Category: Daily Rants

My sports attention over the weekend was clearly focused on college football including the Division 1-AA playoffs where there is a family rooting interest in Delaware as one of the participants.  By the way, Delaware won its first-round game over Sacred Heart and will face Jacksonville State next weekend.  What caught my attention was an announcement by the college football mavens regarding rules changes and the college football playoff.  Three rule changes and a “point of emphasis” will be in effect in 2021; there is good bad and ugly in that mix.

• Good:  When there is suspicion that players have been faking injuries to slow down “up-tempo offenses”, officials can use replay after the fact to make a determination.  This process may not mete out punishment proximal to the “faking”, but it is a way to try to cut down on bogus injuries – – and that practice seems to have spread widely in recent seasons.
• Bad:  The team area on the sidelines has been expanded to run from 20-yardline to 20-yardline.  It has always been between the 25-yardlines until last year when – to promote social distancing on the bench, believe it or not – the team area extended between the 15-yardlines.  So now we settle for a compromise?  Look, the players and coaches make the officials’ jobs harder; if they want to make a change there, compress everyone into the space between the 40-yardlines to assist the officials.
• Ugly:  The overtime rules will change.  Some will say that is a blessing – – until you hear what they are going to do.  Starting this Fall, teams must go for two-point conversions starting in the second overtime period; that mandate did not take effect until the third overtime period in the past.  And here is the horrible part – – after the second overtime period and if the score is still tied, the game will change into a two-point conversion shoot out.  College football will emulate soccer and change the game itself to break a tie.  Supposedly, a major motivation for this change was a 7-overtim game between Texas A&M and LSU; I do not care if it were a 10-OT game; at least they played real football to determine the winner.

The “point of emphasis” is a good one but it should not be necessary if officials would have asserted themselves properly in the past.  For this year – and presumably going forward – game officials will “crack down” on taunting penalties and on coaches who enter the field or leave the team sideline area to argue with calls made on the field.  Both of those things are good things, and they should have been common practice at all times in the past.  The fact that they need a “point of emphasis” for 2021 is not praiseworthy for college football officials.

My other major issue from the weekend related to college football was sort of disappointing.  With the NFL Draft on tap for later this week, I gathered my notes from last year’s college football watching for my annual pre-Draft prospect commentary.  I had a sense that I had watched a lot less college football last year than normal given the schedule uncertainties and the smaller number of games on TV; but until I reviewed my notes, I did not realize that I had a serious deficiency on my hands.

I always watch a lot more of the major schools in Power 5 conferences than other schools but my notes this year make it seem as if I watched that football exclusively.  And there are fewer players noted – – and they are the “usual suspects”.  Everyone has read about the 5 QBs who could go in Round 1 this year; I never saw Trey Lance – – but I have notes on the other four.  I have plenty of players from Alabama and Clemson in my notes and there is other representation from the SEC and the ACC and the Big 10 – but there are only 14 players that have not been written up to death already.

So, I decided to dispense with the normal pre-Draft format and break this into small parts here:

• QBs other than the “Big Five” slated to go in Round 1:  I thought Kellen Mond (Texas A&M) improved a lot from junior year to senior year and liked his “size and physique”.  I liked the passing accuracy of Kyle Trask (Florida) but thought he “might not have the arm-strength to make it in the NFL”.
• RB other than Najeh Harris or Travis Etienne:  I think Michael Carter (UNC) will be a good pick for the middle rounds because he “can be part of a running or a passing game”.  He is short but he is big; he “looks like a pro” to me.
• TE other than Kyle Pitts:  I noted that Pat Freiermuth (Penn State) is “big, strong and great hands”.  I said he would be a good pick on the third day even though he is “not fast”.
• WRs you have not read lots about:  I thought Dyami Brown (UNC) has “sprinter speed” and “is a deep threat on every snap”.  He also has “ good hands when the ball gets to him in the open”.  I also noted that Terrance Marshall Jr. (LSU) was “overshadowed by Ja’Maar Chase but Marshall is big and has great hands”.  I noted that he could become a “possession/Red Zone receiver”.
• OL:  I noted Wyatt Davis (Ohio State) was a “really good pass blocker”.  I noted that Aaron Banks (Notre Dame) was a “powerful run blocker and a good-enough pass blocker”.  Both were mid-round picks in my estimation.
• DL:  Davyon Nixon (Iowa) is “powerful as a run stopper” and “gets middle pressure on many pass plays”.  I had him listed as a late round pick.  Azeez Ojulari (Georgia) is “super quick pass rusher” but “not yet big enough for NFL except on obvious passing downs”.  I had him as a late round pick also.
• Linebackers:  I wrote that Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah (Notre Dame) had “plenty of speed to cover in the passing game” and was “ a sure tackler in the run game”.  However, I also noted he is “too small to play LB in the NFL – screen graphic says he weighs 220 lbs”.  So, maybe a late-round pick?
• DBs not named Patrick Surtain II:  Caleb Farley (Va Tech) is “tall with a long wingspan and good cover skills”.  However, I also noted that he is “not the best tackler on the field”.  Asante Samuel, Jr. (Florida State) is “genetically designed to be a cornerback” and “very physical in pass defense and in tackling”.  I thought both players here were second to fourth round picks.
• Punter:  Oscar Bradburn (Va Tech) “gets good distance plus good hang time”.  My note says, “have his agent on speed-dial to get him as an undrafted free agent”.

So, that takes care of college football business from last weekend and sets you up for a few names to look for in the later rounds of the NFL Draft at the end of this week.  I shall close today with an item from Dwight Perry in the Seattle Times related to college football:

“Ohio State safety Marcus Hooker was arrested on DUI charges after he passed out behind the wheel while waiting in a McDonald’s drive-thru line.

“Defense lawyers can’t decide whether to enter a plea of guilty, not guilty or ‘I deserve a break today.’”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

 

 

No one should be surprised to learn that the NFL owners rejected any and all of the “major” rule changes proposed by teams and adopted a handful of rule changes that tinker around the margins of the games.  For example, the onside kick will not be replaced by a single “4^th and 15 play”.  Here are some of the changes for 2021 – – and presumably beyond:

• In onside kick situations, the receiving team can only have 9 players within 10 yards of the boundary line at which a kickoff becomes a free ball.  In the past, teams had chosen to line up 10 – – or even 11 men – – in such situations.  [Special Teams’ coaches will have to go back to their drawing boards…]
• It is now official; there will be no overtime periods in Exhibition Games.  The only people who might care about that rule change are folks who wager on NFL Exhibition Games.  [Let me catch my breath here…]
• They adopted a new rule that will allow running backs, wide receivers, tight ends, linebackers and defensive backs to wear uniforms with single digits.  [Indeed, there was a rule against such a thing until now…]
• They formally instituted the 17-game regular season schedule that we have known for weeks was going to be the case starting in 2021.  [$$$…]
• There will be “expanded communications” between replay officials and other game officials with the on-field crew when there is “objective information” that needs to be brought to the attention of the on-field crew.  [I smell more game interruptions on the horizon here…]
• Double passes had already been disallowed but starting in 2021, the defense will not need to decide to take the penalty or take the loss of down.  Starting in 2021, it will be an automatic loss of down.  [Since this sort of play happens about once every two seasons, I doubt this will have cosmic implications…]

Now, let me posit a bargaining point for the owners and the players that will bring a plus to both sides and deliver a minus to both sides:

• The players agree to expand the regular season schedule to 18 games and the owners agree to cut the Exhibition Game schedule to 2 Exhibition Games per season.

One plus for the players is that the total number of fames is reduced from 21 today to 20 under my proposal.  Another plus for the players is more league-wide revenue which translates into an increased salary cap and salary floor.  One minus for the players is that there is indeed an extra regular season game on the schedule and players have not been warm to that idea for a while now.

One plus for the owners is more revenue as they get to “sell more inventory” to their “broadcast partners”.  Another plus is by reducing the number of Exhibition Games they also reduce the potential for a long-term injury to a player that could result in paying that player a contract guarantee without deriving any benefit from that player’s participation.  Exhibition Game injuries can cost owners sizeable sums.  One minus for the owners is that they will forego revenue derived from the 2 Exhibition Games that are taken from the schedule.

At the moment, the owners and players are in a spitting contest over virtual OTAs versus in-person OTAs all of which are defined in the CBA as “voluntary activities”.  That level of pettiness does not portend any likelihood for meaningful and serious negotiations along the lines outlined here.  But one can hope…

Over the past week or so, the breathless pre-Draft news dealt with where Justin Fields fit into various team plans.  Some reports had him slipping way down in the first round of the draft; other reports had him being a long shot for the overall #2 pick by the Jets but a potential pick at #3 by the Niners.  Yesterday, a report surfaced that may shed some light on the disparity of reporting:

• Justin Fields informed NFL teams that he is managing epilepsy.

According to reports, other members of Fields’ family have suffered from epileptic seizures in their youth, but many have outgrown them as they matured.  Justin Fields is managing the seizures with known medications and he asserts that he has never had a seizure on a football field.  He also asserted that the seizure incidents have been decreasing in frequency in recent years.

How all this will affect Field’s draft status will soon be revealed.  Instead of worrying about what team will get to draft him and which team will choose to pass on drafting him, I prefer to take this moment and wish Justin Fields good health and full management/overcoming of his epilepsy.  I have no medical knowledge here but epilepsy is a “neurological condition” and football is a game where concussions happen.  Is there a relationship there?

Moving along …  Sammy Watkins signed on with the Ravens as a free agent in this offseason.  As part of his introduction to the fans in Baltimore, he said:

“It’s time for the world to see the real Sammy Watkins.”

Excuse me; Sammy Watkins has already been in the NFL for 7 seasons and has participated in 86 games; he has been on playoff teams with the Rams (once) and with the Chiefs (three times).  He has played with Patrick Mahomes for three years and been to two Super Bowl games in the past two seasons.  And now, I am supposed to believe that the real Sammy Watkins has yet to emerge?

Finally, since today’s rant has touched on a variety of NFL-related issues, let me close with this item from Dwight Perry of the Seattle Times:

“Marshawn Lynch and Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared together on a vaccination info video?

“Eat your hearts out, Felix and Oscar.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

 

 

Recently. Bob Molinaro had this item in his column in the Hampton Roads Virginian-Pilot:

“Brewing: The controversy over whether America should boycott the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics or work to pull them out of China could have been anticipated the moment the International Olympic Committee awarded the event to a country with such horrific human rights abuses. But taking into account China’s immense market, the IOC and its corporate sponsors — largely American — cannot resist pouring money into the country, human rights be damned.”

There is an awful lot to unpack in that statement.  Let me start with the reports that the current US administration might be considering a boycott of the 2022 Winter Games in Beijing.  Well, how well did that work out in the past?

• In 1980, the Olympic Games were held in Moscow.  The US was mightily offended by the actions and intentions of the USSR when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.  To demonstrate the depth of its concern, the US chose to boycott the 1980 Olympics.  Please note that the US boycott in 1980 had just about zero effect on the Soviet decision makers with regard to Afghanistan; the boycott was symbolic and useless.
• In 1984, the Olympic Games were held in Los Angeles.  At the time, the US and the USSR had dozens of issues over which they disagreed; but it is fair to say that the main reason that the Soviets and some of its allies chose to boycott the 1984 Games was to “punish” the US for its behavior in 1980.  Please note that the USSR boycott in 1984 had just about zero effect on any decisions made by the US administration at the time; that boycott was similarly symbolic and useless.

Now – – as history is poised to repeat itself – – the Winter Games will happen in Beijing in 2022 and the Summer Games will happen in in Los Angeles in 2028.  Currently, the geopolitical rivalry of note is between the US and China and the current US administration is reported to have an Olympic boycott under consideration as a gesture of showing the folks in Beijing the depth of its consternation.  Once again, I feel the need to channel Derrick Coleman here in order to express the depth of my sense of the importance of such a gesture:

• Whoop-di-damned-do!

Let me assume that the “boycott to emphasize US concerns” wins the day in Washington over the next 9 months and that there is no US Olympic team that arrives in Beijing for the competition there.  Out of all the many issues over which the US might hope to demonstrate moral concern regarding Chinese behavior(s), can someone point me to any sort of logical path whereby the boycott leads naturally to modified Chinese behavior that swings in the direction that the US chooses as its moral North Star?  I have not yet heard such logic.

There are plenty of issues over which the US and China can and do disagree as I sit here and pound out these words in April 2021.  In no particular order, here are some such issues – – and most importantly, I seriously doubt that a US Olympic boycott will have any positive effect on the status quo of any of them:

• Full disclosure of data regarding the origin(s) of COVID-19: The majority of evidence points to a species jump of the virus from bats to humans but there are still data gaps that suggest this virus was engineered and accidentally released from a laboratory in Wuhan.  The actions of the Chinese government a year and a half ago regarding the virus and its subsequent dealings with the World Health Organization have not been fully transparent.  Guess what; the failure of the US Olympic Team to show up in Beijing in February 2022 will not create said transparency.
• Political freedoms in Hong Kong:  When the Brits returned Hong Kong to Chinese control in 1999, there were certain “democratic assurances” given by the Chinese leadership associated with that divestiture.  Over the past two decades, there has been a tightening of the screws on the people in Hong Kong with regard to the definition of “political freedom” as tolerated by the Chinese.  Over the past couple of years, that tightening has markedly increased.  Guess what; the failure of the US Olympic Team to show up in Beijing in February 2022 will not result in political freedom in Hong Kong.
• Tibet:  It has been more than 30 years now when Western countries began to decry the Chinese annexation of and dominance over Tibet.  I would bet that about 90% of the Free Tibet bumper stickers on cars in the US now reside in landfills somewhere.  Guess what; the failure of the US Olympic Team to show up in Beijing in February 2022 will not result in Tibet emerging as a free and independent nation.
• Uighur genocide:  According to the majority of Western reporting, the Uighur minority in Xinjiang Province is being targeted for “re-education” or “elimination” by the Chinese authorities.  Guess what; the failure of the US Olympic Team to show up in Beijing in February 2022 will not miraculously change the status of the Uighurs in China from a group that needs any sort of “re-education” to one of equal stature with other groups in China.

The US and a bunch of its allies may decide to boycott these upcoming Games and it will not amount to a drab of donkey dreck when it comes to tangible and meaningful alterations regarding Chinese policies on any of those issues above.  In fact, the most probable logical extrapolation of a 2022 boycott by the US would be another boycott by the Chinese and/or some of its surrogates of the 2028 games scheduled in Los Angeles.  Is anyone ready to consider a fundamental change in US democratic or diplomatic positions six years hence over such a boycott?  Do the words “feckless”, “useless” and “inept” come to mind yet?

In the original statement from Professor Molinaro that started this rant, he notes that much of this controversy could have been anticipated at the time the IOC awarded these Winter Games to China about a decade ago.  Indeed, the evidence supporting such foresight was present then, but the IOC has a long history of ignoring any such signals and thinking that its treasured “Olympic Movement” can overcome any political or social disagreements among nations due to the purity of the competition in the Games.

• [Aside:  I have referred in the past to the “Olympic Movement” as being akin to a “Bowel Movement”.  I am not anywhere near the point where I feel any need to change that opinion.]

In retrospect, the IOC and the “Olympic Movement” has some dirty laundry to deal with.  Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler staged the Games in 1936; the world did not yet know the depths of the depravity of that regime, but those Games can only be a stain on the Olympic reputation.  Lest anyone forget, the Olympic Games were also held in Berlin in 1916; unless you slept through that chapter of World History, you should recognize that the German government at the time was not exactly seen as a beneficent force in the world at large at the time.  As noted above, the Games were staged in Moscow in 1980 and then in Beijing in 2008.  The conclusion here is that the IOC does not care about political or social righteousness; it cares only for governments to commit to staging these events on the grandest possible scale.  [Aside:  Even if a country cannot afford such an extravagance – Athens in 2004 or Rio de Janiero in 2016 – the Games will go on there at the expense of the poor people of that country.]

The best course for a US administration to take here would be one that minimizes the importance of the Olympic Games as a recurring international event.  An Olympic boycott will confer a level of importance on the Games that the Games do not deserve.  Moreover, the losers in such a boycott will not be the ne’er-do-wells in the Chinese hierarchy; here are the real victims if there is to be a US boycott:

• NBC will experience a financial bloodbath as it pays out its commitment for the broadcast rights to those Games but cannot sell much of any of its advertising inventory herein the US because there will be no Americans in the competitions.
• The US athletes who have trained for most of their lives for the chance to compete in these Games will be denied any chance to win an Olympic Medal not because they were not worthy of such stature but because a bunch of suits in Washington decided not to sanction their participation.

I refuse to take a back seat to anyone when it comes to contempt for the IOC and the high-fallutin’ ideals of the Olympic Games; most of that aura is nothing more than the “man behind the curtain” in the Wizard of Oz.  And because the IOC and the Games do not deserve any sort of identification as a “signature world event”, my position is simple and straight forward.

• Do not boycott the 2022 Winter Games in Beijing – – unless you are prepared to boycott any and all future Olympic Games no matter where they are held.

Allow me a tangential thought here.  The IOC is not beneficent as Professor Molinaro points out above.  Nonetheless, consider that one of the US sports organizations widely hailed for its sensitivity to social issues and social justice – – the NBA – – does lots of business with those “bad guys” in China and when an NBA GM dared to Tweet his support for the folks in Hong Kong demonstrating for democracy, none other than LeBron James said the GM needed to educate himself.  For the record, that GM lost his job over his Tweet…

Finally, I mentioned above that NBC would be a financial victim of any sort of US boycott here.  I will not be glued to my TV set to watch the Winter Games with or without US participation; I find most Winter Games events to be uninteresting at best.  Therefore, let me close today with a definition from The Official Dictionary of Sarcasm:

“HDTV:  A device that allows you to watch crap in greater, more pristine  detail.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

 

 

Earlier this week, I wrote about the proposed “Super League” in European soccer and how it was not being received well in some parts of the European “football community”.  This morning I got an email from good friend, a woman who has lived in Scotland for the past 20-25 years and who has become a soccer – football to her – fan there.  The title of her email is:

• Death of the Super League

I mentioned in my writing that two of the four overseers of the proposed Super League were Americans who owned bits of European clubs.  My friend refers to them as American bankers and billionaires and she says that they grossly miscalculated the negative reactions of fans in Europe and specifically the negative reactions of the fans of the 14 clubs in the EPL that have not been “invited” into the “Super League”.  Whenever there is widespread agreement among the populace on any issue, you can be sure that politicians will rush to align themselves with that widespread agreement.  My correspondent says that the Ministry of Sport would be looking into a “windfall tax” and “other penalties” for clubs that might be part of the proposed “Super League”.

She believes that the “Super League” is dead in the water and that few if any of the fans will mourn its passing.  As I said at the end of my comments last Monday:

“This is a most complex issue; it is likely to go on for a while before it is resolved one way or the other.”

I have a sense that there will be more rumblings and grumblings about the “Super League” down the line.  Stay tuned; the story is probably not over just yet…

Moving on …  the ”Super League” is not in the best of health this morning but I think there is a sport that is in worse shape – – Boxing.  As I have mentioned here several times, back in the 1950s when baseball was the national pastime, the biggest other sports were:

• Horse racing
• Boxing

Today, boxing is just about dead.  Finding meaningful and/or riveting fights on the boxing calendar is difficult; if there are one or two a year, that is a banner year for boxing these days.  That situation is bad enough for a sport that is in decline but as they say on the late-night infomercials, “Wait … there’s more!”

Too much of boxing has left the realm of “important sporting event” and has wandered off into “concocted circus event”.  Just to be clear, that is not a good place to be.  The latest big time “boxing event” involved Jake Paul – identified not as a boxing champion but as a “social media celebrity” – knocking out an MMA fighter.  It was a non-boxer beating another non-boxer in a boxing match that drew millions of dollars’ worth of attention.  If that were a one-off occurrence, it would not be so bad, but that match was Jake Paul’s second big fight; in the first one he knocked out Nate Robinson – – not a boxer but a former player in the NBA.

• [Aside:  This is analogous to Joe Flabeetz – someone you have never heard of – beating a former athlete like William the Refrigerator Perry in an event that is totally unrelated to Perry’s former sport – – say the 100-meter dash.  It does not prove much of anything and it should not be something that focuses attention on itself.]

Once again … there’s more.  Other nominal boxing events that have drawn lots of attention recently are staged events where it is the aura of the participants that draws attention and not the skills of the participants.  Consider:

• Floyd Mayweather/Conor McGregor:  A world champion boxer fought a guy who had never been in a boxing match in his life.  I am surprised that it was not arranged for the winner here to face 65-year-old Hulk Hogan in a Steel Cage Texas Chain Saw Death Match.
• Mike Tyson/Roy Jones, Jr.:  At least, both of these guys were boxing champions – a long time ago.  Both were in their 50s and had been out of “real boxing” for about a decade when this fight took place late last  year.  The result of this fight was a “split draw”.  Moreover, on the undercard for this circus event was the Jake Paul/Nate Robinson “battle”.
• Evander Holyfield/Kevin McBride:  They will fight on pay-per-view on June 5^th.  Holyfield is 58 years old; McBride is 47; Holyfield last fought a real match in 2011; McBride has been out of action for almost 10 years, and he lost 6 of his last 7 “real matches”.  This will be an 8-round bout with two-minute rounds a testament to the fact that these are “boxing geezers”.

These circus events draw lots of attention and real boxing matches do not; if that is not a signal that boxing is moribund at best, I do not know what would have to happen to put boxing into that category.  I hope no none will be surprised when the winner of the Holyfield/McBride encounter challenges Mike Tyson to another circus event.  If Holyfield is the winner, they better get the fight set quickly lest the folks who sanction such “sporting events” around the country are put in the position of certifying a 60-year-old man as fit to be a professional boxer.

Finally, let me close today with a comment related to parks and arenas selling their naming rights.  This comment is from Greg Cote of the Miami Herald from a couple weeks ago:

“Corporate names in South Florida keep getting worse: First it was the home of the Heat becoming FTX Arena. Bad. Then it was Marlins Park becoming loanDepot park. Worse. Now Inter Miami announces its home in Fort Lauderdale is now AutoNation’s DRV PNK Stadium. Oh if only I were kidding.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

 

 

In his column last week in the Hampton Roads Virginian-Pilot, Bob Molinaro had these two items:

“Two months after the Super Bowl, NFL draft palaver engulfs sports TV and radio. Two weeks into its season, what you mostly hear about Major League Baseball is that its replay system is a farce. Therein lies a problem for the National Past-its-time.”

And …

“Don’t know about others, but I could live out my life perfectly well without official replays. Just as I lived a perfectly happy childhood absorbed by sports long before reviewing calls became a thing. I just wish all leagues and sports could keep things moving. Replay rules prevent that from happening.”

The evolution of “instant replay” from a technological panacea to an annoying presence is an example of the proverbial slippery slope.  As technology became available to have at the ready replays of every molecule of action in any sporting event of consequence, several things became clear:

1. Things look different when viewed up close and magnified than they do at full speed.
2. Things look different when viewed from different angles.
3. Game officials sometimes miss a call or three because they only see a piece of action from one angle and at full speed without magnification.

The vector heading of most thinking at the time when technology provided for “instant replay” was that technology was the knight on a white horse who could ride in and save sports from the dastardly situation of a blown call.  Technology would allow for “perfection”; there would be no more “grey areas”.  Technology would fulfill Superman’s quest for:

• Truth, Justice, and the American Way!

And here we are … with even better technology than back when “instant replay” was going to save the day … with more officials on the field/court … with more replay officials in more various locales … and what do we have?

• There are still plenty of “grey areas”.  Officials in the NFL have even invented a vocabulary that conveys their level of uncertainty on a call after seeing the replay.  A call is confirmed or changed when they are confident in doing either one of those things; a call is left to stand when they still are not sure what the “absolutely correct” call should be.
• “Instant replay” is anything but “instant”.  Some replay events can take up to 5 minutes.
• “Instant replay” is used in far too many “instances”.

And, as Professor Molinaro points out above, “instant replay” chops up the flow of just about every game that it has touched.  Let me suggest a few changes here that might speed up the game by changing what “instant replay” might be used for:

• MLB:  Use it for “home run or not a home run” calls; use it for “fair ball home run or foul ball”; and use it for determining if a “fair ball down the line was actually a foul ball”.  That’s it; I can live with an occasional mistake on the base paths.
• Basketball (NBA and NCAA):  Stop using replay to adjust the time on the clock at the end of a game.  The fact that every examination of the clock shows that it needs adjusting certainly means that every clock stoppage in the first 95% of the game needed adjusting.  The game has arrived at its end point imperfectly before the final minute or two; live with it.
• Football:  Lots of reviews can be obviated by changing one rule and allowing the ground to cause a fumble.  Moreover, if the rules mavens cannot come up with a definitive definition of what is a catch and what is not a catch then maybe stop using replay to look at what is or is not going to be ruled as a catch.  Just a thought…

[Aside:  If you really want to turn the game of football into a boring 5-hour slog, just expand the replay rule to include “holding” or “not-holding” by the 5 offensive linemen on any given play…]

We got to where we are with “instant replay” because we looked at technological wizardry through rose-colored glasses and imagined that it would lead us to a land flowing with milk and honey.  The premise sounded irrefutable; replay would always “get it right”.  The problem is that it does not always “get it right” and that its scope has been expanded to too many aspects of the games such that it is an intrusion and not a godsend.

Perhaps we should not be so surprised to come to such a realization.  Technology has been welcomed as a glorious blessing in many parts of our lives only to let us recognize down the line that it may not be all it was cracked up to be.  Social media platforms would be one such technological encroachment in society that we now recognize is “less than a perfect addition” to our lives.  Just because technology can do something does not mean that we need to put up with technology’s baggage as it does that something; sometimes less is better.

Finally, Scott Ostler of the SF Chronicle had this to say about some other additions to our society courtesy of technology:

“Handy tip: The microchip they secretly implanted in your arm during your ‘vaccination’ can be de-activated by a quick blast from a Jewish space ray.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

 

 

The big sports news of the day comes from Europe where a dozen of the big-time soccer teams in the English Premier League, Spain’s La Liga and Italy’s Serie A have announced that they will break from the current soccer establishment there and form a “Super League”.  At the moment, there are 6 English teams, 3 La Liga clubs and 3 Serie A teams in the “Super League”.  The plan is to add three more “permanent members” and then have 5 “other members” forming a 20-team league that would play mid-week games so that the teams can continue to participate in their national leagues.  Interestingly, two of the four members of the “governing board” for the Super League are American owners of European soccer clubs – – John Henry and Joel Glazer.

There is less-than-universal support for such a Super League.  German clubs, and some of the better teams in France and Portugal have said they will not join the Super League.  As you can imagine, UEFA and FIFA are not happy about this.  Here is what UEFA had to say about the breakaway league:

“Every club and player participating in the Super League could be banned from all UEFA and FIFA competitions, European or International level.

“As previously announced by FIFA and the six Federations, the clubs concerned will be banned from playing in any other competition at domestic, European or world level, and their players could be denied the opportunity to represent their national teams.

“We call on all lovers of football, supporters and politicians, to join us in fighting against such a project if it were to be announced. This persistent self-interest of a few has been going on for too long. Enough is enough.”

FIFA obviously does not like this idea because it would allow a large part of the best soccer to be played without FIFA “oversight” and “control”.  My cynical view here is that if FIFA is given an opportunity to share in any revenue(s) generated by the Super League, they might ease their opposition just a tad.  This is a most complex issue; it is likely to go on for a while before it is resolved one way or the other.  If you want to be able to understand the origins of the issues when you hear about some change in the status of soccer in Europe over the next year or so, please read this introductory piece at CBSSports.com.

Rebellion is in the air in the sports world – – or maybe its just the pollen in the air…  About 20 of the 32 NFL teams will hold OTAs without many of their players present in person.  Players – – at the urging of the NFLPA and team representatives – – have decided that they will stay away from these activities to keep the pandemic under control.  If you believe that is the prime motivation here, you probably also believe that Lucy will one day hold that football for Charlie Brown to kick.

The players look back at last year when OTAs were held virtually because last year there was some immediacy to pandemic control when there were lots more questions than answers abut COVID-19.  It turns out that last year’s NFL season came off with only minor hitches and statistically, there were fewer injuries than in “normal seasons” before last year.  So, the players have chosen to flex their labor muscles here and to focus attention on that part of the CBA that labels OTAs as “voluntary” acts by the players.  In essence, players on more than half the teams have said they are not going to volunteer to be present and will participate virtually.

The NFL offseason program for veteran players has 3 phases – – as spelled out in the CBA:

• April 19 – May 14:  Virtual meetings; no on-field drills with coaches.  Team weight room facilities are there for those players who choose to avail themselves of those facilities.
• May 17-21:  Full-speed on-field drills and practice with coaches present but without contact.
• May 24-June 18:  Team OTAs plus mandatory mini-camp.

Rookie mini-camps will be held a week or two after the NFL Draft; there does not appear to be a significant change in place there.  Given that more than a few rookies will have opted out of college football last year, rookie mini-camps are likely to be even more important for draftees than usual.

My reaction to this seeming act of defiance by players borders on dismissive.  First of all, even the union recognizes that it is crass at the core.  The NFLPA “understands” that some teams will have players participating in the “voluntary” activities because those teams have significant numbers of players who receive “workout bonuses” for attending such activities.  Translation:

• Safety and control of the pandemic take a back seat to performance bonuses that might be at the “six-figure level”.

In addition, these declarations of independence by the players simply means that they will adhere to the terms of the CBA which have labeled these offseason activities as “voluntary” for years.  By standing on their hind legs and declaring that they will not be attending, all the players are asserting is that they are willing to defy their coaches’ preferences and urgings so long as the CBA provides them cover.

Moreover, these are the same players who ratified a new CBA – – by a remarkably close vote to be sure – – just a year ago.  In that CBA, the players folded their cards on two issues that they had declared to be “lines in the sand” prior to negotiations.  Those were:

1. Thursday Night Football
2. A 17-game regular season schedule.

Those were health and safety issues; those were abominations in the sight of the Lord.  So, what happened?  Not only did the players give in on both issues for an extra percentage point of the revenues being counted toward setting the salary cap, but also the players signed onto the new deal for 10 years.  One full decade…

Look, I happen to think that the players were right to sign on; they will take down lots more money in salary caps and salary floors with the new deal than they did in the previous deal – – and certainly more than they would have gotten without a 2020 season due to a work stoppage.  However, I find the current posturing and the tone of “rebelliousness” just a bit over the top given last year’s behavior that was more akin to “rolling over and playing dead”.

Finally, since today’s rant has been about seeming acts of rebellion, let me close with some thoughts on rebellion by people much smarter than I:

“I find rebellion packaged by a major corporation a little hard to take seriously.” – – David Byrne

And …

“Rebellion is always going to fascinate, as it’s always packaged in a very safe way.” – – Irvine Welsh

And …

“I am from a family of artists. Here I am, making a living in the arts. It has not been a rebellion. It’s as though I had taken over the family Esso station.” – – Kurt Vonnegut

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

 

 

Tennessee State University plays Division 1-AA college football in the Ohio Valley Conference.  Normally, a coaching hire at a school like Tennessee State involves an announcement and a press conference that draws virtually no attention outside the campus area.  Not so with the most recent one.

Tennessee State hired former Ohio State star and Tennessee Titans’ star running back, Eddie George, to be their next head football coach.  This is newsworthy for two reasons:

1. Eddie George brings a ton of star-power to an otherwise ordinary football program.
2. Eddie George has never held a coaching position – – let alone a head coaching position – – at any level of football.

George played in the NFL for 9 seasons; his first year was with the Houston Oilers in that team’s final season in that city; then he spent 7 years with the Titans in Nashville before finishing his career with the Dallas Cowboys in 2004.  During his time with the Titans, he made the Pro Bowl four times and was named first team All Pro once.  He has some “football gravitas” in Nashville – – which may serve him well because Tennessee State University is also in Nashville.  It would certainly appear as if he should be able to get some recruiting business done in the immediate environs of Nashville.

It would appear that George quickly recognized that he could use some coaching of his own as he took this position because he made two rapid hires:

1. He hired his former Titans’ head coach, Jeff Fisher, to be a “Special Advisor” to him and to the program.  Fisher was an NFL head coach for all or part of 22 seasons; he took the Titans to their only Super Bowl appearance following the 1999 season.
2. He hired former Cleveland Browns’ head coach and Cincy Bengals’ Offensive Coordinator, Hue Jackson, as the Offensive Coordinator for the Tennessee State team.

Eddie George may never have structured a program and coordinated sets of practices in the past, but he can get advice and counsel on such matters at the ready.  I mentioned above that Eddie George’s name and reputation should give him recruiting entrée in the area.  Add to that situation the presence of two former NFL head coaches on the staff and Tennessee State could become a football destination for players in that part of the country.

Tennessee State does not have the reputation as a “football factory” but it has produced 5 NFL players of some note:

• Richard Dent
• Joe Gilliam
• Claude Humphrey
• Ed “Too Tall” Jones
• Dominick Rodgers-Cromartie.

The Tokyo Olympic Games are scheduled to begin in about 100 days – – July 23, 2021 to be exact.  Nevertheless, it is still not certain that the game will take place at all.  Japan’s Secretary General, Toshihiro Nikai said earlier this week:

“If it seems impossible to go on with the games, they must be definitely canceled.  If there is a surge in infections because of the Olympics, there will be no meaning to having the Olympics.”

He made it clear that he was not looking forward to any sort of “cancellation” and that it would be important for Japan to host the games as had been the plan for the last 10 years or so, but the pragmatic considerations of “pandemic factors” made it prudent to consider canceling the Games.

The Games might be held without fans in attendance; the position of the Japanese government is to put on “safe and secure” Olympic Games and in 2021, that could well mean limiting the number of foreigners coming to Japan to see the Games and/or limiting the number of fans who do come to be allowed in the various venues.  Just last week, the Japanese Economy Minister announced business restrictions in Okinawa and Kyoto due to coronavirus case rises in those areas.  In addition, the areas of Miyagi, Hyogo and Osaka were just put under “targeted lockdown”.  Osaka has seen a sharp rise in infections recently hitting new highs.

Japan’s case numbers and death totals are far lower than those here in the States, but in recent weeks the numbers have been trending in the wrong direction in many parts of Japan and Tokyo is another area that is on the rise.  The situation in Tokyo is sufficiently problematic that the Tokyo Governor has asked non-residents of Tokyo not to come and visit.

This decision will go down to the wire.  I feel sorry for the athletes who have been training for years to get to this point in their careers and who now must continue their training in anticipation of a set of Games that may be canceled at the 11^th hour and 59^th minute.

Finally, let me close today with an entry from The Official Dictionary of Sarcasm

“Hard Copy:  A printout for your records of a document created on a computer, which pretty much nails the coffin shut on how those freaking things were supposed to cut down on using paper.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports……..

 

 

Yesterday afternoon, I received an email from the reader in Houston.  I have always described him as a person with a treasure trove of sports stats and history.  The email yesterday – with no prompting that I can discern – demonstrates how and why he is always able to flesh out things I posit generically here.  This is the entirety of his communique:

“A review of  MLB’s Injury (formerly ‘Disabled’) List as of 4/13, less than two weeks into the season, shows 169 players on the list, which is the equivalent of almost six full teams, give or take, or almost 20 percent of the players.

“Of those, 112 are pitchers, which is almost the equivalent of 10 pitching staffs, with 37 being starters and 75 being relievers. Of those 112 pitchers, 21 are ‘out for the season’.

“The Padres lead MLB with 14 players on the list, including 10 pitchers, four of whom are out for the season.

“Based on the average player salary, that’s a lot of money being paid to players for being on ‘sick leave’.”

According to statista.com, the average salary for MLB in 2020 was $4.43M.  Using that figure as an approximation for the 2021 season, that means the players on the IL now represent an annual cost to MLB teams of $748.7M.  [Of course, many of those players are not out for the season and will be “earning their salaries” in short order.]  Nonetheless, that is a lot of money for injured players…

MLB announced earlier this week that they will be experimenting with a rule change in the independent Atlantic League this year.  The pitching rubber will be moved back 12 inches from home plate; the idea is to give hitters another split second to get the bat on the ball and – presumably – to put the ball in play more often.  The Atlantic League was a major part of the tests for robot-umpires calling balls and strikes in previous years and that experiment has now carried forward to further experimentation in some of the lower minor leagues.  There had been a proposal to move the pitcher’s rubber back 24 inches, but MLB and the Atlantic league settled on a 12-inch setback as the experiment for 2021.  As with any “experiment”, one must not jump to a conclusion until there are data to analyze; so, we shall wait and see what comes of this.

The Atlantic League will also experiment with another rule change that has come to be known as the “double hook”.  What this rule would say is that a team can use a Designated Hitter; but when the starting pitcher is removed from the game, so is the Designated Hitter and the relief pitcher assumes that spot in the batting order.  As you know, I have hated the Designated Hitter concept from the jump; ergo, you cannot be surprised to hear that I like this rule.  One recent trend that adoption of the “double hook” would reverse is the use of a pitching “opener” who is only intended to go an inning or two into the game.  Under those circumstances, that team’s DH would be almost useless.  I will restrain my enthusiasm here to see if there are any unforeseen and/or unintended consequences from application of the “double hook”, but I confess that I hope it turns out to be wonderful.

Speaking of baseball rules that I hate, there are statistical implications for the “runner on second to start extra innings” that is in place again in 2021.  Rather than go through all the details, here is a comment from Dwight Perry of the Seattle Times that will give you an overview:

“For pitchers’ stat purposes, that runner stationed on second base to start extra innings is considered an unearned run if he scores.

“So how long before numbers geeks demand an ‘unearned loss’ stat, too?”

The Texas State Senate overwhelmingly passed a Bill called the Star Spangled Banner Protection Act; the Bill had strong conservative support and attracted more than 75% of the Democratic votes in the chamber.  The Bill would make it mandatory for “any professional sports teams with contracts with the state government to play the national anthem before the start of a game.”  The final vote in the Texas State Senate was 28-2.

Whether or not you think this is a good idea, one must wonder why such legislation would be considered necessary.  The reason goes back to a decision made by the Dallas Mavericks and its owner, Mark Cuban, to stop playing the anthem before their home games in Dallas.  The Bill now goes to the Texas House of Representatives for consideration as it moves to become the law in Texas.

When the Mavs stopped playing the anthem, it was not much of an issue because there were no fans in attendance at the time.  However, it became a big deal pretty quickly once the Lt Governor there found out about it and Tweeted that Cuban should sell the team to some “Texas Patriot” who would buy it and announced that this sort of legislation was one of his legislative priorities for 2021.  The NBA seemed to render the issue moot when it decreed that all its teams would play the anthem before their home games – – including the Mavericks.  Obviously, that was insufficient; and it surely seems as if this legislation is on its way to become State Law.

Finally, Bernie Madoff died yesterday.  Madoff was serving a 150-year prison sentence for his fraudulent financial Ponzi scheme which defrauded as many as 35,000 people in more than 100 countries over a period of 4 decades.  Here is an important question in my mind:

• Will his grave marker be in the shape of a pyramid?

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

 

 

It is far too early in the baseball season to make any sensible projections but there have been a few happenings that are worthy of attention.  Last weekend, Mets’ starter Jacob deGrom threw 8 innings in his start and gave up 1 run and 5 hits.  He struck out 10 batters and walked no one.  And the Mets lost that game.  deGrom has started twice this year and here are his stats from those two starts:

• 14 innings pitched, 1 run allowed, ERA = 0.64, 2 walks, 21 strikeouts
• And the Mets lost both of those games!

deGrom is a two-time Cy Young Award winner, and the Mets have a history of providing him with meager run support.  In 2018, he won the Cy Young Award with a season-long ERA of 1.70 over 32 starts and 214 innings.  Not too shabby, I should say but deGrom’s record for 2018 was only 10-9.  The baseball gods must be intervening in deGrom’s games because there is no apparent logical explanation there.

Last week, Ken Rosenthal reported in The Athletic that umpires collected “multiple balls” thrown by Dodgers’ starter, Trevor Bauer in a start against the A’s.  According to Rosenthal, the balls had visible markings and a sticky substance.  Those balls were forwarded to MLB for inspection/analysis.

During Spring Training, MLB announced that it would be focusing more attention on doctoring baseballs by pitchers to increase pitch movement.  This shipment of balls to the MLB analysts appears to be the first step along a road of increased enforcement – – if something comes of the analysis.  As you may imagine, Trevor Bauer is not particularly happy with Ken Rosenthal’s report and Bauer took to Twitter with this comment:

“Lol always fun reading desperate and misleading clickbait headlines from national gossip bloggers. To translate fake journalist speak for y’all, ‘It’s unclear whether’ = ‘I can’t be bothered to look into this cuz it doesn’t fit my narrative.’”

I do not have any narrative here.  What I do see is that MLB declared enhanced vigilance for the season on pitchers’ doctoring baseballs; MLB did that on its own initiative.  Now, it is up to MLB to perform said enhanced vigilance and report the findings of any such investigations as publicly as it announced the initiative in the first place.  When they do that, there will be no narrative for anyone to try to carry forward.

Dwight Perry of the Seattle Times summarized this investigation succinctly:

“In other words, they’re going to check for GPA — Gaylord Perry Additives.”

The Atlanta Braves lost a game to the Phillies on a hugely incorrect call by the home plate umpire.  According to the call, the winning run scored on a play where the runner never touched home plate.  The play went to review, and the call stood.  Given that the game took place in Atlanta, you can imagine the negative reaction for the fans there.  In fact, that fan reaction went over the top as fans proceeded to throw trash out of the stands and on to the field.

Braves’ shortstop, Dansby Swanson, went to the post-game press conference to put his feelings on the record.  Obviously, he was not happy with the call at home plate and its validation by the review process.  However, he was also very upset by the fan reaction.  Here is what he had to say:

“What happened after [the call] … I love this city. I love our fans. They’re passionate. They care. But what happened after they announced that call, that’s the most embarrassing part of the whole night. Not the call, but the reaction and the throwing of things on the field. Because No. 1, it’s disrespectful to the people who put in so much work to have the field ready for us every day to make sure it’s in the best shape possible. No. 2, endangering players. That’s incredibly disrespectful. It’s an embarrassing representation of our city because I know, being from here, that’s not how we act.

“And then the worst part of it all, I don’t think people realize that we have families here. There are kids here. There are kids sitting in the front row and you have bottles whizzing by their heads. Just endangering kids who can’t protect themselves is downright embarrassing and it should never happen again.

“It just can’t happen. It never needs to happen again.”

I have always liked Dansby Swanson as a player; now, I like him as a person.  Notwithstanding the emotion of the moment having lost a game in a seemingly unjust manner, he had the presence to address a situation beyond the loss that is bigger than the loss of a single baseball game.  Kudos to Dansby Swanson.

There is a language phenomenon that has always amused my long-suffering wife and me; we call it the “Qualified Superlative”.  The use of the superlative should not have modifiers; something is either the biggest or the best whatever – – or it is not.  However, the “Qualified Superlative” has become a language staple.  If you visit a small art museum in Beaglebreath, NE, you may learn that it houses the largest collection of paintings by Joe Flabeetz outside of North Dakota in a museum open to the public.  Obviously, this “largest collection” exists in a universe where there are in fact other collections that are larger.

Dwight Perry had this item in the Seattle Times over the weekend demonstrating that he too finds the “Qualified Superlative” an interesting language construct:

“Further evidence that stat geeks have too much time on their hands: It was revealed that Tigers rookie Akil Baddoo just became the first player in MLB history to hit home runs in his first two career games while batting out of the ninth spot in the batting order.

“Somehow overlooked: by a left-handed hitter, at home, on natural turf, in day games.”

Finally, since today has been a baseball day, let me close with a comment from Scott Ostler in the SF Chronicle.  I am in full agreement with Professor Ostler here:

“New idea nominated for instant oblivion: Farhan Zaidi’s support for the concept of making all MLB games seven innings. The Giants’ president of baseball operations pitched the idea in an interview on KNBR. That’s the worst solution to a problem since the bleach ‘cure’ for coronavirus.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

 

 

Within the world of sports, I suggest that the Deshaun Watson matter is the one that most demands a bit of disambiguation now.  It has all the elements we have come to associate with a sports mystery:

• The center of the situation has star power, and the sport is one that garners lots of attention with or without this particular mystery.
• There is plenty of apparent evidence – on both sides of the conundrum in this particular case – and it has come out in dribs and drabs.
• Both sides have chosen to “try the case in the media”.
• There is an element of iniquity and or indecency at the core of the matter.

Early on, I decided to stand by for the tug of war here to play itself out before weighing in.  The reason is not that I have a particular outcome for this mess in mind that I would prefer above all others; the reason is that until some outside and objective evidence is produced, the two sides will be locked into a series of declarations that mimic the old Miller Lite ads:

• Tastes great!  Less Filling!  Tastes great!!  Less Filling!!! …

Recently, the Houston Police Department opened an investigation because someone came forward with a criminal complaint.  Normally, that is not a good thing; but in this case, it opens the possibility of discovering “outside and objective evidence”.  Moreover, at least one – and possibly two – judges have ruled that the identities of the civil litigants here must be identified to the defense lawyers at a minimum.  So, there is some movement here although I doubt this matter is any closer to “resolution” than Houston is to the moon.

What strikes me this morning is that the NFL has done nothing and said nothing about this mess except that the league is “deeply disturbed” by the allegations made here.  Let me channel Derrick Coleman here and say:

• Whoop-di-damned-doo!

With that as its only pronouncement on the matter, it is not easy to tell if the NFL is deeply disturbed by the nature of the allegations or if it is deeply disturbed that the story has legs and has not just dried up and blown away.  In modern political parlance, the NFL’s behavior here has a “bad optic”.

I recognize that the NFL has to walk a tightrope here; it cannot take sides in the matter nor can there be a general perception that the league has taken sides.  In the real world, the NFL must wait – just like all of us must wait – for this Shakespearean drama to come to its end at which point all of us will know if this is a comedy or a tragedy.  But what might – or even should – the NFL do now to alter that “bad optic” without taking sides?

The NFL has a thing it calls the Commissioner’s Exempt List.  A player on that list may not participate in any team activities – including meetings – but that player is paid in full accordance with his contract while he resides on the list and the “problem” that got him there is resolved.  In normal life, this is called paid administrative leave.  When the matter is finally resolved, the player is either punished by the league or reinstated with his teammates having suffered no damage to his bank account.  The league has never imposed this status on a player during the off-season; perhaps the reason is that there are no team activities ongoing now that the Exempt List would bar him from.  I do not know why The Commish has chosen not to use his own Exempt List, but I think the time has come for him to do so.

Before I go any further, let me be sure to state:

• I am not prejudging the outcome of this matter in any way.  That determination will be made for me – and for the NFL – by outside entities.

To those who say that putting Deshaun Watson on the list now only protects him financially in this matter but the act of putting him on the list damages his reputation, I say Buncombe! [Hat tip to H. L. Mencken there!]  Deshaun Watson’s image and reputation are tarred for life beyond any noticeable augmentation of that damage that might be done by the Commissioner’s Exempt List.  The NFL has cover for such an action about now and should use that cover while it still has currency:

1. Nike has “suspended” its endorsement deal with Deshaun Watson.
2. Beats by Dré has ended its “partnership” with Deshaun Watson.
3. Reliant Energy “suspended” its relationship with Deshaun Watson.
4. H B E Groceries “will not renew” an endorsement contract that expired in December 2020.

Those four business entities – and the NFL is indeed a business entity – have decided that the best thing for them to do is to take a position where they are not perceived to be in one corner or the other here; they are withholding endorsement money from Watson awaiting the final outcome here.  The NFL can and should do the same thing.  In fact, the NFL’s current posture looks pretty silly if you juxtapose two situations:

1. The NFL – considering voluminous yet contradictory evidence – in a matter involving allegations of disgusting personal behavior by one of its star QBs has decided to be “deeply disturbed” and then has gone about its business.
2. The NFL – considering poorly collected and tenuously analyzed evidence – in a matter involving the inflation level(s) of footballs involving one of its star QBs decided to suspend him without pay for 4 games.

At least in my mind, the NFL’s “bad optic” just got worse…

The more serious question, I believe, now is not what the NFL can or should do; the question now is:

• What can or will the Houston Texans do?

Watson wanted to be traded; the Texans say they have no interest in trading him; there is an outcome here whereby it would be impossible for him to play for the Texans or anyone else should he be convicted of criminal charges and sent to prison.  Are there teams out there willing to trade for him and his obvious QB skills in the current situation?  Should the Texans take any phone calls that come in?

To me, the NFL’s choice here is obvious.  Put Watson in the Commissioner’s Exempt List; seize the moral high ground; sit back and let others do the grunt work to make your final decision for you.

To me, the Texans’ choice(s) are far less obvious – – and therefore far more interesting.

Finally, the NFL has tried over the past several years to convince folks that they “value women”.  Well, here is a situation where the NFL can demonstrate some leadership where the issue of “valuing women” is interwoven throughout the issue.  That recalls a distinction made by one of my former supervisors that seems pertinent here:

“Managers do things right.

“Leaders do the right thing.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………