The Getting LeBron James Debate… A Big Apple Shaped King’s Crown

June 30, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Bleacher Fan.

Living near Cleveland, and near LeBron James’ hometown of Akron, allow me to go on the record and say that I am disgusted with LeBron James.

I have written several pieces on LeBron throughout the last NBA season and post-season. I have also done several radio appearances where I genuinely voice dismay at James’ decision-making. It has become apparent to me now, on the eve of “The Decision” or “The Meetings” or whatever dumb name ESPN will slap on it, that LeBron James will respond to the strongest pitch he receives – and that pitch will come from the New York Knicks.

The Knicks essentially have to overcome two nuanced but primary advantages over LeBron’s stated frontrunner, the Cavaliers.

First, the hometown effect. I could bore everyone by stating the obvious advantages of living in New York versus living in Cleveland, but I think we all get that. Of course, LeBron does have strong ties to northeast Ohio, and those cannot be dismissed. But New York offers tremendous advantages that start with an unparalleled nightlife and an endless stream of admirers with the business opportunities LeBron covets. Sure the hometown is important, and I am sure the Knicks would allow for relocation for his entire family to New York in a few swanky downtown lofts… complete with Jay-Z rapping something about how home is where the heart is. New York has an edge here, if the reps play the diplomacy game properly. And I am sure they will.

Second, we all know that economics play a factor here. While it is true the Cavs can offer LeBron the most money, what is often left on the editing floor of virtually every story published on the subject is that Cleveland can only win the money game if LeBron were to sign a long term – six year – contract.

Since business thinking is driving this entire enterprise right now, I highly doubt that LeBron will sign a six year deal, no matter where he signs. That would mean he would be ineligible for free agency until he is 31-years old. We all know why this is such a big decision… because LeBron will play his prime years under the next deal. But it is just bad business to sign a six year deal. A three year deal means he can get max money from anywhere – the same amount. That neutralizes any Cavs financial advantage.

New York representatives can easily overcome any Cleveland advantage with a well crafted pitch. New York cannot be Cleveland or Akron, but it can host the people that make LeBron feel at home. New York cannot offer as much money, but it can offer the same amount of money – and a very enticing world where business and pleasure off the court are easily accomplished. New York also offers a connection to basketball’s history that is an X factor for a guy like LeBron who really does care about, and have respect for, the history of the game.

New York also has enough money to add at least one more high priced free agent, and likely another mid-level talent. New York sure has a lot of roster holes – a fact the brass does not back away from – but it sure has the space to make some key additions. LeBron and Joe Johnson, and one more talented player, is plenty of firepower. It is enough to remind us all of a move Boston made a few years ago. Should the New York representatives include that model in their presentation, it is hard to argue with the success.

Plus, if New York does not get LeBron, they will get some other big free agents. LeBron would have to choose to join them, or fight against them every chance he gets. I am guessing the New York brass may bring that up, depending on how the pitch interaction goes.

In a recent radio appearance I told ESPN radio’s insightful and entertaining Matt McClusky that LeBron had a decision to make between becoming a championship professional basketball player and becoming a global business and marketing icon. I wrote an article for The Sports Debates about LeBron choosing to remain in Cleveland, and that if he did, he would be choosing a real shot at a championship.

Choosing New York as his destination means choosing his business ambitions over basketball – and all of the distractions that come with it. While Michael Jordan won first and then began closing business deals, LeBron’s business ambition outpaces everything else. Whether it is selfishness or greed or both, neither is part of the formula for winning a championship.

So while I go on the record yet again stating that New York is the wrong choice for LeBron, I firmly intend to eat crow tomorrow on that statement. I expect LeBron to choose New York over Cleveland, to choose business over authentic, championship success. And while a chorus of “good riddance” rises from Akron, Ohio, New York is getting an incredibly talented, incredibly selfish basketball player that will tease fans with close calls – but never deliver when it counts. Cleveland has suffered enough on those types of outcomes.

To LeBron, I offer just one piece of advice – bring earplugs when you return to The Q… and when you return home for Thanksgiving.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share


The Getting LeBron James Debate… Show Me the Money

June 30, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Sports Geek.

The future of LeBron James is a topic we have debated regularly on this site. Our most recent edition debated the team that would provide the best fit for LeBron.

When the city of Cleveland was brought into the conversation, Sports Geek wrote about the various business aspects of why LeBron should stay in Cleveland, and pointing them all back to one single point – Cleveland gives LeBron the best chance to win a championship.

Obviously, that statement is debatable (especially in light of the latest rumors that Miami could be poised to sign Dwayne Wade, Chris Bosh, AND LeBron). What is not debatable, however, and what ultimately leaves the city of Cleveland in the absolute BEST position to keep LeBron is this: No other team can offer LeBron James the long term salary that the Cavaliers can.

I know that LeBron talks about wanting to play in a city that gives him the best opportunity to win a championship, but every single team in the NBA can make an attempt at that argument. What those teams cannot do is pay him.

LeBron James could make as much as $30M EXTRA by staying in Cleveland. For him to leave the Cavaliers and play somewhere else, he would essentially be PAYING $30M just for what he PERCEIVES as a better opportunity to win a championship.

Is LeBron James at a point in his career where he is so DESPERATE for a championship that he would actually sacrifice $30M that was on the table to get it? I don’t think so.

If we are still having this conversation in another ten years, and LeBron STILL has not won a championship, then I think his level of desperation would put him in the mindset that sacrificing money for the legacy of a ring would be worth it.

That is not the case today.

LeBron James is only 25-years old, and is the most talented player in the NBA. He has won back-to-back league MVP awards, and no matter where he ends up playing basketball, that team will be a postseason threat.<br.

There can be no denying that LeBron James has a very bright basketball future STILL ahead of him, and that he will remain in contention to win a championship every single season of his career no matter WHAT jersey he wears. Time is not yet running out for LeBron, and he knows that.

While he may be hungry to win that first championship, it is a mistake to classify him as desperate.

As much as LeBron talks about wanting to win a championship, or loyalty, or any of that other fluff, his motivating factor is and always has been his ego (I don’t mean to imply any negative connotation from that). As with all of us, LeBron is going to make the decision that best serves him. Every choice he makes will be made to provide maximum boost to his already well-established legacy.

While he has publicly stated a desire to win a championship, he has ALSO publicly stated that he wants to be a billionaire athlete, and that comes only one way – making as much money as possible, as quickly as possible.

For LeBron James, there is only ONE team in the NBA that gives him the opportunity to meet BOTH of those goals – the Cleveland Cavaliers.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share


The Getting LeBron James Debate… The Windy City Has the Upper Hand

June 30, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Bleacher Fan and Sports Geek.

Tomorrow is July 1, 2010. Yep, I have a calendar on my desk, so I am privy to this information. I also watch a lot of sports television, so I know how big of a sports day tomorrow supposedly is. If you don’t, where have you been?

Tomorrow starts a period of time that promises to change the landscape of the NBA. Almost on a daily basis we are hearing rumors about which team will get the top free agents and who is going with them. Almost all of these involve Lebron James in some way. LeBron James is perhaps the most heavily debated player in this Web site’s 13 month existence. That will continue today as we debate which team is positioned best to acquire his services. My article comes with a little bit of doubt, as Miami will possibly be able to sway LeBron with the Dwyane Wade-Chris Bosh package. But, I still argue that Chicago is best positioned.

Obviously, to be able to go after James, a team has to not only be willing to spend the cash it would take to bring him and his headband to town, but a team also must have the necessary salary cap room. Chicago has that. It became to clear to all of us last week that the Bulls were clearing cap room to make a big splash in free agency by trading Kirk Hinrich to the Washington Wizards (though it can’t be announced until July 8). That trade gave the Bulls close to $30M to spend on free agents, which is almost enough to sign not only one, but two players to maximum contracts.

The team that LeBron would be coming to is loaded with young talent and ready to make a run at multiple championships. He knows this all too well as the Cavs played the Bulls in the first round of the playoffs this past season, and the Bulls actually played them tough. The current roster includes a young All-Star in Derrick Rose, and young solid players in Joakim Noah and Luol Deng (who is a six year veteran, but still only 26). This does not even include the second player that the Bulls could sign in addition to James. Possibilities include Chris Bosh, Joe Johnson, Amare Stoudemire, Carlos Boozer, and others. Can you imagine a starting lineup that included James, Bosh, Rose, and Noah? They would immediately elevate to the top of the Eastern Conference and would be a serious threat to dethrone the Lakers next season. At least on paper, that is.

Many experts have stated that LeBron would be interested in going to Chicago because of the Michael Jordan factor. James is on record as saying he idolizes Number 23, so much that he is actually going to give up his own jersey number to pay respect to the man he calls the greatest basketball player ever (and many of us agree). He has seen stories about Jordan and about how Chicago is a great sports town and how they embrace a winner. If James seeks out advice from M.J. and M.J. nudges him toward Chicago, then James would definitely take that into consideration.

The bottom line is that LeBron wants to win (Editor’s Note: Or be rich?), and he wants to surround himself with a winning team. Playing in Chicago with the young talent they already have in place in addition to another free agent prize would be the best possible winning situation for him. Chicago remains the front runner in the LeBron James sweepstakes.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share


The Phil versus Red Debate Verdict

June 30, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Sports Geek and Loyal Homer.

Comparing the legacies of Phil Jackson and Red Auerbach proved to be an extremely difficult task. Both men established dominant dynasties, which in turn escalated the level of play – even for the NBA itself – to new heights. But which one was greater?

Attempting to quantify their greatness purely objectively is an exercise in futility, considering each man coached very different players during different eras. It would be like trying to determine which is more exciting, a monster slam dunk or a buzzer beating half court shot. Both feats leave fans in breathless amazement, but these feats utilize completely different set of skills. The same can be said of the legacies of Jackson and Auerbach, but that did not stop Sports Geek and Loyal Homer from producing mightily persuasive arguments for which coach was the greatest.

Sports Geek defined the impact of Auerbach’s coaching career as multifaceted. Without diminishing the achievements of Phil Jackson, he explained how Auerbach built a championship team from the bottom up, and how he did this without the benefit of league-leading scorers or an extensive entourage of coaches. He additionally highlighted that Auerbach’s leadership contributed to the development of several great coaches who reached the highest levels of success in the NBA. Sports Geek made a compelling case that Auerbach’s involvement with the integration of the NBA was another significant achievement that cannot easily be measured by statistics. But the most significant aspect of his argument was the description of how Auerbach’s legacy could not be limited to the role of coach.

Sports Geek explained how the famed coach also experienced great success in the roles of general manager and team president. He even suggested that the nine additional championships Boston achieved while Auerbach was serving in these capacities should be taken into account with his overall success in the sport, a logic I cannot deny.

Loyal Homer’s argument focused on the amazing and inarguable success that Phil Jackson experienced. He explained that Jackson’s unprecedented and record shattering accomplishments with both the Chicago Bulls and L.A. Lakers were more his doing than not. He overcame the prevalent criticism that Jackson’s success is more a reflection of his player’s talent than his coaching. Loyal Homer pointed out that other coaches were unable to help players like Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant reach the pinnacles of their success, something Phil was able to do immediately with each team.

Both Sports Geek and Loyal Homer were able to meet the challenges which I laid out for them. Sports Geek was able to explain how the contributions of Red Auerbach transcended records in the win-loss column and fundamentally altered the history of basketball. Loyal Homer provided a more than adequate defense of Phil Jackson’s actual contribution to coaching champions rather than riding their coattails into the record books.

While I agree with, and practically live by, Loyal Homer’s central assertion – that championships define greatness – Sports Geek points out that considering all Auerbach’s roles, Red actually accumulated the most championships. Equally as important to my determination was the fact that Loyal Homer was unable to cite one clear example of how Jackson made a lasting impact on the sport the way Auerbach did, another telltale sign of greatness. That’s why I am awarding this debate victory to Sports Geek. He unquestionably proved that Red transcended impressive records and shaped the future of a sport. While Auerbach may not be the contemporary name that Jackson is, he proves to be the greatest of all time.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share


The Phil versus Red Debate

June 29, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Sports Geek and Loyal Homer.

Phil Jackson is quickly becoming a living legend. He is the winningest coach in NBA playoff history. He has coached some of the greatest players in the history of the sport, players who are universally recognizable by singular names. Names like Jordan, Shaq, and Kobe. He holds the record for NBA titles with 11, and it seems that he has seen and done it all in his coaching career.

With yet another NBA championship added to Phil Jackson’s resumé this year, it begs the question: Is Phil the greatest NBA coach of all time?

Obviously the Zen Master is most dominant contemporary coach, but to earn the title of “greatest of all time” someone must prove that he is better than all those before him. Only one man immediately comes to mind and challenges Phil for the top spot in NBA history – Red Auerbach.

Red Auerbach is a coaching icon. He led the Boston Celtics to an unprecedented eight straight NBA championships between 1959-1966, and was a central figure in the integration of the sport. He won the Eastern Division title 10 of 16 years, and left coaching in 1966 as the winningest coach in NBA history, with 938 victories, at the time. These statistics are even more compelling considering he never coached a league leading scorer. While these feats are no doubt impressive in their own right, do they compare with what Phil Jackson has accomplished?

Only a good debate can decide that, and Sports Geek and Loyal Homer are more than happy to oblige us in today’s epic question: Who is the greatest of all time – Phil Jackson or Red Auerbach?

Sports Geek will have to prove that what Auerbach accomplished during his day was more impressive and important to the game of basketball than the records the Jackson holds. Loyal Homer, on the other hand, will need to prove that Jackson’s leadership was the instrumental cause in the success of the programs he coached, rather than the result of hiring high priced mercenaries. He will need to prove that Jackson has actually revolutionized the game just as Red did before him.

Debates are always heated when the title of “greatest of all time” is on the line, and I expect this one to be no different.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share


The Phil versus Red Debate… Auerbach Will Always Outshine Jackson

June 29, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Loyal Homer.

This probably seems like the type of debate that should have been done when Phil Jackson won his tenth championship ring. But, even now, there is a solid case to be made that comparing Phil Jackson to Red Auerbach simply cannot be done. What Phil Jackson has in numbers – 11 NBA titles – Red Auerbach has in true, credible, and authentic ability that expands well beyond coaching.

It was well known in both Chicago and Los Angeles that Phil Jackson was walking into situations where superstar talent was already in place, and management was extremely supportive (for a while). That is not to say Phil Jackson is without talent, since he won multiple NBA titles while coaching in both locations. Though he is not the “glorified baby sitter” Bleacher Fan called him, his main task was to manage, rather than coach. There is a big difference.

When Phil Jackson arrived in Chicago, Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen were already in place. The nucleus of a great team was present, and Jackson helped that nucleus achieve great things – as long as Michael Jordan was there. When Jordan retired to baseball, it is not as though Jackson forgot how to coach; but his teams were seemingly unable to get over the hump. Jackson was unable to turn Pippen into a superstar, and it appeared as though Jackson needed a superstar to reach the high bar he set for himself.

In many ways, Red Auerbach built the game of professional basketball we all enjoy today. Though it is at times boring, team play and defensive prowess were preached by Auerbach, and executed flawlessly by whatever personnel was on the court during Auerbach’s run as the Celtics head coach. Auerbach’s style of defensive toughness and his de-emphasis on individual accolades and performances were pioneering, and mandatory for his ability to build a dynasty. He locked in a system of play that worked for decades, regardless of which players were on the court. It worked so well his teams won nine championships in a ten season span… still a record unmatched across all sports. His system made good and great players Hall of Famers. Phil Jackson’s system and style only helped superstar talent reach the expectations fans, peers, and media already had for them.

Contrast Jackson’s history with Auerbach’s. Jackson chased superstars around the league like accident lawyers chase ambulances. Auerbach steadily guided the same franchise not just to success and several championships, but to a dynasty unrivaled in sports, regardless of changeover in talent. Auerbach’s teams never had a dominant scorer. The full team contributed, night in and night out.

Historical context also gives the nod to Auerbach over Jackson. While Jackson enjoyed coaching in a fully racially integrated league, he had Auerbach, and others, to thank for that. Auerbach was the first coach in the history of the league to start five black players at the same time.

Coaches are often evaluated on their coaching tree, as well. While Jackson’s is admittedly incomplete, Auerbach’s is decorated with championships. Former players Bill Russell (two championships), Tom Heinsohn (two championships), K.C. Jones (two championships), and Bill Sharman (one championship) all achieved the league’s top honor. Not bad.

Auerbach built a dynasty, a winning tradition that still thrives in Beantown. It is only possible to do that effectively if a coach remains in one location for his entire career. Auerbach stayed with Boston, Jackson sought out the top talent du jour.

Red Auerbach also wore a great many more hats than Phil Jackson ever had to. He was a general manager, a team president, and a coach – the ONLY coach on the Boston Celtics’ bench, too. Modern NBA organizations, like the ones Jackson has coached for, actually have two benches and as many as ten spots reserved for “coaches.” Auerbach pulled all the strings, called all the shots, and shouldered all of the responsibility. Jackson shares the burden, and even offloads it during some seasons due to his back problems.

If you wished to compare Auerbach and Jackson solely on the merits of their statistical achievements, consider that Auerbach won nine NBA titles… as a coach. He won seven more in his role as general manager and team president. No matter what Auerbach did, or how he was involved with the Celtics, he made his team successful.

There is no doubt that Phil Jackson is a good coach. As someone who grew up outside of Chicago I can attest to his refreshing style and ability to bend Jordan’s ear where few others were ever able to. But what Jackson has accomplished is not even close – still – to what Auerbach did. Whether Auerbach was patrolling the sidelines of the hardwood, or adjudicating talent from a loge seat, his insight and ability to get things done always made his team better.

Phil Jackson has been a great coach. But when he retires, he will have left no lasting impact on the game, other than his personal, albeit rather impressive, stats. When Auerbach left the game, it was better because of his influence.

Accepting, encouraging, and guiding talent is a challenging task. But recognizing and molding talent into greatness is what separates good coaches from great ones. It is also what separates Red Auerbach from Phil Jackson.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share


The Phil versus Red Debate… The Math Says It’s Phil Over Red

June 29, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Sports Geek.

You’ll never hear me say anything negative about Red Auerbach. How could you? He built the Celtics into the dynasty that the franchise still remains today. But Phil Jackson has passed Ol’ Red in overall greatness, even if he decides to retire.

Obviously, Phil Jackson’s numbers speak volumes. He has eleven NBA championships compared to Auerbach’s nine. Sports Geek actually said in a debate earlier this month that the only statistic that truly matters is championships, and that’s something Jackson has over Auerbach. In nineteen seasons as a head coach, do you want to guess how many times Jackson has made the playoffs? You guessed it… nineteen, including 13 appearances in the Finals. He’s had a winning season EVERY single season. Can Auerbach say that? No, he can’t. He actually went 36-36 during the 1954-55 season. Jackson’s worst record is 42-40. Overall, Jackson has 1,098 wins in those nineteen seasons, which is an average of almost 58 wins per regular season. Perhaps the coolest stat to me – the one that defines his greatness – is that from the 1995-96 season to the 2001-02 season, a Phil Jackson-led team had a victory celebration downtown. After those last three titles with the Bulls, he hopped across the country to Los Angeles and won three consecutive titles with the Lakers. That’s six seasons and six titles! That’s impressive.

Jackson’s critics have said that he has inherited the teams that ultimately won championships. Yes, he certainly didn’t build these teams from scratch, but how many of these teams won championships before he got there? You may say, “Well anyone could have won with Michael Jordan.” Doug Collins didn’t. The Bulls made the playoffs under Collins, but they couldn’t get over the hump. In just his second season as Bulls coach, Jackson won his first championship, and that was followed directly by two more. This is the period of time when Jordan began taking his legacy to another level. Doesn’t Jackson deserve some credit for taking His Airness to that next level? Six championships later, Michael Jordan is arguably considered the best NBA player ever.

Likewise, how many championships did Shaquille O’Neal and Kobe Bryant win before Phil Jackson became courtside buddies with Jack Nicholson? Again, people say, “Well anyone could have won with Shaq and Kobe on the team.” Well, Del Harris didn’t. Jackson’s first season in L.A. was a championship winning season, and it was the first season that Kobe averaged over twenty points in a season. He hasn’t looked back since. After the bitter breakup between Shaq, Kobe, and Phil Jackson, the Lakers missed the playoffs. Jackson comes back, and in that first season after returning, in the 2005-06 season, the Lakers return to the playoffs. Just like it was with Jordan, Shaquille O’Neal and Kobe Bryant both took their games to another level while playing under Phil Jackson.

That’s something I think that a lot of people overlook. Sure, he inherited teams with stars on their rosters. But he took them to championship levels that were unknown before his arrival. Overall, the bottom line is championships. And, my bachelor’s degree tells me that eleven is more than nine. What does that tell you?

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share


The Most Entertaining Story of World Cup Group Play Debate… Soccer Is French for Surrender

June 28, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Sports Geek and Bleacher Fan.

With the relative success of Team U.S.A. and controversial calls dominating many of the headlines about the World Cup here in the States, the French team’s monumental collapse has largely flown under the radar here. But that is not about to happen on my watch.

That’s right sports fans, just after Cup competition got under way the French team went down faster than a Ghana player trying to eat up time with a BS injury. While it is by no means shocking that the French side essentially surrendered to a foreign power (probably a good thing they did not start off playing Germany), it is surprising that these defeats came on the soccer field. Soccer was one of the few things that the French were supposed to be good at – aside from wearing striped shirts and berets, smoking, and making American tourists feel unwelcome.

So how did the French team go from powerhouse to pushover? C’est la vie, I guess.

The French stumbled out of the gate posting an underwhelming 0-0 tie against Uruguay, and a 2-0 defeat against Mexico before eventually being bumped from tournament play by the 2-1 loss to South Africa. As CNN.com reported, adding insult to injury is the fact that the French have the dubious honor of being beaten by the “first World Cup [former] host nation to be eliminated before the tournament’s knockout stages.” So even though their country’s performance was strangely reminiscent of one of those French mimes being suffocated in a perpetually shrinking invisible box, it wasn’t the team’s on field play that was the most embarrassing aspect of its World Cup performance.

Not only were the former champions knocked out of the tournament in rather unimpressive fashion, but they also left amidst more drama than a Jersey Shore group therapy session with Dr. Phil. The team was fighting itself before they ever took the field. French coach Raymond Domenech displayed virtually no authority, leadership, or control over his squad. His arguments with team captain Patrice Eura and striker Nicolas Anelka erupted into huge distractions which had many calling for Domenech’s resignation. (Editor’s Note: It also could have been Domenech’s penchant for filling lineup cards with the help of astrology.) Team backbiting got so bad at one point that the team actually refused to practice as a protest.

Now there’s a bright idea, refusing to practice when your team is already choking. Maybe next World Cup they can protest by refusing to wear shin guards and cleats, too. How does any team expect to win when they act like bigger divas than Celine Deon and Aretha Franklin? They can’t. Until they get their coach and squad on the same page, the team is going to continue to play like the European version of the Bad News Bears.

That huge sucking noise coming from South Africa wasn’t the vuvuzela at all, but rather the complete and utter implosion of the French side. But, since I’ve brought up the world’s most annoying noise – aside from the screeching tones of Mariah Carrey’s upper register (ok we get it you can sing really high, but that does make it good) – let me say a few words about the irritating horn.

As a peripheral follower of soccer I watch very few matches. But when I do, the last thing I want to hear is the incessant chatter of thousands of plastic horns drowning out every aspect of the game. It would be one thing if the vuvuzela were used like thunder sticks, crowd chants, or synchronized claps to amplify intense moments in the game, but the noise never stopped. I know the horn is cultural, but come on, I don’t remember a freaking oompah band drowning out everything on the sidelines of Germany four years ago. But I digress.

While this year’s epic French failure and infighting was an embarrassment, it is not as if controversy and drama have not plagued the squad in the past. Just four years earlier the popular French player and team captain Zinedine Zidane was red carded during the World Cup final for what turned out to be the head butt heard round the world. In the final minutes of his career, Zidane let the trash talking of Italian defender Marco Materazzi get the best of him. In a moment of rage, and a clear lapse in judgment, Zidane delivered a head butt to the chest of the Materazzi and was removed from the tie game during bonus time. Without the leadership of their captain, France went on to lose the match 5 to 3 in a shootout. While this was no doubt an embarrassing moment for the French, it pales in comparison to this year’s epic failure. At least during the 2006 Cup the French made it to the final, as opposed to the South African cup where they were eliminated before the knockout rounds.

France blew it in a big way at the World Cup. There performance was so bad they probably had French Canadians pretending to be Americans for a change. Maybe we should all go back to calling things “Freedom Fries” and “Freedom Toast” until the French put up a respectable performance. Unless they make some major changes soon, they will have to consider throwing in the towel on their national pastime.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share


The Biggest Story of the World Cup Debate… Fate Controlled by the Whims of the FIFA Gods

June 28, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Sports Geek.

There are two things that sports fans in America hate.

The first thing we hate is poor officiating. Blown calls by officials, especially at pivotal moments in high-profile matches, fall under the classification of intolerable by the American sports fan. As painful as it may be to lose justifiably at the hands of an opponent on the field, it is nonetheless acceptable. However, when victory is UNJUSTLY robbed thanks to the mistake of a trained professional who is supposed to PROTECT the integrity of the game, it is an outrage.

The second thing that American’s hate in sports (for the most part) is a boring game with no scoring and no resolution. To the average sports fan, offense equals points, and points are what equal excitement.

One of the biggest criticisms that sports fans in America have for soccer is the lack of scoring that takes place. For fans who enjoy seeing basketball scoreboards lit up with triple-digit figures in just 48 minutes of actual competition, a 90-minute marathon that ends in a 0-0 tie is just something that we as offense-crazed junkies simply cannot fathom.

What do you get when you put those two things together? The World Cup!

Now that more Americans than ever before are caught up with World Cup fever, the biggest story from the tournament has been the horrible officiating of the FIFA crews, wrongfully perpetuating low scores by disallowing perfectly legitimate goals.

It is no wonder that soccer is not more popular in the United States. Even the goals that ARE scored aren’t allowed to count! If this is the very best that soccer has to offer – artificially manufactured scores from a competition that fails to recognize and fully reward the best play – then maybe soccer is not as good as it is cracked up to be.

In a sport that is already criticized for having too little scoring you would think that the FIFA directors would want to do everything in their power to make sure that every possible point is LEGALLY put on the board, especially during the biggest tournament of any sport in the entire world. Instead, what we have learned is that they are actually content to let the on-field officials strip goals away on a whim.

Forgive my American egotism, but at least OUR sports organizations (the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc.) take active measures to ensure that the game is decided by the PLAYERS on the field as much as possible. I know I am just a dumb American who doesn’t understand soccer, but isn’t that why the game is played, to see which TEAM is better? Instead, the FIFA officiating crews have usurped the player’s right to play the game, and their opinions have determined the outcome far too many times.

And it is not like this is a rare occurrence that happens only once in a very great while.

The United States alone fell victim to two such instances within a five-day span, once versus Slovenia and the other against Algeria, both of which could have cost the American side the opportunity to make it out of its group. In both cases, the United States scored perfectly legitimate goals, but was not rewarded. Instead, the goals were not counted because some official simply SAID that a rule was broken. They couldn’t TELL you which rule was broken, there was no EVIDENCE of a broken rule, and review of the tape confirms that both goals SHOULD have counted. Still, the American side was not rewarded.

The U.S. was are not alone, either. Many nations have suffered injustice at the hands of this horribly mismanaged and poorly implemented system. Yesterday featured two MORE games that were both marred by game-changing blown calls.

While trailing 2-1 against the Germans, England scored a goal which would have tied the match. The ball hit the cross-bar, bounced INSIDE the goal (again, review of the tape CONFIRMS this fact), then was grabbed by the opposing goalkeeper and quickly kicked away. That goal was not counted, and Germany remained ahead on the scoreboard 2-1.

In the second match, the refs got it wrong the other way by actually allowing a goal that should not have been. Argentina scored a goal from a player who was BLATANTLY offside, but the officials counted it.

It seems like the only goals that count at the World Cup are the ones that are scored while VIOLATING rules.

In fairness to the World Cup officials, this is not a new problem in soccer. During World Cup qualifiers, for example, Ireland was eliminated from qualification thanks to a blown call by the officials. In that case, French striker Thierry Henry committed an intentional handball en route to assisting a game-winning goal that cost the Irish an opportunity to play in South Africa.

Once more, a team was cheated out of what they had rightfully earned, all at the hands of officials who perpetually get it wrong.

I don’t mean to diminish the role that the officials play on the field. With 22 different players running around, kicking each other and then theatrically flopping to the ground (there is an ad before the video starts… be patient, it’s worth it!) as though they had just broken every bone in their body, all hoping to draw a penalty, officials have a very difficult role to fill. Added to that responsibility is the fact that the entire world is literally judging their every decision.

Their task is not an enviable one, and I do not blame the individual officials for the problem that exists. Instead, I blame FIFA.

Those within the FIFA organization KNOW the kind of scrutiny that the games are subjected to, and they KNOW the difficulty that the officials have to fairly call a match, and yet they still send their crews out to the wolves, armed with nothing more than a whistle and two plastic cards.

I have written it before, and I will write it again – if the technology exists to support the officials in their mission to PROTECT the integrity of the game, then it MUST be used. Failure to do so results is willing permission of one of the greatest injustices that can occur in sports, which are supposed to be governed by the principles of FAIR play.

While the problem of poor officiating extends to all sports, the frequency and apparent tolerance of it at the World Cup has made a mockery out of what is supposed to be the greatest sporting event in the entire world.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share


The Most Entertaining Story of World Cup Group Play Debate… Frustrated England Misses Tourney Climax

June 28, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Bleacher Fan.

Without question, the most frustrated team – and fan base – in World Cup 2010 is from England. First, the coach, Fabio Capello, bans a certain activity that two adults enjoy very much. Then he sets up technology so he is able to, at a moment’s notice, look in on the rooms of each of his players and spy on them, just to make sure they aren’t having any special adult fun. These two extreme decisions were made and implemented before one player set foot on African soil. So much for trust.

Why these two seemingly extreme decisions? In England, at least for the World Cup, it is always win at all costs. English soccer fans care a great deal about their team. And, that makes sense. Few countries have been playing soccer as long as England. It is in the bones of the country’s residents. Like a political candidate, the coach and team must react strongly with a matching level of passion or come under fire for not caring enough – a surefire way to get lambasted by fans.

So, it is easy to understand why so much angst and frustration emanates from the fan base about a team that either underperformed in the World Cup, or just was not as good as fans would like to think it is. Combine that high charged emotion with the disappointment of the country’s Dream Team in its most important sport, and the already teeming tension becomes out of control. For example, watch as fans decry the poor officiating that negated at goal against Germany, and not the horrible defense that led to two positive counterattacks from the German side.

I could bore all of you (and probably me) with a litany of examples of English soccer fan intensity circa this World Cup. Suffice it to say, the angry fan that managed to get around security, into the team’s locker room, and angrily confront David Beckham (who isn’t even on the team) proves the point. This isn’t the one crazy English fan. This is the one that got in. And it just adds to the drama and entertainment level that English soccer has been for their too brief World Cup stint.

Back to that Dream Team idea. The U.S. has long referred to its international basketball teams as a Dream Team. It is no different for English soccer teams. Except, perhaps, it is more intense. This English team, in particular, was quite good, filled with huge stars of international renown and tremendous individual skill. The midfield, with Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard, was one of the best in the entire World Cup. Wayne Rooney is a world class striker and tenacious spirit while defender, and team anchor, Joe Cole is one of the most skills defenseman anywhere. In every sense, this year’s World Cup team for England is a Dream Team.

The question, when comparing this team an American basketball Dream Team, which one is it most like? There have been some excellent U.S. Dream Team’s, but there have been some highly disappointing ones as well. It appears as though this England side more like the 1994 Dream Team. Both this English World Cup team and the 1994 U.S. basketball team had similar expectations heaped upon it – neither could lose and have that be an acceptable outcome.

Fans are angry with a team that has only scored two goals in group play, and tallied only one additional goal in its round of 16 play. The 1994 U.S. Dream Team analogy would have been perfect, if England didn’t lose to spectacularly and so quickly.

So, these are interesting tidbits and anecdotes, but what’s the story part? The story is the expectations heaped on the team from fans and media all around the world. The story is the cause of all of these effects. The reason a coach feels he must ban sex from a team is because he cannot afford to have any excuses for losing, or a moment of fatigue from a player late in a game that may have been avoidable. In many ways, for the sake of future members of the English team, it is a good thing that England lost. If it had won, no future teams would be allowed to have sex, either.

Few teams in the history of international sports consistently take the drama from the field home with them after a game like English soccer teams. This is not a Web site built on making predictions, and I have no intention to start now. But it will be incredibly fun to sit back and watch the next twist in this story emerge. Just because England is out of the tournament, doesn’t mean it is out of the news. And to it will be fun to see which potentially exhausting activity the team bans next.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.