Date: 6/14/2010
Watching: Mariners vs. Cardinals
The St. Louis fans just gave a BIG cheer for Albert Pujols hitting an RBI single, even though they were already up 8-3 in the bottom of the 8th, it's not like the outcome was in doubt. But a.) they were appreciating a good at-bat (and did I only notice that because I'm constantly told how "good" and "knowledgeable" the St. Louis fan base is? But then, I have an eyewitness account from a co-worker that Rams fans are the nicest road fans he's ever encountered, so there may be something to it), and b.) he's their guy, their own personal superstar, and they want his numbers to be the best, so that everybody in the country knows: St. Louis has the best hitter in baseball. The closest Cincinnati's come to that in recent memory is Carson Palmer in 2005, and it's an intoxicating feeling. Everybody in the city feels it. I had just moved to Cincinnati from Dayton (only about 30 miles down the road), and the feeling was everywhere you went, the pride and excitement and happiness. Does that make sense? No. But the feeling is real, and wonderful. Of course, it helped that the reason I'd moved was to move in with my now-wife (I LOOOOVE you, puddin'!), so I was feeling pretty fantastic regardless. But the Palmer thing was a whole different kind of happiness.
During that Pujols at-bat, Aaron Boone (he really is an ESPN baseball analyst!) had just been talking about how batters may say they don't know what their average is, but they know, and guys like Pujols or Ichiro, when they start dipping around .300, they kick it up a notch. Which sort of ties into what I'd just been thinking about, that the ideal mentality of the sports fan is really very similar to the ideal mentality of the athlete: the same simultaneous forgetting and remembering the past, and the same simultaneous planning for and ignoring the future. Like, I shouldn't feel differently about the Reds based on whether they're .5 games in first or .5 games out of first, the difference between the two is miniscule. And I shouldn't feel differently about the Reds season than I would if they had the same record but they had been contenders in recent years. They're all independent events. And yet I do, and to some extend should, because the fact is they're NOT independent, both for the reasons that a.) players' performances generally don't jump around randomly; their path is chaotic, but continuous, and b.) nobody can really forget the past, and everybody knows that nobody can really forget the past. You know when your success is unexpected, you know that everybody else knows it, and that they're waiting for you to regress to the mean. And again, because sporting events are public ceremonies, the opinion of the masses is central, and will find some way to make itself felt. So players, and fans, need to have quantum memory, both present and absent at the same time.
In an unrelated note: ESPN is usually good at these things, but whoever designed their on-screen score graphic for baseball should be demoted to the horse racing division. Instead of just giving the count in the "3-2" format that has been working perfectly well for a hundred years, some genius changed it to "B:xxxS:xx:Oxx", where each of the x's is a little light that turns on as the count changes (green for balls, red for strikes, yellow for outs). Which is both less readable, and takes up MORE space, than the traditional format that again, has been working for a HUNDRED YEARS. I have NEVER heard anybody say, "If only there were an easier way to communicate the pitch count!" And thank you so much for condescending to me with your cutesy color scheme, jackass. "Oh, strikes are bad and balls are good? I never knew that!"
Some ESPN anchor just asked Pujols (I think it was Pujols, I heard it from the other room), whether he was optimistic that the Cardinals could "put some distance" between themselves and the Reds in the division. Excuse me?! The Reds are still in first place! I understand that you don't think they're going to stay there, and I even understand why, but at least acknowledge it! They'll have to catch us before they can put distance between us. Screw you, ESPN.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Late-Inning Drama
Date: 6/7/2010
Watching: Reds vs. Giants
The Reds home crowd believes in this team more than they have since 1999, if not 1994. The crowd just went nuts for Logan Ondrusek, putting the Giants down in order, with the Reds one run back. They believe that the Reds can come back, and knew it was vital to be only down one. We'll see if they were right, but they would never have cheered like that any time in the last 10 years. Plus, they're following closely enough to know that Ondrusek's performance is one of the keys to the Reds success, strange as that might seem.
Nope. They were wrong, Reds lose. But to be fair, Torres stole a double from Hernandez in the first at-bat, that would have completely changed the inning.
Watching: Reds vs. Giants
The Reds home crowd believes in this team more than they have since 1999, if not 1994. The crowd just went nuts for Logan Ondrusek, putting the Giants down in order, with the Reds one run back. They believe that the Reds can come back, and knew it was vital to be only down one. We'll see if they were right, but they would never have cheered like that any time in the last 10 years. Plus, they're following closely enough to know that Ondrusek's performance is one of the keys to the Reds success, strange as that might seem.
Nope. They were wrong, Reds lose. But to be fair, Torres stole a double from Hernandez in the first at-bat, that would have completely changed the inning.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Cincinnati, USA
Date: 6/6/2010
Listening to: Reds vs. Nationals
The problem with being a baseball fan is that every season, there's a new local commercial with a "catchy" jingle that plays like 4 or 5 times during every game, and it winds up being stuck in your head for MONTHs. Usually with the Reds it's a JTM commercial, but this year it's one by the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce or whatever, which consists entirely of a song about how great it would be to spend a week in Cincinnati. The lyrics along (example: We can go to King's Island, the Aquarium too! There's so many fun things to do!) can't really convey how awful it is to hear this song so many times. I have never wanted to go to Cincinnati less.
By the way, for those keeping track: Cordero definitely sucks. My lack of faith in him was justified once again today, when the Reds, down 2-1 going into the 9th, finally busted out for 3 runs to take a 4-2 lead, and Cordero promptly comes in and gives up 2 runs. Thankfully, the Reds pulled it out in the 10th, thus avoiding the humiliation of losing a series to the Nats. But Jesus Christ, something needs to be done. Marty Brennamen sounds like he's going to rush the field and attack him sometimes.
Listening to: Reds vs. Nationals
The problem with being a baseball fan is that every season, there's a new local commercial with a "catchy" jingle that plays like 4 or 5 times during every game, and it winds up being stuck in your head for MONTHs. Usually with the Reds it's a JTM commercial, but this year it's one by the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce or whatever, which consists entirely of a song about how great it would be to spend a week in Cincinnati. The lyrics along (example: We can go to King's Island, the Aquarium too! There's so many fun things to do!) can't really convey how awful it is to hear this song so many times. I have never wanted to go to Cincinnati less.
By the way, for those keeping track: Cordero definitely sucks. My lack of faith in him was justified once again today, when the Reds, down 2-1 going into the 9th, finally busted out for 3 runs to take a 4-2 lead, and Cordero promptly comes in and gives up 2 runs. Thankfully, the Reds pulled it out in the 10th, thus avoiding the humiliation of losing a series to the Nats. But Jesus Christ, something needs to be done. Marty Brennamen sounds like he's going to rush the field and attack him sometimes.
I hate sports
Date: 6/4/2010
Listening to: Reds vs. Nationals
Budweiser just ran a commercial making the point that "there are 24 happy hours in the world." This is sick! You shouldn't be making commercials encouraging people to drink beer at 9:00 in the morning! For fuck's sake!
Fandom is a disease, isn't it? I'm sitting here listening to this game (Reds down 4-2 going into the bottom of 8 in Washington, poised to lose their lead in the division), and I can't stop caring, and I can't stop listening and go off and do something productive. And it's not even that I think that I'm being naive to think they can win. For one thing, they can. And for another thing, it's that I shouldn't not be able to stop listening REGARDLESS of the situation! Because it doesn't mean anything. And I know it doesn't mean anything. In fact, the fact that it doesn't mean anything is a crucial part of it. We never like hearing about money, or business, or anything. It's SUPPOSED to be purely abstract and meaningless. So why can't I go wash some dishes, or go on Facebook or whatever (blogging to nobody hardly counts), or just do something real, until this game is over? It's a disease.
Sounds like the Nats have their own Cordero. I don't know how we didn't pull a double-switch and bring in Nix for Gomes, and thus be able to keep Rhodes in case they tie it up in the top of the ninth. If they don't it doesn't matter, and it's more likely they'll score 2 then 3. But hey, what do I know. Really. That might be a really dumb idea for some reason I don't know about.
If you told me that Jeff Brantley was drunk right now, I would believe you.
And the Reds lose. Meaning this activity I just devoted the last 3.5 hours of my life to has made me LESS happy. Fuck me.
Listening to: Reds vs. Nationals
Budweiser just ran a commercial making the point that "there are 24 happy hours in the world." This is sick! You shouldn't be making commercials encouraging people to drink beer at 9:00 in the morning! For fuck's sake!
Fandom is a disease, isn't it? I'm sitting here listening to this game (Reds down 4-2 going into the bottom of 8 in Washington, poised to lose their lead in the division), and I can't stop caring, and I can't stop listening and go off and do something productive. And it's not even that I think that I'm being naive to think they can win. For one thing, they can. And for another thing, it's that I shouldn't not be able to stop listening REGARDLESS of the situation! Because it doesn't mean anything. And I know it doesn't mean anything. In fact, the fact that it doesn't mean anything is a crucial part of it. We never like hearing about money, or business, or anything. It's SUPPOSED to be purely abstract and meaningless. So why can't I go wash some dishes, or go on Facebook or whatever (blogging to nobody hardly counts), or just do something real, until this game is over? It's a disease.
Sounds like the Nats have their own Cordero. I don't know how we didn't pull a double-switch and bring in Nix for Gomes, and thus be able to keep Rhodes in case they tie it up in the top of the ninth. If they don't it doesn't matter, and it's more likely they'll score 2 then 3. But hey, what do I know. Really. That might be a really dumb idea for some reason I don't know about.
If you told me that Jeff Brantley was drunk right now, I would believe you.
And the Reds lose. Meaning this activity I just devoted the last 3.5 hours of my life to has made me LESS happy. Fuck me.
A whole lotta baseball
Date: 6/2/2010
Watching: Reds vs. Cardinals (on ESPN!)
Ken Griffey, Jr. retired. This is what it's been to be a Reds fan: we got the one damn home run hitter in the entire game who didn't take steroids. Talk about a fucking rip off. The Cardinals got McGwire, the Cubs got Sosa, the Giants got Bonds, and they all got playoff runs out of them. And we get Ken Griffey, Jr., whose iconic image for the Reds will always be pulling up in pain running down the third base line in spring training. He had good seasons after that, but never another super-star season. I bet steroids would have fixed that right up. Son of a bitch.
(Another note, they got Aaron Boone, "ESPN Baseball Analyst" on the phone, and I can't help but think, did they get Aaron Boone on the phone, offer him a verbal contract to become an ESPN Anchor for 24 hours, put him on the phone with Baseball Tonight, and throw together that graphic? I think maybe they did. I mean, I could easily be wrong, maybe he's a real correspondent. I don't watch enough ESPN any more to be able to identify their third-string baseball correspondents. Back in the day I would have known all about him, I would have listened to him come up through the ranks, doing a segment on the radio, some remote spots for Baseball Tonight. Good Lord, what life must be like there, it's just as competitive as being a professional athlete (though your career lasts longer). Sean Salisbury was on a meteoric rise there for years, and now he's just completely gone (and rightly so, I have to say, I don't know what they ever saw in him).
Anyway, now the Reds are in first place, and being taken reasonably seriously. This is as exciting a position as they've been in in the last 5 years. A battle for first place in the division, and the series win, with the Cardinals throwing their ace up there, a guy who's owned the Reds, and who is 74-24, attempting to become only the third pitcher in history to win 75 of his first 100 decisions, joining only Cy Young and Pedro Martinez, which is awfully impressive.
Luck isn't with the Reds in the top of the first (Note: turned out that was true the whole game). I had two thoughts during the inning, one of which is that holy shit! The Reds are the best offensive team in the league! I don't think that's been true since 1990! And the other of which was that one of the keys to this Reds team is that they don't have a single slow guy on the team. No Adam Dunn, no limping Griffey, no Sean Casey. However, the Cardinals, and Carpenter in particular, neutralize that advantage, they haven't allowed a steal all year. They're going to be a tough matchup for the Reds all year. And the Reds? Sam LeCure, second major league start. He won the first one, but that was the Astros, these are the Cardinals.
I guess Six Flags' new slogan is "More Flags. More Fun." So I'm going to open a theme park called Seven Flags. They're doing my advertising for me!
Griffey said that he couldn't stay sharp coming off the bench, and so his continued presence was a distraction to his teammates. Which I think is a great way (I don't mean this sarcastically) of saying that he sucked, and the Mariners couldn't fire him because it would somehow look bad, so he didn't want to just be there bringing the team down just to get a paycheck. Which I think is nice. Not only did he not use steroids, but he didn't obsess over money. It's not that he didn't care about it, but he had the perspective to realize that whatever he did, he was going to have all the money he'd ever need, so he didn't worry too much about whether he was getting every dollar he could.
Jim Joyce made this terrible call (note: I meant to go back and add exposition here, but every one who reads this blog (i.e., nobody) already knows about it. It was mentioned on NPR's Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, for God's sake), and within ten minutes the crawl on ESPN was mentioning him by name. You don't think they're powerful?
The paragraph that runs on ESPN when an athlete retires is structured exactly like an obituary. It starts with a sentence or two outlining what he's most remembered for, segues into a series of vital statistics, and ends by listing the surviving family members (with whom he'll be spending time).
(You may have noticed that I stopped writing about the Reds. Feel free to reach your own conclusions about what that says about how the game went.)
Watching: Reds vs. Cardinals (on ESPN!)
Ken Griffey, Jr. retired. This is what it's been to be a Reds fan: we got the one damn home run hitter in the entire game who didn't take steroids. Talk about a fucking rip off. The Cardinals got McGwire, the Cubs got Sosa, the Giants got Bonds, and they all got playoff runs out of them. And we get Ken Griffey, Jr., whose iconic image for the Reds will always be pulling up in pain running down the third base line in spring training. He had good seasons after that, but never another super-star season. I bet steroids would have fixed that right up. Son of a bitch.
(Another note, they got Aaron Boone, "ESPN Baseball Analyst" on the phone, and I can't help but think, did they get Aaron Boone on the phone, offer him a verbal contract to become an ESPN Anchor for 24 hours, put him on the phone with Baseball Tonight, and throw together that graphic? I think maybe they did. I mean, I could easily be wrong, maybe he's a real correspondent. I don't watch enough ESPN any more to be able to identify their third-string baseball correspondents. Back in the day I would have known all about him, I would have listened to him come up through the ranks, doing a segment on the radio, some remote spots for Baseball Tonight. Good Lord, what life must be like there, it's just as competitive as being a professional athlete (though your career lasts longer). Sean Salisbury was on a meteoric rise there for years, and now he's just completely gone (and rightly so, I have to say, I don't know what they ever saw in him).
Anyway, now the Reds are in first place, and being taken reasonably seriously. This is as exciting a position as they've been in in the last 5 years. A battle for first place in the division, and the series win, with the Cardinals throwing their ace up there, a guy who's owned the Reds, and who is 74-24, attempting to become only the third pitcher in history to win 75 of his first 100 decisions, joining only Cy Young and Pedro Martinez, which is awfully impressive.
Luck isn't with the Reds in the top of the first (Note: turned out that was true the whole game). I had two thoughts during the inning, one of which is that holy shit! The Reds are the best offensive team in the league! I don't think that's been true since 1990! And the other of which was that one of the keys to this Reds team is that they don't have a single slow guy on the team. No Adam Dunn, no limping Griffey, no Sean Casey. However, the Cardinals, and Carpenter in particular, neutralize that advantage, they haven't allowed a steal all year. They're going to be a tough matchup for the Reds all year. And the Reds? Sam LeCure, second major league start. He won the first one, but that was the Astros, these are the Cardinals.
I guess Six Flags' new slogan is "More Flags. More Fun." So I'm going to open a theme park called Seven Flags. They're doing my advertising for me!
Griffey said that he couldn't stay sharp coming off the bench, and so his continued presence was a distraction to his teammates. Which I think is a great way (I don't mean this sarcastically) of saying that he sucked, and the Mariners couldn't fire him because it would somehow look bad, so he didn't want to just be there bringing the team down just to get a paycheck. Which I think is nice. Not only did he not use steroids, but he didn't obsess over money. It's not that he didn't care about it, but he had the perspective to realize that whatever he did, he was going to have all the money he'd ever need, so he didn't worry too much about whether he was getting every dollar he could.
Jim Joyce made this terrible call (note: I meant to go back and add exposition here, but every one who reads this blog (i.e., nobody) already knows about it. It was mentioned on NPR's Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, for God's sake), and within ten minutes the crawl on ESPN was mentioning him by name. You don't think they're powerful?
The paragraph that runs on ESPN when an athlete retires is structured exactly like an obituary. It starts with a sentence or two outlining what he's most remembered for, segues into a series of vital statistics, and ends by listing the surviving family members (with whom he'll be spending time).
(You may have noticed that I stopped writing about the Reds. Feel free to reach your own conclusions about what that says about how the game went.)
Ouch
Date: 5/27/2010
Watching: Lakers vs. Suns, Game 5, Conference Finals
Well, now we get to see what this whole Steve Nash rah-rah chemistry is made of. Because that was as gut-punching of a loss as I've seen in a long, long time. Fighting your way back, grabbing two offensive rebounds on your last possession to tie the game with 3 seconds left, force Kobe into a bad shot, and have Ron Artest get a putback as time expired? And the only reason the Lakers won was BECAUSE Kobe was so off balance; if he'd missed close, it would have bounced up or out and time would have run out. It's only because he airballed it that the Lakers won. So, can the Suns still go out there and really believe that they can win Game 6 AND 7? We'll find out.
Note: I would just like to point out that I am a little skeptical of myself, feeling so convinced that this is a battle between good and evil when the good guy is white and the bad guy is black. But it's how I feel. I don't think that one can ever say that you are being totally unprejudiced, it's just a part of human nature. All I'll say is, if it's there, it's subconscious, and I have plenty of conscious reasons to hate Kobe and love Nash, if just for the classic underdog aspect to it. (Not to mention the raping. But I hated Kobe before that.)
Watching: Lakers vs. Suns, Game 5, Conference Finals
Well, now we get to see what this whole Steve Nash rah-rah chemistry is made of. Because that was as gut-punching of a loss as I've seen in a long, long time. Fighting your way back, grabbing two offensive rebounds on your last possession to tie the game with 3 seconds left, force Kobe into a bad shot, and have Ron Artest get a putback as time expired? And the only reason the Lakers won was BECAUSE Kobe was so off balance; if he'd missed close, it would have bounced up or out and time would have run out. It's only because he airballed it that the Lakers won. So, can the Suns still go out there and really believe that they can win Game 6 AND 7? We'll find out.
Note: I would just like to point out that I am a little skeptical of myself, feeling so convinced that this is a battle between good and evil when the good guy is white and the bad guy is black. But it's how I feel. I don't think that one can ever say that you are being totally unprejudiced, it's just a part of human nature. All I'll say is, if it's there, it's subconscious, and I have plenty of conscious reasons to hate Kobe and love Nash, if just for the classic underdog aspect to it. (Not to mention the raping. But I hated Kobe before that.)
Outdated NBA Thoughts, part 1
Date: 5/19/2010
Watching: Lakers vs. Suns, Game 2, Conference Finals
Kobe Bryant is the only player I've ever both really hated and really feared. I fear Albert Pujols, but I have nothing against the guy. I hate Derek Jeter, but (even if he was in the National League) I wouldn't fear him, I can talk smack about him. But Kobe Bryant, that smug entitled little rapist, that Michael Jordan wannabe that always looks like he's 6 years old and pissed, is fucking. Good. The Lakers had gone up 9, and I thought to myself, "The scary thing is, Kobe hasn't really gotten involved yet," and immediately thereafter, he takes it down the court, pulls off a beautiful behind-the-back dribble that left his defender in the seats, and sinks the easy jumper. Lakers by 11, and Kobe's running down the court making a face like a dog taking a dump. I hate that guy. And I hate Derek Fisher, who just hurled himself into a defender, fell down, and got the foul call, AND was praised for it by the announcers, AND the announcers were right. Fucking Lakers.
I try to be tolerant and understanding, so rather than saying that Lakers fans aren't real fans, I'll say: I don't understand Lakers fans. Why would you be leaving with two minutes left in a playoff game your team is winning? Regular season, sure. Your team's down 20? Sure. And I'm not even saying you SHOULD stay until the end, I'm just saying, how could you not want to? Isn't that what we live for? Isn't that what we suffer through all the losing to get to? And you're there, and you leave? Well, I suppose it's not surprising, I'm sure the Lakers crowd has a lower percentage of locals than any other sports crowd in America. They drive it home by their dutiful shots of the celebrities in the crowd. None of them are from LA (well, except the Kardashians). Why do they get those seats? Spike Lee I have no problem with, he got rich and got to live his dream of sitting courtside at Knicks games. If I got rich, and if it didn't mean I'd have to live in Ohio, I'd have season tickets behind the Reds dugout. No question. (Not the Bengals, football just honestly doesn't work as well in person.) 81 times a year (well, probably around 60, anyway), I'd be sitting there yapping at the team, cheering on future Mike Leake and future Joey Votto, heaping inventive abuse on future Albert Pujols and future Roy Oswalt. It would be fantastic. And I'll tell you what, if the Reds were up 7-0 in the 9th in Game 2 of the NLCS, I damn sure wouldn't leave.
Watching: Lakers vs. Suns, Game 2, Conference Finals
Kobe Bryant is the only player I've ever both really hated and really feared. I fear Albert Pujols, but I have nothing against the guy. I hate Derek Jeter, but (even if he was in the National League) I wouldn't fear him, I can talk smack about him. But Kobe Bryant, that smug entitled little rapist, that Michael Jordan wannabe that always looks like he's 6 years old and pissed, is fucking. Good. The Lakers had gone up 9, and I thought to myself, "The scary thing is, Kobe hasn't really gotten involved yet," and immediately thereafter, he takes it down the court, pulls off a beautiful behind-the-back dribble that left his defender in the seats, and sinks the easy jumper. Lakers by 11, and Kobe's running down the court making a face like a dog taking a dump. I hate that guy. And I hate Derek Fisher, who just hurled himself into a defender, fell down, and got the foul call, AND was praised for it by the announcers, AND the announcers were right. Fucking Lakers.
I try to be tolerant and understanding, so rather than saying that Lakers fans aren't real fans, I'll say: I don't understand Lakers fans. Why would you be leaving with two minutes left in a playoff game your team is winning? Regular season, sure. Your team's down 20? Sure. And I'm not even saying you SHOULD stay until the end, I'm just saying, how could you not want to? Isn't that what we live for? Isn't that what we suffer through all the losing to get to? And you're there, and you leave? Well, I suppose it's not surprising, I'm sure the Lakers crowd has a lower percentage of locals than any other sports crowd in America. They drive it home by their dutiful shots of the celebrities in the crowd. None of them are from LA (well, except the Kardashians). Why do they get those seats? Spike Lee I have no problem with, he got rich and got to live his dream of sitting courtside at Knicks games. If I got rich, and if it didn't mean I'd have to live in Ohio, I'd have season tickets behind the Reds dugout. No question. (Not the Bengals, football just honestly doesn't work as well in person.) 81 times a year (well, probably around 60, anyway), I'd be sitting there yapping at the team, cheering on future Mike Leake and future Joey Votto, heaping inventive abuse on future Albert Pujols and future Roy Oswalt. It would be fantastic. And I'll tell you what, if the Reds were up 7-0 in the 9th in Game 2 of the NLCS, I damn sure wouldn't leave.
Beer
Date: 5/15/2010
Watching: SportsCenter
See, here's the thing about beer commercials: I get that they're supposed to be jokes, and that I need to "lighten up," or "have a sense of humor," or whatever. But take this Coors Light commercial: the guy walks into his house, there's a trail of rose petals, a sexy note with lipstick on it, candles burning, etc. And he follows the trail, and mistakenly thinks it ends at the refrigerator, where he finds Coors Light, which he finds more fascinating than his smoking-hot, lingerie-clad wife. And the thing is, if he had been more into, say, a bag of Doritos than his smoking-hot, lingerie-clad wife, then fine, ha ha, funny joke, whatever. But there are people out there with real, serious problems with beer that prevent them from functioning normally in society. I mean, what's the point in them putting "Drink Responsibly" in fine print at the end of their ads if the entire message of the ad is: Drink Irresponsibly. It's funny. You can still be super happy and rich and have a smoking hot wife, and it will just be this hilarious thing about you that you're a RAGING ALCOHOLIC. So, point is: beer commercials really are uniquely evil, even by male-targeted commercial standards.
Watching: SportsCenter
See, here's the thing about beer commercials: I get that they're supposed to be jokes, and that I need to "lighten up," or "have a sense of humor," or whatever. But take this Coors Light commercial: the guy walks into his house, there's a trail of rose petals, a sexy note with lipstick on it, candles burning, etc. And he follows the trail, and mistakenly thinks it ends at the refrigerator, where he finds Coors Light, which he finds more fascinating than his smoking-hot, lingerie-clad wife. And the thing is, if he had been more into, say, a bag of Doritos than his smoking-hot, lingerie-clad wife, then fine, ha ha, funny joke, whatever. But there are people out there with real, serious problems with beer that prevent them from functioning normally in society. I mean, what's the point in them putting "Drink Responsibly" in fine print at the end of their ads if the entire message of the ad is: Drink Irresponsibly. It's funny. You can still be super happy and rich and have a smoking hot wife, and it will just be this hilarious thing about you that you're a RAGING ALCOHOLIC. So, point is: beer commercials really are uniquely evil, even by male-targeted commercial standards.
Standard Apology
I've written a bunch of stuff busy but kept forgetting it to post it. Sorry, non-existent readers!
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Date: 5/12/10
Watching: Montreal vs. Pittsburgh, Game 7, Round 2
Why do I want the Stanley Cup to go to Canada? Because right now, in Montreal, they have sold out their stadium for people seeing a game that is being played in Pittsburgh. Now, I know, this is hardly the only time this has ever been done, but look: Pittsburgh is generally acknowledged to be a pretty good hockey town, with a dedicated, passionate, and knowledgeable fan base. But is there any chance they sell out Mellon Arena to watch a game on TV in round 2? Sure, if it was Game 7 of the Finals, I can see that.
Though of course, there's the additional factor that Montreal is one of the most underrated cities in terms of sports heartbreak. Their baseball team got taken from them. And I know that most people feel like they deserved it because nobody was showing up to the games. But listen: the strike cost them a trip to the playoffs, in what had been their best season by far in many years. They were well clear in first place, and they got nothing out of the season. The same thing happened to the Reds (it actually happened to them in the strike before that as well -- it came mid-season, and it was decided to award the playoffs based on the best records in each half of the season. The Reds had the best overall record, but were in second place in each half of the season, so they got shut out). And it sucks, big time, especially in a town that didn't have the insanely deep baseball roots that Cincinnati has. So, of course attendance dwindled, it dwindled everywhere. My dad didn't go to a game for a good ten years after the strike, and we used to go maybe 7 or 8 times a season. And the Expos' brilliant counterstrategy was to let all their best players leave, and then sell the team to a guy that then doesn't sign any broadcast deal. So that happened, and then their hockey team, which was the best FOREVER, became bad for a long time. So that's a lot of angst to deal with, but now they've snuck into the playoffs by the skin of their teeth, and knocked off the #1 seed, are carrying the weight of the entire country after Vancouver got knocked out last night (so much for my Stanley Cup prediction), and now are absolutely destroying the Penguins (the defending champions, who have the best player in the game). I'd be excited, too.
In other news, in a business-day special this morning, Homer Bailey shut out the Pirates in 90 pitches. This the day after Johnny Cueto pitched a one-hit (should have been an error), no-walk shutout. That is just... unbelievable. The Reds haven't had back-to-back shutouts since 1988! And if you had asked any Reds fan who the two least-likely pitchers in the rotation to throw back-to-back shutouts, they would have said "Bailey and Cueto." You know, I said at the beginning of the season that it was nice that there was at least a scenario that had the Reds being a real playoff contender this season. It involved a lot of people not having bad seasons, many of whom had histories of inconsistency, so it wasn't at all likely, but, fingers crossed, everything seems to be breaking in the right direction all at once. I'm actually glad to be playing the Cardinals: let's find out right now how good we are.
Watching: Montreal vs. Pittsburgh, Game 7, Round 2
Why do I want the Stanley Cup to go to Canada? Because right now, in Montreal, they have sold out their stadium for people seeing a game that is being played in Pittsburgh. Now, I know, this is hardly the only time this has ever been done, but look: Pittsburgh is generally acknowledged to be a pretty good hockey town, with a dedicated, passionate, and knowledgeable fan base. But is there any chance they sell out Mellon Arena to watch a game on TV in round 2? Sure, if it was Game 7 of the Finals, I can see that.
Though of course, there's the additional factor that Montreal is one of the most underrated cities in terms of sports heartbreak. Their baseball team got taken from them. And I know that most people feel like they deserved it because nobody was showing up to the games. But listen: the strike cost them a trip to the playoffs, in what had been their best season by far in many years. They were well clear in first place, and they got nothing out of the season. The same thing happened to the Reds (it actually happened to them in the strike before that as well -- it came mid-season, and it was decided to award the playoffs based on the best records in each half of the season. The Reds had the best overall record, but were in second place in each half of the season, so they got shut out). And it sucks, big time, especially in a town that didn't have the insanely deep baseball roots that Cincinnati has. So, of course attendance dwindled, it dwindled everywhere. My dad didn't go to a game for a good ten years after the strike, and we used to go maybe 7 or 8 times a season. And the Expos' brilliant counterstrategy was to let all their best players leave, and then sell the team to a guy that then doesn't sign any broadcast deal. So that happened, and then their hockey team, which was the best FOREVER, became bad for a long time. So that's a lot of angst to deal with, but now they've snuck into the playoffs by the skin of their teeth, and knocked off the #1 seed, are carrying the weight of the entire country after Vancouver got knocked out last night (so much for my Stanley Cup prediction), and now are absolutely destroying the Penguins (the defending champions, who have the best player in the game). I'd be excited, too.
In other news, in a business-day special this morning, Homer Bailey shut out the Pirates in 90 pitches. This the day after Johnny Cueto pitched a one-hit (should have been an error), no-walk shutout. That is just... unbelievable. The Reds haven't had back-to-back shutouts since 1988! And if you had asked any Reds fan who the two least-likely pitchers in the rotation to throw back-to-back shutouts, they would have said "Bailey and Cueto." You know, I said at the beginning of the season that it was nice that there was at least a scenario that had the Reds being a real playoff contender this season. It involved a lot of people not having bad seasons, many of whom had histories of inconsistency, so it wasn't at all likely, but, fingers crossed, everything seems to be breaking in the right direction all at once. I'm actually glad to be playing the Cardinals: let's find out right now how good we are.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Steve Nash's Haircut of Destiny
Date: 5/9/2010
Watching: Spurs vs. Suns, Game 4, Round 2; Canucks vs. Blackwawks, Game 5, Round 2
Marv Albert (paraphrasing): "And so as the Suns try to close out this series, it's one-point game, going into the fourth quarter, this could not be set up any more dramatically." Um, really? What if it was, I don't know, Game 7? Heck, even this game could be set up more dramatically, if it was tied. Not a lot, but I'm just saying, you're way over-selling this game, Marv.
That said, if the Suns are really going to make a run at this, the NBA Playoffs just got a lot more interesting to me. They show Steve Nash on the sideline, and he's lying down for his bad back, and he's old, and he's got one eye half-swollen shut. And the thing about it is, he obviously doesn't care about any of that. At. All. Physical pain is really not an issue for him, as long as he has a chance to win the championship. And he honestly, truly, believes he does, and he knows he doesn't have many chances left. But there's no anxiety in that, because it's enough that he has had this one. If you think he's worried, then how can you explain his taking onthe Spurs, supposedly his arch-nemesis, and calmly demolishing them. He doesn't buy into the media narrative, because the fact is, this year's series is in no way determined by matchups of previous teams with different players. Whether he's going to be able to take down Robo-Kobe, I don't know. But HE thinks he can. He's not scared of Kobe at all. I hope he's right.
I also like Nash's low-maintenance, slightly distinctive haircut that he picked out 20 years ago so that he would never have to think about his hair again.
The Canucks win comfortably in Chicago, forcing a Game 6, in Vancouver. And here I'm going to have to point out again how I think fans are a part of the game: I really believe that a factor in the game will be whether or not the fans are afraid. If the fans are afraid, the players will know. And I don't think this team has the mental strength to ignore that. (I say authoritatively, having seen parts of 8 or 9 of their games).
Watching: Spurs vs. Suns, Game 4, Round 2; Canucks vs. Blackwawks, Game 5, Round 2
Marv Albert (paraphrasing): "And so as the Suns try to close out this series, it's one-point game, going into the fourth quarter, this could not be set up any more dramatically." Um, really? What if it was, I don't know, Game 7? Heck, even this game could be set up more dramatically, if it was tied. Not a lot, but I'm just saying, you're way over-selling this game, Marv.
That said, if the Suns are really going to make a run at this, the NBA Playoffs just got a lot more interesting to me. They show Steve Nash on the sideline, and he's lying down for his bad back, and he's old, and he's got one eye half-swollen shut. And the thing about it is, he obviously doesn't care about any of that. At. All. Physical pain is really not an issue for him, as long as he has a chance to win the championship. And he honestly, truly, believes he does, and he knows he doesn't have many chances left. But there's no anxiety in that, because it's enough that he has had this one. If you think he's worried, then how can you explain his taking onthe Spurs, supposedly his arch-nemesis, and calmly demolishing them. He doesn't buy into the media narrative, because the fact is, this year's series is in no way determined by matchups of previous teams with different players. Whether he's going to be able to take down Robo-Kobe, I don't know. But HE thinks he can. He's not scared of Kobe at all. I hope he's right.
I also like Nash's low-maintenance, slightly distinctive haircut that he picked out 20 years ago so that he would never have to think about his hair again.
The Canucks win comfortably in Chicago, forcing a Game 6, in Vancouver. And here I'm going to have to point out again how I think fans are a part of the game: I really believe that a factor in the game will be whether or not the fans are afraid. If the fans are afraid, the players will know. And I don't think this team has the mental strength to ignore that. (I say authoritatively, having seen parts of 8 or 9 of their games).
Thursday, May 6, 2010
SABR is for atheists
Date: 5/5/2010
Watching: Canucks vs. Blackhawks, Game 3, Round 2; Suns vs. Spurs, Game 2, Round 2
Also today I listened to the Reds take on the Mets, but business day specials kick off at 9:30 AM on a Wednesday on the West Coast, at which point I'm a.) at work, and b.) still waiting for the coffee to kick in. So I wasn't in the correct state of mind for this blog, but I do just want to update all of you (i.e., nobody) on the status of the Cordero-as-closer experiment: not good. The Reds won in extra innings, their ninth win of the season (out of 14) in their final at-bat, after Cordero blew a one-run lead in the ninth. And yes, it was a good win, in the deciding game of a must-win (by early May standards) series. But I wish I was still a kid. When I was a kid, I could know that and think, "this team is solid in the clutch, and clearly blessed in some way, they're going to ride this to the World Series!" But now, I know better. In so far as you classify people as pro- or anti-SABR, I'm in the pro- camp. And the fact is that, over the course of 162 games, you're going to win about as many extra-innings games as you lose, the same goes for 1-run games in general. So if we're winning a lot now, that means we're probably going to lose a lot later. If nothing else, we can't sustain this streak (we are undefeated in extra innings this year), and when that happens, we'll realize this is the same team we have every year: pitching that is just barely respectable, and hitting that is, not notoriously awful, but not respectable, either. They're going to score fewer runs than they allow, and that means they're going to win fewer games than they lose. It's just a fact. I guess I believe in SABR in the same way I believe in atheism: I kind of wish it wasn't the case (that there is no God, that baseball season outcomes can be predicted with reasonable precision in June), but I'm not going to ignore reality either, and there is a beauty to it, in an austere way.
Speaking of things that disappoint but don't surprise me: I wish the tasing of that kid in Philadelphia had been at least SOMEWHAT controversial in the sports-commentary world. And I'm not as in the game as I used to be, so maybe somebody on PTI or somewhere came out against it, but as far as I can tell, everybody in the sports world that talks about it thinks both a.) that was totally appropriate, that kid deserved it, and b.) tasing is hilarious! And it just isn't. I hate to be a buzzkill (really, I do, it's not a pleasant experience), but tasing is much more dangerous than people admit. And it's just not necessary. The kid didn't even have a weapon. Do what cops have always done: tackle him. I saw it at the one-game playoff the Reds lost in 1999 (Good Lord, I haven't thought of that game in a while. I think I blocked it from my memory. What an awful, awful experience.): some kid ran onto the field in like the 7th (at which point it had been clear that the Reds had no chance for approx. 5 innings), and tried to run the bases. IIRC, he nearly got to third before some cop jumped on him. And hey: don't hold back when you tackle him, and if he hits the ground hard, so be it. But that's all you gotta do. It works fine, and nobody risks heart failure.
I had to leave at the end of the second period of the Canucks game, after they'd scratched their way back to within a goal (I'm trying to be more social, to get out more. So every post on this blog is a record of my failure). And I have to say, I was really into the game, I didn't want to leave. So hockey's getting some kind of hold on me, it would seem. Although they wound up losing 5-2, so it's not like staying would have made me happy.
Watching: Canucks vs. Blackhawks, Game 3, Round 2; Suns vs. Spurs, Game 2, Round 2
Also today I listened to the Reds take on the Mets, but business day specials kick off at 9:30 AM on a Wednesday on the West Coast, at which point I'm a.) at work, and b.) still waiting for the coffee to kick in. So I wasn't in the correct state of mind for this blog, but I do just want to update all of you (i.e., nobody) on the status of the Cordero-as-closer experiment: not good. The Reds won in extra innings, their ninth win of the season (out of 14) in their final at-bat, after Cordero blew a one-run lead in the ninth. And yes, it was a good win, in the deciding game of a must-win (by early May standards) series. But I wish I was still a kid. When I was a kid, I could know that and think, "this team is solid in the clutch, and clearly blessed in some way, they're going to ride this to the World Series!" But now, I know better. In so far as you classify people as pro- or anti-SABR, I'm in the pro- camp. And the fact is that, over the course of 162 games, you're going to win about as many extra-innings games as you lose, the same goes for 1-run games in general. So if we're winning a lot now, that means we're probably going to lose a lot later. If nothing else, we can't sustain this streak (we are undefeated in extra innings this year), and when that happens, we'll realize this is the same team we have every year: pitching that is just barely respectable, and hitting that is, not notoriously awful, but not respectable, either. They're going to score fewer runs than they allow, and that means they're going to win fewer games than they lose. It's just a fact. I guess I believe in SABR in the same way I believe in atheism: I kind of wish it wasn't the case (that there is no God, that baseball season outcomes can be predicted with reasonable precision in June), but I'm not going to ignore reality either, and there is a beauty to it, in an austere way.
Speaking of things that disappoint but don't surprise me: I wish the tasing of that kid in Philadelphia had been at least SOMEWHAT controversial in the sports-commentary world. And I'm not as in the game as I used to be, so maybe somebody on PTI or somewhere came out against it, but as far as I can tell, everybody in the sports world that talks about it thinks both a.) that was totally appropriate, that kid deserved it, and b.) tasing is hilarious! And it just isn't. I hate to be a buzzkill (really, I do, it's not a pleasant experience), but tasing is much more dangerous than people admit. And it's just not necessary. The kid didn't even have a weapon. Do what cops have always done: tackle him. I saw it at the one-game playoff the Reds lost in 1999 (Good Lord, I haven't thought of that game in a while. I think I blocked it from my memory. What an awful, awful experience.): some kid ran onto the field in like the 7th (at which point it had been clear that the Reds had no chance for approx. 5 innings), and tried to run the bases. IIRC, he nearly got to third before some cop jumped on him. And hey: don't hold back when you tackle him, and if he hits the ground hard, so be it. But that's all you gotta do. It works fine, and nobody risks heart failure.
I had to leave at the end of the second period of the Canucks game, after they'd scratched their way back to within a goal (I'm trying to be more social, to get out more. So every post on this blog is a record of my failure). And I have to say, I was really into the game, I didn't want to leave. So hockey's getting some kind of hold on me, it would seem. Although they wound up losing 5-2, so it's not like staying would have made me happy.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Your Own Personal Jesus
Date: 5/4/2010
Watching: LA Lakers vs. Utah Jazz, Game 2, Round 2
The TNT Studio show is a fascinating study in race relations. Charles Barkley, Kenny "The Jet" Smith, and Ernie Johnson, Jr., who is the whitest white guy in the world, doesn't appear to be that knowledgeable about basketball, and, to re-iterate, is named "Ernie".
Flipped over to the A's for a second, they were saying what you missed if you'd been watching the Sharks win in overtime (which I was, it was kind of exhilirating, they were down 3-1 in the third and came back to win it 4-3 in overtime). And that caused me to think about the fact that it seems to be the general consensus that the A's are probably going to move to San Jose. And I thought, "I wonder if they would ever move the Reds?" And you know what? My immediate reaction was NOT, "Baseball would never move the REDS, the first professional baseball team, a fanbase which has delivered consistently moderate attendance despite the fact that the team hasn't been any good for FIFTEEN YEARS, and doesn't really give any indication that it ever will be again." No, my first reaction was, "that would suck." Which is pretty shameful. Not that there's anything anybody can do about it. If they decide to move the team, they will, and that will be that. I guess sports fans aren't masochistic, necessarily, just bottoms. They like to sacrifice their pleasure to the whims of others. Because there IS a twisted pleasure in supporting a losing team, and everybody knows it. If we wanted to fool them, we'd have to not go to baseball games in August when the team's been out of it for 7 weeks already and there's still 7 to go; or selling out UD Arena to see a team that won 10 games COMBINED over two seasons, or actually voting to RAISE TAXES (in CINCINNATI!!!) in order to keep a team that was universally acknowledged as the WORST team in football from leaving town. And that's why the owners can always say to us, "What? You know you want it." And we do.
Watching: LA Lakers vs. Utah Jazz, Game 2, Round 2
The TNT Studio show is a fascinating study in race relations. Charles Barkley, Kenny "The Jet" Smith, and Ernie Johnson, Jr., who is the whitest white guy in the world, doesn't appear to be that knowledgeable about basketball, and, to re-iterate, is named "Ernie".
Flipped over to the A's for a second, they were saying what you missed if you'd been watching the Sharks win in overtime (which I was, it was kind of exhilirating, they were down 3-1 in the third and came back to win it 4-3 in overtime). And that caused me to think about the fact that it seems to be the general consensus that the A's are probably going to move to San Jose. And I thought, "I wonder if they would ever move the Reds?" And you know what? My immediate reaction was NOT, "Baseball would never move the REDS, the first professional baseball team, a fanbase which has delivered consistently moderate attendance despite the fact that the team hasn't been any good for FIFTEEN YEARS, and doesn't really give any indication that it ever will be again." No, my first reaction was, "that would suck." Which is pretty shameful. Not that there's anything anybody can do about it. If they decide to move the team, they will, and that will be that. I guess sports fans aren't masochistic, necessarily, just bottoms. They like to sacrifice their pleasure to the whims of others. Because there IS a twisted pleasure in supporting a losing team, and everybody knows it. If we wanted to fool them, we'd have to not go to baseball games in August when the team's been out of it for 7 weeks already and there's still 7 to go; or selling out UD Arena to see a team that won 10 games COMBINED over two seasons, or actually voting to RAISE TAXES (in CINCINNATI!!!) in order to keep a team that was universally acknowledged as the WORST team in football from leaving town. And that's why the owners can always say to us, "What? You know you want it." And we do.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Into the present day...
Date: 5/3/2010
Watching: Vancouver Canucks vs. Chicago Blackhawks, Game 2, Round 2
Listening to: MLB.com's broadcast of NY Mets @ CIN Reds.
Sports is an excuse to leave. My wife has some friends over, all people I like, but sometimes I want an excuse to not talk to anybody for a while. And I can use sports for that; I just have to tell people I'm keeping an eye on a sports game, and then I can leave the room any time I want. It's a sweet deal, especially when the Reds win on a walk off home run by Laynce Nix.
The beauty of baseball is the collection of individual stories embedded in the larger story. Like, I know the story of the Reds over the last couple of years: a mediocre team that succeeds in not being awful. But in many ways I'm more invested in the players. Is Aaron Harang ever going to return to his pre-18-inning-game self? Has Bronson Arroyo figured out that early-season inconsistency that's plagued him the last few seasons? Will Joey Votto mature into the true, feared top hitter that a playoff team needs? Is the house of cards that is "Francisco Cordero is our closer" going to come tumbling down, as it did with Danny Graves a few years back? And today, a chapter in the story of Laynce Nix (every day player? solid bench presence? waste of effort?) was told, as he came on to pinch hit in the bottom of the 11th, 1 out, nobody on, 2-2 game, and hits a game-winner in a game that was crucial to the story of the Reds' next week or so. We were looking good, then we lost to in St. Louis, but on the other hand, we didn't look awful, and it is St. Louis, after all. Now, at home, against another legitimately good team, is the time for the Reds to establish, for the moment, whether or not they are a team that's worth keeping an eye on or not. Then tonight, Mike Leake continued to look like the real deal, the bullpen looked like they did in Houston, and Laynce Nix showed that even he is capable of helping this team. A good night.
As if it isn't easy enough to root for the Canucks, then I see Vince Vaughn and Kevin James, all fat and beardy in the Chicago stands, going nuts as the Hawks win it... man, I hope the Canucks win the series.
Watching: Vancouver Canucks vs. Chicago Blackhawks, Game 2, Round 2
Listening to: MLB.com's broadcast of NY Mets @ CIN Reds.
Sports is an excuse to leave. My wife has some friends over, all people I like, but sometimes I want an excuse to not talk to anybody for a while. And I can use sports for that; I just have to tell people I'm keeping an eye on a sports game, and then I can leave the room any time I want. It's a sweet deal, especially when the Reds win on a walk off home run by Laynce Nix.
The beauty of baseball is the collection of individual stories embedded in the larger story. Like, I know the story of the Reds over the last couple of years: a mediocre team that succeeds in not being awful. But in many ways I'm more invested in the players. Is Aaron Harang ever going to return to his pre-18-inning-game self? Has Bronson Arroyo figured out that early-season inconsistency that's plagued him the last few seasons? Will Joey Votto mature into the true, feared top hitter that a playoff team needs? Is the house of cards that is "Francisco Cordero is our closer" going to come tumbling down, as it did with Danny Graves a few years back? And today, a chapter in the story of Laynce Nix (every day player? solid bench presence? waste of effort?) was told, as he came on to pinch hit in the bottom of the 11th, 1 out, nobody on, 2-2 game, and hits a game-winner in a game that was crucial to the story of the Reds' next week or so. We were looking good, then we lost to in St. Louis, but on the other hand, we didn't look awful, and it is St. Louis, after all. Now, at home, against another legitimately good team, is the time for the Reds to establish, for the moment, whether or not they are a team that's worth keeping an eye on or not. Then tonight, Mike Leake continued to look like the real deal, the bullpen looked like they did in Houston, and Laynce Nix showed that even he is capable of helping this team. A good night.
As if it isn't easy enough to root for the Canucks, then I see Vince Vaughn and Kevin James, all fat and beardy in the Chicago stands, going nuts as the Hawks win it... man, I hope the Canucks win the series.
Civic Pride
Date: 5/2/2010
Watching: SportsCenter
I can't overstate how dominant ESPN is. They decided that Americans would start liking soccer, and it happened! Do you understand how impossible that once seemed? Go back and read what people wrote when MLS was founded. Heck, read anything written about it in its first five years. And now, it seems solidly established; it's never going to be a major sport but it seems to have a consistent, reasonably respected existence. And everybody is expected to care about the World Cup, and even the UEFA tournament! A tournament that doesn't take place in America, and has no Americans in it! NBC has had the Olympics forever, and refuses to even to TRY to get Americans to care about foreigners. But ESPN saw the business opportunity, and they put the word out throughout their organization: cool sports fans respect soccer. And lo and behold, it happened.
The success of sports teams has an effect on a city. Cleveland hasn't won a championship since 1960 or whatever, they had their most important team stolen from them, then restored to them as the worst team in football, a laughingstock. And now LeBron is probably leaving, without giving them a championship. The best player they have had in any sport since James Brown, and he's going to skip town for a bigger spotlight, and likely as not win multiple championships there. And it spills over into reality the real world. What do people think of Cleveland? Losers. Look at that 30 Rock episode, where they "Flee to the Cleve." That was the perfect Midwest city for that joke, because it's a natural punchline, and has been my whole life. And yet, I've spent a reasonable amount of time in Cincinnati, Columbus, Toledo, and Indianapolis, and a bit of time in Detroit and St. Louis, and I have to say I like Cleveland better than any of them (I do prefer Pittsburgh, however, and Chicago is obviously in a different league). But, even if you're not a sports fan, how is it going to affect you when 80% of the times that you hear something about Cleveland, it's negative? Wouldn't it make you less likely to move yourself or your business there? Not by a lot, but enough to potentially make a difference? I think it must.
Hockey fandom update: the deal-breaker for me may turn out to be its unsuitability for casual watching. If I read a book while I'm watching baseball, football, tennis, or really even basketball, I won't miss anything that crucial. There are down periods even in the run of play, which are worth watching if you're really into the game, but if you just want something on while you're reading, or cleaning, or whatever, hockey seems kind of pointless. Because you look away for five seconds and "Goal!". And, I don't know, it robs the excitement of it from me. And they show the replay, and it's always the same story: one team got a little lucky, and was fortunate enough to actually get a shot past the goalie. Foozball has more of a flow than hockey (when it's played right, and I've played with some serious players). Though I must say, both teams I was rooting for tonight won, and I did enjoy that aspect of it. So, we'll see. I mean, it helps that I don't feel that passionately about the NBA playoffs this year. It's the Robo-Lakers vs. the about-to-betray-his-city-immediately-after-disappointing-in-the-playoffs-yet-again LeBron Cavaliers. And I'd like the Suns to win, but they're not going to, they're going to steal one on the road, maybe push it to 7 (after getting screwed by the refs in Game 5), and then lose by like 8 points, never quite being out of it but never really looking convincing. And if we're really unlucky the Lakers will be up against the Magic after LeBron goes 10 for 28 in a crucial game, and we'll be treated to teams led by Kobe "I may or may not be clinically insane" Bryant and Dwight "the least charismatic man in the universe" Howard. Awesome.
I have to admit that much of the reason I like the Sharks is because I think San Jose is so cute with its hockey team. It thinks it's a real city!
Watching: SportsCenter
I can't overstate how dominant ESPN is. They decided that Americans would start liking soccer, and it happened! Do you understand how impossible that once seemed? Go back and read what people wrote when MLS was founded. Heck, read anything written about it in its first five years. And now, it seems solidly established; it's never going to be a major sport but it seems to have a consistent, reasonably respected existence. And everybody is expected to care about the World Cup, and even the UEFA tournament! A tournament that doesn't take place in America, and has no Americans in it! NBC has had the Olympics forever, and refuses to even to TRY to get Americans to care about foreigners. But ESPN saw the business opportunity, and they put the word out throughout their organization: cool sports fans respect soccer. And lo and behold, it happened.
The success of sports teams has an effect on a city. Cleveland hasn't won a championship since 1960 or whatever, they had their most important team stolen from them, then restored to them as the worst team in football, a laughingstock. And now LeBron is probably leaving, without giving them a championship. The best player they have had in any sport since James Brown, and he's going to skip town for a bigger spotlight, and likely as not win multiple championships there. And it spills over into reality the real world. What do people think of Cleveland? Losers. Look at that 30 Rock episode, where they "Flee to the Cleve." That was the perfect Midwest city for that joke, because it's a natural punchline, and has been my whole life. And yet, I've spent a reasonable amount of time in Cincinnati, Columbus, Toledo, and Indianapolis, and a bit of time in Detroit and St. Louis, and I have to say I like Cleveland better than any of them (I do prefer Pittsburgh, however, and Chicago is obviously in a different league). But, even if you're not a sports fan, how is it going to affect you when 80% of the times that you hear something about Cleveland, it's negative? Wouldn't it make you less likely to move yourself or your business there? Not by a lot, but enough to potentially make a difference? I think it must.
Hockey fandom update: the deal-breaker for me may turn out to be its unsuitability for casual watching. If I read a book while I'm watching baseball, football, tennis, or really even basketball, I won't miss anything that crucial. There are down periods even in the run of play, which are worth watching if you're really into the game, but if you just want something on while you're reading, or cleaning, or whatever, hockey seems kind of pointless. Because you look away for five seconds and "Goal!". And, I don't know, it robs the excitement of it from me. And they show the replay, and it's always the same story: one team got a little lucky, and was fortunate enough to actually get a shot past the goalie. Foozball has more of a flow than hockey (when it's played right, and I've played with some serious players). Though I must say, both teams I was rooting for tonight won, and I did enjoy that aspect of it. So, we'll see. I mean, it helps that I don't feel that passionately about the NBA playoffs this year. It's the Robo-Lakers vs. the about-to-betray-his-city-immediately-after-disappointing-in-the-playoffs-yet-again LeBron Cavaliers. And I'd like the Suns to win, but they're not going to, they're going to steal one on the road, maybe push it to 7 (after getting screwed by the refs in Game 5), and then lose by like 8 points, never quite being out of it but never really looking convincing. And if we're really unlucky the Lakers will be up against the Magic after LeBron goes 10 for 28 in a crucial game, and we'll be treated to teams led by Kobe "I may or may not be clinically insane" Bryant and Dwight "the least charismatic man in the universe" Howard. Awesome.
I have to admit that much of the reason I like the Sharks is because I think San Jose is so cute with its hockey team. It thinks it's a real city!
A long night of hockey
Date: 4/21/2010
Watching: Vancouver Canucks vs. LA Kings, Game 4, Round 1
Surely, there has to come a time when men will get sick of being bullied by their commercials, right? I'm referring to the commercial where a guy says he doesn't care which light beer he drinks, and the hot bartender says "Well, when you start to care, take your skirt off, and get a Miller Lite." Which, first of all, I know that the audience is mostly men, but still, don't you NOT want to tell 51% of the population that you don't want their business? Women drink beer, too. And second of all, are there really fewer men with my reaction (namely, "Hey, Miller Lite! Fuck you, I'm not going to by your beer just to keep you from making fun of me, asshole!"), than with the presumably intended reaction of "Oh, shit, I better buy that beer, otherwise they'll keep making fun of me." Like, can I just make an announcement to the people of this country: the people in commercials CAN'T SEE YOU. They don't know what you do, or what you buy. They've never met you, they never will meet you, and so whatever judgments they're making about your life are COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. You know what it takes to be a man? Just saying you're a man. That's it. It's not even about having a penis, there are men without penises and women with them. But if I say I'm a man, then that's it, I am one. And I can order whatever brand of beer I like, or a sweet mixed drink if that's what I prefer, or nothing at all, and I can disapprove of objectifying women, and I can watch chick flicks (COMCAST!), or I could fucking knit, and read romance novels, and eat chocolate, and be really fucking sensitive and emotional all the time, and you know what? I'd STILL be a man. Because, really, what does it matter? The only reasons it matters are dating, medicine, and because the English language requires gender to be specified. Other than that, it's as irrelevant as skin color.
The neutral zone in hockey always reminds me of the Neutral Planet from Futurama.
The Canucks, with their entire season on the line, face a power play, already down a goal, and 2-1 in the series. They haven't stopped a power play in their last 6 chances. The sideline reporter says that they did not practice on the off day, even though they knew they had work to do, because they felt that they would be better off with the rest, and had just had a video review session, and said that there was "some question" whether that would be enough (in Wikipedia, somebody would have slapped a citation needed on that "some question", but sports commentary gets away with it). And what do they do? They kill the power play, including a solid save by Luongo, then IMMEDIATELY go on the attack and score on an absolutely clinical goal. And as soon as I finished typing that, LA scores again. I'm beginning to see the appeal of hockey, perhaps. It's like any sport, it's all about knowing the story being told.
My favorite part of every Buffy the Vampire Slayer program description on my digital cable, is the part at the end where it says "(Drama)". I'm like, yeah, I kind of got that from the part where Buffy's brain tumor was affecting her personality, or from the part where Buffy's post-Riley emotional turmoil was interrupted by a malevolent troll. There's definitely drama.
And fuck you, Miller Lite, why is it so important to you that men have no convenient way of carrying around anything bulky. Like, I travel light myself, so it's fine, but why does it upset you, a multi-national alcoholic beverage conglomerate, whether or not a man carries a bag?
Canucks take the lead! And I have to say, I actually kind of saw how that goal came together, I saw the buildup a little bit. Maybe I'm coming around on hockey?
Watching: Vancouver Canucks vs. LA Kings, Game 4, Round 1
Surely, there has to come a time when men will get sick of being bullied by their commercials, right? I'm referring to the commercial where a guy says he doesn't care which light beer he drinks, and the hot bartender says "Well, when you start to care, take your skirt off, and get a Miller Lite." Which, first of all, I know that the audience is mostly men, but still, don't you NOT want to tell 51% of the population that you don't want their business? Women drink beer, too. And second of all, are there really fewer men with my reaction (namely, "Hey, Miller Lite! Fuck you, I'm not going to by your beer just to keep you from making fun of me, asshole!"), than with the presumably intended reaction of "Oh, shit, I better buy that beer, otherwise they'll keep making fun of me." Like, can I just make an announcement to the people of this country: the people in commercials CAN'T SEE YOU. They don't know what you do, or what you buy. They've never met you, they never will meet you, and so whatever judgments they're making about your life are COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. You know what it takes to be a man? Just saying you're a man. That's it. It's not even about having a penis, there are men without penises and women with them. But if I say I'm a man, then that's it, I am one. And I can order whatever brand of beer I like, or a sweet mixed drink if that's what I prefer, or nothing at all, and I can disapprove of objectifying women, and I can watch chick flicks (COMCAST!), or I could fucking knit, and read romance novels, and eat chocolate, and be really fucking sensitive and emotional all the time, and you know what? I'd STILL be a man. Because, really, what does it matter? The only reasons it matters are dating, medicine, and because the English language requires gender to be specified. Other than that, it's as irrelevant as skin color.
The neutral zone in hockey always reminds me of the Neutral Planet from Futurama.
The Canucks, with their entire season on the line, face a power play, already down a goal, and 2-1 in the series. They haven't stopped a power play in their last 6 chances. The sideline reporter says that they did not practice on the off day, even though they knew they had work to do, because they felt that they would be better off with the rest, and had just had a video review session, and said that there was "some question" whether that would be enough (in Wikipedia, somebody would have slapped a citation needed on that "some question", but sports commentary gets away with it). And what do they do? They kill the power play, including a solid save by Luongo, then IMMEDIATELY go on the attack and score on an absolutely clinical goal. And as soon as I finished typing that, LA scores again. I'm beginning to see the appeal of hockey, perhaps. It's like any sport, it's all about knowing the story being told.
My favorite part of every Buffy the Vampire Slayer program description on my digital cable, is the part at the end where it says "(Drama)". I'm like, yeah, I kind of got that from the part where Buffy's brain tumor was affecting her personality, or from the part where Buffy's post-Riley emotional turmoil was interrupted by a malevolent troll. There's definitely drama.
And fuck you, Miller Lite, why is it so important to you that men have no convenient way of carrying around anything bulky. Like, I travel light myself, so it's fine, but why does it upset you, a multi-national alcoholic beverage conglomerate, whether or not a man carries a bag?
Canucks take the lead! And I have to say, I actually kind of saw how that goal came together, I saw the buildup a little bit. Maybe I'm coming around on hockey?
Bring The Cup home!
Date: 4/15/2010
Watching: Vancouver Canucks vs. LA Kings, Game 1, Round 1
The Canucks are going to win the Stanley Cup. A ludicrous thing to say, I know, after the first game of the first round of the interminably long NHL playoffs. But if you'd seen that game, and in particular, the audience, you'd feel the same way. The Cup hasn't been in Canada for far too long, and to see and hear the crowd's reaction to the OT winner, with the "It's Our Time" signs, it just seems like destiny. Not only that, but the Olympic gold actually takes a bit of the pressure off the Canadian teams. The pressure's still there, I'm sure, but maybe not the crushing pressure that, say, the Cubs feel if they are in the playoffs (remind me to tell you THAT story sometime). So, since sports commentary is predicated on nothing if not ludicrously uninformed opinions, I'll re-iterate: the Canucks will win the Cup this year. Count on it.
(I'm aware that this throws a wrench in my becoming-a-fan-of-the-Sharks thing. But you can't force these things, and I'm sure I'll retroactively justify whatever decision I end up making).
Another thing I realized, watching this game, was that I had somehow never really reflected upon the fact that the one thing that unites and defines all sports, is that there are no examples of a competition being regarded as truly valid if it is not held in front of a live audience. Anything else would be considered practice. Even if it was televised live, it would be, at best, an "exhibition." The live, in-person audience is simply not optional. And that doesn't seem like much, until you stop, and try to think WHY that should be. After all, it's not stated in any rulebook. Nothing about the points or scoring or eventual result is dependent on an audience being there to see it. And yet it is a truth so fundamental that it never even needs to be stated: if there's no audience, there's no game. It's no accident that sports, like theater, started out as religion.
And I think this is really what fans are trying to say when they say something like "I'm the one who pays his salary!" Which is true, as far as it goes, but kind of silly; after all, you can quit paying their salary any time.. But what we really mean is, "I am a fundamental part of what you do. What you do would not be what you do, without me." And it's true. The fan IS a part of the event, and when athletes act otherwise, we're not wrong to be insulted.
Watching: Vancouver Canucks vs. LA Kings, Game 1, Round 1
The Canucks are going to win the Stanley Cup. A ludicrous thing to say, I know, after the first game of the first round of the interminably long NHL playoffs. But if you'd seen that game, and in particular, the audience, you'd feel the same way. The Cup hasn't been in Canada for far too long, and to see and hear the crowd's reaction to the OT winner, with the "It's Our Time" signs, it just seems like destiny. Not only that, but the Olympic gold actually takes a bit of the pressure off the Canadian teams. The pressure's still there, I'm sure, but maybe not the crushing pressure that, say, the Cubs feel if they are in the playoffs (remind me to tell you THAT story sometime). So, since sports commentary is predicated on nothing if not ludicrously uninformed opinions, I'll re-iterate: the Canucks will win the Cup this year. Count on it.
(I'm aware that this throws a wrench in my becoming-a-fan-of-the-Sharks thing. But you can't force these things, and I'm sure I'll retroactively justify whatever decision I end up making).
Another thing I realized, watching this game, was that I had somehow never really reflected upon the fact that the one thing that unites and defines all sports, is that there are no examples of a competition being regarded as truly valid if it is not held in front of a live audience. Anything else would be considered practice. Even if it was televised live, it would be, at best, an "exhibition." The live, in-person audience is simply not optional. And that doesn't seem like much, until you stop, and try to think WHY that should be. After all, it's not stated in any rulebook. Nothing about the points or scoring or eventual result is dependent on an audience being there to see it. And yet it is a truth so fundamental that it never even needs to be stated: if there's no audience, there's no game. It's no accident that sports, like theater, started out as religion.
And I think this is really what fans are trying to say when they say something like "I'm the one who pays his salary!" Which is true, as far as it goes, but kind of silly; after all, you can quit paying their salary any time.. But what we really mean is, "I am a fundamental part of what you do. What you do would not be what you do, without me." And it's true. The fan IS a part of the event, and when athletes act otherwise, we're not wrong to be insulted.
Hockey...?
Date: 4/14/2010
Watching: San Jose V. Col, Game 1, Round 1:
So I'm watching the Stanley Cup playoffs, because it occurred to me: all I have to do is start following hockey, and I could totally be the fan of a winning team. I'm totally covered by sports fan rules, because I've never really followed hockey, or been the fan of a particular team, AND I just moved to the home town of said team. It's not bandwagon jumping. And I know all the Sharks fans are like, "whatever, they're going down in the first round anyway," (that is a direct quote from multiple sources). But still, just to be the fan of a team that was a contender! Like, and taken seriously by other teams in the league! Do you know how long it's been since that happened to me? TWENTY YEARS! (Specifically, since the 1990 World Series).
So, anyway, it's a commercial break, and naturally they run an A's spot, and I love that their advertising slogan is "Green Collar Baseball." I'm like, oh, I recognize this campaign. This is the "our team kind of sucks this year, so come out and see some likeable, hard-working kids give it their best shot out there. They might even win the day you're there! Who can say?" The A's are really the American League Reds. They haven't been that good since the early 90's, though they've each had brief flirtations with relevance. Any decent players they develop (and the A's have had a few more than the Reds) will move on to a bigger market team. They're not great, and never will be, what else is there to sell? But then, baseball can get away with it. The beauty of baseball is the fact that the season has a million games in it. So any particular game, you hope they win, but if they don't, you know, you can live with it. And maybe your guy hit a home run, or had a good start before the bullpen blew it. Their motto should be "come to the ballpark, and at least you won't be miserable." Which is why ESPN hasn't been good for it. ESPN needs to hype up everything, that's its whole business model (though you have to admire their tone control, they do keep a clear separation between their "news" shows and their "opinion" shows, thus making the hyping in the news shows that much more insidious). But baseball pre-dates hype, and doesn't really benefit from it.
It's hard to get into hockey, though. It's like basketball, if teams only made 2 or 3 shots a game.
Watching: San Jose V. Col, Game 1, Round 1:
So I'm watching the Stanley Cup playoffs, because it occurred to me: all I have to do is start following hockey, and I could totally be the fan of a winning team. I'm totally covered by sports fan rules, because I've never really followed hockey, or been the fan of a particular team, AND I just moved to the home town of said team. It's not bandwagon jumping. And I know all the Sharks fans are like, "whatever, they're going down in the first round anyway," (that is a direct quote from multiple sources). But still, just to be the fan of a team that was a contender! Like, and taken seriously by other teams in the league! Do you know how long it's been since that happened to me? TWENTY YEARS! (Specifically, since the 1990 World Series).
So, anyway, it's a commercial break, and naturally they run an A's spot, and I love that their advertising slogan is "Green Collar Baseball." I'm like, oh, I recognize this campaign. This is the "our team kind of sucks this year, so come out and see some likeable, hard-working kids give it their best shot out there. They might even win the day you're there! Who can say?" The A's are really the American League Reds. They haven't been that good since the early 90's, though they've each had brief flirtations with relevance. Any decent players they develop (and the A's have had a few more than the Reds) will move on to a bigger market team. They're not great, and never will be, what else is there to sell? But then, baseball can get away with it. The beauty of baseball is the fact that the season has a million games in it. So any particular game, you hope they win, but if they don't, you know, you can live with it. And maybe your guy hit a home run, or had a good start before the bullpen blew it. Their motto should be "come to the ballpark, and at least you won't be miserable." Which is why ESPN hasn't been good for it. ESPN needs to hype up everything, that's its whole business model (though you have to admire their tone control, they do keep a clear separation between their "news" shows and their "opinion" shows, thus making the hyping in the news shows that much more insidious). But baseball pre-dates hype, and doesn't really benefit from it.
It's hard to get into hockey, though. It's like basketball, if teams only made 2 or 3 shots a game.
SportsCenter
Date: approx. 4/12/2010
Watching: SportsCenter
I get all contemptuous of SportsCenter when they come up with some ridiculous statistic. Like, "That's the first time all three of a team's outfielders have homered in the team's home opener since the 1987 Padres!" And I'm like, "What? That has no meaning." And yet, really, that applies to basically every statistic. Like, Jorge Cantu has an RBI in every game this season, and I'm wondering how long it will last. What possible reason is there for me to care? They're not even winning.
And now ESPN is giving Tim Tebow a softball interview with Jon Gruden, in order to boost his draft position, in order to maximize their ratings! We think they don't affect what they observe? Haven't you heard of Heisenberg?
Watching: SportsCenter
I get all contemptuous of SportsCenter when they come up with some ridiculous statistic. Like, "That's the first time all three of a team's outfielders have homered in the team's home opener since the 1987 Padres!" And I'm like, "What? That has no meaning." And yet, really, that applies to basically every statistic. Like, Jorge Cantu has an RBI in every game this season, and I'm wondering how long it will last. What possible reason is there for me to care? They're not even winning.
And now ESPN is giving Tim Tebow a softball interview with Jon Gruden, in order to boost his draft position, in order to maximize their ratings! We think they don't affect what they observe? Haven't you heard of Heisenberg?
Welcome, nobody!
So, I'm starting a blog, for whatever bizarre reason it is that people start blogs. Basically, in my case, I like to indulge in a little medicinal activity (it's totes legal where I am) and watch sports. While doing so, I often find myself possessed of fascinating insights, which are lost on my wife, who has developed a moderate interest in tennis, but who otherwise has no interest in sports whatsoever. Thus, this blog. I still won't be telling anybody my fascinating sports insights, but I can pretend that I am. Apparently that will make me feel better.
So, I started this by just keeping a notepad file of my thoughts for the last couple of weeks, to see if my thoughts were really as interesting as they seem in the moment. The answer, of course, was no, but I was reasonably pleased that there did seem to be scraps of value in there. In so far as I have a dominant theme (I don't), it's what I think of as "The Quantum Theory of Sports." The scientifically literate among you will know that it's a basic principle of quantum theory that you can't observe an event without changing it. The same principle applies to sports. The concept of home field advantage rests on that principle, and on a very fundamental level, sports only exists insofar as its observed, both in the crass financial sense and in a deeper, almost religious way, ESPN is far more insidiously influential than is generally acknowledged, etc. But as I am currently neither intoxicated, nor watching sports, I won't get into it any farther, I'll let you discover my genius for yourself! If you exist. Which you don't.
Just to give a quick sports background: I am a lifelong fan of the Cincinnati Bengals and Reds, the University of Dayton men's college basketball team. I've been a fan of the US Men's Soccer Team since the 1994 World Cup, and I am a big tennis fan, my current favorite players being Federer (though I really want to see Roddick win another major) and Justine Henin, who won my heart first by being part of a riveting semi-final in the Australian Open against Jennifer Capriati (which marks the beginning of my serious tennis fandom), and then a few months later blatantly cheating against Serena Williams at the French.
I'll start off by posting the thoughts I collected in the last couple of weeks, in the order I had them. They're not that good, but I like to imagine that I'll get better. In the best blogging tradition, I expect to then continue posting somewhat regularly for the next few weeks, not post for a couple months, post an apology for not posting, post three more times, then abandon the blog forever. Let's take this journey together!
So, I started this by just keeping a notepad file of my thoughts for the last couple of weeks, to see if my thoughts were really as interesting as they seem in the moment. The answer, of course, was no, but I was reasonably pleased that there did seem to be scraps of value in there. In so far as I have a dominant theme (I don't), it's what I think of as "The Quantum Theory of Sports." The scientifically literate among you will know that it's a basic principle of quantum theory that you can't observe an event without changing it. The same principle applies to sports. The concept of home field advantage rests on that principle, and on a very fundamental level, sports only exists insofar as its observed, both in the crass financial sense and in a deeper, almost religious way, ESPN is far more insidiously influential than is generally acknowledged, etc. But as I am currently neither intoxicated, nor watching sports, I won't get into it any farther, I'll let you discover my genius for yourself! If you exist. Which you don't.
Just to give a quick sports background: I am a lifelong fan of the Cincinnati Bengals and Reds, the University of Dayton men's college basketball team. I've been a fan of the US Men's Soccer Team since the 1994 World Cup, and I am a big tennis fan, my current favorite players being Federer (though I really want to see Roddick win another major) and Justine Henin, who won my heart first by being part of a riveting semi-final in the Australian Open against Jennifer Capriati (which marks the beginning of my serious tennis fandom), and then a few months later blatantly cheating against Serena Williams at the French.
I'll start off by posting the thoughts I collected in the last couple of weeks, in the order I had them. They're not that good, but I like to imagine that I'll get better. In the best blogging tradition, I expect to then continue posting somewhat regularly for the next few weeks, not post for a couple months, post an apology for not posting, post three more times, then abandon the blog forever. Let's take this journey together!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)