I know this is my sports blog and I usually keep it on the sports tip ... but I just had to get this off my chest.
The movie industry is just killing me!
My wife and I took our two nieces to the movies on Tuesday. We saw the new Adam Sandler flick, "Grown Ups". It was cute, family friendly and funny. The only issue is that amount of money I had to pay to see it.
Again, it was a Tuesday. At 2:45pm. In Charlotte, NC. I had to pay $8 per adult ticket and $6 per child ticket. Yep, that's the matinee prices ... which were the expensive prices a decade ago. So that was $28 just to walk in the door. Not horrible, but still stung.
Now we head to the concessions. It cost me $17 for two large drinks and a large popcorn for me and my wife. It cost me $15 for two regular drinks and a regular popcorn for my nieces. There was $32 for the food. I haven't seen one second of the movie and I've already spent $60.
Isn't there something wrong with that? Heck, we stopped at Walgreens before we went to the movies to stock up on candy (they have the same boxed candy there for $1 ... $2 to $3 cheaper than what it would have cost to buy it there).
See, this is a movie I figured I would like. My wife and I will rarely go "try" a movie anymore. If we aren't absolutely sure that it's right up our alley, we won't go. We got burned on this recently on "Shutter Island". Sure, the reviews were good for it, but it sucked. It was boring, drawn out and extremely predictable. You could see the twist a mile away (at least we could) and were disappointed in the movie. For the two of us, we spent $20 on tickets and $15 on concessions -- $35 in total -- for us to have a bad time. That sucks.
It's not like I'm one of those people that drones on about this. I was a movie nut back in my single days and when I first got married. I used to go to movies all the time back in the day ... when I was broke ... and never was taken aback by the prices I was paying. But now when I make more money than I ever before, it really is getting to me.
I don't have kids (working on it). So I really empathise with families and how much it costs to do anything anymore. That includes sports (see, I knew I could get back on task!). If I had to pay $60 every time I went to the movies then I won't go to as many. Same thing with sports. I went to a Pirates-Reds game with my wife, my two nieces, my sister, my mom and my wife's two cousins. Yeah, I've blacked out what I've spent there.
I know no one cares about this because as long as schmucks like me keep buying tix, then it won't go away.
By the way, the four of us were the only people in the theatre to see Grown Ups. The only people.
Rabu, 30 Juni 2010
Selasa, 29 Juni 2010
Every Team Should Be Represented In All-Star Game
We are nearing the MLB All Star break and we get into the time honored tradition of whining about who is on the team. One of my main gripes is when people say "they shouldn't have at least one person from every franchise in the game. Put the best players on it instead."
Um. No.
To me, that's part of baseball. The entire league and all its teams should be represented. I don't care if a 7th Yankee doesn't get on the team because you had to put a Royal on there. All the bad teams should have someone on their league's squad.
And spare me "the game counts now" crap. If that was the guide for the game, than the National League would start Ubaldo Jimenez and make him pitch six, seven innings. The starters (or the best players) would play the entire game and never sit. I mean, what other game during the season sees teams intentionally try to get guys rest and feature as many players on their expanded roster as possible? That's the entire reason the leagues expanded their rosters ... to get more players on the team (and allow those players to receive contracted bonuses). Why would we need more players on the team if the starters played all or most of the game?
See, the line of reasoning is stupid. Oh, and what if no Kansas City Royal deserved to get on the team and none were voted to it? What if those Royals turn it around and win the AL Central? Say they take that momentum and win the American League pennant. So the World Series ... which home field advantage is determined by the All Star Game ... will feature a team that wasn't allowed to have a player on it to help determine who gets the advantage.
To me, the fact that the home field advantage is on the line even solidifies the fact that every team should be represented. Don't feature just the best players on the best teams -- bring on a rep from all teams since that is the true "power" of league. Take the good with the bad.
(By the way, I think home field advantage in the World Series should be determined by who wins the interleague war).
So bring on the Royal, the Oriole, the Indian, the Mariner, the Pirate, the Astro and the Diamondback. They all should have at least one guy flipping their cap in Anaheim.
Um. No.
To me, that's part of baseball. The entire league and all its teams should be represented. I don't care if a 7th Yankee doesn't get on the team because you had to put a Royal on there. All the bad teams should have someone on their league's squad.
And spare me "the game counts now" crap. If that was the guide for the game, than the National League would start Ubaldo Jimenez and make him pitch six, seven innings. The starters (or the best players) would play the entire game and never sit. I mean, what other game during the season sees teams intentionally try to get guys rest and feature as many players on their expanded roster as possible? That's the entire reason the leagues expanded their rosters ... to get more players on the team (and allow those players to receive contracted bonuses). Why would we need more players on the team if the starters played all or most of the game?
See, the line of reasoning is stupid. Oh, and what if no Kansas City Royal deserved to get on the team and none were voted to it? What if those Royals turn it around and win the AL Central? Say they take that momentum and win the American League pennant. So the World Series ... which home field advantage is determined by the All Star Game ... will feature a team that wasn't allowed to have a player on it to help determine who gets the advantage.
To me, the fact that the home field advantage is on the line even solidifies the fact that every team should be represented. Don't feature just the best players on the best teams -- bring on a rep from all teams since that is the true "power" of league. Take the good with the bad.
(By the way, I think home field advantage in the World Series should be determined by who wins the interleague war).
So bring on the Royal, the Oriole, the Indian, the Mariner, the Pirate, the Astro and the Diamondback. They all should have at least one guy flipping their cap in Anaheim.
Why Soccer Really Won't Work In America
Now the pundits want to discuss the impact the 2010 World Cup will have on the future of soccer in the United States. Some think this will start to take off and the sport will flourish. Others think that we'll just go back to our daily lives and not care again.
I think the latter will happen.
I do think soccer will get a slight up-tick (more on that later). But soccer will never be very meaningful in this country. It wasn't after Pele joined the American pro leagues. It wasn't after the U.S. hosted the 1994 World Cup. It won't be now.
The difference is that here, the best athletes don't play soccer. In nearly every other country, the best athletes are pushed into soccer and that is the sport everyone is dying to play. In the U.S., the best athletes want to play basketball, football or baseball. Soccer picks up only the diehards.
Imagine if guys like LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, Adrian Peterson, Joe Mauer, Jimmy Rollins, Dwyane Wade and Chris Johnson played soccer instead of their respective sports. The Americans would field a team with so much athleticsm and (probably) skill that we'd be among the elite in the world soccer community. Those guys won't play soccer, though, so we don't have to worry about that.
The one thing soccer could have going for it is if they decide to reach out to the inner cities and latch on to the growing Hispanic communities out there. It would still be hard to get kids growing up in America to play soccer no matter their nationality, but you'd have a better chance going after kids whose parents grew up loving the game. Outside of that, I don't see soccer exploding here for a long, long time.
I think the latter will happen.
I do think soccer will get a slight up-tick (more on that later). But soccer will never be very meaningful in this country. It wasn't after Pele joined the American pro leagues. It wasn't after the U.S. hosted the 1994 World Cup. It won't be now.
The difference is that here, the best athletes don't play soccer. In nearly every other country, the best athletes are pushed into soccer and that is the sport everyone is dying to play. In the U.S., the best athletes want to play basketball, football or baseball. Soccer picks up only the diehards.
Imagine if guys like LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, Adrian Peterson, Joe Mauer, Jimmy Rollins, Dwyane Wade and Chris Johnson played soccer instead of their respective sports. The Americans would field a team with so much athleticsm and (probably) skill that we'd be among the elite in the world soccer community. Those guys won't play soccer, though, so we don't have to worry about that.
The one thing soccer could have going for it is if they decide to reach out to the inner cities and latch on to the growing Hispanic communities out there. It would still be hard to get kids growing up in America to play soccer no matter their nationality, but you'd have a better chance going after kids whose parents grew up loving the game. Outside of that, I don't see soccer exploding here for a long, long time.
Senin, 21 Juni 2010
Should Kobe Have Both His Numbers Retired?
With all of this discussion among fans and talking heads about Kobe Bryant's legacy and his place amongst the great of the NBA, it got me thinking about the simpler spoils. Like, when the Lakers retire Bryant's jersey ... will it be No. 8 or No. 24?
Or both.
There's a case to have both numbers retired.
NUMBER 8 (1996-2006): Kobe won the first three of his NBA Championships while wearing this number. He also accomplished the most amazing individual feat I've ever seen when he dumped 81 points on the Raptors. He also finished off his career with that number with a 35.4 ppg average in 2006; one of the highest scoring averages anyone has had over the last four decades.
NUMBER 24 (2006-present): He's won two titles so far with this number. He also transitioned from athletic marvel to smartest basketball player during this time. While he had already won three titles before, these were title teams he was the leader of. He won two NBA Finals MVP awards. In the four years he's had this number, they've been to the Finals three times.
Statistic-wise, having No. 8 retired makes the most sense. Most of his jaw dropping feats happened during these years. But the Kobe we'll remember the most after he retires will be the current one. The Assassin. The Black Mamba. The greatest player of his time.
They'll probably only retire No. 24 since that's the number he will leave off with. Still, there's a case to be made for both.
Or both.
There's a case to have both numbers retired.
NUMBER 8 (1996-2006): Kobe won the first three of his NBA Championships while wearing this number. He also accomplished the most amazing individual feat I've ever seen when he dumped 81 points on the Raptors. He also finished off his career with that number with a 35.4 ppg average in 2006; one of the highest scoring averages anyone has had over the last four decades.
NUMBER 24 (2006-present): He's won two titles so far with this number. He also transitioned from athletic marvel to smartest basketball player during this time. While he had already won three titles before, these were title teams he was the leader of. He won two NBA Finals MVP awards. In the four years he's had this number, they've been to the Finals three times.
Statistic-wise, having No. 8 retired makes the most sense. Most of his jaw dropping feats happened during these years. But the Kobe we'll remember the most after he retires will be the current one. The Assassin. The Black Mamba. The greatest player of his time.
They'll probably only retire No. 24 since that's the number he will leave off with. Still, there's a case to be made for both.
Jumat, 18 Juni 2010
Why Can't We Eliminate Referees?
This is 2010. Sports are different. They are huge money makers that fans get more on edge about than ever before. In a world where few things are sacred, your sports allegiances are some of our strongest loves.
So when we see someone make a mistake and screw over one of our teams, it's grounds to go.
Today's USA-Slovenia World Cup soccer game/match/round/whatever featured a goal that was negated by a bad call by an official. This comes a couple weeks after Jim Joyce robbed Armando Galarraga of a perfect game. And all of that comes after the Tim Donaghy gets pinched for tampering with games for gamblers' benefit.
Officiating is horrible everywhere. It isn't all their fault. Officiating sports is one of the toughest things to do. You have to be Armando Galarraga every day ... perfect. You cannot make a mistake or ... in this day and age ... it will be shown in 10 different angles and fans will be instantly upset. Dealing with angry players (who may or may not be correct) is another deal.
The only time I ever officiated anything was during a "charity" basketball game. I played in a youth league at my local YMCA when I was 17 years old. The "charity" game featured all the coaches of the various teams against the officials in the various leagues. It was all supposed to be in great fun and a couple of players, myself included, got to hold a whistle to at least attempt to act like a ref.
Big mistake. Those coaches and refs complained about everything. They wanted ticky tack fouls called but then would scream bloody murder when they assaulted someone and you blew the whistle. I never saw grown men act like babies in my life. Again, we were teenagers who never did this before ... and these were our mentors. From that point on, I never officiated anything in my life. I don't want to get involved.
That small sample has allowed me to be a bit sympathetic about officials. But I'm not on the biggest stage in sports. I was at some YCMA in Charlotte for a meaningless game. I'm not calling the World Cup or Super Bowl or NBA Finals or a Major League Baseball game. Those guys do that for a living and are the best in their business. And they get it wrong.
Why can't we just eliminated these guys? The linesmen at tennis matches. Officials in football. Umps in baseball? I mean, do we really need an ump tell me if someone is safe or out? You could sit a camera on each base (or even sensors) to determine that. Sure, we need humans out there for a quick call in baseball (we can't keep playing on if we don't know if there was an out or not), but we can get these cats a bunch of help.
Again, this is 2010 and still no one can get it right. Even the sports that use technology to aid their officiating can't get it completely right. Why isn't there a replay offical that makes the calls in the booth for the NFL? Why do we have to call down to the referee and have him put his head under a hood and watch the play? Pay someone to sit up there with all the equipment and make those calls. I can sit at my house and with my DVR make a decision quicker.
How hard is it to have someone sitting at each venue (or even one guy sitting at the main offices) who can quickly look at each play and then correct it when needed? I know there are piddly calls that may not need a change (did the clock stop with 9:37 or 9:38 left?; is it 2nd and 4 or 2nd and 4 1/2?) but the big mistakes need to be corrected. Obvious mistakes need to be overturned.
You owe that to us, the fans.
So when we see someone make a mistake and screw over one of our teams, it's grounds to go.
Today's USA-Slovenia World Cup soccer game/match/round/whatever featured a goal that was negated by a bad call by an official. This comes a couple weeks after Jim Joyce robbed Armando Galarraga of a perfect game. And all of that comes after the Tim Donaghy gets pinched for tampering with games for gamblers' benefit.
Officiating is horrible everywhere. It isn't all their fault. Officiating sports is one of the toughest things to do. You have to be Armando Galarraga every day ... perfect. You cannot make a mistake or ... in this day and age ... it will be shown in 10 different angles and fans will be instantly upset. Dealing with angry players (who may or may not be correct) is another deal.
The only time I ever officiated anything was during a "charity" basketball game. I played in a youth league at my local YMCA when I was 17 years old. The "charity" game featured all the coaches of the various teams against the officials in the various leagues. It was all supposed to be in great fun and a couple of players, myself included, got to hold a whistle to at least attempt to act like a ref.
Big mistake. Those coaches and refs complained about everything. They wanted ticky tack fouls called but then would scream bloody murder when they assaulted someone and you blew the whistle. I never saw grown men act like babies in my life. Again, we were teenagers who never did this before ... and these were our mentors. From that point on, I never officiated anything in my life. I don't want to get involved.
That small sample has allowed me to be a bit sympathetic about officials. But I'm not on the biggest stage in sports. I was at some YCMA in Charlotte for a meaningless game. I'm not calling the World Cup or Super Bowl or NBA Finals or a Major League Baseball game. Those guys do that for a living and are the best in their business. And they get it wrong.
Why can't we just eliminated these guys? The linesmen at tennis matches. Officials in football. Umps in baseball? I mean, do we really need an ump tell me if someone is safe or out? You could sit a camera on each base (or even sensors) to determine that. Sure, we need humans out there for a quick call in baseball (we can't keep playing on if we don't know if there was an out or not), but we can get these cats a bunch of help.
Again, this is 2010 and still no one can get it right. Even the sports that use technology to aid their officiating can't get it completely right. Why isn't there a replay offical that makes the calls in the booth for the NFL? Why do we have to call down to the referee and have him put his head under a hood and watch the play? Pay someone to sit up there with all the equipment and make those calls. I can sit at my house and with my DVR make a decision quicker.
How hard is it to have someone sitting at each venue (or even one guy sitting at the main offices) who can quickly look at each play and then correct it when needed? I know there are piddly calls that may not need a change (did the clock stop with 9:37 or 9:38 left?; is it 2nd and 4 or 2nd and 4 1/2?) but the big mistakes need to be corrected. Obvious mistakes need to be overturned.
You owe that to us, the fans.
Kamis, 17 Juni 2010
Remembering Game 7 of the 2010 NBA Finals
Game 7 and the 2010 NBA Finals are in the book after an interesting game Thursday. Not a great game ... but highly intense and very physical. Great matchup. That's what you get in Game 7s. These guys know what you want to do and are now fully trained to try to stop it.
So here are my bullet points after Game 7:
KOBE BRYANT: He's got his 5th ring. Despite the horrible game he had, he found other ways to contribute. His rebounding and defense were outstanding and he's a deserving Finals MVP. His legacy is solid.
RAY ALLEN: I said going into this game that Allen will either have 25 points or 11 points. Nothing in between. I was nearly correct, since Allen just got 13 points. I don't see how one of the greatest shooters we've ever seen had such a horrible Finals (aside from that epic Game 2).
RON ARTEST: All year long, everybody wondered if the Lakers made a mistake signing Ron Ron instead of resigning Trevor Ariza. It seemed to work out nicely. While Artest didn't put up huge numbers, he came up huge when it counted. His tip in at the buzzer in Game 5 of the Western Conference championship saved the season. He then went on to score 25 on the Suns in a closeout game. In this series, he made life a living hell for Paul Pierce. And when everyone else was struggling, it was Artest fighting for rebounds, loose balls and scoring points.
PHIL JACKSON: I think he made the key in-game adjustment. In the third quarter, the Lakers started switching off on everything. Didn't matter who was guarding who ... they switched. That helped keep the Celtics out of the paint and forced them to take tough shots. It would be easy for a coach to get bent with a 13-point deficit in the third quarter, but Phil kept calm and got his troops directed to the right path.
KEVIN GARNETT: KG isn't the same cat anymore. He is in stretches and if he's rested. I think KG's minutes need to be dropped in order to make himself more effective. He was great in the first half but had no gas in the tank late.
DOC RIVERS: I think he's out the door. He coached a great series, but I think he sees the window closing in Boston. I think he hangs up his whistle and spends time with his family. When he wants to get back into coaching, he'll have his pick of jobs. In this Game 7, he really struggled trying to keep his guys fresh. Because he couldn't get them enough rest, Sheed and KG hit the wall late. That's not a knock on Doc since there really wasn't anything he could do.
SHELDON WILLIAMS: He's the reason the Celtics loss. Don't you know that Duke players can't win titles in the NBA!?!?
ANDREW BYNUM: I can't believe he played in these playoffs with his knee that jacked up. Thanks for showing up!
SASHA VUJACIC: Coming in cold with 12 seconds left and hitting two huge free throws was impressive.
So here are my bullet points after Game 7:
KOBE BRYANT: He's got his 5th ring. Despite the horrible game he had, he found other ways to contribute. His rebounding and defense were outstanding and he's a deserving Finals MVP. His legacy is solid.
RAY ALLEN: I said going into this game that Allen will either have 25 points or 11 points. Nothing in between. I was nearly correct, since Allen just got 13 points. I don't see how one of the greatest shooters we've ever seen had such a horrible Finals (aside from that epic Game 2).
RON ARTEST: All year long, everybody wondered if the Lakers made a mistake signing Ron Ron instead of resigning Trevor Ariza. It seemed to work out nicely. While Artest didn't put up huge numbers, he came up huge when it counted. His tip in at the buzzer in Game 5 of the Western Conference championship saved the season. He then went on to score 25 on the Suns in a closeout game. In this series, he made life a living hell for Paul Pierce. And when everyone else was struggling, it was Artest fighting for rebounds, loose balls and scoring points.
PHIL JACKSON: I think he made the key in-game adjustment. In the third quarter, the Lakers started switching off on everything. Didn't matter who was guarding who ... they switched. That helped keep the Celtics out of the paint and forced them to take tough shots. It would be easy for a coach to get bent with a 13-point deficit in the third quarter, but Phil kept calm and got his troops directed to the right path.
KEVIN GARNETT: KG isn't the same cat anymore. He is in stretches and if he's rested. I think KG's minutes need to be dropped in order to make himself more effective. He was great in the first half but had no gas in the tank late.
DOC RIVERS: I think he's out the door. He coached a great series, but I think he sees the window closing in Boston. I think he hangs up his whistle and spends time with his family. When he wants to get back into coaching, he'll have his pick of jobs. In this Game 7, he really struggled trying to keep his guys fresh. Because he couldn't get them enough rest, Sheed and KG hit the wall late. That's not a knock on Doc since there really wasn't anything he could do.
SHELDON WILLIAMS: He's the reason the Celtics loss. Don't you know that Duke players can't win titles in the NBA!?!?
ANDREW BYNUM: I can't believe he played in these playoffs with his knee that jacked up. Thanks for showing up!
SASHA VUJACIC: Coming in cold with 12 seconds left and hitting two huge free throws was impressive.
Shaq: Kobe Wins and He'll Be Greatest Laker
In an interview (the video is shown here at LakersNation), Shaquille O'Neal says that if Kobe Bryant and the Lakers win tonight's Game 7 against Boston, he would be the greatest Laker ever.
No.
He's in the discussion already, but I have to put Kareem and Magic ahead of him. Jerry West is a tough call. So is Shaq, himself, who dominated as a Laker.
This all smells like Shaq wants to know how Kobe's "ass tastes". Shaq is ... shockingly ... a free agent this summer. He still wants to play and he most likely wants to play for a winner. He tried to chase down a 5th ring in with Steve Nash in Phoenix and with LeBron James in Cleveland. It looks like he's trying to position himself to try to squeeze one more out with the Lakers.
If he is very cheap, it's not a bad move. I mean, he is better than DJ Mbenga. If he played cheap and was just a fill-in for Andrew Bynum then it could work. But the scuttlebutt that the roster would become just isn't worth it. I mean, you (probably) have the Zen Master next to The Black Mamba next to Ron-Ron next to Lamar Odom next to Shaq?
Anyways, it's nice to see that Shaq still loves him some Kobe Bryant.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)