After another weekend of bizarre situations and questionable calls by replacement refs, we saw two debacles to end it off, with Bill Belichik running and grabbing after an official on the Sunday night game, trying to get an explanation on the game-ending field goal and, more probably, their entire oeuvre that evening, and now a farcical performance by the crew working the Monday Night Football game.
The replacement refs have been having an underlying effect on the games since they started working them. At first, they weren't calling pass interference penalties as stringently as they should have, and we saw a lot of low-scoring games and upsets as a result in the first couple of weeks. We saw them lose control of games, some of them dragging on so long that I missed out on some game endings and had to adjust my PVR settings accordingly.
One effect that hasn't been mentioned is the amount of jawing and woofing that goes on now, constantly. This blight on the game had been effectively curtailed during the previous seasons, when jabbing your facemask into someone else's to taunt or dis them was grounds for an unsportsmanlike conduct 15-yard penalty. This season, I have yet to see a flag for such behaviour, which is now endemic, and the source for a lot of the scrums and shenanigans we see after most whistles seemingly.
This weekend, we saw an avalanche of yellow flags, as the NFL circled the wagons and probably instructed the ersatz zebras to tighten the calls on defensive backs. And we now understand why they weren't calling more penalties. It was not as a misguided attempt to 'let them play', it's simply that they can't make the right calls, the speed of the game is evidently too high for them. It seems as if every call or non-call is a toss-up, whether they're nailing it or shanking it. I can do just as well at home with my trusty flipping quarter.
We have probably reached the Rubicon, and NFL management has to decide whether they'll cross it, or back down and come to terms with their real referees, the actual pros of the game, who while imperfect, are now shown to be effective in the overwhelming majority of cases, and to be decisive and fully, functionally knowledgeable of the rules of the game.
The sad part out of all of this is that the NFL are having a principled disagreement with their staff. This isn't about dollars and cents so much as it is about NFL owners trying to wrest more money from the refs to pile on to the staggering fortunes they already make from their teams. The NFL isn't on the brink of financial insolvency, this isn't necessary for the survival or even the profitability of the league.
The refs are not holding out for more money, an unreasonable raise, or anything crazy. The refs aren't on strike. They're being locked out by the owners. The reason they're being locked out by the owners is that they're being asked to give up the pension they currently earn and accept a vastly inferior version, one with a 'defined contribution' instead of a 'defined benefit'. So now instead of a pension that will pay out a set amount upon retirement, an amount that they can plan their life around, they are now asked to take a glorified mutual fund account that will be subject to the vagaries of the stock market and the piratical penchants of Wall Street.
The NFL's reason for the change? As weak as their moral fibre. They say that since they already beat down their other employees and wrestled away their pensions, they now need to beat down the referees as well. It wouldn't be "fair" to their other employees not to. I'm not making this up. This is their reasoning.
I'm sure if you asked any client of the NFL, anyone who buys tickets or jerseys or the Sunday Ticket package or a case of Budweiser, none of them would begrudge the officials a tiny slice of that purchase so that they can have a reasonable pension that allowed them to retire in dignity and security. None of them would vote that that money should rather go into Paul Allen's pocket. Anyone who did would do so out of bitterness that they themselves are deprived of such a pension by the climate that reigns currently in Corporate America and North American society as well.
Roger Goodell has been a bit of a crusader since becoming Commissioner, to various degrees of effectiveness. He has often punished players for off-field transgressions that he claimed tarnished the image of the league. He now has to wear this fiasco of a lockout. It's on him. And he has to fix it. He has to bring his vaunted conciliatory and persuasive powers to bear on the owners and convince them that they must drop their demands of the officials to get a deal done, for the good of the game.
Better yet, the vaunted 'conscience' of the game, the long-time owners like the Rooneys and the Maras, Bob Kraft who cried arm-in-arm with Jeff Saturday last summer, need to intervene and to put a stop to this. They need to bring everyone to their senses and protect their own legacy, their very business. Everyone in the owners circle must understand that their principled stance, repugnant no matter how they try to spin it, must end. They are damaging their product and image for a trifling amount in the grand scheme of things.
Monday, 24 September 2012
Sunday, 16 September 2012
NFL Week 2: Chargers 38, Titans 10
Okay, let's get the elephant in the room discussed and out of the way: those white uniforms on the Chargers today were jarring (I first wrote shocking, but didn't want to be accused of committing a pun). They were awful.
I haven't been on board with the white helmets to begin with, ever since they were introduced, and all the footage we've seen in the last few months of Junior rampaging on the field reminds me how much better the electric blue helmets were. The players looked more intimidating with these on. I wonder if the 'finesse' team reputation the Chargers have derives in part from the white helmets our team has been sporting lately.
Today, the team went all white, and asked the fans to wear white as well to replicate the Winnipeg Jets' whiteout tradition. Was it a transparent attempt to sell white jerseys to fans who normally rely on their electric blue or powder blue jerseys? Another reason given was to keep the players from overheating while San Diego is embroiled in a heat wave, it was thought the white uniforms would keep our team cooler. I'll allow the point, although I wonder if the yellow pants would have been materially warmer. They certainly would have been less transparent. Yikes. It's a purely academic point however, since the only allowable colours this year are white and blue for pants, and white, blue and powder blue for the jerseys.
In any case, the Chargers have some of the best, most iconic uniforms in the NFL. We don't need to reinvent the wheel. We're not the Oregon Ducks or the Seattle Seahawks. Let's bring back the yellow pants, and use the powder blue more. Just 'cause.
Today's game was refreshing for Chargers fans, in that it confirmed some positives we suspected, and countered some negative assumptions we have, at least for one week. The offensive line was effective, in that Kamerion Wimbley didn't maul Mike Harris, and didn't hospitalize Philip Rivers as he nearly did last season. While Mr. Harris isn't an ideal solution at left tackle, when we well remember Marcus McNeill's excellence at that position, his play offered some encouraging signs. He got flagged on at least one occasion, but he never gave up, tried hard, and seemed to get better as the game progressed, especially when the Chargers were running the ball right at the Titans to close out the game. In fact the whole offensive line seemed to enjoy pounding on the Titans defence at that point, and they in turn didn't seem to want to play anymore. It wasn't quite like the old days with Marcus and Kris Dielman blowing holes open for LT, but it was good to see an effective run game to wind down the clock.
The running backs played well. The intent at training camp was to have a panoply of RB's with complementary skills. Sure, Ryan Mathews would get the lion's share of the carries, but we'd have ways to use Ronnie Brown, Le'Ron McClain and even Jackie Battle in certain situations, we thought. Today, they showed they can contribute, and are not useless as we were beginning to fear after four pre-season games and last week's dud at Oakland. Curtis Brinkley showed a little more than Ronnie Brown did last week, and may have wrapped up the unofficial #2 spot behind Ryan, and we can only hope he continues to improve.
We also had hopes that the four tight ends would all contribute to the offence as well as on special teams. They could be deployed in two TE formations and cause headaches for defences. We saw today that Dante Rosario can chip in quite well, that Randy McMichael is trustworthy as ever in the run and passing game, and Ladarius Green's first NFL reception, with an impressive bit of running after the catch. As such, this made the absence of Antonio Gates seem academic. We can hope that he will be recovered fully by next week, and that his presence on the roster doesn't preclude the other guys being effective.
The defence also solidified our early impression that they'd be more athletic and effective than the last couple of seasons. The front seven limited Chris Johnson, a guy who has killed us in the past, to pedestrian numbers. Shaun Phillips seems re-energized after a difficult season last year. Donald Butler is an early-season revelation, after a rookie season on IR and a promising sophomore season all things considered. He's not just a solid run-stuffer, he shows athleticism and runs sideline to sideline. Eric Weddle came up with another interception.
While the Titans may turn out to be one of the weakest teams in the league this year, it was good that the Chargers didn't play down to their level, and executed in all three phases of the game. We saw the coaching staff reacting to game situations, with play calls capitalizing on the Titans failure to cover Dante Rosario, and inserting Jackie Battle to see what he could do and keeping the big back rolling when he showed effectiveness. They kept at the running game and got some positive results. Even Norv got into the act, working the refs and trying to gain an edge for his team.
Finally, for this viewer, the most hopeful sign was the steady play of Philip Rivers. He didn't force any balls, he didn't have happy feet, he didn't melt down when there was pressure. He was the steady reliable QB we've come to know in the past few seasons, at least before the blip of last season and the worrisome training camp this August. His one interception came on a third-and-10 longshot attempt to Malcom Floyd, and served as a shortish punt if anything, it certainly wasn't a disaster.
So a good win to put into the bank, in a game that was a 'should-win' home game. It's the first time the Chargers have been 2-0 since 2006, and it's great to have put away weak sisters before we hit a stretch of four games against tough NFC South teams and Divisional opponents.
I haven't been on board with the white helmets to begin with, ever since they were introduced, and all the footage we've seen in the last few months of Junior rampaging on the field reminds me how much better the electric blue helmets were. The players looked more intimidating with these on. I wonder if the 'finesse' team reputation the Chargers have derives in part from the white helmets our team has been sporting lately.
Today, the team went all white, and asked the fans to wear white as well to replicate the Winnipeg Jets' whiteout tradition. Was it a transparent attempt to sell white jerseys to fans who normally rely on their electric blue or powder blue jerseys? Another reason given was to keep the players from overheating while San Diego is embroiled in a heat wave, it was thought the white uniforms would keep our team cooler. I'll allow the point, although I wonder if the yellow pants would have been materially warmer. They certainly would have been less transparent. Yikes. It's a purely academic point however, since the only allowable colours this year are white and blue for pants, and white, blue and powder blue for the jerseys.
In any case, the Chargers have some of the best, most iconic uniforms in the NFL. We don't need to reinvent the wheel. We're not the Oregon Ducks or the Seattle Seahawks. Let's bring back the yellow pants, and use the powder blue more. Just 'cause.
Today's game was refreshing for Chargers fans, in that it confirmed some positives we suspected, and countered some negative assumptions we have, at least for one week. The offensive line was effective, in that Kamerion Wimbley didn't maul Mike Harris, and didn't hospitalize Philip Rivers as he nearly did last season. While Mr. Harris isn't an ideal solution at left tackle, when we well remember Marcus McNeill's excellence at that position, his play offered some encouraging signs. He got flagged on at least one occasion, but he never gave up, tried hard, and seemed to get better as the game progressed, especially when the Chargers were running the ball right at the Titans to close out the game. In fact the whole offensive line seemed to enjoy pounding on the Titans defence at that point, and they in turn didn't seem to want to play anymore. It wasn't quite like the old days with Marcus and Kris Dielman blowing holes open for LT, but it was good to see an effective run game to wind down the clock.
The running backs played well. The intent at training camp was to have a panoply of RB's with complementary skills. Sure, Ryan Mathews would get the lion's share of the carries, but we'd have ways to use Ronnie Brown, Le'Ron McClain and even Jackie Battle in certain situations, we thought. Today, they showed they can contribute, and are not useless as we were beginning to fear after four pre-season games and last week's dud at Oakland. Curtis Brinkley showed a little more than Ronnie Brown did last week, and may have wrapped up the unofficial #2 spot behind Ryan, and we can only hope he continues to improve.
We also had hopes that the four tight ends would all contribute to the offence as well as on special teams. They could be deployed in two TE formations and cause headaches for defences. We saw today that Dante Rosario can chip in quite well, that Randy McMichael is trustworthy as ever in the run and passing game, and Ladarius Green's first NFL reception, with an impressive bit of running after the catch. As such, this made the absence of Antonio Gates seem academic. We can hope that he will be recovered fully by next week, and that his presence on the roster doesn't preclude the other guys being effective.
The defence also solidified our early impression that they'd be more athletic and effective than the last couple of seasons. The front seven limited Chris Johnson, a guy who has killed us in the past, to pedestrian numbers. Shaun Phillips seems re-energized after a difficult season last year. Donald Butler is an early-season revelation, after a rookie season on IR and a promising sophomore season all things considered. He's not just a solid run-stuffer, he shows athleticism and runs sideline to sideline. Eric Weddle came up with another interception.
While the Titans may turn out to be one of the weakest teams in the league this year, it was good that the Chargers didn't play down to their level, and executed in all three phases of the game. We saw the coaching staff reacting to game situations, with play calls capitalizing on the Titans failure to cover Dante Rosario, and inserting Jackie Battle to see what he could do and keeping the big back rolling when he showed effectiveness. They kept at the running game and got some positive results. Even Norv got into the act, working the refs and trying to gain an edge for his team.
Finally, for this viewer, the most hopeful sign was the steady play of Philip Rivers. He didn't force any balls, he didn't have happy feet, he didn't melt down when there was pressure. He was the steady reliable QB we've come to know in the past few seasons, at least before the blip of last season and the worrisome training camp this August. His one interception came on a third-and-10 longshot attempt to Malcom Floyd, and served as a shortish punt if anything, it certainly wasn't a disaster.
So a good win to put into the bank, in a game that was a 'should-win' home game. It's the first time the Chargers have been 2-0 since 2006, and it's great to have put away weak sisters before we hit a stretch of four games against tough NFC South teams and Divisional opponents.
Review: "Playing with Fire" by Theoren Fleury
"Playing with Fire" is the autobiography of Theoren Fleury, co-written with Kirsten McLellan Day. In it, Mr. Fleury tells how he grew up in a difficult circumstance with an alcoholic father and emotionally withdrawn mother. He explains how hockey becomes his escape, how it allows him to come in contact with coaches and families who are more stable and supportive, and nurture his talents. This reliance on external authority figures while salutary at first turns disastrous when he comes into the sphere of influence of hockey coach and convicted pedophile Graham James.
This section of the book is difficult to read, but also fascinating and somewhat incomprehensible. The reader who hasn't had the same background and thus doesn't suffer from the same vulnerability is aghast that the author doesn't speak out or talk to the police or have some other like reaction to his situation. Without making light of the circumstances, this reviewer found himself comparing the decision-making and turns of events to the protagonists in a horror movie, and asking himself: "Why doesn't he do such and such, instead of that." In this way, the book is enlightening and serves to make the reader understand what the assault victim is subjected to and how she/he responds differently than 'common sense' would seem to indicate they should.
While the book is illuminating on this subject, it is not very insightful, and once again I have to lay the blame on the co-author. Ms. McLellan Day also worked with Bob Probert on his autobiography "Tough Guy", and my suspicions at the time I read it that she's at most a transcriber of words spoken into a voice recorder seem more founded after reading another book by her on hockey. She allows the subjects to recount their life and experiences with very little introspection or any questions to probe further or challenge them. As such, the books she co-writes are much less than they can be. The reader is left to wish that a capable author with knowledge of her subject matter, whether it be hockey or the pathology of sexual abuse, had been trusted with this project.
Mr. Fleury eventually escapes the clutches of Graham James and plays in the AHL and NHL, but by this point the material in the book becomes less gripping, and repetitive. This may be because his career peaks very early, and then declines somewhat as he is stuck on mediocre teams. The seasons pass, and the anecdotes all sound similar, and most are unhappy ones.
He is forthright about his alcohol and drug abuse, but also somewhat dismissive of their effects on his career and his team. He often describes a 'party' he participates in, which are invariably not so much festive as an opportunity to ingest great quantities of intoxicants, and then how well he performed the next day in a game, which is his 'Get Out of Jail Free' card of preference. He seldom delves into the effect his behaviour has on his team and teammates, and how much better he might have performed without the deleterious effects it has on his health and conditioning. Of course, the reader is aware that a lot of the passion and intensity in Mr. Fleury's play derives from his background and his battle with his demons; with players such as he you can't really tease apart the good from the bad. Mr. Fleury is a person that needs to be taken as a whole, to selectively amputate certain aspects of his existence would yield a different person entirely, not merely a healthy and productive Theo.
Graham James re-enters Mr. Fleury's life later on in his career, incomprehensibly, but by this time the reader doesn't need to be reminded that he hasn't 'walked a mile in his shoes', and can't really understand the inner workings of his mind.
The end of the book is unfortunate in that it follows Mr. Fleury's career arc. Again, the reader is left to wish that things had turned out differently, although all is not lost. While Mr. Fleury isn't as financially stable as he could have been, he has patched up a few relationships along the way and is struggling to find inner peace, and seems to have his substance abuse under control.
This reviewer is not sure he can recommend this book to readers unless they are fans of Mr. Fleury or the Calgary Flames. Certainly, Canadiens fans will find it difficult to relive the loss in the 1989 Stanley Cup finals as seen from the other side. If anything, this book makes one wish that a talented biographer had taken on this project, and had had access to Mr. Fleury and his family and loved ones and teammates and opponents. There is no question that we would have had a much richer, fuller portrait of the man.
This section of the book is difficult to read, but also fascinating and somewhat incomprehensible. The reader who hasn't had the same background and thus doesn't suffer from the same vulnerability is aghast that the author doesn't speak out or talk to the police or have some other like reaction to his situation. Without making light of the circumstances, this reviewer found himself comparing the decision-making and turns of events to the protagonists in a horror movie, and asking himself: "Why doesn't he do such and such, instead of that." In this way, the book is enlightening and serves to make the reader understand what the assault victim is subjected to and how she/he responds differently than 'common sense' would seem to indicate they should.
While the book is illuminating on this subject, it is not very insightful, and once again I have to lay the blame on the co-author. Ms. McLellan Day also worked with Bob Probert on his autobiography "Tough Guy", and my suspicions at the time I read it that she's at most a transcriber of words spoken into a voice recorder seem more founded after reading another book by her on hockey. She allows the subjects to recount their life and experiences with very little introspection or any questions to probe further or challenge them. As such, the books she co-writes are much less than they can be. The reader is left to wish that a capable author with knowledge of her subject matter, whether it be hockey or the pathology of sexual abuse, had been trusted with this project.
Mr. Fleury eventually escapes the clutches of Graham James and plays in the AHL and NHL, but by this point the material in the book becomes less gripping, and repetitive. This may be because his career peaks very early, and then declines somewhat as he is stuck on mediocre teams. The seasons pass, and the anecdotes all sound similar, and most are unhappy ones.
He is forthright about his alcohol and drug abuse, but also somewhat dismissive of their effects on his career and his team. He often describes a 'party' he participates in, which are invariably not so much festive as an opportunity to ingest great quantities of intoxicants, and then how well he performed the next day in a game, which is his 'Get Out of Jail Free' card of preference. He seldom delves into the effect his behaviour has on his team and teammates, and how much better he might have performed without the deleterious effects it has on his health and conditioning. Of course, the reader is aware that a lot of the passion and intensity in Mr. Fleury's play derives from his background and his battle with his demons; with players such as he you can't really tease apart the good from the bad. Mr. Fleury is a person that needs to be taken as a whole, to selectively amputate certain aspects of his existence would yield a different person entirely, not merely a healthy and productive Theo.
Graham James re-enters Mr. Fleury's life later on in his career, incomprehensibly, but by this time the reader doesn't need to be reminded that he hasn't 'walked a mile in his shoes', and can't really understand the inner workings of his mind.
The end of the book is unfortunate in that it follows Mr. Fleury's career arc. Again, the reader is left to wish that things had turned out differently, although all is not lost. While Mr. Fleury isn't as financially stable as he could have been, he has patched up a few relationships along the way and is struggling to find inner peace, and seems to have his substance abuse under control.
This reviewer is not sure he can recommend this book to readers unless they are fans of Mr. Fleury or the Calgary Flames. Certainly, Canadiens fans will find it difficult to relive the loss in the 1989 Stanley Cup finals as seen from the other side. If anything, this book makes one wish that a talented biographer had taken on this project, and had had access to Mr. Fleury and his family and loved ones and teammates and opponents. There is no question that we would have had a much richer, fuller portrait of the man.
Saturday, 15 September 2012
Owner greed no valid reason for a 50-50 split
It's started already. Fans are blaming the players for the current NHL lockout. A lockout imposed by the owners. Maybe they need to review the definition of a lockout.
From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lockout
It astounds me that anyone even thinks of siding with the owners, and their facile 50-50 split. The players are who we pay to see, not the owners. I don’t care about Jeremy Jacobs and Charles Wang, they’re all crooks and monopolists and fraudsters. Why they get half the money they declare, plus all that they embezzle is inexplicable.
From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lockout
Definition of LOCKOUT: the withholding of employment by an employer and the whole or partial closing of the business establishment in order to gain concessions from or resist demands of employees
It astounds me that anyone even thinks of siding with the owners, and their facile 50-50 split. The players are who we pay to see, not the owners. I don’t care about Jeremy Jacobs and Charles Wang, they’re all crooks and monopolists and fraudsters. Why they get half the money they declare, plus all that they embezzle is inexplicable.
The 50-50 split sounds reasonable to simpletons, since it harkens back to kindergarden, when we were taught to share and share alike. It does not apply to this situation however. The owners recklessly cancelled a season, locking out the players and depriving fans of the game they love, in order to obtain ‘cost certainty’, which was a hard salary cap. The players’ share of revenue was rolled back from more than 60% down to 55% at that point, accomplished by the players taking a 24% pay cut. Eight years later the owners come back and ask for more cuts? To support hockey in moribund locales like Phoenix and Uniondale? So that more of the inflated ticket prices and jersey sales end up in their pockets? How exactly will you benefit personally from another lockout to prop up those franchises? Wouldn’t you be better off with fewer hockey teams, with less diluted talent, with more franchises in Canada, where they will draw fans?
Give your head a serious shake. The only reason there won’t be hockey in the fall is because of owner greed. They’re the ones who opted out of the current CBA, and they’re the ones who will lock out the players. The players would gladly continue to play under the current conditions, but Gary Bettman won’t, so that Phoenix doesn’t have to meet a salary floor that he agreed to less than a decade ago.
If there is no hockey, it’s not the players’ fault. They are not going on strike. The owners are the ones who opted out of the current CBA, the one during which revenues grew and they signed the biggest broadcast deal ever with NBC. The owners are preparing to lock out the players. So the owners are the ones who will deprive you of the game you love, in the name of greed. They got everything they wanted last time they tried to kill hockey, a salary cap and 24% wage rollback, but they’re coming back to strangle it a little more.
If there is no hockey, it’s not the players’ fault. They are not going on strike. The owners are the ones who opted out of the current CBA, the one during which revenues grew and they signed the biggest broadcast deal ever with NBC. The owners are preparing to lock out the players. So the owners are the ones who will deprive you of the game you love, in the name of greed. They got everything they wanted last time they tried to kill hockey, a salary cap and 24% wage rollback, but they’re coming back to strangle it a little more.
And for those of you who say that players come and go, but that doesn't matter, since you're only really a fan of the team, think again. You had no attachment to Jean Béliveau, Guy Lafleur, Ken Dryden, Patrick Roy, Saku Koivu? These guys were just interchangeable cogs? Their personality had nothing to do with your love of the Canadiens?
The game is what it is because of the players. They’re paid very well to play a game they love, but that’s not an excuse to rob them of some of the ticket revenue to give it to Francesco Aquilini and Ed Snyder.
Also, if the owners operated as pure businessmen, I’d give them credit for what they do, but they rely on exemption from anti-trust legislation and taxpayer subsidies for their operations. If Pierre Karl Péladeau built the Colisée, then the beatification of owners would make sense. Rather, he’s going to let the citizens of Québec assume all the costs and risks, and then turn around and gouge them as much as he can with ticket prices and cable bills. So give me a break with the owners being responsible for the league’s existence.
Read “Net Worth”, you’ll see what the NHL owners did for the league, they almost killed it, only used it to fill dates in their arenas between wrestling and boxing matches. They defrauded generations of players. The owners are never the heroes.
We'd actually be way better off if we didn't have owners and instead ran NHL teams as public trusts or utilities. Do you really think that if the NHL was a league with 12 or 20 community-owned teams like the Green Bay Packers, with revenue sharing to even out the bumps in the road, and salaries reflective of the consummate skill of the players but not necessarily inflated by the current monopoly which charges you $100 for a ticket and $200 for a jersey, that you’d enjoy the games less? What value does Boots Del Baggio bring to the equation?
Owners didn’t create the NHL, they didn’t invent hockey, they almost killed it. And they’re killing it to this day, by focusing on ways to raise the price of beer to $10 instead of trying to improve the product on the ice. Now they're shutting it down on the fans who paid for these teams ten times over.
We love hockey. The players love hockey. The owners love the money they wring out of hockey.
We love hockey. The players love hockey. The owners love the money they wring out of hockey.
Is a five-year contract limit good for the NHL?
I see a few fans who see the NHL owners demands for a five year limit on contracts as a positive.
So to a fan, long-term contracts are not preferable. And it will help the owners to have an imposed five-year limit on contract length.
In a way that's true, it will allow GM's to say to players "Jeez, I wish I could give you a ten-year deal, I really do, but my hands are tied by the CBA..."
I'm not sure it will help competitive balance though.
Thought experiment: Seth Jones has just reached free agency after playing All-Star quality defence for the Calgary Flames for ten years. He signed two five-year contracts, an entry-level deal as prescribed by the CBA, and then a generous but sub-maximal second contract, also as prescribed by the CBA. He's now unfettered and evaluating his options.
The Flames have offered him the maximum dollar amount five-year deal they are allowed to given the strictures of the CBA and the salary cap. So have twenty other teams. The only reason the other nine teams didn't is because they're at the cap limit and can't clear the room, otherwise they would have offered the Norris Trophy candidate the same deal.
So now Seth thinks. "Calgary is kind of a nice town, I love how they made me the Parade Marshall the past couple of years. I have lots of friends here. Cowboys was fun while I was still single. But I can make the same money and not be so much in the public eye if I go home to the States. It would be neat to go home to Dallas. I could go to New York or L.A. or Anaheim and rake in endorsement cash. I could go to a Florida team and golf whenever I want, the wife really hates the snow."
Calgary would have a tough time retaining him. They can't 'renegotiate' his contract, only extend a current deal in the last year of the contract. It would have to appeal to his 'loyalty' after he'd played there nine years, but how loyal does the kid need to be to a team when the league has depressed his earning capacity to a level far below market value? He didn't ask to be drafted by the Flames, they just happened to suck the season that he reached his draft year.
Remember how Erik Cole was about to re-sign with Carolina last July, since the offer he got from them was about the same as that offered by the Canadiens, and maybe a couple of other teams if I remember correctly. Pierre Gauthier then raised his offer, tacking on an extra year and a No Trade Clause, and that won the auction. The Canadiens only got Erik Cole because they were 'allowed' to make him a better offer.
In this same situation, where a lot of teams were trying to entice a free agent to their team, but can't separate from the pack because they're all offering the max for a single player and a five-year term, the Cinderella teams will never find Prince Charming. If there's an(other) artificial brake or ceiling on salaries, a lot of players might just say "Screw it, for the same money I'm going to be a King and meet starlets." The Rangers and Kings will be the big winners.
Friday, 14 September 2012
Gary Bettman is an awful partner
My first real job growing up was working on tobacco farms. It was strenuous, dirty work, but I was a kid and didn't know any better. I was probably working harder at home on chores, so it was almost like a vacation when I was at work. Plus I got paid what was fat cash for a teenager in the mid-seventies.
Harvest time could go a number of ways based on your crew. You were all seated on the same harvester that crawled up and down the field, you were responsible for picking tobacco leaves on the plants in your row. If you had coworkers who'd done a few seasons, you could go at a pretty good clip, maybe even second or third gear with a mid-throttle. Some seasons though some newbie would join and be overwhelmed and we'd need to putter along in first gear on idle to accommodate him. Either way, you got paid a day rate, you were done your day when you'd filled a kiln.
So we were happy summers when we had a fast team and could knock off around 1400 hr or so, we'd sometimes skip lunch and finish even earlier. The crew back at the farm who hung the leaves in the kiln were happy with short days too. When we dragged up and down at a snail's pace and barely got home for dinner, nobody was. And on those slow days, we'd start yapping and moaning, since that's all we could do to pass the time, pick tobacco at a mind-numbingly slow pace and talk with each other, while the newbie had a stress aneurysm trying to keep up.
One day we were talking about wages. We spoke covetously of some farms that seemed like Shangri-La, with spic and span barns and kilns and kickass gleaming equipment, where they apparently paid as much as $35 or $38 a day. We were only making $26, a raise over the $24 we'd received the previous season. One wag piped up that Monsieur Laporte, our employer, used to pay his guys $32, but dropped the rate the year we joined or the one before. We understood that we got paid lower rates, his farm was smaller, and so were his kilns, so that our harvester was a six seater instead of an eight-seater at those bigger operations, and for him a day's harvest wasn't as lucrative as at those big places. But still, we thought...
Well, Monsieur Laporte got wind of this, and midway through the next day, he drives to the field we were at in his truck and hops out, with a stack of ledgers under his arm. He calls us over and opens his meticulous books to us, who are at this point embarrassed and crestfallen that this nice man feels he has to explain himself to us young punks. But he insists and he lays it all out on the table, he shows us the entries for wages for this season and the years we worked for him before, and the years before we joined, and he put to rest the rumours we'd floated. It's all there in the clearly marked ledgers, one for each season, and he points out the figures with his beaten thumb.
We felt yea big. Monsieur Laporte wasn't mad at us, he seemed just as embarrassed as we did, but he felt it necessary to clear the air, and for us to understand that he was paying us fairly, according to what he brought in, what he could afford, and what he always paid for his pickers. When he left and we got back to work, we talked about how he was a good guy and always treated us fairly, how he always threw a big party at the end of the season, how when the first frost approached and we slept at his farm's bunkhouse he'd wake us up every two hours or so and we'd run out to the field and change the irrigation sprinklers from one field to another in the hopes that the warm water would prevent the tobacco from freezing, and he was so appreciative of us for our work. On the really cold and rainy days when you're getting slapped in the face with wet tobacco leaves and you're soaking wet no matter how good your rain gear is, he'd show up with his bottle of rum and pour us all a shot, and laugh along with everybody as each downed his shot and grimaced. "That'll warm up your fingers," he'd intone.
I thought of Monsieur Laporte while I watched Sneerin' Gary Bettman condescend to the reporters in his Thursday press conference. He let out some whoppers. One that made me sit up and laugh and rewind my PVR to ensure I'd heard him correctly, was when he said that in 2005 they come to an agreement that was fair to both parties, but in hindsight it had been "too fair." Exclamation point!
Another good one was when he kept saying that costs were rising, his only justification for wanting to claw back 10% of the players' take. He mentioned that things such as jet fuel had increased, a necessary item for the charter planes the teams use. He explained that expenses for the benefit of the players, such as bigger medical teams, training staff, and coaching staffs had also risen.
Now, these last costs seem to me costs that a winning organization would bear to be competitive, since owners usually want to win Stanley Cups and championships, and it has never historically been the role of the players to bear these costs. In any event, this is where Gary Bettman is the anti-Monsieur Laporte. If he had, as he told us he would after the last lost season, treated the players as partners he would work with to grow the game for everyone's benefit, he'd now be able to take out his ledger and show the players like Monsieur Laporte did with us. "Look boys, we agreed on 45-55 last time around, with you guys getting 56 and 57% if revenues grew, but lookie here, our expenses have risen at double the rate of revenues. Jet fuel is such and such, equipment costs are 300% higher, most teams have doubled their training staff to help prevent injuries and recover quicker, we've had to add doctors to deal with the concussion problem and make your workplace safer, ...." If he valued the players, and if they trusted him, they could enter a discussion where there'd be a collaborative tone, not an adversarial one.
Instead, he flatly states that they're paying the players too much, apparently based on a value judgment, on the owners' druthers. He refers to the recent NFL and NBA settlements as examples to justify that 57% for the players is too high, but this was something he was deadset against in 2005, brusquely stating that hockey was its own sport and had its own conditions that didn't lend itself to comparisons.
At the end of the year parties, Monsieur Laporte would give you your last paycheque, one that usually had a small bonus if the harvest looked promising, and he'd ask you what your plans were. We were all going back to school, most of us had already missed a week or so of classes to help bring in the harvest. He assured you that you had a job guaranteed the next summer if you wanted one, but that he'd understand if you got another job somewhere and needed to save up more money for university. He clearly seemed interested in our future and our success, and as a result so were we, we worked hard for him, not just as we normally would at any job, but because he was a nice man and we wanted nothing but the best for him.
If Gary Bettman wasn't the twerp that he is, the little guy with the Napoleon complex who has to browbeat everyone and show that he's the smartest guy in the room, he could have counseled the owners differently and have approached these negotiations with a different tack. There would have been a chance that some common ground could have been found. Instead, the players see a sneaky little liar who is trying to worm his hands into their pockets, and the reporters who cover the game see it as much the same. It's no surprise that this will be the third lockout on his watch. It's indicative of who he is, and his leadership and management style. It also reflects very clearly what he values most: money over hockey.
Harvest time could go a number of ways based on your crew. You were all seated on the same harvester that crawled up and down the field, you were responsible for picking tobacco leaves on the plants in your row. If you had coworkers who'd done a few seasons, you could go at a pretty good clip, maybe even second or third gear with a mid-throttle. Some seasons though some newbie would join and be overwhelmed and we'd need to putter along in first gear on idle to accommodate him. Either way, you got paid a day rate, you were done your day when you'd filled a kiln.
So we were happy summers when we had a fast team and could knock off around 1400 hr or so, we'd sometimes skip lunch and finish even earlier. The crew back at the farm who hung the leaves in the kiln were happy with short days too. When we dragged up and down at a snail's pace and barely got home for dinner, nobody was. And on those slow days, we'd start yapping and moaning, since that's all we could do to pass the time, pick tobacco at a mind-numbingly slow pace and talk with each other, while the newbie had a stress aneurysm trying to keep up.
One day we were talking about wages. We spoke covetously of some farms that seemed like Shangri-La, with spic and span barns and kilns and kickass gleaming equipment, where they apparently paid as much as $35 or $38 a day. We were only making $26, a raise over the $24 we'd received the previous season. One wag piped up that Monsieur Laporte, our employer, used to pay his guys $32, but dropped the rate the year we joined or the one before. We understood that we got paid lower rates, his farm was smaller, and so were his kilns, so that our harvester was a six seater instead of an eight-seater at those bigger operations, and for him a day's harvest wasn't as lucrative as at those big places. But still, we thought...
Well, Monsieur Laporte got wind of this, and midway through the next day, he drives to the field we were at in his truck and hops out, with a stack of ledgers under his arm. He calls us over and opens his meticulous books to us, who are at this point embarrassed and crestfallen that this nice man feels he has to explain himself to us young punks. But he insists and he lays it all out on the table, he shows us the entries for wages for this season and the years we worked for him before, and the years before we joined, and he put to rest the rumours we'd floated. It's all there in the clearly marked ledgers, one for each season, and he points out the figures with his beaten thumb.
We felt yea big. Monsieur Laporte wasn't mad at us, he seemed just as embarrassed as we did, but he felt it necessary to clear the air, and for us to understand that he was paying us fairly, according to what he brought in, what he could afford, and what he always paid for his pickers. When he left and we got back to work, we talked about how he was a good guy and always treated us fairly, how he always threw a big party at the end of the season, how when the first frost approached and we slept at his farm's bunkhouse he'd wake us up every two hours or so and we'd run out to the field and change the irrigation sprinklers from one field to another in the hopes that the warm water would prevent the tobacco from freezing, and he was so appreciative of us for our work. On the really cold and rainy days when you're getting slapped in the face with wet tobacco leaves and you're soaking wet no matter how good your rain gear is, he'd show up with his bottle of rum and pour us all a shot, and laugh along with everybody as each downed his shot and grimaced. "That'll warm up your fingers," he'd intone.
I thought of Monsieur Laporte while I watched Sneerin' Gary Bettman condescend to the reporters in his Thursday press conference. He let out some whoppers. One that made me sit up and laugh and rewind my PVR to ensure I'd heard him correctly, was when he said that in 2005 they come to an agreement that was fair to both parties, but in hindsight it had been "too fair." Exclamation point!
Another good one was when he kept saying that costs were rising, his only justification for wanting to claw back 10% of the players' take. He mentioned that things such as jet fuel had increased, a necessary item for the charter planes the teams use. He explained that expenses for the benefit of the players, such as bigger medical teams, training staff, and coaching staffs had also risen.
Now, these last costs seem to me costs that a winning organization would bear to be competitive, since owners usually want to win Stanley Cups and championships, and it has never historically been the role of the players to bear these costs. In any event, this is where Gary Bettman is the anti-Monsieur Laporte. If he had, as he told us he would after the last lost season, treated the players as partners he would work with to grow the game for everyone's benefit, he'd now be able to take out his ledger and show the players like Monsieur Laporte did with us. "Look boys, we agreed on 45-55 last time around, with you guys getting 56 and 57% if revenues grew, but lookie here, our expenses have risen at double the rate of revenues. Jet fuel is such and such, equipment costs are 300% higher, most teams have doubled their training staff to help prevent injuries and recover quicker, we've had to add doctors to deal with the concussion problem and make your workplace safer, ...." If he valued the players, and if they trusted him, they could enter a discussion where there'd be a collaborative tone, not an adversarial one.
Instead, he flatly states that they're paying the players too much, apparently based on a value judgment, on the owners' druthers. He refers to the recent NFL and NBA settlements as examples to justify that 57% for the players is too high, but this was something he was deadset against in 2005, brusquely stating that hockey was its own sport and had its own conditions that didn't lend itself to comparisons.
At the end of the year parties, Monsieur Laporte would give you your last paycheque, one that usually had a small bonus if the harvest looked promising, and he'd ask you what your plans were. We were all going back to school, most of us had already missed a week or so of classes to help bring in the harvest. He assured you that you had a job guaranteed the next summer if you wanted one, but that he'd understand if you got another job somewhere and needed to save up more money for university. He clearly seemed interested in our future and our success, and as a result so were we, we worked hard for him, not just as we normally would at any job, but because he was a nice man and we wanted nothing but the best for him.
If Gary Bettman wasn't the twerp that he is, the little guy with the Napoleon complex who has to browbeat everyone and show that he's the smartest guy in the room, he could have counseled the owners differently and have approached these negotiations with a different tack. There would have been a chance that some common ground could have been found. Instead, the players see a sneaky little liar who is trying to worm his hands into their pockets, and the reporters who cover the game see it as much the same. It's no surprise that this will be the third lockout on his watch. It's indicative of who he is, and his leadership and management style. It also reflects very clearly what he values most: money over hockey.
Wednesday, 12 September 2012
NFL Week 1: Chargers 22, Raiders 14
The Chargers start off on the right foot by getting one in the win column, and we're happy with that. We just have to keep things in perspective, and keep the unconvincing win in context.
The Raiders organization and their fans are a joke. They put on their pathetic costumes and makeup and wear jerseys as black as their heart and as dark as their souls and have scary skulls and spikes and get all revved up and psycho at the start of the game, and then wilt under the crushing idiocy and buffoonery of their team. By the third quarter they're usually booing their heroes. As they did during this game.
The Raiders have been led by a demented old woman for decades now, and the NFL deification machine has obfuscated that fact, instead spinning it into a case of a headstrong and idiosyncratic owner. His bizarre personnel decisions, involving both players and coaches, have been glossed over. He has been allowed by the courts to highjack the Raiders from Oakland to L.A. and back again for his personal enrichment. Even the manner in which he became the owner of the Raiders is under question, with various former partners claiming to have been defrauded and pushed out of the ownership team.
So when I see them gift another team with a win as they did in this game, by the simple fact of having lost their long snapper and not having a competent backup on the roster, I see only a team that has itself to blame. I see a team that is wrapped up in its own mystique of being a bunch of renegades and outlaws that sinks under the weight of its own indiscipline. I see a team that claims to prize the vertical passing game but has a succession of inept quarterbacks leading it, and drafts players based on their 40-yard dash times and ends up with massively flawed reaches like Darrius Heyward-Bey and Taiwan Jones on its roster, instead of football players.
For all his failures, Norv Turner and his coaching staff do their actual job and have on their roster players capable of subbing in for their long-snapper. The Raiders, led by the never-amount-to-anything son of the deceased owner, and by rookie head coach Dennis Allen, evidently don't get around to those kinds of details.
So we're not going to get excited about this win. It's nice that for once a crazy event resulted in a fortuitous win rather than a seemingly undeserved loss, as we've suffered in recent years. But our offence sputtered. Our lines on both sides of the ball got caved in on the first couple of series, before the Raiders lost their initial slavering homicidal energy and deflated their own balloons with their penalties. Our quarterback and his favourite target Antonio Gates seemed out of sync, with the latter allowing a couple of passes to slip through his mitts, one of which would have been a touchdown.
Sure, our defence looked good at the end, when the Raiders had lost hope, and came up with cheap sacks, but they seemed like they had all they could handle at the start.
About the only bright spot seemed to be the return to form of Nate Kaeding, who it must be repeated seems to have an even stronger boot than before he blew out his ACL, if that's possible.
So we'll keep this win, but we're not going to get carried away. We're going to wait and see how the Charger fare against an actual NFL team, one with a leadership and an organizational plan and a roster filled by professional players who are coached to win games rather than to satisfy the adolescent urges of its moronic fan base. If the Chargers can stop Chris Johnson and the Titans, we'll pay closer attention then.
The Raiders organization and their fans are a joke. They put on their pathetic costumes and makeup and wear jerseys as black as their heart and as dark as their souls and have scary skulls and spikes and get all revved up and psycho at the start of the game, and then wilt under the crushing idiocy and buffoonery of their team. By the third quarter they're usually booing their heroes. As they did during this game.
The Raiders have been led by a demented old woman for decades now, and the NFL deification machine has obfuscated that fact, instead spinning it into a case of a headstrong and idiosyncratic owner. His bizarre personnel decisions, involving both players and coaches, have been glossed over. He has been allowed by the courts to highjack the Raiders from Oakland to L.A. and back again for his personal enrichment. Even the manner in which he became the owner of the Raiders is under question, with various former partners claiming to have been defrauded and pushed out of the ownership team.
So when I see them gift another team with a win as they did in this game, by the simple fact of having lost their long snapper and not having a competent backup on the roster, I see only a team that has itself to blame. I see a team that is wrapped up in its own mystique of being a bunch of renegades and outlaws that sinks under the weight of its own indiscipline. I see a team that claims to prize the vertical passing game but has a succession of inept quarterbacks leading it, and drafts players based on their 40-yard dash times and ends up with massively flawed reaches like Darrius Heyward-Bey and Taiwan Jones on its roster, instead of football players.
For all his failures, Norv Turner and his coaching staff do their actual job and have on their roster players capable of subbing in for their long-snapper. The Raiders, led by the never-amount-to-anything son of the deceased owner, and by rookie head coach Dennis Allen, evidently don't get around to those kinds of details.
So we're not going to get excited about this win. It's nice that for once a crazy event resulted in a fortuitous win rather than a seemingly undeserved loss, as we've suffered in recent years. But our offence sputtered. Our lines on both sides of the ball got caved in on the first couple of series, before the Raiders lost their initial slavering homicidal energy and deflated their own balloons with their penalties. Our quarterback and his favourite target Antonio Gates seemed out of sync, with the latter allowing a couple of passes to slip through his mitts, one of which would have been a touchdown.
Sure, our defence looked good at the end, when the Raiders had lost hope, and came up with cheap sacks, but they seemed like they had all they could handle at the start.
About the only bright spot seemed to be the return to form of Nate Kaeding, who it must be repeated seems to have an even stronger boot than before he blew out his ACL, if that's possible.
So we'll keep this win, but we're not going to get carried away. We're going to wait and see how the Charger fare against an actual NFL team, one with a leadership and an organizational plan and a roster filled by professional players who are coached to win games rather than to satisfy the adolescent urges of its moronic fan base. If the Chargers can stop Chris Johnson and the Titans, we'll pay closer attention then.
Monday, 10 September 2012
Prediction: San Diego Chargers go 7-9 in 2012
While I'm eagerly anticipating the San Diego Chargers' season, it's more as a result of my fan status and the attachment I have to the players, the team and its history and identity, and the city, a positive jewel. It's not because I expect the team to be strong and competitive and to go deep into the playoffs.
As a matter of fact, to go on the record here, I believe the Chargers will go below .500 in 2012 and end up a mediocre 7-9 also-ran in a difficult transition season. Note that I didn't go down the calendar and allot probable wins and losses, a mug's game since teams are evaluated in this pre-season rundown according to their previous season's performance, and NFL teams are known to swing wildly in quality from one year to the next. No, my prediction rests on the feeling I have that this team is no longer the supremely talented but underperforming unit of the last few seasons. It is a team that is showing the strain of too many misses on its first and second-round draft picks, and of too often bundling picks to trade up for players that end up laying an egg. The resultant lack of depth is apparent on the offensive line and defensive lines, notably.
The reason I say this is a transition year is that while the face of the team is still there in Philip Rivers, and the All-Pro tight end Antonio Gates is due for a big rebound season after two marred by injury, many of the mainstays on the team have moved on. On offence, in a matter of two seasons, the team has dropped Pro Bowlers Kris Dielman, Marcus McNeill, Darren Sproles, and Vincent Jackson, all players who were dominant or game-changers at their position and were replaced by lesser ones. In all this churning, there is only one player who seems to have a chance to be a star in his own right, but he's on defence, not offence.
The offence is feeling the effects of players like Buster Davis, uh, being busts, and players like Ryan Mathews not living up to their high draft billing and the assets surrendered to obtain them. 'Fullback' Jacob Hester never became the go-to do-everything heart and soul leader the team gave up a 2nd and a fifth round pick to obtain. Journeymen at best replace Mssrs. McNeill and Dielman on the left side of the line.
We saw how Philip Rivers' decision-making and accuracy suffered last season with his line in a state of upheaval, and I fear he'll have the same problems this season. He often aired it out to Vincent Jackson, a physical beast who would go up and get his passes against overmatched corners. He doesn't have the same kind of connection and rhythm, and certainly doesn't have the same physical mismatch with Robert Meachem. Passes he would wing out to VJ that ended up completed for touchdowns will more often be intercepted if the pre-season is any indication.
Ryan Mathews is a very talented back who has had conditioning issues and fumbling problems, still has some maturing to do, and struggles to go through a season without having to sit out games due to injuries. He's started the season on the sidelines and should be back soon, but must be productive and consistent for the season to not be a disaster. Even healthy, he'll struggle to find holes without road grader Kris Dielman up front.
On defence, we'll also see a team trying to find a new identity. Jacques Césaire and Luis Castillo were let go before the season, but they were at best steady and experienced but unspectacular. They are replaced by younger, more athletic players with promise, and we can expect them to make mistakes, but also make some plays due to their sheer athleticism.
The linebackers is one area we can be optimistic, even excited about. The addition of first-rounder Melvin Ingram can inject a healthy dose of energy, he showed a high motor and skill in the pre-season getting after the quarterback, a deficiency for the Chargers last season. Shaun Phillips saw a lot of double-teams as the only pass-rushing threat early on, until he got help from Ravens castoff Antwan Barnes. Both are back, along with a seemingly healthy Larry English who seems ready to deliver on the first round pick the Chargers spent to acquire him. Add in veteran Takeo Spikes and third-year player Donald Butler, who played solidly at middle LB last season, and you have the makings of a strong crew, especially when accounting for free agent acquisitions Jarret Johnson and Demorrio Williams.
The secondary is a cause for concern. Quentin Jammer isn't getting any younger or speedier. Antoine Cason seemed to take a step back last season, yet he is counted on to contribute as a former first-rounder and starting cornerback. Eric Weddle is a point of strength, but finding him a partner at Safety has been a a headache for the Chargers for years now. Last year's roll of the dice on oft-injured Bob Sanders came up snake eyes. This year, the plan is to go with hard-hitting but mistake-prone Atari Bigby, and ease in 2012 third-rounder Brandon Taylor. Overall, this is a thin group that can be adequate if things go mostly right for the Chargers, but also has the potential to go very wrong.
Special Teams seem to have solidified under coach Rich Bisaccia, who quelled the Football Follies fodder that were the special teams in 2010, what with blocked punts and fumbles and touchdown returns allowed. Nate Kaeding has returned seemingly stronger than before after tearing his ACL on the opening play of last season. Mike Scifres is one of the best punters in the business. The return game was hurt by the loss of Darren Sproles, and we'll have to see if the options provided by Richard Goodman, Micheal Spurlock and Eddie Royal improve last season's results.
So overall, you have a team with a few bright spots but more questions than answers. Multiply that with the pedestrian coaching and leadership of Norv Turner, and we have a recipe for a muddling team if not for disaster. While Norv may be a nice guy, and has overcome much to attain the success he has, as demonstrated in a profile by Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune, he is not a leader and motivator, he waffles and gabbles and goofs during games. His much-vaunted talent as an offensive genius and play-caller can be questioned by fans who find some of his calls either predictable or mind-boggling.
The case of Darren Sproles is illuminating. He was often called upon to provide a change of pace in the Chargers' offence, but Norv would try to 'disguise and surprise' by sending him all too often for a run between the tackles, famously during a game-ending play against the Ravens in which he was stuffed by unconvicted murderer Ray Lewis. Norv's 'surprise' play was attempted so often that it was fully expected by teams, who awaited Darren with relish and exposed him to injury. Last season, he defected to the Saints and promptly had the best season of his career, an NFL first in that he was the first to go over 1000 yards on offence and in the return game in the same year. This while in a new system without the benefit of OTA's and a pre-season, and on a team that has a surfeit of options for Drew Brees to choose from. Why couldn't offensive genius Norv Turner wring that kind of production out of him?
Norv's greater failings are his lack of leadership. His teams routinely commit bone-headed mistakes. The players fumble and bumble and take dumb penalties and are never called to account. He is the anti-Belichick, a coach who takes unheralded players and coaches them up and molds them into a winning team. For the Patriots, the team is greater than the sum of its parts. For the Chargers, unfailingly, the team is a shiny bauble that breaks early after moderate use. We all remember Rex Ryan's quip that he would have won a few Super Bowls if he'd been the head coach of a collection of talent like the Chargers. It's probably fair to say that most coaches believe they'd do better than Norv too.
Norv also is awful at clock management and coaches' challenges. His sideline presence leaves a lot to be desired. Observers think that he spends too much time play-calling during games and loses sight of the overall picture. While he has hired an assistant in Steve Fairchild to help with game management, he has historically been a negative on game days in terms of putting his team in the best position to win.
Overall, one can't help to think that the team has regressed from last season. I'm being optimistic and hoping for a small step back this year, and a return to form next season with most of the big pieces intact, an influx of productive draftees, and an improvement from the young players on the defence. And, as manna from heaven, a long-overdue coaching change.
As a matter of fact, to go on the record here, I believe the Chargers will go below .500 in 2012 and end up a mediocre 7-9 also-ran in a difficult transition season. Note that I didn't go down the calendar and allot probable wins and losses, a mug's game since teams are evaluated in this pre-season rundown according to their previous season's performance, and NFL teams are known to swing wildly in quality from one year to the next. No, my prediction rests on the feeling I have that this team is no longer the supremely talented but underperforming unit of the last few seasons. It is a team that is showing the strain of too many misses on its first and second-round draft picks, and of too often bundling picks to trade up for players that end up laying an egg. The resultant lack of depth is apparent on the offensive line and defensive lines, notably.
The reason I say this is a transition year is that while the face of the team is still there in Philip Rivers, and the All-Pro tight end Antonio Gates is due for a big rebound season after two marred by injury, many of the mainstays on the team have moved on. On offence, in a matter of two seasons, the team has dropped Pro Bowlers Kris Dielman, Marcus McNeill, Darren Sproles, and Vincent Jackson, all players who were dominant or game-changers at their position and were replaced by lesser ones. In all this churning, there is only one player who seems to have a chance to be a star in his own right, but he's on defence, not offence.
The offence is feeling the effects of players like Buster Davis, uh, being busts, and players like Ryan Mathews not living up to their high draft billing and the assets surrendered to obtain them. 'Fullback' Jacob Hester never became the go-to do-everything heart and soul leader the team gave up a 2nd and a fifth round pick to obtain. Journeymen at best replace Mssrs. McNeill and Dielman on the left side of the line.
We saw how Philip Rivers' decision-making and accuracy suffered last season with his line in a state of upheaval, and I fear he'll have the same problems this season. He often aired it out to Vincent Jackson, a physical beast who would go up and get his passes against overmatched corners. He doesn't have the same kind of connection and rhythm, and certainly doesn't have the same physical mismatch with Robert Meachem. Passes he would wing out to VJ that ended up completed for touchdowns will more often be intercepted if the pre-season is any indication.
Ryan Mathews is a very talented back who has had conditioning issues and fumbling problems, still has some maturing to do, and struggles to go through a season without having to sit out games due to injuries. He's started the season on the sidelines and should be back soon, but must be productive and consistent for the season to not be a disaster. Even healthy, he'll struggle to find holes without road grader Kris Dielman up front.
On defence, we'll also see a team trying to find a new identity. Jacques Césaire and Luis Castillo were let go before the season, but they were at best steady and experienced but unspectacular. They are replaced by younger, more athletic players with promise, and we can expect them to make mistakes, but also make some plays due to their sheer athleticism.
The linebackers is one area we can be optimistic, even excited about. The addition of first-rounder Melvin Ingram can inject a healthy dose of energy, he showed a high motor and skill in the pre-season getting after the quarterback, a deficiency for the Chargers last season. Shaun Phillips saw a lot of double-teams as the only pass-rushing threat early on, until he got help from Ravens castoff Antwan Barnes. Both are back, along with a seemingly healthy Larry English who seems ready to deliver on the first round pick the Chargers spent to acquire him. Add in veteran Takeo Spikes and third-year player Donald Butler, who played solidly at middle LB last season, and you have the makings of a strong crew, especially when accounting for free agent acquisitions Jarret Johnson and Demorrio Williams.
The secondary is a cause for concern. Quentin Jammer isn't getting any younger or speedier. Antoine Cason seemed to take a step back last season, yet he is counted on to contribute as a former first-rounder and starting cornerback. Eric Weddle is a point of strength, but finding him a partner at Safety has been a a headache for the Chargers for years now. Last year's roll of the dice on oft-injured Bob Sanders came up snake eyes. This year, the plan is to go with hard-hitting but mistake-prone Atari Bigby, and ease in 2012 third-rounder Brandon Taylor. Overall, this is a thin group that can be adequate if things go mostly right for the Chargers, but also has the potential to go very wrong.
Special Teams seem to have solidified under coach Rich Bisaccia, who quelled the Football Follies fodder that were the special teams in 2010, what with blocked punts and fumbles and touchdown returns allowed. Nate Kaeding has returned seemingly stronger than before after tearing his ACL on the opening play of last season. Mike Scifres is one of the best punters in the business. The return game was hurt by the loss of Darren Sproles, and we'll have to see if the options provided by Richard Goodman, Micheal Spurlock and Eddie Royal improve last season's results.
So overall, you have a team with a few bright spots but more questions than answers. Multiply that with the pedestrian coaching and leadership of Norv Turner, and we have a recipe for a muddling team if not for disaster. While Norv may be a nice guy, and has overcome much to attain the success he has, as demonstrated in a profile by Kevin Acee of the San Diego Union-Tribune, he is not a leader and motivator, he waffles and gabbles and goofs during games. His much-vaunted talent as an offensive genius and play-caller can be questioned by fans who find some of his calls either predictable or mind-boggling.
The case of Darren Sproles is illuminating. He was often called upon to provide a change of pace in the Chargers' offence, but Norv would try to 'disguise and surprise' by sending him all too often for a run between the tackles, famously during a game-ending play against the Ravens in which he was stuffed by unconvicted murderer Ray Lewis. Norv's 'surprise' play was attempted so often that it was fully expected by teams, who awaited Darren with relish and exposed him to injury. Last season, he defected to the Saints and promptly had the best season of his career, an NFL first in that he was the first to go over 1000 yards on offence and in the return game in the same year. This while in a new system without the benefit of OTA's and a pre-season, and on a team that has a surfeit of options for Drew Brees to choose from. Why couldn't offensive genius Norv Turner wring that kind of production out of him?
Norv's greater failings are his lack of leadership. His teams routinely commit bone-headed mistakes. The players fumble and bumble and take dumb penalties and are never called to account. He is the anti-Belichick, a coach who takes unheralded players and coaches them up and molds them into a winning team. For the Patriots, the team is greater than the sum of its parts. For the Chargers, unfailingly, the team is a shiny bauble that breaks early after moderate use. We all remember Rex Ryan's quip that he would have won a few Super Bowls if he'd been the head coach of a collection of talent like the Chargers. It's probably fair to say that most coaches believe they'd do better than Norv too.
Norv also is awful at clock management and coaches' challenges. His sideline presence leaves a lot to be desired. Observers think that he spends too much time play-calling during games and loses sight of the overall picture. While he has hired an assistant in Steve Fairchild to help with game management, he has historically been a negative on game days in terms of putting his team in the best position to win.
Overall, one can't help to think that the team has regressed from last season. I'm being optimistic and hoping for a small step back this year, and a return to form next season with most of the big pieces intact, an influx of productive draftees, and an improvement from the young players on the defence. And, as manna from heaven, a long-overdue coaching change.
Sunday, 9 September 2012
ESPN doesn't think very highly of your Montréal Canadiens
ESPN ranked the Montréal Canadiens jersey as the best in pro sports in North America. We swelled with pride. It now ranks the franchises themselves, according to various criteria, and the Toronto Maple Leafs come out as the absolute worst franchise in sports, in their opinion. Before we chortle though, we notice that the Canadiens are ranked 111th out of 122.
Ouch!
After years of unstable ownership and some clown GM's in Irving Grundman and Réjean Houle, and some seemingly talented and experienced hockey men who ran aground in Bob Gainey and Pierre Gauthier, we can't really expect our team to do well in this analysis. Geoff Molson seems to have the right philosophy to both rejuvenate our team and return it to its former glory. With all the advantages conferred on the Montréal Canadiens, nothing else than excellence can be expected or tolerated.
Ouch!
After years of unstable ownership and some clown GM's in Irving Grundman and Réjean Houle, and some seemingly talented and experienced hockey men who ran aground in Bob Gainey and Pierre Gauthier, we can't really expect our team to do well in this analysis. Geoff Molson seems to have the right philosophy to both rejuvenate our team and return it to its former glory. With all the advantages conferred on the Montréal Canadiens, nothing else than excellence can be expected or tolerated.
Review: "Wherever I Wind Up" by R.A. Dickey
The autobiography of R.A. Dickey "Wherever I Wind Up" is not your average sports biography, but then again neither is the author your average ball player. He's one of the few knuckleball pitchers in the Big Leagues. He's only recently started having success after being a borderline AAA-Major Leaguer his entire career, and exploded this season with a 17-4 W-L record with a 2.63 Earned Run Average as of this writing. He majored in English Literature in college and quotes lines from his favourite books. As such, he has started receiving a lot of attention from the media, and not just the usual sports content providers.
While R.A. Dickey uses a co-author, it's easy to see that he has a distinctive voice which carries through the book. His account is more than the old-school biography in which a player would quote: "My second year I did such and such and went to the All-Star Game and we made the playoffs, blah blah blah.." It is well written, and revealing. It also follows a recent trend in sports biographies in that it is searingly honest about his upbringing and experiences outside the sport. Mr. Dickey overcame a difficult family situation and personal suffering and abuse, which he exposes and discusses openly.
His interesting athletic journey takes him from a gym rat childhood to a great collegiate career and eventual membership on the Atlanta Olympics US Baseball squad. He is a first-round draft pick of the Rangers, but hits a major speed bump to his career right after being drafted. He perseveres through the ups and downs of life as a journeyman pitcher until a fateful meeting with his team's management when they convince him to retrain as a knuckleball pitcher, which entails more time in the minors and tribulations.
While he is a thoughtful and reasonable guy, there are some surprising moments in the book which make the reader shake his head, none more so than his decision one day to attempt swimming across the Missouri River while in Omaha. He had looked out upon the mighty river from the team's hotel for years and thought that, as a strong swimmer, it would be a difficult but achievable challenge for him. His very cursory research should have led him to reconsider, but bizarrely, he went ahead and attempted the stunt which went very wrong. This passage was all the more shocking to this reader when the amount of pollution in the river is considered, and for the fact that he is currently reading Stephen Ambrose's account of the Lewis and Clark expedition. Nowhere in the latter book does it occur to a reader that attempting to swim across such a broad and swiftly-flowing river is anything but a suicidal project.
Another worthwhile aspect of this biography is how the author repairs some of his relationships that have been damaged, sometimes by his own actions. He is a man of strong faith, and often takes the high road when faced with difficult moments in his life, instead of burning bridges, which serves him well later on.
While no longer a baseball fan, the reviewer enjoyed this book and would recommend it to anyone who is interested in sports and stories of triumph over adversity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)