It's just driving in circles

I had hoped I wouldn't have to write about the Danica Patrick absurdity again, but it keeps coming back worse and worse. I watched an IRL race on Saturday, and sure enough, the announcers spent more time talking about Danica cruising in fourth place as they did about Scott Dixon beating Dan Wheldon way ahead of her. The write up the next day on ESPN.com made me want to vomit. It was one thing to lead with the fourth place finisher, but the author even admitted he wasn't going to get to the winner until later because he wanted to "focus on Danica's quietly impressive evening." . She did finish fourth, but she wasn't really that competitive. Only six drivers were even on the lead lap, and it was pretty obvious the winner was going to be Wheldon or Dixon.

To top that, half the article was about her possibly moving to NASCAR. The biggest joke in the world is the fact that her "possibly" moving to NASCAR is considered on the level as Juan Pablo Montoya going to stock cars from Formula One. What the Hell? Montoya is a top driver. Patrick is a novelty act. She hasn't even talked about going into the Busch Series to prepare for the Nextel Cup, but Montoya is planning on driving there to gain stock car experience. And Montoya is a much more accomplished driver. He won a CART championship when that series was still the top open wheel racing in the country. During that time, he crossed over to run the Indy 500 and completely dominated in winning. Patrick has never finished higher than fourth in any IRL race (which means she's never won a race). She needed Saturday's fourth place finish to move to ninth place in the IRL standings, and while being in the top 10 means something in NASCAR which has over 30 regular drivers, it doesn't mean much in IRL. Out of nine races, the Indy 500 (with 33) is the only IRL race to have more than 20 starters. So, there's probably only about 18 full time drivers.

Actually, I think the low number of drivers will be the reason that Patrick stays in IRL. Looking at the race results in IRL, it's very competitive at the top, but not at the bottom. The reality is that there are only six drivers in IRL that I would pick to win week in and week out. Sam Hornish, Jr., Scott Dixon, Helio Castroneves, Dan Wheldon, Vitor Meira and Tony Kanaan are way ahead of the rest. Out of nine races, 32 of the top five finishes were from that group. Only 13 were from the rest of the field. Out of 18 first and second place finishes this year, only Marco Andretti's second at the Indy 500 was from somebody other than the six.

Yet, that could work in the favor of Patrick. She's not a bad driver. She just hasn't shown me that she's better than mediocre. One thing she doesn't do is wreck, which I believe is the same reason that she doesn't win. She's not aggressive which means she spends a good chunk of the race cruising around the track. However, by not wrecking, she just needs six guys to wipe out and she's got a shot. In NASCAR, there are a whole lot more drivers capable of winning a race. Their standings change week to week, and last year's champion, Tony Stewart, has actually dropped out of the top ten. I think she'll have a much better chance at getting that elusive win in IRL. And I don't think racing is as important to her as marketing, so I can't see her wanting to drive as many races as NASCAR has.

Another reason I don't think she'll move is because her popularity won't be as high in NASCAR. It was easy to pick up a following in IRL because no one else in IRL had any fans. Think about it. Two years ago, did you ever hear of a hardcore Scott Sharp fan? If Patrick moves to NASCAR, she's going up against a race series where most of the drivers already have a fanatical following. Jeff Gordon fans aren't going to suddenly jump off his bandwagon onto Patrick's. She'll probably pick up some fans by being a novelty, but it won't be to the same level as in IRL. Plus, NASCAR fans want a winner before they root for you. The closest thing to a built in fan base that I've ever seen in NASCAR was Dale Earnhardt Jr, but he pretty much inherited his father's fans after Dale Sr.'s death. I'm just not sure Dale Jr. would be the most popular driver in NASCAR if his father hadn't died on the track (think Kyle Petty and his "following"). However, Dale Jr. didn't jump right into NASCAR. He spent two years in the Busch Series where he won a pair of championships. So, he was pretty accomplished as a racer when he moved up to the top series.

The final reason I don't think she'll make the jump is she would want to be in a top team because she can't win in IRL with a decent team, so she'll want top of the line. Marketing the driver is important in NASCAR, but I don't think it's as important for the top teams. Sure, the teams just scraping by would want her because she brings sponsor dollars. Top teams want winners, because NASCAR doesn't just have a points race for drivers, they have one for owners. Would a top team boot a proven driver to pick up someone who can cost them points? Unlikely.

I don't care if women race professionally. While I don't like it when someone is pushed ahead in sports for reasons other than merit, it's going to happen. What drives me nuts is when sports reporters are pushing an agenda instead of honestly reporting the story. With her complete lack of race course accomplishments, would anyone care if Patrick moved to NASCAR if she weren't a woman? Actually, yes. That driver would be a laughing stock if he had never finished higher than fourth on a minor circuit, and was flirting with bottom half of the standings, but thought he was good enough to jump to the top racing series in the country.

More Random Thoughts

I was watching a Robert Ryan (one of the great unsung actors of his day) cop movie on TCM, and at the beginning ran the logo for the studio - RKO Pictures. The logo calls it "An RKO Radio Picture". What the Hell is a "radio picture"?

Not being a Myspace aficionado, I have no real clue what kind of anti-pedophile protection teenager have on it, but I really have to question this lawsuit by some woman whose 14 year old daughter was sexually assaulted by someone she met through it. She wanted protection for teenagers against adults, but would she have felt better if her daughter was attacked by a 17 year old instead of a 19 year old? If you're going to tell your kids not to talk to strangers, shouldn't you also tell them not to go find a complete stranger that you meet on the internet?

I'm not a Catholic so I don't really care who they ordain. However, I had problem after reading this article on some chick being "ordained" as a Catholic priest. It's how it was written. Isn't it being dishonest for whoever wrote the article to say the woman was ordained as Roman Catholic priest when the Roman Catholic Church law is that women can't be ordained, and the presiding "bishop" had already been excommunicated from the Church? This is the equivalent to me being fired from my job, and then declaring myself Vice President of the company.

I think Phil ripped off my old "Bad Movie Review" from my fantasy football website.

I can understand keeping your job if you win a couple of million in the lottery. I can even understand keeping your job at McDonalds if you're nuts. I just can't understand why anybody would eat the crap they serve at McDonalds.

From reading several news sources, I can find quite a difference of opinion on who is at fault in the latest Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I'll just make a couple of points. My brother serves in our armed forces. If he were grabbed by a bunch of radicals, I would not object to our military laying waste to half the Middle East to get him back. In fact, I would expect it. Some may not remember that Hezbollah from long ago, but they were the ones who blew up the Marine Barracks in Beirut in 1983 which killed 241 American serviceman on a peacekeeping mission (for those who think it was because they were Americans, the French lost 58 paratroopers in similar suicide bombing the same day). Let's look at which side really wants peace. In recent years, Israel has evacuated their southern Lebanon and Gaza buffer zones in an effort to push along the "peace process". How did the Palestinians respond? Hamas declared that they ran Israel out of Gaza and won control of the Palestinian government. Gaza is now a staging ground for rocket attacks on Israel. Come to think of it, Hezbollah uses southern Lebanon for the same thing. Israel gives up land as concession for peace. Two terrorist groups who are still dedicated to the destruction of Israel use that land to launch attacks. Yeah, I don't have to put a lot of thought into whom really wants peace.

And please don't think a captured Israeli soldier is equivalent to a captured Palestinian terrorist. The Palestinian is put in jail where they do things like run for the Palestinian Parliament. Captured Israelis have a tendency to disappear for good.

Finally, since Phil has ripped Wal-Mart for their policies, I will defend them for no other reason than I can. Well, not all their policies. They've never had good service (but most general merchandise chain stores don't). I could really care less whether or not they chant in the morning, but maybe it works better than half the employees showing up hungover like at a place I used to work. Still, Wal-Marts are cleaner than KMart, but so is a stall at Keeneland so that's not really a selling point. The main thing I want to point out is that not all poor people work at Wal-Mart. Other retail stores don't pay that too either (don't bother looking for the BMWs in Meijer's employee parking). Not to mention the spare change waitresses at the Waffle House make (I don't bring up their janitors because I don't think Waffle House has them). The unfortunate fact is that we will always have a class of people who work low wage jobs. I think the high school dropout rate is 20 something percent, and I believe all of us who worked at Toys R Us can name people who jumped from job to job because The Man expected them to do things like show up on time. Or at all. Personally, I can afford to shop at Meijer or Target or whatever. For those who are stuck in low income jobs, Wal-Mart is one of the best things that happened to them. Low prices mean they are spending a smaller percentage of their income on necessities.

Hey, it's now the 20th. NFL training camps start opening today. Football is almost here. College practice starts the first week of August and since I'm not a UK fan, I can watch college football past September too.

NBA Draft - ho hum

I'm not that big a NBA fan, but the NBA draft is always interesting. It's not on the same level as the NFL draft, so I didn't sit and watch it beginning to end. One reason is that I was sitting at the bar at my local Hooters because they had $2 Coors draft, and Wednesday night is all you can eat wings. Plus, there are waitresses with big knockers. So, this isn't a draft diary so much as thoughts written on the edges of a newspaper that took with me so my staring, I mean, looking around is less noticeable. And don't hold going to Hooters against me. I don't have the dirtiest mind around. In the latest Maxin, they had a panel of sports experts to talk about reader voting on sports topics. One was "Hottest Female Athlete" which include the Sharpovas, Kournikovas, Jennie Finch etc. Then Shaquille O'Neal added Michelle Wie. Isn't she 16?

To begin with, I knew I was lucky (or more than I originally thought) to be at Hooters because the TV volume was low, and loudmouth Stephen A Smith was one of the commentators. The unfortunate part was most of the players were wearing normal looking suits. No bright orange or avocado green. What did they think they were there for - to meet a loan officer? My theory on this draft is this: if you need immediate help, take Brandon Roy; if you can wait a year, take LaMarcus Aldridge; if you can wait two or more, Tyrus Thomas is the choice.

Things started off with some Italian with a girl's name going first which was a big surprise because ESPN had been reporting that for the past half hour. Aldridge goes next Chicago, but they are only pretending because he's already been traded to Portland. Then Charlotte takes Adam Morrison. I don't really care for Morrison. It's my belief that you should have to play some defense in the NBA, and he plays none. In fact, it's my belief that Michael Jordan drafted him because he wants to play pick up games with the Charlotte players, and he needed someone around for him to score 40 against. Morrison fits that bill.

Besides that, I've been trying to figure out why so many "pundits" insist that Morrison has the most "star power" and would be the biggest rookie draw. He's a goofy looking guy with a bad haircut and 70s style pornstache. How appealing is that? Wannabe Marxists aren't that popular in North Carolina. Just look at what happened in Greensboro (good episode of City Confidential). Speaking of which, does anyone really think he'll "redistribute" his NBA millions? I didn't think so.

Why on earth would Atlanta promise Sheldon Williams that they would take him with the fifth pick? Usually, you promise a player you'll take him so he stops working out for other teams, but no one was thinking of taking Williams with the first through fourth pick so there was no point in making that commitment. Outside of Atlanta, I don't think anyone was thinking of Williams in the top ten. He's certainly not good enough to lock yourself up on. What if Houston wanted to trade picks to get Brandon Roy and threw in a veteran player who in all likelihood is better than Williams? Do you say no because you promised Williams you would take him fifth? That's just stupid and explains why Atlanta sucks every year.

Why would you have both Stephen A. Smith and Dick Vitale on the same show? Isn't one person completely incapable of speaking in a normal tone of voice enough?

I'm so happy that the Sonics drafted that guy from Senegal, because a lot of people thought my favorite team, the Jazz, would take him. The guy averaged three points in Belgium, which is less competitive than the Italian, Spanish or French European leagues. Come to think of it, probably less competitive than the Russian, Serbian or Israeli leagues. Glad to see JJ Redick go to Orlando, because he was the other guy everyone thought the Jazz would take. You know because he's white just like Deron Williams from last year. Oh, wait.... Good news is that the Jazz get Ronnie Brewer who I think will be a better pro than college player, and will be better than Redick.

That guy from Switzerland sure didn't look Swiss, but he did have that solid Swiss name Thabo Sefolosha. One of the highlights of watching at a bar is that one of the TVs has closed captioning, and it's pretty funny to watch the guy keep up with names like that.

Cedric Simmons just went to the Hornets. The little note under his name mentioned his childhood pastimes were building treehouses and shooting things (squirrels and rabbits). Once the team moves back to New Orleans, both skills could come in handy.

Why did they keep saying Adam Morrison was highest draft pick out of Gonzaga since John Stockton? Stockton went 16th which seems a bit lower than third.

Is everyone being traded? And all these trades seem to have cash consideration. Am I the only one that thinks it sounds like they'll send briefcase full of small bills? And are the Suns going bankrupt or did they think the talent level was really low this year? They traded away all their picks pretty much for cash.

Got to love the way the commentators are talking about Marcus Williams' free fall while he's sitting in the green room listening to the whole thing. The basic reasons are that he's fat and David Stern better check his wallet after shaking hands with him. Now, the Knick fans want Williams which means Isiah Thomas will draft someone else. In this case, Renaldo Balkman. You know, I liked Balkman in college. He's a hard-working athlete who never slows down. Still, I don't like Balkman as the 20th pick, because nobody else was going to take him in the first round, and is he really what the Knicks need? One plus of the pick is that Stephen A. Smith was almost speechless. Then later in the first round, Thomas takes Mardy Collins who is a tweener guard without much athletic ability and can't guard anyone with any quickness. My favorite part of his draft bio is "He struggles to shoot from everywhere on the floor." Everywhere? Got a winner here. Do the Knicks think he's better than Marcus Williams? Common sense says take Williams with the 20th pick and if you really want Balkman, don't worry, he'll still be there for the 29th.

In Balkman's defense, I think he could make a niche for himself in the pro game. Bring him off the bench and have him chase around the other team's top scorer. In fact, I agree with a guy I work with who said Balkman would have a better career than Nets' pick Josh Boone. Of course, Boone did a fine impression of garbage last year at UCONN, so I don't find that expectation to be too high.

And Rondo goes to the Celtics via the Suns. I believe Rondo will be fine at the pro level. Word on the street is the Celtics really wanted him because he abused Marcus Williams and Randy Foye when he faced them in a pre-draft workout for Boston. His shooting will be an issue if he can't improve it a bit, but he shot pretty good with the under-20 U.S. team. Besides, I don't think he needs to become stellar at it to succeed. Tony Parker is a lousy three point shooter. Jason Kidd is a 40% shooter from the field, not just from beyond the arc. Those two have managed to do well by being good at other things. Rondo is good at other things. He's one of the quickest players I've ever seen which is why his defense is so good. He led UK in rebounds, assists and steals. Opposing teams will have to account for him on the floor.

Of course, Dick Vitale disagrees as he calls Rondo a ".220 hitter". Of course, when you spend the past twenty some odd years sucking up to big name coaches like Tubby Smith, you certainly aren't going to like the players who won't kow tow to them. I'm not sure where his expertise comes from. Was it the one time he took the University of Detroit to the NCAAs or the 38% winning percentage he compiled as an NBA coach?

Of course, it's nothing like Stephen A Smith. This guy isn't just loud and irritating. He's borderline retarded. Plus, what exactly does he bring to the show? He just said that he had never heard of Renaldo Balkman until he started moving up draft boards a couple of weeks ago. Smith has his own sports talk show on ESPN2 (so I've heard, never actually watched it). Balkman might be unknown to casual sports fans, but how could somehow who covers sports for a living not know who he is? He was the NIT MVP. Earlier when they were discussing Rudy Gay, Smith said he hadn't seen him play much. You've got to be kidding me. How unprepared can you be? It's bad enough that you're a sports reporter who admits he didn't watch one of the top college basketball teams, but how can you agree to go on the NBA draft show and not go back to watch the top prospects? This guy is a buffoon who has no business being on TV, let alone covering an event like the NBA draft.

Not real sure why the commentators keep ripping Portland's draft. They ended up with Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge, both of whom I liked. Who else ended up with two players of that quality?

I must say that all the trades made for an interesting draft. Just like every other draft, we won't know much for a couple of years who really did well. I was surprised that Rondo was the first point guard taken and he went late. Hated to see Taquan Dean not get drafted, but I hope he catches. Really wish they would get a new broadcast team.

One other point. I am so sick of the commentators who said that guys who didn't came out early didn't get drafted. I love college basketball so I would like to keep as many good players around as possible, but I'm realistic. The NBA doesn't like seniors. Outside of Brandon Roy and Randy Foye, name me one other player who really helped himself by staying until his senior year. Maybe Hilton Armstong (who I wouldn't have drafted). West Virginia had two players, Kevin Pittsnogle and Mike Gansey, who probably would have been drafted last year. This year, neither was. Keith Bogans went back to UK after his sophomore year because he was projected in the second round. After his senior year, he went in the second round. Coming back really helped.

Almost Forgot

I thought I was done with the NBA Finals, but then I saw a column by Bill Simmons on ESPN.com. Thanks to the continuing inanity of the late night start time, I didn't stick around to watch the trophy ceremonies after game 6. Even with California, the Pacific time zone only has about 15% of the population, but God forbid they be inconvenienced. So, I didn't see it happen, but apparently Shaq wouldn't let David Stern hand the MVP award to Dwyane Wade. He had to take it from him and be the presenter. I guess Shaq thinks of it as passing the torch. Except it's not. Wade was their best player last year too.

I think Simmons' point is dead on. Shaq may say all the right things, but it has to be killing him that Wade is getting all the credit. Little does he know that it could (and should) be worse. He's actually getting some credit for the win rather than it being honestly reported that Miami won in spite of Shaq having flaws so bad that he wasn't on the floor at crunch time. Most think that Miami wouldn't have won a title without Shaq to draw double teams. There may be some truth to that, although I thought the team actually played more fluidly (especially in game 6) when Shaq was off the floor. However, that's a debatable point. What isn't debatable is that the Heat probably wouldn't have made it out of the second round with Shaq, but not Wade. They certainly wouldn't have won the title.

I'll be perfectly honest. I don't really like Shaq. I got tired of his knocking people into the stands to go to the basket without a charge being called, and then whining that he gets hacked all the time. If a defensive player isn't allowed to position defend him, what else can they do besides foul him? Besides, if he'd learn to hit a free throw, they probably wouldn't do it as often. I've also had to listen to him give interviews where he thinks he's a comedic genius, but he's really not that funny (why does Ozzie Guillen get grief for calling someone a fag, but Shaq gets away with calling Sacramento the Queens?). Of course, he also thinks he's talented outside basketball, but that leads to Kazaam, Shaq Diesel and Shaq Fu. Half his interviews degenerate into "Look at how great I am", and then he ends up giving himself multiple nicknames like The Big Aristotle (can't wait for Shaq's philosophical treatise). Yet when Eric Dampier outplayed him in game 2, he hid from interviewers. Think of it this way - if I don't like Terrell Owens for being a "me,me,me" braggart, why would I like Shaq when he does the same thing?

I don't like Kobe Bryant either, but I think the problems that the Lakers had their last year together weren't just Bryant's fault. Neither of them liked sharing the spotlight, and unlike Wade, Bryant was not going to be subservient when he knew he was just as important to the team. I'm sure it had to be irritating to him that he was expected to carry the load while Shaq was "playing" himself into shape, but Shaq was bragging about how he would be the one carrying the team in the playoffs. Many observers thought the Lakers made a mistake when they traded Shaq, because they believed the Lakers wouldn't be able to sign Bryant if Shaq stayed. That's just stupid. Bryant is much younger, and Shaq is clearly on the downside of his career. Keeping Shaq over Bryant would have been a good idea if they could have gotten someone like Wade, but what's the likelihood they could have? Does anyone think the Lakers would have made the playoffs this year with Shaq, but not Bryant?

So, we're left with a new superstar in Wade, and an aging diva in Shaq who still wants to be relevant. Actually, it kind of reminds me of the director's commentary on the Big Trouble In Little China DVD. Their idea was to flip flop the leading man character and the sidekick, with a little subtlety. Apparently, they were so subtle that no one knew. Kurt Russell's Jack Burton was seen as the hero even though he was really a doofus, and Dennis Dun's Wang Chi was the sidekick even though he did most of the ass kicking. Shaq thinks he's still the hero, but he's now the sidekick.

Re-thinking (or not) the NBA & World Cup

OK. I didn't get my complete wish in the NBA Finals. Mark Cuban didn't win a title with his hippie kraut, but Dwyane Wade screwed it up for me. No one (outside of Dallas) is going to remember questionable calls in his favor. They are just going to remember Wade's incredible performance in dragging that somewhat lifeless Heat team to a title. I wanted to puke when I kept hearing that Shaq delivered a title to Miami just like he promised. Sure his 13 points and 10 points were pretty good, but considering his "Superstar" status, it's not really all that. Plus when you miss 34 out of 48 free throw attempts (and 3 of your 4 wins are by 3 points or less), you were a lot closer to losing the title for your team than "delivering" it. Alonzo Mourning and Udonis Haslem were more important to the team in Game 6 than Shaq was.

Then there is the Pat Riley who is given credit for a great coaching job to win it. Well, to begin with, if Wade hadn't hurt his ribs before game 6 of the conference championship last year, the Heat would have been in the Finals then without Riley or the "veteran" supporting cast. Yet, somehow Riley is a genius for taking a highly paid team and making it slightly better. Of course, he wasn't an idiot when the Heat looked like crap in the first two games when the plan was to force it into Shaq. The genius apparently came from him making "adjustments". Is that the new term for "give the ball to Wade and get out of his way"? Yeah, no other coach would ever have thought of putting the game in the hands of their best player instead of an out-of-shape former star who can't hit a free throw.

Still, I do have the jerk-off Dallas fans crying conspiracy, so at least there is some taint to the win, but not enough. After all, "pundits" rave about Michael Jordan finishing his Bull career with a game winning shot against Utah, but they rarely mention his push-off to get the shot off. However, the Dallas fans are entertaining in their whining. I heard an email from one into Dan Patrick's radio show that actually complained about a foul not being called when the non-call favored the Mavs. On their last shot, Dallas needed a three and Jason Terry tried to get open for it. He did, but before he got into shooting position, Gary Payton grabbed his jersey. The refs ignored it and the shot missed. Everyone knows the last thing the Mavs wanted was for a foul to be called. It would have been on the floor, so at best they would have had two free throws instead of a fairly open three point shot. I bet the same moron would have whined that the refs shouldn't have made the call if Terry had hit a three after the whistle blew.

Now, the World Cup. As I said before, I wasn't nearly as impressed with the American side against Italy as so many others were. I couldn't believe so many thought the U.S. were a lock to beat Ghana. Ghana beat the Czech Republic. We were embarrassed by the Czech Republic. Sure, we could have beaten Ghana, but we didn't and I wasn't that surprised. When you don't score a goal (remember, Italy kicked our only score in for us) in your first two games, why should expect a big performance in the third? Losing 2-1 wasn't that surprising to me.

I still think soccer will always be problem for the U.S.. The reason is that so many of the premier athletes in this country are tracked into basketball, football or baseball. Think about Hakeem Olajuwon. He started out playing soccer, and only went into basketball because he was tall. Now, think about the athletes playing other sports in this country. Look at the speed and footwork of a Barry Sanders when he played football. Maybe he wouldn't have other attributes to be a great soccer player, but I think the necessary athleticism is there. And he's not alone. I just think the other professional leagues are full of guys who could have been great soccer players if they had chosen that sport at an early age. As long as the NFL, NBA and MLB are a more attractive destination than professional soccer, the U.S. will be fielding teams that are considered overachievers for simply making the quarterfinals of the World Cup.

Money can buy a ball team, but not class

Let's see. A Miami Herald columnist has said Dallas Maverick owner Mark Cuban screamed obscenities at NBA commish David Stern, and then followed it by accusing the NBA of being rigged. Cuban denies it and a lot of people don't believe he said it. Who knows (well, besides him and Stern) if he really said it, but for some reason I can't rule it out of hand. Actually, it's not some reason. It's the fact that I think he's a paranoid nutcase who is irrational about his team. He's also a condescending dick.

Let's look at his acknowledged behavior after the game. He says he stared at Stern, but didn't yell at him, and just because the camera showed him doing so is no reason to think otherwise. He also went on the court and screamed at the referees. Then he proclaimed that Dwyane Wade made a backcourt violation on the inbounds of his game winning shot. He was wrong, but he's rich-man Mark Cuban so he doesn't have to admit it. In his defense, just because he constantly criticizes the refs, I don't think he ever said he actually knew the rules. Of course, does anyone think he would be so critical of the officials if they had incorrectly called the backcourt violation and Dallas got the ball? Me neither. To top it off, he answered reporters with the F-bomb and a sneer. Since that wasn't enough, he blamed them for asking him a question in his house (I didn't realize Dallas' home arena was in Miami), and that it was a waste of time. Hate to tell you Mark, but you're an owner. There's no requirement to talk to reporters at all. If you don't want to waste people's time, don't talk. Unfortunately, I don't think Cuban has the ability to keep his trap shut.

Cuban got fined $250K which is like me getting fined $2.50. He got off easy. I think the NBA should collect the money for their general fund (secretly offset it to their charities) rather than make it a donation. I bet Cuban wouldn't be so cavalier about it if he couldn't write it off. If the NBA wants to really stick it to him, they should ban him from his sideline seats. Does anyone really think owners should be running onto the floor to confront referees after a game? If he wants to act like your average jerk fan, let him. Just make him play by the same rules as fans.

I just find it funny that Cuban is so bitchy about officiating. Did Wade shoot a lot more free throws than anyone else? Sure. Was the last foul pretty ticky-tacky? Absolutely, but it was consistent with the rest of the game for him. Was there a foul differential? Sure was, but how many were part of the hack-a-Shaq away from the ball? Wade did shoot a lot of free throws going 21 out of 25, but I don't remember Cuban getting so put out when a star player went 21 for 24 from the line in a one point game earlier in the playoffs. Of course, since it was Dirk Nowitzki doing it against the Spurs, it was just good officiating. Come on, if 25 free throw attempts in an overtime game is excessive, 24 in regulation is just as bad. You can't even make the argument that about free throw differential. Yes, the Heat shot 24 more than the Mavs, while against the Spurs, the Mavs only had 18 more. I figure there were at least six attempts by Shaq that were directly the result of the Mavs intentionally putting him on the line.

Frankly, I don't care for either team (although I do like Wade), but since they both can't lose, I really hope the Heat win, but that everyone thinks it was rigged because the league doesn't want Cuban to win a title. Actually, I would like the Heat to win and there actually be some evidence that the league did rig it (but not enough to vacate the title). Then, Pat Riley will get a tainted title (see my May 21 post why I didn't want him to win), but the horse's ass Cuban won't get the title at all, and it will be all his fault. He used his money to build up the team so that he could posture and preen for the TV cameras. How great would it be if all those histrionics undid the success his money bought him with that team?

Soccer - When nothing else is on

I am once again attempting to give soccer a chance, mainly because I didn't feel like going anywhere and the U.S./Italy game was pretty much the only thing on. So, it was that or the Discovery channel showing something on killer ants. Granted, if the show on ants was two hours long, I may have chosen it. Still, while I may regret watching, I decided to record my experience for posterity.

The last time I really paid attention to the World Cup (or soccer in general) was when the Cup was here in 1994. I gave it a shot, but when the final ended up as a 0-0 tie and decided by penalty shots, I ignored it. I just don't think soccer is ever going to be that popular in the U.S., because it's what you know. Soccer's more popular in other countries because it's always been the main sport. In this country, it's always been way behind the home grown sports of football, basketball, baseball, NASCAR etc.. I can see a sport building in popularity (i.e. basketball in Europe and baseball in Latin America) if it's only competing with one major sport. Here, you've got to go through at least three.

One thing I must say before the game even starts is that it's nice the American women are getting with the soccer program, and going with the less is more clothing philosophy. Brazil has the most scantily clad fans and they are the favorites, in spite of having a player who goes by the name Kaka (Doo Doo was apparently left off this year's squad). So it's nice to see American girls trying to help Team USA along.

Watching the Italians come out, I'm reminded of a line by Minerva Mayflower in the movie Hudson Hawk. "That's why we hired the pasta slurping guinea". Of course, none of these guys actually look like Danny Aiello. Actually, as a team, they look a bit taller than the U.S. squad. In fact, the Americans are playing a couple of midgets. Hopefully, head shots won't be that important.

That's pretty funny. The Italian goalie just kneed his own teammate in the butt. And he's down and getting his butt sprayed with the numbing spray by a trainer. I wonder if the trainer had to take a class of spraying ass.

I am shocked. American Brian McBride just went down and actually came up with a bloody face from an elbow shot. Usually when I see a soccer player go down, it's after minimal contact, but they act like they just got gunned down. Come to think of it, some of the best floppers in the NBA (think Vlade Divac or Manu Ginobli), come from countries with big soccer followings. Coincidence? I think not.

Ha Ha. Italy just kicked it into their own goal. Hopefully, if the U.S. pulls out a win, the Italians are more forgiving than the Columbians. I don't know that much soccer history, but I do remember when the World Cup was here, a Columbian scored an own goal which gave the U.S. the win. He was later shot when he got back home.

Not really understanding the criteria for these red cards (ejections). The Italian guy got one for elbowing someone in the face, but the American got one for a slide tackle that was a bit late. Maybe I don't understand soccer, but there seems to be a big disparity between the degree of offence. What really gets me is the commentators keep saying the American red card was a make-up call. A make-up call? For what? The Italian red card? These same guys were saying the Italian red card was the proper call. If the Italian deserved to get tossed for his actions, but the American didn't, how is that a make-up? If that's the case, the U.S. got screwed because a make-up call was unnecessary. Was it done so the Italians wouldn't have to play 3/4 of the game down a man? In that case, why eject them anyway?

Second Half Thoughts
Without a doubt, the stupidest thing in soccer is the time. To begin with, does any other sport count up rather than down? Plus, what the Hell is stoppage time? They apparently add time to the end of the half/game to make up for when the clock should have stopped during play. Here's a thought - just stop the clock. They didn't even know how much stoppage time there was really going to be. They said they were going to add "about" two minutes of stoppage time. It ended up being 2 minutes and 13 seconds, and we didn't know that until the referees pretty much just stopped play.

This was actually one of the better soccer games that I've seen, because they didn't stall for a good chunk of the first half. The last time I tried to watch the World Cup, too many of the games were the soccer equivalent of North Carolina's pre-shot clock Four Corners offense (actually, it was just stalling, so I think calling it offense is the epitome of crap terminology). Granted, today's match is still not Phi Slamma Jamma, but at least both teams seemed intent on trying to score even if they only managed one apiece. Well, Italy scored two, but one was for us.
Great, we start the second half with another American being ejected for a late slide tackle. This is like the NBA ejecting a player for throwing a punch, and then tossing a couple more for a charging foul. If they keep this crap up, I definitely won' t be back.

The Italians are offside a lot. I looked up the rule, and it's about as clear as their yellow card rule. Now, the U.S. just had a goal negated for some kind of interference because an American was between the kicker and the goalie. Of course, the shot was from 25 yards away, and the interfering player was about dozen yards in front of the goalie. So, if that was really the correct call (I'm not trusting the clowns refereeing this game), I've got to mark this down as another stupid rule. No wonder 2-0 is a blowout in this sport.

On the plus side, I was afraid the U.S. would go into a stall while being a man down. Instead, they are still attacking. In fact, they seem to have more life than the Italians even with fewer players although guys from both sides appear about dead. Not that it does any good. The game ends (in stoppage time, of course) in a 1-1 tie.

From reading some post-game thoughts by those who know more about soccer than me, apparently we did rather well. I'm not so sure about that. I know the Italians are supposed to have great defense, and the U.S. did seem to go at the goal a lot, but we never kicked the ball into the net in almost 100 minutes of play. In soccer, a tie must not be like kissing your sister, but since I don't have a sister (or predilection for incest), I've never really understood that analogy. I will admit that unlike other soccer games I've watched, I didn't feel that I'd lost two hours of my life for this one. Heck, if a miracle happens (beat Ghana and hope Italy beats the Czech Republic), I might even try to catch the second round game for the U.S.. Of course, speculation is that the number two team out of America's grouping will end up playing Brazil with their fans in the skimpiest of outfits.

Still, I can't say I'm sold on this sport yet. First, there's that clock thing. I just don't understand how you can end a game not knowing how much time is really left. Can you imagine a basketball game ending with neither side really knowing how much time is left? Second, what's with the fouls? Modify the offside rule so you don't have it called 30 times in a match. Plus, it's rather stupid to me that you could conceivably make a team play 10 on 11 for almost the entire match. Even if you feel someone has earned an ejection, let the team substitute. This is like someone fouling out of a basketball game and the team not being able to put someone else in. Even the closest equivalent sport, hockey, only makes them a man down for a set period of time. This seems to give too much power to the referees, and probably makes it more likely a team goes into a defensive stall for a good chunk of the game. I don't see the advantage here. Lastly, what's the deal with limited substitution? I've always heard how well soccer players are conditioned (and they are), but these guys were gassed late in the game. A bunch of guys standing around sucking wind didn't make for an exciting ending.

Dumb, Dumb, Dumb

When I heard Ben Roethlisberger was hurt when his motorcycle hit a car, my first thought was who was driving the car? Marvin Lewis? My second thought was how stupid can someone be? You're making millions of dollars with the possibility of millions more playing football. Why are you jeopardizing it by riding a motorcycle a month before training camp, and doing so without a helmet? As a friend of mine who rides once said, "It's not if you'll wreck, it's when and how bad." Well, early indications are that Roethlisberger may not miss time because of it, but that just means he was incredibly lucky. Kellen Winslow was out for the entire season last year after his wreck. Jay Williams hasn't played in three years after having one.

As someone opposed to the nanny state, it's fine with me if people want to ride motorcycles, and I personally disagree with helmet laws or for that matter seat belt laws (at least for adults). If you want to mess yourself up by smashing your unprotected skull against pavement or going through a windshield, have at it. However, that doesn't mean I won't call you stupid for riding a motorcycle (especially Suzuki's fastest production model crotchrocket) without a helmet. Roethlisberger made the point last year that he was a safe rider, and he could be. So what? Motorcycles are dangerous as much for the other traffic as for their own riders. For one, they are hard to see. Plus, fender benders tend to be quite a bit more serious than if it's in a car. A small wipeout in a car is unlikely to send me head first into a curb. (When the BenOnABike issue came up last year, Joey Porter had the best comment: "The concrete is undefeated") Let's put it this way, a few years ago, my pickup was hit broadside by a woman coming out of a parking lot doing about 50 mph who just happened to not see me until it was too late. Think what would have happened if I had been on a motorcycle instead of safely ensconced inside a truck?

I just don't understand wanting to take the risk. A minor injury for me could be a huge one for an NFL quarterback. A broken hand for me would just make typing harder (two broken hands might cause me other problems). For Roethlisberger, it just might affect his ability to hold a football. If I wrecked a motorcycle even as bad as Jay Williams, I might miss a bit of work, but I wouldn't be out of work for a full year, let alone three. It probably wouldn't affect my future earnings that much either unless I came out like a vegetable (even then my coworkers might not notice). A little different for Ben. Even out for one year could have pushed back Roethlisberger's first contract extension which will be significantly more than what he gets now. A Jay Williams injury and he's viewed as damaged goods. Real smart to risk that just to have the wind blow through your hair.

If he was just an individual athlete, I would just mention the stupidity of risking your paycheck and say it's his tough luck. However, as a member of a team, there's a certain level of selfishness in such risk taking. If I had such a wreck, it might inconvenience my coworkers who have to pick up my slack while I'm healing, but it isn't likely to affect the bottom line. Even if it was someone with actual importance to the company were to miss time after an accident, it probably wouldn't ruin the company's fiscal year. If Roethlisberger had been out for the year, it would have affected a whole lot more people than him. I would pretty much write off the season for the Steelers, and I actually like Charlie Batch who would most likely be the starter in his absence. I also liked Tommy Maddox, but after his performance last year, I would cringe if he came back to be anything but third string. Yet, if Roethlisberger had torn up his knees worse than road rash (and it might still be too early to tell), that's what Pittsburgh would be looking at. Who else could they get with training camp a month away? Kerry Collins is the only quarterback of any account that's still available, and I don't see him as an upgrade over Batch. His bike riding would have put his teammates in a poor position for this year. I realize it's a free country and his neck, but I think team athletes have to recognize that when they sign a contract, they do have some responsibility to their team and teammates. One of those responsibilities is avoiding injury off the field.

Odds & Ends

I think what I found most interesting in this story about the three Gitmo prisoners committing suicide was the fact that Saudi Arabia has a Human Rights Group. That name is the biggest misnomer since the Soviet's called their official newspaper Pravda (Truth in Russian). I have to wonder if the person writing the story was able to type "Saudi Human Rights Group" with a straight face. I also like how some Saudis don't believe they killed themselves because suicide is a grave sin in Islam. Unless you take out a bunch of Jews and Christians when you do it. Then it's OK.

Does anyone really go to Sam's Club looking for a $900 purse?

I hope Phil doesn't find out about the Vietnamese karaoke story because he may try to implement it on the ski trip, and I don't want to have to write a "self-criticism" report for not singing.

Of course, he will be proud to know that the iPod is more popular with college students than beer. Actually, I think it's because the modern college student has been spoiled by overindulgent parents who give them enough money to buy hard liquor (or foo foo drinks), and they don't have to buy beer. When I was in college, bourbon was for special occasions. Beer (usually Stroh's or Keystone) was much more cost effective.

Speaking of being drunk or getting over it, some guy got quarantined on an Australian cruise ship because he was suspected of having stomach flu. He says he was just hungover. Usually it's opposite as one blames his hangover on stomach flu.

Normally, I'm OK with topless women wondering around, but not quite sure about this sheriff's deputy who got fired for it. That's a hard looking woman. And yet, in the picture (fully clothed) that was in the story, she's got her arms crossed in a "modest" pose.

To go with topless, there's bottomless as an escapee from the circus drove a motorized cart around the store with her pants down.

In the ultimate public nudity, two teachers had to quit when students saw them having sex in a classroom. Here's a thought. Wait until the school day is over. I'm sure they'll blame their public boning on a mental problem. Amsterdam just opened a clinic "for people who can't leave their joysticks alone." Although in this case, it's for video game addicts.

Although, I'm supportive of English only policies in this country and do give the proprietor credit for helping immigrants learn the language, I'm trying to figure out how you order a cheesesteak in Spanish. It's a cheesesteak. I wouldn't go to a Mexican restaurant and ask for a steak tortilla wrap instead of asking for a burrito. Of course, after that Hardee's commercial for their cheesesteak hamburger with the two Philly cab drivers that needed subtitles to be understood, I'm not sure my English will suffice there.

Of course, crime fighters are in the pizza industry. I don't find a pizza delivery guy catching a purse snatcher all that strange, but the fact that the pizza joint makes their delivery boys dress like superheroes is a bit odd. Hopefully, he won't find himself getting sued by the scumbag criminal like the guys at an Auto Zone did. With gall like that, you hope his cellmate finds him purty.

And finally, in the government is retarded segment - a town council in England is concerned about the safety problems inherent in palm trees. Not any concern like them falling over on people or the danger of someone climbing them (Keith Richards could visit) and falling out. No, they are concerned a leaf could get in someone's eye. One idiot went so far as to compare having palm trees to having a tigers running loose. Tax dollars at work.

What's the appeal?

I don't understand the hoopla over Roger Clemens pitching for the Lexington Legends. Is regular season baseball so boring that a guy coming out of retirement to play for a third place team is cause for media to descend on Lexington to see him throw three innings? Considering he's going to be around for just over half their games, how much impact can he really make? He'll probably pitch fewer than 20 games, so how many more wins will that give them (it's highly unlikely he'll win every game he starts) compared to the rest of the staff?

Why the excitement for locals? Sure, he's a great pitcher, but so what? Cincinnati is an hour away and they get good pitchers going against major leaguers. Clemens pitched three innings against development players. It might as well have been batting practice. I don't remember people getting this excited when the Bulls and Michael Jordan came to Lexington to play an exhibition in the late 90s, and they were the defending champs. They were also facing other NBA players, and yet I don't think that game was even a sellout. Someone told me Clemens pitching for the Legends was bigger because he would be pitching for the local team. That's crap. How many people know how the Legends are even doing this year? How many people know whether or not Lexington won the game he started? Plus, single A is a development league where winning is nice but secondary. That's why training and rehab starts are often done there. They don't want to disrupt the major league lineups while finding out what someone can do.

I do have to give Clemens some credit. Of all the names mentioned as possible steroid users by Jose conscious, he and Barry Bonds were the only ones that weren't called before the Congressional committee investigating steroids in baseball. Come to think of it, Clemens has pretty much been given a free pass on the steroid issue. Of course, just because he looked washed-up and out of shape at the end of his Red Sox career, but managed to turn it around and have career years up into his 40s is no reason to think steroids could be involved. That would be silly. Late career resurgence by power pitchers are very common. There's Clemens and ...... well, Clemens. Still, assuming he might take steroids during baseball's steroid era is just plain wrong. It would be like assuming steroid use when a hitter who never had more than 46 home runs during his first 14 seasons suddenly averages over 50 late in his 30s. And, coincidentally looks like he ate another player. Still, that's just unfounded suspicion. He could very well have gotten back into shape through hard work and human growth hormones.

Actually, I always figured Bonds got a lot of steroid grief for several reasons. He was connected to people at BALCO when the proverbial steroid crap hit the fan, had doubled in size, was breaking records and hadn't retired like Sosa and McGwire. Plus, he's an ass. But so is Clemens. He burns bridges whenever he leaves a team. He gets it into his contract that he doesn't have to go on road trips when he isn't scheduled to pitch. He indicated that he would want to sign with a playoff contender if he un-retired then turned down three of them to sign with a sub-.500 team that offered more money. He's so obsessed with himself that he set his latest contract at $22,000,022 because his uniform number is 22. He also gave names that begin with "K" (abbreviation for strikeouts) to all his kids. What is there about Roger Clemens that would make me root for him?

Remember when winning was the story?

I never cared much for spelling bees when we did them in class during grade school. In fact, I would usually try to botch a word early so I could go sit down and not deal with such foolishness. That's why I am completely indifferent to the National Spelling Bee and was rather shocked that they would put it on network television. I guess in some way I should admire these kids for their obsession with learning, but frankly I can't get too excited about someone spending most of their waking time memorizing words that they'll never use in regular life or probably ever hear again. Still, whatever floats your boat. Normally, I wouldn't follow any of it, but ESPN carried it for years before it moved to sister network ABC. In typical ESPN fashion, they pimp the Hell out of the show on their website and news programs, so I'm forced to.

So how did ESPN report who won this year? They felt the need to focus on the fact that the winner was the first girl to win sin 1999. How am I supposed to feel about this? Outraged that female spellers had been oppressed for the past five years? Delight that one girl was able to overcome the male dominated world of competitive spelling to pull out the win? Nope. To begin with, the male/female ratio is usually pretty evenly split, and girls have won the contest throughout history so five wins in a row by males is probably coincidental. Secondly, why would it matter anyway? The number of kids actively engaged in these things has to be incredibly small. Since only a male or female can win in any year, a short run of one gender is an anomaly signifying nothing. Yet, ESPN felt it was the most important fact to report.

Frankly, I'm just getting tired of this PC bull that permeates sports reporting. The biggest at this time of year is Danica Patrick in the Indy Racing League. She's a female in a male dominated sport, and she's cute. She's willing to pose for the men's semi-skin magazines (although I don't think she's hot enough that FHM would give her a second glance if she was Jane Nobody off the street). She's different which gives her novelty status and a much higher profile than her success (or lack of) would suggest. She's a pretty good driver and with a good team, but so far she hasn't shown me anything to indicate she'll ever be more than middle of the pack on the elite level. Still, IRL is smart to make her the face of their league over better, more accomplished drivers, because the IRL is a distant second to NASCAR in this country. In fact, without the tradition of the Indy 500, it would barely be on the auto racing map.

While I understand the IRL pushing her, I don't understand why the sports press does. Regardless about the fact that she's never won a race and only has two top five finishes (both 4th), she's always written up as a major contender. It doesn't matter where she finishes or how she runs. Every article is going to make a special note about where Patrick ended up. When I went to ESPN.com after this year's Indy 500, there was more mention of her (and her eighth place finish) than things like the fact that this was one of the most exciting finishes (which she had nothing to do with) in my memory of the race. Or that a father/son combination from the American royal family of open wheel racing (the Andrettis) almost finished first and second. Patrick was really a non-factor in the race, but you wouldn't know it by the coverage.

You can say that maybe the coverage is just giving people what they want, but there's a high level of dishonesty in the coverage when dealing with her. How many times did sports writers make the point of saying Patrick "almost" won the Indy 500 last year? A lot. The only problem with it is that it really isn't true. She was running about ninth late fairly late in the race when all the cars in front of her pitted, because they knew they probably wouldn't have enough fuel to finish the race. Patrick stayed on the track even though she was in the same shape. Her crew figured their only chance to win was to leave her out and hope for enough cautions that she wouldn't run out of fuel. She also needed them because she would have to run slower to conserve what fuel she had. She did get cautions, but it was obvious when she was in the lead that she was going to get caught. In fact, she was a lot closer to not finishing the race than she really was to winning it. If it wasn't for a caution at the end, she wouldn't have held on for fourth, and probably wouldn't have had enough fuel to finish. Yet, the intellectual dishonesty was so bad that more than one sportswriter said her pit crew told her to slow down as if to say she could have won if her crew had let her. If she hadn't slowed down, she doesn't finish. These sportswriters simply did not want to admit that her leading laps and finishing high was the product of a desperation move.

So, did it get any better this year. Not really. They couldn't hype her as almost winning because I don't think she never ran higher than fifth place. Instead, this year's refrain was that Patrick ran a better race this year (based on finishing eighth after starting tenth) and was a big factor throughout. She may have run a better race, but as I pointed out above that isn't saying a whole lot. Moving up two spots after 500 miles of racing doesn't set my world on fire unless you started third. As for being a factor, she probably wouldn't have been mentioned if she wasn't a she. She has to be considered a non-factor because she never threatened the lead or had an effect on it. In fact, Sam Hornish and Scott Dixon were both black flagged (made to pass through the pits at 60 mph rather than on the track at 200+ mph) late in the race, but still finished ahead of Patrick. Basically, she ran a nice safe race that meant she didn't wreck, but also didn't matter.

But she's a pioneer, right? Not really. Women drove in early NASCAR races of the late 40s which has to be tougher (think no power steering) than driving the high tech Indy cars of today. Other women have raced in the Indy 500 and that goes back to the 70s. So, contrary to popular belief, Patrick's only new contribution so far is that she's had pictures taken in skimpy outfits to promote herself. If she finally gets a win, okay. If she wins the IRL championship, good. If she jumps to NASCAR and wins its title, great. However, until that point, sports reporters need to honestly and objectively report on her career rather than acting as cheerleaders. When they are borderline (at best) lying about what she's done, they go beyond reporting and begin pushing an agenda.

Random Sports Thoughts

This doesn't make any sense at all. Detroit beat Cleveland on Friday to lead to a Sunday game seven. Yet, the Suns/Clippers played their game six on Thursday with game seven on Monday. Are the Clippers going to walk to Phoenix? Even worse, it means that there's going to be another 10:30 start time on Monday. Has the NBA decided they are going to be a west coast league? I may stay up past midnight to watch Monday Night Football, but not the NBA.

I was sad to see Cleveland get bounced from the playoffs today. They had LeBron. Detroit has a tendency to be boring. Still, I want Detroit to win the East, but not necessarily because of them. I really don't want the Heat to go to the Finals. I thought what Pat Riley did this year was pretty bush league. A few years back, he quit right before the season started because he didn't think the Heat were good enough to win. And they weren't after winning only 25 games the previous, so it's not illogical to think Riley quit rather than hurting his all time record. Stan Van Gundy takes over in a bad situation, but improves the record in year one. In year two, he takes the team to the best record in the East and to game 7 of the East championship. Van Gundy's reward for turning things around? Riley signs a bunch of veterans for a one year run at the title, makes Van Gundy "resign" and becomes the coach again to add to his "legacy". What an ass.
Speaking of asses, the other person who would be unhappy with a Pistons win would be Larry Brown. I used to like him, but the way he exited Detroit was pure garbage. Right in the middle of their playoff run, he was trying to engineer his way out of Motown to New York. Ironically, New York got what they deserved when they hired him by getting worse. Now, he's trying to con New York into buying him out so he can move on rather than have to coach the disaster that he helped create. If he gets a $40 million buyout after one season of helping destroy the team, he would basically be a thief.

Damn shame what happened in the Preakness. Barbaro certainly had the potential for the Triple Crown so it sucks it had to end with an injury. Even worse, it may end up being fatal. I can't say that he would have beaten Bernardini (he ran a nice race), but if he was even close to his Kentucky Derby form, I think he would have. I'm happy Keeneland is going to the Polytrack surface. Racing at Turfway indicated that breakdowns like Barbaro's can be significantly lessened on it. Some would whine about tradition, but I'm tired of seeing good horses going lame.

Speaking of horse's asses, Barry Bonds finally tied Babe Ruth's home run record. Big deal. I've never thought much of baseball's home run records if for no other reason than every field is different. Unlike Brett, I think Bonds' big problem with popularity is the little matter of him apparently lying to a grand jury about taking steroids. Well, and lying to the public about taking steroids. After all, when he set the single season record, he wasn't absolutely despised like he is now (he wasn't liked either, but that's because he's always been a dick). However, since then, the whole steroid thing blew up, and everyone tainted by it has been hurt. As popular as Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa were when they had their home run competition, neither can be found. Bonds may as well savor it, because he's always going to be thought of as the guy who late in his career doubled in size and increased his home run total by 24 over his previous best. Besides, it doesn't matter who has the home run titles, Babe Ruth will always be larger than life. He's been dead for almost 60 years, but his name is still synonymous with greatness. Bonds' will be with steroids. Ruth's legacy is saving baseball after the Black Sox scandal. Bonds is helping pushing baseball farther into irrelevancy.

Speaking of irrelevant, I was at Beef O'Brady's for lunch when Doug Flutie announced his retirement. They actually showed the press conference live on ESPN2. I realize that his Hail Mary pass to beat the Hurricanes and win the Heisman Trophy was an all time great highlight. However, the guy hasn't been a starter in five years, and while it was nice that he was able to fashion a career even though he was a midget, his retirement wasn't that big a deal. Truthfully, I was never a big fan. He always seemed to be a shameless self-promoter with an exceptionally thin skin. After the Dolphins beat the Bills in the playoffs, Jimmy Johnson smashed a box of Flutie Flakes (a cereal sold for a charity on autism which Flutie's son had), and Doug whined that it was like his autistic son had been stomped. Geez, if someone has them for breakfast, does he feel like his son was eaten? Hey, Johnson bought the box thereby donating to the charity. What's really funny now is I've seen a couple of people say that Flutie should be considered for the Pro Football Hall of Fame, and the reasoning is that it's the "pro football" not NFL Hall of Fame, and Flutie had several great years in the Canadian Football League. Please. The CFL is the CBA of pro football. No one goes to the CFL if they can make an NFL roster. Flutie is an exception in that he managed about four years as a decent starter in the NFL, and only two that I would classify as good. The rest of his NFL career was as a journeyman backup. In fact, most often top CFL players who try to transition to the NFL are lucky to be third string. So, no, being the top player in the CFL is not Hall of Fame worthy especially when your NFL career is nothing special.

Great. Here comes the Indy 500. I don't watch much open wheel racing, and I especially try to avoid IRL, because I'm just a little bit tired of the focus being a tenth place car just because a cute girl is driving it. Danica Patrick isn't a trailblazer. Women drove in the first Daytona 500 which was on a beach and before cars had power steering. If they could handle that, there's no reason they can't race in this high tech machines. I'm not trying to be mean, but I would be a little ticked off if I was a top driver on the circuit who had to spend half their time answering questions about someone who hasn't even won a race. Is it really an advancement for women in sports when her appeal is mainly that she's attractive?


I see ESPN is pushing the World Cup. I find some humor in some of the commercials like the one where England faces Argentina shortly (actually it was four years, but why mess up a good commercial) after the Falkland War. Diego Maradona leads Argentina to victory with a shot he calls "the Hand of God" goal. Actually, he knocked it in with his hand, and while I'm not real clear on many of soccer's rules (offsides befuddles me), I'm pretty sure hitting it in with your hand is illegal. Argentina goes on to win by one goal and restores their manhood. Maybe I have higher standards, but I'm not real sure I would carry a lot of pride over this like the Argentineans did. They lost the Falklands War in about three months, so winning a soccer game by a cokehead who cheated doesn't really seem to make up for it.

I don't know how much I'll watch the World Cup. If the Brazilians are playing, I may watch very closely in case they go to the stands, because hot Brazilian women like to go to soccer matches wearing very little. I'm certainly going to be rooting for America, because I'm very jingoistic, but it is soccer so I'm not sure how much I will care. I gave soccer a chance when the World Cup was played here, but became very disillusioned when a 0-0 tie had to be decided on penalty kicks in the Finals. I enjoyed playing intramural soccer in college, but I can't get into watching it. I have a bad feeling that even if the U.S. were to pull the big upset and win, professional soccer still wouldn't catch on. It would be like the Olympics used to be. People only cared about minor sports every four years. Remember the excitement of the women winning the World Cup back in 1999? It was supposed to herald in soccer's popularity. They formed the WUSA professional women's soccer league which folded in two years. The men's league, Major League Soccer, has lasted about 10 years, but it's a niche sport. You just can't force sports onto people.

Which leads to the WNBA. Based on the commercials, it's season must starting sometime soon. Got your season tickets yet?

Damn Derby

I love horse racing. Yet, the Kentucky Derby kills me every year. If I was smart, I would bet the undercard, but skip the Derby itself. There are just too many horses in the field. It looks like a traffic jam every year. If it's the best horse race in the country, a nag like Giacomo wouldn't win it like 2005. Granted, this year Barbaro is actually quite a good horse. In fact, I hope he wins the Triple Crown, because even though I didn't win money on him, he's a quality horse. Which is important. I could have handled Smarty Jones winning the Triple Crown, but not Giacomo (worst Derby winner in my lifetime) or even Funny Cide (still think Jerry Bailey blew it with Empire Maker). Of coure, I'm still ticked Afleet Alex didn't win the Derby last year. I had money on him in all three Triple Crown races.

In hindsight, I'm kicking myself for going with Lawyer Ron over Barbaro. When I make my Derby pick, I throw out most of the long shots as having no chance then work my way through the rest. I may throw a horse out because of bad post position (Brother Derek) or recent race that seems like a fluke (Sinister Minister in the Bluegrass Stakes). When I work it down, I look for somewhat of a long shot as a saver bet (this year was Point Determined), a long shot to hit the board without winning (Keyed Entry who decided to beat Sinister Minister to the punch in killing himself with a fast pace) and the horse for the big bet. I worked it down to Lawyer Ron and Barbaro. And I took Lawyer Ron.

Once again, in hindsight, I should have gone with Barbaro. Good post position, a sire I like (Dynaformer) and one of my favorite jockeys (Edgar Prado rode Birdstone at 36-1 when he beat Smarty Jones in the Belmont with my money riding on him). Instead, I let sentiment get the best of me. Lawyer Ron's recently deceased owner was from Owensboro (where I went to college), his trainer has been around 100 years (give or take a few) and he was being ridden by my grandmother's favorite jockey since Pat Day retired (John McKee used to live across the street from her). Sadly, I justified my decision by thinking Barbaro might bounce (follow a win with a poor showing) from the Florida Derby. Unfortunately, Lawyer Ron was the one that flopped.

The worst part is that I also gave Lawyer Ron to Phil, and I'll probably hear him gripe about not giving him the winner (if it was easy, I'd handicap for a living). If it makes you feel better, Phil, I probably dropped more money on the race than you did.

Day Two Thoughts

One thing that I find interesting is the Sean Salisbury segment during the draft where he's sitting with four NFL veterans (Trent Green, Torry Holt, William Henderson and Shawne Merriman) who are smarter and more charismatic than he is (not that it's a stretch). What I find interesting is they are now calling them "The Experts", but when they originally did this a few years ago (hosted by Suzy Kolber), they were the "Future GMs". What was funny was that psycho Bill Romanowski was the only "Future GM" that dressed the part by wearing a suit. Washington tackle Jon Jansen wasn't too bad in business casual. Then there was Corey Chavous and another guy (I can't remember) who were wearing throwback jerseys, ball caps and all their bling while looking hungover which is exactly the look that NFL GMs are going for. It's nice to see ESPN must have told them there was a dress code as all the "Experts" are wearing suits (without ties).

Salisbury just said he was forced out before and he mentored the younger player. Who? Stan Humphries? I can't see anywhere on his career where he was the solid starter.

Some of the blurbs that ESPN was running next to draft picks was somewhat interesting. Such as Charlie Whitehurst being the first Clemson quarterback drafted since 1979. A factoid like that tells you something about Clemson developing quarterbacks. Then you get some like Davin Joseph being the first Oklahoma player taken in the first round by Tampa Bay since Lee Roy Selmon back in the 70s. What does that tell me? Nothing. Then there are some that are really stretching to make a point. They ran one that said Anthony Fasano was the highest drafted tight end for Dallas since Jason Witten in 2003. I'll ignore the fact that Fasano as the 53rd pick was drafted higher than Witten who was 69th which "since" doesn't make sense. However, even if they were right that still is a pointless fact. It was 2003. There has only been two drafts since then, but they're making it seem like it was the days of leather helmets.

Really, how did Suzy Kolber get this job? She just said Rudi Johnson had back to back one hundred yard seasons. Plus she has a nose like Elmo. And now she's doing another segment on Marcus Vick.

Denver drafts University of Louisville defensive end Elvis Dumervil. I was glad to see Gene Washington knew how to pronounce his name. One of my favorite all time drafts was when Brett Favre was taken and his name was butchered. Think no silent V.

Did they just say Tony Dungy was a name that came up as the next commissioner of the NFL? What crack was someone smoking on that one? Do they want the NFL to be the ratings champ during the regular season, but have the Super Bowl get worse ratings than the World Series? Even if he wasn't the great choke artist that he is, what does he bring to the table to make people think he could be the NFL commissioner? He doesn't even have real executive power on the teams he coaches. He's had strong GMs at both Tampa Bay (Rich McKay) and Indianapolis (Bill Polian). That thought is just nuts.

Interesting discussion about "character" by the Experts. I think Merriman was trying to make the best point that players see a difference between on field character and off field. Teams are more interested in off field character for PR reasons, while players are more concerned with on field. You never heard any teammate complaining about Michael Irvin, because while his off field life was always bordering on disaster, he always brought it on the field. Or more recently, think about the Minnesota "Love Boat" scandal which I've always said was a complete overreaction. The Vikings management joined the press in a tizzy over it, but the team played better after it. The players knew that getting a lapdance isn't going to affect their play on the field, so it's not an important issue. By the way, if I was a taxpayer in Minnesota, I would be pissed at the prosecutor who went to a jury trial (never cheap) and came away with a misdemeanor conviction against Moe Williams for groping a stripper where the kitchen staff might see it.

About time they showed the Rockettes. Why have the draft at Radio City Music Hall (actually, they stopped having it at Madison Square Gardens because MSG management helped kill the Jets plans for a downtown stadium) if you aren't going to show the Rockettes. Of course, they followed up sexy (Rockettes) with butch (WNBA), so obviously better planning is needed.

This isn't draft related, but it's about Tony Gonzalez. I finally read part of my ESPN magazine and discovered Gonzalez was on some celebrity cooking show where he lost to Cindy Margolis. The thing is he apparently tied her when the results were first read, but the producers redid the ending to make Margolis the winner. I wonder if they thought Margolis' massive mammaries were more photogenic?

Interesting. Louisville linebacker Brandon Johnson joined fellow Cardinals Dumervil and Jason Spitz by getting drafted by Arizona. What I find interesting is that I thought he and Dumervil were going to be drafted after UL DT Montavious Stanley who is still on the board. I hope he goes soon so I can stop looking for local players until the final round since I don't see any other UL or UK players going before then.

Thoughts From The Rest of Day One

I thought Jimmy Williams was going to be a first round bust, but he fooled me. His attitude apparently caused him to drop to the second round. I see that ESPN had Williams doing an NFL draft promo, so I guess they thought he would have been in the first round. I remember a few years back when they did the same thing with Chris Simms because everyone thought he was moving up into the first round, but he ended up being the last pick on day one. I wish the NFL had put him in the Green Room. A ten hour wait is certainly funnier than a five hour one.

Green Bay trades Javon Walker for a second round pick after asking for a first round. It's pretty funny that they had been asking for a first round pick because last year, they didn't want to pay him a big contract based on two average years and one really good one. But they thought someone would give them a first round pick in exchange for Walker after he hurts his knee? Actually, I agreed with Green Bay when they didn't give him the contract. He needs to prove a bit more.

The Trey Wingo Schmo Show was discussing the fact that Vince Young will have a learning curve when he hits the NFL, and while Jaws thought he was fixable, the others were saying that he wouldn't have the time because he would be expected to play right away as a top five pick. In most cases, sure. However, Tennessee has been the exception before. Steve McNair was a number three pick just like Young, and Tennessee brought in Chris Chandler for two years to get McNair ready. I think this is an ideal situation for Young, because even though McNair is probably gone, they still have Billy Volek who could hold down the fort for a couple of years until Young is ready. Tennessee's rebuilding anyway, so why not wait on him. Young could be in trouble if he had gone to somewhere like Oakland who was hoping he would drop to them. If he wants to pick up bad habits, Aaron Brooks is the one to teach them.

ESPN.com sucks. Apparently, their servers can't keep up with the traffic when I try to go to their draft tracker. NFL.com isn't having a problem.

Lendale White goes to Tennessee. Think Vince Young will invite him over to watch a replay of the Rose Bowl?

Word is that Matt Leinart has lost at least $10 million by staying for his senior year. I think Rovell is wrong to say that we shouldn't presume Matt Leinart would go first last year. Apparently, he has forgotten that it was pretty common knowledge the 49ers were on hands and knees praying for Leinart to declare for the draft last year. They settled for Alex Smith, the luckiest man in football, because Leinart in the 2005 draft probably would have cost him that $10 million (actually more because he probably would have dropped to mid-teens). I think this is another indictment of the NFL rookie scale. There is no way you can say that a number 10 pick is worth that much more than a number 1.

Why should the Colts get a mulligan for last year as Chris Berman said? Las Vegas and ESPN may consider the Colts odds on favorites to win the AFC, but I don't. Sure they won 13 straight games to start the season, but that's their M.O. since Peyton Manning's second year. Win a lot of games. Lose in the playoffs. In the past seven years, they've won at least 10 games in six seasons. Four of those seasons were one and done in the playoffs. They've made one AFC Championship, and lost pretty badly. In fact, the closest the Colts have been to the Super Bowl since they had Johnny Unitas was in 1995 when the immortal Jim Harbaugh led Colts were within one dropped Hail Mary of winning. Oh, and that one season that they didn't win 10 games, they lost Edgerrin James to injury. You may have heard that James is now in Arizona.

Why are they talking about Marcus Vick on the first day? None of them even think he's going to be drafted. Which he shouldn't, but unlike the analysts, I'm not convinced someone won't take a chance on him. Although, Maurice Clarett and Ricky Williams have screwed a lot of players who may have character issues. Quite a few guys with such issues have dropped. Of course, this is nothing new. Randy Moss dropped a lot because of character. Warren Sapp dropped because he tested positive for pot. It seems like someone always tests positive for something at the combine, and I can't figure out why. The date of the combine isn't a secret. How tough is it to figure out when to stop and let your system clean out. My favorite this year was the Rams' third round pick Claude Wroten. This guy was busted for intent to distribute pot back in January (charges were dropped), and then he failed a drug test a month later at the combine. Let's see. I just got busted for drugs and will be at the combine soon. No reason to stop smoking weed now.

One final note of the day. I didn't think Scouts Inc did all that well in predicting the draft, but what they did afterward indicates there might be some credibility issues with them. They listed the top three players by position who are available for day two. Only problem was that Abdul Hodge from Iowa was listed as the top inside linebacker. Funny. A guy by that name, from that school and at that position was drafted by Green Bay in the third round.

First Round Thoughts

I thought it was interesting that Jets fans who were at the draft didn't seem too perturbed that they didn't draft Matt Leinart. The way it was being reported was that skipping Leinart would be a public relations disaster for the Jets. Apparently not. Jets' fans in the stands cheered the selection of Ferguson (and later booed Herm Edwards) and later did the "overrated" chant when Leinart was picked by Arizona. Granted, the guys who take the time to go to the draft may have more football knowledge and realize how much line help the Jets need. By the way, the Giants are supposed to have the much bigger New York fan base, so why don't they seem to have as big a presence at the draft?

Speaking of Leinart to Arizona, it's becoming a trend. Every time Kurt Warner seems to solidify with a new team, they draft a quarterback early. First, it was Eli Manning in New York. Now, Leinart.

The other interesting thing is that Leinart supposedly fired Leigh Steinberg because he believed he should be the number one pick and thought Tom Condon could get it done. Then, one of the reasons given for Leinart dropping in the mock drafts was the fact that changing agents late in the game makes NFL executives nervous. And suddenly, he's the 10th pick.

Why is Ray Lewis griping about not being able to make plays without his defensive tackles keeping the blockers off him? Isn't he God's gift to defense? Shouldn't he be able to knock all five offensive linemen on their butt? Maybe he wants someone in front of him to mask his declining skills.

When Merrill Hoge was talking about Antonio Cromartie (a bit of a project at cornerback drafted in the first round by San Diego), he said that the highlight films showed Cromartie making interceptions of poor passes which he won't see in the NFL. Does Hoge watch the NFL anymore? Aaron Brooks threw a pass to the referee standing behind him, and he's projected to start for the Raiders.

ESPN really covered themselves in glory with their little Sportscenter break-in where they said Vince Young would get to play with his good friend Steve McNair at Tennessee. Let's see. I know that McNair hasn't been allowed to work out at the Titans facility because they are most likely going to dump him. Shouldn't ESPN know that?

I had an interesting thought during Sean Salibury's interviews with Trent Green. ESPN should fire Salibury and hire Green. Not only is he a better QB (Salisbury's five year career numbers were 3824 yards and 19 TDs; Green averaged 4023 yards and 22 TDs in each of his five KC seasons), he doesn't come across as a dick.

Do they let the guys waiting in the Green Room drink? I think they should have an open bar and a laptop for the players. Leinart really didn't have to wait long, but wouldn't Aaron Rodgers' five hour wait last year have been so much funnier if he got hammered and started surfing porn? Or asked Suzy Kolber for a lap dance (which would have been an improvement over her interview skills)?

Thank God. When they said the Steelers traded up with the Giants, I was really hoping it was for Santonio Holmes and not Lendale White. Maybe all the problems (laziness, getting fat) White has had since the end of the season are the result of a hamstring pull that he had diagnosed by a chiropractor, but it's been reported that White blew a pre-draft drug test.

Michael Irvin is such an idiot. He felt the need to ridicule Mario Williams by asking what N.C. State's record was last year after a third member of their defense was drafted in the first round. It was 6-5, but it doesn't mean the defense (or more specifically the defensive line) was the main problem. By the way, why didn't he ask that about Florida State since they had four defensive players taken in the first round, but lost to N.C. State? His drug ravaged brain can't process information as fast as a doorknob.

Now, Ohio State just had their fourth first round pick. Considering that they are losing all their starting linebackers and most of their defensive backfield, I'm not sure why so many are picking them as the number one team next year. Granted, at Ohio State, you re-load, but still, that's a big hit.

Okay. Once again, doesn't anyone at ESPN do research? They are discussing the possibility of Lendale White dropping out of the first round, and not one of them mentioned a newspaper report of him flunking a drug test. Trey Wingo and his staff of dummies do mention character injuries, but they only mention him not working out. The workout issue dropped him to later in the first round. The drug test report is dropping him out. It doesn't matter if it's true or not. It's causing a problem for him. Finally, Ed Werner mentions it. Wouldn't it have been better when they were having a group discussion on it?

The First Pick

I'm shocked. Absolutely shocked about the Texans drafting Mario Williams. Not that they took Williams over Reggie Bush, because as I said before, I don't think there are any sure things in the draft. No, what shocks me is how bent out of shape so many analysts are because they didn't take Bush. I thought Bush as the second coming of Gale Sayers was a stretch, but I wasn't aware that he was the second coming of Sayers, Barry Sanders, and Jesus Christ himself. This is the NFL draft. Probably a third of the people drafted in the first round are going to underachieve and some will be absolute flops. It doesn't necessarily have to be caused by lack of NFL ability (Aundray Bruce, 1st pick 1988) or attitude (Ryan Leaf, 2nd pick 1998). I'm still not convinced that Ki-Jana Carter was a flop, because who knows what would have happened if he doesn't blow out his knee before playing a regular season game. Yet, predicting greatness in the NFL for a college player is silly. So many things can derail it. Even consensus picks can flop. San Diego wasn't the only one fooled by Leaf. Every team in the country had Leaf and Peyton Manning 1 and 2. Yet, it still doesn't stop the fevered hyperbole. The worst was network clown Michael Irvin (no surprise there) who had the gall to say the Texans just gave up 2000 yards and 25 to 30 touchdowns. Apparently per year. If Bush does that, he'll be the greatest NFL player of all time. Does this mean IrvinDoes that mean Irvin thinks Bush is better than Emmitt Smith? After all, even assuming the 2000 is total yards, Emmitt Smith only broke 2000 twice (never rushed for 2000). Smith also only had one season of 25 touchdowns, and only had more than 15 three times. Granted, he wasn't alone. Someone pointed out the Bills once took a defensive end with the first pick (Bruce Smith) who was an essential piece of their four straight Super Bowl appearances. Tom Jackson said Bruce Smith wasn't as important to them as Thurman Thomas. Of course, that could make it seem smarter to draft a defensive player. Thomas was a second round pick and the eighth running back taken. It might be easier to find a franchise back in later rounds. Actually, the new coach of the Texans, Gary Kubiak, came over from Denver where they specialize in turning late rounders into stars. Does that mean Bush will flop? Nope. He could easily be better than Williams. He could be the greatest player to play the game, but projecting a Hall of Fame career before he steps foot on an NFL field is ludicrous.

I was actually a little surprised the Texans took Williams over D'Brickashaw Ferguson since their offensive line is getting David Carr killed. Of course, taking Ferguson number one would have brought about my other pet peeve about the draft - THE REACH. It's a case of a team targeting a player they really like (good fit for system or fills a need) and taking them before the "consensus" indicates he should go. The conventional wisdom is that if you want a player most think should go around the 25th pick, you shouldn't "reach" and take him with the 17th pick. You should trade down and get him later. The Rams did it this year when they targeted Tye Hill who was considered a "reach" at 11, but traded down and got him at 15. However, the reason I get ticked is because when the "pundits" say a team could have traded down and drafted the guy, they neglect two things - 1) someone else right behind you could target him 2) someone has to be willing to trade with you. If you want someone, why is taking him a few picks ahead of where anyone else will take him so bad? Does it really make sense that Ferguson was considered a reach with the first pick, but still considered a top five talent? Besides, take the case of Lofa Tatupu who the Seahawks took in the second round. Most analysts projected him as a third rounder so Seattle was roundly criticized for taking him that early even though he fit a need and the system. Considering how well he played during their run to the Super Bowl, he should have been a first rounder.

Football, Football, Football

Thank God for this week. Usually the post March Madness sports scene looks like crap. I do get Keeneland and the Triple Crown, but unfortunately the races go quickly (and I lose money on them). I do catch some NBA playoffs, but since the Jazz haven't been in for a few years, I don't care too much. I would rather watch my toenails grow than watch baseball. I've been watching quite a bit of NFL Europe and Arena football which is always good fun, because I can finally find out what happened to Glenn Pakulak who used to punt the Hell out of the ball for UK. But this week turned it up a notch. Started off with UL's spring football game on Friday and will end with the NFL Draft this weekend. I get to watch the future of my favorite college team, and then comes a two day orgy of football highlights with the possibility of Mel Kiper getting into a pissing match with a team executive like when he said the Colts drafting Trev Alberts was a joke. Gotta go with Mel on that one.

Love the draft because it's so funny to see all the first rounders being talked up while guessing which ones will be busts this year (I'm betting Jimmy Williams from Virginia Tech). Every year several "players of the future" flop. Actually, I look at the three biggest names in the draft, and I wouldn't bet on any of them being a top NFL player. Reggie Bush is exciting to watch, but I'm not sure he can last as an every down back. If he can't be an every down back, you've got another Dante Hall, not another Gale Sayers. Nothing against Hall, but would anyone draft him in the first round? Rumor is that the Texans have made a deal with NC State defensive end Mario Williams which means Bush was probably asking too much money. Contrary to speculation, the questions about his parents living in a mansion on an agent's dime probably played no role in his drop. After all, why do the Texans care if Bush was violating NCAA rules? However, I think it's a good move for Houston, although probably not too popular with the home folks. But so what? I think Williams will improve the Texans more than Bush.

Speaking of fun to watch, Vince Young certainly has the pizzazz. I loved watching him play in college, but the NFL is a whole different game. The closest approximation to Young has always been Michael Vick who has filled the highlight reels but he certainly hasn't been that effective. Strangely enough the NFL managed to hold their playoffs last year without Vick. Running against college kids is one thing, but in the NFL, it can get you hurt. When Vick broke his leg, the deed wasn't done by a Ray Lewis or Michael Urlacher. It was Adalius Thomas. Not so primetime. The other question about Young is can he learn to throw? Vick really hasn't. Young's got a good arm, but he also pretty much played out of a shotgun and has a funky motion. Still, I think he's got the most (cliche alert) UPSIDE. If he can learn to throw, there's no limit to how good he can be. Unfortunately for him, he'll probably be drafted by a crap team that will throw him out early and he'll never develop. A shame.

The guy I don't see much upside in is Matt Leinart. Some are hoping that he's the next Carson Palmer, but that's crap. I don't think he's near as good as Palmer. In fact, I find irony in the fact that the Jets are reportedly hoping Leinart falls to them with the fourth pick, because the guy he reminds me of the most is Chad Pennington. Accurate arm, but average arm strength. That means he could have a good career, but I don't see him developing into an elite quarterback. Even before his arm was hanging by a thread Pennington was never what I saw as a top tier quarterback. I found it interesting that when asked why he should be a high pick, Leinart basically said because he won the Heisman and only lost two games in his college career. That's slightly better than Jason White who I think had three losses and won the Heisman. He didn't even get drafted. How impressed should I be about Leinart when he was quarterbacking the most talent stocked team in the league? Think of it this way. I'm not sure Jay Cutler is a better quarterback, and if he was put on USC that they would have still only lost two games, but I bet they still win a bunch. Put Leinart on Vanderbilt, and he might have gotten them that extra game to make a bowl last year, but I wouldn't bet money on it. One thing I would bet on is that Leinart wouldn't have finished with only two losses.

More Odds & Ends

I might have been more interested in baseball's opening day, but it was baseball and I had a nap to take.

Hindsight being 20/20, I sure am glad I never had to go to summer camp.

Or went to the john at this Denny's.

I don't know if anyone is really following the Hollywood PI case surrounding Anthony Pellicano, but I just stumbled across the most tragic story of them all. Director John McTiernan is being charged for having Pellicano wiretap a business partner. Sadly, the business partner wasn't from movies like Die Hard or The Hunt For The Red October. It was for the Rollerball remake. He could be going to jail for a bomb that could charitably be called a "Chris Klein vehicle".

Don't go to this site. It can be addictive.

This is a big ass rabbit.

If you ever wondered why Johnny can't read, it could be caused by the fact that many of the people running our education system have the common sense of an eggplant.

Am I the only one who thinks a whole lot of NFL players will become involved in holistic medicine if Ricky Williams wins his drug suspension appeal?

When I tell you I really like a horse, don't let Jon Connor talk you out of it.

They Said it:
I'm not going to get too far into the Duke lacrosse scandal until more info is known, although I'm surprised how quickly there was an assumption of guilt in the case. However, there was one quote from this article that confounded me. It was about 100 students who met the Duke president to discuss (harangue) the situation with him. Someone actually bragged "That students got up at 8:30 in the morning shows you the level of concern". Nothing says commitment to social justice like waking up well after most people have gone to work.

After a fight on Saturday night, Don King actually said "For the integrity of the sport, that has to be a disqualification" when discussing a melee that broke out. Normally, when the words "Don King", "boxing" and "integrity" are used in the same sentence, you find the word "lack".

I really shouldn't be surprised that our education system is being run by people like that guy in Indianapolis. After all, it starts at the universities. This story is from England, but there are similar stories in the states. A professor actually said that the London subway bombings that killed over 50 people weren't "terrorism", but a form of "demonstration". Not only that, but calling it terrorism does nothing but "demonise" those who boarded a civilian transport with strap on bombs in an effort to kill as many people as possible. To think I was wasting my sympathy on those who were murdered. I wish someone would go to his office and administer one of those low blows from the boxing story to him. Don't think of it as an "act of violence". Think of it as demonstration against his gross stupidity.