At this point, the fine towns of Minneapolis and St. Paul would probably be inclined to throw the guy a ticker-tape parade the day he shows up.
For the time being, however, they choose to fellate Brett Favre through the media.
By reporting on him practically every day.
Here's the latest. Bear in mind that this comes from Charley Walters, who would probably be lucky to hit .500 on his "scoops". If true, it shows just how much of an idiot Brad Childress really is.
Latest word is that 40 percent of the Vikings' playbook is being customized for the pending signing of quarterback Brett Favre.
You read that right, fans. The Minnesota Vikings are catering to a 40-year-old, noodle-armed quarterback who has thrown 84 interceptions over the last four seasons.
(Of course, since the Vikings playbook consists of "Run AP left", "Run AP up the middle", "Run AP right", "throw long", and "punt", they're only customizing two plays. That's not a big deal, I guess.)
Brett Favre went away over two months ago. He's gone. Has barely said a peep publicly.
Yet, his name keeps coming up.
The latest in media idiocy comes from, among others, USA Today. And it's a doozy.
Favre's locker still has his nameplate and that the legendary passer's shoulder pads still rest there on a shelf.
Credit Jason White of "OnMilwaukee.com" with "breaking" this Earth-shattering story.
I have to respectfully disagree with coach Mike McCarthy and the team keeping it intact, as it is was during the Packers' organized team activity practices. Even though the Packers legendary quarterback called it a career in March -- albeit with a few public unretirement ruminations afterward -- his nameplate is still above his locker, and his shoulder pads are still on the shelf.
I think that's wrong. It isn't fair to Aaron Rodgers, who has as tough a follow-up gig as anyone has ever had at quarterback in the NFL. Not only is he following a sure-fire first-ballot Hall of Famer, which has been done before, but Rodgers is following a guy who started 275 consecutive games without missing one with an injury, and he's doing it in a town where Favre is a deity.
Words can't describe how stupid this is. If nothing else, it has forced the Packers to blow the doors off what they'd been quietly working on. And it's a nice gesture.
The Packers took away the Favre nameplate from Brett Favre's locker and replaced it with a standard ‘Packers' nameplate. The Packers had initially planned to keep the locker with Favre's name until further plans, but pulled it this week, coincidentally as the locker drew national coverage. Apparently the team is now considering giving the locker to Favre as a gift. "I think it's been totally blown out of proportion. It's frankly an excellent idea that Ted Thompson and the organization had as far as a gift on a personal note to Brett. It's been discussed with Brett, and we can talk about it at a later date. But its really a construction concern, is the reason why the locker hasn't been taken out of there. So there's nothing more to it. A lot has been made of it. ... Ted, at the board of directors meeting yesterday, talked about the Brett locker situation and told them the plans that he had had as far as what he was going to do with the locker and they gave him a standing ovation. It's a classy move and something that definitely reflects how the Green Bay Packers do business and how they appreciate what Brett Favre has done in his career."
All the guy wants to do is retire. And all the Packers want to do is move on.
Why is this such a difficult thing for the media to understand?
Sadly, someone out there in blog/talk radio/column land will spin this as somehow being Favre's fault. As if the tearful press conference wasn't evidence enough. As if the Packers' repeated attempts to move on weren't enough.
"I have a lot of things to worry about besides whether they keep the locker or not," Rodgers said. "I mean, it's not even on my mind. I got to try to figure out a way to lead this team on my mind — workouts, OTAs — so I'm not worried about that at all."
I'm sure Rodgers has experienced a few sleepless nights, racked with worry over when the Packers will finally get rid of that damn locker. Good thing it got settled now, or it would have ruined any shot he has of succeeding in 2008.
Former (should-be Hall of Fame) major league pitcher and current Minnesota Twins broadcaster Bert Blyleven did an interview with Yahoo's Big League Stew, and he made it clear that he believes he'll make the Hall.
The convincing, to me, is over with. I feel I'm going to be in there in a couple years. I honestly feel my time is coming.
...I think with the steroid era — how the game has changed — and with guys pitching every fifth day now, there's no emphasis on complete games. I see guys pitching eight shutout innings and then not going out for the ninth because of a pitch count. We never had the pitch count.
He also believes in a superb idea about the Hall selection process that will probably never, ever happen:
I talked to Ernie Harwell about that. He thinks I should be in. He says in his great voice, "You know, Bert, I just don't know why announcers haven't been involved in the voting for the Hall of Fame. If only because they see these players every day." A guy like a Vin Scully — my goodness. Any radio play-by-play guy or TV play-by-play guy should — if they're there a certain amount of time, just like the writers for 10 years, I think, they should have the right to vote also.
Most of the baseball writers are fantasically intelligent people who take this process seriously. There have actually been sane arguments against admitting Blyleven in the Hall. Getting into shouting matches with the Bill Conlins of the world is simply a waste of time, energy, and breath.
Say all the nice things about the BBWAA you want, but it's patently insulting that the people who broadcast the games don't have any say over who gets in. People like Bob Uecker and Vin Scully are on the outside looking in. They're at the ballpark every day, and their passion for baseball is unparalleled. With all due respect, why is a guy like Richard Justice more qualified to decide who gets in the Hall of Fame than Scully?
There are a lot of things wrong with the Hall of Fame and the system used to select its members, but this is one of the serious structural flaws that is just inexplicable to me.
To a certain extent, I understand the buzz (no pun intended). Bissinger was belligerent, profane, and combative in his appearance on Costas NOW. He's been much more articulate, understanding, and conversation in his media appearances since.
For that, I applaud him. I also applaud him for the interview he gave with The Big Lead. Not only did he give an interview, but he answered all the questions and actually made some very interesting points. I'll post a few of his thoughts and respond, because it seems like a really good idea.
The initial reaction was quite positive, more than quite positive from those I immediately spoke to–fellow panelists and members of HBO with the exception of Costas (Bob was friendly but muted in his response to my performance. He is one of the most thoughtful people I know and I think he was mulling that I had gone way too far.) What I began to realize by the next afternoon is this: What the fellow panelists thought (at least the ones I spoke with) were not remotely a representative group. When I came home from New York, my wife simply told me that I had been over the top and undignified.
I don't know how you can watch his performance and not have an "Oh, my God. What is he doing?" reaction. I'm glad Mrs. Bissinger conveyed the same reaction, though I think I would shriek if my wife used the word "undignified" in a conversation with me. She'd probably just say I made an ass of myself.
I believe in what I said (although the emails I received have also directed me to some excellent information-based sports blogs I was not aware of). But I made a terrible mistake in the manner in which I said it. I am a man of passion and my passion truly got the better of me. I should have considerably toned it down, in particular in terms of my treatment of Will Leitch. Without going into details, I have taken steps to remedy that. I have also publicly apologized on several radio shows that have been widely disseminated. Those apologies are sincere, just as my passion was sincere if terribly misplaced. I treated Mister Leitch like the worst kind of blogger.
You're not going to get a blind defense of Will Leitch on this site. I think Will is brilliant, but he does have flaws. One of them is the amount of profanity that can be found on his site. For some of you, that's either a turn-on or a non-factor. And that's okay. It's part of the beauty of the internet. If you don't like something, you don't have to click on it. Personally, I'm not a fan of it, and I choose not to read the saltier stuff that you can find on Deadspin. I prefer to keep things a little cleaner around here, and I will very rarely use any words here that I couldn't use on the radio without getting at least a call to the proverbial carpet.
But your mileage may vary. I bought Leitch's book and was riveted. It was superb content. His site is usually the same. It's not so much about showing athletes to be jerks and philanderers. It's about showing that we shouldn't take sports (or ourselves) too seriously.
As I have just answered, there are some very good information-based sports blogs out there written by bloggers who clearly have excellent sources, just as there are some ESPN commentators who think before they talk and some marvelous radio talk show hosts who know their information inside and out and also have real sources. Now of course I will contradict myself by making the generalization that as a society, we have become more petty and mean-spirited and nastier than ever. We revel in watching celebrities fall apart. We revel in mockery and that is true of every media outlet whether you define it as new or old or mainstream or the future or whatever. Sports blogs certainly do not hold the monopoly on being vindictive.
I'm in absolute agreement on all counts. We're too voyeuristic in our society nowadays. We take pleasure in the downfall of others, which simply isn't right.
(NOTE: To me, there's a distinct difference between being amused by the problems of others [see: "Clemens, Roger"] and reveling in the destruction of said person's life.)
My youngest son, who is 16, never picks up the paper. So I have no solutions for the American newspaper, although it makes me terribly sad to acknowledge what appears to be their extinction in print at some point in time.
I became a writer because I loved the feel of a newspaper in my hands. I know saying that makes me sound terribly old, but it is hard to hold the Internet in your hands. But you guys are not simply the future; you are the present. All I ask, and I am pretty sure I have already said this somewhere before during this Q and A, is to take up your responsibility with seriousness and honor while not stifling what is the best part of the Internet, which is the way in which it gives a voice to everyone. That part of the Internet is truly exciting. As for us MMSers, we will continue to write and cling to print, and sometimes we will still do it pretty damn well. And maybe with some tolerance along the way and acceptance, we can co-exist and maybe even like each other instead of fueling the flames of hate as I unfortunately did with my appearance. But it will take more responsibility on the part of the blogging community and less maliciousness and sophomoric sexual references.
The bottom line is that the internet is here to stay. Any solution for newspapers doesn't involve the internet going anywhere. They need to to understand ways to use the internet to their advantage. Give us compelling content, make it available on the internet, and re-construct the business model to make better use of the internet.
Frankly, this isn't anything compelling or original. But it's the best I can do. I just don't have any reason to pick up the hometown paper anymore. I can read all the content I need on the internet. The one day I used to always pick up the paper was Sunday. I don't anymore, because I'll read articles on the internet, and then I'll just use the internet to look at the Sunday store circulars and print any ads or coupons I want to save.
The only time I buy newspapers is when I'm on the road. There's still no better way to spend an hour-long flight or a long car ride than thumbing through the newspaper and finding interesting stuff to read and talk about. When I travel for hockey, I almost always buy the local newspaper, even though I can usually read the content on the internet.
Even travelers don't need physical copies of the newspaper anymore. Just fire up the laptop, connect to the hotel's wireless network, and read.
It's a different world. Someday, a newspaper executive in a reasonably-big city is going to find an answer. His/her newspaper will thrive, and everyone will follow that lead.
I just hope that day comes before the newspaper goes away. There's still great use for the material, and even those of us who have migrated to the internet would miss the voice.
I don't get HBO. Frankly, I don't have any interest in their original programming. I'm not a boxing fan. I don't think Bill Maher is all that great. And I have this thing in my house called a "DVD player" that allows me to watch the same movies they're showing on HBO, only I don't have to pay $whatever a month and get a bunch of other shows and movies I don't care to watch.
Anyway, that's not the point I'm about to make.
Tuesday night, Bob Costas hosted a roundtable discussion on sports blogging during his creatively named Costas NOW program. The guests were Will Leitch, the brilliant editor of Deadspin; H.G. "Buzz" Bissinger, the author of Friday Night Lights, among other works; and Braylon Edwards, wide receiver for the Cleveland Browns. Why was Edwards on the panel?
(Seriously, why was Edwards there? And has someone checked to make sure he's not in shock after what he sat through?)
I'm all in favor of people having their own opinions. It's even okay with me if someone's opinion is misinformed. It's the old saying: The less one knows, the more firmly one believes. If this saying is true, Bissinger is the most ignorant man alive when it comes to sports blogging.
Other takes can be found here, here, here, and here, among other places. I won't bore you with any more shots at Bissinger or his televised idiocy.
However, there is a rather odd irony to Bissinger's appearance. At 1:39 of the video, Bissinger tells Leitch that he feels blogs are "dedicated to journalistic dishonesty".
Bissinger's words were prophetic. A story broke today that is wrought with what I feel is journalistic dishonesty. Even if you don't feel it goes that far, the word "irresponsible" certainly applies.
I don't know about you, but I hate it when blogs start stuff like this.
(A tip of the hat goes to HockeyFights.com for getting the image.)
Oh, wait. You mean that a blog didn't start it? The New York Daily News isn't a blog? What?
Did they acknowledge their error? Not so much (if they did, I haven't found it).
The best part about the original Daily News story? They made sure to mention their March report about Avery's alleged ties to prostitution (I mean, you don't even have to imply any allegations of drug use here, because it's so obvious that it's the direction you want this story to go). Play that card for all it's worth, kids.
Where's the outrage, mainstream media? If this story originally appeared on Deadspin, FanHouse, or any of the multitude of sports blogs that can be had on the internet, you can bet your ass that the Daily News and probably every other mainstream outlet in America would have been all over it.
Their words would have been similar to Bissinger's, only not nearly as profane. They would have called bloggers "irresponsible", ranted about how bloggers don't have editors to answer to like "real reporters" do, and how bloggers are just driving down the journalistic standards across America.
If a random guy with a Blogger account is driving down the journalistic standards across America, then what happens when the freaking NEW YORK DAILY NEWS messes up a story as badly as this one, then just gets to pretend it never screwed up in the first place?
Where, Mr. Bissinger, is your outrage today? Where is your statement about the horrific reporting by a major American newspaper?
Perhaps you misplaced it, along with your manners and dignity.
Even though the odds of him reading this are about as high as the odds I'll win Powerball tonight and get to retire to my own private Caribbean island, I thank Will for sitting through that last night and not doing anything stupid. Lord knows what they'd say about bloggers then.
(By the way, in case you're too lazy to click, Avery is okay. He's out for the rest of the season, which might only be one game for the Rangers. But he's expected to make a full recovery.)
Did you pay your taxes? Wait, I already did this bit two years ago. Sorry.
Kiszla strikes again. I wrote about this here. In summary, Mark Kiszla is a columnist for the Denver Post. He is one of these guys that just writes about whatever the big story is at the time. He's not a beat writer for the Avalanche or Nuggets or Broncos or any single team. Just a columnist. And he sucks at his job. Instead of provoking thought and expressing his thoughts and opinions, Kiszla would rather incite and anger. It's a rather annoying trend that sportswriters tend to carry with them. I don't know if it's all the bad press box food, or if they're born that way.
Michael Russo, who covers the Wild for the Star Tribune and does a wonderful job, says fans should calm down. In reality, he's right. Kiszla got the reaction he wanted out of his hatchet job on the Wild. Fans are irate with him, mainly because his rant came across as completely uninformed and ignorant about how hockey works.
Russo's point is pretty simple. This guy's a moron, he doesn't know anything, and it shouldn't bother you that he doesn't like the Wild, how they play, or what they wear. Russo, however, is clearly losing patience with the ignorance that spews from the Denver media when it comes to the Avalanche and the NHL.
I’m not into ripping other writers. But at some point here in Denver, the Avs jerseys should come off and impartiality and professionalism should trickle back into the business.
I’m sure I’ll be regretting that line later today, but I’ve bit my tongue all series.
Surely, Russo's tired of Kiszla's crap, especially when the prospect of dealing with the likes of Woody Paige and Jim Armstrong still exists before the series is over. Oh, and the Avalanche beat writer at the Denver Post is potentiallyunstable, too. Fun!
I feel sorry for any real hockey fans in Denver, and there are many (I've met a few of them). The fanbase is full of a bunch of bandwagoners, and the media there is clueless about anything that doesn't involve John Elway.
As for the hockey...The Wild are in a good spot tonight. They'll have to weather a storm, as Colorado knows they have to win to avoid a 3-1 series hole. While it's nice to not be the team with all the pressure on them (as Minnesota would be if they had lost last night), things aren't yet all rosy with the Wild. Their top three available defensemen (Brent Burns, Kim Johnsson, and Martin Skoula) have all played admirably well, but all are playing a lot more minutes than they're accustomed to. This is going to be a problem if the series goes long, and a Colorado win tonight ensures at least six games.
So while Colorado has a lot of heat on them tonight, the Wild can't lollygag through this one. This is the time to show some killer instinct. A five-game series win would be huge for the Wild, as it would allow these defensemen to rest, and it would allow Nick Schultz to work himself back into shape so he can play again in the second round.
Minnesota hasn't scored a first- or second-period goal in this series yet (six in the third and two in overtime). To get that coveted 3-1 advantage, the Wild probably need to reverse this trend. It would help to get Marian Gaborik going, and they took a huge step in that direction last night. Gaborik led the team with nine shots on goal. If he can keep putting that kind of pressure on the Avalanche defense, it's bound to pay off for him.
In other series in the West, Dallas is mere minutes away from their shot at a 3-0 lead over Anaheim. No one gave them much of a chance in this series, and for them to have a 2-0 lead is shocking enough. The Stars need to do it. Even though Anaheim is the defending champion and completely befuddled by their poor play in the first two games, Dallas has pressure on them tonight. They don't want to let the experienced and tough Ducks back in the series.
San Jose is on their way to another classic playoff collapse, this time in the first round against Calgary. Will this one cost Ron Wilson his job?
Give plenty of credit to Boston for hanging in there against Montreal. The same can't be said for Ottawa, who is in the midst of folding like a cheap tent against Pittsburgh. It's somewhat fitting that it is the only first-round series still with a chance to end in a sweep. Ottawa did little down the stretch, and they just can't match up with Pittsburgh's high-end talent because of all their injuries.
I loved what Sean Avery did Sunday night in New York. I also understand the league's position, especially when it comes to the prospect of copycats and further hijinx from Avery. But I still laugh when I see the video, and I think people who talk about this being some sort of "black eye" on the NHL are being silly. Avery is a pest, and he'll think of other exciting ways to get under the skin of Devils goalie Martin Brodeur. The two don't exactly exchange Christmas cards every year.
NBA Playoffs. Who cares?
NFL schedule is out. Only in the NFL could this be a story. Some key dates, and then I'll bring you the Packers and Vikings schedules.
Week One Thursday, September 4: Redskins at Giants Sunday, September 7: Bears at Colts Monday, September 8: Vikings at Packers and Broncos at Raiders
Week Six Patriots at Chargers
Week Nine Cowboys at Giants Patriots at Colts
Week Thirteen THANKSGIVING Titans at Lions Seahawks at Cowboys Cardinals at Eagles
At this point, the fine towns of Minneapolis and St. Paul would probably be inclined to throw the guy a ticker-tape parade the day he shows up.
