The MLB All-Star Game Equation

The MLB All-Star Game counts. It counts by giving the wining league home field advantage in the World Series. Does one National League team and its fans care if another National League team has home field advantage in the World Series? Chances are, the team and its fans from one National League team, will have more reasons to root against whatever other National League team is playing in the World Series.

Put me on board with those who think having baseball’s All-Star Game meaning anything is just outright stupid. MLB has put into place rules and caveats that try make the game more legitimate, but in the end, 28 out of the 30 MLB teams do not care who has home field advantage. And unless my team is playing the World Series, I do not care.

If you take a look at the MLB standings at the All-Star break, about 15 teams have a legitimate or a little better then long-shot chance shot at making the playoffs. Only half. Yet, the half who have no-to-little shot at even making the playoffs all have at least one representative at the game. If those teams, with three months left of the season to be played, have at least one player selected to the All-Star team, why should they be playing for home field advantage? It doesn’t matter if they’re one of the best players in baseball, they should have no business in determining the fate of two teams in the World Series - who by the way will not be known for another four months.

Baseball columnists and fans all across the country have made arguments against the All-Star Game counting for anything. How many arguments of support have we seen?

Having the MLB All-Star Game count will never make me watch it any more then if it did not mean anything at all and was a plain old exhibition game like every other sport on the planet. If there’s nothing else on TV, my DVR, or whatever I have from Netflix, then maybe I’ll tune in and watch. At best, the All-Star Game is fourth on TV watching my list tonight.

Making it count, actually makes me less interested.

Read more...

Soccer Minus Players = MLS?

The United States soccer team hasn’t even played yet and I’m already excited about the 2011 Woman’s World Cup. Part of has to do that it’s an international competition that the U.S. has a shot at scoring a medal. But the more important and simpler piece of the pie is that we get to the best athletes in the world at this sport compete against each other in every match.

The best vs. the best, every game, every day is something that’s missing for soccer in the United States. It’s why Major League Soccer is stuck in the grassroots stage of development with little light at the end of the tunnel.

As Americans, we’re use to seeing teams comprised of the best talent in the world compete against each other on a regular basis. The NBA has the best basketball players in the world. The NFL has the best football players in the world. America’s soccer league does not. The MLS has some very good players and some players who used to be among the best in the world recently, but are now past their prime.

This is why I believe soccer in the United States has to find its niche with important international competitions. Americans will not accept the MLS on a national scale when its All Star Game showcases the best in the league versus a regular European squad. It also doesn’t help when their All Star team doesn’t win. Can you imagine a team comprised of MLB All Stars losing to Japan’s Chiba Lotte Marines?

The MLS is a niche sport on a local level and that’s OK. Some MLS teams pack their stadiums and have great success. But the MLS on a national level? Not yet, not now.

On a national level, soccer in the United States is at its best during international competitions. It will not be until we see the best soccer players in the world playing in the United States that soccer will become more then just an occasional sport here.

Read more...

The Jose Reyes Equation

I am a New York Mets fan. For better or worse, I’m always a Mets fan.

I am also a Jose Reyes fan. Call me fair-weathered, but I’m only a Jose Reyes fan when he’s not injured. When Jose Reyes is injured, he’s the most frustrating player to be a fan of.

But despite his injury-prone history, I believe the New York Mets should re-sign Jose Reyes at almost any cost. Hands down, Jose Reyes is the most exciting player since … Mike Piazza when he was a consistent home run threat at every at bat? I might have only been watching the Mets for the last 20 years or so, but I’m pretty sure Jose Reyes is having one of the most exciting seasons the Mets have ever seen.

The Mets are a franchise whose payroll will be questioned, doubted, and have restraints for the next few years. So tying up $20+ million per season on one player might not make sense economically. But when he’s healthy, Jose Reyes is simply one of the most exciting players in Major League Baseball to watch every single game. And not just because he hits home runs – because he doesn’t pop them out on a consistent basis. Singles and stolen bases, doubles and stolen bases, triples and daring the pitcher to balk. He brings excitement to small ball baseball.

Jose Reyes might turn in an injury-riddled season every few years – that’s just how he plays. So if the Mets sign him to five, six or seven seasons and he’s healthy for two-thirds of those, that’s what you have to expect. For those healthy seasons, he’ll be great.

Now I understand Reyes is having a career season and the greatness we’re currently seeing might be his best and where his career tops off. But even 75% of this makes him worth the investment and he’ll be able to produce that. He’s a homegrown player with a million dollar personality. His talents are worth “Carl Crawford money” and maybe more so.

I understand a team will not want Jose Reyes at the end of his career because his game is predicated on speed and health. But at 28 years of age, Reyes has plenty left in the tank. And I want to see him in a Mets uniform next season.

Read more...

The Rory McIlroy Postulation

I watched golf’s U.S. Open this weekend and rooted for Rory McIlroy -- even though I hardly knew who he was. But here’s why I, a sports fan who only watches golf during the Major’s that have a good storyline, paid attention this weekend:

1) Rory McIlroy imploded at the previous big tournament and was completely outpacing the entire field and

2) His wasn’t named Tiger Woods.

McIlroy had a redemption/feel-good vibe about him and it was intriguing. Along side of the “will he crack again in the final round” plotline, I wanted McIlroy to win. I wanted him to win because he was demolishing U.S. Open records, a lot that Tiger Woods held.

I didn’t like Woods long before he drove a car into a tree. I did not, do not and will never like Tiger Woods because he’s too good and too big of an asshole on and off the gold course. What’s the fun in rooting for him?

Now, Rory McIlroy could be as big of a jerk as Tiger Woods, but I do not know that yet. All I knew this weekend was that he was breaking records and putting Woods and his records in the rearview mirror. In twelve months times I could hate Rory McIlroy for the same reasons I detest Tiger Woods. But that did not matter this weekend.

For this weekend, Rory McIlroy made golf matter to me. Will he be able to do it again?

Read more...

Diminishing Returns of Fan Riots

When fans riot, it gives a black eye to not only an entire fan base, but also an entire city. That’s unfair, but a fact.

As in the case with Vancouver and Canucks fans after a disappointing and devastating Game 7 loss in the Stanley Cup Finals.

Vancouver is a beautiful city, one of the best in North America. And I know first hand that the people of Vancouver are generally very nice and accommodating. And what was represented in the aftermath of the Game 7 loss should not reflect the city and Canucks fans in general.

But the truth of the mater is that it does and it will continue to.

Controlled rioting (if there is such a thing) can be a good thing. For freedom; against oppression; to stand up for civil rights and liberties. Not for losing a sports championship. (Not for winning one either.)

What does rioting after a sports event even prove? Nothing. But it does show something: stupidity and public intoxication never leads to good decisions.

Being in New York, I do not have any firsthand knowledge, but I bet the intoxication level of the rioters were pretty high. How many examples do we need that excessive alcohol and sports events do not mix? How many fights at games are a product of a little liquid courage?  While I would not mind seeing the elimination of alcohol at sports events altogether, I know that will never happen because that is a multi-billion dollar revenue stream for the industry. Something needs to be done to help fight this problem because it’s only going to get worse over time.

But alcohol is only one reason behind the pointless riots in Vancouver. A big part of it is stupidity mixed with emotional attachment to the team.

As fans, having an emotional attachment to your team is the whole point of being a fan. But as human beings - as healthy human beings - fans need to know when to draw the line before your elation or disappointment in your team wining or losing leads to lighting fires, flipping cars onto their roofs and throwing bricks through glass windows.

What are fans trying to prove by rioting like this? Nothing. They just look stupid.

I feel bad for the over 99% of Canucks fans that did not riot last night and that are trying to help law enforcement catch the idiots who did. But the truth of the matter, sports will now relate Vancouver Canucks fans to punk rioters.

Correction: It’s just not a black eye for Vancouver Canucks fans, the City of Vancouver, but sports fans in general.

Read more...

An Epidemic? "I Saw Him Safe"

Steroids are no longer baseball's biggest enemy. It's umpires.

When a referee or umpire is being questioned by reporters about a call they made on the playing field, they should never answer a question with the phrase "I saw...".

Following a blown call in the opening game of the San Francisco/Atlanta Braves series where second base umpire Paul Emmel incorrectly called Busty Posey safe on a steal attempt. Posey went on to score the only run of the game for a Giants victory and a 1-0 series lead.

Following the game, Emmel told reporters "I saw him safe, that's what I called."

This isn't a direct call for expanded instant replay in baseball (although I personally full support that notion). Rather, I'm just trying to understand Emmel's comments and how it effects the game in a larger way.

Emmel told the baseball world that he saw the play unfold incorrectly. Worse yet, he didn't even try to admit that he could have been word let alone admitting he was in error (hello, paging Mr. Jim Joyce).

Is this arrogance with Emmel defiantly saying that he wasn't wrong? Or is this a form of peer pressure from the umpire fraternity of not admitting mistakes because its a sign of weakness?

If Emmel would have continued his statement by saying he was wrong, not all would have been forgiven, but it would have made it easier to move on. We could have even done without an apology for getting it wrong. Admitting one was wrong is an apologetic gesture.

Instead, two days into the post-season and several wrong or missed calls by umpires later, baseball's officiating epidemic continues to get worse. Bad calls are effecting the results of our (supposed) nation's past time.

Like performing enhancing drugs, maybe we should start putting asterisk's next to results with blown calls.

Of course, so much of this could be fixed with expanded instant replay*.

Read more...

Link: H.S. Football Player Runs into Goalpost

In the Canadian Football League, the goalposts (the big yellow things that field goal kickers are attempt to kick the ball through) are on the goal line. In America, supposedly they are placed in a better/safer location in the back of the endzone. But not for this high school kick returner.

Read more...

Baseball Heroes: Of Fathers & Sons

Associated Press writer Mike Fitzpatrick wrote what is probably the off-the-field baseball story of the summer. It's a about a rookie outfielder for the Florida Marlins who is playing in a MLB game in front of his father for the first time. Unfortunately, the father has inoperable lung cancer.

The emotion of the story between the player, Logan Morrison, and his father, Tom, is what makes this a special read. It reminds us how inconsequential and important sports can be at the same time. It reminds us who the real sports heroes are for many of us -- our fathers.

According to a Google search, the Associated Press story was picked up by over 150 news outlet. Stories like this will never lead SportsCenter, but are just as important to follow as Brett Favre's yearly retirement saga.

If reading a short synopsis of this story doesn't reach on an emotional level, the quotes from Morrison's surely will.

"Anytime he's in the stands I kick it up a little bit. He's the reason I'm here. And with him being sick, there might not be too many more opportunities where he can see me play."

It's stories like this that make us remember why sports really matter. Not the big money contracts or glorified stats, but the emotional connections it allows us to make with those who are closest to us.

Here's to a miracle for Tom Morrison and his family.

Read more...

Re: Revis, NY Jets and Holdouts

Hours after Dallas Morning News columnist Tim Cowlishaw Tweeted the New York Jets and holdout All-Pro CB Darrelle Revis will announce the two sides have come to a contract agreement this week (of course not confirmed by the team, Revis’ camp or the Jets beat writers), news leaked out from multiple sources that the team is close to signing another young All-Pro to a contract extension: center Nick Mangold.

Despite playing on different sides of the ball, Revis and Mangold are very similar. Both first round draft picks by the Jets. Both are unhappy with their current contracts that they are currently signed to. Both are All-Pro’s and pretty damn good at their positions. Both talked about holding out of training camp if a new deal was not signed.

But that’s where the similarities end.

Mangold honored the contract he signed and reported to camp on time. Revis, who previously held out for the contract he is currently signed to, which also has three more seasons left on the term, has held out.

Now it seems like Mangold is being rewarded for reporting to camp by receiving the contract extension that he deserves. The contract is rumored to make him the highest paid center in the NFL.

Are the Jets sending a message to Revis and his agents? Are they saying, “Look at Nick Mangold: he’s a team player and we rewarded him as such”?

The only leverage Revis has is that he was the best player for the NFL’s best defense in 2009. That’s pretty good ground to stand on. But last year the Jets’ defense only had one legit cornerback: Revis. In the off-season, they traded for another All-Pro cornerback in Antonio Cromartie and used their first round pick on Kyle Wilson.

2010 of Cromartie + Wilson > 2009 of Revis and the leftovers.

The Jets trumped Revis’ leverage. Of course the Jets would be a whole lot better with Revis, but as is right now their 2010 cornerbacks are more balanced then the 2009 version.

So here we are the beginning again. Will Revis holdout for the entire season? And what about the potential work stoppage in 2011 players face when the League’s Collective Bargaining Agreement ends. With so much about the 2011 NFL season unknown, is Revis willing to risk sitting out two full seasons?

Revis wants to be paid as the highest earning cornerback in the NFL. Fair enough and deservingly so. The Oakland Raiders' Nnamdi Asomugha currently holds the honor Revis is seeking at a whopping $16 million per year on a short-term deal. Revis wants that kind of money over a long term, but he should settle for having the largest total compensation for a cornerback under contract.

The Jets aren’t going where Revis wants. They didn’t in the offseason. They haven’t this summer or in training camp. I doubt they will go there if Cowlishaw is wrong and the holdout continues into the season.

And here’s another thing to remember: No one wins during holdouts. The fans don’t because their team isn’t as good without the player. Same goes for the team, who also runs the risk of looking cheap (although I don’t think the Jets do in this case). The player might win in terms of money, but fans will never look at him the same way. For the player, even a small mistake on the playing field gets blown-up ten fold because in the fans’ view post-holdout the player’s performance has to be perfect. All the time. Anything less is unacceptable.

Luckily for Revis, he’s reputation is still repairable if he signs soon. If Cowlishaw is correct and Revis and the Jets come to terms this week, everything will be OK in Jetsland.

If not, Revis is in for a tougher time then the Jets.

Read more...

Mets Need to Send a Message

In the aftermath of the Francisco Rodriguez domestic violence incident at Citi Field on Wednesday night, the New York Mets suspended their closer for two games, which docks him $125,683 of his $11.5 million 2010 salary. More seriously, K-Rod was charged with third-degree assault and second-degree harassment for beating up his “wife’s” father, the grandfather of his two children.

The Mets also released a token one-sentence quote from COO Jeff Wilpon, that as a former sports PR executive I would be embarrassed to have as the only statement from upper-management.

So with that said, in my opinion it’s time for the Mets to step-up because it seems like the team suffers one embarrassment after another. On the field or off it, the Mets can’t seem to get out of the way of humiliating situations (see: K-Rod, Oliver Perez, et al…).

The Mets need to make a statement with K-Rod: The embarrassment stops now.

The Mets need to release the former All-Star and World Series winning closer.

They need to get ride of him even with the Mets bullpen currently being a complete disaster and with K-Rod pitching his best as a member of the Mets. Even though it would be throwing in the towel on the 2010 season. It’s the right and only move the Mets have – that is if they care how their team is perceived by their fans and the rest of the baseball world.

If K-Rod was in management or a salesperson with the Mets and he was charged with an assault crime, he most likely would be fired. And if it happened in the Mets offices, there’s no doubt he would be filing for unemployment insurance by now.

Just because he’s a multi-million dollar athlete shouldn’t create a double standard. The Mets have to fire K-Rod for cause. Surely there’s a clause in his contract that he violated when he committed a violent crime. Although with the Mets, we can't be sure of that.

By releasing K-Rod the Mets would be sending a message to everyone that they want to field a respectable team both on and off the baseball diamond. The move would say the team will not tolerate being embarrassed.

And why stop there? They should wave goodbye to Ollie Perez while they are at it. If he’s not willing to take a demotion to the minor leagues to work on becoming an actual pitcher and not the homerun tossing thrower that he is, then he doesn’t deserve to wear a Mets uniform.

But in order for someone to be deserving of wearing a Mets uniform, the team has to rid themselves of the players who are not. It starts with releasing K-Rod.

Read more...