The Middle Foam Finger

Conspiracy and Sport

2009-05-06T16:38:00.000-07:00

Whenever there's a game where even 60% of the calls and most notably, a handful of important ones, go in favor of one team or the other, talk then becomes dominated by how the result was "fixed", how the administrators of a sport have determined that one team will lose and that another will win, based perhaps on region, perhaps on overall popularity or perhaps that somebody somewhere has just crapped out.

Sometimes, like the 1972 Olympic basketball finals, where one call completely changes the result of the game or other instances where players and/or coaches have thrown matches, these accusations have some merit. However, most of the time, as it is in life, mistakes are just that, mistakes.

To accurately "fix" a match, when it is so full of various twists and turns, would be exceedingly difficult, especially considering that if any part of it would come to light, that the validity of the sporting organization of itself would be immediately at threat. As much control as an official has, they cannot make a player score purely by influence alone. In cases where an official appears to be favoring a team, it is far more likely that the official is merely incompetent and if one team is forcing the action, those mistakes will be amplified to one side or another -- for example, if a team is constantly defending, either the official will call too many or not enough fouls and there will not be enough incidents of the overwhelmed team attacking to balance things out.

Why then, is it necessary to assign some sort of agency?

Or more importantly, as a friend likes to ask, "Who benefits from this narrative?"

The answer seems to be that people are more comfortable with the concept of malice as opposed to incompetence. Given a choice between a world where shadowy figures exert control through hidden measures and one where we are ground in our myopia between the gears of Destiny and Fate, people will go for the former. It at least allows for a situation where somebody is in control, even if they turn out to be Evil.

(It should be noted that one kind of conspiracy by the higher-ups is possible, in that by assigning an official who is known to be incompetent, it is likely that certain results will occur. This is analogous to the difference between saying that 9/11 was an inside job and that the U.S. Administration knowingly turned a blind eye to the possibility of an attack.)

An Open Letter to Adrian Wojnarowski

2009-01-18T07:59:00.000-08:00

In Reply to: "Miles separated Blazers GM from greatness"

Woj,

I wanted to reply to your recent article on the Darius Miles-Kevin Pritchard fiasco.

There are several pieces of rebuttal that you never even begun to shed light on, and you seem to perpetuate this personal attack on the Blazers' front office with no real argument.

First of all, independent doctors deemed Darius' injury to be career-ending - they are the ones that stamped the label of "medical retirement" on Darius - not the Blazers front office.

But, the front office, obviously, relished that it had a "dirty" bill of health for Miles. Pritchard has made no secret that his goal was to change the character of the Blazers organization - and Darius was the man that needed to be gone to make that image complete. During his years as a Blazer, he showed his continued immaturity and presented absolutely no passion for the game. Darius was the "poison pill" that allowed writers like you to keep up the "Jail Blazers" tag on the franchise.

Not only was Darius a malingering drain on the franchise, but his contract made him virtually untradeable (a fault of the Blazers, I know). So why shouldn't Pritchard, and more importantly Paul Allen, try and see the injury as the only means of escape from a bad situation?

Keep in mind, this is Paul Allen, he didn't get to where he is by handing out money in 8 million dollar chunks willy nilly. Why shouldn't he feel personally attacked when his own money is as stake? Would you, for example, roll over for millions of your own dollars in a case like this? Put yourself in Paul's shoes. You protect your investment.

Did the Blazers' do everything right? Absolutely not. But, did they also receive some injustice in being thrust into this situation? Absolutely.

I applaud Darius in coming back from this injury - it shows a lot more character than he portrayed in Portland. It's a shame that the Blazers' fueled the fire for Darius to play again, but no one is blaming Darius. And no one should.

Perhaps the blame is on writers that continually use this as a personal dart board with Kevin Pritchard's face plastered on it. It's lazy writing and by no means a new story (why don't you research the Fortune 500 companies that protect their investments in an even more unethical way?).

I hope in the future to read much less ireful, and hopefully more insightful, BASKETBALL commentary from the writers at Yahoo! Sports.

Sincerely,
Rosco

P.S.
More insightful commentary from someone WAY smarter than me here.

Happy New Year, Idiots

2009-01-01T14:35:00.000-08:00

So it took exactly one day into the New Year for Ol' Woj to come up with an apologia for Good Ol' Brett vis-a-vis a non-comparison comparison with Aaron Rodgers. Gene tries to set it up like it's a wash while constantly bringing up little asides on how Favre's division was tougher, how Rodgers had more prep time (and who, exactly is to blame for that?) and how Rodgers sucked from coming from behind.

Oh yeah, and Favre threw a ton of picks. A league-leading amount of picks, in fact. His skill players were worse though, so it's cool.

I'd also like to set an over/under of a week for Ol' Woj to respond to Thomas Jones calling out Favre for being selfish and a shitty teammate who distanced himself from the other players. Double or nothing if he compares Jones disfavorably to Obama.

To move across the pond, sad news from Soccernet, where Phil Ball, half of the writers on that site worth reading (the other half being Uli Hesse-Lichtenberger*), has moved on to ply his trade else where. This means that rather than thoughtful and nuanced pieces that manage to take a reasonable and knowledgable stance on the sport itself (not to mention understanding that there's more to sport than just sport), we're stuck with dross like this.

The weakest part of a weak article is the passage making fun of Marouane Fellaini, whose main fault seems to be that he hasn't become a worldwide star in his three months or so in the EPL. Oh, sorry Marouane, your ability to adjust to an incredibly physical and demanding league in a short time and become an integral part of a good team while showcasing your ability to both attack and defend while playing multiple roles as the team suffers an injury crisis is made moot because you have a silly haircut and cost more money than the cheap shit that whoever writes this crap gets lashed on every night.

Happy New Year, motherfuckers.

* - And it's no conincidence that these writers are more strongly affiliated with the mighty good When Saturday Comes rather than the corporate blockheadedness of The Worldwide Leader.

I Pay Your Salary OR The Sociology of Fandom, Part Whatever

2008-11-19T11:21:00.000-08:00

"I pay your salary."

There is a common delusion among sports fans that players are in some way beholden to their fans because the fans "pay their salary" through their economic consumption of sports.

Unless you are writing a check every two weeks that says "Frank Thomas" on it, you are not paying his salary. Even if you write a check to the Denver Broncos or to their ticket office, you are not paying Jay Cutler's salary. The movement of dollars through various entities transmogrifies it. It is no longer yours, it no longer carries your dreams and desires, if it did it in the first place.

Aside from highlighting a particularly childlike view of basic economics, this trope is a good example of how fans feel alienated from modern sports and how they attempt to bridge this gap.

This update was borne out of a Clinton Portis anecdote about interacting with the public. Here, the gap was bridged physically, the player controlled. The semantics of the utterance "I pay your salary" is then exposed as having much deeper meanings than the surface interpretation. For most of us, if our boss/supervisor, someone who far more literally pays our salaries (although it's more that they provide us with the opportunity to be paid, we'll skip over that for now), were to grab us like the unnamed fan grabbed Portis, it would be inappropriate. This is not to say that this hasn't happened or would automatically result in termination or some other censure for the higher-up; it would still represent a breach of the social contract and an action that most would deem as unacceptable, especially in a professional environment.

Instead, what is meant here is "I Own You", replete with all the racial connotations inherent in a white fanbase rooting for a largely non-white pool of athletes. I'd like to say that this is borne out of sports being increasingly dominated by economics, with astronomical numbers increasingly becoming the norm; I think this has always been around though, the feeling that as fans are a tribe, the players are not the leaders of the tribe, they somehow owe their existence to the tribe. Some sort of reversal of the standard cosmological religious relationship, where the masses are aware that they have created their gods and thus establish their primacy, fandom wresting the title of Demiurge from their pantheons.

This is all because sports are now effectively completely abstract in terms of their relationships to the geographical commuities that they are supposed to represent. While it seems that nothing except Liberated Fandom is a reasonable stance to take in a situation of We Have Always Been Conference Rivals With Oceania, the old allegiances still reign supreme, a bit weathered and faded as people take on "second teams"; yet still the Manichean view pervades, obscuring Truth, Reason and Beauty.

Blazers Wallpaper!

2008-11-11T13:21:00.000-08:00

[UPDATED] - 11/17
I, admittedly, have too much free time on my hand. Please enjoy this new wallpaper.

[1440 x 900]

[1920 x 1200]

[1920 x 1440]

[1280 x 800]

I appreciate your comments and/or rantings about what a crappy job I did.

R.I.P. Duckworth

2008-08-26T08:09:00.000-07:00

(1964-2008)

Most Improved Player: 1988
All-Star: 1989, 1991

NBA Finals: 1990, 1992

We'll miss you, big fella.

I just can't help myself

2008-07-01T12:06:00.000-07:00

I know that ESPN is all about puff these days. Trying to find something that actually analyzes sport or the business that surrounds it is difficult when pushing through all the flab of personality pieces, regurgitated press releases and "frat-fan" pandering. The most insipid content on ESPN.com are the feature columnists, who read like the editorial page of a badly out-of-touch regional newspaper, myopically hearkening back to a world that never existed outside of their heads, appealing to whatever they might believe will get Joe Fan out of their seat, spilling their domestic beer in righteous outrage, regardless of whether what they're saying is relevant or correct.

Knowing this, I should really stop a. reading it and/or b. stop writing self-righteous screeds about them on MFF. However, I can't help myself. I like sports. I like what sports journalism has a chance to be and if nothing else, I like letting off steam by taking people to task when I feel like they're using their platform in a less than meritorious fashion.

The target of today's bile is Good Ol' Gene Wojciechowski, a MFF favorite (along with Pat Forde) because he represents the worst of ESPN's "voice", that being an easy, middle-of-the-road white-bread "fan's view" that could very well be automatically generated by a machine in a Bristol basement and is almost always unfailingly bone-headed to the point where I wonder if a cranial cavity is involved at all.

The article in question.

The issue is whether NFL rookie contracts are too generous. I think that there's a pretty obvious answer there, which is: "yes". When teams are more interested in trading down and getting rid of higher (read: better) draft picks for purely financial reasons, then something is amiss and it's no surprise that the NFL would want to address the issue. Yes, NFL management made a mistake in letting this situation occur in the first place and yes, the player's union is absolutely correct in not wanting it to change. It's a sticky problem and it's unlikely that it will be elegantly resolved.

Which is why it's reasonable for Wojciechowski to chide the NFL management in terms of letting it occur and then appearing to the bad guys by asking the union to help fix things up. Fair enough.

Then he goes on to point out that hey, the Dolphins are pretty excited about this Chris Long guy, enough so that they signed him before the draft and sent his agent a medal for helping it get done. So, since a team appears to be happy with the player that they drafted first overall, a player who has yet to play a snap in the NFL, I guess this means that there isn't a problem. A single pick, taken out of context and heavily relying on supposition that the player involved will pan out, is proof enough that the system works. Huzzah!

After this, he points out that football players operate under different rules than the average working man. Good point, Gene! I commend you on not pulling out the "George Fanguy moves from Midway Accounting to Takahashi Inc. as accounting fans boo hysterically from the sidewalk" trope that mid-rate columnists like to drag out like a distentegrating corpse, instead restraining yourself to merely stating that people who earn astronomical amounts of money to play a game are beholden to rules and regulations that don't apply to say, somebody who runs a hot dog stand.

The next step is to needle Goodell for not taking a pay cut himself and then launch into a full-scale assault on the NFL for pricing out fans. While high executive pay and the rising cost of attending sporting events are definitely issues that deserve debate and investigation, I fail to see how they're relevant to the problem of high rookie contracts acting as a disincentive to the point where they become more important than actual athletic talent. For one thing, the NBA, which has a rookie contract system that Goodell would like to mimic, still has the executive pay and high seat prices problems of the NFL, which would seem to indicate that there doesn't seem to be a direct connection those and having a less grandiose system for determining rookie contracts. And if there's no connection, you have to wonder exactly why it would be brought up unless these are subjects that will appeal to the fan that is being priced out and spark a resentment of perceived elitism that creates a kneejerk response in lieu of actually having to write something thoughtful. Or maybe we don't, because that seems to make a lot of sense.

Wojciechowski then brings up that the league and its owners are making a shit-ton of money. This is not really debatable. Jerry Jones could pay for a facelift for every NFL fan worldwide and still have enough money left over to make the country of Bolivia dance for his amusement. The league itself has reached an unprecedented position of success in American sports and bestrides the continent like a money-stuffed colossus. What this has to do with the fact that draft picks have lost value because of the structure of rookie contracts, I'm not entirely sure, beyond acting as an incentive to rile up fans about how they're gettin' screwed by the fat cats in the NFL front office. Oh, looks like I answered my own question again.

The main problem I have with this piece is that it promotes this ridiculously simplistic worldview where if Goodell says "We are currently giving rookies too much money" the response is "Well, you've got lots and lots of money, so why do you have a problem giving it to the people who play the game?" It seems reasonable at first; however, once you start thinking about the situation, the issue isn't about total pay, it's about how giving untested players a lot of money right off the bat makes it difficult for teams to improve through the draft since the rookies are going to be taking up money from the cap that could be used for proven players, money that might as well be tossed into a furnace if these rookies (as many don't) don't pan out. The issue here is how rookie contracts affect competitive balance, something that is near and dear to the NFL's (black, oozing, money-stuffed) heart, not protecting the bottom line. (A conclusion that is made even more ridiculous by the fact that there's a salary cap.)

In closing: ESPN is horrible. Gene Wojciechowski writes intellectually dishonest columns. And we're a bunch of spiteful jerks. Everybody have a safe Fourth!

Quarterfinal Previews: Game One

2008-06-18T15:51:00.000-07:00

Portugal v. Germany

0-0: On one hand, Portugal has been one of the most fluent sides in these championships, capable of holding the ball for long periods of time. On the other hand, they have precisely two players who are above-average at defending set-pieces (to be fair, C. Ronaldo has the physical abilities to be in this group as well, I'm just not sure if he can mark somebody), which is not exactly where you want to be against the Germans, who have quite a number of players who are good in the air (assuming that Friedrich plays at right back and Schweinsteiger replaces one of Podolski/Frings, I count 7 out of 10 outfield players and a minimum of 4*).

Another problem for the Portuguese is that they don't have a particularly dominant center-forward, which they only play one of, meaning that if the Germans play smart and play defensively-oriented players at the wing midfield position, they could effectively dictate where the ball has to be played. This could possibly mask the fact that the center of the German defense, Metzelder - Mertesacker - Lehmann, has been decidedly shaky in the group stages and are eminently capable of giving up a soft goal.

If Portugal Scores First: Not completely lights out. Germany has shown an inability to break down a determined and bunkering opponent; however, Portugal lacks the physicality of the Croats or Austrians, they should concentrate on keeping on the ball and getting a second.

If Germany Scores First: Should be interesting, as Portugal will have to pour players forward and the German defense is shaky. Will depend on a great extent as to whether anybody other than Ronaldo or Deco can score.

Portugal - If I Were Doing It: Drop Nuno Gomes, play C. Ronaldo as the nominal "center forward" with Simao and Nani on the flanks. Play similarly to Manchester United, relying on possession and pressure to crack an unsettled German defense. (Although, if Portugal were truly to play like Man U, they would have to play C. Ronaldo, Nani, Simao and Quaresma in a rotating mess of wingers/attackers and have Deco and Moutinho playing out of midfield. Which would be tantamount to defensive suicide; however, it would look pretty cool.)

Germany -- If I Were Doing It: Continue with Lahm at LB, Friedrich at RB, play Fritz and Schweinsteiger as the wide players and then bring in Hitzlsperger for Frings. Drop Gomez and play Neuville (or Podolski, if available) between the midfield and Klose. Play on the counter and concentrate on overwhelming the Portuguese on set-pieces. If you go behind, move Friedrich to CB, Fritz and Lahm become wingbacks, with Ballack playing a free role.

Prediction: Portugal 2-1 Germany, with Germany getting a consolation goal in the last 10 minutes just to keep things edgy. Portuguese goals will come on a bullshit penalty and a breakaway on the counter that Ronaldo will roll into the opposite corner.

* - Ze Germans could bring out a (relatively) lightweight lineup of: Lehmann; Lahm, Mertesacker, Metzelder, Jansen; Fritz, Ballack, Frings, Podolski, Neuville, Klose -- that's still a big (no pun intended) ask for the Portuguese in terms of bodies on bodies though.

Domenech the Donkey

2008-06-17T12:13:00.000-07:00

In World Cup 2006, we piled on Jose Pekerman for not going for the jugular against Germany with a wealth of attacking talent on his bench.

Well, as ill-advised as that was, poor Jose should feel more than a bit put out by our remonstrations, since after today, he's not even in the same galaxy as the Ultimate Donkey, French coach Raymond Domenech. Not only did Domenech not bring David Trezeguet, one of the top French strikers, not only did he substitute like-for-like against Romania instead of going for the jugular, he, after Eric Abidal had been sent off for giving away a penalty that put the French down 1-0, took off attacking midfielder Samir Nasri (who had come on minutes earlier for the injured Franck Ribery) for a central defender. And not just any defender, he brought on Boumsong, who arguably shouldn't even have been in the squad.

At this point French fans could be forgiven for venting their spleen in his general direction, as it is primarily his baffling approach to tactics that has gotten the French where they are now, sitting bottom of the Group of Death, looking upward at the cavalier Dutch, who have swashbuckled their way to the quarterfinals.

Domenech must be hoping that the French can sneak one on the counter or on a set-piece (and as I write, Henry pulls one just wide); however, how do you expect to do this with a minimum of attacking options, with still two defensive midfielders?

Euro 2008 Days 3 and 4; Rooting for the Underdog

2008-06-11T09:47:00.000-07:00

France v. Romania

Oh, how I love it when a coach is bitten on his ass because of his own trepidation. Faced with a Romanian team that was concerned completely with defense, Raymond Domenech brought on a forward for a forward, then a midfielder for the other forward. Ridiculous. If you are the better team, if you are in a situation where you are in a group with two other tough teams and you are playing the Weak Sister, you will probably need a win. Now, it may be that France will still go through; however, leaving things up for chance leaves you where Italy was last Euros, claiming collusion between the Swedes and Danes as they flew home.

Italy v. Netherlands AND Spain v. Russia

Both of these games are similar to me because they represent the essential nature of the sport. While both the Netherlands and Spain enjoyed victories that were generally represented as routs, that doesn't accurately describe how the games played out. Both games could have conceivably been victories for the other teams, had chances been/not taken. Actual domination in soccer is a rare thing and although both the Spanish and the Dutch are sentimental favorites at TMFF, these performances are definitely not an indication that they are ready to rampage through the rest of the field.

Sweden v. Greece

That was a pretty nice goal.

On Rooting for the Underdog

I also wanted to talk about Rick Reilly's recent article for ESPN regarding rooting for the underdog. Under the viewpoint of liberated fandom, rooting for somebody or some team simply because they're less likely to win is just as formulaic and insipid as bandwagon-jumpers are to those who always pull for the underdog. To consistently choose one side of an equation regardless of the character involved is dogmatic blindness. It's taking the side of the working man in the same sense that totalitarian Communism was all about the proleteriat.

Euro 2008, Days 1 & 2 Analysis

2008-06-08T10:55:00.000-07:00

The first two days of Euro 2008 featured matchups that paralleled each other well -- in the early games, the presumably overwhelmed host nations would play against countries considered to be dark horses for the title. In the late games, a team considered to be one of the favorites played against teams that would have a shout at getting out of the group stages and not much more than that.

In both of the early games, pre-tournament analysis* was proven to have missed one of the canonical rules of soccer -- host nations are invariably lifted to at least one level higher than their talent due to the homefield advantage. Although Austria and Switzerland lost their games, both were the dominant team and were unlucky not to get at least a point.

In the later games, a 2-0 scoreline was paralleled as both contenders managed to control their games and either could have scored more. Portugal and Germany identified themselves as having a significant amount of influential players in their sides as well as a quality in depth that is lacking from many other squads in these championships. While the late games were more one-sided that those than game earlier, they were also more entertaining, as the greater technical abilities of the contenders created a more open, end-to-end game, as opposed to the cageyness of the early matches.

Switzerland v. Czech Republic

The Czechs lacked any sort of fluency in midfield, consistently turning the ball over 30-40 yards from the Swiss goal. They took the one clear chance that they had, otherwise it was extremely forgettable. Having Rosicky, Nedved and Poborsky removed from the team that looked so good at Euro 2004 is a let-down; however, I was surprised that Milan Baros was not on the field at any point in the match. Although he is a flawed and limited player, one of his major attributes is his willingness to run at players with the ball at his feet, something that the Czechs were lacking and which might have opened up the game.

One odd moment was near the end of the game, with the Swiss pushing for an equalizer. The camera cut to the Swiss bench and showed Liverpool-bound Philippe Degen sitting next to the injured Alexander Frei. With his team down 1-0 and struggling to make anything happen, as well as sitting next to the captain of the team that was injured near the end of the first half and struggling not to break down, Degen was laughing and smiling, apparently trying to share some sort of anecdote to Frei, who appeared to be studiously ignoring him. Considering that reports out of Borussia Dortmund around the time of his leaving were accusing Degen of having the intelligence of a rock with developmental issues, I'd be wary of him if I were a Reds fan.

Portugal v. Turkey

In the second half, Portugal took off Gomes and went to the formation that many people had been suggesting they adopt as the default, using three attacking wingers up top (in this case, Ronaldo, Simao and Nani) switching positions with no real center-forward. This type of formation has been used very effectively in club football by Manchester United and Roma and with Portugal not having a stand-out classic forward, it's a very attractive idea for them to adopt the fluid and interchangeable style that is currently the cutting-edge of modern soccer tactics. That said, it is worth noting that the winning goal was scored by a center-back, Pepe, who was put through on goal by a one-two played by Nuno Gomes, who started the game leading the line.

Austria v. Croatia

This match for me highlighted the problem with the traditional "flat" 442. Austria came out with an unusual 3-5-2 formation and after going behind early, the wide players in the midfield played more as wingers than wingbacks. For the majority of the match, the Croatian wide players were pinned back defending, allowing the Austrians to easily crowd and overwhelm the two Croatian forwards, who were forced to check back deep into midfield to receive the ball. In this kind of situation, it would have been beneficial for Croatia to play with one central attacker and two attacking widemen in the vein of the classic Ajax 443, since with their wide players pushing up, Austria was leaving the flanks open. However, with the Croatian wide midfielders having to spend most of their time defending, there was nobody exploiting that space. Although Croatia won the match, they were lucky to have done so and would have been better off being able to generate chances on the counter than desperately hoping their defense could hold out.

The man of the match for me was Dario Srna, who was responsible for the majority of the chances that Croatia generated and was an excellent defender down the right side. Croatia should have scored from one of his excellent dead-ball deliveries, although his one direct shot from a free-kick was poor and into the wall.

Germany v. Poland

Germany decided to go with an attacking lineup featuring Podolski wide left and Gomez and Klose up top. This decision paid off with all three players involved in the first goal, Gomez playing a tremendous flicked through-ball that sent Klose free before he set up Podolski for a tap-in. While they did not score again until the later part of the second half, the Germans were consistently able to generate a variety of chances, although neither Michael Ballack or Torsten Frings were able to get forward as much as they would have liked.

Poland played well tactically yet could not generate more than a few clear-cut chances, which they were unable to take advantage of. The best chance was a cut-back from the right side of the penalty area that was put wide of the far post, which was quickly followed by the Germans blowing the exact same situation at the other end of the pitch. Although the Poles had a great deal of shots, most of these were from 30+ yards and were either wide of the goal or easily handled by Mad Jens.

* - Sensibly missing from TMFF, of course.

Holy Balls, I am Rooting for Boston

2008-06-05T09:21:00.000-07:00

Hell is freezing over. Pigs can fly. I can pass calculus.

I am rooting for a Boston team. More specifically, I am rooting for the Boston Celtics - otherwise known as the second most inocuous Boston pro franchise. So, really, it's not THAT bad (I like to tell myself).

This gets me thinking, if I am rooting FOR a Boston team, what then, could be bad enough to root against. Yep, the Lakers. For those that don't know - the Lakers are a bunch of sole-sucking, bandwagon fan having, pretentiously coached bunch of overachievers with one legitimate star (sorry Pau, add an extra consenant to your name, and we'll talk - but you're still a one-move exploiter with no defensive skills).

Oh, and that one legitimate star that you have - he's a bitch. He makes faked videos, has spotty defensive skills (ball hawk? sure. On ball defender? Um, sorry, not quite.), and bills himself as the next Michael Jordan. Guess what though, Kobe? No one really hated Michael Jordan.

The short of it is, these finals suck (see my post two years ago on the "fabulous" Miami/Dallas finals - where are those teams now?).

Here's why you need to root for Boston:

Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett - these guys have seen better days, but, let's give them one before they walk off into the sunset.

Rajon Rondo - I sort of pity a starting point guard that has made SO many mistakes, yet somehow stumbled his way into the finals. Wait, did I say pity, I meant despise.

Paul Pierce - for no real reason except, well, if Antoine Walker has a ring, Pierce should (maybe that'll keep him from sitting out ends of seasons).

Kendrick Perkins - actually, he pretty much sucks, and it'd be a shame for him to win a ring.

Scott Pollard - he'll do something with that ring.

Now, the reasons the Lakers should win:

...

Have you been paying attention? The Lakers as an organization suck - they are pure evil. If they win, the zen-minded, Hans Gruberesque coach joins the ranks of Red Auerbach. For shame! Kobe wins without Shaq. Holy Bitchfest, Batman! Pau Gasol gets an NBA ring to add to ... don't even mention it - he sucks on so many levels. Bill Walton's son gets a ring. WTF?

This cannot happen.

And I take a deep breath when I say this -

Go Celtics.

Man U - Barcelona II

2008-04-29T12:24:00.000-07:00

Van Der Sar has now saved Man U's hash twice and appears to be a bit shaken up. Barca have the foot on the gas now and the Mancunians are defending desperately, helped only by the fact that the Catalans tend to "Arsenal" it a bit, trying to dribble it into the goal rather than letting fly.

This game is an advertisement for the true nature of the game and a repudiation of the boring mush that we're frequently served up as fans. This is the reason that Chelsea will never be thought of as fondly as Arsenal, even if they've been more successful.

As I type, a Nani header flashes just wide.

If both these teams finish second in their league (Barca most likely will wind up being third), it will be a pity, even if Real Madrid and Villareal are fun to watch in their own right, just because this is how the game is meant to be played at the highest level, full of skill, inventiveness and a sense of risk. Fie on those teams that "grind" out results. Fie on you, other CL semifinal. There's a reason why Cruyff is a godhead.

This is affirmation for what we want as fans, the desire to see players attempt the fantastic, to dance with the ball.

Milito just misses connecting on a free header.

Halftime. I like the selection of Park and Tevez for Manchester. They're excellent combinations of offensive skill and defensive desire, defending from the front. I would say that they're the analogue to Iniesta, Xavi and Yaya Toure for Barca, the hod-carriers, even if the pair of Red Devils plays much further up the pitch.

Man U - Barcelona

2008-04-29T12:09:00.000-07:00

I'm typing this with one eye on the window and the other on a tiny, ghost-filled window showing a Chinese broadcast of the Champions League match between Man U and Barcelona. It's almost a religious experience. Thus far, this game is delivering what we didn't get from the Arsenal-Barca final two years ago: two of the most attacking, talented teams in the world going at each other.

Currently it's 1-0, courtesy of two typical events:

1. Barca trying to play the ball out of the back and making a horrible giveaway.

2. Paul "Ginger Ninja" Scholes blasting a long-range shot into the upper corner.

Now creating a situation where Barcelona has to steam forward to get an equalizer while Man U tries to get a second goal to put the game to bed. Right now Little Leo Messi is the Danger Man. Every time he gets the ball you can feel everybody tense up -- he's already had one run where he beat three men and then was robbed by Van Der Sar for the equalizing goal. It's his pace when he gets going with the ball at his feet, combined with his close control, that makes him something unworldly. The thought of a team with both him and Cristiano Ronaldo is maybe too perfect to actually happen.

Cut. Parry. Thrust.

In Soviet Russia, the ball shoots you

2008-03-04T22:39:00.001-08:00

The Warriors are Twilight Zone NBA. They succeed by not playing basketball. That is, they don't play basketball as it's "meant to be" by Those in the Know. The Right-Wayers have no place here. Teams are defeated not by box-outs or carefully-run screens; instead, they sacrifice themselves on the altar of Playground Basketball. They willingly allow their hearts to be taken beating from their chests because they deep down love the game as it should be, winners stay, shirts vs. skins. It's less the Warriors imposing their will on the other team and more that the other team can't help themselves from being seduced and becoming the National Guardsman tripping on LSD, heading down to the river to skinny-dip while the Weathermen loot in the background.

It makes sense then that the team that ended the dream last year was Jerry Sloan's team of robo-players. It was either going to be them or the similar androids that make up the Spurs that would finally put an end to this, ending like most rebellions do, a splinter group, broken off from the ideological runners of the Suns, defeating The Best only to fall when presented with a foe that would not give in to their hedonistic orgy of threes and bops.

Few Warriors fans would say that fate could be any different for this year. For one, the Dubs might not even make the playoffs, a travesty that has caused Bop City to proclaim, on an estimated average of 3.5 times per day that alternately, either that the league should reseed across conferences to prevent the hideousness of the lower seeds in the East desecrating the concept of a meritocracy or alternately that Stern already has such a reseeding in place, waiting only for the moment to grasp media ascendancy for the NBA, only biding his time until the moment is right.

Of course, we all know that the iron fist of Rules and Regulations will remain supreme over any sort of Common Sense. The Management is The Management for a good reason and this is because they see this sort of thing as important.

To finish, this season should prove, to any knowledgeable fan at least, that the heart and soul of the Warriors is Stephen Jackson. Aside from the straight-up evidence (horrible start, the Messiah returns, vengeance is wreaked, etc.), he is at one the physical and mental personification of the team and its philosophies. It makes far too much sense in a smoking-too-much-pot kind of way that it took S-Jax coming to Oakland basketball for them to redeem each other.

The Adventures of Greggy and Kev the Wunderkind

2008-02-29T12:04:00.001-08:00

Volume 1, Issue 3...
Auf wiedersehen,
Rosco

Up Yours, Internet

2008-02-22T16:21:00.001-08:00

One aspect of the blogger-led revolution on sports commentary is the highly-trumpeted and touted Democratizing of Sports Commentary. That is to say, for you sports bloggers out there, we've finally wrested control of sports commentary from the Sports Commentary Elite and given a voice to the little guy. There's a problem with this, though, which is the assumption that the little guy always has something worthwhile to say.

Middle Foam Finger deals with the issue of not having something worthwhile to say by well, not saying anything. Some may claim that this is laziness on our part, while we prefer to think of it as "Quality Control". However, most of the rest of the Internet doesn't have the wherewithal, foresight or rugged good looks to hold themselves in check like ourselves and instead relies on repetition of textual diarrhea which in its highest form consists of nothing more than summaries of what other crap people have posted elsewhere on the internet today.

Which is a roundabout way to getting to the subject of today's bile-infested spittle-fest: is there anything more inane or banal than ESPN.com's Featured Comment? Like clockwork, these comments are always something that if you closed your eyes, you could imagine being uttered, along with scraps of buffalo wings, from some genius with a Red Sox hat even though he's from Indiana, saying after he's had about two beers two many* shortly before the bartender tells everybody that they're far too stupid to not go home.

And why is this comment on the ESPN.com front page? Well one, it's free content, and that's nothing to turn your nose up at. Two, it shows that ESPN is "hip with the kids" by allowing user-created content, probably just so that ESPN executives can avoid criticism that they're ruining sports coverage in America (and increasingly, the rest of the world as well) by pointing out that the most utterly brain-stomping piece of crapulence on their home page is straight from the fans, meaning that instead of ruining things, they're just giving people what they want.

Nevermind that these are probably the worst possible advertisement for sports fan comments possible (the second-worst possible being the comments on Deadspin, which we are contractually obliged to hate on because Leitch totally bogarted OUR logo for the cover of his brand-spanking new and assuredly financially-successful book, just wait Leitch, our solicitors will be contacting you shortly). Nevermind that the only possible rational reaction to these things is to vow never to view ESPN.com comments unless you are very very drunk, along the same lines of those late-night visits to lisasparxx.com interspersed with visits to chick.com and then back again. Actually wait, you should mind! You go ahead and mind this shit. I may have just had someone stare crosseyed at me while I sit here digging my finger two knuckles deep into my ear while I'm supposed to be working and I'm still three steps higher on the evolutionary ladder than half of the so-called sports bloggage out there.

The Democratization of the Blogogogogosphere does not mean the Retardification of the Sports Fan**. Resist the urge of posting just because you can. If you don't have anything smart to say, don't say it at all.

* - So, three.

** - Or at least, not any more so.

Wise Fwom Yo Gwave

2008-02-08T12:12:00.000-08:00

Okay, we've been sleeping for a while. Rip Van Foam Finger, or something like that. However, something needed to be said after one of the most satisfying results for Haters worldwide.

Is there really anything more satisfying than seeing the underdog pull it off? Than seeing Papa Bouba Diop freak after scoring against France for Senegal? Than seeing Doug Flutie jump around like a 4-year-old who actually got the basketball through the hoop? Okay, maybe not the last one because that was a Baaaaaaahston Sports Moment and if nothing else, this year has taught us that there's nothing quite as aggravating as a smug and condescending Boston sports fan, chortling at their World Series win, their best record in the NBA, their perfect Patri...

Oh...

Oh.

Oh!

Oh, I can hardly describe the feeling, the glee, of seeing Perfect Tom Brady, Perfect Bill Belichick and the Perfect Patriots taste the sour sour grapes of losing to the Goofy Manning* and the New York Giants, who were probably the fourth-, maybe third-best team in the NFC. Way to go, Greatest Team in the History of the World Ever. Thanks for making my week, my month, my year. Let the Haterade flow.

* - That's fucking hard to do people, if you're immediately identifiable as the goofiest member of *that* family.

The Curse of Spain

2007-11-17T22:40:00.000-08:00

During Spain's 3-0 victory over Sweden in Euro 2008 Qualifying today, Ray Hudson made a number of comments about how Spain are the perennial underachievers of world football, featuring a plethora of talent at every position and yet having nothing to show for it.

"Nobody knows why", he said.

Bull-ass-crap, Mr. Hudson.

The reason, as explained to me by my culé co-worker Eduardo, as well as laid out in Phil Ball's excellent book Morbo, is that Spain is an incredibly divided nation. There is no Spanish monoculture; there's a collection of ethnic/cultural groups, all of which have historical reasons for not liking each other. As Eduardo said when I first tried to talk to him about the national team: "Fuck Spain. I'm Catalan, not Spanish. While I'm interested in how the national team does, the only team I root for is Barcelona."

I'm certain the same is true for many other Catalans/Basques/etc. and while there are plenty of people (mainly in Madrid) who want to see some sort of united team, you get the sense that there's still some simmering resentment of the members of the 'other' Spanish cities who happen to play for the national team. And while these differences certainly have a questionable affect, if any, on the action on the field, is so tied into a common feeling among both players and fans, that any sort of basic political schism in the team must at some point represent enough extra friction to keep things from running smoothly. And to win an international tournament, one needs smoothness.

Which is a pity, because the current Spanish side can play some breathtaking football. Today, Aragones put out a lineup that featured Ramos-Puyol-Marchena-Capedevila across the back, with Albeda acting as a midfield librero in front of the defense while Xavi acted as the pivot in midfield. Iniesta and Fabregas seemed to have license to pop up anywhere. David Silva switched flanks with impunity while David Villa played a floating position up top. The end result was a nastily fluid team, reminiscent of the recent trends in La Liga and the EPL that favor a team that can adjust itself on the fly and relies on technical, one-touch football to break down a bunkered team.

It's the transition midfielders that really make the difference with this team. In terms of box-to-box midfielders, Spain have an astonishing number players who are not only good; it's arguable that they have 3 out of the top 5 in the world. Xavi, Iniesta and Fabregas are all comfortable with the ball at their feet, can tackle if they need to, run all day, make the killer pass and with the slight exception of Xavi, are good-to-excellent finishers. Oh, and they're some of the best tactical players in the game today. Still, every time Xavi got the ball, you could feel tension in the Bernabeu, tension that couldn't do anything to the machine today; still, you never know when a little bit of grist will get in the gears.

Celebration of a Single Table

2007-11-16T10:20:00.000-08:00

Over the last couple years, domestic football in Europe has suffered from an overabundance of non-competition. Too frequently, the title races has been decided only halfway or two-thirds of the way through the season. The most egregious example would be in France, where Lyon has won the title seven years in a row and has done so in most of those cases going away, leaving everybody else fighting for a distant second spot.

Last year brought us a little sign that things could be different -- even as Lyon and Inter bulldozed their way to the French and Italian titles, the German, Dutch and Spanish titles all came down to the final match-day, with back-and-forth results in all cases. Even the English league, which had been extremely straight-forward for a number of years, had something approximating a dash down the homestretch as the double-champion Chelsea bowed out to a resurgent Manchester United.

This year, at least so far, looks like it will be the best year for competition in a long time. Arsenal and Manchester United are neck-and-neck in the Premier League and I'm certainly not writing off Chelsea or even Liverpool, who are still only 6 points back (although Arsenal has a game in hand). Real Madrid, Villareal, Valencia and Barcelona are all grouped together at the top of La Liga, with no team looking truly convincing. In Italy, it's Inter, Juventus, Fiorentina and Roma. Even in Germany, where everybody expected the rejuvenated Bayern Munich to run the table, a recent patch of poor form has left the Bavarians only a point ahead of Hamburg and Bremen, two teams with an excellent core of players themselves. The Dutch league features the traditional Big Three all grouped together, doubtless snarling like dogs.

While Lyon are only 3 points ahead of Nancy with the second-place team having a game in hand, it seems likely at this point that they are starting to pull away from the pack. To be in first even after an extremely choppy start is an excellent position, especially considering that there doesn't seem to be a real challenger among the chasing teams. And this is going to be the next phase in the season for all the leagues, the point in time where fatigue and injuries separate the wheat from the chaff, the squads who have been riding a good run of form finding goals hard to come by, the player list getting threateningly short, finding out that the backup keeper maybe isn't quite as good as everybody thought.

And this is the beauty of the format used across Europe, where you play everybody home-and-away and the season ends with the team with the most points crowned champions. For a sport such as soccer, where luck and fate (not the same thing) play so much of a role in any individual result, it doesn't make sense to have the domestic title rest upon any single result (although it must be said that it does make sense for the World Cup to do so). The system rewards consistent success and makes each game more significant.

More importantly, it creates a larger sense of continuity across the length of the season as the momentum and emotions from a single game or series of games becomes this undercurrent of feeling that affects the players and the fans alike, each team carrying with them the narrative of performance. There is no reset button of the playoffs, no rescue for a team waiting to turn it on, it's a long haul death-march towards validation, for a season can be a success without a championship, depending on the context of the team. All it can take is results against your enemies, results against teams that are "bigger" than you, results that resonate higher than the meaningless regular-season contexts of a league with playoffs, results that are the reason why Blackburn still has followers, not because they expect Rovers to win the league; instead, those fans are there because of identity, a self-assigned tribal association that strikes deeper ground than where the team finishes at the end of the year.

The Making of a Star OR Freekobe OR The Golden LeBron

2007-11-08T22:45:00.000-08:00

A recent post over at FreeDarko got me thinking about the nature of stardom and the way that an athlete can become commodified and how such commidification stands in contrast to athletic performance. The genesis of this was thinking about the global nature of sport and the intersection of two fairly indisputable facts:

1. The most popular sport, globally, is soccer.
2. The most popular athlete, globally, is Michael Jordan.

That they are both true is anti-intuitive. Shouldn't the most popular athlete be one who participates in the most popular sport? Shouldn't the most popular athlete be someone who is actively playing? And if "no" to the latter, then shouldn't Pele stand on that column instead of Jordan?

The answer is that Jordan is the most popular athlete of all time, barring no national boundaries, because he was the first athlete to realize the potential of personal marketing*. Boosted by Nike, Jordan is/was everywhere, a benign figure who was very very good, won championships and sold a lot of shoes at a time when media was truly blossoming in a global sense. By being the first iconic figure to take that instantaneous global access and to turn into a marketing empire, Jordan indelibly stamped his now-unforgettable silhouette on the plaque of World's Most Important Superstar.

Except, how much do people, in the global sense, actually know about Jordan in the context of basketball? Of course, NBA fans will be able to tell you. However, will that kid wearing a Jordan shirt in Guatemala be able to tell you who Jordan beat to win those Championships, how much he averaged as a rookie or what position he played? (To be fair, how many American soccer fans could tell you similar facts regarding Pele?)

The answer being, of course not. And this doesn't really represent a problem so much for Jordan so much as it does for those who come after him. By creating a figure that's larger than sport, Jordan created a situation where star players are not only competing on the court, they are also competing with the concept of historical status, attempting to be the gods that throw over the titans, only it's another cosomology entirely and Jordan is YHWH-23, looking down on creations made in his own image and smiling that smirk that says "I've won, and there's nothing you can do about it".

The two figures that immediately come to mind, largely because of their so-far parallels with Icarus (throw that cosmology into reverse), are Kobe and LeBron.

Kobe, more than possibly any other NBA player, appears to be consumed with the problem of perception. His persona, as examined earlier in this blog, seems to be centered around the concept of controlling his public persona and therefore, controlling his reception from fans. He doesn't seem to realize that Jordan controlled his image through extreme restriction of access, in much the same way that Shaq has done more recently**, by reducing himself to a smiling, largely detail-less figure. Kobe is both too open and too dissembling, putting out enough of himself to create a complex persona and also too-obviously putting on an act for the cameras, creating a fascinating figure that is also extremely difficult to market outside of "he's very good at basketball".

And that seems to be the best way to describe the New Boss, LeBron James, defined by his seemingly-omniscient excellence at the sport. Like Jordan, LeBron has restricted access to whatever's real with him, creating a media image from an extremely early point in his career. An image that is (as has been gone over again previously here) defined not by what he has done; rather, it's about what he will have done, to the point that nobody feels particularly presumptous talking about multiple titles and multiple MVPs. They are, after all, his birthright. Horribly, it makes his astounding ability boring. It's too easy to be visceral and too preordained to be suspenseful. The only way his career could be staggering is if he fails somehow to reach the peaks that we all assume that he must.

Ultimately the game, their games, are obscured because they can never match up to the manufactured majesty of the Alpha and the Omega of sports marketing***. It's impossible for them, simply because He Has Become Before and now that we know that it can be done, there's no way that it can happen again.

* - This is almost assuredly untrue and should instead read "because he was the first athlete to realize the potential of personal marketing and have a mega-millions clothing company willing to throw all of their resources behind you and have enough personal high-profile success to make it seem like more of a coronation than an advertising campaign"; however, that isn't nearly as snappy.

** - Although in comparison, Shaq shows much more of a personality than Jordan, possibly because he actually has a sense of humor.

*** - And it should go without saying that to "fans of the game", their games will still burn bright, as will Chris Paul's as will the fact that John Salmons is leading the Kings in several statistical categories, alas poor Kobe/LeBron, they are playing a bigger game than basketball itself and I do think sometimes that they know that they can't win.

MFF Flips Off the NBA Season...

2007-10-30T09:25:00.000-07:00

Sadly, this year, we're doing it Odenless...
Eastern Conference...
Oh man, where do I start with these guys. Hey, everyone, just FYI, they are still the East, and Garnett and Ray Allen don't change the whole scene too much. Boston, I'm sorry, but you'll be better, just not Championship better. Two over-the-hill superstars joining a third over-the-hill superstar does not an all-star team make. Keep in mind, your starting center is still Kendrick Perkins, or that guy who paints his nails black. But, at least they are a Boston sports franchise that's likeable, and would be more so without Danny Ainge - just saying.

Of course, the East will be pretty darn competitive, even if they are competing over the title of "king of the weiners." The Raptors are going to surprise more than a few teams and end up in the top half of the conference. The Heat are steadily on their way down, and with Ricky "Own Rebound" Davis on board a two-move and one-shouldered Dwyane "I can't spell my name" Wade and Shaquille "I can, sorta" O'Neal, they will be one fun ship to watch sink.

Atlanta is an up-and-comer, but won't fill the seats, even with immediate impact rookies adding to the dynamite man Joe "MFing" Johnson. The Bulls are good - don't forget them - and Tyrus Thomas will get a paycheck and put up some highlights, while the nuts and bolts guys get the rest of it done. And Joakim will still be as ugly as his jumper (I think he automatically wins ugliest jump shot in the NBA). Charlotte will be better, but I will miss 'Stache and "Burrito Wagon" Sean May. Washington still has their players, but still no one in the front court - so expect them to go as far as, oh say, the first round. The Knicks are marginally better, if only because Zach Randolph > Steve Francis, and David Lee is pound-for-pound the best rebounder in the East.

The Magic - well, they got Rashard Lewis. How much better does that make them? Only so far as Dwight continues to dominate the Eastern paint - which he will continue to do. Cleveland is still a factor, but unless my boy Gibson keeps up his playoff sidekick role to LeBron, they will always be known as an also-ran.

Three are other teams in the East, but they aren't worth mentioning.

Western Conference...
Yay! The one with eleven viable teams playing for eight playoff spots. This is not going to be easy.

The Southwest conference could put all their teams int he playoffs, if only because they possibly the three best teams in the conference. Luis Scola and the Rockets (even IF they have Francis) are going to by explosive - if McGrady's knee doesn't explode first. The Spurs are always gonna be good, and still play that boring brand of Popo-ball that makes me want to retch. The Mavericks, well, they still have Dirk - and he's still surrounded by a bunch of players I hate, which means they will do everything to piss me off. The Hornets are good, because they have Christopher Paul and the weirdest collection of players ever. Oh, and Peja is there. I think. Okay, Memphis played worse than their talent last year (and the Draft Lottery proved it!), add to that Navarro and Conley (in addition to a healthy Lowry) with up-and-comer Kinsey and that is going to be a fun team to watch. Iavaroni as their coach is going to bring them a Phoenix-like following.

The Pacific will be competitive - for the second place teams anyways. Phoenix owns this division, and Grant Hill adding injury-prone firepower to the second string is going to keep their scoring up. The Warriors will be fun to watch (and root for) again, and Bellinelli will be just the type of player I love - unbelivably hot-headed and egotistical with a money jumpshot (best in the draft with Mo Almond). Lakers suck - we'll see if Kobe lasts the season. Kings, bleh. Oh, and the Clippers - the darkhorse - because it all depends on what that team wants to be - right now, it's losers.

Ah, the Northwest - home of mine. Utah will continue to be good, whether they find a Kirilenko deal or not. Deron Williams is about to be a superstar on par with Jason Kidd - but with a jumpshot. Denver will also make the playoffs, but still need to figure out to play with two balls. Marcus Camby, if he's healthy for the entire season, will be the defensive player of the year. Seattle will be rebuilding, but will be awfully fun to watch. Minnesota, not as fun to watch, and they'll probably win about twenty games, and inevitably Kevin McHale will be fired (probably before the New Year's ball drops). And, last and certainly not least, Portland. Oh, what joy. No Oden, but that's okay. LaMarcus would win (if there were such an award) "Sophomore of the Year" and Brandon will keep himself up. Everyone is much more gelled this year, and it'll be exciting, and P-Town fans should be excited about finishing third in the division and getting another lottery pick to add to Rudy and Oden next year.

Those End-of-Season Dealies...

All-Rookie Team
PG – Acie Law (Hawks)
SG – Marco Bellinelli (Warriors)
SF – Kevin Durant (Supersonics)
PF – Al Horford (Hawks)
C – Sean Williams (Nets)

Okay, so Mr. Williams is a stretch – but so is any of the other Nets’ “big” men becoming a reliable post player. Also, it should be noted, that eventual injuries to both Davis and Ellis will free up some time for the Italian Hot Head (I’m thinking Pancetta is a good nickname for him – to go along with my trend of naming Italian players after cold cuts).

All-NBA Team
PG – Chris Paul (Hornets)
SG – Kobe Bryant (Lakers, Mavericks, Bulls)
SF – LeBron James (Cavaliers)
PF – Dirk Nowitzki (Mavericks)
C – Tim Duncan (Spurs)

Sorry, a little slow on the surprises here – but that’s what the NBA brings – little surprises. My little surprise here is Mr. Paul, who would score the biggest coup in NBA history by overthrowing perennial All-First Teamer Stevie Nash. Gilbert (aka Agent Zero) could be here too, but he’s a videogame turncoat – and that doesn’t make me want to be on your side – maybe he should change his nickname to “Agent Buncha Zeroes.”

Here’s the fun part, the actual awards and not theoretical teams that would be “tough” to beat. I am still trying to understand what sort of pride these players take in being mentioned in a team – because obviously they are not in the NBA to be part of a team.

Rookie of the Year: Kev the Wunderkind. I mean, uh, Kevin Durant out of that (for now) Northwest powderpuff Seattle Supersonics. It’s no gimme by any stretch, but he’s as explosive as it comes and has all the tools to build on this season. Also, he’s a Longhorn pseudo-alum and that makes you aces in my book.

Most Improved Player: Joel “The Przydent” Przybilla. He’s coming back in a strong way, Blazer fans. And as a Blazer fan, I would like to go ahead and squelch the rumor that this is a biased homer pick. It’s absolute truth. But, seriously, this is gonna be a good year for the 10. And, if I just jinxed him to all hell – well, we’ll have Oden next year.

Most Valuable Player: Chrysler LeBaron James (Speaking of MVP, it’s a shame they didn’t make a basketball iteration of that loveable chimp movie series – thought up here first, Hollywood!). This seems like it should be his year to win it. And he will accept the award with the same indifference and boring way that he earned it.

So there you have it, another season in the books before it begins (because you can take these predictions to the BANK!)…

Oh, also, Spurs win over the Bulls (and the long trend continues - the league still hates Phoenix).

The Adventures of Greggy and Kev the Wunderkind

2007-10-29T09:00:00.000-07:00

Volume 1, Issue 2...

Till next time,
Rosco.

'Fair' Competition OR Economics in Sports, Part One

2007-08-17T16:52:00.000-07:00

Recently two English publications have been spending some time investigating the matters of money and sport and how competition on the field is contrasted against competition at the coffers. The first, When Saturday Comes, is a fanzine that's grown into a magazine, with a concentration on paying attention to the smaller clubs in Britain instead of turning into all-Premier-League-all-the-time, as many English publications have. The second is The Economist, a British journal that has a basis in economics, although articles cover a wide range of subjects, with an emphasis on a free-market philosophy.

Both publications have noted that it is odd that America, which tends to a free-market approach, has highly socialist and collectivist sports leagues (the most obvious being the NFL), while in England, which traditionally tends toward socialism, the EPL definitely leans towards a free-market approach (although not nearly as much as in other European soccer leagues, as we will get into later). Both of these approaches are reflected in the competitive nature of the the leagues.

The modern NFL, where the salary cap and shared revenues ensure that no one team or group of teams maintains a permanent advantage over the others, is defined by parity, with no team dominating the league (in theory) and where any team can have a reasonable expectation of success in the short- to medium-term without having something miraculous occurring.

In direct contrast, the EPL is dominated by a group of 4 clubs, and even that may be generous considering that Liverpool has gone an extended period of time without winning the league. These clubs maintain their dominance because financial rewards, both in terms of prize money and more importantly, in the form of television contracts and merchandising, mean that the rich are those who have the greatest earning potential and joining the ranks of the rich is possible only through a massive cash investment, approximate to a deus ex machina.

Of course, both publications have reached conclusions that their preferred way of thinking is obviously the correct one, with WSC looking wistfully at the number of different NFL champions over the last 10 years while The Economist asserts that the Premiership is as popular as it is precisely because a small handful of teams, free of administrative controls, can go forward with creating super-teams.

Both of these arguments have their own pitfalls. The Economist claims that the NBA has "lost its shine" since Michael Jordan's dominating Bulls teams left the landscape, which has more to do with the nature of stardom and the state of the game in terms of strategy and rules in the late 90s than it does with the lack of a truly dominant team, especially considering the success of the Shaq/Kobe Lakers (not to mention that the NBA's periods of high success, including during Jordan's dominance, were post-salary cap); while WSC believes that fan interest in the EPL is, to a certain extent, driven by dreaming by Tottenham/Newcastle fans as well as the fleeting interest of fans whose teams have been promoted, which seems to be a bit too eager to downplay the impact of the uber-successful teams and their large amount of fans, both ticket-buying and otherwise.

The most galling aspect of this is, that for myself, my initial inclinations are to agree with WSC -- open financial competition has seemed to kill off competition on the field, with all domestic prizes inevitably falling to one of the big teams, while as a 49ers fan, I know that a couple years of shrewd maneuvering could bring the team back to the Super Bowl relatively easily, regardless of tepid performances in previous years. And that being said, it is the EPL that is far more fascinating to me as a fan, to the point where I posted on this blog an article last year decrying the parity of the NFL, where the rules intended to spread the wealth have created a league of mediocrity, where excellence is confined to the front office and the best teams are those that merely fail to lose. My viewing habits also support this, as I watched more EPL games over the opening weekend than the total number of NFL games I watched during the previous season (which also serves to highlight that I have more options for watching games from a league not even in my country than I do with NFL games, courtesy of the league monopoly with DirectTV).

If asked to choose between the systems, it becomes clear that the situation is not that simple. There are pros and cons to each methodology. Although any NFL team can become a contender, they have lost their sense of personality. With millions behind them, the great managers of Europe can build teams that fit their philosophy, allowing teams to retain a visible and notable style of play that extends to the teams outside of the elite.

It seems that an increasing response, at least among vocal sports fans, is "neither". While both systems have their strengths and weaknesses, neither of them is particularly forgiving to the fan. Both the EPL and the NFL have become dominated by the rich fan, the tourist or the corporate interest, the prototypical beer-swilling working-class fans of the earlier years of the sport having been priced-out by ticket and concession prices (especially in terms of taking kids to games), creating an atmosphere decried both by ESPN-haters in the US and by football lovers in the UK, including Roy Keane's famous dismissal of the new "prawn-sandwich brigade" fans attending Manchester United matches.

One area that crucially is different between the two countries is how the creation of new teams is treated. When Manchester United was bought by the Glazers, Americans who also own the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, a group of Manchester United fans got together in protest, which eventually turned into fan groups pooling money and starting a new team, Football Club United of Mancester, or FCUM for short. They've already made it to the Premier League, even if it's the Unibond Northern Premier League, Division One North, a full 7 levels of football below Manchester United.

Compare this to the NFL, which has no lower divisions and if one wanted to start a new team, say in Los Angeles, you would need approval of the League's commissioner as well as the Board of Directors, as well as a metric fuckton of money, as well as a possible stadium location, etc. As a communalist system, the NFL works on stringently controlling all aspects of the sport, especially the economic ones, making it extremely difficult for newcomers to break into the game.

The fact that both the Manchester United supporters who left to support FCUM, as well as the Wimbledon supporters who started AFC Wimbledon after the original Wimbledon FC was moved to Milton Keynes, is a strong argument for the viability of the more entrepreneurial sporting system in the UK, even if the financial maneuverings at the top of that system are regarded as the catalyst for these groups of supporters having to"take back" their teams.

At the same time, the system as set up in England creates a situation where, like other businesses, a club can fail to the point of disappearing. Leeds United have always been one of the larger clubs and in 2001 they were one of the pretenders to the throne, even appearing in the Champion's League semi-finals. Today, they've been relegated to the third division of English football, complete with a 15 point deduction to start the season thanks to shaky financial dealings which at one point threatened the club with liquidation. Smaller clubs are continually having to deal with what's called "asset stripping" as owners take over the club with the main intention of leveraging the club's property as real estate, often leaving clubs with nowhere to play.

I'm left wondering if there isn't a sweet spot in the middle ground, possibly along the lines of the NBA's soft cap and luxury tax, some way to allow the big clubs to spend money if they want while allowing smaller clubs to maintain a certain level of competitive edge, creating leagues with discernible styles for their different teams and some financial oversight on teams that might otherwise be run into the ground. There's no way to bring back the past; however, that doesn't mean that future disasters are in any way inevitable.

Rosco's Lotto Fever - version 2

2007-06-26T16:31:00.000-07:00

Oh. My. God. The Draft is like totally almost here. And yes, despite my hate last year on Isiah and the Knicks - they actually proved me wrong - did slightly better than expected and didn't rig the draft. In fact, my Portland Trailblazers (and apparently a lot of people's Portland Trailblazers - which was a surprise to me - it seems like there are a FEW more Blazer fans out there post Lottery Draft) have the first pick. I can't tell you how elated I was that day - or any day since - let's just say more than one pair of undershorts have been soiled.

But, let's get on with the mock lotto draft action - because, well, because if you have a website, you are required to do an NBA mock draft - it's written somewhere. Most will be way wrong - but I plan on being the wrongest.

1. Portland Trailblazers - Greg Oden (C Ohio State)
Holy crap, do I want to write Kevin Durant in there soooo much.... But, I'll be unbelievably happy to have a charismatic guy like Oden. He was pretty much a force against all those not-so-great doughy white guys in the Big Ten - and the in the tournament, he wasn't too shabby either. I'll be alright with him putting up 18 and 12 a night. But, for the love of God, can we get someone exciting to watch...like -

2. Seattle Supersonics - Kevin Durant (SF Texas)
- Yeah - a stud, no doubt about it. This guy is pre-packaged goodness (like a mint condition 1982 Snake Eyes with Uzi still in his box). What I wouldn't give for the second pick in the draft - Effin' Sonics. This guy did stuff on the court I had never seen anyone ever do - and the second time he made that Acie Law shut up!

3. Atlanta Hawks - Yi Jianlan (SF/PF China)
Okay, this one I am picking based on the pick - not necessarily Atlanta - because if Atlanta had it's way it'd probably screw this pick up something awful. But it's not really their fault - who should you take at #3 where there isn't someone just as good? But still, Atlanta = not good.

4. Memphis Grizzlies - Mike Conley (PG Ohio State)
Yep. I said it - Damon Stoudamire not good enough. Oh, and they totally DIDN'T tank, no, they just didn't have the talent, that's all - karma had nothing to do with them losing the lottery. Nope. Not a bit.

5. Boston Celtics - Al Horford (PF Florida)
Why when they have Al Jefferson? Because Danny Ainge is not a good GM - not at all. You know that everyone in the front office told him, "Don't talk to Kevin Durant, don't - STOP! Oh God!" Also, not karma - nope.

6. Milwaukee Bucks - Joakim Noah (PF/C Florida)
Well, Bucks, you should probably get some backup help for Bogut and Villenueva, since they were all injured and all. I mean, you wouldn't put them on the injured list just to better your odds at the draft lottery, would you? That's what I thought - get the insurance in Noah - he won'y break in two once he matches up against Dwight Howard at all.

7. Minnesota Timberwolves - Jeff Green (Sf/PF Georgetown)
What is this? The worst GM awards? Go with a safe pick McHale. You and your 80s Celtics teammates are stinking up the front offices. Safe. Solid. Pick.

8. Charlotte Bobcats - Brandan Wright (PF North Carolina)
Why not? What the hell do you guys need? All your starters are under 26 and are, well, decent, if not unspectacular. Take the guy before he becomes a steal before someone else.

9. Chicago Bulls - Corey Brewer (SF Florida)
No needs? No problem. Take the best guy still available - that's mini-fro Brewer. Sure the Augmon comparisons abound - but that's not a bad thing. Plus Brewer is biodegradable - more earth friendly than plastic - so the environuts should be all over him.

10. Sacramento Kings - Spencer Hawes (C Washington)
Oh man, this franchise is a sinking ship. Everyone jump off now - not so fast, Mike Bibby. Why not take the next Dollar Store version of Brad Miller, especially since about now Brad Miller is the Dime Store version of Brad Miller.

11. Atlanta Hawks - Acie Law (PG Texas A&M)
You told Kevin to shut up in game one. I respect that. But, I also hate you. But, secretly like you. Go git 'em, Acie.

12. Philadelphia 76ers - Al Thornton (SF/PF Florida State)
What's better than one uber-athletic small forward that can jump out of the gym and wow the crowd with dunking hijinks? Two of 'em. But, expect Dalembert, Miller, and Korver to be gone - only so that the 76ers can secede from the NBA and become the basketball version of Cirque de Soleil.

13. New Orleans Hornets - Thaddeus Young (SF Georgia Tech)
Nice upside on this kid. And well, let's face it, Desmond Mason isn't doing much with his all-gold contract - so might as well find a replacement - someone that Chris Paul can pass to with a little confidence.

14. Los Angeles Clippers - Julian Wright (SF Kansas)
All this means is: Pack your things, Corey!

Okay, well there you go, I am going to be completely wrong - but that's fine, because it's going to be a good one. Oh, and you Portland fans out there (and you newly adopted fans) make sure you watch the whole shebang - because if you're not expecting anything between #1 and number #37, you're going to miss out...