YOU'RE LUCKY MORRIS CLAIBORNE EVEN TOOK THE WONDERLIC FOR YOU BASTARDS

You're welcome for the five year old pop culture reference. My 15th podcast of the year with Cousin Sal will be out on Thursday. Anyways, some goon from Foxsports.com is not happy that Claiborne's dreadful Wonderlic score got leaked. Now, is his obvious inability to answer basic logic and math questions under timed conditions the most hilarious thing of all time? No, monkeys dressed as astronauts are. But is it worth a little bit of snark? Of course. When the test creators supposedly say you need to get a 10 to be classified as illiterate, a 4 is... well, it's not good. The guy doesn't deserve to be excoriated for it but I think the situation is worth a few chuckles, especially since 1) he's probably already a professional athlete, given that he goes to LSU, IF YOU GET MY DRIFT, and 2) he's about to be a top 10 draft pick. But Foxsports dude doesn't agree with that sentiment. Boy does he ever not.

(FWIW, I don't really buy this below 10 = illiterate thing, unless there are somehow a decent number of questions on the exam that don't include any words. I guess you could say that someone guessing all As or all Bs or whatever can get a 10, and Claiborne couldn't meet that, but let's cut the guy some slack, I'm sure he can read. LITERALLY.)

Anyways, let's the mitigating information out of the way first.

[Claiborne] also has a learning disability.

According to Greg Gabriel at the National Football Post, Claiborne’s disability — though not specified— isn’t a secret around the league. When he was recruited out of high school, it was made clear to the various big-time college programs courting him that he’d need academic advisors and assistance in the classroom once he selected a school.

Fortunately he chose a school that doesn't require athletes to visit places like classrooms and advisors' offices. Although more power to him if he chose to do so.

After deciding to attend LSU, Claiborne didn’t fade away and let the rigors of the college environment swallow him whole. He worked with tutors and utilized LSU’s various on-campus learning resources to get the grades he needed to stay academically eligible and compete.

So there you go. Good on him. He's got a disability, he works with it, he's tried hard to be a good student. Still, he got like the lowest Wonderlic score ever. Ever. Even Vince Young out-tested this guy. So with all the background bullshit out of the way let's get to the Chris Crocker stuff.

The real issue is that the report was even leaked at all. Whether true or false, it’s a nefarious act

Whoa. Ease up, 1860s newspaper writer describing the Lincoln assassination.

from an individual or individuals who clearly have some incentives to damage a young man.

Or an individual or individuals who are just being low-level jerks by relaying a part sad/part hilarious piece of information to the public.

Did the score come from a team that wants to draft Claiborne and thought the information would stray another team away from doing so?

Could've.

Or was it from an agent trying to better position his own client, potentially a top cornerback, himself?

Also could've. Do we want to stick with "nefarious?" Are "dastardly" or "opprobrious" still available?

You’ll drive yourself crazy playing Andy Sipowicz trying to figure that one out.

If it's one of those two things, which seems plausible if not likely, it's a little shady but not surprising given the stakes of the draft. And definitely not worth shitting your shorts over.

But we should know.

We should have the name of the tough guy

I doubt this person thinks they're tough. They probably think they're a hilarious troll.

who went public with information that’s supposed to be highly confidential.

HE SHOULD BE MADE TO FACE JUSTICE FOR HIS NON-CRIME

The NFL conducts these tests in what are described as highly secure environments.

Read: some emptied-out equipment room in Lucas Oil Stadium with a few folding tables set up.

The results are not intended to be leaked. And yet, here we are today, and Claiborne’s woeful Wonderlic is the biggest football headline of the day.

And yet, the Earth continues to spin on its axis while rotating the sun.

The truth is, Claiborne’s score won’t impact his draft stock in April. I assure you that he’ll be the first cornerback taken in the draft, regardless of how he performed with a No. 2 pencil in Indy.

I misrepresented things when I said this guy was acting like Chris Crocker- he's acting half like Chris Crocker and half like Claiborne's mom.

He’ll get over it. He’ll use it as motivation. He’ll come out angry and he’ll have a fine NFL career. This will all be forgotten and five years from now, the same message board commenters that were mocking him today will be wearing his jersey and selling his game-used mouth guard on eBay.

Probably not.

But the slime that sheepishly — and worse off, anonymously — shared his score with a media outlet will never have to deal with it.

Holy shit, who cares? I bet Claiborne doesn't. (Earlier in the article there is a paragraph about how Claiborne defended himself on Twitter in a calm, humorous, and light hearted fashion.) I know I certainly don't.

He’ll continue to sit on his computer

I BET HE'S ONE OF THOSE COMPUTER PEOPLE WHO LIKES COMPUTERS! THIS IS EXACTLY THE KIND OF SHENANIGANS THEY PULL!

behind a desk and just know that he made a good kid feel bad today.

He's about to get like $10MM in guaranteed money. I think he's OK with things, especially if his disability is known throughout the league already.

He’ll know that he leaked a kid with a learning disability’s standardized test score to the world without providing any of the context that should have gone along with it.

HOW DARE HE NOT ALSO MENTION ALL THE THINGS THAT HAVE EVER GONE WRONG FOR CLAIBORNE TOO, LIKE THE FACT THAT HE WAS FEELING KIND OF GASSY DURING THE TEST AND THAT HE WAS BUMMED OUT AT THE COMBINE BECAUSE HE LOST HIS CELL PHONE THE WEEKEND BEFORE?

He’ll sleep fine and likely won’t have to face any repercussions.

But I wish he would.

We got it, thanks.

Roger Goodell’s all about security and the purity of the game. His stance on Bountygate was aggressive and firm. If the NFL is going to ask its draft prospects to take an exam under the assumption that the results won’t be made public, they should honor that agreement. Otherwise, why would any of these kids even bother?

That's great stuff. I'd do the multiple copy and paste thing but I'm tired and it's late. But just to summarize: league office's harsh stance on players allegedly trying to injure other players means league is hypocritical if it doesn't do a better job of safeguarding written test scores. Spectacular. I hope more shitty football writers try to lump anything that goes slightly wrong in the NFL this season into the bounty scandal. "Sure the league PRETENDS to care about safety when Brett Favre's ankles are involved, but where is the justice for Chargers fan Bob Q. Smith, who had half a beer dumped on him while watching his team play in Oakland? IT AIN'T RIGHT."

Morris Claiborne could have walked out of that room and said, “I’ll be a top-10 pick regardless of what I score on this. What’s the point?” Hell, if his score’s going to be discussed on SportsCenter three weeks before the draft, he should have done that.

What? What are we talking about?

If you’re going to hold these kids responsible and ask them to honor their end of the pre-draft process, you should hold all parties responsible for it, too.

Including people who circumvented what was likely a lax security process and made a day's worth of headlines by leaking an awesome player's abominable score!

Maybe I’m getting too worked up over this.

No, I think you're pretty much being rational and measured about it. Sincerely, people who bitch endlessly about instant replay in MLB.

Chairman of giant company shows JoePa mourners how giant companies placate the public after shit goes down

Nike's Phil Knight spoke at Paterno's memorial service. He delivered a message about where blame should go for the Sandusky debacle that's pure, sweet, delicious corporate PR bullshit. It's amazing.

Commenting on those events, Knight said, "it turns out (Paterno) gave full disclosure to his superiors, information that went up the chains to the head of the campus police and the president of the school.

And when they didn't do anything, Paterno's duty remained fulfilled. Nope, nothing else to do at that point. No reason to follow up , go to the cops, confront Sandusky or ban him from your facilities. Once you've talked to a few people about the problem it's time to sit back, pop a few cold ones, and unfurl the "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner.

The matter was in the hands of a world-class university, and by a president with an outstanding national reputation."

World-class universities being well known as the kind of entities that are outstanding at conducting internal investigations into important and respected members of the football program.

Knight added,

With all the empathy Tony Hayward used when discussing the Gulf oil spill,

"...this much is clear to me. If there is a villain in this tragedy, it lies in that investigation and not in Joe Paterno."

/standing ovation

You see everyone, there's no PERSON at fault here. Certainly not the person you're all here to celebrate today. No no no, this scandal is much bigger than any one identifiable human. The problem is with the system! It's the process that's really to blame for all the rape and continued enablement of rape that happened here! It's really all about the way stuff happened and specifically not the humans that let it happen. Put another way: mistakes were made, specifically not by your hero. But isn't it time for the healing to begin? Let's start that healing process by pretending like Paterno didn't do anything wrong. That'll make everyone (except the rape victims) feel better.

To be fair to Knight, he pretty much had to address the scandal in his speech at some point. And saying "Joe screwed up" would have been met with a loud barrage of gasps, boos and fainting women. But this is just comically brilliant message-shaping from a guy whose job demands that he excel at it. I hope the people in that crowd appreciate the magic they witnessed in that moment.

Matt Sussman uses giant soapbox to whine

The only thing I know about Matt Sussman is that he is a contributing writer for the site Deadspin, which I read every day. Today he wrote this really crumb-bum article:

Was That A Great UFC or What? (No, Really, Tell Me)

When I first read this, I assumed that this article would be about a non-MMA enthusiast having watched UFC 100. But I was wrong. Dead(spin) wrong!

Not to break wind on the parade of the 18-35 male demographic, but it seemed from this comfy couch that everyone was watching UFC 100 because everyone else was.

Yeah, that, or maybe it was the Welterweight and Heavyweight title fights, which included possibly the best pound for pound fighter in the sport and the most physically dominant heavyweight ever respectively.

So, not being one to fall behind on today's hip happenin' trends, I turned it on. And let me tell ya, I don't know what the big deal was. All the view was obfuscated by the letters "SORRY, THIS CHANNEL IS NOT AVAILABLE." I was later informed that you have to pay money to see this event, because it is important.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. I did not see that coming!

I then inquired why such a huge event in a sport trying to constantly prove itself to the mainstream isn't available for free. The dog had no idea.

Just a wild guess, but maybe it has something to with money.

I really want to formulate some kind of thoughts on the sport — and I'm sure others out there are curious too — but, c'mon, I don't have that channel. Especially as a guy who has to keep a site like this warm on the weekends, it's beneficial to be at least competent in boxing and MMA and the Premier League.

Argh, if only Deadspin or the Gawker network had some sort of revenue stream. Then they could pay for you to watch both.

But I'm not going to spend another $30 a month to get certain premium soccer channels or spend ... really? Just 55 bucks for the fights in HD?

God forbid, you'd go to a bar and watch it for the price of drinks/some cover charge.

Were the Super Bowl to be aired on pay-per-view, the live blog of it would be much less descriptive. All the sports websites would still be talking about it, and you'd feel left out, too.

Yes, NFL : UFC :: Apples : Apples

Except for the fact that the NFL is the most popular league in America, with every regular and post season game being broadcast on network television (save for MNF on ESPN). Additionally, the Superbowl (which happens once a year) rakes $90 billion per 30 second ad spot.

Compare that to the UFC (whose best fighters fight 1-3x per year) which has a couple shows on Spike TV, and has pay-per-views an average of once per month. Those ppv's draw powerhouse sponsors like Mickey's Malt Liquor, and for UFC 100: The USA Today Sports Section, the Cadillac of sponsors. But I'll be darned if I can figure out why Dana White would want people paying $55 per ppv.

So I understand how MMA is ever-proving to everyone that it's legitimate entertainment and how far they've come, but ... um, would ya mind showing the rest of us cheapskates?

Yes, they would mind because they like making money.

If not, then I'll be damned if I ever have the desire to write about the sport anymore.

This was the MMA article that Deadspin, the most prevlant non-msm sports blog in America, ran the day after UFC 100. Sheesh.

Jemele Hill Somehow Writes Column Without Accusing Anyone of Being Racist or Being Racist Herself; It Still Blows

How the hell is she still getting published by ESPN? I thought her contract expired last fall and was not renewed by the suits at the World Wide Leader. Yet here she is, bumblefucking her way through an NBA column. The shocking thing about her is that when she appears on 1st and 10, she actually sounds mildly competent. But that's probably just because she's usually matched up with characters like Skip Bayless and that other dude with the square-shaped head. Anyways, like the title says, I'm completely blown away that this column contains neither ridiculous and baseless accusations of racism, nor obvious racism on the part of Jemele herself. What I'm not blown away by is the fact that this is undeniably atrocious and self-contradictory writing about a lame subject. Which subject? Well, I'll let Jemele set the scene for you herself.

I wish the current NBA looked more like this NBA.

And this NBA.

Hey, let's go all the way and make it look like this. That incident was totally awesome and good for the league, no?

I miss seeing players getting thrown under tables (Wes Unseld versus Bill Laimbeer). I miss seeing players putting other players in choke holds (Manute Bol versus Sedale Threatt). I miss left hooks (Xavier McDaniel versus Charles Oakley).

So what you're saying is that you miss fighting.

I love today's NBA, and I do appreciate today's players. The game has never been more athletic, with 6-foot-11 guys who can dribble as though they're 6-1 and LeBron James, who must have been a defensive end in a former life.

What? Worst compliment for a great player I've ever read. That Albert Pujols is really something- he must have been a guy who was really strong and good at sports in a former life.

Playoff ratings are up, and the Lakers and Celtics are strong.

Thank God! What would we do without them? I mean, can you imagine an NBA in which neither of those teams competes for a title? When's the last time that happened, like three seasons ago? Those were dark, dark days for the league.

Fucking kill me if the Celtics and Lakers meet in the finals again next year. I hope both those metaphorical bandwagons catch fire and collide with each other head-on, killing the millions of clueless assholes riding each.

It's a shame Dwight Howard received a one-game suspension for throwing an elbow during the Magic's first-round series with Philadelphia, when all Howard did was just create a little more air near Samuel Dalembert's ear. Predictably, the NBA acted as if Howard had hit Dalembert with a tire iron.

If this were the 1980s, NBA commissioner David Stern probably would have called Howard and chastised him for a weak elbow. Consider that in 1987, Robert Parish was suspended one game for triple-slapping Laimbeer in Game 5 of the Pistons-Celtics Eastern Conference finals. When Laimbeer and Larry Bird got into a fight in Game 4, they only received ejections.

Great point! So, that said, here's what you need to know about the Howard/Dalembert thing: if the refs actually see the elbow, Howard gets tossed from that game and then in all reasonable likelihood does not get suspended because he would have already missed time for it. But since the refs missed the call, Howard got suspended instead. He was going to miss a game (or most of a game) either way, just like Laimbeer and Bird did. He just ended up missing one down the road instead of the rest of the game in which he threw the elbow. So in other words: not much has changed.

There are a lot of people to blame for the new, wussy NBA, but mostly I blame Michael Jordan and Ron Artest.

If Jordan and Phil Jackson had not incessantly whined about the "Jordan Rules" -- which ushered in the superstar officiating system that put great defenses at a disadvantage -- maybe a player in the current era could execute a playoff foul without fear of a firing squad.

I don't know, ask Kenyon Martin or Rajon Rondo about that one.

Of course, the Knicks and Heat teams of the 1990s didn't help. The hysteria from Artest and Stephen Jackson's brawl with Pistons fans at The Palace of Auburn Hills only encouraged the NBA to catapult its product further into softness.

What they should have done was keep everything the same, deny that there were any problems, and watch attendance and interest dwindle away.

Now don't get me wrong- I think the reaction to that fight (as well as the Nuggets/Knicks "brawl" in 2006) is ridiculous when viewed in light of the fact that hockey and baseball players fight constantly. Hell, in both those sports, there are confrontations between players and fans (usually verbal, although occasionally physical) a couple times a season. Good grief, a player/fan confrontation which allegedly got physical went down at a baseball game less than 48 hours ago. The brawl at Auburn Hills was awful, but still received disproportionate scorn from the media and public. In fact, I don't know how Jemele missed this golden opportunity, but I think it's worth considering the possibility that the race of the players involved is what led to that scorn.

But all that aside, let's focus on the real issue here: Jemele is upset that the league's reaction to that brawl involved cracking down on fighting. When, if they didn't react, the league was probably going to take a sizable financial hit.

I'm not condoning fighting or lawlessness.

Yes. Yes you are. Earlier you said you missed players putting other players in choke holds and throwing left hooks. And if the Rambis clothesline play is not lawlessness, and what ensues afterwards is not fighting, then what the fuck is? Look at Howard's elbow on Dalembert. FUCKING LOOK AT IT. That's not "physical play," or "hand checking." That's essentially throwing a punch. That's lawless, and an invitation for a fight. Period. I'm all for the NBA loosening up on things that actually fall into the "physical play" category, like hard fouls on guys who are trying to dunk (While challenging for the ball. This means no clotheslines or head slaps, I'm looking at you, Rondo), or big guys beating each other up a little bit in the post while getting position. I'm not, however, all for guys being allowed to throw punches.

I just wish the NBA had the attitude and edginess it used to have. It gave us real rivalries and genuine hatred instead of weak battle raps.

I would gladly pay Shaq to say something awful about Jemele in a freestyle.

We saw Magic and Isiah's friendship disintegrate because the Pistons and Lakers continued to challenge each other for the NBA title. Today, the two best players in the NBA are having a bromance in a puppet commercial.

You... you... you got that that was fictional, right? That's not actually Kobe and LeBron. They don't actually live in the same apartment. So I know it's hard to fully comprehend, but just because a shoe company portrays them as doing so in order to sell more shoes doesn't actually mean they're friends. Got it? Ah, shit, nevermind. Just play with this piece of aluminum foil for a while.

Players in previous decades had to earn their reputations at the offensive and defensive ends, but today marginal players have inflated reputations because the NBA is where coddling happens.

See what she did there? With the whole twist on the NBA's slogan thing? Also, if you think mediocre players are overrated in today's game because they don't get fouled hard enough (or deliver enough hard fouls), you're a fucking numbskull.

On to the conclusion of the column, which is really more bizarre than dumb:

Other wishes I want @Kazaam to grant:
• An Anna Kournikova-Sergei Fedorov makeup. These two were far more intriguing and interesting when they were together than apart. Kournikova's hottest years -- no pun intended -- were from 1998 to 2004, both on the court and off. The bulk of that time she was with Fedorov, who was never the same player post-Kournikova. When they first hooked up, there was the drama that Fedorov might have pulled an R. Kelly. This time around, it would be a sweet reunion of star-crossed lovers.

Who. Gives. A. Shit. Where is this coming from? Why are we reading about the failed relationship of a washed-up has been and a washed-up never was, neither of whom (aside from a brief blip of success for Federov for the Capitals during their playoff run a couple months ago) have done anything relevant in years? So confusing. Is Jemele trying to reach out to her Russian readers? I guess that's a pretty big demographic, but this still makes zero sense. I also like how she notes that Federov was never the same on the ice after this breakup... which coincidentally happened during his mid-30s. Hmmm. I'm not a scienticianologist, but I have a funny feeling that there might be another reason Federov's athletic skills were declining right around that time period. Just a hunch.

• That players' girlfriends, at the professional or college level, should never be interviewed during live broadcasts. I don't care whether a player is dating a woman who looks like Megan Fox, is a nuclear physicist by day, a police officer at night and can kick a 48-yard field goal. She's a girlfriend, which means she likely has an expiration date.

But it's absolutely critical that a random medium-profile athlete couple gets back together. No expiration date on that kind of romance!

Mini WMTMQR: Didn't You Forget Something Important?

Gregg has some thoughts about the semi-popular primetime drama "Friday Night Lights":

The Panthers are back in the Texas state championship, via yet another last-second touchdown -- Dillon blocked a punt with 34 seconds remaining, scored to draw within 14-13, then went for two and won. The episode included five crying scenes and four drinking scenes: Don't they do anything in Dillon, Texas, but cry and drink? A subplot involved redistricting Dillon to build a new high school because of population growth, which was puzzling because previously we have been told Dillon is a dying town that's so small it has only two motels. There are two more episodes in the "Friday Night Lights" series. Let's see whether the finale involves a game at Reliant Stadium, site of this year's actual Texas 5A championship. Dillon's 2006 fictional championship game was played at Texas Stadium, though the actual 2006 5A title game was in the Alamodome.

That's all well and good, but Gregg has skipped over a really important issue. And that is: the producers of FNL are so worried about creating characters and a story that will actually engage viewers that they've forgotten to have Dillon High play the correct number of games to get to the championship game! Yes, I'm afraid it's true. You just can't trust a fictional TV show to accurately reflect reality in every single possible way. Dillon has won four playoff games so far, but that should only put them in the semifinals, not the finals! Here, check out the official Texas 5A championship bracket for 2008 and you'll see what I mean.

Pretty disappointing, isn't it?

Speaking of the Yankees, Would Someone Please Throw Hank Steinbrenner Out of a Hot Air Balloon Already

Everyone's already seen this; everyone already knows it's laughably dumb; I don't care. I haven't posted since Sunday night. Take what you can get, people.

Fredo says:

"The biggest problem is the divisional setup in major league baseball. I didn't like it in the 1970s, and I hate it now."

Way to throw in that little bit of (likely) revisionist history just to make sure we all know you've felt this way for 30 years, and are not just complaining about it now for the first time because your team is not going to the playoffs.

"Baseball went to a multidivision setup to create more races, rivalries and excitement.

Yes. And despite its occasional shortcomings, it has done exactly that, which is worth a lot more to the game and the fans than what you're about to bitch about.

But it isn't fair.

That poor New York Yankee organization just can't catch a break, can it? Why can't the world just be fair every once in a while? Is that so goddamn much to ask?

You see it this season, with plenty of people in the media pointing out that Joe Torre and the Dodgers are going to the playoffs while we're not.

I hadn't really looked of the relative accomplishments of those two teams through that lens before right now. But thanks for bringing it up! Hey Yankees- choke on a tall, warm pile of your own shit. You embarrassed your successful manager, made him an offer that was never meant to be accepted, and more or less told him not to let the door hit him in the ass on his way out. Now you'll be sitting at home in October while he gets to take a shot at the reasonably wide open NL. Fantastic.

"This is by no means a knock on Torre - let me make that clear-but look at the division they're in. If L.A. were in the AL East, it wouldn't be in the playoff discussion. The AL East is never weak."

1. If L.A. were in the AL East, who knows what their record would be. Odds are Hank is right about where they would be, but you can't just say "if team X changed leagues, they'd still have the exact same record." Just saying. I'm being nitpicky before I dive into the good stuff.
2. This quote isn't really a knock on Torre... but at the same time, it's a response to what the media has been saying about Torre's accomplishments versus the Yankees' accomplishments. So, yeah, it's a knock, you jealous bucket of butter.
3. The NL West has stunk to varying degrees for the past 4 years or so, but the AL East is far from perfect. The Central or West was stronger 2006, 2005, and 2002. I didn't hear any execs from any of those divisions' third place teams complaining about the sand in their cunts during those years.
4. Fair? Fair? You want to talk about fucking fairness? You run a team that can afford to sign whoever the fuck you want, whenever the fuck you want, for as much or more than any other team can possibly pay them. You have the most pronounced and staggering competitive advantage of any team in professional sports. You can never be outbid for a free agent. Ever. And if you make a mistake and sign a clunker? Who gives a fuck! Give him his money, let the fans eat him alive, and sign someone else. Nearly every single other fucking team in the fucking league is in a relatively unfair position compared to yours when it comes to the most important determinant to how much talent a team can acquire and keep. Get fucked, Hank. I hope they blow up the old Yankee Stadium while you're still working there in your office.

In case you missed that joke, the Yankees are moving out of their old stadium and into a new one next season. You might not have heard.

Steinbrenner also questioned the legitimacy of the Cardinals' 2006 title, noting that their 83 regular-season victories were two less than the Phillies' total, but because of the system, St. Louis reached the playoffs as NL Central champs while Philadelphia lost the wild card race to the Dodgers, who had 88 wins.

"People will say the Cardinals were the best team because they won the World Series," Steinbrenner wrote. "Well, no, they weren't. They just got hot at the right time."

Hey, DUMMY- if you're going to complain about this kind of thing, you might want to, you know, pick on a team that didn't "deserve" to go to the playoffs and then actually went out and tanked. For example, might I recommend the 2005 Padres? They won the NL West with an 82-80 record and somehow got bounced out of the NLDS by the Cardinals in just two games. Picking on that 2006 Cardinal team is retarded- any team that wins it all "got hot at the right time." You can't be awesome all year, stroll into the playoffs, and stroll home with that ugly-ass trophy with all the flags on it. The 2001 Mariners won 116 games. Maybe Hank should forfeit his team's AL pennant from that year (earned by beating those Mariners, of course) because clearly those Yankees (95 wins) weren't the best team in the league.

What a useless windbag.

P.S.- To the credit of Yankee fans, almost 90% of them who voted in the poll attached to that article (assuming most of the people who read it are, in fact, Yankee fans) already know that Hank is a zilcheroo. Or maybe a bunch of Red Sox fans came over and voted, who knows.
P.P.S. Before you write a comment that says "HEY BUT THINK ABOUT IT TEH MARLINZ WON TEH WORLD SERIES OVER TEH YANKZ AND TEH RAYZ R GOOD THIS YEAR SO THAT SHOWS MONEY DOESUNT MATTER," yes, I know money doesn't guarantee anything. But I don't think anyone would disagree with me if I said it's much easier to be the Yankees than it is to be any other team. Compared to 85% of the rest of the teams in the league, their mistakes are less costly and their opportunities to add assets are far more frequent.
P.P.S.- I attached the "Barbaro" label to this post because Hank Steinbrenner somehow makes me even more angry than Barbaro does.
P.P.P.S.- I hope Hank Steinbrenner spontaneously combusts. Immediately.

Idiocy, Thy Name Is Jemele Hill

Life's been dealing me some lemons lately. It's been rough. My parents' basement is developing a mold problem, my Super NES isn't reading cartridges right now, we're out of Pop Tarts, and worst of all, my Kate Beckinsale poster fell off the wall and somehow got ripped in the process. Sigh. That's just the way it goes sometimes, I guess. But whenever I hit a rough patch like this, there are two truths I can always lean on to make me feel better:

1. "No matter how bad life gets, there is always beer." - Norm MacDonald
2. No matter how bad life gets, Jemele Hill will always be the perfect balance of entertaining and ignorant.

There was one particular hand gesture that came to mind when I heard the NFL will be intensely scrutinizing players' hand signals for possible gang signs next season. And let's just say the response I thought of is the same gesture Michael Vick gave Atlanta Falcons fans.

Let's just say that since you recently decided to compare rooting for the Celtics to being a Nazi sympathizer, you might as well just directly say that the NFL can go fuck itself. Go ahead, let it out.

I'm usually not opposed to a league being proactive, but in this case not only has the NFL gone too far, it has successfully insinuated to the public that the league is full of Doughboys and O-Dogs.

The second clause and the third clause there are redundant. That's like saying "not only are you ugly, you're also very unappealing to look at." Unless, of course, Jemele thinks there's another aspect of the policy that takes things too far, which is doubtful. Also- easy on the hyperbole, champ. The league is not insinuating that it's "full of" gangsters; it's insinuating that it's worried about the possible presence of some level of gang affiliation.

Sports leagues have a right to protect their image. Doing so often rubs players the wrong way, but sometimes it's what is best for the league and its players. NBA players rebuffed the league dress code, but ultimately it was for their own good. An undying allegiance to Phat Farm and Jesus pieces was costing the league and the players money at the box office. When corporate sponsors are uncomfortable and reluctant to spend, the players don't make as much as they possibly can. Besides, with any job, there is nothing wrong with instituting a standard of decorum.

Remember this- it will be very, very important.

But the NFL's latest move is not about decorum or even petrified sponsors.

The "Paul Pierce incident" (the impetus for this idea) is less than 2 months old, and no NFL games have been played since it happened. How do we know how sponsors would respond? How do we know how much negative media attention might develop over the first incident that resembles Pierce's that happens this fall? We don't. Thus, the league is being proactive. Shouldn't be too hard to figure out.

It's just a league overreaction, and a reminder to the players that they -- and not the coaches and owners -- are under the rule of a stern commissioner.

I think pretty much everyone involved in the league is aware of Goddell's personality and iron-fisted rule at this point. I don't think any coach or owner is happily parked on their ass, saying to themselves "Ah, good ol' Rog. I know he's on my side. I should be able to do pretty much whatever I want."

An NFL official told the Los Angeles Times this week that the league was focusing its attention on players' hand gestures because of an overblown incident involving Paul Pierce during the NBA playoffs. After a scrum with Atlanta's Al Horford in the first round of the playoffs, Pierce flashed what the NBA deemed "menacing gestures" toward the Hawks' bench and was fined $25,000. Pierce vehemently denied making a gang sign.

That makes it overblown, I guess. Now, no one's definitively saying that Pierce runs with a gang and would have shot and killed the Hawks if he could have. But what he did was certainly strange, needless, and overaggressive. The fine might have been excessive, but I'm not sure if I'd call the incident "overblown." It wasn't that huge of a story to begin with, and gesturing at an opponents' bench in the way Pierce did probably isn't within the bounds of good behavior.

(Side note- this is why I hate Boston sports- check out the video of the incident. Then check out this video from a local Boston sports station, which tries to get Pierce off the hook by documenting non-threatening hand signals he uses during pregame celebrations that are absolutely nothing like the ones from the incident. Now, maybe any city's local sports station would make a claim like this if one of their stars did something sketchy. But I doubt it. Just my opinion. Go fuck yourself, Boston fans besides those who read this blog.)

According to the Times, if a game officials sees a "suspicious hand gesture," he must alert the league, which will be hiring gang experts to review game tapes.

Right. Exactly. It's not like they're throwing down personal foul penalties or taking points off the board during the actual game. They're just looking into suspicious incidents to make sure there isn't anything overly negative going on.

"We were always suspicious that [gang-related hand signals] might be happening," Mike Pereira, the NFL's vice president of officiating, told the L.A. Times. "But the Paul Pierce thing is what brought it to light. When he was fined … that's when we said we need to take a look at it and see if we need to be aware of it."

What a normal, expected reaction from a business as powerful and profitable as the NFL. (No sarcasm)

Being more aware is generally a good thing, and I'm certainly not suggesting the NFL look the other way on something as serious as gang violence.

Except that by bitching about a new policy that will simply involve the league reviewing any suspicious signals, you're basically implying that they should be looking the other way. We have a label for this.

But by responding to a situation in another pro league, the NFL successfully planted a stereotype about its own -- namely, that the league is filled with Bloods and Crips.

Damn you, NFL, for being proactive! You know, I don't really think any given sport should start a steroid testing program until its athletes are breaking records at a furious pace. By instituting a program before any of its own athletes are caught, that sport is insinuating that steroids are a widespread problem. We all know that's not the case.

The next time a player throws up an ode to his fraternity in the end zone, Johnny Consumer is going to be thinking: "Drive-by."

Based on the Pierce incident, it's somewhat probable that that reaction would have happened whether or not the league instituted this policy.

The last thing the NFL should want to do is add to the perception that players are out of control.

Yes, it would be much better for them to bury their collective heads in the sand and insist that their sport couldn't possibly have any problems.

We can get that idea without the league's help, even though NFL rule breakers are the exception, not the rule.

This is one of the most batshit crazy things I have ever read. Let me simplify Jemele's stream of logic for you: Paul Pierce did something sketchy and got fined for it ==> Paul Pierce doesn't play in the NFL ==> Therefore, it's dumb for the NFL to institute a policy that responds to Pierce's incident ==> People already think the league is full of out of control players anyways

Don't read that too many times. You might get dizzy. I'm not 100% happy with the way it turned out, but I think that's Jemele's fault rather than my own.

Maybe the NFL decided now was a good time to reiterate its tough-on-crime stance because of some of the criminal shenanigans that have taken place the past week. Jaguars wide receiver Matt Jones was charged with felony drug possession, former Viking Darrion Scott received a three-game league suspension for putting a plastic bag over the head of his 2-year-old son, and Giants running back Ahmad Bradshaw was released from jail after serving time for a probation violation.

You are not helping your case. (Again.)

Time to show everyone who's the boss.

Yeah, actually, maybe it was.

What's lost is that there is absolutely no evidence to suggest gang affiliation was even an issue for the NFL.

Jemele is still struggling with the concept of proactivity (sic?). Hey, why worry about a potentially dangerous problem until it's a really legitimate problem?

When asked on Friday if the NFL had a gang problem, league spokesperson Greg Aiello quickly issued a strong denial.

What the fuck else is an official spokesperson going to say?

So why is the NFL creating smoke, when it's adamant there's not an actual fire?

You're absolutely clueless.

"What they've done is publicize the solution without giving us any information on the problem," said David Cornwell, an Atlanta-based sports attorney who once served as the NFL's assistant general counsel.

That's because they probably don't know much about the problem, but want the public to know that they're being proactive. Do you see a trend developing here?

All this does is ease a path to stereotyping. Even if a game official witnessed a "suspicious hand gesture," how exactly could the NFL prove intent?

They don't need to. They need to investigate and see if there really is a problem or not. If it seemed like there was a problem, they would probably discipline (or at least have a discussion) with the player in question. Shouldn't be too hard to fix.

In my old Detroit neighborhood, kids and adults use hand signals all the time, but they represent neighborhood pride, not gang activity.

That's fine, but maybe they represented different things to different people. Some of them probably were/are open for interpretation. And remember how Jemele approved of the NBA's dress code, because millions of dollars from sponsors and fans was at stake? Hmmmmm. If you really stretch your brain, you should be able to envision a scenario in which the same issues come into play for the NFL.

These days, players are so creative they invent their own signals. Doug Christie, possibly the most whipped man in the history of professional sports, used to send hand gestures to his wife, Jackie, after made shots and free throws. Jason Kidd did the same on foul shots as an ode to his ex-wife, Joumana. Steve McNair put up his fraternity sign on touchdowns.

All of these are perfectly acceptable. If these incidents happened in the NFL after the institution of this policy, the league would probably review the tapes, consult with the players, decide whether or not the signal was harmful to the league's imagine, and then either let them slide or ask the player to please stop. Not that difficult.

And sometimes, players merely copy what they see from hip-hop videos, unaware of what those hand signals mean. It's naive, but imitation is the root of pop culture.

Were the players to accidentally use gang signs they saw in music videos, the league's paying customers and sponsors would probably not care where or how said signs were learned.

The NFL's heart is in the right place, but there are times when even the most well-intentioned rule can be harmful. Case in point: David Dicks, the police chief in Flint, Mich., has come under fire for ordering officers to arrest people who wear their pants too low and expose what we'd rather not see. Personally I detest seeing young men "sag," because they're copying prisoners. But even I can't argue that Dicks' directive is unconstitutional and provides a convenient way for cops to racially profile.

I for one don't know what Dicks' (haha.... "dicks") motives were. But I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt here and suppose that this policy is actually about indecency rather than race. Just like this NFL policy is about protecting the image of the league, rather than race. Oh wait, this is a Jemele Hill column. I almost forgot. Everything is about race.

"I do understand what they're trying to do [in the NFL], but I don't think it's a move in the right direction," said Carl Taylor, a senior fellow at Michigan State University who has studied gangs, violence and youth culture for years and is the principal investigator for the Michigan Gang Research Project.

Why is that, Carl? Please explain your position.

"I also understand why they don't want guys doing [gang signs].

Oh, OK. You're not going to clarify. You're just going to contradict yourself.

It's also interesting because you open that Pandora's box. A lot of people don't know the Ku Klux Klan has signs too. Are you going to police all signs?

You definitely should. All signs linked to violent, hateful organizations, anyways.

"The mere fact that they've done this, we're looking at black and Latino athletes. It does have the undercurrent of racial stereotyping,

1. People of all races are members of gangs. There may be a disproportionate number of non-whites in gangs, but it's not like some kind of uniquely black/Latino thing.
2. If that is the case, it's not the NFL's fault. Not wanting to appear to be racially stereotyping is not a good excuse to overlook a issue like this. (Sorry about the double negative.)

but also youth culture stereotyping."

Hiding gang activity behind the pseudo-intellectually protective umbrella of "youth culture" is disgusting.

The NFL wants to make money and have a clean league.

And this is not a good way to achieve that goal, because....

But it has to be careful. In its thirst to appear tough, fans can be left with the wrong impression.

Remember when you said this?

The last thing the NFL should want to do is add to the perception that players are out of control. We can get that idea without the league's help...

You're fucking stupid.

I Honestly, Legitimately Don't Know How I Feel About This Article

But it's definitely thought-provoking.

Well, I do know one thing I feel- this author is a little bit slow if he didn't know the Stanley Cup Finals were happening these past two weeks or that Justine Henin retired. Obviously those events didn't get much coverage, but they still got some coverage.

Anyways... other than that, I'm not sure what to think about it.

It Happened Again (And Probably Not For The Last Time, Either)

By popular demand- I know you're excited about this- It's just what your life needed- more Jemele Hilllllllllllllllllllllllllll! (smack)

Remember when she wrote this? And it just made her look really bad because of the comparatively uncritical way she's written about Barry Bonds for the last year or so?

Yup. Again. Roger "the shitbag" Clemens this time. But Jemele... Barry Bonds... repeatedly lying in public for years... you're ripping other players for it (or a topic related to it, like a bad apology) left and right... yet you've never mentioned it in a single one of your Bonds pieces...

And again I am caught between a stupid journalist and a detestable ballplayer, both of whom I hate. Which will I side with? Oh, that's right, I don't have to side with either of them. I was worried for a minute there.

Anyways, this article is so bad and so similar to the Pettitte piece, I'm just going to copy and paste the highlights and then present my vague half-theory about why this keeps happening at the end of the post.

Anyone who has ever cheated in a relationship knows the best way to hide cheating is out in the open. That seems to be the defense Clemens is running.

Just like Barry.

So we are left with an act that is officially long past tiresome. See Fraud-ger's interview and ensuing news conference for what it was: compelling, but not very informative.

Hmmm, sounds like Barry's original grand jury testimony from back in 2003.

You'd think if a guy was trying to ruin your livelihood, Fraud-ger would have dropped a couple choice four- and 10-letter cuss words on him, or simply never have taken the call.

1. The purpose of the call was to tape it for legal purposes, you fucking idiot. Whether that plan is now actually working out or not is irrelevant. The point is, his intent was to use the tape to try to establish his innocence. He's not going to not take the call... Jesus. I feel like I'm trying to explain "The Usual Suspects" to an 8 year old.

2. There are no 10-letter cuss words, unless shitterass or fuckinging count.

Telling the truth never has been an option for Fraud-ger,

Yup. Just like Barry.

Many Americans want to believe Fraud-ger didn't do it. Unfortunately, he isn't giving them much to work with, alternately presenting doubt and hope.

Sounds familiar.

For the most part, Clemens has defended himself in such a baffling manner, it's difficult not to view this as an elaborate con.

Interesting. I choose to view Barry's method of defense as a lighthearted romantic comedy starring him and Bud Selig as high school seniors at a well-to-do suburban school who fight all the time, but only because they secretly have a crush on each other. (They go to the prom together at the end!) But yeah, I guess "elaborate con" as a genre works too.

Perhaps the most comical part of the interview with Wallace was when Clemens tried to argue that taking steroids and HGH would never have been beneficial to his career. So, Fraud-ger, you mean Jose Canseco, Rafael Palmeiro, Barry Bonds and the litany of other athletes who have been connected to performance-enhancing drugs are allegedly endangering their reputations for a product that doesn't pay off? HGH, which many doctors claim is akin to a fountain of youth, is reportedly being bought on the black market by at least dozens of athletes because it doesn't do anything?

Why yes, actually. I've heard many professional scienticianists make that exact claim several times in the past few months. Awful, crazy, delusional, and stupid as Clemens may appear, he is probably right about this. Although he didn't seem to be aware of this fact when he had McNamee shooting him up in the belly button back in the day. But whatever. I just wanted to make Jemele sound even stupider.

Either Clemens thinks we're all stupid, or he's forgotten the information we've learned about steroids and HGH in the wake of so many athletes using those drugs.

Just like Barry wants us all to believe his unparalleled success and massive bulkup after age 35 are the result of working out really hard.

"I don't know if I can defend myself," Clemens said. "I think people -- a lot of people have already made their decisions. And that's our country, isn't it? Guilty before innocence -- that's the way our country works now."

By the way, this is the same country that has made Clemens millions.

Where did that come from? You fill in the blank: Our capitalist economy which pays huge sums of money to elite athletes is related to our justice system because ______________. Go nuts! I'm not saying you can't make some kind of vague connection ("Duh! They both happen in America!"), but can you make one in a way that justifies Jemele's comments?

At this point, all we can expect from Fraud-ger are well-constructed lies disguised as genuine outrage.

All we can expect from Barry are simply-constructed lies disguised as bored outrage. And a gigantic head. And a funny high pitched voice, because his nuts are probably the size of peanut M&Ms. But don't expect Jemele to write an outraged piece about him and his suspicious responses to allegations of steroid use. Although she acknowledges that he is/was definitely a user, his lying/excuse making is somehow different than other players'. I hold every bad journalist to the same standards. Why can't she do the same with pill-popping ballplayers? I have a theory... well, it's not a theory, just the start of a theory. Let me be as indirect as possible about it.

There's one obvious difference between Bonds and Pettitte/Clemens. I'm not referring to the fact that one is a hitter and the other two are pitchers. I'm not referring to the fact that one is known as a Giant and the other two are known as Yankees. I'm referring to something else that's pretty easy to identify... you figure it out. Now, I'm not saying it's definitely the case. I'm not saying "I know for a fact that Jemele Hill is holding these players to different standards because of ______." I'm just saying... I'm curious. It seems a little fishy. I'm as sensitive about that issue as the next guy, but I still think it's fair to discuss in this case. I sure hope it's not the reason for Jemele's disparate stances, but you never know. It's definitely a vague possibility. You think she'll reply to an email I send her about it? We'll see. I'm sending one as soon as I proofread this.

More Double Standards, Please

Whether they're created by the media or simply by the ignorant masses, sports are filled with them. Fighting in famous Pistons/Pacers brawl of 2004 shows that the NBA is filled with dangerous thugs. But fighting in baseball and hockey, which has at times also spilled into the stands, is just part of the game. Baseball is boring and unwatchable unless teams from New York, Boston, Chicago, or Los Angeles are involved. (I don't need to link this one; go look up the ratings for the 2007 NLCS.) But football is completely engaging and enjoys massive ratings even when teams from Pittsburgh, Seattle, San Diego, and Indianapolis consistently play deep into the playoffs. Vince Young (career: 21 TDs, 30 INTs, 0 playoff appearances so far) "just goes out and wins football games." Jeff Garcia (career: 149 TDs, 77 INTs) can't seem to keep a job; he's played for a different team each of the past 5 seasons. And according to a very reputable source who plays wide receiver for the Cowboys, he's probably gay.

But perhaps the most relevant and annoying double standard in all of sports today involves those fancy little pills, injections, and arthritic balms we're all so familiar with. We all know what the reaction to the Mitchell report has been so far; but chances are it'll intensify next April when baseball starts up again. Expect a chorus of boos for the named offenders and a hefty amount of bad journalism (even moreso than what we've got right now) to show up. But where was the outrage when this happened? Or this? I'm not saying no one cares about steroids in football. I'm not saying that offenders get a free pass. But it's incredibly disproportionate compared to the vitriol journalists and bloggers have spilled/will spill about baseball's users. It's very frustrating. And ESPN's Jayson Stark lays out a fantastic analysis of the situation here. It's a great read. I can't believe it took me two paragraphs to get to that point.

Baseball Players Never Grew Up

I recently stumbled upon this blog post by a guy named Jeff Horrigan. In it, he mentions that former Reds catcher Joe Oliver (a classic name from dan-bob's youth and the catcher of the last world champion Reds team) is feeling disgruntled. Here's what Joe said:

What would happen if someone like me decide to have an attorney bring a lawsuit against MLB because the owners and GM’s knew about players juicing and did nothing about it. That would have created an unlevel playing field for players like me to compete. I had to vie for a job every year and now I know it had something to do with certain players having a competitive edge on me.

I don't think the lawsuit would hold a lot of water. But what confuses me is that Joe alleges that the owners and GMs knew about it, but that he didn't. This brings me to the larger point: sure, you got screwed, Joe... but as much as the owners and GMs tolerated it, so did the culture of the players tolerate it. Baseball players are some of the most immature athletes; a lot of them never even started college. Their player culture is famously closed (see the story of Jim Bouton's Ball Four). One wonders how many scores of clean players like Joe were aware of the level of abuse, but never said a word. Got to toe the line. Don't break the code.

“I spent all that time in the early hours running and lifting weights, these guys would shoot up and be done and get stronger, faster, and the owners knew who they were and the GM’s knew who they were. Every time I argued for a contract, I was competing with juiced catchers in the same boat looking for a job. They got the higher paying jobs and I got screwed.

Yep. You got screwed, Joe. You did get screwed, but just as much by your own players' culture as the management's willful ignorance. At least now you're not on the list, Joe. The players won't suffer repercussions due to the strength of the players' union [see how successful the game is? gotta feed the beast -ahem, the players]. It's hard for anyone to check the arrogance and collective power of a group of young men who, while making millions for themselves, also generate millions for the owners and for their cities.

The losers, as usual, are the fans and the Joe Olivers of the world. With apologies to Green Day and the Leo Durocher, "Nice Guys Who Didn't Take Steroids Finish Last in Contract Negotiations".

Bill Simmons Somehow Delivers A Very Inoffensive Chat Session; Several Shit-For-Brains Readers With Dumb Questions End Up Stealing The Show

The headline says it all. Actual questions from The Sports Guy's extravaganza of a chat on Wednesday, as answered by me, because Simmons is too nice to tell these people they need to turn off their computers and go back to laughing at Garfield comics and eating paste.

Mike (Philly, PA) : Bill, is McNabb done in Philly after Feeley's game on Sunday and Garcia's play last year?

Larry B: No, asshole. McNabb is potentially done because he's frequently injured, not playing very well this year, and both Philly's fans and management are getting tired of his bullshit. The performance of his replacements has nothing to do with it. Either or both could have bombed while filling in for him and it wouldn't have made him any less potentially done. It's not like Philly fans are saying "McNabb is great, but Feeley almost won last Sunday! Give him a 5 year deal!" They're saying "Screw McNAbb, we need someone new. Anyone."

Chris (Jersey City, NJ): Fair on balanced? What? While it may turn out that Sean Taylor was killed IN HIS HOME because of something that he had previously done wrong, it is a lot bit unfair that every story is referencing his past mistakes. If a regular non-famous person was killed during a break-in (the most obvious scenario) would the stories talk about that time in college when I got into a bar-fight or when I was lied to my boss about being sick so I could go away for a long weekend? No and no. Yet every single news outlet wants to link his being fined for the occassional late hit and his murder. That is not balanced at all.

Larry B: Due to the nature of my employment, I'm able to consume a large amount of sports media from a variety of sources on a daily basis. I can promise you that not one of them is trying to link his late hits while playing a sport and his tragic murder. Somehow you have arrived at this conclusion. When did you manage to do so? Right after you decided that the feds went after Mike Vick because he once flipped off his home crowd and got caught with some weed at an airport?

sammy (Florida): whatever happened to the steroid investigations that were going to happen after the world series and the players that were supposed to be 'outted'?

Larry B: Why are you asking me this? Do you understand how the internet works? This is a live ESPN chat during which about .1% of all questions submitted will actually be answered. There are about 1,000 better ways to figure this out right at your goddamn fingertips. Anything else you need to know? Are you wondering what the temperature is outside? Maybe you're looking for some deals on air travel or hotels? And on another level, anyone who cares about baseball knows the deadline for the Mitchell report is sometime before the end of the year. Although this aspect of your stupidity is much less glaring than the fact that you're asking me about "whatever happened?" to the Mitchell report.

Forest: (Minneapolis): Randomly I am forced to stay at work until 6 tonight which turns out to be the best punishment ever. I started watching the Wire on demand this fall and it has consumed me. It may be responsible for me failing out of school. Everything you have said about it is accurate. You can't hype the show up too much. Who's your favorite character? Its gotta be Lester or Omar, right?

Larry B: The Wire is a sweet show, so forget the question itself. Instead, let's go back to your preface: you've been forced to stay at work all the way until 6 tonight? Unless you're a teacher or a bank teller, you are officially a bitch for acting like that's significant. America does not feel your pain for having to work a whole half hour later than most people do.

John (Toronto, Canada): Whats up with no one realizing that the Patriots worst threat is a healthy Indy team.....I dont get how no one sees that this Indy team is the best they've had in recent years, but still no talk of a Superbowl....what do you think?

Larry B: Maybe you missed it, John. Less than a month ago, in one of the most hyped regular season NFL games in years, New England defeated Indy in Indy. Then, Dwight Freeney got sidelined for the season. Remember those events? Evidently not. Now, this doesn't mean the Colts aren't still a huge threat to the Patriots. But no one's going to be talking about seeing them in the Super Bowl anytime soon, because they lost to New England at home and then lost one of their best defensive players. That's how comparisons between two competing teams work.

Simon (Pueblo, CO): Kobe to Denver for Carmelo, mix in some other guys for cap reasons, tell me why this is bad for either team.

Larry B: Well, Simmons gave the obvious answer by making a joke about Kobe and his misadventures with rape in Colorado. Here's an even more obvious answer: the Nuggets have Allen Iverson. He and Kobe basically play the same position, and both love dribbling the ball around for the first twenty seconds of the shot clock. They would not play well together. At all.

Jesse (Chicago): Bill, I am disappointed that none of my questions have been answered yet. I know you are busy, but I actually did donate to Jimmy V Foundation. I figured a response wasn't too much to ask... I'm out

Larry B: Jesse, do you need me to call the WHAAAAAAMbulance for you? Do you have any idea how many people are sending Bill questions during this chat? He's probably getting like 10 every second. Suck it up and deal with it. Thanks for donating to a worthy cause. (Promotion of the foundation was the purpose of this chat, part of the reason I'm taking it easy on Simmons.) Here's your cookie. Go play in traffic.

Vev (Atlanta, GA): Do you have something against us women sports lovers since you haven't given us much print on answering our questions?

Larry B: I'm all for gender equality, Vev, but exactly how the hell do you know how many women are submitting questions? What if you're the only one, up against like 100,000 men? You're nearly as clueless as Jesse in Chicago.

Ricky, Sherman Oaks: I think it was you who noted that Kobe's teammates are significantly better than what MJ was working with towards the end of his run with the Bulls. What is the single greatest reason that Kobe simply cannot do what MJ did? Same drive, same passion, same vicious thirst to win, and both great offensive and defensive players. What is it?!?

Larry B: This is basically what Simmons said, but I was already thinking it before I read his response so I get to count it here as my own. I'll keep it simple for you, Ricky, because you seem like a simple guy. Kobe. Isn't. Nearly. As. Good. As. Jordan. Was. The. End.

Craig (Baltimore, MD): Will you ever re-release your Boston Sports Guy columns? Like many of your readers I've only seen your ESPN work. I would love to read your early stuff even if it means slitting my wrists from reading more love notes about the Celtics, Red Sox and Patriots. Plus can you hint at all on the new book???

Larry B: Always coming back for more even when they know it's not in their best interest. Tragically, these are Bill Simmons's readers.

Knee-Jerk NBA Reactions, Vol. 1

According to foxsports.com's Charley Rosen, it's pretty much over for Cleveland after tonight's 92-74 loss to Dallas. Who cares that it was the first game of the season? It's time to tell it like it is- the Cavs are finished.

From the get-go, Cleveland's interior defense was putrid — especially the total lack of communication between Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Drew Gooden. As a result, the baseline rotations were either late or non-existent, with Z showing to help on ball penetration and not being able to recover back to his man, and with Gooden nowhere in sight.

Last year's Cavs team, which reached the NBA Finals, never had a bad half of interior defense. Ever.

Not that the rest of the Cavs fared much better — especially in their inability to prevent the Mavericks' ball-handlers from penetrating deep into the lane. Nor was the Cavs perimeter defense any more efficient. For the game, Dallas knocked down half of their eighteen 3-pointers, with most of them launched under little (or no) pressure.

Also the first time this has happened to Cleveland since the 2005-06 season. It's looking bleak.

For sure, the Cavs did tighten up their defense in the second half,

Whoa whoa whoa! Don't backtrack, Charley! It's over and we all know it. Get those tickets and jerseys on EBay, Cavs fans. Get off the bandwagon while there's still time.

LeBron James was downright awful — 2-11, 4 assists, 5 turnovers, and only 10 points.

Trade him.

As the game progressed, the Cavs' "revised offense" was identical to last season's schemes.

How dare they play like that again! It's not like it got them anywhere. I'm surprised they didn't demolish their arena and build a new one in the offseason in an attempt to turn their fortunes around. Their zero season conference title drought is borderline embarrassing.

Daniel Gibson looked lost out there — 3-6, four assists, eight points.

Choke job.

He had difficulty staying in front of Devin Harris,

Cut him.

but doesn't everybody?

No. Only Daniel Gibson, only tonight.

Larry Hughes shot the ball like he was trying to join the bricklayers union — 2-13, seven points.

Get it? Bricklayers? As in, basketball players who frequently miss shots? It's a slang term- how cutting edge. This is the kind of stuff the youth today wants to read.

Devin Brown showed impressive quickness — 2-5, five points. But he did little else.

Donyell Marshall — 2-5, five points — was repeatedly chumped when Nowitzki took him into the pivot.

Damon Jones — 3-5, eight points — hit a pair of meaningless treys, and was toasted by everybody he tried to guard.

No sarcasm, these aren't very good. Still... it was one fucking game.

Okay, James is allowed to have bad games. Trouble is that when he's not brilliant, the Cavs are in deep trouble.

When (name of their biggest star) isn't brilliant, three quarters of the teams in the league are in deep trouble.

And except for frequently running LBJ into the low-post, the Cavs' offense looks just as stagnant as it did too often last season.

The situation is hopeless. It's almost like a horrible car crash; I want to turn away, but I can't, because it's too horrific. Cavs owners, have you considered moving the team to Canada?

Anyway, one ball game does not a season make.

That's a good poi- wait, WHAT? Are you serious? Losing to one of the top 3 teams in the league on opening night doesn't determine your entire season? Well, I'll tell you this- back in good ol' days of Wilt and Kareem, back when players called their own fouls and you were allowed to dive at your opponents' knees when they were cutting through the lane, things were totally different. If this Cavs team had put up this kind of performance in 1968, LeBron would have kneed Gibson in the balls after the game.

But unless something dramatic and unforeseen happens between now and next spring, the Cavs most relevant motto just might be: "Wait till last year."

I have a feeling something very undramatic and foreseen (at least by me) will happen to the Cavs. Stick with me now: They will eventually resign holdouts Anderson Varejao and/or Sasha Pavlovic, be basically the same team they were last year, play some games against teams that aren't nearly unstoppable in the regular season, and win 50ish games again. See how that works? It's called small sample sizes don't usually reflect season long performance. Use your brain, Rosen.

I realize this is a relatively low quality post, filled mostly with poorly written and unfunny sarcasm. I just couldn't help it. Let me explain it to you this way: when two 0-1 NFL teams are squaring off in week 2, and analysts make ridiculous statements like "This is pretty much a must-win for both teams... that sounds reactionary, but it's true" it absolutely infuriates me. No. No it is not a must-win. For either team. Same general idea applies here, only moreso, because there are 5 times as many NBA games as NFL games in a season. You can start 0-5 and still high step to the playoffs when you have Cleveland's talent (and more importantly, play in the Eastern Conference). Let's not go shitting ourselves just yet, even though the Cavs got blown out by the Mavericks on opening night. Please.

The Real Question

So the Red Sox finished off their comeback tonight, and defeated the Indians in a semi-thrilling game 7 of the ALCS. They'll open play in the Fall Classic against the Rockies this Wednesday. Game 1 starters will be Josh Beckett and Jeff Francis.

But let's cut to the real issue here: how does this affect the Yankees and their search to replace Joe Torre? Furthermore- how does it affect Torre and his availability for giving interviews for puff pieces this coming week?

I expect a 14 minute Sportscenter segment answering these and other crucial Torre/Yankees related questions tomorrow.

One Yankee Fan Purports to Speak For Millions of Other Yankee Fans

How often can you say this: whew, what a Monday!

First, we got Big Leadeded. Always a thrill to check that morning roundup and see our blog's humble name among those cool enough to make the cut. And if anyone reading this is new, as in, you hadn't seen us before yesterday and were somehow motivated to return this morning, we appreciate it. Poke around a little bit. If you don't like what you see, go to one of our links. I guarantee you might enjoy us or someone we plug.

Second, we got into a couple reasonably bitter comment fights. For the second time in two weeks we squared off against some angsty Padres fans, in addition to exchanging words with a couple of Simmons supporters in the post that was linked on The Big Lead. What can I say; I'm not exactly proud of how often we get into these nerdy wars of words... but they're still fun anyways. Hey, what's the point of living in your parents' basement if you can't anonymously argue with other people living in their parents' basements?

Third, longtime FireJay reader, interviewee, and whipping boy Jeff Pearlman had this to say about the Yankees, their season, and how their fans (supposedly) perceive the way things went down in 2007:

When did a baseball season in New York become solely about the finish line, and not about the journey? How can a team that clawed its way out of a 14½-game hole be deemed a failure for falling to a team -- the Cleveland Indians -- that features two of the league's top five starting pitchers? Do the memories of Alex Rodriguez's 54 home runs and Chien-Ming Wang's 19 wins and Derek Jeter's steely determination and Joba Chamberlain's meteoric rise fade to ashes without a diamond-studded ring?

Is this who we are?

Is this what we've become?

Yes, I know plenty of ink has been spilled on this topic. But Jeff's angle interested me because of an email I received from FireJay tipster/reader Tom E. In Tom's words:

Of course, the “voice of the fans” is a ploy that Pearlman did not invent. Many columnists use it to express disapproval without admitting that they are the ones who are doing the disapproving. I suppose that claiming that the fans are upset allows them to avoid directly confronting the coaches and players they are skewering.

In my house, where three die-hard Yankee fans reside, we certainly were disappointed by the Cleveland series, but we also took pleasure in what we thought was an exciting season with a great comeback and an influx of exciting young players. And watching closely on TV, I didn’t get the sense that the fans at the game were anything but supportive. The gross generalizations that claim to have insight into how millions of people feel about a team and its season are weak, at best.

Tom: thanks for the insight. I certainly and obviously appreciate it. Now let me basically restate what you said in my own less articulate terms.

Whoa whoa whoa. Listen. I'm no Yankee expert, but this is mildly suspicious to me. Maybe that's how Steinbrenner feels about your boys. Maybe he feels that anything less than a championship is automatically a failure, regardless of circumstances (like being fifty games out in May or whatever it was). But here's the question- do many/most/all Yankee fans feel that same way? You never say for certain that that's the case. Meanwhile, the impression I get from interacting with a large number of Yankee fans on the web (besides just Tom) is that most of them feel the season was definitely a success. At the very least it wasn't a failure. The number that want to see Choke-Rod resigned, as well as the number that want to see Joe Torre brought back, speak volumes to that end. So who's setting the standards... millions and millions of devoted fans, many of whom are mature adults with well developed decision making capabilities? Or a crusty old bastard of an owner who's never been famous for is rationality? I'm just saying is all.

Anyways hopefully our week ends up being as exciting as I promised. Thanks for checking in and be sure to tune in frequently lest you miss out on a sissy-ass comment fight.