10/18/11 A-a-a-r-rgh!
People don't like losing, but they hate being cheated more. Losing is saddening, being cheated is blood boiling. If you've ever listened to sports talk radio you know this first-hand. Or first-ear if there is such a thing.
Fans rather easily come to terms with a loss where their team just got beat. They blame the players and coaching, but they can accept it. The old "You can't win them all" attitude. Or maybe the old "Sometimes you win, sometimes you loose" philosophy. Either way, fans may not like it, but they get over it.
On the other hand, sports fans go ballistic when the officials blow a call that lost their team a game, especially a call that let the opponent cheat and get away with it. The controversy will be bigger news than any other loss. Fans will bitch about it for years. English soccer fans are still bitter about a disallowed goal against Germany in the World Cup some 40 years ago.
You might dismiss such sport controversies as a tempest in a tea pot. However the same thing applies to life in general. When a person fails in life or business through their own faulty decisions and efforts, they can accept it with some amount of equanimity. They don't like it, but in a fair system they figure they had a shot and the failure is largely their own.
But if a person gets a raw deal from the powers that be, they get cheated by a corrupt system, that creates anger. The type of anger that can generate revolt. People who blame themselves are not easily roused, folks who feel victimized are. Revolutionaries appeal to the outrage of being cheated. "Unfair!" is a good rallying cry, "We blew it!" not so much.
Then again, if things are unfair in their advantage... people can be philosophical about that, too. Especially if the cheating can be blamed on someone else.
Sports has a bevy of cliches, one being "It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game." People like to think this is the case. To a degree it might be. But there's also this quote from Vince Lombardi, "Winning isn't the most important thing, it's the only thing." So then, what happens when the system is so corrupt the only way to win is by cheating? Will people live by the cliche or the quote?
5/25/11 100!
On March 2, 1962 the Philadelphia Warriors beat the New York Knicks 169-147. While this might sound like a ridiculously high-scoring game, back then not so much as offence and "outscore the other team" was the name of the game. Of course, the real name of the game was basketball. But I digress.
So the game wasn't notable for the total points scored, but it did have one incredible distinction. One Warrior player, Wilt Chamberlain, scored 100 points.
This is one of those records they like to say can never be broken. And unless the way the game is played changes, I'd have to agree. Not only did Chamberlain tally a century in a single game, for the season he averaged an amazing 50 points per game. Another record unlikely to be broken.
Here's the kicker, both records were set before there was a three-point shot.
2/8/11 Superbowl Win IV
Congratulations to the Green Bay Packers for winning their fourth Superbowl. Thus the smallest city in the NFL increases their historic best total of NFL championships to thirteen. I guess you might call Green Bay the biggest small town in America. With apologies to Reno.
Anyway Aaron Rogers becomes the third different quarterback to lead the Packers to Superbowl victory. Previously there was Bart Starr, hall-of-famer, and Bret Favre, shoe-in hall-of-famer. Now we add Rogers who, if he keeps playing as he has the last few seasons, is a likely hall-of-famer.
Compare that to my hometown team, the Detroit Lions whose Superbowl record is, well, they've never even been to a Superbowl. Over the time period there's been a Superbowl the Motor City Kitties have had QBs the likes of Greg Landry, Gary Dannielson, Eric Hipple, Scott Mitchel, Joey Harrington... a completely forgettable lot. No Superbowls, no super quarterbacks. Think there might be a connection there?
12/30/10 Casual Sportsman of the Year
Though it's unclear how to compare athletes or accomplishments in different sports we do it anyway with athlete-of-the-year awards. I mean, how many homeruns is a TD worth? Is it records broken that matter or is it headlines or victories or consistent high level of performance or championships or what? So then, let's admit the selection will be pulled out of our arse and get on with it.
The Casual Sportsman of the Year goes to Jimmie Johnson for winning his fifth straight NASCAR championship, the Nextel Cup.
Though you might ask, should Jimmie Johnson get the honor or the number 48 car? Or maybe the crew chief, engineers, or even the owner? On the other hand, while five years in a row is pretty impressive it means I'm including the four previous years for an award for this year. I guess you could argue with that. Which is OK since you can argue with most anything about this type of award. Sports fans love a good argument. And a bad argument. Arguing about sports is practically a sport itself. Isn't that basically what sports-talk radio is all about?
Though Jimmie Johnson repeated, 2010 was a year of firsts. Or at least first in a long time. Which isn't really a first, but play along.
First-Time and First-in-a-Long-Time Champs of 2010
Spain wins the World Cup
New Orleans Saints win the Superbowl
San Francisco Giants win the World Series
Chicago Blackhawks win the Stanley Cup
The first two are true firsts. The Giants (1954) and the Blackhawks (1961) last won championships before I remember. Making them firsts of sorts. Sort-of like if I didn't personally witness it, maybe it didn't really happen. Though it is the first World Series title since the Giants moved from New York to San Francisco. For the Blackhawks, I think 49 years counts as a long time. Anyway, that's longer than the Saints or the Superbowl have been in existence.
Now then, first in a long time will only apply to teams which last longer than the individual players. After all it's pretty unlikely a race car driver can go 49 years between championships.
11/15/10 Not Too Little Too Late
We at the Casual Sportsman can take our sports in smaller doses than your normal sportsman. Just one of the things that make us as casual as the name implies. We've already admitted to being fair weather fans. We don't bother watching our favorite team when they stink. We're in it for the fun and that's no fun.
Another way we reduce the dosage is with the end-of-game tune-in. That is, if we're not all that interested to see a particular game on tv, we tune in late. This could be in the 7th inning, fourth quarter, third period, and so on.
If the game is close we will watch the rest. After all, our team has a chance to win, hooray! or lose, rats! In either case there is drama in a close game. Whether this translates to real excitement isn't always the case, but close games just seem more exciting. Sometimes fake excitement is real enough.
If our team is getting the snot knocked out of them we tune right back out. Why bother watching them lose, which ain't any fun. Then there's the added benefit of knowing we didn't waste a lot more time watching it slowly and painfully unfurl from the beginning. Take the bitter pill in one quick dose, and go on to something else.
If our team is way ahead we will watch the rest. Hey, it's fun to watch them win even if we don't see it all. We do get to see the best bit for satisfaction, the game end in victory. True, we missed a lot of action and fine plays and all that, but there's always highlights and recaps. After all, we're casual, so that's enough. If it weren't we'd be the Avid Sportsman.
Which means on any given sunday the Casual Sportsman might watch more post-game show than live football. As casual as we are we like to see the highlights and know the scores. We even sort-of follow the standings. Though the farther down the rankings our team is the less we care. Being fair weather fans we're only in it for the good times.
Some people can't get enough sports on tv, others go for none at all. We fall somewhere between the two. We're like the Baby Bear of sports, not too hot, not too cold, just right. Or would that be Goldilocks? Whatever.
Which is sort-of the Casual Sportsman's casual battle cry, "Whatever!"
9/24/10 The Season Turns
Ah, autumn. When the weather turns crisp and the leaves turn color. Autumn, when mother nature turns the page from long days to long nights. Autumn, when a man's fancy turns to love... of football.
We at the Casual Sportsman turn our thoughts to football. These are not deep thoughts, constant thoughts, informed thoughts, or intense thoughts. Which is to say, we really haven't thought about it much so far. There are no visions of Sugarbowls dancing in our heads.
Still, football seems America's favorite team sport and football fans seem more fanatical than other sports fans. I would suggest several reasons for this: short season, violence, television, and gambling.
By short season I mean fewer games. Baseball season is 162 games, hockey and basketball about half that. NFL football is 16 games. Meaning each and every game is important, almost like a playoff game. Any one week can make or break a season. Not really, but it seems like it.
What's more spectacular than a car crash? Nothing gets a hockey fan's attention like a big hit. Football is a game of men the size of small cars running at and hitting each other. On every play!
Football was almost designed for television. Most of the time is run off between plays in unpiling, returning onside, huddles, lining up and barking signals at the line before the action itself begins. This provides lots of time for replays, watching the collisions over and over and over. It's like having four games of action in one game.
Not only that, football plays are fast and furious and things happen all over the place. It's hard to keep track of it all. But if you can see the same play four ways from four angles in slo-mo, you actually begin to understand what happened. This is invaluable for fans like the Casual Sportsman. It makes us feel smart, despite being largely clueless about the nitty-gritty of the game.
Whoever invented the point spread was a genius. Despite the fable, nobody would bet on a tortoise to beat a hare in a 100 yard dash. If you gave the tortoise a 99 yard head start, then you might get some betting action. The point spread makes every game a toss-up for the gambler so everyone can bet on their favorite team, no matter how bad, and still have a chance to win. Or cover the spread at any rate. That's like a moral victory with a payoff.
Now, the Casual Sportsman doesn't bet on football or any other sport, but we watch football on tv. So we get three out of four, which ain't bad. That's like a .750 batting average. But that's baseball so might not really apply. Still, being 75% fanatic might be a good amount. Better to be 25% sane than totally insane.
8/24/10 World Cup Afterthought
Why are there so many national teams from the UK in FIFA? There's an England team and a Scotland team. And I think a Wales team and a Northern Ireland team, too. On the other hand, there's no Bavaria team, Prussia team, and a Sturm and Taxis team, there's only a Germany team. One team for the whole country. What's so special about the UK it has more than one?
After all, doesn't UK mean United Kingdom? If they're so united why the separate teams? No other country splits its soccer effort up that way. Why do they do it? How did this happen? What does the rest of the world think about the UK having multiple teams when everyone else only gets one each?
It's not like the UK was only recently united. Not that long ago Germany had two teams, East and West, but since reunification now have one. Korea has two, but then there are two Koreas. What gives? Is the UK a single country or an empire of several countries? They only have one queen, right? Heck, the Prince of Wales will become the King of England some day.
Makes you wonder. Well, even if it doesn't make you wonder, it makes me wonder.
On a related but non-sports note, this division within the UK explains the Union Jack. It's actually three flags in one. First is Saint George's cross, which is England. Next is Saint Andrew's cross, for Scotland. Finally there's Saint Patrick's cross, representing Ireland, or Northern Ireland since the rest of Ireland became independent.
You might wonder, what happened to Wales, where's the Welsh flag in the Union Jack. That flag, a red dragon on a white over green field, is not incorporated because Wales was considered part of England when the first Union Jack was devised in 1606 which combined only the flags of England and Scotland. Ireland, and the red X, was added in 1801.
Now then, if you're Scottish you might not care for that dominating Saint George's cross. In which case you might prefer the flag have Saint Andrew's cross over it, as below left. That wouldn't sit well with someone from Northern Ireland who might like to see it as at the center left. If Wales finally were included, perhaps they could add a Welsh dragon as at the center right. Though maybe the dragon is a bit much, an alternative might be to add the green field from the bottom of the Welsh flag as at the far right.
Since the UK is so fond of combining flags, why not combine the soccer teams while they're at it? Just a thought.
6/10/10 World Cup 2010 Team Rundowns (In which I run down the teams.)
A soccer curmudgeon's view. With apologies to everyone, everywhere. Which is what FIFA should also do as they rule this misbegotten excuse for a sport.
You don't have to read between the lines to see I'm not enamored of soccer or the World Cup. I played soccer and enjoyed it. Though I found it more fun to play than to watch. To confess, I found it more fun to practice than to play. Maybe I just don't get it. Then again, maybe I do, the rest of the world doesn't get it that soccer is over-rated.
Be that as it may, here at the Casual Sportsman we feel it is incumbent to comment on the major sporting ados of the day, however casually.
The usual suspects (These four have won most of the World Cups and been in most of the finals. Don't be surprised if history repeats.)
Brazil: Poetry in motion, the embodiment of "the beautiful game." At least they try to make soccer entertaining. Which unfortunately is like putting lipstick on a pig. No surprise if they win yet another Cup.
Germany: Their game is Teutonic power soccer where they run at you, over you or through you. Would you expect anything less from Germans? Have lost more finals than anyone else, a lot like their war record actually. Could be the same this year.
Argentina: Imagine short Spanish-speaking Germans trying to play like Brazilians and you get Argentine soccer. Never as good as they think they are, but better than everyone else would like them to be. Will "the hand of God" help them this tournament or will they just get the Finger? I say the latter.
Italy: The anti-Brazil, win with defense. Motto: "winning ugly is beautiful." The world Cup will likely be ugly as usual, but it doesn't mean Italy will win it. That's just soccer.
The woulda-couldas (Won a few between them. Be surprised if one of them takes home the gold.)
Uruguay: Won two cups. 80 years ago. Their future is all behind them. The elusive third cup will elude them again.
England: The Brits seem to celebrate their glorious failures. Think Dunkirk and the charge of the light brigade. They will have more to celebrate this year. Last world cup 40 years and counting. Keep on counting.
France: Some call team France "the Brazil of Europe" for their style of play. A style which might produce more cups if they fielded Brazilian players instead of Frenchmen. Don't look for the cup in France this time around.
The also-rans (Be very surprised.)
Spain: Latin passion. Latin flair. Latin under-achievement. At least they're consistent. No mas this time around? Si, mas. No Cup.
Netherlands: They've been called the Clockwork Orange. But the mainspring has come unsprung and their time is over. No Cup for the Dutch.
Sweden: Organized, disciplined, strong, tall, blond. Look better than they play. Usually do better than expected which still hasn't won them a Cup. The Swedes won't again.
USA: All the best American athletes play real football, not futbol. What will they do in the big show on the big stage? Does America care? The answer to both questions, not much.
China: More good acrobats and divers come out of China than soccer players. If soccer were more about acrobatics and diving... wait a minute, it is. China just might win the World Cup!
Everybody else: I don't know and I don't much care. To be honest, I don't even know who qualified.
That's it, whatever it is. Hope it helps your brackets and betting pool. Though I wouldn't bet on it.
5/10/10 Do Upsets Upset You?
It's playoff time in the NBA and NHL. If they are anything like March Madness in the NCAA we can expect the unexpected, meaning we can count on upsets. As you know, whenever the decided underdog beats the overwhelming favorite, David beats Goliath, they call it an upset. Ever wonder why, where the usage comes from?
One might suspect it derives from the common meanings of the word upset. As in when you upset something over you knock it over. You know, like upset the apple cart. Or perhaps it comes from the reaction of over-confident fans or players who when beaten are bitterly disappointed, angry, they're upset.
Neither of these speculations is correct. The term is actually an eponym, a word derived from a proper name. Like boycott after Charles Boycott or spoonerism from the Reverend Spooner for instance. Only in this case it doesn't come from a person but an animal. You can trace the usage of upset back to the Sport of Kings, horse racing.
One of the greatest racehorses ever was the legendary Man O' War. In his racing career he started 21 races and won 20. "Big Red" as he was sometimes called was only beaten once, in the Sanford Memorial. The horse he lost to was a 100-1 longshot, a supreme underdog by the name of... Upset.
Afterwards the name of Upset was used by sportswriters to describe when other favorites were beaten unexpectedly. As in "pulled an Upset." Eventually the name Upset became synonymous with such an event and it lost the upper case "U" transforming into a true eponym, upset.
Which meaning of the word upset the horse Upset was named for, I don't know. Though it is curious we accent different syllables depending on which meaning, 'UP-set' in the sporting sense and 'up-SET' in the other cases.
For a little color, here's Upset's jockey, Willie Knapp, describing the race: "We'd passed the quarter pole and were going to the eighth pole, I guess it was, and I heard something right behind me and I knew it was Big Red coming at me now. I looked back and there he was. Johnny Loftus was riding like a crazy man and he yelled at me, 'Move out, Willie! I'm coming through!' So I yelled back at him, 'Take off! Take off me, bum, or I'll put you through the rail!' Then I set down to riding and we won."
2/23/10 Olympic Ague
Perhaps you're a fan of the Olympic Winter Games now underway in Vancouver. Then again, perhaps not. Let's face it, winter sports don't appeal to everyone. Especially folks who live in lands where winter doesn't bring snow and ice. The summer games are just more popular for people who only ever encounter ice in their cocktails.
However there might be a way to make the winter sports appeal to denizens of warmer climes whether they drink their potables neat or on the rocks. If you think about it, NBA basketball is played in the winter. Indoors, of course, but wintertime nonetheless. Switch basketball to the winter olympics and you'll grow the audience instantaneously. After all, hockey is played indoors, too.
Sure, it's a goofy idea, but maybe some think the entire winter games are a goofy idea. Face it, some people just don't like sports in any weather come rain or shine, hell or high water.
1/31/10 SuperBowl Excelivey
The SuperBowl is the most-watched sports event on the planet. Then again, maybe the World Cup is. But the latter is only every four years. So let's say the SuperBowl is the biggest annual game in the world. And if that's not right, the SuperBowl is the biggest annual sports event in the English-speaking world. Whatever, it doesn't matter. It's just my intro for...
The Casual Sportsman's 10 Keys to SuperBowl victory.
1. The best offense is a good defense. Let the defense play offense.
2. The game will be played north to south. Remember which way you're headed.
3. You have to play it one down at a time. Though sometimes you have to repeat a down because of penalties. In which case... I don't know.
4. Give 100% effort in the first half. In the second half give the rest.
5. Don't leave points on the field, put them on the scoreboard where they belong.
6. Always know where you are on the field. And where the field is.
7. Special teams need to be special, but not special needs special.
8. Keep your mind in the game and the game in your mind and avoid mind games.
9. Protect the ball. Protect your quarterback. Protect your field position. Protect your lead. Protect your pass protection. Protect... I guess that's it.
10. Above all, score more points than the other team.
I'm sure the serious football experts would have a different list, being experts and serious and all. Though I would say nobody really cares or remembers all the various keys to the game lists anyway. I mean, when's the last heated debate you're ever heard about them? And sports fans love lists and heated debates and heated debates over lists. Especially if a list is rankings of any sort.
Heated sports debate seems almost a sport itself. Or a business, sports talk radio. I suppose you could come up with a list of the top ten most heated sports debates. Perhaps this would inspire heated debate itself. Where does it all end? Right here, for me, for now. The end, fine, full stop, period.
12/19/09 Bigger and Less and Better?
What's with the proliferation of talking heads on NFL pre-game shows? Do we really need a bar-length desk of five or more ex-jocks and retired coaches jawjacking about the games? What do they propose is gained by having so much overlapping cross-talk of big men in tight suits?
Maybe it's a sign of the modern audience's short attention span where we can't listen to one mouth more than the length of an extended sound bite. Then again, perhaps the ever increasing line-ups is simply a way of filling up the new wide-screen format of DTV.
Speaking of filling up, have you ever seen a group of men that fill out a suit like ex football players? Wonder how that sports homunculus, Bob Costas feels crammed into the veritable on-screen huddle of behemoths. Wonder if he has a special chair or sits on a phone book (or in his case a thesaurus).
Football inflation doesn't apply only to NFL pregame shows. Have you seen the size of these guys lately? Six foot five, 325 pound linemen. Can you imagine being run into by one of these gargantuans at full tilt intent on separated you from the ball and maybe your head from your shoulders while he's at it?
What gets me is the recent habit of modern players to forego the padding which seemed necessary in a previous age. Check it out, they don't wear knee pads, thigh pads or kidney pads any more. I have heard many of them don't even sport cups. Shoulder pads have gotten smaller so it appears they're wearing pads from their peewee football days. Even the uniforms have shrunk to form-fitting proportions and the sleeves of the jerseys have almost disappeared so the stripes are now on the shoulders.
On the other hand, many quarterbacks seem all puffy in the midriff. That's because they wear a type of flack jacket to protect their ribs. If I remember correctly, this was pioneered by Archie Manning playing with cracked ribs back in the day.
The human body wasn't designed to sustain so much punishment, was it? I just wonder what kind of shape these guys will be in when they reach 50 years old or so. How many will wind up on crutches, punch drunk and mumbling semi-coherently about the football wars? They can't all be sports talking heads no matter how big the pregame show sets get.