Absolutely Disgraceful Lawsuit
This has to be one of the most disgusting things I have ever heard. The father of John Hancock, the former St. Louis Cardinals reliever who
died in a car accident, is
now suing several people that he claims are "responsible" for Hancock's death.
Let's quickly review the facts of the case:
- John Hancock was legally intoxicated while driving.
- John Hancock did not have his seatbelt on while driving.
- John Hancock was talking on the cellphone while driving, apparently to set up a booty call.
- John Hancock had marijuana in his car while driving.
- John Hancock had been in an accident just three days before, and possibly alcohol was involved.
- John Hancock was driving 68mph in a 55mph zone.
- John Hancock crashed his car into the back of a tow truck that was clearing a stalled vehicle.
So, despite all of these facts, John Hancock's father believes that instead of his son being liable for his own death, instead of his son bearing the responsibility for his own ill-advised actions, despite his son being LUCKY that he didn't kill the tow truck driver or the owner of the stalled vehicle because he was driving drunk and unable to control his car properly, despite all of these things, instead it is the following people who are responsible for John Hancock's death:
- The owner of the bar who served alcohol to John Hancock. Because bars need to magically know when someone is over the legal alcohol limit and stop selling them drinks, even if they don't appear intoxicated.
- The tow truck driver, for, you know, doing his job.
- The owner of the stalled vehicle, for, you know, daring to stall his car in the middle of the highway.
These are the people listed in the lawsuit.
Things like this disgust me. I want to
punch John Hancock's father in the face! People need to learn to learn
take responsibility for their own goddamned actions. If people are too stupid to know when to stop drinking, if people are too stupid to know that they should sober up before driving, if people are too stupid to put on seat belts, and if people are too stupid to stay under the speed limit, then they HAVE to accept responsibility for the consequences of their own stupidity. It's that simple.
The only person responsible for John Hancock's death is John Hancock. If he wasn't dead, he would be liable for criminal prosecution.
Even more disgusting is the public's racist bias for athletes who get in trouble. Michael Vick fights dogs illegally at his home? Ooh, he's a bad, bad, irresponsible man! John Hancock gets drunk and nearly kills a disabled motorist and tow truck driver? John Hancock is a sad, tragic figure and the bar owners should have known better than to keep serving him alcohol!
It's so fucking two-faced, it makes me sick. John Hancock was an irresponsible adult who got himself killed and nearly killed two innocent bystanders in the process. He is not a saint, he is not a tragic figure, he is not a teammate to be glorified. He should be held up as an example of how dumb and stupid people can be when they are drunk, and how bad the consequences can be when people don't know how to handle alcohol. Period.
Silly Dice-K Hype
This is getting out of hand. Dice-K strikes out ten batters in his first outing, and everyone is ready to
proclaim him the next staff ace. Bill Simmons
writes a freaking diary about the first start. This is ridiculous. He beat the ROYALS, for crying out loud! How many times will the Royals get mowed down by an opposing pitcher this year? 30 times? 40 times? This is not a powerhouse lineup. Let's wait until Dice-K plays the Yankees or White Sox or Tigers or Angels before we proclaim him to be worth the $103 million. Seriously.
Worst Dynasty Ever: The New England Patriots
Let's be honest: the Patriots will probably beat the Colts next week, they usually do. And we know that the AFC is going to trounce the NFC in the Super Bowl. Tie that all together and it means the Patriots will win yet another Super Bowl. So undoubtedly we will once again start to hear all the annoying claims that this team is a "dynasty". I suppose four super bowl wins in six years is pretty much undeniably a dynasty.
But that would make the Patriots the worst dynasty in NFL football history.
It's very simple: the Patriots don't really beat anybody, their opponents beat themselves. The Chargers beat themselves yesterday, with poor offensive playcalling and mistakes. They dominated the Patriots for most of the game offensively and defensively and should have put the game away, but they made crucial mistakes that let the Patriots hang around, and in the end if you give a team enough chances you get burned. The Patriots didn't beat the Chargers so much as the Chargers beat themselves.
The same thing has happened in most of the Patriots playoff wins. Why is the game always so close? Why does Vinatieri keep winning it in the last second with a field goal? Certainly it can't be because the Patriots are dominating the other team, or else the Patriots would be coasting to victory at the end. No, the Patriots are simply getting lucky, a few breaks here, a few there, they have the last possession, and they win. That's not indicative of a team that is truly dominating their opponent. They always leave their opponents feeling like if they had one more drive they'd beat them. If they just made one less mistake, they'd win the game. The Patriots just get lucky.
Think about the truly great dynasty teams. Vince Lombardi's Packers. The Steel Curtain. Montana's Niners. America's Team. These were teams that won in convincing fashion. Few opponents left those Super Bowls feeling like if they had had just one more play they would have won; their opponents knew they were soundly beaten. And the scores reflect that. In the history of all the Super Bowls, there are only two teams other than Belicheck's Patriots that have won Super Bowls by a field goal or less, the Baltimore Colts in Super Bowl V, and the New York Giants in Super Bowl XXV. That's right, Belicheck's Patriots have won more close Super Bowls than any other team in Super Bowl history. Every other Super Bowl team basically left no doubt. Lombardi's two Super Bowl wins were by almost 20 points each. While two of Pittsburgh's Steel Curtain victories were by four points, the other two were by 12 and 10 points. Montana destroyed Elway in Super Bowl XXIV, 55-10! And Aikman, Smith, and Irvin shellacked Buffalo in Super Bowls XXVII and XXVIII by a combined 52 points! These were teams that left no doubt that they were the champions.
The Patriots, on the other hand, squeak by each time, counting on opponents' mistakes. They are the world's luckiest team. Until they beat someone in a convincing fashion, they simply don't deserve to be talked about in the same breath as the other true dynasties.
Sports Illustrated At It Again
Sports Illustrated has to be one of the least classy magazines out there. If there was a sports magazine equivalent of a tabloid magazine, Sports Illustrated would be it. They consistently like to do "in-depth" articles on athletes that really do nothing more than bash them and make them look bad. Sports Illustrated was the magazine that ran that article on Jon Rocker. Sports Illustrated was the magazine that ran that piece on David Wells, where every other paragraph mentioned that Wells is "fat". And now Sports Illustrated has decided that they are such a hard-hitting sporting news magazine that they have to run an article about how all of A. Rod's teammates basically
think he's a wimp.
It's not that I think all athletes are saints, or that their bad traits should be hidden. For example, when David Ortiz whined about how he deserved to be the MPV over Derek Jeter, that deserves to be reported on. The difference is, David Ortiz did this in public, in the clubhouse, after a game, in front of several reporters. He was being indiscreet and stupid. Sports Illustrated doesn't do that. Instead, they get "exclusives", one on one time with various players, and they string together what the players say in order to generate controversy. Jon Rocker didn't say the things he did in the clubhouse in front of all the other reporters. He had a one-on-one interview with a Sports Illustrated reporter. So they spent some time together, the reporter got Rocker to open up a bit, got Rocker to trust him, and then the reporter went and basically ambushed him.
The whole thing is just very underhanded and shady, and really shows a lack of class on the part of Sports Illustrated. You don't see these kinds of exclusive interviews showing up from ESPN reporters. Unless a player goes out of his or her way to be a complete ass, there's no reason to show up that player, and especially to take a private conversation (or in this case a series of private conversations) and air them out like dirty laundry. That's what tabloids do, which is why Sports Illustrated is the worst of the major sporting magazines.
No objective journalism in New York?
I always knew that sports in New York get a little crazy, what with the fans and owners demanding instant performance from athletes, but apparently it goes as far as George Steinbrenner (or someone associated with him) telling broadcasters on the YES network (and baseball writers before YES existed) to
say critical things of Alex Gonzalez. This is remarkable mostly because apparently it's
normal in New York. Apparently George Steinbrenner has been doing this type of thing for a very long time.
It just reduces the value of independent journalism even further than it already is in today's conglomerate-controlled, money-driven environment. When broadcaster's "opinions" are scripted by the officials on a baseball team, it means there really is no way to believe anything that a broadcaster says, which means you might as well turn off the volume when watching a baseball game. There are probably many that already do.
The Most Wonderful Time of the Year
For some, Christmas is the most wonderful time of the year. And sure, Christmas is a pretty wonderful time, I admit that. But for me, this time is the most wonderful time of the year. Not only for the coming great weather, the outdoor sports, the barbecues, the beach, etc. etc, but also because it's time for baseball! :-)
This is the time where I finish off my days watching Sportscenter and Baseball Tonight, watching all the highlights from the day's games. Unlike other sports, there is baseball almost every single night, and not just a few teams, but every team. It's a great thing to look forward to.
And for the past few years I've also played fantasy baseball, so not only do I watch the highlights for my favorite team, the
California Angels, but I also watch the highlights for many of the other games to see how my fantasy team players are doing, and to do research on which other free agents are doing well.
It's a very relaxing way to end the day, and it will happen for the next six months. :-)
ESPN Going Downhill ...
Is it just me, or have things been going steadily downhill ever since Disney bought ESPN? The biggest thing that bothers me have been the attempted cross-promotions between ABC and ESPN sporting events. Last season every time ABC talked about a Monday night game, they would always throw in a mention about the ESPN Sunday night game, and vice versa. Now, when it's during football broadcasts or during commercials, I think that's annoying, but OK. Disney owns both stations, they want to promote the other channel's show, fine.
But they also started doing it on SportsCenter. I have a real problem with that, because SportsCenter is supposed to be a news show. It should strive to be impartial and not favor any particular sports or teams or events, but instead now it's slowly skewing toward its own programming. It's gotten even worse this year, with weekly segments that plug "Monday Night Football" in the form of highlight clips and "rememberances". When the new NFL schedule got released, they did an entire segment on favorite MNF moments during SportsCenter, and also highlighted interesting MNF matchups.
Like with all news reporting, there's a big problem when the content of news programs starts to be driven by marketing concerns rather than legitimate news concerns. SportsCenter is a news program first and foremost, in my opinion. The mood might be lighter, they might crack jokes and do funny segments, but the bottom line is for most of the past decade they've done a damn good job of reporting sporting news. What was the score? Who got traded where? Who made an amazing play?
But now that they've started schilling for their own programs, the idea that they're "reporting" news has become tainted. Instead, they are clearly trying to
create news, trying to generate buzz for their own events. instead of just reporting the news. It started with the X-Games, when they devoted lots of time to covering the athletes in those events even before people really cared that much about it. Then came their own "original programming", such as PlayMaker, which they plugged towards the end of SportCenter. And now it continues with the whole Monday Night Football thing. SportsCenter is slowly turning into a platform for ESPN to advertise its own shows.
That really bothers me, because I love SportsCenter. It was the one place where I could get a great overview of everything that's going on in the world of sports in just one hour, and for the most part it was impartial. It didn't favor any particular sport over any another, and it didn't favor any particular team over any another. It just presented the news in an entertaining way. Now that's slowly going away, as they become partial to their own programming. That makes me sad.
