Showing posts with label Sports. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sports. Show all posts

Friday, March 09, 2012

The Five Greatest US Soccer Team Moments

In the wake of the United States soccer team's first-ever victory over Italy on February 29 (in Genoa, where the Italians had never lost), The Guardian's Sports Blog decided to compile the USA's Five Greatest Soccer Results. It's hard to quibble too much with the list (and really they take into account any alternative results, though it's hard to ignore the Algeria game in the 2010 World Cup that advanced them to the knockout stages) and I suspect that over time the win over Italy will recede, if slightly.

The list also brings a couple of thoughts to mind.

First: It's not exactly a rich history.

Second: Nonetheless, the trajectory is clear -- in the last twenty years or so, and especially in the last decade, the US has risen to become a legitimate second-or-third-tier presence in the Beautiful Game. And no, I don't intend that as a backhanded compliment. In a generation or so we have gone from being a backwater and punchline in the world's most popular game to being a team that can play with even elite teams without fear of being humiliated. Or at least without fear of being humiliated too badly.

Perhaps the biggest sign of the burgeoning respect our national team has earned? The Guardian blog post is not ironic, patronizing, or tongue-in-cheek and the comments are worth the read, which is truly rare in this day and age where bile is the default excretion online.

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Me in ESPN the Mag (Self Indulgence Alert)

A while back something I wrote a few years ago was quoted in an ESPN the Magazine article on stadium security in the 9/11 commemorative issue. I had been quoted in an AP story on the same topic that got pretty wide distribution so I missed this one until recently.

Thursday, July 28, 2011

AP & Me on Stadium Security Post-9/11 (Self-Indulgence Alert!)

I was interviewed by a writer from the Associated Press on the issue of stadium security ten years after 9/11 largely on the basis of this piece for The Public Sphere that I wrote about three years ago. And when you get quoted in a story by AP it ends up appearing everywhere. (My personal favorite is Sports Illustrated via SI.com).

Friday, April 01, 2011

Friday Sox Report: Opening Day Edition

I think I'll try to do a weekly update on the Red Sox this year. We'll see how long I stick with it.

It's Opening Day (Opening Day for me is when the Sox first toss the ball out there for real) and there is much reason for optimism in Red Sox Nation. Despite the fact that lots of people are picking the Sox to do well (usually enough to give pause -- how often is that consensus right?) I am going to agree with them simply because Boston experienced a horrid season of injuries last year and still finished up with 89 wins and were in the running with a week or so to go in the season. Assuming that last year was an outlier -- Pedroia, Youkilis, Ellsbury, Martinez and Cameron missed an average of 88 games to injury last year and much of the pitching staff spent time on the DL.

And if reverting to something resembling a mean on the disabled list would be enough to inspire optimism, the offseason signings of Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzales should be enough to have warmed even the frostiest heart. Gonzales is going to mash in Fenway. He was a stud in San Diego, and PETCO is the worst hitter's park in the game. Crawford meanwhile steps into a better lineup in Boston and is just reaching what should be his peak years. The irony of last year's team is that while they went in preaching the virtues of defense, with cynics wondering where the offense would come from, they ended up having an incredibly potent offense despite some of the lineups Tito was forced to put out there and despite their supposedly weakened situation. This year's team could conceivably bring the team back to its 2003-2005 offensive apex when they were historically good.

The biggest concern is likely with pitcing depth both in the starting rotation and at the back end in the bullpen. In the pen papelbon had his worst year last year and every save opportunity seemd like a misadventure, even when he prevailed. Fortunately Paps is in his contract year, so he has every reason to excel, and they have Daniel Bard and former White Sox closer Bobby Jenks in the wings. Barring some sort of epic season from Papelbon this is likely his last year in a Sox uniform as it would be uncharacteristic of Theo and the rest of management to break the bank for a closer.

On paper the starting rotation looks as if it could be exceptional. but there are some cracks. Lester and Buchholz should continue to improve, though whether they will be top-5 in the Cy Young voting good again remains to be seen. But Daisuke Matsuzaka, Josh Beckett, and John Lackey all disappointed last year. For all of DiceK's potential he is simply maddening, nibbling rather than being aggressive, and as a consequence rarely getting much past the 5th inning. there have been some promising signs this spring (and last fall) but most Sox fans need to see progress when it counts to believe it. Beckett too has been frustrating since his first couple of years in uniform, putting up mediocre numbers and having a hard time avoiding injuries great and small. It felt like a panic move when they extended him last year when he was struggling. He needs a big year to validate the contract and to avoid being the priciest fifth starter in baseball. Lackey too disappointed, though as the season progressed he seemed to get a bit better. Maybe the pressure of the first year in a Sox uniform got to him. Whatever it was, he needs to improve. Ageless knuckleballer Tim Wakefield returns as well but he is at the stage in his career where he is better seen as a stopgap than a regular starter, though reports of his demise have proven premature in the past.

The season starts against Texas, here in the Lone Star State, and were it not for an unfortunate foot injury that's kept me on my own version of the DL the last ten days I'd be getting up there this weekend. But I'll be watching here at home and obviously will hope that the Red Sox get out of the gate strong and keep it rolling. Once again the AL East will be beastly. The Blue Jays and Orioles are no slouches. It seems a long time since Tampa was a laughingstock and even after some of their offseason losses have likely become "perennial" contenders, though they have to hope they continue to replicate their farm system success. Then there are the Yankees. I suspect that they have loved being discounted by just about every pundit. yes, they did not have the offseason they had hoped for, largely because they put all of their eggs in the Cliff Lee basket and they never hatched. but something tells me that the demise of the Yankees has been greatly exaggerated. they will be there in September when postseason berths are being allotted.

Thursday, March 03, 2011

Apportioning Blame

Want to know who to blame for the NFL's player-owner conflict? This sums it up just about perfectly.

Wednesday, March 02, 2011

The Sporting Closet

A prominent English cricket player, Steven Davies, recently announced that he is gay. Davies is 24 and is likely to be a prominent player at both the county and the national level for years to come, so this is a really important step. He follows Welsh rugby star Gareth Thomas, who came out in the last couple of years.

The question remains: when will an active male in a major team sport in the United States follow suit? Note that the question is not "when will there be a gay male athlete in a major team sport in the United States?" There is absolutely no doubt that there has been and that there are closeted gay men in the Major League Baseball, the NFL, the NBA, the NHL, and MLS. But that step is a huge one, and while we can hope that today's athletes would handle it, it would only take one or two not to for the situation to become virtually untenable in a machismo-laden locker room.

I asked my students about this in my Global Sports History class this semester and they made the sage point that whoever did it would have to be a very, very good player. The 53rd guy on and NFL roster or the mop-up guy in the bullpen almost certainly could not do it. I'd like to think we are ready for it. But I fear that we are not. Still, Steven Davies and Gareth Thomas provide hope.

The best hope is that someday gay athletes will not be a big deal. But we are not there yet.

Tuesday, February 01, 2011

The Ten Worst Men in Sports

Hate. Glorious, glorious hate.

Monday, November 08, 2010

Pardon Our Interruption . . .

My US Sports History and Society class had a project whereby they put together an episide of Pardon the Interruption. Their YouTube trailer is brilliant and is destined to go viral.

Thursday, September 09, 2010

Worthless NFL Predictions

Predictions. Why do I make them? The off chance of being right is more than offset by the reality that almost everyone's predictions about everything are a middling effort. Still, this is what I do. So with no further fanfare, here are my predictions for this year's NFL season. I'm going to list order of finish and my reasoning and then my playoff picks -- I'm not going to pick regular season records only to have the Thunderstick weigh in and tell me that my math is wrong. Wild Card teams get denoted with an asterisk.

AFC EAST
1. Patriots -- D will be weak early on, but will cohere, the O will be strong, and they are able to play the disrespect card, Belichick's favorite card to play.
2. Dolphins* -- They improved more than the Jets did in the offseason and they are flying below the radar.
3. Jets -- Did I miss something? This team needed the Colts and Bengals both to roll over just to get to 9-7 and slip through to the playoffs last year. They had a nice run in the postseason and they have a really good D, but finding Rex Ryan amusing and wondering about how well the rest of the league will respond to his running his yap are two separate things.
4. Bills -- This is a terrible, terrible team. CJ Spiller will get used and abused, because they will not be able to throw the ball consistently.

AFC NORTH
1. Ravens
-- Now this might be the team that the Jets want to be. They will be stout on defense and will have a legitimate offense with loads of weapons. And I know that Ray Lewis and co. take issue with everyone anointing the Jets as champs in waiting.
2. Steelers* -- Peter King's choice for the Super Bowl might be lucky to make the playoffs. Roethlisberger's absence surely isn't going to help their cause.
3. Bengals -- But they may be the most amusing team in the league. Unless you're Carson Palmer when both TO and Ochocinco feel they aren't getting the ball enough in November.
4. Browns -- I just feel bad for my many friends who are Cleveland fans. How can you not?

AFC SOUTH
1. Colts
-- Look, I'd love to be able plausibly to come up with some other scenario. But seeing Manning choke away another postseason has its own rewards.
2. Texans -- The Texans are always on the verge of becoming. For now they are still becoming a team that's not going to the playoffs.
3. Titans -- I wonder if Vince Young's gonna get handed a Heisman in the next few weeks.
4. Jaguars -- Hard to believe Jacksonville has an NFL team and LA doesn't.

AFC WEST
1. Chargers
-- The best of a bad bunch out west.
2. Chiefs -- Consider this a vote of solidarity for Matt Cassell.
3. Raiders -- Just be less horrible, baby.
4. Broncos -- Not a stellar offseason, which follows a not stellar second half of last season. But at least they picked Tebow in the first round. That should bear lots of fruit . . .

NFC EAST
1. Cowboys
-- It's always funny to approach a new football season and listen to Cowboys fans insist they are going undefeated and will win the Super Bowl. Michael Irvin isn't walking through that door (with scissors to stab a teammate in the throat).
2. Eagles* -- My guess is the McNabb trade will prove to be a wash for the Eagles, and that's probably a pretty good outcome for them.
3. Giants -- Boring and mediocre is no way to go through life, fellas.
4. Redskins -- The best part is that I am certain Skins fans started talking Super Bowl as soon as they acquired McNabb. It's in their dna. (I actually think this will be a pretty good division top to bottom).

NFC NORTH
1. Packers
-- Not sure I buy the Aaron Rodgers MVP talk, but this will complete the cycle of Rodgers supplanting Favre on the team, in the division, and in the conference.
2. Vikings -- The Saints will kick the shit out of the Vikings tonight and I suspect that will begin an ugly final season (seriously) for Favre.
3. Bears -- Closer to 4th than to 2nd.
4. Lions -- One of these years this won't be an automatic choice.

NFC SOUTH
1. Saints
-- This team isn't winning the Super Bowl again, but they are likely to win the division again and for now they remain pretty likable.
2. Falcons* -- I think last year, not two years ago, was the outlier. This will be a pretty good team. And this is also a vote for Matt Ryan.
3. Panthers -- They should have a good 1-2 running attack, and Matt Moore is fairly serviceable. They aren't good enough for the postseason, but they are also not awful.
4. Buccaneers -- If you do not live within 100 miles of the Tampa-St. Pete metropolitan region you cannot tell me five specific things about the Tampa Bay Bucs.

NFC WEST
1. 49ers
-- Holy shit this is a woeful division.
2. Seahawks -- I mean awful. (Though to be fair, the whole "Pete Carroll was a terrible head coach in the NFL" narrative is kind of bullshit.)
3. Cardinals -- Matt Leinart must have been really awful in the locker room because his numbers were better than Derek Anderson's. I still think Leinart's going to be a serviceable NFL quarterback.
4. Rams -- Sam Bradford will be good someday. But this team is going to make this first year unpleasant for him.

PLAYOFFS
AFC:
Wild Card Round:
Colts over Dolphins, Patriots over Steelers
Divisional Round:
Ravens over Colts, Patriots over Chargers
Conference Championship: Ravens over Patriots (yes, I do think this is a first for me, picking against the Pats. My heart says they can do it. But since no one on earth is picking the Pats there is no way that I can pick them to win it all and not come across as even more of a homer than usual.)

NFC:

Wild Card Round:
Eagles over 49ers, Cowboys over Falcons
Divisional Round: Packers over Cowboys, Saints over Eagles
Conference Championship: Packers over Saints

Super Bowl: Ravens over Packers


Kickoff in just a few minutes. WOO HOO!

Wednesday, August 04, 2010

A Catch Up Links Dump

My best intentions have been to get a lot of blogging done here. But reality (I am still a long way from catching up from my trip, for example) has interceded. So here are a number of stories that have caught my attention, with commentary as apt:

The imbroglio over the Muslim cultural center-cum-mosque a couple of blocks from ground Zero is driven by two interrelated factors: Pure bigotry and rank political opportunism. There is no excuse for trying to exclude any particular religious group from building in the area, never mind one that has long had a presence there. People don't have a right not to be offended or to be made to feel uncomfortable. But beyond that, feeling uncomfortable just by the very presence of Muslims is pretty strong evidence of pretty vile prejudice. I know, I know -- conservatives have tried to turn the tables on those who accuse them of bigotry, making the accusation somehow as bad as the actual act of being a bigot. But that's nonsense, and we need to keep pointing it out at every turn. Oh: and the critics are playing right into the actual extremists' hands. (There has been tons of commentary on this. Almost literally to pick two at random, see Richard Cohen at the WaPo and William Saletan at Slate.)

The 1980 Olympic boycott was a terrible thing, especially for its victims, the athletes who never got to compete. But that does not make the decision wrong or bad. It may well have been the best option in a scenario where there were few good options. Let's dispense with the pablum that sports and politics should never mix. Virtually the entire history of the Olympics (or for that matter sport) is inseparable from politics. Was it really a better option to go to Moscow, providing legitimacy, exposure, and financial support (directly and indirectly) to what was still at the time our enemy -- so much so that Ronald Reagan would soon after label the Soviets the "Evil Empire"? Once the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, there were no good options and considerable bad ones for President Carter when it came to the Moscow Olympics.

The senate recently unanimously (you read that right) passed a bill that, in the words of a New York Times editorial, "protects Americans from the whims of foreign libel judgments." This is important. A while back I was working with an editor on something about Zimbabwe that I was working on. I had written something pointed about Robert Mugabe and he pretty much told me that my commentary on Mugabe would likely lead us both into a potential libel suit. I thought at the time that he was overreacting (and refused to temper my writing, and so we parted ways) but I also knew that the British court system has often been used for libel fishing expeditions. And as someone who often writes for audiences outside of the United States it would be nice to know that the next David Irving won't be able to take me for all I'm worth. (Note to potential litigants: remember Steve Dallas' first law of being a lawyer: never, ever sue poor people.)

Not that we really needed studies to confirm it, but sports are good for girls.

A trifecta from The Chronicle of Higher Education: The New York Times recently stacked the decks in a forum discussion about university tenure (against tenure, I should add). Conservatives recently selectively used or plain misrepresented the arguments of a book on elite college admissions. And UT-Austin will be the focal point of the latest court action over affirmative action.

Finally, Charles Pierce wonders if the Jets, everyone's preseason favorites, are not in for a mighty disappointment. Amen. It's not like there is anyone else in the Jets' division that has had any success over the last decade or so.

Tuesday, August 03, 2010

Overrating Favre

Twice today on ESPN talking heads proposed that the maybe-retiring Brett Favre might be the greatest quarterback of all time. let's dispense with this nonsense right now. Favre's prolific statistics notwithstanding, during the era when he played alone there were at least five better all-time quarterbacks. In no particular order: Joe Montana, Dan Marino, John Elway, Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady were all better than Favre.

Thursday, June 03, 2010

Stars, Drugs, and Track

The message to take away from this story on the state of track & field in the United States? Stars are good for the sport. Drugs are bad for it. It's not exactly a magic formula, but until we have a handle on the latter the former will live under a cloud of suspicion.

Saturday, May 22, 2010

A Voice of Sanity Amidst the PED Cacophony

As a general rule I've devoted relatively little time to the issue of performance enhancing drugs in sports. The people who get most exercised about it tend to engage in levels of sanctimony that quickly become intolerable, and we're such enormous hypocrites about it: NFL guys get caught all the time for using PED's, get slapped on the wrist with a four-game suspension, and that's that. And the NFL probably has the most sane approach. People simply go insane over baseball, and perhaps worse, they get even crazier over sports, such as cycling, that they generally do not give a damn about.

In a post at his truly excellent sports blog for The Boston Globe, Charles Pierce has what is one of my absolutely favorite arguments about this whole mess:

As I always point out, this is not my drug frenzy, but, even if it were, I'd need an offer of proof beyond the argumentum ad hogwash and, no, citing The Canseco Precedent is not it. The people who get their plumbing in a knot over this stuff are the people insisting on more, better, and more intrusive drug testing. You cannot do that, and then dismiss negative testing results just because you don't like them. And, in the absence of an admission and/or a positive test, you can't simply decide who's using and who's not based on who you like and who you don't.
Bingo. This is absolutely right, but the people who most need to hear it are the shrillest voices in the debate to begin with.

Sunday, May 02, 2010

My Old Kentucky Home

Better late to the infield party than never. Yesterday Deadspin pointed us to "Stories That Don't Suck" about the Kentucky Derby, including Hunter S. Thompson's classic "The Kentucky Derby is Decadent and Depraved." And in honor of the great Commonwealth of Kentucky, why not buy this? (Shameless? Perhaps.)

Monday, April 05, 2010

dcat's National League Preview (With World Series Pick!)

And now for a much briefer take on the National League. (World Series pick at bottom.)

NL East
1. Phillies: This quasi-dynasty in the making had a peculiar offseason, effectively swapping proven postseason commodity Cliff Lee for Uber-Ace Roy Halladay. Very good rotation, strong lineup, postseason experience: I think you'd be a fool not to pencil Philly in to the postseason.

2. Braves: They have the most exciting young position player in baseball in Jason Heyward. The rotation is sneaky good. But they are rolling the dice with Takaski Saito and Billy Wagner at the back of the bullpen.

3. Mets: The sun will rise, the sun will set, Mets will get injured, and they will disappoint their fans, aka the fans of New York's other team.

4. Marlins: They have Hanley Ramirez going for them, which is nice. Although keep in mind that some years this front office really tries to win. But what a lousy team to root for as a consequence in all of those other years.

5. Nationals: I have Stephen Strasburg on my fantasy team just because at some point they are going to have to bring him up just to get people to go to games. This will be an improved team, but by how much, and will it matter?

NL Central:
1. Cardinals:
Always good, rarely great (even when they won the World Series in 2005) but they have the best player in the game, a strong rotation, and a decent lineup. It is difficult to begrudge this team and their fans their success.

2. Cubs: Remember last year when they were a hot choice to win it all? That was then. Expectations are low, which might benefit this team. But I look at their lineup, their pitching staff, their bullpen, and I just see nothing that makes me think that the best thing about Wrigley this year won't yet again be Wrigley itself.

3. Brewers: Or maybe the Reds.

4. Reds: Or maybe the Brewers. Though I have to say, I love them stepping up for the moderate-risk, high-reward Aroldis Chapman signing.

5. Astros: Ever since they made their improbable run to the World Series a few years back it seems as if this team has just disappeared. I will root for Brad Mills, their first-year manager and Terry Francona's long-time right-hand man with the Sox. By the way: Is it me, or is the NL Central really freaking dull?

6. Pirates: It is nearly impossible for casual fans to have any reason to understand that this is one of the great franchises in baseball history. We need to find a way to get them in the same division as the Royals.

NL West:
1. Rockies:
Every year this is a competitive division, and it seems that every year someone different wins, and someone good fades. They have done a good job of developing an organization that produces players and they have built the team to their ballpark. The lineup is really disciplined too, drawing loads of walks and therefore seeing lots of pitches. It will pay off this year.

2. Dodgers*: The Dodgers seem to be in the running every year. This year won't be any difference. Manny is flying below the radar, the Broxton-Sherrill bullpen combo should shorten games, and they seem to be made up of solid if not spectacular guys up and down the lineup. That's not a key to a World Series championship, but it should keep Chavez Ravine open into October.

3. Diamondbacks: If they can just improve their OBP slightly this is a team that should score tons of runs. And if they can score lots of runs they can win lots of games, or at least keep fans entertained in the Valley of the Sun.

4. Giants: Largely because I don't see Tim Lincecum, with that frame, continuing to be an ace without dealing with some injuries. This is not, to say the least, a great hitting team. And without Lincecum it could get ugly. And yes, I am predicating my entire guess on the San Francisco season in 2010 on an injury that has shown no sign of coming.

5. Padres: Sure -- if the Pads are in the crapper in July it increases the odds that the Sox are in the Adrian Gonzalez sweepstakes. But it's not like I wish ill on them. I just suspect that illness is coming no matter what, and if I can provide a gentle nudge, well . . .

* Denotes Wild Card Winner
NLDS:
Phillies over Dodgers
Rockies over Cardinals

NLCS:
Phillies over Rockies

World Series:
Red Sox over Phillies

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Taking on the Dumb Jock Stereotype (Again)

At Critical Mass, the blog for the National Book Critics Circle's Board of Directors, Deirdra McAfee has a post with which I take issue. I responded in the comments with the following:


I want to take issue with the following assertion in this post:

“A culture that idolizes physical skill (sports of all kinds) and has no use for intellectual skill (the smart or knowledgeable stigmatized as nerds), that places physical passion above all possible other passions, except perhaps that for winning, is not one that believes books are important.”

This is just plain silly. It is possible, just possible, that millions of Americans can value both sports and books. Folks like Norman Mailer and Ernest Hemingway and George Plimpton and John Updike and Doris Kearns Goodwin (the list could go on for pages) all managed to value (and write about) sports and yet still somehow also to care about books. The creation of false dichotomies and strawpersons in a post that would seem to celebrate the intellectual life is ironic, because it shows poor analytical skills and sloppy argumentation, the opposite of what intellectuals are supposed to value.

There are lots of problems with our culture with regard to books. But a passion for sports has nothing to do with it. Blaming jocks is commonplace amongst too many intellectuals, which does not make it any less dumb.

I want to augment this a little bit here. When I was in grad school there were lots of social divisions. One of the more pernicious ones came between jocks (which included former athletes but also simply fans of sports) and non-jocks. And of course the non-jocks possessed that air of superiority that McAfee reveals in her post. Which was somewhat problematic since almost universally the jocks were also the better graduate students in our program. But the very stereotype allowed the non-jocks to feel superior despite the fact thet their superiority was unearned and undeserved. There is something bizarre about certain circles in intellectual life that allows being anti-athlete to be not only acceptable, but to be heralded.


When I wrote that the list of intellectuals who demonstrably care about sports could go on for pages, I was not kidding. Stephen Jay Gould and Gay Talese. David Halberstam and George Will. Michael Lewis and David Foster Wallace. Stewart O'Nan and Frederick Exley. Not to mention those academics who write about sports -- Chuck Korr and Charlie Alexander and James Carroll and Amy Bass and dozens of others spring to mind. And the ranks of those who are predominantly sportswriters yet who write well enough to transcend the stereotypes of that genre warrants more than scorn -- Bill Simmons and Sally Jenkins and Bob Ryan and Bud Collins and John Feinstein and Dick Schaap and Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon and Rick Telander and John Ed Bradley and myriad others. (Unless I am misreading McAfee's website and Amazon and Worldcat, she has not ever actually published a book, unlike all of these people, with their crazy sports affinities.)


The idea that sports is the enemy of books or the intellectual life is a muddleheaded argument put forward by people who have decided they are the enemy of sports and who have elevated their prejudice to the realm of virtue. But it's not virtue. It's ignorance. And it is not to be lauded. It is to be scorned.


As a perhaps relevant aside, or at least for the sake of full disclosure, I am a member of the National Book Critics Circle. I also have written a couple of scholarly journal articles on sports, have written at least a dozen reviews of books on sports, am working on a project that may become a book on sports, and have published a book on a sports-related topic. I was one of the jocks in my graduate program, and in some circles of detractors was seen as the jock ringleader. I also care deeply for books, for book culture, and for American intellectual life. False dichotomies and strawmen are dumb. They are also deeply intellectually dishonest and indeed are anti-intellectual.

Friday, November 13, 2009

Deadspin Giveth to the Sportsguy, Taketh Away Brutally

Just days after Deadspin founder Will Leitch wrote a nice piece recognizing the contributions of The Sportsguy Bill Simmons, the site publishes Charles Pierce's absolute takedown of Simmons' new book on the NBA. (Extra credit to Pierce for linking this glorious Molly Ivins evisceration of Camille Paglia.)


I know it is too grad-schoolish of me, but I find sympathy with both Leich and Pierce on Sportsguy.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

FJM Spins the Dead

OMG Guys! OMG! OMG! OMG! The gang from the gone but never forgotten blog Fire Joe Morgan are guest blogging at Deadspin. No productivity for me today!

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Ready For Some Football? Why Yes, Yes I Am

Tonight marks the first game of the new NFL season. It's also Thursday. What does that mean? It means welcome to the first installment of Big Daddy Drew's Thursday Afternoon NFL Dick Joke Jambaroo. You missed it. I missed it. Humankind missed it.


Predictions for this year's season that are sure to shame me:

AFC East
Pats 13-3
NY Jets 9-7
Miami 7-9
Buffalo 4-12

AFC North
Pittsburgh 11-5
Baltimore 10-6
Cincinnati 8-8
Cleveland 3-13

AFC South
Indianapolis 10-6
Jacksonville 9-7
Tennessee 9-7
Houston 8-8

AFC West
San Diego 10-6
Kansas City 6-10
Denver 5-11
Oakland 3-13

WILD CARD
Ravens over Indy
Chargers over Jags

DIVISIONAL
Patriots over Chargers
Steelers over Ravens

AFC CHAMPIONSHIP
Pats over Steelers

NFC East
Philadelphia 10-6
NY Giants 10-6
Washington 9-7
Dallas 8-8

NFC North
Green Bay 11-5
Minnesota 10-6
Chicago 8-8
Detroit 3-13

NFC South
New Orleans 10-6
Carolina 9-7
Atlanta 8-8
Tampa Bay 6-10

NFC West
Arizona 9-7
Seattle 9-7
San Francisco 6-10
St. Louis 5-11

WILD CARD
Minny over Arizona
Giants over Saints

DIVISIONAL
Eagles over Minny
Packers over Giants

NFC CHAMPIONSHIP
Packers over Eagles

SUPER BOWL
Pats over Packers


Feel free to start your mockery!


EDITED: For arithmetic

Friday, May 22, 2009

Mind the Raining Blood and Locusts

Here is a sure sign of the apocalypse, bringing together two of my least favorite entities on the planet.