Remember when Olbermann faked modesty?

By Rick Morris

Keith Olbermann has shown himself to be enough of an out-of-his-depth political lightweight that even those who share his fever-swamp hatreds like Glenn Greenwald are taking him apart on a regular basis. As he degenerates further and further into his irrelevant world of obsessive grudge-furthering and political lie-circulating, it occurred to me that KO had previously tried to rehabilitate his reputation with an allegedly heartfelt mea culpa for being an idiot. Given my mad Google-fu skills, I uncovered his sniveling Uriah Heep routine in no time. Compare and contrast the words you see here and here with the remorseless, deranged rantings chronicled on a daily basis at OlbermannWatch.

Here's some of the better passages:

"This isn't even about specific events or people, although nearly everybody at ESPN merits an apology from me, and I give it willingly and with great sadness, but with some hope that it will explain if not erase my actions, and might even be of some inspiration to any who might be afflicted in the same curious way I've come to learn I am.

This is about not knowing why you do things -- literally, not knowing for years and years -- and then suddenly beginning to scratch the surface of understanding. That earlier imagery about the gauzy haze is almost factually precise: It feels as if I've been coming out of a huge fog bank." QUESTION: When did you get re-immersed?

"But whatever any of them said about 'insecurity' or 'perfectionism,' I know I just took it as an attack and stiffened my extra-long spine." Wow, Keith, you seem so much better-adjusted these days. Of course, my sarcasm at the expense of "The Great One" probably just got me nominated for "Worst Person in the World."

"The oddest thing about all this, is that even when I left -- and in six weeks I will have been gone longer than I was there -- executives like Walsh and Howard Katz underscored that I was welcome to return at some distant future date, despite all the Sturm und Drang. And, man, I was usually producing both the Sturm and the Drang." Keith, do you forget what you've written previously, or do you just have no capacity for self-awareness?

"Referring to ESPN's executives, I told Freeman that 'other than Steve Anderson, I don't think any of them are any good.' Well, that was ridiculous then and it is ridiculous now. Without even judging how good they were, just to keep a monolith like ESPN on the air every day requires as many good executives as they have at NORAD." OK, who are you going to admit you were lying about a few years from now? Are O'Reilly and Murdoch really good guys who you're just perpetrating show-biz feuds with for the sake of ratings and dollars?

"I now read with horror of my ESPN2 co-host, Ms. Kolber, sequestering herself in the women's bathroom and weeping over how I treated her. She told Freeman that as things deteriorated, I wouldn't talk to her. She's wrong: I couldn't talk to her. I pumped up some small-scale complaints into a scenario in which she was at fault for everything ESPN2 hadn't become. I wasn't completely obtuse back then, and if anything would have cut through my neuroses, it would've been a colleague's tears. If I had known, I think I could've jumped over the fence I'd built around myself and said what the inner guy always knew: No TV show is worth crying over. Suzy: I'm sorry." And how many MSNBC employees cry in restrooms right now as a result of your bullying personality, Keith?

"So, I'm sorry. It should have been done differently. It wasn't. Then again, I'm only finding out now about that extra vertebra and the extra steps I have to take to learn how to be, well, flexible." If any MSNBC employee wants to leave any of Keith's old words for him on a note left on his desktop, there's a crisp shiny fin in it for you!

NHL trade deadline winners and losers

By Rick Morris

Today's NHL trade deadline was covered in exquisite detail by ESPN.com writer Scott Burnside. Herewith, my brief thoughts on the biggest winners and losers in the short term -- teams that either moved toward a date with the Stanley Cup or took a step backward.

WINNERS

1. Pittsburgh. Marian Hossa gets added to this lineup? Are you kidding me? Hey, as a lifelong Clevelander I'm born and bred to loathe The Yinzers, but I'm impressed. Hal Gill won't hurt on the blue line, either.

2. Dallas. On the day that Tampa Bay threw in the white towel for this season and turned the page decisively on their 2004 Stanley Cup season by moving their Conn Smythe winner from that campaign, the Stars came away with a huge haul in Brad Richards. His horrible defensive numbers will pick up in Big D and Dallas fills the need for an additional scorer that I thought they still had coming into today.

3. San Jose. When Raider Fan By Another Name files into the Shark Tank this spring, he may be witnessing the team's best run yet. Brian Campbell fills the longtime hole the team has had on the blue line and it's entirely likely he'll provide the same boost to his new team that Joe Thornton provided last year -- albeit that lift only came in the regular season and Campbell was brought in for the games that follow that.

4. Colorado. First a team from Pittsburgh, now my most hated team in sports -- it hurts be objective some days and this is certainly one of those days. But with Forsberg and Foote coming back without damaging the existing roster in any way, this team just locked up a playoff spot IF -- and it's a big if -- Floppy Furesburg is even relatively healthy. Hey, with Darren McCarty coming back to Hockeytown, the first round could be a great nostalgia-fest!

5. Washington. First they get an impressive goalie like Huet on the cheap, then they get a low-risk flyer on Sergei The Enigma. It's very possible to overstate the impact of these moves, but they help and with no margin for error on the Eastern bubble, that's important in and of itself.

LOSERS

1. Detroit. Again, objectivity really hurts today. I've nicknamed Ken Holland "The Smartest Man in Sports," and he's had such a golden touch over the years (including the time since the salary cap was instituted, so put that in your pipe and smoke it, haters!) that it doesn't seem right to bash him today. But bash him I must. Brad Stuart helps on the blue line, but that's the area of greatest strength already. My Wings really needed another scoring wing and I fear it will come back to haunt us in the playoffs.

2. Montreal. How does trading Huet help in the short term? It doesn't, and they're out on a big limb in net right now.

3. New Jersey. You're either upgrading or moving backwards in this climate.

4. Columbus. So much for being a buyer at the trading deadline, although the team may benefit in the long term from their approach.

5. TIE Toronto and Buffalo. See Columbus.

Grading the final NBA trades of the year

By Rick Morris

ESPN.com’s John Hollinger has broken down the recent NBA trades and he has delivered grades to all teams involved. I’m going to limit my own grades to the teams in serious contention this year, because the quest for a title in the short term was the most dramatic element involved in this remarkable flurry of deals. Having said that, though, if I were going to grade Seattle, I’d give them an A+ for clearing out insane cap room to put together with Kevin Durant, Jeff Green and whichever amazing stud from the top of this year’s draft class that winds up with them – it’s just a shame for their great fans that the people in Oklahoma City will be the ones watching up-close when they’re making serious title runs in the next decade. Likewise, I’d have given an A+ to Miami for setting themselves up to have the league’s best nucleus in the next few years: Dwyane Wade, Shawn Marion and Michael Beasley.

Los Angeles Lakers A Coach Pop is right; the league does need a trade review committee. Memphis got absolutely nothing in return for a legitimate star who poses matchup problems. Clearly, the Grizzlies are worshipping at the false altar of cap space. They should go ask Crumbs Krause how that ends up sometimes. The Trevor Ariza deal also helped the Lakers in terms of having enough usable depth to make the Gasol deal.

Atlanta A- The Hawks gave up absolutely nothing to add Mike Bibby, thereby solving a longtime need at point guard and procuring a shooter who can spread the floor. What’s not to like?

Cleveland A- I agree completely with the grade that Hollinger assigned. The Cavs had three main deficiencies for the past few years: point guard, an extra shooter and frontcourt enforcer. They upgraded substantially in all three areas, while not parting with anyone indispensable. Hilariously, the idiot-basher part of the Cleveland fanbase, which is one of the worst in sports, represented strongly prior to the trade in priceless fashion as no less than 16 different brain surgeons bashed outstanding Akron Beacon-Journal beat reporter Brian Windhorst for correctly indicating that a big move was underway.

San Antonio B+ They won a title with the same nucleus last year – well, scratch that, they won with much less production out of Manu Manu. Now, they add Mighty Mouse Stoudamire and Kurt Thomas to the mix. Right now, they are stronger than last year at a point when they definitely needed to be better.

New Orleans B- Once again, I agree exactly with Hollinger’s grade. Bonzi Wells fills a hole at two-guard, the only one that the Hornets have had, but the bench remains suspect. The starting lineup is very good, but not as top-heavy as other Western competitors, notwithstanding Chris Paul’s ascension to megastar this year and the fact that he’s second only to Lebron James in MVP worthiness this year.

Phoenix B- The Suns took a ginormous risk by turning their system upside down, but there’s reason to believe they will see some approximation of the Shaq of old rather than an old Shaq. Shawn Marion’s an excellent real player and an even better roto one, but he’s a small price to pay as the key component of a deal for one of the greatest centers of all time. Phoenix will now be a bit more balanced offensively and more able to play the half-court game that is so important in the playoffs.

Utah B- On the nights when “Bad Korver” materializes, the team won’t be any better off than it was before. On the nights when “Good Korver” is in the house, the Jazz will be much more frightening.

Dallas C+ Aside from Devin Harris, I don’t feel that the Mavs parted with anyone individually of any consequence. But collectively, they lost a lot of depth. Everyone points to the Phoenix as an example of a team that threw its approach of the last few years out of the window because they can’t run as much with Shaq in town. But the top-heavy Dirk/Kidd/Howard approach represents just as dramatic and risky of a break from the past in Big D.

Detroit, Boston and Orlando C- In this climate, if you’re not moving decisively forward, you’re falling behind. Granted, Danny Ferry didn’t complete his deal until the 11^th hour and many doubted whether he’d be able to get anything done with the Cavs’ plethora of bad contracts, but the gamble that he would not be able to by the Pistons and Celtics greatly reduced the chance of a late ‘80s throwback in the Eastern finals. Much as I was unimpressed by the Pistons’ moves, I don’t think the Magic sufficiently addressed their hole at two-guard or their overall need for depth.

Houston D- They’re even more of a two-man team than before and firmly on the periphery of Western relevance.

"How Do You Get Toothpaste Back in the Tube?"

By Tony Mazur

Earlier this month, I embedded a YouTube video on this very website featuring an irate Chris Berman, belittling the ESPN camera crew. Since then, a few more "Boomer" videos have been leaked to the Internet, unedited and all, which make me wonder how many behind-the-scenes videos have really been taped. Each video showed Berman spewing profanity after profanity, and one displayed him flirting with a female coworker.

At first, ESPN said "what's past is past" (since the videos dated back to 2000). Now all of a sudden, the clips have been removed from YouTube. If what's past is past, then why did ESPN order YouTube to take them off their site?

Just another instance of ESPN covering up their own rear ends. People still don't know why Harold Reynolds got canned. And Lord only knows how many sexual harassment lawsuits have been pinned against Mike Tirico (his newest lawsuit should be why he has a radio show). If you can find the Chris Berman videos, alert me and I will post them. I still cannot look at Boomer the same way.

Roid-ger's karma sandwich

By Rick Morris

The complete and utter humiliation visited upon Roger Clemens during the Congressional hearings this week vindicates all of us who have long seen he and Barry Bonds as flip sides of the same coin for the Steroid Era. For those like myself who were limited to watching excerpts of it later because we were unable to view it live, Jayson Stark's ESPN.com liveblog really drove home the nature of events all throughout that unique day.

I must say, though, that there seemed a vague note of sympathy shining through in Stark's writing in terms of the degradation being visited upon Clemens. If I was correct in detecting that, it was probably very similar to the sentiments of our Senior Editor Jason Jones, who was able to watch gavel-to-gavel coverage of the hearings. He described to me feeling the emotion that whatever Clemens might have done, it didn't merit that type of virtual anal probe in front of a national audience.

I disagree completely.

I don't believe that anything Clemens experienced this week amounts to anything more than a tiny slice of a karmic repayment for a career of conducting himself as a horse's arse, HGH/roids or no HGH/roids. Go ask Mike Piazza, the recipient of repeated attempted decapitations from this puffed-up bully, if he thinks the committee went too far.

For me, it's not a zero-sum question of whether Clemens is a vile cheater or whether Henry Waxman is a camera-addicted posturing egomaniac. For me, both notions are true.

While I find Stark's overall account to be outstanding and a perfect example of what can be captured both in the moment and for posterity in terms of liveblogging, I do question his belief that Clemens' statements were punctuated by believable intensity. It's all a matter of individual interpretation, but I found his occasional stammering and what I perceived to be a "Forced Angry Guy" manner of speech to be signs of insincerity.

In matters such as these, it's natural to come to the conclusion that nothing has been settled in the absence of any type of conclusive legal finding, but here too I disagree. The predecessor to this circus, the infamous 2005 Capitol Hill hearing, permanently branded Mark McGwire as a cheater in the court of public opinion based on his dissembling before the committee that day. If you glance at the public opinion polls this week, you'll see a similar dynamic at work with Clemens having been unalterably pronounced a cheater by the public based on his pathetic performance before Congress.

So tell me again why nothing was settled with these hearings?

How Do You Arrive At Your Super Bowl XLII Prediction

by Jason Jones

Ask yourself one question…What percentage of people across the country are rooting for the Patriots and how many are rooting for the Giants? The national media has spun this Super Bowl even harder than any other in recent memory. I guess that is justified, since we are about to witness history one way or another. They would have you believe that the “rooting breakdown” is barely 55/45 in favor of the Patriots. I clearly think it really is more like 70/30 in favor of the Patriots. The following is courtesy of ESPN.com. This is a collection of people who have given their picks for the Super Bowl. I have supplied all 129 of them with score and team. This list includes ESPN employees as well as celebrities that span sports, acting, music, etc. If that was not enough, I have done some basic adding and came up with what the average score would be according to people who honestly think the Giants will win. The average score by people who believe the Patriots will win. And, yes, the average score of all 129 people included. Enjoy, I’m not very good at math, so this was a son of a bitch.

ESPN STAFF and Selected Celebrities

1. Jeffri Chadiha: 24-23 Giants
2. John Clayton: 38-24 Patriots
3. Matt Mosley: 31-17 Patriots
4. Len Pasquarelli: 31-20 Patriots
5. Mike Sando: 30-20 Patriots
6. John Banks: 42-21 Patriots
7. Mike McAllister: 34-24 Patriots
8. Scott Symmes: 27-24 Giants
9. Sheldon Spencer: 27-23 Giants
10. Jeremy Green: 27-23 Patriots
11. Keith Kidd: 27-20 Patriots
12. Matt Williamson: 33-20 Patriots
13. Ken Moll: 28-17 Patriots
14. Doug Kretz: 31-17 Patriots
15. Marwan Maalouf: 28-27 Patriots
16. Gary Horton: 31-20 Patriots
17. Bill Simmons: 42-17 Patriots
18. Greg Garber: 38-21 Patriots
19. Gregg Easterbrook: 20-19 Giants
20. Jemele Hill: 38-31 Patriots
21. Wright Thompson: 35-3 Giants
22. Paul Newman (actor) Tie ---------
23. Joanne Woodward (actor) 28-14 Patriots
24. Jack Nicklaus (golfer) N/A Patriots
25. Arnold Palmer (golfer) 28-21 Giants
26. Gen. Mike Hayden (Dir CIA) 28-24 Giants
27. Martina McBride (singer) 31-27 Patriots
28. Placido Domingo (singer) 24-21 Giants
29. Serena Williams (tennis) N/A Giants
30. Don Rickles (comedy) 21-12 Patriots
31. Phyllis Diller (comedienne) 30-10 Patriots
32. Lebron James (cle cavaliers) 34-14 Patriots
33. Dwayne Wade (mia heat) 27-17 Patriots
34. Shaquille O’Neal (mia heat) 21-20 Giants
35. Keith Olbermann (msnbc) 27-21 Giants
36. Bill O’Reilly (fox) 31-30 Giants
37. Michael Phelps (swimmer) 24-17 Patriots
38. Mitt Romney (anti-Christ) 28-14 Patriots
39. Michael Bloomberg (Mayor) 31-28 Giants
40. Elisabeth Shue (actress) 31-20 Patriots
41. Mamie Van Doren (sex icon) 28-7 Patriots
42. Jerry Mathers (leave it to beaver) 30-27 Patriots
43. Bobby Thompson (baseball Giant) 28-21 Patriots
44. Ralph Branca (Brooklyn Dodger) 34-31 Giants
45. Chuck Yeager (pilot) 28-17 Patriots
46. Mickey Rooney (actor) N/A Patriots
47. Yogi Berra (NY Yankee) N/A Giants
48. Steven Van Zandt (sopranos) 20-14 Giants
49. Wayne Newton (singer) 35-30 Patriots
50. Dave Grohl (foo fighters) 24-21 Patriots
51. Dana Delany (actress) 28-21 Patriots
52. Mark Cuban (owner Mavericks) 28-16 Giants
53. Dr. Joyce Brothers (psychologist) 17-10 Giants
54. Andy Williams (singer) 21-7 Patriots
55. Barry Williams (brady bunch) 42-27 Patriots
56. Christopher Knight (brady bunch) 31-20 Patriots
57. Shirley Jones (partridge family) 34-20 Patriots
58. Adam West (original batman) 24-14 Patriots
59. Dawn Wells (gilligan’s island) 28-17 Patriots
60. Russell Johnson (gilligan’s island) 21-20 Giants
61. Haley Joel Osmond (sixth sense) 34-20 Patriots
62. Dick Vitale (espn coll basketball) 28-24 Giants
63. Dennis Miller (comedian/radio host) 19-0 Patriots
64. Dennis Farina (actor) 27-24 Giants
65. Randy Jackson (American idol) 31-24 Patriots
66. Tobin Bell (Jigsaw from “Saw”) 17-14 Patriots
67. Pam Shriver (tennis broadcaster) 24-13 Patriots
68. Neal McDonough (actor) 38-14 Patriots
69. Robert Patrick (actor) 35-17 Patriots
70. Stacy Keibler (wwe/actress) 32-17 Patriots
71. Jess L. Martin (actor) 25-21 Giants
72. Gordon Clapp (actor) 41-10 Patriots
73. Dr. Pat Robertson (reverend) 20-14 Giants
74. Dr. James Dobson (reverend) 34-24 Patriots
75. Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass) N/A Patriots
76. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) N/A Giants
77. Scott Turow (author) 21-17 Giants
78. David Wright (N.Y. Mets 3B) 27-24 Giants
79. Omar Epps (actor) 35-24 Patriots
80. Marisol Nichols (actress) 35-21 Patriots
81. Susan Anton (singer/actress) 31-28 Patriots
82. Dierks Bentley (singer) 27-24 Giants
83. Kirsten Haglund (miss America) 31-20 Patriots
84. Rachel Smith (miss USA) 29-28 Giants
85. Vince Neil (singer/Motley Crue) 49-14 Patriots
86. Tony Sirico (actor/sopranos) 35-31 Giants
87. Christopher Gorham (actor) 27-17 Patriots
88. Dominic Chianese (actor/sopranos) 24-21 Giants
89. Jon Tenney (actor) 27-24 Giants
90. John Slattery (actor) 41-28 Patriots
91. James Denton (actor) 23-20 Giants
92. Dick Van Patten (founder NBPF) 35-14 Patriots
93. Ed Asner (actor) 7-3 Giants
94. Eva Marie Saint (actress) 38-35 Giants
95. Marlee Matlin (actress) N/A Giants
96. Shelley Berman (actor/comedian) 28-21 Patriots
97. Dionne Warwick (singer) 27-17 Giants
98. Bob Weir (musician) 31-24 Patriots
99. Joan Jett (singer) 35-21 Giants

100. Tom Scholz (boston) 28-21 Patriots

101. Rodney Atkins (singer) 42-17 Patriots

102. Dolph Lundgren (actor) 21-13 Giants

103. Carl Weathers (actor) 31-17 Patriots

104. Leroy Neiman (artist) 31-21 Patriots

105. John Cena (wwe wrestler) 34-14 Patriots

106. Maria Menounos (tv host) 30-27 Patriots

107. Julia Mancuso (skier) 31-28 Patriots

108. Kerry Walsh (volleyball medalist) 35-27 Patriots

109. Jeremy Wariner (track medalist) 24-17 Patriots

110. Mike Eruzione (1980 US hockey) 38-21 Patriots

111. Karch Kiraly (volleyball medalist) 28-17 Patriots

112. Tyson Gay (track star) 27-14 Patriots

113. Sanya Richards (track star) 21-17 Giants

114. Clint Bowyer (NASCAR) 45-24 Patriots

115. Matt Kenseth (NASCAR) 24-21 Giants

116. Jeff Burton (NASCAR) 34-13 Patriots

117. Ted Giannoulas (SD Chicken) 34-26 Patriots

118. Carrot Top (comedian) 27-23 Patriots

119. Scott Adams (dilbert) 37-21 Giants

120. Judy Tentuta (comedienne) 28-21 Patriots

121. Penn Jillette (penn and teller) N/A Patriots

122. Sean Salisbury (ESPN) N/A Patriots

123. Merril Hoge (ESPN) N/A Giants

124. Ron Jaworski (ESPN) N/A Patriots

125. Mark Schlereth (ESPN) N/A Patriots

126. Mike Golic (ESPN) N/A Patriots

127. Mike Ditka (ESPN) N/A Giants

128. Keyshawn Johnson (ESPN) N/A Patriots

129. Emmitt Smith (ESPN) N/A Patriots

ESPN SportsNation Poll (as of Feb 1) – 492,651 total votes

Patriots will win-60.7%

Giants will win-39.3%

Total Score and Average Score of those taking the Giants

939-734 (in favor of the Giants)

26.08-20.38 (giving the Giants a +5.7 point margin of victory)

Total Score and Average Score of those taking the Patriots

2293-1390 (in favor of the Patriots)

31.41-19.04 (giving the Patriots a +12.4 point margin of victory)

Total Score of All Participants (129-not including the D-Bags who are too lame to actually pick a winner and chose to go with a tie in a non-tie era).

3232-2124 (in favor of the Patriots)

29.65-19.48 (giving the Patriots a +10.17 margin of victory)

If you do not have a rooting interest and might have been wondering how to make a pick without getting to completely immersed into it, this may be the best way to go. In a manner of speaking, this is the “Who Wants To Be A Millionaire-ask the audience” analogy. That is of course, if 129 of the ESPN employees and a gamut of celebrities were an audience at your disposal. If that is the case, then maybe your pick should be…

PATRIOTS, 30-19 (by way of rounding up or down).

Chris Berman: Rumblin', Bumblin', Cursin'!

By Tony Mazur

I don't know why it has taken eight years for this to come out, but a video was leaked to the Internet of ESPN's Chris Berman exploding on the camera crew. I'm not sure if he was taping a promo or something, but Boomer went on a profanity-laced tirade against the set for moving around while he's filming. Classic.

Free Tony Bruno!

By Rick Morris

Tony Bruno is no longer performing his daily talk show on Sporting News Radio. He will be under contract for a few more months, but has been pulled from the air pending expiration of his contract.

As somebody who's been with SportsTalkNetwork.com for almost five years (well, four years and ten months), I can legitimately say that he's been the biggest influence on my work. I don't consciously imitate anyone, I'm too much of an individualist for that, but you can definitely tell that I'm a fan by some of the traits he has that I try to incorporate in my own way. Specifically, he's not afraid to try to inject humor and goofiness into sports discussions (and unlike most hosts, he understands that some of the best comedic material can come from making yourself the butt of some jokes), but also, he will show you his deep level of knowledge from time to time and not adhere to any radio "norms" about dumbing topics down for the audience.

I heard Bruno for the first time in the early '90s when he and Chuck Wilson were doing their awesome nightly show during the early days of ESPN radio. Wilson had a straight-laced, wholesome persona that meshed so well with Bruno, the smartass from Philly. So many shows try too hard to come up with an "Odd Couple" pairing and few ever work because it's hard not to sound contrived. Bruno and Wilson worked because, like truly great entertainers, they didn't try to force anything. They were simply themselves and they let their stylistic differences speak for themselves without trying too hard to call attention to them. In so doing, in a strange kind of way, they blended perfectly and just had incredible chemistry. To this day, when I talk radio with people, I always mention the pairing of Tony Bruno and Chuck Wilson and anyone who remembers them always agrees with me about how great they were together. Bruno's subsequent solo shows over the years have been outstanding as well, as he has worked well with anyone assigned to him.

I've done many shows during my time with STN, but one of my fondest programs was the first one I was on, Reality Check. Proving what a small world it really is, my old high school friend Dave Adams was one-third of the crew, along with our friend Ron Glasenapp and myself. Ron was the lead host and performed more of a neutral bus-steering type role on the show. As it happened, Dave has somewhat of a Chuck Wilson-type personality and as I mentioned, I have some tendencies toward a Bruno-type style. Our chemistry was really great together, and I felt it was a fitting tribute to that old ESPN radio program, when the hosts just clicked together so effortlessly just being themselves.

In a business increasingly hard to succeed in without being a corporate guy who fits a certain mold, Bruno is again going to be looking for a national platform for his great skills. You can keep up with his efforts in the meantime at his personal website and on his message board. He's not bashing Sporting News Radio at either place, so despite my frustration with the fact that I am deprived from listening to his program, I won't either. I will, however, in the spirit of the headline to this column, appeal to the Powers That Be at Sporting News Radio to reach a settlement with Mr. Bruno that will allow him to get on with his professional career as soon as possible. Like most of his fans, I feel it's the least they can do for him.

Reliving the days of Bozo-Choke

By Rick Morris

To the long sad list of Cleveland sports futility we must add one more: the looming specter of the first perfect NFL team in 35 years, the same franchise that has already been crowned the "team of the decade" -- coached by a man run out of the North Coast in a cloud of futility 12 years ago. Why did Bill Belichick fail in Cleveland?

The question is often posed by people who did not have an up-close seat to the sorry state of the Browns franchise in the early and mid-90s. Those of us unfortunate enough to remember the coach once known as "Bozo-Choke" purposely designing bootlegs to humiliate his starting quarterback Bernie Kosar, kicking a field goal at the end of a game that his team would still lose by several touchdowns and blazoning in our minds forever the putrid phrase "Metcalf Up the Middle" -- well, we can tell you that the "genius" you're seeing in New England bears little or no resemblance to the goof we suffered through for five interminable years.

It's easy to miss this point on the surface. Now, as then, Belichick displays no social graces. He has a great mind for defense now, as he admittedly did then. But there are many subtle nuances in the job The Hoodie has done over the last several years with the Pats that indicate lessons that he learned the hard way in C-Town. Gene Wojciechowski does an excellent job in this ESPN.com article of breaking down everything that we in Cleveland observed during those painful years. In the long line of infamous Cleveland sports heartbreaks, the huge success of this man after using the Browns as a pathetic "training wheel" start to his pro career has to rank high on the list.

Another Reason To NEVER Listen To Mr. ROTO

by Jason Jones

It is no surprise that, we at FantasyDraftHelp.com do not think Roto is as talented as he thinks he is. Deep down, the guy is an idiot. This is the same guy that said after T.O. lead the league in touchdowns receptions, that you should NEVER draft T.O. What if T.O. is available in the 8th round? Should we still never draft him? The same nimrod who said always play and/or consider the matchups. Specifically, BENCH ADRIAN PETERSON AGAINST THE CHARGERS, if you don't remember Peterson broke the single game rushing record that day. So, here are even more examples of why ESPN should never not associate their name with his. The following was published, which blows my mind, in the December issue of ESPN the Magazine..."it's been six years since I’ve owned Fred Taylor on any fantasy team, and it will be seven next season. Why? Because in 2001, I declared him dead to me. Never again, I swore to myself. And even though swearing to yourself about fantasy football isn’t the best to keep your friends around, I can’t help it. So it’s time for this year’s version of 'the Dead To Me List'. These guys might produce great seasons in the future, and have lovely personalities to boot, but it doesn’t matter. In my world, they cease to exist"

WOW!!! What a D-Bag. This is the guy that who ESPN goes to when fantasy football questions arise. Millions of fantasy football managers are going to his site and watching his pieces on ESPN television in the hopes of getting solid advice. And this is the guy who each and every year is downsizing the number of players those people will draft. Along with his “umbrella rules” and other rigid ways of thinking are dooming fantasy owners everywhere. Never draft rookie RB’s (Adrian Peterson), never draft rookie WR’s (Dwayne Bowe, 995 yds and 5 td’s with 7 games with more than 4 receptions), always draft RB/RB back to back-you won’t survive if you don’t (my ’07 roster would disagree…T.Brady, R.Moss, C.Johnson, R.Wayne, J.Lewis, A.Peterosn, K.Winslow)… I could go on all day with the ways that ROTO is WRONG, but I’ll let you see what I mean.

1. Fred Taylor-Never draft Fred Taylor because he was injured most of 2001. I go one further, Fred Taylor was hurt most of his career, but depending on the value as the draft continues Fred Taylor may become very tantalizing. If Fred Taylor is available to be your 3^rd RB, by all means it makes sense to draft him. If you want to say that you don’t think it’s wise to draft Taylor, say that its because he splitting carries with the guy who will eventually replace him, not because you have a stick up your ass about something that happened 7 years ago. S***, I had Randy Moss in 2006, that didn’t stop me from drafting him in the 3^rd Round in 2007. And why? Because I am not an idiot like ROTO.
2. Shaun Alexander-He claims that this decision was made solely on his performance (or lack there of) against Cleveland in week 9. Again, and ROTO is famous for this, “focused on the wrong details”. If you don’t think Shaun is worth the risk, at least come up with more than one game (or at least 2 and a half quarters) to arrive at that decision. Look, Shaun is not the Shaun of even 2005. Seattle does not have a contingency plan at RB for the long term. They are going to have to rely on Alexander until a replacement can be groomed. And they will not get one drafting where they are (at least not one that will be ready until 2009-2010). Now if they sign a guy like Michael Turner in Free Agency, then maybe the Shaun Alexander issue will be a more urgent one to consider.
3. Laurence Maroney-The Patriots scored 355 points in the first 9 games and Maroney didn’t get in the endzone once. LOOK DIPS*#@!! This is a great example as to why ROTO doesn’t know D@#%. Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth, and Ben Watson. The first time Brady truly had a dangerous WR core to pass to. There was a great possibility that they wouldn’t even get to the red zone. Its just like playing madden. If you’re good enough, you can lead the league in scoring and never get inside your opponents 30 yard line. Some day soon, Maroney may be a top 10 RB in the league. I can only hope I am in a league with ROTO and wax the floor with him. At this rate, he’ll be turning down 5 players out of every 12 picks.
4. Cedric Benson-Look, Benson has been a huge disappointment. I can’t really look down on someone who doesn’t feel confident that Benson can carry a team. But to say you write him off for good, is just asinine. Maybe some day Benson gets his head out of his conceited ass. Maybe some day he will realize that getting picked in the top 5 doesn’t extend to you anything. Never is a very close minded approach, especially in Fantasy Football
5. Norv Turner-HOLY S@#$. “It’s any player he’s touched as a head coach or coordinator”. This basically says that JaMarcus Russell, and more importantly Tomlinson, Rivers, and Gates are no longer worthy of being drafted in any Fantays league. He must not have thought this one out, ROTO, you can’t be this stupid.
6. Santana Moss-I think at this point he is just trying to fill the space left on the page. Does anyone believe that Santana Moss is a legit #1 WR? You better not. This is more about ROTO not properly evaluating than it is hating on Santana Moss. Santana Moss may be the best shifty slot receiver in the game if they’d ever use him correctly. In Washington, they have to work him like a #1 because he is the best they’ve got. Put Santana Moss on the Patriots and not Welker or Stallworth. His stat line would definitely be worth having on your fantasy team. Conversely, give Washington a legit #1 WR (6’2 or taller, 205-230lbs, 4.4 40 or better) and even ROTO will have to reconsider his take on Santana Moss. Oh, and this just pissed me off…”Every time he (Santana Moss) drops a pass, a Jets fan gets his wings.” Who the F@#$ are you? Why the Jets? A Cowboy fan getting wings at least makes sense in a drug-induced stuper. And I am now dumber for having spent any time on that stupid It’s A Wonderful Life reference.

I’m done. I can only focus on “The Talent-Less Mr. ROTO” for so long. My head hurts.

The All-Star Debate Reconvened

by Jason Jones

Some of you are familiar with my call of change toward any and all All-Star game voting. It is my moderately sized dream that All-Star game roster be decided solely by statistical production as opposed to any other means. An All-Star game roster should not reflect a roster of “potential future hall of famers”, unless said roster also reflects players who have put up the best numbers THIS year not over the last few years. Recently, John Hollinger of ESPN.com had written a piece on a similar topic. His “East All-Stars: Slim Pickings When Selecting Subs” has mentioned some details I do not agree with, and I hope you agree with me.

"Best" in this case is hazily defined. I look at it in the big-picture kind of way -- not necessarily who is having the best season, although that's certainly important, but who are the best players, period. That, in turn produces a series of criteria for being on the team:-John Hollinger

This is the crux of my entire argument. The All-Star rosters SHOULD reflect only the best player of this particular season and only based on the numbers they have put up THIS season, Hollinger disagrees. I say, the All-Star rosters should reflect statistical production in a “current season vacuum”. Last year and the year before that should have absolutely no bearing on the proceedings.

Hollinger’s first point I do agree with, “Small Injuries Don’t Matter”

To summarize, if a player has better numbers than another but missed a small amount of time with an ankle injury (“say 12 games”) then the first player should not be penalized for a small injury. I can get behind that thought, because as he mentions, Elton Brand should not be considered (likewise, Gilbert Arenas). Signed, 1997 Anfernee Hardaway who played only 19 games in ’97 and was still voted an NBA All-Star.

The second point is what made me respond here. History Matters.

“If Player A and Player B are having comparable seasons, but Player A is playing way better than he ever has before while Player B has played at this level the past three seasons, I'm taking Player B every time.”

This should disqualify Hollinger from polluting sports fans minds forever. History should play zero part in the evaluation process.

-Al Jefferson PF (MIN) 20.6 PTS, 12.3 REB, 1.3 BLK

or

-Jermaine O’Neal (IND) 15.8 PTS, 7.4 REB, 2.0 BLK

If we left it up to Mr. Hollinger, according to his article, he would not hesitate to select Jermaine O’Neal. Jermaine is a quality player, but by saying what he’s saying, it sends the message that it does not matter what a guy does if he hasn’t been there before. I find it hard to believe any fan, much less most of them would agree Jermaine O’Neal should get the nod over Jefferson because he has been to more All-Star games. This is the kind of analysis that belongs in Hall of Fame discussions, not All-Star Game discussions. This is the famous “double-edged sword” angle. If we go with who’s been there more, how do the new guys get in if they’ve never been there before. Are we supposed to wait until the current guard of players retire, then look around with our thumbs up our asses, assuming who would have been there before had we not been so pig headed? HISTORY HAS ZERO TO DO WITH IT!

The third point deals with winning, “.500 is not a magical All-Star maker”.

I agree with this one as well. Remember, All-Star nods are not and should not be reflected in the team’s Win column. As much as I’ve hated it in previous years, it should effect MVP voting. You should not have a losing record and be heralded as the leagues best player. Just think, lets use a hypothetical player, we’ll call him John Johnson. If John Johnson is on the flat out worst team in the league, but he has a stats line that reads: 38 PTS, 18 REB, 12 AST, 3 STL, and 3 BLK a game, you mean to tell me he doesn’t belong in the All Star game? That is hogwash. Those are probably the best numbers ever put together by the half way point in history. Now it is hypothetical, but the point remains. This player should not be penalized because the rest of his team and maybe coaching staff is worthless. It’s a far-fetched analogy, but it is translatable. In varying degrees, if Johnson gets in shouldn’t anyone get in based on their performance and not the teams? The All-Star game is a reward for exceptional individual performance, not team. Needless to say, he would not be in the running for the MVP.

Yet, and this one is beautiful, Hollinger continues this point with, “The Parliament Argument or The Electoral College Argument. Since Boston has the best record they have to have three All-Stars" or "Portland has to have representation on the All-Star team. “But we should be talking about the actual players instead of how many All-Stars their constituencies deserve or how a certain team needs representation”. Clearly I agree with this line of thinking. This is exactly why the Detroit Pistons had not gotten any All-Star nods during their recent run until 2006. In an era when most All-Star players register 23-28 points a game or at least 7 in any second tier category (i.e. rebounds or assists) as a bench mark statistic, is it any surprise a team that boasts 3 or 4 player who all average 15-19 points a game are not in? Times have changed slightly in the last couple years, but the point remains. The All-Star appearances by the Detroit Pistons clearly supports Hollinger’s points. I like this example because it clearly illustrates how consistent the Pistons have been over their current run of success. Since 2001, they have been the most consistent team lead by 4-5 of the most consistent players in the same amount of time. However, if you deny Hollinger’s idea that the best players in the game based on talent and popularity should get in even if they have not performed on par statistically, then read the Pistons' statistical findings below. Then we will show the actual 2006 NBA Eastern Conference All-Star Game Roster and compare it to the roster that should have been on the court. If you believe as I do, in that an All-Star bid is an individual achievement based on THIS year's statistical production, then you will find the following interesting and clear as day.

The Following Stats Reflect Only the Years They Were Pistons

Chauncey Billups

2006-17.0 Pts, 3.1 Reb, 7.2 Ast

2005-18.5 Pts, 3.1 Reb, 8.6 Ast

2004-16.5 Pts, 3.4 Reb, 5.8 Ast

2003-16.9 Pts, 3.5 Reb, 5.7 Ast

2002-16.2 Pts, 3.7 Reb, 3.9 Ast

Richard Hamilton

2006-19.8 Pts, 3.8 Reb, 3.8 Ast

2005-20.1 Pts, 3.2 Reb, 3.2 Ast

2004-18.7 Pts, 3.9 Reb, 4.9 Ast

2003-17.6 Pts, 3.6 Reb, 4.0 Ast

2002-19.7 Pts, 3.9 Reb, 2.5 Ast

Tayshawn Prince

2006-14.3 Pts, 5.2 Reb, 2.8 Ast

2005-14.1 Pts, 4.2 Reb, 2.3 Ast

2004-14.7 Pts, 5.3 Reb, 3.0 Ast

2003-10.3 Pts, 4.8 Reb, 2.3 Ast

2002-03.3 Pts, 1.1 Reb, 0.6 Ast

Rasheed Wallace

2006-12.3 Pts, 7.2 Reb, 1.7 Ast

2005-15.1 Pts, 6.8 Reb, 2.3 Ast

2004-14.5 Pts, 8.2 Reb, 1.8 Ast

Ben Wallace

2005-07.3 Pts, 11.3 Reb, 1.9 Ast

2004-09.7 Pts, 12.2 Reb, 1.7 Ast

2003-09.5 Pts, 12.4 Reb, 1.7 Ast

2002-06.9 Pts, 15.4 Reb, 1.6 Ast

2001-07.6 Pts, 13.0 Reb, 1.4 Ast

2000-06.4 Pts, 13.2 Reb, 1.5 Ast

The beauty of this is, the Pistons made the playoffs in;

2006-1^st in the Central Div, Lost Conf Finals

2005-1^st in the Central Div, Lost Conf Finals

2004-1^st in the Central Div, Lost NBA Finals

2003-2^nd in the Central Div, Won NBA Finals

2002-1^st in the Central Div, Lost Conf Finals

2001-1^st in the Central Div, Lost Conf Semis

Best individual seasons:

Chauncey Billups: 2005, 18.5 / 3.1 / 8.6 (All-Star appearance: ’06, ‘07)

Richard Hamilton: 2006, 19.8 / 3.8 / 3.8 (All-Star appearance: ’06, ‘07)

Tayshawn Prince: 2004, 14.7 / 5.3 / 3.0 (All-Star appearance: 0)

Rasheed Wallace: 2004, 14.5 / 8.2 / 1.8 (All-Star appearance: ‘06)

Ben Wallace: 2002, 6.9 / 15.4 / 1.6 (All-Star appearance: ’03, ’04, ’05, ‘06)

You’ll notice that in all of the shuffle, Billups, Hamilton, R. Wallace, B. Wallace all put up quality numbers in 2006. It is a great achievement to have 4 players contribute the way the Pistons of 2006 did. It may be a by product, but as they say, “Those are the Breaks”. It may not be fair, but the math is just working against them. They were and still are a strong defensive minded team. Good defense sometimes means less possessions in a game. Then 61 of the 96 points scored on average per game came from Billups, Hamilton, Prince (not in All-Star contention), R. Wallace, B. Wallace (who only averaged 7.3 pts a game). Divide that out and each member averages 15.25 points a game. If the Pistons want more run as a team who produces All-Star players, maybe they should conduct themselves in a manner that would produce All-Star like statistics. The only drawback is not winning as much. I think they will take their division titles and playoff appearances over All-Star bids. As for the actual 2006 NBA All-Star Eastern Conference Roster, there were some votes extended due to popularity and other non statistical reasoning. When relating it to the 4 Detroit Pistons, I believe the voting populous put them in as a way to rationalize their success. It’s a lot like Fred Taylor making the Pro Bowl. His stats did not merit it, but because he put up solid numbers over time, it was treated like a Lifetime Achievement Award, not a Pro Bowl invite. I went through and pulled all of the major stats for every player in the Eastern Conference. Then took the top 25 at points, top 25 in rebounds, and top 25 in assists, then cross referenced all of it together to come up with a an Eastern Conference All-Star roster comprised completely by statistical analysis. The numbers is parenthesis are some of those stats crunched as reference points in the remainder of this discussion.

Actual East All-Star Roster_____________Roster Based on ONLY Stats

G Allen Iverson (24/3/7)________G Gilbert Arenas (28/5/6)

G Dwyane Wade (27/4/8)_______G Allen Iverson (24/3/7)

G Gilbert Arenas (28/5/6)__________G Jason Kidd (13/8/9)

G Richard Hamilton (20/4/4)________G Dwyane Wade (27/4/8)

G Paul Pierce (25/6/4)_____________G Joe Johnson (25/4/4)

G Chauncey Billups (17/3/7)_________F Lebron James (27/7/6)

F Lebron James (27/7/6)________F Vince Carter (25/6/7)

F Jermaine O’Neal (19/10/2)_____F Paul Pierce (25/6/4)

F Chris Bosh (23/11/3)_____________F Chris Bosh (23/11/3)

F Vince Carter (25/6/7)____________F Jermaine O’Neal (19/10/2)

F Rasheed Wallace (12/7/2)_________F Dwight Howard (18/12/2)

C Shaquille O’Neal (17/7/2)______C Shaquille O’Neal (17/7/2)

C Ben Wallace (7/11/2)_____________C Eddy Curry (20/7/1)

Bold = indicates starters

A few notes…Allen Iverson, Dwyane Wade, Gilbert Arenas (even though with almost 29 pts a game, he almost didn’t make it), Paul Pierce, Lebron James, Jermaine O’Neal, Chris Bosh, Vince Carter, and Shaquille O’Neal all were on both rosters. D. Wade, L. James, and S. O’Neal are the only consensus starters. They had voted Allen Iverson a starter over Gilbert Arenas. Allen Iverson had 24 pts a game while Gilbert Arenas had almost 29. Allen Iverson registered 7 assists while Arenas managed a close 6. In the not so guard friendly category Iverson had 3 rebounds to Arenas’ 5. Statistically, it was close but Arenas gets the nod going +4, -1, and +2…That’s a +5 in favor of Gilbert Arenas who went on to light up the playoff stage with Lebron not A.I. The other major disparage was at the starting power forward position. They had Jermaine O’Neal while I contest it should have been Chris Bosh. Jermaine O’Neal put up 19 points and Chris Bosh had 23. J. O’Neal grabbed 10 rebounds a game to Bosh’s 11. In the unselfish category, O’Neal had 2 assists to Bosh’s 3. That again goes in favor of my choice +4, +1, and +1 for a net gain of +6 in favor of Chris Bosh. Some of the other differences also make statistical sense.

Jason Kidd over Chauncey Billups, +3 in favor of Kidd

Joe Johnson over Richard Hamilton, +5 in favor of Johnson

Dwight Howard over Rasheed Wallace, +11 in favor Howard

Eddy Curry over Ben Wallace, +8 in favor of Curry

No fan is going to vote the biggest member of the worst trade in NBA history to the All-Star game over the Defensive Player of the year no matter what the stats, especially if that would be deemed a victory for Isaiah Thomas. Howard/R. Wallace fits Mr. Hollinger’s claim that if player A is having his best season and player B is on par within his own previous season’s, he takes player B. One problem with that theory. What if player A (Dwight Howard) is a #1 pick, is in his second season, and just so happens to be improving daily until the point that he is a no question starter in the All-Star game? And what if player B is an aging head case, who’s ceiling couldn’t sniff that of player A? Point is, Hollinger is wrong on this one, it is Dwight Howard by a mile…or, more like +11 statistically. Richard Hamilton may be the most consistent mid range jump shooter in the game. Fact of the matter is, he still is an equal offensive option on a team that splits 96 points almost equally by 5 players. Joe Johnson is the biggest name and biggest talent on a cellar dweller. Joe Johnson is the clear cut #1 scoring option on his team. Besides, +5 says Johnson belongs and Rip doesn’t. The closest margin of victory for my squad is that of Jason Kidd vs. Chauncey Billups. Kidd loses ground in points, as if there’s a lack of scoring in any All-Star game, but he makes it up in assists. This is a point I would like to think all NBA fans could get behind serious or casual. If Shaq comes down with the rebound and the other team clears out. Then Lebron, Wade, and Pierce are spread out in their running lanes, who do you want pushing the break? Billups or Kidd? Young Kidd or old Kidd, it doesn’t matter. For this era and this generation of basketball, there is no one you should want pushing the fast break more than Jason Kidd. Not to mention statistically he’s just better, even if it is somewhat close.

After all of that, it comes down to a simple concept that I have uttered many times over and it does not matter what sport we are discussing. It works for all sports alike. “Fans should not vote on All-Star rosters, because the will inevitably get it wrong”. There should be no voting. All-Star game participants should be determined the same way NFL playoff teams are determined. By cold hard statistics; after that there should be tiers of tie-breakers. This should not be done by the coaches, players, sports writers or anyone else. It could be done by a computer (one of the few sports details that should be left to a computer-BCS). This way there is no debate as to who gravy-trained and who got snubbed. If voting for something is necessary to keep the fans' attention, let them vote for the Starters.

RIP Sean Taylor

By Rick Morris

FDH sends its thoughts and prayers to Sean Taylor, his family, friends and teammates.

Honestly, I had two thoughts when I heard about the shooting on Monday morning:

1. Not having heard about Taylor's attitude adjustment in the last year or two, I wondered if this might be connected to consequences about his lifestyle. Having read sorrowful accounts from his teammates about how he had turned his life and attitude around, I feel badly for my thoughts at the time.

2. What was he doing at his Miami home? Even if Joe Gibbs had given the Redskins the day off on Monday, aren't these players supposed to stay at least roughly in the area? I think most people would think it to be awfully lenient for players to travel to the four corners of the earth as long as they were back at practice on Wednesday. I'm not raising this point to blame anyone in the Washington organization, merely to indicate my initial surprise that he could have been so far away from his in-season home at the time of this tragedy.

A subsequent thought that I had was reinforced by this Jemele Hill column on ESPN's Page 2. Now, I should mention right off the bat that Ms. Hill is not generally my cup of tea -- and I'm being restrained in that description because of the serious nature of this column and subject matter. Her style of race-baiting is something I find reprehensible. I agree with my colleague Burrell Jackson when he stated on the last Lounge program that he hates race-baiting from both sides (which is not to suggest that he is going to reciprocally agree with every statement I make here!). But she makes the point in her column that the leading cause of death for black males between the ages of 15 and 24 is homicide. Practitioners of the race card such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton love to point out how blacks are incarcerated in vast disproportion to their representation in the population. But guess what? They also suffer from crime, most definitely including violent crime, in vast disproportion to the population.

As is her wont, Ms. Hill then veers completely off the rails by playing the race card and suggesting that white America is somehow to blame for this, or doesn't care, or whatever her "point" may have been. Of course, the fact that race hustlers like her treat ANY discussion of crime or law and order as a coded appeal to racism undermines her case completely. It's hard to get white America to care about the problem as much as you'd like if you figuratively slap a Klan hood on someone for merely being concerned about crime levels.

Her initial point was right, however. Sean Taylor's murder was part and parcel of a crime virus that is devastating the young black male population. Unlike her, however, I have an idea about how to address it. We will hear much talk in the days, weeks and months to come from pro athletes wanting to make a difference in the aftermath of this tragedy and to try to leverage something good from it. If they simply live up to their social obligations as role models, they'll succeed in doing just that:

^ Those who glorify thug culture (such as Carmelo Anthony participating in a "Stop Snitching" campaign or PacMan Jones with every act of immature entitlement that makes up his pathetic life) should stop immediately.

^ A "Sean Taylor Campaign" to urge legislatures and the judiciary towards concrete steps towards zero tolerance for violent crime would be a fitting tribute.

It's way past time for the richly paid athletes of our society to recognize their responsibilities to the community. Kids idolize them and politicians can be moved by them if they mobilize in the right way. Above all, it's time for some focus. If we get serious about locking up violent criminals, stop thinking that law and order is a bad thing in this country and stop navel-gazing about the percentages of black males in prison, then we can address the point of Jemele Hill and start saving the lives of young black males and everyone for that matter. I should point out that I am in favor of rooting out whatever racial double standards do account for the disproportionate black prison population as I believe in racial fairness across the board. But in general, less sympathy for criminals and more for victims and potential victims is the jolt in the shorts that society needs.

The only way to really honor Sean Taylor is through positive action.

Lllllloyd Carr drives into the sunset

By Rick Morris

Some of the Detroit Red Wings blogs I enjoy reading have a fitting nickname for Detroit Free Press columnist/author/talk show host Mitch Albom: The Delicate Genius. His writing talent and creative abilities are beyond dispute, but he doesn’t have an internal meter to keep his tendencies to become overwrought and maudlin in control. Witness his piece earlier this week bemoaning the circumstances surrounding the departure of Michigan football coach Lloyd Carr.

It is quite possible to buy into one of the larger points of Albom’s column: that Carr is a much nicer guy than his gruff public persona would indicate and that he is a rare figure in the sports world with a sense of perspective about the place of his profession. Certainly, Carr’s insight about the worth about sports vis-à-vis the rest of the world is refreshing and necessary, especially in a week when a jerk like Nick Saban wallows in self-pity and compares a football loss to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. But Albom, unsurprisingly, let his fondness for Carr take him too far in this article as he basically suggests that Carr was too morally pure for college football:

"Say good-bye to the good guy, maybe the last of them. Whoever coaches Michigan next will have to be more about business than Carr was, more about national titles, less about hospital visits, more about recruiting, less about philosophy. It is just the way the world works, and the world has moved quickly on Carr. In recent years, you could see the weariness showing on his face, in his jowls, in his eyes, which became steelier and angrier as the silliness grew in college football ... Remember, this is a guy who started in Ann Arbor in 1980, when ESPN was just a Connecticut cable experiment. In his time, he has seen the Big Ten grow to 11, the Rose Bowl go from Granddaddy to group member, and the goal of college football go from playing on Jan. 1 to playing on Jan. 7 ..."

True, Carr’s career coincided with the period in which big money (TV deals, endorsements, sponsorships, alumni organizations, etc.) really ran amok. Point well taken. But to suggest that Carr might be “the last good guy?” What hyperbole. What garbage.

Frankly, one need look no further than Michigan’s archrival to disprove this idiocy. Jim Tressel has worked every bit as hard to uphold academic standards as Carr and has done every bit as much for charitable and educational organizations (both of his parents were heavily involved in education, as is one of his brothers) and has been equally concerned with trying to uphold a good image for his university. Granted, Tressel has suffered his share of off-field embarrassments from his players over the years. But Carr has had a number of wanna-be Terrell Owens types with big mouths over the years (i.e. Mike Hart, Braylon Edwards, Charles Woodson) and he never suffers in some quarters the way that Tressel does for his players’ failings.

Again, I don’t have a problem with what the main thrust of Albom’s column seems to be. College football has become a lot sillier and more like a circus in the last quarter-century – although some coaches have continued to thrive in this climate without selling their souls. And Carr has probably been one of the good guys in the game and has a record better than many. But Lloyd Carr, when it was all said and done, was unable to be any better or worse than a mirror of what was happening in Columbus. When they had a horrible big-game coach in John Cooper, he thrived. When they had a great big-game coach in Jim Tressel, he folded. Frankly, it’s very unfair to the rest of college football to find in Carr’s failures evidence of his nobility. Whether Mitch Albom believes it or not, Lloyd Carr is not a better man than Jim Tressel just because The Vest has pounded him year after year.