Hi all, just wanted to wish you all a Happy Thanksgiving. And to officially put you in the spirit, Drew Sharp of the Detroit Free Press proudly uses his gifts of logic to persuade us on why we should love a certain Thanksgiving tradition.
[T]radition should stand for something in sports, regardless of the outcomes.
[Ummm, that's the opposite of how traditions should work, right? If you are going to do something over and over and over and over and over again, you would probably want that something to have an awesome outcome, as opposed to an undeniably brutal outcome, no?]
Critics also should realize that the Thanksgiving game is the perfect TV burial ground for the Lions. Where would you put them if you took Thanksgiving away?
[Best. Point. Ever. This is my new favorite logic disaster that we've covered here at The Theorem. Sharp's main argument for not stripping the Lions of their annual Thanksgiving Day game? The Lions are SOOOO awful that if you took away their Thanksgiving Day game, you and the rest of the country might be forced to watch them on some OTHER day during the season! That deserves two QEDs.]
Plus, the Lions’ Thanksgiving game isn’t going anywhere as long as the Big Three remain among the NFL’s most supportive corporate partners.
[Ummmm, jeez, this is a little awkward, right? I mean, it is going to be potentially difficult for the Big Three (seriously? They still get to be called the "Big" Three?) to be a corporate partner of the NFL when they lose the "corporate" part of that phrase. Partners are good too, though. (See, Kemp, Shawn) (Yes! Finally, a Shawn Kemp tag!)]
I was all set to end this post on the high note of my gratuitous Shawn Kemp reference, but this closing anecdote was too perfect when juxtaposed with the final argument that precedes it.
Thanksgiving football remains special here, regardless of how poorly the Lions perform.
[Fair enough. I'm not doubting that the people of Detroit have many fond memories of childhood trips with their Dad to see the Lions play on Turkey Day. I wonder if Drew Sharp has just such a story to hammer home his point that THANKSGIVING FOOTBALL REMAINS SPECIAL HERE?]
My father took his three sons to the 1969 Thanksgiving game against Minnesota in a driving snowstorm.
[Yes....]
The Lions didn’t often beat the Vikings then. Of course, they don’t beat them now, either, but I digress. The Vikings blanked the Lions, 27-0.
[That's ok, that's ok. I'm sure you still had an awesome time....]
As my body temperature dropped, I asked my father a question.
[Could we come back again next year??? Pleeeeeeease, Dad!?!]
Considering we were having turkey for dinner that night, was it really necessary to subject ourselves to turkey at lunch?
[.....]
He never again took me to a Thanksgiving game — for which I was eternally grateful.
[Special, indeed.]
Here's wishing that your Thanksgiving remains special to you are yours as well!
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Peter King Gets Paid For This: Vol. 7
A couple of quick lines of Pete trying to reason through a debatable topic in his Tuesday column.
An e-mailer writes:
"If you had to choose the NFC Pro Bowl rushers, who would you leave out among Clinton Portis, Adrian Peterson, Michael Turner and Brandon Jacobs (presuming he is healthy and will play the rest of the season)?"
Pete's response:
The NFL names one running back and one fullback starter per conference for the Pro Bowl, with two substitute running backs. You ask a great question, and my initial answer would be I'd have to leave Jacobs off.
[OK, as big a fan of Jacobs as I am, he is still part of an larger (and awesomer) RB-by-committee approach in NY, so I can buy an argument from Pete that Jacobs isn't the second-best RB in the league.]
That would pain me hugely because I think the only back better than Jacobs is Peterson...
[Er, I mean that I could accept an argument from Pete that Jacobs isn't at the top of the league in important statistics that measure productivity.]
...and because Jacobs is first in the NFL in yards per carry (5.4) and second in rushing touchdowns (11).
[Damnit, Pete! Wait, he said that he'd leave Jacobs out, right? (scrolling back up...) Yep, he did. He must have some IRON-CLAD arguments, then, for putting those other guys ahead of Jacobs. I bet I will feel stupid for mocking his thought process after he tells me why the other guys are better selections....]
But you can't leave Portis or Peterson off, and it's hard to leave off Turner....
[Well, I do feel stupid; but not for the reason stated above.]
An e-mailer writes:
"If you had to choose the NFC Pro Bowl rushers, who would you leave out among Clinton Portis, Adrian Peterson, Michael Turner and Brandon Jacobs (presuming he is healthy and will play the rest of the season)?"
Pete's response:
The NFL names one running back and one fullback starter per conference for the Pro Bowl, with two substitute running backs. You ask a great question, and my initial answer would be I'd have to leave Jacobs off.
[OK, as big a fan of Jacobs as I am, he is still part of an larger (and awesomer) RB-by-committee approach in NY, so I can buy an argument from Pete that Jacobs isn't the second-best RB in the league.]
That would pain me hugely because I think the only back better than Jacobs is Peterson...
[Er, I mean that I could accept an argument from Pete that Jacobs isn't at the top of the league in important statistics that measure productivity.]
...and because Jacobs is first in the NFL in yards per carry (5.4) and second in rushing touchdowns (11).
[Damnit, Pete! Wait, he said that he'd leave Jacobs out, right? (scrolling back up...) Yep, he did. He must have some IRON-CLAD arguments, then, for putting those other guys ahead of Jacobs. I bet I will feel stupid for mocking his thought process after he tells me why the other guys are better selections....]
But you can't leave Portis or Peterson off, and it's hard to leave off Turner....
[Well, I do feel stupid; but not for the reason stated above.]
Monday, November 24, 2008
Let the ND Hate Begin!
As would be expected, Notre Dame is taking heat from everyone (even though Jason Whitlock would have you believe that he is only one). As a program that is CLEARLY not performing up to expectations, Weis and the Irish are worthy targets for criticism. And God knows (seriously, He does; He is a season-ticket holder) there are plenty of viable angles to take when criticizing ND. But why, then, am I seeing so many pointless approaches?? Here's a common one from the Boston Globe.
...unless BC wins the next two games and the Atlantic Coast Conference title (with the automatic bid to the Orange Bowl), the Eagles will go to a less prestigious, lower-paying bowl than Notre Dame.
[The "Bowl games should be like arbitration hearings" argument. Let the LOGIC FAIL begin!]
We all know the bowl business is not so much about how many games are won and lost, but how many people see those wins and losses.
[Oh, OK. So we're on the same page? Cool. That was easy.]
BC - fairly or not - is regarded as one of the "have-nots."
[Ugh. There is no element of "fairness" in play here. Ticket sales = All Bowl games care about. Convince 25,000 BC fans in their hideous yellow shirts to fly to Florida for New Year's. If not, stop whining.]
[Last season,] BC went to Orlando and the Champs Sports Bowl.... "We did have a great time and we brought about 6,000 people," said BC athletic director Gene DeFilippo.
[FYI: The Champs Sports Bowl is played at the Citrus Bowl, which seats around 70,000. Six-thousand is a good start, though.]
And even if tickets are an issue... an SEC team with a large and vocal fan base such as South Carolina or Mississippi could fill the void.
[Citing the underlying issue of ticket sales, and then admitting your team can't sell tickets? Yep, you guessed it, it's LOGIC FAIL time.]
The point here is simple: Enough catering to Notre Dame.
[I get it. You are pissed that ND gets more national attention than YOUR Catholic boys. But, c'mon. Trying to make a profit = catering to Notre Dame?? Wrong. And pointless. If you want to be in the "more prestigious" meaningless bowl games, then bring more than 6,000 fans.]
...unless BC wins the next two games and the Atlantic Coast Conference title (with the automatic bid to the Orange Bowl), the Eagles will go to a less prestigious, lower-paying bowl than Notre Dame.
[The "Bowl games should be like arbitration hearings" argument. Let the LOGIC FAIL begin!]
We all know the bowl business is not so much about how many games are won and lost, but how many people see those wins and losses.
[Oh, OK. So we're on the same page? Cool. That was easy.]
BC - fairly or not - is regarded as one of the "have-nots."
[Ugh. There is no element of "fairness" in play here. Ticket sales = All Bowl games care about. Convince 25,000 BC fans in their hideous yellow shirts to fly to Florida for New Year's. If not, stop whining.]
[Last season,] BC went to Orlando and the Champs Sports Bowl.... "We did have a great time and we brought about 6,000 people," said BC athletic director Gene DeFilippo.
[FYI: The Champs Sports Bowl is played at the Citrus Bowl, which seats around 70,000. Six-thousand is a good start, though.]
And even if tickets are an issue... an SEC team with a large and vocal fan base such as South Carolina or Mississippi could fill the void.
[Citing the underlying issue of ticket sales, and then admitting your team can't sell tickets? Yep, you guessed it, it's LOGIC FAIL time.]
The point here is simple: Enough catering to Notre Dame.
[I get it. You are pissed that ND gets more national attention than YOUR Catholic boys. But, c'mon. Trying to make a profit = catering to Notre Dame?? Wrong. And pointless. If you want to be in the "more prestigious" meaningless bowl games, then bring more than 6,000 fans.]
Peter King Gets Paid For This: Vol. 6
I thought, for a moment, that Pete was going to make it through an entire MMQB unscathed this week. He almost did.
Adrian Peterson knows teams are starting to figure him out.
[He does? They are? Second in the NFL in rushing with 1180 yards. A robust 4.9 yards per carry average. Sounds about right.]
I'll have a story in Sports Illustrated this week, delving into the mind of one of the game's smartest players, Tampa Bay linebacker Derrick Brooks..... Brooks and the Bucs did a good job on Peterson....
[19 carries, 85 yards. Eh. How bout we say an "acceptable" job?]
In the story, I explain how Brooks and the Bucs tried to throw a front-seven net around Peterson on every logical rushing down...
[I'm pretty sure this is a commonly-applied strategy, no?]
...because the times he gashes a defense are usually the times he gets a hole....
[And that's what makes Peterson so amazing! Gaining yards when he gets a hole?? Wow, try outsmarting THAT, Belichick!]
"It says a lot about Derrick that he knows all that about me, even though he doesn't play me very often,'' Peterson said.
[Seriously! It's like Brooks is stalking you! Knowing that you gain yards when you have holes to run through?? That dude is probably watching you RIGHT NOW.]
Thumbs up and thumbs down for big Marriotts, like the Marriott Westshore in Tampa.
[OK?]
Good: High-def TVs in the rooms.... The Bad: Marriotts simply have to change their shampoo.
[If I flipped formats today, and put the quoted material in brackets, and my observations in italics, you might believe it right about now, wouldn't you?]
Marriotts have been using some Bath and Body Works girly shampoo for the past year or so, and when I get out of the shower, the perfume smell is revolting. Shampooing with soap is the only option -- a grotesque one, but a necessary evil now -- to avoid smelling like a woman.
[Mrs. Pete King just fired her new Bath and Body Works Cucumber Melon conditioner at her computer screen in a fit of rage. And now she's cutting off all of her hair with a pair of coupon-clipping scissors while muttering "Revolting? I'll show you revolting!!" to the dog.]
Where is this business [sportswriting] going?
[Someone should start a sarcastic observational website that is premised on that very question. I bet it would be fun.]
Adrian Peterson knows teams are starting to figure him out.
[He does? They are? Second in the NFL in rushing with 1180 yards. A robust 4.9 yards per carry average. Sounds about right.]
I'll have a story in Sports Illustrated this week, delving into the mind of one of the game's smartest players, Tampa Bay linebacker Derrick Brooks..... Brooks and the Bucs did a good job on Peterson....
[19 carries, 85 yards. Eh. How bout we say an "acceptable" job?]
In the story, I explain how Brooks and the Bucs tried to throw a front-seven net around Peterson on every logical rushing down...
[I'm pretty sure this is a commonly-applied strategy, no?]
...because the times he gashes a defense are usually the times he gets a hole....
[And that's what makes Peterson so amazing! Gaining yards when he gets a hole?? Wow, try outsmarting THAT, Belichick!]
"It says a lot about Derrick that he knows all that about me, even though he doesn't play me very often,'' Peterson said.
[Seriously! It's like Brooks is stalking you! Knowing that you gain yards when you have holes to run through?? That dude is probably watching you RIGHT NOW.]
Thumbs up and thumbs down for big Marriotts, like the Marriott Westshore in Tampa.
[OK?]
Good: High-def TVs in the rooms.... The Bad: Marriotts simply have to change their shampoo.
[If I flipped formats today, and put the quoted material in brackets, and my observations in italics, you might believe it right about now, wouldn't you?]
Marriotts have been using some Bath and Body Works girly shampoo for the past year or so, and when I get out of the shower, the perfume smell is revolting. Shampooing with soap is the only option -- a grotesque one, but a necessary evil now -- to avoid smelling like a woman.
[Mrs. Pete King just fired her new Bath and Body Works Cucumber Melon conditioner at her computer screen in a fit of rage. And now she's cutting off all of her hair with a pair of coupon-clipping scissors while muttering "Revolting? I'll show you revolting!!" to the dog.]
Where is this business [sportswriting] going?
[Someone should start a sarcastic observational website that is premised on that very question. I bet it would be fun.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
