Thursday, February 02, 2006
McNabb crushed and dead
McNabb is finished in Philadelphia. The rest of McNabb's Philly life will be a living hell. He is getting buried like never before on the 610-WIP. It is now officially impossible for him to succeed in Philly. He joins the long line of stars run out of town because the reactionary fan and the WIP station turned on them.
Thursday, January 26, 2006
For you George Will fans
Here's George Will on 'Thunder Road':
Will-On "The Road"
Why state the obvious about this movie (that it takes liberties)? Why would it be different from any other picture?
Most of what he says is historically accurate, U of San Fran, the black all-americans, etc. The problem is he totally misses the point. It is not about TW starting 5 black players, it's about Rupp's refusal to recruit black players. This was all-white basketball's last stand. After Kentucky lost, it was obvious that allowing "race" to determine your recruiting policy was no longer a viable method of building a top program. Integrate or perish.
And could someone explain to me what is going on at the end of this piece? Is George conceding that racism existed in college basketball beyond 1950?! Or he is just content to state historical facts and let them hang without stating the significance?
Why ask such a stupid rhetorical question like, "What do you suppose that was about?" It was about race and limiting the effectiveness of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. It was okay to have one Wilt Chamberlain. He was a freak. But after the all-white all-stars got beat, the cracker-white NCAA brass realized UCLA freshman Lew Alcindor would be eligible in '67. Alcindor could "slam dunk" without jumping. His enormous height and athletic advantage needed to be neutralized so grand white wizards like Pete Maravich could lead the nation in scoring while failing to qualify for the Tournament.
But George already knows all this.
Will-On "The Road"
Why state the obvious about this movie (that it takes liberties)? Why would it be different from any other picture?
Most of what he says is historically accurate, U of San Fran, the black all-americans, etc. The problem is he totally misses the point. It is not about TW starting 5 black players, it's about Rupp's refusal to recruit black players. This was all-white basketball's last stand. After Kentucky lost, it was obvious that allowing "race" to determine your recruiting policy was no longer a viable method of building a top program. Integrate or perish.
And could someone explain to me what is going on at the end of this piece? Is George conceding that racism existed in college basketball beyond 1950?! Or he is just content to state historical facts and let them hang without stating the significance?
Why ask such a stupid rhetorical question like, "What do you suppose that was about?" It was about race and limiting the effectiveness of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. It was okay to have one Wilt Chamberlain. He was a freak. But after the all-white all-stars got beat, the cracker-white NCAA brass realized UCLA freshman Lew Alcindor would be eligible in '67. Alcindor could "slam dunk" without jumping. His enormous height and athletic advantage needed to be neutralized so grand white wizards like Pete Maravich could lead the nation in scoring while failing to qualify for the Tournament.
But George already knows all this.
Monday, January 16, 2006
A great weekend for haters
Bask in the hater-zone!
Some nice shots fired at sports cliches as well. In "defense wins championships" news, the Bears lost because they couldn't score when they needed to and because their defense looked like garbage against the true league MVP. Perhaps that classic phrase should be changed to "more often than not, the better team wins."
In "some guys are just winners and clutch winners always win" news, Tom Brady lost!
The more sports I watch, the less I believe in old sports adages like "clutch" or "choke" and the more I believe that sports outcomes are greatly impacted by chance, circumstance, luck, bounces of the ball, opportunity, etc.
Simply put-Sports outcomes are the "Match Point" of sports!
Some nice shots fired at sports cliches as well. In "defense wins championships" news, the Bears lost because they couldn't score when they needed to and because their defense looked like garbage against the true league MVP. Perhaps that classic phrase should be changed to "more often than not, the better team wins."
In "some guys are just winners and clutch winners always win" news, Tom Brady lost!
The more sports I watch, the less I believe in old sports adages like "clutch" or "choke" and the more I believe that sports outcomes are greatly impacted by chance, circumstance, luck, bounces of the ball, opportunity, etc.
Simply put-Sports outcomes are the "Match Point" of sports!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)