Want to see the most annoying ad in the world?

The above ad puts together two of the worst seemingly new Internet advertising tactics there are.  In fact, it would have hit the trifecta had it also contained a ridiculous animated .gif of someone dancing or making a silly face.  Alas, we'll just have to live with these first two...

1) "Trainers hate her."  I see variations of this all the time now, whether it's an ad selling financial services ("Credit card companies hate him."), or whatever.  It's a variation of the "Good cop, Bad cop" game..."Those trainers are jerks!  But not us - So it's you and us versus the mean, hateful trainers!  Why they can't just learn to love her, we'll never know..."

2) "...this weird trick..."  It's WEIRD.  If you only understand one thing about this trick, let it be that.  Just take all your preconceived notions about what is a normal or traditional trick and be prepared to throw them out the window, because things are about to get WEIRD.  Also, it's a "trick" so you won't have to work very hard, kinda like a shortcut.  

Yeah, try to never do this in sports

 I was hesitant to post something like this, because I didn't want to give it any more attention than it deserves.  But I am doing so - not just to ridicule, but also to make a call to all fans of all teams, to hold each other accountable. For my part, I try to condemn any time something low is done on Giants fans' behalf, such as calling the Cowboys the "Cowgirls," or changing one letter in Tony Romo's name to turn it into an insult.  We're better than that as fans, and the Giants are better than that as a team (save for Week 1).  

Okay, disclaimer up...

Oh, so much to take in.  Where to begin?

*Neither the Joker in general, nor specifically Heath Ledger's remarkable performance of the character in The Dark Knight, has anything to do with the Arizona Cardinals.  The team's mascot is a small red bird.  (Although, a friend I showed this poster to, remarked that the Joker is fitting because the Cardinals are a joke, so that is duely noted.)  Sure, I get it, because "Cards," but again, that isn't short for "Playing Cards" in this case.  This is like shortening "Panthers" to "Ants" and representing them with the characters from A Bug's Life.

"Cardinals Fan...Yes I Am!"

"Fan" and "am" don't rhyme.  I feel like I'm being asked to accept that it does.  Also, this couldn't be more opposite of the tone of the rest of what is going on here.  "Cardinals fan, yes I am!" is something a happy-go-lucky 7 year old is meant to chant.  Guy Who Made This, you kind of compromised your theme of anger; It seems like you just wanted to combine everything you've ever heard about the Cardinals into one thing.  Next time maybe make two separate posters, and put this phrase in the other one.

"F{cardinalslogo}CK THE REST"

Strangely standoffish for a fan of a franchise that the overwhelming majority of fans of other teams, are apathetic about.  Also, representing your team with implied profanity is always a good decision.  This part mainly just makes me sad, so let's move on.

"BIRDGANG"

Along with the overall tone of this picture - minus the cute near-rhyme of course - the term "birdgang" does nothing to dispel the stereotype about Cardinals fans, which says that, besides people who don't know much about football, and/or people who only root for them because they feel obligated to support the team who plays their home games geographically closest to where they live, Cardinals fans is a group largely made up of gang bangers who wanted a different team to root for than the Raiders. 


I'm not going to go as far as to say that something like this encourages or incites fan violence.   But it sure doesn't encourage or incite peace.

Stay classy, Cardinals fan.

LOL HOF

If I may interrupt the awesomeness of a Giants playoff week...Barry Larkin was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame with 86% of the vote. Okay, fine, 86% seems super high for a guy who, while good, wasn't a superstar, but whatever, he's in...

And Bernie Williams received just 10% of the vote? And still no Don Mattingly? Really? I have vowed to no longer give Halls of Fame the time of day in the past, but this seems especially ridiculous and anti-Yankee. Larkin was pretty good with his career 116 OPS+, played good defense at an important position, and has a ring. But then to mostly ignore Williams with his career 125 OPS+, also good defense at an important position, and 4 rings? And if the voters think Larkin's 3 gold gloves are meaningful...Williams had 4.

But then I guess I'm sleeping on Larkin for his 1995 MVP award. Williams never won one. Larkin's MVP season: .319/394/492, 133 OPS+, gold glove. Williams' best year, 1998: .339/422/575, 160 OPS+, gold glove. He finished 7th in the MVP voting that year.

Also, while Larkin didn't have control over playing on teams as good as Williams did...not for nothing, just look at where Williams ranks in the following lists for all-time playoff numbers:

Runs - 2nd

Hits - 2nd

Total bases - 2nd

Doubles - 2nd

HR - 2nd

RBI - 1st

Walks - 3rd

Halls of Fame don't really matter, we know this. But come on baseball, if you're going to pretend your Hall of Fame is important, at least try to get it right.

Case study on how not to run a business

I am having fun reading the comments at the bottom of this Netflix announcement. For all the jokes we make about the average person or consumer being dumb, this is a great example of not a single customer being fooled by an egregious rate hike and accompanying corporate spin-job.

I'm honestly impressed...Netflix has handled things so badly, that they've united 100% of respondents' opinions in one direction. Do you realize how hard it is to get every last person to agree on anything? Especially on the Internet? If I posted a blog called "Food and water are necessary to live," and enough people respond, I think a disagreement would break out eventually.

The great thing about our free market is that a company run this poorly, is going away. Blockbuster, Hulu, and Amazon are coming for you Netflix.

The single dumbest thing ever said about baseball

Mariano Rivera recorded his 600th career save yesterday. He now trails current record holder Trevor Hoffman by 1. Saves are one of the least important stats in baseball, but some people think they are important. Rivera is the greatest pitcher who ever lived, but when he breaks the record for saves, that will not be the reason why.

Anyway, I don't know how I missed this a couple weeks ago, but better late than never...

Ted Leitner, San Diego Padres' radio play-by-play announcer, on August 22, at the ceremony to retire Trevor Hoffman's number:

"And I know baseball fans...baseball broadcasters...we love to argue. So we argue who's better, who's the best. But there is no argument. This is not a Padre broadcast bias, it's not a Padre fan bias. We know this. The only true measure of a closer is how many saves did you get. So today without any fear of argument I tell you that today the San Diego Padres retire the number of truly by that benchmark - the only benchmark - the greatest closer in the history of major league baseball."

Stare. Blink. Stare. I don't even know where to begin. This statement has already been torn apart, and this is one of those times I wish FJM was still around because no one did it better...but it would be kind of lazy for me to say absolutely nothing, so here goes...

But there is no argument.

NO ONE DENIES THIS!

This is not a Padre broadcast bias, it's not a Padre fan bias.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

We know this.

Have you seen Mariano Rivera pitch?

The only true measure of a closer is how many saves did you get.

Some might offer up that ERA, or WHIP, among other things, might be a better measure. How about postseason performance?

Hoffman: 13 innings, 3.46 ERA, with 4 precious, only-measure-being saves.

Rivera: 139 2/3 innings, 0.71 ERA, 42 saves. And 5 championship rings.

Is that cherry picking? How about just leaving it at regular season performance then...over their entire careers, Rivera's ERA has been greater than half a run less than Hoffman's (2.22 to 2.87). Hoffman pitched his entire career in the National League. ERA+: Hoffman, 141. That's really good. 14th all-time, in fact. Rivera, 205. That's highest of any pitcher who ever lived. To put it in perspective just how far and away Rivera is the best, Pedro Martinez is 2nd in ERA+, at 154. But by all means go on, Mr. Saves...

So today without any fear of argument

Again with the "No one dare argue with me, the subject is closed" gambit. Always a secure move. "Vin Diesel is the best actor ever and I fear no challenge because there is no other way to measure this other than how many cars blew up in his movies."

I tell you that today the San Diego Padres retire the number of truly by that benchmark - the only benchmark - the greatest closer in the history of major league baseball."

The sad thing is that Mo is about to pass Hoffman on the all-time saves list - the one metric Leitner thought was safe, and could use to call Hoffman "the best." What, like Mo wasn't going to get another 10 saves or so in his career at that point in August?

Look, I know you were there to honor Trevor Hoffman, but you could have done that by talking about his longevity, how he was beloved by the fans of San Diego for so many years, or how he's among the best of his generation. But you can't just say whatever and not expect to be called on it.

Tired

No, this post isn't about the Foo Fighters' 2002 song "Tired Of You" featuring a guitar track contribution from Brian May. (By the way, their new album is terrific if you haven't heard it yet.) Rather, I wonder which is a more tired joke at this point: Charlie Sheen, or Donald Trump? In fact, if someone was to combine the two subjects, he'd have one unstoppable, worn out super-joke! I'm looking in your direction, Jay Leno. "Ehhh, Charlie Sheen in the news again, have you heard about this, have you seen this? He said Obama's birth certificate is WINNING!" {Audience cheers mindlessly}

Also, if I can get on the record on Trump, I believe his "birther" angle was a work. He's actually on President Obama's side, and wants him re-elected. What better way than to portray Obama's opponents as stupid as possible? He played right into the exact stereotype of that tiny minority of conservatives that make the vast majority of conservatives shake their heads in embarrassment. (If you even want to count the birther movement as "conservative" in nature - I don't, but whatever.) See, if I want to make Cowboys fans look bad (as if they needed help), I don't just wear a Giants jersey and list logical reasons why Cowboys fans are not good...I wear a Cowboys jersey, and do the most idiotic thing I can, like kick a bunch of kittens or something.

Soccer jihadists, we're telling you for the last time...

First, a disclaimer. I don't require people to agree with me, but my plea is always that they argue fairly and within the bounds of logic. And when encountering someone who is genuinely misguided, it is important to respond fairly and logically, even if their position is mind-blowingly idiotic and they're not arguing fairly themselves. Just calling someone stupid won't convince them of anything. Therefore, there is value in practicing how to respond to a bad argument. With that said...

I came across this Youtube video via Uproxx: If George Carlin's Baseball and Football was a 75-yard touchdown pass, then this weak offering by John Cleese about football and soccer is a feeble Monty Burns throw that lands right at his feet as he lets out a lifeless, "feh." Among the cutesy, yet strangely disdain-soaked arguments made:

*Football has breaks in action so TV can have commercials - even though football was invented like 50 years BEFORE TELEVISION.

*Soccer is "creative" (always the go-to saying of the soccer jihadist), like jazz music. (You know, the kind of jazz music where you get grazed in the chest and flop like you've been shot in the head.)

*Coaches call plays. Therefore football players don't use their brains at all. (Interesting. Do you think strategy and playcalling makes for a better quality game, or worse? Would it be better to send the players out to the field with no plan whatsoever? "Alright men, just go out there and be creative.")

*Generic "Dick Cheney is bad" joke. (Even Jay Leno thinks Cheney jokes are tired. "Ehhhh, Monica Lewinsky in the news again...")

I'm not going to blame Cleese fully because maybe he was told to say everything as part of this show, but come on. Other than the name being "foot-ball" he's got nothing. And even then, his beef is with whoever named it in the late 19th century. I wouldn't have chosen "football" myself, but in fairness to the founders, when the game was invented field goals were worth more points than touchdowns so there was more emphasis on kicking than there is today. And near as I can tell, the title came from when the split was made between "association football" (note the "s-o-c" in association), and "rugby football," which was shortened to just "football."

Worst of all, it's supposed to be funny but just isn't. I'd gladly shrug off all the vertebrae-breaking reaches if there were some laughs involved.

The World Cup gives soccer the stage every 4 years to show us just how lame and boring it really is. The reason Americans don't like soccer is that we simply invented better sports.

It's funny how football fans are secure enough to not have to entertain comparisons between the two sports; yet so often we see soccer fans going out of their way to tell us how much better soccer is than American tackle football. As Shakespeare once wrote, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

So please, for the last time soccer fans, enjoy your World Cup but try to tone down the inferiority complex - it's unbecoming. Only 32 days until camps open...

Bad sports logic strikes again

I have always felt the layperson has nothing to apologize for, or to be ashamed of, when giving genuine sports analysis the way he or she sees it. I often hear regular people bullied off their point by the supposed trump card, where the other person (usually a current or ex-jock but not always) says something like "What do you know, you never played in the NBA/NFL/MLB..."

We the commoners should never be shy to have a view, even if we've never played at a high level. If we watch enough games, and understand the sport, we can have valid and meaningful analysis. Especially if we can easily look at records and/or statistics to back up our arguments.

This sort of leads into another example of poor sports logic I grow weary of: The bitter old man. Even if he was legitimately great, he is not secure with his own legacy. As a result he'll take any opportunity to slight the players of today.

One recent sports dust-up combines elements from both example pools - from the New York Times, the Sayers/Butkus vs. Urlacher feud. In short, Gale Sayers says the Bears stink now, Brian Urlacher puts it in perspective by pointing out that Sayers never won anything, and Dick Butkus says Urlacher wasn't born yet, so what does he know?

True, Urlacher wasn't born yet, but he could use something called THE INTERNET, and see that indeed, the Bears with Sayers never made the playoffs. He could have even added that the Bears were under .500 during those years if he wanted to.

Mike Ditka then added in a radio interview, that had Sayers not gotten hurt, no one would ever be able to break his records. After another look at the Internet, (Pro Football Reference in this case), in Sayers' first 5 years before serious injury he rushed for these yardage totals (with rushing TDs):

867 (14)
1231 (8)
880 (7)
856 (2)
1032 (8)

I'm not sure I understand what kind of record pace Sayers was setting, but maybe Ditka thought Sayers was about to double these totals over the next 5 years had he stayed healthy. And Sayers only missed 5 games combined over those first 5 years. Could Ditka have been thinking of career yards per carry? 5.0 is damn good, but not a record, Jim Brown's 5.2 leads all running backs. (And that's not a volume stat anyway.) Maybe he meant a fumbles record, as Sayers coughed it up 34 times in 68 career games?

Ditka and Butkus came up in a time when there was no internet, so they probably feel they can make any claim and not be called on it. But come on fellas, times are different, people can actually check stuff now. No longer can you just say whatever you want and pass it off as a given.