money ...
All college athletes would be allowed to be paid -- Maybe the university would pay. Maybe boosters would pay. Maybe endorsers would pay. However, it's done, if someone wanted to pay college athletes, it would be legal.
If Kentucky wants to buy a team of great basketball players ... oh wait, bad example.
If every SEC football team wants to pay all its players ... oh wait, another bad example.
You get my drift.
Staying in college ...
The NCAA basketball tournaments would be run by a straight S-curve -- The top team would play No. 68 and have the No. 8 team as the second seed in its region. The second team would play No. 67 and have the No. 7 team as its second seed.
There wouldn't be any of this crap where Wisconsin might be the second seed in Kentucky's region, even thought the Badgers are definitely not the No. 8 team, because Cleveland is the closest site to both schools. (And is Wisconsin wins the Big 10 title game, it should be a No. 1, rendering the whole discussion moot.)
And while we're at it ...
So long, pods -- If the committee wants to give the top seeds early round games close to home (and congratulations, NCAA, for having yet another subregional in North Carolina; God forbid Duke or North Carolina actually have to travel), that's fine, but otherwise, teams go to the sites the S-curve tells them to.
If a team from the eastern half of the country is in the West regional, it'll have the change to see the country from 33,000 feet.
Generic floors go, too -- I have written about this before, and have not changed my mind.
Regarding who plays in the tourney...
New format for play-in games -- First of all, they would be called just that, "play-in" games. Also, they would all be the lowest-seeded at-large teams, not the split of at-large teams and 16 seeds. Teams that actually won something to get into the tournament should not have to win something else just to make the main bracket. Let the lower-ranked teams from power conferences, who otherwise have just about every advantage when it comes to being chosen, play for bids.
As for college football ...
Four teams are good, but more are better -- The college football playoff would be a minimum of 16 teams, and perhaps 20 or 24 with byes. Every conference champion would get in, plus the best of the rest.
And yes, it would run on an S-curve.
As for the sport that's about to start, even though you wouldn't know it with all the talk of NFL free agents ...
Day games are a wonderful thing -- This is why, with the exception of the ESPN Sunday night game and playoff weekends where there are three or more games in a day, all weekend games would be day games, starting at 1 p.m. locally.
Being able to see the end of a game ... what a concept!
Let's make Ernie Banks smile in Heaven -- Every team would play one single-admission Sunday doubleheader a month. They'd play the first game at 1, retreat to the clubhouse for a half-hour to get ready for the second game, and then play that one. One ticket price would cover both games.
It's a little bit of a break for the fans, and it would also shave about a week from the schedule, lessening the chance of November baseball.
Bring Pete Rose back -- I've always been torn on this one. He bet on his own team's games, so I can understand a lifetime ban, but he never bet on them to lose (and yes, I understand the argument that he may have indirectly by managing the Reds differently on days he did bet), and by this point, letting him back in probably just means he can go in the Hall of Fame and perhaps get work as an ambassador of some type. I highly doubt he'll be managing again.
So I'll let him back in the game so he can go in the Hall of Fame.
Be consistent on cheaters -- Until someone tells me why it's OK for guys who doctored baseballs to be in the Hall of Fame but not guys who doctored their bodies, I expect the writers to either vote for guys involved with PEDs or move to throw guys like Gaylord Perry out. And, by the way, they have to go tell Perry personally.
Shift away -- If a team knows where someone is going to hit the ball, why not let them arrange their defense accordingly? If hitters don't like it, they can actually learn how to hit differently. Yes, it might change their precious routines, but the best baseball players in the world (even Brendan Ryan) should be able to figure it out.
Changing gears (see what I did there?) ...
You're paid to race the whole race, so do it and don't whine -- I'm not tuning in to the Insert Sponsor Name Here 50; I'm watching the Insert Sponsor Name Here 300/400/500/600, so I expect drivers to try the whole time. If they don't, and they complain about guys who do, they can give back their prize money.
Let's go old-school -- NASCAR needs to find a way for its top divisions to race at North Wilkesboro, Rockingham, South Boston, the Milwaukee Mile and other tracks that may not be as lucrative or architecturally majestic, but are still fun.
A bit of a business lesson ...
If you don't take yourself seriously, no one else will, either -- If one of your best and most-recognizable players isn't playing this year because another team is paying her more not to play, that's a bad thing, and it makes you look like a joke. You really should do something about that.
Also, if there's an announcement about a famous player coming to play in your league, you should make sure he comes when you say he's going to. Otherwise, you also look like a joke.
And finally, even though I'm not sure what I would do to enforce it (although I have a few ideas, being Supreme Ruler of the Sports World and all), some words of advice for fans ...
Don't be f---ing idiots -- While the players are the game, it's your willingness to pay that makes people rich. I get that, but that doesn't mean you get to do whatever you want, in spite of what you may have been taught.
You don't get to throw things. You don't get to run onto the field/court/pitch (unless it's a court-storming after a big college basketball win, which I will allow as long as it's safe). You get to boo, but you don't get to make racist, sexist or homophobic remarks.
And while we're on the topic of sexism, any woman athlete is a better athlete than you or I will ever be, and if you actually challenged her at her sport, she would embarrass you.
Think a female sports announcer should just "stay in the kitchen"? Give it a try yourself, and you'll be begging to make her sandwiches. Also, for every woman announcer who you think is terrible, there are 20 men who are as bad or worse. Trust me on this one. Actually, you have to; I'm the Supreme Ruler of the Sports World.
So those are the first-day items. More could be coming as I see fit.
And we'll start with the development in sports that has been making me pull my hair out all week ...
All NFL contracts would be fully guaranteed -- I've always considered the concept of the "non-guaranteed contract" to be someone oxymoronic. Isn't a contract by its very nature a guarantee that a player will play for a certain amount of time, and in exchange, the club will pay a certain amount of money?
Instead, what we have now in the NFL is a situation where if a team doesn't want to pay a player any more, it demands he rework his contract or cuts him outright. Strangely enough, it doesn't work the other way, that a player can demand more money, and if the club doesn't comply, he becomes a free agent.
Sure, it'll mean lots of bad contracts for aging players whose pay doesn't match their performance. Oh well, too bad ... players are expected to live up to contracts, and so should teams.
Of course, none of this could matter if ...
No salary caps -- Players are the game. Sports is the business it is because of them. No one buys tickets or turns on the TV to watch owners own. They deserve all the money they can get.
"But the rich teams will buy all the best players and win everything!!!" you cry. I know I certainly enjoyed that Dodgers-Yankees World Series last year, but I am willing to consider revenue plans that make sure everyone has a chance, although I don't think it's as big a problem as some claim.
Speaking of deserving money ...
All college athletes would be allowed to be paid -- Maybe the university would pay. Maybe boosters would pay. Maybe endorsers would pay. However, it's done, if someone wanted to pay college athletes, it would be legal.
If Kentucky wants to buy a team of great basketball players ... oh wait, bad example.
If every SEC football team wants to pay all its players ... oh wait, another bad example.
You get my drift.
Staying in college ...
The NCAA basketball tournaments would be run by a straight S-curve -- The top team would play No. 68 and have the No. 8 team as the second seed in its region. The second team would play No. 67 and have the No. 7 team as its second seed.
There wouldn't be any of this crap where Wisconsin might be the second seed in Kentucky's region, even thought the Badgers are definitely not the No. 8 team, because Cleveland is the closest site to both schools. (And is Wisconsin wins the Big 10 title game, it should be a No. 1, rendering the whole discussion moot.)
And while we're at it ...
So long, pods -- If the committee wants to give the top seeds early round games close to home (and congratulations, NCAA, for having yet another subregional in North Carolina; God forbid Duke or North Carolina actually have to travel), that's fine, but otherwise, teams go to the sites the S-curve tells them to.
If a team from the eastern half of the country is in the West regional, it'll have the change to see the country from 33,000 feet.
Generic floors go, too -- I have written about this before, and have not changed my mind.
Regarding who plays in the tourney...
New format for play-in games -- First of all, they would be called just that, "play-in" games. Also, they would all be the lowest-seeded at-large teams, not the split of at-large teams and 16 seeds. Teams that actually won something to get into the tournament should not have to win something else just to make the main bracket. Let the lower-ranked teams from power conferences, who otherwise have just about every advantage when it comes to being chosen, play for bids.
As for college football ...
Four teams are good, but more are better -- The college football playoff would be a minimum of 16 teams, and perhaps 20 or 24 with byes. Every conference champion would get in, plus the best of the rest.
And yes, it would run on an S-curve.
As for the sport that's about to start, even though you wouldn't know it with all the talk of NFL free agents ...
Day games are a wonderful thing -- This is why, with the exception of the ESPN Sunday night game and playoff weekends where there are three or more games in a day, all weekend games would be day games, starting at 1 p.m. locally.
Being able to see the end of a game ... what a concept!
Let's make Ernie Banks smile in Heaven -- Every team would play one single-admission Sunday doubleheader a month. They'd play the first game at 1, retreat to the clubhouse for a half-hour to get ready for the second game, and then play that one. One ticket price would cover both games.
It's a little bit of a break for the fans, and it would also shave about a week from the schedule, lessening the chance of November baseball.
Bring Pete Rose back -- I've always been torn on this one. He bet on his own team's games, so I can understand a lifetime ban, but he never bet on them to lose (and yes, I understand the argument that he may have indirectly by managing the Reds differently on days he did bet), and by this point, letting him back in probably just means he can go in the Hall of Fame and perhaps get work as an ambassador of some type. I highly doubt he'll be managing again.
So I'll let him back in the game so he can go in the Hall of Fame.
Be consistent on cheaters -- Until someone tells me why it's OK for guys who doctored baseballs to be in the Hall of Fame but not guys who doctored their bodies, I expect the writers to either vote for guys involved with PEDs or move to throw guys like Gaylord Perry out. And, by the way, they have to go tell Perry personally.
Shift away -- If a team knows where someone is going to hit the ball, why not let them arrange their defense accordingly? If hitters don't like it, they can actually learn how to hit differently. Yes, it might change their precious routines, but the best baseball players in the world (even Brendan Ryan) should be able to figure it out.
Changing gears (see what I did there?) ...
You're paid to race the whole race, so do it and don't whine -- I'm not tuning in to the Insert Sponsor Name Here 50; I'm watching the Insert Sponsor Name Here 300/400/500/600, so I expect drivers to try the whole time. If they don't, and they complain about guys who do, they can give back their prize money.
Let's go old-school -- NASCAR needs to find a way for its top divisions to race at North Wilkesboro, Rockingham, South Boston, the Milwaukee Mile and other tracks that may not be as lucrative or architecturally majestic, but are still fun.
A bit of a business lesson ...
If you don't take yourself seriously, no one else will, either -- If one of your best and most-recognizable players isn't playing this year because another team is paying her more not to play, that's a bad thing, and it makes you look like a joke. You really should do something about that.
Also, if there's an announcement about a famous player coming to play in your league, you should make sure he comes when you say he's going to. Otherwise, you also look like a joke.
And finally, even though I'm not sure what I would do to enforce it (although I have a few ideas, being Supreme Ruler of the Sports World and all), some words of advice for fans ...
Don't be f---ing idiots -- While the players are the game, it's your willingness to pay that makes people rich. I get that, but that doesn't mean you get to do whatever you want, in spite of what you may have been taught.
You don't get to throw things. You don't get to run onto the field/court/pitch (unless it's a court-storming after a big college basketball win, which I will allow as long as it's safe). You get to boo, but you don't get to make racist, sexist or homophobic remarks.
And while we're on the topic of sexism, any woman athlete is a better athlete than you or I will ever be, and if you actually challenged her at her sport, she would embarrass you.
Think a female sports announcer should just "stay in the kitchen"? Give it a try yourself, and you'll be begging to make her sandwiches. Also, for every woman announcer who you think is terrible, there are 20 men who are as bad or worse. Trust me on this one. Actually, you have to; I'm the Supreme Ruler of the Sports World.
So those are the first-day items. More could be coming as I see fit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)