What If....

What if "old baseball rules" still applied to this years World Series? Had those rules still be applicable within this years Series, the game would have ended in the 6th inning. However, the real question should be: Would anyone have cared had the World Series ended in a rain delay? While the commissioner of Major League Baseball, Bud Selig, made it a point to let people know the game would not end before the full nine innings were played out, I could not have cared less.  From the very start of the learning about which teams would be playing in this years fall classic, I never had any interest.  To make matters worse, I have been watching recaps of the Series games (that have been played thus far), and the key players on the Rays squad that were producing some highlights on the late editions of Sportcenter (during the previous series they have played in), have not done crap this series (minus the couple of hits in game 5). 

To be honest with all of you, I wanted the rules that applied before the 2006 World Series got underway to be applicable to this years Series. At the very least that would have created some interesting dynamic to be discussed on sports shows and barbershops across the country. 

With the American economy in the toilet and a seriously serious election day coming up right around the corner, a nice distraction in conversation about a World Series with boring teams that ended in the worst possible fashion would have paradoxically been a treat. As well, even though the remaining three innings (or more, which would not be surprising considering the Phillies lack of success with runners in scoring position and the Rays "good hitters" general lack of hitting a white ball with red seams during this particular series) will be resuming tomorrow night, I will be tuning in the Golden State Warriors opening night. I am more curious to see how Don Nelson will attempt success with an undrafted point guard running the show, than the World F ing Series. I wish that was not the case. And, that would not be the case had Manny been taking on Torre in this years series rather than Eva...I mean Evan Longoria been taking on Charlie Manuel!!!. However, it is what it, and I will therefore continue to be straightforward about what many hold back on.  While the title on yesterdays San Francisco Chronicle read "Rain on Parade," had I written an article on what took place the previous night in Game 5 of the Series, I would have entitled my article "No One Cares!! Why Rain Why?".  To conclude, while I do not in any way endorse dishonest activities, I almost wish there was an MLB umpire playing the role that NBA Referee, Tim Donaghy, played in the 2002 NBA playoffs (and probably many others as well) during this years playoff baseball semifinals. Instead of having financial motives like Donaghy had, the motives of the MLB umpires should have been to orchestrate a World Series that had some element of entertainment.

Old School vs. New School

After his first game as head coach of the once storied San Francisco 49ers franchise, Mike Singletary decided it was proper to bring some fire. The man who just inherited the head coaching position of the team, got heated at an incident that took place on the field involving his tight end, Vernon Davis.  I am a fire guy myself, so I get it. Are all people able to bring it, not so much. However, Singletary brought it and to a degree it inspired me to at some point in the future believe the Niners will be good again. One of the main themes that Singletary addressed during his conference, was the difference between "old school" and "new school" mentalities which especially sparked my interest.

The main difference that Singletary discussed was the idea of "old school" players being willing to sacrifice there own egos, for the sake of the team getting together and putting in a stellar effort to win the game on any given Sunday. That mentality sounds legit. If I were on a team that had not been succeeding for a while (I have lost count of how many season in a row the Niners have been under 500, at least 3 though), I would definitely consider a mentality that goes hand in hand with winning. However, I also question if the "old school" mentality is still applicable within not only the contemporary NFL but also other sports leagues as well. I mean, the Dallas Cowboys were a solid team last year, and they were led by Mr. Prideful himself, Terrell "I love me" Owens. Therefore, it makes me partially wonder if the Niners players are just not up to par with the others and regardless of any mentality change it will not help them become successful. But, I honesty don't believe that to be the case. And anyways, I am having trouble of thinking about any other teams besides the Cowboys that have an overtly arrogant superstar and also maintain a high-level of success. To conclude, I am a fan of the "old school"mentality of each individual utilizing a hard work-ethic to improve themselves while at the same time realizing the better they get  better the team will be; as well as actions on the field which do not highlight there selfish needs to place themselves (in any capacity) above the team.

Just Do It....Only If You Are In An Elite Class

A women's nike marathon took place yesterday in the San Francisco Bay Area, and the person with the quickest time did not win the race.  You may be thinking to yourself how the women with the fastest time did not win the race? That would be a good question.  The Nike officials would answer that question by stating Arien O'Connnell was not in the group of elite runners and therefore did not qualify to win the race. While today's San Francisco Chronicle argued the fact that O'Connell should have won the race based on the speed of her time, I am going to play devil's advocate and say that she should have announced to the officials she was in fact an elite runner. 

After O'Connell's time had been reported (I believe it was around 2 hours and 56 minutes), the officials asked her how come she did not announce herself as an elite runner? O'Connell's paraphrased response was that she was a solid runner but did not believe herself to be on an elite level.  While many of the press people (and people reading any article on her story...and there have been plenty) could take this for an attempt of modesty, I am not going to (once again, and to re-state, I am playing devil's advocate). The time that O'Connell ran at the Nike Marathon was 12 minutes better then her best time ever (she had never cracked three hours in a marathon before). However, this begs me to ask the question regarding if it was really modesty in the case of her not admitting she was a top runner, or was it a lack of confidence/ self-esteem in her own abilities with a dash of dishonesty on top of it all. I mean I'm going to be real straight with all of you: If I  ran a marathon in less then 4 hours I would consider myself to be on an elite level. As well, if I had the capabilty (and clearly O'Connell did) to run a marathon close to 3 flat (3 hours) there is no reason that I can think of other then a possible lack of confidence (which translated to being dishonest with other people) regarding her legitimate ability to compete. 

As a result of her defects of character, the elite runners ran their race and O'Connell ran her race with the average runners (the Oprah's and Diddy's of the world who run 4 and a half hour marathons and are darn proud of their accomplishment).  Therefore, two separate races were being run. The marathon winner is not for the average runners. The average runners  get to tell other people for the rest of their lifetimes that they ran a marathon (and trust me they do that). That is their cash and prize. The winner is the elite runner who participates amongst the other elite. I truly believe had O'Connell been in the class with the other elite runners, the winning time would have been different. The reason I believe this is because when I go for runs by myself, I do not run as quickly; however, when I am running with someone else, I challenge myself more. I believe the elite runners (especially the ones in the front of the pack at this particular marathon) would have challenged their bodies more had O'Connell been side to side with them throughout the race. Not to say O'Connell would not have still placed in the top two or three (or maybe even first), but I definitely believe the dynamic would have changed (even slightly). To conclude, just because this bandwagon may sound good to jump on (a women that "just did it" to play on Nike's famous slogan "just do it," but when push came to shove the company looked the other way and awarded someone else the winners trophy) please take a look at both sides before throwing your bags on the back of moving vehicle aimed to make a fool out of a reputable company.

A True Superstar

There is nothing better then a good sports movie. Seriously, watching for the first time and then re-watching sports movies, is amongst the top 25 things I enjoy doing in life. "Field of Dreams," "The Natural," "Remember the Titans," "Little Big League," and "Tin Cup", along with many other great movies make my insides tingle. When a sports movie comes out, I go watch it. To prove that point, I even went to the theatre to see "Radio," starring Cuba Gooding Junior (please don't hate). While "Radio" along with few others ("The Babe" is another) have been disappointing, the majority of sports movies I have come to appreciate over time. Some of the movies that took me some time to appreciate were "Coach Carter," "Glory Road," and "Bull Durham,"(even though many believed it was a classic after their first watch). Fact is, sports are a wonderful vehicle to instill great values in individuals; many of the teams and individuals being exemplified in sports movies display these values.

Today I went and saw "The Express," the new sports movie based on the career of Ernie Davis starring Rob Brown and Dennis Quaid. Great movie.  Please go see it. It hit me on all cylinders.  The music was solid, the acting was solid, and most importantly the protagonist was a true example of the many positive attributes human beings have the potential to contain (inside and outside the sports world).  Some of the attributes that Davis contained were respecting others (especially his family), having humility, and being tolerant of other peoples viewpoints (even in the racist South). While I was not alive to follow Ernie Davis during the time he played for the Orangemen at Syracuse, the movie really highlighted his unique physical ability to hit the hole. Also, and on a personal level, he inspired me to continue being a good person and example to others. Within using an analogy along the lines of the movie, sometimes when a person hits me unfairly I want to do the same back to them; however, Davis did not. So, for one more day, I will also continue to play fair. Today, "The Express," helped re-affirm to me the importance of making the most with the time that I am alive (as Davis died at the young age of 23) and doing it in a positive way as often as possible. To conclude, good sports movies not only have the ability to make tears come out of my eyes (the same way they did when I was twelve years younger), but they also have the power to inspire positive actions outside of the theatre that same day.

Fairweather Fan

I am a fairweather fan. Born and raised in the San Francisco Bay area I support the basketball, baseball, and football teams (dont really give two shits about hockey) that do well.  When the team is not doing well I will not support them.  However, I am not the type of person that will look you in the eye and not be ashamed of my "fairweatherness".  In fact, I am very open about it. I root for the teams that are succeeding.  If the teams are not succeeding, I do not check up on them nearly as much as when the team is doing well.  I just don't have any desire to follow a team that is not winning. It is just not fun. While I respect the fan that sticks with "his team" through the bad times, I also feel bad for them to a degree.  I mean it has to be painful to really care about a team that consistently begins to let you down. Examples of teams that I have stopped supporting have been the San Francisco Giants, 49ers, and soon to be Golden State Warriors.  Not to say that I don't still converse about these two franchises, but I will rarely tune into the telecasts for the games when they are taking place.  I believe that that is the true mark of a fairweather fan; not watching the games, or making no effort to watch them (I may be sitting home on Sunday, and literally by chance the one of teams may be playing).  Point is, when the team is not succeeding, I don't care about them. 

While the Giants contain the probable NL Cy Young award winner from this past regular season, they were just boring to watch. They did not have one hitter that could hit the ball over the fence (and if you think Aaron Rowland is a power hitter you are wrong). While pitching is an essential component to being successful in baseball, you also need to have players that can put up big power numbers at the plate. The Giants had a huge opportunity to be a successful team about three years ago (dont quote that). That opportunity laid in the hands of management signing a legitimate power hitter. However, they chose to not sign Vladimir Guerrero, and instead (not directly connected, but definitely a stupid decision later on) spent the money on Barry Zito (who to anyone following as loosely as I was this past season, seemingly started it with a win-loss record of 0 and 500). Had they made the move to sign Guerrero I truly believe they would not have been in the cellar of an already shitty division for last couple of years. On the other hand, the downfall of the 49ers began the moment the words "Alex Smith" were said by the commissioner at the NFL draft during the 2005 draft. Smith has been a bust from the beginning, and will most likely be alongside Ryan Leaf as the biggest bust in the history of the league (so far). That being said, staying strong with the franchise after that terrible a decision took place makes no sense. The last team I will discuss is the Golden State Warriors, who surprisingly have made me proud over the last couple of years. However, there is a strong chance I will also stop supporting them after about 25 games (give or take) once the 08-09 season gets under way. Robert Rowell (President of the team) not giving Baron Davis the money he clearly deserved as a result of putting a crap franchise back onto the map is a darn shame. Therefore, without a true point guard (Stephen Jackson is not that, but according to todays newspaper Rowell will most likely be giving him an extension before the season begins), the Warriors have only a slight chance of success.  To conclude, if you want to hate me for not giving my allegiance to crap teams, fine. I cannot control who likes me an who does not. But, I will stand firm by my stance of not supporting the teams that do not succeed. What is the fun in that!

B.J who

I am not excited about the 2008 World Series. Because of my general lack of excitement, I do not think I will be watching many games of this years series.  To be honest with all of you, I may have watched only two to four innings so far of the entire mlb playoffs.  Not that there have not been exciting moments, its just that I know the highlights on Sportscenter will cover all the main moments from the games.  I almost purposefully don't watch the games because it makes it more interesting to see the results on one of the late editions of sportscenter after the game has already ended.  

Regarding this years World Series, I would have been much more content with the teams that lost in the semifinals of the playoffs then the teams that won. The losers bracket of the semifinal baseball playoffs would have been ideal.  Especially the story-line of Manny going back to Boston and Torre in the World Series with a different team then the Yankees. Plain and simple it would have been more entertaining to watch, especially for people like myself who had low inning counts already going into the series.  Not to say the matchup is terrrible, it is just not the ideal.  Maybe, I'm expecting what took place in the 2008 NBA championships to happen in all sports finals.  In case you forgot, the basketball situation involved two historic franchises playing eachother, superstars on each squad, and most importantly Bill Russell and Kevin Garnett as well as Luke and Bill Walton doing one on one interviews. Those interviews especially were amazing.  Amazing not because of the interesting stuff being talked out during the one on one conversations, but because both of them contained some of the most awkward moments ever in my history of watching human beings being interviewed.  The way in which Luke told Bill "Happy Fathers Day," was just so darn uncomfortable for everyone involved.  As well, the inability of KG to say anything other than "I feel you," could not have made that particular interview any better (seriously).  

Getting back to this years World Series, the franchises are not historic, there are not superstars on each side (Evan Longoria is not a superstar, yet...), and lastly I don't think Mike Schmidt(the one and only Phillies great) will be doing one on ones with either Ryan Howard, Jimmy Rollins, or Chase Utley (and even if he does, there is no way it will top either of the interviews mentioned above).  While this years World Series is not ideal, there does exist some form of story-line within the whole thing. That story involves the fact that a true underdog does exist.  Please do not argue this fact: Even though the Tampa Bay Rays (make sure to note that I did not include the Devil) had 90 plus wins during the regular season, they are the TAMPA BAY RAYS!!!!!!!  Therefore, rooting for them to win before the series begins would in fact make it slightly more interesting to watch. However, and to conclude, it is a fact that the majority of people reading this could not name two Rays players before the playoffs began.