Rantom Thoughts

More on Beane's Post-Moneyball Trades

2011-08-02T00:00:00.000-07:00

Yesterday we broke down some Billy Beane's post-Moneyball trades to see if he could still be considered a genius. The results were split, the Hudson trade was terrible, the Mulder trade a stroke of artistry. Today we look at two trades that also involved two top of the rotation talents and the Nick Swisher deal, all from 2008. As we did yesterday we are using Wins Above Replacement as our measure of how players fared after each trade. The higher the WAR the better the performance.

Rich Harden SP:

-6 years, 36-19, 541.2 IP, 3.42 ERA, WHIP 1.238, WAR 11.8

-2 years, 14-10, 212.0 IP, 3.31 ERA, WHIP 1.217, WAR 4.0

Sean Gallagher SP:

-2007, 0-0, 14.2 IP, 8.59 ERA, WHIP 2.114, WAR –0.5

-2 years, 3-5, 71.0 IP, 6.34 ERA, WHIP 1.746, WAR –1.5

Scott Hairston OF:

-2008, 362 PA, .248 AVG, .791 OPS, WAR 2.1

-1 year, 248 PA, .236 AVG, .653 OPS, WAR –0.8

Kevin Kouzmanoff 3B:

-2009, 529 PA, .255 AVG, .722 OPS, WAR 1.1

-2 years, 735 PA, .242 AVG, .666, WAR 0.6 (Sent to minors due to bad defense)

Eric Sogard IF:

-2009, 530 PA, .293 AVG, .771 OPS (Minors)

-1 year, 9 PA, .429 AVG, .984 OPS, WAR 0.0 (Still in Minors)

Eric Patterson 2B/LF:

-2008, 53 PA, .239 AVG, .625 OPS, WAR –0.5

-3 years, 325 PA, .221 AVG, .638 OPS, WAR -0.5

Fabian Williamson SP:

-2010, 9-5, 128.1 IP, WHIP 1.590

-No appearances, still in minors

Matt Murton LF:

-2007, 261 PA, .281 AVG, .791 OPS, WAR 0.7

-1 year, 31 PA, .100 AVG, .262, WAR –0.2

Corey Wimberly UTIL:

-2008, 449 PA, .291, .716 OPS, (Minors)

-No appearances, in minors elsewhere

Josh Donaldson:

-2008, 461 PA, .267 AVG, .772 OPS (Minors)

-1 year, 34 PA, .156 AVG, .487 OPS, -0.3 (Currently in minors)

So Harden was an amazing talent who actually wasn't that helpful averaging just under two extra wins/year during his first stint with the A's. After he left it was more of the same as he averaged the same two Wins Above Replacement in his next two years with Chicago and Texas. The guys who came back in that trade and the guys those guys got traded for were actually much worse combining for a -3.3 WAR if we don't count the WAR shares from Kevin Kouzmanoff that we counted yesterday. Still, unlike the Hudson trade this wasn't a bad deal at the time. Billy, Rich, Rich's mom, and the rest of us knew he was going to get hurt again, and again, and again so trying to get something for him was the right move.

Joe Blanton SP:

-5 years, 47-46, 760.2 IP, 4.25 ERA, WHIP 1.330, WAR 8.9

-4 years, 26-16, 476.0 IP, 4.46 ERA, WHIP 1.380, WAR 2.6

Josh Outman SP:

-2007, 12-7, 159.1 IP, 2.99 ERA, WHIP 1.374 (Minors)

-3 years, 8-6, 139.2 IP, 3.67 ERA, WHIP 1.303 WAR 2.5

Adrian Cardenas IF:

-2007, 564 PA, .295 AVG, .770 OPS (Minors)

-Still in minors

Matthew Spencer OF:

-2007, 198 PA, .263 AVG, .789 OPS (Minors)

-Still in minors

Aaron Miles 2B:

-2009, 170 PA, .185 AVG, .466 OPS, WAR –1.4

-Never appeared for the A’s

Adam Rosales 2B:

-2009, 266 PA, .213, .620 OPS WAR –0.2

-2 years, 315 PA, .253 AVG, .696 OPS, WAR 1.0

Jake Fox LF/IF:

-2009, 241 PA, .259 AVG, .779 OPS, WAR 0.4

-1 year, 106 PA, .214 AVG, .591 OPS, WAR –0.5

Ross Wolf RP:

-2009, 4-2, 82 IP, 3.95 ERA, WHIP 1.256 (Minors)

-1 year, 0-0, 12.2 IP, 4.26 ERA, WHIP 1.421 WAR 0.0 (In minors elsewhere)

Win! In limited action over the last three years Outman has already equaled Blanton's WAR production roughly 1/4 the number of innings. Yes Blanton won a World Series but it wasn't the Joe Blanton show. Spencer was turned into Aaron Miles, who never appeared for the A's, and Jake Fox. Miles became Adam Rosales who's been worth 1 extra win over the last two years. Sure Fox cost the team half a win and was traded for nothing but we're still up on this one. Right now anything the A's get from Cardenas is a bonus.

Nick Swisher RF/1B:

-4 years, 1924 PA, .251 AVG, .825 OPS, WAR 9.0

-4 years, 2142 PA, .241 AVG, .800 OPS, WAR 9.7 (With Yankees)

Faustino De Los Santos RP:

-2007, 10-5, 122.3 IP, 2.65 ERA, WHIP .916 (Minors)

-1 year, 2.1 IP, 3.86 ERA, WHIP .857, WAR 0.0 (Prospect)

Gio Gonzalez SP:

-2007, 9-7, 150 IP, 3.18 ERA, WHIP 1.153 (Minors)

-4 years 20-25, 435.1 IP, 3.95 ERA, 1.413 WAR 5.6 (Doing well)

Ryan Sweeney OF:

-2007, 49 PA, .200 AVG, .599 OPS, WAR –0.3

-4 years, 1453 PA, .290 AVG, .735 OPS, WAR 5.0 (Solid)

Basically Swish has been Swish. He hasn't changed much over time. In return the A's got three very good prospects from the White Sox. Sweeny and Gio have more than replaced Swisher's production with the downside being that they've taken up two positions on the field to do it. If Sweeny had been able to equal Swisher's out put on his own this would have been a great trade. As it is, the real story of this trade will likely depend on what Gio does for the rest of his time in the green and gold. A likely scenario is that he'll eventually be traded for more prospects. De Los Santos is likely on his way to Oakland right now and if he can produce this thing could swing slightly in the A's favor, as it is it's basically a wash.

Next time we wrap up this three part series by looking at actual replacement players. Billy's let a few guys walk as free agents, I'll examine the value of those decisions. Cheers.

Billy Bails

2011-07-31T20:36:00.000-07:00

The 2011 MLB trade deadline has come and gone and even though the A's are going nowhere Billy Beane only made one move, sending relief pitcher Brad Ziegler to the Diamondbacks for a couple prospects. It may turn out to be a great move but the fact is the A's could have done so much more. Hideki Matsui, Coco Crisp, Rich Harden, Josh Willingham, David DeJesus, and Brandon McCarthy are all free agents at the end of the year and are unlikely to return. I for one was hoping for a complete fires ale of all players not under club control beyond this year but either Billy thinks he'd rather see what these guys have so he can gauge resigning them or the rest of baseball is scared. The A's did have a deal in place to send Rich Harden to the Red Sox but that fell through when the Sox got spooked. Maybe they saw a preview for the Moneyball movie and remembered how Billy fleeced so many other teams in the past.

So without much to analyze this year let's take a look back. Not all the way back, I don't want to ruin the movie for you so let's look at the post-Moneyball trades and see how good Billy has been. Some people have looked at the A's struggles since 2006 and scoffed that the Moneyball ideals don't work anymore. Of course this is complete buffoonery since the stats so revered in Moneyball (i.e. OPS) are now driving huge salaries in New York and Boston. Of course what the Moneyball philosophy is really about is finding out what people aren't paying huge money for and trying to get that skill on the cheap. In recent years in Oakland that's meant a return to valuing speed and defense, exactly the skills overvalued prior to the release of Moneyball.

So, how has our man Billy done since everyone found out how smart he is? Below is a break down of the major trades Billy's made since, and including, breaking up Oakland's vaunted Big Three back in 2004. The chart looks at three measures of player value, On-base Plus Slugging (OPS_ for hitters, Walks and Hits per Inning Pitched (WHIP) for pitchers and Wins Above Replacement (WAR) for both. For context here's how career OPS looks for three hitters, two are very good and one is famously bad:

Barry Bonds: 1.051
Albert Pujols: 1.041
Mario Mendoza: .507

You probably know Bonds and Pujols are great hitters. Mendoza is the name sake of "The Mendoza Line" which represents a .200 batting average.

For more context here's the WHIP numbers for three pitchers, again, two very good and one very bad.

Cy Young: 1.130
Sandy Koufax: 1.106
Vin Mazzaro 1.630

Cy Young is the guy they named the Cy Young award after. Sandy Koufax is someone you should look up if you don't know who he is. Vin Mazzaro recently had two of the worst days a pitcher has ever had. First he gave up 14 runs in 2.1 innings and was sent to the minors. It was statistcally the worst game ever pitched by anyone in the majors ever. For the year Mazzaro's WHIP sits at 2.137 which is just gawd awful.

I think the WAR stat is the most instructive here as it tells us what the stats meant in terms of each player contributing wins to the club over multiple seasons.

The chart is a little funky, each time you see an indent and a player's name and stats it means the indented player was traded for the player above him. Each player blurb reads like this:

Name Name Pos:
-What they did the year(s) before the trade (and at what level)
-What they did after the trade (Comment)

For example, let's look at a trade that did not work out well for Oakland even if you figure the player, Tim Hudson, wasn't going to resign with the A's.

Tim Hudson SP:
-6 years, 92-39, 1240.2 IP, 3.30 ERA WAR 28.9
-7 years, 79-54, 1147.2 IP, 3.54 ERA WAR 19.5 (Still in ATL)

Charles Thomas OF:
-1 year, 267 PA, .288 AVG WAR 2.1
-1 year, 55 PA, .109 AVG WAR –0.2 (Last Appearance, out of baseball)

JD Closser C:
-2006, 112 PA, .196 AVG WAR -0.1
-No Appearances for Oakland (In minors elsewhere)

Juan Cruz RP:
-2004, 6-2, 75 IP, 2,75 ERA WAR 1.1
-1 year, 0-3, 32.2 IP, 7.44 ERA WAR –1.1 (Doing OK elsewhere)

Brad Halsey SP:
-2005, 8-12, 160 IP, 4.61 ERA WAR -0.1
-1 year, 5-4, 94.1 IP, 4.67 ERA WAR 0.4 (Last Appearance, in minors elsewhere)

Dan Meyer RP:
-2004, 9-6, 126.1 IP, 2.49 ERA (Minors)
-2 years, 0-6, 44.0 IP, 7.98 ERA WAR –1.8 (Journeyman, in minors elsewhere)

So how do we read this? Well, Hudson did well enough in 6 years in Oakland that he likely helped the team win almost 29 extra games over that span, roughly 5 games/year. In return the A's got three guys, plus two guys from a subsequent trade who combined to help them lose a combined 2.7 (negative WAR means the player is costing you wins) extra games over the next two years. Essentially the A's would have been better off keeping Hudson in 2005 and then letting him walk. In the meantime Hudson has continued to be pretty darn good for Atlanta helping them win almost 3 extra games/year compared to an average replacement player.

Now, let's look at a much more complicated but also much more successful trade, Mark Mulder:

Mark Mulder SP:

-5 years, 81-42, 1003 IP, 3.92 ERA, WHIP 1.284, WAR 17.5

-4 years, 22-18, 311 IP, 5.04 ERA, WHIP 1.531, WAR –1.4 (Last Appearance, out of baseball)

Kiko Calero RP:

-2004, 3-1, 45.1 IP, 2.78 ERA, WHIP .816, WAR 0.8

-4 years 8-8, 159 IP, 3.96 ERA, WHIP 1.321, WAR 1.8 (Journeyman, out of baseball)

Daric Barton 1B:

-2004, 393 PA, .313 AVG, .956 OPS (Minors)

-5 years, 1765 PA, .252 AVG, .740 OPS, WAR 6.2 (Recently sent down to minors)

Dan Haren SP:

-2004, 3-3, 46 IP, 4.50 ERA, WHIP 1.348, WAR 0.1

-3 years, 37-26, 662 IP, 3.64 ERA, WHIP 1.212, WAR 11.7 (Doing well)

Brett Anderson SP:

-2007, 11-7, 120.1 IP, 3.07 ERA, WHIP 1.564 (Minors)

-3 years, 21-23, 371 IP, 3.66 ERA, WHIP 1.267, WAR 5.9 (Doing OK)

Chris Carter 1B/LF:

-2007, 545 PA, .291 AVG, .906 OPS (Minors)

-2 years, 79 PA, .183 AVG, .573 OPS, WAR –0.7 (Prospect)

Dana Eveland RP:

-2007, 1-0, 5 IP, 14.40 ERA, WHIP 2.60, WAR –0.4

-2 years, 11-13, 212 IP, 4.92 ERA, WHIP 1.627, WAR 0.8 (Last Appearance, in minors elsewhere)

Aaron Cunningham OF:

-2007, 573 PA, .308 AVG, .885 OPS, (Minors)

-2 years, 144 PA, .211 AVG, .609 OPS, WAR –0.6 (Meh)

Kevin Kouzmanoff 3B:

-2009, 529 PA, .255 AVG, .722 OPS, WAR 1.1

-2 years, 735 PA, .242 AVG, .666, WAR 0.6 (Sent to minors due to bad defense)

Eric Sogard IF:

-2009, 530 PA, .293 AVG, .771 OPS (Minors)

-1 year, 9 PA, .429 AVG, .984 OPS, WAR 0.0 (Still in Minors)

Carlos Gonzalez CF:

-2007 547 PA, .288 AVG, .814 OPS (Minors)

-1year, 316 PA, .242 AVG, .634 OPS, WAR 1.1 (3^rd in MVP 2010 for Colorado)

Greg Smith SP:

-2007, 9-5, 122 IP, 3.54, WHIP 1.510 (Minors)

-1 year, 7-16, 190.1 IP, 4.16 ERA, WHIP 1.345, WAR 2.0 (In minors elsewhere)

Matt Holliday LF:

-2008, 623 PA, .321 AVG, .947 OPS, WAR 4.8

-1 year, 400 PA, .286 AVG, .831 OPS, WAR 2.4 (Doing well for Cards)

Shane Peterson OF:

-2009, 571 PA, .288 AVG, .768 OPS (Minors)

-Still in minors

Brett Wallace 3B:

-2009, 600 PA, .293 AVG, .822 OPS (Minors)

-No Appearances for Oakland now in majors with Houston

Michael Taylor OF:

-2009, 491 PA, .320 AVG, .850 OPS (Minors)

-Still in minors

Clayton Mortensen SP:

-2009, 0-0, 3 IP, 6.00 ERA, WHIP 2.00, WAR –0.3

-2 years, 2-4, 33.2 IP, 7.22 ERA, WHIP 1.693, WAR –1.0 (Meh)

Ethan Hollingsworth SP:

-2010, 12-8, 170.2 IP, 3.31 ERA, WHIP 1.839 (Minors)

-Still in minors

So, Mark Mulder who in five seasons in Oakland was worth 17.5 extra wins all on his own, an average of 3.5 wins/year goes to St Louis and costs them roughly a game and a half over four injury plagued years. In return the A's got Daric Barton, Kiko Calero, and Dan Haren, a direct combined WAR value of 19.7 over the last seven years. Just with that the A's clearly win this trade and Billy's a good GM. But the fun doesn't stop there because Haren (and a couple other spare parts) was turned into the fantastic haul of Brett Anderson, Chris Carter, Aaron Cunningham, Dana Eveland, Carlos Gonzalez and Greg Smith who contributed another 8.5 Wins Above Replacement. But wait! There's More! Aaron Cunningham became Kevin Kouzmanoff and Eric Sogard and another 0.6 wins. CarGo and Greg Smith became Matt Holliday's 2.4 wins for half of 2009. Trading Holliday actually cost a win no thanks to Clay Mortensen but it also gave s Brett Wallace who became Michael Taylor who should be up in Oakland the September. All told the Mulder deal netted the A's 30 wins over what they would have gotten from your average players over that time plus prospects. If you factor in avoiding the losses Mulder incurred that's a net of almost 35 extra wins over the last seven seasons. WINNING!

OK, I think that's good for now. Next post we'll break down the Rich Harden and Joe Blanton trades.

Quick Thought on Libertarians

2011-06-08T18:23:00.000-07:00

Is there any group that seems more confused than Libertarians? I get the feeling that people who call themselves Libertarians rarely know what the term and the ideology really are. It seems that many of them just like to hate the government and they've hit on a few ideas they heard somewhere and decided to say "Hey, I'm a Libertarian." I mean, these are the people who, along with the Tea Party, do things like plan huge rallies in DC to protest taxes and government services and then complain that the city didn't ramp up metro service to accommodate them.

Now here's the thing. I don't know much about being a Libertarian either. And I'm not super motivated to find out. I looked up Ron Paul and it seems like he has some interesting ideas that would never ever work in a million years. They wouldn't work for the same reason communism doesn't work on a national level, they're predicated on people doing the right thing. In the case of communism the reliance on people giving an honest effort and then taking only what they need ignores the fact that people are complete assholes. Ron Paul's ideas hinge on things like corporate stewardship and the belief that companies will take care of their employees and only charge what they need to for goods and services. Basically he ignores 2011 years of world history. My friend who suggested I look up Ron Paul works as a government contractor. I asked him about Paul wanting to cut most government services possibly including the one that employs this friend and his answer was, "Well hopefully not all of them."

Now, how did I get on this? I've recently made a couple of acquaintances who call themselves Libertarians and they say thing that confuse me vis a vis their supposed political stance. The one that got me thinking involved my taxes. I was telling someone that I got a tax break last year because I'm renting my house in California for less than what the mortgage and property taxes cost. The result is that it became a business loss. So instead of having to pay taxes on the rental income as I feared, I got a huge credit. Yay me!

The response from one of my new Libertarian friends was basically, "Great see, this is what's wrong with this country. The government is paying people to fail." Well thanks pal. But come on, if they'll do it for Wall Street why not for me? I never could tell if he had been for or against the Wall Street bailout but he was certainly against my tax break.

It wasn't until later that I realized how non-Libertarian his little freak out was. First of all, he should be happy I wasn't taxed on my income. Second it wouldn't make sense for me to be taxed since there really wasn't any income. My "business" lost a ton of money. I didn't "get paid to fail" all I got was not taxed to death while also losing money. If the feds came along and said "Hey, give us $3,000 on top of not making a profit." it would just be piling on. After all, it's income tax. You can't really tax income that isn't there. So shouldn't Libertarians be happy for me? The government is basically leaving me alone to fail or succeed on my own without either helping me or dipping into my pockets. Isn't that what the Libertarians want?

Skills to Avoid the Bills

2011-03-16T16:04:00.000-07:00

Can we get a few things straight here? Please? Specifically regarding payment for services and how much and whatnot? Can we? I’ll warn you now, I’m in a hurry and I’m not going to do a lot of research on this one, I’m just gonna shoot from the hip. Agreed? Fuck, they’re rants after all right? Right.

Here’s the deal, an accumulation of comments has been bugging me lately capped off by Adrian Peterson’s comment that being an NFL player is “like modern day slavery.” Yes, the guy set to make $10.4M once the NFL resumes business in 2011 is a slave. Others who have been referred to as slaves recently include college athletes who claim that their so called labor and likenesses are used by the NCAA and member schools with no compensation. A group of these college athletes led by former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon has recently sued the NCAA and EA Sports for unfair practices. I think the Peterson quote is something we can all dismiss as blatant stupidity. The student athlete is a little more complicated. When these kids accept their scholarships they sign away their rights to the NCAA forever. Basically the scholarship agreement allows the NCAA to use the kids' image etc for marketing purposes any way the NCAA wants in perpetuity. I don't know if I agree with that. But the fact is, the kids do have a choice, don't sign. If you think you're all that and you think you're going to be a legend who's going to be plastered on water bottles and billboards decades after you leave school then hold out for a better deal. And don't tell me you don't get paid. You get a free education, books, dorm, meal plan, etc. You know, the shit the rest of us are going tens of thousands of dollars into debt for. You also often get tutoring, you get to travel and get excused absences from class. You get say you played college sports. You get a ton. You. Get. Paid. Period. Maybe the NCAA shouldn't own you forever, but without them you wouldn't have some famous image to put out there. You'd be like the rest of us. No one wants to see me in a video game.

Let's talk a little more about being paid. Another group recently compared to slaves in my presence is white suburban housewives. In a class discussion on Dorothy Smith's book "Ethnography for the People" we examined her redefinition of the term "work." Basically she says work is anything you do intentionally. The point is to fram the work women do in the home as work that contributes to society on par with what men do outside the home. I personally don't see how this is so revolutionary, especially for a book published in 2005, since I grew up with this idea. I have no problem with this definition of "work." But I take issue with an idea Smith espoused and my professor backed up which is that this women's work was "unpaid." Excuse me? These women aren't paying rent, for food, for any expenses really, they are given transportation, health care, and often extra money to buy things they like. Much like college athletes these women are paid for their work. If they don't like it they can go get traditional jobs outside the home. They can run their marriages like financial partnerships.

Now I know this is a complicated socio-political issue. But I can't accept that if we are going to redefine "work" (and we should), that we resist also redefining "paid," which should also be redefined. "Payment" is anything you receive in exchange for your work. This idea did not go over well in class and led one of my fellow students then compare being a housewife to slavery. After all, slaves also got free room and board and health care. I mean, aside from the fact that the slaves were forced to be there under penalty of death isn't that big a distinguishing factor right?

Wrong. And that's the point. Nothing compares to slavery except for more slavery. Any time you have choice to do or not do you are not a slave. You don't have to take the scholarship. You don't have to play in the NFL. You don't have to get married and stay home. You have a choice. And don't tell me that they don't really have a choice because not taking the scholarship or whatever means they have nothing. Just because it's a hard choice or a choice with one really beneficial side and one bleak side doesn't mean you don't have a choice. Hard choices are what define life. If you take the scholarship, or the money, or the house in the 'burbs you have to accept what you are choosing. If you decide later that you don't want it you can leave, because you're not a slave.

Moving on. Peterson also states that the NFL is making a lot of money off of the players. This same sentiment is often expressed by people who think college athletes should be paid cash on to p of their sweet sweet scholarships. But here's the thing dummies, you make money off them too. Guess what AP, there isn't anyone else in the world with the means or the desire to pay you $10.4M to run around with a ball. You can check. Go to the UFL or CFL and see what kind of gig they have to offer. Or, go get a real job and see how that pans out. Yes, the owners make money because people want to see you play. But the owners are also the only ones who have the infrastructure to make you rich and famous. Without them you're me. Guess what, players come and go. The game and the brand persist. So yes, we watch you, but really we watch the NFL. We watched before you came, and we'll watch when you're gone. You are easily replaceable, the league is not. The same goes for NCAA athletes. Guess what Ed? Your time at UCLA is the only reason people know who you are. You were not a good NBA player. You peaked in college. Instead of suing because the NCAA helps keep your memory alive maybe you should be happy anyone cares who you are. Because the truth is, if you're so upset I'm sure the NCAA would be happy to use Grant Hill next time.

One more note on being paid and what jobs are worth. I am sick to death of hearing people compare athletes to farmers and teachers. It usually goes something like this, "It's disgusting that these pro athletes make all this money and teachers are getting laid off." Or, "I don't watch pro sports because my dad's a farmer and he's struggling while feeding America. Doesn't he deserve to be rich?" Well no, if he were rich he'd stop being a fucking farmer. Seriously, this shit is so ignorant it's silly. Do you know why teachers and farmers don't make Adrian Peterson money? It's because you can't get 50,000 people to regularly pay $100 for tickets, $20 for parking, guzzling $10 beers to come watch your dad fucking farm. It's not interesting. Teachers don't get paid big bucks because as much as I love and respect teachers, most of them suck. Seriously, it's one of the few jobs it seems like they'll just let anyone do. I was hired to teach linguistics even though I told them at the interview that they should find someone else. That's why teachers get paid shit. Because the system is set up to let shit people become teachers. I'm not saying all teachers are bad people. Or that they're not great valuable members of society. But let's be honest, you've had more bad ones than good ones in your life. As for farmers, some of them get paid to not farm so that the ones that do farm can get a decent price for their goods. If you're dad wants to be rich he can sell his veggies or milk or whatever for $100 each. Maybe all the farmers can do that, then all the farmers will be rich and the rest of us will be malnourished or dead. Wouldn't that be nice?

Pro athletes aren't paid based on their worth to society. They're paid because WE pay them. We watch the TV commercials that convince advertisers to pay networks that pay the leagues huge sums of cash. We buy the tickets and the jerseys and the video games. We do it. It's us. Don't blame athletes, blame yourself or your friends, or your family. We do this. We don't pay teachers and farmers big bucks because we don't buy teaching bubble gum cards. We don't want corporate sponsorship of education. But the fact is that teaching and farming are such shit jobs that if you got a million dollars for doing it you'd fucking quit. There's no way you'd deal with these little asshole students and demanding asshole parents and fucking asshole administrators if you had a million dollars. Let's face it, a lot of teachers teach because they love teaching. A lot would keep doing it if they already had money. But so many more do it because they thought they'd love it and now they feel stuck.

So what's the answer? I don't have an answer. Maybe it's corporate sponsored education. Maybe it's halting pro sports until all the whiny babies can share their billions of dollars. I think a long work stoppage would be a good thing int he long run. Most pro baseball players have roughly a high school diploma. Let's see how they do out in the real job market. Baseball tried a players league 100 years ago or so. It failed. Now that players are millionaires maybe they should try it again. No owners. Unhappy players can start a football collective and put their money where their mouths are. They can set up infrastructure, TV deals, political allies, get venues, advertisers, clothing deals and all that. I think that would be good. In the meantime teachers can try to get shoe deals and have their faces put on water bottles and such. That would be nice.

Bonny Prince Hank

2011-02-22T17:23:00.000-08:00

I recently saw this article on espn.com in which Hal Steinbrenner calls revenue sharing ""Socialism, communism, whatever you want to call it." And says of teams in small markets, "At some point, if you don't want to worry about teams in minor markets, don't put teams in minor markets, or don't leave teams in minor markets if they're truly minor,"

So where does he want to go? Maybe Hal is for contraction. By my quick look around the internet 4 teams fall outside of the top 30 US media markets. So what, maybe get rid of those 4 (#31 Kansas City #32 Cincinnati, #33 Milwaukee, Toronto) then get rid of the double dippers (White Sox, A's, Mets, Angels) and you're all set right?

I like his "don't put them in small markets" comment like teams just got dropped in these cities randomly last week. These teams have been in most of these towns for a very very long time. When they were established baseball still had the reserve clause. You didn't need $200M for your payroll. Now times have changed. You need a healthy league to have interest. If you don't support the Royals then you're hurting the league.

I will say there should be a salary floor. If you take revenue sharing money you should basically be a break even organization. You should be forced to put that money into development, not the owner's pocket. Of course Hank could pay less in luxury tax if say, he kept his payroll down. Like maybe not paying $35M for a set up guy.

Please Don't Melt Me in Your Pot

2011-02-21T17:00:00.000-08:00

I was recently told by a couple young men that I should disassociate myself from the label or group known as "feminists." They told me I'd be wise to avoid that group because they are now seen as crazy, man-hating, radicals. They gave me this advise in order to "help" me. I needed their help, they said, because the world had passed me by. Someone else told me we should "get rid of labels" especially the ones where people align themselves with color. The idea was that these labels are divisive. The goal, according to this person, was to move on to a world where we don't see any difference.

To me this is a nice whitewashed fantasy. It is only from a certain privileged vantage that one can ask for the rest of the world to do away with the labels that have been forced upon them for so long. It's an even more privileged view when you can make giving up these labels a condition of your acceptance. As if somehow because you've been allowed to move beyond race we all have to follow or we're not really interested in equality. Once again, the powerful are setting conditions on the rest of us, dictating what will be allowed in order for us to gain acceptance.

This same person said they don't mind labels related to culture as if culture and ethnicity and color are separate and unequal parts of identity. I believe that when black, or latino or woman have been foisted on a people for hundreds of years and have eventually been adopted by those people and transformed into labels of liberation, that it is oppressive to then decide, no, you must give up these labels that were forced on you that you have made your own because now they make the rest of us uncomfortable. We did not choose to be labeled. We did not choose to have color associated with inferiority. But now that we have pride in ourselves in our color, our gender people want to take that away too.

So I ask, what else should I disassociate myself from? Should I not claim to be a Christian because of the bigotry and hate spewed by some who claim ownership of God? Should I not call myself a man because of the horrors and atrocities men have visited upon the world? Should I not align myself with Latinos because of the current backlash against immigrants? What other parts of my identity should I cast off in order to make you comfortable? How else can I deny my history, our history together in order to make you feel better? What other accommodations can I make to you in order to ease into your acceptance?

How about none? That is my offer. I offer that I am a man, a feminist, a Latino, an Asian, a Christian, and many other things. I cannot deny that I am any of these things and I will not hide from them just because you think they are divisive or crazy or radical or dogmatic. Those are not who I am, they are your views of who I am. What I offer is a future where I accept your difference and you accept mine. A world where we acknowledge and celebrate our differences and our roots and the strengths we bring to the world through the lenses of our experiences not only as individuals but as member of groups as well.

If we can't accept all of someone then we can't accept any of them. We can't ask people to leave their identities at the door.

Random Ranting

2010-09-20T09:28:00.000-07:00

Hello Rant Fans,

I haven't had a ton of time lately and it's killing me to be away from you for so long. This PhD thing is a ass kicker and I haven't had time to devote to coming up with the kind of thoughtful analysis of the day's important issues that we all expect from Sir Rantalot. Then I realized my original idea of ranting without any supporting evidence or citations (or grammar, or spell checking) and I felt liberated. So, here's a few things I've been wanting to say.

-Remember this post about Mike Vick coming back to the NFL? If not you can read it now. The point is I had this to say to the guy who was all mad that Vick was suspended coming off his incarceration while Ben Roethlisberger wasn't suspended after his first rape allegation. Here's what SR had to say to that:

"Vick has shown a pattern and Ben has not. IF Ben gets in trouble again they will look back to his current situation and say "There's a pattern." Ben had better watch his step in the future."

Hey look! Sir Rantalot was right again. Ben has shown a pattern and a six game suspension (recently reduced to four games) despite there being no conviction. He was punished for being a jackass. Race has nothing to do with it, commissioner Goodell does not play.

-Speaking of Mike Vick, can we get off the QB controversy in Philly? IN the last two years both Vick and Kevin Kolb have each had two good games. Is that enough to toss Kolb aside and anoint Vick? Does anyone remember that Vick has only once had a passer rating over 80? He's exciting, but is he a good QB over the long haul? Still, as I said last year, I'd love to see him in SF.

-People were all on the Jets' offense after their week one loss to Baltimore. Didn't anyone notice how terrible the Jets defense was in that game? They kept coming with the all out blitz and getting burned deep. Don't blame Sanchez, blame Rex Ryan. His D was terrible.

-Dear misogynists, stop dwelling on what Inez Sainz was wearing. But really, enough of whether female reporter should be in the locker room or not. Does anyone need to be in the locker room? Why not let these guys shower and get dressed and then come out and be interviewed? And no it's not a double standard that male reporters aren't allowed into female sports locker rooms. If you need an explanation as to why then you're not paying attention to American society.

-Wow, Darrelle Revis is injured and Brett Favre says he needs "time to gel" with his teammates. I guess maybe going to training camp IS important. Afterall, isn't that when you're supposed to "gel" with your teammates and "get in shape so you don't pull a hammy?" Maybe the long holdout/retirement waffle isn't in anyone's best interest.

-With that said, who wants to trade for Vincent Jackson? Anyone? Bueller?

-I hate Derek Jeter but his "Ouch I got hit with the ball" performance was hilarious. If you ain't Jeteing you ain't trying.

That's all for today kids. Dunno what I'm talking about? GGI.

Toodles.

Regarding Marty

2010-06-24T17:57:00.000-07:00

I was on the sideline that day at the Bingham Cup in June 2006. In fact I had just returned to the sidelines after having been removed by a teammate a few minutes earlier for getting a little to chippy with the opposition players and supporters. The game had been back and forth with each team holding slim leads for short intervals. My boys were losing by two in the final minutes to a team we had beaten handily just a few months before. As the game went into stoppage time my club put on a furious attack, one that gained a few meters at a time but which constantly threatened to be stopped by a penalty, or a lost ruck, or any other number of things. There was desperation in the air on all both sides as the next whistle would certainly be the end of the game.

What happened next is far and away the greatest moment I’ve ever been a part of as an athlete. With our attack stalled just shy of the half way line our scrum half Marty stood back from the ruck and called for another player, any other player to throw him the ball. Some how one of our flankers was able to toss the ball out Marty who stood approximately fifty-five meters out from the posts. In one fluid motion Marty caught the pass and drop kicked the ball, it seemed, directly into the sun.

Two years later I was on the sideline again. I had missed most of the tournament due to my brother’s high school graduation, a ceremony I wasn’t going to miss as it was a bit of a miracle itself. Still, I had managed to play in parts of two games that day. Our boys had lost to our rivals from New York in the quarterfinals. It was a bitter defeat. As we watched the final Marty, our little Irish fireplug who’d be showing us around Dublin later that night, remarked, “Y’know Berto, I don know if I can keep dooen this. Every year we get close, but we never get over the hump like. I’m tire o just shown up and playin well. I want to win the damn thing n I just don know if we can do’t.”

Another two years go by and I’m no longer a player. Instead I’m back at Bingham as a referee. It’s different, but I’m thrilled to be involved. The top four teams roll through pool play leaving no doubt who the class of the tournament are. The quarterfinals are also unsurprising as all four of the top seeds advance. Then, in the semis, Marty and the boys are set to face their old rivals from New York. Again, even though our boys had beaten them easily earlier in the year, New York, as they do every two years, is putting up a tremendous fight. Some time in the last five minutes Marty gets his bell rung and is forced to come off the field to have bleeding controlled. At this point his team, our team, is down by seven. Again they mount a furious charge and with no time left they punch one across dead center between the posts.

As I come back to the referee’s tent after my match another ref, also a former teammate tells me, “The Renegades are about to go to overtime against Gotham.” The implication is that the conversion is a given. It’s directly in front of the posts and Marty is coming back on to take the kick. It’s a done deal. Marty is one of the most accurate and strong legged kickers I’ve ever seen on a pitch at any level. Hell, his nick-name is “Miracle Marty,” so named for how many games he’s won the club with his boot. I figure I have plenty of time to report my score and then go over and then quietly, perhaps from a distance, watch the end of the match.

I remember Scott Norwood. If the name doesn’t ring a bell he’s the kicker for the Buffalo Bills who missed a game winning kick in the Super Bowl. The Bills went to four consecutive Super Bowls in the early 1990s, an NFL record, and didn’t win any of them. The closest they came was a forty-seven yard field goal attempt with eight seconds left that went wide right. The kicker, Scott Norwood is usually associated with that one kick. It was part of the plots of the films “Ace Ventura” and “Buffalo 66.” People blame Scott Norwood. I feel for him. I’ve done some kicking in my career. I would describe my kicking ability as serviceable, sometimes even useful, but I was never great. I was never Marty, or Scott Norwood. At the time Norwood lined up for his kick against the Giants in January of 1991 he was the Buffalo Bills all time leading scorer, the next year he would kick the winning field goal in the AFC title game to send Buffalo back to the Super Bowl, but most people don’t remember that. Most people remember “wide right.” It’s not fair. As a kicker I know what it’s like to line up a ball, set your self, approach and strike. A lot of the time you know as you hit it if it has a chance. As a kicker I have a particular empathy for the job and the people who do it. Often disregarded as not being real players kickers are thought to be nearly interchangeable, until you really need one. One problem with kicking is that until you miss an important one people don’t really notice you. And because they don’t notice they don’t understand what goes into it, how any one of million different things can go wrong. A slightly misplaced plant foot, a small difference in your strike point, a sudden gust of wind, tall grass that tilts the tee, ground that’s softer than it seems, any of a million things that can go wrong. Certainly getting hit in the head and leaving the field for blood can have an effect on a kicker.

I didn’t see Marty’s kick. I didn’t think I had to. I was going to report my scores and then go quietly, and perhaps from a distance, watch the rest of the match. When I got near the fields I heard what had happened. Marty had missed. The boys had lost to their rivals 15-13, just two points from a tie. Not just a tie, but a tie with momentum! A tie where they had just shown that they could win! But it wasn’t a tie. They couldn’t win. Marty’s kick had sailed wide. By the time I found him the game had only been over for a few minutes. His eyes were red and swollen. I embraced him and held him for a good long time. “Berto,” he said to me, “I fucked it up man. I really fucked it up. I cost us the chance and it was an easy one man. How many times have you seen me make that kick Berto? How many times?” A million times. I’ve seen him make that kick in just about every game I’ve seen him play. I tried to remind him that even making that kick didn’t promise anything but another few minutes, that the other team could have taken the next kickoff back for a score, that ultimately it didn’t matter. I knew it rang hollow. What can you say to ease the pain of player who’s just missed the biggest kick of his life? What did they say to Scott Norwood? “You see Berto man, Becky and I are gonna be wantin to star a family now. Y’see, I know this is my last Bingham Cup. I wanted to win it. I wanted my chance and I had it, and I fucked it up.” All I could think to say was, I love you Marty, don’t dwell on it, this doesn’t define you, and then go out and make sure we drank safely that night.

The fields on Randall’s Island in New York are more dirt and needles than grass. Throughout the three days of the tournament the British and European teams were incredulous about the condition of the fields they were being forced to play on. The field for this game was especially sparse on vegetation and the dust clouds lingered in the air as strong men fell violently to the ground. It was though this haze, staring into the setting sun that we watched Marty’s kick sail through air. It too seemed to hang forever as if gravity was aware of the moment and wanted us to savor it. I remember following the path of the ball, losing sight of it in the glare and haze, then finding it again just as it landed over the crossbar. For a moment everything was still. When the referee’s whistle split the air between what was inevitable and what was possible I remember thinking “Please let it be over. Please don’t let there be another kickoff.” The first whistle meant the kick was good, the second meant the game was over. We had won. The New York fans ignorant and arrogant began to cheer and rush the field clanging they’re infernal cow bells. One of them ran up to me and screamed “Yeah! Yeah! How do you like that?” “I like it just fine.” I replied, “We just won.” As our sideline rushed out to pay tribute to the fifteen lads on the field the reality set in for the home side supporters. They had just been beaten by a fantastic play, a 55 meter drop goal with no time left. We ended up third out of twenty-nine teams. It was the club’s highest finish in three appearances in the Bingham Cup. The legend of “Miracle Marty” was now firmly established, and nothing could ever take it away.

Don't Phase Me Bro

2010-06-04T08:20:00.000-07:00

I think my views on use of force by law enforcement would surprise a lot of people. Contrary to what some people may assume I’m pretty supportive of it in many situations. My basic view is this, if you don’t want get tased, beat up, or killed just do whatever the cops tell you to do. Even better, don’t get in a position where the cops are telling you to do something. I say this as someone who’s had run ins with law enforcement. I’ve had guns drawn on me, been in lock up, hidden from the police, been beat up by cops over a misunderstanding, been stopped for “fitting a description,” etc. My experiences, cases that have come to my attention, and conversations and training with law enforcement have shaped my view on use of force. It seems like the person getting hammered on is almost always in a position to avoid it if they could just keep their heads. Also, public perception is skewed way out of line (often from watching too much fiction) from what I understand to be police training. I bring this up now because this idiot who ran on the field at a baseball game and got tased provided a nice counter point to this guy who got tased when just about anything else could have worked instead.

First let me briefly relay my own experiences with law enforcement:

When I was thirteen some friends and I were playing hide-and-seek (manhunt) in a neighborhood at night. Naturally someone thought we were burglars and called the cops. The cops showed up with guns drawn. We avoided being killed by complying with their directions and everything got sorted out. I was scary but OK.

When I was sixteen I was walking down the street one evening when two squad cars drove the wrong way down a one way street because I looked “just like someone who escaped from prison a few hours” before. I sat on the curb for a while, they cleared it up, and I was on my way.

When I was seventeen I was stopped for skateboarding on UC Berkeley property. The “cop” asked us about some graffiti nearby but couldn’t pin it on us. He then asked for ID. When I turned around to go to my backpack where my ID was he assumed I was running and proceeded to call four other guys to come help beat the crap out of me since with him being 6’2” and all muscled he clearly couldn’t handle my 5’10 120lb frame all by himself. I’m still pissed about it but time and maturity have taught me that if I’d said, “Sure officer, it’s in my bag right over there. Can I go get it?” then none of that would probably have happened. But I was young and trying to do what I was told, I just didn’t understand what it is that cops look for and more importantly, what they fear.

Cops are often constantly on high alert. How many times does a routine traffic stop turn into a shoot out? OK well, not very often but often enough that it has to be in the back of your mind every time you pull someone over. How often do people run from the police? Pretty often. Certainly enough that it’s probably annoying and you feel like beating someone up over it. The point is, understanding what cops are thinking and what they go through and what they’re looking for can help you avoid getting beat up.

But where do you start? It’s pretty simple. The first thing to remember is it doesn’t matter if you’re “right.” If you are right you will likely be vindicated in the end. However, you are not going to get a chance to show that you’re right unless you first do whatever the cop is telling you to do. Once the officer sees that you are compliant and not a threat they are less likely to beat the crap out of you and more likely to listen. People more worried about being right than not getting tased have gotten themselves in more trouble than we can ever know. In my experience if you get through the first few minutes of doing what the cop says and being respectful they can actually be pretty reasonable. If you start off with how you know your rights and you didn’t do anything and fuck them then you’re probably going to jail or getting smacked around whether or not you actually deserve it.

This is not to say that cops don’t need to dial it down and learn to better assess a situation. Clearly some cops are out of control and out to do harm for whatever fucked up reason. The guy who shot a defenseless young man on a BART platform is an example of cops who go too far with little provocation. A few years ago there was a case where the police, responding to a domestic disturbance, killed a deaf man in his own driveway because he was holding a rake and he did not understand their command to lay it down. Soon after another deaf man was severely beaten by police in a parking garage because police attributed his “aggressive” gesturing and “babbling” to being on drugs. Police officers need to be accountable for being able to read and react appropriately to different situations. We can help them. If we can stay calm and show that we’re not a threat it allows the officer time to assess without pressure.

Of course not everyone has the chances I’ve had to go to their trainings and discuss these things with law enforcement. I do think a little common sense and empathy can help. For example, do you perform better or worse at your job if someone is angry and contradicting you and being derisive just because you wanted to talk to them? Does anyone you work with have a chance of killing you? Would this add to your stress level? There have been a few high profile cases coupled with my own experiences that have shown me that the public in general just doesn’t understand police training. One case that exemplifies this is the Rosebud shooting in Berkeley several years ago. People I talked to were outraged that a woman who broke into the UCB Chancellor’s home with a knife, who then rushed at police with the knife, was killed. Many people at the time expressed to me that “They should have shot her in the leg or something.” This shows a basic lack of understanding borne of too much TV and to little knowledge of firearms. In my dealings with law enforcement I’ve learned that cops are taught to avoid firing their weapons if at all possible but if they feel they have to fire to empty their weapon and shoot to kill. Think about it, it’s hard enough to come to a decision to shoot someone (something I think many of us assume is taken lightly by police officers) but if you are in a situation where you feel like your life is in danger, your scared, stressed, and you have to make a quick decision are you also going to have the time and concentration to “just shoot them in the leg or something?” No. There is no nonchalance when it comes to firing a weapon. If there were people would be getting shot in the leg a lot more often. If you have to shoot someone you shoot to kill. There is no other option, there is no other reason. You shoot because you believe if you do not shoot someone else may die. Isn’t that how we want it? Don’t we want shooting to be the last resort? Don’t we want guns to only be used in life or death situations? Isn’t anything else just a slippery slope towards shooting jaywalkers in the leg? Besides there’s a simple way to avoid being shot by the police. Don’t break into anywhere and don’t rush at them with a knife. If you can do those two things your chances of being shot fall dramatically. But there’s a solution for you “shoot ‘em in the leg” types, a middle ground. It’s called the Taser.

The Taser allows an officer to subdue a suspect from a distance in a non-lethal but effective manner. There is clearly a time and place for a Taser to be used. For example, if you are a moron who wants to run onto a baseball diamond during a game you should expect to be tased. If you are somewhat peacefully speaking into a microphone at a meeting on your college campus you should not expect to be tased. What’s the difference? In some ways it’s a matter of time, proximity, and probability. For the famous “Don’t tase me bro” guy the cops had plenty of time to assess the threat, plenty of bodies to physically take the offender away, they were close enough to subdue him by hand, he did not appear to be any sort of threat, and he wasn’t trying to flee. He also had some reasonable reason for being where he was. In other words the Taser use here was completely out of line. Now look at the other guy. Here’s a dumbass running around attempting to elude capture, delaying the game, with no reasonable cause to be where he was, in a context where fans have assaulted players, coaches, and umpires in recent years. Also, I think it’s reasonable to have a strong deterrent to people doing something like jumping on a baseball field as opposed to having a strong deterrent to people peacefully expressing an opinion. Expressing an opinion is a right, criminal trespass is not. Again, it’s easy to avoid being tased at a baseball game, stay in your seat. I applaud the moron’s parents for basically siding with the police on this one. Conversely one should be able to assume that they can speak in an open public forum without being electrocuted.

So what’s the take away? It’s this, cops are people too. They are people who work in a dangerous and high stress job for too little pay. Yes, some of them are complete assholes. A smaller number are dangerous bordering on psychotic. Most of them can be completely reasonable and even helpful if you give them a chance and put them at ease. The citizen bears some responsibility in how cops react to them. It may suck to have to swallow your pride, forget that you’re “right,” and submit for a short period of time but it can be worth it. If you are able to do what it takes to set a cop at ease you may even be able to have a conversation and help change their perspective a little bit. I know it sucks to think, “I shouldn’t have to kowtow to these assholes just to avoid getting shot.” but that’s the reality. Would you rather be right, or dead? If you live you can always be right later on. You can sue someone or write angry letters, or try to get a cop fired or whatever recourse is available after the fact. But remember, even if it’s annoying, even if you’re sure you’re the subject of discrimination, if you keep your cool initially you can get what you want when interacting with police officers. There’s no other viable path. If you run, fight, or just act like an ass you will lose that interaction in that moment. You just have to remember that most of them are just honest people trying to do an honest job. If you ignore that and then you get tased, you have to look at your own culpability.

Wherever You Go, There You Are

2010-05-27T22:11:00.000-07:00

LA isn’t fake. It’s not. Really. I mean it. I’m pretty sick of the whole So-Cal/Nor-Cal rivalry. To start with, I don’t really see the point. Beyond that the complaint I hear most up here in the wild hippie north is that people in LA are “fake.” Well, they’re not any more fake than people anywhere else. It’s kind of like “bad drivers” and traffic, people everywhere are bad drivers and traffic sucks anywhere you have an actual population of people who are, by definition, bad drivers.

I lived in LA and I’ll let you in on a little secret, there are “real” people there. There are, but there’s a trick to finding them. Now I’ll preface this by saying it’s a gross generalization, and I’m sure there’s good people in the industry, but this is good rule of thumb: If you want to avoid “fake” people don’t try to get into “the scene.” I think that’s the big mistake people make when they go to LA. No matter what they’re there for too many people go to LA and try to go to the cool clubs, meet stars, and try to live the life they see on “Entourage.” That is your ticket to fake. Here’s the truth, famous people have to be wary of you, and everyone like you sees you as competition. This doesn’t mean you can’t make real friends but if you’re trying to break in to the inner circle of LA cool and you’re a normal schlub with no connections you’re going to have a very frustrating time. It’s tough at the other end of the scale too. If you’re famous for some reason you’re going to have a lot of people trying to glom on which leads to dealing with a lot of “fake.”

Here’s the key to enjoying LA as a Nor-Cal, don’t give a crap. If you go to LA and don’t give a thought to trying to be something you are not you can have a great time. LA has museums and dive bars and theater and everything else you think you love about the bay area. If you want to have a good time in LA don’t try to figure out where Vinnie Chase hangs out, find out where his gardener hangs out. Don’t stand in line for some place with a $40 cover, find the place that has no doorman and no buzz but is crowded anyway. Make friends with people before finding out what they do or who they know. Basically, keep doing the things you did and being the person you were before you got to LA and you’ll have a great time. Because the real reason so many people are disappointed or unhappy with So-Cal is because they’re being fake. They go down there expecting to become something other than what they were before they arrived. Basically a lot of people get frustrated because their fake persona isn’t fooling anyone else either.

Of course Nor-Cal has its share of fake people too. The difference is that here you’re more likely to encounter fakeness in your everyday life and not even know it. Seriously, people act all kumbaya like they love everyone and are all about peace but a lot of the time it’s a front. Most hippies are out for themselves just like everyone else. Even worse, they’re usually more intolerant of opposing viewpoints than Tea Baggers and right wing whackos. Have you ever seen an indignant hippy? Let me give you an example, one year my wife asked my brother-in-law why he didn’t want to wrap his Christmas presents, because she thought is would be nice, he stormed out ranting that he clearly cares more about the environment that she does. Y’know, because not using wrapping paper that’s already been through several Christmases is going to save the world, it’s not because he’s a lazy hippy. The people ranting about the immigration law in Arizona are often the same people who don’t want to send home school information in Spanish or provide interpreters for PTA meetings. Because the fact is that intolerant tree huggers are still intolerant. At least in LA fake people who don’t think you can get them ahead have the decency to treat you like crap or ignore you to your face. Here in the “genuine” north it’s more likely that they’ll just pretend to be interested in you and then avoid your calls.

In a way I think I like the LA fakeness better than the San Fran fakeness. I’d rather be able to gauge people based on what they think of my clothes or my sunglasses than whether I only use locally farmed toilet paper. I’d rather be judged for my car being too cheap than for not being electric enough. The scenesters in SF are far more annoying than the ones in LA because the ones in SF act like they’re a part of something so real and so important and so different that no one else could ever possibly understand how real it is. The ones in LA are far more honest about their existence. I had a great time in LA because I never tried to get “in.” I loved LA because I ran into so many interesting people who were either on top, or on their way up, or on their way down, or who weren’t going anywhere ever. I had a great time going to weird places and meeting real people. LA, in my experience, is way more real than SF. I’d rather hang out in LA than in SF. I’d rather drive in LA than in SF. Of course I’d rather be in Berkeley than anywhere else but that goes without saying; even with all the fake kumbies running around.

Today’s point: There’s fake people everywhere. Fake southern hospitality. Fake Capitol Hill freaks. Fake mid-western modesty. Fake Wall Street D-bags. Fake ivory tower academics. The key to enjoying wherever you are is to stop trying to get “in.” If being “in” is who you are or what you’re working towards then you should know from the jump that you’re going to have to deal with some kind of fake so don’t be surprised, throw on your mask and have fun.

Who's it For?

2010-04-29T17:15:00.000-07:00

I have a new hobby. More on this in a minute.

Isn’t the internet great? It’s great. It is probably the greatest media invention ever. Well, maybe not. It’s more like mortar. I mean bricks were a great invention. They were better than building with rocks, but they didn’t become way better than rocks until the invention of mortar. Hell, mortar was such a great invention it even made rocks better for people who couldn’t afford bricks. The internet is the mortar of media. It takes all the other bits we use to build our understanding of the world and not only connects them and holds them together, but forges them into a stronger cohesive whole. Damn I love the internet.

Which brings me to my new hobby; as soon as I finish watching a movie I head to the computer and look it up a wikipedia to learn more about it. I was looking up “The Hurt Locker” recently and the thing that stood out for me was the section detailing Iraq War veterans’ impressions of the film. Unsurprisingly they basically panned it. They also seemed to feel it was the best movie about the war to date. So there it is, it’s unrealistic to the point of being absurd, but it’s also the best one yet. What struck me about this perspective is how familiar it felt. It’s the exact same sentiment the rugby community had about “Invictus.” It’s roughly the same reaction people from Berkeley have towards NBC’s “Parenthood.”

This is when I had this month’s “aha” moment. These works aren’t made for “us” they are made for “them.” Who the “us” and “them” are depends on what who we are and what we do. Confused? I didn’t think so. For “The Hurt Locker” “us” is Iraq war veterans and embedded journalists. For “Invictus” “us” is the rugby community and South Africans. For “Parenthood” “us” is people from Berkeley. See where I’m going? It thought you would. The thing is, making movies and TV shows that resonate with the demographic depicted is almost impossible. The people who are the real people who are being fictionalized and depicted in popular media are too close to the subject matter to ever really be satisfied.

Even “reality” can leave a bad taste in the mouths of the “us.” In 1994 PBS spent a year at my high school filming a documentary about race relations called “School Colors.” Whiff. It was terrible. The filmmakers clearly had an agenda and ignored anything that didn’t fit the narrative they wanted before they arrived. The documentary depicted Berkeley High as completely racially segregated in every way resulting in a powder keg of race related tension and violence. I don’t know anyone who attended BHS at that time who had the experience depicted in “School Colors.” Yet everything in the film actually happened so I guess in a way it was real. It just wasn’t real enough for “us.” (For a much more resonant depiction of BHS in the mid-1990s check out “Yellow Jackets” by Itamar Moses.)

Here’s the truth that the “us” has to embrace, if these works were made with an eye towards resonating with “us” they wouldn’t appeal to “them” or anyone else. And there’s a lot more of “them” than there are of “us.” Media made for “us” is so specific and has so much potential to get caught up in little details while making assumptions about shared knowledge that the vast “them” would feel lost and left out. Besides, the “us” is already in. We’re already invested. We get it. The goal of the creators isn’t to draw us in, it’s to draw everyone else in. The goal is to provide a glimpse of our world to the masses. In doing so it’s going to change, sometimes to the point of seeming foreign to “us.” But if “Invictus” got a few people interested in rugby, or social justice then the film will have accomplished the goals of both the filmmakers and the rugby community. If “The Hurt Locker” helps people understand the stress and chaos of war then it’s served its purpose. Even “School Colors” was right in that Berkeley is not the race relations nirvana people dreamed it would become back in the 1960s. The point is that the “us” need to be satisfied with the details. The Bravermans from “Parenthood” are A’s fans, it’s a nice touch. The show is still pretty detached from the Berkeley I know, but they have drinks from Peet’s so I tolerate the inaccuracies. I think that’s the most we can hope for in service of the greater goal of bringing our passions exposure to a wider audience. So maybe it’s time for “us” to take a new tack and appreciate these works for what they are and what they bring to “them.”

Talkin A's Baseball 2010 Opening Day Edition

2010-04-05T14:08:00.000-07:00

Concept and original lyrics by Terry Cashman, 2010 lyrics by Berto
(Need help with the tune? The song was featured in the video accompanying this post.)

The Mac Men were dominant
when derby hats were prominent
legends filled Athletic uniforms

Homerun Baker and The Chief
Double X brought pitchers grief
They broke up the A's and thenthe darkest days were born

I'm talkin baseball
Simmons, Grove, and Dykes
A's baseball
Pete Sutter and Black Mike
Ferris Fein and Chance both had their day
Then a stop in Kansas City along the way
I'm talking baseball
baseball and the A's

They were scrappers, they were tusslers
And Finley was a hustler
Three series in a row for Charlie O

A perfect game by the 'Cat
Reggie Jackson at the bat
Williams and Dark just came to the park and let 'em go

I'm talking baseball
Sal Bando, Vida Blue
A's baseball
Campy, Gene, Alou

Rick Monday and Rudy had their say
Darrell Knowles and Rolly saved the day
I'm talking baseball
baseball and the A's

Hey when you're talkin Oakland baseball
there's Rickey and Billy the Kid
Eckersley, and Welch and Dave
Tim Hudson he was once the rave
Those brothers bashed it over the wall
Now we're playing moneyball

2006 was another year
the Athletics had their game in gear
streaking towards the classic in the fall

Mark and Crosby both were gone
but Scutaro carried on.
The Big Hurt was on fire and we had Loieza so we played ball

I'm talkin baseball
Nick Chavez and Street
Oakland baseball
Dan and Zito brought the heat.
Kendell, Joe, and Bradley and Kotsay
There's DeAngelo, The Duke, and Rich and Jay
Talkin baseball
baseball and the A's

Well twenty ten is finally here
Forget about the last three years
The team is young since Taylor got the call

Ben Sheets is on the mound
There's new grass on the ground
Cust got the boot but we still got the Duke so let's play ball

I'm talkin baseball
Barton, Kuze, and Cliff
Oakland baseball
Mark Ellis is no stiff
Davis and Coco run all day
Ziggy's underhanded but OK
Talking baseball
Baseball and the A's

Happy Opening Day!

The Puppy Phase

2010-03-30T23:11:00.000-07:00

GRRRRRRRRR

I can’t believe I haven’t read about this somewhere else. I mean really, with all the parenting stuff out in the world I can’t believe no one has mentioned the “Puppy Phase.” Perhaps I am the first to have the perfect storm of Chihuahuas and child under one roof but it’s so clear to me I can’t believe it’s not already a thing.

Sorry, what the hell am I talking about? I’m talking about the never ending need to dissect every phase of a baby’s development and give it a cut name. I seem to remember that when my brother was a baby he was a “baby,” then a “toddler, “ then a “kid.” The third phase lasted until he was a “teenager.” Nice, simple, four steps to adulthood. Not anymore. It seems my son has been a “newborn”, an “infant”, a “pre-crawler”, a “crawler”, and a “cruiser.” Soon he will be a waddler, then a ”toddler.” I’m sure I’m missing some intermediate labels from that list. Still, there’s seven stages before he can eat with utensils. It’s madness. And, as one who sees madness and endeavors to heighten it to a truly absurd levels I am now identifying, codifying, and proposing a new developmental stage, the “Puppy Phase,” which slots between “crawler” and “cruiser.”

As you may be able to guess the Puppy Phase is based on a child’s similarity, at this phase, to a dog. During the puppy phase the child exhibits many dog-like qualities. For example, many babies this age do not have the lip dexterity to smooch the way most humans are used to. Instead they show affection with a type of pen mouthed slobbering much like being licked by a small St Bernard. This, along with babies tendency to chew everything they see, is probably the least noticeable aspect of the puppy phase, which is largely centered around mobility.

When my son learned to crawl it was a joyous occasion for all of us. For him he was now relieved of the frustration he had found when he learned to throw his toys weeks earlier than he was able to retrieve them. For me it meant we could now play fetch, which was way more fun than playing sit still. Usually the game involved my son or I throwing a ball or other toy and my son crawling off to fetch it and either throw it again himself or bring it back to me; in his mouth. The puppy phase started to show when he decided he wanted go visit his mother in the dining room, clamped a small novelty Frisbee between his teeth and headed off.

Children this age also display other mobility related puppy behaviors. For example a pre-lingual child in the puppy phase will careen off towards the door emitting shrieks whenever he hears the mail slot open or the lock turn. The child will sit dutifully at the feet of anyone who seems to be eating. If they are not fed (or if they just want attention) they will then raise up on their hind legs (like a little Rory Calhoun) and emote until they are fed, pet, or cuddled.

Other behaviors associated with the puppy phase include following you around the house, the afore mentioned desire to chew everything, and the need to curb occasional biting. The puppy phase generally lasts a few weeks, can overlap with the “cruising” phase, and ends when the child starts standing or walking.

Your Mom Has Taken Over My Life

2010-03-24T22:10:00.000-07:00

Photo by Tenysa Santiago

Sorry. That should read "Your Mom" has taken over my life. "What's that Sir Rantalot? What do you mean?"

Well as you may have heard (but probably not, I do have illusions about my reach in the world) I'm getting my fifteen minutes of fame. Back in July I decided to poke fun at a coworker by making up some "Yo momma" jokes. Specifically jokes that started with, "Your mom is so Berkeley..." We thought it was all pretty funny so I posted some of the good ones as a note on my facebook page. In the note I encouraged my friends to add their own "Your mom is so Berkeley" jokes.

After a while, as the note was shared around, I created a facebook group so we could reach a wider group of people. I figured this would be something we'd giggle about for a week or so and then it would fade away. But a funny thing happened. People I didn't even know started joining the group and posting jokes. When the group got to 50 members I was astounded. When it got to 300 members I sent out a message to the members thanking them for making the group "the most successful thing I've ever done on the internet." After that I didn't look at it for a long time because I figured that was that.

Then we got mentioned on what I thought of as "some guy's blog." It turns out it was on Berkeleyside which is a Berkeley news blog founded by some pretty serious journalists. This marked the first time someone mentioned a potential book from the material on the group. Since I didn't know who Berkeleyside was at the time I thanked them, posted a link on the group and again pretty much forgot about it. I checked in now and then to read the new posts, a couple more people suggested a book, but I really didn't think much of it.

Until about three weeks ago. That's when I went back to check it out and found that we had over 950 members. I watched it like a hawk for the next few days waiting for it to hit 1,000. When we hit that nice round number I sent out another facebook message thanking the members for their contributions. That message led to our second appearance on Berkeleyide.

What I said in the 1,000 members message is true. I really do see the concept as a way of honoring my mom through humor and community connection. I can't believe something I thought of as a way to kill time at work has touched so many people. There's something there that helps us Berkeley kids see our common bonds after growing up looking at the rest of the country and feeling like freaks.

Anyway, two Fridays back I received a facebook message from a reporter for the New York Times asking if I wouldn't mind being interviewed about the group. Sure, why not? The article came out in the Bay Area section of the New York Times on Friday, March 18th, 2010. I have to say, it was a pretty cool thing to see. When the interview was done the reporter mentioned that a lot more people might see the group after the article was published. Just as before I thought, "Sure, how many people read the NYT online?" Well it turns out it's a lot. But the article didn't just show up there. It was in the print edition (which I didn't expect). The other thing I didn't know was that when something appears in the NYT online it gets picked up and re-posted in a million places. Well, around 2,640 places according to Google. But that's a lot and includes NPR. NPR! I started thinking, "Maybe this book idea isn't so crazy after all."

In the past week and a half since the article we've added 580 members. It's crazy. In order to keep up the momentum I've added a blog and a Twitter account. These two endevors have taken up a lot of time. Today I read a post by a group member who mentioned that he saw a teaser on our local NBC affiliate's eleven o'clock new cast about a story on the group. Today I waited for two hours before they rescheduled to Friday. So now I might be on TV. For this thing that started on facebook. It's crazy.

I've been Sir Rantalot for six years, pounding out opinions for a readership of roughly six people. Now, in nine months I'm getting fifteen minutes of minor local attention for something that took me six minutes to come up with. Maybe this is my "Java Jacket." The simple idea that starts without fanfare that turns into something bigger than the creator expected. I know I never expected this. But now with the blog going, and the group growing, I'm trying to get this book out there. If it comes to fruition I'll be pretty stoked. I guess you never know what will come of your ideas.

Tck tck tck Ouch! Crap.

2010-03-17T13:11:00.000-07:00

Hello All,

No posts in a while. Usual malaise? No. Seems I have a torn ligament in my wrist and I'm supposed to lay off the typing for a
few more weeks. Drag. But I promise I'll be back soon.

Excerpt

2010-02-28T00:37:00.000-08:00

“I hate you! I hate you!” she screamed at him small and red faced, smudged and salt streaked with tears. “You stupid little bastard. Sometimes I wish I could just give you away.” He wailed and crumbled in the back seat in the car and her anger, fed by pleasure blazed in viciousness.

The perfect excuse for anger, for letting loose of control.

My feelings have been so bad lately, so frustrated, lashing out. Crippled by depression – the job, feeling hurt, hopeless, confused, who, what, why. Feeling hateful, it’s draining. Pencils in my back. I can’t concentrate on work and I make lists that irritate me. I don’t want to exercise. Ugly times and fights at work. Don’t want to be there.

I fly off the handle when I find my son has lost his second set of $55 dental equipment. “I want to die!” he cries. Superstitious thought spring into my mind. What if, because I’m cruel, it happened?

Where’s Martin when I need him? The bell rings and rings, he’s not home. Is he alright? (How will I be punished? My worst most frightening fantasies coming true?)

My child is not happy either. He imitates me in temperament and action. “I can’t do anything. I’m useless.” he sobs. I’m mad at myself because I’m so absent minded.

But in some way maybe this is growing point for us. Tito is less of a child because he is starting to split from me. I have to treat him like a big boy, to share my feelings. Maybe it’s wrong to tell your children your problems but I can’t handle them alone.

Maybe I’m poisoning him. I’m showing him an immature way to react to problems. I was treated that way, it’s what I know and I pass this horror to my son.

I love him, I just don’t know how to.

Cheated

2010-02-26T01:30:00.000-08:00

Recently, during the end of a family evening, I felt the loss of my mother more acutely than I have in a while. It was during a conversation about my in laws. My wife and I have been on the outs with them for about six months and when we were discussing it this time she hit on an important issue. One of the big issues is that they don’t seem to put any value or priority in getting to know their grandson. And the thing is that whatever they’re mad at us about has become so important to them that they’d rather avoid us than see him. All this continues despite my wife’s attempts to put aside her own discomfort with them to get the family together. While discussing this I felt void left by my mother’s death as if it had just happened. Our lives would be so different if she were still here.

My mother would have wanted to see Ryu as much as possible. In my day dreams, where my mother is alive and well and living just a mile and a half away, we see her three or four times a week. We’re there for dinner because we were passing by and we stopped in and then we all got hungry. She’s over at our place reading to him while sitting on a big pillow on the living room floor. She’d convince us to let her come over to baby sit on Wednesdays so we could get out for a couple hours. In all the dreams of him growing up she’s there rooting him on, smiling that satisfied smile knowing that she’ll do even better with him than she did with us because she won’t have to worry as much. She would have brought all the joy and passion to being a grandmother that she brought to her work and her friendships. She’d be perfect.

Of course this is all fantasy. No one’s perfect. Beyond that if my mother had never gotten sick there’s a good chance we wouldn’t be back in California. If she hadn’t died we may not have felt the same urgency to come back here. We might still be in DC wondering what we were going to do about childcare and desperate to meet other parents. We certainly wouldn’t be in our current home since my mother’s life insurance became the down payment. Instead we’d likely be upside down on some condo in Silver Spring. Still, I think we would have come back by now. I can’t see anything in the last few years that would have convinced me to raise my kids in DC. If there was a positive in my mother’s passing it was that it got us back to our community. Back to our friends who are already experienced parents. Back to the people who can give us advice, and support, and hand me downs. Her passing brought us home.
The next day I heard this story on This American Life. It’s about a woman who’s mother had cancer and knew she was going to die. So the mother wrote a series of letters for her daughter to open each year on the daughter’s birthday beginning at age 18. In the end the daughter and her father come to see the letters as a kind of curse. For them the problem is that while they continued to grow and change the voice of the letters did not. They felt stuck trying to adhere to the wishes of someone, long since gone, who every year would try to exert some influence on their lives. Again I felt my mother’s absence like a swirling vortex in my soul.

My mother and I got to say goodbye, but that was all we got. I know I might sound selfish because many people don’t even get that but I still feel cheated. We could have had so much more except no one would acknowledge that my mother was dying. When she was diagnosed she already had stage four renal cell carcinoma; a kind of cancer that doesn’t respond to traditional cancer therapies like chemo. After the first few months I knew she was going to die. But because she couldn’t admit it, or she was trying to be brave for my brother, or she really thought she’d pull through we never talked about the possibility.

Because no one would talk about mom dying we never got to have the conversations I longed for. I wanted to get closure on all the things that had haunted us for so long. I wanted to tell her that she had been a good mother and that I forgave her for all the negative things that had passed between us. I wanted to get her advice on marriage and child rearing. Mostly I just wanted us to be able to spend her last months really loving each other without reservation. Instead I felt pressured to keep up with the manic positivism of the rest of my family. After all “everything” was “going to be OK.” We’d have plenty of time to hash out the past.

Surprisingly, when my mother died it was sudden and unexpected. She had gone in for some tests and was supposed to go home but she ended up staying. She never did go home. I had spoken to her on Thursday afternoon. This was a day after she was supposed to have gone home. “They’re just going to keep me over one more night for observation. I’ll call you tomorrow. I love you.” Those were the last words my mother ever spoke to me. Not bad as last words go. The next time I saw her she had a tube down her throat and couldn’t talk. That was Friday night. I was living in Washington DC and I’d had kind of a bad feeling all morning when I got a call at my office. The doctor on the phone said that if I was going to see my mother again it had better be today. Two hours later I was on a plane to California.

When I got to the hospital and spoke to the doctors it was clear that my mother wasn’t going to recover. Her organs, at least the ones that filter toxins weren’t working at all and her blood wasn’t clotting. They had kept her alive by inducing a coma and pumping a constant stream of blood in and out of her body. The thing that happens with this is that over time the brain is slowly starved of oxygen. They could have kept her like that for a while, but she’d be a vegetable. The most humane option was to turn everything off and let her go. The one solace was that they offered to wake her up and let her say goodbye.

As the oldest and only adult child the decision making role had fallen to me. When my mom came to and started to reconnect with the world around me she recognized me and took my hand. “Hi mom.” was all I could muster. I think she could see it in my eyes. She knew why I had come. With the breathing tube adhered to her face she mouthed as best she could, “It’s OK. It’s OK. I’m ready.” I explained to her what was going on. She nodded in comprehension and agreement. In her eyes I could see she was trying to comfort me. We were able to call a small group of her close friends in to say goodbye. Mom had faded a little bit by then having turned up her pain meds with the little button next to her bed. I introduced them as one at a time they each got a few minutes to say goodbye. I knew my mom was lucid when I mispronounced someone’s name and she shook her head vigorously. “Mom, Judy’s here. Would you like to talk to Judy?” This was followed by a very strong “negative” “I’m Julie honey.” “Sorry. Mom Julie’s here.” Affirmative. She knew what was happening.

After friends and family had had their opportunity for closure I was able to have one last moment. She around her tube she mouthed, “It’s OK. You can let me go. I’m ready.” And that was it. And it should be enough, but it’s not. I feel cheated. Not just because my mother died. Not just because my son will never know this wonderful woman. Not just because she missed out on a really fun joyful part of her life that she had been looking forward to for years. I feel cheated because of this bullshit sense that we all have be endlessly optimistic. I feel cheated because I didn’t get to have those final conversations with her that I needed. Maybe it sounds selfish. Maybe it is selfish. After all dying is a very personal process. But goddamnit she’s dead and I’m still here. I’m the one who has to keep living with this pit in my heart every day. I’m the one who has to look at my son and know that there are no answers to my questions. Which brings me back to the This American Life story. I would give almost anything to have one last token of my mother’s love. One last message, something I could hold on to, something tangible that shows she was thinking about how I could cope with the future without her. I wish she had written something to Ryu, to me, to the family, something that we could go back to and say, “See, this is what grandma thought. This is what she had to say before she left.” The problem for the people in the story isn’t that they were growing and changing it’s that they felt the need to argue with ghost instead of just appreciating that in her final days that mother wanted to remain as a presence for her family. They couldn’t find a way to laugh off or otherwise set aside the parts of the mother’s message that no longer fit their worldview.

I wish my mother still had some presence, any kind of presence, in my life. I don’t really feel one. I don’t’ feel like she’s watching me from heaven. I don’t’ feel like her spirit lives on in the artifacts of hers that I have around my home. I just feel like she’s gone. She’s gone and I’ll always have this hollow spot in my heart. That’s why my in-law’s behavior is so infuriating. They seem like they take it all for granted. They do this despite the fact that my father-in-law may be dying of cancer himself. They have a chance to know Ryu that my mother never had and they don’t care. They’re willing to sacrifice that relationship with him because of some perceived problem with us. I really hope they change their minds before it’s too late. He’s at an age now where he can start to remember people. If you don’t know what you have until it’s gone what happens when you’re the one that’s leaving? What will you leave behind? What will you say before you go? I wish I could have one more message.

Friends Again

2010-02-23T21:16:00.000-08:00

A while back I penned some thoughts on friendship. It turns out that like the relationships themselves my view on friendship continues to evolve. If you look at my facebook page it will tell you that I have 398 “friends.” Of these I have met all but three of them in real life. There is a group of these that I have not seen since high school. That group is further divided into people I did and didn’t really know very well in high school. There is another group of people I talk to regularly on facebook but never see. Corollary to that is the people I see all the time in real life but who are never on their facebook pages. I’m not the first to comment on how social networking sites have changed and possibly diminished the quality of friendship. I’m not here to hammer that point. I recently realized that all this “friending” had worked a subconscious change on me. I became very cautious about referring to people as “friends.”

I didn’t notice this change for a while though I did notice a little more precision in describing my relationships with people. For example when the topic of Andy Samberg comes up it usually comes up that we went to Berkeley High at the same time. For some reason I always feel compelled to emphasize that I didn’t really know him. I remember him being around but that’s about it. It’s a little weird for me because I’m a big fan of his work on SNL and I’m proud that he’s a BHS grad the same way I’m proud of my mom or Raymond Burr. In fact the first part of the Raymond Burr conversation goes pretty much the same as the Andy Samburg conversation:

Person: “Raymond Burr for some reason.”
SR: “Oh, he went to Berkeley High.”
Person: “Oh, neat.”

The difference is this:

Person: “Ha ha, I’m on a Boat. I love that guy.”
SR: “Oh, he went to Berkeley High.”
Person: “Really? What’s he like? Is he funny? Was he in the yacht club?”
SR: “I didn’t really know him.
Person: “…”

This is usually followed a few weeks later with Person telling someone “Oh, yeah Berto knows that guy.” Followed by me having to correct them. So what’s the point? Well I bet if I were to go on facebook and send a friend request to one of Andy’s (see we’re on a first name basis) buddies from The Lonely Island who I used to skate with, that guy would accept it. Then, if I sent a friend request to Andy he’d see we have that guy in common and he’d probably accept it. Heck, he might even remember me. Then, in the context of facebook we’d be “friends.” But in reality our relationship wouldn’t be any different than it is right now. By contrast, when the topic comes up, I readily tell people that my friend Malik was on the Real World. Because Malik and I really are friends. We hang out. We BBQ. I know his family and he knows mine. He has my WiFi password.

These distinctions don’t just apply to the semi-famous. I break all the people in my life into these categories. The thing is, it feels like a very antiquated and formal thing to do. Five years ago I would have just called anyone I knew, even a little bit, in high school a “friend.” Now they are “acquaintances,” or “classmates,” or “we were in a play together.” I didn’t really realize what I was doing until I wrote this for my other blog.

“I recently came across a former classmate of mine from Berkeley High on the internet. If she ever reads this I hope she’s not offended by my use of “classmate” and “Ms. Welch.” I still have a hard time using the title “friend” for people I haven’t heard from in 15 years. Besides, though we were friendly and spent a lot of time together one semester while working on a play I don’t know if we she would consider us old friends. Though we may become friends again now that we’re in touch. Or at least that version of friendship you can have between busy adults who live on opposite sides of the country.”

Oops. I used another example with a “public figure”. So maybe this whole article is really about my comfort level with name dropping or the appearance of name dropping. The thing is, the more “friends” I have online the fewer people I call friends in real life. There is some balance however. There are a few people I hardly knew in high school who I communicate with all the time on facebook. If not for social networking I would never have known how interesting they are. Of course, I never see them out in the world. I’ve thought about setting up some kind of happy hour for all of my facebook “friends” so we can all say we’ve seen each other at least once in the last fifteen years but after watching The Guild I don’t know how well that would go over.

I feel like I’m getting sidetracked. Where was I going? I think if we really analyze the issue we see that “friendship” isn’t necessarily diluted by social networking. Sure you end up being “friends” with a bunch of people you would otherwise just lose track of but is that so bad? It’s nice to be able to keep an eye and an ear on the comings and goings of people who were once a bigger part of your life. It’s also nice to get better acquainted with people who slipped by on the first run. And hey, if we all become a little more precise with our language that’s not a bad side effect either.

G.O.A.T.s

2010-02-08T21:35:00.000-08:00

This year Jerry Rice will be inducted into the Pro-Football Hall of Fame in Canton Ohio. This is Rice’s first year of eligibility and he will be what is known as a “first ballot hall of famer.” That’s all obvious and well known to people who follow football and even to some people who don’t. The only real question surrounding Rice’s career is whether or not he is the best football player ever,, or the Greatest Of All Time. During the latter part of his career Rice’s nickname was G.O.A.T. which is a pretty strong argument for his status as the best football player ever. A recent ESPN.com article examined Rice’s candidacy for G.O.A.T. status and in my opinion sealed it up for old “Flash 80.”

The Jerry Rice question got me thinking. If he is the best ever that means that recent sports fans have been treated to quite an era. Anyone who was alive and conscious between 1978 and 2005 (inclusive) had a chance to see the best athletes ever to compete in three of the four major North American sports*. Wayne Gretzky and Michael Jordan are held almost without debate as the best ever in their sports. Sure, some diehards still hold out for Bill Russell and Gordie Howe but the fact is that Gretzky and Jordan established their greatness during a time when their leagues were really coming to prominence. Gretzky helped establish hockey in the non-Canada adjacent parts of the United States. Jordan not only won at an astonishing rate he also changed the way sports-business is done. Howe and Russell played at a time when their sports were niche compared to baseball and football. Out of the three greats to play between 1978 and 2005 only Rice is still really debated in terms of his place on the all time leader board.

In 1999 Wayne Gretzky was inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame without having to wait the usual three years. That same year Jerry Rice was named the second greatest football player of all time by the Sporting News. Jerry went on to play five more years, which in the minds of many solidifies him as the NFL’s G.O.A.T. Both of these honors were bestowed on the heels of Jordan’s sixth NBA championship run in 1998. In 2002 Rice went back to the Super Bowl one last time but lost to the Buccaneers. Still, Rice can’t shake the ghost of Jim Brown. Brown supporters point to his dominance during his playing career and the fact that he retired early. “Look,” says the average Brown fan “he could have done so much more f he hadn’t retired early.” But he did retire early. He left the game and in my mind left behind his claim as the Greatest Of All Time.

But I don’t want to get bogged down too much in what is really an impossible debate. My point is that we sports fans have been treated to a special era. We saw three of the greatest athletes in three of the most popular sports in North America all overlapping. So, what do we hope for now? Maybe we hope for Albert Pujols to stay free of the steroid era. Dare we go for the superfecta of greatness? Sure, why not? But in the meantime let’s just take a moment to sit back and reflect on what we had.

Gretzky (1978-1999): “The Great One”, four Stanley Cups, several all time records

Rice (1985-2005): “World”, “Flash 80”, “G.O.A.T.”, three Super Bowls, 13 Pro Bowls, 11 time All Pro, 1985 ROY, 1980s All Decade Team, 1990s All Decade Team, 75th Anniversary All Time Team, 1988 NFL MVP, Super Bowl MVP, 7 All Time career records

Jordan (1984-1993, 1995-1998, 2001-2003): “Air Jordan”, “His Airness”, six NBA titles, 5 NBA MVPs, 14 All Star selections, 6 NBA Finals MVPs, 1988 Defensive Player of the Year, 10 All-NBA selections, 1985 ROY, 2 Olympic Golds, 50th Anniversary NBA All Time Team.

Jim Brown: (1957-1965): 9 Pro Bowls, 8 time All Pro, 1960s All Decade Team, 75th Anniversary All Time Team, 6 NFL MVPs

*Sorry Bonds fans, Barry wasn’t even the greatest ever at his position (Ted Williams, Rickey Henderson) or the greatest ever Giant (Willie Mays), Barry was just a ‘roided up freak show.

A Matter of Perspective?

2010-01-13T08:14:00.000-08:00

(Note: This column has been delayed by a few weeks due to computer problems that persisted throughout December and the Mark McGwire news that required more immediate analysis. I can’t believe it’s been two months since my last post. Oi.)

Here we are in the midst of January 2010. The past month has inundated us with various “of the Decade” lists. Best this, worst that, most memorable etc. I will not bore you dear reader with any long reminiscence of the last ten years. In part because I don’t have a coherent perspective on it all and thus would ramble on even more than usual and in part because the last thing we all need is another damn list. I will say that on new year’s eve 1999/2000 was the first time I kissed the woman I would someday marry and on new year’s eve 2009/2010 I found myself kissing my beautiful wife who is in fact a completely different person than the one in the previous sentence. And that pretty much sums up the ‘00s. Besides, we all know that we’ve all changed in the last ten years. We’ve all had struggles and triumphs. You don’t need me to rehash it here.

Instead I want to focus on something that has been either an unqualified success or a semi-dismal failure depending on how you look at it. I am turning to you oh readers to help me decide which it is. I want us to examine my career in fantasy football. If you don’t know what fantasy football is click here for the full explanation or just know that it is a drawn out form of sports gambling that is tied to individual player performances collected into disparate groupings involving several “owners” trying to win money in a league type format. If you want to see what a league looks like you can click here to view our league from this year. The bottom line is fantasy football, like most forms of sports betting exists to enhance the fun of watching sports. It is not supposed to a viable means to earn money.

The intangible aspects of playing are numerous and rewarding. Tracking “your” players lets you feel involved and excited while watching games that might otherwise be boring due to lack of a rooting interest in the teams involved. For example, as a 49er fan I would be pretty bored watching the woeful Chiefs play the horrific Raiders except that I need the Chiefs’ wideout to score at least one touchdown so I can win my fantasy game this week. Fantasy football also provides camaraderie and fellowship by connecting friends both near and far to get together or make an extra phone call to talk smack to other owners in your league.

My two favorite fantasy football memories both involve games that I lost. The first was a game between me and my wife (the current one) that came down to players we each had on Monday night. The game went back and forth all night both in real life and in our little fantasy game. The missus and I had been running smack all night and in the end it came down to a 50 yard field goal with :01 left on the clock. The field goal was good and I lost, but man it was a fun night. Anything that can get your significant other invested in watching Monday Night Football is a good thing. The second memory also involved my wife. It was the last week of the regular season and it was down to me and her for our division crown and a playoff spot. (The playoffs are where you win money in fantasy football.) Five of our league’s 12 owners got together (including two who drove to DC from New Jersey) and it was on. My wife ran so much good smack while kicking my team’s ass she instantly became a legend among our friends and family.

While the intangible benefits of fantasy football are wide-ranging and immeasurable, the tangible benefits are narrow and ultimately quantifiable. It starts with your buy in. In our league the buy in is $25.00 in a twelve team league for a starting pot of $300.00. Over the course of the season most owners spend between $35.00 and $55.00 additional dollars on transactions like adding players and making trades. In the end the prize pot is usually around $700.00 which is divided among teams that make the playoffs with the champion getting the lion’s share. If you win games you win money. If you win money you get a tangible benefit along with all the fun of playing.

Of course as with all gambling how much you win is offset by how much you spend. So while bored at “work” I decided to see what my tangible return on investment has been. Below is my year-by-year result: money spent -> money won and [initial analysis ROI].

2009 1st: $110.00 -> $400.00 [3.61]
2008 8th: $85.00 -> $50.00 [0.59]*
2007 3rd: $80.00 -> $89.00 [1.11]
2006 6th: $95.00 -> $47.00 [0.50]
200513th: $59.00 -> $0.00 [0.00]*
2004 1st: $65.00 -> $300.00 [4.62]
Total: $494.00 -> $886.00 [1.79]

(* represents non-playoff years)

On the surface it looks pretty good. I spent $494.00 on fantasy football (an average of $82.33/year) and won $886.00 (an average of $147.67/year). Not bad. If I’m reading that right I’ve made 179% more than I’ve spent. You tell me another investment that’s going to return 179%. Go ahead I dare ya!

So I was feeling pretty good about myself until a thought dawned on me. In a way I didn’t really win the money I had invested. It may be a more realistic and grounded analysis to factor out my original investment. It is more instructive to see not how I did when I gambled, but how I did compared to holding my money not having played at all. So lets check that out:

2009 1st: $110.00 -> $290.00 [2.64]
2008 8th: $85.00 -> -$35.00 [-0.41]*
2007 3rd: $80.00 -> $9.00 [0.11]
2006 6th: $95.00 -> -$48.00 [-0.51]
2005 13th: $59.00 -> -$59.00 [-1.00]*
2004 1st: $65.00 -> $235.00 [3.62]
Total: $494.00 -> $392.00 [0.79]

These numbers feel more real to me. Dismal, depressing, but real. It makes sense, if you factor out the money I put in that I would never have lost in the years I lost money I haven’t really made all that much. I paid $494.00 to play fantasy football over the last six years and got only $392.00 back. Which means I only got .79¢ for every dollar which is a negative return right?

“Plus your original investment.”

Huh? Who’s that?

“It’s Other Berto. Dude, you did get your original money back. So all your worry is just worry. No matter how you slice it you’re still up .79¢ on the dollar. Sure the profit margin is slim compared to the gross margin but it’s really the same number. You brought in more than you spent. Period. Get over it.”

Um, OK, I think I believe you Other Berto but I’m still not sure.

“Then let the readers weigh in.”

OK readers help me out. Has fantasy football been a good tangible investment or not?

Mark

2010-01-12T16:31:00.000-08:00

So Mark McGwire has finally come out and admitted what many of us already believed, he was a steroid user and he used them during his run at the single season home run record in 1998. Why now? Well McGwire was recently hired as a coach for the St Louis Cardinals and he knew he was going to have to come clean all at once or face questions all season. This was an opportunity for a personal and national catharsis but though McGwire showed emotion he did not give his fans or the public what they needed most from a fallen star, he did not fully reveal himself. Rather than give in fully to the reality of his actions McGwire continued to hide throughout his admission.

McGwire claims that he never discussed steroid use with anyone. Not with other players, not with his family, not with his friends or his agent or anyone else. He says none of the people in his life ever asked. As hard as that is to believe I guess it could be true. However according to former teammate Jose Canseco, and ESPN analyst T.J. Quinn several players have said that McGwire was very open about his use of steroids and human growth hormone. Canseco went as far as to write in his book that he and McGwire would shoot up together in the Oakland clubhouse. McGwire’s claims that no one knew about his steroid use seem dubious at best.

Another of McGwire’s assertions that does not sit well is his claim that his steroid use did not contribute to his ability to hit home runs at a rate never seen in baseball history up to that point. McGwire claims that his production was due to shortening his swing and improving his concentration. During his interview with Bob Costas on MLB Network McGwire mentioned that he had always been a good home run hitter. He claims that his first little league at bat resulted in a home run. He mentions that he led the country in home runs while in college. Then he says something that hasn’t been focused on in much of the commentary I’ve seen so far. He talks about how as a rookie he hit a lot of “wall scrapers,” home runs that just barely get over the fence. As either a testament to his delusion or slip up that exposes his lies he first acknowledges that he hit a lot of homeruns prior to his PED use that were just barely out but then attributes his increase in production to swing adjustments and concentration, not the added strength he got from juicing. While his claim that “There is no pill that can give you the hand eye coordination to hit a baseball” may be correct it falls way short completing the steroid equation. First, if steroid make you stronger and faster and thereby increase your bat speed you are able to wait longer to identify a pitch. A lot of hitting involves being able to wait as long as possible and bat speed and reaction time determine how well a batter sees a pitch. But even if we allow that making contact with the ball relies solely on talent we must continue on and look at the result of that contact. It is insane to deny the possibility that due to steroid use some of those wall scrapers became towering shots, and balls that would have died on the warning track became wall scrapers. For that matter a little velocity can be the difference between a routine ball to second base and a hit that just gets through the infield. Here’s a look at McGwire’s numbers before and after he says his steroid use really picked up.

Year, Average, AB/HR, Slugging%, Most HR in a Season
1986-1993, .249, 14 , .509 , 49,
1994-2001, .277, 8.4 , .674 , 70,

So here’s a guy who by his own admission ramped up his steroid use and added roughly 30 points to his batting average, 70 points to his slugging percentage, doubled his home run rate and hit 20 more home runs than he ever had before (nine more than anyone had ever hit in a single season) but doesn’t acknowledge a connection. The only question here is if he’s really that stupid, or if he thinks we are.

Finally McGwire really lost any sympathy we may have had for him when he refused to take full responsibility for his actions. Yes, he said several times that he had done a stupid thing, a “dumb act” in his words. But he never allowed himself to shoulder his full burden. Instead he says he wishes he hadn’t played in the steroid era. That if he “hadn’t played in that era we wouldn’t be having this conversation.” McGwire also says he wishes there had been testing when he played. The implication seems to be that if there had been testing, or if steroids had been against the rules he wouldn’t have done it. Here’s a news flash Mark, the era didn’t make you do it. You chose to take steroids. You went out and purchased steroids. You injected them. You did it Mark, not the era. You. You are to blame. Besides, you claim you never discussed steroids with anyone else and you have no idea who else, if anyone, was taking steroids. If that’s true then there was no steroid culture, no pressure to perform. If you had no knowledge of any other steroid use then you didn’t play in the steroid era as far as you knew. According to your story you played in a bubble where you were the only one taking PEDs. And in a way that’s even worse.

It also doesn’t matter the rule book didn’t have a specific prohibition against it. You knew it was wrong. You knew you were doing something wrong. Otherwise why would you talk about the burden of keeping this secret? It wasn’t the lack of testing that caused this problem, it was your failings as a person. McGwire was asked, if the steroids didn’t help his performance then why are they banned? His answer, “I don’t know, that’s for the Olympics.” Mark, if they didn’t help you and you don’t know why you’re takning them ten why the cover up? If you don’t even know why you’re apologizing then why are you crying and carrying on? The fact is you know you’re stats are tainted. That’s why you hid it.

As a lifelong A’s fan growing up in the 1980s and ‘90s I was a huge McGwire fan. When they found the andro in his locker in 1998 and the steroid whispers started I was still a fan. As time went the little boy in me clung to the hope that Big Mac was clean. When it became clear that McGwire was a likely PED user I still maintained hope that he’d say or do something to redeem himself. Now that hope is gone also. McGwire admitted to taking steroids but in blaming others for his weakness and refusing to acknowledge their effect on his performance his admission and apology have hurt him more than they have helped him. I don’t care if this is hard for you Mark. I don’t care if you’re sorry. It was one thing to lie, it was one thing to clam up and disappear. But if you can’t be honest with us now when you are claiming to be coming clean and unburdening yourself then this is not an act of contrition, it’s a PR stunt. I am far more disappointed in Mac now than I ever have been. He lied to the fans, he lied to baseball, he lied to nine year old Berto. A part of my childhood was a lie and this guy did it. Maybe I should be more grown up and less hurt but I’m not. Thanks for nothing Mac. You had one final chance to be a stand up guy and you blew it. You’re a joke.

Ramble

2009-11-16T06:07:00.000-08:00

I just watched “Lars and the Real Girl.” I can’t take it. I don’t have the strength. Watching sad movies, or any movie involving death by anything other than car chase or explosion has become too much for me. I can’t get used to the idea of death. I understand it on an intellectual level of course but I can’t get used to in my life. There are people in our lives who we will never see again for a variety of reasons but for me that makes death even more incomprehensible. I can’t explain why but even now the idea that I can never see my parents again doesn’t really register. Maybe it’s because I lived so far away for so long that I only miss them every few months or so. But when it comes it comes so strong that I feel like I should be able to pick my phone and call and I can’t. I can never call them again.

I’m too young for this. I’m too young to have lost them both so close together. I look at my son and I have so many questions. I wonder if I was like that when I was his age and I have no to tell me. I have no one to tell me who I was. Instead I find myself in the opposite position of having to describe them to him. I have to keep them alive for him. Instead of them keeping the little boy Berto alive in their memories and doling him out in little pieces to me and my little branch of the tree, that little boy who was me only exists in me now. And since my mother’s death tore apart the already tenuous bonds between me and her side of the family she really only exists in me now as well. Here I am burdened with the task of teaching my son who she was and who I was. The truly crippling thing is that I can see her with him as if I’m actually remembering them together. I can see her holding him, fussing over him, telling me how I was just like that or not like that at all. I remember it even though it’s not real.

So I fear death. Not my own death but death of people around me. I think my mother was used to death. Her brother died shortly before I was born. She’d had friends die and grandparents die. In a way it seemed like the lifestyles of the 1970s and 80s took a lot of people away from her. It makes me wonder at what age or after how many occurrences do we get used to death. I’m not used to it. I avoid loving the people around me much as I want to because I don’t know what I would do if they were taken from me. I don’t think I’m strong enough to handle the death of someone to whom I’ve given my whole heart. So I build little walls. I know, it’s a hackneyed metaphor but it’s what I’ve got. I build little walls by not looking at people unless I have to. I build little walls by being endlessly sarcastic. I build little walls, not high enough or strong enough to isolate me but just enough so that I can bear to lose people if they go.

I pile worry upon worry. I worry that I don’t love my son enough. I worry that I’ll distance myself from him as he grows older in order to protect myself when I inevitably end up being a bad parent and he ends up hating me. I worry that this worry is exactly what will lead to me being a bad parent and him hating me. I worry that even though I’m aware of all this I’ll be unable to prevent it because I am so afraid of loving anyone to the extent that losing them would destroy me.

I’ve built a life on not letting anything destroy me. I know I don’t have real problems. Not in the sense that people who truly have nothing and have no prospects of ever having anything have problems. And I didn’t have a hard childhood like my mother did. And she didn’t have a hard childhood like my grandmother did. And I was better off growing up than my father who came form that group of people who had very little with very little chance of ever getting more. The one thing I had to deal with was notion that the people you love can leave you at any time. My father left me for years and even though I understand why I was never able to forgive him while he was alive. During my somewhat tumultuous adolescence my mother often threatened to cut me out of her life. It seemed like the members of my mother’s family were always ready to write each other off over whatever perceived slight or inequity. As much as they were proud to be associated with each other they never allowed themselves to grow truly close. They never wanted to depend on one another. For most of my childhood I understood that at any moment you could end up completely alone. Up until my mom died I wanted so desperately for her side of the family to show some real unity, for them to stop backbiting and really support each other. After mom died I got a version of that as they all united against me. I still don’t know why and I know that I lashed out against them with a terrific fury in large part because I was so hurt that they would all turn on me like they did. As a result my walls with everyone else grew a little higher and a little thicker.

My friend Ben used to say he didn’t need any of us. We were a tight knit group from the time we were 14 all the way through adulthood. We fought and made up just like a family but in contrast to my real family no one ever walked out or even threatened to. Rarely was anyone ever threatened with expulsion from our little tribe and on the couple occasions when it did happen the idea of it was enough to bring the offender in line. Squabbles could last for months but in the end they were always squashed. Ben used to say he didn’t need any of us. He would say we could all die or decide we hated him and it wouldn’t make any difference to him. I couldn’t understand that. I needed those guys and I wanted to need them. Ben never had to find out whether he was right or not because he hung himself in my stairwell. Instead we all had to find out how much we needed him.

His philosophy stuck with me. Losing Ben drove home the point that anyone can leave you at any time for any reason. So you isolate yourself so people can’t hurt you and in doing so you create a world where people can’t help you either. Maybe not needing us was the final piece that allowed Ben to take is own life. I don’t think I could ever commit suicide because I know how horribly it would impact all the people who care about me. There’s a lot of them. Still, I can’t stop myself from trying to reach a state where anyone of them could disappear and I could go on.

When my first wife left me I had to be able to go on. She hadn’t died she’d left. I grieved the loss but instead of the loss of her life it the loss of our life. The life I had imagined was gone. The kids I thought we would have would never exist. The vacations wouldn’t happen. There wouldn’t be any of it and I had to learn to cope and move on. Looking back I know that my little walls were partly to blame. They were also what allowed me to go on. The same issues with trust and love have threatened my new marriage from time to time. Strength can hurt. Too much strength can cripple you. Look, I know I’m not unveiling any great new truths here. Other people have been saying this for centuries. I do think that until we hear it from the right source t doesn’t sink in. My mother’s strength kept a lot of people at arms length including me. Her strength probably led to her cancer going undiagnosed for over a year. In trying to emulate her strength I appeared dispassionate to her family and they in turn treated me as though her death shouldn’t affect me. I spent so much time making sure nothing could affect me from the outside I rotted from within. I was never destroyed, but I never grew either.

Trying to be too strong leads to carrying burdens alone. We are not alone. None of us are alone. Having a partner means having someone to share your burdens. Not because you’re weak but because they want to help. Accepting help strengthens both of you. The measure of a man isn’t how much you can bear on your own. It’s how much you can do as a part of your community. I’m finally learning that. I’ve been lucky to find another influence.

I didn’t get to know my father’s side of the family until I was an adult. They lived on the east coast so I didn’t see them much until I moved to Washington DC. Even then it wasn’t until my cousin made a real effort to reach out to me over and over again that I really opened myself up to them. My cousin’s efforts to get to know me are endemic of that side of the family. They fuss and squabble just like my mother’s side but the difference is they do it out in the open. They yell at each other, they criticize, they admonish. Then they make up and move on. I remember my aunt telling me that there were times when she told my father to not call, to not visit, to not be around. But she always told him she loved him and never failed to help him out when he needed it. Even when she knew she could never give him money she still gave him clothes and books and mementos. My father’s side of the family embraces the idea that you can have passionate disagreements with family but you can never turn your back on them. This is a stark contrast to the Japanese side who can cast you out without ever telling you why. As an adult I’ve come to identify much more closely with my Puerto Rican side of the family because they give me the one thing I’ve always craved, unconditional love coupled with unconditional honesty. You always know where you stand with them and wherever you stand you always know that they love you.

That’s what I want people to get from me. I want them to know that even when I’m upset I love them. Before that can happen I need to learn to allow myself to love people beyond my ability to recover. I need to be able to give myself to people without fear. My wife deserves more of me than I’ve been able to give her because I’m afraid of hurting too much if she leaves. My son deserves more than I’ve been able to give him because I’m afraid he’ll suffer some accident and die. My friends and family deserve all that I’ve with held from them because I’ve doubted the permanence of our relationships. I need to give myself permission to love people the way I believe many of them love me.

Why I Can't Hate the Yankees

2009-11-05T20:47:00.000-08:00

Hate:

I am an avowed Yankee hater. I hate the Yankees. I hate them for the playoffs in 2000 and 2001. I hate them for taking Jason Giambi and turning him into a complete tool. I hate them for driving up the price on everything from players to tickets to caps. I hate them because it’s almost un-American not to.

But I can’t hate them for winning. Not this time. Yes the Yankees are still the bully on the block. Yes they are still primarily responsible for the payroll imbalance in baseball. But the fact is this time it feels different. I’m not happy to see them win. I would have been happy to see Philly take them in five. But it’s different this time. For all the talk of the Yankees spending $423.5M on three players this year, they really only spent $62 on those three players this year. This year they won with a collection of stars and role player. Just as they did the last time.

The Giambi Factor:

Jason Giambi was the Oakland A’s from the time Mark McGwire left in 1997 until his own departure after 2001. Giambi’s transformation from hero to complete crapulence was immediate and began before the 2001 season had even ended. Giambi praised New York at the press conference prior to the A’s game five ALDS loss to the Yanks. He went on national TV and denigrated Oakland. He shaved, he cut his hair, he pimped deodorant. He turned his back on everything that had made him great. Then he came back to Oakland and all was forgiven. He was forgiven for the same reason this Yankee win is easier to swallow, he didn’t win. During Giambi’s tenure with the Yankees they made the World Series only once and lost to the Marlins. Giambi not being on this year’s team makes a Yankee win less enraging than it would otherwise have been.

Nine Years, Big Money, No Titles:

Over the nine years since the last Yankees championship the team has proven that simply buying all the big name players at the highest prices doesn’t work. Especially when you’re buying old players long past their primes (Gary Sheffield, Randy Johnson, Kevin Brown) or off the juice (Sheffield, Giambi, Clemens) or never as good as advertised (Carl Pavano, Esteban Loaiza, Jose Contreras). Sure they still have a roster full of the most highly paid players in the world but the core of the team is also stocked with home grown talent and castoffs. Jorge Posada, Robinson Cano, Derek Jeter, Melky Cabrera, Brett Gardner, Andy Pettitte, Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughs, Phil Coke, and Mariano Rivera all came through the system. Nick Swisher was cast off by the A’s and the White Sox and then almost cut or traded before ever playing a game for the Yanks after they signed Mark Texiera. Eric Hinske, and Freddy Guzman and Jerry Hairston, castoffs all, played important roles this year. Without Jose Molina AJ Burnett may have been a bust. The team stayed afloat for two months with Cody Ransom at third base. As much as the mercenaries were the story this year the role players were the heart. Mark Texiera hit .180 during the playoffs. From that standpoint it’s easier to view this Yankee win the same way I’d view any team winning. After all, every winner since 2000 (aside from the Marlins) has been in the top tier in payroll. It’s not just a Yankee phenomenon any more. The fact that the Yankees haven’t won in nine years, and that everyone else who has is also on the money train, makes this one easier to deal with.

Did I mention that it’s been nine years since the Yankees last won the World Series? It seems it’s true what they say about time healing all wounds. There are people I’ve had tremendous disagreements with who I no longer hate. It seems this now includes the Yankees. Sure I still dislike them, and when the season starts again I’ll root for them to go 0-162. If they win again next year, and/or the next year, and/or the next year I’m sure the old hatred will spark up again. But today I’ll tip my cap.

Quickie

2009-11-05T08:34:00.000-08:00

This article mentions that the University of Central Florida has lost it's sponsorship deal with Adidas because Marcus Jordan will only wear his father's shoes on the court.

What a bunch of over entitled bullshit. First off if MaJ were any good he'd be at a real basketball school. Second if I were the AD at UCF I'd sit the kid until he came around. Pandering to him (perhaps in the hopes his dad will bestow riches upon the school) sets a bad example for everyone everywhere. Suck it Marcus. You're not your dad and you never will be. Grow a pairs UCF. Suspend the kid or offer him a transfer to another school. I'm sure the UNC intramural league would let him wear whatever he wants.

Halloween for Sir Rantalot

2009-11-04T16:44:00.000-08:00

Recently a friend of mine posted the following on facebook:

“Considering saying screw it and letting the kids eat all their candy and deal with one day of crazyness rather than the whining because I won't let them eat it.”

She got a lot of responses and advice from various people in her life. I for one recalled my childhood habit of trying to make my candy last as long as possible. After trick or treating I would come home and organize my haul. Candies of the same kind were grouped together. Then based on the amounts of each kind I would formulate a plan on what order they would be eaten in and which ones I would allow my mom to poach when she came sniffing around my stash.

On thing my mom did has influenced me to this day. My mother felt that the worst type of candies were lollypops, gummies, and anything else that was hard or sat in your mouth for an extended period of time. Her logic was that due to the duration those candies spent in your mouth they were more likely to give you cavities so she would take them from me. She did this so matter-of-factly that I never complained. The result is that I’ve never really liked those types of candies. In fact I now view those types of candies, especially anything with gummi and fruit flavor, as old people candy. Recently when my wife filled our candy jar, which I always fill with M&Ms, with fruity gummies I came home and had about the same reaction I had when she came home with Daniel Radcliffe’s haircut. “What are these? Why do we have old people candy in here?” (Now I know, the mere fact of having a candy jar makes me an old person but that’s another deal.) I was unhappy for a day or so until my friend came over and happily started eating them. “Oh, I love these!” he exclaimed. I felt silly. I still think they’re old people candy but I didn’t realize why until my friend’s post allowed me to reflect on my mother’s approach to her children’s Halloweens.

The other thing this reflection brought me was a longing for the eager anticipation of a Halloween stash. Understand, I was the type of kid who organized his dollar bills by serial number, my candy stash was obsessively cataloged. I felt a certain sadness knowing that I may never have that kind of feeling again. I could see now why people collect wines or cars, though I’ll never have the money for those. Now I understand my friend’s vast collection of model cars. But the cars are only partially consumable and that’s part of the whole point right? The anticipation and planning of how and when to consume these things that would someday be gone with nothing but a moment’s satisfaction to show for it. I wasn’t sure what could provide that childhood feeling again., until today. You see, the other factor is that you don’t buy the candy you get on Halloween. You go out and get it for free. You go out with your friends, usually on a school night, and people give you candy. The joy of organizing, planning and consuming something you got for free far outstrips the feeling you get from things you buy. Where can we get this satisfaction as adults?

My son was baptized on Sunday and we had a small reception at our house afterwards. Unexpectedly more than one person brought beer to our house. We had about five different kinds of malty goodness in our fridge when the party ended. Of course, since we are adults now no one brought their beer gifts home with them. I had no idea how much beer was left until I opened the ‘fridge that evening. It was just like opening up that loot bag for the first time. There before me lay chocolaty stouts, malty porters, spicy reds, caramel draughts, and nutty browns. Reflexively I did a quick count of how many there were of each and formulated a plan regarding how many there were of each, what order to drink them in, and which ones could be combined to create even yummier concoctions. It turns out we can recapture the joys of our youth in unexpected places.

Ole Miss Shall Rise Again

2009-10-22T22:21:00.000-07:00

Long time readers here may remember this post . It was one of the first things I wrote as Sir Rantalot. If you don't have the time to read it now the basic point is that any state or local government that displays the Confederate Stars and Bars should be considered in an open state of rebellion and charged with treason against the United States. Well I doubt anyone at the University of Mississippi reads this blog but hey've decided to do the right thing any way.

Recently Ole Miss has changed it's fight song in an attempt to eliminate the chant "The South shall rise again." Follow the link to the ESPN article for the full details. What I thin should be pointed out is that a symbol of the south is taking steps to divorce itself from its susesh past. Ole Miss has previously dropped its Colonel Rebel mascot.

The University of Mississippi should be applauded for their efforts towards uniting their student body and their fan base. Let me be the first to provisionally welcome Mississippi back into the Union.

And Take Al Davis With You.

2009-10-21T21:24:00.000-07:00

So A guy named Ed Roski is planning to build a football stadium in LA. He's planning this even though he does not own an NFL team. He's planning this even though his prospects of owning an NFL team are slim. Good for him. Now let' hope he can get the Raiders to move back to LA.

That's right boys and girls Sir Rantalot's prayers may be answered. There is now a chance, however slim, that our fine community may be rid of the Raiders once and for all. And good riddance. After all who can tell me that the Raiders return has been anything but a nightmare? Massive debt to the county, an ugly ugly remodeling job to the stadium, black outs, PSLs, high ticket prices, six straight seasons of 11 losses or more, black outs, Darrell Russell, this abomination that I still have sort of blocked out of my memory, black outs, and the list goes on. And we still haven't mentioned drunk violent Raider fans.

The Raiders second stint in Oakland had been a disaster for everyone involved. Al has been looking for a way out since he signed the lease. If he bolts back to LA the rest of us can get back to real double headers on Sundays and not being afraid of getting stabbed for wearing colors other than black. I know Al is unlikely to sell and Roski wants a majority stake in a team before he breaks ground but this may be the time. Al's health is failing and I'm sure he could work out a gradual transfer of power that would be completed upon his death. After all it can't be long before Darth Raider throws old Emperor Alpatine down the shaft right? Best of all if Al leaves then maybe, just maybe, we can get a 35,000 seat baseball only stadium that will keep the A's in town and prevent Al from ever coming back.

So here's to all the decent people of the east bay getting together to find out what we can do to make this thing happen. Sometime dreams really can come true.

PS: I've got things to say about Rush, Crabtree, and the other recent sports happenings but I'm still on vacation so it'll have to wait for another day. G'night y'all.

LeGarrette Blount Update

2009-10-03T04:08:00.000-07:00

It looks like there may be some forgiveness for LeGarrette Blount. It's interesting to see that one of the people Blount's been consulting with is Kermit Washington who I mentioned in my original post.

Checking in on Crabtree

2009-10-01T21:09:00.000-07:00

Crabtree II

The question I haven’t seen answered in all the Michael Crabtree analysis is this, how much more money will he have to get to make this hold out worth it? If you examine it in terms of simple math rather than leagalese contract math (discounting various bonus triggers that change what is paid when) it goes like this: the contract on the table is reported as $20M/5years. That breaks down to an average of $4M/year. For some antiquated reason NFL players are given game checks 16 times over the course of the season. Each of Crabtree’s game checks should be ~$250,000. Right now the 49ers are pro-rating their offer so that every time Crabtree misses a game the offer is reduced by ~$250,000. So far he has “lost” ~$750 ,000. If you’re not yet sick to your stomach about a guy turning up his nose at that kind of money read on.

Crabtree has threatened to hold out the entire year and re-renter the draft next year. This plan seems to be based on the fact that he thinks he will be picked higher than he was this year and thus get more money. It is also possible that he believes that the amount of money available next year will get him a better deal. Again, how much more money will he need to get to make it worthwhile? Well for one he’d have to make up for sitting out this year. Essentially he’d have to make six years worth of salary in five years giving us a break even point of $24M ($4M/year x 6 years). But that’s not all.

According to the current collective bargaining agreement (CBA) players can become free agents after five years of service time. That’s when big time players really cash in. Forget for a moment that we don’t know if Crabtree is Randy Moss or Carlos Rogers, he believes he’s a big time player which means whatever deal he gets will have to make up for the fact that he’s now delaying free agency and his big payday by another year. If you look at just the average of the top five cap numbers for wide receivers in 2008 ($9.74M) it means Crabtree would have a new break even number of $34M. If you consider the fact that salaries rise over time it's not crazy to think that number will be higher five years from next year so lets say, accounting for 6 years of salary inflation, he needs $40M to break even. Still this number is only what he would need to make up for missing this year. This is the “the plan didn’t really work and it’s kind of a wash” number. For this hold out to be considered a success he’d have to make a lot more than this.

Now, ready for what he’s allegedly asking? $40 million. That’s right, the guy picked tenth wants $40M. That’s about $2M more than the guy picked seventh, who plays the same position, got. But remember, Crabtree’s whole rationale for this hold out is that he should have been picked fifth.

Beyond the money though is another issue. How good can Crabtree be expected to be? The final answer is we have no way of knowing, but that answer’s no fun to analyze. Instead lets look at other players who have missed entire years. The two that spring to mind for me are Maurice Clarett and Mike Williams. If you don’t remember Mo C. he was a running back at Ohio State who had a great freshman year. He was so good that year he decided he should challenge the NFL rule that forces players to wait three years after high school to apply for the draft. When Clarett won a temporary injunction against the NFL Williams decided it would be a good idea to declare for the draft as well. In the end the NFL rule was upheld (thank you judge Sotamayor) and both players missed the entire 2004 season. In 2005 Williams was taken 10th overall and Clarett was taken 101st. Clarett, who turned down $413,000 in guaranteed money in favor of an incentive laden deal with no guarantees, didn’t make it through training camp and never played in the NFL. Williams ended his rookie year with 29 receptions and 1 touchdown. Not exactly what one looks for in the number 10 overall pick. The next year Williams had just 8 catches and 1 touchdown. In 2007 Williams split time between the Raiders and the Titans recording 7 receptions and 0 touchdowns. He has not played a down since then.

What does this mean for Michael Crabtree? Possibly nothing. Andre Smith, this year’s number six pick was the last player left holding out other than Crabtree. Smith finally reported to camp and was immediately lost for the year with a broken foot the next day. Smith was following the path laid out by 2002 number 6 overall pick Ryan Sims who held out for weeks and then was injured and lost for the year a couple weeks after reporting.

Beyond that sports landscape is littered with guys who thought they could do better. Matt Harrington was drafted by MLB teams four years in a row. He was initially a first rounder but found the offer of a paltry $4.9M to be too little. He played junior college ball, then independent ball and got a little worse every year. Now he works installing tires at Costco. The history of players who turn up their noses at not enough millions and skip a year is littered with stories of failure. In fact the only person I can think of who’s at least made a ton of money after sitting out is J.D. Drew and he at least played a year of high level indie ball while he was off denying the Phillies. But there is no high minor league for football. Crabtree gave up his eligibility for the closest thing to that when he left college. Besides that Crabtree has more to lose in terms of his rookie deal by playing this season in Canada or the UFL than by sitting out. The risk of injury is too great and of he doesn’t excel his stock will drop. Instead he’ll hope that his college resume will hold up through next April. That hope is all he’ll have since he won’t be allowed to work out for other teams before the draft. Here’s hoping the Niners will be in position to draft him again. And again, and again, and again.

Sit Down, Read Rule Book, Shut Up

2009-09-15T12:51:00.000-07:00

Pic from ESPN.com

You see what you've brought me to Raider fans? You see what's happening here? No? I'll tell you what's happening here, I'm blogging from my phone that's what's happening here. I swore I didn't want to do this but you've driven me beyond my limits. Read below for the short version.

Get this straight you freaks, you did not get robbed last night. Not even a little bit. Of course, being Raider fans I don't really expect you to this into that black hole in your head. You know, the place where common sense and actual football acumen go to die. But try to pay attention here: it was not a catch. Under no circumstances in no one's interpretation of the rules is that ever going to be a catch.

Since I know you don't actually know the rules here they are:

"A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball in bounds. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted or recovered, a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet completely on the ground in bounds or any other part of his body, other than his hands, on the ground in bounds.

"If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, there is no possession. This rule applies to the field of play and in the end zone."

"A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball (with or without contact by a defender) must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone.

"If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, there is no possession. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, it is a catch, interception or recovery."

The guy lost control of the ball. It hit the turf. He didn't Bert Emanuel the ball and get it mostly off the ground. He fully lost the ball and it completely hit the ground. If you go to 1:41 of this recap video you'll see the ball clearly hit the ground before his elbow. After that he never regains possession. Then go to 3:15 of that vid, if the first one was a TD the pass to Higgins should have been a fumble. Higgins also took 2 steps. If that had been a fumble then there would be no TD after that and the same result in terms of the final score.

Instant Reaction

2009-09-04T15:23:00.000-07:00

I do not support LaGarrette Blount's actions. I do think we need to try to understand what he did.

For those of you not following this story Blount is a running back for the University of Oregon football team. After a game last night Blount punched an opposing player in the face. The opposing player, Boise State's Byron Hout, sought out Blount immediately after the game and taunted him. The taunt may have been a reaction to Blount's comments to the media before the game to the effect of Oregon owing Boise an "ass whuppin" to avenge the Ducks loss to the Broncos in Oregon last year. I can't condone players punching each other after a game. I do think this kid Blount is getting a bad rap.

I have long contended that this idea that words should never lead to violence is, like communism, a nice idea that has no real practical basis in reality. The fact is you can't just go around saying whatever you want to whoever you want and not be ready to accept whatever reaction you get. Now, if you do something reasonable like honk at someone who darts out in front of your car it is fair to expect they won't smash in your windshield with a crowbar. However, if you roll down your window and yell "Get you stupid fucking monkey ass out the street." I don't see how you can expect to not have your windshield smashed in with a crowbar. Polite society is for polite people. If you can't be polite I hardly see how you can complain if someone answers your rudeness with even greater rudeness. It's like the people who complain when the cops shoot someone and the complaint is, "Well all she did was run at the cop with a knife" (Rosebud) , or "All he did was wave a sword around and yell at them." Well, if you don't want to get shot by the police don't run around with a weapon in public.

Apply this to the end of a game. If you win you should let the fact that you won be all the smack you need to run out there. However if at the end of a tough emotional game you feel compelled to seek a guy out, tap him on the shoulder and rub it in his face you should expect to get punched in the face. If you want to live in a world where you do not ever get punched in the face don't go around taunting angry men who just lost a contest of strength and will. If you want to live in a world where you can taunt large angry men without any repercussion move to Candyland. point: Hout needs to accept some responsibility for his actions and the result.

Some ESPN analysts have referred to the incident as a sucker punch. I don't think this is a fair characterization. If Hout had stood and faced Blount after his comment he would have seen the punch coming. Instead he puts on a shit eating grin and turns to look for props from his boys. Dude, if you're going to talk shit keep your wits about you. In the immortal words of Chris Tucker, "You got knocked the fuck out!" I also think it's telling that Hout's teammates didn't rush to his defense. Maybe the guys' just a dick.

Let me emphasize I am not behind hauling off and punching people. I don't think it's the right thing to do. I just think we shouldn't act so shocked when it happens. Colin Cowherd said something on his show today that stood out for me. He said, "It's not how you act that's important, it's how you react." This is true. Hout is a dumb ass for what he did. Blount could have shown tremendous character and restraint by shining Hout on. That would be the kind of thing we look up to as a society. But Blount isn't that guy. I don't think he should be vilified for it. I'm not that guy. Ask Kermit Washington what can happen in a bad instant. Washington punched Rudy Tomjonovich and his life changed forever. Blount is getting hammered for something that happened in the heat of the moment. we accept temporary insanity as a basis for murder defense. We coach temporary insanity in football players so we can be entertained. But when the insanity carries over by a few minutes we want to act like we're outraged.

Now Blount has been suspended for the rest of the year. I'm fine with that. Just like I was fine with the Mike Vick suspension. Blount needed some sort of punishment. I think a year his a little harsh but he did something wrong and he needs to accept the consequences of his action. I don't think we need to keep hammering on him after this. I don't think we should write him off as a person or a player based on this one incident. It could well be that he's a good person who did a bad thing. We need to look at ourselves and ask if our expectations are really in line with reality. Is it really reasonable to expect that these guys will just turn it off as soon as the whistle blows? Is it really reasonable to expect that we should all have carte blanche to say whatever, whenever, to whomever and expect that it will never draw an unfavorable reaction?

Cop Out

2009-08-31T13:43:00.000-07:00

OK, I know this is old news but it has become one of the sticking points of my marriage, Dumbledore the made up wizard character in the Harry Potter series was "outed" by author J.K. Rowling about two years ago. My wife was thrilled. Every gay rights minded Harry Potter fan I know was thrilled. I was not. Honestly I see it as a stunt. First off Dumbledore's sexuality is in no way germane to the books. It simply doesn't enter in to it. second why "out" him now? What's the point? This is no great symbol for gay rights or anything else. It's complete BS.

Rowling went on to say, "If I'd known it would make you so happy, I would have announced it years ago!" I doubt that very much. Cynically I think she was looking for a secondary boost in sales or publicity. If we can posthumously out dumbledore and have people cheer why not other pretend people? Why not Captain Ahab? Hey, Atticus finch was gay. Does that do anything for ya? It doesn't matter if Dumbledore or Snape or that Moaning Myrtle were gay. It's not a win for social justice. It's nothing. If were going to be a win for anything important it would have been revealed in the books. I think the following quote sums it up nicely.

Ross Douthat of The Atlantic Monthly:

"It seems like a case of J.K. Rowling trying to retroactively bestow a level of adult complexity on her characters that they don’t possess on the printed page. A writer confident in her powers wouldn’t feel the need to announce details like this after the fact."

In an interview with Harry Potter fan site The Leaky Cauldron GLAAD spokesman Sean Lund sees the Dumbledore revelation as a good thing. You can read the interview but I'm not convinced.

Having openly gay characters in books and other media is important for gay rights. Hopefully having visible gay characters helps normalize homosexuality for the audience. But "outing" a fictional person after the character has been killed off after the final volume of the series has been released is baloney. It's a meaningless gesture signifying nothing.

Blah! to you J.K. Rowling. You're no pioneer, no activist.

1568 Part III

2009-08-27T00:54:00.000-07:00

Down in the kitchen Jayne put on the kettle and whisked her three-quarters of a cup of coffee into the microwave. Mr. Pelican sat at the table looking out the window at the side yard from the same chair in which Jayne had first seen Mr. Pelican. “I sat here in this very spot,” he began, “when I was eight years old. We had woodpile just there and one evening we watched about a dozen raccoons come clambering out, one at a time, from what seemed to be a perfectly solid woodpile.” Jayne regarded him over the rim of her mug trying to picture this old man as an eight-year-old boy. Imagining him very small but still wrinkled and dressed in a suit is as far as she could get with him sitting there in front of her. But when he spoke she felt like she could see the figures of his family moving through the house like a time lapsed photograph.

When the tea was ready he thanked her for the cup and they moved out to the back porch. He told her about his parents putting in the brick patio just beyond the porch, about his mother putting in the greenhouse window over the sink. He spoke at length about how the kids next door and two houses down to the south were all in a s close enough age range that their parents took boards out of the fences in the back yards so the kids could go back and forth. He talked about the epic games of hide and seek and make believe the kids played in the three adjoining yards. She learned that his was the only one without a tree house. Jayne mentally committed to talking to June Grunwald about their fence even though her son and Jayne’s own kids weren’t very close.

“Well,” said Walter Pelican, “I’m afraid I’ve ended up giving you a tour instead of the other way ‘round. I hope I wasn’t to forward with my wandering.”

“You were fine.” replied Jayne. “I enjoyed hearing your memories of the house.”

“The one place I was truly happy.” he sighed. “Did I mention that before?’

“You did. Do mind…” she paused and he gave her a slight nod of acceptance. “Do you mind if I ask what you mean? Why you left?”

“Not at all. It’s an important part of the story I guess. You see Malcolm and my mother weren’t married. He wasn’t my father but oh I wanted him to be. So did she. Then somehow it just didn’t work out. They broke up and sold the house and we moved away. At that time, at that age I mean, I didn’t know what had happened. They both gave me the speech you’re supposed to give kids. It wasn’t my fault, they both love me very much. To his credit Malcolm stayed in touch and would come and visit and take me out every once and while, until he had his own kids and moved too far away. Even after that we were in touch periodically through my early adulthood. But at that time it was like my life had been replaced with another. Like the prince and the pauper or like when you come to the end of a good book and you look up and you’re back in the real world sitting on a train with a bunch of very average people.

“When my mother was with Malcolm it was the last time I felt like I was part of real family. The kind you grow up believing in like the Seavers or the Keatons. Malcolm’s family was normal. They were all still married for the first time. They had the 2.8 children and still went to his parents every year for Thanksgiving and Christmas. When they broke up I lost all that and I never got it back.

“I tried to provide the kind of stable home I’d always craved for my children. I hope they know that.”

Jayne felt an urge to take the old man’s hands, to look in to his eyes and comfort the hurt child inside him. She longed to reassure him that he’d done a wonderful job with his children. Instead she turned towards the stove and rearranged the pans that had been drying there. She didn’t want to delve any deeper in to the old man’s pain but she couldn’t stop the question from eking its way from between her lips, “Do you know what happened?”

“Oh, I think it was a lot of things.” he replied. “The kind of things that happen to people sometimes, work, stress, neediness, jealousy, diverging interests or careers or goals. I guess sometimes people just grow apart.”

“You mentioned a brother, was your mom…”

“At some point yes. I think it happened around the time they were breaking up. I found her journals after she died. I read through them, hoping they would provide answers to questions I never thought of asking. In them I found that my mother wanted to have a child with Malcolm, that one was conceived but never carried to term. She didn’t write down the reason. I guess it was too painful even to commit to her private notes. Even though she never told me about it I think I knew on some level that I was supposed to have a sibling that never came. I kept hoping for one and when she and Malcolm split that dream died too.

“My mother did end up having another son eventually, with another man. But by that time he was a different kid and so was I. I was thirteen and as jaded as a kid that age has a right to be. But that’s another house and another time, one that I’m not as anxious to relive.

“I’m sorry. I don’t mean to leave you on a sad note. This really was a happy place for me. I’m glad to see it in the care of a family like yours.”

Jayne stood leaning against the range. They looked at each other for a long moment. “Well, I should be going.” said Walter motioning the hat in his hand towards the door. Jayne shook her head slightly as if waking from an extended daydream, “Yes, of course.” she said and followed him towards the door.

When they reached the threshold she opened the door for him and he stepped out onto the porch. He turned towards her and took her hand in his placing his left hand over her right. “Thank you Jayne.” he said. The look of calm in his eyes overwhelmed her and as he turned to go she felt that she couldn’t bear the thought of not seeing him again, of not getting the rest of the story. “Mr. Pelican.” she called after him. “Walter. You can come back again. We’d be happy to have you visit, meet the kids.”

Mr. Pelican paused on the stairs and turned himself halfway so that he could address her without facing her. “Thank you Jayne, but I think I’ve got what I came for. Anything more may be too much.”

Too melancholy to watch him make his way down the stairs Jayne closed the door and looked at the rooms around her. She knew that would never be alone in the house again. The ghosts of former occupants that she always felt in a vague way, the spirits, the feeling of history in that old house which had helped her fall in love with it had become tangible. Now when she watched her children rip through the house chasing after each other she would see that little boy riding circles on his first bike. When she cooked lunch or did the wash she would do it alongside that other young mother who seemed to feel as happy and as uncertain as she sometimes felt. In the sunroom she could see the cradle of the baby boy who was never able to call this house his home in an alternate space where the happy little boy, who grew up to be Walter Abraham Pelican, Retired, stands cooing at his little brother. Outside the humming birds resumed their frenetic zigzagging flight.

1568 Part II

2009-08-26T00:53:00.000-07:00

As she stepped back into the entryway to let Walter Pelican in Jayne fixed on the old man’s eyes. As he stood in the sunlight of the foyer his pupils dilated as if to let in as much of past as possible. “I had so many good times here.” he breathed the words as if talking to someone very close by. Jayne felt that his words were not meant for her so she said nothing. Mr. Pelican placed his hand on the railing of the stairs leading to the second story. “I remember running down these stairs on birthdays.” he said still not looking at her. “I would try to peek over the railing there to the dining room to see what kind of cake she’d made.” He looked down the short hallway towards the dining room, then at Jayne still holding the door standing slightly behind as if to ward off the strength of the old man’s memories. She noticed that she was hiding there not wanting to disturb him in place she had long felt was her own. It was a puzzling feeling. “She always made the best cakes, very creative, in different shapes.

When we started looking for houses I said that I wanted a house with stairs on the inside. For whatever reason that’s what a home meant to me. They took me on a lot of the trips to look at houses. I remember vetoing a few because they were only one story.” Jayne finally closed the door. His gaze remained fixed on were she had been standing through that spot and on to the sitting room.

“The Christmas I turned six years old I followed a trail of clues to the front porch. Sitting out there was my very first bicycle. Mom let me ride in circles through the sitting room, down the hall, round the corner of the dining room, the living room and back through the sitting room.” As he spoke he traced a path in the air. “It must have been a small bike.”

“Should I show you up stairs?” asked Jayne. She didn’t wait for a reply, uttering the phrase and moving towards the stairs almost simultaneously. She realized she’d taken a few steps up the stairs before checking to make sure he was following. He was. He took each stair slowly always stepping up with his right foot then bringing the left foot up to meet the right. She waited for him on the landing before proceeding up the last four stairs. When they reached the top he paused leaning slightly on the railing. He looked at the three bedrooms running left to right from the back of the house to the front. “The middle one was mine.” he said after a moment.

“That’s my son’s room now. Would you like to look inside?”

Walter paused, “No.” he said, “Even though it was my room for those years I don’t have many memories of it.” Instead he moved to the left, to the bedroom at the back of the house. The door was ajar and he paused at the threshold. “You can go in.” said Jayne. “It’s my daughter’s room. She’s older.”

The room’s dimensions hadn’t changed in the eighty-one years since Walter had last been there. In his mind he could see the roll top desk, the couch, and the TV that had once been there. At the back of the room was door leading to a sunroom. The room, about eight feet wide, at the very back of the house had windows running along its length with a short bench stretching wall to wall beneath the windows. It had been his mother’s sewing room and now was strewn with dolls and games. “It’s my daughter’s play room.” said Jayne. She had been trailing along behind him, allowing what she thought was an appropriate space between herself and his past, and now stood leaning in the doorway between the two rooms. “Ryan kind of dominates the rest of the house with his toys and she needed a place to play without worrying about a little brother crashing through.”

“I think this would have been my little brother’s nursery if I’d had one at the time. But that didn’t happen until much later.” He trailed off and she followed his gaze to floor at the far corner of the room. Poking out beneath the dollhouse was the corner of a rectangular burn mark. Walter pointed at it.

“That was me.” he said. “The burn mark is from and old toy oven. A really old one like the kind my mother must have had when she was a child. It was all metal with a plug so old the cord was wrapped in fabric, from a time before widespread use of plastics. One day I was playing with it and I realized I’d never plugged it in. So I did and nothing seemed to happen. I put a little plastic pie pan filled with mud in the chamber and waited. Eventually I went outside to play. My mother smelled the plastic burning some time later and when we came up to investigate this electrified hunk of metal had been sitting there getting progressively hotter for over an hour. That’s when I learned about fire safety. I think my mom learned something about child safety that day too.”

“So there it is.” thought Jayne, “Another mystery solved.” Walter started back towards the hall taking a last look around the young girl’s suite as he went. He proceeded down the hall past the middle bedroom to the room at the front of the house. Although the door was open this time he paused again. Again, Jayne trailing some distance behind him, more curator than tour guide, gave him the OK to enter the room.

The front bedroom was sparse but still homey. Along the south wall a queen bed stuck partway into the room. At the west wall near the window was an old armoire. Otherwise there was no other furniture. Jayne stopped and took up her now customary position leaning in the doorway. Walter stood in the middle of the room and made a full shuffling turn. When he was facing Jayne he began his story again.

“ I don’t think I’ve been in here more than a handful of times. My parents slept here. I don’t think it's that I wasn’t allowed in here. I remember the door being open almost all the time. I think it’s that, with so many other places to be, it just never really occurred to me to come in here.

“I do remember my mother had a big freestanding mirror that stood nearly in the middle of the room just about here” he said pointing few feet to his left towards the closet door. “I remember wondering if the boy in that mirror was having a better life than I was.” He paused staring into the mirror that was there eight decades in the past. “I read a lot of Lewis and Madeleine L’Engle when I was kid.” he sighed.

“Can I offer you something to drink?” asked Jayne.

“That would be lovely.”

1568 Part I

2009-08-25T10:49:00.000-07:00

It was the kind of spring day you imagine when you think of spring days. The morning had been bright and clear without the layer of fog that usually took until mid-morning to fully burn off. There were humming birds darting in and out of the creeping flowers that no one had planted but still grew along the south side of the house. The house stood there as it had since 1908. Set back from the street and on a bit of a hill so that you had to climb two set of stairs to reach the porch. The bees buzzed in the north east corner of the yard but she was content to leave them alone since trying to eradicate them in past summers hadn’t worked and the kids didn’t seem interested in playing in that corner of the yard anyway. The erratic motion of the humming birds and the bees highlighted the fact that it was an otherwise still day.

Jayne sat with her second cup of coffee. It was almost eleven-o-clock but she wasn’t rushing into chores today. Instead she was reading sipping that indulgent second cup and skimming the gossip blogs. She liked having this time to herself though she rarely took the tie to really enjoy it. As she clicked through photos of ugly things celebrities had worn it only half occurred to her that she’d seen someone outside along the side of the house. A stooped but well appointed figure somewhat aimlessly walking along the side yard between her and the Grunwalds. The man had such a casual air about him he almost seemed as though he belonged there, as if he were looking at a house he had just noticed had come on the market.

The house was not on the market. Jayne had lived at 1568 Milvia St for about five years and was happy there. It was nice neighborhood quiet with good schools and walking distance to the more chi-chi Walnut Square part of downtown. Jayne went out the back door to the side yard to see who the man might be. They’d had a couple homeless people wander into the yard over the years. Never with any ill intent just looking for a quiet spot to sleep or sit. They never gave her any trouble when she approached them and went on their way without being asked. Once Joe had even found a woman sleeping in his car when he was off to work. “Rise and shine” he’d said to her as she nervously gathered her self and exited through the rear door. But this man did not seem homeless. Though she’d only seen him for a second she did not get the impression that the man was down and out. Maybe he was lost.

When Jayne reached the gate at the side of the house, the gate they’d put in to keep people from getting all the way to the backyard she could see that the man wasn’t there. She went back in intent on finishing her coffee and figuring out if she hadn’t imagined the whole thing when the doorbell rang which, to her surprise, gave her a bit of a start. As she walked down the hall she could see through the three crystal cut panes of glass a man’s hat. It was the type of hat she’d seen in the Country Gentleman ad in her grandmother’s old Life magazines. The hat put her at ease as she thought that only very old men wear that type of hat. Despite her new confidence she opened the door they way one does for a Jehova’s Witness or someone holding a clipboard, a way that says “You’ve got about six words to convince me not to close the door again.” Sure enough, there beneath the hat, stooped in a way that suggested both age and a lifetime of poor posture, stood an old man.

“I’m sorry to bother you ma’am” he said. He was dressed the way old people used to dress. Rather than the elastic waistbands and jogging tops worn by on the go seniors of to day he wore a tan shirt with a button down collar topped by a green tweed vest and a brown blazer. Below that his tan slacks, when viewed in the right light form the right angle revealed a hint of very thin corduroy.

“You were at the side of the house.”

“Yes ma’am. I’m sorry about that. It was so quiet I wasn’t sure there was anyone home. My name is Walter Pelican and I am ninety years old just recently.

Jayne briefly pondered the figure standing before her. He didn’t look like a beggar, at least not a modern beggar. If he was about launch into a sob story and request money she knew she’d have a hard time not at least listening so she started to plan her escape. She silently prayed for the phone to ring. “How can I help you Mr. Pelican?”

“Well this may sound a bit,” he paused searching for the right word, “peculiar” he finally managed. “But you see I used to live in this house when I was a young boy. I think it was the only time in y childhood I was truly happy.

I’ve passed by here now and again over the years on my way here and there and I’ve often wondered about the people living there now. I’ve longed to see the place but I never had the confidence to approach it. I’ve always wanted to knock on the door and see who was here. What they’ve done with the place. Mostly I guess I just wanted to take a few moments to be this space and reminisce about those years. I wondered about it in my twenties when I couldn’t knock the door without seeming suspicious. I wondered in my thirties and forties when I was busy with my children and unwilling to revisit my own childhood. I wondered in my fifties and sixties when the desire seemed foolish and immature for man with grandchildren. Now I’m much older and I’ve finally found courage to knock on this old door.

So I’m wondering ma’am, if some time, when it’s not too much trouble, if you’d be wiling to give me a tour of the place. I understand it’s an odd request but it would mean a great deal to me.”

He reached inside his pocket and produced a business card, which he handed to her. “Well that’s what I’ve come to say.” And with that Walter Pelican turned to leave. Jayne stood in the doorway unsure of what to say. She looked down at the card in her hand. It read, “Walter Abraham Pelican, Retired” with a phone number. “Mr. Pelican.” Walter Pelican did not turn back but cocked an ear towards her. “I’m not doing anything right now. I’d be happy to show you around.”

“I don’t want to intrude on your morning.” he replied already moving back from the top step to the porch.

“Oh it’s no bother Mr. Pelican.” Jayne answered. “I’m Jayne.”

Mr. Pelican stuck out his hand and stood as straight as he could, “Walter. It’s good to meet you Jayne.”

“It’s good to meet you Walter.”

Plax

2009-08-20T10:26:00.000-07:00

"Yeah Hi, I'd like to hire that guy from "The Bodyguard." No no Kevin Costner, the guy, the bodyguard guy. Nevermind."

So Plaxico Burress is going to prison. ESPN is reporting that Burress agreed to a plea that will send him away for two years. For those who have not been following the story Burress was arrested last season after accidentally shooting himself in the leg in a New York night club when a gun stuck in the waistband of his sweatpants slipped out and fired.

According to the ESPN.com article Burress's lawyer thinks his client was unfairly targeted because of his celebrity status. There are some aspects of the case that back that up. For example no one else involved in the incident was indicted even though there is evidence to suggest a fairly wide ranging attempt to cover up what happened. Plax's gun was not registered in New York or New Jersey. The security guard at the club did not confiscate the weapon at the scene to turn over to police. Instead he gave it to Giants linebacker Antonio Pierce (removing evidence) who then drove then gun to his own home (transporting an unlicensed weapon across state lines) then to Burress's home (and again). The staff at the hospital did not report the shooting to police which they are compelled to do in many states. Still, even though multiple people were involved in actions that point towards an attempt to shield Burress from prosecution only Burress is being held accountable.

That said the lawyer's comments in regard to the severity of Burress's punishment are boarder line hysterical. here's a sampling from the ESPN.com article:

"This was not an intentional criminal act," Brafman said. "In my judgment, a two-year prison sentence is a very severe punishment."

"Brafman called the case "a perfect example about how bad judgment can have very serious consequences," and said Burress was treated more harshly because he is a celebrity."

"If Plaxico Burress were not a high-profile individual, there never would be a case," he said. "If he were just John Q Public he could have walked out of the club and he never would have been arrested."

Seriously? Lets discuss this further.

"This was not an intentional criminal act?" Really? So tucking an unlicensed handgun into the waistband of his sweatpants and going out to a night club was...an accident? "Oops, do am I still carrying a concealed weapon without a permit? Silly me."

""If he were just John Q Public he could have walked out of the club and he never would have been arrested." Really? So if I carry a gun into a public venue, shoot myself and have the bullet nearly hit the security guard standing nearby I'll just get off without any kind of consequences? Cool. I'm thinking that what will really happen if J.Q. Public does this same thing is that the guard, realizing he's OK and that I almost Pacman Jonesed him will proceed to beat me within an inch of my life, then he'll call the cops, then I'll sit in jail until my trial because I can't come up with the bail, then I'll go to jail for whatever the maximum sentence is. I'm thinking people, even "normal" people, don't just get away with this kind of "unintentional criminal act."

So, what do we learn from this? I really don't know. I hope people learn that they should not carry guns around. Especially in the waistband of their sweatpants. i can't even keep my phone in an elastic waistband how did this guy think a gun was going to stay? Also, rich people, use your money to hire people to do things for you. If you're worried about security hire a body guard who is authorized to carry a weapon. If you like to drink call a cab, or a limo, or tour bus but don't get in your car and start driving around killing people. It looks like the Leonard Little days are over. If you are too stupid to remember these simple things hire someone to remember them for you. But for gawdsake stop doing this stupid shit.

It's Not Who You Know

2009-08-13T10:21:00.001-07:00

Berto and Jim Rice

About twelve years ago I had the privilege of going to a San Francisco Giants game as a guest of a guest of the person playing the national anthem. This meant we got access to a catered luxury box and everything that comes with it. The game was notable for being the major league debut of future Twins All-Star closer Joe Nathan who began his career as a starter for the Giants. The box was full of people I didn't know which I was used to with these types of events but being an out going type I chatted with the people around me about the game and baseball in general.

When we left my host asked "So, did you get an autograph?"

"From who?" I had no idea what he was talking about.

"Tony Perez. The guy sitting next to you."
"Like, Big Red Machine? Tony Perez?"
"Yeah. The guy you were talking to."
"No. No one told me that was Tony Perez."
"So I guess you didn't meet Cepeda either."
"Orlando Cepeda?"
"Yeah, with the hat."
"I met him. We talked. I didn't get his name. Dude, you have got to tell me these things."

So there it was. I had just spent four hours talking baseball with a couple hall of famers and didn't even know it. Looking back it was probably a good thing I didn't know. I wasn't intimidated or over awed. I probably said somethings that made me look stupid in regards to baseball but I was myself. When I remember that day I don't swell on the missed opportunity to get autographs and take pictures. I think of the rare chance to sit with legends on an equal footing. They didn't look at me and shake their heads at this kid who thought he knew the game. They engaged me in conversation. What I didn't know that day gave me a rich and treasured experience.

Ten years later I had another rare baseball opportunity. I was hired to work at the boston Red Sox fantasy camp . The camp was staffed by a mix of former Red Sox like Spaceman Lee, Oil can Boyd, and others who didn't have cool nicknames with appearances by current Red Sox coaches, hall of famer Carl Yastrzemski, and future hall of famer Jim Rice. Everyone (except Yaz who was only there for one day) did a great job of integrating the campers, men between the ages of 30 and 75, with the former players. Again here was a group of former big leaguers treating everyone around them as equals. Maybe this shouldn't be such a big deal, but in an age of pampered stars it was refreshing.

The main difference between the camp experience and the luxury box experience is that I knew who most of the players were. I had a chance to read a little bit about them and their careers before I arrived, they were introduced the first day, we spent a week hanging out and playing ball ten hours/day. We got a chance to get to know them. At one point Jim Rice asked me about my mismatched uniform (white home jersey/grey away pants):

"They didn't give me a uniform Jim. I had to put this together myself."
"Aw c'mon it's not what you know, it's who you know. If you had come to us we could have hooked you up."
"I didn't know I knew you Jim."

One of my favorite guys was Luis Tiant. El Tiante was a good guy. Sox fans love Luis Tiant. I was not a Sox fan so all I knew about Tiant, other than him pitching in the 1975 World Series, is what I learned by talking to him. I knew he was from Cuba. I learned that he likes cigars and he's a jovial joking, kind hearted man. I left camp with a fond impression of El Tiante. It turns out I had only scratched the surface. I if I had known then what I've learned since I would have stood in awe of him.

ESPN recently premiered "The Lost Son of Havana" a film about Luis Tiant's first trip back to Cuba in 46 years. Luis Tiant was playing pro ball in Mexico when the Bay of Pigs Invasion occurred. At that time cuban athletes playing abroad were told to either come home and play amateur baseball or be exiled. Tiant, whose father had played in the Negro Leagues, chose Major League Baseball and exile. I won't recount his entire career here except to mention that Luis began playing in the US under Jim Crow, came back from injury, perception and age several times, and turned in one of the great World Series pitching performances of all time albeit in a losing cause. The crowning moment for Tiant was 1975 when Fidel Castro allowed Tiant's parents to leave cuba to watch their son pitch for the Red Sox. They hadn't seen each other in 14 years. El Tiante's father Luis Tiant Sr. who had pitched the New York Cubans to their only Negro League title was finally allowed to take the mound in a major league park when he threw out the first pitch at Fenway prior to his son's game. A year later both of Luis Tiant's parents passed away within a few hours of each other, his father of cancer and his mother of a ruptured aorta.

The legacy of Luis Tiant is that of a man who gave up everything to follow his dream. He gave up his family, and he gave up his homeland. His desire to test himself at the highest level and to fulfill the dream his father was never able to attain turned him into a permanent sojourner. He faced discrimination here and a mixture of scorn and admiration at home. Luis Tiant is a symbol of strength and perseverance. He is also part of the enduring legacy of Jackie Robinson.

It may seem like a leap to go from Luis Tiant to Jackie Robinson but follow me for a moment. Tehre has been a lot of talk over the past few years about the dwindling impact of Jackie Robinson's legacy. People point to the decreasing numbers of African Americans in the majors as though it's a slap in the face of all the Robinson endured. The claims often indicate that baseball is not doing enough to attract African Americans to the sport and is thereby disrespecting Robinson in the process. This analysis in itself diminishes the impact of Robinson's legacy by overlooking dark skinned Latin American players.

Luis Tiant Sr. was not African American but he was barred from playing major league baseball because of his skin color. Jackie Robinson did not just break the color barrier for African Americans, he broke it for all players of color. Without Jackie Robinson there would have been no El Tiante in Boston, we would never have seen Manny Being Manny, no Pedro striking out six in the all star game. Without Robinson there is no Clemente. Without Robinson there is no Tony Perez or Orlando Cepeda for me to lead off this article with. Without Jackie Robinson there is no Mpho Ngoepe. Haven't heard of him?

Mpho Ngoepe is a Pirates minor leaguer and the subject of a recent Sports Illustrated article. Mpho, or "Gift" is trying to become the first ever African player in the Major Leagues. People who focus on the number of African American players in the major leagues as the sole measure of Jackie Robinson's legacy are doing a disservice to both Robinson and to all of the dark skinned Latino players who have come into the league since 1947. They are also marginalizing players like Gift who will come into the league in future years.

In the end it isn't about who you know. It's what you know about them. Orlando Cepeda, Tony Perez, and Jim Rice are all in the Hall of Fame. Meeting them was a thrill, even if only in hindsight. But everything I know about them begins and ends with their credentials. It's Tiant that I will always remember the most. Thinking about this jovial little butterball that I joked with and drank with for a week one spring, how I saw him then, and everything I've learned about him since will stick with me as one of the most cherished experiences of my life. Knowing that this man who had been through so much, dealt with so much pain, could keep on smiling is something I hope I can carry into my own life. When I sit down to teach my son about baseball I'll teach him about Rickey and Campy, and Manny. But I'll take extra time to teach him about Jackie, and Clemete, and Tiant, the man who gave up everything, and kept on laughing.

Berto and El Tiante

Cribbs Notes

2009-08-12T08:56:00.000-07:00

Image created by dawgpounddaily.com, hosted on photobucket

So Joshua Cribbs wants a new deal with four years left on his current contract. He says he wants Devin Hester money. Some people agree with him. Some people are Sir Rantalot. And then there's bam28226. As we saw in the Mike Vick debate post the people who get the most passionate about these arguments also have the least to say. So what's the point of these posts? To show how clever Sir Rantalot is? Not really. It's more to show that even when you show people the rationale behind the debate they still refuse to see anything other than what they want to see. It doesn't matter if it's health care or football ignorance rules the roost.

Again, do not debate if you don't have anything of substance to say.

Bertissimo 10:23am

Wah! Wah! Wah! What a baby.

You signed a six year deal, honor it. The only way the team isn't honoring the deal like Cribbs claims is if they don't pay him. If you want to renegotiate this soon you should have signed a two year deal. You sir are no D. Hester.

Oh, and if you can't live off 6 mil for the rest of your life you're doing something wrong. Cribbs makes in one year what I make in 10. My family is doing fine. Learn to budget dummy.

--Oh but he's a triple threat. He's a return man, a WR, a QB, a RB and he sells hot dogs during half time.--

Bertissimo 10:35am

Career

REC YDS AVG LNG TD
16 / 153 / 9.6 / 18 / 1

CAR YDS AVG LNG TD
40 / 239 / 6.0 / 27 / 1

This guy has 16 career receptions and 40 carries. He's not exactly Slash Stewart. He's not even Troy Brown. He's not underpaid, he's getting what he's worth.

--Now it gets fun--

bam68226 10:36am

bertissimo You are a idiot to think hester is better then cribbs. hester avg 20 yrds a return in his career cribbs 28, and as i recall hester lost his return job bc he wasnt preforming for the last 8 games. you dont know nothing.

--A guy who used the word "preforming" just called me an idiot. He also deleted a post where he said I was aliar and there's no way I make $1M/year.--

Bertissimo 10:48am

Bam,

You moron, Hester also has 71 career receptions including 51 last year. He's WAY more valuable than Cribbs. Oh, and if needed he's a better defender than Cribbs. At least you cleaned up your bad math though so kudos on that. Dummy.

bam68226 10:52am

bert you are dumb really cribbs playd QB, RB, WR, defense of special teams, and returner. he buy far is way more versitile then hester. and comin from a hurricane fan hester is whack so hope of his D. you dummy. its hard to carry a team on your back like he did never getting time to catch his breath, but i always say hester on his bench cept when recievin

--"but i always say hester on his bench cept when recievin" Huh?--

bam68226 10:57am

oh and bert yea i think it was daniel manning who took over kick returns at the end of the bears season, #### im a browns fan and i know more bout any team then you do

Bertissimo 11:03am

Bam,

Who cares about Daniel Manning? Considering your spelling and grammar you should chill with insulting people's intelligence. You really are the worst kind of ignorant.

--I usually try to stay off of mentioning people's spelling and grammar in chats because it online but this guy called me stupid one too many times.--

bam68226 11:05am

your right who cares bout him but guess what he was doing his job over hesters thats why hester lost it and right now idc bout my spelling and grammer it isnt school, im heated right now bc your an ignorant piece of S***

Bertissimo 11:06am

The hold out strategy worked in the past but I think teams are over it by this point. It seems that in the past players held out if they had a year left on their deal and they wanted to stay where they were. But this new trend of players wanting to renegotiate with two or more years left on their contracts is terrible. If you want to renegotiate that soon sign shorter deals.

bam68226 11:07am

just bc you cant be famous and make good money like these people and work as hard as hard as they do. its not just the 16 games for his 6 million hes making. its all year round the effort they put outside the field and having talkd to cribbs seen cribbs he is one of the hardest working players you will ever see, bert

--He just kind of threw me in there at the end. Why?--

bertissimo 11:09am

Bam,

You're comparing a returner to a position player you yutz. Who cares if Hester lost his return job? He's a real full time player now, not a gimmick. You're whole argument is based on Hester's primary value being a returner. It's like comparing you to someone with a clue, it's two totally different things.

rgs_13 11:10am

return guys and average WRs are a dime a dozen

Bertissimo 11:10am

"return guys and average WRs are a dime a dozen "

Exactly.

bam68226 11:10am

oh bert your real funny cribbs doesnt have aset spot when he plays the whole damn game, have you watched football before, i mean come on he is every where on the field

bearsclone 11:12am

"If you want to renegotiate that soon sign shorter deals."

The problem is that as a drafted rookie, your rights are controlled by one team, and they can largely dictate terms. If you are a top pick, you have the leverage, because no team wants the PR nightmare of being bad AND having their top pick not sign-- it makes the fans angry and gives them no hope for the future.

If you are outside of that top 15, you have a greatly diminished amount of leverage. A team says "sign this six year deal" and you either sign it or sit out a year and come back a year older, not playing any football for a year, and suddenly you're a 4th round pick or go undrafted.

If you sign a veteran deal (that is, you get a nice fat contract extension with a signing bonus, that you didn't NEED to sign) then I agree. I hate the fact that some one will sign a huge deal that makes them the most highly paid person at their position ever, and then in year four or five of that eight year deal, they want a new one.

Bertissimo 11:14am

"The problem is that as a drafted rookie, your rights are controlled by one team"

He's not on his rookie deal. He signed an extension in 2007 before his 3rd year.

bearsclone 11:16am

"He's not on his rookie deal. He signed an extension in 2007 before his 3rd year."

If that's the case then I can see where people would have a problem with it.

--Thanks bearsclone. Now that's a friendly debate.--

bam68226

bert, he is a KR,PR,QB,RB,WR, special teams defense, and this year soon to be a CB. please tell me hester does all that for his 40 mil contract and 15 mil guranteed. thats right cribbs does it all for 6 mil point in case deserves a raise

--OK, bam's coming around. He said something half way cogent and didn't call me an idiot. Cool. At this point I get behind in a couple responses because I had to go and do some actual work at work. I thin kyou can still foloow the thread though.--

Bertissimo 11:19am

Bam,

Since I don't live in Ohidaho I don't get to see many Browns games. We have our own cruddy teams to watch here. So I'm very familiar with the players that play really well on losing teams around here. I just don't have the time to follow every terrible team in the league to see who's doing just enough to not really matter. It's great that you love Cribbs so much. Good for you.

bam68226 11:21am

Bert i live 3.5 hrs away from cleveland and i went to 7 out of 8 games one missd bc i had a college baseball game, and i bet your team you like is garb. im not sayn the browns are the best in the league we have problems and it was signing mangini as are coach

bam68226 11:22am

by the way its ohio, and i bet i went to more games last year then you did your entire life

OhioDevil 11:23am

Bam are you serious? Do you even watch the Browns play? Cribbs is on the field for maybe 10-15 plays a game, he does not play QB or RB. Every time he lines up back there he ran the ball for 2yds up the middle. The guy is a great cover guy on special teams and a great return guy, but teams kicked away from him last season negating his effectiveness. There is no way a Special Teamer can demand a new deal, just because the Bears were stupid and paid Hester does not open the door for Cribbs. If Cribbs wins a spot as a Safety or Corner, then yes...give him a raise.

Bertissimo 11:26

Yeah, he's a great QB. He's 1 for 5 for 8yds and a whopping 39.6 rating. Hes got 8 total TDs in his 4 year career.

Hester has 17 TDs in 3 years.

bam68226 11:29

bc they kickd the ball to hester, they were afraid of cribbs. and damn i wish i could have the fluke year that hester had to he had 1 good year cribbs has been increasing as his years go on

--Yeah. That year the Bears went to the Super Bowl no one was afraid of Hester. Right.--

Bertissimo 11:30am

Bam,

I already said I don't care about how many games I've watched or been to or seen and I've already said the teams in my area are terrible. Who cares how many games you go to each year? You're still a dummy. You probably should know more if you invest so much time into it.

And it's Ohidaho because I said it's Ohidaho.

bam68226 11:32am

haha well your a #### to say its that where you from north dakota where there are more cows then people haha

--????--

bam68226 11:34am

o and by the way i dont invest my time in it your the one coming up with all the stats, mine are from my head i dont have the time i have a life, sorry i cant sit on a comp all day and look at stats like you

--This from the guy who's been matching me comment for comment all morning. I'll never understand the people who feel like it's a conversational advantage to just spout whatever it is they half remember based on their hazy impressions of events rather than taking ten seconds to look it up. People, research and verification are good things!--

Bertissimo 11:35am

"haha well your a #### to say its that where you from north dakota"

Dude, I work with languages for a living but I have to say I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. I get that you think I'm from ND but that's about it. Are you drunk?

bam68226 11:40

congradulations BERT you work with languages you want a present. i dont give a you know what where you work, your the one that seems to know everything but you still cant give a valid reason, why he doesnt deserve his money

this is to an earlier statement you had o and by the way i dont invest my time in it your the one coming up with all the stats, mine are from my head i dont have the time i have a life, sorry i cant sit on a comp all day and look at stats like you

--But he had time to repeat that comment about not knowing anything.--

Bertissimo 11:44am

Bam,

Looking up stats takes two minutes, far less time than driving from Saskatoon to Cleveland to spend 5 hours at the game then driving home. But you have a life right? And you do have time to spend all day on the computer, you've been chatting it up with me for over an hour. But hey, we know math isn't your strong suit. Neither is English. You're kind of the Josh Cribbs of this discussion, you're all over the place but you don't really contribute to any wins.

thirdfloor81 11:44am

2 receptions for 18 yards and 1 touchdown in 2008... BOO HOO CRIBBS!

bam68226 11:45am

thirdfloor81 hey funny how donte stallworth, kellen winslow, braylon edwards, syndric steptoe, steve heiden are all in front of him of course he isnt goin to get many receptions

--Wait, haven't you been basing your argument on how great a receiver he is? If he's so great why are there five guys ahead of him on the depth chart?--

bam68226 11:48am

bert i havent been on a comp in a week prolly and since your so ignorant how couldnt i stay on and chat with you. bc you think your the man but your cases have all been whack just like you

--Heh. I'm compelling.--

oronatx 11:49am

Bertissmo,

Thats great. You summed this dude up best

"You're kind of the Josh Cribbs of this discussion, you're all over the place but you don't really contribute to any wins"

lmao

--Heh. I have fan.--

Bertissimo 11:51am

Bam, you make no sense pal. What you did last week doesn't matter. It's now that counts. And yes. I am the man.

bam68226 11:53am

bert you are a tool, not the man your the person at work that gets annoying and people tell to shut up bc thats all you been is a pest, that has no knowledge of sports

--Now it's just getting silly. But I'm OK with that.--

Bertissimo 11:57am

Bam, I clearly know way more than you and with less effort. I rule. People at work love me because I'm fun and I'm good at what I do. Man=Me.

bam68226 11:57am

bert normally the people that say that dont have friends, your a no one and its said to see that, but i hope your right in that you do have friends but the way you have been doesnt show any promise just like hesters career no promise hes LAZY

Bertissimo 11:59

Bam, I didn't bring it up. You did.

--Then there was some name calling and a discussion of the 49ers. I went to work for a couple hours and returned to this:--

Irishogs 1:51pm

GIVE THE MAN HIS MONEY!!!! He is our most dependable offensive player. He always plays hard and has done everything asked of him from being a kick returner, to a wide receiver, to running the wildcat, and apparently now playing cornerback. I'm starting to think Mangini is on a mission to destroy the Browns. Consistently, Cribbs makes the plays and catches that Braylon usually drops.

Mr. Lerner - GIVE THE MAN HIS MONEY!!!

Bertissimo 1:59pm

"He is our most dependable offensive player."

He scored 3 TDs last year. He doesn't consistently make catches Edwards can't, he only had 2 catches last season and only 16 in 4 years. If he's the best on the team the team is in big trouble.

Irishogs 2:03pm

Bertissimo:

I'm saying he shows up every game, and he plays every down. Maybe he only had 3 TDs last year, but he wasn't the main guy either. Compare him to the main guys (Winslow, Edwards, Stallworth) and talk to me about efficiency. I put Stallworth in that group because he was supposed to be important to our offense. Although, he was ridiculously underused which isn't entirely his fault.

I'm not saying he is our most talented receiver. I'm saying that he is our most consistent and dependable player, and if he outplays and outperforms the main guys (despite fewer attempts) he should be paid at their level.

--Well said. Next is a response to a few Cribbs apologists.--

Bertissimo 2:36pm

"if he outplays and outperforms the main guys (despite fewer attempts) he should be paid at their level"

--Maybe. But he hasn't done it yet.

"HE PLAYS MORE THAN 1 POSITION"

--And he doesn't play any of them other than KR/PR at an elite level. His best skill position seems to be RB. If he was an elite RB he'd be starting there.

"This isn't him crying over his contract after the 1st or 2nd year"

--Yes it is. This is now the third year of this deal.

"he's a better WR (as of right now)" (than Hester)

--No he's not. He had 2 catches last year Hester had 51.

If you want to look at versatility and playing multiple positions compare Cribbs as a QB and Ronnie Brown (the man who put the wildcat on the map last year).

Cribbs for his career is 1 for 5 for 8 yds and 0 TD. Brown is 2 for 4 for 41 yds and 1 TD. But Brown also rushed for 916 yds and had 16 receptions and 10 total TDs last year. Cribbs had 2 catches 167 yds rushing and 3 total TDs.

Cribbs is not the offensive dynamo some people think he is.

How about Cribbs compared to LT?

Remember Cribbs: 1 for 5, 8 yds, 0 TD.

LT: 8 for 11, 143 yds, 7 TDs

Plus LT contributes way more to the offense. Cribbs has made himself slightly more valuable than as just a good return man. That's how you keep your job, but not enough to make demands with 4 years left on your deal.

FEEZJAMES 2:45pm

BERTISSIMO look, when he gets the opportunities he's not gonna disappoint, I don't agree with the Hester comment either, but understand he was a situational player last year whereas Hester was already put into the system. but since you took one of my quotes (not mad at ya 4 that) you seem to leave the most important one out. WHO LED THE BROWNS IN ALL-PURPOSE YARDS LAST YEAR. and last time i checked All-purpose yards DOES determine who your top 2 (if not 3) best yard producers are, therefore MAKING THEM 1 OF YOUR BEST PLAYERS. Like it or not people, he deserves it and find a better reason other than comparing his bankroll to yours why he doesn't deserve it. Then It'll be a REAL debate here.

FEEZJAMES 2:48pm

ok BERTISSIMO you're sounding real asinine with that one. comparing Cribbs to LT is comparing Elway to Plummer or Cutler, U CAN'T COMPARE APPLES AND ORANGES DUDE, come more sensible than that

Bertissimo 3:03pm

"WHO LED THE BROWNS IN ALL-PURPOSE YARDS LAST YEAR. and last time i checked All-purpose yards DOES determine who your top 2 (if not 3) best yard producers are, therefore MAKING THEM 1 OF YOUR BEST PLAYERS."

I disagree. First off Cribbs wasn't even in the top ten in all purpose yards in the NFL last year. Some of the guys who beat him out were Steve Breaston, Eddie Royal, Johnnie Lee-Higgins and Josh Wilson. These guys are not among the best players on their teams. These are not the guys who make their teams "go." Should Breaston ask for a new deal to put him on par with Larry Fitzgerald? Breaston had more yards.

"Cribbs to LT is comparing Elway to Plummer or Cutler, U CAN'T COMPARE APPLES AND ORANGES DUDE,"

Exactly, but it seems his agent and people in this discussion are saying he's as valuable as other guys with big money deals who do more than one thing. He's not. He's a good KR/PR and below average at everything else. He needs to compare himself to other KR/PR not guys who actually start at a skill position.

Oh and he's asking for a raise after ranking 12th n KR and 18th in PR yards. Outside the top ten in his specialty.

FEEZJAMES 3:17pm

well BERTISSIMO i don't know where you've been but everybody in Phoenix (recent visit) said despite what Fitz has done, they wouldn't have gotten there without Steve Breaston who they refer to as their 'X-Factor'. So that's null and void. Eddie Royal will be Denver's #2 receiver, don't know those other guys but I thought my ? was WHO LED THE BROWNS in all-purpose yards, NOT THE NFL. which validates point #3 (Breaston and Royal the other 2) anything else?

Bertissimo 3:22pm

FEEZ,

My point is that all purpose yards is a misleading stat. It doesn't always point to your best players. You have a good point about Royal, I forgot about him. Breaston did very well, but he's not an elite player at this point. You can get other guys to do what he does.

Teams also wouldn't make it through the year, through the playoffs, to the Super Bowl without kickers. Kickers often lead their teams in points but very few people think kickers should be given huge contracts. Cribbs is a nice player, but he's not great

Players with more impact and less money than Cribbs who have not issued a press release:

Lance Moore

Vincent Jackson

Johnnie Lee Higgins

Steve Breaston

Brandon Marshall

The bottom line is that guys like Cribbs are like utility baseball players. The guy who starts at six different positions in a season usually doesn't do it because he's such a great player. These guys learn to play several positions because that's how they keep a roster spot. If they were good enough to play one position and stay in the line up they would do it. Cribbs doesn't play WR/RB/QB/DB because he's a great player. He does it because he's not good enough at any of those positions to play any of them full time. In short he's a slash guy because he's not good enough to do anything else. Hopefully he, and myopic Browns fans, will figure that out.

I'm a Bad Fan

2009-08-10T09:06:00.000-07:00

I'm a bad fan. At least that's what I gather based the fact that I don't want my team to win. I want them to lose. I want them to lose enough to end up with a top ten draft pick, but not a top five draft pick. I'll tell you why.

Recently 49ers first round draft pick Michael Crabtree's "advisor" (cousin) has stated that is willing to hold out the entire year rather than take the slotted money being offered by the 49ers. This comes on the heels of Crabtree's agent, Eugene Parker, saying that Crabtree should be paid like a top five pick despite the fact that Crabtree was drafted with the tenth pick. This is apparently based on where Crabtree was projected to go in the draft . Parker issued a non-denial denial regarding the hold out threat but that has not kept this from becoming a hot story in the bay area.

Of course there are several reasons why Crabtree should not be paid like a top five pick. The first being that he was drafted tenth (see previous paragraph). The second is that not only was Crabtree not the top player in the draft, he wasn't even the top player at his position. That honor went to Darius Heyward-Bey who was also not a top five pick (number seven to the Raiders). Finally many sports including the NFL use an informal slotting system for paying draft picks. That is if the number one pick gets X then everyone else gets less than X with the number 2 pick getting roughly X-(1 draft slot), the number 3 pick getting X-(2 draft slots) and so on. This has the most impact at the top of the draft where there's more ego involved. #2 is never going to sign for less than #3 or #4. So with only six of the top ten picks signed so far it seems like people are waiting to see what Crabtree gets before making deals for players picked higher in the draft.

According to Ray Ratto among others I should be upset with the 49ers. I should be crying out that they do whatever it takes to sign Crabtree. After all we need him in order to win. Right? Right? Uh....right....? Sure the Niners came within a couple plays of beating Arizona twice and maybe making the playoffs but that's not enough to convince me. Who knows, maybe a game breaking wide out would have made the difference. Maybe going with Shawn Hill from the beginning would have made the difference. Maybe Eddie DeBartolo not getting popped for bribing a Louisiana Governor would have made the difference. But I'm not upset with the team. Why should they over pay a guy to come in and not make a difference on a bad team?

I think it's time for teams to go back to the days of taking stands against players and their insane demands. It seems like the teams are with me. You can find evidence of this in the Joshua Cribbs story this off-season. Cribbs wanted "Devin Hester money" but hadn't put up Devin Hester numbers. Anyone remember Sean Gilbert? Yeah. So here's why I'm a bad fan. I hope Crabtree does hold out the entire year. I hope the 49ers lose enough games to land some where between the 6th and the 10th draft pick. Then I hope they draft Crabtree again and offer him a little less than they offered him this year. And if he holds out again I hope they draft him every year until he retires. They won't need a top ten pick every year. After a while they'd be able to get him for a 2nd round pick then a 3rd round pick and so on. I'm a bad fan because I'd rather see an example made of this player than see my team win.

I guess this is what happens when the team is so bad for so long. Maybe I'd feel different if the Niners were winning and adding talent might actually mean something. For now though I'm rooting that no one wins.

Oh and if you want a laugh track back through some of the comments on Josh Cribbs article. There's an even better debate on there between me and a guy coming "off the doom."

Shenanigans

2009-08-07T00:26:00.000-07:00

I am cursed with noticing things. It's really a bit of a problem. I often wish I could go through life with blinders on because noticing things often leaves me to puzzle over strange happenings that most people think I'm weird for having seen. One place of constant amazement for me is the bathroom at work. See, you already think I'm weird because the bathroom is one of the places where people try as hard as possible not to notice anything. (The other being the back corner of a gay bar.) But I can't help it, I'm cursed.

The bathroom at work has provided a few head scratching moments this year. Once I saw a guy at the urinal with his pants pulled all the way down like a kid who's just recently been potty trained. Another time I saw a guy wash his hands before he peed but not after. Often I find toilet paper laid on the toilet seat as if someone just doesn't trust the thin paper covers provided for y'know, covering the toilet seat. But all of these pale in comparison to what I witnessed a little while back. I'm sure you've all seen the people who wash their hands and then use paper towels to work the doors when they exit. Well the guy in this story takes it to a whole other level.

As I was exiting one of the stalls there was a guy exiting the adjoining stall. The paper towel dispenser in this bathroom is the kind where you pull the little handle to dispense towels that come out in a long sheet until you tear it off. I witnessed the following sequence:

1. Exit stall head directly to paper towel dispenser.

2. Dispense approx four feet of paper towels.

3. Use some towels to turn on sink.

4. Wash hands

5. Use some towels to turn off sink

6. Use remaining towels to work the handle on the paper towel dispenser to dispense more paper towels

7. Use some of the new towels to dry hands

8. Use half of the remaining towels to open inner door to bathroom

9. Throw door handle towels on the floor

10. Use remaining towels to open outer door to bathroom

11. Throw door handle towels on the floor

12. Exit

Now lets set aside the ecological implications of this behavior and focus on the really absurd part. Refer to step 6. That's right he used paper towels to work the handle of the paper towel dispenser he had just contaminated! He's thrown off the entire "using paper towels to protect yourself" system! If there is one thing in that whole bathroom that should be relatively germ free it should be the handle of the paper towel dispenser. After all by any reasonable standard the only people using it are people who have just washed their hands. But now this guy comes along and cocks it all up for everyone. WTF guy?

Now here's the rant: ALL YOU TOWEL PEOPLE ARE MORONS!!! Do you really think you're protecting yourselves from the non-hand washers? Even if we accept that the towels are protecting you do you really believe that all the germs got off the other guy's hand at the first two stops? The door to your office suite is only fifteen feet from the bathroom, do you really believe that the germs didn't make it that far? Seriously, if you think the door to the bathroom is so gross why do not believe that every surface in every public place isn't equally gross?

Let me ask you something. How often do you wash your belt? Now, based on that how often do you think everyone else washes their belts? And what's the first thing you touch when you're done in that stall? Well, the top of your pants, but the second thing is your belt. Follow me here. All these people you're worried about AND all of the people who obsessively wash their hands and create little paper towel gloves are all walking around with these grodie belts smack dab in the middle of their bodies. And the germs on these belts are slowly creeping up their shirts and down their pants and any time they adjust the waist of these pants they are getting germs on their hands. And then they are touching things with these hands. Touching things all around them including you and the things you touch.

Think I'm done? WRONG! Now imagine the dirtiest most disgusting surface in our shared and common world. A city sidewalk. These people with their dirty belts are also walking around on the dirty sidewalks where people spit and pee and drop (for some reason) condoms. And their shoes, their yucky disgusting shoes, are touching the cuffs of their pants. And these germs are slowly migrating up from the cuffs to rendezvous with the belt buckle germs that are migrating down. These germs then meet up right around the knees. And where do people often rest their hands when they sit down? On. Their. Knees. That's right! Knees are the enemy! People are walking around all day with their vile cesspool knees touching things and shaking your hand. YOU'RE DOOMED!!!!

Which is exactly my point. If you follow all this germophobia to a logical end you realize there's nothing you can do. The world is a dirty place. The best thing you can do is build up some immunities. Get sick people! It's good for you. If you continue to over Purell your world you will a) help create super germs that will kill us all or b) die from a common cold.

So let your babies eat off the floor. Go ahead and share a beer with a hobo. Live life! And maybe save some trees while your at it.

Vick (Or Why You Should Never Debate Sir Rantalot Unless You Have Something Real to Say)

2009-08-06T04:05:00.000-07:00

The following is an excerpt from a discussion I had regarding Michael Vick. I wasn't planning to do a Vick post but I think this excerpt sums up the two of the three different stances on Vick (the third being that he should be banned for life) rather well. I've truncated the names of the other participants since the goal here isn't to trash any identifiable individuals. This is an edited version, at a certain point two of us (me being one) said some things I don't think we're proud of which were removed by the moderator before I could do the repost.

Roberto Santiago: I'm fine with Goodell's decision regarding Vick. I'd have been fine if Goodel had not handed down any suspension at all. The thing is, Vick wasn't going to be anybody's starter this year anyway so the 6 game suspension really doesn't do anything.

Vick served his time. Now the judgement comes from the owners. If no one wants to deal with the headaches of having him on the team (media attention, fan reaction, QB controversy etc) then he won't get work this year. If I owned a team I might take a chance on him.

As for people calling out Rookie Ben, there was no criminal complaint so there's no investigation. It comes down to finger pointing. She files a law suit a year after it happened after not telling anyone about it? Yeah, sounds like someone's hoping for some hush money.

EA: With regards to Vick, he did his time and it should be done with. Roger Goodell has gotten power-drunk, and full of himself. No one man should have that amount of power in ANY organization. He is the same one whose punishment for a whole team (NE) and a Coach was tantamont to a peck on the wrist, but when it comes to the players he so Mr. Don't-take-mess.

A lot of folks will again like to bypass the fact that there are racial-undertones to these things. Forget about the fact that Roethlisberger's incident was a civil-suit. Imagine that civil-suit was against T.O, Randy Moss, or some other black athlete. Do we honestly thing that the reaction to it woulda been this mellow so far? T.O expressed his view which I think was right, and he is entitled to it. Goodell has basically told a grown man how he should run his life to please HIM before he decides to fully reinstate the man - nonesense. Take a look at the details of this suspension.

Roberto Santiago: TO and Moss have been in trouble with the league (and for Moss the law) many times in the past. Big Ben has not. If TO had Ben's rep then no, I don't think he'd be in trouble for what Ben's involved in.

" Goodell has basically told a grown man how he should ruhis life to please HIM . "

-Not to please HIM, to please the league as a whole, the owners, and the sponsors. If Vick was such a grown man who didn't need any guidance he wouldn't be involved in a multi-year criminal conspiracy. Again, it's not like Vick was going to come back as anyone's starter so the added suspension really is just for show.

Anyone remember this?

"Regardless of the verdict of juries, no player who throws a ball game, no player who undertakes or promises to throw a ball game, no player who sits in confidence with a bunch of crooked ballplayers and gamblers, where the ways and means of throwing a game are discussed and does not promptly tell his club about it, will ever play professional baseball."

Now that's a strong arm commissioner.

EA: It is not to please the league. There are owners as well as players that wanted Vick back with the team, so you saying the actions is the please the league is totally baseless. Vick has been suspended without pay since it was ascertained that he was involved. He has been rediculed, lost playing-time and lost millions of dollars. What else type of punishment should he endure? Before this dog-fighting case, please name the other problem that Vick pose - please name it. Since the reason Ben case gets little or no attention is because of first-time offense, please name Vick's first offense other than this. This suspension is not to satisfy any owners of the league. Any owner that needs a QB of Vick's talent will not hesitate a lick to take him. Satisfy the sponsors? What is that? 5 more games will satisfy them? Did any sponsor say that's what they were looking for?

Not to belittle the offense, but he killed a dog, there people in this society still enjoy their presitge eventhough they killed people, some of them (like some of the Presidents of this country) killed thousands of people. Oh please on the strong-arm commision - my foot. He is only strong when it comes to dealing with players. He's nothing but a kiss-up-kick-down punk.

Roberto Santiago: "There are owners as well as players that wanted Vick back with the team, so you saying the actions is the please the league is totally baseless."

The league is not the players. The league is the owners. As for "baseless" Vick remains unsigned at at least 11 teams have publicly said they don't want him. So where are these owners who want him back?

As for his previous offenses:

In early 2004, two men were arrested in Virginia for distributing marijuana. The truck they were driving was registered to Michael Vick.

In March 2005, Sonya Elliott filed a civil lawsuit against Vick alleging she contracted genital herpes from him in the autumn of 2002, and that he failed to inform her that he had the disease.

November 26, 2006 – After a Falcons loss to the New Orleans Saints in the Georgia Dome, in apparent reaction to fans booing, Vick made an obscene gesture at fans, holding up two middle fingers. He was fined $10,000 by the NFL and agreed to donate another $10,000 to charity.

He is only strong when it comes to dealing with players." -That's his job.

EA: No team wanna pick him up and pay him, while knowing he might miss 5 games. Especially, when everything depends ONLY on what the commisioner feels. His job is to be tough with players only? I thought you said he was the commissioner of the League, which in your words mean the owners? When he wants to please the League then the definition covers owners. But if he wants to get tough, the definition covers only players? Are you serious about this? He is the commissioner of the League, which I would thing includes all those under the sphere of the NFL, which includes players, owners, teams, etc.

Now on to your offenses: 1. Someone driving Vick's car, not Vick, and Vick is not in the car, but he is at fault?

2. His private sex-life, mind you his medical history which is covered by HIPAA, was violated and you call that a violation against the League?

Where do you come from with these arguments, dude? And by the way, the difference here which points again to biases, is the fact that this revelation was something sort after by espn journalists.Roethlisberger's incident fell in their lap and they did everything to conceal it. The bias even made CNN.

3. The incident on the field was a League violation, but then we must also include Roethlisberger's violation of the league's personal injury clause when he rode a bike without a helmet. I still see the bias, but I understand that you cannot. My central point surround the punk, Roger Goodell, who is full of himself. Prior to him, such incidents were reviewed by a panel of NFL officials. When he took over, he placed the decision solely in his hands alone. To me that's someone who is drunk with power, and it turnsd out he's bias. Vick did his time and he paid for it more than a 1000 dogs worth. He deserves his chance to redeem himself. Goodell is no God. I am so hoping that his skeletons will come out pretty soon. Trust me it will, he loves attention.

Roberto Santiago: "No team wanna pick him up and pay him, while knowing he might miss 5 games"

-Why not? He's out of shape and wasn't that good a QB to begin with. It's not like he was going to play anyway.

"His job is to be tough with players only? I thought you said he was the commissioner of the League, which in your words mean the owners?"

-You know that he works for the owners right? They hire the commissioner. They hire him to deal with the NFLPA. And what is he supposed to get tough with the owners about? Was Zygi Wilf on a sex cruise? Was Arthur Blank out at the Gold Club making it rain?

"Vick is not in the car, but he is at fault? "

-The league frowns upon it. They always have and that's who he's dealing with.

"His private sex-life, mind you his medical history which is covered by HIPAA, was violated"

-It was not violated. Knowingly giving someone an incurable STD can be a criminal offense. In this case it was a civil complaint and you're misapplying HIPAA. Again it shows a lack of judgment and the league frowns upon it.

Know this, if Ben gets in trouble again they will point back to this civil case and call it a pattern.

FSW: Have to admit Arthur making it rain is somewhat amusing, but Goddell aside, is Vick mentally ready to take on the role of QB right now?

Roberto Santiago: I doubt he's mentally ready and he's certainly not physically ready.

And Vick can't help the Vikings. All he can do is cause more problems for Tavaris Jackson. I've heard mention of him going to the Pats. That could work.

He'd be a threat on third down or in the Wild Cat and an insurance policy on Brady.

The Steelers also have a good history of creative use of athletic backup QBs.

EA: Roberto, I'm seeing the source of your argument and it has no objective basis. So you don't think highly of Vick, cool. It does not mean that it is okay for him to be treated unfairly. All your arguments posits that you do agree that bias is there, and that is what I am saying as well. We differ in the fact that you think that the bias is okay, and I do not think it is okay.

Andy Reid's sons did worst then Vick's friends in that car, and the league did not frown on it as you claim they always frown on things like that. The league in fact supported him. The case with Ben is a civil case as well, and it is criminal if he raped the girl. You are pointing out Mike's incident as if he was convicted, he was not. This is another place in which YOUR bias is apparent. Alas though, you agree with me that he is a kiss-up-kick-down commissioner. He's no tough commissioner.

JFM: I think Godell and the owners are more afraid of bad publicity and what that might do to their bottom line than to do what's right. Vick did his time. He should be able to play with whomever will have him. And if he screws up again.. then kick him the hell out.

Roberto Santiago: "I think Godell and the owners are more afraid of bad publicity and what that might do to their bottom line than to do what's right."

That is what's right. Vick doesn't have a right to play football. If the people who run the game don't want him around then he won't find work. People aren't falling over to sign Marvin Harrison either and he hasn't even been formally charged yet.

If no one wants to hire him to play in the NFL that's their business. Literally, it is their business they run it, they hire and fire. Of course they watch the bottom line, it's not job corps it's a business. No one owes Mike Vick anything.

Roberto Santiago: EA, you're myopic.

If you actually read what I wrote instead of looking for some one to jump you'd see that I said:

-I would have been fine if the commissioner hadn't done anything to Vick

-I would probably sign him if I owned a team.

-He would be good for the Pats or Steelers

Society didn't take anything from Vick. He's a convicted felon. He did this to himself. He chose to be involved in a criminal conspiracy. Society and the NFL don't owe him anything.

Andy Reid's sons are not league employees and Andy Reid was not involved in their crimes. Why punish Reid for his kids? Vick wasn't punished for what his friends did with his car but it shows a pattern.

Big Ben's thing isn't criminal because there's no evidence. She waited a year to file a civil suit. Just like with Vick's accuser in '05. There will be no criminal charge.

"Yo are pointing out Mike's incident as if he was convicted, he was not."

-Do you mean dog fighting? He went to Levenworth. He was convicted.

The fact is felons have a hard time getting back to work in high profile jobs. Mike Vick is being treated just like anyone else.

Oh, as for the "soft" stance towards coaches and owners remember "Spygate?"

"On September 13, for the "use of equipment to videotape an opposing team's offensive or defensive signals,"Belichick was officially fined $500,000 — the largest fine ever imposed on a coach in the league's then-87-year history, and the maximum permitted under league rules. The Patriots were also fined $250,000, and stripped of their first-round selection in the 2008 NFL Draft." -Wikipedia

500K is no joke. A 1st round pick is no joke.

Hey look, more action against coaches:

"On August 31, 2007, Goodell suspended Dallas Cowboys quarterbacks coach Wade Wilson for five games and fined him US$100,000, and suspended New England Patriots safety Rodney Harrison four games without pay, after they admitted the use of banned substances for medical purposes and to accelerate healing, ... Read Morerespectively. The league indicated to Wilson that his more severe penalty was because they held "people in authority in higher regard than people on the field." -Wikipedia

So now that we've put the "soft on owners and coaches" issue to bed I think we can dismiss the "no objective basis" comment.

In fact I may be the only person to post here who has brought actual facts, research, and a working knowledge of both the law and the league to the table. This would make me the sole presenter of objective fact so far today.

EA: Roberto it is good you know about myopia, because that actually applies to you. You argument has been spurious and nothing more. Your facts you brought to the case end up being circular and has no substance whatever to the argument. Remember, you jumped me, not the other way around and I'm okay with that. Oh I actually read what you wrote and found it to still lack an objective basis. Your comment that you would have been fine if Goodell had not handed down anything came on the heels of you stating that you are fine with Goodells FLAWED decision. So that mention is neglible to me and shows nothing about your objectivity. Your other points about Vick going to the Pats or Steelers also shows nothing about your objectivity in our (u & I) discussion because first it is certainly not YOUR insight, and it was in response to Fabunde or another person's comments.

JFM: Roberto, there's nothing objective about Vick's situation. Facts and the law aren't entering into it. It's public perception that's ruling Godell's decision. The NFL doesn't want Peta protesting at every game. I'm a little surprised that the Players Union are being such wusses. You would think they would be filing a grievance on his behalf.

Roberto Santiago: JFM,

You're right facts and law don't enter into it because this is not court. It is based on fear of protest, public perception, etc because it is a consumer driven business. If you want to keep making tons of money don't piss people off. If you look at any convicted felon you'll find that they have a hard time getting work. No one owes Vick job.

Guess what, he's probably not allowed to vote any more either. He can't leave the country. He can't travel out of state without permission from his PO. He can't own a firearm. he can't run for public office. He's a felon. Along with everything that entails.

EA: 1.You find that it is okay to hold Mike Vick accountable for his friends that are not in the NFL. Probably because they used his property. Andy Reid's sons also used his property to commit crimes, not once but twice, even after they were awaiting trial for a previous. We can do without this kind of "objectivity".

2. You agree that Vick's STD case was as similar as Ben's current case, yet you still absurdly hold it against him while looking at Ben's as mere nothing. Well, the girl in Vick's case also never filed a suit till she and Vick were through with the relationship

Roberto Santiago: EA, you're using a lot of big words but you still haven't put together a cohesive point. It is one thing to say my facts are circular, but you have yet to explain how that is or back it up with anything at all. You have yet to actually base any of your comments on anything. I'm all substance, you are a few syntactically odd collections of superfluous vocabulary.

As for who my comments are to, they are to everyone. This isn't a me-you discussion this is an open group discussion.

Finally I didn't jump you. I countered your points with my points.

EA: "Yo are pointing out Mike's incident as if he was convicted, he was not." Regarding this comment, do not try to be smart, cuz so far I haven't found you as that. You know I was refering to Vick's STD case and not the Dog-fighting case. $250,000 and a 1st round draft pick, of which they had two, is a severe punishment for a team? Who the hell is your weedman? He must be good. Cuz only someone with an impaired mind will see that as severe. Oh I forgot it is not weed, you do have myopia. $500,000 thousand for a coach that makes approxy $5mil+ a year is severe? He lost not one week of coaching, and still got to be coach of the year. Are you kidding someone?

Let us be frank bro, there is absolutely no insight and objectivity in the facts you brought up. My responses to you have been quick off the doom, while you have scoured around to pick up news clippings. The funny thing about it is that they are not supporting your points - that is if you are claiming that there is no bias.

Roberto Santiago: EA, you're not really processing my comments.

1. Again, Vick is showing a pattern. Andy Reid had some bad luck with his kids. I just re-read some of the articles about the Reid kids, nothing indicates it was Andy Reid's cars.

2. What I said is Vick has shown a pattern and Ben has not. IF Ben gets in trouble again they will look back to his current situation and say "There's a pattern." Ben had better watch his step in the future.

EA: I have countered the substance of all your clippings without having to scour the web. That you name the dates does not mean there is any substance to your argument, it just meant that you found a clipping from somewhere. Quite often, lemmings like you that have not point, tend to inject ad hominem in these arguments and I usually try to guide your type back to the substance of the argument. In this case, I won't. You give your appraisal of me, well here is my appraisal of you. You are one of two kinds of lemmings. More than likely, you are the kind of lemming that probably grew up impoverished, but with some luck and mediocre work, you find yourself fortunate now. So all of a sudden, the world is level to you - because you got lucky. Or you are the kind of lemming. You grew up priviledge and have had daddy's spoon in your mouth the whole damn time, and lack real-life experiences. Either way, your insights protray lack of objectivity and lack of intellect.

Roberto Santiago: "My responses to you have been quick off the doom"

-Indeed. and that's my point. You bring nothing except what's in your tiny malformed little brain. You haven't backed up anything, you have no understanding of business, sports leagues, or reading for content.

That I bring up facts at all is the only measure of objectivity. You've brought up nothing. You've got nothing. You said Goodell never punished any coaches or owners and I gave you several examples. Now all you can say is they're not good enough? And you're obsessed with Andy Reid because you know my other arguments are rock solid.

The fact is you've presented nothing. It's easy to tear someone down when you've been not only wrong, but ignorant on top of that. Coming "quick off the doom" isn't something to be proud of.

EA: Go back my friend and look at your arguments, you have used the big words that lack any meaning. I stated there were biases in the system and that Goodell's power is unchecked. You have yet to counter my points that there are biases in the system, or that Goodell's power is not unchecked. You go and pick up news clippings that only highlight the same biases that I'm talking about. And no, stop being a liar, you countered every patterned I mentioned regarding Ben. You can't counter all the patterns, and then try to claim that you still accept them. They work for someone that is unable to see the nothingness of your arguments, but not me. Also, while the overall discussion is with everyone, clearly you and I are having a separate discussion. Probably you may need to read clippings again to orient yourself. Also, there are responses from you that were to my points, and responses to the points of others. I focus on your responses that are to my points so I can respond to you.

Roberto Santiago: Let's break it down "off the doom"

"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim,"

-I've brought a ton of facts to the table. You've brought nothing but attacks on me and misinterpretations of nearly everything else. (BTW the league doesn't have a "personal injury policy" some acts are forbidden in individual player contracts negotiated with individual teams, not the league)

"rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim."

-Bring some facts son!

Dude, What does this even mean?

"And no, stop being a liar, you countered every patterned I mentioned regarding Ben. You can't counter all the patterns, and then try to claim that you still accept them"

Try again, in English this time.

But you're not focusing on my points, you're focusing on me. You think you're clever hurling insults but all it does is reinforce the fact that you haven't got a leg to stand on.

Here's the thing. You can disagree with Goodell's decision. That's fine. I can not care either way (which was my original point). But the bottom line is that no one owes Vick anything. He does not have a right to play football.

omething Fabunde touched on but no one else has mentioned:

Can Vick actually help a team win right now?

Conventional wisdom seems to say "no." He hasin't played or been in a real conditioning program for 2 years. You don't just roll out of bed and play in the NFL. He's got to gethis timing down, learn a new system that will not be tailored to him like the falcons offense was and get used to being hit again.

Remember, Jamal Lewis went to jail for 2 months and had a bad year coming back.

Also we're talking about a guy who has never had a season in which he completed 60% of his passes, thrown for 3,000 yards and has had only one year with a QB rating above 78. The fact is he wasn't a great passer to begin with and now he's rusty. It's entirely possible that the suspension will help him by not having any pressure to come in and start right away.

After this the conversation petered out. I think the point here is that if you're the type of person who is proud of the fact that your opinion is completely un-researched and based solely on what you have rattling around in your "doom" you probably shouldn't get into too many debates.

I Also Got A lot of Jerseys

2009-08-05T11:32:00.000-07:00

I'd say I probably have 60 jerseys. About a fourth of them are for teams I played on. Another fourth are for reffing. The rest are from various sports teams. That said, I only have one jersey for which I support neither the team nor the player.

I am lucky in that once my jersey collecting actually became a professional asset. I was interpreting for a deaf participant at the Red Sox fantasy camp in Ft. Meyers, Florida. The Sox didn't provide a uniform for me (I should have negotiated one in my contract) but I was on the field with my client eight hours a day. Luckily I was able to cull several full uniforms from my collection which lasted me until the camp staff finally hooked me up with some Sox gear.

2007 AL All Star jersey

Santurce Cangrejeros away jersey

Puerto Rico World Baseball Classic jersey

But the fact is, I got nothing on this guy:

My Son's First Game/Rickey Henderson Day

2009-08-02T22:31:00.000-07:00

Taking Buddy Buddy to this game was special for me because it bookended a chapter of my life. When I was a little kid my dad used to take me to A's games and as a three or four year old kid I immediately latched on to my favorite player. He could run, hit, steal bases, and made great plays in the outfield. That player was Dwayne Murphy. Later on I learned to appreciate, then love a new guy named Rickey Henderson. Going to those games are the best memories I have of my father. Baseball is the one thing he gave me, other than my name, that has lasted and I love him for it.

Eventually Rickey replaced Dwayne as my favorite player. When Rickey went to New York I joined my Bronx based family in rooting for the Yankees. (I know, it's a hard thing for me to admit.) When Rickey came back to Oakland in 1998 I was thrilled. The main reason for my excitement was that I was now able to take my eight year old brother to see Rickey. His dad traveled a lot for work so I had the privilege of providing my brother with his baseball education. We'd been going to games for a couple years but taking hm to see Rickey helped me gain some closure with my experience of my father.

Rickey was drafted nine months before I was born. Thirty-three years later I got to bring my three month old son to his first A's game, the day we closed the book on Rickey's career. Number twenty-four has been retired in Oakland. I would have loved to have brought my dad. He passed away almost exactly a year ago. He never knew he was going to be a grandfather.

Having been there for the start of Rickey's career and having my son there for the end means more to me than I can express in print. So I'll close by saying thanks Rickey, for the memories, for the endless entertainment, and for being a constant for all those years. Thanks dad. Your failings were what they were but you tried in your own way and you gave me the gift of baseball.

This video has some typos and the camera work is shaky at best. That's what happens when I hold my son while taping on my cheap little snap shot camera then rush home to put together a video at 12:00am. Anyway, enjoy it for what it is.

Legacy

2009-07-22T18:05:00.000-07:00

I'm sitting here writing this with my my son strapped to my chest like a reverse Quato, listening to my cousin's version of "My Lean Baby," and thinking about my mother. It's a nice family moment. Today I started a project I've been looking forward to for a while now. I'm reading my mom's journals. After mom died I found journals going back to October 1978. My mom was 25, I was a year old.

It's a strange experience reading this first hand account of a young woman I never knew. The person I knew was mom. The woman in these pages is Chiori and is all the things my mom never was. She's younger than I am, less experienced, naive, immature. She's full of self doubt. My mom was confident, insightful, worldly. The woman in this

Knowing how the story ultimately ends provides some interesting moments. At one point she mentions that as someone who is almost twenty seven years old she feels mature and grown up. Then there's a couple times when she writes about how much more time she has to live. She indicates that she has a long time left, as much as fifty more years which means she predicted her life span as 77 years. She didn't know it then, but at 27 she was exactly at the half way point of her life.

Reading these early accounts is like peeling back the curtain on another life revealing a woman who's primary concern in life is being loved on her terms. She mentions that she does not write much about motherhood because she has so many other things to figure out about herself before she can reflect on parenting. Indeed she often references her "adolescent self" as though the issues that teenaged Chiori had yet to work through were following her into adulthood. This idea makes sense to me. My mom moved out of her mother's house at seventeen. It seems likely that having to grow up early also stunted her emotional development. Many parts of her journal do read like something a teenager would write. Her views on personal relationships don't seem as mature as I would expect from someone her age. I look at my wife who is now the age my mother was at the end of the first volume I've read and see someone who seems much more mature and confident than the woman in this journal.

This experience has caused me to wonder what kind of legacy I will leave for my son. I don't keep a journal. There is no day to day account of my life or my thoughts. I doubt any of my forays into this type of expression out here on the internet will remain after I am gone. Besides, there's seems to be very little romance in reading an online journal. It can't compare to holding a bound volume in your hands. Knowing that these pages were there in that time. Reading the author's words in their own hand. I don't know if I'l be able to give that to my son and that makes me sad.

Reading mom's accounts of her life when I was a toddler has brought me closer to her. I understand her better now. I wish I had been able to read this five years ago when she was alive and I could talk to her about it. I wish I could ask her what she thinks of the young woman who wrote these entries. I wish I could dig deeper into her experience of being a twenty four year old single mother. I think we could have been closer if I'd been able to understand her beyond what she was able to tell me. But I am grateful to have these journals. I am happy that I will be able to paint a more complete picture of Grandma Chiori for my son. I look forward to starting the next volume.

I'm Back

2009-06-07T19:15:00.000-07:00

So back in 2004 I had a blog called Berto is Sir Rantalot. Some people read it and it was fun. Then I got a life that took me away from the computer for a long time and my blog slowly died. Also, my hosting site change things around to the point where I couldn't figure out how to post anymore.

Now life has slowed down a bit. I have a steady job, a wife, a kid, a home and fewer people to rant at in my daily life. So I'm making my return to the blogosphere. O'm sure your excited. For those of you who are new readers I'll be posting some things from my old blog to help you get a feel for where I'm coming from. For my old readers enjoy some classic posts and look forward to new "insights."

I won't always be right. I won't always make sense. And I'll almost always misuse commas. But hopefuly it'll be fun.

Rock on,

-Berto

Watch With Me

2005-09-05T19:57:00.000-07:00

First Inning:

Just as I sit down in front of the TV with my meatloaf, tater tots, and cola I think to myself, “These 5:30 start times always kill the A’s. I think briefly about game five of the 2000 ALDS when T-Long lost a fly ball in the sun and cost Oakland the game in the first inning. Boom. Home run Jeter on the first pitch of the game. Here we go again. This happens every time they make us play at 5:30. It’s bullshit. This never happens to the east coast teams. We have to take this shit just so the game can fit into ESPN’s schedule. Fuck ESPN. TV shouldn’t have this kind of impact on the games. Neither should the Raiders. I hate Al Davis and the way his extra seats fuck up my outfield. End of the first, 1-0 Yanks.

Second Inning:

Yer fucking kidding me. I hate Mark Bellhorn, he just hit a dinger. Fly ball…can we get some love from the wind? No, damn! But I’ll take that error by Sheff for two bases. I like Jay Payton. I was against that trade, I loved Byrnsie. Last week Payton ran in from center field and got a force out at second base. Payton comes through with the RBI and it’s 2-1 Yanks. Oh Bullshit! This ump sucks, that was not a strike to Johnson. Fuck! Well He should have swung to protect the runner anyway. End of the second 2-1 Yanks.

Third inning:

This ump really does suck, that was strike to Sheff, now he’s on first. I hate Giambi. I hate watching Chavez take fastballs. I hate it even more when he tries to pull pitches on the outside corner. Great, end of the inning, 4-1 Yanks.

Fourth Inning:

I need more meatloaf. Damn, a double by Jeter leading off. This is trouble. Jeter’s going to hit for the cycle. And there goes Jeter stealing third. And a triple for Matsui. I’m switching over to Entourage if this keeps up. Base hit for Sheff, 5-1. This game is over. Zito’s out after 3.1 innings and in come Yabu. Zito was up in the zone with everything tonight. (I’m at a point in my life where beer commercials actually make want to buy beer.) This is what it’s like to be an A’s fan. I’m almost numb to it now. I feel like a pro, never getting too high, never getting too low. Knowing that heartbreak is just around the bend if I let myself get caught up in hoping. Scott Hattberg’s weak grounder to lead off the inning is a metaphor for the A’s in this century. At first, when you can’t really grasp the angle, it looks like it might get through, but then it doesn’t. Every time you’re ready to believe in Oakland, they lose a crucial series to the Yanks or Angels. As I wrote the last sentence Johnson hit into a double play. Typical. End of the fourth 6-1 Yanks.

Fifth Inning:
Finally we keep ‘em off the board. I hate how much cheering there is when the Yanks do something good. Why can’t we own our own park? Ha! A-rod just fell over trying to catch a pop-up; finally something to cheer about. One out, two outs, Scoooooooooooooooooooooooot! Scoot was a good story last year, he’s a good story this year. He is the second coming of Frank Menechino. He’s that guy who’s not going to start on his own merits, but you want him there when the main guy goes down. He’s that gritty little Eckstein type, but not quite as good. (Which reminds me, why doesn’t Jamie Carroll get more time for the Nats?) End of the fifth, 6-2 Yanks.

Sixth inning:

Great, slow point in the game and now they start to recap the A’s futility against the Yanks in the playoffs. Of course this means they’re showing “The Jeter Play” again. They already showed it at the top of the show, but like the Varitek-A-rod fight they’ll show it every time these two play on ESPN. Well, Yabu is holding them down, but if the A’s are going to do anything they better do it soon, before Gordon and Rivera come into play. Beagle’s are cute. I like watching the hometown fans. They seem so zany and fun on TV. A walk with no outs and the crowd is alive. They think we can get something going here. Then Chavy pops out. A hittie for Hattie and there are two on for Payton. Ahhhhhhhhh!!!!!! FOUL! Damn, there I go hoping again. Can John Miller stop saying people are “a former Red Sox.” It looks better in print, say it out loud. See how stupid that sounds? I know it’s spelled with an ‘x’ but how can some one be a plural thing? It sounds like shit. John Miller is an idiot. Giambi is a former Athletics. Well for all that Oakland gets zilch. End of the sixths, 6-2 Yanks.

Seventh Inning:

I love rum. Rummy rum rum. A robot can make you a car, a bike, and a microchip; but none of these things can make you a robot. Wow, so this is why people think baseball is boring. Running down the A’s injuries just for fun: Kotsay, Crosby, Harden (best pitcher the last two years). Speaking of Harden, why didn’t the A’s start him on the next to last day of the year in ’04? Kendel’s up. He has the most at bats without a home run out of all players in MLB this year. It’s been like 50 years since someone had 500+ at bats and no homers in a season. Sigh.

Eighth Inning:

It’s fitting that MLB is kicking off its hurricane relief on Roberto Clemente day. Clemente died flying relief supplies to Nicaragua after an earthquake. I’ve never liked Joe Morgan. He’s saying that whoever plays against the Wild Card team should get four out of five home games in the first round. That’s idiotic. His logic is that the division winners have earned it (fine), that in the NFL Wild Card teams play all they’re games on the road (not true, depending on who else wins/ loses the WC in the NFL may host the conference championship game), and that this would be the only way to “crown a true champion.” (BTW Witasick just loaded the bases.) The thing is that if the division champ is so much better than the WC team, why do they need the edge? If you need an artificial edge like double home field advantage are you a true champion? If you’re the true champion shouldn’t you be able to beat everyone? If you lose, you lose. Stop whining. Back to the game…We’re going to lose this one, just hit Bellhorn in the face. He walked him. If yer gonna walk him anyway you might as well hit him in the face.

Great, it takes Chavy getting fooled before he’ll take one the other way. Hattie, fielder’s choice and the A’s get one more. That’s all they’ll get. End of the eighth, 7-3 Yanks.

Ninth Inning:

Huston Street is good. Non-save situation, Rivera’s in anyway. Game over. I think the phrase “He fisted him” should be banned from baseball broadcasts. That’s it, end of the game, 7-3 Yanks. Good night folks.

It Was a Good Day

2005-07-20T23:14:00.000-07:00

It is a rare thing in this world, for some of us anyway, that we can experience a truly good day. We have normal days. We have days that aint half bad. We have uneventful days, mellow days, and pleasant days. But it is rare that we have a grade A, bonafide, Ice Cube type good day. Yesterday was one of those days. July18, 2005 was a good day in the life of your fav Ranter.

I woke up late. I didn’t care. I was rested and happy having had a wonderfully mellow and relaxing weekend. I took a long shower and sat down to breakfast and Sports Center. When I opened the fridge to grab the milk my eyes alit upon the meatloaf I’d made Saturday morning but had yet to sample. My stomach perked up at the thought of a nice meatloaf lunch and positively beamed when I realized I still had two slices of real sourdough, left over from my trip to Cali, to go with it. I showed up 45 minutes late for work and no one seemed to care. I had a meeting with my supervisor, which ate up most of the rest of the morning, and before I’d had a chance to settle into the day it was meatloaf time. The meatloaf was divine, my mothers recipe for the most part. Little did I know that the best parts of the day were yet to come.

As lunch was wrapping up I got an IM from former BISR contributor DMJ. A few years ago I had asked DMJ why I never saw him online. He gave me some pithy response about how IM was stupid and anyway he preferred to really talk to people. So imagine my surprise when I get a strange IM from someone I swear I don’t know. “I’m on IM all the time” says DMJ. So, why is this exciting? Is it simply the admission from an old cynic that IM isn’t just for losers? Is it the realization that the only thing hiding DMJ’s status as a full on computer geek was the years long drought of having a decent computer? No. The exciting part came when my computer started ringing. I clicked on the unfamiliar icon that seemed to be the source of the ring and heard DMJ’s pleasant and familiar “Why hello there.” AIM voice chat! I scrambled for my headphones as my heart sang with the knowledge that this here to now useless feature (I didn’t know anyone else who had iChat) was finally bearing fruit. “Free phone calls.” I spent the next twenty minutes looking like a geek who had finally melted down mumbling to my computer breaking down baseball trades as my coworkers passed in and out of the break room asking each other if they should call the white-coats on me. It was giggle-icious.

Shortly after getting off the line with DMJ our VP asked to see me. He told me he’d just processed the paper work for my annual review. My annual review had been the topic some controversy, first between my supervisor and I, then between myself and the beautiful Miss K. Though none of us disagreed about my accomplishments over the past year we differed in out opinions about how much these accomplishments were worth in terms of a raise. The max raise under my company’s system is 5%. The number I wanted was slightly above that. I have a high opinion of myself. My super wanted to focus solely on the numbers in the charts that came out of my review ignoring what I deemed to be my “intangibles.” Miss K preferred to knock me off the pedestal I had placed myself upon by deriding my various accomplishments, which I had inflated a small bit in order to impress my boss, in favor of a view that was slightly less flattering than my reality. All of this made the following moment so much sweeter. As I steeled myself for a defense of my number, the number that was off the regular scale, the number I was sure I was worth, the VP told me he had adjusted things to a nice even number. I tried to maintain my professional demeanor as he then quoted me the number I’d been carrying around in my head the past six months; a number that came in at around 5.26%. Now I know what you’re thinking oh cynical reader, “Why the fuss over .26%?” Why indeed. Well for one thing, it does bring things to that nice round number I mentioned earlier. Second, that .26% is roughly one car payment, or two student loan payments. Finally, and most importantly, it’s respect. It’s a small nod to the fact that I do more to help the company than other people in my position. It’s my Rod Tidwell moment. It’s my little slice of the Kwon.

My good day ended when Miss K and I took her mother out to a ball game. For those who have yet to experience it there is nothing like a minor league baseball game. Except maybe a really cool little league game. Minor league baseball is everything Bull Durham made it out to be; low prices, small crowds, and parks so intimate the players can actually hear you heckle them. It was in this setting, in a mostly empty Double-A ballpark in suburban Maryland where I snagged my first ever foul ball. It wasn’t terribly challenging since the fouls were raining down like shooting stars on a camping trip, and I had to out race an eleven year old kid to get to it, but it was a satisfying end to the kind of day that can rescue your soul from whatever you’ve slogged through to get there; and I didn’t even have to use my AK.

Land of the Dolts

2005-06-30T19:24:00.000-07:00

East Coast baseball fans are a bunch of morons. Seriously, I have heard and seen more stupid things living out here than I ever did back home by the bay. I first noticed this a couple years ago as fans in the Bronx wildly cheered every medium deep fly ball can of corn hit by their beloved Bombers as if it were a game seven walk off slam. That particular trend continued this season in Baltimore as the O’s fans went crazy every time Sammy or Miggy popped-up. In fact, the only place I’ve seen a hint of baseball acumen has been at RFK where Nats fans appropriately cheered a ground ball to the right side that advanced a runner from second with no outs. (If you didn’t follow that keep reading it’ll get easier.) The madness continued this weekend in Philly where I took a road trip to see the Red Sox take on the Phightn’ Phils. Philly is a great town. I got a t-shirt with the slogan “Vote For Bobby” emblazoned Napoleon Dynamite style across the front. I saw a gem of a ballpark in Citizen’s Bank Ballpark. After two feet of hoagie I determined that Pat’s is WAY better than Geno’s. I also heard some of the most ridiculous trade talk on the local sports station.

Here’s the deal, the A’s are basically out of it. Oakland is seven games out of the wild card right now, which will be hard to make up. However, the A’s are hot right now. They’ve won eight of their last ten and are inching closer and closer to .500. Still, the assumption in Philly, and everywhere else with a contending team, is that the A’s are close to mailing it in and dismantling the ball club. I ask why? The A’s are finally starting to look like the etam that many people, including me, thought they would be heading into spring training. They’re getting quality starts out of their young pitchers, the bullpen is holding leads, and the bats are coming around. If Chad Bradford can comeback healthy, and Juan Cruz can figure out his control problems this team will be tough to beat down the stretch. If teams like Seattle pack it in, and Texas’ pitching woes continue the A’s could very well find themselves back in the wild card hunt before too long. But even if they don’t there’s no reason for a fire sale this year.

First off the A’s payroll is right about where it should be and knowing Billy Beane probably a few million under budget. Since it’s unlikely the A’s will add anything this year there’s no reason to dump payroll. The only A’s players of note who can walk after this year are Octavio Dotel who has no trade value, and Mark Kotsay who’s working on an extension. Most of the trade rumors surrounding the A’s have focused on Kotsay, a superb defensive out fielder with a good bat, and Barry Zito who’s been in obvious decline since his 23-5 Cy Young season in 2002. Even if this year is a lost cause the A’s should hold on to both these guys. The A’s got off to a slow start this year and every player save Marco Scutaro played far below their usual and expected level for the first two months. As a result Oakland dug a deep hole from which they may not emerge this year. However, unlike previous years they have no superstars eating up payroll and waiting to walk. Also, unlike previous years the A’s can take a mulligan on this year and keep their credibility with the fans as long as they remain competitive and don’t totally pack it in. Also, with a new owner in place the A’s may be in a position to add an impact free agent to complement the pieces they already have.

Still, the rumors persist. The Yankees and Cubs are said to be high on Kotsay, which is fine for them but begs the question, in return for what? The word at the water cooler for the past few years is that the Yanks don’t have any quality prospects in their farm system and I don’t see anyone on their major league roster who I’d want for Kotsay. Do you want Bernie Williams (.249/04/27/.341/.708)? Here’s a guy who’s been so bad in the field this year that he’s been replaced by Tony Womack who’s played 18 games in center during his 11 year career. Who else do you want for a 29 y/o OF in his prime? How about Tony Womack (35), or Reuben Sierra (39)? The only other piece the Yanks would likely give up is Giambi. Giambi has gotten himself up to.256/05/22/.396/.771 and I know I advocated for him earlier, but I still don’t want a 34 year old fallen slugger in exchange for Kotsay. So who do the Yanks give up? Exactly. Looking at the A’s needs and the rosters of each team I’d say the only player the Yanks could put in the centerpiece of a deal is Robinson Cano. The rookie 2B is hitting .282/05/25/.310/.764 in 174 ABs. A Cano for Kotsay deal would move Swisher or Byrnes into center and open up time for Charles Thomas. The Yanks could then move Womack back to second to fill in for Cano. As for the Cubs, well, I’ll take Corey Patterson because he’s young and could develop into a Kotsay type player even though his defense isn’t all there yet.

Which brings us back to the stupidity of Philly fans. All weekend I heard one caller after another propose a Zito for Pat Burrell deal. This belies their complete lack of baseball knowledge in that they obviously have not looked past Zito on the roster. The A’s currently have five major league quality outfielders (Kotsay, Swisher, Byrnes, Kielty, and Thomas) so why on earth would they give up Zito for another OF? Burrell is a nice player who would add some pop to the line-up, but I don’t think he’s worth giving up Zito. There are lots of ways to create offense, but pitching is at a premium. Besides that, who does Philly use to replace Burrell? Kenny Lofton’s been hurt, Endy Chavez sucks, and Jason Michaels, while good, has only had 142 ABs this year. The Phils could resign Doug Glanville who was traded to the Yankees in the Lofton deal and then cut by NY. Still, unless the A’s gave up an outfielder like Byrnes, and brought back a pitcher (Tim Worrell?) the deal wouldn’t make sense seeing as how Dan Meyer isn’t ready for prime time.

Of course, the A’s don’t need an outfielder. In fact, if they hold on to Kotsay the A’s don’t really need anything. The only holes they had going into this year were on the right side of the infield. Since they’re slow start Mark Ellis has come around and Dan Johnson is doing well at 1B. Other than that the A’s are set at every position. I’d like to see more from Jason Kendall on both offense and defense but I’m willing to give it another year. Peter Gammons seems to be the only major media type who thinks that the Yanks, Cubs, et al. will have a hard time prying young players out of small markets this year. Teams like the A’s who don’t need to dump payroll and have a strong farm system don’t need to give away the pieces that would complete the big boys. After all, why help solidify the Yanks outfield for the next five years when you can take advantage of Bernie’s bad knees for the next two or three? Instead the A’s, Brewers, Pirates and Tigers should sit tight and go get ‘em next year.

Belated Commentary “Everyone’s a little bit _____-ist, sometimes.”

2005-06-27T08:14:00.000-07:00

Carl Everett of the Chicago White Sox, who has previously stated that he doesn’t believe that dinosaurs existed because they’re not mentioned in the bible, has come out with his opinion on gay marriage. In this month’s issue of Maxim magazine Everett says something to the effect of, “I’ve had gay teammates and I’ve accepted them, but being gay isn’t right. I don’t believe in gay marriage, it isn’t right.” He goes on to reveal that two women cannot make a baby, nor can two men. This morning on Mike & Mike in the Morning on ESPN radio Mike Greenberg suggested that this comment by Everett will spark “a firestorm of controversy.” It shouldn’t. Everett’s comments should be taken up to the point of “I’ve accepted them” and end there. As far as his opinion of gay marriage, or the validity of homosexual romance he is entitled to his opinion; even if he’s wrong.

Listening to Greenberg read Everett’s statement on air I got the impression that Everett was clearly stating his belief rather than attempting to influence people or incite debate. I don’t agree with Everett’s remarks but the fact that he is willing to accept gay people regardless of his personal opinion is enough for me. After all, we all have our own prejudices (cue Avenue Q soundtrack here). I don’t like white people in general. To me white people have to prove some kind of minority experience or understanding before I can really name them as a friend. I also don’t like South American immigrants. This isn’t based on a fear of them taking jobs or clogging up the healthcare system. It’s based on the fact that most of the ones I’ve met have been assholes. At least, that’s the case with the ones that stand out in my memory. Despite this I’m willing to accept White people and South Americans. I’ll never vote for harsher immigration laws, or denial of services to immigrants regardless of their legal status. I’ll always take up for the South Americans against the Whites (read government). But I won’t go out of my way to seek out either of these communities (even though I want desperately to improve my Spanish so I can talk to the people in my predominately Latin American neighborhood). Equality and justice for all doesn’t mean we all have to like each other. There will always be groups of people that we have some dislike for. As long as we don’t allow our prejudice to inform our treatment of people, or God forbid our public policy, it doesn’t matter what we think behind our eyes.

Ewoks are not Ethiopian. They’re Iraqi.

OK, they’re neither. One of the lasting memories of childhood is an argument between my mom and her boyfriend a couple of years after Return of the Jedi. The argument was about whether or not Ewoks were derogatory African stereotypes. My mother took the position that they were simply annoying little teddy bears created to sell merchandise to eight year olds. This led to one of the more vicious political arguments I have ever witnessed including my recent trip to the senate.

Now the Ewok argument is being played out on a larger scale as republican leaders attempt to get people to boycott Revenge of the Sith due to it’s alleged anti-Bush bias. Among other things republicans point to Darth Vader’s line “If you’re not with me, you’re my enemy.” As invoking Bush’s “You’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists.” Republicans have also pointed to the films apparent criticism of the war in Iraq.

For crying out loud people get a grip! People have been trying to find hidden messages in Star Wars films for too long. Sure, Lucas borrowed from eastern philosophy and Christianity in order to shape his epic. Sure, there are allusions to other famous stories. Yes, the films depict an amalgam of classic themes on the human condition. We get it. That’s where it should end. When asked about the republican’s ire Lucas himself issued one of the greatest non-confirmations of my young life saying that the story was written during the Vietnam war, not the current war. This statement at once denies that the movie had any overt bias against the current administration while at the same time using the GOP’s accusations to compare the current war to Vietnam, something most republicans want to avoid. In a sly way Lucas is pointing out what should be obvious to all of us, if the GOP see caricatures of themselves in the behavior of the Sith, who are patterned after a xenophobic administration that perpetrated a failed war, maybe they should take a hint that this a clear case of life imitating art. People need to stop trying to find the hidden political messages in Star Wars. After all, how long has this movie been in post production? Wasn’t some form of “Yer either wi’us ‘r a’gin us” used in films as far back as the 1930s? Isn’t likely that it was written into Bush’s speech because it’s an iconic phrase? So did Lucas play on Bush, or did Bush play on John Wayne? Or did Lucas play on Wayne? Could the line have been written prior to Bush’s speech? Yes, yes, yes and yes. Besides, if Bush says something that childish shouldn’t he be lampooned for it? Or are world politics so simple that the entire issue can be as simple as disagreeing with the war is equal to wishing death upon American civilians? I for one am not against the war because I’m for the terrorists, but rather because I am for the soldiers, and I am for the people of Iraq.

If republicans are upset about Sith now imagine if Return of the Jedi were released today. Instead of being worried about comparing Bush to Vader the GOP would be up in arms about how the Ewoks, with their guerrilla tactics, were a clear nod to the Iraqi insurgents. After all, the Ewoks used IEDs and other primitive weapons to attack checkpoints in an attempt to defeat the most technologically advanced army in the galaxy, a strategy that closely parallels the tactics of the Vietcong who preyed upon the over confidence the US put into it’s military might. If Jedi were released today Lucas might find himself at Gitmo while our boys kept on the look out for insurgents using big logs and hang-gliders armed with giant rocks. Again, if the GOP sees a parallel, in a film, about outer space, written during Vietnam, to the current political climate they might want to take that as a sign. From what I can tell Vietnam is now widely acknowledged as an abject failure. If we have reached the point where even those who are perpetrating this war, the same people who promised that Iraq would “not be another Vietnam,” are starting to see the similarities, maybe they should wake up and realize it’s not a case of liberal bias, it’s reality.

On a related note…

…I’m kind of glad it’s all over. I was born approximately 11 months before Star Wars was released. The films have been a constant for me, as they have been for most American males my age. Like a Red Sox fan under the age of 90 I don’t know life without gossip and speculation surrounding one of the passions of my generation. Still, I’m glad that I’ll never again have to leave a movie theater listening to a depressed, thirty-something, never-been-kissed Star Wars junkie complaining that “this one wasn’t (fill in the blank) compared to the originals.” Never again will I have to fight the urge to shake this persona scream, “Dude! When you saw the originals you were 12 years old!” Here’s the deal gang, these are movies made for kids. Adults loved the originals in part because there had, to that point, never been a movie like Start Wars. Heck, if you’re reading this chances are your parents were in their mid-twenties when Star warts came out which aint exactly old. The special effects were unlike anything that had been done to that point. The story was different than anything that had been done to that point. Star Wars was different. Now it’s not. Now we get a few special effects vehicles every summer. Now we have an entire channel that does nothing but sci-fi. Not to mention that no matter what, there’s almost nothing Lucas could have made that would live up to the hype and anticipation that preceded Episode I. Nothing will ever live up to a beloved childhood experience it’s stupid to expect it.

That said Episode three was far and away the best of the recent trilogy. The interesting thing is that this film puts the entire series into a different perspective. The original three were about Luke’s journey from Tatooine farm boy to Jedi Knight. Anakin’s transition into Vader shifts the focus of the entire series to his rise, fall, and eventual redemption. Looking at the series as a whole Luke becomes a supporting character. Say what you want about the acting, the directing, the writing or whatever Episode III delivered exactly what Star Wars fans should have wanted. I think John Cloud said it well in a recent issue of Time magazine. Cloud wrtites, “True, Lucas’ beautiful but turgid prequal trilogy has disappointed. But then again I am no longer an awe struck boy secluded in a theater, trying to find himself in that place far far away.

Too Many MCs not Enough Time

2005-05-13T12:49:00.000-07:00

Friday, May 13, 2005

As seems to be the case more an more often these days it's been a while since my last post. I'm sure this costing me the attention of even my meager audience but what can I say? Maybe I'm overwhelmed by all the crap in the world. It seems like everyday there's something that makes me shake my head. Or, perhaps I'm so content that I've become complacent and unable to Rant. Life has been pretty good lately. I still have a good job with prospects of getting better. I've got a few irons in the fire in terms of other projects. I'm moving in with a guy and saving some money. Life is good. Or maybe it's just that I work too much and play too much and just don't have the time or the mental energy required for writing. Whatever it is it's led to this, not quite a "dot dot dot" column, but a few quick hits on things that have been rattling around my brain.

Disenfranchised voters, judicial impropriety, illegal gifts, it's not national politics, it's not South America, it's American Idol and it's getting more attention than Tom Delay and the Pope combined. Who gives a crap if Paula got her groove back? It's not a real contest! This is not steroids in baseball, this is not point shaving in the NCAA tournament, this is American Karaoke. It doesn't matter, it effects no one, and the guy got eliminated anyway. No harm no foul. Now can we get back to talking about Medicare, Social Security, House Ethics, Congressional Filibusters and Oakland's Bullpen? Jeez.

How great would it be for The Artful Roger to get traded back to Boston? Let's face it: Houston is done. If they're out of it at the trade deadline why not send Roger to a contender? After all he only came to Houston because he thought he and Petite could get the Astros to the series. Well, they couldn't. There are several interesting possibilities for Roger's future if he is indeed traded. Really, you could put any contender in this list, but I'll name my favorites.

-Chicago (AL or NL): The Sox look legit, and they don't have the glaring pitching holes they had when they ran through the AL, only to get demolished in the playoffs, in 2000. If the Sox are in it then I don't see how they could not push for Clemens. As for the Cubs, well, if they climb out of their current hole they should go for it too. After watching what Boston did last year the Cubs have to figure they're next. Besides, Clemens isn't going to want to be a savior and have to carry a team on his own, if he could join an healthy Prior and Wood then why not go for it? After all, Greg Maddux makes a pretty scary fourth starter.

-Texas: They're young, good and in the hunt, but they have no pitching. I guy like Roger may be what the Rangers need to overcome The The Angels Angels of Anaheim, and Seattle. Texas has a history of bringing in aging power pitchers. By going to Texas Roger could cement his legacy (as if he needs to) by tying himself further to the man to whom he is often compared, Nolan Ryan.

-New York: No I don't mean the Mets though it would be interesting to see the "what could have been" of Clemens and Pedro together. It's interesting that for years people said that these two were good in part because they could pitch inside without fear of retribution yet both have excelled so far on the senior circuit. Of course the only option for Roger in NY is the Yanks assuming they're even close. In my mind it would be sad to see Roger got to NY only to miss the playoffs anyway, but it would be a nice thing rub in my cousin's face.

-Boston: This is the best story. If only this could happen. Roger going back to Boston to team with Schilling, the man whose career he saved, to rewrite the final chapter of his tenure with the franchise he was so closely identified with is...well, it's something George Lucas would come up with. A story of redemption so Hollywood it almost makes me want the Sox to win the world series again just so my kids could have one more baseball legend to dream about. Roger helping the Sox to another title would rival last year's Sox run in terms of scale and spectacle. Mr. McLane, please send Roger back to Boston.

Rip-a-ping-ping, the A's dodged a bullet when they didn't resign Giambi. As the steroid cloud follows this fallen figure I don't know whether to laugh or just shrug it all off. In a way Giambi is getting exactly what he deserves after stabbing an entire city in the back. How's that top ten list look now Jason? Now the Yanks want to send him to the minors so he can rebuild his swing and maybe fix his head. The problem is Giambi doesn't want to go. He should. If he doesn't it only confirms what fans in Oakland have suspected since he left in 2001, that he's all about the money. Before he got paid Giambi seemed like a throwback bad boy playing for the pure joy of it. Now he seems like a brooding selfish ass putting himself before the team. The reality is if he doesn't start hitting soon he's going to be a waste of a roster spot. Still, like I said a few months ago, I'd take him back on the cheap if he showed that he really did want to redeem himself. Be humble Jason, be contrite, that's all you need to do to start turning it around.

On an side note, Miggy's making us look like idiots for choosing to go after Giambi, and then Chavez and totally ignoring Tejada. Quick comparison:

Tejada: .348/10/36/.390/1.050
Chavez: .195/02/10/.275/.553
Giambi: .195/03/06/.386/.711

Wow, after looking at those numbers I have to wonder if Chavez destroyed his BALCO evidence before the Feds got to it. Of course it could be that both Giambi and Chavez are in wicked slumps that they'll pull out of. The real difference is that Giambi went to NY and has to accept everything that goes with it including the scrutiny that Chavez has managed to escape thus far.

In more A's related news; the bullpen sucks. After leading the league in blown saves and losing the division by one game last year the A's tried to upgrade their bullpen during the off-season. Oakland added power arms in Juan Cruz and rookie Huston Street to go along with closer Octavio Dotel. Still the A's pen has failed to hold leads in recent weeks, the most glaring example being back to back blown saves against the Red Sox. It seems like missing soft tossers like Chad Bradford (DL-back) is hurting the A's because they have no change of pace type relievers to throw out there.

Moving to football, Rod Gardner wants out of Washington and it wouldn't take much to get him at this point. A former first round pick, Gardner has a modest base salary and though he hasn't lived up to his potential the past couple years he has been very solid under difficult circumstances. If anyone should be willing to risk a 6th or 7th round pick on Gardner it should be the Forty Niners. Gardner would come relatively cheap in terms of cap room as well since Washington would still be responsible for the balance of his signing bonus. SF needs dependable receivers to help number one pick Alex Smith adjust to the NFL. Gardner isn't a super star, think JJ Stokes with better hands, but he can be the steady position type receiver that SF thought they were getting in Curtis "Stone Hands" Conway last year. The SF receiving corps took a step backwards last year with each of their young receivers seeming to regress. I loved the pick of Arnaz Battle but now I wonder if he'll ever be more than a Nate Singleton/ Dexter Carter type player. Bringing in Gardner to complement Brandon Lloyd and to give last year's number one pick Rashaun Woods time to mature would be a good move provided Gardner understood that he wasn't being brought in to save the franchise and would not be getting a new deal as part of the trade.

Speaking of SF receivers I don't understand why SF wouldn't want to bring Jerry Rice back as a player-coach for one last season. Rice could come in for a minimum deal with no bonus and take advantage of the recent rule that allows veteran players with minimum deals to count only half their salary against the cap. At this point in his career Rice could serve as a great mentor to SF's young receivers in a way that he never could when he still believed he was a top-flight player himself. Also, even at his age, Rice could be a good third down type guy, especially in a four receiver set going against a team's fourth corner.

I think it's great that new Forty Niner coach Mike Nolan petitioned the league for permission to wear a jacket and tie on the sidelines rather than the coaches polo and warm ups that have become the norm in recent years. Aside from a few exceptions (Tom Landry) coaches have sported a more casual sideline look since before Nolan's dad Dick Nolan coached the Niners. In a sports scene dominated by throwbacks why not a throwback style coach? Look up a picture of Lawrence “Buck” Shaw aka "The Silver Fox" and tell me that isn't a great look for an NFL coach.

Final thoughts...Eagles owner Jeffery Laurie says TO isn't getting a new deal. Huzzah! Laurie and head coach Andy Reid should be applauded for taking a hard line with the hard head. Right now Owens has few options since he has not been given permission to seek a trade. He can sit out and miss out on this year's salary (a move that backfired on Sean Gilbert), he can admit defeat and report to training camp with the hope that he'll be traded at some point, or he can retire, thus forfeiting the rest of his signing bonus. If he retires and decides to come back his Eagles contract would be reinstated. Here's hoping that the Eagles tell him he can play for their money or sit out forever, or at least until an equal value deal comes along...Every time I come across the name Drew Henson I wonder if anyone's ever made as much money for doing so little. In fact, stat for stat Henson is even more over paid than A-fRod Henson got more than 10 mil from the Yankees and never came up from AAA for more than a cup of coffee, and he was so underwhelming in Dallas last year that Parcells traded for Drew Bledsoe...Which reminds me of that old joke, what's less mobile, Drew Bledsoe or a cardboard cutout of Drew Bledsoe?...Let's Go Nats!...Speaking of which, it's amazing how many prospects came out of the Expos system considering they once had both Dan Duquette and Kevin Malone in their front office...Summer reading? Last Night of the Yankee Dynasty, You Gotta Have Wa, The Meaning of Ichiro, Aces, Moneyball...That oughta hold ya.

-SR
12:44 pm edt

Sometimes a Man's Don't Gotta Do...

2005-04-22T22:17:00.000-07:00

You fight it. You deny it. In the end you come to accept it. You’re a writer. You may not be very good, you may have little insight, but you write anyway because you’re a writer and that’s what you do. You need to write. When you try to deny the urge it dams up inside you like constipation until you know that if you don’t release it you’ll encounter grave physical consequences. So you give in. You sit down and expunge all the things have been swirling around. You know that by writing you can bring some order to things. You can lay them out, give them structure, see how they relate, or don’t.

I never wanted to write. I hated the idea. Writing was mom’s job. I wanted to go out and do things. I wanted to make things happen and let other people report on it and decide what in meant. I’ve become a lot of things I never wanted. I wasn’t going to become an academic, I wasn’t going to teach, and I certainly wasn’t going to write. Basically I wasn’t going to become my family. Then I was. Now I am.

Sometimes your need to write overrides your better judgment. It’s important to know when to write for yourself alone. I sometimes struggle with the difference between writing to express something to the world, and writing to clear out my head. The result is that I run the risk of posting something that could hurt someone. Anyone who knows me knows I don’t often care about stirring the drink a bit. That said I’ve realized that not everything has to be said in a public forum. So, I’ll close with this, I’m sorry Miss K. If you’re wondering what the hell I’m talking about, it’s not important. What’s important is knowing when to stop typing.

Open. Open. Open....

2005-04-08T13:02:00.000-07:00

I was thinking recently that I used to really enjoy logging some couch time when I got the chance. Now I can't stand the darn thing. It's hard for active people to be forced into inactivity. I wish I could be totally zen about it but I always found solace while running. Running was one of the things that cleared everything else away. No worries, no stress, no bills, just grass and maybe a ball. Baseball is like that. That's why I like to go alone sometimes. Then it's just the game, everything else, the outside world fades away and for a while time freezes. One of the nice things about baseball is that it's as close to timeless as anything this country has produced. With minor exceptions the game is exactly the same as it was 100 years ago. Compared with other pro sports it basically stands still. Pro football came into it's infancy in the early part of the 20th century, at that point pro baseball was already 40 years old. If you brought someone from 1920 to see a modern football game they'd hardly know what they were watching. Football if radically different now than it was only 30 years ago. But baseball remains untouched. The bases are still 90 feet apart, the mound is still 60 feet 6 inches from the plate, the bats are still ash or oak, and the ball is still made the same way as it was when Ruth and Hornsby played.

Michael Mandelbaum’s “The Meaning of Sports” compares baseball to our agrarian past. It's a pastoral game, with its green grass and red dirt. It is a game played with wood and leather and little else of consequence. It begins in the spring plays out throughout the summer, growing to a climax harvested by the World Series every fall. Then it lies dormant through out the winter. Bart Giamatti, the former commissioner of baseball and father of the actor Paul Giamatti once said of baseball,

"It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone.”

I think these are some of the reasons that baseball endures for me, and for others. The unchanging nature allows one to feel more of a connection to the past, and thus to the family that introduced the game to us. Stars of the past can be compared to the stars of today because they play roughly the same game under the same conditions (I’m ignoring the steroid issue for now). This is what gives the numbers of baseball the power. The numbers as well as the deeds behind them are the stories we pass down from one generation to the next. When I tell my kids, "I was there." I was there for Jeter's flip. I was there for Strawberry's pinch-hit slam. I was watching number 70. I was watching game 2131.

Thus, I journeyed out to Camden Yards in Baltimore this past opening day crutches and all. I went to escape work; I went to connect with my past. Though I was surrounded by thousands of strangers I was there alone, at peace. With me in that park, along with the record crowd were those separated by both space and time, my brother, my friends, my fathers both past and current. The magic of the game allowed me to connect with all of them. Of course I did so in part by using the conveniences of the present. I used my new camera phone to send pictures of the game to my family, particularly my brother with whom opening day had become a rite of spring. After drinking beers in the middle of the day and enjoying a few Eskae franks (which are, though I hate to say it, and with all respect to Fenway Franks, the best dog I’ve had at a stadium and the only ones close to being worth the price), I hobbled the interminable distance back to my car, and headed home, exhausted, sated, for some much needed couch time.

An End to the Age of Texas Justice by DMJ

2005-03-31T20:39:00.000-08:00

“At the end of the day, perhaps the best argument against capital punishment may be that it is an issue beyond the limited capacity of government to get things right.”
- Scott Turow, author and former federal prosecutor

In 1981, Donald Beardslee murdered two young women in a complex plot to recoup a debt owed to a drug dealer in Redwood City, Ca.. He was on parole for a 1969 murder at the time. Beardslee was executed by lethal injection at San Quentin State Prison in January, some 20 years after he was convicted and sentenced. But the length of Beardslee’s stay on Death Row does not serve as an endorsement of the appeals process in capital cases. Rather, it points out the utter fallibility of a system so vulnerable to human error and malfeasance that even decades’ worth of legal hearings cannot guarantee that the innocent will not be executed.

This is not to say that Beardslee himself is innocent, though some questions remain about his culpability in the murders. His lawyers unsuccessfully tried to have his conviction thrown out based on new evidence suggesting that Beardslee may have suffered long-term brain damage that affected his ability to distinguish right from wrong. But questions of Beardslee’s guilt or innocence cannot obscure the larger issue: A mountain of evidence shows that innocent people are sentenced to death with alarming frequency in the United States.

There can be no question that innocent people have been condemned to die. Over 100 convicts have been exonerated since 1973, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Taken together, those “criminals” served over 1,000 years in prison between their sentencing and exoneration, an average of 9 years each.

The DPIC’s latest report, “Innocence and the Crisis in the American Death Penalty,” is filled with tales of the innocent being sentenced to death. The reasons are myriad – police and prosecutorial misconduct, false or fabricated eyewitness testimony, incompetent or overburdened defense lawyers. Remember that almost all of those exonerated are free solely due to the dogged efforts of a handful of lawyers, students and death penalty opponents. Now imagine what a fully-funded, government-sanctioned effort to investigate capital convictions would find.

An avalanche of evidence also exists showing that the death penalty is fundamentally racist in its application. Under almost any subdivision, ethnic minorities – especially African-Americans – are much more likely than whites to be condemned to die for similar crimes. Black killers of white victims are 16 times more likely to receive a death sentence than white killers of black victims, according to the DPIC. There is no “justice” in a justice system that so blithely murders the innocent and that is so open in its racism.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger should follow the courageous lead of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, once a death penalty supporter himself. By the year 2000, Illinois officials had exonerated more condemned prisoners than they had executed since the state reinstated the death penalty in 1977. Confronted with this shocking exposure of the justice system’s failures, Gov. Ryan commuted the sentences of all condemned prisoners and ordered a special commission to investigate the state’s system of capital punishment. Until the people of California can trust that not one innocent life will be extinguished – a moment that may never come, in my opinion – this state must get out of the business of killing.
8:41 pm est

Hell in a Handbasket

2005-03-18T15:56:00.000-08:00

Friday, March 18, 2005

The past few months have been fast and furious in the world of national domestic politics. Having graduated and found a job I've had a lot more time to actually pay attention to it all. Thus I expect BISR to take on a more political bent, at least until opening day. I started writing about Social Security some three odd weeks ago, but the more I learn about it the more I want to say. Thus you'll have to wait for that one. Besides, Social Security will be a long-standing issue so it can wait few more days. So instead I bring you two stupid government decisions from the past week.

The first, and most recent, is the narrow approval given by congress to allow for oil drilling in the Alaskan wild life refuge. The idea behind this is that the US has become too dependant on foreign oil and this drilling will relax crude prices in US markets. Hogwash. The fact of the matter is that we Americans love our cars. While driving along yesterday the radio asked me if the AAA forecast of perpetual high gas prices would change my driving habits. The answer was no. The fact is that we'll get used to it. By the time any oil is found in the refuge and is able to be pumped and barreled we'll all have gotten used to paying 2.50 per gallon. The new oil entering the market won't necessarily cause a downturn in prices. Why should it? If people are willing to pay the price, why lower it when you can make gobs of money by keeping prices where they are? The drilling is based on two factors, and lower gas prices isn't one of them. The first is that Bush is an oil man who favors opening up economic opportunities for the rich (i.e. tax cuts for the top one percent). Second, caribou don't contribute much to the economy.

The second decision was made by the EPA and pertains to mercury emissions. At first glance it looks like a nice little rule that will reduce the amount of mercury emissions allowed by coal-fueled power plants. But there's a catch. With this administration there's always a catch. The catch is this, plants will be allowed to trade on their emission caps. This policy mirrors a similar provision on international emission trading allowed in the Kyoto agreement. So, suppose plant A doesn't want spend the money to upgrade its technology to meet the new standard, but plant B is already under the new emission cap. Plant A can by cap room from plant B and thus continue to release more mercury into the environment than is allowed by the new guidelines. The up shoot is that while nationwide emissions may drop, local emissions could stay the same or even rise. Flipper babies anyone?

The second thing about allowing plants to trade or sell emissions is that it creates a new market for Wall Street. European markets are starting to open up speculation in emission trading and it won't be long before it becomes a significant player in the US as well. The fact is that pollution, or the permission to pollute is becoming a commodity. It's a scary thought in and of itself, but scarier still to think that emissions which have been shown to cause cognitive defects in children will be making someone rich. It isn't hard to imagine a failing plant simply closing down and then selling it's long term pollution rights for the rest of time. The one positive I can see in the emission trading game would be this; if emissions become publicly traded environmental groups could by emissions rights and then refuse to sell them thereby pulling the right to pollute off the market. Of course this strategy could backfire if it becomes successful and drives the prices up to the point where only super rich companies can afford them. Still every little bit counts.

Everything this administration does seems geared towards making money for the rich and killing everyone else. Right now congress is debating cutting Medicaid for the poorest Americans while considering making the tax cuts for the richest permanent. The good people of the world have to take a stand. So I urge you loyal BISR readers, do something, write something, talk to someone, anyone, incite outrage, this crap must end. If it doesn't most of us are doomed.

An Open Letter to my Former Mother in Law

2005-03-14T18:35:00.000-08:00

Dear Cathy,

Surprise. I hope you don’t mind me writing to you, I promise I won’t make a habit of it. I recently discovered that Liz has remarried. The news, though a bit of a shock, was not entirely surprising. Of course there was a part of me that was sad, but it was smaller part than I would have expected. Really there was but one word that popped into my mind; “why?” Not “why did she marry him,” it’s obvious that they are in love. Not, “why did we get divorced,” the reasons for that are plain as well. Rather, it was “why did she marry me in the first place?”

Even though Liz and I were in love during those years in LA she insisted that she never wanted to get married. It wasn’t until our move to DC was in the works that she decided to propose. It was here that things really began to unravel. I’m sure she’s told you horrible things about me which are only slightly exaggerated. I don’t want to get into mud slinging but I will say this, we weren’t good to each other here. We tried to solve our fears and our anxieties by being increasingly insensitive to each other’s needs. One of the issues I handled particularly poorly was her relationship with Luis. I saw him as a threat as soon as I knew of his existence. This was helped along by the fact that Liz told that he had expressed his love for her almost as soon as he had met her, that he had lamented at what a shame it was that she was getting married, that they were soul mates. As you can imagine I had strong reservations about their friendship. Though I trusted her, I never trusted him. I couldn’t understand why Liz would continue to be friends with him when he continued to say these things over the year leading up to our wedding. The obvious reason is that she was falling in love with him. Before the wedding I found emails between them that indicated a more intimate relationship than I thought was proper. Nothing physical mind you, just a much deeper level of friendship than I thought was safe for my relationship with Liz.

Things between Liz and I were deteriorating leading up to the wedding. I was filled with the feeling that Liz did not respect me, that she didn’t believe in what I was doing with my life. I felt that her heart wasn’t in it any more. So now I come back to my question, why? Why did she go through with it? Surely she knew that she had fallen out of love with me. Surely she knew that her feelings for Luis were stronger than mere friendship. The thing is that our problems were pretty much the same in the months leading up to the ceremony as they were a few weeks or a few days before. They were the same problems we had in the months that followed. Why did she lie about her relationship with him? She continued to lie even after I’d found the pictures of them together. When I first confronted her with the evidence she was contrite, so much so that I thought that this horrible discovery could lead to our reconciliation. After that one night, when she kissed me like my wife and we both wept and held each other, after that one night she denied her relationship with him. She denied that anything was going on, or had gone on, or would go on. So why did she do it? How much pain could we all have been spared if she’d never stood up there and made those vows? I don’t fault Liz for leaving me. These things happen. Maybe Luis really is her soul mate. I fault her for not leaving me sooner. I fault her for leaving me with this hole in my life, this void that was created not because she left, but because she stayed too long.

So why am writing you? I’m writing to ask you what you think. I am writing to ask if you know why, if she ever told you why. You must have asked. Of course I don’t expect you to betray your daughter’s confidence; particularly not to me. But I am hoping that you still harbor some compassion for me. I am hoping that you can find words that do not betray your familial responsibility. I would ask her these things, but she wouldn’t answer me. Or if she did, she would answer me with spite rather than with honesty. I’m writing because you’re her mother. You’re also the one person in her family most likely to respond. Of course I’ll understand if you don’t reply.

As far as other formalities, I am currently living in Maryland, I’m working in my field for an agency that contracts primarily with the government. The pay is decent and the work is interesting, though I recently requested that I not be placed on any more assignments for the military. I can no longer interpret for the military even peripherally without feeling like I’m contributing to the war effort. I’m still writing, both online and magazine articles and research. My goal is to submit my first research paper for peer review some time in the next couple months. I’ve been playing rugby for a team in DC and my name was mentioned in Rugby Magazine as part of an article on a tournament we played in New York this past December.

I hope things are well with you and your family. I don’t know if it’s proper for me to send them my regards, but if anyone ever wonders I wish them all the best. Thank you for everything you’ve done.

-Berto

Take Us Out to the Ball Game

2005-03-05T21:03:00.000-08:00

Despite my best efforts there are still some of you who don’t believe in the power of baseball. There are some of you who just don’t see the beauty in it. So today I will divest myself of the task of trying to convince you and turn it over to people far smarter and more eloquent than myself. Thus I present to you some of the greatest quotes ever made about the American Pass Time. The quotes below are not all from ballplayers, and they are not about specific games or events, rather they are quotes about the game and how it fits into the American landscape. Hopefully I’ll win a few converts here. If not, then I hope I at least entertain you.

-SR

“They'll pass over the money without even thinking about it: for it is money they have and peace they lack. And they'll walk out to the bleachers; sit in shirtsleeves on a perfect afternoon. They'll find they have reserved seats somewhere along one of the baselines, where they sat when they were children and cheered their heroes. And they'll watch the game and it'll be as if they dipped themselves in magic waters. The memories will be so thick they'll have to brush them away from their faces. People will come Ray. The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. It has been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt and erased again. But baseball has marked the time. This field, this game: it's a part of our past, Ray. It reminds of us of all that once was good and it could be again. Oh... people will come Ray. People will most definitely come.” -Terrance Mann, field of Dreams

“Well, you know I... I never got to bat in the major leagues. I would have liked to have had that chance. Just once. To stare down a big league pitcher. To stare him down, and just as he goes into his windup, wink. Make him think you know something he doesn't. That's what I wish for. Chance to squint at a sky so blue that it hurts your eyes just to look at it. To feel the tingling in your arm as you connect with the ball. To run the bases - stretch a double into a triple, and flop face-first into third, wrap your arms around the bag. That's my wish, Ray Kinsella. That's my wish.” -Moonlight Graham, Field of Dreams

“I believe in the Church of Baseball. I've tried all the major religions, and most of the minor ones. I've worshipped Buddha, Allah, Brahma, Vishnu, Siva, trees, mushrooms, and Isadora Duncan. I know things. For instance, there are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. When I heard that, I gave Jesus a chance. But it just didn't work out between us. The Lord laid too much guilt on me. I prefer metaphysics to theology. You see, there's no guilt in baseball, and it's never boring... which makes it like sex. There's never been a ballplayer slept with me who didn't have the best year of his career. Making love is like hitting a baseball: you just gotta relax and concentrate. Besides, I'd never sleep with a player hitting under .250... not unless he had a lot of RBIs and was a great glove man up the middle. You see, there's a certain amount of life wisdom I give these boys. I can expand their minds. Sometimes when I've got a ballplayer alone, I'll just read Emily Dickinson or Walt Whitman to him, and the guys are so sweet, they always stay and listen. 'Course, a guy'll listen to anything if he thinks it's foreplay. I make them feel confident, and they make me feel safe, and pretty. 'Course, what I give them lasts a lifetime; what they give me lasts 142 games. Sometimes it seems like a bad trade. But bad trades are part of baseball -- now who can forget Frank Robinson for Milt Pappas, for God's sake? It's a long season and you gotta trust. I've tried 'em all, I really have, and the only church that truly feeds the soul, day in, day out, is the Church of Baseball. “ -Annie Savoy, Bull Durham

“Well, I believe in the soul, the cock, the pussy, the small of a woman's back, the hanging curve ball, high fiber, good scotch, that the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days. “ -Crash Davis, Bull Durham

“A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.” -Nuke Laloosh, Bull Durham

“Walt Whitman once said, "I see great things in baseball. It's our game, the American game. It will repair our losses and be a blessing to us." You could look it up. “ -Annie Savoy

“Regardless of the verdict of juries... no player who throws a ball game... no player who undertakes, or promises to throw a game... no player who sits in conference with a bunch of crooked players and gamblers where the ways and means of throwing a ball game are discussed, and does not promptly tell his club about it... will ever play professional baseball again.” -Kenesaw Mountain Landis regarding the Black Sox scandal

“You get out there, and the stands are full and everybody's cheerin'. It's like everybody in the world come to see you. And inside of that there's the players, they're yakkin' it up. The pitcher throws and you look for that pill... suddenly there's nothing else in the ballpark but you and it. Sometimes, when you feel right, there's a groove there, and the bat just eases into it and meets that ball. When the bat meets that ball and you feel that ball just give, you know it's going to go a long way. Damn, if you don't feel like you're going to live forever.” -John Cusak as Buck Weaver, Eight men Out

“You see, you spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball, and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time.” -Jim Bouton, former MLB player and author of "Ball Four"

“People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring.” -Rogers Hornsby, former player

“No game in the world is as tidy and dramatically neat as baseball, with cause and effect, crime and punishment, motive and result, so cleanly defined.” -Paul Gallico

“I see great things in baseball. It's our game - the American game. It will take our people out-of-doors, fill them with oxygen, give them a larger physical stoicism. Tend to relieve us from being a nervous, dyspeptic set. Repair these losses, and be a blessing to us.” -Walt Whitman

“Say this much for big league baseball - it is beyond question the greatest conversation piece ever invented in America.” -Bruce Catton

“It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone.” -Bart Giamatti, former MLB commissioner and father of actor Paul Giamatti

“Baseball is almost the only orderly thing in a very unorderly world. If you get three strikes, even the best lawyer in the world can't get you off.” -Bill Veeck, former baseball executive

“You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the goddamn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all.” -Earl Weaver, former MLB manager

“The strongest thing that baseball has going for it today are its yesterdays.” -Lawrence Ritter

“Baseball, to me, is still the national pastime because it is a summer game. I feel that almost all Americans are summer people, that summer is what they think of when they think of their childhood. I think it stirs up an incredible emotion within people.” -Steve Busby

“This is a game to be savored, not gulped. There's time to discuss everything between pitches or between innings.” -Bill Veeck

“I don't know why people like the home run so much. A home run is over as soon as it starts.... The triple is the most exciting play of the game. A triple is like meeting a woman who excites you, spending the evening talking and getting more excited, then taking her home. It drags on and on. You're never sure how it's going to turn out.” -George Foster, former player

“I don't love baseball. I don't love most of today's players. I don't love the owners. I do love, however, the baseball that is in the heads of baseball fans. I love the dreams of glory of 10-year-olds, the reminiscences of 70-year-olds. The greatest baseball arena is in our heads, what we bring to the games, to the telecasts, to reading newspaper reports.” -Stan Isaacs

“Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona.” -George F. Will

“Spread the diaper in the position of the diamond with you at bat. Then fold second base down to home and set the baby on the pitcher's mound. Put first base and third together, bring up home plate and pin the three together. Of course, in case of rain, you gotta call the game and start all over again.” -Jimmy Piersal

“Hating the New York Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers and cheating on your income tax.” -Mike Royoko

“Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too.” -Yogi Berra

Texas is Full of Assholes

2005-03-01T22:01:00.000-08:00

Today the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty could not be given to minors. The surprise here is that the ruling was needed. 30 of the 50 states have already banned the death penalty for minors. According to NPR News, in 1990 there were 10 countries that allowed the death penalty for minors. Before today there was only one. The case that came before the court was indeed particularly heinous. It was a case involving a then 17 year old male who, during a burglary, was recognized by the home owner, taped her eyes and mouth shut, bound her, drove her to a rail road trestle, and threw her to her death. He was then tried as an adult and given the death penalty. There are several issues involved when considering the issue of whether to execute juveniles who commit particularly violent crimes. First of course is the question of whether state sponsored execution is moral to begin with. This fundamental question is followed by the questions of how we treat minors in other facets of society, and finally, why we prosecute crime and administer the death penalty all.

The big issue, the one that has sparked debate in this country for at least as long as I’ve been alive (and I’m sure longer than that) is whether the death penalty is appropriate at all. My personal views on this issue have changed over time. As a young man I believed in the eye-for-an-eye tenor of the death penalty. After all, it’s only fair right? Later I believed that the death penalty should only be administered if the family of the victim was willing to do the deed themselves. Indeed, I even conceived of a big game style hunt to carry out the task. Later still I believed that death row inmates were a drain on the general society and that they should be executed on the spot, directly after sentencing in order to save taxpayer money that was being wasted keeping them on death row for decades while they used their appeals. Over the last few years I’ve had many debates with many people about the death penalty, and they’ve swayed me. Then I did some research. The thing that really turned me against the death penalty was an episode of the nationally syndicated radio program, “This American Life” which aired on February 11th, 2005. The episode is devoted to the story of a man who, despite forensic evidence, eye witness testimony, and the fact that the police had the real killer in custody, was given the death penalty in the state of New York. The episode, titled “DIY”, can be heard at www.thislife.org. Don’t get me wrong, I think that people who commit violent crime should be dealt with harshly, but the more I read, the more I heard, the more convinced I became that putting the decision to kill in the hands of the government was too inexact a science. When you add in the yokels that make up most juries it becomes too horrible to think about some being sentenced to die by a jury of their peers. I’ll tell you, if I were ever facing the prospect of state sponsored death a jury of my peers is the last thing I’d want. I’d want twelve people way smarter and more compassionate than me. The fact is that people are wrongly convicted all the time. Witnesses lie, cops follow their prejudices or their desire more than they follow evidence, and often testimony or evidence that would clear a defendant are ignored, or never heard. Basically, the death penalty is a bad idea. It doesn’t deter crime, it doesn’t bring closure to families that still have to mourn their loved ones, and there’s just too much risk of getting it horribly wrong.

The idea of applying the death penalty to minors is even more horrific. The US generally recognizes 18 as the age of adulthood. It is the age when you can vote, have sex legally, marry without parental consent and go off to die in Iraq. (Remember, if you’re a male you have to sign up for the draft at 18 if you want to be eligible for federal student aid. Even though they say there isn’t going to be a draft, and even though you’ll likely be exempted from the draft if you’re enrolled in a degree-seeking program. Ignacio, I’m talking to you!) According to both law and custom a person who is 17 years and 364 days old is incapable of making any of these kinds of decisions on their own. So, is there some magic of biology that occurs at 18 that gives one the ability to make calm rational decisions about life? Have any of you ever been 18? Hell, I’m 28 and I’m just now starting to make calm rational decisions. The fact is that no one suddenly becomes responsible at 18. Some people are responsible at birth, others are never responsible no matter how old they get.

So what’s the point? The point is that kids are fucked up. They live in a fucked up world, in a fucked up country, with a fucked up government, elected by a fucked up society. Sure, it’s OK for us adults, we can cope, but remember high school? Now add mixed messages about sex (it sells, but it’s bad), drugs (drugs are BAD! Now take your Zoloft and Ritalin, and Cialis), politics (Marriage is good, but only for a man and a woman, ignore your divorced parents and that happy gay couple down the block who have been together for 20 years), individuality (be yourself, as long as yourself conforms to all school policies), etc. If you think it was bad when you were a kid, it’s way worse now. The point is that there are certain personality disorders that psychiatrists are prohibited from diagnosing in minors because the kids are still developing. The point is that minors are far more likely to be swayed by group interaction. There’s even a term for it, Peer…something. It’s all the rage.

It seems that juveniles being tried as adults is becoming more common as America becomes more fed up with increasing and increasingly violent crimes being perpetrated by minors. I’m not suggesting that a 17 year old doesn’t know that killing is wrong. What I’m suggesting is that the whole idea of it isn’t as developed. I’m horrified at the thought of violence in a way that I wasn’t even a couple of years ago. When I was 17 I could watch anything Hollywood was willing to put on a screen. Now when I hear about people stepping on land mines, or being torn apart by car bombs, of beaten with blunt objects it affects me physically. There’s a reason we don’t let minors do all the things we don’t let minors do, we don’t trust them. We know what it’s like to be a kid and we know that we cannot entrust them with certain responsibilities. So how can we decide to kill them?

In his decent one of the judges noted that we allow minors to make decisions about abortion without parental consent. He asked how we could entrust them such an important decision when at the same time we say that they cannot be held responsible for making the grown up decision to kill. This question is flawed in that it is based on false pretenses. In order for it to be valid we must first accept that abortion is an adult decision. It’s not. Especially in the case of minors abortion is often a way out trouble caused by making an immature decision. We allow minors to do this without their parent’s knowledge because abortion is a traumatic and stressful experience that doesn’t need to be compounded with punishment and possible life long family stress. Second, if are to accept this as a valid question then we must also accept that the decision to kill is a mature decision. It is not. The decision to kill is childish. Those who kill in a fit of rage, or during the commission of another crime do so because they are not mature enough to do otherwise. The kind of anger that leads to spontaneous murder is infantile. Crime, in and of itself is immature. The decision to rob or extort is arrived at because the perpetrator cannot see, or is unwilling to undertake a mature and responsible course in the order to achieve their goals. One could argue that any otherwise rational person who commits homicide could not possibly be mature enough to understand the full effect of their actions. It seems impossible that anyone who fully grasps the impact of committing murder could not possibly go through with it. Conversely, anyone who is capable of fully grasping the effect of murder and still go through with it must be insane, and therefore also ineligible for the death penalty. Indeed, murder can be seen as the ultimate immature crime, the instant removal of a perceived obstacle. If this is the case then how can we condemn to death a juvenile who acts in exactly the role society has cast them in?

This is not to say that society bears sole responsibility in creating child killers, though we should examine why this is much more of a modern phenomenon. Nor should juvenile killers skate simply because they were under age at the commission of their crimes. Anyone who takes a life in cold blood, whether spontaneously, or through conspiracy, should be locked away from society. However, in a nation where we cannot accurately assign the death penalty to adults, how can we even debate assigning it to children?

This called The Show

2005-01-30T17:07:00.000-08:00

OK, I was going to let this go, but a co-worker recently brought up Doug Brien’s missed opportunity to send the Jets back to the AFC Championship Game. Here’s the thing, of course Brien should have made those field goals, but either Herm Edwards, or Paul Hackett should have tried to get him closer for that first FG attempt. After all, once they got within 47 yards the Jets didn’t make any serious attempts to get any closer. Therefore I blame the coaching staff for setting Dougie up to fail. This isn’t the first time Dougie has been set up to take the fall for other people’s shortcomings. Hence, in defense of a good player I present an article that first appeared on this site in October of ’03. This one’s for you Dougie…

Owen Pochman is out (thank goodness) and the Niners will now turn to Todd Peterson to solve a kicking game that has been in flux since, well, since Ray Wersching left in 1987. Since then they have had adequate guys like Mike Cofer, Doug Brien, and Wade Richey. Some very good kickers like Jeff Wilkins and Gary Anderson. But mostly they have had spectacular flops, Jose “Clown Shoes” Cortez, Tony “El Bouquero” Zendejas, Jeff “Really? A 4th Round Draft Pick?” Chandler, and now, Owen “Cut by the Giants” Pochman.

Pochman missed 3 field goals last week in a game won by the 49er defense. This week he missed two more as the 49ers lost in OT to the hapless Arizona Cardinals. Now Pochman is out and SF will bring in Peterson hoping that last years 57.1 FG% was an aberration. While Peterson may help in the short term the 49ers kicking problems run much deeper and will not be solved without a change in organizational philosophy. Basically the 49ers have never cared about kickers, since the glory years began having a good kicker was considered a luxury not worth the expense.

This was fine when SF had Montana, Craig, Rice, Solomon, Clark, Young, Watters, Taylor, Jones, Frank, an great O-line and an all pro defense. Back when John Madden was calling out “Sooooo many weapons” and the Niners were in the NFC championship game year after year. But this is a different team in a different era. Dennis Erickson has not lived up to his promise to “open up the offense.” The O-line is shaky and SF is having trouble scoring points. This team that is not going to blow people away like they did during the stretch between ’81 and ’97. This is a team that needs to scratch out wins the way Carolina is with John Kasay (career FG% 80.1, 17/17 this year).

SF has made some terrible decisions with its kickers, here is brief over view:

Name Year Career% %When Cut Post SF Career
Ray Wersching ‘77-‘87 67.5 76.5 Retired in 1987
Jeff Backhaus 1987 50.0 50.0 Subbed for Wersching, never played in NFL again
Mike Cofer ’88-‘93 66.2 61.5 44.4% for Indy in 1995
Doug Brien ’94-95 80.5 88.2 Current 88.9% with NYJ
Tony Zendejas 1995 73.5 42.9 Never played again.
Jeff Wilkins ’95-96 80.2 88.2 Went to rival Rams and won a Super Bowl
Gary Anderson 1997 80.1 80.6 92.9% for Tennessee in ’03
Wade Richey ‘98-‘’99 72.4 68.2 Currently 1/1 with Baltimore
Jose Cortez ‘00-’02 71.9 75.0 With Minn. no FG attempts this year.
Jeff Chandler ’02-’03 73.7 85.7 Out of football
Owen Pochman 2003 47.1 53.3 Out of football
Todd Peterson 2003 77.8
(During this time they also cut Ryan Longwell and his career 81.1%)

Some analysis on the above list shows that the Niners had a decent run of kickers from the middle of 1995 through the end of 1997 which was also the end of the Niners great run (lost NFC Championship to Green Bay). Since then the Niners have suffered through salary cap hell and the premature retirement of Steve Young. But their inability and unwillingness to resign good kickers has cost them games over the years. They didn’t want to spend the money to resign Wilkins or Anderson. They ran out of patience with Chandler who was kicking well when he was cut. Brien was made the scapegoat for a slow start in 1995 when the real problem was that SF tried to replace Ricky Watters with Derek Loville. In both cases the quick hooks cost them games. They brought in Zendejas in ’95 who lasted three games and went 3-7 with 3 blocks (he was also 1-3 on PATs). This year they cut Chandler in favor of a guy who brought in a career FG% of 47.1.
If SF ever again finds a reliable kicker they need to keep him. Consistency is good, from 1981 through 1994 SF had three regular kickers. Since then they have had eight. If SF had a consistent kicker at this point they would be a least 4-4 (if not better) and still be in the hunt in the NFC. As it is they face a huge up hill fight to make the playoffs. You can overlook special teams when you’re rolling over fools to the tune of 42 point per game. When you fall back to the pack however, you need good special teams, coverage, returns, and kicks. After all, as good as the Pats were in ’01 it was Adam Vinatieri (career 81.7%) who won the game for them.

"Can Music Save Your Mortal Soul?"

2005-01-28T16:45:00.000-08:00

I started writing this as a self-pitying year-in-review taking stock of my sad, sad 2004. Then I realized that would be a bunch of bullshit. Instead I hit upon something infinitely more important about 2004 than my depression over getting older. You my gentle reader have been faithfully reading about all the things that piss me off for about a year and half now, so today I've decided to expound upon some of the things I actually liked in 2004. The inspiration for this radical new line of thought was brought about, in part, by one the things I liked in 2004, a book called "Planet Simpson," a postmodern deconstruction of the TV show "The Simpsons." The important thing in this discussion is something almost totally unrelated to the overall subject of the book. For now I'll concentrate on something from the last chapter. In a section entitled "The Rebirth of Sincerity" the author writes about the exact moment when he regained his faith in rock n' roll. Prior to this pint in his life the author details how the cynicism of youth culture in the 1990s had pretty much consumed his entire being. In his mind rock was "played out." He then goes on to describe how he regained his faith in rock n' roll. This resonated with me as I had been going through the same rock malaise since 1994. As you may recall that was the year Kurdt Cobain decided that being Kurdt Cobain was played out. With Nirvana gone a whole horde of whiney-Wallflower-Bush-crappy-McCrap rock rushed in to fill the void. Ever since then my relationship with rock n' roll had stagnated into an adoring love for all the songs I loved during high school mixed in with an occasional single form a current band. At no time in the decade between then and now did I feel the need to rush out and buy an entire album from anyone rock band.

Now, allow me to be not one bit original or insightful. Here's the thing, I don't know about music the way, say, DMJ knows about music. I know what I like, and, except for a few isolated singles most of what I like was released prior to 1996. That changed in 2004. The past year was the best year in music since 1991, which saw the release of Nevermind, Blood Sugar Sex Magic, and The Low End Theory (along with Metallica's Black Album). 2004 finally saw the release of three very good rock albums:

-Jet: Get Born:

The Rolling Stones can go ahead and retire. Remember back when everyone said that Oasis were the next Beatles? Uh, where's Oasis been the past few years? Yeah, that's what I thought. If anyone has assumed the mantle from the rock bands of the 60s and 70s it's Jet. The problem with Oasis is that they were pretentious. They set out to be the next Beatles, they believed they were the next Beatles, they were decidedly, NOT, the next Beatles.

Jet however has done exactly what I, as a rock fan, want, an unpretentious rock album, an album without any real message, an album that is not intended to shock people, or make them think, or any of the other BS things that bands try to work into their albums. This is an album that simply rocks. This is the album, in particular the first single "Are You Gonna Be My Girl," that restored my faith in rock n' roll. Topics covered on the album include women who are, by turns, unattainable, unreachable, and evil, bad DJs, and general RnR malaise. In other words, they cover all the old rock standards.

The band also produced two of the best rock videos of the past decade, for "Are You Gonna Be My Girl" and "Look What You've Done." I simply can't stress enough how great it is to finally here a band that's not overly poppy, or whiney, or any of the other crappy adjectives that can be placed upon most of the crap that has passed itself off as rock and roll since Kurdt killed himself.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0000AQVCL/qid=1106947785/sr=2-1/ref=pd_ka_b_2_1/104-3740391-5741558

-Greenday: American Idiot:

I spent a long time trying to figure out why this was such a good album. In the dark years after '94, after Green Day's "Dookie" was released I had a lot of hope that this would be the band to shine through and take over where Nirvana left off. Then that stupid "Time of Your Life" song found it's way into every TV show in the Western Hemisphere. I remember watching NBC one night and hearing that song on three shows back-to-back-to-back. At that moment Green Day went from being a slightly disappointing band, to an object of down right scorn.

All that has changed. "American Idiot" is a great, let me repeat, great rock album on sooo many levels. First off it's an overt return to politically based anti-establismentary punk. I don't know if Green Day has been inserting political messages into their albums all along, I do know that their singles haven't had anything like the edge that "American Idiot" has. The album, like the title song, rails against the powers that be, and have been for the past few years. There's an awesome send up of the Governator on the third track "Holiday." The last voice begins with an intercom type announcement that "The representative form California has the floor." The next few lines take the piss out of both Bush and Ahnold,

Sieg Hail to the President Gas Man
Bombs away is your punishment
Pulverize the Eiffel Towers
that criticize your government

And it goes on like this throughout the whole album. The radical thing is not that a band, or anyone else, would speak out against the idiocy of the US government, or the media, the radical thing is that it would come from a band that has such a strong history of making commercial pop-punk. That is, we're used to rebellion from the counter culture segments of the population, but rarely does a band with something to lose put out a statement this strong. That's why the call of rebellion in this album hits as hard as it does, because it comes from people who don't need to use it as a device, it comes from those who have already "made it" and are now risking rebuke from those that gave them their position.

But rebellion and angst are only a small part of why this album rocks. The album is actually a concept piece. It tells the story of St. Jimmy, The Jesus of Suburbia, and a girl they call Whatsername. The albume tells a story in a very loose sense. There's no real clear narrative. Instead the album guides the listener through an emotional pseudo-story that, like a film noir project, is meant to leave the audience with the experience of a feeling rather than a coherent story. The album sounds like a soundrack to a play that doesn't exist, which it kind of is. However, the fact that the album is being fleshed out into a Broadway show is irrelevant. The point is, in an era of good musicals also standing as good rock albums (Hedwig, Rent), Green Day has put out a solid rock album that should do well as a musical. It's this interplay that allows Green Day to escape their stripped down power trio roots while maintaining a solid punk sensibility that was missing from their later over produced mass-market schlock.

I'm not doing this album justice. Buy it, or better yet, steal it, listen to it a few dozen times, then get back to me.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0002OERI0/qid=1106947742/sr=2-1/ref=pd_ka_b_2_1/104-3740391-5741558

-Killers: Hot Fuss

Anyone else miss Depeche Mode or New Order? Well, the Killers aren't really like them, but they're like a bastard love child of punk and new wave. They're album, which includes the singles "Mr. Brightside" and "Somebody Told Me," is another one that makes over produced punk sound cutting edge rather than just commercial. I really don't have as much to say about this album as I did with the previous two. It pretty much just rocks

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0002858YS/ref=m_art_bow_1/104-3740391-5741558?v=glance&s=music

So there it is, 2004, the year that saved rock. I know there are other good albums that came out but many of these (To The 5 Boroughs to name one) came form groups that have been putting out a consistently good product forever. Instead I wanted to focus on the bands that surprised me and restored my faith in an art form.

Also deserving mention:
-Franz Ferdinand: Take Me Out
-Maroon 5: This Love (I know it's cheesy but it helped me through a tough time.)
-Modest Mouse: Float On
-My Chemical Romance: I'm Not OK
-Velvet Revolver: Slither (So GnR yet So STP, let's have some peanut butter cups.)

Dallas vs. Dynasty

2005-01-24T21:13:00.000-08:00

OK, the super bowl is set and SR has a few things to say. First of all, Jim Mora Jr. knows that he still has Michael Vick on his team right? Atlanta should have carved up that Philly defense but they only used Vick to his true abilities when it was predictable, or on busted plays. Vick is the most exciting player since Barry Sanders, but only when you allow him to do what only he can do. Barry used to lead the league in yards lost, but he’d also lead the league in yards gained. The point is you have to take the bad to get the good. By playing so conservatively in the first half Atlanta put themselves in a bad situation, instead of Vick being unpredictable and maddening Philly knew exactly when and where he would try his trickery.

That said Philly played very well. The great thing is that they did it without TO. Don’t get me wrong, TO is a great player, and I rode him like Zorro in my fantasy league, but, in the end I, like the Eagles, had to find a way to get it done without TO. Andy Reid drew up a great game plan the last two weeks but, Freddie Mitchell’s “great” hands not withstanding, the Iggles won on a couple of lucky bounces last week. Now I’m left to wonder whether TO will help or hurt his team if he can come back for the big game.

Not that I think it will make any real difference. The Pats look as good as ever and I expect them to win it all. Sure, last week I thought that Manning and Co. would roll into Foxboro and sprint on to Pittsburg. Sure I said that a scheme can’t win without the players to carry it out and that the time had come for the New England secondary to finally not only be exposed, but exploited. But I was wrong. Around the middle of the third quarter last week I decided that Belichick IS the next Walsh and that my money’s on the Pats to win until they lose. After Pitt escaped last week’s game against the Jets and Big Ben looked like the rookie he really is, I knew there was no way the Steelers could win.

So, if the Pats win what is their legacy? A lot of people are starting to throw around the word “dynasty.” During the broadcast yesterday Chris Collinsworth mentioned that when asked about dynasties Belichick mentioned the Dallas teams of the early 90s. Those teams won three titles in four years, which is exactly what the Pats are trying to do, so it’s apt that Belichick would choose them as his example of a dynasty. I disagree. Those Cowboy teams were very good, great even, but they were no dynasty. “But SR, if the Cowboys run doesn’t make a dynasty what does?” I’m glad you asked.

A dynasty requires both winning and longevity. Both the Cowboys of the 90s, and these Pats, if they win the Super Bowl, have the winning, sort of. In order to be a dynasty I think you need to match the title total of the NFL’s first modern dynasty, the four Super Bowls won by the Steelers in the 1970’s. During their dominant stretch (1972-1984) the Steelers won their division 10 times, went to the playoffs 11 times and played in 7 AFC Championships. Still, in order to define a true dynasty you must look at the single greatest dynasty in NFL history, the San Francisco Forty Niners. Even if you mark their run only from the start to the end of their championship years you are looking at 14 years at or near the top of the league. If you include the fact that they lost the 1997 NFC Championship Game their legacy spans 17 years of dominance, nearly two decades as the team to beat in the NFC. During those 17 years SF won their division 13 times, went to the playoffs 15 times, played in 10 NFC Championships, and was the first team to win 5 Super Bowls. No other team has ever had that much success for so long. Even in the lean years, 1998-2004, SF made the playoffs three times, including the second biggest comeback victory in NFL playoff history.

Want more? Too bad, it’s my web site and I’ll Rant if I want to. Going back to the original dynasty, the Steelers won two titles in the first half of the 1970s, and then two in the second fitting them to the criteria of both winning and longevity. The Niners won their championships over an extended period of time becoming the team of the 80s. This is a very important factor. Even if you toss out the ‘94 season the Niners won four titles over nine years with one repeat. They never went more than three years without a title. By contrast, the Cowboys of the early 90s won three tiles in four years, but none after 1995. In my mind this makes them the team of the first half of the nineties, but not a dynasty. This is the mold from which the current Patriots may be cast. If they win this title they will be a very good team that has had a short run of incredible brilliance. Of course they still need to win the Super Bowl this year, and even then they won’t be as good as those Cowboy teams for the fact that between titles the Boys lost to the Niners in the NFC championship Game, between titles the Pats missed the playoffs.

So what needs to happen for the Pats to become a dynasty? Well, they’ll need to win on Feb. 6th, and they’ll have to win at least won more time after that. That fourth win can come any time, but if it comes in 2006 or 2007 so much the better. In the meantime the Pats would have to win their division and make it deep into the playoffs in the years they don’t win it all. If they can keep up this kind of pace for next two or three years I’ll be willing to call them a dynasty.