I guess I could talk about the new job a little bit.
I just realized I have been there about two months now. Surprisingly, I don't hate it. Then again, I don't love it. What I do love about it though is that, in a way, I'm my own boss. Sure, I have people to answer to, but I'm out in my truck, all day, doing my thing. No one is looking over my shoulder all day, telling me what to do, or how to do this or that; it's just me and the job at hand. Also, since the weather is getting nicer, it is truly amazing to be in God's house, just enjoying each day, working hard and getting done extremely early...like, 2 o'clock early. That is truly amazing.
See, the flipside of that is, of course, having to start work at 6 am every day. Then again, it hasn't even been difficult for me. All those years of working afternoons were harder on me than this. I love knowing that I have a certain amount of goals to complete to finish the day, and then, on average, I am home anywhere between 3 and 4 o'clock every day. You can't beat it.
The job itself isn't ideal; I mean, no way at (almost) 27 did I think that I'd be filling vending machines for a living, but having any kind of gainful employment at this time is a blessing and I don't question it: EVER! Also, I know who's fault it is that I don't have a "career." I know who screwed around and let life get the best of him way too many times in the past. I know who made the excuses for not finishing a degree and moving forward on what I wanted to do with the rest of my life.
The pay is good, I have benefits for the first time in my adult life (and they don't kill us financially), and we (collectively, and I, myself) are happy. Isn't that all that really matters?
I'm not coming home anywhere between 10 and midnight, I'm not trying to please the implacable; and best of all, I don't have to work for someone who does not EVER, EVER think you're good enough, respect you, or treat you like a human being. That's probably the best part of this job: it isn't anything like my last one.
18 April 2009
04 April 2009
All right. I meant to post this a while back
But needless to say, I got distracted.
Once again, THQ and the WWE have tried to capitalize on the huge "fighting game" market and released and "old school" wrestling game called "Legends of Wrestlemania." Well, like most smarks, I was genuinely excited for this game. It looked good (graphics and such), and the original rosters looked good, but then something happened.
Well, first of all, THQ decided to use the same game engine that it has been using in it's "Smackdown vs RAW" games. That's ok, I guess, but if this is an old school wrestling game, then button mashing to do moves should have reigned supreme. Supposedly, that's what this game offers, four button control, but maybe it should incorporate a little more difficulty. (A quick aside, I'm talking about games like: WWF Wrestlemania Challenge for NES, WWF Wrestlemania: The Arcade Game for Genesis/Playstation, WWF Wrestlemania for NES, WWF Wrestlefest for Arcade--also by far the best ever, WWF War Zone for N64/Playstation and WWF Raw for Genesis/SNES. Yes, I know there are more, but these arcade style games were the best for me and others when it came to wrestling games.) Secondly, when you take a closer look at the roster, you realize, "wait a minute, something is missing."
Here's what's missing:
*Tito Santana: Santana is a two-time Intercontinental Champion and two-time WWF Tag Team Champion (in eras where BOTH of those titles still meant something), a WWF King of the Ring (1989), and is a WWE Hall of Famer (class of 2004). Also, he wrestled in Wrestlemanias 1-8, including the first ever match at Wrestlemania where he beat the Executioner (Buddy Rose). There is no justifiable reason to not have Tito Santana in this game (not even the fact that for a while he wrestled as El Matador; that's Vince McMahon's fault--something I will discuss in length later in this blog.)
*Rick Martel: Martel, like Santana, was an early pioneer of what is known as the mid-card level. Granted, he never really held a World Title (the AWA Championship he held was impressive, but I'm focusing on the WWE), but he is a former 3-time WWF Tag Team Champion. Martel wrestled in Wrestlemanias 3-7. Also, even though it was one of the worst gimmick matches of all time, Martel lost to Jake "The Snake" Roberts in the infamous "Blindfold Match" at Wrestlemania VII.
*Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat: This is an atrocity. Downright atrocity. Steamboat is a former NWA Heavyweight Champion (beating Ric Flair) and is also a former WWF Intercontinental Champion (which he won at Wrestlemania III, beating Randy Savage...who we'll get to in a minute.) The previously mentioned match has been voted the greatest Wrestlemania match numerous times, and has won greatest match honors in general for years. Steamboat wrestled in the first four Wrestlemanias, but admittedly did go on to have success in WCW, so maybe that played a role here...No wait. The WWE is inducting him into the Hall of Fame this year at Wrestlemania weekend AND he has a match at this year's Wrestlemania. What the heck? He's not a Legend of Wrestlemania, but he's wrestling as a legend at this year's event.
*Randy "Macho Man" Savage: I don't care what Vince McMahon's beef is with Macho. I don't care if Randy raped Vince's daughter while Vince videotaped it and then showed it at Christmas' for the last ten years (I know, it's gross, but I'm tired of Vince McMahon), Savage is the ULTIMATE Wrestlemania guy. He was his generation's Shawn Michaels (or perhaps Shawn is his generation's Macho Man). Savage appeared at Wrestlemanias 2-8, and then again at Wrestlemania 10. The guy is a former 2-time WWF Champion, Intercontinental Champion, and King of the Ring (1987). The guy INVENTED the big match in the WWF. Honestly, personal demons aside and all that junk, Savage was the man for a good, long time. Not having him in this game is a mockery of the title "Legends of Wrestlemania."
*Owen Hart: "The King of Harts," "The Black Hart," "The Rocket," "The Slammy Award Winning," the taken-before-his time...Owen Hart was the best wrestler the Hart family ever produced. There. I said it. He was better than Bret ever was. Deal with it. He was more charismatic, he was funnier, he had a better move set, he was smarter and most of all, he died before he could ever realize his full potential. Owen was a 3-time WWF Tag Team Champion, 2-time Intercontinental Champion, European Champion and of course, the 1994 King of the Ring. And do you want to know the most surprising fact? Owen wrestled at eight Wrestlemanias and he isn't in this game. Wrestlemania 5 (as the Blue Blazer), 8, then 10-15. I can understand if the fact that the WWF killed him makes it so that they didn't want to include him, but not having Owen is a travesty only surpassed by the fact that he died doing what he loved, but in a way no man should have to die.
*Mick Foley: I'm not a huge fan of Mick Foley; in fact, I can't stand him. He sucked as a wrestler, but made his name as a hardcore legend. You can't ignore that, no matter how hard you try. He is a seven time former WWF Tag Team Champion, WWE Hardcore Champion (a belt INVENTED for him), and two-time WWF Champion (both times beating The Rock, a guy who is in the game.) Mick wrestled at Wrestlemanias 13-16, 20 and 22. If the guy hadn't defected to TNA last year, he probably would be in this game. Another reason Vince McMahon should be drawn and quartered (I'm getting to that, I promise.)
*Razor Ramon: I'm not talking about Scott Hall. Scott Hall is funny, but he's not the same guy he used to be. I'm talking about his character Razor Ramon. This guy was awesome for a short time. He was charismatic, strong, and had a decent move set. He is also a former 4-time Intercontinental Champion. He wrestled at Wrestlemanias 9-13 (his appearance at 18 doesn't really count, because he wasn't Razor at that one, but I'll include it for a basic appearance arguement.) and had one of the defining matches in Wrestlemania history: The Ladder Match for the Intercontinental Title at Wrestlemania X, where he beat Shawn Michaels. That match alone should have got him into this game, especially with the only innovative thing in this game being Wrestlemania Tour Mode, where you can relive, rewrite or redefine classic matches.
*I have a couple of other gripes, but they aren't as pointed as the previous. Demolition (3-time WWF Tag Team Champions and wrestled at WM 4-7, including winning the titles at 4 and 6, and successfully defending them at 7. Even LOD, who is in the game, can't claim that.) John Tenta (the man known as Earthquake). Tenta is a former WWF Tag Team Champion (with Typhoon/Tugboat/Shockmaster/Fred Ottman) and wrestled at WM 6-8. The One Man Gang/Akeem: OMG wasn't the best. He never held a major title in the WWF, but was entertaining, got a lot of main event attention and wrestled at WM 4-6. Don Muraco, The Dynamite Kid, and Dino Bravo. Muraco is a former 2-time Intercontinental Champion and WWE Hall of Famer (2004) who wrestled at WM 2-4. The Dynamite Kid (Tom Billington) is best known for being the other half of the British Bulldogs with Davey Boy Smith (who is in the game). Billington is a former WWF Tag Team Champion and wrestled at WM 2-4 as one half of the British Bulldogs (winning the titles at WM 2). Lastly, Dino Bravo. Dino Bravo wasn't much. He was known as "Canada's Strong Man" and had some brief feuds with Hogan, Bret Hart and the Ultimate Warrior. He wrestled at WM 4-7. (Brief aside: Since Bravo was murdered in real life for possibly being linked to organized crime, the WWE might have made a smart move by not including him.) The only reason I listed these guys was because some of the "legends" in the game probably shouldn't be in there either.
"Legends" in the game that probably should have been excluded:
*Koko B. Ware: The Birdman did indeed appear at WM 3, 4 and 6, but it's still Koko B. Ware. The guy never held a single title in the WWF, and as far as I can remember, never even competed for one. Oh, and the icing on the cake: he's being inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame this year. This is what you get for staying on Vince's good side (I'm getting to that).
*Scott "Bam Bam" Bigelow: Granted, Bigelow appeared at numerous Wrestlemanias (4, 10 and 11 to be exact), but again, what did he do? I'll tell you what he did. He lost to a football player in one of the dumbest, yet most hyped, matches ever (WM XI where it was the MAIN EVENT over the WWF Title match that year). Bigelow is another wrestler we lost before his time, but he did more in ECW and even WCW than in WWF.
*"Hacksaw" Jim Duggan: Duggan wrestled at WM 4-6, and again at 8. He's been around forever and is quite frankly, one of the good guys in this business. But again, no major titles in his WWF career (other than winning the first ever Royal Rumble and was also a dubious King when the WWF wanted to embarrass Harley Race).
*Michael "PS" Hayes, Arn Anderson, and Kamala: Hayes and Anderson are somewhat understandable. Both work for the WWE now as road agents, so their inclusion again stems to McMahon rewarding those who work for him. But, Hayes never wrestled at a Wrestlemania. His main success came in World Class Championship Wrestling as part of the Fabulous Freebirds. Anderson wrestled in one Wrestlemania (WM V) and is a former WWF Tag Team Champion (with Tully Blanchard), but as good as Double A is, he's no Legend of Wrestlemania, since he only competed in one. His success came in the NWA/WCW as a member of the IV Horsemen. As for Kamala, again, no Wrestlemanias (excluding the Gimmick Battle Royal at X-7) and the guy was just that: a gimmick wrestler.
*Dusty Rhodes and Big John Studd: Rhodes is another guy who works for the WWE and is also better known for his work outside of WWE. He is a former NWA Heavyweight Champion, but never won a title in the WWF. His only WM appearance was at WM 6, where he wrestled in a mix tag team match against Savage and Sheri. Not exactly memorable or legendary for that matter. Big John Studd was a cool big man back in the day. He appeared at Wrestlemania (where he lost his own Body Slam Challenge when Andre the Giant bodyslammed him), Wrestlemania II (where he lost a gimmick battle royal involving NFL players), and Wrestlemania 5, where he was the referee for the match of Jake Roberts vs Andre the Giant. Studd was a cool big man, but he never actually WRESTLED at any Wrestlemania and if you aren't going to include recent big men, like Diesel or Kane, why have Studd?
*Legion of Doom: Hawk and Animal are one of the best teams in wrestling history. They had it all: charisma, a great look, and could just run roughshod over anyone. They are a 2-time WWF Tag Team Champion, but only competed in two Wrestlemanias (7 and 14). Legendary team, yes. Legends of Wrestlemania, not exactly. At Wrestlemania 7, they beat Power and Glory (Hercules Hernandez and Paul Roma); they weren't even the major tag team match on the card (that would be the Nasty Boys beating the Hart Foundation for the WWF Tag Titles) and at WM XIV, they won a tag team battle royal. This battle royal featured some decent teams, but was the start of the decline of tag team wrestling in WWE.
*Hunter Hearst Helmsley: Triple H is the Game. The guy is the Hulk Hogan of today, to an extent. But as Hunter Hearst Helmsley, Trips lost to the Ultimate Warrior in a squash match at WM 12, beat Goldust at WM 13, and had morphed into Triple H by WM 14. Bottom line, put him in the damn game as Triple H. Hunter Hearst Helmsley was a fag.
Now, my final rant. Vince McMahon is the worst thing going in wrestling today. When THQ decided to put this game out with it being the "25th Anniversary" of Wrestlemania, what do you think designers and video game buffs thought when McMahon said, "Love the idea, but here are some guys you have to put in it and here are some guys that shouldn't be in it."? Um, ok Vince. But we're talking about guys who MADE your business. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Just because you run the most successful wrestling organization EVER doesn't necessarily mean you know what your fans want ALL of the time. A legends video game with all the legends (regardless of what their relationship is to you) is what the fans want. Get down off of your high geriatric horse and INCLUDE those guys as downloadable content in the future or you will feel the wrath you stupid sonofabitch.
All right. I'm done. Enjoy the read and tell me what you think.
Once again, THQ and the WWE have tried to capitalize on the huge "fighting game" market and released and "old school" wrestling game called "Legends of Wrestlemania." Well, like most smarks, I was genuinely excited for this game. It looked good (graphics and such), and the original rosters looked good, but then something happened.
Well, first of all, THQ decided to use the same game engine that it has been using in it's "Smackdown vs RAW" games. That's ok, I guess, but if this is an old school wrestling game, then button mashing to do moves should have reigned supreme. Supposedly, that's what this game offers, four button control, but maybe it should incorporate a little more difficulty. (A quick aside, I'm talking about games like: WWF Wrestlemania Challenge for NES, WWF Wrestlemania: The Arcade Game for Genesis/Playstation, WWF Wrestlemania for NES, WWF Wrestlefest for Arcade--also by far the best ever, WWF War Zone for N64/Playstation and WWF Raw for Genesis/SNES. Yes, I know there are more, but these arcade style games were the best for me and others when it came to wrestling games.) Secondly, when you take a closer look at the roster, you realize, "wait a minute, something is missing."
Here's what's missing:
*Tito Santana: Santana is a two-time Intercontinental Champion and two-time WWF Tag Team Champion (in eras where BOTH of those titles still meant something), a WWF King of the Ring (1989), and is a WWE Hall of Famer (class of 2004). Also, he wrestled in Wrestlemanias 1-8, including the first ever match at Wrestlemania where he beat the Executioner (Buddy Rose). There is no justifiable reason to not have Tito Santana in this game (not even the fact that for a while he wrestled as El Matador; that's Vince McMahon's fault--something I will discuss in length later in this blog.)
*Rick Martel: Martel, like Santana, was an early pioneer of what is known as the mid-card level. Granted, he never really held a World Title (the AWA Championship he held was impressive, but I'm focusing on the WWE), but he is a former 3-time WWF Tag Team Champion. Martel wrestled in Wrestlemanias 3-7. Also, even though it was one of the worst gimmick matches of all time, Martel lost to Jake "The Snake" Roberts in the infamous "Blindfold Match" at Wrestlemania VII.
*Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat: This is an atrocity. Downright atrocity. Steamboat is a former NWA Heavyweight Champion (beating Ric Flair) and is also a former WWF Intercontinental Champion (which he won at Wrestlemania III, beating Randy Savage...who we'll get to in a minute.) The previously mentioned match has been voted the greatest Wrestlemania match numerous times, and has won greatest match honors in general for years. Steamboat wrestled in the first four Wrestlemanias, but admittedly did go on to have success in WCW, so maybe that played a role here...No wait. The WWE is inducting him into the Hall of Fame this year at Wrestlemania weekend AND he has a match at this year's Wrestlemania. What the heck? He's not a Legend of Wrestlemania, but he's wrestling as a legend at this year's event.
*Randy "Macho Man" Savage: I don't care what Vince McMahon's beef is with Macho. I don't care if Randy raped Vince's daughter while Vince videotaped it and then showed it at Christmas' for the last ten years (I know, it's gross, but I'm tired of Vince McMahon), Savage is the ULTIMATE Wrestlemania guy. He was his generation's Shawn Michaels (or perhaps Shawn is his generation's Macho Man). Savage appeared at Wrestlemanias 2-8, and then again at Wrestlemania 10. The guy is a former 2-time WWF Champion, Intercontinental Champion, and King of the Ring (1987). The guy INVENTED the big match in the WWF. Honestly, personal demons aside and all that junk, Savage was the man for a good, long time. Not having him in this game is a mockery of the title "Legends of Wrestlemania."
*Owen Hart: "The King of Harts," "The Black Hart," "The Rocket," "The Slammy Award Winning," the taken-before-his time...Owen Hart was the best wrestler the Hart family ever produced. There. I said it. He was better than Bret ever was. Deal with it. He was more charismatic, he was funnier, he had a better move set, he was smarter and most of all, he died before he could ever realize his full potential. Owen was a 3-time WWF Tag Team Champion, 2-time Intercontinental Champion, European Champion and of course, the 1994 King of the Ring. And do you want to know the most surprising fact? Owen wrestled at eight Wrestlemanias and he isn't in this game. Wrestlemania 5 (as the Blue Blazer), 8, then 10-15. I can understand if the fact that the WWF killed him makes it so that they didn't want to include him, but not having Owen is a travesty only surpassed by the fact that he died doing what he loved, but in a way no man should have to die.
*Mick Foley: I'm not a huge fan of Mick Foley; in fact, I can't stand him. He sucked as a wrestler, but made his name as a hardcore legend. You can't ignore that, no matter how hard you try. He is a seven time former WWF Tag Team Champion, WWE Hardcore Champion (a belt INVENTED for him), and two-time WWF Champion (both times beating The Rock, a guy who is in the game.) Mick wrestled at Wrestlemanias 13-16, 20 and 22. If the guy hadn't defected to TNA last year, he probably would be in this game. Another reason Vince McMahon should be drawn and quartered (I'm getting to that, I promise.)
*Razor Ramon: I'm not talking about Scott Hall. Scott Hall is funny, but he's not the same guy he used to be. I'm talking about his character Razor Ramon. This guy was awesome for a short time. He was charismatic, strong, and had a decent move set. He is also a former 4-time Intercontinental Champion. He wrestled at Wrestlemanias 9-13 (his appearance at 18 doesn't really count, because he wasn't Razor at that one, but I'll include it for a basic appearance arguement.) and had one of the defining matches in Wrestlemania history: The Ladder Match for the Intercontinental Title at Wrestlemania X, where he beat Shawn Michaels. That match alone should have got him into this game, especially with the only innovative thing in this game being Wrestlemania Tour Mode, where you can relive, rewrite or redefine classic matches.
*I have a couple of other gripes, but they aren't as pointed as the previous. Demolition (3-time WWF Tag Team Champions and wrestled at WM 4-7, including winning the titles at 4 and 6, and successfully defending them at 7. Even LOD, who is in the game, can't claim that.) John Tenta (the man known as Earthquake). Tenta is a former WWF Tag Team Champion (with Typhoon/Tugboat/Shockmaster/Fred Ottman) and wrestled at WM 6-8. The One Man Gang/Akeem: OMG wasn't the best. He never held a major title in the WWF, but was entertaining, got a lot of main event attention and wrestled at WM 4-6. Don Muraco, The Dynamite Kid, and Dino Bravo. Muraco is a former 2-time Intercontinental Champion and WWE Hall of Famer (2004) who wrestled at WM 2-4. The Dynamite Kid (Tom Billington) is best known for being the other half of the British Bulldogs with Davey Boy Smith (who is in the game). Billington is a former WWF Tag Team Champion and wrestled at WM 2-4 as one half of the British Bulldogs (winning the titles at WM 2). Lastly, Dino Bravo. Dino Bravo wasn't much. He was known as "Canada's Strong Man" and had some brief feuds with Hogan, Bret Hart and the Ultimate Warrior. He wrestled at WM 4-7. (Brief aside: Since Bravo was murdered in real life for possibly being linked to organized crime, the WWE might have made a smart move by not including him.) The only reason I listed these guys was because some of the "legends" in the game probably shouldn't be in there either.
"Legends" in the game that probably should have been excluded:
*Koko B. Ware: The Birdman did indeed appear at WM 3, 4 and 6, but it's still Koko B. Ware. The guy never held a single title in the WWF, and as far as I can remember, never even competed for one. Oh, and the icing on the cake: he's being inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame this year. This is what you get for staying on Vince's good side (I'm getting to that).
*Scott "Bam Bam" Bigelow: Granted, Bigelow appeared at numerous Wrestlemanias (4, 10 and 11 to be exact), but again, what did he do? I'll tell you what he did. He lost to a football player in one of the dumbest, yet most hyped, matches ever (WM XI where it was the MAIN EVENT over the WWF Title match that year). Bigelow is another wrestler we lost before his time, but he did more in ECW and even WCW than in WWF.
*"Hacksaw" Jim Duggan: Duggan wrestled at WM 4-6, and again at 8. He's been around forever and is quite frankly, one of the good guys in this business. But again, no major titles in his WWF career (other than winning the first ever Royal Rumble and was also a dubious King when the WWF wanted to embarrass Harley Race).
*Michael "PS" Hayes, Arn Anderson, and Kamala: Hayes and Anderson are somewhat understandable. Both work for the WWE now as road agents, so their inclusion again stems to McMahon rewarding those who work for him. But, Hayes never wrestled at a Wrestlemania. His main success came in World Class Championship Wrestling as part of the Fabulous Freebirds. Anderson wrestled in one Wrestlemania (WM V) and is a former WWF Tag Team Champion (with Tully Blanchard), but as good as Double A is, he's no Legend of Wrestlemania, since he only competed in one. His success came in the NWA/WCW as a member of the IV Horsemen. As for Kamala, again, no Wrestlemanias (excluding the Gimmick Battle Royal at X-7) and the guy was just that: a gimmick wrestler.
*Dusty Rhodes and Big John Studd: Rhodes is another guy who works for the WWE and is also better known for his work outside of WWE. He is a former NWA Heavyweight Champion, but never won a title in the WWF. His only WM appearance was at WM 6, where he wrestled in a mix tag team match against Savage and Sheri. Not exactly memorable or legendary for that matter. Big John Studd was a cool big man back in the day. He appeared at Wrestlemania (where he lost his own Body Slam Challenge when Andre the Giant bodyslammed him), Wrestlemania II (where he lost a gimmick battle royal involving NFL players), and Wrestlemania 5, where he was the referee for the match of Jake Roberts vs Andre the Giant. Studd was a cool big man, but he never actually WRESTLED at any Wrestlemania and if you aren't going to include recent big men, like Diesel or Kane, why have Studd?
*Legion of Doom: Hawk and Animal are one of the best teams in wrestling history. They had it all: charisma, a great look, and could just run roughshod over anyone. They are a 2-time WWF Tag Team Champion, but only competed in two Wrestlemanias (7 and 14). Legendary team, yes. Legends of Wrestlemania, not exactly. At Wrestlemania 7, they beat Power and Glory (Hercules Hernandez and Paul Roma); they weren't even the major tag team match on the card (that would be the Nasty Boys beating the Hart Foundation for the WWF Tag Titles) and at WM XIV, they won a tag team battle royal. This battle royal featured some decent teams, but was the start of the decline of tag team wrestling in WWE.
*Hunter Hearst Helmsley: Triple H is the Game. The guy is the Hulk Hogan of today, to an extent. But as Hunter Hearst Helmsley, Trips lost to the Ultimate Warrior in a squash match at WM 12, beat Goldust at WM 13, and had morphed into Triple H by WM 14. Bottom line, put him in the damn game as Triple H. Hunter Hearst Helmsley was a fag.
Now, my final rant. Vince McMahon is the worst thing going in wrestling today. When THQ decided to put this game out with it being the "25th Anniversary" of Wrestlemania, what do you think designers and video game buffs thought when McMahon said, "Love the idea, but here are some guys you have to put in it and here are some guys that shouldn't be in it."? Um, ok Vince. But we're talking about guys who MADE your business. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Just because you run the most successful wrestling organization EVER doesn't necessarily mean you know what your fans want ALL of the time. A legends video game with all the legends (regardless of what their relationship is to you) is what the fans want. Get down off of your high geriatric horse and INCLUDE those guys as downloadable content in the future or you will feel the wrath you stupid sonofabitch.
All right. I'm done. Enjoy the read and tell me what you think.
27 March 2009
Just a quick little rant
So, basically, I just got home and I was browsing the net when I came across the story about B.J. Mullens jumping to the NBA after just one year in college. Big surprise; Ohio State should go from being the Buckeyes to the “OneandDones.” Think about it for just a minute. If the NCAA hadn’t instituted this stupid rule to make high school players go to college for at least one year before turning pro, then a lot of good, quality young players would have made the jump directly and failed (or just succeeded a little bit, or spent time in the NBDL, etc.) Instead, they’ve spent a year in college and improved their game, wasted a scholarship, and maybe, just maybe, improved the school’s program while they were there. Then again, this whole thing is ridiculous.
What is suffering? Well, mostly, college basketball. On the whole, college basketball is still very entertaining (last year’s NCAA tournament should vouch for that.) Then again, think of the the multitude of teams that would have benefited if their players stayed TWO years instead of one. Memphis with Derrick Rose this year, too? Or what would USC really had done with O.J. Mayo patrolling the backcourt again this season? Can’t it be argued that Arizona may have pushed even further with Jerred Bayless? And what about the year before? Javaris Crittenton and Thaddeus Young left Georgia Tech after their freshman campaigns. And what of Washington? Spencer Hawes, anyone?
But back to my original point. I don’t think anyone would have benefited more from players staying two years before going pro than the Ohio State OneandDones. I mean, sure Oden and Conley have been amazingly good (sic), and Daequan Cook won the 3-point shootout this year! Come on! Still don’t believe me? Check out the roster if all of these guys would have come back for a second year and who would have joined them. This is the list of who would have probably started and what the bench would have looked like for last year’s Ohio State Men’s Basketball team:
Starting 5:
C- Greg Oden
F- Othella Hunter
F- David Lighty
G- Mike Conley
G- Jamar Butler
Bench:
Jon Diebler
Daquan Cook
PJ Hill
Kosta Koufos
Dallas Lauderdale
Matt Terwilliger
Evan Turner
Yeah. That’s what I thought. Probably would have done a little more than just won the NIT, don’t you think?
Anyway. I really have no idea where I want this to go completely. Should the NBA change it’s rule? Maybe. But then again, would two years be enough for these guys? Would college basketball really be any better? I don’t really know. But I do know that like most Buckeye fans, I would have really liked to have seen that team play. Really.
18 March 2009
The Twenty-First Time
Nowhere to live
Nowhere to fall
He used to have money
But he’s wasted it all
His face is a photograph burned in mind
But I pretend not to see him for the twenty-first time
He sleeps under stars, it’s all he can afford
His blanket’s an old coat he’s had since the war
He stands on the corner of Carter and Vine
But I pretend not to see him for the twenty-first time
He may be a drifter who’s grown old and gray
But what if it’s Jesus and I walk away
I say I’m the body and drink of the wine
But I pretend not to see him for the twenty-first time
She’s 29 but she feels 48
She can’t raise three kids on minimum wage
She’s crying in back of the welfare line
But I pretend not to see her for the twenty-first time
She may be a stranger trying to get through the day
But what if it’s Jesus and I walk away
I say I’m the body and drink of the wine
But I pretend not to see her for the twenty-first time
This is a call for a change in my heart
I realize that I’ve not been doing my part
When I needed a Savior, I found it in Him
He gave to me, now I’ll give back to them
Drifter or stranger, daughter or son
I’ll look for Jesus in everyone
‘Cause I am the body and drink of the wine
And I’m thankful there’s more than the twenty-first time
Every time, and I do mean every time this song comes on the radio, I have a time of general reflection on my life, what I'm doing with it and what I can do if I would just take more time to listen to His plans for me.
Nowhere to fall
He used to have money
But he’s wasted it all
His face is a photograph burned in mind
But I pretend not to see him for the twenty-first time
He sleeps under stars, it’s all he can afford
His blanket’s an old coat he’s had since the war
He stands on the corner of Carter and Vine
But I pretend not to see him for the twenty-first time
He may be a drifter who’s grown old and gray
But what if it’s Jesus and I walk away
I say I’m the body and drink of the wine
But I pretend not to see him for the twenty-first time
She’s 29 but she feels 48
She can’t raise three kids on minimum wage
She’s crying in back of the welfare line
But I pretend not to see her for the twenty-first time
She may be a stranger trying to get through the day
But what if it’s Jesus and I walk away
I say I’m the body and drink of the wine
But I pretend not to see her for the twenty-first time
This is a call for a change in my heart
I realize that I’ve not been doing my part
When I needed a Savior, I found it in Him
He gave to me, now I’ll give back to them
Drifter or stranger, daughter or son
I’ll look for Jesus in everyone
‘Cause I am the body and drink of the wine
And I’m thankful there’s more than the twenty-first time
Every time, and I do mean every time this song comes on the radio, I have a time of general reflection on my life, what I'm doing with it and what I can do if I would just take more time to listen to His plans for me.
20 February 2009
So the other day, I sent the following to my buddy and fellow professional wrestling aficionado Jay:
"Simply put...if you could make a dream card of any wrestler at any point, playing any character ever...how would you do it? You must give reasons.
The rules:
1. You can only have a person on the card once. For example, you cannot have Cactus Jack wrestle Terry Funk, and then have Mankind wrestle Steve Austin. Only one match per person.
2. You can only have a MAX of 9 matches.
3. If you wish to name your show, give your announcers, who does the ring introductions, fine. Wish to have managers in corners, do that as well. It doesn't have to make sense, so if you want Bobby Heenan in the corner of The Ultimate Warrior, do so.
4. Give reasons to WHY you have the match the way you did.
5. No more than 3 gimmick matches allowed.
6. Feel free to give match results if you want, but you don't have to if you don't want.
Go.
This is interesting, and I know you've thought about it. I'll do it too. But I'm not sending mine until I get yours. But I won't read it until after I send mine. Just title your email as "My List" that way I know to send mine."
Below is my list.
Venue: Madison Square Garden (backup is Caesar's Palace in Vegas; Wrestlemania IX was exquisite, even though Hogan ruined it at the end.)
Commentators: Gorilla Monsoon and Bobby Heenan
Ring Announcer: The Fink (circa 1990)
Dark Match: Brian Pillman vs The Brian Kendrick
I know, I know. I said nine matches because that's a usual PPV, but I like the possibility of the Loose Cannon beating up on the modern-day version of himself. I think it would be a good back and forth match, no Big Zeke in sight and Pillman would walk away after about a five-six minute match after a flying body press.
Match 1: Demolition vs Legion of Doom
Again, not a pretty match, but a fun one to watch. Mr. Fuji is on the outside for Demolition and Paul Ellerling is in LOD's corner. Back and forth powerhouse match for about ten minutes. End comes when Fuji tries to use the cane and hits Smash instead. Doomsday Device. 1, 2, 3.
Match 2: The Ultimate Warrior vs Batista
How could I not? I mean, having these two this early in the show says a number of things. Number 1, I know my first match is nothing short of an attraction match. This one would get people on their feet, even though the match itself would be awful. That's reason number 2. We both know these guys are the exact same character twenty years apart and missing some face paint and arm bands. I think it would be a good powerhouse match with one or two high points. Even though it makes little sense, I'd give the edge to Batista with his horrible version of a power bomb. Match goes maybe eight minutes.
Match 3: Owen Hart vs Chris Jericho (2009 version)
Come on. The consummate whiner versus the consummate whiner. Owen was one of the best to ever enter the squared circle (I believe without a shadow of a doubt that he would have been better than Bret) and Jericho as of now is exactly what would have been Owen if he lived to see this day. This match would have a lot of high spots and good old fashioned wrestling. A sure crowd-pleaser. Owen wins with the sharpshooter after he counters the Walls of Jericho. Match goes close to fifteen.
Match 4: Intergenerational Money in the Bank Ladder Match
"Superfly" Jimmy Snuka vs Rob Van Dam vs Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat vs Shelton Benjamin vs Mr. Perfect vs "Rowdy" Roddy Piper
I couldn't resist. Talk about finding lifetime mid-carders and sticking them in against today's mid-carders. (I know, I know. Dragon was a world champ...but in NWA). This would be a good match, about twenty minutes long with some good spots. Snuka off a ladder with the splash, Benjamin's acrobatics, and Henning just being that guy. I was tempted to go with Punk instead of Shelton, but I am completely underwhelmed by his one trick pony matches. I think I'd go sentimental and give the win to Piper (and I'm talking 1986 Piper here) by shear luck after everyone else is done. And Piper is the heel, so it'd be fun to see him walk out with it.
Match 5: Jake "The Snake" Roberts vs Edge
I think this one speaks for itself. It's a good transition match between a high energy gimmick match and the last three main events. Jake is the good guy here, still has Damian and isn't 900 lbs. Edge is still Ultimate Opportunist, but this is as far as it goes for me for him. I can't see him as a main-eventer and I was almost tempted to put him in the Ladder Match. I think Jake gets the win with the DDT. Ten-fifteen minutes.
Match 6: Randy Orton vs Bret "Hitman" Hart
(Half-way point. No turning back.)
I couldn't resist. Hart had to be here somewhere, and Orton (2009 version) is without a doubt one of the best heels today. Mix that with the Bret Hart that had every fan eating out of his hands for how long and you get an amazing match. The surprise here is that Orton wins after about 20 mins.
Match 7: "Macho Man" Randy Savage vs "The Heartbreak Kid" Shawn Michaels
Again, couldn't resist. I'm talking Macho (circa 1988) versus Shawn (circa 1996-1997). This match is the show stealer, I think. Look at about fifteen minutes and look for Savage to win with the elbow. I can't imagine Savage losing, even though Shawn was at the top of his game.
Match 8: "Nature Boy" Ric Flair vs Triple H
This one needs little explanation. Ric Flair of the 80s versus Triple H now (or no later than 5 years ago.) I can see this one going about twenty five minutes and it would be amazing. I honestly think that next to the match before it, this would be the one to watch. The intensity of HHH and the wonderfully gifted trickery of Natch just means a good time for everyone. I give it to Flair because he ALWAYS finds a way to win.
Match 9: Fatal Four-Way for the WWF Title
Bruno Sammartino vs Hulk Hogan vs "Stone Cold" Steve Austin vs The Rock
Four icons from different times (sort of) battling it out for the WWF Title. (No WWE crap). Hogan, Austin and The Rock aren't even in the same class as Sammartino wrestling-wise, but they are the true draws of their generations. I think it would come down to just shear ability on Bruno's part that it's his match to lose, but a Stunner here, a Rock Bottom there, and of course the Leg Drop, I can't say for sure who would win. I think Sammartino should win, but I can't imagine Hogan not walking out victorious, based solely on the fact that I'm talking 1986-1989 Hogan here. Match would probably only go about fifteen minutes, but that doesn't matter, because no one expects an Iron Man Match.
*Who I left out: No Kurt Angle, Andre, Big Show, Dusty Rhodes, Sting, Rick Rude, Hardy's, DiBiase...Angle is the only one I kind of regret; he had no real place in my line-up, even though I thought about replacing Austin with him for about two seconds. DiBiase was hard for me too, but I could only validate putting him on as Money, Inc. with IRS and I think my tag match was better. Andre vs Big Show almost made it on instead of Warrior vs Batista, but I think the two muscleheads would be more entertaining than two big men. Also left off the Undertaker because I ran out of matches. I would have put him against Sting (the Crow version), but I stuck to WWF only...and he is the only opponent I would have like to see the Undertaker face.
I had fun with this and I've actually re-written it in my head about four different ways. I have no doubt that I will eventually redo this completely and send it on to Jay again. He sent me his back, and as always, I was impressed with his insights and ideas. Frankly, if he and I ever got up the courage to just apply to WWE or TNA, we could actually make wrestling entertaining once again...We're just that good (really, we are.)
"Simply put...if you could make a dream card of any wrestler at any point, playing any character ever...how would you do it? You must give reasons.
The rules:
1. You can only have a person on the card once. For example, you cannot have Cactus Jack wrestle Terry Funk, and then have Mankind wrestle Steve Austin. Only one match per person.
2. You can only have a MAX of 9 matches.
3. If you wish to name your show, give your announcers, who does the ring introductions, fine. Wish to have managers in corners, do that as well. It doesn't have to make sense, so if you want Bobby Heenan in the corner of The Ultimate Warrior, do so.
4. Give reasons to WHY you have the match the way you did.
5. No more than 3 gimmick matches allowed.
6. Feel free to give match results if you want, but you don't have to if you don't want.
Go.
This is interesting, and I know you've thought about it. I'll do it too. But I'm not sending mine until I get yours. But I won't read it until after I send mine. Just title your email as "My List" that way I know to send mine."
Below is my list.
Venue: Madison Square Garden (backup is Caesar's Palace in Vegas; Wrestlemania IX was exquisite, even though Hogan ruined it at the end.)
Commentators: Gorilla Monsoon and Bobby Heenan
Ring Announcer: The Fink (circa 1990)
Dark Match: Brian Pillman vs The Brian Kendrick
I know, I know. I said nine matches because that's a usual PPV, but I like the possibility of the Loose Cannon beating up on the modern-day version of himself. I think it would be a good back and forth match, no Big Zeke in sight and Pillman would walk away after about a five-six minute match after a flying body press.
Match 1: Demolition vs Legion of Doom
Again, not a pretty match, but a fun one to watch. Mr. Fuji is on the outside for Demolition and Paul Ellerling is in LOD's corner. Back and forth powerhouse match for about ten minutes. End comes when Fuji tries to use the cane and hits Smash instead. Doomsday Device. 1, 2, 3.
Match 2: The Ultimate Warrior vs Batista
How could I not? I mean, having these two this early in the show says a number of things. Number 1, I know my first match is nothing short of an attraction match. This one would get people on their feet, even though the match itself would be awful. That's reason number 2. We both know these guys are the exact same character twenty years apart and missing some face paint and arm bands. I think it would be a good powerhouse match with one or two high points. Even though it makes little sense, I'd give the edge to Batista with his horrible version of a power bomb. Match goes maybe eight minutes.
Match 3: Owen Hart vs Chris Jericho (2009 version)
Come on. The consummate whiner versus the consummate whiner. Owen was one of the best to ever enter the squared circle (I believe without a shadow of a doubt that he would have been better than Bret) and Jericho as of now is exactly what would have been Owen if he lived to see this day. This match would have a lot of high spots and good old fashioned wrestling. A sure crowd-pleaser. Owen wins with the sharpshooter after he counters the Walls of Jericho. Match goes close to fifteen.
Match 4: Intergenerational Money in the Bank Ladder Match
"Superfly" Jimmy Snuka vs Rob Van Dam vs Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat vs Shelton Benjamin vs Mr. Perfect vs "Rowdy" Roddy Piper
I couldn't resist. Talk about finding lifetime mid-carders and sticking them in against today's mid-carders. (I know, I know. Dragon was a world champ...but in NWA). This would be a good match, about twenty minutes long with some good spots. Snuka off a ladder with the splash, Benjamin's acrobatics, and Henning just being that guy. I was tempted to go with Punk instead of Shelton, but I am completely underwhelmed by his one trick pony matches. I think I'd go sentimental and give the win to Piper (and I'm talking 1986 Piper here) by shear luck after everyone else is done. And Piper is the heel, so it'd be fun to see him walk out with it.
Match 5: Jake "The Snake" Roberts vs Edge
I think this one speaks for itself. It's a good transition match between a high energy gimmick match and the last three main events. Jake is the good guy here, still has Damian and isn't 900 lbs. Edge is still Ultimate Opportunist, but this is as far as it goes for me for him. I can't see him as a main-eventer and I was almost tempted to put him in the Ladder Match. I think Jake gets the win with the DDT. Ten-fifteen minutes.
Match 6: Randy Orton vs Bret "Hitman" Hart
(Half-way point. No turning back.)
I couldn't resist. Hart had to be here somewhere, and Orton (2009 version) is without a doubt one of the best heels today. Mix that with the Bret Hart that had every fan eating out of his hands for how long and you get an amazing match. The surprise here is that Orton wins after about 20 mins.
Match 7: "Macho Man" Randy Savage vs "The Heartbreak Kid" Shawn Michaels
Again, couldn't resist. I'm talking Macho (circa 1988) versus Shawn (circa 1996-1997). This match is the show stealer, I think. Look at about fifteen minutes and look for Savage to win with the elbow. I can't imagine Savage losing, even though Shawn was at the top of his game.
Match 8: "Nature Boy" Ric Flair vs Triple H
This one needs little explanation. Ric Flair of the 80s versus Triple H now (or no later than 5 years ago.) I can see this one going about twenty five minutes and it would be amazing. I honestly think that next to the match before it, this would be the one to watch. The intensity of HHH and the wonderfully gifted trickery of Natch just means a good time for everyone. I give it to Flair because he ALWAYS finds a way to win.
Match 9: Fatal Four-Way for the WWF Title
Bruno Sammartino vs Hulk Hogan vs "Stone Cold" Steve Austin vs The Rock
Four icons from different times (sort of) battling it out for the WWF Title. (No WWE crap). Hogan, Austin and The Rock aren't even in the same class as Sammartino wrestling-wise, but they are the true draws of their generations. I think it would come down to just shear ability on Bruno's part that it's his match to lose, but a Stunner here, a Rock Bottom there, and of course the Leg Drop, I can't say for sure who would win. I think Sammartino should win, but I can't imagine Hogan not walking out victorious, based solely on the fact that I'm talking 1986-1989 Hogan here. Match would probably only go about fifteen minutes, but that doesn't matter, because no one expects an Iron Man Match.
*Who I left out: No Kurt Angle, Andre, Big Show, Dusty Rhodes, Sting, Rick Rude, Hardy's, DiBiase...Angle is the only one I kind of regret; he had no real place in my line-up, even though I thought about replacing Austin with him for about two seconds. DiBiase was hard for me too, but I could only validate putting him on as Money, Inc. with IRS and I think my tag match was better. Andre vs Big Show almost made it on instead of Warrior vs Batista, but I think the two muscleheads would be more entertaining than two big men. Also left off the Undertaker because I ran out of matches. I would have put him against Sting (the Crow version), but I stuck to WWF only...and he is the only opponent I would have like to see the Undertaker face.
I had fun with this and I've actually re-written it in my head about four different ways. I have no doubt that I will eventually redo this completely and send it on to Jay again. He sent me his back, and as always, I was impressed with his insights and ideas. Frankly, if he and I ever got up the courage to just apply to WWE or TNA, we could actually make wrestling entertaining once again...We're just that good (really, we are.)
11 February 2009
Alex Rodriguez
In 1920, baseball appointed Kenesaw Mountain Landis, a federal juge, the first Commissioner of Baseball. His first major decision was to ban nine men from playing professionally for the rest of their lives. The Black Sox Scandal, as it became to be known, was a major black-eye for the sport that helped define America in one of its most trying times. With the arrival of "Babe" Ruth and the rest of the powerhouse Yankees of the '20s and '30s, (among other factors), baseball was able to regain its footing and remain America's Pasttime.
In 1985, awareness of illegal drug activities came to light when nine Pittsburgh Pirate players were summoned to appear before a grand jury and later their testimony was used in what came to be known as The Pittsburgh Drug Trials. This drug trial led to the nation becoming aware of the heightening drug problems throughout the league, not just Pittsburgh. Amphetamines and marijuana, long thought to be in use in the Major Leagues were now all but confirmed. In 1986, Baseball Commissioner Peter Ueberroth suspended a number of players for varying amounts of time.
In 1989, baseball's all-time hits leader, Pete Rose, accepted a voluntary life-time ban from Major League Baseball. Even though he was given the opportunity to apply for reinstatement, he has been denied both times (in 1997 and 2003). Rose has admitted that he bet on the game and it remains to be seen if his ban will ever be lifted in his lifetime and if arguably one of the greatest hitters ever will be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame.
And of course, in 2007, the delivery of the voluminous "Mitchel Report," documented the alleged use of steroids and other drugs by a named 89 baseball players, most notably perhaps Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, and Roger Clemens. Though some players have vehemently denied use or at least knowingly using (Clemens, Bonds), the admittance of use by other players named (Andy Pettite comes to mind), leads many to believe that if nothing else, most denials are lies.
Now, where am I going with this? Simple. Alex Rodriguez, arguably the greatest player of his generation, has admitted to using performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) from 2001-2003. Now the questions loom as to how honest was he in his interview, how does it affect his legacy, etc.
The answer to these questions, I believe, are quite simple. It doesn't matter how honest he was and no, it categorically does not affect his legacy. In the same breath, I also don't think that anyone named in Senator Mitchell's report has to worry about their legacy. On the whole, Major League Baseball has been through some highly visibly, highly trying times in the history of the game. With the advent of sports as the defining American culture in the last ten years or so, we as fans have come to expect and accept to a degree that sports players are flawed. With nine cities/metropolitan areas supporting at least four major sports teams, with one supporting nine (NYC), one supporting six (the Bay area), and one five (Chicago), sports are our common interest. Even the lackadaisical, disinterested person still knows enough to watch a televised game to know who is playing and what is going on, at least by asking.
Think about how many professional athletes there are in the United States alone. Think again of how many foreign players immigrate to the United States just to play a game. There is no way that you are going to find a majority of "moral-bound" citizens playing in a sport. The need for a competitive edge is always there, especially considering the amount of dollars that are spent by the fan, and in turn are given to said players.
Did Rodriguez do something wrong? Yes. Will we as a society forgive him his trespass? Outwardly, no. We will vehemently deny him the right to be considered one of the greatest to ever play the game without an asterisk, much like we did with Barry Bonds breaking Hank Aaron's home run record. But on the inside, we will still know that he was good; very good, in fact. And that is the main idea in the steroid/PED argument: PEDs obviously give players some sort of edge competitively, but how much of an edge?
Alex Rodriguez is and always will be a great hitter. Roger Clemens is and always will be a great pitcher. The raw talent was always there. Their ability to hit and pitch to the best of their ability, and better than others was always there. Rodriguez hits for average and hits for power, but as a situational hitter in the playoffs, he's never paid off. If PEDs were the best thing ever, wouldn't he be a great hitter all of the time? The point is simple--he is a great hitter, he is extremely talented but he is human. He has his deficiencies as an athlete and probably (like the rest of us) as a human being. But that doesn't mean that he still isn't one of the greatest hitters of this generation...
And like every generation before him, there are problems with the game and problems with those who played it, even the great ones. To judge conclusively doesn't change that fact, nor does it change the fact that we as a society will still come back to the game...if for nothing else, the game itself.
In 1985, awareness of illegal drug activities came to light when nine Pittsburgh Pirate players were summoned to appear before a grand jury and later their testimony was used in what came to be known as The Pittsburgh Drug Trials. This drug trial led to the nation becoming aware of the heightening drug problems throughout the league, not just Pittsburgh. Amphetamines and marijuana, long thought to be in use in the Major Leagues were now all but confirmed. In 1986, Baseball Commissioner Peter Ueberroth suspended a number of players for varying amounts of time.
In 1989, baseball's all-time hits leader, Pete Rose, accepted a voluntary life-time ban from Major League Baseball. Even though he was given the opportunity to apply for reinstatement, he has been denied both times (in 1997 and 2003). Rose has admitted that he bet on the game and it remains to be seen if his ban will ever be lifted in his lifetime and if arguably one of the greatest hitters ever will be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame.
And of course, in 2007, the delivery of the voluminous "Mitchel Report," documented the alleged use of steroids and other drugs by a named 89 baseball players, most notably perhaps Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, and Roger Clemens. Though some players have vehemently denied use or at least knowingly using (Clemens, Bonds), the admittance of use by other players named (Andy Pettite comes to mind), leads many to believe that if nothing else, most denials are lies.
Now, where am I going with this? Simple. Alex Rodriguez, arguably the greatest player of his generation, has admitted to using performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) from 2001-2003. Now the questions loom as to how honest was he in his interview, how does it affect his legacy, etc.
The answer to these questions, I believe, are quite simple. It doesn't matter how honest he was and no, it categorically does not affect his legacy. In the same breath, I also don't think that anyone named in Senator Mitchell's report has to worry about their legacy. On the whole, Major League Baseball has been through some highly visibly, highly trying times in the history of the game. With the advent of sports as the defining American culture in the last ten years or so, we as fans have come to expect and accept to a degree that sports players are flawed. With nine cities/metropolitan areas supporting at least four major sports teams, with one supporting nine (NYC), one supporting six (the Bay area), and one five (Chicago), sports are our common interest. Even the lackadaisical, disinterested person still knows enough to watch a televised game to know who is playing and what is going on, at least by asking.
Think about how many professional athletes there are in the United States alone. Think again of how many foreign players immigrate to the United States just to play a game. There is no way that you are going to find a majority of "moral-bound" citizens playing in a sport. The need for a competitive edge is always there, especially considering the amount of dollars that are spent by the fan, and in turn are given to said players.
Did Rodriguez do something wrong? Yes. Will we as a society forgive him his trespass? Outwardly, no. We will vehemently deny him the right to be considered one of the greatest to ever play the game without an asterisk, much like we did with Barry Bonds breaking Hank Aaron's home run record. But on the inside, we will still know that he was good; very good, in fact. And that is the main idea in the steroid/PED argument: PEDs obviously give players some sort of edge competitively, but how much of an edge?
Alex Rodriguez is and always will be a great hitter. Roger Clemens is and always will be a great pitcher. The raw talent was always there. Their ability to hit and pitch to the best of their ability, and better than others was always there. Rodriguez hits for average and hits for power, but as a situational hitter in the playoffs, he's never paid off. If PEDs were the best thing ever, wouldn't he be a great hitter all of the time? The point is simple--he is a great hitter, he is extremely talented but he is human. He has his deficiencies as an athlete and probably (like the rest of us) as a human being. But that doesn't mean that he still isn't one of the greatest hitters of this generation...
And like every generation before him, there are problems with the game and problems with those who played it, even the great ones. To judge conclusively doesn't change that fact, nor does it change the fact that we as a society will still come back to the game...if for nothing else, the game itself.
03 February 2009
Hmmm
I actually gained two pounds from the last time I was at the doctor. The meds aren't really eating me up anymore, plus I think I'm learning how to eat...I'm just not very good at it. I'm not really feeling like a full update; that'll come sooner than later though. Hang in there. Hehe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
