News on the march!
Posted: November 13th, 2007 | Filed under: Baseball | 26 Comments »
News item 1: “Tampa Bay Devil Rays†officially change their name to “Tampa Bay Rays.â€
– I’ll bet you never expected that it would be the influential but often unnoticed Devil lobbying group that would spark the first name change in Major League Baseball, did you? I’m assuming this name change was caused by Devil fans picketing outside while wearing Black Sabbath T-shirts and playing Beatles records backwards. Of course, it may have been a well-orchestrated letter campaign from Devil worshipers who felt like the name Devil Rays was no mere fish — it mocked their history and their culture. Then again… is it possible I could stretch this lame joke just a couple more lines?
No. It’s not possible. The team changed its name in an understandable effort to run away from the bleak last 10 years. “I think this gives us as an organization an identity,†principal owner Stuart Sternberg told reporters. Yes, now they’re the last-place team that no longer has the D- in front of Rays in the newspaper headlines.
The funny thing is the Rays wanted a full-fledged divorce from the past — new uniforms, new logs, new name. Other suggested names, in case you were wondering, were: Cannons, Stars, Wave, Dukes, and my personal favorite choice: Beelzebub Gleams. But the fans came back to Rays, perhaps because they didn’t want to spend money on new team merchandise. Just cross out the “Devil†and your warm-up jacket is as good as new and also safe for Pat Robertson to wear.
By the way, I do want to mention that I wasn’t joking about Dukes. That name really was listed in the story as one of the finalists. Some people apparently thought it would be a good idea to name their team after Elijah Dukes, whose car would undoubtedly start on the front row in the “Not Overly Great Guys in Sports 500,†Maybe they didn’t mean Elijah. Maybe they meant Dukes as in English Royalty. You know what? Most of those Dukes weren’t especially great guys either.
News item 2: Teams are bidding to give Torii Hunter a billion, shmillion, jillion, quantrillion dollars.
– I like Torii Hunter. A lot. I like him as a person. I like him as a player. I like watching him play outfield. I like watching him hit. I like talking to him after games. He was one of Buck O’Neil’s favorite players, so I like him because of that. I heard he liked my book so I like him because of that too. I would love for him to come to play for the Royals, who are apparently one of the bidders in Hunter’s honorable quest to make $75 million for five years. I would celebrate if the Royals signed him because of all the aforementioned reasons and also, as mentioned, I like Torii Hunter a lot.
I mean every single word in the previous paragraph. And let me add that I hope Torii Hunter gets every dime that he wants. Because, you know, I like Torii Hunter a lot.
Yes, I’m definitely ready for the Royals to sign him. And if they do I will be very pleased because — and I want to make this very clear — it’s not my money.
News item 3: Notre Dame has lost nine football games for the first time in school history, and they lost to service academies in back-to-back weeks, and coach Charlie Weis is signed to a 584-year contract that would take a 2-cent sales tax increase throughout the state of Indiana to buy out.
– I have no comment on this, really. I just like typing the words.
News item 4: Former Miami Dolphins coach Don Shula says that if the New England Patriots happen to go undefeated this year — matching the unblemished record of the famed 1972 Dolphins — there should be an asterisk added because Bill Belichick pulled those cheating video-tape shenanigans for his game against the New York Jets.
– Now, first of all, I like Shula, and it always makes me happy when people rip Bill Belichick. The guy did cheat during that Jets game, and if the NFL would make Belichick forfeit the game, I would laugh heartily and raise a glass to whoever the heck is the commissioner now. I would do the same if they decided to jail Belichick or deport him or banish him to the Arena League for a year. He might not be in the front row, but I’m quite sure Belichick would make the field at the NOGGIS 500*
*Changed the race name from “Not Especially Great Guys In Sports†or NEGGIS 500 to “Not Overly Great Guys In Sports†or NOGGIS 500 in honor of regular poster presidential candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich and also the team formerly known as the Tampa Bay Devil Rays and also because I think Not Overly Great Guys In Sports is actually a little bit funnier name.
That said: Maybe we can stop with the asterisk talk already. Seriously, put down the asterisk, you’re going to hurt somebody with that thing. We have become such a hindsight, backward-looking sports culture. This is why I still despise using instant replay in all sports. I understand the point — the big idea is to get the call right no matter how long it might take. In football replay has become such an integral part of the game that you just can’t go back.
But I still despise it. Nothing is real. Instant replay gives us asterisk feelings. An amazing play happens — a quarterback throws a bomb, a receiver dives and catches it — the referee signals touchdown and … and what do you feel? You feel thrilled*
*Pending further review.
Then you see the replay and, oh oh, he may have not caught the ball. It may have hit the ground. Now there’s a red flag thrown. How do you feel? You feel worried*
*Especially because the announcers are saying they’re going to overturn it.
Then they show another replay on TV from another angle and this time, you know what? Yeah, it looks like he DID catch the ball, maybe. It looks like he may have had an finger under the ball so that it never hit the ground. Maybe. You feel hopeful*
*Because while we’re still not sure he caught the ball, it does look like there may not be enough visual evidence to OVERTURN the play.
Then, finally, the official comes out and he says, “After further review, the play stands as called.†Now how do you feel? You feel relieved*
*Which means in about 90 seconds of watching the same play over and over again, you went from thrilled to relieved, which isn’t the way you’re supposed to watch sports.
Anyway, this is everywhere in our culture now. It’s like we can’t enjoy anything we see because someone might take it away. It’s all pending. There’s an asterisk hanging over our heads every minute. Hundred meter dash world record? Asterisk it. Every single thing we saw in baseball from 1993 to 2003? Asterisk it. Bill Belichick’s sex, lies and videotape game? Asterisk it. And you can’t count on anything.
“Bob, I’m giving you a raise.â€
“Really? That’s awesome. I want to thank …â€
“Wait. I might not give you that raise Bob. I’m thinking about it.â€
“But, um, wait, you said …â€
“What did I say? I was sort of groggy just then. Sleeping pills last night.â€
“You offered me a raise.â€
“I did, huh? Can’t really remember that. Gonna have to look at the video.â€
“There’s no video of it.â€
“Well, Bob, you’re still doing one helluva job.â€
I wonder if people have to ask someone to marry them twice now, you know, just to be sure.
There’s one other point about asterisks, and it’s related to something I was discussing with Bill James recently: He was saying that no matter how hard you try, you can never take bias completely out of data. You can use park effects, you can try to consider strength of schedule, you can neutralize until your head looks like the flag of Switzerland. But there will still be bias in there. No two players, no two teams, no two moments are alike. It’s just that way. Identical twins hit back-to-back home runs against the same pitcher on the same pitch to the same spot, and it’s likely that the wind was blowing 1-mph harder for one than for the other.
And this is how it is for asterisks. Should there be an asterisk for every baseball game prior to 1947 because African Americans were barred from the Major Leagues? How about an asterisk for every game after 1968 because the mounds were lowered? How about saying that a .300 hitter today is much better than a .300 hitter in 1927 because baseball gloves are so much bigger? How about saying that a .300 hitter in 1965 is better than a .300 hitter in 2007 because there were fewer teams. And if that’s the case what do you do with relievers? Night games? Greenies? Better bats? Different kinds of astroturf? Domes? Better lights? Sliders? Video tape? Steroids? Weight rooms? Tommy John surgeries? Lasik eye surgeries? Air travel? New Stadiums? You could go on and on forever really. You could slap an asterisk on anything. So maybe it would be best to stop bringing up asterisks every five minutes and let us enjoy these moments without worrying about them being overturned.
Also, I think this has to be said: Don Shula and that 1972 Dolphins team should appreciate that they had a special season, and we all admire them for it, and they would lose to this Patriots team by about 278 points. Come on. Times have changed. Their best defender was 5-11, 220 pounds (Nick Buoniconti), their best offensive linemen (Bob Kuechenberg, Larry Little) weighed less than 270 pounds, their quarterback most of that year was 38-year-old Earl Morrall, their best receiver (Paul Warfield) caught 2 passes and they did not face a single playoff team that whole regular season.
I do not come bearing asterisks, you 1972 Dolphins. It was a great season. You have your place in history. And if you want to root against the Patriots this year so you will be alone in the undefeated column, please, root away. Anything that makes Bill Belichick suffer humiliations galore makes me happy. But really, honestly, it gives me no joy to say this, even if the Patriots somehow lose a game, they would have destroyed you guys. Even if they had an asterisk at left guard and another playing middle linebacker.
News item 5: Missouri and Kansas will play a college football game next week in Kansas City. The game, barring an unforeseen collapse, could have major national title implications for both schools.
– No comment again. Those words are just so remarkable, I had to type them.
News item 6: Joe Torre is hired to manage the Los Angeles Dodgers. Fans in Los Angeles start ordering playoff tickets.
– It’s a good idea for LA fans to buy playoff tickets. I don’t see anyone beating the Angels in the American League West.
As for the Torre thing, I know I’m in a minority here, but I don’t get any of it. I really don’t. I know from what I’ve read that Torre is the “good guy†in the Yankees thing and the Steinbrenners (Hank taking the lead role) are the “bad guys.†But …
1. I don’t get why Torre was “offended†by the $5 million (with potential to make $8 million) offer the Yankees made.
2. I don’t know why so many people thought he was treated so shabbily when, honestly, the guy has been given the most talented, most expensive and most star-studded team each of the last seven years and has not won the World Series. I don’t blame King George for expecting World Series championships when he’s spending tens of millions more than anyone else.
3. I don’t know why he would agree to write a book about his Yankee years NOW when he’s still managing in baseball.
I’ve always respected Torre, except late in games when he he will make a dozen pitching changes and turn games into four-hour mini-series. I suspect it wasn’t easy through the years to manage for Steinbrenner. I’ll bet he has many classic stories about it all. I believe he handled himself mostly with dignity through the years. And he won a whole lot of games and a few World Series too. He helped bring the Yankees back.
But you know … the Yankees did save his managerial life. They gave him the best team in baseball and the most famous uniform in American sports after he had essentially failed as a manager in three other places. They also paid him (I suspect) more money than any manager made in baseball history. I guess I’m not sure I see the good guy-bad guy thing as clearly as everyone else.
Loading ...
Great post Joe. Couldn’t agree more with replay as asterik. Replay was the best thing since apple cider about 15 years ago. Back then, it was “Holy crap! Did you see that! We’re going to back up the tape to understand it better and keep the high going. It wasn’t long before we were used to that precision. Umpires mess up, because humans mess up, especially when asked to do something for three hours. Double especially when that task is fairly monotonous, the monotony broken mostly by enormous men, who could crush you while holding his cell phone with his other hand. Shockingly, cameras zoomed and focused to the crucial point and played in super slow motion catch a wrong umpire once in a while. Often opinions change depending on the camera angle. It can take 4 or 5 replays to get it right. Somehow, despite all that, umpires seemed inferior to cameras, because the cameras, given enough time, can get it right, and you, fat ump, can’t. Also, the camera can beat you at chess. Pushing the meaning out of the actual event and into the post-analysis sacrifices part of the experience for “truth.”
All that said, when I expect a replay, and don’t get it, it pisses me off.
Thank you for the two points you just typed without comment, for no other reason that to see the words in print. I’ve been having that feeling for about six months now. I’m a Boston native who went to KU, so I’ve got the following going for me this year:
- Red Sox win World Series
- Patriots dominate the NFL
- Celtics trade for Kevin Garnett
- KU is undefeated
- BC (my father’s alma mater) was #2 at one point
- Notre Dame (who my father hated) sucks
All of this has occurred since my father passed away on April 7th.
I do not believe in coincidences.
Who are you calling a “NEGGIS”?
Joe, you seem like a smart guy with a good way of looking at the sports world, so I’ll ask you: does being a nice guy have anything to do with sports?
Let me rephrase that a bit, whenever someone brings up Joe Torre they always say “He’s a nice guy” or “He’s a classy guy”. Usually the opposite happens when sportswriters (not you, I live in New England and this happens a lot) invoke Bill Belichick’s name. However when they talk about Belichick they always add “But he’s a winner.”
Does our sports culture put too much emphasis on “Being a nice guy”, “Playing the game right”, “He exudes class” or any other cliche? Because, aside from killing someone or participating in a crime, who really cares if the person is a “nice guy’ or not? I don’t know Belichick, Torre, Scott Skiles or really any other professional athlete/coach personally, so why should it even be a consideration?
One of the things that I learned from the OJ Simpson case was that public figures often aren’t whom they appear to be and putting modifiers in front of their accomplishments is often a foolish thing to do. How do you feel about the subject?
(BTW, I’m not trying to say that you don’t “know” Belichick or Torre professionally, I’m sure you do, but I think that you would agree that someone’s professional demeanor is completely different from their personal. And I’m not defending Belichick, like I said, as long as he’s on the right side fo the law, I don’t care if he’s “nice”, “mean” or indifferent.)
You know what kills me about replays? That anyone calls it “instant.” In the NFL, it delays the game so much they ought to use a commercial break (instead of using one after kickoffs), everything stops for 45 minutes while we wait to see [insert lame joke about NFL rulebook being thicker than a dictionary].
There’s nothing instant about it.
Joe,
Who was the guy that gave his AL ROY first place vote to Brain Bannister? How exactly does the BBWAA decide who gets to vote? How do they ensure that everyone voted or that someone didn’t have their kid vote for them? Has anyone ever had their right to vote taken away because of a series of stupid votes? A good example would be when a reporter in Chicago voted for Orlando Merced over Bagwell for the ‘91 NL ROY because she said she had seen Merced play more. If not for that ignorant vote Bagwell would have been the unanimous winner that year. Do you get to vote? Perhaps a column on how the whole process works? Thanks.
Oddibe,
That reminds me of the 1999 season where George King (he writes for one of the NY papers) and a Minnesota writer left Pedro Martinez’s name off the ballot because he was a pitcher and “pitchers don’t deserve” MVPs.
A few years later King voted for Rivera or Clemens (I can’t remember which one).
I think that most baseball writers take the MVP/ROY/Cy Young voting very seriously, but there are still a few knuckleheads around.
Joe,
I loved—absolutely loved—numbers 3 and 4.
Keep up the good work.
- TL
And, as a Mizzou grad (BS, 94), number 5 too. -TL
The ‘72 Dolphins situation have for 35 years openly rooted against teams nearing an undefeated season, presumably out of fear that the presence of another undefeated team would tarnish their own accomplishment. Ironically, their own unabashed rooting for losses, and self-congratularory glee every year when the last undefeated team loses, has itself tarnished that legacy. There is something unsavory about 65-year-old men cheering for a new generation of players to lose simply to protect their own self-esteem.
And forget about whether or not the ‘72 Dolphins could compete with the ‘07 Patriots — they couldn’t beat the ‘07 Dolphins. You could even make an argument, looking at how much bigger, stronger and faster today’s players are, that the ‘72 Dolphins might not beat LSU or another of the top college football teams of today.
Joe,
This is my first time posting a reply here, and before I start taking up points of contention with this particular post, I’d like to take up some of commendation:
-You do a great job with these posts. Seriously, I check this site several times daily and almost always enjoy what you write.
-As for this post (and others you’ve made like it), I absolutely am in concurrence with your ideas about asterisks. There is no way to remove context from sports, and each era has given players its own specific handicaps.
Alright, now to the main points of my response.
First of all, let me establish the fact that I am one of the few, the proud, and the patient, Devil Rays fans… I mean, Rays fans. I’m a 19 year old college student living in Orlando, but I was born and raised in St. Petersburg. The dome is about 10 minutes away from my house, and I spend my time hanging around Rays related websites with the 15 or so other Devil Ray (dammit! Ray) fans on the planet.
I’ve always wondered what you would write if you said anything extensively about my team. Understandably, you haven’t said too much, since we’re not in your division nor are we really in the scope of national sports news. It’s okay, we’re used to it. However, on the rare occasion that we are mentioned by a national media baseball person, that person usually establishes himself into one of two camps: 1) they see us as a joke, a perpetual last place team, or 2) they see us as a team to watch out for, because we won’t stay in last place for long.
I had always figured that you would probably fall into the first camp. You know baseball from a statistical as well as a traditional point of view, and such people generally realize that the 2007 last place Devil Rays are very different from, say, the 1998, or 1999, or 2000, or so on last place Devil Rays. Whereas before, our teams performed poorly because they were made up of bad players, this past year, our team performed poorly because it was young and inexperienced (albeit, the bullpen was still made up of bad players).
However, you (understandably, I’ll admit) seem to have missed this distinction, judging by your remark that “now they’re the last-place team that no longer has the D- in front of Rays in the newspaper headlines.” I just have to respond by saying that if you expect the Rays of the future to fail like the Devil Rays of the past, expect to be surprised. While it is true that the new front office has yet to show us that they are willing to open up their wallets, the one thing that is clear is that they have a plan to build a winner, something the Naimoli team never had. We saw the Rockies get to the World Series this past year on a team built primarily from within, and we saw Cleveland, Arizona, and Philadelphia do get to the postseason with fairly similar models over free-wheelin’, big spendin’ teams. Why is it so difficult for some people to believe that we could do the same? It’s because they refuse to acknowledge that things have changed in Tampa Bay.
Listen, I don’t want to bore you with all the details as to why the Rays aren’t hopeless, and are, in fact, hopeful. I’m not gonna talk about how the front office made perhaps the savviest move of the decade in picking up Carlos Pena on the cheap (after both the Yankees and Red Sox turned him away). I’m not going to ramble on about the improved (and improving) core of young offensive players. I’m not going to launch off on a rant about the two stud arms we have at the top of the rotation in Kazmir and Shields, nor am I going to about the stud arms we have on the way up, such as Price, McGee, Davis, and a whole slew of others who could make an impact. All I want to do is make sure that you don’t fall for the trap that guys like John Kruk and Steve Phillips and countless others have fallen for, because I like you, Joe, and you’re better than that.
Torii is indeed fun to watch. I’d rather have him stay in a Twins uniform, but Smilin’ Carl Pohlad — one of the richest men on the planet — will not pay Torii enough to keep him here. He would look entirely out of place in a Royals uniform, like Killebrew did during that last strange year of his great career.
And shut up, Don Shula.
Joe-
A. Thanks for bringing up the Shula quote. I just rolled my eyes when he said that. I hate instant replay and can’t believe baseball is thinking of adding it, even it just is for fan interference and foul balls. Missed calls and legendary fan interference are part of the game. They make great stories. It’s a human game. Replay has no part in baseball. Football games are freaking long enough as it is with all the extra commercial breaks, I would like to see them take it away as well.
B. Maybe Torre was just tired of dealing with Steinbrenner and company. There’s such a thing as a great job with awful bosses. Maybe he disliked them enough to say, “enough.”
C. If the Royals don’t make Butler the freaking first baseman by working his butt off, I’m going to be pissed. IT’S FIRST BASE. JUST CATCH THE BALL. That’s why they hired Hillman right? “We’re going to play a lot of catch in spring training.” You don’t make a 22 or 23 old slugger a DH. How many coaches do the Royals have in their system? Not one of them can teach Butler how to be a first baseman or catch a freaking fly ball? You’re kidding me right? Why not make Emil Brown the DH and not completely overpay for a free agent who’s skills are going to be declining? Save that money for a Boras draft pick that can play for us 10 years in his prime.
Common sense. It’s not to much to ask for.
I haven’t seen this anywhere, but why not change the name to the “Tampa Bay Manta Rays”? It’s an ABC ABC rhyme scheme in a mere four words! Plus, manta rays aren’t purported enemies of God.
Joe Posnanski Fan Club. Membership: Me*
*The previous statement is true. Relieved?
I’ve been a Royals fan and suffered through the Herk/Baird years, and I still have no clue why anyone would support the Rays. “Things are looking up. With a little luck and if the youngsters develop, we could finish third!” The only reasons to enjoy Tampa baseball in my humble opinion: 1. Get a jump on college hoops by sitting next to Dickie V. 2. The food – I mean, there must be a Moons Over My Hammy available within a Grandpa Scooter ride from the Trop.
To the other points:
– Shut up Shula. Take your pills, watch the Pats with a corkscrew in your hand in anticipation, and leave the rest of us alone.
– 1-8 Irish. If MU wasn’t playing so well, that would be the highlight of my sports year.
– Amen to Joe’s take on Torre. Let’s see if Dodger fan cares enough to run him out of town on a rail in 3 years when nothing has changed.
I think you answered your own questions about the Torre/Yankees thing in the point about Belichick/Shula. The whole point of painting the NYY brass as the bad guys and Torre as the good guy is to stick it to the Yankees. Torre’s no longer a Yankee, and it’s always a good time to blast New York, so the rest of us adopt the whole “Joe is a class act” line, formerly put forth by supporters of New York, merely so we can needle those self-same fans.
It’s just the same with the Patriots. I despise Belichick, and so, despite the fact that the Patriots are clearly a very good team, I not only root against them, but enjoy things like the Shula asterisk kerfluffle. It’s just too tempting to stick it to their fans, something to bring up whenever the lossless season talk rears its ugly head.
As for Keith K.’s comment (alliteration!): however unseemly the ‘72 Dolphins and their ritual are, or have been portrayed, and however true it is that they wouldn’t beat todays Patriots, it’s simply false that they wouldn’t beat today’s Dolphins team. Anybody, anytime, beats this year’s Miami team.
To return to baseball, the reason we’re all here in the first place: shame about your Cy Young vote going to the loser, Joe. I think Beckett deserved it for the regular season alone. The playoffs only made the difference, namely Sabathia’s laborious style v. Beckett’s real-deal stuff, all the more obvious; it wasn’t simply that Beckett won his playoff games (although those were all fantastic) as that C.C. showed off his good but seat-of-the-pants nature, and revealed what that actually amounted to against two consecutive battering lineups.
Byron – I agree. They obviously need to spell out the rules for ROY and MVP for the writers a little better. In 2003, people debated about how Hideki Matsui shouldn’t be eligible for the Rookie of the Year award because he wasn’t a “rookie” from his experience in Japan — but this was after Hideo Nomo, Kazuhiro Sasaki and Ichiro Suzuki had already won the award! If you want to make an argument that Matsui wasn’t better than Angel Berroa that year, that’s fine, but don’t say the guy’s ineligible if just a couple years before you’d been voting for other guys in the same situation.
Butch – If your argument revolves around the hypocrisy of a single voter, I see what you’re saying.
But if your argument is that the system accepted one veteran ROY, and that therefore it should accept another, I disagree.
Should we continue to make the same mistakes due to precedent? Sure, it’s a different league, but Matsui, Ichiro, et al were veterans in every sense of the word. Better to fix the problem late than never. If that means Matsui (or another prospective import ROY candidate) “unfairly” loses his chance, then so be it.
I understand your thoughts about Torre… I think we all, as sports fans, tend to forget how much goes on that we’ll never know about. What did the Steinbrenners really intend by making that offer to Torre? What was the nature of the relationship between them and him? Did they know how he would respond? These are all questions to which I will never know the answers, and yet those answers would greatly influence my perception of that situation. Perhaps you, Joe, as a writer, are privy to more information than I. But maybe not a lot
Totally unrelated comment, but I’ve been thinking about this…
Regarding Curt Schilling’s decision to re-sign with Boston… The following paragraph was included in the comments he posted in his blog after the announcement was made:
“Theo and I spoke early in the week about wanting to complete this before the exclusive period ended, and the GM meetings began, because we both thought there could be a scenario popping up that might make this less desirable. He has to run this team, and I needed to do what was best and right for my family. Allowing external influences to change our opinions of each other might have been an unavoidable strain neither side wanted.”
I keep wondering what “scenario” might “pop up” that would gum up the works here. It seems like a cryptic but significant statement to me– although of course I could be reading too much into it. I wondered if there was a possibility that Schilling could be named in the Mitchell Report in some capacity. That would certainly be an “external influence” that would cause an “unavoidable strain.”
This is pure speculation, obviously… but I’m curious what others think.
“I wondered if there was a possibility that Schilling could be named in the Mitchell Report in some capacity. That would certainly be an “external influence†that would cause an “unavoidable strain.—
Two things:
1. Did you see Curt Schilling this year? The man looks like the only thing he ate were Twinkies and extra-stuffed-crust pizzas. If he was doing steroids (which I sincerely doubt) he forgot that he has to work out after. Also, the MPH on his fastball was down about three or four ticks per pitch. It goes up while on the juice.
2. Why would Theo be in a rush to sign a guy that was going to be suspended for 50 games? That really doesn’t make a lot of sense.
I think that the scenario was simply if Schilling made it to the open market, he would’ve gotten more years and more money. He wanted to stay in Boston, but leaving that money on the table is a tough thing to do.
Think there’s any possibility that Andy Pettitte – who bulked up considerably after off-training workouts with Roger Clemens – DIDN’T exercise his option with the Yankees because he knew (or thought) he’d be in the report? Perhaps Pettitte wanted to avoid the humiliation of the Yankees trying to void the contract later.
I’ve wondered about Pettitte, too… and Clemens. They’re both “retiring” this year. As for signing a player who might be mentioned in the report, there’s no guarantee that any of these guys will be suspended, depending on the nature of the evidence against them and the time period during which they were supposed to have used PEDs. Imagine a scenario in which someone states that he connected Schilling up with a PED source before they were explicitly banned, or in such a way that it couldn’t be confirmed. They can’t suspend him (and to be fair, it might not even be true), but obviously it would make negotiations with the team much more complex. I can see why they’d want to get it over with before any allegations might be publicized…
Joe,
I really think that Belichick gets a bit of a raw deal regarding the job he did in Cleveland. It may be that you have other reasons to strongly dislike him but his performance was not the complete and total failure everybody likes to paint it as.
He took over a 3-13 team and completely rebuilt it (it did take three years) to the point where he went 11-5 with the number 1 defense in the league. That 11-5 team won a home playoff game and then lost to the Steelers. The next year he’s 4 and 4 and Art Modell announces that the team is moving the next season. They then go 1-11 over the last 3/4 of the season. I don’t think Vince Lombardi could’ve gotten that team back on track with the reaction in Cleveland.
My question is – Why the dislike of Belichick? Is there something besides performance or is it performance? I didn’t live through the Cleveland years as a Browns fan so I don’t know what it was like then.
And I love the blog. Nice long posts that contribute to the decline in workplace productivity.
Thanks
Sure, Joe Torre had a mediocre managing career before the Yankees hired him. So did Casey Stengel, and he had a rotten record after leaving the Yankees. Earl Weaver’s 1985 Orioles had a terrible record. A manager can only be as good as his players.
Also, Torre was making more than $6 million, and then his next contract offer came up and the Yankees offered $5 million. Yes, there were non-guaranteed incentives that might have jacked it up to $8 million. It’s still a cut in salary, and it’s still a strong sign that they didn’t want him around anymore. He didn’t need the Bronx Zoo anymore either.