Tonight was supposed to be about a certain professional athlete brandishing a gun in a locker room, instead its going to be about something that is possibly just as troubling and could explain why this type of behavior seems to be so common place.
While watching a local high school girl's basketball game a young lady was called for a foul, fair enough, they happen every game no big deal. Until she decides to start yelling at the ref, she is then given the technical. Now according to team rules that denotes the player being benched the remainder of the game. Instead of her taking the bench, she continues to get into a shouting match with the ref for which she is given her second technical and subsequently ejected from the game and no longer permitted near the court. All of this occurred within a five second span in the second quarter. The player goes into the locker room only to emerge during halftime when the rest of the team comes out.
The girls behavior is completely inexcusable and that is evident to every adult in the arena, with the exception of said player's mother. The mother does not seem to realize that her sixteen year old daughter disrespected her team, teammates, school, coach, athletic faculty, and the referees. Instead she blames the coach for being too hard on her child. Twice in the season a player has gotten a technical foul and both times those players sat on the bench the remainder of the game with no issue, but for some reason this mother and this parent seem to think they should be the exception.
I'm not saying this situation is directly related to what recently happened in Washington, but if parents do not hold themselves and their children responsible for these types of actions, then when will they learn what is wrong and what is right? When a player joins a team, there are a certain set of rules they need to follow, if they don't they have to face the consequences. If every parent treated their child like this coach, these referees, and this team treated this player maybe there would not be the issue of athletes attempting to live by a different set of rules. It should be up to the parent to teach this and not high school coaches.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Monday, January 4, 2010
To Play or Not to Play
In the past two weeks the very foundation of the NFL playoff system may have been shaken. The Colts decided not to go for "The Perfect Season" and rested their starters in Weeks 16, giving the 7-7 Jets the chance to stay in the playoff hunt. In Week 17 the Bengals utilized a vanilla game plan and spent much of the second half with backup players playing. In a two week span the New York Jets went from 7-7 and in the back of the pack in the run for a wildcard spot to 9-7 and the fifth seed in the AFC and teams like the Steelers and Texans lost out due to the Colts' and Bengals' treating these games like exhibition games.. Now there are rumblings that these teams should have played there starters and something must be done to uphold the integrity of the league.
A team that does well enough throughout the season has the right to rest players to avoid injuries. That is the luxury of performing well throughout the season, the Colts were 14-0 with nothing to gain from playing their starters down the stretch. The Bengals were 10-5 and guaranteed a home playoff game, they had nothing to gain by risking injury. This is done every season, a team has a great season and knows they will be in the playoffs and have the opportunity to give other players playing time and avoid injury to their stars.
The other side of the argument is the competitive balance that is affected by these teams. Pittsburgh and Houston may have a legitimate argument, but, had Pittsburgh defeated Kansas City or Cleveland or Oakland, teams that combined to go 14-34, they would not have to worry about the tie-breaking procedures or depend on the Jets to lose. Houston on the other hand, could have defeated the Jets when they played in Week One, and they would be in the playoffs rather than readying for free agency.
There are still teams that decide to play to win the game down the stretch, risking injury and fatigue to maintain the team's timing and consistency. The Patriots experienced the ultimate downside to this theory, the loss of the league leader in receptions for the playoffs, Wes Welker.
Resting the starters is no guarantee of a successful postseason, teams seem to be negatively affected by the time off, only one time in the past decade has a team been a top seed and won the Super Bowl (04 Patriots). Over this span teams have been forced to play themselves into the playoffs and ride that momentum to a successful postseason run.
So who is right?
Who knows, the NFL does not like resting starters because hard working fans do not want to pay money to see backups and practice squad players in Week 17. But, what would happen if Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, or Drew Brees were forced to play, only to be injured and miss the playoffs? Would the average fan rather see backups in the regular season and starters in the playoffs or vice-versa? The right answer is...
Whatever the coach decides to do, after all he has positioned his team to have that luxury.
A team that does well enough throughout the season has the right to rest players to avoid injuries. That is the luxury of performing well throughout the season, the Colts were 14-0 with nothing to gain from playing their starters down the stretch. The Bengals were 10-5 and guaranteed a home playoff game, they had nothing to gain by risking injury. This is done every season, a team has a great season and knows they will be in the playoffs and have the opportunity to give other players playing time and avoid injury to their stars.
The other side of the argument is the competitive balance that is affected by these teams. Pittsburgh and Houston may have a legitimate argument, but, had Pittsburgh defeated Kansas City or Cleveland or Oakland, teams that combined to go 14-34, they would not have to worry about the tie-breaking procedures or depend on the Jets to lose. Houston on the other hand, could have defeated the Jets when they played in Week One, and they would be in the playoffs rather than readying for free agency.
There are still teams that decide to play to win the game down the stretch, risking injury and fatigue to maintain the team's timing and consistency. The Patriots experienced the ultimate downside to this theory, the loss of the league leader in receptions for the playoffs, Wes Welker.
Resting the starters is no guarantee of a successful postseason, teams seem to be negatively affected by the time off, only one time in the past decade has a team been a top seed and won the Super Bowl (04 Patriots). Over this span teams have been forced to play themselves into the playoffs and ride that momentum to a successful postseason run.
So who is right?
Who knows, the NFL does not like resting starters because hard working fans do not want to pay money to see backups and practice squad players in Week 17. But, what would happen if Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, or Drew Brees were forced to play, only to be injured and miss the playoffs? Would the average fan rather see backups in the regular season and starters in the playoffs or vice-versa? The right answer is...
Whatever the coach decides to do, after all he has positioned his team to have that luxury.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Manny Being Manny
Manny Ramirez is at it again.
No he's not going behind the Green Monster to relieve himself in the middle of an inning, he's not climbing the outfield wall to high five a fan in the middle of a play, and he's not attempting to trade himself for Brett Favre, its much worse this time.
Manny Ramirez is quite frankly one of the best hitters of his or any other time. At the age of 36 he is in the top 20 in career Home runs, Runs batted in, and Slugging Percentage, to go along with a career .315 batting average. He entered 2009 with 30 or more home runs and 100 or more RBI in ten of his last eleven seasons. He has not failed to hit at least 20 home runs since 1994 and was off to a tremendous start this season until.....
Reports came out that he tested positive for a banned substance.
ESPN, MLB, CNN, and Yahoo are all over it.
This revelation just puts another black eye on the face of baseball. The sports' biggest stars continue to disappoint teams, fans, officials, and the history of the sport. Long past are the days of Babe Ruth when hot dogs and beer were the worst things going into the players' bodies. With players seemingly falling under suspicion and testing positive every other month, how far back can we be certain that players were not using? Is Cal Ripken's streak a product of "performance enhancing drugs", can one really expect that a 185 lbs Ken Griffey Jr was really capable of multiple 50+ home run season without a little help? Are the days of Hank Aaron and Willie Mays so far gone that the players will openly risk the game's and their own integrity in order to better themselves? One also has to wonder who else is currently using? Are Albert Pujols, Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, and Miguel Cabrera really beyond suspicion any more?
In Manny's defense, he has stated "Recently I saw a physician for a personal health issue. He gave me a medication, not a steroid, which he thought was OK to give me". To which I actually believe. You see, Manny has never been seen as the guy to make the best decision. He has always danced to his own little tune. He's always had his own way of doing everything and making the right decision does not seem to come naturally to him. I have always been a fan of Ramirez, and I don't understand how you cannot be. The guy makes baseball fun and despite the quest for the bigger contract, I really think he enjoys the game. He's fun, he's entertaining, and he's good, but now, he also has a fifty game suspension.
Bravo to Major League Baseball for sticking to its guns. You set a precedent, and you followed through despite one of the most marketable players, best team, and biggest markets is involved. Baseball needs to be cleaned up, despite who's expense it is at.
Manny, you're a great asset to the sport, but, make wise decisions, you just received over twenty million dollars to play baseball this season, spare $500,000, and pay someone to check your prescription and compare it to the baseball illegal drug list. Or, don't, after all you are Manny and you're being the only thing you know how to be, yourself.
No he's not going behind the Green Monster to relieve himself in the middle of an inning, he's not climbing the outfield wall to high five a fan in the middle of a play, and he's not attempting to trade himself for Brett Favre, its much worse this time.
Manny Ramirez is quite frankly one of the best hitters of his or any other time. At the age of 36 he is in the top 20 in career Home runs, Runs batted in, and Slugging Percentage, to go along with a career .315 batting average. He entered 2009 with 30 or more home runs and 100 or more RBI in ten of his last eleven seasons. He has not failed to hit at least 20 home runs since 1994 and was off to a tremendous start this season until.....
Reports came out that he tested positive for a banned substance.
ESPN, MLB, CNN, and Yahoo are all over it.
This revelation just puts another black eye on the face of baseball. The sports' biggest stars continue to disappoint teams, fans, officials, and the history of the sport. Long past are the days of Babe Ruth when hot dogs and beer were the worst things going into the players' bodies. With players seemingly falling under suspicion and testing positive every other month, how far back can we be certain that players were not using? Is Cal Ripken's streak a product of "performance enhancing drugs", can one really expect that a 185 lbs Ken Griffey Jr was really capable of multiple 50+ home run season without a little help? Are the days of Hank Aaron and Willie Mays so far gone that the players will openly risk the game's and their own integrity in order to better themselves? One also has to wonder who else is currently using? Are Albert Pujols, Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, and Miguel Cabrera really beyond suspicion any more?
In Manny's defense, he has stated "Recently I saw a physician for a personal health issue. He gave me a medication, not a steroid, which he thought was OK to give me". To which I actually believe. You see, Manny has never been seen as the guy to make the best decision. He has always danced to his own little tune. He's always had his own way of doing everything and making the right decision does not seem to come naturally to him. I have always been a fan of Ramirez, and I don't understand how you cannot be. The guy makes baseball fun and despite the quest for the bigger contract, I really think he enjoys the game. He's fun, he's entertaining, and he's good, but now, he also has a fifty game suspension.
Bravo to Major League Baseball for sticking to its guns. You set a precedent, and you followed through despite one of the most marketable players, best team, and biggest markets is involved. Baseball needs to be cleaned up, despite who's expense it is at.
Manny, you're a great asset to the sport, but, make wise decisions, you just received over twenty million dollars to play baseball this season, spare $500,000, and pay someone to check your prescription and compare it to the baseball illegal drug list. Or, don't, after all you are Manny and you're being the only thing you know how to be, yourself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
