The Presidential Race / NFL Playoff Push

by Jason Jones

Imagine for a moment, if you will, the Presidential nominees in an NFL style playoff run. Mind you, not in the playoffs, but a playoff run. As the landscape of the NFL begins to take shape, we start to realize not every team is worthy of a spot based on the competition ahead of them. The same can be said about the presidential nominees that have no place in this race (namely Ron Paul).

If we are to fairly examine both sides we must create a depth chart or power ranking of both the NFL and the presidential nominees. These are the rankings as I see them:

(Note my opinion does not reflect that of the FDH Lounge, FantasyDraftHelp.com or any of its subsidiaries)

NFL ------ Nominees

1 New England Patriots ------ 1 Fred Thompson

2 Indianapolis Colts ------ 2 Rudy Guiliani

3 Dallas Cowboys ------ 3 John McCain

4 Green Bay Packers ------ 4 Barack Obama

5 Pittsburgh Steelers ------ 5 Mike Huckabee (name change rec.)

6 Detroit Lions ------ 6 Tom Tancredo

7 New York Giants ------ 7 Dennis Kucinich

8 Washington Redskins ------ 8 Bill Richardson

9 Cleveland Browns ------ 9 Duncan Hunter

10 Tennessee Titans ------ 10 Joe Biden

11 Tampa Bay Buccaneers ------ 11 Mike Gravel

12 Jacksonville Jaguars ------ 12 Chris Dodd

13 San Diego Chargers ------ 13 Ron Paul

14 Baltimore Ravens ------ 14 John Edwards

15 New Orleans Saints ------ 15 Mitt Romney

16 Buffalo Bills ------ 16 Hillary Clinton

Now for some explanations. Starting with the Nominees side, I am sure most of you are wondering why my power rankings in almost no way mimic that of the American public. Well, in short, people can be very smart, but groups of people are F@#!ing retarded!!! We will revisit this idea later.

- Starting at the top, Fred Thompson is the most well rounded perfect candidate on the docket. Consequently, this is where the first tier ends. If you do not agree you are entitled to your opinion like the stupid people are entitled to reproduce. This piece is not a debate over the candidates, maybe as we get closer we will do just that.

- Second is Rudy Guiliani, I am not especially riveted by this guy; especially when he mentions being in charge during 9-11. I do get the impression that he could do the job. He would be popular. Whether you like it or not, the average American doesn’t really care about the specific nature of the issues, it’s a feel thing. For some strange reason Rudy rubs people the right way.

- Third is John McCain, for those that know me, this one is probably a shock. There is on doubt, saying he has been underwhelming in the debates is a vast a polite understatement. Nixon looked more calm and collected versus JFK in the debate forum. Bottom line, John McCain knows how to play the game. I do not agree with even the vast majority of candidacy to this point, but he could do the job with a veteran savvy. This ends the second tier.

- Fourth is Barack Obama, the first Democrat on the list and believe me if I considered my party bias the first Democrat would probably come in around 9. He is very very green. This is where my confidence that the candidate is competent enough to do the job waivers. Obama is like a great top shelf minor league baseball player. He looks like he can play the part, his record looks good, and he’s confident that he can play with the big boys. Then he gets there and everyone wonders why his .385 batting average doesn’t translate literally to the majors. Some day Obama might be a great politician, but today is not that day. We need to send him back to the senate and let him work out the kinks for a while.

- Fifth is Mike Huckabee. Lets be honest, he just seems like a good guy. Do you remember that story about conservation? The one where he ride his bicycle to the grocery store to conserve on the gas he uses in his environmentally friendly car and his kids laugh at him for it? Do you remember that? I thought, “aw that’s sweet, what nice guy, a little HIPPY-ish for me, but a nice guy”. News flash, it should take more than NICE GUY. I’m sure under his old and alien like physique, Bob Dole is a nice guy. But would you have felt comfortable 10 minutes after watching any network television on September 11^th, knowing he was probably cowered in some corner sucking on his binkie?

- Sixth is Tom Tancredo. First and foremost, Tom we get it. You don’t like foreigners. Maybe its just illegals from South America. Maybe he doesn’t like Canadians, Europeans, Asians, or Russians if they are here illegally. If that’s the case, this point is mute anyway. You still have to admire the solid Titanium balls on that guy to be so adamant about a single issue. I could have sworn I heard in a debate, Tancredo conclude that the answer to an exit strategy to the Iraq conflict and Universal Heath Care will come in solving our illegal immigration issue. I bet if he could he would have military snipers every 5 feet from California to Florida. Oh, and just a thought. Do you think an American born, suburb raised, heterosexual, 30 something man with a Business Administrations bachelor degree, who pledged for a well renouned fraternity in the Ivy League laid the foundation on his house? Just speculation, but I am pretty sure some illegal contributed to Tancredo’s life positively in some way…and that probably burns him up.

- Seventh is Dennis Kucinich. Not a popular guy. In the Presidential Election ’08 made for tv movie, Kucinich would be played by D.J. Qualls (the skinny kid from Road Trip). Nobody likes creepy to greet you when you’re expecting another spine tingling episode of 24 and get D.J. Qualls addressing the nation. I cannot see Kucinich running the country, but I want to believe he is a good honest man when all is said and done. This concludes the third tier.

- Eighth is Bill Richardson. Let’s not sugar coat it. This is where the bottom falls out. I do not claim to know much about the rest of these with three exceptions. The truth is aside from hearing Richardson spout off his political resume during a debate and his appearance on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, I’ve got nothing on Richardson. He seems like a decent guy who has some gumption. Besides, this list should have ended at Tancredo anyway.

- Ninth is Duncan Hunter. At least he is a Republican. He has no chance, which is a major part of this exercise.

- Tenth is Joe Biden. Again, I could see him doing the job. He has said a great deal of things that I do not agree with, but aside from Fred Thompson, there is not going to be a candidate I will agree with 95% of the time.

- Eleventh is Mike Gravel. Again, I have nothing. I have not heard much one way or the other. What I have heard has forced me to change the channel. While watching presidential debates, one must have an alternate channel to click to when the responses get unbearable. I recommend ESPN Classic or the Discovery Channel. Anything that resides on the other end of the spectrum from Politics.

- Twelfth is Chris Dodd. Insert previous statement here. Conclude tier four

- Thirteenth is Ron Paul. Strap in ladies and gentleman this one begins the tri-fecta of doom. Ron Paul is a hack! A phony, a wolf in sheep’s clothing. I know he has somewhat of following, but so did Ross Perot. Ron Paul is not only bad for president, he’s bad for politics in general. He doesn’t play by the rules. I get it, Libertarian, Liberal Republican, Left Wing Republican, or whatever you want to call him. He should be running as an independent. At least that way the lobe of the American Human brain that tells us to almost disregard Independents because the math precludes them from winning, he would finally get the attention he deserves. Next to none. He’s is a hippie claiming to be the image that the Republican party should be. Believe me, I am not one to say that a single former President embodies every iota that oozes “Republican”. It just seems to me, if the entire party thinks Ronald Reagan is the Republican party, then Ron Paul is as far away from that as one can be without literally being a Democrat.

- Fourteenth is John Edwards. C’mon, are we serious. John Freaking Edwards. Has there ever been a Nominee that more exemplified the smelly kid who wanted to be cool? He’s the kid at the park who wants to be picked to play in the game and keeps getting passed over for kids who are busy doing other things (like 30 yards away on another part of the park). I also get the impression that if he were to be the next president, he is the kind of guy who would have the angle of, “fine, I’m taking my ball and going home, you guys suck!” Which is not really the attitude you want your president to have when dealing with foreign policy and cabinet meetings.

- Fifteenth is Mitt Romney. I really hope you have your seatbelt on for the next two. Plain and simple. Do not believe this devilish swindler. I bet that if I had a 60 inch High Definition television with all of the HD channels and watched a Republican Debate, I would clearly see the horns poke out through the skin on his forehead. Politically, Mitt Romney is the ANTI-CHRIST. The guy has one general thought process when he wants to get elected in Massachusetts, and a completely different thought process to get elected to president. When people bitch and moan about why they don’t like politics and more specifically, politicians; guess what? Mitt Romney is who they are talking about.

- Sixteenth is Hillary “Holy F#@K You Can’t Be Serious” Clinton. I cannot believe this is even a remote possibility. I keep waiting to wake up from what can only be confused as 2 year comma. I keep hoping I’ll wake up and say to someone, “Does Hillary really have a shot”, just to be told she was never even a candidate and that I must have dreamt the whole thing. Remember I said, people can be smart but groups of people can be retarded. In the trial of the State vs. Group’s of People’s Sanity, the prosecution presents Hillary Clinton for President of the United States into evidence as exhibit alpha. This is such a bad idea on so many levels. I’ll admit, aside from Bill downsizing the military to a dreadfully dangerous number, I did not hate Bill Clinton. Just because the majority of the average American populous believe Clinton was a good president is not enough to give Hillary the benefit of the doubt. This is not a gender issue. This is a Hillary Clinton is a crazy bitch issue. Speaking of crazy bitches, am I the only level headed American who is deathly afraid of Hillary Clinton and Nancy Peloci joining their powers of evil combining to create the kind of super villain that the minds of Stan Lee and Todd McFarlane could not dream up. It would be the catalyst for the apocalypse. Nothing she says makes any sense, she just parades around in slip on shoes and pant suits hoping the people will believe the answer to fixing this country is to have a female president; and she’s the only one. Believe me the bitch is banking on it. I am pleading with every American, don’t let it happen. Further food for thought, if Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney consummated and conceived a child, that child would undo existence. It would unravel the threads of life. Dark would become light, good would become evil, right would become left, “in short, it would un-make the world”

Now that we have addressed all of the candidates, it is time to bring the NFL into this discussion. The problem here is the AFC is the Republican Party and NFC is the Democratic Party. In one tier all by themselves are the New England Patriots and the Indianapolis Colts; there’s no two ways about it. New England is just insane. Arguably the best offense I have personally ever seen. And Indianapolis is inches behind New England after coming off last years SuperBowl win. The second tier has the Dallas Cowboys all by themselves. What a difference a free wheeling coach makes. Same players, different result. Tier three doesn’t make any sense. Why is Green Bay winning? Why has Pittsburgh only lost twice? Brett Favre and a collection 3^rd + round picks. He should be babysitting not winning football games. Pittsburgh, they’re o.k., but top 5? C’mon, somebody step up and expose them PLEASE!!! They are not THAT good. Tier four is again where things start to loosen up. Detroit is doing better than they ever have in a non Barry Sanders season. Statistically, offense and defense at the top. New York Giants finally woke up. This team puts season long sack numbers up in one game, thus elevating some of the pressures that Eli Manning cannot handle on his own. The Washington Redskins are all around o.k. Young QB is getting better, solid running game, 17 #2 and #3 WR’s, a good TE, and a solid Defense-nothing exciting. And that’s tier four. Tier five brings tears to my eyes. The Cleveland Browns. I never thought I’d see the day when I could say the Browns at least have a shot (ever week). They are alone on this tier because after this, no team can claim balance. The next tier, 6, is where it gets sloppy. Tennessee Titans keep winning despite the fact their QB hasn’t thrown 1,000 yds yet and has more INT’s than TD’s and has no one else on offense worth a damn. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers have a pretty decent passing game right now and a no-name running back by committee system. If Jacksonville ever becomes a team with no defense, they will be the worst team in the league. I bet they wish they had all of there QB and WR draft picks and traded players to pick over again. This season the Chargers have LT, but not much else. This is not the team that went 14-2 last season, unless you want to put all of the fault on the GM for firing Marty. Tier seven has two former playoff teams who are playing drastically under the mean. Baltimore and New Orleans. Not to be harsh, but the whole “playing to win for the victims of hurricane katrina” can only take you so far. Let’s face it, Baltimore peaked. The defense is getting old and the offense has been dog s#@t since Billick got the job; offensive guru my ass. The last and eighth tier belongs to Buffalo. Who knows what’s going on up there. Lynch is nice and the rest of the kids are having fun and playing well since week 3.

So, what does it all mean. All of the previous comes down to one concept. Who belongs and who doesn’t. In the NFL, just because 12 teams make the playoffs, doesn’t mean 12 teams are worthy of being in the playoffs. In the Presidential Race, 16 nominees is unacceptable. If Cleveland beat Pittsburgh in the first round, or Buffalo beat Dallas that wouldn’t be right-and it won’t happen. The bottom line is no matter who you are a fan of, not everyone is worthy. There’s an old saying, “That’s why they play the game”, horse s#@t. The same is true with this presidential race. Sure the Patriots, Colts, Cowboys, Packers, Steelers, and Lions probably deserve to be in the playoffs. Washington through Buffalo probably do not. Similarly, from Mike Huckabee on down also do not belong in the Presidential Nominee push. Narrow the debate’s contestants. Sorry Democrats, call back when you have someone worth pushing. Give Dole a call maybe he’ll join the race for you. Just like in the NFL, it isn’t a question of who should win the SuperBowl. It’s a question of whoever wins the Republican nomination should be the next president. Its not an issue of Democrat vs Republican. There just is not a legitimate Democrat worth voting for. Just like, no matter how hard Dallas, Green Bay, or Detroit try they will not should not and on this plane of existence cannot beat Indianapolis or New England. Whoever wins that AFC championship game should be crowned the winner. While Tom Brady or Peyton Manning are hoisting the AFC title trophy there should be a small man engraving the Lombardi Trophy to that same team. The same is true for the Presidential Nominees. McCain is better than any Democrat. Rudy Guiliani is better than any Democrat. There is no question, Fred Thompson is better than any Democrat; this time around or possibly in the last decade or more.

All in all, just be smart. Just because someone is literally in the race, doesn’t mean they have a legitimate shot at winning or have earned the right to waste your valuable time and energy listening to their s#@t.

Clinton = Apocolypse

Romney = Apocolypse

Ron Paul = Woodstock at the White House

Fred Thompson = Top 10 President in History

Rudy Guiliani = Competent Politician

John McCain = Great Candidate 3, 5, 8 years ago

Cleveland Browns, SuperBowl Champs = Apocolypse

Detroit Lions, SuperBowl Champs = Apocolypse

Pittsburgh Steelers, SuperBowl Champs = The books are cooked in Vegas

Green Bay Packers, SuperBowl Champs = I saw this movie before, it was more realistic in the 1990’s

Just be careful, and remember to think for yourselves. They are politicians after all.

FDH Lounge Show #20: November 11, 2007

By Rick Morris

The Great American Radio Show on Internet television has turned 20! 20 episodes, that is. The program where nothing is off-topic will bring you another sampling of various intriguing content across the board this Sunday night from 8-11 PM EDT on SportsTalkNetwork.com.

For the first time in our history, we will have a segment airing ahead of the Opening Statements of The FDH Lounge Dignitaries. At 8 PM EDT we will feature a roundtable commemorating the 10th anniversary of the WWE's "Montreal Screwjob" with Russ Cohen of the Wrestleology website and wrestling historians Stephen Laroche and SLAM! Wrestling editor Jon Waldman. After that, we will move on to the Opening Statements and then another presidential race roundtable with the Dignitaries. The contest has taken on many wrinkles since we last convened on the subject (Hillary's debate debacle and the pouncing of her rivals, Romney's growing endorsement list, Brownback's McCain endorsement, Rudy's Robertson endorsement, the Bernie Kerik legal problems, the legal problems of one of Fred Thompson's advisers, etc.).

This segment will proceed into Hour Two for an update on the young hockey season with NHL.com editor John Kreiser. Among other topics, we'll delve into the huge January 1 outdoor game to be contested between Pittsburgh and Buffalo on NBC. After that, we give way to another wonderful FDH Lounge News Nuggets feature. Dog The Bounty Hunter and the Joe Torre migration to L.A. are fair game for the Dignitaries.

In Hour Three, we examine the trend in the niche sports world of recent years involving the addition of playoffs to compete with the NFL and World Series for attention in autumn. NASCAR has held its Chase since 2004 and this year the PGA and NHRA followed suit. What are the pluses and minuses of these developments? We will scrutinize this with new FDH NHRA correspondent Jeff Weber. Then our FDH Lounge Pigskin Report recaps another weekend of college and NFL action.

Join us for all the fun of our 20th show Sunday night! If you want to weigh in and mingle with The Dignitaries, you can call in at 216-881-9600 or toll free nationally and internationally at 866-453-4782 or you can email us at studio@sportstalkcleveland.com . Regardless, tune in and join the fun as The Dignitaries of The FDH Lounge explain your world to you!

When it's obligatory to root against your team

By Rick Morris

As previously bemoaned in this space, the NFL saw fit to victimize the Cleveland market (where I live) by denying us access to Super Bowl 41 1/2 last week. As such, other FantasyDrafthelp.com and SportsTalkNetwork.com luminaries and I were forced to watch the game and the very excellent contest with our Cleveland Browns at Harpo's, an outstanding sports restaurant with the biggest combination of many TVs and large-screen TVs this side of a Las Vegas sports book.

As the Browns were wrapping up an improbable victory, one seemingly destined to be remembered as the turning point away from the misery of their first seven years back in the league, I got into an impromptu debate with my friend Dave Adams. Dave is a gentleman who used to be a part of the old "Reality Check" show on STN with myself and Ron Glasenapp and his brother Jon, who was also present, is a contributor to FDH. In the fun days when we used to do the show together, the struggles of the Browns under Butch Davis were a frequent source of debate. Dave and I had, and have to this day, different ideas on how to show ultimate loyalty to a team.

Dave believes that a fan should always root for his team, no matter what. Even if your brain tells you that the team is on a dead-end path and destined to crash and burn, you should hope against hope that the the team could win games regardless of that.

I don't subscribe to this school of thought at all. In 2003, when it became clear that "Botch" Davis was putting the agenda of pushing Kelly Holcomb ahead of the success of the team, I became one of the first commentators in the Cleveland market to call for his head. For me, it was a frightening case of deja vu, as Bill Belichick was up to similar tricks a decade earlier when he mandated bootlegs for Bernie Kosar so that he could dump him notwithstanding a 2-0 start to the season.

In both instances, I began to root for the team to lose every game so as to end the misery quickly and be able to start over as soon as possible. By 2004, I was calling for Phil Savage's installation as Browns general manager on "Reality Check," a year before the Cleveland organization decided to do just that. While Davis and his stooge Pete Garcia seemed to staff the team with a shoebox that held the names of players Davis had once recruited at the University of Miami, Savage was one of the league's premier personnel experts and a tireless researcher of talent. I opined that the team needed somebody like Savage who operated from a scientific standpoint free from personal agendas and biases that interfered with team success.

To Dave, rooting for the team to lose in the short term for the necessary "enema effect" was disloyal. The concept of being a "fan in exile" for any period of time was, and still is, completely unacceptable to him.

As the Browns were completing the signature victory of their 2007 turnaround, I was motivated at the end to take a victory lap with Dave (proving once and for all that I am the same guy off-air and away from the FDH media family that I am when you see, hear and read me!). After the Pittsburgh debacle in the season opener, Dave cornered me at one of his poker games and asked me if I still thought the team was better off than they were under Davis. I answered firmly that they were, the same sentiment my partner Jason Jones and I were propagating on STN while all around us were panicking. For those who were actually bothering to look, the 2007 roster was light years better than what had been inherited by Savage after the 2004 season. So after the win over Seattle, at a time when the progress of this team could finally no longer be denied, I said to Dave, "See, if the team had listened to me and fired Davis a year or two earlier, look at how much further along we'd be!" Dave, naturally, begged to differ!

It's an interesting debate and unsurprisingly, it's one where I think I'm in the right. Where would Ohio State be if John Cooper hadn't finally hit rock bottom and kept limping along as he had been doing? There would have been no Jim Tressel era, no national championship, no reversal of the domination at the hands of Michigan -- in short, no return to glory. Rooting against one's team should never be done lightly, but I maintain that sometimes it is necessary for the greater good and the ultimate restoration of success down the road.

Pat Robertson's 30 pieces of silver

By Rick Morris

Pat Buchanan's forecast that Rudy Giuliani would try to bridge his differences with social conservatives by buying them off with militarism is paying off -- witness his endorsement by Pat Robertson, one of the big poohbahs of the Social Issues Right since the 1980s. Apparently the willingness to bomb Iran on the drop of a dime transcends every other difference that is supposed to exist between Robertson and the thrice-married drag queen.

Robertson's sellout of the pro-life and traditional marriage community is shameful but not unexpected. For all the rhetoric about leaders of the "far right" in this country, most of them have proven to be phonies and sellouts who want a place at the table far more than they want the advancement of their principles. The best example of all comes from the leadup to the 1996 Republican presidential race, when Bill Clinton was at a low ebb and several candidates with a legitimate conservative pedigree were entering the fray: Buchanan, Phil Gramm, Steve Forbes and Alan Keyes among others. So who did Ralph Reed and other alleged "radical right" potentates line up behind? Good old Mr. Establishment Bob Dole.

For those who have appointed themselves as the leaders and guardians of right-wing thought, viability always trumps every other principle, including integrity and idealism. On the same day Robertson shamed himself by traipsing hat-in-hand to the anti-life frontrunner in the presidential race, Kansas Senator Sam Brownback was putting a period at the end of his campaign by endorsing fellow Senator John McCain. Brownback's effort was doomed when leaders of the so-called "Religious Right" refused to rally to the side of the most consistently pro-life candidate ever to run for president. He wasn't "viable" enough in the polls for them -- in the winter of 2006-07, mind you, when the Howard Dean precedent of 2003 proved that a longshot had plenty of time to catch on -- and they abandoned him to be willfully misled by politicians they know will let them down if elected.

The blogs and message machine on the Left always bemoans the alleged all-powerful influence of the leaders of the "Religious Right." This country should be so lucky. They're a bunch of whimpering, toothless sellouts just like so many other influence-chasers in D.C.

Midseason NFL rankings

By Rick Morris

As with our rankings that we published around the ¼ mark of the NFL season, we will utilize fantasy sports principles here in terms of separating the teams by tier. Just as it was at that point, it remains striking that more than half the league constitutes a vast middle level not separated by much, at least in terms of remaining playoff opportunities. Note by the records of the Steelers and Ravens that this is being published prior to the Week 9 Monday Night Football game.

TOP LEVEL: MUTANT SUPER-TEAMS

1. New England (9-0)

2. Indianapolis (7-1)

SECOND LEVEL: CERTAIN PLAYOFF TEAMS

3. Dallas (7-1)

4. Pittsburgh (5-2)

5. Green Bay (7-1)

6. Tennessee (6-2)

7. New York Giants (6-2)

THIRD LEVEL: POTENTIAL PLAYOFF TEAMS, ALL WITH SIGNIFICANT FLAWS

8. Washington (5-3)

9. Jacksonville (5-3)

10. Detroit (6-2)

11. Seattle (4-4)

12. Tampa Bay (5-4)

13. Cleveland (5-3)

14. San Diego (4-4)

15. New Orleans (4-4)

16. Carolina (4-4)

17. Baltimore (4-3)

18. Kansas City (4-4)

19. Philadelphia (3-5)

20. Houston (4-5)

21. Buffalo (4-4)

22. Arizona (3-5)

23. Denver (3-5)

24. Chicago (3-5)

25. Minnesota (3-5)

FOURTH LEVEL: HORRIBLE FOOTBALL

26. Cincinnati (2-6)

27. San Francisco (2-6)

28. Oakland (2-6)

29. New York Jets (1-8)

30. Atlanta (2-6)

31. St. Louis (0-8)

32. Miami (0-8)

Additionally, to measure the cumulative strength of each division, we added up the above rankings of each team in a division to form a division power number. Keep in mind that the lower the number, the better.

1T. AFC South (37)

1T. NFC East (37)

3. AFC North (60)

4. NFC North (64)

5. NFC South (73)

6T. AFC West (83)

6T. AFC East (83)

8. NFC West (91)

NOTES: Clearly, top-to-bottom, the AFC South and NFC East are by far the deepest divisions in football at the moment. The AFC East is horrible outside of the Patriots, but their strength of schedule this year is still very tough due to also facing the tough AFC North and NFC East. I had forecast the NFC West to be football’s toughest and deepest coming into the season and they are by this measure by far the worst! In my defense, injuries have battered these teams disproportionately relative to other divisions, but I clearly overestimated how far along these young squads were as well. I maintain that the division will be very, very tough by 2008 or 2009. Also, for as much as the AFC has dominated the NFC in Super Bowl play over the last decade as well as interconference games, the public has had it drilled into its collective mind that the American Conference is far superior. Well, when the division totals are added together, the AFC comes out ahead by the slimmest of margins, 263-265. What is the moral of the story that you will not hear anywhere else in the media, at least for months to come? It is that the utter dominance of the Patriots and Colts has hidden the fact that the NFC has pulled very close to parity from top-to-bottom. Now, surely they don’t have a team capable of winning Super Bowl XLII, and perhaps XLIII, but just as we saw in the late 1990s, the tide is turning once again.

ADDITIONAL NOTE: On the occasion of the 100^th post here at The FDH Lounge blog, I thank the readers who have catapulted us to a level I did not honestly think we would reach within three months (roughly at the level of the top one million websites on the Internet, according to Alexa.com). We have worked to bring the same diversity of topics you hear and see on The FDH Lounge Internet television program to this blog and we are happy and grateful that you are responding to it as you are.

(Qualified) sympathy for Ron Paul

By Rick Morris

Every presidential election cycle features an unlikely breakthrough candidate who captivates the mainstream with eccentricities that set him apart from the pack. Unlike Howard Dean in 2004 or John McCain in 2000, however, this year’s refugee from obscurity has no chance of even coming close to the nomination. But Texas Congressman Ron Paul has separated himself from the rest of the Republican candidates by taking positions radically different from the rest – and in so doing, he has angered members of this royalist political party whose idea of responsibility is to sit down, shut up, and swallow the pabulum being pushed by the leadership.

Make no mistake – I am not a Paul supporter. Like other members of The FDH Lounge program, I am backing Fred Thompson and see him as the only viable candidate to save our country from further doom. But I harbor some sympathies for some of the Paul positions and certainly for the spirit that animates his candidacy.

Recently the RedState.com website made headlines by taking the extraordinary approach of prohibiting any new Ron Paul supporters from establishing a presence in the community. They are well within their legal rights to do so. Moreover, in light of the annoying tendencies of Paul supporters to spam and perform various Internet acts of harassment on behalf of their candidate, I understand the unwillingness that RedState may have to deal with the antics of a candidate almost universally regarded as “fringe.”

But the RedState folks were incredibly ill-advised in defending their decision by labeling the Ron Paul movement as “liberal.” Ron Paul is a self-described libertarian who takes paleoconservative positions on many foreign policy matters. Now, I must admit, as a self-identified paleoconservative, that Paul seems to go beyond where I and other paleos are at and does seem to advocate liberal foreign policy positions (such as the nature of the disengagement he seeks from the Middle East). My disagreements with him about this are such that they would preclude my support of him for the Republican nomination for president.

However, even if you grant some matters of foreign policy to those questioning Paul, he’s one of the least liberal candidates ever to run for public office. The man is a radical libertarian. Name any aspect of the modern welfare state and he’s against it. He speaks fondly of the gold standard and the reintroduction of principles from the Austrian economic school of thought. The aspects of complete individualism he preaches run so counter to liberal philosophies that the RedState justification stands as one of the more asinine explanations of any decision in this election cycle.

For a Republican Party that sold its soul this decade to try to buy more votes by embracing a boondoggle Medicare prescription drug program, the heinous, dollar-sucking No Child Left Behind, amnesty for illegal immigrants and all forms of corrupt pork barreling, a moral watchdog like Ron Paul serves a vital purpose – even if he does offend the Powers That Be in the GOP who want everyone to sit down and shut up as our Old American Republic yields to the New World Order, piece by piece. When the guardians of conservative purity have more sympathy for the blow-dried power brokers at the RNC than they do the pursuit of sound domestic public policy, they have nobody to blame but themselves for a world ready to embrace Hillary Clinton and empower the wackos at DailyKos.

Pakistan debacle exposes our overreach

By Rick Morris

I wonder how many people heard the news that Pakistan President/General Pervez Musharraf’s seizure of power over the weekend and assumed that he led off his announcement with a little sample from Jay-Z (THIS … IS … STATE OF EMERGENCY!). Nobody? Just me?

Regardless, the move represents a major black eye for the United States and exposes in humiliating fashion once again the consequences of our imperial overreach over the last five years.

In justifying the Iraq War, Bush administration officials disparaged the policies of their predecessors (including the president’s father!) over several decades in “tolerating” the repressive regimes of the Middle East. The deposing of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, we were told, represented a radical change in how we would utilize our power in the Middle East. No longer would we dirty our hands by dealing with repressive dictators and Third World thugs – freedom was now on the march! The president’s second Inaugural Address made this theme the centerpiece, which came as a surprise to pundits of the time.

Although it’s hard to remember clearly though the fog of our hard times in Iraq over the next two years, George Bush did have some momentary wind at his back as he took his victory lap in early 2005. Iraqi elections had just been held, and the images of jubilant voters waving their ink-stained purple fingers at the camera were compelling. Also at about that time, in a part of the world not far away, the Orange Revolution in Ukraine peacefully toppled a corrupt government trying to cling to power by illegitimate means. Shortly thereafter, the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon drove out the brutal occupiers of Syria by rallying the country in protest. No less a Bush Administration critic than Jon Stewart wondered aloud whether Bush might be on to something with his insistence on the mandatory, immediate and unfettered institution of democracy anywhere and everywhere.

But inevitably, the moment did not last and the world was reminded again why sager minds had resisted the suicidal path of placing Wilsonian democracy above all else that Bush had embraced. Homicidal Hamas won the Palestinian elections and turned the Gaza Strip into even more of a terrorist hub than it had been previously (which really says something!). Iraqis subsequently elected tribal leaders and warlords to their government who, to put it mildly, had no appreciation for the sacrifices our country had laid down for them. The democratic experiment in Afghanistan was fraught with difficulty as well, with a similar ingratitude from many who we had freed there as well.

Granted, we had no choice but to promote democracy in Afghanistan as an alternative to the terror state we rightly annihilated after 9/11, but we should not have become so intoxicated by the early signs of success in that country that turning decades of established policy on its head could ever become an attractive option. After driving the Taliban from power, we were at a stronger point strategically in the world than we had been at any time since the disintegration of the Soviet Union, and arguably the most powerful position since our arrival as a world power with our decisive presence in World War I. We accomplished in weeks what the mighty Red Army could not all throughout the ‘80s and we rebuilt the credibility that had been squandered by Bill Clinton’s cowardice in the ‘90s in the face of terrorist attacks on our interests worldwide. We had the world in the palm of our hands in early 2002, while still maintaining the sympathy of peoples everywhere in the wake of the devastating attack we suffered the previous autumn. Since the security and prosperity of the American people and free peoples everywhere depend on U.S. capacity for deterrence against war and terror, the tragedy of 9/11 had yielded, however briefly, a better world in its horrific aftermath.

Our previous Iraq War FAQ column addressed the crumbling of our military deterrence in the sands of Mesopotamia in the last half-decade. But equally damaging to our deterrence has been the disintegration of our diplomatic capacity. While promoting the “Freedom Agenda” as the cornerstone of our foreign policy efforts worldwide, we have done ourselves terrible damage by blowing our hard-won credibility:

^ While pronouncing democracy as a vital and non-negotiable concept in our dealings with repressive regimes, we never seriously challenged Saudi Arabia and the oil-rich Gulf states we rely on so completely – and the world noticed.

^ We talked tough on North Korea and said that we wouldn’t reward that murderous regime for their behavior – until we did – and the world noticed.

^ Now, we have rewarded Musharraf’s backsliding from democracy not with the calm backroom diplomacy that would have been available to us had we not made such a fetish out of imposing complete democracy anywhere as soon as possible but with the impotent whining of a country whose bluff has just been called – and the world noticed.

In its haste to pronounce George W. Bush as the Ronald Reagan of his time, a designation that could have seemed fair for as long as six months after 9/11 but now seems a grotesque insult to the Great Communicator, the American right has embraced the imperial overreach that has so damaged our national interest these past few years. This is largely because the neoconservative wing of the movement has taken hold almost completely in the 2000s and driven out the traditional adherents of the Old Right, who believed that the only relevant question to ever be asked was “does this serve America’s vital national interest?” Contrary to what today’s “mainstream” conservative followers remember, Reagan’s presidency featured a blend of neoconservative and paleoconservative policies (for example, while Reagan believed largely in free trade, he did not allow Harley-Davidson to be victimized by cutthroat foreign competitors). His United Nations ambassador, Jeane Kirkpatrick, famously distinguished between authoritarian regimes (bad guys aligned with us) and totalitarian regimes (bad guys working against us). Once upon a time in this country, we used to put our own national interest ahead of sweet-sounding ivory tower dreams about filling the world with daisies and democracy. Now, in a world in which we have disavowed working with authoritarians who could be useful to us, we have been exposed as powerless without them. Did that decision make us safer? I think not.

Obligatory "Game of the Decade" prediction

By Rick Morris

In just over an hour, the teams engaged in this decade's greatest rivalry will face off in the first-ever meeting of teams both undefeated this late in the season. That makes this game the greatest and most anticipated yet between the teams and explains the hype that we haven't seen in the regular season since the annual Cowboy-49'er tilts of the early and mid-'90s.

I believe that the scoring will be lower than most believe, with the defenses being able to stand tall better than many predict. In the end, I see New England getting by, as this 2007 Patriot squad is on a short list already of the greatest teams of all time -- the 2007 Colts, although superior to their championship team of a year ago and arguably better than many teams to have won a Super Bowl, are not on that super-elevated level. As a lifelong Browns fan, I am chagrined to have to agree on the final score with Bill Cowher. 31-20 Pats.

On another note, the NFL's prohibition against showing games against a home team's broadcasts has never been shown to be more asinine than today. As this map illuminates, the areas around Cleveland and Houston are not able to receive this game on television. While the NHL's broadcast situation is a joke, the NFL's isn't much better if it can't assure the entire country of witnessing the key regular season matchup of our time.

OSU stays #1 in throwback fashion

By Rick Morris

(NOTE: This is a report filed after attending today's Ohio State-Wisconsin game.)

On an afternoon at the Horseshoe in Columbus that saw the unlikelihoods stack on top of one another, higher and higher, it became difficult to determine which was the biggest of all.

Some might have cited Ohio State's defensive collapse early in the third quarter, that, combined with uneven offensive play in the first half, put the 16 1/2 point favorite and the nation's top-ranked team in their first real jeopardy of the season.

Some might have cited a Wisconsin team known for a bruising running game being able to establish the pass far more successfully on this afternoon -- and still winning the time of possession battle.

Some might have cited the spate of poor tackling that inexplicably befell the nation's top defense during the aforementioned critical stretch in the third quarter.

But the most insightful people would have cited the manner in which the Buckeyes mounted their successful and overwhelming comeback: a throwback to the three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust offense of Woody Hayes that featured one of the school's greatest second-half rushing performances ever by sophomore running back Chris Wells.

Wells ran for 144 of his 169 yards and three touchdowns after halftime in a career-defining performance that led #1 Ohio State (10-0, 6-0 in the Big Ten) past Wisconsin, 38-17 (7-3, 3-3) before 105,449 delirious fans at Ohio Stadium. The victory was OSU's 20th in a row in the Big Ten, earning them the all-time conference record for consecutive wins.

It was a classic example of the game being much closer than the score would indicate, as the Buckeyes did not even come back to tie the game until the 2:41 mark of the third quarter, before adding three scores in the final stanza. Before that point, the game seemed destined to go all the way down to the wire.

Ohio State took the opening kickoff and stormed down the field with a seven-play, 75-yard drive that culminated in the first of two Brian Robiskie touchdown receptions on the day. Wisconsin answered with a surprisingly balanced 15-play, 77-yard drive for a field goal. The key play was a shocking fake punt, a 31-yard pass from Ken DeBauche to Paul Standring that provided enough momentum to ensure points on the board. From there, however, both defenses settled into a bend-but-don't-break mold and the only remaining points in the first half came on a 27-yard Ryan Pretorius field goal with six seconds remaining.

And then, amazingly, the Badgers came out firing with a big play offense in the second half that gave them touchdowns on their first two possessions to take a 17-10 lead and back the Buckeyes into their biggest corner of the season thus far. Wells then proceeded to run at and over the Wisconsin defense with equal ruthless efficiency during the course of four Buckeye touchdown drives the rest of the day. The extent to which the team imposed its will physically on Wisconsin was made more apparent by the fact that it did so despite losing the time of possession battle, 27:41-32:19. The Badgers sealed their doom with an unsuccessful, ill-advised and apparently unscripted second attempt at a fake punt from their own 27 trailing 24-17 in the early fourth quarter.

Wells was not alone in his dominance. On a day when the Buckeyes needed their biggest stars to play up to their potential, most did so and many posted career-best performances. Vernon Gholston became the third player in OSU history to record four sacks in a game and fellow defensive anchor James Laurinaitus recorded a career-high 19 tackles. The two Brians at wide receiver stood tall as well, as Robiskie's three-catch, 46-yard effort included two touchdown receptions and Hartline had a career-high seven catches for 95 yards, including a career-best 45-yard reception to set up the field goal before halftime. Quarterback Todd Boeckman was at least solid, with a 17-for-28, 166-yard, two-touchdown performance. Aside from the occasional multi-receiver spread, he ended up executing a very basic offense that only featured one screen pass to Brandon Saine, a seven-yard catch in the second quarter that resulted in a first down.

The Badgers' loss snuffed out any faint hopes of a BCS bowl bid and puts them firmly in the position of hoping for one of the Big Ten bowl slots on January 1. For Ohio State, a resurgent Illinois team awaits next week for the final home game, then the annual clash with archrival Michigan that could conceivably catapult them into the national championship game for a second straight season.

WWE transitional periods, then and now

By Rick Morris

With the WWE clearly caught up in a transitional period right now, I was curious to check back in the history of the company to determine if we might be able to draw any conclusions about the future success or failure of the company based on present events. I limited my examination to the period coinciding with Vince Junior running the company, because comparing circumstances with a national promotion to the previous regional one would be apples and oranges.

The old WWWF really didn’t feature transitional periods like the ones we’ve grown accustomed to in the modern era, anyway. When Bruno Sammartino captured the WWWF Title from Buddy Rogers on May 17, 1963 and started his legendary eight-year title reign, the overall style of the promotion didn’t change much at all. The next sets of title changes did have transitional champions in the mix, as Ivan Koloff shockingly won the belt from Sammartino on January 18, 1973, only to drop it to Pedro Morales (the Hispanic equivalent of Bruno’s ethnic champion appeal in the urban Northeast) three weeks later. Then, when Vince Senior decided to move back to Bruno on top, Pedro lost to Stan Stasiak on December 1, 1973 and Bruno beat the big heel nine days later. For all intents and purposes, the overall style of the promotion did not change appreciably during the course of any of the title changes.

The next two switches actually had no transitional champions in the mix at all. Superstar Billy Graham started the first long-term heel title run in WWWF history when he ended Bruno’s time on top once and for all on April 30, 1977. His flamboyant run on top, which a subsequent WWE DVD correctly labeled as ahead of its time, ended when the promotion put the strap on the man it had been grooming for the big spot, Bob Backlund on February 20, 1978. With the old-school Vince Senior still running the show, Graham’s wild charisma did not auger any major changes for the promotion and the reign of Backlund solidified the company as a Northeast regional promotion with a white-bread babyface champion. Backlund had a couple of disputed title changes along the way, but stayed firmly atop the (now renamed) WWF until Vince Junior assumed control, started the national era and with it, the first real transitional period in the style of the promotion.

1. THE START OF THE NATIONAL EXPANSION, THE PAY-PER-VIEW ERA AND WHAT WOULD COME TO BE KNOWN AS SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT. This era started with the Iron Sheik’s controversial victory over Backlund on December 26, 1983 when “The All-American Boy’s manager Arnold Skaaland threw in the towel with Backlund trapped in the Camel Clutch. As with Koloff more than a dozen years before, the Sheik was used as a hot-button foreign heel transitional champion, but the man who he would deliver the title to was used as a vehicle to change pro wrestling forever. Just a month later, Hulk Hogan began the modern era with a bang as he took the belt from the Iron Sheik in decisive fashion and was booked in more of a show-biz fashion than any other babyface champion ever. This was due in equal parts to his insane charisma, his larger-than-life physique and his inability to work in the ring in a traditional lengthy main-event fashion. Throughout 1984, Rowdy Roddy Piper was established as the dominant heel personality of the new era with his unprecedented “Piper’s Pit” segments. By year’s end, when he attacked Hogan allies Captain Lou Albano and Cyndi Lauper during a charity award ceremony at Madison Square Garden, the seeds were sown for the culmination of the transitional period. The “War to Settle the Score” between Piper and Hogan from MSG, broadcast on MTV in February of 1985, introduced red-hot celebrity Mr. T into the mix and set the stage for the first WrestleMania at the end of March 1985. That event, with the potent mix of the most over wrestlers in the country, massive celebrity involvement and an undercard of wrestlers ready to be introduced to the national spotlight, set the company in motion with no looking back. That year’s return to national television with “Saturday Night’s Main Event” and the first-ever pay-per-view The Wrestling Classic were anticlimactic events: the transitional period had ended at WrestleMania and started the first national wrestling boom since the 1950s.

2. THE POST-HOGAN ERA BEGINS AND THE NEW GENERATION IS FORESHADOWED. Hogan dropped the belt to Andre the Giant in 1988 and The Ultimate Warrior in 1990, but his shadow never left the main-event scene, nor did the fact that the promotion was still built around the show-biz, style-over-workrate principles he embodied. And when the smoke eventually cleared, he ended up with the belt again both time. However, business had been falling off from the peak period of the boom, starting in earnest with the Warrior’s run on top in 1990. When the title was held up in December of 1991, to be filled at The Royal Rumble the next month, it seemed inevitable that Hogan would stay in the mix – almost certainly to be wrestling in the main event of WrestleMania VIII against the man who became the new champion, Ric Flair (the acquisition of Flair, who left his old promotion without dropping either the WCW or NWA World Titles in the ring in the summer of 1991 is another story in and of itself – proving that the most cyclical element in wrestling is the tendency to make mistakes, the WWF never put Hogan and Flair in the ring one-on-one on pay-per-view during their time together, wasting the ultimate “Dream Match” and foreshadowing how badly they would screw up the acquisition of WCW itself ten years later). But the eruption of the industry’s first major steroid scandal in the winter of 1992 made the poster child for the bulked-up modern era too hot to handle for the company, so a “retirement match” against Sid Justice was booked for ‘Mania instead. For the next several months, the 1980s direction of the company seemed intact, as Flair and Randy Savage traded the title back and forth and kept the focus on the established names of the era with the Warrior also in the mix. But when Flair suffered an inner-ear injury that necessitated the promotion taking the belt off of him, the direction they chose was very fateful. Young Bret Hart, a second-generation synonymous with the traditional type of pro wrestling that had been around for decades before the boom, won the title from Flair in his home country of Canada on October 12, 1992. While the company would not institute the “New Generation” marketing campaign for almost another two years, in retrospect the transition to that era started on that night up north. The following month, Hart and Shawn Michaels, the two most dominant figures of the “New Generation” era squared off in the main event for the title at Survivor Series and signaled that the focus would be on new names and a new direction. Right about then, the Warrior left, Flair was preparing for his final few months with the company and Hogan was preparing a comeback that fizzled due in equal parts to bad booking and a breakdown in understanding with the company. Hogan did have a title run that started with an infamous impromptu match against new champion Yokozuna at the end of Wretlemania IX and ended with a screwy finish at King of the Ring two months later. Fans long accustomed to seeing the Hulkster avenge every wrong were shocked when he quietly faded from the promotion after the loss due to an inability to come to terms with the company. When Lex Luger turned babyface and adopted the persona of a super-patriot by bodyslamming Yokozuna on the USS Intrepid on July 4, 1993, the similarity of his new character to that of Hogan made it clear to one and all that the King of the 1980s era was dead and the new crop of main eventers would be left to carry on in his place. As such, the transition had been completed. The “New Generation” campaign, officially adopted in 1994 as a marketing counterpoint to WCW’s signings of Hogan and other stars made famous by the WWF, fizzled. Business never approached the heights of the boom and the company floundered as more top stars jumped ship over the next few years.

3. THE SECOND NATIONAL BOOM: THE ATTITUDE ERA BEGINS. This is the murkiest transitional era in the history of the company, as the origins were very difficult to trace. For all intents and purposes, however, the November 20, 1995 episode of RAW marks the start of the period. This program was one of the most historically significant in the long history of the company. Diesel, fresh off the loss of the WWF title to Bret Hart at Survivor Series the previous night, gave a speech in the ring in which he declared independence from Vince McMahon and the promotional machine (marking the “outing” of VKM as the real-life owner of the company) but did not turn heel in typical style – instead adopting an intriguing “tweener” character. At the end of the show, Shawn Michaels “collapsed” in the ring as the result of a kick to the head from Owen Hart. This marked the beginning of an effort to infuse as much real-life drama as possible in the show as viewers were subtly led to believe that HBK’s injury was legitimate and unstaged. The next month, Bret Hart and Davey Boy Smith wrestled in a title match that heralded the return of blading to the company, foreshadowing a wilder in-ring style. The start of this transitional era went into a deep-freeze, however, as business-as-usual promoting took over again until King of the Ring 1996. Steve Austin, who had been given the tournament victory to punish Hunter Hearst Helmsley for breaking script in the infamous MSG “curtain call” incident of May 19, 1996, mocked Jake Roberts’ faith with his groundbreaking “Austin 3:16” promo. Throughout the year, Austin’s blue-collar tough-man style caught on with the fans and it was getting harder and harder to keep him as a heel, even after efforts to make him appear as a heartless predator with the Pillman gun storyline. Subsequently, however, the warming of the crowd to Austin coincided with the cooling of the crowd to Bret Hart’s classic style and the resulting double-turn at Wrestlemania XIII in March 1997 launched Austin as the first mega-star of the Attitude Era (which wouldn’t actually be named as such until a year later). Everything that followed (Austin’s run as face champion starting at WrestleMania XIV, the establishment of DeGeneration X as one of the top acts in company history and the creation of The Rock’s character as a cornerstone antihero rivaled only by Austin) was an anticlimax from the moment Austin broke through by passing out in a bloody heap rather than tapping out to Hart at Mania. That moment launched a period of prosperity that by some measures even exceeded the first boom of the ‘80s.

4. THE ATTITUDE BOOM GIVES WAY TO THE BRAND SPLIT. Vince McMahon’s second boom period was initially fueled by the desperation of competition. The Monday Night Wars started off badly for the WWF as Nitro began to thrash Raw in the ratings after an initial period of rough parity in 1995-96. Even the early days of “Attitude” in 1997 saw the company trailing WCW, although business was picking up (as a certain announcer might say). The primal need that Vince had to transcend the accomplishments of WCW served as the incentive to adopt the “old rules are dead” wild style of this new era. But once the epoch of brash shoot-style promos (with questionable language and hand gestures), wild sexuality on display from the “Divas,” the reliance on weapons and wild brawling and the overall “anything can happen” atmosphere took hold, WCW and its corporate restrictions and short-sighted management never had a chance. By 2001, red ink was on the verge of putting both WCW and the country’s third-largest promotion ECW out of business. The WWF came in and scooped up the assets (well, some assets – they turned out to be unable to use the ECW name on-camera due to snags in the bankruptcy proceedings) of each in the spring of 2001. With Austin and The Rock coming off a red-hot main event in the sold-out Astrodome for Wrestlemania XVII, the company seemed poised for many huge years to come. But from that point on, everything they could do wrong, they did do wrong. They stuck with an ill-advised Austin heel turn that did nothing but demoralize an audience that never wanted to boo “The Texas Ratttlesnake.” They botched the WCW/ECW invasion, wrestling’s ultimate dream storyline, in such a brutal manner that the abrupt ending to it at Survivor Series was more of a mercy killing than anything else. And as the company was distracted by the steroid scandal of the early 1990s and their subsequent World Bodybuilding Federation debacle, they were also focused too much on trying to force their insipid XFL down the throats of their fans. Ratings were a complete disappointment, as the promotion was left with only their share of the Monday Night Wars audience. So with their dream of a WWF-run WCW circuit keeping up a semblance of competition dead, the company decided to launch a brand split just after WrestleMania XVIII. On April 8, 2002, the Raw show featured a “draft” in which all stars from the promotion were assigned to either the Raw program or Smackdown program exclusively. This began in earnest the transition to the post-boom reality. Initially, the storyline featured Ric Flair as the on-air boss of Raw and Vince McMahon at the helm of Smackdown. However, the best-laid plans disintegrated as events caused the company to go into a frantic spring and summer of hot-shotting. First, the company made a huge miscalculation about Hogan’s viability as a 21^st century titleholder when they regarded his massive ovation at by the crowd in the dome in Toronto at Wrestlemania XVIII as anything more than the nostalgia pop it was. They abandoned HHH’s first run as babyface champion (and unified world champion, with his belt now having the lineage of both the WCW and WWF World Titles) quickly, although the horrible booking of HHH in that role necessitated some form of abandoning the reign. Then, Austin walked out of the promotion rather than do a job to mega-pushed newcomer Brock Lesnar. The company panicked and hot-shotted a match instead that saw McMahon take unified control of the two brands from Flair. What, then, would serve as the continued rationale for a brand split if one man was in charge of both programs? Bringing in a new authority figure, of course! Eric Bischoff was crowned as general manager of Raw in a desperate attempt to conjure up that old Monday night magic. In the midst of all of this, the company yielded to legal realities in the form of legal challenges from the World Wildlife Federation and changed their name to World Wrestling Entertainment. Meanwhile, rather than push some of the wrestlers who had been on top in ECW and WCW like Lance Storm, Mike Awesome and Raven, the company awarded half-hearted pushes to Rob Van Dam and wrestlers broken out of tag teams in the split for no apparent reason, such as Bradshaw and Bubba Ray Dudley. After the Hogan experiment crashed and burned, the belt was quickly put on The Undertaker and then The Rock, who lost it at SummerSlam to the aforementioned Lesnar. Immediately thereafter, the “unified” aspect of the belt was lost as HHH campaigned successfully to be given a World Title for the Raw brand only and a second set of tag team titles was likewise created. These actions signaled that, whatever fans hoped to the contrary, the brand split was here to stay. Like the New Generation gimmick before it, it did not yield an era of prosperity.

5. A REAL ATTEMPT TO BUILD POST-BOOM STARS. By early 2004, fans had lost patience with the floundering lack of direction in both WWE brands. HHH started the Raw-only World Title era by failing to elevate RVD and Kane, then engaged in a surprisingly mediocre feud with old friend Shawn Michaels, a self-indulgent display of backroom power at the hands of Booker T at WrestleMania XIX and lackluster programs with Scott Steiner, Kevin Nash and Goldberg. Smackdown fared somewhat better with Brock Lesnar and Kurt Angle at the forefront of the WWE Title picture, but distractions like another ill-fated Hulk Hogan comeback kept the show from reaching its full potential. With Austin having retired after WrestleMania XIX, The Rock coming back much less frequently due to Hollywood commitments and Mick Foley surprisingly staying retired, the company was in dire need of developing new stars. Having hyped the 20^th edition of WrestleMania for a full year, the company saw an opportunity and took advantage of it. And they were compelled to make a better effort of it, with the WWE a public entity now and stock prices hanging in the balance throughout their period of stagnation. The transition to the era of new stars began in earnest at the 2004 Royal Rumble when upper-midcard fixture Chris Benoit was elevated with a stirring victory. He ended up on Raw, winning the World Title at Mania. On Smackdown, Eddy Guerrero was tabbed for a promotion to the top of the card, inspiring the wrestling world by capping his comeback from drug issues by capturing the WWE Title at No Way Out and successfully defending it at WrestleMania XX against Kurt Angle. However, the challenges facing the promotion were only just beginning at that point. Mania served as the final WWE match for both Lesnar and Goldberg as two legitimate main eventers quit the scene after one infamous final match. Bradshaw was quickly repackaged on Smackdown as Texas tycoon JBL and thrust into the main event scene so quickly as to defy all credibility. He defeated Guerrero and held on to the belt until the next Wrestlemania, becoming the third man the company tried to elevate that year. He ended up having a longer tenure on top than either Benoit or Guerrero, but never achieved the potential of his great character due to the knee-jerk start to the storyline. Meanwhile, Benoit held onto his belt until Summerslam, but due to questionable booking, still loomed in the shadows of the mighty HHH. Benoit dropped the strap to Randy Orton, the fourth man the company attempted to elevate during this frantic transitional period on both shows. Orton, a relatively hot heel, was inexplicably turned face as champion to go against his mentor HHH. The fundamentally unlikable Orton predictably fizzled as a sympathetic character and his title reign was ended after only a month! Meanwhile, however, HHH’s associate in the Evolution stable Batista was quietly becoming the most over wrestler on Raw. The company did a slow burn with the storyline, culminating in Batista turning face, challenging HHH at Wrestlemania XXI and winning the World Title. On Smackdown, charismatic young John Cena had captured the United States Title, his first taste of gold in the promotion, at Wrestlemania XX. Throughout the year, fans took to his exciting character in such a manner that he was the logical choice for JBL to drop the World Title to at Wrestlemania XXI. On that show, he joined Batista as the final wrestlers in this frantic transitional era to be elevated to the status of world champion. Coincidentally, Cena and Batista were elevated to the “big leagues” not long after the brand split in the spring of 2002 when the company was trying to broaden the rosters of the two shows. When they completed their post-WrestleMania programs with the deposed champs months later, they each moved to the other show in another WWE “draft” that ended this transitional era with each man set as the dominant babyface franchise of his show moving forward. Cena, however, would see his character watered down on Raw, and has never matched the insanely over face status he had on Smackdown – although he has still been the most over wrestler in the promotion, owing to the fact that his crowd reactions are incredible and pretty much unprecedented with women, children and a minority of males loudly cheering him and a majority of males loudly booing him. Batista, due to injuries and incompatible work styles, has never recaptured the magic of his program with HHH. So this era, like the first of the brand split chapter of history, did not lead to massive mainstream success.

6. THE POST-BENOIT ERA. This is where we’ve been since that horrible weekend in late June 2007 when Chris Benoit shockingly gave in to his demons and slaughtered his wife, son and himself. In the months prior to the tragedy, the company did not necessarily seem on the cusp of a new boom, but it did seem at least somewhat possible. With his rap, movie and commercial ventures, John Cena was earning more notoriety in the mainstream than any other star created since the Attitude days. WrestleMania XXIII, held in a sold-out domed stadium for the first time in four years, earned a good deal of mainstream attention as Donald Trump played a key role in the “Billionaire vs. Billionaire Hair Match” between his and Vince McMahon’s proxies. And the company seemed to moving in a pretty decent direction creatively in the first half of 2007, overcoming an injury to HHH that decimated existing plans for Mania and an Undertaker injury that short-circuited his face vs. face feud with Batista. The company did stub its toe somewhat with an ill-advised “Mr. McMahon death” storyline in which it was depicted that the company chairman’s car was blown up with him in it. Resolution of the storyline was interrupted by the Benoit murder/suicide, which shocked and demoralized a fanbase that had already absorbed many previous tragedies, but nothing this twisted. Benoit’s drug issues caused enormous headaches for the company and exposed massive holes in the company’s alleged enforcement policies. In September, many stars were abruptly suspended for drug use, an unprecedented amount of simultaneous punishment brought down the by company. Embarrassing and potentially threatening Congressional hearings await on the issue of the company’s attitudes on drug use. Other main-event stars have gone down as well, including Lashley and Cena (who walked out of WrestleMania as world champion each of the last three years and surely would have been the man holding up the belt with fireworks going off overhead at WrestleMania XXIV in the Citrus Bowl next spring). McMahon quickly wrapped up the “fake death” storyline of his character, only to substitute a “Mr. McMahon’s illegitimate son” mystery storyline that concluded in the most anticlimactic fashion possible, with a midget wrestler being bestowed the “honor” and the matter being played for laughs instead of mined for potential big-money matches. A series of teaser videos have played on WWE programming recently, seeming to hint at the long-awaited return of former star Chris Jericho, but, to the dismay of fans, he has yet to materialize. This transitional period is the most chaotic we have seen in the modern history of the WWE, which is not completely surprising in that it is the first one to feature three brands (ECW was added to the mix full-time in June 2006, although it bears little in common with the underdog promotion of the 1990s that bore the same name). The company is frantically throwing one idea after another at the wall to see what sticks. This desperation paid off with the Attitude boom, but failed in each of the last two transitional eras. All indications are that their unfocused approach will backfire this time as well.

Decade's most influential people in sports

By Rick Morris

As mentioned there, my companion post about the most influential people in the world during the decade to date was actually inspired by a question I posed to myself about the most influential in sports this decade. I knew who I would slot #1, and it's a name most would never associate with this list in any capacity, but I frankly don't think people can question my logic.

As with the other list, what is most important is impact for today and the future on the sports world. Honorable mention goes to Bill Belichick (most successful coach/personnel figure of the decade), Peyton Manning (king of endorsements), Barry Bonds (most divisive and thought-provoking person of the decade). With the exception of Bonds (who is one of the figures causing such a public backlash to steroids and HGH that baseball might be forced to clean itself), however, none of them have caused significant, long-term changes to the sports landscape.

Working our way up the list ...

5. Dana White. The UFC president has been on an incredible roll of late, acquiring the assets of his main rival Pride in a deal he compared, only half-ridiculously, to the AFL-NFL merger. Also, in 2006, his organization hired away Marc Ratner, the well-respected executive director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission. This was seen, correctly, as a body blow to what has remained of the credibility of boxing. Almost all of the ills of boxing -- from the lack of a consistent TV presence to the diminishing ability to deliver "dream fights" to the proliferation of too many meaningless titles -- have been eliminated by the kingpin of MMA. He has also cleaned up the sport, instituting needed safety rules and bringing thus bringing needed respectability. In terms of entertainment impact, the UFC has supplanted Vince McMahon's tired empire as the top buyrate engine for pay-per-views. While White has much to do to advance MMA to the top tier of American sports, just the fact that he could plausibly do so in the next few years is breathtaking. Plus, with MMA having great success at the expense of boxing, it has played an important historical role in the sports world, because boxing has traditionally been such a huge part of the landscape in America.

4. Dale Earnhardt, Sr. Death transforms superstars into icons: from Elvis to Knute Rockne to James Dean, the immortality of a constant presence in the culture awaits the gifted who perish before their time. Such is the case for "Big E," whose combination of accomplishment and popularity was unrivaled in his sport. With NASCAR benefiting from the asinine circuit split in the American open-wheel universe, a large and unprecedented national TV contract and huge media attention loomed for the 2001 season even before the tragic, season-starting accident at Daytona. But the tragedy in the final turn took everything to a whole new level and was the final impetus in carrying NASCAR to the top tier of American pro sports.

3. Lebron James. LBJ represented the apex of the high school-to-NBA era, which the Association ended in 2006. But that development didn't change his level of influence at all. He was the first hoops star to be documented so heavily at such a young age; to a certain extent Greg Oden and O.J. Mayo followed in his footsteps by having large media attention so long before college. Others will assuredly follow. But recent comments from Mayo and new crosstown rival Kevin Love about emulating James' media strategies have confirmed what has long been suspected: while Lebron grew up wanting to "Be Like Mike," and admittedly hasn't yet got the titles to match "That #23," stars of these generation are embracing as a model "This #23."

2. Tiger Woods. Doubtless most will find it shocking that this global icon is not tops on the list. He certainly is the most dominant athlete of the decade along with his friend Roger Federer in tennis and has public credibility and advertising dollars out the ying-yang. And although his emergence as one of the top two golfers of all time has helped the PGA to reach a new strata financially, he hasn't had the impact across multiple sports that our top person in sports did, albeit unintentionally.

1. Matt Kenseth. This NASCAR driver won the 2003 Winston Cup championship and is a perennial title threat. But he has a relatively low public profile compared to some other drivers on his talent level. How did he earn our top spot? He did so without trying, actually. His dull 2003 slog to the title in a season in which he won only one race but accrued points in a relentless but uninspiring style was the final straw that pushed NASCAR to institute its current Chase for the Championship playoff format. From 2004 on, the final 10 races of the season have served as a playoff for the drivers who qualify in the first 26 events. This has revitalized late-season fan interest, ratings and media attention as desired and led to the adoption of a playoff format by the PGA and NHRA, both in 2007. It is entirely possible that other circuits may adopt some form of a playoff system at some point, perhaps the ATP, WTA or PBA. Speaking of other circuits, the increased success of NASCAR made possible by the Chase has led to significant defections from both major open-wheel circuits in this country and probably sealed the doom of that form of competition as a major force in motorsports. At any rate, the effects of Kenseth's much-derided coast to the championship in 2003 forever changed NASCAR, solidified it as one of the predominant forces on the American sporting landscape, provided one more body-blow to open-wheel racing, and caused other sports to mimic the revolutionary changes in his own. As such, Matt Kenseth is deservedly the most influential figure in American sports thus far this decade.