With the Broncos enjoying a much-deserved bye last week, I had a chance to reflect on the Broncos’ season. You know, where we’ve been, where we’re going, and how it is that anyone ever allowed a professional football team to wear those uniforms in public. And as a bonus, I also had some time to check in on other goings on in Denver and around the NFL. So in honor of Week 7 (and of course, John Elway), I give you my 7 thoughts from Week 7:
1. I think last week’s ESPN Power Rankings said it best: “This is a very well-balanced team that doesn’t beat itself and has maximized its personnel. That is awfully good coaching.” Isn’t it though? Think about it, when was the last time you remember someone using words like that to describe the Broncos? Come to think of it, can you ever remember someone using words like that to describe the Broncos? We all know that I wasn’t exactly the biggest Josh McDaniels fan in the offseason, but he has been incredible. After the tumultuous offseason, McDaniels had to put up some big wins early, but no one expected this. His star quarterback is playing like a talented version of Kyle Orton, his star wide receiver has suddenly become Brandon “We Are” Marshall, and oh by the way, McDaniels hasn’t lost a game yet. So yeah, I’m impressed.
2. The perfect season. 16 and 0. Ok, so maybe that’s a bit of a stretch. But as I look at the rest of the Broncos schedule, I think to myself, why not? You know, other than because they need to beat the Ravens, Colts, and Eagles on the road, not to mention the Steelers and Giants at home. But other than that, why not? I bet you didn’t think they’d be 6 and 0 either, right? Or that Kyle Orton would have only one interception through the first six games? Or that the Broncos would have the number one scoring defense in football? I’m just saying, it could happen.
3. Sorry, but I’m still not over the uniforms. Yes the away jerseys they wore in San Diego were better, but still. It’s one thing to embarrass yourselves for one week to honor the ghosts of Broncos past, but week after week after week? We’re sure this is necessary? There have to be other options. For example, why can’t we just honor all the living AFL Broncos at halftime during a home game? Wouldn’t that be a lot more fun, not to mention easier on the eyes? Or better yet, why not just wear the old orange jerseys instead? Would anyone notice? And even if they did, would they say anything? My point is, there has to be another way.
4. And speaking of former Broncos, last week was a big week for two of the greatest Broncos of all time. John Elway was named Man of the Year by the Walter Camp Football Foundation, and Shannon Sharpe was selected as this year’s sole inductee into the Division II Football Hall of Fame. I’m not sure what any of that means, but it does give me the opportunity to say this: Remember that time the Broncos won back to back Super Bowls in the 90s? Yeah, me too. That was awesome.
5. And speaking of awesome, is there any sports team in the world right now in worse shape than the Oakland Raiders? I know there are teams with more losses (the Rams and Titans come to mind), but over the last several years, has any organization looked worse top to bottom than the Raiders? Seriously, they have redefined the word dysfunction each of the last few years, and there are no signs of improvement. None. Between Tom Cable assaulting his assistant coach (I’m sorry, allegedly assaulting his assistant coach), Darren McFadden running the ball only slightly better than I am this season, and JaMarcus Russell playing quarterback (I’m sorry, allegedly playing quarterback), watching the Raiders lose has become almost as much fun as watching the Broncos win.
6. Since the Broncos were off this week and the Nuggets have already qualified for the NBA playoffs (that’s how it works in the NBA, right? As long as you field a team, you make the playoffs?), I decided to check in on the Avs. As it turns out, they are 8 and 1. And 2. Now I don’t really understand hockey (I think it’s the language barrier), but apparently this means that they have won 8 games, lost 1 game, and kinda lost 2 other games. I mean, they didn’t really lose those games, but they didn’t really win them either. I guess. I don’t really know. But hey, Go Avs!
7. In honor of John Elway, thought number 7 has been retired. It will never be thought by anyone to think for the Denver Broncos ever again. Thanks John, you were the best.
8. And finally, this week has reminded me of one very important thing: I hate bye weeks. Seriously, they drive me crazy. Like literally crazy. I mean for God sakes, I just retired a thought. Who does that? Also, in case you missed it, earlier I predicted that the Broncos would finish the regular season 16 and 0. So yeah, I’m pretty happy the bye week is over.
And so, with 7 thoughts from the 7th week of the NFL season, I bid you adieu. Here’s hoping we meet again next week to discuss another number 7: 7 and 0.
October 27, 2009
October 25, 2009
Blame the Mustache
Ever since the Phillies ended the Dodgers’ season last week, I’ve been doing what any other red-blooded American would do in my situation: I’ve been looking for someone to blame. And given the way the Dodgers performed in the NLCS, there were plenty of potential candidates. I could have blamed Clayton Kershaw or George Sherrill for Game 1, I could have blamed Hiroki Kuroda (or Joe Torre) for Game 3, I could have blamed Jonathan Broxton for Game 4, and I could have blamed the entire Dodgers’ lineup for Games 1-5. All good possibilities.
But at the end of the day, despite all of the inept performances by the Boys in Blue, I kept coming back to one inescapable conclusion: The Dodgers just didn’t have enough talent to win. Period. I don’t mean that the Phillies played better for five games, I mean that the Phillies just were better.
Now as we all know, when the players don’t play well enough to win, they get the blame. They get shellacked in the newspapers, criticized on TV, and booed in their home ballparks. And when the manager doesn’t manage well enough to win, making bad decisions in crucial situations, he gets the lions share of the blame (can you say Jim Tracy?). But when the team just doesn’t have enough talent to beat the team in the other dugout, there are only two options: the general manager and the owner. And since the Dodgers’ owner has enough problems these days, I’m blaming the GM.
Sorry mustache fans, but Ned Colletti is the biggest reason why the Dodgers will be watching the World Series at home for the 21st consecutive season.
For the record, I am a Ned Colletti fan. No really, I am. Other than the Jason Schmidt debacle, I think he’s done a great job with the Dodgers, and I honestly don’t think the Dodgers even sniff the NLCS without him. But in 2009, Colletti dropped the ball. Big time.
You see, from the second the Dodgers’ season ended in 2008, it was clear that their starting pitching would be their biggest weakness in 2009. With Derek Lowe and Brad Penny on their way out, there were now gaping holes in the starting rotation that Ned Colletti needed to fill. But Colletti whiffed on C.C. Sabathia and A.J. Burnett during the offseason, instead signing Randy Wolf and pretending that would be enough.
So when the 2009 season began, the Dodgers’ rotation was still their biggest question mark. And despite having the best record in baseball at the all-star break, it still didn’t look like the Dodgers had enough pitching to win in October.
But then, like a gift out of the clear Dodger Blue sky, we learned that both Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee were on the market. Perfect! The Dodgers were just one ace away from a championship caliber team, and now there was not one but two aces on the market! This was our year!
Or not.
As we all know, Colletti couldn’t pull the trigger on either deal, and we got George Sherrill instead. So just to summarize, C.C. Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, Roy Halladay, and Cliff Lee were available, and we got Randy Wolf and George Sherrill. Awesome.
So what happened? What’s the excuse? Why the lack of talent? Well, from everything I’ve heard and read, Colletti thought they were all too expensive. The Dodgers wouldn’t cough up enough money for Sabathia and Burnett, and they wouldn’t give up the prospects necessary to get Halladay and Lee.
I’m sorry, what??
Too expensive?? Really?? We’re sure about that? More expensive than entering October without enough pitching to win? More expensive than being dominated by the Phillies for a second consecutive year? More expensive than yet another year without a championship for one of baseball’s most storied franchises? Really??
I’m sorry, but I just don’t buy it. When four pitchers of that quality are available, you have to find a way to get at least one. You just do.
So no, I don’t accept “But the Blue Jays and Indians wanted too many prospects for Halladay and Lee” as an excuse. To me, Colletti’s 0 for 4 is inexcusable. As Bill Plaschke put it after watching Cliff Lee dominate the Dodgers in Game 2: “I would have liked to see those Dodgers prospects whom they liked more than Cliff Lee.”
Me too Bill, me too.
Don’t get me wrong, I understand why we like prospects. Prospects turn into Andre Ethier, Matt Kemp, James Loney, and Clayton Kershaw. Prospects build dynasties. I get it. But here’s the thing: in the sports world of 2009, there is no next year. And in the Dodgers’ world of 2009 where Manny Ramirez, Rafael Furcal, and Casey Blake were getting older by the day, and where Joe Torre was one step away from retirement, we were lucky there was even a next week. So as GM of the Dodgers in 2009, Ned Colletti’s job was to give the Dodgers the best chance to win in 2009, not in 2012.
Oh, and just in case you think I’m crazy, you should know that Ned Colletti agrees with me. No seriously, he thinks I’m right. In an interview with ESPN immediately after the Game 5 loss, Colletti said, “We have real good pitchers, but we need to get better in the rotation.”
Gee Ned, ya think??
Maybe if you had figured that out in November 2008 instead of October 2009 the Dodgers would be celebrating a National League pennant right now instead of cleaning out their lockers.
So Mr. Colletti, while it pains me to say it, this is strike one. Sorry Ned, but it has to be done. And because I like you, I’ll let you in on a little secret: In the win-at-all-costs sports world of 2009, strike two comes next, followed closely by strike three.
What’s that you say? You don’t know what happens after strike three? That ok, you can ask C.C. Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, Roy Halladay, or Cliff Lee – they know all about it.
But at the end of the day, despite all of the inept performances by the Boys in Blue, I kept coming back to one inescapable conclusion: The Dodgers just didn’t have enough talent to win. Period. I don’t mean that the Phillies played better for five games, I mean that the Phillies just were better.
Now as we all know, when the players don’t play well enough to win, they get the blame. They get shellacked in the newspapers, criticized on TV, and booed in their home ballparks. And when the manager doesn’t manage well enough to win, making bad decisions in crucial situations, he gets the lions share of the blame (can you say Jim Tracy?). But when the team just doesn’t have enough talent to beat the team in the other dugout, there are only two options: the general manager and the owner. And since the Dodgers’ owner has enough problems these days, I’m blaming the GM.
Sorry mustache fans, but Ned Colletti is the biggest reason why the Dodgers will be watching the World Series at home for the 21st consecutive season.
For the record, I am a Ned Colletti fan. No really, I am. Other than the Jason Schmidt debacle, I think he’s done a great job with the Dodgers, and I honestly don’t think the Dodgers even sniff the NLCS without him. But in 2009, Colletti dropped the ball. Big time.
You see, from the second the Dodgers’ season ended in 2008, it was clear that their starting pitching would be their biggest weakness in 2009. With Derek Lowe and Brad Penny on their way out, there were now gaping holes in the starting rotation that Ned Colletti needed to fill. But Colletti whiffed on C.C. Sabathia and A.J. Burnett during the offseason, instead signing Randy Wolf and pretending that would be enough.
So when the 2009 season began, the Dodgers’ rotation was still their biggest question mark. And despite having the best record in baseball at the all-star break, it still didn’t look like the Dodgers had enough pitching to win in October.
But then, like a gift out of the clear Dodger Blue sky, we learned that both Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee were on the market. Perfect! The Dodgers were just one ace away from a championship caliber team, and now there was not one but two aces on the market! This was our year!
Or not.
As we all know, Colletti couldn’t pull the trigger on either deal, and we got George Sherrill instead. So just to summarize, C.C. Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, Roy Halladay, and Cliff Lee were available, and we got Randy Wolf and George Sherrill. Awesome.
So what happened? What’s the excuse? Why the lack of talent? Well, from everything I’ve heard and read, Colletti thought they were all too expensive. The Dodgers wouldn’t cough up enough money for Sabathia and Burnett, and they wouldn’t give up the prospects necessary to get Halladay and Lee.
I’m sorry, what??
Too expensive?? Really?? We’re sure about that? More expensive than entering October without enough pitching to win? More expensive than being dominated by the Phillies for a second consecutive year? More expensive than yet another year without a championship for one of baseball’s most storied franchises? Really??
I’m sorry, but I just don’t buy it. When four pitchers of that quality are available, you have to find a way to get at least one. You just do.
So no, I don’t accept “But the Blue Jays and Indians wanted too many prospects for Halladay and Lee” as an excuse. To me, Colletti’s 0 for 4 is inexcusable. As Bill Plaschke put it after watching Cliff Lee dominate the Dodgers in Game 2: “I would have liked to see those Dodgers prospects whom they liked more than Cliff Lee.”
Me too Bill, me too.
Don’t get me wrong, I understand why we like prospects. Prospects turn into Andre Ethier, Matt Kemp, James Loney, and Clayton Kershaw. Prospects build dynasties. I get it. But here’s the thing: in the sports world of 2009, there is no next year. And in the Dodgers’ world of 2009 where Manny Ramirez, Rafael Furcal, and Casey Blake were getting older by the day, and where Joe Torre was one step away from retirement, we were lucky there was even a next week. So as GM of the Dodgers in 2009, Ned Colletti’s job was to give the Dodgers the best chance to win in 2009, not in 2012.
Oh, and just in case you think I’m crazy, you should know that Ned Colletti agrees with me. No seriously, he thinks I’m right. In an interview with ESPN immediately after the Game 5 loss, Colletti said, “We have real good pitchers, but we need to get better in the rotation.”
Gee Ned, ya think??
Maybe if you had figured that out in November 2008 instead of October 2009 the Dodgers would be celebrating a National League pennant right now instead of cleaning out their lockers.
So Mr. Colletti, while it pains me to say it, this is strike one. Sorry Ned, but it has to be done. And because I like you, I’ll let you in on a little secret: In the win-at-all-costs sports world of 2009, strike two comes next, followed closely by strike three.
What’s that you say? You don’t know what happens after strike three? That ok, you can ask C.C. Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, Roy Halladay, or Cliff Lee – they know all about it.
October 18, 2009
Welcome to The Cheap Seats
I wanted to be a Major League Baseball player when I grew up. That was it. There were no other options. There was no Plan B. But somewhere around my second year as the utility player on my high school baseball team (I played left bench, scorekeeper, right bench, first base coach, and left out), I realized that my dream probably wasn’t meant to be. And even though I went on to enjoy a relatively successful intra-mural career (winning two softball titles in college and three flag-football titles in law school), my most valuable sports contribution has always been, and will continue to be, my fanhood.
But here’s the thing: I lived in Denver until I was seven, Northern California till I was 10, Southern California through college, spent law school in Chicago, and now live in Washington DC. So needless to say, my taste in sports teams is a bit eclectic. At various times in my life I have rooted for the Broncos, Cubs, Buffaloes, Dodgers, Avalanche, Bruins, 49ers, Rockies, Lakers, Angels, Bears, Nuggets, and Nationals, not necessarily in that order. To be honest, I’m a bit of a mess.
So what does this mean for you? It means that at certain points during our time together, you may feel confused, angry, and maybe even betrayed by my columns. You may feel frustrated by my flexible fanhood, perplexed by my pliable passions, or astounded by my amazing ability to apply alliterative adjectives to almost any action, affair, or accomplishment (sorry, I got carried away).
But to make this a little easier for you (and to give myself some credibility as a sports fan), I should tell you that, despite this tumultuous sports ride, I have developed some ground rules. Specifically, there are five non-negotiable principles that truly define who I am as a fan.
Number one: I am, above all else, a sports fan. My big three are baseball, football, and golf, but other than the WNBA, I’ll watch just about anything.
Number two: I bleed Dodger Blue. The Rockies didn’t come to Denver until after I left, and my parents both grew up in Southern California, so I was raised a Dodger fan. Not that I didn’t love the Blake Street Bombers and root like hell during Rocktober, but the Rockies have to be number two, sorry. And yes, I realize they are in the same division, and I know that sometimes I write about the Rockies. Like I said, it’s complicated.
Number three: I also bleed Orange. As a kid growing up in Denver in the 1980s, being a Broncos fan wasn’t really an option. “Super Bowl” was a dirty word until 1998, “Three Amigos” never referred to Chevy Chase, Steve Martin, or Martin Short, and there are rumors that I once (or twice) grew a mullet to honor John Elway. This is just how things were done.
Number four: U-C-L-A Go! Fight! Win! Like I said, my parents grew up in SoCal. Dad went to UCLA. Then my older cousins went to UCLA. Then my friends from high school went to UCLA. Then I went to UCLA. Then more friends from high school went to UCLA. Then my brother went to UCLA. Then my younger cousins went to UCLA. All told, my family has nearly one dozen Bruins, and has had a continuous presence on campus since the late nineties. So yeah, I’m a fan.
Number five: I detest all things Giant, Raider, and Trojan. See rules two through four above.
So you see, I’m not a lost cause. I do have some ground rules. Yes, my fanhood has some flexibility at the margins, but give me the Dodgers, Broncos, Bruins, and not the WNBA, and I’m a happy man.
So that’s it. That’s what you need to know. I will discuss many topics and say many ridiculous things in the days, weeks, and months to come, but you have my word that those five principles will never change.
Oh, and one more thing: I started writing because I wanted to talk about sports. So if you have something to say, don’t be shy. Post it on the site or send me an email. I’d love to hear compliments, criticisms, column ideas, or anything else you want to discuss. Just let me know.
And thanks for visiting The Cheap Seats. I hope you enjoy the view.
But here’s the thing: I lived in Denver until I was seven, Northern California till I was 10, Southern California through college, spent law school in Chicago, and now live in Washington DC. So needless to say, my taste in sports teams is a bit eclectic. At various times in my life I have rooted for the Broncos, Cubs, Buffaloes, Dodgers, Avalanche, Bruins, 49ers, Rockies, Lakers, Angels, Bears, Nuggets, and Nationals, not necessarily in that order. To be honest, I’m a bit of a mess.
So what does this mean for you? It means that at certain points during our time together, you may feel confused, angry, and maybe even betrayed by my columns. You may feel frustrated by my flexible fanhood, perplexed by my pliable passions, or astounded by my amazing ability to apply alliterative adjectives to almost any action, affair, or accomplishment (sorry, I got carried away).
But to make this a little easier for you (and to give myself some credibility as a sports fan), I should tell you that, despite this tumultuous sports ride, I have developed some ground rules. Specifically, there are five non-negotiable principles that truly define who I am as a fan.
Number one: I am, above all else, a sports fan. My big three are baseball, football, and golf, but other than the WNBA, I’ll watch just about anything.
Number two: I bleed Dodger Blue. The Rockies didn’t come to Denver until after I left, and my parents both grew up in Southern California, so I was raised a Dodger fan. Not that I didn’t love the Blake Street Bombers and root like hell during Rocktober, but the Rockies have to be number two, sorry. And yes, I realize they are in the same division, and I know that sometimes I write about the Rockies. Like I said, it’s complicated.
Number three: I also bleed Orange. As a kid growing up in Denver in the 1980s, being a Broncos fan wasn’t really an option. “Super Bowl” was a dirty word until 1998, “Three Amigos” never referred to Chevy Chase, Steve Martin, or Martin Short, and there are rumors that I once (or twice) grew a mullet to honor John Elway. This is just how things were done.
Number four: U-C-L-A Go! Fight! Win! Like I said, my parents grew up in SoCal. Dad went to UCLA. Then my older cousins went to UCLA. Then my friends from high school went to UCLA. Then I went to UCLA. Then more friends from high school went to UCLA. Then my brother went to UCLA. Then my younger cousins went to UCLA. All told, my family has nearly one dozen Bruins, and has had a continuous presence on campus since the late nineties. So yeah, I’m a fan.
Number five: I detest all things Giant, Raider, and Trojan. See rules two through four above.
So you see, I’m not a lost cause. I do have some ground rules. Yes, my fanhood has some flexibility at the margins, but give me the Dodgers, Broncos, Bruins, and not the WNBA, and I’m a happy man.
So that’s it. That’s what you need to know. I will discuss many topics and say many ridiculous things in the days, weeks, and months to come, but you have my word that those five principles will never change.
Oh, and one more thing: I started writing because I wanted to talk about sports. So if you have something to say, don’t be shy. Post it on the site or send me an email. I’d love to hear compliments, criticisms, column ideas, or anything else you want to discuss. Just let me know.
And thanks for visiting The Cheap Seats. I hope you enjoy the view.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)