Major League Baseball Takes Over the Dodgers

On Wednesday it was reported that Major League Baseball commissioner Bud Selig would be appointing a representative to oversee the finances and all aspects of the day to day operations of the Los Angeles Dodgers. The current owner of the Dodgers, Frank McCourt, is currently in the middle of a very messy and highly public divorce from his wife, and part owner of the team, Jamie McCourt which has left the financial stability of the franchise in disarray.

In a public statement issued by the league office Selig had this to say about MLB taking over for the McCourts, "I have taken this action because of my deep concerns regarding the finances and operations of the Dodgers and to protect the best interests of the club."

At this point Selig really had no choice.  Frank McCourt is on the verge of bankruptcy, to the point where last week he had to borrow $30 million from FOX in order to meet the team payroll, and has been attempting to borrow money to try and save the team.  It was reported that he had been trying to borrow $200 million from FOX in order to pay off his ex-wife (that's the amount she is supposedly due after the settlement) and keep majority ownership of the team which he purchased in 1998.

The troubles for McCourt began in October of 2009 when he divorced his, then wife of 30 years, Jamie after accusing her of having an affair with her bodyguard/driver.  At the same time he also fired her form her role as the team's chief executive citing poor performance at work.

What followed was a very public feud between the two that brought to light some disturbing information about the way the McCourt's operated the Dodgers.  It was discovered that Frank McCourt had been using the team as his personal piggy bank and used team revenue to finance his lavish lifestyle in Los Angeles .  The McCourt's also practiced nepotism hiring their son Drew to a front office position in which he received a salary of several-hundred-thousand dollars for services that no one can clearly define.

Other examples include the constant turn-over in the front office, most notably with public relations staff, as well as the payment of over 25 percent of a charitable organizations budget to personal friend Howard Suskin.  Frank McCourt also came under fire recently for not having a Head of Security on salary which became a real issue when on opening day a San Fransisco Giants fan was beaten to a pulp outside Dodgers stadium by fans (the fans name is Bryan Stow and he is still in critical condition with brain damage).

Thanks to the public nature of the divorce proceedings all of that information came to light and has hurt McCourt not only in his wallet but also in the eyes of the league and the fans.  Major League Baseball clearly does not want Frank McCourt to own the Dodgers and that was made quite apparent when they did not approve a the potential $200 loan from FOX that would have saved McCourt and allowed him to keep the team.

McCourt had another loan proposal drafted and sent to MLB for approval that has is still pending a decision by the league.  This proposal would have McCourt receive cash up-front from FOX for a new TV agreement that over the course of the agreement could be worth as much as $3-$4 billion.  If that deal were to be approved McCourt would be more than able to pay off his ex-wife and still be able to keep the team.

The real problem MLB has with McCourt is that all the the loans he has proposed involve him accepting money to pay off his divorce settlement and other non-baseball related debts.  The league doesn't want this to become standard practice for owners (case in the point the Wilpons and the New York Mets) and they also don't seem to want McCourt to be an owner anymore as he has tarnished what was once one of the greatest franchises in baseball.

"My office will continue its thorough investigation into the operations and finances of the Dodgers and related entities during the period of Mr. McCourt's ownership," Selig said in a public statement to the media. "The Dodgers have been one of the most prestigious franchises in all of sports, and we owe it to their legion of loyal fans to ensure that this club is being operated properly now and will be guided appropriately in the future."

The crazy thing is that despite McCourt's disgraceful use of club finances the team has done quite well on the field.  Since he became the owner the Dodgers have averaged 85 wins per year, won three National League West titles and reached the postseason four times.  That is not a bad stretch especially when you consider the fact that payroll was cut in both 2010 and 2011 in an attempt to save McCourt some money.

At this point it would take a miracle for Frank McCourt to remain as the owner of the Dodgers.  The $30 million loan he received from FOX bought McCourt a little bit of time but unless he can get his hands on more money quickly his reign as owner of the Dodgers has seemingly come to an end.


Random YouTube Video

UFC Fighters Refusing to Fight Friends/Teammates

One of the biggest issues currently facing the UFC is the recent epidemic of fighters refusing to fight their friends and training partners.  While the UFC is trying to run a business and put on the most exciting fights possible for the fans fighters are flat out refusing fights and in some cases denying themselves an opportunity for a title.

This is by no means a new phenomenon as fighters have always looked to avoid fighting their friends and training partners.  It just seems that lately it has been occurring far more frequently.

The first major refusal to fight a friend, that I can think of, came from Anderson Silva.  Silva had been cleaning out the Middleweight division and there was a growing theory amongst fans he would step up and fight at Light Heavyweight as well.  The only problem was that at the time the Light Heavyweight champion was Silva's friend and training partner Lyoto Machida.  Although Anderson had just come off back to back victories over light heavyweights James Irvin and Forrest Griffin he said that he would not be interested in making a permanent move to 205lbs if Machida was champion.

Even after Machida lost the belt to Mauricio “Shogun” Rua at UFC 113 Anderson still refused to move up to fight for the title.  He still believed that Machida was in the conversation as a potential challenger for the title and didn't want to do anything to prevent Machida from getting a title shot.  So despite fans desires to see a Silva-Machida superfight the hands of the UFC are tied as they can't force Silva to fight his friend and don't want to upset their biggest star.

Since all of that transpired more and more fighters have come out and said they would refuse to fight their friends.  For example Jon Fitch said that had Josh Koscheck beaten Georges St. Pierre he would have moved up to middleweight and challenged for a title there in order to avoid having to fight his American Kickboxing Academy training partner.

In an interview with MMA Mania Fitch had this to say about the whole situation,"To me there's no reason to fight a teammate. It's just not a fight we're interested in at all. It's a situation where, if Koscheck is able to win the belt and defend the belt, I will move up to 185. [If Georges wins] I'll be waiting on the front doorsteps with flowers [for a title shot]."

A more recent example would be Rashad Evan’s initial refusal to fight Jon Jones.  Obviously since Jones victory over Shogun at UFC 128 Rashad has had a change of heart.  Now a war of words has begun and the two will fight at some point in 2011 but this is the exception and not the rule.

I can understand why fighters wouldn’t want to fight their friends and the people they train with as no one wants to be responsible for setting a friend’s career back by beating them.  I mean if Jones does beat Rashad then Rashad may never get a title shot again and that’s a lot of pressure to put on a friendship.  Guys make their living by fighting and if you're a title contender you are going to be featured on main cards and make more money.  To beat a friend and therefore hurt his earning power is something that I'm sure no fighter wants to do.

Having said that the UFC is a business.  When these fighters sign contracts with the UFC it should be under the assumption that they will need to fight anyone at anytime.  The UFC is trying to pormote MMA and put on the best possible fight for fans and UFC matchmaker Joe Silva needs to have the freedom to make the best fights possible without having his hands tied because of friendship.  In the case of Rashad and Jones the UFC got lucky that they changed their minds and agreed to fight but that won't happen every time.

Another factor to consider is that these days a lot of the top fighters in the world train at the same gyms.  Jackson’s MMA, Black House and AKA are the home gyms of 4 of the current UFC champions and at least 10 fighters that would be considered top 5 in their weight class.  If guys from AKA refuse to fight one another then that's going to be a problem as that gym continues to grow and attract better fighters.

Staying with the theme of gyms by forcing training partners to fight it might also divide the gym.  The best example of this is occurring presently with Rashad and Jon Jones.  Rashad trained at Jackson's MMA long before Jon Jones did and now he has left the gym and is training elsewhere as he feels betrayed by Greg Jackson and the other coaches.  Now other people that trained at Jackson's MMA have to take sides and the whole situation can get out of hand quick.

In the case of Rashad and Jones if they had just agreed to fight in the first place the whole thing wouldn't have gone down the way it did.  Instead they let public pressure and misinterpreted quotes from interviews guide their decisions. Had both fighters realized that they were involved in a business and put their friendship aside this mess could have been avoided.

The UFC needs to put a stop to this sort of behavior as soon as possible because if they don’t eventually it’s going to be hard for them to put on the fights that fans really want to see. Fighters need to realize that they are involved in a business and although it’s understandable they don’t want to fight their friends if you want to be a great fighter you can’t turn down fights.

Random YouTube Video

Cam Newton's Rising Draft Stock

One of the best things about the lead up to the NFL Draft is reading every big writers Mock Drafts and seeing where they predict players will be taken.  Its always interesting to see who climbs into the first round after an impressive Combine or Pro Day (Andy Dalton of TCU comes to mind) and conversely who falls out of the top 10 after being a consensus top pick forever (this year that is Nick Fairley from Auburn).

This year the player that has moved the most, in terms of where he has been projected to be taken, is Cam Newton.  Despite the fact that Newton led Auburn to a National Championship in January and won the Heisman Trophy he wasn't projected as a  1st round pick.  Many experts had him pegged as a 2nd or even 3rd round pick as it was believed he didn't have the skill set to make the transition to the pro style game.

There were also character concerns as all year long Newton had been involved in a highly publicized scandal concerning whether his father took money for him to play at Auburn.  Lots of people wondered how much Newton knew and whether he was involved in the scandal and was letting his dad take all the heat.  Then there was his controversial past at Florida most notably the alleged theft of a laptop and instances of academic cheating.

Needless to say when it came to Cam Newton there were more questions than answers.

Fast forward a few months and all of a sudden Cam Newton is the popular choice to be taken #1 overall by the Panthers on April 28th.  How did Newton go from being a possible 2nd or 3rd round pick to now being the favorite to be taken first overall?

The answer is actually pretty simple.  For all his shortcomings in the character department, in which he does have many, there is no player in this draft with even close to the same potential that Cam Newton has.  His combination of athletic ability and marketability can't be ignored and make him worth the risk of being taken first overall.

Since 2001 there have been 8 quarterbacks taken 1st overall (Michael Vick, David Carr, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning, Alex Smith, JaMarcus Russell, Matthew Stafford and Sam Bradford). Of those 8 quarterbacks only 3 have been busts (Carr, Smith and Russell) with the jury still being out on one (Stafford).  That means that based on recent history Cam Newton has pretty much a 50-50 chance of being a total bust and crippling the Carolina Panthers for years to come.

Mel Kiper of ESPN stated the Panther's dilemma perfectly in his latest mock draft when he wrote, "There are immediate needs, and there is a decision that you believe will change the direction of your franchise for years to come."  That's the important part right there.  The Panthers need someone to market their team around as former stars such as Julius Peppers have left for free agency, or in the case of wide receiver Steve Smith, have become irrelevant.

Kiper continues by writing, "If they really see Newton as the transformative player that can be both a Pro Bowl quarterback and face of the franchise who draws a lot of buzz, they can make this pick. If talent alone was all they were concerned with, Newton would be an easy choice. But this pick also requires a belief in his development and maturity. Certainly, however, Newton's potential is significant"

There's that word again, potential.  Whenever you draft a player it is always based on what you think their potential is.  How good can they be as a professional and do they have the potential to become a superstar that can change the fortune of a franchise?  I believe Newton has that ability.

In terms of athleticism there are no questions.  Newton is an athletic freak and his showing at the Combine proved that.  He ran the 40 in just 4.59 seconds, broad jumped 10 feet 6 inches and had a 35-inch vertical all while being 6'4 220lbs.  He has incredible arm strength and can throw the ball 60 to 70 yards with ease.  His performance made Trent Dilfer say, "The ceiling is so astronomically high for Cam Newton that the scouts, the GMs, the coaches are really going to be slobbering about the prospects of having him on their team."

The two biggest issues Newton has are accuracy and maturity.  The accuracy is something that can be fixed with a little patience and some solid coaching.  The maturity is something Newton is going to have to figure out on his own. 

Before the Combine even started Newton was quoted by Sports Illustrated columnist Peter King as saying, "I see myself not only as a football player, but an entertainer and icon."  While it is good to see that Newton realizes football is a business it does not look good when a college kid is talking about becoming an icon before he has even taken a snap in the NFL.

To me the one thing I always come back to when talking about Cam Newton is his performance in the Iron Bowl at the end of the Auburn season against Alabama.  The game was in Alabama and Auburn fell behind early 24-0.  If the Tigers didn't win then they could kiss a shot at the National Championship goodbye. 

Instead of folding Newton led Auburn back and they eventually won the game 28-27 throwing for 3 touchdowns and running in another. It was probably one of the greatest performances I have ever seen and it really showed the greatness of Cam Newton.  To pull off a victory like that, on the road and in a hostile environment all the while having to deal with talks of scandal and eligibility is impressive and proves Newton is a winner.

This is what coaches and General Managers look at.  They look past the immaturity and the accuracy problems and see the potential for greatness that Newton has.  It truly is undeniable and its why he more than likely will be the #1 overall pick come draft day.


Random YouTube Video

Despite the Officials Best Efforts the NBA Playoffs Have Been Great

What a crazy weekend in the NBA.  It had everything.  Big upsets (Atlanta beating Orlando, Memphis beating San Antonio and New Orleans beating Los Angeles), last second heroics (Shane Battier and Ray Allen) and some ridiculous individual performances (Derrick Rose and Chris Paul).  There were 8 games and almost every one of them came down to the final possession with the largest margin of victory being only 10 points.

The weekend wasn't without its flaws however and the one that stuck out the most, and when it comes to the NBA always sticks out the most, was the officiating.

No other sport is hurt so much by the refs.  Sometimes NFL games can be ruined by a ref making a bad call or calling a stupid penalty but for the most part the players decide the outcome.  That's not the way it goes down in the NBA though as at times it seems like the biggest stars on the court are the officials.  As Bill Simmons tweeted during the Bulls-Pacers game, "For any Bulls fans attending this game: don't forget, you're not there to see the teams, you're there to see Joey Crawford."


That tweet wasn't far off.  Despite Derrick Rose putting on one of the greatest individual performances I have ever seen in the NBA Playoffs the real star of that game was Crawford.  In that game alone there were 46 personal fouls called as well as 2 technical fouls (one to Pacers coach Frank Vogel and one to Bulls forward Luol Deng).  The final score of that game was 104-99 for Chicago.  The Bulls went 26-32 from the charity stripe meaning that exactly 25% of their total offense came from free throws.

But the Bulls weren't even the biggest benefactors of the whistle happy refs.  In a 101-98 loss to the Memphis Grizzlies the San Antonio Spurs scored almost 38% of their total points from the line.  They shot a total of 47 free throws making 36 of them.  In that particular game there were a total of 60 personal fouls handed out by Ed Milloy and the rest of his officiating crew.  I watched that whole game and I can promise you there weren't 60 plays that merited a foul call.  It just so happens that every time Tony Parker or George Hill came within 8 feet of the basket a whistle got blown.

In total there were 445 free throw attempts over the weekend.  That averages out to 55.63 free throw attempts per game.  If I had to bet I would say that going forward that number is only going to get higher as well because these officials want to make sure they are "controlling the game" and not letting the players take over.

Here are the guys that got to the line the most over the weekend (Makes/Attempts):

Dwight Howard - 14-22
Derrick Rose - 19-21
Tony Parker - 12-16
Kevin Durant - 12-15
LeBron James - 13-14
Dirk Nowitzki - 13-13
George Hill - 11-13
Chris Paul - 9-12
Chris Bosh - 9-11
Marc Gasol - 6-10

A lot of the guys on the list are players that drive to the basket and actually get fouled (Rose, LeBron and Durant) and Howard just gets hacked every time he touches the ball.  The rest of the guys on the list though, especially Hill, Parker and Nowitzki, just drive to the basket and flail hoping the ref will bail them out, which more often then not they do.

Its not even just the free throws that are brutal.  In two separate games officials made absolutely terrible calls that ended up deciding the game.  The first was a non-call against Kendrick Perkins of the Thunder against the Denver Nuggets and the second was an offensive foul call against Carmelo Anthony in the final minute of the Celtics/Knicks game.

The Perkins non-call was a blatant basket interference call that the refs somehow missed.  With the Thunder down 101-100 Russell Westbrook put up a shot from 15 feet that bounced off the rim and then went in.  The only problem is that Perkins tipped the ball in from under the basket as it was still in the cylinder.  If the refs get that call right then the Nuggets are still up by one point with the ball and 1:06 left to play.  That basket changed the momentum of the game and ended up titling the game in favor of the Thunder.

That non-call is nothing when compared to the atrocious offensive foul call against Carmelo Anthony.  With the Knicks up 85-84 with possession of the ball Carmelo Anthony and Paul Pierce were jostling for position just outside the post area.  Pierce was holding Melo's left arm and when Melo shook him off Pierce exaggerated and got the offensive foul call.  Was it a foul? No and it is definitely not a foul you call with 21 seconds left in a playoff game.  That gave the Celtics the ball and Ray Allen, being the best clutch shooter in NBA history in my opinion, nails the game winning 3.

Both of those examples gave the home team the advantage and you have to wonder if that's what made the refs blow the whistle.  I personally think its because the officials can't keep up with the speed of the game and they blow the whistle based on assumptions and not based on what they actually see.  Some of the refs in the NBA are in their 60s and 70s and yet they feel they can still run up and down the court with some of the best athletes on the planet.  They see a guy drive the basket in an instant and then see bodies move and they just blow the whistle as a first reaction.

So maybe I am being too hard on the refs.  Then again they are incompetent old men who seemingly want to make sure that basketball games are decided at the free throw line instead of during regular play.  Yet despite the best the officials best efforts the first weekend of the NBA playoffs can be seen as nothing but a major success.


Random YouTube Video

Why Barry Bonds and Manny Ramirez Should be in the Hall of Fame

This was a big, and extremely controversial, week for MLB.  Manny Ramirez surprisingly retired rather than face a 100 game suspension for testing positive during a random drug test and Barry Bonds was found guilt of obstruction of justice and now awaits sentencing in court. 

With all of that going on the usual debate has popped up and has dominated much of the discussion of both Bonds and Ramirez.  The debate of course is whether or not Barry Bonds and Manny Ramirez should be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame.  To me this shouldn't even be a debate as both Barry Bonds and Manny Ramirez 100 percent belong in the Hall of Fame and here is why:

If you go to the Baseball Hall of Fame website they quote their slogan in the top right hand corner of the home page.  The slogan reads, "Preserving History - Honoring Excellence - Connecting Generations."  In the top left hand corner of the same home page the official name of the Hall of Fame is written, "National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum."  Based on the slogan and the official name of the Hall of Fame both Barry Bonds and Manny Ramirez deserve inclusion.

If the point of the Hall of Fame is to preserve the history of baseball then how can Bonds and Ramirez not be included?  Just because they cheated does not mean that they don't have their place in the history of the game.  No one in baseball history has ever hit more home runs than Barry Bonds. How is that not integral to the history of baseball? Just because fans and writers don't like him doesn't mean he should be excluded from baseball history.

The same can be said for Ramirez who historically is one of the greatest right handed hitters in the history of baseball.  His numbers are right up there with such baseball legends as Hank Aaron, Willie Mays and Frank Robinson.  To deny him entry into the Hall of Fame would be the exact  opposite of preserving history, it would be ignoring.


The most important word to focus on is 'museum.'  If the Hall of Fame is actually going to be a legitimate museum for the game of baseball then how do you exclude players for taking steroids?  That would be the same as the German National History Museum excluding the Holocaust.  While it does make the country look bad it is still an important part of their history and to try and sweep it under the rug like it didn't happen is ridiculous.  The same goes for players who took steroids.  Baseball can try and pretend like it didn't happen but fans know and it makes the Hall of Fame look ridiculous for trying to exclude those players.

Nowhere on the Hall of Fame website does it have the word 'moral' written.  The point of a Hall of Fame isn't to induct players based on moral character and personality.  If that is the case then why is the Hall of Fame currently filled with blatantly open racists, alcoholics, drug users and convicted felons?   Character and personality should have no bearing on whether someone is inducted into the Hall of Fame or not and if it does have some bearing then the word 'museum' needs to be removed from the title of the organization.

Then again this is nothing knew for the Baseball Hall of Fame. In the past they have refused to include some of the more polarizing figures in baseball history.  Pete Rose, the man with more hits than anyone in baseball history, is not in the Hall of Fame because he bet on baseball.  The list of records Pete Rose holds is astounding including most hits ever, most games played, most career at bats, most singles, runs/doubles/walks/total bases by a switch hitter and most consecutive seasons of 200 or more hits: 10.  Yet despite his amazing playing career he has been excluded from the Hall of Fame and more than likely will never be inducted, which is one of the greater tragedies in sports if you ask me.

'Connecting Generations' is also listed as one of the principle values of the Baseball Hall of Fame.  If that is the case then how will you connect the 80s to the late 2000s without showcasing the "Steroid Era" of the 90s and early 2000s? How do you know for certain who was on steroids and who wasn't?  Maybe everyone was and only a few people got caught.  A few years ago there was a reported list of over 500 players that tested positive for performance enhancing drugs yet only a few names were released.  Who else was on that list and why haven't their names been released? 

If the selection committee is going to deny Bonds and Ramirez, with Bonds never actually testing positive, then how can they induct anyone from that era?

The most common defense for not inducting someone like Pete Rose or Barry Bonds into the Hall of Fame is, "they are excluded because they cheated." This is a not a valid argument for exclusion in my eyes.  The Hall of Fame is currently filled with pitchers who admitted to using illegal pitches throughout their careers.  Guys would use sandpaper or a nail file to wreck the shape of the ball making it harder to hit and of course there is the infamous spitball used by pitchers such as Gaylord Perry and Don Drysdale.  The pitchers that used these pitches broke the rules of baseball and yet still find themselves in the Hall of Fame.  If they are included then why can't Barry Bonds be inducted as well?


By blatantly ignoring the purpose of the organization and the '"values" it supposedly stands for, the Baseball Hall of Fame has become a popularity contest.  Players whose careers were far less impressive than someone like Rose's or Bonds' are being inducted.  You're telling me Bert Blyleven is more important to the history of baseball than Pete Rose and Barry Bonds?

Excluding players such as Pete Rose, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Mark McGuire and Sammy Sosa because they broke the rules of the game is a blatant contradiction of what the Hall of Fame is supposed to stand for. Why can these players not be inducted and then on their plaque have an inscription that states they tested positive for steroids?  Is that really such a big deal?

Until the day that Barry Bonds, Pete Rose and Manny Ramirez are inducted into the Hall of Fame I will never look at the Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum as legitimate.


Random YouTube Video

NFL Rookie Wages Set to be Cut

Late Monday night documents were leaked from the NFL offices that outlined a proposed plan by the owners to cut almost 60 percent of guaranteed money paid to first round draft picks.  The plan would free up a total of $1.2 billion by 2016 and that money would be diverted to veterans' salaries and benefits rather than being spent on players that have yet to play a down in the NFL.  Also all players drafted in the first round would have to sign five-year fixed contracts*.

* Players selected in rounds 2-7 would sign four year fixed deals


Making changes to the rookie salary system was a major point of contention during negotiations before the lockout occurred as it should be.  First round picks, especially quarterbacks, get paid way too much money considering they haven't actually accomplished anything.  In almost every other sport there is a maximum rookie contract, or rookie wage scale*, that limits how much rookies can make.  A system like that forces players to earn a big contract rather than simply being handed millions of dollars for possible future production.

* The owners leaked proposal does not include a rookie wage scale as contracts can still be negotiated on a case by case basis

The amount of guaranteed money first round picks receive is insane.  From the year 2000 to the year 2010 the amount of guaranteed money first round players received went up 233 percent.  In 2010 alone $525 million of guaranteed money was included in contracts ($50 million of which went to Sam Bradford, the 1st overall pick by the St. Louis Rams).  That number needs to come down as paying players that young, that much money, before they have ever played a down not only gives them a feeling of entitlement but can also create animosity from veterans who had to earn their contracts.

Here are the last five #1 overall selections and how much guaranteed money they got:

Sam Bradford -$50 million 
Matthew Stafford  - $41.7 million
Jake Long - $30 million
JaMarcus Russell - $32.019
Mario Williams - $27.125

Before the JaMarcus Russell bashing starts keep in mind that there are other quarterbacks who have been huge busts that cost their teams millions of dollars as well, maybe not as the same level as Russell but still. Matt Leinart ($12.9 million), David Carr ($15 million) and Joey Harrington ($13.9 million) are just a few that come to mind.  Think of how crippling those contracts were to their respective teams.

In an interview with ESPN Philadelphia Eagles team President Joe Banner had this to say about the proposal to cut guaranteed money being given to rookies, "From a fairness standpoint, the simple concept to drive this should be that the players who contribute the most to the league should get the most money.  What this system does is ensures players playing well in the NFL and bringing in fans and driving TV [ratings] will get the money that went to players who turned out not to be so good. And that is good for everyone."

The agents for these rookies might tend to disagree with Mr. Banner as this new proposed system would severely hurt the amount of money they would be able to make.  Ben Dogra for example is the agent for Sam Bradford and he no doubt made a ridiculous commission on Bradford's contract with the Rams.  If this proposed system was in place Bradford would have gotten only maybe $20 million guaranteed which would mean Dogra would have lost out on millions of dollars. 

Its not just the agents who would be getting hurt by the proposed new rules.  Veteran players would also suffer if the price to sign rookies was to be lowered.  Some players in the league only have jobs because teams are hesitant to hand over large sums of money to unproven players.  If the average cost of a rookie contract was to drop by the proposed 60 percent and veterans' salaries would go up by 60 percent then teams would be more likely to fill their roster with cheaper and younger players.

Player agent Peter Schaffer put it best when he said, "This will eliminate the veteran middle class because teams can have younger players who are making less and are under fixed contracts."  He also called this proposed system, "scouting insurance" as it protects teams that screw up their first round picks in the draft.

Although it will more than likely get rejected I hope this proposal does become the rule.  I hate seeing rookies that haven't done a thing in the NFL holdout because they want more money.  They should have to earn their contracts as it would make them try harder and you would have fewer busts.  No more guys like JaMarcus Russell getting paid their millions and then not caring or trying.  Players are now going to have to play their ay to the big pay day (totally meant for that to rhyme).


Random YouTube Video

The UFC Hype Machine

What do Mark Hominick, Jake Shields and Yushin Okami all have in common?  Well for one they are all #1 contenders for UFC titles in their respective weight classes.  More importantly than that however what they all have in common is that despite the glowing praise from Dana White, Joe Rogan and others associated with the UFC they have no chance to beat Jose Aldo, Georges St. Pierre and Anderson Silva.

This phenomenon is what I like the call the 'UFC Hype Machine.'

The basic function of the UFC Hype Machine is get fans to believe that fighters, while excellent in their own right, have a chance of beating the best fighters on the planet.  That's exactly what Aldo, St. Pierre and Silva are, they are pound for pound three of best fighters in the world and yet for some reason fans, including myself, always seem to doubt them heading into a fight.

If you watch The Ultimate Fighter then no doubt you have seen the new promo ad for UFC 129.  The ad features Jake Shields in a locker room as Joe Rogan does voice over work listing all of Shields' best victories.  The purpose of the ad is to get fans to believe that Jake Shields has a chance in hell of beating Georges St. Pierre on April 30th.  If you watch Mixed Martial Arts at all then you know that this is just not possible.  Shields has never faced anyone half as good as GSP and he will no doubt get severely outclassed when they meet.

Jake Shields is the latest example of the UFC hype machine at work.  When the fight was first announced months ago I remember public reaction being 'he doesn't stand a chance against Georges St. Pierre.'  Yet slowly but surely doubt starts to creep into the minds of fans and they start to believe that Shields might actually stand a chance, which is exactly what the UFC wants you to think.

The Hype Machine has been doing its work since long before Jake Shields arrived.  Think back on Georges St. Pierre's last few fights.  Going into each one of them the message from the UFC was always the same, "fighter X is the most dangerous opponent Georges has ever faced."  They even said that about Josh Koscheck, who the first time he fought GSP at UFC 74 got absolutely man handled.  Koscheck, Dan Hardy, BJ Penn, Thiago Alves and Jon Fitch.  These are the men that GSP has not only beaten but absolutely dominated.

Even when it comes to Anderson Silva, the best fighter in the world in the weakest division in the UFC, the Hype Machine is still extremely effective.  Before he fought Vitor Belfort, Chael Sonnen, Demian Maia, Thales Leites and Patrick Cote there were fans who thought he could be in trouble. Yet other than Sonnen (who was on steroids and Silva had a cracked rib) they have all looked pathetic barely posing a challenge.  Two of those guys (Leites and Cote) aren't even in the UFC anymore.  Yet when Anderson faces Yushin Okami you better believe fans will think Okami has a chance.

How many fights will Anderson Silva need to dominate before fans finally realize he cannot be beaten?  I mean the man hasn't lost since 2006.  Georges St. Pierre hasn't lost a round 2007.  Let me repeat so it really sinks in.  He has not lost a single round in over 5 years of fighting.  Yet Jake Shields (who is often in bad positions and barely pulls of victories) is somehow a serious threat? Jose Aldo hasn't lost since 2005, that's 6 years people, but Mark Hominick is being given a "punchers chance."

I'm not saying that the UFC is being dishonest in the way they promote fights.  No the point is that fans keep falling for the same thing (I include myself here).  We as fans watch Countdown and Primetime, we see the promos and we start to think, "yeah I could see him pulling off the upset."  That is the power of the UFC Hype Machine.  It takes rational MMA fans and gets us to completely disregard all the fights we have ever watched.  All the evidence of domination we have witnessed in the past is forgotten in an instant and that's when the UFC has us right where they want us.



Random YouTube Video

1st Round NHL Playoff Predictions

The NHL playoffs kickoff on Wednesday and I couldn't be more excited.  The regular season is fine and all but playoff hockey is a better representation of what real hockey is.  Guys actually finish their checks unlike in the regular season and players actually try for the entire game, its awesome. 

I just can't wait for that first double overtime game that takes until 2:35am to finish.  And is there anything better then when someone throws a dirty hit in Game 2 officially signifying that the series just got chippy?  


So here are my predictions:


Western Conference


(1) Vancouver vs. (8) Chicago

God damnit Dallas you mother f*&ing pieces of s%@* how did you not beat the f%$#@ing Minnesota Wild?! All the Stars had to do to make the playoffs, and keep Vancouver from playing Chicago, was beat Jose Theodore and some AHL callups.  But I guess that's just way too much to ask for a team who boasts one of the best top two lines in the NHL.  Just disgraceful.

As a Canucks fan am I worried that my team will get bounced from the playoffs for the 3rd straight season by the Blackhawks?  Am I worried Roberto Luongo hasn't slept since the Stars lost and still has nightmares about Patrick Kane every night?  Am I worried Vancouver's best faceoff man is half blind?  Am I worried about the President's Trophy curse?   Of course I am.

But I am also cautiously optimistic and here is why.  Vancouver's penalty kill during the regular season was 3rd bets in the league at 85.6% while Chicago's was 25th at 79.2%.  I don't see Corey Crawford stealing any games and becoming this years Antti Niemi.

Lastly with Dustin Byfuglien now on Atlanta and Troy Brouwer and David Bolland unlikely to be healthy for the series I don't think Chicago will be able to man handle the Canucks like they did the past 2 years.  That should hopefully give the Sedins more room to work with.

Having said all that I could still see the Canucks getting swept and wasting another year as a Stanley Cup contender.

Prediction: Canucks in 6 (had to go 6 because if it goes 7 the Canucks are screwed.  Maybe I should have gone with the reverse jinx on this one)

(2) San Jose vs. (7) Los Angeles

I could talk about how San Jose doesn't kill penalties half as well as LA does and how LA has a young team that is loaded with talent but really it would be a waste of time. 

The only thing you need to know about this series is that the Sharks top line are what I like to refer to as "choke artists."  Unless they are on the same team as Sidney Crosby, Eric Staal, Jonathan Toews, Drew Doughty, Chris Pronger, Corey Perry, Ryan Getlaf and every other great Canadian player in the NHL they aren't winning shit.  No one to carry them means no chance of victory.

Prediction: LA in 6


(3) Detroit vs. (6) Phoenix

List of players on the Detroit red Wings that have won a Stanley Cup:  Pavel Datsyuk (2), Henrik Zetterberg, Brian Rafalski (3), Johan Franzen, Jiri Hudler, Nicklas Lidstrom (4), Nicklas Kronwall, Dan Cleary, Valtteri Filppula, Tomas Holmstrom (4), Kris Draper (4), Brad Stuart, Drew Miller, Darren Helm, Chris Osgood (3), Mike Modano.

List of players on Phoenix that have won a Stanley Cup: Ilya Bryzgalov, Ray Whitney.

Prediction: Detroit in 4 (yeah I said it.  Phoenix shouldn't have a hockey team and they probably won't even sell out the building during their 2 home games.  But keep pushing the NHL on people that could care less about the game Gary Bettman its noble work you're doing).


(4) Anaheim vs. (5) Nashville

Nashville got so screwed here.  They almost got to play Phoenix or LA both teams they more than likely would have won their first playoff series ever against but now they have to play Anaheim who will not be an easy out.

For me this series comes down to one player: Shea Weber.  In order for Nashville to be successful Weber needs to play his best hockey and shutdown Corey Perry and Ryan Getzlaf.  If he does that then Nashville might finally get over the hump and win a playoff series which I am really hoping for because Nashville is a solid team and Barry Trotz could use a break (I mean the guy has no neck he could use a win).

Prediction: Nashville in 7


Eastern Conference


(1) Washington vs. (8) New York

Time to see if the Capitals new commitment to defense will pay off.  Last year they got bounced in the first round by Montreal and rededicated themselves to playing 'playoff hockey' all season.  It may have cost them in offense but they still won their division, got a first seed in the playoffs and had the 2nd best penalty kill in the league.

The Rangers barely got into the playoffs (Carolina choked at home against Tampa Bay on the final day of the season) and when I look at this team I wonder who is going to step up and be a leader in the playoffs.  Henrik Lundqvist is an amazing goalie but he can't win the series on his own, not with the defense he has in front of him anyways.

The Rangers owned the Capitals during the regular season but I don't see them continuing that trend when it actually matters.

Prediction: Capitals in 5


(2) Philadelphia vs. (7) Buffalo

They may have limped into the postseason (going 3-4-3 in their last 10 games) but the Flyers are a team that was built for the playoffs.  They play physical hockey and across the board are in my opinion the most talented team in the NHL.  Their goaltending is a real question mark but they made it to the Stanley Cup Finals with Brian Boucher in net last season so no need to worry there.

Plus if Chris Pronger plays in this series, which it looks like he will, then god help the Sabers forwards.  he has built some pent up aggression sitting in the press box and no doubt he wants to kill somebody.  Thomas Vanek better keep his head up.

I emailed my buddy Draper (biggest Sabers fan I know,well to be fair the only Sabers fan I know) asking him how many games he thought the Sabers would win.  "2 if we are lucky."

Prediction: Flyers in 6


(3) Boston vs. (6) Montreal

I was watching TSN today and they aired an interview with Travis Moen of the Canadiens asking him how he thought they were going to win the series.  His response, "drive hard to the net and make Tim Thomas work." Not a bad strategy although there is one flaw I do see in it.  The Canadiens don't have a forward taller than 5'4.  How are these midgets going to drive to the net on Zedeno Chara?  They won't even be able to get by Milan Lucic and Nathan Horton.

With all the bad blood between these two teams this year this series should be great to watch but I think its going to be pretty one-sided in terms of wins.  The again my boys Carey Price and PK Subban might go off and pull off the upset, I kid I kid.

Prediction: Boston in 4

(4) Pittsburgh vs. (5) Tampa Bay

The fact that the Penguins played so well down the stretch despite missing Evgeni Malkin and Sidney Crosby is mind bottling.  Jordan Staal proved he can be a #1 center and everyone else stepped up their level of play.  I don't think Crosby will be playing in this series but I don't think the Penguins will need him as they are a proven group with the best penalty kill in the NHL.

Steven Stamkos and Martin St. Louis combined for 190 points.  Tampa bays next 4 top scorers combined for 183.  Tampa Bay is a 2 man team that scored the 6th most goals in the NHL this year but had just 8 players finish with a + rating.  They don't play good defense and their goaltending is mediocre at best.  I mean Dwayne Roloson?  Its not 2005-2006 anymore.

Prediction: Pittsburgh in 5


So there you go.  Predictions that mean absolutely nothing from some random jackass on the internet.  Enjoy the playoffs.  I know I will.


Random YouTube Video

Tara Sullivan Denied Access to Male Locker Room at Masters, Overreaction Ensues

"Bad enough no women members at Augusta. But not allowing me to join writers in locker room interview is just wrong."

That is a tweet from female journalist Tara Sullivan of the Bergen Record from Sunday night after she was denied access to the male locker room at Augusta National Golf Club.  The tweet was published at around 8:30 pm and thanks to the express nature of social media the story blew up in a matter of minutes. 

The general public reaction was one of outrage as people simply couldn't wrap their heads around a female being barred from a male locker room.  Naturally the majority of the outrage was directed at Augusta National due to their history of sexism (they currently have no female members) however some people were quick to blame the security guard who refused her entry.

This is where the overreaction began.

A common saying is that when you have a knee-jerk reaction often times you end up looking like the jerk.  This saying rings especially true in this case as people were quick to call both Augusta National and the security guard sexist before getting all of the facts.  If people had simply waited for the entire story to surface they would have realized that the whole situation was a misunderstanding and not some sort mean spirited and sexist act with the intention of embarrassing Tara Sullivan.

Fact #1 - The security guard that denied Tara Sullivan was female not male like many assumed

Here is a quote from Tara Sullivan in an article she published this morning that ran in almost every major newspaper Monday morning,

"At the final portion of the hallway, the one that ended at the locker room door, I was told by a female security officer that I was not allowed in.  I asked the security woman again why they had such a policy, and she told me it was because there was an open bathroom area in the locker room.  She apologized for the rule, saying it was not her policy."

So rather than a male security guard rudely telling Tara Sullivan she wasn't allowed and not giving an explanation it was actually a female who, based on Sullivan's own story, politely explained to her the situation and what she understood was the policy of the club.

But rather than wait for that information to come out people just assumed it was a man who denied her.  I'm not saying it makes it right because she was denied by a woman I am simply showing how jumping to a conclusion rather than waiting for facts can lead to overreactions.


Fact #2 - Augusta National apologized as soon as they were informed of what occurred

Once the story broke many people were quick to blame Augusta National and point to their sexist past (myself included although I didn't blame them I simply stated I wasn't surprised based on their history).  For those that are unaware in 2002 there was a large controversy over the lack of female members at Augusta National.

In response then Chairman Hootie Johnson stated publicly, "Our membership is single gender just as many other organizations and clubs all across America. These would include junior Leagues, sororities, fraternities, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and countless others. And we all have a moral and legal right to organize our clubs the way we wish"

That is sound logic and although it may not be politically correct and socially acceptable it is legally correct as Augusta National is a private organization who can create and enforce any policy it wishes.  Since then the club has allowed female members to join the 'waiting list' although that was 9 years ago and there still isn't one single female member.  But back to Tara Sullivan.

Once again in her own words, "I approached the media desk for an official reaction. An apology was translated to me shortly after and Masters media official Steve Ethun met with me personally."

"I apologize," he said. "It was a complete misunderstanding by tournament week security and you should have rightfully been given access per the standard practices of major sporting events."

One more quick excerpt from Tara Sullivan's personal account, "I looked around for any official Masters representative, but didn’t see anyone."

So what happened was Sullivan was denied access to the locker room and there was no official present to correct the mistake that had been made.  As soon as an official was notified an apology was given although at that time it was too late. 

There was nothing that Augusta National could have done short of stationing an official right by the door to the locker room.  In this case it seems as though Tara Sullivan was simply unlucky and to accuse Augusta National of purposely baring her is flat out incorrect.


Fact #3 - The female security guard was "tournament week staff" 

What does that mean exactly?  It means that the security guard isn't a full-time employee of Augusta National and that she was hired on a 7 day contract to work just the Masters.  Once the tournament ended she would effectively no longer be employed.

Therefore it would be fair to say she might not know 100% of the policies at the club and simply made a judgement call that was incorrect.  She was clearly unaware of equal-access policy which Augusta National does have in effect and had an official been there at the time the situation would no doubt have been rectified.

Tara Sullivan even took some of the blame off the female security guard herself when she said in her recounting of the incident, "Augusta National does not allow women members, so perhaps security personnel could be confusing club policy with Masters policy."

As I said before it was bad luck for Sullivan and an unfortunate misunderstanding that has spiraled into a backlash against Augusta National for being "sexists."


Fact #4 - Sullivan met her deadline and got her story on Rory McIlroy published

That obviously doesn't make up for what happened to her but in reality that's what this whole incident is about.  A reporter wanted an interview but was denied access to the locker room.  She eventually got quotes and the entire transcript of a group interview from her fellow journalists but she missed out on being there personally.

People were reacting like she was denied access to a cure for cancer.  She was just trying to write a 700 word story and couldn't talk to her main interview subject directly.  Context people, context.


I can understand why people would be upset over first hearing about a story like this.  Its 2011 and females are still having to deal with incidents like this.  A lot of the outrage I saw came from female journalists and members of the media which is shocking because if you are a professional journalist you should know that facts are king.  Reacting without knowing the facts can blow up in your face and make you look foolish and had everyone just sat back and waited 12 hours they would have seen that this was just a case of misunderstanding and bad luck.


Random YouTube Video

Carolina Hurricanes and Dallas Stars Crack Under Pressure

Win one game.  That's all the Carolina Hurricanes and the Dallas Stars had to do to make the NHL playoffs.

Thanks to a New York Rangers loss earlier in the week all Carolina had to do was win at home against the Tampa Bay Lightning on Saturday and they were in.  As for the Stars they were given a ray of hope when the Chicago Blackhawks lost Sunday afternoon to the Detroit Red Wings. 

But the pressure was too much as both teams ended up losing and will now have to watch the playoffs on television like the rest of us.

For the past 3 weeks the Hurricanes had been chasing the New York Rangers and the Buffalo Sabres for the 8th and final playoff spot in the Eastern Conference.  It seemed that no matter how well they played, and they did play really well down the stretch, they just couldn't make up any ground.  Then miraculously the Atlanta Thrashers beat the Rangers 3-0 on Thursday opening the door for the Hurricanes to sneak their way into the playoffs with a win over Tampa Bay on Saturday night.

It seemed like a dream scenario for the Canes as they were playing a team that had nothing to gain by winning and were playing them at home in the RBC Center where they were 22-13-5 on the year.  Unfortunately for the Canes, and their fans, it quickly turned into a nightmare as the Lightning scored 3 unanswered goals in the 1st period to suck the energy right out of the building.  The Hurricanes wouldn't recover and ended up losing 6-2 thus ending their season.

"I think there's a chance it was shock at 3-0," Carolina coach Paul Maurice said in an interview with NHL.com after the disappointing loss. "It happened so fast that you're shell-shocked a little bit, and then the enormity of how much you put into it and where it's at, I think that made it difficult for us."

Captain Eric Staal echoed his coaches sentiments, "We worked our butts off all year to have this opportunity at home and we didn't get the job done."

I thought for sure the Hurricanes would make it into the playoffs.  I figured there was no way they lose with Cam Ward in net and Eric Staal knowing what was on the line but clearly they choked.  They didn't play a strong game defensively and didn't set the tone early instead playing a style of hockey more suited to Tampa Bay's strengths.

Luckily for the Hurricanes they aren't the only choke artists in the league as the Dallas Stars also blew their glorious chance to make it into the playoffs when they lost 5-3 to the Minnesota Wild on Sunday night.

The Stars were all but out of the playoff race going into the weekend but on Sunday afternoon they were given a second chance at playoff life.  The second chance came thanks to a 4-3 Blackhawks loss at home to the Detroit Red Wings.  The defending Stanley Cup champions knew they controlled their playoff fate and would be guaranteed the 7th or 8th seed with a win, but they blew it.

"I can't even believe we're here right now," said Hawks captain Jonathan Toews during his post-game press conference to the media. "It's so frustrating that it has to come down to this. I'm pretty much speechless."

If the Stars had beaten the Wild, the Blackhawks would have become the 5th team in NHL history to win a Stanley Cup one year and fail to make the playoffs the following season.  The 1967-68 Maple Leafs, 1969-70 Canadiens, 1995-96 Devils and 2006-07 Hurricanes are the only teams to fail to make the playoffs the season after winning the Cup.

But the Hawks don't have to worry about adding their names to that list thanks to the choke job by the Dallas Stars and believe me it was a choke job.  The Wild played backup goalie Jose Theodore instead of Niklas Backstrom and most of the Wild's best players (John Madden, Martin Havlat and Nick Shultz) weren't even in the lineup.  No the Dallas Stars got shut down by a Wild team that was filled with minor league call ups and backstopped by a goalie that only started 28 games this year, winning just 14 of them.


Its crazy to think that two teams could play 81 games working so hard to try and get into the playoffs and then lose the most important game of their season to teams that had nothing to play for.  In the case of the Stars they couldn't even beat a team that, based on the roster they put on the ice, looked like they were trying to lose.

Both teams will now have a full off-season to reflect on just how exactly they blew their respective chances to potentially win a Stanley Cup.  You can't ask for much more than to control your own playoff destiny and for the Canes and Stars it was too much pressure to handle.  Then again by losing both teams proved that they didn't deserve to make the playoffs and the teams that got in are the correct teams.

I am more pissed than shocked that the Wild won as I was banking on a Stars win so that my Vancouver Canucks wouldn't have to play the Blackhawks in the opening round.  Now I have to sit and watch as Roberto Luongo gets ravaged by Patrick Kane backhands.  Thanks a lot Dallas.


Random YouTube Video (Fail compilation seems appropriate)

Manny Ramirez's Shocking Retirement

On Friday Manny Ramirez announced that after 19 seasons he would be retiring from the game of baseball effective immediately. Only hours later it was revealed that Ramirez had tested positive for performance enhancing drugs in a random blood test during Spring Training.  This being his second offense Ramirez would have faced a 100 game suspension but instead he chose to walk away from the game officially ending one of the most impressive, and controversial, careers in baseball history.

Reaction from players and managers all over the league was one of disbelief. "I'm shocked," said Colorado's Jason Giambi in an interview with ESPN. "He always kind of portrayed that he was out there, but he knew how to hit, man. He was unbelievable when it came to hitting."

In a conference call to the press Ramirez had this to say about his decision, "I'm at ease.  God knows what's best [for me]. I'm now an officially retired baseball player. I'll be going away on a trip to Spain with my old man."

Had Ramirez not retired he would have become the first baseball player in MLB to get caught using performance enhancing drugs twice.  The first time he was caught was with the Dodgers a few years ago and he was suspended for 50 games.  Now at 38 years old and as a member of the Tampa Bay Rays Manny has chosen to retire rather than face his punishment.

So far every article I've read or interview I've watched has had the same theme, 'what will Manny's legacy be and did he ruin it with this latest positive test?'  Its an understandable question and a tough one to answer especially since another controversial baseball figure, Barry Bonds, is in the middle of one of the craziest trials in recent memory.

A lot of times I get accused for defending assholes and I guess that trend is going to continue because I am about to stick up for Manny Ramirez.

Maybe I am blinded by the fact that I am a Red Sox fan and he was so important in helping the Sox win both their World Series titles (MVP of the 2004 World Series) but I feel Manny's legacy will remain intact and here is why.  In ten years no one will remember that Manny played for the Rays and the White Sox, they might not even remember he played for the Dodgers, much the same way people always forget Jerry Rice played for the Broncos and the Seahawks.

When people look back on the career of Manny Ramirez they will focus on his years with the Indians and the Red Sox and the fact that he got caught cheating twice will more than likely be forgotten.  He had too many great and absolutely hilarious moments (like the time he dove to intercept the throw to the cutoff man) that will dominate the memory of the fans and overshadow his recent transgressions.

For me Manny Ramirez will always be one of the greatest right handed hitters in the history of baseball.  If you look at his career numbers he ranks right up there with some of the best players in history such as Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Frank Robinson and Joe DiMaggio.  His combination of power (555 career home runs good for 14th all-time) and his ability to hit for average (.312 lifetime career batting average) are extremely rare in today's game.

But it wasn't just his stats that made Manny so great.  He was a rare breed in baseball, someone with talent and an actual personality.  Too often the best players in baseball have the charisma of a brick wall and never look o enjoy themselves while playing.  The same can't be said of Ramirez who had a childish energy about him and always seemed to be smiling and having a good time.  That is why so many fans were drawn to him and enjoyed watching him play.  Sometimes it seemed like he didn't care or that his work ethic was lacking but former teammates say otherwise.

For teammate Omar Vizquel told ESPN his thoughts on Manny, ""A lot of people don't take it really seriously when they talk about Manny Ramirez.  But the guys who have been in the lineup with him and know how he works, his work ethic, he shows up at 2 o'clock every day, he takes extra batting practice every day and it doesn't matter if he went 5-for-5 the day before. He was constantly in the gym lifting weights. His work ethic was very, very good. And some people look at him on the field like, 'Who the hell is this guy? What is he doing?' There are actions that he does on the field that really don't reflect what type of player he was. But he was just an amazing guy."

Will he get into the Hall of Fame?  Probably not anymore because for some reason baseball treats its Hall of Fame like its the Hall of Morals instead of a museum celebrating the history of baseball.  I emailed Woody Paige of Around the Horn fame after Manny was caught the first time asking whether he would vote for Manny and this was his response, "James: I will not vote for players who have been found to use steroids unless the voting rules are changed."  Since that won't be happening anytime soon Manny may be out of luck when it comes to the Hall.

It truly is a shame because Manny Ramirez had such a great impact on the game and brought so much joy to so many people.  Ron Washington, manager of the Texas Ranger put it best, "You hate to see greatness all of a sudden just fade."


Random YouTube Video

Potential NBA Lockout Keeping Players Out of Draft

With so many different sports stories occurring everyday one of the bigger stories that many fans are unaware of is the almost guaranteed NBA lockout that is going to occur next season.  While the NFL lockout may end in time for the start of the 2011 season the NBA lockout, according to league experts, is almost certain to cancel the entire season and its effects are already being felt as almost daily top prospects are declining to enter the draft and are opting instead to return to school.

The lockout itself will be initiated by the owners and led by NBA Commissioner David Stern with the main goal being the reduction of the current NBA salary cap.  Other issues will be discussed as well such as the current age limit on entry into the NBA as well as the recent trend of players 'choosing' their team by forcing trades.  This means that the current CBA will be voided and if a player is drafted they will more than likely miss their rookie season and may be joining a league that theoretically won't exist.

The uncertainty about the future of the league is already having an affect as some top prospects have decided to return to school rather than declare for the draft.  The most high profile of these prospects is Jared Sullinger who last week stated that he would return to Ohio State next year for his sophomore season.  Sullinger was considered to be a top 5 pick, with some experts even having him going 1st overall, but he has opted to return to school rather than becoming a pro.

Other top prospects who have stated they are returning, or who have yet to make up their mind, are North Carolina's Harrison Barnes, John Henson and Tyler Zeller, Arizona's Derrick Williams, Colorado's Alec Burks, Texas's Tristan Thompson and  Jordan Hamilton and Vanderbilt's Jeffery Taylor and John Jenkins.

Not every top prospect has been scared away by the lockout though as earlier this week Duke's Kyrie Irving decided to declare for the NBA draft rather than come back for another season.  Irving was considered a top 5 pick although with so many others staying in school he may now be the consensus #1 overall pick which no doubt had some bearing on his decision.

In an interview with the Associated Press the freshman point guard summed up his decision to become a pro, "it was really a tough decision for me.  If I would have come back, I would have gained a lot more experience under Coach K.  That was hard to let go, especially in the culture that's built here that I was a part of. It's something that I'll remember for the rest of my life.  But on the other hand, deciding to go the NBA is just my ultimate dream," he added. "I've been dreaming about it for a while, and having that opportunity to be such a high pick at such a young age is an opportunity that many people won't pass up."

Even before players started dropping out of the NBA draft it was already being labeled as one of the weakest in years.  There was no consensus top pick as mock drafts had a constant rotation of Sullinger, Irving, Barnes and Williams going first overall and now with so many players deciding to stay at school the talent level of the 2011 draft may be at an all-time low.

This is awful news for lottery teams that were really hoping to draft a franchise player to help turn their team around.  What's happening now is that players that were considered 'bubble first-rounders' are now moving their way up the draft board because the better players are staying at school.  This means that teams will teams be forced to use their 1st round picks on mediocre players who are extremely over valued and more than likely won't be able to provide the impact needed for those teams to improve.

There is something positive to take out of this issue though as now more kids will have a chance to stay in school a year longer then they would have initially wanted to, which has multiple benefits.  For one they will gain more experience playing another year, they will also grow both mentally and physically making them better prepared to enter the league when they do declare.

Staying for a second year might also convince some players to stay for all four years and actually graduate, which in theory is the purpose of going to college.  Rather than going to a school for 8 months and then leaving as soon as possible more players might choose to stay until they earn their degree, which if they stay for 2 years they will be halfway to achieving. 

The players that do declare for the draft and get selected will be joining a league that won't exist much like the players in the upcoming NFL draft.  They may end up missing their entire rookie season and being forced to play overseas for a year just to stay in shape and be ready for when the lockout ends.  That is if they can get a roster spot on an overseas team as no doubt more established players will be more sought after than untested rookies.

If that is in fact the case then the players who opt to stay in school may be at somewhat of an advantage. The national exposure that college players receive is invaluable and may make them better prepared for when the league resumes.  The players that are drafted may be forced to take an entire year off if they can't sign with a team overseas and that will really hurt their development.

No matter how the NBA lockout situation shakes out the damage has already been done  There is enough doubt out there to force players to stay in school rather than entering the draft.  A draft that was already short on talent is now even shorter and those bottom dwellers hoping to rebuild through the draft are going to have to wait another year.

Random YouTube Video

Has The Ultimate Fighter Run Its Course?

When the Ultimate Fighter first aired back in 2005 the show was meant to showcase young up-and-coming fighters in the world of Mixed Martial Arts.  The contestants were some of the best fighters not currently fighting in a major promotion and for the most part they were all extremely talented.  Most of the competitors from the first few seasons still fight in the UFC today and some have even gone on to become champions.  But that trend seems to be over as the latest crop of fighters in the past few seasons have been mediocre at best which leads me to wonder if TUF has run its course.

If you look at the first 3 seasons of the TUF compared to the last 3 the level of talent isn't even close.  The competitors on the more recent seasons seem far less experienced and in the case of the Heavyweights during season 10 unable to go more than 90 seconds before becoming exhausted.  There have been a few diamonds in the rough here and there but overall the talent just isn't there.

Here are some of the fighters from the first 3 seasons that are still relevant within the UFC:

Josh Koscheck

Forrest Griffin (former champ)

Stephan Bonnar

Diego Sanchez

Kenny Florian

Chris Leben

Joe Stevenson

Melvin Guillard

Rashad Evans (former champ)

Michael Bisping

Matt Hammill

Now compare that list to the fighters from the last 3 seasons that are relevant or have a bright future (not counting the current season)

Brendan Schaub

Roy Nelson (barely counts as he was a well established fighter before appearing on the show)

Matt Mittrione

Court McGee

Michael Johnson

Jonathan Brookins

The level of talent has clearly dropped off as all of the really good fighters have seemingly already been found and are either fighting in a major promotion or working with solid camps and on the UFC radar.  So over the past few seasons the fighters, and their performances, have been less than impressive and its starting to really hurt the show.

If you have been watching this season you know what I am talking about.  Only 2 episodes in and so far both fights have been brutal to watch.  The lack of excitement compounded with the fact that both representatives of Team Dos Santos were top picks makes me less then enthused to watch the remainder of the season.  Add that to the general lack of charisma that the coaches for this season (Brock Lesnar and Junior Dos Santos) possess and it makes for some dull television.

But the lack of charisma from the coaches showcases yet another problem with the show.  Since the fighters are so awful the show now needs to be carried by the personality of the coaches.  This has morphed the show into a 10-12 episode hype video for an eventual fight. 

This was especially evident when Rashad Evans and Quinton “Rampage” Jackson were coaches during season 10.  Each episode would feature footage of the two fighters arguing with one another, one coach pulling a prank on the other and then the last 10 minutes were reserved for the fight. 

It was interesting television and it may have built anticipation for their fight, but it detracted from the actual contestants on the show.  No fighter really got any airtime, other than Kimbo Slice, and by the end of the season I didn’t really care who won.

The latest rumor is that the coaches will be middleweights Chael Sonnen and Michael Bisping.  The two would then fight upon completion of the show with the winner of that fight becoming the No. 1 contender at Middleweight.  That person would then likely fight Anderson Silva after he fights the current No. 1 contender Youshin Okami.  

Now with Bisping and Sonnen being tagged as possible coaches, the dynamic of the coaches being more important than the fighters will be multiplied tenfold as both fighters have extremely big egos and love to talk trash.   Will it be entertaining?  Of course, but I was under the impression that the point of TUF was to showcase potential UFC fighters and get fans interested in their careers, not to hear two fighters disrespect one another.

I love TUF and I will watch it no matter what just because I'm an MMA fan, but I really hope the UFC either changes the format somehow or gets a higher level of fighter to compete because if the show continues the way its been going over the past few seasons then I think it might be time for TUF to come off the air before it does more harm than good.

Random YouTube Video