What Brett Favre Should Be Remembered For

Favre’s Day

December 22, 2003

Oakland Raiders vs. Green Bay Packers

One of the defining moments of Brett Favre’s career and arguably his greatest game ever took place on Dec. 22, 2003, in a Monday Night Football game against the Oakland Raiders.

The day before, Brett’s father, Irvin Favre ran into a ditch near Kiln, MS—where years earlier, Brett Favre had nearly died in a car accident.

Favre chose to play the day after his father’s death.  He would pass for four touchdowns in the first half and 399 total yards in a 41–7 victory over the Raiders on international television—Favre even received applause from “Raider Nation.”

Afterwards, Favre said, “I knew that my dad would have wanted me to play. I love him so much and I love this game. It’s meant a great deal to me, to my dad, to my family, and I didn’t expect this kind of performance, but I know he was watching tonight.”

Favre earned the NFC Offensive Player of the Week for his performance.  He then attended his father’s funeral in Pass Christian, MS.  Favre would also win an ESPY Award for his Monday Night Football performance.

Memo to Tom Brady: Call Off Your Dogs (If They are Your Dogs)

I have recently come under intense scrutiny for my opinions and perceptions about Tom Brady and the New England Patriots.  Lately, I have been pursued and harassed by readers and writers on The Bleacher Report.

I needed to report that a user Andrew Cahill has made threats against me for my journalism about the Patriots.

In that, he posted on my BB, “You have no idea who you are messing with.  You have no right to come on my BB and post comments…” and,  “Oh, and Tom Brady is certainly watching you.”
 
I already blocked Mr. Cahill and the others, but I am concerned that others will continue to harass me.  Nevertheless, it is obvious that Mr. Cahill is connected to trollers that have harassed me: John Souza, Zachary Hueras, Steve Tellers, patriots rule, and a few others. 

All of whom, have no profile, no photo, no articles and only one favorite writer—Andrew Cahill.  Thus, there is a clear link between them.
 
From Andrew’s profile, he states that he is a Marine at Camp Pendleton, and yet, this seems to be gross conduct unbecoming on his part by virtue of being moral turpitude by disruption of a lawful assembly of persons. 

Thus, I hope if Mr. Cahill’s commanding officer is reading this, that they will consider an inquest in order to determine whether Mr. Cahill should be disciplined.

However, I wonder about the veracity of Mr. Cahill’s statement, “Oh, and Tom Brady is certainly watching you.”  Is Mr. Cahill just some kook, or is he connected to Tom Brady?  If and only if Mr. Cahill is connected to Brady: Did Brady request the actions of harassment and cyber stalking? 

It would not be the first time a pro-athlete retaliated against a journalist’s criticism.

Thus, if you Tom Brady, is truly asking others to stalk me, then I cordially request that you cease and desist, and that you instruct your trolls to do the same.

Obviously, I cannot prove a connection to Brady, but I am unwilling to hedge my bets, and thus formally state that the cyber-stalkers cease and desist.

I always insist that you can agree or disagree.

The Greatest Game Never Played: Oakland Raiders at New England Patriots

I make no bones about my criticism, but no one *must* agree.  I simply ask that you evaluate the veracity of the facts and my explanation of the facts.

However, like Tom Brady, I always persist.  As Brady was quoted by Judy Battista of the New York Times in 2002, “I just kept challenging him until I beat him. It’s like the tortoise and the hare. I was the tortoise.”

So am I.  But now you’re the hare. 

Thus, I will continue to report until the public at large understands how Spygate ran afoul of the NFL’s antitrust exemption, and the significance of Spygate by virtue of, “The Tuck Rule Game.” 

You can read the article at the included hyperlink, but the jist of that story is, to say that the Patriots did not cheat the Raiders in that game: does not make sense. 

It however, does make sense that Roger Goodell would cover up an issue of anti-trust, when there’s a connection to a man who has repeatedly pursued the NFL on anti-trust issues: Al Davis and the Raiders.

Furthermore, I have written everything from referring to Brady as a dirtbag, hustler and cheater to calling Boston fans racists for supporting a dirtbag, hustler and cheater in dystopian obedience for an imposter.  It’s not like Boston has a shining record on race relations in sports (i.e. Jim Rice).

Meanwhile, others like Pacman Jones get defamed by a league policy set-forth by Roger Goodell that should be reviewed for possible violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and should impugn the NFL antitrust exemption by wrongfully defaming players that should be afforded the right of innocent until proved guilty.

I realize that the NFL is an organization in which they can determine the rules for the players within their league.  The difference is, the NFL is a monopoly over football with an antitrust exemption from the US Congress.

Thus, by defaming a player like Pacman Jones with an arbitrary policy that has been an inordinate detriment to non-white players—the NFL is running afoul of their anti-trust exemption, because by the nature of their monopoly, they wrongfully deprived a player of his career reputation with a discriminatory policy.

In this country, we are supposed to be afforded the right of innocent until proved guilty, and the right to reclaim our reputation if proved not guilty.  Ray Lewis for instance was indicted for murder and aggravated assault in 2000 and was proved not guilty. 

The next year, Lewis won the Super Bowl MVP trophy with the Baltimore Ravens.  Lewis was given a chance to live it down.

Roger Goodell however, has been judge, jury, and executioner.

All I see with Pacman Jones is an incident in which he “made it rain” at a strip-club, and a series of subsequent incidents in which people likely understood Pacman’s reputation and thus manipulated it in order to get attention.

Certainly, Jones is a troubled player—chasing his demons like the demons chase the real Pacman.  In this country however, we are supposed to receive the right of a fair trial before being deprived of life, liberty or property. 

Yet, Goodell has trounced on a player that he felt damaged the reputation of the NFL and thus wrongfully exacerbated the troubles of Jones, but covered-up for a team (New England) that had truly undermined the integrity of the NFL.

The reason I believe that is because the rule has clearly been an inordinate detriment to non-white players, while the New England Patriots flagrantly undermined the integrity of the game and got a slap on the wrist, but also a new rule “The Brady Rule” to protect quarterbacks.

You would think that if the NFL would suspend a player for being around trouble, that they would also suspend a coach and quarterback for flagrantly undermining the integrity of the game.  But apparently not.

Some may assert the NFL’s record on equal opportunity in hiring by referring to the Rooney Rule, which has required that an NFL team must interview at least one minority candidate for a head-coach vacancy. 

Yet, the NFL did nothing when the Seattle Seahawks circumvented the Rooney Rule by naming Jim Mora Jr as their future head-coach, while Mike Holmgren still held the position.

Some have questioned my journalistic integrity.

Nowhere in the First Amendment does it say that a person cannot print their opinions, rhetoric and perceptions as journalism.

Paid journalists are inherently more irresponsible than I could ever be, because I receive no financial gain from it.  Paid journalists print slop in order to meet deadlines, and impugn bloggers to protect their egos.

Nowhere in the US Consitution does it say that a journalist must adhere to an arbitrary set of rules to determine credibility that were devised in order to receive compensation for journalism. 

The fact is, I receive nothing from this, other than to exercise my rights under the First Amendment of the US Constitution in order to enlighten others as to what I believe to be true.

If you disagree, that’s fine. 

All I ask is that you focus on the veracity of the facts and explanations, not motives.  The reason why is that I do not claim to know everything.  All I assert is: If I’m wrong, then prove it.

That’s why I included a poll in, “Why Tom Brady IS a Dirtbag.”  I’m probably in the minority on that statment, but that also scares me, because it is clear that Tom Brady has received a pass and excuses for his lack of ethics in the totality of his life, while others would be impugned for the same things (mainly, black people like Pacman Jones).

Frankly though, I do not want to be in the majority on *every issue,* because the majority can often times be wrong.  I think it is a healthy exercise of a writer’s integrity to fearlessly travail the waters of the minority, in order to exude that which you know to be true.

Even if no one is jostled to your point of view, you as a writer will only come away stronger by defending that which you know to be true. 

No pain, no gain.

Should Goodell and the NFL Boycott London for Crimes Against Humanity?

(This article has been significantly updated from the previous version)

 

May 6, 2009 is a date that will live in infamy, as the beginning of the end to free speech and free expression.

 

In a shocking move by British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, the British government has banned controversial talk-radio host Michael Savage, on the premise that Savage has promoted violence and inter-community tensions with his free speech.

 

The move was made to intentionally humiliate Michael Savage, author of multiple best-selling books and holder of a PhD and two masters degrees from the University of California.  In some ways, even some defenses have been inherently defamatory, simply by referring to Savage as a “shock jock.”

 

Yet, Savage has in the past, hosted a judge from the Nuremberg trials of Nazi’s to talk about the horrors of war and war crimes.  The horror of war and anarchy is the real theme that Savage emphasizes, even if his conclusions can be off the map.

 

The move has placed Savage amongst murderous terrorists and gangsters, mostly because Jacqui Smith didn’t like what Savage said in outrage after the attacks of September 11 2001 – hence the inclusion of the photo taken by me on September 01, 2001 from the Liberty Island Ferry.

 

Though I do not particularly agree with the opinions of Michael Savage, he certainly has a right to say them.   Surely though, we all said or thought things after September 11, 2001 that we would like to retract, modify or explain.

 

I believe that it is dangerous thinking to assume that someone’s rhetoric might cross a line to something violent or vandalistic, until it actually does.  That is a risk that any free society must take in order to ensure the freedom’s of everyone.

The fact also is, most sports are violent in nature, and yet we tolerate that and pay to see it.  Once a society has decided to retaliate against someone for their rhetoric because of something it might do: Where does it end?

All shades of left, right, and center (whether you like or dislike Savage) should all be horrified by this act of fascism by the British government. 

 

Has the British government committed an act of war and crime against humanity?

http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/ccno10.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_against_humanity

 

It is a crime against humanity regardless of whether the act was in accordance with your domestic laws.

 

There are no words (without being profane) that can accurately articulate how despicable the British government has been.

 

Even detractors of Savage have come to his defense, in this deplorable act by the British government that should remind even the most passive observer of why this country was founded as a rejection of the British government and based on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 

 

Frankly, the British government should be tried for crimes against humanity in their blow to free expression worldwide.

 

Jacqui Smith has also stated that it is a ‘privilege’ to enter Great Britain and therefore they can suppress the rights of a foreign national per government policy which would suggest that this will not be an isolated incident but a crime extending from a criminal policy of the British government.  Thus, their so-called ‘hate crime law’ is in fact, a crime against humanity. 

 

Please remember, I abhor racists and hatred; however, I accept that a free-society must allow for crackpots.  They cross the legal line when they commit violence or vandalism, not before.

 

It would also suggest that the British believe that it is a ‘privilege’ to be British.  Thus, I must wonder if Jacqui Smith plans to use this to open the door to the suppression of rights of all British people that are ‘privileged’ to be in her presence.

 

As I mentioned, this act by Smith is clearly a crime against humanity and should not only be tried civilly but also criminally.  It also borders on an act of war against the United States for retaliating against a US citizen for simply exercising his rights as guaranteed by the US Constitution and protected militarily by the government of the United States of America.

 

Should the British Also Ban the NFL and Roger Goodell?

 

This is the land of the free and the home of the brave.  And thanks to Jacqui Smith, we can all be reminded as to the reasons for the American Revolution.

 

In a quick aside, based on the logic of Jacqui Smith, Britain should also ban futbol and the World Cup.  Apparently, Smith has never seen a soccer riot, nor Diego Maradona’s “Hand of God.”

 

One could also argue that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has promoted a game of violence and inter-community tensions via televised propaganda and a false image that does nothing but promote violence and inter-community tensions for the purpose of gambling — by destroying evidence in regards to the Spygate scandal.

 

One could argue that because the NFL is exporting its mob-backed game of promoting violence and inter-community tensions to London, that it could foment tensions within their communities, a la sports rivalries.

 

I thus wanted to pose a question based on the logic of Jacqui Smith: Should NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell also be banned from Britain?

 

After all, the National Football League has promoted games of violence, and thus has fomented tensions between communities (i.e. New York and Boston).

 

The 1983 documentary by Frontline entitled The Unofficial History of the NFL has also shown the connection between the NFL and organized crime.

 

The NFL has attempted to expand its brand into London by hosting contests there in the past two seasons, and has guaranteed that London will host the Super Bowl. 

 

Thus, based on the logic of Jacqui Smith: Roger Goodell and the NFL should be banned from Great Britain.  It seems then that we NFL fans should boycott the British and the Super Bowl, in the event that London hosts a distinctly American game.

 

Let’s not turn this into a Who concert / Sympathy for the Savage

 

Moreover, based on the logic of Jacqui Smith, the British should also ban some of their greatest musicians, including The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Who, The Clash, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, The Police, The Kinks, Black Sabbath, U2 and The Sex Pistols — well, they did ban them to an extent.

 

The music of those bands has in the past, instigated violent acts and inter-community tensions in the United States, Great Britain and globally.

 

Though, many of you surely wouldn’t associate Michael Savage with your favorite musician, the principle is the same.  Michael Savage has done no more to promote violence or inter-community tensions than the aforementioned bands.

 

The Beatles once sang a song entitled “Run for Your Life” in which they sing, “Well I’d rather see you dead, little girl / Than to be with another man / You better keep your head, little girl / Or I won’t know where I am / You better run for your life if you can, little girl / Hide your head in the sand little girl / Catch you with another man / That’s the end’a little girl.

 

The Beatles also wrote “Helter Skelter” which became the moniker of the Charles Manson cult, while many prepubescent youngsters have been known to act wildly irrational because of The Beatles (see, clips from Ed Sullivan Show).

 

U2 has evoked my anger when I listen to “Pride” and “Sunday, Bloody, Sunday.” 

 

The Sex Pistols have sang about “Anarchy in the UK.”

 

The Police have sung about paranoid stalkers in “Every Breath You Take.” 

 

The Clash sang about London at war in “London Calling.” 

 

Eleven people were trampled to death at a Who concert in 1979. 

 

The Rolling Stones conscripted Hell’s Angels to act as security at the Altamont Rock concert in 1969, which led to several intentional and unintentional deaths; The Rolling Stones have also evoked images of death and rape in “Gimme Shelter.” 

 

I think you get the point.

 

Should the NFL Boycott London for Crimes against Humanity?

 

Perhaps, the best solution to the atrocious acts by the British government, would be to boycott all-things British. 

 

That would include the city of London and the rights to host the Super Bowl.

 

And that if Roger Goodell cannot take up this issue on his own volition, we NFL fans should boycott the NFL in the interests of all things decent and right.

First they came…

 

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

Then they locked up the social democrats
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.

Related Articles:

The Truth of Victory and Tangents on Trivial Things

The Greatest Game Never Played: Oakland Raiders @ New England Patriots

 

Appendix:

Crimes against Humanity. Atrocities and offences, including but not limited to murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, imprisonment, torture, rape, or other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds whether or not in violation of the domestic laws of the country where perpetrated. . . .

http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/ccno10.htm

 

Crimes against humanity, as defined by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Explanatory Memorandum, “are particularly odious offences in that they constitute a serious attack on human dignityor grave humiliation or a degradation of one or more human beings. They are not isolated or sporadic events, but are part either of a government policy(although the perpetrators need not identify themselves with this policy) or of a wide practice of atrocities tolerated or condoned by a government or a de facto authority. Murder, extermination, torture, rape, political, racial, or religious persecution and other inhumane acts reach the threshold of crimes against humanity only if they are part of a widespread or systematic practice. Isolated inhumane acts of this nature may constitute grave infringements of human rights, or depending on the circumstances, war crimes, but may fall short of falling into the category of crimes under discussion.”^[1]

 

“Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated”.^{[4] [5]}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_against_humanity

Should the Raiders, Bengals, and Bills Convert to the 3-4?

In going through my routine of updating all my notes on NFL teams (I have extensive notes), I started to wonder about the direction of the defense for three clubs:  the Raiders, Bengals and Bills.

On paper, these teams appear to have personnel better suited for the 3-4 alignment. However, because I do not have an up-close-and-personal knowledge or relationship with those players, I do not know if the 3-4 would fit their skill sets rather than just their sizes and the lack of a true pass rush from the down linemen.

I must emphasize that in the 3-4, the down linemen are mostly occupiers rather than playmakers, so as long as they free up the linebackers, then they have *usually* succeeded at their job.

Each of these teams could then acquire Julius Peppers by trade.  The Raiders could offer DE Derrick Burgess, while the Bengals could offer rookie DE Michael Johnson and a draft pick, while the Bills would probably have to offer a package of draft picks.

The Oakland Raiders

In the draft, they made some scratch their heads.  I say let the players decide that on the field before making broad generalizations.  Anyway, the Raiders selected DE Matt Shaughnessy, DE Stryker Sulak, and DE Slade Norris, all of whom have the size to play linebacker, especially in the 3-4.

On the defensive line, Gerard Warren and Terdell Sands have the right size to play the nose, and Jay Richardson and Tommy Kelly could play ends. 

There is also the question of whether new Raiders defensive coordinator John Marshall is comfortable with the 3-4.  From his bio on Raiders.com, he has spent most of his career working with linebackers, which would be conducive to the 3-4, but the bottom line is I’m not sure that Marshall is interested in the 3-4.

Conclusion: Al Davis is no stranger to the 3-4, so if he wants it, he’ll get it.

The Cincinnati Bengals

The Bengals had an above-average defense in 2008, despite their record.  However, they lacked a pass-rush force from starting defensive ends Robert Geathers and Antwan Odom, while the backups were virtually non-existent.

With Jonathan Fanene, Domata Peko, and Tank Johnson, they have a trio that has the size to play the 3-4.  Meanwhile, Antwan Odom looks like he could transition to rush linebacker.

The Bengals selected ILB Rey Maualuga and DE Michael Johnson in the second and third round of the 2009 NFL Draft.  Maualuga would fit well in the 3-4, but I’m not certain about Michael Johnson.

Conclusion: The 3-4 makes sense for their personnel, but their draft selection of Michael Johnson seems to conflict with the 3-4.

The Buffalo Bills

The Bills selected DE Aaron Maybin from Penn State in the 2009 NFL Draft, who has been projected as a linebacker in the 3-4.  However, Maybin is similar in size to current Bills defensive end, Aaron Schobel, yet the Bills have remained with the 4-3.

Nevertheless, DT Marcus Stroud has the size to play nose, while struggling 2006 first round pick DT John McCargo might be a better fit as an end in the 3-4.  Moreover, DT Kyle Williams could fit well as an end in the 3-4.

The Bills have two linebackers capable of playing the inside with Paul Posluszny and John DiGiorgio, while Kawika Mitchell seems capable of playing outside linebacker opposite to Aaron Maybin.

Conclusion: I’m not sure if coach Dick Jauron is interested in converting to the 3-4, but I think Buffalo needs to be more explosive defensively in order to temper an offense with a questionable offensive-line.

The Truth About the New England Patriots and Racist Idiots

To all of you Patriot fans and defenders:

You are certainly entitled to the right of defending Tom Brady and the Patriots; yet I am also entitled to the right of stating what I believe. I will warn you though, before you make asinine insults and comments about my article being “trash,” or (fill in the blank): I take your rebukes as badges of honor, so it is futile to think you can eviscerate my confidence in what I believe as true with your trash talk.

Any person that claims to be unbiased is a liar. Thus, I own my bias, so I willingly tell people that I loathe everything about the New England Patriots. Nevertheless, you can still make a fair argument based on the rules of sophistry.  No one can truly escape their own bias, but they can make an effort to be fair to their opponent with rules of sophistry.

I apologize if you feel loathed because of that, but it is ultimately your choice to be a Patriots fan, as it is my choice to revile the Patriots organization.  I do not however, loathe all New England or Boston fans — just those who cannot cry foul when their teams have cheated, and in effect, cheated the sports world.  New England fans are those who must demand change, so: Why are you afraid of that?

I despise those who have defended the Patriots for cheating because, “everybody does it.”  If you can prove that ‘everybody does it’, why is not every team penalized?  Thus, in order to defend the vile Patriots, one must defame the other 31 teams for something that you cannot prove.

“Why did Spygate matter— and prove the affects?” 

Here you go.  In watching nearly every New England postseason game since 2001, every time is the same deal.  The Patriots offense looks like slop, until they *magically* pull together a winning drive.

As I see it, the Patriots merely hustle the opponent as long as possible, stealing signals as they go; until they *magically* pull together a winning drive.  Gee, I wonder why they could muster perfect drives on offense after looking like slop.

As I also see it, Brady has cheated his own son, and that is just a microcosm of what Brady and the Pats have done to millions of NFL fans, many of whom are innocent children.

I also remain convinced that when white people cheat, people make excuses. 

For example, the public knew that Mark McGwire used steroids in 1998 yet the public did not care even after he broke the single-season HR record.  In 2001, Barry Bonds broke the same record — and fans started to cry foul. 

People make excuses of ‘legal’ or ‘illegal’ for their hatred of the black man, when the reality is, both McGwire and Bonds did the same thing in creating a false image of being naturally gifted.  For most of Bonds’ career, he did not use steroids and weighed around 180 before shooting up to 220. 

If you ask me, Bonds merely became jealous of the attention that McGwire received and thus did the same thing, thinking that the public would not care. 

I still remember the home run race in July of 1998, when it was considered between Bonds, McGwire and Sammy Sosa before Bonds fell off the radar. 

So Bonds saw how McGwire did it, and did the same. Bonds must have thought racism was dead, when it truly is still kicking and screaming.

In a qualitative twist, it is funny that Tom Brady and Barry Bonds went to the same high school. 

Yet, the public will rail about Barry Bonds, but make excuses for Brady because, “everybody does it.”  What is the difference—apparently many people cheated with steroids, not just Bonds?  Bonds has stolen records, and Brady has stolen championships.

If you ask me, it is just sublimated racism.  If you think that is just nonsense then consider that, the Republican Party of Lee Atwater intentionally sublimated the racism of the South. (By the way, Karl Rove learned his tactics from Atwater.)

Atwater, having come from South Carolina, understood the politics of the South.  He knew that voters would vote for Democrats even though they were deeply racist.  Yet as far as Atwater’s concern went, he just wanted to win. 

Therefore, instead of using the n-word, he replaced it with “states rights” and “forced busing.” Moreover, Atwater intentionally made political hay in 1988 from the case of Willie Horton—a convicted murderer—who had committed another murder while on furlough from a Massachusetts prison under Governor Michael Dukakis. 

Atwater knew that the ad was to sublimate racism by singling out a black criminal (as if only black people commit crime) by making people think they were just rejecting a criminal and being tough on crime.

When really they were just scared of black people.  Yet, Atwater did not care because he knew what would win…and George HW Bush won in a landslide in 1988 after being far behind in the polls.

As for Barack Obama, I think he had the good fortune that the son of George HW Bush was just an incompetent buffoon.

Why do you have to paint a big picture of racism; are just some bleeding heart? 

The reality is, people are still racists in this country, they just find convenient excuses.
Look at Pete Prisco of Sportsline.com.

He once made a list of “Best Offenses in NFL History” and refused to consider the 1999 Vikings (second best in terms of numbers and had Randy Moss, just as the 2007 Patriots did). 

The 1999 Vikings were *coincidentally* dominated by black people (Dennis Green, Daunte Culpepper, Robert Smith, Cris Carter, Randy Moss, Korey Stringer).  Nevertheless, it did not fit Prisco’s vision of (fill in the blank).

I am no bleeding heart either.  I will verbally lacerate any cretin of an insipid mind.

References:

Boogey Man: The Lee Atwater Story, Frontline, PBS, 2008

Sportsline.com; Prisco, Pete

How the Patriots Have Copied the Oakland Raiders

This is a multi-faceted argument on why the Hall of Fame has shortchanged the legacy of the Raiders, the problems of cheating, and why the legacy of the Raiders is still alive and well, just in a different team…The New England Patriots.

One reason that the NFL writers have shortchanged the Raiders is that they often emphasize players with a long and trivial career of statistics (i.e. Dan Marino), or relatively short careers in which a player achieved greatness with statistics (i.e. Steve Young). 

The writers (i.e. Peter King) then denigrate players that had relatively short careers, but achieved greatness (i.e. Jim Plunkett) without trivial statistics, or long careers of ho-hum yet significant stats that contributed to greatness (i.e. Cliff Branch). 

See if I care—yes, I think that Dan Marino’s career was trivial and not truly significant, only with the exception that he led the Dolphins to prevent perfection by the 1985 Bears. 

Marino’s career amounted to nothing more than a pile of dirt in the record book. 

Words cannot articulate my vehemence for the glorification of Dan Marino (without being profane). 

Yes, my vehemence does not bother me when writers like Peter King refer to the career of Jim Plunkett as, “mediocre.”

The reality—Marino was mediocre and Plunkett was great. 

Save for all the lame excuses of the Marino bandwagon—the reason they would lose is because Marino did not trust his teammates, thus they did not trust themselves. 

Marino was nothing more than a me first player in football, as Allen Iverson was in basketball. 

In other words, people make excuses for white me first players that lose, yet accuse non-white me-first players that lose of being ball hogs. 

Marino was a ball hog who had little faith in the team. 

Frankly, I think Trent Dilfer had a greater career than Dan Marino did. 

If Dan Marino is reading this—send your hate mail to Peter King of Sports Illustrated; I only decided to make this point because of King’s insipid mind. 

With that said—Marino belongs in the Hall of Fame, but I truly do believe that other players are just as deserving (if not more so).

Then they wonder why players would run up the stats when they lose rather than emphasize the significance of their career.  Individual stats are insignificant because they change as fluidly as the bonds of H20. 

Championships never die.

Cheating is really just the act of taking advantage of someone else’s work, challenges, temptations, or blurring the success of others to enhance your own, and in turn calling the “success” your own. 

Someone like Al Davis though, has made it to the point of his career to uplift the players that had been used for the success of others. 

Meanwhile, the sports media has tried their hardest to say that it was Davis and only Davis, even to the detriment of someone like Tom Flores.

In the abstract, slavery was a form of cheating— so yes, it does matter how you “get it.”

Thus, I have little sympathy for the sports media because they perpetuate the catch 22 that statistics will equal greatness.  I know that many of those in the sports media have a better conscious than that, but temptations often blind them rather than permit them to see and pursue the truth (conscious does make cowards of us all). 

Or they ask: What is truth?

When people emphasize numbers over all else, I start to question the integrity of those numbers. 

For instance, I have known plenty of people who had 4.0 GPAs that cheated or had their grades changed.

They emphasize the one area of study that is of most importance to them, and then fill in the rest with cheating or phony disabilities (like how athletes pretend to have asthma in order to use steroids), because well, they figure they do not need to “learn” things that they will not use in their career of choice.

Except their integrity…just ask AIG.

Therefore, when writers emphasize stats, I start to wonder: Did you “pay your dues” in college by cheating? 

When people assert that the product is all that matters, I then question their process.

I have known the types of cheaters.

Some might bribe contractors with free stuff in order to stuff customer surveys with positive reviews but no comments, while others are bullied into getting positive reviews with comments in order to create the misinformation needed to cover the tracks (yes, I was alluding to The Home Depot in Liberty Lake). 

All the while, the truth of the deception and corruption is under the nose—when people’s injuries occur because of mistakes made by on-the-clock alcoholics that have created a facade of success with inflated facts, get hurt, or make mistakes because they have been severely abused emotionally and can no longer focus. 

Such as, the former reconnaissance marine led to believe he was, “not worth a damn thing.” 

If they can break him, they can break anyone. 

Such as, the firefighter who had the store under investigation in order to protect the job he needed to help his terminally ill mother, and the army soldier who needed to schedule consideration to spend time with his family before leaving for Iraq, yet had that request denied.

Instead, the drunks expect the sober to correct the safety issues made by their behavior, and in effect, to babysit for self-medicating white trash that claim victory over undiagnosed problems, and then denigrate the real ailments of others through their delusions.

It seems like a form of hypochondria: Self-medicate for a problem you do not have or that you think is more severe than it actually is, and then “spit on” the people with real ailments and fail to rise to the level of your own delusions.

Instead, a place like THD will protect an unstable drunk named Dale Brink who sexually assaulted a pregnant woman (Jan. 23, 2008) or that enjoys the reckless endangerment of himself and others by, “Drinking heavily and driving my motorcycle,” because he was/is a critical part of THDs smoke and mirrors—during these difficult economic times in which THD has been slammed.

Alternatively, THD will protect a dirt bag who wanted to be a cop, Andrew Wilkerson, who damaged property while drunk on a forklift (April 28, 2008). 

He also liked to see “not white” people go to jail.  I knew that because he wanted to switch shifts with me in order to watch the sentencing of, “not white” people that broke into his wife’s car in 2007. 

He muttered that under his breath, but I heard what he said. 

Unfortunately, racism is still kicking and screaming in this country thanks to sad sacs filled with self-pity that cannot identify with any person of a different race. 

All that a person must do is consider the NFL’s treatment against Pacman Jones for merely being *around* trouble, while the NFL has done nothing to players that cause trouble, like Matt Leinart, and that have been photographed inflicting dangerous behavior onto others. 

All I hear is “Atta boy,” from the egos of white trash in regards to people like quarterback Matt Leinart or quarterback Tom Brady, and in all sadistic irony, use people like Pacman Jones to earn brownie points. 

In other words, Pacman Jones would have been suspended for being *around* Matt Leinart, but Leinart would have received a pat on the back.

Before the end of your silent cognition, yes, you really do that. 

What has Pacman Jones truly been guilty of other than bad timing or being around people that manipulate his manufactured reputation, and thus take advantage of it, and the wasting of money foolishly given to him by NFL execs? 

Meanwhile, the NFL went ahead and made more rules to protect the predominantly white position of quarterback with the Tom Brady Rule.

Apparently though, the white trash of this country have been so blinded by their own racism that they would allow others to endanger the health of someone that could be their daughter.

All thanks to the sheep in the sports media that would rather tow the NFL line in order to protect their job rather than see and pursue the truth.

True cheating (like me first players) is insidious and truly detrimental to all that it truly means to be American (or is it?). 

Yes to, thanks to The Home Depot in Liberty Lake—I do believe that The Home Depot is the antithesis of America’s principles and heroes (or do they?) and should be shunned by the masses. 

That though, is ultimately your choice. 

Maybe I am wrong, but I do not think so. 

You tell me then. 

If you do resort to name calling, at least support it with a bevy of facts rather than just rhetoric.

I can hear the smirks about, “Just Win, Baby,” already, but on honest inspection, you will see that the Raiders had a justifiable process that led to the product of their success.

Though the Pro Football Hall of Fame has inducted many former Raiders, I remain convinced that the writers have shortchanged the Raiders. 

For one, the voters continue to assert that the Raiders do not deserve a quarterback in the Hall of Fame because they were just the result of the Al Davis system. 

Just forget to tell that to Todd Marinovich or Jeff George.

Another argument that has prevented the induction of American football’s greatest punter, Ray Guy, is that special teamers do not spend enough time on the field to warrant recognition in the Hall of Fame because their importance *must* be minimal. 

Just forget to tell that to Al Davis, Marv Levy, Bill Belichik, Bill Parcels, or Dick Vermeil among others—all of whom were mavericks that emphasized special teams which allowed for the situations needed for the stars to make big plays.

Another argument has denigrated the value of Raider coaches in favor of Al Davis, being the idea that any coach could succeed with Al Davis. 

Just forget to tell that to Mike White, Joe Bugel, or Lane Kiffin. 

Realistically, those were the only total flops in the NFL by Davis(though Bugel succeeded before then with the Redskins). 

Other coaches have been the recipient of Davis’ iron fist, or turned off by his omnipotence over the Raiders yet succeeded elsewhere: Mike Shanahan, Jon Gruden, Sean Payton, Norv Turner, and Ken Whisenhunt.

The bottom line is the voters have asserted a false axiom for success with Al Davis.

“If you play for Davis, then your success will be inflated by the Davis system.” 

If that were true, then those players and coaches would have succeeded. 

Maybe Davis was just preoccupied with litigation at that time in the late nineties after returning from Los Angeles…

On the other hand…

Okay, so the flops I have referenced came from the past 25 years as opposed to the previous 25 years. 

To me, many in the sports media have tried to create a perception of Before & After about Al Davis, which I know to be false.

Sure, Davis has been stubborn and impatient ever since he canned coach Art Shell in 1994 (and again in 2007 and has since appeared to change course), but at the same time, the Raiders won three Super Bowls under Davis and humiliated the predetermined greats of the media (like the Chargers of Dan Fouts) in doing so.

The other reality is that the Raiders of the 1990s were not abysmal as the sports media has now tried to project. 

They were a middle pack team with one of the toughest schedules in the NFL. 

A schedule that at times included two meetings against the John Elway/Terrell Davis Broncos, the Joe Montana Chiefs, the Junior Seau Chargers, and the meddlesome Seahawks who made it a point to defeat the Raiders in Seattle after the humiliations of the Bo Jackson game and the 1983-1984 AFC Championship Game.

The reason I know that the collective conscious of the sports media has been wrong about Al Davis is because the ways of Davis are still alive and well…just on a different team: The New England Patriots. 

With an exception for Draft strategies, a saber rattling owner, and a few players of super accolades—the *business model* for the Patriots under Robert Kraft and Bill Belichik has been nearly identical to that of the Raiders between 1965 and 1985. 

Now you know why I love to give Patriot fans a hard time. 

They love to gloat about how the Patriots won, pretend it was fair and square, and disrespect the legacy of the Raiders mainly because of the Ben Dreith Game. 

The reality, however, is the Tuck Rule Game stole more than just a win from the Raiders. 

Thus, I make an effort to hammer the truth about the Patriots every time they spin lies about the Raiders.

The Pats became *doppelgangers* of the Raiders that plagiarized the Raider blueprint from their days of Super Bowl greatness and have since called it their own. 

Yet, no one in the sports media has made that association because his/her own lies have blinded him/her to the truth about Al Davis.

The Patriots, like the Raiders, have lived and breathed as an offense on the utilization of two tight ends, all purpose running backs, a fast flanker, a possession split end, and a crafty (or “snake like”) quarterback that is protected by an efficient offensive line who like to score quickly and then grind it out.

On defense, the Patriots, like the Raiders, have succeeded with discarded yet crafty veterans, athletic youth, and big bodies of efficiency. 

More specifically, by an emphasis on linebackers; a secondary that has blended speed, craft and hard hits; an efficient defensive line; and situational players that can pull a rabbit from their hat.

Under all of that, there have been special teams units that have not only provided an advantage in field position and trick plays but also clutch wins. 

Why am I the only one reminded of George Blanda when I consider the career of Adam Vinatieri in New England? 

Okay, so Vinatieri never played quarterback, but I think the similarities between the clutch plays by those two is undeniable.

You cannot disregard the fact that both the Raiders and Patriots have been consistent in their disfavor for players that think they are above the team, and for rehabilitating the careers of troubled players and turning them into winners.

Do I really need to do a player-by-player comparison in order to prove the truth of my statements? 

An honest look at the Raiders between 1965 and 1985 and the Patriots since 2001 can prove that organically, especially when you consider the winning percentages.

The big difference however between the Raiders and Pats was that when the Raiders played fast and loose with the rules, it was justifiable subterfuge of an unjust rulebook that protected predominantly white players.

Technically they never *broke” rules, but rather they forced changes of the rulebook. 

When the Patriots undermined the rulebook, however; it was for no reason but selfish gain. 

Moreover, the NFL has changed the rulebook because of the Patriots, but for more of the same, by protecting predominantly white players from the violence of the game (i.e. the Tom Brady rule).

Here then, are my choices for former Raiders that indubitably deserve induction into the Hall of Fame. 

Most sports writers seem to apply a standard of, could this player have been successful anywhere, regardless of Super Bowl wins?

I, however, apply a different standard: How successful were you on your team and within the NFL in a year or time period where your team won the Super Bowl (because you had to be the best of the best)?

People defend and elevate Dan Marino with “ifs”: if he had a running game, if he had a defense—then maybe he would have won the Super Bowl. 

Meanwhile, the writers denigrate players that actually won the Super Bowl by having successful teammates (i.e. Terrell Davis). 

Bottom line is Marino did not win.

 

Ken Stabler, QB

Super Bowl Champion, 1976; NFL MVP, 1974; four time Pro Bowler, two time All-Pro, NFL All-Decade Team of the 1970s; led NFL in passer rating, 1976; led NFL in yards per game, 1976; led NFL in passing touchdowns in 1974, 1976; led NFL in completion percentage, 1973, 1976; one of the most storied quarterbacks in NFL (and NCAA) history; pioneer of “ugly wins.” 

The Raiders won 72 percent (69-26-1) of games that Stabler started; all time passing leader for Raiders.

Probably the most awarded and deserving quarterback to be outside the Hall of Fame. 

You cannot mention the greats at the position of quarterback without mentioning Ken Stabler.

In a career with the Raiders that spanned from 1970 to 1978, Stabler won the award for NFL MVP in 1976, and outperformed the likes of Hall of Fame quarterbacks Terry Bradshaw and Roger Staubach, both named to the NFL All-Decade Team of the 1970s along with Ken Stabler. 

He was also recognized for being the Most Valuable Player in a season that the Raiders dominated (with a record of 13-1), and won the Super Bowl with go to receiver Cliff Branch.

Stabler is also one of the most storied quarterbacks in NFL history for his role in legendary Raiders wins such as: “The Sea of Hands,” “The Ghost to the Post,” “The Holy Roller,” and his nickname of, “The Snake.” 

Stabler also played his first game as a Raider during “The Immaculate Reception” game.

 

Jim Plunkett, QB

Super Bowl Champion, 1980, 1983; 1971 AFL Rookie of the Year; 1980 Comeback Player of the Year; pioneer of game manager concept. 

The Raiders won 66 percent (38-19) of games started by Plunkett.

In a career with the Raiders that spanned from 1979 to 1986, Plunkett became the starter for the Raiders in 1980 after outperforming Dan Pastorini (whom the Raiders had acquired in trade for Ken Stabler). 

Plunkett also overcame a history of bad knees and the drama of the Raiders move to Los Angeles to lead Super Bowl victories in 1980 and 1983.

Plunkett’s career epitomized that of a crafty game manager at quarterback who could defeat even the best by spreading the ball around with go to receivers in Bob Chandler and Todd Christensen, and the big play ability of Cliff Branch. 

Plunkett out dueled Hall of Fame quarterback Dan Fouts in the 1980-1981 AFC Championship game en root to winning the Super Bowl. 

Plunkett would also lead the Raiders to victory in the storied “Red Right 88” game of the said postseason. 

Moreover, Plunkett out dueled Redskins legend, Joe Theisman in the 1983-1984 Super Bowl, and Hall of Fame quarterback Terry Bradshaw in the same postseason. 

Some look at the success of Al Davis, Art Shell, Gene Upshaw, and Todd Christensen as the explanation for Plunkett’s success—when Plunkett’s go to receiver in 1980 for touchdowns and receptions was Bob Chandler.

 

Daryle Lamonica, QB

AFL Champion, 1967; AFL MVP, 1967, 1969; five time ProBowler, two time All-Pro; led NFL in winning percentage as quarterback in 1960s; led AFL in passing touchdowns in 1967, 1969; pioneer of the deep pass and thus the modern game. 

The Raiders won 72 percent (63-16-6) of games started by Lamonica.

In a career that spanned from 1963 to 1974 with the Buffalo Bills and Oakland Raiders, Lamonica would help pave the way for the deep pass in the NFL en root to victory in the AFL Championship of 1967, and an appearance in Super Bowl II of 1967 as, “The Mad Bomber.”

 

Ray Guy, P

Super Bowl Champion, 1976, 1980, 1983; seven time Pro Bowler, eight time All-Pro, NFL All-Decade Team of the 1970s, NFL 75th Anniversary Team; most storied punter in NFL history; award for Best Punter bares his name

Another consummate player, but this one played on special teams. 

In my mind, no player changed the view of special teams more than Ray Guy did. 

Special teams would be the cornerstones for maverick coaches like Bill Parcels, Dick Vermeil, Bill Belichik, and Marv Levy.

A first round pick in 1973 from Southern Mississippi, Guy would dominate his position for most of his career and would make significant contributions to the Raiders in the years they won the Super Bowl—1976, 1980 and 1983.

 

Tom Flores, quarterback/coach

Super Bowl Champion, 1980, 1983; first Hispanic-American to play quarterback, 1960; first Hispanic-American named as coach in NFL, 1979; first Hispanic-American to coach Super Bowl winner, 1983; pioneer for minority quarterbacks during Civil Rights movement, and later for minority coaches.

In certain cases, being a pioneer is significant. 

Some players or coaches changed the game offensively, defensively, or on special teams. 

Tom Flores, however, helped change the NFL in the greater context of culture (yes, that is an accomplishment), especially when you consider that Flores did so with the Raiders at the height of the Civil and Labor Rights movements in the 1960s.

Moreover, however, the success of Flores is more than just one of a cultural impact. 

Flores would also earn a Super Bowl ring in 1976 as an assistant under Hall of Famer John Madden, and as coach of the Raiders in 1980 and 1983.

 

Cliff Branch, WR

Super Bowl Champion, 1976, 1980, 1983; four time Pro Bowler, four time All-Pro; led NFL in receiving yards, 1974; led NFL in receiving touchdowns, 1974, 1976; led NFL in yards per game, 1974, 1976; led NFL with longest catch, 1976, 1983. 

Led the Raiders in receiving yards 1974, 1975, 1976, 1976, 1980, and 1982; led the Raiders in receiving touchdowns 1974, 1975, 1976, t-1977, and t-1982; led the Raiders in receptions 1974, 1975, 1979; longest reception in Raiders history, 1983.

The consummate deep threat, Cliff Branch, would dominate his position in the NFL in 1976 as a go to receiver for 1976’s NFL MVP, Ken Stabler, and thus set Branch apart from Raiders Hall of Fame wide receiver, Fred Biletnikoff (even though Biletnikoff won the Super Bowl MVP award that year).

In a career with the Raiders that spanned from 1972 to 1985, Branch would also make significant contributions to the Raiders when they won the Super Bowl in 1980 and 1983. 

When you look at the numbers, Cliff Branch in fact was the go to receiver for Ken Stabler, while Fred Biletnikoff had been the go to receiver for Daryle Lamonica.

 

Todd Christensen, TE

Super Bowl Champion, 1983; five time ProBowler, two time All-Pro; led NFL in receptions, 1983 and 1986.  Led Raiders in receptions, 1983, 1984, 1985, and 1986; led Raiders in receiving yards, 1983, 1984, 1985, and 1986; led Raiders in touchdown receptions, 1983, 1984, 1985, and t-1986.

The consummate triple crown receiver for the Raiders, Christensen not only led the Raiders in three major receiving categories between 1983 and 1986, but also the NFL in receptions in 1983 and 1986.

Christensen outperformed Hall of Fame tight end, Kellen Winslow in the three categories of receiving yards, receptions, and touchdown receptions in 1983 as he dominated the NFL and served as go to receiver for Jim Plunkett. 

The Raiders won the Super Bowl in 1983, thus, Christensen was the best tight end in the NFL the year that the Raiders won the Super Bowl, and performed at a high level for five seasons in a career that spanned in totality from 1980 to 1988.

 

Tim Brown, WR

Nine time ProBowler, second All-Pro, six time All-AFC; NFL All-Decade Team for the 1990s. 

Third overall in NFL for reception yards; fourth overall in NFL history for receptions; t-sixth overall in NFL for touchdown receptions. 

All-time leader for Raiders in reception yards, reception-touchdowns and receptions.

Normally, I prefer that a player had won the Super Bowl, but Tim Brown was easily the best receiver of the AFC during the 1990s and early millennium, in which the Raiders appeared in the AFC Championship game in 1990, 2000, and won in 2002.

Keep in mind that Brown also did this in a tumultuous period in which the Raiders returned from Los Angeles to Oakland in 1995, and in which Brown lacked stability at quarterback (Jeff Hostettler, Jay Schroeder, and Jeff George) until Jon Gruden and Rich Gannon entered Oakland in 1998.

Technically Former Raiders (Spent most of their career with another team)

Jerry Rice, WR

Roger Craig, FB-HB

Max Montoya, RG

Greg Pruitt, RB-RS

 

Honorable Mention

Rich Gannon, QB

Art Powell, WR

Jack Tatum, S

Charles Woodson, CB

Lester Hayes, CB

Terry McDaniel, CB

George Atkinson, RS-S

ChesterMcGlockton, DL

Greg Townsend, DE-LB

Steve Wisniewski, G

Lincoln Kennedy, RT

Henry Lawrence, RT

Dave Dalby, G-C

Don Mosebar, C

Bo Jackson, HB

Mark Van Eeghen, FB

Raymond Chester, TE

Hewritt Dixon, FB-TE

There you have it.

Why Michael Crabtree Is the Next Terrell Owens—Not Jerry Rice

One thing that has bothered me about the Draft analysis of Michael Crabtree has been the comparisons to Jerry Rice.  People do so because of Crabtree’s perceived lack of speed.

I know one thing for certain though—Michael Crabtree is not the next Jerry Rice.  He’s the next Terrell Owens.  Or at worst, the next Mike Williams.

In other words, I think Crabtree will be productive player, but in listening to his interviews, I can tell that he’s not excited about where he’s going.  Maybe he’s upset because he lost money.  Maybe it’s because he wanted to play for a different team.

He sounded like he needed Zoloft.

One thing I know for sure is, moody players are usually more trouble than they are worth.

I think that’s why teams passed on Crabtree.  Keep in mind that Seattle, Cleveland, Cincinnati, St. Louis, and Jacksonville all passed on Crabtree too.  I think they saw the same things in Crabtree that the Raiders did—a moody and uncooperative player.  Rumor has it to that some within the 49ers organization did not want Crabtree either.

People think that the Derrius Heyward-Bey pick is just typical Al Davis, but from all indicators, other teams were uninterested in Crabtree as well.  Heyward-Bey could have been the first receiver selected, regardless of Al Davis.  So, we’ll see.

People have scratched their head over Oakland’s choice of Derrius Heyward-Bey at first, because Michael Crabtree, B.J. Raji, Aaron Maybin and Eugene Monroe were all available.

Each one would have upgraded a position for the Raiders.  Yet they went with the burner.  Everyone knows that Al Davis is a speed-freak.

I was disappointed by the pick, but I would rather let Derrius Heyward-Bey disprove that disappointment, rather than berate Al Davis for the pick.

One thing is for sure:  With Johnnie Lee Higgins and Derrius Heyward-Bey, the Raiders will truly be able to stretch the field.

I Worked on This Article All Day…

With college players, sometimes the productive ones pan out while the athletes flop.  Other times, the athletes pan out and the productive players flop.

The productive skill-players are particularly hard to judge.  Florida and USC have been notorious for productive college skill-players that flopped at the next level.  They go from the limelight to no light in a small town where they just feel restless to be a star again. 

I think it’s just a matter of work ethic, the system, and attitude that will determine the player’s future.  There’s really no determining quality or quantity that will guarantee success for a college player at the next level. 

I know it does sound trite, but it truly is a matter of how much the player wants it.  Some pro athletes in history have the rare combo of talent and hunger (i.e. Michael Jordan), and others are talented but don’t really care (i.e. Joe Barry Carroll).

I know I’m comparing football players to basketball players, but the reality is, there is at least one thing that’s universal in sports and that is: How much do you really want to win or to just win individual records? 

Is it just a matter of whether you win records or whether your team wins championships?  Whether you’re a superstar on a losing team, or a productive player on a winning team. 

Time after time, productive players on losing teams have been plucked by other teams, only for that player to continue to lose.

How else would you explain the fact that a quarterback with an history of bad knees, Jim Plunkett, would twice win the Super Bowl?

Who Ya Got? / Why Impostors Have Destroyed Journalism and Bloggers Have Saved It

That is why the “journalists” continue to denigrate Plunkett’s achievements.  They would rather think that some people in life were born inherently unable to compete with the best of the best, while others were just gifted to compete with the best of the best.  And that if someone defies the fire in their minds then it’s just a fluke. 

That’s because most sports “journalists” are the poor-sport types that would take the ball home when they lose.  Yet, they attempt to define the perceptions of the sports that they could not win at.

Frankly, I think those “journalists” are no better than Adolf Hitler for thinking that black people were born inherently unable to compete with those that Hitler defined as the best of the best. 

And it seems ironic that “journalists” have continued to denigrate the legacy of a Jewish man, Al Davis, in the eyes of the contemporary fans—after his strive to model a successful franchise in his abhorrence for the Holocaust of Hitler’s Nazi Germany.  After all, Davis did come of age during the Nuremberg trials.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Blog

The shills give one ounce of credit to Davis with one hand, but take away two with the other. 

Shills for the players that remind them of themselves.  Shills for the parties.  Shills for the interviews and the attention.  Shills that claim to protect journalistic integrity, but just make stuff up half the time and collect a paycheck.  Shills that would rather ramble about “Who ya got” predictions and contradictions rather than investigate the sport for malfeasance and for crimes against the fans.  Shills for the teams that they labeled as great (i.e. New England Patriots), only to learn that was a false label.  But like any corrupt journalist or historian, they insist that the truth doesn’t matter, or will ask: What is truth?

All I know is, there’s a difference between constructive and destructive.  And that the “journalists” are mostly just destructive by protecting corruption.  Your silence is your complicity, because it’s your job as a journalist to be eternally vigilant.

The impostors in the media do not know the beginning of the world greatness—thus, it’s better to ignore them and just focus on the game and not making mistakes.  Don’t let them in your head.

Players cannot let the sad sac “journalists” run them down simply because they hold the keys to the sports kingdom known as the Hall of Fame.  All you can or should worry about is whether you win.

As I’ve said before, there’s no gray area to that: Just SILVER AND BLACK.

_____________________________________________________________________

References:
CBS.sportsline.com

Fire in the Minds of Men; Billington, James H; Harvard Press

The 2009 NFL Draft Kit: Do’s and Don’ts

This is not a full mock draft.  You can see that by clicking the following link http://bleacherreport.com/articles/151786-2009-nfl-mock-draft-mark-sanchez-to-seattle-crabtree-to-oakland.

This article is about my opinions of “Do’s and Don’ts” in terms of what to expect from the NFL Draft on Saturday.

 

First off, the “Do’s”

Do expect there to be a run on linemen (offensive and defensive).  Despite some rumors, I expect four offensive tackles to go in the top 15, plus three defensive ends and one defensive tackle (though the ends might be converted to linebackers).

Do expect wide receivers to tumble.  Wide receivers and quarterbacks are generally the least NFL ready positions, aka “skill positions.” 

I know that quarterbacks in recent years have had better luck (Ben Roethlisberger, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco), but I still believe quarterbacks by rule should have a “grace period” of three seasons on condition of no exigent circumstances (e.g., status of franchise, injuries, etc.), and five seasons with exigent circumstances.

Do believe that there still is hope for Alex Smith in San Francisco.  Smith came from a non-NFL system at Utah to a bad situation in San Francisco and a rookie head coach, Mike Nolan, and fans that wanted him to be Joe Montana or Steve Young the next day. 

I know that he’s been hurt and has had knocks on the size of his hands, but I believe that is mostly nitpicking on a player that had enormous expectations in a bad situation and deficient preparation.  But I still believe that Smith can turn around, if the Niners focus on defense and running and just rely on Smith to be a Chad Pennington type of player.

Do expect defensive backs to slide.  I think most of the d-backs available aren’t worth first-round picks, when the value at other positions is better.  Do expect there to be a run on d-backs in the second round.

Do expect draft madness if the Chiefs select DE Tyson Jackson at third overall.  Jackson would be a great fit for the three-four, but if the Chiefs select him at third overall, it will shake up the Draft board the way that Mario Williams did in 2006.

Do expect trade wheeling and dealing on Draft day.

 

Now for the “Don’ts”

Don’t be surprised if Braylon Edwards, Anquan Boldin, and Chad Ochocinco are traded on draft day.  Their respective teams would rather wait and see what’s available before pulling the trigger.

Here’s the deal on veteran players.  Generally, contenders need a few veterans.  Unfortunately, some teams try to work backwards from the veterans down to the youth (e.g. Dan Snyder), and it usually does not work.  Teams need to build from the bottom, patiently, and build trust in their foundation before they bring in hired guns.

Subsequently, here are some teams that could and should trade for the said receivers: Chicago Bears, New York Giants, San Diego Chargers, the Washington Redskins, or even the San Francisco 49ers.

I know that Washington has Antwaan Randle El, Santana Moss with Devin Thomas, and Malcolm Kelly in the wings, but don’t be surprised if Dan Snyder trades one of those prospects for one of the said receivers in a prospect-for-veteran swap.

Meanwhile, San Diego could do the same by upgrading at receiver by trading Chris Chambers for one of the said receivers.  If you’re a contender, it’s better to have a veteran quarterback and receiver than it is to rely on inexperience.

Moreover, I think San Francisco would win the NFC West by shoring up the offensive line, adding defensive youth, another runner, and a veteran wide receiver.  Sounds like a lot, but possible if they play their cards right. 

They have a chance at OT Andre Smith in the first round, and can load up on defense the rest of the way; while a receiver like Chad Ochocinco would actually fit well in San Francisco.  The Chad models himself after Jerry Rice and in fact studies as hard as Rice would; that is why it is sad to see a player of his work ethic humiliate himself.  Perhaps a conditional 2010 draft pick would be fair value for Ochocinco.

Don’t be hesitant to call the Cleveland Browns organization insane.  There’s a reason that the Browns suck, and it’s because they keep doing the same things and expect different results.

Don’t be surprised if the Seahawks have the first overall pick in the 2010 draft.  If they truly think they can contend—they are utterly, utterly insane.  Their only hope is to find five quality starters and breakout seasons by five roster incumbents, otherwise, this team is on a road to nowhere fast.  That is why they should select the franchise passer now and build around his learning curve.

Don’t put your money on Denver to win the Super Bowl or even be in the postseason after the draft.

« Previous Page

NFL Sport Channel Latest

• Just How Far Would You Go?
• Sorry Rex, But It Isn’t Happening
• Super Bowl Predictions: Five Stat-Free Reasons Why the Eagles Will Reach The Super Bowl
• Seahawks Attempt to Turn Corner With Heavy Pursuit of Pete Carroll
• Bill Cowher Unlikely to Coach in 2010