Because I love anything from Steve Sabol

You might say that much like Michael Bolton falsely claimed in Office Space, I celebrate NFL Films' entire collection. So when I heard NFL Films President Steve Sabol filled in for NFL Buffoon Peter King at SI this week, I couldn't wait to read what Sabol had to say. He did not disappoint, touching on players he felt made the biggest impressions on him, the differences between follies, blunders, and bloopers, and why Hard Knocks is the most challenging show they do.

And I just love the way he wraps up the column:

I think I'd like to close with this: Erma Bombeck once said, "If a man watches three football games in a row, he should be declared legally brain dead." I say, "What a way to die."

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...

Colin Curtis: A reminder of why we love sports

A special moment in Phoenix last night, as Yankees rookie Colin Curtis, just called up two days ago, got his first major league hit - an 8th inning two-run double to deep center - in a 9-3 win over Arizona. Curtis is a 2006 4th round pick from Arizona State University who overcame testicular cancer at age 15.

Seeing him earn a once-in-a-lifetime experience, with his family in attendance, just made me think that this is the kind of heartwarming feeling sports can deliver sometimes.

It's good to keep stories like that of Curtis in mind, when hearing about how Albert Haynesworth and his $21 million signing bonus didn't report to Redskins minicamp because they couldn't lure him with a big enough bacon and cheese cart.

Here's to this being the start of a long and prosperous career for Colin Curtis.

Fun with heat

It's the first day of summer, but here in the desert this rarely marks any type of significance. Most years we're well into triple digit temperatures by now, and usually have been for about a month.

However, this year has been different. The unseasonably cool April and May were absolute gifts. I didn't use my home's air conditioner until late May, and in this region that's almost unheard of. June has also been - dare I say - "not so bad," with highs most days in the upper 90s. And even when it's topped 100, it's been in the 101-103 range. Again, I can't believe I'm saying this, but that's not so bad. At least not compared to insane 110-115 degree heatwaves, which we're sure to see every summer for at least a few days at a time. Sure, 100 is hot, and 115 is hot, but failing to recognize a difference would be another good old line drawing fallacy.

The Farmer's Almanac long range forecast predicted this June would be 5 degrees below average, and so far they're spot-on. But what about July-September, which are expected to be just as bad as usual? Don't you worry, I've got a positive spin to put on that.

You see, I usually count April and May as part of the heat. And the pain usually leaves as September comes to an end. That makes 6 hot months out of 12 we're working with. Two of them are over, and the 3rd is almost over. Why, after this week we're right on July's doorstep!

So we've barely faced any awful summer heat thus far, and I'm declaring it half-over. Do you like how I did that?

Me neither. See you (outdoors) in October.

Why I don't have facebook

Facebook has taken the internet by storm over the past couple years. Everybody's doing it. Your boss, your grandma, everybody. ("Stan, why didn't you friend your grandma?") It's essentially the same thing as myspace (more on that later), but I used this transition period of the herd moving from myspace to facebook, as the perfect way to quietly slip out of the social networking business. I love the freedom and privacy, and I don't plan on coming back. Many people ask me why I'm not on it though, and I feel it deserves mentioning here. Not only as a personal explanation, but as a service to those who might be on the fence.

I know I'm out on a limb here. This isn't like saying "Brees is better than Manning," where most people can see both sides and it's maybe a 60% majority I'm going against. While I'm aware that there are people - wise people - who are leaving by the thousands, I know I'm part of about 10% vs. 90%.

So here we go! First, a couple disclaimers:

*Didn't you used to have a myspace?

Yes, and I don't regret it. That was a nice little two year era that helped me pass time while working weekend overnights before I got a house, a job with more responsibility, and in general a busier life. I won't go all the way and say I don't have any time for it - but I don't have as much free time anymore, and certainly not enough to where I'd want to spend it on facebook.

*What about this very blog?

There is a vast difference between a (mostly) sports blog, and facebook - in privacy levels (notice there are no full names, photos, birthdates, or other personal information anywhere to be found here), and in time commitment (with 4-6 posts a month, I admittedly don't devote as much time to this as I could). Failure to recognize the difference would be to fall victim to what the logic community calls a line drawing fallacy; they're not the same, and it isn't an "all or nothing" proposition.

Speaking of myspace, I find it hilarious when someone who is currently all about facebook, will go out of his or her way to rip myspace and say how stupid and worthless it is. I'm afraid this is common in human nature - it's easiest to condemn something that you yourself have overcome...or something you feel are in no danger of doing yourself. Like the insecure person who says, "Not only am I not gay...I hate gays!" Again, this isn't everyone, or even the majority of social network users, but I've heard it enough that it resonates with me. Where will these folks go when the next big site comes along? I bet they'll leave facebook for it, then talk about how lame facebook is/was.

Now, my friends and family don't really use facebook in the narcissistic "Hey everybody, look at me!" way, so I'm going to skip that argument here. But another problem I have is that many seem to feel facebook can take the place of real communication. Social networking communication can be misinterpreted, or missed altogether. A couple weeks ago I had a friend who wanted to put an event together. Whereas he used to email me personally, this time he only sent it via facebook, perhaps thinking it's now his "one-stop-shop" for friend communication. It did get to my girlfriend, but she misunderstood what it was. So if it wasn't for the fact that I called him on the phone out of the blue last week - something friends actually used to do - I may have missed the event altogether.

Still don't accept my reasons? How about this: Facebook owns everything you post...forever...even if you take it down. I don't know about you, but that gives me the willies.

If you're my friend, I hope you'll respect my desire to not have facebook. Please communicate with me directly - I don't care so much whether it's by email, phone, text, or singing telegram...just don't assume facebook is the only way to communicate anymore. I'll never say never, but I can safely say I won't be joining unless I can find a way to make it comfortable for me - such as by using an alias, by creating a page as a different person altogether, like movie hero Zap Rowsdower, or by simply not sharing enough information that it's all a good hacker needs to steal my identity. But it's still a long shot.

Thanks for reading, and happy facebooking. By the way, it saddens me that "facebooking" is used as a verb...

Sometimes, you just don't get to gloat, revisited again

Last year, I talked here and here about how the very nature of something slowly fading away, rather than ending with a singular win/loss type of event, robs us of that "gotcha" moment where you'd get to gloat about it to those whose prediction was incorrect.

Well, remember all that panic over how home runs were flying out of the new Yankee Stadium at an alarming pace...like after one week...and how much hand-wringing was done over it? How did that turn out?

Does the NFL know about this?

I'm sure most of you knew this before I did, so I hope I'm not going all Peter King on you here ("Hey, I just saw Saving Private Ryan, that's a pretty good movie"). But I just discovered this, and it's spectacular. The NFL section of Hulu.

Every "Super Bowl Highlights" show. An "America's Game" feature on every Super Bowl winner. Greatest Games. Hard Knocks. Game of the Week, going back to over 10 years ago. A section for each team. I feel like I'm stealing, or that the NFL will take all this down as soon as they find out I'm watching it.

I will no doubt spend countless hours between now and September watching these features, to the point where others who care about me will have to pry me away with a pretty good amount of force.

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.

The fun of saving draft day predictions

Mel Kiper Jr., on draft day 2007:

"JaMarcus Russell's going to immediately energize that Raider nation, that fan base, that football team, on the practice field, in that locker room. Three years from now, you could be looking at a guy who's certainly one of the elite top 5 quarterbacks in this league."

"And mobility's a little underrated."

"The skill level that he has is certainly John Elway-like."

That, or he's a lazy, bloated bust who's going to be cut in May of 2010...

(Photo courtesy of Kissing Suzy Kolber)

Are you sure about that?

I kid you not, I just heard these words come from Erin Andrews on Dancing With The Stars, and in fact I backed up the video just to make sure I heard her right.

On being in the "bottom two," facing elimination from the show: "That was the grossest feeling I've ever had."

Wow. (Blink. Stare. Blink.)