Cashing out

It was a metaphorical jolly stomping in the Fens - an early season referendum on the moves made by Yankees' GM Brian Cashman.

The Sox beat the Yanks in every conceivable way over a three game stretch - out-slugging, out pitching, and just plain out-executing the highest paid team in the majors. The Yankees, with over $200 million in annual salary (since the start of the 2005 season the Steinbrenners have spent over $1 billion on the team and seen their record slide) - again - the Bombers are off to a 9-9 start, have the worst bullpen in baseball, and have the worst overall ERA of any pitching staff in the majors.

Here's what else $200 million has bought New York -

A team outscored 25-16 in three games by their arch-rival.

A team that saw 11 runs and two leads evaporate when the bullpen entered the game.

A team whose second biggest free-agent pitching acquisition was smoked for eight earned after being spotted a 6-0 lead.

A team that saw home stolen on them with two outs in a close game. Let's face it - that last one shows a complete lack of respect for the Yankees. There's no aura left, they're just another team.

And to compound matters - the Red Sox don't even have the second highest payroll in baseball - they're fourth (and a lot closer to being seventh than they are to being third). They lost ugly, are unable to hold a lead, and just look brutal in the field (great play at first by the sure-handed Mark Texiera, huh?).

Anyone else wondering which Celtic team is going to show up for game five? The one that's shot ugly in the close games, or the one that dismantled the Bulls on their home-court in game three?

Kudos to the Bruins for moving on. It would be nice to see Boston land the Stanley Cup before the end of the decade to get that final jewel in the championship crown for the big four. They do it, that will mean that between 2001 and now the city will be home to three Super Bowls, two World Series, an NBA (I still think a second one of these is unlikely this year) and an NHL championship. Not bad.

Picking up the slack

Cassel is still a work in progress, however, signs are encouraging..

I'm not going to post the Brady-Cassel comparison this week - mostly because the Boston Globe has already done it. But it is interesting to note that other media outlets are finally getting that comparing Cassel to Brady '07 isn't the appropriate comp to make. They're finally figuring out that the appropriate comp is for the late-round pick, career back-up getting the start is to compare him to when Brady was the late-round pick, career back-up.

Its about freakin' time.

While I'm not going to repost the numbers here, having provided the link above, I am going to say that it's interesting to note that the numbers through seven games are remarkably similar, and with the exception of in the area of sacks, touchdowns, and interceptions, Cassel leads Brady version .01 in almost every other category - and neither leads the other by any sort of significant number in any category.

It's creepy.

Other thoughts and observations...

The Giants front office is gutless.

Plaxico Burress won't start the game against the Steelers as punishment for actions detrimental to the team - harassing officials last week, not showing up for treatments, and other petulant actions are at issue. Sure, he plays and collects all his salary. Wow. What a punishment.

Would the Giants have just benched Burress for the first couple of plays of the game had the team been playing the Lions? Or would they have suspended him again? I'm guessing the latter.

But against the mighty Steelers? No. It's all hands on deck for that, discipline be damned.

I notice they had no problem suspending him for a game against the lowly Seahawks.

Other boneheads...

Former Jets receiver Don Maynard said some dumb things this past weekend.

"You have 106 coaches in the NFC that's never played pro ball, you got 126 in the AFC that's never played pro ball," Maynard said. "You got 64 coaches that never played college football, so now you know why the knowledge of pro football has gone downhill. They don't even do what we did in offenses and defenses."

Never mind the fact that three of the last five Super Bowl winning coaches never signed a contract to play in the NFL (Bill Belichick, Jon Gruden, Tom Coughlin); never mind the fact that the man for whom the championship trophy is named, Vince Lombardi, never played a down of professional football; or that Maynard's own NFL coach with whom he won a ring - Weeb Ewbank, never played professional football (that's eight rings from five coaches who obviously have no idea what they're doing by Maynard's reckoning - more if you include Green Bay's pre-Super Bowl Championships). Never mind all of that.

Let's just talk about one of the biggest differences in the game - the playbook. When I was in high school in the mid 1980's, we ran a pro-style offense...from the late 1960's and 1970's, with a dash of the 80's thrown in. The closer we got to current day, even then, the more complicated the plays became. This guy probably couldn't decipher today's playbook- so, yeah, he's right, they're not playing the offenses and defensed they did then - they're playing much more complicated schemes.

On second thought, I think I am going to address the boneheaded thought that someone who never played pro football is less qualified. There have been 42 Super Bowls, of those 42 championships 26 rings/trophies went home with 15 (head) coaches that never played pro football. There are only 26 coaches that even have earned the right to wear Super Bowl rings, and 15, essentially 58 percent, haven't played a down in the NFL. They account for 62 percent of the wins in the big game.

More impressively, eight of those coaches that Maynard thinks lack the requisite background account for 19 rings. Thirty-five percent of the coaches on the list account for 45 percent of those wins. Some of the names of the unqualified (Maynard's complaint, not mine):

Vince Lombardi
Weeb Ewbank
Bill Walsh
Joe Gibbs
Bill Parcells
George Seifert
Jimmy Johnson
Mike Shanahan
Bill Belichick

Lombard, Ewbank, Walsh, and Gibbs are all in the Hall of Fame for their coaching acumen. All the others are, at worst, in the discussion.

So what have we learned?

That Don Maynard is a total ass-clown with the football IQ of a brain-dead platypus.

Sigh.

Mass-destruction and a fond farewell

The last time any region has experienced a decade with as much dominance over the professional sports scene was probably in the 1960's when Massachusetts saw titles in the NBA practically every year, closed out the decade (1969-70 season) with a Stanley Cup, and sent the Sox to the 1967 World Series and the Patriots to the 1963 AFL Championship (both lost).

From 1961 until 1970 the city was home to nine titles in the big four of professional sports...of course eight of those came from the Celtics.

With the '08 baseball season in front of us still, we're looking at three more seasons before the end of the decade (starting from '01) and Boston already has six titles spread over three sports.

While there were more titles in the 1960's, by virtue of where the titles have come from - the Patriots (3), the Red Sox (2), and the Celtics (1) - and how much of it happened.

Consider - since 2001 the Patriots finally rose to prominence, becoming the most dominant football team of the decade, winning three Super Bowls, appearing in a fourth, and amassing the two longest regular season winning streaks in league history including the only undefeated 16-game regular season.

Move into baseball and you have the Red Sox who have swept their National League counterpart in the World Series twice - the first of the Championships after turning the table on the arch-rival Yankees. En route to delivering their first Series Title since 1918, the Sox became the first team to ever overcome an 0-3 deficit in the ALCS and had a hand in dealing the worst meltdown in the history of the post-season to their rivals. It was a thing of beauty. Add to all that the fact that the Sox are the only team to win two since 2001 and the Yankees are 0-2, it's only icing for the members of Red Sox Nation.

That brings us to the Celtics.

For the better part of the decade the Celtics have been awful. I mean, brutally bad. Not Knicks bad - they weren't carrying either the payroll nor the highly touted talent - but they were scraping the bottom.

In delivering this year's Championship, the team was part of the NBA's biggest turn around ever, extended their league leading number of championship banners to 17, and prevented Phil Jackson from passing Red Auerbach as the coach with the most Championships. Putting together this season's edition, Danny Ainge positioned the team to compete for the rest of the decade.

On the periphery, taking the place of previous Boston area teams that got to the Big Dance, but not able to seal the deal has been the New England Revolution. The Revs have been the runners up to the MLS Cup four times ('02, '05, '06, and '07).

Of the six major league sports now represented in Boston (including the Major League Lacrosse Boston Cannons), New England/Boston has made appearances in the finals of five of the leagues, missing out on only hockey. The Cannons lost by two goals in the 2004 championship game.

In the combined seven seasons since the inception of the 2001 seasons there have been 41 potential titles (hockey missed one due to labor strife). The teams from the Boston Bay area has had teams compete for 12 of those (29.3 percent) and won close to 15 percent of the titles.

By any account, those are impressive numbers.

Speaking of impressive numbers and the post season...

While he hasn't officially announced retirement, Curt Schilling is done. His shoulder is cooked.

It's been a fun ride while it's lasted. I haven't always agreed with Schill's opinions - but as someone who makes his scratch as a reporter, I can tell you, he's a reporter's dream. An absolute quote machine and a clutch performer.

He's the sort of person that I think I would not get along with in a personal relationship - but he'll always get a pass for bringing Boston their first World Series title since Babe Ruth was on the team.

I wish him well recovering from his shoulder surgeries and in whatever his subsequent career is.

Observations on the Hub of the (Sports) Universe

I guess Kermit was wrong...it's easy being Green.

During this decade Massachusetts has seen three Lombardi Trophies, two World Series titles, and just earned a seventeenth banner for the rafters of the Bahstin Gahden. Historically, there's still something missing...Bruins, I'm looking at you. You have two season left to get over the hump before the new decade begins.

Reebok has already commemorated the Celtics' achievement with a great ad that can be seen over at A Red Sox State of Maine.

Here's another from them -



From David Letterman -

"The hookers in Times Square are offering the Willie Randolph special. They'll screw you in the middle of the night when no one is looking."

An observation on Tiger's win...

It was impressive that he did this on one leg, but let's not confuse what Mark Twain called "a good walk spoiled," with things like Tyler Hamilton winning a stage of the Tour de France (and subsequently completing the race) while supporting his weight on a collar bone broken in two places (in one of the earliest stages of the Tour), or Reggie White playing with a torn hamstring (according to the doctors, the connection at the bottom had torn cleanly, causing the muscle to roll up like a window shade), or Drew Bledsoe playing with hardware holding the finger bones in his throwing hand together, or Jack Youngblood playing through the NFL playoffs on a broken leg.

It's golf.

It's not like Tiger is sprinting down to first and rounding the bag, or chasing down a fly-ball. He doesn't drive the lane with the big bodies laying some weight on him.

Let's keep this in perspective.

Woods was impressive winning the US Open on one leg. But let's be realistic - having been a caddy and seen the people who golf (and I saw a lot of Joh Daly-esque physiques out there) and I can honestly say - the hardest part of golf, from a conditioning and strain on the body stand-point over the course of 18 holes is borne by the caddies.

Young Guns...

I've mentioned this before, but I think it bears mentioning again.

Sox fans as a whole are getting spoiled.

Each time a pitcher goes down, he gets replaced with a more than adequate replacement as a starter. And it seems like the rotation just keeps getting younger.

The current rotation -

Masterson (23)- 4-1, 3.00
Lester (24) - 6-3, 3.18
Matsuzaka (27) - 8-0, 2.53
Beckett (28) - 7-4, 3.87
Wakefield (41) - 4-4, 4.19

Should the youngsters falter, Bartolo Colon is waiting in the wings, as is (likely) Schilling, who has not had to rush back due to the success of the youngsters. None of that includes young guys like David Pauley, Clay Buchholz, Daniel Bard, or Michael Bowden.

Let's face it - from a starting pitching standpoint, the Sox are loaded. If the team's bullpen hasn't had so many meltdowns, none of the current starters (other than Masterson) would have fewer than six wins, and I would venture to say that Lester would have at least nine, as would Matsuzaka whose first start was a no decision.

First Amendment

Whenever a reporter or any other sort of pundit says something stupid, a-la Don Imus or Jemele Hill, and gets suspended or fired, all the idiots come out of the wood work defending the right of the idiot to say what they said, and claiming suppression of the reporters' rights to freedom of expression.

I want to remind all the idiots out there that, yes, people like Jemele Hill certainly have the right to make stupid, ill-thought out, and offensive statements. ESPN as her employer has the right to make a statement as well. They have a right to state their disapproval at being used as a forum to propagate any sort of writing they find offensive, and possibly damaging to their bottom line.

What the critics of ESPN don't get is that ESPN has not suppressed Hill's ability to express herself freely in our society. They have just removed themselves from being her forum, her vehicle for dissemination.

They have done nothing to violate her civil rights. It would be no different than ESPN refusing to give space on their site, or in their magazine to a neo-Nazi spokesman who wanted the company to print his editorial comments regarding the superiority of the Aryan Race.

Sure, Hill's statements were meant to be hyperbole, but it's unconscionable that she even typed the line, "Rooting for the Celtics is like saying Hitler was a victim," let alone submitted it for publication.

It's one thing to make the comparison to The Evil Empire - a Star Wars reference, a reference to a piece of fiction - and another to link a sports franchise and its fan base to the world's most notorious genocidal mass-murderer of the last century.

As much as Hill deserves the suspension and a subsequent firing, I want to know what ESPN is doing about the editors who let this travesty make it into print.

Thoughts and opinions

Proportionately speaking, no two teams in any professional sport have dominated their league the way the Lakers and the Celtics have. This latest meeting is the 62nd NBA Championship and at the end of it, no matter who wins or who loses, the two teams will combine to account for 50 percent of the league's titles.

To put that into perspective - the next two teams with the most titles, the Bulls and Spurs, combine for 10 total titles.

Counting each conferences' entry into the finals as a separate entry, the two teams account for 49 of 124 possible appearances in the finals.

No two (professional) teams in the Unites States account for as large a percentage of finals competitors.

Even if you wanted to be anal and discount the five wins as the Minneapolis Lakers, that's still 27 championships and 43 appearances.

Just going Super Bowl Era alone, there are no two teams that even come close to approaching the 50 percent mark in combined titles. Of the 103 World Series played, the Yankees and Cardinals combine for around 33 or 34 percent of the titles at 36 combined. The closest is in the NHL where the Canadiens and the Maple Leafs make up 37 of the 83 titles that are held by teams still active in the league (in other words, there are teams no longer in existence that hold titles that would push it to 92 titles since the 1914-1915 seasons).

That's domination.

One last basketball observation - I would like to see the Celtics win, however, I don't think they will. How I hope I'm wrong regarding that.

Required reading...

Peter King's Tuesday Morning Quarterback, essentially his mail bag for his Monday Morning Quarterback column at si.com should be required reading this week for everybody. If you haven't read it, you should.

His readers, for the most part, are responding to his Monday column dealing with Aaron Kampman and the tornadoes that tore apart Iowa last week. They are some of the more eloquent and touching letters I have seen from any columnists' fan base, and deserving of both our time and consideration.

Three for four...

Winning a championship is an exceedingly difficult feat on any level of sports. Even getting to the big game is a chore.

Last year, after an undefeated season, the Patriots lost in the Super Bowl. To stress the "any level" point - the Aussie rules team I play on was bounced in the national tournament one game shy of the championship match after an undefeated season.

Boston teams are three for four in just getting to that championship game, with only the Bruins not making it quite as far as the other three. And they still made it to the post season.

Right now the teams are one and one, waiting on the Celtics to see if that winning percentage jumps to .667, or drops to .333.

East Coast Bias

There is, quite often, an accusation leveled at the national sports press of an East Coast bias in the corps' reporting.

There is probably some truth to favoritism of the East Coast teams, not because of proximity to the New York offices of Sports Illustrated, or the Connecticut offices of ESPN, but because the teams on top of the pile draw the most attention. East Coast teams in the major team sports, except for basketball, have won or represented more than half of all championship contenders for an extended period of time.

Starting from the low end of the totem pole, over the last 14 seasons in the NHL the East Coast has been represented in 12 of the 28 potential contestants for the Stanley Cup. Teams from states that abut the Atlantic (in the US) have represented six of the sport's winners. Those totals go up when eastern Canada is in the mix.

Since the Bills started their run of four straight appearances in the Super Bowl there have been 34 teams that have vied for the Lombardi trophy. Twenty teams from the states on the Eastern Seaboard have been among the 34 fighting to raise the silver trophy each January or February and nine of the winners have been from the East.

Since 1994 in Major League Baseball 14 of the 26 teams that have made it to the 13 World Series held over that span. Nine of the winners have been from the East.

Out of the 44 pro championships noted above, 24 have had a champion from the East - 54.5 percent of all the winners. Forty-six of the 88 contestants have come from the East accounting for 52.3 percent of the teams represented in the games. The teams have won at a rate of 52.2 percent.

In recent years divisions like the NFC West and the NL West have cycled into down periods, sometimes producing division champions that barely breaking a .500 winning percentage.

A simple rule in sports has always been that winning garners attention. The more you win, the more attention you get. It is why great players on bad teams have difficulties with Hall of Fame recognition.

There are players and teams off the East Coast deserving of attention, but until the winning percentage swings the other way, the focus is going to stay on the old powers like New York and Boston.

Between a rock and a hard case

Football players sacrifice their bodies for a lot of reasons. For many it's the large salaries, for some it's the love of the game, and for others it's the glory that a championship brings. They sacrifice their health and well being. They put a lot on the line.

They are professional sports' tough guys (face it, hockey players are tougher, but that's only because they're certifiably insane - it' not the same thing as just being tough).

Players garner reputations for toughness and durability. Brett Favre has played in every game since he got his first start...in a leather helmet. At least it feels like that's when he got his first start. Tom Brady and Peyton Manning also have started every game since starting - in spite of being banged up. Drew Bledsoe won consecutive games with a pin holding together the tip of his index finger on his throwing hand (and he wasn't leading those comebacks by handing the ball off). He even tried to come back into the now famous Jets game after shearing an artery in his chest (sure, he wasn't in his right mind, but you get the point).

Hall-of-Fame Rams defensive end Jack Youngblood famously played in the NFC Championship game and subsequently Super Bowl XIV with a stress fracture in his left leg. Lawrence Taylor and Emmitt Smith were both major factors in playoff games for their respective teams while each played with a separated shoulder. Terrell Davis famously suffers from debilitating migraines, and had one during Super Bowl XXXII. According to Davis it was so bad that he had trouble seeing. It didn't stop him from lining up, if for nothing else, as a decoy in Denver's backfield.

Recently Antonio Gates and Philip Rivers, both listed as questionable and game-time decisions for the Chargers' loss to the Patriots in this past weekend's AFC Championship game, toughed out the game in the hopes of landing that Super Bowl berth.

Why? Because opportunities to get to the Super Bowl are rare. Many players never get there. Half the teams in the NFL have never won a Super Bowl. Eleven teams account for 35 of the 41 titles. Approximately 18 percent of the league's teams haven't even played in the game.

Dan Marino lost in the big game in his rookie year, and then never got back...in 17 seasons. Linebacker Clay Matthews played for 19 seasons and never made it. Neither did quarterback Vinny Testaverde in his 21 seasons.

As Ron Jaworski is fond of noting - winning in the NFL is hard.

It's why so many of these players play hurt. They believe they give their team the best chance of winning.

Which brings us to LaDainian Tomlinson.

Tomlinson is catching a lot of flack for being on the sideline while his team put up field goal after field goal in Sunday's match-up with the Patriots. He might be as injured as he is now claiming, however, that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve to be called out by the former players that are now part of the entertainment machine that is sports journalism (and when your toughness is questioned by Deion Sanders...well that's just sad).

Tomlinson is defending himself, saying he was no better than 50 percent and that he felt that the healthy duo of Michael Turner and Darren Sproles gave the Chargers the best chance to win. He can defend himself in this manner all he wants - but he dug himself this hole. HE told the team doctors in the days leading up to the game that he was well enough to be taken off of the injury report. HE told the press that he was 90 percent in the days leading up to the game. So, either HE lied to the doctors, press, and San Diego fans in the days leading up to the game, or HE's lying now in order to deflect criticism.

Either way, he deserves to be questioned...deserves to take the hit, so to speak - whether for his toughness, or for unrealistically raising the expectations of the San Diego fans and teammates.

One thing's for sure - it appears that it would have taken being in a wheelchair or on crutches to keep his injured teammates off the field. And, hell, Rivers had [arthroscopic] knee surgery surgery six days before the game.

Tomlinson best get used to being criticized for this one, because it's not going to stop.

Much ado...and at least one answer

There's a lot being made of the Giants 9 game road winning streak going into Green Bay, and not to take anything away from the Giants who have been road warriors this season, but the Packers haven't been slouches at home, going into this game with an 8-1 record at Lambeau this season.

How about this statistic for home field advantage - the Patriots have won 13 straight at the Razor, last losing to the Jets over 14 months ago. Also, the team is undefeated in Championship games at Foxborough, and undefeated in post-season games held in Massachusetts in sub-freezing temperatures since Bill Belichick took over the team.

The hosting teams have four Super Bowl rings in five appearances and are 6-2 in this round of the playoffs, the second loss was by Tom Brady in last season's match-up in Indianapolis. Brady is 3-0 in championship games held in Foxborough.

As for the answer...

Teresa posed a question to me - has the AFC East hosted the best and worst teams in the NFL before this season? Yes. The first time the East held the dubious distinction was in 1984 when the Dolphins and a rookie Dan Marino led the league with a 14-2 record while the Buffalo Bills brought up the rear with a 2-14 record.

All of this has inspired the final note...a note on futility -

The Arizona Cardinals, the longest active franchise in professional football - actually predating the league currently known NFL - hasn't won a championship since 1947. The team was founded in 1899 under the name the Morgan Athletic Club on the South Side of Chicago. It later became the Racine (Street) Cardinals, then the Chicago Cardinals, St. Louis Cardinals, Phoenix Cardinals, and finally the Arizona Cardinals.

In 108 years this team has won two championships, an average of one every 54 years. Their last title was 20 years before the Super Bowl.

This team did Chicagoans a favor by moving from the Windy City.

The teams that haven't even made it to the Super Bowl include the Browns, Cardinals, Lions, Saints, Texans and Jaguars. As far as opportunities - All but the Texans and Jaguars were in existence at the beginning of the Super Bowl Era (technically the Saints for the second). The Texans and the Jags have been around for, combined, less than 20 Super Bowls (the Jags first year was 1995, the Texans 2002).

Then there are those who have made it to the big game only to lose - Eagles, Bills, Vikings, Oilers/Titans, Bengals, Chargers, Falcons, Panthers, and Seahawks. Unless the Chargers can get past the Patriots tomorrow, it means that the winner of this Super Bowl will come from the pool of 16 winners of the 41 previous Super Bowls.

Of the three active teams in the playoffs that previously won, all are multiple winners - the Giants with two (1986, 1990), the Packers with three (1967, 1968, 1996), and the Patriots with three (2001, 2003, 2004). Other multiple winners include with five each - the Steelers, 49ers, and Cowboys; with three are the Raiders and Redskins; and with two are the Dolphins, Colts, and Broncos.

Of the 41 Super Bowls already played, 11 teams account for 35 of the titles - if you're wondering why the math is off, I think it's because of the whole affair between the Cleveland and Baltimore with the Browns' move and subsequent name change, however, I might just be missing a team in there.

Either way, it's likely that a franchise that has already won a Super Bowl will be getting fitted for another set of rings come February.