Goodbye Ricky, we hardly knew ye

ESPN is reporting that Ricky Rubio will be playing in Spain for at least two more years, costing the Timberwolves their point guard of the future and David Kahn thousands of dollars on international flights to Spain.

It's not like none of us saw this coming. Rubio's face on Draft Night said it all. "Where is Minnesota? They did not teach me about this state in school. At least I get to play with Garnett." (Has something whispered to him) "Whaaaaaa?"

But you've got to hand it to David Kahn. In only two months on the job he's already surpassed Kevin McHale in overall ineptitude! He managed to turn Randy Foye, Mike Miller, and the 5th and 6th picks in the draft into Jonny Flynn!

And the most crushing blow of all to Minnesota fans: With only a half-second of playing time, Rubio will have spent more time on the court for Gillette than he will for the Timberwolves in the next two years.

Five columns I won't be writing in September

We can rebuild him, we have the technology
"Yao Ming had broken down; his bones cracking under the weight of his 7-foot-6, 300 pound body and from the lofty expectations placed on him by his country and the city of Houston. His body finally couldn't take it anymore, and as the injuries piled up, there was talk that he might never step foot on an NBA court again.

That's when Rockets' GM Daryl Morey stepped in and said "bring in the scientists."

Driven by his belief that the Rockets' championship window was still open, Morey assembled a team of the world's top scientists, engineers, and robotics specialists and gave them one task: Get Yao back on the court, no matter the cost. The fate of a franchise and its relationship with a foreign power depended on it.

So the team worked night and day, exhausting every resource they had. They combined elements from other machines and human beings, creating a hodgepodge of features in their Ultimate Player: Shaq's girth, the robotic arms of Jax from Mortal Kombat, Tracy McGrady's lazy eye.

The result was Mecha-Yao. And NBA teams are quickly taking notice."

Beer Pong, now with a full-ride scholarship
"With colleges beginning their academic year, the NCAA was looking for a sport they could put their trust into. After all, in the past year two Division-I coaches were involved in major controversies, with John Calipari lying about a player's eligibility and Rick Pitino violating restaurant health codes. And one of the nation's most recognizable football programs - Michigan - was facing accusations of mistreating its student athletes.

So in response, the NCAA turned to the one pure sport it had left: Beer Pong.

By making Beer Pong an NCAA-sanctioned sport, new doors are being opened left and right for student-athletes and the Universities. With players policing themselves, there was no controversy from slimy coaches. With its simple rules and fun atmosphere, schools could save money on uniforms and arenas while still drawing crowds to the house party. And of course, the Beer sponsorships went through the roof and brought the schools even more money.

The only controversies that remained were whether a player's cup was filled high enough. Hardly something for Yahoo Sports to make a big deal out of."

Finally, a line is drawn in the sand with press conferences
"The trend had become popular: whenever disparaging facts were revealed by the media, a coach would call a press conference and read a speech about how everyone else was lying. No questions would be allowed from the press, only a written statement from a coach in which only one viewpoint is allowed. This made things very easy, PR-wise, because coached could use those press conferences to spin the topic whichever way they wanted. Whether they used crying, yelling, or references to 9/11 were optional (and highly irrelevant).

So the media banded together and made a decision: If they wanted the coach's side of a story, they would get it by asking questions and getting interviews, not by being lectured with a prepared statement.

So when the next controversy-addled coach approached the podium to try to spin his situation, he was shocked by the scene:

No one had shown up."

Fall sports, the most wonderful time of the year
"You can feel it in the air. The leaves are falling, it's getting colder, and sports fans everywhere are gearing up for the most exciting season in the sports calendar year.

It was a long summer, but now that's finally over. At long last, fans will finally get what they've been craving for months.

College soccer is back."

My unemployment continues
(By hook or by crook, I'm getting a job.)

Weekly Sportscamp - August 30

-My dad has always maintained that the NBA is fixed. He thinks that home teams are rewarded and big-market teams always end up winning, in order to draw in more fans and money. While his theory may not be entirely true, it's appearing that certain aspects of NBA games are fradulent.

Deadspin's Tommy Craggs wrote a fantastic article about the life of an NBA scorekeeper, in which this person reveals to him that the home scorekeepers are basically an extension of the team's PR staff, and are often encouraged to pad stats. These are the official stats that the NBA keeps, and scorekeepers are regularly adding more rebounds or assists to a player's total. Not only does Craggs get great quotes from his subject, he also brings out home and away splits to go along with it.

Amazingly, this article has gotten no play outside of Deadspin. None. The national media has completely missed it. Here is an article that could open up a can of worms with the NBA, which is already fighting for credibility, but no one has taken the next step and gotten the league's thoughts. Someone needs to throw that article at David Stern and say "explain that."

-Garrett Ross, an old high school chum of mine, is an Art student at Southern Oregon University, where he dabbles in 3D and Animation. He recently took my up on an offer to design a Sandberg On Sports logo. Here's what he came up with:
Pretty damn good, I'd say. As I figure out a way to incorporate it, you should check out the gallery on his Web site.

-For the right perspective on David Kahn's quest to free Ricky Rubio from Spain, we turn to The Matrix's Agent Smith:

Smith: Why, Mr. Kahn? Why do you do it? Why get up? Why keep fighting? Do you believe you're fighting for something? For more than your survival? Can you tell me what it is? Do you even know? You must know it by now. You can't win. It's pointless to keep fighting. Why, Mr. Kahn? Why? Why do you persist?

Kahn: Because I choose to.

-D-Generation X + Teaming with Vince McMahon & John Cena + this being marketed as a good thing = loss of whatever appeal WWE had left.

-No wonder Sergei Monia and Viktor Khryapa didn't pan out. Just look at their entourage on draft night.

-The Little League World Series is over? Does this mean I have to wait another year to laugh at the failure of children?

Giving to the troops instead of taking for ourselves

You know those "buy 2 get 2 free" deals that they have at Hollywood Video? It's almost never worth it to actually take part in the deal. Usually, there's only two movies that you really want to purchase anyway, and yet you still convince yourself to buy two other mediocre ones, simply to take part in the deal. So if you're dead set on owning "Slumdog Millionaire" and "The Wrestler," you're almost guaranteed to also be taking home "Paul Blart" or "Knowing."

I recently went into my local Hollywood Video knowing that I wanted to buy "Frost/Nixon" and "Watchmen." As I grabbed the two movies from the rack, I noticed that the display was advertising something called "DVDs for the Troops." Basically, if you bought two movies, Hollywood Video would donate three movies to Operation Homefront, who would then send those movies to deployed troops overseas. The sign also said that if you didn't want to participate in that, you could do a "buy 2 get 2" deal.

After looking around at some of the other crappy titles that I could've lumped together, I finally decided that there really wasn't anything else that was worth owning. I only really wanted the two movies anyway, so I figured "what the hell, I'll help out a good cause."

I took my movies to the register, where Misty the cashier (sounds like a children's book title) told me that I could get "buy 2 get 2" if I wanted.

No, I told her, there wasn't really anything else I wanted. I was going to do the other thing for the troops.

"Oh. OK ..." she said, fumbling around in a training manual. "Um, I may need a minute to figure out how to ring this up on the computer. You're like the first person who has done this."

She told me that the promotion had be running for about two weeks, and it was being presented as an either/or situation. Customers could either send three movies to the troops with their purchase of two movies, or take two free ones. She said that in the entire time the promotion has been going, she didn't think that a single person had chosen to send the movies.

"But do people still pick the 'buy 2 get 2' option?" I asked.

"Oh yeah," she said. "Tons of people do that!"

I couldn't believe it. Here is an opportunity to help our troops overseas, to send them a few movies from home and give them a little entertainment if only for a few hours, and no one was taking part at that store.

"It's the way people are around here," Misty said. "When I was putting up the signs, I had a feeling that no one was going to do it."

I have three good friends who are serving in the military. One is in the Navy, two are in the Marines, and all three are in different parts of the world. But one thing that all three of them have said was that getting mail was like Christmas morning. It didn't matter if it was letters, pictures, books, or cookies; it felt good for them to be remembered by their loved ones and to get a little distraction for a short while.

But no one at this particular Hollywood Video wanted to participate in sending some DVDs to our men and women overseas. When given the option of choosing something for yourself or giving something to people you don't even know, most of the people at that store were opting for getting a themselves couple more movies. And to be honest, I wasn't any different. Hell, the only reason I chose the DVDs for the Troops option initially was because I couldn't find two more good movies. Had there been a couple more good titles available, I wouldn't have had a second thought.

It's lazy thinking. But this doesn't even take much effort. Instead of picking out two movies you'll probably never watch, you could pick three that would mean the world to a soldier overseas. No, you don't get any special deal out of it, but you shouldn't have to.

I hope the trend at that particular store isn't happening at other Hollywood Videos. But still, it doesn't bode well that two days before the promotion was set to end, the workers at that store don't remember a single person taking part. It shouldn't be that way. When given the option of choosing for others or choosing for yourself, especially with something as trivial as DVDs, the majority shouldn't be picking the latter.

My friend Adalid, a Marine serving in Afghanistan, told me once that in whatever little down time his squad had, they would watch movies together. It didn't matter what genre or even if they movies were any good. It was simply for the fact that, for a couple hours, they were all just buddies gathered around a TV, laughing and enjoying themselves. They knew they would have to get back to work eventually, but for the time being, they had a little entertainment.

I don't mean to sound preachy. I just know that the feeling my friends in uniform have when they get mail, even if it's something as small as a movie, means more than someone grabbing two free DVDs in a Hollywood video just because it's a limited-time deal. What's in it for you? You might be tempted to say, nothing. But what's in it for the people you're helping? A package from home, which sometimes means the world.

For Your Viewing Enjoyment: Bo Jackson, video game god

Madden is a great video game. But never could you do this in Madden.

From Tecmo Super Bowl, The Oakland Raiders receive the opening kickoff and run out of bounds at their own 1-yard line. Then Bo Jackson takes over.




That just happened. Essentially a 205-yard run to end the quarter.

An inexplicable love of football

I've never had a favorite football team.

Part of the problem with growing up in a one-sport town like Portland is that it forces you to look elsewhere for a favorite team in a lot of sports. For me, things fell in place easily for most sports: The Trail Blazers have always been my number 1 team, my parents raised me as a Cubs fan, and I became a Zag fan when I enrolled at Gonzaga in 2005.

But football has always been different. There is no major football program in the city of Portland, meaning that if you want a team to root for, you have to venture outside your borders. For college football, the decision for most Portlanders is easy - it's either Oregon or Oregon State. But I've never felt an attachment to either team; they've always felt so disconnected and distant from me. Other than sharing the same state, I've never felt a connection with them. In professional football, the Seahawks are shoved down Portland's throat in an effort to regionalize the team to the entire Northwest. But again, there's no connection for me there. The Seahawks are Seattle's team, and I didn't want to root for them simply because they're the closest team to me geographically (I also got sick of having to watch Seahawks games every Sunday instead of better NFC matchups).

I've tried to latch onto teams now and again, but it never felt genuine. My best friend is a Raiders fan, but I could never get into the silver-and-black the way he does. Other teams just couldn't hold me, either. There just isn't really a team out there for me.

But despite all of that, despite the absence of an emotional connection to any one team, I am more excited for football season this year than I have ever been.

Every time I've seen highlights or caught a glimpse of a preseason game, I realize just how much I've missed watching the sport since last season ended. When I hear about the big college football matchups, I mark my calendar. I love watching every play, whether it's a tight game in the 4th quarter or a blowout by halftime. Every pass, every run, every hit; for some reason the game of football is gripping me more than ever in anticipation of the upcoming season.

I don't understand this about myself. I don't have a favorite team in college or the pros, not even one that I casually follow, and yet I still dive into football season excited and anxious.

If you talk to most people who are fans of a particular sport, and they'll tell you that they have a particular favorite team. It's only natural that someone who devotes a lot of time to a particular sport does so because they have a team that they support. Anyone who says "I don't care who wins or loses, I just like watching the game," is lying to you. (In retrospect, you probably think that about me right now. Am I nothing more than one of those people??? Don't worry, I can assure you that I do care who wins or loses, simply because there are teams that I hope lose. Patriots, you've been warned.)

No, for me, there are teams that I would prefer to win each matchup, but in the end, there isn't one team that I can devote my fanhood to. It's not that I don't care or I don't want a team, it's just that there is no natural connection between for me with any one team. And yet still, I'm excited for football.

I asked my friend Alex if this was a normal situation, if it was weird that someone without a favorite team could still love football.

"No," he said. "It just means you love the game."

"How many people are like that?" I asked.

"Not many."

But even those people have reasons. Those people that love football simply because they love the game are emotionally vested in football somehow, whether it's through their upbringing or environmental circumstances. I never had anything like that. I never played competitive football - no Pop Warner, no high school ball, no nothing. I wasn't a student of the game and I didn't really start watching it a lot until late in middle school. My college hadn't fielded a team since 1941. I had no family who played, I wasn't raised on it like I was with baseball and basketball, and, oh yeah, I don't have any favorite teams. What is there that connects me to the game itself?

I don't know. I may never know. And I don't really care.

For whatever reason, whenever football season rolls around, I find myself glued to all the action, examining the plays, reading the updates, humming the Monday Night Football theme. I'll dig out the football that's been buried under my bed for six months and toss it around. Every August and September, I start to realize how much I missed the game while it was gone, and when the seasons end in January and February, I kick myself for not appreciating the short time we had together.

This season it's happening all over again. I can't wait until week 1 of the NFL season, when I can flip between three channels to catch the games. I can't wait for that first primetime college football matchup. I want to see a running back rip off a 25-yard run, or a linebacker burst through the line and sack the QB. I can't wait to watch some football.

It's a beautiful game, whether it's in a packed stadium with 80,000 screaming fans or on a converted baseball field. Every matchup, every game, every storyline, every play, it's so much fun to be a fan of it.

I may not have a favorite team and probably never will. But I am a fan of the game of football, and I'll take that all the same.

The evolution of a player efficiency system

The other day I was going through some old junk in my room when I stumbled upon a long-forgotten collector's item: the Premiere Issue of Rip City Magazine from November 1992.

Inside the issue, there was a long feature on Clyde Drexler's experience at the Olympics, a Q & A with the newly-acquired Rod Strickland ("I'm looking forward to going back home to New York City with a championship ring on my finger.") and a bold prediction by Mike Rice that Dikembe Mutombo would be a bust (Short answer: he wasn't).

As I was flipping through it, I got to an article by Pat Lafferty called "Inside Player Ratings." In it, Lafferty describes the increase in the use of player efficiency evaluation.

"In the age of computer technology," he wrote "most clubs measure the production of their own players and those on other teams as well."

He wrote that one formula being used to measure player efficiency did so by adding the positive stats of a player (points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks), subtracting the negative ones (missed shots, missed free throws, turnovers, and 50 percent of fouls), and dividing the net figure by minutes played, thereby giving a performance grade for each player per minute.

Michael Jordan, for example, was the league's most efficient shooting guard, with an efficiency rating of .769. David Robinson was the most efficient center, with a rating of .814. And in large part, the system was very effective in charting the efficiency and value of the league's top players, especially when viewed nearly 20 years after the fact.

But as I read all of this, I thought "well this sounds familiar." And then I remembered John Hollinger.

Hollinger is ESPN's resident basketball statistical genius, and rose to fame after creating the Player Efficiency Rating, or "PER" for short. PER has been widely viewed as the sabermetrics of basketball, and is taken to be a very accurate account of measuring the offensive efficiency of NBA players in a way that normal individual stats cannot. Hollinger has used his PER every year to chart NBA player efficiency, and has been a go-to-source in recent years for anyone who wants to see if a player is as good as the numbers say he is.

In his words, this is how he measures PER: "To generate it, I created formulas ... that return a value for each of a player's accomplishments. That includes positive accomplishments, such as field goals, free throws, 3-pointers, assists, rebounds, blocks and steals, and negative ones, such as missed shots, turnovers and personal fouls. Two important things to remember about PER is that it's per-minute and pace-adjusted."

The two ratings systems are remarkably similar on the surface, with Lafferty's formula already in use nearly 10 years before Hollinger discovered PER. No one had ever even heard of a Player Efficiency Rating until Hollinger came around, and yet, tucked away on a two-page spread in a 1992 Portland Trail Blazers fan magazine, was a system that seemed to have been built on the same concept. Curious, I went about comparing the two formulas to see how much the two shared.

If you look closer at the actual formula that is used to calculate PER, Hollinger's is slightly modified. In Hollinger's equation, there are some fractions and percentages thrown in, as well as league averages in various statistics and a league-wide PER set at 15.00 PER also adjusts for a team's pace, because a fast-break team will have higher statistics than a team that plays at a slower pace (and I'm not even going to begin to describe how pace is factored into the equation).

Working with only the general description that Lafferty gives the 1992 formula, I can't say with certainty whether it goes more in-depth than the simple formula he described. But I think it's fascinating how something that was so simple and obscure 20 years ago turned into the most talked-about statistic today. Hollinger took something that just barely scratched the surface of player efficiency, altered it, adjusted it, expanded it, and made it into something more in-depth and complex.

Yes, Hollinger invented his PER, but the concept of a player efficiency system dates back to the years when Hakeem Olajuwon was patrolling the paint and Kevin Johnson was manning the point. Even in 1992, years before Hollinger even stepped on the scene, there was a system that accurately measured which players were better than others; creating a numerical value to take the place of personal fan debates.

But it never became popular until Hollinger's updated version was developed. In the cases where an efficiency system was used, it was relegated to fan newsletters or someone's blog. No matter what the system was or how they differed, it wasn't taken seriously, and didn't catch on in the mainstream. Maybe fans weren't ready for it in 1992, or maybe PER caught on because of the rise of the popularity of sabermetrics in baseball.

Now, it seems like efficiency matters more than individual stats like points and rebounds, and is used as a more effective tool for measuring a player's value. Any way you look at it, the concept was there, it only needed to be refined and revised, which Hollinger did with great success.

I'll bet that back in 1992, Lafferty and Rip City Magazine had no idea that the small concept they used in a filler piece would take off the way it did.

Embracing the dark side

If there's one thing that sports routinely gives us, it's heroes.

We see Willis Reed limping onto the court in the 1970 NBA finals to inspire the Knicks to victory. We see Lance Armstrong beating cancer and conquering the Tour De France. We see Roberto Clemente dying tragically in a plane crash while on his way to deliver aid to earthquake victims.

We see all these things, and in our minds, they become heroes for their efforts. They sacrifice themselves and their well-being for the good of a team, or a city, or a the fans. In the minds of fans, the heroes' actions represent something more than just a game, something that speaks to the human spirit.

Sports at its essence is entertainment, and the creation of heroes in sports is an extension of the storytelling and mythmaking that accompanies the games. If fans are to devote their minds and their hearts to sports, then having heroes to cheer on makes it even more worthwhile.

But today, real sports heroes are hard to come by. Except for the wonderful exceptions like Armstrong, most of the athletes that pass for heroes are all the same: they play a game, they're good at it, they don't say anything bad in the press, rinse, repeat. Guys like Derek Jeter, Tom Brady, and LeBron James may be great athletes and good people, but from a storytelling, entertainment standpoint, there's nothing really heroic about about them.

It's so ... boring.

What's needed then, is a foil for these so-called heroes. Something to spark the heroic nature of others. Something that polarizes the sports world.

We need villains.

Sports is in need of a really evil villain, someone who is despised by all and loves that fact. We need someone really diabolical, whose actions and words inspire a sense of conflict and compels the heroes go against him. We need someone who lies, cheats, backstabs, and does it all with a smile on his face.

Good vs Evil. Right vs Wrong. Heroes vs Villains. It's what sports need.

The entertainment aspect of sports is all about creating a narrative, and the way to do that is to frame sports as a clash between two sides, which often means our favorite team is "good" and the opponent is "bad." But where is the drama? A team cannot simply be good or bad just because we say so. I want to see a real conflict, where fans can actually see the good guys become heroes. And you can't have a hero without a villain.

The problem is, sports needs a real villain, someone who is really evil, and unfortunately, the athletes who have been labeled as quasi-villains at the moment don't really fit the bill.

Michael Vick did some horrible things, but players and many fans genuinely like him and think he's repented. Alex Rodriguez cheated, but is more of a pompous prima donna than a real villain. And at the same time, it needs to be someone big, who is in the spotlight regularly. Some scrub on the bench or a corrupt, faceless executive won't do it.

No, we need someone really devious. Someone who will makes fans think "we need someone to stand up and stop this guy!"

It's all about drama. With a real villain in the sports world, no one would ever have to make an issue bigger than it really is simply to inflate the sense of drama and entertainment. There would be less media posturing, less sensationalism and less vilifying of athletes who don't deserve it. A real villain would be a bad guy, and he would revel in that fact. We need someone who doesn't give a damn about others, and is willing to use any means necessary to benefit himself.

So is there anyone out there in the sports world who has what it takes? Is there someone who has the cunning, the attitude, and the power be an effective bad guy?

We've got options.

Brett Favre. The farmboy that everybody admired turned his back on the city that loved him, joining with a purple-clad rival. If he were to come out and say that Green Bay is an awful city and he's glad he left, the transformation to the dark side would be complete. Not only would people already be sick of his lying and un-retiring, now everyone else would turn against him and make the defeat of his powerhouse Vikings the main goal.

Kobe Bryant. We've all heard about his clashes with teammates and coaches, his solitude, and his unrelenting, everyone-else-be-damned pursuit of another championship ring to prove his worth. This guy has all the ingredients of a classic villain! All he has to do is stop pretending to like his teammates and stop forcing a false persona upon us and he'd be perfect.

Clay Bennett. The man hijacked the Seattle Sonics despite vehement protests and moved them halfway across the country to Oklahoma City (forcing his team to play there should be reason enough for villainy). The e-mails that revealed he was planning something like that all along is further evidence. Some public, anti-Seattle comments would be enough to turn the NBA against him and start an effort to save the Thunder from their horrible plight in OKC under his tyrannical rule. And if David Stern admits to being in on it, we could have a Vince McMahon, corrupt CEO situation on our hands. Even better!

One or both of the Williams sisters. If both are evil, it creates an unstoppable duo. If it's just one of them, then we get the family-struggle.

Michael Phelps. Just to mess with people. Wouldn't it be the ultimate shock if Phelps turned heel on us?

With a few villains around, things always get a little more interesting.

Villains inspire heroes. There's no Batman without a Joker. There's no Spider-Man without an uncle-murdering burglar. There's no Luke Skywalker without Darth Vader. There are no heroes without villains. I think it's about time the sports world embraced this concept to bring a new level of conflict and drama to the table.

It's the most basic and enduring element of storytelling: the good guys vs the bad guys. The sports world is all about storytelling, too, that's why you see so many bland personality profiles of athletes. It's done in an effort to give personalities to athletes, to make them more than faces, to try to find characters. But in any good story, a character remains flat if there isn't anything to test his resolve or something that inspires him to change. In stories, there's usually one thing that sparks that transformation.

Imagine the character development we'd see when the villains get involved.

Moving on at the top of his game

I first met Kevin O'Brien three years ago at Gonzaga. I was in my second week on the job as Sports Editor of the Gonzaga Bulletin, and I was meeting with prospective writers for the page. I had never seen any writing examples from the reporters I was talking to, so I figured that this would just be an informational meeting so they could get their feet wet and learn how to contribute in the future.

At the end of the meeting, I asked if anyone had any story ideas for the next issue. After some silence, one man spoke up and said that he had an idea for a sports column about the need for college football at Gonzaga. I had never seen this guy's work before, so I had no idea what kind of writer he was, or if he was just more interested in getting his name published. After all, at the time, the sports section was notorious for employing flaky and unpolished writers. For some reason, I agreed to let him do it.

One impressive debut column later, and Kevin O'Brien's sportswriting career had begun.

He became the hardest worker I had seen on the Sports staff, taking any story assignment that was thrown his way and producing well-written articles every time. Later, he moved on to the position of sports editor and columnist, where he and his co-editor Travis Lucian hit a home run with their in-depth and unique sports coverage. And of course, during this past year, he authored the excellent blogs "The Ex-Call Taker" and "Remember 51," from which I drew inspiration constantly.

He was a wealth of sports knowledge, and could turn any situation into an obscure sports reference ("God, I feel worse than I did when the Warriors picked Todd Fuller 11th in the 1996 Draft"). He even got one of his columns published on ESPN.com, and was able to have it referenced live on College GameDay.

Why all the love for Kevin right now, you ask? Well, because in a Barry Sanders-like move, Kevin is leaving the sportswriting world at the top of his game. But not because of a lack of desire or ideas or any selfish reason. In fact, it is because of the most unselfish reason of all.

You see, there was always another side to Kevin that wasn't as obvious as his love for sports, but it still was in important factor in his life, and that's why he is doing what he is doing now: joining the Priesthood. Kevin O'Brien, writer, columnist, blogger and sports fan extraordinaire, is in training to become Fr. Kevin.

This was his plan all along, this is where is biggest passion lay. He finished what he set out to do this summer by writing about the Giants every day, and now he is moving on with the next chapter in his life. And I couldn't be more proud of him.

When I first heard the news, I had trouble wrapping my brain around it, but then I remembered the way he was when he worked at Gonzaga's Jesuit House, or the way he interacted with many of the Jesuits at GU, and I understood. When you find your calling, you have to answer.

So this is merely an attempt to say thanks. Thanks for the hard work and great writing, thanks for your knowledge, and thanks for teaching me a thing or two. I'll miss your regular blog updates and the quality that came with it, but in the grand scheme of things its not as important as taking an important next step in your life.

It takes an awful lot of dedication to be as good of a writer as he is, but it takes even more dedication to leave it behind because of a higher calling. Based on the way he's talked about his next step, I know he'll approach it with the same excitement as he did with his love of sports.

Sports and the Priesthood aren't things that seem to go hand-in-hand very often, but I have a feeling that Kevin will figure out a way to balance his passions. When we were getting ready to graduate from Gonzaga last May, Kevin mentioned that graduations should be held like the NBA draft, where each graduate is selected by a group for their immediate future. "With the first pick, the Jesuits select ... Kevin O'Brien!"

Yeah, I think he'll do just fine.

I'm proud to have worked beside him for so many years, and I'm proud of the next steps he is now taking.

Weekly Sportscamp - August 24

-I've been wondering, since the announcement came down that Memphis would have to vacate their 39-win season in 2008 because of Derrick Rose's phony SAT scores, has any media outlet bothered to talk to Rose? I don't remember seeing a single quote from Rose this entire week. It seems to me that it would be worthwhile to talk to the main figure in this case, if only to ask him why he cheated, how it happened, and why he can't figure out analogies. Sure, Rose probably doesn't care one bit about what happened at Memphis, and most likely wouldn't comment about it, but it's still worth a shot to see what he says. I think the media has been dropping the ball on this issue.

-Uh oh. Adrian Peterson went duck hunting. Although in actuality, he missed the ducks with his three shots, and was laughed at by his dog.

-You can tell it's a slow news day at ESPN when they've run out of Vick and Favre news and are forced to rehash the old "Pete Rose is banned FOR-EV-ER" story.

That's the tough part of covering sports in late august: there's really not a whole lot to talk about. Baseball hasn't hit its stretch run yet, football is deep enough in the preseason that the hype has worn off and the hype of the regular season hasn't heated up yet, and basketball is still months away. At this point, I'm sure most sports news outlets will take anything they can get their hands on.

-Was it because of the mysterious baggies in the background of his Twitter picture? Michael Beasley apparantly checked into rehab this week, according to Slam. This isn't what you want from one of the futures of your franchise.

-The Blazers just signed second-round draft pick Dante Cunningham. I like the move. I think Cunningham can be an effective backup small forward/power forward, like a Travis Outlaw who doesn't take bad shots. He's got the range to shoot from the outside and the size to be a good power forward. The only thing I want to see him improve on is his inside game, because Portland has enough shooters. Here are some highlights of Cunningham from the Blazers' Summer League, although you might want to watch it with the sound turned off to get rid of the annoying techno music.

-Look, I'm a Cubs fan. But with that being said, even I think that it's time to pack in this season and look to 2010. Give it up, Lou.

Forget the extra numbers, let baseball stand on its own

My friend Brian is a pretty knowledgeable guy, and considers himself a casual sports fan. He's not a die-hard by any means, but he can still sit down with you and have a conversation about sports ranging from football and basketball to soccer and golf.

One sports that he absolutely doesn't care for, though, is baseball. He doesn't watch it, doesn't read about it, and can't really talk about it. His main reasoning, aside from the game's pace, is that he doesn't understand it; that it's too complicated.

As I was talking with Brian about this the other day, I had a thought: "When did baseball become a complicated sport?"

In reality, it isn't, but to outsiders it only seems that way because of the influx of too much unneeded, complicated statistics.

You know what I'm talking about. It's the current baseball mindset that every single moment and situation needs to be expressed and anylized statistically. It's regular statistics, advanced statistics, and sabermetric statistics, and every time a baseball player so much as sneezes, there's a statistic for that.

OBP, OPS, RISP.

WHIP, Runs created, Balls in play average.

Average with a 2-2 count. Average with a full count. Average with a 1-1 count with no outs on the road after the 6th inning.

It's every single possible moment, instance and situation being described by numbers. It's a push from baseball to have the entire game and any possible outcome to be expressed as a stat.

In basketball, a player can be described as being so much better when his teammates are involved, or a football player can be thought to be more effective in a certain formation, but in those sports commments like these are just speculation, even if they are perceived as accurate. In baseball, it's as if the only way you can think about a player's value is through the numbers.

"I like our starting pitcher, he seems to pitch better in tight games."

"Oh yeah? Well according to his ERA-per-27-innings-in-games-within-2-runs, he's actually in the bottom half of the league."

It just takes the fun out of it, and turns it into math class.

Statistics are a valuable tool in any sport, but in baseball its seemed to have gone overboard. For some, like Oakland's Billy Beane, baseball is a math equation where everything can be expressed or predicted numerically. But that concept takes away most of what makes sports so fun and unpredictible: things like gut instincts, hunches, hot streaks, and risky moves. In my mind, statistics are great and can be very useful, but the influx of unnecessary sabermetric statistics can never fully replace player or coach judgement and insight.

But unfortunately, baseball seems to be entrenched with this current mindset that statistics are needed to create something more out of a simple game.

David Halberstam once wrote that with the rise of televised sports, fans flocked to the more up-tempo, fast-paced games like basketball and football because it was more exciting to watch. Baseball, he said, then turned to countless new statistics - every situation and tendency broken down into stats - to try to make up for the fact that its pace was slightly slower than the other games on TV. He said that the soul of the game was pushed aside because an unnecessary need to have the statistics make baseball seem like more than it really is.

Some stats may be very accurate, others may be completely bogus, but baseball doesn't need to have everything measured with numbers in order to makes things more interesting. It's the simplicity of the game that is interesting.

Fans watch basketball because it's easy to understand. They watch football because, at its essence, its fun and straightforward. Baseball needs to understand that the majority of its fans feel the same way. Fans don't like a better because his OPS is out of this world, they like him because he's a good hitter. They don't like a pitcher because he's the league leader in WHIP, they like him because he can strike guys out.

And fans do like statistics, too. They love seeing a pitcher's ERA, or who leads the league in hits. But for fans, baseball should still be left as a game, instead of an equation. Not everything needs to be analyzed from all angles.

Instead, leave the advanced statistics to the eggheads who use them while running a team. If they think that it's useful to learn a player's RC27 (runs created per 27 innings) or ISOP (Isolated power), then let them go nuts. It's their team.

(And let's face it, sabermetrics doesn't always yield big results. The Oakland A's, for all their years of "Moneyball" tactics, aren't exactly a powerhouse.)

Baseball is a simple game, and that's where the fun lies. Fans have loved it for over a hundred years because of its players, its games, and its stories. Like any other sport, it's about the feeling you get from being there, from watching it, from taking it all in. You can measure things in statistics all you want, but in the end, fans will always care more about the fun and the entertainment of baseball.

You don't need a calculator to figure that out.

2008 Memphis Tigers finally defeated ... by Derrick Rose's SATs

31 college basketball teams don't have to feel so bad anymore about losing to the Memphis Tigers in 2007-08.

According to a report from the Memphis Commercial Appeal, The NCAA Committee on Infractions will announce Thursday that Memphis will have to forfeit all of its 38 wins from that season, including the Final Four appearance, based on information that then-freshman guard Derrick Rose had someone else take his SATs for him, thereby rendering him ineligible for the season.

(I love how the masthead for that article comes with a banner reading "Go Memphis Tigers." Go where? You could have a lot of fun with that, based on this news. "Go ... to class!" "Go apologize! "Go directly to jail, do not pass GO, do not collect 38 victories.")

This is huge news. Memphis was seconds away from a national championship that year, had it not been for Mario Chalmers' amazing shot to send the game into overtime and Kansas to the title. And Rose was the driving force for that team. 15 points, five assists, and four rebounds per game, and an eventual No. 1 NBA draft pick to the Chicago Bulls. I remember seeing just how good Rose was when Memphis defeated Gonzaga in January 2008. Rose had a near-triple double, with 19 points, nine assists and eight rebounds while routinely carving up the Zag defense and getting to the line.

But even aside from Rose, that was a special Memphis team. They were so freakishly athletic that my friends and I nicknamed them the Monstars. They could beat any team, any night, with their physical skills alone.

Now all of that is gone, because Rose was too dumb to take his own SATs.

A big problem that is coming out of this is finding who to punish. We all know exactly who to blame, but different circumstances are changing who will have the hammer laid down on them.

You can't blame Rose entirely, because he got exactly what he wanted out of it. He got to skip the SATs, play for a college basketball power, and parlayed all of that into a multi-million dollar NBA contract. It was shady and backhanded, and Rose probably doesn't care one bit. As well, he's in the NBA now, and won't be subject to any punishment for his cheating. He's going to get off scot free.

So then we move to the next major player, former coach John Calipari. As a Division-I head coach, you have to know the academic situations of your players, if only to know when to cover it up when they're failing, so obviously Calipari knew about this. But he wanted to win, and wasn't about to let silly little things like "ethics" or "rules" or "serious violations" take away the best point guard in the country. He's just as liable as Rose. But the problem is, you can't punish him, either. Calipari just left this offseason to take the Kentucky head coaching job (probably to avoid this mess). So as it stands now, he's essentially in the clear (it won't follow him to Kentucky, college basketball programs are notorious for ignoring the past misdeeds of coaches).

So because the two major players are no longer in the picture, that leaves only one who will receive the full brunt of the NCAA's wrath: the University of Memphis.

The player who cheated is already gone. The coach who allowed it is already gone. That leaves only Memphis and its athletic department to take all the punishment. While I'm sure that they participated in this on some level, it couldn't have been as big of involvement as Rose or Calipari. And yet it's the school, the team and the fans who will forever have to live with a big asterisk next to its records from 07-08.

Hey, you've got to punish somebody.

And while all this is happening, Rose and Calipari are laughing like they're in the ending of a heist movie; they pulled all of this off, pinned it on a fall guy and got out just in time before the axe fell.

The moment you move from baseball to softball, you know you're not a kid anymore

My friends and I were like a lot of other kids growing up. During the summer, we played baseball.

Every week, we'd all get together at the little field at the park down the street from my house and play ball. Our crew usually wasn't big enough to field an official nine-on-nine game, but that didn't matter to us. We'd pick sides, install a permanent pitcher or DH, play double-or-nothing if we had to, and end up having a blast playing six-on-six baseball.

There were no catchers or catcher's gear. No batting helmets. We shared our gloves, used only two aluminum bats (one had a crack in it), and had maybe seven baseballs that we reused every game. If a ball rolled into a bush, you had to find it, or else risk ending the game early.

It was always a modest setting, but we loved it like the seventh game of the World Series.

Baseball always meant more to us during those summers than other sports like football or basketball, because of the effort it took to get a game together. It took more players, more equipment, more planning, and therefore we cared more about winning the game. To us, those our days on the baseball field were more than games, they were events, spectacles, and gatherings of friends.

And that's the way it's supposed to be. When you're a kid, you play baseball.

But as you grow older, it becomes harder to get the old gang back together for a game. School, work, growing apart, all of these things get in the way. Friends move out of town, responsibilities come up, and suddenly, before you realize it, high school is over and you hadn't had a baseball game in years. And by then, it's too late.

Something that meant so much during those summers of our youth is relegated to nostalgia, just a memory.

Because when you grow up, it seems like you're not allowed to play baseball anymore. In its place is softball, and it's not the same.

The same elements are there: you hit, run, field, and pitch (to a certain degree). It's played on a field very similar to a baseball diamond, and much of the same equipment is used. But again, it's not the same.

As kids, we played baseball spontaneously and to have fun. Games were competitive but only because that's how they should be played, and it never got out of hand. Softball for adults, however, is rigid, scheduled, and lacks the heart that came from a session of six-on-six, double-or-nothing.

Softball isn't played with your closest group of friends just trying to get a game together, it's played with coworkers, extended family, or members of an organization. And unlike your friends, who wanted to win while keeping it in perspective, softball is populated by people who don't care at all or care way too much. In a softball game you could be teamed with the lady in accounting who doesn't know how to swing a bat or throw a ball, and you wonder if she's even heard of the game. Or you'll be teamed with the over-competitive jackass ("Softball Guy" as Jim Rome calls him) who will yell at that same lady for not knowing how to play, while arguing calls and throwing his bat after each pop-out.

Gone is the spontaneous sense of "quick, call all your friends for baseball and get to the field" from pickup baseball. It's replaced with something like "ladies and gentlemen, this saturday we'll meet in the office parking lot and go to the field ... or else" in softball.

We weren't softball players when we were kids; that game wasn't the same. The ball was too big and bulky, and you couldn't throw it or hit it as far. There were never those crazy hoppers to short that would leave you with a shiner if not properly fielded.

In our games of baseball, we used the same equipment as our childhood heroes, and emulated them on those hot days of summer. We felt like ball players, because we were playing the same sport, and playing it right.

But you don't play that as an adult; you're expected to play softball. Unless you're getting paid to play it professionally, baseball is considered a kid's game.

And at first, all of this is hard to take for someone who was raised playing baseball. But then slowly, you start to make rationalizations about softball. No, it's not the exact same as baseball, but it's rules do make it easier for people to play, especially as they climb up in the years. It evens the playing field. It limits injuries that could've occurred with a hard baseball rocketing off an aluminum bat. Sure, certain people may ruin the game, but if that's the case, just play with a different group of people.

And as these reasons pile up, you eventually settle into the fact that softball will the the closest thing to a baseball game you will ever play again.

It doesn't seem normal; to go from being a kid playing the real game of baseball to being an adult playing the easier version of it. While other sports like pickup basketball or football can be put together easily by kids and adults alike, pickup baseball just doesn't seem to work anymore after you reach a certain age. But that's where baseball/softball is different: no other sport makes you face your own maturation as obviously. The transition makes you realize that you can't play the same game the same way you did as a kid.

It's a sobering moment when you make that realization. But it comes to everyone. Most people move on easily, leaving the kid stuff in the past and accepting the fact that things will always be different. At that point, you go play softball and enjoy it, while looking back on playing baseball as a short-lived, memorable experience, one that made your childhood fun.

Brett Favre, please go home

Well it appears once again, we've been had.

For the 17th time in five years, Brett Favre has decided that his talk of retirement was premature, and has officially signed with the Minnesota Vikings. Yes, Favre, the gunslinger, the big kid, the Iron Man, the Wrangler spokesman, is back in the NFL.

...Again.

Only this time, the mood surrounding his return isn't about admiration or respect for the aging quarterback. While once upon a time fans were glad to have Favre return to the gridiron, that excitement wears off each time this happens. Now, people are finally sick of it.

We're sick of the mind games, the false promises, the crying at press conferences and sudden return without explanation. We're sick of the attention-hogging, the wall-to-wall media coverage, and the emotional tug-of-war.

Basically, we're sick of Brett Favre and ego.

For the past four years, Favre has openly discussed his retirement at the end of each season. Sometimes it was an emotional press-conference, sometimes it was to say that he "might" be coming back. And every year, Favre has returned to the NFL, without much of an explanation as to why he continues to ponder retirement and eventually come back.

"He just wants to play football," the analysts say. "And this is a difficult decision for him." "He's doing this because he loves the game so much." "Football is all he's ever known, how could he ever adjust to retirement?"

Well, by now, no one cares anymore.

Favre is like the friend in college that no one likes to invite to parties. Somehow he shows up, and he's fun at first, joking and partying with the group. But after a few drinks, he starts to get out of control; falling down, throwing and breaking stuff, calling too much attention to his antics and being more of a distraction than a fun addition to the party. He might get really emotional later and start crying, and everyone wishes that he would just leave so they could have fun again. Only he sticks around, disappearing every 10 minutes before coming back into the house and bringing the mood down.

Brett, if you want to play football, then play football. If you don't want to play, then retire. But you have to pick one.

Because this waffling back and forth is only turning fans off, and makes people feel that Favre is only in it for the attention. The rumors, whispers, and outright lies from Favre and team officials, followed by Favre signing just in time for the end of training camp (no sleeping on a bunk for Brett!), makes it all seem that Favre was planned all of this to get the maximum attention from the least effort. Roger Clemens did this by "retiring" and then returning as a savior at mid-season while picking and choosing when he played. He wasn't in it for the team, and, based on how this current situation has played out, it appears that the only thing Favre is in it for is himself.

No one cares anymore. The media, once to adoring of Favre, are yawning at the news. Vikings fans who were spurned by Favre earlier this summer are thinking "oh, so now he decides to show up." Jets fans are laughing that Favre and his 22 interceptions are Minnesota's problem now. Maybe the only guy who's truly happy (besides Favre, of course) is Michael Vick, who's thanking Favre for taking the attention away from him.

And all of this is happening because Favre needed his ego stroked. If he was really serious about playing in the NFL all along, then he should have become a free agent and go through the process like every other player. If he really wanted to retire, he would have realized that he'd had his day in the sun and leave the NFL gracefully.

But neither of those things happened. Favre seems to like having the media follow his every move. That's why he's pulled the same fake retirement stunt again and again and again; because he knows that he'll be back in the spotlight.

Only this time, he's being greeted with eye-rolls and sighs. Not again...

Everyone is tired of the shenanigans. Play or retire, it makes no difference; the Favre story has run its course. Now, all that's left is for Favre to spend the entire season bringing the mood down at the party, while everyone hopes that he never shows up to do it again in the future.

World Championships of Fictional Sports Teams: Baseball Winner

Rules and Overview
First Round
Semifinals
Championship game matchup

Now it all comes down to this. The Angels vs the Indians. The winner is crowned as the greatest fictional baseball team of all time.

Naturally, this was the hardest one to choose. Both of these teams were lousy at one point, but ended up winning the American League pennant because something inspired them to believe. The Angels had the help of real angels to propel them to victory, then when the angels abandoned the team, it was the belief of a little orphan boy who inspired them to win the pennant on their own. The Indians were put together because the owner thought they would be so bad that attendance would drop and she could move the team to Miami. When the team caught wind of this plan, they were determined to prove her, and the rest of the baseball world, wrong. A team of has-been's and a couple of never-will-be's went on an inspired late season run and won the pennant on a bunt-and run.

How do you choose between the two?

Readers, you voted, you gave me the reasons, you decided. Here now, is your winner:

#3 California Angels (Angels in the Outfield)
Vs
#2 Cleveland Indians (Major League)
Winner: Indians
The divine angels, per the rules set down by Christopher Lloyd, could not interfere with the championship game, so the California Angels needed to do it on their own. The problem for them is that this would be their first game in months that they had to play with their own abilities, while the Indians have been betting better and better with every game. After relying on angels to do most of their work, the Angels team doesn't remember how to properly swing a bat, how to execute a double-play, and Mel Clark (Tony Danza) can't throw more than 84 MPH. The Angels are exposed for the awful athletes that they really are.

Meanwhile, the Indians have everything working in their favor. They have homefield advantage, where the fans will be singing "Wild Thing" instead of waving their arms like angel wings. They have players who have developing their natural talent all season and are peaking in this game. They have a power hitter who can finally hit a curveball, a third baseman who is finally winning to dive for grounders, and a closer whose stuff tops out at 101 MPH. The Indians are just too good.

The kid tries to stand up on the edge of the dugout and wave angel wings to inspire the Angels, but is hit by a foul ball off the bat of Willie Mays Hayes and nurses a mean shiner for the rest of the night. Angels manager George Knox is eventually tossed out for arguing a play at second, and the Indians go on to win easily and take home the championship. Jake Taylor gets the girl, Knox adopts the kids out of simpathy, and both teams go on to make crappy sequels.

After the game, the kid asks Al the Angel "Why? How come the angels didn't help out the Angels against these voodoo-worshiping, wife-stealing players?"

"It's simple," Al replies. "Because it's more important to learn to do it on your own that wait for a magical handout. Didn't you learn anything from what I said? Plus, He doesn't really care which team wins or loses, he's more focused on important things, like trying to keep the Universe and Existence from ripping apart."

The Indians win it! The Indians win it! Oh my God the Indians win it!


My big thanks to everyone who participated in this series, I had a blast. I can't wait to do it all again in the future with football and basketball. But remember, this concept doesn't just end because the baseball tourney is over. That's the great thing about this debate, there are so many movies, each with different teams and different arguments for and against, that something like this can go on forever. That's the beauty of these fictional teams: you never know what could happen when they face off, and that's why we talk about it.

Ladies and gentlemen, your winner for greatest fictional baseball team of all-time: The Cleveland Indians from "Major League"!

Weekly Sportscamp - August 16

-Tomorrow I will be posting the winner in baseball of the World Championships of Fictional Sports teams, so if you want to have your voice heard on the subject, be sure to send me an email or leave a comment saying who you think should win and why. The final two teams are the Angels from "Angels in the Outfield" vs the Indians from "Major League."

In case you missed any of it, catch up quickly:
Rules and Overview
First Round
Semifinals
Championship Game

-Kevin O'Brien goes through blogs like the Denver Broncos go through running backs. As part of his summer pledge to cover the San Francisco Giants every day before he heads off to start his ministry studies, Kevin started a new blog: Remember '51, dedicated to covering the Giants and the game of baseball. It's a must-read for all baseball fans, and especially for those in the Bay Area.

-My friend (and huge Chicago Cubs fan) Jessica Michaels is a news photographer for KOAA in Colorado Springs, and has been chronicling her experience in her blog "A Year in the Life of a News Photographer." It gives a great look behind the scenes at the things that make newscasts run. Her last post touches on how the departure of two reporters changes the role of everyone else in the newsroom. As her blog proves, there's always so much more than what you see on TV.

-Well, finally, Gonzaga is adding more big-name teams to their season schedule. Too bad most of those teams lost most of their star power to the NBA draft. But still, maybe this is the start of better things, where the Kennel will actually have some top-tier teams visit the McCarthey Center on a regular basis.

-Right on cue, EA Sports is quickly adding Michael Vick to the Eagles' roster in Madden '10. Gamers everywhere are rejoicing at the fact that they can now dominate the game again.

-The Blazers will be loaded at every position this season, which raises the question: whose minutes get cut down?

-If you are looking for good college sports news, sometimes a good place to look is at the school newspaper. A lot of times, those reporters can find access to teams and write stories from angles that aren't being presented anywhere else. The Gonzaga Bulletin just posted it's first issue of the year, and Zags beat writer Zach Stratton has a look at some of the team's incoming players.

Philly, you got some 'splainin' to do...

The Philadelphia Eagles' signing of embattled quarterback Michael Vick is going to raise certain questions. Can the Eagles weather the PR storm that will come from signing Vick? Does this mean that teams are valuing talent over character? What role is Vick even going to play on a team with Donovan McNabb already at QB?

If Philadelphia wants this move to work, then they'll need to spend the rest of this season, and maybe longer, answering those questions and more.

Because at first glance, this move doesn't make a whole lot of sense to people outside of the Eagles' organization. The Eagles were one of many NFL teams who initially said they had no interest in signing Michael Vick, due to him being, you know, a pretty horrible human being. They already have McNabb at QB, and he led them to the NFC title game yet again while putting up a career-high in passing yards. And the Eagle were already set talent-wise and in popularity; they weren't in need of an infusion of attention and ticket sales like a lousy team wouldn't had by signing Vick.

So far, it doesn't make sense. So Philadelphia, please explain.

Explain to McNabb how the situation is going to work. McNabb has always been the starter for the Eagles, and due to his performance this past season he will be again. But Michael Vick is a star. Even despite his transgressions, there are fans out there that still love him, and people will expect him to play. You don't pay Vick millions of dollars to hold a clipboard all season. Suddenly, McNabb is feeling the pressure, because with even the slightest mistake, fans and media will be screaming to put in Vick, if only to justify the signing. Now, Vick, McNabb, Andy Reid and the Eagles' front office are thrust into a position where none of them want to slip up the slightest bit, but none of them want the others to succeed.

Explain to fans how this move makes the team better. Vick is a talented quarterback, there's no doubt about that, but he hasn't played since 2006. And even then, he had a mid-70s passer rating while questioned arose about his effectiveness in certain systems. Vick's strengths have always come from his mobility - if defenses are worried about his receivers, he'll run it, if the defense is concerned with him running, Vick will pass. But unless Jeremy Maclin turns out to be a fantastic receiver, the Eagles don't have talented enough receivers to draw the attention away from Vick. By single-covering Hank Baskett and Kevin Curtis, the defense can focus solely on Vick, taking away the one thing that made him effective. This current Eagles team is not built to Vick's strengths.

Explain to your city, the fans, and the rest of the NFL the reasoning behind the signing of a player that has been viewed as a villain for the past 2+ years. Don't get me wrong, Vick served his time for the crimes he committed, and he has the right to seek employment. But the things he did were heinous, and now the Eagles must address those facts in explaining their decision to sign him. How do you justify it, without resorting to a sleazy, talent-over-character explanation. How do you market him? "Ladies and gentlemen, a man who went to prison for killing multiple dogs ... Michael Vick!"

Is everything water under the bridge because you need a backup QB? Or will you speak opening and candidly about the things Michael Vick did and why you think he deserved a second chance. If you gloss over it or ignore the elephant in the room, you fail. If you say it's strictly a talent decision, then the fans are cheated. There aren't a whole lot of options. All you can do is address the past and pray to God that it's enough. The entire Eagles organization's credibility rides on what you say to announce the signing.

And explain whether this is merely a sideshow act. Whichever team signed Vick was sure to become a media circus, and would have a large microscope on them all season. With Donovan McNabb taking the snaps, Vick seems at the moment to be a gimmick to sell tickets and get media attention. Of course, Vick probably knew that before he signed the contract, and is probably more concerned with getting a paycheck instead of whether or not he plays.

As things stand right now, all we have are questions that need answers. The original ESPN breaking story went from a once-sentence proclamation that Vick had signed, to a host of rumors about the situation. But all of that doesn't matter. What does, is what the Eagles have to say about the Vick signing.

No one knows right now what this signing means, or what it will bring. It's up to the Eagles to explain to us what they were thinking and what they hope to accomplish.

Ever since Vick was reinstated, there have been a host of "what if's" about his future. Soon, the Eagles may give us some answers. But knowing the Michael Vick situation, we may only be left with further questions.

Our Summer of Tennis

Relationships are all about common ground. Men and women who chose to be in committed relationships do so because the share plenty of things in common with their significant other, whether it be ideals, beliefs, background, goals, or even just the same hobbies and interests.

But the one thing that never bridges the gap between men and women in relationships is sports.

It’s just the way it is, and all men have been there. He’ll want to watch a big playoff game between two heated rivals, and she’ll be bored out of her mind and wondering what all the fuss is about. He’ll check out every book written on his favorite team and read them cover to cover, and she’ll wonder why he can’t do the same thing for classic literature.

Men and women are just wired differently. Most men grew up watching and playing sports, and have sports’ significant ingrained in them. Most women never had that same type of upbringing, so it’s almost impossible for some women to have the same passion for sports as their significant other. Sure, some couples have their favorite sports teams, and some women are big enough fans that they’ll buy team merchandise, go to a couple games, and recite the starting lineup of his favorite team. But deep down men know that there won’t be that common fervor between them about sports.

My fiancé and I are much the same way. Don’t get me wrong, she loves the Blazers; she owns a couple jerseys, watches every game with me, and has gone to a few games. But whereas to me, sports is a way of life, to her sports is a hobby. She enjoys it, but doesn’t invest herself emotionally in it like I do. To her, it’s entertainment, no more so than any other show on TV.

So earlier this summer when the two of us resolved to do something athletic every day, at first we were at an impasse. Basketball was out, as my competitive nature quickly turned games of HORSE ugly. Football was out because she couldn’t throw. Golf was out because I was awful. We needed something that allowed us to be on a level playing field, something that both of us could enjoy. So we found tennis.

Before this summer, I had played tennis maybe twice in my whole life, and hadn’t touched a racket in years. She hadn’t played very much either, so we thought “if we’re going to suck at this, then at least we’re both going to be equally bad.”

Every couple of days we would grab our gear and head out to the nearest tennis courts around sunset to get in a few games. At first, things were rocky. Three straight serves into the net. Tennis balls that rocket over the fence. Multiple utterances of “my bad,” “I’ll get it,” and “let’s try that again.” And that was just from me.

But things started to smooth out the more we got accustomed to the game. We would volley back and forth, initially more concerned with keeping the game going rather than trying to win. We would talk about strategies, I taught her how to keep score (how many games in a set, sets in a match, what “deuce” meant), and every so often we’d try to keep the ball in the air as long as we could.

We would also talk about our days and our plans for the future as we played. We’d joke around, we’d laugh, and we’d make fun of each other.

Our tennis games became our common ground, the place where the athletic side met the fun social side. I had never been a fan of tennis – watching or playing – prior to this summer, but our games together became a highlight of the week. I could still be competitive, but the game was still relaxing and fun enough that we both enjoyed it.

I thought, “how crazy is this, to have my fiancé enjoying sports so much?” But I realized over time that it wasn’t about sports, it was about us spending time together. This as a girl who would watch any sports movie I suggested, with little or no complaint, a girl who would let me ramble to her about Brandon Roy’s contract negotiations, a girl who would read me sports trivia questions when we were bored.

Does she do all that because she’s a huge fan? Maybe, but it’s more about the two of us being able to spend time and have fun together. The more I thought about it, each time we had done something sports-related, more often that not we followed it by doing something she wanted to do.

I can’t even explain how lucky I felt. My fiancé acknowledges my passion for sports and takes part in it – so long as I remember to acknowledge and take part in her passions, too. Our games of tennis this summer helped me understand that.

Sports might never be a complete common ground for men and women in committed relationships, but it can still be something to share, and it’s a great feeling when you can get the girl you love to get excited over at least one of your teams. Just make it mutual; maybe share in some of her favorite activities once in a while. Because while a man might have his passion for sports, his significant other’s equal passion is in something else. If you understand what she’s all about, she’ll begin to understand how you love sports so much.

So help her in her pastimes, too. Maybe after that, she’ll sit down next to you during a baseball game and ask you what a slider is.

Hold on to that one.

World Championships of Fictional Sports Teams: Baseball Championship Game

Rules and Overview
First Round
Semifinals

And now it's down to two.

It was a hard-fought battle, but in the end, you readers decided which two teams would meet in the baseball Championship Game of the World Championships of Fictional Sports Teams. But before we get to the matchup, we need to take a look at the results.

#1 Ghosts from Ray’s Cornfield (Field of Dreams)
Vs
#3 California Angels (Angels in the Outfield)
Winner: Angels
This was the toughest to call. Both teams have supernatural elements working on their side. One team was the ghosts of some of the most talented players of all time, while the other team was guided by divine intervention. However, it seemed like the Ghosts had been placed in a sort of purgatory for their gambling crimes; they weren't in hell, but they weren't in heaven, they were in Iowa. Meanwhile, God and His Angels were directly aiding the California Angels to victory. The main reason that the Angels win is because they are in it to win it, while the Ghosts are happy just to be playing baseball for all eternity, and don't care if they win or lose. The Ghosts already screwed up once by throwing the 1919 World Series; they're not going to ruin their chances to keep playing baseball by beating a team playing for a little orphan kid. It's an enjoyable game, and all six people in attendance loved the competition, but in the end, the Angels have the edge.

#2 Cleveland Indians (Major League)
Vs
#4 Sandlot Kids (The Sandlot)
Winner: Indians
The Sandlot kids have heart, but let's face it, they're just kids! They're going to be too shocked to be in the presence of MLB players to even put up a real fight. Ham is able to talk trash to distract Ceranno in the first few plate appearances, but then Jake Taylor does it right back when Ham comes up to the plate. All of the kids are too afraid to step into the box to face Vaughn's heat, and gladly allow themselves to be called can't-hack-it-pantywaists for it. The ghost of Babe Ruth, Wendy Peffercorn's attention, and Dennis Leary's guidance don't do a thing to inspire the kids, as they stand no chance against an Indians team too big, too tough, and to inspired to win the whole f'n thing to spite their owner. After a severe pummling, the Sandlot kids head to the pool after five innings.


My thanks to everyone who participated! Now, it all comes down to this.

Baseball Championship Game

#3 California Angels (Angels in the Outfield)
Vs
#2 Cleveland Indians (Major League)

Keep in mind, there are certain things to consider in this game. The Angels will no longer have divine intervention, as Christopher Lloyd wants the Angels team to learn to do it on their own. The game will also be played in Cleveland, where the hungry fanbase will be going crazy for the Indians to try to end their long championship drought. Other than that, the same basic rules of the Tournament apply. Not only do you have to pick a winner, you have to tell me why they'd win. Make a comment or e-mail me your thoughts at stevensandberg@hotmail.com

Two major league teams, two former laughingstocks, two great movies, one championship on the line. Who will be crowned the greatest fictional baseball team of all time? Again, readers, the decision is yours.

Choose wisely.

Josh Hamilton, Deadspin, and the price of fame

Josh Hamilton's story has always been accompanied by words like "comeback," "redemption," and "triumph." After all, Hamilton was a man whose baseball career and personal life were derailed because of drug and alcohol abuse. But with plenty of help and determination Hamilton got clean, dedicated himself to his family, and turned his life around, culminating in a memorable performance in the 2008 Home Run Derby.

Fans were awed by Hamilton's perseverance in overcoming his addictions, and considered him a success story for people who've struggled with their own demons.

But one thing we tend to forget when we praise these success stories is that these people, like the rest of us, are only human.

A big story making the rounds today is that photos have popped up on the Web site Deadspin showing Josh Hamilton in a bar, shirtless, doing whipped cream body shots with a number of young women, hardly activities that would befit a man who has previously proclaimed his sobriety and his dedication to Jesus, his wife and kids. Hamilton himself even held a press conference today admitting that the incident took place in January, and said that he was embarrassed that he had fallen off the wagon in that particular moment.

Does this cast a shadow over his inspiring story of redemption? Hard to say at the moment. But does it make Josh Hamilton a horrible person? No, it only means that he's human, and humans make stupid mistakes.

In Hamilton's case, his mistakes are made all the more public. Considering how important his recovery was to his image in the first place, these photos prove even more damning. But such is the life for a professional athlete. In this current era of instant media coverage, every aspect of an athlete's life is capable of being covered. That means that every action, statement, or mistake can easily become public record. It's not enough anymore to simply watch your words in front of a reporter, or to stay away from the Paparazzi. In Hamilton's case, he did his deeds in a dive bar where someone happened to have a camera. That person sent them to Deadspin, and the rest is history.

Deadspin only did what it was supposed to do. If someone sends them photos of a player who's image is based on his victory over drugs and alcohol going wild in a bar, it's only right that the public knows this. There's been a mini-backlash against Deadspin for this, mostly because the photos don't actually show Hamilton drinking, and because some feel the Web site deliberately waiting until now to use seven-month-old photos to paint a negative picture about Hamilton. But what was Deadspin supposed to do, not run them? I may not agree with the subtext of delight Deadspin is taking taking in showing the photos ("look what Josh Hamilton is doing!") but it was Hamilton who engaged in those actions, Deadspin just posted the photos.

Is it fair? Probably not. Regular people wouldn't want their dirty laundry being aired out for the world to see. But this is the price professional athletes pay for being so visible to the public. As a celebrity, you can't go out and do body shots off a coed, because someone will have an incentive to reveal that fact.

For Hamilton, after overcoming his addictions (and having that fact stressed in magazines, TV shows, and books) the last thing he should have done was to go into a bar, let alone party with a group of girls. But he made a mistake. He's human. Now that the news has come out about it, he has to own up to his actions, like any one of us. But unlike most of us, Hamilton has to own up to those mistakes with the eyes of the entire world - fans, newspapers, blogs, TV, Radio - scrutinizing him.

And that's all Hamilton's fault. Despite his celebrity and his previous history, he chose to go into that bar and do the things he did. Don't make excuses for him, or berate Deadspin for exposing his indiscretions. But at the same time, don't label him an evil hypocrite, or think that this knocks a hero off a pedestal and now fans can never trust anyone.

Just think of him as somebody who did something he knew he shouldn't have done. He'll get skewered for it now, just like any of us would, only a little more publicly. Don't make it bigger or smaller than it is.

He's human, and he did something really, really stupid.

Why is Phil Mickelson imitating my golf swing?

I don't think it's supposed to look like that.

But seriously, Phil, it's great to have you back.

Courtesy of ESPN.com

World Championships of Fictional Sports Teams: Baseball first round results & semifinal bracket

Rules and Overview
First Round

You voted, you gave me reasons, and now we finally have our semifinalists! These outcomes were determined by you, the readers:

#1 Ghosts from Ray’s Cornfield (Field of Dreams)
Vs
#8 Rockford Peaches (A League of Their Own)
Winner: Ghosts
This one isn’t even close. And while I may not have been happy with some of the blatant bashing of women’s sports in the comments, it was just too obvious that the Ghosts had a lot more talent. That “pitching” that was supposedly the Peaches’ strength? Kevin Costner’s batting practice pitches were more potent. The lead gets so big that “Moonlight” Graham comes in to bat. With Terrance Mann on the sidelines expounding on the importance of baseball, Shoeless Joe and the Ghosts cruise to an easy victory on the Iowa Cornfield.

#3 California Angels (Angels in the Outfield)
Vs
#6 Durham Bulls (Bull Durham)
Winner: Angels
You don’t bet against God or little kids. The Bulls’ Davis and (Robbins) are too busy chasing after Susan Sarandon to really care about a meaningless exhibition, and God favors the wholesome. Christopher Lloyd provided the Angels with some great defensive plays, Joseph Gordon Levitt gets adopted by Danny Glover, and the Angels send the Bulls back down to the minors.

#2 Cleveland Indians (Major League)
Vs
#7 Chicago Cubs (Rookie of the Year)
Winner: Indians
Unfortunately for Henry "The Kid" Rowngartner", the one pitch he can throw is the one pitch Ceranno can hit. Ceranno has a field day and hits three home runs. When Rowengartner comes up to bat, he tries to use the “pitcher’s got a big butt” line on Ricky Vaughn, who proceeds to throw a 97 MPH fastball to the kid’s temple. Once the runs start to pile up, Busey goes off the deep end and murders Daniel Stern in the dugout. Willie Mays Hays (the Snipes version) steals nine bases and scores from first on a bunt from Taylor after the Cubs defense quits on the team in retaliation for bringing in a kid.

#4 Sandlot kids
Vs
#5 Hardball kids
Winner: Sandlot kids
This one was back and forth. At the beginning of the game, only Benny can get on the basepaths for the Sandlot kids, and he keeps getting stranded as the Hardball pitcher continually strikes out the side as Biggie Smalls bumps in his headphones. The Hardball team gets a big lead through five innings. Then, the Sandlot kids decide to pull out the big guns. They get the Beast to sit near the third base line as a mascot, which scares the living daylights out of the Hardball kids. Ham and Yeah-Yeah start talking trash from the dugout, which distracts the Hardball pitcher enough to put some runners on in front of Benny, who is inspired by the ghost of Babe Ruth to hit an inside the park home run. Plus, Coach Keanu’s gambling habit flares up again. He bets on the Sandlot kids, and then forfeits the game in order to get the payout. Diane Lane is not impressed, and proceeds to go make out with Mr. Mertle in retaliation.


Thank you to everyone who participated! Here were a few of my favorite reader comments:
-"There is no better groupie than Al the Angel. Plus, Christopher Lloyd has much better hair than Susan Sarandon," -Bryan Navarro.
-(On the ending of Rookie of the Year) "Come on, the kid saw his mom in the upper deck and she told him to throw an underhand pitch and it worked. How unrealistic is that? Come on," -Stephen Hobbs
-"Even the over-the-hill ghost will K Geena Davis," -Mark Nelson
-"With Cerrano and his voodo, the kid will be dreaming that he is pitching naked in front of a sold out crowd," -Alex Kunkle
-"As much as I love the Sandlot kids, they only have one black guy, Hardball kids have nine. Athleticism always wins at this age," -Kevin O'Brien


So now, that takes us to the semifinals, where our bracket looks like this:

#1 Ghosts from Ray's Cornfield (Field of Dreams)
Vs
#3 California Angels (Angels in the Outfield)

#2 Cleveland Indians (Major League)
Vs.
#4 Sandlot Kids (The Sandlot)


Once again, it's up to you, the readers, to determine who moves on to become the greatest fictional baseball team of all time. Remember, it's more than a popularity contest; you actully have to tell me reasons why you think one team would beat the other. Please leave a comment or e-mail me your reasons at stevensandberg@hotmail.com, and we can decide who moves on to the Championship Game!

World Championships of Fictional Sports Teams: Baseball bracket round 1

OK, here are the first round brackets for the baseball tourney of the World Championships of Fictional Sports Teams.

Here's what you have to do: Comment or e-mail me (stevensandberg@hotmail.com) your reasons for picking the winner in each matchup. Make sure that your reasons are more than just "I like the movie better." Give me a legitimate, baseball or movie-oriented reason why a particular team would defeat the other in a baseball game.

Remember, the worlds of the movies still apply. In other words, if a particular team was helped by a certain supernatural element, that also comes into play during this matchup (unless, in your breakdown, you can find a compelling or entertaining reason to take it out).

So read over the matchups, analyze the teams and players, and get me your reasons for picking the winners.

The matchups are as follows:

#1 Ghosts from Ray’s Cornfield (Field of Dreams)
Vs
#8 Rockford Peaches (A League Of Their Own)
Yes, I know that technically the Ghosts were based on the 1919 Chicago Black Sox, however, I feel bad excluding them from this contest. Plus, various aspects of the team, from Shoeless Joe Jackson batting righty in the movie (he was really a lefty) and the inclusion of young Doctor kid, means that there’s enough fictional elements to put the Ghosts in.

About the Ghosts:Shoeless Joe was described in the movie as the greatest hitter who ever lived, and he hit homer after homer in that Iowa Cornfield. Even sent a liner back at Kevin Costner for trying to throw a curve. Ghosts didn’t really show a whole lot of pitching. There seemed to be one guy who was way past his prime doing most of the work from the bump. (That’s something that always bugged me about Field of Dreams – how come Shoeless Joe’s ghost was totally in its prime, yet every other player seemed over the hill?) It’s safe to assume that there were some high run totals in that cornfield.

About the Peaches: The most dominant and popular team in the All-American Girls Baseball League. Geena Davis swung a mean bat, but didn’t get much help from a lineup that included Rosie O’Donnell (no way she hits a breaking ball) and Madonna. For the Peaches, considering that there wasn’t much in the way of batting, you’d have to think that it was pitching and defense that carried them. They were helmed by Tom Hank’s immortal Jimmy Dugan, a former major leaguer who didn’t put up with any nonsense (“there’s no crying in baseball!”). The Peaches have a definite edge in coaching.


#3 California Angels (Angels in the Outfield)
Vs
#6 Durham Bulls (Bull Durham)
Ahh yes, the most family-friendly baseball team against a team more concerned with scoring with Susan Sarandon.

About the Angels: At first glance, The Angels don’t really have a whole lot of power outside of Mitchell. Still, Mitchell seems like your typical Russell Branyan type who’ll give you 30 homers and not much else. Adrien Brody’s Danny Hemmerling was formerly a utility infielder, but lo and behold, angels gave him an edge at the place, so much so that he actually pinch hit for the power hitter Mitchell. The Angels’ main plate strategy: swing away, and let divine intervention do the rest. Tony Danza is the Angels’ ace. Even with the spirit of God shining down on him, there’s no way his body holds up over the course of the season. He’s a Jamie Moyer type, good for a 11-13 record and an ERA around 6.50. Skipper George Knox. Even in a Disneyfied world, he’s not above punching the play-by-play announcer on live television or cursing out his players in the locker room. Plus, he recognizes a good opportunity when he sees one: his season is already out of reach, so why not listen to the orphan boy who says he sees angels?

About the Bulls: Crash Davis is the main threat for the Bulls. He’s a career minor-leaguer, which means that he must’ve had numbers that were good for Triple-A but not quite good enough for a call-up. Let’s say 10 HR, .270 AVG with Durham. Again, there’s a reason this guy never made it to the big leagues. Meanwhile, Tim Robbins’ character Nuke LaLoosh is the top pitching prospect for the Bulls, and major league clubs are breathing down his neck. Plus, he’s got a great battery mate in Davis, who knows how to call a game.


#2 Cleveland Indians (Major League)
Vs
#7 Chicago Cubs (Rookie of the Year)
Two major league clubs with abysmal reputations go head to head. One team was intentionally built with the league's worst players ("Mitchell Friedman?") One team has a flamethrowing kid on the mound. Which one moves on to break the curse?

About the Indians: The Indians have one of the best power hitters in cinema history, Pedro Ceranno. He was good for about 40+ home runs, and could hit them a mile. But if you give him something off-speed, he’s completely useless, probably striking out 170 times in the season. Willie Mays Hayes had the speed to reach base on an infield hit, so long as he focused enough to stop trying to hit home runs. Roger Dorn was once a decent contact hitter, but his skills have deteriorated, and Jake Taylor is on his last legs after a once-productive career. But all they need is one game. The starting pitching for the Indians left something to be desired. Harris was the typical aging starter, but could be productive for a few innings by wiping foreign substances on the ball. Wild Thing Rick Vaughn has great velocity, but is prone to control issues if things don’t immediately go his way.

About the Cubs: For the Cubs The Kid could thrown in the 100s easily and overwhelm batters. But correct me if I’m wrong, did the kid ever throw anything other than a fastball? Eventually, hitters are going to know what’s coming. The ace of that team was Gary Busey. Gary freaking Busey. ‘Nuff said. As for coaching, all the Cubs' coach did was agree to let a kid pitch for the team. Way to throw the rest of your team under the bus. “Season’s over guys! You suck so much that we’re bringing in a 12-year-old!”


#4 Sandlot kids
Vs
#5 Hardball kids
Which one better personifies the youthfulness of the game, the talented team from the city, or the ragtag group from the sandlot? For that matter, which team was more talented?

About the Sandlot kids: From reader Anthony A.: "Clearly the leader of this team is Benjamin "The Jet" Franklin Rodriguez. The guy can play D and hit with the prowess of a 16 year old, but his best attribute is his lighting quicks. Whether its getting out of a pickle or running from the monster, this guy is sure to beat you with his speed. Plus the guy made it to the majors, which is living proof that he is a tween superstar on the diamond. Next up is Hamilton "Ham" Porter. He is the Yogi Bera of this team. He is an adept catcher with staying home run power, but he most remembered most for his classic one liners. Whether its getting into the pretty-boy baseball teams head or berating the weakest member of the Sandlot team (Scotty Smalls),"
Still, there were some holes on the team. DeNunez couldn't pitch (he even gave up a home run to Smalls). Speaking of Smalls, the kid was basically there out of charity. As Anthony A. put it "he failed at boyhood."

About the Hardball kids: Let's face it, Keanu Reeves is not coaching any team to glory by himself, which makes me believe that there had to be a lot of hidden talent on that team waiting to come out. The Hardball kids were dominant on the mound, as their ace was in a zone whenever "Big Poppa" played on his headphones. He couldn't concentrate without the song, though.


So there you have it, the baseball bracket. Now it's up to you. Get me your compelling reasons for the winning teams, and I will take all of them into consideration before the winners are announced. You can't just vote for a team, you need to give me a reason why one team would beat another at a baseball game.

Play ball.