- 01:35 PM
- 12/23/24
Thanks for noticing, dusted. I stand by my statement that that is the most awesome scoring system ever devised. I think the Thursday night draft is fine-- my biggest concern was an early morning weekend for those of us who might be out late the night before.
posted by nath at 02:22 PM on August 05, 2004
My hometown is #216. The place I live now is #4.
posted by nath at 04:27 PM on August 04, 2004
I'm My Pet Goat. (may change since I'm already using that name for another league). I'd like to see 3 WRs starting instead of two. And the draft is currently scheduled for a Saturday at 9:30 AM. That seems like a bad idea. :)
posted by nath at 04:22 PM on August 04, 2004
I like Ufez's suggestion of a survival league. Particularly since you don't have to limit the number of people who can participate.
posted by nath at 04:19 PM on August 04, 2004
still need players? i've been in the last two years and i'll give it another go even though i haven't been around spofi in a while.
posted by nath at 05:23 PM on August 03, 2004
Coaching is more than in-game decisions. It's planning, preparation, scheme, strategy, teaching, developing talent, etc. All I'm saying is that they put up with TO just fine as long as they were winning, but a losing season is a convenient excuse to get rid of him. Personally, I think the 49ers have been getting worse via a combination of personnel mistakes and Erickson's coaching inability. The last two 49ers drafts have been lackluster at best (after great drafts in 2000 and 2001), and some of the young players seemed to regress this year. To me this speaks more of problems in the front office and coaching than in the players.
posted by nath at 05:19 PM on March 07, 2004
Regardless of the contract situation I think TO is largely made to be a scapegoat. The only major change from the 2002 to 2003 49ers was replacing Steve Mariucci with Dennis Erickson. Sure, Garcia was hurt at times, but Rattay proved a more than capable backup, so much so that they released Garcia this week. J.J. Stokes was no great loss, so Mariucci to Erickson is the major move this team made, and they went from division champions to 7-9. And it's TO's fault. I don't care if he's a jackass or not, and I leave that to others to debate. But I definitely see him being used as a scapegoat by the front office, who doesn't want to admit it screwed up badly last year in the entire handling of the coaching situation.
posted by nath at 12:18 AM on March 07, 2004
I think the game will be close, because these teams play close games. I think the Patriots will win, and it'll be a pretty defensive game. Something along the lines of 20-16. Maybe not even that high.
posted by nath at 01:58 AM on January 20, 2004
The list be damned. My top oddity of the sports year is still Joe Namath's sideline interview.
posted by nath at 04:36 PM on January 09, 2004
last, belated note: I checked it out and Marbury's never played more than 2 1/2 years anywhere in his professional career. And there's always a reason he wants to move on (or at least, reasons given why he'll be better at his new location): In Minnesota, he wanted to go back home (or at least to Jersey) and wanted to run his own team. In New Jersey he wanted a better supporting cast (and get away from the pressures of performing at home). I don't know what he wanted to get out of Phoenix, but I think they're just the latest team to figure out they can lose just as easily without Marbury as with him.
posted by nath at 04:32 PM on January 09, 2004
Cool. Those sound like good reasons to me (but basketball is a distant third in terms of sports I profess knowledge of). I just wouldn't expect much. The playoffs aren't out this season (if only because a team could probably make it in the East by winning 35 games), but I wouldn't expect much more than a few years' worth of first-round exits. Then Marbury becomes unhappy again. I think his biggest problem is that he's way too selfish to be a real point, and prefers to toss up shots like a 2 (and maybe he should be one; that's what they did to Iverson and that worked pretty well, after all). I can't imagine him distributing the ball enough to keep Houston or anyone else happy.
posted by nath at 06:23 PM on January 06, 2004
I think it's better for the Knicks, sure, because now they don't have a glut of 6'7" - 6'10" players, and actually have capable guards. However, I don't think they're going to actually play much better, and in a few years Marbury will be tired of it and be ready to go somewhere else, because there's too much pressure being at home or he doesn't like his supporting cast or something. Marbury's a fine player, but there's a reason he keeps finding himself on bad teams.
posted by nath at 03:43 PM on January 06, 2004
This is Marbury's fourth team. He wanted out of Minnesota because he didn't want to be in KG's shadow. Then he wanted out of New Jersey because he wanted a better supporting cast. Minnesota didn't improve, per se, but they haven't been hurting without him (and this year's squad might be the best yet). New Jersey improved immediately after getting rid of Marbury and replacing him with Kidd. Phoenix has become the worst team in the West. And now he goes to New York to try to turn a sub-.500 team into a playoff contender? What makes anyone think he is capable of doing this?
posted by nath at 05:54 AM on January 06, 2004
Boy, did he ever. Were we disagreeing about something? I can't even tell now! Well, I think we definitely established Bill Parcells is a good coach and Gregg Williams is not. :)
posted by nath at 02:15 AM on December 31, 2003
I grant you that the Cowboys were not in the middle of a purge; however, they weren't (aren't?) exactly loaded with talent... the offensive skill positions are mediocre, the line isn't what it used to be, and the defense was pretty good but not great. Parcells made all of it better-- offense, defense, and special teams. I too think Gilbride was by and large the problem, but that offensive line needs to be revamped before that team goes anywhere. Ruben Brown going to the Pro Bowl year after year has become one of the biggest jokes since... well, since Larry Allen made it this year (And I guess now we've tied both those conversations together). Then again, perhaps the offensive coaches were pretty clueless about how to coach a line (if he is available, and I assume he will be given the coaching firing, I would seriously consider bringing in the Giants' offensive line coach, Jim McNally, for the same capacity). The defense has enough talent that if the offense can be fixed, this team can be a contender.
posted by nath at 03:00 PM on December 30, 2003
And Williams took over a team in 2001 that had gone 8-8 the year before and was on the verge of a salary-cap purge anyway. It's not like he came in and trashed a 12-4 system that had made the playoffs or anything. Fair enough. But I wasn't thinking of players like Smith; I was more concerned about the way the whole linebacking corps (Cowart, Sam Rogers, Keith Newman) was gutted. They're finally good again, but it seemed unneccessary-- I don't buy into coaching/personnel plans that involve blowing up the team for two years until the coach stockpiles the players he wants (look at Parcells, he's one of the best talent evaluators in the game, and yet he's still managed to double his team's wins from last season with essentially the same personnel. Wait until he builds that roster.) As far as the Bills' season went, offensively, Moulds was hurt, the offensive line sucked (death for any team, but especially when you have an immobile quarterback with a cannon arm-- you have to protect him), and Gilbride was a very bad offensive coordinator. Not to mention I agree with the sports guy, who puts Gregg Williams at the top of his "coaches I think I could outcoach for one game" list. As far as my Saints go, I wonder why no one has picked up on the fact that the Haslett/Loomis duo is fairly clueless when it comes to personnel, or at least bringing in veterans. The 2002 draft was good (Grant, Stallworth, Bentley), but this team has signed and let go of more talent in the last four years than anybody-- TMQ nailed it today when he pointed out that the team only has three starters remaining from the 2000 playoff squad-- and I think only six players total, three of whom were rookies (DE Darren Howard, FB Terrelle Smith, and long snapper Kevin Houser; the others are Brooks, Horn, and Jerry Fontenot, the only constant on an offensive line that was great but that Haslett insists on replacing nearly whole-cloth every season). I bet you could put together a killer team from the players the Saints have let go. ESPN has picked up the story that Spurrier is denying he resigned.
posted by nath at 01:11 PM on December 30, 2003
Gregg Williams had this coming. Outside of rebuilding a salary-cap ravaged defense, Actually, didn't he just outright cut most of those players (from a defense ranked #3 the year before he got there), because they didn't fit in his new system? And then they tanked defensively for two years before finally becoming respectable this season? Fucking something up and then fixing it most of the way, while not improving anything else (he makes bad in-game decisions; the offense was terrible, and I think it was more the play-calling and the offensive line than Bledsoe) is no way to keep a job. I expect Jim Haslett to ask to talk to the Bills, get his wish and get hired. Fine with me. All he's done is muck up the personnel since Randy Mueller built our first playoff winner then was fired for no reason. For one example, let's look at the defensive tackle situation. You know... it was "Let's get rid of La'Roi Glover and bring in Grady Jackson, because the defense is too small! It needs more size!" The very next year it was "Let's get rid of Norman Hand (and eventually Jackson, too) and trade up to choose a defensive tackle, because the defense needs more speed!" Stuff like that. I'm not sure he knows what he's doing very much. (Of course, Tom Benson should've never fired Mueller, but that's a whole 'nother story... Yeah, I'm a Saints fan.)
posted by nath at 10:28 PM on December 29, 2003
Better quality video here.
posted by nath at 07:05 PM on December 27, 2003
I read on ESPN that the Knicks have six power forwards on the roster! Six! While much of the rest of the roster is thin and undertalented. No wonder Layden got fired. How do you let that happen? "Uh, they were all so good, and at the right price, too, and I just couldn't choose, so I got them all!"
posted by nath at 08:27 PM on December 22, 2003
Did they ever identify the player in that shot, rcade? (And I can't believe you made a pun out of that.)
posted by nath at 08:23 PM on December 22, 2003
Sorry 'bout the low quality of the video but it was the only one I could find (I doubt it's the sort of thing ESPN makes or will make available on their website).
posted by nath at 12:41 AM on December 22, 2003
I didn't mind the orange jerseys... ...however, with that said, I'm a little worried that the NFL is taking a page from the NBA's "Hey, if we change our uniforms every four or five years, we can sell much more merchandise". I mean, really-- the NBA's got some serious problems here. It all started when everyone got into teal and black sometime in the mid-90's. Since them teams just constantly change for no reason. (Although I do admit I like Phx's orange jerseys. And now this comment has come full circle.)
posted by nath at 04:27 PM on November 24, 2003
Well, they might beat Houston or Jacksonville, especially if Vick doesn't just sit out the season. But man, Reeves is done. I knew it last year when he was asked why he didn't use Duckett more in one close loss and he responded "I let the running backs decide when they want to go in or out" or something like that. What? I thought his coaching was subpar in the playoff game vs. the Eagles last year, too; I remember a 3rd-quarter drive that was going well, with the Falcons down a touchdown, and when they got close to the end zone, Reeves made some poor playcalling (including, I believe, a toss in the backfield to Warrick Dunn on a 3rd-and-1, which promptly lost three yards). Reeves' playcalling killed the momentum; the Falcons missed the field goal, and never threatened after that. A similar thing happened vs. Chicago, I think early last season. About a minute and a half left, ball on the 30, down one or two. Instead of getting close for the sure field goal to win it, Reeves basically runs it into the ground and gets two yards, Jay Feely misses the 45-yarder, and the Bears win. There's just some poor in-game management going on here. It's time to replace him.
posted by nath at 04:58 PM on November 03, 2003
Well, I have to admit it - this is apparently the season Peyton has traded his panties for a jock. You know, I never bought all the bullshit about "Peyton Manning can't win the big games." QBs get too much credit when a team wins, and too much blame when a team loses. Let's examine the Colts' history while Peyton played for them. His first four years resulted in two playoff appearances under Jim Mora, the man who has still never won a playoff game in the NFL, despite being one franchise's all-time leader in victories, and despite taking that team (the Saints) to their first four playoff berths. For whatever reason, Mora is 0-6 now in the playoffs; it seems he's probably just a crappy playoff coach. Last year was Tony Dungy's first in Indianapolis. The Colts lost 41-0 to the Jets in the opening round of the playoffs. Somehow, I don't think a score of 41-0 can be blamed on one player. (If they'd lost 6-0 and Manning threw four or five interceptions, that would be one thing.) He didn't have a good game by any means, but more than any other sport, football is a team game. for the Bucs to whine about a ticky-tack call after leading 28-7 with 13 minutes left in the game is bogus. Or for them to be leading 35-14 with under four minutes left. I mean, really. "Defense for the ages" my ass.
posted by nath at 06:56 PM on October 07, 2003
I have a voice in the back of my head that keeps saying that Bonds will never win a Championship - karma, dude. If you play like an individual, act like an individual and treat your teammates as second bananas - you can have all the individual acolades you want - but you'll never get the team rewards. Just seems fitting, that's all. Funny... I have a voice in the back of my head that says baseball is predicated on individual matchups, and that if the media writes unfavorably about you because you don't provide them with enough sound bites, you shouldn't give a shit.
posted by nath at 06:40 PM on October 07, 2003
Yeah, that's another problem I've been having with my computer-- nothing recognizes my internet connection except IE. (It started happening about a year ago. Very weird, and nobody can really explain it to me... not that I'm trying to turn this into TechSupportFilter, I'm just pissed, when I think about how little I can actually do with this machine. I need a new OS.)
posted by nath at 04:49 AM on October 02, 2003
Something on these ESPN Page 2's screws up my browser! Those damn Orbitz pop-under ads that reopen EVERY TIME I OPEN AN ESPN.COM PAGE crash mine, because if I close them every freakin' time they open, another one pops up immediately after going to the new link. If I leave them open, the browser crashes. It's lowered ESPN.com from my most-visited webpage to "good content but annoying as shit to open".
posted by nath at 06:59 PM on October 01, 2003
Kaufman doesn't bring a whole lot to the table, but he can be good when he's going on certain topics (like the corruption of the NCAA). Easterbrook is a great football writer and a very intelligent person, but his politics do get into the way of his columns a bit too much (the Hillary Clinton thing has already been noted, and it's just the most recent example). Some of the non-football stuff he injects is a little odd (I'm in a hurry so I'm not going into more detail right now). My personal favorite football writer has been, and remains, Dr. Z.
posted by nath at 06:53 AM on September 25, 2003
Remember when Joe Gibbs retired after that Super Bowl, and Richie Petitbon took over? Two years later, they were 4-12. He was a modern-day Ray Handley (well, a one-year later Ray Handley, at least). What are those guys doing now?
posted by nath at 01:44 PM on August 15, 2002
It's not an unrealistic question. Ted Williams was an established major league baseball player, and a damn good one at that. And he lost five years of his prime; it's not very hard to guess or theorize what might have happened. The question isn't "What would Ted Williams' career as an accountant have been like?" or anything. So, no, it isn't an unrealistic question. Obviously we'll never know, but we can guess.
posted by nath at 10:00 PM on August 14, 2002
Favorite quote from a Bucs coach, I think it was John McKay, in response to the following question from a reporter: "What do you think about your team's execution?" "I'm in favor of it."
posted by nath at 01:37 AM on August 14, 2002
One other point: The Royals couldn't afford Jermaine Dye or Johnny Damon. But they ponied up $6 million a year for Roberto Hernandez and $4.9 million a year for Neifi Perez. (Each of whom, I believe, were acquired in the trading of the first two.) They turned promising young outfielders into a bad reliever who is worth more because he's a "closer", and the worst regular in the major leagues. Economic choice? Or a franchise that doesn't know what it's doing?
posted by nath at 12:15 AM on August 13, 2002
Here's the thing: Some teams spend wisely, some don't. (The Pittsburgh Pirates are a notable example: See Derek Bell, Kevin Young, Pat Meares, etc.) The Yankees, for the most part, spend wisely. They just do it a ton. The problem is, Steinbrenner's revenues through the team's exclusive TV deal allow him to massively outspend teams and still turn a profit. He can even afford the occasional gross blunder. If a better revenue sharing plan existed, to curb this kind of disparity, I think you'd see wasteful spending start to clean up. Either that or some owners would have to be really willing to trade making a profit for a chance to win. And after enough wasted money, that would curb. Players who are much better deserve more money. Players who have been around a long time and aren't good can be replaced; $5 million a year is not worth a "Veteran presence" who's a "leader in the clubhouse" and "can't hit, run, or field".
posted by nath at 12:01 AM on August 13, 2002
Jayson Stark had an interesting point in his recent column: He said, basically, that if baseball swas still operating under the two-division format, with only division winners advancing, the Yankees would not be nearly as dominant, as they would've missed the playoffs in 1995, 1996, 1997, and 2000, and subsequently two of those four World Series titles-- two in a row and three appearances in four years isn't bad, but winning four in five years and making the Series five of six is dominating. Stark points out correctly that they've only dominated in October, and not in the regular season.
posted by nath at 03:22 PM on August 08, 2002
OPS isn't a perfect measure of the best season ever. But Ruth does have the higher OBP so I'm not going to argue it. What really burns me is the argument that Bonds isn't a "team player", because he's not friendly to the media, so the media dumps on him (a la Rick Reilly when he's out of ideas and deadline's coming up). As opposed to someone like Jeff Kent, who the media love, and even gave the MVP over Bonds in 2000 (a close call, admittedly, but I think Bonds' 100+ point lead in OPS make up for Kent's tougher defensive position), who actually broke his wrist while riding a motorcycle, in violation of his contract-- which I think is more selfish than having your own trainer or PR guy or whatever else Reilly accuses Bonds of doing. In the sports media, terms like "selfish" and "clubhouse cancer" usually mean "star player who doesn't like giving interviews".
posted by nath at 03:18 PM on August 08, 2002
Argh, I meant Chris Spielman. Not Steve Tasker. Damn it all, me getting my ex-Bills confused.
posted by nath at 10:10 PM on August 06, 2002
I thought the review was bizarre, too. Madden's analysis and delivery is "dated"? No shit? Does this guy think he's breaking new ground with that one? Personally, I want to see Steve Tasker calling some NFL games. If he can be as good as he was doing low-level college stuff, calling plays before they happen, then I'm all for seeing more of him. I'm a bit tired of this whole angle of bringing entertainment into football (first with Miller, now bringing in Madden because he's the best known name in the game, not necessarily the best), and pushing that angle. Football is a hell of a lot of entertainment as it is-- give me commentators who can actually tell me something about what's going on.
posted by nath at 10:09 PM on August 06, 2002
In another article, BP makes a (brief) case that teams that show they're trying to win received a boost in attendance, as everyone's favorite candidates for contraction demonstrate, before and after the trades for Floyd and Colon: Average Att. Median Att. Expos, Not Trying 8,429 6,091 Expos, Trying 14,064 13,402 So, of course, they traded away Floyd, because if MLB wants to contract the Expos, they can't be showing any signs of being a viable team... so let's trade Floyd to the team whose owners already owe Bud a favor for rigging the sale of the team to them. But then, why would Montreal need prospects if they were "definitely" going to be contracted? Baseball needs a commissioner who can act independently of the owners before things will start to turn around.
posted by nath at 01:50 PM on August 06, 2002
Arrrghh... New stadiums do not hold as consistent source of new revenue by themselves. Winning teams build revenue, and the money can be spent on continuing to build winning teams. I'm sick of Bud Selig's anti-marketing campaign. Does he really look at the sport and say "You know, I think we can make this all work, if we convince 2/3 of the fans that their teams have no chance"? From a Baseball Prospectus article from August 1: (link) "Bud Selig is the game's public figurehead, and he lies constantly. He lied to Congress. He'll say things that are so ludicrous ("teams won't make payrolls!") that his own lawyer has to come out and contradict him the next day. ... His lies aren't even good lies. Selig doesn't tell his wife she looks good in that dress before they head out to parties; he'll tell her they can't afford that dress, and that even if it was the most flattering dress in the world, there's no way she'd be able to compete with the other women who will be at the party, who are way more luminous than she is. "
posted by nath at 03:05 AM on August 06, 2002
I have never been a Dr. Z fan... Why not? I'm curious.
posted by nath at 07:07 PM on August 05, 2002
Yeah, absolutely. The idea that he's an opportunist is laughable. Now the only real debate about him is when he'll get into the Hall of Fame, depending on how long Hall voters want to 'punish' him for wavering on possibly taking another coaching job.
posted by nath at 06:40 PM on August 03, 2002
SI's Dr. Z, a voter, has some good points on the people who made it, who didn't and why, and who he pushes for and against.
posted by nath at 06:39 PM on August 03, 2002
Hmm. I'm going to have to take another look at this. It sounds fishy, but from my understanding the prosecution knew as well that they really didn't have any evidence for a conviction. The impression I got, the first time around, is that witnesses fingered Lewis because he was basically the only one recognized, due to his fame. But admittedly it's been a while since I took a look at the facts, so my memory is hazy. Something was up, for sure. I just don't know to what degree he played a part.
posted by nath at 01:38 PM on August 02, 2002
He probably shouldn't be fired. I mean, it was a dumb thing to say for several reasons (Inappropriate comparison, it's wrong to say baseball won't survive, and besides, don't you fly planes?) But it's just a guy making a ludicrous comparison. I mean, it's not Al Campanis, a guy in the front office of a major-league baseball team, trying to explain why blacks don't have the necessary skills to become front-office executives. Which revealed not only idiocy but a probable prejudice in hiring practices as well. It was dumb, but I've heard dumber.
posted by nath at 12:55 PM on August 02, 2002
Jesus, Ray Lewis didn't kill anyone. This isn't an O.J.-style case-- there was basically no evidence against him. And a $19 million signing bonus is pretty unfathomable to me, but there's no doubt he's the best player at his position, bar none. (Although come back in two years and we'll see how Brian Urlacher is doing.)
posted by nath at 01:48 AM on August 02, 2002
Tom Coughlin seems to have benefited most by the current expansion team draft system than overall coaching style. I say give him 5 more years with the Jaguars and then judge his coaching ability. He's heading into his eighth year there. What kind of coaching analysis requires thirteen years to evaluate? I think we have a pretty clear idea of what kind of a coach Tom Coughlin is. As for Parcells, he simply jumped around too much to make any serious marks in coaching. Well, you know, except for two Super Bowl wins with the Giants, turning a dismal New England franchise into a Super Bowl team, and taking a 1-15 Jets team and bringing it to 12 wins and the AFC championship game two years later. Pretty serious marks, if you ask me. He was Giants coach eight years, Patriots coach four, and Jets coach three. Not as much jumping around as you might think. Sign him to the Texans for five years and see how he does. Has them in the playoffs in two years, like every other team he's taken over? (That's not an exaggeration.) His career record and reputation relies more on opportunism than actual coaching. What are you basing this on? He takes teams that are in the toilet and turns them into winners. He's anything but an opportunist. If he found a team with solid players, a shot at the playoffs,and that would sign him for only two years, he'd be all over it. Not that he's ever worked for only two years, and not that he couldn't retire in the middle of his contract, but doesn't that describe the Tampa Bay Buccaneers job Parcells turned down? They offered him a three-year deal, which again would be his shortest stint coaching. Parcells doesn't need an opportunity. When given a team in the tank with little forseeable hope, he brings in good players and coaches the hell out of them, as his entire coaching / GM history indicates. He's the finest coach of our generation (depending on whether or not you feel Bill Walsh is part of "our generation"). Unfortunately he doubts his own coaching abilities as much as I do. Well, my theory is that he just doesn't want the stress, or the stress-induced heart attacks. And also I disagree with every single point you made.
posted by nath at 01:45 AM on August 02, 2002
The trade is great for the Clippers (although not as great as the draft-day rumor that had them getting Miller for Lamar Odom and a #1). The question here of course is Donald Sterling, possibly sports' worst owner (as SI detailed in a feature a few years back), and his willingness to re-up all the players for what they're worth. Past history indicates this is unlikely.
posted by nath at 12:57 AM on August 01, 2002
The Wonderlic is notorious for being simply bizarre and not really that well correlated to any sort of football performance, if I remember correctly. It makes for fun conversation, though.
posted by nath at 12:54 AM on August 01, 2002
Yeah, this is pretty much it. Strikeouts in hitters tend to correlate with good things, like plate discipline, so they aren't so much a detriment. Strikeouts in pitchers are basically the perfect result (I suppose besides a double or triple play), so obviously they're good. The less balls hit in play, the less hits, players on-base, runs, etc.
posted by nath at 12:51 AM on August 01, 2002
The thing about the trade is, I can understand them wanting to move Giambi for whatever reason, but John Mabry? Why a team that's probably already looking to 2003 trades for a 31-year-old utilityman who doesn't hit much is beyond me. There are reasons, I'm sure, that Beane wanted to unload Giambi. But surely he could've gotten more.
posted by nath at 03:11 AM on May 24, 2002
Fantasy NFL 2004
Whatever works for people rosterwise is fine. I kind of like the idea of standard rosters because it really makes you do your research on those last spots. Then again, the WR pool is usually deeper so if we go that route that's okay with me too. And I'm glad I found a league with people who appreciate the team name.