November « 2010 « The Sports Debates©

The 2010 NFL Mid-Season Playoff Push Debate… Charge!

November 11, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Bleacher Fan and Optimist Prime.

With last night’s game between the Baltimore Ravens and the Atlanta Falcons, the second half of the NFL season began in full swing and teams could legitimately start looking at whether or not they had a realistic chance at making the playoffs. Looking at the NFL standings, it’s easy to see that some teams have already established themselves as Super Bowl contenders (Steelers, Giants, etc.) while other teams (Bills, Cowboys, etc.) have already buried any chance of playing any meaningful game in January.

However, there are quite a few teams who are stuck in the middle who have a chance to make a run during the second half of the season. It’s called parity, folks, and it’s one of the things that makes the NFL so great! There’s one team out there that I think is primed for a run during the second half of the season and I think it’s the much maligned San Diego Chargers.

The Chargers started out the season horribly, as has been the case in recent seasons. They were 2-5 over the first seven games of the season. This was despite the best efforts of quarterback Philip Rivers, who is somewhat quietly in the midst of an outstanding season. Drowned by all of the MVP surrounding the likes of Peyton Manning and Tom Brady – who are also having great seasons – Rivers has quietly thrown for 2,944 yards and has a quarterback rating of 102.9, which is currently good enough for third in the NFL. Now, with two consecutive wins, they are 4-5. In my mind, that is right back in the thick of things.

Head coach Norv Turner seemingly has been on the hot seat at some point in all four years of his coaching tenure in San Diego. Yet, you look at his record there and you see he has three division titles in three seasons. Looking at his team and looking at the schedule, I think he has a decent shot at getting that fourth title. Over the last seven games of the season the Chargers have two games against the struggling Broncos, the Bengals, the 49ers, and a game apiece against both teams ahead of them in the standings, the Chiefs and the Raiders. The opportunity is certainly there.

Keep in mind who the Chargers will be getting back soon, also. That’s right, Vincent Jackson is coming. He FINALLY signed his contract tender in late October, and he is eligible to play beginning November 28th. That’s going to be a big pickup for the Charger offense. The offense has been doing fine without him, which is amazing considering Antonio Gates has been battling a toe injury and actually still easily leads the team in catches despite sitting out the last game.

The Chargers have a bye this week, which comes at the perfect time. It gives Gates more time to heal and gives this team more time to regroup for the stretch run. The Chargers are in a surprising position. Review the statistics and you may notice that the Chargers are first in total offense and fifth in total defense. But the Turner-led Chargers have been down this road before. This isn’t their first rodeo. And they are in prime position to do what they’ve done in the past… make a charge towards the post-season.

Leave a Comment » | The 2010 NFL Mid-Season Playoff Push Debate | Tagged: Babe Ruthless, bleacher fan, loyal homer, norv turner, Philip Rivers, playoff contenders, San Diego Chargers, second half teams, sports, Sports Debates, sports geek, the sports debates | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate Verdict

November 10, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Optimist Prime.

While I completely agree with Optimist Prime’s main point that these types of pre-season honors do not really matter, it became clear to the editorial staff here at TSD that a great many fans do in fact care deeply about a freshman being allowed to appear on a pre-season All-American team.

Before diving into the arguments I do want to call attention to one point from Optimist Prime that I vehemently oppose. The notion that basketball is an individual game is flat wrong. It is true that the individual nature of the reward we’re debating today is inescapable, but the irony lies in the fact that the sport – especially at the collegiate level – relies heavily on team achievement, and much less on the abilities of a single player. Team’s have a hierarchy of talent, but college basketball isn’t great because each team is just a disjointed conglomeration of individual talent. Successful teams work together flawlessly, and the vast majority of championship teams prove that out.

As Optimist points out, in total fairness, the freshman did not appoint himself to the team. Rather, a membership group of sports media elite did that. That is not the player’s fault. It is, however, proof that the “award” is ridiculous. Fair point, Optimist Prime.

But, regardless of the award’s fairness from a media standpoint, it is counter-intuitive – and it should be counter-culture – to lavish anyone with awards and esteem who has done nothing to earn it. Barnes may become a great college player, but it’s impossible to agree that he would then, retroactively, deserve the pre-season All-American team honors as a freshman. Freshmen have not proven anything on the court in a college atmosphere, a fair and acknowledged point from Loyal Homer.

If the purpose of the award is to give the nod to players who show tremendous potential, then have a freshmen All-American team (which does exist). But, and the winning arguer Loyal Homer so succinctly stated, to include a freshman in the overall pre-season All-American cheapens the entire team.

Sure, I understand the game of college basketball has evolved. Freshman now rule the roost in part because an early departure for the elite players is now standard practice. But NBA draft prospects are completely different that All-American honors. There was a simpler time when professional prospect didn’t influence a college player’s perception at all. The All-American award harkens a simpler, more pure time in sports, and giving a freshman the nod for is a deep and irreversible stain.

Maybe this Sports Geek is old school, but whatever happened to earning an award? With respect to Optimist’s argument that Barnes has been evaluated at countless camps in the off-season and AAU environments over the course of his prep career, Barnes hasn’t won a game with a last minute shot in Cameron Indoor. He hasn’t gone on the road in Little John Arena and beaten a pesky Clemson club in conference with a tough road game. He hasn’t proven his mettle in a conference tournament or propelled his team to a berth in the NCAA Tournament. He may appear to have the pedigree to accomplish those feats, but let’s ease up on the praise and awards until he proves worthy. It might be old fashioned, but it’s also the right thing.

Leave a Comment » | The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate | Tagged: 2010 college pre-season all American team, all American basketball teams, Babe Ruthless, bleacher fan, college all American team, college basketball, college pre-season all-american teams, Harrison Barnes, Jacob Pullen, Jimmer Fridette, JuJaun Johnson, Kyle Singler, loyal homer, NCAA basketball, ncaab, optimist prime, sports arguments, Sports Debates, sports geek, The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate, the sports debates | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate

November 9, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Optimist Prime.

It is always an honor for a team and an individual player to be named to the pre-season All-American team. This pre-season is no different, as four veteran college basketball players have earned their way on to the high profile and well respected pre-season All-American team.

This season’s team consists of the following players:

Kyle Singler, Duke, C/F, Senior
Jacob Pullen, Kansas State, G, Senior
Jimmer Fridette, BYU, G, Senior
JuJaun Johnson, Purdue, C/F, Senior

Harrison Barnes, North Carolina, F/G, Freshman

The team is chosen by a panel consisting of 65 national media personalities. One player in particular sticks out of the lineup. Barnes is a true freshman for North Carolina. He has never once bounced a round orange call on the hard wood in a college game atmosphere. Yet, the 65 national media personalities that chose the players for this team honored him with All-American status.

Did the panel get it right? Do freshman deserve to be included on the Pre-Season All-American team?

Optimist Prime believes that a freshman like Barnes should be allowed to be named to the team while Loyal Homer will argue that a freshman has not yet earned the right to be called All-American, even on a pre-season team.

Convince a pragmatist a freshman belongs on the team. Good luck.

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate… Freshmen Deserve A Chance

November 9, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Loyal Homer.

Many sports fans have excitedly picked up their pre-season football, basketball, baseball, or hockey preview magazines, flipped to the section detailing their team, and done a little fist pumping when they read, “Team X’s Star Player Y is positioned for a breakout year. He is the Mid-Atlantic Culinary School Association’s pre-season player of the year.”

That same fan then sees star player Y fulfill that promise, or even drag his shiny pre-season player of the year trophy to the bench, halfway through the season. Indeed, it seems like the latter happens far more than the former. Having been in the shoes of those fans, I feel like I can legitimately argue that a freshman should be eligible for consideration for pre-season All-American honors because, honestly, do they really matter that much? As a bonus, I’ll also have an argument for those of you who do think pre-season All-American honors do matter. In order to keep things brief, we’ll consider only the basketball award during this debate.

First, let’s consider the meat of what a pre-season All-American team “invitation,” even a notable one such as the Associated Press, actually means. Typically these awards end up as footnotes on a player’s career, or bullet points on a television broadcast of their team’s games during the season. The player does not receive monetary compensation for this award and it does not entitle him to anything other than being an answer to a trivia question after his playing days conclude. If you agree that the AP All-America team is the most prestigious pre-season All-American team, factor in that the voting is done by the same 65-member national media panel that votes on the AP top 25 poll each week. The award is not a validation by your peers, your competitors, your coaches, other coaches, etc. It is simply a tip of the cap from people who cover your sport for a living. While that is, without a doubt, a nice accomplishment and a feather in a player’s cap, it seems completely unreasonable to keep freshmen from having the pleasure of reading online, “These reporters think I’m going to be one of the top players in the country this year.” Freshmen in the running for an All-American “invite” will have heard their name countless times in countless mediums – why prevent them from receiving a slightly more prestigious, slightly more official honor?

Second, as promised, if you think a pre-season All-American acknowledgement is a meaningful, worthwhile award, why would you deny sportswriters the ability to bestow that honor on any player they so choose? While I’m not saying Harrison Barnes or Brandon Knight, at this very moment, belong in the same mention as Tyler Hansbrough or John Wall, who’s to say that a majority of sportswriters do want to say that? I cannot think of a reason to deny those professional basketball watchers/writers that ability unless we go back to the days when freshmen could not play on the varsity team. Moreover, if the argument is that you cannot legitimately evaluate a player’s game until he plays at the college level, I can respect that argument while debunking it at the same time. While there is no doubt that the college game is different, modern freshmen have been evaluated for years at shoe camps, AAU tournaments, pickup games, etc. Their individual game is not a mystery and an All-American honor is just that – an individual honor for their individual game.

If the freshmen are used in the marketing and promotion of college basketball, why deny them the opportunity at a pat on the back before the season starts?

Leave a Comment » | The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate | Tagged: AAU, Brandon Knight, college basketball, Harrison Barnes, John Wall, Tyler Hansbrough | Permalink
Posted by Optimist Prime

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate… Earning and Learning

November 9, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Optimist Prime.

You have missed this bit of news recently, and who would blame you because who pays attention to anything but football this time of year. But a true freshman was named to the Associated Press pre-season All America team in college basketball. That’s right, a wet behind the ears kid who has yet to play a meaningful game as an amateur athlete has been named one of the top five players in college basketball. Now, I know there is a lot of uncertainty going into this season with no member of last year’s first team All-America team returning, but does this seem right to you? It doesn’t to me!

For one thing, I think it’s a tremendous slap at all the returning players. But, I’m not going to use this space to debate the merits of even having a pre-season All-America team. That’d be pointless because it isn’t going anywhere, and situations like this obviously provide some type of buzz to a season that I think is lacking in hype. But to include someone who has never played against other amateur athletes cheapens the entire team. Not to mention the pressure it puts on freshmen! Imagine never having played a game and all of a sudden being asked, “How does it feel to be an All-American?”

It’s like bringing in the new guy at work and giving him an office with a window and a beautiful view of the city. What’s even worse is this guy is fresh out of college and has no work experience whatsoever. He has the “I graduated top of my class” look stamped all over his forehead (don’t you hate bozos like that?).

Parallel that to college basketball and to this particular debate. Harrison Barnes was a highly recruited McDonald’s All-American, the USA Today National Player of the Year for prep players last year, and has basically accomplished everything anyone can hope to accomplish in his position… on the high school level. What had he accomplished on a college basketball court when this team was announced (he has since played an exhibition game… and struggled)? Nil! The same as Bleacher Fan, Sports Geek, Babe Ruthless, Optimist Prime, and myself. And no, shooting the half court shot at half-time as part of some fundraiser does not mean you played basketball in college, Bleacher Fan!

Harrison Barnes may well turn out to an All-American. All his accolades up to this point lead to the belief that he has the potential to be the real deal. He committed to wear the Carolina Blue by choosing the Tar Heels in a hotly contested recruiting battle last fall. Playing in the spotlight on a nightly basis at school like North Carolina, he’s certainly going to have the opportunity, and I wish him the best.

That’s not the focus of this debate though. All-Americans should be proven players who have earned their stripes and who have run the gauntlet of a college basketball season at least once. Sticking true to my character, I’m very loyal to the guys who have served their time and earned their accomplishments. Barnes – and any other future freshmen – needs to come in to the game, earn their keep, and put up the numbers that warrant consideration of such accomplishments. He hasn’t done that, and therefore, he doesn’t belong on this team.

Leave a Comment » | The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate | Tagged: ap all-america, Babe Ruthless, bleacher fan, college basketball debates, freshmen all America, freshmen of the year, Harrison Barnes, loyal homer, North Carolina Tar Heels, pre-season all-america, sports, Sports Debates, sports geek, the sports debates | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate Verdict

November 8, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Bleacher Fan and Loyal Homer.

While the post-season celebration in the City by the Bay may finally start cooling off, the old Hot Stove is just heating up. Mere days removed from the San Francisco Giants World Series championship, some 29 other teams are already thinking about how to unseat the Giants during the 2011 season.

With huge contracts and blockbuster deals in the works, the baseball landscape as we know it could be in for a major overall. The actions in the days to come serves as a crucial indicator for the upcoming season as teams make statements about their willingness to compete or rebuild by being buyers or sellers on the off-season market. It is during this pivotal time that championship contenders are made. This is a very exciting time for a baseball obsessed seam-heads like myself, but especially so for Yankees’ fans in particular.

The Yanks are already making waves with high profile drama about the anxiety ridden task of finding an appropriate deal for the Yankees captain, Derek Jeter. But the Bombers will not be content to just sit on their laurels and re-sign core players. This season is about reloading. Now, deciding which free agents and players on the trading block are worth the asking price, and which players are the next overpaid (yeah I’m talking to you Javier Vasquez and Carl Pavano), is the necessity of the time.

There has been much speculation that the Yankees will make a run at acquiring Cliff Lee and Carl Crawford. While the Yankees have the economic resources to sign both players (not to mention pay off a good portion of the national deficit while they are at it), today’s debate explores the hypothetical scenario of: If the Yankees could only sign one person between free agent pitcher Cliff Lee and free agent outfielder Carl Crawford, who should the team sign?

Bleacher Fan provided what can be aptly called a thorough argument for the Yankees to sign free agent left fielder Carl Crawford. His main premise hinged on the fact that while the addition of Lee would be nice, it was not necessary. I have to admit that I wasn’t completely convinced that the need for another top tier pitcher would be entirely superfluous, but his description of the advantages of adding Crawford to the Yankees’ lineup were undeniable.

The Yankees have clearly been moving towards a more all around athletic club. This ascension of players, like Brett Gardner and Curtis Granderson, are proof enough of that, and Crawford fits that mold perfectly. He brings the speed of the former with the power of the latter. Not to mention the best fielding in the AL. It is tough to argue with the attractiveness of adding a player like that, but Loyal Homer was more than willing to give it a try.

Loyal Homer made a strong case for the New York Yankees to acquire free agent pitching phenom Cliff Lee. As is often the case in Yankee Universe, the team has become enamored with a player that has dominating success against the Yankees. As Loyal Homer adeptly points out, Lee nearly single handedly eliminated the Yankees from the playoffs, and if that doesn’t qualify as success against a given team then I don’t know what does. This has no doubt made him an all the more attractive option for the Bombers. Add to that the fact that the Yankees made a huge push for Lee and failed to land him before the trade deadline, and we are talking about team wants Lee more than Brett Favre wants attention.

Aside from C.C. Sabathia, the Yankees’ rotation is about as stable as a Milton Bradley meltdown. Phil Hughes and A.J. Burnett are both hot and cold pitchers that cannot be counted on during the post-season. As Loyal Homer’s observes, Andy Pettite’s Brett Favre-esque “will he or won’t he” retirement melodrama only serves to further undermine the stability of the rotation. So it’s clear that acquiring Lee would be a great first step in shoring up a beleaguered rotation, not to mention providing them with a great one-two punch in the post-season.

What ultimately determined the outcome of this debate was a statement Loyal Homer made about what might have been if the Yankees acquired Lee in July, rather than see him slip to the Rangers.

We all know that scenario actually played out – with Texas beating the Yankees in six games and going on to their first World Series in franchise history – but Loyal Homer’s hypothetical scenario got me thinking about how the 2010 post-season would have played out with Lee in pinstripes. The Yankees probably would still have beaten the Twins, and would probably handled a Lee-less Rangers rotation with relative ease. But would the World Series have proven any better for the Yankees than it did for the Rangers?

I have to believe it would not.

Lee proved less effective in the World Series, and that was with a much hotter offense than the Yankees displayed this October. Although Lee’s presence would undeniably make the Yankees a better team, there is no proof that it would have made the Yankees into World Series champs. In fact, the evidence points to the contrary. Crawford, on the other hand, packs more potential. Based off of the numbers that Bleacher Fan presented, it seems likely that Crawford’s potent bat behind Derek Jeter would certainly prove more effective. It could even have a trickledown effect providing relief to the rest of the lineup by bumping a bigger bat like Nick Swisher further back in the order and removing questionable DHs like Marcus Thames altogether. While Crawford isn’t a sure thing (because really, who is besides Mariano Rivera) he has more potential upside given his track record. That’s why I’m awarding this debate win to the Bleacher Fan. While I don’t have a fat contract offer for you, you have my congratulations and another notch in the victory column.

Leave a Comment » | The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate | Tagged: Babe Ruthless, bleacher fan, Carl Crawford, Cliff Lee, Derek Jeter, free agent, hot stove, loyal homer, New York Yankees, NY, sign, signing, sports arguement, Steinbrenner, the sports debates | Permalink
Posted by Babe Ruthless

The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate

November 8, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Bleacher Fan and Loyal Homer.

Anyone familiar with baseball knows that for the New York Yankees, their season does not even begin until October. Other clubs may desperately seek to make the playoffs or even have a winning record. But for the Yankees, each season that does not result in a World Series championship is, by, definition a failure.

Although the Yankees made it to the ALCS and posted 2010’s ,third best record 95 wins and 67 losses – only bettered by the Philadelphia Phillies (97-65) and the Tampa Bay Rays (96-66) – it will be counted a failure because the Yankees did not accomplish what they set out to do. Now Brian Cashman and company will set out to make a plan to bring home the next title, perhaps without the decade long wait this time.

Today, however, The Sports Debates enter the realm of the fantastic as we explore a hypothetical scenario – what if the New York Yankees had a limited supply of money?

As ludicrous as that proposition may be, it is somewhat plausible considering the Yankees enter a new era with different Steinbrenners at the helm. So what should the Yankees do if they only have the funds to sign one big name player this off-season? Which bring us to the debate at hand: If the Yankees can only sign one person between pitcher Cliff Lee and outfielder Carl Crawford, who should they sign?

Obviously the Yankees have a penchant for chasing guys who get in their way in the post-season (see Jason Giambi, Carl Pavano, and Randy Johnson). Likewise, we all know that pitching wins championships and Cliff Lee is unquestionably an ace. But this debate is no open and shut case. It was not New York’s pitching that looked the most vulnerable this past post-season, rather the lack of punch in the offense. The Texas Rangers outscored the usually potent, but suddenly anemic, Yankees offense in the ALCS. Adding the speed, quality glove, and capable bat of Crawford could also be exactly what the Yankees need in 2011.

It is up to Loyal Homer to make an argument that proves Cliff Lee is the more important target this off-season while Bleacher Fan will make a case that Carl Crawford should capture the hot stove attention of the Bronx Bombers.

As an obvious Yankees fanatic, I can hardly wait to hear these arguments. Gentlemen, let’s “Play Ball!”

2 Comments | The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate | Tagged: Babe Ruthless, bleacher fan, Carl Crawford, Cliff Lee, free agency, free agent, hot stove, loyal homer, New York Yankees, offseason, outfield, pitcher, sign, sports arguments, Sports Debates | Permalink
Posted by Babe Ruthless

The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate… Cliff Lee is a Luxury, Carl Crawford is a Necessity

November 8, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Loyal Homer.

I can absolutely see the attraction that Cliff Lee holds as a free agent, and from the New York Yankees’ perspective, Cliff Lee is basically the reason their season ended in October rather than November. To be able to add a pitcher like Lee to the Yankees rotation would absolutely be a major plus, but if Brian Cashman and the Yankees organization are afforded the ability to only sign one free agent this off-season, then Carl Crawford should be the primary target.

This is a simple question of need versus want for the Bronx Bombers.

Do they NEED another pitching ace? In short – no.

C.C. Sabathia remains one of the frontrunners to win the AL Cy Young Award AGAIN for his performance in 2010. He was the only 20-game winner in the American League this past season, and at a pricey $25M per season, he is the undeniable anchor of the Yankees’ pitching rotation.

If the Yankees were to sign Lee, he would become a luxurious complement to Sabathia, but he would neither supplant nor replace Sabathia as the top pitcher in the Yanks’ rotation. As much as the Yankees may enjoy opening up the check book, I don’t think they NEED to pay upwards of $150M for a number-two pitcher.

Now, left field in New York is a different story.

Brett Gardner had a decent season in left, but this is an area where they could absolutely use an upgrade. Enter, Carl Crawford.

At the plate, Crawford is exponentially more productive than Gardner. In 2010, his average was 30 points higher, and he racked up 52 more hits, 14 more home runs, and 43 more RBI than did Gardner.

Just imagine Crawford at the plate in pinstripes, batting behind, say, Derek Jeter (who I am confident the Yankees will re-sign). Yankee Stadium is a home run paradise for left-handed hitters, which should inflate Crawford’s home run total, and Jeter will give Crawford many more RBI opportunities than Jason Bartlett, Tampa’s leadoff hitter. As for those at-bats where Crawford doesn’t go yard, his base-running ability will be another huge boost for the Yankees, who have hitters like Mark Teixeira, Nick Swisher, Alex Rodriguez, or Robinson Cano to move him around the bases.

The best lineup in baseball just got better. Oh yeah, did I mention that Crawford provides an upgrade in the field as well?

Gardner may have only committed one error in the field for the Yankees last season, but Crawford’s speed, range, and athleticism make him a much better defensive left fielder, especially when paired with Curtis Granderson in center field.

Crawford, who is in line for his first career Gold Glove award this season, led all left fielders with a range factor of 2.24, and his 306 put-outs were second only to Juan Pierre (307) of the Chicago White Sox.

The addition of Carl Crawford to the New York Yankees further solidifies their positioning as the best lineup in baseball, and elevates their outfield into the ranks of being the best defensive trio in the league.

Any way you look at it, Carl Crawford IMPROVES the Yankees, while Cliff Lee only COMPLEMENTS them.

If Hal Steinbrenner signs only one free agent this off-season, it had better be Carl Crawford!

Leave a Comment » | The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate | Tagged: 2010 Cy Young, 2010 Gold Glove, Babe Ruthless, baseball, best left fielder, best lineup, bleacher fan, Brian Cashman, Carl Crawford, Cliff Lee, free agency, free agent, hot stove, loyal homer, MLB, New York Yankees, optimist prime, should the Yankees sign Carl Crawford, Should the Yankees sign Cliff Lee, sports, sports arguments, Sports Debates, sports geek, starting rotation, the sports debates, yankee pitching | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate… A Glaring Need For Lee

November 8, 2010

Read the opposing argument from Bleacher Fan.

It’s no secret that the New York Yankees are going to attempt to make a big splash after failing to even make the World Series in 2010. Obvious weaknesses were shown on this season’s team and that’s why they made a big push in July to acquire pitcher Cliff Lee. They knew back then holes existed in the pitching rotation. Those holes didn’t go anywhere in the closing months of the regular season. Facing Lee in the ALCS against the Rangers was a painful reminder of what could have been for the 2010 Yankees. The Yankees saw firsthand how dominant Lee could be, and with problems still remaining in the starting rotation, I believe signing Cliff Lee should be a higher priority than signing Carl Crawford.

The Yankees have one of the top pitchers in baseball in C.C. Sabathia, who happens to be a former teammate of Lee’s from their days in Cleveland. Sabathia very well could be named the American League Cy Young winner later this month. But that’s where the stability ends in the Yankee rotation.

On the surface, it looks like the number two spot in the rotation is nailed down with Phil Hughes. After all, Hughes did win 18 games this past season. But he struggled somewhat in the second half of the season and after the All-Star break was just 7-6 with an ERA of 4.90. In the post-season he totally blew up with an ERA of 6.32, and he took two losses in the ALCS loss to the Rangers. Andy Pettitte, a stalwart of all of these dominant Yankees teams, has finally (maybe) let that retirement age catch up to him. He’s entering the off-season unsure of whether or not he will be pitching next year (haven’t we heard this before with him? Haven’t we heard this before in another sport?). And A.J. Burnett? My goodness, where do we begin? His two years since signing that ridiculous contract have been a huge disappointment to say the least, especially this season. A 10-15 record with an ERA of 5.26 will get you skipped over in the rotation in the first round of the playoffs every time, and that’s what happened to Mr. Burnett. In his one start in the ALCS, he took the loss by giving up five runs in six innings, though I admittedly thought his line looked worse than he actually pitched. Still, this is unacceptable for what he is getting paid. And Javier Vazquez? Does the word “bust” come to mind? The bottom line is that this rotation desperately needs Cliff Lee.

What all of Major League Baseball saw this post-season was the domination by the San Francisco Giants and their starting rotation. Tim Lincecum, Matt Cain, and Madison Bumgarner gave everyone a blueprint to follow on how to win a championship. By combining Lee with Sabathia, general manager Brian Cashman knows he would have two front line starters that would make the Yankees extremely difficult to beat in a short series, regardless of what the rest of his rotation looks like. As Cashman said after being eliminated by the Rangers, “It’s always pitching. Pitching is the key to the kingdom, which is why you try to collect as much of it as you can.”

Cashman obviously agrees with me because apparently the Yankees have apparently already contacted Lee’s agent. They need Lee much more than they need Carl Crawford. Pitching wins championships. The Giants just proved that, and that’s where the Yankees want to be.

Leave a Comment » | The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate | Tagged: Babe Ruthless, bleacher fan, Brian Cashman, Cliff Lee, free agency, loyal homer, New York Yankees, sports, Sports Debates, sports geek, starting rotation, the sports debates, yankee pitching | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The 2010 Mid-Season NFL Coach to Go First Debate… Fire Childress Chant Picks Up Steam

November 4, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Loyal Homer.

It was not hard to hear. And it wasn’t one of those chants you hear from a crowd that is tough to figure out what is being chanted. It was abundantly clear to all those in attendance that the crowd on the Minnesota Vikings’ home turn was yelling “Fire Brad Childress… Fire Brad Childress!” The thing is, the crowd was spitting this refrain after a win over the Lions, the team’s first win of the 2010 season.

Many coaches are on finding their respective seats getting hotter and hotter. But, Brad Childress is the proud owner of the hottest seat around right now. No NFL team had higher expectations coming into the season, and no team has done a worse job of fulfilling those expectations.

Fans agree. There is a Fire Brad Childress Internet petition you can sign. If that is too much action for you, feel free and enjoy a video compilation or funny Childress poses that are clear proof he must be fired. Read reports of tiffs between Childress and the player his entire career is now tethered securely to… reports that pre-date game one of the season. Join the Fire Brad Childress Facebook group, retweet some pithy remarks from firechilly.com, or Twitter’s “firechildress,” or givechildresstheboot.com. Here’s a picture of Childress with a bright red X over his face.

Usually when fans are getting this loud about firing a coach it is tougher for the front office to ignore. Childress has not delivered an NFC Championship or Super Bowl in his tenure, and he has made a host of questionable and dubious decisions, including enabling Brett Favre’s indecision and tying his team’s success dubiously to Favre’s right arm (and ankle, elbow, fingers, thumb, legs, etc.).

Just this week Childress decided to release his new prized receiver and offensive savior, Randy Moss, rather than listen to possible insights from a player who dressed in the opponents uniform a short week before playing them. Hmmm, it seems like a pretty bad idea to ignore the advice of a veteran, let alone one that can willingly help identify tendencies of an opponent.

Childress’ bad decisions really are too numerous to mention. First, the decision to beg Favre to come back and play for him is ridiculous and many levels. He let Favre skip camp and hold his entire team hostage. Then, as the season dawned, the group played predictably bad and unorganized. Second, Childress has not been effective at keeping talented players to stay in Minnesota. Center Matt Birk – who is one of the better players at his position in the league – loved playing in Minnesota, but not for Brad Childress. These are not small, insignificant decisions. These are decisions as a head coach that dramatically impact the talent of the team and the mental health of the locker room.

The consequences of these decisions – and many more- are now becoming very evident. A case for firing Childress is clear, but why fire Childress before the end of the season – and before coaches like Wade Phillips and Mike Singletary, who are being highlighted by my esteemed colleagues?

The Vikings stand only to lose more and more the longer Childress is coach. The team is not a playoff team this season, is far back in the standings, and is struggle to mesh the varying talents of a patchwork team after a desperation move to trade for Randy Moss… a decision for the present that has a cost for the future.

While some Childress apologists may be reading this and screaming at their computer screens right now that Brett Favre is the issue, consider that Favre is not the team’s running game. One of the primary issues with the lackluster Vikings offense – the side of the ball Childress professes to be a guru on – is the inconsistency of the running game. The real issues on the offensive side of the ball appear to be undetermined, and that responsibility can be laid at the feet of the self-professed offensive guru/head coach.

Listen, it’s a bad economy still. Jobs are tough to come by. But Childress probably has some pennies stocked away somewhere. And Vikings cans can’t wait for him to need them.

Leave a Comment » | The 2010 Mid-Season NFL Coach to Go First Debate | Tagged: Babe Ruthless, bleacher fan, brad childress, fire brad childress, fire childress, Fire Childress Chant Picks Up Steam, fire Vikings coach, loyal homer, Minnesota Vikings, National Football League, NFL, sports arguments, Sports Debates, sports geek, The Mid-Season NFL Coach to Go First Debate, the sports debates, Vikings coach | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The Sports Debates©

The 2010 NFL Mid-Season Playoff Push Debate… Charge!

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate Verdict

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate… Freshmen Deserve A Chance

The Freshman on the Pre-Season All-American Team Debate… Earning and Learning

The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate Verdict

The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate

The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate… Cliff Lee is a Luxury, Carl Crawford is a Necessity

The Who Should the Yankees Sign Debate… A Glaring Need For Lee

The 2010 Mid-Season NFL Coach to Go First Debate… Fire Childress Chant Picks Up Steam

Subscribe to TSD

The Essentials

Our Past Debates

Search TSD Topics

Our Resources

The Sports Debates Links

TSD on the Radio

TSD on Twitter

Show TSD some love!

Follow “The Sports Debates©”