NOTE: This year, I am serving as a student announcer for my high school’s major sporting events; as such, I have less time on my hands to write about national sports. Therefore, I will try to counteract that by writing recaps from Bergen Catholic sporting events and placing them here. This recap and all others are 100% mine. I’ll hopefully be writing more of these over the next few weeks and months.
Cole Bosch and Miles Franklyn led the way Saturday as the Bergen Catholic Crusaders defeated the Paramus Catholic Paladins, 4-1, in Big North soccer action.
Franklyn added his second goal of the season roughly nine minutes into the second half. The Syracuse commit played just his second game of the season after missing last Thursday’s game against St. Joseph’s Regional. Bosch, on the other hand, scored the first goal of the game in the first minute of play and added another in the 18th minute. He completed the hat trick with 18 minutes left in the game. Stephen Teitelbaum also added two assists in the victory. Bosch has now scored five goals in his last three halves of action, and you thought Lamar Jackson was dominant…
With the result, the Crusaders jumped to 3-0-0 on the season; the Paladins fell to 0-3-1 with the loss. BC travels to Wayne for their next game against Wayne Valley while Paramus Catholic plays Lakeland. Both games are scheduled for Monday afternoon.
Dodgers manager Dave Roberts is currently in the running for National League Manager of the Year. Part of his success this season (his team leads the NL West by three games over the Giants) is because of his complete willingness to buck baseball’s common sense and conventional wisdom. He’s done it again, and his most recent unorthodox decision has drawn controversy and skepticism.
Here’s the lowdown: newly-acquired pitcher Rich Hill was tossing a no-hitter through seven frames against the Miami Marlins on Saturday. Hill was coming back after suffering from complications from a blister on the middle finger of his throwing (left) hand. Interestingly enough, this is the second occurrence of the blister, as Hill was forced to miss over a month with the injury after being traded from the A’s at the trade deadline and then a start at the end of August, as well. So it’s not exactly like Hill’s blister wasn’t a concern going into Saturday night’s game. But even with that pretext, Hill reached the end of the seventh inning without allowing a baserunner and having thrown just 89 pitches. So what would Roberts do?
He would decide to remove Hill from the game, making what may very well be the most difficult decision a manager can possibly make.
For one thing, Roberts has demonstrated a willingness to pull the plug on his starting pitchers, even as they have flirted with once-in-a-lifetime feats. In April, Roberts yanked Ross Stripling from his Major League debut after 7.1 no-hit innings. Stripling also happened to be two years removed from Tommy John Surgery. The Dodgers ultimately lost the game in ten innings and Roberts was second-guessed by just about anyone you can imagine. Want to guess who was among those not questioning the manager’s decision? The father of none other than Thomas Ross Stripling.
It’s true: according to reports, Hayes Stripling tearfully thanked Roberts after removing his son from the game. According to that same report, Stripling often eclipsed 120 pitches per start in college, which may have been a factor in his receiving Tommy John Surgery in 2014. So pulling him at that point in the game, disappointing as it may have been, was absolutely the right decision for the young pitcher.
It was also the only decision. The same thing can be said about the Rich Hill ordeal, if only for slightly different reasons.
Hill’s injured blister does not compare to the long-term effects of Tommy John Surgery in any way. However, the injury is one that must be handled delicately, just like Stripling’s elbow was in the early stages of the season. So it would make sense that the Dodgers would want to tread lightly with one of their best pitchers, even though Hill was making his second start since the re-occurrence of the injury.
Let’s think about this, as well: why do we want to see no-hitters and perfect games? We mostly enjoy witnessing them for the raw emotion, the pitcher launching his glove in the air when the game ends, and the players congratulating the pitcher on his achievement. But, other from that, how much do we actually think about the long-term health of the pitcher? In the moment, it’s not something we really consider (unless it’s really obvious, as it was with Johan Santana in 2012). We’re happy when the pitcher finishes off his accomplishment and then we move on. We don’t often consider the long-term effects on pitchers such as Santana and Tim Lincecum, who, three years after throwing 148 pitches in a no-hitter against the Padres, is likely out of baseball for good.
Another thing to consider here is that the Dodgers need Hill down the stretch and potentially into October, as well. As nice as it would have been for Hill to throw a perfect game over the weekend, it’s more important for the Dodgers to prioritize his long-term health and availability over two innings at the end of a game in September (when Hill was removed, the Dodgers led 5-0 and won the game by the same score). Yes, reliever Joe Blanton came in and gave up a hit to end the perfect bid, but the question of “What if Rich Hill stayed in?” contains far worse hypothetical possibilities than that.
For example, what if Hill hadn’t left the game and the blister on his middle finger popped open again? If Roberts employed the tact used by many managers in that position and left his pitcher in, he very easily could have aggravated the injury even further. Granted, there’s every possibility that Hill could have remained on the mound and not suffered an injury, but the possibility of the worst is what likely led Roberts to pull the trigger. If Hill had indeed gotten injured, we would be scrutinizing Roberts for not protecting an important asset to his team.
And that’s exactly what Hill is. With the Dodgers just three games up on the San Francisco Giants for the NL West lead, the team cannot afford to have more injuries to its starting rotation. Both Hill and ace Clayton Kershaw have both missed significant time this season with injuries, and losing either for any more time would be a serious blow to the Dodgers’ chances of making the playoffs and/or playing well into October. When you think about that dire possibility, is it really all that important that Rich Hill finishes his perfect game?
There are many reasons why Dave Roberts was right to pull Rich Hill from his start last Saturday. There are many points of view from which to examine this debate, but the one that matters the most is that of Rich Hill. If he had hurt himself while trying to complete his perfect game, would it have really been worth the trouble to keep him in the game? I would venture to say so, and it’s apparent that Dave Roberts agrees. More importantly, would it have been fair to Rich Hill to risk his long-term health? I’d say the answer to that is no.
Roberts is certainly not your average manager. He makes unconventional decisions, the most notable of which involve his starting pitchers. But he has done the best he can in protecting them, and the curious case of Rich Hill is no different.
Which is why he deserves credit, not blame, for how he handled this situation.
The first week of the college football season generally lends itself to overreactions and irrational thought. For example, after this year’s week one, Deondre Francois is the best quarterback in the country, Texas is back, and Les Miles is getting fired. So it’s easy to see where fans and pundits could get a little excited about the results of just one week of games.
And that’s where the Houston Cougars come in.
You remember Houston from a season ago as the team that crashed the New Year’s Six Bowl games, defeating Florida State 38-24 in last year’s Peach Bowl. The team came into this season as a runaway hype train, with everything from a Heisman contender at quarterback to a coach who wears UH grills on his teeth like he’s 2 Chainz. With many significant pieces coming back from a season ago, as well as the addition of five-star defensive lineman Ed Oliver, Houston appeared to be a formidable team heading into this year.
And they proved their believers right with their performance on Saturday. The week one test against Oklahoma would prove to be an outstanding victory and a validation of what the Houston Cougars could be: the team that crashes college football’s party and, perhaps, makes the College Football Playoff.
And really, Houston dominated the Sooners from start to finish on Saturday. The win was nearly cemented in the third quarter when Oklahoma kicker Austin Seibert attempted a long field goal. He not only missed the kick but he left it short. And that’s never a good idea in college football:
I think it’s safe to call that field goal return the third–greatest of its kind in the history of college football. Nonetheless, it served as the turning point in the game. The Cougars later added another touchdown to expand their lead, and only a late score from Oklahoma brought the final score to within ten points at 33-23. The win was arguably the most significant in the history of the program and elevated the Cougars to the sixth ranking in this week’s Associated Press poll. And, predictably, the hype around Houston is becoming unbearable, with many around the sport suggesting that the team has passed its biggest test on its way to the College Football Playoff.
And yet, even as Houston has climbed the polls and showed it can play with any team in the country, we still need to pump the brakes here, at least for the next few weeks.
For starters, there is every chance that the Oklahoma Sooners are not that great of a team. We have seen many examples in years past of teams that have disappointed after being ranked near the top of the polls at the beginning of the season. While Oklahoma can still make the Playoff, it is possible that this win may not look nearly as good in three months as it does now.
Another component to this discussion is that Houston’s schedule is, honestly, not that strong. Aside from a November 17 tilt against Louisville that could decide the AAC and even have Playoff implications, the Cougars’ schedule consists of matchups with teams like Lamar, UConn, SMU, and Tulane. In fact, as of right now, Louisville is the only remaining ranked team on Houston’s schedule. That could change, but if it doesn’t, the Playoff committee will have to seriously consider the strength of Houston’s slate and whether or not they deserve to be among the last four teams standing, even if they do go undefeated.
About that game with Louisville: it could be very important to the Playoff and most certainly will not be a cakewalk for the Cougars. While Houston quarterback Greg Ward could make his way to New York as a Heisman finalist, the Cardinals have their own Heisman contender in quarterback Lamar Jackson. Jackson accounted for eight touchdowns last week and even though he did that against Charlotte, it’s still a very impressive performance that is worth noting. While Houston’s schedule looks to be fairly easy, Louisville will be no pushover. Of course, there’s also the possibility that Houston doesn’t make it to week 12 with its Playoff hopes alive.
Yes, that is still a very real possibility. While basically everyone wants to jump to conclusions and assume that Houston is just going to run the table the rest of the way, it is possible that the Cougars won’t make it through the season without losing. Obviously, any loss would virtually end Houston’s run at a national championship, so there is little to no margin for error here.
Also, what if Ward or any of the team’s other main contributors get hurt at some point during the season? While it sounds terrible to speculate on this subject, Houston’s one loss last season (a 20-17 defeat at the hands of UConn) came with a backup quarterback (Kyle Postma) at the helm. If Postma has to step in to relieve Ward in the case of injury again this season, there is no guarantee that the Cougars will come out on the other side.
There are many reasons why Houston can run the table and make the College Football Playoff. After all, if the Cougars go undefeated, even with their somewhat weak schedule, there probably won’t be any way the committee can put three (or even four) one-loss teams ahead of them. If Houston is able to win the rest of its games, there is almost no reason to suggest they won’t be playing for a national championship.
On the other hand, New Year’s Eve, the date of the College Football Playoff semifinals, is a whole 113 days away. Many things can change between now and then, which should be a reminder that Houston (and every other team in the country) is one injury away from being a very different, and markedly worse, team.
Houston looked very good in week one and their win over Oklahoma put the nation on notice. But let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves: they have a long way to go if they want to make the Playoff.
While we still have a month to go in the Major League Baseball season, it’s never too early to dissect the individual award races in the sport. Many standouts have made their mark on the season in positive ways, and this post is dedicated to those who have distinguished themselves this season. We’ll take a look at each individual award race (with the exception of Most Valuable Player) and pick a winner in each league. We’ll start with rookie of the year.
AL Rookie of the Year: Michael Fulmer, Detroit Tigers
I know, I know, you probably wanted me to pick Yankees phenom Gary Sanchez here. The young catcher is hitting nearly .400 with 11 home runs in 23 games to start his career and is even drawing comparisons to Babe Ruth, for some reason.
But I’ll go with the far more conventional choice of Michael Fulmer.
Fulmer has not only been one of the best rookie pitchers in the game this season but also one of the best hurlers in all of baseball. His 2.69 ERA ranks sixth in the game and it’s very fair to wonder where the Tigers would be without him. While Sanchez is definitely the sexy pick here, Fulmer has contributed to the Tigers’ success unlike any other rookie has for his team in the American League. That’s why I have him as my AL Rookie of the Year, but this award is at least debatable. The NL Rookie of the Year award, on the other hand, is absolutely not up for discussion.
NL Rookie of the Year: Corey Seager, Los Angeles Dodgers
This one is obvious. Seager leads all rookies in WAR (6.9); the next closest hitter in this category is Rockies’ shortstop Trevor Story at 2.6. Story, however, could miss the rest of the season with a torn ligament in his thumb. Quite frankly, even if Story was healthy, Seager would probably beat him out for Rookie of the Year. The Dodgers’ shortstop has hit 23 home runs and driven in 62 runs this season. He’s also fifth in baseball with a .321 batting average. While the AL race is still to be determined, the NL race has already been decided. The winner is Corey Seager, and it’s not even close.
AL Cy Young Award: Cole Hamels, Texas Rangers
The races for the Cy Young Award in both leagues are very tightly contested. In the American League, there are a bevy of contenders to take home the crown. However, I’ll take Cole Hamels of the Texas Rangers as my AL Cy Young winner. Hamels has pitched to a 2.67 ERA this season, tops in the American League, and he is also going deep into starts, averaging around 6.2 innings per outing. That will be very important to a Ranger bullpen that has been decimated in recent days by the actions of closer Jeremy Jeffress, who was arrested last week on a DWI charge.
In the meantime, though, Hamels is my pick for the AL Cy Young.
NL Cy Young Award: Madison Bumgarner, San Francisco Giants
This race, like that of the American League, is wide open. In the National League, though, there are far more bona fide contenders who have a legitimate chance at winning the award. Among them are Madison Bumgarner, Jake Arrieta, Johnny Cueto, and even Jon Lester. My pick, though, is Bumgarner, the pitcher as well-known for his hitting as he is for his pitching. Unbelievably, Bumgarner is two long starts away from reaching 200 innings, and while the Giants have gone in the tank since the All-Star Break, Bumgarner has been the most important player on the team this season. As the team’s ace, he’s carried the pitching staff to a 3.73 ERA, which is good for fourth in baseball.
It’s close, but I’ll give the NL Cy Young Award to Madison Bumgarner.
AL Manager of the Year: Terry Francona, Cleveland Indians
The Cleveland Indians have been one of the biggest surprises of this MLB season. While much of that has to do with the emergence of young stars such as Corey Kluber, Francisco Lindor, and others, we should give credit where it’s due. And credit should be given to manager Terry Francona, who has been one of the best managers in baseball since taking over the Red Sox managerial gig in 2004. Francona has welded this team into one of the best in baseball and even into a serious World Series contender this season. He deserves major credit for doing that, and by that measure, he also deserves AL Manager of the Year.
NL Manager of the Year: Dusty Baker, Washington Nationals
While the obvious choice here would be the Cubs’ Joe Maddon, I’m giving NL Manager of the Year to the Nationals’ Dusty Baker. Baker arrived in Washington after last season to what appeared to be a fractured locker room after the team’s disappointing 2015 campaign. We can all agree that Matt Williams wasn’t exactly the best manager for a team that has had championship talent for the past three seasons.
And that’s where Baker comes in. All he has done this season is lead the Nationals to first place in the NL East; the team is on pace for 93 wins, which would mark a 10-win improvement over last season. Granted, there are other factors at play (Daniel Murphy’s emergence as one of the best hitters in baseball, a mostly healthy Stephen Strasburg), but you can’t say that Baker hasn’t managed the team to its full potential.
And that’s good enough for me.
I would make calls on the MVP race here but both leagues are extremely crowded and the last month of the season will go a long way to deciding these award winners in both leagues. Until then, let me know what you think by leaving a comment!
As we saw last season, attempting to predict the College Football Playoff is normally a futile task. I tried last year, picking Baylor, Ohio State, TCU, and Stanford; none of those teams made college football’s final four. The College Football Playoff is very difficult to predict and I usually don’t get it right. So let’s go ahead and try anyway, shall we?
Here are my projections for the top four teams in college football this season.
1. Florida State
I’m not going to say that picking Florida State as my top team is a no-brainer; in fact, it’s very far from it. The team still has uncertainty at the quarterback position; while Sean McGuire should begin the year as the team’s starter, his performance last season begs some questions about whether or not he can lead the ‘Noles to the promised land. Additionally, McGuire could miss the first few weeks of the season with a stress fracture in his foot. There’s literally no certainty at the quarterback position for Florida State right now. The rest of the roster, though, is not wrought with such insecurity.
For starters, running back Dalvin Cook returns after a season in which he rushed for nearly 1,700 yards and 19 touchdowns. Also, Cook was able to do all of this in just 229 attempts, so just imagine what he could do if he stays 100% healthy for an entire season. After all, this is the complete list of running backs to rush for over 1,600 yards and rack up 19 touchdowns last season. It’s impressive:
Derrick Henry (Alabama)
Leonard Fournette (LSU)
Ezekiel Elliott (Ohio State)
Dalvin Cook (Florida State)
So it’s not difficult to see why we should be excited about Dalvin Cook this season. He should be a legitimate Heisman Trophy contender and will lead a Seminoles’ offense that returns literally every starter from a season ago. A potentially game-of-the-year matchup with Clemson on November 7 might seal Florida State’s fate (for better or worse), but this team is loaded with talent.
And f they can figure out the quarterback position (and I’ll bet that they will), the Seminoles are my national title favorite.
2. Alabama Crimson Tide
Let me ask you a question: who will be the starting quarterback for Alabama this season? If you can’t answer it, don’t worry. You’re not alone. And if you can’t name Alabama’s new starting quarterback(s), it probably won’t matter anyway.
Because before the 2011 season, you likely had never heard of A.J. McCarron; he became a two-time national champion. Before 2014, you didn’t know much about Blake Sims; he led Alabama to the first-ever College Football Playoff. And before last season, you had definitely heard of but were still remarkably unimpressed by Florida State transfer Jake Coker; he won a national title a season ago. It’s clear that Alabama’s quarterback position has never really mattered that much, but this year might be a different story.
This season, the prohibitive favorite to start at QB for the Tide is Junior Cooper Bateman. Bateman is the only quarterback on the roster who had game action last season; he started in the team’s loss to Ole Miss and played the first half before giving way to Coker. The Bateman-related moment we all remember from that game, though, was this:
That game was widely regarded as a turning point in Alabama’s championship season. This year, it looks like Bateman will have the reins to the offense, provided he can beat out Freshmen Blake Barnett and Jalen Hurts for the job.
Things are different at Alabama this year, however. The team has no established running back (although it figures to be Bo Scarbrough and he could be something special). But the Tide are stacked at wide receiver with ArDarius Stewart and Calvin Ridley both returning after combining for 152 catches a season ago. The defense should be strong again this season and the offensive line only has Cam Robinson to replace.
And if you still don’t know who Cooper Bateman is, that’s just fine. It’s probably not going to matter who starts at quarterback for the Tide, anyway. It hasn’t before, and it shouldn’t now.
3. Ohio State Buckeyes
Okay, the Buckeyes lost their two best players (Ezekiel Elliott and Joey Bosa) from a season ago and have losses up and down the roster. Theoretically, they shouldn’t be a championship contender. But just hear me out on this one.
Unlike last season, the team will have complete certainty at the quarterback position. J.T. Barrett will take over the starting job (this time, for good) and he has the potential to have a ludicrous season. I’ll even go as far as to pick him to win the Heisman Trophy because the offense is literally all his now. Remember when Barrett started basically a full season in 2014 and threw for 34 touchdowns and nearly 3,000 yards in just 11 full games? That type of performance (and possibly even better) could be awaiting him in 2016.
Granted, this Ohio State team lost a lot from last season. Their top three receivers, three offensive linemen, Joey Bosa, Adolphus Washington, Darron Lee, Joshua Perry, Eli Apple, Vonn Bell; you name it, Ohio State lost it. This really is kind of a shot-in-the-dark prediction, but I have a lot of faith in Barrett to lead the Buckeyes into the final four this season. If he has that type of season, the Buckeyes will be going to the Playoff, and potentially, even beyond.
And now for my next trick and something completely different….
4. UCLA Bruins
I know what you’re probably saying, and I think it has something to do with me being insane. Tell me something I don’t know.
UCLA was expected to break out last season with new starting quarterback Josh Rosen. He had a tremendous season, posting 3,669 yards and 23 touchdowns. However, the team succumbed to several significant injuries en route to a disappointing 8-5 finish. Like Ohio State, the Bruins lost key players such as Paul Perkins, Thomas Duarte, Jordan Payton, and Myles Jack from last season. But the secondary returns every player from a season ago and has a chance to be something special.
If Rosen and several other key players can stay healthy, UCLA has a chance to have a huge season. A look at their schedule shows that they have USC, Utah, and Stanford all at home. Their slate does contain several land mines (at Texas A&M, at BYU, at Washington State), but UCLA could legitimately be favored in every game this season.
Rosen is also a Heisman candidate if he can stay healthy. While he’s losing his two best receivers from a season ago (Payton and Duarte), he has a chance to become a breakout start in college football this season. Oh, and he also has this going for him:
Last fall, inspired by a friend at Arizona State, he went online and paid $400 for an inflatable Lay‑Z‑Spa hot tub. (“It came down to my roommate and I saying, ‘What are we going to be able to tell our kids we did in college?'”) He installed it in his dorm room, using a 20-foot beer funnel for a hose. His mom even came over to see it. But a picture posted on Instagram by one of Rosen’s friends ended up going viral, drawing coverage from TMZ. The school forced Rosen to remove the tub. He had to write an apology paper to the school, which he struggled to take seriously.
“I’m not a social media guy, I’m not,” Rosen says. “It’s just once every three weeks it’s like, Hey, let’s shake some s‑‑‑ up,” Rosen says. “I like to be a real person and show personality. People appreciate that.”
Nice. Very nice. You may not agree with him, but you have to respect someone who’s willing to erect a hot tub in his dorm room. He’s basically become that guy from the State Farm commercial, which is awesome to see from a Division I quarterback (and a really good one, at that).
They have to stay healthy if they want to run the table, but the UCLA Bruins have a legitimate chance at the College Football Playoff. And that’s a sentence I never thought I’d say after picking them to go to the Playoff in 2014.
What do you think? Let me know by leaving a comment below!
At just 25 years old, Mike Trout is arguably the best player in baseball, a once-in-a-generation talent, and a five-tool superstar. The Los Angeles Angels are lucky enough to have him on their team, and you would think that the organization would find a way to use his absurd skill set to their advantage.
It hasn’t happened that way. In fact, the Angels have done quite the opposite; they’ve somehow, some way wasted his other-worldly talent.
In Mike Trout’s five years in Major League’s baseball, he’s averaged 34 home runs, 99 RBI and 28 steals per 162 games. Additionally, he’s hit over .300 and made someamazing outfield catches over his first five seasons. Trout’s versatility and multitude of talents make him one of the best, if not the best player in all of baseball. He’s also stayed extraordinarily healthy throughout his career; in four full seasons in the majors, Trout has missed a grand total of 14 games, almost all of which can be chalked up to routine off days. Trout made his debut on July 8, 2011 but didn’t reach the show for good until April 28, 2012. If you don’t follow baseball, try to take a guess what the Angels’ record has been since that date. I’ll give you some time.
Okay, you have your guesses ready? Awesome. Prepare to be amazed. The Angels’ record since April 28, 2012 is:
394-356.
Yes, since the best player on the planet has joined their team, the Los Angeles Angels have won 52.5% of their games. Many teams would kill to have a generational talent such as Trout, and most of those teams would find some way to have sustained success with Trout on the roster and playing every day. But no, these Angels are not one of those teams.
Instead, the Angels’ organization has completely botched the composition of almost the entirety of the rest of the roster. Through trades, flawed free agent acquisitions, and front office shakeups, the Los Angeles Angels have somehow become the most inefficiently-run organization in all of baseball, which isn’t exactly something to be proud of. To understand why they’re blowing it with Trout, we need to understand the scope of some of those moves and how they have hamstrung the organization for years to come.
The team’s first ill-fated free agency maneuver was signing Albert Pujols, then the best hitter in baseball, in the winter of 2011. The Angels inked Pujols to a ten-year, $300 million deal; at the time, Pujols was going into his age-32 season, which is around the time hitters’ skills begin to decline. Sure enough, that’s what has happened with the first baseman. While he has still averaged nearly 30 home runs per season in Los Angeles, his batting average in five years with the Angels his dipped to .263 (as opposed to a .328 figure with the Cardinals in the first 11 years of his career). That’s hardly worth a $300 million price tag. What’s worse is that Pujols no longer plays first base, which means that the Angels are paying someone $30 million per year to be a designated hitter. That’s not a worthwhile investment, to say the least.
But Pujols is hardly the only bad decision the Angels’ front office has made over the past five years. In that same offseason, newly-minted General Manager Jerry Dipoto signed pitcher C.J. Wilson to a five-year, $77.5 million deal. The problem is that Wilson was never that great a pitcher to begin with, as he only really had two great seasons before heading to L.A. That didn’t warrant the team giving him that much money at that point in time, but that’s the decision Dipoto and the front office made. Worst of all, the deal was heavily backloaded; Wilson is making a cool $20 million this year. Want to know how many starts he’s made this season? Zero. He underwent season-ending, reconstructive shoulder surgery in July. The Angels are paying him $20 million this season to rehab from injury, try to make a comeback in baseball, but most significantly of all, not pitch.
And then we come to Josh Hamilton.
Hamilton was one of the best players in all of baseball when the Angles plucked him from the Texas Rangers before the 2013 season. However, he had been known for a history of drug problems and alcohol abuse that caused several teams to stay away from him. Those problems were somewhat taken care of with the Rangers, where his support system of advisors and mentors helped him stay (mostly) clean. Unfortunately, that support system didn’t quite follow Hamilton to the West Coast. And the Angels organization didn’t exactly support him, either.
As you probably remember, Hamilton self-reported a third relapse, consisting of cocaine and alcohol abuse, to Major League Baseball in February of last year. While it’s terrible that Hamilton suffered yet another relapse, it was honorable that Hamilton was honest about his infraction. But that apparently wasn’t good enough for the Angels and owner Arte Moreno. After an arbitrator ruled that Hamilton would not be suspended by MLB for his conduct, Moreno took to the press to publicly denounce his star player and say that the team was looking to take action against him because of his lack of “accountability”. Okay, Arte, here’s some advice: if you don’t want to deal with his potential issues, which are a sensitive subject, don’t sign Josh Hamilton in the first place. Avoidance would have been a very easy way to deal with Hamilton’s problems, and instead of avoiding him, Moreno and Dipoto thought it would be a good idea to sign him. They know this could become a problem and pretended to be shocked when it did. That’s their fault. Hopefully, Hamilton can keep his problems in check and live happily, sober, and clean for the rest of his life. But the Angels messed up badly with Josh Hamilton, and there’s no escaping that fact.
And finally, there was the ultimate front office shakeup last season. A clash of wills between Dipoto and manager Mike Scioscia led to Dipoto’s resignation as the team’s GM in early July. While we’ve established that Dipoto was (and still is) a pretty terrible General Manager, Scioscia is not blameless in this situation, either. Under his tutelage, the Halos haven’t won a postseason series, much less a playoff game, since 2009. Since that year, the team has made the playoffs just once and has had four seasons between 80 and 89 wins. With the exception of this season, one that has Los Angeles on pace for just 67 wins, the Angels have been one of the most perennially mediocre teams in the game.
And it shows in the team’s farm system, too. Actually, calling the Angels’ conglomerate of minor league affiliates and players a farm system is disrespectful to the other 29 legitimate farm systems in baseball. I kid you not, these are real words from Keith Law, ESPN’s resident prospect expert, on the Angels’ minor league system. From January:
I’ve been doing these rankings for eight years now, and this is by far the worst system I’ve ever seen. They traded their top two prospects in the Andrelton Simmons deal and had no one remotely close to top-100 status. They need a big draft this year to start to restock the system or we’re going to start talking about whether it’s time to trade Mike Trout.
And Law isn’t just saying that: the Angels legitimately have no good prospects in their system. One would’ve thought that the team would have tried to seriously restock their farm system at the deadline, a la the New York Yankees, but, as Law smartly points out, that would have entailed trading Trout. So the Angels have no good prospects and no trade chips they could use to go out and get solid prospects. The team and new GM Billy Eppler stayed quiet at the deadline, making no trades. I would criticize Eppler for this, but there was legitimately nothing he could’ve done besides dealing Trout, who is a once-in-a-generation talent. There’s really no use in getting rid of him. I actually feel bad for Eppler; it’s like he took over for someone in the middle of a Monopoly game and was given no properties and no money to work with. He’s bankrupt.
This is what Mike Trout has to look forward to. The team he plays for has no future and no present. He’s the best player in the game, and no one is caring to watch him or his team play. That’s sad, especially when you consider that the Angels have him under contract until 2020.
And if Trout isn’t traded before then, he’ll be languishing in the wallows of Anaheim, as the team that employs him wastes the best years of his career.
I’m sure this will come as an absolutely shocking development, but Roger Goodell is abusing his powers again. I know; surprise, surprise.
Last December, Al-Jazeera news released the results of a months-long investigation into doping in sports (the American wing of the organization folded three months later). The reason why you heard about it was because then-Broncos quarterback Peyton Manning (and others; more on them later) was implicated in the exposé as being affiliated with Dale Guyer, the head of Indianapolis’ Guyer Institute. It is known that Manning visited Guyer’s anti-aging clinic multiple times in 2011, which also coincided with the season he missed because of four neck surgeries. Why he went to the Guyer Institute is not known; what is known is that Manning never failed a drug test and there is no credible evidence that he was doping. Frankly, it’s none of our business why Manning went to the institute. Guyer did send drugs to the Manning household under the name of Ashley Manning, Peyton’s wife. And it’s none of our business if she was the one taking drugs, either, which is very plausible.
Of course, Manning retired into the sunset after last season’s Super Bowl victory over the Carolina Panthers. Where this story (which is nearly 8 months old) pertains to today’s events is that four current players were implicated in the report. They are Julius Peppers and Clay Matthews, both of the Packers, James Harrison of the Steelers, and Mike Neal, who is currently a free agent. An unpaid intern at the Guyer Institute, Charlie Sly, attested to giving Delta 2 (or D-2 for short), a banned substance, to every player but Matthews in various instances. Sly said that Matthews was not on D-2 but requested Toradol from Sly in a text message shown in the documentary. (Toradol is so dangerous that it is banned in several countries; it is legal to obtain it in the United States.) Another doctor, Chad Robertson, also claimed to give Matthews Percocet before the 2015 NFC Championship Game. Sly says that Matthews used to take HGH and was on Ipamorelin at the time of the documentary. Robertson also claimed to have given Neal, then a linebacker for the Packers, medication that helped increase his salary from $400,000 to $2 million in the span of a season.
If you’re reading all that and your head is about to explode, I don’t blame you. The documentary features many damning claims about quite a few of the league’s best players; it also implicates Ryan Howard, Ryan Zimmerman, and Taylor Teagarden, all of whom played (or are still playing) professional baseball at the highest level. There is a lot of juicy information packed into 49 minutes and 13 seconds of video. There’s just one problem that I found with the investigation:
There is absolutely zero hard, credible, concrete evidence that the players implicated actually used performance-enhancing drugs.
Teagarden is the one exception to this rule. In the report, aptly titled The Dark Side, Teagarden is seen talking to a British runner named Liam Collins; Collins was visiting with Sly to pick up medication he will never take to help his chances at making the Olympics. Collins was hired by Al-Jazeera to carry out his fake story and is most famous off the track for swindling would-be customers out of nearly a million dollars in a property scheme. Anyway, Teagarden speaks about his years of testosterone use and how he evaded multiple drug MLB drug tests. My gut feeling is that he wouldn’t be talking so openly about this if it was all a lie. Then again, four United States Olympic swimmers are in the news for straight-up lying about being robbed at gunpoint, so I don’t know who to believe anymore.
And that’s where the NFL and Goodell come in.
Last week, the league threatened to suspend the current players involved in the Al-Jazeera report. To be clear, the threat of suspension would only come true if the players didn’t cooperate with the league’s investigation. Ironically, this same NFL investigation exonerated Manning of any wrongdoing three weeks ago. However, the league used the suspension threat as a way of getting the players to cooperate with the investigation. Apparently, it worked; it was announced today that Harrison, Matthews, and Peppers have agreed to meet with investigators associated with the NFL.
But that’s not the problem here. This is the real issue: the NFL clearly overstepped its bounds in threatening suspension for players who refused to speak with the league. To be completely honest, abuse of power has been Roger Goodell’s legacy in his ten-year (!) tenure as NFL commissioner. We saw this abuse in Deflategate, Bountygate, the Ray Rice saga, and almost any other incident involving NFL players and coaches. He is slowly turning the league into his own totalitarian regime and has made himself judge, jury, and executioner in disciplinary matters.
The NFL overstepped its bounds because it needs credible evidence or a failed drug test as a basis to interview the players. It has neither of those things. And while the league has told the Players’ Union that it has evidence “beyond what’s been reported publicly”, it hasn’t been willing to come forward with that new information. So it may be an honest, independent investigation. Or it could be a nontransparent witch-hunt. I’d say the lack of an in-between option might be an issue here.
And yet, the players are partially to blame for this. I feel like a broken record in saying this, but the players did negotiate away key rights in the last Collective Bargaining Agreement. Among those rights was Roger Goodell’s policy power; the players had the opportunity to hold out and have Goodell’s all-encompassing disciplinary faculties either severely reduced or eradicated completely. They didn’t do that, and that’s a very large part of the reason we’re sitting here talking about this today. And while the players have the right to complain about Goodell’s power, those who were around in 2011 contributed to the growth of Goodell’s empire.
And I’ll also say this: I’m somewhat surprised the players decided to agree to the interview. While they believe answering questions will improve their chances of avoiding suspension (and rightfully so), I honestly thought they would take a stand against the league. Albert Breer of The MMQB made the case for the players doing this today:
Don’t show up. Don’t go to New York. Block Adolpho Birch’s number if you have to. Sit on your hands, dare the NFL to suspend you, and see what comes next.
After union losses in the cases of Tom Brady and Adrian Peterson, if these four players answer Goodell, there’s no way to conclude that the commissioner powers are going to change before 2021. It also wouldn’t bode well for what’s to come in the next round of labor talks, given that it would score another union-busting win for the NFL’s barons and another blow against player solidarity.
Adolpho Birch is one of the league employees who helps Goodell oversee the league’s disciplinary policies and drug enforcement. He was also the poor gentleman rolled out by the league to defend the commissioner in the wake of the Ray Rice incident; it didn’t go too well.
The NFL players are not without blame in this situation; just today, Ravens linebacker Terrell Suggs said that there was no relationship between the Players’ Union and Goodell. But while the players aren’t without reproach here, it’s clear that Goodell overreached in his powers by forcing the players into an interview.
But is that even a surprise anymore? It shouldn’t be.
Photo Credit: Brian van der Brug/Los Angeles Times
The sun may rise in the East, at least it settles in the final location…..
Never, ever, ever did I think I’d be using a line from a Red Hot Chili Peppers song as the lede to an article about an NFL team’s quarterback situation. If you want a reason as to why I’m suddenly grabbing wisdom pearls from “Californication”, here’s an explanation:
As you already know, the Los Angeles Rams are on HBO’s Hard Knocksthis season. During the first episode of the show, #1 overall pick and quarterback Jared Goff was asked by his position coach, Chris Weinke, where the sun rises and sets in the sky. His answer? He had no clue. Obviously, it rises in the East and sets in the West, which would seem like common knowledge, except for the fact that it apparently isn’t. And it seems like Goff is far from alone on the team in terms of his ignorance of the Sun’s activity.
So hey, let’s make a case for him as an NFL team’s starting quarterback, shall we?
To begin, Goff, as previously stated, was the first overall pick in this year’s draft. Out of the last five quarterbacks selected first overall (Matt Stafford, Sam Bradford, Cam Newton, Andrew Luck, Jameis Winston), exactly zero of them did not start for their team in week one of the season. Granted, the Rams are in a theoretically better position than all of those teams were, but the precedent set by these quarterbacks is clear. However, we need to look far beyond precedent to see why Goff should be the team’s starting quarterback at the beginning of the season.
One of the things we need to examine here is the Los Angeles Rams’ current state of affairs. While there is a lot of excitement for the team’s move to the West Coast, the reality of the situation is that the Rams just aren’t that great of a team right now. That means that expectations should not be set very high this season; while that doesn’t mean the team should try to lose, it does mean that the organization should take more of a forward-thinking approach when it comes to personnel.
But why are we having this discussion in the first place? Well….
When Goff was selected at the top of the draft, many observers concluded that he would begin the season as the Rams’ starting quarterback. It seemed like the franchise had finally settled on its guy and would take the lumps that came with Goff’s development. And then it decided to seriously consider another option, even if it was an option that wasn’t a whole lot more experienced than Goff.
That option is Case Keenum. Keenum, the fifth-year quarterback who made a name for himself by throwing for almost 20,000 yards in his five-year collegiate career at Houston, has never started the season as an NFL starting quarterback. That may be about to change, as Keenum took reps with the first team in the Rams’ first preseason game on Saturday. Of course, Goff could still win the job; he’s slated to take more snaps with the starting unit this week. However, it’s clear that the Rams, at least for now, are planning to start the season with Keenum under center.
And, truth be told, Keenum isn’t really that bad. In parts of six games last season, Keenum threw for 828 yards, four touchdowns, and just one interception. That really isn’t terrible; the problem is that those numbers are hopelessly pedestrian and mediocre. Kind of like Jeff Fisher, the Los Angeles Rams’ head coach.
Jeff Fisher is one of the most respected authority figures in the NFL. He has burnished a reputation as a smart, tough leader who gets the most out of his teams no matter how much talent is on the roster. He is regarded as one of the best coaches in the league over the past twenty years, and there is very little argument about this supposed fact.
The only thing is that Jeff Fisher’s reputation is completely unearned.
Over the course of his career, Fisher has won just 52% of his games with the Oilers/Titans and Rams. With the exception of a Super Bowl run in 1999 (fueled in part by an illegal forward pass) and brief spurts of success in the 2000s, Fisher’s teams have largely been in the middle of the league’s pack. That’s not good, especially for a franchise that could use some long-term success after a much-anticipated move back to Los Angeles, the second-largest media market in the United States.
That probably informs Fisher’s thinking in the matter. Keenum is the safe option here, the “experienced” choice, the guy who won’t lose you games. Goff is the far more aggressive option, the franchise quarterback, the player whose game-to-game performance may be rather unpredictable.
And yet, I’d start Goff over Keenum. Here’s why: the Rams don’t really have a lot to lose this season. With the team’s return to L.A., the fan base will be excited to watch its beloved Rams no matter how good they are this season. I’m not saying that the Rams shouldn’t try to win, but I am saying that this season is not as important as the future to the team’s long-term and much-needed success.
And if Goff performs well, then he would be a better option than Keenum based on performance alone. We all know that the Ryan Gosling lookalike is going to be the Rams’ starter at some point, so what point is there in delaying his maturation process? While we’ve seen recent examples of teams trotting out quarterbacks who weren’t nearly ready to play (cough, cough, Geno Smith), we’ve also seen plenty of examples of quarterbacks who improved after struggling to start their careers (Newton, Andy Dalton, Aaron Rodgers). It can be done. This could be what the Rams have to look forward to with Jared Goff.
Let me also say this: it isn’t some great injustice if Goff doesn’t start week one. The coaching staff knows the players better than we do and their quarterback decision will be informed by their intimate knowledge of the players and system. They’re at practice every day and they deserve the benefit of the doubt if Keenum is chosen, even if that doesn’t seem like the right decision.
However, it’s easy to see that Goff has far more upside than his veteran counterpart. And, especially with the team’s future being so bright, what do you have to lose by giving Goff the keys to the offense in week one? If you know you’re going to start him at some point anyway, why not start him in the season opener?
Rams fans can dream this season. They can dream of their team’s potential, of selling out the L.A. Coliseum, and even of Californication (hey, we’re right back where we started).
And maybe they can even dream of Jared Goff as their team’s starting quarterback.
Many players who have played in the Olympics often talk about how there is nothing quite like it in sports. They’ll tell you that the Games are different from regular athletic events because players are competing for the love of sport and country instead of just for a team. Inevitably, players who win medals are compared to those who win championships in their sport. The debate turns to whether or not winning a championship in a sport is the same as winning a gold medal in the Olympics.
And that’s where we turn our attention to Carmelo Anthony.
You know Carmelo Anthony as one of the unquestioned leaders of the United States basketball team and one of the most well-known players in the NBA. Participating in his fourth Olympics, he has basically seen it all in his decade-plus of international basketball. The other thing you know about ‘Melo is that he’s never won an NBA championship or even gone to an NBA Finals. He’s almost more famous for his failure than he is for his success, even though he’s never had a great team around him in the NBA career. While he’s earned two Olympic gold medals and a bronze medal in 2004, he’s never earned what many refer to as the most cherished prize in sports: a championship.
So when he talks about the comparison between a gold medal and a ring, it’s probably something worth noting. Sure enough, he expounded on the subject in an interview with ESPN; this is what he said:
Most athletes don’t have an opportunity to say that they won a gold medal, better yet three gold medals. I would be very happy walking away from the game knowing that I’ve given the game everything I have, knowing I played on a high level at every level: high school, college, won [a championship at Syracuse] in college and possibly three gold medals.
I can look back on it when my career is over — if I don’t have an NBA championship ring — and say I had a great career.
First of all, notice how he seamlessly worked in the phrase “if I don’t have an championship ring”. Not only did that line add context to his remarks but it also likely saved him from further scrutiny among fans and the media. That critical insertion made it sound like an NBA championship ring would be the holy grail of his career and anything else would be viewed as a disappointment.
But there is a multi-pronged debate to be had over whether or not an Olympic gold is more significant than a championship ring, regardless of what Anthony actually believes.
For starters, not every competitor in these Olympics has the chance to say that they play in a league that has a championship. For athletes like swimmers and gymnasts, the Olympics are absolutely the be-all, end-all of their athletic careers. They’re also unlike some professional athletes in that they don’t make the same crazy, lucrative salaries that players in other sports make. After all, a guy that played 24 minutes per game last season just received a new contract for four years and $50 million because there was just that much money in the NBA this year.
Yes, I’m sure there are some Olympic athletes who would kill for that much money. But then again, some athletes train their entire lives just to be part of the Olympics. Take America’s two new favorite sports (gymnastics and swimming), for example. Athletes such as Simone Biles, Michael Phelps, Aly Raisman, and Katie Ledecky don’t necessarily compete in prestigious leagues or even any league at all. There are world championships that many athletes compete in either to qualify or prepare for the Games, but these championships pale in comparison to winning big in the Olympics. Those athletes can’t sympathize with what Carmelo is talking about because they aren’t in situations where you can choose between one or the other.
Going back to ‘Melo, though, it’s understandable that he would value (or play up the value) of winning a gold medal over winning an NBA title. Anthony’s career has taken him many different places but he’s never gone to the supposed promised land of winning a title. Therefore, he has to think of his promised land as the Olympics and the ability to compete for the United States. It’s clear that ‘Melo has gained a lot of perspective over the course of his career and has definitely matured from his younger years. That should be applauded, even as he’s failed to win in his NBA career.
At the same time, he did kinda sorta admit that he’s probably not going to win a championship anytime soon, if ever. That might not sit well with the Knicks organization or the team’s fanbase, but the sentiment is absolutely based in reality. Despite Derrick Rose’s claim that the Knicks are a super team (yes, he really did say that), the team is closer to being an 8-seed than an NBA champion. Anthony realizes that and knows that he’s not going to have a chance to win a title in the coming years.
With all of this being said, I have no problem with ‘Melo taking a stand and speaking his mind on exactly what is important to him in his basketball career. And this is the reality of the situation: not every star can win a championship in the NBA. Winning a title is really, really hard; we saw this with the Golden State Warriors, the greatest team of all time, this past season. They couldn’t finish the deal against the Cavaliers in the Finals, showing us that going the distance in the NBA is very difficult, even as a 73-game winner.
Some people will undoubtedly be ruffled by Anthony’s comments. They’ll say that he doesn’t care about winning and he’s making the Olympics about himself and so on and so forth. Some people will also reject Anthony’s notion on the grounds that winning a ring is the single most important thing in an athlete’s career. Personally, I understand both sides of the argument. It’s up for interpretation.
But let’s respect Carmelo for being honest with us about what really matters in his career and his life. After all, it’s all we say we ever want out of our athletes.
If you’ve been following the Olympics over the past couple of nights, you’re probably aware of the evolving spat between swimmers Lily King of the United States and Yulia Efimova of Russia. But if you’re not up on things, here’s a recap of recent events:
Efimova and King were swimming in two semifinal races on Sunday to qualify for the 100-meter breaststroke final on Monday. Efimova swam in the first race and won her heat with a time of 1:05:72. After the race, Efimova, while still in the pool, faced in the direction of a television camera and gave a Dikembe Mutombo-esque finger wag. King, Efimova’s top competitor, was watching the race on a television monitor in preparation for her heat and had this priceless reaction to Efimova’s celebration:
US swimmer Lily King gives Russian swimmer Yulia Efimova the Mutombo finger wave pic.twitter.com/YMBrgp2Mw9
King would have another response to the Russian in her race, winning her heat to qualify for Monday night’s final. Her time? 1:05:70, or two one-hundredths of a second faster than Efimova’s interval. She responded exactly as you would expect: with a finger wag. After winning her semifinal, King had this to say about Efimova and the finger wagging:
Basically, what happened this morning was that I finished and then I waved my finger a little bit, because that’s kind of how I am. Then tonight just now Yulia got done with her swim and I am watching in the ready room — and there she is there shaking her finger. So then I got done and I beat her time so I waved my finger again. People probably think I am serving it up a little bit but that is just how I am.
That’s just my personality. I’m not this sweet little girl, that’s not who I am. If I do need to stir it up to put a little fire under my butt or anybody else then that’s what I’m going to do.
Some background: Efimova tested positive for Meldonium in March but was cleared right before the games to compete (more on that later). But wow, that’s some pretty strong stuff. An Olympic athlete openly saying that she’s basically a mean girl is not something you see every day. King’s comments set up an epic final for Monday night, one that would seemingly pit good versus evil, dirty versus clean, and honest versus dishonest.
Before the race, as the swimmers were standing behind the blocks waiting for the commencement of the proceedings, King had this comical “exchange” with the Russian:
Many were in King’s corner, too: Efimova was booed as she was introduced before the start of the event. After this absurd, WWE-like buildup, though, the race began. It went fairly predictably, with King and Efimova swimming one-two for most of the 100-meter duration. Despite a late charge from Efimova, the 19-year-old American held off the competition to win gold in the event. After winning the race, King commented that it was incredible to win a gold medal, especially “knowing I did it clean”. The implication was very, very obvious; Efimova had cheated her way into the race and King was calling her out on it.
Since her crusade against Efimova and basically the entire country of Russia began, King has been hailed a hero by many in the American media. Finally, here was an Olympic athlete who won against drug cheats and criticized the system that allowed them to compete in the Olympics in the first place. And King didn’t just denounce the Russians for their doping: she later said that Americans such as Tyson Gay and Justin Gatlin, who had both previously tested positive for banned substances, should also be banned from the Summer Games. To her credit, she’s an equal-opportunity offender; she calls out all athletes who cheat instead of only those from one country or those she’s competing against.
But the problem is that Yulia Efimova is being painted as a villainous cheater today. Her story, in actuality, is really not that cut-and-dry.
In 2013, Efimova was given a 16-month ban from competition after testing positive for DHEA, a prescription steroid. Efimova served her ban and returned to the water; however, she would fail another drug test this past March, this time for Meldonium, a drug added to the World Anti-Doping Agency’s list of banned substances at the start of the new year. Since January 1, it has been reported that “hundreds” of Russian athletes have tested positive for the substance, including tennis star Maria Sharapova, Efimova, and many others. The catch? WADA freely admitted in April that it had no clue how quickly or slowly the drug can enter and leave the human body after consumption; because of this finding, the agency was forced to admit that it could not determine for sure if the athletes who had tested positive for the drug had taken it before January 1. Because WADA could not determine how long it took the drug to leave the body, Efimova and other Russian athletes were controversially cleared to compete in the Olympics.
That being said, it is impossible to defend Russia against its state-sponsored doping ring, one that got the nation’s entire Paralympic team banned from the games as well as many athletes in Summer Olympics. It was very surprising and yet totally unsurprising that the Russians were not banned from competition altogether (this is the IOC we’re dealing with here). Efimova is far from alone in her participation with Russian doping; however, it is fair to wonder whether or not she fully knew of the drug’s presence on the banned substance list and if she took it before January 1. Granted, as an Olympic athlete, she should probably be keenly aware to WADA’s banned substance list. But I’d be willing to bet that the Russians don’t exactly inform their athletes of what substances they can and cannot take under WADA’s rules. In fact, it’s evident that the Russians have been breaking those rules for some time now.
And this is meant in no way to take away from Lilly King. She was very courageous, not only in winning the race but calling out her main competitor for supposedly cheating her way into the event. It is 100% true that the IOC should treat drug offenders with the same toughness that King exemplified in her words to the media over the past couple of days. King won fair and square, without the aid of performance-enhancing drugs or any other substance that would have given her an artificial edge over her competition. She should be applauded for her stand.
However, we should also ask ourselves to reconsider our strong stance against Efimova. While I am in no way defending the use of performance-enhancing drugs, there is no concrete proof that Efimova has been using during the calendar year. Therefore, it’s highly unlikely that there were any banned substances in her system during the race. No matter what happened in previous years, it is more likely than not that Efimova was clean during her race against King. That means that they were on the same plane when they competed against each other and the other swimmers. King won, Efimova did not. While it’s possible that Efimova could have been doping, there is no proof.
So please, go ahead and hail Lilly King a hero today. I have no problem with that; she’s a warrior who pointed out the inadequacies of Olympic drug testing for all to see. It’s true that she’s cast correctly in this motion picture.
That’s not necessarily the case for Yulia Efimova.
