Opinion: Tenure rules should be tweaked, but gently
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
BY DAVID B. PUSHKIN
THE RECORD
http://www.northjersey.com/news/opinions/op-ed/tenure_083110.html
David B. Pushkin of East Rutherford is a research consultant with the Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative at the University of British Columbia and chairman of the American Chemical Society’s subdivision for chemists with disabilities.
REGARDING “Calls mount for a N.J. tenure system based on teacher skills” and “New efforts to evaluate teachers,” The Record, Aug. 22):
Having taught at the secondary and college levels since 1984, I’m of two minds regarding teacher tenure and the removal from the classroom and dismissal of ineffective educators. On one hand, it is vital that school systems dismiss incompetent and abusive educators. On the other hand, there’s the question: “What defines effectiveness?”
In my 2001 book, Teacher training: A reference handbook (ABC-CLIO Publishers), I discussed the historical background, as well as inherent pros and cons of teacher tenure. I also devoted much space discussing foundation building for effective life-long educators, as well as how to evaluate them.
The key premise is that every educator is an intellectual individual with his and her own baseline perspective of what the teaching-learning process looks like. Extensive educational research has shown it takes approximately three to five years for educators to evolve and develop their pedagogical approach, and yet tenure is awarded at the early end of that development process.
What does this mean? Tenure could very well be given to an educator who is still developing and possibly not for the better. While this may be the exception rather than the rule, it does raise the question as to the wisdom of awarding tenure after three years of classroom service as opposed to four.
Let’s not stick our heads in the sand about tenure. There’s a very good reason to keep the tenure system, albeit in tweaked form. While tenure protects jobs, educators still need protection from politics — not theirs, but the politics of others.
Teachers targeted
Throughout my career I have witnessed educators become targets of students, parents, colleagues and superiors for their own teaching practices simply because they differed from the dominant culture. It didn’t matter if the teaching practices were effective or ineffective. Education (public, private or parochial/religious) in general is resistant to significant change. Any educator who sticks out is at risk, because a system at rest tends to remain at rest, and education systems follow the laws of motion in a desire to maintain the status quo.
As we look around us, we see a nation that seeks to quash differences more than celebrate them, and for all the anti-bias legislation on the books, the sad reality is that education systems do discriminate, be it towards one’s ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation or physical ability.
But the decision on when to award tenure underlies the main flaw in almost every effort by state and local officials to improve teaching and school quality: one-size-fits-all policies. Why must all educators receive tenure after three years, or four or five?
Perhaps it might make more sense to work with a sliding scale and award tenure when an educator is clearly ready to earn it. If an educator can’t earn tenure after five years, perhaps that’s a sign he or she needs to consider leaving the profession?
How do we evaluate for effectiveness? While most legislative concerns focus on the elementary grades and statewide assessments, the outcome is a more generic one-size-fits-all policy that is imposed on middle and high school educators. This is very myopic.
Knowing what works and where
As a chemistry and physics educator, I know that what “works” in my learning environment doesn’t necessarily work for all chemistry or physics educators, or math educators, or history educators, or educators working with tweens, or educators working with young children.
And yet, New Jersey, just like many other states, insists on creating policies that directly contradict years of educational research. Why?
Because it’s more convenient and efficient. But that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s effective.
I’m all for reform, I’m all for making the teaching profession better, and I’m all for seeing our state’s schools be the best they can become. But not at the expense of supporting professional development across the spectrum of individual educators who serve a spectrum of learners, age groups and academic subjects.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Monday, August 23, 2010
Silence Really is Golden - Sports Thoughts for August 23, 2010
The sports world never ceases to amaze or disappoint me...
We all know New York Jets head coach Rex Ryan has a personality to fit his 300-pound frame, including a spectrum of colorful language
Well-documented by HBO in Hard Knocks. Well, along comes former Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Indianapolis Colts head coach, and current NBC Sports analyst, Tony Dungy, who not only expresses his displeasure with Ryan’s use of expletives, but goes as far as to suggest an intervention by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. Holy smokes and golly gee whiz!
I couldn’t agree more with New York Daily News columnist Bob Raissman on how Dungy’s comments smacks a tad of hypocrisy. However, I see the comments from a slightly different reference point. Yes, Dungy stepped over the line, but he was directly questioned about his view on Hard Knocks by ESPN Radio’s Dan Patrick. What do you do when someone directly asks, “well, what do you think?”? Offer something completely cheesy and incredulous like, well, Rex is one of G-d’s children, and we all know we’re supposed to love our neighbor?
C’mon, let’s get real here... Dungy’s sociopolitical views should be separate from his Mr. Rogers persona. Keep in mind that Dungy does not come from a broken home, an impoverished background, or an inner-city upbringing. Dungy’s parents were both middle-class professionals. Heck, his father was a biology professor in suburban Oakland, Michigan. In fact, Dungy’s roots are likely more dignified than Ryan’s, considering his father is irascible former coach, Buddy Ryan. Does it bother me that Dungy believes in a sociopolitical paradigm that’s homophobic and exclusionary? Of course it does, just as that same sociopolitical paradigm’s passive anti-Semitic, racist and anti-Civil Rights agenda bothers me. But we’re in America, the land of the free and the brave, as well as opinionated, and as we all well know, everyone’s entitled to their opinions, no matter how bigoted and hurtful.
But that doesn’t necessarily mean Dungy can’t say that Ryan’s vocabulary gives him the willies.
In fact, I’m not even bothered by Dungy saying that he’d never hire Rex Ryan because of his foul mouth. If Dungy wants a defensive whiz who can keep his language clean, good for him. Keep in mind that Tom Landry had Ernie Stautner, Gene Stallings, and Mike Ditka as assistants in Dallas, and none of them came close to Coach Landry’s G-rated vocabulary. Joe Gibbs had Dan Henning, Jim Hanifan, and Joe Bugel as assistants in Washington, and all of those guys could curse with the best of them. My point is if the sewerage from one’s mouth disqualifies an assistant coach from employment, Landry and Gibbs might never have won their combined five Super Bowl trophies.
Case in point, years ago I was a high school chemistry and physics teacher (and football coach) in Florida, and the principal I worked for was a blatant racist, bigot and anti-Semite. For four years I thought my name was “New York Jew Boy,” and on several occasions I witnessed this man reprimand young African-American males using the N-word. And yet, he was a church-going man... A Christian man...
But for Dungy to suggest Commissioner Goodell get involved with Ryan and discuss his vocabulary was a tad ridiculous. Yes, I’d love to see a little less profanity in our American culture, but this really isn’t something to legislate in professional football. So, while I wish Rex would simply tone down, I really wish Dungy didn’t go overboard on The Dan Patrick Show.
Haven’t we seen this type of contrast before? Sinners against the saints? Catholics against the convicts, as in Notre Dame against Miami in college football? Can’t everyone just get along... Or at least shut the $%#@&! up?
In case you didn’t know, LeBron James has informed the hating world that he’s making mental notes, and taking names and numbers of everyone who’s talked trash or dissed him this summer since his Decision. Wooooo.... I’m so scared. Okay, big fella... Count me in on your you-know-what list, since I’ve also scolded you in previous columns. In fact, you can take on me and Charles Barkley at the same time since I agree 100 percent with his assessment of your “punk” moves.
Isn’t it just a tad nippy in the air these days? We better watch out. We better not cry. We better not pout, because LeBron James is making his list and checking it twice... Yeah, yeah... Sorry kiddo... This Jew doesn’t worry about Santa Claus coming to town, or the Easter Bunny, for that matter. Oh, and while you’re working on your revenge list, or whatever you want to call it, could you STOP referring to yourself in the third person every time you open your yap to share your hurt feelings? Did anyone ever teach you about pronouns at St. Vincent–St. Mary High School in Akron?!
Could we finally stop this Cold War between Washington Redskins head coach Mike Shanahan and defensive lineman Albert Haynesworth? Yes, I know Fat Albert is lazy and overpaid, but now we hear that Haynesworth may have a degenerative condition known as Rhabdomyolysis, a condition that causes the rapid breakdown of skeletal muscle tissue and adversely affects the kidneys. My first questions are:
(1) How long has Haynesworth had this condition?
(2) Did he know about this condition before he accepted his $21-million roster bonus in March?
(3) When did the Redskins learn of his condition?
(4) Did Shanahan know the risks to Haynesworth before subjecting him to conditioning drills?
While this condition may explain why Haynesworth has struggled to be in football shape so far in training camp, we still don’t have confirmation of the diagnosis, much less a prognosis relative to Haynesworth’s ability to play this season and beyond, not do we know what his long-term prognosis is, perhaps more important, considering Haynesworth is only 29 years old. While physical trauma is one cause of Rhabdomyolysis, there are plenty of questions to ask regarding the football or non-football related etiology in this case. It’s a little more than nine years since the heat stroke death of Minnesota Vikings offensive tackle Kory Stringer, so if the diagnosis is indeed valid, this is something not to be taken lightly by the Redskins. Furthermore, if the diagnosis is indeed valid, Mike Shanahan needs to call an immediate truce with Haynesworth and focus on Haynesworth’s recovery rather than his disruption to the new world order in Redskinland. If ever there’s a case that may require NFLPA intervention, this may be it. Given Shanahan’s unceremonious dismissal in Denver two years ago, he can ill-afford another hit to his reputation and credibility. Maybe I’m making more of this story than warranted, but we don’t need another Kory Stringer tragedy, and the Redskins’ new management can’t afford a potential lawsuit to short-circuit its rebuilding agenda.
Is Mets closer, er... ineligible closer, Francisco Rodriguez, still sorry about his family squabble from last Wednesday night?
Let me get this straight... K-Rod smacks his “father-in-law” silly, spends a night in the pokey, gets charged with third-degree assault and kicked out of his Long Island home, and the MLBPA restricts the Mets to only a 2-game suspension without pay? Then, after he pitches a scoreless inning three days later, it’s determined he tore his right thumb during the beat-down, but the MLBPA is filing a complaint against the Mets for suspending him without pay for the remainder of the season due to this non-baseball injury?
REALLY?! What exactly does it take for the MLBPA to tell a player he’s radioactive and on his own? Obviously not steroids. Obviously not domestic violence. Obviously not alcohol or drug abuse. Obviously not drunk driving. Would murder work, or would the players’ union find a way to protect a player’s salary until his conviction was held up after a Supreme Court appeal? Seriously... When does it stop?
And let’s give three cheers to your favorite blockheads and mine, former Red Sox, Blue Jays, Yankees, and Astros pitcher Roger Clemens and his trusty attorney, Rusty Hardin. Yep, the feds finally handed out multiple indictment counts against The Rocket for his fictional account about steroid use to Congress, and according to Clemens and Hardin, everything’s going exactly according to plan, and The Rocket will have his day in court. His day for what? A conviction for lying to the government? An opportunity to consult Martha Stewart on penitentiary cell décor? What’s going to be Clemens’ defense strategy: throw broken bat shards at the heads of the prosecution, judge, and jury members, then tell everyone “I thought it was the ball”?!
So Brett Favre’s back in the Vikings fold and all’s hunky dory as they gear up for another run towards the Super Bowl, right? Well, not if you heard back-up quarterback Tavaris Jackson tell reporters how he really doesn’t care if Favre is in Minnesota or not, or the anonymous players telling reporters that Favre doesn’t “trust” head coach Brad Childress running the offense. First, let me be the first to tell Tavaris Jackson that the Vikings don’t trust HIM as the starting quarterback. Second, after seeing his performance during the first two preseason games, let me offer these words to Mr. Jackson: Sage Rosenfels will be the starting quarterback before YOU are. Third, let me suggest Tavaris Jackson rent in the Twin Cities, not own.
Speaking of home owners, is anyone overly surprised Denver Nuggets forward Carmelo Anthony put his Denver home on the market last week? Is anyone seriously expecting the Nuggets to re-sign him after his contract expires at the end of the 2010-2011 NBA season?
Speaking of the Nuggets, how many of you said “yeah, right” when Miami Dolphins wide receiver Brandon Marshall told reporters that if the NFL has a lockout for the 2011 season he’d consider playing hoops for the Nuggets or Miami Heat? First, I didn’t know Marshall was welcome back in Denver. Second, isn’t there a limit as to how many “punks” are allowed to play on any single NBA roster? For some reason, I thought the Heat already reached their quota last month.
I know... Maybe I should stop running my mouth. But why should I if nobody else seems to be?
We all know New York Jets head coach Rex Ryan has a personality to fit his 300-pound frame, including a spectrum of colorful language
Well-documented by HBO in Hard Knocks. Well, along comes former Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Indianapolis Colts head coach, and current NBC Sports analyst, Tony Dungy, who not only expresses his displeasure with Ryan’s use of expletives, but goes as far as to suggest an intervention by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. Holy smokes and golly gee whiz!
I couldn’t agree more with New York Daily News columnist Bob Raissman on how Dungy’s comments smacks a tad of hypocrisy. However, I see the comments from a slightly different reference point. Yes, Dungy stepped over the line, but he was directly questioned about his view on Hard Knocks by ESPN Radio’s Dan Patrick. What do you do when someone directly asks, “well, what do you think?”? Offer something completely cheesy and incredulous like, well, Rex is one of G-d’s children, and we all know we’re supposed to love our neighbor?
C’mon, let’s get real here... Dungy’s sociopolitical views should be separate from his Mr. Rogers persona. Keep in mind that Dungy does not come from a broken home, an impoverished background, or an inner-city upbringing. Dungy’s parents were both middle-class professionals. Heck, his father was a biology professor in suburban Oakland, Michigan. In fact, Dungy’s roots are likely more dignified than Ryan’s, considering his father is irascible former coach, Buddy Ryan. Does it bother me that Dungy believes in a sociopolitical paradigm that’s homophobic and exclusionary? Of course it does, just as that same sociopolitical paradigm’s passive anti-Semitic, racist and anti-Civil Rights agenda bothers me. But we’re in America, the land of the free and the brave, as well as opinionated, and as we all well know, everyone’s entitled to their opinions, no matter how bigoted and hurtful.
But that doesn’t necessarily mean Dungy can’t say that Ryan’s vocabulary gives him the willies.
In fact, I’m not even bothered by Dungy saying that he’d never hire Rex Ryan because of his foul mouth. If Dungy wants a defensive whiz who can keep his language clean, good for him. Keep in mind that Tom Landry had Ernie Stautner, Gene Stallings, and Mike Ditka as assistants in Dallas, and none of them came close to Coach Landry’s G-rated vocabulary. Joe Gibbs had Dan Henning, Jim Hanifan, and Joe Bugel as assistants in Washington, and all of those guys could curse with the best of them. My point is if the sewerage from one’s mouth disqualifies an assistant coach from employment, Landry and Gibbs might never have won their combined five Super Bowl trophies.
Case in point, years ago I was a high school chemistry and physics teacher (and football coach) in Florida, and the principal I worked for was a blatant racist, bigot and anti-Semite. For four years I thought my name was “New York Jew Boy,” and on several occasions I witnessed this man reprimand young African-American males using the N-word. And yet, he was a church-going man... A Christian man...
But for Dungy to suggest Commissioner Goodell get involved with Ryan and discuss his vocabulary was a tad ridiculous. Yes, I’d love to see a little less profanity in our American culture, but this really isn’t something to legislate in professional football. So, while I wish Rex would simply tone down, I really wish Dungy didn’t go overboard on The Dan Patrick Show.
Haven’t we seen this type of contrast before? Sinners against the saints? Catholics against the convicts, as in Notre Dame against Miami in college football? Can’t everyone just get along... Or at least shut the $%#@&! up?
In case you didn’t know, LeBron James has informed the hating world that he’s making mental notes, and taking names and numbers of everyone who’s talked trash or dissed him this summer since his Decision. Wooooo.... I’m so scared. Okay, big fella... Count me in on your you-know-what list, since I’ve also scolded you in previous columns. In fact, you can take on me and Charles Barkley at the same time since I agree 100 percent with his assessment of your “punk” moves.
Isn’t it just a tad nippy in the air these days? We better watch out. We better not cry. We better not pout, because LeBron James is making his list and checking it twice... Yeah, yeah... Sorry kiddo... This Jew doesn’t worry about Santa Claus coming to town, or the Easter Bunny, for that matter. Oh, and while you’re working on your revenge list, or whatever you want to call it, could you STOP referring to yourself in the third person every time you open your yap to share your hurt feelings? Did anyone ever teach you about pronouns at St. Vincent–St. Mary High School in Akron?!
Could we finally stop this Cold War between Washington Redskins head coach Mike Shanahan and defensive lineman Albert Haynesworth? Yes, I know Fat Albert is lazy and overpaid, but now we hear that Haynesworth may have a degenerative condition known as Rhabdomyolysis, a condition that causes the rapid breakdown of skeletal muscle tissue and adversely affects the kidneys. My first questions are:
(1) How long has Haynesworth had this condition?
(2) Did he know about this condition before he accepted his $21-million roster bonus in March?
(3) When did the Redskins learn of his condition?
(4) Did Shanahan know the risks to Haynesworth before subjecting him to conditioning drills?
While this condition may explain why Haynesworth has struggled to be in football shape so far in training camp, we still don’t have confirmation of the diagnosis, much less a prognosis relative to Haynesworth’s ability to play this season and beyond, not do we know what his long-term prognosis is, perhaps more important, considering Haynesworth is only 29 years old. While physical trauma is one cause of Rhabdomyolysis, there are plenty of questions to ask regarding the football or non-football related etiology in this case. It’s a little more than nine years since the heat stroke death of Minnesota Vikings offensive tackle Kory Stringer, so if the diagnosis is indeed valid, this is something not to be taken lightly by the Redskins. Furthermore, if the diagnosis is indeed valid, Mike Shanahan needs to call an immediate truce with Haynesworth and focus on Haynesworth’s recovery rather than his disruption to the new world order in Redskinland. If ever there’s a case that may require NFLPA intervention, this may be it. Given Shanahan’s unceremonious dismissal in Denver two years ago, he can ill-afford another hit to his reputation and credibility. Maybe I’m making more of this story than warranted, but we don’t need another Kory Stringer tragedy, and the Redskins’ new management can’t afford a potential lawsuit to short-circuit its rebuilding agenda.
Is Mets closer, er... ineligible closer, Francisco Rodriguez, still sorry about his family squabble from last Wednesday night?
Let me get this straight... K-Rod smacks his “father-in-law” silly, spends a night in the pokey, gets charged with third-degree assault and kicked out of his Long Island home, and the MLBPA restricts the Mets to only a 2-game suspension without pay? Then, after he pitches a scoreless inning three days later, it’s determined he tore his right thumb during the beat-down, but the MLBPA is filing a complaint against the Mets for suspending him without pay for the remainder of the season due to this non-baseball injury?
REALLY?! What exactly does it take for the MLBPA to tell a player he’s radioactive and on his own? Obviously not steroids. Obviously not domestic violence. Obviously not alcohol or drug abuse. Obviously not drunk driving. Would murder work, or would the players’ union find a way to protect a player’s salary until his conviction was held up after a Supreme Court appeal? Seriously... When does it stop?
And let’s give three cheers to your favorite blockheads and mine, former Red Sox, Blue Jays, Yankees, and Astros pitcher Roger Clemens and his trusty attorney, Rusty Hardin. Yep, the feds finally handed out multiple indictment counts against The Rocket for his fictional account about steroid use to Congress, and according to Clemens and Hardin, everything’s going exactly according to plan, and The Rocket will have his day in court. His day for what? A conviction for lying to the government? An opportunity to consult Martha Stewart on penitentiary cell décor? What’s going to be Clemens’ defense strategy: throw broken bat shards at the heads of the prosecution, judge, and jury members, then tell everyone “I thought it was the ball”?!
So Brett Favre’s back in the Vikings fold and all’s hunky dory as they gear up for another run towards the Super Bowl, right? Well, not if you heard back-up quarterback Tavaris Jackson tell reporters how he really doesn’t care if Favre is in Minnesota or not, or the anonymous players telling reporters that Favre doesn’t “trust” head coach Brad Childress running the offense. First, let me be the first to tell Tavaris Jackson that the Vikings don’t trust HIM as the starting quarterback. Second, after seeing his performance during the first two preseason games, let me offer these words to Mr. Jackson: Sage Rosenfels will be the starting quarterback before YOU are. Third, let me suggest Tavaris Jackson rent in the Twin Cities, not own.
Speaking of home owners, is anyone overly surprised Denver Nuggets forward Carmelo Anthony put his Denver home on the market last week? Is anyone seriously expecting the Nuggets to re-sign him after his contract expires at the end of the 2010-2011 NBA season?
Speaking of the Nuggets, how many of you said “yeah, right” when Miami Dolphins wide receiver Brandon Marshall told reporters that if the NFL has a lockout for the 2011 season he’d consider playing hoops for the Nuggets or Miami Heat? First, I didn’t know Marshall was welcome back in Denver. Second, isn’t there a limit as to how many “punks” are allowed to play on any single NBA roster? For some reason, I thought the Heat already reached their quota last month.
I know... Maybe I should stop running my mouth. But why should I if nobody else seems to be?
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Mad as hell amidst the overflowing testosterone - Sports Thoughts for August 15, 2010
Okay, I’m already getting old and grumpy, but there’s so much to annoy me lately it’s ridiculous. I really can’t say I’ve been inspired much by that idiot Jet Blue flight attendant, but I suppose I’ve reached my threshold.
Rather than drop F-bombs like Jets head coach Rex Ryan, or smack around a family member (or common-law family member) like Mets closer Francisco Rodriguez, or kick folks with my cleats like Reds starter Johnny Cueto, I’m going to use what I’ve learned from anger management and simply swing my big fluffy pillow while I vent…
WHOOMP!
Memo to Darrelle Revis: Let me get this straight... No matter what the Jets offer you, you won’t settle for anything less than $16-million per season. Fine... And when next year and the year after come, and other defensive players exceed your salary, are you going to hold out again and hold your team hostage? Just a thought…
Are you underpaid in terms of your $1-million 2010 salary? Yes. Have you outperformed your rookie contract? Probably. Do you and your Rockland County attorneys, Neil Schwartz and Jonathan Feinsod, have the right to throw everyone into turmoil because you worry too much about the salaries of other NFL players? NO. Unless I’m mistaken, you already signed a 6-year, $36-million contract as a rookie in 2007, and the last I checked, you work for the New York Jets. They don’t work for you.
For those who think Jets owner Woody Johnson is simply pocketing as much money as he can without paying for the talent that brings fans into seats and pay for new stadium PSLs, I believe you’re not looking at the broader picture. If I was paying for a PSL I'd want that money to go to Woody Johnson, Revis as well as all the other players seeking long-term deals, specifically center Nick Mangold and linebacker David Harris. I’ve said for weeks that the Jets and Revis would be smart to take $15-million from the $20-million still due on Revis’ rookie contract and fold it into this year as a guaranteed $16-million salary, THEN use remaining $5-million towards new long-term deal. Do I think that new contract should average $16-million per season? Of course not; both parties need to think about the future overall team salary structure and how to sustain a winning team with as many core players as possible.
Revis has to learn to give a little to get his due, and his holdout was not wise in many respects, his second in four years. Former running back Leon Washington's gone because he cut his nose off despite his face with greed towards last year's contract offer and an antagonistic attitude towards Jets when he got injured and his money plans blew up.
Revis is a great cornerback and part of Jets defense, but it's still the New York Jets, not the New York Revises, and I do believe Rex Ryan’s defensive scheme can still succeed at a relatively high level without Revis. Let’s face it, as great a talent as Revis is, there are still ten other players on the field playing defense and to be a great unit requires all eleven position players working together. If you doubt my theory, take a look at the $16-million man out west, Oakland Raiders cornerback Nnamdi Asomugha. The last I checked, the Raiders didn’t necessarily have one of the best defenses in the NFL lat season (26th overall, 29th against the rush, 7th against the pass), so one man doesn’t make an entire defensive unit.
Getting back to the Revis situation, BOTH sides are in the wrong on this stalemate, but Revis is more in the wrong because he's reading and listening to too much media praise and it's warping his perspective. Sorry, but as a former player from 30 years ago, I don't see the issue as simply "give the star the money he deserves." He's one of many important stars and needs to better comprehend the grand scheme of things in terms of the pot of money and how it's shared in a salary cap era, which will still exist when the new CBA is settled.
But I’m very happy Revis, Schwartz, Jets GM Mike Tannenbaum and Woody Johnson finally decided to suspend the public spat through the media and work quietly between themselves. I’ve more than made my views clear on Revis’ holdout and contract, and for the sake of maintaining a healthy blood pressure, I choose not to vent further.
WHOOMP!
Memo to Rex Ryan: Haven’t we discussed your inclination towards profanity before, back when you were photographed flipping some slob the bird at a mixed martial arts event in Miami during Super Bowl week? So now you treat viewers of the first episode of HBO’s Hard Knocks to a steady stream of F-bombs? More than one Jets fan counted approximately three-dozen during the first ten minutes of an hour-long show. Were they really necessary?
I don’t even get HBO on my television, and I saw so many tweets from folks watching the show, there’s no point to me downloading a podcast for myself. Everyone spoiled the $#@&*%! suspense for me.
Now don’t get me wrong… I can swear like the best foul-mouthed Philistine American society has to offer, but I also know there’s a time and place for unleashing expletives. Just like some of today’s lowbrow comedians (and I use the term graciously), Rex seems to use profanity for profanity’s sake, catering to the lowest common denominator of sports fans and HBO viewers. C’mon, coach… you can do better than this.
And is “My mom’s the only one really disappointed that I care about” your idea of an apology?! Sheesh!
Your blue language embarrassed your mother, an education professor in Canada. Folks at ESPN even commented that your language likely made your own father, former Eagles and Cardinals head coach Buddy Ryan, blush. Now that we know you can verbalize profanity as well as express it with sign language, let’s see you show viewers and fans how articulate and intelligent you really are, which is MUCH more than what you demonstrated last Wednesday night.
Oh, and could you spare us all the grandstanding overtures about Revis’ holdout and your ideas for détente? You really don’t want to get sucked into this mess, for your own sanity. Yes, I understand and appreciate your willingness to help out and get talks out of their inertial state, but just stick to coaching the players currently in training camp and on the field.
WHOOMP!
What a week for our New York Mets. On Tuesday, ace pitcher Johan Santana was slapped with a civil suit charging rape going back to an October 2009 incident on a Fort Myers, Florida golf course. On Wednesday night, after a 6-2 home loss to the Colorado Rockies, closer Francisco Rodriguez beat up his girlfriend's father in the family room adjacent to the players’ locker room. On Thursday and Friday night, with K-Rod on team-imposed suspension (more on this later), Santana and R.A. Dickey showed the best way to work around bullpen woes and win consecutive games was to pitch complete-game shutouts – 4-0 over Colorado by Santana and 1-0 over Philadelphia by Dickey. Come to think of it, it seems the ONLY way for the Mets to win lately is to pitch shutouts (Mike Pelfrey pitched a gem in defeating Colorado’s Ubaldo Jimenez 1-0 Tuesday night).
What has me venting? Let me count the ways…
First, if Santana and Dickey can toss 100-plus pitch complete game victories in August, why couldn’t Met starters do this more often in April, May, June and July?! Why were pitch counts so strict earlier in the season while manager Jerry Manuel overworked his bullpen, but now he lets pitchers finish what they start?
As much as it pains me to say it, Jerry needs to go, as does GM Omar Minaya. Let’s face it; the season seems to be lost, too many players are simply underachieving, Jerry can’t seem to get the most from the players, and Omar’s the one who provided Jerry these players. Don’t get me wrong… I respect Jerry, but the more I watch the Mets play the more I’m convinced Jerry manages not to lose as opposed to win, and to quote everyone’s favorite sage, former Jets head coach Herman Edwards, you play to win the game!
When your pitching staff leads MLB with 18 shutouts and also giving up nine grand slams, this tells me a major problem exists with team consistency and focus, both clearly falling on the manager’s shoulders for blame. It was clear from the start of the season that this year’s team would be a relatively mediocre .500 team – better than last year’s 70-92 disaster, but certainly not ready for primetime playoff action. That being the case, the Mets are likely cleaning house with their coaching staff and bringing in new blood. If not, then someone in the front office needs his head examined.
As for Omar Minaya, for every David Wright, Jose Reyes, and Angel Pagan there’s Luis Castillo and Oliver Perez. I get a kick out of listening to Mets fans call in on WFAN and beg for the Mets to unload Castillo and Perez one minute, then demand the Mets trade away Reuben Tejada (yes, I got it right this time) for a veteran second baseman. Folks, you can’t have it both ways. Either you want the Mets to rebuild with youth or stock up on high priced veterans. Either way, there are no guarantees of a divisional title, NL pennant or World Series title. If Mets ownership wants to scale back payroll, fine. Let’s work with an everyday lineup of younger cheaper players and let them mature into a solid contender in 2-3 years. But don’t make a mish-mash of youth and expensive players past their prime, expecting an instant championship team to pacify a whiny impatient fan base perpetually unhappy and not knowing what it wants.
Second, as much as this may shock some, I think the Mets need to cut ties with Perez, Castillo, and K-Rod, either by release (and eat the contract) or trade. Perez is too much of a head case to ever really contribute again. Castillo simply is too beaten up and close to retirement. K-Rod simply isn’t worth the aggravation anymore for inconsistent performance and a trigger temper.
Third, it’s clear Omar Minaya no longer knows how to put together a cohesive or productive roster. For all the splashy moves he made 2005-2007 in putting the core of this team together, it has underachieved poorly and come up very short in class and accountability for all the machismo in the locker room and on the field. What was once a grand and exciting vision in 2005 has become a public relations albatross in 2010.
This finally brings me to K-Rod’s explosion on Wednesday night. I’m of two minds as I offer my view, but the bottom line is that Rodriguez’s violent actions were unacceptable, unprofessional, and inexcusable. Worse, his minute-long “public apology” on Saturday was not only inadequate, it was embarrassing and an insult to Mets fans and the New York media. Regardless of English not being Rodriguez’s first language, his words were too few, too lacking in thought or meaning, and too small in magnitude relative to Wednesday night’s events.
The Mets reportedly wanted to suspend K-Rod for longer than two games, but that’s all they were allowed by the collective bargaining agreement. If that’s the case, former MBLPA leader Don Fehr and MLB Commissioner Bud Selig have insulted baseball fans and media members just as much as Rodriguez did with his lame apology.
You know there’s a real manhood issue in the Mets locker room when no player publically denounced Rodriguez’s actions. For all the machismo in that locker room you really need to ask what the standard is for being a man. Obviously the standard is a tad lower among the players than for the general population.
Now I speak from my second mind, one of a former athlete, on this story. No matter how reprehensible K-Rod’s actions and his teammates’ reaction were, there’s a more disturbing issue to consider. Why does Citi Field need a “family room” mere feet from the locker room? Yes, I know players have wives, kids, parents and significant others, but why keep these people so close to where emotions can boil over after any game? Regardless of whatever interpersonal issues exist between K-Rod and his girlfriend’s father, something like this was bound to happen, be it with the Mets or some other professional sports team employing immature hotheads. If Mets management wants to entertain players’ loved ones after a game, why not make one of their new restaurants available to them, where they can be fed and catered to until sufficient time has passed after the game and players have showered, gotten treatments and talked to media members. Remember, this is still a person’s place of work, their proverbial office, not a social club. I don’t know about other professional sports teams, but if the Mets paid more attention to business instead of ancillary fluff, maybe a good chunk of its overall woes might be eliminated. The Mets seem to spend too much time and effort catering to the wrong people and it’s only making the on-field product more of a letdown to the people who pay for it, the fans.
WHOOMP!
Memo to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell: A couple of weeks ago, I praised you for advocating NFL players were more protective padding during games, but I also questioned the logic of why only have the teams wear this extra padding and not even make it mandatory beyond the pre-season. Now you’re subject to my piercing and disapproving stare because one of your league’s biggest stars, Cardinals wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald, took a wicked shot to his right knee during Saturday night’s 19-16 pre-season opening win against the Houston Texans. Fitzgerald is lucky he suffered “only” a sprained medial collateral ligament and won’t miss any regular season games.
But if you watched the replay, what do you notice about Fitzgerald’s uniform? NO knee or thigh pads underneath his uniform pants. Minutes later we see Fitzgerald on the Cardinals’ bench with ice wrapped around his knee. DUMB, Mr. Commissioner! Very DUMB! If you listened to me (or perhaps your gut), you’d make ALL players wear extra padding for EVERY game and practice, and maybe Cardinals fans wouldn’t have gasped with worry last night when Fitzgerald went over the middle for a pass reception.
Please don't make me tell you this again...
WHOOMP!
Speaking of dumb, I declare this mini-rant Dumb and Dumber, Part Two – playing the part of Dumb, Cincinnati Reds second baseman Brandon Phillip; playing the part of Dumber, Reds starting pitcher Johnny Cueto. In case you missed it, Phillips shot his mouth off in the local press, saying how much he hated the St. Louis Cardinals and calling them “[female dogs]” before the second game of a three-game sweep by the Cardinals. Naturally the Cardinals took exception to it, and when Phillips tried his “hey, all part of the game; no-harm, no-foul” bit in the bottom of the first inning, it started a benches-clearing brawl behind home plate. In the middle of this brawl, Cueto was pinned back over the backstop and into the surrounding net. What does Cueto do? He starts kicking out with his spikes in order to presumably gain him space for an escape. Cueto was the only player suspended for the melee, for seven games.
Of course, Phillips wasn’t the only one opening up his big mouth to say not quite the right thing at the wrong time. Consider San Francisco 49ers tight end Vernon Davis telling Jarrett Bell of USA TODAY, “I want to dominate. My goal is to be the best to ever play this position. It’s going to take discipline. I’m going to have to be smart and relentless. The stuff [head coach Mike] Singletary always talks about.”
No, no, no, NO! This is NOT what your head coach, a hall of fame linebacker with the Chicago Bears, talks about. Yes, you want to dominate your opponent, but your goal is to do everything you can to make the 49ers the best team in the NFL. Your individual glory is secondary. You still fail to realize it’s not all about you and your personal statistics.
Davis shouldn’t feel too bad. He’s not alone. New Orleans running back Reggie Bush recently called University of Southern California athletic director Pat Haden to “apologize” for the sham of a 2005 Heisman Trophy season he perpetrated while taking illegal money from a potential sports marketer. As a result of his “series of mistakes,” USC’s football program is banned from bowl games for the 2010 and 2011 seasons and forced to vacate 14 victories from the 2004 and 2005 seasons, which could result in losing the 2004 BCS national title.
What were Bush’s touching words of contrition? If I could turn the clock back, I would. If I could give the Heisman Trophy back, I would. Oh, isn’t that touching? Could someone please pass me the airsick bag? Oops... I think that Jet Blue dude took it with him down the emergency slide.
Speaking of the 49ers, they will need to move on without second-string running back Glen Coffee, who abruptly retired from professional football. Coffee is 23 years old, a third-round 2001 pick of the 49ers, and behind all-pro Frank Gore on the depth chart. Coffee’s reason? His heart was no longer in it and he needed to leave the game to pursue his faith.
WHAT? Are you entering the priesthood or ministry, or are you simply tired of not having a chance to be the star of the 49ers’ offense? You're second-string, pal, and getting paid for sideline duty.
WHOOMP!
Memo to NBC Sports’ Jim Gray: Do you take personal pleasure antagonizing sports figures?
Last, a memo to New York Knicks president James Dolan and his BFF Isiah Thomas…
Oh, why waste my breath…
WHOOMP! WHOOMP! WHOOMP! WHOOMP! WHOOMP! WHOOMP!
Sorry… some folks simply get me steamed…
Rather than drop F-bombs like Jets head coach Rex Ryan, or smack around a family member (or common-law family member) like Mets closer Francisco Rodriguez, or kick folks with my cleats like Reds starter Johnny Cueto, I’m going to use what I’ve learned from anger management and simply swing my big fluffy pillow while I vent…
WHOOMP!
Memo to Darrelle Revis: Let me get this straight... No matter what the Jets offer you, you won’t settle for anything less than $16-million per season. Fine... And when next year and the year after come, and other defensive players exceed your salary, are you going to hold out again and hold your team hostage? Just a thought…
Are you underpaid in terms of your $1-million 2010 salary? Yes. Have you outperformed your rookie contract? Probably. Do you and your Rockland County attorneys, Neil Schwartz and Jonathan Feinsod, have the right to throw everyone into turmoil because you worry too much about the salaries of other NFL players? NO. Unless I’m mistaken, you already signed a 6-year, $36-million contract as a rookie in 2007, and the last I checked, you work for the New York Jets. They don’t work for you.
For those who think Jets owner Woody Johnson is simply pocketing as much money as he can without paying for the talent that brings fans into seats and pay for new stadium PSLs, I believe you’re not looking at the broader picture. If I was paying for a PSL I'd want that money to go to Woody Johnson, Revis as well as all the other players seeking long-term deals, specifically center Nick Mangold and linebacker David Harris. I’ve said for weeks that the Jets and Revis would be smart to take $15-million from the $20-million still due on Revis’ rookie contract and fold it into this year as a guaranteed $16-million salary, THEN use remaining $5-million towards new long-term deal. Do I think that new contract should average $16-million per season? Of course not; both parties need to think about the future overall team salary structure and how to sustain a winning team with as many core players as possible.
Revis has to learn to give a little to get his due, and his holdout was not wise in many respects, his second in four years. Former running back Leon Washington's gone because he cut his nose off despite his face with greed towards last year's contract offer and an antagonistic attitude towards Jets when he got injured and his money plans blew up.
Revis is a great cornerback and part of Jets defense, but it's still the New York Jets, not the New York Revises, and I do believe Rex Ryan’s defensive scheme can still succeed at a relatively high level without Revis. Let’s face it, as great a talent as Revis is, there are still ten other players on the field playing defense and to be a great unit requires all eleven position players working together. If you doubt my theory, take a look at the $16-million man out west, Oakland Raiders cornerback Nnamdi Asomugha. The last I checked, the Raiders didn’t necessarily have one of the best defenses in the NFL lat season (26th overall, 29th against the rush, 7th against the pass), so one man doesn’t make an entire defensive unit.
Getting back to the Revis situation, BOTH sides are in the wrong on this stalemate, but Revis is more in the wrong because he's reading and listening to too much media praise and it's warping his perspective. Sorry, but as a former player from 30 years ago, I don't see the issue as simply "give the star the money he deserves." He's one of many important stars and needs to better comprehend the grand scheme of things in terms of the pot of money and how it's shared in a salary cap era, which will still exist when the new CBA is settled.
But I’m very happy Revis, Schwartz, Jets GM Mike Tannenbaum and Woody Johnson finally decided to suspend the public spat through the media and work quietly between themselves. I’ve more than made my views clear on Revis’ holdout and contract, and for the sake of maintaining a healthy blood pressure, I choose not to vent further.
WHOOMP!
Memo to Rex Ryan: Haven’t we discussed your inclination towards profanity before, back when you were photographed flipping some slob the bird at a mixed martial arts event in Miami during Super Bowl week? So now you treat viewers of the first episode of HBO’s Hard Knocks to a steady stream of F-bombs? More than one Jets fan counted approximately three-dozen during the first ten minutes of an hour-long show. Were they really necessary?
I don’t even get HBO on my television, and I saw so many tweets from folks watching the show, there’s no point to me downloading a podcast for myself. Everyone spoiled the $#@&*%! suspense for me.
Now don’t get me wrong… I can swear like the best foul-mouthed Philistine American society has to offer, but I also know there’s a time and place for unleashing expletives. Just like some of today’s lowbrow comedians (and I use the term graciously), Rex seems to use profanity for profanity’s sake, catering to the lowest common denominator of sports fans and HBO viewers. C’mon, coach… you can do better than this.
And is “My mom’s the only one really disappointed that I care about” your idea of an apology?! Sheesh!
Your blue language embarrassed your mother, an education professor in Canada. Folks at ESPN even commented that your language likely made your own father, former Eagles and Cardinals head coach Buddy Ryan, blush. Now that we know you can verbalize profanity as well as express it with sign language, let’s see you show viewers and fans how articulate and intelligent you really are, which is MUCH more than what you demonstrated last Wednesday night.
Oh, and could you spare us all the grandstanding overtures about Revis’ holdout and your ideas for détente? You really don’t want to get sucked into this mess, for your own sanity. Yes, I understand and appreciate your willingness to help out and get talks out of their inertial state, but just stick to coaching the players currently in training camp and on the field.
WHOOMP!
What a week for our New York Mets. On Tuesday, ace pitcher Johan Santana was slapped with a civil suit charging rape going back to an October 2009 incident on a Fort Myers, Florida golf course. On Wednesday night, after a 6-2 home loss to the Colorado Rockies, closer Francisco Rodriguez beat up his girlfriend's father in the family room adjacent to the players’ locker room. On Thursday and Friday night, with K-Rod on team-imposed suspension (more on this later), Santana and R.A. Dickey showed the best way to work around bullpen woes and win consecutive games was to pitch complete-game shutouts – 4-0 over Colorado by Santana and 1-0 over Philadelphia by Dickey. Come to think of it, it seems the ONLY way for the Mets to win lately is to pitch shutouts (Mike Pelfrey pitched a gem in defeating Colorado’s Ubaldo Jimenez 1-0 Tuesday night).
What has me venting? Let me count the ways…
First, if Santana and Dickey can toss 100-plus pitch complete game victories in August, why couldn’t Met starters do this more often in April, May, June and July?! Why were pitch counts so strict earlier in the season while manager Jerry Manuel overworked his bullpen, but now he lets pitchers finish what they start?
As much as it pains me to say it, Jerry needs to go, as does GM Omar Minaya. Let’s face it; the season seems to be lost, too many players are simply underachieving, Jerry can’t seem to get the most from the players, and Omar’s the one who provided Jerry these players. Don’t get me wrong… I respect Jerry, but the more I watch the Mets play the more I’m convinced Jerry manages not to lose as opposed to win, and to quote everyone’s favorite sage, former Jets head coach Herman Edwards, you play to win the game!
When your pitching staff leads MLB with 18 shutouts and also giving up nine grand slams, this tells me a major problem exists with team consistency and focus, both clearly falling on the manager’s shoulders for blame. It was clear from the start of the season that this year’s team would be a relatively mediocre .500 team – better than last year’s 70-92 disaster, but certainly not ready for primetime playoff action. That being the case, the Mets are likely cleaning house with their coaching staff and bringing in new blood. If not, then someone in the front office needs his head examined.
As for Omar Minaya, for every David Wright, Jose Reyes, and Angel Pagan there’s Luis Castillo and Oliver Perez. I get a kick out of listening to Mets fans call in on WFAN and beg for the Mets to unload Castillo and Perez one minute, then demand the Mets trade away Reuben Tejada (yes, I got it right this time) for a veteran second baseman. Folks, you can’t have it both ways. Either you want the Mets to rebuild with youth or stock up on high priced veterans. Either way, there are no guarantees of a divisional title, NL pennant or World Series title. If Mets ownership wants to scale back payroll, fine. Let’s work with an everyday lineup of younger cheaper players and let them mature into a solid contender in 2-3 years. But don’t make a mish-mash of youth and expensive players past their prime, expecting an instant championship team to pacify a whiny impatient fan base perpetually unhappy and not knowing what it wants.
Second, as much as this may shock some, I think the Mets need to cut ties with Perez, Castillo, and K-Rod, either by release (and eat the contract) or trade. Perez is too much of a head case to ever really contribute again. Castillo simply is too beaten up and close to retirement. K-Rod simply isn’t worth the aggravation anymore for inconsistent performance and a trigger temper.
Third, it’s clear Omar Minaya no longer knows how to put together a cohesive or productive roster. For all the splashy moves he made 2005-2007 in putting the core of this team together, it has underachieved poorly and come up very short in class and accountability for all the machismo in the locker room and on the field. What was once a grand and exciting vision in 2005 has become a public relations albatross in 2010.
This finally brings me to K-Rod’s explosion on Wednesday night. I’m of two minds as I offer my view, but the bottom line is that Rodriguez’s violent actions were unacceptable, unprofessional, and inexcusable. Worse, his minute-long “public apology” on Saturday was not only inadequate, it was embarrassing and an insult to Mets fans and the New York media. Regardless of English not being Rodriguez’s first language, his words were too few, too lacking in thought or meaning, and too small in magnitude relative to Wednesday night’s events.
The Mets reportedly wanted to suspend K-Rod for longer than two games, but that’s all they were allowed by the collective bargaining agreement. If that’s the case, former MBLPA leader Don Fehr and MLB Commissioner Bud Selig have insulted baseball fans and media members just as much as Rodriguez did with his lame apology.
You know there’s a real manhood issue in the Mets locker room when no player publically denounced Rodriguez’s actions. For all the machismo in that locker room you really need to ask what the standard is for being a man. Obviously the standard is a tad lower among the players than for the general population.
Now I speak from my second mind, one of a former athlete, on this story. No matter how reprehensible K-Rod’s actions and his teammates’ reaction were, there’s a more disturbing issue to consider. Why does Citi Field need a “family room” mere feet from the locker room? Yes, I know players have wives, kids, parents and significant others, but why keep these people so close to where emotions can boil over after any game? Regardless of whatever interpersonal issues exist between K-Rod and his girlfriend’s father, something like this was bound to happen, be it with the Mets or some other professional sports team employing immature hotheads. If Mets management wants to entertain players’ loved ones after a game, why not make one of their new restaurants available to them, where they can be fed and catered to until sufficient time has passed after the game and players have showered, gotten treatments and talked to media members. Remember, this is still a person’s place of work, their proverbial office, not a social club. I don’t know about other professional sports teams, but if the Mets paid more attention to business instead of ancillary fluff, maybe a good chunk of its overall woes might be eliminated. The Mets seem to spend too much time and effort catering to the wrong people and it’s only making the on-field product more of a letdown to the people who pay for it, the fans.
WHOOMP!
Memo to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell: A couple of weeks ago, I praised you for advocating NFL players were more protective padding during games, but I also questioned the logic of why only have the teams wear this extra padding and not even make it mandatory beyond the pre-season. Now you’re subject to my piercing and disapproving stare because one of your league’s biggest stars, Cardinals wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald, took a wicked shot to his right knee during Saturday night’s 19-16 pre-season opening win against the Houston Texans. Fitzgerald is lucky he suffered “only” a sprained medial collateral ligament and won’t miss any regular season games.
But if you watched the replay, what do you notice about Fitzgerald’s uniform? NO knee or thigh pads underneath his uniform pants. Minutes later we see Fitzgerald on the Cardinals’ bench with ice wrapped around his knee. DUMB, Mr. Commissioner! Very DUMB! If you listened to me (or perhaps your gut), you’d make ALL players wear extra padding for EVERY game and practice, and maybe Cardinals fans wouldn’t have gasped with worry last night when Fitzgerald went over the middle for a pass reception.
Please don't make me tell you this again...
WHOOMP!
Speaking of dumb, I declare this mini-rant Dumb and Dumber, Part Two – playing the part of Dumb, Cincinnati Reds second baseman Brandon Phillip; playing the part of Dumber, Reds starting pitcher Johnny Cueto. In case you missed it, Phillips shot his mouth off in the local press, saying how much he hated the St. Louis Cardinals and calling them “[female dogs]” before the second game of a three-game sweep by the Cardinals. Naturally the Cardinals took exception to it, and when Phillips tried his “hey, all part of the game; no-harm, no-foul” bit in the bottom of the first inning, it started a benches-clearing brawl behind home plate. In the middle of this brawl, Cueto was pinned back over the backstop and into the surrounding net. What does Cueto do? He starts kicking out with his spikes in order to presumably gain him space for an escape. Cueto was the only player suspended for the melee, for seven games.
Of course, Phillips wasn’t the only one opening up his big mouth to say not quite the right thing at the wrong time. Consider San Francisco 49ers tight end Vernon Davis telling Jarrett Bell of USA TODAY, “I want to dominate. My goal is to be the best to ever play this position. It’s going to take discipline. I’m going to have to be smart and relentless. The stuff [head coach Mike] Singletary always talks about.”
No, no, no, NO! This is NOT what your head coach, a hall of fame linebacker with the Chicago Bears, talks about. Yes, you want to dominate your opponent, but your goal is to do everything you can to make the 49ers the best team in the NFL. Your individual glory is secondary. You still fail to realize it’s not all about you and your personal statistics.
Davis shouldn’t feel too bad. He’s not alone. New Orleans running back Reggie Bush recently called University of Southern California athletic director Pat Haden to “apologize” for the sham of a 2005 Heisman Trophy season he perpetrated while taking illegal money from a potential sports marketer. As a result of his “series of mistakes,” USC’s football program is banned from bowl games for the 2010 and 2011 seasons and forced to vacate 14 victories from the 2004 and 2005 seasons, which could result in losing the 2004 BCS national title.
What were Bush’s touching words of contrition? If I could turn the clock back, I would. If I could give the Heisman Trophy back, I would. Oh, isn’t that touching? Could someone please pass me the airsick bag? Oops... I think that Jet Blue dude took it with him down the emergency slide.
Speaking of the 49ers, they will need to move on without second-string running back Glen Coffee, who abruptly retired from professional football. Coffee is 23 years old, a third-round 2001 pick of the 49ers, and behind all-pro Frank Gore on the depth chart. Coffee’s reason? His heart was no longer in it and he needed to leave the game to pursue his faith.
WHAT? Are you entering the priesthood or ministry, or are you simply tired of not having a chance to be the star of the 49ers’ offense? You're second-string, pal, and getting paid for sideline duty.
WHOOMP!
Memo to NBC Sports’ Jim Gray: Do you take personal pleasure antagonizing sports figures?
Last, a memo to New York Knicks president James Dolan and his BFF Isiah Thomas…
Oh, why waste my breath…
WHOOMP! WHOOMP! WHOOMP! WHOOMP! WHOOMP! WHOOMP!
Sorry… some folks simply get me steamed…
An “Open Letter” to Rep. Michele Bachmann (R, MN):
Dear Representative Bachmann:
Allow me to introduce myself. I am the chairperson of the Chemists with Disabilities Subdivision within the American Chemical Society. Why would a chemist be writing to you through the media? I’m glad you asked. I’ve been a chemistry and physics educator, and science education scholar since 1984. I suffered a spinal injury in 2006, which essentially cost me my career, family, and home, not to mention my health and opportunities to remain a productive member of our American society and economy. I am, in many respects, the epitome of what you consider wrong with today’s America.
In the August 13th issue of USA TODAY (News Cover Story: ‘Tea Party’ members offer a ground-level view), you stated that you’re “not the national spokeswoman” for the Tea Party even though you personally started an official Tea Party Caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives. Well, congresswoman, to paraphrase from Colin Powell’s erroneous Pottery Barn analogy: If you create a caucus, you speak for them.
Do I have anything personal against the Tea Party? Yes and no. A democrat for almost 30 years, I readily admit the presence of a third political party in state and national politics is a good thing. I’m far from pleased with the state of things in Washington, not to mention the direction things are headed. I’ll even admit that President Obama wasn’t even my first or second choice on the Democratic Party ticket in 2008 (P.S., neither was Secretary of State Hillary Clinton). But I reluctantly voted for President Obama and Vice-President Biden because I had zero trust or confidence in John McCain and Sarah Palin. If a better alternative to either choice existed, I likely would’ve voted accordingly. Even though he’s my president, I’m not overly pleased with Mr. Obama’s job performance so far.
The very first presidential election I took personal ownership of was in 1980, and I supported the third party candidate, John Anderson. Why? As a college student, I had little confidence in incumbent Jimmy Carter and no trust in Ronald Reagan with regards to our national economy and how it would affect higher education. Did it matter to me that Anderson stood little chance to win the election? No, because my candidate represented my ideals and national agenda. Four years later I supported the candidacy of Rev. Jesse Jackson. Why? Because I believed in similar ideals regarding what our nation could be.
So, I don’t begrudge the Tea Party’s existence, and respect its constitutional right to exist as a political party, just as I respect your constitutional right to be a U.S. representative with “non-squished” views. Do I agree with your views or those of the Tea Party? THAT’S a different story.
You see, congresswoman, no matter how much you and others advocate that the Tea Party is a “fiscal movement” rather than a “social movement,” you and your like-minded colleagues fail to convince people like me. Why? Kentucky senatorial candidate, Dr. Rand Paul, and the schizophrenic stance the Tea Party has on big government programs.
Allow me to address the latter reason first. The Tea Party is allegedly angry with both the Bush and Obama administrations for throwing large sums of federal dollars at the Wall Street bailout, Medicare prescription drug benefits, the auto industry, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Federal Stimulus package, and extended unemployment benefits. Okay, fair enough. I agree that the federal government is tossing around major money and adding to our national debt and deficit. But where were you and your colleagues when President Bush signed off on a $1.6 trillion, 10-year tax cut plan in January 2001, effectively wiping out a federal surplus left to us by Bill Clinton’s administration? Oh? You were satisfied constituents back then, so no need to brew any tea? Funny... As a college professor, all I got was a lousy check for $350, which I then had to report on my income tax returns in 2002. I don’t recall being able to buy a lot of anything with that kickback, but I guess we come from two different worlds, don’t we?
And where were you and your colleagues when President Bush took us into, not one, but two wars, costing the U.S. economy billions of dollars daily in the name of fighting terrorism? Oh? It’s good to go deeper into debt when fighting bad guys, even though we’ve still yet to find Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice after nearly nine years? And where exactly are all those Weapons of Mass Destruction Saddam Hussein reportedly had in Iraq?
According to USA TODAY, you’re 54 years old. Congratulations, congresswoman; you qualify for AARP membership. Did you know the AARP advocates a full spectrum of Medicare benefits, the very ones the Tea Party consider an example of big government waste? Did you know that as a woman over 50, the Equal Pay Act as well as the Age Discrimination in Employment Act legally protect you? Both acts are oversaw by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal agency that also oversees the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990?
Ah... The Civil Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, two rather nuisance acts of legislation that stick in the craw of Dr. Rand Paul. You see, congresswoman, when you associate yourself with a political party that supports the discrimination is free will views of a political candidate, that’s when I take exception to the candidate, the political party, and its congressional spokeswoman. Does Dr. Paul have the constitutional right to be a U.S. Senator? Yes. Is he entitled to his views? Yes. Is he good for this country as a U.S. Senator holding his views towards any aspect of civil rights or the purpose of the EEOC? No. He does not, and neither do you, if Dr. Paul’s agenda is your unofficial agenda.
Listening to you and your Tea Party colleagues on various news shows (oh, that darned “liberal media”) I’m often reminded of Daniel Day-Lewis’ character Daniel Plainview in the 2007 movie There will be blood. At one point in the movie, Daniel Plainview says, “I have a competition in me. I want no one else to succeed.” And THAT’S what the Tea Party movement sadly reminds me of, a collection of mostly white, mostly angry people who feel they haven’t gotten enough of what they think the world and the American government owes them, and by golly, if they can’t get it, no one can. You’re the congressional spokeswoman for a political party that looks to all corners of American society as the boogeyman... Except for the corner you occupy. Everyone else needs to be blamed for your corner not having everything it wants and craves... Everyone but you. When democrats and anti-war activists protested against President Bush during his 2004 re-election campaign, we were all enemy sympathizers. When Tea Party members carry posters of President Obama with a Swastika and Hitler mustache, they’re being patriotic.
When Tea Party members and advocates hold rallies, they’re trying to stand up and save America from ruin. When we object and challenge, we’re communists, crackpots or anarchists. Whether you realize it or not, congresswoman, your “unapologetic conservative” advocacy for the free market comes across to me as Orwellian, just as much as I may seem to you like a bandit from Sherwood Forest. But there’s a difference... I don’t begrudge your advocacy of the free market as long as it doesn’t exclude or prevent everyone from a basic life of health, happiness, and human dignity. Unfortunately, neither you nor the Tea Party you “facilitate” shares a reciprocal view. You are, congresswoman, the embodiment of Daniel Plainview, a far cry from British philosopher John Locke (1632-1704).
You see, congresswoman, educated professionals like me actually need the Civil Rights Act and Americans with Disabilities Act in order to remain part of our society and economy, and even if I wasn’t physically disabled by my spinal injury, I’d still advocate for the continued existence of those legislative acts. When you support a political party that supports a political candidate who publically states his desire to repeal these legislative acts, that sends up a big red flag as to what “core values” you and your Tea Party colleagues hold. I’m all for a more efficient, effective, and smarter government no matter its size, and I’m all for more fiscal sanity in our state and federal governments, but I’m not for any political party, its members or endorsers if your constitutional rights mean more than mine.
If I haven’t made my point well enough, allow me to close with this: When the founding fathers established this nation and our constitution more than two centuries ago, they did so with the ideal of a United States of America, not a collection of independent and semi-warring fiefdoms. But perhaps I’m naïve and your way works better — a disjointed and polarized nation of selfish and greedy bigots, racists, misogynists and homophobes completely devoid of empathy, united by hate and mistrust.
I’m so committed in my logic and values versus your logic and values that I’m willing to debate you and Dr. Paul (feel free to bring along Mrs. Paul and her fish sticks, too) anytime on any network news show — NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, even FOX News. I think the American public could learn a lot from watching you and Dr. Paul meet face-to-face with a “cripple” to explain why and how your political agendas make America a better place for all of us.
Allow me to introduce myself. I am the chairperson of the Chemists with Disabilities Subdivision within the American Chemical Society. Why would a chemist be writing to you through the media? I’m glad you asked. I’ve been a chemistry and physics educator, and science education scholar since 1984. I suffered a spinal injury in 2006, which essentially cost me my career, family, and home, not to mention my health and opportunities to remain a productive member of our American society and economy. I am, in many respects, the epitome of what you consider wrong with today’s America.
In the August 13th issue of USA TODAY (News Cover Story: ‘Tea Party’ members offer a ground-level view), you stated that you’re “not the national spokeswoman” for the Tea Party even though you personally started an official Tea Party Caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives. Well, congresswoman, to paraphrase from Colin Powell’s erroneous Pottery Barn analogy: If you create a caucus, you speak for them.
Do I have anything personal against the Tea Party? Yes and no. A democrat for almost 30 years, I readily admit the presence of a third political party in state and national politics is a good thing. I’m far from pleased with the state of things in Washington, not to mention the direction things are headed. I’ll even admit that President Obama wasn’t even my first or second choice on the Democratic Party ticket in 2008 (P.S., neither was Secretary of State Hillary Clinton). But I reluctantly voted for President Obama and Vice-President Biden because I had zero trust or confidence in John McCain and Sarah Palin. If a better alternative to either choice existed, I likely would’ve voted accordingly. Even though he’s my president, I’m not overly pleased with Mr. Obama’s job performance so far.
The very first presidential election I took personal ownership of was in 1980, and I supported the third party candidate, John Anderson. Why? As a college student, I had little confidence in incumbent Jimmy Carter and no trust in Ronald Reagan with regards to our national economy and how it would affect higher education. Did it matter to me that Anderson stood little chance to win the election? No, because my candidate represented my ideals and national agenda. Four years later I supported the candidacy of Rev. Jesse Jackson. Why? Because I believed in similar ideals regarding what our nation could be.
So, I don’t begrudge the Tea Party’s existence, and respect its constitutional right to exist as a political party, just as I respect your constitutional right to be a U.S. representative with “non-squished” views. Do I agree with your views or those of the Tea Party? THAT’S a different story.
You see, congresswoman, no matter how much you and others advocate that the Tea Party is a “fiscal movement” rather than a “social movement,” you and your like-minded colleagues fail to convince people like me. Why? Kentucky senatorial candidate, Dr. Rand Paul, and the schizophrenic stance the Tea Party has on big government programs.
Allow me to address the latter reason first. The Tea Party is allegedly angry with both the Bush and Obama administrations for throwing large sums of federal dollars at the Wall Street bailout, Medicare prescription drug benefits, the auto industry, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Federal Stimulus package, and extended unemployment benefits. Okay, fair enough. I agree that the federal government is tossing around major money and adding to our national debt and deficit. But where were you and your colleagues when President Bush signed off on a $1.6 trillion, 10-year tax cut plan in January 2001, effectively wiping out a federal surplus left to us by Bill Clinton’s administration? Oh? You were satisfied constituents back then, so no need to brew any tea? Funny... As a college professor, all I got was a lousy check for $350, which I then had to report on my income tax returns in 2002. I don’t recall being able to buy a lot of anything with that kickback, but I guess we come from two different worlds, don’t we?
And where were you and your colleagues when President Bush took us into, not one, but two wars, costing the U.S. economy billions of dollars daily in the name of fighting terrorism? Oh? It’s good to go deeper into debt when fighting bad guys, even though we’ve still yet to find Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice after nearly nine years? And where exactly are all those Weapons of Mass Destruction Saddam Hussein reportedly had in Iraq?
According to USA TODAY, you’re 54 years old. Congratulations, congresswoman; you qualify for AARP membership. Did you know the AARP advocates a full spectrum of Medicare benefits, the very ones the Tea Party consider an example of big government waste? Did you know that as a woman over 50, the Equal Pay Act as well as the Age Discrimination in Employment Act legally protect you? Both acts are oversaw by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal agency that also oversees the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990?
Ah... The Civil Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, two rather nuisance acts of legislation that stick in the craw of Dr. Rand Paul. You see, congresswoman, when you associate yourself with a political party that supports the discrimination is free will views of a political candidate, that’s when I take exception to the candidate, the political party, and its congressional spokeswoman. Does Dr. Paul have the constitutional right to be a U.S. Senator? Yes. Is he entitled to his views? Yes. Is he good for this country as a U.S. Senator holding his views towards any aspect of civil rights or the purpose of the EEOC? No. He does not, and neither do you, if Dr. Paul’s agenda is your unofficial agenda.
Listening to you and your Tea Party colleagues on various news shows (oh, that darned “liberal media”) I’m often reminded of Daniel Day-Lewis’ character Daniel Plainview in the 2007 movie There will be blood. At one point in the movie, Daniel Plainview says, “I have a competition in me. I want no one else to succeed.” And THAT’S what the Tea Party movement sadly reminds me of, a collection of mostly white, mostly angry people who feel they haven’t gotten enough of what they think the world and the American government owes them, and by golly, if they can’t get it, no one can. You’re the congressional spokeswoman for a political party that looks to all corners of American society as the boogeyman... Except for the corner you occupy. Everyone else needs to be blamed for your corner not having everything it wants and craves... Everyone but you. When democrats and anti-war activists protested against President Bush during his 2004 re-election campaign, we were all enemy sympathizers. When Tea Party members carry posters of President Obama with a Swastika and Hitler mustache, they’re being patriotic.
When Tea Party members and advocates hold rallies, they’re trying to stand up and save America from ruin. When we object and challenge, we’re communists, crackpots or anarchists. Whether you realize it or not, congresswoman, your “unapologetic conservative” advocacy for the free market comes across to me as Orwellian, just as much as I may seem to you like a bandit from Sherwood Forest. But there’s a difference... I don’t begrudge your advocacy of the free market as long as it doesn’t exclude or prevent everyone from a basic life of health, happiness, and human dignity. Unfortunately, neither you nor the Tea Party you “facilitate” shares a reciprocal view. You are, congresswoman, the embodiment of Daniel Plainview, a far cry from British philosopher John Locke (1632-1704).
You see, congresswoman, educated professionals like me actually need the Civil Rights Act and Americans with Disabilities Act in order to remain part of our society and economy, and even if I wasn’t physically disabled by my spinal injury, I’d still advocate for the continued existence of those legislative acts. When you support a political party that supports a political candidate who publically states his desire to repeal these legislative acts, that sends up a big red flag as to what “core values” you and your Tea Party colleagues hold. I’m all for a more efficient, effective, and smarter government no matter its size, and I’m all for more fiscal sanity in our state and federal governments, but I’m not for any political party, its members or endorsers if your constitutional rights mean more than mine.
If I haven’t made my point well enough, allow me to close with this: When the founding fathers established this nation and our constitution more than two centuries ago, they did so with the ideal of a United States of America, not a collection of independent and semi-warring fiefdoms. But perhaps I’m naïve and your way works better — a disjointed and polarized nation of selfish and greedy bigots, racists, misogynists and homophobes completely devoid of empathy, united by hate and mistrust.
I’m so committed in my logic and values versus your logic and values that I’m willing to debate you and Dr. Paul (feel free to bring along Mrs. Paul and her fish sticks, too) anytime on any network news show — NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, even FOX News. I think the American public could learn a lot from watching you and Dr. Paul meet face-to-face with a “cripple” to explain why and how your political agendas make America a better place for all of us.
Monday, August 9, 2010
Dog Days of Summer. Woof! - Sports Thoughts for August 9, 2010
I’m not much of a summer person. Anyone who knows me well knows how much I hate hot humid weather, but I guess that’s why they invented ice cream and cold showers, right? As a sports lover, August is the beginning of my favorite time of year... The baseball season is slowly creeping towards the homestretch and sometimes the wacky becomes the norm, and the NFL exhibition season begins, which means I get to start scouting and studying teams for the upcoming regular season.
Of course, if I’d just focus only on what Rex Ryan has to say about the 2010 season and Super Bowl XLV, my job would be so much easier, right? If he says it often enough, then we should all conclude the regular season is simply a formality en route to the New York Jets coronation in Dallas on February 6, 2011, right? Ah, August optimism... If only it were that simple.
As a die-hard Jets fan, I hope they make it back to the Super Bowl every season, but I am cautiously optimistic heading into the 2010 season. On paper, the Jets do appear much more loaded to go further than they went last season, but we don’t play football on paper, and there are always a whole bunch of ifs for the Jets and their loyal fans (as is the case for every NFL team) to cross fingers, toes and eyes during a marathon of a season. We’ve seen bubbles burst before after falling short in the AFC Championship game — 1983 and 1999 — but at the same time optimism, and even swagger, is “justified” as Super Bowl III legend Joe Namath said this past Thursday. Even with holdout Darrelle Revis out of camp the defense looks formidable. Even with Thomas Jones toting the ball in Kansas City’s backfield, and Alan Faneca playing on Arizona’s offensive line, the running game still looks steady. Even with Santonio Holmes facing suspension for the first four weeks of the season, the passing game looks promising. Even with Nick Folk as placekicker, one has to have faith in the special teams.
Of course, lots can go wrong fast during an NFL season. We keep it in the back of our minds and hope all those hobgoblins and gremlins stay there until after Valentine’s Day, but the reality is an NFL season is a war of attrition and all fans can really hope is that the Jets are still standing at the end, the last survivor of the NFL War of 2010.
Is there reason for worry at all the pre-season hype and bluster coming from Cortland? Perhaps. Last week, ESPN’s Tony Kornheiser noted that all the Jets lead the NFL in so far is mouths. Yes, there’s too much big talk. Then again, maybe for the first time in a long time, the big talk isn’t just empty.
Last points about the Jets... No matter what happens this season or beyond, and how many big talkers and studs this roster has, this will ALWAYS be the team of Broadway Joe. Without Joe Namath, there would never be any Jets legacy. Mark Sanchez can say all he wants that this is his offense, but for those who’ve endured the roller coaster since 1969, Sanchez is merely guiding the newest effort to honor and build on Namath’s legacy, as well as Winston Hill’s, and John Schmidt’s, and Don Maynard’s, and Ralph Baker’s, and Weeb Ewbank’s, and all the other members of that Super Bowl III team. You don’t talk about today’s Jets without talking about Broadway Joe and the rest of that 1968 team, the team that helped make the NFL and Super Bowl what they are today. That’s why next Monday night’s pre-season opener against the Giants is special. A new stadium. The ring of honor. The first step towards making a new chapter in history and waking up the echoes of 1968. But just as I proposed a few months ago that this new stadium be named after Wellington Mara and Sonny Werblin, the very men responsible for making New York football relevant and vibrant when the NFL needed both the Giants and Jets for its long-term growth and success, I can’t help but wonder why the Jets fail to recognize Werblin among the ring of honorees. If it weren’t for Sonny Werblin, there would be no Joe Namath, no Super Bowl III, no NFL-AFL merger, and quite possibly no buzz like we have now every year a new season begins. You always need to know where you come from in order to appreciate where you’re at. I do hope Rex Ryan and his merry band of men at Camp Chutzpah remember every minute of every practice and every meeting and every game that this entire 2010 season is a tribute to a legacy that really didn’t just start on January 12, 1969 at the Orange Bowl in Miami. It began in Sonny Werblin’s Park Avenue office during the summer of 1963, when the moribund and bankrupt Titans became the Jets and a team with a plan.
**********
So let me get this straight... Isaiah Thomas is coming back to the Knicks as a “consultant” to James Dolan and Donnie Walsh? He gets to stay on as head coach for Florida International University, 7-25 last season? And this is a conflict of interest in the eyes of the NBA and NCAA? Are you kidding me? What should commissioner David Stern be worried about... FIU might supply a few extra scrubs to fill out the Knicks’ bench, possibly making them more of a joke?
**********
Question: What is it about the Tampa Bay Rays and no-hitters? For almost the fourth time in approximately one calendar year, the Rays were going to be no-hit victims by Toronto’s Brandon Morrow yesterday, but dodged the bullet with two out in the 9th inning on a close hit by Evan Longoria. Still, the Rays lost 1-0, and were swept in Toronto for the entire weekend series, including a wild 17-11 loss Saturday.
Morrow (9-6, 4.45 ERA) was masterful, striking out 17 batters, bringing his season total to 151. And yet, for as much as Morrow should’ve been the story, the question begs as to how the Rays keep finding themselves on the wrong end of no-hitters. Since last July 23, the Rays have been no-hit by Chicago’s Mark Buehrle and Oakland’s Dallas Braden by perfect games, and no-hit by the White Sox’s Edwin Jackson while he pitched for the Arizona Diamondbacks (hardly a perfect game). Now Morrow takes the Rays to their last out. Why? How does this happen to one of MLB’s best offensive lineups? The Rays are 3rd in the AL in runs scored and runs batted in, 4th in On Base Percentage, 1st in walks received, and 7th in home runs. At first glance one would consider the Rays a fairly disciplined collection of hitters, but consider they are also 12th in hits, 11th in batting average and 9th in total bases, which gives some evidence of the feast or famine results one might expect from a young and free swinging team. Maybe the statistics tell the story; maybe the Rays simply are quirky magnets for no-hitters at a greater frequency. Nonetheless, when the next no-hitter is brewing, chances are good the Rays may be involved.
As for Saturday’s game, another Blue Jay made an auspicious debut: catcher J.P. Arencibia went 4 for 6, including 2 home runs and 3 RBIs. The Jays lead the entire major leagues in home runs with 175 despite being near the bottom of the AL in hits, team batting average and On Base Percentage, hence their feast or famine fortunes this season. What made Saturday’s game most remarkable was Toronto hitting 8 home runs off one of MLB’s best pitching staffs, including 6 off starter Jamie Shields.
Sometimes baseball’s like that... Offensive explosion one day, 1-0 pitchers’ duel the next.
**********
Has anyone noticed the AL’s winningest pitchers so far this season are the Yankees’ C.C. Sabathia, the Rays’ David Price, and the Twins’ Carl Pavano, all with 14 wins? By the way, for those who think the Yankees can roll through the post-season regardless of winning the AL East or wild card, C.C. Sabathia is 13-0 at Yankee Stadium, 1-5 away from the Bronx. Maybe this statistic doesn’t mean much, but if I were manager Joe Girardi I’d want the AL East crown real bad, just to be on the safe side with my pitching rotation’s bipolar home-road performance.
**********
Is it time to stick a fork in the Mets and declare them done for the 2010 pennant race? Yes, I, loyal fan since the ugly duckling beginnings, am finally accepting the cold realty that the 2010 season was fun while it lasted, and the Mets are now on proverbial life support. Is there anything wrong with an August youth movement, benching Jeff Francoeur and Luis Castillo in favor of Fernando Martinez and Reuben Tejada? Is there anything wrong with releasing Alex Cora and his .207 batting average? No, but there also would’ve been nothing wrong with using a 4 or 5-man outfield rotation when Carlos Beltran came off the DL, rather than disrupting team chemistry and a spunky lineup with a 33-year-old centerfielder still trying to regain his form after a long rehab from knee surgery. But the damage is done and all we can really do is a premature post mortem on how things went wrong so quickly.
Who do we blame for this Mets downslide? GM Omar Minaya? Manager Jerry Manuel? Underperforming veteran players? A roster simply playing too far above its head in May and June? Owner Fred Wilpon? COO Jeff Wilpon? Bernie Madoff? Bad luck? All of the above?
My theory is the Mets were never as good as they played in May and June, but they really aren’t as bad as they’ve played since early July. Somewhere in the middle lies the truth for essentially a .500 team (55-56). I’m not completely convinced the Wilpons are in financial straits after Bernie Madoff fleeced them in his Ponzi scheme, but I do think there’s some evidence the episode has made the Mets ownership very skittish about expanding payroll. The Mets already have the NL’s third-highest team payroll of $136 million, and chances are the Wilpons will seek to gradually trim the payroll over the next few years. Does this mean the Mets are giving up on competing? No, why should they? Look at the Tampa Bay Rays with their 67-44 record and $72 million payroll. Money isn’t the limiting reagent when it comes to team success.
What about bad luck and injuries? Maybe last year’s 70-92 disaster could be blamed on an astronomical rash of injuries, but look at the mounting injuries the Boston Red Sox and Philadelphia Phillies are dealing with. The Red Sox are 63-49; the Phillies are 62-49. How are both teams overcoming injuries better than the Mets have the past couple of seasons? Granted, the Red Sox ($161M) and Phillies ($143M) have higher payrolls with more talent and deeper rosters, but Carlos Beltran, Angel Pagan, David Wright, Jose Reyes, Jason Bay and Jeff Francoeur are hardly the Toledo Mud Hens.
Could we attribute the Red Sox and Phillies’ success to better managing? Terry Francona is clearly one of MLB’s best managers, and Charlie Manuel knows how to lead a team too, but neither are necessarily mentioned in the same breath as Miller Huggins, John McGraw, Connie Mack or Casey Stengel. Then again, Francona and Charlie Manuel have on attribute Jerry Manuel clearly lacks — the mentality of playing to win as opposed to avoiding loss. As cruel as this sounds, Jerry Manuel manages as if he’s running a prevent defense in football, and as we well know, a prevent defense merely stalls the inevitable — snatching a close defeat from the jaws of victory. The Mets play all nine innings for the most part, but they keep finding ways to lose the close ones. The Mets are 14-22 in one-run games so far this season. By contrast, the Phillies are 18-11. The Padres, NL West leaders and owners of the NL’s best record, are 21-15. When you consider the Mets can’t win on the road (22-37 vs. 33-19 at home) and can’t win the close games, there’s little margin for error if the lineup isn’t consistently running on all cylinders.
The issue isn’t talent as much as it’s mental toughness and focus. This falls on the manager, and the sands of the 2010 hour glass are running out on Jerry Manuel.
Does this let Omar Minaya off the hook? Not at all. For all of the big moves Minaya’s made since 2005, bringing in stars like Beltran, Francisco Rodriguez, Pedro Martinez and Carlos Delgado, the fact remains that these big moves have mostly failed to pay off the expected dividends. Minaya underestimated the talent and heart on his roster, especially with Oliver Perez and Luis Castillo. While Minaya deserves credit for finds like R.A. Dickey, Angel Pagan and Jonathon Niese, these finds haven’t been enough.
But Fred and Jeff Wilpon would rather be penny-wise and pound-foolish by holding onto bad contracts and trying to extract something, anything, from them. Why not simply cut Perez and Castillo and accept the fiscal losses? If unwilling to take a loss on contract money still owed, why not simply re-assign Minaya within the organization and start with a new GM? Ironically, when Alex Cora was released, Minaya said that Cora had the talent to be a future GM. Why not move Cora from the field to the front office? What’s there to lose if he has this potential? Or keep him as an additional coach if he’s the positive role model everyone says he is in the clubhouse? You have to start somewhere. Joe Torre first started his managerial career as a player-manager for the Mets in 1977. Not too long ago, the Mets had another veteran in the twilight of his playing career who would’ve been a wonderful addition to the coaching staff upon his release in 2007, Jose Valentin. Where is he now? Nowhere in Flushing, that’s for sure. If a player can’t do it on the field anymore and is still universally seen as a positive part of the organization, find a new role rather than severing all ties and kicking him to the curb.
When the season is over and the Mets have finished playing out the string of meaningless September games, Fred and Jeff Wilpon need to sit down and take a fresh look at their team and the grand scheme for its future. What kind of team do the Wilpons want to have as they look towards 2011 and beyond? How do they want their roster constructed and managed? Until the Wilpons come to terms with a vision it won’t matter who the GM, manager or players are.
**********
Memo to Darryl Strawberry: Congratulations on the opening of your new restaurant, Strawberry Sports Grill. Good luck! As one former cancer survivor to another, do you have any salads on the menu? Just wondering...
**********
Heard about Alex Rodriguez’s left leg injury yesterday. Took a line shot off the bat of Lance Berkman moments after saying a quick hello to FOX Sports announcer Joe Buck while playing the field during batting practice. This is definitely one for the books we could look up years from now, as Casey Stengel used to say. Hey, Joe! Good to see you... OW! OW! I’m wounded!
Guess that’ll teach A-Rod to cater to the media, eh? For the record, that’s supposed to be the most solid swing Berkman’s had since the Yankees acquired him from Houston.
As we see, A-Rod recovered quickly from his shin boo-boo and returned to the lineup in last night’s 7-2 win over the Red Sox. Gee... You don’t think? Nah...
Speaking of A-Rod, now that he’s reached 600 career home runs by age 35, the question remains as to how good his chances are of surpassing Barry Bonds’ record of 762, especially if he’s now clean of PEDs. Well, he averages 25 homers a season for the rest of his career, A-Rod should be huffing and puffing towards the record six seasons from now, 2016, at the age of 41, on par with how old Henry Aaron was when he passed Babe Ruth’s 714 in 1974. And that’s the way it should be when pursuing a record associated with longevity. An older player should be running on fumes and Ben-Gay, perhaps carrying a slight paunch, not an increased skull circumference like Bonds did. Would it mean something if A-Rod breaks Bonds record sometime in 2016 looking like he’s carrying Father Time on his back? Yes, because A-Rod wised up and allowed himself to age like all ballplayers should. Maybe if A-Rod breaks the record looking more like Ernest Borgnine rather than Joan Rivers folks might finally give him his due and look past his Texas Boli days.
**********
BIG prediction from my crystal ball: The Baltimore Orioles will become respectable next season under new manager Buck Showalter, a force to be reckoned with in the AL East by 2013, and win the world series by 2016. By the way, Jerry Manuel will be the Orioles manager in 2016 after Buck drives everyone nuts and Peter Angelos is forced to fire him after the 2015 season at the advice of Dr. Phil.
**********
Any idea how San Diego and San Francisco keep leading the NL West? Pitching, pitching, and more pitching. The Padres have their solid rotation of Mat Latos, John Garland, Kevin Correa and Clayton Richard, and Heath Bell still continues to be among the best closers. The Giants have their solid rotation of Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, Jonathan Sanchez and Barry Zito. Of course it still remains to be seen if the Giants can get consistent performances from their bullpen. Either way, both teams need pitching to keep carrying them as neither is an offensive juggernaut.
**********
Did you catch that “blown” call by Bob Davidson during the 9th inning of Thursday night’s Phillies-Marlins game? What clearly seemed like a fair ball down the third base line was called foul by Davidson, costing the Marlins the winning run of a game they’d ultimately lose in 11 innings. Marlins manager Edwin Rodriguez called the call the “worst” he’s seen in his entire MLB career as a player and coach, and there’s been lots of hubbub over Davidson’s arrogant refusal to reconsider his call. Of course, folks have done their fair share of harping over the need for expanded instant replay in MLB, especially after it’s been approved for the Little League World Series. This is all well and fine, I agree Davidson appeared in a very poor light, and I do agree MLB needs to come out of the Dark Ages and use technology more to assist with umpiring. However, if you take four or five extra looks at the call in question, you might just start to wonder the same thing I did... When the ball left Gaby Sanchez’s bat, it DID immediately strike in foul territory first then land very near the foul side of the third base line on its first bounce in front of the third base bag. With all due respect to baseball experts and hysterical baseball fans and media members, I’m not completely convinced Davidson blew the call the longer you look at the replay.
**********
Question: Why are certain members of the New York media mocking Amar’e Stoudemire’s exploration of Judaism and possible Jewish roots through his mother?
**********
This past Wednesday evening I had the opportunity to accompany a friend and see a screening of “The Tillman Story,” due out soon in limited release. I highly recommend all of you add this movie to your must-see list, whether in a theater or on television. In fact, I’ve gone as far as recommending this movie to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and all NFL employees.
For those who don’t remember, Pat Tillman was a hard-hitting safety, and thinking man, for the Arizona Cardinals who gave up a multi-year multi-million dollar contract to serve in the US Army Rangers after the 9-11 Terrorist attacks. Sadly, Tillman was killed by friendly fire in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004. The movie primarily focuses on the farce of an investigation conducted by the Pentagon and the shameful way the Bush-43 administration, and its cronies, used a dead football player as a public relations tool for its War on Terror agenda and the president’s re-election campaign.
But the most powerful part of the movie relative to sports was listening to Pat Tillman speak from his heart and deep mind on September 12, 2001 in a television interview. To paraphrase, Tillman noted how despite his national fame and comfortable wealth associated with being a professional football player, he really hadn’t done anything in life to contribute to the big picture of being a global citizen (this apparently was his motivation for leaving the NFL to serve in war just as athletes of earlier generations did during WWII and the Korean War). Tillman said, “we bitch” about things players don’t like as the trade-offs associated with professional sports, but players fail to remember or appreciate how these trade-offs are a much better benefit compared to struggles by previous generations of players.
Think about it... September 2001, and here was a player who GOT it, what the modern NFL was about relative to its roots and years of evolution. We’re closing in on the ninth anniversary of those attacks, and players are still bitching about things that have very little to do with the big picture. So why do NFL players like Darrelle Revis and Terrell Owens constantly harp on their monetary worth? Considering the uncertain state of the NFL’s future and its next collective bargaining agreement, might it be wiser to simply shut up and enjoy the peace of mind of having a contract and roster spot in the first place? After all, these guys are watched and rooted for by a national fan base still suffering from a double-digit unemployment rate. Will this crop of players get it like Tillman did?
**********
Speaking of shutting up, I really wish Brett Favre would until after he visits Dr. James Andrews and gets a full evaluation of his surgically repaired ankle. Hear what the surgeon has to say, then share with us your annual Hamlet routine of “to retire or not to retire.”
**********
This past weekend was the Pro Football Hall of Fame induction ceremony and exhibition game. Congratulations to Jerry Rice, Emmitt Smith, Rickey Jackson, John Randal, Russ Grimm, Dick LeBeau and Floyd Little for their entrance. I had the pleasure of watching all seven play during their NFL careers and thought highly of all of their contributions to the game. For LeBeau and Little their inductions are long overdue. However, my fondest player memory from this Hall of Fame class is of former Viking John Randal in a Brett Favre-related commercial. Randal, one of football’s most entertaining motor mouths, is sitting at a sewing machine making a miniature Packers jersey with Favre’s number 4 on it. In the next scene, Randall is chasing a chicken, wearing the Favre jersey, all around the coop in preparation for the upcoming season. We saw this unconventional training technique in Rocky, but the fact that a commercial took advantage of the Vikings-Packers rivalry adds special humor.
Lastly, the Hall of Fame game between the Dallas Cowboys and Cincinnati Bengals was pretty much a snoozer. However, I will give you food for thought towards any regular season predictions you might wish to make... T.O. or no T.O., if Carson Palmer can’t stay upright in the pocket and step into his passes, the Bengals’ offense is in big trouble. Perhaps I’m reading too much into what I saw in the limited action by the starting offense, but I sense their starting quarterback still isn’t completely healthy after a couple of injury-marred seasons. Just a thought for you to keep an eye on as the pre-season progresses and August eventually becomes September.
Of course, if I’d just focus only on what Rex Ryan has to say about the 2010 season and Super Bowl XLV, my job would be so much easier, right? If he says it often enough, then we should all conclude the regular season is simply a formality en route to the New York Jets coronation in Dallas on February 6, 2011, right? Ah, August optimism... If only it were that simple.
As a die-hard Jets fan, I hope they make it back to the Super Bowl every season, but I am cautiously optimistic heading into the 2010 season. On paper, the Jets do appear much more loaded to go further than they went last season, but we don’t play football on paper, and there are always a whole bunch of ifs for the Jets and their loyal fans (as is the case for every NFL team) to cross fingers, toes and eyes during a marathon of a season. We’ve seen bubbles burst before after falling short in the AFC Championship game — 1983 and 1999 — but at the same time optimism, and even swagger, is “justified” as Super Bowl III legend Joe Namath said this past Thursday. Even with holdout Darrelle Revis out of camp the defense looks formidable. Even with Thomas Jones toting the ball in Kansas City’s backfield, and Alan Faneca playing on Arizona’s offensive line, the running game still looks steady. Even with Santonio Holmes facing suspension for the first four weeks of the season, the passing game looks promising. Even with Nick Folk as placekicker, one has to have faith in the special teams.
Of course, lots can go wrong fast during an NFL season. We keep it in the back of our minds and hope all those hobgoblins and gremlins stay there until after Valentine’s Day, but the reality is an NFL season is a war of attrition and all fans can really hope is that the Jets are still standing at the end, the last survivor of the NFL War of 2010.
Is there reason for worry at all the pre-season hype and bluster coming from Cortland? Perhaps. Last week, ESPN’s Tony Kornheiser noted that all the Jets lead the NFL in so far is mouths. Yes, there’s too much big talk. Then again, maybe for the first time in a long time, the big talk isn’t just empty.
Last points about the Jets... No matter what happens this season or beyond, and how many big talkers and studs this roster has, this will ALWAYS be the team of Broadway Joe. Without Joe Namath, there would never be any Jets legacy. Mark Sanchez can say all he wants that this is his offense, but for those who’ve endured the roller coaster since 1969, Sanchez is merely guiding the newest effort to honor and build on Namath’s legacy, as well as Winston Hill’s, and John Schmidt’s, and Don Maynard’s, and Ralph Baker’s, and Weeb Ewbank’s, and all the other members of that Super Bowl III team. You don’t talk about today’s Jets without talking about Broadway Joe and the rest of that 1968 team, the team that helped make the NFL and Super Bowl what they are today. That’s why next Monday night’s pre-season opener against the Giants is special. A new stadium. The ring of honor. The first step towards making a new chapter in history and waking up the echoes of 1968. But just as I proposed a few months ago that this new stadium be named after Wellington Mara and Sonny Werblin, the very men responsible for making New York football relevant and vibrant when the NFL needed both the Giants and Jets for its long-term growth and success, I can’t help but wonder why the Jets fail to recognize Werblin among the ring of honorees. If it weren’t for Sonny Werblin, there would be no Joe Namath, no Super Bowl III, no NFL-AFL merger, and quite possibly no buzz like we have now every year a new season begins. You always need to know where you come from in order to appreciate where you’re at. I do hope Rex Ryan and his merry band of men at Camp Chutzpah remember every minute of every practice and every meeting and every game that this entire 2010 season is a tribute to a legacy that really didn’t just start on January 12, 1969 at the Orange Bowl in Miami. It began in Sonny Werblin’s Park Avenue office during the summer of 1963, when the moribund and bankrupt Titans became the Jets and a team with a plan.
**********
So let me get this straight... Isaiah Thomas is coming back to the Knicks as a “consultant” to James Dolan and Donnie Walsh? He gets to stay on as head coach for Florida International University, 7-25 last season? And this is a conflict of interest in the eyes of the NBA and NCAA? Are you kidding me? What should commissioner David Stern be worried about... FIU might supply a few extra scrubs to fill out the Knicks’ bench, possibly making them more of a joke?
**********
Question: What is it about the Tampa Bay Rays and no-hitters? For almost the fourth time in approximately one calendar year, the Rays were going to be no-hit victims by Toronto’s Brandon Morrow yesterday, but dodged the bullet with two out in the 9th inning on a close hit by Evan Longoria. Still, the Rays lost 1-0, and were swept in Toronto for the entire weekend series, including a wild 17-11 loss Saturday.
Morrow (9-6, 4.45 ERA) was masterful, striking out 17 batters, bringing his season total to 151. And yet, for as much as Morrow should’ve been the story, the question begs as to how the Rays keep finding themselves on the wrong end of no-hitters. Since last July 23, the Rays have been no-hit by Chicago’s Mark Buehrle and Oakland’s Dallas Braden by perfect games, and no-hit by the White Sox’s Edwin Jackson while he pitched for the Arizona Diamondbacks (hardly a perfect game). Now Morrow takes the Rays to their last out. Why? How does this happen to one of MLB’s best offensive lineups? The Rays are 3rd in the AL in runs scored and runs batted in, 4th in On Base Percentage, 1st in walks received, and 7th in home runs. At first glance one would consider the Rays a fairly disciplined collection of hitters, but consider they are also 12th in hits, 11th in batting average and 9th in total bases, which gives some evidence of the feast or famine results one might expect from a young and free swinging team. Maybe the statistics tell the story; maybe the Rays simply are quirky magnets for no-hitters at a greater frequency. Nonetheless, when the next no-hitter is brewing, chances are good the Rays may be involved.
As for Saturday’s game, another Blue Jay made an auspicious debut: catcher J.P. Arencibia went 4 for 6, including 2 home runs and 3 RBIs. The Jays lead the entire major leagues in home runs with 175 despite being near the bottom of the AL in hits, team batting average and On Base Percentage, hence their feast or famine fortunes this season. What made Saturday’s game most remarkable was Toronto hitting 8 home runs off one of MLB’s best pitching staffs, including 6 off starter Jamie Shields.
Sometimes baseball’s like that... Offensive explosion one day, 1-0 pitchers’ duel the next.
**********
Has anyone noticed the AL’s winningest pitchers so far this season are the Yankees’ C.C. Sabathia, the Rays’ David Price, and the Twins’ Carl Pavano, all with 14 wins? By the way, for those who think the Yankees can roll through the post-season regardless of winning the AL East or wild card, C.C. Sabathia is 13-0 at Yankee Stadium, 1-5 away from the Bronx. Maybe this statistic doesn’t mean much, but if I were manager Joe Girardi I’d want the AL East crown real bad, just to be on the safe side with my pitching rotation’s bipolar home-road performance.
**********
Is it time to stick a fork in the Mets and declare them done for the 2010 pennant race? Yes, I, loyal fan since the ugly duckling beginnings, am finally accepting the cold realty that the 2010 season was fun while it lasted, and the Mets are now on proverbial life support. Is there anything wrong with an August youth movement, benching Jeff Francoeur and Luis Castillo in favor of Fernando Martinez and Reuben Tejada? Is there anything wrong with releasing Alex Cora and his .207 batting average? No, but there also would’ve been nothing wrong with using a 4 or 5-man outfield rotation when Carlos Beltran came off the DL, rather than disrupting team chemistry and a spunky lineup with a 33-year-old centerfielder still trying to regain his form after a long rehab from knee surgery. But the damage is done and all we can really do is a premature post mortem on how things went wrong so quickly.
Who do we blame for this Mets downslide? GM Omar Minaya? Manager Jerry Manuel? Underperforming veteran players? A roster simply playing too far above its head in May and June? Owner Fred Wilpon? COO Jeff Wilpon? Bernie Madoff? Bad luck? All of the above?
My theory is the Mets were never as good as they played in May and June, but they really aren’t as bad as they’ve played since early July. Somewhere in the middle lies the truth for essentially a .500 team (55-56). I’m not completely convinced the Wilpons are in financial straits after Bernie Madoff fleeced them in his Ponzi scheme, but I do think there’s some evidence the episode has made the Mets ownership very skittish about expanding payroll. The Mets already have the NL’s third-highest team payroll of $136 million, and chances are the Wilpons will seek to gradually trim the payroll over the next few years. Does this mean the Mets are giving up on competing? No, why should they? Look at the Tampa Bay Rays with their 67-44 record and $72 million payroll. Money isn’t the limiting reagent when it comes to team success.
What about bad luck and injuries? Maybe last year’s 70-92 disaster could be blamed on an astronomical rash of injuries, but look at the mounting injuries the Boston Red Sox and Philadelphia Phillies are dealing with. The Red Sox are 63-49; the Phillies are 62-49. How are both teams overcoming injuries better than the Mets have the past couple of seasons? Granted, the Red Sox ($161M) and Phillies ($143M) have higher payrolls with more talent and deeper rosters, but Carlos Beltran, Angel Pagan, David Wright, Jose Reyes, Jason Bay and Jeff Francoeur are hardly the Toledo Mud Hens.
Could we attribute the Red Sox and Phillies’ success to better managing? Terry Francona is clearly one of MLB’s best managers, and Charlie Manuel knows how to lead a team too, but neither are necessarily mentioned in the same breath as Miller Huggins, John McGraw, Connie Mack or Casey Stengel. Then again, Francona and Charlie Manuel have on attribute Jerry Manuel clearly lacks — the mentality of playing to win as opposed to avoiding loss. As cruel as this sounds, Jerry Manuel manages as if he’s running a prevent defense in football, and as we well know, a prevent defense merely stalls the inevitable — snatching a close defeat from the jaws of victory. The Mets play all nine innings for the most part, but they keep finding ways to lose the close ones. The Mets are 14-22 in one-run games so far this season. By contrast, the Phillies are 18-11. The Padres, NL West leaders and owners of the NL’s best record, are 21-15. When you consider the Mets can’t win on the road (22-37 vs. 33-19 at home) and can’t win the close games, there’s little margin for error if the lineup isn’t consistently running on all cylinders.
The issue isn’t talent as much as it’s mental toughness and focus. This falls on the manager, and the sands of the 2010 hour glass are running out on Jerry Manuel.
Does this let Omar Minaya off the hook? Not at all. For all of the big moves Minaya’s made since 2005, bringing in stars like Beltran, Francisco Rodriguez, Pedro Martinez and Carlos Delgado, the fact remains that these big moves have mostly failed to pay off the expected dividends. Minaya underestimated the talent and heart on his roster, especially with Oliver Perez and Luis Castillo. While Minaya deserves credit for finds like R.A. Dickey, Angel Pagan and Jonathon Niese, these finds haven’t been enough.
But Fred and Jeff Wilpon would rather be penny-wise and pound-foolish by holding onto bad contracts and trying to extract something, anything, from them. Why not simply cut Perez and Castillo and accept the fiscal losses? If unwilling to take a loss on contract money still owed, why not simply re-assign Minaya within the organization and start with a new GM? Ironically, when Alex Cora was released, Minaya said that Cora had the talent to be a future GM. Why not move Cora from the field to the front office? What’s there to lose if he has this potential? Or keep him as an additional coach if he’s the positive role model everyone says he is in the clubhouse? You have to start somewhere. Joe Torre first started his managerial career as a player-manager for the Mets in 1977. Not too long ago, the Mets had another veteran in the twilight of his playing career who would’ve been a wonderful addition to the coaching staff upon his release in 2007, Jose Valentin. Where is he now? Nowhere in Flushing, that’s for sure. If a player can’t do it on the field anymore and is still universally seen as a positive part of the organization, find a new role rather than severing all ties and kicking him to the curb.
When the season is over and the Mets have finished playing out the string of meaningless September games, Fred and Jeff Wilpon need to sit down and take a fresh look at their team and the grand scheme for its future. What kind of team do the Wilpons want to have as they look towards 2011 and beyond? How do they want their roster constructed and managed? Until the Wilpons come to terms with a vision it won’t matter who the GM, manager or players are.
**********
Memo to Darryl Strawberry: Congratulations on the opening of your new restaurant, Strawberry Sports Grill. Good luck! As one former cancer survivor to another, do you have any salads on the menu? Just wondering...
**********
Heard about Alex Rodriguez’s left leg injury yesterday. Took a line shot off the bat of Lance Berkman moments after saying a quick hello to FOX Sports announcer Joe Buck while playing the field during batting practice. This is definitely one for the books we could look up years from now, as Casey Stengel used to say. Hey, Joe! Good to see you... OW! OW! I’m wounded!
Guess that’ll teach A-Rod to cater to the media, eh? For the record, that’s supposed to be the most solid swing Berkman’s had since the Yankees acquired him from Houston.
As we see, A-Rod recovered quickly from his shin boo-boo and returned to the lineup in last night’s 7-2 win over the Red Sox. Gee... You don’t think? Nah...
Speaking of A-Rod, now that he’s reached 600 career home runs by age 35, the question remains as to how good his chances are of surpassing Barry Bonds’ record of 762, especially if he’s now clean of PEDs. Well, he averages 25 homers a season for the rest of his career, A-Rod should be huffing and puffing towards the record six seasons from now, 2016, at the age of 41, on par with how old Henry Aaron was when he passed Babe Ruth’s 714 in 1974. And that’s the way it should be when pursuing a record associated with longevity. An older player should be running on fumes and Ben-Gay, perhaps carrying a slight paunch, not an increased skull circumference like Bonds did. Would it mean something if A-Rod breaks Bonds record sometime in 2016 looking like he’s carrying Father Time on his back? Yes, because A-Rod wised up and allowed himself to age like all ballplayers should. Maybe if A-Rod breaks the record looking more like Ernest Borgnine rather than Joan Rivers folks might finally give him his due and look past his Texas Boli days.
**********
BIG prediction from my crystal ball: The Baltimore Orioles will become respectable next season under new manager Buck Showalter, a force to be reckoned with in the AL East by 2013, and win the world series by 2016. By the way, Jerry Manuel will be the Orioles manager in 2016 after Buck drives everyone nuts and Peter Angelos is forced to fire him after the 2015 season at the advice of Dr. Phil.
**********
Any idea how San Diego and San Francisco keep leading the NL West? Pitching, pitching, and more pitching. The Padres have their solid rotation of Mat Latos, John Garland, Kevin Correa and Clayton Richard, and Heath Bell still continues to be among the best closers. The Giants have their solid rotation of Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, Jonathan Sanchez and Barry Zito. Of course it still remains to be seen if the Giants can get consistent performances from their bullpen. Either way, both teams need pitching to keep carrying them as neither is an offensive juggernaut.
**********
Did you catch that “blown” call by Bob Davidson during the 9th inning of Thursday night’s Phillies-Marlins game? What clearly seemed like a fair ball down the third base line was called foul by Davidson, costing the Marlins the winning run of a game they’d ultimately lose in 11 innings. Marlins manager Edwin Rodriguez called the call the “worst” he’s seen in his entire MLB career as a player and coach, and there’s been lots of hubbub over Davidson’s arrogant refusal to reconsider his call. Of course, folks have done their fair share of harping over the need for expanded instant replay in MLB, especially after it’s been approved for the Little League World Series. This is all well and fine, I agree Davidson appeared in a very poor light, and I do agree MLB needs to come out of the Dark Ages and use technology more to assist with umpiring. However, if you take four or five extra looks at the call in question, you might just start to wonder the same thing I did... When the ball left Gaby Sanchez’s bat, it DID immediately strike in foul territory first then land very near the foul side of the third base line on its first bounce in front of the third base bag. With all due respect to baseball experts and hysterical baseball fans and media members, I’m not completely convinced Davidson blew the call the longer you look at the replay.
**********
Question: Why are certain members of the New York media mocking Amar’e Stoudemire’s exploration of Judaism and possible Jewish roots through his mother?
**********
This past Wednesday evening I had the opportunity to accompany a friend and see a screening of “The Tillman Story,” due out soon in limited release. I highly recommend all of you add this movie to your must-see list, whether in a theater or on television. In fact, I’ve gone as far as recommending this movie to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and all NFL employees.
For those who don’t remember, Pat Tillman was a hard-hitting safety, and thinking man, for the Arizona Cardinals who gave up a multi-year multi-million dollar contract to serve in the US Army Rangers after the 9-11 Terrorist attacks. Sadly, Tillman was killed by friendly fire in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004. The movie primarily focuses on the farce of an investigation conducted by the Pentagon and the shameful way the Bush-43 administration, and its cronies, used a dead football player as a public relations tool for its War on Terror agenda and the president’s re-election campaign.
But the most powerful part of the movie relative to sports was listening to Pat Tillman speak from his heart and deep mind on September 12, 2001 in a television interview. To paraphrase, Tillman noted how despite his national fame and comfortable wealth associated with being a professional football player, he really hadn’t done anything in life to contribute to the big picture of being a global citizen (this apparently was his motivation for leaving the NFL to serve in war just as athletes of earlier generations did during WWII and the Korean War). Tillman said, “we bitch” about things players don’t like as the trade-offs associated with professional sports, but players fail to remember or appreciate how these trade-offs are a much better benefit compared to struggles by previous generations of players.
Think about it... September 2001, and here was a player who GOT it, what the modern NFL was about relative to its roots and years of evolution. We’re closing in on the ninth anniversary of those attacks, and players are still bitching about things that have very little to do with the big picture. So why do NFL players like Darrelle Revis and Terrell Owens constantly harp on their monetary worth? Considering the uncertain state of the NFL’s future and its next collective bargaining agreement, might it be wiser to simply shut up and enjoy the peace of mind of having a contract and roster spot in the first place? After all, these guys are watched and rooted for by a national fan base still suffering from a double-digit unemployment rate. Will this crop of players get it like Tillman did?
**********
Speaking of shutting up, I really wish Brett Favre would until after he visits Dr. James Andrews and gets a full evaluation of his surgically repaired ankle. Hear what the surgeon has to say, then share with us your annual Hamlet routine of “to retire or not to retire.”
**********
This past weekend was the Pro Football Hall of Fame induction ceremony and exhibition game. Congratulations to Jerry Rice, Emmitt Smith, Rickey Jackson, John Randal, Russ Grimm, Dick LeBeau and Floyd Little for their entrance. I had the pleasure of watching all seven play during their NFL careers and thought highly of all of their contributions to the game. For LeBeau and Little their inductions are long overdue. However, my fondest player memory from this Hall of Fame class is of former Viking John Randal in a Brett Favre-related commercial. Randal, one of football’s most entertaining motor mouths, is sitting at a sewing machine making a miniature Packers jersey with Favre’s number 4 on it. In the next scene, Randall is chasing a chicken, wearing the Favre jersey, all around the coop in preparation for the upcoming season. We saw this unconventional training technique in Rocky, but the fact that a commercial took advantage of the Vikings-Packers rivalry adds special humor.
Lastly, the Hall of Fame game between the Dallas Cowboys and Cincinnati Bengals was pretty much a snoozer. However, I will give you food for thought towards any regular season predictions you might wish to make... T.O. or no T.O., if Carson Palmer can’t stay upright in the pocket and step into his passes, the Bengals’ offense is in big trouble. Perhaps I’m reading too much into what I saw in the limited action by the starting offense, but I sense their starting quarterback still isn’t completely healthy after a couple of injury-marred seasons. Just a thought for you to keep an eye on as the pre-season progresses and August eventually becomes September.
Monday, August 2, 2010
Labor Pains and the NFL - Sports Thoughts for August 2, 2010
As NFL training camps are opening summertime discussions gently shift from baseball pennant races to predictions for 32 teams heading into the 2010 regular season. We start to ask more pointed questions about quarterbacks, new rookies, relocated veterans, rebuilding teams and the fragile perch where several teams occupy in terms of power rankings.
Well, I have a pointed question… how did we get here?
Here? What’s here?
The cloudy state of labor negotiations between NFL owners and the NFLPA.
Oh… there!
I know it seems odd, but looking at where things are with a new NFL collective bargaining agreement I can’t help but recall the same question my ex-wife asked me as we were signing our divorce papers last year. How did we get here? Gee… like a million other divorces, let me count the ways. Don’t you somehow think a few geniuses on Wall Street or in Washington probably asked the same question as our national economy went down the toilet?
Sorry, I can’t help it. When you listen to the laundry list of issues keeping NFL owners and players on course for a 2011 lockout you can’t help but wonder how and why both parties let things continue to simmer, fester, and eventually build up to a boiling point. These issues really aren’t news. It’s not like any of these issues weren’t already being discussed a few years ago. In fact, some of these issues were discussed when Paul Tagliabue was NFL commissioner, and these issues were definitely discussed when the late Gene Upshaw was running the NFLPA. So why, after more than a couple of years of issues being on the table, are we looking at a stalemate and potential work stoppage?
Here’s my limited theory…
I believe many of the issues fundamental to today’s ongoing labor strife were discussed often among owners, players, Tagliabue and Upshaw. Then Tagliabue retired and Roger Goodell took over as commissioner in August 2006. Tagliabue had his own vision and agenda; Goodell has his own vision and agenda as well, though not necessarily identical to Tagliabue’s. Upshaw was ill with pancreatic cancer, albeit unaware of his illness or how quickly it was killing him. To say Upshaw had a contentious relationship with retired players was an understatement (this will be discussed more later).
But Upshaw passed away in August 2008 and the NFLPA essentially went leaderless until DeMaurice Smith took over as executive director in March 2009.
Why is this basic timeline important? The last collective bargaining agreement in 2006 focused on television revenue, the salary cap, how much of the revenue pot would go towards player salaries, how much of the pot would go towards extended medical benefits for retired players, and rules for free agency. This was a CBA negotiated with Tagliabue, Goodell and Upshaw all playing major roles.
But the owners voted unanimously to opt out of that collective bargaining agreement in May 2008, approximately three months before Upshaw’s unexpected death, primarily because player salaries – especially for rookies -- were getting out of hand. Now we have a CBA about to expire two years earlier than planned, all because of money no matter which angle we view things from. Worse, the NFLPA didn’t have any official leadership for approximately ten months after the owners opted out of the current CBA. To say the least, the timing of things has not helped matters as the 2010 season begins.
What seem to be the primary issues at the crux of this CBA impasse?
1. Percentage of revenue pot going to player salaries.
2. Guidelines for rookie contracts, length and salaries.
3. Rules for free agency.
4. Overall player discipline policy.
5. Testing for Human Growth Hormone.
6. Expansion of NFL regular season schedule from 16 to 18 games.
Allow me to address each issue:
Testing for HGH – I’m sticking my neck out and going on the record as 100% in favor of this. Yes, the blood test is more invasive than a urine test. Yes, the testing protocol has its flaws. Yes, it may take incredible luck to catch an HGH user with the reliability limitations of this test. But it is for the best interests of professional sports to use whatever means are available to ensure clean and healthy players. Say what you want about MLB using HGH testing in the minors, but something needed to be done as a first step towards making HGH testing part of the big league landscape. Just as the reality for the MLBPA will be to accept HGH testing as Bud Selig’s office gently forces it down its throat, the same will be true for the NFLPA. In the case of NFL players, testing for and cleaning the sport of HGH use is vital considering the long-term health risks players face after their careers end. The rule of thumb has long been that one year of playing contact football shortens the life span by approximately nine months. Think about it… just how many of your former football heroes live into their 70s and 80s?
Do the math… the average US male has a life expectancy of 72-74 years. The average NFL career is approximately four years, after an average of 6-8 years of playing football at the college, high school and lower levels. So, let’s work with an average football player having 12 total years of contact; this translates to shortening his life expectancy by nine years, meaning the average football player can expect to die sometime between ages 63-65. If the federal government does as expected, retirement age for the sake of saving Social Security an early demise will be raised to 70. Why? Because average Americans are living longer and costing more in terms of health care. But former football players aren’t going to live as long, even though they potentially cost more in health care costs due to debilitating injuries.
Now it’s time for a quick lesson in math and science: If an NFL player uses HGH with the goal of extending his career for as long as possible, what are the implications for the rest of his life? Well, let’s suppose an NFL player wanted to use HGH and enjoy a 20-year career like Brett Favre (no, I’m NOT accusing Brett Favre of using HGH). This player enjoys a long career, piles up lots of impressive stats, perhaps even wins a few MVP awards and Super Bowl rings, and earns more money than you or I would know what to do with it. He retires at the ripe old age of approximately 42, assuming he was drafted out of college after playing his full four years of eligibility.
Being such a prolific player, we’ll assume he’s entering Canton as a first-ballot hall of famer at age 48. So, on a bright and sunny Ohio day, this 48-year-old football legend stands before all of his adoring fans, friends, family members and contemporaries, to give the speech of his life and recall the glory of approximately 30 years of playing football, from his pee-wee league days all the way to his final game in an NFL uniform.
While we’re all soaking it in, we’re all oblivious to the fact that our beloved gridiron warrior, our football hero, is a physical time bomb waiting to go off. Why? Those 30 years of playing football potentially shorten Mr. Football Hero’s life by 24 years, so instead of living to an average age of 74 he’s potentially among the dearly departed by 50, only two years after his Hall of Fame induction. Sounds familiar? All you have to do is look at all the former players who have recently died between the ages of 44 and 52. Did all these players take HGH? Of course not, but if the wear and tear of years of brutal contact could shorten their life spans through an assortment of physical ills, is it really that outlandish to envision the scenario I presented?
Player Discipline Policy – It’s no secret that NFL players were finding their fair share of trouble without consequence towards the end of Paul Tagliabue’s stewardship. When Roger Goodell took over in 2008, player discipline and “honoring the shield” became top priority. As prosecution, judge, jury and executioner, Commissioner Goodell has certainly made us all aware of the new sheriff in town, and despite the harsh and unilateral impression of this conduct policy, things are working in the right direction.
Naturally the players take exception with the way this conduct policy works, since they bear the brunt of consequences. But ask yourself this, even if the NFLPA provided its version of a public defender, and offending players were provided the same “constitutional rights” as criminals in our nation’s courts, would we honestly expect much different penalties imposed, or none at all, on Pacman Jones, Tank Johnson, Michael Vick, Ben Roethlisberger, or Plaxico Burress?
Just last week, Jeff Pash, the legal counsel for the NFL, invoked Burress’ name, without specifically saying it, to Mike Greenberg and Mike Golic on their ESPN Radio morning show. At issue was Burress’ legal right to retain his signing bonus with the New York Giants even after being sentenced to prison for “shooting himself in the foot” with an unlicensed handgun in a Manhattan nightclub. I tend to agree with Pash on this insinuation; I don’t think Burress deserved to retain any money associated with his Giants contract. The moment his gun went off should’ve automatically nullified any rights. Yes, it’s been explained to me that some of his bonus money was for service before the shooting, but no one can fully convince me he had the legal right to keep any of that money, since his self-inflicted shooting made him useless to his employer. Ask yourself this: if you or I did the same thing, what would the consequences be?
Only a few days ago, Roethlisberger told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that he’d be torn apart if Steelers fans booed him at home this season. This was interpreted by ESPN’s John Clayton as “Ben’s finally getting it” about his off-field reputation in relation to Steelers fans. REALLY? If anything, I think it shows how little Roethlisberger still gets about the consequences of his actions. He’s not promising to be a better person; he’s begging for a free pass from fan wrath. NONSENSE! I think Steelers fans SHOULD boo Roethlisberger as much as possible during the pre-season so he gets the message loud and clear how disgusted fans are with his behavior the past three years. He should hear their disapproval and disappointment with him so it sticks in his head for his entire six-week regular season suspension, a reminder of how much worse things could be if he screws up again. When Roethlisberger finally returns from his suspension, then Steelers fans can cheer him.
But Roethlisberger’s suspension is another issue of concern regarding the player conduct policy. Roethlisberger’s suspension is for six weeks but could be reduced to four if he demonstrates progress towards behavioral expectations. This is where I believe Commissioner Goodell needs to avoid hypocrisy and stick with six games, even though I was among many folks calling for eight in the first place. To reduce the suspension almost caters to the emotional manipulation ploy Roethlisberger seems to be playing through the media: please love me… don’t hate me or punish me… my ego can’t take it if you don’t keep worshiping me.
If you didn’t already figure it out, I’m very much in favor of the conduct policy staying just as it is, if not tougher than its present format. The sad reality is that no matter what actions Commissioner Goodell takes with players who can’t honor the shield, players will continue to transgress off-field, so this conduct policy is not a fool-proof deterrent. But as long as there are fools on NFL rosters, a maximum toughness policy is a necessity.
Rookie Contracts – All we need to see are the new contracts and signing bonuses given to Sam Bradford and Tim Tebow to know that NFL economics are completely out of whack. There needs to be a rookie salary cap as well as a limit to guaranteed monies in the form of bonuses for kids barely of drinking age who have yet to play a single down in an NFL regular season game. Many years ago, in 1965, the New York Jets singed rookie quarterback Joe Namath to the richest contract in professional sports history, $427,000 for three years. One of the most lasting reactions was by defending NFL-champion Cleveland Browns quarterback, Dr. Frank Ryan: “If Namath is worth $427,000, I’m worth a million.”
For as outlandish as Namath’s contract appeared, many folks are unaware that Jets owner Sonny Werblin and head coach Weeb Ewbank required Namath to earn no more than $30,000 per year in base salary in order to prevent all-out mutiny by veteran teammates making in the neighborhood of $10,000. The rest of Namath’s contract was deferred to ensure income later on during his career or after his career ended. The bottom line was Namath’s contract represented a balance between reward for talent and pragmatism relative to the grand scheme of running an organization, even if this contract did represent a new era in spending.
Do we honestly know how Bradford and Tebow will fare with their teams? No. Does Bradford deserve the largest signing bonus for a number one draft pick? Not if we’re comparing his potential, coming off a lost junior season at Oklahoma, shoulder surgery and playing behind a porous St. Louis offensive line against a decade of high level performance by Peyton Manning and Tom Brady. Should a rookie receive some healthy compensation for being a top draft pick? Yes, but not equivalent to an entire continent’s GNP.
Do I believe Bradford can be successful in St. Louis? Yes, but with a supporting cast. But let’s see how performance works out before the keys to the vault are turned over. If Bradford does turn out to be the second coming of Kurt Warner in St. Louis, there will be plenty of opportunities to restructure his contract and reward him fairly.
In the case of Tebow, it’s no secret Broncos head coach Jeff McDaniels is rolling the dice and staking his entire coaching career on the fortunes of this quarterback. Is Tebow a gifted athlete with great intangibles? Yes, no doubt, but as I’ve also written prior to the NFL Draft, I don’t believe Tebow will ultimately succeed as an NFL quarterback, but could very well become a very productive tight end or H-Back. Again, the Broncos signed Tebow to a contract as a very overrated first-round pick, and the guaranteed money is quite handsome. What happens if I’m right and Tebow fails as a quarterback? The Broncos end up with egg on their face for throwing millions at someone who should’ve been a third-round pick and converted to a more appropriate position on offense.
Now we see the risk of unexpected injury with Cowboys first-round pick, receiver Dez “carry your own shoulder pads” Bryant. Bryant didn’t even make it through his first week of training camps before an ankle injury sidelined him 4-6 weeks. But the contract is signed and the bonus check is cashed. Already the only guarantee the Cowboys have is that whatever guaranteed money has started depreciating in terms of investment.
Why such a harsh stance against rookies who any team would love to have on their roster as part of a rebuilding process? Consider Exhibits A, B and C -- Ryan Leaf, JeMarcus Russell, and Michael Vick. What do all three quarterbacks have in common? All inked contracts with very large bonuses and their teams got incredibly lousy returns on their investments.
And this doesn’t just apply to quarterbacks. Look at offensive linemen busts like Tony Mandarich, or linebackers like Brian Bosworth. Any number of running backs from Penn State -- Blair Thomas, Ki-Jana Carter and Larry Johnson come to mind. If you want to consider wide receivers, just look at all the busts former GM Matt Millen drafted for the Lions.
Signing rookies to their first contract and providing upfront money does present lots of risks. Players can get injured or complacent, or they can find a lifetime of off-field trouble, or simply encounter a small dose of bad luck. I think it would be far less outrageous and risky if bonuses weren’t escalating at the pace of a geometric progression. I’m clearly in favor of setting up a rookie salary scale, rookie salary cap, and limit on bonus money. I don’t begrudge players their money; I just think the time has come to spread the money wisely. Pay enough of a signing bonus for players to establish themselves in adult life in a new home and geographic location, make sure they have enough money to help out immediate family and establish a economic foundation in terms of a bank account.
Twenty-somethings don’t need millions of dollars to bankroll a posse of hanger-ons, organize a future entertainment career, or throw away on other foolish fluff. If rookies better understood there’s a fundamental scale difference between the “American Dream” and creating a Vegas-like lifestyle. Why do players pursue a professional football career, for the passion for the game, competition and pursuit of a championship – or do they pursue the career as a means to an end, a stepping stone towards becoming yet another commercialized brand? If NFL owners have issues with what their players are potentially becoming, then they should’ve given more thought to creating and perpetuating this monster. Sadly, the owners are the enablers with the money.
Do we also need a standard length for rookie contracts? Yes, but not as the NFLPA wants things. The NFLPA wants three-year contracts so all rookies would be unrestricted free agents at the expiration. This can’t work if owners are going to continue signing rookies with astronomical bonuses and sometimes get little in return on the investment. In fact, in some cases it literally forces a team to throw players into action before they’re ready to positively contribute (see Tim Tebow in Denver).
Rules for Free Agency - If the owners and NFLPA can agree on a rookie salary cap, salary scale, and put reasonable limits on signing bonuses then I could theoretically live with three-year contracts for all rookies. However, unrestricted free agency cannot take place at the end of the contract. For so many rookies it may take well beyond three years to make any significant impact. If players are restricted free agents at the end of the third year, perhaps in the context of rookie contracts having fourth-year vested options, then this could be a reasonable compromise where all players can be unrestricted free agents after their fourth season.
Perhaps the most troubling theme throughout these issues is the NFLPA, owners and players all fighting over more, more, more, and having it now, now, now. Yes, the average length of an NFL career is barely four years, but maybe if players didn’t come to the NFL with the agenda of getting all they can as fast as possible, while the getting’s good, perhaps their priorities and focus would be better and their careers might be longer and healthier. In fact, as we hear more and more about current NFL players fighting with their teams over contracts and money, one really has to wonder what long-term risks they take by going toe-to-toe with the people writing their checks. Again, I don’t begrudge the money. I do take exception with ego and money dominating the dialogue when the majority of NFL players are essentially disposable at some point in their careers.
Dividing up the Revenue Pot – Again, here is another issue where ego, money and the need for artificial and immediate gratification warp the system. Players currently receive 60% of league revenue towards salary. Owners would like to redistribute that allocation. The underlying question is whether the owners are trying to pocket more money for themselves, so at first glance it seems millionaire players are battling billionaire owners over shared wealth. I don’t necessarily see it this way because, again, I think the key issue appears to be the players’ cut is all desired in terms of as much as possible and as soon as possible while the window is open yet in the process of slowly closing.
I believe the owners could continue to live with 60% of revenue going to current player salaries, but not in the form of short-term payments. Given how many former players deal with financial problems, for one reason or another, in addition to serious debilitating injuries, I think owners could be more comfortable with salary deferments for players so there’s income waiting for players after their on-field contributions end. For star players, long-term deferments of salary could be tied to personal services contracts where they could continue to work for the organization in a variety of positions after their playing days are over. By remaining members of the organization after they retire as players, these former players could be taken care of on the organizational group health plan. If given the choice between income and health care, I’d think every former player would welcome continued health care benefits from their former team for as many years as possible. But if the goal of a player’s contract is to get as much money as fast as possible, there’s no long-term plan beyond what the NFL has in place as part of its agreement with the NFLPA and retired players association.
Are the retired players receiving as much as they should for their “golden” years? Hardly. Case in point, look at the recent lawsuit filed by former Miami Dolphins running back Eugene “Mercury” Morris, suing the NFL for retroactive retirement benefits to the tune of $3,000 per month. Think about it… one of the NFL’s most electrifying running backs from the 1970s is suing the NFL for being shortchanged $3,000 per month, or $36,000 per year. One could only wonder how much total money the entire suit seeks, not to mention how little Morris is forced to live on each month as a man in his early sixties. Granted, the salaries were much lower forty years ago, but the story is still the same: inflow of funds, quality of lifestyle, purchasing power and personal acquisitions are all drastically different years after one leaves the game compared to the height of your playing career.
Today’s players will be living quite differently and having much different expenses 20, 30, 40 years from now, assuming they’re still alive. Do they understand the concept of saving for the rainy days, and not necessarily a short-term lockout? Do today’s players comprehend how retired players struggle to live on a daily basis? I’m very skeptical as to how many of today’s players fully comprehend and appreciate NFL history prior to the last work stoppage in 1987, much less the implications of how past labor battles have shaped the evolution of today’s multi-billion dollar industry.
Again, I don’t begrudge today’s players their money. I do, however, believe today’s players need to make the money less about them and their fast track narcissism. If today’s players were more willing to look at their income with more long-term and bigger picture perspectives, there would be a more cost-efficient way of enjoying that 60% revenue share where they could help retired players more and lay a stronger foundation for themselves when they retire.
Repeat after me: it’s not all about us, so let’s find a way to make things win-win for all NFL stakeholders. Perhaps this was Gene Upshaw’s biggest flaw as NFLPA Executive Director – only believing and advocating his representation of current players at the expense of retired players and rookies. The Upshaw mantra was “my salary is only paid by players currently on NFL rosters”, and this made him Public Enemy Number One to his fellow retirees.
Expansion to 18-Game Schedule – This is perhaps the DUMBEST move by the NFL and most myopic effort to generate more revenue from fans and television networks. This issue has been tossed around since the current CBA was negotiated, and has always been a long-term vision of Commissioner Goodell. The rationale is to provide football fans more of a great thing and spare fans and networks of four mediocre-quality preseason games. It seems inevitable that NFL owners will approve an 18-game regular season schedule with the tradeoff being only two preseason games. In theory, players are still only playing 20 total games, but fewer games would be meaningless. For those of us who enjoy football more than any other sport, we could get a longer season and more of what we love.
However, unlike the majority of NFL fans Commissioner Goodell cites in a recent speech to Green Bay Packer boosters, I would rather stick with the current schedule of four preseason games and 16 regular season games. Why? Because two additional weeks of regular season games increases the potential for more player injuries, especially starters who are on the field for almost every team’s play. At least in preseason games your team’s starters get time off to save on physical wear and tear.
For those thinking an 18-game regular season schedule would force teams like the Colts to play their stars throughout the entire season and not take games off like they do after clinching a division or home-field advantage, I expect the opposite to be true. If the Colts can clinch their division in the same 13-14 games as they did in 2009, fans should expect them to rest their regulars for even more of the final weeks of the regular season. If you’re pining for a perfect season, you can likely forget about that forever.
The players are naturally complaining about potential for injury, but diminish their position by also complaining about being paid their multi-million dollar salaries for two extra games instead of the current 16. Excuse me? We need to prorate an increase in salaries? Are NFL teams going to do this with coaches, trainers, office staff or referees? I seriously doubt it. In fact, I frankly don’t understand why players are paid their salaries in 16 weekly checks. The players are essentially full-time employees with off-season training programs, mini-camps and training camp. I wouldn’t be surprised if NFL players are at team facilities for as many days during a calendar year as teachers are at schools during any given academic year. That being said, if teachers are paid over monthly or semi-monthly paychecks, why can’t NFL teams pay players every 15th and 30th of each month? Oh… I get it… if players are paid in 24 semi-monthly paychecks, the checks will have smaller amounts compared to 16 weekly checks, and smaller isn’t good in today’s era of monetary egocentrism.
As you can tell, I have little sympathy for players in terms of how their salaries are paid, much less the size of each paycheck. However, I do side with the players overall on this particular issue. 18 games is too long a regular season, unless we’re talking the Canadian Football League, where players only play 18 regular season games with no preseason at all.
However, if the NFL does go to an 18-game regular season, owners and the NFLPA need to make certain adjustments in order to make this new schedule as safe as possible for players:
1. The NFL mandates a bye week prior to the start of regular season games, as well as another bye week prior to the playoffs.
2. Each team receives two by weeks during the regular season, as opposed to one.
3. Elimination of regular season overtime, allowing for games to end in ties scores.
4. Expansion of active team rosters to 55 players with a commensurate salary cap.
5. Maintain six-man practice squads.
Since every issue on the negotiating table contentiously revolves around money, I don’t expect this issue to be resolved with any more ease than the other issues.
The bottom line is that players and owners are equally green-eyed when it comes to money and the new CBA. This is hardly new, and these issues have all been kicked around among players and owners since before the current CBA was negotiated. For a sports league boasting so much wealth and revenue, it seems foolish for money to be the volatile focal point for potential sabotage. Everyone needs to zoom out the focus lens and scan the broader picture of how the NFL has evolved and how it will continue to evolve. There’s more than enough money to go around and the NFL is too big, too successful and too popular to bog down over all this money. While there’s certainly enough blame to go around for all parties, the players are mostly in the wrong on almost every issue. But today’s players are the manifestation of a worldview gone amok when things were going good and no one was minding the store as closely as it should’ve been.
Well, I have a pointed question… how did we get here?
Here? What’s here?
The cloudy state of labor negotiations between NFL owners and the NFLPA.
Oh… there!
I know it seems odd, but looking at where things are with a new NFL collective bargaining agreement I can’t help but recall the same question my ex-wife asked me as we were signing our divorce papers last year. How did we get here? Gee… like a million other divorces, let me count the ways. Don’t you somehow think a few geniuses on Wall Street or in Washington probably asked the same question as our national economy went down the toilet?
Sorry, I can’t help it. When you listen to the laundry list of issues keeping NFL owners and players on course for a 2011 lockout you can’t help but wonder how and why both parties let things continue to simmer, fester, and eventually build up to a boiling point. These issues really aren’t news. It’s not like any of these issues weren’t already being discussed a few years ago. In fact, some of these issues were discussed when Paul Tagliabue was NFL commissioner, and these issues were definitely discussed when the late Gene Upshaw was running the NFLPA. So why, after more than a couple of years of issues being on the table, are we looking at a stalemate and potential work stoppage?
Here’s my limited theory…
I believe many of the issues fundamental to today’s ongoing labor strife were discussed often among owners, players, Tagliabue and Upshaw. Then Tagliabue retired and Roger Goodell took over as commissioner in August 2006. Tagliabue had his own vision and agenda; Goodell has his own vision and agenda as well, though not necessarily identical to Tagliabue’s. Upshaw was ill with pancreatic cancer, albeit unaware of his illness or how quickly it was killing him. To say Upshaw had a contentious relationship with retired players was an understatement (this will be discussed more later).
But Upshaw passed away in August 2008 and the NFLPA essentially went leaderless until DeMaurice Smith took over as executive director in March 2009.
Why is this basic timeline important? The last collective bargaining agreement in 2006 focused on television revenue, the salary cap, how much of the revenue pot would go towards player salaries, how much of the pot would go towards extended medical benefits for retired players, and rules for free agency. This was a CBA negotiated with Tagliabue, Goodell and Upshaw all playing major roles.
But the owners voted unanimously to opt out of that collective bargaining agreement in May 2008, approximately three months before Upshaw’s unexpected death, primarily because player salaries – especially for rookies -- were getting out of hand. Now we have a CBA about to expire two years earlier than planned, all because of money no matter which angle we view things from. Worse, the NFLPA didn’t have any official leadership for approximately ten months after the owners opted out of the current CBA. To say the least, the timing of things has not helped matters as the 2010 season begins.
What seem to be the primary issues at the crux of this CBA impasse?
1. Percentage of revenue pot going to player salaries.
2. Guidelines for rookie contracts, length and salaries.
3. Rules for free agency.
4. Overall player discipline policy.
5. Testing for Human Growth Hormone.
6. Expansion of NFL regular season schedule from 16 to 18 games.
Allow me to address each issue:
Testing for HGH – I’m sticking my neck out and going on the record as 100% in favor of this. Yes, the blood test is more invasive than a urine test. Yes, the testing protocol has its flaws. Yes, it may take incredible luck to catch an HGH user with the reliability limitations of this test. But it is for the best interests of professional sports to use whatever means are available to ensure clean and healthy players. Say what you want about MLB using HGH testing in the minors, but something needed to be done as a first step towards making HGH testing part of the big league landscape. Just as the reality for the MLBPA will be to accept HGH testing as Bud Selig’s office gently forces it down its throat, the same will be true for the NFLPA. In the case of NFL players, testing for and cleaning the sport of HGH use is vital considering the long-term health risks players face after their careers end. The rule of thumb has long been that one year of playing contact football shortens the life span by approximately nine months. Think about it… just how many of your former football heroes live into their 70s and 80s?
Do the math… the average US male has a life expectancy of 72-74 years. The average NFL career is approximately four years, after an average of 6-8 years of playing football at the college, high school and lower levels. So, let’s work with an average football player having 12 total years of contact; this translates to shortening his life expectancy by nine years, meaning the average football player can expect to die sometime between ages 63-65. If the federal government does as expected, retirement age for the sake of saving Social Security an early demise will be raised to 70. Why? Because average Americans are living longer and costing more in terms of health care. But former football players aren’t going to live as long, even though they potentially cost more in health care costs due to debilitating injuries.
Now it’s time for a quick lesson in math and science: If an NFL player uses HGH with the goal of extending his career for as long as possible, what are the implications for the rest of his life? Well, let’s suppose an NFL player wanted to use HGH and enjoy a 20-year career like Brett Favre (no, I’m NOT accusing Brett Favre of using HGH). This player enjoys a long career, piles up lots of impressive stats, perhaps even wins a few MVP awards and Super Bowl rings, and earns more money than you or I would know what to do with it. He retires at the ripe old age of approximately 42, assuming he was drafted out of college after playing his full four years of eligibility.
Being such a prolific player, we’ll assume he’s entering Canton as a first-ballot hall of famer at age 48. So, on a bright and sunny Ohio day, this 48-year-old football legend stands before all of his adoring fans, friends, family members and contemporaries, to give the speech of his life and recall the glory of approximately 30 years of playing football, from his pee-wee league days all the way to his final game in an NFL uniform.
While we’re all soaking it in, we’re all oblivious to the fact that our beloved gridiron warrior, our football hero, is a physical time bomb waiting to go off. Why? Those 30 years of playing football potentially shorten Mr. Football Hero’s life by 24 years, so instead of living to an average age of 74 he’s potentially among the dearly departed by 50, only two years after his Hall of Fame induction. Sounds familiar? All you have to do is look at all the former players who have recently died between the ages of 44 and 52. Did all these players take HGH? Of course not, but if the wear and tear of years of brutal contact could shorten their life spans through an assortment of physical ills, is it really that outlandish to envision the scenario I presented?
Player Discipline Policy – It’s no secret that NFL players were finding their fair share of trouble without consequence towards the end of Paul Tagliabue’s stewardship. When Roger Goodell took over in 2008, player discipline and “honoring the shield” became top priority. As prosecution, judge, jury and executioner, Commissioner Goodell has certainly made us all aware of the new sheriff in town, and despite the harsh and unilateral impression of this conduct policy, things are working in the right direction.
Naturally the players take exception with the way this conduct policy works, since they bear the brunt of consequences. But ask yourself this, even if the NFLPA provided its version of a public defender, and offending players were provided the same “constitutional rights” as criminals in our nation’s courts, would we honestly expect much different penalties imposed, or none at all, on Pacman Jones, Tank Johnson, Michael Vick, Ben Roethlisberger, or Plaxico Burress?
Just last week, Jeff Pash, the legal counsel for the NFL, invoked Burress’ name, without specifically saying it, to Mike Greenberg and Mike Golic on their ESPN Radio morning show. At issue was Burress’ legal right to retain his signing bonus with the New York Giants even after being sentenced to prison for “shooting himself in the foot” with an unlicensed handgun in a Manhattan nightclub. I tend to agree with Pash on this insinuation; I don’t think Burress deserved to retain any money associated with his Giants contract. The moment his gun went off should’ve automatically nullified any rights. Yes, it’s been explained to me that some of his bonus money was for service before the shooting, but no one can fully convince me he had the legal right to keep any of that money, since his self-inflicted shooting made him useless to his employer. Ask yourself this: if you or I did the same thing, what would the consequences be?
Only a few days ago, Roethlisberger told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that he’d be torn apart if Steelers fans booed him at home this season. This was interpreted by ESPN’s John Clayton as “Ben’s finally getting it” about his off-field reputation in relation to Steelers fans. REALLY? If anything, I think it shows how little Roethlisberger still gets about the consequences of his actions. He’s not promising to be a better person; he’s begging for a free pass from fan wrath. NONSENSE! I think Steelers fans SHOULD boo Roethlisberger as much as possible during the pre-season so he gets the message loud and clear how disgusted fans are with his behavior the past three years. He should hear their disapproval and disappointment with him so it sticks in his head for his entire six-week regular season suspension, a reminder of how much worse things could be if he screws up again. When Roethlisberger finally returns from his suspension, then Steelers fans can cheer him.
But Roethlisberger’s suspension is another issue of concern regarding the player conduct policy. Roethlisberger’s suspension is for six weeks but could be reduced to four if he demonstrates progress towards behavioral expectations. This is where I believe Commissioner Goodell needs to avoid hypocrisy and stick with six games, even though I was among many folks calling for eight in the first place. To reduce the suspension almost caters to the emotional manipulation ploy Roethlisberger seems to be playing through the media: please love me… don’t hate me or punish me… my ego can’t take it if you don’t keep worshiping me.
If you didn’t already figure it out, I’m very much in favor of the conduct policy staying just as it is, if not tougher than its present format. The sad reality is that no matter what actions Commissioner Goodell takes with players who can’t honor the shield, players will continue to transgress off-field, so this conduct policy is not a fool-proof deterrent. But as long as there are fools on NFL rosters, a maximum toughness policy is a necessity.
Rookie Contracts – All we need to see are the new contracts and signing bonuses given to Sam Bradford and Tim Tebow to know that NFL economics are completely out of whack. There needs to be a rookie salary cap as well as a limit to guaranteed monies in the form of bonuses for kids barely of drinking age who have yet to play a single down in an NFL regular season game. Many years ago, in 1965, the New York Jets singed rookie quarterback Joe Namath to the richest contract in professional sports history, $427,000 for three years. One of the most lasting reactions was by defending NFL-champion Cleveland Browns quarterback, Dr. Frank Ryan: “If Namath is worth $427,000, I’m worth a million.”
For as outlandish as Namath’s contract appeared, many folks are unaware that Jets owner Sonny Werblin and head coach Weeb Ewbank required Namath to earn no more than $30,000 per year in base salary in order to prevent all-out mutiny by veteran teammates making in the neighborhood of $10,000. The rest of Namath’s contract was deferred to ensure income later on during his career or after his career ended. The bottom line was Namath’s contract represented a balance between reward for talent and pragmatism relative to the grand scheme of running an organization, even if this contract did represent a new era in spending.
Do we honestly know how Bradford and Tebow will fare with their teams? No. Does Bradford deserve the largest signing bonus for a number one draft pick? Not if we’re comparing his potential, coming off a lost junior season at Oklahoma, shoulder surgery and playing behind a porous St. Louis offensive line against a decade of high level performance by Peyton Manning and Tom Brady. Should a rookie receive some healthy compensation for being a top draft pick? Yes, but not equivalent to an entire continent’s GNP.
Do I believe Bradford can be successful in St. Louis? Yes, but with a supporting cast. But let’s see how performance works out before the keys to the vault are turned over. If Bradford does turn out to be the second coming of Kurt Warner in St. Louis, there will be plenty of opportunities to restructure his contract and reward him fairly.
In the case of Tebow, it’s no secret Broncos head coach Jeff McDaniels is rolling the dice and staking his entire coaching career on the fortunes of this quarterback. Is Tebow a gifted athlete with great intangibles? Yes, no doubt, but as I’ve also written prior to the NFL Draft, I don’t believe Tebow will ultimately succeed as an NFL quarterback, but could very well become a very productive tight end or H-Back. Again, the Broncos signed Tebow to a contract as a very overrated first-round pick, and the guaranteed money is quite handsome. What happens if I’m right and Tebow fails as a quarterback? The Broncos end up with egg on their face for throwing millions at someone who should’ve been a third-round pick and converted to a more appropriate position on offense.
Now we see the risk of unexpected injury with Cowboys first-round pick, receiver Dez “carry your own shoulder pads” Bryant. Bryant didn’t even make it through his first week of training camps before an ankle injury sidelined him 4-6 weeks. But the contract is signed and the bonus check is cashed. Already the only guarantee the Cowboys have is that whatever guaranteed money has started depreciating in terms of investment.
Why such a harsh stance against rookies who any team would love to have on their roster as part of a rebuilding process? Consider Exhibits A, B and C -- Ryan Leaf, JeMarcus Russell, and Michael Vick. What do all three quarterbacks have in common? All inked contracts with very large bonuses and their teams got incredibly lousy returns on their investments.
And this doesn’t just apply to quarterbacks. Look at offensive linemen busts like Tony Mandarich, or linebackers like Brian Bosworth. Any number of running backs from Penn State -- Blair Thomas, Ki-Jana Carter and Larry Johnson come to mind. If you want to consider wide receivers, just look at all the busts former GM Matt Millen drafted for the Lions.
Signing rookies to their first contract and providing upfront money does present lots of risks. Players can get injured or complacent, or they can find a lifetime of off-field trouble, or simply encounter a small dose of bad luck. I think it would be far less outrageous and risky if bonuses weren’t escalating at the pace of a geometric progression. I’m clearly in favor of setting up a rookie salary scale, rookie salary cap, and limit on bonus money. I don’t begrudge players their money; I just think the time has come to spread the money wisely. Pay enough of a signing bonus for players to establish themselves in adult life in a new home and geographic location, make sure they have enough money to help out immediate family and establish a economic foundation in terms of a bank account.
Twenty-somethings don’t need millions of dollars to bankroll a posse of hanger-ons, organize a future entertainment career, or throw away on other foolish fluff. If rookies better understood there’s a fundamental scale difference between the “American Dream” and creating a Vegas-like lifestyle. Why do players pursue a professional football career, for the passion for the game, competition and pursuit of a championship – or do they pursue the career as a means to an end, a stepping stone towards becoming yet another commercialized brand? If NFL owners have issues with what their players are potentially becoming, then they should’ve given more thought to creating and perpetuating this monster. Sadly, the owners are the enablers with the money.
Do we also need a standard length for rookie contracts? Yes, but not as the NFLPA wants things. The NFLPA wants three-year contracts so all rookies would be unrestricted free agents at the expiration. This can’t work if owners are going to continue signing rookies with astronomical bonuses and sometimes get little in return on the investment. In fact, in some cases it literally forces a team to throw players into action before they’re ready to positively contribute (see Tim Tebow in Denver).
Rules for Free Agency - If the owners and NFLPA can agree on a rookie salary cap, salary scale, and put reasonable limits on signing bonuses then I could theoretically live with three-year contracts for all rookies. However, unrestricted free agency cannot take place at the end of the contract. For so many rookies it may take well beyond three years to make any significant impact. If players are restricted free agents at the end of the third year, perhaps in the context of rookie contracts having fourth-year vested options, then this could be a reasonable compromise where all players can be unrestricted free agents after their fourth season.
Perhaps the most troubling theme throughout these issues is the NFLPA, owners and players all fighting over more, more, more, and having it now, now, now. Yes, the average length of an NFL career is barely four years, but maybe if players didn’t come to the NFL with the agenda of getting all they can as fast as possible, while the getting’s good, perhaps their priorities and focus would be better and their careers might be longer and healthier. In fact, as we hear more and more about current NFL players fighting with their teams over contracts and money, one really has to wonder what long-term risks they take by going toe-to-toe with the people writing their checks. Again, I don’t begrudge the money. I do take exception with ego and money dominating the dialogue when the majority of NFL players are essentially disposable at some point in their careers.
Dividing up the Revenue Pot – Again, here is another issue where ego, money and the need for artificial and immediate gratification warp the system. Players currently receive 60% of league revenue towards salary. Owners would like to redistribute that allocation. The underlying question is whether the owners are trying to pocket more money for themselves, so at first glance it seems millionaire players are battling billionaire owners over shared wealth. I don’t necessarily see it this way because, again, I think the key issue appears to be the players’ cut is all desired in terms of as much as possible and as soon as possible while the window is open yet in the process of slowly closing.
I believe the owners could continue to live with 60% of revenue going to current player salaries, but not in the form of short-term payments. Given how many former players deal with financial problems, for one reason or another, in addition to serious debilitating injuries, I think owners could be more comfortable with salary deferments for players so there’s income waiting for players after their on-field contributions end. For star players, long-term deferments of salary could be tied to personal services contracts where they could continue to work for the organization in a variety of positions after their playing days are over. By remaining members of the organization after they retire as players, these former players could be taken care of on the organizational group health plan. If given the choice between income and health care, I’d think every former player would welcome continued health care benefits from their former team for as many years as possible. But if the goal of a player’s contract is to get as much money as fast as possible, there’s no long-term plan beyond what the NFL has in place as part of its agreement with the NFLPA and retired players association.
Are the retired players receiving as much as they should for their “golden” years? Hardly. Case in point, look at the recent lawsuit filed by former Miami Dolphins running back Eugene “Mercury” Morris, suing the NFL for retroactive retirement benefits to the tune of $3,000 per month. Think about it… one of the NFL’s most electrifying running backs from the 1970s is suing the NFL for being shortchanged $3,000 per month, or $36,000 per year. One could only wonder how much total money the entire suit seeks, not to mention how little Morris is forced to live on each month as a man in his early sixties. Granted, the salaries were much lower forty years ago, but the story is still the same: inflow of funds, quality of lifestyle, purchasing power and personal acquisitions are all drastically different years after one leaves the game compared to the height of your playing career.
Today’s players will be living quite differently and having much different expenses 20, 30, 40 years from now, assuming they’re still alive. Do they understand the concept of saving for the rainy days, and not necessarily a short-term lockout? Do today’s players comprehend how retired players struggle to live on a daily basis? I’m very skeptical as to how many of today’s players fully comprehend and appreciate NFL history prior to the last work stoppage in 1987, much less the implications of how past labor battles have shaped the evolution of today’s multi-billion dollar industry.
Again, I don’t begrudge today’s players their money. I do, however, believe today’s players need to make the money less about them and their fast track narcissism. If today’s players were more willing to look at their income with more long-term and bigger picture perspectives, there would be a more cost-efficient way of enjoying that 60% revenue share where they could help retired players more and lay a stronger foundation for themselves when they retire.
Repeat after me: it’s not all about us, so let’s find a way to make things win-win for all NFL stakeholders. Perhaps this was Gene Upshaw’s biggest flaw as NFLPA Executive Director – only believing and advocating his representation of current players at the expense of retired players and rookies. The Upshaw mantra was “my salary is only paid by players currently on NFL rosters”, and this made him Public Enemy Number One to his fellow retirees.
Expansion to 18-Game Schedule – This is perhaps the DUMBEST move by the NFL and most myopic effort to generate more revenue from fans and television networks. This issue has been tossed around since the current CBA was negotiated, and has always been a long-term vision of Commissioner Goodell. The rationale is to provide football fans more of a great thing and spare fans and networks of four mediocre-quality preseason games. It seems inevitable that NFL owners will approve an 18-game regular season schedule with the tradeoff being only two preseason games. In theory, players are still only playing 20 total games, but fewer games would be meaningless. For those of us who enjoy football more than any other sport, we could get a longer season and more of what we love.
However, unlike the majority of NFL fans Commissioner Goodell cites in a recent speech to Green Bay Packer boosters, I would rather stick with the current schedule of four preseason games and 16 regular season games. Why? Because two additional weeks of regular season games increases the potential for more player injuries, especially starters who are on the field for almost every team’s play. At least in preseason games your team’s starters get time off to save on physical wear and tear.
For those thinking an 18-game regular season schedule would force teams like the Colts to play their stars throughout the entire season and not take games off like they do after clinching a division or home-field advantage, I expect the opposite to be true. If the Colts can clinch their division in the same 13-14 games as they did in 2009, fans should expect them to rest their regulars for even more of the final weeks of the regular season. If you’re pining for a perfect season, you can likely forget about that forever.
The players are naturally complaining about potential for injury, but diminish their position by also complaining about being paid their multi-million dollar salaries for two extra games instead of the current 16. Excuse me? We need to prorate an increase in salaries? Are NFL teams going to do this with coaches, trainers, office staff or referees? I seriously doubt it. In fact, I frankly don’t understand why players are paid their salaries in 16 weekly checks. The players are essentially full-time employees with off-season training programs, mini-camps and training camp. I wouldn’t be surprised if NFL players are at team facilities for as many days during a calendar year as teachers are at schools during any given academic year. That being said, if teachers are paid over monthly or semi-monthly paychecks, why can’t NFL teams pay players every 15th and 30th of each month? Oh… I get it… if players are paid in 24 semi-monthly paychecks, the checks will have smaller amounts compared to 16 weekly checks, and smaller isn’t good in today’s era of monetary egocentrism.
As you can tell, I have little sympathy for players in terms of how their salaries are paid, much less the size of each paycheck. However, I do side with the players overall on this particular issue. 18 games is too long a regular season, unless we’re talking the Canadian Football League, where players only play 18 regular season games with no preseason at all.
However, if the NFL does go to an 18-game regular season, owners and the NFLPA need to make certain adjustments in order to make this new schedule as safe as possible for players:
1. The NFL mandates a bye week prior to the start of regular season games, as well as another bye week prior to the playoffs.
2. Each team receives two by weeks during the regular season, as opposed to one.
3. Elimination of regular season overtime, allowing for games to end in ties scores.
4. Expansion of active team rosters to 55 players with a commensurate salary cap.
5. Maintain six-man practice squads.
Since every issue on the negotiating table contentiously revolves around money, I don’t expect this issue to be resolved with any more ease than the other issues.
The bottom line is that players and owners are equally green-eyed when it comes to money and the new CBA. This is hardly new, and these issues have all been kicked around among players and owners since before the current CBA was negotiated. For a sports league boasting so much wealth and revenue, it seems foolish for money to be the volatile focal point for potential sabotage. Everyone needs to zoom out the focus lens and scan the broader picture of how the NFL has evolved and how it will continue to evolve. There’s more than enough money to go around and the NFL is too big, too successful and too popular to bog down over all this money. While there’s certainly enough blame to go around for all parties, the players are mostly in the wrong on almost every issue. But today’s players are the manifestation of a worldview gone amok when things were going good and no one was minding the store as closely as it should’ve been.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)